q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
301
| selftext
stringlengths 0
39.2k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 3
values | url
stringlengths 4
132
| answers
dict | title_urls
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
fh6po0
|
Do historians generally believe that terracotta army found near Qin Shi Huang's mausoleum were made using imported 'Hellenistic' expertise?
|
The BBC documentary 'The Greatest Tomb on Earth: Secrets of Ancient China' claims that Qin sculptors weren't capable of creating the terracotta army or the more recently excavated acrobat sculptures, and argues that Greek experts were likely present to teach the local craftsmen the necessary techniques.
Are these claims as conclusive and irrefutable as the documentary suggests? And can anyone comment on how difficult it would really have been for Chinese sculptors of the time to create these works without outside help? As a lay person in both history and sculpture, the idea that lifelike sculptures would be impossible to create just because prior to that time the dominant form of sculpture in the region were small and heavily stylized figures seems absurd.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fh6po0/do_historians_generally_believe_that_terracotta/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fka5731"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"There was a great answer on this question about a year ago by u/kungming2 in response to someone who watched the same documentary:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8kvhlw/what_is_the_current_thinking_of_greek_style"
]
] |
|
2t3dcz
|
how's does liquid soup turn into foam when i pump it from it container? what's exactly is happening?
|
How's does this happen? it's liquid in the container than turn into foam.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t3dcz/eli5_hows_does_liquid_soup_turn_into_foam_when_i/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnvboxl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you push the pump (which contains one chamber for soap and one for air) it creates negative pressure that brings the liquid and air together, creating foam. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2jdyud
|
why do i sometimes wake up in the middle of the night with the sole thought of remembering i forgot to set my alarm?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jdyud/eli5_why_do_i_sometimes_wake_up_in_the_middle_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clatb5i",
"clatkj8",
"claww93",
"clb1j5q"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'd love to know the answer to this too. Sometimes I can't even get to sleep until I *know* I set the alarm.",
"You wake up in the middle of the night. You don't hear your alarm. You think you need to hear your alarm. You think that you didn't set the alarm.\n\nNow there are two possibilities:\n\n1. You have set your alarm and you go back to sleep, annoyed that you woke up too early.\n\n2. You didn't set your alarm, set it now and go back to sleep, happy that you woke up too early instead of too late.\n\nSleep well tonight :-)",
"Okay. It might have something to do with this thing I read a while ago. I haven't tried it, so I'm not sure it works. \n\nYou wake up a minute before your alarm goes off because you think about it the night before enough for your brain to set up a sort of psychic \"alarm\" that wakes you up in the time. Maybe your brain realizes that you depend on your alarm to wake up and your subconscious remembers that you did not set it? \n\nI'm not sure if this is right, but it makes the most sense to me. As for the psychic alarm, I kinda believe that works. You do have an internal clock of sorts, but that doesn't explain why I always wake up late for classes... Oops. ",
"This is your subconscious reminding you of an important task. Your brain does not have the memory of having set the alarm, knows that the alarm needs to be set to keep you out of trouble, and it wakes you up to solve the problem. Similar to waking up when you hear your baby crying in the night, except your brain provides the stimulus, not your baby. :o) "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1imb4r
|
what is the point of those things that appear in your eyes after sleeping?
|
They somewhat resemble boogers, but I have no idea what they are called.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1imb4r/eli5what_is_the_point_of_those_things_that_appear/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb5vqxf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They're called eye poop in Sweden"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3k414s
|
why do companies spend excessive amounts of money on logos that look barely different?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3k414s/eli5_why_do_companies_spend_excessive_amounts_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuukbm6",
"cuur0gc"
],
"score": [
17,
3
],
"text": [
"Peter Drucker, a very famous business professor, was often quoted as saying: \"There are only two things in a business that make money - innovation and marketing. Everything else is a cost.\"\n\nA company's logo is its face to the world. Anything that people think of when they glimpse a company's logo is probably going to strongly impact that consumers perceptions of the company.\n\nOne of my firm's clients recently heard in a focus group that a new logo they were testing out made someone think of the Nazi Swastika. This one guy's random impression was enough for our client to want to get us to speak to hundreds more people to ensure that this was just one random guy thinking that and not evocative of a larger trend. It's pretty clear how the client would have lost a lot of money if their logo made people think of nazis and they didn't catch it before making the change. That type of thing is a pretty compelling case to spend money researching a logo. A bit of money spent on research can avoid huge costs in the future if the logo/marketing idea doesn't work out.",
"Keep in mind that sometimes *barely different* is a good thing. When you have an established, recognizable brand, the last thing you want to do is make your new logo unrecognizable. \n\nInstead of looking at it as *barely changing*, look at it as *incremental change*. Comparing two sequential iterations of the Google or Windows logo seems like a small change, but comparing two a few iterations apart can be a quite drastic difference. Jumping from the first version to the last would have saved costs along the way, but most likely would have alienated a lot of people because they are suddenly unable to recognize the brand."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5hdpq6
|
britons of reddit, can someone explain the "first past the post system"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hdpq6/eli5_britons_of_reddit_can_someone_explain_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dazdchw",
"dazkure",
"dazl3ec",
"dazlmhi",
"dazn4gy",
"dazrro1",
"dazusht",
"dazxlkd",
"db08v10",
"db0kyof"
],
"score": [
158,
12,
9,
9,
5,
2,
23,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The country is divided into \"constituencies\".\n\nEach constituency elects a single representative, or MP. (Edit, as pointed out below): they do this by voting on the candidates, and the candidate with the most votes wins. The winner doesn't need a majority of votes, they just need more votes than anyone else.\n\nMost MPs represent a party (although independent candidates are allowed to stand, and occasionally win). The party with more than 50% of MPs gets to form the government.\n\nIf no party has more than 50% of MPs, the party with the most MPs gets to try to form a government by going into coalition with other parties, so that the parties in the coalition have more than 50% of the MPs between them.",
"It's the system used in the US house of representatives effectively if that helps.\n\nBut yes, other posters are correct, it's a division of the electorate into areas, called constituencies in the UK, and a series of candidates run in each area. The one with the most votes (even if it's only 20% of those who voted) wins, and represents that area in parliament.",
"I guess I'll add the corrollary: what is the \"post\" in this system? If it's just plurality voting, then it sounds like you don't have to get past any particular amount. So what's the \"post\"?",
"I know this may be a tad controversial, but I quite like the system we have, as there is an MP who represents your area in terms of national issues, and who you can go directly to.\n\nProportional representation is good, but by it's very nature it dilutes the ability of the electorate to have direct representation. However this is somewhat alleviated by the council system, at least in regard to local issues.\n\nIt's certainly not perfect by any means, but I don't think any system is.",
"It's also called simple plurality. Basically whoever gets the most votes in the contest wins 100% of the win. So if there are 10 votes and A gets 3, B gets 4, C gets 1 and D gets 2 then B wins with 40% of the vote, not a majority but a plurality.\n\nIt's a very common form of democratic contest, also used in most US states for the electoral college votes (but not all) and pretty much all other US elections. It's more common in the older Anglo nations, less common in nations with newer constitutions because it's kinda shit and obsolete because it produces a lot of really dysfunctional behaviour like spoilers, tactical voting and gerrymandering.\n\nIn the UK we have constituency FPTP which means that the overall contest is made up of hundreds of small FPTP contests for individual seats, rather than it just being a nationwide vote and whoever wins that wins 100% of the power. So whoever wins a constituency wins 100% of that constituency but whoever gets a plurality of votes nationally does not win 100% of the nation. Similar to the US Houses in that regard.\n\nThis is worth watching\n\n_URL_0_",
"It's also worth mentioning that the votes are actually made on paper, collected up and counted. The polling stations all close at the same time, although most will have ballot boxes returned to 'HQ', where ever that is for the election, throughout the day and stacked ready. Then there is a competition between some of the Returning Officers (literally, they 'return' the vote result) to be the first to get their votes counted and to announce the result. I say some because some areas don't want to race! There can be recounts if the count is close.\n\nThere are elections every year in most places because local Council members tend to be replaced in 'thirds\" over a three year cycle as well as the General Election (for Parliament) and European Elections, plus County Council elections in some places.\n\nI worked in an area where a Council member election was tied and it was decided on the flip of a coin.",
"First of all, it's debatably a poor system. It suits the 2 bigger parties (Conservative and Labour) that win, and hinders the smaller parties that don't, so makes it almost impossible to get the voting system changed as those parties in power vote against the change. Bare this in mind, will explain more later.\n\nThere are 650 'seats' in the UK elections, literally meaning the number of seats up for grabs in the Houses of Parliament. So, there are 650 areas of the UK that vote for an individual to be their area's MP (Member of Parliament). The individual with the most votes wins. That individual can stand as a representative of a specific party (Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem, Green, UKIP, SNP, DUP, Monster Raving Looney Party, etc.) or run as an independent. For example, the MP for Birmingham Yardley is Labour's Jess Phillips as she received the most votes of all the candidates standing for election in that area, called a constituency. She therefore takes 1 seat in the Houses of Parliament. \n\nThe process of separate constituencies voting for an individual to represent their area happens 650 times across the country during 1 election day, typically in May, once every 5 years. For 1 party to win outright, they must win 50% of the seats +1 (326, this figure being the 'post' in the first past the post phrase). This gives them a majority and can govern alone, as happened in 2015 when the Conservatives won. However, if a party doesn't get 50% of seats, as in 2010, the party with the most seats has the opportunity to form a government with another party. This is not necessarily with the next most voted party. The top 2 are usually Labour and Conservative, Labour being much more left wing, Conservative much further right, making a coalition here effectively impossible. \n\nFor there to be a more effective working relationship between parties, the party with the most seats try to combine their total of seats with a smaller parties total of seats to then make the magic 326 seat figure. In 2010, the Conservatives combined their 306 seats with the Lib Dems 57 seats, creating a majority, and they worked together for the next 5 years. \n\nNow, the reason the system is deemed unfair is that it disproportionately awards a high number of seats to the big parties in relation to number of votes and a disproportionally low number of seats to smaller parties. For example, the Conservatives got 330 seats from 11,000,000 votes in 2015. Whereas UKIP got 1 seat from 3,800,000 votes. This happens because the smaller parties can get a consistently solid number of votes across the country, but very rarely enough to come 1st in any given constituency. It can also be seen as unfair if a smaller party is very prevalent in a highly specific area, for example the SNP in Scotland (who only stand in Scotland and not the rest of the UK) got 59 seats from 1,500,000 votes. \n\nSigned up to answer, never had a ELI5 that I've been qualified to answer until now!\n\nEDIT: Removed opinions ",
"Not in Britain, but this [CPG Grey video](_URL_0_) is an outstanding explanation",
"_URL_0_\n\nBest video for understanding this system!\n",
"Why just Britons? The US and many other \"democratic\" countries use the same system."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&ab_channel=CGPGrey"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo"
],
[]
] |
||
b45v11
|
Did any military powers use light (most likely the reflection of it) in military tactics in an attempt to blind or burn the opposition?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/b45v11/did_any_military_powers_use_light_most_likely_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ej4e9je"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Sorry, we don't allow [\"example seeking\" questions](_URL_0_). It's not that your question was bad; it's that these kinds of questions tend to produce threads that are collections of disjointed, partial, inadequate responses. If you have a question about a specific historical event, period, or person, feel free to rewrite your question and submit it again. If you don't want to rewrite it, you might try submitting it to /r/history, /r/askhistory, or /r/tellmeafact. \n\nFor further explanation of the rule, feel free to consult [this META thread](_URL_1_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_no_.22example_seeking.22_questions",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3nub87/rules_change_throughout_history_rule_is_replaced/"
]
] |
||
1md4ht
|
quantum computers (you can explain it like i'm a dumbass 26yr old too if that suits you more.)
|
What's the difference? What's it mean? What's gonna happen to us?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1md4ht/eli5_quantum_computers_you_can_explain_it_like_im/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc83uu8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nThis video explains it fairly well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_IaVepNDT4"
]
] |
|
174ug2
|
eli: the current debate in the uk about the eu.
|
So, I should have an opinion on this since it's clearly a big issue at the moment and will likely be a big one for the next election. But I don't have any idea what it's about.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/174ug2/eli_the_current_debate_in_the_uk_about_the_eu/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c828lcs"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"[This](_URL_0_) excellent post by /u/loudribs over at /r/unitedkingdom gives a good overview of the pros and cons."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/174h2i/what_are_the_pros_and_con_s_for_leaving_europe/c825wsz"
]
] |
|
2ghbxh
|
Is there a chance to be struck by lightening in a room with window and door closed ?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2ghbxh/is_there_a_chance_to_be_struck_by_lightening_in_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckj3vjb"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Yes, but probably not in the way you think. A lightning bolt will most likely not shoot through a window, leave the wall unmolested, shoot through the air in your room and then head right towards you. Lighting is electricity and takes the path of least electrical resistance. Your walls have metal plumbing pipes and metal household electrical wires running through them that are the path of least resistance. Therefore, a lightning bolt will mostly likely touch down from air onto your roof or the outside of a wall, and then run along the wiring and plumbing towards the ground. For this reason, being inside a building is safer than being out in an open field. But, lightning bolts carry a lot of electrical current, so not all of the current is contained exactly in the pipes and wiring that it is traveling down. A lot of the current spills out, and dissipates in all directions. So if you are touching your metal sink knob right when a bolt hits your house and runs down the plumbing in the wall just behind your sink, some of current can travel through you and give you a shock. You may not be \"struck by lightning\" in the sense of lightning first touching down from air directly on you if you are in a building, but you can still be \"struck by lightning\" in the sense that some of the electrical current from the bolt travels through you as it makes its way down through the structure of the house. \n\nIn short, to stay safe from lightning when indoors, avoid touching plumbing or the water coming out of plumbing (sinks, showers, toilets) and avoid touching plugged-in electrical equipment (appliances, corded phones, charging devices)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
168iuq
|
why do people enjoy the smell of their own farts??
|
Or is it just me?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/168iuq/why_do_people_enjoy_the_smell_of_their_own_farts/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7tpe0z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's just you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5geddr
|
why was earth more subject to cosmic debris impacts billions of years ago compared to today?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5geddr/eli5_why_was_earth_more_subject_to_cosmic_debris/
|
{
"a_id": [
"darlele",
"darlgcs"
],
"score": [
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Because there was a whole lot more debris rocking around when the solar system was new. Earth and the other planets spent the better part of 4 billion years cleaning up the solar system by either smashing into things or slinging them out into orbits where they won't intersect planets.",
"Because there were a lot more cosmic debris back than, in fact Earth is a collection of cosmic debris. Over the course of billions of years Earth along with the rest of the planets in the Solar System have cleaned out the space debris adjacent to their orbits. That being said there are still billions of space rocks left in the Solar System, but since space is so big they rarely hit us."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3q307v
|
is it really true that cockroaches find humans repulsive?
|
I read on Reddit some days ago that cockroaches finds humans repulsive, dislike them, and go to wash themselves if a human touches them. How much of a truth is there to this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3q307v/eli5_is_it_really_true_that_cockroaches_find/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwblaw7",
"cwblbm4"
],
"score": [
17,
8
],
"text": [
"Cockroaches don't have the neurons required to feel revulsion, or much of anything, really. They're little machines with a bunch of hardwired responses and little to no ability to actually make decisions. That said, one of their responses is to remove foreign smells from their bodies. The oils on your finger qualify, so they try to remove them.",
"Cockroaches wash themselves all the time, when anything gets on them. They can't talk, so statements of their opinions are all made up."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2j7n9g
|
Historians, how do you feel, in general, the accuracy and completeness of wikipedia entries compares to High School history textbooks?
|
For a timely example: [Christopher Columbus](_URL_0_).
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2j7n9g/historians_how_do_you_feel_in_general_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl99pub",
"cl99twq",
"cl9f5f3",
"cl9fwgt"
],
"score": [
11,
16,
3,
10
],
"text": [
"James Loewen's *Lies My Teacher Told Me* is an indictment of the high school history textbook, including on your chosen topic of Christopher Columbus. He'd picked old textbooks and criticized them for outdated scholarship (which is one of several issues I had with his book), but apparently the situation has not improved a whole lot since then.\n\nThe problem essentially boils down to a flawed textbook writing system that is based on incremental change that only allows new scholarship to slowly percolate into the books.\n\nWikipedia pages, at least in theory, can be updated every time a new paper or book comes up.",
"It depends on the article, especially on how popular the topic is. I'd say, in general, that wikipedia articles are more complete than a typical textbook. This is due to space more than anything. A textbook can't spend 1200 words on Julius Caesar's [early career](_URL_0_) before becoming consul. But the rest of his career is pretty comparable to what you might find in a textbook.\n\nThankfully you do not have to rest on my anecdotal data. Check out this [study by Roy Rosenzweig on Wikipedia](_URL_1_). This is widely read by teachers and professors and informs many opinions on the website. He concludes that Wikipedia is just as accurate as a comparable encyclopedia, a tad less accurate than a topical encyclopedia, but more exhaustive than either. The issue is that the articles often focus on material that many academics would consider \"beside the point\" for a person looking for an overview on a topic and its importance to historians.\n\nEdit: the study is about Wikipedia, not at Wikipedia.",
"I think a big difference is Wikipedia encourages you to easily look further at subjects. That was a big part of why I went into history, and also helps the development of history as a long tapestry of interrelated events, not a series of dates to remember.",
"This is a little bit of an unfair comparison, because most high school textbooks (at least American ones) are pretty terrible, even when they try to get things right. So in areas where Wikipedia articles even have a reasonable stab towards neutrality, recent scholarship, and so forth, they automatically win, hand's down, because the textbooks are so poor. \n\nIt's also a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison because Wikipedia articles are not so limited in brevity as a high school textbook, and brevity is responsible for a lot of the worst aspects of textbooks in my view (when you cannot say much about something, and cannot provide evidence, then you end up with the kind of mealy-mouthed summaries that make textbooks boring and vague). \n\nAn example: textbook coverage of the use of the atomic bomb in my experience is limited to a brief account of the end of WWII, a brief framing of the \"decision to use the bomb,\" and then say it was used and the war ended so hurrah. Wikipedia, by comparison, has separate articles about all aspects of this matter, and even discusses the more recent (e.g. last decade or so) historiography of the bomb which has generally rejected the idea that there was a distinct \"decision\" to use the bomb and has cast doubt on whether the bombs actually were responsible for the Japanese surrender. Now, it's not impossible for a textbook to cover at least _some_ of what it does better (it could, for example, at least acknowledge that the timing of the atomic bombings and the Soviet declaration of war were identical, and the latter may have been at least as influential, if not more so, for the Japanese), but no matter what it does it is going to be a lot more limited in its coverage because it only has maybe one or two paragraphs to devote to the subject, as opposed to Wikipedia's pages and pages."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus"
] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar#Early_life_and_career",
"http://chnm.gmu.edu/essays-on-history-new-media/essays/?essayid=42"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
920cra
|
how come some animals, like kangaroos, bulls and some apes, can get so jacked buy eating almost no proteins?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/920cra/eli5_how_come_some_animals_like_kangaroos_bulls/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e323iys",
"e323qta",
"e324kmd",
"e324p61"
],
"score": [
2,
13,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"One benefit they have is that they don’t sit around staring at lasers and poking at buttons all day",
"They don't eat \"no\" proteins, but their diet consists of food with only a small amount of protein in it (grasses, etc do still have a small amount of protein)\n\nSo they eat a LOT of it. And have digestive systems (and muscles) that have evolved to extract the maximum benefit out of what they do eat. ",
"All plant cells have protein. No always a lot of it, but it's plenty if you eat all day and can break down all the fiber. Lettuce and cabbage for example have 1% protein, that means we'd have to eat 5 kg of it each day for our recommended daily intake - assuming that we can digest it all. Sounds like a lot, but grazing animals usually eat a lot more food than we do. Hay usually has somewhere around 10% protein content. Since it's dehydrated, the protein is concentrated a lot. Corn silage, a very important cattle feed, has around 5%, and usually is mixed with a bit of high protein fodder like soy, the byproducts of vegetable oil extraction or other protein rich plants.",
"Plants do actually have a considerable amount of protein in them. The limiting factor there is how it’s extracted. Humans for example, it takes us far more energy to break down plant matter than it does meat. It’s one of those arguments vegans use a lot. X plant has more protein per 100g than red meat. But neglect the fact it takes twice as much (citation needed) energy to get that protein. Digestive systems of other animals function in a way that maximises the energy input/output of consuming entirely vegetation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1r8l2n
|
What would be considered the greatest political "blunders" of U.S.'s 1st President, George Washington?
|
After seeing an earlier submission about another idealized President, JFK, I started to wonder that same question about one of the most idealized of Presidents. The founding father of the United States of America, George Washington.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1r8l2n/what_would_be_considered_the_greatest_political/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdkpdcr"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Over reliance on Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton and Washington's relationship is well known and predates his time as President but it was his over reliance on Hamilton during and after his Presidency that greatly increased political tensions, contributed to the rise of the Republican party and contributed to Adams loss in 1800. \n\nInitially Washington had leaned very heavily on James Madison, who was the most effective politician in the house, but Washington eventually turned to his cabinet largely out of constitutional reasons. His cabinet was initially a good mix of geography and political persuasion. The political arguing between Jefferson and Hamilton is known well, but initially Washington was far less biased than one would think, for instance he very nearly vetoed BOTUS I. As political tensions mounted Washington increasingly relied on Hamilton at the expense of the moderates and what would be Jeffersonians within his cabinet. For instance the negotiations between Jay and the British were run through Hamilton( the secretary of the treasury) and not state. Edmund Randolph (the secretary of state) was left almost entirely in the dark and consequently so was the ambasaddor to France, James Monroe. Jay and Hamilton's working around of the Pro-French Virginians put both Monroe and Randolph into the near impossible position of attempting to explain the Jay Treaty to their still nominal allies in France which contributed to the more famous hostilities of Adams presidency.\n\nAfter Jefferson's departure there was no remaining Republican leaning members of Washington's cabinet, only Randolph and mostly high federalists. In 1795 a letter written by Edmund Randolph to France had been seized by the British who turned it over to Alexander Hamilton, who informed Washington that it contained treasonous material to the United States. Washington, never actually read the letter nor did he have someone else read it relying solely on the opinion and word of Hamilton. He confronted Randolph in a cabinet meeting forcing him to resign. Within the 18th century society of honor, Washington's actions were highly offensive made evident by Randolph taking the unusual steps of publicly attacking Washington in his [A Vindication of Mr. Randolph's Resignation](_URL_0_) at about the same time Monroe was also removed from France. These removals meant that there was now no Republicans holding high office within the United States, and only one moderate Federalist(Lee). Jefferson and Madison in particular saw the removal of Randolph as the last straw, and any lingering sentiments towards reconciling with the Federalists was highly unlikely. Jefferson in a pained letter even wrote to Washington, telling him of how dangerous he felt Hamilton was to Washington. \n\nAdams too many problems during his presidency to get into at any length but one of the ones not of his creation was because of Washington. Adams had expanded the armed forces of the United States (either to oppose France or as some Federalists hopped to stop domestic violence ie: Republican). At this highly partisan time Adams thought that only Washington could be offered command of the army to ensure that the army held the support of all Americans. Perhaps showing the severity of the time, Washington actually accepted but refused to have anyone other than Hamilton as his second in command. Adams huffed and puffed but was left with little choice but to accept Hamilton. Hamilton was not the man to bring the nation together, especially at the head of an army one of his best friends Gouvernor Morris wrote of Hamilton\n\n\"Our poor friend Hamilton bestrode his hobby to the great annoyance of his friends, and not without injury to himself.. He well knew that his favorite form (of government) was inadmissible, unless as the result of civil war; and I suspect that his belief in that which he called an 'approaching crisis' arose from a conviction that the king of government most suitable in his opinion, to this extensive country, could established no other way\".\n\nHamilton's appointment panicked Republicans even more so, many who now openly thought that the army's purpose was to crush the Republican movement. Jefferson sent out letters to Republican leaders imploring them to avoid giving the Federalists any reason whatsoever for using the army against them. In doing so Jefferson allowed the public to arrive at their own conclusion regarding the army, which contributed to his victory in 1800. Adams had planned to appoint moderates in Pennsylvania and New York to high offices within the army (the two states he needed to win to secure his election) but Hamilton ensured that only high federalists and no Republicans were appointed to command, again reinforcing the Jeffersonian fear. It was at this point that Adams realized he had lost complete control of the Federalist party and he attempted to reassert his authority through sacking his cabinet(minus Lee) and negotiations with France, causing a civil war within the party.\n\nHad Washington continued to rely on moderate Republicans like Madison and appointed a bi-partisan cabinet much of the political infighting that resulted in the two party system could have been lessened or delayed.\n\noutside of that I'm not sure what else you can really hold Washington accountable for major political mistakes. Ellis in *American Creation* holds the entirety of the founding generation responsible for failing to find a solution for the natives and slavery. However Ellis notes in the book (for the Creek confederacy for instance) the Federal government held few tools on hand to deal with many of the issues affecting the Creek. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://books.google.com/books?id=JzZcAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Edmund+Randolph#v=onepage&q&f=false"
]
] |
|
908pcg
|
how can video games produce sounds from specific areas in the game?
