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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18onqs | how do bugs survive when i bend my muscular middle finger, placing it behind my thumb, tense with the power of thirty arched bows, release with the explosive force of thor himself, and flick them across the room? | No, really. No coma? Trauma? They just keep. fucking. walking. Is it their relative light mass? Doesn't the sudden inertia shear off appendages? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18onqs/eli5_how_do_bugs_survive_when_i_bend_my_muscular/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8gmm3r",
"c8gmpp6",
"c8gndbf",
"c8gnle9",
"c8gs7z2"
],
"score": [
7,
50,
2,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"I'd say it's a combination of light mass (ie basic newtonian physics, it would take a very small amount of the energy you are applying to them to get them moving at the same speed as your finger, so all that force is mainly pushing nothing) and the fact that they have a built in spring-loading in the form of an exoskeleton.\n\nAlso thirty arched bows would tear your hand off.",
"Excellent description of flicking a bug. A full paint can is really heavy and when you drop it, it dents. But an empty paint can is really light, and when you drop it, it's fine. Same thing goes with living stuff but living stuff is squishier. If you drop a horse from fifty feet, it squishes. A person: squishes but a little less messily. A dog: Squishes even less messy. A cat: breaks. A mouse: breaks less. And as you go down small enough, the landing is lighter and lighter.",
"and now i can hear the bows when i flick my finger.\n\nbut on topic, bugs arent made for squishing but they are able to resist most impacts(think of it as an occupational/environmental hazard).",
"Their shells are hard and bouncy like ping pong balls. Flick a squishy animal like a pygmy field mouse and it will get hurt :(\n\nIF;DR bugs are ping pong balls, we are meatballs",
"You don't feel much when you flick them, do you? That must mean that there's not a whole lot of force acting on you. Since the force is acting on your finger by the bug, an equal force must be acting on the bug by your finger. It doesn't take much force to send a bug flying and the bug's skin (exoskeleton? Shell?) is able to withstand that minimal force."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
lgnqr | what is data mining and why is it considered to be un-ethical? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lgnqr/eli5_what_is_data_mining_and_why_is_it_considered/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2sj0jw",
"c2sj0jw"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not considered unethical at all.\n\nData mining is nothing more or less than extracting *information* from *data.* Data and information are two different things. Data are just uncorrelated facts. For example, I could tell you that the temperature outside where I am right now is 72°. That's a fact, a *datum* as they're called. You could collect a whole bunch of similar data and put them all in a pile, but you wouldn't know anything you didn't know before except for that big collection of uncorrelated facts.\n\nData mining is the process of going through a big collection of uncorrelated facts and finding patterns, trends and correlations. For instance, you could sort through a big pile of temperature data and conclude that it's getting cooler over time … which makes sense, since summer is over and winter is coming. But of course, in real life we're talking about finding *non-obvious* patterns in data. That's what data mining is good for.",
"It's not considered unethical at all.\n\nData mining is nothing more or less than extracting *information* from *data.* Data and information are two different things. Data are just uncorrelated facts. For example, I could tell you that the temperature outside where I am right now is 72°. That's a fact, a *datum* as they're called. You could collect a whole bunch of similar data and put them all in a pile, but you wouldn't know anything you didn't know before except for that big collection of uncorrelated facts.\n\nData mining is the process of going through a big collection of uncorrelated facts and finding patterns, trends and correlations. For instance, you could sort through a big pile of temperature data and conclude that it's getting cooler over time … which makes sense, since summer is over and winter is coming. But of course, in real life we're talking about finding *non-obvious* patterns in data. That's what data mining is good for."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
6gm6sx | what is happening mentally when you learn to ride a bike? how do things suddenly "click" after a hundred attempts and it's suddenly perfect thereafter? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gm6sx/eli5_what_is_happening_mentally_when_you_learn_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dirbzzm"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It's basically your brain learning through simple trial and error (mixed with balancing correctly). You try one thing, doesn't work, so subconciously you adjust a bit. The biggest challenge for your body is the balancing. The vestibular system is in the ear area, and it's what helps you balance. That's mainly what your brain is adjusting, going from walking, to now riding a bike, since it is significantly harder to balance on one. It's a similar process when babies learn to walk. Obviously, being on all fours is much easier than two legs.\n\nBonus info: the reason why your brain doesn't forget how to ride a bike, even though you can go years without riding, is the heirarchy in which it remembers. You remember sounds more than sights, for instance. More mechanical movements are much easier to remember (and consequently those areas take up more space in the brain). Playing instruments, riding a bike, etc will be one of the last things people forget due to that heirarchy."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
6vtb7i | why is it good to eat "bland" food when we're sick? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6vtb7i/eli5_why_is_it_good_to_eat_bland_food_when_were/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm2su30"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because often when you're sick your stomach is already inflamed or irritated or you may have nausea. So it's recommended to eat lighter food so that it's easier on your digestive system and you don't vomit. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
dx3tmn | is it possible for companies such as amazon and google to fail? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dx3tmn/eli5_is_it_possible_for_companies_such_as_amazon/ | {
"a_id": [
"f7n8mxy",
"f7n98tk",
"f7n9wnh"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Yes, historically there have been companies so large that they seemed to be taking over the world, yet they were either brought down by government action, or were displaced by changes in technology.",
"Lots of possible ways to make a company fail. Gross negligence, financial mismanagement, or being unlucky enough to get tried in the court of public opinion are all possibilities.",
"It’s absolutely possible for today’s behemoths to fail, as unlikely as it seems from our current perspective. \n\nSears & Roebuck was sort of like the Amazon of its day, selling - via mail order - an offering as broad as socks and kitchen tools, to complete home constriction kits (including plans, wiring, plumbing, pre-cut lumber, etc.). They diversified into insurance, credit cards, financial advisory, and other lines, and were a dominant force in American retail. But as times changed, their broadline department store format began losing ground to specialty retailers (specialty, as in, specializing on certain categories, like Home Depot and Best Buy). This was by no means the only reason for Sears’ fall, but just one example. In the early ‘80s, their fall would have been unthinkable, but today, they’re a mere trace of what they once were. \n\nWe tend to think of today’s tech-driven giants as having more info, more foresight, better agility, proportionately more resources, and that they’ve learned from history... but the reality is that the way we think of those factors’ durability and longevity as being impermeable... can be illusory. AOL, anyone?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2s7j8q | why is the first gear of a manual transmission always the hardest to push into while moving, and how does it lock like that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s7j8q/eli5_why_is_the_first_gear_of_a_manual/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnmwckd"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In order to change gears in a manual transmission, the teeth of a sliding gear have to engage with the teeth of a fixed gear. But those two parts are probably moving at different speeds, so to synchronize their speeds to allow a clean connection without grinding there's an intermediate part that uses friction to bring the sliding gear to the right speed first. That mechanism is called synchromesh and [I think this video has some good shots of how it works.](_URL_0_)\n\nAfter watching the video, notice how the synchro prevents the sliding gear from engaging until it's close to synchronized. If your car is moving more than a couple MPH, the engine (and one of the gears) is going to have to be spinning pretty quickly. If you're trying to shift into first in a moving car, the synchro *probably* has to do a lot of work to spin up the sliding gear fast enough and, until then, it'll prevent first gear from engaging. That's a good thing.\n\nIf you want to make it easier to shift into first, a good technique is to use \"double clutching\" and blip the throttle to get the engine and transmission into the neighborhood of the proper RPMs it'll end up in after the shift. That reduces the amount of friction on the synchros and also gives you a better appreciation for just what RPM is correct for which speed and which gear."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6hWAaE5VWY"
]
]
|
||
4gj1wh | the difference between a republic and a democracy. | The US is considered to be an electoral democracy but also a republic? How? What? Why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gj1wh/eli5_the_difference_between_a_republic_and_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2hyys7",
"d2hz4pa",
"d2i9t3j",
"d2i9tmh",
"d2ic374",
"d2ieja4",
"d2if36o",
"d2igh9x",
"d2igy9y",
"d2ih6kp",
"d2ikk1j",
"d2iqeri",
"d2j5x8i"
],
"score": [
9,
122,
5,
3,
2,
81,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"* Democracy: Rule by THE People.\n* Republic: Rule by people elected by THE People.\n* Electoral: The process of electing somebody\n* Electoral Democracy: A democracy of people elected by THE people.\n\nRepublic's are a subset of Democracy. The people give up their basic power to elected individuals for them to exercise it on their behalf. ",
"Republic and democracy refer to two completely different concepts.\n\nDemocracy means that power comes from the people. So you elect representatives and their law giving power arises from that mandate and that satisfies the definition of a democracy.\n\nRepublic means the state is nominally owned by the people. So ultimately no family or interest owns the country.\n\nThe US is both democracy and republic. \nTo contrast:\nCanada and Britain are democracies but not republics. They are monarchies.\nNorth Korea is not (functionally) a democracy but IS a republic.",
"In a Democracy, you vote on everything, like whether or not you want chocolate milk or strawberry milk. But you also have to vote on important stuff you may not know anything about, like whether or not daddy should invest in your college fund and how. In a Republic, you choose someone to choose for you. So if you don't know anything about investing or college, you vote for mommy or daddy to do it for you. Some places, like the USA, have a mix of both. So you are free to choose chocolate or strawberry milk, but you can let mommy and daddy make the big decisions for you.",
"In the broadest possible terms, a republic is a state without a monarchy, ie. executive power is not transferred through hereditary means. A democracy is a group in which each individual member of the group has equal say in the group's actions. A representative democracy or indirect democracy is a group in which individual members democratically elect a subset of members to make those decisions, because having a referendum on every minor law that comes up is unlikely to be a successful strategy.\n\nStates like the United States or United Kingdom have little claim to call themselves democracies, as the method (first past the post) used to elect representatives is not very democratic, and once the members are elected the public cannot easily remove them until another election comes up, where they'll probably still win anyway due to the useless system. However, in this scenario the US is a barely democratic republic, whereas the UK is a barely democratic barely a monarchy.",
"The problem arises because 'republic' is a fairly nebulous term and a solid definition has never been agreed on. It seems to work best as an exclusionary term; everyone agrees that a monarchy cannot be a republic. The ancients made a distinction between a republic and a tyranny (essentially a non-hereditary monarchy, what we today would call a dictatorship).\n\nSo the most agreeable definition of a republic would be something like: \"a system of government that is not a monarchy, and (perhaps) also not a dictatorship.\"",
"There are a lot of answers here and I don't know that a lot of them are correct - specifically, people seem to be equating a 'direct democracy' with 'democracy' in general. See below.\n\nJust to weigh in, for what it's worth - a quick look at wikipedia (which is of course the final say in everything ;) ) shows the following definitions (among others):\n\nDemocracy - *\"a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.\"* In other words, it is basically a political philosophy or system in which the rule of law ultimately lies in the hands of the people (this is key), who have votes to determine the course of law. It does not necessarily require that people vote on everything - you can have representatives. If people vote directly on policy, that is called a direct democracy. If people vote in representatives to subsequently vote on policies, that is called a representative democracy. Democracy in general would be contrasted with something like a dictatorship in which an individual wields the power and there are no free elections, votes, etc - the people don't hold the power, an invidual (or group) does.\n\nRepublic - *\"a sovereign state or country which is organised with a form of government in which power resides in elected individuals representing the citizen body and government leaders exercise power according to the rule of law.\"* In other words it is a representative government, referring to the structure of the government, as opposed to perhaps a monarchy in which there is a family line.\n\nThese are not exclusive.\n\nSo, as /u/dracosuave said, they are basically terms that are pointing at different things. The USA could be considered both, basically. You could call it a representative democracy, or a democratic republic. \n\nI believe what I've said is accurate.",
"All that is really unarguable is that 'republic' comes from Latin and 'democracy' comes from Greek.\n\nIn English usage, Republic means a country with an elected head of state instead of a monarch. A democracy means that the country is run by elected politicians, whether the head of state is elected or not.",
"a democracy is 3 wolves and a sheep deciding whats for dinner. A republic has laws that say even if everybody wants to eat sheep you cant, sheep lives matter.",
"A republic is a form of government where the leaders are elected (as opposed to inherited as in monarchy or the House of Lords in Britain). It doesn't say anything about how they are elected and by whom, just that this privilege is not inherited. A democracy is a form of government where the power is exercised by the people, usually through (elected) representatives. The US is a republic and also a democracy, as the executive and the legislative are elected. Some countries have mixed systems - UK again is a monarchy and only a partial democracy as the House of Lords (with veto power on legislation) is not elected but inherited and/or nominated. A republic does not have to be a democracy - a military junta like Egypt is right now is a republic, but hardly a democracy. Argentina and Chile have been in the same spot in the '70s and '80s. Most African countries are probably somewhere around that spot as well.\n\nThe term used more frequently is \"representative\" (not electoral) democracy. The other form of democracy is direct democracy where each person has a direct role in the running of the country (this only works, obviously, at a very small scale).",
"A republic is a system of governance in which the head of state is elected. A democracy a system of governance whereby the people choose the affairs of the area in which they live.\n\nDo the people of the US vote? Yes. Therefore it is a democracy. Do the people of the US vote for their Head of State? Yes. Therefore it is a republic.\n\nConfusion usually arises because the founding fathers of the US used the terms 'republic' and 'democracy' in a different way to how we use them nowadays.\n\nI'm happy to go into more detail if requested but as this is ELI5, I'll keep my main answer short and simple.",
"The term 'Republic' is extremely confusing, because it has been used with similar but different definitions. To my knowledge, there are four main meanings attributed to it (somebody please correct me on this if I made a mistake somewhere):\n\n1. The classical Aristoteles-inspired definition (which, to my knowledge, is also what Rousseau uses): \nHere, a 'Republic' designates a government that acts for the benefit of the people. \nAs such, a democracy **is** a republic, as opposed to an ochlocracy (mob rule), and a monarchy **is** a republic (as opposed to a tyranny), and an aristocracy **is** a republic (as opposed to an oligarchy) etc...\n\n2. The Roman definition: \nHere, the term 'Republic' translates to sovereignty of the people. This means that the state is essentially a public entity, which means (according to Cicero) that \"*the collectivity is the affair of the People*\", who, \"*have come together thanks to an agreement concerning the Law and a commonality around it's usage*\" ^((my Latin is more than rusty, so don't quote me on that)^). \nI am not too sure how (a more modern definition of) democracy fits in here, but since the Roman Republic developed parallel to the Athenian Democracy, these two models are often considered distinct from each other and not superposable, and as such, a state could be either a democracy **or** a republic.\n\n3. The French/modern European definition: \nThis one looks like it came about during the French Revolution, and designates a form of government that isn't a monarchy; that is, where the sovereign of the state is not an (often hereditarian) title given by God to a person. Note that ownership of the state in a monarchy may be private, instead of public. \nHere, a state can be both a democracy and a republic at the same time (Germany), or a democratic monarchy (the UK), or a republican oligarchy/tyranny (Pinochet's Chile), or neither (the Vatican).\n\n4. The American definition: \nBasically a synonym for 'indirect democracy'. But you guys probably know that better than I do (although this would make Switzerland not a republic since it's for the most part a direct democracy, even though it describes itself as a republic) ",
"In a nutshell the difference is in who does the actual voting. \n\ndemocracy - a lot of work\n\nrepublic - you elect people to vote for you\n\nSo lets say you formed a brand new country and there are 1000 people in it. Any time you need to pass a new law, you just get 1000 people together and cast your votes, easy. But when you have millions of people and they don't have time to drop what they are doing and vote every time something needs to be done, it can be a pain. \n\nSo instead of directly voting, you elect representatives who will vote on your behalf. Then they vote for a living and in a perfect world they would listen to the people who elected them and vote in those people interest and using their opinions. This is a republic. \n\nSo when a new law is proposed or a bill, the elected representatives will debate on it based on feedback from their constituents and vote on it.\n\nThere are sometimes special bills usually at the state level that people directly vote on, but for the most part, the ordinary people don't need to vote for much more than who they want to vote for them. ",
"Actual ELI5: \n\n\nYour're in 1st grade. Four of your classmates and you form a gang. Here's a couple of ways you could run your gang:\n\n\n**Democratic+Republican** (e.g. USA, theoretically North Korea): the 5 of you vote that Jack should run the gang. He says your gang colors are green. You didn't like that so you vote Frank into power at the next election.\n\n\n**Democratic+Non-Republican** (e.g. UK): 1000 years in the future, Jack III is the head of the gang. He does because his ancestors used to do so. You vote for your gang color to be green. Jack III declares your gang color to be green. After a while you realize only stupid people wear green so you vote for your gang color to be red instead. Jack declares your gang color to be red.\n\n\n**Non-Democratic+Republican** (e.g. Nazi Germany): You institute Jack as your gang leader. He says your gang colors are green. You'd better like green.\n\n\n**Non-Democratic+Non-Republican** (e.g. practically North Korea): Glorious Leader Jack-Jong-Un runs the gang like his ancestors did. He says your gang colors are green. You don't like that. There's no clear way how to get rid of Jack. You have to improvise.\n\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
8shock | why can magnets mess with electronic devices but not with the electrical activity in our nervous system? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8shock/eli5_why_can_magnets_mess_with_electronic_devices/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0zxvv1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"why is this not answered?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
4gtw8b | why do muslims immigrate from countries (e.g. syria) where islam is destroying the country to successful, mostly non-muslim countries such as in europe, but continue to hold the beliefs that held back their old country from improving? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gtw8b/eli5_why_do_muslims_immigrate_from_countries_eg/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2kmox0",
"d2kmx8o",
"d2kmyax",
"d2kn1t6",
"d2kn6i4",
"d2kn9u9"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
4,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Syria was a fine country before its it's dictator fought back against a rebellion.\n\nIslam did not cause the fall of Syria. A bad leader caused the fall.\n\n*It's been claimed that I am wrong .. and this is partially true. Syria had several issues before its collapse, but these were not due to Islam, they were due to Assad. These issues contributed to the need for a rebellion.",
"Might as well ask why the U.S holds onto a religion that's holding it back from major advancements in every major scientific front. ",
"Islam isn't the reason there country is falling apart its the people in charge who use there religion as a means to manipulate people, they are destroying there country",
"I don't fully understand what you're asking. Are you asking why people move to countries and retain their religious beliefs or other non-conforming cultural practices?\n\nOr are you asking why people move to a country and refuse to fully remove whatever culture is ingrained into them so they can integrate and become, in your view, something culturally superior?",
"Because Islam itself, as well as many of its adherents, command and support death for apostasy. A large portion of muslim immigrants are \"Islamists\", which means that, through whatever means, they wish to turn the culture they moved to into one governed by Sharia Law. The vast majority of muslims cannot see the causal relationship between islamic culture and the failure of civilization.\n\nThey had a decent culture a thousand years ago, but islamic literalism took over Persia and destroyed everything they built.",
"Well i am a syrian immigrant that moved to sweden (due to the war) and as /u/jmerc83 said, Syria was indeed a fine country before the war. So, if you mean why syrians are immigrating to europe right now the answer is most likely that they don't wanna die. The second part of your question is just you being superficial. Uae, malaysia and qatar are all muslim countries yet they are considered very \"developed\". Why they still have their believs is because everyone is entitled to have one."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
63n2fy | g2a, how it works, and why there's so much hate towards it | In light of [this](_URL_0_) thread over on /r/pcmasterrace, I'm curious as to exactly what this whole G2A situation is all about. What did they do to anger so much of the gaming community? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/63n2fy/eli5_g2a_how_it_works_and_why_theres_so_much_hate/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfvdwbj",
"dfve9sf",
"dfvf7dz"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"You go to store. Steal a bunch of games. Open up the cases and take a photo of the CD-key. Sell it on G2A.\n\nThis is why people are angry at G2A. They sell stolen property. This can have all kinds of effects besides being immoral (the CD-key can be denied retroactively by the game publisher).\n\nTotalBiscuit is known for hating G2A due to this as he have talked with a lot of developers that have strong concerns and say \"It's worse than pirating\".\n\nEDIT: TotalBiscuit saying [\"You're better off pirating\"](_URL_0_) (he earlier in the video says \"It's worse than pirating\").",
"They provide a venue for people to sell stolen game keys. To get protection from illegal keys, they also implemented a service called Shield, but it imposed a recurring monthly fee that wasn't obvious and many had difficult unsubscribing from. So basically, if you buy a key from them, you have a chance that the key was obtained illegally, and your recourse is to first pay a regular fee to g2a. So they make money by turning a blind eye to illegal key selling, hurting the game developers and the gamers. They claim you don't need Shield to receive a full refund, but there are many, many people who never saw that claim be substantiated.\n\nJust peruse what happened with their AMA to see complaints and how they try to deny any wrong doing: _URL_0_",
"Aside from other things people have said I had very bad experiences with all of the games I've gotten from them. I have. Ever purchased another one and don't plan on it."
