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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5ylhep
|
how do we know ancient civilisations/events existed?
|
I mean none of us have actually witnessed them, and none of us actually know anybody who personally experienced them.
What is to stop people who lived 200+ years ago from fictitiously making up civilisations like the ancient Egyptians, or the Persian/Bablyonian empire.
I get that there are artefacts and literature but how do we know that these are authentic and actually from the era and not made recently in a fictitious manner?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ylhep/eli5how_do_we_know_ancient_civilisationsevents/
|
{
"a_id": [
"deqyynx",
"derdf1j"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Carbon dating is a chemistry-based method for determining how old organic matter (wood, preserved food) is. There's no disguising a 200 year old tomb as a 4000 year old tomb; the carbon dating is completely different.\n\nAlso, we have records from long ago (like the Roman Empire) of people *already* knowing about things like the Egyptian Pyramids, which were already old at the time.\n\nAlso, some civilizations (like China) have existed continuously for thousands of years, with continuous written records updated every year, and consistent with the archaeological records. It's just too much to fake; you might as well give up on reality entirely.",
"The oldest recorded event that we can pin down to an exact date was a battle between the ancient armies of Media and Lydia, on May 28th 585 B.C. \n\nWe only know this because a well recorded story tells that in the middle of the battle, the Sun disappeared in he sky in the middle of the day- scaring the fuck out of everyone in attendance. Believing they had angered the gods they signed treaties then and there. \n\nWe know the exact date because astronomers can calculate backwards and see that here was indeed a solar eclipse over Asia Minor at the very time the battle was said to be."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1vv34b
|
what are volts? amps? watts? which one(s) can kill you versus just shock/hurt you?
|
I have tried so many times to get a grasp on all this electricity stuff and just can't for the life of me get a handle on it. So, if you can make this very remedial, I would really appreciate it.
Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vv34b/eli5_what_are_volts_amps_watts_which_ones_can/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cew1vsr",
"cew2ug7",
"cewa9l1"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The water pipe analogy is a famous way to understand electricity.\n\nVolts are like water pressure (high voltage would be like a pressure washer, low voltage would be like a babbling brook)\n\nAmps are like the amount of water flow (high amperage would be like the Mississippi river, low amperage would be like a kitchen faucet)\n\nWatts are the ability of the water to do work. Watts, conveniently, are equal to Amps * Volts.\n\nWhat kills you is current (amperage) running through your body in the wrong way. However, current can't run through your body without a voltage (pressure) to drive it. So both are what kills you, really.",
"No one has ever been able to tell me EXACTLY, NON ABSTRACTLY what voltage is. No one has ever been able to describe voltage in a way that I can visualize non metaphorically. I will give a huge internet hug to anyone who can do this in this thread.\n\nAs I understand it, people always say that voltage is a \"potential difference\". Does that mean that if I have a metal rod, with atoms with a surplus of electrons on one side, and atoms wanting electrons on the other, I have a voltage? And that the voltage increases as the ratio of electrons on the surplus side to the atoms wanting electrons on the other side increases?",
"Voltage is potential energy. Amps are kinetic energy. Tethering this with water pipe analogy should work. Volts == size of the pipe. Amps == pressure. Without the kinetic energy of amps, there is no flow. Smaller pipes and smaller volume of water even at higher pressures doesn't really hurt, just like your shower doesn't (usually) hurt. Ramp that pressure up enough though, and you can cut steel (low voltage/high current). It works going with a larger pipe as well. A huge pipe full of water won't need much pressure to be lethal, the sheer volume of water will be enough to kill (high voltage/low current)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6nq7zq
|
each of the 5 positions in basketball and their responsibilities.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nq7zq/eli5_each_of_the_5_positions_in_basketball_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkbf3t1"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"Point guard, or the \"1\": Primary ball handler on offense. Brings the ball up the court, generally starts plays and creates opportunities for others. On defense, defends the perimeter.\n\nShooting guard, or the \"2\" or the \"2 guard\": perimeter scorer that plays off the ball. Needs to be a good ball handler as well. They can drive to the basket to create opportunities for themselves or others, just as the point guard does. Defends the perimeter. \n\nSmall forward, or the \"3\": nowadays, these are some of the most impactful players. Sometimes called a \"wing player.\" They need to be versatile in their ability to score from various places and defend various types of players. See LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard, and to some extent Draymond Green. \n\nPower Forward, or the \"4\": traditionally a post (post means underneath the basket, in a basic sense) player, nowadays many of them have the skills to step outside the basket and hit longer shots. Having a fourth player that can do this helps to stretch the defense. They also need to be able to rebound and defend the post.\n\nCenter, or the \"5\": This position is seemingly less important than ever in the modern game, but they are further specialized in playing the \"post\" than the power forward. They need to protect the basket on defense and rebound. On offense they can be used to take close shots, rebound, or step out to the perimeter and set \"picks\" (a pick is when one player blocks a defender so his teammate can create space from that defender, or \"get open\"). The modern game is fast and heavily focused on perimeter play so this position has become more about utility players that can rebound and set picks than about dominant players that can take over a game with scoring. Less about Shaq, Wilt Chamberlain, etc. Traditional type of \"big men\" such as Dwight Howard struggle to fill a dominant role right now. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1g4qv5
|
TIL about the Phaistos Disk and Linear A and I'm curious, what other languages are still undeciphered? What are the chances that they will be deciphered?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1g4qv5/til_about_the_phaistos_disk_and_linear_a_and_im/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cagt8d5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Indus script, inscriptions left by the Indus Valley Civilization, has yet to be deciphered. The language appears to use short strings of symbols. For the past few years, researchers have attempted to decipher the language but the chances of Indus script being deciphered is very low. A big reason is that inscriptions of Indus script are short (Average length: 5. Longest on a single surface: 17). We also have no idea what language the Indus Valley people spoke and there is no artifact like the Rosetta Stone that we can refer to.\n\n[Most of these numbers were pulled from this paper on page 796](_URL_1_)\n\nEDIT: I did some more searching and found a [TED Talk](_URL_0_) by one of the guys who contributed to the paper I listed above"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.ted.com/talks/rajesh_rao_computing_a_rosetta_stone_for_the_indus_script.html",
"http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/coli_c_00030"
]
] |
||
a9gkt6
|
why does japanese use 3 different alphabets/sillabaries?
|
So I'm learning Japanese (on Duolingo) and I've been learning hiragana, but then got katakana thrown at me, and then kanji is/may be sliding in there? I don't even know what's kata and what's kanji because they don't tell me.
Why does Japan use 3 different systems at the same time? I've heard and seen this as the case and it doesn't make any sense. If a word can be pronounced fully with hiragana, why not just use it as the full alphabet like Roman characters are for western languages?
Also, spaces? Where?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a9gkt6/eli5_why_does_japanese_use_3_different/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecj3u3n",
"ecj3vgk",
"ecj3vkx",
"ecj40tm",
"ecj4vn6",
"ecj70wc",
"ecj99ee",
"ecjpv0v",
"eck50fi",
"eck5hb0"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
64,
3,
4,
22,
10,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > \twhat's kanji because they don't tell me.\n\nKanji are symbols for full words. Obviously this requires a massive number of unique symbols and isn't practical for keyboards. Hiragana then was made for phonetic spelling of Japanese words, but many words are incorporated from other languages so katakana is used for those foreign words.\n\n > \tAlso, spaces? Where?\n\nOnly if the writing is exclusively in hiragana and katakana. Otherwise they aren't used (and why should they when each symbol is independent already?).",
" A native speaker might be able to answer better, but my understanding has been that katakana is used for many non-native words and it was used like print writing is used in the west as opposed to cursive. \nSo, in my understanding and to sum up:\nHiragana- used like cursive, more formal, covers all Japanese syllables. \nKatakana- used like print, more in formal, covers all syllables and foreign words.\nKanji- traditional symbols that translate into entire words, rather than syllables. ",
"In the beginning, what would later become \"Japan\" adopted Chinese characters for their writing. Note that they only adopted the script, the spoken language is still Japanese, they just hammered that into Chinese characters\n\nLater, during the middle Heian period (~1000 AD), a combination of a movement to detach from the mainland and develop a \"native\" culture, along with much of literature being written by women in courtly cultural salons lead to \"women's hand\" being developed and the de facto language. Women were traditionally not allowed to learn Chinese script, which is why what would later become Hiragana developed. \n\nA number of important works, like the kokinshu, were written in hiragana.\n\nLater, the Heian period collapsed, and the era of warrior rule started. With the end of cultural salons as the center of literature, works once again were written by men, for a predominantly male audience. The language became a mixed script of Chinese characters and onnade.\n\nKatakana was parallel to all of this. It was used primarily for foreign loan-words. At first, Chinese of course.\n\n---\n\ntl;dr let's copy china, let's try to stop copying china (women make their own script), rip women, now we do both",
"The picture-based Kanji was taken from Chinese. Japanese is a language that conjugates many of their words but Chinese does not use Japanese conjugations. The Hiragana phonetic alphabet is combined with Kanji to add in the conjugations that did not exist in Chinese. The Katakana is... wait, yeah Japan, why 2 phonetic alphabets? Katakana is typically used for foreign words and is not attached to any Kanji. I think this was really just Japan having a bit of fun with us.\n\nEdit: who downvotes people for trying answer questions? Good lord, people.",
"What I have learned is that katakana is used for words that did not exist in Japanese. For instance, ドイツ would be mimicking the German word \"deutsch\". Hiragana is for words that already exist in Japanese (words such as ふとんorふろ). Kanji is for helping make a sentence clearer. Since there are some Japanese words that sound the same like 神 and 髪\nEx. ふろにはいりたい becomes 風呂に入りたい。",
"Kanji is like the full word.\n\nHiragana is the pronunciation (plus some grammar usage)\n\nKatakana is for word form foreign countries.\n\nThe reason why Kanji exist is because it contains more meaning than a hiragana and there are shit ton of homophones. For example. 死、詩 and 四 can all be read as し but all have different meaning and nuance (Death, Poem, and Four)\n\nI would try to compare it to English homophones like cell and sell. If written as they're read, the two words are /sɛl/ (comparable to hiragana) while the actual words it self (cell and sell) would be comparable to Kanji. You can imagine how hard it is to communicate using only the pronunciation without knowing the actual words (I scream VS Ice cream).\n\nThis arguably makes things stupidly difficult because you have to memorize shit tons of kanji for each words. However, it also can arguably be said that this allow much more information to be packed in a single character, for each character can be thought of as a symbol representative of a concept. This also allows a character to be read differently depending on the situation (for literary value or coolness or whatever). For example, 拳 (Fist) alone is read as こぶし (Kobushi) but when used in conjugation with other words, like 北斗神拳 (Hokuto Shin Ken - God Fist of the North Star), 拳 is simply read as けん (Ken). This is the Onyomi or Kunyomi which should be mentioned in any japanese lesson. I personally recommended against remembering which is Onyomi or Kunyomi because, in the end, the reading are practically fucking arbitrary and can be read whatever the hell a person want because there is actually no rule. Names are guilty of this in particular (You can never really be sure how a name is read if they don't specifically specify it). Just remember word by word is more efficient and you will get a sense of how to read a kanji in different situation.\n\nThis is also why japanese generals in the past can have a kanji like 義 as their banners, while having words like Justice on a western flag would looks weird. It also kind of enable kanji to be written both vertically or horizontally.\n\nAt least, that is what I understand from having studied japanese for 8 years and have passed N1 several years ago. I understand that it may be one of the hardest language to learn (but damn being able to watch anime and play every japanese game I want is fucking sweet). You can ask me if you have any other question.",
"Chine characters were introduced along with Buddhism. Texts came in Chinese, and scholar learnt Chinese for religious texts. In Chinese, 1 character=1 syllable=1 word (roughly). Japanese scholar could write in Chinese, but the need to write down the language everybody (=the court) arose. \n\nSo they decided to use Chinese characters to write down japanese, where single words have multiple syllables and some words have changing forms (endings) like verbs or adjectives. But they didn’t follow one method. Some words were written by only using the sounds of the Chinese characters, some were written using only the meaning with a Japanese word attached to it, some even written with characters like rebus. And it was not consistent. The Man.yōshū, one of the first poem collection, is not consistent with its use of kanji, was written with what got called the man.yōgana (the 10000 letters), that is a total mess that is a whole university subject of its own. (In the same time religious and « serious » text were still written in Chinese. \n\nSo there was a dual system:Chinese characters were used « purely » to write Chinese, and used in various ways to write Japanese. To write Japanese, easier or more common kanji got preferred over others, and as the people writing them wanted to write faster, they evolved in a more and more cursive ways and became hiragana. As women were not taught Chinese, they used those to write down purely Japanese texts with those phonetic letters. some kanji with easy meaning were also used here and there only for their meaning, as shortcuts.\n\nIn the mean time, monks still worked with Chinese texts. But as not all of them could really learn Chinese, they had to find a way to read Chinese text with a pronunciation guide. They created katakana as simple signs, usually a part of a common kanji, to write how Chinese texts were to be changed. \n\nAs years passed, more Japanese language had to be written down, with more and more texts relying on Chinese words that had entered the common language (but with part of the administration still using Chinese only). Slowly, hiragana or katakana (it became standardised much later as to which one should be used) got used along Chinese characters in order to write those Chinese words in grammatically Japanese sentence.\n\n(I should mention the kambun texts, which were Chinese texts with Japanese kana added along them to specify the correct Japanese grammar, correct word order etc which had already mixed the 2 writing system but I don’t remember precisely how it developed) \n\nSo many words of Chinese origins, with a lot of nuances, had entered the vocabulary. Not writing them with kanji would have made them lose some weight, some nuance, and Japanese has so few different sounds, that it was convenient in a way to keep them around. That’s (very roughly) how you end up with a dual phonetic/ideographic system. \n\nI write these relying on my university memories. There are inaccuracies but I hope you get the idea! ",
"It's simple.\n\nOriginally, Japan had no writing system. Then they took the Chinese symbols but developed their own way of pronouncing them because the languages are nothing like each other. One Kanji usually has two or more possible pronunciations - one Japanese and one \"Chinese\", which obviously doesn't sound like Chinese but comes from there. It depends on context and is a pain in the ass to learn. Kanji carry the meaning and make up the roots of words. \n\nHiragana developed out of Kanji and was initially used by women only. Gradually, it got adapted by everyone because it fits the flexibility of the language a lot better than using Kanji alone. In verbs for example, the root of the word is a Kanji and then you have a string of hiragana after it which changes depending on the tense and different conjugations. Hiragana characters are phonetic and always pronounced the same\n\nKatakana is basically the same as hiragana but used for foreign loan words and names.\n\n\nIn case you're wondering why they don't just abandon the Kanji to make it easier (you have to know about 2000 of them), there are lots of reasons not to. Japanese has a lot of homophones so seeing the Kanji (=meaning) in a sentence immediately makes it obvious which one of the meanings was intended. We read by recognizing the overall shape of words and not by reading letter by letter, which is perfect for the latin alphabet. Japanese however, doesn't have that many sounds and a text that's entirely in hiragana is simply confusing because it doesn't have that many distinct shapes. Sometimes you don't know how to pronounce a Kanji but can still understand a sentence because at least you recognize its meaning.\n\nIt's a crazy writing system but really fits the language perfectly. ",
"The others comments are great answers. I would also like to add that many people ask why they don't just use one in modern times to make it easier.\n\nReason being, if they got rid of kanji, texts like books or newspaper would be crazy long. One \"letter\"/character would become 2~3. Also, it's hard to read just hiragana and understand the meaning. As others pointed out, kanji clarifies the meaning of words with the same \"spelling\"/pronunciation. Many of my Japanese colleagues find it difficult to read all hiragana text because of this. It's very slow.\n\nIf they got rid of hiragana, then it would be difficult to learn the meaning AND way of reading the kanji. Kids learn hiragana first. Then they learn kanji alongside with the hiraga \"pronunciation\", or way of reading (yomikata), the kanji. One kanji can have different pronunciations too, so the hiragana helps them memorise all the different ways the kanji might appear in text.\n\n\n",
"the amount of syllables in japanese in limited, and so kanji are used to fill in meanings where just speaking/writing in full hiragana would leave so many areas where homophones run rampant to the point at which meaning is too ambiguous.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nalso spaces arent necessary because \"particles\" are used to identify what role each part of a sentence is playing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1mgndj
|
When did the notion of American exceptionalism first take root?
|
I understand there are several unique aspects of the U.S. that sets it apart from other nations; but when (and how) did the notion of American exceptionalism propagate?
Was it before or after globalization?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1mgndj/when_did_the_notion_of_american_exceptionalism/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc92otj"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"An early advocacy of American exceptionalism came with the Puritan colonizers of Massachusetts. Here is some of the text of John Winthrop's sermon to the Puritan colonists while still on the ship \"Arabella\" as they were about to land in the New World. It is known as the \"City on a Hill\" sermon, referencing Jesus in Matthew 5.14, in the sermon on the mount, when he tells the audience, \"You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.\"\n\nPart of Winthrop's sermon:\n\n\"The God of Israel is among us, when tenn of us shall be able to resist a thousand of our enemies, when hee shall make us a prayse and a glory, that men shall say of succeeding plantacions: The Lord make it like that of New England: for wee must Consider that wee shall be as a City upon a Hill, the eies of all people are uppon us.\"\n\n(Source: _URL_2_) \n\nThe \"City on a Hill\", has been referenced many times by American politicians, perhaps most famously by Ronald Reagan in his 1989 farewell speech:\n\n\"I've spoken of the shining city all my political life....in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still...\"\n\n(Source: _URL_1_) \n\nReagan was referencing an earlier famous speech of his in 1974. In that speech he quoted John Winthrop, and closed with:\n\n\"We cannot escape our destiny, nor should we try to do so. The leadership of the free world was thrust upon us two centuries ago in that little hall in Philadelphia. In the days following World War II, when the economic strength and power of the United States was all that stood between the world and the return to the dark ages, Pope Pius XII said, \"The American people have a great genius for splendid and unselfish actions. Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind.\n\nWe are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth.\"\n\n(Source: _URL_0_) \n\nAmerican exceptionalism - there at the beginning - still there today."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://reagan2020.us/speeches/City_Upon_A_Hill.asp",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_upon_a_Hill",
"www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/Winthrop.htm"
]
] |
|
2bb1es
|
How did the US Government get all of the Native Americans to Oklahoma during the Trail of Tears? What happened to the people who refused to leave?
|
Also, I was curious as to what happened to the Native American's land when Oklahoma reached statehood. Were they compensated at all?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2bb1es/how_did_the_us_government_get_all_of_the_native/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cj42jt6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Basically the tribes were coerced by violence to relocate to Indian Territory. Some tribes were able to hide out and they later became their own tribes in their original homelands. Famous examples include the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama, Seminole Tribe of Florida (who were never militarily defeated by the United States), Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa, and Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians.\n\nA band of [Nez Perce](_URL_2_) were forced from Washington to Indian Territory in 1878. Basically they said hell no and returned back to the NW in 1884. Same with the Northern Cheyenne, who returned to Montana on foot in the winter of 1878.\n\nThe Dawes Commission, led by Senator Henry L. Dawes (still hated today by most Oklahoma Indians), oversaw destroying tribal governments and landholdings in Indian Territory. The Curtis Act of 1898 dismantled tribal governments, courts, and school systems (many of these buildings were stolen from the tribes). The Dawes Severalty Act called for lands collectively owned by the tribes to be broken up into small individual allotments to individual Indians and Freedmen/Freedwomen. Then the so-called \"Surplus\" land was opened up to non-Native settlements in lotteries and [land runs](_URL_1_).\n\nWhen the idea of combining Oklahoma Territory, Indian Territory, and the \"unassigned lands\" was proposed, traditionalists fought it legally and even by force (see the Four Mother's Society, the Green Peach War). Politicians from the NE tribes tried to promise a separate [State of Sequoyah](_URL_0_) to be separate from Oklahoma (it breaks my heart that this didn't happen). \n\nSome tribes have recovered stolen public buildings from the state of Oklahoma in recent years. The tribes had to reorganized their governments under the [Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act of 1936](_URL_3_) and rebuild their infrastructure in ensuing decades. Some have repurchased important lands, but compensation, no."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/S/SE021.html",
"http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/L/LA016.html",
"http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/N/NE015.html",
"http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/o/ok059.html"
]
] |
|
2c95sd
|
how film negatives work the difference between them and digital
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2c95sd/eli5_how_film_negatives_work_the_difference/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjd5qkl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Think of a film negative as a cardboard with a cutout of something on it. When you shine a flashlight through the cardboard, it will cast a shadow of whatever's in it. \n\nIn an actual photo, you cast the \"shadow\" from the film negative on a paper that has light sensitive chemicals. The darkest part of the film negative will therefore block most of the light (cast the darkest shadow) on the paper, so that part will appear bright. Same thing applies to the lightest part of the film negative. The colors appear from the color of the shadow. That paper will be the actual photo. The film negative acts as your \"memory card\" so you can reprint photos as much as you like.\n\nMost digital cameras work with something called a charge coupled device(CCD) behind the lens, instead of a film. Basically what a CCD does is to manipulate charges/signals according to a certain stimulus, in this case light.\n\nCCD's are composed of tiny pixels, each recording the light it receives. Every four of those pixels, each in a square formation, contain one color filter each(red, blue and two green), so the colors are slightly lower res than the actual image resolution.\n\nSo in short a digital camera works by having very small squares record what kind of light they see, and save it on memory.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1e4m8j
|
Was 200,000 Jews really conscripted into the German Wehrmacht during WWII?
|
I was wondering if the Jews really did fight for Nazi Germany, as I've read that the Nazis conscripted them to fight.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1e4m8j/was_200000_jews_really_conscripted_into_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9wrtlp",
"c9ws3rx"
],
"score": [
10,
12
],
"text": [
"The actual number is disputed and other historians gave much lower estimates. But even if that number of Jews in the Wehrmacht was technically true, it's more complicated than it looks like. The problem is the definition of a 'Jew' in Nazi Germany: If your parents (or even grandparents) were Jewish or you were married to a Jew, you were considered 'a Jew', no matter your actual religious orientation. During the war, the number must have been even lower as most 'Jews' were discharged from the Wehrmacht in 1939/40.",
"It did happen however the number is closer to 150,000. It should also be noted that they were not outright \"Jews\" but rather \"Mischling\" by German Law. \nHere it how it works. In Nazi Germany the Nuremberg Laws (1935) defined \"Jew\" as someone who, regardless of religious affiliation had 3 Jewish grandparents. You were also considered a Jew if you were a \"Geltungsjude\" or \"Jew of Legal Validity.\" This was determined if you met any one of the following:\n\n- You were enrolled as member of a Jewish congregation when the Nuremberg Laws were passed, or after they were passed\n\n- You were married to a Jew\n\n- You were the offspring of a Jewish parent \n\n\nSo what is a Mischling? A Mischling is a \"mixed breed.\" If you had two Jewish grandparents you were a Mischling of the first degree, and if you had one you were a Mischling of the second degree. You were then put through the Mischling test who's second part had the above standards (religion, marriage, etc). If you met any of those you were no longer a Mischling but rather a Geltungsjude. \nMischlings, though no preferable to Aryans *could* live and work in German culture and according to [this source from the University of Kansas](_URL_0_) about 150,000 of these Mischlings actually fought in the Wehrmacht.\nI would compare life as Mischling to the life as a half-white/half-black individual in the American South. Sure you could own property and hold a job but the jobs you could work would be very limited because people wouldn't hire you, police would discriminate against you, etc. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/righit.html"
]
] |
|
4vkd77
|
is there any benefit to turning my phone off at night? does it need to "rest"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vkd77/eli5_is_there_any_benefit_to_turning_my_phone_off/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5z5fgd",
"d5z5g81",
"d5z60t9"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"No. Modern smartphones are designed to only need to be rebooted for major upgrades. Turning it off at other times makes absolutely no difference other than battery consumption when not plugged in. ",
"The battery doesn't like being charged after it hits 100% so all modern phones will stop charging it when it hits 100%. Otherwise, no, your phone does not need rest.",
"Nope, most phones will benefit from a restart every few weeks if they start to get sluggish. Otherwise just charge and use. Electronics don't need to rest."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ale9az
|
how do you make a car more "reliable"
|
Seems to me all the awards come after the model of car has been out on the market, how do the engineers design a car with the goal of it being more reliable than the average?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ale9az/eli5_how_do_you_make_a_car_more_reliable/
|
{
"a_id": [
"efdax38",
"efdgk1r"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"In general reliable cars come from years of iterative design and improvement. For example, you might design a car that ends up having 10 common faults. You fix these faults in the next redesign of the car and release it to the market. Consumers then discover another 5 faults and you fix those for the next redesign and so on. This is how companies like Honda work, they also (in general) only make small changes between models to make sure reliability doesn't suffer hugely.\n\nYou also tend to find that reliability falls when a car company makes a huge overhaul to a car with many changes at once.\n\nCar companies also go through absolutely huge amounts of testing on all components - they put all of them through rigorous stress testing, testing in all climates, drive them for miles over rattle strips to make bits of the dash come loose, soak them in gallons of water to check leaks, leave parts in the desert to check UV degradation etc...\n\n\n\n",
"The answers so far have given you a number of ways that the engineers *look* at the issues to be fixed, but not what is fixed.\n\nThere are a lot of things that go into the reliability of a car, just like there are a lot of systems, but here's a few things that have been improved over the past 30 years:\n\n1. Computers - More and more of any vehicle is now computerized, and that necessarily adds some complexity. But, it also better integrates the systems so the transmission works better with the motor, the fuel delivery varies based on environment, lots of formerly mechanical parts are now controlled by the computers such as valve timing and throttle response. Vehicle computers have gotten far better by being more integrated, getting glitches fixed, and having all of the wiring, connections and switches made better. \n\n2. Engines, transmissions and driveline parts - Outside of the computer engines have increased in reliability in a lot of ways. Manufacturing has improved immensely, allowing for much tighter tolerances and physical things actually being more sturdy and fitting together better. Chemical engineering has improved many things in the engines; ranging from oils and fluids to the gaskets that fit between the metal parts. This keeps more fluids where they're supposed to be and helps with reliability. \n\n3. Other components - Just like the engine, improved manufacturing, chemical engineering and wiring have improved everything else. \"Rubber\" lasts much longer in the elements because it's not just rubber anymore. There is far more engineered plastics and synthetics in the cars now, so they don't rust like cars used to. Add to that chemical coatings and better seals to keep salt and other things away from the metal parts make them just last longer. \n\nIn short, there are a lot of things that have improved to make cars much more reliable. My first car was a 1978 Datsun B210 with 100,000 miles on it when I got it. That care was about done. Now 100,000 miles is just a starting point. It's a good thing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
btimsv
|
why does the body need to be trained for cardio? what does your body do when at first u can’t run 1 mile but after a while u can run 10?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/btimsv/eli5why_does_the_body_need_to_be_trained_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eoyh88m",
"eoyqbzu"
],
"score": [
6,
16
],
"text": [
"Your heart is used to a non effort life so it supplies a small ammount of oxygen to your muscles, blood and eventually brain. When you start exercising, the heart starts pumping more but it's not used to it yet and can only do it for a small ammount of time. As the effort builds up, your brain gets to \"breathe\" less and that's when you start crouching, breathing through your mouth for the necessary oxygen. \n\n(Advanced info: if you keep going tired as you are, you will start losing your vision because of the lack of oxygen)",
"None of the three answers yet actually address the question, IMHO. I’ll take a stab at it: \n\nYour body’s constantly trying balance a bunch of finite resources. If your heart doesn’t need to pump much blood all the time, the energy to maintain the heart muscle to do that would be better spent somewhere else. Cardio training (and all other muscle training) is just telling the body that it needs to start devoting some of its resources to those muscle groups now."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
kfcp8
|
If I blow my nose with a piece of toilet paper, would it be more environmentally friendly to put that paper in the toilet (to be flushed later) or in the garbage to be hauled away by a truck?
|
I know one piece of toilet paper isn't going to make a significant difference, but if, say, 100,000,000 rolls of toilet paper are used for this purpose in a year, is it better to run the paper through the sewer system, or through the garbage system?
