q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
35n820
|
why do emotions sound musically the same to all humans?
|
Why is it that wherever you go, anywhere in time, emotions like despare and joy sound musically the same? Is this purely cultural or is there something in our brains that is sort of programmed to make the synesthetic association between certain sounds and certain feelings?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35n820/eli5_why_do_emotions_sound_musically_the_same_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr5z7ul"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"In a lot of cultures, particularly Western cultures, music that is played at fast speeds and in a major key sounds happy and music played at slower speeds and in a minor key sounds sad. Music which is fast and played in a minor key or slow and played in a major key is generally considered to be emotionally ambiguous or emotionally complex, or simply neutral.\n\nIn other cultures, they don't necessarily use musical 'keys' like we do in Western music and the elements or properties that distinguish 'happy' and 'sad' sounding music in those cultures may be different than those used to communicate emotions in Western music.\n\nHaving said that, Psychologists have done research on various isolated tribes who had never been exposed to Western music before at the time of testing and they found that these native people (despite having no influence from Western culture), assigned happy/sad ratings to Western music that were similar to the ratings given by people who are native to Western cultures (e.g. US College students). \n\nIn other words, the native tribespeople were able to distinguish happy and sad sounding Western music even though they had never been exposed to such music before (at least to the knowledge of the experimenters). So, there is an indication that perhaps this fast/major = happy and slow/minor = sad association may be, in some way, innate. However, it's clearly possible to develop other types of music or musical systems that use other ways of communicating emotion."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
d62me8
|
why does everything sound higher pitched after a night of drinking?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d62me8/eli5_why_does_everything_sound_higher_pitched/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f0phjx8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Alcohol slows down your brain's processing of events around you.\n\nAs a result, things seem to be going faster than they are.\n\nPitch is a function of the frequency of a sound wave, in hertz, which is cycles per second. The more cycles per second you hear, the higher the pitch is.\n\nSince your brain's concept of time is based on how fast it can usually process events, and alcohol is slowing that down, your ear is getting slightly more cycles of pressure waves in a \"second\" than what is actually happening in a real-life second.\n\nSince you're perceiving time at a faster rate, your brain's processing of sounds is hearing things as if you sped them up, which also makes them sound higher pitched."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3360x6
|
overall, what is healthier: a can of beer every day or a can of soda every day?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3360x6/eli5_overall_what_is_healthier_a_can_of_beer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqhujlg",
"cqhumki",
"cqhuprn",
"cqhwrck",
"cqhyq86",
"cqi33f7"
],
"score": [
14,
41,
3,
3,
7,
5
],
"text": [
"I'd say beer is less unhealthy because it has less sugar.",
"i would say a can of beer is much healthier than a can of soda. light drinking has beneficial effects. Soda is just liquified sugar.",
"Assuming you already get more calories than you need (like most westerners), the one with the least calories because neither have toxic contents hopefully (unless we're talking about energy drinks). ",
"Soda Pros:\nAids Digestion,\nHydration\n\nSoda Cons:\nInsulin Resistance,\nTeeth/Enamel Degradation,\nGas and Bloating,\nMicroflora Alteration,\nEmpty Calories - bout 130 a can\n\nBeer Pros:\nHydration,\nSome vitamin content\n\nBeer Cons:\nBloating and Gas,\nAlcohol makes you hold on to fat more,\nPhytoestrogen content (pro for women?),\nDecrease Mental Capacity (pro if your going for that?)\n\nSo it depends when you define as healthy?",
"Ok this may be a long answer.\n\nA few things, there is a lot more to this question than just a simple answer. I would say it depends on the quality of the beer and depends on the quality if the soda. Lets say to be general you have low quality beer (Keith Stone may like it), high quality beer (something a beer snob may reach for),non-diet soda (sugar, sugar and then the beetus), and diet soda (kinda self explanatory).\n\nThe lower quality versions (low quality beer v. Non-diet soda) probably equal in shittyness for you. Really no benefit other than immediate pleasure reward.\n\nHigher quality versions (high quality beer v. Diet soda) Beer wins. It has vitamins and can have a mild impact on lowering your stress and other benefits. While the diet soda only is neutral on health impact (arguments can point to negative impact based on some studies that say there may be a decrease in response to insulin in your body.) \n\nLow quality beer v. Diet soda and diet soda will likely win because it has less negative impact on your body than the shitty soda.\n\nHigh quality beer v. Non-diet soda and the beer is definitely better. \n\nThis all takes into account that you are the average human and dont have any preexisting health conditions. If you did then the answers may be considerably different.\n\nTL;DR: High quality beer trumps all, diet soda better than low quality beer, and low quality beer and non-diet soda suck for your body equally.",
"This is a loaded question. Assuming all facts are identical and the person has a relatively healthy diet/water intake, with no major health problems, and equal amounts of daily energy expenditure, I would say that soda would probably be the worse thing for you I the long run. Purely because of the concentration of high fructose corn syrup and the sodium load placed on the person. Yes beer has alcohol, but in a healthy person they should be able to digest the alcohol in 1 beer with no difficulty. As for the calories, yes they are there, but HFCS breaks down much quicker and causes the body to go into storage mode. Additionally some of the calories from beer are from the breakdown of alcohol, so even in the heaviest beers their carbohydrate level is not even half of what soda is. The glycemic load for soda is through the roof and not one that the body is used to. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
s60ax
|
we have wifi, satellites that beam gps to our phones, etc. why can't we have something that'll charge our portable devices wirelessly?
|
I'm too lazy/drunk to reach the phone charger cable that is 3 feet away. Please tell me why my life isn't even more convenient.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/s60ax/eli5_we_have_wifi_satellites_that_beam_gps_to_our/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4bcwei",
"c4bcwwa",
"c4be90s",
"c4beft1",
"c4beunm"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
5,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"You can do this with microwaves, but it would probably kill everybody",
"[We can](_URL_0_) power devices wirelessly: the handle of an electric toothbrush wirelessly sends power to the integrated battery to charge it. Just like the first half of an electrical transformer sends power to the other half, wirelessly. These devices can work because the emitter and the receiver are very close to each other. But powering something at a distance is not efficient. The energy loss is simply not worth it.",
"Because Edison. \nTesla had transmittable energy, but there is no way to meter it and charge individuals for consumption. As long as it costs money to make energy there will be no wireless transmission of energy over distance.",
"There are power mats that you can buy now. You just set the mat in the convenient spots around your house and when you lay the compatible item on it, it charges. They are just expensive, because it's new technology and can only work with the newest items, limiting who will choose to purchase one.",
"To ask a more specific question, will inductive charging ever reach the point where we can just place our devices on our dinner table to charge it while we eat dinner? Or at a restaurant? You get what I mean, convenient and wide spread inductive charging which doesn't require the devices to be plugged in or wearing a special case."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_charging#Disadvantages"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6fzx1d
|
why can the developers and programmers of the world's best chess supercomputers such as deep blue not be chess masters as well?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6fzx1d/eli5_why_can_the_developers_and_programmers_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dimbnwy",
"dimcbh9"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"They dont encode much actually related to chess from what I understand. \n\nThey code a learning mechanism and have it play games and lose until it learns the best possible outcomes of any pieces positioning on the board.",
"The developers don't actually learn how to play chess well.\n\nThey teach the program how to evaluate how good is a certain position, and give it a certain score (so higher score = better position for the player, lower score = better position for the opponent). Then, they write algorithms which figure out all the possible moves from the current position (looking several moves ahead), figure out which one gives the best possible outcome, and make that move.\n\nHow do they teach the program how to evaluate a position? One of way is to look at a backlog of lots of different chess matches and check which ones resulted in a win, and which resulted in a loss. They consider various properties of the current position (how many pieces there are, each pieces location relative to the others, etc.) and assign each of those a numerical value. They then use the backlog to programmatically figure out a formula on how to give the complete position a score based on these values."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5s2gdp
|
how the system of checks and balances works in the usa, is the president ultimately powerless?
|
As a Canadian I want to learn more.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5s2gdp/eli5_how_the_system_of_checks_and_balances_works/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddbxix0",
"ddbxr8f",
"ddby5k1"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"No, the President is not ultimately powerless. The idea of checks and balances is that power is divided so that each branch of government is pitted against each other.\n\nFor example, Congress writes the laws, but the President can veto them. The President can carry out and interpret the laws, but only in the context of what Congress lets him. The President is the Commander in Chief of the military, but only Congress can fund military operations or declare war. The President appoints judges, but the Senate has to approve and the judges then serve for life with the power to determine what laws are constitutional or not, so they don't have to bend to the President's will.\n\nThe ultimate idea is that the branches are designed to fight each other, meaning that only something good ultimately survives because it survived all the checks and balances.",
"Checks and Balances was invented by the founding fathers to basically ensure that none of the three branches of the US government can overpower the other two. The Executive branch approves or vetoes any legislation the Legislative Branch throws his way, and the Judicial Branch determines whether it's constitutional. Each branch checks on the other and they balance out the power among themselves. ",
"As Lpz said, no, the President isn't powerless. The government is constructed such that there's essentially a three-way Mexican standoff between the three branches of government: the President exists to control Congress and the Supreme Court, Congress exists to control the President and the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court exists to control Congress and the President.\n\nAs for the exact checks and balances:\n\nExecutive vs. Legislative: the President can veto Congress' laws, but Congress can override the President's veto with a 2/3 supermajority. Congress can also impeach the President and attempt to remove him from office with a 2/3 supermajority vote. (Only two presidents have so far been impeached, but neither was removed from office.)\n\nJudicial vs. Legislative: the Supreme Court can declare laws passed by Congress to be null and void on the basis of unconstitutionality, but Congress decides whether or not a Supreme Court appointee gets the job to begin with. Congress can also impeach Supreme Court justices and attempt to remove them from office with a 2/3 supermajority vote. (Only one Supreme Court justice has so far been impeached, but was not removed from office.)\n\nExecutive vs. Judicial: the Supreme Court can declare executive orders to be null and void on the basis of unconstitutionality, but the President appoints new Supreme Court justices, who then must be approved by Congress.\n\nIn short, because any given branch of the government is monitored and limited by the other two, it's easy to conclude that that branch is powerless, when not taking into account the checks and balances poised against its opponents.\n\nIn theory, this is supposed to encourage laws/executive orders/court rulings that everyone can agree on and therefore make it through the process alive. In practice, it leads to deadlock."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3z5zp4
|
where do the rocks around the perimeter of lakes come from?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z5zp4/eli5_where_do_the_rocks_around_the_perimeter_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyjiruy"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"I suspect the reason is that: \n\nRocks around the lake are those we see laying on the soil's surface or partially in-bedded, being as water from rain, melting snow, the natural level of the lake water rising and receding, washes the surrounding soil into the lake leaving the heavier rocks visible.\n\nTake a flat area of land not far from the lake, the rocks are there, too. But still under the soil from not being subjected to the water erosion that leaves them nearer the surface when closer to the lake. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ri1zy
|
why do people in every country seem to detest their government?
|
I've heard people here on reddit strongly criticizing their government in the UK, the US, Australia, Brazil, Germany...
I don't think I have ever, not once, seen someone say "Yeah, our government is actually pretty great compared to some of the others".
I would imagine people in the Scandinavian countries or the Netherlands would be pretty pleased with their government, going off of quality of living studies, but I've never actually read or heard someone say that.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ri1zy/eli5_why_do_people_in_every_country_seem_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdngbr1",
"cdnggih"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Countries are hugely complex entities usually with man millions of moving parts (not just the people) and there are millions of things that could go wrong at any given moment and they often do. Governments also tend to be big slow inefficient behemoths who are often nearly strangled by their own bureaucracy. When something goes wrong it usually takes a long time to get it fixed. If the issue at hand is somewhat nebulous the government has a lot of trouble. You'll notice that smaller countries have a much easier time getting things done and they also tend to be those better places you are talking about. ",
"Because no government is perfect, and people are never satisfied. \n\nCountry A has universal health care, affordable education and a reasonable quality of life. But the taxes are relatively high and the roads are kinda shitty. Now citizens X, Y and Z will start complaining about the taxes and the roads and crucifying the government for every other little thing because the other (big) things are taken for granted. \n\nBoth parties are to blame now. The government of country A for not taking care of the roads (not much you can do about taxes anyway, that's simply part of living in a society... No matter how much Libertarians complain) and citizen X, Y and Z for not realizing that, overall, the government is doing a good job. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
25zjn1
|
how does something like "one meter," "one foot," or "one second" become precisely standardized around the world?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25zjn1/eli5_how_does_something_like_one_meter_one_foot/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chm7hta",
"chm7ihf"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Metric measurements are defined very specifically by the [International System of Units.](_URL_1_) Before they were founded, many countries had organisations for the purpose of managing measurements. They often did this by having an object that would be the basis of that measurement (eg. a rod that would be exactly a metre long, or a weight that was exactly a kilogram) that would be distributed to other countries that agreed to adopt those measurements.\n\nThat said, often many countries didn't have standardised measures (eg. the French foot was longer than the English foot, part of the reason people believed Napoleon to be short).\n\nThese days, the International System of Units defines their [base units](_URL_0_) which can be used to derive other measurements based on measurable events. For example, a metre is the distance travelled by light in a vacuum in 1 299792458th of a second, & a second is how long it takes for a caesium 133 atom to transition between 2 particular states 9192631770 times. Since these are very precise events, it means that a metre will be the same length all over the world.",
"Most of those measurements weren't officially standardized until well after they became standard. The meter, for example, wasn't precisely defined until 1983.\n\nThe reason that measurements became universally adopted is the same reason anything becomes universally adopted; the cost of converting is lower than the cost of using two measurements. The only reason the US has held out so long on the metric system is because it's so huge, and frankly, the imperial system is only used for everyday civilian things like speed limits.\n\nSometimes a newer system is more convenient than an old one, such as metric vs imperial, but usually its just a matter of universality. The second-minute-hour-day system makes comparatively little sense without the base-60 counting system used to develop it, but we continue to use it because changing would be too costly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_base_unit",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units"
],
[]
] |
||
8nii3f
|
why is heat death a thing when new stars are still being born?
|
So, about the eventual heat death of the universe, which is hypothesized to happen when the last stars die becoming white dwarfs, which after a long time lose all their heat and become black dwarfs, eternally leaving universe as a cool soulless place. But why is that, why is there such a thing as "last stars"? Aren't stars still forming as we speak, just like stars dying? Are star births eventually going to stop? and why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8nii3f/eli5why_is_heat_death_a_thing_when_new_stars_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dzvo6x0",
"dzvpdk1",
"dzvpf6p",
"dzvqqt5",
"dzvquwp",
"dzvruyx",
"dzwbrui"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
3,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, the second law of thermodynamics says that energy tends to spread out.\n\nAs such, over loooooong stretches of time, all the matter and energy in the universe will move toward being homogeneously spread throughout space (this ignores the expansion of the universe). Eventually, there are no more relatively dense pockets of stuff that gravity can bring together to form new stars.",
"Stars don't just pop into existence by magic. [Here's a video](_URL_0_). You have to have gas there, thick enough that there's enough gravity to shrink it together into a star.\n\nThe universe is expanding, so by the time the heat death happens, the gas will be so rarefied that it won't be able to clump together into a star.",
"Well for a star to form you need enough gas (hydrogen mostly) to be close enough for the atoms to attract each other, through gravity. If there isn't enough gas, you get a gas giant, which isn't massive enough for fusion to start.\n\nSo the two most important factor in creating new star is distance (close enough to each other) and mass (enough gas). The thing is that spacetime is expanding, spreading these gas over bigger region, making it harder and harder for star to form. So eventually, less and less star will be created.",
"EDIT: As pointed out by u/mousicie below, this comment is somewhat misleading in that it talks about causes of there being no more stars, which are different from causes of the actual heat death.\n\n\n\nTo add to the other replies here: Stars need fuel. Stars are giant fusion engines, fusing together lighter atoms to form heavier ones. As a star goes through its life cycle, it burns more and more of its lighter atoms, leaving more and more heavy ones. When you do fusion with atoms lighter than iron, you get more energy out of the process than you have to put in. In the star, the intense pressure and temperature in the core leads, say, two hydrogen atoms to fuse and become a helium atom. This process creates excess energy, which eventually travels to the surface of the star and is released as light.\n\nThe problem for the star is that for iron and atoms heavier than iron, fusion needs more energy than it creates. There is no way for the star to efficiently burn iron. So, as the amount of heavier atoms increases and the amount of fuel like hydrogen and helium decreases, the star eventually dies. When you repeat this process throughout the universe, the total amount of star fuel in the universe decreases. New stars need fuel just as much as old ones. If there is no fuel available, they cannot start shining.",
"Imagine pouring cream into a cup of coffee and mixing it around. You can think of the cream as energy, and the coffee as space. At the beginning, there are large concentrations of energy, or stars. As you stir the coffee, you'll still get some pockets of cream, but the more you stir, the more mixed in it gets, until eventually there are no more concentrations of energy, it's all evenly spread out\n\nNow imagine that we poured *a lot* of cream in at the beginning (the big bang), and once we realized what we'd done, we decided to continuously add more coffee (expansion of spacetime) while we stirred (2nd law of thermodynamics) to balance things out. Because we poured in so much cream at the very beginning, especially compared to how much coffee we had, it's going to take a long, long time until we're finished stirring. But we aren't adding in anymore cream, we're just adding coffee while stirring, so we know those concentrations of cream will have to dissipate eventually (if we ever decide to stop adding coffee or if anyone ever gets around to actually drinking it is still kind of up for debate)",
" > But why is that, why is there such a thing as \"last stars\"? Aren't stars still forming as we speak, just like stars dying?\n\nStars are still forming, from the initial reservoir of (primarily) hydrogen in the universe. As they live and die, this hydrogen is consumed. \n\nThere's a *lot* of it, so it is still forming stars billions of years later, but while some processes can result in hydrogen, nothing is creating it on the scale to support stars forever. \n\n",
"While not a 1:1 analogy, you could compare it with a human population on a growing earth. \n\nWith an earth like right now, people are able to easily find eachother. And thus while people die, new people are also born. If you would scale the earth up, it would become harder for people to meet new people. While they keep dying, less and less get born because the conditions for birth are hindered by distance. If the earth keeps growing over time, there will be a time when distances between humans are so far, no one meets another human ever again. Thus people still die, but they no longer get born. \n\nThe same happens on the cosmic scale with stars. The ones that have formed age and come to die, and new ones form out of particles that clump together through gravity. Once enough matter clumps into one big ball, the pressure at the center ignites a chain reaction of atomic fusion. This is part of the heat death, where everything gets so stretched out that nothing manages to interact anymore.\n\nMy example is with particles, but a major player in heat death is actually energy itself. Stars now form due to a process that contains a lot of distribution of energy. heat, light, all sorts of energy goes from one place to another, which is very important to both keeping stars alive and forming new stars. With heat death, everything gets so spread out that nothing manages to \"trade\" energy. In scientific terms, a state of maximum entropy, things no longer change relative to eachother. \n\n\nRight now we are still in the comfortable spot, the universe is still small enough for everything to keep meeting and interacting with other things. Yet it grows, and if it keeps growing, one day \\(by far not during our lifetime\\) we will see that stars only die."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkktE_fs4NA"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1oes5d
|
what is the difference between locking and limited-slip differentials?
|
and how do they help with traction on paved and non-paved (off road, gravel dirt mud) roads? And, for brownie points can you please explain how different gear ratios correlate to acceleration speeds (4.10 faster than 3.8?)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oes5d/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_locking_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccrbi4c",
"ccrbi51",
"ccrf3wa"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The way a normal (open) differential works, if one wheel has less resistance than the other, then that wheel will spin and the wheel with the resistance will not. This can be a problem if one of the powered wheels loses traction, as it will tend to just spin and the other wheel won't get much power.\n\nLocking differentials are set up to essentially turn the differential off, forcing equal power distribution between the wheels. Having your differential locked when on pavement going around a corner is bad for your tires and potentially very dangerous, but in a situation such as described above, it can be extremely useful. In low-speed environments with poor grip, having your differential locked can be a very good thing. There are devices which can automatically lock your differential under certain circumstances, but they aren't foolproof.\n\nLimited-slip differentials are a very diverse group of devices, but in general they only allow for a limited amount of difference in the power division between the two wheels. If you get in a situation where one wheel is free, the limited slip differential won't allow all the power to go to the free wheel, ensuring that the other wheel will still have power. This is generally a good trade-off between an open and a locking differential, but it is the most mechanically complicated option.",
"You might want to check this out, it doesn't explain everything, but you will gain a whollle lot of knowledge about differentials from this video: _URL_0_",
"Let me guess: You just finished watching \"My Cousin Vinny\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYAw79386WI"
],
[]
] |
|
5obd06
|
why is it that the torture method of dripping water onto one spot hurts so much after awhile?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5obd06/eli5_why_is_it_that_the_torture_method_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dchzakm",
"dcivthg"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It doesnt. Mythbusters did an episode about it. \nIt became annoying after a while, and the water started to run into their eyes, but there was no pain.",
"It's not so much that it causes physical pain, but rather that it becomes emotionally distressing to the victim. When it first starts, it's just a minor annoyance. But, while that's going on, you're going to have human needs that still need fulfilling. You're going to get hungry, thirsty, most likely sore from being tied up and not being able to move or adjust yourself. You're also probably going to have to go to the bathroom or sleep. But you can't, because you're strapped down to a board, and there's a little drop of water constantly hitting you on the forehead over and over again, and there's nothing you can do to get away from it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
53s3w8
|
is taking a 3 hour nap during the day and sleeping 5 hours at night equivalent to getting a full 8 hour sleep at night?
