post_title
stringlengths 9
303
| post_text
stringlengths 0
37.5k
| comment_text
stringlengths 200
7.65k
| comment_score
int64 10
32.7k
| post_score
int64 15
83.1k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
RNA vaccines question: Could be used to regenerate tissues? | I am reading about the new covid rna vaccine, and I saw the following comparison:
>Brosh said that this does not mean the vaccine changes people’s genetic code. Rather, he said it is more like a USB device (the mRNA) that is inserted into a computer (your body). It does not impact the hard drive of the computer but runs a certain program.
>
>[https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-an-mrna-vaccine-be-dangerous-in-the-long-term-649253](https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-an-mrna-vaccine-be-dangerous-in-the-long-term-649253)
Why we can not have RNA vaccines to regenerate for example burned skin, or even heal heart related problems? | mRNA is an instruction to the cell to make a specific protein. As far as we knows, there's no "heal heart" protein. In the case of an mRNA vaccine, the protein your cells are being told to make is an inactive part of the COVID virus, that teaches your body to recognize it. | 1,201 | 3,595 |
ELI5: Why did it used to be harder to sail over deep ocean, compared to shallow waters | It is more to do with being far from land. Land does a few things for a sailor. First, it is a convenient reference point; if you keep the shore to starboard, you know where you are and are going. Second, land tends to decrease the power of weather; trees, mountains, etc. dissapate the wind, and don't let it build up as much. Third, being close to land made it so you did not have to keep as many provisions; you could usually go to land to forage or trade for food and water.
One area where the depth of the water mattered was in the size of waves. In shallow water, if a wave gets big enough it starts to rub against the bottom, and starts to die out. In deep water the waves can get much bigger. Also, waves are usually driven by wind, and again, land breaks up the wind. | 1,428 | 864 |
|
CMV: "There is no evidence that God DOESN'T exist" is not a valid argument against atheism. | The lack of evidence of a god is probably one of the most compelling arguments that atheists have in their favor. In response to this argument theist will often argue that atheists don't have evidence either. I think this an invalid argument. The burden of evidence must rest with those asserting the existence of god.
Let's assume for the sake of this argument that the default is no stance. A person has not considered the existence of god and therefore has no opinion on the issue. Now imagine a scientist who makes the claim 'A supernatural power exists in this universe, let's call him God, who created the universe'. The person with no stance has three options immediately presented: 1) The person accepts the scientists claim without question, 2) the person remains skeptical and requests evidence, or 3) the person present an alternative theory to the creation of the universe.
The people who choose option 1 are the faithful theists and do not require any further evidence. The people who choose option 2 and do not see any further evidence are entitled to disregard the claim. And the people who choose option 3 would be expected to provide arguments as to why their theory is more likely.
When an atheists states that there is no god, they are not claiming to have evidence to the contrary to god's existence. They are returning to the position they held before someone made a claim and failed to back it up with evidence. They chose option #2 and with no further evidence they disregarded the claim made by the scientist.
Similarly, if a scientist were to claim that unicorns exist and provided no evidence, the claim would be disregarded. Nobody would be expected to disprove unicorns exist. Why should we not apply to same standards to the existence of god?
It is my view that evidence is not required to disregard a claim made without evidence.
_____
> *Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to* ***[read through our rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules)***. *If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which,* ***[downvotes don't change views](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/guidelines#wiki_upvoting.2Fdownvoting)****! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our* ***[popular topics wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/populartopics)*** *first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to* ***[message us](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/changemyview)***. *Happy CMVing!* | There are 3 positions to take:
1. Asserting that god exists.
2. Asserting that god does not exist.
3. Not asserting anything.
1 and 2 are both indefensible positions - neither has evidence. 3 is the only rational position at this time.
Do you disagree? | 40 | 68 |
How is Virtue Ethics not just Consequentialist with a different value system? | As I understand it, consequentialism is a normative ethical framework that judges the value of an action based on its outcome.
Virtue ethics propose that the the character of the actor should be the measure of ethical value.
How is this not just consequentialism, with higher value placed on the personal, internal consequences than the consequences in the outside world?
If so, doesn't this make virtue ethics fundamentally selfish?
edit: clarification of what I mean by selfish.
Propose a scenario with two possible decisions and outcomes, A and B.
Consequentialist and Virtuist agree that the objective consequences are superior in "A" (more lives saved, for instance)
However Virtuist feels decision A violates his virtuous character. (must commit despicable act)
Virtuist must either
a) violate his moral character to act for the best consequence, in which case virtuism == consequentialism, and virtuism has no distinct philosophical identity.
or
b) choose personal virtue over the common good.
I argue that the second case is a selfish act.
| Virtue ethics doesn't say that we should try to maximize the amount of virtue in the world. That would be a kind of consequentialism which assigns intrinsic value to virtue.
What a virtue ethicist would say is that when making choices you should act on the basis of your virtuous dispositions. Not that you should aim at virtue as if it was the good.
A virtuous person might help other develop and themselves enhance their virtues, but only because this is the kind of thing that a virtuous person would do. It's part of being wise and kind.
Do virtuous people only aim at the internal? Probably not. A virtuous person might value beauty and order and work to make the surrounding world better aesthetically and work to make their society more just.
Is virtue ethics selfish? Probably not, since common virtues on many theories are kindness and generosity, and if you act on the basis of such virtues, it is hard to see how you are being selfish. | 13 | 15 |
How can the universe be 150 billion light-years across and only 13.7 billion years old? | A coworkers and I had this discussion Friday and we may very well have confused ourselves into missing something obvious. Taking the fact that the universe is 150 billion light-years across and estimated to be 13.7 billion light-years old how is this possible? Knowing that a light-year is the distance traveled over a year it should just be a 1:1 ratio correct? Couldn't the max radius of the universe be 13.7 billion light-years while the full universe would be 27.4 billion lightyears? We spent a half an hour in passionate debate about this and I went as far as to convert distances, calculate the speed of light in miles/year and find out how many actual miles light would travel during the age of the universe. The more we discussed the topic the more we were stumped...it seems so straight forward and yet so illogical, we could very well just both be missing something obvious. This all started with this article, http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/11/black-hole-disk/ and my coworker asking the age of the the universe then stating "how can anything be 18 billion light-years away if there have only been 14 billion years of expansion?". So what obvious conversion or explanation did we miss?
Sources:
http://www.universetoday.com/36469/size-of-the-universe/
http://www.universetoday.com/36278/age-of-the-universe/ | Light rays can reach us from a distance greater than 13.7 billion light-years because the universe has been expanding while the light ray has been travelling. While the ray of light itself can't have travelled further than 13.7 billion light-years, the universe is still expanding *behind* it, so by the time it reaches us, the distance between us and the object it came from is greater than 13.7 billion light-years. | 56 | 101 |
If memory cannot be passed on genetically how does instinct work? | My kids will not know what I know. Given that then how are dogs born knowing how to swim. How can a baby know how to find milk. How are instincts passed on if memory isn't | Well, there are certain genes that predispose individuals who carry them to certain behaviors. Individuals who carry genes that predispose them to certain behaviors which give them a survival (or reproductive) advantage will, well, be more likely to survive (or reproduce). Thus, these genes will spread through the population. The more advantageous the gene is, the more likely it is to spread to the entire population over time.
How, exactly, these genes predispose individuals to certain behaviors is a little more complicated. There is likely not a single "suckle for milk gene" that turns on in infants so they know where to find milk. Genes code for proteins, not behaviors, and those proteins interact with other proteins, which interact with other proteins, etc. etc. such that the sum total of those interactions results in a given behavior. For this reason, behavioral genetics is, well, hard. For a certain "instinctual" behavior, there may be more than one gene which, if removed, would eliminate the behavior.
Is this what you were looking for? | 155 | 190 |
ELI5: How are nutrition facts calculated? | I always imagine Karen's machine from SpongeBob lol | There are many different chemical methods that are used for this. For macronutrients (water, fat, protein, carbohydrates, and ash) the specific method is dependent on the product.
Water has many different methods for being determined. One method that can be used to check a result is to simply dry a known quantity of a food. Any weight that is lost is water. There are other methods that are longer, but more accurate, but it's been forever since I've worked with them. Google would likely be able to help with that.
Generally speaking, fat is determined by mashing the food, and soaking it in a solvent. Once it has had time to extract the fat, they take the weight of the solvent fat mixture. Since the amount of solvent added is known, the extra weight is fat.
Proteins are actually determined by figuring out the nitrogen content and multiplying by a factor that is dependent on the product. This works because proteins are usually the only naturally occurring nitrogen source in a food. If there is another source of nitrogen, say nitrates, that is a known quantity that is added and it can be subtracted out of the calculation.
Ash, or minerals, is calculated by simply burning the product. Whatever doesn't burn is considered ash.
Carbohydrates are super fun. Legit, everything else is calculated, added together, and subtracted from 100. The chemical structure of carbohydrates is so vastly different there is no one test method to find all of them.
Calories are calculated because each group of macronutrients provides a known energy per unit of weight. Fats give nine calories per gram, proteins and carbohydrates give four calories per gram. Just take the results from above and add them all together to get the calories.
There are also rounding rules in place to give manufacturers some wiggle room for batch to batch variation. | 22 | 30 |
How cold is cold plasma? | I heard someone who I'm pretty sure is a knucklehead saying that temperatures in the Van Allen Belt are around 2000 degrees Celsius. This didn't sound right to me because there shouldn't be enough matter to contain that sort of thermal energy.
I did some reading and apparently the electrons are usually in the several thousands of degrees. But electrons don't have much mass, if I understand right they are mostly going to damage people via ionization rather than excitation. So, really I guess what I'm asking. Superman chills 1000 miles over the surface of the earth with a rectal thermometer of infinite scale sticking out of his ass backwards.
What does it say?
Also should he wear a parka or get naked? | You can think of temperature and thermal mass like volts and amps.
The temperature of your fluorescant light is a couple thousand degrees, but you don't get burned when you touch it because the thermal mass of the plasma is incredibly low. Similarly, if you have a slab of copper that's a little warm and you touch it, you feel the temperature difference immediately. | 10 | 15 |
Understanding algorithms and data structures, but not being able to implement them? | Just a bit of background information: I'm currently in high school, and I'm taking a course about algorithms on Coursera. I do have previous programming experience.
I'm able to understand the concept behind algorithms and why and how they work, how efficient they are etc...
However, when I try to implement or code those algorithms, I get stuck. I know that to solve this problem I should practice more, and I do try, but for some reason, I just can't seem to "translate" the algorithm into code.
This is really affecting me cause I really enjoy computer science in general, and I understand the concepts, but I just can't seem to find a way to transfer my thoughts into code, and it kinda discourages me. However, I'm not gonna give up anytime soon.
What can I do to solve this problem? Any advice is greatly appreciated! Thank you so much :)
Sorry if this post doesn't belong here, I'm not sure where to post it. | Step 0: practice a lot
Step 1: if a problem seems unsolvable, just try to understand the solution then try to write the same solution.
Step 2: come to the question few days later, try to do the problem now, if not succeed then again look at the solution.
Step 3: Step 0 | 15 | 25 |
ELI5: The difference in programming languages. | Ie what is each best for? HTML, Python, Ruby, Javascript, etc. What are their basic functions and what is each one particularly useful for? | Every single programming language serves one purpose: explain to the computer what we want it to do.
HTML is... not a programming language, it's a markup language, which basically means text formatting. XML and JSON are in the same category
The rest of languages fall in a few general categories (with examples):
1. Assembly is (edit: for every intent and purpose) the native language of the machine. Each CPU has it's own version, and they are somewhat interoperable (forward compatibility mostly).
2. System languages (C and C++) . They are used when you need to tell the computer what to do, as well as HOW to do it. A program called a compiler interprets the code and transforms it into assembler.
3. Application languages (Java and C#). Their role is to provide a platform on which to build applications using various standardized ways of working.
4. Scripting languages (Python, and Perl). The idea behind them is that you can build something useful in the minimal amount of code possible.
5. Domain-specific languages (FORTRAN and PHP). Each of these languages exist to build a specific type of program (Math for FORTRAN, a web page generator for PHP)
Then you have various hybrid languages that fit in between these main categories. The list goes on and on. Various languages are better suited for various tasks, but it's a matter of opinion.
Finally and most importantly: JavaScript is an abomination unto god, but it's the only language that can be reliably expected to be present in web browsers, so it's the only real way to code dynamic behavior on webpages.
Edit: Corrections, also added the 5th category
| 1,294 | 1,978 |
Will learning logic tech me how to reason? | Will logic teach me how reason (better), if so how will it do that and where should I start in learning logic? | Formal logic will help you reason *better,* but it won't finish the job. The main thing it's going to be doing for you is helping you learn how to evaluate an argument's structure and the force of that argument. To be really useful, that reasoning needs to be backed up with some wisdom, like recognizing what are good sources to use, who to trust, how to interpret things contextually, and so on.