|
I.e. when you're playing Call of Duty and you hear gunshots how is it possible for the game to emit the noise in a way where you can figure out where it came from instead of just hearing gunshots?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/908pcg/eli5_how_can_video_games_produce_sounds_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e2ok5hs",
"e2onx31",
"e2ox22r",
"e2p3k4p",
"e2pe313"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Science.meme\n\nBut seriously, it’s all in just using the right balance between left and right to mimic what he hear and how we perceive direction in real life. We experience the sounds we hear all the time in stereo (i.e. out of each of our 2 ears), so it’s *relatively* straightforward to create this same effect by splitting the sounds just right between 2 (or more, but a minimum of 2) speakers. \n\nYou can confirm by playing one of these games with headphones on backwards. It’s pretty trippy, to be honest. ",
"humans have 2 ears, TV's have 2 (or sometimes more) speakers. Our brains use differences between what each of our 2 ears hear to determine where an object is in real space. That's why objects echoing fuck up where we think a sound is coming from. \n\nTVs do the same thing with their stereo speakers. They use the left and right channel to make sounds that come from the left or the right. But manufacturers are even smarter than that and they can mimic how a sound from behind you sounds kind of muffled vs something in front. So it just mimics that. Or if you have a \"surround sound\" system or headphones it can use actual speakers located in front or behind you to make sounds come from there. ",
"You need at least two speakers in order to achieve directional sound. Sounds can be panned from left to right, depending on where the sound source is located (data that the game engine has easy access to). If your sound equipment has additional speakers, those can also be used to produce sound coming from a certain direction.\n\nPsychoacoustics is the study of sound traveling through your body to your ears. The shape of your ears determines how sounds might be heard when coming from other directions. Slight changes to the sound can make it seem like the sound is coming from above, below, or behind, while still using one speaker per ear. Sound can also pass through your body instead of through air, so a voice can be made to sound like your own character's by increasing the bass tones and other frequencies that would travel through your flesh and bones (sounds you can't hear from other people unless they were in intimate contact).\n\nSound can also be shaped by the environment. The hard walls of a cave or masonry building can add reverb (the same sound being heard in quick succession), allowing you to tell whether a sound is coming from inside the same room. Distant mountains or buildings can create echoes, allowing you to tell that the sound came from outdoors.\n\nDifferent frequencies of sound travel through air in different ways and have different effects. Bass sounds can travel for great distances, but can be overpowered by other sounds. Treble sounds are often absorbed by materials, and so can indicate that a sound came from nearby.\n\nSome newer games like *Rainbow 6 Siege* try to model how sounds travel through a building, bass sounds traveling easily through walls and floors/ceilings, while treble sounds travel through air. Different parts of the sound may take different paths to the player.",
"Let's start with a simple example. We'll generate a pure tone that's somewhere out in front of you (and your simplified-for-the-sake-of-argument omnidirectional ears).\n\nThe time it takes that tone to reach your left and right ears will be slightly different because the distance it travels will be slightly different.\n\nThis has two effects:\n\nAttenuation. The volume of a sound declines as the reciprocal of range. So while the original sound is a single volume, your ears are hearing it at slightly different volumes.\n\nTime delay (phase discrepancy). Sound is transmitted in waves. The slightly greater/lower distance means that the wave 'starts' at a different place for your two ears. This phase discrepancy also clues us in where a sound is coming from.\n\nOnce you start to add complexity, you start to get a lot more information.\n\nFor example, if our ears are cardoid instead of omnidirectional, the attenuation varies with the angle of arrival but the phase discrepancy does not.\n\nDifferent materials (and width of materials) reflect and absorb sound in different ways (in general, low frequencies penetrate while high frequencies reflect). Your actual ears evolved the way they did to create differential reflections and allow you to use two receivers to fix a point in 3-dimensional space.\n\nYou also end up with constructive/destructive interference effects which can be incredibly helpful when you're tracking sound from moving sources/receivers over time.\n\nThat being said, the people who design sound effects for video games generally aren't the type of people with the mathematical background to design sonar arrays. Instead, they start with sampled sounds and toss a bunch of canned signal processing tools until it sounds right to them.",
"There are two main ways to produce directional sound and positional audio. The theory for each is more or less the same in both stereo speaker configurations and surround sound configurations.\n\nThe first method is called *amplitude positioning* and is by far the simpler and less computationally intensive of the two. In amplitude positioning, a single sequence of audio samples, such as a voice or gunshot, is played back in each of the speakers at different volumes.\n\nAmplitude positioning on a stereo speaker configuration allows for reasonable positioning across one dimension (left/right). positioning across a surround sound setup allows for positioning across two dimensions.\n\nThe second method is called *head related transfer function*, or HRTF, and is much more computationally complex. HRTFs adjust the pitch, delay, and amplitude (volume) of sounds in order to position them in 3D space.\n\nAlthough surround sound speaker configurations still provide the best positioning, HRTFs can provide excellent and highly accurate positioning on stereo speakers as well. Many \"virtual 7.1\" headsets are in fact stereo headphones with a digital signal processor that uses a set of HRTFs to convert a 7.1 audio signal into a 2.0 audio signal.\n\nRunning HRTFs in real time is computationally complex and thus demanding of CPU resources, so many sound cards provide hardware acceleration for doing so. Reverberation and other sound processing techniques are often supported in hardware as well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8ylwcs
|
what does the wow! alien signal mean? the image is just a bunch of numbers and letters so what is the significance of those specific letters?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ylwcs/eli5_what_does_the_wow_alien_signal_mean_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e2bvima",
"e2cdyv2"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"[Here is a better visualization of the WOW signal](_URL_0_)\n\nBasically those numbers and letters are a printout of raw data because you can fit more datapoints on a printed sheet of paper this way. The numbers go up and then into the alphabet to represent the strength of a signal. \n\nAs you saw on the printout, the norm was nothing and maybe 1's 2's and 3's. Suddenly you get a 7, and then start seeing letters! Not just one, but a sustained 70 second signal. That was something of note. ",
"Thanks everyone this has been very enlightening!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Wow_signal_profile.svg/390px-Wow_signal_profile.svg.png"
],
[]
] |
||
2l1vlx
|
how does the chinese economy work/differs from the rest of the world.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2l1vlx/eli5_how_does_the_chinese_economy_workdiffers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clqrqq9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Its basically American capitalism with loose or non-existent civil rights laws (child labor, unequal wages and hours ) and the government can own and compete in business. Imagine if the US government decided to start building super cheap economy cars, built with unpaid slave labor provided by the prison system and super ultra subsidized by itself, and than sold those cars with huge tax incentives to the customer within America in direct competition with American manufacturers. Substitute analogous industry with any alternative you like. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
s099a
|
why do non-hearing people sound "that way" when they speak?
|
Not trying to come off as a jerk, but why do many non-hearing people speak with a noticeable nasal quality in their voice when they speak?
I guess I would be referring to those that have never been hearing or who perhaps lost their hearing at a very early age, as opposed to a hearing adult who lost their hearing later in life.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/s099a/eli5_why_do_nonhearing_people_sound_that_way_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4a1srr",
"c4a1su3",
"c4a2xsx"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"I would assume it's because they have never heard the language spoken before and this leads to an accent based, not on the sound of it, but based on the movements of the mouth to create the sounds. ",
"They can see how lips move, but they can't see how throat, tongue, windpipe, etc move. Observing mouth movement is not enough to recreate all the sounds, you need to be able to hear it in order to accurately replicate what others are saying. Not to mention you can't get the tone or pacing correctly either by just looking at mouth movement. In addition some of them can't hear their own voice either, which makes it even harder to know if they pronounce something correctly or not. ",
"Constantly while you speak, you hear your own voice and you correct the placement of your tongue and lips to tailor the sounds coming out so it sounds like you think it should and how everyone else sounds, too.\n\nWhen a deaf person is speaking, they don't get to hear much or anything of the sound they are making - maybe only feel the vibrations in their skull from the sound, but that's it. So they've learned to put their tongues and lips in pretty much the same position, but they don't have the same kind of feedback to help them tailor it into the specific sounds we take for granted."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
26yhzu
|
why do road workers cut strips out of the interstate and refill them?
|
I live in WV, and I64 is absolutely terrible when it comes to potholes. However, I've noticed that when they actually get filled, the workers don't just patch them, they also take several horizontal strips out of either one lane or the entire road. Why do they do this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26yhzu/eli5_why_do_road_workers_cut_strips_out_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chvo4zr"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Potholes are partially caused by the stuff under the road settling and no longer supporting it. They need to cut out the road and repair the road bed or else the problem will just come back.\n\nA freeway isn't just a strip of concrete, they have to dig out the ground and provide a stable foundation when building it. Just putting blacktop on a pothole is like putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7bypun
|
Does anyone know a good read on snipers in WWII?
|
I am writing a research paper on snipers in WWII for my history class. I was interested if anyone knew any good books or web articles I could reference.
I was hoping to learn about how Soviet, American, and German sniper units operated, and how they could have changed strategy throughout the war.
Also, I am doing an engineering perspective and comparison on the design of snipers during the war, such as the Mauser Kar98k, or the Springfield '03. This will be a majority of the paper.
Any references you might know that I could use would be greatly appreciated!
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7bypun/does_anyone_know_a_good_read_on_snipers_in_wwii/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpm0hf9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Karabiner 98k by Karem and Steves is a great resource for K98k snipers, particularly Volume IIa. There are currently 3 volumes, Volume 1 covers pre-war (banner model, standard modell, etc) to 1938 rifles at Mauser-Oberndorf, JP Sauer, Mauser-Borsigwalde, Ermawerke, Berlin Lubecker, and BSW. Volume 2 covers wartime production, and Volume 3 covers the Kriegsmodell. 2A specifically has a lot of info regarding sniper rifle development at Mauser-Oberndorf, specifically the ZF-39 (low and high turret), the ZF-41, and the Jung Prismatic Optics prototypes. The 3 book set is an excellent resource for the history and engineering of the German K98k. The only downside to the books is that they are pretty pricey, at $345 for the 4 book set (Volume 2 is so large that they had to split it into 2 volumes). \nLink: _URL_1_ \nThe only other \"WW2 German Sniper\" book I know about is Backbone of the Wehrmacht Vol 2. \nLink: _URL_0_ \nI personally do not own volume 2 (I own volume 1), but it seems to be a decent source on the rifles. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.amazon.com/Backbone-Wehrmacht-Vol-II-Variations/dp/0889352224",
"http://www.thirdpartypress.com/category-s/1632.htm"
]
] |
|
42xszv
|
Iroquois vs. Haudenosaunee
|
As a child I learned about our local Native Americans, the Iroquois. However, recently I've heard the term "Iroquois" may be considered offensive because it means something rude in Algonquin. Would it be more correct then to refer not to the Iroquois but to the Haudenosaunee, as this is the league of six nations they created?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/42xszv/iroquois_vs_haudenosaunee/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czdwkdb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The exact etymology of \"Iroquois\" is debatable, and there are plenty of Iroquoian people who use it and related terms for various purposes. If you're talking about an individual person, it's best to go with their specific nation. Joseph Brant is Mohawk (or *Kanien'kehá:ka* if you're feeling particularly ambitious). Haudenosaunee is the accepted English variation for the name of the confederacy itself, based on the Mohawk name (*Rotinonshonni*). As such, it's reserved of usage for the political entity or its citizens as a whole. Joseph Brant was a defender of *the* Haudenosaunee, but he was not *a* Haudenosaunee.\n\nIroquois is used more generically, to refer to people culturally but often outside the context of the Haudenosaunee as a political entity. After the revolution, Joseph Brant led many Iroquois refugees to Ontario and helped found the Six Nations of Grand River (now home to the Iroquois Nationals lacrosse team) as one of the successors to the Haudenosaunee. In the derivative form \"Iroquian\" is extends to cover culturally and linguistically related peoples including the Wendat (Huron), the Chonnonton (Neutral), and the Cherokee. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2xh2ow
|
How did the various Viking colonizers of parts of Britain react to different forms of Paganism in the areas they commanded?
|
First of all apologies if using the term Viking is considered bad here as I know obviously that isn't the actual name for the people but more of a generalization of the Nordic people who left their countries to raid and plunder.
I just wondered that in the areas that they held dominion over, say parts of Ireland and Scotland. What was the Norse peoples reaction to the fact that they had a different form of Paganism? Was it looked down on as bad how Christians looked down upon Vikings or were they cohesively allowed to live on without trouble?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2xh2ow/how_did_the_various_viking_colonizers_of_parts_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cp01g11"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"They didn't react to them, because as far as we can tell, there were no surviving population groups practising pre-Christian religions in the British Isles when the Vikings first began making incursions in 793. Ireland and Scotland had fully Christianised over the course of the fifth to seventh centuries and developed pervasive Christian identities of their own right -- especially so in Ireland, where sharing religion and language across the many hundreds of small states across the island facilitated a degree of common ethnic consciousness that made Norse settlers initially quite unwelcome. When the Vikings began appearing at the end of the eighth century, there were no pagans left in the British Isles, or at least any remaining communities were small enough to escape documentation and to leave no trace in the archaeolgical record.\n\nIf you're interested in how Scandinavian pagans interacted with other polytheistic communities, it might be smart to direct your inquiries into their early voyages into Eastern Europe, especially the Kievan Rus. I haven't studied that part of the world to the extent I've studied Ireland (and to a lesser extent, Scotland), so I can't speak with any authority there, nor can I recommend you any texts.\n\nSources: Stefan Brink and Neil Price (eds.), *The Viking World*, various articles\n\nJ. H. Barrett (ed.), *Contact, Continuity and Collapse: The Norse Colonisation of the North Atlantic*, various aritcles\n\nClare Downham, *Viking Kings of Britain and Ireland: The Dynasty of Ivarr*"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2heab8
|
what does a magnetic polar reversal mean for everyday life?
|
What will happen to life as we know it if this occurs, say, in 3 years? Will it be immediate? If it isn't, will there be immediate consequences? Would we even know besides having a scientist say "it happened"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2heab8/eli5_what_does_a_magnetic_polar_reversal_mean_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckrxjfc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The poles don't actually switch like flipping around. One or both weaken, then wander. During the weak time, the Earth is bathed in radiation that a strong field prevents. Time to go underground."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2rywbs
|
if i find an undiscovered island in international waters, is it mine?
|
What exactly would be its legal status?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rywbs/eli5_if_i_find_an_undiscovered_island_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnkji3f",
"cnkjkyg",
"cnkjlux",
"cnkjm9w",
"cnkjn0r"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I imagine you could make a claim assuming it is in international waters. ",
"follow up question, is that even possible with all the satellites we have?",
"Essentially, on the scale of nations, there's not really legal rules exactly. Its more like, if you can convince everyone that it is yours, then it's yours.\n\nFor my money, I would instead make a deal with the US or your large power of choice. \"Let me own this whole island, and I'll be part of your country.\" The odds of the international community recognizing the US's claim on an undiscovered island is way better than them recognizing yours.",
"If you claim it and no other state disputes your claim then congratulations it is yours. You aren't a state yet though unless other states recognize that you are a state and don't try to use their authority over you. ",
"You could theoretically claim it. However, the chance of finding one would be almost nonexistent as countries will always be looking for islands at sea. Why? Not because of the land itself but due to the economic exclusion zone that grants the country exclusive resource exploitation rights within a 200 nautical mile radius."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1ucez7
|
how do music editing programs change the pitch without changing the speed?
|
I have no clue how this works. From a physics standpoint, the speed of the song should change with the change in pitch, but programs like Audacity and Adobe Audition can change the pitch without changing the speed of the song, and vice versa. How does it do that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ucez7/eli5_how_do_music_editing_programs_change_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cegmvy7",
"cego04l"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Sound can be converted between \"time domain\" and \"frequency domain\" using Fourier transform (sort of a spectrum analyzer). So you can convert the sound to frequencies, do modifications there (for example shift frequencies) and convert back to time domain, and you get pitch shift without speed change. In practice doing this is very time consuming, so it's done in small blocks and quality will not be perfect.",
"You take the audio signal and extract a set of parameters from it (usually it's a fourier transform but other methods exist). This set of parameters help 'describe' the song (if it's a fourier transform each number you get tells you how much of each pitch you have), so you can then use them in a mathematical formula to recreate the original sound (though there tends to be some distortion so you don't get exactly the same thing as the original).\n\nThese parameters are extracted from a set of 'windows' of the song (very small segments of the sound, as the sounds change through time so you want only a small section of the song each time so it changes as little as possible). Also, windows are sometimes overlapped to help with recreating the original sound as close as possible.\n\nNow, the value you get is not for a single pitch but for a group of pitches. Here we have a compromise, you can either get a very detailed map or a small window. Each will have an effect on what you get back, so a decent middle point needs to be found, be it from information you already know (this changes relatevely fast/slowly) or trial and error.\n\n\nTo change only pitch you just change this values (shift them by the amount of pitch you want to change, so the amount you had of one pitch is now the amout you have at the new pitch) and run them through the formula to get a new pitched sound.\n\nIf you want to change the speed without changing pitch you can make each window larger or shorter when recreating the sound or delete / duplicate windows to reach the wanted lenght. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3achmo
|
Is the total mass of oxygen atoms greater in the ocean or in the air?
|
Include the maths/moles if possible as well
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3achmo/is_the_total_mass_of_oxygen_atoms_greater_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csbtko5",
"csbto6z",
"csc3shy"
],
"score": [
6,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Oxygen is about 23.20% of the atmosphere by mass, and the atmosphere has a total mass of about 5 x 10^(18) kg. So the atmosphere contains about 1.16 x 10^(18) kg of oxygen.\n\nOxygen is about 88.89% (16/18) of water by mass, and the oceans have an approximate mass of 1.35 x 10^(21) kg. So the oceans contain about 1.2 x 10^(21) kg.\n\nIn other words, the oceans contain roughly 1000 times more oxygen than the atmosphere does, by mass.",
"Just using some quick values from Wikipedia:\n\nMass of Earth's oceans: 1.35x10^21 kg\n\n[Percent oxygen by mass](_URL_1_): 85.84%\n\nMultiply these values to get 1.2x10^21 kg of oxygen in the oceans.\n\nFor the atmosphere, oxygen is contained in O2, H2O, CO2, and some other minor gases such as O3, N2O, etc. For the purposes of estimation, we will neglect all of these except for O2, [which comprises](_URL_0_) about 21% of the atmosphere by volume. We will assume air is an ideal gas, so fraction by volume is equivalent to fraction by moles. The total mass of the atmosphere is 5.15x10^18 kg; multiplying these values we get 1.1x10^18 kg of oxygen in the atmosphere.\n\nSo there is more oxygen in the oceans, by about a factor of 1000.",
"The pressure of the atmosphere is equal to the pressure of 10m water. The average depth of oceans is more than 4km, and if there was no land the average depth of oceans would be around 2.5 km. So a rough estimation is that the mass of oceans is 250x that of the atmosphere.\n\n~~Water~~ *EDIT: Oxygen* is almost 90% of water by mass, and only around 25% of the atmosphere. There is no comparison, oxygen in oceans is 1000 more than oxygen in the atmosphere."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth#Composition",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawater#Compositional_differences_from_freshwater"
],
[]
] |
|
5h84ex
|
All this talk about humans on Mars someday. How will that be possible with such extreme cold temperatures on Mars?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/5h84ex/all_this_talk_about_humans_on_mars_someday_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"daz4cg9",
"db1yy4o"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Well, the temperature isn't even the biggest problem. Radiation and (lack of) pressure are at least as problematic. All of these limit the extent of extravehicular surface activities feasible to humans. We do need heated, insulated pressure suits on Mars, but they can be quite a bit more lightweight and less clumsy than the spacesuits used on the Moon and in orbit.",
"I find this an odd question. It applies equally well to living in Reykjavik, Chicago, or Moscow. Humans will, of course, live in heated and insulated habitats or wear protective clothing and gear to protect them from the natural cold.\n\nConsider how many people on Earth live lives that would not be possible or practical without modern technology. People who earn their living based on technologies that didn't exist 10, 20, 50, or 100 years ago. People who live in places at population levels that would be untenable without modern buildings, heating or cooling, long distance water transport and irrigation, long distance food transport, and so on. In the US 3/4 of workers drive alone to work, and nearly half of all commutes are farther than 10 miles in one direction. A ubiquitous lifestyle made possible by the advancement in automobile development and manufacturing. Today cars are common and relatively inexpensive but only a century ago they were incredibly rare and costly. From the perspective of 1916 or even more so 1891 (125 years ago) the world of today or even the 1950s and its extensive reliance on the automobile is one that seems unnatural and difficult to comprehend. Just as folks in the 1980s would find our modern dependence on computers and the internet seemingly baffling and troubling.\n\nFor people who are unfamiliar with it relying on new technology is like walking on thin ice. You have no confidence in it and you will have fear that it will fail spectacularly at any moment leaving you without it or worse off than before. It's only after extensive experience with a technology and finding out its limitations as well as its strengths that it becomes easier to rely on. People have come to rely on automobiles and the internet because they've both consistently delivered. Every single year in America the automobiles there drive over a trillion cumulative miles, and have been doing so since the 1970s. That experience tells you more than enough about the reliability and dependability of the automobile as a part of the US socio-industrial infrastructure. Similarly, an unimaginable amount of network traffic is constantly being handled by the internet and trillions of dollars in business is happening through or on the internet.\n\nToday we see the technology of spaceflight and space colonization as outside our bubble of familiarity. As experimental, as potentially unreliably, as risky to rely on. And for now to some degree it is. But over time we will improve that technology, scale up our manufacturing of it, and scale up its use. Just as happened with the automobile, the telephone, the internet, nitrate fertilizers, artificial irrigation, green houses, transcontinental shipping, and so many other technological wonders that our modern world relies on. And over time the measurements corresponding to usage of those technologies (liters of water recycled, cubic meters of habitable volume manufactured, kilograms of CO2 scrubbed) will grow exponentially, to thousands, millions, billions, perhaps trillions. And over time those technologies that are an essential part of space colonization but not, currently, essential to life on Earth will move inside the bubble of familiarity.\n\nMillions of people will live off Earth, and their lives will depend on different technologies and different infrastructure than ours just as ours depends on different things than those living a hundred or a thousand years ago on Earth. But for them it will be normal. They will have developed the technologies to sufficient levels of reliability and performance to depend on them comfortably. For them it will just be the normal way of life."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2ep6o3
|
why do apples make me hungrier?
|
I don't know if it's something that developed at a specific point in my life, but I noticed in about the 8th grade that every time I eat an apple, I feel way hungrier. If I eat an apple as a snack on an empty stomach, then I HAVE to eat a ton of food. If I eat an apple at the end of a meal, then I'm probably not going to be done eating.
