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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
cazmsj
|
What aspects of a speaker determine it's max volume?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/cazmsj/what_aspects_of_a_speaker_determine_its_max_volume/
|
{
"a_id": [
"etc3w0h",
"etc416u",
"etc5co8",
"etc626o",
"etc7cd8",
"etcaj22"
],
"score": [
31,
12,
81,
3,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Volume is just an amplitude of the signal which is carried by a sound wave. You can imagine the amplitude as a \"size\" of the sound wave. The more the speaker moves, the more air it pushes, thus producing bigger sound waves that your ears interpret as louder sound.\n\nOr in other words, the capability of the speaker to produce louder noises is defined by how much air it can push which is proportional to its membrane size and strength of the electromagnet.",
"The size and msterials its made of. Speakers have a membrane that translates electrical signals into analog and makes the air move which is what creates the sound you hear. So basicly the more air it moves the louder it can get.",
"Two things can go wrong with a speaker.\n\nThe coil can push the cone too hard and it rips. This happens a lot with older paper speakers.\n\nYou can put too much electricity through the coil (a little transformer) and burn it out.\n\nThe volume produced is (sort of) the diameter of the cone times the travel in and out. That tells how much air it will move.\n\nAlso, some speakers are more efficient than others. If you use a lighter weight Mylar cone, it takes less electrical power to move the cone than a heavy paper one, and you can move more air.",
"Frequency response is a big driver (no pun intended). \n\nHigh frequency can be emitted by small speaker, and even at debilitating volumes. \n\nLow frequency requires more “space” for a complete wave and therefore a larger “speaker” for a given unit of power or volume. \n\nI’m not an audio engineer but I have slept at a holiday inn express in my lifetime.",
"From an engineering standpoint, there is a set of inter-related parameters known as the [Thiele/Small Parameters](_URL_0_) that determine the performance of a speaker at low frequencies in a given environment. Basically, it has to do with the size of the cone, how far the cone can travel, material properties of the cone and suspension, etc. That article will tell you more than you ever wanted to know about the subject.\n\nThe maximum output (I'm using this term since \"volume\" also refers to the amount of air the speaker can move) of the speaker is the point at which the voice coil reaches the end of its suspension travel or the cone starts to deform from its resting shape.",
"Everyone else is talking about the mechanical aspects. In terms of measure, the efficiency or sensitivity at a particular wattage determines the loudness. Also note that perceived loudness is not directly proportional to any of the above, it’s logarithmic."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiele/Small_parameters"
],
[]
] |
||
k6izx
|
what makes elements perform ionic and covalent bonds?(x-post from askscience)
|
I've heard the whole lecture about how the atoms want to be "happy" by sharing electrons, but they never tell us why or how. If you just put these elements in a room by themselves, would they do it on their own, or do they need something else?
i.e. If I put one part oxygen and two parts hydrogen in a room completely by themselves, with no outside interference, would I magically have water?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k6izx/what_makes_elements_perform_ionic_and_covalent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2i64wn",
"c2i64wn"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Ionic bonds are a bit easier to visualize I think. You can sort think about it this way: Atoms are composed of a nucleus with protons and a bunch of electrons. Each proton carries a positive charge and each electron carries a negative charge. Like the poles on a magnet, the positively and negatively charged particles attract each other, and if an atom has the same number of protons and electrons, they balance out and the atom has no charge overall.\n\nIt turns out that atoms kind of store their electrons in a set of bags, where each bag holds a certain number of electrons. The first bag holds two, the next one holds eight, the next one holds 18, etc.\n\nThe atoms on the left hand side of the periodic table have juuusstt too many electrons to fit evenly in their bags. Take sodium, for instance, with 11 protons and electrons. The sodium atom puts its first two electrons in the first bag, the next eight into the second bag, but it only has one electron remaining for the last bag, which is designed to hold 18 electrons. Now sodium doesn't necessarily want to expel that last electron, but if someone else comes along that might want an extra electron, sodium wouldn't feel too bad about giving it away, because then it would only need 2 bags instead of carrying around a whole third bag with only a single electron in it.\n\nAlong comes chlorine with 17 protons and electrons. We can do the same kind of analysis and find that it has 2 electrons in its first bag, 8 in next, and 7 in its last bag. Even the though the last bag can hold a total of 18 electrons, it turns out that 8 is also a pretty even number that fits in the last bag, so if chlorine had one more electron, it would be happy. When sodium and chlorine meet, sodium gives its awkward electron to chlorine. After the exchange, sodium becomes positively charged because it lost its electron, and chlorine becomes negatively charged. The oppositely charged sodium and chlorine attract each other and form an ionic bond and become Sodium Chloride (NaCl), or common table salt.\n\nAlso, regarding your question about if you'd get water if you massaged oxygen and hydrogen together... Typically, if you have pure hydrogen or oxygen, they exist as hydrogen gas molecules composed of 2 hydrogen atoms, and oxygen gas molecules, also composed of 2 oxygen atoms. Say you mix the two gasses together in a room at room temperature. In this case, not much would happen. This is because the hydrogens are lazily happy on their own bonded to each other, and the oxygen as well. Sure, the hydrogen would _rather_ be bonded to the oxygen, but at such a low temperature, they're too lazy to do anything about it. If there should happen to be a spark though, the hydrogen and oxygen close to the spark might get just enough energy to change from hydrogen and oxygen gas into water vapor. When that happens, it turns out that energy is released by the atoms as they exchange in the form of heat and light. The released heat and light might cause other neighboring hydrogens and oxygens to bond, too, causing a very fast chain reaction throughout the room. The resulting heat and light from the gigantic chain reaction would cause a hindenburg explosion in your room, after which you'd have water vapor. Like this: _URL_0_ ",
"Ionic bonds are a bit easier to visualize I think. You can sort think about it this way: Atoms are composed of a nucleus with protons and a bunch of electrons. Each proton carries a positive charge and each electron carries a negative charge. Like the poles on a magnet, the positively and negatively charged particles attract each other, and if an atom has the same number of protons and electrons, they balance out and the atom has no charge overall.\n\nIt turns out that atoms kind of store their electrons in a set of bags, where each bag holds a certain number of electrons. The first bag holds two, the next one holds eight, the next one holds 18, etc.\n\nThe atoms on the left hand side of the periodic table have juuusstt too many electrons to fit evenly in their bags. Take sodium, for instance, with 11 protons and electrons. The sodium atom puts its first two electrons in the first bag, the next eight into the second bag, but it only has one electron remaining for the last bag, which is designed to hold 18 electrons. Now sodium doesn't necessarily want to expel that last electron, but if someone else comes along that might want an extra electron, sodium wouldn't feel too bad about giving it away, because then it would only need 2 bags instead of carrying around a whole third bag with only a single electron in it.\n\nAlong comes chlorine with 17 protons and electrons. We can do the same kind of analysis and find that it has 2 electrons in its first bag, 8 in next, and 7 in its last bag. Even the though the last bag can hold a total of 18 electrons, it turns out that 8 is also a pretty even number that fits in the last bag, so if chlorine had one more electron, it would be happy. When sodium and chlorine meet, sodium gives its awkward electron to chlorine. After the exchange, sodium becomes positively charged because it lost its electron, and chlorine becomes negatively charged. The oppositely charged sodium and chlorine attract each other and form an ionic bond and become Sodium Chloride (NaCl), or common table salt.\n\nAlso, regarding your question about if you'd get water if you massaged oxygen and hydrogen together... Typically, if you have pure hydrogen or oxygen, they exist as hydrogen gas molecules composed of 2 hydrogen atoms, and oxygen gas molecules, also composed of 2 oxygen atoms. Say you mix the two gasses together in a room at room temperature. In this case, not much would happen. This is because the hydrogens are lazily happy on their own bonded to each other, and the oxygen as well. Sure, the hydrogen would _rather_ be bonded to the oxygen, but at such a low temperature, they're too lazy to do anything about it. If there should happen to be a spark though, the hydrogen and oxygen close to the spark might get just enough energy to change from hydrogen and oxygen gas into water vapor. When that happens, it turns out that energy is released by the atoms as they exchange in the form of heat and light. The released heat and light might cause other neighboring hydrogens and oxygens to bond, too, causing a very fast chain reaction throughout the room. The resulting heat and light from the gigantic chain reaction would cause a hindenburg explosion in your room, after which you'd have water vapor. Like this: _URL_0_ "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMB2VR0087w"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMB2VR0087w"
]
] |
|
1jwf1d
|
What did people do before coffee?
|
Coffee consumption is so pervasive now, what did people do without it? Was there a common daily stimulant used in Europe prior to the importation of goods from the New World? What about other parts of the world? When did tea become popular in Western Europe? Is tea consumption in Britain linked to the colonization of India, or does it predate it?
So many questions! I'm really just looking for an idea of the history of frequently consumed chemical stimulants. Thanks!
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1jwf1d/what_did_people_do_before_coffee/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbj0xh8",
"cbj7ieg",
"cbj7l23"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"In the Arabian Penninsula and parts of Africa, [khat](_URL_0_) was (and is) sometimes used. it's a leaf that you can chew, and is a stimulant. it's quite common in yemen. while it's not used widely, it's a very common stimulant in the areas where it's been grown historically.",
"A similar question was asked about a month ago. You will find somewhat relevant answers in the comments.\n\n[Did the Ancient Romans have their own version of a \"cup of coffee\"? by which I mean a mild stimulant they would have used on a daily basis](_URL_0_)",
"Incas had coca leaves which they chew and use to make coca tea, which has a stimulant effect similar to coffee. Still used in the Andes region today widely. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1hhvv3/did_the_ancient_romans_have_their_own_version_of/"
],
[]
] |
|
e6z4cl
|
What equipment would ancient Romans use against armoured opponents? ~107BC-395AD
|
Talking about the post-Marian Republican and early imperial Rome, when fighting armoured opponents, such as other Roman legions in a civil war, what sort of weapons would they use considering the gladius seems better suited to stab lightly armoured opponents? (Unless my perception on Roman infantry warfare is off, please clarify it for me if so.)
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/e6z4cl/what_equipment_would_ancient_romans_use_against/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f9ug5eg"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Standard fighting equipment for a post-Marian legionnaire was the gladius, pilum, pugio, scutum, galea, and some sort of body armor, either the lorica squamata, lorica hamata, or, mainly imperial, lorica segmentata. This profile rarely if ever changed in any meaningful way, whether fighting naked Britons or Parthian horse-archers or perfumed Egyptians or other Romans legions. This changes in Late Antiquity, when we start to see specialized units, but in your period specialized forces would always be auxiliaries.\n\nYour focus on [weapon type] effective against [protection type] is mostly a modern construction. The vast majority of casualties in an ancient battle happened after a side broke and fled. Ancient battles were much more about maneuvering, positioning, and maintaining morale rather than inflicting damage to combatants along the line of battle. Casualties were incidental to those three, and killing blows often the consequence of an injury unrelated to body armor (like taking a *tragula* through an exposed thigh at twenty meters, or going down with a sprained ankle in the push).\n\nYou should also not discount the gladius. It was a vicious, versatile weapon, and the legionnaire treated it like a tool. Gladius, shovel, wooden stake. Its tapered point made it a sturdy puncturing weapon as much as a slasher, and with the force of a thrust, it was more than enough to push through the weakpoint of a lorica hamata or the joint of a lorica segmentata. The hilt design was intended to help transfer force to a thrust attack in this way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5tyqq0
|
why was black and white photography very high resolution at it's peak, but soon after when color photography was introduced, it was very bad quality?
|
Same with like video and stuff.
By "it was very bad quality", I'm talking about the bad quality of the color photography when it was introduced.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tyqq0/eli5_why_was_black_and_white_photography_very/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddqbc1l"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Black and White film has one emulsion, color film has three emulsions (RGB). \n\nAccording to [Wikipedia](_URL_0_):\n\n > Photographic emulsion is a fine suspension of insoluble light-sensitive crystals in a colloid sol, usually consisting of gelatin. The light-sensitive component is one or a mixture of silver halides: silver bromide, chloride and iodide. The gelatin is used as a permeable binder, allowing processing agents (e.g., developer, fixer, toners, etc.) in aqueous solution to enter the colloid without dislodging the crystals. Other polymer macromolecules are often blended,[citation needed] but gelatin has not been entirely replaced. The light-exposed crystals are reduced by the developer to black metallic silver particles that form the image. Colour films and papers have multiple layers of emulsion, made sensitive to different parts of the visible spectrum by different colour sensitizers, and incorporating different dye couplers which produce superimposed yellow, magenta and cyan dye images during development. Panchromatic black-and-white film also includes colour sensitizers, but as part of a single emulsion layer.\n\n > Most modern emulsions are \"washed\" to remove some of the reaction byproducts (potassium nitrate and excess salts). The \"washing\" or desalting step can be performed by ultrafiltration, dialysis, coagulation (using acylated gelatin), or a classic noodle washing method. Emulsion making also incorporates steps to increase sensitivity by using chemical sensitizing agents and sensitizing dyes.\n\nThe number of emulsions affects the quality and the volume of byproducts that had to be removed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographic_emulsion"
]
] |
|
3larxd
|
How can a layman tell how reliable a source is?
|
So in my spare time I've been reading up/listening to books and such about (primarily) Rome. Some sources I hear good things about (such as the ask-historians podcast and the history of rome podcast) and figure I can trust to provide good information but there are a ton of other books and authors I've never heard of as history is not my field.
