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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
50yc1s | how different is state of lawlessness to martial law? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50yc1s/eli5_how_different_is_state_of_lawlessness_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d77w0ov",
"d77wg6x"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Pretty much sort of opposites.\n\nOrdinary civil law exists in a society with police and courts. Everything is orderly. Police make arrests, put people in jail. They are tried in a court of law.\n\nOn a battlefield there is no civil law. US soldiers operate under a universal code of military justice. Crimes can occur and soldiers will be tried in a court martial. Martial law prevails on the battlefield where there is no civil law so there is a state of lawlessness except armies operate under martial law. \n\nIn a battle area with no armies operating there is no law operating.\n\nIn a civilian area during a state of unrest martial law may be declared. A set of rules is proclaimed by the commanding general of the controlling army. ",
"Martial Law is imposed, and still has codified laws, just enforced in a far more expedited manner, whereas State of Lawlessness is a complete failure of the legal system and law enforcement. The two can occur simultaneously if not enough boots are on the ground to shove jackboots up everyone's rear ends."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
4hdfn5 | venezuela's insane inflation rate. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hdfn5/eli5_venezuelas_insane_inflation_rate/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2p6bo1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"\nBasically, their government controlled the entire economy. History has shown this to be impossible, because economies work on too many variables for central planners to be able to manage them all.\n\nWhen things start going wrong, these governments start printing money to appear to be wealthy. More money means the money is worth less, so they need to print more... and it becomes a vicious cycle where the money just becomes worthless."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
d26dzh | why do streams and downloads seem to speed on up until they get to 99 percent done the. slow right down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d26dzh/eli5_why_do_streams_and_downloads_seem_to_speed/ | {
"a_id": [
"ezszmhg",
"ezt0l19",
"ezt1sfb",
"ezt53gb",
"ezt6msh",
"ezt8xiy",
"ezt9eao",
"eztcq0p",
"eztherg",
"eztio46"
],
"score": [
3517,
931,
9,
117,
34,
3,
23,
3,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"When the download is finished, the computer has to copy the retrieved file, and often pass the file off to the anti-virus for scanning. All of this happens while the browser is displaying 99%.",
"Portions of the download will often be cached in RAM by the file system and only flushed to disk when the file is closed. And, as robbak said, virus scanners are another source of slowdown. On some systems, searchable files like PDFs will be indexed once downloaded too, although that usually happens in the background after the download gets to 100%, but there's some other bookkeeping going on too, like assigning an icon to the file, writing the download date to the file's metadata, etc.",
"The reason it speeds up overtime instead of just immediately hitting some maximum download speed is that the internet is designed that way. Think of the internet connections as a funnel that you want to pour sugar (data) through as quickly as possible. If you pour too much then it can clog up the funnel but, if you can start to ease back once it gets unclogged and find the amount of sugar that let's it keep draining, you end up pouring at around its maximum speed.\n\nThe internet connection actually moving the upload or download around ends up starting pretty slow because the computer doesn't assume the network is running perfectly. Once its able to use the slow speed, it eventually starts bumping the speed up more and more until data starts to get delayed or dropped too often. Once it notices that there is too much data being sent, it will scale back to a slower speed and try bumping it up occasionally to check if anything changed. This is what let's us do things on all different types of physical networks which may be clogged up or temporarily broken by over use or even bad weather.",
"In the case of torrents, the file(s) you're downloading are split up into pieces, and each piece can be downloaded individually from one of the available peers/seeds. Your computer then stitches together the file(s) form these pieces.\n\nOften there are peers that are only uploading at an extremely limited rate, so your computer ends up making a request for a piece which will take hours or even days to finish from that peer, even though the piece is only a megabyte or so. When everything else has finished, you're often stuck with the last few pieces being downloaded from those slow peers, which shows as a massive drop in download speed for the last 1% or so of the file(s).\n\nMost bittorrent clients nowadays have something called \"endgame mode\" specifically to counter this issue. When all pieces have either been downloaded or requested from some peer (meaning that we're most likely downloading the last few pieces from said slow peers), your client starts requesting all remaining pieces from multiple peers. This ensures the last few pieces actually finish in a few seconds or minutes instead of potentially hours, but this is still much less efficient than the previous download speed was.",
"In the context of progress bars, the graphics generally have algorithms that smooth out and estimate progress(a 100% accurate real-time graphic would be difficult produce). In these circumstances, especially if progress slows towards the end of a graphic, the time to complete can be misrepresented.",
"The 99% is only what the copy tool can measure. I.e: How much actual data have been moved to your computer. The last 1% is for \"anything else\" that could take anywhere from a nanosecond (renaming the file) to several seconds (antivirus) to several minutes (Windows antivirus on Java files). The tool you use for copying the file simply has no way of knowing what happens to it afterwards, or how much time it takes. So it just stops at 99% and waits.\n\nIt could stop at 95%, instead of 99%, like you mentioned earlier, but it wouldn't be any less of a guess than what it already does. The standard has been set to 99, so that's what everyone uses.",
"Progress bars are a little bit of a farce. They are just there to make you feel better about waiting. Check out this recent 99% invisible podcast on this very topic: _URL_0_",
"At 99%, the computer has to verify the integrity of what it has just downloaded, it checks every single file. Also needs to be passed through an Anti-virus at times like Windows Defender, or 3rd party one that force the files to redirect through their software to check the them.",
"On a sidenote, when you are downloading ANYTHING which contains more than one file, for example a game on steam, it heavily depends if the downloader is currently working on multiple really small files, or one big one. It is much easier to download just one big file, and faster,than 1 000 000 5kb files, because he always has to start over and over again, allocating new space for the new file, setting start and end points etc etc \n\n\nso sometimes, when you come to the confic files and other stuff like XML etc, your download becomes much slower \n\n\nDoesnt answer your question particularly, but it is closely related. Often for example, in the end the last files remaining are textfiles, or a lot of small icons etc. \n\n\nThe other answers are good as well, passing files to virus scanners, sometimes setting up executables, extracting containers (like .zip for example) and other datacrunching.",
"The most recent [99 Percent Invisible podcast](_URL_0_) is all about the history of the \"loading/busy\" icon on computers!\n\nBriefly, progress bars typically don't attempt to accurately portray progress anymore, but are there to make waiting less intolerable. An excerpt:\n\n\"Pretty soon, progress bars started popping up everywhere — but there was one problem. The progress bars gave the user an accurate depiction of how much of a task had been completed at any given time. So if the first ten percent loaded in ten seconds, then you would think — well this whole thing will take 100 seconds. Except it didn’t always take a hundred seconds. Sometimes the computer would slow down over some computational speed bump, and you’d end up feeling completely betrayed! This revealed something really key about the psychology of waiting and why things often feel slower than they really are. It’s all about our expectations.\n\nThis is true on our computers and it’s true at lines at Disneyland. You look at it and it tells you how long it’s going to take and you set an expectation,” explains Jason Farman, “And when you get to the front of the line faster than you thought you were going to (or when that particular piece of software loads faster than you thought it was going to), you leave the encounter feeling positive.” And that realization about expectations led designers to new idea — a loading bar that had nothing to do with how much work the computer had done. Instead, it was designed just to make the wait feel better. It would always start off slow, to set your expectations for a fairly long wait, and then speed up at the end, so that you end up feeling pleasantly surprised.\n\nThis “front-loaded loading” bar tricked you into feeling like you were waiting for less time than you actually were. In the early 2000s, that idea of trying to manipulate the users’ experience of time really took off, especially with big online retail companies whose profits depended on keeping customers on their website.\""
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/wait-wait-tell-me/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/wait-wait-tell-me/"
]
]
|
||
49vt0i | are two dogs from the same litter more related than dogs from a different litter by the same parents? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49vt0i/eli5_are_two_dogs_from_the_same_litter_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0vazk2",
"d0vbakn",
"d0vssfm"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Genetically? No. The mother might have 6 separate eggs, and they'll get fertilised by 6 separate sperm from the father. It's exactly as if they had 6 separate individual pregnancies. The genetic similarity between two pups from the same litter is the same as the similarity between two pups from a separate litter by the same parents (unless two of the pups happen to be identical twins, which happens when an egg separates and forms two fetuses, just like in humans).\n\nSocially? You have the term 'littermate'. In a dog society they might very well say that littermates are more related than siblings from other litters. But that'd just be a cultural thing.",
"Dogs from the same litter can be twins, so that would be more closely related than dogs from another little.\n\nAnd there might be some minor epigenetic effects going that would make dogs from the same little very, very slightly more related.\n\nBut in general, no, dogs from the same little are not significantly more related.",
"They can possibly be *less* related. It's possible for littermates to have different fathers."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
1qyb54 | why are cigarettes so much more expensive than they were eight years ago? | Will the price ever go down? Is there anything I can do? As you may already be able to tell, I am a bitter American smoker. Right now, I don't want to quit, and that being the case, I sure would like my filthy habit to be cheaper. Thanks in advance. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qyb54/eli5_why_are_cigarettes_so_much_more_expensive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdhq2ig",
"cdhqyvr"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because taxes and inflation.\n\n > Do you believe it's fair to tax someone's personal legal choice, however unhealthy it may be?\n\nThis subreddit is not for open-ended discussion of subjective issues.",
"Thanks for all the answers."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
1m0pt6 | why are there so many astrology ads in the newspaper classifieds? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m0pt6/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_astrology_ads_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc4otr4",
"cc4sgiu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Gullibility is an infinite resource. ",
"Because there are a lot of people who want to make money offering some sort of astrology-based service, and they think the newspaper classifieds (often not that far from the horoscopes) are a good place to find customers."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
cvxfu6 | difference between piano and keyboard? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cvxfu6/eli5_difference_between_piano_and_keyboard/ | {
"a_id": [
"ey71scy",
"ey71vwc",
"ey74iyj"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
12
],
"text": [
"A piano has strings that make noise when you hit the keys.\n\nA keyboard is electronic. You typically plug it in, or it uses batteries. No strings inside.",
"It's like the difference between a fruit (a general category of food) and an apple (a specific type of fruit). In this case, \"keyboard instrument\" is the general type of instrument, something played with a board or set of keys - it can include pipe organs, electronic keyboards/synthesizers, etc. A piano is a specific type of keyboard instrument that is a percussion instrument.",
"Differences include:\n\nNumber of Keys — pianos have a standardized set of 88 while keyboards can differ\n\nKey Weight — piano keys have different weights by default while keyboards usually have weightless keys\n\nSound Quality — there are some pretty great electric keyboards out there but the ones you’ll commonly see just use midi or low quality samples. By contrast it’s rare that you’ll ever run into a cheaply made piano and even older, less cared for pianos have a decent sound, all things considered. \n\nDynamic range — Most common keyboards lack this. A piano’s volume will change due to the amount of force a player puts on it. Keyboards have a volume fader or knob but that’s typically it unless you want to approach high-end modals. \n\nPeripherals - A piano typically has 3 pedals: sustain (holds all notes after the key has been released), half sustain (only keeps the lower half sustained), and damper (makes the piano quieter through various means). A keyboard may have an external sustain pedal but you can also connect it to your computer or to other cool peripherals and devices. \n\nSize — even the smallest pianos take up a lot of room (especially since Wurlitzer went out of business) and are very loud when played in a house. Keyboards can be as small as a book and you can put your headphones in them to practice. Unless amped they aren’t loud at all and some don’t even have internal speakers (these are usually just called Midi Controllers)\n\nCost — the cheapest, good quality pianos will run you a few grand *at the very least.* You can probably buy a keyboard for like $20 online. Even really high end ones cost about as much as a basic piano. \n\nThen, of course, pianos are acoustic while keyboards are electric. \n\nIf you want a keyboard that plays like a real piano you’re looking for a Digital Piano. If you want a high end keyboard with a lot of cool functions go for a Nord. If you just want something to mess around with or if you want to experiment with electronic stuff go for a midi controller of some kind (whichever works for you because you can offset almost of the actual sound design to your DAW)."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
1tf5vr | warning: this product contains chemicals known to the state of california to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tf5vr/eli5warning_this_product_contains_chemicals_known/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce7arkf",
"ce7asdd",
"ce7chhf"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
7
],
"text": [
"Proposition 65 in California requires that products that are sold that may cause cancer be labeled. It's inefficient to label two sets of products - one for California and one for the rest of the country, so many companies will simply comply with the law in California and say that their product contains chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.\n\nIt was intended to be a consumer advocacy measure to protect its citizens from genuinely dangerous highly toxic materials, but that label is put on just about anything, so it's lost its meaning over time.",
"This warning pertains to the [California Proposition 65 of 1986. link: _URL_0_\nBasically there is no regulation as to what you can put these labels on. Since labeling products as such releases liability from the seller you see them on everything regardless to how harmful it is. ",
"Almost anything can be shown to create cancer in test-tube studies. Too much of anything will cause damage to the DNA which could lead to cancers.\n\nCombine that with California's ill-thought-out law, and you have a cancer warning on practically everything."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_65_(1986)"
],
[]
]
|
||
28k94i | why don't tv shows reveal actual dollar values behind characters' salaries or debts? | I was watching the episode of How I Met Your Mother "I'm Not That Guy" where Marshall is offered a job from a major law firm and Lily reveals to Robin she has enormous credit card debt. In both cases, the characters revealed the money values (for salary and for debt) by writing it on a piece of paper.
I've noticed this in lots of shows. Why do so many shows avoid revealing the numbers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28k94i/eli5_why_dont_tv_shows_reveal_actual_dollar/ | {
"a_id": [
"cibpa6b",
"cibpdih"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Because it's fictional and would over-complicate the plot. Even though it seems like it would be relevant, it is actually a minor detail to the developing plot.",
"There are a few reasons.\n\nFirst off, because salaries vary by location. If the main character makes $70,000 a year, that may seem awfully low to people in some parts of the country and awfully high in other locations.\n\nAlso, it can really, really date the show years from now. That's a bit of a secondary concern, but I remember watching old shows about how someone with a really good job was happy that he was now taking home $300 a week."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
1k6pvd | what do the different knobs and sliders and buttons do on dj mixers? | I'm talking specifically about the ones that DJs use in concerts like this: _URL_0_. Not necessarily an explanation of every single button, but maybe some general categories of controls. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1k6pvd/eli5_what_do_the_different_knobs_and_sliders_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cblx86q",
"cblxbts",
"cblyft7",
"cbm1p5h"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Depends on the knob, but most pertain to live audio effects such as the volume on different channels, crossfades, EQ and effects like reverb and resampling. The array of buttons is most likely used to trigger pre-recorded samples for live music mixing. ",
"Generally the knobs are arranged in sets vertically. Each vertical set is called a channel. Various things (microphones, music sources, drum machines, etc.) Feed into them. One source per channel. The knobs usually control gain (how much of the signal enters the mixer), sends/returns (sound can go out to another device to change it, then back into the mix), EQ (to control the bass, midrange, and rebel. Often there are external EQs as well), panning (left/right) and a channel volume. \n\nGenerally on the left side of the board there are switches to control where the sends/returns enter and leave the chain, as well as some knobs that affect the whole mix- master volume, pan, etc. Pm me if you need more details.\n\nSource: I'm a theatre sound engineer.",
"other answers are already really good. but one thing to mention about DJs using 2 turntables is the crossfader, that slider that you see scratch DJs manipulating furiously. it controls how much of the sound is coming from one or the other turntable. ie it 'cross-fades' between the two.",
"The mixer, the center console, controls the sounds from the two turntables. This one bears the crossfader, as well as the EQ knobs for each channel (song A, song B). The EQ knobs, will be sorted Gain-high-mid-low, most often. This lets you reduce or increase the volume, and varying pitches of sounds that make it from a turntable to the speakers. Mixers often come with a microphone panel, where you can turn a mic on and off. Some mixers will automatically make the music quieter when the mic is used, and this can be toggled.\n\nAlso on the mixer, there is the monitor, which allows the DJ to hear anything from either turntable regardless of the crossfader's position. This can be used to hear how two tracks sound together, or the opposite of what is playing, before the audience is aware of it.\n\nTurntables, aside from the wheel, come with a slider for speed, where you can change the bpm of a song. The effectiveness of the slider can be toggled, to precise or vague, and this is accompanied by a button which lets you lock the pitch on the original. Turntables also come with play/pause buttons, some simple effects like flanger/reverb/reverse/brake. There are buttons to start and end a loop, to set points where when time B is reached, the song jumps back to time A. Turntables have sections dedicated to where the source of sound is, be it CD, vinyl, mp3, usb, or other. Some come with hotkeys for cuepoints, which are buttons that can be assigned to times in a song, where pressing them will jump to that point.\n\nI can answer any questions you have, because there is a lot more.\n\nSource: 2xDNS3700, DNX600"
]
} | []
| [
"http://wallpaperscraft.com/image/9325/640x360.jpg"
]
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
2t4lfn | how is elon musk still a billionaire despite the fact that he keeps spending absurd amounts of money on new projects? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t4lfn/eli5how_is_elon_musk_still_a_billionaire_despite/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnvnbsh",
"cnvnepi"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"He sells expensive ass cars and gets paid hella bank for sending shit to space. He also has investors like google that just gave a cool one billion.",
"Most of the money his companies spend isn't his own money. He starts the companies but gets other people to invest."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
5kk500 | how can an hourglass take different amounts of time? | So I recieved an hourglass for Christmas. One direction it clocks in consistently around 1:50. Turned the other way it runs about 1:26. Have repeated many times to confirm. Help me out here? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5kk500/eli5_how_can_an_hourglass_take_different_amounts/ | {
"a_id": [
"dboh4c1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The shape of the funnel that leads to the hole can be different on each side. This means the sand packs more (or less) well, giving a slightly faster/slower run time."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3pdc3l | what are the differences between the kingdom (saudi arabia), the sheikdoms (uae), the emirate (kuwait) and the sultanate (oman) of the middle east? | Are there any political differences or just different titles? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pdc3l/eli5_what_are_the_differences_between_the_kingdom/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw5aihq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Mostly just different titles. You'll note that UAE is a collection of emirates (United Arab Emirates). Ibn Saud was an emir until 1934. You could see \"emir\" as a title roughly equivalent to \"duke\", where then a \"king\" would be a person who united a bunch of dukes under one monarchy, but to some extent that comparison is facile. Sultan is just another word for monarch. All the countries have different political structures as with any country, e.g., if England had a king, it would not be comparable to Saudi Arabia's king just because the (translated) word is the same."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
908n56 | what is the difference between a chancellor and a president? | Is there something fundamentally different about Chancelloring as opposed to Presiding? Why do some universities have a chancellor and others have a president? Why do some countries have both? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/908n56/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_a_chancellor/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2ojgce",
"e2okw6j",
"e2onfmb"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Nothing too fundamental. Different traditions, and the actual job responsibilities will vary depending on the institution or the country, but there's not a set of things that chancellors do, and a set of things that presidents do.\n\n",
"When it comes to countries, a Chancellor is more like a Prime Minister than a President. The difference is the President is the head of state, while the PM/Chancellor is the head of government. \n\nCountries like the US combine those two roles into one, where the President is both head of state and government. But in countries which have both a PM/Chancellor and a President, typically the PM/Chancellor is the one which actually runs the country and makes the big decisions, while the President is more of a figurehead.\n\nBut in some cases also kind of like a referee. They don't make policy decisions, but they can veto laws if they think they are unconstitutional. They might also be responsible for appointing the PM/Chancellor, but their decision would have to be based on which parties got elected into Parliament rather than their own preference. That's just a couple of examples of what a President might do in a system like that, the details differ between countries.\n\nI'm not sure if there is any technical difference between a Chancellor and a Prime Minister though.",
"In universities, for the most part \"chancellor\" is just a fancy word for \"president\".\n\nIn government, it's a bit more complicated.\n\nThe US has a presidential system. The president is head of the executive branch, and he appoints people to his cabinet to help him run the country. Congress is a separate body that makes the laws, and the Supreme Court makes sure everything is done legally.\n\nA parliamentary system is different. There are, basically, two people in charge: the head of state, and the head of government.\n\nThe head of state usually has a mostly ceremonial role, although in some countries (such as France), he has quite wide powers. Often, though, he is a final sanity check on any legislation that is passed (e.g. the German president can return legislation to parliament if he thinks it violates constitutional law or the correct procedure wasn't followed) and has emergency powers if the government is unable to function. The head of state is usually a president, but in a monarchy it's a king or queen.\n\nThe head of state appoints a head of government -- usually this is the leader of the party that got the most seats in a parliamentary election, but there are occasionally exceptions. The head of government appoints a cabinet, usually drawing it from members of parliament (separation of powers is less important when you have separate heads of state and government), and is usually known as the prime minister, or occasionally first minister; some countries (such as Germany and Austria) call their head of government chancellor.\n\nThe confusing thing is that in the UK, the finance minister has the title \"Chancellor of the Exchequer\": the Exchequer is the process of managing the government's current account (basically, tax revenue), and its name comes from the mediaeval practice of using a chequered tablecloth to perform calculations. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is usually referred to simply as \"the Chancellor\", but he isn't head of the whole government -- only one part of it."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
e6km3q | if you got cut while under water a ways down, would the external pressure slow or or prevent you from bleeding? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e6km3q/eli5_if_you_got_cut_while_under_water_a_ways_down/ | {
"a_id": [
"f9qwn6y",
"f9qxu0s"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No, under water the pressure would also work to squeeze the blood out of you. This would cancel out the pressure trying to keep the blood in the wound. The only thing that matters would be the pressure differential (ie. the blood pressure caused by the heart beating), not the absolute pressure in the surrounding water.",
"No. Pressure like that doesn't compress blood, as most liquids can't be compressed by pressure. If anything, the constant contact with the water would wash away the formation of scabs and clotting in the wound and cause you to bleed more before your body was able to naturally stop the bleeding.\n\nThis thought process may come from the concept of \"apply pressure to the wound\" in first aid, but that pressure is direct pressure, and is physically sort of clamping the cut veins and capillaries which (like pinching the end of a hose) is helping to stop the flow of blood out of the wound. The pressure you're under from being underwater isn't direct on the wound, but normalized across your whole body's surface area, so it wouldn't have the same effect as directly applying pressure with a bandage."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
3mabxq | how is bubble wrap made? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mabxq/eli5_how_is_bubble_wrap_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvddisx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"well i would expect they mold a plastic with bubble, then attach another plastic layer on top of it.\n_URL_0_\n\n\n\nyeah, they just roll two peaces of plastic together. one has the bubbles on the roller.\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOZxLDYJNr8"
]
]
|
||
9z7ley | how did contraceptives, birth control and family planning empower women to succeed? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9z7ley/eli5_how_did_contraceptives_birth_control_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea6x9ws",
"ea7oe8m",
"ea7sxlp"
],
"score": [
30,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"By choosing when and under which circumstances they become pregnant allows a woman to explore alternative life choices that do not require them to have children now or ever. \n\nAnytime birth control becomes widely available, women have more choices to succeed in ways that do not include having children when they don't want to. ",
"Not that long ago, people thought that a pregnant woman should stop working, drop out of school, hide her belly in public or not go out much at all - basically give up every activity except housekeeping and child-raising. Even today, you don't have to give up everything because you're pregnant, but it does make it harder to keep up with work and school because you're tired and don't feel good a lot of the time, plus you still have to stop going to work and school for a little while to go have the baby and heal afterwards, and then you have a baby to take care of so you have less time to study / need to take more days off work, etc.\n\nSo birth control means that a woman can decide when is the best time for her to get pregnant so that it won't stop her doing other things she wants to do, things that can help her succeed. She can decide to finish her high school or college degree first before having a baby, for example, or make sure she has a stable job and enough money before she has a baby.\n\nThat all means that over the course of her lifetime, a woman who can choose when to get pregnant will be able to make more money and accomplish more things that are NOT baby-related, if that's what she wants. And it empowers her because it gives her control over the way her life will go in the future (and control over an important part of her health and safety - pregnancy is very hard on women's bodies and can even be dangerous for them).\n\nWithout birth control, the only good way not to get pregnant is not to have sex. This is a problem though, because for a lot of people, sex is an important part of a good relationship and a fulfilling life, so having sex sometimes is important. Without birth control, a woman would have to choose between the possible bad effects of not having sex or the possible bad effects of getting pregnant. If she didn't want to get pregnant, she would have to hope that her partner was okay with not having sex for a long time, and hope that she wouldn't be forced into sex against her will. With birth control, she can have the kind of relationship she (and her partner) wants and still not get pregnant until she's ready. (And if she were forced into sex, at least she wouldn't also become pregnant against her will).",
"What they said and also kids are expensive and mentally/physically/emotionally draining. If all your money and energy are going into raising kids a plethora of children, you can't really do much else. Especially outside the home. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
lhlz9 | what the protestors in greece want. | I'm a Dutch guy. I watch the news from time to time. Today, like every other day, there was a segment about the protesting in Greece. The news explains to me what is going on and why. I've got a pretty good idea about why the Greeks are pissed off (but if there is someone here that knows a lot about it, feel free to school me further) but I have no idea **what the protestors themselves want or want to do to fix their situation.** I ask this because The Netherlands and other European countries keep sending money that way and all I see on TV are people being mad as hell. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lhlz9/eli5_what_the_protestors_in_greece_want/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2suvl3",
"c2suvl3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Nobody has answered it, so I'll give it a shot even though I'm probably not the most suitable measure.\n\nFirst of all one must understand that over the past years, the Greek govt always said that the finances were stable even though tax avoidance, corruption and bad spending were the order of the day.\n\nNow imagine yourself having worked for 40 or 50 years but now your pension has been halved due to austerity measures, because other people have put the economy in a dire situation because of tax avoidance and corruption. You're going to be pissed, because ultimately you don't care about the economy you only care that the thousands euros a month you paid all your life for as pension is now 500 euros, and the rest is being taken by the govt to pay for the debts.\n\nThis is only one scenario. In my opinion, every Greek citizen which passively allowed the culture of avoiding paying income tax or other taxes is at fault. It's very hard to pinpoint because many believe its so widespread, that at one point it was a case that everyone was doing it. The checks and balances of government taxation failed miserably and compared to other European peers, things like pension and government jobs were more generous even though they didn't have the money to back it up.",
