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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2qu3tv | why does nintendo not allow its titles to be available on pc like other companies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qu3tv/eli5_why_does_nintendo_not_allow_its_titles_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn9iq32",
"cn9j7u7",
"cn9jihz"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"I'm no expert but i believe the main reason is they want you to buy their next-generation consoles so they make more money",
"As with all console exclusives, it's to make people by the console. Because if they where available on the PC what would be the reason to get a console?",
"Generally speaking, 1st party games (i.e. those made by, or published by, the company that makes the console) don't get released on PC. There are some exceptions of course, some Microsoft games have come out on PC too (they do make Windows after all), but usually they are exclusive to that company's console.\n\nSo actually Nintendo is not particularly different in that regard. However it might seem different because so many of the popular games on Nintendo consoles are games made or published by Nintendo. Where as many of the popular games on Xbox and Playstation are not made by Microsoft or Sony.\n\nThere's also the fact that many Wii and DS games are designed around the console's unique features, so it doesn't make much sense to release them on PC. Which is why even a lot of non-Nintendo games are exclusive to Nintendo consoles.\n\nAs for why Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo only release their titles on their own consoles, it's to encourage people to buy the console."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
22w7jz | why is harvard considered the best university in the world? how are the rankings of universities determined, and by who? | I was just wondering, is it due to facilities? More success of alumni? How did Harvard and other such as Yale, Cambridge etc... become worldwide known as the world's top universities? What makes other universities inferior?
I don't need answering on all the above I was just typing what I was thinking. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22w7jz/eli5_why_is_harvard_considered_the_best/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgqzm0r",
"cgr2dyk"
],
"score": [
22,
4
],
"text": [
"They aren't. They're considered *one of* the best universities in the world, but not the single best.",
"Most of the \"Best colleges rankings\" publish methodology documents that describe how the rankings were computed:\n\n[US news]( _URL_2_)\n\n[Princeton Review](_URL_1_)\n\n[Forbes](_URL_0_)\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinehoward/2013/07/24/ranking-americas-top-colleges-2013/",
"http://www.princetonreview.com/how-we-do-it.aspx",
"http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2013/09/09/how-us-news-calculated-the-2014-best-colleges-rankings"
]
]
|
|
4bik3n | when nuclear missiles are tested in oceans aren't we affected? | I keep reading about N. Korea testing missiles in the East sea and I was wondering: 1. Do they test them as in make them explode or just test distance then recover them. 2. Doesn't this affect our health? I mean we eat fish from the ocean. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4bik3n/eli5_when_nuclear_missiles_are_tested_in_oceans/ | {
"a_id": [
"d19eoq2",
"d19ewco",
"d19ffgm",
"d19g9q5"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"North Korea isn't testing nuclear missiles. \n \nMore specifically: they're testing missiles that in theory could carry a nuclear weapon, however they are not armed when they are tested.",
"This is the common misconception about how nuclear weapons work and how radiation works. \n\nWhen a nuclear warhead goes off all but very very minuscule amounts of radioactive material are turned into energy. Within hours there is almost no elevated radiation. That is why people are living today in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the cities in Japan that were bombed. The radiation levels there are perfectly normal.\n\nNow when a reactor melts down and breaches its containment it causes major problems. This is because the actual radioactive materials is contaminating the area. The only way to clean that up is to remove everything that little bits of radioactive material could be hiding in. This normally requires excavating a large areas of earth. ",
"OK, there's two parts to a nuclear missile: the missile, and the nuclear warhead.\n\nWhat North Korea is testing is the missile, which is basically a flying tin can that can be accurately pointed towards a target. Once you get the missile right, you put the warhead on it.\n\nNorth Korea isn't testing nuclear missiles. No country ever has. Countries test nuclear bombs/warheads/devices. They separately test missiles.",
"Thanks for the answers. I feel smarter and a little safer. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3ndhl4 | why do you see the red/green/blue lines when you move your eyes back and forth while looking at a video from a projector? | For some clarification if the title wasn't clear enough:
If you are using a projector on a white screen, and you move your eyes from left to right quickly and repeatedly, you are able to see the red green and blue lines/bars. Why is this? And why don't you see them unless you do move your eyes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ndhl4/eli5_why_do_you_see_the_redgreenblue_lines_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvn2fzx",
"cvn3yq6"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Those different color lines make the picture. When you look without moving your head, the lines blend together to make all the different colors. These lines are projected one after another. The eyes have this thing called \"persistence of vision.\" That is, if they see a bit of light, the eyes seem to keep seeing it for a short time; that's how the eye blends the projected colors together. \n\nA projected picture changes the image more rapidly than the eye can follow the individual changes, so you don't see individual bits of image, but a moving image.\n\nIf you look at an image made up of individual bursts of color, that depends on you just looking at it, and instead move your head or eyes side to side, then your eyes don't see the different lines on top of one another, blending together, but next or near to one another... suddenly you see the parts that make up the image.",
"It sounds like you are talking about the rainbow effect. This only affects some people and only with single chip DLP projectors. Here is more information: _URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.projectorreviews.com/articles-guides/rainbow-effect-2/"
]
]
|
|
9enuc4 | there is so much discussion about the amount of oxygen and carbon in our atmosphere. but, 80% of our atmosphere is nitrogen. where does nitrogen fit in the whole circulation process? how is it made, how is it used, and what does it get turned into? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9enuc4/eli5_there_is_so_much_discussion_about_the_amount/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5q61iy",
"e5q6i96",
"e5q8pa0",
"e5qnryl",
"e5qpu46",
"e5qqzr0",
"e5qs3es",
"e5qvf87",
"e5r1oj7",
"e5r2kcf",
"e5r9475",
"e5rq2mg"
],
"score": [
2443,
95,
2,
2,
12,
14,
4,
3,
3,
59,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Nitrogen is just very inert, it's not reactive and is not easy to take out of the air for use in reactions.\n\nBut there is a cycle, naturally [nitrogen fixing bacteria](_URL_1_) take nitrogen from the air and turn it into nitrogen compounds like ammonia, this is what plants and other organisms use to incorporate nitrogen into other compounds (it's required for many amino acids). These bacteria typically live in the roots of Legume (plants like soybeans and peas). Thus nitrogen is a critical fertilizer for plants and it's required for all plants but not \"fixed\" many places.\n\nWe use a synthetic process to make ammonia, the [haber process](_URL_0_) because we needs LOTs of ammonia to grow crops on a huge industrial scale the way we do. We spend over 1% of all the worlds energy doing this, essentially to accelerate the nitrogen cycle.\n\nAll that nitrogen eventually goes into living things to make their proteins. Some things will eventually release the nitrogen back as a gas (some bacteria will do it, as will just burning plant/animal matter). In general, there isn't much movement outside of this bacteria and human pathway to take nitrogen out of the air, and it's very stable in the air, so things tend to just turn to N2 and stay that way.",
"The nitrogen molecules that make up 80% of the atmosphere are very stable and it's therefore hard to do anything with (or to) them.\n\nIn nature, some amount of nitrogen is essential for plants and animals to create proteins. But they cannot use atmospheric nitrogen for that, only some bacteria are able to turn atmospheric nitrogen into nitrogen compounds that are useable - these are then used by plants, and by the animals that eat the plants, and by the bacteria and fungi that decompose dead animals, and then again by plants... You can see the whole cycle here: _URL_0_\n\nNitrogen is an important component of fertilizer, and there are some parallels to fossil fuels - nitrogen deposits are created by plants or animals in some circumstances, and in some places we're harvesting thousands- or millions of years old deposits to fertilize our fields. However, this is less critical than fossil fuels because it doesn't really have an impact on the atmosphere, and in any case the fertilizer can also be produced artificially.\n\nOh, and another thing nitrogen is used for is to make explosives and rocket fuel. The amounts are pretty irrelevant on a global scale, though.",
"Follow up question: could we slow or reverse climate change by replacing some of the atmospheric nitrogen with a different inert gas?\n\nEdit: typos",
"The best source of plant ready nitrogen is ourselves, our own urine. Human urine is 18 percent organic nitrogen with additional amounts of potassium and micro nutrients in the exact proportions required to grow the plants we ate to produce the urine. Pee power is the E=MC of life itself. We could support an unlimited human population simply by recycling ourselves. read Hard Seed",
"What you are talking about is referred to as the Nitrogen Cycle. Let's start with the nitrogen gas in our atmosphere and go through the cycle. This is a very simplified version of the cycle.\n\n1. Nitrogen gas is breathed in by animals. Most of it is breathed back out, but much of it remains in the blood stream of the animal.\n\n2. Ammonium and Ammonia are produced by the animal's waste products. In humans, this is released through urine. \n\n3. Ammonium is broken down into nitrites and nitrates by bacteria.\n\n4. Nitrites and nitrates are used as fertilizers for plants and algae. Some bacteria will eat them too. These will turn some of it back into nitrogen gas. \n\nParts of this cycle are skipped a bit by having nitrogen gas and nitrates that are in plants, eaten by animals. This will make those forms of nitrogen go straight to ammonium. [Here is a good graphic to show the nitrogen cycle.](_URL_0_)",
"Nitrogen is an “organic” element, meaning it’s found in all life. Carbon is also found in all living life (not to be confused with carbon dioxide, just elemental carbon). Hydrogen is another element that is found in life. Nitrogen can be found in soil, various minerals and plants, and in the air.\n\nHowever it is non-reactive for the most part. Nitrogen doesn’t change very much the way carbon and other elements do. This means that, while it’s found everywhere on Earth and in our atmosphere, it doesn’t come in many forms.\n\nElements like carbon can be shaped into gases, solids like diamond, soft solids like graphite, etc. Oxygen can bond with many things like hydrogen (becoming hydrogen monoxide, which is a lethal gas), water, carbon, and many other elements. But nitrogen is sad and lonely because it’s usually all alone.",
"Nitrogen rich fertilizers from agriculture cause nitrogen runoff to leech into local water supplies which causes these bodies of water to become increasingly toxic to fish and animals dependent upon the water supply, since nitrogen waste is chemically similar to urea/urine; while simultaneously promoting algal and fungal blooms, which in turn absorb increasing amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere since the majority of plant based respiration involves aquatic plant life.\n\nSo, in sum, it decreases CO2 concentrations, at the cost of increasing toxicity in water supplies to fish, amphibians, birds, and land animals dependent upon said organisms.",
"For the most part, Nitrogen in our atmosphere is inert, in the form of N2 (a pair of nitrogens bonded together). It requires very little energy to form N2 and therefore a lot of energy to split it away from this point. This means that it's pretty hard to get it to do much of anything. \n\nNitrogen is an important fertilizer for growing plants, but it's actually kind of difficult to get there due to most nitrogen being in this unreactive form. Some bacteria do this naturally, but usually we use some kind of nitrogen fertilizer to do it faster to support agriculture. \n\n**Fun fact:** The low energy of N2 means that nitrogen is used in a lot of explosives. TriNITROtoluen (TNT), NITROglycerin, etc. When your end product is very low-energy like N2 and it takes a lot of energy to get it to form something else... well, this energy can often come flying right back out. Boom. \n\n & #x200B;",
"Reactive nitrogen is essential to all life. It is a fundamental building block of both protein and nucleic acids. Most living organisms (humans included) cannot do anything with N2 gas. \n\nBelieve it or not, plants can't do anything with it either. Some plants like legumes have a symbiotic relationship with nitrogen fixing bacteria in their roots. Thats is the only natural way (that we know of) that anyone or anything is able to build protein or nucleic acids other than eating something that already has those things in it.\n\nToday we can use the Haber process to turn N2 into ammonia (NH3) but it isn't a simple thing to do.\n\nBiologically we (humans) have no way to store nitrogen other than protein. Anything we eat gets broken down, turned into protein or excreted. We have no way to recycle nitrogen, unlike carbon, hydrogen or oxygen.\n\nWe are only able to feed everyone through the fertilizer we generate synthetically. We simply do not grow enough legumes to generate all of the nitrogen we use in agriculture.",
"No one is really answering question I think if you are talking about respiration and the circulatory system. \n\nNitrogen doesn’t too much at normal atmospheres except help your alveoli stay open. If you breathed 100% oxygen not only would you have issues with atelectasis but you could incur oxidative stresses as well. \n\nNitrogen gets more wonky as you breath it at high pressures such as being underwater. As you go down you your body becomes more saturated, this isn’t too big of a deal until you try to resurface without giving your body enough time to wash out the nitrogen from your tissues. What can happen here is called DCI it decompression illness. Amazingly enough there is still not a lot very well understood about the mechanics of it, and divers are overly conservative because everyone is so variable not only from each other but themselves on a day to day basis. \n\n",
"In addition to the good answers by others, the reason we talk about carbon dioxide instead of nitrogen (and oxygen) when it comes to global warming and the greenhouse effect is that nitrogen (and oxygen) does not absorb infrared light. They are transparent to infrared, so a 100% oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere would allow Earth's heat to radiate away freely. Carbon dioxide does absorb infrared light, so some of the heat that is radiated away from Earth is then trapped, absorbed, and re-emitted by CO2 in the atmosphere.",
"Nitrogen is like mostly filler; it’s super abundant and super stable and mostly just exists as a major component of air. It is just one of those gases that our atmosphere happened to have a lot of.\n\nNitrogen mostly moves around and dissolved in/out of water and stuff, whereas Oxygen and Carbon are quickly sucked into chemical reactions and stuff, and actually change their atmospheric levels because of it. Oxygen is really really reactive, and our atmosphere would run out of breathable oxygen if it wasn’t for plant/algae photosynthesis cycling it back using the power of the sun. Carbon dioxide is sucked up by photosynthesis and made into plant parts, but this is always more-than balanced by decomposition and our burning of fossil fuels, which put carbon dioxide back into the air.\n\nNitrogen is mostly like Switzerland, they’re just nearby and being neutral.\n\nHowever, *mostly* is the key word. A pretty insignificant amount of Nitrogen is pulled out of the super-stable air by lightening, but more often by special soil/root bacteria. It’s made into really useful compounds that plants suck up and build into crucial plant components like proteins and DNA. We eat that and cycle the ‘useful’ nitrogen around. But there’s so much nitrogen in air that the nitrogen cycle basically doesn’t affect it at all."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_fixation#Biological_nitrogen_fixation"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_cycle#/media/File:Nitrogen_Cycle.svg"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_cycle#/media/File:Nitrogen_Cycle.svg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
8zh8bu | why do large commercial ships use diesel engines to produce electricity, to then power the turbines? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8zh8bu/eli5why_do_large_commercial_ships_use_diesel/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2ipjbv",
"e2ipp0g",
"e2ipxpq",
"e2ipz15",
"e2iqerw",
"e2iss6j",
"e2j661i"
],
"score": [
15,
2,
5,
10,
4,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Ships go fast and slow. Diesel is more efficient at particular engine speeds (ask the engineer). Keeping the diesel at the efficient point and using electricity to power the propeller turns out to be a good idea.",
"Really big ones like the Maersk E and Triple-E don't. They have the propeller shaft directly connected to the primary diesel engines.\n\nCan you provide an example of why you think they use diesels to produce electricity? The specific ship likely has something about it that makes this more advantageous like needing to use the bow and stern thrusters most of the time for maneuvering or needing to switch between diesel and a gas turbine",
"To take the already-mentioned issue of efficiency to an extreme, a diesel engine **cannot** operate at 0 RPM. You need to start it moving and this gives it enough energy to ignite fuel and continue moving. \n\nIf you want to couple a moving engine to stationary wheels, there are a few ways to do this including the torque converter used in automatic transmissions, but these all involve some inefficiency and if you want them to be large, they’re expensive.\n\nIn cars that works out OK, but in ships *and trains* where you have the space/money to invest in an electric generator/motor system and the amount of fuel was high enough to justify those fuel savings, it ends up making sense to use the system you mention (which is more efficient).\n\n",
"Point 1. Electric motors don't need transmissions. Having a generator and a motor is more efficient than having a motor and a transmission.\n\nPoint 2. At least for cruise ships, in the mornings, around 75% of the generated power is used for the people, not thrust. (heating water for showers, blow dryers, cooking, etc) \nIf you need that much power generation, it doesn't make sense to have generators, diesel motors, and transmissions. ",
"This is more common on trains. It is beneficial because diesel engine efficiency is difficult to manage during times of acceleration or especially climbing a hill. An electric motor revs quicker than a diesel so response time is lessened.\n\nWith this setup, the electric motor draws power from the battery which is then recharged by the diesel/ generator. So the battery is acting as a buffer allowing the diesel engine to recharge the battery at a more gradual pace. More gradual of a pace means lower surge in demand equals more efficiency.\n\nAlso, having a giant generator makes it more cost effective to feed power take offs such as thrusters or compartment doors, cranes etc.",
"Moving extreme mass (cargo ships, trains) at comparatively low speed is best done by electric motors because they generate maximum torque at zero RPM. Their power is maximized near the starting line. Diesel internal combustion OTOH generates maximum torque midway through its powerband and is most efficient when running at a particular steady speed which is NOT zero. This makes the diesel powerplant-electric drive configuration sort of magical because by applying maximum torque where it is most needed it can move gargantuan loads with the most economy and reliability.",
"This isn't used all the time. It's common to have the diesel engine connected directly to the propeller shaft, so that the engine runs at the same speed and direction of the propeller.\n\nSo, if you want to reverse or do emergency braking. You'd stop the engine, then restart it running in reverse. This can be time consuming so makes precise navigation difficult. You are also limited because the engine has minimum speed so extremely fine control is also difficult. \n\nThese days, better mobility with advanced steerable propellers or additional thrusters are available. For example, cruise ships which are designed for comfort, or scientific/industrial ships which need precise positioning may have additional propellers at the front and sides. This allows the ship to spin around or move sideways without moving forward.\n\nIn this type of ship you can't have a big diesel on each propeller so, you have electric motors on each with diesel generators for power. In addition to the flexibility of multiple thrusters, electronic speed control gives much more precise control of motor speed making these ships much more steerable. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2ltl39 | how does the gut flora repopulate after a bout of stomach flu? | Hi all, I'm just starting to get over a bad case of stomach flu and I was was wondering how the gut flora (all the bacteria that live in your intestines) repopulate it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ltl39/eli5how_does_the_gut_flora_repopulate_after_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cly55kq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It hides out in the appendix (_URL_0_) or you pick it up from the environment after the fact."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Appendix_function_diagram.svg"
]
]
|
|
3mwjd2 | when companies put the phrase, "all rights reserved." on their product, what does that mean? | I've recently come across a few programs that have the words, "All Rights Reserved." printed in view. While I have seen this phrase before, what does this actually mean? What are all of the rights that are being reserved? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mwjd2/eli5_when_companies_put_the_phrase_all_rights/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvir5iz",
"cvivmyh"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"It just means that the owner of the copyright reserves all rights given to them by the copyright for their own use, as opposed to licensing the rights to a 3rd party or making it publicly usable.",
"The phrase \"All rights reserved\" used to be required to protect your work under copyright laws, and must have been indicated on the content. When something is copyrighted that means you cannot use the content freely without the permission of the content owner. The copyright status (as of the Berne Convention) lasts for at least 50 years after the author's death, unless otherwise specified. The 50 year rule doesn't apply to photography, if you copyright a picture, then the picture is copyrighted for 25 years from the date that the photo was taken. Cinematography also has special rules, in which copyright lasts for 50 years after the first showing of the movie. If the content creator is unknown, then copyright lasts for 50 years after the content was published, unless the author is later discovered, then the same rule of \"50 years after death\" applies.\n\nThe phrase \"All rights reserved\" indicates that the author or owner of the content would like to reserve all the rights provided by copyright laws, and indicates to a third party (like you) that their product is protected by copyright law.\n\nLittle History: This phrase became popular among those who wanted to protect their work. As one requirement to be protected under copyright laws used to be mentioning in the content that the owner of the content would like it copyrighted. However, this phrase can be substituted for things like the copyright symbol (©) as of the Berne Convention, but most still choose the include it as it is widely known, and a clear way to indicate copyright."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
5wtmd4 | why is the smell foul when things decompose?why isn't it pleasant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5wtmd4/eli5_why_is_the_smell_foul_when_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"decwgck",
