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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2s0zm3
|
why do companies still use coax to supply the video signal to a tv when all other electronics use ethernet; especially considering the supply fiber optic cables all the way to the home
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s0zm3/eli5_why_do_companies_still_use_coax_to_supply/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnl5j7g",
"cnlb5r8"
],
"score": [
13,
3
],
"text": [
"Ethernet has a limited range. All the electronics in your house that use Ethernet are communicating locally, with all of them eventually connecting to some sort of modem than then communicates with the rest of the world over either DSL (which uses your phone line), fiberoptics, or . . . . . wait for it . . . coax.\n\nCoaxial cables can carry a *lot* of bandwidth. Like, a **lot**. The [DOCSIS](_URL_0_) 3 specifications allocates roughly 40Mb/s of bandwidth **per channel**. That means that *every single channel that you can tune into on your TV* is the equivalent of an entire home broadband Internet connection. A coax cable can carry many gigabits of information per second.",
"1. Most places *don't* have fiber optic to the home. Fiber may be close, but that last mile is very expensive. \n\n2. One-way broadcasts are easy. You send out a signal and as long as you amplify it occasionally, it'll get to the end of the stream regardless of how many recipients there are. \n\n3. Bi-directional communications have to allow for the possibility that the sender will send a unique signal to every recipient. For the most part, there's no economy of scale."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS"
],
[]
] |
||
799s4i
|
what happens to grass durning winter?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/799s4i/eli5what_happens_to_grass_durning_winter/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dp0bk1e",
"dp0s57m",
"dp0sgce"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It hibernates (lies dormant). Plants need sun and water to live, both of which are scarce during winter. So the plants go dormant to conserve energy until snow/ice begin to melt and the days get longer.",
"Many grass-like plants have adapted their cycle to also cover the colder part of the year: autumn and winter. one of these plants for example is wheat. \n\nThe mechanism is simpler than you think: they produce an antifreeze-like substance, which prevent water to go solid (freeze). Like in cars and houses, where one use antifreeze to prevent water to freeze, breaking the piping, grass prevents it from breaking its own cells. then it blocks its growth and waits for spring when it has a competitive advantage over other plants which still have to sprout.\n\n",
"Your grass does NOT die during winter. Grass usually goes dormant and has a tan appearance in the winter. Shorter days and colder temperatures slow down grass growth. Older grass leaves will die in continuous cold and the lawn will look brown. This will occur with all grass types including tall fescue and bluegrass.\n\nGrass blades can also go dormant from a process call desiccation. This occurs in cold windy areas. Cold wind causes the grass blade to lose its moisture. The roots are frozen so no water can be taken up to replace the lost moisture and the grass turns brown. This is most noticeable on west facing areas that have no protection from the wind.\n\nThough the grass looks dead, it is alive and once the temperatures rise in late March to early April, the turf color will begin change and start growing again.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1fh9gt
|
how does a device "know" how much power to draw.
|
Kind of vauge, but what im getting at is for example. Idle my PC will only need, 100w of power, but under load it will need 600w. What process electrically speaking demands this extra power from the Power supply?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1fh9gt/eli5_how_does_a_device_know_how_much_power_to_draw/
|
{
"a_id": [
"caa8n43",
"caacynm"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Like water under pressure flowing through an open valve, parts of your computer are switching on other parts (lowering resistance) and letting higher amperage flow through the motherboard at the same supply voltage.",
"When alternating current (AC) (the electricity from the wall) comes into the black box, it goes through a series of rectifiers and transformers that convert the alternating current to direct current (DC), which all electronics use (it's more stable). The rectifier smooths out the AC waves to DC pulses, and the transformer steps down the voltage to about 12V DC from 110-120V AC that the wall is giving. This is how different devices can pull the right amount of power. It's all in the circuitry. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
369it9
|
why do people (gardeners specifically) cut the tips of their plants' leaves most of the time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/369it9/eli5_why_do_people_gardeners_specifically_cut_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crbxoya",
"crbxrzi",
"crc0mi2",
"crc2xn0"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"1: it stops them from growing if you have it just right.\n2: the resources are redirected to the current living plant making it more luscious.",
"when you are growing fruit or vegetables you dont want many branching from the main stem and too many blooms, branching will take more energy by cuting down on it the plant will have more energy and recources to focus on fruit same with blooms too many blooms will result in to many energy and resources used by the plant and the fruit wont be as big and good quality as if you had lesser blooms.",
"Other responses have correctly described [Pruning](_URL_0_), which usually applies to branches.\n\nBut you said \"tips of their plants' leave\". I've never seen or heard of this being done. Was that just a poor choice of words, or do you really mean cutting the leaf tips and not the tips of branches?",
"Plants have this thing called \"apical dominance\" that is the plant will want to concentrate it's growth towards the apex in order to reach high, cover a wider area. If the gardener wants to keep his plants compact and bushy, he cuts off the tips of the plant, it's apexes, which causes the plant to form new branches/sub-branches rather than just growing taller/wider, making the plant more dense and bushy!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruning"
],
[]
] |
||
5ssuco
|
why do subtle vibrations on the road put us to sleep so easily?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ssuco/eli5_why_do_subtle_vibrations_on_the_road_put_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddhlxtu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Gentle rhythmic movements work just like rocking a baby to sleep. The road noise also provides a white noise effect that helps you tune out other city noises that might making sleeping harder. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6zyvv9
|
why are we unable to digest some hydrocarbons (such as petroleum and gasoline) while others (like glucose) are perfectly fine?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zyvv9/eli5_why_are_we_unable_to_digest_some/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmz9hw5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because we don't have enzymes evolved to break them down into more usable chunks. Enzymes are VERY particular about what they work on - it has to be exactly the right shape and size. Even breaking apart glucose takes several different enzymes - each enzyme acts on a different carbon that makes glucose."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bidcvp
|
if our tears are salty, by don’t hurt, then why the hell does it burn when you get saltwater in your eye?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bidcvp/eli5_if_our_tears_are_salty_by_dont_hurt_then_why/
|
{
"a_id": [
"elzrwxl",
"elzvcxp",
"elzzul4",
"elzzxny",
"em05emc",
"em05pz7",
"em0ft8j",
"em0h1n1",
"em0h5ua",
"em0hmyw",
"em0irom",
"em0lmia",
"em0m8jj",
"em0rvon",
"em0umiu",
"em1ey25",
"em1h9v9",
"em21787"
],
"score": [
40,
8745,
6,
84,
132,
3,
179,
2,
146,
188,
5,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Sterile NaCl water wont hurt your eye (e.g: eye drops), but polluted water (e.g: ocean) can result in an inflamatory response in your eyes. Same as why chlorine water (swimming pools) can result in red (irritated) eyes, etc, etc.\n\n*Inflammation is a biological response of the immune system that can be triggered by a variety of factors, including pathogens, damaged cells and toxic compounds.*\n\nEdit: This comment is wrong, I forgot that the cornea is avascular (re: r/jjfrunner's comment). I apologise for my mistake!",
"The salt concentration in sea water is about 3.5%. The concentration that would be isotonic to your body is 0.9%. So sea water is 4x the concentration.",
"Even sweat getting in your eyes hurts, I know. After cycling in warm weather for a few hours sweat can really burn your eyes. It all depends on the salt concentration.",
"water likes to move from places with less water to places with more water. In salt solution, that means water moves from the less salty solution to the more salty solution. (the same thing happens with heat. that's the second law of thermodynamics and what is often called entropy).\n\nyour tears have about 0.9% salt, same as your body. So when they're in your eyes, everything is fine.\n\nsea water is about 3.5% salt. when sea water gets in your eye, the water molecules in your eye cells try to rush out to dilute the sea water. Ouch. \n\nWhen plain water gets in your eye, the water molecules in the plain water try to get into your eye's cells. Also ouch, but slightly less ouch because the difference in concentration isn't as big. \n\neyedrops actually have a little bit of salt in them, enough to mimic your body's concentration. that's why you can bathe your eyes in eyedrops and it doesn't hurt. \n\nyour tears are your body's own natural eyedrops.",
"But what if tears *do* hurt - like a lot? When my eyes tear up, they get so red and itchy and burn.",
"Opening your eyes underwater in the ocean does not hurt though. It does hurt when you surface and the wind hits your face. I can only assume the air/salt combo dries your eyes out rapidly causing the pain.",
"I open my eyes underwater all the time when I am in the ocean. Burns less than chlorinated pools..",
"And seawater contains salts other than just Sodium Cloride, such as Pottasium Cloride, which tastes like shit",
"Salt water doesn't burn my eyes, I have always opened them underwater in the ocean. Um, anyone else?",
"This one can be ELI5'd almost literally, which I like:\n\n & #x200B;\n\nTears are salty, but the sea is much saltier. You can cope with a bit of salt, but more than a certain amount hurts.",
"Does salt water hurt? I was just in Jamaica and it only hurt when the salt water would run sub screen in to my eyes",
"My eyes don’t burn under water. I always open them in the ocean, pools , and lakes. Maybe it’s the sunblock that hurts your eyes.",
"Something begins to hurt your eyes when the acidity or bascity of the liquid doesn't match the pH (a measurement of acidity) of your eye. With saltwater, when it gets in your eyes in small amounts (eg sea spray), it doesn't hurt, since our body has a limited capacity to try to keep our eye's pH constant. However, if a liquid that's not the right acidity gets in your eye in a significant amount, then your eye fluids can't deal with it and your eye will start to hurt.",
"Sea water didn't hurt. Sweat does, but I think maybe there are other things washing off of our skin and into our eyes?",
"Lightly sprinkle some salt on something. \n\nTastes good right?\n\nNow eat a spoon full of salt.\n\nTastes bad right?\n\nSame reason.",
"Am I the only one who can open their eyes in the ocean without it stinging? Sea water alone doesn't cause my eyes to sting, but if I'm wearing sunscreen and the water carries it into my eyes it hurts like hell.",
"In clean ocean water the water feels better than chlorinated water. It's the impurity other than salt that cause the most burning.",
"I didn't realize it hurts people to get seawater in their eyes. I open my eyes underwater when I'm swimming in the ocean."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6tiq09
|
this quote from nicholas machiavellis "the prince"
|
"...For it is the nature of men to incur obligation as much by the benefits they render as by those they receive."
For the context, he's talking about maintaining the loyalty of a towns people during a siege.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6tiq09/eli5_this_quote_from_nicholas_machiavellis_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dlkz7es",
"dlkzdfl",
"dll1kt6",
"dll63h5"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > For the context, he's talking about maintaining the loyalty of a towns people during a siege.\n\nSuppose you are a townsperson who has defended your prince at the cost of having your home and possessions destroyed. Now your prince comes to your aid and from your view there is compensation due for your efforts; the prince must aid in your recovery from such circumstances. How likely then are you to desert him for the invader who owes you nothing?\n\nAnother example: Suppose an acquaintance gives you $50 and then you have the choice of maintaining contact with them. Probably would, right? But now what if you loan them $50, are you going to break contact? No, you want your money back!\n\nSo you see the prince maintains their loyalty both by giving them aid and by their expectation of recouping their losses!",
"Tit for tat. If I do for you, you do for me. A prince, a leader, is obligated by his position to keep the state safe, and to do this he asks the people to support him in the endeavour. If the prince stops honoring the obligation to keep safety and order, the people also can ignore their roles in that order. During a siege, the tit for tat obligations come doubly or triply due, as safetu and order can quickly break down unless both sides honor the bargain. ",
"I understand it as follows:\n\nHumans will be obligated to do many things during their lives but this is not necessarily a bad thing. Obligations benefit both parties. Both the one asking and the one doing. \n\nI suppose this is stated in regards to maintaining order / hierarchy.",
"I think the first part of the statement is the operative part of the phrase, so to speak. To me:\n\n\"... incur obligation as much by the benefits they render...\"\n\nreads as a warning that rendering a given benefit breeds the expectation of its continued rendering; e.g if you feed your townspeople three loaves of bread every day during a siege, this is the amount of food they will consistently expect to receive throughout the siege. You have, to put it pointedly, obligated yourself to feed them three loaves of bread a day. However, perhaps your townspeople only require a single loaf of bread to survive, and if you simply feed them this from the start, you have more time to work with before they become dissatisfied with your rationing and open the gates for the enemy.\n\nWrit large, it's a general warning that no good deed goes unpunished because entitlements breed entitlement, and that the wise ruler should avoid fostering obligations by giving his people *too much*, because they will expect to keep receiving, and will become unhappy when the amount they receive decreases. Instead, the wise ruler gives as little as is compatible with the continued goodwill of his people.\n\nEdit: I do not have access to the full book and as such there may very well be a better reading in context. This is simply an educated guess re the fragment in the OP."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6tpwwl
|
what makes us think a face looks pretty or a landscape look beautiful?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6tpwwl/eli5_what_makes_us_think_a_face_looks_pretty_or_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dlmkddn"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Can I suggest a small but important factor in this without knowing the entire reasoning: it's very different for both although I guess they could overlap, for faces symmetry is most crucial. For landscapes dramatic angles and features take the cake. Things that haven't or are rarely seen that inspire emotion and raw feeling. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2ltm21
|
how a reddit post can show that it has comments, but none are visible.
|
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ltm21/eli5_how_a_reddit_post_can_show_that_it_has/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cly1wc3",
"cly3x24",
"cly40y8",
"cly47jw"
],
"score": [
4,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Reddit admins can inflict a \"shadowban\" against suspected spammers or brigaders. The details are murky, but basically it's an invisible ban from participating on Reddit. Your profile is deleted to everybody except yourself, and anything you post is marked as spam and must be specifically allowed by subreddit moderators for others to see. You get no notification that anything is wrong, and admins refuse to comment about your specific case.\n\nNotice how _URL_0_ is not an accessible page, as if it was deleted or never existed.",
"If a mod deletes a comment it'll still be reflected in the total number of comments. That's the usual reason more so than a shadowban. Source: I'm a mod.",
"If you want to know if you're shadowbanned, join /r/shadowbanned and create a post. A bot will reply quite quickly to inform you if you are, in fact, shadowbanned. ",
"When admins shadow ban your account, you are no longer allowed to leave comments on posts. Anytime you save a comment, it won't show the comment to anyone else besides you. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://imgur.com/GT94G15"
] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/user/ElagabalusCaesar"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4w4rr4
|
how did paul kern survive without sleep after a bullet destroyed part of his front lobe?
|
Wikipedia here - _URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4w4rr4/eli5_how_did_paul_kern_survive_without_sleep/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d642h56"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The story is fiction.\n\nSometimes truth is weirder than fiction. Sometimes it isn't. Wikipedia articles aren't always that reliable either"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Kern"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
eimegi
|
how do car dealership position cars for display?
|
When I look at car dealerships, the cars are super close to desks and other permanent objects. How do they get cars around that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eimegi/eli5_how_do_car_dealership_position_cars_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fcruoen"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In some cases they can drive them in to get close to where they want the cars. Then there are these dollys that go around the wheels to fine tune the positioning. I’m sure there are other ways but this is how I have seen it done."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2758w1
|
black holes - what would happen if a spaceship entered one?
|
What exactly is a black hole? How is it formed? Namely, what would happen if a spaceship was pulled into one? Would the spaceship be destroyed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2758w1/eli5_black_holes_what_would_happen_if_a_spaceship/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chxiukh",
"chxm02u"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"During the lifetime of a star, reactions within the core of the star produce enough energy and pressure to balance out the effects of gravity, keeping the star stable and preventing it collapsing under the weight of its own gravity. When the star runs out of \"fuel\" at the end of its life, it can no longer produce the energy and pressure to prevent gravity causing it collapse in its own core.\n\nThis process will cause a sufficiently large enough star to explode into a supernova, ejecting the outer parts of the star into space with a pretty epic kaboom. If the remaining core of the star has a sufficient mass, it's gravitational pull prevents anything (including light) from escaping (this is why they're invisible, or \"black\").\n\nIf you flew into one, the simplest answer is you'd be very, very dead. If the black hole was sufficiently large enough you might be able to survive just beyond the \"Event Horizon\", which is the point at which nothing can escape the gravity of a black hole, but as you go closer to the core, a mixture of radiation and intense gravity forces would eventually dismantle you down to a subatomic level.\n\nIn fact, because of the rate at which gravity gets stronger as you go further in, the front of the spaceship would become stretched far, far ahead of the rest of it (the same would then happen to you). This process is known, scientifically, as \"spaghettification\".",
"A black hole is a region of space where gravity is so intense that one would have to move faster than the speed of light to leave. Black holes form when too much matter is smashed into too small of a space. We think this happens most often when stars much larger than the Sun reach the end of their life and explode. Just as the explosion pushes the outer layer of the star away, it pushes the very center of the star closer together. Push too hard (and we're talking number that make even astronomers go 'wow') and a black hole may form. \n\nUnder General Relativity (Einstein's Theory of Gravity), a black hole has a very straightforward structure. The hole is a spherical object with a radius directly proportional to the mass of the black hole. That is, the more massive the hole is, the bigger the sphere. The surface of the sphere is called the Event Horizon. Mathematically, it is the distance from the center of the black hole where the escape velocity equals the speed of light. That is, if you cross the event horizon, you would have to move faster than the speed of light to leave.\n\nAt the center of a black hole is a singularity. This is a mathematical point of infinite density. The entire mass of the black hole is concentrated in this point. Between the singularity and the event horizon is empty space, but that space is weird. Time and space reverse so that instead of moving from past to present, you must move closer to the singularity. We'll come back to the interior of a black hole in a bit.\n\nBlack holes are not magical space vacuums. Outside the event horizon, they are very predictable. Imagine our Sun were replaced by an equal mass black hole. What would happen to the Earth? Well, it would *not* go spiraling down into the black hole. It would continue on its orbit quite happily. Well, except that with no sunlight, the Earth would get really cold.\n\nIncidentally, a black hole the mass of the Sun would be about 6 km across. A black hole the mass of the Earth would be about the size of a grape.\n\nSo what happens if you bring a spaceship close to a black hole? It depends on the mass of the black hole. For this, we need to discuss tidal forces. And we'll need a smidgen of math. It goes like this.\n\nThe force of gravity is inversely proportional to the distance *squared* between the two objects. Go ahead and stand up and consider for a moment the Earth, your feet and your head. Standing? Good. Now, if you look down, you'll note your feet are closer to the center of the Earth than your head. Not much, but a definite amount. Does this mean your feet are feeling a stronger pull towards the Earth? Yes. It isn't much, but it's there.\n\nNow consider what it would be like if you were much taller. Say, the size of a skyscraper. That should increase the difference in the force, right? Yes, just not that much. Earth's gravity is just too weak and our height just too short to really experience tidal forces.\n\nBut what about the moon? It's pretty big. Is there a difference in the force of gravity between the side of the moon closest to us and the side that's furthest? Yes. And it's moderately substantial. So the near side of the moon is pulled towards Earth more than the far side.\n\nNow consider how this feels from the moon's point of view. Or, if you like, consider yourself moon sized and think what it would feel like if someone was tugging your feet a lot but your head not so much. What it would feel like is like being stretched. Since your head experiences less of a tug than your middle, which is less than your feet, it feels like your middle is staying still and your feet and head are being tugged in different directions. This is the tidal force, and it's about to get worse.\n\nYour left and right sides extend a way a bit as well. By a similar argument, they are feeling a force pulling them towards your middle. So the full tidal force is being pulled from head to toe while being simultaneously squished from the side.\n\nThis can put a lot of stress on something. Tidal forces can tear apart things like comets and asteroids if they get too close to something. A great example of this is comet [Shoemaker-Levy 9](_URL_0_), which came too close to Jupiter and was tugged and squeezed so much it broke apart.\n\nSo, back to black holes. Since black holes are very massive for their size, the tidal forces can be really large. So large that they will break apart anything coming close to them. If the black hole is the right size, anything approaching will be tugged and squeezed apart. The delightful term for this is *spagettifacation*. Seriously. Come close enough to the right sized black hole and your body will be tugged and squeezed down to its component atoms.\n\nBut only for medium sized black holes. The monsters at the center of the galaxy are different. They are so large, the tidal forces they exert mainly work on something the size of a star. Something the size of an astronaut could get right up to the event horizon without being spaghettified. Then what?\n\nNow we come back to General Relativity. According to General Relativity, the astronaut continues into the black hole, falling towards the singularity until the tidal forces rip him or her apart, then what remains impacts the singularity and is absorbed.\n\nBut if all this happens on the other side of the Event Horizon, how do we know for sure? Remember, once anything crosses the event horizon, it can never come out. \n\nSo let's have some fun. Let's use this to commit a crime. Up for it? We're going to violate a fundamental law of reality. We're going to destroy entropy.\n\nEntropy is a measure of the disorder of a system. And one of the laws of thermodynamics says it must always increase. So do this. Take an experiment that generates a massive amount of entropy. Scramble a few billion eggs or something. I dunno, get creative. Now, heave that experiment into a black hole. Where did the entropy go?\n\nAccording to General Relativity, a black hole is completely characterized by three parameters: it's mass, charge and spin. No entropy. So we have the Universe before we heaved our experiment in the black hole and we have the Universe after. Before, we had a big gob of entropy right here. After, not so much. It's in the black hole. But how can you tell? Sure, the black hole's *mass* increased. But it'd increase whether I fed the hole low entropy matter or high. So where's the entropy?\n\nThis is the start of a series of arguments, discussions and bets between physicists that has been going on for a while. We're starting to get some hints that General Relativity is incomplete. That is, its description of a black hole - singularity, event horizon, mass, charge and spin - is incomplete. The science is far from complete, but the interior of a black hole is appearing less and less simple. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Shoemaker%E2%80%93Levy_9"
]
] |
|
257ojc
|
why did apple buy beats?
|
disclaimer: I know this is still technically a rumor, but what benefit would there be for Apple to buy Beats for $3.2B?
Beats Music is too small of a part of Beats for justify Apple's acquisition.
Beats headphones do not deliver sound quality of other headphones in similar price range.
Then what benefit is there for Apple to buy beats for $3.2B, its biggest acquisition yet? Is there something I'm missing or did somebody at Apple just made a big mistake?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/257ojc/eli5_why_did_apple_buy_beats/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chehiar",
"chehngz",
"cheil1q",
"chejmqc"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nNobody really knows, but the talks are happening. \n\nI personally think Apple made a mistake. Unfortunately Apple is getting a notorious reputation for coming out with stale ideas and overpricing (not to mention that older generations have latched onto Apple - making younger generations shy away). If they came out with their own awesome headphones it would be great, but instead buying another company means you aren't innovating. People liked Apple when they were innovators like Steve Jobs was. ",
"Apple, Facebook, and the other tech companies are in a acquisition war with each other. Each one is so rich with cash, that its worth their effort to simply buy companies rather than competing with them, developing new item and customer bases, or letting them get bought by a competitor.\n\nThe stranger question is why the hell did they spend $3.2B on a company likely valued at half (or less) of that price? We don't know that answer yet, but it probably relates to the ideas in the paragraph above.",
"Everyone thinks it is a bad deal however this deal will result in a strong synergy IMHO. Apple is buying beats mainly for their music streaming-they are competitive because of their curation abilities and subscription based model that allows ad-free music content. Also, beat's revenue last year was 1 Billion with HUGE profit margin. \n\nAt the end of the day, 3.2 Billion is chump change for Apple (they have 150B in cash reserve) They are not stupid people ready blow that much money if it weren't gonna provide a future economic benefit. ",
"There's a number of reasons behind the acquisition. \n\niTunes sales have been on the decline recently, and Beats has a subscription style music service (Beats Music) that Apple's own iTunes Radio was competing with. Now, it's theirs. \n\nAlso, Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine. But mainly Jimmy Iovine. He is a **very** influential figure in the music industry and having him at Apple would bolster Apple's ability to do business with record labels and such, further improving their music sales.\n\nAs /u/toastter said, Apple has seen a few younger users move away from their products, and again, if we all know one thing about Beats, it's that they know how to appeal to that demographic. \n\nI don't think they have any real plan about the headphones right now, but the reasons above are what most people consider the likeliest reasons for this acquisition. \n\nPersonally, I think it isn't a good move, but that doesn't matter. I might be right. I might be wrong. Time will tell. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/05/reminder-apple-would-spend-about-2-of-its-cash-hoard-to-buy-beats/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
35nbmi
|
why is steven moffat so hated?
|
I've heard of Dr Who/Sherlock fans wanting him to quit or retire because he's so bad. What makes him a bad writer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35nbmi/eli5_why_is_steven_moffat_so_hated/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr5zz3g",
"cr60fjz"
],
"score": [
8,
10
],
"text": [
"He is pretty terrible with things like \"plot\" and \"logic\" and \"consistency\". He comes up with some cool ideas, and some good dialogue, but when you think about it, nothing ever makes any sense, and tends to rely on people being stupid, doing things out of character, or shocking swerves out of nowhere. It also frequently tends to break canon, and winds up getting rewritten by the subsequent writers. \n\nOh, and more importantly, Sherlock and Dr. Who (*especially* Dr. Who) have some of the most obnoxious fanbases ever. If Moffat was literally Jesus, people would still want him fired. ",
"If you haven't watched the old school Doctor Who, you might not understand how different it's become.\n\nBack in the day, Doctor Who did a lot of hard science fiction. It was slow building, taking 4-6 episodes on a single story, and it explored complex ideas about society, philosophy, and technology. Not every story was good, but about half of them were amazing hard science fiction.\n\nSteven Moffat's Doctor Who is a very different series that's based around inspiring emotions of hope, longing, and despair. It's not bad writing - if it was, it wouldn't be as popular as it is. But it's a very different style than what classic Doctor Who fans are looking for, where solutions to problems arose from complex and rational understanding of the situation and exposed a deeper philosophical meaning to the whole plot arc. None of his writing can be called hard science fiction, and often times it doesn't really make sense after you've thought about it - where classic Doctor Who was the reverse, and things only made sense if you really thought it over."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9sc94v
|
why are the clocks on appliances always wrong?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9sc94v/eli5_why_are_the_clocks_on_appliances_always_wrong/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8nnn83"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Because you set it wrong? I don't understand the question. In fact as out appliances get smarter this is less likely to be true."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
68pnl1
|
how do private investigators avoid getting arrested for stalking?