"Nobody has answered it, so I'll give it a shot even though I'm probably not the most suitable measure.\n\nFirst of all one must understand that over the past years, the Greek govt always said that the finances were stable even though tax avoidance, corruption and bad spending were the order of the day.\n\nNow imagine yourself having worked for 40 or 50 years but now your pension has been halved due to austerity measures, because other people have put the economy in a dire situation because of tax avoidance and corruption. You're going to be pissed, because ultimately you don't care about the economy you only care that the thousands euros a month you paid all your life for as pension is now 500 euros, and the rest is being taken by the govt to pay for the debts.\n\nThis is only one scenario. In my opinion, every Greek citizen which passively allowed the culture of avoiding paying income tax or other taxes is at fault. It's very hard to pinpoint because many believe its so widespread, that at one point it was a case that everyone was doing it. The checks and balances of government taxation failed miserably and compared to other European peers, things like pension and government jobs were more generous even though they didn't have the money to back it up."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
5gsrla | if we lose weight when we sweat, why is it often harder for unfit and heavier people to lose weight when they probably sweat more for less exercise? | FYI: I struggle with my own weight so I'm not trying to have a go at anyone. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5gsrla/eli5_if_we_lose_weight_when_we_sweat_why_is_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"dauqxqr",
"dausi4a"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"Because the weight you lose while sweating is just water. You gain it back pretty quickly when you rehydrate yourself. Sweating by itself is not actually burning calories or getting rid of fat.",
"The calories you burn are actually expelled as carbon dioxide when you exhale. So effectively you breath out your fat, not sweat it out."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
8gelgm | what are the effects of ingesting too much extracts (like vanilla)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8gelgm/eli5_what_are_the_effects_of_ingesting_too_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyb39y9",
"dyb3oic",
"dyb4rwi"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Extracts like that aren't \"like\" normal alcohol - they *are* alcohol. [Ethanol](_URL_0_) (or ethyl alcohol) is the alcohol in every alcoholic beverage. It's also pure alcohol, at 200 proof (before the extract thins it out some)\n\nSo, your half-ounce was exactly like drinking a half shot of (at the least) 151 rum. Maybe closer to straight moonshine.\n\nLong story short, drink too much vanilla extract and you're gonna get a wicked hangover.",
"Extracts use alcohol as a solvent. The concentration is usually comparable to most ordinary spirits like Vodka.\n\nAt the dosage you describe nothing should have happened. I'm guessing placebo effect, but cheap vanilla extracts are known to contain some suspicious chemicals.",
"Fun fact: Alaska’s substance abuse issues are so bad that many stores have to lock up vanilla extract. Many stores only put the outer box on the shelf. You have to go to customer service and sometimes show I.D. To purchase it. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol"
],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2ahfbr | how does a history of cancer in the family affect your likelihood of cancer? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ahfbr/eli5_how_does_a_history_of_cancer_in_the_family/ | {
"a_id": [
"civ4ugv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There are genetic predispositions to cancer. This doesn't guarantee that you *will* get cancer, but it means that you are more likely to do so than average. So if your great-grandmother, grandmother, and mother all died of cancer, you will probably want to see your doctor and think about how best to deal with your increased risk."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
jdubv | why do we need water and air? | They're the two of the most essential things our body needs, but I never understood what exactly they do once they enter the body. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jdubv/eli5_why_do_we_need_water_and_air/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2ba84b",
"c2bbtuv",
"c2ba84b",
"c2bbtuv"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Air has oxygen in it, which all of our cells use for their process of converting sugar (glucose) to energy (ATP). It is the last link in the chain that does this conversion, so without oxygen our cells are useless... and we die. \n\nWater hydrates us (duh, I know) but this is more important than it sounds. The human body is ~70% water which is A LOT. It is used in all bodily processes from digestion to chemical reactions to the creation of blood, to the purging of toxins, to sweating.... regulating body temp, nutrient absorption, on and on and on. You can live weeks without food but mere days without water.",
"Just think of it in terms of oxygen. I'll try to ELI5:\n\n...\n\nOxygen is like a banker.\n\nThe Electrons are the cash. \n\nThere are plenty of other bankers like Oxygen that exist, such as: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur, etc... but Oxygen has been around a really long time *and* it's pretty much everywhere you turn.\n\n...\n\nSo when you ask \"Why do we need water and air?\", what you're really saying is \"Why do we need Oxygen?\" \n\nJust like in real life, there are plenty of places you can use money but sometimes you can't use the same money everywhere you go. For example, China has there own money, just like Japan, or Mexico, or Saudi Arabia. This is why we have so many bankers (like Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur, etc...), they all do the same thing, loan out money, it's just that they do it there own way.\n\n...\n\nSo Oxygen is this really cool guy, he's actually a nice business man who likes to loan out money. He's also always looking for some way to make *more* money - *but*, here's the catch, he's not really in it for profit. He loans out money to the community (businesses big and small - macromolecules) only so that the community can use the money, but all Oxygen ever wants back is his original investment. All Oxygen ever wants is what he loaned out *without interest*. He doesn't want any more or any less then the money he gave you. So he's better than a bank, because he doesn't ask for interest, so he's more like a personal friend that loaned you money. Oxygen is really a cool dude. \n\n...\n\nSo you take the electrons Oxygen gives you, and you use it to attract other business people. Sometimes you use the money to build things, somethings you use the money to break things down, but you always use the money no matter what.\n\nNow, Oxygen isn't silly... he's not going to loan you out money without making sure someone keeps track of it. Hydrogen is Oxygen's bestest friend, they've known each other for pretty much a long time. They're the type of friends that could go for years without seeing each other, but put them in a room together and it's like not a day has gone by. They laugh, they hug, they dance, they're awesome together! \n\nSometimes Oxygen loans out money but he asks Hydrogen to go along with the person or business he loaned it too. Oxygen does a lot of loans so it helps to have a friend help you work. Hydrogen loves his job to, because he loves meeting new people. He's sort of a social butterfly. \n\nOnce the business is done, or it's time to pay back Oxygen, the cash is given back for Oxygen to loan it out again. \n\n...\n\nSo you ask \"Why do we need water and air\" ... Well water is made up of two Hydrogen and one Oxygen - and air, which is mostly made up of Nitrogen, has oxygen in it. The reason we use Oxygen (water and air) is because when we evolved in water and oxygen was abundant. So we got used to him being around. \n\nI think I rambled on... :/\n\n[Key] \n\n* Businesses - Are macromolecules that use electrons, like ATP, GDP, electron transport chains, and use electrons to set up potential gradients. \n\n* When I say \"been around the longest\" I mean evolutionarily-wise. All the other elements preceding Oxygen were probably in existence before oxygen, like carbon, but weren't as efficient as electron donors/acceptors. Also, if you look at the periodic table anything listed under oxygen would serve as an excellent donor/acceptor but the most abundant of them all (on Earth) is oxygen in the form of water. If you believe in evolution, then you also believe that we used H20 as a donor/acceptor.\n\n* \"Well established\" just means we evolved to use it. \n\n\n**tl;dr** It was most efficient to evolve using Oxygen as a method to get electrons. Especially since the first organisms evolved in water. \n\n > what they exactly they do once they enter the body.\n\nIf you understand the Electron Transport Chain, and what the electron is actually doing, it makes sense... that's another topic though. \n",
"Air has oxygen in it, which all of our cells use for their process of converting sugar (glucose) to energy (ATP). It is the last link in the chain that does this conversion, so without oxygen our cells are useless... and we die. \n\nWater hydrates us (duh, I know) but this is more important than it sounds. The human body is ~70% water which is A LOT. It is used in all bodily processes from digestion to chemical reactions to the creation of blood, to the purging of toxins, to sweating.... regulating body temp, nutrient absorption, on and on and on. You can live weeks without food but mere days without water.",
"Just think of it in terms of oxygen. I'll try to ELI5:\n\n...\n\nOxygen is like a banker.\n\nThe Electrons are the cash. \n\nThere are plenty of other bankers like Oxygen that exist, such as: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur, etc... but Oxygen has been around a really long time *and* it's pretty much everywhere you turn.\n\n...\n\nSo when you ask \"Why do we need water and air?\", what you're really saying is \"Why do we need Oxygen?\" \n\nJust like in real life, there are plenty of places you can use money but sometimes you can't use the same money everywhere you go. For example, China has there own money, just like Japan, or Mexico, or Saudi Arabia. This is why we have so many bankers (like Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur, etc...), they all do the same thing, loan out money, it's just that they do it there own way.\n\n...\n\nSo Oxygen is this really cool guy, he's actually a nice business man who likes to loan out money. He's also always looking for some way to make *more* money - *but*, here's the catch, he's not really in it for profit. He loans out money to the community (businesses big and small - macromolecules) only so that the community can use the money, but all Oxygen ever wants back is his original investment. All Oxygen ever wants is what he loaned out *without interest*. He doesn't want any more or any less then the money he gave you. So he's better than a bank, because he doesn't ask for interest, so he's more like a personal friend that loaned you money. Oxygen is really a cool dude. \n\n...\n\nSo you take the electrons Oxygen gives you, and you use it to attract other business people. Sometimes you use the money to build things, somethings you use the money to break things down, but you always use the money no matter what.\n\nNow, Oxygen isn't silly... he's not going to loan you out money without making sure someone keeps track of it. Hydrogen is Oxygen's bestest friend, they've known each other for pretty much a long time. They're the type of friends that could go for years without seeing each other, but put them in a room together and it's like not a day has gone by. They laugh, they hug, they dance, they're awesome together! \n\nSometimes Oxygen loans out money but he asks Hydrogen to go along with the person or business he loaned it too. Oxygen does a lot of loans so it helps to have a friend help you work. Hydrogen loves his job to, because he loves meeting new people. He's sort of a social butterfly. \n\nOnce the business is done, or it's time to pay back Oxygen, the cash is given back for Oxygen to loan it out again. \n\n...\n\nSo you ask \"Why do we need water and air\" ... Well water is made up of two Hydrogen and one Oxygen - and air, which is mostly made up of Nitrogen, has oxygen in it. The reason we use Oxygen (water and air) is because when we evolved in water and oxygen was abundant. So we got used to him being around. \n\nI think I rambled on... :/\n\n[Key] \n\n* Businesses - Are macromolecules that use electrons, like ATP, GDP, electron transport chains, and use electrons to set up potential gradients. \n\n* When I say \"been around the longest\" I mean evolutionarily-wise. All the other elements preceding Oxygen were probably in existence before oxygen, like carbon, but weren't as efficient as electron donors/acceptors. Also, if you look at the periodic table anything listed under oxygen would serve as an excellent donor/acceptor but the most abundant of them all (on Earth) is oxygen in the form of water. If you believe in evolution, then you also believe that we used H20 as a donor/acceptor.\n\n* \"Well established\" just means we evolved to use it. \n\n\n**tl;dr** It was most efficient to evolve using Oxygen as a method to get electrons. Especially since the first organisms evolved in water. \n\n > what they exactly they do once they enter the body.\n\nIf you understand the Electron Transport Chain, and what the electron is actually doing, it makes sense... that's another topic though. \n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
34ko9h | why do boxers awkwardly stare at eachother at a close distance for minutes before a fight? | Are they like trying to intimidate eachother? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34ko9h/eli5_why_do_boxers_awkwardly_stare_at_eachother/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqvkrjy",
"cqvlcho"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"You know that game \"gay chicken\"? ",
"It is partly for intimidation, but has become part of the theater of the match, and now is kind of expected."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
2kbh2i | why doesn't email cost a very small amount to stop spam? | If email systems charge a very small amount large mass spam emails would cost a significant bit. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kbh2i/eli5why_doesnt_email_cost_a_very_small_amount_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cljnzij",
"cljo1fw"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Because that would put a barrier on entry for people who want to use email. Whichever email service starts charging for people to send emails will lose a lot of users.\n\nIn addition, why is the responsibility for stopping spam borne by the email providers?",
"Because no one would use it. Why use a service that costs money when you can use it for free?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
2oczlx | why are women just now targeting bill cosby with these rape allegations? | Don't get me wrong, I do not condone his actions at all. If the allegations prove to be true, then the punishment should fit the crime if proven guilty. However, my concern is that these allegations are anywhere from 10-50 years old (they seem to range from 1965 to 2004). What's taken so long to come forward and start accusing Cosby, who is now 77 years old? Was it fear of retaliation, money previously paid off to the victims, traumatic stress, something else?
I only wonder for two reasons:
1) He's got one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. He's not exactly healthy, nor does he look like he'll live long enough to be able to adequately serve a sentence. He's certainly got enough money to tie the case up in litigation until he's dead.
2) By now any statute of limitations will have passed, so he wouldn't be able to be tried for most of the older ones anyway. My own brief research (and **please** correct me if I'm wrong) indicates very few states have no time limit on sexual assault, some go up to 12 years, but most seem to cap at 10 years. Even still, the perpetrator must START the trial proceedings before the statute of limitation runs out. Even the most recent accusations (2004) will run out by New Years Day if proceedings haven't begun yet.
Are they seriously looking for justice after so many years or are some of them just trying to get a piece of the pie before he croaks off?
EDIT: Thanks very much for the responses, guys! A couple of you made me chuckle, but most of you made very valid points that made me think. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oczlx/eli5_why_are_women_just_now_targeting_bill_cosby/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmlxr8l",
"cmlxrg8",
"cmlxrmq",
"cmly0g6",
"cmlzr45",
"cmm189h",
"cmm720v",
"cmm7flj",
"cmmcctd",
"cmmg778"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
51,
8,
20,
11,
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"2 possibillities \n1. These women had no proof of what he did and thought that they would not be believed if they came forward and simply could not take a lenghty court case where the memory of the abuse would have to be described in detail to alot of people while Cosby's lawyers tried to discredit them. But as soon as they realized that they where not alone it gets alot easier to stand forth. \n2. These women want settlement money...",
"If true, victims often hide allegations that would be difficult to prove, particularly against someone so beloved (who it would be hard for a jury to convict with shaky evidence). If false, it's a good way to get money without the guilt of putting an innocent man in his 70s behind bars.",
"Many of these allegations came about 10 years ago. Some women came out at the time and he settled out of court. Now more women are coming out. This isn't a new thing.\n\nSexual assault can be difficult for victims to report, because of the many stigma attached. Here's an [interesting read on how hard it can be for women to report sexual misconduct](_URL_0_).\n\nYou may be too young to remember when the first woman came forward regarding Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct and then afterwards many other women came forward. It can be hard to feel like you're the only person going up against a famous, well liked/respected, powerful person.\n\nImagine being a little girl in the early 80s when Bill Cosby is basically American 'nice guy' royalty. Really, who would believe you? \n\nI'm not saying he did or did not commit any of hte allegations against him, but this post is meant to be food for thought.",
"You saw the same thing with the Sandusky stuff up in Penn State. It's really difficult for a victim to come out against a their assailant especially if it's someone famous. But now that one person has made it public is easier to say something.\n\n\nIt does appear that a lot of of them did speak out originally but things were settled quietly at the time. And of course there are probably a few that didn't actually happen or did happen but wouldn't qualify as sexual assault at the time, but they're still speaking up because hey its a celebrity. Those don't change that a lot of these assaults probably did happen and we'll see if Bill has to pay for them.",
"This happens with nearly EVERY case where an offender is left on the streets to continue assaulting others. The Catholic church, Jerry Sandusky, the Boy Scouts, etc. Those are examples of where the victims usually stayed quiet until someone has the courage to come forward, at which point the flood gates open.\n\nIt is extremely hard to admit to being a victim of sexual assault. Often the victims feel they won't be believed so they keep quiet(such as someone implying they're just after money *hint hint*) and try to suppress that memory. When they see someone else come out as a victim that memory becomes raw again so they're forced to face the situation again. This time though they know they have at least one other person who knows their pain and would believe them so they often come forward.",
"recently Hannibal Buress [spoke](_URL_0_) about cosby and the rape allegations. I think this kind of brought the issue back into the limelight. combine that with the way social media can whip up a frenzy and you have the downfall of cosby.",
"Because even if you've explicitly stated you are not looking for money and even if there is little to no chance of you receiving money people still assume you're telling the whole world something incredibly personal and hurtful because \"you want a paycheck\". \n\nIn the UK when girls reported Jimmy Saville to the police a lot of them were told it was their fault or they knew what they were getting into. I imagine the same would have been true of Cosby's accusers. Even nowadays people default is to assume victims of sexual assault brought it on themselves. Imagine what it was like in the 70's and 80's. \n",
"Imagine this: As a male you are raped. Now tell me how eager you would be to go to the police? Now tell me how eager you would be to go to the police and tell them someone extremely famous raped you. Think about whether you would really want the whole world to know that this guy had raped you. It would be so demeaning, so embarrassing. Think about how everyone would look at you. Now imagine after you decide to actually forgo your whole personal life and the embarrassment and go to the police and everyone decides to say you are just wanting money. Imagine trying to explain to them how ridiculous it is that money hadnt even entered your thoughts at any point yet it is all people talk about once you decide you want justice. Now if you know this is how its all gonna play out how eager would you be to report the whole ordeal or would you just try and forget about it? Seems like a lot of men have such a hard time understanding the situation but if they were in the exact same situation it seems so obvious how you would feel, or it is to me. ",
"Money, attention & taking advantage of how easily men can be convicted of sexual assault with no proof",
"It's sort of a safety in numbers thing. Individually a rape victim has lots of painful memories and fear of painful social stigma associated with coming forward about their rape. When it's a public figure, that is magnified by the fact that any such accusation will become widely publicized. If you have a lot of victims who are afraid, individually, to come forward, the fact that someone else is doing so might be enough to help them overcome their fears. \"That person came froward, why can't I?\" as more come forward, it can snowball as now you can say \"Well, those two came froward, why can't I?\" \"Dozens of women have come forward, why not me?\"\n\nI'm sure there's the occasional person who sees an opportunity to get some fame and a settlement who didn't actually have anything happen as well, because some people are like that, but ultimately I think the majority are coming forward because they realize they are not alone and being a member of a group rather than a lone individual gives people courage."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/sandy-garossino/jian-ghomeshi-women-report-sex-assault_b_6059124.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzB8dTVALQI"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
b6lljw | why can’t chimps imitate human speech? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b6lljw/eli5_why_cant_chimps_imitate_human_speech/ | {
"a_id": [
"ejl8jbn",
"ejl9bmq"
],
"score": [
7,
5
],
"text": [
"They're physically unable to make the sounds, due to the shape and structure of their vocal cords and jaw.\n\nParrots can replicate some human sounds, but through a very different mechanism.",
"It doesnt have to do with intelligence it has to do with the muscles around the mouth and cocal cords. Birds have a vocal box that is located much lower near their lungs, surrounded by pure muscle that they can use to make nearly any sound they hear, you have to remember that parrots evolved to be able to copy other animals sounds as part of their defense mechanism, chimps did not. Their vocal box is quite simple in comparison and only needs to be able to make enough noises to communicate effectively with other members of their species. Think about it this way, humans are the most intelligent species of all but that doesn't mean we can just accurately mimic the sounds of any animal because we haven't evolved to have that mechanism. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
3sz97j | how does our body adjust to temperature to make it less severe? (i.e when you're in the shower and water that seemed extremely hot seems to mellow out) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sz97j/eli5how_does_our_body_adjust_to_temperature_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx1pnny"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This ties into the mechanism we use to detect temperature. A lot of folks make the mistake of thinking we're like thermometers. That is, that we have some kind of absolute sense of temperature.\n\nWhat we actually have, is more like the ability to detect the *change* in temperature. Until you get very cold/hot, you detect that change much more sharply. \n\nSo, when you dunk into a warm bath or hot shower, your skin starts out at one temperature and raises to match the temperature of the water. At that point, the mechanism detecting changes doesn't have anything to do, so you feel the temperature less strongly."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
5rpxva | why do movies shot for tv look so different to a movie created for cinema? i'm not talking production budgets, just the sharpness or polish to it you notice while you're watching. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rpxva/eli5_why_do_movies_shot_for_tv_look_so_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd97dbq",
"dd97pwc",
"dd9ikz3"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Part of the reason is mastering. Movies shot for TV have a lot more time in the editing room, and part of that is based on the production budget. You've got people with more skill, better techniques, and possibly much more time. Another difference is lighting, which is often performed by more talented individuals in film production. Perhaps one of the biggest differences is frame rate. Film and TV have different frame rates, with a lower frame rate being standard for film. The higher frame rate for TV makes things appear a little faster because you're seeing more nuances in movement, and the lower frame rate has a bit of a smoothing effect. ",
"Lack of production design. Quicker setups, lighting in particular. Less rehearsal (actors and cinematographers), fewer retakes.\n\nThere was a time, when movie professionalism was at its peak, that a day's work might typically yield two minutes of film. A TV movie can be shot in a week-10 days.",
"It has a lot to do with the lighting and it depends on the kind of TV show or film. Sitcoms like Friends or The Big Bang Theory are lit to be even and bright. Where as a feature film is more realistic or dramatic. Lighting styles also change over time, sometimes you can watch a film and it looks like it was from a certain decade.\n\nThe kind of media used to shoot on also makes a difference. Different kinds of film have different looks over others and even different digital cameras can have different looks. A lot of time can be spent in post giving specific looks with digital.\n\nIt's a total artistic choice what a show will look like and it's determined in pre productions. It's not necessarily budget based but it can be cheaper to have certain looks over others.\n\nIt doesn't matter what the \"look\" is like if you don't have actors that can play the part the way it's intended.\n\nSource: I have worked a little in the film business in production and post production."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
5helfn | how did alan turing break the enigma? how does the bombe work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5helfn/eli5_how_did_alan_turing_break_the_enigma_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"dazkzdk",
"dazl80c",
"dazmt39",
"dazpc7t"
],
"score": [
4,
10,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Brute force computational power.\n\nNow he knew how to build a computer that could run the jumbled enigma message through a decryption but simply the amount of variations available to the enigma machine were too high (14 billion or something iirc) for the computer he could build to get a result in a reasonable amount of time as the Germans changed their enigma configuration every 24 hours.\n\nSo he needed to figure out a way to reduce the amount of variations needed to run through, and did this through a very common trick in code breaking. Find a repeated message that used the same sentence everytime, in this case weather reports was used that always ended in \"hail hitler\" There were a few other more intricate things he did but that may to too much for an ELI5. \n\nHis computer was based off an older model of a Polish design but upgraded in many ways. ",
"Enigma was a challenge.\n\n* There were a set of three internal rotors for randomization, chosen at 'random' from a larger set of five.\n\n* There was a positional notch in an additional alphabet ring that had to be known or otherwise set, for a total of 26 settings.\n* There were 10 leads that could be cross-routed amongst the 26 possible letters, for about 150 trillion combinations.\n* There was a scrambler rotor at the start of the enciphering, which had about 17,000 settings.\n\nIf you knew the proper settings the message had been encoded with, the enigma machine would reverse the entire process.\n\nOne man, trying these combinations by hand, could not possibly try to decode all of them - just the leads alone would take you an entire lifetime just to make a dent. In short, the Enigma machine was secure because there were just too many possible combinations.\n\nThe Bombe essentially acted as an emulator. The mechanical wheels replicated the rotors and leads and all other manner of encoding mechanisms, and then passed the input right back into another equivalent machine, so as to produce cleartext. The original bomb had the equivalent of 36 Enigma machines inside of it.\n\nThe bombe would rotate each drum fairly quickly, and then pass an electrical signal through the whole apparatus. If the input emulated enigma settings matched the output related, the electrical signal would pass to the comparator, and the device would stop. So for example, you would expect that current flowing FROM the letter A, when passed through the reflector, would return the letter A. If it did, it was deemed valid, and the device would stop. If instead it returned the letter N, that's a logical fallacy, and the device continued testing. They did this for each of the rotors.\n\nThis process quickly discarded many, many, many, false settings. *Stops* were then sent through the bombe again, to find which ones had problems farther down line, and then again for the lead settings. The process would be repeated over and over and over, displacing false positives in the process. \n\n\nEventually they would have a resonable number of programmatic settings that could be tested by hand. If these hand-tested settings produced German language, all testing stopped and those were the settings used for actual decryption.\n\nTL;DR: By discarding false positives at each setting, and distributing the work over 36 emulated enigma machines, Turing's bombe was able to reduce the amount of configurations to test to a manageable level.",
"If you get a free 20 minutes or so, this gentleman does a FANTASTIC job covering the Enigma machine and its downfall over two videos. A little simplified, but fascinating:\n\n_URL_0_",
"Thanks a lot guys!! \nDidn't expect a single comment!! \nThanks for the explanations I'm going to start reading them just now!:) "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2_Q9FoD-oQ"
],
[]
]
|
||
7vmgts | if your heart randomly stopped beating, would you be able to recognize that it stopped beating before you die? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7vmgts/eli5_if_your_heart_randomly_stopped_beating_would/ | {
"a_id": [
"dttetr5",
"dttf46q",
"dtthtzn",
"dttr9k5",
"dtttkbj",
"dtttkxx"
],
"score": [
3,
24,
9,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If your circulatory system stops all at once, you have a minute or two before your brain shuts down from lack of oxygen. You wouldn't necessarily know instantly, \"oh shit, my heart's not beating anymore!\" But if you know the signs of a heart attack - chest pains, sudden dizziness, shooting pain or numbness on the left side of the body, tight feeling in your chest, et cetera - you'd certainly understand what was happening. If you had the presence of mind to take your own pulse, you'd be able to tell that you don't have one... and then probably panic, then pass out shortly thereafter. You miiiiight just have enough time to call 911.",
"It depends on what you mean. Would you be able \"feel\" the absence of a beat. Yes, as this occurs when people have irregular heart rhythms. However, with a complete heart stoppage it's unlikely you would notice since other symptoms and anxiety would take your immediate focus. The symptoms of a stopped heart would be like those of a heart attack; weakness, shortness of breath, chest pain/tightness and anxiety. The oxygenated blood would definitely be able to maintain consciousness long enough for awareness that something was wrong but not much longer than that before unconsciousness and then death. ",
"As someone with occasional heart rhythm issues...yes you feel it. Sometimes my heart will skip a beat, sometimes it will fire off at a million miles an hour, sometimes it feels like one half is a split second behind the other half. \n\nYou don't feel your heartbeat normally, but you become very aware when it's suddenly absent.",
"I imagine it depends on the context. Several years ago I had a 5-inch (13cm) tumor wrapped around my heart. There is not a lot of room under the breastbone and due to the pressure I felt my heartbeat *all the time*. (It started so gradually I didn't even realize it was a symptom until after my first round of chemo I didn't feel every beat anymore.)\n\nThe few weeks before I started chemo if I leaned against my left side in certain ways my heart would skip beats: thud... thud... thud... ... ... THUD ... ... ... THUD. It was pretty disconcerting.",
"Yes. From my own experience... Heart stopped beating, my lungs were working like mad without changing the oxygen level in the blood. For me, it was an eternity, but the doctors later said it was somewhere between three and five seconds until the heart started beating again - there are several mechanisms that keep the heart going, and one emergency mechanism sets in after about that time. The first beat was crazy - I thought my chest would explode.\n\nThat was nearly thirty years ago, since then I've got different medication, and this never happened again.\n\nAnd its definitely a 0/10, won't want do it again.",
"It seems people here are talking about two different things. There are different 'heart attacks' as they are called by many people. One is a infarction, the other one is a rhytmdefect. The most common one is the infarction. This is due to a shortness of oxygen being supplied to the heart muscle itself. This could be either due to atherosclerosis or a (thrombo)embolism. This leads to symptoms as pressure/pain on the chest, sweating, weakness and a feeling of anxiety. This can lead to loss of consciousness in minutes.\n\nThe other form is the rhytmdefect, and for your question specifically the asystole. This is when the ventricles suddenly stop pumping blood due to lack of electric activity in the heart muscle. This will lead to a sudden stop of bloodiflow to your brain, which leads to a sudden loss of consciousness(literally seconds). "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