This doesn't really ever happen to me with any other food. I don't feel it with any other fruit, even other kind of similar ones like peaches, plums, nectarines, etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ep6o3/eli5_why_do_apples_make_me_hungrier/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck1mhos"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The problem with apples is that they are purely carbs and nothing else, and carbs will always leave you with that \"empty\" feeling. Granted, they have a lot of health benefits, are highly nutritious, and I definitely eat them all the time. However, foods that contain fats and proteins are the ones that make us feel full. What you need to do, and what I do, is eat the apple with a couple of almonds or a piece of low calorie string cheese. That way you are getting a good mix of carbs, fats, and proteins as part of a healthy snack that will leave you feeling full for quite some time. Hope this helps! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6g7wor
|
Why is there a dotted image on the side of public bus windows?
|
[deleted]
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6g7wor/why_is_there_a_dotted_image_on_the_side_of_public/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dip84sj"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"It's called frit. Has a number of purposes- it's ceramic based paint that helps the adhesive bond to the window in the mount. It also minimizes UV reducing its ability to break down the sealant. \n\nAnd, I've heard they think it makes a car more appealing- so you don't go from black window gasket to window- it's a slow transition. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4zgu02
|
how does private individual buy stocks offline/online? and how does the process work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zgu02/eli5_how_does_private_individual_buy_stocks/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6vphr8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"\"private individuals\" don't really buy stocks, you need to go through a broker. You place an order with one of a thousand or more investment houses/companies that you have made an account with, the company then goes through the process of buying you that stock through their electronic systems. It takes only milliseconds for a transaction to occur."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6kfnbt
|
According to a History Channel documentry, during the Vietnam war, US ground troops would face 240 days of combat a year, versus 11 days of combat a year during WW2. Is this claim true?
|
On average per soldier, that is.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6kfnbt/according_to_a_history_channel_documentry_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djlxf31"
],
"score": [
64
],
"text": [
"I just recently [made a post](_URL_0_) concerning the psychological effects of long-term frontline service in the U.S. Army during WWII.\n\n > Being assigned to the Infantry branch (as roughly half of all men entering the Army were in mid-1944) was an assignment fraught with danger;\n\nDeployed overseas|Total battle casualties|*Deaths among battle casualties*|*KIA*|*DOW*|*Died while MIA*|*Died while POW*|WIA|MIA|POW\n:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--\n757,712|661,059|*142,962*|*117,641*|*19,613*|*1,795*|*3,913*|471,376|15,830|56,212\n\n > There was no such thing as a \"tour of duty\" for U.S. soldiers during WWII; those on the front lines saw service until they were killed, wounded, taken prisoner, disabled, or otherwise too mentally broken to continue. It was estimated that a soldier began to lose his effectiveness after about 90 combat days (American troops were often on the front lines for as long as two months without a visit to a rear area rest center; the British had a policy of allowing four days of rest for every twelve days of combat) and was completely ineffective after 200-240 combat days. After 180 combat days, less than three percent of the original men in a unit remained, the rest lost to various causes. Neuropsychiatric casualties accounted for 15 to 25 percent of all non-battle losses (the Army hospitalized about 900,000 men for neuropsychiatric reasons during the war, a number Eisenhower demanded not be released to the press) and it was estimated that for every ten days of combat, three to ten percent of men in a unit became neuropsychiatric casualties. The \"rate of replacement\" for men varied wildly; many were killed nearly immediately, while others made it through the entire war without suffering any bodily harm whatsoever. \n\n > Men who showed particular aptitude for certain tasks were often sent back to the United States on temporary duty to attend specialist schools; they then returned to their units. Week-long passes were often offered to rear areas such as London or Paris. Combat veterans who had been made unsuitable for frontline service through wounds or other causes were often assigned to apply their expertise in training new soldiers at replacement training centers stateside. \n\n > In early 1945, to improve the morale of replacements (by now called \"reinforcements\"), General Joseph Stilwell proposed that they be pre-designated for assignment to certain units while still in the United States, and shipped in groups. Four men would form a squad, four squads a platoon, and four platoons a company. Companies and platoons would be broken up as needed, but the basic unit of four men would always remain intact. The plan was begrudgingly adopted by theater authorities in Europe in March 1945, and it is not possible to tell how effective it was since it only operated for a short time. The Surgeon General of the United States proposed that soldiers be given a six-month non-combat furlough after 200 to 240 days and have the option of serving it in the United States. \n\n > Before the invasion of Japan, it was proposed that infantry divisions be augmented with a fourth regiment (many being the \"orphan\" regiments detached from divisions when they moved from a \"square\" to \"triangular\" structure in 1940) so that one could be shifted completely out of the combat zone, as well as a policy that soldiers only serve 120 combat days before a substantial rest. As Japan surrendered, this was never implemented. A proposal was also made to rotate divisions completely out of the front line to rear areas, something done in the German *Heer*.\n\n > The replacement system in the *Heer* operated differently than in the U.S. Army, and it can be argued that there was an effect on morale. Divisions in the German Army were raised in certain geographic areas (not dissimilar to U.S. National Guard units) known as *wehrkreise* and men were assigned to divisional replacement units and took their training together, shipping to the front in groups, where they received more training before being assigned to their unit. The U.S. replacement system was rather impersonal. Men from all over the country (remember that the United States is massive; Germany is only about the size of Montana) were shipped to replacement training centers to receive instruction, and then shipped overseas to wherever they were needed, be it Europe or the Pacific. A port of embarkation (many replacements were assigned to augment divisions less than a month before they shipped out; the only significant small-unit training these men received would be combat) gave way to a trans-Atlantic or -Pacific voyage, intermediate and then field army replacement depots, replacement battalions, and then final units, each step of the way another obstacle to unit cohesion. Men often arrived scared and isolated, having little, if any, training upkeep offered along the way.\n\n > **Sources:** \n\n > * Atkinson, Rick. *The Guns at Last Light: The War in Western Europe 1944-1945*. New York: Picador, 2013.\n\n > * Ruppenthal, Roland G. *United States Army in World War II, European Theater of Operations, Logistical Support of the Armies Volume II: September 1944-May 1945*. Washington: United States Army Center of Military History, 1959.\n\n > * United States. United States Army Adjutant General's Corps. *Army Battle Casualties\nand Nonbattle Deaths in World War II Final Report, 7 December 1941-31 December 1946*. Washington: Statistical and Accounting Branch, Office of the Adjutant General, 1953.\n\n > * United States, United States Army Medical Department. *Neuropsychiatry in World War II Volume I, Zone of Interior*. Washington: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, 1973.\n\n > * United States, War Department, *Army Ground Forces Historical Study No. 7: The Provision of Enlisted Replacements*. Washington: Army Ground Forces Historical Section, 1946.\n\nThis is a very interesting claim that is supposed to have originated in a speech given by Army general Barry McCaffrey to Vietnam War veterans at the Vietnam War Veterans' Memorial in 1993. Was raw data collected from a sample of a large enough number of men to form a representative conclusion, or an assertion made based on interviews with just a few veterans? The method of data collection is thus unknown, and calls the results into question. The possible decision to include rear-echelon service troops in the World War II situation and not the Vietnam War one (as that average appears *very* high in comparison) makes the average significantly smaller; frontline infantrymen in the ETO were routinely in the line for as long as 30 days (and sometimes up to 60 or 90 days) at a time without relief, and never truly left as divisions were not moved completely to the rear (\"in reserve\" often meant only a mile or two from the front) except in extraordinary circumstances. In the Pacific it might have been a little different, as the number of pitched battles (i.e. Kwajalein or Saipan) were relatively spaced out and divisions were often moved back to Hawaii or Australia for several months of rest and refit. What criteria were used to obtain a definition of what \"combat\" was, and were they applied relatively equally in both scenarios?\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6kcw4y/how_often_were_soldiers_in_the_us_army_during_ww2/djl510s/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=user&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=frontpage"
]
] |
|
3pin59
|
Did the Byzantines ever consider building a 'Great Wall' of their own to repel the Arabs and Turks?
|
While reading through the recent forum about the Great Wall of China I saw a few parallels between China's dilemma contending with the Mongols and The Byzantine struggle against similar foes in the Arabs and Turks. China chose a to put up a big wall which despite some limitations did offer some decisive advantages such as control of the battlefield and early warnings. What I want to know is did the Byzantines consider the advantages of long fortifications on its eastern borders? Were there any Byzantine 'Great Wall' projects in planning or put into practice?
I wouldn't be surprised if Byzantium was well acquainted with concept since they had a historical precedent with the Roman walls, they had diplomatic and trade relations with China and may have had knowledge of the Great Wall and had already proved themselves accomplished wall builders after putting up the Theodosian Walls.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3pin59/did_the_byzantines_ever_consider_building_a_great/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw6va8o"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"The situation for the Byzantines was very different.\n\nIn the cases of the Romans versus the Picts/Germans/other peoples, or the Chinese versus the various nomadic peoples to their north, you have a big, strong, rich, centralised empire that has to deal with endemic raiding from less organised but mobile and elusive enemies. These states have resources to throw at the problem (though not infinite ones) and have border control as their main priority.\n\nThe Byzantines, on the other hand, were a regional power sitting right next to, depending on the timeframe, far greater world-class empires. \n\nSure, the Arabs would raid Byzantine territory year after year in the 7th and 8th century. But it was a different kind of raid: the Byzantine problem wasn't finding the raiders and delaying them until overwhelming force could be brought to bear against them. They didn't have overwhelming force. The Caliphate was much bigger and stronger. The Byzantine priority was survival and minimising the damage they suffered.\n\nThey were never in a position to expend the massive resources it would take to create giant walls. At times their enemies were weaker and divided, but that usually prompted the Byzantines to try and re-take their lost territory rather than construct big static defences. \n\nThat said, in the Balkans they did construct the [Long Walls of Thrace](_URL_0_) in the 5th century, a 56 kilometer stretch of wall west of Constantinople, protecting its peninsula from the Black Sea to the Sea of Marmara. These defences don't seem to have been very effective."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://mybyzantine.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/anastasian-walls.pdf"
]
] |
|
271aue
|
why does america mostly use traffic lights at intersections when europe uses a lot of traffic circles? what are the benefits to either?
|
My university recently removed a traffic circle in favor of traffic lights. It probably cost a bunch of money because they had to rebuild to whole intersection so it was a traffic light instead of a circle.
What are the benefits to either? Why would they change something that seemingly worked in favor of something that takes twice as long to get through.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/271aue/eli5_why_does_america_mostly_use_traffic_lights/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chwfhvi",
"chwftrx",
"chwfw93",
"chwg4to",
"chwggzi",
"chwk1uf",
"chwpwmq",
"chws3f7"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
19,
7,
2,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Roundabouts have a lot less points of intersection/wreck opportunities as well. And the results show they are far more safe",
"_URL_0_\n\n\nThe Mythbusters answer this. Something to do with Roundabouts being able to have more cars in them at once. \n\n\n*Edit - added synopsis of video.",
"A roundabout (or traffic circle) can usually handle a greater volume of traffic. It's relatively rare, at least outside of the rush hour, for traffic to come to a complete standstill, which is the case with traffic lights. However, roundabouts do force traffic to slow down: at traffic lights, drivers may be tempted to speed through a green light, but at a roundabout you have to slow down. So you have this twin benefit of traffic that slows down (which is safer) but flows more smoothly (which is quicker). Also, while at a standard intersection you have to watch for traffic coming from several different directions, at a roundabout you only need to worry about traffic coming from one direction (from the left in countries that drive on the right, and vice versa).\n\nBut there are downsides. First of all, if you have an intersection where lots of pedestrians are likely to be milling around, traffic lights can be programmed to allow pedestrians to cross safely. This isn't possible with roundabouts, where foot bridges or foot tunnels become necessary unless you want to put in crossings on every road just before the roundabout, completely negating most of the advantages. Also, roundabouts can actually become choked at times, and while traffic lights can be programmed to take account of this, roundabouts can't be regulated in this way. Roundabouts also need more space, especially where large trucks and other vehicles have to use them.",
"In general, I like roundabouts, they are a great solution to many residential and medium roads. They allow the roads to intersect without causing too many hold ups. Traffic lights allow bigger roads to be feasible but are still a pain because once you get lots of traffic people have to wait no matter what the solution. \n\nRoundabouts:\n\nUpsides: Constant traffic flow, self-regulating, cheap, generally good on small-medium sized roads, reduces accidents/high speed accidents, multiple directions can be in the roundabout at any one time (depends on size)\nDownsides: Have to slow down considerably to negotiate, bad for slightly mismatched road ends (sometimes a 'kidney' roundabout is used which really slows down traffic), bad if one traffic flow direction is very dominant and stops traffic flow in the other direction, usually bad in large intersections due to visibility/multiple lanes, inhibit bus/truck flow\n\n\n\nTraffic lights:\n\nUpsides: Lets all directions have a go, if green allows continuous flow, allows multiple lanes with ease, can handle slightly offset roads and poor visibility, good for large roads, night cycles can allow good flow even at night if well programmed, creates construction work/jobs\n\nDownsides: Stops traffic completely, long waits, often causes traffic jams, only one direction/line at a time, expensive, increase in accidents/high speed accidents\n\n\nBonus! Ramps:\n\nUpsides: Free-flowing traffic on large roads/highways!\n\nDownsides: Expensive :(\n",
"Roundabouts are safer but cause more accidents at a much slower speed.",
"I'm not sure this is necessarily true for all of Europe, but here in Britain we don't have as many four way intersections as you do in the States. A lot of our intersections are meeting points of three, five, six or more roads, so roundabouts seem a more obvious choice. As for whether either is more efficient than the other, I'm not sure. A quite major junction near to where I live was recently replaced with traffic lights (it used to be a roundabout) and, ignoring all the commotion caused by the construction work, the new traffic light system seems incredibly less efficient than what used to exist.\n\nHowever, some of our roundabouts (particularly the larger ones with a higher rate of traffic) have traffic lights on them. Some of these are only turned on during rush hour, but some of them are permanent. For the most part (at least the ones I've used), these traffic lights actually seem to make the junction less efficient than before the traffic lights were installed. \n\nIt's fair to say though that here in Britain we're not massive fans of traffic lights over roundabouts - putting traffic lights on roundabouts/replacing them always seems to be met with disagreement from locals. I don't know what the case is in the rest of Europe, though.\n\nEDIT ~ [Here's](_URL_0_) a rather extreme demonstration of the lengths we'll go to avoid traffic lights.",
"I think roundabouts are fucking horrible, but people seem to like them. IMO, roundabouts trust more heavily on the good judgement of drivers to be able to merge into and out of traffic, whereas light just dictate exactly what to do at any given moment. This makes you less susceptible to minor accidents but enables people who don't give a fuck to try and cheat the system and fly through intersections at the wrong time. When used correctly, lights provide a much easier and less stressful driving environment by removing almost all judgement decisions. It also allows coordination between multiple intersections on a larger systems level, and helps when there's poor visibility and awkward/atypical intersection geometries. ",
"Traffic lights allow for protected pedestrian crossings. They also take up less space. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://streetsblog.net/2013/10/10/mythbusters-finds-roundabouts-more-efficient-for-motorists/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/63126000/jpg/_63126500_msn_magic_roundabout_470x350.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1c079f
|
Are (biological) children of gay people more likely to be gay?
|
I've read some of the theories about what biological changes lead to a person being gay or not (specifically, [this thread](_URL_0_)) and got to thinking if these changes are not the 'norm', are they inherited? I know a few gay people who were, for whatever reason, trying to hide their homosexuality, and ended up having children, including one of my friends. Is this an inheritable trait? Mainly curious. Thanks!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1c079f/are_biological_children_of_gay_people_more_likely/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9bsfhj"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
" > Is this an inheritable trait?\n\nis a different question than\n\n > Are (biological) children of gay people more likely to be gay?\n\nThe evidence is overwhelming that there are genetic factors at play in homosexuality, if your identical twin is gay, there's something like a 52% chance that you will be gay[1], compared with something like 2-5% of people in the general population. Sexuality is an incredibly complex trait - in other words, it probably involves many different genes and interaction with the environment - but it is almost certainly heritable in some degree.\n\nHowever, this does not mean that the biological children of gay people are more (or at least significantly more) likely to be gay. To take a simple example, there's some evidence that there's a gene or genes on the X-chromosome that may make women with the gene more fertile, but also make men with the gene more likely to be gay. If this was the sole determinant (it's not, but pretend it is), then a gay man would be no more likely to have a gay son than a straight man, since fathers only contribute their Y chromosome. In this case, it would increase the chances that a gay man's male grandchildren (by his daughters only) might be more likely to be gay. \n\nThe genetics of inheritance for complex traits get super complicated super fast, and if a trait is determined by 10 different genes in different combinations in addition to environmental factors, and where the population is extenisvely outbred (in other words, you don't have cousins marrying etc) it's possible that there would be little if any change in the measured probability.\n\nAll of this is a long way of saying that I've never seen a study that suggested that the offspring of gay people are more likely to be gay. It's possible that there just aren't enough known examples, and once more research is done, it will show that gay parents *are* more likely to have gay children, though it might be like a 7% chance instead of a 5% chance. \n\n[1] _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1btxqk/how_does_homosexuality_get_passed_on_through/"
] |
[
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1845227"
]
] |
|
1kc6yj
|
Can it be that life is originating constantly since it first originated 3.5 billion years ago?
|
I understand the start of first life is a complex process. But is it possible that this is a continues process that occurs right now in some muddy pools or on the bottom of the ocean? I never hear of this possibility, does that mean this is a stupid question?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kc6yj/can_it_be_that_life_is_originating_constantly/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbnhbmj",
"cbni063",
"cbnimz2",
"cbnkuis"
],
"score": [
20,
2,
8,
6
],
"text": [
"There is no real way of knowing, but until we find another form of life that does not use DNA/RNA, we have no reason to believe that abiogenesis (the process of life originating) is still occurring.\n\nI would also add that it is very very very unlikely that any life from recent abiogenesis would ever be found, if it ever did occur the resulting organisms would be incredibly simple and would likely die out in competition for resources.",
"One reason abiogenesis was able to occur was that there were no other organisms around to absorb nutrients. While it is theoretically possible that it could be occurring right now, there aren't many places on earth where some form of microbial life isn't already present to eat the potential new life. ",
"Most models of abiogenesis use the Oparin-Haldane hypothesis which suggests atmosphere that is chemically reducing, with O2 rare or absent. This is due to the fact that atmospheric oxygen prevents the synthesis of basic organic compounds. Some models also suggest other places of reducing environments such as outer space or deep-sea thermal vents. \n\nSo atleast synthesis of organic compounds is highly unlikely, unless in some reducing environments. And this is just in terms of organic compound synthesis that has been demonstrated experimentally. Other elements of abiogenesis, such as polymerization, self-replication and formation of cellular membrane are less understood. [Wiki](_URL_0_)\n",
"I believe if a new lifeform did originate it would probably be consumed by the already abundant lifeforms like bacteria almost immediately, so there would be virtually no opportunity to detect it unless we create it ourselves in a lab."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis"
],
[]
] |
|
5pb7n9
|
why hasn't usa adopted nordic countries education and health care system?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pb7n9/eli5_why_hasnt_usa_adopted_nordic_countries/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcptcvh",
"dcptdzb",
"dcpteq2"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
12
],
"text": [
"Because such a system requires a Big Government. And it is an accepted wisdom in US politics that a Big Government is a horrendously inefficient waste of resources that is only good for maintaining tyranny. Americans prefer their government lean, and their taxes low; they expect the market to sort everything out. Under this dogma, Finnish education cannot possibly be good because there is no private competition to make it stick to a high standard and not just waste your money.\n\nSome Americans think all taxes are illegal, for chrissakes!",
"cause it ain't 'murrican!\n\nBut seriously, our House of Rep's and Senate have totally failed the USA. They are only concerned with increasing the wealth of the already wealthy and maintaining their power.",
"*Sigh*. Some of us have, it just doesn't go anywhere for a variety of reasons.\n\nThe \"core\" reason is that when the European democracies rebuilt after WWII, they developed universal healthcare systems to ensure everyone had care. This was largely an expansion of the systems Germany used to strikebreak or otherwise help industrial workers even before WWI, and it spread relatively easily in the wake of WWII - it was also seen as a comfortable political compromise with socialism, which had arrived rather dramatically on the political scene with the influence of an emboldened and expanded USSR. Giving people free healthcare and high taxes but keeping most of a capitalist economy while rebuilding from a grueling war was where people would up.\n\nIn the US, things were a little different. We have a very long history of wealthy people and their corporations having a lot of say in how things are run through several mechanisms. During WWII, it was really hard to get anyone to work for a company - most young men were at war, and there were only so many women who could or wanted to work in the factories or other businesses. This caused some problems, and part of that solution was the government stating outright that nobody could be paid more than a certain amount - but healthcare insurance policies were not considered \"pay\" by this rule. So companies started competing about health insurance instead of just wages. \n\nThis eventually led to a system where the government, insurance companies, and the medical industry all have roughly-equal say in how things are run - and the medical industry and insurers both have a lot of say in how the government is run, since they're fairly wealthy and we still defer to the wealthy in a lot of things. \n\nIt's not necessarily smart, but it's where we wound up."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
25yl5u
|
how do grizzly bears (or any other animal) know that we are not a threat to them?
|
How do they know that we are weaker than them? They don't get taught by their parents to hunt human, so why they are not afraid to attack us? How do they know that we don't have some poison or something. Is it our body language that shows that we're scared? What if we acted super confident and crazy, would they run from us then?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25yl5u/eli5_how_do_grizzly_bears_or_any_other_animal/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chlz5kr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
" > How do they know that we are weaker than them?\n\nWe are smaller, no claws in sight.\n\n > They don't get taught by their parents to hunt human, so why they are not afraid to attack us?\n\nSee answer #1\n\n > How do they know that we don't have some poison or something.\n\nanimals have very limited reasoning abilities. We don't display nature's poison colors so we are not poisonous. \n\n > Is it our body language that shows that we're scared?\n\nYes\n\n > What if we acted super confident and crazy, would they run from us then?\n\nMaybe depends on the bear. Imagine they are like dumb drunk people. Some are rational, some are not. Some are angry, some are cowards, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4to2bt
|
peer reviewed journals
|
Can anyone submit?
How much evidence do you need to support your hypothesis?
Is speculation allowed?
What is the whole process?
Is it better to submit or self publish?
Whats the benefit to submitting?
What copyright rights do you lose?
Is a peer review journal the only place to submit if you have a hypothesis, or are their other platforms?
And anything else worth knowing?
Can you recommend good journals to submit to for certain fields?