|
I assume there's some legal loophole?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68pnl1/eli5_how_do_private_investigators_avoid_getting/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dh0aldw",
"dh0bcwz",
"dh0gs5b"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"They have a license to do what they do so it is not stalking. It is similar to how the police can stake you out and it not be stalking. ",
"They're not \"stalking,\" in a typical sense. Private Investigators do their job which is \"investigate.\" Stalkers may break into homes, cars, and other property to steal items and do creepy things in general. Private Investigators can also work in tandem with the police if a case requires it.\n\nIn short, Private Investigation is a legal career and stalking is a form of harassment.\n\nEdit:\n\nPrivate Investigators are ordinary people that are hired by ordinary people (I believe police can also outsource to PIs), cannot carry weapons with the intent to use them during the investigation, and can only make citizen's arrests. For a comparison, Bounty Hunters (still a thing here in the US) are only hired by the government in order to catch criminals that didn't go to court after being released on bail. They can carry weapons but have much tighter restrictions than the police and can make full arrests. This is all from memory so don't expect it to be 100% accurate.",
"Because following someone isn't stalking. It only becomes stalking if there is a harassment component. \n\nMost stalkers make it a point to let their victims know they are being followed, as a form of intimidation. Most PI go out of their way to make sure they remain undetected."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
13v40p
|
how does amazon work?
|
How does Amazon chose what products go on their website? Do they have a massive warehouse full of everything under the sun, or do they act more as middle men between us and companies?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13v40p/eli5_how_does_amazon_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c77flb3"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Amazon sells stuff in two ways. There are products that they carry in their warehouses, and there are products for which they act as the middleman in taking orders. A large number of their in-warehouse products, though, are shipped there by third parties.\n\nThey don't have one massive warehouse. They have a number of distribution centers around the country, which are designed so that they can do the fastest shipping at the lowest price. For example, if you order from Los Angeles, your order may ship from San Diego or Anaheim. If you order from Buffalo, your order may ship from Pennsylvania. \n\nProducts noted as \"Sold by Amazon\" or \"Fulfilled by Amazon\" ship from the Amazon distribution centers. Products noted as \"Fulfilled and Shipped by Some Other Company\" are, well, shipped by other companies that just use Amazon for order taking.\n\nAs for how Amazon chooses which products go onto their website -- pretty much any fulfilled by some other company product goes up there as long as the company fulfilling it signs up with Amazon, pays the proper fees and fills out the online forms correctly to create the sales pages. \n\nAs for what Amazon carries itself... speaking as someone who has dealt with them as a merchant using Amazon fulfillment... 'tis a mystery, and a crap shoot. It seems like, as long as something has a UPC code that exists in Amazon's database, they'll carry it in one of their fulfillment centers for any merchant that pays the fees, etc., etc. (Hint: if the merchant pays the fee to buy UPC codes for their products, they can probably get them sold on Amazon.)\n\nAs for what Amazon decides to actually carry and sell themselves, that seems to be a big boy game, limited to major publishers, manufacturers, entertainment companies and so forth, and only because Amazon can buy huge amounts at ridiculous discounts and undercut everyone else. They're very big on the \"loss leader\" game, particularly with books and DVDs. \"Loss leader\" means they sell at or only pennies above cost, in hopes that your interest in a particular book or DVD will get you to buy something else on which they do make money.\n\nThere are actually some restrictions on what can be sold on Amazon, particularly internationally. For example, all of the European versions of Amazon (UK, FR, DE, IT) will not carry DVDs in their own warehouses that are region-free, regardless of format -- these must be fulfilled by Some Company. All of the Amazons are also very squeamish about weapony things, like guns, knives, explosives, etc., and are very strict about following applicable local laws when it comes to shipping."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2io8ce
|
when i read a book, the voice in my head reads out loud the words- what do deaf people hear when they read?
|
Question in the title
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2io8ce/eli5when_i_read_a_book_the_voice_in_my_head_reads/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl3vn9p"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > what do deaf people hear when they read?\n\nIf they're totally deaf, and have been since birth, then nothing. They'd have no concept of \"an inner voice\". The words have intrinsic meaning, or they *may* mentally imagine sign-language when reading."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1wdrec
|
how are the breeds of the domestic dog classified?
|
Do the different breeds of dog (Jack Russell, Great Dane etc..) have separate species/subspecies? Could someone tell me the basics of the whole thing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wdrec/eli5_how_are_the_breeds_of_the_domestic_dog/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf12o9n"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"As someone else said, breeds of dogs (or cats or horses or sheep) are not separate subspecies. Actually there's some debate as to whether dogs as a whole are a separate species or are really a subspecies of wolf.\n\nThe kennel clubs do sort the different breeds into groups. The Kennel Club and AKC sort them into 7 groups based roughly on function:\n\n\n**Sporting/Gundog** - generally your pointer, setters, spaniels and retrievers used to hunt birds\n\n**Hound** - generally scenthounds and sighthounds bred to hunt various mammals (such as rabbits, wolves, bear, elk, deer, raccoons, etc etc)\n\n**Terrier** - generally smaller dogs bred to hunt vermin and go to ground after prey (that is, follow an animal into its underground den), also includes bull terriers bred to fight bulls\n\n**Toy** - the smallest breeds bred mostly to be companions\n\n**Herding/Pastoral** - breeds bred to herd various kinds of livestock\n\n**Working** - generally the largest breeds bred to do various \"work\" tasks like pulling carts, livestock guarding, water rescue work, etc\n\n**Non-Sporting/Utility** - breeds that don't really fit into any of the other categories\n\n\nThe FCI divides breeds more on physical characteristics and has 10 groups:\n\nGroup 1: Sheepdogs and Cattle Dogs (except Swiss Cattle Dogs)\n\nGroup 2: Pinscher and Schnauzer - Molossoid Breeds - Swiss Mountain and Cattle Dogs\n\nGroup 3: Terriers\n\nGroup 4: Dachshunds\n\nGroup 5: Spitz and Primitive types\n\nGroup 6: Scenthounds and Related Breeds\n\nGroup 7: Pointing Dogs\n\nGroup 8: Retrievers - Flushing Dogs - Water Dogs\n\nGroup 9: Companion and Toy Dogs\n\nGroup 10: Sighthounds"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1n9a1j
|
hollow point bullets vs normal point?
|
What's the difference?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n9a1j/eli5_hollow_point_bullets_vs_normal_point/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccghxtm",
"ccgiakd",
"ccgjgl7"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
40
],
"text": [
"A hollow point won't penetrate as deeply, the lack of a pointy or rounded tip will increase the chance of it catching. The high speed, when it catches, will make the round mushroom or fragment, dispersing the energy of the round into the target. \n\nA normal point will punch right through, separating the target's material. In some circumstances, the bullet's spin will cause it to tumble and change trajectory, but that doesn't have as high of a chance to fragment the round.",
"Hollow points are made to make big holes in things. \nRegular points are made to put holes through things.\n\n",
"**[Hollow Points](_URL_1_)**\n\n*What are they?*\n\nThey are bullets with a hollow in the point, designed to expand on impact. \n\n*Why do they do that?*\n\nThere are a number of reasons:\n\n* this expansion maximizes the transfer of energy from the bullet to a target, meaning that if something or someone is attacking you they will stop more quickly\n\n* This also helps prevent the bullet from passing through what you intend to shoot and carrying on to hit something you had no intent to hit.\n\n* When hunting, they help make the kill quick and humane.\n\n*Ok, so why or when would I use them?*\n\n* Self-defense - they will quickly stop an attacker while minimizing danger to those around you\n\n* Law enforcement - for the same reasons as self-defense\n\n* Hunting - depending on the game, but they can help ensure an ethical kill (minimize suffering of the animal)\n\n\n**[Full Metal Jacket](_URL_0_) (also known as Ball)**\n\n*What are they?*\n\nThey are (generally) a lead bullet fully encased in a copper wrapper.\n\n*Why do they do that?*\n\n* They are cheap to manufacture\n\n* In war, there are agreements to avoid using expanding ammunition like hollow points.\n\n* The copper coating prevents lead build up on the inside of the gun's barrel.\n\n*When would those be used?*\n\n* By the military\n\n* General target shooting\n\nSome others:\n\n**[Wadcutter](_URL_4_)**\n\n*What are they?*\n\nBullets that are almost entirely cylindrical with a flat \"point\".\n\n*Why do they do that?*\n\n* They make [nice clean holes in paper targets](_URL_2_), so are good for competition.\n\n* They are usually only used in revolvers due to not feeding well in auto-loaders\n\n**[Bare Lead](_URL_3_)**\n\n*What are they?*\n\nBullets composed exclusively of a solid mass of lead (or lead alloy)\n\n*Why do they do that?*\n\n* Cheapest bullet to manufacture\n\n* They penetrate more than Hollow point bullets, while still offering expansion - this is important for hunting large or dangerous game\n\n\nThis is not intended to be a comprehensive list, only a general overview of some common bullet types."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/gsagi/gsagi0804/gsagi080400101/2920162-full-metal-jacketed-bullets-for-a-9-mm.jpg",
"http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/hollow-point.jpg",
"http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/12-22-10-01-RWS-Diana-45-HN-wadcutter-pellet-target.jpg",
"http://ammo3.tripod.com/ammo/images/9mml.jpg",
"http://media.midwayusa.com/productimages/880x660/primary/198/198662.jpg"
]
] |
|
3g3gm6
|
why can't machines be powered by food and water?
|
The human body is powered by food and water, not electricity. Why can't we build a computer or robot that works the same why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g3gm6/eli5_why_cant_machines_be_powered_by_food_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctuhr5v",
"ctuhsm5",
"ctuht8c",
"ctuj6ci"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"It has been done, experimentally. But in truth the chemical reactions needed to turn food into plenty of energy are [exceedingly complicated.](_URL_0_)\n\nIt's much easier just to burn fuel or use batteries.",
"Food and water aren't very effective sources of energy for one. Normal food will get you a few thousand calories while the same amount of gasoline will give you 10x as much energy in a simpler process",
"The human body is full of electricity, and the water and electrolytes regulate this electrical activity. For example, lack of electrolytes leads to abnormal electrical activity and may result in epileptic seizures. \n\nThis slight logical misstep has created a fundamental misunderstanding, I'm afraid. ",
"The real question is \"Why can't humans be powered on fossil fuel?\". Food is actually a terrible source of energy. It takes a long time to process, due to all the different processes to access its energy, and it produces a lot of waste. We could burn food as fuel, but it still only burns, while fuel explodes. It won't generate the same force to turn a piston or boil water in a steam turbine. \n\ntl;dr Fossil fuels are better energy sources. We're the handicapped ones, not machines.\n\nAs for electricity, I'm assuming you heard that nerves use electrical signals. That's only sort of true. It's not a current of moving electrons (technically wires conduct a field, but for simplicity's sake, we'll say it's the electrons). Our neural signals are actually a wave of ion concentrations. The difference is like when you flick a rope, you see a wave moving down it, but the rope itself isn't moving in that direction, and you can't send a thing tied to a rope to the other side like this, but you can by pulling the rope. Theoretically, we could make a system of tubes that transmits signals in the same way, but why go through the trouble when you could just use a simple wire?\n\nAgain, we're the ones who have to go through complicated biological processes to achieve what can be done in a much simpler way by engineering."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://d194ekacf8mn8t.cloudfront.net/content/femsre/29/3/531/F5.large.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a884iv
|
why aren't there multiple versions of the internet run by different tech companies?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a884iv/eli5_why_arent_there_multiple_versions_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ec8n8al",
"ec8n8pa",
"ec8nm5c",
"ec8noq2",
"ec8nv6n",
"ec8plwt",
"ec8qso7",
"ec8v296",
"ec8y6dm",
"ecab6tc"
],
"score": [
3,
52,
20,
2,
6,
4,
7,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think there are, in the form of various organizational intranetworks and in the patchwork 'ownership' system that we use to build and maintain the internet and our data infrastructure.",
"The internet is just millions of computers connected to each other. It's not actually run by anyone, and too widely diffuse to be controlled by one company. Although Google's search function dominance comes closest. ",
"It's theoretically possible to do that. A big company like Google could spend billions of dollars building their own infrastructure across the world to make a separate Internet. But then they have to convince both consumers and companies to switch over to using their Internet. \n\nBut why would anyone do that when it's inevitably going to have less stuff on it, at least at first? To make it more useful chances are someone would provide a service allowing you to access the regular Internet from the Google Internet. And if someone does that, well now it's just one big Internet really.",
"I’ve thought about this before. I guess it’s because, why? There’s need for only one “internet” but there can be multiple search engines and service providers to connect to “the internet”.\n\nOnce the internet was created, everyone jumped straight on it, and everything ever known or discovered by humans is on it. There would be no advantage to making ‘another internet’ as no one would use it. No one is stupid enough to make such a thing as there’s absolutely\n \nIn addition to all that, all internet companies make much more money when they are all on the same servers. If they had their own “internet” they would get much less traffic. Imagine having to buy a new router and pay just to access a different website.",
"There were services like this - AOL, or Compuserve, for example, used to be like this.\n\nHowever once the open web became more popular these services died out as being more expensive and more restrictive than the web.",
"In the beginning there were several proto-internets that worked like this, only instead of being corporate, they were government and academic. There were services like the French Minitel, NIPRNet, SIPRNet, and individual university networks. The problem was that with so many disparate systems, it became difficult to transfer data between systems if they ran on incompatible codes or weren’t supported by a connection between the services. You would need nodes and hubs of operators changing over the data in exchanges like with old-timey telephone or telegraph systems, and would ultimately be a technological backslide compared to the current internet.",
"There are. \n\nHere is what the Internet is: is is not a single system of networked computers, but actually the \"inter-netting\" of different systems. \n\nSo you can imagine that all kinds of people run all kinds of systems and computers and what we consider \"the internet\" is just a bunch of standards we agreed to so all those computers and nets can talk to each other. \n\nImagine a company having an internal system that's technically the same as one of their public ones, but since it is not \"inter netted\" and accesible from your computer via the \"inter net\" protocols, we do not consider it the internet.\n\n---\n\nNow, that was a literal answer to your question but not the answer to your question you asked.\n\nIn the earlier times of the internet there *were* different internet-like systems that were isolated from each other. There were large companies that provided access to the normal internet as we cosinder it today, but *also* access to a company-owned smaller, more controlled version. CompuServe and AOL were providers, online portals and content providers that set up their own, very isolated net for their customers. \n\nWe do not do it that way anymore because it was in the end very impractical and people went from the company-owned offers back to ones in the \"normal\" internet that were better - or just let them connect to other people not with, say, AOL. \n\nAll that said: given how the current tech develops we're going to see more non-internet internets. For example China is pretty much on their way to creating an isolated China-net. But I am certain one of the large tech-trends in the next 20 years will be some large network by one company that offers its customers \"what they need\". \n\nI am fairly certain there were a lot of people for in the last years for whom \"Facebook\" was basically all the internet offered, sure, they *could* have gotten out. But for many people there was little need to do so (with Friends, information, and games all being readily available on just that platform). With Facebook dissolving we're going to see a step back in that trend, just with \"The Next Big Company\" that replaces Facebook (or its replacement) offering people \"all they need from one hand\". ",
"In this context, think of the internet as roads that lead to shops, etc which are websites.\n\nYou can have your own roadways, but you have to build shops for your roads or separate roads to the existing shops or the simpler option of connecting your roads to the existing roads and we are back to having only one set of roads i.e only one internet.",
"A real ELI5: The internet isn't a single thing. It's like having a pen pal you write to. The letter is like a website and the postal companies are like the ISPs. You can use USPS, FedEx, UPS, whatever you want, but the letter will still get to your pen pal since all those companies can reach their house. \n\nIf you wanted a \"separate internet\" like you say, it would mean there exists an origin and destination address that only one postal company can get to, using only private roads, the entire way (if not using private roads then it's not really separate). In our analogy, it would make no sense to do this and the same holds for the internet.\n\nThe internet is just a bunch of interconnected computers. Companies own those interconnects, but no company owns them all (Although some control large chunks; Facebook owns a huge stake in some transatlantic fiber for example).",
"There are. The military/US Government runs a separate internet for classified information that is air gapped from the public internet. Same address space and everything. It is called the SIPRNet, or Secure IP Routed Network. The regular internet is called the NIPRNet for Non-secure IP Routed Network."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1x7yuc
|
where are carpool lanes? are they regulated? why have i never seen one?
|
I'm actually curious and would like Reddit's explanation.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x7yuc/eli5where_are_carpool_lanes_are_they_regulated/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf8wlsj",
"cf8wr0j",
"cf8x8pd"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Have you ever driven on a major highway near a major city?",
"Carpool lanes are often on congested highways near cities. The name varies (HOV Lane, Diamond Lane, etc). They are usually marked by a large painted diamond shape in the lane every so often. Their rules will vary, like some require 2 or more people in the vehicle, some require 3, some are only HOV lanes for parts of the day (rush hour), and some are only for specific vehicles (bus only lane). Some states give exceptions for some vehicles like hybrids and motorcycles, allowing you to use the lane without the higher passenger requirement.\n\nI don't know where you live, but in the northeastern part of the United States they are everywhere. ",
"Carpool lanes are lanes on a highway- sometimes the whole thing- where you're not allowed to drive (sometimes only during certain hours of the day) unless you have a minimum number of people in your car, usually two.\n\nIn the DC/Northern Virginia area, I-66 has HOV (High-Occupancy-Vehicle) lanes; one of three lanes in each direction outside the Capital Beltway, both lanes in each direction outside. The lanes are in effect from 6:30AM-9:00AM on the inbound (Eastbound) direction, and 4:00PM-6:30PM in the outbound direction.\n\nDuring those times, there are police parked aside the onramp, checking whether you have someone in your passenger. If you try to get onto the highway without a second person in your car, they'll wave you over to ticket you. It's about $150."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
74povz
|
why do we constantly complain about water running out, doesn't water just cycle?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/74povz/eli5_why_do_we_constantly_complain_about_water/
|
{
"a_id": [
"do05cnt",
"do05ksh",
"do0688j"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You're right in that water goes in cycles. However, it doesn't always go the same place, and stores of it that we rely on now, such as aquifers, may be depleted faster than they recharge. If fully depleted, they can even become ruined. Aquifers can get salt water intrusion, or ground subsidence, if too drained. At that point, you can't use the water from the aquifer anymore. Wasteful water practices might drain water from a river, leaving none for people downstream to use for themselves, or for agriculture.\n\nThere's still as much water in the world, the problem is *accessibility* and *cost.* Converting salt water into drinkable water is much more expensive than having a handy dandy aquifer. Piping in water is much more expensive than harnessing a river. And so on.",
"Its about rates, as well as fresh water quantities. Water cycles, so does oil/CO2 technically. The rate at which we are using it far outpaces the return rate to a useful form.\n\nNot to mention for water it could rain back over the ocean, or some other place that isn't in our direct water source.",
"The cycle have a rate. There is a certain amount of water per year of water that evaporate, condense and rain back down.\n\nIn addition, not all the water that rain down is consumable. Some rain on the ocean where is become salty. Some drop on the ground, where it can reach a lake, but some also go in the ground and it could take a lot of times before that water reach an aquifer from where we could take it back to the surface to drink it.\n\nAs long as we consume water at a lesser rate than the cycle, we are good. But currently we are consuming it faster, meaning the total amount of water available for consumption is dropping.\n\nSee picture of the colorado river or the Lake Chard.\n\nOf course, we are not running of water. What we are running out if drinkable water in lake and river. We could always use water from the ocean, but that cost a lot more to remove the salt out of it and it wouldn't help population far from the Ocean, who would have to pay even more to transport water to them. Most cities were built where the water was."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4y99hm
|
what exactly is tryptophobia?
|
When I see clusters of bumps or holes in animals, or humans I often get anxious or very uncomfortable. What makes something uncomfortable on this level or something of this nature?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4y99hm/eli5what_exactly_is_tryptophobia/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6m1vah",
"d6m26uc",
"d6m28fq",
"d6madn7",
"d6mhurx"
],
"score": [
24,
34,
16,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"I once read that this is a great example of a learned fear, or a phobia which is picked up by unconscious suggestion rather than innate aversion. I thought I was trypophobic for a while, but when I heard this idea of an unconsciously aquired fear I thought back to my first exposure to both the idea of trypophobia and pictures which triggered tryptophobes. It was an online post with super freaky holes in an arm, and then also some flowers or something which were obviously the source of the creepy photoshop which made it seem like bugs had borrowed into someone's skin. I think my idea that I was afraid of that pattern came from that specific image, and that seperate from that experience I could really not give a crap about groups of small a holes. \n\nEdit: spelling. ",
"If you mean why, I suspect it comes from an instinctual recognition of disease and survival response to avoid it.\n\nThe thing most likely to cause holes like that on something living is some sort of infection or parasite infestation, so it makes evolutionary sense to avoid it. ",
"It's actually called trypophobia (rather than tryptophobia), but it is not a scientifically recognized phobia. Neither is there an official diagnosis for it. What most people describe as trypophobia doesn't follow the characteristics of a phobia. Rather than fear, those who claim trypophobia report feelings of unease, skin crawling, anxiety and nausea, among other things.\n\nTL;DR: What OP describes is exactly what trypophobia is, but it isn't a real phobia.",
"Trypophobia is the purported fear of holes that look \"freaky\". The issue with the phobia is that it's not recognized very well, and a lot of images online that show it are photoshopped. While they might instill a \"fear\" in you or elicit a reaction, that's what the maker had in mind. A key way to see if you really have this is to ask if you've ever jumped up or been scared by an English muffin or other piece of bread. If not, you're in the clear. As is probably everyone on Earth.",
"Hey! I [made a video for you to explain the basics of trypophobia](_URL_0_)\n\nIf you'd prefer to read I'll run over what the video states:\n\n- Trypohobia is the phobia of closely packed holes in objects, these objects can be everyday objects or images of skin with holes in it.\n\n- It can cause, nausea, shortness of breath and a racing heart. It can also cause a feeling of anxiousness like you describe.\n\n- Psychologists believe that it exists because shapes like tehse are taxing on our brain, and we have trouble processing them. They also believe that it's a historical thing, as things like snake skin and mold has tight holes in them and they are both warning signs for bad things!\n\nHope I helped a little bit."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IW3UzuPG2g&feature=youtu.be"
]
] |
|
ciyjhf
|
how is it that so many people die with such big debts, and their creditors are still net positive on the amount lent?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ciyjhf/eli5_how_is_it_that_so_many_people_die_with_such/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ev9zo21",
"eva0ezr"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"People usually pay significantly more due to interest than a loan is originally worth. This allows the relatively minor loss of money to be offset by the deceased's prior interest, as well as the interest of other debtors. It's not like the majority of the population dies with 100k debts on their shoulders. Also, when people die in debt, this debt is often paid for in part by selling everything they owned.",
"Sometimes just the way the loan is structured, sometimes compound interest, especially on any missed or late payments. An unpaid debt accrues interest, and that interest accrues additional interest, etc. If an interest rate is high to begin with, it's not hard to repay an amount that exceeds the total amount lent but still owe plenty more due to the impact of interest. Start missing a few payments, and the penalties and interest upon interest really starts to add up. Keep missing payments, or make sporadic payments, and growth of the debt accelerates.\n\nAn example:\n\n$1,000 borrowed at 15% interest assessed once per year, with a 10 year even repayment term (this is super simplified and not at all how this would actually be calculated - the actual calculations generally favor the lender far more than this simple example).\n\nSo, at the end of year one - $150 interest + $100 principal is owed - $250 paid, remaining debt is $900\n\nEnd of year two, $135 interest + $100 principal is owed - $235 paid now, $485 paid total, remaining debt is $800\n\nEnd of year three, $120 interest + $100 principal is owed - $220 paid now, $705 paid total, remaining debt is $700\n\nEnd of year four, $105 interest + $100 principal owed - $205 paid now, $910 paid total, remaining debt is $600\n\nEnd of year five, $90 interest + $100 principal owned - $190 paid now, $1,100 paid total, remaining debt is $500\n\nStopping here - there's still $500 in principal owed even though the borrower has timely paid $1,100. So if the borrower dies, the estate still owes $500 even though the lender has received more than the amount loaned. Further, if any payments were missed along the way (or were late or short), penalties and an increased interest rate likely kicked in, greatly adding to the amount owed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3xny4o
|
why do most grocery/shopping carts work terribly?