j504f | in finance, what is 'equity'? | Also, what are 'securities'? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j504f/in_finance_what_is_equity/ | {
"a_id": [
"c299km6",
"c29bu7r",
"c2973s8",
"c297lai",
"c299km6",
"c29bu7r"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
4,
10,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Equity is the worth of a company that belongs to the owners, basically if you have a bunch of assets like houses and a bunch of liabilities like mortgages, the value of the houses less the outstanding mortgage is what you have in value, its also often referred to as net assets or owners equity. ",
"Equity is how much of something you own.\n\nIf a bank loans you $10,000 for a car, and you pay it down until you only owe the bank $3,000, your equity is $7,000.\n\nA security is a piece of paper that is worth something.\n\nIt may be a dollar bill, a stock certificate (a piece of a company), or a piece of paper saying that someone owes you money.\n",
"Equity has several meanings. In finance, it is similar to what it is in real estate:\n\n > Assets – Liabilities\n\nIn other words, it's what the stock is worth, minus the debt associated with it. Just like how in real estate, your equity is the value of the house minus your mortgage. You could also think of this as something called the *net worth* of a stock. If the stock is bought without any debt, then the stock itself *is* equity. Equity is also one of the terms for categorizing *securities*, equity securities generally just means you have some ownership of the company or investment.\n\nA security is a contract, or written agreement, that can be traded between people at rates. For instance, stocks are a type of security. The contract for a stock states that you have some sort of ownership of the company in which you invested. The more complicated securities you might have heard of are also securities, such as bonds, derivatives, options, etc.",
"The balance sheet is a deceptively easy item in accounting.\n\nWhat it tells you is three things:\n\n1) How big of a pile of stuff do I own?\n2) How much money did I borrow to buy my big pile of stuff that I still have to pay back?\n3) If I removed everything from my pile of stuff that I still owe money on, how much is left? This smaller pile of stuff that you have paid in full for and that you don't owe another cent on is your \"equity\".\n\nIt can be broken down to the classic accounting equation of:\n\nASSETS (Total Pile of Stuff) = Liabilities (Stuff in your pile that the bank can take back because you haven't paid for it yet) + Equity (Stuff in the pile that is paid for and yours forever)\n\nOr, in terms of a home, if I take out a mortgage and buy a $200,000 house, and promptly pay $100,000 as a down payment, I own half of a house. That is my equity. The bank owns the other $100,000 of the house, and that is my liability. Again, the equation tells us:\n\nTotal Assets (The Whole House, 200k) = Liabilities (Bank's half of the house 100k) + Equity (my half of the house that I plunked down 100k for).\n\nTo answer the question about what equity is in finance, this is how is it important:\n\nLet us say that I owned an entrepreneurial cat. The cat decides to get into the business of rat control. I take the cat to the bank, and the bank lends the cat $995,000 as a business loan under the agreement that the bank can repossesses everything if the loan isn't paid back with interest. The cat takes the bank's 995k and I throw in 5k of my own money that the cat never has to pay me back for, and he buys 1 million dollars worth of rat control equipment.\n\nNow if I went on Craigslist and offered to sell the cat and his 1 million dollars worth of rat control supplies to the highest bidder, my cat might sell for close to 1 million dollars. \n\nHowever, once the potential buyer found out that the 1 million dollar cat owes $995,000 to the bank still, the potential buyer would realize the EQUITY in the cat is only $5,000, and wouldn't pay much more than that.\n\nNow that begs the question, why would I give the feline $5,000 that he didn't have to pay me back for? This relates to the second use of the phrase equity in finance, which is ownership.\n\nI gave the cat $5,000 to become a partner in his business. Think of this as \"seed money\" that the cat can spend on things that will make his business better, and that he doesn't have to worry about paying me interest on or ever repaying directly. Instead, he gives me 100 shares of Rat Cat Stock of a total 200 shares outstanding. He owns the other 100, which he assigned to himself when incorporating his business. What's in it for me? As owner of 50% of the EQUITY in the company (I own 100 of 200 total shares), I am entitled to half of the profits! Now if the cat is very successful and makes $200,000 in profits each year after paying interest on his loan to the bank, that is great for me! Going back to our general accounting equation:\n\nAssets $1.2 Million Dollars (1 Million Dollars in Supplies + $200,000 profit) = Liabilities (1 Million Principle Still Owed to the Bank) + 200k (Equity, money that belongs outright to me and the cat!).\n\nThe amount of money we borrowed from the bank doesn't change. We still have 1 million dollars worth of equipment that could be liquidated and sold to pay back the bank, so that 200k is pure profit for us (me and my cat) as business owners.\n\nNow this $200,000 can either be paid to use in the form of dividends, or reinvested in new equipment and services that can help the business grow. \n",
"Equity is the worth of a company that belongs to the owners, basically if you have a bunch of assets like houses and a bunch of liabilities like mortgages, the value of the houses less the outstanding mortgage is what you have in value, its also often referred to as net assets or owners equity. ",
"Equity is how much of something you own.\n\nIf a bank loans you $10,000 for a car, and you pay it down until you only owe the bank $3,000, your equity is $7,000.\n\nA security is a piece of paper that is worth something.\n\nIt may be a dollar bill, a stock certificate (a piece of a company), or a piece of paper saying that someone owes you money.\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1mdo3k | how is it five minutes after a show is broadcast it can often be downloaded!? what's the process in getting it online? | I'm not in the slightest way looking to do it myself! I've just always been intrigued as to how this is done. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mdo3k/eli5_how_is_it_five_minutes_after_a_show_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc87c1u",
"cc87csj",
"cc87o18"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Digital video recorders I imagine. Then it's a straight upload to the internet. ",
"someone records the show (probably on their computer) and starts uploading the file via a p2p service (like utorrent) straight away. With these programs you do not have to have the whole file uploaded before sharing as it breaks it in to little pieces and sends a piece at a time (kind of). ",
"Alternatively to the p2p idea (which it could be), they could just have good upload speed.\n\n20-30 minutes of footage is very doable in 5 minutes provided you have good upload speed.\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
248l1i | why does affirmative action cause controvery in college admissions while athletic recruiting is acceptable? | From what I've observed, it seems that the topic of affirmative action can cause a lot of bitterness when put in the context of college admissions, whereas there isn't nearly as much complaining about athletic recruiting. It also seems like this disparity becomes much more controversial when the issue is discussed in the context of top-tier schools (e.g. Ivy League, Stanford, Duke).
I know that athletes work incredibly hard to reach the point where they can be recruited, and I think that is very commendable. However, I think there are still striking similarities between both systems...
For example, both are based on factors the applicant can't control; you can't control if you're an underrepresented minority and you can't control if you have natural athletic talent (again, I know athletes work hard, but its common sense that the ones who fare best are the ones with natural ability). Applicants have a little more wiggle room for lower test scores when they fall into the category of affirmative action or athletic recruiting. The school will definitely look better outwardly if it accepts applicants using these systems (athletes increase endowment through athletic revenue; underrepresented minorities enhance the school's diversity).
I guess the main question I am asking is that despite their similarities, why is affirmative action bashed on a more frequent basis than athletic recruiting within the context of college admissions?
Also, if you know of a more appropriate subreddit for this discussion, I'd be happy and grateful to hear your suggestions. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/248l1i/eli5_why_does_affirmative_action_cause_controvery/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch4nex6",
"ch4nj6j"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Athletes are chosen because they have a documented skill. Affirmative action rewards individuals based on the color of their skin (not going to get in to the justification arguments for affirmative action). That's a huge difference.",
"To be fair, plenty of people complain about the role athletics play in colleges, as well as the lower standards for legacy students (children of alumni), which seems similar but you didn't mention. Also, the Ivy League doesn't (officially) recruit athletes, so your statement on that isn't really true.\n\nI would imagine plenty of the people who complain about affirmative action would prefer that their schools do well in college sports, and they hold the belief that if someone works hard enough, they could be good enough to earn an athletic scholarship."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
nrjsy | what is the difference between an imessage and a text message in ios 5? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nrjsy/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_an_imessage/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3bd71p",
"c3bdcy7",
"c3bdycf",
"c3bd71p",
"c3bdcy7",
"c3bdycf"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
3,
2,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"As far as I can tell, iMessage just works as more of an \"instant messenger\" style system. It also gives you \"receipts\" telling you that your message was delivered, read, etc. ",
"Apple has figured out that if two people are using iPhones (or iOS derivatives), they can route the message through Apples servers and push it to the destination. This bypasses the carrier network saving the consumer money. \n\nIf it knows one of the two parties is not using an iPhone, the message is routed through the carrier. All this is done seamlessly benefitting the consumer.",
"iMessage uses your phone's internet and is just a mobile phone version of something like MSN Messenger or Facebook Chat. Android phones have Gtalk which isn't very popular and blackberries have BBM which as far as I can tell is the current preferred chat system for teenagers in the UK. When I was that age, it was MSN!\n\nA text message is a text message, as it always has been. This uses your phone's sim card and network's cellular service to send an SMS to another mobile phone.\n\nI just learned by reading tazzy531's comment though that Apple have made it seamless and allow you to send iMessages to people without an iphone; I learned that Apple have developed the system so that when this happens, the message is actually sent under the hood as an SMS instead, which is rather clever. I've not seen this for myself though.",
"As far as I can tell, iMessage just works as more of an \"instant messenger\" style system. It also gives you \"receipts\" telling you that your message was delivered, read, etc. ",
"Apple has figured out that if two people are using iPhones (or iOS derivatives), they can route the message through Apples servers and push it to the destination. This bypasses the carrier network saving the consumer money. \n\nIf it knows one of the two parties is not using an iPhone, the message is routed through the carrier. All this is done seamlessly benefitting the consumer.",
"iMessage uses your phone's internet and is just a mobile phone version of something like MSN Messenger or Facebook Chat. Android phones have Gtalk which isn't very popular and blackberries have BBM which as far as I can tell is the current preferred chat system for teenagers in the UK. When I was that age, it was MSN!\n\nA text message is a text message, as it always has been. This uses your phone's sim card and network's cellular service to send an SMS to another mobile phone.\n\nI just learned by reading tazzy531's comment though that Apple have made it seamless and allow you to send iMessages to people without an iphone; I learned that Apple have developed the system so that when this happens, the message is actually sent under the hood as an SMS instead, which is rather clever. I've not seen this for myself though."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
7rybrz | why is it so much easier to calculate round numbers? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7rybrz/eli5_why_is_it_so_much_easier_to_calculate_round/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt0i2bz",
"dt0i7mz",
"dt0iaxa",
"dt0jd0e"
],
"score": [
9,
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There are lots of different ways to do math, but the way I see this is...\n\n30 x 3 requires you to multiply only 3 and 3 together (and then move the decimal one point for account for the zero).\n\n27 x 3 requires more steps, either calculating 25 x 3 and then adding 6 (to account for the \"2\" left over from the original 27), or calculating 30 x 3 and removing 9 (to account for the \"3\" left over from the original 27). ",
" When finding a big number like that we typically split then. We know that 3x3 is 9 because of common use and you probably learned up to 12x12 in school. In base ten we also know by adding a 0 to the 9 we achieve 30x3. For 27x3 however we need to find 2x3, multiply it by 10 and add 7x3. It comes down to common use and an extra step. ",
" > When I think about it it doesn't make too much sense. What makes 30x3 that much different for our brains to process than 27x3?\n\nThere are significantly fewer calculations to perform. Multiplying 30x3 is basically the same as multiplying 3x3 and adding a zero. But 27x3 means you need to multiply 7x3 to get 21, remember the 2 to carry it, multiply 2*3 to get 6, carry the 2 to get 8, add the zero to get 80, and pair with the 1 from before to get 81.\n\nNotice how in the first one we did a single instance of single-digit multiplication and slapped a zero back on the end, while in the second we did two instances of multiplication, carried a digit, slapped the zero on the end, and matched with the remembered 1. That is twice as many calculations and more importantly remembering two different numbers while doing so.",
"If you use a different base for your arithmetic, then different calculations become easy - for example in base 8, 14x8 is 140. Multiples of 10 are easy in base 10, which almost every civilisation has used (exceptions exist - the Mesopotamians used base 60, which is why hours have 60 minutes and minutes have 60 seconds). "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3vhuym | .gif v. .gifv. | Just saw a gif. Comments a fellow redditor posted it in gifv in the comments. Why? I personally dislike gifv because I can't load it into iMessage. Educate me (and call me dumb if you must)! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vhuym/eli5_gif_v_gifv/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxnpade"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"gifv isn't an image file. It's a movie. The \"proper\" file extension is either .webm or .mp4 (depending on what your particular browser supports). The difference is in the way they store each frame of the animation. Movie files remember what was on the previous frame, so each frame in the animation only has to store the difference between the previous frame and the next one, while GIFs have to store the whole image every time.\n\nFor a typical movie clip, this means that a GIF is somewhere around 5-10x the size. For people with slow Internet connections or limited data, gifv is a pretty big improvement."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
6aazzp | how does uncooked meat kill a person? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6aazzp/eli5_how_does_uncooked_meat_kill_a_person/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhd4mti"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Cooking meat: Kills parasites, Kills bacteria, Kills fungi, and denatures some of the proteins making it easier to digest. When raw meat kills people it is because they catch an infection, or get a parasite and that kills them. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
4zx081 | why are most amount caps in video games 9? ex: the max numbers of rings in sonic 1 are 999. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zx081/eli5_why_are_most_amount_caps_in_video_games_9_ex/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ze6ce",
"d6ze9rd",
"d6zoo3g"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
5
],
"text": [
"as opposed to what, 8?",
"Each number displayed on the screen has a fixed number of digits. If it went over the allowed digits, say 999 to 1000, then that extra 1 may overlap with another displayed item. For each digit, you can have the numbers 0 - 9 so the highest value is 9.",
"Usually because the number isn't limited by the computer's internal storage (if it was, the max would be something like 255 or 65535, the largest unsigned integer that can be stored in 8 or 16 bits), but by space on the screen; there's enough room for 2 or 3 digits, so the maximum number is the highest number that can be expressed in that many digits."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
echame | if inflation causes money to degrade in value, why can’t we just destroy a lot of money to make the remaining money increase in value? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/echame/eli5_if_inflation_causes_money_to_degrade_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"fbbchdp",
"fbbd4ic",
"fbbdaq7",
"fbbkjmc",
"fbc92av",
"fbd4luc",
"fbdd17z"
],
"score": [
15,
4,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"We can. \n\nGovernments can tax more than they spend and make the rest disappear. It causes deflation.\n\nGovernments and policy experts tend to agree that inflation is better than deflation.\n\nIn cases where inflation goes crazy, it is happening for a reason. It's not like the handle on the printing machine just got stuck, it's that the government has a reason to print all of that money.",
"You can, but this kind of inflation is no accident.\n\nThe government is intentionally printing currency to devalue its own debts and force investment instead of saving. Hyperinflation is typically the end result of rampant government debt spending. The government cant afford to pay its debts if the currency were to regain strength.",
"You first need to understand what inflation is.\n\nCurrency is just a representation of wealth, to make it easier to trade it. Wealth usually increase over time, we use manpower to get natural resources, transform them into produce, or provide services.\n\nThe law of supply and demand come into play, where your wealth is your demand (the more wealth you have the more you want to trade it) and the currency is the supply (because we need it to trade). So as wealth increase overtime, if your supply of currency stay the same your currency will increase in value and that's deflation, which can be bad for the economy at long term.\n\nSo the solution would be to add new currency, if you add as much currency as the increase of wealth you stay stable, if you produce more than you have inflation. Your supply of currency is higher than your demand, your currency decrease in value.\n\nNow most central bank target 2% inflation for 2 main reason. You can't predict the wealth increase precisely, so you always gonna have some fluctuation, by targeting 2% inflation, you won't often get into deflation, during those fluctuation. The second reason is that a bit of inflation is good for the economy, since it incentive people to invest their money instead of keeping it. Invested money do some work to growth the economy, which is a good thing.\n\nSo the vast majority of time you don't want your inflation to drop, you want it stable around 2%. Now if you have huge inflation problem could people destroy a bunch of currency to help stabilise? Kind of yes, but usually huge inflation happen, because the central bank produce too much currency for the government. They already were in need of money and so having them destroy the money they have seem unlikely. It could be ''good'', but nobody would want to be the one to destroy their own money. It's a lot easier to introduce new currency than to remove it.",
"there is about $1.5 Trillion is US currency in circulation. The entire US economy is valued at over $20 Trillion. The actual physical supply of cash is only a small percentage of the overall economy",
"You can, but you don't want to. A little bit of inflation is actually a good thing. It's only when it's too high of inflation that you have problems. And having *deflation* is as bad as having high inflation, it'll fuck up your economy.",
"It will slow down the economy. If money become more expensive, people stop spending them and keep them instead, the business don't receive cash flow, they diminish their production and so on.",
"Deflation can be fine, and happened occasionally during the gold standard.\n\nDeflation + debt do not work so well: this happened in the United States between 1931 and '33 for example."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
11yzdt | the star wars trilogy. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11yzdt/eli5_the_star_wars_trilogy/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6qro79",
"c6quk03",
"c6qw43n"
],
"score": [
18,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Episode IV: Kid and Old Guy find some robots, meet a smuggler. They save the princess, bad guy kills old guy, but his base blows up because the kid is a good pilot and knows some magic. Then they have a party.\n\nEpisode V: Kid and his crew are on the lam from the bad guy. Bad guy finds them, they split up. Kid goes to train under a master. Smuggler goes to find his old bro. Old bro sells him out to bad guy. Kid leaves master and fights bad guy. Bad guy says he's kids father. Kid cries when his hand is lopped off. \n\nEpisode VI: Kid and his crew come to save smuggler from his old boss. Old boss gets owned. Kid goes back to master, says we cool and dies. Kid's crew finds out bad guy is building his old base back up but like more uber and the smuggler and princess go to the forest to fight more bad guys. Meanwhile kid goes to the base and fights the bad guy, his dad. The bad guy's boss is like \"kid hang with me\" and his dad flips and kills his boss then dies too. Then they take off and they blow up the base again. Then they have a party.",
"Anything in particular you're confused about?\n\nThe original trilogy is, relatively speaking, pretty simply. Much simpler than the prequel trilogy, which is, in professional scriptwriting jargon, \"a complete fucking mess\". *Spoilers ahead*.\n\n**Setting**: It takes place in a galaxy a long time ago, and far away. It is a society with thousands of cultures and languages and planets and species, all ruled by a galactic evil empire. The head of the empire is The Emperor. His second-hand man is a bionic bad-ass named Darth Vader. The Galaxy used to be controlled by a republic, with a huge senate with representatives from every planet. This was until the emperor, with help from Darth Vader usurped the republic...this is what the prequel trilogy is about.\n\nIn this galaxy is a, well, force called \"The Force\". It is apparently in all living things, and with individuals strong with the force, they can manipulate matter, have super-human reflexes and strength, and can even change how people *think* if their mind is weak enough. There are two sides of the force: light side and dark side. The light side is comprised of the Jedi, who, in the Republic were sorta a diplomatic/police force for the entire galaxy. The Jedi are the good guys, essentially. They believe in rationality and justice above all emotion and passion. Jedi are forbidden from forming strong emotional attachments, or acting in anger or passion. For this reason, the Jedi council would normally refuse students if they're more than like, 7 years old, or else they can easily turn to the dark side.\n\nThe dark side is also known as the Sith (note: word was never used in the original trilogy). They rule with passion...they lusted for power especially. Emotions of love, revenge, hatred, etc, turned them to the dark side. There are always two sith at the top...the master, and the apprentice. The Emperor is the master, Darth is the apprentice. Together, they destroyed the vast, vast majority of the jedi and turned the republic to an empire.\n\n**A New Hope**: Luke is a teenage farmer boy being raised by his aunt and uncle on a desert planet. He comes across two robots who are carrying a message from an imprisoned princess (Leia), who is asking for Kenobi (Obi Wan) to bring secret codes to destroy the Death Star to her home planet of Alderaan, so they can destroy it. Luke takes the robots to the only Kenobi he knows, Obi Wan, who tells him about the Jedi order and about his father--a Jedi--whom he apprenticed. He tells Luke his father turned to the dark side and died, and attempts to take Luke as a student. Luke says no until he goes back home and sees his aunt and uncle killed by the empire. Luke and Obi go to a port city to find a smuggler to sneak them out of there. They find Han Solo, who is revealed to have a huge bounty on his head by the gangster Jabba the Hut. They escape from the planet by the skin of their teeth. Meanwhile, Leia, imprisoned on the death star, witnesses her home planet destroyed by it.\n\nLuke, Obi, Han and the robots try to get to alderaan, but only experience an asteroid field and the death star. They are sucked into the death star, but Han and Luke hide in stormtrooper costumes while Obi Wan attempts to shut off the death star's tractor beam. Obi Wan does so, and Han and Luke manage to save the princess. There is much battling though, and in the chaos, Darth Vader kills Obi Wan in front of Luke's eyes, but they escape.\n\nIn the third act, they got the plans to the Rebel Resistance. The plans reveal that the exhaust port can be used to blow up the death star. Han, however, is content with his reward for rescuing the princess and leaves. Luke gets into a plane and with the rest of the rebels attempt to blow up the death star, which he manages to do with help from Han (who comes back at the last moment). And the spirit of Obi Wan teling him to use the force. They get medals.\n\n**Empire Strikes Back**: It's, like, a few years later, and the rebel resistance is on the ice planet Hoth. The empire had managed to find them by sending a droid out to all corners of the galaxy. When luke goes to investigate, he almost is killed by a Yeti-thing, and is told by the spirit of Obi Wan to go to Dagobah to be taught by Yoda. Luke is found by Han and they get back. The empire, however, is here, and they attack the base! An epic battle happens, and Han and Leia and the bots escape on the Millenium falcon. Luke escapes to Dagobah, where he crash lands in a swamp.\n\nHan and Leia, meanwhile, narrowly escape from Darth Vader, who assembles a bunch of bounty-hunters to get them. Luke meets Yoda, who starts a crash-course in Jedi-ism, one test of which involves him fighting a hallucinatory Darth and seeing his own face in him. Han and Leia head to Cloud City to seek help from Han's old friend Lando. However, Lando betrayed them and turns them over to Darth, who wants to use them to lure luke. Luke, with the force, senses his friends are in danger and leaves. Han, in the meanwhile, is frozen and given to the bounty hunter Boba Fett to give to Jabba (that gangster). Luke arrives and gets in a light-saber battle with Darth, who reveals that HE is his father, and that he wants Luke to be his apprentice so they can rule the galaxy together. Leia, who gets a telepathic call from him, saves him. It ends on a downer.\n\n**Return of the Jedi**. Han is still frozen in carbonite, at Jabba's palace. Leia comes in disguise to save him, but she is captured and becomes a sex-slave. Luke comes and allows himself to be captured. Luke and Han (now unfrozened) are sentenced to death by being dropped into a worm-pit thing. A big battle occurs where all of them escape. Luke goes back to Dagobah to see Yoda is dying, and Yoda says there is another skywalker (Leia). \n\nThe Rebels find out that the Empire is making a new death star and plan to destroy its shield generator. Luke, Leia and Han are part of the tem to destroy the shield generator, but Luke realizes his prescence is alerting Darth to them, so Luke surrenders to the stormtroopers to be brought to Vader, while Leia and Han work with the Ewoks to take down the generator. Vader brings Luke to the Emperor, and Vader and Luke attempt to convince each other to turn from their side of the force to the other. It turns into a light-saber battle. Luke is getting angrier and angrier, while the emperor is encouraging luke to let the hate flow through him, when Luke refuses, the emperor starts electrocuting him, and Vader regains his humanity and picks up the emperor and throws him down a giant shaft, turning to the light side...but Darth dies. The strike team are successful in bringing down the sheild generator, and the rebels blow up the death star. The deaths of Vader, the emperor, and the death star imply the end of the empire in general.\n\n**Shorter Summary**:\n\nThe first movie is essentially luke discovering he's a jedi and striking a huge blow against the empire. Second movie is Darth realizing who luke is (his son) and getting him to become his apprentice (with Darth replacing the emperor when the emperor dies, I'm guessing). Third movie is Luke attempting to turn his father over to the other side, and succeeding, which results in the empire being destroyed and order returning to the galaxy.\n\nThe original trilogy is about the redemption of an evil man to become good by his son. The prequel trilogy is about the transformation of a good little boy to become this evil man in the first place.\n\nSorry that was a bit long.",
"**EPISODE IV**: *asthmatic breathing* pew pew pew pew \"Help me obi wan kenobi, your're my only hope\" beep boop pew pew swoosh! Lutini! ZAP! \"but i wanna be a fighter pilot!\" vroom! HAN SHOT FIRST swoosh! \"That's no moon!\" \"I'm Luke Skywalker, im here to save you!!! PEW PEW PEW PEW! BEEEEEEEENNNNNNNN!!!! pewpewpewpew swoosh pewpewpewpew \"we can destroy the death star with a single shot at an exposed hatch that was designed for this exact purpose\" swooshswooshswoosh pewpewpewpewpewpewpewpewpewpew \"now let's blow this thing and go on home\" pew... ... ... BOOOOOOOOOOOM! HUZZAH! (duuh duuuuuuuh duh duh duh duuuuuuh duuuuuuh duh duh duh duuuuuuuh duuuuuuh duh duh duh duuuuuuuuuh duhduh)\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
66yk7o | what would happen if you do something that is legal in your current home country but illegal in a foreign country? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66yk7o/eli5_what_would_happen_if_you_do_something_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgm8u5v"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Okay, so let's say weed is legal here in Freedonia, but illegal in Suckistan, the neighbouring country. Say I'm in Freedonia as a dual Freedonian/Suckistani citizen, and I light up a spliff in a Freedonian cafe. Technically, I could face charges if I tried to return to Suckistan, but it's unlikely, and there's basically no chance Freedonia is going to extradite for something that's legal there."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3d6wvo | what exactly is suicide squad and where does it fit in the dcu? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d6wvo/eli5_what_exactly_is_suicide_squad_and_where_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct2cgtq",
"ct2cro5"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A bunch of people with powers (or just skilled criminals) get arrested and locked up. The Suicide Squad is a program where Amanda Waller, with approval from the government, is allowed to take these people and use them for suicide, black ops, off-the-books type missions, ones too dark for the heroes (such as assassinations). \n \nIf they oblige, they get time off their sentences, if they fail a mission, they die, if they disobey Waller, they die. \n \nAs stated in the trailer, these people came out of the woodwork when Superman revealed himself. \n \nFrom the looks of the trailer, we will get some background on Enchantress (as her comic book self is different than in the movie). Even Harley Quinn's backstory seems to be different from the comic books/animated series, where she fell in love with the Joker, from the trailer, she looks like she is being tortured. \n \nSide note-Batman will also be in the movie, and is seen briefly in the trailer. The link between them is already established in the Batman v Superman trailer, with Joker's graffiti on Jason Todd's Robin costume.",
"This is best for one of the many DC subs. \nr/DCcomics r/DC_Cinematic/\n\nAre both good starting points."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
5dmyha | why is the brain shaped the way it is? why not smooth like the liver for example? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dmyha/eli5_why_is_the_brain_shaped_the_way_it_is_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"da5q934"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Because all the ridges maximize the surface. The human skull can't grow past a certain size due to how vaginal delivery works (mainly, the diameters of the pelvis) so the only way to \"fit more brain\" in the skull is to make it as convoluted as possible. Since neuron bodies are in the surface (the gray matter), it's nature's way to give us more neurons. Generally speaking, the less evolved is the brain, the flatter it looks. Here's an interesting pic to show what I'm talking about\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://137.222.110.150/Calnet/vetneuro/image/brain%20species%20difference%20LABELLED.jpg"
]
]
|
|
1qhru4 | how do we know if animals have vowels? | I recently heard someone speak about birds having vowels. How do we humans know that they have vowels in their "language"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qhru4/how_do_we_know_if_animals_have_vowels/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdcwsps",
"cdcwy9g"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"What on earth? ",
"Hey OP, \n\nHave you got a link to the original article/documentary/source that you got this information from?\n\nIt will help people give you a better explanation!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
1mn1xn | why do some drivers stay 50-100 yards back in bumper to bumper traffic. | Commute in Chicago daily. I see nothing beneficial to this regarding safety improvement, gas or engine preserving. It just pushes traffic back farther. Maybe someone can help here.