Traditionally, logic is the first thing you need to learn in philosophy. The first books on logic ever written by Aristotle were later called the "organon" or "tool" because that's how logic was treated. Logic is a tool that you bring into other disciplines to help figure them out. Now the exact status of logic as a mere "tool" can be disputed itself since logic will often get mixed up into metaphysical problems (e.g. if future statements are true or false, does that mean determinism is correct?). Still, logic certainly *is* a useful tool for wherever you plan on using it, and learning it first seems like sound advice.
I would start with syllogistic logic, then propositional logic, and then maybe symbolic logic. You could even read through Aristotle's original works if you want, although that's not necessarily the easiest user-friendly method. | 35 | 34 |
CMV: Comunism is an unreacheable utopia | I have been interested in the topic for years and I have disscuss and debated it with several activist and members of various socialists organizations, through all of it and their different perspectives one thing remain for me and that is the fact that the society they are claiming to be aiming for is not possible so long as we remain human.
So far such talks express an ideal society without any ruling class or any goberment that is self sufficient, able to manage itself, provide necesities and comodities for all its members, have everyone work for the good of them all, and progress in arts and science. The problem is that it is presented as the reachable end point without taking into account how to realistically you would get there or how such a society would deal with greed, selfishness, envy, and any other deffects humans have; most of the time it's presented the idea that somehow just "following their philosophy" is how you get there which considering the centuries of history that show how ideas fail or are corrupted when apply to the real world just begs for another failed system if attempted as is.
Don't get me wrong I can see many failings in our current system that need to be work on and improve, but simply thinking that just replacing it with another one that has considerable less revisions based on it's application and proven exploits won't work.
EDIT: After responding to several comments I noticed that I didn't make clear what view I wanted to change, in short is the fact that since so far anyone that has presented a communist society to me has only displayed the ideal version currently can't see how a pure communist society would work on any level. | The various “-isms” are too vague, with too many different interpretations and variations, to make statements like this. It doesn’t really mean anything in particular.
How would goods be allocated? How would trade occur? How would “capitalism” be prevented from cropping up in communes? How would crimes be enforced without a state? What does “common ownership” mean? What would this society actually look like, how would it work when you got there?
So there is no particular “utopia” that is unattainable, but a great many, and you’ll rarely know which one someone is talking about. Seems like most of the time it doesn’t refer to any particular utopia at all. | 18 | 87 |
How come glow in the dark objects are easier to see using peripheral vision? | I have a few glow in the dark things in my room, but I usually cannot see them glow when I stare directly at them. When I look away, their intensity increases and I can see them using only my peripheral vision. What is going on? | Color sensing cone cells in the eyes are clustered toward the center of the retina, giving us better resolving power in the focus of our sight. However cone cells have a weakness; they are not as sensitive to low light levels as rod cells which can only sense monochrome. At the edges of our retina the proportion of rod cells goes up and thus our sensitivity in low light conditions. | 25 | 21 |
ELI5: How can instruments be in a key? | Background on me: I am a classically trained trombonist who struggles with music theory.
I know that a trombone is in the key of Bb, but what does that mean? The key is determined by the piece your playing? Additionally, a trombone with an F trigger is shifted into the key of F when the trigger is depressed (same with the G trigger on bass trombone). What does that mean? For me it just means that first position is now 6th. | With instruments it means that the notation is conventionally transposed.
For example: a piano is easy to play in C and music is easy to read in C.
However, a Bb trumpet is easiest to play in Bb. So music for it is commonly written in Bb. But Bb is more difficult to read, unless you enjoy lots of accidentals in the key signature. So the music as written as though it is in C, but C on the stave is sounded as a Bb, D is sounded as a C, and so on.
It therefore means that music in the easiest to read key is easiest to play. | 31 | 25 |
ELI5 why x^0=1. | I know the math and can explain it easily with limits but my friends and I couldn't figure out how to explain it to a child easily. Any ideas? | To get x^2 from x^3, divide x^3 by x.
To get x^1 from x^2, divide x^2 by x. By this logic, you can see that x^1=x.
To get x^0 from x^1, divide x^1 by x. Since x^1 =x, this is equal to x/x, which equals 1.
| 65 | 51 |
If mass is the source of gravity, and energy is proportional to mass, can we gravitationally attract objects with energy alone? | If mass is energy, do high-energy fields/particles/etc. create gravity?
I know E = mc, and c is huge, so it would require huge energy, but is it reasonable to say that sufficiently high energy creates gravity?
Photons are massless but contain energy. Are they gravitationally attracted?
Current in a conductor contains energy, is there any gravity there?
A massive body has gravity, but if that same massive body has kinetic energy, is there more gravity? Either spinning or moving.
My guess is 'no', but I'm hoping to learn something here.
thank you | The source of gravity is something called the energy-stress tensor, which is a complex mathematical object that contains many terms. Some of those terms can be interpreted as mass-energy density, or momentum density, or energy-momentum flux (e.g., pressure). All of these things contribute to gravity.
Yes, a charged wire has a different gravitational field than an uncharged wire, and it is because of the energy in the electromagnetic field. | 34 | 48 |
Do we expect that "unsolvable" differential equations would have an analytical solution if we simply knew more math? | In my engineering studies and while reading the book [Chaos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos:_Making_a_New_Science), I see a lot of mentions of complicated differential equations without solutions.
For example, the equation (dx/dt)+sin(x(t))=sin(wt) does not have an analytical solution as far as I know. Is there hope that if we had more functions at our disposal (for example, more functions like sine, hyperbolic sine, etc.) we would be able to find such a solution? Or is something like this fundamentally unsolvable for some reason?
If it would be possible, are mathematicians working to discover these new mathematical terms? It fascinates me that we don't have the math to cleanly describe the three-body problem, for example, and it's hard to imagine that a clean solution wouldn't exist if we simply knew more. | In many cases you can prove that a given set of functions is not sufficient. If there is a solution you can always define a new function to be that solution. It will solve the problem by definition. Does that count? | 27 | 16 |
Is it possible to quantify the impact of Wikipedia the world economy? | Sure, but probably it can't be done well. Probably, the most reasonable approach to doing something like what you may be asking about would involve sorting out the following:
1. How valuable is Wikipedia to people as a consumption good? That is, how much is it worth as a thing people browse and look things up in for fun or for their hobbies or whatever else?
* How value is Wikipedia as a capital good? That is, how valuable is it to businesses, governments, researchers, etc. strictly as a tool used to help people do work stuff? Probably a good idea to make these calculations net of time people waste browsing it at work.
* How much does Wikipedia cost to create? Think server costs, but also time spent by people editing it.
You can probably do a pretty good job of getting at the cost side of the ledger here, at number (3). But (1) and (2) are the hard part: you can make your own assumptions, you can survey people about what they think they'd pay for Wikipedia if it wasn't free, you can extrapolate from whatever you learn from the select circumstances where you can nail down an answer (e.g. maybe you can run an experiment in some country with limited internet/wikipedia access and randomly give some businesses access to Wikipedia and others not, to see whether / by how much wikipedia recipients perform better), etc. But ultimately, you probably can't get the true number.
For an added layer of complexity, there is the question of Wikipedia vs what. Realistically, you can't credit Wikipedia either all of the benefits or costs of its existence. It is probably true that Wikipedia has displaced some purchasing of encyclopedias and made things tough for at least some information provider / encyclopedia companies. But what that means is that some people and companies receiving benefits from wikipedia probably would have received similar benefits from the encyclopedia britannica, or whatever other company. And, on net, some of the labor we've devoted as a society to making wikipedia has freed up labor that otherwise would have been spent on making encyclopedias for some other company. So, this adds a bonus layer of irritation to efforts at quantifying wikipedia's impact, however defined.. | 31 | 77 |
|
ELI5: How were cartographers able to make increasingly accurate world maps as early as in the 16th century, when we weren't even airborne? | They used *triangulation*, or measuring triangle shapes. You start by picking two places, and measuring, with a measuring chain, rod or a trundle wheel, the distance between them. Then you choose a third point that you can see from both places, and measure all the angles. Then using mathematics, you can calculate the location of that third point. Then you keep on measuring angles from your known points to find the location of further points.
Eventually you have mapped out triangles all over your country, you know the shape of the triangles and the location of every point, and you can draw an accurate map of your country. | 1,755 | 3,719 |
|
Is concrete a heterogeneous or homogeneous mixture? | In a chemical point of view, from most scales, entirely heterogeneous. Concrete is, by definition, a mixture of cement (a paste that could in certain scales be considered homogeneous) and rocks.
They do not, in optimal situations chemically react in any way. The rocks are bonded by the cement by simple physical constraining. | 10 | 15 |
|
ELI5: Why do US cities expand outward and not upward? | They expand upward when land is scarce or expensive, and they expand outward when the opposite is true.
In most cases, it is the later. The US is _huge_ and available land is not a problem that we have to deal with. Most major cities have more than enough surrounding land to expand on to at a fraction of the cost of a skyscraper.
There are a few exceptions, like New York where the value of being on Manhattan Island warrants the cost of upward expansion, but it just doesn't make financial sense for most cities. | 8,971 | 8,026 |
|
ELI5: do laser beams have a ending when pointing them at the sky? I have a green one and point it at the sky at night and it looks short but idk if it really is. | Another factor is diffusion. Lasers are a focused beam of, ideally, a single light wavelength.
In actuality the consumer product you have will diffuse, or defocus, over distance. So eventually it will be relatively undetectable.
That said, your device will NOT experience this at any distance you will be able to measure. Its beam remains coherent (focused) and highly dangerous well beyond what you can see.
For that reason you should never point it skyward. It will be dangerous to aircraft, specifically the pilots, that you may not see. A report of a laser by a pilot is always investigated rapidly and will result in serious charges.
Lasers are cool. Please be safe with it. | 261 | 164 |
|
If philosophers really determine their position by evaluating the best available arguments and evidence, why do so many defend the same position for their entire career and so few change camps? | Many career academics start research at the age of 22-24 get their PhD at the age of 26-27 or so and publish until they're 60+, so they easily observe 3+ decades of development in philosophy and science.
If they really just evaluate the currently best available evidence, wouldn't we expect many more cases of prominent defenders abandoning their position in the light of better evidence? Like, there are 5 prominent defenders of position A, 5 of position B, 5 of position C, and none of them thinks the available evidence presented to them over 3-4 decades changes anything, they just happened to get it right all along? How plausible is this? Say between 1980 and 2010 they just didn't see anything that prompted them to change their take on the human mind, mathematics, science, logic, or whatever topic they philosophize about?
And aren't there all sorts of other forces at work? For example the fact that being an expert on position A for 2 decades is a pleasant position to be in, the psychology of admitting defeat, the fact that putting something to rest isn't great for maybe the PhD students of that person or their department, if those want to research this? Does anyone actually believe all that's going on is evaluating evidence? | I know what you mean. Philosophers are known for a general position, even if there's refinement of what they believe over time. You have "idealists", or "scientific realists", or "Humeans".
One non-philosophical reason is probably to do with modern academia as it is. You're not gonna get published if you flip flop between positions. You'll lose credibility, in fact, because readers will think your position is just your flavour of the week. Someone who is a staunch defender of a philosophy fits much better in the modern system of journals and constant competition for promotion in a university. Philosophers are incentivised to maintain their positions in a world run by branding.
Philosophically/psychologically, people are maybe just not very open to completely overhauling their positions. It takes a tremendous amount of mental energy to accept that the foundations of the world as you previously knew them may be wrong, and to start from scratch. Wittgenstein did something like this (and lost a lot of Cambridge friends over it).
Eventually we all settle upon something, even if that something is very close to a "nothing". | 137 | 202 |
ELI5: Why are allergies more common in Eastern, Western and European countries but nearly non existent in Africa? | I'm from Africa and have had the opportunity to travel and meet a lot of people throughout the African continent but I have not met anyone during this time that has a food allergy and is a native African (not saying that they don't exist), is there some explanation as to why this is? | There is a theory that allergies can form when a young person grows up in a relatively sterile environment. The immune system, lacking anything to attack, becomes hypersensitive in some people. This isn’t to say that Africa is unclean, but your average African child is probably exposed to more pathogens than your average European child. I’m no expert, but this is what I’ve been told by an expert. I’m sure there are other variables or other theories. | 50 | 37 |
[Marvel] Why did The Super Soldier Serum increase Rodger's height ? | Why didnt it just increase his musculature physique and stats ? Could he not have been peak human at his former height ? Did the experiment really need to make him 6'2"-6'4" to be a super soldier ? Cant he just be the peak human/enhanced manlet like wolverine ? | SSS typically grants what's "perfect" for your own genes. Steve was raised by a single mother and his early childhood was during the great depression. He likely spent his formative years malnourished, hence the reduced height and weight prior to receiving the treatment. | 173 | 121 |
ELI5: centuries ago, how did they find the other planets in the solar system? Also, is there a possibility that there are other planets in our solar system that we have not yet found? | Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn are visible to the naked eye and have been known about and studied since ancient times. Early astronomers noticed that these "stars" appeared to change position compared to other stars and so they started to track thier motion across the sky. The word planet actually means "wandering star".