What is the best way I can go about making sure that the information I am using to learn about history is accurate and not written by someone who is questionable (or out of date/debunked)?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3larxd/how_can_a_layman_tell_how_reliable_a_source_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv4nemc",
"cv4s6dg",
"cv4sgdy",
"cv4t3fn",
"cv4t656",
"cv4tvmf",
"cv4y5o8",
"cv54knj",
"cv57w24",
"cv5q26p"
],
"score": [
17,
9,
79,
2,
10,
10,
3,
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"A good start is to look at the sources used. A respectable work will have pages and pages of works cited at the end. That's not a guarantee, but it is a helpful place to start looking. ",
"It's difficult for the layman to determine good vs. bad sources sometimes. A few indicators, though not guarantees, of good sources will be:\n\n1) They are published with a reputable press. Be wary of anything published with a press that sounds like it's run out of the author's garage, because it probably is. University presses aren't going to publish terrible books on the whole. \n\n2) They are not an \"independent scholar.\" Some times, though not always, this means that this person is under qualified or has wacky theories that have kept them out of the academy.\n\n3) If you have access to academic journals, read a few book reviews on the book. If other scholars in the field are engaging with it, that's a good sign. If they all hate it, that's probably not a good sign. ",
"I tell my students to start with a Google of the author. Is s/he affiliated with a university? With a think tank? NGO? Each of these will have differing goals in publishing, and you need to weigh them when considering a source. \n\nThen read her/his CV, paying attention to what has been published and in which journals. Is the author publishing stuff in the *Journal of American History?* If so, probably reliable. Is the author publishing stuff in the *Journal of Crazy Conspiracy Theories?* If so, maybe not as reliable.\n\nIs the book published by an academic press (University of Somewhere You've Heard Of Press, etc.?) If so, it has most likely gone thru a pretty rigorous peer-review process. That doesn't guarantee a good book, but it does mean that at least a few people think it's probably OK. \n\nThumb thru the citations. By itself, footnoting doesn't mean anything. Heck, I can cite Phil Foner all day, but that doesn't mean it's a good thing. Are the footnotes citing someone reputable? Are the notes to works that are as describes above (academic presses, solid journals, etc.?) Do the notes include historiographic discussion? (nb: historians, if allowed by a publisher, would probably write a 5000 word article with a 25000 word set of footnotes politely bashing or congratulating their colleagues.) \n\nThis list is far from exhaustive, but should give you a fair footing.\n\nCheers and keep reading. ",
"Jumping in with a related question, what's the best way to tell how reliable a primary source is? I hear all the time about how this or that historian of antiquity was exaggerating or had an axe to grind, and obviously historians have done a great job correlating or debunking a lot of it, but how does a layperson tell?",
"Sadly there's no hard-and-fast rule, or database for reliable sources. Every source carries with it some degree of bias or inaccuracy, and it's part of the historians job to work out the degree to which this exists. \n\nYour question seems to be referring to works of history as opposed to primary sources (i.e. first-hand data, records, images etc.). The only way to tell if the information they are providing is accurate is by checking these original sources. It's likely that if you are reading from widely-available or academically published texts that the sources they are using are reliable (or at least accepted as useful by the historical community) and if they are good historians they will discuss the problems that arose from the sources they've used. For a period such as Rome it is very hard to find source material that doesn't have significant problems in it's provenance, so most reputable historians should be taking these into account with their analysis.\n\nI think what you're getting at is whether their analysis and the conclusions they are drawing are up-to-date, and again this is a bit of a nuanced question. For instance, Bryan Ward-Perkins' argues in *The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization* that the traditional view of the fall of Rome, (that it did mark a serious material and societal decline) argued by Gibbon et al still holds true, but not for the reasons Gibbon put forward. Therefore Ward-Perkins is arguing that while he is rightfully 'debunked', his points still stand. Post-modern and Marxist historians would most likely disagree. What is accepted by some as a good interpretation of events will inevitably be rejected by others. For this it's useful to read (or listen) to works discussing the **historiography** of a period, which will hopefully give you an impression of what is still worth reading, but at the end of the day you have to choose who to believe. No-one has a monopoly on historical knowledge, although you will find that the more obscure the subject area the smaller the pool of 'strong' works of history exist. As for Rome there are many reputable historians and works of history which are worth reading, and I really recommend Ward-Perkins if you're interested in that period. ",
"[We did a Monday Methods thread](_URL_0_) on critical reading that you might find helpful! ",
"Another thing that hasn't been said by now: Critical reading. Is the author making claims he possibly can't know? (Like Napoleon at a secret meeting said:\"...\"). Does it feel like the author makes statements with dubious claims? Both of those often happen in biographies.\n\nDoes it read like a novel? This isn't inherently wrong, but often it is indicative of less than rigorous argumentation.",
"I would add that once you have read a few established historians you should be perfectly capable of coming to your own opinions on how trustworthy a source is. Any historian can find bones to pick with any other historian. That's how we keep the field alive.\n\nSo here's a quick list to help any budding Roman historian get a good grounding:\n\nRoman society:\n\nSuper readable: Mary Beard's book on Pompeii\n\nScholarly: Claud Nicolet's *World of the Citizen in Ancient Rome* (I would use it as a reference. Might be hard to find outside a university)\n\nPrimary Sources: Pompeii, Catullus, Cicero, etc.\n\n\nRoman Republic\n\nSuper readable: What the heck, go for Robert Harris's *Imperium*. It's historical fiction about Cicero but does a good job. I've never met a historian who hated it. Also HBO's *Rome*. Skip the second season if you aren't totally enthralled.\n\nScholarly: Erich Gruens *Last Generation of the Roman Republic*. Once you make it through that, you're practically ready for your comprehensive exams.\n\nPrimary Sources: Polybius (esp. Book 6), Livy, Appian, Caesar\n\n\nRoman Empire\n\nSuper Readable: *I, Claudius*, though it is a little too conspiracy driven. There are a ton of biographies for the emperors. Yale did a series, so look for Yale University Press.\n\nScholarly: Yale UP books are scholarly but also mostly narrative. \n\nPrimary: Tacitus, Suetonius, The Augustan Histories/Lives of the Later Caesars, Ammianus Marcellinus\n",
"Some academic search engines will show how many articles cite an article you pull up there. Obviously if it's new work you need to discount it a bit, but if you pull up a decade old paper that's been cited 5 times and isn't on a super narrow topic, that should set off warning bells.",
"It gets easier the more good history you read.\n\nIf you were to go to graduate school, you'd spend the first two (or more) years reading a lot of books and articles and discussing how their arguments were put together, how they used their evidence, whether their methods were credible and convincing, what they did wrong (etc). At first, it's hellishly difficult because - as you know - it's very hard to evaluate the quality of an argument when you're still learning the basic story (which the author often assumes you already know). If you have to stop and look up every single source to see if it's being cited properly, it's veeery slow going. But after you've read a few good books on the same subject by different authors, you start to see how they fit together because - especially when you study something like the Roman empire - they're talking about the same primary sources, referencing the same important books by other (modern) historians, and actually having a conversation with each other. Once you've read enough to understand how that conversation fits together, you'll quickly see when a book does something different; bad of fringe history is usually very easy to recognize once you're steeped in enough good history.\n\nSo to start, I'd recommend reading through a list of known, trustworthy books about the Roman empire - we have a [book list here](_URL_0_) with some great recommendations, and we'd be very happy to point you toward other good books on specific topics that might interest you if you ask us.\n\nAs you read these vetted books, look at how they back up their arguments with evidence. What sources do they use to support their arguments? If one source keeps coming up again and again, consider looking it up and reading it (many of the sources Roman historians use have been translated into English, and are available free online). What are the ways they use these sources, and what are the ways they *don't* (lots of pop historians read original documents from Rome as though they were ripped from a modern newspaper, but real historians are much more careful to read sources in their own context - and good historians will often explain why they choose to read a particular source in one way and not another)? After a while, you'll start to get a feel for how real academic historians write and use our evidence, and it will begin to be very obvious when something fails to pass muster.\n\nWe also have a few professional shortcuts for tracking down good books. We rely very heavily on reviews by other academics, and - for ancient history - you can find a lot of these for free online. The [Bryn Mawr Classical Review](_URL_1_) is a fantastic place to see in-depth reviews by qualified experts of most of the latest books on the Roman empire, and you can subscribe to their email list to stay on top of the best recent publications. As a general rule, if a book you want to read hasn't been reviewed by BMCR, and wasn't published by a university press (or another press that you see all the good historians you've read citing all the time), it might be suspect."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2nxsli/monday_methods_critical_reading_and_criticism/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/books",
"http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu"
]
] |
|
9r2lsb
|
If genetic testing shows Ashkenazi Jewish people have much more relation to the semitic people, where did the Khazar jews end up after the empire collapsed?
|
I'm aware this is a controversial topic, but I find migration of different ethnic groups fascinating. The Khazars are particularly interesting, as it's not often an entire nation converts to another religion en masse, that's a sizable Jewish population.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/9r2lsb/if_genetic_testing_shows_ashkenazi_jewish_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8es0cx"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This thread has a pretty good compilation of threads on the religion of the khazars\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\n_URL_1_\n\nBy /u/gingerkid1234"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2sj7wo/how_was_judaism_introduced_to_the_khazars_how_did/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/92owbf/did_the_khazars_really_convert_to_judaism/"
]
] |
|
dxbzwq
|
Books on early fascism's relationship to liberalism and socialism?
|
More specifically, the early Italian fascist movement and it's ties to anarchism, Marxism and conservative liberal forces.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dxbzwq/books_on_early_fascisms_relationship_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f7y1w8c"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Emilio Gentile (whose works have the additional quality of being, some times, available in an English translation) has spent a good portion of his career analyzing the early stages of the ambiguous definition of a \"fascist ideology\" within the environment of what he has defined \"national radicalism\". \n\nHis early works that focus especially on this process - *Le origini dell'ideologia fascista (1918-25)* [1975, 1996] and *Il mito dello stato nuovo dall'antigiolittismo al fascismo* [1982, 1999] - provide a good insight into the context of the transition from the ideas of the Italian liberal state to those advocating for a new, albeit often ill defined, political system. Since both are somewhat technical in their perspective, I would suggest pairing them with a general overview of Italian politics during Giolitti's age and the Great War (for instance Bosworth's), unless one is already familiar with the period.\n\nStill with Gentile, and for additional context, his early work on *La Voce* - *Mussolini e La Voce* [1976], especially for the influence of Prezzolini's newspaper on Mussolini's (tenuous) attempts at developing his own revisionist approach to Marxism - *La Grande Italia* [1997] for the affirmation of a new sentiment of *Italianismo* during the early XX Century - *\"La nostra sfida alle stelle\", Futuristi in politica* [2009] for the origins and relative impact of Italian Futurism as a political formation - *Mussolini contro Lenin* [2017] for a review of Mussolini's \"anti-Bolshevism\" during 1917-22, mostly taken from the pages of his *Popolo d'Italia* and for an attempt at a critical examination of how Mussolini's \"revolutionarism\", or instinct for a national renovation, could adjust to the impact of the Bolshevik revolution.\n\n\nFor a more detailed coverage of Mussolini's relations with the internal currents of early fascism, and for the illustration of the traditional distinction between \"party\" and \"movement\", one should check De Felice's *Mussolini*, especially vol. 1-2-3. As well as De Felice's additional works on the relations between Mussolini, De Ambris and D'Annunzio centered around the \"Fiume endeavor\" (for context on the latter, one should check Alatri, P. *Nitti,D'Annunzio e la questione Adriatica*)\n\n\nIn more recent years, specific works have attempted to cover Mussolini's experience as a more or less prominent figure of Italian socialism and his eventual transition to revolutionary interventionism and then to \"national\" interventionism. \n\nDi Scala, E. ; Gentile, E. - *Mussolini 1883-1915, Triumph and transformation of a revolutionary socialist* [2016]\n\n\nFor a comprehensive examination of the ongoing social and political landscape across the Great War, I would nonetheless recommend Vivarelli, R. - *Storia delle origini del Fascismo* and his *Il fallimento del liberalismo* - the latter especially more focused on the elements of weakness of the Italian liberal system. In English, but much shorter and with a different (and far more \"British\") perspective on Italian liberalism, Seton-Watson C. - *Italy, from liberalism to Fascism, 1870-1925* [1967]."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
sn12o
|
Can a solar system or star get pulled into a different galaxy?
|
I saw [this post](_URL_0_) of interacting galaxies in r/spaceporn, and it made me wonder if the gravitational pull from a galaxy could be strong enough to pull a star/solar system away from a second (nearby) galaxy.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/sn12o/can_a_solar_system_or_star_get_pulled_into_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4fc9hi"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"In around four billion years our galaxy will collide with the Andromeda galaxy (Since galaxies are largely empty space with the odd solid bit - it won't be quite as violent as it might seem - probably).\n\nAssuming that the two galaxies subsequently go on their merry ways (imagine a comet having a close pass with the sun) then it is likely that the two galaxies will exchange some mass (solar systems) during the encounter.\n\nThere are two parts of the interaction that are likely to be interesting:\n\n1. The action of the centre of masses of the galaxies on solar systems.\n2. The specific interaction when two solar system pass near each other.\n\nBoth of these types of interaction can/will disturb orbits and could lead to a solar system (or part thereof) to be pulled into a new orbit."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/kEay5.jpg"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1oamak
|
Is the Higgs field an actual physical field of energy?
|
Hi there
I recently finished reading Physics and Psychics by Victor J. Stenger and in it he says that ''fields'' on a quantum level in science / mathematics aren't physical fields per se but they are mathematical constructs used to understand reality better. Now the book was published in 1990 (I believe) so maybe the potential Higgs field was not on his mind at the time.
Although I can't quote the book directly as I don't have it on me, I did find this article:
_URL_0_
Espousing the same information - '' No one has ever observed a quantum field. Quantum fields are purely mathematical constructs within quantum field theory. ''
The reason I ask is that I was recently challenged to read a book by Gregg Braden (with an open mind). I know what to expect but want to go through it with a fine toothed comb and highlight what will inevitably be inconsistencies and misconceptions. The all pervasive field that links conciousness to non-locality being one of them no doubt!
Thank you. Just wanted confirmation on this.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1oamak/is_the_higgs_field_an_actual_physical_field_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccqc4hi",
"ccqhiw4"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"First off the Higgs field is as real a field as any other field and was predicted in the 60's. As to whether particles or fields are fundamental or mathematical tools, that is really a philosophical question. ",
"I'd say pretty much the same thing as /u/whathappenedtosmbc and /u/MCMXCII, that I can't imagine what the difference is between a physical field and a mathematical construct, or even how that difference matters. The Higgs field is just as real as any other quantum field like the up quark field or the electromagnetic (potential) field. It's not really _made_ of energy, but energy can be stored in it.\n\n > The all pervasive field that links conciousness to non-locality\n\nNow _that_ field is not real. I would be highly suspicious of any book (or person) that talks about that with a straight face while claiming to be an expert in physics.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/particles-are-for-real_b_2177361.html"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1rhwdb
|
Why is the direction of the torque vector significant?
|
Torque is a vector, the cross-product of the force vector and r, the vector representing the distance of the applied force from the center of rotation. Since the torque vector is the cross-product of two vectors, it is also by definition orthogonal (perpendicular) to both force and r vectors. In many cases, this results in a torque vector that is "in" or "out" of the page. I understand the significance and applications of the magnitude of the torque vector, but what significance does its direction have?
Related question: it is known that tangential acceleration = (angular acceleration * r). In this situation, the units of r must be in meters/radian. How is this possible?
Thanks!
EDIT: I understand the right-hand rule and how to find the direction of the torque vector; however, it is the significance of this direction that I do not understand.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1rhwdb/why_is_the_direction_of_the_torque_vector/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdnfssi",
"cdng4a7",
"cdngftu"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
16
],
"text": [
"the in or out direction comes from the right hand rule, which is where you put your right hand on \"r\" and then curl your fingers towards the direction of the force. so lets say that \"r\" is going to the right and the force is upwards, then the torque would be out of the page. so basically the in our out direction doesnt mean anything all by itself, you have to use the right hand rule to break it down.\ni dont really have a good explanation for your second question, but i can say this. radians are kind of weird because they dont really have a unit (the calculation for a radian ends up with a length/length so the units cancel out). 1 radian is the angle that is made from an arc length of 1 radius. thats why there are 2pi radians in a circle, because the circumference of a circle is 2pi",
"If you understand the right-hand rule, I don't entirely know what 'significance' you don't understand. Outward pointing of the torque vector means the rotation is accelerated one way. Inward pointing means it is accelerated the other way. There's not much more to understand. Can you elaborate on what you feel you are missing? ",
"The direction of the torque vector is only significant once an arbitrary convention (i.e. the right hand rule) has been chosen. Really I think it make more sense to think of toques and angular momenta as defined by a plane plus a direction of circulation than it does a vector. However, there's a nice property in three dimensions that each plane has exactly one direction perpendicular to it, and we can define a direction/magnitude of circulation by specifying a given vector along the direction of that normal.\n\nFrom this point of view the direction (in or out) is just a stand in for the direction of circulation of the plane. In some ways the plane picture is better, however most of the math you would have developed is better at using vectors and since this one to one correspondence between the two exists we can jump back and forth between the two.\n\nthat was a bit rushed by I hope its clear.\n\nAs for the second question radians are dimensionless so the units of meters/radian are the same as the units of meters. Radians are the ratio between the arclength (distance around the circumference) and the radius. ratios of two things with the same units are dimensionless. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
49yoj3
|
law of conservation of mass
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49yoj3/eli5_law_of_conservation_of_mass/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0vwkjb",
"d0vz2fh"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"It's like when you're playing with your legos, buddy. You can take your house apart, make it into a car, move the bricks closer together or further apart. But you can't break the bricks, they're indestructible. Now pretend everything in the world is made of legos which are so tiny that you can't see them, those are called atoms. Atoms work in almost the same way as legos, if you burn, cut or pull something apart then you only break that thing, but not the legos. The legos stay. Do you get it? ",
"All Laws of Physics are simply apparent habits of the Universe that we have observed by looking at an ever-so tiny fragment of the whole. We have then projected those observations outward to the whole cosmos and enshrined them in words we call a \"law\".\n\nThese laws are useful rules of thumb for any human living in our universe. Yet they may be neither ultimate nor eternally applicable. Previous laws such as the geocentric universe and newton's motions have since been overturned on appeal (so to speak).\n\nThus we can make no absolutist statements even if we do enshrine them in the language of law. The Universe is too subtle and vast for us to have yet reached any conclusive understandings of it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1xklp2
|
just seen captain phillips, why are cargo ships sailing around the horn of africa so poorly defended?