]
} | []
| [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/63kxdu/totalbiscuit_will_no_longer_be_covering_gearbox/"
]
| [
[
"https://youtu.be/E7Bi6PCQ39o?t=8906"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5rg9mo/we_work_for_g2acom_global_digital_marketplace/"
],
[]
]
|
|
zhblb | why does a sound get quieter as you get farther away? | Ex: Why can you hear a balloon pop when your're right next to it, but you can't hear it 100 feet away? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zhblb/why_does_a_sound_get_quieter_as_you_get_farther/ | {
"a_id": [
"c64kq56",
"c64ky5s",
"c64ll79",
"c64o2zs"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This about it this way, the sound waves work like waves in a pool. You sit right next to somebody jumping into a pool and you get splashed like crazy (loud sound). But if you are on the other side of the pool you will barely feel ripples, if anything at all. The energy of the sound gets absorbed as it travels through the air (it takes energy to move through molecules) just as the wave eventually dies out. ",
"Imagine I give you a baseball and some plasticine and ask you to cover the ball with the plasticine. \n\nOnce you've done that, I take all the plasticine you used and ask you to cover a ball twice as big.\n\nYou'll still be able to do it, but you'll really have to make the plasticine thin. That's because the same amount of plasticine has to cover more area.\n\nSound works the same way. A sound goes out equally in all directions, so the farther you are away from the source of the sound, the less energy (loudness) there will be. \n\nIn the same way the plasticine gets thinner, the sound gets quieter.\n\n",
"This is because of the just noticeable difference. A just noticeable difference or JND is the smallest amount of change in stimuli that is detectable by your sensory organs i.e. sound in decibels, light in lumens, etcetera.\n\nSee also: _URL_0_",
"Sound waves are created when the molecules in a material are bumped, typically by a vibrating object, like a guitar string or the column of air inside a musical instrument. These vibrations start out carrying a certain amount of energy with them, but they spread out in every single direction from the source of the sound. \n\nVery close to the source, the part of the wave that your ear captures is very large, so most of the energy coming from the source might then go to vibrate the bones inside your ear a lot. So, putting your ear right next to the end of a trumpet might be uncomfortably loud. But, from farther and farther away, a smaller and smaller part of the whole wave (which expanded away from you in every other direction, too) reaches your ear. So, less of the wave's energy vibrates your ear bones, and you hear a softer sound. \n\nFrom far enough away, the wave carries so little energy in any part of it that random changes in the air (or whatever else the sound might be traveling through) disrupt it, and the sound cannot be picked out. The softest sound you can hear is 0 decibels, and the reference intensity I0 that causes it equals 10^-12 W/m^2 . Basically, that means that you can hear astoundingly weak vibrations, but there comes a point where other sounds from other places and the random movement of the air around you destroys the sound wave you'd like to focus on, and you won't be able to hear it."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-noticeable_difference"
],
[]
]
|
|
3bh0vk | who receives the royalties for music from musicians that have been dead for centuries? e.g. ludwig van beethoven | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bh0vk/eli5_who_receives_the_royalties_for_music_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"csm25sy",
"csm260k",
"csm2az2"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"After a while copyright expires and works enter into a public domain. \n\nHowever, I think if a performer records the work that is in a public domain I think (but I am not sure) that his recording is copyrighted. ",
"Not that old. Royalties remain in the original author's estate (it's the same with books, btw), until the end of the copyright period, at which point the work enters the public domain. The period is different depending on which country you're in, but the author's life + 70 years is a general rule that many countries follow (at the moment, anyway...)",
"No, music that old is in the 'public domain' which means the composition is not protected by copyright. Not only does this mean nobody gets paid royalties, it also means that you are free to copy, redistribute and even sell Beethoven's work (e.g. as sheet music, as audio recordings you've made or synthesized, etc.) for commercial profit.\n\nIn most countries, copyright lasts for a term no longer than 70 years after the death of the original author(s). In some countries, copyright expires significantly sooner than that, however very few countries protect copyrights for periods longer than that.\n\nDo note, however, that new recordings of old public domain music may still receive copyright protections (depending on the country). For example, if someone plays Beethoven's music on the piano and records it now, that sound recording itself may receive copyright protections and it may be possible for the person who played/recorded that audio to exercise exclusive control over the distribution of that particular recording of Beethoven's music."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
6p2843 | what happens to children put up for adoption if no one adopts them before they turn 18? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6p2843/eli5_what_happens_to_children_put_up_for_adoption/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkm01z7",
"dkm0ni2"
],
"score": [
7,
16
],
"text": [
"They would be released from the foster system, given that they have turned the age of emancipation, and would then be considered their own legal guardian.",
"It's called \"aging out\" at which point they are on their own. There are programs in place to help kids who age out, but their resources are slim. The 1999 [Foster Care Independence Act](_URL_0_) was a helpful move in that it earmarked resources specifically for these kids, but IMO a lot more need to be done. In 2015, more than 20,000 foster kids aged out without placement, but I'm not sure of more recent stats. These kids are significantly less likely to get their GED or attend college. They often have few financial resources and minimal positive family support. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foster_Care_Independence_Act"
]
]
|
||
bpav5i | why do some countries want to leave the eu? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bpav5i/eli5_why_do_some_countries_want_to_leave_the_eu/ | {
"a_id": [
"enqtlk4",
"enqw58g",
"enqwlg5"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The EU comes with obligations. For example, most countries currently in the EU have agreed to the Schengen-agreement, which allows travel within the EU without passport-checks, as well as allowing EU citizens to work in other EU countries. While most people see that as a benefit, nationalists in some countries don't want foreigners \"taking their jobs\".\n\nThere is also a system of agricultural subsidies, which benefits countries that rely a lot on agriculture rather than other industries. Some countries pay more money into this fund than their farmers receive, while others receive more than they pay. This was a huge thing for the Brexit vote - the Brexit supporters basically lied about the extent of these subsidies and other duties to the EU.",
"There are a lot of different motivations, and not all supporters of leaving hold all of them. I'll list a few below.\n\nFreedom of Movement: Predominantly a British issue, the EU mandates that every citizen of the EU has the right to live, work, study etc in other countries of the EU. This has caused some issues, in the UK a number of people are unhappy with the level of migration from Eastern Europe to the UK. Thus they want to leave the EU. \n\nSoverignity: One primary EU goal is \"ever closer union\" - essentially its slow transformation into a federal country like the US. Some people don't feel European, and thus don't want to be part of this federal Europe, and feel leaving is the only way to stop it. For example, they might want \"their own government\" to decide on regulations - because they do not feel like the EU is \"their own\".\n\nDemocracy: The EU has some issues with democracy. Its executive is not directly elected and a lot of power is held by various unelected officals through its institutions. A lot of power is also organised through countries within Europe, so rather than power being held by its citizens it is held by the German Chancellor or the British PM etc. Some don't feel that the EU is sufficently democractic, and don't think it can be reformed to be democratic, and so want to leave. Arguments on the nature of power are difficult to ELI5, since they are heavily linked to both how the EU is organised, how it actually works (i.e. including backroom deals and so on) and more philosphical arguments about democracy. \n\nThe Euro: This does not apply to the UK, except through the paranioa they might be forced to join. However it is a motivator for some continental views. Simply put, the Euro is not very stable. It links together economies that are very different, without strong safeguards. During the 2008 recession this had a devastating effect, causing a massive recession in poorer countries like Greece, and dropping much of the rest of Europe into a recession in 2010. Under the Euro southern Europe has struggled to grow, with a number of countries having not grown much since they joined. Whether this is the Euro's fault, if it can or will be fixed, and so on, are still debated. However for those who think the Euro is a problem, there is no legal way out, so leaving seems the only solution for some. \n\nTrade: Being part of the EU removes a nation's ability to set its own trade policy - it cannot negotiate its own deals or set its own tarrifs or subsidies. Sometimes this results in deals not totally in a nation's favour. For example a country without significant agriculture might see the EU push for protection for farmers, which pushes its food prices up to protect another country's farms. Often disagreements within the EU causes deals to fail as well. Some people think that being outside the EU will allow for more trade deals, and for those deals to be better focused on that nation's interests, and thus want to leave. \n\nMoney: The EU collects money and pays it back out (like all governments). Some nations pay more than they directly receive, and thus some of their citizens feel they could save money by leaving. \n\nPlease note: These are motivations, not watertight arguments. You may see flaws in them, they may not meet your values at all (e.g. you might not care about immigration). This does not matter - what matters is that people belive them, and that people care about them, and that makes them want to leave the EU. I have probably missed some arguments. I have deliberatly ignored counter arguments since a balanced, nuanced, and in depth perspective would fill books. Also I do not agree with all of them, so would rather clarify than defend them.",
"Before asking \"why\", you should ask \"if\". Any country can leave the EU and none have yet. So it stands to reason that none want. The one country that expressed a wish to leave still haven't figured out a way to do it. In addition, more than half the people in that country don't want to leave the EU. It's a big mess. So if you want to ask \"why\", you should probably ask why a country would/could want to leave the EU."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
25uhc6 | what am i tasting when i taste "burnt"? | And is it the same as when I smell "burnt" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25uhc6/eli5_what_am_i_tasting_when_i_taste_burnt/ | {
"a_id": [
"chkugug"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You are tasting/smelling carbon."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
q8r3j | client/server relationship | examples would be helpful as well! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/q8r3j/elif_clientserver_relationship/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3vn1zi",
"c3vq0i8"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine that you're a weedy little kid. You're the \"client\".\n\nYou have a large muscular friend. He's called \"Server1\". You also have a really brainy friend called \"Server2\". \n\nWhen you want something done that you are not capable of - for instance, beating up a bully - you can send a message to Server1 and he'll do it for you. If you want to answer a maths homework question that you're struggling with, you can ask Server2 and he'll send back an answer.\n\nSo basically a server 'serves' requests from you, the client. To make it more interesting, you could also be a server yourself. Let's say that you're really good at art and a friend wants you to draw him a picture. He sends you a message saying \"draw me a horse\" and you do it, and send him the picture back. You are acting as a server to him as the client in this case.\n\nA web server serves web pages to your browser (the client).\n\nA gaming server (at Steam for instance) sends and receives game data\n\n...and so on.",
"People use these words in fuzzy ways. For instance, \"server\" can mean any of these things:\n\n1. A program that provides services for others: The Apache Web server knows how to serve Web pages. An IRC server passes your chat messages to other people.\n2. A copy of that program, installed and running on some particular computer: Our Web server is down because the sysadmin is upgrading it. The file server gets slow when everyone tries to play their MP3s off of it.\n3. A computer that is designed to be good for running server programs: We bought a new server from HP because the old Dell server had bad RAM. Should we run Linux, BSD, or Windows on our new servers?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
kr5ub | what is freud's "death drive", as opposed to the "life drive", and what evidence is there for this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kr5ub/eli5_what_is_freuds_death_drive_as_opposed_to_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c38jufa",
"c38jufa"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Freud's life drive is based on the fact that we like to to feel good, reproduce, conserve energy, and most of all, we want to stay alive. His death drive is based on the fact that sometimes people do do counter-productive things like relive traumatic memories over and over. Why don't they just forget the bad memory? The death drive is a way to get control over difficult experiences. This is like a toddler throwing a toy outside a crib over and over, only to be returned again and again by the mother. This repeating action allows the toddler to gain mastery over the sad feeling of the lost toy since he controls the feelings and gets used to what they feel like. This repetitive action, and the drive for mastery underlining it, are a waste of energy and if done too much, will lead to death. There is not a lot of evidence and this theory is not accepted by everyone. It is one way of making sense of the world and our place in it as living beings.",
"Freud's life drive is based on the fact that we like to to feel good, reproduce, conserve energy, and most of all, we want to stay alive. His death drive is based on the fact that sometimes people do do counter-productive things like relive traumatic memories over and over. Why don't they just forget the bad memory? The death drive is a way to get control over difficult experiences. This is like a toddler throwing a toy outside a crib over and over, only to be returned again and again by the mother. This repeating action allows the toddler to gain mastery over the sad feeling of the lost toy since he controls the feelings and gets used to what they feel like. This repetitive action, and the drive for mastery underlining it, are a waste of energy and if done too much, will lead to death. There is not a lot of evidence and this theory is not accepted by everyone. It is one way of making sense of the world and our place in it as living beings."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
54rlkx | is learning english by a chinese person as hard as an english person learning chinese language? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54rlkx/eli5_is_learning_english_by_a_chinese_person_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"d84c517",
"d84i50b",
"d84v40o"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They're both hard, but for different reasons, and some people may find one harder than the other. Chinese is a tonal language, where the tone of each syllable changes its meaning. That's a major feature that English lacks. Whereas English's main difficulty is its extensive vocabulary; we have a much bigger dictionary than other languages.\n\nEnglish has a much smaller alphabet, but spelling and pronunciation are all over the place. Chinese has a more straightforward written structure, but with a much, much larger set of characters.\n\nOn balance, the spoken languages are probably about equally difficult, but I would guess that the written language is a little harder in Chinese.",
"I'd say for daily use learning (not academic level), living language, Chinese is probably a little easier. That's almost exclusively because their grammar and pronounciation is easier than English.\n\nIn Chinese, you pronounce a word precisely as it's written (in pinyin / Roman alphabet) with no exceptions. Trying to learn English is a nightmare for a foreigner because of our silly laughter/slaughter rules (one letter different completely changes the pronounciation). So with some basic learning, anybody can read pinyin Chinese and get it sounding right.\n\nWhat's going to take you a lot longer in Chinese is learning to read. 3-4000 characters will get you fluent enough to read a newspaper, but even as little as 500 will allow you to read a fair bit and guess the blanks.",
"I lucked out because I was exposed to Cantonese when I was young. I was also exposed to English (no shit!) when I was studying. The earlier the age that you are exposed to a language, the easier it would be to learn it.\n\nPeople who speak Chinese who learn English formally in school are at a disadvantage. Chinese only relies on time markers as the tenses. For example, 了/過would be used to indicate the last tense. 會 would be used to indicate future tense. 在 for present or present continuous. As a result, conjugation of verbs is difficult to grasp for a native Chinese speaker. \n\nAnother difficulty that Chinese people have is the pronunciation of certain sounds that don't exist in Cantonese or Mandarin. For example, most people can't roll their r's. They can't distinguish between the r and l sound. One of the examples that I can give you is that for the Chinese word 你 it can be pronounced as li or ni (in Cantonese, only ni in Mandarin).\n\nPretty sure it would be even more difficult for a native English speaker to try learning Chinese, because it relies heavily on tones, where a single word has like 4-9 meanings depending on how you pronounce the word. Obviously, English has no tones\n\nSo in conclusion, I think that it would be harder for an English speaker to speak Chinese, because the tones are a bitch to nail down. Chinese speakers have to worry about the endless amount of grammar rules in the English language. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1438lx | why do tv shows need people to sign a release form to show people on tv, but you can post videos and pictures of strangers on the internet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1438lx/eli5_why_do_tv_shows_need_people_to_sign_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c79if81",
"c79r5sk"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"You need consent from people when you have images/videos of them taken in public places, and you're using them *for commercial purposes*.\n\nIf the image isn't being sold or used to generate revenue, then you're free to use it.",
"It's astonishing to me how much misinformation is in here.\n\nThe short answer is that as long as there was no reasonable expectation of privacy (being in public for example), you don't need to ask them to sign a release regardless of if you're using it for personal or commercial use. The reason why professional entities have policy regarding that is because lawsuits are expensive and waste an incredible amount of time. It's much cheaper for them just to either get a release or blur a face rather than have their lawyers review each complaint's merit."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
6zqvla | why do phones & computers continue to increase in price even though we're told advances in technology should make the prices cheaper? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zqvla/eli5why_do_phones_computers_continue_to_increase/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmxcffc",
"dmxcigh"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You can get the *same* capabilities for less and less money. But consumers like to see new features in these devices so much, manufacturers have decided to upgrade the capabilities dramatically, even to the point where the price needs to go up.",
"40 is pretty cheap for a printer, considering what they used to cost.\n\nBut mostly it's because instead of decreasing price, they increase in power. My computer might cost the same as the one i bought 15 years ago, but it runs software in ultra high settings where my old computer can't even install it. \n\nThe real question is why aren't data plans for cell phones getting cheaper. They're not giving us more data but the price still seems to go up. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
2103s6 | why isn't ukraine fighting back for crimea? why did ukraine pretty much just hand it over to russia without defending their own land? | Pretty much what the title says. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2103s6/eli5_why_isnt_ukraine_fighting_back_for_crimea/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg8bkz9",
"cg8bumh",
"cg8cacd",
"cg8do42",
"cg8e605",
"cg8egwj",
"cg8ffa9",
"cg8ffzo",
"cg8ft6c",
"cg8gm6c",
"cg8h4fq",
"cg8haav",
"cg8hmhm",
"cg8iavc",
"cg8icd8",
"cg8jg3i",
"cg8kcax",
"cg8kcdw",
"cg8klm4",
"cg8l6o8",
"cg8lb5j",
"cg8me6o",
"cg8mhc7",
"cg8mmiw",
"cg8mpz6",
"cg8o9xe"
],
"score": [
42,
748,
9,
33,
2,
5,
182,
5,
5,
3,
109,
24,
3,
3,
14,
8,
2,
5,
9,
4,
10,
2,
9,
3,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"In a real world situation: Russia is asymmetrically larger than Ukraine in every measurable metric. \n\n",
"If I'm out skinny dipping in a pond in the woods and a Grizzly Bear wanders up and sits its butt down on my boots, I think maybe I'll just walk home barefoot.\n\nI'm Ukraine. Russia is the bear. Crimea is the boots.",
"The Ukraine isn't in the best position to fight. They just had an \"revolution\" and only an transitional government. Russia took Crimea when the Ukraine didn't watch. Plus, Crimeans seem like they want to join Russia.",
"If the US Army landed on your house and said they owned it now, would you 'try' to storm them with guns-a-blazin', or appeal for a political resolution? ",
"It's the whole stones against tanks issue. They are severely lacking in technology and manpower compared to Russia. You need to make check marks for 1) Can I destroy or defend against their Army. 2) Can I destroy or defend against their Navy. 3) Can I destroy or defend against their Air Force, before you should react violently.\n\nIn Ukraine's case, they need to make sure that they can check all 3, which they cannot check even one. So really the questions is: Why start violence when you know the outcome anyway?",
"Ukraine military is weak compared to Russia's they would lose the war and other countries won't help out because Crimea is not worth it for a war.",
"**TL;DR: They would lose**",
"Ukraine knows that it cannot fight Russia without military assistance from the international community (which it knows it isn't going to receive). It can either fight and be obliterated or hand it over and hope Putin doesn't come back for seconds (which he will).",
"Russia is a military power. Ukraine has no chance.",
"_URL_0_\n\nRussia - > 90 Billion.\nUkraine - > 4.9.\n\nSo\n > defending their own land?\n\nhow? (I mean given the stat above, they just plain don't have the resources). \n\nUkraine could try and fund and supply an insurgency war against the Russians in Crimea, that's the modern relatively advanced form of warfare, and has successfully defeated the Russians in Chechnya and Afganistan (soviets), the French in Algeria, the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan and a few other places. But it requires somethings to work that don't exist yet. Insurgencies only really work if the population support the insurgents over the occupier, and they take time to get going. Neither of those are the case yet. \n\nBut in a straight up fight, Russia has been trying to modernize for the last few years, whereas Ukraine is still largely using old stuff from the Soviet era mostly. \n\nOh and Ukraine is not part of NATO (they withdrew from the ascension process in 2010), their only ally was Russia. So much for that. \n\n",
"Take a look at what happened in Georgia in 2008: Georgia sent military forces into South Ossetia (in response to provocation, or as an attempt to reclaim disputed territory, or both, depending on who you ask). Within a day, the Russians swarmed them with airborne forces and armor. They smashed up the Georgian forces in South Ossetia, then launched a second offensive through another breakaway region, Abkhazia, charged deep into Georgia and briefly occupied four Georgian cities. Following peace agreements, things went back to approximately where they were before, but with more Russian forces stationed in the contested regions, and with Georgia's chances of bringing them back into a unified Georgia significantly weakened.\n\nToday, the Russians once again have troops ready to roll and they're waiting for Ukraine to make a hostile move against Crimea, at which point Putin will go \"See? They're violent! We told you so!\". The numerically- and technologically-superior Russian forces will then charge into eastern Ukraine and roll the Ukrainian military up like a cheap carpet. (Well, I oversimplify slightly: the Ukrainian military is a well-equipped former-Soviet force, so it may not be a pushover - but the Russians will still win).\n\nIf Ukraine does not attack, Russia keeps Crimea. If Ukraine does attack, Russia kills a bunch of Ukrainian soldiers and blows up a lot of their bases and equipment, keeps Crimea _and_ possibly some substantial chunks of eastern Ukraine. Strategically, it would be very much to Russia's advantage to have a 'buffer zone' to the north of Crimea, possibly extending as far west as the Dnieper River. I won't go so far as to say that Putin _wants_ Ukraine to attack, but I doubt it would displease him much, because it would give him the pretext to take what he wants.\n\nThe US and Europe will not confront Russia directly, so Ukraine can't count on anything except \"humanitarian supplies\" in the event of a conflict. They're on their own. \n\nTL;DR: Ukraine has two choices: lose, or lose more. They've chosen option 1.",
"Lots of people in Crimea (and in rest of Ukraine) want to join Russia anyway.\n\nUkraine would lose a military fight with Russia, and a lot of Ukrainian people would be killed.",