|
There seems to almost always be something wrong with these carts. A wheel is locked up. A wheel rattles. It turns so much to one side that you have to white-knuckle it down the aisle. And a host of other issues. Most seem to be with the wheels. But, it seems weird that these common items have been seemingly unchanged by technology over the last 30 years.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xny4o/eli5_why_do_most_groceryshopping_carts_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cy6af8q",
"cy6ajam",
"cy6bwbv",
"cy6dy6i",
"cy6ezw1",
"cy6fix9",
"cy6kijc"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
25,
2,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It saves those companies money to keep using old, cheap parts and cart designs. Also, they pick up stuff out in the parking lot that mess up the wheels. If they only stayed inside the store, they might work better for longer amounts of time. ",
"Just Like I tell my kids *if you don't take care of your things they will get torn up and if they get torn up I won't fix them.*\nIt worked great when our local store got some brand new carts; including \"double carts\" and car seat carrier carts. Since I have two kids and the store only got two \"Double carts\" I have my kids play I spy as we part to see if one of them is outside; and when we leave we always try to take back to the cart area inside, to take better care of it.\n\nOther than customers not taking care of the carts as they use them, store. often don't have a way for their employees to fix them either. Even if they did, all the little pieces to fix them cost a lot of money over time, so for them it's cheaper to just toss an unstable cart and buy more in bulk.\n\nBut Unusable is judged very loosely\n\nThe worst are those terrible power scooter carts... we could get new batteries for them now and they would be dead before spring!",
"If it has mechanical parts, it will break. Applies to anything. Shopping carts get used and abused everyday for extended periods of time and am guessing only get replaced every so often, if at all. ",
"Carts are left out in all sorts of weather. Rain/snow/sleet/ice/sun....whatever can add wear and tear ",
"I work in a grocery store. Mostly it's because we never replace them and nobody feels individually responsible for their mechanical failures, so nobody tries to take better care of them, the customers that is. ",
"It's not like they have a person tuning them up every so often. They pretty get used and abused until their wheels fall off. ",
"I worked at a grocery store when I was in high school. Basically the shopping carts hold the wheel on with only one nut and bolt per wheel and just like anything else that nut can come loose with constant use which can make it wobbly and hard to push. Can't speak for every grocery store, but at the one I worked at there was no one whose job it was to repair carts and when a large portion of your workforce is teenagers making minimum wage no one is going to take the initiative to bring tools in from home and work on shopping carts. And like /u/|Chickendoodles| was saying a grocery store doesn't really replace carts just get new ones. Often times there's a shortage of carts during busy times so the managers feel that customers would rather have a large amount of carts that some of them work and some don't as opposed to a small number of new carts that always work properly but aren't available."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8dxaxw
|
how come it’s nearly impossible to get vitamine d overdose from the sun, but you can from supplements?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dxaxw/eli5_how_come_its_nearly_impossible_to_get/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dxqo5f9",
"dxqtvow",
"dxqwd05",
"dxqx1gk",
"dxr0abv",
"dxr0o7t",
"dxr1ah6",
"dxr29xr",
"dxr37bp",
"dxr3qhc",
"dxr6hq8",
"dxr74jq",
"dxr7qfk",
"dxrag9r",
"dxrf5fu",
"dxrf62x",
"dxrjyxm",
"dxrmi7j",
"dxrqrxp",
"dxrt5sj"
],
"score": [
726,
438,
6084,
128,
9,
35,
26,
21,
7,
76,
6,
4,
4,
9,
14,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because your body is only capable of producing so much vitamen D. \n\nIts like how you can’t boil a pot of water with a match but can with a stove. Both provide heat, but a match only has so much heat it can provide until it is used up (and its not enough).",
"You could take a single dose of 600,000 IU every six months or so. How much is necessary to overdose? That would be several bottles worth with no problem.",
"The sun is used to convert a vitamin D precursor to the next metabolite in the process. The body doesn’t store enough of the vitamin D precursor to cause an overdose. It also isn’t the final “activation” step for vitamin D.",
"It's been a while since I took biochem but I recall that the product of the enzyme for one of the precursors for vitamin D also slows the process of that enzyme. So basically the more you produce the less active the enzyme is until the product gets used up a bit. \n\nThere's a lot of these mechanisms in the human body to stop over production of a bunch of things. ",
"The vitamin D is created inside of your body. The human body generally does not poison itself.",
"Vitamin D doesn't come from the Sun. It's produced in your body and activated in part by your body's reaction to sunlight.",
"A usual dose is 200UI, some people need take until 50.000 per week and I already see cases that people take 600.000UI injectable!\n\nSo, I think is very difficult to do a overdose...",
"Vitamin D is such an enigma due to stupid marketing. Unless I want to go talk to my doctor it is absolute guesswork to determine if you should take D2 or D3 and how much daily. You'd think at this point in science this information would be presented in a fairly uniform manner.",
"The same way you can die from crushing your legs but can't die from running them to pieces. Your body has natural processes and rates it does things. You aren't going to accidentally circumvent them. ",
"Some vitamins are fat-soluble (Vit A, D, E and K) and some are water-soluble (C and B). Water soluble vitamins can be eliminated in urine, so you can't overdose on them. You can technically overdose on vit A, D, E, K.\n\nThe sun \"makes\" vitamin D because it's rays can modify cholesterol into vitamin D. It's a cool trick but the proportions mean you can't really overdose on it. Most people don't get their recommended vit D dose via the sun but via food. UVs just add a bit.\n\nAka: The sun helps the organism to make vit D but not in sufficient quantities that you can overdose on it.",
"Vitamin D is fat soluble, your body doesnt make enough to poison you but enough supplements will store enough where it's toxic. Same with Vitamins A, E & K. It's not exactly easy to do unless you're taking way too many supplements or have an issue with metabolism but it's certainly possible. Other vitamins that are water soluble are harder to \"OD\" or become toxic on because they're water soluble and your kidneys filter out what you don't need. Those include vitamins C and all the B's. That's why your pee looks like highlighter fluid if you drink too many energy drinks.",
"Different skin parts have various amount of Vitamin D production. The belly skin produces highest amounts of D. Does that mean the bikini is a health aid? ",
"I thought it was very hard to OD on vitamin D. Scientists have people taking 250,000 units daily as parts of experiments—",
"Sunlight converts cholesterol in your skin into a vitamin D precursor. Your body converts the precursor into true vitamin D. If your body senses vitamin D levels are adequate or high, it simply stops converting the precursor into vitamin D.",
"I feel like this sub doesnt do a good job at explaining things like you were explaining it to a 5 year old. I understand people dont want it to seem like you’re mocking or patronizing the OP, but I get interested in a post and check the top comment and its using words I dont understand. Doesnt matter if Im just stupid, if I dont get it, a 5 year old wouldn’t get it.\n\nNot tryna be toxic, I just want to be talked to like a 5 year old lmao",
"We make vitamin D in the presence of sunlight from cholesterol. Like most things the body makes its self regulated. You only have enough enzyme to produce it at a rate that is needed, if you have too much you produce less enzyme, if you have too little you produce more enzyme. Its kinda similar to red blood cells in that aspect",
"Just taking this from my head and trying to keep it simple (eli5):\n\n\"Vitamin D\" has a number of activation steps before it is activated. The one that takes place in the skin is just one in a sequence of steps. One of the latter steps (I think the one to 1,25-cholecalciferol) is actively inhibited by its own product, which means if a too great amount exists, this transformation step stops so no more will be made. If you instead ingest it, it is possible you ingest a metabolite further down this line (I am not 100% sure) and thus skip the self-limiting step and get too high levels of the activated metabolite. \n\nAnother thing is that Vitamin D isn't *made* in the skin, the skin (again) only makes out one of the steps. Sun exposure will not affect the prior steps in the sequence either, so if you ingest precursors prior to this step it could also be a cause to get too great levels of those inactive precursors, but it may still be toxic. ",
"To overdose on vitamin D yo'd have to have an absolutely stupid amount, if it's even possible. So I question your idea That we can overdoes by eating it, at least not unless you're actually trying to and eat nothing but vitamin d pills for a week. ",
"The vitamin D that your body produces (from UV light) is a water soluble form of vitamin D. If your body has more than it needs, your body can quickly get rid of the excess through your urine.\n\nDietary vitamin D is fat soluable. If you take too much, that excess stays in your body (stored in your fat reserves), and it will stay there until your body uses it.\n\nIf your intake (of fat soluble) vitamins remains at a higher intake level than your body's usage level, the concentration in the body will grow higher and higher (possibly leading to a toxicity event, if levels become \\*too* high).",
"Although I am late to this thread I want to add a couple things I learned from my personal research about Vitamin D:\n\n- High doses of Vitamin D supplementation is proven to cause a higher incidence of hip fractures in the aging population. There are several videos on YouTube with doctors citing these medical reports.\n\n- I was told after a blood test, like many, many people in the U.S., that my Vitamin D levels were low and that I should take supplements. A doctor elsewhere in this thread has stated that Vitamin D supplementation caused no apparent increase in levels in their review of patients' bloodwork. After getting several more blood tests myself over a year of taking these supplements, I would have to agree.\n\n- I started by taking Vitamin D2 chewables. These caused sudden shooting pains in random parts of my body. When I asked my doctor why, she said it was probably \"fillers\" used in the chewable. And?? Why is this acceptable?? If you have ever experienced pain that felt like a jolt of electricity and came without warning, you might agree that the tradeoff is not acceptable. \n\nWhen I got tired of that happening, I looked into gel caps that had Vitamin D3. I thought a pure isolate without cornstarch or whatever was causing the pain would remove this issue. (I also learned that Vitamim K is necessary to metabolize Vitamin D, so I bought caps for that too.) With the gel caps I started experiencing a kind of \"confusion.\" The best way I can describe this feeling is that it felt like what I imagine dementia feels like. It felt similar to when I took 5 mg of melatonin each night before bed over the course of a week. (*This was before someone realized that that 5 mg was waaaaay too high a dose to take for Melatonin.)\n\nThis feeling scared the hell out of me so much that I had to beg the question: what is \"Vitamin D\" made from? You, like me, may have thought fleetingly about this and resolved that these pills are literally filled with liquid sunshine and never gave much more thought to considering the absurdity of such an idea. Well, it's not liquid sunshine...\n\n- So-called Vitamin D is made from IRRADIATED SHEEP SEBUM! Gross! It is culled from their wool and irradiated against what I assume are pathogens like anthrax. There is a vegan version of this cholesterol extract purportedly made from lichen but it was found not as effective, much like cyanocobalamin is not as effective as Vitamin B found in meat, or calcitonin in desiccated pig thyroid being a more effective precursor for TSH for a small set of the population that straight synthroid.\n\nI have noticed over the past couple of years that it is sneaking into more and more \"health foods,\" like snack bars. I can now tell when it has been added to my food and I will go out of my way to not eat any food with it. I dont like how it makes me feel. \n\nTLDR: OTC Vit. D is made from irradiated sheep sebum! They put this in your milk, people! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3nb3wz
|
why do racoons get to a eat ton of grapes but just one will kill a dog?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nb3wz/eli5_why_do_racoons_get_to_a_eat_ton_of_grapes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvmgq69",
"cvmhbm3",
"cvmhh5w",
"cvmlhar"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Because raccoons are different animals than dogs...every animal has a different diet and digestive system. Raccoons can safely digest grapes, but grapes are poisonous to dogs.",
"Ooooh, just one **grape** will kill a dog. i was confused for a sec... *what murderous racoon killed a dog?* ha",
"Racoons and dogs are different species with unique evolutionary histories which have selected for different kinds of digestive system. \n\nThere are some commonalities, like how the [theobromine in chocolate](_URL_0_) is toxic to cats, rats, birds, mice, and dogs - but the dose required to kill these animals, and even individuals within these species will vary. \n\nHowever, there are enough differences between species and within a species that new pet/animal owners really need to do their research - what is poisonous to a dog is different from what is poisonous to a cat, a rat, a mouse, a snake, a parrot, a horse, a cow, a llama, a chicken, a pig....\n\n\n",
"I had a Pomeranian that ate grapes. And M & Ms, when he could steal them off the table. He once ate most of a Hershey bar. And some of the wrapper. \n\nHe lived to be 16. Make of this what you will."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theobromine"
],
[]
] |
||
6xzmfc
|
how is digital information stored (in computers, memory sticks etc.) without a power source?
|
To my basic, high school level of knowledge all digital information is stored in millions of byte, small "switches" known as transistors, that have two settings: 1 or on, when there is current flowing through the transistor, and 0 or off, when there isn't any current through the transistor. That is fine and well as long as there is a power source connected, but how can for example the memory stick retain its information when it is unplugged from the computer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6xzmfc/eli5_how_is_digital_information_stored_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmjmaxa",
"dmjmjql",
"dmjp63q",
"dmjptyi",
"dmjv0qp",
"dmjvvox",
"dmk0qpg",
"dmk13ps"
],
"score": [
28,
154,
44,
29,
2,
13,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Flash memory, for example, is based on floating gate transistors, where the gate of the transistor is insulated. That means any charge you collect in there, will stay there. In ELI5-terms, it's like a bucket that holds electrons.",
"Well, you have optical storage, like CD, DVD, or Blu-Ray where ~~tiny holes let a laser beam trough and mean 1 or no hole means 0.~~ a sequence of microscopic indentations reflect a laser beam with different intensity than the flat surface and is interpreted as binary data. \n\nThen there is magnetic storage, like hard disks or tapes, where a special material is locally magnetized one way or the other, meaning 1 or 0, and remains that way without power. \n\nAnd then there is your USB stick or SSD, which contains a special memory type, NAND flash, which has some special transistors (Floating-gate transistor) that do not lose their electric field on one of the gates when disconnected from power. And other types of flash memory too.\n\nLE: replaced the *tiny holes* theory with the *indentation clarification*.",
"The way I understand it, a power source is only required to \"flip the switch\". Once a particular bit is set to either 1 or 0, it will remain 1 or 0 until an electric current is applied to switch it again. \n\nOf course, transistors are physical objects and they can be damaged or corrupted. ",
"Solid state devices, like the one in a USB memory and some newer hard drives hold a charge (each memory cell is an electron trap), kind of like a mini battery.\n\nYou could make a storage device out of a set of rechargeable batteries if you wanted, charge up a battery and it represents a 1 or shortcut it until it'd empty and you have a 0, just connect a volt meter to each battery to see if it's charged or not to read your memory. This doesn't require any power to store the memory, but it requires energy to read and write.\n\nOlder mechanical hard drives rely on magnetism, that doesn't require steady current either. You can magnetize an iron nail with a magnet and it will remain magnetic afterwards, without any current. Same with these! only smaller nails. This is how analog information was stored before the computer days as well, remember video tapes?",
"It takes power to read and write data, But does not take power to store it in a floating gate transistors (flash memory)\nSame principles apply to writing a note with a pencil and a piece of paper; once it is written, it is stored, until the note is erased, burned, scribbled out, or destroyed in some manner. The only difference is the storage medium. \n\n",
"It all depends on the medium of storage and how information is stored on it. Media like CDs and hard drives can store information without power, while RAM can't.\n\nRAM uses circuitry to store the 0s and 1s. A 0 means there is no current passing through the circuit, and a 1 means there is. Since the circuit requires electricity to function, all information is lost without it.\n\nOn the other hand, 0s and 1s on a CD are stored as physical crests and troughs on the medium. On a hard drive, they are stored as magnetic polarities (North or South) on a magnetic medium. In both cases, once the 0s and 1s have been created, they don't need electricity to persist.",
"For brevity, I will assume you already know enough about transistors and don't need more information on them. I will also assume you know about diodes, which is hard to avoid on the path to learning about transistors as a simple transistor is basically a diode and a half.\n\nNow, transistors and diodes are commonly packaged into functional units known as *logic gates.* You could imagine these as boxes with one or more inputs and an output, with the output depending on the inputs and the type of gate. There's the NOT gate, which basically inverts the signal, zeroing the output when the input is a one and vice versa. There's the AND gate, which does exactly what it says on the tin: if all the inputs are all ones, the output is a one, and otherwise it's a zero.\n\nThe one we're interested in is the NAND gate, which is a NOT gate tacked onto the output of an AND gate. This means that the output will be zero when the the inputs are all ones, and otherwise it's a one. Thus, assuming the names A and B for the inputs and X for the output:\n\n\n\nA | B | X\n---|---|----\n0 | 0 | 1\n0 | 1 | 1\n1 | 0 | 1\n1 | 1 | 0\n\nNow, imagine two of these bad boys next to each other. Actually, scratch that. *Draw it,* otherwise you'll just be confused. Let's append numbers to the connector names, so we can tell them apart. Now, connect X₁ – that is to say, the output of gate one – to A₂ – the first input of gate two – and X₂ to A₁. Now, imagine that you have connected power to B₁ and B₂, so they are constantly ones, but can be made powerless when you so desire.\n\nWhen you first power this thing on, one of the outputs will be one, and the other zero. Now, do a thought experiment, and try to figure out for yourself what happens if you briefly make each of the B inputs powerless. The answer follows in the next paragraph.\n\nIf you make the B input powerless on the gate where the output is zero, that output will go high, and the other output will go low. Connecting power to that B input again will not change the outputs, but doing the same thing with the *other* B input will restore the original state. And that is how you store information in a powered system. This is known as a *NAND latch.* There are other types of latches, but this one is one of the more common ones, and it demonstrates the principle. Flash chips are basically vast arrays of latches. This leads to an unholy amount of input and output leads – although not as many as you think, as usually something called *multiplexing* is used, but that's beyond the scope of this ELI5 – so usually a flash memory chip is coupled with a flash *controller* chip, which is basically a translator between whatever language the computer wants to speak (USB, SATA, & c.) and these input and output pins. I say *usually,* because some older memory card formats – such as the xD-Picture card and the SmartMedia card – didn't contain a controller, but had the NAND flash chip connected more or less directly to the card pins. This made them cheap to produce, and the host system had more control over the raw memory structure which meant they could in theory optimise the use of it. The damning disadvantage, though, was that, as a bigger array of latches means more input and output leads, the controller-less design pretty soon hit an upper size limit, as greater sizes would have meant redesigning the card, which would have made it incompatible with existing devices. And that probably *was* beyond the scope of an ELI5, but there you are.\n\nIt should be added that these gates aren't actually *powered* by the inputs and the outputs. Those are data ports, not power ports. Power is supplied individually on other pins. So, what is providing the power when the device isn't connected to another, powered, device? In short: Capacitors. Well, not really. Modern NAND flash uses something called floating-gate MOSFETs, which is a fancy name for a type of transistor where one of the nodes are *floating,* i. e. not directly connected to anything, and thus is only capacitively influenced. A transistor with a built-in capacitor in a funny way, basically. So, again, in short: capacitors. These capacitors are pretty resilient and will hold the charge for long, long periods of time, but flash memory is definitely not something you would chuck in a vault and expect to be able to read in a century's time. The longevity of USB flash drives is measured in decades – and, if you ask me, talking about *decades* in plural is pushing it.",
"It's kind of hard to actually explain it to a 5 year old, but here goes...\n\nElectric current flows through a wire like water flows through a pipe, if the pressure is low, the water dribbles out, and if the pressure is high, the water spurts out. The pressure in an electric current is called \"Volts\" and there is a minimum pressure or volts you need to activate a gate and that minimum is called a 'threshhold'.\n\nIn a computer you have logic gates, and the logic is pretty simple: If there's a voltage (pressure) measured at the gate above the threshhold, the gate will have a '1' or 'true'. if it's below that threshhold, you have a '0' or 'false'.\n\na gate in a flash card is different in that instead of one gate, there are two gates locked together, one is called a control gate and the other a floating gate. \n\nThe floating gate sits on top of the control gate and is like a trap for electrons, if the voltage is high enough to the control gate you can put electrons into the floating gate or get them out, and the control gate will lock the electrons in there.\n\nThe thing with the floating gate is that it affects the control gate. If there are no electrons in there then the threshhold to get a '1' or a '0' from the control gate is low. If there are electrons in there, then the threshhold is higher, so that voltage that was enough to get a '1' before isn't anymore _on the control gate_.\n\nThat means you now have 2 threshholds to work with, a low one to test if there is a '1' or a '0' in the floating gate, and a high threshhold to set the floating gate to '1' or '0'. If the voltage is above the first threshhold but below the second threshhold then you're reading, if it's above the second threshhold you're writing.\n\nSo it's like a weird pipe with a balloon in the middle. Put a high pressure into the pipe, and the balloon can be filled or emptied. Put a medium pressure into the pipe and if the balloon is filled, it won't be enough to get past the balloon, but will get past if the balloon is empty.\n\nIf you want to know more, then the internet is your oyster.\n\n#somuchwrongwiththismetaphor"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7kpuu1
|
why do song vocals get stuck in our heads so much easier than instrumental parts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kpuu1/eli5_why_do_song_vocals_get_stuck_in_our_heads_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drgaxmb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I get instrumental parts stuck just as easily.... not sure everyone is the same in this regard. \n\nJust think smoke on the water.... crazy train... under pressure... I can think of tons of instrumental parts that get stuck"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3rnewj
|
why don't we pronounce the name of a country like the natives do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rnewj/eli5why_dont_we_pronounce_the_name_of_a_country/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwplu1r"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"We don't speak the same language they do! The English name is often simply different from the native name. The idea that things should be rendered precisely as in the language of origin is very modern. When people were more internationally oriented and less particular about the country they were from, it used to be the norm for names to be anglicized, especially if they have a direct English equivalent. For example, \"Pyotr\" is a Russian given name, but we always speak of \"Peter the Great\" in English, because \"Pyotr\" is just the Russian rendition of \"Peter\". It's the same name.\n\n \"Germany\" is an English term derived from the Latin regional name \"Germania;\" \"Deutschland\" is a term that originated in the German language. However, until a few centuries ago, \"Dutch\" was a term commonly used for Germans (derived from \"Deutsch\"), until it came to be exclusively associated with people from the Netherlands, who asserted a separate identity from the Germans."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1cwp6x
|
why free trade is supposedly beneficial to all economies, and the debate surrounding it
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1cwp6x/eli5_why_free_trade_is_supposedly_beneficial_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9kon17",
"c9kplco",
"c9ku67m"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because its beneficial in aggregate, not universally, those industries and individuals who aren't positively effected by it don't like that one bit.",
"Imagine you live in a country that makes everything for itself. Your country is good at making bananas (nice climate), but bad at making TVs (minerals you need are rare in your country). You just accept that TVs cost a lot and bananas are cheap.\n\nThen one day a guy says he's invented a machine that turns bananas into TVs. Everyone loves him -- TVs are suddenly much cheaper, since you just have to give up some cheap bananas to get one. The TV-making workers are out of work now, but there are so many more TVs that on a whole everyone's happy.\n\nNow imagine the machine was a lie -- the inventor just had a boat, and smuggled the bananas to a neighboring country where bananas can't grow but making TVs is cheap. He buys your country's bananas, sells the bananas and buys TVs in the other country, and brings you the TVs. Trade is just like a miracle technology that makes it possible to buy expensive goods with cheap ones.\n\nYour country has cheaper TVs and more banana-growing jobs, the other country has cheaper bananas and more TV-making jobs -- everyone is better off, right? Do we still love the inventor/smuggler? Well, maybe it's not so perfect... here are just a few objections.\n\n**Externalities and Regulatory Competition**\nThe bananas-for-TVs story ignores pollution. Maybe the reason TVs were expensive in your country wasn't about mining -- it was that you have strict rules protecting against toxic waste byproducts from making TVs. Making TVs in the other country isn't better for everyone if the people in that country get poisoned. And if your country realizes it can save the TV workers' jobs by lowering regulation, they might do so. This is called the \"race to the bottom\" in regulatory competition, and it happens all the time -- look at China's pollution levels and labor conditions. Even if their workers demanded the same wages as US workers, it would be cheaper to make some products there and ship them halfway across the world to the US, because of lax regulation.\n\n**Disruption to Labor Market**\nThe main opponents of free trade are usually unions -- the people who represent the TV workers in your country. These workers face a concentrated harm from free trade, while consumers get a diffuse benefit (a few cents off the cost of each TV vs losing the only job they've ever had). Workers have limited flexibility in their employment: geographic constraints on available job opportunities (they can't move to where TVs are being made now), human constraints on skills (they aren't banana farmers), and psychological constraints on adaptation and productivity after the indignity of job loss, especially from manufacturing jobs that have high status and compensation relative to the required skill level.\n\nThese concentrated losses are outweighed by savings, but the decision of whether and how to compensate displaced workers is a tough one. In the US, it's usually a token measure only, like subsidized job training at community colleges.\n\n**War Industries**\nThere are some kinds of industries that are nationally important. Unlike a machine that turns bananas into TVs, a country that makes TVs might invade your banana republic, and TV-making industry is probably easier to convert to guided missile construction than a banana plantation.\n\nThis plays out in real life when the opposite happens: countries support some ailing industries at great taxpayer expense, because they are seen as vital war industries. The US can't economically support shipyards -- all the big commercial shipbuilding has relocated to Japan and South Korea, with China getting in on the game now. But the US supports a few military shipyards keeping workers on and building warships the Navy doesn't really want or strictly speaking need, just to keep them trained and occupied. This is just in case we need warships in the future, and because having the capacity is a deterrent to other countries starting anything. Without free trade, shipbuilders might be able to stay busy building commercial ships, and wouldn't be on the military-industrial equivalent of the dole.",
"Suppose there are two families living in farms next to each other: the Granger and the Smith families. Both families do these two things:\n\n1. They make farming tools.\n2. They use the tools to grow crops.\n\nSuppose that growing crops causes the tools to wear out, so they can't just make tools once and then use them forever after; they make tools, grow crops, then make new tools, grow crops, etc.\n\nNow imagine that:\n\n* The Grangers are really good at growing crops, but bad at making tools. If they didn't spend so much time making tools, they could grown more than twice as many crops.\n* The Smiths are really good at making tools, but bad at growing crops. If they didn't spend so much time growing crops, they could make more than twice as many tools.\n\nOne day both families talk it over, and decide to change how they do things: \n\n* The Grangers will stop making any tools, and grow crops on both their own land and the Smiths'. They will give half of this food to the Smiths in exchange for tools.\n* The Smiths will stop growing crops, and dedicate themselves completely to making tools. They will give the tools they make for the Grangers to use.\n\nNow the result is that since neither family wastes time doing something they're very bad at doing, now in combination they can make more tools grow more crops than they could before, when they were separate.\n\nThis is the benefit of free trade, basically. It's supposed to allow the people who are best at doing any one thing to specialize in doing just that, and get everything else they need by trading. This means that, for example, a doctor can make their living from treating patients, without needing to own a farm to grow their own food.\n\nDownsides of free trade? Well, imagine that 100 years pass by, and now the descendants of the Grangers no longer know how to make tools, and those of the Smiths no longer know how to grow crops. Now the two families get into a fight, and the agreement breaks down. But the original families, while they were much better at one task than the other, they knew how to do both and thus were self-sufficient; the descendants don't know how to do both things, so now they're in trouble.\n\nNow reset the scenario to the beginning, and imagine that tool-making knowledge is also useful for making weapons. Now the Grangers might not agree to give up tool-making to the Smiths, because they might be worried that the Smiths might make weapons and use them to turn the Grangers into their slaves.\n\nOr imagine that there is a third family down the road, the Youngs, who aren't very good either at farming nor at tool-making. Because of this, the Youngs find it very hard to obtain food or tools from the Grangers and the Smiths, because they don't have much to give them in exchange.\n\nSo the Youngs would like to get better at growing crops and making tools, which means they need to practice these things on their own—but every time they try to do it, the Smiths and the Grangers come in and give them a lot of food if they promise to stop trying. The Youngs are always hungry, so either they agree and take the food, or when the father and mother say \"no\" their children go behind their back, take the food and stop practicing; when the food runs out, the cycle starts again. So the Youngs are stuck in a cycle where they can never get better at farming, making tools or anything else they could use to become independent."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7lwbft
|
what is terminal velocity and how does it happen along the vertical axis but not the horizontal plane of motion?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7lwbft/eli5_what_is_terminal_velocity_and_how_does_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drpgj93",
"drpi071",
"drpjo2l"
],
"score": [
19,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"As you move through the atmosphere, the air causes a force known as drag. You can feel drag if you stick your hand out of the window as you're travelling in a car. Drag is related to the speed an object is moving through the air. The faster you move, the more drag you experience. If you are falling, accelerating faster and faster, the drag you experience also grows. Eventually, the force of drag matches the force trying to accelerate you (gravity in this case), and you experience no further increase in speed. This is known as terminal velocity.\n\nTerminal velocity can and does happen along horizontal planes as well as vertical. Ironically, it is experienced in planes. This is the reason jets travel so high. The get into the thinner air so the drag is less (and the terminal velocity is greater).\n\n",
"If you had a constant force acting horizontally and a consistent source of friction applied, would have a terminal velocity horizontally... but not really something commonly encountered.",
"**What is terminal velocity?**\n\nTerminal velocity is the highest velocity you can naturally achieve by falling. In this case \"terminal\" means \"last\" and not \"deadly\" like it sometimes does. As you fall, you have to push air molecules out of the way; if you fall faster, you have to push the molecules harder. Because of the third law of motion (equal and opposite reactions), that means those air molecules are pushing back on you too. The force of this push back is called Air Resistance. When the force of air resistance (which is slowing you down) equals the force of gravity pulling you down (which is speeding you up) you've reached your terminal (last) velocity because your air resistance was only increasing because your speed was increasing.\n\n**Why doesn't it happen along the horizontal plane?**\n\nThe short answer is because there's no force of gravity in the horizontal plane.\n\nI said earlier that terminal velocity was the highest velocity you can *naturally* achieve. The reason I used the word \"naturally\" was because terminal velocity only considers when there are *only* two forces on the falling object: Gravity (pulling down) and Air Resistance (pushing up). You can go faster than terminal velocity if you added another force in the downward direction (like a rocket, or a spring-loaded launcher), it's not an absolute limit.\n\nAdding a new force doesn't completely get rid of terminal velocity though, it just moves it further down. Eventually the air resistance will catch up to the added force and your object will stop accelerating (although it'll be going faster than if you hadn't added the extra force to it). In this way you could come up with a different term (I'm sure there is one) that is essentially \"terminal velocity, but with more forces involved\" and you could apply this to the horizontal axis; but Terminal Velocity as it is only applies when there's just gravity and air resistance."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6buvx0
|
how did the biggest churches around europe were built back in the midcentures? (in terms of economics)
|
Heyy reddit!
