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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6dh48q
|
what are the limitations of genetic engineering in adults?
|
I know the buzzwords "gene therapy", "germline engineering" and "CRISPR" but can't figure out whether it will ever be possible, even in theory, to give an adult human a genetic treatment that makes them stronger or smarter or healthier.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6dh48q/eli5_what_are_the_limitations_of_genetic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"di2z6dr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is possible, in theory, to develop and administer a genetic treatment that would help an adult. There are a number of ways that this could be done, but in a certain sense CAR T cells are already a genetic treatment that is undergoing clinical trials. For a genetic treatment to work, you need to get that the following questions/issues:\n\n1. **What and how much am I trying to change?** Breaking a gene is much easier than *fixing* a gene, and most genetic manipulations people like to dream up involves fixing things. Keep in mind that fixing things, even with CRISPR, is not an efficient process (2-50%, depending on conditions). So that means if you want to fix a lot of stuff in a cell, you're going to have an increasingly low chance of doing all of it!\n\n2. **What and how many cells am I trying to change?** If you only need to change a few cells, that is good in a certain sense because if you have a 10% chance of changing them, your odds of changing all of them gets better the fewer cells involved. That said, targeting the treatment to specific cells is generally more difficult than hitting random cells.\n\n3. **Where and how are you going to get the treatment to the cells?** Many people imagine changing all of the DNA within all of the cells in our body by taking some sort of shot. This would be called an *in vivo* treatment, and there are a lot of difficulties involved with doing it this way. CRISPR-Cas9 needs to be packaged into something to get delivered to the cells, and all the options we have for delivery are a compromise between amount delivered, specificity of delivery, and coverage of delivery. This is a very difficult problem that many people are working on. However, *in vivo* delivery isn't the only option. You could take a sample of the person's cells and grow them in a dish, and then apply the genetic treatment to those cells, then reintroduce them into the person. This would not lead to the treatment changing *every cell* in the body, but sometimes you don't need to do that. I mentioned [CAR T cells](_URL_0_) earlier, which are T cells isolated from the blood of the patient that are genetically modified outside the body (*ex vivo* or sometimes *in vitro*), and then are reintroduced into the body.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/research/car-t-cells"
]
] |
|
2kpe2h
|
how do sites track my activity in incognito mode?
|
If I browse YouTube in incognito mode, why do those videos still show up on my account when I'm not logged in?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kpe2h/eli5_how_do_sites_track_my_activity_in_incognito/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clngpcq",
"clngq33",
"clngth7",
"clnhhxr"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"incognito mode only means that your browser, the software installed on your computer will not make local logs. You're still sending all the same information to the world.\n\nThat's the same reason you shouldn't browse porn at work, the network administrator knows who went to see what, since the data goes through your workplace's network.",
"Incognito mode only affects your browser. It won't keep any history/cookies/other information on your browser but it still goes through all the same channels otherwise. You can see the traffic on your network, sites that use trackers can still track your IP and when you visited what pages, and accounts like youtube can still do all the things they normally do. Incognito doesn't do anything but make sure your history doesn't save *in the browser*. ",
"Incognito Mode only asks the browser on your personal computer to please not record stuff. Other computers, like say the youtube web server you're talking to, are free to record whatever they want. \n\nIn most browsers this is explained on the splash page that shows up when you first go in to incognito mode. ",
"Incognito mode has nothing to do with preventing tracking. It's designed to prevent other users of the **same computer** from discovering what you have been doing. To this end, it erases all files that the browser created during that session. It does nothing to prevent websites from tracking you, nor does it prevent eavesdropping.\n\nIncognito mode is not a proxy nor does it add any additional layers of encryption. It does nothing to hide your identity from anyone.\n\nIt will wipe your history, cookies, cache, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
30l09w
|
what role does federal reserve play in the economy?
|
Are they responsible for debts and inflation that's going on in America? I read conspiracies that FEDs are essentially a privately owned company made by government to support itself. Please help me learn the correct version.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30l09w/eli5_what_role_does_federal_reserve_play_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpteumw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" > Are they responsible for debts and inflation that's going on in America?\n\nI wouldn't really say so for debts as that's more fiscal policy, but they do have an affect on inflation. They generally try and keep it around 2% or 3%. Their primary affect is on the money supply and interest rates. The Fed's official objective:\n\n > ...shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices and moderate long-term interest rates.\n\nConspiracies about the Fed are pretty much all wrong. The public / private thing comes from people not understanding how each part is set up. [Here is the Fed in plain English](_URL_0_), I'll quote some parts:\n\n > ...What emerged—the Federal Reserve System—was a central bank under public control, with many checks and balances. Congress oversees the entire Federal Reserve System. And the Fed must work within the objectives established by Congress. Yet Congress gave the Federal Reserve the autonomy to carry out its responsibilities without political pressure. Each of the Fed's three parts—the Board of Governors, the regional Reserve Banks, and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)—operates independently of the federal government to carry out the Fed's core responsibilities. The Federal Reserve System was developed and continues to develop as an interesting blend of public and private interests and centralized and decentralized decision-making."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.stlouisfed.org/in-plain-english/introduction"
]
] |
|
19h9wp
|
Considering the length of time the Basque area was under Roman rule why is their culture/language so different from their neighbors?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/19h9wp/considering_the_length_of_time_the_basque_area/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8o2luu",
"c8o5fbe",
"c8o6lnz"
],
"score": [
14,
4,
9
],
"text": [
"In Mark Kurlansky's \"The Basque History of the World\" he argues that Basquelands were less fertile and less valuable to Romans and Basques were often rebellious. Therefore, he argues that the Romans were more accommodating of the Basques. Notably Basques didn't pay tribute and were allowed to govern themselves under their own laws. This would seem to be a basic justification for why Basques were never pushed to assimilate as closely to Roman law and therefore are rather different from their neighbours.\n\nThat said Kurlansky is not a historian, but a journalist, and i am an ex-history student and not a historian.",
"Without know much about Basque country, my assumption is that the region could not economically support wide scale Romanization. There were several areas with \"internal barbarians\" so to speak, such as Wales and eastern Anatolia. Basque country could have been like that.",
"While Basque is a common example in these sort of things, it's not *that* unusual for an isolated language to survive under foreign rule for millenia. Berber languages are still there, Breton is going through a revival, the Caucasus mountains have some weird-ass languages etc. Simply put, they got lucky geographically, and it was not worthwhile for the Romans to attempt to heavily Romanise the area."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9io023
|
Why is it difficult to find the exact cause of canker sores?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9io023/why_is_it_difficult_to_find_the_exact_cause_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e6n6zsl"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Its a relatively harmless phenomenon, that almost always resolves on its own, so there isn't a lot of money or effort spent on studying it. The cause was less straightforward than \"its an infection by ______\" and since nobody dies from it, it generally isn't worth the effort to look more deeply at it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
563wa5
|
how to ensure anonymity online?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/563wa5/eli5_how_to_ensure_anonymity_online/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8g3mwq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"TL;DR yes by using a VPN (virtual private network). \n\nYou connect to a private server using your personal IP address and then use that private server to connect to the internet using that private server's IP and not your own personal IP. The only way to track you is by tracing the private server's IP and checking who access the private server at the time the IP was active. Some VPN services keep a record, some don't. \n\nReal life translation: You go to a mask store (VPN server) then you get a mask (the VPN's IP address). You use that mask out while you do your every day life in public (the internet). When you finish you go back to the store and return the mask (disconnecting from the VPN and stop using the VPN's IP address). Say the police see you doing something illegal and they want to arrest you so they trace your mask back to the mask shop(tracking IP). Here they ask to see a record of who used the mask at the time they sighted you (checking who had access to the VPN at the time of the crime). Some mask stores don't have a record so cops can no longer track you (VPN keeps no record), some VPN do have a record but its so muddled they can't identify the specific person so its pseudo-untraceable, and sometimes there is a detailed record and cop finds the person. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
262h6a
|
why doesn't ups deliver all night long?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/262h6a/eli5why_doesnt_ups_deliver_all_night_long/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chn09au",
"chn0y49",
"chn12tk"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because just like you, the drivers would like to sleep at night.",
"For a few reasons:\n\n1. they get preferential costs for moving long distances during the evening on airplanes. Landing a plane at an airport at 2AM costs much less than at night. So...there are a lot of goods that are in transit away from front doors during the evening hours.\n\n2. Businesses are a huge portion of deliveries. They aren't open...and you can't leave the package.\n\n3. people don't want packages delivered at night. _most_ places with high volume won't allow a package to just be left (e.g. you don't leave a package on the front stoop in manhattan or chicago or SF or LA etc.).\n\n4. You'd pay a premium for labor at night.\n\n5. there would be greater crime against drivers and package theft at night.\n",
"Probably a variety of factors, cost for one, it would be more expensive for their trucks to be running 24 hours a day, also, most freight companies like Fedex and UPS use the evening/overnight to transport their packages, if you look at a timetable, most of Fedex and UPS planes are in the air in the middle of the night, arrive in the early AM and have packages delivered during the day. The companies have set up a precise logistics program and keeping deliveries during the night might require planes to be flying more during the day instead of the night once again adding to more costs .Also, while Amazon doesnt require a signature, many other packages do, and most people dont want to be woken up at 3am to sign. Other things to take in account could be theft, packages left in the middle of the night could have a higher chance to be stolen etc. At the utmost, it comes down to cost and logistics, trucks and planes traveling more would probably decrease profits for the companies. tl:dr, gas isnt cheap."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2ju1eo
|
Assistance wanted to help identify these WWI Australian ANZAC items [x-posted]
|
I hope a request like this is allowed.
[Link to album of items.](_URL_0_)
All of these items belonged to an ANZAC soldier who was in the Australia Artillery, WWI. They have been donated to a small private museum I work at. I don't normally deal with these types of items so I don't know terminology and am looking for assistance with that. Thank you.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2ju1eo/assistance_wanted_to_help_identify_these_wwi/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clf7ji9",
"clfbopw"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"From first glance number 7 is an epaulette, and 2 and 12 are shoulder pips, which would be worn on the epaulette (one can even be seen on it) \n\n4 is a rising sun badge, but It looks a little small for the slouch hat. so perhaps it was used on the tunic? It does look like the third pattern, used from 1904 to 1949.\n\n8 seems to be the Retired Member Insignia, but I'm not sure sorry.\n\nI will have a closer look at some of the other stuff and try to get back to you soon.",
"Regarding 18: All I can tell you is that it from a ~35mm weapon of some sort, which means it is more likely an autocannon like the 37mm COW Gun or a Breech loader like the Vickers Q.F Mk II\n\n15 is a badge and would usually be worn on a tunic or coat. The placement shouldn't really matter, but would most likely have been near the breast.\n\n17 is similar to 15, and should have a date of issue in the red of the crown, however I cannot see one which would make me guess it was a very early one. \n\nI'm not sure what the chains are, they could have been attached to the base of a revolver, but once again I am not sure.\n\n5 is unusual, it seems to be a Gloucestershire Regiment rear cap badge- definitely not Australian Artillery. The Sphinx and Egypt represent the regiments actions in 1801 where they faced the French at the Battle of Alexandria, where on 21st March 1801 they defeated a major French push which like many other British regiments, won them the honour of having the sphinx and Egypt included. \n\nThat's about it from me I'm afraid, I hope this helps.\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://imgur.com/a/rvGLU"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
7111l8
|
why can't movies be offered on release date for more money at a premium for home viewing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7111l8/eli5_why_cant_movies_be_offered_on_release_date/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn7d3u5",
"dn7e4yq",
"dn7f7cx"
],
"score": [
16,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"- You can lend it around and have an entire community see it within the first week.\n\n- You can rip it and seed it and have DVD HD versions flood the market within the first week of the movie's release. \n\n- The cinema chain that you have a deal with will lose out on ticket sales and food and beverage sales, which will cost you a lot more in the future to screen your movie at their locations due to loss revenue.",
" > I spent a lot of money on my home theater \n\nNot as much as [Prima Cinema](_URL_0_) wants you to though I'm guessing. The numbers are supposedly something like $35k for the hardware plus $500 per movie. Go for it ... or go back to the cinema like everyone else.\n\nMovie companies are of the opinion that they make more money with an exclusive-to-cinemas period. Periodically people try to change their minds (there are rumours that Apple is working on this now) but so far, no dice. In addition, cinema chains seem unlikely to go down without a fight and could try to punish any studio that goes it alone.",
"Because the one person who buys it is going to pirate the movie to be part of The Scene and everyone will use his or her copy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.primacinema.com/"
],
[]
] |
||
vfbqi
|
Have humans evolved to the consumption of Alcohol over the last several millenniums?
|
In other words, have our digestive systems developed better methods to handle it since we've been consuming it for so long? I am not talking about alcohol tolerance, I am asking if the body made mechanisms to process this toxin more efficiently.
Hypothetically in the future could we ever become intolerant to it that we couldn't get drunk anymore? Almost like developing an immunity to it like we do from diseases.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/vfbqi/have_humans_evolved_to_the_consumption_of_alcohol/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5402u9"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Alcohol consumption by humans probably has origins in eating naturally fermented fruit. Many animals (elephants, monkeys, et al) become intoxicated this way.\n\nHuman alcohol consumption became routine once we figured out how to \"domesticate\" the fermentation process--which was originally a means of preserving foods; intoxication was just a side effect. Even beer was originally a way of preserving foods, so running out of beer was a genuine crisis.\n\nI doubt humans as a species could become desensitized/tolerant unless alcohol gradually became the dominant food source and our liver, pancreas, kidneys, et al evolved accordingly.\n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6zc5yz
|
If both parties viewed war as almost inevitable, why would they both accept the German–Soviet Commercial Agreement (1940); the sale of raw materials from the USSR to Germany?
|
I'm more so curious about the Soviet logic. They sold thousands of tons of grain, oil and ore to Nazi Germany. Weren't there fears that this could be possibly used against the Soviet Union?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6zc5yz/if_both_parties_viewed_war_as_almost_inevitable/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmuj2ay"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I'll answer this looking moreso from the USSR's point of view. The main reason is neither side wanted to fight each other right away - they needed time to prepare or had other issues to deal with. Stalin reputedly told Kaganovich that he was only buying time by making the deal with Nazi Germany. There is also the argument that Stalin attempted to form an alliance with the West but this was ultimately unsuccessful. But for the purpose of your question that kind of doesn't matter - after all the question is why Stalin and Hitler thought this was a good idea at all. Otherwise there would have been no viable alternative.\n\nAlso keep in mind it isn't as though the Soviets didn't get anything out of the deal. The secret bits of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact also resulted in territories going into the Soviet sphere of influence/control. In exchange for raw materials, which for Nazi Germany were fairly important for sustaining their war effort and home front, the Soviets received various military and industrial items. Particularly naval weapons designs/gear which in hindsight was probably a bad trade. But at the time the means of building up a modern navy and shoring up key areas of industry probably seemed like a good move for long term power politics etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7j4l1o
|
why do plants growing in the wild not have to be watered like the same type of plant as a houseplant
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7j4l1o/eli5_why_do_plants_growing_in_the_wild_not_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dr3kqn6",
"dr3kxis"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Houseplants contain a small amount of soil. Even when the soil is fully saturated, it takes relatively little time to dry out. \n\nIn nature, the soil is virtually limitless, and the plant's roots can reach deep down into the soil where there is much more water available ",
"Plants growing in the wild grow in the places that naturally have the amount of water they need (outside of flood or drought). So if they need a lot of water they will be near a creek, lake, river, spring, or be a low lying place with a high water table. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
8j0qjq
|
Why did crime drop in the middle of the great depression and onwards?
|
Crime peaked in 1933 but steadily decreased after. Whats the reason?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8j0qjq/why_did_crime_drop_in_the_middle_of_the_great/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyw52f1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"What's your source on crime rates during that time period?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
71o8we
|
have any nations with incredible debt (like america) ever paid off their debt?
|
I was wondering since I noticed that the Federal Debt is growing and growing, but I have never seen America pay any of its debt.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/71o8we/eli5have_any_nations_with_incredible_debt_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dnc7zcd",
"dnc858j",
"dnc8k22",
"dnc8nom",
"dnc9h64",
"dncaz7x",
"dnd38cn"
],
"score": [
3,
11,
3,
16,
7,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"America did have it's debt paid off in 1835, Andrew Jackson wad President then I think. Of course you've never seen it because that was more than century ago but you should have been glazed over it in US history class in high school at least.",
"America primarily owes money to Americans and the Federal Government. About 2/3 will never be \"paid back\".\n\nThere are plenty of countries that pay off their debts. Most are oil rich nations with extremely poor citizens that didn't participate in WWI or II.\n\nWe don't ever want to completely pay off the debt. No debt means no bond market. No bond market means people will invest in the bonds of other countries. We don't want that to happen.",
"Great Britain finally paid off some bonds, debt, from the Napoleonic wars.\n\nA realistic way to look at our debt is to compare it to the GDP, or gross domestic product. \n\nDuring World War II the debt was far higher compared to the GDP. America was going to spend everything it could borrow to win the war.\n\nWe are paying our debt every day, fully. Bonds issued in the past are being paid with interest. We issue new bonds every day, sell them, and use the money. Party we use it to pay off old debt. Partly we use it to build new highways, bridges, a lot of things which seem very practical and which we should do.\n\nExactly what should not be paid for by the Federal Government can be argued forever.\n\nThe only real fear is that someone might not raise the debt limit which would panic the world and raise our interest payments.",
"The United States pays off its debt whenever its due. We just immediately go and accumulate more debt, because we will be able to pay it back and it grows our economy. We have never missed a debt payment and are an economic power house because of that debt. ",
"The USA's debt level is not that exceptionally high given its GDP. US debt-to-gdp ratio was higher coming out of WWII and the debt had been largely paid down by the mid-late 1960s. Maintaining some level of debt is actually useful for manipulating financial markets, so it is unlikely that the debt would ever be fully paid.",
"The answer to your literal question is yes, the US paid off its debt in 1835. What I think you are driving at is why national debts seem to grow and grow and why isn't that a massive problem? That is pretty complicated to answer. I think the best ELI5 answer can be summed up by this quote.\n\n\"If you owe the bank $100 that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem.\" - J. Paul Getty",
" > I was wondering since I noticed that the Federal Debt is growing and growing, but I have never seen America pay any of its debt.\n\nThe US pays of its debt all the time. If you get savings bonds they will eventually be paid back. The US government has never missed a debt payment.\n\nThe federal debt continues to rise because they borrow new money after paying off the old. Imagine someone who graduates from college with a lot of student loans. They start paying them off, but then they need to buy a car so they take out a loan for that. They pay off their car and student loan debts, but then they buy a house so they have a mortgage. They're always in debt, but they're never failing to pay back any of it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3k7neg
|
how did the english monarch come to be?
|
How did it start? When did it start? What events transpired that caused the formation of the Monarch?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3k7neg/eli5how_did_the_english_monarch_come_to_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuve8u5",
"cuveo5q"
],
"score": [
3,
10
],
"text": [
"Once upon a time there were many different little groups of people. One day one group of people took over another other group of people. Then another group of people took over that group of people. Eventually everyone was taken over by a single group. The leader of that group then was in control of all the groups. ",
"Here's a pretty good video about [History of the Royal Family](_URL_0_) from 1066 until today."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNgP6d9HraI"
]
] |
|
27jh11
|
Were the Bohemian nobility treated differently within the Holy Roman Empire?
|
Since the HRE was mostly German, and especially after they lost most of Italy, and considering that Slavs haven't always been viewed in the most favourable light in Western Europe, were there any negative perceptions of Bohemia among the mostly German nobility within the HRE? And if there were, did this change at all after the Habsburgs absorbed the kingdom?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/27jh11/were_the_bohemian_nobility_treated_differently/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci4b0tr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The Bohemian nobility were treated differently, yes. However, this treatment had nothing to do with their ethnicity, which was all but irrelevant, and everything to do with the unique religious and political privileges the Bohemian nobility earned over the centuries. The Bohemians, in fact, *required* that their king treat them differently, and led major rebellions roughly once a century for four hundred years to protect and expand their privileges. You're asking about other nobles, however.\n\nA brief note before I go on: \"Czech\" and \"German\", as such, didn't yet exist as distinct, important cultural or ethnic markers until the 19th century. Germans themselves were (and still are, though very much less so) divided into several large linguistic and cultural subgroups. \n\nMore broadly, cultural and linguistic differences were relatively unimportant to the Holy Roman Empire's nobility. Their shared class and knowledge of Latin, French and/or German allowed them to communicate with ease, and they certainly had far more in common with one another than they did with most of their subjects. The *most* important difference, by far, was in fact religious—the Bohemian nobility was distinct in this way after the Hussite Wars, although the resolution of that conflict made the Utraquist Church into an accepted part of the Catholic Church, minimizing the importance of this distinction.\n\nThe Bohemian nobility took to the Reformation very readily, and roughly 90% of them were non-Catholic by the (Second) Defenestration of Prague. They vigorously defended their right to practice the new religion, which set them at odds with the Catholic Habsburgs and their Jesuit-backed re-Catholicization efforts. This same defense, naturally, earned them respect from the rest of the German nobility (which was, itself, majority Protestant before 1610).\n\nAfter Ferdinand II decisively defeated the Bohemian rebels and their Winter King, the make-up of the Bohemian nobility (and, increasingly, its lower classes) became more German-speaking, subjugated to their prince, and entirely Catholic. By 1648, then, they were very similar to the nobility of the Southern half of the Empire by virtually ever barometer."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7f1mzq
|
why does cold metal feel wet?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7f1mzq/eli5_why_does_cold_metal_feel_wet/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dq8vy1e"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"The feeling of \"wetness\" isn't actually a sense, but more of a combination of senses. If you've ever touches water through gloves, your hand feels like it's wet, but you're not actually getting any water on you. This is because, even though you have gloves on, it's a combined triggering of your cold thermoreceptors and various mechanoreceptors that contribute to the perception of wetness, and these can be felt through the gloves. The same is true for the metal. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5b3h7q
|
- light, in terms of being a part of the electromagnetic (radioactive?!) spectrum... ?
|
So, TIL that Light is electromagnetic radiation. Visible light is a specific wavelength, just the same as infrared and ultraviolet.
But I've always known radiation to just be a 'bad' thing (ignoring the microwave in my kitchen) that kind of hovers around burnt down nuclear reactors and ground zero of horrific bombing campaigns? And that certain types need to be inhaled before they become deadly to humans?
If radiation is in effect 'light', how can we breath it in? Are dust particles irradiated and inhaled?
Could someone ELI5 the whole concept or light / radiation? I'm very confused!