Astronomy, neuroscience etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4to2bt/eli5_peer_reviewed_journals/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5iv5tr",
"d5iv8bp",
"d5ivp0c",
"d5ivrzw",
"d5ivwws"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Yes, anyone can submit. But be aware that a paper written by Prof's Snuffsky and Huffsky from Oxbridge University has a much higher chance of getting through than a paper from Mr. Smith, Main Street 10025.\n \nYou need 'enough' evidence. I'm getting the gist that you've come across something that's a bit left field and hoping to surprise the world. If you're a 'nobody' the burden of evidence is going to be higher on you, so it really has to be beyond reasonable doubt.\n \nSpeculation is strongly frowned upon. If you can verify it, why haven't you? If you only have speculation, expect rejection. A journal will require you to have put in some time and effort into verifying. Even mathematical proofs will be good. Just \"I wonder if the earth is actually flat, I mean, the horizon looks flat when I look at it\" will be rejected without a second glance. Put some effort into it.\n \nSubmitting will get you to a larger audience, provided it's the right quality paper. I don't know all the branches of science, so I can't tell you which journals are good and which are bad. Some journals seem to take anything, but they're rarely read.\n \nIf there is anything in there that's useful for industrial purposes, you shouldn't publish it, you should patent it. If you have published something, it has your name, but what are you expecting that to do for you?\n \nSome high quality journals accept 'letters', and if your theory isn't sufficiently developed to merit a full article, that may be the way to go.\n \nWhat else? For heaven's sake: Do your literature survey. Read what other people have written on the subject, and reference them so that people know you have done your homework. Citeseer is a good place to start.\n \nProper journals have a review process. They receive your submission, they then pass it on to 3 or so reviewers, usually people with a good track record themselves, who then grade it in quality. The grade can be Good, revolutionary, a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, etc. I think that varies between journals.",
" > Can anyone submit?\n\nTechnically yes, although your qualifications to publish will be subject to scrutiny.\n\n > How much evidence do you need to support your hypothesis?\n\nDepends on the field and the type of paper. Some publications don't really posit much of a hypothesis at all, but rather report on experimental findings, offer suggestions as to why a given set of behavior is seen, and use it as a means to test *other* people's hypotheses.\n\n > Is speculation allowed?\n\nAgain, depends on the field. This is where your own qualifications come in handy, as well as the qualifications of those you cite. You need enough evidence to back your claims, but what constitutes \"enough\" is subject to what field you're publishing in. Use other papers in the same field as a litmus test.\n\n > What is the whole process?\n\nYou write a paper and submit it to a given journal, who then send it out to reviewers (often, you can choose who you'd like to review your paper, which typically will be people you cite in your work). The reviewers give their input, and pass it on to the editor, who decides between the following;\n\nAccept.\n\nRequest minor revisions.\n\nRequest major revisions.\n\nReject.\n\nOf the four, the 2nd and 4th are the most common, and are up to the editor's discretion (typically, a \"major revision\" request won't happen unless the subject matter is particularly good, or the name(s) attached to the paper are particularly noteworthy). Assuming revisions are necessary, you revise the paper as per the reviewers'/editors' critiques, and then send it back in for another round. This can technically go on forever, but typically after the first round of revisions your paper is either accepted or rejected. Once it's accepted, you fill out the remaining paperwork, and the paper is published in the next edition of the journal. If rejected, you try again somewhere else.\n\nRejections aren't necessarily because the paper is bad, but often because the paper doesn't fit the journal's subject area. Because many of the journals are affiliated with other journals, they sometimes make a recommendation, or will outright hand your manuscript to the editor of another journal on your behalf.\n\n > Is it better to submit or self publish?\n\nSelf-published material is generally seen as worthless in the sciences, unless you have already have a name for yourself.\n\n > Whats the benefit to submitting?\n\nYou get citations and readership, ultimately to get your name out there. If you have more journal papers, it's easier to convince Universities and funding institutions that you're worth investing in.\n\n > What copyright rights do you lose?\n\nDepends on the journal. Many reputable journals hold the copyright themselves, but leave intellectual property rights to you. Less reputable journals with less stringent peer review may ask you for a fee to publish, and you sign away all intellectual property rights based on your work.\n\n > Is a peer review journal the only place to submit if you have a hypothesis, or are their other platforms?\n\nPeer-reviewed journals are the only place that's worth anything if you want to be taken seriously.\n\n > And anything else worth knowing?\n\nBe careful with anything that starts with \"International Journal of ...\" These are typically scam journals (particularly in engineering fields), and are based out of India. There are exceptions of course (Int. Journal of Hydrogen Energy is one that I deal with occasionally), but generally IJXX journals are shifty. Open-source journals also can be highly suspect, as they are often patent trolls who get you to sign your IP away in return for \"expedited publishing\" (i.e. no peer review).\n\n > Can you recommend good journals to submit to for certain fields?\n\nLiterally depends on the field. The rule-of-thumb is to check the journal's Impact Factor, which is just a number representing the likelihood that your work will be read and cited if you publish in that journal. The higher the impact factor, the better, but what constitutes a \"high\" impact factor depends on the precise field. For example, in medicine, the *really* good impact factors are up in the 30-60 range, while for my field (engine research), I start breathing heavy when a journal with an impact factor of 4 or more starts talking to me.\n\nEdit: On names and author order; there are two schools of thought on this.\n\nThe first way, which seems to be more common in the US, is that the first author is the person responsible for writing the work (typically a graduate student), the middle names are people who helped out with the work (typically, the 2nd or 3rd name is the PhD student who runs the lab, and who was supervising when the experiments were taking place), and the last names are the professors who actually funded the work. Thus, it's best to either be the first author (as the person who was responsible for the work), or the last author (as the most important PI who has the biggest name in the field, or who contributed the most money to the research).\n\nThe second school, which seems particularly common in India, is that the author order should go in importance of the authors, so PI first, second PI second, and so on, down to the graduate students who likely did the bulk of the work, but don't have a name for themselves.\n\nOf the two, I prefer the American version of it, although it has led to me getting shitloads of resumes and job requests from graduate students and postdocs (typically from India, as they are used to the *other* system) wanting to work in \"my\" lab, thinking I'm some hot-shit professor, when in reality I'm just a PhD student ruffling through my friends' couches looking for quarters for the laundry machine. It's a fun world.",
"\nAnyone can submit a paper to a journal, its just like how anyone can submit a manuscript for a book to a publisher. Its pretty much the same process you submit your work, an editor reads it and either turns it down out right or accepts it with suggestions for revisions. Then the author(s) and editor(s) go back and forth with edits until a final draft is accepted by all parties. At the same time if the work is copyright-able/patent-able the paperwork is being completed to restrict others from stealing the idea once published. If you don't copyright before its published you essentially lose your rights if someone copyrights it and makes money on it without your permission before you get it copyrighted. Journals are really the only way to disseminate such work into the world, although another way would be patents for new inventions. You can self publish but most likely nobody would ever see your work. And as for content for your work in the biological field(I'm in) the only speculation you should really have is your hypothesis, and then the rest of your paper is all the evidence you can muster to prove your hypothesis. A paper is 5 basic parts: the introduction to what you're talking about, your hypothesis, the methods you used to experiment(so others can repeat your experiment, the result/data, and finally the conclusion where you discuss why your result prove your hypothesis. Anything extra is just fluff and really shouldn't be in your paper. I'm not sure what you're planning on doing with this information because unless you're an engineer most people that I know aren't submitting their work to journals unless they have a doctorate and are experts in their field. And I really cant give you any suggestions for journals, but look for ones with high impact factors(IF), its how often their articles are cited by other people doing research. And the higher the number the more reputable and renown the journal is. ",
"Anyone can submit but they're really meant for professional researchers (grad students, professors, or those who work in research organizations). If you're not one of these, your chances of being accepted are incredibly low.\n\nThe benefit of being published in a peer review article is that it gives your work some kind of prestige. It's essentially a sign that other highly educated people have vetted your work and agree that it is a significant contribution to the field. Especially if you're seeking a career in academia, being published in peer reviewed journals is a necessity for promotion and tenure (this is colloquially referred to as \"publish or perish\"). How important it is to be published in peer review journals varies if you work in research outside of the academy; in some fields it's still important, while in others it's not important at all.\n\nPeer reviewed journals are not the only way of getting your ideas out there: we also have what are referred to as \"gray literature\" which are reports and other publications produced in academic and research contexts outside of peer review. Gray literature is easier to produce because there are fewer boundaries, but is generally considered less impactful to the field (e.g. preliminary research findings, policy briefs, etc). Self-publishing is another option but is even less prestigious than gray literature, as all that means is that you felt like writing a paper.\n\nThe peer review process starts by submitting your paper to a journal. Generally you wouldn't just submit a hypothesis; you would've actually done the research and have some findings - no one really cares about an untested hypothesis. The editor will decide whether your paper is good enough to review or if it's an automatic rejection. If it goes on to further review, it will be sent to usually two, sometimes more, reviewers who will be given a set of criteria to score your paper. Depending on the journal's own procedures, they either will or will not be told who you are. They will then return their comments to the editor, who will summarize and send you the decision, which can either be (in order of least common to most common):\n\n* Accepted without revision\n* Accepted with minor revisions\n* Revise and resubmit\n* Rejected\n\nIf you receive a decision of accepted with minor revisions, it just means do what the reviewers said and they'll take it. If it's R & R, it means make the suggested revisions, send it back, and then the editor and reviewers will review it again to decide if the revisions were good enough. Most commonly, papers are rejected outright.\n\nEach journal will also have its own copyright guidelines. In some cases, the journal maintains full copyright of the work. In others (I think this is more common), the author maintains copyright of the work, but the journal may retain certain rights such as the exact typesetting of the published paper (i.e. you're not supposed to freely distribute the PDF of the paper as it's published, but you can send your own personal Word file to people).\n\nTo be completely honest with you, if you have to ask whether you should be submitting your work to a peer reviewed journal or not, the answer is probably that your work is not relevant enough. People who are submitting their work to peer reviewed journals know that they have the educational training and skill level to do so.",
"Will tackle some of these...\n\n-\n\n > Can anyone submit?\n\nYes, but lack of credentials (using the term loosely here to mean that at least one of the authors should be a scientist/engineer at a university or at a company) will typically be considered a \"red flag\" and will make the reviewers scrutinize the submission more carefully. A small fraction of journals have a \"double-blind\" review process in which this would be a non-issue, because the reviewers would not know who submitted the manuscript. Much more common is a \"single-blind\" review process in which the reviewers are anonymous but the authors are not.\n\n-\n\n > How much evidence do you need to support your hypothesis?\n\nDepends in part on the hypothesis. \"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof\", [as the saying goes](_URL_0_). Unfortunately, a hypothesis that makes a relatively \"obvious\" claim (and therefore would not require much work to support) would most likely not be of much interest to most journals. The answer depends also on the field. Experimental research in biomedicine, astronomy, and many other areas often require years of work before one obtains publication-quality data. Other areas of research may allow for publishable data to be generated over the course of months or perhaps weeks (if one is lucky!). \n\nBy reading published journal papers in the areas that interest you, you can get a sense of what is expected.\n\n-\n\n > Is speculation allowed?\n\nSpeculation is generally frowned upon. However, if a paper has made several solid conclusions fully supported by the authors' results, reviewers and readers may indulge the author in a speculative comment or two (assuming these are based somewhat in actual observations).\n\n-\n\n > What is the whole process?\n\nWill have to save that one for later (or for someone else to tackle), so I will just say that almost every scientific journal has a website that explains in detail the process that must be followed to submit a manuscript.\n\n-\n\n > Is it better to submit or self publish? Whats the benefit to submitting? Is a peer review journal the only place to submit if you have a hypothesis, or are their other platforms?\n\nIf you want to be taken seriously by scientists (and scientifically literate non-scientists), then your work should be published in a peer-reviewed journal.\n\n-\n\n > What copyright rights do you lose?\n\nGenerally, the publisher of the journal takes ownership of the copyright, but you will retain some rights (e.g., the right to re-publish your work in a compendium, etc.). Nowadays, you often have the option to have your journal article published as an \"open access\" publication, which sometimes means that you retain the copyright. The drawback is that you are required to pay the publisher a hefty fee (several thousand dollars) to exercise this option.\n\n-\n\nI hope this answers some of your questions.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi"
]
] |
|
267ke7
|
Any recommendations for a good espionage book?
|
I have to write a book report for class on an espionage book and was hoping someone would have a good book for me to read. I do really like WWII but if there are really good books out there that aren't WWII I would be good with that too. Something exciting would be nice.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/267ke7/any_recommendations_for_a_good_espionage_book/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chog6pz",
"chogveg",
"chohvyh",
"choidbi",
"choslrv",
"chotc18"
],
"score": [
15,
10,
3,
2,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"I'm a fan of the atomic spies myself. Some favorites that focus on individuals (which often makes for better stories than big, all-encompassing books on Soviet espionage, like _The Haunted Wood_): \n\n* _Bombshell: The Secret Story of America's Unknown Atomic Spy Conspiracy_. This focuses primarily on the spying of Ted Hall, a Harvard undergraduate who worked at Los Alamos. The guy is barely out of high school and he decides to spy on the atomic bomb for the USSR. Why'd he do it? How'd he do it? And why did he never go to jail, even though the FBI figured out he was a spy? The book gives interesting answers to these questions.\n\n* _The Catcher was a Spy_. Moe Berg was a Princeton-educated catcher for the Boston Red Sox. He was also a spy for the US during WWII. One of his jobs was to decide whether or not he should assassinate the famous German physicist Wernher Heisenberg who was thought to be working on an atomic bomb for the Nazis. \n\n* _The Invisible Harry Gold_. Gold was not a spy himself per se, but he was part of the Rosenberg/Greenglass/Fuchs network that got a lot of information out of Los Alamos, working as a courier. What makes him a great study is that he is not some kind of trained agent or even an ideological die-hard, but just a psychologically kind of messed up guy who falls in with \"the wrong crowd\" and aims to please. A much more nuanced story than you usually get with spy accounts, a great psychological portrait.\n",
"I would recommend *Agent Zigzag* by Ben McIntyre. It's a biography of a gangster from the east end of London who ended up serving as a m & amp;s agent for the Germans... And then the British. McIntyre writes ridiculously well, and Eddie Chapman's life was like a thriller anyway, you'll finish it in a day or two, and wish it was longer.\n\nFavorite example of Chapman's ridiculousness: he was parachuted by his German spymasters into England (oxfordshire, I think). He landed in a field, and walked up to an old stone farmhouse with two spinster sisters inside. He knocked on the door, and said (paraphrasing): \"hello. I'm a German spy. Would you please call to police\". That was how he came to work for the British.\n\nChapman almost single-handedly save central London from the blitz. He reported back to the Germans that all their bombs were falling on hampstead and kilburm (north-west London), so the Germans dialed down their V2 range, obliterating south-east London (and many innocent people), but leaving the seat of power in central London *relatively* unscathed.",
"Also if WWII is your thing, still in the historical fiction area I'd suggest Robert Harris' [Enigma](_URL_0_).\n\nFor non-fiction: \n\n[The Defense of the Realm](_URL_2_) is a fascinating, if incredibly long, history of MI5. Bear in mind it is an \"authorized\" history.\n\n[The Puzzle Palace](_URL_1_) comes highly recommended by people I know in the intelligence community, though I have not read it.\n\n",
"maybe not as exciting as some other books listed here, but Steve Coll's *Ghost Wars* is an excellent (and Pulitzer prize winning) description of the CIA's efforts in assisting the Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Taliban - and the subsequent intelligence operations and failures that led up to 9/11. Fascinating depiction of how intelligence organizations work to achieve goals in very difficult fields of operations having to negotiate with tenuous allies - like communist China",
"\"Spycatcher\" by Peter Wright - Autobiography of a Senior Intelligence Officer of British MI5 1954-1965. It contains a great mix of personal struggles, technical details, overviews of (and some nitty gritty details of) specific surveillance and counter-surveillance operations, spy-turning, detailed accounts of double-agents, and the technology employed in espionage and counter-espionage, it doesn't touch particularly heavily on any one subject, but it's generally a very fascinating read. \n\nBut most of all it was known for it's controversy in exposing just how *astonishingly* (and I can't emphasize this enough, you need to read the book to understand) badly infiltrated by Soviet Counter-Intelligence MI5 were (and to lesser extents MI6 and GCHQ) back in the early days of the cold war. \n\nThe book was officially banned from sale in England by the government of the time before the books first attempted publication in 1985, at the time of it's first actual publication 1987, English newspapers were banned via gag order from even mentioning the book, and it was difficult to get hold of for at least a few years [untill 1988.](_URL_0_)\n",
"Ken Follet writes some great spy stuff. The Eye of the Needle immediately comes to mind. Jackdaws is also very good."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigma_%28novel%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Puzzle_Palace",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Defence_of_the_Realm:_The_Authorised_History_of_MI5"
],
[],
[
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/13/newsid_2532000/2532583.stm"
],
[]
] |
|
5ojav0
|
why does certain parts of audio dissappear when the headphonejack isn't all the way in?
|
I've always wondered what might cause this, or why it happens.
If you don't understand what I'm trying to get at, try and pull your headphones out just a couple of milimeters and try and listen to some audio. In some videos voices dissappear and you only hear music, and in some songs you only hear certain layers of the music, as if all bass is gone.
Thank you!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ojav0/eli5_why_does_certain_parts_of_audio_dissappear/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcjphqr",
"dcjpjci"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The headphone plug actually has multiple connectors on it--those are the colored ridges on the plug itself. Usually, there are three main connectors, but I suppose others can exist.\n\nWhen the plug isn't all the way in, some of those connectors don't line up, and others might line up with another input. This causes the audio to be messed up.\n\nThe audio is typically split into several channels; each channel contains some audio information. If the song is encoded such that the voices are on one channel and the bass is on another, moving the headphone plug out a little bit might cause the lyrics to cut out but not the bass, or the bass to cut out but not the lyrics, etc.",
"Check out [this diagram](_URL_0_) of a 3.5mm stereo audio plug. The tip is connected to the left audio channel, and the ring is connected to the right audio channel; and the rest of the plug is connected to ground. If your plug isn't inserted all the way, then your left earpiece is connected to the right stereo channel, and the right earpiece is shorted to ground."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Jackplug-wiring.svg/220px-Jackplug-wiring.svg.png"
]
] |
|
2dib9v
|
Have the Amish always been significantly different than other rural Midwestern farmers? At what point did technological and societal changes really set the Amish apart?
|
Also, has there ever been anti-Amish sentiment? They aren't evangelizing like the Mormons, but I wonder if their business practices provoked some ire.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2dib9v/have_the_amish_always_been_significantly/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjpru9x",
"cjqi0a8"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"From the time they first settled in the US, the Amish have been different. They spoke German and eschewed the clothing that was popular. They had specific rules about dress and behavior, like no buttons, which set them apart even before modern technology. They also have their own religion that is a branch of Protestantism.\nAs a result, they'd be going to their own church and hanging out in their own social circles.",
" > Also, has there ever been any anti-Amish sentiment?\n\nBackground: I grew up Mennonite (similar to Amish), and I have Amish in my extended family.\n\nBefore I go trying to pass off family anecdotes as history, here is a source with more info and examples: _URL_0_\n\nNow, you asked whether there has ever been any anti-Amish sentiment, the answer is yes, particularly in WW1.\n\nTwo things to understand about Amish:\n\n1. Amish don't believe in going to war. Conscientious objectors, in other words.\n2. Amish to this day speak a dialect of German.\n\nSo in WW1, you have Amish and Mennonites who speak the enemy language, and on top of that they're refusing to join the military and go fight. It was not uncommon for them to be viewed as traitors because of it.\n\nThere are a number of stories in my family of people getting tarred and feathered, jailed, or even killed. Some of it is no doubt exaggerated with the passage of time, but the sentiment certainly existed for a time.\n\nFor WW2, I don't have any sources so I can't say anything definitively...that said, I've certainly been told by my older relatives that the sentiment was much reduced compared to WW1. Why, I have no idea"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.kshs.org/p/kansas-historical-quarterly-mob-violence-and-kansas-mennonites-in-1918/13278"
]
] |
|
1n14jo
|
why does tiresize change based on car size?
|
Why is it that a larger vehicle like a pickup or SUV will have significantly larger wheels then a smaller car like a civic or a smart car?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n14jo/eli5_why_does_tiresize_change_based_on_car_size/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccegeyr",
"ccegso3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Larger wheels allow the axle to be higher off the ground, letting you drive over larger irregularities without smashing into things. This is important in something like a pickup truck which might be driving onto an ungraded work site. A civic or a smart car would prefer to have smaller wheels because they aren't designed to leave a road, and it is more difficult to turn a larger tire because of the leverage involved.",
"Traction is a function of tire pressure and wheel diameter. Notice I didn't mention width. Whether you have a wide tire or skinny, given the same diameter and pressure, you'll get the same surface area of the tire touching the ground.\n\nSo, a larger tire increases traction, something I would like an SUV to have as much as possible, so they don't lose it and rear end me (EDIT: again!). You can calculate traction, roughly, but engineers are going to test tires until they get the traction characteristics they're looking for.\n\nA Civic, by comparison, just doesn't need it, being a smaller, lighter car. Too much traction is just going to add to cost and wear.\n\nSo what does the width of the tire contribute? Heat management. A wider tire won't heat up as fast, it will soak heat better, and dissipate it faster. Heat will soften a tire, which contributes to traction, and in the case of a consumer vehicle, wear. Too much heat can actually cause a tire to fail. So this is another dimension engineers will calculate to get close, and then experiment with different tire widths until they find characteristics they want."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2shw5r
|
why does our own body clog our nose, which is essential for breathing, on allergic reactions or when we've got a cold?
|
I mean, that's kinda counterproductive...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2shw5r/eli5_why_does_our_own_body_clog_our_nose_which_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnplz4h"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The allergic reaction comes from the inflammatory response trying to stop the spread of the allergen. The cells that release these chemicals don't know where in the body they are located. Just that something foreign is there and the body doesn't like it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ay3cxd
|
if you're swimming in a pool and lightning strikes the water, it'll most likely harm you. at what range when swimming in a larger body of water, like a lake or even an ocean would lightning have an effect on a person swimming in it at the time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ay3cxd/eli5_if_youre_swimming_in_a_pool_and_lightning/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ehxxtwy"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Lighting striking in an open water has a lethal range of about 6 - 10 meters with most of the energy being dispersed along the surface. If you're outside that range, you might still suffer burns. There's also a notable pressure wave (the underwater equivalent of thunder) that would be potentially dangerous at further distances."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3hbp3q
|
in terms of evolution, why are peacocks' tails so big?
|
What advantage did this large feathery tail offer the peacock to make it a desirable trait?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hbp3q/eli5_in_terms_of_evolution_why_are_peacocks_tails/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu5xxua",
"cu5ygu9",
"cu62ybc"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"a large tail would be a trait of a healthy bird, which in turn drives the success of the species.",
"It was mostly likely an early positive feature due to making the peacock appear larger to predators, male competitors and potential mates. To the animal brain bigger generally means stronger so it would scare off predators and other males and be attractive to females.\n\nPeacocks are, probably, not smart enough creatures to actually possess any form of abstract thought. Which is to say it's not a deliberate choice on their part to be scared of, or attracted to larger members of their species. It's just sort of built in after many many years of evolution. There isn't really an upper limit on it either, as far as we can tell. There's no point where their brain goes \"hold on, that's just ridiculous\". Same way that a cats brain is super stimulated by a laser pointer and the cat will go nuts chasing that little dot even though if they were able to think about it at all, it is clearly not any sort of prey.\n\nThey've probably only ended up stopping where they are now because there's an opposing selective pressure against having too large a tail. Lack of mobility, most likely. But if you painted an enormous realistic mural of a male peacock on a wall, it would impress the hell out of female peacocks.",
"A couple things. One is sexual selection. Peahens would be impressed and attracted to (and simply notice better) the males with the biggest, prettiest tails. MANY birds show this evolutionary trait. Check out the difference between males and females of [Long-Tailed Widowbirds](_URL_0_).\n\nAt the same time, it is a defense mechanism. Peacocks open their tails very quickly, and when a predator is near this, to the predator it looks like the peacock just grew to like 5x it's original size and got really fucking colorful. That is terrifying when you're about to try and kill something, so they run away. Birds with less impressive tails got eaten. Natural selection at it's best."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-tailed_widowbird"
]
] |
|
3035as
|
at any given night in a city, we see a fairly small amount of stars but far away from city lights we see thousands of stars. what determines what stars we see in a city?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3035as/eli5_at_any_given_night_in_a_city_we_see_a_fairly/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpoo8m5",
"cpoo8rq"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The brightest stars are still visible. Cities produce a lot of light, dubbed \"light pollution\" that drowns out the light from dimmer stars.",
"Light pollution.\n\nAll those cars and buildings radiate light, which gets scattered through the air to brighten the general area, reducing the contrast of the dark sky and limiting the numbers of faint objects we can see."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
7pc2um
|
How does the photon of specific phase that causes stimulated emission in a laser device arise?
|
I understand that when a photon of specific properties (phase, wavelength..) comes near an excited atom with sufficient energy, the atom will most probably release a photon that has the same properties as the first photon and will fall to a lower energy state. I understand this is how light is amplified in a laser device after population inversion is achieved. I just don't understand one thing. Where does the photon that causes stimulated emission in the device come from in the first place? I tried to think of an explanation taking spontaneous emissions as a factor and using brewster's window for polarization but that seemed really unintuitve for some reason. Is there an external entity that increases the probability of the spontaneously emitted photons to be in a specific phase? It would be a great help if someone could explain this. Thanks!
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/7pc2um/how_does_the_photon_of_specific_phase_that_causes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dsgctsr",
"dsge1nh",
"dshhj85"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"You mostly have it already. The overall polarization of the beam depends on the lasing medium and the cavity design, but in general, a photon will be emitted by spontaneous emission, and that gets the stimulated emission going to start lasing. Like you said, you could have a cavity with Brewster windows in it, which will cause high loss for one polarization and force the laser to have an output with only one polarization. There are also lasing media which, due to their crystal structure, will only emit photons in a given polarization (relative to the crystal structure). ",
"The first photon doesn't have to have a specific phase. Whatever it has determines the phase of the laser. In terms of direction and polarization: If it is not aligned with the laser cavity (or has the wrong polarization, if that is relevant), this chain of photons dies down quickly and another \"first photon\" will start the laser. Note that actual lasers do not emit *perfect* laser light. You can still get all sorts of weird effects in between.",
"To start, there is no such thing as phase for a single photon. If you quantize the EM hamiltonian in the cavity and find the expectation value of the electric field for a single photon state (an eigenstate of the EM field hamiltonian in the cavity), you will find that it is zero everywhere (on the other hand, E^2 is not). It is the superposition of many of these single-photon states in a [coherent state](_URL_0_) that gives rise to a classical EM wave (which does have a phase). If you have trouble seeing why this is, consider the 1-D quantum harmonic oscillator: its excitations have discrete \"lumps\" of energy (energy hbar*omega) but have an expectation value for x of zero. It takes the superposition of at least two modes to have any sort of time-dependence, and many more modes in a coherent state to get classical harmonic motion (where the concept of phase is well defined). \n\nWhen a laser begins to lase after a population inversion has formed in the gain medium, a photon is spontaneously emitted in one of the [longitudinal modes](_URL_2_) of the cavity. Because the end-mirrors are not perfectly flat, there can be many thousands of these modes in the line width of the atomic transition that are above the [threshold gain](_URL_1_) of the cavity. The number of photons in this mode grows exponentially in time to the point where it decreases the inversion density, which effectively decreases the gain of other modes in the cavity below the threshold gain (hence killing these other modes). \n\nFor some applications involving q-switched (pulsed) lasers, the cavity is seeded (i.e. \"back-filled\" with photons already in a specific mode) by shining a bright fiber laser through the cavity end-mirror. This decreases the \"build-up\" time for laser light in the cavity when it turns on (by 10s of nanoseconds in most cases) and reduces shot-to-shot timing jitter that occurs when the laser starts on a spontaneously-emitted photon. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherent_states#The_wavefunction_of_a_coherent_state",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasing_threshold",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longitudinal_mode"
]
] |
|
2yg287
|
Who is the Japanese military leader in this picture?
|
My grandfather obtained this picture in the Pacific Theater. He took many photos, but this is not one of them. He traded lots of photos and this is one he got through a trade. The family legend is that this picture shows American soldiers around some high-ranking Japanese military leader who killed himself just as the Americans were about to reach him.
I would like to know if anyone can help nail down more information. Who is he? Where was this? Perhaps a similar picture exists where we know who is shown?
My own investigation of Jappanese military leaders who killed themselves in circumstances where the Americans might quickly find their body makes me think it could be either Isamu Cho or Mitsuru Ushijima. The picture of Cho kind of looks like the picture I have.