|
The whole boarding scene really makes you think about how ridiculous the whole piracy thing has been over the past few years. Four guys on a wooden boat with rusty AKs and no shoes capture a gigantic cargo ship that has to defend itself with water cannons and *distress flares*. All they would need is one gun to shoot back at the pirates to scare them off. One. Single. Gun. Or just arm the crews to the teeth with grenade launchers and stick an M60 on the stern and pirates would soon learn to not attack shipping. It must be legal to defend yourself from pirates on the high seas? What's going on?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xklp2/eli5_just_seen_captain_phillips_why_are_cargo/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfc6jvx",
"cfcfzc5"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"International maritime law forbids arming merchant ships.",
"Captain Phillips is actually being [sued](_URL_0_) by his crew for “willful, wanton and conscious disregard for their safety.” he is not the man the film makes him out to be."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://nypost.com/2013/10/13/crew-members-deny-captain-phillips-heroism/"
]
] |
|
67yg1m
|
why can't robots move exactly like humans yet? what is holding engineers back?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67yg1m/eli5_why_cant_robots_move_exactly_like_humans_yet/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dgu750a",
"dgu7tyl",
"dgue75j",
"dgur4vv"
],
"score": [
5,
13,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"My uneducated (somewhat) guess would be rapid fine tuning of balance and equilibrium of a bipedal body.\n\nIf you really try and \"feel\" your muscles as you move, or even stay in place, you can quickly see that a LOT of stabilizing autonomous activity is going on. This is all going on very quickly in your body and automatically, programming that in a robot is likely extremely complex.",
"The trouble is software. We have the technology to build the physical machine itself. We could build an artificial skeleton with artificial tendons and muscles and the necessary sensors, but developing the software to control it all simultaneously in a way that duplicates human movement is a daunting task. ",
"Another problem is how movement produced,there is a limit to the speed of movement for each \"muscle\" of the robot,because it's based on an electric motor,and gears,which limits agility and character of movement.",
"In addition to all the control problems thre is motivation. You need to have an AI that will relate to its environment and decide to do something. Otherwise it's like. Yay! it can walk perfectly...but doesn't want to. Nope still standing there.\n\nOnce moving there are hundreds of tasks that need conquered. Waling through a crowd? catching a ball? Crossing the street? all radically different things your biology had learned to deal with.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xg262
|
why can't the cellular infrastructure that is in place to provide 3g and lte just be used to create a giant wifi network?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xg262/eli5_why_cant_the_cellular_infrastructure_that_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfb0fol",
"cfb1jkq",
"cfb1zel",
"cfb2vyo"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Those networks use different standards to provide their signals. It's not like it's all using the same frequency for all of the various forms of wireless. [Source.](_URL_0_)",
"WiFi is not the same thing as a cellular network. This seems to be a common misconception, when I tell people that I have wireless broadband, because I can't get a landline, many people respond \"oh, so you got wifi\". \n\nWiFi use 2.4 GHz radio waves, cellular networks use many different frequencies, from ~700 MHz up to ~3.6 GHz. Also, cellular networks use completely different protocols, e.t.c. \n\n",
"I guess I was thinking along the lines of Wireless mesh networks that can be implemented with various wireless technology including 802.11, 802.15, 802.16, cellular technologies or combinations of more than one type.",
"They are vastly different technologies. Plus, can you imagine all of the interference? My 2.4 ghz is already 50% the speed if my 5 ghz network because of interference. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_wireless_data_standards#Overview"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1q79y3
|
why are "bologna" and "lasagna" pronounced so utterly differently?
|
Is it just an English thing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1q79y3/eli5_why_are_bologna_and_lasagna_pronounced_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cd9wq5l",
"cd9wv0b"
],
"score": [
4,
7
],
"text": [
"In Italian the \"gn\" combination sounds the same for both words.",
"We've Americanized the pronunciation of *bologna* a lot more than *lasagna*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
xqqld
|
I'm an extremely deep-sleeper, and have massive troubles waking up on time. Is there a scientific alarm solution?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/xqqld/im_an_extremely_deepsleeper_and_have_massive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5ore6r",
"c5ork1b",
"c5orz92",
"c5os9ec"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I read about using sunlight/simulated natural light to help people wake up: _URL_0_\n\nI use a similar thing but I go low-tech when trying to wake up my 5-year-old (not an easy task) and just turn on the light.",
"Do you hit the snooze button a lot? If so, one of [these](_URL_0_) may be the answer.\n\nHave you ever taken the Horne-Ostberg test or a \"Lark or Owl\" quiz? I usually score as a night owl or late riser and I sleep heavily and have trouble getting up even with an alarm. I have to be pretty strict about my sleeping patterns to make it to work on time. \n\n",
"Bed shaker: _URL_0_\n\n",
"Being consistent in the times you go to bed and the times you wake up, may be a natural solution. Always go to bed at 10pm and wake up at 6am. and your body will adjust and get used to waking up at 6. I usually wake up a minute or two before my alarm goes off. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/sleep/basics/how-to-fall-asleep2.htm"
],
[
"http://www.nandahome.com/"
],
[
"http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/8f1a/"
],
[]
] |
||
3gxrgh
|
how can banks detect if someone else is using your credit/debit card when the amount is small and the location of purchase is near?
|
I've had a bank call me for a $16 purchase that was made in the city that 10 minutes away from where I live. I've been there and bought plenty of things before so how did they detect that I was not there at that time nor did i make that purchase?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gxrgh/eli5_how_can_banks_detect_if_someone_else_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu2hynt"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"What was the store? What was the time? Had you made any other purchases recently?\n\nFraud detection systems work by finding patterns in your spending and flagging things that don't fit the pattern. If it's in a weird city when you're normally at work & not buying things at all, that's going to flag things. If you're a guy & suddenly you're buying lingerie, it might raise a flag. If a purchase 10 minutes away is made 5 minutes after a purchase you make, it might trigger an alert. If you always shop at Safeway & they see you shopping at Publix, it might raise a flag. If you filled up your gas tank yesterday & you're buying gas today, it might raise a flag. If you always use debit+PIN & they ran the charge as credit, it might raise a flag. If they entered your PIN wrong twice, it might raise a flag. There's probably hundreds of other things they look at - exactly what they look for is kept a secret.\n\nSometimes, no one thing is enough to trigger a warning - it takes a combination of things, possibly spread over multiple transactions, to really be sure that something might be fraud."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1bw8ws
|
Why is Napoleon often portrayed with his right hand tucked into his vest?
|
As an art history minor, I frequently came across portraits of Napoleon and other contemporaries in this pose. I asked a French art history professor about it once and she didn't have an answer. Is it a military stance specifically, or related to men's fashion? Why always the right hand and not the left? In looking at the paintings, it appears that the vest is simply unbuttoned at the bottom to accomodate the hand - is this right, or is the vest specifically designed for the insertion of a hand, as in the tubelike pocket on modern hoodies?
For reference: _URL_0_
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1bw8ws/why_is_napoleon_often_portrayed_with_his_right/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9ao2hv",
"c9ao9a3",
"c9at90s"
],
"score": [
13,
6,
8
],
"text": [
"The pose is quite common in period paintings: \n\nDirectly bearing on the \"hand-in\" posture, and underpinning Nivelon's description of it as \"manly boldness tempered with modesty,\" is Bulwer's \"Sixth Canon for Rhetoricians,\" which claims that \"the hand restrained and kept in is an argument of modesty, and frugal pronunciation, a still and quiet action suitable to a mild and remiss declamation.\"\n\n_URL_0_\n\n",
"I can't say for certain why Napoleon used that pose, but I do study fashion history so I'm going to stick with that part of your question. \n\nThe vest is just unbuttoned. There is no special pocket there. Or at least, probably not. It wouldn't be unheard of for a tailor to add a special pocket by request, but it would certainly be atypical. The vest is meant to sit close to the body, so a large pocket isn't particularly useful inside of it. That's why coats have all the pockets - they're meant to fit more loosely. \n\nI checked to see if there were any sources citing a specific military or social reason for using one hand or the other in addition to tailoring tradition, so I'm pretty sure that the use of the right hand is related to how clothes were made at the time. Menswear closures traditionally function with the left side on top: the right side has the buttons, the left has the buttonholes, so when closed the left side sits on top of the right. Take a second to try out lapping left over right on whatever top you're wearing. The opening is oriented so the right hand slides in easily, while the left would have to turn the corner. Womenswear has historically been made to close in the opposite direction, if you're curious, though the distinction has been disappearing since jeans became popular.",
"There have been a few ideas on why Napoleon was posed as he was, and theories include that he had a stomach ulcer, he was winding his watch, he had an itchy skin disease, that in his era it was impolite to put your hands in your pockets, he had breast cancer, he had a deformed hand, he kept a perfumed sachet in his vest that he'd sniff surreptitiously, and that painters don't like to paint hands. Most of these, especially the more gruesome/demeaning of them, were no doubt some form of anti-Napoleonic propaganda of some kind inserted to make the man seem slightly repulsive. A simpler and more elegant theory is contained in an article entitled, \"Re-Dressing Classical Statuary: The Eighteenth-Century 'Hand-in-Waistcoat' Portrait.\" by Arline Miller. Art Bulletin (College Art Association of America), Vol. 77, No.2, March 1995, p.45-64. Miller points out that the 'hand-in' portrait type appeared with \"relentless frequency\" during the eighteenth century and became almost a cliched pose in portrait painting. The pose was used so often by portraitists that one was even accused of not knowing how to paint hands. \"In real life,\" Miller observes, \"the 'hand-held-in' was a common stance for men of breeding.\" Miller goes on to give many examples of this posture in painted portraits dating from the early and middle 1700s, well before Napoleon's birth. In 1738 Francois Nivelon published A Book Of Genteel Behavior describing the \"hand-in-waistcoat\" posture as signifying \"manly boldness tempered with modesty.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://historyonyx.blogspot.com/2011/09/napoleon-and-reshaping-of-europe.html"
] |
[
[
"http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-17011388/re-dressing-classical-statuary.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
dkn6ah
|
albinism seems like a very disadvantageous mutation. how has it continued in the animal kingdom?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dkn6ah/eli5_albinism_seems_like_a_very_disadvantageous/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f4hqztg"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"A mutation can appear more than once in time. Albino animals pretty much never have albino parents, it just appears randomly and likely subsides again as the chances of reproduction are lowered. The parents have instead carried an albino gene, without being albino themselves."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
27766e
|
what happens when my computer is connecting to/loading a website/?
|
From the moment I finish typing the URL to the moment I arrive at the webpage, whats happening?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27766e/eli5_what_happens_when_my_computer_is_connecting/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chy37ji"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There's many steps, but here is a simple explanation:\n\nYou send an \"HTTP request\" to the server. HTTP is the protocol commonly used to send/receive data on the internet. Let's just say it's like the format of when you write your address and destination address on an envelope. \n\nThis request will look something like this (They don't always look like this, but most contain these common \"headers\"):\n\n\n\tGET /r/explainlikeimfive/ HTTP/1.1\n\tHost\twww._URL_1_\n\tUser-Agent\tMozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0\n\tAccept\ttext/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,/;q=0.8\n\tAccept-Language\ten-us,es;q=0.5\n\tAccept-Encoding\tgzip, deflate\n\tReferer\t_URL_0_\n\n\nThat's saying that I want to access \"/r/explainlikeimfive\" from the host \"www._URL_1_\". This is how the server know what page I want.\n\nThe \"user-agent\" tells the server I'm using \"windows NT 6.1\" which just means Windows 7. The \"Gecko\" and \"Firefox\" basically just mean I'm using Firefox. (Fun fact, see that \"Mozilla\" at the very start of the user agent string? All browsers include this, even IE, Chrome, Safari, etc. It's a neat bit of trivia that I won't go into, but you can look it up)\n\nThe \"Accept-Language\" header tells the server my browser preference. Right now it's set to US English, followed by Spanish. If I made Spanish first, and I visited Google, I'd get Google in spanish. That happens purely because Google's server sees my language preference, and changes the response. Most sites would probably ignore it.\n\nThe \"Referer\" tells the server what page I was on when I clicked that link. In this case, it was the Reddit homepage.\n\nSo, all these headers and their values get sent to the server whenever you try to access anything on the internet. They tell the server exactly what you're trying to access, and the server responds with it (assuming everything is OK). If everything is good, it'll respond with response code 200. If the file wasn't there, it would give a 404. If the server encountered an error trying to get it, it'll respond with 500. \n\nKeep in mind that this is what happens on the very top level. Networking workis via different protocols and layers, all stacked on each other. Before anything I explained even happens, for example, the TCP/IP protocol is used to get the IP address of _URL_1_, establish connection, etc. \n\n\nTL;DR: You send some headers that tells the server what content you want, and the server responds with it.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/**",
"reddit.com",
"www.reddit.com"
]
] |
|
7sp6hj
|
Why is the modern nation of Ghana located far southeast of the medieval kingdom of Ghana?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7sp6hj/why_is_the_modern_nation_of_ghana_located_far/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dt8ra92"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This question comes up from time to time. My answer in [this thread](_URL_0_) gives the specific context for how the Gold Coast colony came to be named Ghana. Also, [this post from last month](_URL_1_) provides additional context about the oral traditions that Danquah was drawing on to justify the connections."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3pve7m/why_is_the_empire_of_ghana_so_far_away_from_the/cwapzxm/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7ld3ri/why_ghana_empire_isnt_in_ghana/"
]
] |
|
1yjpg9
|
Why do old portraits all look so similar? I feel like I have no idea how these people really looked.
|
For example, I was recently reading about Henry VIII and his wives. All of their portraits look so similar other than slight differences. Very angular faces and features. His wives look virtually identical, save for their hair color. Was this a style preferred by nobility then? Or was it the style of artist at the time? We know artist can paint more realistic portraits and these don't seem realistic. Or maybe my eyes are to untrained to recognize the differences?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1yjpg9/why_do_old_portraits_all_look_so_similar_i_feel/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfl7ft3",
"cfla1hx",
"cflfulo"
],
"score": [
7,
14,
7
],
"text": [
"You have to remember that portraiture is a very formal event. It takes hours for an artist to paint a portrait and they were quite expensive. People would dress up in their finest clothing to pose for the portrait and put on their most serious expressions (smiling was not considered professional). For this reason, when looking at old portraits though our modern cultural eyes, we see them as serious and almost Orwellian, though this may not be the case. ",
"I don't think this is universally true; if you look at the portraits by Hans Holbein the Younger for example it starts to become very obvious that these people all look different. Some people have rather large noses, some people have rather wide or round or skinny cheekbones, some people have the most absurd tiny eyes, and so on and so forth. This is most obvious when you look at his male portraits; it's a little less visible in his female portraits but it's present. Bear in mind also that all these people are wearing very similar clothing and formal robes; because we are used to using very visible differences in clothing habits, hairstyles and dress to tell people apart(think about how recognizable some of your friends are simply by their haircut or the way they dress) and strongly expect old portraits to be idealized(not that they weren't; but a greater or lesser degree of idealization is always a intentional choice on the part of the artist) we might also be less sensitive to subtle distinctions in their appearance. Indeed, once we look more closely at the portraits of his wives in sequence, salient differences emerge in the length of their faces, their noses, how deep-set their eyes are, the prominence of their chin and so on and so forth. A useful point of comparison is the rather nasty racist joke that 'all Asians look alike\"; in the same way we tend to mentally categorize all people in 16th century paintings as looking alike. This extends to the clothing; the fact is that a typical modern viewer is going to be less sensitive to the vagaries of 16th century fashion and less sensitive(in a world where virtually everyone wears cheap and affordable comfortable cotton or synthetic fabrics on a regular basis) to the different textures and qualities of linen, silk, taffeta, velvet, or brocade is probably going to not recognize subtle differences in dress that would be glaringly visible to a 16th century viewer-look at for example how the portrait of Jane Seymour you probably saw shows a much wider collar than the portrait of Anne of Cleves, or how much more loosely and widely cut and fabric-intensive the clothes of Anne of Cleves look.",
"So I'm not an art historian — I should say that up front. But you're not the only one to notice that this is the case. The artist David Hockney has wondered this himself, as both a practitioner and a viewer of art. Hockney has noted that there is an apparently huge jump in portrait quality — that for hundreds of years it is as you described, not very distinct, not very detailed, not very photo-realistic. And then out of nowhere comes a school of very very realistic painting (e.g. Jan van Eyck, Caravaggio, Velázquez) that looks totally different — [damned near photographic](_URL_0_). \n\nHockney, with the assistance of a physicist named Charles Falco, has put forward a theory that this change came about through the use of optical technologies, including lenses and mirrors, that allowed these masters to aid their painting by projecting the image of their subject onto the canvas. In other words, they \"traced\" some of it. He has found a lot of interesting evidence in favor of it, including distortions in paintings that are exactly the kinds of distortions you'd get if you were using lenses or mirrors, and by looking at the original sketches he says you can see evidence that they were tracing as opposed to free-handing (the strokes have a very different character to them). He also, as an artist himself, took pains to try and replicate these technologies. He would be the first to emphasize that this is not \"easy\" work — but it can help you anchor a much more realistic portrait than without it. \n\nI found Hockney's argument somewhat compelling from a history of technology standpoint — the idea that they _wouldn't_ have used these kinds of tools seems idealistic to me, and the fact that they would keep these sorts of things secret also is in line with other early modern optical practices (e.g. Galileo). \n\nThe book on this is David Hockney's _Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters_. It's a beautiful, fascinating, unusual book. It's a coffee table book size but it's making a real scholarly argument — it just needs the visual space to do it. \n\n(There's a movie that just came out, _Tim's Vermeer_, which is along very similar lines. I haven't seen it yet and can't speak to it.)\n\nMy understanding is that most art historians are not interested in these arguments, but how much of that is because there is genuine dispute about the Hockney thesis, or because it disrupts their standard modes of analysis a bit too much, I don't know. I found it pretty interesting, though, and I suspect that in a few more \"generations\" of art historians there will be more acknowledgment about these kinds of possibilities. I think Hockney feels that the present discipline of art history is too invested in the idea of these guys being \"pure\" painters and is just unwilling to even talk about this sort of thing. Again, I'm an historian of science and technology, not art, so I can't speak to the latter with any authority. But I do find the argument interesting."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Retrato_del_Papa_Inocencio_X._Roma%2C_by_Diego_Vel%C3%A1zquez.jpg"
]
] |
|
dlnr4b
|
Chinese(?) coins
|
Hello everyone,
I've got these two (what I assume are) chinese rusty coins and I've always been interested to get to know something more about them. I am possitive they are just replicas of various coins from who know what century but I'd still love to learn more about them.