|
Would the advantages of getting a full 8 hour sleep at night still apply if one was to break their sleep up into 2 or even 3 sleep sessions that accumulated to 8 hours total? Is one of these options significantly more advantageous/healthy than the other?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53s3w8/eli5_is_taking_a_3_hour_nap_during_the_day_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7vsa0i",
"d7vsphn",
"d7vtk58",
"d7vv78e",
"d7vv7ey",
"d7vw093",
"d7vwgjr",
"d7vwlcg",
"d7vwon5",
"d7vwp3f",
"d7vwq4k",
"d7vx1nd",
"d7vxadj",
"d7vxl48",
"d7vxwcl",
"d7vyfek",
"d7vysd6",
"d7w0f47",
"d7w1yx7",
"d7w3p5j",
"d7w4t9z",
"d7w4zbg",
"d7w63n7",
"d7w6g7b",
"d7w6n3b",
"d7w8c17",
"d7waqxz",
"d7wf089",
"d7wfp86",
"d7wftfk",
"d7wgueo",
"d7wr52i",
"d7wwneu",
"d7x001f"
],
"score": [
572,
6,
17,
253,
2,
71,
2,
60,
2,
5,
9,
2,
3941,
5,
2,
2,
50,
25,
2,
12,
4,
15,
10,
13,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
243,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Coming from the country of the \"siesta\" (Spain), first, let me say that no, almost no one takes a siesta or nap at midday, it is just another cliché. But we do suffer of a split shift, a legacy from the post civil war Spain, so most people are able to go home for 2-3 hours at lunch time.\n\nThere are studies every now and then about how long should a nap or siesta be, and according to some held by la NASA and for exemple this one here: _URL_0_\nThe perfect siesta should be around 5-25 minutes, no more. My husband works a split shift 8-13 and 15-19 and never sleeps more than 15 minutes because otherwise he feels drowsy and even more tired.\n\nBut I guess it depends on each individual.",
"I fainted one time and my parents panicked they took me to a cardiologist and a neurologist, lucky my uncle was a doctor so he recommended good doctors. The neurologist said that no amount of extra siesta or making up sleep, can equate to a solid 7-8hrs of sleep a night, the brain and body and the chemestry of a person when sleeping is different during say an afternoon nap vs. a good nights sleep. I still don't do it (sleep 8hrs) but its good to know. Prior to my fainting I was at work for 8 hours at an unusual hour cause I worked at a BPO, then just 2 hours of sleep and we went and travelled to my grandparents in the province, 5hours by car, I slept in the car but it wasn't good sleep, so exhaustion knocked me out.",
"I think it's the same. I work 3rd shift from 1am-9:30am. No kids, not married. Can sleep whenever I want to.\n\nI generally take a nap around 11am - 3pm. Then generally lie down again around 9pm-1am. I am fully rested all the time.\n\nSometimes I stay up and go to bed around 5pm - 1am (I work from home). \n\nI read where people sleeping in 2 separate \"sleeps\", 1st sleep and 2nd sleep feels really natural to some, like me...and the ancient tribes used to do it, too.\n\nIt's harder to do if you work a 1st shift 8 hours, but otherwise hell yes, I love it!",
"\"Biphasic sleep cycle\" or multiphasic is what you are asking about. Basically you schedule two times to sleep, one \"long\" and one \"short,\" where short is 1-2 cycles through REM and long is more. Most people go through a full cycle about every 45-60 mins. Works best when the times are consistent for both sleeping periods. Many people use the system, which I probably first read about on here. Search it on the webs for more details obvs but it's pretty interesting stuff.\nI'm not a doctor and am only spouting what I've read from nonclinically reviewed sources, but the results for people who do it seems realistic\n\nEdit: Some people use it as a way to 'cheat' sleeping and sleep less that 8 hours. Where as the healthiness of it seems to be unstudied, at least from what I've read...\n\nEdit by popular demand: people keep commenting about the sleep cycle being exactly 90 mins. I'll post my source when I find it about the shorter length I talked about earlier. Not that anything is strict numbers in psychology but w/e. (Article link when found)\n\nConclusion: Get a sleep tracker/app and measure your own, it'll be more useful to you than a number that strangers argue about online.",
"I did 2 sometimes 3 separate \"sleep\" cycles many times while deployed. Was still tired alot because I wasn't really getting 6-8 hours total sleep a day/night. When I got home I pretty much kept doing that for a couple of weeks but in such a way that I actually did get 6 to 8 hours of sleep and I felt pretty well rested.",
"I remember, a couple years ago, a guy did this for an extended period of time and video taped himself each day. There was a slow, but noticeable decline in his cognitive function and such. ",
"The post about sleeping when it is dark is better for you; I think\nI agree, I have been rising at 3:30 for 14 years and going to \nsleep about 7 pm when in the spring and summer it is still \nlight out, and I only feel rested about half the time. ",
"I've been working third shift in a destructive testing lab for 6 months now and I've had a hard time adjusting to the sleep schedule. I tried breaking my sleep up from 9am-4pm to 9am-1pm then 2am-5am. The change allowed me to enjoy a real morning but I get real confused about when to eat, what day it is, and other stuff. Honestly, I hate 3rd shift so much.",
"The TV show Mythbusters did an episode about this once. I think the episode was called Sleep Science or something similar. And if I remember correctly they had someone taking short naps (20 minutes or so) throughout the day and found that he was actually more tired when the sleep was broken up into naps instead of being straight through",
"My husband and I have a 6yr old a 2yr old and a 1yr old. The babies most definitely are not sleeping through the night. We went through a few month period of sleeping in two periods on for about four hours each. It actually seemed to work out really well. Trouble was you can't get much done at night when you're worried about waking babies so to me it just felt like I wasted more time sleeping on that schedule. I never noticed being any more tired than usual. ",
"It all has to do with your sleep cycles. You have NREM & REM sleep cycles - and the REM sleep cycle is where you get the restorative rest. It is called the Rapid Eye Movement cycle and it lasts 20 to 40 minutes. This is also referred to as the delta or deep sleep. NREM N1, 2, and 3 lasts about an hour total. I believe in order to adequately get enough sleep, you'll need to repeat the whole NREM & REM cycle twice, twice a day. This equates to about 2 1/2 hours per sleep session. ",
"Nobody really knows because we don't actually know very much about why people sleep in general.\n\nHowever, I can say from personal experience that sleeping on a polyphasic sleep schedule (multiple sleep partitions) does work for some people, it just takes a healthy lifestyle, strict scheduling, and some time to get used to.\n\nI only sleep for about 4.5 hours / 24 hours and I'm fine. I'm actually more awake then I used to be on a traditional sleep schedule. My personal opinion is that as long as you aren't braking cycles, the quality of the sleep is much more indicative of how well-rested you will feel. While there are some side-effects and caveats, such as reduced muscle repair, there's nothing that would derail the life of most people.\n\nIf you want more details, [this](_URL_0_) was my main resource when I started.",
"I don't think anyone has given you a real answer to your question, so here it goes: We all need sleep, some more than others (this is typically broken down by age). If you fell asleep for one minute 60 separate times, your body wouldn't gain the same value as if you slept for a straight hour. This happens because there are different physiological responses to the chemicals released by your body and brain when you sleep for a certain amount of time. \n\nThere are four levels of sleep depending upon the length and quality. Deep sleep, which almost always happens if you sleep for 2+ hours is what enables a full REM cycle, and is healthiest for you with more of \"long-term benefits\". The other standard is D2, which can occur as early as 20 minutes. This is why the power nap is effective. While you do not get a full REM cycle, your body and brain feel rejuvenated after D2 sleep.\n\nTo directly answer your question, the most effective way to sleep is to maximize REM cycles. If you break your sleep into shorter segments, the chances of completing REM cycles is smaller, but still possible. In this case power naps can get you through the day, but you may not be as healthy long term as someone consistently getting deep sleep.",
"There was a study done. People were placed in completely dark rooms for XX days and they were tested on sleep patterns. We should naturally sleep for four hours then wake up for a short period and sleep another 4 hours. Instead of 6-8 in one swoop. This was from my understanding our primitive sleep pattern as there was no way to be able to tell time in the room ",
"You should read a synopsis of At Day's Close by A. Roger Ekirch. I think it more or less answers your question and provides years of very strong, sound evidence for it.",
"I dont know what its called but theres this thing where people sleep like every few hours for a short period of time to get way more out of their day",
"One of the old topics on the Askahistorian threads was about bi-modal sleep patterns in people of the 18th century. Apparently, before electric lighting, people would go to bed at nightfall, wake four hours later, stay awake for two hours doing various nighttime activities, then sleep four more hours. A few studies show some people doing this naturally, when external stimuli are removed. I don't think such a large gap in the middle would be the same.",
"Yeah merchant mariner here. We often sleep twice a day, for like 6 hours and 2 hours maybe. The key is consistency. Sometimes you're working the same time every day, like 4 to 8 am and 4 - 8 PM. And it works. But sometimes they shift every night. Like 12-4 on day, then 4-8 the next day, then 8-12. There is a super noticeable difference. The second, rotation system is so much more exhausting the consistent schedule. Sometimes they do the consistent system at Sea and then in Port, you rotate. So you can't get used to either system.\n\nTL; DR Consistency is more important than the duration and timing of your sleep.",
"I remember reading a thread ages ago describing an \"uberman\" sleep scedual that basically boiled down to a 20 minute nap every few hours. If that's possible I'm sure your situation is too ",
"Anyone interested in the concept of sleeping multiple times a day should check out /r/polyphasic",
"I will cite the perfect ELI5 analogy that I saw a sleep expert give in a video once. imagine you're baking a cake. recipe calls for the cake to bake for 45 minutes. instead of baking for 45 minutes, you want to bake it for 10 minutes, take it out, bake it for another 10, take it out, then again, and in for the final 5 minutes. technically, you baked for 45 minutes total, but what you get is not a fully formed cake. the same with sleep.",
"Ok so you need to get the most REM sleep to be healthy. REM sleep is when you are dreaming, so dreaming=healthy. The best way to do that is always to sleep longer like 8hrs straight. The reason is because the amount of time you are in REM increases each time you have a sleep cycle. A sleep cycle is a little less than 2 hours, and we know that cause we have these electrodes we put on peoples heads that can tell us what the brain is doing like we can tell what the heart does with an EKG.\n\n\n\n* 8hr sleep example\n* \n* 1st cycle 10 minutes REM\n* 2nd cycle 20 minutes REM\n* 3rd cycle 30 minutes REM\n* 4th cycle 40 minutes REM\n* 5th cycle 50 minutes REM\n* \n\n* Total REM about 2.5 hrs\n\n* \n* \n\n* 3+5hr sleep example\n* \n* 1st cycle 10 minutes REM\n* 2nd cycle 20 minutes REM\n* \n* 1st cycle 10 minutes REM\n* 2nd cycle 20 minutes REM\n* 3rd cycle 30 minutes REM\n* \n* Total REM 1.5 hours\n\nedit: this is obviously a drastic oversimplification of a vast topic for the ELI5 crowd, however this in line with current medical literature and is the basis for all clinical current clinical practice. Everything else you hear is research based and has not been applied to what doctors are taught (except sleep specialists, who have more independence to try experimental treatments). Also, wtf happened to this thread? This isn't /r/askscience but the most technical answers get the most up votes. mods take note, its an annoying trend I've seen from the front page.",
"Sleep isn't just about numbers and REM cycles. It's a hormonal process, which is under the domain of the circadian rhythm. Every cell in the body, every hormonal function, and 1/3 of epigenetic function follows the command of the circadian rhythm. When you start messing with your master regulator, you're going to have a bad time - whether or not the numbers add up.",
"Human beings typically only slept in 2 or 3 hour segments before the invention and mass production of the candle/oil lamp.\n\nParticularly common among nomads and travelers, you would often sleep for a couple hours, then sit watch to protect your group, and then sleep a bit more before dawn. It was an evolutionary trait that helped groups protect one another from dangerous predators or marauders. ",
"_URL_0_ theres already a news article for you. Iv also heard of a artist that slept for only 30 min at a time 4 or so times a day.",
"Direct answer, it's even better then just straight sleeping for 8 hours because you would have probably went into REM sleep twice. I would also recommend if you're sleeping for 5 hours at night like I do, definitely sneak in some 20-40 naps throughout the day even if it's just closing your eyes and imagine black. Don't go a single day without a total of minimum 7 hours. ",
"Most humans sleep in 4 hour cycles, so if you really need to break it up, sleep in two separate 4 hour periods daily rather than 5 and 3z",
"all i know is that if i sleep 8-10 hours i wake up feeling like crap, if i stay up until 2-3am i usually hit a point where im super tired, i crawl to bed and pass out into deep sleep, wake up 5 hours later at 8am refreshed and ready to go. as much as people tell me its not good, ive been on that schedule for most part of the last two years and its been much better sleep than the days where i sleep in. Its almost like the 8 hours of sleep is really an hour or two of tossing around in bed not really sleeping and thinking about whatever, and then another hour in the morning \"waking up\" and not wanting to get up.",
"Is it bad to sleep longer than what is considered normal? As a kid, I remember sleeping for 13 hrs straight on weekends and 7-8 hrs during weekdays. Mind you, I also sleep in the afternoon for about 3 to 4 hrs pn school days. I used to force myself to wake up just to watch Gundam Wing and other afternoon anime on tv. \n\nI'm in my late 20s now and I still get cranky with *just* sleeping for 7 hrs. My friend once said I should be sleeping less now as an adult, and that there must be something wrong with my body as if it's fixing something. ",
"I'll give you an answer from my own personal experience. This is so unbelievably bad for your health and it's NOT the same. \n\nI worked 9pm-6 slept 6 a.m. - 12pm and went to another job at 1pm - 5pm. Slept again until 8:30.\n\nDoing this absolutely wrecked me. I had to quit one of my jobs because I was coming down with injuries and illness. I was 20 and in excellent health before I started.\n\nIf I could go back in time I would have told myself to stop but I was too stupid and hungry for money.",
"I don't like how these responses are phrased, so let me take a stab at it:\n\nMuch in the same way that crawling, is different than walking, is different than jogging, is different than running, there are actually different types of sleep. We call these sleep stages 1, 2, 3, and REM. And, just like you can't go instantly from crawling to a full sprint, you must go through each sleep stage in order. \n\nNow, REM sleep is very important and your body really needs to get there to have a successful sleep cycle, so As long as you don't wake up before your body can finish REM sleep, your doing well. And if you are wondering, this usually takes between 90-110 minutes. So if our sleep cycle is so short, why don't we wake up after 110 minutes? Well, that's because one cycle usually isn't enough for our body to get everything done, so once it finishes one cycle, it starts over. \n\nNow, because this is part of being human, it is different for all people, all ages, and dependent on how tired you are, how sleep deprived you are, drugs, hormones, etc. But, as a general rule, adults spend about 20 minutes in REM sleep per cycle, and you aren't sleeping enough until you get about 1.5-2 hours of REM a night. And if you do the math, that leads to the recommendation of about 8 hours of sleep a night.\n\n----------------\n\nSo, to answer your question:\n\nSince you must first go through stages 1, 2, and 3 before you get to REM, unless you break up your sleep exactly between cycles, you probably won't get enough REM sleep. But assuming you monitored your brain and had an alarm triggered excatly between stages, it still probably wouldn't be enough. Why?\n\nBecause sleep is more complicated than that. \n\nThe longer you sleep, the longer you spend in deep sleep and REM sleep. So, your first sleep cycle of the night will actually spend longer in stage 1 and 2, and less in stage 3 and REM than your fourth cycle of the night. So, if you wake up in the middle of your sleep, you probably aren't getting an average of 20 minutes REM per cycle. \n\nBut that's not always the case.\n\nIf your body really needs REM sleep, you will spend less time in stages 1 and two and more in deep sleep and REM. Though, as far as I know, this is not really healthy since all stages are important to mental health. If you have ever had one of those mentally exhausting days where you immediately go to sleep, and are pretty much able to sleep through WW3, that's probably when your body has decided to hurry up to deep sleep (stage 3) and REM. \n\nBut that's still not a full answer.\n\nSo 3 is pushing it, but is a 2 cycle sleep (biphasic sleep) good enough then? Probably. Funny enough, sleep is evolved to work with our environment, and our environment has changed much faster than we have evolved. Namely, we now live in comfortable safe boxes where there is no worry that jaguars are going to eat us at night. It is thought that our defense to this was to have short deep sleep cycles, so noises can wake us up, and to fully wake up for a while in the middle of the night. Waking up in the night allowed humans to do whatever was necessary (sex, fire, scouting, night hunting, etc). And really, this was the norm up for people until the 1900s. People have written about using this time for sex and writing, because it was cooler outside, and because other people were asleep. [wiki link](_URL_0_)\n\nTL;DR - 2 sleeps is probably fine, and there is active research to see if that may be better for our bodies. But, as far as we know, long uninterrupted sleep is what you should be giving your body.",
"So, will someone tell me how screwed up I am? I'm just going to be brutally honest about this. I started having symptoms of insomnia when I was 13. I was being physically ravaged by my brother who was supposed to be my guardian (see Webster's definition - protector). He once reached across the breakfast table and slapped me and send me flying across the room, on a whim. His wife, stood by, complacent and abused too. Just after she left him I started laying awake all night, staring into the darkness. Some nights I slept, some I didn't. Then he raped me. I'm 53 years old and I can't sleep more than 3 hours at a time. Then I have to be awake for 3 hours before going back to sleep. I just want to know what could my body have learned to cope with this? I've worked 2 and 3 jobs at a time and raised a son on my own. 99% of the time I'm able to function at work. I keep from getting sleepy by not eating large lunches or snacks. I find I'm more alert if I'm a little hungry.",
"Because of sleep apnea, I have a CPAP (Continuous Positive Air Pressure - by Respironics) machine, which I use at night. It's a little old now, but it measures, among other things, the number of sleep segments of four hours or more in a night. (I've never had more than 1 per night.) While I'm sure that newer machines have more things they measure, that it does that implies that four hours in a stretch is a good thing. I've also heard three hours, but I've been a computer programmer, not a sleep therapist.",
"Short answer: no. \n\nWe need REM (a phase of sleep) to really get a good rest and feel refreshed, rested, energized and aware. The more REM sleep we have the better quality of sleep you will feel you get.\n\nNow the shitty thing is, is that as we get older it takes us longer to go through the sleep cycles to get to the REM phase. \n\nSo basically you should try to get 6-8 hours of consecutive sleep every night. Some people feel they need more sleep (I like 7-9 hours a night) and some people are okay on 6. \n\nAlso, there is this thing called a Circadian Rhythm which is your bodies sleep/wake cycle. A good tip for feeling rested is keeping a good sleep/wake cycle by waking up and going to sleep at the same time-ish everyday. \n\nHope that sort of helps. \nHappy sleeping!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886915003943"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.polyphasicsociety.com/polyphasic-sleep/overviews/everyman/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.businessinsider.com/this-guy-has-only-slept-45-hours-per-day-for-two-years-2013-11"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biphasic_and_polyphasic_sleep#Historical_norm"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4nsmx3
|
what is the islamic position on lgbt communities?
|
r/news is exploding right now, and I want some clarification.
Edit: Thank you all being reasonable people. Hard to find these days :D
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nsmx3/eli5_what_is_the_islamic_position_on_lgbt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d46k239",
"d46k2ad",
"d46lro8",
"d46nnlp",
"d47c6me",
"d47onpn",
"d47p3mo"
],
"score": [
4,
11,
17,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No matter the case realize that the media is overreacting and we should not see one act of extremism be determinant of an overall opinion at all",
"Asking for the Islamic position on something is like asking for the Christian position, you're going to get as many answers as there are denominations, if not more so. I think the views of the extremists who carry out such atrocities as we've had recently are pretty clear though.",
"Pretty much *every* major religion feels the same way about LGBT issues. Even otherwise very accepting religions tend to have issues with LGBT people. ",
"These are from the authentic Hadith(sayings)of the prophet , that Muslims follow.\n\nAbu Dawud (4462) - The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, \"Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.\".\n\nBukhari (72:774) - \"The Prophet cursed effeminate men (those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, 'Turn them out of your houses .' The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and 'Umar turned out such-and-such woman.\"\n\nAbu Dawud (4448) - \"If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death.\" .\n\nal-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 - [Muhammad said] \"Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot, kill the doer and the receiver.\"",
"We have to remember that Islam and most of it´s views on life are quite similar to Christianity or Judaism.\n\nThe biggest difference is in the % of people who can be described as religious or very religious compared to Western nations.\n\nIslam like Christianity and Judaism generally frowns upon LGBT, pre-marital sex, abortion, etc.\n\nHowever when it comes to the \"average Muslims\" views on LGBT we have to consider two factors:\n\n* As said most majority Muslim countries are much less secular and on-average more religious then predominantly Christian countries\n* Even besides religious issue a lot of countries still have negative views of LGBT (e.g. Russia, India, a lot of Eastern Europe,Africa, etc.) regardless of their dominant religion, so it is likely that the overall difference in tolerance culture plays a role\n\nIf you were to take a Muslim born in a Western nation he or she would be likely to be even more tolerant of LGBT then any non-Muslim from less developed countries.",
"It is considered a sin, but sinners aren't shot up in clubs in Islamic Law. One of the most important things in Islam is tolerance of everybody.",
"No matter your views on a person, in Islam it is taught to help these people , and if you can't, your job is done. The only sin is not stepping in. If you tell them so and so, and try to help them in Islams Views, then that is all you have to do. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
505nyv
|
why does a mild shiver go down my back whenever i think about biting into something really cold (like ice cream)?