Let's assume this is an urban or suburban toilet.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/kfcp8/if_i_blow_my_nose_with_a_piece_of_toilet_paper/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2jurir",
"c2jus2g",
"c2jvcoc",
"c2jvknx",
"c2jvuwo",
"c2jurir",
"c2jus2g",
"c2jvcoc",
"c2jvknx",
"c2jvuwo"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
12,
2,
6,
3,
7,
12,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Put it in the trash.\n\nIf you flush it, it goes through a couple miles of pipe, maybe a few grinder pumps, until hitting your local treatment plant...where it is filtered out by the screening system/centrifuge/pressing system or such, loaded in a dump truck...and dumped at the landfill.\n\nI imagine it would require more energy to process it out of the wastewater at the plant than just letting it get hauled to the landfill on a different truck later.\n\nEdit: Random thought - the centrifuge systems used at wastewater plants are neat! [This](_URL_0_) is a really small version of the kind that are sometimes used - they get to insane speeds (They can take more than an hour to spin down!), use a ton of energy, and can turn a nasty sludge into water and an incredibly dried cake.",
"Toilet paper biodegrades very quickly, so it can be composted. If it goes to landfill it will most likely degrade anaerobically (without the presence of oxygen) and create methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Many of the more modern landfill sites (at least in Europe, don't know about the US) have systems in place to capture and use the methane, but not all.\n\nI don't really know what happens to waste that's flushed down a toilet. If you have a garden I recommend composting.",
"I have the same question regarding vegetable matter in the garbage disposal vs. garbage bin (ignoring composting).",
"I'm not sure either are better in a particularly noticable way, too many variables are involved. However, it would be a great deal better to just bring your own handkerchief and wash it in your laundry.",
"It depends on your *local* environment. For instance, if you live in the desert where water is scarce, but non-arable land is in great supply, throw it in the garbage. If you live in a place where water is plentiful, it's probably better to flush (later).\n\n\"Environmentally friendly\" isn't an absolute measure; it is a measure relative to your actual environment.",
"Put it in the trash.\n\nIf you flush it, it goes through a couple miles of pipe, maybe a few grinder pumps, until hitting your local treatment plant...where it is filtered out by the screening system/centrifuge/pressing system or such, loaded in a dump truck...and dumped at the landfill.\n\nI imagine it would require more energy to process it out of the wastewater at the plant than just letting it get hauled to the landfill on a different truck later.\n\nEdit: Random thought - the centrifuge systems used at wastewater plants are neat! [This](_URL_0_) is a really small version of the kind that are sometimes used - they get to insane speeds (They can take more than an hour to spin down!), use a ton of energy, and can turn a nasty sludge into water and an incredibly dried cake.",
"Toilet paper biodegrades very quickly, so it can be composted. If it goes to landfill it will most likely degrade anaerobically (without the presence of oxygen) and create methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Many of the more modern landfill sites (at least in Europe, don't know about the US) have systems in place to capture and use the methane, but not all.\n\nI don't really know what happens to waste that's flushed down a toilet. If you have a garden I recommend composting.",
"I have the same question regarding vegetable matter in the garbage disposal vs. garbage bin (ignoring composting).",
"I'm not sure either are better in a particularly noticable way, too many variables are involved. However, it would be a great deal better to just bring your own handkerchief and wash it in your laundry.",
"It depends on your *local* environment. For instance, if you live in the desert where water is scarce, but non-arable land is in great supply, throw it in the garbage. If you live in a place where water is plentiful, it's probably better to flush (later).\n\n\"Environmentally friendly\" isn't an absolute measure; it is a measure relative to your actual environment."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=268qskku5Pk"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=268qskku5Pk"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ajkoci
|
Slavery seems to have a very prominent role in the popular conception of the Roman Empire, then sort of seems to fade away and become relevant again during the 17th-19th centuries. To what extent and how was slavery practiced in Western Europe following the collapse of the Western Roman State?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ajkoci/slavery_seems_to_have_a_very_prominent_role_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eexbmqn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Hello, [here](_URL_0_) is a post I wrote a little while ago about post-Roman slavery in the British Isles. I hope it's useful and I'm happy to answer further questions :)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/80a0jl/what_happened_to_slavery_at_the_end_of_the_roman/duuimqe"
]
] |
||
2rmh80
|
what are the rules for fan made merchandise? if it is illegal like i think it is, how do companies like etsy and redbubble get away with it?
|
Wanting to create some TV series merchandise.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rmh80/eli5what_are_the_rules_for_fan_made_merchandise/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnh7pyf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This would fall under copyright, and the gray area of copyright is confusing and hard to navigate. However, here is some basic information on this kind of scenario. Before going further: I'm not a lawyer, so please don't take my word as gospel.\n\nWhat this boils down to is that you're going to be at the mercy of the copyright holder of whatever product you're making unlicensed merchandise of. Meaning that if they catch wind of your product and don't like you doing it, they can shut you down. Thankfully, with copyright, this isn't always going to happen. They are not legally compelled to enforce their copyright on all cases.\n\nThat said, avoid using any form of trademark. Unlike copyrights, trademarks MUST be protected in order to remain trademarks, and must be done universally. Meaning that if the trademark holder in question finds your works, they are legally obligated to get you to stop producing those works.\n\nThough if experience tells me anything, most companies will send out C & Ds if they've got problems with your works, rather than take you to court to start. Litigation is costly for both sides, and stamps are cheap, emails cheaper. If you wind up getting a C & D, I'd urge complying to save you the hassle of a legal battle."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5u7w85
|
I've read that nazis' hate for jews derived of the fact that they were a race without a nation, and as a result were considered "parasites"[sic] of other nations. Would nazis then have approved of the construction of a jewish state like Israel?
|
Let me first mention, in case it's not obvious, that I don't agree with any views expressed by nazis.
I was just wondering if the removal of that concept of "nationless culture/race" would have been considered a solution for nazis, instead of eradication.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5u7w85/ive_read_that_nazis_hate_for_jews_derived_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dds79ms",
"dds7xae"
],
"score": [
883,
27
],
"text": [
"Not really, no.\n\nWhat is important to understand regarding the Nazi world view is that not only were Jews regarded as an existential thread due to their \"international character\" but also that Nazi policy did undergo an evolution during the Nazis' tenure in power.\n\nAs for the first factor: Rather than thinking of the Jews as \"parasites\" and dangerous because they didn't have a state/homeland, the lack of a Jewish state/homeland was seen as an expression of their \"parasitic\" and dangerous character. Within the formation of modern anti-Semitism in the 19th century, the fact that Jews were regarded as different because they had no nation/homeland quickly was turned upside down and what had been one of the initial causes for the construction of difference quickly became a viewed as a symptom of an alleged \"racial character\".\n\nIn the tradition of völkisch thought as formulated by thinkers such as Gobineau and Houston Steward Chamberlain races as the main historical actors were seen as acting through the nation, the latter being basically their tool or outlet to compete in Social Darwinist competition between them. The Jews thought of as a race had no nation - seen as their own race, which dates back to them being imperial subject and older stereotypes of them as \"the other\" - but were a \"race\" that acted internationally rather than nationally – the absence of a nation both evidence and symptom of this. In order to be able to compete within the racial conflict them having no nation were seen as acting in a conspiratorial manner. Chamberlain e.g. made them out to be the controlling parasites behind political action and order that was seen as anti-national such as the Catholic Church or the Habsburg Empire. The anti-Semitism that formed here in the later stages of the 19th century is in effect a ideology of conspiracy, alleging a Jewish conspiracy in order to weaken their racial competitors.\n\nThe clearest example of such a way of thinking can be found in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a political treatise produced by the Tsarist Secret Police at some point in 1904/05 that alleges to be the minutes of a meeting of the leaders of the Jewish world conspiracy where they discuss their plans to get rid of all the world's nations and take over the world. Despite these protocols being debunked as a forgery really quick, they had a huge impact on many anti-Semitic and völkisch thinkers in Europe, not at least for some in the Habsburg empire such as Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels and others which were most likely read by the young Hitler.\n\nThe whole trope of the Jewish conspiracy as formulated by völkisch thought took on a whole new importance with the end of WWI, the Bolshevik revolution, and the subsequent attempts at revolution in Germany and elsewhere.\n\nThe defeat of the Central powers were seen by many of its soldiers and ardent supporters not as a military defeat but as a \"stab in the back\". The way the war ended in Germany with revolts of soldiers and the deposition of the monarchy by Social Democrats was the foundation for this myth that in essence revolved around Germany not being defeated by the Entente but by the enemies within. The trope of the enemy within being Jews and leftists had been brewing for a long time (see the Jew count of the German army in 1916/17) but really came to the forefront with the defeat. What follwed compounded this further. The violence of revolution and counter-revolution as well as the treaty of Versaille lead to many völkisch inclined thinkers and political actors believing that Germany's defeat and the subsequent peace terms could only be explained by a concerted act of the jewish conspiracy leading to internal enemies stabbing Germany in the back, threatening the very German way of life through Bolshevism and preparing the Jewish-Bolshevik takeover of Germany by making it defenseless through the Versaille treaty.\n\nDemocracy seen as faulty and antithetical to the German racial character and communism as an essential anti-national movement were both shunned by these völkisch ideologues and explained through a concerted effort by a conspiracy of the anti-national \"race\", the Jews. This was the very core idea of völkisch thought and of Nazi Weltanschauung. In the end, for Hitler and many of his followers it was the only way to explain the state of the world because it hinged on this Social Darwinist, ultra-nationalist view of history being a history of races competing for power and supremacy.\n\nWithin this matrix of ideological delusion, the effort of the Zionist movement to establish a Jewish national homeland in Palestine were not seen as an attempt to overcome this assumed \"international character\" of Judaism but rather as a further ploy in its international machinations to fight the \"Aryan race\". Rather than being welcomed by völkisch ideologues, Zionism was condemned as \"unnatural\" for there was no traditional, bllod-and-soil homeland of the Jews and \"artificially\" creating rather than having one through racial tradition was seen as dangerous rather than welcomed. Thus, the Nazis very explicitly did not approve of any such initiatives to create a state like Israel or the Zionist project as a whole, because no matter where they were, the Jews were always regarded as a danger and a mortal enemy.\n\nBut the Nazis once in power were also following a path of what was possible and thus an internal, ideologically constraint pragmatism. Once in power, what seemed possible was to rid Germany of the Jews. Not having had concrete plans of physical annihilation, the program that seemed viable was to rid all of their controlled territory of Jews. Thus, the frequently cited Haavara agreement between Zionist organizations and the Third Reich represents an outcome of this ideological pragmatism in the sense that while for the Zionists it was a way to save Jews from German discrimination, for the Germans it was a way to reach their intermediate goal – ridding Germany of Jews – and profiting economically from it. Rather than an endorsement of Zionism, it represented a policy of what was possible at the time.\n\nThe same applies to the Madagascar Plan, meaning the plan to deport the Jews in Europe under German rule to Madagascar after the capitulation of France. I've written about this before [here](_URL_0_) but it is imperative to recognize the plan for what it was: A proposal that already contained elements of genocide.\n\nRather than envisioning a Jewish state on the Island, the proposal for the plan made it out to become what was basically a large scale concentration camp: Deporting 5 million people toparts of the island that could only support – according to their own estimates – 7000 families. They designed the whole thing basically like a ghetto and assumed the Jews would succumb to the harsh conditions as they were already in other German Ghettos.\n\nSo, in short, the creation of a Jewish homeland was never planned nor welcomed by the Nazis. Rather, it was regarded as dangerous and any plans made by the Nazis themselves such as the Madagascar Plan did not want to establish a Jewish state, rather planning a huge ghetto/concentration camp where the Jews would die slowly under German supervision. \n\nSources:\n\n* Chrisoph Dieckmann: Jüdischer Bolschewismus 1917 bis 1921. In: Fritz Bauer Jahrbuch 2012.\n\n* Robert Gerwarth: The Central European Counter-Revolutionary: Paramilitary Violence in Germany, Austria, and Hungary after the Great War.\n\n* Andre Gerrits: Anti-Semitism and Anti-Communism in Easter Europe.\n\n* Peter Pulzer: The rise of political anti-Semitism in Germany and Austria. ",
"Yes, there was a lot of varied thought about this and many proposed solutions during the 1930s-'40s, the \"Madagascar Plan\" being one of the most well-known, and probably the best example of attempts to remove Jews from Europe. In the '30s there were some limited proposals for removal of Jewish families to Madagascar but plans were actually drawn up in 1940. Franz Rademacher wrote a memorandum that called for \"all Jews out of Europe\"; he believed Madagascar was more suitable than Palestine (which, after the war, became the location of the new Jewish state of Israel) since it was a possession of France rather than Britain and that Germany could better leverage the relocated Jews for political reasons. Adolf Eichmann, who dealt with 'Jewish affairs', called for a million Jews to be relocated each year to Madagascar, for four years. They intended to negotiate with France for Madagascar after the war, then use the British fleet to transport Jews to the island, which would then be controlled by the SS. The British fleet being an important part of the plan meant that after the invasion of England was made impossible following the Battle of Britain, the Madagascar plan was postponed, eventually being largely abandoned after Madagascar was taken from Vichy France by the U.K. in 1942. As relocation plans became decreasingly viable, the Jews were sent en Masse to the camps in what is commonly known as the Holocaust.\n\n\nSources:\n\n\nShirer, William L. (1960). *The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.* Simon and Schuster.\n\nLongerich, Peter (2012). *Heinrich Himmler: A Life.* Oxford University Press.\n\nBrowning, Christopher R. (2004). *The Origins of the Final Solution : The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939 – March 1942.* University of Nebraska Press.\n\nHilberg, Raul (1973). *The Destruction of the European Jews.* New Viewpoints.\n\nThe actual plan:\n\nRademacher, Franz (1940). *The Madagascar Plan: The Jewish Question in the Peace Treaty.* Jewish Virtual Library. \n\n\nEdit: Removed possible inaccuracy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5hkvcr/what_were_the_nazis_planning_to_do_with_the/"
],
[]
] |
|
cxkcfo
|
why does chronic sleep deprivation cause erectile dysfunction?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cxkcfo/eli5_why_does_chronic_sleep_deprivation_cause/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eyltj2o"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Sleep deprivation is a huge stress for your body. Evolution has built us that way - if you are that much stressed, the last thing you need at that moment is having sex"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2nuug2
|
why isn't worshipping jesus considered idol worship in the christian faith?
|
I am interested in theology but not as educated as I would like to be. In Christianity, a monotheistic religion , why isn't praying to Jesus considered idol worship? As I understand, Jesus is considered by his followers to be the son of God and the true messiah, but he is not God himself. If this is the case , why would God accept humanity to pray to anyone besides him?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nuug2/eli5why_isnt_worshipping_jesus_considered_idol/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmh25s2",
"cmh2aox",
"cmh2utv",
"cmh2z6i",
"cmh38vd",
"cmh3p88",
"cmh4tii",
"cmhh2to"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
9,
12,
2,
18,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Idol worship is worshiping a specific physical thing, like a statue -- literally, an idol.\n\nNow, there are things can can represent Christ, like a cross. But if you were to destroy a cross in a church, people would get upset, but they would not think you had destroyed the thing they were actually worshiping.\n\nIn idolatry, if you destroy the idol, you literally destroy what they were worshiping.",
"At some points, and by some groups, it has been. This is one of the reasons some churches have very ornate interiors and others are very spartan (including such decisions as whether to have the image of jesus on the cross, vs just having a cross without an occupant)\n\nIf you want to see a real internal division, look over the ten commandments; some sects have one version, and some another - the difference being largely centered around the idea of \"graven images\".\n\nIf you're seeking cognitive dissonance, you can look for images of people prostrating themselves before a carved representation of the commandments.",
"Idol worship is the worship of the creation rather than the Creator. Jesus *is* the Creator.",
"Jesus is considered to be God himself. That's what make Christianity different from every other religion. Islam regards him as a prophet (though lesser than Mohammed), Hinduism as a teacher, but Christians say he is God. \n\nFor reference: [John 1:18 NIV],[John 8:28 NIV],[John 10:30 NIV]\n\n > 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[a] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.\n\n\n > 28 So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up[a] the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.\n\n\n > 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[c]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”\n\n\nAll instances of Jesus saying he is God. Now, the doctrine of the trinity with there being Jesus (the Son), the Father, and the Spirit as three people, but one God is a little complicated. The way I tend to think about it is three people all doing the same thing (running the universe) but taking on slightly different roles: The Father being the judge, The Son being the mediator for humans to the Father, and the Spirit being the helper for believers. ",
"Jesus is not an idol. You are confusing polytheism with idolatry. An idol is a non-living object like a statue. \n\nClearly, none of the major religions are monotheistic. While Muslims deny that they worship Muhammad, he is considered to be an ideal person. No real person is ideal or perfect. Christians say that Jesus and God and the Holy spirit are all, in some way we cannot understand, the same thing. By this logic, most Hindus are monotheistic as well. Also, all the major religions have other supernatural beings, such as angels, devils, etc. which they do not call gods to make it seem like they have only one god while, in fact, they have a chief god who rules over lower level gods.\n\nedit: note on Hindu ideas.\n\n Rig Veda:\n > Then there was neither death nor immortality\n\n > nor was there then the torch of night and day.\n\n > The One breathed windlessly and self-sustaining.\n\n > There was that One then, and there was no other.[note 67]\n > \n > At first there was only darkness wrapped in darkness.\n\n > All this was only unillumined water.\n\n > That One which came to be, enclosed in nothing,\n\n > arose at last, born of the power of heat.[note 68][web 21]\n\n > Most Hindus believe that the spirit or soul – the true \"self\" of every person, called the ātman — is eternal.[305] According to the monistic/pantheistic theologies of Hinduism (such as Advaita Vedanta school), this Atman is ultimately indistinct from Brahman, the supreme spirit. \n_URL_0_",
"In catholicism jesus is part of the Holy trinity. Father, son and holy spirit...all 1 God, same person, just different forms. Weird, I admit, but that's my explanation. ",
"Better question is why is worshiping Mary, the Saints, or relics of the Saints not considered idolatry.",
"Lifetime Christian here, minored in Christianity in College.\n\nChristians believe that Jesus was the \"Son\" of God. In other words, Jesus was the physical embodiment of God. However, this doesn't mean that Jesus was just a person. Christians believe that Jesus was both fully man and fully God.\n\nChristians also believe in the Trinity, which is often explained incorrectly. People often use an egg to explain the Trinity-- 3 parts, the shell, the yolk, and the white are like God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The reason this is inaccurate is because God (The Father, Jesus, and the HS) cannot be separated.\n\nPut simply and correctly, God is three, but is one all at the same time. God is The Father, Jesus, and the HS all at the same time. Jesus is called \"The Son of God\", but that doesn't properly convey that he's God himself. Therefore, the worship of Jesus is the same as worship of the Father and HS, because they're all the same. That's how it isn't idolatry.\n\nHope that helped! It's very difficult to wrap one's head around, and the doctrine of the Trinity is always something that makes people's heads spin. If you have any questions, I'd love to answer them! I'm always happy to clarify!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism#Concept_of_God"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2gm83t
|
neurologically speaking, why do people learn in different ways (ie kinesthetic, visual, etc)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gm83t/eli5_neurologically_speaking_why_do_people_learn/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckkgrpy",
"ckkhpaa",
"ckkiece",
"ckkkfau"
],
"score": [
3,
21,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"And which is the best?",
"Some scientists say the whole concept is bogus. NPR recently did a [story](_URL_0_) on this topic that you might like.",
"This is probably one of those things they write books about, with little science to back up and a lot of marketing, like \"Emotional Inteligence\" and the derivative \"kinds of intelligence\" stuff.",
"It's not true, and there is nothing to back it up, just like multiple intelligence's theory, emotional intelligence, etc. \n\nIt's an education tool, it only exists in the rooms of grade school classrooms, in the SIGNIFICANTLY AND HEAVILY controversial world of elementary education."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/08/29/139973743/think-youre-an-auditory-or-visual-learner-scientists-say-its-unlikely"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
b6l6vw
|
What does it actually mean to “die peacefully” in your sleep? Is this even possible?
|
I understand this generally means the individual died while unconscious and may not have known what was happening, but does this also mean the body just stopped functioning overnight? Is this even possible, or does some sort of medical issue or trauma have to occur?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/b6l6vw/what_does_it_actually_mean_to_die_peacefully_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejngy5p",
"ejno8u2"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"During REM sleep the body is paralyzed ti prevent movement during dream state. \n\nWhen you are having trouble breathing due ti oak if oxygen, the body can jerk you awake using a body reflex. \n\nIf you combine poor breathing with rem state paralysis the body may not be able to rake you from your dream, thus passing while asleep. Keep in mind this is only one possibility. No blood flow eg heart attack means brain damage. Hypoxia.",
" > but does this also mean the body just stopped functioning overnight? \n\nAre you asking if the human body just fails all at once? No, it's not like an off-switch.\n\n > Is this even possible, or does some sort of medical issue or trauma have to occur?\n\nIts kind of like how people say \"he died of old age\". Old Age isn't something you *really* die of. What they mean is \"he died of an inevitable, age-related ailment that happens at the end of a long life.\" Just like how someone who died of old age died of *something*, someone who dies in their sleep dies of *something* too. \n\nGenerally, people die of the same things in their sleep that they do in their awake - respiratory failure, cardiac arrest, strokes, carbon monoxide poisoning, whatever - but it just happens when they're unconscious. Which is why people think of it as being peaceful; the person dying is unaware of what's happening - they 'go to sleep and just don't wake up'. \n\nThe idea of sleep and death are closely tied in people minds anyway. We say a dog is \"put to sleep\" or we tell kids too young to understand that \"grandma is sleeping forever\". If you, consciously or unconsciously, think of sleep as being somehow *closer* to death, then the idea of dying while you're asleep might seem like an easier transition. Like, sleep is the intermediate step between awake and dead. Which is sort of a weird way to think about sleep inretrospect..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1ifpq4
|
how are some cars so much more expensive than other cars. eg. 1,000,000$ car vs. 20,000$ car.
|
A second question would be: why don't they style 20,000$ cars to look like a 1,000,000$ car?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ifpq4/eli5_how_are_some_cars_so_much_more_expensive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb3zong",
"cb3ztkr"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not just the style; it's the material they use, the speeds they can reach (for sports cars), the size of the vehicle, the rarity, etc.\n\nIt's like saying why they can't just kill more snakes to make snake-skinned boots so they aren't $4,000 dollars. Snakes are rare and so is carbon fiber. Snake skinned boots are hard to make and so is carbon fiber. Thus, a vehicle with a full carbon fiber chassis is worth much more than your standard metal chassis honda and the same reason why snake skinned boots cost more than your vans.",
" > why don't they style 20,000$ cars to look like a 1,000,000$ car?\n\nThey do. Check out newer Hyundais and Chryslers, some of them are almost identical to Bentleys at a glance. If you don't know the brands you have to look at the details to see the quality differences. Check out things like precision machined parts vs. cast parts vs. stamped steel - That list goes from most expensive to least, most durable or lighter (take your pick based on performance needs) to least, and most precise to least. Also the quality of materials used, time and care they take to assemble it, etc. If you watch How It's Made you'll get a good feel for manufacturing processes and how some are labor intensive and wasteful and others are cheap and easy - a car has literally thousands of individual processes and each one adds to the cost."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1kutvl
|
How do things like Bop It manage to generate pseudorandom numbers?
|
In a normal computer, random numbers are generated by using various data and manipulating them until you get a single number, right? So how come a Bop it, or any other single-serving machine like that, which contains no data at the time of it being turned on, manage to create a random number that is different every time? Wouldn't it be always the same value, which would generate a predictable second value, and a predictable third and so on?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kutvl/how_do_things_like_bop_it_manage_to_generate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbsufck",
"cbsuh3h",
"cbsul0g"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"A very common way to generate random numbers in a small embedded device like that is to have a fairly fast free-running counter. When the device receives some input (like the player pressing the start button) the counter is read and that can provide a dozen or so bits of entropy, which is plenty to make a game like Bop It random. (If it needed more, it could read the counter every time you activate one of the thingies on the game, and accumulate entropy.) It probably uses this entropy to seed a simple PRNG like a LFSR.\n\nBuilding a reasonably-good hardware random number source is not hard, but it would add a few cents or tens of cents to the toy's cost, and at the volumes those things are made that's a significant price. The free-running-counter approach can usually be implemented very cheaply.",
"Like /u/manlymann said twice, it's using a pseudorandom number generator to generate the values. Most likely, it's generating numbers between 0 and either 2^16 - 1 or 2^32 - 1 , and using the remainder of that number divided by k (where k is the number of distinct bop it actions) to figure out the next move.\n\nAs you pointed out, the process of generating random numbers from previous ones is entirely deterministic. How does bop-it initialize the (pseudo)random sequence, then? I have two guesses\n\n1. Since bop-it has a time aspect, it has a piece of hardware can keep track of time. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it kept track of time even when off, since these pieces are so mass produced that it would probably be cheaper to install one of these than to install a piece of hardware that *doesn't* keep track of time while off. When it's turned on, it uses the time as the initial seed for the RNG and works from there.\n\n2. It has a very small amount of memory to store the previous state of the RNG while off. When you turn it on, it simply returns the RNG to the previous configuration and starts from there.\n\nInterestingly, in both cases, it's likely that bop-it is actually draining your battery a bit when off as volatile memory (memory that gets erased when it loses power) is much cheaper than non-volatile (fun fact: the various Nintendo cartridges used to have built-in watch-like batteries to keep your saves intact!). Thankfully, the amount of battery power consumed in either case is even less than what a typical watch battery provides, and your AAs can handle the tiny amount of power consumption with ease.",
"I suspect the answer is the device seeds a prng using a static value (or something very low entropy like clockcycles elapsed since power-on) and then re-seed after every button hit using the low bits of cycles elapsed. Basically you can pull entropy (and hence pseudo-randomness) from the highly variable timing of button presses by the user so the sequence changes every time unless the button timings are *exactly* the same between runs.\n\nThat's how I'd do it in the absence of any cheap hardware source of randomness like a noisy diode."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1uawmx
|
how did the first land bound life forms know we needed water to survive?
|
Going billions of years back, the first life forms that lived solely on land, how did they know they needed to drink water? Were they able to tell the difference between fresh and salt water?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uawmx/eli5_how_did_the_first_land_bound_life_forms_know/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceg7rmh",
"ceg7uak"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"How did you know to suck your mothers teat? How is it that all puppies, kittens and even little babies know to flee from pain? \n\nIt's instinct. Evolution has brought us certain tendencies born right into us. If we never felt like drinking water when we needed it we'd die. If we couldn't distinguish salt water from fresh and we couldn't handle one or the other? We'd die.",
"We'll assume that Dan was the first land based life form.\n\nDan was walking around one day, examining all the beautiful flowers, and he took a bite of one, out of curiosity. He realized that ingesting the flower satiated the feeling he had. We'll call that feeling hunger.\n\nBut dan had another feeling, we'll call this one thirst. No matter what he did, he couldn't figure out how to fix this feeling. But it felt good when Dan swallowed his spit.\n\nDan found water in a lake and noticed it looked like his spit. Dan ingested the water, and felt good.\n\nDan found water in an ocean, and remembered that water was good for him. So he ingested it and carried with him a lot of the water. Dan felt sick afterwards and wondered why.\n\nDan tasted the ocean water again and it tasted different than the lake water.\n\nDan discovered salt water."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1otbr4
|
is the ability to sing a natural or acquired talent?
|
There are studies that show an average person can reach mastery level of the piano in ten years with atleast 3 hours a day of practice. How about singing?? Please use citations.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1otbr4/eli5is_the_ability_to_sing_a_natural_or_acquired/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccvfw2x",
"ccvg121",
"ccvjm1l"
],
"score": [
6,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"It's a combination of both. If you have no ear for discerning notes, lots of practice probably won't make you a great singer. But I can tell you from personal experience, if you have an alright ear for music, you can practice and be able to see massive improvements. I was good at beatboxing and ok at singing, and I joined an a cappella group for a few years. I started singing more, and I was able to see a very noticeable progression in my abilities. ",
"Check out this interesting [story](_URL_0_) from Radiolab.",
"I have been doing music all my life, my parents made me play violin when I was 2 years old, and singing as soon as I could speak. I have had a wide varity of teachers of all kinds, from Opera singers at the Royal Opera house in Stockholm, to pop/rock singers in the small town I grew up in.\n\nFrom my experience, almost anyone can learn to sing. Some require a LOT more work for sure, but most of the people calling themselves tone deaf, are simply not. If you can speak in a normal voice, with highs and lows, then you have an ability to hear the notes you're speaking on. \nSinging on pitch might be very foreign to you, probably because you've never really practiced it and you might have a harder time hearing notes than other people, but it in no way means you're tone deaf.\n\nI've heard people go from sounding tone deaf to singing really really well. Not in a short time, but after lots of not only practice, but the RIGHT kind of practice. There's a lot of bad teaching out there, who focus mostly on breath and support and don't actually teach you what to do with your vocal chords. That is the main thing you should teach someone, breath support is just how to maintain it well baiscally. Which might be another reason why people have a hard time singing. \n\nTL:DR: Singing is hard for a lot of people because unlike a piano, you can't just show someone what to do. They have to feel it themselves. So it requires good ear, and really good teachers, to do it well. But almost anyone can do it with the right amount and right kind of practicing. Even if you have a bad ear for tones you can train it to the point where it doesn't matter."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.radiolab.org/story/91513-behaves-so-strangely/"
],
[]
] |
|
7hzbwo
|
Can anyone explain the Mouse Utopia experiments in a less tinfoil-hatty way?