OP response: Wow I got tore up, but that was awesome! Just got back from work, apologies for going MIA and not marking explained. Lots of constructive responses, and others not. I enjoyed the links and feedback. Please allow me to explain. I was looking for answers from various drivers, those that do this and those that don't, not out of ignorance. This question was not about tailgating or road rage. Just something I have noticed a handful of people do among thousands as I sit in traffic every day. I'm not originally from Chicago, or Illinois. I moved to Chicago almost 3 years ago. The key word in this question is YARDS (0.9144 Meters), not feet or car lengths. Thank you for those who understood that. An air pocket is definitely always necessary, 50 ft is completely acceptable! At HALF AN AMERICAN FOOTBALL FIELD I got curious. This seemed extremely excessive, especially when several others cut in front and that driver will maintain that 50+ yards distance from those cars that are now ahead of them in that lane. That much braking distance isn't needed at that slow of a pace (8 mph on the way home) and I have never felt the need to "control" traffic myself, I feel like I'd hold others up. If I do drive up on this, I just go around and continue my commute. Today I wondered what Reddit thought. Maybe I could have found a different subreddit but ELI5 is what came to mind, I wouldn't be the first.
Thanks everyone, no hard feelings for the aggressive comments my way, I 100% expected that reaction from strangers online. I'm going to use this thread down the road and I hope others do as well. This thread also kept me awake at work today. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mn1xn/eli5_why_do_some_drivers_stay_50100_yards_back_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccaq5hp",
"ccaq5su",
"ccaqhez",
"ccar5kl",
"ccaromx",
"ccasah2",
"ccasbna",
"ccasbto",
"ccasjud",
"ccasvap",
"ccasysx",
"ccasyvr",
"ccat1fy",
"ccat383",
"ccat4kn",
"ccat4wt",
"ccat96a",
"ccatdni",
"ccatpdo",
"ccatruk",
"ccattow",
"ccatz5j",
"ccau4ke",
"ccau4xb",
"ccau7qd",
"ccaumiw",
"ccauqiv",
"ccauu07",
"ccauuzo",
"ccauxc1",
"ccauxje",
"ccauy6m",
"ccav46p",
"ccavae6",
"ccavgj7",
"ccavhf8",
"ccavlr4",
"ccavn2w",
"ccavss8",
"ccavxxk",
"ccaw1d4",
"ccaw1fh",
"ccaw44j",
"ccaw8cb",
"ccawgfb",
"ccawk46",
"ccawl8i",
"ccawmvu",
"ccawxqo",
"ccawzfj",
"ccax1ac",
"ccaxdm6",
"ccaxdu4",
"ccaxdyz",
"ccaxnab",
"ccaxo3h",
"ccay3ui",
"ccaypm1",
"ccaz3ar",
"ccazbbz",
"ccazd8s",
"ccazm5i",
"ccazxq5",
"ccb03zd",
"ccb0akd",
"ccb0eg3",
"ccb1ggz",
"ccb272r",
"ccb2ihg",
"ccb3f1w",
"ccb3vch",
"ccb447w",
"ccb5h4p",
"ccb5mzh",
"ccb6ii4",
"ccb7xhf"
],
"score": [
983,
75,
65,
198,
51,
9,
14,
9,
20,
37,
2,
12,
82,
18,
5,
50,
9,
34,
3,
14,
7,
5,
6,
2,
6,
2,
12,
2,
6,
4,
5,
3,
2,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
5,
3,
32,
3,
3,
5,
3,
5,
8,
7,
8,
6,
11,
3,
3,
5,
6,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
3,
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It actually lets traffic flow better. Instead of speeding up and slowing down, which can create more choke points, you slow down to the point where you are just rolling. Eventually, it breaks up the choke points and helps traffic flow smoother. Speeding up, and slamming on your breaks is what causes everyone behind you do do it to.",
"if you drive a manual, it saves you from having to constantly use the clutch. you can put it in gear, hang a little far back, and the gap will effectively act as a buffer so that you push the clutch in as little as possible",
"This should explain it: _URL_0_\n\nThe problem is that most drivers aren't smart enough to figure it out. When Google creates self-driving cars though, we'll be set.",
"I do this daily, and it's actually a huge reliever of stress when coming across traffic jams. There's a lot of reasons why I started doing it.\n\n* It's better for your car. You're not accelerating and braking constantly. If the traffic is still flowing somewhat, you can just roll the whole time, saving a lot on brake usage, so they don't wear out as quickly.\n\n* It's MUCH better on your MPG to do this. By rolling, you're basically just letting the engine idle with maybe a bit of acceleration when things pick up a bit. This is a lot more fuel efficient than accelerate-brake-accelerate-brake, etc\n\n* As others have mentioned, it helps traffic flow better. This is especially true on highways where traffic chokes up near on ramps. By creating some space, other drivers have a place to go if they're merging onto the highway, or if they need to get out of the way so someone else can merge. \n\n* It's much less stressful. By staying back a bit, you're not flustered by all the braking, especially if the person in front of you brakes too hard/quickly and you have to hit your brakes harder to not bump them. You can just roll along, and since you spend a lot more time moving than people around you that are braking all the time, it actually makes it feel like you're not stuck in traffic as long because you never stop.\n\n* It's legally what you're supposed to do, anyway. By law (and this varies by state, but it's true in my state), if someone rear-ends you, and your car gets pushed into hitting the car in front of you, YOU'RE responsible for the damage caused to the car you hit (not the guy that hit you). You're supposed to leave enough stopping distance that you're assured to be clear. Obviously there's a limit to this (a semi hitting you at 40 mph because he didn't see the traffic jam is going to push you hundreds of feet and people would fill in the gap if you left THAT much space, so you'd never have that much room). But by leaving extra room, you're providing insurance that you won't be responsible for an accident that could affect your insurance rates and/or coverage. ",
"It's the way it *should* be done, unfortunately 99.9% of the population cannot see beyond themselves. It has already been explained why it's a good idea and that it actually helps relieve congestion (assuming the people you're surrounded by don't jump at the chance of an open lane++).\n\n++ Something I love to do while in slow traffic is watch the changers. You know, those people who never mentally made it past five years old patience wise and will never be able to process the error of their ways. They change lanes every 10 seconds, frantically, all while thinking it's getting them to their destination sooner. I hang back rolling along just watching them sweep back and forth across lanes, laughing at all the brakes they cause, and all for nothing as they never *actually* get ahead of anything. It is absolutely hilarious thinking about how these people go through life.\n\nI was driving in heavy traffic one evening to visit a friend and was on the freeway for about 30 miles. At some point a hummer gets on and starts swapping lanes as described above. He's with me for the rest of my journey and gets off at the same exit (but behind me!). I stayed in the middle lane the entire 30 miles of slowness. He swapped lanes over 100 times. I lost count because I was mostly enjoying music, but 100 is a low estimate.\n\nAre these people retarded? ",
"I do this, recently got rear ended at speed by someone not paying attention, my car thankfully brought their car to a complete stop before I was pushed into the car in front. Meaning I didn't need to go through my insurance to fix his car.",
"Everything is beneficial about this (and many other driving tips). Many excellent links here to show how traveling at the (relatively) same speed as others, letting others merge, merging safely (zipper), and leaving the correct distance between your front bumper and the car ahead's back bumper does not \"push traffic back\" it speeds traffic up and prevents backups. The goal is to keep rolling and change speed mainly by small adjustments with the gas pedal (only if needed) and no braking or sudden braking.\n\nIt's not just a belief, it's physics!",
"I take it you've never heard the motto, \"Better to be safe than sorry.\"\n\nI think you should be asking why don't all drivers stay back (maybe not quite that many) yards during traffic.\n",
"Nothing is worse than leaving a gap intentionally, only for some shitwidget to cut in front of you and force you to slam on the brakes.",
"Because I'm actually clearing up the traffic jam behind me. \n\n\nHere is the scientific research : _URL_1_\n\nHere's a non scientific video: _URL_0_\n\n\nBasically, stop and go traffic is exacerbated when people speed up and slam on the brakes causing a shock wave effect. If people go at constant speed by leaving a gap and eat up the buffer everything the car in front of you brakes, this clears up the traffic behind you. \n\n\nThink of the gap as buffering in online videos. The buffering prevents the stuttering pause. The same applies in traffic. \n\n\nIncidentally, I've seen traffic mitigation activity being performed by police officers in traffic. They drive side by side slowing down traffic to a constant flow before letting the traffic go. This unclog stop and go traffic. ",
"I know that for some people that I see on the road during my commute it is because they are on their cell phones",
"Because they are smart.",
"I suppose a better question is, \"When traffic is clearly moving at a set pace, with no hope of going any faster (or slower) why do people with room temperature IQs insist on riding my ass?\" ",
"I love when the guy behind me is mad at me for having a gap, he speeds around me and gets stuck in the traffic ahead of me.",
"Can this please be on the front page of life?",
"I'd like to turn the question around:\n\nELI5: Why do some people insist on making the commute to work worse than it already is by accelerating like they want to leave Earth's gravity well when they can see the cars 50 feet in front of them are not moving AT ALL?\n\nReally, leaving some space is just the reasonable thing to do, everything else is being impatient and makes the jam worse, if anything. It's also less safe and more stressful.",
"I don't leave that much room as most have pointed out, it inevitably gets filled by some inconsiderate tool. But I do leave some space for 2 reasons.\n1.A LOT of people who drive stick shifts get real jumpy when people are too close. Jumpy/Nervous people are an accident waiting to happen. This is also in case they roll backwards, or go into reverse by accident(yes I've seen it happen).\n2. To get out of the way. Either of someone behind me not paying attention of if the Traffic on the other side is not bumper to bumper I want some room to get the hell out of the way should someone come across(Yes seen that too.) ",
"1. I have no desire to rear end anybody. It is never, ever worth my time or money. Ever.\n\n2. Traffic is pushed back by people being unable to merge quickly. [Experimental proof](_URL_0_)\n\n3. They are unable to merge because there is no space between cars, so they have to stop to get in (see: Experimental proof).\n\n4. By leaving space so that people can go where they want without honking or coming to a full stop, I am actually speeding up traffic.\n\n5. The amount of car spaces is NOTHING compared to the fact that we are moving *sixty times slower* than we would otherwise be moving, if people could actually drive the speed limit, if people could merge, if people weren't tailgating all over the place. There aren't sixty times more cars on the road: we are driving more slowly because people slow down to merge and cause a cascade of slowing and stopping and people can't cope.\n\nRear end me if you must. It's your insurance rates.",
"Because its better than zero miles per hour.",
"Get off my bumper, fib.",
"I stay back in case the guy riding my ass hits me. In some instances if you're too close and that causes you to hit the car in front of you there may be liability on your end.",
"I do it because by the time I get up to the guy in front of me he is moving again, and if you stop your motion and have to restart your motion, your using more gas, I would rather slowly roll forward than stop and waste all of that kinetic energy. In short, better gas milage.",
"Once I was in bumper to bumper traffic, I did the roll forward game every chance there was and it was great. Until the car behind me stopped paying attention after during a small roll period where we actually were able to drive a little bit. They slammed into my rear end, which thanks to bumper traffic meant I went into someone else's. I'd rather stay back and let people get angry but leave room for error, or crazy lane switchers, than stay bumper to bumper.",
"I personally stay a little back from the car in front of me for traffic flow, but also in some case of an emergency (ambulance, firetruck, etc.) I have room to merge over without hitting the car in front of me or so other cars have a window to get out of their lane. ",
"Can we up vote this to the front page? In my commute I just do it so that cars can get into my lane if they need to get out to an exit. Allowing the gaps for service vehicles is a great idea. Everyone that has to manually shift has already explained that rolling at a slow speed is just easier, but I want to add that your gas tank will be happier also for not accelerating and breaking hard continuously, which uses much more gas than going slow speeds. I want more people to be actually educated, especially in America. It is desperately needed...",
"If you are trying to change lanes in slow traffic and the lane next to you is moving the only way to change lanes is to give yourself some space to accelerate to get into the other lane",
"If only 10% of cars drove this way, allowing cars to safely change lanes there would be no traffic jams. This has been studied and is known as the accordian effect. _URL_0_ What causes the problem is cars driving too close to each other, so any small change causes braking, and braking causes more braking. 50 - 100 yards will not make any difference in how quickly you get to your destination. But if all of us gave it a try we would all get there faster. ",
"I don't use this much of a gap but I do leave a gap if possible because if that one guy in front slams on his brakes, the next guy who's up his bumper is gonna hit him and so on- this is how pile ups happen. \n\nI also leave a gap in case I'm the one who has to do the panic stop so I'm not slamming on my brakes and the dude behind me has time to stop rather than rear end me.\n\nNowadays in traffic everyone is texted or reading email. I have zero faith they are paying attention enough to handle quick decisions properly. \n\nI always try to drive defensively and leave myself an out, expect unexpected. ",
"Helps you avoid accidentally rear ending someone.",
"Lots of people talking about \"slamming on the brakes\". I find the most common problem is people tapping their brakes. It's an ingrained reaction to tap them when you see someone ahead slowing down. The problem is that every time you tap, someone behind you taps a little bit harder.",
"I do this... because I drive a manual transmission car and do not want to have to start from a dead stop every 10 seconds, if I leave a reasonable gap I can just roll in 2nd gear for days.",
"To help alleviate the \"red-light\" breaking which causes a domino effect of people gradually braking harder and harder down the line until finally reaching a complete stop. Just because you see brake lights, doesn't mean the car is slowing down.",
"Because they don't like to quick accelerate and quick brake. Think as if you drove a manual transmission car in traffic. It's a lot easier to just coast in 1st gear, rather then shift into second, down into first, and neutral.\n",
"Relevant video: _URL_0_.",
"I drive a manual, dammit! Do you know how uncomfortable it is to keep my foot on the clutch pushing it in exactly half way!? No, just cruise @ 10-15 mph. Plus traffic flows better that way unless you get assholes who think, \"Ooh! Look at all that space I can speed up to 17 mph for 2 seconds!\" and they jump in to fuck up the day.",
"They drive stick. \n\nsource: i drove stick.",
"It's also about safety.",
"High tech analysis aside, I do this for one simple reason. When there is heavy traffic that traffic dictates the rate at which I can travel. No matter how fast or slow I go moment-to-moment I will arrive at the same time. So I just relax and take it easy and get there just the same with all the other advantages for my peace of mind and vehicle. ",
"CALM DOWN!!! It's a fucking traffic jam - you're not going anywhere!!!\n\nAnd SLOW THE FUCK DOWN when you're driving other places - STOP CAUSING ACCIDENTS!!!",
"1) rolling constantly is better than stop and start, having that buffer lets you roll a little longer before coming to a full stop\n\n2) Being able to slow more smoothly also aliviates traffic. [Here's an example of how sudden breaking affects traffic](_URL_0_)\n\n3) If the car in front of you has an issue (car stalls, hits the car in front of them, or someone in front of them has a similar issue and they are too close to get around) having the space makes it easier to change lanes and get around.\n\n4) having the space gives you more room to change lanes if another lane opens up",
"So your bitchass can swerve in front of me, thinking you are advancing in traffic in any meaningful way, which you are not. Just kidding, I leave the gap because I have a stick shift car and it is more relaxing to roll along in 1st or 2nd gear without braking and revving constantly. ",
"Let's all play a game the next time we're stuck in traffic. That game is called \"See how far you can go without touching your brakes.\"\n\nEveryone wins!",
"It lets traffic flow better and its just a smart thing to do over all. If someone rear ends you, its his fault. If he rear ends you and you go flying into the car in front of you, its your fault because the law dictates that you're meant to stay 6 feet behind the car in front of you. Also it allows the car next to you to merge if they really need to. ",
"Because ERLANG C calculations. The very same used to predict queuing at lights can be used for call centers, general traffic scenarios, etc...",
"I do this (in the UK). I keep a large space between me and the car in front, for several reasons:\n\n1) Safety Bubble! You can't control the cars behind you or to your sides, but if you keep space in front of you then there's always somewhere to go if someone starts steering into your car (for example).\n\n2) It feels a LOT smoother to coast along in 1st gear, rather than accelerate to 20mph, then hit the brakes, accelerate, etc.\n\n3) When you have a car with manual transmission, it puts a lot less wear on your clutch and doesn't tire out your left leg.\n\n4) If any other drivers do the same (which is rare!) it can help quite a large stretch of the traffic to flow rather than stop/start.\n\n5) We've all seen drivers who slam the gas pedal down in traffic to squeeze into a gap in the other lane. Why not make life a bit easier for everyone by leaving space for people to move in calmly?",
"Check [this](_URL_0_) out. The author uses fluid dynamics to explain how traffic jams form and how to break them.",
"Starting and stopping driving uses a ton of fuel. Also, if someone rear ends a car, it won't cause a pile up, because you can accelerate forward. ",
"I keep my distance in heavy traffic for two reasons. \n\n* There's no reason to be bumper-to-bumper. Doing so isn't going to get you out of traffic faster. Might as well relax and not waste gas through constant stop and go.\n\n* Some people legitimately need to get in another lane and can't because of the congestion. This gives them some space and helps smooth the traffic as a whole.\n\nIt's better to approach traffic from the perspective of \"how can I help untangle this mess?\" rather than just \"how can I get through this faster?\"\n\nRemember, you are **NOT** in traffic; you **ARE** traffic.",
"Because they understand, unlike everyone else for some reason, that it helps traffic. In fact, if everyone drove like that, theoretically, there would never be a traffic jam. ",
"Guys calm down... he's a driver from Chicago. He can't be expected to have known this. They haven't even mastered turn signals up there. ",
" > I see nothing beneficial to this regarding safety improvement, gas or engine preserving. It just pushes traffic back farther.\n\nLetting your car slowly instead of gassing and breaking constantly does indeed save gas and is less stressful on the brakes, transmission, oil, etc.\n\nEven just letting your car sit and wait for a longer gap instead of \"adjusting\" every couple inches saves gas.",
"Oh god, judging by your comments you're one of those assholes who didn't get the memo and makes traffic jams worse.",
"ITT: Lots and lots of trolls.",
"\"Breaks\" is a present-tense conjugation of the infinitive \"to break.\"\n\n\"Brakes\" are what cause your car to slow down. \n\n************** The More You Know ***",
"I drive a manual I like when people stay that far back. ",
"You have the patience of a five year old",
"If everybody did this there would be no traffic to sit in. [here is a guy who single handly ends a traffic jam](_URL_0_)\n\nalso see this traffic jam created from nothing [hi](_URL_1_)",
"i do this, it allows traffic to move, think of unclotting an artery, bumper to bumper no one can move over so they have to hit the brakes to make their turn off, and as drivers we are all idiots, that extra space allows more time for reactions and a smoother execution ",
"I get the 'leave space' thing; I drive stick.\nJust don't be Speed Police and try to \nregulate the fast lane, just because you\nhave no where to be. Maybe the guy behind you\njust got a call - his kid was rushed to E.R.\nMaybe his lawyer called - they upped the court time and \nif you don't show, there'll be a bench warrant issued.\nSo, you know, don't do that. M'kay ?",
"If I do this, I find that I don't ever have to use my brakes. I don't really ever get to use the gas either, but hey. I've also found that just letting people in helps too. And looking behind me has proven me right every time, I usually notice an improvement for as far as I can see.",
"Stress, there is none.",
"I just have to say that if you ride my bumper in traffic I will slow down because you're driving like an idiot and your anger gets me angry. \n\nThe space helps traffic flow, reduces fuel consumption, and is safer than riding another car's bumper. ",
"Yeah...the only problem with staying 50-100 yards back is you'll never move anywhere. Cars will constantly swerve around you and cut you off/move around you. Its just another one of those ideas that are a great concept but impossible to force on people. ",
"So I don't have to use the clutch every 12 seconds.",
"because that way I never have to be part of the stop and go traffic.\n\nif people would just *cruise slowly* instead of hitting the gas, and then having to brake right away we could all just keep moving.",
"It is absolutely fitting that a Chicagoan would be asking this question. As someone from smalltown, Ohio now living in Chicagoland, these people are the most absurdly douchey, impatient, inconsiderate drivers imaginable. ",
"EL5: why people think they should be able to pass me in the fast lane when I am just keeping a safe distance from the person in front of me? Basically you want to tailgate and think there's nothing wrong with it. \n\nAlso explain the mindset of weaving through heavy traffic. Your time is so important I know, but, I should get to freely throw rocks at your car when we end up at the same place at the same time.",
"TAILGATING IS NEVER GOOD! EVER. Under no circumstance should people tailgate each other. It is one of the many problems of driving. Driving tests should be 200% harder to pass.",
"In essence, most every bumper to bumper situation is caused by brakelights. You should never brake on the freeway except in cases of emergency.\n\nUnnecessary merging (resulting in braking) is the reason for 9/10 jammed days on I-55.\n\nOther states, holding the lane is pretty common too, where when there's two lanes of traffic, two cars will drive side by side, disallowing anyone to be screaming past on the left.",
"Reasons may vary. Some people use very slow traffic as an opportunity to read their phones (stupid and unsafe, but the motivation is obvious). But an increasing number of them may have learned something that was reported a few years ago: Trying to find and match the *average* speed of traffic around you actually improves traffic flow for you and and everyone *behind* you. It may sound counterintuitive, but stop-and-go traffic is caused by people trying to close the space in front of them, while ignoring the overall pattern, which is what 'traffic' really is. By working to move with the overall pattern instead of one's own lane, traffic in the pattern-matching driver's wake ceases to stop and start, and instead begins to move at a slow but even pace.\n\nThe thing to understand is that once traffic exceeds a certain fairly loose density (somewhere just above but still near 'light' traffic), it's no longer possible to 'get ahead' of it or 'get around' it. At that density and above, traffic becomes fluid, and everyone is just stuck in it. What happens after that depends on choice, but the one thing that *doesn't* happen is anyone getting ahead. The practical upshot is that no matter what choice you make, it won't change how long it takes you.\n\nGiven that, you still have a choice as to how you'd like to drive that fixed and unchangeable time and distance. You could try to minimise the distance to the car in front of you, which quickly leads to 'stop and start' traffic, the kind that many find to be the most maddening of all (and is also hardest on your car, and most likely to lead to dingers).\n\nOr, you could observe *all* the traffic around you, or even just the *whole* of your own lane, as far forward and back as you can see, and figure out what the *average* speed is that it's travelling. If you match that speed, your own average speed will not be different than if you did the above, nor will your overall end-to-end travel time, and obviously neither will the distance. But, you will no longer be starting and stopping, just cruising along at a more or less even pace. And so will those behind you.\n",
"I've been hit twice in bumper to bumper traffic by two assholes who were falling asleep. The first time I totaled my car because I was relatively close to the person in front, so when I got smashed from behind my car went into the person in front aswell. Second time I got hit same thing got pushed into car in front of me. Now I stay back 2 cars and when I see some dipshit on their phone or driving like an asshole I stay far away and anytime I brake I'm tapping my brakes like crazy to get the persons attention that's behind me with my taillights",
"I do this, it has multiple reasons: \n\n1) If you drive a stick shift vehicle it is annoying shifting at the whim of people who crowd the drives in front of them so they constantly have to break. It's just easier to hang back and maintain a consistent speed, letting the buffer close when they break and build up again while they're moving. This also helps the people behind you avoid breaking to a stop which in turn improves the over-all flow of traffic and can halt/reverse traffic jams.\n\n2) It does actually benefit the mechanics of your vehicle. Stop and go traffic is by far the hardest driving you will do with consideration to the amount of wear and tear done to the mechanics of your vehicle. Maintaining a relative constant speed is far better for the brakes, engine, drive train and gas even, when you're stopped completely you're getting exactly 0 MPG + expending more gas when accelerating, when you're driving, even really slowly you're doing better.\n\nIn essence, small things build up and do affect change. ",
"because it doesn't matter, if you're in traffic anyways then there is no benefit from being 3 feet behind the car in front of you",
"To avoid hitting the person in front of them in case of sudden stop. Your car has an expected distance to full stop (braking distance). You should leave that much space between your car and the car in front of you. ",
"Overall, it does help traffic BEHIND US at some point later by stopping the people go gas > brake > gas > brake > gas > brake. Unfortunately some people don't know this and just continue to ride bumpers, cut into gaps and blare their horn like it's going to make the person in front move faster. Everyone moving at a slower pace clears up the congestion faster than stop and go bumper to bumper. Think about it.\n\nThey should teach this in high school, ESPECIALLY in Chicago where everyone drives like a selfish five year old on 90/94 and N. LSD.",
"The fact that you have to ask the question is the real problem... \n\nYou can't possibly imagine why it would be better for your gas mileage, engine, car, traffic, etc. to NOT quickly accelerate and then slam on your brakes repeatedly??????\n\nGoogle cars can't come quickly enough."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://trafficwaves.org/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGFqfTCL2fs&feature=youtube_gdata_player",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Suugn-p5C1M&feature=youtube_gdata_player"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.bigcitydriver.com/proof.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accordion_effect"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wm-pZp_mi0"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Suugn-p5C1M"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.smartmotorist.com/traffic-and-safety-guideline/traffic-jams.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1550345/breaking_up_a_traffic_jam/",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Suugn-p5C1M"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