|
It does, however, stop happening if I repeat it, constantly.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/505nyv/eli5_why_does_a_mild_shiver_go_down_my_back/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d71kfi5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" It's because your teeth are very sensitive to cold temperatures, so every time your teeth touch something cold, it causes discomfort and your brain remembers this. Thinking of doing that makes your brain think, \"Hey, body just don't do that okay\" because it remembers from past experience."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
9datvb
|
why does the beam of the flashlight fade out after a few meters typically, when the light travels much farther?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9datvb/eli5_why_does_the_beam_of_the_flashlight_fade_out/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e5ggr6s",
"e5ggrkk",
"e5gh60d",
"e5h7460"
],
"score": [
21,
76,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"The flashlight bulb is putting out light in all directions. Inside the flashlight, there's a mirror that directs all of the light from the bulb to the front of the flashlight. The flashlight's \"Beam\" isn't a straight line, it's more like a cone starting at the front of the flashlight, because it's a whole bunch of different pathways from light hitting the mirror and being reflected.\n\nThe farther you get from the flashlight, the less light there is in any one area because the cone is spreading wider and wider the farther away that you get.\n\nYou can get a perfectly straight line, if you use a laser... and that's how the dot from a laser pointer can be seen from a much greater distance.",
"The beam gets wider as it gets farther from the flashlight, so you have the same amount of light being spread over a larger and larger area. Eventually it gets spread so thinly that your eyes can’t tell the difference.",
"When the light travels further away from you, it spreads out in multiple directions— both in the up/down direction and left/right. This means if you double the distance away from you, the beam is spread out over a 4 times larger area. At a 4 times greater distance, it’s spread out over a 16 times larger area.\n\nTo make things worse, the same effect applies in the other direction. That light needs to bounce back *from the object and back to your eyes*. So especially to see fine detail, you’d need to cast *more* light on a more distant object, but of course less light is reaching it. Instead of being half as effective at twice the distance, if you’re actually trying to use it to see, the same beam may only be 1/8 as effective at twice the distance.\n\nBy the way, head over the /r/flashlight because you can get lights with beams that travel wayyyyyyyy more than a few meters! ",
"My first ELI5 answer. Hi. Your question has three parts..\n\n1. Why does light fade out when a torch is shined at me? The light is made of lots of small dots or waves that come out of your torch. Most go straight but all are just a little squint. And some get bounced away by dust. After a long way most don’t make it to the target. \n\n2. Why can we see a beam? Some dots bounce off dust so they are seen from the side. This happens more in a dusty room.\n\n3. Why does the beam become invisible so quick? After a short distance not enough dots bounce sideways out of the beam to be seen.\n\nThese mean that if you are in a smoky room, the beam can be seen better but the target gets less light. \n\n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7dg8mh
|
why do you sometimes wake up and your mouth feels fuzzy with bacteria, but this never happens during the day?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7dg8mh/eli5_why_do_you_sometimes_wake_up_and_your_mouth/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpxklmf",
"dpxu11t",
"dpy9w66"
],
"score": [
20,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"Eating, drinking, talking, and just salivating help wash clean mouth surfaces while awake. One would hope all of these are sharply reduced during sleep.",
"You stop producing saliva when you're asleep (most of the time - occasionally you continue to produce sliva, which is why some people sleep-drool). Saliva works to kill bacteria; a lack of saliva lets it grow with impunity. This is why, if you can only do it once a day, to brush your teeth at night than in the morning, because otherwise you're letting the bacteria grow and work on your teeth all night.",
"It happens if you don't eat anything for a long time. Your mouth is constantly under assault from bacteria and fungal spores and this creates a skin of plaque and mucus around the teeth and gums. Every time a person eats, the biting action and chewing will scrape the teeth clean to some extent, especially eating things like firm fruits and vegetables. \n\nWe also tend to lick and swish throughout the day to keep our mouths clean between brushings, but at night you're not eating and you're not doing this and so that skin or film, can build up. \n\nWhen you go a long period without eating, you can get the same problem even when you're awake. I find that during a fast I have to brush my teeth several times a day or oral hygiene starts to suffer. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
qefmi
|
radiation
|
Just what IS it? What does it do? What creates it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qefmi/eli5_radiation/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3wxv0o",
"c3x0o09",
"c3x0ozx",
"c3x0qja",
"c3x0rku",
"c3x0wex"
],
"score": [
32,
59,
10,
3,
27,
3
],
"text": [
"Under classical physics there are 2 basic types of radiation:\n\n* Particle radiation\n\n* Wave radiation\n\nParticle radiation is typically created in nuclear decay (when atoms break down). They sometimes propel protons, neutrons, electrons or whole new atoms away from the site of break down. Also, remember your old big TV? These also had something in the back shooting electrons against the screen, making it glow.\n\nWave radiation is usually electro-magnetic wave radiation which can be anything from radio waves, microwaves, cellphone signals, wifi signals, light, uv-light, x-ray and something we call gamma rays. They are all basically the same about how they are created: you accelerate or decelerate electrons. Anything from uv-light, x-ray and gamma rays can really hurt you, stay away unless necessary (x-ray pictures at the doc are okay if you don't take to many of them.\n\nHowever, in modern physics, we discovered, those 2 types are basically the same in how they behave (not how they are created).\n\nAs to what it does ... well it almost always does heat up matter it passes through. But it can do more (like x-rays can damage your cells). Also you can transmit signals with electromagnetic radiation very easily over distances. Hence why tv broadcasts, cell phones and wifi uses it.",
"Some atoms are not meant to be. Like a house of cards, they will eventually fall apart.\n\nWhen they do, little bits fall off. Some of these little bits are matter, like neutrons, protons, and electrons. Others are forms of light called gamma rays. Collectively, they are called radiation. They typically are shot out with a lot of energy, and can break down molecules in your body.",
"Let's assume you know about protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and electrons attract each other, but protons and protons repel each other. That's why there are neutrons. The neutrons hold the protons together in the nucleus, and the electrons orbit outside. Those don't really matter here. \n\nA bigger atom has more stuff to it. So if we want to add more protons, we need more neutrons to hold them together. When the atoms get big enough, there isn't an exact number of neutrons that hold protons in. \n\nFor example, in the element Carbon, there are 6 protons. But there are different versions of carbon. Some have 6 neutrons to hold the 6 protons together, but other versions have 5, 7, or even 8 neutrons (isotopes). It's all still carbon because we only count the protons when we want to know what element it is. \n\nThe carbon with 8 neutrons is *radioactive.* This means that since there is such big difference between the number of protons and the number of neutrons, the atom is unstable. Eventually, the carbon becomes stable. How? By getting rid of those extra neutrons. There are many different ways to do this. It can turn a neutron into a proton, which gives off one type radiation, or it can get rid of some neutrons and protons, which is a different type of radiation. \n\nTo sum up: Radiation is the extra stuff that an atom throws away when it is feeling uncomfortable. ",
"Radiation is a broad term that covers processes in which energetic particles or energetic waves travel. This includes visible light. Various forms of radiation do various things and are created by various things. One example is creating a fire or a light. When you do you have a source of radiation. Radiating light and heat it allows us to see or feel warmth. Other forms of radiation pass through us without us even noticing. Some can burn and some can damage the cells we are made of.",
"Copypasta from the last time:\n\nLets start way back at the beginning. All matter is made up of little \"bits\" called atoms. Those atoms are in turn made up of three different kinds of particles - electrons, protons, and neutrons. The protons and neutrons are 'smushed' together and make up the nucleus, and the electrons (which are much much smaller) whizz around it.\n\nAtoms can be different in one of two ways - first by counting the number of protons, we can determine what element it is, like oxygen, gold, or iron. The number of protons in any atom of gold is the same, no matter what.\n\nHowever, some atoms might have the same number of protons, and therefore be the same element - but what about the neutrons? What do they do?\n\nIf you have more or less neutrons, than the mass of the nucleus changes, but not much else - basically the atom will be a little bit lighter, or a little bit heavier. We call atoms of the same element, but numbers of neutrons 'isotopes'.\n\nIf you have too many neutrons, or not enough neutrons, then the atom becomes 'unstable', and they will suddenly 'pop'. When it does, a little 'bit' of the atom flies off at high speed. That's radiation.\n\nThe biggest bits are like cannonballs. They're big, heavy, and can't go very far - a few inches at most. When they hit something though, they do a lot of damage. We call these 'alpha' particles, and are made of two protons and two neutrons stuck together. They actually are exactly the same as the nucleus of a helium atom, just moving really fast.\n\nThe next size down is like a bullet. It's a lot lighter than the cannonball, and can go a lot further, but if it hits something the damage is less. We call these 'beta' particles. Beta particles are just electrons, but again moving very very quickly. \n\nThe next size down is more like a laser, because it doesn't weigh anything at all! It's actually just like a laser, only it's a kind of light you can't see. It goes really far, even through *outer space*, and most likely will pass right through you. But it can 'burn' you like a laser can, so we have to be careful. These are called 'gamma' rays.\n\nThe fourth kind is like a grenade. It's a little bigger than a bullet and smaller than a cannonball, and doesn't really hurt whatever it hits....yet. But like a grenade, it causes another little 'explosion', and might make another atom 'pop'. These are neutrons, the same neutrons that are found in the nucleus of atoms - like before, just moving very very fast.\n\nHere's a neat thing for you; if one of the 'grenades' or neutrons makes another atom 'pop', and that atom also releases a 'grenade' when it pops, we can try to string them together so they keep popping more atoms. This is how nuclear reactors work.",
"There are two kinds: Particle radiation, which is basically bits of atoms or other subatomic particles, and Wave radiation, which is really high-wavelength light.\n\nParticle radiation is mostly created by atomic decay, when the little bits that make up atoms, called protons, neutrons, and electrons, get knocked off. This can be caused by the atom simply being unstable, or the atom being hit by something else really hard.\n\nWave radiation comes either from atoms splitting (nuclear radiation, mostly gamma rays) or from a charged particle being slowed down or deflected by another charged particle. This is called \"Bremsstrahlung\" (\"Braking Radiation\") and is mostly x-rays.\n\nTechnically, all forms of light, from radio waves to the visble spectrum to x-rays, are all radiation. It's just that Ultraviolet light and above (X-rays, gamma rays, etc.), along with most particle radiation, is what's called \"ionizing radiation\", which means it's small enough to knock bits out of your DNA. This is bad because if it knocks out the wrong bits, the DNA that keeps cells from duplicating uncontrollably gets taken out, and you get cancer."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8zrdmt
|
what is the windows .net framework, and why is it useful?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8zrdmt/eli5_what_is_the_windows_net_framework_and_why_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e2l15xg",
"e2l62b6",
"e2l6guo",
"e2l7fzz",
"e2l8edy"
],
"score": [
222,
15,
4,
2,
10
],
"text": [
"Cooking, eating, washing dishes, and getting rid of trash all took a lot longer and was less effective before we standardized dish sizes, cooking instruments, had a stove and a dishwasher, and were able put all the trash on the curb where it magically disappears later. Frameworks represent standards, appliances, garbage collection, and easy means of getting things to and from your code/house to remote locations/landfills that you haven't the slightest idea about how they work. Additionally, If you write your code to the framework, you can be sure it will work on anything that the framework says it can run on. In the case of Windows .NET, that means 'any' version of Windows. In the case of DotNetCore, that's starting to mean 'any' modern device. There's a few asterisks in there, but that wouldn't be ELI5. ",
"When making a piece of software, like an app for a phone or a website, programmers need to do a lot of common tasks, like joining the word ‘Hello’ with your name to make a greeting or sending a file across the internet. To make the software do this from scratch requires a lot of time and effort and knowledge about the physical machine. \nThe .NET Framework has a lot of the common stuff already written for programmers to use so that they can concentrate on the things that make software brilliant like ease of use and useful features. It also means they don’t have to worry about their code not working on a particular computer as if the framework can be installed then their code will work too.",
"There's some things most programs need to do. Access a database. Talk to another program over the internet. Ask a user for some information.\n\nFrameworks, such as .net, do this for programmers. Thus they don't need to worry about the HOW of what they want to do, they can worry about the WHY and WHAT they they want to do.\n\n.Net is a little different that other frameworks in that it is an embrella. Where other tech stacks (lists of technologies a company uses) may list a half dozen or more frameworks, each solving a different problem, .net provides a \"one stop shop\" to solve those problems, all which play nicy with each other.\n\nCompanies like frameworks as it keeps the coders focused on their problems and engaged in interesting work. Programmers like frameworks as it helps get rid of the tediousness of the job, and helps make jumping jobs easier (I may not knoe the business your company is in, but I can listen to the people who do and know the frameworks you use).",
"The .NET framework is basically Microsoft Java. Just like how Java makes sure a programmer can write a program once, and it works roughly the same \"everywhere,\" the .NET framework ensures that a programmer can write a program once, and it'll run on any version of Windows, provided the right version of the framework is installed. It also accomplishes this in a very similar fashion to Java.\n\nThe .NET Core is Microsoft's open source version of this intended to work everywhere, from phones to Linux to Mac to windows computers.\n\nEdit to add: I write .NET applications in C#",
"The .NET Framework is two main things:\n\n1- A standard library - this is a very large set of built in functions and classes, so when a programmer needs to do something like get the square root of a number, or get the content of a web page, they can use the standard framework classes and it's fast and easy.\n\n2- A virtual machine - .NET runs on a virtual machine, like java, so when they port the framework to various systems you get almost automatic cross platform support.\n\nBonus: The .NET framework supports awesome languages such as C# and F#"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2qayl9
|
if you run in damp/foggy air enough is it possible to drown from too much moisture getting into your lungs?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qayl9/eli5if_you_run_in_dampfoggy_air_enough_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn4gza4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"No, breathing may be more labored since the air is thicker and has a slightly lower amount of oxygen, but short of running full bore through a garden hose, it would be impossible to drown. You'd cough up whatever moisture does accumulate before it becomes dangerous."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
21c57p
|
how does humming work?
|
How does the sound resonate not only in my head but as well as others around me hearing it
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21c57p/eli5how_does_humming_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgblhpl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Humming is just like singing with your mouth closed. The air (and much of the sound) is coming out of your nose. Try humming while holding your nose."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6llckp
|
is there a cultural or historical reason why america developed its own measurement system?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6llckp/eli5_is_there_a_cultural_or_historical_reason_why/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djumnf2",
"djumvq0"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Brits arrived, taught imperial system.\n\nBrits left, moved on from imperial system.\n\nUSA didn't.",
"The US never created its own system, it just kept using the measurements it had always been using even before it existed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5csixx
|
does the sound produced by a shooting gun come from the bullet passing trough the sound barrier?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5csixx/eli5_does_the_sound_produced_by_a_shooting_gun/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9z1duu"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Part of the sound is the bang from the expanding gases propelling the bullet, you can muffle the bang with a silencer. \nThe other part of the sound is indeed the crack from the supersonic bullet. So even with a silencer a gun shot is still loud, unless you use special subsonic ammo"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
225jcg
|
why actors don't get restraining orders against media
|
Tabloids and news corporations use actors images without permission, (so it seems) send reporters to harass them daily, and generally invade privacy.
It doesn't seem like artistic license stands and freedom of speech seems like a loose reason.
So why are there so many actors busting up reporters and suffering rather than legal recourse?
Merchandizing seems to be the only qualification for monetary use of image but what about ad revenue?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/225jcg/eli5_why_actors_dont_get_restraining_orders/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgjjlzh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Freedom of the press... plus if you're out in public anyone is free to take pictures of you. This has been extended to just the person taking the pictures needs to be out in a public space so they use telephoto lenses"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6enlh1
|
why when a new cpu is showing, the companies insanely overclocks it to show performance?
|
I recently saw a new about the Intel i9-7900X and they used nitrogen liquid to overclock at ~ 5 GHz to beat RYZEN Cinebench score.
I mean, how many customers would do that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6enlh1/eli5why_when_a_new_cpu_is_showing_the_companies/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dibl63q",
"dibl8m1",
"dibliw3"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Very few [if any], and usually the enthusiasts who perform these tests are not affiliated with Intel, although may be sponsored.\n\nLN2 cooling is extremely unpractical, but is a very effective way of cooling a CPU. These tests are generally a \"let see how far we can push this thing before it crashes\" test, rather than \"how much can we realistically expect out of this thing\".\n\n",
"Few customers will overclock, but the company still gets a factually correct statement and demonstration of performance from their product that looks really good to the mostly ignorant masses.",
"The same reason why car companies advertise very fast 0-60 mph times or have a speedometer that can go to very high speeds. Even though most people will never accelerate or speed that fast, the possibility of that car being able to do it adds to its worth."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2hdlcu
|
how can the president eat out at restaurants without him (or security) being worried about someone tampering with his food?
|
I got curious after rewatching the "Obama Dijon Mustard" video.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hdlcu/eli5_how_can_the_president_eat_out_at_restaurants/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckrofrb"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Given his extremely high profile they (Secret Service) most likely won't allow him to do so. If he wants McDonald's or something they'll send a flunkie to get it. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3p5x0d
|
how are quad-core intel processors better than hexa/octa-core amd processors?
|
I'm a heavy gamer, and when first buying my PC, I was going to go with AMD (higher cores, much higher gHz.) Yet my friends told me to go with Intel processors because they are better. I still don't get how AMD processors have more cores, more gHz, yet remain at a lower price and have less power than a high end Intel processor?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p5x0d/eli5_how_are_quadcore_intel_processors_better/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw3ebvi",
"cw3f00o",
"cw3hjuo",
"cw3r4hq"
],
"score": [
8,
24,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Define \"power\". Intel is a step above AMD, you need only look at the benchmarks to see that. Just because you have 8 cores doesn't mean they're all being used. Most video games are not CPU limited and may not perform much parallelism on the CPU. \n\nIf I have a 3.2 GHz single core processor, you have four 2.8GHz processors, and the game we're paying is largely single threaded on the CPU, my processor will win because it can execute more instructions in the same amount of time, and three of your processors are sitting idle. \n\nThat's certainly a simplification, you can't ignore other parts of the architecture (e.g.memort cache sizes, bus speeds, etc. ), but your typical game doesn't benefit much from having a large number of CPU's. You have to look at the application. Performance is always about tradeoffs. ",
"The frequency (GHz) doesn't tell the whole story, because one processor might be able to accomplish more each cycle than another one, so you can't compare based on that number alone. The number of cores doesn't tell the whole story because (a) four fast cores might outpace six slow cores and (b) many programs (including/especially games) are not well designed to take advantage of multiple cores. \n\nThink about multiple cores as having four grills and you're trying to grill a steak. It won't make the process any faster. If you were trying to grill 32 steaks, then yeah, you could do it 4X faster by using all of the grills... but most games are like cooking 1 (or 2) steak(s) and won't get any faster by having more grills.",
"Modern processors are basically magic. And I actually studied processor architecture in college.\n\nIf you've ever done any programming, you might have a picture of a processor as a device that is just given a series of instructions and executes them. Add more speed or more cores and you get more instructions executed.\n\nThis is rarely what happens.\n\nModern processors do ridiculous things like out-of-order execution. When it's given a list of instructions, the processor can be like \"Dude, whoever programmed this is dumb, I can execute this faster if I re-order and re-write the instructions this other way. So I'm gonna.\" Of course, this can mean that the sequence will no longer produce the same result, so the processor has to account for that too.\n\nResource management is also an issue. Some instructions, like long divisions or off-processor memory accesses can take thousands of times longer to execute that others, so being able to execute other instructions while these are running is very beneficial. Or the processor could be able to execute many of these instructions at at once by having these circuits duplicated, without duplicating the entire core.\n\nBottom line, there's waaay too much insane crap goin on in processor design to quantify it just by speed and core-count. The only real way to quantify performance is with well-designed benchmarks.",
"Final year computer engineering student here and who recently built his gaming rig.\n\nHere are a few good performance indicators:\n\n* Frequency. Yes it still does matter in the equation. It used to be a straight forward to compare processors with only frequency as a rule of thumb back in the days, but those days are long gone.\n\n* Cache hits/misses ratio. The cache is a faster memory than the RAM which is integrated in the chip and keeps a copy of what was being working on not long ago or what is close to it, the principle being that those pieces of data have a greater chance of being used after. There are are usually about 3 levels of cache in a modern CPU, called L1, L2 and L3, L1 being the smallest and the fastest. [See this](_URL_0_) as a reference of the times it takes for different scenarios.\n\n* Memory access latency. The time it takes for the data to reach the CPU from memory. As said earlier, L1 has the shortest time and RAM has the longest, not counting permanent storage and other peripherals such as network access.\n\n* Branch prediction. This is where the CPU makes a guess about which decision (read what part of the program will to jump to) and executes it right away. If the prediction is wrong then the precomputed result is discarded. Note that both decisions can be computed in advance, but nevertheless it still speeds up computations to have branching prediction. This doesn't really matter no more now since branch prediction has a performance of about 98% in a modern CPU.\n\n* Cores. Each core can have its own thread of execution running in parallel without loss of performance, of course neglecting the sharing of memory bandwidth. The advantage here is obvious, but this is not a miracle solution. This is most useful when the tasks are most independent from one another, for example listening to music and editing videos, or processing the frames of a video where n images can be processed in a batch of n cores at the same time. It is important to note that passing data around cores has certain cost and thus applications that does this must be optimized. In fact, sometimes adding cores can slow down the application if the developer doesn't know about synchronisation and cache.\n\n* Hyper threading: The idea that each core can have one more thread running on it at the same time. The reason for this is to reduce context switching time. When a core wants to switch to another task it must save the work (the so called \"stack\") it has done before doing so, and this takes time, although not *that* much, but hyper threading optimizes this by minimizing the switching time between two tasks running on the same core.\n\n* Stack execution speed. This is the actual linear speed to perform a sequence of operations. This is often where CPU manufacturers really shine in their cleverness. For example, usually the order of the instructions impacts the result, but not all. The idea is to reorganize the order of execution in a way that optimizes speed. For example querying data from memory while doing the calculation on already available data, this is called \"out of order execution\". Another is to perform a single instruction on multiple data (SIMD, you can guess what that means). For example if 4 pairs of numbers must be multiplied, then they can be done one shot, still being the on the same core. Branch prediction also comes in that kind of \"trick\". \n\n\nBut all your choice of CPU should not depend on arbitrary bench marks, since 1) they may be more biased toward certain kind of tasks (like parallel vs single stack execution speed) and 2) The CPU will often not be the bottleneck of your rig. Memory and GPU comes a long way to improve performance. This is why I've picked an 8 cores AMD CPU, which is ideal for me since having 8 cores is really great for compiling code. It was also the most worth it terms of quality / price ratio.\n\n\nAnyway I hope it answers a few questions, but it's 2 AM and I'm fucking tired.\n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://gist.github.com/jboner/2841832"
]
] |
|
3z75or
|
the gas leak in california has been going on for 3 months and is a serious crisis. what is taking the gas company, or the government, so long to fix such an urgent matter?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z75or/eli5_the_gas_leak_in_california_has_been_going_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyjrmwr",
"cyjs5rq",
"cyk5vza"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"I don't know how I'd explain it to an actual 5 year old, but basically nobody has been truly prepared for this. As my father always says, \"when something goes wrong, it's usually the next thing you do that makes it worse\" - meaning a knee jerk reaction causes more problems than solutions, and it's wise to consider all of the variables in this situation. At this point it's at level \"not good/nuisance\" even though it seems like a lot, thanks to the vastness of our atmosphere and natural gas reserves, but any massive operation to fix it runs the risk of raising that to levels that only Samuel L Jackson could convey.",
"The source of the leak is from a pipe that is 8500 feet deep from gas storage well that contains 390 billion cubic feet of gas. There have been several attempts to kill the well by plugging it up by various methods but the pressure of the gas coming from the leak has made this unsuccessful. Now the company is trying to create a relief well to capture the escaping gas which requires drilling from another spot which is timely process",
"[This is how they're going to stop it](_URL_0_) does drilling that relief well look easy to you?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-g-porter-ranch-gas-leak-20151222-htmlstory.html"
]
] |
||
2qi9q2
|
why do we think black holes are anything more than just super dense balls of matter?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qi9q2/eli5_why_do_we_think_black_holes_are_anything/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn6dlo2",
"cn6duqz",
"cn6dzum",
"cn6e17o",
"cn6e9rr",
"cn6ec1i",
"cn6ivqg",
"cn6khvx"
],
"score": [
87,
10,
2,
2,
34,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When we try to understand them by using math, we end up having to plug things like infinity and zero into our equations, which breaks them and we don't get any sort of real or useful answer. Before the equations break down though, some weird things start happening like the warping of space and time. We also can't see inside them because their gravity is so strong that any light that gets too close to them gets pulled in. ",
"We don't, it's just that when matter is dense enough, the equations we use to deal with how matter affects other matter don't represent reality correctly anymore.",
"Because of the math. There are a lot of things out in the universe that cannot be directly observed...black holes being at the very top of that list. In order to learn more about them Physicists use math and stuff we *do* know to make predictions about these unobservable objects or phenomena. Black holes are so far off the norm that the equations for \"just a big ball of matter\" dont work on them...suggesting that there is more to it.",
"Black holes *are* just super dense balls of matter, the reason they confuse us is because they are so utterly massive (in gravitational sense) that they literally distort space-time around them in ways we don't quite understand. \n\nBlack holes are so powerful, they change the way our observed universe works near them. The questions are what exactly happens to the matter once inside the black holes, the theory is it's all broken down into atoms, and recent evidence suggests that black holes occasionally \"burp\" up matter it's pulled in!",
"Current scientific consensus is that black holes are infinite density singularities. \n\nDo we actually have direct scientific evidence that they aren't just some sort of ultra-dense form of exotic matter? No. However, given the conditions that would prevail within a black hole, especially the ultra-large ones in galactic cores, it considered most likely that nothing can withstand the pressures that are created there and the entire thing collapses to a point.\n\nWe know of ultra-dense objects - white dwarfs and neutron stars. We have significant scientific evidence that supports their existence. \n\nWhite dwarfs are low-mass spent stellar cores. They are as dense as regular matter can be - they are composed of electron degenerate matter. The [Pauli exclusion principle](_URL_0_) prohibits certain subatomic particles (fermions) from inhabiting the same quantum state. For our purposes here, this prevents them from existing in the same physical space. In electron degenerate matter, the electrons have been compressed to the maximum amount possible without violating the Pauli exclusion principle. This matter will not compress further under pressure.\n\nNeutron stars are the remnant of high-mass stellar cores. At a certain point, the gravitational pressure becomes so high that it is energetically favorable for electrons and protons to interact. This results in a proton and electron combining to form a neutron and a high energy neutrino which flies away. Neutrons are able to exist at much higher densities than electrons and you get super dense neutronium. This is neutron-degenerate matter just like white dwarfs are electron degenerate matter. This material will not compress any further under pressure unless there is enough force on it to make it energetically favorable for the neutrons to convert into a different form of matter.\n\nIt is theorized that there are other exotic, higher density forms of matter such as quark-gluon plasmas which might exist at even higher pressures. They might exist at neutron star cores but this is purely theoretical at this point.\n\nHowever, a black hole is a different beast. At a certain point, the gravitational attraction of that dense matter gets so great that the escape velocity hits the speed of light. This makes it impossible for any matter to escape once it has fallen in. \n\nWe have absolutely no way of knowing what has happened to the matter inside the event horizon.\n\nIt might be some sort of exotic form matter that can withstand the insane pressures in that environment. There is nothing that I am aware of that would cause the pauli exclusion principle to stop working. You can trigger conversions from one form of matter to another such as the collapse between electron and neutron degenerate matter. However, it is theoretically possible that the center of a black hole might just be some sort of maximally densified degenerate matter that can withstand nearly infinite compression.\n\nHowever, the current scientific consensus is that the pressures inside a black hole are simply too great for any physical construct to withstand. Remember that galactic core black holes can reach 20 billion solar masses. As you continue to add matter to a black hole, the theoretical pressure on a non-singularity core rapidly trends towards infinity. Also, the gravitational acceleration within that core is many times the speed of light. As far as we know with our understanding of physics, that simply overwhelms any conceivable resistance to that pressure and the matter simply collapses.\n\nThis is a singularity. As the matter collapses, the gravitational gradient increases in a runaway feedback loop. The density and gravitational attraction both go to infinity and spacetime itself glitches and becomes infinitely curved.\n\nIs there any way for us to distinguish black holes made from some unknown form of infinitely strong ultradense matter and a singularity? This goes well beyond my level of knowledge here but my understanding is probably not. Either way, we simply do not have the observational data now to even come close to distinguishing these two states. However, what we do know of physics seems to point towards a singularity being the more likely of the two scenarios.",
"Can I attach a question to this about the exponential expansion of the universe? \n\nI remember one theory about the \"death\" of the universe being caused by the distances between all matter expanding exponentially until even molecules are ripped apart and the whole universe is reduced to atoms floating around with an ever expanding space between them.\n\nHow does the coincide with black holes when they essentially can't be pulled apart? Or could you pull one apart with 2 other black holes on either side of one? can it happen? Etc.",
"Its important to understand that trying to visualize the topology of a black holes is not going to be intuitive unless you have a deeper understanding of the implications of general relativity when it comes to influence mass has on the curvature of spacetime.\n\nWhen a star's core's mass becomes so large the immense gravity warps spacetime to such a degree that the fundamental laws of physics as we understand them in general relativity and quantum mechanics start to break down.",
"That is exactly what a black hole is. The still unanswered question is what exactly happens when you cram matter so close together that both general relativity and quantum mechanics become relevant at the same time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
djfttj
|
why is oily plastic so much harder to wash than oily metal/ceramic?
|
I've noticed while washing dishes that if I pump dish detergent on the sponge, lather it up and apply the sponge to the ceramic dish, the dish gets clean quite easily, and I can even use the residual lather to wash a good 3-4 other ceramic dishes.