"They'd get stomped.",
"It's related to the reason why Russian troops in Crimea don't wear insignia and attempt to hide the fact they're from Russia. Putin's original plan was to provoke an attack on such \"Crimean self-defense units\", so that they \"could not stand idly by\" while \"Western masonic zionist banderofascists murder Russians\", in order to save the day. \n\nExcept Ukraine didn't play along with that plan and showed remarkable restraint avoiding provocations and not shooting anybody, even when their military bases and other assets were blatantly attacked. \n\nSo eventually Putin figured he's not going to get such excuse, but occupied and annexed the place anyway, only now he gets to say \"there was no invasion, there was no bloodshed or victims, everything was nice and voluntary, so what occupation are you talking about?\"\n\nWere Ukraine not in shambles as a state and in a political void, were the population makeup and history of Crimea different, then of course it would have been wiser to resist. The Baltic states were occupied and annexed to USSR using a similar model, and they rue the decision to give up without a fight to this day.",
"\"The strong do as they can and the weak suffer what they must.\"\n\nMelian Dialogue\nThucydides",
"Peter the Great fought the Ottoman Empire and Sweden for control of that area over 300 years ago.\n\nKhrushchev gave it to Ukraine in 1954 when Ukraine was part of the USSR.\n\nSevastopol is the only warm, deep water port near western Russia, a strategically vital need for its navy.\n\nThe only other port in all of Russia that isn't frozen at least four months a year is Vladivostok, and that is over 4,000 miles and seven time zones from Moscow.\n\nDuring the Cold War, our strategy for curtailing the red bear has been one of containment. Viewed from their side, it looks more like encirclement.\n\nTo have their Mediterranean fleet anchored within the borders of a country trying to join the EEC and NATO was a bit more than Putin could stand.\n\nI say let them have it. Ukraine's economy is the size of Philadelphia's. not important enough to start a war over, that's for sure.\n\nAnd besides, Bush broke the US Army and used up any soft power we might have brought to bear. ",
"Because they don't want to start a war for a peninsula that has 60% russian population, a total of 90% population who wants to be Russian for one reason or another (\"kyiv fascisti!! amerikanskaya imperialistichsky! m-maidan n-nazis!!!\" being probably one of those reasons) and is only responsible for 3% of their GDP.",
"\"Ukraine is weak.\"\n--Cosmo Kramer",
"Crimeans see themselves as Russians more than as Ukrainians (granted, this is because Stalin forcibly removed the native Tartars and moved in Russians loyal to him). Crimea was part of Ukraine simply because Khrushchev decided it would be easier to administer them as part of Ukraine.\n\nIf Ukraine tried to hold Crimea by force, they would get as much grief from local militias as the Russian military. It's just not worth the trouble. ",
"Crimea is 95% Russian already everyone speaks Russian not Ukrainian, it was already a central hub for the Russian minority in Ukraine. ",
"Crimea is a historically Russian region that was put under Ukrainian political control in 1954 for internal reasons relevant to the USSR at the time. There is no longer any USSR. Ukraine continued governing Crimea after the collapse of the USSR and there was no particular reason for Russia to care about that until very recently because Ukraine was more-or-less stable and an ally of Russia. Recently Ukraine has become unstable and no longer clearly an ally of Russia. Now is the time when it made sense for Russia to re-assert its claim over Crimea.\n\nWhy did Ukraine not make a bigger issue out of this? Because there would be no point. Starting a war that they were guaranteed to lose for land that is arguably not really part of Ukraine anyway is not something they wanted to do. ",
"Because Ukraine knows its long term survival and independence is dependent on European and American backing, including diplomatic and economic support. It does not wish to risk that fighting a war it cannot win.\n\nIt certainly insults the pride, but it makes sense when you think long term.",
"Crimea was originally part of Russia during the USSR days. Nikita Khrushchev decided to give the region to Ukraine, in an act that at the time was semi-meaningless since it was still a part of the USSR. Once the USSR broke up however, it became much more meaningful since now it was an entirely different country. So now you have Crimea, which is part of Ukraine, but it is full of Russians, who speak Russian. So when Russia comes and takes it back, if you are Ukraine and you are in the middle of your second revolution in a decade, it is not worth trying to get it back.",
"Ukraine isnt part of NATO so being backed up isnt a given. Two. Once you start a small war over Crimea you may lose a large war for all of Ukraine. ",
"Because Ukraine is like a 5th grader and Russia sent in the High School football team. \n\nThey would get completely destroyed in any confrontation. \n\nWhat the world reaction to that would be is just speculation at this point, but that is why they didn't fight back to begin with. ",
"Seems like a lot of people are rehashing their own interpretations of Western media... well, being in the American military, dating a Russian speaking Ukrainian that comes from southern Ukraine, and knowing Russian myself and having Russian friends, figured I'd try to give a better perspective here...\n\nYes, Ukraine doesn't want war with Russia. However, while 'mutually assured destruction' does exist as a form of strategy between superpowers, it isn't really relevant here. Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet Union of course, but that doesn't mean he would launch nukes at the U.S. over little fucking Crimea, so I'm not sure why people brought that up. \n\nIf the U.S. was to say \"you know what? fuck this, fuck Russia, we're taking this shit back\" and 'invade' Crimea to reoccupy it for Ukrainians, there is a possibility Putin might not do a hell of a lot to counter it honestly, because again, it's CRIMEA. It provides very little economically for Russia, it contributes only its position as a strategic military base. MOST Russian soldiers would not want to go to war with the one military that is both bigger, more well equipped, and more well funded with powerful allies.\n\nEvery military consists primarily of average joes making middle class wages, even less in the case of Russia considering the economy is in the shitter and would be even moreso if it went to war with the U.S. Who wants to invest in a country that is getting blackballed by the majority of first world countries? It would have EVERYTHING to lose over this little fucking speck of land if the U.S. decided they had enough of their shit.\n\nOn the flip side, that would of course be a gamble on our(U.S.) part, and truthfully we don't want to go to war with Russia either over this irrelevant piece of land. Best case scenario here is to give it to Russia, but utterly fuck them if they invade Ukraine, as this would be indicative of them trying to reconsolidate their former Soviet states again which we would not allow.\n\nLastly, it is difficult to say how much of the population of Crimea really wants to join Russia. Most of the 'ethnic Russians' in Crimea were actual Russian citizens stirring up pro-separatist ideals. How would anyone outside of Crimea be able to tell the difference between an 'ethnic Russian' and an actual Russian? It would be comparable to Mexican nationals coming across the border to stir up pro-separatist movements in southern Texas or New Mexico - most wouldn't know the difference. \n\nThe most disturbing part here is that Russian citizens are trying to go to other Ukrainian cities to do the same thing, and encourage them to make referendums like that in Crimea. The Ukrainians I know from these southern oblasts, including my girlfriend, are PROUD to be UKRAINIAN, and do not want to join Russia solely because they speak the fucking language. So take those news stories with a grain of salt, because the movement of Russian nationals into Ukraine to promote this image of 'ethnic Russians' wanting to join Russia is nothing more than deception to manipulate the media and by extension, the Western world's perception of how Ukrainians really feel about joining Russia. That is why I felt compelled to post here - because their strategy is working."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1w2w6v | how do scientists know when they can trust a theory? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1w2w6v/eli5_how_do_scientists_know_when_they_can_trust_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cey6yb2",
"cey8qaj"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"After actual experiments have given the expected result.",
"A lot of people seem to have the idea that a theory is just a guess. You hear this all the time when creationists try to dismiss evolution as \"only a theory,\" even though gravity and cells are also explained by theories. It actually turns out that the theory is the strongest form scientific knowledge and facts are one of the lowest.\n\nA fact is a simply a statement that is verified by observation. Because we're constantly coming up with more precise tools to collect data (and *more accurate* methods of interpreting data) facts tend to change all the time. For a long time it was a fact that the sun revolved around the Earth. It made perfect sense, all you have to do is look up and you can see it traveling around us! Eventually, a very smart man figured out the *wanderers* were circling the sun and that [Earth was a planet orbiting the sun](_URL_0_) just like them. \n\nLaws are a more complex and reliable form of knowledge because they describe a collection of facts that have been determined mathematically or via experimentation.\n\nTheories are even more dependable because they incorporate several laws which necessarily means **years of observations**, and thousands of facts, tests, and equations. Where laws describe scientific relationships, theories explain them, which means something very cool- theories make predictions. That's why scientists know they can trust theories. Because decades after Einstein had died, GPS satellites didn't work until the engineers factored in time dilation due to general relativity.\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism#Copernican_revolution"
]
]
|
||
5d4g8f | why do the addresses on some streets run sequentially (101, 103, 105...) while on other streets there are gaps (101, 115, 129...) even though the buildings / houses are directly next to each other? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5d4g8f/eli5_why_do_the_addresses_on_some_streets_run/ | {
"a_id": [
"da1o4p7"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"It's quite common for house numbers to be based on the street number, and the position of a property within the block. So if you have a block between 7th and 8th street, the house numbers would be in the range 700...799.\n\nIf there are 10 properties on each side, one side might get 700, 710, 720, ..., 790, and the other side might get 705, 715, 725, etc.\n\nThe nice thing about this arrangement is that if one property is sold and split into two, you can squeeze more numbers in without affecting other house numbers.\n\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
22g4wl | special relativity | I'm having the hardest time wrapping my head around how it's possible for the speed of light to be constant regardless of the source of said light's speed. I also can't seem to comprehend what implications this has.
Extra Credit: ELI5: What is Time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22g4wl/eli5_special_relativity/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgmgqvo",
"cgmhrlh",
"cgmib7y",
"cgmjdph"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There's no intuitive way to think about this. You just have to accept it as a fact of the theory. Once you do that, you can work out all the details. ",
"It's not really the sort of thing that our brains are built to comprehend, because the effects of it are unnoticeable at the \"scale\" at which humans evolved and live. \n\nBut the long and short of it is that space and time are less rigid than they appear, and they'll bend and stretch as required to make sure that c stays c. ",
"special relativity and constant speed of light came more and more into the light after every experiment to prove the existence of an \"aether\" ( a medium lightwaves travel in, comparable to waves in water or soundwaves in air) failed, see for example _URL_0_\nNow given light's speed is constant c, imagine a light beam traveling from source to mirror (distance d) and back again, time needed= 2d/c.\nNow imagine you move both source and mirror constantly sidewards and send the beam, time needed = 2l/c with l²=d²+(xtoside/2)². This is illustrated here _URL_1_ . So constant speed of light implies time dilation.\n ",
"The key thing is the principle of locality, really. That is, stuff that happens here on Earth shouldn't be able to influence things in the Andromeda galaxy right away, some signal has to travel there first. But to have such a locality principle, there needs to be a maximum speed with which signals, information and influence can travel. Otherwise, a signal could just go arbitrarily fast, and stuff from far away could effect us instantly. However, such a maximal speed must look the same from every perspective, otherwise it wouldn't be a proper maximal speed at all. Or in other words, if you could send a light signal a bit faster by letting the source travel quickly, it would break the universal speed limit and locality would be lost. So therefore, the maximal speed, which is the speed of light, must be the same for every observer, no matter how the source of the light is moving.\n\nThis of course has a bunch of implications, like time dilatation, length contraction and so on."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment",
"http://astarmathsandphysics.com/ib-physics-notes/relativity/ib-physics-notes-time-dilation-html-m6f9305f2.gif"
],
[]
]
|
|
1a3vba | what is a tv license in the uk and why do you need one? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1a3vba/eli5_what_is_a_tv_license_in_the_uk_and_why_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8tva6t",
"c8ty5oe"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"In the UK, broadcast television is not created by for-profit corporations like CBS & NBC. The BBC is meant to run as a non-profit whose goal is not money but the betterment of society.\n\nThe TV license is a tax that goes to fund the BBC. This is why the BBC has few (none?) commercials. This is also why they aren't producing long strings of mindless reality shows - they're required to make quality content, not forced to make profitable content.",
"Why are there 15 comments here but only 1 upvote?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
oc7xf | what is the difference between a primary and a caucus? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oc7xf/what_is_the_difference_between_a_primary_and_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3g6gdx"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Caucus: \"Dude, we are totally going to vote for you later.\"\nPrimary: \"Dude, we are totally voting for you now.\""
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
bi159w | can someone explain the deeper meaning of these type of photos? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bi159w/eli5_can_someone_explain_the_deeper_meaning_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"elx7quj",
"elx7w3k"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"As a general rule the idea is that people who see disturbing or atypical things (blood, sexual images, images of a violent nature) are presumed to have disturbing thoughts and psychoses.",
"They're called a Rorschach Test and it was hypothesized that what people saw in the blots provided some clue to their psychological state.\n\nThere's little empirical evidence that they can accurately predict anything about a patient's state of mind or predilections, but they have some use in getting patients to start talking to a psychologist."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
2z02r9 | why does my powerade or gatorade taste better when i shake it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z02r9/eli5_why_does_my_powerade_or_gatorade_taste/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpemprq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"\"Taste\" is a complex chemical phenomenon that doesn't just involve the tongue, but the nose and the sense of smell, as well. Scents, combined with the chemicals in food themselves, work together to produce what you think of as the \"taste\" of any given thing.\n\nWhen you shake your drink, you agitate the liquid, causing scent molecules to escape the surface and effectively creating an invisible \"cloud\" of scent. Since scent heavily influences your experence of \"taste,\" this enhances the taste.\n\nThis is also why wine tasters swirl around their wine before tasting it; it's not to look fancy, it's to agitate the liquid!\n\nTo demonstrate this \"scent cloud\" to yourself, pour some apple juice or Gatorade or whatever into a bowl and let it sit for a few minutes while you go away and do something else. When you come back, smell the liquid without disturbing the bowl. It won't smell very strong. Take a spoon and vigorously stir the liquid, and then smell it again. It'll smell a lot stronger!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
7ndjif | why does it start to feel like you’re looking at someone else when you stare at yourself in a mirror for too long? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ndjif/eli5_why_does_it_start_to_feel_like_youre_looking/ | {
"a_id": [
"ds12u5a",
"ds134d2",
"ds1995z"
],
"score": [
20,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Urban legend says it's because you are seeing the faces of yourself in past lives.\n\nMost likely it is really because you are focusing on your eyes so intensely that your brain puts the rest of your face in your peripheral vision from what you remember it to be and not necessarily what it is.",
"This could be a form of depersonalization, although I'm not sure why that would trigger it. ",
"you dont see yourself that much, you start imaging yourself as another person, or what another perosn might think ewtc"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
9lw3cr | why is american culture so violent/confrontational/hostile? also: how can a culture be violent? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9lw3cr/eli5_why_is_american_culture_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"e79ux6o"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This is subjective, and that's not allowed on ELI5. You might want to post this in r/askanamerican."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
9jniqg | what does it mean when someone has a "low mental age"? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9jniqg/eli5what_does_it_mean_when_someone_has_a_low/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6srih0",
"e6ssnh9",
"e6st7ik",
"e6tiiu5"
],
"score": [
10,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In this context it would mean the person hasn't developed mentally to their real age. My aunt was born with Down syndrome and just died recently in her 50s. She could be considered to have a low mental age because she acted like an 8 year old. She liked Barbies and disposable cameras and puzzles.",
"\"Low mental age\" is used to suggest that a person's mental abilities are comparable to someone of a younger age. One's ability to think and use their brain progresses rapidly from birth to 25 years; what's reasonable to ask of a 16-year-old is not reasonable to expect from a 6-year-old.\n\nHowever, \"low mental age\" is a concept that should be used cautiously, if at all. Someone with a mental disability like Down's syndrome or autism may be delayed in some areas, but advanced in others. For instance, someone with autism might have very poor language skills, but advanced analytical or numerical skills. A person with Down's syndrome might have emotional control comparable to that of a child, but only slightly-impaired language skills.",
"Pedophiles get off on manipulating kids and the feeling of power over them, so depending on where they are on the spectrum it could be possible? Probably not with people of a \"low mental age\" (I hate the term) but they would have to be \"higher functioning\".\n\nIn my experience as someone with autism, I was a victim of pedophilia. I was more naive than other kids my age and I've grown up with pretty much unmonitored access to the internet...\n\nTo answer the first question, its like your emotional and intellectual progress came to a halt at a certain age.",
"It is a guideline to give you an idea how to interact with someone who has a mental disability. If you are told someone who appears 25 has a mental age of 12, you know you should be talking *Avengers* with them, not *Inception*.\n\nA pedophile is someone who has a sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Someone with a low mental age can still be a pedophile, but I don't think that is what you are asking. I think your real question is \"If someone with a low mental age has sexual contact with a minor of that physical age, is it still illegal?\"\n\nMental age refers solely to cognitive ability, not emotional or sexual maturity. That otherwise normal 25-year-old with a mental age of 12 is going to have the sex drive of a 25-year-old and be attracted to sexually mature people. If they had sexual contact with a minor, they would face legal consequences. However, their mental age could be a mitigating factor, if it was determined they did not have the capacity to know what they were doing. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1w6xcn | where does 'an apple a day keeps the doctor away' originate from? | And does it hold true to this day? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1w6xcn/eli5_where_does_an_apple_a_day_keeps_the_doctor/ | {
"a_id": [
"cez8l17"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It originated first in 1866 as \"Eat an apple on going to bed, And you'll keep the doctor from earning his bread.\" and in 1913 became An apple a day keeps the doctor away\n\nIf you want an in depth answer look here but meh you wouldnt be here if you want in depth _URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/an-apple-a-day.html"
]
]
|
|
2ybsx2 | why did europe develop into an industrial countries much sooner while much of world lagged behind? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ybsx2/eli5why_did_europe_develop_into_an_industrial/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp8267e",
"cp82v9l",
"cp836z3",
"cp85pkv",
"cp874fr"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
16,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"I think there are a lot of reasons. Warfare could be one, there was a lot of war in Europe, and war is always a good reason for coming up with new inventions. Geographically, most parts of Europe are relatively mild, so it was easier to focus on other things than just surviving. And of course resources, big industrialization was based on coal, which could be found everywhere in Europe. But I could be wrong, and there might be a lot more to it as well.",
"read \"Guns, Germs, and Steel\"\n\nIt answers that exact question. \n\n1. Eurasia has a East-West orientation which allowed the spread of crops because climates change more north-south (africa, the americas). That allowed them to develop civilization faster. \n\n2. Domesticatable megafauna (animals over 100lbs). More of them existed in Eurasia\n\n3. living in proximity with domesticated animals, diseases jumped from animals to man, and then immunities were developed. Then when Europeans came in contact with other cultures, they didn't have the immunity\n",
" > I realize that part of the answer is that: once Europe became powerful, they began to colonize and conquer native peoples thus stopping native peoples (North/South America to Africa, China, India) from undergoing industrialization.\n\nThat isn't really accurate. If anything, Europeans introduced new technology to developing nations, speeding up their process of industrialisation.",
"1. The UK had easily accessible coal deposits.\n\n2. Those coal mines had a lot of water in them, which needed to be pumped out. Steam engines are good at this so this provided a technological demand for innovation.\n\n3. Competition with the textile industry in India provided massive incentives for efficiency gains in industry and so there were economic demands for the technology to be rolled out.\n\nI think trade probably plays the biggest role here. Many other places and times in history saw the invention of potentially transformative technologies, but no strong economic incentives for broadscale implementation.",
"In the colonization era, most of the European countries made it so that the colonies would only be able to export raw materials, not products. Then they would have to buy these products from the colonizing nation. For example, England would allow import of timber from nation X, while selling the same timber as furniture to the colony (bad example). This lead to primary industry beibg established in the colonies (agriculture, mining), and secondary industry in the colonizing nation (refining raw matarials into advanced things). "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
j38tb | how do i do the strange mangled text thing? (see below) | m̛̲̽̾ͥ͟u̷͉̙̻̻͕̣͌ͫ̕s̸̷͚͖̔ͤ̒̿i͔̲͕͉̗̬̎̆ͦͫ͌̎ͅć̥̱͓̪͔̞͊,̷̫̺͎̣͓̯ͥͣ̄ͥ͑̽ ̱̰͚̗̳͆̅̄͌̅́ẗ̰̙̾̿͟ͅh͑͑ͬ҉̸̶̩̱̼a͚͍̫̍͛ţ̴̟͇͍ͥ̽͑̒ ̡͙̇͑͠ẅ̛͚̺̫̠͔̮͉͙́̉̐̏ͫ͛̅́a̼͈̩͗ͯͨ̑s̜̳̹̮̜̜̝̣̺̓ͬͣ͆̈͑͐ͧ̕ ̶̶̶͖͉̘̈́a̭̤̳͊ͥ́͆̕ ̶̥̖̝̤̯̾ͨͪ̂̌ͣͭ͜g͇͚͎̻͔̦̭̯͛͌ͫ́̓̾̿̀ö̴̵̞͈̖̹̤̪͕́͐ͤ̆ͫ̃ͪŏ͍̯̜̳͖̬̼̇d̡̰̼̘͙̰͔̓̇̄ͩ͗̀͌̍͝ ̖̳̗̙̣͖̜ͬ̄̇ͣ̆̉͗m̦̣̣͓̤̮͚͊͋͢o̯͚̘͔͚͓͍͌ͫ̇͂ͦ͑̾̈v̶̡̠̔̄͒ͭ̊͒̔i͚̹̖̯̞ͧͫ͢ͅe̋ͭ̉͋̏̚
this was copy-pasted. How do I do it without the rectangles at the top? Explain like I'm five | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j38tb/how_do_i_do_the_strange_mangled_text_thing_see/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28riva"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Each one of those letters is a special character designed to look like that. \n\nSee:\n\n\n.\n\n\n \ne̋ͭ̉͋̏̚\n\n\nI can't find the source for these symbols, but Microsoft word *may* have a font for them. \n\n\nI would advise against doing this too often in reddit, as it does make it difficult to read anything. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
27jt6l | why is there so much love for the sega dreamcast? | It's seems like there was only a handful of really great exclusives (ill bleed, jet set radio, blue stinger) it had a ridiculous looking controller, and quickly got overshadowed by the release of the ps2, which seems overall like the superior product (DVD player, exclusives) is it just notalgia? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27jt6l/elif_why_is_there_so_much_love_for_the_sega/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci1hs4o",
"ci1htxz",
"ci1huws",
"ci1inqm"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It was the first console to have a great online gameplay and the controller was great. Especially, since Microsoft took a lot of design for their Xbox controller. Also, it was easy to play bootleg games on it and one of the greatest RPG was released on it (Grandia 2).",