57vciz | why does holding hands feel weird when you and your partner's fingers are in the "wrong" order? | Edit: Thanks for sharing personal experiences! It aids deeper thinking. However, am I to gather that the answer is "no one knows for sure"? Was looking for biological theories like the way the brain is programmed. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57vciz/eli5_why_does_holding_hands_feel_weird_when_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8vanz2",
"d8vccsp",
"d8vfytw",
"d8vrjjd",
"d8vv7mi",
"d8vw5eo",
"d8vw83r",
"d8wd6d6"
],
"score": [
696,
2,
17,
8,
4,
2,
79,
13
],
"text": [
"Hand clasping preference has been studied by many people. It seems to have some basis in genetics, but not entirely. It's not linked to handedness. In most studies, preference was about 50/50 as to which way people preferred to link hands.",
"Our bodies are very connected to our psychology. If you study body language you learn that there is a direct correlation that is often subconscious between how we feel and how we position our bodies. If we are forced out of a comfortable body position it literally effects our mood and perception. \n\nSo holding hands is a signifier of a lot of things: comfort, dominance, intimacy, and a host of other things. When your hands are held \"wrong\", you're throwing those things out of whack in your relationship. ",
"I'll start off by saying that there is no way to actually know for sure without research. \n\nThat being said, think about the associations your brain makes when you hold hands. Holding hands can have a strong \"feel good\" reaction to the brain. \n\nIt's possible your brain associates specific muscle movements with this good feeling (most likely oxytocin released by acetylcholine). Hands being in a different position, means that your muscles aren't in the same position. \n\nTherefore, as far as your brain is concerned, it's not getting the typical response of neurotransmitters. Basically, you don't get the same satisfaction. \n\nAnother theory: Fingers aren't meant to move left and right. It might just be plain uncomfortable to your joints.",
"Hold your hands together, now hold your hands the other way together. Notice how the second one doesn't feel right. You're basically doing this but with your partner's hand if it doesn't feel right, and if you hold your hands together and it does feel right then it's like you holding your own hand the way you prefer. Little is known about this preference but something we do know is that it's somehow biased in genetics.",
"The same reason a cold room *feels* cold, or a new shirt *feels* different, or that beef stew you bought from the farmer down the road tastes *off* compared to your mother's stew. Namely, you're not used to it. ",
"I'm shorter than my boyfriend, so my hand goes in the back, otherwise it doesn't work. There's not really room for having a preference. Or am I not understanding the question correctly?",
"Late to the game, but I haven't seen a great answer to this thread yet, so I thought I'd send one.\n\nMost people are one-hand dominant. When you clasp your own hands together, the index finger of your dominant hand tends to wind up closest to your torso, as does your dominant thumb.\n\nWhen you hold hands with a partner, you will typically use your dominant hand to hold their recessive hand. So the coupling feels natural based on your \"normal\" hand-clasping standards.\n\nHowever, what tends to occur with partners who are mixed-hand-dominant is their hands don't match up in a natural-feeling arrangement, making hand-held ingredients feel weird for both parties.\n\nThe same feeling occurs when you hold your partners hand in a way that isn't your normal dominant hand.",
"I don't think anybody has got this right. I'm not an expert, but I did read this book What Every BODY Is Saying. And the author was a member of the FBI and specialized in reading body language. So, based on what I read in this book, a lot of what we do is to protect ourselves from attackers. Subconsciously our limbs are controlled by the Limbic system of our brain. For instance a person would cross their legs toward the person they feel most comfortable with and away from the person they feel most threatened by.\n\nSo, through my own experiences a women will always hold my hand leaving my hand to the front(her fingers aft), doesn't matter what side, left or right, or their handedness vs. mine. When I was younger I did wonder this same question you have asked. So I would intentionally hold hands leaving my hand to the back(fingers aft). Without hesitation the women would always change this immediately. I never knew why, until I read that book. According to the book, her hand to the back(fingers aft) is a limbic response to protecting herself. She wants to have you between herself and any potential danger. If it were a mother and child, then her limbic response would be to leave her hand to the front so she could position her self between danger and her child.\n\nTL;DR; Her hand goes fingers aft of yours is a limbic response so you can position yourself between her and danger. If I learned correctly from this book, What Every BODY Is Saying."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1yp7ad | how can an electric guitar make so many different kinds of sounds? | Electric guitars can range from very clean, almost acoustic tones to fuzzy, distorted things like the main riff in Sunshine of Your Love to warbly metal solos. How are such a wide range of effects possible? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yp7ad/eli5_how_can_an_electric_guitar_make_so_many/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfmhz7j",
"cfmi1ka"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Lots and lots of electronic manipulation of the sound. Distortion, reverb, echo, chorus, wah, phase, flange... There are huge numbers of things you can do to the signal before it comes out of the amp. You can use any of these effects singly or in groups, or none.",
"It's not the guitar that is responsible for the effects on the noise, but the amplifier as well as many different effect pedals that can be connected to the amplifier. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
97pzx3 | how and why does the amount of oxygen in the air affect the size of the creature breathing it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/97pzx3/eli5_how_and_why_does_the_amount_of_oxygen_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4a3c5a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Insects get oxygen by absorbing it at various places around their bodies. So if there's not much oxygen, their bodies cannot be thick — the middle parts will not receive enough."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
n4xz1 | laplace operators | I understand what the divergence of a vector field is, and I understand what the gradient of a field is, but I have no clue what's meant by the "divergence of the gradient." Also, what are some of the applications of this operator?
Edit: Since this is ELI5, I should probably explain some key terms in this post if people are reading.
**Vector Field** - The best way to explain a vector field is with magnets and iron filings (such as in [this picture](_URL_0_)). If you drop a metal particle of negligible mass into the field, the iron filings illustrate the force and direction acting on that particle. A vector field is an illustration of all of the forces and directions (e.g. vectors) within certain parameters.
**Divergence** - This is what's called an "operator" of a vector field. Basically, divergence means finding the magnitude (the "strength") of the field's source (where the forces come from) or the sink (where the sources go to) of an infinitesimally small point in the vector field. In the magnet example, you can see that the "strength" of the source (the north end) increases as you get close to the magnet.
**Gradient** - Another "operator" of a vector field. You'd use a gradient operator to find the direction of the increasing rate of change of a scalar field. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/n4xz1/eli5_laplace_operators/ | {
"a_id": [
"c36al4h",
"c36amf4",
"c36al4h",
"c36amf4"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"It might be useful to draw some gradients and see what you are working with.\n\nFor instance, draw the gradient of x^2 + y^2 or x^2 - y^2 or ln(x^2 + y^2 ) or x^3 - 3xy or arctan(x/y)\n\nWhich of these gradients look like they have divergence and where? What might be some consequences of a function having positive or negative laplacian somewhere?\n\nA function whose gradient does not have divergence anywhere (ie its laplacian is zero) is called [harmonic](_URL_1_) and has a ton of nice properties. One of which is that it is determined by its values on the boundary: if you drew any shape and knew the values of a harmonic function on the boundary of that shape, you would know all the values of the inside of the shape! Going from specifying some values on the boundary to getting a harmonic function on the inside is called the [Dirichlet problem](_URL_0_) and is one of the classical PDE problems.",
"So let's take a step back. You're back in high school physics, and you're studying mechanics. You're looking at the motion of a ball as it rolls down a hill. \n\nYou can be interested in its position _x(t)_, or its velocity _v(t) = x'(t)_, and also its acceleration _a(t) = v'(t) = x''(t)_. Velocity and acceleration are the first and second derivatives of position with respect to time. \n\nYou can also think of the acceleration as \"the rate of change of the rate of change of position\" - but that is pretty difficult to conceptualize. This is the same problem that you're running into - you're trying to figure out what the gradient is and means, and then you're trying to figure out what the divergence of the gradient means. \n\nThe Laplacian is the sum of the 2nd derivatives of each term in your vector function. \n\nThe Laplacian naturally shows up when you're studying different fields: electric fields, magnetic fields - as well as transport phenomena: heat transfer, mass transfer (diffusion), and fluid dynamics. Take some of these classes and I'm sure you'll get to use the Laplacian to your heart's content. ",
"It might be useful to draw some gradients and see what you are working with.\n\nFor instance, draw the gradient of x^2 + y^2 or x^2 - y^2 or ln(x^2 + y^2 ) or x^3 - 3xy or arctan(x/y)\n\nWhich of these gradients look like they have divergence and where? What might be some consequences of a function having positive or negative laplacian somewhere?\n\nA function whose gradient does not have divergence anywhere (ie its laplacian is zero) is called [harmonic](_URL_1_) and has a ton of nice properties. One of which is that it is determined by its values on the boundary: if you drew any shape and knew the values of a harmonic function on the boundary of that shape, you would know all the values of the inside of the shape! Going from specifying some values on the boundary to getting a harmonic function on the inside is called the [Dirichlet problem](_URL_0_) and is one of the classical PDE problems.",
"So let's take a step back. You're back in high school physics, and you're studying mechanics. You're looking at the motion of a ball as it rolls down a hill. \n\nYou can be interested in its position _x(t)_, or its velocity _v(t) = x'(t)_, and also its acceleration _a(t) = v'(t) = x''(t)_. Velocity and acceleration are the first and second derivatives of position with respect to time. \n\nYou can also think of the acceleration as \"the rate of change of the rate of change of position\" - but that is pretty difficult to conceptualize. This is the same problem that you're running into - you're trying to figure out what the gradient is and means, and then you're trying to figure out what the divergence of the gradient means. \n\nThe Laplacian is the sum of the 2nd derivatives of each term in your vector function. \n\nThe Laplacian naturally shows up when you're studying different fields: electric fields, magnetic fields - as well as transport phenomena: heat transfer, mass transfer (diffusion), and fluid dynamics. Take some of these classes and I'm sure you'll get to use the Laplacian to your heart's content. "
]
} | []
| [
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Magnet0873.png"
]
| [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirichlet_problem",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_function"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirichlet_problem",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_function"
],
[]
]
|
|
5rac4j | how would the world be different environmentally if the world was flat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rac4j/eli5_how_would_the_world_be_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd5noam",
"dd5oese",
"dd5t3k5",
"dd6oiqn"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"This would be nearly impossible to tell because a flat planet couldn't exist. So you'd also have to account for the new physics that would allow for a flat planet.",
"If the earth was flat, we would only be able to live near the center. The outer radius will basically be like a tall mountain one could never climb.",
"while obviously lots of things would be different, I think the most obvious one would be gravity:\n\nif you're in the middle of the disk you would be slightly heavier than near the borders. \n\nAlso: on the borders gravity wouldn't only pull you down to the ground but but also towards the center of the disk.\n\n\nbut such a shape would not exist for long. rotation, gravity and the atmosphere would lead to it bulging more in the center while there'd be abrasions on the borders eventually leading to a somewhat circular shape (probably more like an American Football or so for a while)",
"I guess the first thing we'd need to worry about is where the elephants and space-turtle would go.\n\nReally everything would fail.\n\nThere would be no gravity of any use to us. There would be no radiation shielding since there is no spheroid rotating core. There would be no oceans. There might be some water layers if the flat world was big enough but it wouldn't stay for very long.\n\nThere would be no variations of layers of rock. All that is from convection of lava and moving continents and sediment under pressure.\n\nPretty much it would be a lifeless brick."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
4fi6f3 | if, hypothetically, a ship can travel at the speed of light, the standard "speed limit" of the universe, what would happen if someone on that ship walked forward? wouldn't they be technically be traveling faster than the speed of light? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fi6f3/eli5_if_hypothetically_a_ship_can_travel_at_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d28z8md",
"d28ze9x"
],
"score": [
3,
8
],
"text": [
"Relativity doesn't work that way. You wouldn't be able to walk forward on the ship. \n\nIf you were traveling AT the speed of light, it would take an infinitely long period of time to move forward any distance whatsoever, effectively preventing you from moving forward at all.",
"A ship can't hypothetically travel at the speed of light. So a question about 'how do physics work when we change how physics works' isn't very effective to answer.\n\n*However* if we ignore that case, and we say a ship moving very *close* to the speed of light, as observed by an outside observer, then we have to note that velocities are not, in reality, directly additive. \n\nIf to an outside observer, you are going 1mph slower than the speed of light, and inside the ship you walk forward at 2mph from your perspective, it is not the case that the outside observer will see you walking forward at 2mph and hence FTL. From his perspective, you would be moving more slowly through time. Your forward motion could seem to approach, but would never reach, the speed of light itself. \n\nYou can't validly take pieces from both of your frames of reference (his \"how fast is the ship moving\" and your \"how fast am I moving\" ) to create a 'overall' result. \n\n\nEdit: You might wonder why I am bringing up \"this other guy\" at all, instead of just talking about you, alone in the universe in a ship going 1mph slower than the speed of light and walking forward at 2mph. The caveat is, you will always measure light going past you at the speed of light. You can't 'catch up' to light speed, no matter how hard you accelerate. And there's no \"static universe background\" to measure against. So you can accelerate forever, but if you're the only thing in the universe, then there's no way for you to say \"I have reached 1mph below light speed.\" You have to qualify it as \"I have reached 1 mph below light speed *relative to some other object*."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
3cykh1 | why do people with no teeth make that jaw grinding motion? | My wife just got back from VA and says she saw more of it there than she had ever seen before. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3cykh1/eli5_why_do_people_with_no_teeth_make_that_jaw/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct05ijk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Some of it is reflexive, some is learned. \n\nFew people are born with no teeth, so we all basically learn to chew.\nA bunch of folks also carry stress this way, and will grind teeth in response to stress, even in their sleep. \n \nInsurers and doctors/hospitals don't \"waste\" time or money on rehabilitation that isn't necessary. Nobody is trying to stop these folks from moving their jaws when they eat, swallow, or mindlessly move their jaws. Why would they? \n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5yjp5f | why humans can run marathons for hours but are exhausted after 1-3 minutes of fighting? | Why does fighting appear to be so much harder for humans than long term physical activities? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yjp5f/eli5_why_humans_can_run_marathons_for_hours_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"deqlkop",
"deqlpdi",
"deqlq7b",
"deqokw0"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Marathons are about stamina and maintaining a constant speed. You practice and regularly train. Fighting (I assume you mean actual fighting not a sport or anything) your body is in fight or flight mode, adrenaline flowing, heart pounding, muscles ready to fire on command. It burns a LOT of energy to react quickly and swing hard enough to do damage. ",
"Because endurance isn't like a battery in an electric car with a set capacity. Aerobic stamina is the ability to replenish the oxygen and energy your muscles use while you're burning it. A closer comparison is a regular car, that can run as long as it has gas, but will stall unless it gets enough air as well.\n\nRunning a marathon, while extremely taxing, is not a problem for someone who trained because they are taking in more oxygen at the same rate they are burning through it. An elite distance runner could, with food and sleep of course, basically run until their joints wore out.\n\nFighting is a little different. Since you're trying to win and not get hurt, many people's instinct is to fight as hard as possible. That means tensing up and putting max effort into attacks and blocks while trying to keep balance and distance. In addition, some people who haven't been trained may even forget to breathe. This leads to getting winded almost instantly.\n\nBut as you may notice, boxers in particular can conserve their energy to fight many rounds. A \"clinch\" is for that in particular-- a few seconds to catch your breath and quit getting hit in the face. Sometimes it's all a fighter needs before being able to watch his pace and come back from getting pummeled.",
"It's part of how we evolved to survive predators/catch prey.\n\nHumans evolved better anaerobic respiration (getting energy without oxygen) and that means that we have far more endurance because we couldn't possibly breathe in enough oxygen to remain using aerobic respiration for a long time.\n\nBasically we can continue doing less strenous tasks for considerably longer than other animals, you'll notice we're slower than most other animals so how did we catch them? We just ran slower but kept going until they got tired and then we caught up.\n\nIt's also a lot to do with the fact that marathon runners train to focus on using as little energy as possible (look up the cliffy shuffle) while trying to be efficient isn't really a good strategy in a fight",
"It is all about your level of exertion.\n\nRunning a marathon is aerobic exercise. Runners use as much oxygen as they breathe in, but no more, allowing them to run until their energy reserves run out.\n\nExplosive movement like fighting is partly anaerobic. That means they use more energy than can be sustained by the oxygen they breathe in, and build up a deficit. This is a lot harder on your muscles and the rest of your body, and requires more recovery time than an equivalent amount of aerobic exercise.\n\nAlso, they are getting hit in the face, and no one likes that."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3mrurp | could i drink the water on mars without getting sick? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mrurp/eli5_could_i_drink_the_water_on_mars_without/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvhk5qr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Not a scientist by any means. Blue collar worker here. But I'm gonna go with...nope?\n\nI mean a) it's salt water. You drink enough of that on earth and you get sick. \n\nB) if there is life on Mars and you ingest foreign microbes, you're probably fucked. I say probably because again, not a scientist. Think like being an American and drinking the water in Mexico. \n\nThat's all I got. If someone smarter or more qualified than me reads this feel free to expand or correct. Thanks"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
2djvq6 | how much do donations to disease research help? | Overhead for charities aside, I'm talking actual money that gets forked over to do reasearch.
Don't companies perform R & D on disease research to cure them so that they can sell the cure?
How much do private donations to research help?
Are the private donations, in a way, subsidizing companies' R & D who will in turn sell their products? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2djvq6/eli5_how_much_do_donations_to_disease_research/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjq5oex"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Companies have to make a profit, so they want to minimize their risk as much as possible. Choosing a project or a target disease is a pretty big part of these calculations. If there doesn't seem to be a chance of recouping the R & D costs they won't fund the research.\n\nUniversities and private institutes have much more freedom in project choice. They can work on hopeless diseases and then call their \"progress\" basic science so they can continue to get funding from the government or from private donors. Typically, when people donate to disease research the money goes to these types of labs rather than to research going on in companies. Companies can apply for grants and get taxpayer or private money, but it happens a lot less.\n\nAcademic labs potentially make the initial discoveries or at least describe how things work, and then companies use this knowledge to treat the disease. Sometimes other things happen, but this is the current model."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
b0pcg5 | why do oil change stickers say you should get another oil change in a certain amount of miles, or a date? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b0pcg5/eli5_why_do_oil_change_stickers_say_you_should/ | {
"a_id": [
"eig5ryi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Oil becomes less effective with age, providing less lubrication and less ability to repel water."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3b4eaz | how does wasp spray kill a wasp? | Does it paralyze the wasp or do chemicals eat away at it? Is it something different? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b4eaz/eli5how_does_wasp_spray_kill_a_wasp/ | {
"a_id": [
"csiq6qs",
"csiq7co",
"csiqg6x"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
155
],
"text": [
"Different sprays do different things, but most of them have a chemical that blocks nerves from communicating (paralysis). This means the wasp loses control over its entire body, including important things like breathing.",
"It's a neurotoxin. It interferes with the way their nerves transfer signals, so yeah it basically paralyses them.",
"My understanding is that most sprays contain a chemical which deactivates an enzyme in the synapse (gap) between nerve cells which usually would denature neurotransmitters. In the absence of this enzyme, too many neurotransmitters reach the next nerve cell, meaning that the message being sent is sent too strongly, and so muscles being told to contract will contract with sufficient force that they are paralyzed. Insects breathe through expanding and contracting their abdomens to force air through holes in their abdomen, so when paralyzed, they (as my grade 12 bio teacher once put it) simultaneously have a heart attack, suffocate, and have muscles seizures."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
4c2lw8 | why are many children of immigrants much taller than their parents who are short? | Its not unusual for some second generation immigrants from Asia to be a head taller than their parents. Their parents say that it's because of nutrition and environment. However the growth still caps off at around 6 feet. Parents may only be 5'5 , kids may be 6' but their grandchildren rarely get much taller than that. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c2lw8/eli5_why_are_many_children_of_immigrants_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1eh3gw"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"It's pretty much nutrition. An example of the effect this can have is the difference between North and South Koreans. North Koreans are definitely shorter than South Koreans, even though the two groups are quite similar genetically, primarily because they eat less, and less good, food."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
2zptop | why does the abdomen push out when we get bloated? | I have a basic knowledge of the digestive organs, but I don't understand what's there that makes you get temporarily... round. Do your internal organs inflate and push your abdomen out? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zptop/eli5_why_does_the_abdomen_push_out_when_we_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpl6pez"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They fill up with partially digested food and gas in the intestines until it is eventually passed as a stool or farts. this in turn displaces the other organs in the abdomen which make you appear bloated."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
1jjhum | wouldn't it be easier (and more efficient) to just get rid of all paper money and use electronic (like debit cards) money instead? | We would save money on the actual creation of paper and coins and wouldn't things just be faster? Or does paper money have an actual value? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jjhum/eli5_wouldnt_it_be_easier_and_more_efficient_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbf9rfc",
"cbfa35p",
"cbfau8p",
"cbfaz8r",
"cbfl120"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
" > Or does paper money have an actual value?\n\nYou can make anonymous, untracked transactions with paper money. Depending on the system you use, that can be difficult or impossible in an electronic-only world.",
"The government would probably like it because it would be easier to track and tax but it would not be that great for privacy and it wouldn't be as efficient.",
"Things might be faster, but this concept provides that every person in the country (including your 10 year old getting allowance, every hole-in-the-wall rural business, every poor family) has access to the internet and phone that allows them to keep track of their own money in such a system. ",
"I'm assuming you're asking about the USA? In the states, the paper money budget is 796M USD: _URL_0_\n\nThe line item breakdown is here:\n_URL_2_\n\nTo your question, about the relative efficiency of going digital vs. having cash ... \n\nI'd argue that we already are 'electronic.' (single source, I know!) but this article ( _URL_1_ ) cites research that ~66% of all retail (physical) point of sale transactions in the USA are made using debt or credit cards. \n\nIf well-over a majority of retail transactions are happening electronically via payment cards, I'd have to argue we're already at the point of electronic money. \n\nA couple of reasons why we're not at a 100% (and probably wont get there) ... \n\n1) This is a pretty new development (1950s) and the reality is that cultural changes take time for society to process. \n\n2) Credit and debit cards are not \"free,\" the transaction processing network slaps on a fee per transaction. And naturally, that fee ends up in the prices you pay. \n\n3) There are millions of unbanked individuals in the US. These individual do not have access to, or enough money for, a bank account. And if you don't have a bank account you're not getting a credit card.\n\n4) And as it has been pointed out, electronic money is not anonymous. ",
"And then your store has a network outage and you can't sell anything."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12771.htm",
"http://www.cutimes.com/2012/06/07/cash-dethroned-by-cards-print-preview",
"http://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/2013newcurrency.htm"
],
[]
]
|
|
3z5lpb | how to properly charge a cell phone battery to maintain longevity? what is myth what is science? | There's a lot of facts and misnomers I see going around. People swear by stuff others claim it useless.
Letting a battery drain before recharging...
Topping off good/bad
Keeping a battery cold when not in use
Fast charging vs slow charging
And so on...