Unfortunately, they are not in the best shape, so I couldn't take a proper photo. However, I sketched down how they look like;
[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)
(\*red coloured may not be accurate because they are very hard to see at this point but I think they are both the same.)
Thank you in advance for your answers!
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dlnr4b/chinese_coins/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f4shu2b"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Based on your drawing the first one is from the period of the Daoguang 道光 Emperor, the 8th Qing emperor who ruled from 1820 to 1850. The second is from the reign of the Shunzhi 順治 Emperor, who was the third Qing emperor, ruling from 1644 to 1661. The side with Chinese characters just says the name of the empepror and that it's money (通寶).\n\nThe other side is written in Manchu and says \"Ministry of Revenue\" on both coins. That's the minting authority, which in this case was in the province of Chihli, which no longer exists today as a modern administrative division. Basically Beijing, though.\n\nChances are these are not authentic. A lot of these are made as tourist trinkets and you can get them for literal pennies. If they look to be very similar in condition and material, then it's almost certain that they are knock-offs, since if they were authentic you'd expect the 200 years differnce of when they would have been minted (if authentic) to leave different patterns of ware. Even if they are authentic, the Daoguang one isn't going to make you rich. Neither is the Shunzhi though it might arguably be worth more. You'd obviously need them authenticated by a collector to really know, though.\n\nAlso your red is pretty darn accurate. Well done!"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://imgur.com/a/JQmuBGR"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
enmjub
|
How are artifical sweeteners digested by the body?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/enmjub/how_are_artifical_sweeteners_digested_by_the_body/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fe6qdn5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It depends on the sweetener. They are very different molecules. \n\nAspartame, brand name Equal, is basically a tiny protein molecule with an alcohol molecule stuck on the end. It gets broken apart into its component parts and they are digested separately. This generates about 4 calories per gram-- the same as sugar.\n\nThe reason aspartame is a \"low calorie\" sweetener is that it's 200 times sweeter than sugar, so you use much less of it. Instead of two teaspoons of sugar, you use one blue sweetener packet, which contains 0.04 grams of aspartame and some filler. \n\nSucralose, brand name Splenda, works differently. It's low calorie because the body does not recognize it as a nutrient, so it doesn't get digested at all. It passes through the digestive tract unchanged, and almost entirely unabsorbed. The tiny amount of sucralose that does get absorbed into the bloodstream gets excreted right back out again, still unchanged, in the urine."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
scbm6
|
I have some hypothetical questions about magnetic spheres.
|
Sorry if this is a lay question, but I doubt it's been asked before.
There are 2 spheres, or balls technically. They are made of some magnetized metal. Sphere #1 is thicker and has the larger radius, with the north pole on the outside, and the south pole on the inside. Sphere #2 is thinner and has the smaller radius, with the south pole on the outside, and the north pole on the inside. Sphere #2 is inside of sphere #1.
I'm assuming that if the spheres are virtually even in terms of their distribution, that sphere #2 will hover inside of sphere #1 without touching.
Now, lets say there is a small, thin sheet of magnetized metal inside of sphere #2. The north pole facing sphere #2 (the north pole), which is also facing the south pole of sphere #1.
Here is my question: is it possible that this sheet of magnetized metal could be simultaneously repelled by sphere #2 on the inside, while also being attracted to sphere #1 on the outside. In this scenario, the sheet of magnetized metal would hover above the surface of sphere #2, while remaining attracted to sphere #1. Thereby staying close to the inside surface of the inside sphere regardless of gravity, without touching it. In this scenario, the sheet could move around the inside surface of the inside sphere while remaining very close to it, without touching it.
Is this possible, or am I horribly misunderstanding magnetism?
On a side note: let's say there's only 1 sphere, with north on the outside, and south on the inside. The sheet of metal inside the sphere has south facing the sphere, and north facing towards the center of the sphere. If this sheet begins at the bottom towards the center of gravity, and does a loop up around the top of the inside of the sphere, can it gain enough momentum (in the case of some source of propulsion) to complete the loop without falling down towards the center of gravity?
In both scenarios, what determines how likely it is that this sheet flips over so that it is attracted to the inside surface of the inside sphere?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/scbm6/i_have_some_hypothetical_questions_about_magnetic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4cvge0",
"c4cvp11"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Based on what I can understand of your question you are horribly misunderstanding magnetism.\n\nReason: Your spheres are impossible.\n\nWithout a path to complete what I generally hear termed the \"magnetic circuit\" you are effectively looking at some sort of magnetic monopole type structure which is (as far as science understands so far) is impossible.\n\nBy \"thicker\" and \"thinner\" it sounds like you are thinking of a spherical shell but the same idea of inability to complete the circuit applies even when they are within each other. Does that make sense? (as in, flux lines from the very center cannot loop back out as they want to)\n\n\nAlso, magnets cannot be magnetized spherically like you indicate. It can be approximated with smaller magnets put together but can't just be magnetized that way to begin with. (_URL_0_)\n\n\n\nIs there a particular reason you are asking? That will direct how I can address perhaps creating a type of situation like you're thinking of.",
"Let me rephrase the situation as best as I can understand what you wrote. \n\n* There are 2 hollow spherical shells of radius R1 and R2, R1 > R2. \n* The shells have thicknesses d1 and d2. \n* For simplicity we will say the radii are the inner radii of the shells, and the outer radii are R1+d1 and R2+d2.\n* The spheres have been magnetized such that the direction of the magnetic field is along the radial direction. In other words it is like you peeled an orange, magnetized the peel when it was flat, and then reshaped it back to its original shape.\n* The spheres are opposite in magnetization and concentrically located.\n* You then place another sphere of magnetized material inside the 2nd sphere. \n\nUnfortunately, yes, your understanding of magnetism is off. A sphere that is radially magnetized is equivalent to a magnetic monopole. These do not exist in nature that we have yet seen. They are theoretically allowed, we just have no evidence that they exist.\n\nIf you placed the 2nd sphere inside of the 1st, two points need to be made. First, the direction of the magnetization does not matter. The outer sphere will be either pushing OR pulling the inner sphere equally in all direction, there are completely equivalent mathematically. Second, the equilibrium is unstable. It would be like trying to balance a marble on the top of a bowling ball. You can do it, but any slight disturbance will send it off to one side.\n\nThis brings me to the actual question. What happens to the thin sheet of magnetized material. This concept you are referring to is call \"superposition\". Basically it means that if you have two fields (in this case magnetic fields), to find the net effect you can just add the values of the fields together to get and effective field. For the case you have concocted, the thin sheet will feel both magnetic fields. It depends on which one is larger and how far away they are (the radii). It could be arranged such that there is no net magnetic field in the center as well.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.kjmagnetics.com/magdir.asp"
],
[]
] |
|
153cgf
|
Why don't we create a small scale nuclear reactor to power cars individualy?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/153cgf/why_dont_we_create_a_small_scale_nuclear_reactor/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7iwmrp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The cost is far too high for it to be reliable and consistent, and the waste produced would be difficult to manage, depending on the type of fuel used."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5i6hfk
|
in terms of microeconomics, how does piracy of digital goods affect supply, demand, sale, price, etc.?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5i6hfk/eli5_in_terms_of_microeconomics_how_does_piracy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"db5yia7",
"db5zgvs"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Within a narrow context, piracy has two effects. It depresses or increases potential demand for a product at the rate at which the file spreads through a population. There's less than 1 to 1 correlation between the number of people with an illicit copy who drop out of the demand population. The number of people who will potentially purchase a file through sanctioned means can sometimes be greater with a moderate amount of piracy than with none at all, due to marketing and to pirates who pay their respects. In other cases, piracy allows a digital good to be sampled at no cost to the consumer, and the product fails due to lack of appeal or quality.",
"Not an economist, I work in IT, but this info may be interesting to you nonetheless.\n\nI see lots of money go into what we call \"revenue protection\" via licensing and the Product Activation Keys (PAKs) that you may be familiar with. The classic way to implement license protection is to build your software so that the software image alone won't do anything unless there's a license file issued from the manufacturer to bless your device to run the software. The information in the license file itself (eg. the device's Serial No. or MAC address, license generation date, owner) is encrypted using a private key into what looks like a nonsense string, eg. \"A34FKZX98...\", and decrypted by the software using a corresponding public key.\n\nThe technology and cryptography know-how behind it is a big burden for software companies, so they'll frequently buy a solution from a 3rd-party company like Flexera to generate their licenses.\n\nNet net, the work to prevent unauthorized use of software products is expensive, which drives up the product costs which effectively pushes your supply curve back, increasing price and decreasing quantity demanded."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5shonw
|
why do emojis show up differently on ios vs android devices?
|
Why aren't there universal emojis?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5shonw/eli5_why_do_emojis_show_up_differently_on_ios_vs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddf4kw3",
"ddf6ceb"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Well consider it like a different font type. It still conveys the same information, but it is a separate style. ",
"When your phone sends text back and forth, it's encoded as numbers. These are standard, so 33 is !, 65 is A, and 128512 is 😀. All your phone gets are these numbers, and to show them, your phone has a list of little pictures for all these characters that it puts on the screen. The pictures should all be similar, but there's no reason why each company has to use exactly the same pictures. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4k3gb4
|
Did the Romans have some concept of 'standardized spelling'?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4k3gb4/did_the_romans_have_some_concept_of_standardized/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3c8duj"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"I think this depends entirely on what era you're looking at.\n\nSo far as I am aware, there wasn't an institution in Rome that said \"Ok, everyone, amicus is a second declension noun, not a fourth declension one!\" I'm not sure how linguists would approach this issue, so I can't speak to how everyone agreed that it should be \"amicus, amici.\" There doesn't seem to be the same variation of dialects that you get with ancient Greek writings. \n\nHowever, the educational curriculum was extremely conservative insofar as people studied the same Latin texts regardless of where they were in the empire. By the late antique period, people studied Vergil and Cicero (and a few others), and being able to write like them was considered the gold standard of Latin writing. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1rl3rq
|
if someone were to dip a live electrical wire into the ocean, wouldn't everyone swimming in the ocean at that time be electrocuted?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rl3rq/eli5_if_someone_were_to_dip_a_live_electrical/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdob0co",
"cdob5wo"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"No. Electricity moves from one place to another place, along the path of least resistance. It doesn't spread out and electrocute everything that happens to be in the same body of water.\n\nIn the case of an electrical wire in the ocean, it'd likely prove dangerous to things within a few feet of it (maybe even a few dozen feet), but that's about it.",
"I'm going to use [this thread](_URL_0_) from /r/AskScience to answer this:\n\nElectricity doesn't just go on forever - with water, some electrical charge is lost as it disperses over the surface of the water (as I understand it)\n\nSo if you dipped a live electrical wire in the ocean, there would be an area where the electricity would disperse and anyone in that area would get electrocuted.\n\nTo electrocute the entire ocean you would need a *massive* amount of electricity. If you could somehow create that electrical source where its dispersal range was pretty much the entire ocean surface, than technically you could electrocute every ocean swimmer in the world. But only those on the surface - divers would not be effected, nor anything else not very close to the surface."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1mm794/when_lightning_hits_a_large_body_of_water_how_far/"
]
] |
||
272cs2
|
why did we domesticate chickens for the use of eggs and not other birds?
|
I was just curious why we have domesticated chickens and not some other species of bird for the use of eggs? I know people eat duck eggs, quail eggs, etc. as well, but why are chickens the main source? Do they lay more eggs than other birds?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/272cs2/eli5why_did_we_domesticate_chickens_for_the_use/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chwpl2h",
"chwplgx",
"chwplli",
"chwq3h5",
"chwt2e2"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"We do. Duck eggs are very common in Chinese cuisine, for instance. The real stuff, though. Not the N American version. ",
"Most likely because they tend to be slow, their eggs full of protein and they can't fly. Chickens are probably a lot easier to domesticate over a pigeon, for example.",
"My guess is that chicken eggs are just the right size. Also, chickens are smaller than Turkeys and Guinea Hens so they take up less space. ",
"Chickes are cheap to maintain and produce the most amount of eggs/meat per dollar. ",
"Chickens are fairly convenient. They're stupid, but not too much trouble, and the eggs are a good size.\n\nWe also do quails (tiny eggs), which is a lot of work for the results; ducks, which need some maintenance, have smelly poo, and have kind've muddy-flavored eggs; geese, which are aggressive; ostriches, which definitely need some room...\n\nAnyway, chickens are relatively convenient, and we've bred some varieties specifically for egg-laying, so they're productive."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
10raxw
|
Does the "subconscious" really exist?
|
Also if it does "exist" could some people have "access" to it while others can not.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/10raxw/does_the_subconscious_really_exist/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6fy8er",
"c6fybml",
"c6fyv4y"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
24
],
"text": [
"You may be interested in this BBC Horizon program [\"Out of Control\"](_URL_0_) which explores the subject of the subconcious mind.",
"Yes. In fact your 'conscious' is a relatively small percentage of your brain activity. And also in fact experiments have shown the time delay between when your brain decides something and when 'you' become aware of that decision. ",
"As DeathSquid5000 said, it's really just a catch-all term for cognitive processing that you're unaware of, for example, a lot of decision-making processes (most of which seem to occur outside of awareness, although you'll likely be inclined to think otherwise). In terms of the singular, nebulous, primal, almost mystical construct that Freud discussed... evidence is currently not working in his favour.\n\nAn interesting unconscious process can actually be seen in the phenomenon of [blindsight](_URL_0_), which is seen in people who lack conscious visual perception due to the destruction of their primary visual cortex (a.k.a. striate cortex, V1, or Brodmann Area 17), or at least part of it. They still retain above-chance ability to react to objects presented in the blinded areas of their visual field, which suggests some unconscious processing in other brain areas (~10% of retinal neurons don't project to V1), or in the lateral geniculate nucleus in the thalamus (which is the step before V1). Some people have suggested that their may be \"islands\" of intact striate tissue remaining, though, but it's hard to be sure due to the fact that researchers need to use human patients with pre-existing cortical damage, which will pretty much never be uniform from one patient to the next. (Of course, surgical cortical lesions could be done in monkeys, chimpanzees, etc., but I'm not sure of what's happening as far as research into non-human blindsight is concerned.)\n\nAlso, the idea of \"accessing\" the subconscious may be taken to imply that it's a singular entity or cognitive store, which it really isn't. Still, hypnosis and lucid dreaming appear to allow us to tap into some of our unconscious processes, since they can aid in memory recall and, in the case of lucid dreaming, even allow us to analyse our emotional states and aspects of our memories and lives that we normally don't seem to be able to consider. Also, hypnosis patients sometimes report that there is an almost separate subconscious aspect to themselves that is able to perceive things that are happening when their \"conscious mind\" is hypnotised, although, like with any hypnosis research, you do get a lot of skeptics out there."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM_iiPFkNas"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindsight"
]
] |
|
23xftf
|
Does tourettes exist in all languages and if so does it manifest itself differently in different cultures?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/23xftf/does_tourettes_exist_in_all_languages_and_if_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch1mcii",
"ch20mi2"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Verbal tourettes is just a very small part of the disorder at about 12% of the individuals who have it and of those only a small percent expel curse words. Most manifestations occur in physical repetitive motions such as tapping or twitching and can be as grand as siting down repeatedly. So yes it happens in all cultures in many different ways ",
"The way tourettes is interpreted in different cultures relates can strongly affect the experience of the person who is afflicted. Anthropologist Rob Lemelson has actually made a short film about this, which follows someone with Tourette's in Indonesia to explore the experience of this person and how the culture affects conceptualization of the disease. It's worth a look if you are interested in this question: \n\n[The Bird Dancer](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://blogs.plos.org/neuroanthropology/2012/05/16/not-allowed-to-have-a-small-heart-tourette-syndrome/"
]
] |
||
3ls0k8
|
How close to the Moon would you have to be before you would fall to the Moon instead of to the Earth?
|
For the purposes of this question, let's assume that you would start with zero initial velocity, and there is nothing blocking your path to either the Earth or the Moon.
(If you would fall towards the Sun instead, then put that in the answer, but what I know of gravitation tells me that the Sun is too far away to beat the Earth and Moon, at least until you get way farther from the Earth and Moon than this question allows for.)