"deej36v"
],
"score": [
12,
3
],
"text": [
"Thinking about it logically, I would have to assume this is more biological instead of chemical (yes, there are chemical reactions taking place, but they are subsequent to biological processes). \n\nI don't know exactly what happens chemically, but I think that our bodies have evolved to find the smell of decomposition repulsive so as not to indulge in it. It's the same with other animals. Obviously humans have natural predators. No animal wants to eat a decaying body, because it's filled with bacteria and other harmful things. But an animal can't tell the difference between sleeping and dead, so the \"smell\" that comes off of decaying animals indicates to them that they are already dead and decomposing, and are not to be consumed. \n\nBack in our Hunter-gatherer days, this was a useful adaptation, so that we didn't consume things that were decaying and bad for us. Our bodies naturally evolved to find the smell of bacterial decomposition repulsive and unappetizing. \n\nDoes this make sense? ",
"Generally, things smell bad when they have [amine groups and thiols](_URL_0_). Amine groups are nitrogens with some hydrogens around them, and thiols are sulfur with some hydrogen. Your nose has evolved specifically to pick these things out as \"fucking gross.\"\n\nThe reason we evolved to pick those out is because when something is rotting, a lot of amines and some thiols get produced by the bacteria, fungus, and insects picking over the rotten material. If you eat something that's in the process of rotting, you're probably going to get sick, and in a pre-medical society like what we evolved in, that could easily kill you if not weaken you enough that something else kills you. Also, shit has a lot of those things in there, and it's also riddled with bacteria, viruses, and parasites in pre-medical societies: you don't want to be messing around with shit if you have no chance of medical care.\n\nYour brain is pretty much hardwired to generate a strong response whenever your nose detects those chemical groups, and it's doing it to keep you from getting sick.\n\nSpeaking of getting sick, the reason people often throw up when exposed to these smells is very similar. If you're eating something you just found on the ground (you're a caveman, and you give no fucks about ground food), and suddenly smell that on the food, you throw up because that purges your stomach. It's a last-ditch effort to keep you from catching a disease. Same goes for just smelling something foul while eating: cross contamination could have happened).\n\nThis is, of course, an educated guess because we can never know the exact reasons our body evolved the way it did. What it *is* is a very probable explanation."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"https://jameskennedymonash.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/table-of-organic-compounds-and-their-smells-w.jpg"
]
]
|
||
1wkg56 | what would be the economic effects of enacting some sort of maximum wage? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wkg56/eli5what_would_be_the_economic_effects_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf2srgm",
"cf2tzm0",
"cf2uzh5",
"cf2w42y",
"cf2zx8y",
"cf31ehi"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"People who are working at or near that wage will stop trying as hard, since their rewards for their work (wages) is going to be capped. Why put 110% into your job if you're only going to be paid for the first 100%?",
"Well, there'd be a huge pressure to circumvent it, for example by becoming self-employed or being given assets rather than a wage, or all manner of other things. So we have to assume the maximum wage would try to cover this somehow. However it couldn't stop people just leaving.\n\nWould the government take all the extra wages? Or would they default back to the employer? If the latter, government revenue would fall. Either way, wages would naturally tend to the maximum limit. Businesses would struggle to attract top talent (assuming a certain bar, of course - if it were very high, this wouldn't be so much of an issue).\n\nSelf-employed/non-salaried people would end up in the strange position they'd get to June and have earned all they could. That would have a really strange effect on activity; it's possible self-employed people would simply stop being productive.\n\nHowever I think the pressure would be so great that ways round the bar would be found and it would be reduced to little more than symbolic effect - good and bad.",
"Depends on the maximum wage. If it's low enough where people start deciding, \"I'll just do illegal things because I can make way more money\", then bad things will happen. ",
"Companies and high-earners would move out of that country and into ones without a maximum wage. Thus all the money that would be spent on houses, cars, entertainment, taxes, etc. would be spent somewhere else and thus lower the GDP of said country.",
"If employers believe it's worth paying more than the max to hire someone, they will compete to pay that higher amount, while making sure employees only get the legal max *as salary*.\n\nThat means they will look for ways to transfer an additional $X worth of benefits in a way that doesn't count as a salary. For example, they will pay them in fringe benefits or better amenities: nicer office, free food, minions, health insurance, etc.\n\nIncidentally, that's exactly how employer health insurance became popular: there were (unrealistically low) price caps on worker wages, and so they competed for workers by offering health insurance.\n\nA similar thing happens when labor taxes are high: since little of the money \"gets through\" to the worker, they offer more in non-monetary benefits. For example, if each extra dollar of pre-tax wages is taxed at 70%, but non-cash benefits are untaxed, then it may make sense to just give workers something that they want that costs $50 rather than $100 in wages (of which they'd only see $30).\n\n**TL;DR:** A shift toward non-monetary compensation for labor.",
"People would stop trying to get those high paying jobs. Why would I want to deal with the stress of being the CEO of a fortune 500 company when I can get the same pay managing a chain of pizza places?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
66eb8b | daydreaming | We all get those moments were we "visualize" being somewhere else and can picture it perfectly in our heads. What's really going on? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66eb8b/eli5_daydreaming/ | {
"a_id": [
"dghxp7t"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Not everyone can achieve daydreaming easily, daydreaming is the body entering a state of trance of meditation if you will, unlike actual dreaming you are not sleeping the brain doesn't paralyze you and you don't process theta waves (a form of brain activity). you are focusing most of your attention on processing, imagining and materializing an image. (thus any sound that calls attention instantly snaps you back to reality). \n\ntl;dr: daydreaming isn't real dreaming its a side effect of meditation like concentration disconnecting one from reality for a moment"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
11jv3o | why do people develop habits seemingly out if nowhere with no advantages to them? suck as nail biting. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11jv3o/why_do_people_develop_habits_seemingly_out_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6n3p2s"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because nothing stops them from doing it.\n\nIt really is that simple. Habituation is a pretty straightforward phenomenon, neurologically speaking. You repeat an action consciously often enough and you'll start doing it unconsciously. This happens because our neurons have a feedback mechanism; when an action potential — \"signal,\" basically — propagates from one neuron to another, the process of repolarizing the connection between those neurons — \"resetting\" the signal path, basically — strengthens the connection, making it easier for action potentials to propagate along that connection in the future. That's fundamentally how we learn. When you practice playing the violin, you're literally wiring your brain up such that playing the violin becomes automatic for you, something you just do without thinking about it.\n\nHabituation works the same way. It's got *absolutely nothing to do* with \"advantages\" or anything like it. It's just that nothing *stops* that habit from forming. So the same mechanism that makes people get better at the violin with practice makes people unconsciously twist their hair or bite their nails, whatever."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
63rs4f | why is living in the us around twice as pricey than most of europe and around 4 times as pricey on south america? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/63rs4f/eli5_why_is_living_in_the_us_around_twice_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfwhsau",
"dfwl1qs",
"dfwwdbv"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It is called the cost of living, the wages of all the people around you providing services are more expensive. The cab driver, shop worker, doctor, lawyer, teacher etc are all paid more than in those other countries so the services they provide are more expensive.",
"It's all very, very relative. I'm sure my cost of living here in Texas is far lower than a safe place in Paris, London, or Rio De Jinero.\n\nReally it comes down to available jobs and wages in an area, as well as the availability of land and housing.\n\nAlot of people may flock yo economic centers like San Francisco, NY, Miami, LA etc. Because the jobs available are so high paying. Once enough people in this area have plenty of income. The cost of goods start to rise in those areas to keep the supply of goods stable. Same thing happens with needs like electricity. Also housing value in places like Manhattan, all of California etc may be much, much higher than other areas based on available housing. \n\nYou may be surprised to know that in the center of the country there is plentiful availability of land and housing. But the trade off is job availability. But say you work in a factory in Rio. If you got transfered to a factory in Kansas City, they may pay you more but your lifestyle would end up relatively the same.\n\n",
"The cost of living in the US is on par with the more developed countries in Europe. A quick comparison:\n\n* Germany - 12% lower\n* Italy - 6% lower\n* UK - 4% lower\n* France - about the same\n* Sweden - 1% higher\n\nIt is only when you get to the less developed countries that the gap widens:\n\n* Spain - 26% lower\n* Poland - 47% lower\n* Bulgaria - 51% lower\n* Albania - 57% lower\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
60s75q | unmanned aerial vehicles seem like a really obvious extension of aerial warfare. so why did it take us so long to go from first achieving flight, to achieving unmanned flight? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/60s75q/eli5_unmanned_aerial_vehicles_seem_like_a_really/ | {
"a_id": [
"df8w6kl"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"[They've been around in some for or another since WW2](_URL_0_).\n\nBeing able to *securely* control a craft remotely, have it navigate on its own, provide real-time feedback to the pilot & have weapons systems capable of identifying, aiming at & hitting targets, however, takes a lot of modern technology.\n\nOn top of that, most drones are fairly slow. They're not much use against an enemy with a modern air force or air defence system. You need to have total air superiority for it to be safe to toss them up in the sky. It wasn't until we got bogged down fighting terrorists/insurgents that it really made sense to start spending money on them. In Korea or Vietnam, they'd have just been eaten alive by MiGs, AA cannons & missiles.."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicles"
]
]
|
||
j3oic | penis enlargement, explain li5. i'm not trolling, i'm serious. i made a throwaway and everything. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j3oic/penis_enlargement_explain_li5_im_not_trolling_im/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28vco1",
"c28vcq4",
"c28viti",
"c28vjip",
"c28vky6",
"c28vqwx",
"c294tr4"
],
"score": [
34,
20,
2,
9,
3,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"When you get a little bit older, perhaps when you're twelve, you'll notice some changes in your body. One of them will be your penis getting a bit larger. It's normal, and you don't have anything to be ashamed about.",
"If there were a safe, effective way to enlarge your penis, every male in the universe would already know about it.",
"Check your spam folder in 8 years.",
"Here's a really funny article from someone who tested the pills. The results are hilarious and informative.\n\n_URL_0_",
"actually there is a procedure that cuts the suspensory ligament of the penis. this doesn't lead to any new growth of the penis but rather allows it to shift forward (i can't really think of a better way to describe this. if anyone else can help please do). there are also problems with this procedure: this ligament is what makes the penis point up when erect so if you cut it, the penis will get hard but just kinda flop around pointing less upward and/or downward instead of up. ",
"Simply, there is no proven Penis Enlargement methods. The Penis enlargement surgery will cut the ligament that holds your penis upright to allow is to protrude slightly more but not actually enlarge it.",
"I'm sorry gentlemen but penis enlargement is a reality. Basically if you force so much blood into your penis that it goes a bit beyond its natural size, you can stretch and expand permanently the tunica albuginea. This process takes a long time and is achieved through different methods (jelqing manual exercises, vacuum pumping, water negative pressure pumps, clamping).\n\nYou can also make your penis longer by stretching the suspensory ligaments (instead of cutting them surgically) like any other ligaments. You can do that by stretching , hanging with weights etc.\n\nLY5: Stretching your weewee will make it longer over time, blowing it up like a baloon makes it thicker. But you have to do it consistently and safely for a little while ( 6 months) to see results. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.zug.com/pranks/penis/"
],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
544q1e | one touch make ready - why does current equipment have to be moved, why can't google fiber just add their lines to an existing pole above or below at & t and comcast's equipment? | Nashville has recently passed a One Touch Make Ready law, which would allow a single contractor to go to a utility pole, and move the AT & T and Comcast equipment so Google Fiber can also use the pole. My question is, why does that equipment need to be moved at all? Can't Google Fiber equipment be added to the pole above or below the existing equipment? I think I get that there is a specific section of each pole dedicated to communications lines, but the news keeps saying that AT & T and Comcast need to move their equipment to make room for Google. Why can't Google just put their lines in the exact spot AT & T or Comcast would be moving to? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/544q1e/eli5_one_touch_make_ready_why_does_current/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7ytw66"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There is a code limit for how high on the pole these comms cables can be to permit safe work on the high voltage electric power wires above. There is a lower limit on the comms wires to permit access by taller vehicles. The phone company and Cable company tend to put their stuff near the limits, to give them more space to work. But, they aren't too careful, because they move each other's wires all the time. They can agree, however, that not matter what they don't want Google Fibre. Now they will get over it and go back to they way it was before."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
qwdmg | locked and unlocked phones | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qwdmg/eli5_locked_and_unlocked_phones/ | {
"a_id": [
"c40z3w2"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"a locked phone is 'locked' into use on a single service provider's network. \n\nAnd unlocked phones may be used on any provider's network.\n\nThis mainly applies to phones with sim cards, GSM phones."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
4u5q2j | what measures prevent nuclear bombs from being fired? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u5q2j/eli5_what_measures_prevent_nuclear_bombs_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5n2ihe",
"d5n2zpk"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Most countries that have nuclear weapons have a process with several sanity checks along the way to make sure one looney can't start WW3.\n\nExactly what the process entails is usually a closely guarded secret.",
"It takes multiple people to launch one. Typically, each unit has a secret code that must be entered that is stored separately. Many also require the turning of one or two keys stored separately. And technical skills are required to actually perform the launch.\n\n\nIf they are actually fired (missiles) or dropped (bombs) in large numbers, there is no highly effective defense or way to direct them away. Target is toast."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
djd7ox | if opposite charges attract, why is the proton "connected" to the neutron, and not the electron? | shouldn't the proton and electron be in tbe nucleus instead of the proton and neutron? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/djd7ox/eli5_if_opposite_charges_attract_why_is_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"f44csxj",
"f44uthg",
"f457dee"
],
"score": [
8,
22,
4
],
"text": [
"The electron isn't really a tiny ball of negative electricity. It's a different kind of thing, wave-particle duality and all. so a stopped electron might be attracted to a stopped proton, but when it moves it takes on wave properties that prevent it from just \"sticking\" to the proton to make a neutron.",
"Protons and neutrons are bound by the strong nuclear force, while protons and electrons are bound by the electromagnetic force. They're both fundamental forces (two out of the four, including the weak nuclear force, which moderates nuclear decay, and gravity).\n\nBoth protons and neutrons are made of quarks - electrons aren't. Electrons aren't made of *anything*, as far as we know. They're as fundamental as they can get. Electrons just don't experience the strong nuclear force.\n\nThe strong nuclear force is an extension of something called \"color force\" or \"color charge\". **Color charge has nothing to do with visible colors of light. It's just a convenient but kind of confusing metaphor.** So, you know how electromagnetism can have two charges, positive and negative? Color force has three. Well, actually six because it's three and then the three anti-matter versions. So, again, these aren't actually visible colors, but you can *think* of them like having a charge of red, green, or blue; or, anti-red, anti-green, or anti-blue.\n\nAny particle made out of quarks is a *hadron*. All hadrons *must* have a neutral color charge. They *cannot* exist without a neutral color charge. Neutral means *either* having all three colors (or all three anti-colors), or having a color plus its anti-color. So a hadron can be three quarks that are red, green, and blue, which is a *baryon*. Or a hadron can be two quarks that are, say, red and anti-red, which is a *meson*. And also very rarely they can have five quarks that are the three colors *and* a color/anti-color pair. They don't occur naturally as far as we can tell and they don't last for very long, so we can ignore them.\n\nProtons and neutrons are baryons. They have three quarks, one of each of the three colors, red, green, and blue. But quarks don't just stay those colors. They will change color if they absorb a force carrier particle called a *gluon*. Photons carry electromagnetism; gluons carry color charge. So, say a green quark absorbs a red gluon. Neat! It's now a red quark. But it has to do something with its green charge, so it spits out a green gluon which will probably get absorbed by its neighboring quark.\n\nAnd remember how hadrons *have* to be neutral and baryons like protons and neutrons *have* to have all three colors? All these gluons get traded around so that any individual baryon overall stays neutral. They are only unbalanced for a tiny fraction of a fraction of a nanosecond. That trading of gluons is the color force that binds the quarks together within a single baryon.\n\nThe strong nuclear force happens when those gluons zip *outside* of their original baryons and get absorbed by quarks in a neighboring baryon. So a gluon might get emitted by a quark in a proton, but get absorbed by a quark in a neutron. This force is *incredibly* strong. It's so strong that with a few neutrons it will overcome the electromagnetic repulsion between all the positively charged protons trying to get away from each other. *But*, the strong nuclear force is *very* weak over any kind of distance. Go more than the width of a single proton away from it and it falls to almost nothing.\n\nElectrons don't have a color charge, so they don't interact at all with color force.",
"Long story short:\n\nProtons and neutrons are attracted to each other via the strong nuclear force, which is *much* stronger than the electric force. At least at short ranges.\n\nSo why don't all three bunch up? Because electrons really don't like to be confined in small spaces (like the size of the nucleus), so they stay some distance away. This is true of all fermions (which electrons, protons, and neutrons are all examples of). But the lighter you are the less you like to be confined. So protons and neutrons (being much more massive) are fine with being stuck in relatively tiny nucleus, while electrons are forced to be some distance away."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
5llb0g | how can a company apply a patent to something that hasn't been invented yet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5llb0g/eli5_how_can_a_company_apply_a_patent_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbwidl4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Technicly they cant. \n\nwhen you apply for a patent or trademark you have to provide the patent office with scematics or blueprints of the device, mechanism or process you want to patent, if not the patent isnt granted. \n\nI cant go and patent a transporter or a warp drive becuase i cant provide the scematics to a working example. \n\nThats why software patents are so critiziced, its the only field where you´re allowed to patent vague processes so people patent simple processes and then blackmail manufacturers of bigger software or hardware devices with vauge patents of small processes, for a while you couldnt put a email address in to a SMS messege becuase a company pantented the concept of accessing a email address through an sms messege and tried to sue cellphone manufacturers. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
5y6voq | can someone have mild anti-social personality disorder? aka can they be a mild sociopath; different or less severe than simply a full blown one who is just high functioning? | I know there are mild narcissists whose personality disorders overlap in many areas. My question is, can someone fit all of the hallmarks of sociopathy but have one or two moderating aspects that make them difficult to diagnose or get exposed by typical sociopathic rage incidents? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5y6voq/eli5_can_someone_have_mild_antisocial_personality/ | {
"a_id": [
"deno6b0",
"deo3wor"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A key thing to understand with regard to the DSMV is that it solely deals with mental disorders. A key aspect of calling it a disorder is that the condition impacts negatively on the functioning of the person. Or as DSMV states:\n\n > Mental disorders are usually associated with significant distress in social, occupational, or other important activities. \n\nAll the categories it is possible to have milder versions of it, but one does then not call it a personality disorder.\n\nThese milder versions are the norm, not the exception.",
"u/absobloodylootely's response gives excellent coverage of the diagnostic ideology (dimensional approach) of disorders in DSM-V.\n\nTo address some of the nested questions: \n\n(1) Sociopathy is *not* a clinically-recognized term, and I've seen it used to reference both psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (which are clinically-recognized). However, **psychopathy ≠ antisocial personality disorder**, as there are distinct, discriminative factors between them (e.g. IQ, neuroticism, amygdalic activity/volume, fear paradigm response).\n\n(2) For ASPD, there are Dx complications, especially given the DSM-V's restrictive pathway to an ASPD Dx:\n\n* Must be age 18+\n* Must have Dx (or typically evidence, as most don't have diagnostic history) of Conduct Disorder by age 15. And to qualify for CD, we typically look for Oppositional Defiant Disorder by age 12.\n* As such, if there are difficulties in obtaining historical/diagnostic data from those age ranges, then a diagnosis becomes murkier than usual.\n* Also, all of the above Dx's have frequency, severity, and context specifiers (i.e. is this only happening at school/home/etc., what frequency [with overall Sx presentation of at least 6-12 months], how intense, etc.) which can also complicate the clinical picture.\n\n(3) Circling back to point 1, 'high-functioning' is indicative of primary psychopathy (methodical/manipulation-based), not ASPD (impulse/aggression-based).\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