Thank you.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5b3h7q/eli5_light_in_terms_of_being_a_part_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9lg6yi",
"d9lg8dk",
"d9lhmlf"
],
"score": [
8,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"There are three types of radiation:\n\n* Alpha radiation is helium nuclei emitted from certain radioactive materials. It is highly ionizing but does not penetrate very far - a sheet of paper will stop it. Because it can't penetrate very far, it's harmless if the source is outside your body, but if you ingest it it can be very dangerous.\n\n* Beta radiation is fast moving electrons, also emitted by radioactive sources. Beta radiation penetrates further than alpha radiation, but still not very far - a thin sheet of metal is sufficient to stop it.\n\n* Gamma radiation is electromagnetic waves of very high frequency. Gamma radiation penetrates much further than alpha and beta radiation, and thick lead is typically used to absorb it.\n\nElectromagnetic radiation is only harmful above a certain frequency - photons of visible or infrared light, microwaves, or radio waves, do not have enough energy to do anything but heat things up. \n\nBut EM waves in the high ultraviolet frequencies and above have sufficient energy to rip electrons from their atoms, which can damage living tissue. It is exposure to so called *ionizing radiation* which is harmful.",
"You've got your ionizing radiation, and your non-ionizing radiation. \n\nThe former is the stuff, somewhat mythologized, that is scary and damages your cells and hangs around reactors.\n\nThe latter, is stuff like light, microwaves, infrared. They warm your skin.\n\nSome materials are radioactive, in that they emit particles of ionizing radiation. These can be, among other things, potentially inhaled, and can be bad for you. Note however, that at very low levels there's ionizing radiation everywhere, even in your body. Like most bad things (if not all) it's a matter of dosage.\n\nEating something that emits non-ionizing radiation (like a light bulb that's powered on) is more likely to burn you if it hurts you at all.",
"The rest of the guys haven't addressed the key confusion.\n\n > If radiation is in effect 'light', how can we breath it in? Are dust particles irradiated and inhaled?\n\nRadiation is light. If you're dealing with a gamma source, you've got an object that's shining rays of death that can penetrate meters of concrete; beta is stopped more easily. But, basically, run to the nearest corner and take cover in case you ever, say, [encounter this mound of lava from the reactor core in Chernobyl](_URL_1_). That's why a corridor leading to a source of radiation should make plenty of turns.\n\nNow, the thing is, many radiation-related incidents (like Chernobyl) result in release of dust and aerosols that are also radioactive. That stuff can enter your lungs, yes, and that's how even weakly radioactive alpha emitters like fuel-grade uranium can be damaging. [Don't ever eat that yellowcake uranium!](_URL_2_) That's why dealing with radioactive fallout is like dealing with chemical gas: you need gas masks and to wash the radioactive stuff off. [Literally](_URL_0_).\n\nFinally, electromagnetic radiation does not make objects radioactive, but *neutron flux* created by nuclear fission and fusion reactions (such as in a bomb or a reactor) can."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://intpolicydigest.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/1500174505866.jpg",
"http://cdnpix.com/show/imgs/142312fd9090ca62ee0f0f0d017ecd96.jpg",
"http://andrewtheprophet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Uranium-Oxide.jpg"
]
] |
|
4dddyq
|
what happens exactly to our bodies as we experience stress and anxiety? how does the body cope in positive and negative ways with this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4dddyq/eli5what_happens_exactly_to_our_bodies_as_we/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1q78k1",
"d1q8rj5",
"d1qbps4",
"d1qgffm"
],
"score": [
76,
65,
18,
7
],
"text": [
"The body responds to stress by releasing the hormone cortisol. This is part of the bodies fight or flight response in order to raise blood sugar levels for our muscles to use. This is important to escape from potentially dangerous situations. When cortisol or stress hormones are elevated, or heart rate also increases and other bodily functions such as digestion and the immune system are put on halt. You can see why elevated levels of stress hormones can be harmful to your body as it needs time to \"rest and digest\".",
"_URL_0_\n\nHere is a wonderful TED talk about stress and how our response and understanding of stress can influence how our body copes. It's calming to understand this perspective and I have definitely embraced it when feeling unnerved. \n\nWell, basically, embracing these feelings of stress positively by looking at stress as your own body energizing itself for what may be a challenging situation is a really great thing. Interestingly, when you approach stress in this way, your heart continues to pump strongly, but your body remains relaxed by the way of unconstricted blood vessels. Also, oxytocin, which is actually a stress hormone -the cuddle hormone - is released and binds to your heart and strengths your heart! \n\nIt's pretty awesome that your stress response has a built in response for stress resilience, which is bolstered by looking at the situation with this positive spin. I'm easing into this mentality. Check it out, see what you think.",
"There are two kinds of stress, specific and general. \n\nGeneral is the kind of stress that you get when there's no direct point of injury. Historically, this kind of stress was caused by parasites of one kind or another. \n\nSpecific stress is caused by having something that the immune system can immediately target, like a physical injury or a strained muscle. \n\nIn the case of general stress, your body will release cortisol, which triggers a few reactions, the most evident of which is Feel Like Shit. The apparent purpose of that reaction is to keep your ass in your cave and away from the tribe while your body burns through some stored calories and kills off the potentially infectious worms that could affect the rest of the tribe. \n\nIn the case of specific stress, your body will still release the cortisol, which increases immune function, but will suppress the Feel Like Shit portion of the reaction, cause there's no damn benefit to hiding in your cave when you've got a tiger hole in your bicep. \n\nIf you happen to have massive trauma, your body will experience the specific stress reactions, but the sheer amount of cortisol released will cause so much Feel Like Shit that it overpowers the suppression that you have available for the reaction. If you've ever had major surgery, you know exactly what this is like. Things kind of hurt, but mostly your body is just telling you that it's time to sleep. \n\nNow. Adding in Anxiety, you're dealing with a different kind of thing. Humans have a massively over developed brain. The damned thing is so big and so interconnected into... well everything, that it can override a lot of signals. \n\nSo, it can take your \"I'm ok.\" signals that are normal and \"fix\" them to be \"AHHHHHHHHHHH!\" signals. And that's an anxiety attack. Or it can replace them with \"oooooowwwww\" signals. Which will trigger a general stress signal, which makes your body think that it has parasites and triggers the general stress reaction. \n\nFortunately, humans have a massively over developed brain. One that can override most signals. \n\nSo, if you give your body a Specific Stress target to work with, it will treat the other signals as background noise. If you introduce some specific stress, you'll get roughly three days where your body won't be responding to cortisol. That specific stress can be really healthy, like a good hard sprint or a 20 minute power lifting session, or it can be harmful, like cutting. \n\n\nEither way, you get the benefit of not feeling like shit when you shouldn't. But, please, don't cut. Hitting the gym is almost as fast, feels so, so much better, and helps you get laid. ",
"The HPA-axis is activated. The hypothalamus (releasing CRF) signals the anterior pituitary (releasing ACTH) which in turn signal the adrenal glands (releasing glucocorticoids). The liver releases glucose, blood pressure goes up, breathing rate increases, heart rate increases, pupil dilate, muscles tense.\n\nThe sympathetic (fight-or-flight) nervous system activates.\n\nYou might not know this, but you have two divisions of the autonomic nervous system that uses different signal molecules to produce opposite effects on target organs. For instance, acetylcholine, used by the parasympathetic nervous system, makes the heart beat slower. This system is also responsible for breathing out, which is why you can sense your heart beating slower when you do so. When you breathe in, the sympathetic branch of the nervous system is activated, and you can feel your heart rate increasing (because of noradrenaline stimulating the heart).\n\nThe parasympathetic nervous system is responsible for rest and restoration. It relaxes the muscles of your bladder, allowing you to urinate. The sympathetic nervous system does the opposite, which is why some people find it hard to \"go\" when other people are around (they get anxious). But in cases of extreme stress, the sympathetic nervous system can relax the muscles of the bladder. It's so you will lose weight by urinating, allowing you to run away from danger faster. The same goes for the bowels.\n\nStress can be divided into good stress (eustress) and bad stress (distress). What separates the two is the degree to which you believe you can control the source of the stress. Uncontrollable stress (distress) can lead to psychiatric disorder in suspectible individuals. Controllable stress (eustress) can lead to enhanced performance.\n\nIt's easiest to think about stress in terms of energy. In normal individuals, cortisol (a glucocorticoid) rises during the day and drops during the night. Energy is made available at the times when it is expected to pay off more. When faced with a serious threat, it makes sense to throw whatever you've got at it. It's better to spend it than losing all of it. Cortisol reaches the hypothalamus, which makes sure it goes back down after reaching a certain threshold level. In PTSD, cortisol levels are lower than in healthy individuals. This might seem counter-intuitive, but what this actually does is to prevent the hypothalamus from shutting down the flow of cortisol, leading to a constant state of vigilance.\n\nThe reason why uncontrollable stress is bad is that it is a response to an unpredictable environment. The only logical response, worked out by evolution, is to always expect to be stressed. So you will be prepared. You spend energy keeping yourself alert, when that energy could have been spent elsewhere. Compare this to a state allocating resources to the military vs. education and infrastructure. By spending resources on preventative measures to be safe in the present, the state is neglecting to invest resources in growth.\n\nWe can find a human analogy for this phenomenon: psychosocial dwarfism. Some people are short simply because their \"military budget\" prevented resources from being invested in growth (infrastructure). The same holds for IQ levels (education). If you took a random person from the world a hundred years ago and paired him up with a random person from today and gave them both IQ tests, the modern person would probably score 30 points higher. While part of the explanation is the cultural development of abstract thought, a very important factor is the caloric resources they had available for intellectual growth throughout their childhoods."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.ted.com/talks/kelly_mcgonigal_how_to_make_stress_your_friend?language=en"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
94lg86
|
how can a human possibly survive a headshot? what would the bullet have to miss?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/94lg86/eli5_how_can_a_human_possibly_survive_a_headshot/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3lv9mt",
"e3lvlr7",
"e3lwab5",
"e3lxpga",
"e3lyk65",
"e3lzkaf",
"e3m1ckd",
"e3m28ni",
"e3m2lc1",
"e3m2nni",
"e3m3268",
"e3m3qut",
"e3m4eh4",
"e3m4pa0",
"e3m6aqq"
],
"score": [
320,
48,
31,
20,
96,
7,
4,
55,
6,
2,
7,
5,
2,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"As long as the bullet misses the Medulla Oblongata, a small section of your brain responsible for basic life support, you could in theory survive the gunshot if you were treated for the complications afterwards, such as internal bleeding. Obviously you'll suffer massive brain damage as the bullet rips through your skull, so it's impossible to be completely unscathed. \n\nThe Medulla Oblongata sits right around the nape of your neck, which explains the common execution pose of kneeling face down. \n\nEdit: I've been getting a lot of comments about alligators and the movie Water Boy. It's a hilarious scene alright, but the medulla oblongata does NOT affect aggresssion. The amgydala has more of an affect on that. Hollywood just likes using Medulla Oblongata cause it's a sciency word. ",
"Skulls are extremely hard bone.\n\nBullets are small and extremely light- they just travel very fast.\n\nIn certain conditions bullets can hit a skull and do one of many things like shatter, deflect, or travel across the skull instead of into it.\n\nSource:\n\nI'm a cop and combat veteran. Seen many people shot in the head and live.",
"It depends where your shot too. For example, shots going from one side of the head go through both lobes of the brain. These are much more likely to be fatal. A shot going from front to back only damages one lobe, so it isn't as bad. People have actually had an entire lobe of the brain removed and are still able to live relatively normal lives.\n\nAlso, if the shot hits the thalamus, which is sort of in the center of your head below the cortex, you may live, but will likely be in a vegetative state for the rest of your \"life\".",
"I knew a guy who got shot in the forehead and the bullet zoomed around his skull in a half circle and exited the back, he only had some superficial tissue damage and a cool story. He was wearing a kevlar helmet at the time, so I'm sure that was the mitigating factor.",
"When Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head, the key to her survival was that the bullet only traveled through one hemisphere of her brain (left. I’m saying this based on what her doctors said, as recounted in the book her husband wrote about it. Despite the massive brain damage she sustained, the doctors were sure after the initial surgery that she would definitely survive). So that’s an important element. And of course she was treated immediately. \n\nAnd then there’s Trevor Noah’s mother. She was shot in the back of the head. But she’s fine now. The bullet traveled just below her skull, and then went upwards and exited through her nose area. It missed causing any brain damage as a result.\n\nAlso, look up Phineas Gage and the massive brain damage he had. It was also all in one hemisphere, and he survived. ",
"The brain isn't really just one thing, it's more like a whole lot of smaller systems working together.\n\nSome of them you need to live, like the part that controls breathing and making your heart beat. Others you can live without, like the part of your brain that controls speech, or vision.\n\nWhen a bullet goes through your brain, it might destroy some of the parts, but still leave the most important areas untouched. This can be more likely than it seems because the most important parts for basic survival are down at the very back near the bottom where your neck and head meet. \n",
"There's a story of a woman got shot through the head, right between the left and right brain so no major damage to the brain, and she survive, with a hole in her head. So yeah, people can survive a head shot, but not a brain shot. There're still exception, but the chance is slime to none",
"My uncle, a police officer, was struck in the head with a bullet while pursuing a bank robber. He chased the guys down and caught them, thinking it was just glass that hit him between the eyes... \n\nHe’s still a feisty Irish farmer, now retired from the sheriff’s department, but he still farms crops full time as a “hobby.” \n\nHe was saved because the windshield absorbed much of the force from the bullet, but still pretty damn lucky. \n\n_URL_0_",
"I’m in a quiet bit of the UK, so this was very unusual, but we had a woman in our hospital a few years back who was ‘found collapsed’. We only found she’d been shot in the back of the head when we did a CT scan looking for a stroke. Was fine - just a damaged bit of brain to deal with. Much like having a stroke. Obviously a low power gun or whatever. ",
"I am not sure this is the answer you are looking for, but one way people survive is the bullet won’t enter the skull with some hand guns. The bullet will scratch the bone up and leave a pretty nasty scar, but not enter the brain even at close range.\n\nHere is a news story from one of many instances of this. \n\n_URL_0_",
"I know a guy who got shot right above the temple by a .22 from about 15 yards. Shattered his eye socket. Fucked his eye up, but no brain damage",
"My father was shot in the forehead with a .45. For some reason it deflected upwards along the skull, ripping a furrow through his skin all the way to the back. No brain injury. ",
"[Malala Yousafzai](_URL_1_) is a pretty awesome example, imo, of not just surviving a gunshot to the head, but going on to recover so well, and do so well academically, that she was accepted to read PPE at Oxford University (Lady Margaret Hall). \n\nThere is more info via the link but the bullet travelled from the entry point, near to her left eye, through her neck and came to rest in her shoulder (near her spinal cord). \n\nPart of her skull was surgically removed to allow the brain room to swell, soon after the shooting, in Pakistan. \n\nFurther lengthy surgeries (carried out in the UK) were required to repair her facial nerve, reconstruct her skull & eventually a [cochlear implant](_URL_0_) was placed, so the bullet must have destroyed the normal auditory apparatus (presumably on the left side).\n\nFrom the available info, the entry wound & path of the bullet missed the more vital areas of the brain associated with cognition & just basic life function but I still think her recovery has been extraordinary.\n",
"In addition to some of the topics other people posted already, something to keep in mind for high velocity projectile damage is penetrating vs perforating wounds. If the bullet enters the body and exists (perforates) then the bullet still has a lot of energy that it takes with it when it leaves. If the bullet enters and is halted (penetrates) then all the energy the bullet has traveling hundreds-to-thousands of feet per second all gets dispersed into the tissue, which can be much more damaging. \nSource: I'm a forensic scientist.",
"There was an armed robbery at the Milk Bar (Convenience Store) behind my Primary School when I was younger.\n(Before the Gun Amnesty)\n\nThe owners son was shot in the back of the head. It ricocheted off the inside of his skull and came out the top of his head. He was taken to hospital, treated for the entry and exit wound and rehabilitated (Free Public Health care) and survived. He even had full congnizance after the swelling went down.\n\nSince the gun amnesty, we don’t have armed robbery with a gun any more.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://articles.latimes.com/1985-01-09/news/mn-11988_1_deputy-shot"
],
[],
[
"http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900317&slug=1061504"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_Yousafzai"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
4xxwz6
|
what would happen if i was charged for a crime that became legal?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xxwz6/eli5_what_would_happen_if_i_was_charged_for_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6jcrom",
"d6jeh5m",
"d6jeonu",
"d6jetjb"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Depends how it becomes legal. Most have guidelines on if or how they will release current incarcerated people. ",
"Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.\n\nIf you are arrested for, but not yet tried and convicted of a crime before the activity was voted on and made legal, that may be your only chance of not going to prison. The odds of that happening are very slim, however, since even after a bill is passed, it may take months before it is put into effect; longer than you'd be waiting to be put on trial.\n\nIt may come down to which state you're in and what judge and jury you get. It also depends on your lawyer, too. A good lawyer who actually has time to work on your case may do his/her best to ensure the trial get delayed until such time as the passed bill goes into effect to at least give you a better chance of winning an appeal should you still be convicted.\n\nEven if you are arrested for a crime that later becomes legal, the DA may still look to charge you with other crimes related to your arrest so you'd still have to face fines and/or sentencing.\n\nThe only way to guarantee you wouldn't be convicted after the crime becomes legal is if that is covered under part of the legalization bill. That is, unless sometime before then the state you're charged in had already passed a law that would protect you if you're awaiting trial and what you're arrested for/charged with becomes legal.\n\nIf you were arrested, convicted, and sentenced before the activity you took part in became legal, there is still no state that has signed any bill that would release you from prison due to its legalization. Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper attempted to pass a bill in 2014 that would release people charged with marijuana offenses since marijuana became legalized in that state, but I haven't found any information saying that the Bill had passed.\n[Colorado Governor Set To Release Those Convicted On Marijuana Related Charges….](_URL_0_) \n\nIn 2015, it was ordered that 6,000 prisoners who were serving sentences for marijuana based offenses be released from prison before serving their full sentence due to new sentencing guidelines that have reduced charges for those crimes.\n[6,000 People to be Released from Federal Prison….](_URL_1_) ",
"Most jurisdictions operate with the philosophy of \"Nulla poena sine lege\", that is, \"no penalty without a law\". You can't be charged for doing something if it was not illegal at the time.\n\nVery rarely, laws can be 'ex post facto' where they apply retroactively ie. 'I did something that wasn't illegal when I did it, but am being charged now for it'. These are generally frowned upon/prohibited by the US Bill of Rights, UN Human rights etc.\n\nIn some countries, the start date of the law can be when the government announces it, not just when the law passed through the legislature (which can take months/years) which can add to the confusion of what is legal/illegal at any one moment. \n\nWhen something is decriminalised, there is sometimes included an 'amnesty law' clause that under certain circumstances can quash those previously convicted of the crime, and expunge criminal records. A modern example of this in [some countries ](_URL_0_) is people who were charged with homosexuality back in the 50s being able to get their criminal records removed now - keep in mind that it took 50 years from it being decriminalised! ",
"Legally, the state would be under no obligation to drop the charges. You willfully ignored that law, and that is an offense in and of itself.\n\nPractically speaking, that state might choose to drop the charges. This often happened when Colorado and Washington legalized recreational marijuana. But it was the state's choice not to pursue, they still could have."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://nationalreport.net/colorado-governor-set-release-convicted-marijuana-related-charges-expunge-records/",
"http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/2015/10/6000-people-be-released-federal-prison-next-month-line-new-drug-sentencing-guidelines"
],
[
"https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/09/act-moves-expunge-historic-convictions-homosexuality"
],
[]
] |
||
lpur4
|
Guys... It sucks to admit, but I don't really understand evolution.
|
What's the difference between natural selection and evolution? What is the proof of it, and what does it mean? I've been looking around online, but I'm no scientist, and I don't follow a lot of the articles I've found. Can you help me out? I've always believed in evolution... but I realize that it's been just that: belief. I've never really understood it, and that just doesn't sit well with me. Thanks for any assistance.
Umm... I'm trying to keep up, but a lot of the comments seems contradictory to other comments. Here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to find some books by Dawkins, and see if I can figure this stuff out. Short of devoting my education to science, and evolution specifically, I doubt I'll ever be an expert, but at least I might be able to understand it well enough to explain it to someone else. Thanks everyone, for your help, but to tell the truth, I'm more confused than ever, now.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/lpur4/guys_it_sucks_to_admit_but_i_dont_really/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2umtyd",
"c2umv5g",
"c2umva7",
"c2umvd6",
"c2umxgh",
"c2up3so",
"c2upi28",
"c2urakw",
"c2umtyd",
"c2umv5g",
"c2umva7",
"c2umvd6",
"c2umxgh",
"c2up3so",
"c2upi28",
"c2urakw"
],
"score": [
9,
31,
3,
11,
35,
2,
2,
2,
9,
31,
3,
11,
35,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A good resource for that is [Berkeley's Evolution 101](_URL_0_).",
"Natural selection - Think about the people you know. They have different skin colors, they are tall and short, some are smarter, some are stronger, etc. There is variation in populations. When some sort of driver causes certain members in a population to be more 'fit' - able to survive and reproduce, then the distribution of traits in that population will change over time. \n\nConsider two such populations that are exposed to different driving forces. Maybe one climate is warmer, and the other is cooler. Maybe the food sources are different in each area. The two populations will change in different ways over a long period of time. At some point, the difference between the two groups may become so large that they are no longer able to produce fertile offspring. At this point, they are different species.\n\nNatural selection is a mechanism (though not the only one) of evolution. Evolution is simply the change in inherited traits over time in a population. For example, dog breeding is a form of evolution, but it is not due to natural selection. ",
"You could, conceivably, get a pretty encyclopedic answer on this but here's a relatively quick overview: _URL_0_\n\nIt's framed in the form of an evolution vs. creation discussion but gives a decent synopsis of the basics.\n\nApart from that, if you want to go more in depth, Dawkins' \"Greatest Show on Earth\" is a good read.",
"Evolution refers to the change in frequency of certain genes in a population over time. That's it.\n\nNatural selection refers to the *mechanism* under which evolution can take place, which is what Charles Darwin proposed. Herbert Spencer's 'survival of the fittest' theory falls under this umbrella, too.",
"It doesn't suck to admit it.\n\nStupidity isn't *not* knowing things.\n\nIt's not knowing things and being content with not knowing.",
"The best analogy that I've heard for natural selection is actually from George Carlin, \"The kid who swallows too many marbles doesn't grow up to have kids of his own\". \n\nNatural selection is just a population changing due to pressure applied to it either from the organism itself (too slow and gets eaten) or external (food source dies out, food, fires, etc)\n\nEvolution is just the name applied to the process of an organism's descendants changing over time due to natural selection. \n\nThat's the best way I can describe it in the least amount of space.",
"I could get into mendelian inheritance, genes and allele frequencies and populations and all that, but I want to make this as intuitive as possible. A ten year old can understand selection, and given a little thought can extend this concept to explain why life is so useful and varied.\n\nOkay, there's four things about most life that you need to know before you can understand this stuff:\n\n1. All living creatures die.\n\n2. Living creatures which are better suited for their environments have a better chance at reproducing before they die. This is related to the concept of fitness.\n\n3. All living creatures have offspring which share traits with their parents.\n\n4. Most offspring have random differences from their parents. This is called a mutation.\n\nNatural selection comes from rules 1 and 2. It's a very intuitive notion: if you're more fit in a given environment, the higher chances that you'll survive to have children. Repeat this process thousands of times with variation and you get...\n\nEvolution.\n\nWhy? Remember rules 3 and 4. If the offspring inherits 100% of the traits of their parents (basically cloning), they should at least be as fit as their parents, right? Right. Here comes the kicker - reproduction is rarely perfect. Rule 4. The stuff that encodes our traits, our form - DNA - is prone to copy errors. Random insertions, deletions, you name it. In fact, nature encourages this kind of variation.\n\nMutations are random, but not always bad. The positive ones are ones that improve fitness - ones that increases your chance at reproducing so you can pass these mutations to your children. Negative ones decrease fitness - I know you might be asking, \"why aren't all the negative mutations weeded out of our gene pool?\", but that's a whole other topic.\n\nThe final ingredients are an everchanging ecosystem and time. A hostile environment - volcanoes, ice ages, desertification, rises in sea level, changes in weather patterns - drives natural selection. What is fit today might not be fit tomorrow. This creates impetus for variation in the gene pool; living creatures that can adapt, survive to pass on their genes, ones that don't die. \n\nNow turn up the fast forward, the time-lapse; when you see this process over thousands of generations, you begin to *see* changes in shape. Lineages change shape... big, small, tailed, tailess, carnivores, sharp teeth, herbivores, blunt molars, clawed, clawless. All kinds of body plans to adapt to new ways of living.",
"An example, by way of analogy and oversimplification:\n\nImagine prom night - every year, some guys find a date and others dont. Girls are selective and all guys are different: some have what a girl wants, others dont and girls can tell. So some guys will lose out in the lottery of life and die childless. \n\nEvery year, this process is repeated. Some of these pairings result in offspring. Genes responsible for whatever it is girls like will have higher chances of being passed on to the next generation, where these genes might become more common. Over several generations, the aspect of members of this population should reflect a predominance of whatever the girls have picked as studly. \n\nBut girls are picky, they'll keep singling out guys who possess these traits to the highest degree, which will over time exagerate these traits, possibly in a runaway fashion.\n\nThis mechanism is sexual selection a subset of natural selection, and is what is believed to be an important driver of bird speciation. This way, traits which might diminish the survival of an individual (say, the bright red color of the cock in the rock bird, or outlandishly long tail feathers) will nevertheless be accentuated by selection by females. The way the female sees things: if a male can prove his healthy survival despite the handicap of beeing showy, he's got to be one hell of a stud!",
"A good resource for that is [Berkeley's Evolution 101](_URL_0_).",
"Natural selection - Think about the people you know. They have different skin colors, they are tall and short, some are smarter, some are stronger, etc. There is variation in populations. When some sort of driver causes certain members in a population to be more 'fit' - able to survive and reproduce, then the distribution of traits in that population will change over time. \n\nConsider two such populations that are exposed to different driving forces. Maybe one climate is warmer, and the other is cooler. Maybe the food sources are different in each area. The two populations will change in different ways over a long period of time. At some point, the difference between the two groups may become so large that they are no longer able to produce fertile offspring. At this point, they are different species.\n\nNatural selection is a mechanism (though not the only one) of evolution. Evolution is simply the change in inherited traits over time in a population. For example, dog breeding is a form of evolution, but it is not due to natural selection. ",
"You could, conceivably, get a pretty encyclopedic answer on this but here's a relatively quick overview: _URL_0_\n\nIt's framed in the form of an evolution vs. creation discussion but gives a decent synopsis of the basics.\n\nApart from that, if you want to go more in depth, Dawkins' \"Greatest Show on Earth\" is a good read.",
"Evolution refers to the change in frequency of certain genes in a population over time. That's it.\n\nNatural selection refers to the *mechanism* under which evolution can take place, which is what Charles Darwin proposed. Herbert Spencer's 'survival of the fittest' theory falls under this umbrella, too.",
"It doesn't suck to admit it.\n\nStupidity isn't *not* knowing things.\n\nIt's not knowing things and being content with not knowing.",
"The best analogy that I've heard for natural selection is actually from George Carlin, \"The kid who swallows too many marbles doesn't grow up to have kids of his own\". \n\nNatural selection is just a population changing due to pressure applied to it either from the organism itself (too slow and gets eaten) or external (food source dies out, food, fires, etc)\n\nEvolution is just the name applied to the process of an organism's descendants changing over time due to natural selection. \n\nThat's the best way I can describe it in the least amount of space.",
"I could get into mendelian inheritance, genes and allele frequencies and populations and all that, but I want to make this as intuitive as possible. A ten year old can understand selection, and given a little thought can extend this concept to explain why life is so useful and varied.\n\nOkay, there's four things about most life that you need to know before you can understand this stuff:\n\n1. All living creatures die.\n\n2. Living creatures which are better suited for their environments have a better chance at reproducing before they die. This is related to the concept of fitness.\n\n3. All living creatures have offspring which share traits with their parents.\n\n4. Most offspring have random differences from their parents. This is called a mutation.\n\nNatural selection comes from rules 1 and 2. It's a very intuitive notion: if you're more fit in a given environment, the higher chances that you'll survive to have children. Repeat this process thousands of times with variation and you get...\n\nEvolution.\n\nWhy? Remember rules 3 and 4. If the offspring inherits 100% of the traits of their parents (basically cloning), they should at least be as fit as their parents, right? Right. Here comes the kicker - reproduction is rarely perfect. Rule 4. The stuff that encodes our traits, our form - DNA - is prone to copy errors. Random insertions, deletions, you name it. In fact, nature encourages this kind of variation.\n\nMutations are random, but not always bad. The positive ones are ones that improve fitness - ones that increases your chance at reproducing so you can pass these mutations to your children. Negative ones decrease fitness - I know you might be asking, \"why aren't all the negative mutations weeded out of our gene pool?\", but that's a whole other topic.\n\nThe final ingredients are an everchanging ecosystem and time. A hostile environment - volcanoes, ice ages, desertification, rises in sea level, changes in weather patterns - drives natural selection. What is fit today might not be fit tomorrow. This creates impetus for variation in the gene pool; living creatures that can adapt, survive to pass on their genes, ones that don't die. \n\nNow turn up the fast forward, the time-lapse; when you see this process over thousands of generations, you begin to *see* changes in shape. Lineages change shape... big, small, tailed, tailess, carnivores, sharp teeth, herbivores, blunt molars, clawed, clawless. All kinds of body plans to adapt to new ways of living.",
"An example, by way of analogy and oversimplification:\n\nImagine prom night - every year, some guys find a date and others dont. Girls are selective and all guys are different: some have what a girl wants, others dont and girls can tell. So some guys will lose out in the lottery of life and die childless. \n\nEvery year, this process is repeated. Some of these pairings result in offspring. Genes responsible for whatever it is girls like will have higher chances of being passed on to the next generation, where these genes might become more common. Over several generations, the aspect of members of this population should reflect a predominance of whatever the girls have picked as studly. \n\nBut girls are picky, they'll keep singling out guys who possess these traits to the highest degree, which will over time exagerate these traits, possibly in a runaway fashion.\n\nThis mechanism is sexual selection a subset of natural selection, and is what is believed to be an important driver of bird speciation. This way, traits which might diminish the survival of an individual (say, the bright red color of the cock in the rock bird, or outlandishly long tail feathers) will nevertheless be accentuated by selection by females. The way the female sees things: if a male can prove his healthy survival despite the handicap of beeing showy, he's got to be one hell of a stud!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01"
],
[],
[
"http://darryl-cunningham.blogspot.com/2011/06/evolution.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01"
],
[],
[
"http://darryl-cunningham.blogspot.com/2011/06/evolution.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
aabfwu
|
What are some good academic books/articles to consider when looking at intellectual history?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/aabfwu/what_are_some_good_academic_booksarticles_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecqi8fg"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Have you checked out [this section of our books list?](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/books/culturalhistory"
]
] |
|
6u2bdt
|
why are there so many conflicting views on taking large amounts of fat soluble vitamins?
|
Some places say it's fine for me to take 10,000 + iu of vitamin a and d and some places say those levels would be super toxic. Who am I to believe?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6u2bdt/eli5why_are_there_so_many_conflicting_views_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dlpfhwa",
"dlpxyub"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's fine if you're getting that much of a particular vitamin if it's from a natural source, like whole carrots, sweet potatoes, etc because your body has to process vitamin A, for example, from beta carotene into a form it can use. Vitamin A supplements (and that from liver) are already in a form your body can use, and getting too much of this usable form can cause vitaminosis.",
"To be hones I am not aware of any \"conflicting\" views on this topic. Large amounts of soluble vitamins ARE unhealthy, as they lead to overdose. In medical terms this is called \"hypervitaminosis\".\nOverdosing on fat soluble vitamins is possible, because your body naturally stores fat and therefore it stores those vitamins with it. Look up hypervitaminosis A, D, E, K (the last two being pretty rare).\nTo overdose on vitamins that are soluble in water is practically impossible, water in your body is constantly being renewed (although I do recall one article that I read years ago of a man who overdosed on vit. C and got kidney stones as a result)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
e86scd
|
Why did the ancient Roman pantheon mostly consist of assimilated Greek gods?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/e86scd/why_did_the_ancient_roman_pantheon_mostly_consist/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fabu2ya"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The FAQ has answers to a [similar question](_URL_0_), courtesy of /u/idontplayoboe and /u/cleopatra_philopater"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4u6bdw/were_the_roman_gods_literally_transplanted_from/d5nelxu/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=AskHistorians"
]
] |
||
3pq5bo
|
why does it feel different/better when you get a bj/hj from a different person than when you masterbate?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pq5bo/eli5_why_does_it_feel_differentbetter_when_you/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw8goxg",
"cw8it1e",
"cw8jtc3"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Try sitting on your left hand until it's numb and having a go. It's just like having someone there!",
"Same reason you can't tickle yourself - your mind expects the sensation. With someone else its different, unexpected (and awesome)",
"You can give yourself a bj?!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6rwbrf
|
why does the one cup of coffee i drink make me pee as if i drank 3 cups?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6rwbrf/eli5_why_does_the_one_cup_of_coffee_i_drink_make/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dl88fn9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You probably already know this, but the active ingredient in coffee is a chemical called caffeine.\n\nPeople don't normally think of caffeine as a \"drug\", but it is in the technical sense of the word. The main effect of caffeine is that you'll feel more awake, but it's also a mild diuretic.\n\nSo... caffeine makes you feel more awake and it also makes you have to pee a bit."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1udnpm
|
why is french so complicated?
|
I'm taking French as a foreign language for GCSE. Just wondering how the language manage to develop into such complex forms and each form being able to have so much exceptions.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1udnpm/why_is_french_so_complicated/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cegzxjq"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Chinese is horrid because you can't tell how to pronounce a new character.\n\nEnglish is known for its bizzare amounts of homophones.\n\nFrench has lists and lists of conjugations to add to words when you want to refer to different subjects, i.e. he, she, they.\n\nWelsh just looks like the sign writer was sneezing or something.\n\nLanguages like French or English evolve naturally over time through slang and other means. Since it's us imperfect humans who created it, and since they were mostly developed at a time when you weren't expecting a language to sweep the globe like it does now, most languages have redundant, senseless and overly complicated rules.\n\nAn interesting exception is Korean, where the history of it can be generalised as just some guy sitting down and writing the rules to produce an efficient and no-nonsense language."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1wt44o
|
Lou Gehrig's disease
|
Can someone explain the effects, cause, and cure for this disease?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1wt44o/lou_gehrigs_disease/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf55j68"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"the current hypothesis for how ALS works is dysfunction of the mitochondria in motor neurons resulting oxidative stress and therefore damage to the cell.\nIt is caused is also unknown however around 5% of suffers have a known genetic involvement such as a mutation in the superoxide dismutase-1 gene.\n\nAs a result of the damage to neurons there are many specific signs which medical professionals may pick up on and they vary from type to type and patient to patient. But the general gist is muscular weakness which can lead to dysphagia (trouble swallowing) difficulty/changes to their voice, muscle wasting and hyperreflexia or hypo-reflexia depending on where on the neuron it is damaged. Also these symptoms are progressive as more cells are damaged.\n\nThere is no cure currently all care given is palliative and to help relieve the symptoms. They include regular exercise with speech and physical therapy to help maintain utility of affected areas and to help overcome the disabilities that develop and dietic support for when eating becomes difficult.\nA drug which has been shown to slow the progression called Riluzole may also be used. It works by decreasing the amount of glutamate released during nerve transmission and as this has been shown to damage nerves in the CNS and brain by reducing the level released it conveys a protective effect.\nI primarily used here to ensure the reliablity of my statements.\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Motor-Neurone-Disease-(MND).htm"
]
] |
|
5dg493
|
[Serious] do we know if Jefferson raped "his" slaves at any point in his life?
|
My girlfriend is really trying to figure out if this really happened at any point and if so if it has any citation. Thank you! (sorry if this is against any rules I don't frequent here often but have seen a lot of great answers before.)