After I had a vacation in city of Vatican and visiting quite a few magnificent churches around Rome as well I got a question.
Where and how was it possible to build and decorate such things back in times? Was the working force much less paid or did the church had much more money back then in comparison to nowadays?
But besides working/building forces there were also multiple famous artists who were working on design.. and I doubt they were underpaid then.
OR does church still has the same amount of money or even more, but due to the higher education of midclass people it doesnt waste money so freely anymore? (So it wouldnt get judged)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6buvx0/eli5_how_did_the_biggest_churches_around_europe/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhppg5p",
"dhppkem",
"dhppt0y"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Churches had significantly more power and money than they do now, though they are quite rich still. Back in the day having a massive place of worship, be it Temple, Synagogal, Church/Cathedral, etc. was a sign of prosperity and was very well funded by the community. They paid the artisans fair wadges and would bring in renowned ones from other areas just to build a crowning glory in the city. This primary building was also considered to show the community's devotion to God, and thus they were willing to pay for it.",
"Cultures have always been able to devote a huge amount of resources to temples. Look at Egypt, it is temples and mausoleums. The oldest large architectural objects are pyramids, temples, and Stone Henge objects. Before christianity there were pagan temples.\n\nTremendous secular construction is an entirely new modern thing.",
"Churches were often given the role of collecting the taxes for royalty. Then they would keep their share and pass on. Members of the faith would also contribute, and people working on Churches weren't really paid that much. Back then there was a massive GAP between rich and poor"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6hlnwr
|
. why do most american recipes require kosher salt, when european recipes don't? is kosher salt chemically different than regular salt?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6hlnwr/eli5_why_do_most_american_recipes_require_kosher/
|
{
"a_id": [
"diz8bu4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"From the recipes I have seen. The main difference is the size of the salt grains. Kosher salt is course and so when you get a teaspoon it has a particular weight of salt which is less than a teaspoon of what they call table salt which is finer. If you use table salt in a recipe that calls for kosher you will be putting in too much salt etc. I have made this mistake before "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
d1hgyt
|
how do we move? how do our muscles even contract?
|
Obviously our muscles contracting allows movement, but how do they contract? Do cells in the muscle get pulled closer by a chemical process or something?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d1hgyt/eli5_how_do_we_move_how_do_our_muscles_even/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ezlpk52"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The cells that make up your muscles are long and stretchy, like little rubber bands. \n\nThese cells form long strands, which exist in bundles, and those bundles are in groups which form a muscle. \n\nLike rubber bands, they stretch. They can relax to get longer or contract to get shorter. \n\nChemical reactions in the cells cause them to either relax or contract, by themselves they're weak and could tear easily, but because they're bound together in large bundles, they're stronger and tougher, like a group of people in tug-of-war vs a single person. \n\nThe muscles connect to tendons, that connect to bone, anchoring them together so that when the muscle moves, the bone moves with it. \n\nSo when your arm muscles move? They pull or relax the bone in your arm, causing it to move."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
15l1lr
|
why video game consoles "freeze" every so often and need to be restarted.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15l1lr/eli5_why_video_game_consoles_freeze_every_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7ngnvf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Computers/consoles/badgers freeze for a multitude of reasons. Commonly, there was an exception that could not be handled. Exceptions are \"anomalous or exceptional situations requiring special processing\" Exceptions are a normal part of any program; when they are not handled properly, or cannot be handled, the game freezes. A game may freeze if it's engine (main program that controls the game) encounters a bug in the game that was not fixed in testing.\n\nAdditionally, a game may freeze if there is a problem with resources\n- RAM or processor time is not available for a vital operation.\n- Files from game disk cannot be read from a scratched disk or corrupted file.\n\nOr, you may experience freezing on older consoles as components begin to fail. A very common and completely necessary component called a \"capacitor\" fails with age, causing hangs. Poor voltage regulation from overheat damage may also begin to cause hangs."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
537j4s
|
why do we draw hearts like we do? when did it start?
|
Just curious!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/537j4s/eli5_why_do_we_draw_hearts_like_we_do_when_did_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7qlq2f",
"d7qo2fu"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If I remember correctly, the way we draw hearts is supposed to represent 2 connected hearts. No idea when this started though.",
"There are 2 major theories: \n\nOne creation myth is that humans used to have 2 heads, 4 arms, 4 legs, and one heart. The gods decided to split us apart, so we're always looking for the other half of our heart. The shape we draw is a completed re-conjoined heart.\n\nIt's the shape of the rear end of a \"perfect\" woman when she's bent over with her feet together. Wide hips for easier birth and plenty of fat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
39xjar
|
is vsync simply a lock to fps in relation to monitor refresh rate or does it do anything else beside this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39xjar/eli5_is_vsync_simply_a_lock_to_fps_in_relation_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs7fgcw",
"cs7gh6v"
],
"score": [
2,
15
],
"text": [
"When your graphics cards sends an image to the monitor, it does it line by line. When it gets to the bottom, it sends a signal to the monitor called \"vsync\" which tells the monitor that the next pixels sent from card to monitor are back up at the top of the image.\n\nWhen you are playing a game, the graphics card is sending one frame to the monitor. Meanwhile it is drawing the next frame on a \"hidden\" screen (so that you don't see the individual polygons drawing). Then when that frame has finished drawing, it starts sending it to the monitor.\n\nThe question is how that transition occurs. \n\nOne option, is that as soon as the new frame has finished rendering, the graphics card starts transmitting the new frame. The problem comes that if half of frame 1 has been sent to the monitor, and the graphics card starts sending frame 2 - the top and bottom of the image that gets to the monitor will be from different frames. This can cause a \"tearing\" appearance, especially in first person shooters, where the camera angle can change rapidly.\n\nThe second option is for the graphics card to wait for the Vsync signal before showing the new frame. By waiting for the vsync signal before the graphics card switches to a newly drawn frame, every frame that goes to the monitor is whole, and therefore you get no \"tearing\". The disadvantage is that things slow down, because the graphics card sits idle as it waits for the vsync signal.",
"Imagine you have two people copying a series of pictures. One guy is drawing the picture, and then projecting it onto a wall a few yards away. The second guy is then sitting there and copying down what is displayed on the projector.\n\nGenerally speaking, it would work fine (Assuming the second guy is good at copying). You'd end-up with two stacks of pictures that are identical - One being the original copy, and the other being the copy made by the second guy.\n\nMore then likely though, you'll quickly notice that they're *not* identical. The problem is that the first guy wasn't drawing pictures and then displaying them at the same rate the second guy was copying them. So, for example, the second guy may be half-way through a copy, and then the first guy is done with the next picture and switch it out on the projector. The second guy just keeps copying though (He doesn't even noticed the picture was switched!), so the second-half of his copy is now from the second picture. (The first half was from the first displayed picture, the second-half is from the second displayed picture).\n\nObviously this is an issue. The easy solution is to simply have the second guy signal to the first guy when he's ready for the next picture. So, for example, when he finishes creating a copy of the first image, he holds up a flag that the first guy can see. When that happens, the first guy switches out the picture on the projector, and then starts on the next image. Then the second guy copies that next picture, and then puts the flag up again to signal for another picture. By doing this, as long as the first guy can draw pictures that fast, the two sets of pictures will be identical.\n\nThis is generally how your monitor works with your graphics card. Your graphics card works and draws the picture, and then displays it to the monitor (Like placing it on the projector). While it displays it to the monitor, it starts drawing the next picture at the same time. The 'Vsync' signal is the flag, and it's the monitor telling the graphics card that it's done copying and displaying the current picture and to give it the next one. If you have a 60hz monitor, then it displays and asks for a new picture 60 times a second.\n\nAs you noted, the Vsync signal allows the program to display high FPS content without the problem of the graphics card and the monitor getting out of sync (Resulting in the monitor only displaying part of the picture before the graphics card switches to the next)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5nv5fv
|
why is it that it on a moving subway train it is easier to remained balanced by walking, as opposed to just standing still?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nv5fv/eli5_why_is_it_that_it_on_a_moving_subway_train/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcek8lg"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"it's because you're used to it. when walking, there are all sorts of forces trying to tip you over, and you're used to them. the movement of the train isn't going to make a huge difference. you're not used to things moving when you're standing still though, so while you're physically perfectly capable of staying upright, you don't have the practice. people that ride trains a lot while standing probably don't have that issue."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1ywv87
|
how is usb so much faster than say, a legacy serial connection, when the serial connection has more pins?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ywv87/eli5_how_is_usb_so_much_faster_than_say_a_legacy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfohg9m"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Serial was designed for no faster speeds in mind. So the design of the cable allows for a great deal of interference and cross talk. The nine wires a standard serial cable has all tend to interfere with one another. Likewise the signal on the cable is not formatted in ways that take this into account. Add more data at a higher frequency, and the signal on all the lines starts to turn into static.\n\nOn twisted pair cables this has all been accounted for. They is why CAT-3 (max 100 MB/sec) has been upgradable to CAT-6 (10 GB/sec) in the same form factor.\n\nUSB functionally **is** the upgraded form of serial. They rearranged the wires to reduce crosstalk and created a more convenient connector."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
8slveu
|
why do they design highways so the on ramp of new traffic happens just before the off ramp?
|
Don’t know if this is the right place to ask this question but I just don’t understand why highways tend to be designed this way. Wouldn’t there be less chance of accidents if people trying to merge weren’t competing with people trying to get off? Wouldn’t there be less gridlock too? Is there a reason that I’m not seeing that makes this a better design than having the off ramp before the on ramp?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8slveu/eli5_why_do_they_design_highways_so_the_on_ramp/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e10husl",
"e10lsqh"
],
"score": [
13,
12
],
"text": [
"The cloverleaf, or partial cloverleaf, allows traffic to exit and enter without stopping, through traffic on both roads to maintain speed, and requires only one or two short bridges. The downside is the weaving of entering and exiting traffic becomes a major problem with increasing traffic volume, as you've obviously noticed. The typical alternative is a diamond intersection, which forces one road to have traffic lights (usually when a highway crosses a surface street), or expensive long bridges that allow exiting traffic to exit before entering traffic (stack interchange).\n\nSo why is because they work at moderate traffic volume, and they're cheaper than a full stack interchange. But many cloverleaf interchanges are being upgraded, and they will likely disappear eventually.\n\n",
"OK, you are thinking about the [cloverleaf](_URL_1_), which is the most common type of interchange for large roads. There are other types of interchanges where the incoming traffic does not compete with the traffic leaving, such as the stack interchange, cloverstack interchange, or the turbine interchange. You can read about these types of interchange on [this Wikipedia article.](_URL_0_)\n\nEach type has advantages and disadvantages. In some types, you can maintain higher speeds. Others are safer. The greatest advantage of the cloverleaf is that it is inexpensive as only one or two bridges are required."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_(road)",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverleaf_interchange"
]
] |
|
fmqv5k
|
how are we able to drink hot liquids, yet if that very same liquid spilled on our hand, it would hurt like crazy? is there some kind of “internal ac” in our mouths?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fmqv5k/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_drink_hot_liquids_yet_if/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fl5kwzj",
"fl5ouxy",
"fl5yfrg",
"fl6bfq8",
"fl6ie2j",
"fl6p4jo"
],
"score": [
71,
19,
20,
4,
2,
11
],
"text": [
"The tissues are different, both in terms of nerve-endings and thickness. Furthermore, there's saliva in your mouth (hopefully) that coats your throat and cheeks. Also, our oral orifices go thru a different kind of repetitive abuse than most areas on our bodies, but if we abused other parts of our skin, they too would lose sensitivity (think martial artists with calluses and grandmas that have burnt the shit out of their fingers over and over).",
"Also, hot liquids are usually sipped and/or slurped. In sipping, only a small amount is ingested at a time, and this mixes with the saliva in your mouth, instantly cooling it. When slurping, air in introduced with the liquid, allowing a degree of instantaneous evaporation.",
"Personally, my hands are significantly more temperature resistant than my mouth is. Years of working with molten plastic will do that. \n\nYou can easily build tolerance to temperature; at least when it's short of actually damaging tissues.",
"You're also not drinking a lot of fluid at a time, and it's in motion so spreads the heat across more tissue. Spills are bigger and don't go anywhere so all the heat is dumped in one place. Take a huge gulp of a hot beverage, hold it in your mouth, and you will rapidly notice you have burned your mouth.",
"There's a shitload of blood flow to the surface of the mouth tissue to act as a heat exchanger. And either way, when you sip a hot liquid, it immediately spreads out over whatever surface it touches, forming a thin layer that loses heat very quickly.",
"I can't, and I've never understood how people can. Hot liquids in my mouth hurt just as much, if not more, than if they were spilled on my hands"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4mtmtz
|
why do doctors offices that know they're going to busy only keep one available doctor in office? why are the others just having a day off?
|
Leaving the doctors today, saw mabye 30 patients sat around. Most of them are probably still there. Why? Is it because they'd have to pay more for the doctor being there?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mtmtz/eli5_why_do_doctors_offices_that_know_theyre/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3ymnww",
"d3yn5s8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"So a lot of this will vary based on where you are and what type of \"doctor's office\" you are talking about. But in general doctor's offices (and some other businesses like cable companies) will schedule very tightly to attempt to see as many people as possible. Yes, this means longer wait times for the consumer like waiting an hour for a doctor or getting a vague \"we'll be to your house between 9am and 4pm. But it also means that the doctor is constantly seeing people and not just sitting around waiting for the next appointment. A lot of this is because you never know if its going to be a simple 5 minute checkup or an hour long complex issue where they need to run multiple tests. If they didn't overbook, that means they'd have to schedule EVERY appointment to be a long one, even knowing that most won't be. Meaning the doctor sees WAY less patients throughout the day.\n\nIf they were to change it like that, you'd see a large increase in costs (they are still going to want to get paid, so if they are seeing less people they need to make more per person) and most importantly you'd see a huge delay in how quickly you get service. Instead of calling in sick and them being able to squeeze you in that day or the next, they'd be saying they still have 1 spot open late next week. Or when your cable goes out, they'll be able to send you a tech three weeks from now. It just wouldn't work.\n\nAs to how many doctors to have available, depending on where you are there is a good chance that there isn't just extra doctors on hand they could schedule for that day. So if one is gone for whatever reason (Doctors need time off too you know) the others just have to be shorthanded and work through it until they get back. If its a larger area where thats not the issue, then its usually just like a restaurant. They try to schedule as best they can for what they forecast the day to be, but sometimes its busier than they expected it to be. The more unannounced walk-ins there are, the longer wait times will be.",
" > They don't care about the patient's time and just book many more people than can easily be seen in the given time. \n\nIn 90% of cases it's not true that they don't care about patients or their time. The more patients they see in a day the more they can bill. But you also have to remember that physicians do much more than just exams when they see a patient. Unless it's a patient they see very regularly or have been seeing for a while they have to look up the patient's history and reason for visiting. After they have any kind of interaction with a patient they ALWAYS have to record every detail they possibly can in their notes, and that takes time. They may also have to order labs or images other tests or even look up a case they aren't sure about and at times they may wait for results from one patient to come back before they go start with a new patient in the interest of not interrupting a train of thought or being able to react to those results as soon as they come in etc. It also takes a fair amount of time to turn over a room after a patient leaves and for new patients to be \"bedded\" and put in the system because unless you're in a very shady facility it's a computerized system and simply takes time for those processes to be completed; this can be blamed at least partially on a fairly serious shortage of nurses in the US. Physicians have very little to no downtime while on a shift even if they aren't actually seeing patients very frequently during that shift."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
8kfaa0
|
how does concrete get stronger over time?
|
I heard this recently (but can't remember where) that concrete structures get stronger over time. Not the engineering behind it (like addition of rebar) but the actual cement gets stronger. How is that possible? Erosion wears things out over time.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8kfaa0/eli5_how_does_concrete_get_stronger_over_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dz76j41"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"I think they're talking about days and weeks when they say \"over time\". Concrete takes time to set or cure; after only a day or two its lost its plasticity, and a few days to a week it has acheived a good portion of its compressive strength. But as it continues to cure, it gains closer to 100% of its compressive strength. The time periods you're talking about w.r.t. erosion is an entirely different time scale; at that time scale the concrete could be considered at peak strength after the first two or three months.\n\nThere's a lot of factors in how long it takes concrete to do its initial setting: moisture content, environmental conditions, temperature... sometimes concrete is kept underwater until its set. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4xrq57
|
how does our brain evaluate jealously when witnessing other people's actions?
|
For instance if someone cheats on you, how do we interpret that action of another as jealousy or betrayal?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xrq57/eli5_how_does_our_brain_evaluate_jealously_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6hz0a1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If I get the gist of what you're saying, then basically if something that shouldn't happen, and you don't want to happen, actually does happen, then that's the feeling you will experience, jealousy and betrayal seem to be more complex of emotions and can be broken down into simple emotions, if your partner cheats on you with another person, you don't want it to happen, and it \"shouldn't happen\"(for a reason, in this case because they are dating you and cheating is considered morally wrong), however it does happen, so your brain will feel grief for what you didn't want to happen, and rage for what shouldn't have happened, and that's how I would explain it, hope this helps"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3rorc7
|
why isn't the ratio between turning the steering wheel and the actual wheels in a car 1:1?
|
For example, when you want to make a sharp 90° turn you turn your wheel more than 360°. It just doesn't make any sense to me that steering would be that way for cars when steering on a bike or in a video game is so intuitive.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rorc7/eli5_why_isnt_the_ratio_between_turning_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwpya2y",
"cwpya4f",
"cwpybho",
"cwpyvca"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > It just doesn't make any sense to me that steering would be that way for cars when steering on a bike or in a video game is so intuitive. \n\nVideo games have a mouse sensitivity adjustment because not everyone thinks it should be 1:1. \n\nCars have hydraulic power steering, which is mechanical in nature. So changing it requires changing actual hardware. \n\nAs for why it is as sensitive as it is, it's because drivers have to make small deviations in course (like matching the gentle curve in a road) far more often than they have to do a 360 degree turn. So it makes sense to optimize for the common case. ",
"Most driving isn't massively sharp turns. Most are subtle turns that require precision. \n\nGo-carts steering is like you describe and it's hard to make delicate maneuvers like stay in a lane. It's like if you set the mouse sensitivity to max on your computer. The pointer flies all over. \n\nAlso, before power steering you needed it to be able to force the wheels to turn. \n\nWith power steering you don't get the feedback and pushback. ",
"Safety. You don't want your steering to be too sensitive. \n\nIf you were to be going along on a normal dry highway at legal speeds and accidentally lean too hard on a steering wheel, and a quarter turn means your wheels are suddenly going to be pointing due east or due west (which would break your axle but bear with me), you're absolutely going to flip your car. \n\nIn icy conditions, multiply that chance by a bajillion. Rainy conditions only multiply it by a bamillion.\n\n",
"1. You do not need to do such sharp turns normally.\n\n2. It would be impossible to turn the steering wheel if it turned the actual wheels at a 1:1 ratio. The gears within the steering mechanism make it so turning the wheel won't turn the actual wheels so much, but less torque is required to turn the steering wheel, to the point where a human could easily turn it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
93snz9
|
what happens when you show up to an er in the united states with a medical emergency without your id and refuse to provide information to identify yourself.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93snz9/eli5_what_happens_when_you_show_up_to_an_er_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3fnj5c",
"e3fp4qb"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"AFAIK \"the hospital must provide...within the staff and facilities available at the hospital, for such further medical examination and such treatment as may be required to stabilize the medical condition [of the patient]\" (per EMTALA) whether they provided identification or not.\n\nThat said, hospitals can and will still attempt to find out who you are and will almost certainly succeed and bill you.",
"Anecdote:\n\nI was homeless about ten years ago and got really bad tonsillitis. I went to the ER and gave them an obviously fake name, said I didn't know my social, and was homeless with no address.\n\n\nThey treated me very well and I never received a bill, because how could I?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4c6qds
|
how would the united states shoot down a nuclear missile if it were headed our way?
|
Are we constantly on the lookout for nuclear missiles being launched? At what point would we be able to detect one if it were to be launched? What is the time we have to react and how would we go about it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c6qds/eli5_how_would_the_united_states_shoot_down_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1fi7bv",
"d1gm3vg"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If we're talking about *ballistic* missiles, then yes, everyone is constantly looking for them. They show up on radar, and have a very predictable trajectory. In fact, it's already happened multiple times that a false radar signature was mistaken for a potential missile and the personnel almost launched a counterattack for it.\n\nCurrently, while there are laser-based proposals for ballistic missile defense, none are implemented as far as I'm aware. There are, however, anti-ballistic missiles, which work just how you'd expect. You fire one and it intercepts the ballistic missile on its trajectory and hopefully takes it out. The drawback is that these missiles are more complex and expensive than the actual ballistic missiles they take out (minus the warhead cost, of course).\n\nIn case of cruise missiles the story is very different. They fly low and thus can potentially evade radar detection, plus their flight path means very little intercepting opportunity, and high risk of collateral damage. However, their range is much shorter. Thankfully, these missiles are very sophisticated and not many nations are capable of fielding them as easily as ballistic ones.",
"Contractor here. The United States has a portfolio of radars around the world to detect such activities. Depending where the missile is launched, depends what method we use. Since the the closet country with nuclear threats is over an ocean, we would use a long range interceptor. It meets the nuke in space and blows it up. In a missile launch, on a good day and good distance, we have about 30 minutes to react."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2410pa
|
why are some people able to consistently avoid hangovers, while others pay for each shot with an hour spent in fetal position on the bathroom floor?
|
There's always that guy who just does not get hungover. Ever. I hate that guy. Explain his existence.