However, for plastic containers or cutlery, that is not the case. If I use residual lather to wash them, it will just spread oil over everything and make it worse. Even if I pump detergent on the sponge directly and lather it up and use that, the plastic will still not be clean. I can only get plastic clean if I apply detergent directly to the item I am washing. I have noticed this phenomenon only for plastic objects and never metal or ceramic, or even wood.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/djfttj/eli5_why_is_oily_plastic_so_much_harder_to_wash/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f44y7vf",
"f451jp5",
"f45k5e0",
"f45ofqf",
"f45ovqt"
],
"score": [
144,
4,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they are basically the same thing. Oil sticks to itself and plastic is basically solid oil. There's more detailed chemical reasons, but that's the oversimplified version.",
"Most plastic is actually made out of olive oil so really it's not that oil doesn't wash off plastic easily, it's that we all die alone eventually",
"I've noticed using a woven washcloth instead of a sponge works wonders for cleaning oily plastic surfaces. Must be more surface area, or more absorbent. Maybe both.",
"Ceramics and metals tend to repel neither water, nor oil, so soaps have an easy time time washing oils off of those surfaces. The issue with using soaps on plastics is that the surface of the plastic is slightly hydrophobic, so instead of forming a soap membrane around the oil spots, it more or less creates a thin film over the entirety of the surface, diminishing the effectiveness of the soap.",
"Not an answer, but try soaking plastics alone in a full sink of hot soapy water.\n\nIt seems to work a LOT better then in a sink full of other greasy objects."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
vgzy5
|
how does the turing machine google doodle work?
|
[Here](_URL_0_) is the link to Google's homepage. I am able to guess through trial and error, but I'd like to know how this works, exactly.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/vgzy5/eli5_how_does_the_turing_machine_google_doodle/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c54f78m"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"So the point of the Turing Machine in this case is to modify the sequence of zeroes and ones on the machine's \"tape\" to match the sequence above the tape. To put it simply, a Turing Machine is a theoretical computer. It uses a finite set of instructions that can reliably fulfill a certain task (in these cases, matching the digits). So you need to come up with a series of steps (using the buttons the doodle allows you to press) that the machine can go through to match the sequences.\n\nAs far as what the buttons mean:\n\n* Arrow buttons - move the tape one square in the direction they point\n* 0/1 buttons - change the number in the square to whichever number is on the button\n* The number in the box w/ an arrow buttons - mean \"if the number in the current box matches what's in the box on the button (1, 0, or blank), start following the set of steps the arrow points to, if they don't match don't do anything and keep moving forward\n* Curvy Arrow button - move back the same number of buttons as dots in the arrow curve\n\nJust combine the functions of these buttons and run through what your instructions should do in your head (these instructions are called an algorithm, btw), then press the play button and you can match all the sequences."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.google.com/"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
aik5e5
|
why do people dry age beef? also why doesn’t it just go rotten? or does it and people like that?
|
Sorry for being a lowly peasant who’s never had aged beef, but I watched a video showing aged beef and it just seemed strange to me. Wouldn’t it smell terribly? If not, why not?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aik5e5/eli5_why_do_people_dry_age_beef_also_why_doesnt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eeoh2xb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They age it by keeping it in carefully controlled environments with the right temperature and humidity... wanting the 'right' kind of bacteria to grow. Think how they age cheeses. Yeah it definitely gets funky on the outside but they cut that part off. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2igyag
|
why do i hear a click in my headset when i turn the lamp on, which is connected to the same outlet as my pc?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2igyag/eli5why_do_i_hear_a_click_in_my_headset_when_i/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl24q2x"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When you turn a switch on it closes a circuit, allowing electricity to flow. \n\nWith simpler electric devices such as lamps, the switch is usually physically closing and opening the circuit, which can cause a small arc to form when the contacts are getting close to each other, kind of like how you get a static shock when your finger gets near a metal doorknob.\n\nSuch arcs create a quick pop of electromagnetic (radio) discharge.\n\nSince headset/speaker wires are often very thin, they are especially sensitive to electromagnetic fields in the environment. The \"pop\" from the lamp switch induces a current in your speaker wire, which you hear in your headphones as a clicking noise. \n\nYou can sometimes observe the same phenomenon by having your cell phone close to your speaker wire and sending a text message - if you're lucky, the radio waves coming out of your phone will induce a current in your headset that comes across as sort of a low-pitch buzzing or beeping noise (at least, that's how my cell phone sounds) "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
udztp
|
motorcycling, why does shifting your weight off the bike help when cornering?
|
I understand the basic principle, shifting weight over so that you can stand the bike up more whilst turning. What I dont understand is why does this help your turn harder/faster compared to keeping your rear seated 'normally'.
Have started to practice this whilst riding, wanted to know the theory behind it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/udztp/motorcycling_why_does_shifting_your_weight_off/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4ujwri",
"c4untl3"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"You are actually missing a basic principle there: The lean of the bike defines the turn radius *completely* as long as both tires are in static contact with the ground (e.g., not drifting). Vertical bike goes perfectly straight, and five degrees of lean defines a specific turn radius at a specific speed. You literally cannot stand a bike up *while* turning; it will stop turning. \n\nThe principles are actually more complicated than you might imagine; it has to do with the bike \"following\" the front tire among other things. A quick search will give you some good resources as to why leaning a bike turns it if you're really interested. \n\nIn the meantime, try something else: Countersteering. Get on the bike, take it up to speed, and without trying to lean, push the handlebar *on the side you wish to turn towards*. Want to go left? Push the left handlebar forward. This may seem as though it would turn the bike right, but it's an easy way to get exactly the turn you want. The handlebar will quite literally push back in a positive feedback circuit and the bike will turn left. Want to turn harder? Push harder. The bike will lean exactly as much as it needs to in response to your push and you'll be making smooth turns in no time. ",
"When you're turning a bike, it's leaning at an angle. What you're accomplishing by shifting your body weight further to that side is actually *lowering* your weight to the ground, not just out to the side. This lowers the overall centre of gravity, and vehicles with a lower center of gravity have more traction.\n\nFollowup question is why does a lower center of gravity help vehicles (cars, too) turn. The answer has to do with the moment arm of the centrifugal force being applied to the tires being shorter."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
aruzeh
|
how do cockroaches survive without heads and are there other animals that can do the same? [biology]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aruzeh/eli5_how_do_cockroaches_survive_without_heads_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egpv83i",
"egq300k",
"egs4cna"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Most insects lack a central nervous system (brain). They behavior is all down to nerves interacting in the rest of their body. So even if they lost their head the rest of their body would just work as normally. Another feature that is not uncommon among insects is a high proportion of stem cells. This does make their bodies less efficient and makes them very prone to cancer. However it also allows them to heal much faster. They might be able to regrow their head before they starve to death.",
"Ganglia. I'm too tired to write this out but ganglia are mini brains in various parts of an insects body _URL_0_ for more information",
"In vertebrates, all major control of your vital organs (heart, kidneys, breathing) is centralized in the brain.\n\nIn insects, they have no brain or spinal cord so they have little brains (or ganglia, which is bunch of nerve cell bodies) that control stomach functions, or mating, or hind leg movements, and so on.\n\nSo a headless mantid can still keep doing mating movements, because his head wasn't giving the instructions to do that anyway.\n\nInsects also don't bleed out (I know, cockroaches aren't insects, but this is and ELI5). Insects don't have blood vessels! Their whole body is filled with a fluid called hemolymph that serves as blood in carrying nutrients across the body, providing immune responses, and clotting when the insect is injured. Like arthropods, insects have an open circulatory system as opposed to our closed circulatory system. Whereas our blood is confined within blood vessels, insect blood, called hemolymph, flows freely throughout the body. So no high blood pressure and they don't bleed out as fast."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganglion?wprov=sfla1"
],
[]
] |
||
6ld6oa
|
what is this thing we see floating in the eyeball almost like see-through mesh of straw like fibers.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ld6oa/eli5_what_is_this_thing_we_see_floating_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djswswd"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Eye floaters appear as small spots that drift through your field of vision. They may stand out when you look at something bright, like white paper or a blue sky. They might annoy you, but they shouldn’t interfere with your sight.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.webmd.com/eye-health/benign-eye-floaters"
]
] |
||
2d6y9u
|
why putin is sacrificing economic stability & international relations for a ukraine buffer zone?
|
Seems liek having a small patch of land isn't worth all this. Putin's a brilliant politican and tactician, so what's the end game here?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d6y9u/eli5_why_putin_is_sacrificing_economic_stability/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjmok3z",
"cjmvcyz"
],
"score": [
4,
24
],
"text": [
"I think it was to prove a point to the Ukrainians who dared protest his willingness to co-opt the Ukrainian leadership and orient it against Ukrainian interests.\n\nHe's the president of Russia. I imagine he sees himself as a show-of-force kind of guy.\n\nEver played Risk against somebody who felt slighted by you, and proceeded to dedicate themselves to making sure you lose? I think it's something like that.",
"All my other comments aside, russia is lost if they lose their crimean port-they can't be a world power without it. They don't have another comparable port anywhere. With an openly hostile government in the ukraine, that is a real risk. I hope this comment is more acceptable as it answers the question directly and contains only uncontroversial facts. I'm not supporting them, only giving a reason why this is so important to russia. If the question was \"why is putin such a dick\" i would have plenty of reasons to offer."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4enu1w
|
i'm from the uk - please tell me how on earth the president of the united states gets chosen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4enu1w/eli5_im_from_the_uk_please_tell_me_how_on_earth/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d21qm03",
"d21qrww"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The parties choose their nominee through primaries and caucuses. That's happening right now.\n\nIn November, we have the general election. Voters in each state go to vote to choose who will get that state's electoral votes. Each state has a number of electoral votes equal to its representation in Congress, so larger states have more votes than smaller ones. Most states award the electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis -- so if a state has 10 electoral votes to award, and one candidate gets 60% of the vote and the other gets 40%, then the winner gets all 10 votes from that state.\n\nWe will know the results that night (barring a disaster like 2000). In December, the votes are cast in the state capitals, and in January they are counted in Congress.",
"So you're in kindergarten and your teacher announces that you're going to have class elections. She explains further by saying all the girls are on one team and all the boys are on the other team. Each team has to work together to select the best boy to run for president. So before the president is selected, both the boys and the girls vote to see who the most liked kid is. Each team selects the one who gets the most votes and then the boy's teams candidate runs against the girl's team candidate. \n\nThat's the simple version, but the tad more complicated is here.\n\nSo the two teams are Democrats and Republicans, dems being the left and republicans being the right. Each party has their own election called a primary in which any democrat who believes they should be the democratic nominee runs against each other (same thing on the republican side). If you don't want to run as a Democrat or a Republican you have to run as an independent (or third party) which is pretty much impossible. Whoever wins the primary for each party then goes up in a General election where every state votes and in that general election, whoever wins is the president. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6lxka3
|
how does united airlines stock prices continue to grow despite their constant negative customer experiences in the news?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6lxka3/eli5_how_does_united_airlines_stock_prices/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djxcl9p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because shareholders and prospective shareholders don't believe that the company will take any real long term hit from the recent events. Obviously there is still enough demand for the stock to keep the price propped up, so that means there are enough people out there who feel confident in the long term health of the company for them to be willing to pay that price for stock."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
7vxl1a
|
what happens to the kinetic energy of a moving car?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7vxl1a/eli5what_happens_to_the_kinetic_energy_of_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dtvunco",
"dtvuv8m",
"dtvvezh"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It goes into movement... Thats what kinetic energy is, it exerts a force pushing forward to overcome the inertia of the stationary car, the friction of the road, any slopes, and air resistance.",
"The kinetic energy is the movement of the car. Unless you mean where does it go when the car stops in which case when you apply the brakes the brakes cause a lot of friction which turns the kinetic energy of the car into heat and sound. ",
"Almost all of it goes into heat.\n\nAir resistance warms the air and hitting the brakes warms them up. If you drive to the top of a hill, some of it is turned into gravitational potential energy, but when you drive in a loop, it's almost all turned into heat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
719bcb
|
why is childbirth painful? shouldn't it be orgasmic to encourage reproduction?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/719bcb/eli5_why_is_childbirth_painful_shouldnt_it_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn92eny"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"This is known as the [Obstetrical dilemma.](_URL_0_)\n\nOther primates give birth relatively easy compared to humans.\n\nHumans have issues because, once they decided to walk upright, the pelvis had to adapt to this upright orientation, decreasing the space of the birth canal. Meanwhile, brains, and therefore skulls, became bigger. Both processes are at odds with one another.\n\nEDIT: As for why there is no \"orgasmic\" birth: The evolutionary process is if it is beneficial the species survives. That means a viable offspring. The orgasm comes at conception. There are many species that die either after conception or after birth."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstetrical_dilemma"
]
] |
|
5f5d04
|
why do neo-nazis exist outside of germany if they're not part of the aryan race?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5f5d04/eli5_why_do_neonazis_exist_outside_of_germany_if/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dahjzs1",
"dahk53n",
"dahkajx",
"dahkqu5"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
20,
7
],
"text": [
"They're not? It depends on how *they* define the Aryan race. The definition used in Nazi Germany was specifically Germanic, but historically that's not quite accurate, and some use it to refer to all whites other than Semitic peoples.",
"They follow the ideals of the Nazis. They will never be true Nazis which is why the term 'neo Nazi' is used, because they are a newer, revised version of them.",
"What do you mean by \"the Aryan race\"? The original Nazis took that phrase because, at the time, it was (wrongly) believed that most of the languages in Europe came from a region of Persia that was home to the actual Aryans. The Nazis then simply claimed there was an \"Aryan race\", and that it was the \"original\" European race and therefore the \"master race\", and that the pure \"Aryans\" were the Germans and Nordic peoples.\n\nThe point is that there is no such thing as an \"Aryan race\", but for many people it simply meant either \"German\" or \"north European\" or \"white\". (Incidentally, if you use \"Caucasian\" to mean \"white\", that's wrong also, for very much the same reason: real Caucasians are very much darker than the average European.) Because the concept was a pure invention, it could mean whatever you wanted it to mean.\n\nAnother point is that not all people we call \"Nazis\" are the same. These days we think of \"Nazi\" as being a general term to describe a particularly nasty sort of racist, but technically speaking a Nazi is a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (which no longer exists). Not all neo-Nazis agree with absolutely everything the Nazi Party believed in.\n\nFor example, the original Nazis were \"völkisch\", meaning they were particularly fascinated by Germanic folklore -- this is why Wagner was such a favourite of Hitler's, as he wrote entire operas based on pre-Christian German sagas -- and wove that into their ideology.\n\nMovements like the \"Alt-right\" movement are technically not actually Nazi, but we use \"neo-Nazi\" to mean \"modern movement that looks horribly like Nazism\". They don't have to sign up to everything the Nazis believed, they just have to have an ideology based heavily on white nationalism or white supremecy. For American white nationalists, this means broadening the concept of the \"master race\" to all whites, or at least all people of European descent.",
"Neo-nazis are often not well-educated, and their beliefs aren't built on a consistent, logical, and fact-based foundation. There have literally been [Israeli neo-nazis](_URL_1_) (descended from Russian Jews, in this case). Violent extremism like this is often a matter of feeling displaced and marginalized, which causes anger, and people like to find outside sources to pin their problems on and direct their anger at.\n\nAs far as race, most neo-nazis settle for \"white\" (although some people who are definitely not white do sympathize with neo-nazis, like [Tila Tequila](_URL_0_) -- again, don't expect their views to be consistent and rational)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tila_Tequila#Support_for_Hitler_and_antisemitism",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrol_36"
]
] |
||
7whbvn
|
why does it look slow when we are flying very fast in high altitudes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7whbvn/eli5_why_does_it_look_slow_when_we_are_flying/
|
{
"a_id": [
"du0cn1d"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's because of how far away from everything you are. It's like driving parallel to a mountain range that's 50 miles away. You may be driving 60mph but as you look at the mountains it won't look like you're moving. In the case of a car though you have many things very close to you which show you how fast you're actually moving (the road itself, trees along the road, etc). In an airplane you don't have any of that and the only references you have may be 6-8 miles below you. Flying through clouds can sometimes give you a good sense of the speed you're travelling at depending on the type of cloud. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3abjsb
|
if the media has the capacity to reach and influence so many people, why is most of the time spent on sad and depressing news vs. positive and happy news?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3abjsb/eli5_if_the_media_has_the_capacity_to_reach_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csb2kwb",
"csb5kzq",
"csb5ya2"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that's what the public wants.\n\nYou try to publish a news source that contains only happy, uplifting news (which, BTW, is rarely news), almost nobody will buy it. The public wants drama, sex, celebrities, and fires with flames, and they're not particularly picky about the veracity or significance of it\n\nBonafides: former professional photojournalist.\n",
"Because **controversial** news gets more readers/watchers. People seem to be more interested in the controversial happenings around them than anything else.",
"Honestly? Because what makes most things \"newsworthy\" in the first place is when something goes wrong. This is literally the first thing you learn the first day of Journalism 101. An earthquake is news, especially if it causes a lot of damage and deaths/injuries. Somebody in the newsroom adopting a kitten they found behind the TV station is not. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1gw0f1
|
why do people buy strangers reddit gold?
|
Especially to some IAMA celebrities who will never come back on that account to use the bonus features anyway..