|
I watched [this video](_URL_0_) but the whole channel has a conspiracy theory slant that I don’t trust.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/7hzbwo/can_anyone_explain_the_mouse_utopia_experiments/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dqwndj2"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"To start out, [The Smithsonian](_URL_3_) has a simple but brief overview of the experiments. On the opposite extreme, [Population density, social pathology, and behavioral ecology](_URL_0_) by Jim Moore (unfortunately, behind a paywall) discusses Calhoun's and similar experiments in a fair amount of detail. In particular, it argues that the supposed degradation and \"maladaptive\" behaviors identified by Calhoun could in fact be explained by simple (but non-linear) behavioral models (basically, he just points out that different strategies are viable at different population densities).\n\nAs with many experiments that gain widespread notoriety, the conclusions drawn from Calhoun's experiments among researchers differ somewhat from those drawn by the general public. At the time the experiments were publicized (1960s) overpopulation was a major concern, as was the possibility of \"moral decay,\" and overpopulation remained a major political topic until the 80s. The bleak results of the experiments played into public fears about overpopulation. These days overpopulation is less discussed because of declining birth rates in developed countries, as well as greater focus on other concerns such as global warming and pollution.\n\nIn scientific fields the link between population density and social problems, especially crime, had already been under investigation for a while ([example](_URL_5_)). However, greater public interest did lead to more experimentation. Your video seems to mention this briefly, but Calhoun's experiments did not generalize to humans. In fact, the effect of overpopulation on different animals remains a popular topic of study and the results tend to vary quite a bit between species.\n\nTo start off with a couple simple examples: clearly bees and ants can live in dense hive structures without great difficulty while animals like lions and whales react very poorly to even modestly small enclosures (much to the dismay of zoos). So the idea that different species react differently shouldn't come as too big of a shock.\n\nTo link you a couple studies, overpopulation in [guppies](_URL_2_) leads to more male-male competition (similar to Calhoun's experiments) but not to less copulation (not similar). In chimps higher density was found to [decrease](_URL_1_) aggressive behavior.\n\nModern researchers have also found results similar to Calhoun's when they study mice while providing more insight into related questions, such as [this study](_URL_4_) which also finds that overpopulation produces particular stress on male mice.\n\nIt is worth noting that all of these experiments had slightly different goals and none of them pursued the same \"wait until extreme overpopulation is reached\" methodology that Calhoun did. Calhoun himself encouraged much of the apocalyptic interpretations, by giving his own experiments evocative names like \"Utopia\" and \"Behavioral Sink.\" This kind of fanciful description is typically avoided today, because it tends to influence interpretations (see how Jim Moore reinterpreted Calhoun's results above)."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://youtu.be/NgGLFozNM2o"
] |
[
[
"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02557698?LI=true",
"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI\\)1098-2345(1997\\)41:3%3C213::AID-AJP4%3E3.0.CO;2-%23/full",
"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347299912484",
"https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-mouse-utopias-1960s-led-grim-predictions-humans-180954423/",
"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0031938495020438",
"http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01621459.1931.10503145?journalCode=uasa20"
]
] |
|
2t9p08
|
What makes an atomic bomb/explosion stop expanding? Why don't atoms continue to split more atoms etc?
|
After countless hours of searching google I couldn't come up with a definite answer. Sorry if this is a dumb question.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2t9p08/what_makes_an_atomic_bombexplosion_stop_expanding/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnxzotg",
"cny1d8t"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Theres 2 basic types of atom bombs. Fission, and fusion.\n\nFission works by splitting already unstable atoms (specifically the nucleus is unstable) so I'll go there. Basically only certain atoms are unstable and prone to breaking apart. Imagine an unstable atom like uranium-235 is a mouse trap thats been set just like [this classic example](_URL_1_) while regular atoms are un-set mousetraps. The chain reaction causes other u-235 atoms to spring apart but it doesn't affect regular stable atoms.\n\nEDIT: Forgot about fusion.\n\nTo my knowledge fusion requires that you heat up and squeeze material thats capable of fusing together, in our case hydrogen. Since the material around the bomb isn't being squeezed it won't undergo fusion. \n\nJust chew on all of that for a moment... all that energy is JUST whats inside the bomb. [Fat Man](_URL_2_) was packing only 14 pounds of plutonium and [Little Boy](_URL_0_) carried 140 pounds of uranium, both according to wikipedia. Fat man with only 14 pounds of actual fissile material was the bigger explosion.",
"The short answer is they blow up. Which is to say the stuff needed for the reaction is violently pushed apart. As a result there is only a very narrow time window for the reaction to occur.\n\nThere are two types of nuclear weapons:\n\n- Fission (Uranium/Plutonium bombs)\n- Fusion (Hydrogen bombs)\n\nIt is worth noting that a hydrogen bomb has a fission bomb wrapped around the outside.\n\nIn both cases the trick is to mash things together at really high densities to make things work. In the case of a fusion bomb the densities and energies needed are so high that you need a fission bomb around the outside to compress and heat the hydrogen enough to fuse.\n\nProblem is when the reactions occur the forces start pushing out (that is the bomb's \"*boom*\"). As a result there is only a very small slice of time where the stuff going \"*boom*\" is in the right conditions to go \"*boom*\".\n\nI forget the number but the amount of material in a nuclear bomb that actually undergoes fission/fusion is something like a few percent (2-4% of the material). I am probably wrong on that number but it's close."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Boy",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v8i4v1mieU",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Man"
],
[]
] |
|
3q0gqp
|
why was cloning such a big deal in the 90's but now is rarely spoken about?
|
Does it not seem that cloning would save a ton of endangered species? What happened to cloning humans?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3q0gqp/eli5_why_was_cloning_such_a_big_deal_in_the_90s/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwb0hsg",
"cwb0k9o",
"cwb7cac",
"cwbb1ci",
"cwbdh0k",
"cwbmhka"
],
"score": [
155,
14,
6,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There were a lot of breakthroughs in the '90s, and that made it new and exciting and a big deal. And naturally also very blown out of proportion. \n\nThere are still advances being made, but nothing huge. \n\nCloning would not make a species viable, either. You need genetic diversity, which is the exact *opposite* of cloning. ",
"Cloning was a big deal in the 1990s because of Dolly the sheep (the first animal to be cloned from an adult cell), so cloning was this sort of groundbreaking technology that suddenly went from science-fiction to real-world science experiment. Now it's become old news, so the hype has worn off.\n\nCloning animals to help save a species may not do a whole lot of good. For one, the clones are likely to have health problems and will die prematurely. Basically when you clone from an adult cell you're essentially making a fetus that has the cells of an adult and that baby animal will age (in terms of health/death) as if it's already an adult.\n\nThe other issue with cloning is it doesn't add any new contributions to the gene pool, so there will be limited genetic diversity and even if you have clones that are breeding with other genetically-different members of the species (or clones of other members of the species), you're still going to end up with a lot of inbreeding which will lead to even more health and development problems.",
"People creating controversy on the subject have been slowly replaced by clones, the plan is on schedule ...",
"It is now clear that we *can* do it given a living source and not clear if we *should* do it or how doing it **makes companies money**. We can't seem to get it right with long dead source material (like a woolly mammoth), but that will be the next big news cycle if they get it to work, because that could actually be worth some bucks. \n\nCurrently, the moral atmosphere will not allow human cloning and there are other, faster, cheaper ways to get replacement organs in the works. We're solidly in the realm of can't really make money off it. There are some people that would pay quite a bit to clone a pet or prized animal, but not enough to offset the cost of getting a program like that to scale. If a rouge state ever allows human cloning, I could see people taking the remains of their dead children to be cloned and forking over fortunes to do it.\n\nCRISPR and other gene editing technologies are the new thing and have way more potential for market than cloning. Why spend a fortune to clone Sea Biscuit, when you can take any fetal horse, inject some designer CRISPER and get Sea Biscuit 2: Electric Boogaloo? With constant research, you won't just get better at getting the same horse, you will get better horses. I hope that clarifies why cloning is not that important and gene editing is.",
"Because people forget about virtually all issues seconds after TV stops talking about them.",
"Thank you everyone for your replies! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1o73eq
|
Does the confirmation of the Higgs Boson have any implications for String Theory? Does it strengthen it, weaken it, or have no effect?
|
gdf
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1o73eq/does_the_confirmation_of_the_higgs_boson_have_any/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccpkyb5",
"ccpogwa"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Little effect, there are some theories with large extra dimensions that would require no Higgs (they have their own mechanism producing the same end effect without adding a boson), so those theories are probably feeling it a bit, but otherwise it sheds little light on the landscape. \n",
"I believe most string theories were already under the assumption that there was a higgs boson. The particular mass it was found at puts in more constraints on possible string theories. It does not have a strong effect on string theories in general."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2enbpu
|
Why was Pilot Wave Theory / de Broglie-Bohm theory considered controversial and ultimately discarded by most physicists? What does it mean for a theory to be nonlocal? What paradoxes would be created by combining relativity and de Broglie-Bohm?
|
Sorry, I know there's a couple questions there but I think they are all inter-related...just trying to wrap my head around all of this!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2enbpu/why_was_pilot_wave_theory_de_brogliebohm_theory/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck1hvj8"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"As a general rue any \"interpretation\" of quantum mechanics better be *especially* compelling in order to gain significant traction with physicists, because interpretations of quantum mechanics are a branch of philosophy, not science. One of the main reasons de Broglie-Bohm theory isn't *especially* compelling is its non-locality. What this means is that the pilot wave in the theory (the wave that guides the particle) can send signals to itself faster than the speed of light. Now due to the way the theory is constructed, this can never be used to actually send information faster than light in practice. You don't ever see the pilot wave (it is a \"hidden variable\"); only the particle. Nevertheless if you take the theory seriously, you must contend with the fact that the theory includes as \"real\" objects that travel faster than light, and therefore violate special relativity. Why is this a problem? Well again it's not a problem *scientifically*, since you don't ever see the pilot wave. But it is a problem philosophically if you take it seriously, because faster-than-light motion results in causal paradoxes. The reason is that if A follows B in one reference frame, and the distance between A and B is farther than light could have traveled in the time between A and B, then when viewed in another reference frame moving at a different velocity, B will follow A. See the wikipedia article about the [tachyonic antitelephone](_URL_0_) for more discussion. More generally, violation of relativity just seems *wrong* to most physicists; it is a simple and beautiful symmetry of nature that has an impeccable record of not only passing every experimental test, but of making surprising predictions (like antiparticles) that have turned out to be correct. Sure it's *possible* that relativity is violated in some *hidden variable* but remains true experimentally, but such baggage seems unnecessary given some of the other compelling interpretations of QM that have gained traction with physicists. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone"
]
] |
|
4sx33g
|
How did the Bismarck compare technologically to the allied fleet?
|
I know it was made hastily, so there had to be shortcomings.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4sx33g/how_did_the_bismarck_compare_technologically_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5d86ae"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It was essentially a 1915 design copy pasted to the 1930s. With a newer model of gun, and some new engines.\n\nWhat that meant was she was still hindered by the expectation of a short range brawl in the North Sea. Where stopping shells coming horizontally was the key. But even during WW1 increasing ranges meant that fire would be coming down at a very steep plunging direction.\n\nBut her double armoured deck and turtle back scheme was problematic. It meant that while certain key areas were protected, the top armor might deflect a shell into other key areas which would then be penetrated and destroyed. There was also the problem that a small volume was protected this way than peer ships. Meaning that she had less reserve buoyancy. In general German heavy ships were hard to sink by gunfire, but could be made impotent quickly. And as soon as they started to flood it was all over.\n\nThere were also serious issues with her ability to handle after a problem to a propeller or rudder that were demonstrated on her final voyage. And concerns about the placement and forget if her armour belt on the sides. And her fire control scheme, and poorly placed radar position. \n\nAnd finally her armament didn't help her. While all ships in 1941 were light on AA, Bismarck's reliance on a mixed battery of single purpose guns meant she was getting less bang for her buck and thus less protection.\n\n/u/fourthmaninaboat and /u/jschooltiger actually had a wonderful conversation on this topic in a thread last week."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
hm6d0
|
What would happen if you swallowed gasoline? Say maybe 8 oz and no vomiting.
|
I have no intention of drinking gasoline. I was just wondering how it would interact with the body.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hm6d0/what_would_happen_if_you_swallowed_gasoline_say/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1whkm5",
"c1wi5dt"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"First off, it would be best to call poison control immediately and follow their instructions, but since that's not what you're asking, I'll give it a go: 8oz is not enough to kill (depending on the size of the person). If you ingest the gasoline, you will vomit as it is recognized as a poison by the body and will likely make you very sick for several hours. Water and milk are good to coat the stomach and flush out the poison. \n\nThat all being said, if you were to develop cold or flu like symptoms or if you drank twelve or more ounces, it's time to go to the hospital. \n\nHope that helps.",
"Gasoline isn't a single type of molecule, it's a soup of some of the more poisonous stuff you can come in contact with. Benzene, toluene, naphthalene, in addition to the hydrocarbons.\n\nI work with some of these chemicals at my job. You have to use a fume hood because if you even smell them you feel ill."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1tsjrc
|
why do i physically feel horrible immediately when seeing gory photos?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tsjrc/why_do_i_physically_feel_horrible_immediately/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceb3u0r",
"ceb5y6t"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"This is an evolutionary \"trait\" of sorts. Similar to how some people faint after seeing blood.\n\nMy guess would be that humans subconsciously see blood and gore as 'something that's gone terribly wrong' and should be heeded as a warning. After all, if you saw someone suddenly shot and bleeding, wouldn't you be somewhat shocked? ",
"One simple theory usually used in psychology, is because of empathy. That is, what happens to others feels like it is happening to us personally although in a lesser extent.\n\nFor example if you are watching a football game and someone gets tackled really brutally you hunch together and say \"ouch\". Your body actually reacts as if it were you out there. Depending on how much you identify with the subject. \n\nIn the brain it is proposed that there exists something called mirror neurons, that like a mirror, reflects what happens outside you and triggers partially the same reactions inside you.\n\nEven though you dont see the action that results in those gory pictures, your inner imagination might picture it, and the empathy response/mirror neuron response reacts accordingly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
16rf8f
|
Question about concave mirrors, projectors, and real images.
|
Hello!
My objective is to make a user interface for a computer that is basically a "virtual" floating touchscreen. The interface will be projected from within an enclosure, reflected off of a concave mirror, and formed into a real image. A leap motion or other motion sensor will detect hand motions.
The original optical illusion is found here:
_URL_3_
or here:
_URL_2_
and a video is here:
_URL_0_
My own (poorly drawn) outline is here: _URL_1_
I was wondering if this was feasible? Would a monitor work better than a short throw projector? Does anyone have any suggestions that would improve on the idea?
Thanks askscience!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/16rf8f/question_about_concave_mirrors_projectors_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7yoiwl",
"c81df84"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"[This is in fact almost exactly how flight simulators work.](_URL_0_) The key to it is a collimating lens that means the user doesn't have to sit in a precise spot and the image truly feels 3 dimensional. Check out the linked wikipedia article for a good diagram (that, good for you, looks almost exactly like your diagram).\n\nAll you would need to do is add the touch/motion sensing.",
"[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nI'm an \"Early Access\" Developer and received my Leap Motion last week. I created a JavaScript demo that allows for arbitrary screen calibration. It's as easy as 3 clicks to calibrate a virtual monitor floating in the air in any orientation."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVpSCICCD9A",
"http://imgur.com/vstz0",
"http://www.umass.edu/rso/sciout/light.html",
"http://www.exploratorium.edu/snacks/touch_the_spring/index.html"
] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_simulator#Visual_display_systems"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbrLnkh3Aks"
]
] |
|
733pj1
|
I'm a king in an average sized European castle in the Middle Ages. How do I get candles? Surely my candle use would be enormous. Do I have a guy whose sole job is candle maker, or do I have to import them from somewhere else?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/733pj1/im_a_king_in_an_average_sized_european_castle_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dnnyir4"
],
"score": [
199
],
"text": [
"I completely love this question.\n\nThe courts of the late Middle Ages used an absolutely *mind-blowing* amount of lighting--individual tapers, full candelabras and chandeliers, larger torches when brighter light was culturally significant. (For example, on either side of the altar at Mass, or using twice as many to light the duke of Burgundy's dining table as the table of his relatives/rivals.) To give just one example, when Edward I lay in state following his death in 1307, the royal household purchased *843 pounds* of wax for candles to surround his body. A *minor* court official under him would still receive a candlelit wake of 300 candles. Yes, supplied by the royal family--in fact, distribution of candles as gifts/livery to court members was a *major* drain on medieval royal wax resources.\n\nWhen it came to acquisition of necessary goods in late medieval royal courts, Malcolm Vale argues that it was almost always the case that the king relied upon a group of outside merchants for the supply, rather than having designated \"court artists\" to provide e.g. furniture or tapestries. (Often, though, the same names appear in records at numerous points in a king's reign, suggesting the existence of favorites/known reliable workers to turn to). It was little different with candles.\n\nResponsibility for the acquisition of candles and related goods in the court culture orbit of late medieval Burgunday-France-England generally lay with a designated official of the king's household. Often candles, specifically, were the responsibility of someone with another central task--but not always the same task. French king Philip the Fair, for example, had a specific staff dedicated to making sure fruit, dates, and nuts appeared on all tables at meals. One or more of these *fruitiers* was responsible for the acquisition of \"candles and wax\" and \"great torches.\" And not just for meals, either. Household accounts often add \"for the chapel\" or \"for the Mass-altar\" or some such.\n\nMeanwhile, under Henry III of England, a *goldsmith* actually seems to have been in charge of candle selection! Edward Fitz Odo was an \"ascended craftsman\" of sorts--he was actually responsible for overseeing a *lot* of the artistic-type needs of the court. He would find and hire painters for ever-more elaborate decoration of the royal chamber (four Gospel authors for four walls, amirite?)--and sometimes, it seems, for new *construction* on the castle. Among Odo's responsibilities was, you guessed it, acquiring the candles needed to put on the proper show.\n\nOne thing I'm really intrigued by is the way many of the primary sources (quoted by Vale, and then a few I found via typing phrases in Google because *that is how I roll*) distinguish between \"candles\" and \"wax.\" I'm not sure if this means that lump beeswax was acquired, at which point the household organizer would also have to have hired chandlers to finish the job; or if we are to make a distinction between *wax* candles and *tallow* candles. I would honestly assume the latter, except tallow candles are generally associated with middle/lower classes, being cheaper but less user-friendly. And if we're dealing with people who can burn down *843 pounds of wax* for a *dead body*, cost is probably not the first factor on their minds."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
141hlp
|
How do scientist know (what evidence is there) to show the decay rates of isotopes, such as carbon 14?
|
*that they are constant?
I just wonder how they can find out that an element's half life is 1000 years. I may be wrong,, but are all elements decaying gradually or is the half life of an element something that happens right away? Please explain. Thanks!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/141hlp/how_do_scientist_know_what_evidence_is_there_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c791dje",
"c792vte"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"They are decaying gradually, and the half-lifes given in the nuclide chart are based on measurements performed over the fixed time period, and then extrapolated from there. At least for those elements with long half-lifes.\n\nThe decay follows an exponential curve, so no matter how much activity you start with, it will always be half this activity after the half-life has passed, so once you know that an isotope dropped to (made-up example, no actual data) 95% of its activity after three years, it's possible to calculate the drop in activity over the following time, and so get an estimate of how long it will take for the isotope sample to drop to half its activity.",
"Radioactive decay is probabilisitc. What that means is that, in a given time period there is a 50% chance a particular nucleus will undergo spontaneous decay. So if you take a large number of them, half of them will have decayed in that time frame. That is why it's called a half life. If you wait a further half life, half of what you had remaining will now also have decayed. And so on\n\nNow, the great thing with this is that there are many, many different isotopes, all of different stability. So they each have different half lives.\n\nNow, if the half lives did not remain constant through time, it would be impossible to draw any comparisons between these different systems. However, what we see is that each isotope system is consistent with the others. So if I get a date using, say K-Ar dating, I will find the same date using U-Pb or Sm-Nd dating etc^* .\n\nSo, if I take isotope X which has a half life of 5 years, and isotope Y with a half life of 20 years, put a known volume of each in a box, and come back and measure them in 20 years, I'll have have half of my original Y isotope, and 1/16th of my original X isotope.\n\nEven better than that, we can calibrate back into the geological record (at least some way) using stuff like ice cores, tree rings, varved sediments and fission track analysis to double check our maths (at least on the younger samples). \n\n^* this is of course an oversimplification, as many isotopic systems can only be used in certain circumstances (i.e. when the parent, stable and daughter isotopes are in high enough concentrations to measure which will depend on rock type) and we have to be aware of potential complications such as metamorphic history, weathering etc which will can introduce inaccuracies. But careful sample collection and preparation does allow us to check these clocks against each other, and we get stunningly good agreement."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
dep66r
|
what is frequency modulation and how are it's uses different from amplitude modulation?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dep66r/eli5_what_is_frequency_modulation_and_how_are_its/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f2xooam",
"f2xrop7",
"f2xtn22"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"So first two key definitions: Frequency (of a wave) is the number of times a complete cycle of the wave is completed in a second; Amplitude (of a wave) is the height of the tallest (or the depth of the lowest) point in the wave from the center/baseline. \n\nIn frequency modulation, the frequency of a signal is changed to encode information. The receiver decodes this information. For example, let's say you and I have a string where each of us holds one end. If I pull on it in a constant pattern, say one tug per second, that would be our frequency. Now in order to send information we agree of a certain code (i.e A is two tugs in a second, B is three, C is four, etc.) Now to send you a message via string, I tug the appropriate number of times per second, varying the frequency of my tugs to match our code. This is frequency modulation in simple terms. \n\nAmplitude modulation is the same idea, we use a set code to send messages. However, unlike frequency modulation, we instead change the amplitude. Using our string analogy again, we agree that a strong tug on the string is a one, and a weak tug is a zero. This difference in force is similar to changes in amplitude; i.e. larger waves are \"stronger tug\" and shorter waves are \"weaker tugs\". Using this method, I maintain the one tug per second frequency to send the message, but you read/decode the force/strength of the tugs.",
"Radio waves are just a type of light that we can't see. A given radio wave, or light wave, has two numbers that describe it. Frequency and amplitude.\n\nAmplitude is just a fancy way of saying how strong the wave is. In terms of visible light, it we perceive it as brightness. High amplitude is bright, and low amplitude is dim. Imagine we had a light bulb on a dimmer. We could move the dimmer to make the light bulb more or less bright, and could send messages that way.\n\nFrequency has to do with how close or far away the peaks of the wave are. With visible light, we perceive frequency as different colors. Red light is lower frequency, and as you move through orange, yellow, and green to blue and purple, the frequency of the light gets higher and higher.\n\nImagine if we had a magic light bulb that could send out light of exactly one frequency, but we could change that frequency. As we wiggle the color of the light between more reddish and more bluish, you could perceive the color change and we could send messages that way.\n\nSo, \"modulation\" is just a fancy way of saying \"wiggling\" or \"making controlled changes.\" If you modulate the amplitude of a radio signal, you're just \"wiggling\" the \"brightness\" of the radio signal. If you modulate the frequency, you're just \"wiggling\" the \"color\" of the radio signal.",
"FM would be like sending a signal by changing the color of the light or pitch of the sound, while AM is like changing the brightness of the light or the loudness of the sound."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6hj84s
|
When did China start having conceptions of race? What is the history of race in China?
|
Obviously, China could be thought to have racial divisions within its own culture from the very beginning, for example Xunzi lists off a few near the beginning of his essay "On Learning." However, it seems he would believe these races to all be equal, as he notes that they all have the same nature at birth, while learning makes them distinct. However, fast forward to the China near the end of the 19th century, and you have people like Kang Youwei who believed that certain races were of lesser intelligence. Hence, we can see a huge difference in understanding of race from Xunzi to Kang Youwei.
However, I have been taught (informally) that race is sort of a western invention, or at least distinctions based on race (i.e a racial hierarchy). Would it be fair to say that Kang Youwei would have adopted his views on race from the West, or could it be said that China has its own distinct evolution of view on race?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6hj84s/when_did_china_start_having_conceptions_of_race/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dizgbra"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This doesn't answer your historical question, but it might be worth clearing up what people mean today by saying that race is a social construct.\n\nThere are different ethnicities in the world, but our decision to group different ethnicities together into large umbrellas of \"race\" is the social construct that most people are talking about.\n\nWe put Ashkenazi Jews, Greeks, Germans, Basques, and Slavs in the same \"white\" category. Are they so similar to each other, and so different from Arabs, Persians, and Kurds, that the categorization makes sense? Or does it all descend from somewhat arbitrary line drawing?\n\nDoes the U.S. Census Bureau's categorization of South Asians, East Asians, and Pacific Islanders as a single category of \"Asian/Pacific Islander\" follow some kind of principled system, or is it an arbitrary categorization that makes sense only in the context of American society?\n\nIt's also worth noting that we tend to account for shared culture and language when drawing the lines of ethnicity in the first place. So meaningfully separating culture from race is difficult to begin with, and I'm not sure what you'd be able to do with the isolated variables."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
eopv8w
|
What period in human history have literacy rates been the highest as a percentage of the worlds population?
|
According to Our World In Date literacy rates in 2016 are the highest since the year 1800 with it now standing at 86.25% for over 15 year olds.