Front page!! This is the best consolation prize for hours of dry heaving that I will ever receive. Thanks for answering, friends.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2410pa/eli5_why_are_some_people_able_to_consistently/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch2j6qv",
"ch2jfby",
"ch2jg3h",
"ch2jhc2",
"ch2jklb",
"ch2jodv",
"ch2jomz",
"ch2jpjk",
"ch2jqmv",
"ch2jub5",
"ch2k0b5",
"ch2k3p7",
"ch2k41i",
"ch2k5qn",
"ch2k954",
"ch2ka78",
"ch2kah8",
"ch2kff8",
"ch2kn33",
"ch2l2b2",
"ch2l43e",
"ch2l6gm",
"ch2ls4y",
"ch2ltno",
"ch2lwfq",
"ch2mb2p",
"ch2mtlp",
"ch2n3ka",
"ch2oc7o",
"ch2ombd",
"ch2oq9f",
"ch2oy42",
"ch2p73o",
"ch2p8ok",
"ch2pfnk",
"ch2pn5b",
"ch2qr20",
"ch2tbnt",
"ch2tk7f",
"ch2u1lo",
"ch2ugpp",
"ch2uqe4",
"ch2urbi",
"ch2uvff",
"ch2vdhm",
"ch2vo7v",
"ch2y3lq",
"ch2y7q6",
"ch308mh",
"ch30x51",
"ch33h6g",
"ch33o51",
"ch33wrz",
"ch34qoz",
"ch368uu",
"ch36p2e"
],
"score": [
20,
2,
14,
288,
3,
31,
2,
1467,
7,
2,
4,
7,
2,
4,
114,
2,
2,
3,
6,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
63,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Drink a Gatorade before you pass out. Water works too\n\n[Also eggs in purgatory is god tier hangover cure](_URL_0_)",
"I drink very often and my Achilles heel is not having enough food before/during drinking ",
"Metabolism, the faster your body can process the alcohol the less hungover you'll get. \n",
"I don't really have an answer (Human biological variability is quite large from person to person so the truth is probably in there somewhere. ) but I would like to point out that if you are under 25 and claim you \"don't really get hangovers\" be prepared for the possibility that it's all ahead of you. I used not to get hangovers either. Some of my friends did and some didn't. Now (early thirties) we are almost universally destroyed by a proper night out. Still do it though. ",
"I've noticed my hangover severity increases with age. I never got hungover from 18-24 or so and now that I'm nearing 30, I definitely get hangovers so I don't drink very often any more (I'm sure my health is definitely improving because of it).\n\nAlso, this probably doesn't relate to your question, but hard core alcoholics really don't get hungover because there is alcohol in their system all the time.",
"\"Dehydration is the enemy\" -Charlie Sheen\n\nYou are dehydrated and need to drink a Gadorade or 2 glasses of water before going to bed. It also has to do with age, hangoves start getting bad and get progressively worse after 22.",
"It is because I drink less than you do. ",
"Some of its a metabolic thing. Your body breaks down alcohol into acetaldehyde, which is quite poisonous. It is what causes the flushing people get when they drink alcohol. If your liver can do this first reaction quickly, you will sober up more quickly. \n\nAcetaldehyde is further broken down into acetate, then to water and CO2. If you can't break acetaldehyde quickly, it will accumulate, and make you feel worse for wear. \n\nThese pathways are affected by genetics, so often people will have similar tendencies to get hangovers or sober up quickly as their parents. They also depend on your liver function, which is why hangovers get worse with time (and a drinking lifestyle!)\n\nFurthermore, if you are dehydrated, you will feel far worse. During at night out or a party, try to drink water, or at the very least, non-caffeinated soft drinks. In Australia, licensed venues must provide you with water on request (say 'glass of water,' or they might try to sell you bottled).\n\nEdit: Poor wording choice above. I haven't been to places that have openly refused to give me a glass of water, but I have been to some where they will try to coerce you into buying the bottled water.\n\nThis is a simplified version. A more full description is here: _URL_0_",
"water. stay hydrated and avoid sugary drinks. ",
"Having an Irish liver helps, blessed virgin mary saw fit to give me one of them green enchanted livers and I have never had a hangover yet!",
"Short answer: Water \n\nI never get hangovers. The reason we get hangovers is because alcohol dehydrates your body. \n\nThe trick is to keep your body hydrated throughout the time you're drinking. \n\nI drink a glass of water for every couple of drinks works for me but perhaps there are other biological factors that come into play so it may not work for others. ",
"Often the type of liquor, time in which it is consumed, and other things consumed have a huge impact on whether you get hungover.\n\nMixing alcohols makes things worse.\n\nDrinking water, throughout he night, makes things better.\n\nDrinking shots of liquor rapidly, as opposed to spaced out, makes things worse.\n\nDrinking after eating a full meal, and eating properly all day, make things better.\n\nSo, stick to one type of alcohol for the night, eat properly all day before going out, drink water throughout, and space your drinks out. Drink lots of water when you get him before bed.\n\nBut I don't know why I'm explaining this for five year olds, they shouldn't be drinking at all.",
"Perhaps you should drink more water while you drink alcohol to avoid hangovers...just sayin",
"Rules you learn by the time you're 25:\n\n- Never mix drinks, stick to the same one all night long\n\n- Constantly drink water. After every drink, have a glass of water, before you go to bed, have a whole pint.\n\n- Spread the drinks out over the night and slow down near the end.",
"Since I've yet to see a good answer, factors involved in hangover:\n\n1. Dehydration. Alcohol opens protein gates in your kidneys called aquaporins; your body attempts to remove ethanol and its toxic byproducts from your bloodstream by flushing them out with somewhat drastic amounts of water.\n\n2. Sleep deprivation. Alcohol binds to GABA receptors in your brain, which are involved in sedation. Whenever you take a drug that binds to a specific receptor, your brain slows down production of its own molecule that binds to that receptor to try to balance it out (and not kill you.) When you lay down after a long night of drinking, your sleep is necessarily of a lower quality, because as alcohol is metabolized/removed, your brain does not compensate immediately with regards to production of GABA-binding molecules.\n\n3. Toxic effects. An intermediary of the metabolism of alcohol, acetylaldehyde, may actually cause more damage than the alcohol itself (which should not be discounted, but anyways.) It causes oxidative stress, pretty much taking electrons away from other molecules where it should not, especially NADH, a molecule essential to powering your body. The oxidation of NADH may explain the feel-shitty-all-over physical symptom, as your body has to revert to an inefficient chemical chain reaction to produce energy, the same one performed during intense exercise.\n\n4. Psychological factors: Your friend may just not notice, or have a higher personal tolerance for many of the symptoms of a hangover.\n\nIn all likelihood, your friends body is likely coping better with one of the first three factors: Does he pace himself with drinks, and chase with non-caffeinated, non-alcoholic beverages? Is he regularly sleep deprived, and thus perhaps desensitized to this particular effect? Is he younger than you, and thus more resistant to oxidative stress? Does he intersperse drinks with eating proteins and absorbent carbohydrates?",
"For some reason I always throw up or get hungover. I think maybe my body is just real sensitive to alcohol. That's why I just smoke weed. You feel like a champ and don't get a hangover haha!",
"Just dont be a bitch about it, and drink tons of water before you go to bed after a night drinking. Eating something helps as well. Hangovers are caused by dehydration from all the alcohol you drink.",
"TL:DR- Lots of different factors like genetics, body size, food eaten recently, etc. Also, drink lots of water while drinking alcohol to never have a hangover.\n\n2nd year Physician Assistant student here. My knowledge of why some people are naturally more tolerant is pretty basic and definitely lacking in details, but there are many variable reasons why people get more drunk than others off the same amount of alcohol. A few factors are genetics and the liver's ability to breakdown the alcohol, the physical size of the person and therefore the time it will take for enough alcohol to circulate the bloodstream and reach the brain, and things like what and how soon they ate before drinking.\nI can, however, tell you how to easily avoid getting a hangover (or at least the headache part). Basically, Alcohol functions as an diuretic. What that means is that it inhibits the function of the body's natural Anti Diuretic Hormone, which triggers the body to reabsorb water in the kidneys. This causes the body to excrete more water than it wants too (hence why you pee a lot when drunk). In simple terms, the body loses too much water and the brain gets dehydrated. That leads to the massive head pain known as a hangover.\nSo, drink roughly a glass of water for every drink/shot or as close to that number as you can, and you won't have a hangover/have a very reduced hangover.",
"Hey idk why that is with some people, but /r/beer posted a an interview with Sam Adams CEO and he says that a teaspoon of active yeast for every beer before you drink will mitigate the effects of the alcohol. ",
"My experience has shown me that to avoid hangovers:\n\n- Stick to one type of drink; I prefer Jack Daniels and Ginger Ale. \n- Watch sugars in the drink. Alcohol has sugar in it, so the more mixers and additions means more sugar.\n- Ibuprofen and a multivitamin before bed. Yes, I know ibuprofen can cause damage, but that is in high doses. They help with inflammation and dilution of nutrients in your system. \n\nYou'll wake up knowing you had some drinks, but you won't be hating life.",
"I'm that guy :) I can remember throwing up once, but for the most part I wake up fine the next morning. LPT - take a couple ibuprofen and drink as much water as you can before you go to sleep and you won't have any more issues.",
"I am that guy. Drink a ton of water. Seriously. It may be the last thing you want to do by the end of the night but it works. ",
"I get a mild headache and really thirsty the morning after. I've never experienced a major hangover though, but I just choked that down to me being awesome",
"I try to drink a glass of water for every two shots...rarely, do I ever have a hangover. I only like to drink when I can get silly, sloppy, stinking drunk.",
"I am one of the lucky ones who never gets a hangover ",
"There's two key enzymes in alcohol metabolism: alcohol dehydrogenase and acetylaldehyde dehydrogenase. The production of these enzymes are determined by individual and complicated genetics\n",
"I feel like there are really only two explanations here.\n\nEither a) Y'all are pussies.\n\nOr, more likely b) everyone's biological build up is different. We have tolerances and weaknesses for different things. Some people lucked out and were born with a high tolerance to hangovers. Maybe becoming an alcoholic can help with this. I've gotten a hangover exactly once in my life, and I suspect it had more to do with food poisoning than the actual alcohol. Otherwise, I'm fine drinking a 750ml of jager a night and I wake up feeling perky. ",
"This is a good question. More often than not, it is about hydration. The hangover is your body's inability to complete the Krebs Cycle as enough as it should. Water is required to complete the cycle as it normally should.\n(_URL_0_). \nSo when you feel like you are dying when you have a hangover, You literally are until you receive enough hydration to counteract the effects. \nAlso tolerance does effect the hangover ability. For the first decade or so of heavy drinking, someone would be able to drink more, and get less hungover as the body normalizes with the alcohol. But as with any drug, it takes more and more to get drunk to a certain extent. However after cirrhosis begins to set in mildly the body's ability to process alcohol diminishes, alcohol lasts longer, hangovers get worse.\nThere are toxins as well that are released by the conversion of ethyl alcohol to acetylaldehyde, where without sufficient vitamins can turn into toxins quickly damaging the liver and kidneys (_URL_1_).\n\nMy dad told me two things when it came to drinking. \"Beer before liquor, never sicker. Liquor before beer, in the clear.\" referring to the concentration of alcohol in liquor vs beer. And \"For every beer you drink, drink a glass of water. you may be pissing all night, but you wont feel like shit in the morning.\"",
"Just drink a ton of water before you go to bed. It works for me really well. (By ton I mean like a 3/4 of a liter)",
"Eat before you drink, and space your drinks with water.",
"I was that guy when I was younger. Now I am an alcoholic who can't drink. Be careful what you wish for.",
"If you've eaten well throughout the day, are well hydrated, and don't consume an insane amount of alcohol in too short a time-span, you should be able to wake up the next morning feeling great. Drinking water before, after, and maybe even during alcohol consumption is a huge factor. It 1) keeps your body hydrated (dehydration is a large part of hangovers), 2) slows the rate at which alcohol is absorbed, and 3) forces you to slow your drinking rate, if you intersperse alcoholic drinks with non-alcoholic drinks. \n\nPersonally, if I haven't eaten much and don't stay hydrated, I could get a (slight) hangover from 5-6 drinks in a couple of hours. But if I eat well and stay hydrated throughout the night, it would take 2-3 times that amount to get hungover. ",
"I have this weird reaction to getting super loaded. I've been legitimately drunk maybe 5? times my whole life, and I'm in my 30s. Out of them, I've only woken up horribly hungover, but that's because I had to get up at 730 am that morning.\n\nThe rest of the time, I wake up, and it's legitimately the greatest mornings ever. Like zen cool with fresh air, quiet sunshine, and birds chirping off in the distance, but not so close as to irritate. \n\nI generally sleep like shit anyways, so I'm wondering if that much alcohol somehow calms my sleep cycle enough that I can actually sleep and not just have major vivid dreams and insomnia most of the time.",
"They probably drink more than you on a regular basis. They may slow it down to your pace so they don't feel self conscious. I've been from sober to alcoholic, back to sober. There was a period of time that lasted a long time where I ceased to get hangovers. I think it's the time between when your body has built up a pretty good tolerance, and you are generally heathy, and your body becoming to unhealthy to clear the toxins that have increased to a much larger amount. I know it's not a scientific answer, just an observation I made along the way. You begin to notice people at different degrees of addiction. Sometimes before they do. Source: recovering alcoholic. ",
"I'm probably \"that guy\". When I go out to the bar with my coworkers, they all seem confused when I'm absolutely fine the next day. \n\nWhat you see is me keeping pace with the beers, doing shots, and basically setting myself up for morning disaster. \n\nWhat you don't see is when I get back to my hotel, I drink water. Then I drink more water. Then I pee a lot. And then I do it over again. \n\nA hangover is basically alcohol-induced dehydration. So rehydrating before bed is the fix. \n\nThe weight gain, on the other hand, rehydrating won't fix. ",
"I was under the impression that. A hangover happens due to dehydration. The body requires water to flushing process the alcohol, and if we don't have enough fluids... We get headaches because there is less fluids in our brain? \n\nThat's how I've always understood it. Just have water after and during your drinking sessions and you'll be fine.",
"You simply adapted to the hangover. I was born in it. I never get hangovers. I always try to stay hydrated though for sport. Awesome I know why now. ",
"Sober up before you fall asleep. I know, that isn't always an option.",
"Hi, former bartender here with some life-saving (or so it would seem) advice.\n\nFirst, each person handles the toxins in alcohol (and what we mix with alcohol) slightly differently. There are also added elements in each alcoholic beverage which may, or may not, adversely affect you. Some people swear that Tequila, for example, leaves them heaving and sobbing on the floor while vodka wears off with only a slight headache and dry mouth. That's probably due to what you 'mix' your drink with far more than what you actually drink. Vodka Cranberry cocktails have at least a little sucrose and a smidge of vitamin C which can help with the hangover [see further down for more details] while Tequila shots chased with licking salt only serve to dehydrate you faster [again, more below]. So the key is know what you drink and what will ruin you later on down the road.\n\nHangovers are partly your body dealing with the side-effects of alcohol and partly your own damn fault for failing to prepare for the morning. First, when drinking alcohol, drink water. Alcohol is a diuretic meaning it drains water from your cells (including brain cells) which cause irritation, inflammation, and that general headache/dry mouth/body ache feeling. Water will **not** stop that from happening, *but* it will slow it down or make it less noticeable. Also, when you wake up, drink water; regular old tap water or bottled water if you haven't pissed away enough money already. Not carbonated water. Not coffee. Not tea, whiskey, or coca-cola. Water. Replace the fluids you need by giving your body what it naturally craves.\n\nBefore you go to sleep, take two ibuprofin (Motrin) with a glass of water. The ibuprofin is an anti-inflammatory medicine which will alleviate **some** of the side effects like your brain shrinking due to severe dehydration. It works to *lessen* your headache to tolerable (or barely noticeable) levels. Some of my bartender compariots used to swear that adding a multi-vitamin helps too, but you just wind up pissing a lot of that out anyway, so who knows if it helps or not - it never worked for me.\n\nDrink orange juice, apple juice, or other kinds of juice **or** eat fruit in the morning after you've had water. The sugars will help your body ramp down from the sugar/toxin high that is being drunk. Also, it gives you some vitamin C which is good to replace some of the vitamins leached out with your binge drunk. \n\nSleep. Sleep a lot. You may feel like you go to sleep easier when you are drunk - and you sort of do - but you don't get the deep, restorative sleep you really need. You totally just fucked up your body on a cellular level and your body needs to repair, which it cannot do adequately without deep REM sleep. Sleep will also help you bypass the \"what the hell did I do last night\" feelings as well as the \"oh, God! just make it stop\" prayer-inducing pain that comes with a hangover.\n\nFinally, learn to drink like an adult, not a teenager: getting a *little* drunk - tipsy, buzzed, painless, whatever - and sustaining it will not only allow you to have a better time overall, but it also helps you avoid the dreaded hangover (and is MUCH cheaper in the long run; plus you get to be the douchebag with the camera and sharpie when your friends pass out in the McDonald's bathroom)\n\nTL;DR If you got a hangover, you're drinking wrong and not planning ahead for the morning. Now go read the rest of this.",
"know what causes hangovers : \n(1) Dehydration \n(2) Sugar + alcohol \n(3) The random alcohols in brewed (but not distilled) beverages\n\nif you drink only vodka, and drink a glass of water with each shot, you will not get a hangover",
"Drink a couple glasses of water before bed. ",
"How do I make the words I'm typing Into a hyperlink? About 80% of Americans are dehydrated. As a strength and Conditioning coach I always stay pretty hydrated. It doesn't matter how much I've drank I never wake up with a hangover. One thing that really helps is that I always pound a glass of water before going to bed as well. \n\n_URL_0_",
"Dehydration is a large contributor to hangovers. Drink lots of water when you're drinking, before going to sleep, and when you wake up. This should help a lot.",
"The best way to cure a hangover, no matter how brutal, is cardiovascular exercise. I feel hangovers possibly more than the average guy, and since I started doing this it's helped me a lot.",
"I used to get pretty hungover but I've come to learn a few neat tricks on how to keep it away. \r First of all, when you come home you should drink lots of water. Just keep filling it up. Then you should eat something salty. And lastly don't go to bed untill you feel somewhat sober. Simple but solid.",
"Your liver can only do one thing at a time. If you're on drugs, pain killers, eating food you're allergic to or even spicy food, the hangover is going to be worse.\n\nEat oatmeal when you're gonna drink",
"Some good on-topic answers here so let me share a little Irishman's wisdom with ye. I don't vouch for the scientific accuracy of the following points, but they're not bad to know and employ in your preparation for defeating hangovers.\n\nThe Soakage:\nBefore a night out, you want to eat a few slices of bread and wash it down with a few glasses of milk. Don't shit it out afterwards, obviously. \n\nBefore going out:\nMake sure to buy a bottle of your favourite tasty soft drink (vanilla coke is my choice). Put it beside your bed.\n\nPace Yourself:\nYou can metabolise about a pint of alcohol every hour. Much more than that, and you'll start getting drunk a lot quicker. Try to drink some water in between, or make up for it later on in the night when home. \n\nIf you can help it, don't mix drinks too much. Stay with your favourite drink, and if you want to do some shots, keep doing the same ones.\n\nWhen you get home:\nA protip for defeating a hangover: Ingest the same amount of water as you did alcoholic beverages. Drank 8 pints? Try to drink 8 pints of water (I can usually manage five or six before giving up). Drink as much water as you can before bed, essentially (a strong bladder comes in useful here, do what you can).\n\nSome people suggest taking an aspirin or ibuprofen before bed too; never have myself but I can't imagine it doing any harm.\n\nIn the morning:\nYou will wake up dying for a piss. After the bathroom, crawl back to bed and drink some of the sugary stash of vanilla coke beside your bed and have a mouth orgasm as your tongue feels less like sandpaper and you get a little energy kick that focuses your head. If you smoke, smoke a cigarette and enjoy that morning nicotine hit. Prop up your pillows and make a duvet-cocoon around your legs (works well with two people also). A warm, comfortable environment is key to your going back asleep. REM sleep is what you need, so try to get as much as you can (by this token, don't drink too much when you need to get up in the morning!).\n\nWhen you're ready to get out of bed:\nYou should be feeling awake, a little hungry, and probably still a bit groggy. Food time! Take that pan, some bacon, some sausages and an egg and fry them up. You can toast some bread in the leftover grease if you like rare, guilty pleasures. If you want to go full-Irish, add in some beans, blood pudding (AKA black or white pudding), make a cup of strong tea and prepare the sofa and computer/TV.\n\nStick on some Netflix or whatever, wrap up in a blanket or duvet, lie on the couch and eat your breakfast. You'll be grand by mid-afternoon.\n\n",
"Asshole alcoholic who doesn't get hangovers here! Genetic luck (full German) is half the battle! I have to seriously overdo it to have an adverse effect the next day. Some of the comments in here are well studied by some of my friends as they also hate me and have caused us to carry breathalyzer around with us most the time for either investigating how drunk we are or if we are ok to drive. (.08 legal limit in my state)\n\nI DO DRINK WATER IN DECENT QUANTITY DURING THE NIGHT.\n\nKey reasons why you hate my type of drinker. 26 M 5'11\" 200\n1.The only way for me to black out is to drink an entire solo cup of hard liqueur straight, even then it will only be for seconds at a time. \n2. My body will tell me to puke before anything disastrous happens. I can throw up the evil and be back to drinking a beer or taking shots almost immediately. I may drink to that point once a year tops. \n3. I can drink any kind of booze and not suffer sickness. I know people who will throw up just smelling tequila.\n4. If the occasion calls for it, it takes me approximately 4 and a half hours to consume a 5th of 70 proof booze and 5 hours for 80 proof. (Example is military friends in town or friends getting divorced and need to hit a bottle > . < )\n5. People shot gunning beers or dropping jäger bombs?! Not a problem, and I usually finish first. (Sad talent here)\n6. My body will also tell me when I'm approaching my limits and I'm smart enough to say no and nurse a beer/not give in to peer pressure.\n\nThere are a few things that put me in a haze the next day (not fetal position but make me feel hazy/not cognitively at 100%).\n\n1. Drinking sugary drinks all night.\n2. Drinking my BAC past .27 \n3. Not drinking enough water.\n4. Sometimes not eating can cause this too.\n\nAfter a party night of heavy drinking my ritual is to drink water until I'm full and toss back two aspirin.\n\nPossible causes for my tolerance/ability. I grew up with part of my family owning a liqueur store. And my first apartment with a buddy we were so broke the only thing we bought (back when 19-20) were CASES of monarch 151... (Shudders)\n\nFun fact: the \"skill cap\" for my drinking where my hand eye coordination increases for things like beer pong, video games, snowboarding, musical instruments, and softball is between .14-.17 BAC. Anything beyond that causes skill decay and drops drastically at .23.\n\nI'm not a nightly drinker and on average drink once a week or every other week. On rare occasion maybe both weekend days. I have an excellent day job that's not worth the risk of getting fired for drinking. I get auto fired for a DUI. (In the past we've done heavy drinking weeks but not recently)\n\nAlso. Any and all electrolyte drinks are gods gift to man kind in the mornings! :-)",
"Water and food. \n\nNever drink in an empty stomach... Always keep hydrated, before during and after. ",
"It has to do with your sugar levels, metabolism, diet, how much you drink, what you drink, etc. There are thousands of chemical reactions that take place when you drink. It all really depends on how depleted and depressed your body gets after a night of drinking.",
"Diet. What they are before hand, if anything. How hydrated they are before they drink, during, and before they go to bed. If they eat before they go to bed. And consumption of alcohol pace isn't through the roof",
"I always drink like a litre of water before crashing after a night drinking, never had a hangover yet.",
"I will just drink lots of water after having alcohol or beer. Never gotten a hangover before.",
"Vitamins. They do wonders. Apparently I can also take a fatal dose of opiates and it does nothing. So said the pharmacist at walgreens when they refused to fill a valid prescription. ",
"Don't know if there's any science to it, but I always stick to vodka and whiskey, and drink a glass of water between each drink. I also avoid eating sugary snacks until I become too drunk to care. When i get drunk, i get DRUNK. like pass out in the bathroom, vomit on myself, then get up and keep drinking. I never have any more than a mild headache the next morning. Once i drank 4 mikes, got a little buzz, and woke up too hungover to function. Could be a combination of dehydration and crazy high levels of sugar?",
"There are no strong drinks, just weak men. And women."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.nigella.com/recipes/view/eggs-in-purgatory"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Biological_Chemistry/Metabolism/Kreb's_Cycle",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism#Ethanol_to_acetaldehyde_in_human_adults"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cafehydrate.com/?p=117"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
xs83b
|
what is white gold? why is it just not silver?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xs83b/what_is_white_gold_why_is_it_just_not_silver/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5p49ul"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Gold in jewellery is not 100% gold. That is what carats stand for: they indicate how pure gold is. In general, gold is sold at 18 carats, meaning there is 18/24^th of gold in it.\n\nThe extra 6/24^th are other metals - to make the jewellery brighter, tougher, etc. You can chose metals that won't change gold's colour. You can chose metals that will look white or grey and tada! grey or white gold. It is still gold!\n\nWhite gold is IMHO better looking than silver - whiter and brighter (Grey gold (with palladium), rhodium plated is sexy). It is also more expensive than silver, and unlike it it won't go dark."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
cs56h0
|
why do excessively large doses of diphenhydramine (benadryl) cause people to have realistic hallucinations, aka delirium?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cs56h0/eli5_why_do_excessively_large_doses_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"exct61v",
"exd71ep",
"exdp9kv"
],
"score": [
4,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"How big a dose? Asking for a friend.",
"Benadryl is an anticholinergic drug. Acetylcholine (choline is the precursor for this molecule) is one of the major neurotransmitters in your brain. These neurotransmitters flying around between neurons is what causes you to experience everything you are currently experiencing. Taking a big dose of an anticholinergic drug disrupts this process to a large degree, and can greatly alter your mentation.",
"There is a drug called \"scopolamine\" more recreationally known as \"hells bells\", \"jimson weed\" or \"devil's trumpet\" containing a chemical related to diphenhydramine that many mistakingly think causes the user to \"hallucinate\" when really causes them to become delirious. A friend of mine had experimented with it and went on a 2 day full on delirious bender and saw people from his past come into existence in which he engaged in conversation for hours on end only for them to vanish and realize they were never there to begin with. The difference between this stuff and shrooms, lsd...etc is that the \"hallucinations\" feel like anything but, as the people and things you see are completely undistinguishable from the real thing. I, I mean *he*, has never felt the same since and would never in a million years want to experience something as terrifying ever again."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
elvqk5
|
how does frostbite occure and why does the skin turn completely black?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/elvqk5/eli5_how_does_frostbite_occure_and_why_does_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fdkikra",
"fdkisn5"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"Frostbite is caused by the freezing of the surface skin and underlying layers of skin and tissue. As the injuries progress deeper, more tissue on the surface dies off, leaving blackened, dead tissue behind.",
"Your body needs to be warm. It also creates its own heat. But if it gets too cold, it's unable to warm itself from the inside out by pumping blood. When it's chilly out, you don't freeze because your heart constantly pumps new warm blood back into your extremeties keeping them warm. When it's SUUUPER cold out, you lose body heat in your extremeties faster than you're able to warm them back up with blood, and eventually your body essentially sacrifices them, to save more warm blood for more important internal parts of your body. You can live if your finger dies, you can't live if your liver dies.\n\nSo frostbite is when your extremities get so cold that your body stops giving them new blood, and those parts of your body die. In the case of severe frostbite they turn black because that tissue is dead and dead rotting flesh turns black."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2q5jvl
|
how exactly does counting cards work and how does it level the playing field against a casino or improve one's chance of winning?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q5jvl/eli5_how_exactly_does_counting_cards_work_and_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn330dt",
"cn33jt0",
"cn344z2",
"cn35m6w",
"cn36fnq",
"cn3iv6h"
],
"score": [
28,
3,
11,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Counting Cards is all about keeping track of probability.\n\nLet's say you're playing blackjack. And the first five cards that are dealt are relatively low (let's say less than seven).\n\nIf you keep track of this, you know that the probability of drawing a high card is larger than normal because several low cards have already been played. This information will help you decided whether or not it's smart to hit or pass.",
"I would add to limerick_santorum's correct answer that most people who count cards aren't literally counting ALL the cards. That's some MIT or \"Rain Main\"-level counting. Usually, what they count is the number of 10s and face cards that have been played from the deck. \n\nSay you're dealt a 6 and a 2, totaling 8, against the dealer showing a 6. You know if the dealer's face-down card is a 10 or a face card, she'll have to take a hit on the 16. Meanwhile, you're trying to decide whether to double down on your 8.\n\nThe decision depends heavily on the probability that the dealer's face-down card, the card she gets on her hit, and the card you get on your hit (or double-down) are 10s. If all are, you win. If you're towards the end of the deck and you've been counting, you'll know how many 10s are left, in ratio to the other values, and can better make your decision.",
"What people actually do is only keep track of the tens, jacks, queens, kings, aces in comparison to the twos thru sixes. At the beginning of the game, your mental count is at zero. For every high card that is shown, subtract one and for every low card that is shown, add one (the sevens thru nines are ignored thus making five high possibilities and five low.) When your count is in the positive, it means that more low cards have been played and thus high cards are more likely (this is favorable to the player.) When people start getting to +4 or so is when it would generally invoke a steep raise in their bet. ",
"Others have mentioned some specifics about how counting cards works, I just wanted to mention *why* it works (because that appears to be omitted) -- In blackjack the dealer must follow a set strategy every single hand. This is known in advance by both players. This strategy is designed to make casinos money on average based on all possible hands...but in some specific cases it's not the ideal strategy. If you count cards you can identify cases where the dealer's required strategy is actually a disadvantage and bet more money during those times. You can also slightly modify your play to take further advantage of the situations.",
"Counting is simply the ratio of face cards to low cards.\n\nVegas here - card counting is possible - however, the casinos have gotten a lot smarter. For example - when playing single deck cards, the cut/end card is DANGEROUSLY close to half. So even if you are counting - you have HALF of a deck unaccounted for. One of the best counting methods is Wong Halves. Not for the faint at heart. However, can increase your odds substantially in a 6 deck shoe. Another problem with counting is you can't play correctly unless you can see ALL the other players cards. Watch for a \"face up deal\" Then you don't have to be so \"Snoopy\" with other peoples cards. Wong halves technique is much easier if you 2x all the values. \nThe hardest part of gambling is money management - FEW people can control their emotions after big wins or especially big losses. Trust me - I have paid the light bill a few times at some of them. ",
"There is an optimal strategy for playing blackjack that is relatively easy to learn. Counting cards does not alter this strategy. Instead you alter your BETTING strategy to take advantage of situations in which you have a better probability of getting big cards rather than small cards. So you bet more when you are more likely to win, and the minimum when the odds are not in your favor."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8nhqfw
|
you meet someone and instantly like or dislike them. what objectively is happening at that instant?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8nhqfw/eli5_you_meet_someone_and_instantly_like_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dzvinvs",
"dzviqhn",
"dzvk9fw"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You’re likely subconsciously scanning for basic threats to your genetic safety like disease or aggression and making a decision as to whether or not to superficially trust them. ",
"You’re comparing them to people you already know you like/dislike and matching those personality traits to the ones the new person is displaying.",
"Your brain is basically a supercomputer doing a massive number of computations every fraction of a second. 90% or more of this is hidden from conscious you. Like, you have constantly small nerves in your eyes activated by incoming light. Your brain is building 3d model of reality based on these neuron activities, and it's pretty much impossible for your conscious mind to intervene in that process. That's how optical illusions work, even if you know something to be false, your brain is still presenting it to you as reality.\n\nAnd much beyond these, you have lots of automation regarding social interactions. You have micro-expressions which cannot be controlled by conscious mind either, they're done automatically to low-key signal various things. Interactions done by posture, gait, and expressions(not micro-expressions) are then added to the mix, some of these are controlled and interpreted by your conscious mind partially.\n\nBut there are lots of things that happen automatically still. For example, your brain has dedicated areas for trying to mimic what other person is thinking and feeling. This happens largely out of conscious control. You just get automatically filled in with your brains best guess of \"How that other person perceives the world, and by extension, me\". Threat scanning is sorta application of trying to guess their thoughts.\n\nAnd then you'd start doing some social interaction planning. How do you want the interaction to proceed. These are now starting to get really close to conscious mind. But at this point, this information about how the other person is interacting with you, how they are feeling about you and others, and how you hope interaction with him should go, you start to get a feeling of \"do I like this person\".\n\nI'm no psychologist, but I've read some academic text books on the subject, plus I've written AIs of my own, so I felt comfortable trying to list basic feats a brain would do when meeting someone. I can't really provide much details about any of these processes, and I can't even quite promise this list captures all essential things your brain does to decide if you like someone, but it should have like, most of the good stuff."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
32637u
|
why do most highways have a speed limit of 55mph?