"So ahead of it's time. ",
"There is a very elitism aspect to it's wide-spread love; it was a very hardcore gamer-centric console, whereas many other consoles were trying to appeal to wider audiences, Dreamcast was subtly marketed as being \"for us\". It also was a precursor to many standards in gaming today, such as online play. It was quiet the trend-setter.\n\nOne of the reasons I loved the Dreamcast was Arcade perfect ports. No other console in America did 2D fighters and shooters like the Dreamcast. I say in America because in Japan the Saturn was a fucking powerhouse for 2D game and easily gave the Dreamcast a run for it's money.",
"You always want what you can never have! "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
29jbju | why can i return stuff at target without a receipt, by using the card i purchased it with. | I'm assuming they just have one epic database of all the shit I buy? I really need to start using cash, don't I? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29jbju/eli5_why_can_i_return_stuff_at_target_without_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cilgw1h",
"cilgwld",
"cilk2us"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a strange claim, but...\n\nTo make it short and simple, they can trace the recipt of purchase back to the cardholder, usually you have to present your Drivers Licence as well to verify you are the owner of the credit card.\n\nIt was a common scam years ago. Buy something with a credit card, then take it back a day or two later to get the cash value returned to you. If you return it with a card, they don't give you the cash back, they just ring the return directly to the card.",
" > I'm assuming they just have one epic database of all the shit I buy?\n\nThey have an epic database of everything they've ever sold, and all of it is linked to credit cards or check account numbers if they have that information.\n\nThey're even able to use customers' purchasing patterns [to tell when they're pregnant](_URL_0_).",
"It's a convince thing. If you mean how... or system looks to see it that item and your card correlate with any receipt made in the past 90 days, if so it's all good and we return it to the same method by which it was purchased, unless there's a gift card on that receipt... then it goes back to that. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/"
],
[]
]
|
|
2brwvh | why is 9/11 seen as a bigger catastrophe than for example the tsunami of 2005? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2brwvh/eli5_why_is_911_seen_as_a_bigger_catastrophe_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj8aetq",
"cj8afio",
"cj8aie7",
"cj8arba"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because it happened in the USA. ",
"Tsunami was not made by terrorists.",
"Because it was done by humans rather than by the forces of nature",
"I would suggest three reasons:\n\n1. Perspective: Ever hear the old joke about the economic definition of the difference between a recession and a depression? A recession is when your neighbor gets laid off. A depression is when you get laid off. Terrorist attacks had been happening around the world, and in fact, Al Queda had hit American targets before the WTC (bombing of USS Cole in October 2000 killing 17, bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in August 1998 killing more than 200 people) but this was the first attack on American soil. It was also the first major attack that targeted US civilians killing them in the thousands. Even the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 targeted a military base. This was probably the largest single day loss of civilian life on American soil except possibly for the Civil War in the 19th century. So for the average US citizen, attacks were happening around the world, but they weren't happening here. The 9-11 attack changed that perspective.\n\n2. Immediacy: This attack was broadcast on TV live around the world. The attack was in a city known as a worldwide media center in the middle of the morning news cycle.\n\n3. Methodology: The attack exposed a severe security hole in a worldwide transportation network of vehicles. This security hole potentially exposed every nation to attack and has proved (and is still proving) incredibly difficult to completely close. The governmental and economic impact of closing that security hole had and continues to have massive worldwide implications.\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
9ohbfu | what does a maestro do and why is he so important when all the musicians have their partitions ? | I know he coordinates them but how ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ohbfu/eli5_what_does_a_maestro_do_and_why_is_he_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7u1qtd",
"e7ubhta",
"e7uej2f"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"If you've ever played in a large group you'll notice it's really hard to hear the other parts. Like when I played violin good luck trying to hear the violas or cellos during some parts of the song. The conductor keeps a beat so all the musicians can stay with each other assuming they're all following thr conductor.",
"The way he moves his arms will keep the tempo. In a song that has tempo shifts, it's up to him to make sure everybody is trying to go at the same pace. It's like the band is a pack of dogs going for walk, and he's holding all the leashes, to make sure they all get to the same place at the same time.\n\nHe will also cue groups when it's time for them to jump back in. If the flutes take a break for 24 measures, he will often glance at them in the measure leading up to their re-entry, and give them a very pronounced sort of \"1-2-3-4!\" as they come back in, to help make sure they all do it at once.\n\nIf some group is playing too loud and being overbearing, he can signal for them to chill. Or he can conversely signal another group, or a soloist to step up their volume. If there is a slow crescendo or decresendo, then he can signal the timing and rate that everybody should change volume, so you don't suddenly hear all the trombones get much louder than everybody else, but you can't hear the clarinets anymore.\n\nAs for the specific gestures people use to signal these things, you can simply google \"conductor hand gestures\" for some ideas what they physically do to make this stuff happen.",
"A lot of the maestros work was done at rehearsal time.\n\nAs found in Wikipedia\n\n > The conductor also prepares the orchestra by leading rehearsals before the public concert, in which the conductor provides instructions to the musicians on their interpretation of the music being performed.\n\nHopefully someone with more knowledge will let me know: who typically arranges the music if the original arrangement wasn't for symphony orchestra? \n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3i4qwv | why do people make fists when they run? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i4qwv/eli5_why_do_people_make_fists_when_they_run/ | {
"a_id": [
"cud9zl7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"For me, I curl my fingers into loose fists when I run, because otherwise my fingers kind of flop around. Curling them up makes it easier to pump my arms when I run.\n\nSource: I'm a runner"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3m8izj | how do countries which import more goods than export (us, uk) sustain a strong economy? | Why don't the US and UK depreciate their currencies to increase exports? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3m8izj/eli5_how_do_countries_which_import_more_goods/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvcwha0",
"cvda3k2"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Not sure about the US, still plenty of manufacturing there from what I see. For the UK although we do have manufacturing out services industry has been the growth sector for quite some time now.\n\nThe other thing the UK relies on is the finance/banking/investment sectors.",
"USA exports dollars, which are quite useful as a reserve currency. Also remember that trade deficits may also be counter balanced by capital movements across borders"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
6t5xt3 | if a nuclear missile were to be launched right now at the west coast of the united states, would we be able to stop it? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6t5xt3/eli5_if_a_nuclear_missile_were_to_be_launched/ | {
"a_id": [
"dli65cv",
"dli75oo",
"dli7zpd"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Perhaps, perhaps not. Some tests have succeeded others have failed. And successful take down were well coordinated, not unplanned heat of moment ",
"Depend on the missile speed. If it is like the most recent Russian test. You won't have time to react. If it is a slow one. Well, let's say the military spent quite a bit of money on a nuclear missile defense in the past 35 years.",
"As people have said, it kind of depends. If its a non-hypersonic missile, once launched you would have somewhere in the realms of 25-60% chance of knocking it out before it arrived. I'm not sure the evidence supports much higher % odds than these. \n\nThis doesn't take into account the possibility for actions such as pre/during launch cyber attacks (which seem to have caused a lot of recent N.korean missile launch failures), or the possibiilty of sabotage to missile components pre launch / during manufacture (again assuming N.korean, this seems to be the likely target of your question). If you factor these in, and bear in mind the possibility of missile failure (they're not easy things to get right), then again assuming Korean launch I'd say the odds of taking it out look somewhere in the realms of 30-90%, depending how effective US assets can actually be on the ground or in cyber actions against n.korea. \n\nTL;DR - coin toss odds"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
5xpw6d | how do chemist do experiments with boiling water when there's no such thing as a "real" boiling point? | I'm reading this article about the [boiling point by Hasok Chang](_URL_0_) where the man has ran his own experiments to determined at what temperature does water really boil. Based on the reading the boiling "point " happens at different temperatures depending on the material of the container, the condition of the container, if any other materials were added (like boiling chips), and the where the thermometer is located. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xpw6d/eli5_how_do_chemist_do_experiments_with_boiling/ | {
"a_id": [
"dek058m",
"dek08mc"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"There's your answer... they do the experiment and take note of factors like atmospheric pressure, relative humidity, the container they're using, etc. When something unexpected turns up the first thought isn't, \"New science!\" it's, \"Shit, must not have cleaned the glassware, lets run it again.\" ",
"This is actually a really neat exploration of what we scientists call \"confounding factors\". These are details about the set-up of an experiment that can affect what our measurements say, but don't actually affect the underlying scientific principle. There is a \"real\" boiling point for water that depends only on the atmospheric pressure, but what a thermometer might say can depend on how well heat transfers into the water, where the thermometer is placed, or how well the water is stirred. A well-designed experiment has carefully considered these confounding factors, and controlled for them by either changing the apparatus (the actual device used in the experiment) or by the scientific model we use to interpret the results.\n\nOn a more practical level, scientists account for these factors when discussing their experiments by specifying the conditions with great detail, so that if there are other scientists who must use other conditions, they can adjust their own experiments."
]
} | []
| [
"http://www.sites.hps.cam.ac.uk/boiling/"
]
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
4vq4gu | what are the images we see when we close and slightly press our eyes and exactly what is it we're seeing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vq4gu/eli5_what_are_the_images_we_see_when_we_close_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d60hzw8",
"d60i09a"
],
"score": [
23,
5
],
"text": [
"These are called \"phosphenes\", which are a type of \"entoptic phenomenon\", meaning that they are visual perceptions that originate within the eyeball itself, as opposed to being caused the normal way through the perception of light.\n\nThe retina is a complicated structure, and it is so sensitive that even pressure can alter the way in which the cells in the retina fire, stimulating the retinal ganglia directly.\n\nIn the absence of normal stimulation, your brain will attempt to order these random firings into patterns, often geometric in nature. This is similar to so-called [form constants](_URL_1_), [retinal migraines](_URL_3_) or [scintillating scotoma](_URL_2_), the main difference being that they arise from actual visual input, and not a physical or chemical alteration of the brain.\n \nA similar phenomenon can be observed when you look at a bright light with your eyes closed (forming a uniform red field) and rapidly move the splayed fingers of a hand back and forth in front of your closed eyes. The patterns so formed are known as [Purkinje lights](_URL_0_), and are again the result of your optical cortex attempting to make sense of otherwise random input.\n\nAs to WHY they are geometric, there are many theories on this related to the physical structure of the optical cortex and its organization. One idea is that one of the first steps in \"seeing\" involves the processing of textures, surfaces and edges, so that is one of the first things your brain will try and do with input data.",
"And why does it end up hurting? I don't hurt my arms by crossing them, why does a little pressure on the eyes slowly hurt more over time?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.topinfopost.com/2014/09/21/5-cool-ways-to-hack-your-brain",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_constant",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scintillating_scotoma",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retinal_migraine"
],
[]
]
|
||
3vrjo9 | if heat and temperature are just the result of molecules physically moving how does salt lower the freezing point of water? | Also if you could elaborate on how it affects ice since water and ice are both different physical forms I guess. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vrjo9/eli5if_heat_and_temperature_are_just_the_result/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxq2fz6",
"cxq2w6k",
"cxqlfyn"
],
"score": [
25,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Ok, so water is made of two hydrogens and an oxygen. Oxygen is strongly negatively charged, and hydrogen is strongly positively charged. When they make a single molecule they kinda line up, but they don't line up in a straight line, so there is a little bit of a charge left on each molecule of water, one side is positive and one side is negative, this is called polarity, and it's *super important* in chemistry for reasons I won't get into here.\n\nBut the polarity of each of these molecules of water do some *really interesting things* one of those things is when the water molecules interact with one another, the negative sides of water molecules try to sorta get close to the positive sides of other water molecules. When you lower the temperature to 0°C, the molecules are already in a a nice cozy spot and figure that they'll just stick around there. This makes large intricate flakes of frost, and makes ice that is generally less dense then water, which allows it to float, which allows life to exist in water.\n\nWhen you add salt (NaCl) it breaks down into very positive Na^+ ions and very negative Cl^- ions. These tend to interact with the water molecules and disrupt their happy little environments where they all interact with other water molecules. This in turn increases the inherent disorder of the water molecules, which also lowers the freezing temperature. Once the temperature gets low enough, the \"effort\" spent to get the water molecules together actually forces the salt ions out of the freezing block of water (usually).",
"Dumping a bunch of salt into water doesn't change it's *temperature*, but it changes when that water will crystalize into ice.\n\nyour question starts with temperature but ends with state change, which are not the same thing! \n\n",
"Imagine you have four marbles and a tiny box just big enough to fit them in. When the marbles are outside the box, they just roll around. When they're packed together in the box, they can't move at all, like they're one solid. Take out the marbles, put a screw in there, and try to put the marbles back in. Even though the screw is small, it's big enough so all the marbles can't fit in the box any more unless you really force them.\n\nThe salt ions get in the way of the water molecules so they can't pack themselves together to form a solid at the same temperature."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
87kj5z | so what exactly is happening with tabby's star | It isn't Dyson swarm, aliens, comet, exoplanet. Do we know what causes these anomalies or we're still guessing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/87kj5z/eli5_so_what_exactly_is_happening_with_tabbys_star/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwdiof7"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The current working theory is a large cloud of space-dust. There are several organizations who've pointed their equipment in the direction of the star, during the current \"dip\" in brightness (presumably because the space dust is obscuring). The dips occur on an interval of about 157 earth days. So that, plus 6-12 months of analyzing and arguing over the data - so late 2019/mid-2020 we'll have a general consensus answer as to what's going on. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
dj42dm | theoretically, if you keep replacing your body parts with transplants, would this slow down your aging process? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dj42dm/eli5_theoretically_if_you_keep_replacing_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"f40rb9e",
"f40ws2l"
],
"score": [
7,
5
],
"text": [
"well it wouldnt slow down the aging but it would reset the things you could replace (assuming you dont get organ rejection) \n\n\nsince we cant do brain transplants you would eventually just die from the nervous system failing or all kinds of dementia",
"Organ rejection isn't optional. All transplants will experience rejection at some point eventually. People who get transplants take immuno suppressants for the rest of their lives and still experience rejection.\n\nFor that reason, transplant recipients typically have a *shorter* lifespan and experience faster \"aging\" of their new organs as they slowly get attacked by the body. \n\nBetter treatments don't exist currently so for that you'd have to ask in r/asksciencefiction."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
5lyfmr | why do we expect technologically advanced extraterrestrial life to broadcast radio signals into space? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lyfmr/eli5_why_do_we_expect_technologically_advanced/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbze43u",
"dbzfws2"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"We expect to see so something hopefully. We see radio as natural step in the process to what ever is the next form of communication is. Since radio waves will propagate for almost unless interfered with, we expect that we would detect old signals sent possible.",
"Of all the artificial methods we know to transmit information through a vacuum, the electromagnetic spectrum is pretty much what we can both send and receive; there may be other theoretical concepts, but radio, and light, and various other points along the electromagnetic spectrum are what we have to work with. It's not because we think aliens will use it, it's because it's what we can currently work with that isn't naturally occurring that is most likely for aliens to be using. So, you are correct: absence of data doesn't prove aliens do not exist, but in cases like this you can't prove a negative as you're noting, so people who say this is proof that aliens do not exist are making insubstantiated claims. It doesn't prove they're wrong, either, it means they're using the wrong info to reach the conclusion."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
2pk372 | the russian monetary crisis. | also, is the West panicking the Russians with money the way Russia is panicking their energy consumers via gas exports? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pk372/eli5_the_russian_monetary_crisis/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmxfw64"
],
"score": [
63
],
"text": [
"Essentially:\n\nRussia's economy is built and tied to the price of oil. Russia has a lot of it. Russia sells a lot of it to people.\n\nRecently, America has been able to quell it's dependence on oil through fracking.\n\nThe middle east has made available a lot more of its oil resources recently as well.\n\nAs such, with some of the major players no longer purchasing as much oil, and ad more and more oil stock up and becomes available. Supply and demand kicks in.\n\nThe price of oil starts to drop.\n\nRemembering that the Russian economy is tied to oil. The economy in Russia starts to go belly up as does their dollar.\n\nNormally when this sort of thing happens. Other nations set in and provide support. Lending assistance and helping to return the economy of said nation to a stable state.\n\nEnter Crimea. Russia decided to declare an illegal war on Ukraine and invaded Crimea. The West and the UN decided this was not to be tolerated. And instead of going to war with Russia over Crimea. They imposed sanctions. Sanctions which stop anyone from helping russia.\n\nFurther, Russia could potentially in a last ditch effort attempt to stabilize its econmy through exports other than oil. However, again, sanctions. \n\nTL;DR: Russia invaded Ukraine and by doing so ruined relations with the outside world. Russia didn't care because almost all of Europe depends on russia for oil. Months later. Several world developments eased the words oil needs and suddenly no one really needed oil as much anymore. The price of oil fell and with it came russias economy. No one is allowed to/wants to help them because everyone is pissed about ukraine. \n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
7cjqtg | the final scene in trading places. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7cjqtg/eli5_the_final_scene_in_trading_places/ | {
"a_id": [
"dpqfv5n"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Past threads on this: _URL_1_\n\nOlder thread on this: _URL_0_\n\nMy Answer from older thread:\n\n/u/Pobody is right, but to clarify a bit, here's the stages (numbers are made up, just to illustrate):\n \n1.) **That morning** - The Dukes have a fake crop report, saying that there is an orange shortage. They take out a short term loan so that they can buy orange futures at the current price. Say the price is $10, because people are unsure of whether there will be a shortage.\n \n2.) **That afternoon** - Murphy and Akroyd show up. The price now is at $15, because the Dukes, and many others following the Dukes, have been buying all day, driving up the price. Murphy and Akroyd start to SELL. They don't own any shares (or own just a few), but that's alright, since they don't have to \"settle up,\" meaning actually give the shares they \"have\" to the person buying, until the end of the day.\n\n3.) **Just before the bell** - the crop report comes out. There is no orange shortage. Now, the price drops from $15 to $5, since everyone knows there are too many oranges, and so everyone starts selling. Once the price gets low enough, Murphy and Akroyd start to buy, which is easy, since everyone else is trying to sell. They buy enough to cover the sales they made earlier in the day, and pocket the difference (15-5 = $10 per share). The Dukes, on the other hand, are stuck. They sell what they can, but every sale is a loss.\n \n4.) **after the bell** - the Dukes haven't made enough to cover their short term loans. They are bankrupt.\n \n5.) **way after the bell** - Murphy's unrelated, identical twin, a wealthy African Prince, happens upon the Dukes living on the street, gifts them tens of thousands of dollars. they are back."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tmehn/eli5how_do_dan_aykroyd_and_eddy_murphy_make/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21orga/eli5the_stock_exchange_part_in_the_movie_trading/"
]
]
|
||
4m2i68 | why are some console versions of pc games not given the same treatment by the developers in terms of updates, patching, and dlc (i.e. team fortress 2 and diablo 3)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4m2i68/eli5_why_are_some_console_versions_of_pc_games/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3rzvbt",
"d3rzy1q",
"d3s7nw8"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"A few different reasons, but mainly because of the process involved with pushing an update on PSN and XBL. Basically any update has to be tested and approved before it gets pushed on their network. Whereas PC updates depend on the developer and their standards and do not have to jump through a bunch of hoops to push content.",
"Every update, patch and DLC has to go through certification and quality assurance on consoles. That process takes not only time, but money as well. Depending on much your particular audience is skewed towards PC, it is understandable that some developers will prioritize putting it up on that platform first, and then rolling it out on consoles after a while, if at all.",
"I recall Valve saying something along the lines of that TF2 on the PC simply cannot work on last gen consoles (360 and PS3) because they were so RAM starved. Both machines had 512 MB of RAM total, and that includes VRAM. All the updates with new weapons and maps and hats and so forth just couldn't fit in such a small footprint."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
akpi68 | per the united states government shutdown, why do "non-essential" government employees exist? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/akpi68/eli5_per_the_united_states_government_shutdown/ | {
"a_id": [
"ef6pvni"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Park Rangers aren't needed to keep the government running, but they are needed. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nIf Park Rangers stay home for a couple of weeks, this is a very different situation from Air Traffic Controllers staying home for a couple of weeks."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
93bnkz | why are brass knuckles so heavily regulated around the world? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93bnkz/eli5_why_are_brass_knuckles_so_heavily_regulated/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3c342f"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"A concealed deadly weapon designed specifically to harm unarmed unsuspecting personnel and nothing else. It's worse than a gun with that definition."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
5f72bt | why does pressing small cuts on the skin feel 'pleasurable'? | Just to clarify I DON'T mean self harm where you intetionally injure your skin with physical or chemical implements to release intense stress, emotional pain, or anger.