What were the literacy rates from let's say 1000 years ago? Have literacy rates just been steadily rising over the past 1000 years are has it been continuously rising and falling thought the course of human history?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/eopv8w/what_period_in_human_history_have_literacy_rates/
|
{
"a_id": [
"feflp6c"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"It may safely be assumed that today's literacy rates are unprecedented: Unesco reports that \"Since 1950, the adult literacy rate at the world level has increased by 5 percentage points every decade on average, from 55.7% in 1950 to 86.2% in 2015\" (*Reading the past, writing the future*, Paris 2016) - and most of the 1950 total represents European and north American countries with rates in excess of 90-95% (Unesco, *World literacy at mid-century*, Paris 1957), a condition that certainly doesn't apply in earlier centuries. \n\nThere's really no reliable way to measure global rates before the 20th century, except to say they were lower than today's or even the 1950 level - inevitably given the spread of education in the 19th and 20th centuries. Even in Europe, barely half of the population seems to have enjoyed functional literacy as late as 1850, and fewer still could read earlier in the century. The US seems to have been a 19th-century leader with extensive schoolong, but even there a fifth were illiterate in 1870, more than a tenth in 1900. \n\nRates doubtless had their downs as well as their ups, as conditions for written communication became less or more favourable in particular periods, as reflected in the varying availability of written sources over time. But the long-run trend has certainly been upward with the spread of writing itself and later of general basic schooling and printing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
14iemc
|
what are mac adresses for computers and how are they different from ip adresses?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/14iemc/eli5_what_are_mac_adresses_for_computers_and_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7dc1ri"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"MAC adresses are hard-coded into physical hardware devices (and cannot be changed) - sort of like the street address for your house. IP address are set in software and can be moved/changed - sort of like your phone number.\n\nWhen you call 911, the operator can tell what your address is because your physical address has been mapped to a particular phone number. You can change your phone number or move it to another house, but the street address for your house will never change (realistically)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
hx19w
|
A simple F=MA problem that frustrates my brain.
|
I have had a basic physics question that I can't really settle within myself. If a car is moving at a constant speed then the forces acting on it must be equal to zero... Yet what happens when you take something like friction into effect? Would you or would you not need another force to overcome the friction and therefore make the car's acceleration equal to zero? More fundamentally, what would the net force on the car be?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hx19w/a_simple_fma_problem_that_frustrates_my_brain/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1z2f9z",
"c1z2ffy"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"If your car is coasting along (ie engine not actively powering wheels) and you include friction, then your car will be slowing down gradually. Friction between the wheels and the ground (rolling friction) would manifest as a force in the direction opposite of the car's movement, resulting in a small acceleration in the same direction.\n\nIf you want a car to travel at a constant speed while considering rolling friction, you must be applying energy to the wheels by some mechanism to oppose the losses due to friction. You'll still have the rolling friction force going in the opposite direction, but you'd have an equal and opposite force driving the wheels forward to get you a net force of 0.\n\n > Would you or would you not need another force to overcome the friction and therefore make the car's acceleration equal to zero? More fundamentally, what would the net force on the car be?\n\nYou would indeed need some other force to cancel out the friction to result in zero acceleration. And if you have zero acceleration, the net force will be zero.",
"Assuming the car is undergoing no acceleration, the net force acting on the car is zero. Thus the forward force being generated by the combustion within the engine (assuming a combustion engine of course...) is just equaling all of the frictional forces acting against the car (the friction of the movable parts of the car rubbing against each other, the friction of the air against the car, or aerodynamic friction, and the friction of the tires against the road)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1fjq5a
|
What is the probable true extent of Koko the gorilla's intelligence? (Additional question for anyone fluent in ASL)
|
I've heard a lot of controversy over whether Koko is extraordinarily intelligent, or if the researchers are exaggerating. I've always thought that we don't really know enough to say one way or the other, but I recently saw [this](_URL_0_) video, and that sure as hell looks like genuine intelligence, communication, and emotions to me.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1fjq5a/what_is_the_probable_true_extent_of_koko_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"caaxxax"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Intelligence and the ability to communicate are not really the same thing. If by intelligence you mean the ability to communicate higher order cognitive functions such as emotions, deception etc I think you're not going to find an answer. People associate intelligence with language, but who says they must both exist in tandem? We may not understand the bounds of intelligence. We see squid seeing with their tentacles with no eyes. The animal kingdom continually amazes us. Depending on who you ask Koko, Kanzi, Panbanisha, Alex the African grey could all be considered \"exceptions\". Just as extraordinary human individuals exist, extraordinary animals are likely to exist. \n\nMy thoughts from my research are that Apes, Parrots and possibly other animals are more intelligent than we give them credit for. They have the ability to possess language it just is poorly understood by us. We place language in this tiny box reserved for humans because the components of religion etc have not came about in other animals.\n\nWe have to question whether the language of other animals is as complex as ours. What if we do not understand it? If we start with the hypothesis that animals do not have language because of the particular results of it we're examining a hero story. We know the ending and we're just searching for facts to prove ourselves right. We've spent so long placing ourselves above animals due to our cultural biases that we lack the objective scientific approach to animal language studies. Nonsense research like [Project Nim](_URL_0_) plague the scientific field because it seems like the obvious answer. African grey's exhibit convergence evolutionary aspects of language and their environment is quite similar as our hominin ancestors. I believe there is something we are missing in our studies of animal language and intelligence. \n\nMany studies of ape language focus on gestural communication as a precursor for language as their brocas areas activate when they communicate manually. (This is the area that activates when we speak.) There was some type of switch between using our bodies and relying more on vocalizations and calls. I have my own theories about how music was a precursor to language and there recently there have been some research done into this idea, so obviously I'm not alone in this idea. \n\nI would say though that most anthropologists feel one way, linguists another, psychologists another and it is really best to evaluate the facts yourself. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdACUfI6nA0"
] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Nim#Project_Nim"
]
] |
|
g00rvi
|
why do professional singers, such as elvis presley and andrea bocelli, have a vibrato on every note? is it learned/does it make singing easier in some way?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g00rvi/eli5_why_do_professional_singers_such_as_elvis/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fn74fp1",
"fn7agok"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Vibrato might make the sound a little more pleasant, and it also covers up tiny imperfections or discrepancies in pitch.",
"Vibrato can be on purpose or spontaneous. Sometimes it's hard to shut off. It can be affected by nervousness, emotions, even being a bit chilly.\n\nAndrea Bocelli's pitch is so flat, I haven't noticed the vibrato.\n\nIf you listen to more Elvis, you'll find that he doesn't always have vibrato. It tends to occur more during ballads, classical, slower songs--when notes are more likely to be sustained."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4zw4fa
|
Is there more evidence of observable black holes now?
|
I am currently reading through "A Brief History of Time" and I just finished the black hole chapter. The copyright for my version is 1996. I was wondering if any further research has came out on Cygnus X-1 or other observable black holes?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4zw4fa/is_there_more_evidence_of_observable_black_holes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6z7r9e"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"Yes, one of the most striking examples is that the stars right at the centre of the galaxy are all [orbiting something massive and invisible](_URL_0_) over like a 20 year period.\n\nAnd just this year, LIGO detected gravitational radiation from two colliding black holes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://i.stack.imgur.com/uy5hk.gif"
]
] |
|
3c7lg6
|
How much of a concrete operations plan was "the Schlieffen Plan"?
|
A while ago I read John Keegan's *The First World War*, in which he goes into great detail on Schlieffen's 1905 "Great Memorandum". Keegan's text implies, to me at least, that the Great Memorandum outlined a supremely-detailed plan of operations for the rapid defeat of France, down to the bridges to be crossed and the roads to be followed, but one that couldn't have worked: according to Keegan, Schlieffen knew that Belgium and France's road network wasn't extensive enough to deploy the huge number of troops he needed to defeat France, and that he literally made the divisions required magically appear at the decisive point on his maps. Nevertheless, the plan was approved for use out of a collective obsession among the German General Staff to rapidly defeat France before turning on the Russian Steamroller inexorably closing on East Prussia.
How accurate is this? I am told that recent research has discredited the notion that there actually was *a* Schlieffen Plan to defeat France and more of a series of deployment plans to which were appended recommendations to commanders for operations, but I have had difficulty finding anything that might reconcile this with Keegan's thesis, if it can be reconciled at all. Enlighten me, /r/AskHistorians!
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3c7lg6/how_much_of_a_concrete_operations_plan_was_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cstdb00"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I'm not an expert, I only know what I had to do on a bit of work over a year ago, but I remember getting a good mark on it:\n\nWell the Schlieffen Plan relied on 5 *huge* assumptions in order to be successful:\n\nInvading Belgium would cause no issue with the UK, or France.\n\nBelgium would not resist, or be unable to delay, German invasion\n\nParis would be captured in a matter of days\n\nWithout France, the UK would sue for peace, if they even got involved\n\nRussia would take at least 6 weeks to mobilise troops en masse, and could not stand against Germany\n\nBasically the entire thing just seemed like it would be more accurate if it were a tactic of pre-Industrial Revolution era (though Germany was a relatively recently industrialised nation). Germany had great military minds in command, so the idea they'd rely on such a plan seems disingenuous, there were probably *similar* plans, and that a best case scenario would play out similar to the Schlieffen Plan, but I doubt this was what they were expecting.\n\nBear in mind, the Schlieffen Plan is not the plan that was shown in WWI anyway. The Schlieffen Plan is actually a collection separate war plans. One for a simple Franco-German war, one for Entente v Germany focused in the West, one Russo-German war, and another Entente-German war. Then both of the Entente plans were plans within plans, based on the participation (or lack thereof) of the UK and other European nations. So your reading of a \"Schlieffen Plan\" not truly existing are pretty accurate. The final war plans were a bit of a combination of plans, also from what I understand, the plans were not all that detailed.\n\nIgnoring the practical limitations of getting the German forces through to Paris, which could be possible, just not in the timeframe dictated, but the plan failed on a political level with the invasion of Belgium, which is typical of Wilhelm's Germany and his fundamental misunderstanding of the Great Powers and their interactions.\n\nHere's a couple readings:\n\nInventing the Schlieffen Plan: German War Planning, 1871–1914 (Zuber)\n\n1914-1918: the History of the First World War (Stevenson)\n\nAlso, my favourite Reddit post, a huge repository of free ebooks:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/trackers/comments/hrgmv/tracker_with_pdfsebooks_of_college_textbooks/c1xrq44"
]
] |
|
1m6yn1
|
complete quantum teleportation of photonic quantum bits
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m6yn1/eli5_complete_quantum_teleportation_of_photonic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc6ddzq",
"cc6ejto"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"How sad... i was really hoping for an answer to this one.",
"A bit is the basic unit of information. It's a logical question with either a yes or a no answer. Quantum teleportation of information has to do with a phenomenon known as \"Quantum Entanglement\" which means that particles are connected sort of like twins are connected in horror films. What one particle knows, the other inevitably knows no matter how far away they are. \n\nOur method of sending and receiving information is limited by the speed of light. For example, we send out phone calls in radio waves which move at the speed of light, this is what photonic (photons are the particles that make up not only visible light, but radio/infared/ultraviolet etc) quantum bits are. Quantum teleportation, in theory, would work because the twin particles seem to \"learn together\" without having to send data to the other one.\n\nSay we have a few sets of 'twin particles' here on Earth and in a lab on the face of the sun. On Earth we have all the 'older twins' and in our lab on the sun we have all the 'second born twins.' We have this lab stationed on the sun to alert us of when the sun explodes. Now imagine that the sun exploded; it would take 8 minutes for us on Earth to see the explosion happen, and we would have no time to react. The lab, being on the surface of the sun, gets this information the instant it happens. Because our particles here on Earth are entangled with the ones in that lab, we now know on Earth that the sun has just exploded and we have about 8 minutes to prepare our defenses against our impending death. \n\n\nTL;DR - Conventional sending/receiving of bits of information are limited by the speed of light. Quantum Entanglement suggests that pairs of particles are connected in a special way such that if one particle 'learns' something, its partner instantly learns it as well, regardless of the distance between them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4742v3
|
What about deep breathing makes us lightheaded?
|
As in, how does deep breathing cause lightheadedness? If it's simply "Too much oxygen" what about all that oxygen results in feeling lightheaded?
What mechanisms are at play/ what's going on?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4742v3/what_about_deep_breathing_makes_us_lightheaded/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0a64dq",
"d0aai8a"
],
"score": [
30,
3
],
"text": [
"Hyperventilation removes more CO2 from the blood than is being released into the blood via cell respiration. This increases the pH of the blood, a condition called alkalosis, which in turn causes blood vessels to constrict, reducing blood flow. Alkalosis also reduces the amount of freely ionized calcium in the blood, which is essential for proper nerve functioning, and which also causes blood vessels to constrict, reducing blood flow to the brain further, which makes you feel lightheaded.",
"The blood needs to do two things to supply your brain (or any cells) with oxygen. First, the heme group needs to absorb oxygen in the lungs, and secondly, it needs to release oxygen in the cells. This two way equilibrium reaction is affected by the pH of the blood. Too low and your blood won't absorb oxygen (acidosis). Too high and the blood, although full of oxygen, won't release oxygen to the cells (alkalosis). The rate and depth that you breathe determines how quickly you expel carbonic acid, in the form of CO2, from the blood. Breathing too quickly or deeply, causes lightheadedness and possibly loss of consciousness as your brain is unable to take oxygen from the blood. A simple treatment of hyperventilation is to breathe into a bag, which causes you to absorb some CO2, lowering the pH of the blood and allowing your brain to acces the oxygen in the blood.\nThis brings up a common misunderstanding about diet and the pH of your blood. Drinking alkaline water won't change the pH of your blood. If your blood was outside of the optimal range of pH values it is immediately corrected by the urge to either breathe faster or slower. If it stayed out of the optimal range for more than a few minutes, you would be dead. You can't change your blood pH by drinking overpriced water."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
z2qio
|
would the mass of a helium balloon be positive or negative and is there such a negative mass
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/z2qio/would_the_mass_of_a_helium_balloon_be_positive_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c60xiit",
"c60xj1o"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"Are you confusing mass and weight?",
"The mass of a helium balloon is positive. The weight is negative. There might be such a thing as negative mass, but we haven't encountered such a thing yet."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
23xh2v
|
why does the grocery store carry fully cooked frozen chicken and turkey, but not beef?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23xh2v/eli5_why_does_the_grocery_store_carry_fully/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch1je01"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Not certain but perhaps its because there's a lot of different degrees at which different people like their meet cooked."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
arm5pz
|
why can't we just transfer antibodies from immune people to sick people to cure them easily?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/arm5pz/eli5_why_cant_we_just_transfer_antibodies_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ego4086"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Give a man antibodies and he's immune for however long they last. Teach a man's B-cells to make antibodies and they are immune for life (unless they stop making them in immune-compromised situations).\n\nAntibodies are single use. They bind to something determined bad to mark it disposal and are removed with the bad thing. If there are not enough antibodies, you can't get rid of the bad things before the bad things make more of themselves. Certain treatments do harvest antibodies made from chemical reactions or manufactured cells to be put in humans.\n\nMeanwhile, if you can train your body's immune B-cells to make antibodies, you will be immune as long as those cells produce antibodies. Vaccines give your body a taste of the bad things so you can produce your own immunity. This may be needed a few times to build up immunity (chicken pox) or repeatedly if the bad thing changes quickly (flu virus)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
7rfjjg
|
how does dental uv lights work on fillings? what makes it cures so fast?
|
Went to the dentist a few days ago, still amazed at UV light cures the filling so fast, so it left me wondering how.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7rfjjg/eli5_how_does_dental_uv_lights_work_on_fillings/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dswrias",
"dswuyxi"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Actually it is intense blue visible light, not UV light that they use for curing. As for how it works: \n\nThe material that is used for fillings is a resin based composite that is specially designed for that exact purpose. Resin is a polymer that looks similar in color to teeth and has physical properties that are desirable to be a replacement for a gap in a tooth, like its strength, durability, heat resistance, etc. Different polymers had been used in the past but they were much more difficult because polymerization (the polymer hardening from liquid to solid) would begin about 30 seconds after the components were mixed together, leaving dentists with very little room for error. \n\nThis led to the use of photoinitiators for resin fillings. By using a photoinitiator, polymerization would not begin until a specific wavelength of light (visible blue in this case) introduced its energy to the mix. The actual science behind photoinitiators is a little beyond what I'm comfortable explaining so I'll leave you to research them yourself. But them being in the resin allows the dentist all the time they could want because the liquid won't polymerize until the light is introduced, and once the light energy is given the reaction occurs quickly and irreversibly. This gives them more control and precision. ",
"An epoxy resin usually comes as 2 different materials that are mixed together to create a glue. You have the glue itself, and an activator which acts like a catalyst to harden the glue. In a normal 2 part epoxy, the catalyst uses chemistry to rapidly convert molecules in the resin to strong, harder, material, and this is an exothermic reaction, creating a lot of heat. The activator/catlyst provides the energy necessary to cure the resin/glue and make it hard and strong. \n\nIn UV activated resins, the UV light itself provides the energy to cure the resin/glue. So a catalyst isn't needed. The advantage of this is that the resin will stay pliable as long as the dentist needs until they are ready to cure it. It also means there is no heat created which could damage the pulp of the tooth, and there are no fumes, or by products of a catalytic reaction which might be unhealthy. \n\nDental resin is not as strong as tooth material though and so a filling is more than just that finishing resin. It's usually a solid plug of a much harder material, and the resin holds it in place, and smooths out it's edges where it meets the tooth. Kind of like digging a hole in the ground, putting a cement block in it, and then using loose dirt to pack around them both and fill in the hole so it looks smooth again. \n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1j8qri
|
how redbull can afford to sponsor so many different (and expensive) sports, yet their product is only a drink?
|
How can they afford to have 2 F1 teams. Sponsor Felix Baumgartner. Sponsor the Air Race and numerous different extreme sports. Yet all the seem to sell is Redbull energy drinks. They cant make that much money can they?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j8qri/eli5_how_redbull_can_afford_to_sponsor_so_many/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbc8i8f",
"cbc8iv8",
"cbc8jkg",
"cbc9sbx",
"cbcasdy",
"cbcb25z",
"cbcb9bf",
"cbcbff5",
"cbccjz9",
"cbcd78m",
"cbcdin6",
"cbcdnl1",
"cbcdouu",
"cbcdu3t",
"cbcdwcd",
"cbce91u",
"cbceb31",
"cbcebvc",
"cbcebvq",
"cbcedld",
"cbcefcs",
"cbceiep",
"cbcemby",
"cbceukr",
"cbcewsx",
"cbcf8xd",
"cbcfiuj",
"cbcfm7o",
"cbcfp95",
"cbcg2ok",
"cbcgwgk",
"cbchux9",
"cbci7os",
"cbci8wc",
"cbcipp2",
"cbciqqg",
"cbcivu6",
"cbcjdst",
"cbcje2f",
"cbcjp29",
"cbckc90",
"cbcm659",
"cbcm9im",
"cbcmiox",
"cbcmvmk",
"cbco3pq",
"cbco5k2",
"cbcq6w3",
"cbcuxit"
],
"score": [
578,
14,
303,
71,
85,
9,
10,
24,
9,
6,
4,
2,
2,
3,
7,
1411,
6,
8,
4,
5,
2,
2,
3,
2,
4,
2,
9,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
4,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > They cant make that much money can they?\n\nThey really do. They brought in over 4 billion in 2011 (revenue, so that wasn't all profit of course).\n\nEdit - It is ridiculous this is one of my highest upvoted comments.",
"That F1 team is valued at over $400 million. It's not just for advertising, it's making them a heap of cash. ",
"Yes, their main source of money is their drinks. And they sell a lot of drinks. According to Wikipedia, they sold almost 5 billion cans in 2011. So yes, they do make a lot of money from that.\n\nBut they do have various other ways of making money. Obviously they have various sports teams. That of course brings in money.Their F1 teams are worth a lot of money, and they own various football/soccer teams outright. You might also be surprised to know that Red Bull has their own media company. In addition to the obvious ways of making money through this (advertising, sales), since they use their own media company for their own sporting events, they can reap in money from royalties.\n\nAnd once they acquire all this money, they put it all back into advertising and sponsorships, which increases their brand awareness and thus increases their sales even more.",
"When your drink retails for $2+ per tiny can and probably costs 5¢ in ingredients, there is a lot of headroom.",
"I had a very smart man with a MBA explain it to me one time so I'll try to remember the best way he explained it. \n\nRedBull is not a energy drink company, they're a marketing company. They started out as a Marketing company and bought a random drink company. \nThey make money by through royalties and advertising as well as they're drinks, however they're marketing is what really makes them money. They fund ideas and crazy things to improve there sales and royalties.\n\nPlease feel free to correct me, I'm just trying to recall our brief conversation. ",
"Red Bull owns a TV Channel too ",
"I can only speak to a really limited market, but Red Bull has started sponsoring a lot of esports stuff lately. Those people are acutely aware of the fact that such a niche interest getting a huge sponsorship like that is a big deal, so they actively go out of their way to support the company. For example Papa Johns did a thing where you could support individual Starcraft players by using their specific coupon codes on pizza, and the more pizzas that were ordered more community rewards were unlocked (teams switching coaches, getting top players to do silly stuff, etc.) Both promotions received a lot of community backing, encouraging people to go buy.\n\nIn regards to Felix Baumgartner, I don't really drink a lot of energy drinks but that was so cool I bought some Redbull out of principle to (hopefully) encourage future stunts. \n\n",
" > yet their product is only a drink?\n\nNot quite. Redbull is so much larger than *\"just a drink\"*. With their sales, their sponsorships, their mascot/symbol, they are beyond being a single product company. They are a **brand**. Coca-Cola is a brand, Dr. Pepper, hell, even KFC. Imgur. Reddit. Microsoft. AMD/ATI.\nAll brands.\n\nCompanies that have such large followings no longer have to be limited to their flagship product. They can merchandise, they can both be paid to sponsor/endorse, and pay to sponsor certain entities, they can license out their trademarks and assets.\n\nNot to mention, according to wikipedia, Red Bull owns at least a couple of sports and racing teams.",
"They sell $.25 worth of flavored sugar water for $2.50. To do that they have to spend a lot of money marketing to create a brand. One of the components of the brand they're trying to create is \"enough energy for the most extreme sports on the planet.\"\n\nOr, put another way, buying tv time is very expensive (10s of thousands of dollars a minute). Extreme sports toe the line between traditional sports sponsorships and publicity stunts -- or put another way, they get lots of free tv time on both sports channels and news shows.",
"Don't just think in terms of revenue - think in terms of profits/margins. You know that 20 ounce RedBull you pay $4.25 for at the bodega? That costs them roughly 12-20 cents to produce, tops. The \"special sauce\" in RedBull is among some of the cheapest stuff in the world to acquire (caffeine, vitamin B, etc. - I used to sell an antioxidant energy pill so I'm aware of the margins and costs) - the most expensive ingredient is sugar, to give you some idea of how little this stuff costs to make. So assume the store gets half of the 4 billion, RedBull gets the other half (2 billion), and at most about 250 million of that is going toward the product. The rest is marketing and events. You can throw some pretty insane events for nearly 2 billion dollars.",
"Well, at least in regards to the F1 teams... those are revenue generating. RBR (their primary team) is easily self-sufficient, especially considering they've won the drivers and constructors championships 3 years running. ",
"Probably because of people like my daughters mom. She drinks the stuff all day so she doesnt fall asleep while laying in bed all day watching television. ",
"For sports such as Formula1 (where Red Bull has been king since 2010), the team is actually funded by a lot of sponsors (cost recovery). Added to this, because of all the points they score(d), they probably even MAKE a fair bit of money. The sport's governing body gives money for each point scored/ Although there is also a fee for entering the next season for each point scored,, it's a weird cost of success. Anyhow, it is a win/win as at the very least they get free-ish advertisement over multiple continents.\n\nAll in all, it wouldn't be too surprising if the *RBR F1 Team* is actually a small revenue item on their income statement. But since RedBull is a private company, their financial statements are not made public record. Therefore, this is all reasonable and informed speculation.",
"They probably make enough money off the amount of that shit I buy daily :(",
"Redbull don't actually sponsor sports teams and events, they buy sports teams and create events.\n\nThat is a point of difference for them according to the ex UK red bull head of marketing.\n\nRed bull didn't sponsor an x-games event, they created the event. They don't sponsor a flying competition, they made a flying competition.\n\nSame with the teams, if you see a team wearing a redbull jerksey, it is because they own that team. It isn't red bull branding on a F1 car, it is a red bull owned F1 Car.",
"Food technology business guy here.\n\nKeep in mind that the operating and manufacturing costs for soft drinks are *ridiculously* low.\n\nFood technology is pretty much just a basic set of chemicals that are essentially commodities (i.e., all products are nearly identical, so they all have an insanely low price). Because of the lengthy FDA GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) approval cycle, the majority of breakthroughs in food science today are just better ways to combine these different chemicals to get a certain recipe/application functionality, flavor, umami, or mouthfeel. It's not rocket surgery.\n\nOf the ingredients that go into a soft drink, the highest cost will invariably be the packaging (the can) and the packaging coating (e.g., the chemical coating on the inside to make it food-safe). Everything else (phosphates, water, sugar, caffeine and its derivatives, dyes, flavoring...) is an industrial chemical that can be bought for a few hundred bucks a ton. Even carbonation is a technology that has been around since the 19th century. It's a well-perfected process.\n\nThe real money is in the marketing. Sustain a decade-long \"Red Bull gives you wings\" campaign and Red Bull's name becomes permanently beamed into people's minds when they think of energy drinks. So Red Bull can absolutely ask ~~$2.00~~ ~~$4.00~~ a brazillian dollars for a can that really only costs them a few cents to make. More for sugarfree or zero-calorie versions that takes virtually no extra effort to manufacture. Marketing is where the whole becomes worth more than the sum of its parts.\n\n~~Sponsorship is equivalent to marketing, since they get to plaster their logo all over something that people actually *choose to watch* (as opposed to commercials). So this is accounted for in their budget and chalked up to the cost of increasing sales.~~ Someone pointed out to me that Red Bull actually *owns* their racing team, rather than just being the sponsor, so they gain income from the team. Doing stuff like the Baumgartner jump and sponsoring other teams, however, is part of the marketing.\n\nEdit: Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick. I really did not expect this to blow up the way it did.\n\nEdit edit: Thank you, kind /u/zTroII for the reddit gold!",
"You ever hear of a little company called Coca Cola? It was built off only a drink...and its a $180 BILLION company",
"Redbull is practically an entertainment company now. I'm sure they made mad profit off of their Signature Series recently. ",
"Companies like Coca-Cola, Red-Bull, etc. arent interested in spending much money on new product development. They already believe they have a wonderful product. So it makes sense for them to spend all the extra money marketing, trying to get it into your head that you should drink their stuff. But a company like General Motors, Dell, etc. spends most of their extra money on new product development rather than advertising. (although they still do some advertising). Im not going to buy red Bull anymore if they make a red bull super version, so naturally they are just going to try to ingrain red bull into my sub conscience, since they already have a near perfected product in their category, they just need people to try it, and to remember it.",
"My energy drink budget is $60/month. I need to work on getting sponsored...",
"I would also suspect that a lot of their sports teams are now profitable. \n\nCertainly, Red Bull Racing would be making big profits from merchandise and winnings.\n",