6ux61w | the last transit of venus was in june of 2012 and before that it was in june of 2004. the next transit is not until 2117 and is followed by another one in 2125. why does this event occur in groups of two like this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ux61w/eli5_the_last_transit_of_venus_was_in_june_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlw1u2p"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Venus and Earth's orbits aren't perfectly in line with each other: one is tilted with respect to the other by a few degrees. This means that a transit doesn't happen every time Venus is between Earth and the Sun. There are two areas where the orbits' planes intersect each other, and this is the only place transits can occur.\n\nAdded to this is that Earth and Venus don't have the same year. Venus' is about 225 days. If you do the math, the pattern of Earth and Venus' orbits repeat every 243 years.\n\nIt's this 243-year cycle plus having to be at the right point in our orbits to line up that causes the strange frequency of transits with Venus.\n\nSo if you start with a transit event, when we're lined up, in 8 years we won't be lined up as well, but still enough to see a transit event. 8 years after that it won't repeat because now it has gone out of sync enough to not transit. It takes on average about 110 years for our orbits to line up again, at which time we see a transit, another one in 8 years, and then we're out of sync again. How precisely long it takes for the orbits to sync up again depends on exactly where Venus transited (sometimes the long gap is shorter because Venus happens to be lined up enough to transit \"early\". If it doesn't, the transit won't show up for about 16 more years, and then you'll see the two. The gap is either ~105 years, or about 105 + 16 years. Once it does happen, though, it works out that it will be lined up enough to happen again in 8 years.)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3oxeye | why do fish that live around coral reefs appear to be more colorful than fish that don't live around coral reefs? | thank you | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3oxeye/eli5_why_do_fish_that_live_around_coral_reefs/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw1fcmw"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Aquatic biologist here. I think the real question is \"why are open ocean fish so dull\"? A great many reef fish are colorful, so are a great many freshwater fish, especially those that aren't \"open water\" fish. Really, many fish are very colorful or boldly patterned.\n\nI think the answer is \"because they can be\". Open water fish (ocean or freshwater) live in a solid blue environment with nothing to hide behind. They are often (but not always) that classic silvery or flat blue fish color. \n\nBut fish near reefs (or in small streams) have other options. They have shelter to hide behind if they spot a predator (meaning camouflage isn't as important). That means they can more easily use brilliant colors as social or sexual signals. If they want to be camoflaged, they can use color or pattern as a means to hide rather than being limited by a featureless environment. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3qgtwp | why does the u.s. use a 2l bottle, and europe use a 1,5l bottle for soda? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qgtwp/eli5_why_does_the_us_use_a_2l_bottle_and_europe/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwf18bz",
"cwf459w"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Here in the UK you get both 2L and 1.5L variants with, I would say, 2L being slightly more prominent in the supermarkets.\n\n\nI'm not sure about continental Europe so perhaps they do use 1.5L more than 2L.\n\n",
"Probably because Americans (like myself) drink higher volumes of carbonated beverages when compared to Europeans. We can slam a 2L before it goes flat in the same time a European can finish a 1L. I'm going to the gym. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
cpiy2a | power grid infrastructure | So the power grid explanations I’ve found online are pretty simple: a power plant steps up its voltage and connects to a distribution substation where the voltage stepped down and is routed to local consumers (like homes).
However there are still lots of things I couldn’t find.
1. The explanations I found only depict a single plant powering a single consumer (like a city). Obviously a power grid consists of many consumers and plants. So how exactly is power distributed from the plants to the consumers? How is this controlled? At which point are transmission lines coming from, say, a single plant branch to different cities? Do nearby plants connect to the same line? How? How is power distributed to local consumers (like homes)?
2. How do power plants supply local consumers? Obviously it’d be a waste to step up the voltage in this case.
3. How do power plants power themselves? Things like lights and machinery, etc. How is this controlled? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cpiy2a/eli5_power_grid_infrastructure/ | {
"a_id": [
"ewps7ik",
"ewpsvtt"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Power plants usually have a substation (or if you have multiple power plants nearby, they'll share a substation.) The substation steps up the voltage for transmission and connects to a transmission line. \n\nIn the cities you'll have more substations that step the voltage down to distribution levels. Sometimes they're quite big - they take up a whole city block and are usually surrounded by chain link fence. \n\nPower is delivered to individual houses either above ground or underground. Above ground you'll see wires connecting from the poles to each individual home. Below ground, you'll only see transformers (which are the small green boxes with a locking lid.)\n\nThe power plants power themselves with the electricity they generate. They also usually have backup generators, especially nuclear plants because they still need to be able to run their cooling pumps if something goes wrong and a shutdown is required.",
"Yes, all the power producers might connect to the same line, the trunk.\n\nDistribution involves stepping the voltage down and that transformer isolates the distribution branch from the main power trunk.\n\nThe only \"local consumers\" that aren't isolated with transformers are things like an aluminum mill or a car plant with a power generation facility sharing the same parking lot. All \"normal\" consumers want the isolation between their valuable switchgear and the lightning magnet, Godzilla-Stopper, transmission lines.\n\nMany plants run on grid power, this caused a problem at Fukushima Daiichi. Most have standby generators. Some have full internal startup power, but that costs more money than regular power lines.\n\nEverything is controlled with switchgear. Electrically powered high voltage switching equipment."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
3xnm4n | what would happen if everything was manufactured in america instead of china? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xnm4n/eli5_what_would_happen_if_everything_was/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy672vr",
"cy674sc",
"cy6fymk"
],
"score": [
2,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"It would be significantly more expensive, and, seeing the tax benefits, low wages, and lax labor and environmental laws offered abroad, companies would move production overseas to countries like China. That would bring down the cost of the product and increase profits.",
"Everything would be vastly more expensive - minimum worker wages, varied required insurances, taxes, etc would drive the cost of various devices through the roof. This isn't mentioning the small part child labor plays. So, if you enjoy that iPod / laptop / drone / ??? - light a candle to the poor sods that built it for you. I seem to remember reading somewhere that a very top brand of tennis shoes are manufactured using slave (yep, you read that correctly - slave) labor. 21st century and we still have people using other people as slaves.\n\nMerry Christmas!",
"Have you seen the news about the smog in Chines cities? Imagine that happening in US cities."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
1v760s | how will we "switch" to ipv6, what changes will that require, and how will i be affected? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v760s/eli5_how_will_we_switch_to_ipv6_what_changes_will/ | {
"a_id": [
"cepcq99",
"cepgqr4"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"How you will be affected depends on what equipment you have and what you do. \n\nMost relatively modern operating systems support IPv6 (vista and above on windows), as do most routers - but not all. If you have a modem (cable/phone/dsl/etc.) from somewhere it will need to support IPv6, and a lot of them don't, particularly older ones. But don't run out and buy one, because your ISP may not have much IPV6 support yet, and they might contact you when the time comes. \n\nIPV6 is really much more about your service provider than you. You will get an IPV6 IP address when you connect to the internet, if you have a website you'll need to add DNS entries for that with whomever you buy your address from. But if you don't own your own website how you connect to and use the internet will be pretty much unchanged. \n\nThe problem then, is that every piece of hardware at every ISP needs to support IPV6 for it to become mainstream. \n\n\n",
"Right now we use **IPv4** but you propably knew that. This uses **4 bytes** (which is 4 x 8 = 32 bits) and can essentially create **2^32 adresses**. Not all of which can be used in networks but that's not important. What is important is that this is **not enough**.\n\nSo to resolve this we use what is called **NAT** (Network Adress Translation) which makes it possible to have **Local IP adresses**. Your router then translates your local IP of your own device to the global IP of your **router + a port** and sends all incomming info of that port to your local IP. (This also happens on bigger scales for ISP's).\n\nThe thing is, routers shouldn't really do this, they work on a different layer and shouldn't be using ports. **Ports are made for different processes, not different devices**. Like port 80 is a standard port used on webservers, and a different port for mail etc, all for the same server.\n\n**So we made IPv6** which is **128 bits long**, yes, that's a lot more than 32 bits ! This will essentially make it possible to (easily put), **not use local IP adresses anymore** and be able to communicate with every device using a global IP adress, so without translation. \n\nHow will you be affected? Most likely your device will already know how to handle IPv6 so you won't notice. Your router might not yet, but by the time it becomes a standard to use IPv6 you will propably own one that can. **You won't really notice**. \n\n**TL;DR only read the bold words**"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
3kfn8q | why are human feet so vulnerable? | The whole premise of human species establishing global domination was our ability to travel far distances on land. We left Africa, traveled all over Europe and Asia. So why are our feet extremely easy to puncture? I can probably cut my feet by stepping on a few rocks but we crossed mountains and deserts and forests. I understand that we were hairy at one point but that doesn't give us any structural integrity. A small cut would be enough to get infected and kill a person. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kfn8q/eli5_why_are_human_feet_so_vulnerable/ | {
"a_id": [
"cux075i",
"cux1bx4"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Spend a Summer walking barefoot. When I was a kid I had callouses so thick on the bottom of my feet that I once ran over crushed glass and all I had to do was pick it out. Not one drop of blood. They are sturdier than you think.\n\nEDIT: To more directly answer your question, they are not. Modern people's feet are soft and vulnerable because they are almost always protected by shoes.",
"If you didn't wear shoes all the time your feet would be much tougher. One of the capacity of our feet is its ability to get calloused and tough. You still have that capacity, you just don't use it!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
5dmhck | glass and ice. | Why do car windscreens get iced up but the windows on my house are fine? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dmhck/eli5_glass_and_ice/ | {
"a_id": [
"da62bwy"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"1) your house is warm, and hence the glass is warmed as well. Frost won't form on a warm surface, since the ice would just melt. your car sits outside all night and the glass cools down, allowing ice to form on it.\n\n2) your house windows CAN condensate and freeze on the inside if it is cold enough outside, IF they are single pain. Most home windows today are dual or triple pane, where it's multiple sheets of glass with a gas barrier between them. that gas between acts as an insulator, so the outside window can be cool and the inside window can be warm, preventing condensation and making them more energy efficient."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
93qt8h | why are standard golf balls white instead of a more vibrant color that's easier to see? | I'm sure there's a reason for this, like does it have something to do with the dimples on the ball? It just seems like making them white makes them impossible to see during games. Like sure you might be able to see it better on the ground, but I feel like it's important to see it flying through the air for safety if nothing else. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93qt8h/eli5_why_are_standard_golf_balls_white_instead_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3f8rk9",
"e3f9ehe",
"e3fh80d",
"e3fivxb",
"e3fjdxl",
"e3foyih",
"e3fpn5e",
"e3fqnl9",
"e3fsheh",
"e3fsp3h",
"e3fsvdy",
"e3ft5cb",
"e3fvafe",
"e3fw8fq",
"e3fwh0o",
"e3fx343",
"e3fxdop",
"e3g2txa",
"e3g3dxu",
"e3g3ncj",
"e3g4kv2",
"e3gb76p"
],
"score": [
5474,
9,
549,
253,
149,
55,
30,
7,
2,
21,
4,
2,
3,
3,
3,
16,
3,
11,
2,
6,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"First, it's tradition. Mass produced golf balls started off white because they covered them with latex, and then stayed that way as a general thing. \n\nSecond, golf balls are actually more important to find on the ground than they are in the air. The \"fore!\" cry is intended to warn people when a ball gets too close, not visually spotting it; they're almost impossible to pick up when in flight regardless of colour due to their size, so \"duck and cover\" to reduce the chances of getting hit somewhere really bad. So you trade off the slim chances that someone will see it inbound and avoid getting brained, against the higher chances that you'll be able to find your white ball in that field of yellow dandelions, or not lose that red ball when it's getting dark and red becomes really hard to see.\n\nFinally, there are lots of fluorescent and non-white balls for sale - quite a few people golf with lemon-yellow ones - but upper-tier professional golf is a bit slow to change and has stuck with white. Again, the tradition thing comes into play.\n\n\n\n",
"White is classic, but golf balls are available in other colors, although they might cost more",
"White is actually pretty easy to spot on the ground, whether the ground is green or brown. I've played with a neon-yellow ball before, and it was very hard to find. Dark orange may be easier, but white is traditional.",
"In bright sunlight on vibrant green grass I will tell you that white is actually easier to see than bright orange. And much easier to see than yellows and greens.",
"There are very few pure white things other than golf balls on the ground at golf courses that are white.\n\nThe balls are glossy, so white ones reflect the most light.",
"White is perhaps the most vibrant and visible color to see on green grass or brown sand. Seeing it in the air is almost meaningless, what matters is where it lands. As for safety, it is moving so fast you are not going to be able to dodge it even if you see it coming. Safety in Golf is obtained by not allowing people to stand in the danger zones at tee off. ",
"Snow golf is a thing, you use bright orange ones for that. White may not be very fun in that situation",
"Simply put, there are very few naturally occurring pure white objects in nature. So the color is less to help you see it flying AT you than it is for the golfer to see the ball and follow its flight path ",
"I would guess that they are white just because they are easier to see. It isn't really hard to track the ball in the air but on the ground it is good to have a ball that sticks out. And I do not think that changing the colour would make it safer, you shouldn't really shoot the ball where it have a chance to hit people.",
"Colored balls are making a push now that matte covers are making them even more visible. See: Callaway Superhot bold, Volvik vivid, Vice pro soft, maxfli soft fli, Wilson staff duo optix",
"I may be talking out of my ass here, but I believe the orange/yellow golf balls allow for easier tracking when playing early morning or late evening rounds. The darker it is, the greater the benefit of the orange/yellow color. \n\nI used them all the time playing as a kid, not so much as an adult as it’s a good way to get goofed on. \n\nThat is all. Carry on. ",
"You can get balls in different colours, and I do occasionally buy yellow balls. The thing is, it's not always easier to see those other coloured balls. Blue, you can forget it in darker areas and if the grass is dark. Red is probably the most visible, but pretty annoying to look at. Yellow is great, but it depends on the vegetation of the area, time of year and day, etc. Yellow can be harder to see. ",
"I've heard that white (being the absense of all color) is the easiest to spot. Unless it's in snow of course. A survival guy on his show tore the white foam out of his neon orange life jacket to use as a signal for help for this reason",
"Major manufacturers might have some trouble making super premium colored golf balls. What I specifically heard is that Titleist could not make their Pro V1 cover in optic yellow to the same specifications and quality. There is a lot of demand for yellow golf balls because many people can't see the white ones as well, both in flight and on the ground. ",
"A lot of the bright ones are harder to find. Bought a sleeve of neon yellow the other day and lost them all on decent shots. Rough couple feet of the fairway. ",
"I've practiced with white, red, and blue wiffle golf balls in tall grass. I will tell you that white was the easiest to find. Blue was surprisingly easy, but harder. Red is surprisingly hard to find on a green background.",
"Orange would be bad for anyone red-green color blind. \n\nVery new white balls are quite easy to find. Once they start getting hit a few times they get grass stains and grime on them and they start to lose that ‘bright white ‘ appeal. But a ball will easily be found when used through 9 holes. Probably even 18 holes if you are a good player.\n\nPros switch them out every few holes, not because they get harder to find but because newer balls perform better. Just like in baseball.\n\nI’ve used the lime green balls, i think they are the hardest to find. Orange balls are ok but a lot of times you walk to where you think your orange ball is but turns out to be a leaf. Now you’re standing in the wrong spot and spinning in circles. ",
"Within a particular brand and mark of ball, there is no difference to the dimple patterns regardless of colour.\nEach manufacturer spends a lot on R & D and patents their dimple patterns.\nGolfers are funny people. Some might look down at a nice traditionally white Titelist and may it make them feel they are just slightly closer to the PGA tour than if they play a neon orange Precept. For 99% this is a false notion. Some golfers look down at a neon orange Precept and think they are much more likely to find it after the inevitable slice into the trees. I look down at either and am just glad I found it while I was in there looking for the one I just lost.",
"You can get balls of pretty much any color. You could probably get rainbow if you want. White is easier to see on the ground.",
"A white ball is pretty easy to spot if it lands in the fairway. If you are like most non pros though, you don't always (or ever) play from the fairway unfortunately.",
"1) no matter what colour the ball is, it's super hard to see in the air. Not sure if you've ever been to a cricket match, they use a dark red ball and if it's in the air it's so fucking easy to lose. And it's probably 3X at least the size of a golf ball. 2) Golf is a game of tradition. Tradition is super powerful. That is the main reason.",
"White is actually easier to see, but if your playing with someone with a different color ball, it can come in handy identifying ownership."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
7dxfji | how will someone who is suicidal react to a life threatening situation? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7dxfji/eli5how_will_someone_who_is_suicidal_react_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dq10qa1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This is going to depend on the person. Some people will stand still if confronted by a speeding car even if they aren't suicidal because their adrenal reaction is to just freeze. \n\nA truly suicidal person has put themselves in that situation on purpose, so if they're still in that \"time to die\" place, they'll follow through, there is no self preservation instinct left. I can imagine if confronted with a different opportunity to die a suicidal person might avoid it because they have a plan, but maybe not."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
440ql2 | what makes an aged steak (such as a 3 month aged porter house) safe to eat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/440ql2/eli5_what_makes_an_aged_steak_such_as_a_3_month/ | {
"a_id": [
"czmfrw4"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Dry-aged meat is aged in near-freezing temperatures where most dangerous bacteria cannot survive. There will, typically, be a fungal growth on the surface of the meat but this doesn't spoil the meat and actually helps the aging. The fungal growth ends up forming a crust on the meat but that crust is removed before the meat is used. Due to how dense red meat is, the growth cannot penetrate deeper so this removal should rid the meat of all of the fungus."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
f35gci | why wouldn't congress want to pass a bipartisan bill? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f35gci/eli5_why_wouldnt_congress_want_to_pass_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"fhgpbmn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because it an election year and they don't want to give anyone in the other party a \"win\". Similarly, if a bill is facing a veto, they might not want to take a loss, or they might be trying to protect the president.\n\nAlso, bipartisan support doesn't mean everyone likes it, it just means it isn't split along party lines. A bill with bipartisan support can also have bipartisan opposition, and that opposition might be a little greater in the Senate."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
b7uia5 | how are we able to distinguish real-life sounds from sounds we hear on a speaker? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b7uia5/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_distinguish_reallife/ | {
"a_id": [
"ejuirfm",
"ejujaba",
"ejujele"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
7
],
"text": [
"Your subconscious mind is really good at telling the difference between different types of sounds. In the case of speakers, there are lots of characteristics that clue your mind in that it isn't real life. The size of the speaker, the type of material it's housed in, the way it's pointing, etc all function to make it sound different from the real thing. If the sound is something that's supposed to be all around you, but is actually coming from a single point, your brain can tell that too. (think those speakers in sounds from museum rain forest scenes that always sound off)",
"I don't think we can. I think a group of individuals to your left and a speaker reciprocating their sounds to your right would seem indistinguishable.\n\nArtificial sounds are emanated from a stereo system, or headphones, etc. If you were to turn your back on someone, and instead of hearing their voice, you heard a clear recording of their voice through a speaker, you would not know either way. Testable.",