Uranus had been observed but thought to be a star. It took the invention of the telescope to make accurate enough observations to track its movement. Eventually its orbit was calculated with such precision that astronomers noticed oddities that could only be explained by the presence of another planet - which turned out to be Neptune.
Astronomers also thought they saw a similar disruption in Neptunes orbit and so predicted yet another planet. When Clyde Tombaugh pointed his telescope at the patch of sky he expected "Planet X" to be, he discovered Pluto.
We now know that this was a coincidence, and there is no Planet X. Pluto was found because the outer solar system is full of these small icy dwarf planets and Pluto was just in the right place at the right time.
| 14 | 16 |
|
ELI5: What are you seeing in a person's eyes that let's you know they are "staring into space" rather than into the distance or at a specific point? | We are _very good_ at reading whether we're being looked at - eye contact is a critical element of our communication (and very few animals use it - one of the craziest adaptations of dogs was learning to understand human eye contact). The physical location of the eyes in relation to each other and you at short distances will be "off" to your perception if they aren't looking at you. You can detect this instinctively.
It's really two. things:
1. the rest of the face "snaps in" to communication mode when you're engaging with someone's eyes. Eye contact comes inclusive of a general "we're communicating" that involves lots of facial muscles and actions. The deadpan look of someone staring past you says "not engaging with you" because of this.
2. at short distances you can reverse engineer the way the eyes focus and know that it's not to you. This is why someone who is a little cross-eyed makes it really hard to know if they are looking at you. | 63 | 85 |
|
ELI5: Why are hairs that grow out of moles so much thicker and deeper rooted than the other hairs? | moles are skin tissue that has the capability to grow quickly. thats why there are usually hairs sticking out of them. deeper hair roots mean the hair has is more established due to the moles fast growth ability
| 15 | 29 |
|
ELI5: Why are personnel in agencies like the FBI called "Special" Agents and not just 'Agents'? What makes them 'Special'? | For reference, check out the end of this article: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2015/01/bayonne_cop_beat_man_with_flashlight_and_lied_on_r.html
"U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Paul Fishman credited special agents of the FBI, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Aaron T. Ford in Newark, and special agents of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Inspector General, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Christina Scaringi, with the continuing investigation leading to today's arrest."
WTF is up with that? | An Agent is simply a representative of the government who can conduct investigations. They do not possess the special power to also arrest people. FBI agents are "Special Agents" because they are able to both conduct investigations and they possess the *special power* to make arrests. | 66 | 67 |
ELI5: Why do banks no longer offer the interest rates on savings accounts as they did in the 80s and 90s? How do banks make money? | Why do banks no longer offer the interest rates on savings accounts as they did in the 80s and 90s? How do banks make money? | As others have pointed out banks make their money by loaning (and charging interest) to other people. They get the money to loan by borrow money from the feds(central bank), business and people who put money into accounts with them. When you put money into your savings account they take that money and loan it to others. They pay you a small amount of interest and then charge a higher amount to those they are loaning too. So in theory it’s a nice system for both the bank and you, but of course the bank is the one that really makes out.
As to why the interest you get back from personal savings accounts has dropped to around 1% or lower when it used to be around 5% or higher. The big reason for that is the that the prime interest rate set by the federal reserve (the US central bank) is extremely low right now. This is essentially the rate at which the federal reserve loans money to banks. It is used as a measure for other interest rates. So when it’s low then in theory all interest rates drop proportionally. They dropped it to very low back after the financial collapse in ‘08 in order to encourage people to borrow money and get the economy back on track. They just haven’t brought it back up. The up side of this is that pollen can get loans for things like homes for a much lower rate. The down sides is savings accounts and even things like CDs are basically useless. They will probably be forced to up the prime here soon as a means of fighting inflation but this also means that the days of 3% or lower home loans will be over.
It’s obviously more complicated then that but that’s the jest. This all applies to the US but pretty much every western nation is doing something similar with their central banks. | 80 | 88 |
ELI5: Why are most homeless people male? | * homeless women often maintain a lower profile due to the dangers of living on the street and being greater targets
* women in need are typically perceived in a more sympathetic light than men, are more able to receive aid from family, friends, and charitable organizations
* woman are more able to engage in survival sex in various degrees in order to obtain food and shelter | 140 | 65 |
|
ELI5 why do pens dry out if you leave the cap off even though most caps have holes in the top? | **TL;DR:** Air, humidity, and heat circulation levels.
Air has two ways of drying out stuff.
The first is through simple "Brownian Motion" - the effect where absolutely still air has individual particles (molecules) that move around and when they hit some water, knock some loose and evaporate them. This doesn't work very well at all when the air is already humid (filled with water).
The second is through general motion, like if a breeze or wind is blowing and pushing ALL SORTS of molecules past, say, a pen's nib. This really affects stuff if the air is warm, and it really steals a lot of water or light oils from something like inks, soaps, or gels, particularly if the air isn't already packed with moisture.
Putting a pen's nib in a cap with tiny airholes pretty much stops all breezes and causes the small bit of space around the pen's point to stay full of water already... so more of the pen's ink won't dry up and crust everything all up when you try and write with the pen the next time. There's just not enough air circulation to really dry the pen out.
| 17 | 37 |
|
ELI5 how a smoke detector can detect smoke | If it detected air quality, which is what would make sense to me, how does it specifically know that there is smoke and not something else? | it depends on the type of smoke detector. Ionization smoke detector uses a radioactive element and measures the conductivity of the air. If there are fumes/smoke in the chamber then it's less conductive and puts it in alarm.
photo smoke detectors just use an LED and a light receptor and measure how much light gets reflected off of anything in the air. They are easy to false alarm with dust or anything fine enough to make its way inside. I've had spiders set them off before. | 12 | 15 |
ELI5:whats an algorithm? | An algorithm is basically the recipe, the step-by-step guide, to solving some problem in maths and programming. Algorithms can have names, like "the Quicksort algorithm" or "the Bogosort algorithm", and each one is a series of defined steps to solve a problem. A problem can have lots of different algorithms that reach a valid solution in different ways with different tradeoffs (eg one algorithm might use a lot of memory, one algorithm might be very slow).
Here are two examples.
# Problem: sort a list of numbers so that [3, 2, 5, 1, 8] becomes [1, 2, 3, 5, 8]
## Bubble sort algorithm
1. Compare the first item (A) and the second item (B) in the list.
2. If A < B, they are in the right order, so move onto comparing the second item and third item in the list.
3. If A > B, they are in the wrong order, so swap them.
4. When we get to the end of the list, go back to the beginning and do the same thing again.
5. If we get all the way from the beginning to the end never having to swap anything, that means everything is in the right order, and we're done.
## Bozosort algorithm
1. Check if the list is in order.
2. If it is, we're done.
3. If it's not, swap two random items.
4. Repeat. | 76 | 123 |
|
Does the body store protein for muscle building, like it stores energy as fat for later use? If so, how does it do this? | Amino acids are 'tied up' in protein structures in the body. It should be noted that proteins in the body refer to a wide variety of different biological structures with varying functions - not just components muscle cells themselves. Proteins contribute as structural components, biocatalysts (enzymes), antibodies, hormones, lubricants, carriers etc. All of these may contribute to skeletal muscle protein synthesis in some way. The basic functions of proteins can be divided into: growth (pr synthesis), maintenance (pr turnover), regulation (hormones, acid/base balance, enzymes), energy (contribute to glycogenic or ketogenic processes).
There are basically three fates for an AA in the body:
1. protein synthesis
2. as metabolic intermediaries for gluconeogenesis or fatty acid synthesis
3. carbon skeletons used in energy production
They can provide a significant percentage of energy requirements - sometimes as high as 50% in high protein diets. Also the BCAAs can be directly used by skeletal muscle as an energy source, and glutamine and alanine by the digestive tract.
There is a small free amino acid pool located in the intra/extracellular spaces that is not bound up in protein structures. This contributes to around 0.5-1% of the total amino acids in the body and plays a large role in the balance of muscle protein. It is thus in constant flux and can vary significantly.
For a net increase in protein synthesis in the muscle, you have to have:
1. increase in rate of synthesis
2. decrease in rate of breakdown
or
3. both
To rephrase this: Your protein balance is a function of input versus output and this is in a constant state of flux. Muscle tissue is highly plastic and can definitely function as a 'reserve' within the body. Less active muscles actually see more use as a supply of AAs when needed. For example, the amount of leucine oxidised during training can be as much as 25x the amount available in the free AA pool, so endogenous breakdown can be a major source of AAs.
there are at least four ways cell protein concentration could change:
1. increased transcription
2. increased translation
3. decreased rate of mRNA degradation
4. decreased rate of degradation of the protein
So the rate of protein synthesis in skeletal muscle taking place during or after exercise depends to a large extent on having a complete complement of precursor AAs. It can also be affected by the availability and efficiency of various enzymes, tRNA, ATP etc.
Long story short, the amount of intracellular AAs can be an indicator of the level of protein synthesis in muscle, but there is no particular 'storage' capability equivalent to glycogen or fat.
Amino acids are either used in metabolism or to form protein structures with a function beyond simple storage. A very small amount is kept as a free AA pool.
| 11 | 44 |
|
ELI5: vitamin letters and numbers like B6 B12. | The B vitamins are a set of vitamins that were originally all thought to be a single vitamin (in early attempts to separate the vitamins, they tended to separate under the same conditions) and were then later discovered to be chemically distinct molecules.
The vitamins were initially numbered in the order in which they were characterized. A number of those compounds were ultimately determined not be vitamins at all -- for example vitamin B4 was determined to be the nucleotide adenine and thus there is no vitamin B4.
Vitamins got their letters by being sorted into groups based on their chemical activity. The A vitamins, for example, are characteristically unsaturated hydrocarbons; the B vitamins are enzyme co-factors, etc. | 75 | 73 |
|
Why is it that when talking about Philosophy, people often come accross as arrogant? | Also, how can this be avoided? | I've noticed a general attitude on the part of non-philosophers that because philosophy concerns topics which everyone ostensibly cares about and even talks about to some degree (the nature of right and wrong, what's the true nature of reality, etc.) that expertise in the actual discipline of philosophy doesn't necessarily qualify you as knowing more than the average person. Therefore philosophers tend to be perceived as arrogant much more than, say, hard scientists, or even social scientists, where the general public seems to tend to assume that the expert actually *is* more qualified to speak about these particular topics than them (generally speaking). | 91 | 41 |
How do astronomers know the "red shift" is coming from the Doppler effect and not from static stars producing light at a red wavelength? | Would scientists not need a benchmark to know what wavelength the star is emitting and then what it is received at? If so, how do they determine the emitted wavelength? | They measure the full spectrum of light. Each element creates a distinct ‘absorption’ line on the spectrograph. When you look at a red-shifted Star, all the elements are there in the right relationship to each other, it’s just that the entire spectrum is shifted towards the red. | 121 | 87 |
ELI5:Why do countries/territories have a zigzag boundaries and not a straight line and how did they set it? | Often they follow a natural border like a mountain range or a river, so that one side is one country and the other side is the other country and a bridge or similar is how the border crossing is handled. | 272 | 202 |
|
ELI5: Why hasn't the evolutionary process made childbirth easier? | Because the things making childbirth more difficult (larger cranial capacity, narrower hips for walking upright) have a larger positive effect on reproduction than the negative effect of the difficulty of childbirth. | 63 | 38 |
|
ELI5: Why is war not a war crime? Where do you draw the line? Torture? Mustard gas? Why not killing? Nukes? | In theory, war itself is a diplomatic state between two nations, where in those two nations will use their respective militaries to sort out what ever disagreement brought on the state of war.
War crimes are, in theory, defined by a breach of the Geneva convention, which are the rules by which nations are required to make war ( pretty much, leave the civilians alone, and don't nuke, gas, or use any weapon that will cause unnecessary suffering.), in theory.