"This [article](_URL_0_) gives some insight.\n\n\"Could all that cash possibly be worth it? Aside from the notion that you can't put a price on victory – and that Red Bull Racing is the current reigning champion – industry insiders, considering the on-air exposure and positive brand association from which Red Bull benefits, say it most definitely is. In fact, according to the report, Red Bull would have to pay roughly double what it does to buy that kind of exposure.\"\n",
"Think about how much it actually costs to manufacture that piss, then think about what they charge for it. Then think about merchandising. They do alright. ",
"because its 3 bucks a can and costs 30 cents to make Massive Profit",
"it's got the electrolytes that plants crave...",
"They don't just \"sponsor\" people like Felix Baumgartner or events like Air Race. They literally _own_ them and make money off of them.\n",
"Here's a thought exercise:\n\nThe Coca-Cola Company's product is also \"only a drink\".\n\nEdit: I have no idea how people failed to understand such a simple sentence as this. Let me re-word it though:\n\nThe Coca-Cola Company are also renowned as a drink manufacturer.",
"RedBull is not a drink company.. They're a brand, they sell a certain life style and they try to increase their brand's worth. It doesn't really matter what they sell, they could sell RedBull branded potatoes and people would buy them. They chose to sell mainly this drink because that's what seems to be working best for them.",
"A buddy of mine used to be involved with Redbull Racing (he was a driver) and filled me in on the specifics of the operating costs. I'll see if I can get the specifics from him again, but it was the most insane margins I have ever heard of for a single product company. \n\nSo in short, yes, they can easily afford the teams and events due to massive margins on their product. ",
"When I was a bartender, vodka & redbull is one of the most popular drinks that is served.",
"For a full understanding on how the company works \n_URL_0_\n\n\nRed Bull GmbH, the parent company, owns and operates a bunch of companies that add value to operations.\n\n 'Red Bull operates many other businesses aside from energy drinks The company owns and manages a construction company, football clubs, youth academies and TV broadcasting and recently online clothing (Red Bull label only) sales.'\n\n'The company has even ventured into the mobile phone service business in Austria, Hungary, Switzerland and South Africa'\n\n'As a privately-held company, financial information is limited however the company reported net sales of €4.9 billion in 2012 and 5.2 billion cans sold'\n\ni just want to say that these upvoted posts suck and wikipidia doesn't cover everything- the thread is called 'explain like I'm five' \n\np.s. if you're learning from the post with the most upvotes your system is severely flawed my friend, the internet is full of sheeple people who happen to be upwards of 99% stupid",
"Keep in mind that their product is an expensive, very popular drink sold in both supermarkets and bars worldwide. Now make another estimate ;)",
"I would guess that their drink is probably the most profitable drink on the market. And that's why.",
"It isn't just a drink. It has what plants crave.",
"It's probably worth noting that the main F1 Team basically funds itself in prize money and sponsorship deals, the other team is run as an 'academy' to get into the main team, but still does very well for itself.",
"Well for starters, they don't 'sponsor' Red Bull Racing or Scuderia Toro Rosso, they own and operate both meaning that the profits from the teams are theirs too. And with the success RBR have been having the past few years that's a lot of profits.",
"Here is a list of video links collected from comments that redditors have made in response to this submission:\n\n|Source Comment|Score|Video Link|\n|:-------|:-------|:-------|\n|[ThatBeardedCarGuy](_URL_20_)|6|[Moonshine: The \"Flame Test\"!](_URL_11_)|\n|[lawk](_URL_13_)|2|[Die dunkle Seite von Red Bull HD Doku](_URL_3_)|\n|[I_like_maps](_URL_19_)|2|[A Brief History of Santa](_URL_12_)|\n|[grasshopper95](_URL_15_)|1|[Secrets of the Superbrands FOOD full doc](_URL_7_)|\n|[vucodlakk](_URL_16_)|1|[Brain Surgeon - That Mitchell & Webb Look , Series 3 - BBC Two](_URL_9_)|\n|[Itsjustnotme](_URL_14_)|1|[BBC Three - Secrets of the Superbrands Food](_URL_1_)|\n|[mr-peabody](_URL_8_)|1|[Can I Keep Him? - The Kids in the Hall](_URL_5_)|\n|[-moose-](_URL_6_)|1|[Superbrands 3 Food](_URL_0_)|\n|[Big_Jar](_URL_18_)|-2|[Getty Images presents Red Bull Media House](_URL_4_)|\n\n* [VideoLinkBot FAQ](_URL_17_)\n* [Feedback](_URL_10_)\n* [Playlist of videos in this comment](_URL_2_)",
"_URL_1_\n\nGreat article on how Red Bull Media House actually makes a profit on content and marketing.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nAnother on Monster v. Red Bull.",
"There is a german documentary out called \"The dark side of Red Bull - When a beverage does not give you wings\" covering various cases of athletes who have died performing stunts for the company. \n\nThey actively promote to always take it up a notch. Some say the athletes would do it anyway. But some decisions might be made because the cameras were rolling even if the conditions are not the best. \n\nThey also would not have cared if Baumgartner died. The PR is the same, also people love a hero. \n\nMcConkey the movie by Red Bull Media house basically capitalizes on his death. \n\nThe documentary can be seen here:\n_URL_0_\nno english subs though :(",
"Red Bull is a marketing company, the drink is only a small part of their portfolio, that's why they have their own F1 team and are not just a sponsor, same with their football team (much to the supporters resistance) they didn't even create the drink they just carbonated an existing product from Thailand, all in all their money comes from the brand from which the drink was merely the anchor ",
"They do A LOT of marketing. I live in a southern college town and I've actually known a couple kids with trunkloads of redbull who for whatever reason got it to sell and market to their friends at some event.",
"I think most people don't know that Red Bull is/was a Thai company, invented by one man. He is now a billionaire. His snot nosed, coke head son blasted a Thai police officer while drunk in his Ferrari a few years back. Cop died, kid didn't spend a day in jail. \n\nRed Bull is like cough syrup here in SE Asia. You can get the carbonated Western version. But a small glasss bottle of red Bull goes for about 35cents USD here in Cambodia and Thailand. \n\nI prefer M 150!",
"Fun fact: If you go on the \"Sound of Music\" tour in Salzburg, Austria, you get to drive past the [Red Bull headquarters](_URL_0_).",
"They sell a lot of drinks.",
"Red Bull costs 5 cents a can to make. That's how they can afford it.",
"You know all those gas stations out there selling $4/gallon gas? If Redbull was sold by the gallon, it would cost you over $30/gallon for Redbull. \n\n_URL_0_",
"Because they charge a premium for what is effectively simply another soft drink, in a smaller can. Their margins are HUGE.",
"They also own Red Bull Records and have artists like AWOLnation and Imagine Dragons signed to the label and those guys generate HUGE revenue. ",
"I would be so pissed off if all of these comments had come to my inbox!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.autoblog.com/2011/06/11/red-bulls-investment-in-f1-tops-690-million/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.euromonitor.com/medialibrary/PDF/RedBull-Company-Profile-SWOT-Analysis.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/UPqr11Qvw4c",
"http://youtu.be/zgQPZV31cAU",
"http://radd.it/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcivu6?only=videos&start=1",
"http://youtu.be/Fe_0hov5mVU",
"http://youtu.be/Vj4LsNL_sfY",
"http://youtu.be/TvFhoqN597k",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcgcm3",
"http://youtu.be/WraCZJuffAg",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcivdf",
"http://youtu.be/THNPmhBl-8I",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/VideoLinkBot/submit",
"http://youtu.be/_v4fH4xAuZQ",
"http://youtu.be/RbUVKXdu4lQ",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcje2f",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcj6zl",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbckkwf",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcj838",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/VideoLinkBot/wiki/faq",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcf4na",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcdwa9",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j8qri/_/cbcfe9g"
],
[
"http://www.ceoafterlife.com/marketing/the-bull-who-withstood-the-monster/",
"http://www.fastcompany.com/most-innovative-companies/2012/red-bull-media-house"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe_0hov5mVU"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/07Efw4x.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cockeyed.com/science/gallon/liquid.html"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
i9ug1
|
Global Warming: Truth
|
Is there evidence to prove that global warming is in fact taking place?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/i9ug1/global_warming_truth/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c221w29",
"c2227v0",
"c2229ip",
"c222bdu",
"c222nto",
"c223ak6",
"c223bvo",
"c2245me",
"c2257hn"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
37,
9,
5,
6,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, yes there is. The issue is with proving if it's man made or not.",
"This can be a touchy subject, since the history of the earth is filled with extreme and sudden changes in climate. At this point we are overdue for an ice-age like event.\n\nHowever, the evidence points to human interaction with the environment as the main cause of any climatic irregularities. Temperatures have steadily increased in the world since the beginning of the industrial age. It could be a massive coincidence, but more likely is the effect of constant release of carbon and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere that would have otherwise remained trapped under the earth.",
"This question has been discussed on /r/askscience several times before.\n\nThe most recent article I remember is:\n\n[How solid is the scientific backing for anthropogenic global warming?](_URL_1_)\n\nThe top comment from that thread [can be found here](_URL_1_c1tfsky).\n\nOther recent discussions:\n\n* [I'm skeptical of Human Caused Global Warming, but I'm open minded! Can you convince me?](_URL_0_)\n* [I remember the global warming scandal a few years back...What's up with that?](_URL_3_)\n* [How do I explain global warming is really happening, in the simpliest and understandable way?](_URL_2_)",
"Five key indicators of climate change are summarized very well on NASA's site:\n\n[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
"The scientific community is as close to a consensus on this as possible. \n\nPersonally, I work a lot with the Inuit (aka eskimau). As we speak, they are learning to cope with later icing up of the arctic ocean (late november instead of mid october) and thinner sea ice. They also have to cook up new names for critters they are seeing for the first time - things like robins which now migrate as far north as Kuujjuaq.\n\nYou want to see unambiguous evidence: go north! Thats where the story is happening.\n\nAnd if you think the Inuit are happy about this, think again! They are majorly POd and scared. They cannot hunt or travel before the sea ice really catches and they dislike summer. ",
"There is zero controversy within the scientific community that global warming is occurring. The only people that doubt that are either in the pocket books of petroleum companies or have zero credentials to seriously judge the myriad evidence that it's occurring. \n\nGlacial retreat as a result of global warming will cause massive water shortages in areas that need it for agriculture, like large parts of Asia. The glacial retreat alone should be evidence enough. \n\n\"Every year since the mid-'70s has ranked above the 20th century average temperature, and all of the Top 10 warmest years on record, since 1888, have been measured since 1998.\"\n\n(_URL_2_).\n\n(_URL_1_)\n\n(_URL_0_)",
"Do you want to know whether climates around the world are changing (climate change), whether the average global temperature is increasing (global warming), or whether either of these are caused by humans (anthropogenic). These are all related, but very different questions, and I'm just wondering whether you actually want to know about global warming rather than anthropogenic global warming.\n\nThere has been a lot of evidence to support global warming, so much so that it is now taken as fact by most scientists. Much of the relevant literature has been already cited by others in this thread. However, you actually don't need to take my word for it, you can readily download mean annual temperature maps for the entire Earth (at a fairly coarse resolution) and simply calculate the mean value. You can do this over many past years and see for yourself whether a trend exists. [NOAA](_URL_0_) lets you do this fairly easily.\n\nClimate change, similarly, can be empirically proven to exist. Climate, by the way, is generally defined as the usual temperatures, humidity levels, precipitation amounts, wind, pressure, etc... for a region over a thirty (30) year range. So climate cannot really change overnight, a single day of \"out of bounds\" weather only skews the climate by 0.0091%, due to that 30 year range. However, looking at the data, we have already begun to see changes, and again, don't take my word for it, look at the raw data which NOAA provides.\n\nThe major point of contention, and what most of the arguments in academia and on the news have been about, is the anthropogenic global warming or climate change. Did humans cause it, or didn't they? This is a huge question, with very important ramifications. If we didn't cause it, then we technically don't have any ethical obligation to stop it, unless it somehow inconveniences us. If we did cause it, we do have an ethical obligation to act. Incidentally, this is a much trickier question to answer, because we can't have any empirical data about what the Earth would be like if we didn't exist.\n\nThe debate on this one is still on-going, but I believe the scientific community, by-and-large, has pointed to anthropogenic climate change, rather that the opposite. Again, plenty of links to good sources were provided by posters at the top, so I won't bore you with duplicates.\n\nTL;DR: Both climate change and global warming are real. The real question is whether humans caused them or not.",
"I saw this on reddit once:\n[The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism](_URL_0_)",
"Everything you need is available at the [IPCC website.](_URL_1_) See especially the [publications.](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fq2dp/im_skeptical_of_human_caused_global_warming_but/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/h8hks/how_solid_is_the_scientific_backing_for/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fwgjo/how_do_i_explain_global_warming_is_really/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fq7hf/i_remember_the_global_warming_scandal_a_few_years/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/h8hks/how_solid_is_the_scientific_backing_for/c1tfsky"
],
[
"http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/"
],
[],
[
"http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/04/manufactroversy/",
"http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/2010-record-temperature#fbIndex1",
"https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850#Impacts_of_glacier_retreat"
],
[
"http://www.climate.gov/#dataServices/dataLibrary"
],
[
"http://www.skepticalscience.com/docs/Guide_to_Skepticism.pdf"
],
[
"http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml",
"http://www.ipcc.ch/"
]
] |
|
10ke85
|
What did people in your focus culture make of dreams?
|
I'm interested in where they thought dreams came from and what they meant. General cultural perspectives or specific stories of historical figures' reactions to their dreams are both welcome.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/10ke85/what_did_people_in_your_focus_culture_make_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6e7s76",
"c6eg6bz"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a topic of particular interest to me! I do Viking-age Scandinavia, and dreams were a big deal to this particular culture, if the sagas are anything to go by. I wrote a paper on this subject, the general conclusion of which was that dreams represent a kind of liminal meeting-place between the human and supernatural realms. People are frequently visited by ethereal figures in their dreams, who may be able to share knowledge with the dreamer; this pops up in Gisli Sursson's saga, for example. Interestingly, the supernatural prophetic figures in dreams are very often female, which has led some scholars to attempt to draw some link between them and valkyries. Of particular interest to my paper was the idea of dream as a more literal neutral ground - there's one fascinating little \"thaettur,\" or short story, called \"The Mound-Dweller,\" about a farmer who stumbles across a burial cairn. He finds a sword underneath it and takes it home with him. In the sagas, this kind of thing often serves as the set-up for a conflict between humans and the dead; there are lots of stories of heroes going down into burial mounds to steal treasure and fight the undead inhabitants. In this story, though, the farmer is visited in his dreams by a strange man, the inhabitant of the mound. The mound-dweller tells the farmer, in verse, that he will be his ruin, to which the farmer replies that he will repay any injury the mound-dweller does him \"blow for blow.\" Impressed by his poetry and bravery, the mound-dweller tells the farmer that \"no other answer would have been appropriate\" and vanishes. So, what we have is the dream as a meeting-place to resolve conflicts between the supernatural and physical worlds. The sagas are fascinating stuff.",
"You might want to check out *The Politics of Dreaming in the Carolingian Empire* by Paul Dutton, if you have access to a good library it shouldn't be hard to track down.\n\nIt is a great look at the way dreaming, and the depiction of dreaming, were used as political tools."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5w2fdx
|
what constitutes a roman numeral in a chemical formula?
|
For example, MnS is manganese (IV) sulphide, but how would I know what Roman numeral to add in something like tin oxide?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5w2fdx/eli5_what_constitutes_a_roman_numeral_in_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"de6sosd"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"You have to look at the oxidation state of the metal in the compound (a number like +1, +2, etc.). If it's always a certain value, like sodium for example, then you don't need a Roman numeral. Otherwise, the numeral just corresponds to the oxidation number, so in your example manganese would have an oxidation number of +4.\nP.S. I think you meant MnS. Mg = magnesium. ;)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4r4mtx
|
how does medicine like asprin work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4r4mtx/eli5_how_does_medicine_like_asprin_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4y9x2c"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Aspirin reduces pain and inflammation because it blocks the activity of a protein (called cyclooxegenase, or COX) which helps produce molecules that promote inflammation (called prostaglandins). \n\nIt helps thin blood in the prevention of strokes and heart attacks because blocking COX also prevents the production of a molecule that that promotes clotting, called thromboxane A2. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
esnpet
|
Is it true that the Soviet Union gave food aid to Americans during the Great Depression and Dust Bowl?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/esnpet/is_it_true_that_the_soviet_union_gave_food_aid_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ffd26v3"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"I'm searching around, and I can't find *any* sources that make the claim that the Soviet Union provided food aid to Americans either in the Dust Bowl, or the Great Depression more generally. I would actually be curious where and who is making this claim. \n\nI can provide a little context for where Soviet - US relations were in this period. The United States had withheld official diplomatic recognition of the USSR from its founding until 1933. While much of this was due to the bad blood around US and foreign [intervention](_URL_2_) in the Russian Civil War and the 1919 Red Scare in the US, a major stumbling block was the [issue](_URL_0_) of unpaid tsarist-era debts - the Soviets refused to honor them, and the US insisted on repayment to bondholders.\n\nThe new Roosevelt administration was open to re-establishing diplomatic relations, however, and did so after a series of negotiations with Soviet Foreign Minister Maksim Litvinov in November 1933 (the issue of debt repayments was pushed off to be settled at a later time). William Bullitt, who had led a negotiating team to talk to Lenin on Wilson's behalf in 1919, assumed the post of US ambassador in December. \n\nSo right off the bat, I can't imagine that there would be *any* sort of aid traveling from the USSR to the US before December 1933, and thus not for the worst parts of the Great Depression. \n\nBut in addition, Soviet foodstuffs were not something that would be easily parted with. In no small part this is because the USSR had its own issues with food supplies, especially in 1930-1934, when famine conditions killed something like 5 to 7 million people across the USSR (especially in Ukraine, where it is known as the Holodomor). Much of the grain that the state did collect was for use as exports, as the Soviet government relied on selling grain on the international market in order to earn the foreign currency it needed to pay for imports of industrial materials and to pay for contracts with Western firms for the development of industrial facilities. Indeed, starting in 1929 the Soviet government had already signed agreements with such companies as Ford Motor Company, Caterpillar and DuPont for the construction of industrial production facilities in the USSR. \n\nWhile Russia had been the largest single exporter of wheat until 1914, during World War I, the Revolution and Civil War, wheat production had collapsed - the American Relief Administration was in fact allowed by Lenin's government to provide aid in the country from 1921 to 1922. Soviet wheat exports began to recover on the international market after 1926, and rose from 1.3% of total exports to 7% by 1931, but collectivization, famine and political crisis largely halted this growth. In the meantime, the major international wheat producers of the Interwar period - the United States, Canada, Argentina and Australia - accounted for some 90% of total exports. With the economic downturn, there was, if anything, a world glut in wheat and prices fell (this was particularly hard on the Soviets, as they continuously needed to sell more wheat to earn a steady amount of foreign currency). \n\nNow, US production of wheat in particular was hard hit during the Dust Bowl and associated drought conditions on the Great Plains - the Department of Agriculture provides the following data for winter wheat:\n\nYear|Production (1000s of bushels)|Price per bushel ($)\n:--|:--:|--:\n1915 | 640,565 | na\n1916 | 456,118 | na\n1917 | 389,956 | na\n1918 | 556,506 | na\n1919 | 748,460 | 2.10\n1920 | 613,227 | 1.48\n1921 | 602,793 | 0.945\n1922 | 571,459 | 1.04\n1923 | 555,299 | 0.945\n1924 | 573,563 | 1.32\n1925 | 400,619 | 1.48\n1926 | 631,607 | 1.21\n1927 | 548,188 | 1.16\n1928 | 579,066 | 1.03\n1929 | 587,057 | 1.04\n1930 | 633,809 | 0.694\n1931 | 825,315 | 0.382\n1932 | 491,511 | 0.391\n1933 | 378,283 | 0.777\n1934 | 438,683 | 0.844\n1935 | 469,412 | 0.827\n1936 | 523,603 | 1.02\n1937 | 688,574 | 0.977\n1938 | 685,178 | 0.574\n1939 | 565,672 | 0.694\n1940 | 592,809 | 0.69\n1941 | 673,727 | 0.957\n1942 | 702,159 | 1.11\n1943 | 537,476 | 1.39\n1944 | 751,901 | 1.43\n1945 | 816,989 | 1.50\n\nYou'll have to excuse this data dump - I mostly just want to show where wheat production hit its low in the mid-1930s, and show how prices collapsed with the onset of the world Depression. The Dust Bowl is connected with these events, but for what its worth that is more specific to droughts in 1934 and 1936, and major dust storms in 1935. It's worth noting that the US went from making up a quarter of world wheat exports in 1930 to a tenth of exports during the 1930s, and during the worst of the Dust Bowl years was a net importer, importing some 3.9 million bushels of wheat during 1934-1935 - but was able to import wheat nonetheless. In fact, attempts by a 22 countries to stabilize wheat exports and prices through price stabilization measures and export quotas under a Wheat Advisory Committee (formed in 1933) had largely come to nought, and the market mostly stabilized from the US needing to import wheat during the Dust Bowl (and the major wheat producers obliging in providing exports). \n\nSo in summation - it seems very unlikely to me that the USSR provided any substantial food aid to the United States during the Great Depression. Perhaps some nominal amount would have been provided for propaganda purposes, but even in the 1930s, the Soviet embassy in the United States was more interested in attracting skilled American workers to move to the USSR, and was more interested in attracting US corporate investment, than in providing something for free to people in the United States. What foodstuffs the USSR did put on the international market faced strong price and production competition from other countries, and also were meant to be sold for desperately needed foreign currency.\n\n**Sources**\n\nKotkin, Stepthen. *Stalin: Waiting for Hitler, 1929-1941*\n\nUS Department of Agriculture. \"Crop Production Historical Track Records\", April 2018. Available as pdf [here](_URL_1_).\n\nWay, Wendy. \"The Wheat Crisis of the 1930s\" in *A New Idea Each Morning: How Food and Agriculture Came Together in One International Organisation*"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/a7whps/during_the_aftermath_of_the_russian_and_french/ec6r8he/",
"https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Todays_Reports/reports/croptr18.pdf",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/b3q4r0/after_world_war_one_the_allies_gb_france_us_japan/ej1um8m/"
]
] |
||
3e17c6
|
how is food waste bad for the economy?
|
Just watched John Oliver's rant on food waste but in a macro scale, it doesn't seem to be a problem to the economy.
Take this for example:
I buy $100 of groceries. $100 goes to the grocery store and will eventually get circulated around the economy. With the $100 groceries, I throw away $40 worth. To me personally, yes. I just "threw away" $40. But I have effectively circulated $100 into the economy. In fact, I circulated $100 instead of $60 which would've been perfectly ok for me.
The economy doesn't seem to care where the food goes, as long as its bought.
And yes, I do know there are environmental issues, wasting instead of donating issues, etc. but I'm purely focusing on the economic impact of food waste.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e17c6/eli5how_is_food_waste_bad_for_the_economy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctak0cs",
"ctaloym"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Consider that you also created an artificial scarcity of $40 worth of food that could have gone to something else. This is similar to what happened in the short run with cash for clunkers. Yes, there were some new cars made and purchased but the dip in supply of used ones rekt the prices in the used car market.\n\n\n\"Mr. Pies, that's a terrible example.\"\n\nI know. I couldn't think of a better one at the time. Comparing consumables with durable goods, blah blah blah.",
"This is called the fallacy of the broken window. If a naughty child throws a rock through your window, that's at least good news for the window makers and window installers right? Well yes. But in general, society (and you) are less wealthy now, because resources and money were spent to create that window, but now there is one less window in the world. The economic allocations are inefficient. We now need to make more windows than we did before, instead of making other, more necessary things, all because the naughty child smashed your window. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1ar0hs
|
What would happen if the Earth were to pass through the particle beam of a black hole or quasar?
|
Is the magnetic field of the Earth strong enough to deflect the particle beam at any meaningful distance, or would it strip away the Earth's atmosphere and leave it a charred hunk of rock?
I've read about the effects of gamma ray bursts from collapsing stars, but I cannot seem to find if the particle jets from black holes and quasars are of similar intensity and/or composition.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ar0hs/what_would_happen_if_the_earth_were_to_pass/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c902fgm"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If the Earth went through an AGN (Active Galactic Nucleus) jet, all life would be obliterated. The atmosphere would be stripped away in very short order by the bombardment of highly relativistic particles; the Earth's magnetic field (which is far, far weaker than the magnetic fields present in AGN jets) would not be able to stop that. The oceans would boil away and the surface would melt. If you left it in the jet for very long, the surface would start to ablate away.\n\nGamma ray bursts are mostly high-energy electromagnetic radiation, probably along with some protons/electrons. AGN jets consist largely of highly relativistic protons and electrons (much more energetic than whatever massive particles are present in a GRB) spiraling around magnetic field lines, along with X-ray flux from both the black hole accretion disk and the jet itself.\n\nThere's a hypothesis that one of the Earth's [major extinctions was caused by a GRB](_URL_0_). During that event something like a third of all animal genera went extinct. If the Earth entered an AGN jet there would be no more life."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordovician%E2%80%93Silurian_extinction_event#Gamma_ray_burst_hypothesis"
]
] |
|
2afg0o
|
how do companies like kfc, mcdonalds or even coca cola protect their recipes? wont modern science be able to breakdown whats exactly in the food they serve?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2afg0o/eli5_how_do_companies_like_kfc_mcdonalds_or_even/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ciuin5e",
"ciuj4bb",
"ciuk6iw",
"ciul5yd",
"ciulger",
"cium36j",
"ciur9gp"
],
"score": [
3,
39,
65,
7,
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Billions have been spent to copy the Coca Cola recipe. It has always failed. Another example would be several old beers from Belgium. Some beers are close to a 1000 years old but nobody outside that one monetary can make it. The West Vleteren is world wide considered one of the best beers in the world. Only 60k cases of it are made every year. The monks can't produce anymore: _URL_0_\n\nI'm thinking that very complicated chemical processes are not that easily unraveled. But somebody with a better understanding of chemistry will have to elaborate on that. I'll ask my boyfriend when I get home.",
"The actual components of Coca-Cola, for example, is fairly well known (hence all the copy-cat, not-quite-the-real-thing colas out there). The trade secret is in the very specific quantity in which they are used when making the product.\n\nYou could figure it out and use it (if you figure it out through legal means), but it's not really worth anyone's time or money to do so. People are going to keep buying the \"real\" thing (because marketing is King, and Coke is King of Marketing).\n\nDon't underestimate the \"secret recipe\" thing as a marketing gimmick too, actually.",
"Yes you can break down the exact components of something like Coke and see what is in there.\n\nIt won't help.\n\nI could tell you a house is made of several hundred boards, a few thousand nails, hundreds of pounds of gypsum, various types of metals (copper, iron), some plastic, and some other stuff.\n\nDoes that help you *build* a house? No. What is secret is the *process*, the actual recipe. *How* to make it. *When* to put in certain ingredients. It's much more about what it's made of. It's about consistency, texture, stability, and many more things.",
"Ok not exactly what your asking. My dad works for Adams Extract. They have a guy whose sole job it is to reverse engineer something. He goes and buys a few of the companies products. Looks at the label, runs it through some chemistry set that Walter White would have loved. And on the other side he gets a rough ingredient list. He then sets about cooking it up. Trying different cooking techniques, temperatures, pre-mixed components and what not. Until he gets something exactly what he was trying to copy. He writes the recipe down and stuffs it in a locked cabinet, or presents it to his superiors. \n\nHe has lots of stuff that is \"almost\" right that tastes just yummy. This includes ice cream, steak seasoning, and everything in between.",
"You mean [like this](_URL_0_) or [this](_URL_1_)? \n\nThe recipes are closely guarded secrets, but that doesn't prevent people from figuring them out. Just look at Coca-Cola and Pepsi and all their copied products.",
"They don't. Head over to YouTube and you can find recipes for a Big Mac (including special sauce) or KFC chicken. You probably just don't have a deep fryer full of days old used oil. \n \nCoke in particular has a special license to import Coca leaves which have had the cocaine removed. Having not enjoyed Coca leaves directly I couldn't say if they really bring a unique flavour or not.",
"I guess it's like Walter White's meth in breaking bad. Everyone knows the ingredients for these things, it's the quantities, the method and possibly the quality of ingredients that make the real difference. Pepsi probably has a version of Jesse locked up in a basement somewhere trying to recreate the famous Coca Cola but they're just a little short on purity."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westvleteren_Brewery"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.copykat.com/",
"http://www.topsecretrecipes.com/McDonalds-Special-Sauce-Big-Mac-Sauce-Copycat-Recipe.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
29bc68
|
Is Gavrilo Princip a "Yugoslav nationalist" or a "Serbian nationalist"?