What is the science behind the claims? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z5lpb/eli5_how_to_properly_charge_a_cell_phone_battery/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyje3dn",
"cyjf4mt",
"cyjodjw"
],
"score": [
16,
31,
2
],
"text": [
"One of the most famous myths is that there is such a thing as \"battery memory\", which says that if you don't use your full battery capacity (completely recharging it and then letting it drain until it shuts off), your battery will \"forget\" about the capacity that you don't use.\n\nYou can forget that right away, it may be the case for nickel-based batteries, but not for lithium-ones (the vast majority of batteries).\n\nTo get the most out of a lithium-battery, you should generally recharge it before it hits 50%, and let it completely drain to 0% about once a month.\n\nOther things like keeping your battery cool actually do have a scientific reasoning behind it. Lithium Batteries lose more energy the hotter it gets, for example, at roughly 0°C (33°F iirc) it will lose 6% of its capacity per year, make it warmer and that number can jump up to 35%.\n\nConcerning your last point, only charge fast when you need to. Lithium Batteries work best when they are charged at slow consistent speeds with a low voltage charger.\n\nHope this helps :)",
"For normal use, it's not something a consumer needs to worry about. All lithium-ion batteries require battery protection circuitry which automatically prevents the battery from being over-charged, over-discharged, or charged to quickly. Also, more intelligent battery controllers which report the SOC [state of charge] are intentionally lying to you; what you understand to be 0-100% is actually closer to 10-90% of true battery capacity. These safeguards maintain safe usage habits, regardless of how you decide to charge your device.\n\nOlder battery chemistries (nickel-cadmium, for example) had a 'memory' which would limit you to however much energy was drawn with previous cycles. If the battery was only ever charged to 60%, soon the battery wouldn't charge much past 60%. However, lithium-ion batteries (which represent the majority of current rechargeable batteries and are what I assume we're talking about) don't have this cyclic memory, so it doesn't matter if you charge the battery fully every time.\n\nFinally, fully draining the battery does not affect its longevity. Many sources will suggest this, but it actually has little effect on the battery itself; but this does enable the battery management circuit to re-calibrate itself. This is often achieved via normal use, so it's usually not something you need to think about unless your device goes for months without dying. However, new approaches to battery management and SOC determination may soon make even this obsolete.\n\nThe only real case for which you should worry about charge state is long-term storage. To store a lithium-ion battery, it's best to charge it to around 40-80% before letting it sit in a cool (not cold), dry place.\n\nTL;DR: In most cases, the simple answer is \"don't worry about it.\" ",
"Many modern batteries are software driven and in some cases they even know when and how to self discharge. At this point I don't think there is much you can do yourself."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
5vpqtn | if light doesn't move through time, why does light take time to go anywhere? | From my understanding of it, light travels at light speed, the speed traveling through space at which it stops traveling into the future. If light doesn't travel into the future, then wouldn't that mean that it would reach a location at the same time that it started somewhere else? Shouldn't it take 0 time for light to reach a new location, meaning its speed is infinite? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vpqtn/eli5_if_light_doesnt_move_through_time_why_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"de3u3dg",
"de3ud7j",
"de3v8dm",
"de3x26d",
"de3x3fh",
"de4dk0t",
"de4evpi",
"de4leuz",
"de527y7"
],
"score": [
12,
10,
2,
6,
161,
2,
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"This is part of how time is experienced differently by different observers. If you accelerate close to the speed of light, you experience less time than an observer in your original reference frame. Light itself experiences no time. (Because of Lorentz contraction, the universe appears to have been flattened to a pancake. Anything it's going to hit is right in front of it.) To outside observers light is traveling, well, at the speed of light.",
"It's speed is not infinite. In the point of view of an observer, it travels in the fastest possible speed. So it does move \"through time\". On the other hand, in the point of view of the photon, time slows down to a halt. A photon \"sees\" the beginning and the ending of the universe simultaneously.\n",
"You're not wrong! To a photon time doesn't really exist (at least not in a vacuum). Being that a photon in vacuum travels at the speed of light then the time from it's creation to the time of it's absorption is actually 0. Now any particle that is speeds up closer to the speed of light will still feel time and it's going to see totally normal to the particle, but the pace of the observed outer world would seem to speed up to ridiculous speeds. Think nova's like fireflies and galaxies spinning like leaves in the wind.",
"The frame of reference for a photon or other object traveling at the speed of light is *undefined.* \n\nWe cannot talk about the experiences of a photon or other such object because that frame of reference simply does not exist, it would violate a fairly central tenet of relativity. If there exists a rest frame at c, then there exists a rest frame in which objects *which move at c in every rest frame* are stationary, which is contradictory. \n\nSaying photons 'do not experience time' is actually going too far. Photons *have no perspective* from which we could even make that claim, or its opposite.\n\nNone of this, however, means that an external observer cannot observe a photon pass through a finite amount of space *in the external observer's frame of reference* during a finite amount of the *observer's* time.",
"To tackle this question, let's assume that light isn't the universal speed limit. \n\n(The speed limit being infinite).\n\n#We Know:\n\nIt takes an exponentially increasing amount of energy to accelerate an object of mass x. \n\nThink of this as a 100m long ramp that grows steeper (as a function of mass) until it's completely vertical.\n\n**Ramp of Heavy Mass:**\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;|\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;|\n\n > _/\n\n\n**Ramp of Small Mass:**\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;|\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;/\n\n > & nbsp;__/\n\n**Ramp of No Mass:**\n\n > & nbsp;__________\n \n\n\n\n\n#We Conclude:\n\n1. We can travel fastest on the ramp that is level rather than one that's uphill. \n\n2. It is impossible to travel faster than the level ramp allows as negative mass and thus a negative declination cannot exist.\n\n3. Therefore, When we have no mass, we travel the fastest.\n\n\n\n \n#Tying It Together\n\n**Fun Fact:** Light has a mass of 0! Thus using the logic from above, it is the fastest any thing can move on our \"ramp.\"\n\nLet's scale it down to easier to manage numbers. The speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s. Let's Say instead that the speed of light is 100 m/s, traveling the ramp in 1 second.\n\n\n > From my understanding of it, light travels at light speed, the speed traveling through space at which it stops traveling into the future. \n\n###Defining The Future: \n\nIn the above scenario, on one end of the ramp I have a flashlight. You are on the other end. Light has a mass of 0, and our \"speed limit\" we defined for that mass is 100 m/s. When I turn it on, you should see the light 1 second later. For time t(seconds) from\n\n**My Perspective:**\n\n > **t(0)** - Present\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;I Turn on the light. It begins shining towards you, hitting you at: \n\n > **t(1)** - Future\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;The light hits you 100m away.\n\n**Your Perspective**\n > **t(0)** - Past\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;It's dark. No light.\n\n > **t(1)** - Present\n\n > & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp; & nbsp;You see my light.\n\nSo our \"speed limit\" (light) caused:\n\n1. T= 0 to be both the Present and Past simultaneously. \n2. T= 1 to be both the Future and Present simultaneously. \n\n > If light doesn't travel into the future, then wouldn't that mean that it would reach a location at the same time that it started somewhere else? Shouldn't it take 0 time for light to reach a new location, meaning its speed is infinite?\n\nSimple Contradiction Proof:\n\nAssume: Light has infinite speed causing it to not travel to the future.\n\nThat Means:\n\n* t(0) Present: I turn on the light.\n\n* t(0) Present: The light hits you.\n\nThe fact both of our times are t = 0 contradicts the **law** we defined above saying the fastest light moves is 100 m/s. So we need another time reference point 1 second later at t = 1. That would mean we have a \"future\".\n\nTL-DR; I took a ton of adderall to study for a test and did this instead.\n\n\n",
"To a photon experiencing infinite time dilation and length contraction, it doesn't move at all, in space or time. It merely is and then isn't all at once and it's reference frame is sort of nonsense as a result. It's exceedingly difficult to say very much about the point of view of a photon because of that. All of space is collapsed around it and there is no passage of time. Be careful when you divide by zero.\n\nBut it can help if you think of lightspeed as a conversion factor between space and time, as opposed to literally a speed. It is possible to trade a second for almost 300,000 kilometers. Because this is, as far as we can tell, a fundamental feature of spacetime, the photon can only trade so many kilometers for a second, and must keep doing so to get anywhere, thus taking some amount of time to do so to an outside observer.",
"Your confusion stems from not fully understanding what causes what. Time dilation is caused by things moving fast, not the other way around. Think of time as just another coordinate and the faster you move through space, the slower you move through time.\n\nThe other key point is that *you* never see *yourself* changing due to relativistic effects. From light's perspective yes, it takes no time to get anywhere but that's because length is contracted to zero in its reference frame. We're not moving anywhere near that fast so we still see light moving at a finite speed. The only thing different that we would see is if a photon could carry a clock, we would see that clock stand still. ",
"By Metaphor:\n\nIf I freeze you, you _experience_ no time.\n\nWhen I ship your frozen body cross-country, the fact that _you_ experience no time doesn't mean that the truck you are in doesn't take time to get there nor does it prevent me from drawing crude sentiments on your frozen face.\n\nSo the packets of light which we most simply call photons, do not _experience_ time. That is if they had little minds those minds would not have any experience of existing. But the packet itself, with its wavy-ness and its particle-ness is moving and moving happens over time.\n\nIf a person were in a ship and they passed through the entire universe at the speed of light. The whole universe would come and go unnoticed because their sense of our time would be zero. They would be the ultimate frozen corpse, utterly untouchable by us. But if we had sensitive enough instruments we could note their passing as disruptions of gravity or whatever, and that disruption would go past us at the speed of light, so we'd know they'd passed, but we could never know they they were about to arrive because their passage and the signal of their passage are going the same speed.\n\n\nSo the old question: what happens if I'm driving a car at the speed of light and I turn on the headlights?\n\nIf you are going _almost_ the speed of light then everything looks normal about you and the car, but the universe looks like a tiny speck right in front of you.\n\nIf you are going the actual speed of light you never turn on the lights because you have slowed infinitely. You don't even know you've frozen. If you ever slow down somehow you'd never know that you touched \"light speed\"... except for the fact that the universe is now gone from around you.\n",
"I know there are already a lot of answers here, but I'll try to contribute by explaining time dilation without using too much math. I'll probably need to sacrifice accuracy for simplicity. \n\nTo understand the answer to this, you'll need to know and accept a few basic things. \n\n* The universe has no preferred frame of reference. \n* velocity = distance/time\n* The speed of light is always the same from every frame of reference. \n\nThe speed of light is about 3.00 x 10^8 m/s. To make it simple, let's call the speed of light *c*. Let's say you're a stationary observer standing on something in space, and you see a spaceship travelling at a constant speed of 0.5c relative to you.\n\nLet's say someone stands at the front of the spaceship and throws a baseball at a speed of 10 m/s measured from his frame of reference. You will measure the baseball's speed as 0.5c + 10 m/s. The speed of the spaceship relative to the observer and the speed of the baseball relative to the spaceship are added together to find the speed of the ball relative to the observer. \n\nThis isn't the case with light. If the person at the front of the spaceship turns on a flashlight, you will measure the speed of the photons as c, but the person on the spaceship will not measure it as c - 0.5c (half the speed of light). The photons will go just as fast relative to him, at exactly c. \n\nSince speed = distance/time, the only way for the speed of light to travel at c for the observer on the spaceship is if the light takes less time to travel the same distance from his frame of reference, making the time term in the equation smaller. The distance term changes too, through length contraction, but let's focus on time. \n\nSo from the observer's perspective, time is slower, and less time passes per measurement interval. This makes the time term small enough for the speed of light to be c for the spaceship instead of the expected 0.5c. This means that for every tick of your clock, < 1 tick has passed on the observer's clock. So even though time is moving more slowly for the observer on the spaceship, he is still travelling at the same speed relative to you. \n\nAs the spaceship increases its speed and gets closer to the speed of light, the clock ticks on the spaceship get slower and slower (0.1 clock ticks/1 of your ticks, 0.01 ticks/1 of your ticks), until it doesn't tick at all. If the spaceship could somehow reach the speed of light, no time would pass from **its** frame of reference. But from your frame of reference, time does pass, and the ship itself gets older, even though the person inside does not. So from a photon's perspective, it essentially travels infinite distance in 0 time, even though it does not from your frame of reference. \n\nHope this helped! "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1lu2cd | how exactly do computer programs work and why can't every program run on every os? | Hello ELI5, I'm one of the less tech savvy Linux out there and I've been wondering why the hell I can't run Ninja Gaiden without buying a console.
I understand that at the very base the only thing my computer really understands is binary and every model of a machine is different, etc. etc. I know, however, that most programs are written in one or many higher level languages (C, Java, etc.).
What exactly am I getting when I buy a game? Am I getting pure binary, or the program written in whatever code they used? Would any computer with any OS be able to run every program in existence if the program was distributed in a standard programming language rather than binary?
If the program /is/ written in binary, how come, for example, every Windows computer with sufficient resources can run anything meant for Windows, despite having different hardware?
If the program is written in binary, where does the OS even come into play?
Please excuse me if I'm using some words wrong or if I completely misunderstand how parts of a computer work. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lu2cd/eli5_how_exactly_do_computer_programs_work_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc2rirx",
"cc2rov4",
"cc2tl2r"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"That is just such a difficult ELI5 thing to do.\n\nThe shortest answer I have is the differences between English, Spanish, French, Latin, etc. \n\nYou can't just speak in one and have every person on earth understand, it's not possible. Such it is with computers and their operating systems (languages.) \n\nThe reason you see one program that can run on multiple platforms (whether a game or an application like Word) is either an emulator (read: middle man) or specifically programmed version for that platform.\n\nEven the second has two major ways to do this... specifically actually hard code program to make it work on the platform desired, or modular programming that uses a 'middle man' library to do the platform specific tasks, similar to the emulator style.\n\nIn both the modular programming and the emulator style of getting it done, the code is written to a rather specific set of instructions, such as \"GetKey\" for a keyboard routine.\n\nThe GetKey name can then be used in the middle man as the name of the procedure to get the key. The middle man asks the platform \"I need a key\" and then supplied it back to the main program.\n\nSo the middle man, such as Java, is used to bridge between what the program wants to achieve, and the platform's abilities. Such that you write code once, but the middle man does the work for you to achieve the goal.\n\nUgh. Even that explanation sounds awful, but that's about as simple as I can make it, I think.\n\nSo anyway, with that in place, the problem is that some things do not do well with an emulator, so require hard coding to the particular platform. Speed is often an issue, and hardware requirements may be another. Whatever the reason, a decision is made to not make it non-platform specific, and so you wind up with a select few, if not singular, platform(s) being written for.\n\nOr money. Microsoft wants to sell the XBox, so Halo only works on XBoxes... and/or Windows. And the latter is because of how they program to XBox, it's sorta easy to translate to a PC, 'cause the XBox IS a PC, just a very specifically made one.\n\nThat doesn't mean that someone couldn't make an XBox emulator for a Mac or Linux box and have Halo work on it (and have, for all I know) but depending on the software's requirements and the hardware's ability to do the work... it might not be very playable.\n\nBut go look at MAME and it's available library. The diversity of platforms that allows one to run on a PC's hardware is rather stunning. Most of it works just *fantasically*. Some of it works, but... And some don't work right at all. That's emulation for ya.\n\nI know some are going to beat me up for this because I'm missing something or misspoke, and that's ok. Hit me, and let's get it right. :)\n\nEdit: Accidentally a word, or misspilt it.",
" > I know, however, that most programs are written in one or many higher level languages (C, Java, etc.). \n\nThat true. And then most programs, including C, are \"compiled\" - that means they are turned into the binary language which the computer understands - which, incidentally, is called \"machine code\".\n\n(You mentioned Java as well - we'll come back to that one later.)\n\n > What exactly am I getting when I buy a game? Am I getting pure binary, or the program written in whatever code they used?\n\nYes, you are getting pure machine code - because the program will have been compiled already.\n\n > Would any computer with any OS be able to run every program in existence if the program was distributed in a standard programming language rather than binary?\n\nYes. There are many languages like this, and we call them \"interpreted\" languages, as opposed to the compiled languages we've talked about already. Your web browser understands a few of these interpreted languages (JavaScript - which is pretty much completely unrelated to Java in every way, as a point of interest - is one such language), and it's common to use them on web pages which need to run on all kinds of different hardware.\n\nJava is an unusual language. When it's compiled, it is not compiled to machine code like other languages. It is compiled to something called \"byte-code\". This is designed to be very similar to machine code, but, with the aid of a helper program (called the JRE, or Java Runtime Environment), it can run on any type of hardware. This makes Java a good choice of language if you want to write software that runs on different types of hardware.\n\n > If the program /is/ written in binary, how come, for example, every Windows computer with sufficient resources can run anything meant for Windows, despite having different hardware?\n\nBecause all Windows computers have the same type of processor, which is the bit of the computer that understands this machine code. The processors aren't exactly the same - they run at different speeds, or are newer/later versions, but they're all based on the same architecture.\n\nAdditionally, it's not just that the computer needs to understand the correct machine code, but also the operating system needs to know how to support the program too - this is why a Mac can't run a Windows program and vice versa, even though they both use the same processor. In fact, you asked about this with your final question:\n\n > If the program is written in binary, where does the OS even come into play? \n\nThe OS is a program, compiled into machine code, just like most other programs.\n\nThe OS has some special responsibilities, though. One of those is to start up other programs when required. Another is to be available for other programs to help them out. It can help them interact with the screen, the keyboard, the mouse, the hard drive, and so on.\n\nThe program requests this help using something called an API - a set of named procedures the program can call on to do different things. But the API for each OS will be very different - the procedures will have different names, different ways of being called, and different capabilities. And that's why, for your compiled program to run on a given computer, it needs to be compiled for the correct processor *and* the correct operating system.",
"The program relies on functions of the operating system.\n\nThe OS isn't just a thing that loads up and gives you a nice screen. It also includes thousands of utility functions that programs hook into.\n\nSomeone else used the example of getting keyboard input. Other things include display, mouse, network connectivity. \n\nAnd of course, the different operating systems all do these things in different ways and with somewhat different interfaces. \"Unix-like\" operating systems make an effort to all offer the same programming interface to the operating system, although there are subtle and annoying differences anyway.\n\nIf the OS didn't have these functions, your program would have to know about every single different type of screen, network card, modem, etc. that's out there.\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3zoofc | how is getting paid millions of dollars to play football not enough money to accept the risk of repeat concussions and other injuries? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zoofc/eli5_how_is_getting_paid_millions_of_dollars_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cynstx9",
"cynsuj7",
"cynt8g6",
"cyntk43",
"cyntlas",
"cyntwmk"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Generally it is considered in bad form to intentionally cause people avoidable brain damage for profit. It is entirely possible to significantly reduce the number of brain injuries suffered by football players without major impacts on play. To not do so would be simply immoral.",
"I agree with you, considering the average soldier makes roughly 48k(?) a year... playing football seems like nothing in comparison IMO",
"I believe you are not correctly understanding the situation and the debate. The issues facing the NFL over concussions and brain injuries isn't that they occur... It's that the NFL was not upfront with the players about information they had regarding the potential for those injuries to occur and their cumulative effects.\n\nRetired pro football players live very painful (and statistically short) lives after football. From r the most part... They go into it knowing this and accept the risk for the paychecks and \"love of the game\".\n\n/source - played in college, know a few former NFLers that can't walk properly.",
" > It seems plain to me that getting paid that much and receiving good benefits is more than enough compensation for the increased risk of brain trauma and its consequences.\n\nYou can't really put a price on health. Sure, making 1.9 million sounds great, but what good does that do if you're in constant agony by the time you hit 40? \n\nHall of Fame Quaterback and current NFL broadcaster Terry Bradshaw recount his expeirence [here](_URL_0_)\n\n > Terry Bradshaw says he's feeling the effects of numerous concussions that he sustained during his Hall of Fame career and now struggles with short-term memory loss, depression and anxiety.\n\n > \"When I played for the Steelers and I got my bell rung, I'd take smelling salts and go right back out there. All of us did that. We didn't know any better. You don't know how many times I was in the huddle, asking my teammates to help me call a play. After a few minutes, I'd be fine and I'd keep playing just like nothing had happened.\"\n\n > (Talking about long term affects)\"It took me 10 days to learn nine pages of a speech, something that would probably take you one or two days to learn,\" he wrote. \"Toward the end of last season on the FOX pregame show, maybe the last six weeks, I really started to forget things. That's why I quit reciting statistics because I couldn't remember them exactly and I stayed away from mentioning some players by name because I really wasn't sure and I didn't want to make a mistake. I'm on national TV in front of millions and I hate making mistakes.\"\n\nThat doesn't sound like a cup of tea, and many young players are choosing to simply [give up the sport and skip the paycheck to avoid the risk.](_URL_1_)\n\n > If anything needs to be changed, shouldn't it just be that the NFL is forced to be more upfront about the risks so players cannot claim ignorance and sue for damages later?\n\nA couple of things. First of all, it's in the NFLs best interest to protect the image of the game. if parents get the impression that football isn't safe and can lead to long term brain damage, many won't let their kids play, which would seriously damage both the quality of the product and interest in the sport *at all levels*, including the NFL.\n\nSecondly, legally speaking, the NFL, just like any other employer in any other industry, can't claim ignorance of a hazard after the fact. It's their responsibility to be proactive when detecting and dealing with risks to employees. \"Seriously, we had no idea that coal dust was harmful.\"",
"There are lots of jobs that pay well because they are inherently risky. There is nothing wrong with that as long as the employee understands the risk and is willing to accept it. What is unethical is if the employer tries to hide the potential risk so that the employee is unable to make an informed decision.",
"Same reason why we dont have Hunger Games yet. Im pretty sure with sponsors and pay per view we can pay participants few millions a game."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81f35094/article/bradshaw-im-rehabbing-my-brain-after-career-of-concussions",
"http://www.forbes.com/sites/simonogus/2015/09/09/green-bay-packers-rookie-adrian-coxson-retires-from-the-nfl-amidst-concussion-concerns/"
],
[],
[]
]
|
||
dhc99i | why do asphalt roads get lighter in colour as it ages? | A newly paved road is black, while an old one is light grey. Why does that happen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dhc99i/eli5_why_do_asphalt_roads_get_lighter_in_colour/ | {
"a_id": [
"f3m3kf3",
"f3ng3ye",
"f3nkaoo",
"f3nl6rd",
"f3nooeu"
],
"score": [
390,
64,
2,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Asphalt (bitumen) is actually the black gooey substance within asphalt concrete roads. The other component in asphalt concrete is aggregate which consists of small smashed up rocks.\n\nWhen first paved, the asphalt concrete retains its black color from the asphalt. However, asphalt is softer than rock so it wears off the surface faster, exposing the harder gray aggregate. This turns the road from black to gray over time. Furthermore, weathering and exposure to the sun will also lighten the asphalt with time.",
"Oh here we go this is my jam, I'm a civil engineer technologist who designs asphalt.\n\nSo as somebody else said asphalt cement is oil, I live in Canada and that oil sands in Northern Alberta is a very good source of asphalt oil. To make asphalt concrete you mix together aggregate(rock), manufactured fines or MF(finely crushed rock), a blending sand which is just sand, and asphalt cement. This mixture together is asphalt concrete which is usually done through either a Marshall Mix Design or SuperPave Design (SUerior PERforming asphalt PAVEment). Basically you're designing to have the right amount of air in the mix and these two design methods both do that, SuperPave is probably more similar to real world applications but marshall designs are the most common, at least where I am.\n\nSo to get to why the road turns grey, it is constantly under stress and strains that are weathering the surface. If you think of the forces being applied to road there's the weight of the vehicle pushing down, the acceleration moving it forward and the normal force pushing up on the road. Every time a vehicle moves over the road it's helping degrade some of the aggregate and stripping some of the oil from the rocks on the surface on a very tiny scale. Combined with weather like freeze and thawing or rain over time this changes how to road looks and performs, think of ruts that appear from cars constantly driving in the same spot.\n\nAnother thing we do to make design is reuse old roads that are milled up, this is called RAP(recycled asphalt product). The rap is always a lot more finely graded material due to the weathering of the aggregates from being driven over. It also has a lower oil content than what it would have been originally paved at.",
"Also skid marks and acceleration marks (burn outs) are from the tire heating the tar in the asphalt and pulling it to the surface and not from the tire rubber. Which is why tire marks are rarely seen or extremely faint on Portland cement concrete.",
"The \"black\" is a bituminous coating, which wears off due to trafficking, weather and oxidisation.\n\nThis is part of the design life of the road surface, as this wearing action exposes the rough surface of the aggregate (crushed rock), and as such provides skid resistance (stopping power) to the tyres.\n\nThe exposed aggregate maybe grey, or red, depending on which quarry the stone comes from.\n\nIf you are interested further, bitumen can be distilled from crude oil but more interestingly also occurs naturally, in lakes...\n\n[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nMy team lays 100's of tonnes of this every week :o)",
"Does a worn road or newly paved provide better grip for cars? Assuming both roads are clean"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.amusingplanet.com/2016/07/asphalt-lakes-and-secrets-in-their.html"
],
[]
]
|
|
1vy90n | why do i go from feeling great and having a positive outlook for my life, to feeling like crap and having a crappy outlook the next minute? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vy90n/eli5_why_do_i_go_from_feeling_great_and_having_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cewyg9q"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You're probably just sobering up, friend"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
1kbick | why am i being taxed 30% on my paychecks? | I recently started my first full time position so this is all new to me, but 30% seems outrageous. Background: Single, 22 year old male in Chicago, Illinois. No extra wages taken out for benefits/401k (yet), but I've calculated that I'm getting taxed at about 30% (One of my checks was for $2,010. I took home $1,434 from that)
Is this normal? Can I do anything about it? Or does this just mean I'll probably be seeing a bigger return? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kbick/eli5_why_am_i_being_taxed_30_on_my_paychecks/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbn8wj1",
"cbn8xho",
"cbn9z6r"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Most of the time your \"Tax\" has to do with \"withholding\" - check your withholding and see how much your company is withholding.\n\nIf you've been seeing a return, that's likely because you're over-withholding. Be cautious though, if you under-withhold you *will* owe the government money at the end of the year. \n\nYou can withhold zero and will end up just cutting the government a check at the end of the year. ",
"If you're single you're taxed at 25% for the amount between $36,251 – $87,850. So if you're making close to the higher end you're probably in total getting taxed by the federal government > 20%.\n\nAdd to that state tax which might be 5-10% and then social secuirty and medicare and you could definitely have 30% taken out accurately.\n\nYou may get back some, but probably not as much as you think. You'll likely be paying > 20% in the end.",
"Usually your paycheck will include a breakdown of your taxes. You should see a FICA tax (or a Social Security Tax and a Medicare Tax) that is 6.2% of income. Because you are in Illinois you should see a state income tax of 5% (from what I can tell from the internet). If you go [here](_URL_0_) you can look up your expected federal withholdings. If $2010 is your average biweekly check, then your annual salary would be $52260. According to the link above that means you will pay 17.21% in federal taxes. That combines to be 28.41% in total tax, which on $2010 dollar check should leave you $1439.59 in post tax income, which is right about what you have."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm"
]
]
|
|
5b9u80 | how do ballot counters know exactly who people are voting for when they write in a candidate? | Let's say there's a small town that's electing a mayor. 51% of the people wrote in "Jane Smith" (no middle name) while everyone else voted for John Smith who's name was on the ballot. There are two Jane Smiths in town. They both happen to hold other public offices and are someone people might actually want as mayor. Neither was seeking to become mayor but upon hearing the results, they are interested in the job. John Smith is saying that they split the vote and so there should be a runoff. What happens next?