(_URL_0_)
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2yg287/who_is_the_japanese_military_leader_in_this/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cp95v8i"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
" > My own investigation of Jappanese military leaders who killed themselves in circumstances where the Americans might quickly find their body makes me think it could be either Isamu Cho or Mitsuru Ushijima. The picture of Cho kind of looks like the picture I have.\n\nRight idea, but wrong guy, mainly because this is a suicide attempt, not a successful one! Hideki Tojo was seen as one of the principal war criminals of Japan by the Allies, and when American MPs went to arrest him in early September, he attempted to shoot himself in the heart, but missed and only wounded himself. He was arrested, and successfully treated by American medical personnel so that he could stand trial for war crimes, be found guilty, and finally be executed by hanging a few years later.\n\nNow of course it is possible Im wrong, but based on what I can see of the face, [with that trademark mustache](_URL_1_), as well as the apparent location of the wound based on the bloodied garments, I feel confident in my deduction here.\n\nEdit: reverse Google search failed, but \"Tojo suicide photos\" turned up a few that [look very similar](_URL_0_), although that specific one does not seem to be online (which would make it pretty interesting for a collector!)"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/Id7d4LL.jpg"
] |
[
[
"http://worldwar2database.com/sites/default/files/wwii1145.jpg",
"http://jto.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/nn20130216a3b.jpg"
]
] |
|
bd2ouf
|
Was suicide among "commoners" normal during time periods like the renaissance? Or is it something that became more prevalent recently?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/bd2ouf/was_suicide_among_commoners_normal_during_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ekvjifq",
"ekvuxns",
"ekw7chr"
],
"score": [
519,
906,
62
],
"text": [
"I have an earlier answer on [suicide in the Middle Ages in western Europe](_URL_1_). If you don't mind, I'll copy-paste it here for now so people have something to read while I work on one that extends into the Reformation/later Renaissance era. (Normally I'd just wait, but the topic seems to demand it.) ([Now posted!](_URL_0_))\n\n~~\n\n[1/2]\n\n*I'm borrowing some pieces from earlier answers [here](_URL_3_) and [here](_URL_2_), but it's mostly new.*\n\nIt's impossible to calculate the rate at which medieval people in the Latin West killed themselves or tried to. First, for the usual reasons--lack of records, bias of records that do survive in favor of focus on specific groups, the sketchily-drawn nature of calculating medieval demographics in general. Equally important, however, are the immense social, legal, and Christian religious consequences not just for the ones who killed themselves, but for those staring numbly at their loved one's body. While we can't say \"how commonly did medieval people kill themselves,\" it is evident that suicide was not only a common problem for survivors, but became an even bigger emotional burden over the course of the Middle Ages.\n\nThe central drumbeat of any examination of suicide in the Christian Middle Ages must be: suicide was a sin. And not just any sin, but an absolutely, fundamentally unforgiveable one. It was understood that the act of self-murder was the last thing that a person would do; there was no time for confession and absolution. No cleansing purgatorial fire awaited those who killed themselves: they were eternally bound to hell. As early as 570, Gregory of Tours writes that the body of a nobleman who had killed himself was taken to a monastery by his survivors, but the monks could \"not put [him] among the Christian dead, and no Mass was sung for him.\" The refusal of burial with the Christian community in consecrated ground is an earthly symbol of the theological belief that the count was separated from the Christian community in the afterlife.\n\nThis story shows us two further things. First, the intimate relationship of suicide and death means the theology of suicide was doctrine that wrapped itself around every level of Christian society. Even if not every single person over a thousand year span was excited to hear every last sermon or could recite the Paternoster (prayer) without prompting at their goddaughter's baptism, everyone dealt with death, whose aftermath was the domain of God and the Church.\n\nSecond, it shows the desperation of the count's family. They still took his body to the monastery even knowing he had killed himself, holding out some shard of hope for his soul, that the holy men might still be able to help. Already in the earliest years of the Middle Ages, we witness the desperation of the survivors.\n\nThe fallout of this desperation--even a generalized sadness of pious writers upset at the consignment of *any* soul to hell--permeates the medieval source record on suicide. As with Gregory, it's not that suicide isn't mentioned. We hear about it in monastic chronicles: a 12th century monk and prior of Le Dale monastery named Henry fell in love with a local woman and, officially absent from his house to earn money for it, moved in with her. When his affair was discovered and he was forced to return to the convent, \"Taking guidance from the Devil he got into a hot bath and opened veins in both arms; and by way of spontaneous, or rather foolish, death he put an end to life.\" From late medieval England, we have cases mentioned in coroners' rolls: A man sentenced to sit in the stocks overnight is found dead in the morning, having stabbed himself. \n\nMiracle stories attached to saints and shrines describe people who attempted suicide, maybe even appeared to have killed themselves, but were (literally) miraculously revived: a young woman was raped repeatedly by her uncle, who forced her to have an abortion each time she became pregnant. The third time, she did so directly, by ripping open her stomach with a knife. But when she cried to the Virgin Mary--here as both mother and *mediatrix*--Mary healed her external as well as internal wounds, and the woman took vows in a Cistercian convent to spend the rest of her days in praise of Mary/out of sight of mainstream society. And fictional literary sources talk of suicide, too: Boccaccio's *Elegy of Lady Fiammetta* describes a woman who decides to kill herself by jumping from a tower, because the people who find her body won't be able to tell whether it was suicide or an accident.\n\nBut in these stories, a clear pattern emerges: an emphasis on secrecy, privacy, and shame. A traveler who drops back from the group; a nun who barricades herself into a room for \"private prayer\" but slips out the window. Fiammetta (who is ultimately rescued) wanted to camouflage her death as an accident; the noblewoman in Gerard of Frachet's miracle tale hid herself away in the aftermath.\n\nThis only increases as one moves up the social scale in considering cases. Although typically we'd say the source record is *radically* denser for religious and the upper class than the small but growing middle class and peasants, with suicide this is not so. Alexander Murray, who composed the most important study of suicide in the Middle Ages (and to give you an idea of the weight of this project: he only ever made it through two volumes of a planned three before it was too much), instead says we must look to \"whispers\". \n\nThe sources ideologically and personally closest to a named noble or royal will shy away from mentioning suicide or suicidal ideation; those further removed in time and alliance will be less reticent. One example of this in operation is the possible attempted suicide of Henry IV, 11th (mostly) century Holy Roman Emperor. A lot of chronicles discuss his wars with the pope and his own son. But it is only one account, by known opponent Bernold of Constance, who includes this detail:\n\n > He betook himself to a castle and there remained without any regal trappings. He was in a state of extreme dejection and, as they say, he tried to give himself over to death, but was prevented by his men and could not bring his wish to effect. *(trans. Murray)*\n\nWhile the modern reader will recongize circumstances of deep depression and suicidal desire that feel all too familiar, there is an even darker angle in play. A given \"mental illness\" is of course a name attached of a web of symptoms that frequently travel together, manifesting slightly differently in all cases; but even the concept of *illness* is a cultural-scientific attachment. *Tristitia*, *acedia*, *melancholia*, and their fellows in medieval writings appear to aligns with different manifestations of what we call major depressive disorder today. But in the Middle Ages, they were sins. Even before one stepped onto the tower window ledge or threw the rope over the rafters, sorrow over worldly matters like *your own son leading an armed rebellion against you, nbd* was a sin that divorced you from other people and from God. It's not an accident that so many accounts of suicide attribute the act to possession by the devil or the influence of demons, and describe the victim's diabolical fear or behavior in the days or years beforehand.\n\nIt's no wonder, then, that even an anti-Henry partisan like Bernold can only bring himself to write \"As they say\" (*aiunt*). It's a common pattern. Dante Alighieri refused to identify thirteenth-century king Henry Hohenstaufen as one of the inmates of the seventh circle of hell in *Inferno*, despite rumors to the effect he was among those violent against themselves. It's not agreement or disagreement with this decision that is picked up by commentators, it's the *debate*: \"but others write,\" hedges Bevenuto da Imola, and \"if this is true.\" \n\nThere was good reason for those left behind to be cautious. As laws and legal systems coalesced over the course of the Middle Ages, death by suicide came to have extensive legal consequences for one's heirs (and whatever a grudge against the dead, might not be good to antagonize the living). Laws permitted or mandated the \"ravage\" of the property of someone who committed suicide: that its, its seizure by the lord or city rather than passing down to one's heirs. This could extend all the way to the home that a house-owner's family was *still living in*, throwing them onto the street. \n\nA 1280 case from England illustrates these laws in action. Upon the death of one of his tenants, a lord had claimed it was suicide and thus her property reverted to him. Her heirs had sued to get the property back, claiming his \"presumptions\" were (a) wrong and (b) even if they were right, presumptions weren't strong enough to be evidence of suicide. Notably, the judge ruled in the lord's favor because one of the 'presumptions' was the dead woman's threat to do something to shame her friends. Suicide was shameful for the immediate victim, but it also smade victims of the survivors who had to deal with public shame and material loss in the midst of private grief.",
"It is *also* impossible to calculate a suicide rate for early modern western Europe. The difficulties with identifying modern victims of suicide come into play--people who try to cover up their own actions, families who don't report it. For the early modern era, the usual problem with surviving sources compounds these problems exponentially. \n\nBut it's also harder because of much darker cultural beliefs about suicide. It was a matter of deep social shame for the survivors and the memory of the victim. It was a legal crime that punished survivors through state seizure of the victim's property. And in Christianity, it was a sin that sent one's soul straight to hell.\n\nThis was true on all sides of the Reformation. In Catholicism, suicide offered no time for repentance between act and death. According to Protestant beliefs, suicide was an act of the reprobate. \n\nSo with so much societal push against suicide, combined with the usual narratives of the early modern era as the \"rise of social discipline,\" who would get to the point of actively trying to kill themselves? Through the difficulties in the sources, one thing has stood out in multiple studies. \n\nSuicide was often, though obviously not always, a sin and a crime of social and economic outcasts. People who perceived they had nowhere to turn or would have nowhere to turn in the future; people who faced a really awful future.\n\nLegal records are where most of our data on suicide in early modern Europe comes from--actual court cases, records of deaths in a city, investigations of violent death and accidents in general. But studies of England and northern Germany show some of the problems with using these records straightforwardly. \n\nFirst, it's generally considered fact that people sought desperately to cover up the suicidal death of a family member for three reasons: their own social shame, refusal of Christian burial rites, and seizure of property. In England, laws mandating almoners and coroners investigate *all* suspicious deaths were codified around 1500, which you would think would eliminate some of the chances of a cover-up. \n\nBut as R. A. Houston showed for 16th century England, cases taken to the courts often ended up more as a mediation in how to divide a deceased person's assets than outright forfeiture. And they might not end up in court until *decades* after a death. At the same time, there's plenty of evidence of families indeed trying to cover up someone's suicide. And people who committed suicide themselves might also have taken care. So we're definitely still dealing with very selective reporting and recording.\n\nIn northern Germany and Scandinavia, so-called \"suicidal murder\" became a major problem in the 16th-18th centuries. This involved a person who despaired to the point of suicide actually murdering someone else, a victim and in a manner that made capital punishment inevitable (usually a child not related to them). Arne Jansson traced this horror to a local folk belief that a violent death of any kind--including execution--sent one to heaven. This would presumably constitute a small number of cases of suicide overall. But it's a useful, if tragic, reminder that suicide doesn't always look like \"suicide.\"\n\nAnd of course, a major difficulty is that sources don't always agree--and that they disagree in really significant ways. Through 1646, Laura Cruz observed 38 suicides recorded in court records for Leiden; Jeffrey Watts observed 41 in Geneva through 1650. This seems quite ordinary until you realize that Leiden was about twice the size of Geneva.\n\nHowever, Cruz and Watts found agreement in their sources on a crucial point: suicide was overwhelmingly an act of the socially marginalized. Cruz observes a strong link between economic difficulties and suicide. Even as Leiden prospered dramatically, not everyone came along. Those excluded from guild membership as temporary workers (the adjunct professors of early modern trades, if you will) or those still trying to earn their way in as apprentices (the grad students) constituted 20% of the people \"convicted\" of committing suicide in court records. \n\nFeeling a full sense of belonging and community in a church was also insulation from actually committing suicide, although there is no information on attempts. Cruz found only 2 cases out of 38 who were full members of a Calvinist or Anabaptist church (about 40% of the population overall).\n\nFor Geneva, on the other hand, Watt identified surprisingly specific groups as those most likely to commit suicide: suspected witches, prisoners, and people previously considered violently insane. 9 out of the 41 pre-1650 victims of suicide had been accused or suspected of witchcraft.\n\nStudying England, Houston cautions that the predominance of social outcasts in statistics about people who committed suicide, likely reflects source bias to some extent. MacDonald and Murphy in *Sleepless Souls: Suicide in Early Modern England* highlight the presence of nobles and wealthier burghers among the registers of suicide victims. But they still point out that based on assets uncovered for forfeiture, more than half of victims of suicide would qualify as poor or destitute. \n\nSharon Strocchia, meanwhile, studied suicides and suicide attempts among nuns in early modern Italy--what more tight-knit community than a convent? It's impossible to reconstruct the complex social, medical, and personal reasons that any one person committed suicide. But looking at the circumstances of these nuns, she detected two patterns at work in many (not all) cases. First, some of the nuns were noted as suffering horrible verbal and even physical abuse. (And this does not seem to have been an exaggeration--one nun, who reported the suicide of her sister to local authorities, also sought permission to transfer to another convent because of the terrible environment.) Second, many nuns who attempted suicide, or had sisters desperately concerned that they would, were among those forced into monastic life by relatives. In both those cases, there was sharp displacement from these women's desired community, whether that was within the convent or outside.\n\nAnd Houston offers a poignant reminder that \"social outcast\" could come in many forms. From 17th century Shropshire (the year isn't clear), a man named John Gossage committed suicide by taking arsenic. He had spent time in jail for counterfeiting money and was accounted an alcoholic by survivors. When his body was found, the only person the town could find to deal with his burial was his landlord.\n\nAnd the nameless woman who threw herself into the Nor Loch in Edinburgh in 1665? She was buried right next to where she drowned herself--she had no family or friends to claim, move, or take care of her body. We only know her from a brief reference in the city treasurers' records of the need to supply a coffin.",
"As a follow up question: *why* was the punishment for suicide so harsh and *why* did it get harsher over time? Why did it extend to living relatives? Wasn't eternity in purgatory punishment enough? Was it just about money - i.e. seizing the property of the suicidee?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/bd2ouf/was_suicide_among_commoners_normal_during_time/ekvuxns/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7e013q/was_suicide_a_common_issue_in_the_middle_age/dq1vrz7/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/50zlpb/were_the_bodies_of_suicide_victims_decapitated_in/d789rbw/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/43u90l/how_prevalent_was_suicide_in_medieval_europe/czl6tlw/"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ria70
|
why do woman traditionally throw underhand while men throw overhand?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ria70/eli5_why_do_woman_traditionally_throw_underhand/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdnkp5m",
"cdnl7al",
"cdnlade",
"cdnlku5",
"cdnlmhv",
"cdnq4dj"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
12,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"At least in cricket I've always been led to believe that it was women who started bowling overarm, as at the time their dresses were to voluminous to allow underarm bowling which was the style at the time.\n\n_URL_0_",
"If you are talking about softball, they are utilizing centripetal force, thus exerting less energy and requiring less strength the launch the ball. In addition with the size of a softball, it is much more difficult to effectively throw it overhand.\nThrowing and overhand ball is much more difficult as far as technique goes as well, as your arm is not moving in a straight, or even a steady curved direction. It folds back on itself and then sort of whips forward, requiring you to put spin on the ball to aim it in a certain direction. \n\nThrowing a softball underhand requires much less technique to throw in a straight line.",
"What do you mean by \"traditionally\"? Do you mean as in softball vs. baseball? They're different games with different rules, and overhand pitching is illegal in softball. Women who do play baseball do throw overhand pitches.",
"The underhanded throw is actually much easier on the arm (specifically the elbow), as it is a much more natural movement. That's why you hear about so many male pitchers needing Tommy John surgery. Now, I'd imagine that since girls typically have less upper-body strength, it makes more sense to use what we do have the more natural way to prevent injury and to use these muscles in the most efficient way possible. Also, getting added velocity is much easier using the pendulum motion than the slingshot motion that men typically use. Momentum!\n\nSource: I was a catcher for both baseball and fastpitch softball for 15 years and understand the mechanics that go into each style of pitching.",
"The women who don't throw a ball conventionally is because nobody taught them the proper way. Most boys when growing up have someone show them how to throw a ball.",
"This five-year-old's parents should stop teaching him/her such rigid gender roles. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overarm_bowling"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
19hay6
|
Will Microscopes ever be powerful enough that we can view individual molecules?
|
for example the molecular structure of water
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/19hay6/will_microscopes_ever_be_powerful_enough_that_we/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8o7tj4"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"[Already exists](_URL_0_). That is from an atomic force microscope; optical microscopes are limited by the wavelength of light and laws of optics."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://blog.everydayscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/pentacene-AFM.png"
]
] |
|
7qetr2
|
i need help understanding the difference between torque and rotational inertia
|
If anyone can help me out, that would be lovely. The semester is already moving full fledge. While I get the mathematics (sort of)... I'm really ambiguous on what these terms actually mean. Like I get the whole *pushing the door* scenario,... but what actually IS torque? Is it a force (sorry if this sounds dumb). Also what exactly is a moment arm? Thanks for any help!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7qetr2/eli5_i_need_help_understanding_the_difference/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dsomyxb",
"dson5tj",
"dsonex6",
"dsonx4n"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Ok, ELI5 attempt: you can imagine rotational inertia as a measure of the total kinetic energy in a rotating object. It's the amount of energy that you have to invest to spin the object up from a standstill to the current situation, or alternatively, the energy you need to bring it to a stop.\n\nTorque, on the other hand, is the force (not energy) you need to apply in order to affect a certain change in rotation.",
"All the rotational quantities you're learning are equivalent to linear motion concepts you already know.\n\n* Torque is the rotational version of force. \n* Moment of inertia is the rotational version of mass. \n* Angular acceleration is the rotational version of acceleration.\n* Angular momentum is the rotational version of linear momentum.\n* \"sum of torques = moment of inertia * angular accel\" is the rotational version of \"sum of F = m a\".\n\n... and so on.\n\nThe key difference is that because of the [arc length formula](_URL_0_), when an object rotates by a certain angle, the parts of it that are further from the center of rotation travel farther. Thus, the \"distance from the center\", aka the \"moment arm\", appears in the definitions for many of these quantities. The torque is greater if you apply a force far from the center -- this makes it easier to turn. Moment of inertia is greater if the mass is far from the center -- this makes it harder to speed up or slow down its rotation. And so on.\n\nBe careful with the analogy though: while torque is the \"rotational equivalent\" of force, it's *not* force. They're related by the equation\n\nTorque = force * moment arm * sin(angle between them)\n\nso you can see that torque has units of newtons * meters, not newtons.",
"Linear | Rotating\n---|---\nForce | Torque\nInertia | Rotational Inertia\n\n\nTorque is the force you apply in a circular fashion. The moment arm is how far away from the axis that the force is applied. If I have a wrench and I'm turning a nut with it, I'm applying torque (circular force) to that nut by pushing on the end of the wrench. The distance between the center of the nut and where my hand is is the moment arm. The further from the nut my hand is (longer the wrench) the more torque is applied as long as I'm pushing with the same amount of strength.\n\nRotational inertia is just how much inertia a spinning object has. I spin a basketball on my finger by applying torque to it. Once it's spinning, it keeps spinning because it has rotational inertia, even if I apply no additional torque.\n\n[I made you a crappy picture](_URL_0_)",
"Probably the easiest way to look at rotation is to think of it as having parts that are analogous to the linear motion you're probably used to dealing with. You're used to working with position, velocity, acceleration, momentum, force, mass, etc.\n\nAll of those have angular analogues when you're dealing with rotation. Angular position, angular velocity, angular acceleration, and angular momentum are easy to identify as analogues to linear position, velocity, acceleration, and momentum. It's a bit trickier to identify the analogues for force and mass, though, which is where torque and moment of inertia come in.\n\nIn linear motion, we deal with momentum, which is calculated as mass * velocity. It's constant unless a force is applied to a system. Force is defined as the rate of change of linear momentum, which is why F = ma (as acceleration is the derivative - and therefore the rate of change of - velocity). In this case, we could think of mass as a measure of how difficult it is to accelerate an object by applying a force to it.\n\nAnd it turns out that the angular analogues work pretty much the same way! We have angular momentum, which we can (in the case of a rotating system) define as rotational inertia * angular velocity, and by taking its derivative, we can find a rate of change for it that is analogous to force. This works out to being rotational inertia * angular acceleration, and it's what we call torque. Just like how you can think of mass as a measure of how difficult it is to accelerate an object, you can think of rotational inertia as being a measure of how difficult it is to cause the object to rotate faster. \n\nA moment arm is used to easily calculate the magnitude of torque (which you can calculate as moment arm * force). Simply put, it's a line between the axis that you're rotating on and the point where the force is being applied. In the door analogy, it's the distance from the hinges to the spot where you're pushing on the door. It's the reason why door knobs are on the opposite side from the hinges - it's easier to open the door by pushing on the opposite side than if you try to push next to the hinges, because you can produce more torque with the same amount of force."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.coolmath.com/reference/circles-trigonometry"
],
[
"https://imgur.com/Th6Swjt"
],
[]
] |
|
47jq35
|
electricity supply
|
If a building has 120 V supply, what happens when you plug in a 240 V unit, and vice versa? I know how the current and voltage are inversely proportional. Can you explain how each voltage multiple relates to the other one please?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47jq35/eli5_electricity_supply/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0de4ac",
"d0deap1",
"d0degn7"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Houses have 3 power lines. Imagine a top, bottom and middle line. Top and bottom are 240V with respect to each other. The middle line is there to give you 120V between it and the top or bottom line.",
"If you plug a 240 appliance into a 120 outlet, chances are it just won't work. Voltage is electric \"pressure\". ",
"For a simple resistive load a 240V unit rated at 10 amps will draw 5 amps at 120V. Current and voltage are **not** inversely proportional in this case. I=E/R.\n\nIf you plug in a unit which can automatically work anywhere between 120 and 240 volts, then the current at 120V will be approx twice the current as at 240V. In this case they are inversely proportional. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ck8cze
|
why do muscles stiffen and lose flexibility? and why does stretching sometimes feel good and sometimes hurt?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ck8cze/eli5_why_do_muscles_stiffen_and_lose_flexibility/
|
{
"a_id": [
"evkl4rt",
"evm1u5e",
"evmx0d1"
],
"score": [
33,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Lots and lots of reasons. But ELI5. Muscles get stiff because they get used to being short and all the fibres get tighter and closer together. It can also be because of literal knots in the muscle. Imagine you cut a piece of string in half, to make it whole you have to tie a knot in it. The string is shorter but it’s whole. These are knots and there can be thousands. Thanks to healing and massage those cuts can be healed to normal. \n\nPain when stretching is normally due to excessive tearing. It’s your body screaming at you to stop. It feels good because of other reasons that I’m not clear on.",
"It is rarely muscle fibers that are the issue. For most of us it is the facia that runs through the muscles that becomes inflexible and inflamed. This prevents the muscle fibers from contracting and stretching as they are designed to do. \nAs for feeling good after stretches (done properly), you have ‘freed’ those fibers and lessened the inflammation in the area.",
"NASM Certified Trainer here, the ELIF simple explanation for the stretching would be: it feels good when loosening (getting the knots out) or prepping the muscles for activity. It can often hurt when you are trying to become more flexible because when you push your muscles past it's normal range your body has 2 alarms. The first will try to resist and bring the muscle back to avoid injury (this is where it hurts) but after 30 seconds some complicated process happens and the second alarm will tell the body to relax and loosen up to avoid injury. \n\nSo make sure to hold your stretches for 30second!:)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
30pdom
|
what is a proxy war? what sets it apart from a traditional war/conflict?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30pdom/eli5_what_is_a_proxy_war_what_sets_it_apart_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpuipmi",
"cpuj429",
"cpul484"
],
"score": [
5,
20,
3
],
"text": [
"It's when two countries fight a war using other, smaller countries like puppets. Watch this: _URL_0_",
"You have a brother called Joe, and a sister called Suzy, now you don't want to fight Joe because your parent will get mad at you, so you give Suzy some candy to pick a fight with Joe. Your parents don't get upset with you, because you're not involved.",
"I'm writing my graduate thesis on this topic, so I should be able to answer it. \n\nProxy war is one of those words that gets thrown around a lot with little thought as to its meaning. It has existed for hundreds of centuries, but it is really only within the last 10 years that is receiving serious study by academics, though there is still a long way to go. \n\nProxy war is *external actor(s) seeking to indirectly influence the outcome of a conflict in pursuit of their strategic policy objectives by providing direct and intentional assistance to an existing actor in the conflict.* (I should point out that this definition of is a modified version of the definition provided by Andrew Mumford and also includes input from Geraint Hughes' description of proxy warfare and Daniel Byman’s definition of state sponsorship of terrorism). \n\nWhat does that mean exactly? It means that a state or a nonstate group (which I will call the *benefactor*) is providing assistance to one or more groups fighting in a war (which I will call *proxies*). The benefactors are providing support to their proxies with the belief that their assistance will influence the outcome of the war in a way that is beneficial to them. And the benefactor doesn't want to fight the war itself, so they are supporting someone who will fight on their behalf. The proxies want this support because they believe that it will help them win the war by giving them access to things--like weapons, money, training, intelligence, logistical support, and other fighters--that they would not be able to get normally. This relationship is often covert because neither the benefactor nor the proxy want the world to know of their relationship. \n\nIt may also help to explain what proxy war is *not.* First, it is rarely (if ever) one country fighting on behalf of another country. The most commonly cited example of this phenomenon is Cuba sending 30,000 soldiers to fight in the Angolan Civil War. Most people assume that Cuba did this on behalf of the Soviet Union, but recent studies have shown that not to be the case. Second, proxy war is not diplomatically supporting a group fighting a war. Unless there is the direct transfer of materials or support to the group to help them win the war, it is not proxy warfare. \n\nAs to your second question, what makes proxy warfare different is the additional level of support behind the parties of the war. However, in terms of how the fighting is conducted on the ground it is very similar to normal war except that it is usually bloodier and lasts several years longer. The existence of a proxy relationship complicates the war because it means that the proxy will always have its base of support outside of the conflict zone, and therefore will be much harder to defeat. \n\nEDIT: Wording"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.stufftheydontwantyoutoknow.com/video/clips/stdwytk-proxy-wars-video/"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
797zly
|
why does vision degrade when you are tired?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/797zly/eli5_why_does_vision_degrade_when_you_are_tired/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dozvxes",
"dozx6rz"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"Your eyes become fatigued, as they are working muscles. So after a long day of using your eyes, they need that rest. Usually by the time you’re tired your eyes have been strained enough to feel that fatigue. It can also sometimes make you think that you are tired when your eyes just need resting too, especially if you use bright light objects such as a computer phone or television for an extensive amount of time. ",
"Eye tech here. May I also add that if you have been staring at a screen (computer, tv, phone) for any length of time you tend to blink less often. The less you blink, the more dry your eyes get. You need a complete tear film for clear vision. It's actually part of the refractive process. If you live in a dry climate, it's even more difficult. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
ekwx4r
|
Was there any condemnation in the 1500s towards Luther's piece on the Jewish community?
|
I actually posted this about a year ago and forgot about it, and unfortunately it didn't get answered then. But with all the recent anti-Semitism on the rise I want to ask this again:
In 1543, just a couple years before Luther's death, he published a regrettable piece, *On the Jews and their Lies*. Did any scholars of the day condemn that piece, or was Luther's words the prevailing opinion of the day?