I'm referring to accidental cuts on the skin, hands, legs that people may encounter during their day to day lives. The first few minutes are throbbing pain from the area and blood loss but once the cut stops bleeding touching any moderate pressure from touching or contact with the area will feel 'good'. Even for a few minutes. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5f72bt/eli5_why_does_pressing_small_cuts_on_the_skin/ | {
"a_id": [
"dai2kqn"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Your body makes it's own feelgoods/painkillers. These are called endorphins. They are opioid shaped molecules that get released when things go bad (or when they go well...think sex).\n\nBruises, cuts, torn muscles all cause these endorphins to be released. Marathon runners get addicted, and this is called a runner's high.\n\nAnother reason could be that nerve pathways can only carry one of three possible signals. Pain, pressure, or temperature. The nerve only has enough bandwidth to carry one signal at a time. By applying pressure, you saturate the nerve pathway, and the pain can no longer be transmitted. You interpret this as feeling good."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
8dn8qr | the irish border situation? | I keep seeing the Irish border being mentioned with regards to Brexit, and I’m a little confused. Would someone be able to summarise what the issue is? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dn8qr/eli5_the_irish_border_situation/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxofbi0",
"dxofsez",
"dxoizr8"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The island of Ireland is divided into two parts: the Republic of Ireland (an independent country) and Northern Ireland (part of Britain).\n\nNorthern Ireland is split about 60-40 between Protestants and Catholics. Protestants generally consider themselves British and Catholics generally consider themselves Irish.\n\nFor much of the 20th century, there was tension and fighting between these two groups, due to many Catholics wanting to leave Britain and join Ireland and also because they were often mistreated by the Protestant majority. You might have hear of “The Troubles”\n\nThe Troubles ended with a series of peace treaties. One of those treaties removed all border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic. Many Catholics welcomed this because it gave them a much easier connection with what they consider to be their native country.\n\nThis was fine and dandy while Britain and Ireland were both EU members.\n\nHowever, with Brexit, things will change. Britain and Ireland will no longer have automatic free trade with each other, which means that border controls and customs checks have to be set up. Many people are concerned that this will upset the Catholic community and possibly even restart the violence.",
"When the Republic of Ireland got it's independence from the United Kingdom, the UK decided to keep a part of the island of Ireland as part of the UK which became known as Northern Ireland. This meant that the UK now had a land border with a foreign country.\n\nHowever, to avoid a hard border, both countries agreed to cooperate on immigration and trade, creating a zone known as the Common Travel Area. The customs part of the CTA was superseded when both countries joined the EEC, which became the EU.\n\nNow the UK wants to leave the EU, this makes maintaining the CTA look untenable, since Ireland will have one set of customs and immigration rules, and the UK will have another. \n\nFurther complicating the issue is the Good Friday peace agreement which commits both countries to cross border cooperation, which many feel will be broken if border controls are introduced. \n\nAnother factor is the weakness of the current UK government which depends on the support of a prominent Northern Irish party - the DUP. The DUP support Brexit but want no controls between the north and south, but also no controls between NI and the UK. This stance is incompatible with most of the compromise solutions suggested by the UK and EU\n\n",
"Northern Ireland is a constituent country of the UK; Ireland (sometimes called the Republic or Ireland, or, more properly, Éire) is not.\n\nBoth the UK and Ireland are (currently) EU member states -- so far so good. Although they're not part of the Schengen Area -- an area comprising most EU member states and a couple of other countries which have agreed not to have border checks between them -- they are part of a Common Travel Area, which comprises the British Isles.\n\nThis is important, because Northern Ireland is divided (roughly 50/50) over the issue of whether to remain part of the UK or join the Republic. For many decades until the 1990s there was a guerilla war going on there, with terrorist attacks on both sides. The British and Irish governments finally managed to broker a peace, which is so far still holding, but only just.\n\nThe CTA means that people can pass from Ireland to the UK without border checks and without custom checks.\n\nIf the UK leaves the EU, that will change: it will mean that the UK/Irish border is an external border of the EU, meaning that immigration checks may need to be reinstated; if the UK also leaves the EU customs union, it will also mean customs checks will be necessary.\n\nSo now the UK, Ireland and the EU are having to figure out what to do about the situation, and pretty much every option they have will seriously anger somebody.\n\nThe UK could formally leave the EU but still remain in the single market and the customs union; but that will basically mean that the UK will still have most of the rights and responsibilities it already has, except that it will no longer have a say in anything. No votes in parliament, no right to take part in debates, but still have to follow all the rules and regulations. This will please pretty much nobody: it will annoy people who think the UK should stay in the EU because it means *actually* being \"at the mercy of Brussels\"; and it will seriously anger those who think the UK should leave because... it won't really be leaving.\n\nArrangements could be made to give Northern Ireland some kind of special status, allowing continuing freedom of movement and goods between Northern Ireland and Ireland. But then that means effectively putting a border between mainland Britain and the island of Ireland, including Northern Ireland. This will give rise to the absurd situation of people having to go through customs and immigration to get from one part of the UK to another. Those in Northern Ireland who are fiercely loyal to the UK will be made extremely angry, as this will be almost like leaving the UK and joining Ireland, something they are not prepared to tolerate.\n\nThe other option would be a \"hard border\" between Northern Ireland and Ireland, which is basically the default option. But that will cause serious problems for people living and working on the island, and will also anger those who think Northern Ireland should leave the UK and join the Republic.\n\nThe problem for the British Prime Minister is this: She says she is committed to a complete withdrawal from the EU, including leaving the customs union; at the same time, she also says she wants to avoid a hard border between the UK and Ireland, as any such border would badly impact on trade and may even restart \"The Troubles\". That basically means that none of the three options is acceptable to her.\n\nThe PM came up with a few ideas she hoped would solve the problem, but the EU has, it seems, rejected them as being unworkable, unfair or too expensive."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
366efk | when you look at someone welding, it hurts your eyes. why is it that when you look at a video of someone welding, it doesn't hurt your eyes? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/366efk/eli5_when_you_look_at_someone_welding_it_hurts/ | {
"a_id": [
"crb4mfh",
"crb4ov3"
],
"score": [
18,
5
],
"text": [
"Welding torches emit ultraviolet and infrared light, which can hurt the eyes. Since cameras are only designed to pick up visible light, and monitors are only built to display visible light, UV and IR don't get projected by the video.",
"When you look at somebody welding all of the light that's being generated goes into your eyes, which makes them hurt, keeping it simple it's because your eyes are receiving more light than they can handle.\n\nWhen that same light goes into a camera a similar thing happens. the camera can only store a certain amount of 'brightness' information, so eventually the light maxes out the sensor and the extra brightness is lost (and/or the rest of the image gets darker).\n\nWhen a computer reads back the image it knows to display the weld as bright as it possibly can, which is probably the same white that's on this page right now. The display can't generate any more brightness than that, and even if it could the information (or even the technology for that matter) doesn't exist to accurately recreate the original light."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
au9gx9 | can someone please explain what all this hype is about peta recently? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/au9gx9/eli5_can_someone_please_explain_what_all_this/ | {
"a_id": [
"eh6j7td"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"PETA faces backlash after criticizing late 'Crocodile Hunter' Steve Irwin on birthday\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/peta-faces-backlash-after-tweets-criticizing-steve-irwin-on-birthday"
]
]
|
||
a3z13r | how does rock weathering get rid of atmospheric co2? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a3z13r/eli5_how_does_rock_weathering_get_rid_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"eba9yzn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"CO2 can react with water molecules to form carbonic acid - which is the stuff that makes soda fizz. This acid can react with some minerals in the ground, essentially binding the CO2 to rock. \n\nEach raindrop only has a tiny amount of CO2, and only a small fraction of that can bind with a mineral in the ground, so this process is incredibly slow. It only binds a fraction of the CO2 that we release into the atmosphere each year, and it'd take centuries to get CO2 back to normal when we stop emitting it altogether."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
apg1ln | how is rock removed to expose a fossil without damaging the fossil? | To me, it's all just rocks, so I don't understand how a paleontologist is able to differentiate and remove rock from a fossil, whether it's bone, shell, plankton, bacteria, plant matter, & cet. What techniques are used in the preparation of the specimens seen in museums? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/apg1ln/eli5_how_is_rock_removed_to_expose_a_fossil/ | {
"a_id": [
"eg8dmmz",
"eg8emof"
],
"score": [
24,
3
],
"text": [
"Yes, by the time they are fossils, they are all \"just rocks\"; but, importantly, they are different kinds of rocks. When a bone gets fossilized, the chemical makeup changes, with minerals replacing some of the components of the bone. This forms crystals which are often harder than the surrounding sedimentary rock. So, you just scrape away the sedimentary rock and you have your fossil. Of course, you have to have the right tools so that it only takes away the stuff you want and not what you don't. It's tedious and time consuming. \n\nThere are actually different processes depending on both what you started with (bone vs shell vs soft parts etc), what it went through over time, and then what sort of rock it ended up in. Some fossils are more like prints, where there is just the outline of carbon left over but no shape; some are more like casts, where you can tell the shape but there really is nothing left of the original. Here is a link to different ways it occurs: [_URL_1_](_URL_1_) \n\nThe chemical changes during fossilization are still under study. Here's a relatively recent publication: [_URL_2_](_URL_0_) . That paper has a great section called WHAT IS ‘‘FOSSILIZATION?’’ that talks about what happens and why from a chemical point of view. ",
"I picked a couple of fossilized leaves this summer. The leaf was very different to the rock around it, and several of the rocks i found split apart at the leaf when i tried cracking them open.\nThe leaf surface is smooth and hard, while the rock around it is porous, letting cracks easily form in the plane of the leaf. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://earth.boisestate.edu/mattkohn/files/2010/07/2008_Kohn_Diff-models-fossils.pdf",
"http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilrecord/fossilization/fossilization.htm",
"https://earth.boisestate.edu/mattkohn/files/2010/07/2008\\_Kohn\\_Diff-models-fossils.pdf"
],
[]
]
|
|
ahhghc | when it snows, why don’t rivers/lakes rise to the same level that it snows? | Like the title says, if it snows say 1 foot, why doesn’t a body of water rise equal to what has accumulated on land?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ahhghc/eli5_when_it_snows_why_dont_riverslakes_rise_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"eeejok0",
"eeenkq9"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Snow is less dense than water is. This means that when it melts and turns into water, the water takes up less space than the snow originally did. So we may get a foot of snow on the ground, but in its liquid state, it takes up significantly less space than in it’s snow state ",
"Aside from the density of frozen and liquid water, you also have to get the water through the water table and to the river/lake. Some of the melt will also evaporate and never reach a stable body of water."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
p5iiv | the controversy around the kennedy assassination | Has it been proven that Oswald did it? Is there any real evidence of a cover up? Is the whole conspiracy behind is really credible or just a crackpot theory? Also, why did Jack Ruby kill Oswald? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/p5iiv/eli5_the_controversy_around_the_kennedy/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3mqjna",
"c3mqknf",
"c3mr5gs",
"c3mspki",
"c3mth23",
"c3mtskp",
"c3muad8",
"c3mv0ko"
],
"score": [
7,
7,
7,
14,
7,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Jack Ruby apparently killed Oswald to prevent Jackie from suffering through a trial. \n\nThis of course, is most likely bullshit.",
"IMO, Oliver Stone. The public just wasn't properly informed of how many liberties he took in JFK. I mean, he made good guys bad and bad guys good, totally clouding the story. Not to mention that he perpetuated the whole magic bullet theory which is a simple misunderstanding. Yes, the conspiracies were out there before that movie, but he made them mainstream.\n\nThis does a phenomenal job of debunking all of the theories (ABC News Special-90 minutes): _URL_0_\n\nIn summary, yes. There is more than enough evidence to have convicted Oswald and no one else.",
"An interesting theory [states that Kennedy was not Lee Harvey Oswald's primary target](_URL_0_).\n\nThere is no proof either way, otherwise there would be no controversy. The evidence known as of now, leads me to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter. But, that's just, like, my opinion, man.",
"I'm not going to get into a lengthy conversation on this, but when you have a United States Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant sniper saying \"We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don’t know how many times we tried it, but we couldn’t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. Now if I can’t do it, how in the world could a guy who was a non-qual on the rifle range and later only qualified 'marksman' do it?\" it certainly doesn't help the \"official\" story.\n\nThere's also the bizarre decision to remove the body guards [right before turning onto the plaza.](_URL_0_)\n\nAll in all, and as with many conspiracy theories, there's enough vagueness, unexplained decisions, mysterious disappearances, etc. to Let people not accept the official story at face value.\n\nI personally do not buy it. But I won't claim I know what went down there.",
"It has never been definitely explained and at this point, with so much time passed, it may never be. You won't find it explained here. All you'll find are people repeating their favorite theories. Some people have devoted decades to proving exactly what happened and so far none have been successful. They have some interesting theories, for sure, but no definitive proof.",
"The first clue needed to see there was a conspiracy for any event, not just the Kennedy assassination, is to see who benefited from the event taking place. ",
"When talking to people of my parents generation, they all remember the exact moment that they were when Kennedy got shot. Looks like everyone has their alibis.",
"If you've got a lot of time to spend on this, I'd recommend reading *Reclaiming History*, by Vincent Bugliosi. It's a brick of a book, but I enjoyed it. He goes over all the theories and debunks them. Or claims to. He is a proponent of the single shooter (Oswald acted alone) theory, so that's the perspective you'll get it from."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um0f7NuM_3Y"
],
[
"http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/06/16/a-new-to-me-theory-about-the-kennedy-assassination-it-was-an-accident"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFpPjjKdUds"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
4dvog3 | how do noise machines work ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4dvog3/eli5_how_do_noise_machines_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1ur7x0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"To clarify, I'm pretty sure OP is referring to the [noise machines that the Clinton campaign used to prevent journalists from listening to her during a fundraiser speech.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/07/clinton-campaign-uses-noise-machine-to-block-reporters-from-hearing-fundraiser-speech/"
]
]
|
||
6bahzq | how does fast food restaurants like mcdonalds keep the cheeseburger at 1$ when every other product goes up in price. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6bahzq/eli5_how_does_fast_food_restaurants_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhl09nq",
"dhl2cw7",
"dhl2tfo",
"dhlfuvt"
],
"score": [
27,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"McDonalds doesn't have to make a profit on every item sold, in fact I am fairly sure that at least some of their items are sold at a loss purely to push other products.\n\nThe $1 cheeseburger is probably pretty cheap to make, it's not exactly high quality. But let's say it actually costs them $1.05 to make. \n\nOkay. We're losing a nickel every time we sell one of these things. That kinda hurts. But it's okay! Because nobody buys JUST a cheeseburger. Usually they also buy some fries and a drink. Funny thing about those guys... they are cheaper than sin and we mark them up to high hell!\n\nThe drink especially probably costs $1.20 but McDonalds is paying less than $.10 to make it. That's a huge margin and more than recovers the loss of the cheeseburger which is driving this sale.",
"Featuring a \"loss-leader\" in advertising is a well-known retail gambit. It is expected that any losses on the low-priced item will be more than recovered on the profits from the over-priced items that will also be purchased by the customer on the same visit.",
"You kind of answered your own question. There's a few factors that go in to this, though. \n\nFor one, that cheeseburger probably costs 50-75 cents per. With economies of scale, and the low price that they probably get for their ingredients, each aspect of that burger is significantly cheaper. If that's the case, they're not losing money, they're just not making as big a profit. Let's say they're breaking even on that cheeseburger, that it costs exactly a dollar to make and sell. The idea behind it is that you're going to get other stuff, too. Even if you just get a drink, that soft drink they charge 2 dollars for costs them about 30 cents, total, cup included. So, with the idea that you'll buy other stuff, they take a risk by selling a cheeseburger for less profit. \n\nThe second part, which you've answered already, is that they will bump the price up on everything else to make up for the short-change from the cheeseburger. So a Big Mac goes from 4 dollars to 4.25 per big mac. Multiply this thousands of times over, and that one quarter adds up. Now, lets say they do this with every product they have. Those little bits add up in the end, making the move to a 1$ cheeseburger that much more achievable. ",
"Are you SURE you want this explained?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
11suvv | why and how does the popular vote matter if the electoral college exits? | I've been really confused about this and it's becoming more relevant to me since I turn 18 soon, though I can't vote until the next election.