*I do know this situation is extremely unlikely but I'm still curious. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5b9u80/eli5_how_do_ballot_counters_know_exactly_who/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9mtkat",
"d9mtvs4",
"d9mynuq",
"d9myw6b",
"d9n1zub"
],
"score": [
11,
10,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It will go to a court for a judge to decide. You can always come up with nebulous speculative dubious questions. It is up to a judge to decide.\n\nWhen I was in high school one of my classmate's father ran for state representative. He and his opponent got an equal number of votes. They agreed to split the term with each one serving one term in the legislature. The election was for two legislative sessions. They flipped the coin to decide who served first. ",
"Write-ins aren't counted unless they would change the outcome, which is almost never.\n\nThere is no way 51% of people could write someone's name \"by accident\" or \"at random\". There would have to be a campaign to convince people to do this. The Jane Smith running the campaign would be well differentiated from the other Jane Smith, no doubt much to the chagrin of the other Jane Smith (who probably left town weeks ago to get away from reporters calling her at all hours of the night with questions).\n\nSome locales go a step further, and require registration of write-ins.",
" > I do know this situation is extremely unlikely....\n\nAnd that's exactly why nobody knows the answer.\n\nPeople generally don't work out solutions to problems until they need to.",
"I know in my state of NY the state releases a list of names of people who are eligible of being written in, if you do not spell the name exactly right it does not get counted.",
"Write in candidates generally still have to register as candidates. You can't just write in whoever you want and have it counted."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1ni4mo | how come my vision is blurry/double vision but when i.... | put my an object underneath my eye (the bottom of my cornea) or make a small hole to look through with my index finger everything is perfectly clear? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ni4mo/eli5_how_come_my_vision_is_blurrydouble_vision/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccismgk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you're looking through a pinhole, the light you're seeing is focussed through one tiny part of the lens of your eye. So the effect of clouding of your eye's lens as a whole is minimised by the sharp focus.\n\nGet your eyes checked out. Could be cataracts. It's treatable, but if you're young finding out if there's an underlying medical reason might be the best thing you ever did. (I am not a doctor; I do have cataracts)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3ivyag | why do some programs "not respond" but look perfectly fine? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ivyag/eli5_why_do_some_programs_not_respond_but_look/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuk3c42",
"cuk3tn7"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"The window rendering on your monitor is only part of the program. If one of the background functions fails, like fetching the next song from a server, the program can hang up while it waits for the operation to complete. \n\nIn that case the window is fine, the buttons might even still work to let you close or minimize the program, change stations, etc but it's still waiting for the server or file it is trying to read to respond.",
"ELI5: The librarian can't tell you the answer to your question until their associate comes back with the book, but they can still smile, ask how you're doing, answer the phone.\n\nPrograms are like that (have multiple \"threads\", some for user interfaces, some for loading data, etc) so that the part you're looking at is still there, while in the background it's running off for data. Network file systems are the worst for this; they can freeze the entire process until data comes back. Next time it hangs, try turning off the net, or ejecting drives. Sometimes, that's all it takes.\n\n/the biggest issue is when a program DOESN'T have multiple threads. Then every request will \"lock\" up the user interface and esp. when there is some issue with the 'net, that can mean a full minute of not being able to do anything useful."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
8gh3d9 | why can you hear the low rumble of a train engine from so far away? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8gh3d9/eli5why_can_you_hear_the_low_rumble_of_a_train/ | {
"a_id": [
"dybk7p3",
"dybl9dt",
"dybr03f"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Flaired as Engineering, but I it's probably also related to physics since its sound.",
"Sound waves work a lot like light does. Low frequency waves travel further than high frequency. \n\nWith light, high frequency = high energy. It frequently interacts with matter. It gets absorbed quickly. Long waves like radio and AM especially travels further as it is absorbed by fewer structures and requires a larger antenna to intercept. \n\nSound waves work the same way. High frequency sound vibrates many surfaces in a way that they absorb the energy of the wave. Even small surfaces acting like a drum can absorb high frequency sound. Lower frequency sounds have fewer surfaces that can absorb them. ",
"Train rails transmit sound at significantly higher speed and efficiency that air. The sound along the rails arrives less ahead of the train being visible in most places. Putting your ear to the rail to hear the train coming actually works very well.\n\n**Trains are super dangerous, don't go on the tracks without being very careful.**"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
adwm7p | why do loud noises become increasingly irritating as we get older? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/adwm7p/eli5_why_do_loud_noises_become_increasingly/ | {
"a_id": [
"edlz5nj",
"edlz8ee",
"edm4lli"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Hold on. This gets worse? I've hated loud noises my entire life. You're telling me I will come to hate them even more as I progress through life?\n\nGreat. Just... Great.",
"Because we're old, and tired, and loud noises startle us wide awake! We're old, and tired, be quiet already!! We just want peace, and quiet, and rest.",
"Psychologically though people who have been abused (yelled at) or witnessed domestic abuse as kids are the ones who don't like loud noises too. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
jqbyo | that tingly feeling you get when you cuddle someone you care about. | Like you know? In some cases it can be better than sex IMO. What is it though, why does it happen? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jqbyo/eli5_that_tingly_feeling_you_get_when_you_cuddle/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2e9v1p",
"c2eaybq",
"c2e9v1p",
"c2eaybq"
],
"score": [
15,
2,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"Oxytocin, the \"cuddle chemical,\" is produced in your system when you are sexually aroused (something that often happens around relationship partners), and increases your feelings of trust and attachment to that person. If your body is used to producing oxytocin because of having sex with that person, eventually you start producing it just from seeing them, or cuddling with them. So when you cuddle with someone you love, you produce oxytocin and then you have strong feelings of trust and attachment.\n\nOxytocin also plays a role in mother-baby attachments, since its production is not exclusive to sexual arousal, but there's some evidence that just touching your nipples is enough to do it - so during breastfeeding oxytocin is produced and makes the mother and baby feel closer and more trusting of each other. Also you get a huge rush of it when you're in labour and afterwards, making you forget how painful it was and making you feel euphoric and happy about your baby instead.",
"It's not oxytocin. That makes attachment, not tingles. The tingles come from a protein called NGF (Nerve Growth Factor) which spikes to rather high levels in the first year someone is in love, and is responsible for \"butterflies\" in the stomach, which may be the tingle to which OP is referring.",
"Oxytocin, the \"cuddle chemical,\" is produced in your system when you are sexually aroused (something that often happens around relationship partners), and increases your feelings of trust and attachment to that person. If your body is used to producing oxytocin because of having sex with that person, eventually you start producing it just from seeing them, or cuddling with them. So when you cuddle with someone you love, you produce oxytocin and then you have strong feelings of trust and attachment.\n\nOxytocin also plays a role in mother-baby attachments, since its production is not exclusive to sexual arousal, but there's some evidence that just touching your nipples is enough to do it - so during breastfeeding oxytocin is produced and makes the mother and baby feel closer and more trusting of each other. Also you get a huge rush of it when you're in labour and afterwards, making you forget how painful it was and making you feel euphoric and happy about your baby instead.",
"It's not oxytocin. That makes attachment, not tingles. The tingles come from a protein called NGF (Nerve Growth Factor) which spikes to rather high levels in the first year someone is in love, and is responsible for \"butterflies\" in the stomach, which may be the tingle to which OP is referring."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
6uhv29 | how does a boat motor work, and how does a small propeller move such a large object? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6uhv29/eli5_how_does_a_boat_motor_work_and_how_does_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlsr9c0",
"dlsrmag"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"The small propeller moves a small stream of water, just as wide as the propeller, at a speed that's much faster than the boat moves. This stream of water has more mass than you'd think, because water is quite heavy, and it has a momentum (m • v). All this momentum goes into the boat, because momentum is conserved (the old physics rule \"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction\") so since the boat has a larger mass it gets a smaller increase in velocity.\n\nIt's surprisingly effective because well designed boats experience very little water friction, that's how you can paddle a canoe that floats your weight, plus the canoe, plus your stuff.",
"A boat motor works similar to a car motor except they're usually direct drive or have a simple single speed forward gearing, as well as a reverse gear. You have a shaft attached directly to the engine rather than a complex gearbox. The shaft runs through what's called a stuffing box, which is a grease filled tube that keeps water out. \n\nVery large boats (cruise ships, container ships) use azimuth thrusters. Large rotating pods which contain an electric motor that is powered by a diesel generator in the ship's engine room. So no need for a stuffing \n\nAs for the propeller, they work the same way an airplane propeller does, or a fan, or a swimmer doing the front crawl. They scoop water and push it back. Since every action has an equal and opposite reaction, this causes the boat to move forward. Thrust. \n\nYou can change how much water they scoop by adjusting the angle of the blades, the pitch. The sharper the angle, the more water they can scoop at a lower rotational speed. Allowing them to work more efficiently. Since water is more viscous (thicker) than air, you don't need as much surface area or rotational speed as you would with say a plane. Nor will you need to go nearly as fast. So you can make the prop smaller. The downside with adding more pitch is it requires more torque, rotational power. Which is why boats are often powered by high torque engines like diesel, steam, and electric as opposed to gas. With a gas engine, the prop has to turn faster, so it needs a shallower pitch to get the same amount of speed. But it's doing less work per rotation. So when buying a prop, you really have to keep in mind the ones that are designed to work with your engine. \n\nThere's another issue that crops up too if you spin a prop too fast: cavitation. The spinning prop creates a low pressure zone which causes water to boil at below 100c. Bubbles of steam appear and pop, which cause shock waves that can actually damage the prop. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
38j5tt | what is that buzzing noise i hear when i plug my electronics in? what is physically moving to make the buzz noise? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38j5tt/eli5_what_is_that_buzzing_noise_i_hear_when_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"crvf0u5",
"crvgfut"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are magnetic fields that make various things vibrate. It can be speakers, parts of electronic components, casings, or even ionized gas. [See here](_URL_0_) for more information.",
"If you're talking about the buzzing or hum you hear in your speakers when you plug something into an electrical outlet, that's called \"ground hum\". Many electronic devices generate low levels of electronic noise. This noise acts the same way the signal from a radio station does, but at much much lower power. Any metal can act as an antenna for this signal, for example the wires in your stereo. \n\nThe signal however is much too weak to make it from the device to your stereo by its self. But in many cases the device has something called a ground connection (third, rounded prong on the plug). This is a direct pathway to the circuit breaker panel in your house that way if a live wire gets loose in the device, the electricity will take that path to the breaker and shut it off, instead of through you. \n\nThe side effect is that all the electrical devices in your house have a common metal connection. This means electrical noise from one device can easily make it to another device. In the case of your stereo, the noise finds its way into the wires that carry the signal you want to hear and the amplifier in the stereo happily makes it loud since it doesn't know the difference between your late 90s SKA and the motor noise from your foot massager. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mains_hum"
],
[]
]
|
||
4euq4c | why does milk generally come in cardboard cartons while water is almost always in a plastic container? and why do juices often go both ways? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4euq4c/eli5_why_does_milk_generally_come_in_cardboard/ | {
"a_id": [
"d23iod6",
"d23jchp",
"d23kk2r",
"d23nofl",
"d23oa7a",
"d23yu5z",
"d246mz0"
],
"score": [
15,
2,
12,
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I'd bet that water is sold in plastic to prove that it is clean water (even if it is just filtered tap water).\n\nWe get most (95%?) of our milk in plastic these days (Australia).\n\nIs \"Juice\" 'Fruit Milk' or 'Fruit Water'? even I'm confused.",
"Like cardboard cartons at lunchtime? Perhaps it's easier to transport? Or cardboard is better for insulation? ",
"It's funny you ask this because I was just watching 'Dexter' and found it odd that every time they use milk, it's in a cardboard container. I've only ever seen milk in plastic! Must be where I live!",
"Milk comes in both cardboard and plastic, largely depending on how the factory in your region is equipped. \n\nWater usually comes in a transparent container so you can see how pure it looks, and because it may take on a slight taste from the lining of the cardboard container.",
"I am currently a college student studying to get my Bachelors of Science in Packaging Science so I do have a decent understanding of containers (and before someone asks we do a whole lot more then just make boxes). Off the top of my head I was not able to answer your question so I looked some of this up in my overly priced textbooks. But first there are some things you should know about your terminology.\n\n1. There is no official thing know as cardboard only corrugated paperboard.\n\n2. These types of paper based containers are officially known as aseptic packaging and commonly referred to as a tetra pak after the multi national food packaging company Tetra Pak (see _URL_0_) who did most of the innovation in these materials. Off topic side note: this is known as a proprietary eponym or genericized trademark when the brand name becomes synonymous with the product. \n\n3. Aseptic packaging is made of a single piece of paperboard not corrugated paperboard which has three layers. Additionally this paperboard is coated with a plastic and materials for barrier properties. Some containers also feature a layer of metal foil. \n\nGetting back to your question \"When filled with ultra-heat treated (UHT) foodstuffs (liquids like milk and juice or processed food like vegetables and preserved fruits), the aseptic packages can be preserved without being chilled for up to one year this means that distribution and storage costs, as well as environmental impact, is greatly reduced and product shelf life expanded.\" ",
"That depends on where you live. In Canada, at least in Southern Ontario, milk is available in cartons, plastic jugs and plastic bags. ",
"Milk usually comes in paper cartons when less than 4L (~1 US gallon). There are exceptions, but paper cartons become more and more likely the smaller the amount of milk. This I believe is because of the strength needed to support the weight of the milk vs the cost of the container. Also paper cartons are used because milk has a relatively short shelf life and so doesn't need as well sealed container like something that is shelf stable. In the case of juice, it's probably a combination of marketing and ability to store for longer periods."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra_Pak"
],
[],
[]
]
|
||
42m2z8 | what are the full repercussions for donating blood? how does my body recover, and how long does it take? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42m2z8/eli5_what_are_the_full_repercussions_for_donating/ | {
"a_id": [
"czbblo8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The plasma itself will be restored in about a day. The blood cells themselves take longer, upwards of 4 to 6 weeks. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3qw8wv | when a groundbreaking cancer test is discovered, why do we not spend a lot of money to bring it to the public immediately thus saving many lives and heartache? | In the news from The Netherlands that many cancers can now be detected early with a single drop of blood ( _URL_0_ ) it says that it may be available in 2020. Surely there is a moral and economic imperative to bring this to the market in a much quicker timeframe. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qw8wv/eli5_when_a_groundbreaking_cancer_test_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwiw9km",
"cwiwc8s",
"cwiwhih"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because money isn't always the bottleneck. There might be many other factors limiting them bringing this to the market quicker and throwing more money at it won't change that. Though, lets be real here, 2020 is pretty much only four more years away. For something like this, four years isn't really that long. Yes, of course we'd all want it to be out quicker, but compromising on the testing cycle and making sure that this really honestly works is not worth it. Some of the biggest medical tragedies happened because we compromised on properly testing a new technique or medicine (Thalidomide anyone?)",
"I just spent like, ten minutes look and I *can't find it*, damnit...\n\nThere was a great article I saw in passing earlier today that was about how when you see the word \"groundbreaking\" it almost universally means the opposite.\n\nIn any case, we have to test and make sure that it works. It has to go to other researchers so they can repeat the original experiments and prove that it does, in fact, work. The *last* thing we would want is to say \"Ok guys, this thing totally detects cancer!\" and find out ten years later that, no, it doesn't work that well and a bunch of people got really sick because they thought they were cancer free.\n\nYou also have to figure out mass production. Just because it works in a lab in a controlled environment doesn't mean you can just crank them out...you have to figure out the best, most efficient way to manufacture the test, then make sure those tests work, *then* start distribution and more trials...",
"Certainly everyone wants things to be available quickly. But even with as much budget as is needed, there are many hurdles to brining any new test to market, even assuming we could manufacture and distribute the product easily and doctor's would choose to use it.\n\nThey need to do studies from many willing participants, to prove beyond any doubt that their results are not due to experimental error. This requires a large sample size in many cases, and can take quite some time to find enough people who meet specific control conditions who are willing to participate.\n\nThese studies need to be analyzed, reviewed, and published to make sure that no errors have been made to lead to the results found, this process can take a very long time.\n\nFinally, the test would need approval by various regulatory bodies for use, which requires testing, and review by these bodies before they will grant approval. \n\nAnother hurdle is the body may not grant approval if the results are not particularly great. This test shows a 96% accuracy at detection, which may be too low, and it isn't clear what the false positive rate might be either, which could also be a factor.\n\nFor all these reasons, even if we push something to market as fast as we can, it can still take a very long time. \n\nIn addition, pharmaceutical companies spend billions on testing and testifying to bring their products to market, and still face a battle for years to get approval. \n\nThis is another reason why it may take longer, with billions involved in the research and development of tests and medications, this money has to come from somewhere, and if a company isn't funding it, the only other options really are for large numbers of people to donate, or hope that a government will spend their tax paying citizen's money on bringing the test to market instead of, for example, funding research for treatment, or any other number of required investments.\n\nAll together, its quite possible that targeting a 2020 availability might be quite optimistic on the part of the researchers."
]
} | []
| [
"http://www.thelatestnews.com/single-drop-of-blood-soon-enough-to-diagnose-most-types-of-cancer/"
]
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
8t0b6i | how do birds hunt worms? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8t0b6i/eli5_how_do_birds_hunt_worms/ | {
"a_id": [
"e13pp0i",
"e15wvkw"
],
"score": [
16,
3
],
"text": [
"Blackbirds for example hunt worms like this: They hit the ground with their beak, imitating rain drops hitting the ground. The worm thinks it's raining and moves towards the surface making it an easy target for the bird. \n \nI can only assume that other birds use similar tactics.",
"As a landscaper, some birds are smart, they wait for us to weed or move dirt, every time worms pop up, w move onto next area and you see birds landing where we were just working"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
2l8obf | does lack of sleep shorten your life? | Say I'm around 15 and I get about 5 hours of sleep a night on weekdays because of schoolwork/start times and on weekends I get around 7 or 8. Will this decrease my lifespan compared to someone who gets 8 hours of sleep each night?
Just some extra info, I have no health problems or lack of growth; in fact I'm growing quite a lot and have grown a lot over the past year as normal. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2l8obf/eli5_does_lack_of_sleep_shorten_your_life/ | {
"a_id": [
"clshrwu"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"While sleep loss won't kill you sooner per se, it does put additional stress on your body that could cause other complications. It's important to get sleep to help promote your immune system. At your age you should get 8 hours of sleep per night to insure healthy growth, because without it you might literally stunt your growth. I assume your asking because you want to know if there's any backlash to staying up late. There's not, you'll turn out just fine, but you might be adjitated tommarrow!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
367bq9 | why aren't women allowed to play normal baseball? | Seems dumb to have a huge separation with ball size, bat and pitching style. Why can't this shit be equal? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/367bq9/eli5_why_arent_women_allowed_to_play_normal/ | {
"a_id": [
"crbddjv",
"crbdfyj",
"crbdg8w",
"crbe6s1",
"crbhucr"
],
"score": [
56,
23,
7,
10,
7
],
"text": [
"They are, but none have ever been good enough to make it into the majors.\n\nIn fact, the NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB all allow female athletes.",
"[prep for a shitstorm]\n\nJust as we have separate Marathon, Sprinting, Long Jump and so forth segments for men and women. Men and Women are biologically quite different in many ways from muscle mass, lung size, etc... If we pitted the BEST men vs the BEST women in the world, barring a rare few exceptions, no women would win the 100 meter sprint. And visa versa, no Man would win the gymnastics. \n\nThe same goes for baseball. To even the playfield, they seperate them.\n\n---\nThe better question to ask is why the fuck CHESS is gender separated.\n\nedit: i've been informed chess isn't gender seperated. pick another brain-skill language. like e-sports or whatever.\n\nedit: this is talking about the difference between biosex females and males. i have NO idea how shit is arranged / don't even want to think about the clusterfuck on regulations with intersex or trans individuals.\n\n\n\n",
"They aren't, a female can play in the MLB, its just that none have been good enough. Their currently is a girl in little league, name Mo'ne Davis, who is aiming ti be the first girl in the MLB.",
"I think maybe the question you are wanting answered is why is softball so popular with women's professional sport rather than baseball, when baseball is so much more popular with men's professional sport.",
"People seem to be misunderstanding your question. Several of them on purpose. \n\nI would try reposting it as \"Why is softball the major sport instead of women's baseball?\". Or something like that. I'm curious too."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
2ewmsy | how do plane ticket prices compare country to country? | ELI5: So flying from the US to China is expensive. How about the other way around, for a Chinese person to fly from China to the US? Would it be around the same price, just converted to RMB? Or would it be way cheaper, having accounted for China's lower cost of living?
I've always wondered because if we all paid the same price, that would mean that it's much, much harder for people from countries of lower economies to travel. Put another way, people from those countries who are able to travel are considerably richer than average... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ewmsy/eli5_how_do_plane_ticket_prices_compare_country/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck3nb1x",
"ck3nka2",
"ck3o8dt"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"It is not the same. I know this for sure for India - Singapore via Singapore Airlines. Tickets for India - Singapore - India are WAY cheaper than those for Singapore - India - Singapore. It is not just the currency conversion. However, I do not know how the airlines work this out and am now keenly watching this space to find out.",
"There is a little bit of difference, but not much. (The biggest cost for a flight is fuel, and most airlines have to pay the market price for that. Same with parts. But some costs (such as labor, facilities) are not an international market and vary by region).\nInterestingly, I've seen airlines offer lower rates for a trip beginning and ending in their country (visiting USA) than for the same flights but beginning and ending in USA and visiting the county. I guess they charge what the market will bear.",
"Yes there are absolutely price differences between different flight paths, even if they are essentially the same cost to travel (in fuel, facilities, etc.).\n\nThe reason for this is simply price discrimination, as you suggest in your example. Airlines study flight paths and adjust prices based on demand (and other factors), so over time route fares vary dramatically based on seemingly irrelevant or counterintuitive factors, and country of origin is one of those things."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
6cbdqd | $110b arms deal with saudi arabia... why a country with former citizens masterminds of 9/11, what are the terms, and what are the benefits? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6cbdqd/eli5_110b_arms_deal_with_saudi_arabia_why_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhtddhb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As to the Why, Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally of the United States, they're strongly opposed to Iran and its nuclear developments, and they're a relatively stable country in a region full of instability. The fact that some of their citizens were behind terrorist attacks is irrelevant, they don't refuse to do business with the U.S. even though some of our citizens joined ISIS.\n\nAs to the terms, I cannot say exactly what, but a news article indicated that the deal will include naval ships, airplanes, and bombs.\n\nThe benefits are that the U.S. builders of the above mentioned military assets get over a $100 Billion in business, which means they can hire more people, expand facilities, and invest in research and development."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
ksgsg | why comic book art seems to get "better" over time | I've been curious about what factors make comic books today seem more polished than the art in the very first comic books. Are there new techniques? More and better-paid artists? Just subjective? Does the entire field move forward somehow?
[Compare the first spider man covers](_URL_0_)
[to the latest ones](_URL_0_/12)
This same effect is in cartoons, too | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ksgsg/eli5_why_comic_book_art_seems_to_get_better_over/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2mtzoj",
"c2mugwz",
"c2mtzoj",
"c2mugwz"
],
"score": [
11,
12,
11,
12
],
"text": [
"The only change as far as what the artists are capable of is the advent of stuff like photoshop. Artists in the 50s could have drawn tiny details or painted whole pages, but comics were made to be affordable to little kids, so they used cheap printing techniques, so all that effort would have been wasted. ",
"clevemire puts down the basics. It's essentially right, but I'd just like to widen it a little.\n\nThree things are happening at the same time over time:\n\n1. The path to quality production is becoming more established. Methods and techniques to learn quality levels of work are now better known and taught. In older times, many techniques were still being developed, and were yet to be widely known enough to be standards and teachable across a broad class of people. Time, and communication methods (especially the internet) have closed those gaps.\n\n2. The tools to create have changed. Computers have greatly changed the game of creation. With the ability to build your basic components (this isnt new, and cellular animation basically inspired this in digital animation) and make them easily reusable, the speed of production is reduced, and the trade is we can focus that reduction in raising the quality of product produced. This is the case for still cartoons/comics: instead we're using tools like Corel Paint, Adobe Illustrator, Flash, and Photoshop. These tools let us paint and draw the pieces we'll use, and break them apart so we can manipulate them, reshape them, and place them. Instead of drawing a copy of the same character for every panel, we can manipulate the pieces of the character form a template to piece it together like a lego. Basically, we can do more with the same amount of time.\n\n3. The way its made. We 'farm' out many animations now. Animators work in teams, much larger than in the past. For movies and television, this is huge, it allows faster production of flat-animation, and 3d animation practically draws itself after you make the first model, all you have to do is move it and tell it how to move now. This is why modern 3d is so detailed. For print comics/still comics, this comes from innovations in printing machines, paper production and distribution channels. We've refined the way the product is made, the materials its made out of, and how it gets to you. We've done it so much that we can keep the costs the same while delivering a steadily increasing quality of product to you.\n\nLastly, to counter some of your posits as to why:\n\nIt's more artists, but not better paid. Since more are in the field and the field is more commoditized now, the average pay is down a little. Not that it was ever high for anyone but those who had jobs on big deal comics and animations, anyways!\n\nand the 4th hidden point: you the consumer demand better from us, so we deliver! We're constantly competing amongst ourselves to 'one up' eachother in both story and visual quality, and the companies we work for encourage and also demand this as the team putting out the best stories and visuals is often the one selling the most product. Now, 'best' is subjective of course! But in this use, I mean best as in 'appeals to the largest audience'.",
"The only change as far as what the artists are capable of is the advent of stuff like photoshop. Artists in the 50s could have drawn tiny details or painted whole pages, but comics were made to be affordable to little kids, so they used cheap printing techniques, so all that effort would have been wasted. ",
"clevemire puts down the basics. It's essentially right, but I'd just like to widen it a little.\n\nThree things are happening at the same time over time:\n\n1. The path to quality production is becoming more established. Methods and techniques to learn quality levels of work are now better known and taught. In older times, many techniques were still being developed, and were yet to be widely known enough to be standards and teachable across a broad class of people. Time, and communication methods (especially the internet) have closed those gaps.\n\n2. The tools to create have changed. Computers have greatly changed the game of creation. With the ability to build your basic components (this isnt new, and cellular animation basically inspired this in digital animation) and make them easily reusable, the speed of production is reduced, and the trade is we can focus that reduction in raising the quality of product produced. This is the case for still cartoons/comics: instead we're using tools like Corel Paint, Adobe Illustrator, Flash, and Photoshop. These tools let us paint and draw the pieces we'll use, and break them apart so we can manipulate them, reshape them, and place them. Instead of drawing a copy of the same character for every panel, we can manipulate the pieces of the character form a template to piece it together like a lego. Basically, we can do more with the same amount of time.\n\n3. The way its made. We 'farm' out many animations now. Animators work in teams, much larger than in the past. For movies and television, this is huge, it allows faster production of flat-animation, and 3d animation practically draws itself after you make the first model, all you have to do is move it and tell it how to move now. This is why modern 3d is so detailed. For print comics/still comics, this comes from innovations in printing machines, paper production and distribution channels. We've refined the way the product is made, the materials its made out of, and how it gets to you. We've done it so much that we can keep the costs the same while delivering a steadily increasing quality of product to you.\n\nLastly, to counter some of your posits as to why:\n\nIt's more artists, but not better paid. Since more are in the field and the field is more commoditized now, the average pay is down a little. Not that it was ever high for anyone but those who had jobs on big deal comics and animations, anyways!\n\nand the 4th hidden point: you the consumer demand better from us, so we deliver! We're constantly competing amongst ourselves to 'one up' eachother in both story and visual quality, and the companies we work for encourage and also demand this as the team putting out the best stories and visuals is often the one selling the most product. Now, 'best' is subjective of course! But in this use, I mean best as in 'appeals to the largest audience'."