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3ls0k8/how_close_to_the_moon_would_you_have_to_be_before/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv8unr7",
"cv8v5z8"
],
"score": [
9,
31
],
"text": [
"For the sake of simplicity lets assume that we're talking about two generic masses, M_1 and M_2, separated by some length R, with a small test mass, m, inbetween them, and no other masses around. What you're asking for is the point at gravitational forces on m are in equilibrium. \n\nIn general we have F = GMm/r^2, so what we want is\n\nGM_1m/r_1^2 = GM_2m/r_2^2 = > \n\nM_1/r_1^2 = M_2/r_2^2\n\nAnd since R = r_1 + r_2 (If that doesn't make sense draw a figure.)\n\nWe get, in the case of the Earth-Moon system, M_m/r_m^2 = M_e/(R - r_m)^2\n\nThis can be solved for r_m, the distance from the test mass to the *centre* of the moon. So if you're closer to the moon than that distance, you'll 'fall' towards the moon. \n\nEdit:\nr_m = (R*sqrt(M_1 * M_2) - M_1)/(M_2 - M_1) = [4.31*10^7](_URL_0_)\n\nThat's about a tenth of the distance between the earth and the moon, which seems like a reasonable value given that the earth weighs about 100 times as much as the moon.",
"\"Zero velocity\" is a little ambiguous in this context, since the earth and the moon are each moving with a different velocity. Let's take that to mean zero velocity with respect to the center of mass of the Earth-Moon system. In that case, we can define r_moon and r_earth to be your height from the center of each body, with the constraint that r_moon+r_earth=400,000 km, the approximate earth-moon distance. This tells you that r_moon/r_earth =sqrt(m_moon/m_earth) =0.11. So something like 90% of the way to the moon is where you would start to fall towards the moon and not the earth. \n\nOne problem with this position is that the moon would be zipping sideways from you, and as it gets farther away you would start to fall back towards the earth again. A more useful number is the [L1 Lagrange point](_URL_0_). Here we assume \"zero velocity\" means that you stay between the earth and the moon. This means you have to add in some centrifugal forces to balance things out, but it turns out that at that point you would hover between the earth and the moon without falling towards either one. Less intuitively, there are four other points that have this property: one behind the moon, one behind the earth, one \"ahead\" of the moon's orbit, and one \"behind\" the moon's orbit. They are useful places for [satellites](_URL_1_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%283.84*10^8+sqrt%285.97*7.35*10^46%29-7.35*10^22%29%2F%285.97*10^24-7.35*10^22%29"
],
[
"http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mechanics/lagpt.html",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point#Spaceflight_applications"
]
] |
|
5ji039
|
What would it mean if we proved that P = NP, or P != NP ?
|
What are the implications of proving one way or another?
For example, proving that P = NP would it mean that cryptography is "useless"?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/5ji039/what_would_it_mean_if_we_proved_that_p_np_or_p_np/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbgf22t",
"dbgi97k",
"dbgirc0",
"dbgjnwg",
"dbgq5o7",
"dbq94u9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
8,
10,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Well, proving N = NP would say that *all* of the problems that can be verified in polynomial time could be solved in polynomial time. For example, sudoku. It's very easy to verify that a sudoku solution is correct: just loop through all of the \"groups\". But it's not that easy to solve it. \n\nWhat does this mean for cryptography? Well, key-based crypto is based on the fact that it would take a *REALLY* long time to solve some math problem. However it's quick to verify (look at how fast your computer unlocks when you type in your password, or when you log into Gmail.)\n\n Now, imagine if a hacker was able to mathematically find a private key really quickly, given, for example, the encrypted message (say, an HTTP packet), and the server's public key. Anyone with a basic computer would be able to listen in on every encrypted packet. That's something to consider.\n\nedit: However, that doesn't mean that one day we won't discover some other form of 'crypto' that isn't mathematics-based. It still might be possible to keep stuff secure.",
"I recommend you watch [this video](_URL_0_) which is quite clear and simple, without simplifying the key concepts.",
"Proving P=NP would have vast consequences beyond cryptography assuming that the algorithm for reducing an NP problem to a P problem is efficient. For instance, it would put mathematicians out of a job. Checking that a mathematical proof is correct is a problem that is in P. If P=NP, then if a proof is of reasonable length a computer can find the proof as easily as it could be checked. Thus, assuming we are only interested in proofs of propositions that are reasonably short, mathematics would become completely mechanical.\n\nPhilosophically, P=NP would defy many of our intuitions - it effectively implies that brilliance can be made mechanical. \nTo illustrate by analogy: if P=NP a computer that can appreciate one of Bach's masterpieces (verify that it is a Great Work) can write a masterpiece of equivalent quality (create a Great Work). \n\nFor more on this topic see Scott Aaronson's [essay](_URL_0_) on philosophy and computational complexity.",
"A side remark: polynomial time is usually taken to be a short amount of time, and in the limit of large inputs it is much much *much* smaller than exponential time. However, even if someone proved that P=NP, it could still be the case that the complexity of a problem scales as n^(100000000) or something ridiculous like that. Talking about crypto for example, it means that there could be crypto protocols that although are broken in polynomial time, they take forever and a day to break for all practical purposes. So the possibility that they are secure wouldn't be completely ruled out.\n\n\nP and NP, and the 'polynomial hierarchy' in general, are really coarse grained gauges of the complexity of a problem. P=NP would mean that we would have to go to 'finer grains' to distinguish the difficulty of problems.",
"I think the top two answers overstate the practical impacts.\n\nWe know that proving a number is prime is possible in polynomial time. However, the AKP algorithim (which runs in polynomial time) is enormously slower in practice than ellipitcal curve primality proving (which runs in 'slower than polynomial and non-deterministic' time).\n\nSo from a practical level, the effects may not be as far reaching as expected. Knowing that 4096 bit cryptography can be cracked in polynomial time does not matter if the act of cracking it would require 67 quadrillion years with all of Earth's computer power.\n\nThe theoretical impacts could, however, be profound.",
"Hi! I found a similar question asked on Quora phrased as _\"What would happen if I proved P=NP?\"_, so the top answer there might help you:\n\n > A mere proof of P=NP wouldn't do much by itself. The interesting thing would be a fast algorithm for solving NP-hard problems. What would happen then depends on how fast the algorithm is. Let's assume a low-degree polynomial with manageable coefficients.A linear- or quadratic-time algorithm for SAT would break pretty much all crypto except the one-time pad. Internet communication would be insecure unless parties shared OTP data. It would probably be worthwhile for banks to hand out OTP tokens, but overall the security situation would be pretty terrible. Some protocols could try to eek by on a quadratic security margin, but these would only be useful for short-term security.On the other hand, a fast algorithm for SAT would revolutionize the rest of the world. Suddenly, many problems in AI would become easy. Computer-aided design would become much more powerful, as computers could quickly find the optimal design for pretty much anything.Overall, an effective P=NP would be good for the world, not bad.\n\n^(I'm just a bot trying to share the love. Sorry if questions are loose matches right now; I'm working on it!)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/YX40hbAHx3s"
],
[
"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1108.1791v3"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
flhzx
|
Why are mid-air manifestations of electricity jagged? (i.e. sparks, lightning bolts etc.)
|
Inspired by [this photo](_URL_0_).
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/flhzx/why_are_midair_manifestations_of_electricity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1gtlw0",
"c1gu55e"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"This was a really interesting question that I didn't know the answer to so I looked it up. [This Scientific American article](_URL_0_) does a pretty good job of explaining it.",
"Path of least resistance?"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/cTFUm.jpg"
] |
[
[
"http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-are-lightning-bolts-j"
],
[]
] |
|
495sni
|
"Photons" of different EM spectrum?
|
If photons are particles of light (visible light? correct me if I'm wrong), do photon equivalents of x-ray or gamma exist?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/495sni/photons_of_different_em_spectrum/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0pa5y3"
],
"score": [
47
],
"text": [
"All electromagnetic waves are made of photons -- visible light, radio waves, X-rays, gamma rays, ultraviolet light, infrared light, you name it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3z1jth
|
why is being deaf or blind much more common than say having no taste, touch, or smell?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z1jth/eli5_why_is_being_deaf_or_blind_much_more_common/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyigzec",
"cyih52y",
"cyih5fb",
"cyij8ie",
"cyim6p9"
],
"score": [
17,
55,
13,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you only have two eyes and two ears whereas you have billions of touch taste and scent receptors, it would be impossible for them to all fail so the only way you can lose these senses is if the area of the brain that processes them is damaged.",
"Part of it is confirmation bias. Blind people are really obvious, deaf people are fairly obvious. You wouldn't know someone couldn't smell or taste just by looking at them.\n\nLocalized loss of touch is not uncommon. But you have so many touch receptors in so many places, there are few conditions that will systemically shut down all of them.",
"The ears and eyes are a lot more complex and inter-connected. Ears and eyes have a lot that can go wrong and you can be declared legally blind or deaf if your senses are reduced enough. Each of your nerves are pretty independent and connected to your motor system, so unless you have a rare genetic condition lack of feeling is likely to be partial, unless you are paralyzed. For smell/taste, you again have a number of separate sensors.\n\nAlso, having limited or damaged smell/taste is a lot less debilitating than being blind or deaf so you tend not to hear about it. You don't need much accommodation if you lack smell or taste. No braille books or sign language, etc.\n\nThere is a rare condition where one lacks touch. They have trouble figuring out when they're injured and can easily get cuts infected. It is pretty terrible.",
"fwiw, a lot of people have a poor sense of smell, especially as they grow older. But unlike blindness or deafness, it's not obvious and it doesn't really affect how someone lives their life. Blindness and deafness are things that affect safety, if nothing else; a bad sense of smell is pretty much just an inconvenience.",
"The real answer, according to me:\n\n{ELI5 Edit: Ears and Eyes have to change the light and sound into different sorts of stuff before they can understand them. The other stuff doesn't. It's hard to do and easy to mess up. \nAlso, they are the most important ways we communicate with each other, so small problems are actually big problems. }\n\nThe mechanism by which the stimulus is transferred into a signal by the nervous system is markedly more complex in the Eyes and Ears. \n\nTaste and smell are chemical senses. There are receptors which detect specific molecular motifs and tell the brain \"bitter!\" or whathaveyou. \n\nThe Eye and the Ear involve complex, low margin for error, physical transformations of the stimulus into a form that is detectable and able to be interpreted by the brain. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2js1tm
|
how can the un give sanctions for nuclear weapons to some countries and not to others?
|
It all seems so unjustifiable *on paper*. I mean... Is there a regulation stating "good countries" can handle uranium and stuff while "bad countries" can't? If there is such a regulation... what's the definition of "good country".
I guess that we're far better off with the UK or France having nuclear weapons than with Sudan having one. But... Is there any kind of law that makes this distinction explicitly? If so... How comes Russia, India etc... don't have sanctions while North Korea and Iran, that doesn't even have a bomb, do??
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2js1tm/eli5_how_can_the_un_give_sanctions_for_nuclear/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cleja7i",
"clejgmk"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The nuclear nonproliferation treaty recognized the then-nuclear states as legit, and called on them to disarm to some degree (which they haven't) and tried to prevent nuclear capability from further spreading. It's called, creatively, The Treaty for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) of 1970. \n\nEdit: India is not a signatory to the treaty, North Korea un-signed it, I believe. It permits Russia to have their weapons. Russia, France, the U.K., the U.S., and China are all permanent security council members with vetoes - that means that any of them can unconditionally strike down any legislation from the U.N. that they don't like. ",
"A treaty (the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) was made in 1968 that says, basically, \"the only states that can have nuclear weapons are those that already publicly have them\" (USA, USSR/Russia, UK, France, China), \"and anyone else who signs this treaty agrees that they won't get them, and the IAEA has the authority to investigate these things.\" \n\nSo what's the benefit for those who sign but don't have them? The treaty says, as well, that anyone who signs the treaty is entitled to peaceful nuclear technology (e.g. nuclear reactors).\n\nNot all states have signed the treaty. In the beginning, even France and China declined to sign it! But eventually it has become the \"norm,\" whereby lots of countries have said that it is better to try and \"fix\" the number of nuclear states and the treaty is a means of trying to do that. \n\nCountries can pull out of the treaty if they want to. North Korea pulled out of it before making a nuke. Iran is a signatory and insists its activities are peaceful and allowed under the treaty. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3fasgu
|
What language/script is this? Where can I have it translated?
|
My great-grandfather was a Russian Jew who immigrated to the US around 1910. He corresponded a few times with his father who seemed to move around between Russia and Poland. Here's a few samples of their correspondence:
[Letter](_URL_1_)
[Letter](_URL_2_)
[envelope](_URL_0_)
Any help would be greatly appreciated. I apologize if this is an inappropriate post for this sub.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3fasgu/what_languagescript_is_this_where_can_i_have_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctng1v2",
"ctmva71",
"ctmzuxx",
"ctn2ve3",
"ctn988d"
],
"score": [
3,
30,
14,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"To supplement what has already been said by u/farquier and others, the script is [Hebrew Cursive](_URL_1_), which was used to write Yiddish before modern Hebrew became popular. It's still used today, both to write Yiddish and Hebrew, and is basically what all handwritten Hebrew is today. You can even see it on modern signs and advertising, much like English cursive is sometimes used as a design choice. [Here is Hebrew cursive being used in the Coca-Cola logo](_URL_0_).",
"This is almost certainly Yiddish(essentially late medieval German in Hebrew script). I do not myself read Yiddish but /r/Judaism and /r/Yiddish would be able to help here.",
"/u/farquier is correct. What we have here is cursive Hebrew script which is why it looks so different from the writing on top. You may want ro journey over to /r/linguistics or /r/yiddish and see what they can do.",
"I don't have the time now for a full translation. The first letter is addressed to a Uncle Josef, and both the writer and the addressee are related to Nathan (grandson and great-grandson). /u/farquier is correct in that the text is mostly Yiddish, but it also contains some Hebrew words and phrases.",
"Thanks for all the responses! I'll give those other subs a shot."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://imgur.com/xDij8c9",
"http://imgur.com/rQpC0Y7",
"http://imgur.com/OGOuxC0"
] |
[
[
"http://www.blatner.com/adam/scriptology/1-Intro/cocacola.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cursive_Hebrew"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
hrbcr
|
What oscillates in light?
|
Like for waves in the sea it's the water height, right? For sound, it's the pressure. For light, what oscillates?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hrbcr/what_oscillates_in_light/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1xp4qq",
"c1xp5f0",
"c1xqfp2"
],
"score": [
5,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Light doesn't have a medium that it travels through. For a long time people thought that it did (and they called it the luminiferous aether), but experiments show that it doesn't exist.",
"The thing that oscillates is the electromagnetic field of the photon itself. It is a self-sustaining electromagnetic field. A changing magnetic field induces an electric field, and vice versa.",
"An electric field going one way and a magnetic field going perpendicular."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
doq3ze
|
Medieval French translation help (again!)
|
Can anyone enlighten me to the meaning of the word cuyler?
It’s amongst entries of an inventory of the royal treasure and these are pantry items. Here is the entry for context:
R 789 xj cuylers d'argent enorrez, du poys, xxiiijs.
Can these items be bowls/dishes as it’s similar to ecuelles. I’ve Googled and use both Middle English and Anglo-Norman dictionaries but I’m still none the wiser.