"There are a few reasons, mostly boiling down to technology not being on human standards yet:\n\n1. Quality of the recording: you can't broadcast a sound a a higher quality than how it was recorded. You can try to \"clean up\" the sound, getting rid of any parasitic noise but that's all you can do. \n\n2. Quality of the speakers: similarly, you can't broadcast anything at a superior quality than the one it was recorded on and if you put it loud enough you can hear the impurities in the recording. \n\n3. The environment: this one is more subjective but if you are inside, sheltered from the elements and you hear a someone speaking in a windy environment, you'll notice fairly quickly that something is amiss. \n\n. \n\n**Tl;dr:** Speaker/Recording tech is not advanced enough to allow for \"full sensory/sound immersion\"."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
9f6yfr | why humans grit their teeth when they hear a screeching sound? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9f6yfr/eli5_why_humans_grit_their_teeth_when_they_hear_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5u6slv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They really tense everything up as a defence mechanism they developed thousands of years ago. The sound resembles a sound that indicated danger to our ancestors."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3j824x | does being in the sun for 30 minutes have the same effect as being in the sun for 5 minutes 6 times (with a pause in between)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3j824x/eli5does_being_in_the_sun_for_30_minutes_have_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cun0u0o",
"cun5cx1",
"cun8kte",
"cun92qt"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"So this doesn't *directly* answer your question but it gets close. [This](_URL_0_) dermatology research paper studied the cumulative lifetime impact of UV exposure and reached the conclusion that even low level, long term, intermittent exposure increased the risk of skin cancer.\n\nThat result seems to support the idea that 30 minutes of straight sun exposure would have the same impact as 30 minutes of staggered sun exposure.",
"Being in the sun for any length of time will most likely result in immediate immolation, so yes, they would both have the same effect. The temperature at the surface of the sun is around 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit, and will get increasingly hotter depending on how far in you are. For reference, cremation ovens typically run below 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit.",
"So, to ask a follow-up to the top responses that seem to indicate that continued exposure is the same as staggered exposure, what is the threshold?\n\nI would think that the implications for skin cancer are different than sunburn.\n\ne.g. (to take it a bit of an absurd level) I may get a sunburn if I'm in the sun for an hour. If I am in the sun for 10 minutes, and then go inside, and repeat this five more times throughout the week, I won't be getting a sunburn.",
"If your body lacks the ability to convert sunlight into vitamin D, no amount of time in the sun is going to help. If you are using sunlight to improve your levels, no more than 15 minutes is needed. Less sunlight is best, we really don't need hours in the sun. If you want to improve your bodies ability to disperse the heat of the sun over your skin, you can use DHA or fish oil to do it. Tons of research is available on how Omega 3 fatty acids helps to protect out skin. If you have chronically low vitamin D levels regardless of sun exposure, an MTHFR gene mutation could be the culprit. \n\nI know I'm not answering the question particularly well and I'm pretty OT but I assume this post is in regards to vitamin D via sunlight. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.sunsafetyalliance.org/docs/9217311_1_012904.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
145ctr | how do hair products like gel and hairspray work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/145ctr/how_do_hair_products_like_gel_and_hairspray_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7a4enp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's an adhesive. Similar to, but not as strong as, glue. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
186zc3 | why does college football use the bcs while the nfl uses a playoff system? | I've always felt that the NFL got it right. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/186zc3/eli5_why_does_college_football_use_the_bcs_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8c5n8i",
"c8c6gri"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Football is hard. The NFL can get away with putting teams through 4 teams in 5 weeks because the pros are better conditioned. Making college kids go through that kind of gauntlet would lead to injury and bad football. Also, the NCAA makes enough money branding inconsequential games like the Rose Bowl that it doesn't need to make a playoff system. ",
"Two reasons:\n\nThe number of teams and conferences in college football would make a playoff impossible. You wouldn't know who gets the championship until all the \"good\" teams played each other.\n\nThe college football season is limited to August - December with a few bowl games played in early January. They can't drag it out any longer. So unless they played 2 games a week (which won't happen), you can only get a certain number of games in and most of those have to be conference games. There simply isn't time to add non-conference \"playoff\" games."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
d98n6k | if the flue shot is a guess at how the influenza virus will mutate in a particular year, how exactly to physicians/ researchers make educated guesses at how it will mutate? | Also if they just need to be close, how close doe they need to be (how come last years flue isn't close enough to this years for my body to know what to do about it)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d98n6k/eli5_if_the_flue_shot_is_a_guess_at_how_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"f1fcsle",
"f1fcwyu"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Vaccine makers are not trying to predict how the virus will *mutate*, rather they are trying to predict which strains that already exist now out in the world will spread from one area of the globe to another area of the globe. And in that respect, it's a little bit like tracking an existing weather pattern -- like a hurricane -- as it moves around the map. Influenza follows some basic patterns as it spreads from region to region. \n\nFor example, flu strains typically spread out from Asia to the rest of the world, so if you monitor which strains of the flu are picking up in Asia in one year, there is a higher probability that they will pick up in Europe and the Americas a year or two later, so you make vaccines for those markets based on that information.\n\nBut, just like predicting the weather, predictions about the movement of different strains of the flu around the world are only probabilities. Sometimes strains migrate in ways that were less probable than what was predicted to be more probable.",
"The flu shot is not a \"guess.\" Monitors are set up at clinics and hospitals across the country. People who come in with severe upper respiratory infections that could be flu are asked to provide samples. Those samples are sequenced. \n\nScientists then look for sequences that appear to be spreading through the population by looking for increased frequency. This is pretty complicated, because they can infer frequency from geographic distribution in addition to actual number of cases. \n\nOnce the dominant strains become clear, those samples are used to generate a new vaccine. \n\nAs to \"how come last year's flu isn't close enough\" the answer is a bit tautological. A new strain wouldn't be able to move through the population if it wasn't different enough. Quite simply, the vast majority of \"new strains\" never get off the ground because people are too resistant (either innately resist or immune from previous similar infections). It is a somewhat rare event for a flu to be \"different enough\" to be able to infect the population and spread. This rare flu takes about a year to develop/spread, hence our flu seasons. \n\nTo be clear, the next flu season starts around December 2019. However, the flu that will be dominant in December 2019 may have begun spreading all the way back in December 2018 (although it's usually a little later). It takes a long time to spread."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
bux2qf | why do scientists documentaries use terms such as "one thousand billion" instead of just saying one trillion? | Edit: Title should read “scientists *in* documentaries” | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bux2qf/eli5_why_do_scientists_documentaries_use_terms/ | {
"a_id": [
"epit5pl",
"epiu0fp",
"epiwan1",
"epj7ha3",
"epjukmn",
"epldni5"
],
"score": [
3,
12,
143,
15,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Possibly because they prefer using the long system for numbering, where one billion is a million million, and a trillion is a billion billion.",
"People in general have a hard time understanding scale for extremely large and extremely small things. It's easy to understand how far away say, the next city over is. If I needed to quantify it in terms of say, how long it would take to walk there, I could probably make an okay-ish estimate. Trying to comprehend just how far away from us Proxima Centauri is much harder, and if I attempted to perform the same exercise I'd probably be way, way, way off.\n\nPeople have an easier time comprehending what a billion is. Explaining a trillion as a thousand billion is easier for people (especially average people) to comprehend the scale of.",
"In British English until fairly recently, a billion was considered to be one million million, rather than the thousand million that Brits and Americans use now. And by the same token, a trillion was a million times that - a one followed by 18 zeroes. They were called \"long scale\" and \"short scale.\" The terms were standardized in the 1970's I believe and the traditional American usage of one thousand millions = a billion and one thousand billions = one trillion is agreed upon now.\n\nStill, because of that there can be confusion between what each number might mean, especially to older viewers/readers who might remember the old system. So to minimize confusion, many scientists prefer to use terms like \"thousand million\" or \"thousand billion\" to identify those numbers. \n\nIt also has a little bit of a rhetorical advantage: it's really hard to imagine large numbers. I can imagine a million dollars in terms of things you could buy - a nice house in many areas, several very nice cars, etc. I can sort of imagine a billion (thousand million) dollars in terms of goods as well - maybe a few huge mansions, each with a big garage full of luxury cars might total a billion dollars' value. It's much harder for me to really imagine a number bigger than that, like a trillion dollars, because it's so far removed from the scales at which I live or imagine. Saying \"one thousand billion\" might make it easier, because now I can take my billion-dollar example and imagine a thousand of those - still mind-boggling, but easier to relate to things that I understand. \n\nThe same applies to scientific extremes like distance or time. I can imagine a mile, because I've walked and run plenty of them. I could probably estimate one pretty well. I can imagine a hundred or even a thousand miles, because I've driven and flown those distances - a thousand miles is somewhere around the distance of Los Angeles to Seattle (more like 1,100 but whatever!), which is a trip I've taken. It's hard to imagine a million miles. But I can kind of imagine a thousand flights from Los Angeles to Seattle. Multiply that thousand-trip 93 times more and that's the distance from the Earth to the sun - a distance that's much harder to actualize when you hear \"93 million miles.\"",
"here's an example of the difference from Robert Heinlein's *The Number Of The Beast*\n\nFrom “The Number of the Beast” by Heinlein. The number of the beast was not 666, but 6^6^6, which gives:\n\n > 10,314,424,798,490,535,546,171,949,056.\n\n\n > \"Mmm, `Ten thousand three hundred and fourteen quadrillion, four hundred twenty-four thousand seven hundred and ninety-eight trillion, four hundred and ninety thousand five hundred and thirty-five billion, five hundred and forty-six milliard, one hundred and seventy-one million, nine hundred and forty-nine thousand, and fifty-six. But I would never say it other than as a stunt.\n\n > \"I blinked at her. \"I recognize that nomenclature -- just barely. Here is the way I would read it: `Ten octillion, three hundred fourteen septillion, four hundred twenty-four sextillion, seven hundred ninety-eight quintillion, four hundred ninety quadrillion, five hundred thirty-five trillion, five hundred forty-six billion, one hundred seventy-one million, nine hundred forty-nine thousand, and fifty six.\"",
"While all the responses are interesting I would like to note a subjective observation. \"one thousand billion\" sounds more impressive than \"one trillion\" even though they're the same.",
"The terms billion, trillion, quadrillion etc are ambiguous.\n\nA thousand million or a million million are not.\n\nThe issue is that there are two ways to interpret what the higher -illions mean.\n\nIn the US you just go to the next -illion each time you multiply by thousand. The European version has the next -illion every time you multiply by a million and -illiards for the intermediate thousand times steps.\n\nThe European way simply tells you to take a million to the nth power. A **bi**llion is a million to second power. A **tri**llion is a million to the third power and **quad**rillion is a million to the fourth power. It works very well.\n\nFor the American way there is no easy way to make sense of how the prefixes and the actual numbers get together. You might say it tells you to which power plus one you need to take a thousand but that is not very intuitive.\n\nIn any case two systems exist. Normally within a single country or language the system used is clear, but when communicating across the globe in a language that might not be everyone's native tongue this can lead to mistakes. \n\nTo avoid ambiguity scientist either simply talk about taking 10 to the nth power or when talking to lay people talk about thousands or millions of millions. It also manages to get across the vastness of these numbers better, too."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
2o7gip | why do humans have to chew their food so thoroughly when many other animals can just gulp down their dinner? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o7gip/eli5_why_do_humans_have_to_chew_their_food_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmkgi6u",
"cmkpzwv"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Carnivores vs omnivores/herbivores.\n\nCows not only chew more than we do, they regurgitate and chew their food *again*.\n\nVegetable matter requires mastication to increase surface area and release nutrients.\n\nProtein and fat, cartilage, tendon, etc. don't have cell walls so they basically dissolve in the acidic environment of the stomach. \n\nBacteria in the intestines help digest as well, for all eaters.",
"It's not as important as we are led to believe. This dude Horace Fletcher around 1913 was obsessed with chewing (and pooping) and claimed that if you chewed your food a lot you can get more nutrients out. While there is some evidence for this in regards to tough vegetative matter, most of the food we eat just needs to be chewed enough to be swallowed comfortably. Fletcher coined the phase \"Nature will castigate those whose do not masticate.\""
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
5uxfig | [biology] what keeps or gut flora from drunkening us? | Without oxygen, bacteria will undergo its anaerobic energy burning method: producing alcohol and methane. What keeps bacteria from drunkening us due to their lack of oxygen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uxfig/eli5_biology_what_keeps_or_gut_flora_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddxmc4v"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"You're mistaking \"air\" for \"oxygen\". We don't have many air pockets in our bodies. We do have a great deal of oxygen. We wouldn't survive without it. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
2qxbhh | every planet is round, so why does earth have huge, deep dents full of water? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qxbhh/eli5_every_planet_is_round_so_why_does_earth_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnaczub",
"cnaczw9",
"cnad03c",
"cnad0wk",
"cnad1a7",
"cnad3q2"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
3,
5,
3,
18
],
"text": [
"Planets are generally not round nor smooth. Even if you 'smoothed out' the topographical features of the Earth, for example, it's not really round. It's slightly bulging around the equator and slightly squashed at the poles.\n\nEven a marble isn't perfectly round if you magnify it.",
"Every planet is round.... also every planet is generally pretty fucked up on the surface. Mars has mountains and craters that make Earth's look like a joke. ",
"Mars and venus have the same type of elevation differences, they just dont have water. If you dumped water on them it would look very very similar to how earth is. There are just as deep places on other planets. We do have trenches though and thats due to our tectonic activity",
"The radius of the earth is about 6,000km, the deepest ocean is about 11km and the highest mountain is almost 9km, a total difference of 20km at most. 20km is about 0,3% of the total radius of earth, that isn't that deep actually. ",
"Earth is incredibly smooth. If Earth was shrunk down to the size of a bowling ball then it would be smoother than the bowling ball. As /u/Sand_Trout wrote, every planet had irregularities. Mars has [a mountain that is 21km tall](_URL_0_).",
"If you scale the Earth down to the size of a billiard ball, it will still actually be smoother than a billiard ball.\n\nThere's under 20km altitude change between the peak of Everest and deepest part of the Mariana trench.\n\nThat's about 0.15% of the Earth's diameter. Which is next to nothing, really.\n\nEDIT: Spelling"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_Mons"
],
[]
]
|
||
15rta9 | why can you train a dog to do a multitude of complex tasks,but you can't train it to poo in a box? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15rta9/why_can_you_train_a_dog_to_do_a_multitude_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7p7iij",
"c7paf6t",
"c7pdlg4",
"c7pluht"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You can, you are just not doing it right. Lean more.",
"You can, but to be perfectly honest I prefer if my dog poops outside. Litter/shit/piss smells awful, I don't want that in my house. ",
"Predator messes smell horrible compared with rabbits/hamsters/guinea pigs.\n\nIn the wild, wolves have no fear, and so they go wherever they feel like it. Small wild cats, on the other hand, generally bury their leavings to hide their territory, and have evolved slightly less disgusting droppings.\n\nDogs could be trained to go inside, but dear god it would reek. I don't know that I would want to try. ",
"My mother had two min pins that were boxed trained. Smelled awful but she insisted they be box trained."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
7vmwo0 | if you can’t lie under oath, what’s stopping someone from asking you if you committed the crime? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7vmwo0/eli5_if_you_cant_lie_under_oath_whats_stopping/ | {
"a_id": [
"dttgw38",
"dttgx4s",
"dttgys1",
"dtti3ft",
"dttioz7"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"in civil cases like you owe me money, you can not remain silent. but in murder case or anything like that you have the right to not incriminate yourself. Because of this you have the right to plead the 5th which is not to say anything.",
"Normally, criminal defendants don't take the stand for this reason. However, if you're on the stand (not as a criminal defendant - the rules are somewhat different) and someone asks you a direct question like this you can simply refuse to answer under the 5th Amendment.",
"Nothing. But people do still lie under oath. And you still have to prove they lied under oath, which in your hypothetical, means proving they committed the crime. If someone is at risk of going to prison for murder, I don't think lying under oath is going to bother them too much.",
" > Eli5: if you can’t lie under oath, what’s stopping someone from asking you if you committed the crime?\n\n(Assuming US) Nothing stops them from asking it. The Fifth Amendment allows you to refuse to answer. You cannot be compelled to take an oath in order to testify against yourself.",
"The fifth amendment. All you have to do is say \"I plead the fifth\" or something to that extent and you're good.\n\nNaturally this sounds a lot like an admission, but juries aren't supposed to use that as proof. It's sort of a \"this question didn't happen\" sort of thing."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
bl9hcl | how far do vibrations travel? | How far do vibrations travel? Could walking down the stairs make the ice in my refrigerator fall? Googling only explains vibrations on the large scale. What happens on the small scale? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bl9hcl/eli5_how_far_do_vibrations_travel/ | {
"a_id": [
"emmotv7",
"emmpsi9"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It depends on what kind of vibrations you are talking about. Now for walking down the stairs again it depends on the materials of the building , your weight/force while you go down e.c.t",
"This depends on different factors. Mostly the vibrating material, how it is attached to its surroundings and what frequency and amplitude the vibration has. \n \nStronger vibrations travel further. I think this is relatively straight forward. \n \nNow let’s get to what vibrates. If a material is very rigid like concrete it won’t vibrate as strongly as a more elastic material like wood or metal. Thus rigid materials don’t transfer vibrations very well. \nLoose materials like dirt or sand transfer vibrations very badly btw, since the movement is lost to inner friction between the particles. \n \nIf your vibrating object is attached very firmly to non-vibrating materials like concrete or the ground, it also loses its vibrations very fast. The number of attachment points is also important: more attachment points means less vibrations thus the vibrations travel a shorter distance. \n \nNow to the last topic: resonance frequency. Every material has a resonance frequency. This is a specific frequency, at which vibrations of the material are amplified. This obviously increases how far the vibrations travel. \n \nIn conclusion: \n \nIf you stomp down the stairs in a wooden house at the resonance frequency of the wood for example, the vibrations of your stomps will probably travel all over the story you’re closest. Now it is very possible to „stomp“ ice out of your freezer from your staircase even if your freezer is 10m/30ft away. \n \nIf you are in a concrete house however, you would need to exactly hit the resonance frequency to even get anywhere with the vibrations. But if this is given, you should be able to stomp the ice out of the freezer, if it is relatively close to the staircase (like 3 to 4m/10 to 13ft)."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
3abaf3 | can food chemically change in the stomach if eaten with other types of food? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3abaf3/eli5_can_food_chemically_change_in_the_stomach_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"csaznsq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm curious whether eating a combination of certain types of foods, when broken down into more basic components, can become something poisonous or deadly?\n\nNo shit if you drink bleach or what have you, but was there ever a case where a specific combination of even commonly eaten foods that chemically become something terrible?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
324q07 | why do u.s. politicians announce that they are going to announce that they are running for president? | Isn't the announcement of an announcement just an announcement? Is this something to do with federal election laws or just media being obsessed with the horse race? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/324q07/eli5_why_do_us_politicians_announce_that_they_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq7tx2t",
"cq7u168",
"cq7vbfb"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Publicity, Publicity, Publicity. The more air time and the more you are in front of the camera and getting talked about the better! All it does is give you an extra (one or more) opportunities to get your face on screens and get your messages out",
"The official announcement is a big press conference. You need to let the media know that you're having a conference & why they should care enough to show up.",
"meglomaniancs love attention, and will do anything to get it.\n\nit is why Facebook is so popular and why all politicians use twitter, even the pope!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
39atv9 | insurance plans | This is going to sound dumb but what are benefits of low deductible and high deductible plans? Do they work as a bank account sort of thing where your doctor visits are free until that deductible "runs out" and you have to pay for visits?