Thanks for any insight.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ekwx4r/was_there_any_condemnation_in_the_1500s_towards/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fekzv29"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"I wasn't active here for a while and am looking through the backlog of Judaism related questions, and think this is a great one.\n\nLuther's views on Jews in that essay were by no means universal and perhaps more vitriolic than the average, but they did reflect his era's view on Jews in general, were not considered particularly unusual, and were very influential. \n\nHis attitude in general toward Judaism was very much shaped by the prevailing Christian beliefs in Judaism as the antithesis to Christianity, in supersessionism (the idea that with the New Testament, Christians had become the \"real Jews\"), and in Jews as a malevolent force. It's unlikely that Luther himself ever met more than a few Jews in his life, despite living among them; however, he would have had plenty of material, theological and otherwise, on which to rely in his formulations here. For centuries, Jews had been used as examples of veniality, heresy, blindness to reason and truth, falsehood, and arrogance. Martin Luther simply continued in this tradition in many ways, in that he used his perception of Judaism and Jews as a foil for how he saw Christianity to be, as in the much older comparison of the frail, blindfolded Synagoga with the youthful, forward-seeing Ecclesia. However, it is undoubted that these feelings about Judaism went beyond a rhetorical device and were instead an actual sentiment felt about actual Jews.\n\nSome draw a sharp distinction between early Luther and late Luther in terms of his antisemitism, saying that he was actually somewhat friendly to Jews in his early life and only in his later years grew virulently antisemitic. However, while there is certainly a difference in the level of the rhetoric regarding Jews, the actual feelings were essentially the same. As I mention in [this answer](_URL_0_), no matter how benevolent Christian theologians and academics ever were toward Jews, it was nearly always from a position of superiority and disdain and often with an eye on conversion. In fact, a main feature of Luther's early writing about Jews is his opinion that if Christians treat Jews badly then they won't want to convert. However, it seems that later in his life he became less tolerant, and soon raged against Jewish practice of Judaism as a heresy against Christianity but no longer believed that conversion was possible.\n\nIt was at this point that his statements about Jews became far more violent than merely advocating for conversion. He made recommendations like \"... first to set fire to their synagogues or schools ... to raze and destroy their houses ... to take all their prayer books and Talmudic writings ... that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb ... that safe conduct on the highways be abolished completely ... that that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping...\" In these recommendations he was NOT necessarily supported by other Christian scholars of his era; however, this was because of the violent nature of his statements rather than a fundamental disagreement between him and them about the role of Jews, their inferiority, and their heresy. These scholars would have preferred something of a benign disdain, enlightened curiosity, and subtle (or not so subtle!) attempts at conversion. Luther was seen as vulgar in his recommendations by other theologians, not necessarily as wrong in his opinions about Jews from a theological perspective. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nBell, \"Martin Luther and the Jews: Context and Content\"\n\nRudnick, \"Early Modern Hate Speech- Martin Luther's Anti-Semitism Responses and Reactions\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/eb4xax/floating_feature_fly_on_in_and_share_the_history/fdk33pn/?context=3"
]
] |
|
1zbkfi
|
the median of something vs. the average.
|
I know what an average is, but could someone explain to me what is a median, and what is it used for?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zbkfi/eli5_the_median_of_something_vs_the_average/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfs7t1x"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Median is just a different way to calculate an average. The three main ways to 'average' a group of numbers are: Mean, median, and mode. \nLet's say you have the following 11 speeds caught on a radar and you need to determine the average\n(56,58,62,65,65,68,69,70, 71,74, 75)\n\nMean = 66.6 (add all #s and divide by the sample size). This is the most common use when someone talks about an average. \nMedian = 68 (the middle number when #s are sorted by size. 68 in this example is the 6th sample counting up from the smallest and 6th sample counting down from the largest sample) \nMode = 65 (mode is the most frequently sampled speed as there were 2 samples at that speed whereas there is only 1 sample for all the other speeds) \n\nThe type of average used depends a lot on what the user wants to convey. Mode is often used to communicate image the most \"popular\" or most likely outcome. Median is used to identify the middle, where it may be helpful to know that half of the numbers are smaller and half the numbers are larger... You can even say that is the number where there is a 50% chance that any new sample will be larger and 50% chance that it will be smaller. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1nwurp
|
if both nuclear fission and fusion generate energy, why don't we have infinite energy?
|
In my class, my professor said that both fission and fusion generate lots of energy.
He said that sun uses fusion to make energy while we use fission in bombs to create vast amounts of heat and energy. Fusion means combining, and fision makes breaking for those who are new to the topic. So think of like two clay ball. You put them together - > energy, and you pull them apart - > energy.
If both of these can be used in a cycle, could not we not have infinite energy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nwurp/eli5_if_both_nuclear_fission_and_fusion_generate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccmrtdk",
"ccmrugm",
"ccmrv7p",
"ccmt8es",
"ccmtt2f",
"ccmvxal"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You don't use the same elements in fusion and fission. The whole reason the respective processes can generate energy is because the nuclear reaction results in a nucleus that is _more stable_ than the starting nuclei.\n\nYou use a heavy element - such as uranium - for fission, while you use a light element - such as hydrogen - for fusion. You cannot reverse those and still get energy out of the reaction.",
"*Some* fission reactions **release** energy and *some* fusion reactions **release** energy. If you take any particular reaction which releases energy, reversing it requires using energy. In general, you can fuse things to release energy up to iron, but above that, fusing takes more than you get out.",
"This assumes that you can create an environment in which you can create a controlled fission reaction that then feeds into a controlled fusion reaction, which then can feed back into and create a new fission reaction safely. \n\n[Fusion bombs](_URL_0_) (H bombs) work this way - they use a Fission reaction* to provide the power to create the fission. This then creates an explosion - so what you are asking is why when that H bomb goes off, it doesn't then re-power the Fusion reaction that set off the Fission reaction. It's not as simple as energy out energy in - its a ton of energy out, which is absorbed, and then released into more energy out - the original material used to create that initial reaction is gone, and isn't going to re-appear.\n\nMore importantly, to my knowledge [we haven't figured out fusion yet outside of nuclear bombs](_URL_2_). If we did, theoretically, we would still be stuck figuring out how we could get the reaction that happens in [this](_URL_1_) to play nicely with the reaction that happens in [this](_URL_3_)\n\nEdited for info on Fission bombs",
"thermodynamics makes this impossible. if you could connect a fission plant to a fusion plant and run it forever you would have a perpetual motion machine, which is impossible.",
"We can't capture energy with 100% effeciency. There will be loss, and eventually, you'll deplete your fuel until your energy production cycle is no longer sustainable.\n\nBut that's not the worst of it. Fusion is really hard to perform, here on Earth. We're still struggling to perform reliable fusion in the technologies we have, and some of these experiments aren't designed to caputre energy for means of energy production. We are still far away with regards to this technology.\n\nFurther, we can't reasonably split anything or fuse anything. Some elements are extremely stable, which is why fission is done with heavy and unstable elements. They break down into something stable, and that's it. Some elements are too big and heavy and whatever else that prevents fusion from happening. We use hydrogen in our fusion experiments for whatever this reason is, and not heavier elements.\n\nIf you look at nature, a recent paper suggests that almost all the heavier elements (than iron, if I recall) found in the universe are the blown off debris of neutron stars colliding, and the paper suggests stars don't get big or hot enough to produce these elements the the quantities we see in the universe.\n\nSo, we can fission already unstable elements, we can barely fuse the lightest of elements, and that's it. While nothing in between is impossible, they usually don't happen outside particle accelerators, and thus, are not a possible source of energy.",
"Fusion and fission *sometimes* generate energy, and sometimes require energy.\n\nSpecifically, fusion of light elements generates energy, fusion of heavy elements requires energy.\n\nFission of heavy elements generates energy, fission of light elements requires energy.\n\nSo after all the energy generation reactions, you wind up with medium sized elements (iron and nickel to be precise) that you can't really do anything with."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_weapon#Basic_principle",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/The_Sun_by_the_Atmospheric_Imaging_Assembly_of_NASA's_Solar_Dynamics_Observatory_-_20100819.jpg",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion#Thermonuclear_fusion",
"http://www.tsarbomba.org/images/tsar%20bom%20explosion.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
20nx01
|
How did medieval leaders get their armies to fight against the pope?
|
This question has been asked before, but it hasn't been answered. Christian countries have been at war with the Papel army, but how could you inspire your army to fight them. After all, it would look like they had God on their side.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/20nx01/how_did_medieval_leaders_get_their_armies_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg59lab"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"In some cases there were Antipopes - that is, a rival claiming to be the true pope. Of course, each declared the other to be the Antipope! This was the case during Roger II of Sicily's disagreements with the papacy. In Roger's case the hostilities were usually initiated by the pope rather than the king, which might have helped. Regardless, one of the greatest disputes Roger had with the papacy revolved around the new Pope Innocent II's refusal to acknowledge him as king of Sicily, and the equally new Pope Anacletus II's promise to support him if Roger returned the favour. At this point, Roger was one of the most powerful rulers in Italy and his backing would be invaluable to Anacletus. Roger, for his part, wanted simply to have his newly assembled kingdom recognised as such, and the anti-Norman Innocent II had no intention of doing so (Houben, *Roger II: a Ruler between East and West*). In this type of case, both sides have an equal claim to righteous conviction. \n\nAs might be expected, a papal schism is not the norm when disputes between secular rulers and the papacy arise, but I think these unusual cases serve as illustrations of a more broadly applicable principle - that clergy, including even popes, can be considered illegitimate. The claim of a pope to divine correctness isn't necessarily swallowed without question. Any pope could be painted as a fraudulent pope. Remember also that God's will is in action. If a ruler goes against the pope and wins, then it was God's will all along and the pope was being ungodly. \n\nIndeed, Helene Wieruszowski argues (in a 1963 article that makes some very valid points despite its age) that the widespread support of Sicily's social elites, magnates and so forth could be taken as evidence that God was speaking through the actions of these powerful citizens - who, naturally, had themselves risen to prominence on the back of God's good will (Wieruszowski, 'Roger II of Sicily, *Rex-Tyrannus*, in Twelfth-Century Political Thought', *Speculum* 38:1). Near-universal acclaim by the divinely appointed influential elites is a ringing endorsement of the king's legitimacy and a condemnation of the pope's ungodly error. \n\nTo further muddy the waters, the pope was also ruler of a material realm in his own right, and could muster armies and negotiate treaties like any other ruler. The 1156 Treaty of Benevento between Pope Adrian IV and William I of Sicily is an interesting example. Although the concessions that it requires from Pope Adrian are ecclesiastical - that is, it demands papal recognition of the Hauteville kingdom of Sicily in perpetuity - in most respects it is like any other treaty between two rulers. (ed. Enzensberger, *Guillelmi I Regis Diplomata* and, for an English translation, ed. Loud, *The History of the Tyrants of Sicily by 'Hugo Falcandus' 1154-69*). Clearly the popes were treated as susceptible to mundane negotiation like anyone else. \n\nMy point here is there's evidence that popes weren't thought to be unassailable and so defying them wasn't necessarily as unthinkable as we might imagine. \n\nOf course, the best we can do here is to speculate based on limited evidence. There's very little record of what an 'average' citizen, soldier or otherwise, thought about anything during the middle ages. They didn't govern and they weren't literate, so couldn't write their own letters or diaries. The lesser nobility who followed the kings most likely did so out of self interest, which brings me to my final point. \n\nI want to throw in a thought that one of my undergraduate professors always reminded us of: people are always people. In the present day, many of us would be more likely to follow our immediate ruler over a lofty figure from hundreds or thousands of miles away, someone who is more an abstract idea than a tangible, real person. If we stand to gain (or simply to avoid hardship) by following our king or government to war against a faceless abstract concept who we have never seen and who doesn't even know we exist, many of us will go with the tangible, the things that are real to us. People are always people; follow your king against your pope because he's here and his best interests probably overlap with your own. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5hss9g
|
if the edge of the universe to us is 45 billion light years away, could it have already stopped expanding?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hss9g/eli5_if_the_edge_of_the_universe_to_us_is_45/
|
{
"a_id": [
"db2s50w"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When we talk about the \"edge\" of the universe, we are referring to the extent of the observable universe. Space is expanding, and there is no centre to the expansion. Every point is moving away from every other point, equally in all directions. The further away you look, the more space exists between you and the point you are observing, so the faster that point appears to be moving away from you. If you look far enough, space is expanding away from you at the speed of light. This is the limit of observability, because no information about events beyond that distance will ever reach you. That occurs at a finite distance, so the observable universe is finite in extent, but we can't ever know what lies beyond. The true universe could be infinite or not. At present, all indications are that the expansion will continue, so more and more objects will continue to expand out past the observability limit and become invisible to us, until eventually our own galaxy will be the only thing in the night sky."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5cotbn
|
why do we tend to get small violent tendencies when we get angry or have a heated argument with someone else? [biology]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5cotbn/eli5_why_do_we_tend_to_get_small_violent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9y9udr"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The \"Fight or Flight\" response to the confrontation. Anticipating a fight, a cascade of things happen to your physiology..adrenaline production, flushing, heat, respiration increasing, muscles tensing..the whole brain is prepped to go to battle. This also suppresses normal functions, like situational awareness giving way to tunnel vision, reduced perception of pain and fatigue, and most noteworthy: rapidly reduced impulse control. Impulse control in a potentially fatal situation can be deadly, and we have evolved a way of shutting it down in the face of danger: Don't *think* about the tiger in the bushes, just run. Baser impulses become difficult if not impossible to suppress, as seen when someone \"rages\". Those violent tendencies rush to the surface and find expression. \n\nWe don't even have to full on rage for this. It varies from person to person but when there is moderate stimulation of a fight-or-flight response we can observe expressions of anxiety and/or aggression. It's why people yell during sports matches. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2c5no9
|
I'm watching English period pieces like The Tudors and Elizabeth. Did monarchs have titles like Lord Burleigh to give out? What did that entail?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2c5no9/im_watching_english_period_pieces_like_the_tudors/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjcaklw"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"If you're just talking about titles rather than estates and incomes, yes. The sovereign is the [fount of honour](_URL_0_), i.e. has the exclusive right to confer titles of nobility and orders of chivalry."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fount_of_honour"
]
] |
||
1mftka
|
Why do atoms "want" to get full outer electron shells when bonding?
|
A hydrogen atom on its own is stable, and has no overall charge. The same goes for oxygen. So why would they bond to form water, which has the exact same charge?
Also what causes chemical bonds to have specific angles?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1mftka/why_do_atoms_want_to_get_full_outer_electron/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc8tjcs",
"cc8w3vr"
],
"score": [
9,
5
],
"text": [
"Good question! Understanding this behaviour requires that you first understand that a reaction can be considered as a number of individual processes. When you combine chlorine and sodium to make table salt, the sodium atom loses an electron, the chlorine atom gains one and the resultant ions bond due to their charge (this description is accurate to a first approximation).\n\nRemoving electrons from atoms takes energy. Adding electrons to neutral atoms releases energy, but adding electrons to already-negative ions typically takes energy. Forming the resultant bond between the atoms releases energy. So, let's add this all up.\n\nSodium has a single electron in its outer shell. The energy cost of removing this, combined with the energy gain of creating Cl^- and then the salt NaCl yields a large negative number for the overall energy change because the bond that's formed is quite strong. That is, the overall process is favoured and the reaction happens. You may ask: if the bond is quite strong, why not form two of them (i.e. NaCl*_2_*) and get twice the energy out from bonding?\n\nRemoving a second electron from sodium is much tougher. It's at a lower energy level, much closer to the nucleus and more tightly bound. It turns out that the energy gain from a second bond doesn't make up for the extra energy required to remove a second electron. Similarly, for magnesium, which does form two bonds, this is because magnesium has two electrons in its outer shell which are comparatively easy to remove.\n\nSo, it's not so much that an element wants to form a particular number of bonds. Elements will form as many bonds as they can (because bond formation releases energy) until the energetics become unfavourable. Sometimes, if you have particularly reactive compounds, you can exceed the traditional \"correct\" number of bonds because the reactive compound releases sufficient energy in the reaction.\n\nBond angles are caused by the electrons in bonds repelling each other. If you have methane, a tetrahedral molecule, you end up with the bonds at an angle of about 109 degrees because that maximises the distance between bonds. However, lone pairs that aren't involved in bonding exert higher repulsion than bond pairs. So, in water, oxygen has two lone pairs which squeeze the bond pairs closer together to an angle of about 104 degrees. Read up on \"VSEPR\" for more about this.",
"I remember one of my lecturers telling me there was nothing special about a full shell, and that it is just where energy minima tend to be.\n\nOne of the reasons for this is shielding of the nuclear charge:\n_URL_0_\nElectrons in inner shells shield the outer electrons from the nucleus's charge I.e some of the protons' attraction to the outer electrons is blocked by the inner electrons. As you go across a row of the periodic table, all elements have the same number of inner electrons, and therefore the same amount of shielding, but more protons and therefore a higher nuclear charge. This means the outer electrons of the elements on the right hand of the table experience a larger \"effective nuclear charge\" than the ones on the left. \nWhen a left and a right element are mixed together, for example lithium and fluorine, one of lithium's electrons will be pulled off and into fluorine (who has a much higher effective nuclear charge)'s last remaining space it its second shell. \nWith a now complete second shell, any more electrons pulled off by fluorine would have to sit in the third shell, which has two shells of shielding in between it and the nucleus, causing it to experience a much lower effective nuclear charge - lower than it would experience staying in orbit around the lithium atom meaning fluorine stays as F-, and the second Li goes off to find an F.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_nuclear_charge"
]
] |
|
1n40e9
|
What is the best referencing/organizing software you use to write history and why?
|
Feel like I need a few good opinions before I buy. Endnote, Masternote, Citavi, Pages? something else?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1n40e9/what_is_the_best_referencingorganizing_software/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccf7uj1",
"ccf7w1g"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Not history specific, but OneNote works REALLY well for writing initial drafts. You can organize your work far beyond anything else I've used, and can include text clippings, photos, videos, and links out to the side. It eschews the \"page\" construct and is more like a whiteboard.\n\nOnce you get down to doing a final draft, you'd be better to switch to something designed to nicely handle notations, footnotes, and all that.",
"If your research project includes lots of references and if you're looking for an advanced reference manager, I would recommend [Citavi](_URL_0_). I have yet to see a reference manager that comes close to it. I can't really name that *one* feature that makes Citavi special, it's the overall product and attention to detail that makes it worth the money (~$140; it's free if your university has a licence!). There is a [trial version](_URL_1_) which works for up to 100 references if you want to have a look at it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://citavi.com/en/index.html",
"http://citavi.com/en/download.html"
]
] |
|
20cna3
|
what is the purpose of checking in for a flight, if you can check in online?
|
The term 'check in' is usually indicative of arriving somewhere, so if you can check in prior to even getting to the airport, why even have the process in place?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20cna3/eli5_what_is_the_purpose_of_checking_in_for_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg1xm07",
"cg1zfei",
"cg20kcf",
"cg23hzp"
],
"score": [
17,
6,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"The online checkin process is mainly to get the customer to complete as much of the administration and data entry as possible before hand - rather than have staff do it whilst a queue waits.",
"You still need a boarding pass. \nYou still need to weigh your checked bags. ",
"In the US, you can check in online and get your boarding pass.\n\nThen you can go directly to the gate as long as you do not have to check any luggage.",
"I'm not familiar with all the airlines in the industry, but one of my parents works for a US airline so I grew up flying non-revenue stand-by most of my life, and this is how I understand it.\n\nBooking agents for airlines, which have since evolved into computer systems in most cases, are allowed to oversell flights based on historic records of the same and similar flights. For example, imagine a flight from Atlanta to New York City, that leaves at noon, and has 200 seats available. Based on records of that flight in previous days, 20% of the people that purchased a ticket for the flight did not actually show up to take the flight. Therefore, the booking agents (or computers) are able to sell 15% more tickets for the flight than actually exist, or in this case, 230 tickets can be sold for a flight with only 200 seats. This information becomes more relevant towards the end of the check in process, as I will explain.\n\nThe check in period currently exists (at least on the carrier I'm familiar with) from 24 hours before the flight departs until 30 minutes before the flight departs. This period exists so that passengers that have purchased a ticket can check in with the airline and say they still plan on taking the flight for which they bought a ticket, and the airline marks that passenger's seat as claimed. Once there are only 30 minutes until the flight is going to depart, the gate attendant (the people physically at the gate that the plane is departing from) will open up the seats of all the passengers that haven't checked in, and will then give those seats to various forms of stand-by passengers in a seniority order - which include displaced passengers from other flights, passengers that bought stand-by tickets, or employees and their relatives flying non-revenue stand-by. Once there are only 10 minutes left until the flight departs, even checked-in passengers that haven't boarded the plane may lose their seats if there are more stand-by passengers available at the gate, on a full flight.\n\nIn summary, it's my understanding that the check in process is something of a soft confirmation that can only occur in the 24 hours prior to the flight departing, and allows the airline to better streamline its boarding process in regards to ticketed and stand-by passengers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3da45g
|
Why do the edges of certain materials dry faster than the middles?
|
After it rains, the sidewalks usually dry from the edges in. Is there something special about the edges that makes them easier to dry?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3da45g/why_do_the_edges_of_certain_materials_dry_faster/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct3mm9t"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The edges are more likely than not touching more air than concrete found in the center of a section of sidewalk. Whereas the center only has exposure to air above it (along with a very small amount found in small cracks, etc), the edges are exposed to air on two fronts, the top and the side that goes into the ground. More air allows for more heat to transfer to the edges of the sidewalk, causing more water to evaporate. As the center is only exposed to air on the top, the water found in this section takes longer to acquire enough energy to evaporate, thus remaining wet for longer. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1s2o0m
|
Why can I hear a transmitted radio signal on several frequencies?
|
Hi everyone.
I tried [this](_URL_0_) tutorial and build a small radio transmitter out of my Raspberry Pi. The usage is really easy, I just plug in a file and the frequency on which I would like to broadcast and I can tune in on my radio.
I tried it on different frequencies (beforehand I read about frequencies I am not allowed to broadcast on) and found something funny:
If I tune my radio to 88MHz, I will also be able to hear the sound at a 44MHz, 22MHz or 10.5MHz transmission. How is this possible?
I also read that CB-Radio is transmitted at roughly 27Mhz, but I can also hear that in my normal FM-radio at roughly 105Mhz (again, a multiple of the "smallest" frequency.