Also, is it true that if you vote differently from everyone in your area, your vote doesn't count? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11suvv/why_and_how_does_the_popular_vote_matter_if_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6pvf9m",
"c6q1rwz"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The popular vote matters if you live in one of the 29 states (or the District of Columbia) that legally binds electors to vote as they have pledged. Meaning if that state's popular vote picked Obama then he wins both that and the Electoral vote because the electors are legally bound to cast their Presidential vote matching that state's popular vote.\n\nThe 21 remaining states are not legally held to that. So when you see states that someone won the Popular but lost the Electoral, that is why.\n\nI hope that helped you. \n",
"[Because I'm lazy, I'll just link you the the explanation I gave in a thread last week.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11om3l/eli5_the_electoral_college/c6oqdxq"
]
]
|
|
5rdvng | how do tiny snails end up in fish tanks even though no snails are put in? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rdvng/eli5_how_do_tiny_snails_end_up_in_fish_tanks_even/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd6ifja"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Live, fertilized snail eggs would have needed to be introduced somehow. Snails often lay eggs on plants, so if there are live plants in the tank, it could have been from them. But anything *could* have had snail eggs on them (gravel, tubes, decorations, etc.) if they weren't sterilized first."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3j9asv | how are so many animals going extinct? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3j9asv/eli5_how_are_so_many_animals_going_extinct/ | {
"a_id": [
"cunckmz",
"cuncn1x"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because people like houses with land (and frequently like a small variety of highly organized non-native plants to fill the land around their homes), roads, food, things made in factories, energy and lots of other things that require land, and they regularly pay for these things. Providing things on the list frequently requires developing land where an animal used to hunt/mate/live, and now the animal doesn't have the space to do something important for it's lifestyle and it either adapts to live in shared spaces with humans or dies without reproducing. \n\nInsects make up about 75% of this [list](_URL_0_) of animal species, so it would be rather surprising if they weren't a majority of the animals going extinct. Also, bacteria aren't animals, single cell organism kingdoms have undergone many name changes in various systems. ",
"Bacteria are not animals. But yes it is likely they are insects because there are millions of insect species. There are separate species you might not think about, for example they are like 50 species of weasel, but if one went extinct you probably had no idea it was different from the types of weasels you see. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://bowfinprintworks.com/ListPages/PhylumSpeciesList.html"
],
[]
]
|
||
18s528 | what volume of water is required to drown a human? | And a second, slightly sillier question, can someone drown swallowing only a mouthful of water? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18s528/what_volume_of_water_is_required_to_drown_a_human/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8hh6ru",
"c8hjcuv",
"c8hk9ir",
"c8hkrfk",
"c8hos1r"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Try /r/estimation, that would be a better subreddit for your question.\n\nIt is extremely unlikely that you'll drown from swallowing a mouthful of water. This will depend on how big your mouth is, your lungs are, and whether or not you have respiratory problems.",
"It's not really *drowning* at that point. When people say \"drowning\" they're generally talking about immersion. What you're talking about is *choking,* which of course happens very easily. Inhaling even a tablespoon of water could (depending on the person and the situation) be enough to send you into respiratory spasms that would keep you from getting enough air long enough for you to lose consciousness and eventually die.",
"I've heard 6 inches of water is enough for a person to drown in. Imagine someone walking, tripping on something, and knocking themselves out upon impact. Their face is perfectly positioned in a puddle of water, but their unconscious body cannot do anything to create a flight response to it, so they lay there, therefore drowning in 6 inches of water.",
"Got plans later tonight OP?",
"From what I know, The pain you get from lack of oxygen isn't lack of oxygen at all. It's really the build up of carbon dioxide in your blood. This is why you feel pain when you need air. This is also why nitrogen asphyxiation is brought up in capital punishment as a more humane way to execute. I don't know the exact volume of water required, as it probably varies from person to person.\n\nI just realized everything I said was irrelevant and didn't answer anything."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
27jw7x | why can't an orbiting spacecraft match the speed of the earth and decend into the atmosphere to reduce the friction of reentry? | It seems logical to be able to safely drop into the atmosphere in this manner without the reentry burn. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27jw7x/eli5_why_cant_an_orbiting_spacecraft_match_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci1i33c",
"ci1i4hu",
"ci1i5o9",
"ci1i67r",
"ci1ih09",
"ci1mw0b",
"ci1pc5r"
],
"score": [
16,
5,
5,
29,
2,
11,
10
],
"text": [
"Way too much fuel to slow it down that much. It's also not friction, but air getting hot from being compressed. ",
"It could - but it would take a tremendous amount of energy to slow down the spacecraft from its orbital speed of 8 km/sec. It is far more practical to do what their doing, and let the atmosphere slow them down.",
"Hitting the air on re-entry is what slows them down. The re-entry burn is just reduces their speed enough that they will actually hit the atmosphere to start the real breaking process. If you wanted to break without that, you'd need to much larger burn. It would sort of be like putting a retro-rocket on the front of a car, so it could stop without using breaks. ",
"Because friction slows you down for free, but reversing a low-earth orbit requires an absurd amount of fuel. It takes a gigantic rocket to lift a few hundred pounds into orbit. In order to slow the spacecraft down you'd need to carry the rockets and fuel required to do so into space, which would require a much, much larger rocket.",
"you need to maintain speed in order to maintain your orbit. The heat building up on the skin of the aircraft is a result of you slowing down",
"Just play kerbal space program. Learn by doing!\n\nEdit: added a letter. :)",
"Here's a good [XKCD What If](_URL_0_) that explains why they don't do this.\n\nThe simplest answer is \"It's possible, but carrying enough fuel to do it is heavier than a heat shield\". Since spacecraft are trying to be as light as possible to save costs, that's a significant savings."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://what-if.xkcd.com/58/"
]
]
|
|
dqj9uy | will people without good athletic genes who become good atheltes pass some of their new traits to their children? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dqj9uy/eli5_will_people_without_good_athletic_genes_who/ | {
"a_id": [
"f64x6ar",
"f64ywvi",
"f6581yh"
],
"score": [
7,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Short answer: no. This is what was the most 'popular' wrong interpretation of evolution theory in the past. \nWhile epigenetics can have influence on the person itself, it doesn't really carry trough to their children.",
"But if the good athlete (because of hard work) has 3 kids and forces them to be top athletes from day one two might die in the process and the one that is left alive likely has a genetic mutation that helped them survive the training. This lone survivor would then have to repeat the process inadvertently killing some of his own offspring for the sake of athleticism after a few generations of this in theory there will be some natural born athletes.",
"This is known as [Lamarckism](_URL_0_) after a 19th century French biologist, but it was generally accepted for centuries — back to Hippocrates and Aristotle — that acquired traits are passed on. Lamarck presented this as a way to explain how animals evolved from a common ancestor. Most famously, Lamarck argued some animals stretched their necks to eat leaves high on trees; the stretching meant their descendants were born with slightly longer necks, which they stretched further; and *their* descendants did the same, and so on, until we wind up with giraffes. Darwin argued instead the longest-necked giraffes had an advantage over shorter-necked giraffes, and therefore survived and mated with other longer-necked giraffes, and their descendants had even longer necks."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism"
]
]
|
||
2zlv3s | when you look at the sand underwater at beaches, why does the sand have ripples? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zlv3s/eli5_when_you_look_at_the_sand_underwater_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpk3gim",
"cpk78zn"
],
"score": [
24,
2
],
"text": [
"Sand underwater produces dunes due to currents/tides/waves in a manner similar to how dunes are produced due to wind in deserts. ",
"The sand is the lower boundary layer and there is friction between the sand and the water. This is creating local turbulence and a kind of vorticity pattern can be seen in the sand"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
42hhdi | what are "parameters/arguments" in computer programming, specifically in javascript? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42hhdi/eli5_what_are_parametersarguments_in_computer/ | {
"a_id": [
"czabq7d",
"czabw68"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You can think of parameters as roles in a play and arguments as the actors that fill the roles. A parameter might be like *x* in a function *f*(*x*) that computes and returns the value 2*x*, whereas an argument would be like 7 in a separate routine that calls *f*(7) and receives back the value 14.",
"Parameters are variables that a function/method expects to be passed into it. so, in the function\n\n int sum(int x, int y){\n return x+y;\n }\n\nx and y are parameters. They don't have any constant value but they are placeholders for whatever you, the programmer, will pass to that function later. \n\nif we then later call this function:\n\n int a = 3;\n sum(a,7); //returns 10.\n\nthen a and 7 are arguments. They are the actual values you pass to the function when you are using it."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
7g1wtc | how exactly does currency “move” between banks, individuals, companies, etc. when processed electronically and without the use of any actual physical currency (cash)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7g1wtc/eli5_how_exactly_does_currency_move_between_banks/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqfzd2h"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Ahoy, matey! Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: What happens when money is digitally transfered from one bank to another? Is the money later picked up to be stored there? Or is there some sort or digital I.O.U. involved? ](_URL_1_)\n1. [ELI5: Electronic Funds Transfers ](_URL_0_)\n1. [ELI5: How do wire transfers work? ](_URL_2_)\n1. [ELI5: What really happens when banks transfer money? ](_URL_3_)\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jdx1v/eli5_electronic_funds_transfers/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ipzmn/eli5_what_happens_when_money_is_digitally/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g6m2h/eli5_how_do_wire_transfers_work/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yuup8/eli5_what_really_happens_when_banks_transfer_money/"
]
]
|
||
795hvd | fingerprint scanner (touch id) hashing | Specifically, explain it like I completely understand hashing.
I understand that when you change the input to a hash function a tiny amount the entire output changes.
This is what I don't get: if a hash of the fingerprint is stored then doesn't a tiny variation on the positioning, lighting etc of the scan completely change the output which is then compared with the stored version, thus marking it as incorrect??? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/795hvd/eli5_fingerprint_scanner_touch_id_hashing/ | {
"a_id": [
"dozd180",
"dozdavn",
"dozwjer"
],
"score": [
10,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\n > The raster scan is temporarily stored in encrypted memory within the Secure Enclave\nwhile being vectorized for analysis, and then it’s discarded. The analysis utilizes subdermal\nridge flow angle mapping, which is a lossy process that discards minutia data that would\nbe required to reconstruct the user’s actual fingerprint. The resulting map of nodes is\nstored without any identity information in an encrypted format\n\nI think the idea is that it's always just looking for the same set of nodes (or rather the subset that is in contact with the sensor during a given scan). Each individual scan may be slightly different, but it's discarding all of the stuff that varies and just looking for a few static parts. ",
"Your fingerprints contain a lot of little details that make them unique, that's how we're able to consistently identify different people using them. These details are called minutiae. When the scanner picks up your print, it identifies the various minutiae and can use those to create a consistent hash.\n\nMost computer fingerprint systems will do this by comparing the presented fingerprint against a database of fingerprints, but in order to maintain security, a biometric security system shouldn't do that, instead a minutiae point called the pattern, the overall shape of the fingerprint, can be used to indentify the center and rough orientation of the print, from there the computer can then check the other minutiae points relative to that center to calculate the hash and ask the computer to compare the two.",
"The image itself isn't hashed, rather the software identifies a group of landmarks in the fingerprint, hashes their attributes, then compares the hash to the original's."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf"
],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1be0ol | how is a format lossless and how does it stay lossless after copying it repeatedly? | Just wondering. I searched and couldn't find the question.
I believe .flac is a lossless format. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1be0ol/eli5_how_is_a_format_lossless_and_how_does_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"c962asa"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Simply copying a file from one location to another is expected to be lossless. Otherwise, computer files would break a lot. But, I think you are really asking about converting between lossless audio formats without losing information.\n\nWell, you could start with the simplest audio format: PCM. It's just a bunch of numbers in a row that pretty directly describe how to move your speakers in and out to make sound. PCM is what compressed audio formats usually decompress into. It's often referred to as uncompressed audio.\n\nOne way to losslessly compress PCM would be to just Zip it. Zip is well known to not mess up your bits. You get the same bits you started with after you unzip. Otherwise, people wouldn't use Zip. Unfortunately, Zip doesn't work very well on PCM. PCM tends to vary too wildly for Zip to predict well. So, Zip only compresses PCM by a small amount.\n\nA well known way to get strong audio compression is to use MP3 or OGG compression. Unfortunately, those formats are lossy. You don't get exactly the same bits back when you decompress back to PCM. But, the difference is usually really small. Therein lies the trick! The really small differences between decompressed OGG compared to the original PCM bits is relatively easy for Zip to deal with. So, FLAC uses OGG to compress the audio, but then also uses something like Zip to losslessy compress the *exact bit differences* that cancel out the errors introduced by OGG. Both data streams are packed together in the FLAC.\n\nIt goes like this when encoding:\n\n* LossyCompressed(PCM) - > Ogg\n\n* ZipCompress(PCM - Decompress(OGG)) - > zippedErrors\n\n* PackTogether(Ogg, zippedErrors) - > FLAC\n\nThen when decoding:\n\n* Decompress(Ogg) + Unzip(zippedErrors) - > LossyPCM + errorCorrection - > Original PCM without errors!\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
2w2jv8 | why do people in public keep their bottle in the brown paper bag whilst drinking from it(the bottle) ? | It's not like a cop would be like, 'another bag drinker' .. 'Drive on, Rusty .. nothing to see here' | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2w2jv8/eli5why_do_people_in_public_keep_their_bottle_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"con05tr",
"con07aq"
],
"score": [
9,
5
],
"text": [
"It's exactly like that.\n\nMany municipalities have 'open container laws'. What this means in practice is that if you're holding an open container of alcohol on the public streets, the police can stop you (and, in theory, arrest you - although they're more likely to make you throw it away). Placing the container in a brown paper bag means the police don't know what you're drinking and won't stop you.\n\nSomething to bear in mind is that there are many laws the police don't particularly *want* to enforce, so they'll overlook them when it's not shoved in their face.",
"Because it gives everyone plausible deniability for public drinking. The police cannot see that the beverage is alcoholic, so the person can complain that they are being unfairly targeted if the police stops them for that (\"what, because I'm black you think I'm out here drinking a 40 on the curb?\") and since the police aren't *actually* seeing a crime being committed, they ignore it.\n\nThat being said, paper bagging it doesn't make it legal, and a police officer having a bad day could stop and ticket you for it. Generally speaking though, it is not worth the effort. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
3427gv | how are actors/actresses under the age of 18 allowed to play adult scenes in films and tv shows? | for example a recent sex scene between Dean-Charles Chapman (16 at the time) and Natalie Dormer (33) in Game of thrones season 5? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3427gv/eli5_how_are_actorsactresses_under_the_age_of_18/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqqj1lh",
"cqqjdmq",
"cqqji1p"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"He wasn't actually having sex on camera. Doing an R-rated scene and simulating sex is different than doing an x-rated scene in a porn shoot.",
"I assume you're talking about this scene.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nNotice nowhere in that scene did either actor come in contact with each other. She only touched him on the shoulder. She was probably wearing underwear and some kind of cover that was taped over her breasts. \n\nHe of course was also wearing underwear. \n\nThere is no law about an older woman touching the shoulders of a underage male.",
"They aren't performing the acts, they are making it seem as they are. It's the sams reason people are able to perform crimes on TV shows :)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RULE2NM0LBA"
],
[]
]
|
|
99yadt | what does tl;dr mean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/99yadt/eli5_what_does_tldr_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4r9sct",
"e4ra0xg",
"e4ra7fo"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Too Long; Didn't Read.\n\nIt's a flippant way for commenters to ask for, or for writers to add, a summary to longer pieces of text in a way that's easily recognisable. You'll often find it at the end of multiple paragraph long posts on many subreddits starting a brief explanation, or just the term itself in the comments should OP fail to provide one :P",
"I feel like googling it would have been faster to answer this question then asking the question. But tl;dr is too long, didn't read. It using follows after someone posted a wall of text and they gave a short summary for people who weren't going to read it.",
"What does ELI5 mean? Make it simple, like I'm very young please."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
20j09p | why are people against the farming of rhinos? | Wouldn't it help keep the species from going extinct? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20j09p/eli5_why_are_people_against_the_farming_of_rhinos/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg3oyr2",
"cg3oz3u"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Farming is for animals you want to harvest for consumption. Plenty of people are for the preservation of the species, including but not limited to preserves and zoos.\n\nThe biggest problem is that they're massive animals, and require massive food and space -- often more than can be properly provided.",
"Hippos were proposed to be farmed in the wetlands of Louisiana."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
2pz3oj | why are people asking for nyc mayor de blasio to step down after the deaths of 2 nypd officers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pz3oj/eli5_why_are_people_asking_for_nyc_mayor_de/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn1b829",
"cn1erjm",
"cn1f130",
"cn1nigq",
"cn1ocpb",
"cn1pfja",
"cn1q6wv",
"cn1rlvt"
],
"score": [
78,
10,
2,
26,
12,
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The people calling for him to step down are (1) people who didn't vote for him and are upset that he is in office (2) people who believe conspiracy theories like the one about him telling the city not to clear rich streets of snow (3) people who are deranged by anything liberal/with a black connection or (4) people who don't live in NYC. \n\nAfter every school shooting, the same people who are trying to capitalize politically from these murders say that no one is to blame but the shooter. Now, when a man who killed his black wife that morning (I guess the mayor of NYC incited him to do that too) it is all about a mayor who had the insane idea of calling for more training for his officers (which the FOP already wanted until the mayor said it). \n\nNoise doesn't equal content.",
"I typed out a huge reply but deleted it... long story short racial tensions are high (think Brown, Gardner). \n\nEven Bill OReilly thinks the guy who was responsible for Gardners death crossed the line. Reddit hates him but the guy is no idiot. De Blasio is being blamed for making polarizing remarks instead of trying to resolve and unify the city. Many believe this is what led to the shootings. \n\nI'll be the first to admit that some of what the nypd is doing is trashy:\n\n\" The blood of 2 executed officers is on the hands of mayor de Blasio.\" -SBANYPD Twitter \n\nHowever, the NYPD felt that de Blasio had created such a dangerous situation for them that several officers started signing something that would not allow de Blasio to attend their funerals if they were to be killed. That was before all this so the department actually believed (perhaps correctly) that the mayor was putting the police in danger. \n\nEdit: finished my thought, I'm in mobile and thought my post got erased \n\n\n",
"Because police officers have the intelligence and emotional maturity of 5 year olds, and thus equate the sentiments he made with the actions of a mentally unstable individual. In short, a whole lot of childish behavior.",
"As someone currently living in NY right now cops want him to step down because he \"turned his back\" on the police officers and traditionally a NYC mayor would view police officers as his own responsibility and would stick by them no matter what through good and bad. Some of the more extreme people feel that he is fueling a race war because he sides with both the cops and the protestors at different times. \n\nNow for the more practical reasons people do not like de Blasio.\n\n* He is trying to ban the iconic horse carriages through central park. It has been speculated that the real estate will be sold to some friends of de Blasio. \n\n* He closed down the ferry to the Rockaway to the public yet he took the same ferry to flight 587 memorial (20 minutes late) because it was faster. \n\n* Hes lowering the speed limit across the entire NYC.\n\nHe preaches equality and change a lot how Obama did in 2008 and is slowly taking more and more away from NYC and is not focusing on the basics like affordable housing. He's more of a flop of a mayor, very political, wants to sell real estate to foreign investors, and is only focused on how to get reelected.",
"The NYPD is a political force of its own. Look at the propaganda from the 70's. They hate De blasio because there are 30k NYPD officers who don't like being told what they can and can't do. \n\nThe NYPD uses intimidation and violence and always has. If anyone questions it, they're committing heresy. \n\nThe same time the Union rep called out the Mayor he also called out all protesters ever. They are quite literally jackbooted thugs. If you disagree with them you are wrong and should be dealt with.\n\nEdit: tense and punctuation\nEdit2: missed another",
"because this is how politics works, you try to capitalize on events to win votes/political favor, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt ",
"Police officers of the NYPD have taken an oath to the City of New York and their Mayor (the top ranking official in the NYPD hierarchy). They took this oath believing that when they wake up in the morning and put their lives on the line, that the mayor would support them when they have to make those tough decisions: He did not.\n\nWhen anti-police rhetoric started sprouting up, the mayor did not stand behind the men and woman that served him. Instead the Mayor sided with the protesters (to appease the masses), telling the protester that even he has spoken to his own son to be fearful of the police. \n\nThe mayors agreeableness with the anti-police protesters created a permissive sentiment where people feel justified in being physical with an police officer. Such as what happened on the BK bridge not too long ago. (_URL_0_) \n\nIt's also this sentiment, that cops are bad(which de blasio passiveness supports) that swayed Ismaaiyl Brinsley into thinking he can come out a martyr by killing two NYPD officers.",
"I think reading the discussion over at /r/protectandserve really lends some insight.\n\n_URL_0_\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wrSMqQL0GM"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/ProtectAndServe/comments/2pxs0r/video_nypd_officers_turn_away_from_mayor_de/"
]
]
|
||
5vmxei | how long would it theoretically take for us to get to the 7 earth sized planets? | My assumption is we would have to spend generations upon generations traveling so I would think we would need a flotilla of self sustaining ships to travel that distance where an entire community would grow together, similar to the Quarians in Mass Effect. My question is theoretically how many years or generations would it be? You can assume our current space ship speed if possible.