Many thanks in advance.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/doq3ze/medieval_french_translation_help_again/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f5pegsr"
],
"score": [
23
],
"text": [
"Looks like an ancient french version of the actual « cuillère » (\"spoon\").\n\nSource : french and historian"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6o8fgk
|
Who were the Desert Fathers? What was their impact on early Christianity? What happened to them and the desert monastic movement?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6o8fgk/who_were_the_desert_fathers_what_was_their_impact/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkfel6k"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"The desert fathers emerge toward the end of the fourth century as Christianity transitioned from a fringe cult to an accepted community in the pantheon of faiths. While earlier Christian communities had faced persecution and martyrdom, in this new period asceticism became the hallmark of true commitment to the faith. Thus some Christians sought to lead a life marked by exceptional ascetic rigor while pursuing constant prayer and fighting the temptation to return to the world. These figures spent their time alone in caves, atop pillars, or in the ruins of old roman structures now reclaimed by the wilderness and often gained a reputation for sanctity and holiness in their local community, becoming—ironically—something of an attraction and public figure. St. Anthony, whom historians consider to be the first of these \"Desert fathers,\" retreated to the desert sometime in the late third century after giving away a large inheritance he had recieved from his parents. As a hermit living in an old military outpost, his commitment to prayer and the memorization of the bible attracted a number of followers that he organized into a informal monastic community that continued until his death in probably 356.\n\nSome later emulators took Anthony's message of retreating from the world a little too seriously. My favorite example is [Saint Symeon the Stylite](_URL_0_), who, frustrated at the incessant visitors who came to him for prayers, placed himself atop a pillar to escape their pleas.\n\nThe communities that formed around these Desert Fathers became the earliest monasteries, ordering themselves around a communal set of principles. These \"Rules\" by which they lived their life formed the backbone of the monastic movement as it spread across the Late Antique world, although the earliest focused on physical work and communal prayer, not the intellectual work and reading that later monasticism would become known for.\n\nThis is merely a cursory sketch of the very large question you have outlined. I might suggest some further reading if you feel interested. [Peter Brown's The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity (1971)](_URL_1_) remains the fundamental text for understanding the growth and social importance of these figures. For a more general overview, I would still recommend Peter Brown. His World of Late Antiquity is now in its Third Edition, and has an excellent chapter on the desert fathers and the growth of monasticism.\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Stylites",
"https://faculty.washington.edu/brownj9/LifeoftheProphet/The%20Rise%20of%20the%20Holy%20Man%20-%20Brown.pdf"
]
] |
||
2cxylb
|
how did my plane yesterday depart late but it was able to reach the destination before it's original scheduled arrival time?
|
My plane the other other day left it's origin about an hour after it was originally meant to. How then did it arrive to my destination before it's original scheduled arrival? Did the pilot just put his foot down?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cxylb/eli5how_did_my_plane_yesterday_depart_late_but_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjk52ca",
"cjk5e2d",
"cjk8t6c",
"cjkbsfa",
"cjkdz41",
"cjkgi9e",
"cjklfak"
],
"score": [
24,
40,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > Did the pilot just put his foot down?\n\nYes, plus you may have encountered better than average conditions. The average flight time is calculated using the average conditions. By the definition of \"average\" half the time, conditions are better, meaning that they may not have experienced cloud coverage or storms as they had thought they might, or may have gotten a tail wind.",
"We generally do not fly \"as fast as we can go\". We fly at a speed that is calculated by our airline to be a nice balance of speed and fuel economy. However, if a flight is behind schedule and could potentially impact the departure times of flights further down the line, then we can be authorized to kick it up a notch, so to speak, and try to make up some time in the air. We can also pester air traffic control for a few extra \"shortcuts\" along the way if we really feel that we need to catch up a bit with our schedule.",
"And sometimes things go *very right*. I've had two flights in my life where the plane arrived earlier than planned and had to wait for the gate to clear the preceding plane. Both were on-time departures.",
"Pilot found a shortcut.",
"Couple of things could have been to the pilots favour. The jet stream, Air traffic control may have allowed the aircraft to take a different route. Weather conditions may have affected other flights allowing the pilot to keep his original landing slot. ",
"Airlines also plan for these delays. The want to increase their on-time performance so that will add an extra 15-20 minutes to the arrival time. \n",
"In addition to the other answers, scheduled arrival times are padded a little, so an airline can claim a 95%+ record of arriving on-time, and so passengers plans around arriving a little later than they actually will, and miss less connections."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
22687x
|
How did Taiwan handle the massive influx of Chinese refugees following the Chinese Civil War? How did the Kuomintang "set up shop", so to speak?
|
I know that there has been significant Chinese presence on the island since the Qing Dynasty, but were there enough houses, farms, jobs, etc. to meet the needs of all the new migrants? Or did the Kuomintang have to build new ones really, really quickly?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/22687x/how_did_taiwan_handle_the_massive_influx_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgjrg17"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In the memoir of Taiwanese author [Chiung Yao](_URL_0_), she said because her father was an intellectual and easily found another professor job, her family received a Japanese style house the size of twenty [\"tatami\"](_URL_1_) from the university. Her family was still extremely poor despite being better off than most refugees. \n\nAnother Taiwanese author named Liu Hsia wrote in her memoir that a family of fellow refugees could barely survive on the father's army pension with five kids. The author's father wanted to help them out so he resorted to forging a letter of recommendation and found a nurse position for the mother. \n\nThe less fortunate ones with fewer resources and connection would live in what they call \"Military dependents' Village\" consists of very poorly built houses similar to slums. They were originally intended to be temporary housing built with organic materials, but eventually the buildings were replaced with more permanent structures. In recent years those communities were demolished and replaced by low cost high rise apartment buildings. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiung_Yao",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatami"
]
] |
|
2sacag
|
Why did the Tlaxcalans allow Cortes to remain in Tenochtitlan/Mexico?
|
I read this the other day on badhistory: _URL_0_
It basically stated that the Tlaxcalans manipulated Cortes to bring down their enemies, including the Cholulans and Aztecs. After they were victorious, why didn't they take all of the spoils? Why did they share their gains with a few hundred Spaniards?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2sacag/why_did_the_tlaxcalans_allow_cortes_to_remain_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cno8pk5",
"cnoe9gn"
],
"score": [
2,
21
],
"text": [
"If I may add a tangent to this question - what rewards did the Tlaxcalans receive from the Spanish after the Aztecs were defeated? ",
"There's two big misconceptions that are commonly held about post-Conquest Mexico: that Hispanicization progressed rapidly and the native population faced discrimination equally. I covered in a [previous post](_URL_2_) how life in Mesoamerica basically continued on with business as usual for almost a generation after the fall of Tenochtitlan. This was doubly true for the Tlaxcalans since they were not only granted great leniency in \"New Spain\" in maintaining independent governance, but also the end of what was basically an Aztec embargo on trade. \n\nThe point made again and again is that, when the Spanish arrived, the Tlaxcalans had neither salt nor cotton, those two items standing in for a whole range of trade for not only luxury, but staple goods that the Aztec encirclement had cut off. Hassig, in *Aztec Warfare* makes the point that the *xochiyaoyotl* (flower wars) which had typified conflicts between the Aztecs and Tlaxcalans had, in the years leading up to the Spanish arrival, been becoming more intense, more bloody, more vicious, and more territorial. The whole idea of the Tlaxcalans manipulating the Spanish into the Cholula Massacre was that it had recently flipped from being sympathetic to the Tlaxcalans to shifting allegiances to the Aztecs. Since Cholula sat on the doorstep of Tlaxcala, this was a major blow to their state security.\n\nThus, after the Tlaxcalans and Spanish spent a few rounds beating the crap out of each other, they eyed each other up and entered into a mutually beneficial alliance. To suggest that the Tlaxcalans manipulated the Spanish to their own gain is, well, to understand the political landscape of Postclassic central Mexico. To suggest that the Tlaxcalan goal was the conquest of the Aztec states is to misunderstand the restricted role they were in. Fighting the Aztecs was a much a matter of survival for the Tlaxcalans as it was for the Spanish, more so even, since the actual existence of the Tlaxcalan nation was on the line.\n\nThere are numerous instances in the Spanish texts and even in the *Historia de Tlaxcala*, written in the 16th Century by a Tlaxcalan-Spanish chronicler, Diego Camargo, supporting the idea that this was a mutual alliance that was highly valued on both sides. For instance, after the deal was struck, Cortés said that they should destroy their \"idols,\" to which the Tlaxcalans basically said, \"no thanks.\" \n\nGomara's biography of Cortés actually deals directly with this in a chapter titled \"The Tlaxcalans Defend Their Idols\" wherein the response of the Spanish to the Tlaxcalans rejecting Christianity is thus:\n\n > Cortés answered them, promising that he would send someone to teach and indoctrinate them, when they would see the improvement and the very great profit and pleasure they would have by following his friendly advice; but that at the moment he could not do so because of his haste to get to Mexico.\n\nYeah, his \"haste to get to Mexico.\" \n\nCortés, who spent weeks on the Gulf Coast casting down idols and messing with local politics before trekking inland through unknown and hostile lands, is suddenly in a huge rush to get to Tenochtitlan. Just in cast the sarcasm isn't coming through, the modern interpretation of this is that Cortés looked around, saw he had zero chance of forcing conversions without alienating the only friends he had, and opted to table the whole Jesus-thing for a later date.\n\nOther notable events include the famous joint \"Tlaxcala! Castile!\" cheer and the fact that a powerful noble, the son of one of the Tlaxcalan rulers (like the Aztecs, Tlaxcala was not a singular state but a confederation of *altepetli* tied together by custom and marriage), was put to death for his agitation against the Spanish following their expulsion from the Valley of Mexico after La Noche Triste. Here is Bernal Díaz del Castillo's account of a speech given by Maxixca condemning the noble in question, Xicotencatl the Younger:\n\n > I ask you, do you yourselves think, or have you ever heard others say that such riches or so much prosperity was ever known for the last hundred years in the land of Tlascalla as since the time these teules *[the Spanish]* have appeared among us? Were we ever so much respected by all our neighbours? It is only since their arrival we possess abundance of gold and cotton stuffs; it is since that time only we eat salt again, of which we had been deprived for such a length of time. Wherever our troops have shown themselves with these teules, they have been treated with the utmost respect; and if many of our countrymen have lately perished in Mexico, they certainly fared no worse than the teules themselves. All of you must likewise bear in mind the ancient tradition handed down to us by our forefathers, that, at some period or other, a people would come from where the sun rises, to whom the dominion of these countries was destined. How dare Xicotencatl, taking all this into consideration, contemplate this horrible treachery, from which nothing can flow but war and our destruction? Is this not a crime which ought not to be pardoned? Is it not exactly in accordance with the evil designs with which this man's head always runs full? Now that misfortune has led these teules to us for protection, and that we may assist them with our troops to renew the war with Mexico, are we to act treacherously to these our friends? ([Lockhart trans.](_URL_1_))\n\nYou can see the lines about having access to salt and other goods again, but also the idea that \"we are in this together,\" which really does permeate a lot of how the Tlaxcalans and Spanish come off during this period. At the end of the war with the Mexica (in which the Tlaxcalans are noted as engaging in a bit of looting), this paid off in being relatively unbothered by the new Spanish regime. It was a return to normalcy. As Lockhart notes in *Nahuas After the Conquest*, the fact that Tlaxcala was saved from the ravages of war meant that it was also the best organized state in the region, and thus provided a great deal of officials, like traveling judge-governors, throughout central Mexico. Groups of Tlaxcalans also moved north with Spanish/Aztec forces in the pacification of the Gran Chichimeca to establish towns in what are now San Luis Potosí, Coahuila, and Zacatecas. They essentially had an independent state which, while denied tributary domination over the nations in the Valley of Mexico, nonetheless benefited from no longer being under siege and branching outward.\n\nSo why didn't the Tlaxcalans end up establishing dominance over the Valley of Mexico. The easy answer is that the Spanish moved very quickly to recognize Mexica nobility and re-establish them in their roles. Descendants of Motecuhzoma II continued to rule Tenochtitlan for decades after the \"conquest,\" and there is in fact a [Spanish ducal title held by his direct descendants](_URL_3_). This lazy ethnocentric answer fails to take into account that, with the surrender of Cuauhtemoc, the Spanish/Tlaxcalans no longer had any cause to press the war further. Despite beating the Mexica back, the idea that Spanish/Tlaxcalan/Etc. forces would completely remove the Mexica from power would have meant a kind of total war that was really outside the discourse. Within the framework of Mesoamerica, the Spanish had made the Mexica a tributary state and the Tlaxcalans had removed the Mexica as a threat. It was win/win.\n\nLet's take a moment, however, and consider another, more speculative reason why the Tlaxcalans did not press for more substantial spoils of war. Well, one reason is that the lands that served as the buffer between Tlaxcala and the Aztecs, Huexotzinco and Cholula, both allied with the Tlaxcalan-Spanish (albeit after the aforementioned massacre at the the latter altepetl). Then there's the fact that the eastern side of the Valley of Mexico and the 2nd most important state in the Aztec Triple Alliance, the Acolhua, flipped to the Spanish early on. Thus, the Tlaxcalans could not exactly demand that land. Other groups in the region, like the Xochimilca, also turned against the Mexica, if not exactly jumping on the Tlaxcalan-Spanish bandwagon. Thus those groups were also not considered to be in conflict with the Tlaxcalan-Spanish forces, which again put them off-limits for punitive measures according to the custom of war in both cultures.\n\nA more speculative view is that, following the 1520 smallpox epidemic, the Tlaxcalan leadership was devastated and unable to effectively press their claims. Accounts generally credit Xicotencatl the Elder and Maxixca as the most important leaders. Xicotencatl most likely died either at the tail end of the conquest or shortly afterwards, while Maxixca is said to have died in the smallpox outbreak leaving some sons which are generally unnamed in the sources as successors, or at least what the Spanish recognized as successors. There's a [passage in Torquemada](_URL_0_) (start at the top of pg. 63) which gives clues to the kind of chaos of succession that followed the death of Maxixca. So one interpretation would be that there was no effective leader to press Tlaxcalans claims post-Conquest, and that by the time there was, the epidemics of 1540s and 1570s would devastate the native population, setting the stage for Spanish control.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/2qjnyo/should_it_mexico_accept_the_historical_record/"
] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.historicas.unam.mx/publicaciones/publicadigital/monarquia/volumen/04/mi_4/02Libro%20Undecimo/miv4025.pdf",
"http://www.gutenberg.org/files/32474/32474-h/32474-h.htm#CHAPTER_CXXIX",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/25y5j0/what_was_daily_life_like_for_the_indigenous/chmcx1y",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Moctezuma_de_Tultengo"
]
] |
|
22uwym
|
moving matter from a neutron star
|
I've seen on various places that a thimbleful of matter from a neutron star would weigh something ridiculous. But I always wondered does it only stay that compressed due to the gravity of the star? What would happen to that thimbleful once it was say brought to Earth? Would it still occupy the same amount of space?
I searched about for this but only got explanations of what neutron stars are, thanks all.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22uwym/eli5_moving_matter_from_a_neutron_star/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgqmbup"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"If you were to bring a chunk of neutron star matter to the Earth, it would expand. Before I can explain this I have to explain what's actually going on in a neutron star. \nWhen a star 'dies' it collapses in on itself and blows off its outer layers of gas. The core that's left is called a stellar remnant. This remnant can become 1 of 3 things, depending on it's mass. If its mass is below 1.44 solar masses (the Chandrasekhar limit) it becomes a white dwarf. If it's above that limit and below 3-4 solar masses(Tolman–Oppenheimer–Volkoff limit,) it becomes a neutron star. If it's above that limit it becomes a black hole. In normal matter, you have electron degeneracy pressure. Under normal conditions, the electrons of a material prevent you from compressing it too much. However, in a neutron star, the energy and pressure is so great that the electrons and protons of the material actually combine to form neutrons. What causes neutron stars from collapsing into a black hole is now neutron degeneracy pressure. \nSo, if you were to take away some of that material and bring it to Earth, you would no longer have the immense energy compressing it. You'd end up with a large ball of neutrons.\nNow free neutrons are quite radioactive so if you were to do this then they'd start decaying and releasing a whole bunch of harmful ionizing radiation. So don't do it :P"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ddjj4o
|
we see ordinary city pigeons in most major cities, but never in between (e.g., chicago and denver but not in north dakota). how do they get there?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ddjj4o/elif_we_see_ordinary_city_pigeons_in_most_major/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f2ijl06"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"1. Pigeons and doves are the same thing. People tend to call them pigeons in cities and doves in the country. They are common in cities and in rural areas. North Dakota has seven types of pigeons/doves.\n\n2. City pigeons are often domesticated pigeons that were released back into the wild (in this case, cities). So humans brought them there.\n\n3. Feral pigeons in cities were domesticated from rock doves that were used to living on cliffs. So hanging out on buildings wasn't that hard of an adjustment.\n\n4. Most birds have to feed their young worms, nuts, seeds, etc. They need access to that type of food. Pigeons can eat pretty much anything, and they can create a special paste that they feed their young. That means they can better survive on the food in cities than other birds, which makes it seem like there are more of them. There is a lot food in cities, and there are fewer birds that can live off of it besides pigeons.\n\n6. There are fewer predators. There are animals like peregrine falcons that eat pigeons in Chicago, but for the most part, there are are more pigeons than animals that eat pigeons."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
54zjxf
|
it is said that there are more possible games of chess than there are atoms in the observable universe. how is something like this calculated?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54zjxf/eli5_it_is_said_that_there_are_more_possible/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d86ckph"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I don't think there is an easy way to calculate the exact number of games. One can estimate though and get a ballpark figure. Claude Shannon, father of information theory, was the first one to publish his ballpark estimate. It is based on the assumption that, on average the number of moves available to white, and then black (together) is about a thousand possibilities. Since a chess game lasts about 40 moves or so, the answer is about 1000 to the power 40. That is a one followed by 120 zeros. \n\nThe relevant question is not really how many chess games there are, since most of those games are not \"good\" games. One might wonder how many chess games there are that have good moves in them. This question can be posed more rigorously. Let's define a \"good\" move as one that does not change the best possible outcome for the side that makes the move. Then one can pose the question, how many chess games are there with only good moves in them. Now, the number is much smaller. But I have no idea how many."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2gtxy8
|
since a country can print its own currency indefinitely, why can't the us for example just arbitrarily pay off all its debt that way?
|
Even if it's adding a ton of money into the international economy, as long as the money doesn't influence the United States' own economy, does that still devalue the dollar?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gtxy8/eli5_since_a_country_can_print_its_own_currency/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckmhj9n",
"ckmhkyb",
"ckmio2h"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes. The more money in circulation, the less it's really worth, period.",
"Printing more money makes the money worth less, i.e. inflation.",
"Let's imagine \"Purchasing Power\" as a cake. Lets imagine \"Dollars\" as tickets. The tickets serve as coupons to get a cake. \n > 1 Cake = 1 Ticket. \n\nIf I simply print more tickets, but don't produce more cakes, the value of the tickets decreases. For example, if I print 10 tickets, than, \n > 1 Cake = 10 Tickets. \n\n\nPrinting more tickets didn't increase the amount of cakes I had, it simply devalued the individual tickets. \n\nIn relation to money, if you simply \"print more money,\" you aren't actually adding to the purchasing power you have. Your just devaluing the individual dollar. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
30mue4
|
How did Egypt become so thoroughly Arabised?
|
To the degree that the local culture was completely replaced by Arabic?