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5dg493/serious_do_we_know_if_jefferson_raped_his_slaves/
|
{
"a_id": [
"da4cqvs"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"One way of answering this question is in terms of consent as we understand it today. Thomas Jefferson *literally owned the bodies of all his slaves*. It's hard for modern people to conceive of that sort of power relation in any way, but that's what it was. He completely owned them; they had no power of consent over any aspect of their lives. In such a situation, *any* sexual encounter between master and slave is coercive, and meets the definition of rape. Therefore, Thomas Jefferson raped Sally Hemings, repeatedly and over a number of years. In this view, to talk of different degrees of rape, whether the rape was \"violent\" or \"forced\" is abhorrent, and can't be countenanced. I admit, there's a lot of power in this perspective, not least because it foregrounds the immoral criminality of slavery in absolute terms.\n\nAnnette Gordon-Reed, in her fascinating book *The Hemingses of Monticello*, which seeks to pull away from the larger history of slavery to understand one family (Sally Hemings, Thomas Jefferson, and their descendants), takes a somewhat more nuanced perspective. Reed, of course, acknowledges the monstrosity of slavery and its sexual power relations on a world-historical scale, but finds that perspective inadequate for her more targeted, micro-historical approach. Such a perspective, in her view, completely obscures the agency that enslaved women had--or may have had--over their own sexualities. It makes sexuality an entirely male-focused affair, rendering the question entirely \"Did so-and-so have sex with a slave?\" \"Yes? OK, it's rape.\" It leaves no room for the possibility that Hemings or another enslaved woman might have had a real emotional and physical interest in an owner. Put another way, it renders entirely ideological (masters vs. slaves, in never-ending war), a relationship that surely must have had more nuance. To take the first view I enumerated, ultimately, in Gordon-Reed's view, serves to blot out the real lived experiences of enslaved women. These experiences are very hard for us to understand today, given the sheer paucity of literary and archival sources that directly convey the experiences of enslaved women. So she's hesitant to paint with the broad brush, because ultimately that brush serves to obscure understanding, not enhance it. It can even serve to render enslaved women eternally childlike, which itself was a goal of the ideology of slavery.\n\nYou might be interested in reading Gordon-Reed's book to further tease out the nuances of her argument. It's a really great book, though Gordon-Reed is trained as a lawyer and not an historian, and other historians have had various issues with the book's methodology.\n\nThere's no evidence that Thomas Jefferson, a refined and charming man who considered himself a statesman, ever held an enslaved woman down at knifepoint and raped her. Given the power relations between him and his slaves, it's doubtful he ever would have had to. So, I believe you are on firm historical ground if you want to claim that Jefferson raped Hemings. But there is at least one decent argument to say that the answer is more like \"we don't know, and probably never can.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
39vckj
|
why do i sometimes get this ghost itch on the inside of my ear?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39vckj/eli5why_do_i_sometimes_get_this_ghost_itch_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs6wfsr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's most likely wax moving toward the entrance of your ear and it hits a hair that tickles/itches the inner ear.\n\nAt least that's what makes the most sense to me."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3cbbhn
|
How accurate is Chapter 1 of Inglorious Basterds?
|
I know this movie is fictional, but still.
- Did the Nazis have time and resources to go around France "hunting" Jews?
- If so, would they really search this thoroughly? I mean, they're way out in the country, where there's only the one house as far as you can see. They spend a lot of time just talking to the guy, and they're pretty polite to him too. They also are going through records of known people. **Is this related to why it's illegal in France for the government to collect religious demographics today?**
- If the hider gave up the hiding Jews, would he really be "rewarded"? Would he actually be marked down as someone to watch closely? Would he be killed along with the Jews? What if some of the Jews then escaped like in the movie?
- Is it likely that a French dairy farmer and a German soldier would really have English as their best common language? Since it's an American movie, I wouldn't be surprised if all the dialog was in English with no mention of it at all, but they begin in French.
- Are the clothes and house accurate? What about the Nazi's pipe?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3cbbhn/how_accurate_is_chapter_1_of_inglorious_basterds/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csulgax"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"I cannot answer the other questions but if you are curious about the pipe, that is a Calabash Pipe, popularized in media because of Sherlock Holmes. [Quentin Tarantino specifically used it for narrative purposes]( _URL_0_) to portray contrast against the farmer's smaller pipe and to accentuate his detective skills."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://youtu.be/q_g7O7W-IUg"
]
] |
|
2gf3qz
|
how does plant life begin on an isolated island in the middle of the ocean?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gf3qz/eli5_how_does_plant_life_begin_on_an_isolated/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckiiixo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Plants may drift on the ocean, or be carried by wildlife (birds) or the wind, in certain cases. Or, they may be barren, as some islands are."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1t7h8a
|
When was the first time an extensive/university education was available to anyone who was willing to pursue it and work for it (not just the elite)?
|
Also, in the middle ages, who was allowed to attend university?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1t7h8a/when_was_the_first_time_an_extensiveuniversity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce5a07r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"hi, this thread from the FAQ* may have some interesting information\n\n[How has admissions worked at historical universities and schools?](_URL_1_)\n\nand I believe there are more smatterings regarding admissions throughout this section in general\n\n[Life at University](_URL_0_)\n\n*see the \"popular questions\" link on the sidebar or the \"wiki\" tab above"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/dailylife#wiki_life_at_university",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/15er3e/how_has_admissions_worked_at_historical/"
]
] |
|
ad15tn
|
I've heard some say that the Arab slave trade was far larger and more damaging than the Atlantic slave trade ever was. Is this true, or a false/misleading statement to advance political ideology?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ad15tn/ive_heard_some_say_that_the_arab_slave_trade_was/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eddr02u",
"eddwdkf"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nAnswer by u/paxottomanica",
"While you wait for an answer to your question you might be interest in [these](_URL_0_) [previous](_URL_1_) answers regarding the slave trade conducted by Arabs and others across the Sahara and the Indian Ocean. The first notes that many claims about the Arab slave trade beong larger or more damaging rely on distortions and outright falsehoods about the Atlantic slave trade in order to make the comparison. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3a9ea5/how_brutal_was_the_arab_slave_trade_in_comparison/"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3sfu7q/why_is_their_a_relatively_small_african_diaspora/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3a9ea5/how_brutal_was_the_arab_slave_trade_in_comparison/"
]
] |
||
fik8v
|
A thought experiment from childhood. Convoluted question inside.
|
Given that the outer edge of an LP record travels faster than the inner part.
What if you had a really large LP record spun at a fast enough rate that an inside groove had a sub-light speed but the outside edge was traveling at a faster than light speed?
What is happening to the edge? Is it going backwards in time?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fik8v/a_thought_experiment_from_childhood_convoluted/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1g6x7e",
"c1g6xxz",
"c1g72p5",
"c1g863l"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"No. The attraction between atoms wouldn't be strong enough to overcome the acceleration forces and it would break far, far before you got it to lightspeed. In fact, you need infinite energy for the outside to travel at the speed of light.\n\n(Consider swinging a branch really fast so it makes a swish sound -- the tip is trailing the motion.)",
"So imagine your LP. The drive from the hole pulls on the molecules on that inner edge. Those molecules pull their neighbors along and so on down the line. Essentialy the disc rotates because that force is transmitted at the speed of sound in the material. Now if you build a giant disc and rotate it very quickly you still have to pull those inner molecules of the disc, and they'll pull on the next molecules out, and so on. Most likely if you were to rotate a vinyl disc at close to the speed of light it'd warp and break long before that. But even supposing you had some magic material, the fastest the speed of sound could be is the speed of light, and so the whole thing ends up accelerating relativistically. Eventually some molecules, despite their large strength just can't hold on because the force to accelerate the next ring of molecules outward from it is infinite (as that ring approaches the speed of light.) So even this disc shatters before the edge hits the speed of light.",
"I submitted a [similar question](_URL_0_) not too long ago, perhaps you could learn something from the comments there. I certainly did. :)",
"The outside of the LP wouldn't reach light speed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fedkg/1_lightyear_long_rod_that_spins_like_a_propeller/"
],
[]
] |
|
slpq2
|
What wild animals have the best temperament towards humans?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/slpq2/what_wild_animals_have_the_best_temperament/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4f09jr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Not many.\n\nThink about it, why do almost all animals (barring those that live off of our waste) avoid us? If they didn't, they'd likely be extinct. The notion of going to the grocery store for food and walking around in the wilderness to observe is very, very new.\n\nEven 500 years ago we pretty much ate whatever we could kill and wasn't poisonous, and obviously any animals that didn't know better than to avoid us or were unable to do so were the first to die. [This is the reason much of the worlds megafauna are extinct(along with climate change).](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction#Human_influence_on_extinction"
]
] |
||
bt9pxo
|
what’s to stop a bank from just making up money on their computer systems?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bt9pxo/eli5_whats_to_stop_a_bank_from_just_making_up/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eov374j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They get audited regularly and any discrepancies carry large penalties and potential criminal charges."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bc1isj
|
After the conquest of Gaul by Rome why did none of the surviving tribe's try to rebel during the numerous civil wars following the conquest.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/bc1isj/after_the_conquest_of_gaul_by_rome_why_did_none/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ekock97"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Roman influence was already significant before the Roman conquest, roughly since the late IInd century BCE (a bit before the conquest of the *provincia*).Treaties were passed with Gaulish states and coalitions, especially with Aiduoi who controlled not just their confederation and the road from Rhone to Seine but also had a certain dominance over Celtic Gaulish states, in order to ensure a flourishing trade (tableware, oil, wine) to the point eastern Gaulish coinage seems to have been indexed on half the value of a Roman denarius.\n\n\"Tribe\", in the anthropologic meaning of the word (human groups tied by familial, imaginary or not, ties with a fluid social organisation) can't be attributed to late Gaulish culture : we'd be rather talking there about decentralized states (Caesar's civitates, including several pagi which might be identified with Gaulish *teuta*, tribe/citizenship) themselves held regionally trough coalition or assembly patronage.These complex state structures (Aiduoi,for instance, had the equivalent of a constitution and institutional rules) knew factional development of their politics, as Caesar accounted for.\n\n > *In Gaul there are factions not only in all the states, and in all the cantons and their divisions, but almost in each family, and of these factions those are the leaders who are considered according to their judgment to possess the greatest influence, upon whose will and determination the management of all affairs and measures depends. And that seems to have been instituted in ancient times with this view, that no one of the common people should be in want of support against one more powerful; for, none \\[of those leaders\\] suffers his party to be oppressed and defrauded, and if he do otherwise, he has no influence among his party. This same policy exists throughout the whole of Gaul; for all the states are divided into two factions.*\n\nUntil the IInd century BCE, Druids seems to have enjoyed a great political role, not just amongst their own people, but as part of some sort of political-spiritual pan-Gaulish confraternity which regularly assembled. It's still debated what lead to a decline of Druidism in Gaul at this point (a conjunction of the damages of Cimbrii and Teutoni in Gaul; and the Roman influence from the South, possibly), and how much this decline was important (did Diviciacos stressed being Druid or not in this period?) but their traditional role of diplomats and intermediaries seems to have suffered some backlash and to have been more localized to their own states, making relations between them more likely to escalate.\n\nWhile Gaulish factions took a lot of forms and were primarily functioning trough inner politics, one obvious polarization was a pro or anti-roman approach depending. Practically every Gaulish state we have a glimpse of their policies did have such opposition, Aiduoi included (Diviciacos, pro-roman and his anti-roman brother Dumnorix) and during the war (for Aruernoi, pro-roman Epasnactos and anti-roman Vercingetorix). Again, this polarization wasn't set in stone : out of opportunism, pressure or to Roman presence threatening local interests, people changed sides, radicalized or compromised, _URL_3_ a sense, pro and anti-Roman policies could be similar to the opposition between Optimates and Populares in Rome, owing to other matters and whom differences could be sometimes superficial.\n\nPro-Roman Gaulish elites were,thanks to their relations with Romans (Diviciacos was hosted by Cicero probably because both knew each other indirectly trough wine trading), could set up an efficient patronage and political networking, or at least hoped obtaining a similar position Aiduoi had (Arvenrs attempted without success to be considered \"blood-brothers\" of Romans as their rivals were considered). Rome, on the other hand, did intervened in Gaulish matters before Caesar by considering Ariovistos as a friend of Rome (possibly due to his opposition to Sequanoi, then foes of Aiduoi, this support fading when Ariovistos clashed with the latter).More or less anti-Roman did preexisted to Caesar's campaign, hinted by the alliance between Sequanoi and Eleuetoi, which were at least considered hostile and threatening to band with others.\n\nCaesar eventually supported his interventions in Gaul trough the assembly of Celtic Gaul,and the assembly of all Gaul, dominated by Aiduoi which gave the general the protectorate of Gaul,more or less, making his intervention gaining a legalist veneer.\n\nRight from the start of Roman conquest, some peoples and among them the more important, were ready to accept a Roman protectorate out of interest or pressure. Vercingetorix himself most probably was an auxiliary of Caesar at some point. Until -56, without being a constitutional walk, Gaulish opposition was relatively _URL_0_ Roman fiscal,commercial (increasing importance and monopoly of Roman traders), military and political pressure (especially as Caesar set up client kings against the wishes of the population) was felt more seriously, however, a general anti-Roman feeling appeared (at first in peripheral regions where Roman influence never was that strong). Caesar almost systematically dealt with this by heavily punishing revolts (killing off their senates and enslaving when not massacring the population). The general Gaulish revolt of -52 was a mix of disappointed nobles having hoped their alliance would have owed them something, people seeing in Romans an obstacle to their interests, people politically opposed to a Roman protectorate and (such as Aeduoi) some playing both sides.Their defeat meant an almost literal beheading of anti-Roman forces in Gaul.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nStill, you ***did*** have local revolts after -51. We don't know much about them, however.\n\nIn -46, Bellovacoi revolte against Romans. Giving that they participated to every major revolt before, it could point to a permanence of previous _URL_1_ -39/38, revolts happened in Rhineland (allied with Germans) and Aquitaine, without any mentioned people. The definitive settlement of Ubii in Belgica could be interpreted as being ordered to watch over the region as allies.Again in -30/-29, Morinoi and other Belgians possibly supported by Germans revolted _URL_2_ -29, Aquitains and Treviroi rebelled and after their defeat, Gaul was re-organized in provinces.\n\nAfter that, troubles and revolts have a distinct anti-fiscal stance, as soon as Licinius' abuses against Gaulish elites (such as \"adding\" two fiscal months) or Sacrovir's revolt,which concerned more romanized Gauls striving for fiscal liberty firstmost.\n\nAs most opposition to Romans was crushed,and elite benefiting from Roman alliance remained, there was nobody left to really manage and to officer another armed opposition in Gaul in a regional scale, especially as peoples traditionally more or less hostile to Rome were ravaged. We're talking of ten years of war, including political strife and quasi-civil war, with ten of thousands of victims on battlefield or due to massacres, and probably the same being enslaved. Anything that could have represented a possible new rebellion was utterly broken (especially after the wake-up call of -52), when pro-Romans flourished,which supported an already present political romanization,which happened fairly quickly compared to Africa or Hispania.\n\nSimply said, most of remaining Gaulish elite after Caesar, with noted exceptions, continued their Romanising policies as was their broad interest; adopted more and more Roman features and by the late Ist century CE, not much of Gaulish civilization remained.\n\n**Sources**\n\n*Vercingétorix* \\- Jean-Louis Brunaux \n*La vie politique des Gaulois* \\- Emmanuel Arbarbe \n*Vercingétorix, chef de guerre* \\- Alain Deyber"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"meagre.As",
"feelings.In",
"anew.In",
"etc.In"
]
] |
||
1i71v3
|
What are the earliest End of Days/Apocalypse Myths?
|
I'm sorry if this isn't the right subreddit. Basically I'm interested in old End of Days myths/prophecies & c. Is this something that's a cross-cultural phenomena or do we even have the resources to know that?
Thanks in advance for any help.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1i71v3/what_are_the_earliest_end_of_daysapocalypse_myths/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb1v0qe"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Though I do not hold a lofty degree in history, social science or anything similar, I feel I may be able to add a small amount of perspective to this original question.\nThe concept of the Apocalypse is very old and is mentioned a number of times throughout the old and new testament. [The book of Job mentions it, as well as the books of Matthew, John and Revelations.](_URL_3_)\n\nIn addition to the Bible, Norse mythology gives mention to [Ragnarok](_URL_1_), which holds its own when compared to what was being said in the old and new testaments. \n\nThe [Messianic Age](_URL_0_) is also a concept of the Apocalypse but generally one viewed as a favorable change over a violent one.\n\nAlso it should be noted that the ancient Hindu texts of [Puranas](_URL_2_) mentions what they would consider an \"apocalypse\" in that it'll be the reintegration of Vishnu into the universe. Kali Yuga is the current time frame we live in in relation to the Hindu apocalypse, there's more in that wiki link about it.\n\nAs far as finding a specific date, I cannot. But the concept of the apocalypse has been around for a very long time, and could be argued by psychologists as being a mental manifestation of death that inevitably takes us all."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Age",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragnar%C3%B6k",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puranas",
"http://www.openbible.info/topics/the_apocalypse"
]
] |
|
117hmg
|
Why do polar animals tend to be larger than their temperate/tropical counterparts?
|
For example, Polar Bears are the largest bear, Arctic Wolves are the largest wolves, Moose are the largest deer, and the Great Grey Owl is the largest Owl. What about the polar/northern climate makes large size so advantageous?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/117hmg/why_do_polar_animals_tend_to_be_larger_than_their/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6k10pq"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"[Bergmann's Rule](_URL_0_) Basically, larger animals have a lower surface area to volume ratio and thus radiate less heat"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergmann%27s_rule"
]
] |
|
37oaty
|
Why does hypertension cause ocular blood vessels to narrow?
|
I would naturally assume that high BP would cause enlarged blood vessels. Why is it the opposite?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/37oaty/why_does_hypertension_cause_ocular_blood_vessels/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cron6m7",
"crrzqlv"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Your eye doesn't need that much blood flow, at high BP baroreceptors would indicate a lot of blood flowing through, however you don't want or need that much blood in your eyes so they are signaled to narrow in an attempt at limiting the flow of blood to the eye. As to why you don't want too much blood in the eyes, there are a few inferences I can make; burst blood vessels because of too much blood flow, compromising the immunoprivileged state of your eyes as dilated vessels become \"leaky\" as tight junctions are spread farther apart, also your eyes simply don't need so much blood to function.",
"Baroreceptors, in this instance, likely have nothing to do with it...That's part of a autonomic circuit used to regulate heart rate and cardiac output relative to changes is BP. To my knowledge, there aren't any baroreceptors in the ocular arterioles.\n\nOcular vessels narrow due to something called \"myogenic tone\", or \"pressure-induced constriction\". The smooth muscle cells in these vessels are able to sense stretch caused by increases in pressure and constrict accordingly. No neural innervation is required; even a single isolated smooth muscle cell would constrict when stretched. The development of this myogenic tone protects the extremely fragile capillary bed from rupture due to high pressures, since capillaries themselves are extremely thin (1 layer of endothelial cells only) and non-contractile.\n\nPressure COULD get high enough to widen vessels instead, since the myogenic capability of smooth muscle reaches a plateau...but that pressure would need to be pretty dangerously high for that to happen.\n\nI could wax poetic about how this increase in tone ultimately leads to remodeling of the vessel wall, decreased distensibility, and vascular dysfunction, but I won't...unless you want me to. (c:"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
24aouq
|
What did people use bread for before the sandwich was invented/became commonplace?
|
I've been thinking on this a while. The sandwich came around in 18th century Europe. Bread was invented around 30'000 years ago. How did people eat bread during that gap? I kinda feel like this is a stupid question, I may be missing something.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aouq/what_did_people_use_bread_for_before_the_sandwich/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch594rv"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Bread was typically eaten with some kind of moistener, usually based on an oil or sugar. \n\nBread or some other staple starch formed the foundation of the diet, and the term was sometimes used as a synecdoche, in which a part of something (bread) was used to refer to the whole (diet). \"Give us this day our daily bread,\" for example, refers generically to food, and not merely to bread on its own. However, as Sidney Mintz discusses in his wonderful history of sugar, *Sweetness and Power*, while the main starch could be the food itself, it often couldn't culturally count as a proper *meal* unless it had the right accompaniment. Historically, in the West where bread was the starch, this has been some kind of moistener: in the Middle East and around the Mediterranean, olive oil is the standard; in northern Europe, it was frequently butter; with the development of plantation sugar production in the seventeenth and eighteenth century, and industrial food in the nineteenth century, jam became a very popular food for this role in Britain. In other cases, it might be \"drippings,\" a generic term for the fat or moisture produced by cooking meat in certain ways. Of course, bread was also a ubiquitous accompaniment to all kinds of other dishes. Soup, for example, always comes with bread, to the point that in some situations, soup alone might not be considered an actual meal. \n\nI should note that I specialize in the study of wheat, flour, and bread in modern Britain. And, while the sandwich was invented famously by the Earl of Sandwich in the eighteenth century, I actually come across very few references to it before the invention and proliferation of sliced bread. While not unknown before the 1930s, I think the sandwich as the staple form of making a meal out of bread is really a postwar development. In the period that I study, mostly 1750 to 1950, the standard is bread and butter, bread and jam, or bread and drippings. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ba5s3y
|
How was Napoleon able to advance his rank in the French military so quickly?
|
Napoleon was promoted all the way to General by age 24. How did this happen so rapidly?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ba5s3y/how_was_napoleon_able_to_advance_his_rank_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ek9nyzv"
],
"score": [
35
],
"text": [
"The short and snippy answer to why Napoleon advanced so quickly is because of the French Revolution. But for all the brevity, such an answer is not facetious. The Revolution created a series of unique conditions that allowed a man of Napoleon's talents to vault quite high at a young age. \n\nFirst off, and most obviously, the Revolution did create a shortage of officers within the French armies as the pre-1789 institution was dominated by the nobility, especially its upper echelons. Although Revolutionary zeal did not eliminate all nobles serving under French colors, the Revolution did decimate the officer corps. Some of the pre-1789 officers were executed during the Terror while other officers abandoned their commissions and fled the country. The outflow of officers meant that there were now positions open for men from the technical services or middle classes and the minor nobility. Napoleon belonged to the latter category, but he was not alone in this regard. His great Marshal Davout also came from the minor nobility and Napoleon's future chief of staff Berthier came from an established military family with close connections to the old nobility. These relative outsiders managed to seize the opportunity presented to them by the Revolutionary upheavals within the officer corps to advance their positions. \n\nBut opportunity was only one factor in climbing atop the greasy pole. The Revolution may have stressed meritocracy, but the politics of the Revolution could not eliminate patronage completely. The shifting factions within various Revolutionary governments meant that politicians often cultivated their own generals. In Napoleon's case, his connections with Antoine Salicetti led to the young man's advancement early in his career. But political patronage was a double-edged sword in the tumultuous politics of the Revolution. Napoleon's connection with Jacobins made him politically suspect in the Thermidorian reaction after the Terror. But Napoleon was lucky in his choice in political friends. Salicetti was able to save Napoleon from house arrest and later managed to cultivate a relationship with Paul Barras. These networks helped Napoleon gain commissions in what were subsidiary theaters for the French Revolutionary Wars, Italy and Egypt. \n\nNapoleon managed to make the most of these appointments. Although Italy lacked the prestige of Germany, Napoleon succeeded in Italy while his compatriots in Germany failed. The military successes helped connect Napoleon to one of the Revolution's popular elements, military *gloire*. Generals and military exploits became one of the legitimizing components of the Revolution, especially as the more radical social levelling had led to the Terror. So military generals assumed a greater deal of political capital in the closing days of the Revolution than they possessed at its strat. Emmanel Sieyès, one of the key plotters in Brumaire, would famously quip, \"I need a sword,\" in other words, a man who could command the loyalty of one of the few powerful institutions that possessed a great deal of popular legitimacy within the Republic, the army.\n\nNapoleon was only thirty years old when he became First Consul, but many of his own contemporaries were not that much older than Bonaparte. His main military rivals to be the Brumaire coup's \"sword\"- Bernadotte, Jourdan, Hoche, and Moreau - were all born in the same decade as Napoleon. The youthfulness of this cohort underscores how the French Revolution created the right constellation that meant a young man with the right talents and connections could advance farther and faster than he could in the pre-1789 military. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
kwfq5
|
the relationship between the saudi royal family and religion
|
I understand that Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy (there are elections, but they are for a powerless "advisory council"), but it seems that there is a battle going on between the King, who seems to be a more liberalizing force, and an extremely conservative form of Islam.