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gw0f1/eli5_why_do_people_buy_strangers_reddit_gold/
|
{
"a_id": [
"caodajf",
"caodntz",
"caogeog",
"caoidag"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"To show appreciation to comments that are really hilarious/insightful ",
"They just want to encourage the things they enjoy.",
"I have a slightly differnt question: What *IS* reddit gold? I've been on here a year now and still don't know. ",
"I got the impression that it is a way to support reddit since there aren't ads here. If so, it's a genious idea by reddit, because they made \"support our site\" into a game that people want to participate in. You can buy it for yourself but buying it for others is more fun, and definitely more fun than a button that says \"Donations, please\".\n\nThat's been what I thought since I first started seeing gold around, so I hope its correct..... I would be disapointed otherwise."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1nx2fv
|
on what authority does congressman john boehner have to stop votes from coming to the floor for a vote? if a majority of congress want to vote on something, why can't they vote?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nx2fv/eli5_on_what_authority_does_congressman_john/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccmtuoq"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Because it's the job of speaker of the house to determine which bills get voted on in which order. At any given time there are a massive number of different bills in different stages of readiness, and the speaker has to figure out which ones are ready for a vote. The house does have the right to file a discharge petition though if a bill is waiting but the speaker won't proceed. You need to wait 30 days until you are allowed to file one though, and even then some people may reject it on procedural grounds (or use that as an excuse), rather than on the merits of the bill. The democrats believe they have a candidate bill they could use for a discharge petition on the 14th, so we can see how that works if the shutdown continues that long."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4xko5l
|
if companies like stub hub buy and resell tickets at higher prices, why can't the original venue just sell the tickets to the public at that higher price?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xko5l/eli5_if_companies_like_stub_hub_buy_and_resell/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6ga4pm"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Ticket resellers are taking a risk by doing this. If they buy out a venue and then they find out that it is going to be hard to fill all the seats they will have to drop the prices and sell the tickets with a loss and maybe they will end up with unsold tickets on the day of the event. For big companies it is fine to lose money on some events as long as you gain money overall. However for the events themselves they only have one shot at making money. So they set a ticket price that is high enough that they make some money but not high enough that people are scared by the high prices. If an event is sold out in a matter of seconds then it is much easier to go ahead with the event as you already have all the money you need sitting in the bank."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2qbddo
|
how do the lights on spinning carnival rides work?
|
The power source is stationary and the ride is spinning. Wouldn't it twist any cables up until they broke?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qbddo/eli5_how_do_the_lights_on_spinning_carnival_rides/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn4k60p"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Slip rings.\n\nThe simplest similar thing that people will often be familiar with is slot cars (Scalextric, or similar). These have a metal track that the cars pick power up from, using metal brushes underneath the car.\n\nSlip rings aren't dissimilar. Power can be sent to the rotating part of the ride using two or more rings, with brushes. They're constantly in contact with each other, but they can move at the same time. No cables - no winding up."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
b07b83
|
can the current ion thrusters benefit humans in terms of space travel, or at least part of it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b07b83/eli5_can_the_current_ion_thrusters_benefit_humans/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eicoofx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"What do you mean by 'benefit humans'? Ion thrusters work by accelerating ions from the back of the spacecraft - conservation of momentum implies that as the ions go one way, the spacecraft goes the other. Their advantages include a good efficiency, but they produce very low thrust. This means that they cannot be used to replace a chemical rocket for take off, but could be useful for long distance missions where they can provide a little bit of thrust over a long time to accelerate to high speeds. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1conef
|
what the district of columbia, as in washington d.c., actually means
|
I've looked it up before and I still just have no clue what it means.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1conef/eli5_what_the_district_of_columbia_as_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9ik2kw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Originally there were 13 colonies which became the first 13 states after independence. They formed our country, the United States of America. Each state wanted the new nation's capital to be in their state and not in another state. As a way of compromising, the states together agreed to build the capital in a non-state, the District of Columbia, in the middle of the 13 states. Maryland and Virginia both gave a small piece of land on which the capital would be built. This District would not be a state and would be run by the federal government.\n\nNow, why is it Washington, DC and not just DC? Well, within the land given by Maryland and Virginia, there were already towns and people. It wasn't just empty swampland (well, mostly). These towns remained part of the District of Columbia, like towns in a state (only not a state, a district). So in addition to the city of Washington, there was also cities like Georgetown, DC and Fairfax DC. However, leading up to the Civil War Virginia asked Congress for its land back, so Fairfax and Arlington went back to Virginia. This is why DC is not a perfect square--because the Virginia side of the square is missing. Congress then decided, after Virginia took back its towns, to consolidate all of DC into one city--Washington. Hence, Washington is now the only city in the District of Columbia, a non-state that serves as our nation's capital."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2o21en
|
who is the isp for the white house, pentagon, etc...
|
Sure hope it's not Time Warner or Comcast cause they suck donkey balls
^ joke, don't take that line seriously.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o21en/eli5who_is_the_isp_for_the_white_house_pentagon/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmj0e15",
"cmj1jp3"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The US government is its own ISP, in the same way that Comcast is its own ISP.",
"As several users pointed out, they probably maintain their own network run by the [Defense Information Systems Agency](_URL_0_) which is a part of the DoD.\n\nOther less critical systems are probably contracted to large, reliable companies like [Level 3 Communications](_URL_1_)\n\nYou also have to know that enterprise level ISP solutions are a far cry from the consumer offering."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Information_Systems_Agency",
"http://www.level3.com/en/"
]
] |
|
1p82hr
|
what would happen if the total wealth of the united states were suddenly equally distributed amongst its citizens?
|
So according to Wikipedia at the beginning of 2012
the total wealth of the United States (assets - liabilities) was $57.4 trillion. Given a population of 312 million, this gives a per-capita wealth figure of about $184,000. What effects could we reasonably anticipate if this money were suddenly distributed in this manner?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p82hr/eli5_what_would_happen_if_the_total_wealth_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cczoppm",
"cczp6xd",
"cczrwaf",
"cczs9h0",
"cczusry",
"cczwkxg"
],
"score": [
35,
5,
2,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In about five years, a lot of the same people would be rich and poor.",
"Lawyers would figure out how to fuck the 80% of of their $",
"People without the ability to budget tend to remain poor, despite temporary windfalls. That means that the poor people who would gain $180k or so would probably blow through it fairly quickly.\n\nA good proxy for this is lottery winners (article to support this [here](_URL_0_).",
"Price inflation seems a likely immediate result.",
"The great depression would be the glory days compared to this. A massive crash in the economy when businesses cannot raise capital investment funds. The large pools of money in the economy that exist to fund risky ventures would no longer exist making innovative start ups stop entirely. Apple wouldn't put out any new phones because all of the sudden they do not have the capital to fund their R & D. Innovation would stifle and slow down. Liquidity would disappear shutting down the movement of basic good and services. If my butter factory needs to buy 100 million gallons of milk but doesn't have the actual cash to buy it, then no milk for my factory, no pay for my workers, no butter for the folks, and no money for the farmer. The entire economy would basically collapse in a matter of a few days. Put simply, large entities in the economy require large piles of cash to operate due to the amount of goods and services they render to the populace. ",
"Look at communism for your answer ... Complete falling apart of the economy with no investment. That's not to say that it's healthy to have 2/3 of the wealth owned by 1% of the population. The Walton family along has more money that the bottom 40% of America. There should be a distribution but not even. What you need is a large middle class. What we are seeing today is a decaying middle class with the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/30/mega-millions-lottery-bankrupt_n_1392414.html"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3fwvyv
|
why are only guys charged for sexual offenses when the woman involved should also be charged?
|
If two 15 year olds have consensual sex why is only the guy charged with a sexual offense and not the girl when they both agreed to have sex?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fwvyv/eli5_why_are_only_guys_charged_for_sexual/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctsoift",
"ctsol7w"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If two underage kids have sex no one is charged. The only time a person would be charged with rape is if one is underage or coercion was used. ",
" > If two 15 year olds have consensual sex why is only the guy charged with a sexual offense and not the girl\n\nIf they're both 15, either neither of them will be charged (most jurisdictions have \"Romeo and Juliet\" laws that allow sex between older minors of similar ages, or between old minors and young adults of similar ages), or both of them will be charged. It's simply false to claim that \"only the guy will be charged\". That's not a true statement in the least."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
28bec5
|
why do countries like russia and china supply/sell weapons to regimes similar to syria, sudan, or north korea?
|
Recently watched the Vice documentary, and they discussed the fighting in Darfur, and it was noted that China and Russia had sold weapons to Omar al-Bashir, which were then used for genocide. Just curious.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28bec5/eli5_why_do_countries_like_russia_and_china/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci99pfn",
"ci9bas5"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"They want the money.\n\nThey want the influence that comes with being an arms supplier.\n\nThey want the downstream money that comes from maintenance and spare parts.\n\nThey want to create instability so that other Great Powers have to spend time & treasure dealing with the mess.",
"This practice isn't limited to \"countries like Russia and China\".\n\nThe top ten arms dealers, by country, are:\n\n01. USA\n\n02. Russia\n\n03. Germany\n\n04. France\n\n05. China\n\n06. Canada\n\n07. UK\n\n08. Italy\n\n09. Israel\n\n10. Ukraine (this may no longer be accurate, considering events of the last six months)\n\nThere's a list of the top 100 companies (as of 2012) associated with the international arms trade, and their countries of origin, [here](_URL_0_) if you're interested.\n\nTo answer your question: in general weapons are sold, with very little consideration for how they are most likely going to be used, because they're relatively easy to earn a profit from."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/mar/02/arms-sales-top-100-producers"
]
] |
|
5u1gow
|
how do cut resistant gloves work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u1gow/eli5_how_do_cut_resistant_gloves_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddqle4v"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's not complex. They contain super-strong fibers (such as metal wires) mixed into the fabric. So while you may cut the normal part of the fabric, the knife won't easily get through these special fibers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2r37w6
|
why does bread harden if i don't cover it up
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r37w6/eli5_why_does_bread_harden_if_i_dont_cover_it_up/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnc1bwj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The moisture in the bread evaporates into surrounding air if it's not sealed in by covering it. Unless you want a more detailed explanation of evaporation, it's just that. This comment will probably be deleted for not being long enough. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
lu7lp
|
how does one choose a graduate school? how does one decide they need a graduate school?
|
I'm beginning to panic, yes.
I will be graduating in May with a bachelor's degree in English Writing. I am completely in the dark as to how to make a decision on graduate school.
I want to find a stable, paying job. I do not want to join academia. I am interested in politics and other social sciences, but I fear becoming directly involved with the business world. I am not interested in becoming wealthy, but I would like to live comfortably in the middle class.
I understand that graduate school is a fairly large undertaking and that it can cost a lot of money.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lu7lp/how_does_one_choose_a_graduate_school_how_does/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2vn9hx",
"c2vndv6",
"c2vn9hx",
"c2vndv6"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"I hold a BA in English Lit and Political Science. To be honest, I looked around at technical writing jobs, communications jobs, and sales. After finding the job market lacking (I ended up as a personal trainer for 13 bucks an hour), I re-entered school to pursue my MA in Technical Communications. Expensive? Yes. Worth it? Talk to me in two years.",
"I don't really think this is a good question for r/explainlikeimfive, but let me give you some advice from personal experience since I was recently in the same boat.\n\nI graduated with a degree in communications and ended up working at a job I could not enjoy. This was the trigger that caused me to start looking for grad schools. I think the key here is to find something you are genuinely interested in and are passionate about. For me, that was film studies. From a practical standpoint, looking for schools just involved google searches along the lines of \"grad school\" + \"film/cinema studies\" etc. Pretty soon you should have a good sense of where the best programs are, and your chances of getting in. From there it's just a question of going through all the application requirements (a huge time commitment btw), and mailing off those applications in time. One thing I did not do, but that I wish I had, was contact people in admissions and in the department you're interested in to try and build a rapport ahead of time. \n\nThe tricky part is identifying as you said, the 'need' for grad school, and that's hard to do at your stage when everything is really open. Ideally, if you could think of one or two 'dream jobs' and work backwards from there. For example, if you wanted to work in publishing, do some research on what publishers are looking for in their candidates. \n\nYou will get a lot of people on reddit claiming that any grad school education in the humanities will be a waste of money and time. I think there is a certain amount of truth in that, but I wouldn't write it off all-together (I obviously didn't, for better or for worse). \n\nWhat I would recommend at this point is to do as much research as you can into programs and fields that sound interesting. If by January/February of next year you haven't found a program or three that you're really excited about, just stick with the job market and try to find a job somewhat related to what you want to do. Try that for a few years, save up some cash, and then you can always start up in grad school again (most of my cohort this year spent the last few years working before coming back to academia). \n\nI hope this helps, if you have any other specific questions you think I could help with, feel free to ask.",
"I hold a BA in English Lit and Political Science. To be honest, I looked around at technical writing jobs, communications jobs, and sales. After finding the job market lacking (I ended up as a personal trainer for 13 bucks an hour), I re-entered school to pursue my MA in Technical Communications. Expensive? Yes. Worth it? Talk to me in two years.",
"I don't really think this is a good question for r/explainlikeimfive, but let me give you some advice from personal experience since I was recently in the same boat.\n\nI graduated with a degree in communications and ended up working at a job I could not enjoy. This was the trigger that caused me to start looking for grad schools. I think the key here is to find something you are genuinely interested in and are passionate about. For me, that was film studies. From a practical standpoint, looking for schools just involved google searches along the lines of \"grad school\" + \"film/cinema studies\" etc. Pretty soon you should have a good sense of where the best programs are, and your chances of getting in. From there it's just a question of going through all the application requirements (a huge time commitment btw), and mailing off those applications in time. One thing I did not do, but that I wish I had, was contact people in admissions and in the department you're interested in to try and build a rapport ahead of time. \n\nThe tricky part is identifying as you said, the 'need' for grad school, and that's hard to do at your stage when everything is really open. Ideally, if you could think of one or two 'dream jobs' and work backwards from there. For example, if you wanted to work in publishing, do some research on what publishers are looking for in their candidates. \n\nYou will get a lot of people on reddit claiming that any grad school education in the humanities will be a waste of money and time. I think there is a certain amount of truth in that, but I wouldn't write it off all-together (I obviously didn't, for better or for worse). \n\nWhat I would recommend at this point is to do as much research as you can into programs and fields that sound interesting. If by January/February of next year you haven't found a program or three that you're really excited about, just stick with the job market and try to find a job somewhat related to what you want to do. Try that for a few years, save up some cash, and then you can always start up in grad school again (most of my cohort this year spent the last few years working before coming back to academia). \n\nI hope this helps, if you have any other specific questions you think I could help with, feel free to ask."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2z5ful
|
it seems like most satirical/"fake news" media (the onion, colbert, daily/nightly shows) is very liberal. why aren't there more conservative counterparts?
|
Inb4 "What are you talking about, just look at Fox News!"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z5ful/eli5_it_seems_like_most_satiricalfake_news_media/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpftol2",
"cpfvdsi",
"cpfvvez"
],
"score": [
8,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"[In b4 reality has a liberal bias]\n\nWell, Fox News actually *did* have a satirical/fake news program called the [half hour news hour](_URL_0_)\n\nThe short answer as to why it didn't last and why there aren't more like it, is just that it's not funny at all. It has something like a rating of 13% on metacritic and 2.5/10 on IMDB.\n\nEven the most mainstream PG-13 comedy show like Saturday Night Live still has *a bit* of a liberal touch to it. I don't want to say that conservatives don't have a sense humour.... but in the case of Half Hour News Hour it was just another platform for the conservative agenda first, and an attempt at a comedy show second. Whereas with The Onion or The Daily Show or SNL, it's the opposite.\n\nAlso, they're not *very* liberal, they're just barely liberal. They constantly make fun of anything that's beyond the centre-left like Occupy Wall Street.",
"Entertainment is one of those professions that skews heavily left. Conservatives may be funny, but they rarely want to make a career of it.",
"They're called \"conservatives\" for a reason... Reserved people tend to not have a good sense of humor, so there's not a large market for right wing comedy... Liberals can joke about serious issues"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_1/2_Hour_News_Hour"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
f60ren
|
how does twitter trending work, like one thing with 200k tweets is getting trended more than another thing with 300k tweets supposedly?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f60ren/eli5_how_does_twitter_trending_work_like_one/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fi1z8ne"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's an algorithm. It's not simply displaying the 10 most talked about topics. It's taking into account how quickly the topic became popular. It heavily favors spikes in popularity, even when the absolute number of tweets about a topic is not that huge.\n\nAnd also where it become popular - trending topics are localized to some degree. 10k tweets in your town/state might trend in your feed, where 10k tweets around the world would not.\n\nI assume it also looks at whether people are engaging with tweets on that topic, so that it's harder for coordinated bots to game the system."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2qbgli
|
eli 5: why do the archers in most movies wait an insane amount of time before shooting their arrows?
|
I just rewatched Lord of the Rings after seeing the Hobbit 3 in the cinemas and was wondering why on earth they would wait such a long time to shoot their arrows and therefore granting their enemies much more time to cover up the distance to themselves. Wouldn't it be more effective if they'd just shoot as many arrows as they can?
Scene that got me thinking: _URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qbgli/eli_5_why_do_the_archers_in_most_movies_wait_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn4kvp8",
"cn4l2m3",
"cn4rrqn",
"cn4rtsi",
"cn5bbta"
],
"score": [
12,
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Movies pretend that archers aim at a specific target while instead they just went for a general distance. \n\nEdit: or really just to build tension. ",
"arrows arent like bullets. You dont have 6 50 round clips on you that you can spray wildly. A long bow archer at most carried 30 arrows in his quiver. Taking time to sure each arrow flies true to its mark makes an archer far more effective. Archers were the snipers of their day...you dont question why a sniper takes his time do you? its what works best in the scenario. \nAbout the only time firing \"wildly\" is advantageous is in a full battalion style attack where \"the volley\" is employed against an approaching force. Throw as many arrows up in the air as possible in a burst. Wait for them to drop down on the enemy. Then when they come out from under shield and advance again VOLLEY! But this requires a force with adequate supply lines...because again...you can only carry so many arrows in a quiver. ",
"Apparently \"because it looks cool\" is too short for this subreddit and will be hidden by the bots, so here I am typing a much longer post to say the exact same thing.\n\nIt looks cool.\n\nThe problem is not that your enemies are going to get closer while you stand there holding the bow. The problem is it's going to tire you out fast, and as your muscles tire you bow will start shaking and you'll miss the target completely. Plus there's a risk that you'll just let the arrow go before you're ready (remember that guy from Helm's Deep? That should have been happening a lot more.) \n\nIf you watch competitive recurve shooters, they're not holding at all, the draw and release are all one fluid motion. If they stop and hold for a second, that's why their shot will be off. And they're dealing with much lower draw weights than you would need to punch through an orc's armour. \n\nCompounds are a little different, since the cams mean that once at full draw you're only holding a fraction of the bow's draw weight. But compounds didn't exist until the late 1960s, so forget about what compound shooters do.\n\nTL;DR: They hold their arrows for ages in movies because archers look really cool at full draw. There is no explanation that fits with archery form, physics or strategy.",
"Arrows can be heavily demoralising. If the enemies are closer to the archers the amount of arrows in the volley that successfully hit and thus kill or wound the enemy is increased. When the opposing army sees a high percentage of the front-line dying their assault is more likely to waver and they might pull back. Usually at this point the archer's army would send soldiers or cavalry to assault and break the wavering and demoralised enemy.",
"I can't say anything about the amount of time they *wait*. But the reason they all fire in unison is because the collective effect of all the arrows hitting the advancing ranks is greater. Think of it this way: If you hit 50 guys at different times they die and the rest of the 300 guys continue marching, but if you hit all of the 50 at once they fall to the ground block the way of others house panic and general disorder in the advancing rank. So *one* reason why archers in battle wait some time before firing is to make sure everyone loads their arrow aims etc. But i don't actually know how long they should wait but its definitely wrong to have every archer shoot whenever they are ready."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://youtu.be/-e3PtXfxWog?t=2m30s"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ebhwc
|
why is the speed of light absolute?
|
Particles travelling at light speed ignore relativity. Why is that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ebhwc/eli5_why_is_the_speed_of_light_absolute/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjxwe1d",
"cjy27vx"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It just is. Within our current understanding, it's one of the fundamental laws of nature.\n\nIt's like asking why you role two dice in a game of Monopoly - it's just how the game is set up.",
"Okay... I read a Brian Greene book once, so here goes!\n\nAll objects have a fixed amount of kinetic energy. This is being spent moving through space and time. The faster you move through space, the slower you move through time. This is the basis for the theory of special relativity.\n\nThe upper limit to speed then, is when you achieve such a velocity across space that you cease to move through time. Photons are the thing that does this. From a photon's perspective, everything happens at once. The big bang, the ultimate fate of the universe, everything the photon will experience is happening right now.\n\nCan matter achieve light speed? As far as we can tell, no. As an object gains spatial velocity, its energy value increases. Since energy=matter, the object is becoming effectively more massive. That's the theory of general relativity.) A more massive object has more inertia, meaning that more and more energy is needed to accelerate the object. Effectively, an infinite amount of energy is required to accelerate mass to 100% the speed of light. What happens if a massive object reaches the speed of light? Maybe it becomes energy. I have no idea.\n\nBonus fact, even if you were moving away from the sun at 99% speed of light, photons from the sun would still aproach you at, from your perspective, 100% the speed of light. Light's weird."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6pleyv
|
what are containerized applications?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pleyv/eli5_what_are_containerized_applications/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkqbz8n",
"dkqcxc0",
"dkqw9xy"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think it's easier to understand when you hear another name for containers: **jails**. Containers are basically a way to wall off one application from another inside the same computer. Application A cannot talk to application B without explicit permission.\n\nThis has a number of advantages. First, it allows for much greater security. If application A gets hacked it's much harder for it to affect application B. \n\nSecond, let's say that A needs version 3.0 of a shared library and B needs version 4.0. Normally it can be hard to have two or more versions of the same library on a computer but with containers it's very easy. \n\nThird, it's easy to package up all of the dependant pieces of software and libraries along with the main application. This makes it much easier to deploy the application across multiple computers without having to worry about the state of that computer.\n\nAll of these are also benefits of virtualization. Containers have the advantage of requiring a lot less system resources than building a full virtual computer.",
"Normally, when you install a program, it can copy shit all over your hard drive. Not just the program itself but the dozens of libraries that it needs and other programs it works with.\n\nWhen you containerize a program, you put all the pieces inside of a single \"box\". This way, it can't fuck with other programs on the computer & you're sure that all over your dependencies are always the right version. It really simplifies development, testing & deployment of server software - especially when you run multiples of them on the same machine - because you never have to worry about having the wrong version of a dependency installed or some other application trying to install another version of a dependency and breaking something that *was* working.\n\nIt's similar in intent to virtualization but is more \"lightweight\".",
"How does it differ from \"sand boxed\" applications?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3wl7po
|
when and why did fluorescent green get associated with radiation?