Thanks :) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vmxei/eli5how_long_would_it_theoretically_take_for_us/ | {
"a_id": [
"de3b3p8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" > You can assume our current space ship speed if possible.\n\nAFAIK, the fastest we've gone is with that Jupiter slingshot probe which reached 165,000mph. We're not going to go much faster than that, and a large ship would probably go slower. But let's be optimistic and stick with 165,000.\n\nThe distance is 39 light years. So about 160,000 years. Or about 5,000 generations.\n\nBasically, it's impossible with current technology. We'd run out of food. We would also have huge problems with radiation in space unless the ship was outfitted against that as well."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5pwsot | why does ginger hair retain colour longer than other colours? | Similarly, why does it require bleach to take to colours? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pwsot/eli5_why_does_ginger_hair_retain_colour_longer/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcup9dv",
"dcvi7aa"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I have nothing more than anecdotal, experience-based evidence, but does red hair *really* retain color longer? My family has a good amount of redheads in it, and they have certainly not kept their color very long. One of my redheaded cousins already has a gray spot growing on the back of his head (graying is sooner in men though, isn't it? so...).\n\n & nbsp;\n\nYour body text makes me think you may not be talking about genetic hair color though, and instead talking about red hair *dye*.\n\nAnd I don't know that answer either.\n\n & nbsp;\n\nAlthough I feel pretty certain that the reason you need bleach first when dying hair is that the dye can only darken the hair's color. So, you want bright red hair and you have dark brown, you gotta get that brightness first.",
"I do not think this is true. Both my grandmother and grandfather were redheads. My grandmother started going grey early and was completely snow white before 60. My grandfather still has a head full of hair at 90 so no hair loss, but it has been all steel grey before 55. My mother is a redhead who has never colored her hair, she is 52 and about 1/4 of her gair is grey and the red has faded to a very light brownish red. My best friend had a head full of grey hair (and a grey beard) at 40, he was a ginger. I have always thought that red hair lost its color faster, but I guess it depends on the person."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
4yhz2c | how can an island surrounded by saltwater have fresh water springs? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4yhz2c/eli5_how_can_an_island_surrounded_by_saltwater/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6nunbz",
"d6nv4cc"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Fresh water springs get their supply of water from the rain which falls on the island and drips down the soil. towards where the spring comes up.",
"The islands of Jamaica and Puerto Princesa have underground rivers.\nIsla de Mona has an underground aquifer. The Sanibel and Captiva Islands have deep artesian aquifers."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
1d9q9q | practicing buddhism, becoming a buddhist, the buddhist philosophy, ect. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1d9q9q/eli5_practicing_buddhism_becoming_a_buddhist_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9oivly"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Well, to begin with, this is a very big question. Buddhism is older than Christianity and practiced today by ½ to 1.5 billion people, depending upon how you define a “Buddhist”. There are lots of ways people practice Buddhism, so there are lots of answers your question. Over the centuries, Buddhism has come to be practiced differently in different places. Even if you consider one place, Buddhism has changed over time. I won’t go into the many ways that they are all different because that alone is enough to fill up many books. \n\nBuddhism was started by a real man, around 500BCE. His name was Siddhartha Gautauma and he is said to have been born a Hindu prince in what is now India or Nepal. He left his royal life of comfort and became a kind of wandering pilgrim, trying to find the answers to life. At that time this was not uncommon and a respectable practice for even well-off people. At first, Siddhartha tried extreme asceticism (giving up food and bodily comforts and almost withering down to nothing) but found that this didn’t bring him insight. He knew his previous life of plush comfort didn’t bring him any enlightenment either and he created what is called “The Middle Way”, which means that we should tend to our body’s needs but not blunt our contact with the world with overindulgence. \n\nBuddha’s Middle Way leads to a broader approach about how we should interact with the ourselves and the world and it’s one that is quite different from most other religions. Human foibles such as laziness or gluttony (or over-redditing) are not seen as “evil” but simply as a byproduct of our imperfect biological selves. As a result, Buddhism is less condemning of human error. To be sure, Buddhists set very high standards for ethical human behavior (vegetarianism and non-violence among many others) but they see the failure to reach those goals as a mark of our imperfect biology, rather than “sin”.\n\nAnother important characteristic about Buddhism is that Buddha is not a wholly theistic religion. When Buddha was asked if God exists, he said he didn’t know; perhaps there is a God (or Gods) or perhaps not but the important thing is that doesn’t affect how we should behave here on earth. That being said, the respect that all Buddhists (and many non-Buddhists) have for Buddha has lead some to worship Buddha like he is a God: there are big statues of him and people pray and make offerings to him. Many Buddhists however consider worshipping a godlike Buddha as simply another human need, which they accept (following The Middle Way) but see as something to be shed. Because Buddhism is in part atheistic, some people go so far as to call Buddhism a philosophy, rather than a religion. \n\nThe ultimate goal of Buddhism is for us to reach enlightenment, which is a way of saying that we finally come to see beyond our flawed biological selves and “become one” with the true nature of existence. Another important difference between Buddhism and other religions is that Buddhism does not assert that it has *the only way* to reach enlightenment. Other religions are not seen as necessarily in error and following those religions can also result in reaching enlightenment. For this reason, Buddhists do not try to convert people to their religion.\n\nLike many religions, Buddhism teaches its values through parables. Here are three stories from the Buddhist canon that I think illustrate some of these points:\n\n-The Buddha had disciples who followed him on his travels. One day one of them came to Buddha and said that he had heard about another wandering philosopher and that even though he loved the Buddha, the disciple wanted to follow this other man. Buddha told him to go. Follow this other man and if he was truly following his heart, then he would be following Buddha too. In other words, Buddha said that you can follow his path even when you practice another religion(!) (which is in part why there is such a large range of numbers in the second sentence of my answer.)\n\n-A Chinese Buddhist monk begged for alms for many years in order to raise money to translate the Buddhist texts from Sanskrit into Chinese. Unfortunately, just as he had raised the money he needed, the village burned down and the monk gave all his money to help rebuild the village. The monk began raising money again and just as he had the money he needed, there was a flood. Once again, the monk gave all the money he had to help the villagers rebuild their lives. Finally the money was raised the translation was made.\n…But many people consider the first two translations better.\n\n-Two neighbors keep little statues of the Buddha in their houses. The one that considered himself more devout burnt incense as an offering every day, while the other simply went about their life following the precepts of the Buddha. In the end, the first one ended up closer to enlightenment. The other just ended up with a blackened and sooty statue. \n\nRegarding becoming a Buddhist, I would suggest reading about the different kinds of Buddhism and seeing what seems right to you. In beginning your research, probably the two most major branches of Buddhism are called Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Also, in the west, many Buddhist temples serve local community of immigrants from a specific country, so there are Thai Buddhist temples or Vietnamese Buddhist temples. Zen Buddhism (From Japan) has had a profound effect on western culture; from “being in the zone”, to gestural minimalism in art.\n\nLastly, I would say that becoming a Buddhist means simply beginning to do so; beginning with your imperfect self and going forward. The symbol of Buddhism is the lotus flower: the perfect white flower that grows out of the muck at the bottom of the pond. \n\nOne last story from the Buddhist canon: the new monk asks his master how he can get started on reaching enlightenment. The master responds, “Did you eat your meal?” The initiate says he did. The Master says, “Good. Now go wash your bowl.”\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
630i98 | why does norovirus need to be cleaned with bleach from surfaces, but washing hands with regular soap & water is sufficient on hands? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/630i98/eli5_why_does_norovirus_need_to_be_cleaned_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfqcuj7",
"dfqdcqa"
],
"score": [
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Here's a reference, CDC says wash hands w/ soap & water and surfaces w/ bleach: _URL_0_",
"Norovirus isn't killed by alcohol. Therefore, we have to use soap and water to physically remove it from our hands. This isn't killing the virus, but rather just flushing it down the drain. This is why they stress soap and water, because using hand sanitizer won't do the job.\n\nIf we used bleach on our hands, that would cause a lot of damage, so soap and water is definitely good enough.\n\nOn the other hand, it's far more efficient to kill the virus that is on surfaces. To do so, we use bleach (rather than clorox wipes)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.cdc.gov/norovirus/preventing-infection.html"
],
[]
]
|
||
1xp1ze | why are more developers choosing indiegogo instead of kickstarter to fund their projects? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xp1ze/eli5_why_are_more_developers_choosing_indiegogo/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfdbsic"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Indiegogo gives you more payment options (paypal), which makes it more accessible for international backers, and it also gives people the option of \"flexible funding campaigns\" - ie, collecting all the pledged funds regardless of whether the goal is reached."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
22mqcm | why are there two traffic lights for one lane of traffic? | While stopped at a traffic light, I wondered why if only one lane sees this light, why have 2? It's a bit redundant but I'm curious. _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22mqcm/eli5_why_are_there_two_traffic_lights_for_one/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgob46w"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Redundancy and improved visibility.\n\nThe redundancy comes in to play if for some reason one of them fails, the other still would function fine. \n\nIn visibility, simply having a second light increases your chances of seeing it."
]
} | []
| [
"http://imgur.com/F5WVUgz"
]
| [
[]
]
|
|
200nps | what exactly is occuring in your lungs after vigorous excersize that doesnt allow you to catch your breath immediately? | What is happening in the lungs when your body cant catch its breath at first? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/200nps/eli5_what_exactly_is_occuring_in_your_lungs_after/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfyp2wl",
"cfyp47a",
"cfyqdin",
"cfytenh"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not what's happening in your lungs as what's not happening.\n\nMostly when someone is out of breath and can't catch it they are out of shape so their body isn't as efficient as it needs to be to transfer oxygen to the blood.\n\nOnce you're in good shape you stop running out of breath, you'll still breathe hard after exercise but it ends really fast because the body has gotten good at transferring oxygen to the blood.\n\nSo muscles need oxygen but the body can't get it to them as fast as needed so the body has to breathe fast to try and get more",
"It's not your lungs, it's your muscles. Exerting yourself means your muscles require more energy, and in order to catalyze that energy, oxygen is required, a lot more oxygen than is normally dissolved in your blood.",
"as i understand it: carbon dioxide builds up in the blood stream during exercise and your body needs to get rid of it, heavy/deep breathing is the best way to get rid of that excess carbon dioxide.\nThis is probably contrary to the way many people think about breathing (getting rid of carbon dioxide vs breathing in oxygen/air) but im 95% certain this is the way it works.\nDr Karl would explain it better....",
"As a lifelong runner/cyclist/triathlete, I have a bit of knowledge in the subject. We're talking about why it's hard to catch your breath after a workout, but to answer that question you have to look at the workout itself.\n\nYou use the term vigorous, and that makes me think [anaerobic](_URL_2_) ([glycolysis](_URL_3_)/[lactic acid fermentation](_URL_4_)) exercise rather than aerobic exercise ([cellular respiration](_URL_1_)). The main difference is the way the body receives energy. In aerobic exercise, your muscles power themselves by converting your oxygen into energy. For an effort to be considered 'aerobic' you're not using all of the oxygen your lungs can take in. In other words, you have excess oxygen, so it's easier to recover.\n\nIt helps this next section to think of your lungs as containers for air. Simple enough. Your lungs have a limited volume, [\"VO2 max\"](_URL_0_) in the athletic world, VO2 max is also known as \"maximal aerobic capacity,\" the maximum amount of oxygen your lungs can process. There is also the concept of \"oxygen debt,\" which is exactly what it sounds like. You're using near your peak VO2 max in oxygen, and your body is starting to process what oxygen you do take in inefficiently. You're exhaling prematurely and not allowing your lungs to process enough oxygen. Your body is now looking to other means of powering your muscles.\n\nThis is anaerobic exercise. Sprinting. Your heart is pounding oxygenated blood through your body as fast as it can, your lungs are pumping their hardest to get that precious oxygen in. But it's not enough. Welcome to the wonderful world of oxygen debt! Your muscles need energy and they need it now. Your muscles begin a process called glycolysis which produces lactic acid as a byproduct. Your muscles are actively breaking down glucose to power themselves. This is typically explained as \"burning fat\".\n\nAs you taper down from anaerobic exercise, you're still in an \"oxygen debt,\" your muscles are still producing lactic acid through glycolysis, and your lungs are working double time to re-oxygenate your blood to normal levels. Hence the issue with catching your breath. Your muscles take some time to fully revert to cellular respiration, in the meanwhile you're breathing harder to compensate.\n\nSome ways to help maintain your breathing/catch your breath easier, that I use, are controlled, forced regulated breathing. During borderling aerobic/anaerobic exercise breathe in your nose, hold it, out your mouth. After your exercise, elevate your arms above your head, recline your shoulders slightly, this expands your diaphragm and allows your lungs to take in more oxygen. Don't hunch over. It might feel easier, but it's detrimental to your short and long term recovery."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VO2_max",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_respiration",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_exercise",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycolysis",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactic_acid_fermentation"
]
]
|
|
5q8b25 | if electricity is made from mostly fossil fuels, how is it considered a clean energy source? (e.g. electric cars) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5q8b25/eli5_if_electricity_is_made_from_mostly_fossil/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcx58cv",
"dcx5amm",
"dcx5op0",
"dcx66jf"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a question of presentation. Electricity is \"clean\" assuming it is already created. Generation methods to produce electricity are varied in their \"cleanliness.\"\n\nYou can further muddy the waters if you consider that building a new car is in itself fossil fuel intensive. So whenever you read \"clean\" anything it isn't a truthful statement as no manufactured product today is free from released carbon emissions and pollution.\n\nJust producing a new car consumes and releases a lot of pollution. ",
"Three main reasons. First, you can get electricity from things like nuclear power, wind, hydroelectric, and solar power. It might come from fossil fuel or it might not.\n\nSecond, converting fuel into energy with low emissions is performed better with more specialized equipment. A coal power plant can scrub exhaust air with mechanisms that are impractical to carry around in every car.\n\nFinally the third and one of the most important reasons is *where* the emissions are released. If you are dumping car exhaust downtown then air quality suffers locally, but if you dump it from smokestacks on the edge of town it is much less of a problem because people aren't breathing it in as much.\n\n\n",
"A few things. 1) there is benefit in localized energy production. Power plants are able to generate power more efficiently that a million internal combustion engines, even with the power lost in transmissions. It also keeps the emissions localized, where they can be more efficiently scrubbed it captured. \n\nThere are also a few other benefits, such as the ability for cars to avoid wasting energy when idling or to reclaim energy in breaking.\n\nEssentially though you are right that part of the benefit relies on a continuation of a transition to renewables. It is an important part of that infrastructure though. Internal combustion engines won't ever be green. Electric cars are more green than their counterparts and instantly become more green as the grid does.",
"Just some fun facts:\n\nAs of 2015 here is the percentage of electricity generated via source in the US.\n\n\nCoal = 33%\nNatural gas = 33%\nNuclear = 20%\nHydropower = 6%\nOther renewables = 7%\nBiomass = 1.6%\nGeothermal = 0.4%\nSolar = 0.6%\nWind = 4.7%\nPetroleum = 1%\nOther gases = < 1%\n\nAnd, as of 2010, power plants in the US emit 3 times the CO2 than cars. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
78wuwz | what's the difference between mitosis and binary fission? | So my professor said that prokaryotes don't do mitosis, and instead reproduce by binary fission. What's the difference between them, and does binary fission happen in any high eukaryotes?