Can someone explain me the physics behind this?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1s2o0m/why_can_i_hear_a_transmitted_radio_signal_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdtc2jl",
"cdtcra6",
"cdtew8q",
"cdtho2a"
],
"score": [
53,
4,
12,
5
],
"text": [
"Its called harmonics, the idea comes from that all waveforms comes from the sum of a series of increasing sinusodial waves. Meaing a 11MHz transducer is transducing a sum of 11Mhz, 22Mhz, 44Mhz, 88Mhz etc frequencies, but in decreasing amplitudes. But your reciever is sensitive enough to pick those harmonics up. \n\nI need to stress that this is not a problem with your transducer, but a fundamental property of maths and physics.",
"/u/zalaesseo said it perfect. I'll add that fast food restaurant wireless headsets operate in a frequency range you can access. They use two frequencies, one to talk to the drive through speaker and one to talk back inside. Electronics are fun. Source: USCG electronics school and way too much free time.\n\nI'm not condoning sending signals to a drive through speaker, but I'm not saying it isn't funny either. The people inside can't hear you and will have no idea what's going on.",
"Despite the excellent answer, I'm going to contribute here because I used to be a serious RF hobbyist and I still have a great deal of enthusiasm for the field (pun semi-intentional) and specifically for harmonics.\n\nHarmonics are harder to come by nowadays when DXing (monitoring, analyzing and identifying radio signals). The reason is that much of the newer digitally-augmented electronics are designed to detect and filter out harmonics (called harmonic rejection). Or digital tuners may not allow you to lock onto a harmonic, because harmonics tend to run substantially lower power and the tuner will simply interpret it as a \"weak\" station.\n\nSo if you have an older dial tuner receiver, you can more easily pick up these little treasures. You can also get specialized equipment.\n\nThe other reason for fewer observed RF harmonics these days is that the nicer, commercial transmitters (FM, UHF, VHF, SW, etc.) have gotten pretty good at minimizing harmonics. Harmonics are a huge indicator to the regulators that you have an out-of-compliance transmitter... and that can get you into big trouble, especially if the harmonic \"steps\" over another licensed station. \n\nI might also add that RF engineers have gotten very proficient at dealing with terrestrial contours that can induce a harmonic skip... a fairly rare phenomenon that's really fun to discover. Basically it's a reflection of an RF signal that shifts frequency... sometimes to a harmonic of the original signal. So essentially, you are listening to an \"accidental\" radar.\n\nA loosely associated phenomenon called Phase Shift can also be observed, that's kind of like this, but that's another topic entirely.",
" > 44MHz, 22MHz or 10.5MHz transmission. \n\nHearing 44 on 88 is probably via the second harmonic, as has already been said. 22 Mhz is likely the 4th harmonic. Odds are you will get a stronger signal if you transmit on something like 29.3 instead, as the third harmonic is typically stronger than the 2nd or 4th.\n\nHowever with the 10.5MHz, I believe you are probably overloading the \"front end\" of the receiver and getting the signal past the filters. 10.5 Mhz (or frequently 10.4 Mhz) is frequently used in superheterodyne receiver (the predominate type nowadays) as an I.F. (intermediate frequency) \n\n_URL_0_\n\nIt's too bad that your radio probably doesn't have a signal strength meter. You could do some simple experiments to verify"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.icrobotics.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Turning_the_Raspberry_Pi_Into_an_FM_Transmitter"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver#Intermediate_frequency_amplifier"
]
] |
|
88yq2i
|
why is it easier to shoot at people under you in games?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/88yq2i/eli5_why_is_it_easier_to_shoot_at_people_under/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dwo4ia3",
"dwo50je",
"dwo579d"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Insert \"i have the high ground\" meme.\n\nIts not only in games, highround has the vision advantage. ",
"Mostly you look more toward ground then toward sky. So usually u see tinks blow you faster.",
"When in high ground, you just need to poke your head out to see entire body of enemies, meanwhile they can only see your head which is much smaller than whole body so it's a lot harder to hit you. In addition, if you need to take cover for reload or heal, you can just take a step back or crouch, while in low ground you must find a proper cover"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3tn3jx
|
why doesn't the us place a price ceiling on medical equipment ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tn3jx/eli5_why_doesnt_the_us_place_a_price_ceiling_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx7klmu",
"cx7mm68"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The issue is that developing new medicines or medical devices is somewhat of a gamble. It costs a lot of money and the project you're working on might turn out to be ineffective or not be approved by the FDA or whatever. The prospect of being able to make a lot of money encourages companies to go out there and spend a lot of money developing new medicines.\n\nThere are certain things that could be done to make this system work better, either by identifying situations where the market is failing and then trying to fix them with new rules, or by subsidizing poor people's drug bills more, or by having the government take a more active role in research and development of new medical technology. A blanket law that said something like \"no pill shall cost more than $10\" would not be a good idea though.",
"The primary purpose of manufacturing medical products is for the company to sell it at a profit in order to make money. If the government were to institute a price cap that would negatively impact their profits and reduce their incentive to release new products. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
95znti
|
What is happening at the molecular level when water is being squeezed or wrung out of something?
|
For example. a washcloth. Obviously, if you let it run underneath the faucet, it gets waterlogged, and wet. But then if you start squeezing and twisting it, the water comes out fairly easily. Is it just that you're compressing the fibers to the point where there's no space for the water to exist between them anymore? What's going on?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/95znti/what_is_happening_at_the_molecular_level_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3wyg0b"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Water goes into fabric and is held in small spaces where its cohesive and adhesive properties hold it to the fibers in the cloth. Tighten up the fibers (by wringing) and you restrict the space the water can be in squeezing it out of all its little spaces in the cloth."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5g7taa
|
why do people hide their license plate when selling their vehicle but not always their vin?
|
What's the rationale behind not showing your license plate when selling your car but sharing the VIN number is okay?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5g7taa/eli5_why_do_people_hide_their_license_plate_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"daq6lhu",
"daq7mi5",
"daq88em",
"daqdhzy",
"daqslgh"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The VIN number only shows who manufactured the car and what model it is. The licence plate tells you what state the car is in and, if someone is thorough, it can reveal the location. You don't want randoms knowing where you live.",
"Somewhat easy, there is belief that car thieves will look on craigslist for cars with high $$$ upgrades on the inside, than use the license plate to gain a location. If you talk all this and that about upgrades like speakers, headunit, and tuners but don't mention anything about an alarm system that you've basically told everyone I have basic security protecting all these upgrades. ",
"If someone get someone else's license plate number they could use it in a false 911 phone call and cause major inconvenience to someone (basically a softer version of SWATTING). This happened to a friend of mine a few years back while selling his car, he forgot to blank the liscense plate and someone 400km away saw the add and called his plate in for speeding or something and the police showed up at his door and questioned him, however they quickly realized it would be impossible for my friend to drive 400km in just over an hour. VIN numbers show manufacturer information, and the VIN number is often used to search for the value of the vehicle on programs such as \"blue-book\".",
" Besides someone noticing your car in a parking lot that was on craigslist, \nThere's an actual Federal law for this called the Driver's Privacy Protection Act. \nBack before there were many privacy laws someone such as a licensed private investigator could put in a request and for a fee find this information, well this led to a murder so since then its very limited. You have to go to great lengths, lie and falsify requests in order to find this out today and that owners plate has to give written consent of their information\n\nThen you have each States motor vehicle offices that have their own rules\n\nBasically only police and official business can search plates for driver information. For such instance a tow truck company can request info to a vehicle they towed, only official stuff like this",
"One reason that is not mentioned yet is that if you put your car up for sale and show the plates someone else with a very similar or identical car know enough of what your plates look like to effectively give you blame for everything they do for weeks or even months before getting caught.\n\nParking tickets, automated speeding cameras, surveillance reviews after break ins, automated toll roads and all kinds of stuff can make you spend all your free time on the phone for quite a while to have it sorted out.\n\nBlock your plates."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
qz7e0
|
How often does a comet crash into the Sun?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/qz7e0/how_often_does_a_comet_crash_into_the_sun/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c41msal",
"c41ow86"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Only one time per comet.",
"The current generation of solar satellites have revolutionized our understanding of this. As of 2011 they've spotted something in the neighborhood of 2024 comets since 1995 (couldn't find the current count). That's a simple average of 126 per year, though the pace of discovery hasn't been constant; [it took 10 years to find the first 1000, but only 5 to double it.](_URL_0_) The really neat thing is that the vast majority are discovered by regular folks who are interested in the Sun and look at the data themselves!\n\nThe majority are from a large comet that broke up into many, many, many pieces, called [Kreutz Sungrazers](_URL_1_). They pass within 1-2 times the radius of the sun, and most evaporate and do not make it around for a second pass. \n\nSometimes, however, they do! [Here you can see Comet Lovejoy on approach and then leaving.](_URL_2_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/soho/comet-2000.html",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreutz_Sungrazers",
"http://sohodata.nascom.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/data_query_search_url?Session=web&Resolution=2&Display=Movie&Start=2011-12-14&Finish=2011-12-17&Instrument=LASCO&Detector=C3"
]
] |
||
4g84lf
|
what is with the sometime hours and hours or delay in having sore/dead/tired legs after over doing and pushing yourself with leg exercise/walking/running?
|
Of*
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4g84lf/eli5_what_is_with_the_sometime_hours_and_hours_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2fbbqb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I believe it's somewhat to do with DOMS (Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness), in which your body begins to repair tiny microtears in the muscle fibres of your legs after long periods of exertion.\n\nDoing this makes your legs stronger and able to endure more physical activity. It's like how people build muscle in the gym.\n\nThe delay must be due to inflammation occurring in your leg tissue hours later as the body begins to repair them. Not inflammation in the sense that your legs are gonna swell up and become red and very hot, but bits of inflammation in the muscle fibres which add up to aching. There'd probably be lactic acid present as well which contributes to the aches, like how a stitch aches.\n\nExplained this out of my own idea of it, so if I'm a bit off what actually happens, I apologise."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
38q2uq
|
why is a revealing outfit that doesn't quite bare all often so much more attractive than a completely nude body?
|
Even when their body is absolutely flawless?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38q2uq/eli5_why_is_a_revealing_outfit_that_doesnt_quite/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crwxeto"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"For the same reason that things like burlesque and stripper shows are popular. It's about anticipation and tantalisation. While the body is covered up, your imagination is running wild. Even the most flawless body is still just a body. Your imagination is always more powerful.\n\nEDIT: general useless spelling."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2ok5xw
|
why does food dye in milk react in such a way when soap is added?
|
[video](_URL_0_)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ok5xw/eli5_why_does_food_dye_in_milk_react_in_such_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmnvdiz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The soap breaks the surface tension of the milk. The food coloring rests on top because it has a lower density than milk. When you drop soap in the middle, the surface tension drops. But it takes time for that effect to reach the edge of the container. So the edge of milk still has all it's surface tension while the middle doesn't. This makes the food coloring move toward the edges. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ5_2OykNrk"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1k3ua6
|
how are government subsidies for food producers different from an indirect food tax?
|
Hey reddit economists, historians and food system experts!
I was researching Fredrick II's reform of indirect food taxes in
Prussia, and I got mighty confused. The general consensus among historians seems to be that placing undue tax burden on food in order to manipulate the market and increase tax revenue is less than ideal... However, when I started reading more about the current system in the US, I began to wonder if we actually have something similar in place.
This is how I gather our system works, in my nascent understanding:
1. We subsidize large corporate food production entities while placing barriers for entry to these programs for independent/smaller/alternative producers.
2. These subsidies enable the subsidized food entities to maintain (artificially) lower prices due to the continuous additional income from tax dollars as well as the increased revenue produced by the fact that these (artificially) low prices enable the subsidized producers to take over an increasing market share.
3. The consumer buys ostensibly "cheap" food in order to survive. Meanwhile, the decreased popularity of "expensive" food provided by producers receiving less in subsidies forces the cost of the production of the food by these producers higher. This further widens the competitiveness gap between subsidized and less or non subsidized food producers. Thus, inevitably, subsidies decrease the ability of less or non subsidized producers to compete.
4. Ultimately, the consumer pays tax dollars for the privilege of having a decreased choice in affordable food, and a market biased toward government subsidized producers. If the consumer chooses to consume any foodstuff other than that provided by subsidized producers, the consumer is still paying, via tax-funded government subsidies, for the production of food that ultimately increases the price of what they consume... Which all seems pretty sucky.
My questions are:
1. How are food producer subsidies different from an indirect food tax?
2. If food subsidies are a form of indirect tax, why don't we ever hear about it?
3. How does the government ensure subsidized producers do not take over an outsized market share in production of a certain foodstuff if the market is in fact skewed towards the subsidized producers?
4. Does a tax by any other name still smell as sweet? (OK, I am truly sorry about that one.)
To be fair, when I tried to sort out my confusion, I found this definition of indirect tax from good ole investopedia:
A tax that increases the price of a good so that consumers are actually paying the tax by paying more for the products. An indirect tax is most often thought of as a tax that is shifted from one taxpayer to another, by way of an increase in the price of the good. Fuel, liquor and cigarette taxes are all considered examples of indirect taxes, as many argue that the tax is actually paid by the end consumer, by way of a higher retail price.
Be kind if I've made a mess of understanding our food system and the difference between a subsidy and indirect tax in this case. Just thought there might be someone else out there who cares and could use a simplified explanation from an expert. Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1k3ua6/eli5_how_are_government_subsidies_for_food/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbl3rxx",
"cbl62ft"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Do you read The Week (the magazine)? They just had a good feature on US food subsidies.\n\nAnyways, there is a very simple difference between an indirect tax and a subsidy. \n\nA tax generates revenue for the government. A subsidy is *paid for by the government*, meaning they lose money on it.\n\nIn terms of effects, (changes to price and quantity), they are generally the same.\n\nFor your other questions:\n\n- I don't know about you, but I heard a lot of debate when the new US Farm Bill was being proposed. The main problem is that it is *so* complex that many common people do not understand most of it. However, there have been a lot of controversies in recent years surrounding it, so I think we can expect reform in the next decade or two.\n\n- They can't, really. The large producers expend a lot of resources on how to get the best deal from the government, from lobbying to expansion/contraction of business. The government does not know the *exact* cost structures or production capabilities of the firms, so have to approximate, which leads to inefficiencies.\n\n- ...\n\nHope this helped!\n\n",
"The difference is that tax money is fungible. Yes, the government derives the money for subsidies from taxes, but it can tax anything to subsidize anything else, so you can pay for food subsidies with fuel or luxury or anything else taxes, thus displacing the costs. A direct tax effects the cost of the specific item that it is placed upon."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1ryihz
|
i know it's not quite scientific, but what are elementary particles(e.g. leptons, bosons) "made of"?
|
I also realize that the explanations would be theoretical or hypothetical, as well, but what are some of the popular ideas floating around? Is it simply "constrained energy", or something more? This question always makes me scratch my head and fascinates me.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ryihz/eli5i_know_its_not_quite_scientific_but_what_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cds7bnc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Thank you all for your answers! I suppose the question was easier to answer than I thought, though as I would hope, I'm still left wanting more answers to the universes mysteries. I imagine my talk with a physics professor would go something like:\nMe: \"Where did that come from?\"\nProfessor: *Explanation given*\nMe: \"But where did THAT come from?\"\nProfessor: *Explanation given*\nMe: \"But where did THAT come from?\"\nProfessor: \"We don't quite know\"\nMe: ...... \"Amazing\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5h1l0a
|
How does the electrolyte function in a dry cell battery?
|
I realized yesterday that I didn't understand how batteries really work, and now it's driving me crazy! I've been doing tons of research online but every explanation seems to come really close and then stops short of explaining the whole process. I understand the basic battery setup is Anode (neg end), Cathode (pos end) and the electrolyte in between.
Here are my two main questions:
1. If the Anode is negatively charged and the Cathode is positively charged, wouldn't connecting these two with a wire immediately move electrons from the negative to positive metal? Why do you need a complete a circuit for the process to occur? In other words, why doesn't connecting a positively charged metal to a negatively charged metal start an electric current? Aren't the electrons required for electricity originating from the Anode?
2. If the electrolyte connects the positively charged metal and negatively charged metal inside a cell, and it moves electrons back to the anode after they've traveled through the wire to the cathode, why does a battery ever deplete? Why aren't electrons just moving in a never ending circle?
I know this is all an oversimplification, but I can't wrap my mind around the whole process. I keep reading articles and watching videos, and all they seem to do is explain how electrons move from the anode to the cathode (_URL_0_) but nothing seems to explain what's happening in the middle of the battery with the electrolyte.
If you know of any good videos/reading material that explains the process, I'd love to know! I've obviously tried looking on Google & YouTube and nothing seems to have a complete explanation.
Thanks!!
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/5h1l0a/how_does_the_electrolyte_function_in_a_dry_cell/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dax70gb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"I can't tell you about the specifics of dry batteries but I can try to address your two main questions.\n\n1) The plates have positive or negative charges like a capacitor. However, unlike a capacitor, there are reactions at the electrodes that facilitate the replenishment of the charges and so a constant (-ish) voltage is maintained (a capacitor's voltage depletes overtime). Sometimes the electrodes themselves are involved in these reactions. But I think the your confusion follows from the fact that the electrons don't flow through the electrolyte. Charged ions carry the charge in the electrolyte. At least this is the case for liquid electrolytes. I can only assume that this is also the case with dry, solid-state batteries and I think it's the defects within the material that facilitate movement of charge.\n\n2) Imagine two half cells with two different concentrations of copper metal ions and each with a copper electrode. If you put an ionic bridge between the two beakers and connect a circuit to them, electrons will flow from the beaker with the lower Cu concentration to the beaker with the higher Cu concentration. The electrons will flow until the concentrations become equal and the cells are at equilibrium. This is why batteries 'run out' of energy; for the cell reaction to preceded any further and for one the concentrations to increase, energy must be supplied. Put another way, we've reach the bottom of a energy well and trying to go up either side of this well requires energy. However, instead of a difference in concentration, batteries typically utilise a difference in reactivity of two metals (you get a lot more energy compared with just a difference in concentration). This follows the same basic idea; the reaction or cell wants to move towards equilibrium. \n\nBut what happens to the electrons if there's a component in the circuit? They don't get used up. It's the energy they 'carry' that is used up, not the electrons. The current or flow of electrons is constant throughout the circuit."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.saveonenergy.com/how-batteries-work/"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
ce9oxv
|
what makes a good haircut?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ce9oxv/eli5_what_makes_a_good_haircut/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eu0kjjn",
"eu0ldef",
"eu0o910"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Asking what a good haircut looks like is like asking what a pretty flower looks like. You kinda just know it when you see it. Browse around on some “popular” haircuts and just tell your barber what you want. Seems like your gf already might have some ideas.",
"Go to a licensed barbershop. Not a salon or discount place. Ask for a gentlemen’s cut. Haircut should run you $30-40.\n\nAsk for a scissor cut. Long on top, taper fade on the sides.\n\nThis is pretty much the traditional ww2 style haircut everyone has. If you want to have a more extreme fade, you can ask them to use clippers down to a 1.\n\nI personally vary my fade length down to a 0, up to scissor length of a half inch depending on the season. \n\nBuy some “American crew” pomade off amazon for $10. Style your hair with that and a **wide toothed** comb. You can easily find one off amazon for < 5.",
"r/malegrooming is that way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8jdxce
|
In the nervous system, how exaclty does a stimulus cause the initial depolarization of the membrane that will then open the Sodium voltage-dependent channels once the treshold value is reached?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/8jdxce/in_the_nervous_system_how_exaclty_does_a_stimulus/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyz8ms2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"At the synapse, the presynaptic terminal releases neurotransmitter that causes receptors on the postsynaptic cell to respond. Typically this can be ligand gated ion channels, G\\-protein coupled receptors, or receptor tyrosine kinases. If the input is stimulatory, that is it triggers an action potential, the ligand gated channels allow sodium and/or calcium to enter the cell causing depolarization. If enough of those channels open to allow for above threshold level depolarization the voltage gated channels open. There are pretty complete explanations [here](_URL_0_).\n\nI tried to keep this explanation broad enough to be true of most types of action potential, but there are many specific types of nerves and synapses so if I didn't answer your question or if I missed your point let me know. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.khanacademy.org/science/health-and-medicine/nervous-system-and-sensory-infor/neuron-membrane-potentials-topic/v/neuron-graded-potential-mechanism"
]
] |
||
2cvkve
|
where the phrase 'second nature' comes from
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cvkve/eli5_where_the_phrase_second_nature_comes_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjjfib2"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"It's a corruption of the Latin phrase *secundum naturam*, which means 'according to one's nature'. Basically, whatever you're referring to meshes well with your natural abilities or tendencies, as opposed to something that was *contra naturam* (against one's nature), or *super naturam* (above nature, or Godlike). "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
920t84
|
Wool as a materials for uniforms: why? And why into WW2?
|
I’m a military uniform collector, and one (perhaps foolish) thing I’ve always wondered is why wool persisted so long as a main material for military field uniforms. It doesn’t seem too durable, or comfortable. Even in countries with abundant cotton (the United States), we see wool shirts, pants, and jackets being worn in the field even in WW2!
The Germans, the Brits, The French, etc all wore primarily wool tunics and trousers. Was this due to tradition? Wool’s inherent properties? Availability?
Post war, we see a lot of nations transitioning to cotton-based uniforms, many based on the M43 and fatigue uniforms the United States had developed. Why did everyone suddenly shift? Had they finally accepted that cotton was the future? Was civilian fashion and technology an influence?
Sorry if this is a bit rambly, but I just find it strange to compare the rapid shift from pre-war heavy wool, to the lightweight camo cottons of the cold war!
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/920t84/wool_as_a_materials_for_uniforms_why_and_why_into/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e337gbs",
"e34y2vs"
],
"score": [
4,
27
],
"text": [
"Delving at little further into OPs question I'm curious if there was a transition period at all where there were wool uniforms for some environments and cotton uniforms for others? Did the layering of uniforms change to mitigate the loss of advantages wool offers, such as wool or (eventually) synthetic undergarments?\n\n \n\nI'm basing this follow up question on the belief that is common within the outdoors community that wool offers a lot of advantages over cotton.",
"Alright, since no good answer has come up yet, I'll field this one. \n\nThere are a lot of misconceptions about wool, and they mostly stem from the horrible synthetic blends that parade around as \"wool\" in cheap suits, cheap coats, cheap socks, and cheap blankets. If your only personal experience with wool is with something like that, of course it seems like a horrifying material to wear, especially in a military uniform. \n\nBut wool was used for hundreds of years, if not thousands, because it was one of the most widely available, inexpensive, and versatile fabrics available to humanity until the last 40 years or so. Depending on the weave and thickness, wool could make quite comfortable blankets, coats, or cloaks, and was even used for athletic clothing and swimwear. Wool wicks moisture away from the body, making it an ideal fabric for cold weather wear, since the material will keep sweat from staying on the body and will prevent outer moisture from penetrating. Outdoor wear, even today, is highly dependent on wool as an inner layer, especially in socks, because other fabrics (like cotton) will swell with moisture and, once wet, will get extremely cold and make the outer layer essentially useless in preventing cold-weather fatigue and injuries.\n\nWool also stretches, and is extremely pliable and durable. Medieval hose, which were often meant to be skin-tight, were generally made of wool and were expected to last a year or more of continuous use. Heavier upper-body clothing, like doublets and coats and overcoats, et al, were often made from a heavier weave and were similarly durable and long-lasting.\n\nSo for military uniforms, wool is beneficial in cold climates because its moisture-wicking properties, and is also not as uncomfortable as you might imagine in hot climates. Wool breathes, it's part of the same microscopic geometry that makes it wick moisture, and so in even direct sunlight it does a good job of blocking sunlight while allowing fresh air to penetrate. An undershirt of cotton with an overshirt or blouse of wool was a standard of the US army, even in the west, where temperatures could fluctuate wildly.\n\nSo there's no reason that wool was holding anything back or was somehow sub-standard. Cotton blends became less expensive and as uniforms changed it was simply a better option for hard-use field uniforms, but wool remained the main component of dress uniforms for a very long time.\n\nIt's honeslty hard to find sources that argue all of this of any quality, partly because wool's ubiquity is itself a weird paradox; when it was the only choice no one wrote about it because it was obvious. Nowadays the assumption is that wool is terrible and scratchy and bad, thanks to synthetic blends. And now, of course, there *are* better options for many things. Performance fabrics and the like. Much of my familiarity with it is wearing wool uniforms at a working historic site, and just realizing that I was fairly comfortable even when the temperatures reached the 90s F, and when I changed back into modern t-shirt and shorts it made very little difference to my personal comfort.\n\ntl;dr, though: wool is extremely versatile, and until the mid 20th century or so was abundant and inexpensive, and made an ideal choice for all sorts of uses."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
272v5r
|
what's wrong with dumping radioactive waste in the bottom of the ocean?
|
IIRC, James Cameron took an underwater vehicle to the bottom of the Marianas trench and found to it be practically devoid of life.
If we dumped our nuclear waste there, what chance would it have getting back up into the ecosystem?