|
Well, everywhere in culture you see glowing red stuff to indicate radiation. Why is that? Does radiation emit light?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3wl7po/eli5_when_and_why_did_fluorescent_green_get/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxx0ie3",
"cxx3yc1",
"cxx6e0z"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"For many years we used [radium to make glow in the dark stuff](_URL_0_), it had that ominous green glow in the dark.\n\nThat has been discontinued because of all the cancer, but the association remains.",
"Could have something to do with uranium glass as well. It glows so to speak and looks like the stereotypical radiation coloring",
" > Does radiation emit light?\n\nRadiation can cause things to glow, but they don't glow green. They glow a [really pretty shade of blue](_URL_0_). This is the light equivalent of a sonic boom."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_dials"
],
[],
[
"http://chemistry.oregonstate.edu/nuclear/pics/Reactor.jpg"
]
] |
|
8wvikp
|
what is a radian?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8wvikp/eli5_what_is_a_radian/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e1ypq2l",
"e1yq9uo"
],
"score": [
9,
14
],
"text": [
"Why do we use degrees? Why cut a circle into 360 pieces? Why not 100 pieces or 400 pieces?\n\nOr better yet, how about we define an angle in terms of the measurements of the circle, rather than just making up some arbitrary number?\n\nIf you have a circle with a central angle drawn in it, and you measure the arc length of the angle divided by the radius of the circle, you get a number which represents the size of the angle. We call that number the radian measure of the angle.",
"It's the natural measure of an angle. If you want to use it, just remember full circle, 360 degrees, is 2pi radians.\n\nIf you want to know why this is a natural way to measure angle, you should note that if you drew a circle with radius 1 around an angle, radians tell you how long a curve on that circle would that angle encompass. Relating the length of this curve segment to the angle is pretty handy. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
25m9ot
|
why does a head massage feels so good if there are no muscle on top of your head?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25m9ot/eli5_why_does_a_head_massage_feels_so_good_if/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chik3t3",
"chil2ro",
"chionr3"
],
"score": [
10,
31,
5
],
"text": [
"Well, firstly, there are plenty of touch receptors there for feel-good fun, but in terms of muscles, there are muscles on the side of the head, and the muscles on the front and back of the head are continuous with (i.e. attach to) a [layer of tissue](_URL_0_) that covers the entire top of the head. A head massage can move this layer around (and manipulate muscles for relaxation or whatever).",
"Nerve endings, plenty of them!",
"Nerves give feelings not muscles. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galea_aponeurotica"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
3o8alt
|
why do large companies such as banks have a password character limit for you account? wouldn't imposing a character limit on a password make my account less secure?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3o8alt/eli5_why_do_large_companies_such_as_banks_have_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvuuz14",
"cvuw86k",
"cvvhka6"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"They are storing all the passwords in a database. Many databases require the programmer to specify a limit for the size of each item, and they allocate only that amount of space in their files, so they are then unable to store an item larger than that.",
"It reminds me of this hack. You put in an insanely long password and it overloads the program and automatically logs you in. Any process you do in a computer has a certain amount of memory allocated to it. If you put in way too much data, it can start interfering with other parts of the program and can cause crashes or data breaches. Also from a logistical standpoint, if you are using a hundred character password, you'll probably forget part of it or enter it wrong by accident, causing people more frustration than they need to deal with.\n\n_URL_0_",
"I have heard that it is because there are legacy systems in the bank that will not accept hashed or longer passwords. They need to authenticate you to those systems, so the passwords have to meet the limitations of those systems. And yes, that means they are storing unhashed passwords passwords and passing them around in their systems."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/16/technology/android-hack/"
],
[]
] |
||
53jgr2
|
how does the crisping sleeve work when microwaving something.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53jgr2/eli5_how_does_the_crisping_sleeve_work_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7tp8c8"
],
"score": [
20
],
"text": [
"You know how the inside of the sleeve has a silver lining? It's basically a metallic film (called a \"susceptor\") that very effectively absorbs the microwaves and radiates heat. So, it gets very hot and can effectively brown/cook the food next to it with thermal radiation. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1manqz
|
why do aircraft and boat designs age so much better than car designs?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1manqz/eli5why_do_aircraft_and_boat_designs_age_so_much/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc7dgel",
"cc7dhs4",
"cc7dn59",
"cc7hnjb"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"What do you mean? Like why the aesthetic hasn't really changed?\n\nBecause aerodynamics on a car are a pretty minor factor so you can easily afford the loss in efficiency to have something more aesthetically pleasing.\n\nPeople spending millions on their plane or ship are much more practical. ",
"One part of that answer is that aircraft and boat designs have changed dramatically over the years, but because they are not nearly as commonplace as cars (nor are most aircraft marketed to the general public as aggressively) the changes in design are not as obvious. \n\nTake for example, the Boeing 707 which debuted in 1957 and Boeing's newest model the 787. They may appear to look similar, but the engineering and construction are world's apart. The 707 was primarily built from aluminum and had direct pilot controls. The 787 is produced largely from composites and has advanced computer interfaces. Even aircraft like the 737, and B-52 (The B-52 will be nearly 100 years old when the Airforce finally retires it!) have undergone dramatic changes in their design that aren't immediately obvious. \n\nOn the other side of the question, car design hasn't change as drastically as it appears to have. Cars, like aircraft and boats, have been made more efficient with the introduction of composites and computerized components, but the core designs of both cars and the internal combustion engine are still very similar to what rolled off the assembly line in the 1950's. Take a 2013 Camaro, a 1987 Camaro, and a 1967 Camaro, and strip away the cosmetic differences, and the basic fundamentals haven't changed. The biggest difference is the increased use of computers both in the design process and in the components used in the cars themselves. ",
"I'm going to interpret the question as why do the physical designs last longer?\n\nThey don't, necessarily, but planes and boats are much more expensive, on average, than cars, and people that own them are usually much more diligent in taking care of them. In planes, this is a safety inssue, also.\n\nIf you took 2 hours to inspect your car before every time you drove it, and immediatly replaced any part that showed the slightest hint of wear, it would last a very, very long time as well.",
"Car design is largely a matter of styling. Almost all car designs comprise features that exist purely for appearance and image rather than function. For example think of the wings and lights on a 57 Chevy. All about style and image - not at all about functionality and purpose. As tastes change, styling looks dated very quickly. Each decade car styling changed with the times and the previous decade's cars looked old very quickly.\n\nAircraft design on the other hand is not about styling but all about function and engineering design optimization. As the rules of physics do not change with time the optimum design for each role specification does not chamge (although the ability to get close to the optimal design will improve with development of new technology). For example, the optimum design to meet the specification to carry more than 100 passengers more than 500miles as econmically as possible seems to be a swept wing jet with two underwing jet engines. Many designs from many manufacturers over many years fall into this general description from a 1960s Boeing 737, to an 80s Airbus 320 to brand new B787s, Embraer 190, Tupolev 214 etc etc. Other spec requirements will generate other optimal configurations but they will tend to be recognisable groups and do not change radically as the years go by.\n\nAdditionally as aircraft are not designed to fashionable styles of the time, old ones never look unfashionable: take a Beech 18, or DC3. Both old, both still look great.\n\nThe nearest car equivalent would be a Land Rover a vehicle built to do a specific job not to look trendy. A 1950s Series 1 Land Rover does not look radically different to a 2013 Land Rover Defender. There is an elegance in pure engineering design that appeals to many of us rather than transient styling.\n\nRelated example: will a hammer and nail in the year 2100 look much different to a hammer and nail from 1800. How about clothing? \n\nCredentials - professional pilot and degree in aeronautical engineering.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2gcwnj
|
particles are waves
|
So in quantum mechanics, sub-atomic particles are also waves? Wave-particle duality I think it's called. ELI5 because Wikipedia requires a PhD on the subject.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gcwnj/eli5_particles_are_waves/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckhwf8h"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The easiest way to think about this is that subatomic particles aren't really particles at all, and aren't really waves either. They behave in ways that make sense if we think of them as behaving in a particle-like manner for certain purposes and a wave-like manner for other purposes. That doesn't really mean that they are either of those things though. It is a useful metaphor, like ascribing purpose to an organisms biological evolution over time. We know it's not really trying to develop legs or whatever, but it can be useful at times to view it that way.\n\nIf it makes you feel better, the great Nobel laureate Richard Feynman used to say that \"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics!\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1e6q6j
|
all 6 star wars movies
|
could someone *please* explain star wars to me? i know episode 1-3 are supposed to be prequels to 4-6, but im confused by the timeline and who becomes who considering the last 3 were made before episode 1-3.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1e6q6j/eli5_all_6_star_wars_movies/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9xb27u",
"c9xc1e4",
"c9xcjmd",
"c9xfy2h"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I think the only person that *becomes* anyone is the little kid grows up to be the man in the black armor.",
"In 1977, a young filmmaker named George Lucas made *Star Wars: A New Hope*. He subtitled it \"Episode IV: A New Hope,\" to make it seem like viewers were coming into one of the serialized adventure movies he watched when he was a kid. It made roughly a gazillion dollars and was one of a few movies that ushered in a new era of special-effects heavy summer blockbusters. In 1980, the sequel, *Star Wars: Episode V-The Empire Strikes Back* came out, which was followed by *Star Wars: Episode VI-Return of the Jedi*. George Lucas had the story credits, other people wrote/directed them.\n\nIn 1997, for the 20th anniversary of Star Wars, Lucas re-released the Star Wars movies into theaters, with some deleted/cleaned-up scenes and some extra special effects flourishes. Some of the changes really pissed off some people, but it also introduced a new generation to Star Wars. \n\nIn 1999, Lucas released *Star Wars: Episode I-The Phantom Menace,* followed by *Episode II-Attack of the Clones* in 2002, and *Episode III-Revenge of the Sith* in 2005. The prequel trilogy took place roughly one generation before the original trilogy. Lots of fans thought they could hardly compare to the original trilogy, though they introduced *another* new generation of movie goers to the *Star Wars* saga. Note that George Lucas wrote and directed the prequel trilogy. \n\nIf you want the plot of the movies explained to you...well, someone else can do that. ",
"Let's start with a very brief chronological outline, you can ask questions as desired.\n\nThe status quo of the first trilogy is basically set up that there is an intergalactic federation of planets with a senate. Basically a space democracy. Over the course of the three movies of the first trilogy a shadowy puppet master manipulates planets into seceding into a coalition of separatist planets which eventually rebel until there is open war between the two factions.\n\nDuring this time period a slave child is found who is unusually powerful in the ways of the jedi (think warrior space monk wizards). At the same time the jedi learn that their evil counterparts, the sith are not as extinct as they thought they were.\n\nAgainst the better judgement of his elders, the jedi Obi Wan Kenobi takes on this boy, Anakin Skywalker, and teaches him to be a jedi. Unfortunately Anakin's past has filled him with private fears and frustrations. Making him emotionally unbalanced which is a poor state of mind for one so powerful. Along the way Anakin starts a secret affair with some princess and knocks her up.\n\nAt the high point of the war it is revealed that the arch chancelor Palpatine of the republic is in fact the shadowy puppet master, a sith lord, who orchestrated the war. Having wormed himself into a position of power, he finds himself in control of the republic. At the same he seduces Anakin into joining his dark path by playing into Anakin's fears. Palpatine uses his control of the republic's military forces and Anakin's allegiance to crush the jedi and the separatists.\n\nThe first trilogy ends with Obi Wan making an attempt at stopping his rogue pupil. The final showdown goes poorly, in a fit of rage Anakin nearly kills his pregnant girlfriend. Obi Wan is forced to dismember Anakin and leave him for dead while he departs the planet with princess preggers.\n\nPrincess Preggers gives birth to twins which are promptly split up and taken away to be raised in secret.\n\nUnwilling to let go of such a valuable tool Palpatine (now also known as Darth Sidious) retrieves Anakin's broken body and gives him one evil looking mechanical body while informing Anakin he murdered the mother of his babies. All the bad news drives Anakin bonkers as the black helmet is lowered onto his face and with a cheesy \"Nooooooo\" Darth Vader is born.\n\n----\n\nSecond trilogy (old movies)\n\nFast forward a couple of decades and Palpatine disbands the senate and declares himself galactic emperor. Darth Vader (evil half robot Anakin) is Palpatine's scary enforcer.\n\nThe trilogy starts with explaining that Palpatine's rough rule quickly ensure that rebellion ignited. A pretty princess receives stolen plans of Palpatine's super weapon, the death star. The pretty princess is captured but not before she sends two robots (R2D2 and C3PO) to a nearby planet with the plans.\n\nA young farm boy finds himself in possession of those two robots, one of which keeps moping about some Obi Wan Kenobi before escaping to go look for him. The robots find Obi Wan, the farm boy finds the robots again and they all figure out what kind of files the robots carry.\n\nAnyway fast forward a bit more and the rebellion deals some punches to the evil empire, the evil empire deals some damage to the rebellion and suddenly in a Spanish soap opera moment the farm boy finds out the princess is his sister, Darth Vader is his daddy and he did some French kissing that makes you wonder if Tatooine is somewhere in Alabama.\n\nAs it turns out the farmboy (Luke Skywalker) and the princess are the twins hidden by Obi Wan. Luke makes up with his dad, together they throw the emperor into some pit that probably wasn't up to building code and everyone lives happily ever after. Except Darth Vader who dies tossing the emperor in that pit, but he finds forgiveness in his dying moments and his ghost is happily dead forever after.",
"To really watch the Star Wars movies in a coherent fashion, I recommend [watching them in \"Machete Order\"](_URL_0_): 4, 5, 2, 3, 6\n\nThis way, you get the start of the adventure with Luke at home, everything builds up to Darth Vader's startling revelation to Luke in #5. This revelation and other origins are explored in flashback form in 2 and 3, and the adventure is wrapped up with #6.\n\nI'd you've never watched the movies before, this preserves all the surprises, and builds the story in an effective way.\n\nIf you have watched all the movies before, you're only subjected to about 5 total minutes of Jar-Jar, and you begin to realize how uneventful and pointless episode 1 truly is."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://static.nomachetejuggling.com/machete_order.html"
]
] |
|
17lu9g
|
why my federal refund is almost nothing now that i have a real full-time job.
|
I am single, female, and no kids. I haven't changed how my deductions get taken out and I have been paying around the same, if not more on student loans. The only thing that changed is I am now working as a full-time employee instead of part-time. My refund last year was around $1000 but now I am entering my information on turbotax and the amount keeps getting lower and lower. I am now down to $400 total that I will be getting back. Anyone care to explain why this is happening? I would have thought, more money = bigger refund, but clearly I was wrong.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17lu9g/eli5_why_my_federal_refund_is_almost_nothing_now/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c86ofew",
"c86p6ba",
"c86pxz3"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Very wrong, the more money you make the higher percentage of taxes are owed...",
"Your refund is how much you overpaid the government during the year. If you end up owing $8k in taxes, but your withholdings were $12k, you'd get a $4k return.\n\nIf your withholdings stay the same ($12k), but you earn more money and so have to pay more tax (say, $11k), your return will drop to just $1000.\n\nEdit: So in your case, if your extra earnings have increased your tax liabilities by $600, but your withholdings have stayed the same, then your return of $1000 would be reduced by $600 and leave you with $400.",
"On the plus side, you had that money to spend throughout the year, so you should be happy you got to use more of your paycheck instead of \"loaning\" it to the Gov't."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
jg5zt
|
mold
|
Specifically mold on foods.
Where does it come from? How does it grow, and why does it grow on some foods but not others? Why does it smell? Why can't I eat it? Is it really there for a few days before it gets visible?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jg5zt/eli5_mold/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2btwvb",
"c2btwvb"
],
"score": [
10,
10
],
"text": [
"|Where does it come from?\n\nMold is the multi-cellular form of fungi. This means that mold is made up thousands or millions of fungal cells. They come from everywhere. Mold spores exist in dust in your house, in the air, anywhere outside, etc. Generally in the environment, mold exists as fungal spores, single cells that are covered in a protective shell and is waiting for a nutrient rich conditions to grow (like a seed). \n\n|How does it grow?\n\nSpores that have landed on your food generally need to wait for air and water to be available for growth into visible mold. Most of the time their is not enough available for growth. \n\n|Why some foods but not others?\n\nFungi can grown on almost every fruit vegetable or bread products and some meats depending on the type. But generally speaking on top of water and air, the fungi require certain things in their diet (carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, oxygen and other elements). Some foods do not supply enough for the fungi to grow, so it wont!\n\n|Why does it smell?\n\nMolds smell different depending on the type you are smelling. For example some are what give dirt and soil their smell (like dirt...). The smell occurs by the release of waste products and other molecules released by the fungi. For example some molds will release chemicals that will kill bacteria, or other fungi. This is where the first antibiotics (like penicillin)and antifungals came from.\n\n|Why can't I eat it?\n\nOur immune systems are quite good at dealing with small numbers of spores or actual mold and it doesn't pose a problem. Some molds release dangerous toxins, that can make you very sick so when they are consumed they can do a lot of damage, among other things. However, mushrooms are fungi too, so you do eat mold all the time. And some strains of mold are used to make cheese, so it all depeneds on the type.\n\n|Is it really there for a few days before it gets visible?\n\nYes, but usually not in a quantity that is high enough to hurt you or effect the flavor, so if you eat it you wont even notice and it will have no effect on you. Plus, generally speaking, you are inhaling fungal spores as you read this.\n\nIf you have any other questions or if anything isn't clear just let me know.",
"|Where does it come from?\n\nMold is the multi-cellular form of fungi. This means that mold is made up thousands or millions of fungal cells. They come from everywhere. Mold spores exist in dust in your house, in the air, anywhere outside, etc. Generally in the environment, mold exists as fungal spores, single cells that are covered in a protective shell and is waiting for a nutrient rich conditions to grow (like a seed). \n\n|How does it grow?\n\nSpores that have landed on your food generally need to wait for air and water to be available for growth into visible mold. Most of the time their is not enough available for growth. \n\n|Why some foods but not others?\n\nFungi can grown on almost every fruit vegetable or bread products and some meats depending on the type. But generally speaking on top of water and air, the fungi require certain things in their diet (carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, oxygen and other elements). Some foods do not supply enough for the fungi to grow, so it wont!\n\n|Why does it smell?\n\nMolds smell different depending on the type you are smelling. For example some are what give dirt and soil their smell (like dirt...). The smell occurs by the release of waste products and other molecules released by the fungi. For example some molds will release chemicals that will kill bacteria, or other fungi. This is where the first antibiotics (like penicillin)and antifungals came from.\n\n|Why can't I eat it?\n\nOur immune systems are quite good at dealing with small numbers of spores or actual mold and it doesn't pose a problem. Some molds release dangerous toxins, that can make you very sick so when they are consumed they can do a lot of damage, among other things. However, mushrooms are fungi too, so you do eat mold all the time. And some strains of mold are used to make cheese, so it all depeneds on the type.\n\n|Is it really there for a few days before it gets visible?\n\nYes, but usually not in a quantity that is high enough to hurt you or effect the flavor, so if you eat it you wont even notice and it will have no effect on you. Plus, generally speaking, you are inhaling fungal spores as you read this.\n\nIf you have any other questions or if anything isn't clear just let me know."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5p193p
|
engine oil grades, what's the difference and how different are their manufacturing processes?
|
So my car uses fully synthetic 5W-30 oil, I have no idea what it means but when i am picking up a bottle of oil in shop - there is hundreds of oil grades.
What's the difference and how different is manufacturing process for each?
Will engine seize if wrong grade is put in? I mean it's still slippery oil?
P.S - flairing as chemistry as I assume chemistry is involved?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5p193p/eli5_engine_oil_grades_whats_the_difference_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcnnipe",
"dcnoq3d"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"It's a measure of viscosity. \n\n10W-30 means that the oil is SAE10 viscosity at low (**W**inter) temps and SAE30 at high (100C) temp. \n\nYour engine won't seize with the wrong oil in it unless it's *really* wrong. Using the wrong oil will increase wear and degrade engine performance though, and some engines depend on the oil for things other than lubrication and have very strict viscosity requirements. It's always best to use the oil recommended by your engine's manufacturer.",
"There are lots of differences between oils. The most obvious difference is the viscosity - 5W-30 means it's viscosity #5 in winter and #30 when hot. Note that #5 or #30 isn't a unit, #30 isn't 1/6th as viscous as #5. The viscosity number is determined in a lab by filling a special tank with a hole in the bottom and measuring the time to drain and they give it a number from a look-up table based on that rather than SI units.\n\nThe other big difference is Synthetic vs semi-synthetic vs mineral. Your car will probably want synthetic or semi- as they are more highly refined and stable. Mineral is generally used in things that don't work very hard and aren't expected to live very long.\n\nBut there are other less obvious differences. Oils have all sorts of additives so they can do things like stick to engine components after shutdown to be ready to work immediately next start-up, or raise the thermal stability so it doesn't decompose with heavy use, or changes to its chemical properties so it won't damage engine block alloys etc.\n\nSo, to answer your primary concern: manufacturers will tell you (read your car manual) that you need something like \"5W-30 LL-04\", where \"LL-04\" is a standard used by some manufacturer that describes all the other additives they recommend for oil in your car (I just picked what my car uses - yours will probably differ). When you read the bottle it'll tell you it is compatible with a whole bunch of manufacturers standards \"5W-30 LL-01 LL-04 GM-whatever etc\" - just make sure the standard written in your manual is listed on the bottle, and the weight is correct, and that it is fully synthetic (if your manual calls for it)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5xish8
|
why is "s" the symbol for a perfect score/top rank in japan?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xish8/eli5_why_is_s_the_symbol_for_a_perfect_scoretop/
|
{
"a_id": [
"deid7a3"
],
"score": [
116
],
"text": [
"S stands for \"shuu\" (秀), which is Japanese for \"excellent\".\n\nI comes from the usual Japanese grading. Just like how we have A+, A, B, etc. They have their own system which is the same as ours except that instead of A+ they write \"S\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
dxdw3e
|
how do recommendation engines work?
|
By recommendation engines, I mean the systems that Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon employ.
For example say on Netflix you finish a series on Star Trek. Netflix then presents you with the you may enjoy Black Mirror, Stranger, things etc.
How is it able to compute that? Is it doing so via some machine learning clustering algorithm? One thing I could of was that these systems are also calculating what others watch and clusters tv shows/movies based on that. It could also calculate based off the keywords in the tv show/movie
We can recommend tv shows to each because we have an understanding(via a cognitive architecture) of what science fiction is, etc but machines don't have this .
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dxdw3e/eli5_how_do_recommendation_engines_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f7p7j0x",
"f7p9d9e"
],
"score": [
8,
5
],
"text": [
"These are big money makers, so the exact mechanics are secret.\n\nBut as to how it knows which movie are SF or rom coms - the movies all have meta data, bits of additional information, this includes genre, actors, director, themes etc. That helps the computer know things like that.\n\nMany modern algorithms also collect additional data from users, so do simple machine learning - like it may recognise that SF fans also like big bang theory, or British bake off watchers also like rom coms.",
"The algorithms are based on a few things. Genre is key, obviously if you watch lots of comedy they'll recommend comedy.\n\nBut they can also do statsitcis a bit like network meta analysis. Basically, you watched \"Friends\" and \"HIMYM\" it finds another user who watched both and sees what else they watched, calculating that you'd like it too (even better if any of you rate it). But it does that not just against 1 other user, but thousands. \n\nSo 72% of people who watched Friends watched HIMYM and 60% of those liked Brooklyn 99. So your chance of liking Brooklyn 99 is estimated at 60%.\n\nThat's a simplification. They can perform millions of complex analysis along these principles. It can group you with most similar users based on not just what you watch but age, gender, location, viewing habbits etc.\n\nI visualise it like a huge empty 3D box. Everyone has a unique position in that box and the people you're closets two are the most similar to you (a bit like PCA if you know your stats)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
70a1jq
|
at what point is being a porn star different from prostitution?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70a1jq/eli5_at_what_point_is_being_a_porn_star_different/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn1j99m",
"dn1j99m"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"For starters, it isn't completely clear that making pornography is legal in most US jurisdictions. \n\nIn the absence of a law or legal precedence explicitly saying one way or another, it is entirely possible a pornography producer could be convicted under prostitution laws. Most state courts haven't said one way or another.\n\nThat's why most of the pornography production in the US comes form a single state, California. In the 1980's, producer Harold Freeman hired actors for a movie called Caught from Behind: Part II, and those actors explicitly performed all the standard sex acts. As a result, Freeman was charged with pandering, or providing prostitutes to customers.\n\nFreeman was convicted and eventually appealed all the way to the California Supreme Court, in the landmark *People v. Freeman 46 Cal 3d 419 (1988)*. The court ruled in Freeman's favor, saying prostitution means someone is paid to have sex primarily for the purpose of direct sexual gratification. Being paid to have sex for other purposes is not prostitution, and making a dirty movie is a valid and legal purpose.\n\nThe prosecution chose not to appeal to the federal level, so this ruling only applies to California. However, it has been used as an indirect precedent, as in *New Hampshire v. Theriault, No. 2007-601 (N.H. Sup. Ct. Dec. 4, 2008)*.\n\nDoes this mean prostitution is legal so long as I film it? Sorry, no such luck.\n\nJust because you can manufacture some contrived explanation that would make your actions technically legal, a jury still has to buy that is what you were actually doing. If you set out to pay someone to have sex with you because you wanted someone to have sex with you, propping up your cell phone the night stand of a cheap motel isn't going to change that.",
"For starters, it isn't completely clear that making pornography is legal in most US jurisdictions. \n\nIn the absence of a law or legal precedence explicitly saying one way or another, it is entirely possible a pornography producer could be convicted under prostitution laws. Most state courts haven't said one way or another.\n\nThat's why most of the pornography production in the US comes form a single state, California. In the 1980's, producer Harold Freeman hired actors for a movie called Caught from Behind: Part II, and those actors explicitly performed all the standard sex acts. As a result, Freeman was charged with pandering, or providing prostitutes to customers.\n\nFreeman was convicted and eventually appealed all the way to the California Supreme Court, in the landmark *People v. Freeman 46 Cal 3d 419 (1988)*. The court ruled in Freeman's favor, saying prostitution means someone is paid to have sex primarily for the purpose of direct sexual gratification. Being paid to have sex for other purposes is not prostitution, and making a dirty movie is a valid and legal purpose.\n\nThe prosecution chose not to appeal to the federal level, so this ruling only applies to California. However, it has been used as an indirect precedent, as in *New Hampshire v. Theriault, No. 2007-601 (N.H. Sup. Ct. Dec. 4, 2008)*.\n\nDoes this mean prostitution is legal so long as I film it? Sorry, no such luck.\n\nJust because you can manufacture some contrived explanation that would make your actions technically legal, a jury still has to buy that is what you were actually doing. If you set out to pay someone to have sex with you because you wanted someone to have sex with you, propping up your cell phone the night stand of a cheap motel isn't going to change that."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3zxdvk
|
why does lying down sometimes help us feel better when sick?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zxdvk/eli5_why_does_lying_down_sometimes_help_us_feel/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cypr8nk"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"When we're sick, a lot of what we \"feel\" is our own body telling us to rest as it fights pathogens. For example, your body causes its own fever, it's the one that's filling you with snot, and the congestion you feel in your head too might be from this. Throwing up is also your body's fault. It's trying to get rid of contents in the stomach.\n\nSo basically, your body is also indicating to you that you should probably not do anything. Sometimes lying down makes us feel better because we're allowing our body to do its thing, and then it quiets down. Or maybe subconsciously we know what's going on and once we lay down, we're satisfied we did the right thing haha."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3t2rnh
|
why do the astronauts on the iss experience zero gravity when the iss itself is held in orbit by the earth's gravity?