Also, I've heard the claim that Arabia was overpopulated significantly in the 7th century, is this true and how significant was it as a factor in the Arabasation of the Fertile Crescent and the Maghreb?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/30mue4/how_did_egypt_become_so_thoroughly_arabised/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cptwkdp"
],
"score": [
19
],
"text": [
"Egypt was under the control of the Arabs directly for six consecutive centuries, and then under the control of people who likely used Arabic for government functions due to the varied origins of the Mamluks themselves. So, in short, for almost a thousand years it was under the control of administrators who spoke Arabic, right in the middle of a large empire where Arabic was the main lingua franca. That is a huge time frame for the language to filter down to the general populace.\n\nAs to the second claim, the 'Arabization' of North Africa was mostly a cultural exchange rather than a replacement of peoples. Recent studies suggest that the average Egyptian can likely trace their heritage back thousands of years, and of course, clearly Berbers are a wholely distinct people from the Arabs. The Fertile crescent and Syria is a bit more, but there would have been Arabs and other Semitic peoples there before the Muslim invasions. The truth is that outside of a few isolated points in time, large scale population transfers just weren't that common. While the elites might be replaced, and the language of government and administration might change to reflect that, the change in the general population is generally going to reflect the cultural pressure from above rather than wholesale replacement of populations. This is not to say that some population transfers didn't take place in the Caliphate, but that they are almost certainly a minor component of the over-all Arabization of the Middle-East and North Africa."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
70nven
|
Has the U.S. Military ever conducted assassinations of foreign leaders in the past?
|
In the past the CIA conducted numerous assassinations of foreign leaders, has the U.S. Military ever conducted at least one such assassination in the past?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/70nven/has_the_us_military_ever_conducted_assassinations/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn5fc3c"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Going off that, of the assassinations done by either CIA or military was it widely known who did it or did people think it was different countries? "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3l32wn
|
terryology.
|
Can someone explain what Terrance Howard means in his explanation of terryology? Does he have any basis for his hypothesis or is it all just randomness?
Link of Rolling Stones article: [link](_URL_0_)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l32wn/eli5_terryology/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv3yiul"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"He's just mixing up multiplication and addition. He thinks 1 X 1 is the equivalent of holding up one index finger for each hand and seeing 2 fingers. He also said everyone thinks √4 is 2, so √2 must be 1, but it's not *because we're told it's 2,* which proves that he knows nothing about simple arithmetics."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://mashable.com/2015/09/14/terrence-howard-one-times-one/#uDkUOjBnvZk_"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1h9pxq
|
what is the difference between a bison and a buffalo?
|
i always throught it was one animal.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1h9pxq/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_a_bison_and_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cas7w26",
"cas7w73",
"cas8s0l"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Basically \n1. The bison are native to North America and Europe.\n2. The buffalo is native to Africa and Asia. African buffaloes are wild animals while Asian buffaloes are mostly domesticated.\n3. Bison have thick shaggy coats, though they shed these during summer, while the buffalo has short and smooth coats. Bison have shorter horns compared to the buffaloes as they prefer butting heads to locking horns. Both are nomadic grazers and they travel in herds.\n_URL_0_",
"You can find pictures on the internet easily so let me explain why the words got mixed up. We keep them separate because they aren't that closely related. \n\n * ~~In Europe, Asia, and Africa there are only Buffalo. There used to be Bison in Europe but they went extinct thousands of years ago.~~ I read a little more about it and there are Bison in Europe but there weren't very many. They only lived in a small part of Europe because they were hunted a lot, just like the American Bison. \n\n * In The Americas there are only Bison. \n\nWhen Europeans came to America they saw Bison. They look kind of similar to the buffalo they were knew of so they called them buffalo. They weren't actually Buffalo so we gave them the name Bison, the same name we give to the extinct Bison from Europe. \n\nIt's not terrible to call bison buffalo, but it isn't correct. Don't worry about it too much but they are definitely different. ",
"Funny story. I was at Yellowstone National Park and asked the park ranger this very same question in front a huge group of people. She didn't know and was really embarassed. I felt so bad. What's funny is that I knew the answer already and I wanted to inform the people but my plan backfired and I made the park ranger look like a incompetent loser. I wish I could say I was sorry. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://imgur.com/tATgXoA"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
a0f116
|
how to best describe/explain ionization energy and electron affinity?
|
I have a science test tomorrow about ionization energy and electron affinity (more specifically surrounding Sodium Chloride) and I have absolutely no clue how to explain these concepts. I understand them broadly speaking, but I feel like my science teacher won't take vague explanations as an answer on a unit final. Can anyone help me out a bit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0f116/eli5_how_to_best_describeexplain_ionization/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eah8jf5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Ionization energy is the amount of energy that must go into an atom to remove an electron. As you remove more electrons, the amount of energy required becomes larger and larger because of the effective nuclear charge. This pulls the electrons closer and closer to the nucleus, which results in higher energy to pull it off. Once all the valence electrons are removed, the ionization energy increases substantially.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nElectron affinity is basically the opposite. It's the energy that's released when an electron is added to an atom.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nIn the context of NaCl, not much energy is required to remove an electron from a sodium atom, and a lot of energy is released when an electron is added to a chlorine atom (in fact, it has the highest electron affinity in the periodic table). "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
55gczv
|
What happened to the Rockefellers fortune?
|
Today the Rockefellers as a collective own as much as 10 billion. Thats is a large chunk of money, but John D Rockefeller's net worth was valued at 336 billion adjusted for inflation. Now typically wealth creates more wealth. So how did this historical figure go from being so ungodly rich with the most powerful company in the world to having his entire family valued at 10 billion between 200 people?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/55gczv/what_happened_to_the_rockefellers_fortune/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8au75i",
"d8b42ar"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a complicated question because when people see that the brothers had such a large sum they automatically assume the same thing you did. That wealth typically creates more wealth. The trouble is no one takes into account the time value of money. Which states that money today is more valuable than money tomorrow or a year from now. He was once valued at 336 billion but that was for at that time in history. The value of money decreases over time, plus the brothers were worth that much. Since their deaths it has been split between 200 family members. The fact that they are still able to be wealthy at this day and age is more what we're use to. In that families that are wealthy usually remain wealthy. The Rockefellers actually made some smart investments. They owned Chase Manhattan bank and were large investors in Apple, so their wealth has accrued but the world will never see the same as in the Gilded age. When there was The Rockefellers, JP. Morgan, Carnegie and So on. ",
"Estate and death taxes removed some of the wealth. Splitting it between 200 people who each have their own households and expenses did away with more of the money."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9okjl4
|
what would happen if a massive planet came very close to earth, as in, would our gravity change?
|
Also, if we jumped, while on earth, would we be in the air longer because the other planet also had gravity pulling us up?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9okjl4/eli5_what_would_happen_if_a_massive_planet_came/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e7uro4o",
"e7uwi2c",
"e7uyb1y"
],
"score": [
9,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The planets would disrupt each others orbit, draw each other closer together and then shoot apart again, over and over and over like this for years as gravity ripped chunks off of each with every pass, each time getting closer together. \n\nThose chunks would hit both planets turning them into lifeless balls of molten rock before finally slamming together completely, most of which would eventually cool down forming a solid mass, a new planet. The remainder of the materials would orbit around the new planet for a while, most of it raining down in the form of giant meteors, until they too eventually merge together and form a moon.\n\nThat's actually how Earth and the Moon were formed.",
"Gravity is very distance dependent, and decreases by the square of distance. The Sun is obviously influencing the Earth, but doesn't do anything to us personally, because we're so close to Earth. \n\nSo if some rouge planet zipped by us at the distance of, say, the moon, we wouldn't notice it at the individual level - we'd still be way closer to earth. \n\nHowever, the Earth is really big. So it notices gravity differently. It would likely cause earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and super crazy tides that would result in basically worldwide Tsunami like effects (tides that are double or triple their typical height). \n\nAnd that would be just if a planet zipped by once. If it got too close and stayed close, it would destroy everything. ",
"I started to say \"No\", but then I realised the answer could be Yes.\n\nAt first I thought that the earth would be ripped apart long before the rogue planet could get close enough to have any measurable effect on our weight, but it turns out that's not the case!\n\nImagine a giant planet the mass of Jupiter, but denser. If it were as close to the earth as the moon is, the gravitational attraction between [the planet and a 100kg person](_URL_1_) would be about 78N, roughly equivalent to an 8% difference. So when the rogue was directly overhead, our 100kg person would weigh only 92kg, and when it was directly beneath them, they would weigh 108kg.\n\nWe'd definitely notice that.\n\nThe distance to the moon is about 400,000 kilometres, [well beyond the Roche limit for fluids](_URL_0_) (the atmosphere and oceans). The solid earth wouldn't start to pull apart until this Jupiter-like rogue was roughly 150.000 kilometres away. (About 80,000 km from the top of its atmosphere, 150,000km to its centre.) So in principle, we could live long enough to notice the gravitational attraction.\n\nBut in reality, if such a planet entered the solar system, we'd probably be wiped out by incoming comets and asteroids long before it got to us.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.quora.com/If-Earth-passed-within-Jupiters-Roche-limit-could-we-expect-to-find-recognizable-objects-like-cars-floating-in-the-new-rings",
"https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=gravitational+force+between+1.9e27kg+and+100kg+at+403000+km"
]
] |
|
5babn8
|
which one is more environmental friendly - eating with a disposable plate and cutlery to save water; or eating with normal plate and wash them with water and soap?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5babn8/eli5_which_one_is_more_environmental_friendly/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9mxs5w",
"d9mzrmf",
"d9mzucu",
"d9mzzav",
"d9n0r3h",
"d9n127n",
"d9n19e7",
"d9n1ssv"
],
"score": [
47,
113,
80,
18,
2,
8,
4,
8
],
"text": [
"Trick question. Eating with compostable dinnerware and silver ware is best.\n\nPlastic plates and utensils are worst. Hand washing is better. Using a dishwasher when full is better. ",
"Washing your dishes is more environmentally friendly. The water is not destroyed in the washing process.",
"I agree this is a trick question, just because of how complicated the question is. This is basically called an LCA (life cycle assessment) where you look at the environmental impact of a products entire life.\nIt goes from resource extraction to production to shipping to use to end of life, the whole life. So, just because you're using compostable cutlery doesn't mean shit If it took a lot of materials to make that and then ship it to you.. And if you keep disposing them and needing new ones that makes the environmental impact higher.\nWhereas lets say you get a nice ceramic plate and use it for 20 years, over and over hand washing. I personally would argue that the amount of water spent washing 1 plate over a lifetime is so negligable it would maybe not even make it on an LCA. But idk,\nBasically, we would need to look at some really extensive piece of research telling us about a products whole life (not just the time we use it!) and go from there.\nTl;dr environmentalism is confusing, producing less waste is generally the more environmentally friendly thing tho (even if its compostable)",
"The most environmentally friendly option is to only eat things that require neither dishes nor cutlery ie Pizza, Bananas, Ice Cream cones, Hot Dogs, etc.",
"I suppose you can go around and around on this one, as some resources get used either way, but you don't \"use\" water. You temporarily borrow the water. The small amounts of detergent and detritus you wind up with in the water will partly get taken out by a water treatment plant and in some cases are not really hazardous to nature to begin with. \n\nBuilding disposable cutlery - especially if you do it out of plastic - is a whole different ball of wax. Or plastic, as the case may be.",
"Several people have mentioned compostable items. We've discussed the extraction, manufacturing, and shipping impacts, but end of life is important too.\n\nThe standard for compostable cups, plates, utensils state that they must biodegrade in certain conditions and within a certain timeframe. I don't have the exact language in front of me, but it's something like, in 90 days break down to certain size pieces. However, those standards are typical of industrial** compost facilities. They certainly don't compost in a landfill, nor will such items break down in your home compost pile. In fact, for municipalities that offer curbside composting, there's nothing requiring them to set the conditions such that these items will break down. To meet the standards, typically you need 90 days, conditions over a certain temp, and the material needs to be ground up early on. Your home pile won't reach the necessary temps and a commercial facility can't afford to let product sit for 90 days when most food and yard debris breaks down sufficiently in 30-60 days. (selling finished compost is revenue opportunity).\n\nTL:DR Compostable dishes rarely are actually composted.",
"A shit ton of water is used to make paper.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Definitely washing your plates is better for the environment. Even more so if you wait until you have a dishwasher full of plates/ other items. (New) Dish washers are exceptionally efficient and conserve a ton of water over washing in the sink. \n\nWater that's used for washing can be recycled and reconditioned to be safe for release or reuse. Disposable goes into landfills. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq7L9-0XdVw"
],
[]
] |
||
73hcgu
|
why do animals in a particular ecological niche often look so similar even if they are completely unrelated?
|
For example why do birds and the now extinct flying reptiles share such strong similarities as far as appearances go? Why did marine reptiles look like either fish or whales?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/73hcgu/eli5_why_do_animals_in_a_particular_ecological/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dnqaqbh",
"dnqxia8"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a concept called \"convergent evolution.\" Basically, if the pressures on one creature were such that flight was advantageous to survival in a particular environment, those same pressures could easily select for similar variations should they happen to randomly arise in another species. \n\nThis is particularly true for those filing the same niche, as the pressures will be particularly similar. ",
"Convergent evolution happens because optimal solutions exist.\n\nIe. if you want to move through the water efficiently it's effective to have a hydrodynamic shape, a propulsion method and a steering method.\n\nThere are many different ways of achieving this. That's why there are some pretty exotic solutions, like the way a squid will take in water and then squirt it out to propel itself forward or a flat eel with a body shaped like one big paddle.\n\nBut one of the simplest and most effective solutions is having a torpedo shaped body, with a big paddle for propulsion at the rear end and a number of fins to use as control surfaces.\n\nWhich is why the archetypical shark, whale, seal and ichthyosaur all more or less look the same. For entirely different species, evolution keeps resulting in a fairly optimal solution.\n\nAlong the same lines, specific needs create specific shapes. So while a torpedo with paddles might be an ideal shape for animals that swim in open waters, specific needs will just as easily see them evolve away from that basic shape. For instance flatfish. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
fgkgaf
|
non-native speaker here, why is "biannually" considered to be twice a year, but "biweekly" only once every two weeks instead of two times per week?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fgkgaf/eli5_nonnative_speaker_here_why_is_biannually/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fk53ekr"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"\"Biweekly\" can refer to either twice a week or two times a week. The same for \"bimonthly\" (i.e. once a month or two times a month).\n\nThe issue stems from the prefix *\"bi-\"*, which is inherently ambiguous in that it can mean either **occuring twice** or **occuring every two**.\n\nEnglish offers us an alternative with 'annual', as things can either be *\"biannual\"* (twice a year) or *\"biennial\"* (every two years). However, using the word \"biannual\" to mean every two years is also technically correct, and is more often used over \"biennial\".\n\n*\"Bi-\"* is one of English's many ambiguities and requires experience with understanding context to decipher its true meaning in a given situation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4ntosg
|
why are people/businesses moving to the south and not detroit?
|
As we all know the the city of Detroit has gone through a lot of problems in the last few decades, but now the city is on a big upswing and things are looking bright. My question however is, why are movie studios, large corporations and people in general moving to southern states? The land is super cheap down south, I know, but land is cheap in Detroit too. Plus Detroit has so much room for expansion and the Detroit Metro is still one of the most heavily populated areas in the US so there's no shortage of people around.