What exactly is the relationship between the Saudi king and Islam? Is the King the "good guy" here?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kwfq5/eli5_the_relationship_between_the_saudi_royal/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2ntepa",
"c2ntf4d",
"c2ntepa",
"c2ntf4d"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
5,
6
],
"text": [
"You know how at Thanksgiving when all the family has to get together and it is tense and awkward from years and years of harbored resentment towards one another? Well, that's basically how Saudi Arabia politics work. It's a very large family with members of varying levels of influence over how things run in the nation. Nominally the Qu'ran is the \"constitution\" of the nation, so basically the royal family claims that they are ordained by God to be in charge. I mean, that's the cover story anyway. As you note, claiming a religious holy text as your basis for power doesn't tend to sit well with people who read and study that text because they figure out that you're full of shit. So yes, there are Islamic hardliners who advocate terrorist acts against the royal family. It's all very messy and ripe for revolution as soon as the money starts to dry up faster and faster. ",
"Ok so this is gonna be a long one with sweeping overviews and very little specificites, but this is the basic breakdown. \n\nTowards the beginning of the 20th century, Arabia was still a collection of warring fiefdoms that couldn't really agree with one another. They had each been ruled by a sucession of rulers including the sultans of the Ottoman empire, their own individual rulers, and the new colonial powers that were pushing their way into what is now Saudi Arabia. \n\nThis time was also a time of great wars in the region. Concurrent with the wars, there was a new and thriving religious movement called Wahabism, named after the founder I believe. It basically contains all the crazy bits of fanaticism that the west consideres to be \"violent islam.\" So all the hardcore following of Sharia law, and the insane punishments that come with it, and the whole women not being allowed to drive that mostly stems from the Wahabi movement. \n\nAnyway, during the 1920s a nomadic tribe leader named Ibn Saud finally conquerored Mecca and declared himself king with the backing of a massive army that he had managed to gather together. \n\nNow most people ask, \"where'd the army come from? I thought he was the leader of a small nomadic tribe?\" Great question. \n\nThe army was recruited from newly militarized followers of the Wahabi sect, who were goaded to use force to conequror in the name of Islam. \n\nIbn Saud made an agreement with the group of imams who were considered the governing body of the Wahabi Sec (Henceforth refered to as the Ulumat), to force wahabism onto the newly conquerored people if the Ulumat would tell their followers to back Ibn Saud. The backing of the Ulumat was the reason that the Ibn Saud was able to conqueror the country and name it after himself and his family: Saudi Arabia. \n\nAnywho, continuing down to the formation of the government.\n\nThe Ulumat wanted their proverbial pound of flesh in return for helping Ibn Saud conqueror the kingdom so they set up an Islamic Jumhariya (Islamic State) where the king (Ibn Saud and his descendants) would rule, but ALWAYS defer to the Ulumat before making any laws. \n\nThis agreement continus down to today, and the Ulumat is more powerful than ever, even making oil concession descisions in certain cases. The king can make a law, but without the approval of the Ulumat it means nothing. \n\nDon't be mistaken, the king is not the innocent pawn in this circumstance. Since the 1930s, when Ibn Saud and his family discovered that Saudi Arabia had more oil than sand, they sold out HARD to the west. Making massive concessions to the likes of BP and Aramco (Arab American oil Company). \n\nAfter making these oil concessions, they allowed foreign governments such as the British and the Americans to station hundres of thousands of foreign troops in the nation in order to secure the oil reserves.\n\nThe king and the Ulumat are both at the mercy of these foreign powers. Without the backing of these nations, the people would rebel and overthrow both the Ulumat and the King. This is not speculation, since the assasination of King Faisal in the 1960s by a member of his own family, there has been a very uneasy feeling amongst the Saudi people regarind how their governmental structure runs, specially with the interest of the Ulumat and foreign powers dominating the rather powerless monarchy. \n\n",
"You know how at Thanksgiving when all the family has to get together and it is tense and awkward from years and years of harbored resentment towards one another? Well, that's basically how Saudi Arabia politics work. It's a very large family with members of varying levels of influence over how things run in the nation. Nominally the Qu'ran is the \"constitution\" of the nation, so basically the royal family claims that they are ordained by God to be in charge. I mean, that's the cover story anyway. As you note, claiming a religious holy text as your basis for power doesn't tend to sit well with people who read and study that text because they figure out that you're full of shit. So yes, there are Islamic hardliners who advocate terrorist acts against the royal family. It's all very messy and ripe for revolution as soon as the money starts to dry up faster and faster. ",
"Ok so this is gonna be a long one with sweeping overviews and very little specificites, but this is the basic breakdown. \n\nTowards the beginning of the 20th century, Arabia was still a collection of warring fiefdoms that couldn't really agree with one another. They had each been ruled by a sucession of rulers including the sultans of the Ottoman empire, their own individual rulers, and the new colonial powers that were pushing their way into what is now Saudi Arabia. \n\nThis time was also a time of great wars in the region. Concurrent with the wars, there was a new and thriving religious movement called Wahabism, named after the founder I believe. It basically contains all the crazy bits of fanaticism that the west consideres to be \"violent islam.\" So all the hardcore following of Sharia law, and the insane punishments that come with it, and the whole women not being allowed to drive that mostly stems from the Wahabi movement. \n\nAnyway, during the 1920s a nomadic tribe leader named Ibn Saud finally conquerored Mecca and declared himself king with the backing of a massive army that he had managed to gather together. \n\nNow most people ask, \"where'd the army come from? I thought he was the leader of a small nomadic tribe?\" Great question. \n\nThe army was recruited from newly militarized followers of the Wahabi sect, who were goaded to use force to conequror in the name of Islam. \n\nIbn Saud made an agreement with the group of imams who were considered the governing body of the Wahabi Sec (Henceforth refered to as the Ulumat), to force wahabism onto the newly conquerored people if the Ulumat would tell their followers to back Ibn Saud. The backing of the Ulumat was the reason that the Ibn Saud was able to conqueror the country and name it after himself and his family: Saudi Arabia. \n\nAnywho, continuing down to the formation of the government.\n\nThe Ulumat wanted their proverbial pound of flesh in return for helping Ibn Saud conqueror the kingdom so they set up an Islamic Jumhariya (Islamic State) where the king (Ibn Saud and his descendants) would rule, but ALWAYS defer to the Ulumat before making any laws. \n\nThis agreement continus down to today, and the Ulumat is more powerful than ever, even making oil concession descisions in certain cases. The king can make a law, but without the approval of the Ulumat it means nothing. \n\nDon't be mistaken, the king is not the innocent pawn in this circumstance. Since the 1930s, when Ibn Saud and his family discovered that Saudi Arabia had more oil than sand, they sold out HARD to the west. Making massive concessions to the likes of BP and Aramco (Arab American oil Company). \n\nAfter making these oil concessions, they allowed foreign governments such as the British and the Americans to station hundres of thousands of foreign troops in the nation in order to secure the oil reserves.\n\nThe king and the Ulumat are both at the mercy of these foreign powers. Without the backing of these nations, the people would rebel and overthrow both the Ulumat and the King. This is not speculation, since the assasination of King Faisal in the 1960s by a member of his own family, there has been a very uneasy feeling amongst the Saudi people regarind how their governmental structure runs, specially with the interest of the Ulumat and foreign powers dominating the rather powerless monarchy. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6ddg3k
|
Did Hitler have any plans to eventually invade France and/or Britain if they did not declare war when he invaded Poland?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6ddg3k/did_hitler_have_any_plans_to_eventually_invade/
|
{
"a_id": [
"di220nh"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The memoirs of the German Foreign Ministry interpreter Paul Schmidt relates an illuminating anecdote about Hitler's reaction to Britain's war ultimatum delivered to Hitler on the morning of 3 September 1939. According to Schmidt, Hitler read the ultimatum and angrily turned to his Foreign Minister on Ribbentrop and said \"What now?\"\n\nAlthough Gerhard Weinberg doubts the veracity of Schmidt's account and Ian Kershaw believes that Hitler was prosaically asking what the French response would be, this particular anecdote illustrates the hazy and muddled German response to the expansion of the war. Although it was logical that an expansion of German force on the continent would inevitably lead to another war with France, the Germans did not make any systematic plans to defeat and occupy France. Although *Mein Kampf* had asserted that France was an eternal enemy of Germany, Hitler was remarkably lax in actually planning for this eventuality. When it was clear that the British and French would not be brought to accept Germany's dismemberment of Poland, Hitler summoned his service chiefs to the Reich chancellery on 27 September to tell them he intended to smash France and bring her to heel through swift military action between October and December 1939. \n\nMuch of the OKW leadership was aghast at Hitler's accelerated timetable and engaged in a degree of strategic footdragging to encourage Hitler to postpone what later became known as *Fall Gelb*. Although OKH was relatively enthusiastic about the Polish war, many commanders in OKH had believed that a political solution would prevent the need for an offensive in the west. Prior to Hitler's 27 September meeting, OKH had issued its *Directive for Reorganization of the Army for Defensive War in the West* on 17 September which stressed training for a defensive response to a Franco-British offensive. The resulting plans for an offensive in France and the Low Countries produced on 19 October were unimaginative frontal attack on a broad front. Hitler was unimpressed by these plans, but continually reaffirmed his commitment to an offensive despite the constant postponement of *Fall Gelb*. \n\nHitler's dissatisfaction with the conventional plans of attack, coupled with the Mechelen incident in which a plane carrying the current *Fall Gelb* plans accidentally landed in Belgium, gave an ideal opportunity to revamp the operation into something far more dynamic. The resulting Manstein sickle plan through the Ardennes is well-known, but even this firm operational plan created much dissension within the German ranks. Whether or not the panzers would need to be accompanied by the infantry or strike out on their own to swiftly close the trap in the Low Countries was fiercely debated in wargames prior to May 1940. \n\nLooking at this chaotic and almost dysfunctional military planning, the German success in 1940 was all the more remarkable. The delay in operations proved indirectly quite valuable as it did allow the German forces to reequip and engage in training that would allow them to improvise at key points in the campaign. The German command at various points in the campaign seemed to be amazed and almost skeptical of the success of the sickle cut. Hitler's Fuhrer Directive No. 6 of 3 October stated German goals were:\n\n > to defeat as much as possible of the French Army and of the forces of the allies fighting on their side, and at the same time to win as much territory as possible in Holland, Belgium, and Northern France, to serve as a base for the successful prosecution of the air and sea war against England and as wide protective area for the economically vital Ruhr. \n\nThat the German offensive had quickly achieved these relatively limited objectives and the door was seemingly open to the conquest of the whole of France shocked the German high command. The stiffening of French resistance along the newly-formed Weygand line during the wider offensive into France in June, *Fall Rot*, summoned up uncomfortable memories of a reversion to the static warfare of the First World War. The encirclement of the French armies in Lorraine and the French appeals for an armistice dispelled these fears, but they were operative through much of the campaign. \n\nThis muddled planning and the self-doubt that pervaded the German planning and execution of the invasion of France suggests that the Third Reich had no firm plan for an occupation of the entirety of France. It should be noted that this was all too typical of the planning culture within the Third Reich and the fact that there was no concrete plan for the occupation of France is somewhat irrelevant. Hitler created a geopolitical situation in 1939 in which it became essential that Germany completely neutralize France if Hitler was to realize his long-cherished vision of an empire in the east. \n\n*Sources* \n\nFrieser, Karl-Heinz. *The Blitzkrieg Legend The 1940 Campaign in the West*. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2013.\n\n Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt. *Germany and the Second World War / Vol. 2, Germany's initial conquests in Europe*. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
31ib6w
|
in very remote places (e.g. 50km from your nearest neighbor, 2 hour drive to the nearest small village) in places like canada, scandinavia, alaska, etc, what jobs do people do to sustain themselves?
|
stay
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31ib6w/eli5_in_very_remote_places_eg_50km_from_your/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cq1tk8i",
"cq1tu7v",
"cq1udq2",
"cq1vg89"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not really possible to live in total isolation in northern Canada. You would need to go to town often for supplies and food.\n\nThere are still professional trappers in northern Canada, so they might be the most 'self sustained' you'll find, but they'll be going to town to sell their furs to a company, but most of these will be living in remote *villages* and not 2 hours from the nearest general store. \n\nThe Canadian government forced northern Inuit people in northern Canada into (relatively)modern planned settlements and out of their remote locations, so they all generally have a home in a town. During hunting season they may travel days away from home (such as to the edge of the sea ice looking for seals) and set up temporary encampment, but they have a house in a town.",
"Do you need to ask slightly rephrased questions every day? Because you asked almost identical question yesterday. \n\nYou got your answer last time, now do some research on your own. ",
"In Australia they are generally cattle stations, large areas of grazing country breeding cattle for export. In dry areas, there can easily be 50 km between station homesteads.",
"Stop asking the same types of questions and maby try to google shit yourself like 99% of ELI5 answers come from.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1z8yk8
|
Can history be effectively taught by teaching effect before cause and slowly progressing backwards into history?
|
To further explain what I mean is instead of just picking important dates through history and working towards today is it reasonable or is anyone trying to teach from current events backwards into the past?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1z8yk8/can_history_be_effectively_taught_by_teaching/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfrmfqw",
"cfrnyx8"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Are you talking about serious academics only, or including elementary school?",
"I have a bachelor's in history, and obtained a Master's in Teaching, and then focused on teaching mathematics rather than history. \n\nThere's actually a lot of really good reasons, not so much the 'effects before cause', but because everyone who is born suffers from a necessary 'flattening' - the world that I was born into simply 'is' the world, another way of saying 'presentism'. \n\nSo by teaching history from the present backwards, we can constantly reference the world that the students know, and build up a backstory that explains the world they can see. \n\nThe reason this doesn't happen a lot more often is because state standards call for state history to be taught often in the 9th grade, and American history to be taught often to Juniors. There's this idea that we want citizenry and civics to be taught to the strongest reasoners. \n\nThe approach that you take has a certain beautiful symmetry to it - we could teach citizenry and civics to 7th and 8th graders, contextualizing the world they are in, and the move backwards to American history in the 8th and 9th, move backwards through America's foundation and European expansionism, and then finally land in the ancient world. \n\nAnother problem with this approach is that you're asking students to understand local history - but it's not as if you're really going to get into any solid international politics. So when you get to the part of the ancient world which is relevant to modern politics, you don't really have the time and scope to have covered enough of the arab or chinese world to make ancient history's explanatory power relevant. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
e97659
|
What prevents full on recovery of limb function?
|
Let's say a soldier is hit by shrapnel. A dozen pieces cut through his arm, cutting tendons, blood vessels, and fracturing bones. He is airlifted back and the arm is saved. Yet, his arm is slower, weaker, and sometimes throbs painfully. Why?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/e97659/what_prevents_full_on_recovery_of_limb_function/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fajvci3",
"fajwnc6"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Some types of tissue don’t heal on their own. These are usually tissues that have no blood flow to them. Tissues that do heal almost always leave scar tissue, which interferes with the natural shape and limits movement.",
"Nerves generally regenerate very slowly or not at all. If nerves are damaged it explains both changes in feeling (e.g. pain, numbness, itches) and function (e.g. trembling, inability to do certain movements). Muscle parts that are no longer connected to nerves will die. Also scar tissue will impair function. It reduces elasticity of the skin and doesn't allow blood flow."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
8hircu
|
dna replication, mitosis and meiosis?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8hircu/eli5_dna_replication_mitosis_and_meiosis/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyk4qkr",
"dyk5cv0"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Mitosis will replicate DNA and cell will divide creating two identical cells to form. 46 Chromosomes total (23 pairs) in starting and ending cells.\n\nMeiosis will replicate DNA and cell will divide. Then chromosomes will crosslink allowing for DNA to move between chromosome pairs. Cells will divide again (no DNA replication) and a total of four cells have formed with only 23 total chromosomes (no pairs).\n\nCrosslinking allows for genetic variance in new generations and is random.",
"DNA Replication: The two strands that make up DNA are \"unzipped\" and a bunch of enzymes - think of enzymes as the machines that do work in cells - attach new pieces of DNA to each strand. Because each strand can be \"read\" in only one direction and the two strands face opposite directions, one strand can get replicated in one step (leading strand synthesis). The other strand is facing the \"wrong way,\" so it has to be replicated in a more complicated manner (lagging strand synthesis). The result of DNA replication is double the amount of DNA in the cell.\n\nMitosis: After DNA replication, the DNA fully splits, so each original strand is only attached to one newly formed strand of DNA. Each pair of strands forms its own nucleus. This is generally accompanied by cell division, which, as the name suggests, is when the entire cell cuts itself into two units. The result is two cells, each with the same amount of DNA as a cell prior to DNA replication. \n\nMeiosis: The DNA gets replicated, then it divides into two halves, similar to how mitosis works. Then each cell divides again while splitting its DNA in half a second time. The result is 4 cells, each with half as much DNA as a cell prior to DNA replication. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
47gxai
|
why is it that fat is removed with soap, yet soap is made from fat?
|
I know animal fat was originally used to make soap, but how does it remove fat yet is made with it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47gxai/eli5_why_is_it_that_fat_is_removed_with_soap_yet/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0culkv",
"d0cw39f"
],
"score": [
39,
6
],
"text": [
"Things dissolve in water because water is a polar molecule. A water molecule is like the Disney mouse ears logo. A big circle with two smaller circles that favor one side. The area at the top of the mouse ears has a slightly more positive charge than the bottom of the mouse's chin. So water has a positive pole and a negative pole, based on where its molecules are.\n\nAs a general rule, other polar molecules will be able to dissolve in water. Non-polar molecules (like many hydrocarbons) are insoluble in water. Fat is a non-polar molecule, and does not dissolve in water. That's why oil and water do not mix. Polar molecules are generally known as hydrophilic (water loving); non-polar molecules are known as (hydrophobic).\n\nSoap is somewhat of a hybrid. It has a polar end and a non-polar end, the latter it gets from being made partially from fat. So when soap is mixed together with fat and water, the non-polar end of the soap is attracted to the hydrophobic fat, while the polar end is attracted to the water. As you agitate the mixture more and more, you get tiny globs of fat that are entirely surrounded by the soap molecules, [like this](_URL_0_). Since it's completely surrounded by soap molecules and the entire external surface is hydrophilic, the whole thing acts like a hydrophilic molecule and dissolves in water, to be washed away with the next rinse.",
"Soap is made from fat, but is not completely fat.\n\nImagine you have a pile of metal. You turn one of those pieces of metal into a magnet. Now you can use the magnet to move the metal that's still there.\n\nIn this example, fat is the metal and soap is the magnet."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.planet-science.com/media/43403/soap_293x267.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
51bnk7
|
how/why the wind blows
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/51bnk7/eli5_howwhy_the_wind_blows/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7awaw7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" Because of the temperature differences. Hot air tends to go up and colder air comes down to take it's place. In larger scale the Coriolis force -it's a force asked to masses due to the earth's rotation- makes air flow in some large scale [\"cells\"](_URL_1_) \n\nIn smaller scale is basically caused from temperature differences. Take for example a city near sea. There will be at one point a \"breeze\" flowning through the city ([sea breeze](_URL_0_) ) as the air above the sea is colder than that of the land (because reasons!)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_breeze",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Earth_Global_Circulation_-_en.svg/2000px-Earth_Global_Circulation_-_en.svg.png"
]
] |
||
5m1xz9
|
what's going on with "black money" in india?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m1xz9/eli5whats_going_on_with_black_money_in_india/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dc05rba",
"dc05yzk",
"dc06ck2",
"dc09a44"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"A bunch of people aren't reporting their income, mostly because it's gained through illegal means (like the black market). This income is kept hidden in their homes generally, and isn't stored in banks. \n\nIn order to combat this, the Indian government surprised everyone by suddenly announcing that all their most common bills no longer have value, and must be exchanged for new bills. It would be like if the US government said \"we're getting rid of the $10 and $20 bills and replacing them with $15 and $30 bills.\" Anyone who wants their money to have value must take it to a bank to exchange it, where the amount they exchange will be recorded. Those with a ton of \"black money\", i.e. money gained through illegal means and not reported for taxes, will be exposed. ",
"This makes for an odd time. As I recall the week before this happened and about a week after the retail location I work at had a massive influx of indian-national customers looking to buy predominately Apple products in bulk. We put a hard limit on ipad and macbook quickly as our stock diminished very quickly but I had people screaming at me that they NEEDED 50 Ipads and 10 Macbooks. They paid in USD but the announcement which occurred on a Wednesday really seemed to put two and two together.",
"A lot of people don't keep their money in banks, to avoid taxes and to hide income from illegal sources.\n\nIndia recently changes their money so the highest denominations will become worthless. In order to change to the new money, which means owning up and paying back taxes, or coming up with some scheme to launder their soon to be worthless bills. At the very least it will be a serious imposition to those who have been breaking the law.",
"I'm an Indian. Our currency is a rupee. We're more like England than we like to admit. Our note denominations are like 10, 20, 50, 100, 500, 1000. Well it was like that for about 35 years or so. Before that we didn't have 1000 rupee notes. The 1000 rupee note was created to remove black money. In November 2016 the government discontinued the 1000 & 500 rupee notes and introduced new notes with denominations 2000 & 500. This was done to force people to come out and exchange their cash. We were given about 3 months with a daily cash exchange limit and also a daily deposit/withdrawal limit. Apart from the daily limit there was an additional total limit which was about 2-2.5 Lacs (200,000-250,000). Old 500 and 1000 rupee notes have been rendered useless after 31st December, 2016. This means if your money is already in the bank you're safe but if you have more cash lying around the house than you should then you're screwed. \n\nI don't know if you know this but 80% of the transactions in India are done in cash. Although I am inclined to believe that in the long run this is a bad move. This mostly affected the poor and the middle class. More than 80 people died standing in bank cues. We didn't manage to get the amount of black money that was expected, naturally. Plus statistics show that since the last time this happened the consumption of black money has increased. It looks to me like black money can now be stored in smaller briefcases. \n\nI'm sleepy or I would have gone into more detail."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1kwhap
|
Would we die if a supernova occurred?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kwhap/would_we_die_if_a_supernova_occurred/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbtb7ti"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If the closest star to sun 'proxima centauri' exoplodes as a supernova, the radiation reaching us will be the sixth of what we are constantly receiving from the sun, so basically no there is no close supernovas candidates."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
lfalz
|
what do the ows protesters want?
|
I know what their cause is, I just don't understand what they want to accomplish with the protests? Do they want the workers on Wallstreet to come and give them handouts or something? Or do they just want the issue to get some media attention?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lfalz/elif_what_do_the_ows_protesters_want/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2s7a4y",
"c2s7jdh",
"c2s8m2j",
"c2s95hh",
"c2s7a4y",
"c2s7jdh",
"c2s8m2j",
"c2s95hh"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
3,
2,
2,
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In general, the protest is about banks being douche bags. They fucked up in 2007/2008, and we, the taxpayer, bailed them about with over a trillion dollars so that they didn't fail. They almost failed due to making overly risky decisions to increase their profits. The protests want to limit what the banks can do.\n\nExample: You and 4 coworkers all make the same amount of money. One of them decides to take all of his paychecks and invest them in some stupid iguana-milk ice cream company. Chances are it's a terrible idea and will fail, but hey, he figured he might make some money.\n\nOf course, it fails and this stupid coworker loses everything. He now has to quit is job and move back in with his parents. However, your boss doesn't want him to leave because he's an important part of you team. So, he takes money out of your and the other, more responsible coworker's paychecks to pay off the stupid coworker's debts. Then, after the stupid guy has recovered, he goes back to making stupid choices. Understandably, you and your good coworkers are pissed off.\n\nEssentially, the banks fucked up, we gave them a shitton of money so they could stay in business, and now they are being even more greedy and risky again. People are pissed about it, and are demanding that the banks act more responsible.\n\n",
"They want an end to economic injustice. As to what they want done about it, that's not the point. Angry mobs aren't there to set policy. They're there to show the people who set policy that they need to address a problem quickly, as they're losing the support of the governed.",
"Return of glass-steagall, corporations are not people. It's pretty simple really. G-S act made banks either be casino banks, or regular banks so people could choose to either make a safe deposit, or gamble for higher rates. Corporations effectively being considered people is what allows money to be funneled into the hands of corrupt politicians to ensure further corruption. Financial donations are NOT free speech ect. OWS just want a return of financial laws that were created out of the great depression as well as actual enforcement of those laws. Also, cake > pie.",
"Go down and ask ten people. You'll get a better idea that way.",
"In general, the protest is about banks being douche bags. They fucked up in 2007/2008, and we, the taxpayer, bailed them about with over a trillion dollars so that they didn't fail. They almost failed due to making overly risky decisions to increase their profits. The protests want to limit what the banks can do.\n\nExample: You and 4 coworkers all make the same amount of money. One of them decides to take all of his paychecks and invest them in some stupid iguana-milk ice cream company. Chances are it's a terrible idea and will fail, but hey, he figured he might make some money.\n\nOf course, it fails and this stupid coworker loses everything. He now has to quit is job and move back in with his parents. However, your boss doesn't want him to leave because he's an important part of you team. So, he takes money out of your and the other, more responsible coworker's paychecks to pay off the stupid coworker's debts. Then, after the stupid guy has recovered, he goes back to making stupid choices. Understandably, you and your good coworkers are pissed off.\n\nEssentially, the banks fucked up, we gave them a shitton of money so they could stay in business, and now they are being even more greedy and risky again. People are pissed about it, and are demanding that the banks act more responsible.\n\n",
"They want an end to economic injustice. As to what they want done about it, that's not the point. Angry mobs aren't there to set policy. They're there to show the people who set policy that they need to address a problem quickly, as they're losing the support of the governed.",
"Return of glass-steagall, corporations are not people. It's pretty simple really. G-S act made banks either be casino banks, or regular banks so people could choose to either make a safe deposit, or gamble for higher rates. Corporations effectively being considered people is what allows money to be funneled into the hands of corrupt politicians to ensure further corruption. Financial donations are NOT free speech ect. OWS just want a return of financial laws that were created out of the great depression as well as actual enforcement of those laws. Also, cake > pie.",
"Go down and ask ten people. You'll get a better idea that way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8mpebv
|
Were there any transgender people in the Holocaust?
|
I know that in 20s / early 30s Berlin there were transgender and gender non-conforming people, and it would stand to reason that they would have been persecuted by the Nazis.
However, in my research I've not found any evidence of them being persecuted. I know many victims of the Holocaust weren't able to be placed into certain categories so were deemed "asocial" which is how I would guess as to the lack of evidence.
As a transgender person this question has always fascinated me, and not being able to find any evidence has really bothered me.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8mpebv/were_there_any_transgender_people_in_the_holocaust/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dzv85te"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"From an older answer:\n\nResearch into this area has only begun in recent years and very little is known at this point.\n\nThe Weimar Republic had allowed people to officially change their sex officially. People who wished to do to had to appear before a judge, undergo psychiatric evaluation, an operative sex change and were then issued a so-called Transvestitenschein (a transvestite certificate or pass). This practice continued under the Nazis and we know of a case where a person had their sex changes as late as 1940.\n\nAll in all, historical research so far has turned up about 25 biogrpahies of transgender persons in the Third Reich who have official documentation attached to their names, i.e. appeared as people petitioning to receive a Transvestitenschein or came in contact with authorities while already having a Transvestitenschein from the Weimar Republic. Of those individuals, seven transitioned Female to Male, the rest Male to Female. Of the F2M individuals, we can trace one case of persecution: A person born Erna Kubbe who for reasons not entirely clear had their Transvestitenschein revoked and was imprisoned in the Ravensbrück Concentration Camp for women. There however, he received permission to wear men's clothing and have his surnamed changed again to Gerd as it had been before he was imprisoned. The other six cases show a fairly normal existence, one person appearing in the historical record to have adopted a child together with his girlfriend in 1943.\n\nOf the F2M cases, seven were persecuted in some form, almost solely because of homosexual acts they had committed while cross dressing as a woman. In their cases, the cross dressing was viewed as resulting from their homosexuality but not as prove of it. They were brought to a Concentration Camp for homosexuality. The other eleven F2M individuals we know about, experienced problems but no persecution per se. In the case of an Austrian maid, she had undergone the operation but not changed her personal status with the courts yet, so when she was called up for the Wehrmacht, she was fined for draft evasion initially but otherwise left to lead her life.\n\nWhat is curious is also that it appears that in 1940 so-called Transvestiteballs were still held in Berlin and enjoyed over 300 visitors, all of them cross-dressing apparently.\n\nSo as far as we can tell, as long as the suspicion of homosexuality could be evaded, trans individuals who had gone through the channels set up by the state were not specifically persecuted. The discrimination and bureaucratic hurdles they had to undergo where not specific to the Nazi state, had been put in place before and continued afterwards. E.g. sending children who experienced trans feelings to psychiatric facilities is a practice that continued in Germany and Austria well until the 90s. What their experiences in Nazi psychiatry might have been, we don't know since we don't have any records of this happening at the moment.\n\nSimilarly, we don't know how the Nazi authorities dealt either with transgender people in the occupied and controlled territories or with individuals who identified as transgender but did not want to undergo reassignment surgery. The Uckermark Camp Memorial has produced some research lately that their camp was also used to imprison young women who displayed sexually and gender non-conformist behavior, what today would be called queer, but that has remained controversial within the academic community because some felt projected queerness back unto people before the concept existed is a form of presentism.\n\nAll in all, a lot of research is still to be done and a lot of sources still to be uncovered before a comprehensive picture of the situation of transgender individuals in Nazi Germany can be painted. In my professional opinion, one reason why in the cases known to us, we see no systematic persecution is because the number of people who openly identified themselves as transgender was comparatively small so that the Nazis never really thought up a all encompassing policy but rather continued what had been the status quo before.\n\nSources:\n\n* Volker Weiss (2010), „Eine weibliche Seele im männlichen Körper; Archäologie einer Metapher als Kritik der medizinischen Konstruktion der Transsexualität“. Dissertation FU Berlin.\n\n* Rainer Herrn (2013), „Transvestitismus in der NS-Zeit – Ein Forschungsdesiderat“. Z SexFo 26.\n\n* Ilse Reiter-Zatloukal (2014); \"Geschlechtswechsel unter der NS-Herrschaft. 'Transvesttitismus', Namensänderung und Personenstandskorrektur in der 'Ostmark' am Beispiel der Fälle Mathilda/Mathias Robert S. und Emma/Emil Rudolf K.\"; Beiträge zur Rechtsgeschichte Österreichs, Bd 1-2014"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3kpbxs
|
how does a tiny cable like usb-c carry such an incredibly huge amount of data so fast? and why couldn't they do that before?
|
In the late 1980s and early 90s computer interface cables were very large and moved data very slowly. Yet my little brain thinks that a wire is just a wire. Why can these few tiny strands of wire carry so much more data so much faster than that that old big bundle of lots of strands of wire?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kpbxs/eli5_how_does_a_tiny_cable_like_usbc_carry_such/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuzcgmt"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It all comes down to signal processing, encoding, and bigger better chips. I havn't looked at USB 3.1 spec closely but this is the case for every 'faster' connection that came before it.\n\nFor example, by sending extra data that verifies the data you sent is correct, you can increase the speed that you send data at and only fix occasional errors. Other techniques include better connections, more advanced techniques for encoding the data, and more efficient measurement devices of the signal coming out the other end."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2vahdj
|
Where does the term "Roma" for the ethnicity come from?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2vahdj/where_does_the_term_roma_for_the_ethnicity_come/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cog0hxd",
"cog5613"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"The term Roma is plural for man (Rom in Romani)",
"_URL_0_\n\n\netymological dictionaries are your friend\n\nEDIT: since you probably don't have access to OED he's what they say\n\n > Etymology: < Romani rom man, husband, Rom (plural romá ), of uncertain origin, probably < Sanskrit ḍomba lower-caste person working as a wandering musician (probably < a Dravidian language; compare Kannada domba , ḍomba , caste of acrobats, jugglers, clowns, Tamil dommara caste of jugglers, dommari member of this caste, and perhaps also Tamil tumpai crowd, Telugu dommi rabble, Kannada tombe , dombi , ḍombi crowd, rabble), but also influenced by or partly < Byzantine Greek Ῥωμ- (in e.g. Ῥώμη, a name of Rome and Constantinople (see Rome n.), Ῥωμαῖος citizen of the Byzantine Empire (in οἱ ἑῷοι Ῥωμαῖοι the eastern Romans; earlier (in Hellenistic Greek) denoting a Roman), use as noun of Ῥωμαῖος , adjective; compare Persian rūmī and its etymon Arabic rūmī Roumi n.), since the Roma formed into a distinct ethnic group within the Byzantine Empire. Compare earlier Romany n.2, Romany adj.2, and also Romanian adj.2 Compare earlier gipsy n., Zingano n., Zingaro n., and also Zigeuner n.\n\nand the earliest english source they give is from 1840s. \n\nso initially India referring to wandering musicians"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=Roma&searchmode=none"
]
] |
||
3hmz82
|
How extensive and fatal was Anti-Loyalist violence during the American Revolution?
|
I understand mobs of Patriots would harass, and at times inflict injury upon Loyalists throughout the Revolution but it is difficult to find any kind of statistics on number of occurrences and fatalities. How often did they outright kill Loyalists? Was this widely reported / hidden?