In practice, the worst offenders tend to win the wars they're involved with, rendering the Geneva convention useless as a tool to restrain the excesses of powerful nations at war, And reducing it to a tool to further punish people who have lost a war. | 22 | 24 |
|
Why do men grow beards and women don't? | Did women grow beards at one time? Bonus question: why do some races of people hardly grow beards at all? | Women produce less of Androgens and Testosterone, which are responsible for secondary sexual characteristics. Some races of women are quite hairy, and some aren't. It is all about mate recognition. Probably women who produced a lot of hair 100,000 years ago got selected out. | 24 | 21 |
With the following fictional assumptions, how can I make my tactical space game realistic? | I'm currently in the middle of a personal project of building a tactical space combat game. In order to create the type of world and gameplay I'd like I need to make a number of assumptions/ground rules. With the following ground rules, how can I make my combat realistic?
**Assumptions**
1. Faster than Light (FTL) travel is possible and functions like a gateway. By this, I mean the ship 'jumps' instantly from one point in space to another. There is no "rushing past stars in a warp field".
1. FTL engines are hugely expensive and large, thereby limiting their use to larger vessels (smallest being ships the size of current Aircraft carriers).
1. Due to the constantly changing nature of objects in space, it is considered extremely dangerous to jump into a solar system without active information from the other side.
1. Faster than light communication is possible. I'll call it some form of quantum entanglement in 'on' and 'off' states.
1. Due to FTL travel and communication, surveillance drones are positioned in key locations in a solar system. Thereby providing early warning of an enemy attack.
1. Space warfare requires fairly close proximity to be combat effective. Fleets do not take pop-shots at each other from different sides of a solar system.
1. Both combatants wish to save the environment and population of the worlds, but want to destroy the enemy fleet.
1. Humans have access to massive rail guns, tracking missles and torpedos, and lasers. The lasers function more as a magnifying glass frying an ant, rather than a bullet. Humans have had inter-species space warfare for about 200 hundred years before the game.
1. The aliens have access to more advanced technology that I haven't decided on yet.
With all of the above assumptions, how can I ground the rest of the setting in reality? Below are some specific questions.
**Questions**
1. How would a military space ship be designed and used? I imagine a heavily armored, low profile bow with an elongated body. Along the elongated body are a number of broadside like guns. Right before firing, the ship will pivot (while still moving towards it's target due to momentum) and fire it's broadsides. It then pivots back to a more defensive posture. Once the ships intercept it's more chaotic than that, but that's the general idea.
1. Followup to the last question. Due to the huge mass of a ship would it require huge thrusters to pivot at combat effective speeds (say, pivoting 90 degrees in less than a minute)? Would delicate, accurately timed smaller thrusters be able to do the job?
1. How would a ship counteract the force applied to it by enemy projectiles? Would it?
1. Is it realistic to have armor than can actually withstand near-speed-of-light projectiles? I'd imagine the force would astronomical. Should I find an excuse to reduce the speed of projectiles?
1. In the midst of a space battle would fighter planes be ineffective due to debris?
Anything else you'd like to add? In the end gameplay will come before some of the science but I would like to make combat better than the space combat in Star Wars, etc. | 1. Given your constraints, heavy armor sounds about right, medium ships and smaller would likely also involve ablative armor. Are there any type of shields? Larger ships would also likely be armed with CIWS of some sort to take out incoming ordinance.
2. The pivot idea seems a bit silly. When you're facing a target, you're not hitting with all your broadside weapons. You're basically talking about a naval warfare paradigm so you'd be more likely to see constantly-moving ships circling each other. Switching to a smaller profile still works, but unless you make some excuse with slow-firing guns, then the turning idea doesn't work. And if you're firing anything at a significant fraction of c, even a smaller profile won't mean much.
3. A ship would want to bleed off the impact force slowly. If it did it all at once, it would take more damage. In fact, a ship may want to move with the projectile if possible.
4. F = ma. You can make the excuse that near-c projectiles have to be very low-mass, probably no larger than a rifle bullet, due to power constraints. Heavy near-c projectiles could be limited to slow-firing launchers on dedicated platforms, and thus likely long-range. They would need to adjust after every shot due to the reaction of the shot too. Basic ordinance could be significantly sub-c (max it at, say, .25c) and be able to handle a sabot shell or something. This, along with a CIWS system (and senor buoys) could justify armor to resist the sort of weapons you're talking about.
5. Debris wouldn't likely be an issue for a small fighter. Remember, in space, you can move on an axis without changing your vector. | 11 | 24 |
ELI5: Why are most of the herbivores mammals like elephants, rhinos, hippos, giraffe, etc. so big in size? Even in the jurassic era the largest dinosaur was a herbivore. | It's a matter of resources, and how to obtain them. There is a lot of plant matter, which is relatively easy to renew; if an animal is adapted to grazing, the resources are plentiful, and once they get past a certain size, there is basically no carnivore that will prey on them (though their babies may be fair game for predators).
For carnivores, it's a different story: being too large would be detrimental to agility and it may make it impossible to catch prey. There is also less to eat, according to the biological food pyramid, as carnivores are secondary or tertiary consumers. Herbivores are primary consumers. | 1,971 | 2,644 |
|
If Karl Marx isn't making moral claims about capitalism, what kind of claims is he making? | I'm aware that Marx and other socialist theorists don't want their ideas to be seeped in what is morally good or bad, but when Marx or anyone else talks about exploitation or landlords being parasites what do they actually mean here if it isn't moral | You can read Marx in a moral sense, many do.
You can also read Marx ‘clinically’, as if he’s diagnosing society. Marx understands where these landlords are coming from. He’s not attaching any morality to that, he’s not out for revenge or a grant tribunal. Marx is calling out a symptom of disease which he thinks needs to be treated. | 92 | 141 |
What are the possible solutions for a slow reader? | I am a very slow reader when I try to read an article. I never can make things simple therefore it is natural to have such a problem for me. I actually normally do not care about being slow because I want to understand the things in depth but because of the time being, I cannot write my papers/homeworks etc. on time. So, in real life (not in my dream world), I have serious problems because I am a slow reader. I know that you are experienced people in your study of areas. So could you make any beneficial recommendations to me?
P.S. I am a student of social sciences.
Edit: Thanks for all of the commentators who kindly help and make suggestions for being a good reader. You shared your experiences and advice with me sincerely. Not only because I got advice from you but also I thank you because you wanted to help a student who is in trouble. | I’ll let you in on a little secret about academic writing: you don’t need to read every word in order to understand the material.
Here is one reading strategy that you might try. Read the first paragraph and then read the first sentence of every paragraph, and then read the final paragraph. You can do this for every chapter or even every section in an article. You can certainly slow down if something seems particularly interesting or important, and you want to make sure you read everything in bold or italics. But generally this will help you get the key points of the reading.
Also, for most academic journal articles, you probably don’t need to spend too much time on the methods section, unless you know it is something that you will be scrutinizing in class. | 84 | 59 |
ELI5:Why speeding up the video on youtube doesn't change the pitch but when the same thing is done using some other software the audio starts sounding like an alien? | Edit : Its how instead of why. | Sound is in the form of waves. Lower pitch is longer waves and higher pitch is shorter waves. When you speed up a piece of sound the time between the waves gets smaller and you end up with a higher pitch sound. It is possible to change the pitch of sound without altering the speed but this is expensive to process and hard to get right. The YouTube playback is able to do this but note that the playback speed is limited to a few select values and not too fast or slow and that there are sound artifacts in the result. This is because they are taking shortcuts to improve processing time and still have a problem with the quality. A lot of software is able to do similar processing with different limits on the processing. A common thing is to drop the sound at over 4x speedup as it just sounds terrible. Even TV stations with top of the line equipment for this processes the sound separately and either plays the sound at normal speed making cuts where logical or replace the sound entirely with folly or music. | 16 | 28 |
Is it possible for animals to make sounds other than the ones they do? For example, could a cow say "milk" if it were trained to? Why don't animals make a variety of noises/why do they sound the way they do? | Sorry, I know this is a jumble of questions, but I just walked in on my sister-in-law asking her dog to say "I love you." I know the dog isn't going to say the words but... why not? | Range of vocalizations is mechanically constrained by shape of the larynx, shape of the vocal chords, shape of oral and nasal cavities, and tongue musculature, to name just a few factors. So even leaving aside the question of training (which gets into neuroscience), it's not a given that a specific animal can reproduce a specific human sound.
Interesting sidebar: while human upper airway structures are well-adapted for versatile vocalization, they are poorly adapted to protect against choking (in comparison to other animals). | 11 | 19 |
ELI5: Why does time use the number 60? | Why are there sixty seconds in a minute and sixty minutes in an hour? | 60 is easy to divide cleanly in multiple ways, and a number based on 60, such as the number of degrees in a circle, can be divided yet more ways. 60 can be divided by 1,2,3,4,5,6,10,12,15,20,30 and itself. This provides many easy-to-reckon, useful fractions. In the days before pocket calculators, slide rules, Napier's Bones, etc. this made life simpler. | 27 | 15 |
Applying for bachelor's degree in Philosophy as I want to work towards a doctorate. Any tips? | I'll elaborate on the title here. I'm 17 and am at the stage of applying to universities to see if I'll be given an unconditional/conditional place in my chosen universities.
Anyway, I'd like to work my way through different stages of education to eventually become a doctor of Philosophy and to have a career as a research fellow at a university.
My specialist subject is existentialism, which I'd like to think I'm quite hot on. I've read most of the works of Camus (my favourite!), Sartre, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Kafka, Dostoyevsky, Schopenhauer and I'm now getting quite into Cioran and am covering a bit of De Beauvoir's work. If you have any suggestions on other existential philosophy books, I'd be very interested to hear your suggestions also!
What I am essentially asking here is for tips on what kinds of skills I need to develop, any foundational Philosophers that will prove to be necessary to know inside out (Plato, Kant, Mill etc.) and what the essay/dissertation structures are often like at university level that would all add up for me to be able to ultimately progress to a PhD.
Thank you! | Glad to hear you're interested in philosophy!
The first thing to say is that the philosophy job market is *very* tight. A good chance at a tenure-track job with a decent salary and job security realistically requires a PhD from one of the top 20 programs in the world, and is far from certain even moving into the top 5 or 10. It's incredibly hard work and, while fulfilling, not well compensated and has low job mobility. This isn't meant to say you can't pursue a philosophy PhD, only that you might not want to set your mind on it completely, and should keep other options open.
If you do want to set yourself up for a good career in philosophy, the good news is that for the most part, the academic considerations involved in choosing an undergraduate philosophy department are the same as the overall academic considerations that go into choosing a school. Broadly speaking, you want a school with a smart and hard-working undergraduate population so the classes will be delivered at a high level. Traditional measures like SAT and GPA are, while fallible, decent proxies for this. This means that you won't have to make a firm commitment to philosophy just yet (at least, not in the US system).
There are two complications in the case of philosophy. The first is that, although generally small liberal arts schools are *great* choices if you'd like to do a PhD, many SLACs in the US have faculty with research interests substantially different from those valued at top PhD programs. That doesn't mean you can't walk out of such a program into a great PhD (I did; with some luck, planning, and hard work) but you'll have to be strategic about it, making sure to cover core electives like logic, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind, language, etc.
The second is that some of the very best philosophy departments in the world (NYU, Rutgers, Pittsburgh) are lower in undergraduate quality and prestige (particularly Rutgers and Pittsburgh) than similarly-ranked counterparts. This can potentially create a great opportunity, as undergraduates there have good access to very high-caliber faculty. However, you'll pay for it with courses aimed lower, larger courses, absent professors, and a focus on graduate education. So while you might *think* about giving these programs a boost in your considerations, in large part the best advice really is just to pick the best SLAC or research university you can get in to and work hard.
As for what you should read, don't stress just yet. You'll learn to do philosophy in an entirely different way in your first few courses, so you might just have to re-read them anyways.
What you **must** do, if you're serious about graduate study in philosophy, is to enroll in an introduction to philosophy course in your first year, and to communicate to your academic advisors that you are seriously considering further study in philosophy and would like advice designing an appropriate course schedule.
What you **must not** do, if you're serious about graduate study in philosophy, is to take easy courses elsewhere or do badly in them, including the sciences. That's not just because you'd be robbing yourself of a great education, but also because admissions committees will want to see demonstrated intellectual curiosity and performance at a high level with some breadth of interests.
What you **might consider** doing is picking up a second major in an allied subject such as linguistics, cognitive science, psychology, math, physics, or biology. But only do this if you're genuinely interested in the subject. | 10 | 16 |
[Justice League Dark] What did Constantine mean by “your souls in the clear”? | Minor spoilers ahead.
In the DCAMU movie “Justice League Dark”, a group of heroes including John Constantine and Zatanna get into a fight with wizard and asshole extraordinaire (Constantine’s words, not mine) Felix Faust. During the fight, Zatanna loses control and tries to kill Faust, only to be stopped by Constantine, who by then had figured out that Faust was not responsible for the mystery they were trying to solve, and stating that “if no blood is spilled, you’re soul is in the clear”.