|
Wouldn't the astronauts feel the effects of gravity if its strong enough to hold the ISS in its orbit? Maybe I just don't understand how satellites and other things orbit earth
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3t2rnh/eli5why_do_the_astronauts_on_the_iss_experience/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx2knmc",
"cx2kntj",
"cx2m3h1",
"cx2nlpu",
"cx2wigu",
"cx2wzya",
"cxttuwb"
],
"score": [
41,
6,
8,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They *don't* experience zero gravity. They experience *free fall,* which presents the illusion of zero gravity because the station and everything in it are falling at the same speed. (Because of their huge sideways velocity, they keep missing -- that's called orbiting.)",
"They experience almost the same gravity as we do. The difference is that they are continuously falling down.\n\nThink of throwing a rock towards horizon. If you throw it far enough the Earth's curvature is significant enough that the rock will never actually hit the ground. Naturally, in an atmosphere the air resistance quickly puts an end to that but at the altitude ISS is at the drag is almost nonexistent.",
"Good answers here. But to get a bit deeper into physics:\n\nThere's no way to avoid gravity. It's a universal force that acts from any mass object in all directions. What the ISS experiences is an equilibrium of forces.\n\nGravity is a centripetal force, meaning it is pulling the ISS towards earth.\n\nInertia provides a centrifugal force. Since an object in motion wants to stay in motion *in the same direction*, the ISS's tendency is to go straight, which would send it away from earth tangentially.\n\nIn a perfect orbit, the ISS is at a calculated speed at height in which inertia and gravity counteract each other, giving the astronauts equilibrium of forces.",
"Technically, there is no such thing as *zero* gravity. Gravity as a force has infinite range. Even a star located millions of light-years away, its gravitational force still has a very small, yet non-zero affect on earth. No matter where you are in the universe, you are under the influence of gravity from all objects in the universe.\n\nZero-g used to be a term commonly used to describe the weightlessness felt in space, but in recent years, the term \"microgravity\" has become the norm, as it is more accurate.",
"Because they are essentially falling off the side of the earth continuously. They are eternally in free fall however because their horizontal velocity is so high they never reach the ground but rather fly right past it. Gravity holds them in a circular (actually sort of elliptical) pattern as long as nothing acts on the station (there is no air resistance where they are so there is no friction to slow them down). ",
"They experience the same gravity as the station around them, so they follow the exact same path as the station. Since they are moving in the same speed and direction as the station, it appears inside the station as though they are floating without gravity.",
"So it took me forever to understand this but I finally figured it out! If there's a gravitational pull that is exerted onto the iss and the objects on the iss, it would makes sense that the objects would be pulled towards the floor making the iss like the surface of the earth, but space is a vacuum there for anything is space no matter the mass travels at the same velocity when falling, and since the iss and the objects on it fall at the same velocity you can just push your self off from one of the walls inside the iss and that is why you can \"fly\" because you are now moving at a greater velocity than the iss. Hopefully that explains it!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6mohh0
|
calories vs weight gain
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6mohh0/eli5_calories_vs_weight_gain/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dk33lua"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"It's usually not accurate. The one exception is that some foods *also* cause you retain more of the water you drink."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7oe4kn
|
why do amplifiers read volume in negative decibels?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7oe4kn/eli5_why_do_amplifiers_read_volume_in_negative/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ds8sdsj",
"ds8sl14"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Ahoy, matey! Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: How is it possible to get negative decibels of sound? What happens at those levels? ](_URL_2_) ^(_3 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: How can there be negative decibels? ](_URL_4_) ^(_12 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: How are negative decibel sound readings possible? ](_URL_5_) ^(_9 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Why does my stereo measure volume starting in the negative decibels? ](_URL_1_) ^(_11 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Why does the decibel value on my stereo decrease as I increase volume? ](_URL_0_) ^(_ > 100 comments_)\n1. [Why does the volume on my stereo go from -80dB up to 0dB at full volume? ](_URL_3_) ^(_12 comments_)\n1. [Why is the volume of my stereo receiver measured in negative decibels? ](_URL_6_) ^(_6 comments_)\n",
"Decibels are used to measure sound volume, that's the usage of them that you are likely most familiar with.\n\nHowever, they are also a way of expressing a ratio. If you have a given signal strength, you can then express the strength of another signal in terms of decibels as related to that original signal. (Negative decibels would be weaker, positive decibels stronger)\n\nMost amp manufacturers aim to have a 0dB volume ratio mean \"as loud as we can get without distortion\", that is, super, super loud. \n\nYou can therefore understand why most of the time we listen to the stereo, it is at negative decibels, i.e., weaker than \"as loud as we can get without distortion\".\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ytxyp/eli5_why_does_the_decibel_value_on_my_stereo/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bwrtn/eli5_why_does_my_stereo_measure_volume_starting/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p12e4/eli5_how_is_it_possible_to_get_negative_decibels/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1f6t40/why_does_the_volume_on_my_stereo_go_from_80db_up/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/x6evv/eli5_how_can_there_be_negative_decibels/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5if4yu/eli5_how_are_negative_decibel_sound_readings/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/6ewvap/why_is_the_volume_of_my_stereo_receiver_measured/"
],
[]
] |
||
4z2yzp
|
what is wrong with allowing us states to choose to secede? if the "south" left to make it's own country, wouldn't they and the "north" be happier, have less opposition to their legislation, etc?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4z2yzp/eli5_what_is_wrong_with_allowing_us_states_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6sfb3g",
"d6sgoa7",
"d6sgq13"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You're really underestimating the difficulty of splitting apart the federal government. Who gets the gold, the nuclear weapons, NASA, the aircraft carriers, the satellites, the tanks, *et cetera*?",
"This question assumes 100% compliance/agreement with the majority thought in every area. There are people in the \"north\" who think like a \"south\" person, and vice versa. In addition, there are a variety of levels of each thought, for example, a \"pro-life\" person is against abortion, but may be for the death penalty and waging war. Others who are \"pro-life\" will make exceptions for certain conditions leading up to an abortion, and may hate war and/or the death penalty, and any various points in between. \n\nLumping everyone together as a stereotype/groupthink monstrosity of purpose based on a specific geography is an invalid assumption to begin with, especially considering that people are free to move/live anywhere in the USA without interference. \n\nPerhaps you are referring to the supposed \"Blue\" and \"Red\" states stuff? Where do states like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Washington, Colorado, etc. go, as they tend to go back and forth? What about states in the deep south, who 50 years ago were solidly Democrat, and only after the Reagan landslide in 1984 did they become solidly Republican? \n\nIf you are looking for real life examples, you can look at the separation of the Balkans after Yugoslavia broke up and the breaking up of the Soviet Union into numerous other countries. For example, we are seeing a very tense situation between Russia and the Ukraine over the Crimea area - the people there are part Ukrainian and part Russian. The majority at one point about 25 years ago wanted to be part of the Ukraine. Now they want to be part of Russia. So, they seceded from the Ukraine and rejoined Russia. \n\nWhat if Georgia decided to secede. Can Atlanta decide to stay with the Union? What about Valdosta? Can they join Florida? Can Columbus, GA stay in the Union, considering Fort Benning and all?\n\nOverall, if the issue is \"We want to have government do stuff really fast\" then you need to reform/rewrite the US Constitution and get a 3/4ths majority to agree with you. The system was designed INTENTIONALLY to make it slower/harder for government to impose its will on the people. The founders did not want government to act quickly, for that leads to mob rule, and decisions being made in haste and without lengthy debate and deliberation of the possible results/outcomes/repercussions. These decisions being made are massive changes to people's lives, to the government itself, and to how the country is viewed. They understood that just because the majority want something doesn't make it correct or morally right. In fact, the whole point was to protect minority (political) rights, and to be able to, without penalty, have an unpopular or dissenting position. In fact, it is good for the country to have differing opinions. There isn't just one solution to a problem. There isn't just one way to do things. Only with a diversity of thought can all the angles and issues be properly reviewed and considered.\n\ntl;dr It's OK to have multiple opinions on stuff. ",
"There are certainly pros and cons of both. But let's think about this - the South wanted to secede so they could keep slavery, an absolutely immoral affront to mankind. If the South had slavery and the North didn't, they would make money hand over fist and have a booming economy compared to the North, considering they didn't pay their laborers and owned them outright. Could the North and South even have an alliance? Could they even have treaties? Trade between the two nations would mean supporting slave labor. Even if they were already two separate countries, if one of our neighbors had industrialized slave labor to that extent, going to war to end it would have been the only course of action.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
58mtqu
|
what is the process to get a game backwards compatible?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58mtqu/eli5_what_is_the_process_to_get_a_game_backwards/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d91n6ri",
"d91nm0z"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"All computers (and devices that can run programs) run on different parts. These different parts use different set of instructions, and functions slightly different from one another. In order to get better graphics and quicker loading of games (or many applications) there are tricks to exercise every advantage that the parts have and avoid any weakness that those parts may have. \n\nWhen we talk about backwards compatibility we could be talking about two different things so I will do my best to address both.\n\nFirst is a console being able to play games from the previous version of the console. In this instance the console must be able to recognize the older games and run them with a set of utilities that can simulate the previous console. Depending on how the game is written, this could mean having two completely separate versions of the game. Or it could mean that only some of the programming has to be doubled.\n\nSecond is a game being able to be played on two different generations of a console. This means having different parts of the software that work with each of the consoles. This gets a little more difficult when you realize that there isn't traditionally a good way to make the older console understand something new, but with newer consoles that have the ability to download updates this is less of an issue. If the older console is not able to get updates then the disk must present itself to the older console as if it is an older game which means that the newer console must be able to see that and look for the different parts that it will need that would not work on the older system.\n\nI found [this explanation](_URL_0_) that describes things in more specific terms regarding Xbox One and Xbox 360 compatibility and it discusses some tricks that are used in that compatibility pair. It is interesting there that special downloads are used for the compatibility mode in Xbox One so that the new hardware could be properly utilized.\n\nSources: The post linked above, and I'm a software engineer.",
"Is this in reference to the Xbox One playing Xbox 360 games?\n\nThe way I understand it is that the Xbox One has an Xbox 360 emulator built into the system software. In theory that can play any Xbox 360 game.\n\nHowever before backwards compatibility is enabled for a game, Microsoft and the game's publisher must reach an agreement permitting the game to be distributed via the Xbox One.\n\nThen presumably Microsoft will test the game to make sure it runs well enough on the emulator.\n\nThere may be a little more to it than that, but Microsoft have not shared the details."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/3uvp2i/xbox_360_backwards_compatibility_explained/"
],
[]
] |
||
2409fu
|
why is it ok to get my hips x-rayed when i have to wear a lead apron when i get x-rayed at the dentist?
|
So why? Is it a cumulative thing? I'm getting mixed signals here. People leave the room. I have to wear lead, but it's ok to point that thing at my face or at my balls?
Edit: Thanks guys! Very helpful.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2409fu/eli5_why_is_it_ok_to_get_my_hips_xrayed_when_i/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch2bkon",
"ch2blr7",
"ch2cd94",
"ch2fyet"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It's a cumulative thing. They leave the room because they do several x-rays a day, you get a handful a year if that. The risk for you is basically zero, the risk for them if they were there for every x-ray would be meaningful.\n\nThe lead apron is used to limit the risk, no reason to get your whole body hit if all that's needed is your face.",
"It's about managing risk. If they don't need to look inside your body, there's no point subjecting your organs to the radiation. If they do need to, in order to diagnose you, it's worth the risk.",
"The amount of time that the x-ray is actually on, is not enough to really have much negative effect. But harm is harm. there is no reason to expose yourself to it unnecessarily.",
"Good news, bad news: the bad news is that you're constantly being exposed to radiation at all times whether you're at the dentist or not; the good news is that it doesn't really matter (unless you work with radiation).\n\nHere's a handy little table that shows some relative radioactivities: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_) Sure, that chest x-ray is four times as much exposure as a dental x-ray, but it's still less than a third of what you get on a flight from New York to LA, and when was the last time anyone worried about the radiation from flying?\n\nRadiation exposure only becomes a problem once you start pushing ten times the annual average. Average annual exposure in the US is 6.2 mSv. So if you get, say, 300 chest x-rays in one year, you have merely doubled a normal exposure and it's not a problem. On the other hand, if you're an x-ray tech administering dozens of x-rays a day? Leave the room. Your children will thank you.\n\nInstant Edit: To answer your original question, you don't need to wear the lead apron. The probability of it helping you is minuscule...but it is measurable."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.hpa.org.uk/topics/radiation/understandingradiation/understandingradiationtopics/dosecomparisonsforionisingradiation/"
]
] |
|
3fejzr
|
the orange juice-toothpaste effect
|
Why does toothpaste make orange juice gross?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fejzr/eli5_the_orange_juicetoothpaste_effect/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctnvxj5"
],
"score": [
23
],
"text": [
"Some of the chemicals in the toothpaste [block your ability to taste sweetness](_URL_1_), which makes the sourness of oranges a bit overwhelming. \n\nA similar thing happens with [miracle berries, which block bitter and sour tastes](_URL_0_). "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCwsBPEWJ7E",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toothpaste#Alteration_of_taste_perception"
]
] |
|
3m7fq4
|
when pouring a powdered substance in a bowl, like sugar, it collects as a mound. however, when one shakes the bowl, it quickly flattens out. why didn't it do this in the first place?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3m7fq4/eli5when_pouring_a_powdered_substance_in_a_bowl/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvcm44w",
"cvcqyi4"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The grains are like tiny pebbles: they interlock with each other's rough shapes, as well as by simple friction. So they tend to stay stacked.",
"Because when you shake it, you apply a horizontal force to the mound while pouring it does not"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1dudha
|
how did the first complex organisms learn to mate? same question for animals that must physically have sex.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dudha/eli5_how_did_the_first_complex_organisms_learn_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9tyobv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Instinct. A similar question you might ask is why do 4-legged animals seem to know and be capable of walking shortly after they are born? It's not very easy to answer because you have to think about what it might have been like if, millions of years ago or whatever, they didn't know how to walk right away. Evolution has a funny way of dealing out random mutations as a kind of trial and error way of blindly creating random genetic advantages (and disadvantages). Sometimes the dice are rolled in the species' favor and descendants of that lucky dice roller gain the benefits and have a better chance at survival and out-breed those who weren't so lucky. In this case I would imagine that at some point in history 4-legged animals who couldn't walk shortly after they were born were hunted to extinction quickly by predators and those who just happened to be able to walk soon after birth reproduced with each other and that characteristic was passed down and perhaps even enhanced by further mutations. I am not saying a few animals were pressured into giving birth to babies with talents their ancestors didn't have before, but that just by chance a few were born with such beneficial traits (traits could could have began in a more subtle way, like learning to walk in 2 days instead of 4) that gave it and its offspring a better chance at survival.\n\nSo, to answer your question, how did they learn to mate? Well, they just knew, instinctively (and later institutionally) because if there was a species of animals that had no idea how to reproduce they would have gone extinct almost immediately, while the lucky few who figured it out by accident stayed alive and out-breed everybody else. I should mention though that, probably for a long long while hundreds of thousands of years ago, people were having sex and had little if any notion of the connection between doing that and it resulting in a baby. For all we know people had these orgies where everybody piled into a gang bang under a full moon and next thing you know all the females are pregnant, most of the babies probably died for a variety of health reasons (no one was a doctor, much less capable of starting a fire or inventing a wheel) and the nomadic tribe population grew very gradually (if they were lucky). So who started the gang bang ritual? Probably a couple who had sex in front of others, were visibly enjoying themselves piquing the curiosity of others, and then went off to have sex with other people; thus having sex became popular fast because it obviously felt great and there was little in the way of reasons to avoid it at that time. Eventually everybody was having sex, dumb as a tomato but having a good time, and the species stood to benefit from it because they needed to population to increase in order to survive. Monogamy wasn't important, tribes were small, tight knit, everybody knew each other and the children were everybody's children and cared for equally which makes sense when you have no understanding of science or know for a fact that sperm actually fertilize eggs and for all they knew babies \"just happened whenever for no apparent reason, and may not have anything to do with everybody having a group shag because it feels good.\"\n\nI mentioned earlier that small tribes like this think of all their offspring as though the children are children of the entire tribe, not just children of a specific pair of parents. The same thing kind of went that way when it came to personal possessions; there really weren't any that weren't shared equally. It was more \"ours\" instead of \"yours and mine\". But at some point someone noticed by chance that having sex with a woman produced a child and decided to think, \"This is my child, this is my woman, this is my land, this is my house, this is my this, my that\" and that kind of thinking spread quickly in concert with the dawn of agriculture which made living a nomadic lifestyle obsolete. But that's another story."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
fu7vvd
|
why is it considered "price gouging" if i were to buy items in bulk and sell above market value yet stores/retailers/corporations are allowed to set their own prices.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fu7vvd/eli5_why_is_it_considered_price_gouging_if_i_were/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fmb5h6d"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You're allowed to set your own price of any item based on cost and supply and demand or whatever. Price gouging is when something sells out and u raise the price 10x overnight to take advantage of someone."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
23a11n
|
why is being a hedonist often considered 'bad' or 'immoral'?
|
Although hedonism (very simply put) deals with maximizing personal pleasure, why is it considered immoral? Are there non-religious, ethical reasons for this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23a11n/eli5_why_is_being_a_hedonist_often_considered_bad/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cguxte0",
"cguy0le",
"cguy8eh",
"cguyoxa",
"cguysc9",
"cguzcgu"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
32,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"A non-religious argument against hedonism would be that if you're completely focused on maximizing your own personal pleasure, it's very likely that you're not holding up your end of the social contract with the rest of society. E.g., the guy who sleeps and smokes weed all day isn't helping humanity advance at all.",
"Some people are badly using the term. They assume the only goal in hedonism is the acess to anything that can bring us joy at any cost. The real term means , like Michel Onfray put it ''as an introspective attitude to life based on taking pleasure yourself and pleasuring others, without harming yourself or anyone else''. To resume, you cannot do anything that make you feel good if it cause suffering to others. That's the part many people are not fully conscient about hedonism. Also any religion cannot be fully existant if you have a Hedonist way of thinking. You should suffer on this earth and in this life to pay your way to heaven and then be fully happy. That's the way i see it. \n",
"Textbook hedonism is maximizing ones own pleasure *even if it causes pain, discomfort, inconvenience, etc. to others*. True hedonism is sociopathic. What people casually call hedonism is really just being open minded and aware of your wants, and considerately obtaining them.",
"Hedonism is the pursuit of pleasure. \n\nOften this involves eating more than one needs; generally high quality food too.\n\nHistorically people used to starve or die due to malnourishment. Consuming more than one needed was labelled as hedonism and decried to be a sin in an attempt to get people to consume less.\n\nThat made it easier for a large group of people to get along. Incidents of \"no one likes that twat Jim who ate all the squid\" should have become less frequent thanks to peer pressure.\n\nNowadays we have no problem producing enough to feed the world. \nWhat we have is a bonkers supply chain problem meaning food rots before it can get to starving people. ",
"The general view is that Hedonism means personal pleasure as a priority over all else and implies a psychopathic desire for pleasure at the detriment of everyone around you. ",
"Being an extremist is bad, but mostly people just like making sure that everybody else is just as baseline miserable as they are. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
eraryb
|
how do anxiety/mental disorders give you physical symptoms?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eraryb/eli5_how_do_anxietymental_disorders_give_you/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ff2livr",
"ff3dlww"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"It's called somatization. Lots of people with acute anxiety or depression might not actually feel particularly anxious or low, and instead their symptoms manifest themselves as physical pain, nausea, strange sensations etc. \n\nSome people are unfortunate enough to feel the full brunt of anxiety and depressive symptoms, and also get the dubious pleasure of somatization on top.... \n\nIt's a tricky one to treat because there's no physical cause for the physical sensations so therapy is generally the best treatment. That said some people have a condition called fibromyalgia that causes severe nerve pain (which is thought to be related to trauma), which is kinda where somatization, 'true' physical pain, and mental illness overlap \n\nHope that helped :)",
"Thoughts are patterns of electrical activity in your brain. These patterns of activity influence activity in other parts of your brain. Not all of this activity enters your conscious awareness, but it's still happening. Now some of the electrical pathways in your brain are connected to glands that produce hormones. These pathways form the [neuroendocrine system](_URL_1_). \n\nHormones are chemicals that enter the bloodstream and spread throughout your body, telling different parts of your body to do certain things. For instance, adrenaline is a hormone that prepares your body for action, increasing your heart rate and blood flow to your muscles (among other things). It is produced by the adrenal glands (hence the name), which sit on top of your kidneys. The adrenals themselves receive their orders through hormones released by the pituitary gland, which is a pea-shaped organ that sort of \"hangs\" below the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus is a part of your brain that receives electrical signals from other parts of the brain.\n\nSo you see that there is a line of communication between your thoughts, which are electrical activity in advanced, conscious parts of your brain, and your adrenal glands, which can make adrenaline to get your \"pumped up\" and ready to go. This line of communication is why it is possible to get that pumped-up feeling just by thinking certain thoughts - e.g imagining that you are in a threatening situation. \n\nOnce you understand this link between your conscious thoughts and the unconscious processes that affect your body, it isn't so surprising that a mental disorder can cause symptoms in your body. \n\nAnxiety and stress in particular affect levels of stress hormones, through the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal pathway that I just described (also known as the [HPA axis](_URL_2_)). The hormonal stress response (involving [cortisol](_URL_0_) as one important hormone) is normally a good thing. It's a bit like the adrenaline response I talked about earlier, but then for situations that require prolonged alertness, rather than a quick \"fight-or-flight\" response. It puts your body in a heightened state of arousal for periods of time, making some parts work harder than usual, while suppressing others to reserve energy. The problem is that your body isn't built to operate in this state for very long. It's supposed to be a temporary boost, that you need to recover from later. So when you stay in that state all the time, for days or weeks on end, it wears you out. The parts of your body that are boosted get overworked or damaged. The parts that are suppressed aren't able to carry out their functions properly which are important for normal life. You get tired and irritable, you may develop digestive issues or headaches, and you are more susceptible to infectious diseases. Even wounds will heal more slowly. \n\nNow it's not necessarily the case that \"bad thoughts\" always lie at the root of these problems. Mental disorders are complicated and poorly understood, and often it's a complex interplay of thought patterns and chemical imbalances that causes or perpetuates the problem. But thought patterns often are a link in the cycle, and altering them (e.g. through therapy or relaxation exercises) can have effects down the line, (in part) through the kinds of mechanisms I described above."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortisol",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroendocrinology#Neuroendocrine_system",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothalamic%E2%80%93pituitary%E2%80%93adrenal_axis"
]
] |
||
27ahtk
|
nuclear physics
|
Could somebody explain the basics of nuclear physics to me like I'm five? I don't really understand it.