|
Seems ridiculously low and no one follows it
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32637u/eli5_why_do_most_highways_have_a_speed_limit_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cq88o5m"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nIn 1974 the federal govt declared 55 mph to be a national max, to save gas in the gas crisis. It was widely ignored. It was not really all that safe to be driving 55 mph, people would be pulling past you left and right. Cops could basically pull over anyone they liked because no one drove 55. 65 was often regarded as \"ok\". You'd still see massive differences in the speeds people were driving, but it's safer to be the faster driver, really, as opposed to being the one getting passed all the time.\n\nIn 1987-88 the law was changed to 65 mph. \n\nIn 1995 the federal law was abolished, letting states set whatever limits they liked.\n\n55 mph is infrequent now, at least where I drive.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law"
]
] |
|
9p2btl
|
do trams just stop right there and then when the power goes out?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9p2btl/eli5_do_trams_just_stop_right_there_and_then_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e7yh3iw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" > Do they just stop right there? Surely that would cause travel chaos for cars and other things trying to get past.\n\nYup. Same thing when one individual car gets into an accident or develops a mechanical problem. Same thing with any railed public transit. \n\nSometimes, if the car can have its brakes manually released and it can be coupled to another train, they can move it. But if not, they have to wait for a tow vehicle and bust out some bussess. And yes, all trains behind that one get stuck. For hours. \n\nThis happens in Toronto _all of the time._"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bg4yqp
|
wasn't the carbon, now being emitted by fossil fuels, at one point in the atmosphere? how did the earth survive back then. what factors have changed this time around?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bg4yqp/eli5_wasnt_the_carbon_now_being_emitted_by_fossil/
|
{
"a_id": [
"elicxh7",
"elid7x2",
"elidf6m",
"elidikd",
"elidlbo",
"elief08",
"elieoee",
"elilc7o",
"eliljxq"
],
"score": [
3,
71,
8,
8,
14,
5,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Earth would survive it again, it would only be horrible for humans.\n\nThe biggest factor that changed is that the sun has become stronger. (It fluctuates short term - it's been getting weaker for 50 years now, but if we look at it by millenium, it always gets stronger)\n\nSo back then we had 60 meter higher oceans, today it would be more.",
"The Earth survives plenty of things that have killed almost all life on it. That's the difference. It's not about destroying Earth, but the destruction of life on Earth. One of the big issues with the current warming is the rate at which its occurring, which is not allowing for enough generations of various species to be born with enough genetic variation to develop survivable traits. The amount of climate we've seen over the last 100 years should have taken several hundred to a couple thousand years to occur.",
"It was actually almost entirely sequestered in plants. The difference is in the rate of change of concentration. Its how fast we are emitting it. The earth is fine with slow shifts (like hundreds of thousands of years, here is a timeline put together by randall monroe, his sources are on the side: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_) ) \n\n\nIts like if I saved all the water I ever used in the shower and then suddenly dropped it all in my bathroom at once (relatively speaking). there will be flooding and damage, even though that water all existed within that bathroom at some time.",
"Jesus...\n\nOkay... Deep breath...\n\nThe Earth is not a living thing. The Earth cannot die. The Earth actually doesn’t give a shit one way or the other. \n\nWE can die. Us, and most of the animal species on the Earth.\n\nHumans care whether the rivers have water. Humans care whether rain falls in the right place. Humans care whether the polar ice caps melt. Humans care whether our crops grow.\n\nWE are here and it hurts US. That is the difference.",
"The Earth has been considerably hotter at various times in the past, depending on how the continents are arranged, how sea currents flow, and what the atmosphere greenhouse is like.\n\nLife adapts to these changes, but it's a difficult process that eliminates many species if the change happens too quickly\n\nLife on Earth will survive whatever change Humans cause, but the extent of the extinctions and the cost/conflict humans incur adjusting their own behaviors will depend on the rate and severity of the change.\n\nWe've built all our farms and cities and infrastructure assuming a certain climate, changing that will get expensive.",
"The carbon in fossil fuels comes from algae billions of years ago. This is pre dinosaurs and basically all life as we know it on the planet. Life existed on Earth before there was an oxygen atmosphere. Just because some sort of life could survive in certain conditions of the past does not mean humans could",
"The earth loves carbon!!! CO2 is literally food for plants. \n\nThe concern is that the warmer climate will melt the polar ice and return the oceans to their historic levels. The state fossil of georgia is the sharks tooth, which can be found throughout the lower 2/3'rd of the state. This is because the land used to be covered by the ocean all the way up to Atlanta. Florida would be nearly fully underwater.",
"As I recall, the Earth's early atmosphere was much higher in carbon dioxide and methane (a bit like Venus is now, but less extreme). Early life (single celled organisms) used this atmospheric carbon dioxide for photosynthesis, and in the process converted the carbon into other things (like sugars). This is just one of the several reasons why carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere dropped over millions of years.\n\nThe atmosphere of the early Earth was great for simple single celled life forms. However, returning to those conditions would be disastrous for modern plant and animal life as we are simply not adapted to it.",
"The earth has gotten accustomed to it not being there, so when we re-introduce it....*stuff* happens, iirc"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://xkcd.com/1732/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3hyi5w
|
what rule, or how is it that in american football you're able to get away with "fake plays"?
|
Like [this](_URL_0_).
I searched this thread but with no answer, and I'm just slightly confused.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hyi5w/eli5_what_rule_or_how_is_it_that_in_american/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cubp511",
"cubp6u3",
"cubpjfv",
"cubpuht",
"cubq78y",
"cubsudl",
"cubxc38",
"cubz531",
"cubz7i8",
"cuc1vfp"
],
"score": [
74,
22,
2,
14,
4,
2,
2,
9,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Why not? The team with possession followed all the rules, the ball was hiked, making it in play, and quarterbacks are allowed to run with the ball. What the team with possession probably did is not give a a snap count (like \"hut, hut, hike!\"); however, while this is done 99% of the time, it isn't required. So, since the other team didn't hear the quarterback doing a snap count, they didn't know it was in play.",
"The ball was legally hiked to the qb. The center handed the ball to the qb, there were no whistles, that's a live play.\n\nThe only thing he did was create confusion before the hike by doing his \" hey wait a minute this ball is bad\" act. And he continued the act while the play was going on until he was in the clear. But there's nothing illegal about talking.",
"If there was no whistle and a linebacker straight fucking smokes him would the linebacker not be seen as a unsportsmanlike player? Even though the hit would be legal? ",
"Blatantly the fault of the defending team. In any sport, you play until the whistle blows. Any defending player could have run up and tackled him while he was walking towards the sideline and it would have been a legal tackle.",
"Baseball has them too. The hidden ball trick gets played a couple times a year. The first baseman fakes throwing a ball to the pitcher, the pitcher punches his glove to sound like a baseball, the runner steps off and is tagged. \n\n",
"As long as they line up in a legal formation, once the ball is snapped, they can do whatever they want as long as it is within the rules (QB can only throw or hand off to elligable player, or carry himself for instance). My grandma always called them \"Razzle-dazzle\" plays because they look cool, but don't always work out. It always cool to see a team do a fake punt or field goal becuase it doesn't happen often. Another trick play I like a lot is what Is called the half-back option. Where the QB hands the ball off to running back and then the running back has the option to throw the ball to an elligable receiver. When it works it is one of the most exciting plays in football.",
"There are no rules about what the players can say to each other to try to confuse each other. The exact rules for a snap differ for each league but in a lot of leagues it is merely defined as the center exchanging the ball to the QB. That means that technically speaking, per the rules, the Center handing the ball over his shoulder is a legal start to the play and any deception used to confuse the defense into thinking that it is not a legal start, is also legal.",
"You also have to realize that this from what appears to be a High School game. A play like this would like fail hard in the NFL and among major CFB teams. As soon as that ball moved, pro level DL would have blown up the play.",
"I'm just gonna leave this here.\n\nThe Annexation Puerto Rico: greatest play ever turned from fiction into non-fiction.\n\n_URL_0_",
"When the ball is snapped(ie, stops being on the turf) is when the play begins. That's why things like snap-count are entirely inconsequential to properly trained defenders - they don't care what the QB is yelling at his offense, only about if the offense moves or if the ball is snapped. \n\nThe \"coach something wrong with this ball\" play is something that literally everybody has seen or done once in Pop Warner, so that by the time you get to High School, nobody is fouled by it. Pop Warner is a much less serious environment, so coaches are prone to do trick plays. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/D7QxhUJ.gifv"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn4cioLwa30"
],
[]
] |
|
8ck6aj
|
what is in wine that makes it have flavor tastes like pepper, and other non-grape flavors? is it in the wine or due to how we taste?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ck6aj/eli5what_is_in_wine_that_makes_it_have_flavor/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dxfl4sl"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Soil, grape, valley/region, and pallette. Just like other medical herb.. also honey is kinda similar from a pollen aspect you can tell region by taste of pollen. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1dlox5
|
what is the curl of a vector field?
|
I'm studying for an electromagnetic fields test and I can't grasp the concept or usage of a vector field. (Also having some trouble with divergence of a vector field, but that's secondary)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dlox5/eli5what_is_the_curl_of_a_vector_field/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9ridol",
"c9rp1ys"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine vectors as a moving fluid, say water. If water is entering form somewhere (i.e. a water source), then there is a positive divergence. If water is getting sucked out (i.e. a sink), then there is negative divergence.\n\nNow imagine that the water is spinning, like in a toilet. If the toilet water is spinning clockwise, the curl is negative. If the toilet water is spinning counter-clockwise, then the curl is positive.\n\nOn a side note, the toilet is also sucking water out of the toilet, so the divergence would be negative.",
"A vector field is a mathematical construct that, given some point (x,y,z), returns a vector value for that point. For example, you probably learned that if you have some point charge *q* at (0,0,0), **E** is given as:\n\n**E**(x,y,z) = (1/4ε0)(*q*/r^(2))e\n\nwhere \"r\" is distance from the origin to (x,y,z) and \"e\" is a unit vector that points towards (x,y,z). If \"(1/4ε0)\" is unfamiliar to you, your teacher/book might use Coulomb's constant instead (ke), they're the same thing.\n\nAnyway, what happens when we plug some values in for (x,y,z) is that the function returns a vector; \"(1/4ε0)(*q*/r^(2))\" gives us a magnitude, and \"e\" gives us a direction. So, each point (x,y,z) is associated with some vector, given by our field equation.\n\nNow, if we use shadydentists' qualitative description of curl as \"the direction of net flow,\" we can start making some sense of things. In electrostatics, i.e. when no charges are moving, the curl of **E** is always zero.\n\nWe can consider curl analogous to circulation. If we pick some arbitrary closed loop, and want to measure how the vector field **A** \"circulates\" around the loop (electric fields don't actually \"circulate,\" but you can imagine that it's like water flow). To calculate the circulation, we do a path integral around the loop, C:\n\nintegral around C(**A** * d**s**)\n\nwhere \"ds\" is an infinitesimal vector tangent to C. \"**A** * d**s**\" is thus the infinitesimal component tangent to C of **A**.\n\nAnd Stokes' Theorem tells us that that's equivalent to the normal component of the curl of **A** integrated over the surface S bounded by C, so:\n\nintegral around C(**A** * d**s**) = integral over S(curl **A**)da\n\nSince **E** is the negative gradient of φ, the electrostatic potential field (which is a scalar field), we see that:\n\nintegral around C(gradφ * d**s**) = integral over S(curl (gradφ))da\n\nand since the line integral from two arbitrary points (1) and (2) in gradφ is given by φ(2) - φ(1), because potential is path independent, the integral around C is\n\n[φ(2) - φ(1)] - [φ(2) - φ(1)] = 0\n\nwhen we arbitrarily pick points (1) and (2) on C. thus:\n\nintegral over S(curl (gradφ))da = 0\n\nwhich implies that\n\ncurl (gradφ) = 0\n\nand since **E** = -gradφ,\n\ncurl**E** = 0\n\nedit: Stokes' Theorem is the real key here, by the way. The basic idea is that for any closed curve, you can break it into pieces, and the path integral will just be the sum of the integral around each piece if you keep going in the same direction (for example, counterclockwise), because any line not on the original border of C will be integrated over twice in opposite directions, and get canceled out. You can thus break a curve into infinitesimal square pieces, and the path integral will be the sum of all those pieces. When you take the circulation over an infinitesimal square, you see that it's the curl, so the sum of all the infinitesimal squares that make up the surface bounded by C is just the surface integral of the curl by da, your infinitesimal squares."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9jfwhq
|
why do unopened water bottles never grow mold in them even at room temp?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9jfwhq/eli5_why_do_unopened_water_bottles_never_grow/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e6r3507",
"e6r3bk2",
"e6r4m98"
],
"score": [
11,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Mold, or spores must exist in the bottle in the first place for mold to grow. Bottled water is packaged in sterile bottles, with sterilized water so there are no mold/bacteria living to reproduce. Your refillable bottle likely isn't re-sterilized between uses and is probably filled with municipal water that isn't 100% sterilized.",
"Mold comes from spores and require nutrients other than *just* water.\n\nWhen in the bottling plant, the area is very, very clean and the water is kept very very pure.\n\nOnce you start using a water bottle, you're allowing it to be colonized by mold spore and introducing contaminates from the air (like dust) an your mouth (saliva).",
"Mold is a living thing. It doesn't pop into existence from nothing. It has to get inside the bottle. Opening the bottle let's it inside."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3kxad1
|
how are hiroshima and nagasaki habitable?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kxad1/eli5_how_are_hiroshima_and_nagasaki_habitable/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv1a37w",
"cv1b1vk",
"cv1cmn1",
"cv1k6pl"
],
"score": [
171,
45,
7,
29
],
"text": [
"The bombs were detonated half a kilometer high up in the air to maximize the shockwave and blast patterns. So most of the \"fallout\" would have blown away from the blast site. \n\nSecond, the bombs were small. This isn't like a nuclear core meltdown where there's tons of primary and secondary radioactive dust and material. This was just a few kilograms of fissionable material that vaporized, and since it occurred over such a wide area the radiation hazard declined fairly rapidly. ",
"* the bombs were small\n* they were detonate in the air, which reduces fallout\n* the more radioactive something is, the faster it decays...virtually all of the most dangerous fallout was gone after a decade",
"Nuclear bombs are designed to consume as much of the \"fuel\" as possible. The products (if I recall correctly) decay faster than uranium and polonium. So none of the start products with very long halv lives persist (ideally). In chernobyl, the fuel wasn't consumed by a reaction but just persists so the area is inhabitable. \n\nAlso it was detoned at a high altitude, so the fallout is spread out easier.",
"In addition to the valid points already raised, there are some more things to consider.\n\nPublic perception of the dangers of radioactivity doesn't really align with the reality. It's dangerous, yeah, but mostly only in very high doses, or moderate doses over a long time. Radiation in an area isn't likely to make you sick straight away, so you can still live there, you'll just be slightly more likely to develop cancer over the next few decades.\n\nThe natural area around Chernobyl is thriving. The humans are all staying away (except for scientists and a few elderly people) because they don't want to get cancer from radiation, but the animals are doing fine because there isn't so much human disturbance, including non-radioactive pollution. Taking an aeroplane flight away from Fukishima exposed people to more radiation than staying in the area would have. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7xh949
|
significance of color of urine
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7xh949/eli5_significance_of_color_of_urine/
|
{
"a_id": [
"du88p1m"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The few I know:\n\nOn a scale of clear to dark = Hydration level. The darker the urine the more dehydrated you are. \n\nOther colors :\n\nReddish / orange can symbolize blood present (almost looks like diluted iodine) \n\nGreen/yellow can be the flushing of extra vitamins (in case youre not dehydrated) \n\nBlack means you’re Satan. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2nnquk
|
what triggers your body to burn fat? why is it so hard to burn fat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nnquk/eli5what_triggers_your_body_to_burn_fat_why_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmf7qnt"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Your body burns calories for energy. The favorite type of calories to burn are Carbohydrates, if you don't eat Carbs your body will start burning its next favorite thing, which is Protein. And if you don't have protein your body will be forced to burn its fat reserves instead. \nWhich is the point of all the stored fat in the first place.\n\nSo to exercise your fat away, you gotta first burn away everything you ate that day. THEN try to do a sufficient reduction to also take away a significant amount of your fat.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3s75eg
|
why do ice cream taste testers use a gold spoon to taste test?
|
I always heard they use a gold spoon(Through Ice cream factory tour/articles/etc) because it leaves the least metallic taste and there for they can taste all the best flavors from the ice cream, but wouldn't it make more sense to use a common spoon as that's what every one uses at home? Like it may taste great on a gold spoon, but couldn't they make it better using a normal spoon?
Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3s75eg/eli5_why_do_ice_cream_taste_testers_use_a_gold/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwuxto2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"How do you define \"common spoon?\" At my house, I have metal spoons (likely of different metallic composition) and plastic spoons (again, there are all sorts of different plastics).\n\nUsing a gold spoon allows for standardized testing and, as you stated, to allow for the most neutral taste test possible."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2hpi6t
|
sometimes when i go to bed, i fall asleep for 15 minutes and wake up completely refreshed and unable to fall back asleep for hours. how does this happen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hpi6t/eli5_sometimes_when_i_go_to_bed_i_fall_asleep_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckusfiw",
"ckuskue",
"ckv83xa"
],
"score": [
3,
17,
2
],
"text": [
"Same thing happens to me every night. Inquiring minds want to know..",
"And how is it when I sleep for 12 hours, I wake up as though I didn't sleep at all",
"Does this happen to many other people? \n\nOP, are you depressed? This same thing happens to me. I'll fall asleep when tired, then wake up and have too much energy to return to sleep. This entirely goes away during periods when I take an SSRI for my depression.\n\nI learned in a behavioral neuroscience class that REM sleep produces brain activity that is similar to that of the waking brain, and depression correlates with low REM sleep latency. This means that, in depressed individuals, REM sleep may begin within 20 minutes of falling asleep. Further, SSRIs suppress the onset of the REM phase.\n\nGiven the information in other comments describing the effects of waking in a deep sleep phase, I suppose that, if you were woken during an energetic REM phase, you could find yourself wide awake. Couple this with rapid entry into REM phase and we have the experience of becoming wide awake shortly after falling asleep. The question is: what is the mechanism for waking in this case? \n\nI am interested to know if OP has any experience with depression or sleep disorders.\n\nEdit: clarified low REM sleep latency. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3cetw1
|
bees, wasps, hornets, yellow jackets, etc.
|
Who's who?