I can’t find a definitive answer for this, so what did Constantine mean by that? | Magic works on intent as well as power, but the effect can have a... magnified reaction on the soul. Since Zatanna tried to use lethal force on Faust, even 8f his immortality prevented his actual death, if he spilled blood as a result of her attack then her soul would be destined for Hell as a result. | 50 | 79 |
ELI5: I live in Utah. This state always votes Republican in every presidential race. Is it a complete waste of time for me to go vote for the next president if I chose a non-republican candidate? | Election results can affect party policies as well. If there is a swing to the left, Republicans may moderate their policies to try to recapture those voters, for example.
It doesn't look like it's worked all that well in recent years in the US, but it's still worth trying. | 28 | 19 |
|
Do computers make calculation errors? | If computers can make billions of calculations per second, is there an expected calculation error rate they make? If so, is there some sort of correction process?
If the calculations are really just tiny jolts of electricity going through logic gates, is there ever chance for an error?
If I give excel 100,000 cells to perform a calculation on, is it possible for one of the calculations to be incorrect mathematically?
Thank you. | The more pressing issue of incorrect calculation is that it is difficult to represent quantities like `1/3` with bits and so there are precision issues that programmers need to be constantly aware of. In finance, this is particularly problematic, so reliable software works in the smallest possible denomination of a currency. For example, you see $4.25, but the computer is working with this amount as 425 cents behind the scenes.
So the answer to the title question "Do computers make calculation errors?" is "yes, all the time" but not for any of the reasons you proposed.
Hope this helps. | 23 | 28 |
ELI5: Where do people get the capital to start big, expensive businesses like cruise lines? | I've always wondered this. I can't imagine a bank would be willing to give someone a multimillion dollar loan, so are all the people in these businesses already incredibly wealthy? Where does the money come from? | Starting a large, capital intensive business like a cruise line fundamentally requires three things (1) up front equity investment (cash you already have), (2) leverage (borrowed money) and (3) a solid management team.
1. You can't can't borrow money (point 2) unless you have some skin in the game. This cash can come from many sources. If you're an individual it could be family wealth or wealth you built up by working for someone else (think c-suite executives that leave large corporations to start something on their own). More likely, the money comes from cash reserves of an existing business (for example, when GE starts a new line of business it draws on cash from its other divisions) or private equity funds. Private equity funds are pools of cash which pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and (to a much lesser extent) wealthy people commit to a management company (think KKR, Carlyle, Apollo, TPG, Cerberus and Blackstone) to invest.
2. Nobody makes money in capital intensive businesses by putting up all the money themselves. You need to borrow money to maximize your return. This is "leverage" (think about the term a "leveraged buy out"). Leverage is different from seeking money from a private equity fund or putting in your own money because debt must be paid back, versus equity has no guarantee of return. If the business fails, the lenders get to pick over the pieces first and the equity is probably worth nothing. Generally speaking, for a business with tangible assets (like aircraft, cruise ships, trucks, big machinery, etc.) you can leverage the business 4 to 1. This means if you put up $100 million in cash, you can buy/start a business that takes a $400 million investment. If that business is worth $500 million a couple years later, you can sell it, pay down your $300 million in debt and have $200 million in "equity" left over (ie you put up $100 million in equity and now its worth $200 million). Conversely, if the business is not so successful and its worth only $300 million in a couple years, the equity is worthless and the lenders get their $300 million back. Lending money is pretty much what wall street is all about. People think about trading stock, derivatives, etc. when they think of wall street, but forget that the bond market dwarfs all those other markets. You go to a commercial bank with a huge balance sheet (JP Morgan Chase, Citi, Bank of America and Wells Fargo) to get your "bank debt" borrowing. You then get an investment bank (Goldman, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and the ibanking sides of the commercial banks noted above) to have them market bonds to investors. Generally, the bank debt has a lower interest rate, but gets its money back first. The bonds have a higher interest rate, are owned by a diverse group of investors, and get paid back second.
3. You can't get private equity backing or borrow any money unless you have a solid management team to create a compelling investment story. Think about how both Google and Facebook, while owned and theoretically run by young founders, brought in seasoned management professionals to lend credibility to their operations and give confidence to wall street that they won't totally fuck everything up.
Note - At work, didn't have time to proof this. | 16 | 59 |
ELI5 - Why do lights make a dink noise when they switch on | Which type of light? Fluorescent tubes have an internal switch that only strikes the arc a brief time after the power is turned on so as to warm up the gas (Mercury vapour) inside first, that makes a characteristic sound. Other lamps it might just be the sudden heat change. | 12 | 28 |
|
Recommended book on Existentialism. | I have just completed Mary Warnock's book on Existentialism. While it is thought-provoking and appears to be fairly rigorous, I am looking for more in-depth treatments of the subject as whole. Can you recommend some books with overview of existentialism and current assessment of the movement? | Here are a few good ones:
*Existentialism* by John Macquarrie is a good book - very in-depth and the author also translated Heidegger
*At The Existentialist Café* by **Sarah Bakewell** - a more informal look at existentialism, but it explores the *scene* surrounding it and the lives of the existentialists
*Man's Search For Meaning* by **Viktor Frankl**
*Existentialism Is A Humanism* by **Jean-Paul Sartre** - pretty much the cornerstone of existential thinking and it's a very easy read
*Existentialism From Dostoevsky To Sartre* by **Walter Kaufmann** | 14 | 19 |
Why is it so hard for many (most?) african countries to get out of poverty? | We see almost everyday commercials for charities that go to african countries (or India) and we do big events where we scrape together hundreds of millions that go to these countries (I live in sweden, I don't know how things work in other countries or if you have these big TV charity events), yet I never see the countries rise from poverty or that things get better.
So is that statement even true from me? Are they progressing out of poverty? And if they are not, what are the causes? | There are a number of problems which make it difficult for African nations to break the spiral of poverty.
They pay more money to service loans. The lower the credit rating of a nation means higher the risk to invest in that country and the higher the return on the bond for the investor. Therefore they have to promise higher returns (which may not be feasible) to draw any investment and repay higher amounts within the due time or risk defaulting on bonds and loans, lowering their credit rating and resuming the debt spiral.
Added to this is that many of the natural resources to draw an income cannot be developed as they lack the infrastructure thus, in order to attract investment, they offer lucrative investment offers to nations such as China in the way of cheap royalties to extract the resources which limits their income
Given that the nation-state is as natural in Africa as tribes and clans in Sweden (ie. not very), often the structures and expectations put in place by organisations such as the WTO, World Bank, UN and first world nations may not be entirely realistic. This makes corruption somewhat endemic in these nations as those in power tend to preference tribal connections over benefits for the wider citizenry. If you are a European or Chinese investor into these nations, there is little reason to change the status quo as dealing with corrupt officials or individual tribes is far cheaper.
Poor health and education means that the population often struggles to break out of subsistence farming and saps the population of able workers through disease, many of which are preventable.
Aid is important in breaking this process and in many nations in Africa, there have been a number of improvements partly responsible through the UN Millennium Development Goals, however there is still a far way to go. These nations are unstable and often years of hard work can be ruined by civil war or unrest which is usually triggered by the poverty cycle.
There is progress, India is a good example. Mozambique in Africa is another, especially when compared to 1990 data. | 35 | 52 |
How do people get caught falsifying data? | First, let me be clear, I have ZERO intention of perusing research at all, so this doesn't apply to me specifically. It's just a curiosity.
Every so often, I'll hear stories of researchers/grad students that got caught falsifying their data. How in the world are people able to tell this sort of thing?
I was going to post this in /r/nostupidquestions, but I figured you guys would know better. | One of the ways is to identify when data look "too good." There's always some amount of natural noise, so when you test a data set and the distribution is so clean that there's almost no chance of that happening in real life, then you may be looking at fabricated data.
Another is replicability. While results being un-replicable doesn't automatically mean falsified (and usually just means not a strong effect), the process of trying to figure out why your replication failed can lead you to other red flags like missing records.
Usually it's a combination of things like this.
datacolada.org has a lot of articles on the statistical tests for finding these like this if you're more interested in the process. | 19 | 20 |
The universe is said to be around 23% dark matter, 72% dark energy and 5% ordinary matter. If we don't know what dark matter and dark energy are, where do the percentages come from? | Edit: I just want to clarify, I'm aware of what dark matter and dark energy are. I'm by no means an expert, but I do have a basic idea. I'm wondering specifically how we got those particular numbers for them. | We can calculate things like gravity and energy density of the universe base on how the galaxies behave on a cosmic scale. We can also calculate how much stuff is out there by direct observation. When we look at the cosmos and look at how the galaxies behave, there is not enough material to generate the gravity (even when accounting for all the gas and dust that may obscuring it). So there's some matter that doesn't emit light but still generates that gravity we see. We call it dark matter, because that's what it is: dark.
There's also an expansion to the universe that suggests that the energy density is not what we can directly measure. There's a bunch of stuff out there causing the universe to expand at an accelerated rate. We call it dark energy, because, hey, we have dark matter already--why not call it "Dark Energy"; that way it sounds cool.
So there's like 5 times as much matter as what we can see, and like 3 times as much energy density as what can be explained by that matter. So that's where the percentages come from: just add up all the stuff we know about that makes up the universe even if we don't yet know what that stuff is. | 4,780 | 16,555 |
CMV:Claiming that black people cannot be racist bc they never had power is absurd | I simply don't understand the argument that black people cannot be racist because apparently the new definition for racism isn't discrimination of another human being based on the uncontrollable trait of their skin color, but instead that racism = prejudice + power. I honestly just want to understand why some people think this applies to black people. IMO, when someone says "well blacks have never had institutional power therefore they can't be racist", my response is "really? Well I'm sure all the white supremacists will feel really relieved when I tell them that we didn't just have an African-American in charge of what is arguably the most powerful position in the world for the last 8 years."
Edit: I am genuinely curious if there is something I am not taking into account with my reasoning. | Individual racism and institutional racism are two different concepts. Most activists are interested in talking about institutional racism because it has a bigger impact on people's lives.
This is a completely semantic discussion. | 49 | 122 |
ELI5: What is a "right to work" state? | i checked the wikipedia page and it just confused me. | In non right-to-work states, a union at a company or in an industry can be so strong that the require every single employee to be a member as a condition of employment.
So a right-to-work state doesn't let the Unions have that much power, meaning, you have a "right to work" regardless of your affiliation with any workers unions.
| 40 | 26 |
ELI5: Why in suburban areas are all houses exactly the same. Who decided this was the best model for a house, and when did everyone get on board to build their houses all the same. | Suburban building works like this: 1) Developer buys a big block and subdivides it into lots; 2) Builder builds 3-5 model homes and offers to build whatever model people pick on whatever empty lots in the development remain; 3) Buyers decide which home to build and where to put it. When (3) most Buyers like one model, you get a lot of copies of that in the development. Building houses all different is much more expensive. In recent eras, local governments have pushed harder to make the building front exteriors look different, but the houses are made with the same cookie-cutter mentality. | 16 | 28 |
|
ELI5: Why are some criminals given outrageously long sentences (150+ years)? | Was reading about [Robert Hansen](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hansen) (tldr he killed 17-21 women in alaska) and noticed at the top of the article it mentioned that he was serving *461* years in a correctional center.
1) Why would they make his sentence that long instead of a life sentence?
2) If the means became medically possible, would his life be extended to serve the rest of his prison sentence?
| It serves two purposes,
First its a message. "What you did was so wrong that one lifetime is not enough to atone".
Second its a practicality. Sometimes sentences get overturned or a lawyer gets clever. One life sentence is beatable, but 5? Forget it. This is a way for the court to bury someone behind enough stuff that they will die in prison.
| 39 | 37 |
How does radiation make other objects radioactive? | And is it always happen regardless of dosage? | The primary way that ionizing radiation makes things radioactive is by inducing nuclear reactions in the material, and transmuting its nuclei into different, radioactive species.
This is primarily only a concern with neutron radiation, although very high-intensity, high-energy charged particles or gamma rays can activate things too.
>And is it always happen regardless of dosage?
The total amount of induced radioactivity will be proportional to the dose. At small doses, the induced radioactivity will be small but nonzero. | 30 | 16 |
[WH40K] Has any aspect of the Imperium improved since 30K? | Like for instance, the Custodes have been holding back a hellmouth for 10,000 years right? Does that mean they're extra hardcore now? Is there anything the 40K Imperium does better than the 30K iteration? | Standardization, in 30k each capital ship for example was a unique piece of engineering that required its own unique components and training for its crew, and if it where from a different system it would sometimes be built with entirely different technologies that would be as different to other Imperial ships as those of another faction.