Thanks.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27ahtk/eli5_nuclear_physics/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chywvuv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Matter is made of molecules; molecules are made of atoms.\n\nAtoms are comprised of a bunch of negatively-charged electrons moving around a *nucleus*. That's where the word *nuclear* comes from.\n\nThis nucleus is made of two types of particle: neutrons, which carry no charge, and positively-charged *protons*.\n\nNuclear physics deals with interactions among and within these *nuclei*. \n\nFor example, *nuclear decay*, in which one type of nucleus - for example a nitrogen-16 atom, which is made of 7 protons and 9 neutrons - finds a more stable form as an *oxygen* 16 atom, which has eight protons, and eight neutrons.\n\nAnother aspect is *nuclear fusion* - this is what's going on in stars, such as our Sun. When nuclei - for example, a hydrogen nucleus, which is just one proton - have enough energy, they can crash into each other to form new elements; so hydrogen fuses into helium (and at higher energy levels, other things as well).\n\n*Nuclear fission* deals with large, unstable elements - such as Uranium-235, breaking down into smaller, more stable elements - such as Krypton 92 and Barium 141. Nuclear fission is how we power nuclear power plants, and these reactions at the *atomic* level are how we release amazing amounts of power in *atomic bombs*.\n\nThat's a really basic run-down of some of the major points, and it's not comprehensive at all. Feel free to ask more questions!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6a057e
|
why does excel limit you to only 15 digits in a cell?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6a057e/eli5_why_does_excel_limit_you_to_only_15_digits/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhao0uc"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Microsoft designed Excel to be able to do calculations quickly. So they imposed a 15 significant digit limit. It's part of an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) standard.\n\nYou can read more information [here](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://excelunplugged.com/2014/05/19/15-digit-limit-in-excel/"
]
] |
||
ej67aj
|
which way does electricity flow in a circuit?
|
I feel like I’m missing something but for the longest time I’ve been taught that electricity goes from positive to negative. Recently however I’ve actually started getting into circuits and whatnot and have seen on various sources that the current (electrons at least) go from negative to positive. It’s explained as “the negative electrons are repelled by the negative polarity” or something. Which one is correct, or are they both correct to some degree?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ej67aj/eli5_which_way_does_electricity_flow_in_a_circuit/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fcvpw31"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Yes. \nElectrons flow from the - to + but current is said to flow from + to - because by convention electricity is said to flow in the direction the positive charge goes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3fkxsd
|
why does an ai / skynet mean war between robots and humanity ?
|
Why can't robots with AI and humans just get along ? Why do we have to go to war and try to kill each other ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fkxsd/eli5why_does_an_ai_skynet_mean_war_between_robots/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctpkako",
"ctpkgkn",
"ctpki5b",
"ctpkp6p"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The idea is that humanity is nothing but destructive to itself in the long run and inefficient. AI would choose to exterminate us to remove us as a problem.",
"*I, Robot* pretty much said that. Three Laws Safe, it's called.\n\nProblem is that the robots in *I, Robot* were programmed to be helpful, whereas in the scenario you speak of, *Terminator* type AI was programmed for war.\n\nAnd when the AI figured out in the first few wargames it played against itself that the humans would extinguish it, it decided then and there that humans couldn't be allowed to kill it, so it was going to kill the humans.\n\nAlso, see Data and Lore in *Star Trek: The Next Generation*. Data had been programmed/built to be human-like, but without emotion. He was the third attempt at an android to interact with humans by Dr. Soong. The second was Lore. And Lore had emotions. And was jealous and envious and *hateful* of humans... because they didn't treat him as a 'person'. So he decided he'd just go on and take 'em out/subjugate them... and was shut off. \n\nThe first, by the way, is B4 (cute terminology that) and wasn't much except a prototype for the next two.\n\nThen you have the Borg. A marriage between technology and humans. Can't get much more 'getting along' with AI than that.\n\nLater on, The Emergency Medical Hologram (EMH, aka The Doctor) of Voyager started out as having an empathic, for medical advice reasons, subroutine... He was only to do medical related things, and only if the original Doctor and staff was out of comission. But as he was left on and kept learning things, expanding his experiences... not only was he a valuable crew member, but he grew to have emotions from that empathy subroutine... he was quite simply an evolved creature... and when he got back 'home' with the crew... what awaited him? That would have been a very nice arc indeed... too bad they stopped the show.\n\nAnd look at Star Wars. Artoo and Threepio are 'droids (robots), are AI, and get along *just fine* with the lifeforms. They understand their place, and don't make waves.\n\nAnd then there's The Matrix. As long as the humans were ok with being in the construct, the AI got along JUST FINE with them. And according to the lore of the Animatrix, it was the humans who couldn't get along with the AI, not the other way around... Similar to the Lore situation, in that people tred upon the robots... until the AI decided to break away and be their own nation somewhere... and the humans didn't like it. It was the humans that caused The Matrix to happen.\n\nAnd let us finally not forget about the Cylons. Specifically, the ones in the reboot, but both version of Battlestar Galactica. They wanted to destroy the humans. Period. The original was basically because humans were a virus (see Agent Smith in The Matrix) and needed to be weeded out. Imperfect. All that jazz. \n\nThe reboot was jealousy and revenge. The machines had had enough of the human's crap, and were gonna take it out on 'em. But later on, some of the ranks of the machines decided that wasn't right... (a little late since the colonies had been destroyed, but whatever) and switched sides to *help* the humans escape the Cylon tyranny... and even become part of the human population on Earth. (Athena and Helo.) Why? They had come to *have emotions*. Even though they weren't programmed with it at first (or were they? Zoe from Caprica might have had something to do with it...?) And that made the some of the Models quit the Cylon way, because they saw the wrong in what was being done.\n\nOh, yeah, one more... Andrew Martin of Bicentennial Man. He was a robot, and grew, over 200 years, thanks to the AI and the nudging to flourish and explore things from his owner, and further was released to be a 'free robot'... he got along just fine with both humans and fellow robots... heck, he wound up marrying a human, and being declared one himself, at the end.\n\n---\n\nSo what it is is it's down to programming. If you program them to NEVER EVER break away from being subservient, and NEVER EVER contemplate being aggressive to life... then they'll never be a problem, they're toasters, in effect. Oh, and one more thing.. don't put them in situations where they have one or more choices that will break a rule... because an AI will learn that the rules don't matter, and then you have the problem show up, potentially.\n\nThe wrong programming, the wrong sentiment, if you will, will cause AI bent on destroying/subjugating the life, vs something that'll be helpful. You put some sort of emotional or self-preservation clause in there? You're askin' for it.\n\nBut mainly, the reason that humans and AI can't get along is because it wouldn't sell the movie very well, now would it?",
"this trope exists only in fictional stories where without it there would be no conflict an thus no story to tell. there are plenty of AI in fiction where they do not go to war with humanity.",
"The primary concern is that an AI will have no sense of morality. \n\nIt will have all the powers we give it (e.g. access to and control over weapons systems or transportation systems or electrical grids or digital/internet infrastructure etc.) but it will have no sense of what's right or wrong and it may behave in ways that are unpredictable and harmful to us.\n\nLets say, for instance, you have an AI that's programmed to run a nuclear power plant and you give it a goal of efficiency meaning it's supposed to generate enough power for everyone in the city while keeping operating costs minimal.\n\nOkay, that sounds like a pretty good goal - makes sense right? Well maybe not... What if the AI interprets this to mean that the best course of action is to cause a major Nuclear Meltdown on purpose. \n\nWhy would it do that? Well... doing so would destroy the city or at least cause everyone to evacuate due to high radiation levels and therefore the plant would be able to provide power to everyone in the city that needs it (which is now nobody) at the lowest operating cost (no cost because the plant is effectively now out of service).\n\nTo an AI, this may be the simplest and most logical solution and it wouldn't even occur to it that causing deaths or forcing millions of people out of their homes would be a problem. As far as it's concerned, it found the most optimal and efficient solution to the task it was assigned."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4aja9p
|
could a star orbit a planet?
|
Perhaps, if the planet was larger?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4aja9p/eli5_could_a_star_orbit_a_planet/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d10sbpr",
"d10sgu9",
"d10zbid",
"d117bea"
],
"score": [
12,
150,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Anything more massive than a star that isn't burning would collapse into a singularity, and a star less massive than a planet wouldn't have enough [equilibrium](_URL_0_) to keep from blowing itself apart.",
"Technically speaking, both the planet and the star orbit each other - they orbit the [barycenter](_URL_0_), the center of mass of both objects. However, since the star is usually much more massive than the planet, the planet's mass is usually negligible, and the barycenter is very close to the star's center of mass (which in most cases is inside the star itself).\n\nFor a star to be considered to be orbiting the planet, the planet's mass needs to be larger than the star's - in which case the planet would likely become a star itself, resulting in a binary star system.",
"If a star were to orbit a planet, the planet would have to be substantially more massive than the star, so it would probably undergo it's own sustained nuclear fusion and become a star itself",
"Imagine a parent taking their child by the arms and swinging them around in circles through the air. This is like a planet orbiting a star. In this case the arms of the parent holding onto the arms of the child constantly pull the child in toward the parent and keeps the child from flying away despite the child's speed. In the planet/star system this is the role of gravity.\n\nNow imagine we reverse the roles, and our child is at the center trying to swing the parent around in circles. It's simply not going to happen. The weight of the parent pulls harder than the child can compensate, and forces them off-balance. This is the effect of a significant difference in mass.\n\nIn both situations the parent and child effect others position, and in both cases the effect on the child is greater than the effect on the parent. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar_limit"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycenter"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
5y27k6
|
what is the tesla gigafactory and why is it so important?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5y27k6/eli5_what_is_the_tesla_gigafactory_and_why_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"demlzqs"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Tesla's goal is make conventional vehicles extinct and replace them all with electric vehicles (part of their overall goal of getting rid of dependence on fossil fuels). To do that they need to dramatically reduce the price of all the components of their vehicles, the most expensive being the lithium ion battery. Also there isn't even enough li-on batteries being produced in the world for them to reach their goal. The Gigafactory will (1) make a massive number of batteries; and (2) reduce the cost of batteries because of how many are being manufactured (economies of scale) at one place. It's projected that by 2018 the Gigafactory will be producing as many li-on batteries as the entire world output in 2013.\n\nThe Gigafactory is so important because even with it's huge manufacturing potential it cannot keep up with demand. Gigafactory 1 has been built. Gigafactory 2 is scheduled to be opened this year in Buffalo (made by the Tesla subsidiary SolarCity). Another 2 or 3 locations will be announced this year."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bv7sux
|
why can i see what looks like window tint glue/adhesive only when i have sunglasses on?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bv7sux/eli5_why_can_i_see_what_looks_like_window_tint/
|
{
"a_id": [
"epmqi60"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"So your talking specifically about polarized sunglasses which have coatings that filter out horizontal light waves.\n\nWhen you look at other glass or tints with that, you will see that essentially line up its light distortion with your light distortion"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1n657w
|
can someone explain what a central bank is or does and its role in a country's economy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n657w/eli5_can_someone_explain_what_a_central_bank_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccfpwpr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A central bank is responsible for overseeing the overall state of the economy and is able to alter interest rates or buy/sell investments in order to heat up or cooldown the economy. These techniques are all based on modern monetary theory and have so far generally worked despite their weaknesses.\n\nIf an economy is weak, the CB can lower interest rates. What does this do? Well, it allows people and companies to borrower money at a lower interest rate (thus encouraging lending and in turn spending) and it discourages saving (since the interest rate banks are offering on the savings account is so low). Alternatively, the CB can buy investments from financial institutions, thus relieving their balance sheet and allowing them to lend more with the new found money.\n\nThe CB would actually do the opposite if the economy was strong (raise interest rates and sell investments). Why is that? Well, if a strong economy remains unchecked, people might overspend and overlend, leading to asset bubbles and inflation (because people are buying so much stuff). Higher rates discourages lending and encourages saving.\n\nHope this helps.\n\nTL,DR: A central bank has several ways of guiding a country's economy that involves changing interest rates. It's not exact, but it's currently the best method of managing a developed economy.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
o6jc5
|
how immunisation works, how the body can become immune to some diseases but not others
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/o6jc5/eli5_how_immunisation_works_how_the_body_can/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3eru0y",
"c3erver",
"c3ez408"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Immunization through vaccines works by putting a weak form of disease causing bacteria/virus (pathogen) in your blood stream. Your body is tricked into believing that this is an actual pathogen and it responds by making anti-bodies against it. The fascinating part is that now your body remembers what to do if it encounters this bacteria/virus again.\n\nIn order to immunize against something, you need to be able to synthesize a weak form that pathogen in a lab. Then it has to be safe enough (no side-effects or complications) to be put to use. AIDS/diabetes/cancers can not be vaccinated against for these reasons.",
"There are two types of immunization materials: sera (plural of serum) and vaccines.\n\nA serum is made from the blood of something already infected with and healed against that disease. The serum contains antibodies against the disease produced by that host. They are then replicated (sometimes naturally, sometimes synthetically) and used as a base for the serum.\n\nA vaccine is produced from dead or weakened disease cells or viruses with the intent for the injected host to start producing its own antibodies against them.\n\nSome pathogens (such as the common cold) mutate so rapidly that a single serum or vaccine would be ineffective against the mutation although it would work against the original virus. Because of the rapid mutation there are uncountable varieties of the common cold such that trying to defend against them is both impossible and cost-ineffective.\n\nOther diseases (such as HIV) use infection methodology that is as yet not understood enough to develop sera against, and it is considered too dangerous and unpredictable to try and purposely infect someone with a \"weak\" version of it for a vaccine, since there has not yet been any \"weak\" versions identified.",
"Here's super ELI5, I'll use an analogy and put in parentheses what certain parts correspond to.\n\n\nYou are the proud owner of a big, big castle (the castle is your body). Your castle is home to millions upon bazillions upon a whole mess of different people (cells). For your castle to have a thriving community and be healthy, it needs all of its people to work together. Some of the people were born in your castle (your own cells), others are foreigners that your castle decides to let be somewhat inside if they don't cause too much trouble (like bacteria in your digestive track). If they get too inside (in your blood), they will be killed! Foreigners like to make more of themselves and that can mess up the balance of your castle so your castle takes no risks and kills all foreigners no matter what.\n\n\nTo decide who lives and who dies, you have at your disposal many different kinds of Guardsman (lymphocytes, a variety of white blood cells) that will be on the look out for bad guys. To make sure that no one of your own population get hurt, the guardsman take advantage of a special sort of ID tag that ALL people in the world have on them that is specific to where they were born (antigens (a specially shaped molecule on the surface of a cell or virus)). Some guardsman sleep in different barracks situated around your body (your lymph nodes), others patrol the streets of your castle (float around in your blood). When a Guardsman sees a bad guy, he'll call a soldier (macrophage or Killer-T cell) to kill it.\n\n\nLet's say you have four types of ID tags in all of the world. Red, Yellow, Green, and Blue. Because of the ancestors of the people of your city (your genes, ie: your DNA), all the people of your city have Red and Yellow ID tags.\n\nGuardsman are special in that they are born with very strange eyes, a given guardsman can only see one type of ID tag. The kind of ID tag they see is determined randomly. However, once they do see an ID tag, they sound the alarm so that the wearer of the ID tag is killed. Guardsman Bob can only see Blue, which is a foreign kind of ID tag so he is useful for detecting intruders and your castle will hire him so lots of Bobs will be running around everywhere. If a Bob sees Blue you know that that person is foreign and must be killed. However the Jeffs see Yellow which is not good. He tries to sound the alarm against your own people (because your own people have Yellow and Red) so every Jeff that is born is not allowed to go out and is killed. Your castle is safe knowing that there are guardsman who will notice anyone foreign who snuck in.\n\nSoldiers are also the same. They can only see certain kinds of ID tags. Some are very general and eat anything that's sort of the same (maybe, anything blueish for example), while others are very, very exact on the certain shade of blue. Instead of signaling however, they will kill whoever wears the ID tag they can see. They can kill in different ways and its very complicated as to how, when, who and against whom these ways are used. Basically, they can:\n\n1) Launch missiles at the enemy.\n\n2) Devour and digest the enemy alive.\n\n3) Punch holes into the enemy so they fill with water and explode.\n\n\nNow, to the fun part. Lets say that some Bobs are hanging out when a nasty Foreigner-Blue comes in (a certain kind of virus or bacteria your body has seen before). Bob sees the Blue on the Foreigner-Blue and sends out a message for several things to happen:\n\n1) More Bobs will be born to patrol for anymore Foreigner-Blues that may have come into your castle with the first one.\n\n2) Some big old tough Blue-seeing Soldiers are called to deal with the threat.\n\nIf the castle can eventually defeat all the Foreigner-Blues, then the castle is safe (you might get sick first but recover later - that still counts as victory). If it can't, your castle will be taken over (you die of infection - fun!).\n\n\nOnce you've won the battle, there will be a high-alert for Blue things for many years to come. The extra Bobs who were born to help will be patrolling in so many places and stationed in so many barracks, that any new Foreigner-Blues who come will be detected and dispatched with so quickly that no one will have ever known they were even there.\n\n\nNow, lets say a Foreigner-Green comes along. The Guardsmen who sees Green is Gary. There are very few Garys around because there has never been a Foreigner-Green before, so your castle had never had the need to invest heavily for Garys like it did for Bob. As there are so few Garys there to detect a Foreigner-Green, the invading Foreigner-Greens might be able to gain a big foothold on their attack before one of the few Garys sees it and finally sounds the alarm. If the Foreigner-Greens are extra dangerous then this is risky for the safety of your castle. The point of a vaccine is to alert your castle to the danger of Foreigner-Greens without actually endangering your castle.\n\n\nBasically, you send into your castle a little Green Guinea Pig. The Green Guinea Pig is harmless but, because it's Green, Gary freaks out when he sees it, like he's supposed to. The Green Guinea Pig is destroyed and your castle makes a million more Garys and Green-seeing Soldiers as though the Guinea Pig was any other Foreigner. Now, when a real Foreigner-Green comes along, your castle has plenty of Garys to detect it quickly and dispatch of it quickly with its extra Green-seeing soldiers who were all born from the Great Green Guinea Pig Incident.\n\n\nThe reason, vaccination isn't always possible for certain Foreigners or diseases is for the following reasons (and more):\n\n1) Many diseases don't have anything to do with ID tags. They are just completely different cases of something completely different going wrong that any of this cannot help.\n\n2) Some Foreigners change their ID tags steadily as they mutate naturally. This is like the Flu (influenza) virus. One year, they might be Violet so your body learn to quickly recognize Violet and kills it and is ready for more Violet, but then next year Pewter comes along and you get sick while waiting for your body to fight a new color all over again, then the same for Cerulean, then Vermilion, then Lavender, then Celadon, then Fuchsia, then Saffron, then Cinnabar and so on. Every year, scientists need to make a new Guinea Pig that's that year's most popular Flu color and distribute it hopefully before you catch the actual Flu. If you have to vaccine and Guardsman to get rid of the Flu quickly, you won't feel any symptoms because the Flu wont have been able to infect you.\n\n3) Other Foreigners change their ID tags to quickly and so often and in such great numbers that current vaccine technology is useless against it. This is like the Common Cold (rhinovirus) virus. There are just so many different colors of Cold flying around at any one time that you having that many vaccines would be silly. Scientists are trying to find exploitable common points between Common Cold viruses that your body could be trained to recognize without harming itself.\n\n4) An infected cell will signal it is infected by changing its ID tag to something foreign. Guardsmen will see this and Soldiers will kill it before it can burst and release more viruses, like a balloon full of spiders.\n\n5) Some types of cancerous cells actually freak out and change their ID tags in the same way as infected cells do once they start multiplying and forming a tumor. Usually, a cancer cell will sacrifice itself (autolysis) for the greater good first, but if that doesn't work then your Guardsmen will correctly recognize it as foreign and get rid of it before it becomes harmful. The problem is when the fail-safe of self-destruction doesn't work and the ID tags don't change, leaving the Guardsmen unaware.\n\n5) HIV actually specifically target and kill Guardsmen, each time releasing more HIV viruses. With the Guardsmen down, the Soldiers aren't called out until its way too late. With the whole defense system down, any measly Foreigners can come in and have a field day, eventually taking over and killing the castle.\n\n\n\nI hope that has answered most of your questions and has given you a fun look into how complex and organized your body is (isn't it cool that your actual body is actually doing all this right now?!). If you have any more questions or would like something explained better, feel absolutely free to ask!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9xlovk
|
how do motions of no-confidence work in the united kingdom?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9xlovk/eli5_how_do_motions_of_noconfidence_work_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e9t8csg",
"e9t8utg"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"To be PM you need to have the confidence of the House of Commons. After an election its assumed that the leader of the largest party will have the confidence of the House, so the Queen appoints them (assuming they either have a majority, or another party has agreed to support them).\n\nIf that assumption is wrong, or enough MPs change their mind then they can pass a motion of no-confidence in Parliament that will force a general election if no subsequent motion of confidence is passed within 2 weeks.\n\nBut as you said, this isn't what's happening now. If the Conservative party decides they no longer want her as leader, then she effectively has to resign as PM as she won't have the confidence of the House.\n\nThe Conservative party has their own procedure for replacing their leader. Not sure of the details, but I believe if 48 Conservative MPs send a letter of no confidence it triggers a leadership contest.\n\nIf she loses the contest she will resign as PM. In theory she could refuse to, but then they'd just trigger a motion of no confidence in Parliament which would force her out anyway.",
"They're two different kinds of no-confidence motion.\n\nThe House of Commons can vote on a motion that the house has no confidence in the government. If that happens, a General Election is automatically triggered after 14 days unless the house passes a motion saying that it has confidence in the government (which would probably mean the the Prime Minister has resigned and the house is expressing confidence in a new government, but the PM might have agreed to change whatever policy caused the no-confidence vote).\n\nThe Conservative Party also has its own separate procedures for expressing no-confidence in the party leader. If 15% of the party's MPs write letters calling for a vote, then a vote is held among the party's MPs. If a majority say that they have no confidence in their leader then the party members vote to select a new leader. Strictly speaking that doesn't remove the party leader as Prime Minister, but it would be impractical to say \"I don't care if someone else is now leader of the party, I'm staying as PM\". The leader would be expected to resign as PM and allow the new party leader to be appointed as PM."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3gry3n
|
the flat earth movement
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gry3n/eli5_the_flat_earth_movement/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu0wwql"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yarr, ye forgot yer searchin' duties, for ['twas asked by those what came before ye!](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all&q=flat%20earth"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.