|
Today's Wikipedia "On this day" describes Gavrilo Princip, who assassinated Archduke Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary as "Yugoslav nationalist". However, most of times, from what I remember, he was described as a "Serbian nationalist". So which is the better description for him?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/29bc68/is_gavrilo_princip_a_yugoslav_nationalist_or_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cijchte"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"I think it really depends on how you conceptualize the Serbian nationalist movement in the early 20th century. \"Yugoslav\" means \"south Slav\" and a Yugoslav nationalist would be someone who supported the unification of southern Slavs - Serbians, Bulgarians, Croatians, Bosnians, etc - into one state. This is the geopolitical result of Pan-Slavism.\n\nOn the other hand, a Serbian nationalist would have seen Serbia as the protector of the Slavs in the Balkans. As a newly founded state which had won substantial victories in 1912 and 1913, Serbia could rightly hope to woo the Balkans' Slavic populations away from the existing Empires there: namely Austria-Hungary. A Serbian nationalist would have supported the idea of a Serb-dominated Southern Balkans in which Slavic lands were incorporated into Serbia or Serb-friendly governments installed.\n\nSee how those can be pretty confusing? They both stem from the idea that together, the Slavs of the southern Balkans are strong and can defend themselves against the various Empires which had dominated them for so long. Yugoslav nationalism is interesting because it necessarily involves the breakdown of the barriers which already existed within the South Slavs themselves - Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian Muslim, Kosovar, etc. Serbian nationalism is more outright nationalism, in that it supports the idea of a strong South Slavic people, but a South Slavic people under the direct guidance of a strong Serbia.\n\nI think Princip was more of an outright Serbian nationalist, in that he saw the Bosnian Serbs living under the domination of the Austro-Hungarian Empire as being rightfully Serbian. As in, the lands inhabited by Bosnian Serbs should rightfully be attached to Serbia. That's why the 1908 Annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austria drove the Serbian nationalist absolutely *nuts*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
965gz8
|
what is the difference between credit cards systems in u.s.a and europe?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/965gz8/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_credit_cards/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3y1u78",
"e3y4re9",
"e3y7hkj",
"e3ybsbz",
"e3ye9lj"
],
"score": [
30,
24,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"People use mostly same cards (Visa, Mastercard) some are unheard of (Diners)\n\nDifferences:\n\nIn EU, People favor using Debit cards instead of Credit cards.\n\nThere is no \"credit score\" in EU, so people have little motivation to use credit card just to improve credit score.\n\nIn USA when you pay in restaurant, they take your credit card and do the processing in back. In EU, they bring machine to you.\n\nTechnology in ahead - no magnetic swipes, everyone has contactless cards and readers.\n\nStuff like Card Skimmers is less common (due to advanced security features) and because there are less things like unattended gas pumps where you pay with CC.\n\nUS has better customer service (like easy revertion of payments) when your CC card gets cloned and abused.",
"Also in Europe by law business pay less to process transactions so reward credit cards are less common and don’t give as much rewards.",
"Even in Europe there is a difference. In Denmark, the DanCard (Dankort in Danish) combined with a Visa is very frequently used. By law, there can be no transaction fees and every store accepts it. I can't remember any time in the last 5+ years I've carried cash in my wallet. \n\nWe also have Mastercard and others, but the most common is the dankort which draws directly from your own bank account with little delay and no directly associated cost for the consumer.",
"People seem to miss the biggest difference between US/UK, and continental Europe that I noticed (the hard way). \n\nIn the latter the default credit card you pay *all* the debt off in the next month. As in the former, the usual CC is a monthly minimum payment. \n\nEdit: US and UK is one category, the rest of Europe is the other.\n\nEdit^2 : If you walked into a bank (it'll hurt) and asked for a credit card then in the US/UK you'll get one that you can pay off in instalments; in the rest of Europe it'll be one where you have to pay the full amount off next month. There are names for all of these types of cards but they don't travel well hence the very ELI5 descriptions.",
"As people said earlier:\n - fewer, if at all, bonuses for transactions paid with credit card,\n - no insurances offered by CC companies,\n - either pin or signature protected, i heard stories that if your card uses pin, it's more difficult to dispute transactions that weren't yours (pin isyour responsibility to be kept secret, signature is bank's to prove is yours)\n - no custom purposes, i.e. non financial companies don't issue these (like: Home Depot), \n - discounts, if any, usually are per business or per offering, sort of like with BofA CCs - eg. Movie tickets, coffee at Costa etc., but then in most cases your debit card offers same\n - you can't use it to pay taxes\n - you have oftentimes a lot of control over daily or monthly allowances\n - numbers don't revolve, I.e. your renewed card won't have the same number, but that could be different for citi, not sure about others\n - paypass is a well established system (You essentially tap your card to pay) that everyone uses for years\n \nThat's from the top of my head. Essentially there's no benefit from using CCs in Europe, so few people do. Usually the reason for cc is corp expenses that get paid by the company, so you don't use your money."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8cr4b0
|
what happens short-term and long-term when a person defaults on their student loans?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8cr4b0/eli5_what_happens_shortterm_and_longterm_when_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dxh44a2",
"dxh65j0",
"dxh816w",
"dxh8o04",
"dxh9kv3",
"dxhe6kp",
"dxhev59",
"dxhf280",
"dxhff0p",
"dxhfon5",
"dxhftkr",
"dxhgez0",
"dxhgjh5",
"dxhhpcz",
"dxhif07",
"dxhixur",
"dxhjg6t",
"dxhjwef",
"dxhjxig",
"dxhnmsj",
"dxhnz42",
"dxhysqy",
"dxi0u56",
"dxi34op",
"dxi3a48",
"dxi3ewx",
"dxiqvhv"
],
"score": [
146,
3,
15,
5,
21,
2,
9,
11,
62,
3,
3,
2,
2,
5,
2,
8,
7,
2,
14,
8,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The usual suspects. Credit score tanks. Collections calls start flowing in. Stuff gets repo'd or your wages get garnished until the debt is repaid.\n\nOf course it might vary by state and by whatever agency granted the loan (federal vs state vs whatever), but the basic pattern of \"this person owes us money\" doesn't change much.",
"Depends on if it's federally insured. Credit score drop, collections process, judgments against your assets and wages possibly. Add in federally insured and you cant bankrupt out of it either, do you're a slave to that debt until you pay it off.",
"In Canada? Nothing. You can even taunt them when they call you. Wait a few years and settle for 1/5th the loan. ",
"Here in Australia you have to be earning over $52k (I'm pretty sure) per year before they start deducting from your wage. ",
"I can come back and elaborate (Lightning game is about to start shortly), but I will make few quick comments:\n\n1) They can't repossess your car or your house. A creditor has to get a summary judgment against you (take you to court), they have to win (if you dont show up they get a default summary judgment entered), then they can TRY to collect wages from you. Yes, if you have a job and they want to be jerks, they can take part of your paycheck, I want to say it's 25%, but I haven't been through a case like that with anyone in forever so I dont know if its' changed. They can place a LIEN on your home, and in some states you used to be able to place a lien on other real property, but TBH, I'd have to go back and look at the statute, because I may even be misspeaking here. But no, they can't just take your house. To reposes a house takes a bank forever and they do it for a living, NELNET isn't in the home foreclosure industry.\n\n2) If you stop paying, they will collect for as long as they can before they assign it to a collection agency. This is dependent on the type of loan and who securitized it . I am helping a friend of mine who got sent to collection on a $17k loan that ballooned from $3500 when he was in college well over a decade ago, because he stopped paying.\n\n3) If you do decide you need to let a debt go, this is the most important, the day you get a collection notice, send an 809 challenge (debt validation letter) and force them to go through the paces to prove you owe the debt. If they dont, guess what, you can have it removed. I am a subject matter expert on the FDCPA and 809 challenges so I'd be glad to give you added advice.\n\nLetting a debt go stinks... its hard sometimes but if you need to do it you need to do it. ",
"Can the US Government garnish your wages if you move overseas and start a new life?",
"On top of what everyone else said, if you were provided some kind of license via your education, your license can be revoked until you return to paying it. ",
"It really depends on the jurisdiction. Ontario as an example, after 15 years the debt is written off. They found the debt to be a hindrance to growing the economy and a great way to target those who really needed help paying for post-secondary education.",
"As has been said, it is very different than say defaulting on your mortgage, car, etc...\n\nThey will practically beg you to set up any kind of payment plan and will be extremely helpful. Continued deferment is easy...\n\nI ran into some financial issues after grad school. They sent letters, emails, and called weekly... I won't go into too much detail but when I finished grad school I had a family to support, mortgage, vehicles... you know, you could almost say I was your average person. I was extremely intimidated because employment opportunities were much slimmer than I expected and those available at the time were not nearly as lucrative, it was a scary spot. After a couple of months really struggling and flat out avoiding the student loan people I sucked it up and called them. I Had almost no experience dealing with creditors so I was scared but walked away from that phone call actually feeling much better about my situation. They were almost unreasonably flexible and accommodating, they know that their expectations on paper are unreasonable in practice a lot of the time.\n\nAnyway, that was a few years ago and I have had to call to adjust payment plan a couple of times since but it's almost like they don't actually care if you're paying as long as you communicate with them.\n\nThis student loan bubble will burst at some point. ",
"Sure it changes your credit score and then collection calls start, but more importantly: If you don’t pay your student loans, the IRS will take your federal & state tax refund every single year and they’ll only apply what they take to your interest, not your principal. That’s their way of saying F U, pay me. They don’t even have to tell you that they’re taking it. They just take that shit. ",
"You get calls and eventually they can take your income taxes (they did for me anyways), and like other people have said it destroys your credit score. Not fun stuff ",
"Some of this will depend on the state. For example, in certain states, they will even pull $ out of your disability checks if you become disabled. It’s pretty messed up. ",
"Federal loans will work with you. Private loans absolutely will not. \n\nIt's different for each private loans company, I suppose. But I was dealing with two of them and they were both the same. I told them that my monthly payments were equal to my wages. I would have to forfeit all of my pretax income to pay which wouldn't afford me a way to pay rent or eat. They said that there were no income sensitive plans. I got 3x deferments and that was it.\n\nYou can Chapter 13 private loans. Basically puts them on hold for 5 years. I still can't pay when I get out, so we'll see what happens then. Bankruptcy varies from state to state, but it's worth the fee to get a lawyer on your side. ",
"I have a co-worker with 150,000 dollars in student loan debt. She has paid none of it and never plans to. What would happen to her? ",
"There was a news story a couple years ago where someone had the SWAT show up and arrest them for their student loan debt -- this shouldn't happen and is illegal. But...\n\nThe worst that usually happens is you will have terrible credit, trouble purchasing cars or homes, and may have your wages garnished (for more than you thought you can spare).\n\nStudent loan debt can't be gotten rid of -- basically -- if you don't pay a debt when your only real choice is pay, why should any company trust you to pay them, ever?",
"I defaulted for around 5 years. Literally 5 years went by without hearing anything about it, from collections or otherwise. Then one day out of the blue I recieved a notice from the Department of Education notifying me of their intent to take my tax returns. Made some calls, got on an income based repayment plan, but I make like 17k a year so my payments are $0/month. ",
"Well, short term you get a lot of letters. Then, long term, you slowly get less letters. Try repoing my Taco Bell and Ramen, bitches. Good fucking luck with that. ",
"I honestly wonder if student loans payments are propping up the government and allowing the trillions of dollars of budget deficit we have in the US now.",
"These comments make me so sad. America....What's happened to you. Punishing your young people for getting an education. What's wrong with us.",
"TL;DR person thinks if you don’t have a job, even if spouse does, you don’t have to pay back loans \n\nSo I know someone who has 30K+ in loans for a degree thats not even finished. They stopped taking classes bc they got pregnant, got a deferral while they were on FMLA after having that baby. Well turn out they never told loan people they were off FMLA, they just had their 2nd baby and are quitting their job. Their theory is that if they don’t have a job (but are married and spouse works) that they don’t have to pay back the loans. \nMany people have tried to explain that’s not how it works but they don’t believe them. Am I wrong or will they be majorly screwed once loans catch up with them. \n ",
"You take a loan out from your parents because you want to buy a big lego set... for learning.\n\nYou have a weekly allowance, which is handed to you at the beginning of each week.\n\nWeek one you bought some candy with your allowance. Your parents ask for the payment on the loan but you have no money. They let this one slide because this is the first time and you forgot you had to repay them.\n\nWeek two you bought some matchbox cars. Your parents are getting concerned that you're not serious about paying back the loan. They decide that it was a bad idea to loan you money, and will think hard about the next time you would like extra money in advance.\n\nWeek three you bought some more candy. Your parents decide that they're not going to give you any more allowance until the loan is paid in full.\n\nWeeks four through twenty you get zero allowance because it's being used to pay your debt.\n\nWeek twenty one you get your allowance, but it's not enough to buy a new GI Joe. You ask your parents for a small loan to get a GI Joe. They decide that instead of giving you a loan you must save up your allowances over a few weeks to be able to buy it yourself.",
"In the UK you don’t pay anything until you hit a minimum salary (someone else in the thread said it’s around £25k), at which point they take it direct from your wages and you can’t do anything about it. It’s such a low repayment though so most people don’t even notice.\n\nUntil you hit that minimum salary you don’t pay shit, and you might get a letter every 5 years or so reminding you what you owe.",
"Well I can tell you in the US if it's a federal student loan and you default long enough, they seize your federal tax return and send you a letter in the mail telling you so. I know because I defaulted 12 years ago on 2 loans; tax returns paid off one loan (they sent me a letter staying it was paid in full after my taxes were taken), and they just sent my letter telling me my federal return of $1023 was taken for the other one. So there's that. ",
"I defaulted a few years ago, and got a letter saying it sas going to a collection agency. I never heard anything else about it until 3 days ago, when I got a letter saying the irs took my whole $1225 tax refund and applied it to that debt.",
"You should specify what country you mean because it will be very different depending on which one you’re talking about.\n\nIn the UK for example you can’t default on a student loan because you only have to pay it back by a small percentage each year (the percentage varies depending on income) if you’re earning over £25,000 a year. This comes out of your pay check like a tax and if you haven’t paid it all back within 30 years any remaining money you owe is written off.\n\nSo you could graduate university, paying for it with student loans, earn less than £25,000 a year for the next 30 years and never have to pay a penny of your own money for the fees.",
"This happened to me. I had a loan, dropped out, and eventually stopped paying.\n\nShort-term: You receive a ton of calls, and letters regarding it. Your credit score starts dropping. The loan agencies will give up, and collection agencies will take over. You then receive a larger amount of calls and letters. Your credit score tanks.\n\nLong-term: You stop hearing about it. One day you receive a letter informing you that they are taking money out of your paychecks. This happens until the amount is paid off. Your credit is now ruined, and your family is likely disappointed.\n\ntl;dr - You'll pay off the loan one way or the other. Only difference is stress occurred, and ending credit score.",
"Here are the links to the 809 challenge and the cease and desist.\n\nTechnically the law is archaic and you are legally required to physically mail them, but some will allow email/fax.\n\nIf you mail it (I would recommend that), send it delivery confirmation via oversized letter. Find a 12x9 folder and print out the postage an affix it to the front.\n\nThe way my system works is it prints out the letter on one side and postage on the other side, I then mail them in a 12x9 envelope that has a huge window on the front of it. The postal carriers can see the barcode clear as day and it gets tracked the entire way. Then it sends you emails and texts letting you know status and when it was delivered. It's not certified, but you can confirm that it was delivered and that's typically good enough. \n\nEvery violation of the cease and desist can be up to $15k and there are plenty of lawyers chomping at the bits to go after people for it. \n\nBe glad to answer any other questions.\n\nVerification of debt -_URL_0_\n\nCease and desist - \n_URL_1_\n\nGood luck."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.dropbox.com/s/cyxa6bb8xsughg5/Verification%20of%20Debt%20Owed%20-%20Redditors.docx?dl=0",
"https://www.dropbox.com/s/elilxmu8qen0r50/Cease%20and%20Desist%20-%20Redditors.docx?dl=0"
]
] |
||
1me8mw
|
When the Roman Empire began to collapse, the Saxons invaded England. Were they united in doing so, or was it one tribe that invaded, or many? What happened to those that stayed behind in Germany?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1me8mw/when_the_roman_empire_began_to_collapse_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc8eslq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Invasion is a loaded word that really does a poor job of describing the Saxon's role in England. Many, many individual tribes traveled across to England and began settling the eastern coast. While there was some conflict between the native Britains and the Saxons it was largely a peaceful transition. \n\nThere was really no unity in the immigration. It really seems like the Germanic tribes came over as opportunists; seeking land. When they found open land they invited more tribes to come over. It was largely a familial affair. It was much more immigration than invasion.\n\nDue to the breaking of Roman trade ties the entire island (well, south of Hadrien's Wall) was thrown into a total upheaval. The culture from the early 5th century to mid 7th century saw a lot of transition and combining of the Roman, British, and English cultures. \n\nThere are theories that the early immigrants rose to economic supremacy due to their relationship with the Germanic mainland. Being the first to arrive, they had the opportunity to set up trade networks with the mainland. Those left in the mainland often moved island-side due to the economic opportunities. We know that at least until the mid 7th century there was frequent trade with the mainland. Change in jewelry culture in the mainland manifested itself in England, for example."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
qwg1o
|
why we can secure banking/investment accts online but we can't secure voting
|
seems to me like if we can trust billions of dollars to banking websites and stock trading websites, then we should be able to create a trustworthy secure electronic voting method
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qwg1o/eli5_why_we_can_secure_bankinginvestment_accts/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4107pu",
"c411ybz",
"c412c5r",
"c413srp",
"c414lqc",
"c416u0c",
"c4185rs"
],
"score": [
37,
6,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The requirements are different.\n\nMost importantly, banking information needs to be tied to the person making the transaction. If any inconsistencies come up they need to be able to make sure they have enough identification information to trace the transactions back to the person who made them.\n\nThis is exactly the opposite in voting. Voting has to be anonymous. Having anonymous voting but still being able to trace the inconsistencies back is a trickier problem. It's not impossible tho.\n\nThe real big issue is that an election screwing up and a country having a tyrant running it who is willing to fix an election to win is far, far worse than any loss of money a bank might suffer. Electronic elections software has way more riding on it than banking software.",
"Security solutions have been designed for certain scenarios. Bilateral security (between you and your bank, for example) against anyone else who should not be involved in the communication is a solved problem. However in a vote, you need to have security between you and an accumulated outcome. Furthermore you have to give your vote to entities that you have no reason to trust, and this vote must go towards the ultimate outcome. There are also more criteria, for example, you have to be able to vote in a way that cannot be coerced.\n\nThe scenario is simply different from what security researchers are used to solving.\n\nThat being said, there have been a couple of [recently proposed solutions](_URL_0_) that seem promising from a technical point of view. So, in fact, we can secure voting. But as you can see, this an *on-site* solution, not an *online* solution.\n\nThe online problem doesn't have an obvious solution. Suppose you have a coercer in your presence while you try to vote online. What online solution could possibly deal with this problem? On-site solutions have the advantage that they can partially control how many people can see a ballot at once while the process of voting is occurring.\n\nIts actually quite fascinating, especially if people truly cared about such things. Unfortunately, people just don't. So people are pushing idiotic things like the Diebold solution which has been hacked to high hills, rather than actually listening to competent security experts like Andy Rubin or David Chaum who have taken these things a little more seriously.\n",
"Nothing is 100% secure when it comes to internet. The other half of the question is what happens after a security breach happens.\n\nFrom an end user perspective, if I was erroneously charged for something, either due to hacker, credit card theft, or bank error, I would notice a few days or weeks later. I call up the bank or credit card company and they would have their investigators looking into the issue and refund me the money most of the time.\n\nHow would this work for voting? First of all I have no idea if my vote was counted correctly or not. Secondly even if I have the ability to track it and notice errors, there's not much room to correct it. Maybe you can have a recount or two, but at some point you have to take the result as it is. ",
"Millions of dollars **ARE** lost daily due to internet banking. It's just that the losses are less than the profit made by doing so. Internet banking is NOT secure, people are making a killing by harvesting credit cards and passwords and whatnot. It's just accepted.\n\n\nWe cannot allow the same to happen for votes. Votes cannot be refunded. Voting fraud isn't detected when Timmy next goes to the supermarket. No proportion of votes is an acceptable amount to lose to hackers, and more importantly no profit is made by putting it online. What's the benefit, really? It's going to cost a **HELL** of a lot more to come up with a system that will still be hacked because of some oversight in the code that might only be found 20 years later. And that's assuming competence and source availability. And assuming we can detect it.",
"Most likely cause nobody in the government knows how to use a fucking computer",
"Banks that lose money go out of business, governments that lose votes don't.",
"Beyond the cost and logistics involved, it is also partly related to why election day is not a statutory holiday. Certain parties benefit from certain demographic being able or unable to vote. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.scantegrity.org/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6evngr
|
religion. honestly i don't understand it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6evngr/eli5religion_honestly_i_dont_understand_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"didd4py",
"didd9hw"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"People want answers.\n\nBut what are the questions?\n\nThings like these:\n\nWhat is the meaning of life?\n\nWhy are we here?\n\nWho made us?\n\nWho made the universe?\n\nDo I go somewhere when I die?\n\nWhat is good?\n\nWhat is evil?\n\nReligion answers all (or at least one) of these questions and more while giving peoples' lives a purpose and structure.",
"Personally I don't either. I feel like it causes more problems than it solves. I don't think it was a place in the world any longer. That's just my opinion though. \n\nI do understand why some people are drawn to it though. It gives them a sense of belonging and it helps to reassure them about their place I the world. It helps them to find some meaning in life as well as death. I realize this is extremely simplified but it's my thoughts on the topic. \n\nEveryone has the right to believe whatever they want and I respect that. Everyone can get along just fine as long as no one pushes their beliefs on someone who doesn't want. Let people be happy and believe what they want. No need to argue and fight about it. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
94eov9
|
what is the purpose of those robocalls where no one is on the other end
|
I get the calls that say “This is the IRS, you are going to be arrested. Please call us immediately to take care of the problem, etc.” because they are an attempt to get your financial and personal information. But what value could a call be that gets no information other than you picked up so it’s a live number?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/94eov9/eli5_what_is_the_purpose_of_those_robocalls_where/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3kj2rw",
"e3kj3u9",
"e3kjp5g"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2
],
"text": [
" > But what value could a call be that gets no information other than you picked up so it’s a live number?\n\nThat information is useful to reduce the calling list to numbers that at least work.\n\nRobo-calling outfits operate by having a call center full of workers ready to pick up and start the scam. The system automatically calls people and then if someone picks up will transfer them to a worker with an open line. But if more people pick up than expected and there is no open line available the call might not be connected to anyone and the system will just hang up.",
"It's a ploy to check if a number is working or not. If they happen to fool you with the IRS bit, then they'll scam the hell out of you for your personal data. \n\nIf you don't fall for the scam, but you pick up, they know that the number is working and they can try a different tactic. Some have the option to 'remove you from their list,' but usually that's just a lie and they'll just throw you into another list to try something else.\n\nMost of the time, they have bots that run everything so that they can just scan through the numbers of an area. Scammers have even started masking their numbers to make you think it's someone from your part of the country. If you call the number back, you get the number of some random person and not the scammer. This makes it hard track them and they get the desired result.",
"You actually hit the nail on the head. The reason for the \"dead air\" robocalls is typically as a first step in attempting further scams and/or the presence of a live person. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nIf the bad guys are attempting to target individuals, having a list of numbers that are \"real\" increases their chances of successful scams going forward. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
eevuc7
|
cold hot water?¿
|
so sometimes i wash my hands with super hot water because it feels nice yknow
but if i do it for too long the hot water starts giving me this weird cold sensation, like it’s cold water but it only happens when i first put my hands in if that makes sense
i searched it up but nothing really made sense haha so i mean explain like im five pls and thank
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eevuc7/eli5_cold_hot_water/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fbx0uli"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I remember one of my middle school science teachers explaining something like this. If I remember correctly, the body's nerves have a hard time telling the difference between extreme hot and extreme cold temperatures. So, the receptors can mix them up. When putting your hand in freezing water, it can feel like it burns. And when putting your hand in really hot water, it can feel like you're freezing.\n\nIf I am incorrect, someone feel free to let me know and steer me in the right direction."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
aar08y
|
how do babies/toddlers run on their knees like it's no problem but adults can't?
|
My nephew is a speedster on his hands and knees but when I try chase him at his level, it looks like I came back from the casting couch. What gives?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aar08y/eli5_how_do_babiestoddlers_run_on_their_knees/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecu83p8",
"ecu86o3"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I think it has to do with the fact that the bones of a baby don't really solidify into hard bones until they are older. So going on their knees isn't too bad. Also as a baby the have at what 15lbs of weight on their knees and are usually somewhat chubby (thinks more padding) Adults are a lot heavier with more wear and tear on their joints already. \nBut I could be wrong.",
"Pounds per square inch. 20 lbs spread over a couple square inch contact patches feels a lot different than 175 over similar area. The surface area of a kneecap touching the ground doesn't change much. They also tend to have baby fat padding."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3esg2l
|
The Cold War was a time of incredible technological achievement. How did that directly impact ideas of national defense for both NATO and the Warsaw Pact?
|
I've always been interested in the Soviet Union (and by extension, the Warsaw Pact) since I lived in Russia while studying for my MA in Soviet military history (specifically the civilian contributions to the Siege of Leningrad). The Cold War saw humanity make the quickest leaps of technological progress we have seen to date - ten years from the time of the first artificial satellite to reach the Moon until Neil Armstrong set the first human foot on a celestial body. We went from rudimentary V-2 rockets in 1945 to nuclear ICBMs. We went from the first model of jet-powered fighters to U-2 spy planes.
How did the invention of things like ICBMs impact the planning of national defense for the two main belligerent alliances in the Cold War? Here are some more specific questions that will help me get the answers I am looking for (also, being a fellow historian, the more primary sources the better!!)
* Can anyone tell me more about the proposed defense plans involving the Fulda Gap? I know that NATO considered that the prime choke point to defending Western Europe from a Soviet tank invasion, but I haven't found much more information on that. Were the NATO plans to hold the Soviets at the Gap or to launch a counter-attack through something like a tactical nuclear weapon (thinking the Davy Crockett nuclear artillery here)?
* How did Civil Defense work for the Soviet Union? I can find absolutely loads of information for the US but finding USSR information is substantially harder since I no longer have access to the (limited) Russian archives. How did the Soviets plan to attempt a defense of their cities and civilians in the event of a nuclear first strike by the US? By and large, I know that civil defense doctrines are more for the population's psychological benefit, but did the Soviets have anything like Duck & Cover or other similar programs?
* What kind of Last-Resort weapons were planned or in existence at the time of the USSR's dissolution? I know about the Dead Hand/Perimeter system, which is supposedly still receiving system upgrades (I saw what I believed to be the radar stations for it when I was travelling to Moscow), but were there any others besides a generic arsenal launch of ICBMs and strategic long-range bombers and MRBMs launched from subs?
* Some of the planned US weapons were absolutely insane. Rods from God, the Project Pluto nuclear ramjet that would power ballistic missiles while spraying everything below it with radiation from its unshielded reactor, which was part of the SLAM (Supersonic Low Altitude Missile) project. SLAM itself would carry a payload of multiple nuclear warheads, and coupled with the Pluto ramjet, would circle the planet dropping the payloads on targets before proceeding to fly over populated areas for several weeks, irradiating as much enemy territory as possible. Keep in mind that SLAM was also travelling at supersonic speeds so in addition to the radiation, the shock waves would also be damaging to the enemy. Did the Soviets have anything on the order of this magnitude except Perimeter? Obviously the US never proceeded with developing this project beyond a prototype, but did the USSR have anything like it planned? What were some of the more extreme, crazier defense plans for the Soviets?
Sorry for the giant wall of text! I have been waiting to post this until I felt I had enough questions to warrant a decent discussion, and I tried to keep it all on-topic as much as possible.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3esg2l/the_cold_war_was_a_time_of_incredible/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cthyh91"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I've forwarded your question to a colleague who is a specialist in this area. I too am very interested to know more. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
45ato2
|
Sailing Speeds
|
I'm currently writing some historical fiction and I'm wondering how fast people would have been able to sail in a typical galley during the Middle Ages. I understand that there would be a range--good wind, bad wind, etc. Does anyone have any thoughts?
Thanks!!
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/45ato2/sailing_speeds/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czzitj3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This is an area of interest to me, but finding actual speeds is like digging a ditch with a teaspoon. You find a bit here, a bit there, and once in a great while, how many days it took to press on from one port to another. Due to the recreated ships, you can find out more hard data about Classical galleys in the Mediterranean and Norse ships crossing the Atlantic than about medieval ones.\n\nIn general, figure a Venetian galley, under sail with a quartering wind, does 12 kn. They did usually sail, and only took down the mast and rowed when battle offered, or when it was dead calm, or they had a contrary wind.\n\nRodgers says of Mediterranean galleys \"In the thirteenth century the ordinary galleys were about 128 feet long and 17 feet wide with a deep draft of 4.0 to 4.5 feet when they displaced about 130-145 tons. ... Each carried one mast which was usually struck when clearing for action.\" This would have about 120 rowers, free men who fought for the ship. Sizes ranged down to the \"vachette\" (little cow) with 8 oars (16-32 rowers), about 23 feet long and 6 feet wide.\n\nBesides the rowers were a captain, steersmen, officers, and an unspecified number of marines, especially crossbowmen.\n\nIn a 1313 Genoese law, merchant galleys of large size had to be manned with \"12 crossbowmen, 4 pilots, and 162 rowers and seamen, all armed with helmets, cuirasses, darts, swords, maces, and other weapons.\"\n\nIn 1203, Rodgers notes, it took a Venetian fleet under sail 31 days to sail 700 miles, though that includes 8 days at Abydos to wait for stragglers. So let's say 700 miles in 23 days. This is over open sea, not stopping each night along a coast, so it's 24 hr/day, meaning they covered 30-31 miles per day, which is kind of pitiful.\n\nIn 1284, the Genoese fleet sailed in pursuit of the Pisans, from Genoa to Porto Pisano in 5 days.\n\nSources: *Naval Warfare Under Oars, 4th to 16th Century* by Rodgers. He admits he uses some galleasses in the Spanish Armada as an excuse to be able to include the Armada Fight.\n\nGardiner, Robert (Editor) *The Earliest Ships: The Evolution of Boats into Ships*\n\nParker, Foxhall A., Commodore USN, *The Fleets of the World: The Galley Period*\n\nThis makes me want ebooks of Rodgers, so I can Search rather than eye-scan around the Crusader battles."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
54wur1
|
I have read that Crete produced some of the best quality archers in the ancient Mediterranean, what was it that set them apart from other archers of the time?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/54wur1/i_have_read_that_crete_produced_some_of_the_best/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d85ts1b",
"d85u3gk"
],
"score": [
13,
136
],
"text": [
"I believe you may be interested in [this post](_URL_0_) by one of our moderators /u/Iphikrates, who comprehensively answers a similar question, but in a bit larger scope - concerning also the Rhodians and Balearics.\n\nIn their conclusion, they state that Cretans are not necessarily better archers, but had branded themselves as such in the mercenary market. Therefore, that is how they became well-known for their archery. Of course, Iphikrates' own conclusion goes in much more depth than I have given here and the post as a whole is very interesting.",
"Mostly the fact that they were Cretan. I've written about Cretan archers at length recently - see [here](_URL_0_). While Cretans were known to specialise in ranged combat due to the rugged nature of their homeland, their reputation as mercenary archers was largely self-sustaining. Cretans offered their services as mercenaries; since Cretans were available, those looking to hire archers would hire Cretans; the Cretans therefore became widely known as useful mercenaries, increasing demand; the Cretans realised that service abroad was a good way to make a living, and offered their services; and so on. Effectively, the Cretan archer was a brand. While skilled use of the bow certainly took a lot of practice, there is nothing in the literary evidence to suggest that Cretans had special skills that others couldn't replicate.\n\nThe Cretan archer would likely have been indistinguishable from other Greek light infantry in dress and equipment. They would wear tunics, but no body armour; on their heads they might wear a felt cap or a loose wide-brimmed sun hat. Their bows were probably short composite bows, expensive and delicate; the maximum range of these bows was perhaps 150 meters, their lethal range much less than that. Those who could not afford composite bows would have used simple bows with a smaller effective range. Xenophon once mentions that the Cretans of the Ten Thousand carried small bronze shields, but it is difficult to picture how such a shield would be wielded by an archer. Either some of the Cretans with this army were not in fact archers but peltasts, or they carried the bronze shields purely for the occasion Xenophon is describing (they were meant to flash their shields in the sun to make the enemy think there was a large force waiting in ambush).\n\nThe only distinctive feature of Cretan archers was that they sometimes used arrows with very large bronze tips. These were so much larger than the average arrowhead that it is difficult for archaeologists to distinguish between Cretan arrows and the bolts of the [*gastraphetes*](_URL_1_) or belly-bow, the earliest piece of proto-artillery. However, I can't think of any scholarship that has examined the impact of this large arrowhead on the Cretan archer's range and potential armour-piercing capabilities."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4yn0mt/why_is_it_that_mediterranean_islands_such_as/"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4yn0mt/why_is_it_that_mediterranean_islands_such_as/d6pddb2",
"http://kotsanas.com/photo/1402001-01.jpg"
]
] |
||
2vtujz
|
(xpost /r/askhistory) When the first recordings of someones voice were made, did people think it was flawed without knowing you sound different in your head then to other people?
|
Like when you hear a recording of yourself and you think it sounds nothing like you because you hear your voice differently. Did people think the recording device had a flaw when they didn't take into account this?