Who are my buds, and who should be destroyed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3cetw1/eli5_bees_wasps_hornets_yellow_jackets_etc/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csuu4pd",
"csuud6z"
],
"score": [
7,
6
],
"text": [
"bees - > give you honey\n\nwasps - > ~~don't give you anything~~ do pest control (says /u/kinder_teach)\n\nhornets - > big-ass wasps though they usually are pretty chill\n\nNothing should be destroyed because just because they don't do anything for you directly, they are parts of the ecosystem.",
"Bees: Pollinate things. Give you fruits and vegetables, honey. Plants can't live without bees. \n \nWasps: Most of them are solitary and hunt and kill other bugs. Including spiders. Mud daubers, for instance, paralyze spiders, bring them to their nest and feed them to their young. \nSo wasps are good too! \n \nHornets: Nasty little fuckers. \nBut they also pollinate things and they *also* hunt and kill other insects. Then like feeding a baby bird, they pre-chew it and feed it to their young. \nSo they both bring you food and they eliminate pests. \n \nYellow-jackets: Almost the same as hornets. Nasty little bastards that pollinate and hunt. \n \nJust stay out of their way. \n \nAnts (Yeah, weirdly enough, they go here too.): Clean up dead things, pollinate, hunt. They also will compete with things like termites, so that's always good. \nGenerally they're the janitors of the natural world. \n \n \nWho should be destroyed? \nThey're all beneficial, but hornets are mean little bastards, probably don't want them around. And ants will get into your food, so probably keep them at arm's length as well. Any social wasp will try to kill you given the chance. But any solitary wasp is usually quite friendly and they take out other bugs. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
asaeau
|
why does it matter how you charge a battery with respect to long-term life?
|
Never fully charge? Deep discharge? Type of battery matter (phone vs car)? What really is best and why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/asaeau/eli5_why_does_it_matter_how_you_charge_a_battery/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egsteji"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"It depends on the battery type. Phones laptops and newer electronics have lithium ion batteries. Older stuff has Nickel Cadmium.\nThe older style batteries had what is called the memory effect, so if you recharged them when they were half empty, this became the new zero after a while and your battery would only last half as long.\nTherefore the recommendation as to deep discharge as much as possible before recharging.\n\nLithium Ion batteries don't tend to do this as much and can be recharged at any level provided you stay above about 20% and below about 80%\n\nNeither battery likes to be left permanently charging at 100% so try and avoid overcharging where possible.\n\nA car battery is an entirely different thing and provided you don't run your lights all night should live a normal life recharging itself as you drive.\n\n > What really is best and why\n\nDischarge whatever it is as much as possible and don't charge it to 100% the battery will last longer due to the electrochemistry of the cells.\nCharge it when you need to and try not to leave it stored with a lot of charge."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2zmshe
|
why it is often fairly easy to differentiate between the voice of a black or a white person even when they share the same accent
|
Speech not singing.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zmshe/eli5_why_it_is_often_fairly_easy_to_differentiate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpkd3hv",
"cpkncxa"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Is it, though? Rick Astley spent much of his early career being accused of having a black man sing his songs and just miming to them.",
"good discussion [here](_URL_1_)\n\n\n[This is also interesting](_URL_0_)\n\n[Browse here](_URL_2_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://ask.metafilter.com/33127/voices-of-colors",
"http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-252978.html",
"https://www.google.ca/search?client=opera&q=linguistic+differences+between+race"
]
] |
|
26abn8
|
why do members of the british royal family use the surname wales during military service instead of windsor?
|
I get that Wales comes for the crown prince's title as Prince of Wales, but don't they for all intents and purposes have a surname already? Are they given a slightly more generic name for reasons of security or impartiality or something?
edit: Thanks to all who contributed. At the very least I now understand that the question isn't quite as straightforward as I had though.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26abn8/eli5_why_do_members_of_the_british_royal_family/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chp5a22",
"chp6705"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Because their last name isn't Windsor ",
"A house name isn't a last name and the way last names are normally passed down. The surnames of commoners are taken from the father and passed to the children.\n\nPrince Harry, for example, belongs to the House of Windsor by way of his *mother* rather than his father. Being in the house isn't a linear thing - it just means you're I. The family tree close enough to be considered a potential heir to the throne. Cousins, aunts and uncles get it too. Check out \"house of Windsor\" on Wikipedia for a family tree.\n\nBeyond that, the royals don't really have last names - just a bunch of first names chosen to honor ancestors.\n\nPicking a surname becomes an arbitrary exercise at this point, simply done to comply with military policy. Harry's father used the name Mountbatten briefly after abandoning his foreign titles and becoming a British citizen before being granted British titles.\n\nIt's wacky world they live in.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
19zhfo
|
why television cable boxes have to be so large?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19zhfo/eli5_why_television_cable_boxes_have_to_be_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8spn3f",
"c8sqlkr"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Y'know, it's funny....cable boxes actually used to be smaller back in the 80's than they are now.",
"They don't *have* to be so large. They could be made smaller, better, and more efficient. The reason they are not has to do with how they are paid for.\n\nThe cable company doesn't care how big or fancy the box is, because they don't care how much space it takes up in your house. They only care that it is cheap, and that it works well from their point of view (it's easy to program and doesn't break down).\n\nYou would probably love to have a better, smaller cable box. But you don't get a choice--you just have to take what the cable company gives you. No one ever switched cable companies just because of the different cable boxes they offered. \n\nSo, from the point of view of the cable box makers, it would be silly to invest in making better, smaller boxes, because the cable companies don't want to buy them, and you aren't allowed to shop for your own."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
9nso43
|
how does this faster than light camera work?
|
They built a camera that records a single photon of light.
How does this work? Why couldn't they do it before?
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9nso43/eli5_how_does_this_faster_than_light_camera_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e7oq0zp",
"e7oqx32",
"e7oso34",
"e7owkzq",
"e7ozqbz",
"e7p0on3",
"e7p3yjm",
"e7p7av6",
"e7po9ac",
"e7pzvel",
"e7q0zfu"
],
"score": [
2059,
360,
136,
15,
212,
3,
6,
14,
5,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"What is special about this camera is its shutter. First of all the shutter speeds can be set to extremely short times. This is done using fast spinning rotating shutters. However no camera can capture enough light during the short shutter time to make any meaningful image from. So instead they use multiple exposures to bring up the brightness. This does require the action that is being captured to be repeated in sync with the shutter. What you are seeing is not a single light pulse but rather billions of light pulses which have been synchronized with the camera shutter so that it looks like a single light pulse.",
"They combined an existing technology \"streak cameras\" with a beam splitter and a second camera to get a slower and cleaner picture.\n\nSo what is a streak camera? Well firstly understand that, \nMovies are really series of photographs, each taken a small amount of time apart.\n\nThe problem with light is that once you have taken the first picture, the light has moved on so fast it is no longer in the frame of the camera.\n\nThe solution is to fire a second piece of light identical to the first, and take its picture a tiny fraction of a second later on the path the first bit of light took.\n\nRepeat and repeat, then combine all the pictures to make a movie that looks like 1 piece of light, but each frame is an image of a different piece of light, which is doing exactly the same thing all the others were.\n\nNow the trick these guys did is taking the same light from the experiment and split it off into both the streak camera and a new fangled static camera. The combination of the 2 images got them a highly detailed movie",
" > this faster than light camera\n\nNope. Nowhere in the article does it say \"faster than light\" .\n\n > They built a camera that records a single photon of light. \n\nNope. Nowhere in the article does it say \"single photon\".\n\n > How does this work? Why couldn't they do it before? \n\nIt sounds like the main new thing is that they have two very different cameras filming the scene, one that is super fast but has very bad resolution, and one that has better resolution but is slower, and post-process the data from both to get a video that has both a ridiculous number of frames per second and a useful resolution.\n",
"It's not faster than light... what makes you think that? It's just a camera taking a lot of photos very quickly. There's nothing that special, this photo is a few years old actually, it's been posted to reddit several times in the past. ",
"How do you take a picture of a single photon? Isn’t a “picture” generated by sensing photons that hit a sensor? A camera should only be able to “see” light that comes through the shutter. If there is only one photon, the sensor would only ever get a single hit, and only if the photon was aimed at it. What am I missing?",
"It's because it isn't in a vacuum. What you're seeing is atoms in the air being excited from their ground state. It's essentially absorption and reradiation. This wouldn't be possible in a complete vacuum as there is nothing to scatter or absorb/reradiate the light. Photons are virtual particles and there isn't actually anything \"travelling\" between the source and interacted receivers; there's just a source being excited in some way and something that is in the \"path\" that is affected by the excited source that reacts after some d/c seconds later (where d is distance, c is the speed of light). In the video that was captured, you're seeing pockets of air absorbing/reradiating or scattering the \"photons\", meaning they're atoms in a direct line with the excited source. It's equivalent to shining a laser in a dark room and seeing the sparkly line that's drawn. You wouldn't see the beam at all were it not for dust particles reflecting some of the light.",
"If you have 2 cameras, one takes a picture at .5 seconds, and the other takes a picture at 1 second. You took 2 pictures in 1 seconds. 2 pictures/second. \n\nIf you have 10 trillion cameras, and have then all go off at specific, unique intervals within the same second, you took 10 trillion pictures/second. ",
"This is melting my brain. I always believed in order for a camera to record something light enters the camera. How is it able to capture a single photon from the side if that photon isn’t entering the camera. How can we see any photon at all unless it’s like seeing a ball as it’s about hit your face.",
"I am not an expert by any means, but I do have some (very little) experience with scientific photography. So I'm going to give my guess at what's going on here: take it with some salt.\n\nIn this experiment, they used two types of cameras. The streak camera has been adequately explained by other comments: it takes carefully timed pictures of multiple pulses then stitches them together to look like a single pulse. The other camera they used was a \"static\" camera. This wasn't explained very well, but I believe that what they meant was a camera that took a single photo of the entire length of one pulse. Ironically, this would appear as a kind of streak across the photo, like if you took a much slower picture of someone running across the frame.\n\nThis photo by itself wouldn't be able to tell them much, because they wouldn't know which part of the photo happened at what time. However, they used something called a [Radon transform](_URL_0_) (actually probably an inverse Radon) that can convert the smear of the static image into the actual shape of the light pulse. I believe that in order to properly calibrate it, they used the streak camera to get the general position of the light pulse at each point in time, and then were able to get the more detailed resolution from the transformed static image.\n\nSo at an ELI5 level: they used the movie from the streak camera to turn the static photo into a movie itself, and then used that to measure the light pulse in detail.",
"There are a few mistakes in your question and a lot in the answers in this thread, so i guess I’ll give it a shot:\n\nThey recorded ONE tiny light pulse, which still contains a lot of photons.\nTo make some of the photons go towards the cameras they used fog. \nThis is simiar to a laser show where there are always fog mashines to make the beams visible.\n\nThe camera is still a lot slower than light. \nYou dont have to be faster than a car to watch it racing down the street either, do you?\n\nThe video itself is a trick. They combine images of two cameras using some crazy math.\nOne shows everything within the whole timespan. Imagine a long exposure shot of someone walking down the street.\nThe second one (and thats the way I understand it) gets its image via a mirror. The mirror moves and thus the light of the next moment will hit the sensor somewhere else. The camera then has all the time it needs to read the sensor and gets something like a flipbook with every page somewhere on the resulting “image”.\nThey then look where photons hit the sensor in pic1, combine it with the sum image and do that with pic2,3, etc.\nEventually they combine all the pictures to make that extraordinary video.",
"It seems that there are quite some explanations of the older, multi exposure technique. This article is on a new technique however, which uses only a single exposure. I tried my best to figure out what they where doing by reading the article, the paper, and looking at the graphics in both. I'm only a masters student in physics, and I don't have much specialisation in Optics, so I might be wrong.\n\nWith that disclaimer out of the way... \n\nThey use a normal CCD camera, much like the one in your smart phone, to get the \"static background image\" of the scene they are studying. \nThis image will provide them with the spatial information of what they are looking at, even though it is far to slow to truly capture the movement of the light.\n\nTo capture the movement of the laser pulse, they use a second camera, as so called streak camera.\n This camera, based on the graphic in the article, uses a phosphor screen to convert the light from the laser pulse into electrons, which are then accelerated and deflected by a varying electric field. This serves, in a way, to exaggerate the motion of the light pulse (the light pulse enters through a small slit, so as the pulse moves in the scene, it hits a different part of the phosphorus screen, and that change in where the electrons are freed from the screen by the photons, is than exaggerated by \"shaking the electrons further out\" in the electric field). \nThis then leads to the electrons creating a streak on another CCD camera at the end of the streak camera, and is probably where the name comes from.\n\nThe streaked image sacrifices the spatial information for temporal information (it doesn't so as nicely where, but instead better shows when), whereas the normal CCD still has all that spatial information. Due to the way it is done, however, you can't just add one and two together to get the full image. Rather, they use complex optimisation techniques, in which they use some very complex mathematics and a computer to find out which reconstruction (i.e. the imaging of the scene) best fits the data they captured using the two CCD cameras.\n\nNow I might very well be wrong, but I think at least that this is the essence of the new technique. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/12/at-10-trillion-frames-per-second-this-camera-captures-light-in-slow-motion/"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon_transform"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2149p0
|
how does my tv actually detects signal coming from cable, or a console or anything?
|
What tells my tv that there is an actual feed coming from anywhere?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2149p0/eli5_how_does_my_tv_actually_detects_signal/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg9hmb8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"From its digital tuner, that it is receiving enough valid data to make sense of it, and it has the data there that gives the parameters to tuned the digital TV packet streams. The 'strength' is simply how much of the data is correct.\n\nFor analog (including the analog tuner) an digital video inputs,, it simply detects the presence of the signals that reset the screen for each picture it sends."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
11mnvv
|
what are the downsides of undervaluing currency?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11mnvv/eli5_what_are_the_downsides_of_undervaluing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6nrubj",
"c6nu959"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"When the value of a currency drops, holders of that currency have to spend more for imports. \n\nSimplified Example: today I can buy a Lexus made in Japan for $40,000. If the value of the dollar were to drop by half, then the price of that Japanese car would now cost me $80,000.\n\nedit: thanks Oprah_Nguyenfry",
"If a country undervalues its currency, its people can't buy as nice things as they ought to be able to afford, because their currency is artificially low. So, all imported goods would cost more. For a nation like China, imports are mainly technology and luxury goods, so people wouldn't be able to afford cars that are as nice, cell phones that are as nice, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4f2i37
|
is there a certain material density where light and sound will have the same speed?
|
Okay, my understanding of Physics may be vastly oversimplified but here is what I'm thinking:
As far as I am aware light (EM radiation to be a bit more scientific) always travels at the same speed but when it travels through a denser material it collides with more atoms, being absorbed and then reemitted which slows its perceived speed through the material.
Sound, however, being a compression wave will increase it's speed as the density of the medium increases as the atoms that it vibrates are closer together.
This made me wonder, is there a certain density and set of conditions that will allow sound to travel faster than (or at least be perceived to) light?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4f2i37/eli5_is_there_a_certain_material_density_where/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d25df8i",
"d25jxy6"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"The other poster is incorrect. Light actually does slow down when traveling through a medium. It's not just particle absorption and re-emission. The actual explanation is rather lengthy, so I'll just post the /r/askscience faq response.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nAs to how slow light can get, apparently people have managed to slow it down to 17 m/s, though I don't have access to the actual paper so I can't say how they did it.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Lots of comments arguing semantics. OP wants to know if there's a material where he can shoot a light wave and a sound wave through it at the same time and have them arrive at the other end simultaneously, right?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_light",
"https://m.reddit.com/r/askscience/wiki/physics/light_through_material"
],
[]
] |
|
5xnrbi
|
why do sugary solutions get sticky as they dry but salty solutions don't
|
Source: Have dropped a variety of IV solutions.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xnrbi/eli5_why_do_sugary_solutions_get_sticky_as_they/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dejmrkp",
"dejn3wf"
],
"score": [
113,
35
],
"text": [
"Sugar will form hydrogen bonds with all sorts of compounds. This means it can be \"sticky\" and hold lightly to things while still being in solution. \n\nSalt, however, will simply dry as a crystal and just be either in solution or out of solution, and can't interact very strongly with ions already in solution. Thus, it is not terribly sticky and will just make your hands a little salty.",
"Salts form ionic bonds. Basically, one atom has an extra electron and is negatively charge, while the other atom is missing an electron and thus is positively charged. These charged particles are called ions. In water, these are equally spread out, so the solution has no net charge in any one place. Without a net charge they don't really stick to anything. When it dries, they form crystals that also have equally spread ions, and again, they have a net neutral charge and don't stick to things. \n\nSugar (and water) bond differently. There are lots of oxygen and hydrogen atoms in sugar. Oxygen molecules like to have extra nearby electrons, but not so much that they steal them completely. Hydrogen is pretty indifferent as to if it has too few electrons, but not so much that it wants to give it away completely. So the hydrogen and oxygen share some electrons, but they're around the oxygen more. This creates a partial negative charge on the oxygen and a partial positive charge on the hydrogen.\n\nNow opposites attract . The partial positive parts of some atoms stick to the partial negative charge on the other. These are called hydrogen bonds. These hydrogen bonds make sugar into solid crystals. But when you add water, which also hydrogen bonds, water slips between these bonds and breaks up all the crystals. Whats left is a whole mess of oxygen and hydrogen sticking together all over the place. All of those hydrogen and oxygen will stick to just about whatever else has oxygen atoms (called hydrogen bond acceptors) and more so anything else that has hydrogen bonded to oxygen, which is...well, a lot of stuff. \n\nSo the question, why do the ions not stick to everything while the partially charged atoms do? Simply, the ions like to stick to the opposite ion too much to stick to anything else, whereas hydrogen bonds aren't that picky.\n \nTL;DR: Salt sticks to itself too well to stick to other stuff. Sugar stick really well, but not so well that it only sticks to itself."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4c8dcb
|
is it possible to die of a heart attack despite apparent good health and having had regular checkups?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c8dcb/eli5_is_it_possible_to_die_of_a_heart_attack/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1fwtdn",
"d1fx8dk",
"d1fyc4q"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I guy I knew went in for a regular checkup, told the doc he had some chest pains occasionally. They did a test, had him run on a treadmill with monitors and stuff. Everything checked out ok and according to the doctor he was a very healthy 45 year old with nothing to worry about. Two days later he died of a heart attack. You just never know.",
"Long QT syndrome is a rare inherited heart condition where sudden (cardiac) death can be the first symptom. An ECG showing a prolonged QT interval will be the only scan that can show that as far as I know.\n\nMore commonly, atherosclerosis of the coronary arteries nourishing the heart may not give of any symptom at an early stage. But if the atherosclerotic plaque were to suddenly rupture, it would trigger the blood to coagulate forming a blood clot which would result in a sudden occlusion of the artery which in turns would trigger a heart attack. If the occlusion occurs in an artery or branch responsible for nourishing a big areas of the heart, the heart attack could be fatal. \n\nAn ECG, CT of the heart and CT angiogram may be used to assess the degree of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries and this together with known risk factors may be used to estimate the risk of developing a heart attack.",
"It is easy to confuse tests with actual knowledge. If you were able to open the heart, examine its vessels with a magnifying glass and see the propagation of the electrical wave front, no \"heart attack\" would be a mystery. As it were, tests are imperfect and only a full exam might take place after one is dead. \n\"Apparent good health\" is not the same as good health. Check-ups actually have not been shown to increase lifespan."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3xb8ln
|
how are some people able to drink a whole bottle of liquor without dying?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xb8ln/eli5_how_are_some_people_able_to_drink_a_whole/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cy354a6",
"cy35dta",
"cy36rkc"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Heavy drinkers basically become immune to the alcohol and it takes more and more of it to get them drunk. They build a tolerance to it. ",
"When normal people drink alcohol they detoxify it using an enzyme called Alcohol De-Hydrogenase (ADH). There is also another mechanism called the MEOS pathway. Both pathways have the ability thru repeated use to be upregulated/increased by continually maxing out the enzymes (or drinking til intoxicated). Hence why alcoholics can drink way more than most people and be less affected",
"in an ELI5 style answer: \n\nAlcohol is a poison, quite literally it poisons our body. if we ate some fish and it made us dizzy and vomit then we would have food poisoning. if we do it with alcohol it is called being very drunk. \n\nHowever the good news is that our body can process the poison unlike other toxins that can stick around for a while. The body uses enzymes to break down the alcohol into less harmful substances and we recover, albeit with a hangover. \n\nThe more we drink the more of these enzymes we have constantly in our system and slowly build an immunity to the poison. and so when you see someone drink a bottle of vodka and still dancing the alcohol is broken down faster in their bodies and they continue to party. \n\nwhere as the non-drinker on a bender has 10 beers and vomits everywhere because the body cannot process the poison and decides that rejection is the best option for self preservation. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ls78f
|
why does my old rotary phone work when the power is out, but my battery wall phone not work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ls78f/eli5_why_does_my_old_rotary_phone_work_when_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2v62fw",
"c2v8ude",
"c2v62fw",
"c2v8ude"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
12,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically the phone line carries a small amount of electricity to your phone, in addition to carrying the telephone signal. Older phones (both rotary and tone dial) were designed to work purely on that small amount of electricity, whereas battery phones are designed to work off the mains. \n \nThe mains is on a completely separate circuit than the phone lines, so when the mains power is cut, the power in the phone line is still working, and thus older phones will work happily, while newer ones will fail.",
"The base station requires electricity to function (connecting your battery handset to the phoneline), so performance suffers when the electricity is out.",
"Basically the phone line carries a small amount of electricity to your phone, in addition to carrying the telephone signal. Older phones (both rotary and tone dial) were designed to work purely on that small amount of electricity, whereas battery phones are designed to work off the mains. \n \nThe mains is on a completely separate circuit than the phone lines, so when the mains power is cut, the power in the phone line is still working, and thus older phones will work happily, while newer ones will fail.",
"The base station requires electricity to function (connecting your battery handset to the phoneline), so performance suffers when the electricity is out."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dl7kv2
|
why is it easier to hear lyrics in a song after having read the lyrics?
|
I find that most of the time I hear a song for the first time, I can't get all of the lyrics no matter how hard I listen. That said, as soon as I read the lyrics on a lyric website, I can go back to the song and hear the words no problem. Why is that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dl7kv2/eli5_why_is_it_easier_to_hear_lyrics_in_a_song/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f4o2xpo",
"f4oh5p7",
"f4om0pj",
"f4ooyo9",
"f4oq88w"
],
"score": [
90,
10,
6,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Human hearing really isn't as good as we'd like to think. Our brains just fill in the gap. This is easier to do when the information has an expected value.",
"How I learned the lyrics to The Immigrant Song\n\n_URL_0_",
"Your brain kinda partially knows what to expect, so it has the information it needs to decipher the often-garbled lyrics. Like, the lyric might sound like henkwing or something; a meaningless word, but then you look at the lyrics and it's actually penguin, so the next time you hear it you still hear henkwing but your brain goes henkwing = penguin.",
"Hey he human mind is a pattern recognition algorithm, we when under stand the pattern it’s easier to notice. Otherwise if it’s even a little off, we need more info to figure it out.\n\nIt’s why 99% of the time you can’t do something on the first try of which you have zero knowledge...",
"It’s because of a phenomena called ‘priming’. The simplest explanation is that muffled or garbled audio is easier to decipher, if you are already expecting specific words to be heard."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9jTonnpRo0"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1xq91p
|
other than political b.s., if the u.s. were to implement free education (from pre-school to the college level) this year starting fall, how drastic would the u.s. look in terms of it's economy.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xq91p/eli5_other_than_political_bs_if_the_us_were_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfdmiey"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The very first year?\n\nThere would be one of two things happening. \n\n1) A tax increase to cover the expense, which would slow the current recession recovery if not throw us back into it. Job growth would stall if not reverse.\n\n2) If there is not tax increase the federal debt blooms larger. More people stop investing in US treasury bonds, and turn to 'safer' alternatives. Due to this, the Fed is forced to raise interest rates. Which makes it harder to get bank loans, therefore harder for business to grow. So employment slows.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4xh9mr
|
why does the nose have an air filtration system and the mouth doesn't if they both go to the same place?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xh9mr/eli5_why_does_the_nose_have_an_air_filtration/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6fhn1h",
"d6fhoky"
],
"score": [
10,
10
],
"text": [
"Because we mostly breath with our noses and the human body wasn't designed by an intelligent agent. We have one hole for eating and breathing and it needs to share space.",
"Different purposes. And not exactly the same locations. \n\nDifferent purposes: Your nose is meant for a 99% of the time breathing, filtering the majority of the air your breath to stop harmful things from getting into your system. Your mouth isn't for breathing but air will still get in there while eating or communicating. It isn't filtered so you can still get viruses and bacteria from breathing, the hope is that it is in a small enough quantity your body will still be able to fight it off. \n\nNot exactly the same locations: Much of the stuff going into your mouth goes into your digestive system which is filled with acids that would potentially break down the bacteria or virus before it could get into your blood stream. Through the nose goes into your respiratory system, which doesn't have these acids and can directly send things into your blood stream as well as getting infected even without it entering your blood stream. So the filter is definitely a nice answer. \n\nThis filter is pretty bad, but it does an okay job without causing any major issues, so it is something your body just does. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
14kwie
|
what does 'proof' in liquors mean? (100 proof, 110 proof, 80 proof)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/14kwie/eli5_what_does_proof_in_liquors_mean_100_proof/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7e05fu",
"c7e05q8"
],
"score": [
4,
31
],
"text": [
"Divide the proof by 2, and you get the percentage of alcohol in the liquor.\n\n80 proof means 40% alcohol, 110 proof is 55%, and so on.",
"The term originated from old British sailors who were paid in rations of rum. To prove that their ration was diluted (watered down, to make more) they would put some gunpowder in it and attempt to light it -- if the rum didn't ignite, it was too watery. If it did ignite, then the rum was proven to be the real deal.\n\nBut all you need to know is that an alcohol's proof is a number that is twice the alcoholic content. So a whisky that is 80 proof is 40% alcohol. \n\nThe strongest, Everclear, can be purchased with a proof as high as 190 (95% alcohol)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1sanq9
|
generally, why do males and females get fat differently?
|
Not trying to offend anyone - but I have noticed this is generally the case.
When a male puts on weight and gets fat, that shows first in the gut / stomach, then in the chin / face area. When a female puts on weight, first it goes to her butt and legs.
I frequently see women who have a big butt / legs but a pretty flat stomach, and men who have normal size legs but a huge gut.