In 40k more STCs have been rediscovered and they are uniformly spread throughout the galaxy, a Lunar-class Cruiser built in the Ultima Segmentum will be very similar to a Lunar-class Cruiser built Segmentum Pacificus. This means crew is interchangeable, modules can be attached and changed without ship specific expertise and a ship can easily operate and get repairs in any part of the galaxy. | 68 | 72 |
Can somebody explain Cloud technology to me? | How does it work? How do I use it? What are the risks? Is there any privacy? | 'Cloud 'is a marketing buzzword that doesn't mean much other than client-server communications (your computer communicating with another computer that sends you data). It's used to sell services that allow you to store files on servers (but that's been around since the 90s) instead of keeping them on your computer.
However, 'Cloud' can also be used to refer to cloud hosting providers that store websites on servers across the world to provide a lower latency for users downloading them.
As you can see, there's nothing to get excited about really. It's nothing new, just a vague word slapped on to different services to make them sellable to the uninformed.
| 16 | 21 |
CMV: I think the protests in Detroit about the water shutoffs are ridiculous. | For those of you unaware, the city of Detroit is shutting off a ton (over 15,000) of residents that are 3 months or 150 dollars behind on their water bills.
They have not shut off certain businesses, which owe a ton, but that's not what the protests are about. The protests have slogans like "water is a human right," and I've seen signs like "Turn the water on, Tax Wall Street"
First off, no one is denying anyone water. They're just not providing it for you, which is a huge difference. Water is still available for drinking at the grocery store, and no one is preventing you from getting it. I grew up in Detroit and I know a good chunk of people just want other people to pay for things. Water bills are not expensive, and if just about any other thing goes unpaid, it stops. Don't pay for your cell phone? It gets cut off. Don't pay for your electricity? It gets cut off. People just want shit for free because so many of them have been handed things by the government for so long.
The only reason this is making news and getting protested is because they're all in one city. If 15,000 delinquent bills across the country got shut off, no one would give a damn.
tl:dr; pay your bill
note: I do think its bullshit that the city is turning off civilians and not businesses, but that isn't what the protests are about.
edit: I've received multiple offensive/threatening PMs over this and will not be responding any more. Thank you for those of you who posted in a courteous manner without name calling.
_____
> *Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to* ***[read through our rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules)***. *If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which,* ***[downvotes don't change views](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/guidelines#wiki_upvoting.2Fdownvoting)****! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our* ***[popular topics wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/populartopics)*** *first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to* ***[message us](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/changemyview)***. *Happy CMVing!* | >Water is not expensive
Well it can be expensive if you've ignored it for months or years. Especially if you add on any late fees.
These people definitely made a mistake by ignoring their water bill, but perhaps there is a middle ground (payment plans, forgiving late fees, forgiving debts over 12 months old, etc.).
Also, water bill liens stay with the property. So, you're not just condeming the people, but the property and ultimately the neighborhood. This is the last thing Detroit needs. Nobody is going to buy a $1,000 house that has a $3,000 water bill lien against it. | 69 | 184 |
CMV: No matter what you eat, you cannot make your body into an "alkaline state". | I have a couple friends who consistently try to convince me that disease is impossible in an alkaline environment. They tell me of all the food I should eat which is "alkaline forming" in the body. My moderate education in biology tells me that if you do change the ph of you body - you will die. Who among you has any credible evidence in this "alkaline diet" stuff. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
As a preemptive statement: please don't include links to websites that solely peddle alkaline diet information. I'm not looking for unbiased sources, as they don't exists, but sources that do not have the "alkaline diet" as their main shtick. | Eating alkaline food or supplements (like antacid/tums tabs) will mostly change the pH of your stomach. So yes, it will have 'some' effect on you body. Beyond your stomach, it won't change much. You can always define 'alkaline state' as increasing the pH in your stomach. Note that increasing the pH in your stomach might make your body more vulnerable to infections as a less acidic environment might allow for mere bacteria and viruses to survive ingestion.
Edit: corrected one of the two 'increasing' (was 'decreasing' before) | 99 | 281 |
ELI5:Why is there a labor shortage when unemployment is low? | Where is everyone working at? | There are several effects that can cause this.
First - the number of job slots is not fixed.
Imagine there's 100,000 people looking for work, 100,000 jobs, and 98,000 of the possible workers have jobs. You've got 2% unemployment (2k out of 100k). This would not really be considered a "shortage"; a small amount of unemployment and open positions is normal as people shift jobs over time, etc.
Now imagine there's 20,000 more job positions opened, but the population is unchanged. Now you have the same 2% unemployment but a major "labor shortage" - one in six jobs is unfilled.
Second - the population can decline. As others have mentioned, the "people looking for work" is not the same as number of total "people". For example, instead of 100k possible workers you now have 95k possible workers.
Third - shortage doesn't necessarily mean that "there's no X", it's also used fairly frequently to mean "X is more expensive". In the above example, with the same 100k people, the same 100k jobs, and the same 98k people working in jobs - if the workers are now demanding a higher rate to work, the employers are likely to describe that as a "labor shortage".
Fourth - shortages are not necessarily "global". Let's say the country has two industries, steel and food. Same original stats - 100k possible workers, 100k positions, 2% unemployment - so 2k unemployed workers and 2k open jobs. In an "evenly distributed" case, the 2k open jobs would be 1k each between steel and food, and the unemployed workers would have their skills and interests evenly split between those. But what if all 2k open jobs are in the food industry, and all of the unemployed workers have steel-making skills and interest? Now the food industry is unable to get new hires at all while the steel industry has extra.
In the practical world, a combination of factors is usually at play, and all of the above can be found to various extents. | 5,734 | 6,414 |
ELI5: How did the litre (volume) come to be? In other words if we had to start from the dark ages again, how could one replicate the volume measurement of 1 Litre? | The metric system is based on the distance from the North Pole to the equator, on a line passing through Paris. This distance, divided by 10,000,000 equals one metre. One metre divided by 1000 equals one millimetre. One cubic millimetre of water equals 1 millilitre. 1000 millilitres equals one litre. | 60 | 29 |
|
Why don't the fusion chain reactions powering the sun get out of control, causing it to supernova? | Why do stars "burn steadily" over billions of years without the chain reactions exponentially increasing in magnitude causing a supernova? I understand fusion is a very different process to fission, but nuclear reactors require control rods to control the reaction. Also if the reaction rate doesn't increase, how come the reactions don't decrease to the point stars just burn out? | Reactions - chemical or nuclear, fission or fusion - produce heat, and heat produces pressure. Increasing the pressure causes the gas to expand. If you've doing this in a reactor, this can be a bad thing: if things get too hot, you have too much pressure, and the whole thing can burst. So we have all sorts of measures to stop this from happening.
But in space, there are no walls to hold the pressure in. So the gas is free to expand. As it expands, the gas gets cooler and less dense, and this naturally reduces the reaction rate, which reduces the amount of heat you're producing.
The star's gravity stops it from continuing to expand forever. You end up with an *equilibrium* where gravity balances out the pressure produced by the nuclear reactions. If the reactions are a little too fast, the star expands, which reduces the reaction rate. If the reactions are too slow, the star shrinks, which increases the reaction rate. So there's a "feedback" loop that keeps the star nicely settled at a roughly constant size for most of its life.
>Also if the reaction rate doesn't increase, how come the reactions don't decrease to the point stars just burn out?
Some stars basically do something like that. Stellar evolution is really very complicated, and what happens to a star depends strongly on how massive it is. But essentially, a supernova is when a star runs out of fuel and collapses dramatically, because even shrinking and increasing its pressure and density doesn't help you speed up the reaction if there's nothing left to burn. It shrinks until things are dense and hot enough to start new types of reaction, which produce a huge amount of energy in a short amount of time. If you add little bits of energy at a time then the star can expand and reach a nice equilibrium. But if you add a huge amount at once, you just blow the whole thing apart. | 35 | 27 |
If humans were to become a multi-planet species, could humans on Planet A and humans on Planet B eventually become two separate species over a vast length of time in two possibly different environments? |
If humans were to become a multi-planet species then one would assume that they would be able to exchange genetic material between the populations on the various planets. The only way they would ever diverge into separate species is if the planets were somehow reproductively isolated from one another for a *very* long time. Long enough for the two populations to somehow evolve innate barriers to reproduction.
So the only way this could really happen would be if humans gained and then lost the ability to travel between planets. If all of the populations were reproductively isolated, then they would probably speciate given enough time. | 119 | 290 |
|
How do colors work at the atomic level? | What makes the difference between red and blue, black and white, purple and yellow? I understand light gets absorbed and some get reflected, and what get's reflect is what color we see. (I think I'm right) But if we take a closer look, what are we seeing, what's there that makes the colors what we see? | Atoms are made of 3 different subatomic particles, protons, neutrons, and electrons. The protons and neutrons form the middle, or the nucleus, and the electrons from the electron cloud. When energy is given to the atom the electrons jump up to a different energy cloud, or a higher energy level. When the electrons jump down energy levels they lose the energy in the form of a photon. The photon is what we see as colors. It all depends on the specific atom and how much energy is lost. | 16 | 27 |
ELI5: If a glass is clear and water is clear, why can you see water in a glass? | I mean, it's not like there are shades of clear. Why can't we see air either? | You can see water in a glass because the two materials have different refractive indecies. RI is a measure of how light moves in a given material compared to in a vacuum. The refractive index of glass is about 1.46 and the refractive index of water is about 1.333. This difference makes light travel differently so they appear as two different objects. (RI is also why a straw appears "bent" in a glass of water).
You can't generally see air because you're surrounded by it. However, if the layer of air is thick enough you can see it. If you look up you'll see that the sky is blue. This is due to the atoms in the atmosphere scattering incoming sunlight.
| 12 | 16 |
If I kept a plant in a sealed plastic bag, would it suffocate? | It depends on a lot of variables, such as the type of plant, the size of the bag, how much air, water, and nutrients were inside it, how much light it was getting, etc. If you managed to balance all of those factors, it could very well live indefinitely. On a much grander scale, our planet is essentially a little container sitting in the sun with plants growing in (on) it. | 13 | 33 |
|
What technological advancements would be necessary for humanity to travel into deep space? | Hard mode:
If immortality is indeed attainable, is it also necessary to explore space?
Might I live to see such achievements within my lifetime? (young adult) | advanced radiation and micrometeorite shielding, high specific impulse AND thrust propulsion systems, food growth and/or synthesis in space, medical procedures to face unexpected health issues, possibly criostasis, possibly robots to perform extravehicular work and repairs, possibly methods to harvest resources. Also, building the ship would require much more cost-effective methods of bringing materials, components and crew into space, so I'd look into a space elevator.
Exploring space is absolutely necessary. Our development as a species is completely incompatible with long-term confinement to Earth alone, which will eventually be unable to sustain our demand for and food and resources (helium is running out fast).
There is also a reasonable number of ways our planet will eventually find itself unable to sustain most forms of life. No, we will most likely not see anything of that in our lifetimes. We have good chances of seeing a moon base and the first humans walk on mars, maaaaaybe on a moon of Jupiter. But that heavily depends on the political and economical situation. If we really wanted, we could put people on mars in 15 years, but nobody sees the worth of that investment at the moment. | 17 | 18 |
ELI5: Japanese business culture. What are its main tenets/unspoken rules? Why is it so different from those of other cultures? | Most of the Japanese specific stuff relates to business cards and introductions.
Business cards are mandatory. You'll exchange one with EVERYONE you interact with. Bring extra.
When you meet someone, introduce yourself (in Japanese, if you can - practice Hajimemashite), then trade cards. Use both hands on your card, and receive theirs with both hands. Do not put their card into your pocket/wallet/billfold. Leave it on the table for the duration of the meeting.
Don't write notes on their business cards.
Don't shake hands or pat on head/back/shoulder, unless they initiate a handshake (if they're very used to dealing with US, they may initiate)
Other than that, normal business etiquette
- Don't fidget
- Not everyone wears suits, but dress to match their environment
- Don't blow your nose in public
- Don't speak down to your coworkers, or make jokes mocking people/groups. Self deprecating humor works in the US, not so much in Japan.
- When you see hesitation in responses/answers, assume the answer is unfavorable, and they're trying not to dishonor you by saying no directly. If you ask to see a copy of a document, and they say they need to check to see if it's OK, that means no. If you ask if they want to go to dinner later, and they say they have a lot of work to do and they'll follow up later, that means no.
| 86 | 130 |
|
ELI5: What makes some wines better than others? Why can some bottles be 10 bucks while others over 100? | Let's say a vineyard makes a wine that's generally considered good (note- it's kinda irrelevant whether it is objectively good or not). This increases demand as people want to buy this famously tasty wine.