As a bit of unnecessary background on my question, I'm locked in debate with a friend who believes that the American Revolution was bloodier and more cruel to civilians of both sides than the French Revolution. I have not found many sources to indicate that the American Revolution saw the same kind of widespread killings as we saw in Paris.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3hmz82/how_extensive_and_fatal_was_antiloyalist_violence/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu92l79"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I would not say that it was more bloody than the French Revolution, but there was more fighting than is popularly portrayed. T.H. Breen's American Insurgents, American Patriots offers a compelling read as to this issue."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1o1wse
|
Do thermocouples take away heat when converting it to electricity? or does the heat not change at all?
|
Peltiers / thermocouples are thin plates, with 2 wires. When you apply current to the wires, one side of the thermocouple gets hot, the other goes cold.
Now if you heat up one side, so there is a temperature difference, it will produce a current. If you attached a motor to the peltier, would this cool down the peltier faster than if it wasn't attached at all?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1o1wse/do_thermocouples_take_away_heat_when_converting/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cco8dv5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In the case of Peltier devices, in which one side resides outside of the system of interest, heat is absorbed to create electricity. This occurs due to phonons (quanta of heat) being absorbed by electrons that are effectively pushed through the material. (The conditions that allow this are very limited.)\n\nFor thermocouples, it would depend on the design. The typical design, two wires of dissimilar alloy, would only absorb the amount of heat the materials absorb intrinsically (see: Heat Capacitance).\n\nSource: Material science education\n\nRegarding your question of a motor, you'll have to give more detail regarding your setup, and the type of motor."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
484fp3
|
Do other animals experience optical illusions?
|
What part of the vision system is responsible for this? Would the same or different illusions carry over for birds, cephalopods, herbivorous mammals?
Inspired by this [video](_URL_1_) of a kitten appearing to hunt rotating snakes
The youtube video links to a [paper](_URL_0_) in which the researchers failed to reproduce the hunting behavior. The paper does point to some other research done on pigeons
and primates.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/484fp3/do_other_animals_experience_optical_illusions/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0hhdef"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It has to do with visual processing in the nervous system, which varies between animals, and as such the perceptibility of illusions to different animals varies widely. [Kelley & Kelley (2013)](_URL_4_), for example, demonstrated that the [Ebbinghaus illusion](_URL_6_) is perceptible to bottlenose dolphins ([Murayama et al., 2012](_URL_0_)) and chickens ([Rosa Salva et al., 2013](_URL_3_)), but pigeons effectively see it \"in reverse\" ([Nakamura et al., 2008](_URL_5_)) and baboons can't see it at all ([Parron & Fagot, 2007](_URL_1_)). \n\nIt's difficult to make any broad generalizations here; different illusions have different neurological causes (Kelley & Kelley, for example, state that \"the Ebbinghaus illusion is mediated to some extent by monocular neurons that occur early in the visual system in the lateral geniculate nucleus and V1, whereas another size illusion, the Ponzo illusion, appears to be a result of binocular processing in V1 and the visual cortices beyond ([Song et al. 2011](_URL_2_))\"), and the effects of these causes, as demonstrated above, vary from animal to animal. The experience of illusions by animals is still an ongoing - and very interesting - field of research.\n\nEDIT: fixed a typo"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://file.scirp.org/Html/16-6901178_48304.htm#f2",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcXXQ6GCUb8&feature=youtu.be"
] |
[
[
"http://search.proquest.com/openview/c2a824b46c5a76adb96a3bbac8fba5cc/1?pq-origsite=gscholar",
"http://www2.southeastern.edu/Academics/Faculty/mrossano/grad_cog/ancestral%20landscapes/readings/baboons%20grouping.pdf",
"http://bmcneurosci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2202-12-27",
"http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10071-013-0622-2",
"http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/3/450.full",
"http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xan/34/3/375/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbinghaus_illusion"
]
] |
|
2v6tkf
|
why vga connectors need to be screwed in when hdmi and others don't need to?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2v6tkf/eli5_why_vga_connectors_need_to_be_screwed_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"coexw3q",
"coexwz9",
"coey1ie",
"cof5xd2"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because of the pins. The screws prevent the connector from accidentally twisting and bending the pins inside. HDMI connectors don't use pins that can bend, so that's not an issue.",
"\"Other\" ports have their own locking mechanisms. HDMI, usb, etc rely on friction, and the fact they are flat surface to flat surface contacts.\n\nVGA, serial, and parallel ports are all pin and tube type connectors without enough friction to hold them secure, and highly susceptible to damage if bumped or tripped over ",
"VGA was designed in the olden days. The connector by itself provides an electrical connection but not a mechanical one. You will notice that there is no positive 'click' when you seat it, or even much friction. \n\nLater video connectors (dvi, hdmi, display port) combine the electrical and mechanical connection into the design of the connector itself. Progress. ",
"In the early days of VGA, computers were large and not portable, and you just put the thing on your desk and left it there. Printers and mice also had connectors with screws back then. Making a connector that would be laptop and quick connection/disconnection friendly just wasn't a priority. There wasn't much danger of somebody yanking on the cable either.\n\nHDMI is a connector adapted to modern era, where you move the laptop around and plug it into a monitor or projector on a regular basis."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b3siuk
|
Were black people allowed to vote during segregation?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/b3siuk/were_black_people_allowed_to_vote_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ej1tztk"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"*Officially*, yes. Their right to vote was constitutionally protected, and could not be denied on the basis of race. However in practice, the right to vote is not actually that well defined under the Constitution, and there were many different ways that the white supremacist regimes in control of the segregationist states used to suppress or control black and poor white votes, some of which were nominally legal, others not so. Although the focus here is on the 19th century so leaves off a good deal of the time span in question, [this previous answer of mine](_URL_0_) does cover some of these issues. I'll quote the core excerpt for you here:\n\n > [....] With the end of Reconstruction and the triumph of 'Redeemer' governments, just about any possible barrier to the voting by African-Americans was implemented. Most famous, perhaps, being literacy tests, but plenty of other mechanisms, including more expansive registration requirements that could be a bureaucratic quagmire for even a quite literate person to navigate, such as requiring documentation of voting history, and subjective tests that could be failed at the whim of the man conducting them. Even though they were clearly targeted primarily at the black population, being as written race neutral (the laws, after all, did impact many poor whites, a not-unwelcome byproduct for the white elites), the laws didn't violate the 15th Amendment as passed, although whether courts would have been forceful in upholding the Constitution with the draft language we can only speculate, given that even the ratified language was hardly well enforced (See Giles v. Harris or US v. Cruishank, among others), and registration requirements were waived or ignored in many cases for white persons, such as small-time felons, or with blanket \"Grandfather Laws\" which ensured that they needed to meet none of the requirements, essentially.\n\n > Instances are known where certain requirements were waived for African-American men, but always in situations where the man was willing to vote Democrat. Holloway notes the case of Silas Green, who had committed some small time crime, who had been allowed to vote when he balloted Democrat, but upon switching his affiliation, was challenged by the Democratic election officials. It is important to note that in 1880, Reconstruction had only just ended and while ascendant, the Redeemers didn't necessarily feel quite in total control, so as Holloway aptly describes, this form of waiver for specific black persons was \"particularly effective because they offered Democrats a flexible but effective way to manipulate the vote when a close race was at hand.\" They quite literally could create voters if needed, but immediately prevent further voting if they believed that person would no longer support them. This would, of course, become less necessary and less common as the Jim Crow laws were passed and the white ruling elite came to feel more secure in power, and there was no longer any need to court any black voters.\n\n > The impact of such laws is stark. During Reconstruction, in Louisiana, 130,000 black men were voters. After the state was \"redeemed\", 5,000 black voters were registered. And even those few who were able to get through every hurdle thrown their way still had to contend with the intimidation and threats that would be directed their way for daring to make use of their right. Other states saw similar declines in the late 19th century (although by the early 20th century numbers would again rise as black community organizers worked to fight back and take back the vote). [....]"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/9qjfjm/in_the_united_states_we_have_to_register_to/e8ar8pj/"
]
] |
|
2rdumz
|
why are there laws that you can not be convicted of different crimes after a certain amount of time has passed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rdumz/eli5why_are_there_laws_that_you_can_not_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cney4u5",
"cneyurz"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Probably so I can't blackmail you and extort money from you, only to file charges years later anyways. That and after a while evidence disappears so it would be a waste of money to try and gather it.",
"It becomes unreasonable to convict someone of some more petty crimes after a certain amount of time, when the case becomes stale and there could be a lack of evidence to prove or disprove. Also, the passing of a lot of time shows a lack of diligence in seeking such a conviction. \n\nReally heinous crimes like murder generally don't have statute of limitations.\n\nedit: more detailed explanation"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2s08yw
|
Since time is (sort of?) a fourth dimension along with the familiar three, does that mean time can be measured in meters, feet, etc.?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2s08yw/since_time_is_sort_of_a_fourth_dimension_along/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnky0ol",
"cnlfmkk"
],
"score": [
23,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, it can. The speed of light is the conversion between seconds and meters in this scenario. A meter of time is the length of time it takes light to travel 1m, which is a little over 3 nanoseconds. It's common for astronomers to do this in the other direction, expressing distances in terms of time (light years being the main example). To simplify things, some physicists use units in which the speed of light is unitless and equal to 1. That way they don't have to carry a bunch of c's around in their math. ",
"Yes indeed, as /u/lmxbftw mentioned. Recall that distance = speed * time, and there is a special speed which is a constant in nature, the speed of light in vacuum. Theoretical physicists often resort to setting c = 1 to have the same unit for all spacetime dimensions. \n\nOne must however be cautious when calling time the fourth dimension, for spacetime (= space together with time) is a so-called Lorentzian manifold. The 3D space we're so familiar with is an Euclidean manifold which is something different. Where's the difference? Think of surfaces containing all points at the same distance from the origin (the 'center' of space). In 2D Euclidean space, it's a circle (all points on a circle are at the same distance from the center of the circle) and in 3D a sphere. Similarly in 4D Euclidean space, it's a [3-sphere](_URL_2_). \n\nBut in a Lorentzian space (also called [Minkowski space](_URL_0_)), it's a [hyperboloid](_URL_1_). That's right, points at the same *distance* from the origin lie on a hyperboloid and not a sphere. You may have guessed, this concept of distance we're using is far more general than and rather different from the one we're familiar with. You're only allowed to think of time as the 4th dimension as long as you remember this. \n\nAlso, time is the unit of 'distance' in spacetime. The distance you cover in spacetime equals the [time elapsed in your wristwatch](_URL_3_). \n\nninja edit: word"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Minkowski_space",
"http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Hyperboloid",
"http://www.wikiwand.com/en/3-sphere",
"http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Proper_time"
]
] |
||
160pi1
|
Would the royal women of the medieval ages really have the flawless features that we see in movies?
|
Example [Daenerys from Game of Thrones](_URL_0_)
Obviously, movies and art take a lot of artistic freedom, and Game of Thrones is a fictional world, but how well-kept would the people of this time have been, even the royalty?
What things would have been used to clean themselves, and how well did these things work compared to all of the products we have available today? How was dental hygiene?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/160pi1/would_the_royal_women_of_the_medieval_ages_really/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7rmktc",
"c7rmkxj",
"c7rmqct",
"c7rn6cl",
"c7rne4v",
"c7ro5v4",
"c7rptzy",
"c7rrhig",
"c7rspta",
"c7ruy2v"
],
"score": [
42,
69,
15,
22,
17,
954,
100,
7,
11,
19
],
"text": [
"Well first of all, judging by the art from the middle ages in Europe, the beauty ideal for women was quite different from the one today, so if the person was widely regarded as handsome then, I'd guess they wouldn't look like Kate Winslet exactly. ",
"The most glaring difference between female appearence (even the royal ones) between now and then was the state of skin. Firstly, washing, even your face, was frowned upon by the Church and medics. Secondly, different diseases, the most prominent being smallpox, left heavy scarring on the face. Thirdly, as a result of bad hygiene, pipmples were the bane not only of teenagers but adults too.\n\nSo how have they dealt with it? First method was to heavily cover your face with lead paint (makeup nowadays). Since lead poisoning can happen through contact with lead, you can imagine their overall health. Second, fake beauty spots, made of paper or leather, were used to cover the most prominent pimples. And third, at the dawn of medieval times, fans were introduced and instantly became a good method to somehow hide your flawes of the face.",
"I'm not sure if this is even my place to speak since I'm only semi knowledgable. In Victorian times lye soap was used as a soap along with animal fat. I don't know if this was also used in the time period you are looking for. Basically it is an acid and was quite harsh for the skin, it would often burn and sting. (Believe me I've used a similar type of soap and it was not fun) It would clean out pores and in some cases would help acne if it was bad enough, also remember they took less baths. Powders were used for complexions and hair. Powders take moisture out of hair making it look cleaner, if it had a scent that's only a bonus. Smelling good was more important than actually being clean.\n\nEdit: Told you it wasn't my place to say anything. ",
"One also has to remember that the perception of beauty in royalty has changed over time. While we may not see her as such today many considered Queen Elizabeth I to be quite beautiful with her chalky white skin and good birthing hips. So I don't believe a girl as skinny as Daenerys would even be considered healthy looking in Elizabethan England. ",
"Sorry? It's a fictional world, as you correctly state. So what period do you actually mean? If you do mean the \"for real\" Mediaeval period, why not check out the numerous portraits extant to check whether or not you think the beauties of the time would appeal to modern audiences? Add in the meat-rich/vegetable-poor diet of the aristocracy, the lack of exercise, other than equestrian activity, poor dental hygiene (Elizabeth I used brick dust and honey), internal parasites, scars from fleabites, skin infections and smallpox and infrequent bathing - and see what you get. Later than the Middle Ages, I know, but Diane de Poitiers' legendary beauty well into (at the time) old age was probably due to nothing more than fresh air, exercise, good food and lots of sex. ",
"Echoing others here, generally not. \n\n[This is a great article](_URL_1_) on the history of cosmetics for a general overview. If nothing else, the long history of \"corrective aids\" to appearance suggests that very few people in any age believe they are naturally flawless.\n\n**Pock-faced Elizabeth**\n\nThe most famous example is probably [Elizabeth I](_URL_0_), who was said by court ambassadors (who were writing home to their own nations -- they would never have written this to be seen in England itself!) to be covered in smallpox scars. She popularized the use of white paint in order to cover them up, but unfortunately it contained lead. Over time, this led to severe hair loss at best and death at worst. Elizabeth had already lost a great deal of hair due to the scarring on her scalp from smallpox, but lost still more to the face-painting, and was said to be almost entirely bald by her forties. \n\nWhile Elizabeth is an extreme example, she's not an entirely unrepresentative one. Noble women were only less susceptible to diseases like smallpox in the sense that noble families often moved around to avoid outbreaks (a group of young people fleeing a plague outbreak in Florence is the context for [Boccaccio's *The Decameron*](_URL_6_)), but they weren't any more immune to scarring illnesses or conditions than anyone else was. Between the lack of access to modern dentistry and orthodontia, lead-based make-up, diseases like smallpox, the ubiquity of fleas, and the inability to correct congenital deformities, I suspect people tolerated a lot more \"imperfection\" in pursuit of beauty.\n\nSome fashionable practices didn't improve the situation much. The elaborate wigs and hairstyles favored during the 18th century were so difficult to put together that you'd have it done in a day's time and then try to maintain it for the next 2-3 weeks. The lard and greases used to keep the hairstyles in place attracted vermin, and the lack of brushing meant that any lice infestation wouldn't encounter any serious opposition. The [Duty on Hair Powder Act of 1795](_URL_2_) helped to kill off the mania for wigs in England, but I don't know when their popularity declined elsewhere.\n\n**Flawless features are a lie anyway**\n\nSecond, and on a more modern note, even the women of *today's age* don't have the flawless features that we see in movies. Emilia Clarke has excellent skin, but in every shot, she's slathered in make-up and lit to advantage. In publicity shots and sometimes even production stills, you should always assume that the unseen hand of PhotoShop is at work. \n\nBig movies even have the budgets to digitally alter key shots to still greater advantage. Remember the FX artist who worked on *Transformers* and did an AMA on Reddit? And the now-infamous scene with [Megan Fox and the car](_URL_3_)? It isn't real. Well, it's real in the sense that Megan Fox and Shia LaBeouf were both in front of a camera saying lines. It isn't real in the sense that Fox's body was digitally augmented, and in pretty much the places you'd expect. If you listen to the commentary tracks on a variety of movies, directors will usually point out the scenes where computers were used to hide something, from things as small as a pimple that Cameron Diaz had on a given day of shooting, to splicing in Natalie Portman's mouth and dialogue from a good take to a Natalie Portman in a take where the lighting was better.\n\nAs much as we can rail about the murky ethics behind it, it's the latest in a long tradition of artistic fakery. Portrait artists in earlier ages left out \"imperfections\" and accentuated good traits in order to keep clients happy. The camera had been invented for all about five minutes before [people started to screw around](_URL_5_) with the resulting pictures. Now PhotoShop is brought in to create an image of people that simply does not exist. And in the meantime, we keep trucking along with our pimples, cellulite, chipped teeth, pores, uneven eyes, varicose veins, and errant hairs, convinced that reality is a lesser version of what we should actually be.\n\nPerfection is literally inhuman, but it's all we seem to want. Sorry to be maudlin, but threads like [this](_URL_4_) are starting to kill my soul.",
"In my period, luckily, we do have some more unflinching accounts of how women looked. A tip: when you want to see how a woman looked, see if there are any busts of her rather than portraiture - it's a tad harder to be flattering and accurate at the same time with busts. Compare [this](_URL_1_) bust of Marie-Antoinette, in which her negative features (high forehead, aquiline nose, slightly protruding 'Hapsburg' bottom lip) to [this] (_URL_2_) portrait of her, which, does display these features, but makes them far less harsh to the eye of the audience.\n\nThose noblewomen and royal princesses that were disfigured, disabled or otherwise invalid were often left unmarried, where they would remain at the court of their brother, or joined the church in the role of Abbess. There are, however, many cases of men being rather repulsed by their royal wives. The Comte de Provence did fervently find himself repulsed by the Savoyard Comtesse de Provence, despite the fact that [portraits](_URL_0_) of her don't hint at the fact that she was apparently, according to the libellous and often very wrong court gossip of Versailles, dirty and unkempt.\n\nI am sorry that this is not strictly medieval, but I think you will find that these policies do go back towards the times of Elizabeth I of England and beyond.",
"As an interesting note on disease and royalty...it is believed that often major pathogens (for example yersinia pestis also known as the bubonic plague) like most others bacteria, require an adequate amount of iron. Thus it often struck families with money harder because they were much more well fed as opposed to the malnourished lower class peasants. ",
"Some, not all. One of my personal heroes, [Diane de Poitiers](_URL_0_), was famous for her beautiful skin, even until she was 50. She reputedly bathed in milk, and drank gold.",
"Medieval ideals of beauty were much different than they are now, as I'm sure has been pointed out to you already. The most important factor in a medieval woman's beauty was probably her skin, which marked her as noble or aristocratic. Due to widespread disease and filth, clear skin was a rarity, and therefore highly desirable. A truly important factor when it came to beauty, as well, was the woman's \"evenness of features\". A medieval man may not have found modern actresses/models very attractive; they preferred a woman to have rounded and *even* features, while the ideal of modern beauty focuses on sharp, exaggerated features.\n\nedit: I feel I should add to my comment since I'm getting questions about what I meant. I hope this clears things up a bit! In another reply I linked a [Raffael painting](_URL_0_) which I feel embodies the general ideals of beauty in medieval Europe, which I will elaborate on. The medieval ideal of beauty seemed to be more concerned with if a woman had these specific features, rather than whether she was actually *pretty* in the face, per se. A woman's personality and status could make up for conventional prettiness if she had these, what they thought of as, *regular* features.\n\n* Clear and pale skin. Darker skin tones were not exactly considered ugly, but paleness was preferred, probably because only wealthy people could generally have such light skin. In some instances, darker appearance could be viewed as exotic and worked to one's advantage, as in the case of Anne Boleyn.\n* A woman's hair was a large factor in her beauty. Due to the same health reasons as clear skin, long and healthy hair was considered beautiful. Only a wealthy person could afford to take care of so much hair, as lice and other such pests were commonplace, and bathing was a rarity even among nobility. A woman's hair color was not as important as its length and health, though light color was generally preferred as the ideal.\n* An oval or rounded face with soft, even features. Any sort of pronounced or non-regular feature, such as high cheekbones or skinniness, was not considered beautiful. The sharp chins and strong jawed models in modern fashion magazines would have not been attractive to many medieval men.\n* Large eyes (with lighter colors preferred), a long nose, and small mouth all in appropriate proportion. During the early and high middle ages, an *extremely* high forehead was the ideal; noblewomen would pluck their hairlines to make their foreheads appear larger. This desire for a large forehead persisted, though to a lesser extreme, at least until the Renaissance."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.lv3.hbo.com/assets/images/series/game-of-thrones/character/s2/daenerys-targaryen-1024.jpg"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_I_of_England",
"http://www.asiapharmaceutics.info/article.asp?issn=0973-8398;year=2009;volume=3;issue=3;spage=164;epage=167;aulast=Chaudhri",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_on_Hair_Powder_Act_1795",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ch0Hu917CQ",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/1605hz/guys_would_you_date_have_sex_withdate_younger/",
"http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2012/10/13/the-surprisingly-old-art-photo-fakery/1s6A05EM9Xt1DJYqPjlpNP/story.html",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decameron"
],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Comtesse_de_Provence,_Élisabeth-Louise_Vigée-Le_Brun.jpg",
"http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_DzskcQgu3L4/TGFNOWEZ2GI/AAAAAAAAC7k/UfeIRFSGVmM/s1600/Marie+Antoinette+louvre+marble+1783.jpg",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Marie-Antoinette,_1775_-_Musée_Antoine_Lécuyer.jpg"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_de_Poitiers"
],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Raffael_046.jpg"
]
] |
|
3ropnt
|
can anyone be a great singer or is being a greater singer something you're born with?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ropnt/eli5can_anyone_be_a_great_singer_or_is_being_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwpyk51",
"cwpykgc"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"As a singer i can say with utmost certainty that pretty much everyone can become a good singer in the same way that someone can become a good guitarist. But i'd say that it's more difficult if you don't already have an interest in music or aren't particularly interested.\n\nAll it takes is teaching and practice. (But as with everything natural talent does help)\n\nI have seen people who were practically tonedeaf become great singers via the singing program that i am being taught by.",
"Being a naturally good \"Singer\" is dependent on your hearing. People who are naturally really good at singing can hear a note, and immediately reproduce it with their voice. In the most extreme case, these people can hear a note and go- \"Oh, that note is F#!\". This is referred to as Perfect Pitch. \n\nUnderstand that you DO NOT have to have perfect pitch to be good at singing. The only issue is if you're tone deaf. \n\nTake a quick test here: _URL_0_\n\nIf you're not pitch perfect, but also not tone deaf, then you'll be fine learning how to sing. Just get lessons, practice often, and you can be just as good a singer as any. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://tonedeaftest.com/"
]
] |
||
oqdgl
|
i realize that i don't like my government that much, and i decide to break away from my country and create a sovereign state. what steps must i make for this to happen?
|
Let's assume I live in in Groklamivlevskanya, an autonomous Oblast in the Democratic Republic of Mraklovistan.
After decades of civil war, a strong government took control of the government of Mraklovistan, but nobody in Groklamivlevskanya is happy with it, and the Great and Powerful Governor of the Oblast decides to break out from the new oppresive regime. Let's also assume that after decades of conflict and corruption, Mraklovistan's army is in such a bad state if can't go to war to defend its territory.