I understand there are some living things in there, but is it worse to expose them to the waste than potentially all the organisms, including people, of terrestrial disposal sites?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/272v5r/eli5_whats_wrong_with_dumping_radioactive_waste/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chwv8af",
"chwv91n",
"chwv93p",
"chwvasy",
"chwvgc2"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
4,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Kaiju \nGojira \nHave you no cinema history? \n/s",
"Offhand, I would consider deep ocean circulation. Water in the ocean can be separated into several parts but basically consider top and bottom. Top is moved by wind but bottom is moved by slight differences in temperature and salinity. Eventually though, due to the movements of the top, the water from the bottom will move up (like peru). This means that nutrients and whatever is in the bottom water ends up going up and mixing with the water on top. Peru is a good example for this, where the upwelling allows for good fishing conditions. \n\nIf we then consider how certain things move up the food chain, it would be a bad idea. Short term there shouldn't be too much problem but in the long run. It could be worse.",
"Godzillas Godzillas everywhere",
"Yes! Because the solution to pollution is dilution!",
"It is because of how sensitive ecological systems can be. \n\n Adding or subtracting away elements of the environment could potentially mess up other important processes that is crucial for all kinds of lifeforms to live. \nIf we introduce radioactive material maybe it'll deter certain type of animals away that help regulate blooms in algae. Maybe it'll get rid of viruses that help liberate some of the carbon from single-celled organisms. With the ocean it is really hard to determine what might happen, because oceans have currents which directly connects other ecosystems together and so we don't want to mess with that until we know the full picture."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a7q611
|
Were Henrietta Lack's cells special?
|
I was wondering if Henrietta's cells were special to begin with, or if the same result, that is making the immortal cells so important in research, could have been achieved by using canceorus cells from any other person?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/a7q611/were_henrietta_lacks_cells_special/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ec4zbd0",
"ec4zlg3"
],
"score": [
75,
6
],
"text": [
"This is a great question! By today's standards, there is nothing inherently special about HeLa cells. Not only do we have countless \"immortal\" cell lines from other people, we have very well established protocols for immortalizing cell lines ourselves.\n\nHowever, at the time Henrietta Lacks' cells were isolated, this was definitely not the case. These were the first human cells which were found to be able to divide indefinitely. Prior to this, cells would last only a few divisions before either dying or changing dramatically. The use of HeLa cells allowed for: 1.) More convenient cell culturing; and 2.) More importantly, it allowed the scientific field to \"normalize\" their *in vitro* research in a profound way.\n\nAll that said, HeLa cells were special because they were the *first* of their kind isolated, not because they were inherently special. In theory, cells of equivalent value could have been isolated from any cancer patient. ",
"At the time yes, they were the first immortalized human cell line which made it much easier to perform experiments in human cells since you could start with a single cell grow that out into many cells that are more or less identical. But these days there are many such cell lines. They are all unique though, having different mutations/coming from different tissues and HeLa cells are still a go-to cell line for many researchers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
70noau
|
why does the skin on our hands & feet have so many lines (i.e. fingerprints)?
|
Do they serve any purpose?
Why does the skin on the rest of our body not have them?
(And why are they in such beautiful patterns?)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70noau/eli5_why_does_the_skin_on_our_hands_feet_have_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn4icgr"
],
"score": [
21
],
"text": [
"They increase the grip and durability of that surface, the rest of your skin is pretty slick.\n\nThe process that your body uses to create that type of skin also blocks hair growth and disables melanin production though, so it's only done on the palms and bottoms of your feet."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
kute0
|
If neutrinos turn out to be faster than light, are they useful in any way? Communication?
|
If the experiment proves true, is it theoretically possible to use neutrinos for communications? Im not incredibly clear on how they are detected as well as whether or not we can manipulate them at all. Not would it be faster than light but you would eliminate the need for satellites as well given that they can travel through the earth.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/kute0/if_neutrinos_turn_out_to_be_faster_than_light_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2ne9g4",
"c2ne9to",
"c2nf4ic",
"c2nfcah",
"c2ngjcj",
"c2nhiau",
"c2ne9g4",
"c2ne9to",
"c2nf4ic",
"c2nfcah",
"c2ngjcj",
"c2nhiau"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
3,
11,
2,
2,
2,
12,
3,
11,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It is possible, but neutrinos are very hard to detect for the same reason that allows them to travel through the earth.",
"The recent measurement has no practical implications for communication. Neutrinos make inefficient signals because they are almost indetectable. One application I've seen proposed is for messaging submarines, because radio can't penetrate and sound is slow. ",
"Well, if the experiment holds (big if), the neutrinos were only travelling a few parts in a million faster...not much of a gain there.\n\nSecond, since neutrinos are so hard to detect, the bandwidth would be terrible...you'd basically be making a billion dollar telegraph machine. \n\nFinally, since neutrinos pass through everything, you couldn't shield your device...essentially, you could only have one of them running on the entire planet at a time. ",
"Basically, if the neutrinos are really moving faster than light, then the universe is operating according to rules so new and different that it's hard to say for certain what would happen if it were true. \n\nI'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it would \"change everything\" if we discovered this were true. Communication via neutrinos is very difficult, but if we found out about whole new laws of physics, who knows what ramifications that would ultimately have. \n\nBasically, there's no clear line from this to a practical application, but if it were true, it would change everything, and changing everything almost always leads to practical applications down the road in ways that are unforeseeable. \n\nThat's why our species is working so hard at CERN. There are huge practical applications-- they're just so far away, we can't say for sure what those applications are. ",
"[Very speculative] Is it not possible that there is an entire branch of super-luminal physics where our sub-luminal laws don’t fully apply?\n\nFor the sake of speculation let’s call it super-luminal mechanics. This could be something like time slowing down when approaching c, but remains at zero once reached/crossed – thus separating space and time in super-luminal mechanics. \n",
" > If the experiment proves true, is it theoretically possible to use neutrinos for communications?\n\nEven if it proves false you can communicate with neutrinos. Guy at CERN says to guy at OPERA: \"If you receive some neutrinos from me, that means 'yes', otherwise 'no'\".\n\nThe question is why would you want to? You'd be trading a 0.0000248% improvement in latency for an epically, massively, absurdly bad decrease in bandwidth.",
"It is possible, but neutrinos are very hard to detect for the same reason that allows them to travel through the earth.",
"The recent measurement has no practical implications for communication. Neutrinos make inefficient signals because they are almost indetectable. One application I've seen proposed is for messaging submarines, because radio can't penetrate and sound is slow. ",
"Well, if the experiment holds (big if), the neutrinos were only travelling a few parts in a million faster...not much of a gain there.\n\nSecond, since neutrinos are so hard to detect, the bandwidth would be terrible...you'd basically be making a billion dollar telegraph machine. \n\nFinally, since neutrinos pass through everything, you couldn't shield your device...essentially, you could only have one of them running on the entire planet at a time. ",
"Basically, if the neutrinos are really moving faster than light, then the universe is operating according to rules so new and different that it's hard to say for certain what would happen if it were true. \n\nI'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it would \"change everything\" if we discovered this were true. Communication via neutrinos is very difficult, but if we found out about whole new laws of physics, who knows what ramifications that would ultimately have. \n\nBasically, there's no clear line from this to a practical application, but if it were true, it would change everything, and changing everything almost always leads to practical applications down the road in ways that are unforeseeable. \n\nThat's why our species is working so hard at CERN. There are huge practical applications-- they're just so far away, we can't say for sure what those applications are. ",
"[Very speculative] Is it not possible that there is an entire branch of super-luminal physics where our sub-luminal laws don’t fully apply?\n\nFor the sake of speculation let’s call it super-luminal mechanics. This could be something like time slowing down when approaching c, but remains at zero once reached/crossed – thus separating space and time in super-luminal mechanics. \n",
" > If the experiment proves true, is it theoretically possible to use neutrinos for communications?\n\nEven if it proves false you can communicate with neutrinos. Guy at CERN says to guy at OPERA: \"If you receive some neutrinos from me, that means 'yes', otherwise 'no'\".\n\nThe question is why would you want to? You'd be trading a 0.0000248% improvement in latency for an epically, massively, absurdly bad decrease in bandwidth."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
96tf3v
|
During the time of the moon landing did people get upset about the governments space race and the mission to the moon?
|
I just really am curious if the general population had any problems with the American governments insistence on going to the moon at the time. Did people worry about the financial implications? Were they upset the money could have been spent elsewhere?
Tldr; was there opposion in the general public to the moon landing, and it's associated missions?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/96tf3v/during_the_time_of_the_moon_landing_did_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e43c0iu"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Absolutely. In fact, at no point prior to the first Moon landing did the program receive a majority of support by the public at large. Indeed, there were several notable very vocal public opponents of the program because they felt it drew funds away from or was a distraction from now important work (such as poverty reduction and anti-segregation).\n\nAnd in some regards they had a solid case to make. In the 1960s the per capita gdp of the US was considerably lower than today. There was a level of common poverty that existed then that today exists mostly in the developing world. Remember that in the 1960s the whole country didn't even have indoor plumbing, electricity, or phones. And, of course, this was also the peak of the struggle against Jim Crow. Many people, correctly, saw the moon race as a geopolitical struggle and lamented the waste of resources for what was effectively war making on another front. Even more so while the Vietnam War was raging.\n\nIt was only after the fact that the Apollo program became more closely associated with peace, science, and the inchoate environmental movement. And, of course, for the spending to become a sunk cost that couldn't be undone or diverted elsewhere.\n\nSources & further reading:\n\n* [Historical Studies in the Societal Impact of Spaceflight pgs. 12-17 particularly (25-30 in the pdf)](_URL_3_)\n* [Public opinion polls and perceptions of US human spaceflight](_URL_0_)\n* [Moondoggle: The Forgotten Opposition to the Apollo Program](_URL_2_)\n* Gil-Scott Heron (of \"the revolution will not be televised\" fame): [Whitey on the Moon](_URL_1_)\n* [The Apollo Disappointment Industry](_URL_4_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222859179_Public_opinion_polls_and_perceptions_of_US_human_spaceflight",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4",
"https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/moondoggle-the-forgotten-opposition-to-the-apollo-program/262254/",
"https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/historical-studies-societal-impact-spaceflight-ebook_tagged.pdf",
"https://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/the-apollo-disappointment-industry-113352455/"
]
] |
|
99llav
|
Who discovered energy = force x distance, and how?
|
I'm guessing someone did a bunch of experimental work figuring this stuff out.. but who?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/99llav/who_discovered_energy_force_x_distance_and_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e4ql00n"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"The work done by a force was simply *defined* to be the line integral of the force field along the particle's path. There's nothing to discover. But this turns out to be *useful* because of the work-energy theorem and conservation of energy, which can be proven using Newton's laws and experimentally verified."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ddrxr
|
Dinosaurs and the Square/Cube Law: How'd it all work?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ddrxr/dinosaurs_and_the_squarecube_law_howd_it_all_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9znu6i",
"c9ps21k"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"I think it's a shame that this site comes up as the 4th Google result for \"square cube law\". It sounds more like conspiracy quackery than a scientific critique. Is this guy just a crypto-creationist or what?",
"The square/cube law applies to objects (or animals) that scale isometrically. In other words, the object exactly retains its shape and relative dimensions, it just scales in size. Think of a scale-model matchbox car relative to a real car. \n\nYou can imagine an isometrically scaled chicken as being a chicken that is longer, taller, and wider by a factor *n*, with *n^2* times the surface area, and *n^3* times the mass of a regular chicken.\n\nIn reality, species do not tend to scale isometrically, due to the problems it would create. For example, a chicken that is 10 times as tall as a regular chicken would weigh 10^3 = 1000 times as much, but the cross-sectional area of its leg bones would only be 10^2 = 100 times greater. This means the static pressure the bones would have to bear would be 1000/100 = 10 times greater than for a regular chicken.\n\nFor this reason, many aspects of physiology are found to scale [allometrically](_URL_0_). For example, larger animals tend to have much stockier legs, dinosaurs being no exception to this.\n\nThis also applies to metabolism. Larger animals tend to burn less energy per unit mass per unit time. Specifically, metabolic rate scales as approximately mass^{3/4}, so metabolic rate per unit mass scales as approximately mass^{3/4} /mass = mass^{-1/4}. This relationship is known as [Kleiber's Law](_URL_1_). While we cannot study metabolic rates of extinct species, the ubiquity of this law in living species suggests that dinosaurs too would have followed it.\n\nIn addition, a lot of early estimates of dinosaur masses are now thought to have been [too high](_URL_2_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allometry",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleiber%27s_law",
"http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/dinosaurs/9312462/Dinosaurs-much-lighter-than-previously-thought.html"
]
] |
||
1fnn41
|
Why when looking at a clear container holding water from a side the surface of the water looks like a mirror? Is it the container or the water?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1fnn41/why_when_looking_at_a_clear_container_holding/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cac0tok",
"cacltgg"
],
"score": [
12,
2
],
"text": [
"You mean the underside of the water? It's because of [total internal reflection](_URL_0_). That's the water. ",
"Materials have a property called refractive index: this measures how fast light travels in the medium, and how much it bends the light when it enters the medium. For any point where there is a change of refractive index (going from water to air, for example), there is an angle at which the light bends so much that it never goes into the air, and is a reflection instead. This is called total internal reflection."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_internal_reflection"
],
[]
] |
||
2uucpi
|
Is there a point between the earth and the moon where their gravitational forces cancel out?
|
Or is the Earth's gravitational field too strong compared to the moon's? Is it possible for this to occur between stars or planets?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2uucpi/is_there_a_point_between_the_earth_and_the_moon/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cobwpv1",
"coc0cgn"
],
"score": [
18,
5
],
"text": [
"Yes, and it has a name. That's the Earth-moon L1 point.\n\nYou can float there but you are in unstable equilibrium; if you are nudged even slightly to one side then you will drift towards either the moon or Earth never to return.\n\nThe SOHO satellite is at the Earth/Sun L1 to monitor the sun and [continually take pictures of it](_URL_0_) without ever having an object get in the way of the sun. It starts drifting away every once in a while but moves itself back.\n\nThere are not one but five different points around any two objects where gravity and centrifugal force will cancel and you can just hang there with little or no effort. There are [lots of things](_URL_1_) at Lagrange points. L4 and L5 are stable; Jupiter has a whole collection of asteroids that have become caught in those points.\n\n",
"I think what you're asking about is Lagrange points: YES there is a point between the Earth and moon where the gravitational forces balance (I wouldn't say \"cancel\" per se). Here's a [YouTube video](_URL_0_) of astronomer Phil Plait explaining Lagrange points. The point you're asking about is L1, but as other commenters mention, Lagrange points get more complicated than an in-between point when you consider that moon is in constant motion, orbiting the Earth. A star-planet system (eg the sun and Earth) will have Lagrange points as well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://soho.esac.esa.int/data/realtime-images.html",
"http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/mission/observatory_l2.html"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD9qx6ZKc6k"
]
] |
|
pc7ml
|
How is the suffix of an element determined?
|
I woke up with this weird question on my mind for some reason. You have some elements ending in "gen" IE: Oxygen, Hydrogren, and some ending in "ium" IE: Cadmium, Helium, Francium. How are these suffixes determined?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/pc7ml/how_is_the_suffix_of_an_element_determined/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3o7b3v"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Well \"gen\" is ~~latin~~ greek for maker, or generator, the word \"Hydrogen\" literally means \"Water Maker\", whereas Oxygen (somewhat misnamed) means \"Sharp (Acid) Maker\"\n\nNot too sure what \"Ium\" means, but ^ is where the gen comes from!\n\nHope that helps :)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
8so2ig
|
the contradiction of why you have to wait x amount of hours to report someone missing when they also say the first 24-48 hours are most important?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8so2ig/eli5_the_contradiction_of_why_you_have_to_wait_x/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e10yien",
"e10yv61",
"e11483c"
],
"score": [
8,
18,
3
],
"text": [
"You can report it whenever you want, but if the person's only been missing a short time, and they are old enough to make their own decisions, the police are going to suspect they just decided to go somewhere and are not in trouble.",
"The 24 hour thing is a myth, an invention for police procedural dramas. In real Police stations they will ask why you suspect that a person has gone missing and will respond accordingly.\n\nFor example, a woman who comes to the Police station stating that her teenage daughter never came home from school and she was supposed to be home two hours ago, the Police might say that she's just running late.\n\nHowever if, in the same scenario, the woman explains that she's worried because she's seen suspicious behavior in the area then the Police may open an investigation immediately.",
"You don't have to wait 24 hours, and law enforcement encourages you to report missing people immediately. The issue is that they having limited resources, and can't go chasing after ever able-bodied adult who forgot to call home and say they are going to be late. 24-48 hours is the approximate range where \"they are passed out drunk at a friends house\" to \"maybe something fishy is going on\". But make no mistake, if your 12-year-old or parent with dementia isn't where they are supposed to be, the police will be all over that.\n\nAlso, while that 48 hours to solve a crime might be statistically accurate, it is also misleading. It isn't like at 48 hours and 1 minute things suddenly get harder. With many crimes, there is nothing to solve, what happened and who did it is obvious, and that brings the average way down. In addition, a significant portion of missing person cases does not involve a crime. Someone goes on vacation without telling anyone, gets pissed of at their family and stops taking their calls, or an ex-spouse is an hour late bringing the kids back. Those don't factor into the statistics, because there was no crime to be solved."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1vkeli
|
Can planets in the habitable zone have moons that also supports life?
|
I was just thinking about our moon and how cool it would be if it was green and lush when we looked up at it. But it has no atmosphere since its too small, also, its too near the sun for its size, i guess? Also no magnetic shielding. Would this also be true for other moons around planets in the habitable zone?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1vkeli/can_planets_in_the_habitable_zone_have_moons_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cet88d5",
"cetev7n",
"cetght7"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think that the magnetic shielding would be a big issue. Even larger planets like Mars have their atmosphere stripped away by the solar winds, and Mars is much larger than our moon.",
"Earth sized planets with earth sized moons would be problematic. In theory, a sufficiently large planet with very large moons that could sustain their own magnetic fields, and retain their own atmospheres would be possible. We've seen gas giants closer to the sun than earth, and if you hit the right mix of sizes of planet, size of the moon, size of star and all the right distances, it would definitely be possible. Most likely very rare though (as even more variables need to be in the right ranges than for a habitable planet), and hard as hell to detect from earth, so we may never find or know of an example. ",
"While Jupiter isn't in the habitable zone, one of it's moons, [Europa](_URL_0_) is a target people are eager to explore for life/habitable conditions. The habitable zone (where liquid water is possible based on distance from the host star) isn't really a restrictive boundary, but more a best guess for where to look first."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_(moon\\)#Potential_for_extraterrestrial_life"
]
] |
|
38ms08
|
Would it be possible to make a mirror that reflects the image back the right way around?
|
By that I mean reflect back whatever is in front the way it is when you look straight at it, not "mirror imaged". I've seen those wacky mirrors that reflect upside down, would a horizontal version of that work? Would it be possible to do that and counteract the optical warping effects?
Obviously one can do this sort of thing with a tablet already but I'm curious whether this is optically possible. Either through a specially crafted slightly curved mirror or a more complex optical mechanism (several mirrors, playing with semi transparent/polarised screens etc.).
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/38ms08/would_it_be_possible_to_make_a_mirror_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crwisvo",
"crwj7ao"
],
"score": [
12,
4
],
"text": [
"Yes. This is called a [non-reversing mirror](_URL_0_). There were some articles about a new kind of such mirror invented a few years ago. The guy who did it also made a side view mirror with \"no blind spot\".",
"The operation of \"mirror imaging\" is called a reflexion or a parity transformation. It's not continuously deformed from the non-reflected image: a reflexion is really a discrete operation. Therefore curving or deforming any single mirror would not be enough to delete this effect.\n\nWhat you can do, though, is to exploit the fact that doing a second reflection cancels the effect of the first. So basically you want to use any system where your image is reflected an even number of times in mirrors (most practically two). This is what the practical example given by /u/albasri exploits."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-reversing_mirror"
],
[]
] |
|
1szuoo
|
how will the porn ban in the uk affect ordinary internet browsing?
|
For example, there are a lot of porn based subreddits on here, or subreddits which occasionally get pornographic material. Should I expect only the "gonewild" side of reddit to be censored, the "mild side" aswell or none at all?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1szuoo/eli5_how_will_the_porn_ban_in_the_uk_affect/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce2y2vr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Same way the torrent site \"ban\" affected torrents in the UK - > it won't."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3ux7lu
|
When and how did Boston, Massachusetts first become so heavily associated with Ireland and Irish culture?
|
From the Boston Celtics, to the stereotypical Irish cop on the streets, to the countless movies and TV shows portraying Irish Bostonians with their typical Southie accents and shamrock tattoos, to the many Celtic Rock bands from the Boston area, it seems this phenomenon is well understood. Does Boston simply have an extremely high proportion of Irish Americans? If so, when did this immigration occur, and why Boston, as opposed to any other major American city?
If this is a phenomenon that has occurred within the past 20 years, please feel free to remove this question.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3ux7lu/when_and_how_did_boston_massachusetts_first/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxjcmyo"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
" > Does Boston simply have an extremely high proportion of Irish Americans?\n\nYes, historically Boston was a site of major Irish immigration, beginning as early as the beginning of the 1800s but massively increasing from 1840-1870 as the influence of the Great Famine was felt in Ireland. \n\nIn the earliest decades of the nineteenth century, the general contours of Irish immigration was to first stop off in the ports of Atlantic Canada (Halifax, Montreal, Quebec) because the shipping rates to those ports were cheapest^1. After a few years, they would then move south to American cities such as Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. In this period from 1800-1820, the majority of immigrants from Ireland tended to be Irish Protestants, owing to the fact that Protestants tended to have greater resources to manage the trip across the atlantic.\n\nIn the period from 1820-1840, the demographics and contours changed, with greater numbers of impoverished Catholics leaving Ireland and heading directly for Boston or New York. This immigration of Catholics did prompt hostility from a Protestant Yankee native population, and this period saw some notable anti-Catholic riots. The most notable event in Boston was the [burning of the Ursuline convent](_URL_3_) in 1834. Another famous confrontation was the [broad street riot](_URL_0_) in 1837.\n\nAs the Great Famine ravaged Ireland from 1845 to 1849, massive numbers of Irish people left the island, far greater in scale than previous migrations. 200,000 Irish immigrated to America in the decade of the 1830s. In the 1840s, 780,000 Irish came to America, mostly after 1846. At the outset of the Famine, Boston had a population of approximately 115,000 residents. In 1847, the first year of major migration due to the famine, 37,000 Irish arrived in Boston^2. \n\nLike the earlier immigration from 1820-1840, this influx of Irish Catholics into a Protestant Yankee majority led to anti-immigrant hostility in the 1850s. In that decade, Know-Nothing politicians filled the State Senate, State House of Representatives, served as Governor and as Mayor of Boston^3.\n\nAs others have said in this thread, migration tended to flow towards established communities of Irish-Americans, where a migrant might have family or friends already living there. Thus, in the post-Famine period, Boston continued to see heavy migration of Irish people into the 1870s, and lower levels of migration into the 20th century.\n\n > and why Boston, as opposed to any other major American city? \n\nAs I said above, other cities like New York, Philadelphia, Savanna and New Orleans all saw migrations of Irish into their cities in the 1840s and 1850s. The immigrant vote was quite important to the functioning of New York's Tammany Hall political machine in the later decades of the 1800s. Additionally, New York City saw severe Draft Riots in 1863, and newly naturalized Irish-Americans played a large part in these riots. They were partly motivated by resentment of exemption provisions, when working-class immigrants could never afford to pay the $300 required. Partially too, the Irish and German immigrant workers were driven by fears that abolition of slavery would result in labor competition from free Blacks.\n\nIn any case, New York City did not become as closely tied to Irish identity as Boston did for a variety of reasons. In the late 1840s and 1850s, New York saw German immigration at the same time and in similar numbers to Irish immigrants. Also, New York has hosted subsequent waves of Italian, Jewish, Balkan, Chinese, and other ethnicities, which made the city a patchwork and prevented New York from being associated with any one community. Boston, in contrast, did witness large Italian immigration into the North End, but not a similar scale and variety of immigration as New York did.\n\nOf course, cities like Philadelphia and Chicago continue to have notable Irish-American communities, and noteworthy St Patrick's day parades. \n\n----\n1) [Enclyopedia of American Immigration](_URL_1_) pp 154.\n\n2)_URL_4_\n\n3)[Hidden History of the Boston Irish](_URL_2_) pp 21"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.celebrateboston.com/strange/broad-street-riot.htm",
"https://books.google.com/books?id=VNCX6UsdZYkC&pg=PA154&dq=irish+immigration+to+boston&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDpe_kkbvJAhWTPB4KHaCYCAE4ChDoAQg8MAI#v=onepage&q&f=false",
"https://books.google.com/books?id=dnudkswMjAwC&pg=PA21&dq=irish+immigration+to+boston&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBhc3WkbvJAhXB2R4KHXIJBtkQ6AEITjAG#v=onepage&q&f=false",
"http://www.celebrateboston.com/crime/ursuline-convent-destruction.htm",
"http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/famine/america.htm"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.