I know it is an ignorant question, forgive me | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39atv9/eli5_insurance_plans/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs1sdga",
"cs1sfrc",
"cs1skjs"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > Do they work as a bank account sort of thing where your doctor visits are free until that deductible \"runs out\" and you have to pay for visits? \n\nYou have it reversed. The deductible is how much you have to pay yourself before insurance kicks in. Generally, a high deductible plan has lower premiums (how much you have to pay every month), because you're responsible for more of your up-front costs.",
"You've got it backwards.\n\nThe deductible is the amount of money *you* have to pay before insurance kicks in. So a lower deductible is better if you expect to be calling on insurance a lot... but that also means that your monthly premium will be higher. Meanwhile, a higher deductible will mean you are paying more out of pocket... but if you aren't calling on your insurance much at all you can take advantage of the lower premiums.\n\n",
"The deductible is the amount of the insured costs you have to pay each year before insurance takes effect. Deductibles are designed to limit an insurance concept called moral hazard (meaning people who don't bear any of the cost take more risks). \n\nLow deductible plans are generally expensive and cover most medical costs. I believe the term used in the ACA was \"Cadillac Plans\". \n\n\"Good\" high deductible plans are generally designed to only cover really expensive events (like getting cancer), and bad high deductible plans are basically scams. With the rest of the cost paid by the insured via a health savings plan (the idea behind them might be better explained by the old economics canard of if you and a thousand others all agree to go to lunch and split the bill everyone should order lobster or the most expensive thing on the menu because you only bear a fraction of the cost of your decision to order lobster--high deductible plans are designed to make the decision maker and the cost to the same person, while still covering events that bankrupt most people). "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
6vcuyu | how do car parks know how many spaces are available? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6vcuyu/eli5_how_do_car_parks_know_how_many_spaces_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlz8muo",
"dlz8qc4",
"dlz9812"
],
"score": [
2,
24,
22
],
"text": [
"There are little sensors that detect when any particular slot is open (most garages that do this also have little \"occupied\" signs for each slot.) They're all networked together. From there its easy math for a computer to display a count. ",
"Is there a barrier on the entrance and exit? Barrier on the entrance goes up, -1 parking space. Barrier goes up at the exit, +1 parking spaces. Start with a known quantity, cos we can count the number of bays, deduct 1% to allow for dicks parking in two or more bays, and away you go.\n\nWhen the number reaches Zero, the car park is full. Illuminate the neon sign that says Car Park Full.\n",
"There's two popular methods you'll see in most garages these days. They either work on a per-garage or per-space basis.\n\n**Per-garage:** Generally done with induction sensors. These are the same sensors used to trigger traffic lights. If you ever notice [these sorts of shapes](_URL_1_) in the road as you're coming up to a light, you've noticed an induction loop sensor. It's a common misconception that these are weight sensors; they're not and weight sensors (they look like big metal plates) never really reached wide usage because induction loops are easier to implement and less intrusive.\n\nEssentially, your car disrupts the magnetic field being created by the induction loop buried beneath the concrete, which triggers a response in the system. In a parking garage there will usually be two sensors: one at the entrance and one at the exit. That way, they can simply count number of cars in, number of cars out, and subtract from the total number of spaces to give an idea of how many spots are available. The major problem with this is with false positives; multiple cars passing over a sensor in rapid succession may get flagged as a single car. That's why the count is often off.\n\nThe counting option for ticketed garages is simple: take the total number of spots, subtract the number of tickets which have been taken and add the number of tickets which have been returned to get a count of available spots. Same goes for garages with barriers/gates.\n\n**Per-space:** These are the systems you see where there's a board that has a count per floor of the garage. \n\nThere are a few technologies for this but ultimately it boils down to putting a sensor above or below every parking spot in the garage to detect if there's a car on it. Sensors can be ultrasonic, magnetic, or infrared, or a combination (the type depends on the environment). Each sensor is connected to a centralized system (either wired or wirelessly) and reports whenever a space is empty or full. These systems are much more accurate, with > 99% accuracy in most cases.\n\nSources: \n\n_URL_3_\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_2_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nedapidentification.com/solutions/cases/the-parking-space-race.html",
"https://cdn.instructables.com/FNM/M85W/F6S98E5S/FNMM85WF6S98E5S.MEDIUM.jpg",
"http://indectusa.com/single-space-sensors/",
"http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/everyday-tech/how-parking-garages-track-open-spaces-why-they-often-get-it-wrong.htm"
]
]
|
||
4502kk | what is a spider's silk made of and how is it produced? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4502kk/eli5_what_is_a_spiders_silk_made_of_and_how_is_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"czu9lvb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Spider's silk it a [long protein](_URL_0_). Hair or finger nails are other examples of this type of protein.\n\nIn the case of hair the protein is made up of a lot of what's called alpha-helices, which are weaker and stretchier. In the case of spider silk it made up of beta-sheets which are quite strong and rigid. (When hair gets wet and hot some of the alpha-helices can temporarily convert to beta-sheets which hold the new shape, which is how hair styling works.) In the case of spider silk the beta sheet is already the preferred state, so it can't really be styled."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider_silk#Macroscopic_structure_down_to_protein_hierarchy"
]
]
|
||
792g3y | what is ice 7? | I was just watching random videos on YouTube, and I stumbled onto a video about strange planets. The narrator mentioned a planet who's ocean floor was made of Ice 7, but couldn't explain what it was. Now I'm curious on what ice 5 is and what are its physical properties.
Video Link: _URL_0_
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/792g3y/eli5_what_is_ice_7/ | {
"a_id": [
"doykrge",
"doykzta",
"doyquog"
],
"score": [
7,
13,
5
],
"text": [
"Ice is what happens when water gets cold and settles into a crystal structure. At different temperature/pressure levels, it forms a different shape of crystal. They're interesting to chemists because it does different things but that's about it.",
"It is just a different geometric packing of water molecules into a solid. Water packs differently depending on the temperature and pressure that it is under.\n\nTake a look [here](_URL_0_) to see all the known phases.",
"Good answers here; just to mention one very important property of high-pressure ice phases: ordinary ice floats on water, but these kinds of ice sink."
]
} | []
| [
"https://youtu.be/18rARy8g4Hc"
]
| [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice#Phases"
],
[]
]
|
|
2njeuh | how are we conscious as a singular entity when our bodies are made up of millions of separate microorganisms? | This might be one of those unanswerable things, and I am in no way, shape, or form educated about anything at all.
I suppose the real question might be: Why do we view ourselves as singular entities, when it's common knowledge that we're made up of a myriad of different cells/bacteria/organisms?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2njeuh/eli5_how_are_we_conscious_as_a_singular_entity/ | {
"a_id": [
"cme4t47",
"cme6ccf"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"We are not made up of a million different organisms, we just have billions of organisms living inside us,helping us digest our food and doing other helpful things. Everything that makes us...*us* has the same set of DNA (read: is part of one organism)",
"Many philosophers and scientist assert that our consciousness is an illusory phenomenon that while effectively serving to create a sense of \"i\" or \"self\" is in fact just an illusion that we have evolved as an efficient means of interfacing with reality (and being most likely to pass on our genes). Not sure if you wanted to touch on the actual philosophical side of it, but there is a great book called \"I Am a Strange Loop\" that tackles this issue. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
2jdzt6 | how a baseball pitcher and catcher decide where and what pitch to throw | who gets to decide? I know some times either of them says no, but who has the final say? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jdzt6/eli5how_a_baseball_pitcher_and_catcher_decide/ | {
"a_id": [
"clatdzk",
"clau6da",
"claxebc"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"catcher makes the decision, pitcher makes the final call though, they are usually one the same page",
"The catcher and pitcher usually make a decision together. Most of the times its the catcher. If you watch the catcher closely, his hand without the glove is usually making signals to tell the pitcher what to throw. If the catcher agrees then it is thrown. If he doesn't then he makes a different decision. Like if the catcher thinks someone is gonna steal then he makes his signal and to which base. Remember, they are a team so they work together. ",
"I used to play catcher. When you can get your hands on tape, the catcher watches it. They need to study who can hit what. That's is a big part of why most catchers are not the best hitters. Only so many hours in a day. If you have to split time between cage swings and tape, you may not be a better hitter than some one who can spend more time in the cage. I would say it's 85% catcher and 15% pitcher. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3c6ck7 | what effect do all the fireworks on the 4th of july have on the environment? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c6ck7/eli5_what_effect_do_all_the_fireworks_on_the_4th/ | {
"a_id": [
"cssrwmv"
],
"score": [
44
],
"text": [
"Well, when fireworks are lit and blow up in the sky, you know the smoke that comes off them? That's actually mostly a gas with a complicated adult name called \"carbon dioxide.\" Cars also have some of this gas come out of them when they go VROOM. Some people worry that this gas will make us just a teeny tiny bit more hot every day, and eventually make us a lot hotter. Mostly they worry about this because they don't want the North Pole to melt on Santa. The amount of this gas from fireworks is about the same as 12000 cars make in one whole year!\n\n**Tl; DR: slightly more carbon emissions than 12000 cars/year. **\n\nSource: _URL_0_\n\n**Disclaimer: not an expert, googled it.**\n\nEdit: Also different metals make the pretty colors when burning, and they turn into dust and gas. This dust can get in water and make it dirty. The gas can make the air gross to breathe in."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/fireworks-ungreen-or-a-necessary-part-of-ringing-in-the-new-year.html"
]
]
|
||
cdgvga | how is it possible that female athletes who train extensively don’t get their period? | My GF played D-1 tennis in college and told me it was normal for all the girls to not get their periods for months or even a full year. How is this possible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cdgvga/eli5_how_is_it_possible_that_female_athletes_who/ | {
"a_id": [
"etts4fl",
"etucfwy",
"etudi2k"
],
"score": [
37,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Main reason is those atheletes have such a low body fat percentage that their body shuts down a lot of the reproductive machinery. It's not worth trying to have a baby if you are in a starvation situation so if your body fat gets too low your body thinks food is scarce so stops trying to make little people.",
"Major athletes have body fat percentages that are often unhealthily low for women. This causes their bodies to not function properly and they will often not get their periods because they are not fit for carrying a child to term. Basically their body is in starvation mode. A healthy woman needs around 22% body fat, these female athletes are often as low as 10%.",
"It’s because the female reproductive system is carefully calibrated to work only if the woman has enough energy to make a baby. When a woman exercises a lot, eats a low amount of calories, and has a low amount of body fat, that indicates the conditions are not right for reproduction. The body only has energy for its other tasks and so it diverts energy away from reproduction. Women who do this long term may exhibit “female athlete triad” syndrome.\n\nAnother way to explain it is that the body needs a certain minimum level of estrogen in order to have a period. Some estrogen is released by body fat. If you have too little fat for that to occur, then you don’t have enough estrogen to ovulate and menstruate."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
4a7vz8 | how did every corporation in every country in the world settle on a corporate hierarchy and standard way of doing business management? was there any historical basis or internationally-mandated standard? | Every corporation is owned by shareholders, governed by a board of directors, and led by C-level execs and follows a top-down style of management with departmental segregation of business operations. People are appointed as managers and are responsible for everything that happens in the business.
How did businesses internationally settle on this style of business organization? Did the world of business meet up one day and decide on such an organizational structure and way of doing business? Moreover how did management become the cornerstone of running a business in the modern world? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a7vz8/eli5how_did_every_corporation_in_every_country_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0y3nhj",
"d0y3q33",
"d0y44y3",
"d0yh0cv"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Doing it the usual way gets you more funding and reliability with employees who may have switched to your company. There are many companies which don't have the above mentioned hierarchy. This includes all startups. Once you start growing big structure helps to keep order.",
"Many corporations are far less \"standardized\" than you think. While many might appear to have the same names, titles, or rough corporate structures, there can be quite often wild difference in what these positions or titles true roles in the company are. \n\nYes we know a lot of really really good ways to structure large businesses. Certainly we know best practices. However execution of this can be so vastly different that you usually need to look a lot further in then just titles. ",
"It's been very much an evolution. It started as partnerships - a structure even kids devise. Then more money was needed, so they started joint-stock companies, which effectively were partnerships with more stakeholders with differing input. These evolutions happened across Europe. Over time it resulted in a fairly uniform legal structure.\n\nSince the 1920s management style and structure has been a study, where corporations and business schools are continuously trying to learn from each other and other countries. There are still many variations. And the culture of a nation impacts on the corporate culture too.\n\nManagement has been a cornerstone from the very start. A single person business will deploy management techniques to achieve success. The bigger the company grows the more staff are added and a pyramid structure naturally ensues (for most).",
"At least in the U.S., corporations are required to have different parts like a board of directors. There are different ways to form a business: partnership, incorporated, and others. Which one you choose determines what you basic structure has to be.\n\nBut that just covers the basics. Having a departmental segregation is up to the corporation - some have it and some don't."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
28nx9o | if you talk in a lucid dream, because you're conscious will you actually be talking out loud? | Because we're aware in lucid dreams, if you say something would you actually be saying it out loud? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28nx9o/eli5_if_you_talk_in_a_lucid_dream_because_youre/ | {
"a_id": [
"cicpvlm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"So when you think to yourself, do you talk out loud? \n\nThe answer to your question is \"Dunno. Do you?\"\n\nPlenty of people talk in their sleep when they aren't lucid. Plenty more don't. There is no difference in the appearance of sleep when you are lucid vs non-lucid. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
erpo55 | how come we’re asked to turn off our cellular data on airplanes? what is is about the connection that could mess up the airplane? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/erpo55/eli5_how_come_were_asked_to_turn_off_our_cellular/ | {
"a_id": [
"ff57fyp"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There used to be a concern over certain frequencies messing with the instrumentation. That is no longer the case, and I’m pretty sure it’s not even truly necessary anymore. I’d imagine it’s still requested because it doesn’t hurt to be a bit cautious.\n\n[for evidence](_URL_0_)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://jalopnik.com/do-you-really-have-to-turn-off-your-electronic-devices-5970176/amp"
]
]
|
||
32i72t | why can't i study new concepts without boredom setting in under half an hour but i can mindlessly level pokemon in a six-hour sitting with no problems? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32i72t/eli5_why_cant_i_study_new_concepts_without/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqbfmem",
"cqbg1zh"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Two major factors, one is that you find it pleasurable and you're kind of progressing in a way you find fun, leveling up something you want to do or use. \n\nThe other is the mindlessness of it, you can level your Shiny Ponyta and think about whatever else, just day dream, but if you're studying it requires concentration and effort, especially if the concepts are difficult...or even if its just dry easy material but you still need to retain it. ",
"Tiny little hits of dopamine hit your brain reward center when you engage in games designed to be *just* challenging enough to keep you playing but *not quite* challenging enough to make you want to go do something else. \n\nVery few real life complex tasks are so perfectly designed to keep you playing. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
69s3w7 | why do people who speak in sign language also move their mouth when speaking? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69s3w7/eli5_why_do_people_who_speak_in_sign_language/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh8x2yj",
"dh8xnfr",
"dh9pn7r"
],
"score": [
35,
14,
2
],
"text": [
"For the same reason people who speak with words move their hands. It adds context and adds clarity to the communication.\n\nMany deaf people also learn to read lips (because only a minority of people know sign language). Many deaf people don't know sign language as well as you'd think! Especially those who lost their hearing later in life.\n\nThe combination of gestures and lip movement helps them understand what is being transmitted.",
"The shape of the mouth (as well as all other parts of the face) conveys meaning and context in addition to the handshapes and directions.",
"There are lots of reasons. Movement in your face and mouth is part of sign language and helps convey emotion since it is a visual language. \n\nWhen I studied it (I am hearing), my professors would tell you when your face was frozen. Many people I met where deaf later on in life, so they mouthed their words when signing because they knew how to speak at one point."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
5qglv4 | wouldn't a 20% tariff on mexican products ultimately end with us citizens paying for the wall? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qglv4/eli5_wouldnt_a_20_tariff_on_mexican_products/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcz1uax",
"dcz1wg7",
"dcz1wjl",
"dcz5n06",
"dcz6czn"
],
"score": [
11,
10,
37,
5,
10
],
"text": [
"More than beer comes from there, my friend. A significant amount of food produce is grown in Mexico. And tes, such a tariff would make everyday purchases go significantly up for every American. And yes, Americans would be paying for the wall.",
"The general idea is that if there was a 20% tariff on Mexican goods then the price would spike and american citizens wouldn't buy them. Its more of a threat than an actual way to get money from mexico to finance the wall. Its also a terrible plan because their aren't enough U.S goods that compete with Mexican and citizens would end up paying for it.",
"Correct. Prices will go up for the American consumer. Mexican companies will start to look for other markets in which to sell their goods. If they can't then the job market in Mexico will become more difficult, thereby increasing the incentive for them to enter our country, legally or not. \n\n",
"It will also lead to a huge surge in illegal immigration. If jobs leave Mexico people will have no choice but to follow them.",
"It's not really a 20% tariff they're talking about.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n > A tax on imports, but not on exports. This sounds like a tariff.\n\n > A border adjustment is not a tariff, nor would it give the U.S. a trade advantage.\n\n > At first glance, a border adjustment sounds like a tariff because it applies to imports, but does not apply to exports. The adoption of a border-adjustable tax is sometimes praised as a cure for the U.S. trade deficit, or promoted as giving the U.S. a competitive edge, or offsetting a competitive edge now enjoyed by foreign producers whose countries use border-adjusted taxes. Such claims are unfounded, and based on a misunderstanding. For instance, Senator Ted Cruz wrongly argued that his plan would benefit exports.\n\n > A border-adjusted tax falls equally on domestic and imported goods, in order to tax the amount of income people spend on consumption. A domestically produced good and an imported good will face the same tax. Goods produced in the U.S. and exported abroad are exempt from taxation, but exports are not consumed at home. However, the foreign buyer may be subject to a consumption tax levied in his home country, but that is not the concern of the U.S. taxing authority.\n\n > Of course, U.S. producers may think of this as a subsidy for exports because they would not be taxed on sales overseas. But if businesses were able to reduce the prices of their goods they sell overseas due to the border adjustment, this would trigger a higher demand for dollars in order to purchase those goods. This higher demand for dollars would increase the value of the dollar relative to foreign currencies and offset any perceived trade advantage granted by the border adjustment.\n\nMost of the media has gotten this wrong because they are English majors and don't understand economics."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://taxfoundation.org/house-gop-s-destination-based-cash-flow-tax-explained"
]
]
|
||
1izw1d | if the us is a democracy, why can the majority of people agree on something, and no change happens? | This isn't a loaded question trying to prove a point, I promise.