What would be the steps the Great and Powerful Governor of the Oblast must take to become a soreveign nation with widespread recognition and an UN member?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oqdgl/eli5_i_realize_that_i_dont_like_my_government/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3j72j1",
"c3j7qxm",
"c3j7ygd"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Be recognized by other big countries that you are another country. You are not a country until important countries recognize you as such. Especially the host country that you are seceding from.\n\nEdit: Spelled a word wrong in three ways. ",
"A state can still be sovereign without recognition, as long as the original state has no ability to project their power within the bounds of your country. In the case of Groklamivlevskanya, the first step is simply declaring your independence. It helps if you don't do this alone, but with a sizable group of people, but you can do it alone. \n\nNow, this declaration basically is an admittance that you won't obey the laws of your host country - won't pay taxes, won't obey officers, etc. The original country will try to enforce their laws.\n\nIf they are unable to do so - you are effectively sovereign. If you kill every tax collector to the point that they start sending police men, and if you kill them too to the point that they start sending army men, and you kill them too to the point that they give up - well, that's a war of independence.\n\nAt this point, you are sovereign. Not really a country though, unless everyone else recognizes your right to rule. I mean this domestically. You should start by going around to your neighbors and beating them up until they agree to pay your taxes. You can use those taxes to subcontract beating people up to a police force. Alternatively, you can make arrangements with people to recognize your authority - this is called a social contract. You can say that you will let other people participate in your sovereignty, freedom from the initial government, in exchange for obeying your laws and paying your taxes. They may ask for other things in return, such as healthcare. \n\nAt this point you are a sovereign state, even if you are not recognized as such, and in the company of regions such as Christiana, Palestine, Transnistria, Ossetia, etc. \n\nIf other legitimate countries choose to recognize your country as legitimate, then you can start engaging in diplomatic relations, trading, quelling internal secessionists, enforcing a personality cult, etc.",
"1. Create a body of one or more people. Call it your government. This will manage your laws, taxes, police, military, chocolate-chip cookie distribution (in case of socialism) etc.\n2. Swear an oath that you will follow this government no matter what, which should give you 'citizenship' of that government.\n3. Hurrah, now you're sovereign! If your host country isn't happy with you forming a government that conflicts with its own, it will send people with guns to kill you. You must kill them and maybe drink their blood. If you don't, they will have taken your sovereignty. If you win, you retain your sovereignty.\n4. Send diplomats from your government (or go yourself) to other countries - preferably rich and famous ones - and ask them to recognise you. If the more important ones do, the less important ones will, and you will be a country in the eyes of the world (not just yours, as was the case before). If not everyone recognises you, you will still be a country, just not universally recognised and hence not so popular and famous (like say, Taiwan).\n\nSo in short: don't follow anyone's laws but those made by yourself, get other people to agree to this, and you're set."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3aifd5
|
where does the saying "cats have 9 lives" come from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3aifd5/eli5_where_does_the_saying_cats_have_9_lives_come/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cscwhft",
"csd5j9h"
],
"score": [
81,
9
],
"text": [
"Easy explanation: Because they're really good with their reflexes. They jump and land from heights we would break apart from.\n\nMore history:\n\nAn old English saying goes \"A cat has nine lives. For three he plays, for three he strays, and for the last three he stays\". The first three are the times where the cat is young. The next three are where it is in it's prime time and the last three are where it's too old to even catch mice. So first it plays, then it goes around, hunting and then it just stays home.\n\nCats are thought to be magical and have been worshipped in the past. The greek thought nine is the number of the \"trinity of the trinities\". \n\nBasically, people have always seen how sturdy these animals are and, back then, have thought they are magical.",
"Pretty sure it comes from a witch being able to turn into a cat but on the ninth time it stays a cat. \nI think that's the reason behind the talking cat on Sabrina the teenage witch. \nBut it's the legit answer. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
rpz7w
|
why old tvs can change instantly between stations but new flat screen tvs that can even connect to the internet can't?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rpz7w/eli5_why_old_tvs_can_change_instantly_between/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c47p59o",
"c47rbiz"
],
"score": [
18,
35
],
"text": [
"Analog signals don't require buffering. Old TV's used analog signals. New TV's use digital signals which require time to buffer. ",
"Here's the process an analog TV goes through when changing channels:\n\n* Tune to new frequency, display signal. It's instantaneous, there are no processing steps required, it can just pipe the signal it receives directly to the screen.\n\nHere's the process a digital cable box or TV goes through when changing channels:\n\n1. **Tune** to new frequency\n2. **Demux** bitstream and identify correct channel\n3. **Decrypt** individual channel (on pay-TV systems)\n4. **Unpack and Decode** channel video and audio streams\n5. **Wait** for a keyframe in the video stream.\n6. **Display** video signal.\n\nEach of those steps takes tenths of a second to complete. The wait for a keyframe, especially, can take 1 or 2 seconds.\n\nLet me explain each of these steps in more detail.\n\n**Step 1** is tuning to the frequency on which the desired channel is broadcast. This step is pretty much instantaneous.\n\n**Step 2** is *demultiplexing* or *demuxing* the signal. This is required because on the vast majority of digital TV systems, a single frequency will carry several individual video channels. These individual channels are smooshed (*muxed*) into a single stream of bits. Your TV/Cable box looks at this bitstream and figures out which bits belong to the channel you selected. It separates the correct bits into a different bitstream that carries just the channel you selected. This is called *demuxing*.\n\n**Step 3** is decryption. On Pay-TV services, most of the channel streams are encrypted to prevent people from watching them if they haven't paid. Your cable box or satellite receiver must consult its internal decryption key table to get the right decryption key, and use it to decrypt the stream. If the key is not available, the box must wait for it to be resent, which can take several seconds (but this is unlikely).\n\n**Step 4** is unpacking and decoding. This is another demux process, but instead of looking for the bits for a video channel, it is now separating the channel stream into video and audio streams. The video uses a codec like MPEG2 or MPEG4, while the audio uses a codec like PCM or AC-3. The box must identify these codecs and begin the proper decoding routines.\n\n**Step 5** is waiting for a keyframe. MPEG2 and MPEG4 are video compression schemes. The way they compress video is by transmitting a *keyframe* (which is a complete frame of video) and then only transmitting the *changes* from one frame to the next. The receiver gets the keyframe, then applies the specified changes to make up subsequent frames. But what if the receiver jumped into the stream in between keyframes (which is the most likely scenario)? All it has are a bunch of changes, but no original to make the changes on. So it has to wait for the *next* keyframe (which usually takes a second or two) and begin decoding from there. This is the biggest reason for the delay in changing channels on most digital TV systems.\n\n**Step 6**, finally, is displaying the decoded video and audio.\n\nAll of those processing steps take a little bit of time, and the cumulative effect is that it takes a couple of seconds to begin showing a newly-selected channel."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3ef5m8
|
why does congress have the power to completely alter a bill, changing the contents and even title, on its way through the house or senate? why was this power created? why has its apparent abuse not caused removal of the power?
|
For further clarification:
[This clip from Last Week Tonight](_URL_0_) is what brought about this question. It doesn't make any sense why the Senate would completely strip a bill that had already been approved by the House and while nothing remains of the original it is still "the same bill".
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ef5m8/eli5_why_does_congress_have_the_power_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cteck2m",
"cteftok"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Congress, and only Congress, has the power to choose each and every word of a bill. This includes the power to edit the bill before voting, and the power to vote on the final bill. If Congress couldn't do this, who would draft, edit, and pass laws?",
"That's Congress's job. They are the ones that write and edit bills. That is just about the only thing they do."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://youtu.be/i8xwLWb0lLY?t=14m15s"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6nxwqa
|
how do animals in the wild figure out that poison ivy is something to stay away from when it takes days after for the rash to show up?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nxwqa/eli5_how_do_animals_in_the_wild_figure_out_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkd35py"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most animals are not affected. Humans are simply allergic to their \"poison\" because it penetrates the skin and is identified by the body as foreign invaders."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4ccxv3
|
How were Viking and Spartan warriors that survived battles and wars seen once they made home?
|
From what I remember from my history courses, it was honorable to die in combat and; dishonorable to be captured. How were those that fought in battles and wars treated if they managed to make it home alive? Would Vikings still make it to Valhalla? How would they be treated in daily life?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4ccxv3/how_were_viking_and_spartan_warriors_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1hhwid"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure about Vikings but elderly Spartan men could be elected into the Gerousia, a council of elders made up of 30 men over 60 years old who typically held office for life.\nThere were also the Ephors, 5 elected high officials who aside from the two kings held the most power. While I'm not sure if there was an age limit to this group they were likely often older, well known men.\n\nIn short elder Spartan men, essentially all of them by then being veterans of many battles (there were long stretches when the Spartans weren't warring with anyone however) could enter high governmental offices. They were an influential and respected part of society.\nIt is possible that there may still have been something of a stigma towards these men as they were no longer prime fighters in a society dedicated to producing prime fighters, but even if there was the society still held these men in high esteem."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
395yxv
|
how can we be certain that there isn't another 'earth' on the opposite side of the sun, always out of view of our telescopes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/395yxv/eli5_how_can_we_be_certain_that_there_isnt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs0lesq",
"cs0m06v"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Its gravity would have an effect on our planet, the other planets in the system, and even(on a very small scale) the sun, as well as all the comets and asteroids constantly cutting through our solar system. As we have not observed any such gravitic effects(and we'd notice, because it would screw up trajectories for interplanetary probes and tracking asteroids, as well as screwing up the math for why the planets were acting the way they did), we conclude there is no such body. ",
"We know this on a number of grounds. In rough order of certainty:\n\n* It's mathematically unlikely. Objects as large as the Earth cannot stably share an orbit over timescales as long as the solar system's been around. In fact, it's believed that such an object *did* once exist (called Theia), but it and Earth eventually collided. The debris of that collision formed the Moon.\n\n* We'd notice its gravitational effects. Earth's pretty big and spaceflight is insanely precise. We can detect the pull of much smaller and more distant objects by watching the orbits of the planets (this is how Pluto was discovered), and we'd *certainly* notice a large body in the inner solar system.\n\n* We've looked directly at that spot via probe. There's nothing there."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
451gcn
|
difference between serial killers and hitmen
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/451gcn/eli5_difference_between_serial_killers_and_hitmen/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czuii65",
"czuiijs"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Motivation. $ or power or sex etc. That's really it. And hitmen are typically serial killers after the third kill( I think). \n\nIt like all Catholics are Christian but not all Christians are Catholics \n\nAll hitmen are serial killers but not all serial killers are hitmen. ",
"Hitmen are considered professional killers. The difference between Serial Killers and Professionals are that Serial Killers kill due to their own motivation - often they have some kind of mental issue but their lust for blood is usually self-manifested and may not provide any economic/social benefit or gain to the killer.\n\nProfessional Killers on the other hand may not have any personal motivation tied into the killing of an individual - at most they are simply being paid by someone who's interests lie in the death of the victim.\n\nAnd finally, to quote the Joker: \"If you're good at something, never do it for free\"\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3b8xhu
|
What percentage of the sky is covered by stars?
|
If we had perfect telescopes on earth that can see every star in the observable universe, no matter how dim they are, what percentage of the sky would be covered by stars?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3b8xhu/what_percentage_of_the_sky_is_covered_by_stars/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csk5xoi"
],
"score": [
35
],
"text": [
"**Short answer:** If you don't count the sun, then basically zero. If you do count the sun, then it's about 0.0005%\n\n**Long answer:** You're hitting on a really interesting problem that astronomers had a hundred years ago, called [Olber's Paradox.](_URL_1_) \"If the universe is static and eternal and infinite, then shouldn't every line of sight end at a star? If this is the case, then why isn't he night sky as bright as the sun if everything we're looking at is the surface of a star.\" This turns out to be great simple evidence of the big bang and for a finite age of the universe. \n\nAnyway, let's do some math. Bare with me for a minute. The observable universe contains about 100 billion galaxies with somewhere between 100 billion and 1 trillion stars per galaxy. This means that the the universe has about 10^18 or 10^19 stars. You can now use this to calculate something called the [\"mean free path\"](_URL_0_) of the universe. That just means the average distance something can go in a straight line before running into something else. Anyway, it turns out that it's about \n\n MFP ~ 1 / (d^(2)) (N/V)\n\nwhere d is the diameter of a star (use the solar radius about 10^9 m), and N/V is the density of targets (so in our case, stars). \n\nThe diameter of the universe is about 100 billion light years, so it has a volume of about 10^80 m^(3). Plugging all these numbers in yields:\n\n MFP ~ 1 / (10^(9))^2 * (10^(19)/(10^80) meters\n\nwhich adds up to about 10^43 meters. Again, for reference, the radius of the universe is about 100 billion light years, or 10^26 meters. This means, probabilistically, that if you drew a straight line from one side of the observable universe to the other, your odds of hitting a star are 1 in 10^(17) (from the ratio of 10^(26)/10^(43)). \n\nSo you can generalize this understanding for the purposes of our problem here. If you are at a random spot in the universe and you draw 10^17 lines away from yourself then this effectively means that only about one line will hit a star. This means, on average, you could run back and forth across the entire universe almost 10^17 times before you hit anything. Basically, it means that only 0.0000000000000001% of sight lines end on stars. \n\nOf course, on the earth, it's a little different. The approximation above assumed a uniform distribution of stars in the universe, when it reality it turns out there's a bunch all clumped together nearby, called the Milky Way, which makes for a much richer number of targets. Indeed, if we repeated this experiment (with drawing lines out into space) then the fraction of lines ending on a star will be as big as 0.0005%, because that's the fraction of the sky occupied by the sun! Anything else other than that is just noise.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.kshitij-iitjee.com/Study/Physics/Part3/Chapter21/81.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers%27_paradox"
]
] |
|
2p62rt
|
if cold air can't hold much moisture, how come fog and mist exist?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2p62rt/eli5_if_cold_air_cant_hold_much_moisture_how_come/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmtohne",
"cmtonag",
"cmtp0xc"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"That fog and mist is water condensing out of the air. The fog is water that has already separated out of the air and \" clumped\" together. It is just not quite heavy enough to fall thru the air to the ground.. The mist is actually heavy enough to fall",
"Uhhh....fog exists because cold air can't hold much moisture. Your post is it's own explanation ",
"Fog and mist exists *because* cold air can't hold much moisture.\n\nI think what's confusing you is the usage of the word \"hold\". In this context, fog and mist is not regarded as \"held\" in the air, fog and mist are tiny droplets of water in the air. \n\nWater that is \"held\" by the air is water vapour, water in a gaseous state. When the air is saturated with water vapour, any excess water is going to condensate into tiny droplets - fog or mist. If a warmer body of air, that is close to being saturated with water vapour, allows to cool down, it's going to be supersaturated, and water will condense into fog or mist. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1vpnkm
|
why is the "wizard of oz" so revolutionary in movie history?
|
It's a great, beautiful movie, but it wasn't the first one to use color or special effects. So why is it so important in cinema history?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vpnkm/why_is_the_wizard_of_oz_so_revolutionary_in_movie/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceul76d"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because it took a wildly popular book and applied new (maybe not original or first time) film making techniques to it to make a wildly popular film.\n\nRemember, it's not who does it first, it's who does it best first."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
117r5o
|
Why is the earth's crust thinner under the oceans?
|
When teaching my students about plate tectonics, I got asked why exactly the crust was thinnest under the oceans and thickest under mountain ranges. The mountain ranges one is fairly easy to explain, but a long Google search later I still can't come up with a good explanation. Can anyone help me out here? I promised them a definite answer tomorrow :)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/117r5o/why_is_the_earths_crust_thinner_under_the_oceans/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6k3k3j",
"c6k46dj"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"The oceanic crust is formed at the mid-oceanic ridges as mantle heat forces rock to the surface. As the mantle pushes up, this crustal rock cools at a fairly uniform rate/thickness of about 7km. \n\nThe reason it works out this way is that the underlying temperature of the mantle is directly related to how thick it gets before solidifying, this occurs over time.. Fast hot mantle rises quickly while cool mantle rises slowly\n\nthe Vast majority of the mantle underneath the mid ocean ridges is of a fairly uniform temperature and is pushed upwards about 7km before solidifying. Cool mantle has crustal thicknesses nearer to 5km, and very hot mantle, such as the hotspot creating Iceland has a crustal thickness near to 20km. \n\n\n\n",
"[Oceanic crust, forming at mid ocean ridges and subducting at the trenches is like a conveyor belt](_URL_4_). It maintains a relatively constant thickness, 7km +/-, due to the melting/cooling/insulation as described by Sycosys.\n\nWhat he/she did not address is why there is a much [thicker continental crust](_URL_0_). This is due to differentiation, which is really just the separation of lighter rocks, that \"float\" rather than being subducted. It is like the skin on a boiling soup, it just keeps piling up.\n\nThis is why the [oldest rocks on the planet](_URL_1_) (4+ billion years old) are part of continents, whereas the oldest oceanic crust, [ophiolites](_URL_3_) notwithstanding, are on the order of [170 million years old](_URL_2_): warning PDF."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/structure/crust/index.php",
"http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/09/080925-oldest-rocks.html",
"http://www.tectonics.caltech.edu/images/maps/seafloor_age.pdf",
"http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/education/facts/ophiolites.html",
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091125135126.htm"
]
] |
|
5r8vly
|
can a mall cop arrest me if i'm in a store that's not in the mall?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5r8vly/eli5_can_a_mall_cop_arrest_me_if_im_in_a_store/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dd5akq9",
"dd5avkm",
"dd5b1ez",
"dd5b2iw"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I don't think mall cops can arrest, period. They're pretty much a liaison between the mall and the police. They're urged not to chase perpetrators and can even lose their job for doing so; reason 1 being it's dangerous and reason 2 is legal implications. If they're chasing a person across the street, and that person gets hit by a car, expect lawyers to get involved. ",
"Technically... Yes. \n\nWhat the mall cop is doing is called a \"citizen's arrest.\" If you witness someone committing a crime, you are allowed to detain them until a police officer arrives. The detaining citizen can also use reasonable force to do so. In general, the courts grant broad authority to business owners to protect their property. \n\nBut as a practically matter... They probably won't.\n\nA citizen's arrest can be legally risky because a citizen does not have the same protections as a police officer. If a cop arrests the wrong person, they are not normally subject to sanctions for it unless they were grossly negligent or malicious. If a citizen arrests the wrong person, they can be sued for \"unlawful detention.\" Not to mention, if they are outside of their place of business they probably won't be covered by their employer's insurance, etc.\n\nTLDR: Yes, because any citizen (mall cops included) has the power to detain criminals. But they probably won't, because it is risky and not worth it.",
"If they are a real police officer who is given authority by the municipality then yes, they can arrest you. If they are hired by the mall to provide security of the mall, then no. They can not arrest you.",
"Is she getting her car worked on? You know on lunch or after her shift? Since its a Walmart automotive?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bc5n1v
|
Why are some roads made from concrete/cement rather than asphalt? What determines whether it should be one or the other? Why do a lot of the cement roads have grooves in them?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/bc5n1v/why_are_some_roads_made_from_concretecement/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eko6sot",
"eko90am",
"ekono9l",
"ekoo1ul",
"ekoqr6t",
"eksiajc"
],
"score": [
12,
42,
5,
3,
15,
3
],
"text": [
"cement roads with grooves are usually being prepped for asphalt. \n\nThe ground on which a road is built dictates the necessity for an underlying structure. Roads laid upon soft soils without a concrete layer are prone to potholes and other accelerated wear issues. Areas that have well compacted earth that is not prone to excessive seasonal fluctuation generally do not require such measures.",
"Cement roads are significantly more expensive. Asphalt is the cheaper option and actually has a better safety rating due to more traction. The grooves are used for better road traction or to extend the life of the road surface.",
"Once worked with a guy who did road/ramp design and from our conversations it depends on a lot of things:\n\nLocation/topography\n\nSoil composition\n\nAnticipated traffic/weight loads\n\nClimate/Weather\n\nSpecific local issues (seismology, hydrology, land usage in surrounding area)\n\nAnticipated lifespan\n\nStrategic importance (interstate highway system)\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThere are a LOT of considerations that go into the design and construction of roads.",
"Concrete is very hard and it can crack from heat cold expansion and contraction. Grooves allow the concrete to slightly bulge or flex without destroying itself. Or at least cracking \n\nBut it can also be to increase surface area, make noise as you drive over, especially near sharp turns, or help channel water. I’m sure there are a ton more reasons. Depends on their shape and placement.",
"Asphalt is cheaper but concrete typically lasts longer. Usually a life cycle cost analysis is performed based on traffic loads to see what is cheaper in the long run. Other factors can come into play -high volume truck routes usually need concrete vs a residential street where road noise is a factor will usually favor asphalt. In some cases composite pavements are used (asphalt over concrete) to get the benefits of both. The grooves are often to reduce noise. If you are talking about the jointing (deeper grooves) those are to prevent cracking.",
"Civil engineer here. This isn’t my specialty, but I am very unsatisfied with answers I am seeing. Reinforced concrete has much better strength properties than asphalt, but it is also less ductile, which means it is susceptible to cracking when it deflects or is stressed enough. It is also much more expensive to maintain than asphalt. For this reason, concrete is typically used in areas such as elevated interstates that are supported by steel or prestressed concrete girders which provide a rigid underlying structures or on top of areas with good subgrade soil conditions such as sand or gravel that will not settle over time. You don’t want concrete to crack because it creates a path for water to freeze and further destroy the concrete or to corrode the rebar. Asphalt is a bituminous material which means it’s almost rubbery. This allows it to be very ductile and deform large amounts before it will crack. This is ideal in areas with less stable subgrade conditions such as areas supported by wilt or clay that may deform over time. Asphalt is also preferable in cold regions where concrete sees significantly damage from freeze thaw and mag chloride that would make it expensive to replace whereas asphalt is significantly easier and cheaper."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6yw2de
|
why are fall colors coming early in north america this year?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6yw2de/eli5_why_are_fall_colors_coming_early_in_north/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmqlpcr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They are not. The season of fall officially begins September 22 and it is not at all uncommon for the leaves to start to change as early as late August. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5hl7s2
|
if isis entirely ignores the rules of the geneva convention, why can't countries fighting them ignore the rules, too?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hl7s2/eli5_if_isis_entirely_ignores_the_rules_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"db0za73",
"db0zgop",
"db0zqgx",
"db0zxyl",
"db0zzbm",
"db10ng4",
"db11r7f",
"db13zec"
],
"score": [
10,
7,
21,
4,
4,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because then you aren't any different than those you stand against?",
"1. To an extent many of those countries already do. \n\n\n2. Those countries signed and agreed and wrote the Geneva Convention. Not ISIS. \n\n\n3. They are a terrorist group, they don't have millions of citizens who fund them who get unruly when the government does bad things. ",
"Because two wrongs don't make a right?\n\nWe agreed to those conventions because we believe those are the right moral things to do in general - not only when our opponents agree. Why sink to their level?",
"Sometimes they/we do. In the U.S., John Yoo wrote what is referred to as the torture memos, which gave the legal justification for the Bush administration to torture. Colin Powell opposed it because he believed it was against the Geneva Convention.\n\nThe basis of the torture memos is that terrorists do not represent a state that has agreed to the rules of war, and are therefore not allowed the protections of those rules.",
"ISIS isn't a country and hasn't signed the Geneva Convention.\n\nBecause of that, other countries *can* (and or) disregard parts of the Geneva convention. For example, captured ISIS members are not considered POWs, and do not get the rights afforded to POWs.\n\nIt usually doesn't go much further than that, because most countries have their own laws and policies that make Geneva Convention violation illegal.",
"What advantage is there to dismissing the Geneva convention? I guarantee that being *extra shitty* to ISIS won't get rid of them.",
"If civilized world didn't agree on imposing some limits, even in war, it would then turn to a race to the bottom where the most savage and sadist would be the victor.",
"Nations have a consensus on what is unacceptable. \n\n\nYou don't copy the behavior of criminals, do you?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
28mahz
|
what happens exactly when it's chilly outside and i'm not wearing enough clothes to stay warm? later i feel the beginnings of a cold/flu.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28mahz/eli5_what_happens_exactly_when_its_chilly_outside/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cicc7ii"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Cold air causes your mucous membranes to swell and excrete mucous, hence the runnyy nose, etc. This could lead to sinus pressure and headaches too, which might make your eyes watery or \"crusty\" with mucous. Extended time in the cold also drains your body of heat, which is energy, so if you haven't eaten, your blood sugar may be a bit lower causing you to feel tired. Similarly, you use more fluids in the creation of all that mucous and by the increased metabolism to keep you warm, which exacerbates feeling tired and sluggish.\n\nYou are not responding to bacterial and viral stimuli but to environmental stimuli."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
vo4zc
|
it may seem dumb but... how do powerful telescopes see far into space without objects getting in the way.
|
i never understood how it was possible to see to almost the beginning of the universe without things getting in the way. or is space just that empty from red shift etc.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/vo4zc/it_may_seem_dumb_but_how_do_powerful_telescopes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c567seb",
"c56867m"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Well, everything that's going to get in the way is in our own galaxy; beyond that space is vacant enough that it's not a problem. In order to get those mind-blowing Hubble Ultra Deep Field images that show thousands of distant galaxies, we had to point the Hubble towards the most vacant areas of sky we could find, and even then we ended up with a few Milky Way stars photobombing the thing. ",
"average density of the universe today is less than 6 hydrogen atoms per cubic meter (for comparison, one cubic meter of air contains 250,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 much bigger atoms). edit: to clarify - by average density i mean that if you took all the stars and planets and everything that is made of matter and spreaded it uniformly over space, that's what you'd get."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6wn1u7
|
why cant we artifically metabolize food to use as a renewable energy resource?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wn1u7/eli5_why_cant_we_artifically_metabolize_food_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dm98o91",
"dm98ps7"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Isn't that just solar energy?",
"We can. That's basically what bio-diesel/corn-based ethanol fuel is. The problem is that food provides enough energy to power a human body handily, but when you want to start powering machines with it, you need a *lot*, more than there's really room to grow if you wanted to power a whole civilization. The other problem is that all the energy that goes into growing the food and processing it into fuel vs the amount of energy produced by the fuel results in a net loss."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3mzz5r
|
what do people mean when they say there are two china's?
|
I briefly read a comment somewhere on reddit where the person said there where to China's. What did he mean by that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mzz5r/eli5_what_do_people_mean_when_they_say_there_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvjkzfl",
"cvjqqz7",
"cvjqvq2",
"cvjr2xk",
"cvjrgy7",
"cvjyf45"
],
"score": [
146,
38,
7,
5,
17,
23
],
"text": [
"There are two countries which claim to be \"China\". There's the \"Republic of China\" (ROC) and the \"People's Republic of China\" (PRC).\n\nThe PRC is the one that actually controls what you'd normally call China. It controls that massive territory in mainland Asia, plus the Special Administrative Regions of Macau and Hong Kong.\n\nThe ROC only controls Taiwan and a few surrounding islands. Most people would probably just call this country Taiwan rather than China, but officially they claim to be the legitimate government of mainland China too.\n\nThis all happened because before and after WW2 there was a civil war between the Communists and the ruling Nationalists. The Communists managed to take over the mainland and declare it the PRC, and the Nationalists retreated to Taiwan. After a while most of the rest of the world decided to accept the PRC as the legitimate government of China, and on paper don't recognise Taiwan as a separate country.",
"Imagine if the Confederates were never fully defeated during the civil war, but instead retreated to Hawaii and re-established their capital there. Both the Union and the Confederate would claim to be the United States of America even though the Union controls the mainland while the Confederates only control Hawaii.",
"They may be talking about Taiwan which also claims to be \"China\", and which actual China claims to own. This is why Taiwan is sometimes known as \"Chinese Taipei\".\n\nIt also could be a referense to the \"One country, two systems policy\" that governs Hong Kong. When Hong Kong rejoined China in 1999 they were allowed to keep many of their existing (non-communist) laws.",
"How can one country \"claim to own\" another country that is acting independently? After years of not being able to control them, wouldn't they have to give in and admit they don't own them?",
"There's the glitzy china that you hear about in the world news and the China of the vast majority of Chinese who are still poor.",
"I don't think the post you read meant the PRC and Taiwan. More likely, it referred to rich, urban mainland China and poor, rural mainland China. \n\nChina restricts the movement of its residents with a system of domestic passports called *hukou*. In order to receive basic services -- including medical service, the privilege of registering your children for school, and internet service -- a citizen must have a valid, local *hukou* (or a valid reason not to have a local *hukou*, like staying in a registered hotel). People who live somewhere their hukou isn't valid are effectively second-class citizens, as are their children.\n\nUnfortunately, most of China's infrastructural development -- public transportation, sewage management systems, etc. -- benefits urban populations, and therefore urban hukou holders. Rural hukou holders live in 3rd-world conditions, and are kept in those conditions even when they travel to cities in search of economic opportunities.\n\nWhen English-language commenters refer to two Chinas, they are usually referring to rural hukou holders -- the vast majority of China's population -- and urban hukou holders. The Chinese government effectively treats these two groups like two different countries. \n\nIt is worth noting, too, that some people who speak of 'two Chinas' are talking about ethnic Han and ethnic minorities in mainland China. If you think that rural Han are disenfranchised, you should read about Uyghurs or Tibetans.\n\nThe mechanisms of the hukou system are shockingly similar to those of apartheid South Africa, so much so that it is worthwhile to read about SA in order to understand the 'two Chinas.'\n\nEDIT: I must add that the Chinese government, by all signs, hopes to eliminate the *hukou* system through urbanization. Clearly, they cannot police the lines between urban people and rural people forever: the border between the two is too long and porous, and the cities need country people to work for cheap. The hukou system is entirely in line with Deng Xiaoping's famous, ominous statement of meta-policy: \"让一部分人先富起来,' *let a portion of the population get rich first*. It seems that the 'portion' he meant was urban people.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2sr0h2
|
How much communication and collaboration was there between American and Soviet scientists and academics during the Cold War?
|
Did scientists and academics in the two countries have any direct contact with each other? Did they work jointly on projects? If so, to what extent? Did the level of communication/collaboration vary based on the field of study?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2sr0h2/how_much_communication_and_collaboration_was/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cns2job"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It probably did vary based on the field. In linguistics, communication theory and anthropology, for example, there was little official communication, but some little did pass through. The Soviets often managed to smuggle in the most important works of Western scholars and unofficial translations circulated among secret scientific societies (e.g. the Tartu-Moscow School of semiotics). Since they had to stave off KGB and their informants, outside information was often distributed in 18th century salon gatherings (which were very popular and influential in Russia especially), e.g. a distinguished person invited friends and acquaintances to his or her home. The reverse is also true - Soviet manuscripts were often smuggled out to be translated and published in Western journals. More often than not, though, they were published in departments of slavistics, so that Soviet film studies, for example, didn't actually have much influence on Western film studies. It was also the case that the French were much more it tune with Soviet humanitarian fields, perhaps because they were more openly Marxist, so that the French were often mediators between America and Russia. For example, the concept of \"intertextuality\" was originally Mikhail Bakhtin's term but gained notoriety through Julia Kristeva. So, too, with structural anthropology, which is attributed to Claude Lévi-Strauss, but only came to be because of the influence of Roman Jakobson. There are countless such examples, but they are easier to trace on the Western side, because the Soviets didn't cite or reference their Western sources. Also, during the Khrushchev Thaw, some few Western academics did get to travel into Soviet countries, especially for conferences, but were kept on a tight watch and driven around by KGB officers. \n\nSource: am Estonian, e.g. from an ex-Soviet satellite country. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ofru2
|
(serious) the thought process that leads doctors to choose to become proctologists, gynecologists or urologists.
|
No disrespect intended, but I am curious as to why some doctors specialize in those areas. If there are any gynecologists, urologists or proctologists here to provide an answer that would be really awesome to hear your story.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ofru2/eli5_serious_the_thought_process_that_leads/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccrjmib",
"ccrjnua"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"I can think of three reason:\n\n1) Money - If these positions pay more money, doctors will follow.\n\n2) Demand - Perhaps a lot of doctors do not want want to be urologists and such. However, since fewer doctors take these jobs, these positions will more available. So the doctor has the choice to compete against 100 other doctors to be become a neurosurgeon, or can take the guaranteed gynecologist job.\n\n3) Personal motivation - Some doctor specialize in certain areas due to personal reasons. A doctor might choose to become a cardiologist because his father died of heart failure. I'm sure this type of motivation might exist for gynecologists as well.",
"All those fields pay very well, and most doctors in those specialties work solely based on appointments which is much less stressful than working in, say, an ICU.\n\nI know it seems like it would be a gross job, but there's no part of the medical profession that isn't gross. A \"regular doctor\" like an MD or PCP has to touch other people's junk and assholes on a daily basis too."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2jhb6p
|
how is a chicken made from liquid?
|
That's what my brother asked me just now. I'm assuming he means how it forms from inside the egg going from egg yoke to a chicken fetus into a live chick.