Someone said to post here, so here I am! (also sorry for poor wording)
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2vtujz/xpost_raskhistory_when_the_first_recordings_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"col5ogl",
"col7yr6",
"cold0ez"
],
"score": [
68,
44,
14
],
"text": [
"Guys, we get it. They could have asked someone else.\n\nIf you have something to say based on historical records about people's reactions to hearing their voices recorded, please feel free to give OP an answer. If you don't, please refrain from commenting because your comment will probably end up deleted anyway.",
"Hopefully I'm not side tracking too much for this sub, but your question presents a bit of a trick because early sound recordings in fact sounded very little like the speaker in terms of reproducing their vocalizations with any accuracy.\n\nFidelity, in terms of frequency response, signal-to-noise ratio, and aural accuracy were sorely lacking in early reproduction mediums. \n\nThe earliest known (and surviving) sound recording of the human voice available for play back is [Au Clair de la Lune](_URL_1_), recorded by Édouard-Léon Scott de Martinville using his invention, the \"phonautograph\" in 1860. You will notice that the voice and ambient sound are plagued with distortion and, to the observer, sound \"weird\".\n\nOther early recording mediums were also severely lacking in their attempts to reproduce full spectrum frequency response in relation to human hearing, often making the human voice sound shrill and \"high pitched\" through their inability to reproduce low frequencies (bass). \n\nSo, in short, a recording of your voice truly *didn't* sound much like your in-person speaking voice at all until the art and science of sound reproduction really got \"rolling\", if you'll excuse the pun.\n\nEdit: More listening available [here](_URL_0_) for any of those interested.",
"Here's one historical anecdote by famous opera singer Adelina Patti--\n\n > \"The release of her records was accompanied by advertisements in 200 British newspapers; record shops announced \"Patti is singing here today\" (Gelatt: 86). This quotation represents a dramatic shift in how we listen in relation to these recordings. In 1906 the recording was considered to be a true representation of a famed voice, the voice of the latter part of the nineteenth century, and people wanted a part of it for themselves. Patti herself, according to Landon Ronald, who accompanied her recording sessions, recognised the truly representational quality of the recordings:\n\n > She had never heard her own voice, and when the little trumpet gave forth the beautiful tones, she went into ecstasies! She threw kisses into the trumpet and kept on saying ‘Ah! Mon Dieu! maintenant je comprends pourquoi je suis Patti! Oh, oui! Quelle voix! Quelle artiste! Je comprends tout!’ [‘Ah! My Lord! now I understand why I am Patti! Oh, yes! What a voice! What an artist! I understand all!’] (Ronald quoted in Cone 1993: 103-104).\"\n\n_URL_1_\n\nTo contrast, here's Maria Callas' reaction, via Wikipedia, but the source is a primary one-- an interview that's available on YouTube. \n\n > Yes, but I don't like it. I have to do it, but I don't like it at all because I don't like the kind of voice I have. I really hate listening to myself! The first time I listened to a recording of my singing was when we were recording San Giovanni Battista by Stradella in a church in Perugia in 1949. They made me listen to the tape and I cried my eyes out. I wanted to stop everything, to give up singing... Also now even though I don't like my voice, I've become able to accept it and to be detached and objective about it so I can say, \"Oh, that was really well sung,\" or \"It was nearly perfect.\"\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\nI know it's not perfect, but I didn't see any more relevant answer so far."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.firstsounds.org/sounds/scott.php",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1860-Scott-Au-Clair-de-la-Lune-05-09.ogg"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCyVOGIMNVU",
"http://www.zainea.com/patti.htm"
]
] |
|
6e1rg5
|
what exactly causes the putrid smell that is released when a dead animal is in the process of decaying?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6e1rg5/eli5_what_exactly_causes_the_putrid_smell_that_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"di6yhqd",
"di6ym07"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Various complex molecules in our body break down into computers with apt names like putricine and cadaverine. \n\nSince decaying bodies are often unsafe to be around, we have evolved to be particularly sensitive to those odors.",
"When an animal dies, a couple nutrients in particular start to break down and cause two very stinky compounds to form. You smell these same compounds in bad breath, stinky cheese, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6qpva2
|
How do scientists calculate the location of a comet and its trajectory (projected orbital path) and then articulate it for others to confirm the data?
|
If I am looking out into space and I identify a new comet flying through the cosmos. What information would I need to have to pinpoint its location in space and calculate its projected orbital path, then share that information with others so they can confirm?
Bonus points if there's a way so the expression of position of the comet isn't determined from a calculation that is relative to earth, but rather toward a more universal astrological localization (like a nearby quasar).
Hope the question makes sense. I'm trying to figure out the best way to express the information for a project. Getting my head lost on epoch vs. equinox and the fun complexities of orbital elements and the celestial coordinate system. Any help is appreciated.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6qpva2/how_do_scientists_calculate_the_location_of_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dl2lq77"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You would want to report:\n\n1. the comet's position on the sky (usually in J2000 RA,dec; J2000 is the epoch, which sets where the axes of the coordinate system are)\n2. at each time you saw the comet\n3. precisely where you were located at those times\n4. optionally, the brightness ([magnitude](_URL_2_)) of the comet\n\nYou bundle this up and send it to the [Minor Planet Center](_URL_1_). For example, if you scroll down on [this page](_URL_3_) you can see the data for Sedna.\n\nIn practice, you don't have to worry too much about exactly how the coordinate system is defined. What you do is take a catalog (e.g. [USNO B1.0](_URL_0_)) which has position information for a large number of stars. You then measure the position of the comet relative to the positions of several nearby stars.\n\nIf the comet is new then you'd want to get a good orbit and to do this you have to track the comet for a while. What 'a while' means depends very strongly on a number of things ... This comes from the fact that what you can measure (sky position vs time) doesn't have information about velocity towards/away from you if you only have a couple nights of observations. You need to wait until the comet-Earth-Sun angle has changed and re-observe to get at understanding the comet's movement in 3D. I have experience with orbit determination of Kuiper Belt objects, and there you need to get several observations over at least two (preferably at least three) years before you can really trust the orbit determination."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://ad.usno.navy.mil/star/star_cats_rec.shtml",
"http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/iau/mpc.html",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitude_(astronomy\\)",
"http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/db_search/show_object?utf8=%E2%9C%93&object_id=2003+VB12"
]
] |
|
3wqdrr
|
why is it supposedly rude to point?
|
Is there some sort of cultural "back story" to this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3wqdrr/eli5_why_is_it_supposedly_rude_to_point/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxy8vzc",
"cxya5f5",
"cxye8tu",
"cxyebgi",
"cxyhksc"
],
"score": [
6,
55,
2,
5,
14
],
"text": [
"How would you feel if someone was talking with someone and then point to you? ",
"Pointing makes people uncomfortable or even feel threatened. If a stranger points at you on the street (assuming you're not a celebrity), it never means something good. They could be signaling an attack, mocking you, etc. Whatever the reason, it's bad. \n\nThus, it's rude to point. ",
"Whenever I see someone pointing at me I always assume it's for a bad reason. That's probably why. Don't want to be caught pointing by someone who now things your judging them. ",
"Isn't this something commonly taught to children? \n\nIf something catches a child's eye while with an adult, they will often point at it.\n\nIf a person catches a child eyes, they will instinctively point to that person as well. This signals to those near the child AND to the person being pointed at that there is \"something to be noticed\" about the person. Often something about the person's appearance.\n\nChild: *sees someone very fat in public, thinks it is funny, points at the fat person and laughs*\nParent: Hey, stop that! It's rude to point at people.\n\nThat is how I always understood it at least.",
"When you point at someone it's usually in order to *point* then out to someone, which generally means you've been discussing the person without his or her knowledge. Basically, you're talking about someone behind their back or without their knowledge (usually saying something negative) and now you've brought this fact to their attention.\n\nYou can say rude things about someone without their knowledge, but the moment they're aware of it, it becomes rude."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
nhtix
|
My mom says to gargle salt water when I have a cold. Is she right?
|
I have a cold and I'm coughing up some phlegm and blowing colored chunks from my nose. No sore throat really though.
I'm Japanese and I know that in Japanese culture "ugai" (to gargle water) is a common thing after washing your hands. Supposedly to keep you healthy.
So I'm wondering the validity of this and if the combination of salt in the water will help me get better?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/nhtix/my_mom_says_to_gargle_salt_water_when_i_have_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c397s85",
"c397s9e",
"c397s85",
"c397s9e"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure how salty water may interact with mucus or phlegm, but salt-water rinses or gargling with salt-water is primarily an anti-bacterial treatment. Salt-water in your mouth will create an osmotic pressure gradient that will cause the water inside bacteria to be sucked right out, killing the bacteria. The common cold is a viral infection, and is not caused by bacteria, so salt-water gargling will not combat the cold directly. It will keep your mouth fresh though...",
"The [Mayo Clinic](_URL_1_) recommends salt water to relieve a sore or itchy throat. [This New York Times article](_URL_2_) cites [this study](_URL_0_) that showed a decrease in upper respiratory tract infections among people who gargled with salt water several times a day during cold and flu season.\n\nMy personal experience is also that salt water does indeed reduce the pain of a sore throat. I haven't usually gargled with salt water when I *didn't* have a sore throat, even if I did have a cold, but perhaps I'll start... I'm a teacher, so can pretty much always use another boost against colds!",
"I'm not sure how salty water may interact with mucus or phlegm, but salt-water rinses or gargling with salt-water is primarily an anti-bacterial treatment. Salt-water in your mouth will create an osmotic pressure gradient that will cause the water inside bacteria to be sucked right out, killing the bacteria. The common cold is a viral infection, and is not caused by bacteria, so salt-water gargling will not combat the cold directly. It will keep your mouth fresh though...",
"The [Mayo Clinic](_URL_1_) recommends salt water to relieve a sore or itchy throat. [This New York Times article](_URL_2_) cites [this study](_URL_0_) that showed a decrease in upper respiratory tract infections among people who gargled with salt water several times a day during cold and flu season.\n\nMy personal experience is also that salt water does indeed reduce the pain of a sore throat. I haven't usually gargled with salt water when I *didn't* have a sore throat, even if I did have a cold, but perhaps I'll start... I'm a teacher, so can pretty much always use another boost against colds!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16242593",
"http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/cold-remedies/ID00036",
"http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/health/28real.html"
],
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16242593",
"http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/cold-remedies/ID00036",
"http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/health/28real.html"
]
] |
|
3wr137
|
Are there any rich or powerful families who can trace the origins of their wealth/power back to Roman times?
|
I'm curious because I know that by the time the Empire started to crumble the majority of the social elite hailed from a plebeian origin, and most of the original patrician families had died out. I know the Rothschilds are an old family, but I'm wondering if there is one that is truly ancient in terms of its origins.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3wr137/are_there_any_rich_or_powerful_families_who_can/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxysiyd"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Although the declining Roman empire left lots of room for non-patricians to make a name for themselves (especially in the army, more on that [here, aren't self-plugs fun!](_URL_0_)) many old Roman families were alive and well (albeit often refreshed with new blood. As stated in the link above, the last emperor, Romulus Augustulus was himself half-roman, half \"Barbarian\"). \n\nHere are some anecdotes of interesting families I'm familiar with (adapted from an earlier answer): \n\nThe Visconti, lords of Milan from the 13th to the 15th century (and active in Lombard communal politics since the 10th century) claim to have been landholders in Massino on the shores of lake Garda since the land was granted to an ancestor in the days of Imperial Rome. They also claim descent through the Roman era from Eneas, the ancient Trojan hero (mind sources on this are questionable and propagandistic, many conveniently having appeared when a match was being made between Gian Galeazzo Visconti and Isabel of Valois, daughter of the King of France. The most complete chronicle was written in the 14th century by the Milanese chronicler Galvano Fiamma, who spends a great deal of time on the Visconti's great exploits in his Politia Novella, or modern history of Milan, today stored in the Ambrosian Library. The tone he takes when speaking of the Visconti is unsurprising given he was Duke Giovanni Visconti's personal chaplain).\n\nAlthough the main Visconti line died out in the 15th century (and the throne passed to the Sforza, a cadet branch that later went extinct) a couple of cadet branches continued to exist in obscurity as small landholders in the Lombard countryside. Many are involved in business and real estate in North Italy up to this day, the most easily traceable being the line of the Visconti of Modone, descendant of Vercellino Visconti, younger brother of Matteo Visconti (1250-1322) who was the Duke of Milan from 1294 to his death (with an eight year-exile after the Della Torre seized back the lordship, but that's a story for another time). The family was clever with their allegiance even after the throne of Milan slipped from their family, and several members were modestly important diplomats and civil servants in the court of the Sforza Dukes. They themselves were elevated to the title of Dukes by Napoleon in the early 19th century. The family count among their number Lucchino Visconti (1906-1976) and his brother Erpirando Visconti (1932-1995), both successful film directors. For a while I thought that this was the last branch of the Visconti to go extinct, but I just checked and it turns out I was wrong; Erpirando does have descendants, and they live in a modest villa near Bologna. It appears they do not own any more land near Modone, but have significant wealth managed privately.\n\nAnother cool example are the Obertenghi, who descend from Boniface, a Bavarian ennobled with significant lands in Northern Italy by Charlemagne (he was granted nearly all of modern Tuscany, Emilia, Lombardy, Peidmont and Liguria). The Obertenghi saw their lands reduced to Lombardy and Emilia by the eleventh century, and finally split into three cadet branches by the twelfth century: the Estensi, Pallavicini, and Malaspina, all three mildly influential during the communal era and increasingly obscure when the communes were consolidated into the dozen Italian states of the renaissance. The Estensi, who became lords of Ferrara, are the most illustrious and are related to nearly every royal house in Europe. They were also the first to go extinct. The Malaspina, the Tuscan branch of the Obertenghi, became Marquis of Massa-Carrara, but had their holdings progressively reduced under the Florentine Republic and subsequent Grand Duchy of Tuscany. They split into various branches living along the Tuscan-Ligurian border and as far as I know all went extinct (although I don't know as much as I'd like on Tuscan history). The last branch are the ones who answer your question: the Pallavicini, already active in Emilia and Lombardy in the communal era, became powerful vassals of the Duke of Parma, but wisely allowed themselves to slip into obscurity during the Italian Wars. To this day there are Milanese and Emilian (based in the town of Zibellio) branches still in existence, both are active real estate developers in the Emilia-Romagna region.\n\nI'd also like to mention the Dandolo, a family that gave the Republic of Venice four Doges. A branch of them is still extant today and inhabits one of their original palaces along the Grand Canal in Venice. The Dandolo family traces their lineage back to the Roman gens Ursia, who arrived in Venice in the eighth century from the Pentapolis (the last five Roman cities to be abandoned by the withdrawing Byzantine empire). However, I am not sure they still hold the deed to the other palaces previously owned by the family (I know of two; one is a hotel, the other holds Venice's city hall) or what sort of activities the descendants partake in. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3onoja/demographics_of_dark_age_to_medieval_italy/"
]
] |
|
1sh5ws
|
why does finding a smaller hubble constant imply that the universe is older than we thought?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sh5ws/eli5_why_does_finding_a_smaller_hubble_constant/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdxjfm8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine the universe as a balloon. And we hook up the balloon to a helium tank that is slowly filling up the balloon. If you measure the size of the balloon, as well as the rate in which the balloon is being filled up at (the Hubble constant), you can make a good estimate as to how long the balloon has been expanding.\n\nYou then discover that the rate of expansion for the balloon is much less than you originally thought. This means that the balloon, for its current size, has been expanding much longer than you originally thought.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
9ttp2b
|
If there were two moons, would nights be noticeably brighter?
|
Would we be able to see easier at night with two moons?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9ttp2b/if_there_were_two_moons_would_nights_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8zebbh",
"e8zexsb",
"e904ncj"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"We perceive light in a log scale so for something to appear twice as bright it would need 10x light on it. Because of this nights would be brighter but not twice as bright as they are currently.\nThe difference in moon phases would also effect brightness. 2 full moons(big moon) would be very different from 2 new moons(almost no moon).",
"It depends on the position of them. If both are positioned in a close proximity they will reflect more sunlight combined hence making the night brighter. But, if they are opposite to each other you could see only one moon at a time. But tides will be crazy.",
"Assuming Moon2 has the same brightness as the Moon, then moonlit nights would not appear all that much brighter because our eyes perceive brightness non-linearly.\n\nHowever if the moons are in unrelated orbits then there might be significantly fewer moonless hours at night, since either moon is sufficient to light things up. This scarcity of moonless nights would be noticeable to anyone regularly outdoors at night away from cities; it would cause problems for some astronomy and disrupt the habits of some animals."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
w94gv
|
Can modern Turks trace their origins to ancient Anatolian peoples like the Hittites and the Trojans?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/w94gv/can_modern_turks_trace_their_origins_to_ancient/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5bcelh",
"c5bcfel",
"c5bcg16",
"c5bco88"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably not. Turks, as an ethnic identifier, are connected to central Asia (e.g., Turkmenstan) and were part of the [expansion of peoples prior to the Mongol invasions](_URL_0_). Those in Ionia might have some extra-Turkic connections that can be traced, but further inland, it becomes murkier owing to displacement, migration, religious change, and limited records. If someone is from those regions they might be able to say something with more certainty, but most Turks I know identify first as Turks (in the sense of the Republic), then as Muslims, then as residents of wherever they're from. But I am of course an outsider.",
"I'll preface this by saying that I am someone who just likes to read about history and do not have a degree in the area so take what I say with a grain of salt. Anyway, culturally speaking, hell no. Turks originated in Central Asia and probably speak a language very different than that probably spoken by the Hittites and are also separated by the Roman and Greek Eras of Anatolia in which the remnants of the Hittites and Trojans were sort of wiped out/forgotten. Biologically, maybe, the people that formed all of these civilizations did not just disappear and there is likely a large degree of genetic similarities due to mixing of different peoples. Though I feel like modern Turks would rather take pride in the ancient Turkic people of of Central Asia than the Hittites or Trojans.",
"It depends on what you define as \"origins.\" Genetically, it is very likely that the vast majority of Turks are related to the civilizations that came before them, such as the Hittites, the Greeks, and the Romans. Culturally, however, Turks trace their origins to the people of the Central Asian steppes, who did not come to Anatolia until the 10th or 11th century CE. \n",
"Edit: I mean genetically."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_migration"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1zd79w
|
How is a historiography written?
|
what exactly is a historiography and how do historians write them?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1zd79w/how_is_a_historiography_written/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfsngyj",
"cfsoc57",
"cfsr6z7",
"cfsxi2o"
],
"score": [
13,
35,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Here's something I wrote a few months ago in response to a graduate student looking for guidance in putting together a historiography paper:\n\nIt sometimes seems as though there must be only one way to write a historiography paper -- as if anyone can just describe the entire state of a field somehow -- but there are actually several ways to do this well. Also, not everyone's reading of the shape of a field or its most pressing issues will match up. Historiography papers will all be slightly different, in other words.\n\nDepending on what issue you're addressing, one of several approaches may be most appropriate. Sometimes you may want to describe the field as a puzzle that's been pieced together over time. Every text is a contribution that makes the picture clearer.\n\nSometimes, a chronological approach is best. So, for example, scholars of Reconstruction in the 1920s put forward a compelling, field-defining theory to explain Reconstruction that was also extremely racist. That framework was poked at and partially deconstructed over the following decades, but wasn't really displaced until Eric Foner's Reconstruction in 1988. Scholars of Reconstruction afterwards branched off into many different directions, feeling less constrained to continue arguing against the scholarship of seven decades earlier.\n\nThere may be factions that have debated a particular key issue over time, and you may way to track the shape of that debate and the way it's impacted the scholarship produced over a certain period of time.\nA thematic approach can work, but only if the paper remains focused. No one wants to read a historiography paper that identifies 10 themes, three of which drop out as 15 more are added -- after which 5 more drop out again.\n\nThe important thing is that your historiography paper have an argument. It's not enough simply to describe the state of a field or how it got to be the way it is. What does it mean? What are the key issues or critiques that historians need to focus on? And in what direction should future research go?\n\nThe information you need to put this sort of paper together virtually always comes in the introduction and conclusion to a historical monograph. If you're in a history graduate program, you must know this already -- but that really is the place where the big ideas of the text are laid out, and it's those big ideas that you'll set in relation to one another in your historiography paper. It's especially useful when the literature review in those monographs gives you a sense of the state of the field that author saw at the time he/she published. State of the field essays are published from time to time as well, and those can also be helpful.\n\nOh, and one more thing. These papers can be a pain, but they can help you figure out where you own work fits within the larger field -- and that's a question that everyone has to answer. Hope that helps.",
" > what exactly is a historiography\n\nHistoriography is the history of history. So what you're doing, in essence, is talking about how historians talk about history. (Sometimes I've found that undergraduates decide that \"historiography\" is just a more fancy-sounding work for history. It isn't, and misusing it doesn't make you seem smarter. And despite what Microsoft Word's spellchecker says, historiography _is_ a word...)\n\nA practical example. Let's say I'm interested writing a _history_ of the atomic bomb. A straight history of the atomic bomb would be about the scientists who built it, the political decisions that went into its production and use, the consequences and so on. Pretty straightforward. My primary sources are going to be things like interviews with people involved, government documents from the time, and maybe press coverage afterwards to talk about how the news was received. \n\nLet's say I was writing a _historiography_ of the atomic bomb. Now I'm writing about _historians_ and my primary sources are _historical works_. So I'm going to talk about how Herbert Feis, a foreign relations historian, wrote his book _Japan Subdued_ in 1966, and how his take on the history of bomb different from that of Robert Jungk, whose _Brighter than a Thousand Suns_ came out in 1958. I'm going to talk about how Gar Alperovitz's _Atomic Diplomacy_ (1965) put forward the thesis that the atomic bombs were just meant to scare the Soviet Union, whereas Tsuyoshi Hasegawa's _Racing the Enemy_ (2005) argued that it was the Soviet invasion, not the atomic bombs, that led to Japan's defeat. I might talk about how Richard Rhodes' _The Making of the Atomic Bomb_ (1986) relies upon \"genius\" narratives for telling its stories of the scientists, but nonetheless is ambiguous about the morality of the bombing. I could mention that Ruth Howes' _Their Day in the Sun_ (1999) is the only book that really takes into account female contributions to the bomb project (which were substantial), but that it has been more or less ignored by most subsequent histories of the bomb written by males (hmm). I might even blur the lines between history and historiography by talking about how the original historical actors — like General Groves or Secretary of War Stimson — were very deliberate with regards to manipulating what was known about the atomic bomb, and in the process ended up writing the \"first draft\" of the history of the bomb (and many of their key arguments continue to be points of discussion by modern historians). Ultimately it can be quite wide, but what I'm looking at is how we talk about the history in question has changed over time — history itself becomes historicized. \n\nSo you can sort of see the difference here in my examples. What's the value of historiography, you might be asking? For one thing, it helps us see, at a glance, what different types of arguments and interpretations have been put forward. It can help us see the production of history as a product of its time, as well. It helps us be more critical about works of history, because we see that _they themselves_ are products of their time and context — they don't sit \"above\" anything like that. \n",
"In addition to the answers already provided, I want to add that a historiography can also address gaps in research. Or rather, provide an analysis of where the research has *been* and how your analysis will provide a different approach. In this regard, chronological is often a good approach, but so is categorical.\n\nUltimately, what you're trying to do is provide your reader with a snapshot of the research so far and how you plan to expand upon or argue against that current line-of-thinking. In addition to giving you a focus, it demonstrates you have a masterful command of the topic so far. It's a good opportunity to convey to the reader that, quite simply, you know what you're talking about.\n\nSource: MA in history; wrote a thesis",
"Most of the posted comments provide good information, but I'd suggest narrowing your subject matter to specific areas. Instead of writing a historiography of WWII, examine writings about the Battle of the Bulge; instead of the Cold War, write about the Cuban Missile Crisis or the Berlin Air Resupply missions. The tighter your paper's focus, the better it'll appear to a reader. Finally, always approach your readings by focusing on the differences between authors' approaches or methods. In many ways you're writing a series of book reviews on a single historical event. If you need help choosing the books to include in your historiography, begin with the most contemporary historian's writing on the subject and use his/her bibliography to identify the historical works they relied upon."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
d9rjax
|
why is there a threat of gun violence / mass shootings at joker screenings??
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d9rjax/eli5_why_is_there_a_threat_of_gun_violence_mass/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f1kqnca",
"f1kr1xh"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Joker is a character that attracts try-hard quirky lunatics by nature. He’s an unhinged murderer after all.",
"The Colorado shootings during the first screenings of the dark knight rises. The guy who did it \"idolized\" the joker."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3qcla9
|
Could gravity in space bend the light coming from stars so much that where a star appears to be isn't actually where it is?
|
I mean... I know about travel time of light, so, the light we are seeing from some stars are like, 5 years old, so the star isn't at all where we see it, but you get the idea.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3qcla9/could_gravity_in_space_bend_the_light_coming_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cweepod"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"This is exactly the effect that was measured by Eddington and Davidson back in 1919 that make Einstein world famous. During a solar eclipse, when the Sun is dimmed, you can see the starlight near it. If you record the positions of those stars and compare them to their locations when the Sun isn't in the way, there is a bending of light or shift which occurs because of the Sun's gravitation.\n\nHere's some info about it with a diagram, \n\n* _URL_0_ \n\nThe actual paper, \n\n* _URL_2_ \n\nAnd the even more impressive and related effect of the Einstein Ring, \n\n* _URL_1_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.astro.caltech.edu/~rjm/Principe/1919eclipse.php",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_ring",
"https://archive.org/details/philtrans06337895"
]
] |
|
3ea61f
|
how do computer viruses work? why can't whatever bug they exploit simply be fixed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ea61f/eli5_how_do_computer_viruses_work_why_cant/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctczfo2"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"*The* bug they exploits can be fixed. But software has become so complex that there will be more. It is a race between those finding bugs to exploit, and those finding bugs to fix.\n\nThere is also a major fault that we can't fix. That is the actions and understanding of the user. We can make our software really good, but all of that is in vain if the user will tell the computer to install the virus because the virus promised to display a pretty picture."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
fgcpb9
|
Why has no country ever tried to emulate the succes of the roman republic, and why did it take european countries so long to get rid of their kings when all it took the romans was one bad king?
|
You often hear about empires claiming to be the succesor to the roman empire, ive never heard about countries trying to follow in the footsteps of the roman republic when that was arguably their best period. Why is that?