Unfortunately vineyards, communes and chateaux can only make so much wine with the land they have. If they want to increase production, they need to buy up more land. However, the microclimates, microflora (the natural yeasts) and the soil quality that all affect how wine tastes can differ literally between fields. Also, the processes for making wine have to be scaled up, which again can affect the taste.
So, if they increase supply to keep up with demand, they end up making a different product that falls out of favor, and nobody wants it any more. Instead, the price just rises.
Simple economics right?
Here's the rub - high end wines are luxury goods. This means that high prices actually *increase* demand. You're not just buying any old wine, you're buying a famous product. It's the same as with brand name clothes or luxury cars. You're paying for increased quality, sure, but you're also paying for the name and the connotations that come with it- of exclusivity, of sophistication, of connoisseurship.
On buying it, you're part of an exclusive club of people who appreciate the finer things. Being a member is desirable enough that people are willing to fork out some extra cash for the privilege. A Château Lafite Rothschild is sold as much on reputation as it is on the quality of the wine inside.
**TL;DR :** Some wines have reputations for being good, which increases demand. Increasing supply is difficult, so prices rise. The wine now has the added bonus of being "exclusive", "expensive" and "rare". Demand remains high. | 99 | 177 |
|
[DC] The Citizens who yelled is it a bird is it a plane, why were they so excited over these things that they had to shout? | Being able to identify what was approaching from the sky was pretty important during that time period. With World War II still fresh in people's memories and the cold war on the rise, making sure that the strange flying object you see is in fact a bird or a plane and not a V2 rocket or russian missile could mean life or death. | 247 | 154 |
|
Why does COVID-19 affect people differently? | This may have been asked here before, but I’m trying to understand how a virus can show completely different symptoms in one person versus the next. For example, Donovan Mitchell, a NBA shooting guard for the Utah Jazz, tested positive for COVID-19 a week and a half ago. He’s repeatedly stated that he is completely asymptomatic and is feeling better than ever, even stating the he would be able to play in a 7-game series right now. But then I see stories of people in their mid-20’s (around the same age as Mitchell), who appear relatively healthy, having to be put on respirators and checked into ICU. I’ve never heard of a virus affecting people completely different like this. For example, if two people around the same age and health get the flu, it usually affects them about the same. And even if it’s not exactly the same, they both would experience negative symptoms to some degree. Why is COVID-19 so different? Any explanation on this would be appreciated! Thanks! | Physician here. The answer is the genetics and experience of your immune system. In layman’s terms there are two important decisions your body must make. The first is how aggressively does the body want to fight the virus when it initially enters your body. Usually this is at the level of your throat before it gets into your lungs. If your body succeeds in fending off the virus at this level, you will have mild to no symptoms. If your body fails to fight off the virus at this level, it will enter your lungs. This second part is where your body has to walk a fine line. There is a degree of variability of your immune system to decide how much “ammo”it wants to throw at the virus. If your immune system is filled with accurate snipers you will have no problem clearing the virus from your lungs. Now if it panics and starts throwing grenades at anything that moves, it will kill much of your healthy lung tissue and clog up the airways with fluid causing you essentially drown yourself. Of course you might be saved if you medical professionals stick a tube down your throat and connect you to a machine that forces air into your lungs for days. There’s is nothing you can do to improve the accuracy or measured response of your immune system. Covid 19 is no joke. We’re all playing Russian roulette when we make contact with others. | 384 | 254 |
ELI5: Why is it impossible to transplant a bladder? It seems strange to me that a heart can be transplanted and a bladder can't. | It's not impossible, it's a weighting of the positives and negatives of a procedure. Transplantation is drastic, dangerous, and life altering. The patient will have to take drugs that suppress their immune system for the rest of their life along with the many side effects that patients will now have to live with. So we generally only do it for stuff that's either not prone to rejection that the patient won't have to spend a lifetime on anti-rejection drugs (i.e. cornea) or for stuff where if the patient doesn't have it they will die.
A heart? You can't live without it. So transplanting easily edges out the risks and possible complications. A bladder? Not so much. Surgeons are good at fashioning bladders from bowel or small intestine, they can create urine accumulation pockets to be drained by cathater, they can route the ureters to a port on the body to be collected by a bag. These are a mere minor inconvenience compared to a lifetime on anti-rejection drugs and a weakened immune system. | 26,984 | 20,411 |
|
Semantic issues with the word "Capital" | Recently I have decided to re-read Katharina Pistor's book titled "The Code of Capital", and it lead me to confusion about the word capital. To my knowledge, capital is a stock that when exploited has the potential to turn a profit. Yet in the book, the author claims that "Capital is a legal quality that helps create and protect wealth". Could we interpret it as meaning that the capability of capital to be profitable is reliant on the power of the state to uphold contracts and protect property rights, or is use of the word here is simply inappropriate? Katharina is a lawyer by education, so I am inclined to accept the second conclusion, but I would like the opinion of others on this matter. | There's multiple definitions. For example, from the System of National Accounts 2008, the internationally-agreed manual that defines how GDP and other macroeconomic statistics are calculated, "capital goods" are ones that provide ongoing services, rather than being consumed within the production process. Therefore someone shipwrecked on a desert island who builds themselves a hut has capital, even though that doesn't fit under your definition or Pistor's. | 19 | 47 |
How are satellite orientated in space? | If down is relative to the ground for us how is positioning treated in space? | It depends whether the satellite is interested in pointing "down" (GPS, weather satellites) or at another object in space (space telescopes etc.)
If it wants to point "down", all it needs to do is spin slowly so it makes a full revolution once per orbit, so the same side is always facing the earth.
For most satellites this is achieved by just getting it's rotational velocity close enough to correct using thrusters, and then fine tuning it with rotating weights (reaction wheels)
If it's looking somewhere else, usually it will be oriented relative to the stars, since on a human timescale they are pretty much perfectly stationary. For this purpose reaction wheels can last a long time let you point it at whatever you want.
There are some interesting consequences of using reaction wheels to orient satellites - if there's an unbalanced force on the satellite over a long period of time certain wheels will need to gradually speed up to counteract this, until eventually they reach a maximum speed and are no longer useful. An example of this is Hubble, it has (from memory, please correct me) 8 sets of reaction wheels, about half of which are no longer functional due to being at max speed all the time. This means Hubble can't rotate directly to look at something, and has to do a sort of wiggly roundabout way to point in the right direction. | 34 | 64 |
CMV: There is no logical reason to celebrate Gender Dysphoria the way society is pressured to | I realize that gender topics are common around here; but I have not seen this particular question in searches. I am not saying to write off transgender people as "mentally ill". I am not saying their feelings are not real and legitimate. What I am saying is that I cannot think of a logical reason that those with Gender Dysphoria are treated a special group that deserves unwavering support over any other of countless things that can affect someone's self-esteem or self comfort.
Take the statements below:
1. I feel sad because I am not *a dog*
2. I feel sad because I am not *a millionaire*
3. I feel sad because I am not *younger*
4. I feel sad because I am not *British Royalty*
5. I feel sad because I am not *a girl*
If someone came out and said most of these things, the normal response would be "Well true, you are not \_\_\_\_\_, but that's life." Except for one, which we instead treat as a legitimate need to want to be something you biologically are not. And tell the rest of society to fully support those that make that determination.
I really do want to know what the difference is | >I really do want to know what the difference is
Well there are several differences.
1) Gender dysphoria is more intense than sadness. Symptoms are typically depression and anxiety. Thus there is a legitimate health concern in treating it.
2) Gender dysphoria is an observable phenomenon. There is no phenomenon of people having an identity crisis because their mind aligns more with a separate species or social status than their body.
3) Gender d ysphoria is treatable. Transition and support from friends and family generally lead to more positive outcomes for people who suffered from it, while not transitioning and organization worsens symptoms.
So whether or not you find transgender people "logical" it is logical to treat them how they wish to be treated. It leads to greater happiness with no cost to you. | 18 | 17 |
Can space yield? | As an engineer I work with material data in a lot of different ways. For some reason I never thought to ask, what does the material data of space or "space-time" look like?
For instance if I take a bar of aluminum and I pull on it (applying a tensile load) it will eventually yield if I pull hard enough meaning there's some permanent deformation in the bar. This means if I take the load off the bar its length is now different than before I pulled on it.
If there are answers to some of these questions, I'm curious what they are:
* Does space experience stress and strain like conventional materials do?
* Does it have a stiffness? Moreover, does space act like a spring, mass, damper, multiple, or none of the above?
* Can you yield space -- if there was a mass large enough (like a black hole) and it eventually dissolved, could the space have a permanent deformation like a signature that there used to be a huge mass here?
* Can space shear?
* Can space buckle?
* Can you actually tear space? Science-fiction tells us yes, but what could that really mean? Does space have a failure stress beyond which a tear will occur?
* Is space modeled better as a solid, a fluid, or something else? As an engineer, we sort of just ignore its presence and then add in effects we're worried about. | As an engineer you're probably familiar with the concept of the stress tensor, a 3x3 matrix describing the pressures and shears on a volume. In general relativity, it is expanded to a 4x4 matrix called the stress-energy tensor, where the 2nd to 4th rows and columns are the stress tensor and the first row and column represent the time dimension. The 1,1 element is the energy density (mc^2 in a simple case), and the other time components aren't important right now.
You can look at a stress-energy tensor to see how things behave in the same way you'd look at a stress tensor to see how a material behaves. In general relativity, each different type of spacetime has a geometry that's related to the stress-energy tensor via Einstein's equations.
The simplest case is Minkowski space, or flat space. Its stress-energy tensor is just zeros. The same is true for non-flat vacuum solutions, like Schwartzschild space (around a point mass) and the hyperbolic and elliptical flat solutions: de Sitter and anti-de Sitter space.
In solutions that describe matter distributions (like the Schwarzschild interior solution for a uniform density sphere) then the stress components tell you everything you need to know.
Over large scales the universe is described by the FLRW solution. The stress-energy tensor is diagonal with the time-time component being the density of the universe and the spatial diagonal components being the isotropic pressure. In this sense, the universe behaves as a compressible gas. | 603 | 799 |
How are tunnels maintained? How do are they kept from collapsing over time? | If a tunnel cracks then how is it fixed? Do they have to be repaired from above? | The arch shaped crown of a tunnel matches the shape of the stress pattern induced naturally by a cavity within the ground, so a tunnel tends to be stable other than for spalling of small chunks from the roof. Spalling causes progressive deterioration of the tunnel, and needs to be controlled, such as with bricks, cast concrete, reinforced shotcrete or other tunnel liner system. A tunnel through hard, strong, weathering-resistant and unfractured bedrock might not need to be lined.
Cracks alone do not hurt a liner system; cracks normally occur in most concrete and brickwork due to shrinkage or during local stress redistribution. However, physical displacement of cracked portions of the liner would be a more serious symptom.
The other main purpose of a tunnel liner system is to control groundwater seepage. Some liners include a drainage layer that conducts seepage down to drains near the floor. A crack that occasionally drips would likely be considered normal. A crack that is spraying or gushing groundwater into the tunnel would become problematic due to erosion and serviceability issues.
Cracks can be repaired by low-pressure grouting of cement mortar into the cavity behind the liner, with care to avoid interfering with drainage. Another method is to bolt steel plates onto the cracked liner. However, a liner that is merely cracked (but not displaced) might well be stable and functioning in a satisfactory manner in accordance with its design. Tunnels should be routinely inspected by a tunnelling engineer. | 121 | 124 |
All philosophy is situation? | After reading Victor Frankl's "Man's Search For Meaning" it struck me that the philosophy that came out of the book seemed very much as response to his situation, and that is it no surprise that he didn't adopt a philosophy of something like Utilitarianism instead. This got me to thinking that most if not all philosophy in general comes in response to the world at large or a particular topic of concern at the time of the philosophy's creation and to the author's situation.
So my question, is there any branch of philosophy that basically says there is no real philosophical rules, but rather any number of valid approaches exist depending on your environment or circumstances. I would call something like this "situational philosophy", and i theory your philosophy of life could change as often as your circumstances change.
Apologies if this questions is unclear. | You might be interested in *moral particularism* \-- the view that there are no authoritative ethical principles, and that moral judgment consists of nothing more than deliberation about particular cases. | 44 | 59 |
Why have seawater plumbing systems not been perfected/used yet? | Most sailing vessels have a seawater intake that is used to flush their toilet, even wash their dishes. As our current plumbing systems insure that all our toilet water (on land) makes its way back to the sea anyways, why not use seawater to flush our toilets, as opposed to flushing potable water? | Because the costs associated with developing and maintaining the infrastructure to get seawater (or unprocessed fresh water) into buildings outweighs the costs of using clean water (specifically the cleaning process) which is already required in buildings. | 19 | 33 |
What kind of success did alchemy have? | You always hear about the outlandish failures of alchemy: it failed to turn lead into gold, failed to make people immortal, failed to create the fabled fifth element (æther). But what success did alchemy have? Since so may people believed and practiced it for so many hundred years I'd assume it made some progress or had some experimental successes it could show off. Am I right? If so, what kind of successes did they have?