I have seen reports about how 90% of people are in favor of legal marijuana or 80% of people are in favor of raising minimum wage.
How does no change occur with these vast numbers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1izw1d/eli5_if_the_us_is_a_democracy_why_can_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb9oew6",
"cb9og7w"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"The US isn't a pure democracy, its a representative democracy. Citizens choose people to represent them in the government, and these people sometimes don't do what the citizens want.",
"America isn't a democracy, it is a representative democracy. People don't vote on issues, they vote for people to represent them. Because there are fixed election dates, if the people they elect are useless, there is little the people can do about it."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
bmqu8y | is there any truth behind the popular belief that if a wound is itchy, it means its healing? if so, why? | It's just something my mother always used to say and I never wondered about it until now. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bmqu8y/eli5_is_there_any_truth_behind_the_popular_belief/ | {
"a_id": [
"emyvbvx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This article explains it really well. Here's an excerpt:\n\n \"The cells unite at the center, attach together and contract to pull the wound shut. This process creates a mechanical stress that activates the itch nerves and tells the spinal cord to scratch.\n\nThese nerve fibers can also be activated by chemicals secreted by the body, which is how wound healing causes itching. As the University of Cambridgeexplains, the body releases histamine in response to the wound and its sudden exposure to outside elements as a protective function.\"\n\nSource:_URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://advancedtissue.com/2014/10/understanding-wound-healing-itching-dilemma/"
]
]
|
|
1ce2iw | 401k. | Started working on oil rig. I am 45, "looking towards retirement." Explain 401k like I'm five. What it is, what are the risks, how it works... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ce2iw/eli5_401k/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9fm65i",
"c9fpb2m",
"c9fqpxg"
],
"score": [
24,
6,
8
],
"text": [
"A 401k is an account where you can contribute money before it is taxed, however you can only access it when you legally retire (there are exceptions I will cover).\n\nSo why is this such a benefit? Well, as you know, your salary is taxed. The amount is fairly substantial regardless of what tax bracket you're in. Let's just say it's 30% to use a round number. So what a 401k does is allow you to take a portion of your income (either a % or certain amount) and put it in this account before it gets taxed at 30%. This amount can then earn interest and grow (depending what it is invested in), and then when you retire you receive the amounts in your account back, though you have to pay taxes on it at that point.\n\nSo if you have to pay taxes on it at the end anyway, why is it so good? Well, over the years that it is in the 401k, it is earning a return on the full untaxed amount, as opposed to you taking savings (which have already been taxed 30%) and keeping it in a bank account that way. \n\nHope this helps. \n\nEDIT: Windrixx's comment below is another benefit to it.",
"As an addition to Bince82's response, some companies will do a match, or a percentage match on what you put up, up to a % or a yearly dollar amount. The last company I worked for matched penny for penny until your contributions reached $250 for the year. So in my example, the company was giving you $250 a year to invest in your retirement, as long as you put at least $250 in yourself.",
"Actual Five Year Old Version:\n\nYou get paid for work and you give some of that to the govt. When you save for retirement in a 401k, you get to wait until later to give the govt their share. This way, you can invest a larger portion now, and then pay the tax after it's grown. \n\nAdditionally, most companies offer a match, where if you put in a certain amount, they will as well. Free money!\n\nEven better, I'm pretty sure company 401k's can save more money per year then if you had a personal 401k."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
69ipmo | how do movie scenes in famous places (like times square or grand central station) work? do they have permission forms for everyone in the area? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69ipmo/eli5_how_do_movie_scenes_in_famous_places_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh6vyyp",
"dh6wfvc",
"dh6xzdg",
"dh6zb3z"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
5,
27
],
"text": [
"You have no expectation of privacy in public. There is no requirement that people who are filmed in a public place sign any kind of form, or even agree to be filmed.",
"No you won't find people randomly entering a movie scene because it's in a public place, gawking at the action is too much of an issue. \n\n\nThey get a permit from the city just like anyone would have to, like parades, construction, events and the like. Then usually if traffic is redirected they pay the police a good sum to do so.\n\n\nAll the people in the movie are extras, usually found through casting agencies or from public postings, like Craigslist ads.",
"They typically film during low traffic periods, like very early in the morning, get permission to cordon off small portions at a time, then edit them together to make it look like they were all part of one scene.",
"If you live near one of these locations, sometimes without warning you attempt your usual walk past the area and find that it's blocked off for filming. Sometimes there's a PA (production assistant) standing there with a clipboard. He/she will give you a lookover to check that you're a visual fit for the show, and then tell you that you have to detour around *unless* you sign a release and promise not to draw attention to yourself as you walk past. \n\nThey only do that for people walking by in the midground, though. Anyone coming anywhere near the actors will be paid extras. \n\n(Really experienced New Yorkers know that things like sidewalks are always fair game [unless they've paid a fortune to block off the entire street for the shoot, in which case it will be police blocking the road, not crew] and can't be obstructed whether you refuse to sign a waiver or not. Look in the background of some Law & Order shows and you'll see a grizzled local plowing through on their way somewhere with a worried production person trailing behind.)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
1v8b97 | how and why governments control the wireless spectrum? | Why do governments auction off cell phone spectrums instead of letting it be a free market? Does thier involvment hamper competition and innovation? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v8b97/eli5_how_and_why_governments_control_the_wireless/ | {
"a_id": [
"cepojof",
"cepptaa"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Why, because there is a limited amount so it is seen as a public resource. How, laws. Without someone controlling it companies might step all over each other.",
"The [radio spectrum](_URL_0_) consists of much, much more than the cellphone spectrum. It is in the public interest to ensure that various uses and companies don't interfere with each other, so someone needs to control it. And giving control to a private entity would give it a huge economic boon. \n \nI suppose it might be possible to set up a public foundation to regulate and allocate spectrum, but that kind of thing is one of the functions government *should* be good at. And the government has a compelling interest in having some spectrum of its own for uses like public safety, the military, etc. \n \nThe US government has gotten significant revenues from auctioning off some of the spectrum. But they do auction it off in a sorta free-market fashion. The only problem with this isn't that it hinders innovation per se, but that you have to have a lot of money or you don't get to play. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://wwwcache.wraltechwire.com/asset/news/2012/03/28/10914779/SPECTRUM_CHART-512x211.jpg"
]
]
|
|
5k3hcz | if you were in a dense nebula that contained a star, would it be possible to hear the star? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5k3hcz/eli5_if_you_were_in_a_dense_nebula_that_contained/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbkzjbp",
"dbl2aji",
"dbl9z93"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Sure but it would have to be pretty dense for a human to be able to hear it unaided.\n\nThat said the [lowest note ever recorded is from a black hole.](_URL_0_) The sound recorded is 57 octaves lower than middle-C which, according to that article, is a million-billion times lower than a human can hear.",
"After a quick look, it seems like the higher end of densities for nebulae is about 10,000 particles per cubic centimeter. That might seem like a lot (and it's a lot more dense than deep space, which has about 1 atom per cubic centimeter), but normal air has about 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 particles per cubic centimeter.\n\nIn other words, although it's ten thousand times more dense than deep space, it's about one hundred trillion (!) times LESS dense than air.\n\nSo you're not going to be hearing much.",
"There is nothing particularly special about air in transmitting sound. You just need some medium the pressure wave can travel though, even solids work. \n\nThat being said, no nebula is going to exist that will be dense enough for your experiment. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/09sep_blackholesounds"
],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2pm6o5 | why don't cars have more than three mirrors to eliminate blind spots and reduce collisions? | it seems like all cars have their three mirrors- the rear view and two side mirrors. but this often isn't enough for drivers to see a complete view of the lanes around their car, creating blind spots, which then cause accidents because people don't check said blind spots and switch into another car's lane, colliding with said car. why don't cars have, say, an extended rear view mirror or sectioned side mirrors that give more complete views of the road around them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pm6o5/eli5_why_dont_cars_have_more_than_three_mirrors/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmxym48"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"If you adjust your mirrors properly you will not have blind spots.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIt can also reduce headlight glare. \n\n_URL_1_\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.caranddriver.com/features/how-to-adjust-your-mirrors-to-avoid-blind-spots",
"http://www.driversedguru.com/driving-articles/car-driving-skills/the-bge-mirror-setting-eliminates-blind-spots/"
]
]
|
|
3r91zh | what are the biological, psychological, or other scientific explanations as to why humans seem to be so attracted to violence? | Specifically, I as a male, seek to understand why my fellow males gravitate towards violent video games, sports involving extreme aggression like MMA, and ultra violent action/ horror movies. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r91zh/eli5_what_are_the_biological_psychological_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwlyrsh",
"cwlzfy9",
"cwm8j63"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The capacity to do violence effectively is pretty much a life-skill of every other animal on earth. We are lucky that lots of smart humans came before us and set things up so tons of us get to just sit on our asses and enjoy our lives but that doesn't mean we aren't still hard coded to fight. Play and sport are both just analogues for violence, you do them to learn to be better able to be violent in the future and we teach our children they should be doing some kind of physical play every single day, its hardly surprising that we enjoy it. There is more than 100k years of human history and another few billion of animal instinct telling you to solve your problems with violence and there is a thin veneer of technology and society for the past maybe 5k telling you not to. ",
"A human is a type of animal known as a primate. The primate family also includes apes and monkeys. Apes and monkeys are often violent because of their animal natures. Humans are violent for the same reasons. Some humans are violent toward other humans, but most are not. Many humans express those violent instincts by substituting other outlets for violence, such as video games, MMA, etc. ",
"It's pretty well accepted that humans became the dominant hominid species because we're (at least males are) sexually aroused by violence. While rape is empirically a terrible thing, raping while you pillage after winning a battle is a good way to propagate your species and foster genetic diversity. Breeding just within a single tribe or social unit can lead to a limited gene pool. Having some of your tribe's offspring be the product of outside genetic histories is, in a purely biological sense, healthier for the species as a whole. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
erni12 | how do ice sculptures stay solid for so long? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/erni12/eli5_how_do_ice_sculptures_stay_solid_for_so_long/ | {
"a_id": [
"ff4sh6a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The surface area to volume ratio is quite high compared to other common forms of ice, meaning that it would take far, far longer to fully melt because only a very small fraction of it is exposed to heat at a time. Also, other forms of ice are usually found in water or in large amounts of contact with solid materials, which speeds up the transfer of heat. \n\nBeing indoors also protects the ice from airflow somewhat as well, as it sucks heat out of the air, other warm air needs to come in to replace the colder air, which happens faster if there is wind or high airflow."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
y1101 | bo xilai scandal? | I'm not sure what's going on and why it's getting a lot of attention. It's a murder, but is there something deeper going on? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/y1101/eli5_bo_xilai_scandal/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5rdxcw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There is accusation (but no solid public proof) that there is a lot more going on.\n\nBo Xilai was in charge of the district housing China's 5th largest city (Chongqing) and it's largest non-coastal city. He and his wife had become celebrities both because they are young and knew how to work the media, used populist language and also because of substantial reforms. \n\nHe effectively shut down organized crime in a single massive raid and mass-arrest, leaving no organization standing to fill the void. They weren't fair trials by western standards, but the end result was an end to organized crime. He built massive parks and housing projects focusing specifically on the working poor, standards of living for the poor in his city were much higher than in most other cities in china.\n\nHe also was ideologically different from the current party leadership. He talked often about how the national leaders had sold out Mao's vision to appease western capitalist businesses. He spoke about the horrid working conditions and growth of wealth inequality that were the very things the revolution stood against. He advocated for a return to a more communist form of government and invoked Mao often when doing so. However with that resurgence of a Maoist ideas came a distrust of foreigners, capitalists and civil libertarians. \n\nShortly before the scandal he was being nominated to be part of the national ruling council. After it happened his bid was rejected. He claims it was a plot by the national party to keep him out of power, he said that his policies were seen as a threat to the pro-western government who favor business stability over communist ideology. Given the circumstances it's believable but purely circumstantial. Unfortunately the same dictatorial powers he used to lock up the mob without trial means he and his wife can be arrested without evidence as well."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5dzwtq | what would happen if the ocean conveyor belt slowed down or stopped? | I am doing research for Environmental Science, and am trying to get a better grasp, or rather be able to explain this simply and need help!
Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dzwtq/eli5_what_would_happen_if_the_ocean_conveyor_belt/ | {
"a_id": [
"da8k83w"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Western Europe would cool dramatically, it would have temperatures similar to southern Canada or the northern states of the USA. Additionally many ocean animals would starve due to the change in nutrients in the water."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3zrxh1 | what is the difference between the capabilities of a hydrogen bomb and a nuclear bomb? what is really the threat in north korea possessing a hydrogen bomb? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zrxh1/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyolz4q",
"cyolzs1"
],
"score": [
7,
7
],
"text": [
"A nuclear bomb is one that uses fissile material to generate an explosion.\n\nFissile materials exist in 1 of 3 states, sub-critical mass, critical mass, and super-critical mass. Sub-critical means (ELI5) you don't have pure enough fissile material to sustain nuclear chain reactions. Critical mass means you have pure enough fissile material to sustain nuclear chain reactions, and super-critical means your fissile material is generating nuclear chain reactions at exponential rate.\n\nAn atomic bomb is the grandfather of them all, generally the start of any nuclear weapons program, and a component of all subsequent types. You take a fissile material, such as plutonium or uranium for practical purposes, and you purify them to at least 30%. Then you want to shape your fissile material so that it remains critical. Now all you have to do is compress these materials until they go super critical. The more you compress them, the faster and more efficient they generate chain reactions.\n\nOne way is with plutonium and a gun type detonator. You make a cone of plutonium, and a puck of plutonium, and you shoot the puck into the cone with conventional explosives. The compression drives the mass into super-critical. Little Boy was one such weapon. You can do this with uranium, but the bomb would be the length of a telephone pole - this was operation Big Boy, and was abandoned early in the US nuclear weapons program.\n\nAnother way is by implosion. Make a hollow ball (to prevent the mass from going super critical on its own). Now surround it with conventional explosives. The uniform detonation will evenly compress the material into super-critical. Trinity and Fat Man were this type, made from uranium.\n\nFill the shell with lithium, which turns into hydrogen in a nuclear weapon, and now you have a hydrogen boosted weapon. You need the neutrons to increase the rate of chain reaction. You can fill the shell with liquid hydrogen, but it's not as effective and hydrogen is hard to store.\n\nIf you use one hydrogen boosted bomb to compress *a second* hydrogen boosted bomb into super critical, you have a hydrogen bomb or more appropriately a thermonuclear bomb, because the heat differential between the hot exterior of the secondary and it's relatively cooler interior, aids in compression. You can chain these steps into multi-stage thermonuclear weapons. The \"Tsar Bomba\" was a Russian 3 stage weapon that was the largest detonated weapon ever built and tested, and it yielded 50 Megatons, ~1,500x as powerful as Hiroshima, 1/4 the power of Krakatoa (a volcano that exploded and was heard around the world, kicked off a mini ice age), and 10% the power of all nuclear weapons detonated to date. A whole lotta' FUUUUUUUCK YOU...\n\nThere's a whole lot more involved in the shape of these components in order to maximize the yield, they encase the pits in barium as a neutron reflector to increase efficiency, and they can be designed to be variable yield, making them less efficient and \"dirtier\" as a consequence.\n\nWhat danger do they represent? Very little to us; they can't even get their \"dong\" whatever rocket off their 1 of 2 launch pads. And if they ever demonstrated the ability to *not* explode on the launch pad, I think more people would decide to do something about it. But even then, most of what they're doing is posturing for political reasons. Their people are starving to death and the regime doesn't want to be overthrown, let alone held on trial for crimes against humanity. They can't afford a war they provoke because China won't back them then.",
"Go to [NukeMap](_URL_0_)\n\nPlay around with it a bit. Pick your city for fun. Choose Fat Man or Little Boy to see some small regular fission bombs. Click the 'detonate' button and check out the map. Now choose the one marked something to the effect of 'first H-bomb' and click 'detonate'. That's why it's bad. Personally I doubt they have an actual hydrogen bomb but who knows. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/"
]
]
|
||
452tjv | why do phone chargers eventually get to a point where you have to place them in a very specific position to actually charge? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/452tjv/eli5_why_do_phone_chargers_eventually_get_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"czuqayr",
"czuqq43",
"czutwml",
"czuwj7x",
"czvfhss"
],
"score": [
29,
5,
13,
27,
2
],
"text": [
"Copper is very expensive, so the manufacturers are making the wires thinner and thinner, and everytime you bend the cord it weakens the wire until the point it breaks. If you bend a certain way you're still barely making contact. Whatever you do, do not wrap your cord around the brick, keep it as loose as possible, or if possible have a charger for each location and dont keep messing with it.",
"It can also be dust buildup in the charging port of the phone. Dry digging it out with a needle or something. Be gentle though.",
"LPT: If your phone charger stops working, check if your phone's charger input has lint in it. \n\nYou're welcome. ",
"The micro usb cable has 2 retractable hooks on its underside. After continual use sometimes the hooks retraction mechanism experiences failure. The purpose of the hooks is to ensure that the teeth of the cable and the plates of the phone's charger port make a secure connection enabling your charger to do as it's name suggests!",
"Along with the other reasons mentioned, I've had my charger port slowly accumulate lint from my pockets which stopped the cord from going all the way in. You can take an unfolded paper clip to get it out."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
26ltq0 | why do people say "aah!" or make a sound like it when they understand something or have a moment of clarity? | It seems to be a universal sound that's made. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26ltq0/eli5_why_do_people_say_aah_or_make_a_sound_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"chs89pr"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"People speaking English make that sound. People speaking German, for example, are more likely to say \"Ach so!\" or simply \"Ach!\"\n\nYes, these sounds vary from language to language, and are actually words -- a special type of word called an \"interjection\". We learn them, just as we learn other words.\n\nFor example, \"ouch\" is also a word, but it's actually borrowed from German, where it is spelled \"autsch\". The original English word is \"ow\". German also has, as well as \"autsch\", the word \"aua\" (pronounced \"ow-ah\")... you may think these interjections are just automatic, but in fact they are words."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5fu8xr | how did the earth get on a tilted axis? and what could make it tilt further? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5fu8xr/eli5_how_did_the_earth_get_on_a_tilted_axis_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dan6m7u"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The earth was formed from a disk of material left over from the formation of the sun from the remains of one or more supernova from a previous generation of stars. It really does not make sense to talk about the 'original' tilt of the earth in the early stages of the planet's building stages because it was not the earth yet. One theory that has a lot of evidence is that later in the earth's formation, it was smaller than it is now and it had no moon. A planetary body the size of mars hit it, obliterated both objects, and blasted matter into orbit around the now mashed planets. The 2 large bodies then reformed into the existing earth and the moon in orbit around it. That last collision would have pretty much set the current tilt but before the collision the tilt could have been different. It was a very large and energetic collision and the new body would rotate differently than before. The final element is the moon. The moon stabilizes the tilt. Without the moon, the tilt of the axis would wobble and the earth might even end up tilted on it side from time to time.\nedit: source - I am not an astronomer but I have an interest in stuff like this."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
8kqsns | how low thyroid function can explain weight gain, depression and fatigue? | [Hypothyroidism:What is it, Causes, and treatment](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8kqsns/eli5_how_low_thyroid_function_can_explain_weight/ | {
"a_id": [
"dz9t57k"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Free thyroid hormone in the form of T3 stimulates our metabolism. More specifically, T3 modifies gene transcription in our cells to turn up biosynthesis of proteins and quicken the turn over of substrates. T3 also ramps up our ability to pull glucose out of the blood stream for energy utilization, makes our fat cells more susceptible to circulating adrenal hormones leading to better fat breakdown, and increases enzyme expression in the liver for utilizing cholesterol. \n\nI don’t have a great answer for how T3 improves mood. If I had to guess, it acts as a stimulant, because patients that are hyperthyroid frequently are jittery, anxious and excitable. However I would be curious to hear from others, as well! \n\nSource: Fourth Year Medical Student, and S.K. Panini, ‘Medical Biochemistry: An Illustrated Review’ (2015). Thieme Publishing. "
]
} | []
| [
"https://youtu.be/h9WIzDa9big"
]
| [
[]
]
|
|
92qo9g | why does the saliva in our mouths seem to become thinner or thicker at random? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92qo9g/eli5_why_does_the_saliva_in_our_mouths_seem_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"e37nsnp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on how hydrated you are. The more hydrated you are the thinner/watery your saliva will be as apposed to being dehydrated and having cotton mouth. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
6ny1xm | the validity of independent studies | All the time on ads and such I will hear something stating how the current advertiser's product is better according to an independent study, but does that study have any merit seeing as the company itself ran the study, as well as there being a clear bias towards the company's product. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ny1xm/eli5_the_validity_of_independent_studies/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkd4kzo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Depending on who ran the study, it could or it could not. Audits are performed by an independent auditor however that audit is paid for by the company. This can lead to conflicts. However we have a governing body that sets rules to limit this.\n\nThe question is who ran the study? Are they independent? What guidelines did they use to score the product, and are they answerable to any higher org? The more yes answers you get the more likely the study is reliable.\n\nAlthough I will say, do you think a company would release a report with negative findings?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
1f9sd8 | mortgages | I opened two threads today and became confused about mortgages. What is escrow? I couldn't understand what I googled. Why would overpayment go to escrow? Why would you need escrow after the title is signed over? What should one look for in a contract? How is it different if you buy the house outright?
I submitted this before, but had a lot of spelling errors. I am sorry. Hopefully this will be better. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1f9sd8/eli5_mortgages/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca85um8",
"ca86k0v"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"escrow just means money set aside with a 3rd party.\n\nwell, as a homeowner, you are required to have Insurance AND pay taxes for the house. the mortgage company usually collects those money along with your mortgage payments, put the money in an Escrow Account AND pay the insurance & taxes for you at the end of the year.\n\nwhy?\n\ninsurance protects you and the bank when something bad happens. if you don't your $100,000+ house will be worth < $10,000 when it burns down.\n\ntaxes, well, banks really hate foreclosing on homes. why sell a house at a fraction of the cost AND pay Your property tax, when you can collect the original sum + interest.\n\nps. if you're really trying to buy a house, talk to your bank and they'll be glad to explain it to you.",
"/u/insomnia_accountant has a good explanation. To hopefully simplify things a bit more:\n\nWhen you buy a house, you are responsible for paying the following:\n\n1. Mortgage\n2. Homeowner's insurance\n3. Property taxes\n\nIn addition to collecting your monthly mortgage payment, your lender will give you an option to setup an escrow account for the insurance and taxes.\n\nIf you choose to have an escrow account, your monthly payment will consist of:\n\n1. Mortgage payment\n2. Estimated monthly cost for homeowner's insurance\n3. Estimated monthly cost for property tax\n\nWhen it comes time to pay insurance and tax, your lender will do that for you since they've been collecting the money from you.\n\nIf you choose **NOT** to do escrow, you are personally responsible for paying insurance and taxes when they are due. This could result in having to come up with a few thousand dollars all at once.\n\n**Overpayments**\nBecause tax rates and insurance premiums sometimes fluctuate, the amount needed to pay them off every year are based on educated guesses. Sometimes your lender may collect too much, which results in overpayment, and sometimes they collect too little. Thus, your monthly payments may \"adjust\" every year to accommodate changes in insurance and taxes.\n\n**If you buy your house outright**, you will be responsible for paying your taxes and insurance. This is the same as not having an escrow account.\n\nHope this helps."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
204r4v | why don't film production companies hire movie critics to help them make a good movie? | Now when I saw how bad the new NFS movie is (I'm not alone who thinks it's bad - see reviews) I'm wondering why can't they show parts of the movie to contracted critics who will tell them what they do/don't like about the movie to make a good movie. **Not talking just about NFS** I mean it must be obvious to atleast one of the guy hundreds people who took part at making movies that the movie sucks. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/204r4v/eli5_why_dont_film_production_companies_hire/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfzr8mi",
"cfzr8uc",
"cfzt1xm",
"cfzwasm",
"cfzx8ws",
"cg00vb9",
"cg09tov"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
8,
2,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Just because a critic doesn't like a film doesn't mean the general audience will not. NFS may be getting crappy reviews but people will disregard those and go see it. ",
"Because critics' opinions are subjective. For all the people who agree with a given critic's opinion, there will be many who disagree. Critics may hate *Shitty Parody Movie 9*, but there'll be plenty of folks with the IQ of a sponge who'll love it, and pay good money to see it.",
"By the time they have enough of a movie to bother showing thru already invested MOST of the money into it and it's mostly complete. Even if every critic in the world says it's terrible they would still release it since they make nothing scrapping it.",
"Because the director/producer's vision is what is to be made, not what a critic desires.",
"It usually isn't clear how bad a movie is until they are nearly done making it. \n\nA critic might step in an say, \"yup, that sucks\", but there would have no way of prevent the movie from getting to that point.",
"I know what a good soup tastes like, but that doesn't mean I know how to make a good soup. I can taste a lot of completed soups and tell you which ones I liked and why, but asking me to taste soups as they're being made and predicting whether they'll be good would be difficult.",
"Because of the way films are shot it's actually not always clear that it's going to suck straight off the bat. When a film is pitched, it's pitched as an outline script, not a full line by line script. The outline says \"here is the setting, here's the characters, here's what happens\". From this a studio greenlights it, and this script then goes off to actors and actresses as well as directors. Actual proper \"scene by scene scripts\" don't appear until contracts are already signed, at which point it may break union rules to back out, or cost the people a vast sum of money to back out, enough to bankrupt said actors/directors etc.\n\nFurthermore, even when the scene by scene scripts appear, it's rare that anyone will get the whole script in one go. They get it bits at a time, so they can learn lines for the scenes they're about to do, scenes which are almost always shot out of order. Shooting lots of scenes out of order makes it hard to tell the actual story hence why directors often have to remind actors of what should be going on in each scene in the story.\n\nFinally, there's the editing room, wherein only a handful of people are responsible for changing the film. Even if John Actor has done an amazing job and has given the best acting of his career, it can all be ruined by sloppy editing that harms the films story. \n\nFurthermore you have to add in that studio execs will come along, pitching ideas, and generally requesting that certain ideas are done to make the film marketable to a wider audience. Execs aren't film makers, they're not interested in telling a good story or making a great movie that wins oscars, all they want is to sell as many tickets as possible hence they'll request changes to the film, sometimes at the request of it's quality. After all bad films can be highly profitable, while good ones can bomb in theaters.\n\nIn other words, people often know it's going to be a disaster ahead of time, but don't have enough control themselves to stop it from being a disaster and just have to grin and bear it. Critics have a good understanding of why something went wrong and can explain how to do it right, but that doesn't mean they know when a project is awful before it begins, or have enough industry clout to not have to cater to the demands of execs, or can stop things going wrong in areas they have no control of."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
5p7u9z | what happens if the president and vice president are both assassinated, and the current speaker of the house is not a natural born citizen? does the presidency skip soh, or do we get a president who is an immigrant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5p7u9z/eli5_what_happens_if_the_president_and_vice/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcp39a1",
"dcp7gjs"
],
"score": [
13,
8
],
"text": [
"It would just move down the line of succession. The line is ordered by position, but it skips those who are ineligible. If the Speaker of the House is ineligible, then the job goes to the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Currently, it is Orrin Hatch.",
"What are you planning, op?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
5rmhyh | how and what triggers gall bladder stones formation? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rmhyh/eli5_how_and_what_triggers_gall_bladder_stones/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd8rgt6"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"I'm going to take the long way around the barn just to make sure I explain it well. I hope it makes sense, but if not let me know. I'm not so great at responses yet because I normally just lurk. \n\nSo you know how if you put oil and water together, it separates into two layers? But if you put a soap or a detergent with it, you can get the two to sort of mix? \nThat's important. \nIt's something called solubility. Solubility is just what will dissolve in something else, like sugar in water. But fats aren't water soluble. They won't be a part of water. Fats are something called lipid soluble. (Lipid is a fancy way to say fat.) They're like oil. \nIn order to absorb things that have fat in them (think greasy foods but also lots of other stuff) you have to be able to absorb fats, but fats are sort of spectators on the side because the body absorbs water soluble stuff. Another reason this is important is because many vitamins are fat-soluble. So if you don't absorb your fats, you miss out on your vitamins especially vitamins A, D, E, and K. The way to solve this problem is to make the fats water soluble instead of fat soluble (like the oil, water, and soap earlier). \n\nThis is done in a process called emulsification. Emulsification basically takes the entire layer of fat and puts it in tiny tiny droplets in the water layer thus making it relatively water water-soluble. The emulsifier, or the thing breaking it down into little droplets (think: the role of soap in the example), here is bile. \n\nBile comes from the liver. It is made by hepatocytes (fancy for liver cell) and cholangiocytes (fancy for bile duct cells. Bile has all kinds of things in it, but the ones responsible for emulsifying fats are bile salts (BS) and bile acids (BA). They can get complicated so that's what we'll call them right now. \nWhen Bob comes from the liver between meals 50% goes to the gallbladder to be stored and concentrated while the other 50% makes its way down the duct system into the small intestine. \n\nIn the gallbladder cells of the gallbladder called cholecystocytes concentrate the bile 100x. The reason it concentrates the bile is so that when you eat next time, the bile is more effective or more potent. Another reason is simply practical because the gallbladder only holds 40-50 mL. \n\nBut when bile is concentrated there is another problem. When anything is concentrated it can be difficult to keep it dissolved. Can you think of a time where you put too much sugar in a drink and could not get it all to dissolve? This is the same concept. It refers to saturation points of a solution. The idea is essentially how much stuff can a liquid solution hold in it. When something becomes very very concentrated or potent, the liquid says it cannot hold it anymore. This increases the likelihood of dropping it just like a person carrying heavier and heavier weight. This is called precipitation in a solution.\n\nWhen bile salts precipitate out of the bile in the gallbladder they can undergo a chemical process called chelation with something called calcium. That's all fancy talk for how to make a calcium salt. Calcium salts are not soluble. Large clumps of these calcium salts are called gallstones. \n\nSo why doesn't this happen to everyone? To solve this problem the gallbladder normally makes the bile acidic in order to keep the bile salts soluble. But this stops working when people eat more fat than they should because the gallbladder is overworked as it has to empty itself and start over more times than normal. So when the gallbladder stops working, you no longer get the acidic bile with better solubility. Now you have calcium salts and gallstones. \n\nSource: I have a B.S. in Biology and Chemistry, and I am working on my M.S. in Biology with a focus in medical science. We went over this yesterday in class. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
ezb559 | why is it that most animals that are domesticated or are easier to domesticate, mammals? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ezb559/eli5_why_is_it_that_most_animals_that_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgm3g6x",
"fgm3pv2",
"fgmms1a"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Many mammals have something called social brain.(at least some of them) that makes it easier to live and breed in captivity for herd animals. It also allows humans to domesticate pack animals by giving them food and shelter( being the pack itself) However reptiles are more like loners and their brain is not complicated as mammals because they are cold blooded.And birds need a whole different process for domestication.(its hard and complicated) and they need special maintenance not like many mammals.",
"It's not that mammals are easier to domesticate, it's just that the only animals we *bothered* domesticating were mammals. Reptiles grow slowly because they rely on the environment to regulate their temperature, and the way they develop also depends on the environment, so it's hard to breed them. Reptiles live slowly, which makes them very inefficient as agriculture. \n\nMammals and birds are warm-blooded, with a fast pace of life. They convert plant biomass into meat biomass rapidly, which makes them more useful when cultivated. They also don't die as easily as reptiles.",
"A few more points:\n\n1) Omnivorous mammals (especially those that aren't very large) are generally less threatening to humans and thus easier to manage.\n\n2) They produce milk, so they are producing food during their lifetime."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
k2n27 | itching | Why do we get random itches? How does the physical act of scratching the itch make it go away? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k2n27/elif_itching/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2h1sqq",
"c2h1sqq"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, our bodies have a mechanism that tells the brain that there's something either on our skin or something that's irritating it. Whether it be something like a fly or maybe a nasty encounter with poison ivy the nerves (if I'm not wrong I think they're the same nerves that deal with pain) in our skin send messages to our brain to tell us to do something about it.\n\nAs for why scratching it relieves it, I think I remember once reading an article stating that when we itch it reduces activity in the part of the brain that deals with pain, but I think it's the fact that you've addressed the problem that makes it feel better, if that makes sense? I could be totally wrong with this so I apologise for not being able to provide a better answer.",
"Well, our bodies have a mechanism that tells the brain that there's something either on our skin or something that's irritating it. Whether it be something like a fly or maybe a nasty encounter with poison ivy the nerves (if I'm not wrong I think they're the same nerves that deal with pain) in our skin send messages to our brain to tell us to do something about it.\n\nAs for why scratching it relieves it, I think I remember once reading an article stating that when we itch it reduces activity in the part of the brain that deals with pain, but I think it's the fact that you've addressed the problem that makes it feel better, if that makes sense? I could be totally wrong with this so I apologise for not being able to provide a better answer."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
3v4ki8 | why is it so uncommon for diseases to become zoonotic, and how can they have such wide ranging effects on different species? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v4ki8/eli5_why_is_it_so_uncommon_for_diseases_to_become/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxk9je3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"for it to cross species it basically needs to be a genetic freak. something horribly went wrong with the little disease's genetics when it multiplied and somehow that genetic mess up allowed it to attack another species while also overcoming the astronomical event of somehow being able to survive. as we see in humans when our genetics are messed up, when we are born, most of the time we don't have a single chance of living with out a civilized society helping us."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
2pzmqt | people in highschool when i was in middleschool looked 20, people in highschool when i'm in college look 20 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pzmqt/eli5people_in_highschool_when_i_was_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn1gb66"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Was your highschool located at 21 Jump Street?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
48cmdv | how can some plants survive through the winter while others require new seeds to regrow in the spring/summer time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48cmdv/eli5_how_can_some_plants_survive_through_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0ip73x"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They're just two different methods for continuing the species, like how some animals have lots of babies knowing only some will survive while others only have or one two and put a lot of effort into making sure they survive. It takes a lot of energy to survive the winter but has the benefit of allowing the plant to grow bigger and take more time to mature; it doesn't take anywhere near as much to mature in three months, drop seeds, and die, but the cost is a shorter lifespan/shorter window for reproduction. Just different priorities."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
9hwwyf | when flowers/plants dry out and lose color what is actually happening to make the color disappear? how is that different from pressed flowers/plants that keep their color? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9hwwyf/eli5_when_flowersplants_dry_out_and_lose_color/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6f61m0"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Nothing actually has color it's really the frequency of light reflecting off the surface of the object. That's why you get a ranbow of colors when shining sun light through a prism. All the colors separate. So when plants dry the surface area changes and the light reflection does as well. Same in fall, summer, and spring."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
882w3i | why does mold seem to appear "abruptly"? | Perhaps I am totally wrong and it is just that by the time I discover a moldy item it's been sitting there long enough to have a decently sized colony.