]
} | []
| [
"http://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/amazing-spider-man",
"http://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/amazing-spider-man/12"
]
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
4a80rn | for the average user, why would you not want to upgrade to windows 10? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a80rn/eli5_for_the_average_user_why_would_you_not_want/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0y4h59",
"d0y5mbl",
"d0y5ujp"
],
"score": [
10,
19,
2
],
"text": [
"Windows 10 has numerous privacy issues, basically Microsoft is spying on what you have installed. \nHowever if you don't care about that, then know that by default Windows 10 will allow Microsoft to use your computer and internet connection as a patch server. They'll upload patches to other people on the internet from your computer, so if you got bandwidth or upload restrictions, you should care about that, unless you can figure out how to turn it off.",
"Because this is my machine and right now it *finally* works how I want it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. ",
"It is not nearly as well optimized as Win 8 for touchscreens. That's my main reason for not upgrading."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
3e4el9 | how can a cop who was speeding prior to a chase pull someone else over? where they not breaking the law themselves? | This just happened to me and I was curious. A cop was going 75mph in the right lane of a highway, and I passed him at 80. Then he pulled me over for speeding when he technically was too. Is he breaking the law, or is there some rule that lets him speed before putting his lights on? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e4el9/eli5_how_can_a_cop_who_was_speeding_prior_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctbdzlr",
"ctbe138",
"ctbefac"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No, cops are not exempt from any laws that apply to you. Cops \"can speed\" if they are chasing someone or for other legitimate duties. It is possible that the cop could be racing to a crime scene or trying to stay undercover, but it looks like in your instance, there was just no other cop to pull over the speeding cop. ",
"He was pacing you from in front and you made it easy when you passed him. ",
"I don't even understand how in the US cops are allowed to \"measure\" your velocity through pacing and be considered a legitimate proof of speeding. There has to be hard evidence for it to hold, not just \"well I'm a cop, I say he was speeding!\"\n\nHere, the only way to be ticketed is to be caught on radar with a nice accompanying picture of your whole car including the license plate along with the velocity reading."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
31bf45 | why does congress want oversight of the iran deal? | Previously, on "Executive Branch":
* Executive Order 12957 3/17/1995
* Executive Order 12959 5/9/1995
* Executive Order 13059 8/19/1997
* Executive Order 13382 6/1/2005
* Executive Order 13553 9/28/2010
* Executive Order 13574 5/23/2011
All of these are Executive Orders regarding recent sanctions on Iran. Even if the President conferred with Congress, ultimately they were issued by the Executive Branch. So why does Congress want more control over any potential Iran deal when it comes to lifting sanctions? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31bf45/eli5_why_does_congress_want_oversight_of_the_iran/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq01zwf",
"cq04em1",
"cq0bgdi"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Some parts of Congress don't believe the deal is good enough. They don't believe its adequate protection against Iran getting a bomb, and they have been trying to gain leverage to get a better deal, either now or in a few years. ",
"Because it's Congress's job to ratify treaties, for one thing.",
"Obama's efforts in the Middle East for the past six years have largely been mismanaged if not outright failures. There is mounting bi-partisan concern over the deal that is taking shape and the Congress is determined not to allow Barack Obama to unilaterally set the course of the US in such an important matter given his tenuous track record. The President simply doesn't have the credibility to get the Congress to trust him on this matter. \n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
a5u1to | why does more sound also make sound louder? | For example, why does ten people talking sound louder than one person talking, instead of just being the same noise-level, just with more types of noises? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a5u1to/eli5_why_does_more_sound_also_make_sound_louder/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebp9jox",
"ebp9ni3",
"ebpa00t",
"ebpaayz",
"ebpfdgh"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
35,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In terms of working with speakers, doubling or adding wattage always yields a +3db increase in volume.\n\nIf you use a speaker that is outputting 20db of music, then add another, you'll hear 23db from both speakers collectively.\n\nSource: Audio Recording and Production degree in college (It was a while ago. I think theirs a name for this principle but I forgot it.)",
"It's called interference. Simply put, 2 waves, what Sound is, will cancel out where a maximum of a wave hits the minimum of another, when two maxima hit they get added together for the new sound. ( constructive interference) Since the Sound made by humans is quite similar in general, you get a lot of constructive interference, making everything loud. ",
"The amount of \"loudness\" is determined by the amount of energy that is shaking your eardrum. The more energy, the louder it is. There's a difference between how loud the same energy level of different pitches seems, but for now we'll just consider two people talking which is close in pitch so we can ignore that factor.\n\nComing out of each mouth is a pattern of pressure waves, they pass through the air and shake your eardrum. The thing is that they interact - adding together. If the pressure bit of both meet you get more pressure, likewise with the low pressure bit, if the opposite bits meet you would get less variation.\n\nBecause the sound of the two people talking isn't a constant, uniform wave, we don't just get cancellation. We get a more complex combined wave pattern shaking our eardrums that has more energy. So it seems louder.\n\nThe pattern though is not \"twice the energy, twice the volume\" it is more of a \"10 times the energy, twice the volume\" thing.",
"IN a physical sense sound is just a bunch of airwaves traveling from each speaker to your ear. If you have 10 people talking then their sound waves add together making a \"Larger Wave\" at your ear. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nNow this is EXTREMELY simplified. Sound waves like waves in water can add but if they are opposite each other they can subtract. Also as mentioned before, the human voice covers a decent range of frequencies and people speak at different frequencies so you also get an effect where you \"fill out\" the sound.",
"Quite hard to explain as english is not my nativ language. Anyway here's my try! \n\nThey don't necessary make a lounder sound. By working on the timing of different sound sources, you can subtract sounds and not have sound anymore the same way you can sum them (+3dB in a log scale). This is used for example in noise reducting headsets. \n\nImagine a rope with 1 person at each end, by shaking it both, you can either amplify the rope oscillation or canceling it depending on your \"timing\". \n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
2iutv2 | what sickness's can you get from using a plastic water bottle after a long period of time? | I know there's a build-up of bacteria and all but what actually happens to you? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2iutv2/eli5_what_sicknesss_can_you_get_from_using_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl5orky",
"cl5p24s",
"cl5x88m",
"cl6f0ne"
],
"score": [
20,
9,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nThis is a pretty good video. If the water is in contact with air it will go bad pretty fast. But if covered it will be ok for quite a while. They explain it a lot better though. ",
"Also, there are concerns for the ingredients in the plastic of the bottle leeching into your water contained within said bottle. If you consume these chemicals along with your water, it could cause sickness. That is why a lot of reusable plastic stuffs have stickers that say \"BPA Free\". \nRecently, another chemical used in making plastic for consumables was found to be harmful, but I'm not sure if there is a push to remove this chemical or even if it is well known.",
"My organic chem professor is a green chemist and studies these things pretty closely. Basically, the reason that BPA is dangerous is because the molecule itself (bisphenol-A) looks like estrogen. The body will then try and use the BPA to carry out a reaction it would need estrogen to carry out. However, it cannot complete the reaction and a number of things can occur: a buildup of dismantled molecules which lead to cell failure (basically cancer) or a lack of whatever results from the estrogen being used. \nThe biggest thing I took away from this is that all plasticides look like estrogen, so they are all harmful in a way. Some more quickly than others. \nLong story short, drink out of metal or glass water bottles. ",
"Nobody seems to have directly answered your question at this point (OP didn't ask about BPAs), so I'll give it a go. It seems like you've probably heard that the PET bottles used to sell cheap bottled water shouldn't be reused because their inner surfaces can promote bacterial growth. And you're wondering \"If this happened, what *kind* of sick would I get?\" The short answer is: probably diarrhea.\n\nTheoretically, any bacteria that you transferred into the bottle from your mouth or whatever might have enough time to go from a harmless small population of bacteria to a dangerously populous colony of bacteria. For this, you'd need a bacteria species that could live and reproduce in mostly pure water (with a few random organic additives from your mouth and such) stored somewhere between room temp and fridge temp. Now, I don't have a handy list of microorganisms and their habitats near me, but I can tell you that most of the ones that cause nasty diarrheal diseases are happy in those environments."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7D7FjK4ffI"
],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3d02f6 | what is soap? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d02f6/eli5_what_is_soap/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct0juvt",
"ct0kl9f"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Soap is a chemical that has two ends. One of those ends is attracted to the dirt on your hands or in your clothes. The other end is attracted to water. So, when you put soap on your hands, one end burrows into the dirt while the other ends washes it away with the water from the faucet.",
"Soap is any block of something, animal fat or whatever, that causes oils to mix with water. Your skin naturally produces oils when you sweat, and over the course of the day. Using soap lets regular water wash away the oils.\n\nIt's also a Danish band from the 1990's that had an awesome song."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
1tgfqt | exceeding dosage amounts on medicine | It came to me earlier when I was reading a bottle of bismuth (having just lost the contents of my stomach). The directions said to take 30ml every hour as necessary, but not to exceed 120ml in 24 hours.
Why is this? For immediate amounts I can understand, such as not taking more than one dose's worth at a time (say, 60ml instead of the recommended 30), but why shouldn't I take more than 4 doses in a 24 hour period at a recommended time span? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tgfqt/eli5_exceeding_dosage_amounts_on_medicine/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce7o8m2"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Not a doctor/scientist but I like to read. Most medications are absorbed into your body and are metabolized slowly. For example, you take a pill and over the next hour you absorb it, your level rises from 0 to 50 to 100 to 250 to 1000. Then you slowly metabolize it over the next few hours and decays from 1000 to 500 to 250 to etc. If you keep adding it can spike much higher then is safe. The total limit over 24 hours gives you time to clear it all before you start again."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
2c7v3q | why is the gop suing obama and what will happen if they win/lose? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2c7v3q/eli5_why_is_the_gop_suing_obama_and_what_will/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjcv0cy",
"cjcvan3",
"cjcwmht",
"cjczhtb"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
57,
3
],
"text": [
"They are suing because they are saying that the people living in the 36 states that refused to implement the state-run health care exchanges cannot be compelled by the federal government to purchase health care.\n\nThe problem is that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) will collapse if those people are not dragged kicking and screaming into helping to pay for the program.\n\nShort answer: Yes, the executive branch probably did aggrandize itself with powers to shoehorn this policy, but there have been many other examples of this in American history which are now considered favorably. For example, Kennedy and Johnson basically dragging the South into allowing Blacks equal rights, FDR forcing privately-owned companies to make less profitable items to support the war effort in WWII, and etc.",
"Sorry to hijack but what financial consequence does this have for the average person? Are they putting in a specific levy or the models they have just doesn't make any financial sense? Seems weird to hate something that is so beneficial at face value. ( Note: not an American)",
"Most of these answers are technically correct, but the real answer is \"2014 Elections.\" Suing Obama for trumped up charges will fire up the conservative base and get republicans winning seats, but it's not as half-cocked and insane as a full-blown impeachment.\n\nNothing will come of this because the suit lacks any serious merit. At best, it'll be political spectacle and maybe help GOP keep the House (and possibly give fodder for 2016 elections).",
"He is being sued by the GOP because he delayed the implementation of the employer mandate. The GOP house says that the only way to do that is to pass a new law through Congress, so Obama is violating the separation of powers.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/07/30/336670807/house-votes-to-ok-lawsuit-against-obama"
]
]
|
||
32mhh3 | desensitization | Often times I read comment threads where people claim to be crying from how sad something is, or they had to close the tab after a few seconds of a gif/video because of how gory/sad it was. Or how they lost appetite and physically can no longer eat after seeing something.
Meanwhile I stomach everything without any effort. I never turn away from anything, I'll see something pretty fucked up on /r/wtf while eating lunch/breakfast and continue eating without a second thought.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32mhh3/eli5_desensitization/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqckj1l"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This ones common sense dude. You see or do something over and over again and you get used to it"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3ac2q3 | what was the first thing to have blood in its body? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ac2q3/eli5_what_was_the_first_thing_to_have_blood_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"csb7uvm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Technically the fluid inside a cell is \"blood\", so the first living single-celled organism had blood in it, just not red blood. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
8274jx | why are academy award winning movies typically movies the majority of folks don’t see? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8274jx/eli5_why_are_academy_award_winning_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv7uv6e",
"dv7v5kq",
"dv7vr3m",
"dv7x8iz",
"dv7y3al",
"dv7yniq"
],
"score": [
15,
19,
56,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"They like to give awards to more artsy, though-provoking films that are more creatively driven.\n\nNot whichever bang bang pew pew whooooosh remake is making a billion dollars.",
"I liken it to the difference between an art gallery and Bed Bath & Beyond:\n\nThe pictures in the store are going to have more mass appeal, but are probably far lower in terms of quality and difficulty of producing. The Oscars are the Academy giving awards to the quality and difficulty in movies. It's annoying for most of us, which is why I don't understand why so many people watch it, but celebrity worship is another issue entirely. Either way, their criteria are completely understandable when seen through the lens of: best movie doesn't mean most popular, but highest \"quality,\" as judged by people involved in the industry.",
"The people who award the Oscars are active participants in the industry. They are experts. The nominations are made exclusively by experts (cinematographers nominate people for the Best Cinematographer prize), but the winners are still picked by insiders.\n\nHow do most people decide to go to a movie? Do they ask a cinematographer? No, most people don't even know a cinematographer. \n\nPerhaps they respond to an ad from an ad agency. Note how there are no ad agency prizes at the Oscars. \n\nPerhaps they have an opinion from seeing a previous movie in the series. Note how few series win (other than John Williams' scores).\n\nThe Oscar voters know a lot more about movies, because their business is movies 40+ hours per week. Ticket sales are decided be a very different sort of person. Fortunately, there are a lot more moviegoers than movie makers because movie making is a very expensive kind of art.",
"Because movies have many layers and you need a conscious effort to see through all the layers. Movies can be exceptional in several ways, some of which are more subtle than others. Most movie-goers either perceive movies as a wholly cinematic experience or they reduce them to one of the layers -the plot, the tone, the genre, the characters, etc.-, which may be an okay component within several other great components that may be missed or not realized by the average spectator. \n\nHere’s something you can try next time you watch a highly praised movie: pay attention to how the camera behaves. Ask yourself why may be that the director chose to shoot a scene with several cuts instead of using one long shot. How does he frame the characters? What objects surround the characters? What colors and lighting are associated with each character? How all these things change according to the tone the movie is trying to convey? Then go watch a popular average movie and ask yourself the same questions. I bet you can come up with more interesting answers with the former.\n\nLike all art, true appreciation of filmmaking takes a lot of studying and introspection. You gotta learn to separate the wheat from the chaff, and there's an awful lot of chaff. But you can learn a lot just by paying attention. \n\nHope this helped. ",
"It's best explained by realising that an \"Oscar\" is awarded by the \"Academy of Motion Picture ***Arts and Sciences***\"\n\nSo for example, Citizen Kane is a great film and often tops the critics choice of best film ever, but it might have been seen by less people than Nightmare on Elm Street 26.\n\nA film with artistic merit isn't the same as a blockbuster or a popular slasher film (although sometimes it is - The Exorcist was nominated for Best Picture)",
"People are gonna bitch about why Marvel movies don’t win any Oscars while this year was an absolutely incredible year for movies. People complain about lack of originality and then refuse to go see Oscar movies because they’re too artsy and not in a franchise of some sort.\n\nPeople are stupid. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2zt5g1 | how far have we come with hair loss treatment? and how far will we go? | Hair regrowth. The future needs to happen | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zt5g1/eli5_how_far_have_we_come_with_hair_loss/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpm7h75"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Being aesthetic in most cases, I'm guessing the funding is not as high as in research for cancer, alchemists, etc\n\nNor is interest. This thread is a great example. I just came from one about Alzheimer's with much more attention this thread. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5ly506 | why does fuel not ignite in cars? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ly506/eli5_why_does_fuel_not_ignite_in_cars/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbzc77s",
"dbzcb4x",
"dbzdyq1"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Petrol itself is not very flammable. It's when the petrol gas is mixed with air at just the right concentration that ignition can happen.",
"For a fire you need 3 components:\n\n- Fuel\n\n- Heat\n\n- Oxygen\n\nIn the fuel tank you're missing the heat.\nOnly in the engine itself you have all 3 present. (the heat is the spark from the spark plug)",
"Fuel passes through injectors to the engine. So there is no change that the combustion would pass to the tank.\n\nAlso in the Fuel tank there is almost no oxygen. The oxygen in mixed with the fuel only on the explosion chamber inside de engine.\n\nAlso, Diesel does not burn like gasoline at normal conditions of pressure and temperature (tested it myself).\n\nEDIT: There is a bit of oxygen in the tank, but if there was a fire there the oxygen would get depleted almost instantaneously and form CO2."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
47l2fz | powers of vice president in the senate | With an eye towards the inevitable contest over the appointment of the Supreme Court Justice, I have a question concerning the power of the President to make recess appointments.
I know that NLRB v. Canning holds that the Senate is in recess "when it says that it is in recess," but as President of the Senate, could the Vice President come in during a *pro forma* session (one where the Senate is essentially in recess but bangs the gavel as a formality to block recess appointments) and declare a recess himself? Would this count as the Senate "saying that it is in recess?" | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47l2fz/eli5powers_of_vice_president_in_the_senate/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0dod51"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The Senate cannot adjourn for more than 3 days without House approval, and *Canning* said recesses must be at a bare minimum longer than that (at least 10 days is the shortest that is definitively allowed) to make a recess appointment. Even if the VP *could* put the Senate in recess (unlikely, he's not a Senator and can't vote except to break ties), he can't do it without House approval. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
68mwh4 | what causes monetary greed? | I've been researching the Mercers and Kochs lately which has me wondering what causes such excessive greed. What is going on psychologically for such people that nothing is ever enough? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68mwh4/eli5_what_causes_monetary_greed/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgzn8oy",
"dgznjvm",
"dgzqroh",
"dgzsot0",
"dgzstnk",
"dgztr32"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Think about what you have now and compare it to what a person of your relative wealth would have 100 years ago.\n\nYour current state would probably be a dream. However you are likely not satisfied, because you are used to it. Your standards go up. So you want more. If you attain it it happens again",
"You have $1 in your pocket to spend on whatever you want per day. You get a raise and you can now dedicate $2 to spending. Holy crap, that's double the $1 you previously had! You literally could enjoy twice as much stuff!\n\nAfter a while, having $2 becomes the new standard. Even if you get the same raise so you can spend $3, that's only a 50% increase. It's not the same feeling as seeing your money double despite the raise being the same amount.\n\nNow apply this to someone making millions to billions of dollars. Even if they increase their income by more than most people earn in a year, relative to what they currently make, it's a small percentage. We only compare an increase in money based on what we currently have, not the absolute value of the money.",
"Money and a rich life is glamorised excessively throughout all levels of media. I think people are money-hungry because money essentially translates to freedom. More money = more freedom to engage in travelling and experiences. Some people get to travel the world and have all the latest stimulus, others don't, what's the difference? Money.",
"It might be helpful to understand the perspective of people who once fit that bill, **but have since changed their worldview and can explain what happened.**\n\nTake [Tom Monaghan.](_URL_0_) He started Domino's Pizza and ultimately sold his share in it for over $1 Billion.\n\nFor a while, he was a bit of an 80's poster-child for excessive consumption - for example, he had a habit of collecting and driving [obscenely expensive Duesenberg automobiles.](_URL_1_)\n\nNow he has stated his intention to donate most of his wealth to philanthropic causes and encourages other wealthy persons to do the same. \n\nNow whether or not you agree with his strongly Right-Wing-Catholic viewpoints, the fact is he **has** made a pretty big lifestyle change from his younger years.\n\nSo what's my point?\n\nHe was giving an interview a number of years ago, and the interviewer called him out on his notions of philanthropy. Essentially asking him how he can justify admonishing others to donate their wealth to philanthropic causes, when he himself was driving around in $5 Million cars not so long ago.\n\nHe recalled that, growing up as a young boy he used to keep an eye out for freshly-discarded cardboard boxes around his neighbourhood. He could tear out clean pieces of cardboard and stick them into the bottom of his worn-through shoes, preventing his feet from sticking through the soles for one more day.\n\nHis father had died when he was four, and when he was six his mother had to give him and his younger brother up to an orphanage.\n\nHe said that \"you don't forget experiences like that. It takes a long time to work that kind of thing out of your system\". Eventually he did, and I suppose he finds activity in his church/religion satisfying in a way that money alone doesn't.\n\nBut some people never get to the stage of \"working it out\". So they're always greedy, always grasping, never satisfied. \n\nI can guarantee, though - it's to a large extent due to the circumstances in which they were raised.\n\nNot saying that people can't change, but change is hard. And we all have our own baggage to carry - rich or poor.\n\nAs Mr. Rogers said:\n\n...Mr. Rogers knew that despite our differences, we all basically have the same fears and desires at our core, and understanding that leaves so much room for empathy. \"Frankly, there isn't anyone you couldn't learn to love once you've heard their story,\" he said...",
"Keeping up with the Jones'. You compare yourself with your neighbors and want what they have.\n\nHe is my neighbor Nursultan Tuliagby. He is pain in my assholes. I get a window from a glass, he must get a window from a glass. I get a step, he must get a step. I get a clock radio, he cannot afford. Great success! \n\nIf you're a millionaire, you compare yourself with multi-millionaires. If you're a billionaire, you compare yourself with Bill Gates. If you have a 100' yacht, there's someone with a 200' one.",
"Because the barrier between many life experiences and the average person, is money. The foundations of currency is that it represent your property while not having to carry it all around. You also cannot deny that without money, you can't have people do things for you or take you seriously. Psychologically, you will see an interesting spectrum of how people view money based on where they start off. Those in the upper middle class generally want money so that they can join the upper class. Those in the lower middle class want enough money to support a family and their hobbies, those in poverty want enough money to survive, and in many cases want money to make sure their children can be anything but impoverished. When you get to certain levels, you can suddenly become overwhelmed with the power that an immense amount of money gives you, and you begin to try and change your world around you to match your worldview. Which, in many cases, is impossible for you to do with what you have, so you want more and more in order to make it a reality. You can look at the clicker mobile games as a good example of an alternative hypothesis behind greed; you have everything you can imagine and more, so maybe you should just spend your time trying to get more zeros to the left of the decimal place in your bank account. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Monaghan#Catholic_philanthropy_and_activism",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duesenberg"
],
[],
[]
]
|
|
2w0mom | why is iran not a natural ally for the kurds as the only fellow persian ethnicity among the multitude of antagonized arab and turkish people? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2w0mom/eli5_why_is_iran_not_a_natural_ally_for_the_kurds/ | {
"a_id": [
"comiwdj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The Kurds and Persians are both an Iranian people. The languages and cultures have many similarities, thus making a shared heritage in a sense. In regards to natural allies, Iran has done a lot in this conflict.\n\nIran has provided the most support, and was the first to do so, for the Kurds in this conflict. Iranian military advisers have been in Kurdistan helping out the military. There are Iranian boots on the ground to help peshmerga and more.\n\nSources: [1](_URL_4_) [2](_URL_2_)\n[3](_URL_1_)\n[4](_URL_0_)\n[5](_URL_3_)\n\nAdditionally, Iran has begun providing agricultural support for the Kurds.\n\nSource: [6](_URL_5_)\n\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2014/09/01/Iran-and-its-sudden-defense-of-the-Kurds.html",
"http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/01/12/world/middleeast/ap-ml-iraq-irans-ascendancy.html",
"http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/08/26/Barzani-Iran-supplied-weapons-to-Iraqi-Kurdish-forces-.html",
"http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iraq-fm-hails-iran-role-anti-fight-kurdistan-638907785",
"http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/03/kurds-complain-of-u-s-weapons-shortages-turn-to-iran-for-munitions/",
"http://www.tasnimnews.com/English/Home/Single/643213"
]
]
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.