[Added a "chemistry"-flare since it forced me to add one, when this question is more for the historians of science.] | One of the kings of the German kingdom of Saxony, Augustus the Strong, hired an (al)chemist call Böttger to invent a method of making gold - he failed entirely, but in the process came up with a technique of making high quality porcelain, which started large scale production in Meissen in 1710. Until then, porcelain manufacture had been a well-kept Chinese secret, so being the first to be able to produce comparable porcelain in Europe made the Saxony a lot of money. | 46 | 25 |
CMV: Ending SALT deduction of state income taxes is fair | As a UMC earner living in a high state tax state, I'm part of the population that will be most harmed by Trump's new tax bill which takes away the ability to deduct state income taxes when calculating federal income tax.
However, on every dimension I can think of, I can't really find a principled reason to support the SALT deductions.
(1) SALT deductions benefit virtually only the upper income level individuals, since lower income individuals benefit much more from taking the standard deduction than itemized deductions.
(2) Giving the ability to deduct state income taxes is a subsidy to high tax states by lowering the cost of their taxes. This is distortive because it favors high tax states at the expense of low tax states.
(3) Related to (2), ending the SALT deductions may put pressure on high tax states such as NY and CA to be more disciplined about their budget, and lower their taxes as well as spending.
Would love to hear good arguments why I should actually get to keep more of my money.
_____
> *This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please* ***[read through our rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules)***. *If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which,* ***[downvotes don't change views](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/guidelines#wiki_upvoting.2Fdownvoting)****! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to* ***[message us](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/changemyview)***. *Happy CMVing!* | Addressing point 2.
If a state has a high tax rate, it is going to provide more services to its citizens. This reduces the dependence of its citizens on Federal programs. The SALT deduction creates an incentive for state and local government to handle their own problems, rather than relying on the Feds to solve them. | 29 | 27 |
ELI5: What is the way economics distinguishes between items that people buy to use/keep, and people just buy to sell at a higher price to other sellers? I see both referred to as "commodities", and both have "intrinsic value" (People will pay for them), but they seem clearly different to me. | Commodities are goods which are basically uniform; crops & minerals are typical examples (corn is corn, copper is copper).
Intrinsic value is value from actually using/consuming the thing (e.g., using gold to manufacture high-quality electronics) as opposed to value from selling it. | 30 | 37 |
|
Why does having 0% or negative inflation stagnate the economy? | I have heard this before, but I have never seen a study or anything supporting it. Why does this happen, and is it proven or only theorized? | Very much proven and for that you can look at Japan.
If the inflation is negative, people are not inclined to spend. Why buy a house today if you can keep the money and buy it cheaper next year? Or in ten years? This reduces the movement of money in the economy, which is pretty much blood in veins. No movement - no activity - no production - further stagnation and no growth.
Going back to Japan, the government constantly prints an exorbitant amount of of money to drive inflation and invests it all in domestic stocks. For reference, Bank of Japan owns circa 5% of entire Japanese stock market (which itself is second biggest after the US’s).
Deflation is terrible. | 106 | 129 |
ELI5: Mixing vs. Mastering | I searched a lot on the internet about this topic and didn't quite catch it. Could you please help? | I do mixing and mastering
Mixing is making the individual sections and instruments of a song sound good together or on their own
Mastering is making sure that the finished combination will sound good on an audio system
example:
Mixers worry that the kick drum and the bass guitar will drown each other out..
Mastering engineers worry that there isn't enough bass in the song when played through a speaker system | 58 | 77 |
AskScience AMA Series: I'm a cancer doc and I'm studying how fecal microbiome transplants (poop!) could boost cancer immunotherapy. Ask Me Anything! | Hi Reddit!
I'm Dr. Diwakar Davar, a physician-scientist at the UPMC Hillman Cancer Center and the University of Pittsburgh.
Despite the success of cancer immunotherapy only about 30-40% of patients have a positive response. We want to know why! And, we think the gut microbiome may hold some of the answers.
There are billions of bacteria in the gut. In fact, the gut microbiome has been implicated in seemingly unconnected states, ranging from the response to cancer treatments to obesity and a host of neurological diseases, including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, depression, schizophrenia and autism.
Together with my Hillman and Pitt colleague Dr. Hassane Zarour, we looked at the success and failure of cancer immunotherapy and discovered that cancer patients who did well with anti-PD1 immunotherapy had different gut bacteria microorganisms. So, what if we could change the gut bacteria? What if we transplanted the good bacteria from those who responded to treatment into the patients who did not respond? In a small first-in-human trial, we found that this just might work! A tremendously exciting finding.
What does this mean for the future of cancer treatment? We think altering the gut microbiome has great potential to change the impact of immunotherapy across all cancers. We still have a way to go, including getting more specific with what microbes we transfer. We also want to ultimately replace FMT with pills containing a cocktail of the most beneficial microbes for boosting immunotherapy.
Read more about our study here - https://hillmanresearch.upmc.edu/fecal-transplant-boosts-cancer-immunotherapy/
You can find me on twitter [@diwakardavar](https://twitter.com/diwakardavar) and Dr. Zarour [@HassaneZarour](https://twitter.com/HassaneZarour). I'll be on at 1pm (ET, 17 UT), ask me anything!
Username: /u/Red_Stag_07 | Are there complementary dietary changes that can improve results ? Does the fecal transplant “jumpstart” what a dietary shift could bring ? Or, are the healthy biomes resultant from more than just food ? | 199 | 3,624 |
If color is the non-absorption of specific wavelengths, wouldn't a 'red' laser consist of every color except red? | The colour of an object is determined by the wavelength(s) of the light that it emits or reflects. If you take an object that doesn't emit visible light on its own, then the visibility of the object is purely caused by reflection of light from other sources.
Depending on what the object is made of, it will reflect some wavelengths of light, while absorbing others. In general, we say that an object is red if it primarily reflects red light and absorbs other wavelengths.
So in that sense, the colour of an object is indeed determined by the non-absorption of specific wavelengths. But what ultimately determines which colour we see is the wavelength of the light that hits our eyes. When we look at a red object, all light other than red is absorbed and only red light is reflected towards our eyes.
But when we look at a laser or other light source, we directly see the light that it emits. So a red laser emits red light which eventually enters our eyes. In this case, there is no absorption or reflection required. | 525 | 709 |
|
CMV: Dictionary definitions should not include the root of the word. | I understand that 'tribalized' is the simple past tense and past participle of 'tribalize', and 'tribalize' is to make tribal and 'tribal' is of or relating to tribes (all wiktionary). That hasn't really gotten me anywhere, has it?
Maybe the reason is because that's how definitions work, it would be odd to define 'tribalized' as the past tense or past participle of making something of or relating to socially, ethnically or politically cohesive groups of people.
But what if we just cut to the chase, tell me how the word relates to the root and then define the root:
*Tribalized* - Past tense, transitive verb, of or relating to Tribes: a socially, ethnically and politically cohesive group of people.
I am coming at this from as a math person, I look at this as basic factorization, I know you word people get frustrated when people like me do this, but that's why we have this sub.
CMV! | Paper dictionaries only have a listing for the root word, with a listing of suffixes used, since it would be inefficient to have an entry for each form.
By focusing on the root, users pretty quickly understand how roots and suffixes/prefixes work - if they understand the relationship of "tribalization" to "tribe" they can figure out the relationship of "factorization" to "factor", and save themselves some effort.
Now, with online dictionaries, the space is no longer a problem - however, it's easy to link to the root word - so "tribalize" should have a link to tribe, so you're not adding a lot of effort. What you ARE doing is making quality control much better. So, say you had a definition of "buggy" as "characterized by bugs". When the term came to ALSO refer to computer bugs, you just needed to change the root word, rather than every reference to it | 24 | 26 |
CMV: Not knowing Mandarin Chinese in 2050 will be the same as not knowing English in today's international job market, and I should learn it. | I'm a journalism student who wants to work overseas covering stories all over the world. Right now, the richest countries are english-speaking, and so if you want to be a foreign correspondent (or almost any other job) the most marketable/profitable language for you to know is English.
[By 2050 the Chinese economy will have well and truly surpassed the US economy](http://citywire.co.uk/money/goldman-sachs-china-to-overtake-us-economy-in-2026/a550329), and if I want to be working internationally and making good money I will *need* to know mandarin because China will be the dominant economy/culture, and so will anyone else who wants to make good money.
_____
> *Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to* ***[read through our rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules)***. *If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which,* ***[downvotes don't change views](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/guidelines#wiki_upvoting.2Fdownvoting)****! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our* ***[popular topics wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/populartopics)*** *first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to* ***[message us](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/changemyview)***. *Happy CMVing!* | You need an empire to export your language and culture. The last two, The British and the American, have been exporting English for the last 400 years. The global-ish empire before that, the Romans spoke Latin which was commonly taught in high school through the 80's.
Also, the Chinese haven't been real great at exporting their culture. If Mandarin becomes a global language, it's at least a century off. | 19 | 17 |
[MCU] How does Captain America get knocked back when a grenade hits his shield yet when Iron Man’s lasers and Thor’s hammer hits the shield he easily holds his ground? | https://youtu.be/7o8VGH5xV4Y
There is the grenade launcher scene. Captain America is sent really far back. | Kinetic energy spread over a wide area vs focused on a point. Hammer blows and repulsor blasts impact a small area, easily absorbed by the shield. The grenade blast was spread over a wide area affecting not just the shield but Cap's body and everything around it, knocking it all back. | 44 | 31 |
[WH40K] How do I know an Inquisitor isn't a foul cultist with a stolen rosette? | So I'm a small business owner - couple thousand employees stamping out rations for the local Imperial Guard regiment through the Departmento Munitorum. We've had Chaos issues in a neighbouring city, and after it was burned to the ground I got the feeling attention was being paid to ours. Sure enough, one of my men -ex-refugee from said city- asked for a private word and presented the Rosette. He demanded I add a chemical he provided to the rations I supplied, that would paralyse the IG once consumed (literally, he said it was derived from a venom). I knew better than to question him, but after our...chat, I wondered.
The Inquisition has no ruling body, no guard stations, no HQ for me to ask. The rosette was genuine, but anyone could have picked it up from a fallen Inquisitor, maybe even centuries ago, and nobody would be the wiser. Inquisitors clash with cultists all the time, it stands to reason some could be struck down, and their badge used to corruption and chaos. Emperor, what shall I *do?* | You have two options here.
You can tell the highest figure of Imperial authority you can get access to (for someone of your station, probably a Munitorium officer or Arbites Precint-Captain) and let them take it up the chain of command.
If you're lucky, it will either get lost in the paperwork shuffle as it grinds its way up the chain of command or take so long that you, your children, and your children's children have long gone to the Emperor's side.
If you're very, very unlucky it will get expedited - or catch the attention of one of the Inquisition's countless spies - and you'll soon have the dread Inquisition breathing down your neck.
If you're unluckier yet, you did in fact give poison to an impostor and the investigating agents will decide "better safe than sorry," especially with the troubles in your region, and you will be *thoroughly* interrogated and executed, your family and employees will disappear, and your existence will be wiped from all records aside from whichever secret libraries contain whichever fell tomes in which the Inquisition lists the names of thrice-damned traitors.
If you're the unluckiest Emperor-forsaken son of a Grox in the Segmentum, you obeyed the order of a genuine Inquisitor. You will, at the very best, have the suspicion of the scariest and most powerful agents of the Emperor trained against you and your house for centuries; at worst, you will be punished for questioning the Left Hand of the Emperor and publicizing the activities of His most secretive servants.
&nbsp;
Or, you could keep your damn head down and mouth shut, lie through your teeth about a bad batch further up the supply chain from you, and pray to your Emperor that you did the right thing - or did the wrong thing, and fell through the cracks. | 30 | 18 |
ELI5: Why aren't there organisms that live on the sun, eat fire, and drink heat? In other words why does there need to be water for life? | The only life we know of occurs as chemical reactions - complex molecules interacting through electrical forces - in liquid water. "Exotic" life that might function similarly but use different chemicals in something other than water (e.g., liquid methane on Titan) is a topic of speculation, but has never been detected.
The Sun is too hot for molecular bonds to exist, so there is no way for different nuclei to interact with each other except fusion in the core or keeping each other apart by mutual repulsion of protons. At such temperatures, matter is ionized and electrons move freely.
"Chemistry" in the normal sense does not exist in such an environment - there are simply atomic nuclei and subatomic particles.
| 48 | 54 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.