Why is that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sanq9/eli5_generally_why_do_males_and_females_get_fat/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdvm3hl",
"cdvmdpa"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Genetics. Genetics decides where fat is stored. ",
"Evolutionary selective pressures were different for male and female morphology. Having stores of fat on your upper chest makes long-distance running for hunting very difficult, and so since most of the hunters were male, men whose bodies stored fat elsewhere were more likely to be good hunters and therefore more likely to breed. Thus, men evolved to store fat closer to the gut area where it's easier for the body to carry over long distances.\n\nWomen, meanwhile, needed to be successful at other types of activities, which required fat to be stored elsewhere on their bodies."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
132fog
|
why do we need oxygen to live?
|
I get food and water, they are converted from one energy source to another, but what does oxygen do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/132fog/eli5_why_do_we_need_oxygen_to_live/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c707vc4",
"c707vuu",
"c70ateg",
"c70auh0",
"c70c9zr",
"c70cxlw"
],
"score": [
19,
66,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They are converted from one energy source to another BECAUSE of the oxygen. \n\nEver hear of cellular respiration? In order for our bodies to change energy in glucose to energy of ATP which is ready for our cells to use, we have to pass electrons down an electron transport chain. Oxygen is the final acceptor of those electrons as well as of the H+. Oxygen plus the electrons and hydrogen ions makes water molecules. Without oxygen to accept these electrons, the whole process will stop. \n\n\n",
"Oxygen is what allows you to actually get energy out of the food you eat. Your body combines oxygen with sugars, amino acids, etc from the food you eat to produce ATP (adenosine triphosphate), which is used as an energy source by your cells.",
"Imagine a candle sitting on the table happily burning away it's fuel, while releasing heat energy. It works because the fuel reacts with the oxygen in the air, this is called combustion.\nPut a glass on top of the candle, and the flame will die because it lacks oxygen.\n\nYour body does something that's a bit different to combustion called cellular respiration. But the principle of combining a fuel source with oxygen to release energy is the same.",
"I'm gonna try and do this one for a true five year old (not that the others don't). \n\n\nThink about your body as burning that food as fuel, and then, like a power station using that energy to run your body. Well, if you cover a candle with a glass it will go out because that of the lack of oxygen. \n\nWell, you're body doesn't actually burn your food but it does something similar, it changes one thing (food) to some other things (CO^2 , *Cough*), but the second set of things have less energy bound up inside them, but you need oxygen to make the CO^2.",
"same principle as why fire needs oxygen to keep burning. oxygen is what lets you turn food into energy. you put a cup over a candle, it runs out of oxygen and the fire stops burning. you run out of oxygen, your body will run out of energy to do things it needs to do and you will die.\n",
"When you burn something it reacts with oxygen to give energy, CO2 and water.\n\nThe exact same thing happens in your body except that energy is stored as fat or used, and you breathe out the CO2 and pee out the water."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
62da72
|
how do anti-nausea patches administer medicine to the body?
|
Hi, first time posting! I had surgery yesterday and to my surprise, I was given an anti-nausea patch for my neck that's supposed to last 72 hours. How do these patches administer the medicine to the body without being injected or swallowed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62da72/eli5_how_do_antinausea_patches_administer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dflmbwy"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The skin is pretty good at stopping things from getting into your body, but it isn't perfect. If molecules are small enough they can slip between gaps in your cells (and a few types of substance go directly through the cells). \n\nThe patch you were given likely contained a drug called hyoscine (aka scopolamine). Hyoscine is a fast-acting drug that would normally only last for around half a day if not less, but having a skin patch provides a natural way of making sure it enters your body slowly. It's like having a very slow injection but without the inconvenience of a needle. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4fznpg
|
why does a song suddenly pop into your mind seconds before you hear it on the radio? can brains sense and detect radiowaves?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fznpg/eli5_why_does_a_song_suddenly_pop_into_your_mind/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2dc9v7",
"d2deour"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"No, not at all. What you're experiencing is called cognitive bias. Essentially, you're subconsciously remembering only the times where this happens, and ignoring all of the times where you thought of a song and it didn't play on the radio.\n\nEven if your brain could detect radio waves, your brain and the cars radio would begin receiving and \"playing\" those radio waves at the same instant, so you couldn't know about it faster than your radio.",
"Most pop stations play the same like 10 songs over and over all day for many days before changing up the rotation. You are just forgetting the 99.99999% of the time this *doesn't* happen."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6npa3y
|
why were serieal killer more widespread during the 20th century?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6npa3y/eli5_why_were_serieal_killer_more_widespread/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkbap93",
"dkbfds7"
],
"score": [
10,
4
],
"text": [
"We don't really know if that is true. \n\nIt could be there have always been serial killers in the past, its just that various murders were not linked together the way they can be today and even if they were then the public was not made as aware of it as we are now. \n\nJack the Ripper was an exception mainly because his crimes were very similar in nature and confined to one area. He also received publicity when he appeared to taunt the police with a letter (although that probably wasn't him). But there may have been many other murders taking place that were never identified as being by a single person.",
"They were not. Serial killers have existed since Rome, at least. \n\nBut only during the Renaissance Era was information shared enough to connect disparate murders together. Someone kept a file on Jack the Ripper because it was their job and connected the dots. Previously it was the job of the constable to club down anyone who got disorderly in public and if no culprit could be found a murder was just unsolved.\n\nThis practice of 'keeping files' spread gradually until society became obsessed with the serial murders of the day - the 1960's or so. These serial killers weren't new, they were just newly in the public newspapers.\n\nAs technology evolved the tracking became so efficient that very few serial murders went unsolved - they now simply query the database and it tells them whose cell phone was next to the murder victim's after she dissapeared, or they run a DNA check on the entire country based on the dirt under the victim's fingernails, or they look up who in the area was searching for \"how to commit a murder\" on Google. \n\nSo serial killers are no longer as successful, so they don't get as much press. The attention has now turned to mass murders - terrorists and 'terrorists' and 'postal workers' and the like.\n\n These are the modern day serial killers who may simply realize they can't get away with regular killings so they go all out at once."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5uzrli
|
why are most people afraid of lizards despite knowing that they can do us no harm ?
|
Edit : I am not talking about a komodo dragon. What I meant was a [house lizard](_URL_0_).
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uzrli/eli5why_are_most_people_afraid_of_lizards_despite/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddy4ckd",
"ddy5z2s"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"To expand on my answer, as to not get it removed:\n\nLizards come in all shapes and sizes, anywhere from an anole, up to a Komodo Dragon. Either one can bite you, it's just the severity of the bite will differ.",
"Probably because they are kind of snake-like. From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes sense to be afraid of snakes and snake-like things that can hurt us and it's ingrained in our hindbrain to avoid them. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.tsusinvasives.org/contentAsset/image/b0ee3a99-bf54-4551-8d43-e29f2b97dc16/fileAsset/filter/Resize/resize_h/225"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9xjrjz
|
why are we able to think more clearly about a problem after we sleep on it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9xjrjz/eli5_why_are_we_able_to_think_more_clearly_about/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e9swdt0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My pseudo scientific guess is that sleeping allows your hormones to balance. When confronted by a problem, stress, lust, fear, hormones hijack our reasoning systems. Things that scared you the day before don’t seem as scary once your hormones even out. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
49os24
|
why do people think that having free college would bankrupt the country and be a bad thing when no one bats an eye at k-12 being free?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49os24/eli5_why_do_people_think_that_having_free_college/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0thrgn",
"d0thzix",
"d0tj54n",
"d0tk35l",
"d0tkej0"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"K-12 isn't free. Taxes are already destroying the middle class, and, with 47% not paying any tax, guess who will pay for your \"free\" college? If you want a degree, you pay for it. I'm tapped out, over here.",
"It is a common perception that you need K-12 to be able to handle a job and basic living. However further education is not required for everyone. If collage were free then the perception is that a lot of people would go to collage instead of working and that most people would be overqualified for the vast majority of jobs.\n\nThis does however neglect the fact that higher education is required to improve efficiency and increase production. If a person spends ten more years in school and then comes up with an improvement that makes a person twice as effective he would have made up for the time spent by him and the teachers on education well before he is retired.",
"I think the primary reason people are opposed to the idea is that the ability to pay for higher education is one of the last remaining barriers separating the castes of America. To have their trust-fund baby directly competing for jobs against a driven lower-class student would be disastrous for the long-term family wealth.\n\nA typical K-12 classroom with 25 kids and a teacher making $50k a year costs $2k per kid/year. A typical college lecture hall with 100 students and a professor making $200K per year would cost... $2k per kid/year.\n\nI know we actually pay grade-school teachers a lot more than that, and college professors a lot less. But the OP has a great point, there's no reason that higher education needs to be any more expensive on a per-student-per-year basis.\n\nI do think that tuition-free higher education should be contingent on maintaining grades and attendance minimums.",
"Colleges and universities are orders of magnitude more expensive to run than K-12 schools. I'd bet a single state college spends more on just computers than all the K-12 schools in their entire state. Colleges also spend more on professor salaries because they are more experienced and more specialized than K-12 teachers.\n\nAlso consider:\n\n* Dorms and food\n* Specialized equipment for hundreds or even thousands of possible professions (medical, physics, chemistry, biology, engineering, art, etc.) + faculty and staff to maintain them\n* Professional-level athletic equipment and sporting venues\n* Tens of thousands of classes on different subjects and different skill levels + faculty to teach them\n* Huge libraries, research facilities, and labs\n* Server and computers for services such as email and file storage + technical staff\n* Constantly changing majors and requirements based on student interest, job market, technological advances, and economy\n* Campus police, safety, counseling, and more\n* Postal services, parking, marketing, career services...\n* I could go on, but free K-12 and free college aren't comparable in expense in any way.",
"When K-12 education was first proposed, people had the same reactions they're having now. The only difference is now they're used to free k-12 education and it doesn't seem like expensive and subversive socialism. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1x5f3n
|
why are some paintings that look like a bunch of random blotches and lines given such praise?
|
Is it just because of the name and/or connections of the artist? If I tossed paint randomly on a canvas and made up some crap about "man's inhumanity towards man" as an explanation, would I be considered just as good?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x5f3n/eli5why_are_some_paintings_that_look_like_a_bunch/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf89jf3",
"cf89ljp",
"cf89mel",
"cf8akbg",
"cf8asb5",
"cf8ause",
"cf8fbsp",
"cf8flas",
"cf8fsh5",
"cf8gjg9",
"cf8gtsb",
"cf8hb2t",
"cf8hkyx",
"cf8ikvy",
"cf8iptu",
"cf8jg27",
"cf8jl97",
"cf8oqck"
],
"score": [
24,
6,
39,
4,
18,
17,
2,
6,
3,
2,
322,
3,
3,
2,
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Ideology and originality. No one will care about yours because you aren't heading any new movements in the art world. ",
"Abnormal ideas and death.",
"[An experiment was done](_URL_0_) that actually showed people think real abstract art is better than similar art made by children or animals about 60% to 70% of the time. So there is some sort of difference between random scribbles and abstract art. ",
"You could make a a bullshit (or real) motivation to explain your painting even if it wasn't abstract. Most of these art movements involved new ways of thinking about art and new ways of expression. A lot of them are actually fairly expressive or visually appealing.\n A good example of this is [Broadway Boogie Woogie](_URL_0_). It's pretty nice looking for something so abstract, and it really does evoke Manhattan and the lights of Broadway. Many of the famous abstract artists were well trained in traditional art and are simply approaching it differently.",
"It's a lot like jazz. A jazz musician is not reproducing a bit of music to an exact standard -- they're improvising, adding flourishes, and sometimes leaving the melody behind altogether. They succeed by demonstrating that their original work can be as pleasing as something pre-written, or by conveying something unique through their original work. \n\nThe same is true in abstract and non-representative art. Most tend to demonstrate particular skills -- balance, emotion, technical control -- or explore some concept. Some of it seeks to make a point that will only make sense to a few people on the planet, just like an experimental guitarist may spend an entire album making strange sounds that 90% of listeners will despise -- but the skillful guitarists and music theory people in the audience will get it, even if it's never easy listening for them. \n\nDon't feel bad if it looks like squiggles -- most of the time, folks like us are not the audience. Of course, sometimes we are, and it's a case of someone laughing in their sleeve when someone pays an exorbitant amount for a canvas covered in an hour's worth of doodles -- kind of hard to tell, if they don't out themselves. \n\nLong story short, enjoy the art that you like, read the reviews and the author's notes every once in awhile, but be true to yourself and screw the haters. If all else fails, learn to argue for the [death of the author](_URL_0_) -- it's as close to a get-out-of-jail card for liking something unpopular as you'll get. ",
"Some abstract painting does seem empty of any redeeming value, but I think as individuals we have to be careful. E.g., my initial reaction to some of Monet's paintings of his gardens at Giverny or the water lilies series was confusion and disappointment: why are these abstract, messy pictures displayed in a respected museum? But after spending some time with them, they got under my skin, and I could feel and see what amazing accomplishments they were.\n\nSo I think it's OK to say that a painting doesn't do it for you, but also retain some respect for the opinions of the experts who are finding things there that you (or I!) can't. I think it's fair to say that someone who's spent their career studying art, history, aesthetics, etc., may be able to see value in works that are opaque to the general run of art fans.",
"Probably because abstract art is a delivery system for some kind of commentary. It's arguable that the message is more important than the aesthetics.",
"Okay, if you want a not-quite ELI5 answer that's pretty in depth, check out Robert Hughes's \"The Shock of the New.\" It places people like Picasso and Jackson Pollock in historical context, so you can see what it meant at the time and why it had such impact. \n\nIt really is about context though. Paint weirdly-angled hookers now? Someone's having an emo phase. Paint weirdly-angled hookers when everyone's got the Virgin Mary in their living rooms, and the next edgiest guy is doing waterlilies? Goddamn genius. ",
"Honestly? Unless you've spent years surrounded by others who appreciate the stuff, it's pretty hit or miss. And unfortunately yes, sometimes it is just because of the artists connections or reputation. But hey, if that isn't why half of the famous people in the world are famous, I'm way more cynical than I thought.",
"I'm an art skeptical myself in most cases too, but I attended an art oriented high school so I might be able to give some insight regarding this.\nPainting started as a way to represent what people saw in the world, those things that somehow amazed them. Bear in mind that photography didn't exist, so it was the only way to perpetuate these topics.\nWith the appearance of religion, it was somehow imposed what was worth painting. In almost every case, paintings showed portraits of kings or important and influent people (those who could afford such a thing); or the most significant moments from the bible (it was never Jesus just chilling or walking down the street, it had to be precise moments such as the crucifixion).\n\nYears later, two things happened. Photography came, eliminating the need of representing the world via painting. At the same time, society started to become more and more secular, with artists asking themselves what is worth drawing. Things like common people having a nice afternoon, not \"posing for the camera\" but just being casual, became something that could be immortalized.\n\nFrom that point, art and specially painting became less about technique, and more about its concept. It's all about defying arbitrary concepts, such as what is beautiful, or what deserves being resembled in a canvas. In fact, most of the cases artists try to create something that does not exist at all in the real world, which is way more difficult than copying something that is in front of your face.",
"Think of art as a community forum. Art is all about what came before you, and you're thoughts/reaction to it or a reply about it. \n\nSomeone scribbles an outline of an animal on a cave wall. \n\nSomeone looks at that and goes, hey lets add some definition. \n\nSomeone creates art depicting a religious scene inspired by church. \n\nSomeone replies \"I can do better\" with an even bigger religious scene.\n\nAnother post about how \"it would be nicer if you depict realism instead of these saints and gods\". \n\nSomeone else goes \"hey how about drawing poor people instead of rich nobles and kings\". \n\nAnother person is like \"this is too depressing, lets use lots of unrealistic colors to portray my emotions.\" \n\nSomeone else goes \"why even bother with one view of people or things, i like to make things abstract and complicated.\" \n\nSomeone else is like \"well if you like that then you'll like my nonsense and irrationality.\"\n \nAnd then DuChamp goes \"Oh you like that huh? how about this upside down urinal\". \n\nThen Freud came out with his theories, and everyone is like \"OMG SEX and PENISES and WET DREAMS.\"\n\nPollock is like \"F all you guys, here is the result of communing with the canvas and i'm better then you.\"\n\nWarhol was like \"i reject your scribbles, but i love this advertisement.\"\n\nand you come to the more modern ideas of photo realism, which was a backlash to abstract expressionists, and minimalism, because we were like.. enough of all this stuff! My eyes are tired!",
"Sometimes it just invokes a reaction in people. I know for me it only has to look nice and I'm sold, abstract lines and colours can do something to me. It's a simple answer but I honestly believe that if you can let go of the pretension that can surround this type of work, and just ask yourself \"do I like how this looks? Does it have an effect on me (that I like/don't like)\" then you're looking at art properly. It's very subjective. If you're interested in it after this point, then that's the time to start reading about the why's...",
"Because a wealthy man bought one of the artists paintings. Jackson \"The Dripper\" Pollock was a dripper and widely criticized artist until a weathly socialite liked his work. Then he suddenly was a genius. (Emperor has no Clothes affect). Art is subjective and largely fueled on bullshit and vanity. Norman Rockwell was \"too commercial\" and \"Thomas Kinkade\" is a hack. Salvador Dali was \"cartoonish\" and O'keef was \"boring\" It's a hellish form of group think that defines art. It boils down to two schools of thought: \"Art is Everywhere\" from your dinner fork to the Mona Lisa; or \"Art is intent\" where art is an willed act by the artist but it's merits are subjective to the viewer.\n\nWith that aside, there are \"rules\" that people make up out of thin air for their particular genre of art. Mostly the bullshit is wrapped in the term \"composition\". It's not the splatter of paint but rather where the paint is splattered, what colors and textures they chose, etc. You can apply \"classical decomposition\" to a work and invent rules for your \"art style\" and then measure a work based on those rules. Usually the first famous artist of a genre sets the rules.\n\nIn the end it's just an exercise in group think, a bastardized form of peer review that says that Pollock is \"better\" then your typical chimpanzee based on an arbitrary subjective rule set designed to protect their own subjective opinion.",
"I grew up in a family of artists and art dealers so I have heard some really pretentious shit in my time. I've also studied art in pretty much every way you can imagine. I highly suggest you read Tom Wolfe's The Painted Word. _URL_0_\nIt explains what those artists were doing while still staying firmly planted in reality. It also explains why people in art galleries seem to stand in front of piles of garbage and act like they're watching the IRL ecstasy of Saint Teresa. ",
"contrary to what you'll hear from some of these clueless fedoras that decide they're an authority on things they don't even attempt to understand, artists like Jackson Pollock did not simply splash paint around or squiggle stuff thoughtlessly. \n\n[for example, Pollock was partly inspired by the aerial photography of his time] (_URL_2_)\n\n[detail from Pollock's \"Lavender Mist\"] (_URL_0_)\n\n[the full \"Lavender Mist\"- note the scope of detail] (_URL_1_)\n\n",
"The art community is easily bored. If you were to randomly toss paint on a canvas, no one would care because abstract expressionism hasn't been \"cutting edge\" for 60 years. Similarly, you could paint a photo-realistic portrait and no one would care because people have been doing that for hundreds of years. Also we have cameras now, so there isn't much point in developing that skill. Successful artists are those who push boundaries enough to make jaded, ennui-ridden art critics feel excited about art again for a few seconds.",
"Old cliches everywhere. This is what you get when there is no art education in public school ( I mean real art education not art therapy).\n\nAbstraction is like music, it doesn't (usually) represent anything it's evocative. Instead of sound it uses color and form. People who don't understand composition and are looking for \"what it represents\" simply can't see it. Like how math looks like random numbers to people who don't know math. It's just more culturally acceptable to be ignorant of the arts in America than things like math. No one tells math majors that calculus is bullshit because they can't understand it - but lots of people are proud to announce that art is a scam and the emperor has no clothes. Sorry but you look foolish to the art world and art lovers. People don't like to say so because it's rude and no one expects you to like all art. It's fine to hate certain art movements and styles but you need to articulate why you don't like it, calling it a scam is a cheap cop out. Plus it's **boring** having to explain art to people. Just take a course in art history especially modern art and go to modern museums and over time you will get it, you won't like all modern art, no one really does it's like saying you like all movies. But you will enrich your life and find things you really love that you never thought you would have before.",
"This, I guess, is very very difficult. It rings a close bell to the wine tasting ELI5, and all the Gravity buzz there's been going on lately.\nOn the other hand, Music. More precisely, tonal music. Shit, I don't get it. it irritates me. The second they play a strung of notes, it doesn sound like a toddler hitting on a piano, and suddenly my friend who has been playing piano and studying music and has majored in composition is crying to tears and saying it's fantastic.\nThat very same evening, we go to the movies and watch Gravity. Now it's my turn. Shit man. That movie has condensed everything a director should do, should he want to be considered a good director. The movie thought everything perfectly. The Camera-consciousness is flawless, and the fact that the camara in itself is the \"villain\", and that the movie is a fucking western... I pooped my pants. And my music friend is all like \"tja, boring\".\nThen I give that online quizz to a friend who is an accomplished paintor, who has actual paintings hanging in museums and galleries over the world, and he nails 9-10. Not only that, he even says \"this painting... I think I never saw it, but i'm pretty sure it's a detail from such and such a guy\". And I ask how the fuck? and he says \"well I guess if I showed you a face drawn by picasso, even if it's taken out of context and you had never seen the full picture, you could still notice it's Picasso's hand. that draw it\". And he is right.\n\nSo it kinda boils down to complexity. A complex taste comes from a complex education. I go to a museum and I see a full black canvas and I think \"Shit man, i could be an artist. I can do this, as well as he did\". And my friend says \"Well, it's a search. It's a question. The artist here is not thinking of the color, or the whatever, but he is reflecting on the canvas itself, on the presentation, on what he can do with a wooden square covered with a piece of cloth. It's like Man Ray and Structural Cinema. They are thinking about the process and the posibilities of the expression of questioning the process. It doesn't matter what it turns out, but how they got there. I don't care in the least how this looks like. I care that by seeing it I can imagine how he did it.\"\n\nSo I guess it's not the fact that it looks like a random blotch, because it is a random blotch. And the praise doesn't go to the blotch. It goes to the making of the blotch. Dripping paint, that was Pollock. Every possible 3d angle in a flat surface, that was Picasso. And so on and so forth.\n\nTLDR: it's given that praise because it's worth it, but only people who have studied and trained themselves in art, can actually really appreciate it. We laymans can maybe like it in its shape and colour, but not fully grasp what's behind it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/03/14/a-child-couldnt-paint-that-can-people-tell-abstract-art-from-a-childs-or-chimps-work/"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadway_Boogie-Woogie"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_Author"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://forum.mobilism.org/viewtopic.php?p=1362009"
],
[
"http://us.cdn001.fansshare.com/photos/jacksonpollock/lavender-mist-detail-centre-lavender-mist-509670253.jpg",
"http://www.abstract-art.com/abstraction/l2_grnfthrs_fldr/g0000_gr_inf_images/g001_pollock_lavender_mist.jpg",
"http://www.forgottenairfields.com/uploads/airfields/malta/island_of_malta/ta_qali/standard2.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a3mygu
|
if statue of liberty's color was originally brown, why government didn't change it back to its originl color and maintain it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a3mygu/eli5_if_statue_of_libertys_color_was_originally/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eb7gjgl"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"It's called patinisation. Which might me completely wrong since I just freehandedly translated from my own language.\n\nMetals oxydate (iron and steel rust for example) when the are open to the elements. The air. Oxygen!\n\nIn certain metals, this forms a layer where oxygen is bonded with the metal. This layer is now inert, meaning it won't change any further. So the underlying material now has a barrier shielding it from the atmosphere, so it won't oxydate any more. This layer is what you see on the statue if liberty. Same as many buildings where they used zinc as roofing material. They turn green naturally. It has a patiné.\n\nPreventing this is costly and requires continuus upkeep. Removing it means the layer underneath will do the same, leaving you with a slimmer layer every time you remove it.\n\nSo let it turn green, it'll last longer"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
cq0cd1
|
how do lights, and light switches work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cq0cd1/eli5_how_do_lights_and_light_switches_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ewst7jq",
"ewswnhp"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"There's a circuit that connects the light to the electricity. Basically the light switch breaks that circuit to turn the light off, and reconnects the circuit to turn it back on again",
"Lights have been explained here before, but basically the electrons in the wire excite electrons in the light which vibrate and release light. The switch is just something that either connects or disconnects wires depending upon its position. You can find diagrams of this online, or dissect an old one you have lying around."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
csg7kk
|
why do serif fonts seem easier to read on printed paper, but sans-serif fonts seem easier to read on screens?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/csg7kk/eli5_why_do_serif_fonts_seem_easier_to_read_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"exejxye",
"exek8ke"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Because paper is way more detailed than a screen. This means that the fine curves and details on serif fonts show up well. But with a less detailed screen, the shape of the fine lines and details is distorted because it has to line up with the much larger pixels.\n\nIn addition, especially on high resolution screens (like 'retina' displays), text is displayed much smaller on small screens than it is on large sheets of paper. Fine detals on tiny text doesn't work, so text in small font sizes is generally sans-serif.",
"As for why serif fonts are more readable on paper: the serifs help distinguish each letter from the next, which is useful in words with lots of adjacent vertical components, such as \"minimum\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5nve1c
|
wikileaks, who runs it, and why it doesn't get stopped.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nve1c/eli5_wikileaks_who_runs_it_and_why_it_doesnt_get/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcelr7x"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Julian Assange, and a collective of anonymous others. No one stops them because they do not \"exist\" in any real location, aside from Assange, who is taking refuge in an embassy in Europe. \n\nHe recently did an IAMA on reddit, and gets talked about a lot. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bw8vj1
|
how come wood or paint becomes reflective the finer the sanding process go?
|
I’ve always wondered how a really opaque non reflective material becomes quite glossy and reflective with just really smooth sanding?
Like paint, as I buff it, it becomes real shiny and smooth, and reflective. Even wood when sanding up to 5000 grit or higher!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bw8vj1/eli5_how_come_wood_or_paint_becomes_reflective/
|
{
"a_id": [
"epvx47m",
"epvz140"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"The smoother a surface is the less diffrence there is in reflection of light. Its the same thing when you take a standard sheet of steel and grind/buff it down to be extremely smooth. Youll have almost a mirror because most of the light is now reflected in a uniform manner.",
"There are two ways light can bounce off a surface; like a mirror (specular) or like a wall / wood (diffuse). We're talking about photons and molecules which makes this quite tricky to wrap your head around, so lets make it bigger, we can imagine one of those tennis ball firing machines pointing at a smooth wall. If you fix the angle of the machine and just move it around the wall, all the balls will fly in parallel at the wall and, importantly, will bounce off the wall in parallel too. This is a lot like the 'specular' mirror reflection. Now, lets make the wall all lumpy bumpy. Whereas before the angle the balls made with the wall was fixed, now each ball will hit on different parts of the bump, so will bounce off in all directions - this is diffuse reflection. \n\n\nSo now we can go back to the microscopic case - when the light hits a smooth mirror all the reflections are ordered - parallel incoming beams leave the mirror in parallel too, so you can see an image. When the surface is bumpy the light get scattered in all directions. Hopefully now you can see that as you polish the surface, removing those bumps, the reflection will get less diffuse and more specular."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.