Also some protozoa like Paramecium for example do both binary fission to reproduce asexually, and mitosis and meiosis to reproduce sexually. Why? Why not stick to one type? Why not reproduce asexually by mitosis or sexuallt by binary fission? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/78wuwz/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_mitosis_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"doxhzt4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Binary fission is like a super-simple form of mitosis. The difference between the two is that mitosis has a *spindle*, which is the yellow structure in [this mitosis diagram](_URL_0_). The spindles grab one copy of each chromosome for each daughter cell, ensuring that each daughter gets a full copy of the cell's DNA. \n\nIn binary fission, the DNA doesn't separate into different chromosomes that need to be individually grabbed; it stays as one big coil. After it duplicates, the two big coils drift apart into the two daughter cells, without the need for a spindle.\n\n > Also some protozoa like Paramecium for example do both binary fission to reproduce asexually, and mitosis and meiosis to reproduce sexually. Why? Why not stick to one type? Why not reproduce asexually by mitosis or sexuallt by binary fission?\n\nParamecium and similar organisms are weird because their cells have two types of nucleus: a macronucleus and a micronucleus. When they reproduce asexually, the macronucleus splits by binary fission, while the micronucleus splits by mitosis (with a spindle).\n\nReproducing sexually can *only* be done with meiosis. That's because each daughter cell of meiosis only has half the chromosomes of the original cell - it then merges with a daughter cell from the other parent to get the full number of chromosomes again. If you tried sexual reproduction with mitosis or binary fission, you'd end up with twice as many chromosomes!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Mitosis_Stages.svg"
]
]
|
|
11pkhd | viewing something subjectively vs objectively | Like I'm 5 years old | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11pkhd/eli5_viewing_something_subjectively_vs_objectively/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6ohfef",
"c6ohxsx"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Objective means it's based on facts, like \"it's 80 degrees outside\" or \"that man weighs 250 lbs\".\n\nSubjective means it's based on opinion, like \"it's hot outside\", or \"that man is heavy\".",
"Objective means something is true no matter what, it is a fact.\n\nSubjective is not, something like an opinion.\n\nObjective: The Sky is blue.\n\nSubjective: I think the sky is pretty."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
z2tdb | why people sell to the pawn stars when the item is way more valuable than the money they are getting. | Can't the sellers just sell to auction houses like the pawn stars? They're being ripped off hundreds of dollars and they act like its a norm. Can't they sell to antique stores, it just seems so silly how much money they are getting when the actual value is way higher. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/z2tdb/eli5_why_people_sell_to_the_pawn_stars_when_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c60y8sk",
"c60y8ux",
"c60ygn4",
"c60yks9",
"c60zmwr",
"c61085k",
"c611v8j"
],
"score": [
25,
2,
21,
3,
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Most pawn shops don't operate like Hardcore Pawn or Pawn Stars. Pawn stores generally don't buy items. They pawn.\n\nYou go to the pawn store and give them your guitar/diamond ring/gun/whatever and sign the paper work. They give you money. You have X amount of time to pay that money back. If you pay it back, you get your item back. If you don't, they keep it and sell the object.\n\nThe shows you see are pretty much lies. Real pawn shops are miserable places where peoples broken dreams are on sale.",
"A: Because they're in Vegas and want some quick cash.\nB: Because something is only worth as much as someone else is willing to pay for it, and if you collect antique cannons, there's probably a very small community of collectors interested in it, who may not have the liquidity/display/storage space to buy a $15k cannon.",
"1. **Connections.** Owners of items might not know where to go, what to sell it for, where to find buyers, how to verify that it's legitimate, and so on. The Pawn Stars have connections that an owner might not, especially if the owner is not a collector and just inherited or found the item. It sounds easy to turn around and sell the item yourself, but if you're not familiar with the system, it's very, very hard!\n\n2. **Simplicity.** You have two options: take $500 today, **or** you can spend countless hours tracking down experts, getting your item authenticated, finding a buyer, storing the item until it sells, and then finally selling it for $1500 months or even years down the line... but you had to spend $200 in fees getting it authenticated, had to take time out of your weeks to make phone calls and search online, and had to deal with the item cluttering up your garage the whole time. For some people, the labour involved just isn't worth it!\n\n3. **Money money money!** A lot of people are won over by the promise of instant money. Even if you're potentially willing to put in the effort yourself to sell it for top dollar, people like the Pawn Stars are waving instant cash right under your nose. Money NOW is always so much more fun and appealing than the vague promise of maybe getting money later.",
"To be on TV",
"You're transferring the burden of finding a buyer, the expense of storing maintaining and restoring the item, and the risk of not being able to sell it to the pawn shop.\n\nIt could take a very long time and a lot of searching to find someone willing to pay the appraised value for something. You might have a cool artifact, but most people aren't buying $5,000 banjos built by Abraham Lincoln's nephew. You'll take a hit on the price in order to get the item off your hands and cash in your pocket, but you then won't have to post dozens of classifieds for it, meet with potential buyers, store it safely, and all of that stuff that takes time and money.\n\nIt's all about risk- the pawn shop might not sell an item for months or years, so they need to evaluate not only what the appraised value is, but also how likely they are to find a buyer, how expensive it will be to hold the item in the store, etc. You can't just toss a bizzare high price item on craigslist and find a buyer in two days- it's a lot of work to find someone willing to drop $10k on Elvis's brother's dining room set.",
"1. Often they aren't selling the item, they are pawning it...getting a loan and using the item as collateral.\n2. It takes time, money, and expertise to get full value for an item. It costs money to list an item at an auction, and it takes time and a car to drive around town checking all the antique stores. If you need money *now*, your options are limited.\n3. A lot of time neither the person nor the pawn store know what an item is really worth. So the pawn broker is only only go offer a value he is 90% sure he will be able to quickly sell the item for. And if it sells for a lot more, not only is that a bonus, that's the item their are going to show on TV, not the broken Nintendo he winds up throwing away.",
"That's how the script was written."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
85s3fg | why firearms' ammo are classified in metric, not imperial? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/85s3fg/eli5_why_firearms_ammo_are_classified_in_metric/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvzmf10",
"dvzmghl",
"dvzmw2g"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"The short answer is that they aren't always and that the designation of a cartridge is usually decided by its creator. For instance, .45ACP , .40S & W, .357 Magnum, are all measured in inches these originate from the USA. Contrast this to 9mm which was made in Germany. \n",
"Some are. 45 acp is 0.45 inches in diameter. 50 Cal is 0.50 inches in diameter. 22lr is 0.22 inches. 223 is 0.223 inches. ",
"They can be in both. NATO uses metric so they have a standard set of calibers they use that are all listed in metric. When you see a caliber listed with a decimal at the front (.45, .357, .308) that measurement is the diameter of the bullet in decimal inches. When you see larger numbers (7.62, 5.56, etc.) those are measured in millimeters. In some cases they can be measured in both imperial and metric. For example, .308 and 7.62x51mm is the same round."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
3nidot | what is it that separates my brain or mind from that of a genius? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nidot/eli5what_is_it_that_separates_my_brain_or_mind/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvocumz",
"cvod4n9",
"cvoef55",
"cvofovx"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Frankly, we don't really know. We've examined brains of geniuses like Einstein, but we still don't have a firm answer.",
"We know that genetic defects can easily render a person mentally retarded, and we know that education and focus can make a mentally healthy person into a very intelligent person. Maybe some people have genetic mutations that allow them to achieve \"genius\" at certain subjects, but there is no hard evidence for this. Therefor, the thing that separates your brain from that of a genius is most likely just effort.",
"I'm pretty sure its more nurture than nature. If I gave you a piano, for example, when you were 5 years old and you spent most of your childhood playing piano and learning music theory out of genuine interest, by the time you reach your 20's you'd likely be as good at piano as most of us are with our native languages. But if I gave you that piano right now, It would take you a long time to be as good as someone who had been practicing since they were very young. Also when you're older we usually dont have the patience or the time to obsess over things like music, math, or language arts. We have alot of other things going on that require our focus so we're too distracted. Who has time, or actually cares to remember pi down to 100 digits after the decimal point? Not many people. But those who do.... Geniuses.\n\n\nTLDR: I think a genius is basically someone who took the time to obsess over a talent and get good at it. If there is any physical difference between the brain of a genius over a non-genius I'd bet it happened after the talent was acquired.",
"No difference. Genius is a loaded term, much like \"god\". It means different things to different people.\n\n\"Super-genius\" Einstein's brain was preserved and found to be pretty typical as far as brains go. Even Einstein said “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” I believe the same thing. But he also helped create the atom bomb, which was a monumentally stupid move."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
1kxh0k | why do you get thick phlegm when you drink soda? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kxh0k/eli5_why_do_you_get_thick_phlegm_when_you_drink/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbtlz40",
"cbtrymb",
"cbtvhdd"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Sugar/high fructose corn syrup \n\nI always do the spit thing the kid on big daddy did. ",
"OP here. Maybe phlegm isn't the right word, I guess mucus in throat is more accurate?",
"Soda is relatively acidic with a pH of 4 (on a scale of 1 being highly acidic and 14 being basic). When you drink the cola your body responds by protecting the lining of your throat with a layer of mucus.\nSource: _URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15591243"
]
]
|
||
287zyi | what do ips do and what can someone do with it? | I know it is bad if a hacker gets your ip but what do they do with it and what is it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/287zyi/eli5_what_do_ips_do_and_what_can_someone_do_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci8as3r",
"ci8dxym"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It's an address, but for the internet, and it means about as much if someone gets it as if they got your house address. ",
" > I know it is bad if a hacker gets your ip\n\nThis is not exactly true any longer. In the past (before cable internet), the common user was exposed directly to the internet through their ISP. Whenever someone would expose their IP address, they would be vulnerable to attacks and I'll get into that in a second.\n\nThese days, however, the common user is generally behind a router such that:\n\n [WWW] < - > [MODEM] < - > [ROUTER]---[YOU]\n\nThis means that the only exposed IP address is the router itself. You will have a network IP address and a public IP address and generally all computers on the router will share the same public IP address to the web but each will have its own private IP address which the router knows to map back to the specific device.\n\n > what do they do with it\n\nSo, there's two parts to this system that needs to be understood before I can answer that. First, you have the IP (internet protocol) address which allows for routing of information. This doesn't say \"where\" you are but \"who\" you are. Then there's the ports your system is listening on.\n\nThe ports on your system are exposed services that are open and waiting for connection from the right protocol. Some might host a website on their system and to do that, they have opened up port 80 for HTTP. Some might provide FTP support which requires exposure of 21. The point is that you are listening on X port for Y services to provide.\n\nSometimes, you are unaware of the fact that you are providing a service at all. Sometimes you might have installed a piece of software accidentially that does something malicious like open port 31337 for listening. The attacker has the client portion and simply runs it to connect to your \"server\" on that port because they have your IP address and know \"who\" you are. This is how trojans work.\n\nSo, when an attack requires a connection like this, it is on the TCP portion of the TCP/IP protocol stack. This can easily get very complicated to explain but just understand that it's a layered system of abstractions that provides the ability for network communications. Being that it's TCP side, means a full connection must be established.\n\nThere are other attacks that do not require a connection at all. These are on the IP portion of the stack. One particular common attack is the ICMP ECHO request (or ping) flood. This was so popular that there have been a great many steps to prevent it. There are also a great many steps to keep it alive as well. This is occasionally how botnets work which perform DDOS (Distributed denial of service) attacks. The premise of this attack is that a machine can only serve so much traffic at once. If you continually tie up the machine with garbage requests, it cannot handle the actual legitimate business that it needs to perform.\n\n*****\n\nThat's enough of a tour of this stuff though. My knowledge is archaic at this point as I have kind backed away from the whole \"hacker\" culture. The fear of IP addresses being exposed is a hold-over from these days. You really do not have much to worry about presently as long as you are using your computer responsibly.\n\nHowever, don't stop there. Get yourself a book on TCP/IP and learn this stuff from a low-level. I recommend [TCP/IP Illustrated](_URL_0_). You can learn how the internet actually works.\n\nMaybe you might be interested in getting into programming as well. One of the best guides on this would be [Beej Network Programming Guide](_URL_1_). So check those out and explore further.\n\nIf this stuff interests you, don't just settle for a ELI5 answer. Go out and master this stuff!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/TCP-Illustrated-Vol-Addison-Wesley-Professional/dp/0201633469",
"http://beej.us/guide/bgnet/output/html/singlepage/bgnet.html"
]
]
|
|
2a68eh | how can a website like 4chan, which is completely anonymous and has content changing every second, orchestrate well-organized raids like they one they're doing to tumblr? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2a68eh/eli5_how_can_a_website_like_4chan_which_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cirw5v9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Content doesn't change every second. Some of those threads have been going for a long time.\n\nSure, it's not as permanent as reddit's comments and links are, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to organize or collaborate."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
asjgtu | how can you bake cookies with eggs and not have to refrigerate what you've baked? | I understand that the eggs cook, but cooked eggs still need to be refrigerated after a bit or they're inedible. So what is it about the process of baking that cancels that out?
Edit: Answered! Tyvm! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/asjgtu/eli5_how_can_you_bake_cookies_with_eggs_and_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"egurp2g",
"egurzi1"
],
"score": [
23,
6
],
"text": [
"Baking it dries it out, any water left is tied up with sugars, starches and salts so bacteria can't use it. This is not the case if you fry an egg. ",
"Cooked Eggs have a lot of water in them, and therefore quickly spoil due to the bacteria in the air being able to reproduce in the moist, nutrient-rich environment of the egg. \n\nCookies are drier, so simply putting them in a container will be able to hold of decay for long enough that you can just eat them. \n\nBasically, baking dries the food out in a way that boiling/frying doesn't. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
4jkqws | how is it that more people have been to the moon than to the bottom of the sea? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jkqws/eli5_how_is_it_that_more_people_have_been_to_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d37dgej",
"d37dis4",
"d37etg6"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"This works only when it refers to the Mariana Trench. Plenty of people have gone to the bottom of the sea where it's less deep.\n\nThe reason this happened is because it's actually not such a very interesting place. 2 submarines have been build that can explore it, the Trieste and the Deep Sea Challenger, but both have made only 1 dive.\n\nRemotely controlled vehicles have made many dives, as they can stay longer, and they can be easily controlled from the ship above. Other than the novelity, there really is no reason to send the human along.",
"Three characteristics link being in space and being at the bottom of the sea.\n\nThere is no available air at either place. Bring your own air and a complete system to supply air for the entire time you are there, or quite simply, you die.\n\nGravity is different there. In space, gravity can be non-existent. On the moon, which is mentally conflated with being \"in space,\" the gravity is much lower than on the earth. In the water, gravity acts on your body the same way it does above water, but you're IN WATER, so the gravity of the water affects what you feel. Most persons' bodies are slightly less dense than water, so there's a tendency to float, or be near the surface. This feels like there's much less gravity than when out of the water.\n\nLastly, we come to the real issue: pressure.\n\nThere is no pressure pushing on you from all around in space. As you descend from space into the atmosphere, the weight of the air above you pushes on your body, and the further down you go, the greater the pressure.\n\n\"Normal\" air pressure is just under 15 pounds per square inch. That is so normal that it is called 0 pounds per square inch of gauge pressure. That is, a gauge we would use to measure pressure does not show any pressure at all in the air, even though there is that just under 15 pounds of pressure per square inch.\n\nNow, what happens when we go into water?\n\nThe pressure of air on us is equal to the weight of the air above us, and the pressure or water on us in water is equal to the weight of the water above us. How do we figure that out?\n\nWell, let's do some estimating. A visit to a website yields the fact that a cubic foot of water weighs about 62.5 pounds. Let's look at that in detail.\n\nA cubic foot of water is of a size that is 12 inches high (= depth of water), 12 inches wide, and 12 inches long. Another way to look at it is that it is a 12 inch high amount of water with a 12\" x 12\" base, that is, a 144\" base.\n\nIf we're one foot down in the water, a square foot of us will be pushed on by 62.5 pounds. Let's round that off and divide into square inches: 62.5/144 = 0.434 pounds per square inch. Let's be sloppy and call that a half pound.\n\nThat is, every foot you go down into water, the pressure on you is a half pound more than at the previous depth. (There's also the air pressure, because the air is pushing down on the water, but we'll ignore that; we're talking gauge pressure here, not absolute pressure.)\n\nSo you go down twenty feet and the water presses on your body with about 10 pounds per square inch of pressure.\n\nGo a hundred feet and it's fifty pounds per square inch. Go ten thousand feet and it's five thousand pounds per square inch. (Okay, it's 4,340 pounds, but you get the idea.)\n\nAre you beginning to see the problem? Our bodies live in an external pressure of about 15 pounds per square inch. At ten thousand feet, the pressure is more than three hundred times greater. And there are lots of places where the ocean is much deeper than that.\n\nA space vehicle has to hold itself together and not blow apart when its internal pressure is in the range of 15 pounds per square inch (simulating being on earth) and the pressure outside is zero. An undersea vehicle has to keep from being crushed by pressures in the range of much more than 300 times \"normal\" air pressure.",
"There were significant military technology advantages in learning how to get to the moon. Specifically, raising the state of the art of rocketry was important for the development of ICBMs, so expenditures for space exploration in the moon race had immediate defense applications. \n\nThere isn't an equivalent advantage for deep sea exploration. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2wn9cs | why do i sense when i'm about to be shocked by static electricity? | I know not everybody has this happen, but I can tell with almost 100% accuracy when I'm about to touch something and will get shocked. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wn9cs/elif_why_do_i_sense_when_im_about_to_be_shocked/ | {
"a_id": [
"cosenjp"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"I think I know what you mean by that... \n\nWhat happens when you get close to a highly charged static source which is usually an accumulation of electrons (a negative charge) is that the hairs on your arm or head or wherever which are neutrally charged initially start to have their own electrons repelled by that negative charge (because like charges repel, opposites attract), causing them to become more positive. The hairs next to each other are positive and because, again, positive and positive will repel, it causes the hairs to straighten and stand up, because it's the arrangement that allows them to be furthest apart. That and the positively charged hairs will now try and pull towards the negatively charged object.\n\nIt's this you can feel, because the skin is *highly* sensitive to movement like that. It's sort of tingly feeling. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
9vvj67 | who decides on electoral district limits that create gerrymandered results in us election? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9vvj67/eli5_who_decides_on_electoral_district_limits/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9fczpi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They are decided by the party that is in power at the time they decide to redraw districts. They are normally redrawn every 10 years with the census and the redrawing takes a few years to complete, but they can also be redrawn in-between if the State Legislature decides to do so. I believe they can also refuse to redraw so long as their federal representation numbers do not change due to population shifts\n\nIf the other party, or theoretically an individual feels that the lines are drawn too unfairly they can challenge them in court via lawsuit. This was recently done in Maryland and they are being forced to redraw. I do not know of any State that has votes on when they should redraw or not, though the states with ballot initiatives could get them put on the ballot for a vote. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
vqlj5 | pros an cons of a credit card and/or a debit card | Recently I've applied for both a credit card and a debit card. I understand how they both function but was wondering if there any particular advantages of using one over the other in any particular situations? Thanks, Reddit! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/vqlj5/eli5_pros_an_cons_of_a_credit_card_andor_a_debit/ | {
"a_id": [
"c56qxq1",
"c56ui40"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"First off we'll assume there are no fees for transactions as that would be an obvious con. This is more common with debit cards.\n\nNow then if you can pay off your credit card in full every pay period, thereby never incurring interest on debt, it is preferable to a debit card for several reasons. The first is in building up your credit score. Each time you pay your credit card bill you will slowly but surely be showing that you are responsible and can be trusted to pay your bills. Second is that the more money you have the better. Rather than taking money directly out of your bank account, it can sit there until the end of the month thereby gaining interest. Finally credit card companies often offer protection on your purchases. The most basic is some form of insurance on the goods you buy, however there are also options to dispute charges which can come in handy (for example with unscrupulous subscriptions which can be difficult to cancel).\n\nCredit cards are great, however the way that the credit card companies make money is people who can't pay off their account in full every month and end up getting charged ridiculous interest rates. If you are sure you can pay it off feel free to use a credit card. If you aren't so sure it may be prudent to just use debit and pay as you go so that you don't get sucked in.",
"**Credit Card**\n\nPro\n\n* allows you to go into debt\n* often get perks, like airline miles\n* has a limit\n* federal laws protect you against fraud\n* universally accepted\n\nCon\n\n* makes it easy to get too much debt\n* charges high interest\n\n**Debit Card**\n\nProd\n\n* works just like a check\n* no debt, no interest\n* simple, no grace periods or due dates to worry about\n\nCon\n\n* exposes all the money in that account\n* overdraft is the same as bouncing a check\n* not federally protected\n* some systems have problems with debit cards\n\nWhich is the best for you? It all comes down to how well you handle your money. Credit cards offer a lot of advantages, but if you are tempted to buy things you can't afford, they can get you in trouble.\n\nIf you are trying to get your spending under control, I'd stick with the debit card. But if you feel pretty good about your habits, I'd get a credit card that let's you automatically pay it in full each month, and basically use it as if it were a debit card. That gets you the best of both worlds."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.