The romans had 5 kings the last one was so bad they got rid of him and instead of getting a new king they instated a republic, why did it take so long for later european countries to do the same when they had far worse kings?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fgcpb9/why_has_no_country_ever_tried_to_emulate_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fk45zt5"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"Though not an exact emulation, both the French and American revolutions were directly influenced by the Roman Republic and the ideals of Libertas achieved by the early Romans, as Sellers writes (reference at the bottom): \n\n“A new \"Senate\" would meet on the \"Capitol\" hill, overlooking the \"Tiber\" river (formerly \"Goose Creek\"), as in Rome, to restore \"the sacred fire of liberty\" to the Western world. The vocabulary of eighteenth century revolution reverberated with purposeful echoes of republican Rome as political activists self-consciously assumed the Roman mantle. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, the primary authors and advocates of the United States Constitution, wrote together pseudonymously as \"Publius\" to defend their creation, associating themselves with Publius Valerius Poplicola, founder and first consul of the Roman Republic. Camille Desmoulins attributed the French Revolution to Cicero's ideal of Roman politics, imbibed by children in the schools. At every opportunity, American and French revolutionaries proclaimed their desire to re-establish the \"stupendous fabrics\" of republican government that had fostered liberty at Rome. The Roman name of \"republic\" evoked first and above all the memory of government without kings. Roman authors dated their republic from the expulsion of Rome s last king, Tarquinius Superbus, and mourned its fall in the principate of Augustus. \n\nAs French and American politicians came increasingly into conflict with their own monarchs, they found a valuable ideology of opposition already fully formed in the Roman senatorial attitude towards Caesar and his successors. The guiding principle of this republican tradition, as remembered (for example) by Thomas Paine, was government for the \"res-publica, the public affairs, or the public good,\" perceived as naturally antithetical to monarchy and to any other form of arbitrary rule. Paine and other eighteenth century republicans viewed the individual and collective well-being of citizens as the only legitimate purpose of government. Their rallying cry of \"liberty\" signified subjection to laws made for the common good, and to nothing and to no one else. Statesmen traced this principle to the frequently cited passage in Livy that attributes the liberty of Rome to Lucius Junius Brutus and to his introduction of elected magistrates into Roman politics, constrained by the rule of law”\n\nAs Sellers suggests, it is not that they directly tried to “copy” exactly the Romans (though in many ways they did - hence for example the movement itself being called Republicanism!) but that the foundation of the Republic served as an ideological benchmark through which they could express their desires for liberty and self governance. This is why for example during the time of the French Revolution there was an increase in paintings and art that recalled famous events from Rome’s early history (Jacques-Louis David is perhaps the most famous, such as the Oath of the Horatii). Both in France and America, intellectuals were consciously linking themselves to the Romans to both help justify and inspire their contemporaries into moving away from monarchy and towards Republicanism and they saw the Roman Republic as both their symbolic and literal predecessors. \n\nThough not as overt, this can be seen in the artistic and intellectual culture of the English Civil War. For example John Milton’s “Paradise Lost” draws mainly from the inspiration of Virgil, who’s often-conflicted portrayal of Aeneas as an effigy of Rome’s first emperor Augustus has led many scholars to believe that Virgil’s work is more subversive of Augustus due to Virgil’s own conflicted opinion of one-man rule under the newly established Principate - rule by the “First Citizen”. It is perhaps unsurprising then that Milton’s Paradise Lost begins with Satan, cast out from heaven for his rebellion against God, the king of heaven. Some of Satan’s sentiments (“better to reign in hell than serve in heaven”) reflect a rejection of absolute monarchy that was beginning to take hold within western intellectualism. \n\nAs to why it took so long for more modern countries to reject monarchy I am no expert, but the enlightenment was built off of the back of the Renaissance - which was a “rediscovery” of Greek and Roman ideals - so you could argue that it is no accident that rejections of monarchy began to take root directly after European intellectuals began to study Rome’s republic (as well as Athenian Democracy and Sparta’s mixed constitution) in a more widespread way. \n\nAs to why Rome rejected their kings this is still a source of debate, as Livy (the main source for Rome’s early history) acknowledges himself that the stories passed down are more “poetic tales than history” and so most of the stories are more than likely legendary fables. My own guess based on studying/teaching the Roman King’s and Rome’s early republic is that there was a cultural shift within Rome that had begun before the rejection of Tarquinius Superbus. For example Rome allegedly always had a Senate, and under the Etruscan Kings there was an increasing importance placed on the increased political participation of Rome’s citizens. For example the 6th King Servius Tullius reorganised Rome’s citizens so they voted according to their property value - landowning citizens had more of a say in the political life of Rome but the burden for military service was placed on them. When the King’s were thrown out we are told by Livy that Brutus and the first republicans decided not to change too much of Rome’s constitution, but instead to dissolve the power of the Kings and divide their roles among the pre existing political bodies, such as the Senate and Popular Assemblies. Livy also tells us that the earliest Kings used to be elected, rather than it being a hereditary monarchy in the strict sense of the world. Therefore it was not an absolute monarchy like many medieval kingdoms. \n\n\nFurther reading:\n\nSellers, M. “The Roman Republic and the French and American Revolutions” in: Flower, H. I. (2014).\nThe Cambridge Companion to the Roman Republic.\n Cambridge University Press.\n\nLink to book: \n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nHope this helps!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.academia.edu/17175334/The_Influence_of_Ancient_Rome_on_the_French_Revolution_and_its_potential_for_class_analysis",
"https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=i1rQqJo_flwC&pg=PA357&lpg=PA357&dq=sellers+the+roman+republic+and+the+french+and+american&source=bl&ots=h9_xWJ0--a&sig=ACfU3U0zZ3EdZyKgMHf-2cBgPWzyNLXa-A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj0lvTAm5DoAhWPa8AKHVb5AyMQ6AEwBnoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=sellers%20the%20roman%20republic%20and%20the%20french%20and%20american&f=false"
]
] |
|
cqy9vd
|
Do tall people have more nerves, and therefore feel more pain?
|
I'm a tall guy, so if I do a squat and my quads get sore, do I feel more pain because my muscles are longer compared to someone who is short? I know pain is relative, and i'm not asking about the level of pain, i'm asking about the amount of angry nerves that would lead to a larger area of pain, and therefore more pain.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/cqy9vd/do_tall_people_have_more_nerves_and_therefore/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ex111vg"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"No, we all have roughly the same layout. I say roughly because that really only applies to the major nerves and branching elements, with the rest a bit more (not random, but) on-the-fly. Broadly speaking though, being taller isn't going to mean that you have more nerves, although you will have more total \"mileage\" of nerve tissue than a shorter person. A much fatter person will also have their nerves innervate the new tissue, but I don't think that's really what you're asking about. Still, a larger body of the same tissue will tend to be *less* sensitive. Even though it will necessarily be fully innervated, the body interprets sensation in a way that takes account of how many nerves are being stimulated at once. \n\nYou could imagine that rather than having \"more nerves\" larger people have \"more diluted\" nerves. Still it would be an *incredibly* subtle effect that would be swamped by almost any natural variance in sensation. \n\nAs to pain though, taller people might experience more pain just because they're taller, carry more weight, their joints may be under more strain, etc. Especially *very* tall people will often experience joint and spinal issues which can be very painful. That's not a result of having more nerves though, even though it is related to being tall/large.\n\nEdit: Link to a previous, related question with a very good answer from a (then) medical student. _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/78v9m3/do_bigger_people_have_more_nerves_than_smaller/"
]
] |
|
6fvupf
|
what is the procedure for when a demolition fails?
|
When a building is demolished and the initial explosives go off but fail to collapse the structure, what happens next?
Are there secondary explosives? Surely it's not safe to approach the building once those first explosives have been detonated.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6fvupf/eli5_what_is_the_procedure_for_when_a_demolition/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dilkooe",
"dilslr7",
"dilslva",
"dilvphp",
"dilz3n0"
],
"score": [
45,
16,
26,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Controlled implosions aren't just about bringing a building down...its about bringing it down so the debris goes where you want it to.\n\nThe actual amount of explosive force needed to bring a structure down is actually low (because of gravity) So if there is a screw up in the implosion process, the building is still coming down...just in a really unsafe way.",
"If their is a failure of the initial detonation a soak time is applied to make sure there is not a slow burn in one of the detonators and then someone walks down to start checking the circuit",
"The explosives going off on their own is not a worry, it takes certain very controlled conditions for modern demolition explosives to be detonated. If the detonation sequence goes off badly enough that there are large parts of the building still standing then traditional but riskier and slower demolition tactics will just need to be used (wrecking balls and the like).\n\nBut the demolitions company will want to recover the unused explosives because governments tend to get a bit touchy about lost high explosives.",
"This actually happened in my hometown about ten years ago! When they detonated the explosives, it imploded the base of the building but the rest ended up still standing, leaning a bit. They ended up tearing it down with a wrecking ball over a week or so. I can't remember how long they waited between the failed detonation and finishing the deconstruction, though.",
"So I live next to a rock quarry, 1/4 mile away, they actually had this happen last year when they were blasting. They drilled and set the charges and set them off. One or two did not detonate, the charge is a two part mix and relatively inert with out the blasting cap. However they had to bring in one of the bigger loaders and retrofit it with a steel cage and some other heavy steel plates before it could go and dig up the charges. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1jlfcc
|
will the city of detroit ever get better? when will it be on par with other cities of similar size? (ex.- charlotte, boston, denver, seattle)
|
From a metro Detroiter who loves the city and its four world class sports teams but doesn't know if it will be good to live here in the future when I start a career and have a family.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jlfcc/eli5will_the_city_of_detroit_ever_get_better_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbftni0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There's no definite answer to that question. It really all depends on whether the city's economy improves, and that depends on the city being able to attract businesses."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
afs6zt
|
How does a strong magnet fall in a copper tube?
|
It can be shown when a magnet is dropped through a copper tube its change in magnetic flux creates a retarding force therefore slowing the magnets rate of decent. It can also be shown that this flux is proportional to the change in the magnets velocity. My question plainly is what happens when the magnets “strength” or corresponding electromotive magnitude approaches infinity?
At first I assumed the magnet would no longer move but if that where the case there would no longer a velocity, resulting in the retarding force becoming zero. It seems the magnet would neither fall or not fall. The paradox at hand and my lack of knowledge of Lenz law has prevented me from studying this case in any intimate mathematic detail.
Perhaps such a strong magnet and uniform field would not initiate enough change in flux to create a retarding force at all. What could this say about uniform fields and “infinitely strong” sources?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/afs6zt/how_does_a_strong_magnet_fall_in_a_copper_tube/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ee17m5h"
],
"score": [
18
],
"text": [
" > At first I assumed the magnet would no longer move but if that where the case there would no longer a velocity, resulting in the retarding force becoming zero. It seems the magnet would neither fall or not fall. \n\nRoughly speaking, ∞ × 0 != 0. It can equal any number including 0 or infinity itself, it depends on the function you are approaching infinity and zero with. Infinite strength and zero velocity could come out to a real force to match gravity. I haven't done the math here, but I'm pretty sure that's the case and it will cause an equal force even with no movement. \n\n\n\n\nAs for the answer here, I found [this article](_URL_0_) deriving the terminal velocity. \n\n\nv_t = 64mga^4 /45πeσμ^2\n\n\nHere m is the mass of the magnet, g Earth's Gravity, a is the pipe size, e is the pipe thickness, σ is the conductivity of the pipe, and μ is the strength of the magnetic dipole moment. \n\n\n\nSo leaving the geometry, mass, and gravity alone, we have the pipe conductivity and magnet strength to work with. They are in the denominator, so to get a 0 terminal velocity we need to get them to infinity. So yes, making an arbitrarily strong magnet would eventually freeze it in place. Magnetic field would be so strong that even infinitesimal movement would be adequate to drive a strong enough current for an opposing force. However, the thing with a magnetic field approaching infinity is you have energy approaching infinity and you're likely going to break the bounds of this equation at some point. Like I don't know, your magnet being impossible to achieve or the field being so energy dense it's gravity comes into play or even sucks the whole pipe up into a blackhole. \n\n\nBut as for the other variable, we can send conductivity to infinity. In other words, resistance to zero. A superconductor. A regular magnet trying to fall by a superconducting material would remain in place. In fact, [here's a video of one doing excatly that.](_URL_1_)\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.msc.univ-paris-diderot.fr/~phyexp/uploads/LaimantParesseux/Tube-Aimant2.pdf",
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l0jEbWfFAXU"
]
] |
|
azsy1k
|
how do languages with a different number of characters share the same computer keyboards?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/azsy1k/eli5_how_do_languages_with_a_different_number_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ei9tovs",
"ei9u070",
"ei9u6g9",
"ei9wxf8"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"With so many keys, and so many options for modifying keys, it's easy to use any language with a standard keyboard. When you need a character that is unique to a specific language, you just use a keyboard macro. Alt+0252 is a \"ü\" for example. ",
"They don't. A lot of languages use their own keyboards. German keyboards for example are layed out qwertz instead of qwerty and include the letter ö, ü, and ä.\n\nFrance uses an azerty layout with their special characters (various accents).\n\nHowever, because most languages use the Latin alphabet, it's possible to write on the same keyboards because the basic set of 26 letters is the same, a standard qwerty layout includes options for adding some basic accents to letters, and other than that you can use Unicode shortcuts to use special characters ",
"Different language keyboards have the symbols in different locations. This makes it easy to fit a handful of extra characters onto the keyboard. However some symbols are harder to get to. The AltGr key is more common in other languages. The most extreme is perhaps the Japanese keyboards which firstly have a lot more then a handful of extra characters in their character sets requiring them to use the number line as well but also use four different alphabets in regular use. This requires the use of several modifiers (like shift) and toggles (caps lock). One advantage is that only Romani (Latin) have separate upper and lower case characters. Korean letters are all ligeatures. If you had used the same system they use then the computer would auto correct ao to @ for you and et to & , 0/0 to % and so on so that you would not need so many keys. For Chinese and the Japanese variant of it, Kanji they similar systems. The keys they type can either represent the sounds you make when you say the word or there is also a lesser used nowadays system of describing the strokes required to paint the characters. This reduces the amount of keys you require from several thousand to less then fifty. And on a 105 key keyboard you can easily fit this and still have room for all the function keys and numpad and such.",
"A good example is writing German on a qwerty keyboard. The letter ä can also be written as ae, ß as ss, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2r19hc
|
if i had a room covered completely in mirrors, and turned on a flashlight, what would happen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r19hc/eli5_if_i_had_a_room_covered_completely_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnbgq42",
"cnbgwvq",
"cnbhcpy",
"cnbiu38",
"cnbiyx8",
"cnbxog3"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3,
12,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"Not what you're probably hoping. You would only see the beam from mirrors that reflected the light to your eyes. Any mirrors that reflected the light to another mirror wouldn't send it to your eyes, so you wouldn't see the light out of them.\n\nThis assumes flat mirrors. You might get something cool if the mirrors were curved. ",
"If they are perfect mirrors, then the light would keep bouncing back and forth until it hit you, meaning you would see light in the mirrors, but you would look illuminated from all sides. If you were not there, the light would bounce back and forth indefinitely.",
"The light would bounce around, but would ultimately be absorbed. Mirrors are not perfect reflectors, and objects in the room - particularly you and the flashlight - absorb the rest.",
"You would see the ridiculous wastefulness of having a room covered in mirrors. ",
"Michael Stevens does a great video about spherical mirrors in this video _URL_0_\nHe talks about turning a light on and then turning it off, hoping to keep the beam reflecting, but light gets absorbed by the mirror so nothing would *really* happen.",
"If the mirrors were perfect reflectors, the light would still be diffused by the air between mirrors. If you were in a vacuum it could probably get very bright from a constant stream of photons (and the flashlight itself would absorb photons too). But you'd also die."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRP82omMX0g"
],
[]
] |
||
92o6mt
|
how on earth does a snake move at all?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92o6mt/eli5_how_on_earth_does_a_snake_move_at_all/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e373jwa",
"e374m3z",
"e376gng",
"e37a74c",
"e37c85h",
"e37f5jp",
"e37hdbo"
],
"score": [
44,
11,
7,
137,
84,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Their bodies contract and it pulls them along. Like a centipede without the legs, it moves so smoothly that it’s hard to really see.\n\nThen there’s a snakes like a [sidewinder ](_URL_0_) that have their own fun way of doing it",
"Snakes have over 300 pairs of ribs. They can use them kinda like internal legs.\n\nThey also use their muscles to push off the ground. The sidewinder someone else mentioned is an extreme example of this.",
"It chooses which parts of its body to push with (or even grip with) and which to lift clear of the ground the flexibility of the system means that it is the equivalent of having multiple legs all along the body which can be selected at will.\n\nAfter all your tongue can move around your mouth with extreme flexibility and push on all sides of the mouth yet it doesn't have any limbs.",
"[This Gaboon Viper movement is really cool](_URL_1_) This movement is called Rectilinear movement and the snake just moves their belly scales forward a small amount alternating sides. [There are 4 other types of snake movement](_URL_0_). Each one allows the species of snake to play to the strengths of its body characteristics. Remember that snakes still have tons of muscles and are very flexible, they use all those muscles and flexibility to coordinate their body and move gracefully through their habitat.",
"Okay. Here’s the real ELI5. There are some very odd (and very wrong) answers on here so far. \n\nYou’ve got three main movement types. The WRIGGLERS, the THROWERS, and the CRAWLERS.\n\nThe WRIGGLERS kinda just wriggle. The classic serpentine movements that make the snake look like a sine wave. The snake gets pushed forward by the force exerted on its local static environment by its very muscly body.\n\nThe THROWERS keep a part or parts of their body fixed on the ground and thrown or push the rest of their body forward, this part then becomes the ‘static’ part and the previously fixed part is pushed/thrown forward. The sidewinder is a cool example of this and leave characteristic J-shaped marks in the sand.\n\nThe CRAWLERS move in an almost straight line. Waves of muscular contraction moving down their body push them directly forward.\n\nAnd then of course you have the odd ones out like the sea snakes and flying snakes that swim and glide respectively.",
"While we’re at it, how do they mate? I mean, I can’t find “that” part on a snake and I’m trying to picture it in my head.",
"Try moving around like a snake. You’ll see you can do it but not very well. Now imagine your body is as slim and flexible as a snake and you can see how it would work."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crotalus_cerastes"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~brm2286/locomotn.htm",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/snakes/comments/6okm49/i_didnt_realize_gaboon_vipers_moved_like/?st=JK5UPTK7&sh=ad84a417"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2v65yd
|
What is the earliest date I, an English speaking American, could effectively communicate with other earlier English speakers?
|
Sorry for the title gore. I suppose if my question doesn't make sense to you, please answer me this instead: When did modern American English develop, and what are the similarities and differences between it and old English?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2v65yd/what_is_the_earliest_date_i_an_english_speaking/
|
{
"a_id": [
"coetbsi"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"hi! fyi, you'll find a few previous posts in this FAQ section\n\n* [How far back could I go and still communicate?](_URL_0_)\n\nAs you'll see in those threads, the differences between Old English and modern American (and every other variety of) English is extreme. But on the off-chance that your last question is asking about the divergence of British and American Englishes, there's another FAQ section that may be of interest\n\n* [American and British accents](_URL_1_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/language#wiki_how_far_back_could_i_go_and_still_communicate.3F",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/language#wiki_american_and_british_accents"
]
] |
|
goy9g
|
Can/will Psychology ever be considered a physical science?
|
What advances would be necessary to bring Psychology from a social science to a physical science?
What might the field look like after this? How would it affect society?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/goy9g/canwill_psychology_ever_be_considered_a_physical/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1p6dal"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Psychology is never going to be a physical science. Wikipedia's definition of physical science being;\n\n > Physical Science is an encompassing term for the branches of natural science and science that study non-living systems, in contrast to the life sciences.\n\nSo, no.\n\nLet me go into a bit more detail. Psychology is actually a *really, really* broad subject - to the extent where sometimes I feel it's justified to treat it as multiple subjects masquerading under one name - and many of its subfields might be classified in different ways. \n\nAs quick examples, I'd feel comfortable calling biological psychology part of the life sciences, cognitive psychology part of the behavioural sciences, social psychology part of the social sciences, and a few like analytical psychology might even be better classed as arts or humanities. All of these categorizations are somewhat vague - that's the nature of scientific taxonomy, I suppose. I also imagine that there will inevitably be some disagreement with my classifications; I've seen some claim that psychology can never be a science at all, or that all its subfields should be classed as behavioural science, or social science, *et cetera*.\n\nThe point I'm making, however, is that although psychology can never be a *physical* science, at least parts of it are (arguably) within the realm of *natural* science - so leaf through a few articles in, I don't know, a recent issue of *Psychological Review* or the *Journal of Experimental Psychology* if you want to see how the field looks today. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
8seq1u
|
what does "the u.s. has officially quit the un human rights council." mean?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8seq1u/eli5_what_does_the_us_has_officially_quit_the_un/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e0yul8p",
"e0yuogo"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"We didn't do much on it, and Trump isn't the biggest supporter of the U.N., so it was only a matter of time. The human rights council, last I heard, is actually headed by Saudi Arabia, a country that stones unfaithful women and throws gays off tips of towers, so I don't think they're the best example of human rights anyways.",
"I honestly thought you meant literally, I’ve been spending too much time on nostupidquestions.\n\nIt means they pissed off a bunch of allies, and also importantly OPEC nations on the board (the ones who control gas prices), to leave a very ineffectual council in order to be ineffectual by themselves.\n\nIt would be a protest statement if they formed their own organization to do it, but they are not."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2jyptu
|
why does the circle on the isis flag look poorly drawn?
|
Is there any meaning behind this uneven design? And while we are on this subject, what does the writing on it mean?
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jyptu/eli5_why_does_the_circle_on_the_isis_flag_look/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clgaw5m"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"idk about the circle, could be stylistic choices or that it's easy to reproduce but the writing is the [shahada](_URL_0_), with the top line saying \"there is no god but god\" and the words inside the circle being, from top to bottom, \"god messenger muhammad\" but if you read it from bottom to top it w/ some arabic grammar thrown into the mix there it says \"muhammad is the messenger of god\", and bam, baby you got a shahada going"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.pri.org/sites/default/files/ISISflag%20copy.jpg"
] |
[
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahada"
]
] |
|
13vcsw
|
Would two people pointing guns at each other have enough time to react to the first gunshot?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/13vcsw/would_two_people_pointing_guns_at_each_other_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c77hjwb",
"c77jghv",
"c77jk5y",
"c77l2xv",
"c77lda1",
"c77lkd7",
"c77lsgd",
"c77ltlf",
"c77lzw3",
"c77m25r",
"c77mpkv",
"c77ms6f",
"c77mshb"
],
"score": [
638,
33,
6,
147,
18,
10,
2,
5,
8,
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Let's take [600 feet per second](_URL_0_) as the speed of the bullet (this would be a pretty slow bullet). At 10 feet, the bullet would take ~0.02 seconds to get to the target. Average human reaction time is in the order of [0.2 seconds](_URL_1_). So to have any chance of reacting in time, you need a bullet traveling around ten times slower or ten times further away. This ignores the fact that you may notice the protagonist's hand moving before they actually fire the gun.\n\nSo in conclusion, Han must have shot first.\n\nEdit: I accidentally a word.",
"While not exactly answering the question, there was a study that showed that in the old Western style duels, the one who pulled their gun second, pulled it [quicker] (_URL_0_).",
"For what it's worth, the book War by Sebastian Junger claims that a rifle round has to be something like 800 yards away to be able to dodge it. [Link](_URL_0_)",
"**REMINDER!!!!!**\n\n\nThis is /r/askscience. Please refrain from speculation, guesses, opinions, jokes, and off-topic discussion. Posts that violate our [guidelines](_URL_0_) are removed. \n\nThanks, have a good one.",
"I think most of you overthought the OP's question. I think he was simply asking \"given a bullet's velocity, is there enough reaction time for person B to fire before a bullet leaving person A's gun hits him. Don't complicate it with all of this nonsense about \"maybe he survives the shot and can fire back\" and such. He's asking 3 basic questions: how long for a bullet to travel 10 feet, and how fast is the realistic human reaction time, and how do those two compare.",
"Mythbusters did this experiment about trying to move out of the way before being hit by a sniper and the answer was no. Moving a whole body is much more than squeezing a trigger, but bullets move faster than sound, so the synopsis of the show was that you cannot react at all in time. Even if you're shot at from hundreds of yards away, you will die before you can react.",
"Mythbusters did a piece about this, seeing if you could react to a muzzle flash and dodge out of the way via reaction only. The range was 500 yards, using a bright Hollywood blank.\n\n[Video](_URL_0_)\n\nGranted, this was using a sniper rifle's statistics...and Jamie even states that if it were a normal round it would have been impossible to see the flash unaided at that distance.",
"The person is most likely reacting to certain body language cues that precede the shot, rather than the trigger pulling.",
"Mythbusters did the same scenario. They did a segment on \"he who draws first, dies first\" and concluded that the person who drew first was able to kill the opponent most of the time. Additionally, the shooter would not be able to dodge a bullet.\n\nThey also tested knife vs gun for the fight or flight response which is equally amusing.",
"Follow-up question: would the \"victim\" reflexively grip the trigger, and fire once it? \n\nSecond follow-up what to police procedures instruct the officer to do in this situation? ",
"If the bullet hit the person in the head, the force of the impact alone would knock them unconscious almost instantly. So in the case of a headshot, no.",
"correct me if I'm wrong, but unless the guns were loaded with ammunition that was subsonic (rounds used with silencers, ect...) the target would not hear the gunshot before the bullet hit because normal rounds are supersonic (the bang you hear when you fire)",
"Somewhat related, if you do choose to take the shot you should also feign/dodge to the outside of the other person.\n\nIn movies they normally end up diving to the inside, or across the shooters field of vision, as this makes for a more dramatic shot, but it is much easier to accurately track someone moving from you gun hand into the center (or across your body) then someone moving from the center toward the gun hand.\n\nIf you are holding the pistol with your right hand and your target breaks to (your) right, it will move visually toward the side you hold the gun, so you will need to track it with muscles that move your hand away from your center. This will make you less accurate, opposed to tracking the target into your center (or to the left if you hold the gun with your right).\n\nIts a small advantage but if you are planning to shoot them anyways odds are their aim will be compromised to begin with, so the more difficult moving target may be the edge you need to survive."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/MariaPereyra.shtml",
"http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php"
],
[
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100202193603.htm"
],
[
"http://davidabramsbooks.blogspot.com/2010/05/dodging-bullets-with-sebastian-junger.html"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/help/faqs/AskScience"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/dodge-a-bullet.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3w205q
|
Is radiation given out from everyday objects harmful towards us?
|
I'm aware technology gives out radiation as I've been told by people that if you sit too close to a television, you get radiation. However, the reason why I am asking this question is because of a [video](_URL_0_) I just watched and it slightly bugged me and made me paranoid. Should we be concerned on the radiation given from our technology? Is this guy in that video overly paranoid for nothing?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3w205q/is_radiation_given_out_from_everyday_objects/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxsonub",
"cxtgbo9"
],
"score": [
30,
2
],
"text": [
"Radio frequency (RF) radiation isn't harmful in the levels produced by household electronics. \n\n\"Radiation\" is a broad category; there's a lot of confusion about what it means. There are various types of radiation, primarily including:\n\n* Beta radiation-- this is electrons that are emitted by the nuclear decay of certain isotopes. This is ionizing radiation and can cause cancer.\n\n* Alpha radiation-- alpha particles are helium nuclei, two protons & two neutrons bound together, and are emitted by the nuclear decay of heavy isotopes. This is also ionizing radiation, but can easily be blocked by skin and so is only dangerous if the isotope is inside the body.\n\n* Neutron radiation-- neutrons emitted in nuclear decays. Also ionizing, also dangerous.\n\n* electromagnetic radiation-- this includes radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, x-rays, and gamma rays. Only UV, X-rays, and gamma rays are ionizing. Radio waves can't ionize atoms in your body. If you expose yourself to a really strong emitter, it can heat up your tissues and cause burns (this is what would happen if you were to expose yourself to the magnetron in your microwave). But all that about it \"accelerating brain waves\" is complete nonsense.\n\nBasically the guy in the video is walking around discovering that objects like wifi routers which are designed to send radio signals do, in fact, send radio signals. Anything running an unshielded electrical current is going to emit some radio waves. These are nothing to be concerned about unless you're very close to a very powerful and unshielded source--which won't happen unless you do something willfully stupid like rig your microwave to work with the door open and then stick your hand in it.",
"The most dangerous / widespread radioactive household thing (not really an object) is radon gas. Quoted from the wikipedia article: radon is the second most frequent cause of lung cancer, after cigarette smoking, causing 21,000 lung cancer deaths per year in the United States. ... The greatest risk of radon exposure arises in buildings that are airtight, insufficiently ventilated, and have foundation leaks that allow air from the soil into basements and dwelling rooms.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://youtu.be/fPw71BnebjM"
] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon#Domestic-level_exposure"
]
] |
|
a2ufvw
|
why is folk music called “folk”?
|
context: I’ve googled it, and I understand what the word “folk” means, but still don’t understand and it raised more questions than answers
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a2ufvw/eli5_why_is_folk_music_called_folk/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eb18e5n"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"What's so hard to understand? It's the music of ordinary folk, originating in the days before the term \"pop(ular) music\" was made up, before electrification, and was passed down by word of mouth (song) from one genreation to another - oftan a way of preserving stories - folk tales."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5fkks8
|
how do earthquakes effect the rotation of the earth? wouldn't that be an object acting upon itself, like using a fan to power the sails on a sailboat
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5fkks8/eli5_how_do_earthquakes_effect_the_rotation_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dakwlbs",
"dal25h7"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Rotation can be affected by the rearrangement of mass. Much like if you're spinning, pulling in your arms so more mass is towards the axis of rotation will make you spin faster and throwing your arms out will make you spin slower.",
"A sufficiently large earthquake may alter the way mass is distributed. It might be less analogous to a sail boat with a fan, and more analogous to moving people around inside the boat. Instead of the normal \"everyone sitting on the high-side rail\" to balance the boat at a given position, the earthquake moves everyone around to the front or back, or perhaps to the low-side of the boat. Or perhaps they started out scattered around, then a breeze came up and leaned the boat (earthquake) so they all shifted to the high-side and sat on the rail to adjust the balance.\n\nWith the earth there is no conscious thought of \"ok, we need this plate over there...\" but the movement still causes slight adjustments or wobbles to the rate and/or angle of rotation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.