Edit 1: Read him the first two replies and he had a follow up question, "but how though?"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jhb6p/eli5_how_is_a_chicken_made_from_liquid/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clbq3og",
"clbq52c",
"clbqgcm",
"clbqscq"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The yolk must be fertilized first. The rest of the egg is formed around the yolk. The embryo uses the nutrients in the eggwhite to survive and grow inside. ",
" > I'm assuming he means how it forms from inside he egg going from egg yoke to a chicken fetus into a live chick.\n\nThe yolk doesn't become a chicken. The eggs you eat aren't fertilized, so there's no embryo inside them. In a fertilized egg, there's a chicken embryo attached to the yolk. It absorbs the yolk and albumen (egg white) for the nutrients it needs as its cells multiply.",
"Think about the egg liquids as a smoothie so plentiful and nutritious that it lets one cell grow in to a whole baby chicken. It's exactly like how eating and drinking makes every animal grow. \n\nAlternately, if he wants to know about embryonic development, to my knowledge it isn't super well understood *how* exactly everything develops in the correct place. It's the result of many complex chemical reactions. ",
"The egg isn't just liquid. There are cells in the liquid, and you should already know that cells are too small to see without a microscope. \n\nThe cells in the egg are able to multiply and grow - just like in humans. Egg cells are able to be \"programmed\" as they grow, so some will eventually become bone, blood, skin, and other parts. \n\nThose first few cells are how most living things all begin - and our cells divide over and over, then become the special parts that make our bodies up. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
21iqwe
|
What is the current historical understanding of how Native Americans developed corn (maize)?
|
I was re-reading [Charles C. Mann's 1491](_URL_0_) the other day, and the question of how maize was developed from teosinte has stuck with me.
In the book, Mann references the fact that no one was quite sure how Indians developed the various species of corn that were widespread in the Americas, given that the ancestor of corn plants (teosinte) has a hard covering over its kernels and produces only a few seeds per plant. Mann's book was most recently updated in 2006, so I'm wondering if there has been any new scholarship on the subject in recent years.
Thanks in advance for any help!
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/21iqwe/what_is_the_current_historical_understanding_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgdkvje"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Actually just this past February a study was [released](_URL_0_) in which the climate at the time of the end of the last Ice Age was recreated in a greenhouse. They discovered that teosinte looks remarkable more like maize in the past than it does today."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://books.google.com/books/about/1491_Second_Edition.html?id=vSCra8jUI2EC"
] |
[
[
"http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/to-decode-mystery-corn-smithsoniain-scientists-recreate-earth-ten-thousand-years-ago-180949708/?no-ist"
]
] |
|
3o7i60
|
what are the people in syria fleeing from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3o7i60/eli5_what_are_the_people_in_syria_fleeing_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvuoy7e",
"cvurish",
"cvuv3x6",
"cvv0kbd"
],
"score": [
5,
9,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"There was a [Syrian civil war](_URL_0_) because the leader was basically an oppressive dictator. In addition to the chaos of a civil war numerous terrorist groups came in/popped up and are just fighting whomever they really want.\n\nIn short, they're running away from terrorist groups (ISIS, etc.) and their own government.\n\nAlso, since they're in the midst of a civil war it's pretty hard to keep a job and get food/water; so lots of people are trying to leave Syria to get jobs so they can buy basic necessities.",
"When the Arab spring happened, many Arabs protested in their respective countries calling for freedom and the fact that they were unhappy with their governments. The Syrians started protesting calling to overthrow the government as it was a dictatorship and they wanted more freedom.\n\nHowever Assad refused to step down. He used brutal attacks and violence which killed many people to stop the revolution. Rebel groups were formed, and fighting ensued. ISIS took advantage of the situation and invaded Syria taking some territory. \n\nIn short the people are trapped between terrorists and their own brutal dictator, so they're fleeing the country.\n\nEdit: [Heres a fantastic video by the Guardian following a refugee family on their journey. Really recommend you watch it OP](_URL_0_)",
"Syrians arent just fleeing from ISIS. ISIS is only a part of the problem, there's no longer a think called freedom or privacy in Syria. If you don't pick a side, you'll end up killed in no time. All the basic necessities of a normal life are gone, food is hardly found, medical attention is hardly available and if available there's thousands and thousands of other people waiting for their turn. Most businesses has shut down. People live in fear everyday, Bombings happen all the time and it became common for them. In few words, Syria is hell and if they don't flee now, they might not live another day to flee in another time, and they sell all their belongings just to make some money to have a spot in a old rusty boat that end up drowning 70% of the time killing most of the people on board.\n",
"They are running from a lawless warzone where your head could be cut off at any fucking moment. they don't have food, water or money. and even if they did have money, they couldn't spend it because the stores are all closed. honestly, there is just nothing to live for in Syria, so they leave."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War"
],
[
"https://youtu.be/ubGhzVdnhQw"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1l0uf5
|
Is solar power viable in the U.S.?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1l0uf5/is_solar_power_viable_in_the_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbumejv",
"cbumy1d",
"cbun9l7",
"cbunm85",
"cbuouox",
"cbuovzi",
"cbuqggx",
"cbuqona",
"cbuqskq",
"cbur3fj",
"cburaz4",
"cburd22",
"cburdpm",
"cburghf",
"cburhi0",
"cbus2a5"
],
"score": [
2,
73,
2,
5,
15,
8,
2,
12,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They use high-voltage DC, with converter stations at each end, for long distance power transmission. Such a system transmits 3,100 megawatts from [Northern Oregon to Los Angeles](_URL_0_).",
"You roommate is making a blanket black and white statement. They are almost never correct. :) The truth is usually in the gray area. We don't have to only choose solar for the sole energy source of the USA. We can implement it where it will work and where it doesn't have to be transmitted too incredibly far and do other energy sources in other places.\n\n",
"From my knowledge solar is completely viable in the United States. The thing about solar is that it is a point source technology. In a perfect world with a better electricity distribution system and every south facing capable rooftop had panels on them, solar would become the most viable option. Yes it would be unwise to cover the state of arizona with panels and transmit the electricity to New York. Solar power should be used where it is generated, this minimized loss of power due to travel distance. So solar is more viable in some locations and less viable in others. Renewable energy technologies are not just pick one and run with it, they all must be used together\" solar wind geothermal tidal hydroelectric biomass all need to be used together to ensure the viability of the system as a whole. Germany has been using a combination of all of these and this is why their renewable energy portfolio has prospered. \n\nTL;DR: Solar should be used at the source to minimize transmission loss, and is more viable in certain areas. but when used in conjunction with other technologies it is viable everywhere.\n",
"I'll assume you are referring to residential use and yes, especially in places where the infrastructure is sub par or where there have been population explosions. When it also coincides with areas that can harvest quite a bit of energy such as the southwest it's an enormous benefit.\n\nThe problem with gauging the entire US is that you have such drastically different climates. I live in Wisconsin and while I could benefit from it I would only be able to depend on it for maybe 6 months of the year at best.\n\nCommercially there is a huge market for this. I regularly consult for energy oriented companies and handled an off grid backup generator that was meant to go alongside solar and wind powered battery banks. Saudi Arabia is leading this but you see cell companies moving to solar in remote locations around the world.\n\nIt should be mentioned that solar isn't best for replacing standard utility but rather supplementing it. In some locations you can even get paid by the utility company for selling surplus energy produced which can lower your bills. Even if you just decide to install solar lighting, something becoming more popular manufacturing buildings, you can greatly reduce your energy use from the utility company.",
"Given that most power is generated locally, and the viability of solar is mostly dependent on the amount of sunshine a place gets I'd have to say your friend's reasons are bs.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Anything is viable if you are willing to pay and/or wait for it. Solar power just isn't competitive right now, due to subsidies, economies of scale, large corporate interests, and many more factors.",
"Well, as someone who specializes in the politics of growth, I'd have to say that NO energy system we currently have access to is \"viable\" for our current level of energy consumption in the long-term.\n\nThis is made worse by the fact that our energy consumption is expected to continue to grow. And at current rates, energy consumption is going up faster than technological advancements can bring it down (efficient lightbulbs, etc).\n\nSo it's important to realize this is a bit of a loaded question, as nothing could reach \"viable\" status.",
"Department of Energy Electrical Engineer here. \n\nIt is viable, but it's not constant. For renewables like solar and wind to take a bigger foothold we either need grid level storage or demand will have to follow generation. \n\nLet's say you have a solar plant that's generating 2GW. It is fed into a town that uses 2GW. Balanced and nice. But then clouds come over and power generation drops down to 1.21GW. **GREAT SCOTT!** Now what? That's 790MW of power that you just lost, that town still needs it. Frequency will dip, you might have brown outs, etc. \n\nRight now we have spinning reserves for that issue. That means there is a power plant, natural gas, hyrdo, coal, etc., and this power plant is ready to hook up to the grid and deliver power when they need to. Some have very fast response, measured in cycles. That also means they are burning fuel just to be ready to jump in and keep the power grid up and running if the renewables drop out due to nature. \n\nThat means that generation follows the load, we alter generation of power to meet the load of the customers. With renewables we can't control generations, Sun shines or the wind blows. For that we have to look at the reverse...\n\nLet's say the same thing happens, clouds come over, drops down to 1.21GW, we need 790MW to keep all the town going. Another option is to let the Dispatchers control high load items in your house; air conditioning units, hot water heaters, clothes dryers, and a new high load item will be electric car chargers when they start to become more common in the home. The Dispatcher can \"load shed\" 790MW of load and make it so the town only needs 1.21GW of power. They alter the load to meet generation. It's already done in some places but not for this reason. *(Some companies pay lower electric rates by opting-in for being a load shed location. If load needs to be shed they will turn that company off. Dog food plant for example, that batch is just junk. Price you pay for cheaper rates all year)*\n\nThat example is what most folks call the \"Smart Grid\". It allows Dispatchers and the like to control the load so it can match the renewable generation since it's not constant. \n\njayman419 is right about the DC power lines. HVDC (High Voltage DC) is becoming more popular and we WILL see more of them pop up for the cross country transmission lines. \n\nSo to answer your question, size of the country is not an issue. There is tech for this, it's just that change is slow for something as huge as the US grid. \n\nI took classes from engineers that worked in Germany and Denmark on their solar system. They love it, and they wish it would happen here more. I think those decisions will have to come from Congress, after enough people contact them and say they want it. It's do-able. \n\nps. Non of those numbers I used are realistic. I had real ones but I thought if you have a chance to use 1.21GW you should take it. ",
"E.E. Ph.D. student here, focusing on photovoltaics.\n\nHere's all you need to know:\n\n1) [Fox News Claims Solar Won't Work in America Because It's Not Sunny Like Germany](_URL_1_)\n\n2) ^ That's bullshit. [NREL PV Resource Map shows basically all of the U.S...including Alaska...gets more sun than Germany.](_URL_0_)\n\n\n...Ok, additional shit to know (economics)\n\n3) Generally, the cost of an installed PV system is 50% module cost, 40-45% \"balance of systems\", and a fraction being power electronics (e.g. the inverter and shit). Balance of systems is stuff you don't think of like: wiring, installation hardware and labor, permitting and fees, etc... Germany has nationwide standards for permitting process and fees which of course lowers the cost (basic process engineering everybody...).\n\n4) The PV field is being driven to a goal of $1/Watt for a utility-scale PV system. At that cost, PV would be price competitive with coal and natural gas fired power plants even without adding a carbon price or PV incentives. Chinese companies are producing silicon modules for ~ $0.60/Watt. Module pricing has been steadily falling for decades.\n\nRonPaulItsHappening.gif",
"The real truth is this, yes I can work in areas of the US, some better than others because we have obviously have varying climates within our borders. However what the US has that Germany doesn't is more access to natural resources (read: not oil) which is less expensive causing the push for solar less \"important\" than a place like Germany where they don't have the same access to natural resources like the US does.",
"I heard in a sustainability class that a 100 square mile grid of solar energy would be able to generate all of the power needs of the United States. And in Arizona there are roughly 350 days of sun a year. But getting the power from point Arizona to point TheRestofTheUS is the main problem I would say. ",
"[A great article about the plummeting cost of solar.](_URL_3_)\n\nThe cost of solar is still dropping despite a short spike during 2012 due to a glut of panels on the market that shoved the price too low for some manufacturers to stay in business on. They closed up, supply decreased and the price spiked temporarily.\n\nIf there are no major advances in the field at all, which is moderately unlikely, [this article](_URL_1_) suggests we may reach parity with coal by the end of the decade for at least some parts of the U.S.\n\nAs far as power storage goes [this man and his research team](_URL_0_) are working on what appears to be a viable cheap battery for the storage of huge sums of electricity for use at night or during cloudy weather.\n\nTransportation isn't really an issue. It's using the old mindset of centralized power generation as the basis for the power grid we'll need in 30 years. We'll use renewables that match the sources of power for the region. We'll still need an interconnected grid to move power during peak times but a distributed system will reduce the losses from long distance power transportation.\n\nWe will likely end up using a mix of renewables over the next couple decades. Until something like Thorium fueled power plants or fusion become a reality(if they ever do, there's plenty of debate about both) it'll likely be a slow march away from coal and oil. \n\nIf the U.S. wants to see faster adoption we could consider a [feed in tariff](_URL_2_) like some countries have. As far as I can tell though we won't be seeing that in the states. \n\nWhat your friend seems to have going on is just basic misinformation. Some real research should in time change his perspectives on the subject in time. It's a complex issue that one solution like solar is just a little piece of.",
"I did a fair amount of research in college on the viability of solar technology in the U.S.\n\n\nThe main limiting factor for solar technology right now is actually cost. Distance for energy to travel is going to be almost irrelevant once the cost comes down. Right now it takes almost 25 years for a completely off the grid solar array to pay itself off. People simply don't plan that far ahead. However, on our current course, solar technology will continue to drop in cost while gas prices will continue to rise. Furthermore, gas is heavily subsidized by the government while solar is not. If the government were to start turning oil subsidies towards solar, many predict that solar technology will be viable for home use within the next 10 years. \n\n\nWill solar power be able to recreate the raw explosive power of combustion fuels? No. For this reason, solar power is not as of now a viable alternative to using fossil fuels in industry. However, the main positive of solar technology is that it eliminates reliance on a grid. Scientists right now are and have developed ways to stack multiple layers of solar cells in one panel, enabling a sizable amount of energy to be harvested even when it's cloudy. Thus, as gas prices rise and solar costs come down, each individual home will be able to afford a solar array that supplies household energy needs off the grid.\n\nTL;DR One main reason we advance solar technology is so that households can operate off the grid, making the size of the U.S. a moot factor. The only question is how SOON can we bring the price into an affordable range.",
"My previous field was with irrigation and livestock water...particularly windmills. Windmills are a dying thing here in the states since working on them, even the most basic maintenance like changing the oil (twice a year), can be very dangerous. They're being replaced with electric pumps and a lot of farmers much prefer electric pumps. They're cheaper, they're safer to work with, and really they're just easy.\n\nThe problem with electric pumps, though, is that they have to be on the grid. Something people don't know about windmills is that there are close to 900,000,000 of them in operation right now. Most people only see them from teh highways as they cruise through rural areas, but for every one you see from the highway there's nearly a thousand of them behind it that you can't...and most are nowhere near the grid. Which presents a problem for the people looking at ailing windmills and needing to update.\n\nThe solution has been solar power. We spent the last couple years of my employment with Gicon bringing in solar panels, racks, and controllers to run submersible pumps. Being new, we had a few issues to hammer out before they were really good to go, but after we got it sorted out they were easy, neat, and very reliable. On top of that, they worked completely off the grid, with no human supervision, and in some of the most adverse environments I've seen. The only thing the systems don't survive very well is hail...but what does?\n\nNow it might be hard to go completely off the grid in an urban environment using just solar panels, but it can still be put to good use. Our panels were about 3X5 to produce 200w in direct sunlight. This panels could produce, consistently, 1.8 kilowatt hours per day. Now, my home in Texas is currently consuming about 1750 kilowatt hours a month, which breaks down to 73 kilowatt hours a day. In order for me to go off the grid I would have to have 41 panels. I simply do not have the space to pull that off.\n\nOn top of that, someone relying on solar power will have to contend with the weather on a larger scale. Clouds really piss solar panels off.\n\nOn a bigger scale, as using solar power to power the grid, it could be done a little easier using the open land we have in so many areas of the USA, but when it comes to open land in our neck of the woods wind power just makes a lot more sense.\n\nTL:DR ~ Yes, solar is great in the United States. It just has to be sold the right way.",
"If you are interested in doing a little reading, I wrote a 10pg paper on the ability to change over entirely to Solar. Here is a list of all my resources that you can try and look up. Basically, there would be more than enough energy, but the biggest problem is our national grid being so out of date. We waste a ton of energy just in energy transportation. I can try and upload a copy of my paper maybe if someone is interested. \nBillitteri, Thomas J. \"Offshore Drilling.\" CQ Researcher 25 June 2010: 553-80. Web. 4 Feb. 2012.\n\nBrignall, Miles. \"Is Solar Power A Bright Investment?\" Guardian News 5 Feb. 2010. Guardian News. 6 Feb. 2012 \n\n < _URL_4_;\nBrown, Mark. \"Solar Panel Researchers Need Your Computer.\" Wired 11 Sept. 2011. _URL_8_. 30 Jan. 2012 \n\n < _URL_3_;.\nGriffin, R. D. (1992, July 10). Alternative energy. CQ Researcher, 2, 573-596. Retrieved from _URL_1_\n\nHendricks, Bracken. \"Wired for Progress.\" Center for American Progress: 1-50. Center for American Progress. 23 Feb. 2009. 3 Feb. 2012 < _URL_6_;.\n\nJacobson, Mark Z., and Mark A. Delucchi. \"A PATH TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY BY 2030. (Cover Story).\" Scientific American 301.5 (2009): 58. TOPICsearch. Web. 18 Jan. 2012\n\nKim, Susana. \"Exxon Profit Up 69 Percent as Gas and Oil Prices Boost Top Five Oil Companies.\" Abc World News. 28 Apr. 2011. Abc News. 4 Feb. 2012 < _URL_7_;.\n\nLocke, Susannah. \"How does solar power work?: Scientific American.\" How Does Solar Power Work? 20 Oct. 2008. Scientific American. 05 Feb. 2012 < _URL_5_;\n\nMcGlynn, Daniel. \"Fracking Controversy.\" CQ Researcher 16 Dec. 2011: 1049-72. Web. 4 Feb. 2012.\n\nMcLamb, Eric. \"Fossils Fuels vs. Renewable Energy Resources.\" Ecology Global Network | News and Information for Planet Earth. 6 Sept. 2011. Ecology Communications Group, Inc. 28 Jan. 2012 < _URL_11_;.\n\nSchoen, John W. \"Solar power shines Brighter.\" MSNBC. 8 Apr. 2008. _URL_2_. 28 Jan. 2012 < _URL_9_;.\n\nStein, Theo, and Tom Darin. Smart Lines: Transmission for the Renewable Energy Economy. Rep. San Francisco: Resource Media, 2008. Western Resources Advocates. 3 Feb. 2012 < _URL_0_;.\n\nWeeks, J. (2011, May 20). Modernizing the Grid. CQ Researcher, 21, 457-480. Retrieved from _URL_1_.\n\"What is nuclear? / Nuclear Waste.\" What is nuclear? / Public education about nuclear energy. What is Nuclear. 05 Feb. 2012 < _URL_10_;.\n",
"It depends on what you mean by \"viable\".\n\nIf you include unlimited subsidies, of course. But without that, if we want an economic cost-vs.-effect answer, it's not great.\n\nWhen offsetting your own power consumption, you can easily calculate the value of each KWH saved. However, when selling power BACK to the power company, there's not a solid basis for the value of a KWH. I don't see why the power company would pay you the same amount per KWH they sell it for. In fact the price they pay for bulk generation on the open market is a minor fraction of the sale price to YOU.\n\nThey like to say it's worth a lot more because it doesn't use transmission capacity. Plausible that it increases value *some*, yes. However, it's of less value in that they don't have guarantees of output. If there were a LOT of solar, you have a problem in that you've told power plants to go into standby but the day turns unexpectedly cloudy and this may result in a need for expensive instant-on gas turbines to avoid a blackout.\n\nI've been through the calculations many times. It becomes a bit clearer when you look at our more complicated *commercial* accounts, which separate out the cost of Peak Demand charges (for the equipment) from the cost of KWH. BTW, solar PROBABLY won't be able to reduce a Peak Demand cost anyways. For us, it's the peak drawn anytime day or night in the month. If you run a 5 ton AC unit at night (even for only a short time in the month), 10KW of solar won't offset that one bit.\n\nBut also even so, both the KWH and Peak Demand charges are divided into both direct charges and taxes. Here, we have a \"Regulatory Charge\" as well as \"Community Benefit Charge\". These actually don't pay for actual energy used or how much transmission capacity you need, it's about taxes, they have a total budget in mind and if everyone were on solar and using no power they'd still want basically that same amount of money from everyone.\n\nBut this \"complicated\" bill does do a favor: it breaks down into the Fuel Charge per KWH (aka \"Projected Power Supply Adjustment\") which is a passthrough of fuel costs and the power company makes no profit on. The ENERGY charge is what profit the power company makes per KWH as a charge for delivery, in addition to the Peak Demand charge issue."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://sunfarmvt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/photovotaic-solar-map.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/us_germany_spain/pv_map_us_germany_spain.jpg",
"http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/02/07/fox_news_expert_on_solar_energy_germany_gets_a_lot_more_sun_than_we_do_video.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_renewable_energy.html",
"http://azizonomics.com/2013/01/25/when-solar-becomes-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed-in_tariff",
"http://www.treehugger.com/slideshows/renewable-energy/important-graph-cost-solar-headed-parity-coal-and-gas/"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/media/pdf/SmartLines_Final.pdf>",
"http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/",
"Msnbc.com",
"http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/crowd-sourced-solar-cells/#more-75197>",
"http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/feb/06/solar-power-bright-investment?INTCMP=SRCH>",
"http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-does-solar-power-work>",
"http://www.americanprogress.org/pressroom/releases/2009/02/clean_energy_smart_grid.html>",
"http://abcnews.go.com/Business/exxon-shell-profits-bp-oil-companies-high-expectation/story?id=13472740#.Ty3QE1wV2Zg>",
"Wired.com",
"http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7549531/ns/business-oil_and_energy/t/solar-power-shines-brighter/>",
"http://www.whatisnuclear.com/articles/waste.html>",
"http://www.ecology.com/2011/09/06/fossils-fuels-vs-renewable-energy-resources/>"
],
[]
] |
||
3b5bvd
|
what exactly makes a group of molecules alive?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b5bvd/eli5_what_exactly_makes_a_group_of_molecules_alive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csizy03",
"csj0brz"
],
"score": [
2,
13
],
"text": [
"There isn't one definition of life or \"being alive\" that everyone agrees on. Here are some requirements that most people agree on:\n\nReplication: things that are alive have to make new copies of themselves. Viruses for instance aren't alive because something else makes new copies of the virus. \n\nMetabolism: living things use energy. They take energy from chemicals and move it into other chemicals. \n\nOrganization: Living things are made of cells. Even if you found something that was alive that wasn't organized into cells, it needs some sort of confined organization, otherwise there wouldn't be a good way to tell if it reproduced. \n\nThere are a bunch more. You can read about them by looking up different definitions of life. ",
"There are a lot of definitions of what \"life\" is, but probably the best one that I've seen is that life is a system of chemical reactions that use outside energy to reduce their own entropy (versions of this were put forth by figures such as James Lovelock and Erwin Schroedinger). "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6jl80a
|
What is the craziest story from history you have encountered in your research?
|
Now and then, we like to host '[Floating Features](_URL_0_)', periodic threads intended to allow for more open discussion that allows a multitude of possible answers from people of all sorts of backgrounds and levels of expertise.
Today's topic is 'Crazy History'. In every field of study, there's a story that makes you shake your head and say "what?" In this thread, we invite users to share what weird and wild stories they've encountered in their study of history, and hopefully give us some context as to why it's unusual!
As is the case with previous Floating Features, there is relaxed moderation here to allow more scope for speculation and general chat then there would be in a usual thread! But with that in mind, we of course expect that anyone who wishes to contribute will do so politely and in good faith.