It seems to me that if I bake a loaf of bread it's totally fine for, say, a week. Usually we eat the bread well before it gets moldy but on occasion some is forgotten / stales and gets eaten more slowly. Then over the course of 24-48 hours it abruptly goes from looking fine to having multiple mold blooms.
What changed that caused the mold to suddenly appear? Was it there the entire time and it just takes about that long to grow enough to be visible? Do mold colonies grow exponentially? Is there some requisite condition for the bread to harbor mold that takes roughly a week to achieve? Or something else? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/882w3i/eli5_why_does_mold_seem_to_appear_abruptly/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwhfhq1",
"dwhfs0o",
"dwhfz4s",
"dwhu6a5"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
" > What changed that caused the mold to suddenly appear? Was it there the entire time and it just takes about that long to grow enough to be visible?\n\nThis is probably the most feasible answer\n\nFungi are microscopic and grow rapidly quick if the conditions are right (Humid weather and a comfortable temperature)\n\nEven before seeing any visible fungi, there are probably just enough fungi that it isn't visible to the naked eye\n\nTo really see this, try to see if you have access to a microscope and put a little sample of a few-hours-old bread\n",
"You don’t want to know the answer...\n\nThe blue or green spots are just the spores or fruit of the mold, it’s reproductive system. The actual organism spreads through the food as strands of “hyphae” which are almost invisible. \n\nYour bread was moldy for days, but you couldn’t tell, and you were eating it the whole time! It probably spread through the whole loaf before any spots appeared. Sometimes you can notice a slight odor even if you can’t see it...\n\nBut don’t freak out, bread molds are generally harmless.",
"What you see and think of as \"the mold\" is actually the fruiting bodies of the mold, the reproductive growths which allow it to spread to other locations. The body of the mold is actually within the bread and likely invisible to you.\n\nYou can think of it like being astonished that flowers grow so quickly because you only notice when the flowers bloom but cannot recognize the body of the plant to which the flowers belong.",
"Most cells replicate fairly exponenti- one becomes two, two becomes four, four becomes eight, etc. Thats because they split while gestating. There comes a point when 500 becomes a thousand, and a thousand becomes two thousand, etc. At around this point (where the numbers get big) the colonies of cells become visible to the naked eye (through shere volume) and have enough area density to be tasted on the tongue.\n\nThey seem to pop into existence by virtue of large numbers doubling over short periods of time.\n\nMold eats the bread and drinks water. It likes the dark. Keeping bread in dark, damp pkaces will make mold happy and itll grow faster.\n\nLeven bread (bread that rises) is also made with yeast, another thing mold loves.\n\nIt is almost impossible to keep bread from getting mold since its spores are everywhere. But, since its spores are everywhere your body has built up a tolerance to the inperceptably small amounts of mold thats always around. If you don't let the mold build up you'll be fine."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
2brenl | how will the everyday life of the average reddit user be worse in the future if global warming continues unchecked? | I am NOT skeptical about global warming / climate change. I realize the earth is warming up abnormally quickly, I am convinced humans are at fault, and I do not deny that the results will be very bad if we do not do something about it. What I still do not understand is, what does "very bad" actually mean in this case? Will my own everyday life be worse in 50 years because of global warming? if so, how? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2brenl/eli5_how_will_the_everyday_life_of_the_average/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj860wl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's difficult to say - the impact to individuals will vary from location to location.\n\n\nOne of the big factors is that global warming is likely to make it more difficult to reliably grow crops as there will be an increase in widespread droughts/floods which can have an enormous impact on yields. What this will do (realistically) is push the price of food up globally, which for most in the west will be an annoyance rather than a disaster, but in developing worlds has the potential to be devastating. \n\n\nSimilarly the expected to be an increase in extreme weather will result in more damage to properties/infrastructure - again more extreme flooding/droughts/wind/etc. which will have an impact on the economy and general stability.\n\n\nThe other, unpredictable, way it will affect everyday life is politically. With food supplies potentially more strained will there be more conflicts/wars? Who knows - certainly the old adage \"a society is only three meals away from anarchy\" could be shown to be true. \n\n\nFinally there's scope for major localised political impact by changing laws/legislation. Currently we are free to use as much electricity as we can afford - will concern for emissions rise even further and see increased taxation on energy supplies not from green sources? Who knows - it's very difficult to predict what political changes will come about as the effects of global warming become more apparent."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
agtwwx | repetition of a word making it lose meaning | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/agtwwx/eli5_repetition_of_a_word_making_it_lose_meaning/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee91kxv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This is a fairly common feeling. It is actually very similar to deja vu, but instead of deja vu (or “already seen” when translated to English from French), this feeling is called Jamais vu (or “never seen” when translated from French to English).this feeling is when something you are used to suddenly becomes alien to you, while deja vu is when an alien scene suddenly becomes something you are familiar with. It works the same way as deja vu, only opposite, and it is a sudden emotional trigger that tricks your brain into thinking something it shouldn’t. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
u1aa6 | can resolution on phones/tvs/computers eventually become so good it would be pointless to improve it? | I would imagine our eyes can only perceive so much detail, so will screens ever reach a "maximum" level of resolution? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u1aa6/eli5_can_resolution_on_phonestvscomputers/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4rhd9o",
"c4riiby",
"c4rjuav"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Figure that the size of the pixels cannot be smaller than the wavelength of the light that they are transmitting. The shortest length of light we can see is around [380 nm, the longest 740 nm](_URL_0_). Do the math and with 3 color subpixels you'll top out at around 11440 pixels per inch (*ppi*) **if** all the subpixels are the same relative size.\n\nCompare this with the iPhone's retina display: 326 ppi\n\nAnother application of extremely high resolution displays are in 4K projectors. The Sony VPL-VW1000ES, for example, has 3x 0.74\" LCD panels with a combined resolution of 4K (4096x2160). If you were to look at the output of the screens directly (but you can't because you would be looking directly at a 2000 lumen bulb) you'd see a tiny screen with around ***6250*** ppi\n\nWe still have quite a ways to go on phones, TVs and computers.\n",
"Yes, and there is an argument to be made that we have already reached that limit for common screen sizes.\n\nThe human eye has an angular resolution of approximately 1 arcsecond. An arcsecond is a division of a circle. A circle is broken up into 360 degrees. A degree is broken up into 60 arcminutes. An arcminute is broken up into 60 arcseconds. So an arcsecond is 1/1,296,000 of a circle.\n\nUsing a bit of trigonometry you can figure out just how big an arcsecond is at a given distance. Most people have their TVs somewhere between 8 and 15 feet away from the couch. At those distances, 1080i resolution is usually too much already. You're wasting some of the resolution because your eye can't make out the details.\n\nA smart guy named Bernard Lechner already worked out the optimal distance for a given screen size. You can view the chart he created [here](_URL_0_).\n\nComputers and cell phones are a bit different because their much closer to your eye. But, the same principle holds. There's a certain maximum resolution over which it's just a waste.",
"Right now the limit isn't really screen resolution, but recording in high enough detail, and being able to reasonably share and transfer super HD in a speedy way, instead of having everything be super compressed."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light"
],
[
"http://hdguru.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/hdtv_distance_chart.pdf"
],
[]
]
|
|
6nppli | how is it that a coin flip always has a 50/50 chance of heads or tails, but chains like 10 heads in a row are so rare? | If I flip a coin and get two heads in a row, wouldn't the next one probably not be heads? Does probability take into account what came before it?
I've never been able to understand this! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nppli/eli5_how_is_it_that_a_coin_flip_always_has_a_5050/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkb9ihh",
"dkb9m5m",
"dkba16u",
"dkba9lc",
"dkbaw45"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the chain of 10 in a row has a probability of (0.5)^10.\n\nTo expand: That's a very low probability. Probably you're thinking why the tenth flip itself has a low probability, but it doesn't. In itself it has the same probability as a single toss, 0.5, or 50%. But that has to follow the very slim probability of having already flipped 9 in a row, so \"getting there\" is the problem.",
"Simple probability, like what you'd use for a coin flip, doesn't care about previous outcomes. After 2 coin flips coming up heads the next one is still 50:50.\n\nYou could try to logic your way into claiming that the next one will more likely be heads since you're on a streak of heads, or you could try to logic your way into claiming the next one will likely be tails because the streak has to end sometime. Both are equally wrong and are examples of the gambler's fallacy. \n\nA sequence of 10 heads in a row is uncommon simply because there are so many different 10-toss sequences (1024 of them; that's 2^(10)). Each of those 1024 sequences is equally improbable. \n\nNote that there are some systems where past events *do* have predictive power. A classic example is the weather: if you're living somewhere where it rains 50% of days then you may be able to get a better than 50% chance at guessing the weather tomorrow if you consider whether it rained today or not. This is Bayesian Statistics. It isn't applicable to independent events like different tosses of a fair coin. ",
"Probably would be easier to understand if you can visualise it.\n\nTake a piece of paper and draw a big V, one branch is heads, the other is tails.\n\nThen draw a smaller V from each branch, again 1 of each of these branches is heads and tails.\n\nKeep going until you have 10 levels.\n\nNow you have all the possible combinations of flipping a coin 10 times.\n\nYou'll notice that only 1 of all of these paths through the 10 levels is all heads or all tails.\nThere are hundreds of other combinations that aren't the one you want.\n",
"Odds of flipping 10 straight 10 heads.\n\nAfter 0 flips: 1 out of 1024(0.098%)\n\nAfter 1 Flip Heads: 1 out of 512(0.195%)\n\nAfter 2 Flips Heads: 1 out of 256(0.391%)\n\nAfter 3 Flips Heads: 1 out of 128(0.781%)\n\nAfter 4 Flips Heads: 1 out of 64(1.563%)\n\nAfter 5 Flips Heads: 1 out of 32(3.125%)\n\nAfter 6 Flips Heads: 1 out of 16(6.250%)\n\nAfter 7 Flips Heads: 1 out of 8(12.500%)\n\nAfter 8 Flips Heads: 1 out of 4(25.000%)\n\nAfter 9 Flips Heads: 1 out of 2(50.000%)",
"*Every* combination of 10 flips has the same probability. 10 heads in a row just *feels* special because it's an easily identifiable pattern."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1wrdx1 | if a normal person has 46 chromosomes, but a person with downs syndrome as 47, where did the extra one come from? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wrdx1/eli5if_a_normal_person_has_46_chromosomes_but_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf4ogg5",
"cf4otnw"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It came from an error when the sperm or egg that formed the baby was made. \n\nNormally, each sperm and egg has one copy of each chromosome (so the baby gets half of each chromosome pair from each parent), but sometimes both of the parent's copies get stuck together. This results in one gamete that is missing a chromosome and one that has one too many. ",
"I'm not going to get too detail-heavy in this explanation, so if there are any questions or holes you don't quite understand, feel free to ask.\n\nReproductive cells undergo a process called *meiosis* in which a mother cell containing both copies of the chromosomes multiplies and divides into four daughter cells containing one copy of the chromosome. Now, near the end of the process, your chromosomes line up in the middle of the cell, with one copy on one side, and the other copy on the other side. They're then grabbed and pulled apart by fibres. However, sometimes, one of the chromosomes doesn't get separated from the other, so now you have one cell that get one extra chromosome (total of 24 chromosomes), and one that's missing a chromosome. The ones that end up missing a chromosome generally die much faster than the ones with an extra chromosome (although they can survive). So when the 24-chromsome egg or sperm is fertilized, you get 47 chromosomes, with the extra copy being called a *trisomy* (two natural copies + one extra copy = three, or tri)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
4xueht | how can i share 50% of my dna with a banana but only 12,5% of it with my cousin? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xueht/eli5_how_can_i_share_50_of_my_dna_with_a_banana/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ignlu",
"d6igyno",
"d6ih7gm"
],
"score": [
2,
11,
13
],
"text": [
"Where did you get that 12.5% stat? Because I think you might be misinformed.",
"HiBecause you're looking at different sets of data.\n\nSaying we share 50% of our DNA with a banana (I think thats a bit high) is looking at 100% of the DNA.\n\nSharing 12.5% of your DNA with your 1st cousin is only looking at the small section of DNA that's different among humans. \n\nIf you look at all of your DNA it's over a 99.9% match to your cousin.\n\nEdit: To put it into better terms, that 12.5% is out of .05% of your total DNA.",
"First of all, the Banana figure is a bit off. [here is a basic mouse-over page that shows](_URL_0_) how much DNA you share with, variously: a fly, an a ape, a fish, a microbe, a plant, and a roundworm.\n\nNext, I know you said \"cousin\" instead of \"sibling\", but let's explore the \"family relatives\" idea. You get half your DNA from your mom, and half from your dad. Since not every kid gets the SAME halves from his/her parents (they're mixed up), that's why siblings aren't identical. Maybe you got your mom's eye color but your brother got your dad's eye color, for example.\n\n[EASY-TO-READ SOURCE](_URL_1_) for the following:\n\n > When scientists say a mouse is 85% the same as we are, they mean that biochemically, we are that alike. Using this measure, siblings are actually 99.95% the same. The 50% refers more to the amount of DNA we get from mom and the amount we get from dad.\n\n > When scientists say we are 85% the same as a mouse, they are referring to the string of letters in a gene. This simply means that on average, if you compare a typical gene from mice to the equivalent gene in a human, 85% of their bases will be the same. Or if the gene was 1000 bases long, 150 bases would be different and 850 would be the same as the other. In other words we are 85% biochemically identical to a mouse.\n\n > How biochemically identical are we to our fellow humans? The **DNA sequence in your genes is on average 99.9% identical to ANY other human being.** Meaning, if you have a gene that is 1000 bases long, on average there will be only 1 base that is different between you.\n\nOf that tiny portion of DNA that is different between humans, THAT is the part people mean when they say you share 50% with a sibling — 50% of 0.1% —, or 25% with an uncle, or 12.5% with a cousin. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://genetics.thetech.org/online-exhibits/genes-common",
"http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask166"
]
]
|
||
d7ia9j | i have a 1% chance of winning something and i win 5 times in a row, what are the odds? | If the game is to guess a number from 1-100 and its guessed 5 times in a row, the odds of that happening is less than 1-500 right? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d7ia9j/eli5_i_have_a_1_chance_of_winning_something_and_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"f1086km",
"f108b0j",
"f108yvg",
"f10beds"
],
"score": [
32,
3,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Well a 1% chance is 1/100. So the odds of guessing a random number between 1 and 100 (inclusive) five times in a row is 1/100 x 1/100 x 1/100 x 1/100 x 1/100 = 1/10,000,000,000\n\nSo one in 10 billion. Good luck.",
"The odds of hitting a 1/100 bet 5 times in a row are 1 / (100 * 100* 100 * 100 * 100) or in other words 1 / 10000000000.",
"Much less.\n\nIn this case, the math is easy: the odds of an event happening N times is equal to the odds of it happening once, multiplied by itself N times.\n\nSo (0.01)^5 = 0.0000000001 or one in ten billion.",
"Just want to point out that the question in your title and the question in your text are different. Guessing a number from 1 to 500 isn't a 1% chance, it's a 0.2% chance. So guessing a number from 1-500 five times in a row would be 1 in 31.25 trillion."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1ivudi | what is the opposite of a vacuum and what would happen to you if you were in a sealed container and it happen? | is it compression? im just curious... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ivudi/eli5_what_is_the_opposite_of_a_vacuum_and_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb8inrs"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yeah, I suppose the opposite of a vacuum would be a highly pressurized space, and if the pressure in that space were high enough than it would basically crush you."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
77q4jf | if silk is as stretchy as elastic and stronger than steel, why isn't it used more often for... everything? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/77q4jf/eli5_if_silk_is_as_stretchy_as_elastic_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"donua66",
"donyslp"
],
"score": [
12,
6
],
"text": [
"People have been working on this for probably around 20 years! The problem is, spiders can't be farmed like silkworms. They tried to solve this by taking the gene for making spider silk and putting it in another organism. Now we have yeast and bacteria that make spider silk, and goats whose milk contains spider silk. \n\nThe problem with this is that it's not in silk form! It's more like a jello, instead of being usable fibers. ",
"Spiders typically produces several kinds of silk of varying properties and compositions. The strongest type is the dragline silk they use to dangle from. This typically has an *Ultimate Tensile Strength\" that is about half that of grades of steel used for wire ropes. (Note that the strength of steel can vary significantly based on the composition and the processes used to strengthen it.) \n\nThe difference is that the density of steel is about 7.8 gram/ cubic cm while silk is about 1.2. So, overall, silk has a much better *Strength-to-Weight ratio* than steel.\n\nHowever, currently the material with the best strength to weight ratio is carbon fiber. CF is common for applications that require extreme strength, vibration resistance, and minimum weight such as aircraft, drones, car body parts, \n\nThe reason that synthetic silk hasn't been a commercial success, is complex. \n\nApparently, the properties of spider dragline silk involves some sophisticated chemical processing tricks, performed by cells in the spider's silk gland. This yields a fairly complex, well ordered molecular structure. Moreover, the individual silk fibers themselves have a sophisticated multilayer structure. The processes spiders use to produce silk aren't well understood. \n\n Laboratory made silk tends to have disappointing properties, and a molecular structure that is rather disordered compared to spider silk. \n\nSilk is biodegradable. In fact some spiders eat their old webs. But this is a problem in many applications where you'd want to use something like silk. For example, you don't want your clothes to start decomposing in the wash. You don't want to go climbing and discover that your ropes are moldy and smell terrible.\n\nNow, considering that there are synthetic fibers already on the market that have equal or superior properties such as aramid or high modulus polyethylene, and require much more straightforward and simple processing methods, silk is a bit of a non-starter. Unless it can be made more cheaply and the demand for biodegradable fibers grows.\n "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.