For those who missed the initial announcement, this is also part of a preplanned series of Floating Features for our [2017 Flair Drive](_URL_4_). Stay tuned over the next month for:
* **Sat. May 27th**: [What is the happiest story from history you have encountered in your research?](_URL_6_)
* **Thu. June 1st**: [What is the saddest story from history you have encountered in your research?](_URL_5_)
* **Tue. June 6th**: [What is your 'go to' story from history to tell at parties?](_URL_7_)
* **Sun. June 11**: [What story from your research had the biggest impact on how you think about the world?](_URL_2_)
* **Fri. June 16**: [What is the funniest story from history you have encountered in your research?](_URL_1_)
* **Mon. June 26th**: [What is the craziest story from history you have encountered in your research?](_URL_3_)
* **Sat. July 1st**: Who is a figure from history you feel is greatly underappreciated?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6jl80a/what_is_the_craziest_story_from_history_you_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djf7i1t",
"djfctq7",
"djfhog0",
"djfmmt9",
"djfqeff",
"djg87ge",
"djgbgfy"
],
"score": [
34,
21,
14,
8,
13,
11,
3
],
"text": [
"Just a few small stupid castrato stories... \n\n* Pasquale \"Pasqualino\" Tiberti, born probably in the decade of 1710 in Citta Ducale, Italy, hired onto the Sistine Chapel in 1743, and fired 11 years later for stabbing a priest in a fight, the priest died of his injuries. Apparently suffered no real setbacks for this, as he shows up in an opera cast in Macerata's 1757 carnival festivities.\n\n* Giuseppe Belli, had a promising opera career, but was murdered in 1760 at age 28, legendarily by a jealous husband. \n\n* Andrea \"Andreini\" Martini: the last boy the Siena Cathedral officially paid to have castrated, age 14, in the year 1775, in payment he sang there for 4 years after. Good opera career. \n\n* Francesco Bardi, was apparently so amazing that in the 1620s he was \"kidnapped\" from his conservatory by the San Pietro cathedral. Furious, the conservatory later compelled them to return him to school to finish his contract. The school had probably paid to have him castrated and that is not cheap. After that a good mixed career for the 17th century, splitting between church and opera work. \n\n* Giuseppe \"Gioseppino\" Ricciarelli and Gaspare Savoy: two names otherwise entirely unpaired in history, except for the fact that Giacomo Casanova took the time to record that he found them sexually attractive. There are more castrati in his memoirs, of course, but these are the two he wanted you to know were hot. But only because they were dressed like women and it was so *very convincing.* Honestly I'll just quote his whole description of Savoy because it's June still: \n\n > He was enclosed in a carefully-made corset and looked like a nymph; and\nincredible though it may seem, his breast was as beautiful as any\nwoman's; it was the monster's chiefest charm. However well one knew the\nfellow's neutral sex, as soon as one looked at his breast one felt all\naglow and quite madly amorous of him. To feel nothing one would have to\nbe as cold and impassive as a German. As he walked the boards, waiting\nfor the refrain of the air he was singing, there was something grandly\nvoluptuous about him; and as he glanced towards the boxes, his black\neyes, at once tender and modest, ravished the heart. He evidently wished\nto fan the flame of those who loved him as a man, and probably would not\nhave cared for him if he had been a woman.\n\nIF GOOD DRAG DOESN'T GET YOU HOT, YOU'RE A GERMAN. - man whose name has become a byword for aggressive male heterosexuality \n\nGiuseppe Ricciarelli was also sworn in as a Freemason in 1774, apparently. Strange times. \n",
"There are a whole bunch of insane situations in Italian history, but I would say my absolute favorite is the War of the League of Cambrai: the closest thing History has ever gotten to a war being fought over \"Causus Belli: Coalition\" like in the strategy video game Europa Universalis. However, unlike in the video game, the dynamics and relationships between the participants were constantly in flux, to the point that upon arriving on a battlefield outside of Ravenna in 1512, the Duke of Ferrara Alfonso D'Este tore at his hair, stamped his feet, and sat behind his cannons while indiscriminately shooting into the melee, having decided that telling friend from foe was insurmountably difficult and altogether useless. \n\nSo in the spring of 1509 Pope Julius excommunicated the Republic of Venice, and French army immediately marched out of Milan. Venice was up against a coalition consisting of France, Spain, Austria, Hungary, Mantua, Ferrara, all assembled by the Papacy. This did not look good.\n\nThe two Venetian captain-generals, d'Alviano and Orsini, immediately distinguished themselves by being completely at odds in every conceivable way. The result was that the Venetian armies were defeated in detail, and d'Alvaino was captured by the French. The Venetian senate, in a panic, voted to \"jettison the cargo to save the ship,\" and dissolved the Venetian cities of all ties of fealty. The Lombard cities submitted to the King of France, while Orsini, in full retreat until he could regroup the Venetian forces in Treviso, did nothing to stop the cities of Verona, Vicenza, and Padua from welcoming imperial emissaries.\n\nBy early summer, Orsini withdrew to a perimeter around the old watchtower at Mestre, the Republic's medieval border on the edge of the lagoon. It would seem that the Republic's days as a power in Italy were over. However, by midsummer the tide was already changing. The emissaries sent to the Emperor by council of the city of Treviso were mobbed in the street before they could leave: the citizens would rather stand and fight than surrender. Orsini sent seven hundred footmen marching down the Terraglio Road in double time so that the walls of Treviso could be manned, and the citizens began gathering stockpiles for a siege.\n\nThe siege never came: Imperial garrisons in the Veneto were too busy fighting a losing battle to maintain order in the cities they occupied. In Padua, the city's rebellious citizens had kept the gates open (Norwich narrates that this was done by way of an Oxcart crash) such that a small company of Venetian Knights headed by the *Proveditore Generale* Andrea Gritti could enter the city. Now riled by mounted men at arms, the Paduan mob expelled the Imperial Landsknechts. Gritti, at the time little over fifty years of age, as *Provveditore* was something of a cross between a procurement officer and a political officer; he had spent the better part of the past few years overseeing the fortifications in the Friuli. However, he had elected to personally oversee the dangerous sally to retake Padua: a testament to the fact that in spite of the Senate's inaction, some elements of the Venetian ruling class still had some fight left in them.\n\nEmperor Maximillian felt obliged to respond: he believed Padua would have been an invaluable addition to the Austrian demesne and he was set on taking it back. An Enormous imperial army set forth from the Brenner to take the city. After linking with French and Spanish regiments, by September of 1509 the city was encircled. However, taking the city would be no picnic: Gritti had convinced Orsini move his headquarters up to Padua with the bulk of his forces. Although the Imperial artillery breached the walls, the ferocious defense mounted by the Venetian army supported by the citizenry meant that by the end of September, the Imperial forces had no choice but to withdraw for the winter. \n\nOrsini, unexpectedly reversing his position on the usefulness of taking the initiative, pursued the withdrawing Imperial forces. He found the Vicenza in total rebellion against the Imperial occupation and entered the city with minimum fuss. However in spite of the bulk of the Imperial forces withdrawing to the Tyrol, the detachment left in Verona kept the city subdued and supply lines into Italy open. A siege would have to be mounted mounted. Although initially promising (Orsini even managed to beat back the Papal relief expedition) upon spotting French reinforcements on the horizon the Venetian army withdrew back to Padua. The Venetian fleet, which had kept the cities of Dalmatia well-supplied in spite of Hungarian incursions, attempted to cut off the French and Austrians from their Italian allies by establishing dominance on the River Po, however the fleet proved no match for Ferrarese artillery on the higher ground. A small victory did come when a detachment of Venetian soldiers seized the stronghold at Este, not only securing the lower river Adige, but also humiliating the ruling house of Ferrara: Este is their ancestral home. But overall, in the winter of 1509, the conflict was at a stalemate.\n\nAll the while, the Venetian diplomatic machine had been meticulously working behind the scenes: Pope Julius was told horrifying tales of the massive size of the Austrian and French armies, and the Venetian ambassador in Rome whispered that the cities of Bologna and Perugia were in endemic revolt: what if the Emperor chose to seize those too? Perhaps the Austrians had come to an agreement with the Aragonese, and were discussing Julian's downfall and the partition of the Papal States this very minute. In fact, it would make perfect sense for them to seize Emilia and Umbria, now that they already held half the Veneto, wouldn't it?\n\nPope Julius was convinced, but drove a hard bargain. Not only would Venice have to abandon all claims in the Romagna, the Republic would allow the Papacy to appoint bishops in its cities. The terms were humiliating, but by February of 1510 the Senate accepted.\n\nA Venetian separate peace with the Papacy royally pissed off King Louis of France. Louis was already annoyed by Maximillian's insistence on organizing big showy actions that invariably ended with him withdrawing to Tyrol, probably to check on the progress of his absurd funeral monument. This was the last straw: as per usual, La France was going to have to take matters into her own hands! However, a successful French offensive in March to re-take Vicenza resulting in the death of Orsini only catalyzed a new uprising in favor of the Republic by November. Plus, now Andrea Gritti was left as the highest ranking officer in the Venetian army, which was another kind of defeat altogether.\n\nPope Julian, unfazed by the quagmire he had sunk the Veneto into, happily organized an expedition against the Duchy of Ferrara while all this was going on. The reason, much like his reason to declare war on Venice, was probably driven by his own megalomania (and the desire to extend Papal territory even further north, seizing the profitable salt plains on the Po delta). He convinced the Swiss Cantons to organize an expedition against Milan, while a Papal army seized Piacenza, Reggio, and Parma (Ferrarese possessions in the Emilia). However, the Swiss raid was quickly turned back at the gates of Milan by King Louis, who promptly organized a punitive expedition into the heart of Italy: by mid October 1510, the French army was within striking distance of the Papal headquarters in Bologna. By May of 1511, the French army occupied the city, while the Papal HQ, headed by Pope Julian himself, evacuated to Ravenna.\n\nBut French advantage would soon be undone: seeing the French push forward without the Austrians, the Spanish convinced the English to come to an agreement so that king Louis would be stopped from getting too powerful in Italy. Betrayed, the French moved quickly, consolidating control over Venetian Lombardy by committing troops to put down a revolt in Brescia, while the French commander Gaston de Foix-Nemours moved rapidly against Ravenna by the Spring of 1512. He did not move rapidly enough however, and a Spanish relief force engaged the French south of the city on May 11th. The Duke of Ferrara also arrived onto the battlefield with an army, but this point had lost track of who was and who wasn't on his side, so he resolved to sit some ways from the battlefield and ordered his artillery to shell both armies indiscriminately.\n\nI suppose the moral of the story is that if the Italian wars get too crazy and confusing, don't worry: it was just as crazy for those taking part in them. ",
"There was a popular martial arts style that arose in the colonial US South and persisted through the antebellum period that consisted of trying to maim your opponent as horrifically as possible, typically by gouging out their eyes but also tearing off ears, noses, lips, fingers, testicles, etc. The only rule to this style of fighting was that no weapons were allowed. It was known by a number of different names including gouging, rough-and-tumble, \"boxing,\" and others. These gruesome fights weren't just matters of last resort but could be started over almost any insult to one's wealth or birth, no matter how seemingly petty to outsiders. Southern culture was defined by face-to-face interactions, kinship ties, and acts of hospitality; all of which placed great importance on spoken words. Like dueling \",To feel for a feller's eyestrings and make him tell the news\" as one participant put it, was a way of asserting your honor; a critically important concept for one's image in that rural reputation-obsessed culture. One's honor was frequently correlated to how hard you were willing to fight to defend it, and to surrender before being maimed was considered cowardly. The fights were major social events and frequently carried out in full view of the public during court days, fairs, and after church which had the effect of maximizing their exposure. Outside observers to these fights were frequently horrified by them, and several wrote of how they were evidence that exposure to the frontier had turned white Americans into savages. While rough-and-tumble fights were most common among poorer sorts in the hinterlands, planters in the Tidewater region and elsewhere were known to participate in them until the practice was largely replaced among the wealthy by the more genteel-but-deadlier pistol duels in the late 18th century, though there were notable exceptions such as Georgia senator James Jackson's gouging match with a rival politician. \n\nThe practice began to disappear as the South became more settled and personal feuds grew less important in determining status. The Second Great Awakening's evangelism reached the South's non-wealthy communities and emphasized moderation and self-control. In the frontiers the decline in rough-and-tumble fighting began to disappear as deadlier weapons such as revolvers, capable of being hidden in one's pocket for use as a last resort to save one's eyes or as revenge against winners of fights, became more widespread.\n\nmain source: Elliott J. Gorn, \"'Gouge and Bite, Pull Hair and Scratch': The Social Significance of Fighting in the Southern Backcountry\"",
"A Monkey, a squirrel, and a dog walk into a bar...\n\nAn unlikely set of companions, yet low and behold they were three of the animals kept by the crew of the Victoria when it arrived in Adelaide in 1933. The ship arrived in Adelaide with a cargo of phosphate rock from Makatea Island, the French mining outpost 125 miles off Tahiti (the connection explaining how I came across the amusing story).\n\nThe trio of bizarre pets made for a motley crew. Two of them originated in Costa Rica, Communist the spider-monkey and the Squirrel, Fritz. Finally, Tuborg was a black and white terrier of unknown origin-- but whose name reflects the Danish origin of the Captain and flag of the ship.\n\nThe story is an interesting example of the sort of transnational voyaging common among large cargo ships, especially those who specialized in moving raw materials like coal, or in this case phosphate rock. The pets illustrate some of the connections that could be made between a crew and the ports they visited-- or of the sort of biological exchanges that were possible even during brief exchanges.",
"“Craziest” for its sheer over-the-top lavishness would be the “Feast of the Pheasant” that the Duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, held in 1454 at Lille to commemorate the fall of Constantinople in 1453 and stir crusading fervor to rescue it. There are several accounts (as Catherine Emerson explains, see below). Jules Michelet and Huizinga both discuss it in their important medieval histories. This one is a conflation of details from a few of them quoted from Jesse D. Hurlbut’s 1992 paper, [“From Functional Feast to Frivolous Funhouse: Two Ideals of Play in the Burgundian Court”](_URL_0_). The main eyewitness account is by Olivier de La Marche (and pardon the length):\n\n > The banquet was served on three tables--one large, one medium, and one small. On the medium-sized table, there was a church with bells, stained-glass windows, and a working pipe organ and choir, which provided musical interludes throughout the evening. On the same table, a *mannekin pis* [statue of a little boy pissing] kept a silver ship filled with rose water. There were, in addition, a model of an anchored freight ship and a glass fountain which featured Saint Andrew, Philip's patron saint, with water spewing from the X-shaped cross of his martyrdom.\nThe large table was far more elaborate. Eight-and-twenty musicians, baked in a giant meat pie, accompanied the interludes of the church choir on the previous table. In addition, the towers of a castle squirted orange punch into its moat; archers tried to catch a magpie perched on top of a windmill. A trick barrel could give either sweet or sour wine: \"Take some, if you want!\" was written on the scroll of a man standing nearby. There are no dimensions or proportions mentioned in the chronicles, but it is a reasonable assumption that with the exception of the meat pie, all of these \"entremets\" (as they were called) were scale models. Practicality and the chronicler's amazement at the attention to minute details support this impression. Five more \"entremets\" adorned this same table: a tiger fighting a serpent; a wildman on a camel; an amorous couple eating the birds that a man was beating out of a bush with a stick; there was also a jester on the back of a bear and a ship floating back and forth between cities.\n\n > There was room for only three \"entremets\" at the small table: a forest with wild animals that moved as if alive; a man hitting a dog in front of a lion attached to a tree; and a street merchant carrying his wares on a harness.\n\n > Elsewhere in the hall, a living lion was chained to a pillar protecting a statue of a nude woman who served \"hypocras\" [spiced, sweetened wine] from her right breast. Above the lion, it was written, \"Ne touchez a ma dame.\"\n\n > Once the guests, most of whom were in disguise, were seated and in their places, the real spectacle began (\"entremets vivants, mouvants, et allants par terre\" Coussy [Mathieu d'Escouchy] 101). This included an assortment of musical numbers and acrobatic acts, interspersed with three scenes of a play relating the story of Jason. At one point, two falcons, which had been released in the banquet hall, captured and killed a heron, which was presented to the duke as a trophy. Later on, a dragon is reported to have flown from one end of the hall to the other.\n\n > The climactic event, and presumably the justification for the entire affair, was the sudden arrival of a giant, dressed like a Saracen. On a leash, he held an elephant. On the back of the elephant was a castle, and in the castle was woman dressed like a nun. The giant led the elephant to Duke Philip's table, where the disheveled woman introduced herself as Holy Church. She relayed the dangers she had endured since the Turkish invasion of Constantinople. She then asked the duke for his assistance in restoring peace by taking up the cross and restoring her honor.\n\n > At the conclusion of this speech, a contingent of ladies and knights approached the duke lead by the King of Arms, an officer of the Order of the Golden Fleece, named Toison d'Or. He was carrying a live pheasant in his arms, which was richly decorated with a golden necklace of pearls and jewels. He invited the duke to make a vow in the presence of the bird according to the tradition of noble courts (no doubt a reminder of the Peacock oaths of Alexander's court as found in French romances of the 13th century). Conveniently enough, the duke had a vow written down, which he delivered to the King of Arms. He then pronounced a brief promise to do what he had written in the letter. Toison d'Or read the letter out loud, which included the duke's vow to undertake, God willing, a crusade to restore Constantinople to the Christians. Holy Church, overcome with joy, expressed her gratitude and left the same way she came in.\n\n > In an enthusiastic outbreak, knights, squires and trenchermen in turn pronounced their own oaths to join Philip on the crusade. The chronicle of Mathieu de Coucy, in which the description of this whole event is preserved, records the vows of 99 men after Philip. Not all of these vows were delivered at the banquet, however. Always sensitive to the attention span of his court, and seeing that \"la chose eut este merveilleusement longue\" (Coussy 118), the duke ordered that the vows stop and that the remainder be recorded the following day and be valued just the same.\n\n > The evening's entertainment continued with an allegorical play in which The Grace of God addressed the duke and awarded him with twelve Virtues to aid him in the fulfillment of his vow. The roles of the Virtues and their escorts were played by the highest members of the court, with the exception of the duke (who played himself).\n\n > After the play, they all danced and ate. In all, 48 different dishes had been served. [Some accounts add that food was lowered from the ceiling by a crane!] A prize for that day's tournament was presented to Philip's son Charles, who proclaimed a new joust for the next day.\n\nSee: Catherine Emerson studies the ms tradition of the feast in “Who Witnessed and Narrated the ‘Banquet of the Pheasant’ (1454)? A Codicological Examination of the Account’s Five Versions” *Fifteenth-Century Studies* 28, 124-137.\n",
"There was a \"Lover's suicide craze\" in Japan in 1932-33 in which *hundreds* of young couples committed suicide – mostly by throwing themselves in Satakayama Volcano. A film version, *A Love That Reached Heaven*, was quickly released in the summer of 1932, and apparently \"at the movie theaters, usherettes now patrolled the aisles, for young couples had taken to drinking poison during the showing.\" By the time the \"craze\" wore off, 944 young people had died in the volcanic crater – not to mentions those inspired to suicide in theaters and elsewhere.\n\nFrom Peter High, *The Imperial Screen*, 27-29.\n\n[Edit addition:]\n\nAlso, Charlie Chaplin came very close to being murdered by Japanese ultranationalists while visiting Tokyo. In fact, the [May 15 Incident](_URL_0_) was timed to coincide with his well-publicized visit to the country. As it happened, though, when armed assassins burst into his hotel room, they found he was out – a last minute scheduling change meant he was attending a Sumo match (with the son of Prime Minister Inukai, it turns out, who would end up the most high-profile victim of the murderers).\n\nDetailed in Miriam Silverberg, *Erotic Grotesque Nonsense*, 1-3.",
"The main screenwriter for the Shaw Brother's production company was a man by the name of Ni Kuang (also known as Ni Cong (given name), I Kuang, Ni Guang). In a fifteen year period, he is recorded as having over 220 writing credits, possibly with more. That's mind-boggling to me. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/features/floating",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6hn5j3/what_is_the_funniest_story_from_history_you_have/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6glbwe/what_story_from_your_research_had_the_biggest/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6jl80a/what_is_the_craziest_story_from_history_you_have/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6dh5xx/historians_of_reddit_raskhistorians_wants_you/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6emm9h/what_is_the_saddest_story_from_history_you_have/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6dnigu/what_is_the_happiest_story_from_history_you_have/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6fllxc/what_is_your_go_to_story_from_history_to_tell_at/"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://toisondor.byu.edu/perform/hurlbut.html"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_15_Incident"
],
[]
] |
|
505oia
|
why does it seem so hard for anyone to make a good usb-c cable?
|
I don't mean this sarcastically, or as a commentary on any company in particular... but what's so special about USB type C that it seems there's another post every week about this or that company getting it wrong, doing a recall, etc? Are there logic chips or drm in the cables or something that is especially precise?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/505oia/eli5_why_does_it_seem_so_hard_for_anyone_to_make/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d71cy11",
"d71d17l"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"These cables are intended to be able to carry more power (more Watts) than the previous generation. Cheap manufacturers sometimes use wires that are too thin or that.",
"The relevant thing that's different about USB-C is that it's designed to draw a lot more power. Previously a USB cable was insufficient to charge something like a laptop, but now it's designed to support that much power, if the device and power adapter support it.\n\nThe problem isn't typically with a USB-C to USB-C cable, it's with USB-C to USB-A cables so that you can plug a newer USB-C device into an older USB-A port.\n\nThere are certain specifications that require that such cables include a specific resistor on one of the pins so that one of the devices doesn't get confused and try to draw too much power. Some of the manufacturers didn't install this resistor even though they were supposed to.\n\nThe problem is that unless you test your cable with lots of different devices and power adapters, it might not be obvious that anything is wrong. It might seem to work fine 90% of the time, but with just the right combination of device and power adapter and a bit of bad luck you could end up damaging something.\n\nThere are certifications to ensure that cables are made properly according to the specs. But in a rush to get products to market, some manufacturers cut corners and started shipping cables before properly testing them and getting them certified.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1zpjtk
|
Does the Milky Way Galaxy travel throughout the universe?
|
I know that the moon is orbiting (travelling around) the earth, and that the earth in turn is orbiting the sun, which is a star that is in turn moving around the centre of the galaxy, but is the galaxy itself orbiting an even greater point in the observable universe?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1zpjtk/does_the_milky_way_galaxy_travel_throughout_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfvsssv",
"cfvsw6w"
],
"score": [
6,
9
],
"text": [
"Galaxies are grouped in clusters, typically orbiting a common barycenter.\n\nIn our case, in the local group the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxy are kindof orbiting a common barycenter. I say 'kindof' because they're actually in a collision course, that will happen probably in 3 or 4 billion years. They are expected to merge into a giant galaxy.\n\nApart from that, both the Milky Way and Andromeda have satellite dwarf galaxies revolving around them.\n",
"To describe \"travel,\" or \"motion,\" you need a reference point. When you say \"the moon is orbiting the Earth,\" you are using Earth as the reference point for the Moon's motion. Then you use the Sun as the reference point for the Earth's motion, and so on. You could use different reference points if you wished, and the motions would be different. My motion relative to Earth is zero, but relative to the Sun is quite substantial.\n\nThe most obvious point of reference for the Galaxy's motion is the Cosmic Microwave Background, and yes, the Galaxy has a motion of about 625 km/s relative to the CMB. \n\nBe careful not to confuse that motion with absolute motion \"through the universe.\" There is no such thing as absolute motion through the universe. All motion is referred to some reference object. Relative to the Milky Way, the Milky Way is stationary, and that is exactly as good a reference frame as the CMB is, and \"at rest relative to itself\" is exactly as good an answer to your question as \"625 km/s relative to the CMB.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
366k8p
|
what is logistics?
|
I can't find an explanation for this in plain English
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/366k8p/eli5_what_is_logistics/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crb68xu",
"crb7xow"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Logistics are generally the process of moving things around. Shipping things like cargo. Stuff like that. FedEx, UPS, the United States Postal Service, etc... are in the business of logistics.",
"Let's say you and some buds want to have a bake sale, you have to deal with logistics for your plan to work. Pretty much everything outside of baking the goods and talking to customers falls under logistics. You need to acquire/transport a table, figure out a place to fundraise, transport your baked goods, make sure everyone you're working with can get there. When someone says something is \"logistically impossible\" they generally mean that the execution of the idea would be very impractical/difficult."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1giain
|
Does modern day cryogenics keep the body intact, or does it irreparably destroy the body?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1giain/does_modern_day_cryogenics_keep_the_body_intact/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cakhilq",
"cakhoi9",
"cakibdz",
"cakjm57",
"cakjm7t",
"cakk33h",
"cakk4ex",
"cakkdoy",
"cakl78q"
],
"score": [
9,
246,
197,
4,
22,
106,
4,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"When the water in cells freezes, it crystallizes just like the water in your ice tray. it also takes up more volume like the ice in your icetray. however, contrary to what's in your ice tray, when cellular water freezes it is more likely to form shards than smooth surfaces and that, coupled with the increase in volume, damages the cell wall/organelles of the cell. ",
"modern day cryogenics is, sadly, something used to steal money from rich people such as Walt Disney.\n\nLike throwawydow has said, cells are damaged by freezing.\n\nIn the laboratory we have products such as DMSO and glycerol which we use to stop cells from freezing conventionally when at very very low temperatures (such as -80°C) but when you are unfreezing mammalian cells, about 80%-90% of them die.\n\nAlso DMSO is not good for you so we can't really put that in people or they will get sick. Plus it smells like rotten cabbage. (I don't think it is 100% toxic, but it certainly does make dangerous chemicals which would otherwise be safe, much more permeable to our skin).\n\nTl;dr\n\nyes it appears to irreparably destroy the body.",
"Cryonics relies on *two* hopes.\n\n1) The technology to cure whatever killed you will be developed.\n\n2) Most important The tech to restore your body and revive you from the freezing process will be developed. \n\nThey realise that #2 is the more difficult (well some do) and that if cancer were cured today then no one previously frozen would be thawed out, because we can't revive them (and may never be able to)\n\nThis said if you have lots of money, say millions then this is just the ultimate longshot bet, with rather good odds. If you win you live. If you loose your still dead and won't be missing the money anyway. So if you have it to waste why not? There is that 1% chance you win. ",
"Another avenue for preserving the brain long-term is [connectome preservation](_URL_0_) - basically an upgrade from cryonics because it also preserves the neural pathways and chemical balance of the brain at the moment of \"freezing\". It seems a lot more promising than cryogenics, although it is still very much a work in progress.",
"There is much interesting discussion here, but perhaps the best way to explain this is\n\n**You are placing a bet on technology that does not exist.**\n\nSummary of common questions, with bonus speculation from sci-fi novels in the form of additional questions: \n\nWill ever will exist? No one can say. \nWill they revive you if they learn how? No one can say.\nWill they care for you on revival or will they make you slave labor? No one can say.\nWill they just harvest your corpsecicle for organs in the future? No one can say.\nToss you in a dump? No one can say.\nWill your memories survive intact? No one can say.\n\nThere are likely a few I missed, but the problems are huge and the risk great. The payof *could* be greater, but no one can say right now.",
"Tons of terrible answers here, in terms of askscience quality.\n\n1) Don't refer to Cryogenics as bullshit/pseudoscience, it's not. Cryonics may be, but Cryogenics is just low temperature physics, and much of it is very real and important.\n\n2) At this point in time, Cryonics is all about doing the very best job we can with our technology to totally preserve the body for future resurrection. Anybody in the field understands that, right now, this is a fancy ice-cube making business, and that's *it*. Also, they understand that yes, there is damage done. At this point in time, the process may not be precise enough to leave a usable body to revive. But, future technology might be far better at repairing damage done. Who knows?\n\n3) In the very far off future, all of the people who have invested money/had their bodies frozen will be the test subjects of the technology required to resurrect these people. This could be 50 years in the future, 100 years, 250 years, or 1000 years. When you think of it on that timeline, we have no idea what technology will do at that point. We might be able to salvage enough of a currently preserved person to grow them an entirely new, healthy body through a slow-resurrection process. Who knows?\n\n4) Why *not*? If you're being robbed of your life at a very young age, and you have the cash to try it, what's wrong with that? People keep saying things like \"it's selfish\", which is fucking *bologna*. Sure, if you have a family who's barely making it, and you're leaving behind loved ones who need the money, maybe it's selfish. If you have enough money to spare on it, go right ahead! You can't beat these odds. There is no \"losing\" situation. Either you win, or it doesn't matter, because you're dead. And if you do win, it's not like it's a bad process. You wake up hundreds of years in the future, immediately after \"falling asleep\". Maybe you have to go through some excruciating process, but hey, it would be cool.",
"Well, thawing certainly irreparably destroys the body today. The concept is a long shot bet is that somehow they'll be able to treat the damage done by freezing and thawing by extending the time scale involved. Once cooled to liquid nitrogen temperatures, stuff isn't really moving in any significant way. \n\nIs it likely they'll be able to repair the damage before they run out of money in a unpredictable world where the economy can effect their respective trust funds and unscrupulous lawyers can find efficient ways of emptying those funds in the hundreds of years before such technology is even feasibly possible? No.\n\nIs it possible that the freezing process does so much brain damage that recovering any part of you is impossible? Yes, though we can't know for sure - the brain is surprisingly resilient, but we have no data on what doesn't exist yet. We can be sure the important data is gone when we burn it. We can't be sure it is gone at negative < 190 degrees.\n\nGiven all that, it is a extreme longshot. But the alternative works 0% of the time. They say cryonics is an experiment, and so far the control group isn't doing well. I look forward to seeing how technology might help those frozen folks someday.\n\nAnd for the people saying it is a waste of their money that could 'save lives today', the same logic applies to your money right now. If you think it is unethical to spend and large amount of money on a comfort or something that only possibly benefits you, just donate all your money to charity now...",
"Wouldn't it be lucrative to BE the scientist who discovers how to revive these people. They're obviously all wealthy, and will likely appreciate you bringing them back to life and all. Sounds like a sure fire way to infinite riches for whoever discovers how.",
"One thing I haven't seen mentioned here is the effect of radiation damage.\n\nLet's pretend for a moment that a working cryogenics system was created that can freeze and then thaw a body without causing harm to the body. Great!\n\nThing is, though, that naturally-occuring radiation in our environment degrades our cells. It's usually not a problem, because our bodies repair themselves. The occasional cell that's killed is replaced.\n\nWhen you're frozen for a century, your body obviously cannot repair the degradation. Stay frozen for long enough and you'll, uh, wake up dead, if you're not properly shielded against radiation. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.brainpreservation.org/content/connectome"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
15vzl3
|
Approximately how many people would Mark Antony have ruled over in his time as a triumvir?
|
I know the population of the entire Roman empire at 25 BC was about 56,800,000, however, this is a few years after and Mark Antony only ruled over a third of this. I did find [this map](_URL_1_) which shows where each of the triumvirs ruled over, I'm not sure if that helps at all though.
I am focussing mainly on the year 33 BC but I don't mind if your answers are a little inaccurate.
Thank you.
EDIT: It seems my map was incorrect (sourced from a deviant art account, not my own map). [Here](_URL_0_) is a more correct piece. Thanks very much to svarogteuse for pointing this out.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/15vzl3/approximately_how_many_people_would_mark_antony/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7qc5t8"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"I can't even guess the number but your map has problems. It lists 3 Triumvirs: Antonius (Marc Antony), Lepidus (Marcus Aemilius Lepidus) and Brutus? Who is this Brutus? The 3rd person in the 2nd Triumvirate was Octavian, later known as Augustus. Is it referring to Marcus Junius Brutus, one of Ceaser's assassins? If so he was most defiantly not part of the Triumvirate. The division of the empire was Octavian the West, Antony of the East, and Lepidus Hispania and Africa not what is shown. I don't believe that Media and Mesopotamia are under Roman control at this point and parts of Asia Minor that are shown as not Roman were Roman. \n\nI think you found some alternate history map. [Here](_URL_0_) is a correct map."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/files/romanabc31.jpg",
"http://th03.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2011/137/5/4/37bc___the_second_triumvirate_by_edthomasten-d3gkqqh.jpg"
] |
[
[
"http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/files/romanabc31.jpg"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.