So what gives? Why Knoxville and not Detroit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ntosg/eli5_why_are_peoplebusinesses_moving_to_the_south/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d46va6o",
"d46vln9"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"A lot fewer unions in the south is a big part. Also rules and regulations setup over decades that are unfriendly to new business in Detroit.",
"Another thing that hasn't been said is weather: people don't like winter and the ice and snow it brings to your commute and ability to get out of the house. The South can get oppressively hot, but being in proximity to water and air conditioning have helped a lot, and make it very liveable."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
8ivlfa
|
Would a helium filled balloon float on Mars?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/8ivlfa/would_a_helium_filled_balloon_float_on_mars/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyvm332",
"dyvsp31"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"You can solve this with the ideal gas law, pV = nRT. Pressure x Volume = #molecules x ideal-gas-contant x temperature. \n\n\nMars' atmosphere is made of carbon dioxide, which has a molar mass of 44g/mol. Air, which is basically an 80-20 mix of nitrogen and oxygen, has a molar mass of 29 g/mol. Helium is 4g/mol. Helium is actually 50% more boyant on Mars than it is on earth. It's looking good, but we haven't factored in the balloon yet. \n\n\n\nBalloons equalize pressure between the atmosphere and the gas inside, plus a little tension from the balloon itself. From some random YouTube video, it seem a balloon fully inflated is at 110 kPa. About 10 kPa over earth's atmosphere. On earth this extra pressure due to the balloon's tension is minimal. On Mars, not so much. Mars' atmosphere is at 0.6 kPa, so a fully inflated balloon would be at 10.6 kPa. \n\n\n\nThe volume of a mol, from the ideal gas law is, V = RT/P. For earth (100kPa, 25C), a mol is about 24L. Which is about a large party balloon, we'll go with that. So the air it is displacing is 29g. The helium is 4g. And the balloon is about 15g. So about 10g of displaced air mass. 10g at 9.81 m/s/s of gravity is 98 mN of lift. About 0.02 pounds for those of you using barbarian units. \n\n\nThe same 24L of martian air is 0.6 kPa(24L) = nR (-55C). So 0.00795 mol. Which at 44g/mol, is 0.35g. Which is way less than the 15g balloon, so even without the helium weight it simply can't be done. The helium at 10.6 kPa is going to be 0.1404 mol. Which will have a mass of 0.56 g. Even the helium itself will weigh more than the displaced martian atmosphere. The displaced 0.35g is replaced by 15.6 g, which at 3.7 m/s/s of gravity is 58mN of force. \n\n\n98 mN rise on earth, 58 mN sink on Mars, varying obviously with some assumptions and averages I made. Nonetheless, a helium filled party balloon on Mars will definitely not float, but will sink with around the same force one rises at on earth. \n\n\nAs for a balloon on Mars made to be a balloon on Mars, it definitely could be done. After all, helium is actually 50% more boyant on Mars. You'd have to go with a much lighter material, as Martian air doesn't weigh much. Or go with a much bigger latex balloon, as you increase the volume the balloon weight starts becoming a much smaller relative to the volume, by a squared factor. Neither of these will matter though if your helium under pressure still weighs more than your martian atmosphere. You'd have to have much less tension in the balloon to keep the helium at a pressure much closer to the atmospheric pressure. ",
"The right design of balloon would.\n\nDepend on location, the air pressure at ground level on Mars is equivalent to Earth between around 100,000 and 190,000 feet. High altitude balloons can reach 120,000 feet on Earth, so they could fly on Mars.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe lower gravity of Mars is not an issue because it cancels out - less buoyancy force is generated but the balloon skin and any payload also weigh less. Mars' CO2 atmosphere is denser than Earth's nitrogen-oxygen one at a given pressure which will increase the lift of the balloon."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.nasa.gov/scientific-balloons/types-of-balloons",
"http://mathscinotes.com/2012/10/earth-altitude-with-equivalent-pressure-to-mars/"
]
] |
||
3jruq8
|
Japan and the UK were allies in WW1. What happened to this alliance post WW1 and pre WW2?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3jruq8/japan_and_the_uk_were_allies_in_ww1_what_happened/
|
{
"a_id": [
"curw7j9"
],
"score": [
30
],
"text": [
"Japan's entry into the First World War was a highly measured response. Japan acted against German interests in the Pacific, most notably invading the German concession at Tsingtao. Japan did not put its economy on a wartime footing and only after repeated entreaties by the British did she send some military force into the European theater in 1917, a small destroyer force engaged in ASW operations in the Mediterranean. Japan justified entry into the war on the grounds of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, an accord that had its origins in the two countries' concerns with defense issues in the Pacific at the turn of the century. \n\nThe Anglo-Japanese Alliance had really begun to fracture significantly by the outbreak of the First World War over differing strategic priorities. The initial orientation of the alliance when it was signed in 1902 was as mutual security pact against Russian intervention within the East Asia. The British conceptualized the pact as a means to guarantee imperial defense within India. For their part, the Japanese saw this alliance as a means to gain access to British naval technology and as a means to ensure a friendly Britain in the event of war with Russia. Japan's victory over Russia in the Russo-Japanese War and the latter's subsequent strategic retreat from East Asia because of the Revolution of 1905 changed this strategic calculus. But the ardor for alliance had cooled somewhat even before the Russo-Japanese War. Prior to 1902, London's understanding of the balance of power was that by helping prop up Japan, they would have prevented Russia from capitalizing upon Japan's perceived weakness and expanding into Korea and Manchuria. This strengthened Russia could then pose an even bigger threat to India. In the run-up to the war, Balfour declared of the alliance that:\n\n > If we interpret the Japanese Alliance as one requiring us to help Japan whenever she gets to loggerheads with Russia, it is absurdly one-sided. Japan certainly would not help us to prevent Amsterdam from falling into the hands of the French, or Holland falling into the hands of the Germans. Nor would she involve herself in any quarrel we might have over the northwest frontier of India. \n\nRussia's defeat altered this strategic equation. The negotiations over the alliance's renewal in 1911 illustrated these new strains. Although the Anglo-Japanese diplomatic negotiations were successful and led to a renewal of the alliance for ten years, there was a clear tension between the two nations. Japan had sought British guarantees for support in case Japan went to war with the United States, and London steadfastly refused. Instead, Article IV of the renewed treaty stated:\n\n > Should either High Contracting Party conclude a treaty of general \narbitration with a third Power, it is agreed that nothing in this Agreement shall entail upon such Contracting Party an obligation to go to war with the Power with whom such treaty of arbitration is in force. \n\nAlthough Article IV does not explicitly mention the US, London had already begun the long process of signing just such an arbitration treaty with the United States that would culminate in the Peace Commissions Treaty of 1914. Renewing the treaty helped forestall any other alliance Japan might make with another power and kept a modicum of security for imperial defense. \n\nFor their part, the opinion of the alliance within Japanese elite circles had dimmed considerably by 1911. Katō Takaaki, the Anglophile foreign minister in 1914, was a strong proponent of the alliance and saw fulfilling it as a means to enhance Japanese power and the strength of the foreign ministry. Yet Katō's opinion of the alliance was increasingly a minority one. One of Japan's senior statesmen, Field Marshal Yamagata Aritomo saw Article IV as proof that Japan would have to stand alone in the coming conflict over Asia and the state would have to double its defense burden. The Japanese Navy had already designated the US as Japan's main hypothetical enemy in its budgetary plans by 1907 and had begun a program of naval expansion, the eight-eight fleet. \n\nWithin this context, Japan's entry into the war and Britain's reluctance over Japan's belligerence makes more sense. The alliance gave Japan a pretext to enter the war, but on Japan's own terms. Factionalism within the Japanese government and ruling elite meant that Japan's leadership was divided upon what Japan's goals should take. Yamagata Aritomo saw the war as a means to create a rapprochement with Russia and help orient Japan towards an Asian-based land power, undercutting the increasingly expensive naval arms build-up. Katō saw the war as a means to cement Japan's status as an imperial power and take its place with its fellow empire, Britain. Other pan-Asianists within the government saw the power-vacuum created by the war as an opportunity to institute an Asian Monroe Doctrine with Japan as its main enforcer. \n\nGiven the Japanese use of the treaty, Britain did not really exert too much effort in renewing it in the aftermath of the First World War. Although Britain initially proposed a tripartite Anglo-Japanese-American pact to keep the Pacific status quo, the US was reluctant to enter into this arrangement. The Washington Conference of 1921 proved the last gasp of the Anglo-Japanese Treaty as British negotiators used the threat of its renewal if the Washington Conference fell apart or was otherwise unfavorable to Britain. The resulting Four-Power Treaty assuring the status quo in the Pacific proved the end of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, but both the strategic vision of both Japan and Britain had parted ways well before 1921.\n\n*Sources*\n\nDickinson, Frederick R. *War and National Reinvention: Japan in the Great War, 1914-1919*. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Asia Center, 1999. \n\n_. *World War I and the Triumph of a New Japan, 1919-1930*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.\n\nO'Brien, Phillips Payson. *The Anglo-Japanese Alliance, 1902-1922*. London: Routledge, 2004. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bidy74
|
how do glute muscles become weak?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bidy74/eli5_how_do_glute_muscles_become_weak/
|
{
"a_id": [
"elzx9bb"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The same way any other muscle gets weaker. Over time and extended periods of low use, they deteriorate and lose mass."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
216qhy
|
why is fertilizer the primary ingredient in many homemade bombs?
|
How does it work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/216qhy/eli5_why_is_fertilizer_the_primary_ingredient_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cga4uhi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's the nitrogen//nitrogen-based chemicals in the fertilizer. The nitrogen stuff is great for growing crops... but it's also good for explosives.\n\nYou can search for \"nitrogen explosive compounds\", but read here this one example of why:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://ask.metafilter.com/6301/Why-is-nitrogen-part-of-so-many-explosives"
]
] |
|
c91rpz
|
how is it that someone (like myself) is allergic to almost every antibiotic? what makes the body hate them so much?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c91rpz/eli5_how_is_it_that_someone_like_myself_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ess22j4"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Essentially an allergy is an immune response to a foreign substance. \n\nFor you, the antibiotics has 'proteins' antigens which trigger the white cells of you immune system to attack them. This appears as massive inflammation due to degranulation of mast cells releasing imflammatory proteins etc. Typically presenting as Rashes to full blown anaphylaxis (air way compromise) \n\n & #x200B;\n\nWhen patients come with multiple drug 'allergies' it important to differentiate what is a true allergy vs what is a side effect of antibiotic such as nausea/diarrhoea."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
gljcj
|
Is cancer a preventable disease?
|
More precisely, can one significantly lower chances of getting cancer through certain lifestyle changes? If so, what might those changes be?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/gljcj/is_cancer_a_preventable_disease/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1ofek5",
"c1offkt",
"c1og6dw"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Yes. Nutrition plays a big role. For instance, [selenium prevents prostate cancer](_URL_0_).\n\n[Here's a book](_URL_1_)",
"Sometimes yes, sometimes no.\n\nI mean, the obvious: don't smoke anything if you want to lower your risk of mouth/throat/lung cancer.\n\nDon't tan excessively or refuse to wear sunscreen if you want to lower your risk of skin cancers.\n\nExercise.\n\nHave protected sex and get tested for STIs. \n\nI think you get my drift.",
"You addressed it in your post, but I just want to point it out as well : \"Prevention\" in medicine is like \"safety\" in engineering. It depends on what you mean by \"prevention\".\n\nIf by prevention you mean complete prevention, as in cancer risk is gone...no. Not going to happen. \n\nBut for what you are asking, yes. You can significantly lower your risk (most likely; there is the of a \"doom gene\" somewhere that means you're getting cancer no matter what you do). However, the degree to which you can lower your risk of a certain cancer is not the same as the degree to which I can lower my risk of the same cancer, largely due to genetics. Personal history, like smoking, sunburn, etc plays a role too, although most people think of these as prevention. I personally don't think of it that way because if you did it in the past, there's not a lot you can do to change that fact now. Your history is just as set as your genes. More so, actually.\n\nNot sure why....just feel like expounding here...\n\nCancer is a multihit disease. Consider an oversimplified individual cell. This cell is only supposed to grow (divide) in response to very specific signals. It has layers of protection to ensure that happens as dictated and only as dictated, with checkpoints all along the way that slow or halt the pathway to division. These checkpoints must be shut down or circumvented in order for the cell to divide. This can happen in a healthy way (controlled division) or as a pathology (cancer).\n\nIt should go without saying, but the checkpoints are all gene products in some way. Some are proteins, some are the products of proteins, some are RNA, etc, but they all work to slow or prevent division of the cell, and they all ultimately come from specific genes or sets of genes.\n\nSay there are 5 of these checkpoints, A, B, C, D, and E. But, unlucky you, you inherited a bad copy of a gene crucial to making C, so you only have 4 of the checkpoints. No worries, though, you still have A, B, D, and E. But suddenly...a wild gamma ray appears, and now the gene that encodes A has mutated into uselessness. OK, it's not great, but you still have B, D, and E. \n\nUntil you take your next drag on that cigarette and you mutate D into uselessness. OK...there's still B and E.... but then you get a free radical straying where it's not supposed to and the gene that ecodes the the thing crucial to the processing of E is mutated so it no longer interacts with E. And then a few weeks later, when the cell divides due to a legitimate signal, a replication error takes out something in the pathway that makes B.\n\nAnd now all bets are off. All the stuff telling the cell \"Stop growing!\" is gone, and any tiny little push towards \"grow!\" is heeded and taken on with gusto. Cancer.\n\nSome of those things you had zero control over and were set from the beginning; the inherited gene, for example. \n\nSome you had no real control over and happened through the course of life, like the gamma ray.\n\nSome were strictly your choice, like the cigarette. \n\nBut then there are things like that free radical; you get those as a course of metabolism. They are inevitable, but their half-life and frequency can be reduced by diet. \n\nAnd the replication error? Certain micronutrients may have been able to reduce the frequency of replication errors (another risk factor). Maybe if you hadn't gotten injured in just that way, that division never would have occured. This is an example of another important aspect; there are risk factors that are simply not known or are not really predictable. \n\nJust for the record: It's not really that simple. The checkpoints aren't all just \"yes/no\" things (some are checkpoints, they just aren't all checkpoints); many work as a balancing act. Once you get an imbalnce, you \"tip\" towards division.\n\nThere are also gene products that work the other way; they initiate division. It's possible to go that way as well, but as it's a gain of function mutation it's much, much more rare than the loss of function mutations you get elsewhere.\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00630.x/full",
"http://www.amazon.ca/Foods-That-Fight-Cancer-Preventing/dp/0771011350"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2aryiq
|
What is the maximum rate of rainfall possible?
|
I know it depends on how big of an area it is raining in, but what would the theoretical limit of rainfall rate be for a set area like a 1 mile by 1 mile? Are clouds even capable of holding enough water to "max out" the space available for water to fall or would it be beyond their capability?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2aryiq/what_is_the_maximum_rate_of_rainfall_possible/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ciyb786",
"ciybavq",
"ciybr0h",
"ciybsth",
"ciybve7",
"ciyd31e",
"ciydabu",
"ciydt5a",
"ciyk2u3",
"ciyl8zp",
"ciymqre",
"ciyzc17"
],
"score": [
10,
231,
15,
1279,
14,
5,
156,
13,
6,
11,
6,
6
],
"text": [
"I've observed rain falling at a rate of 3 inches per hour before over a long period of time many years ago during a hurricane. That unit is without respect to area. Over 1 square mile that is [ 63360 (inches per mile) x 63360 x 3 ] = ~2,350,000 cubic feet of water per square mile per hour. Yes, clouds are big enough. Clouds are only the visible (condensed) water vapor. There's much more water that's invisible in the air itself in gas phase. Rainfall has been recorded falling at rates MUCH higher than 3 inches per hour many times, but it's quite rare. [many records indicate 15+inches per hour occur over brief time spans in very small areas]",
"There is a record of a [34 inch rainfall event over 12 hours](_URL_0_) in Smethport, Pennsylvania on July 18, 1942. \n\nIt has also been claimed that 15.78\" of rain fell at Sahngdu in Inner Mongolia on July 3, 1975 in one hour; but that observation is poorly documented.\n\nI suppose those could would have to do as far as historically verifiable upper limits go.\n\nWhen you talk of clouds \"maxing out\" on their carrying capacity, you've got to remember that most rain is formed when hot moist air rises. This cools that hot and water saturated air, thus decreasing it's carrying capacity (as the solubility of water vapor in the atmosphere decreases as temperature goes down). To \"max out\", as you say, the intensity of the rainfall, you have to get the hottest and wettest air possible to rise and cool as rapidly as possible.",
"In the hydrologic sciences we have observed maximums, but our observation techniques (radar, satellite, rain gauge) all have their own associated measurement errors. Theoretically, there is not a defined upper bound. Instead we characterize rainfall rate distributions using a probability distribution. An exponential distribution is a simple distribution that is commonly used, and it does not have an upper bound, although the very high values would be very unlikely. \n\nAs air temperature rises, the air can \"hold on to\" more water vapor. If the air was hot enough, and cooled very quickly, theoretically it could precipitate all of its water all at once, resulting in a very high rain rate. ",
"There are some great answers so far, but I think everyone is missing the point. /u/evilmercer is not asking what the maximum observed rate has been historically, but what the maximum *theoretical* rate of rainfall is. Given the wording of his question, I believe he is seeking two separate answers:\n\n* What is the maximum rate of rainfall from an air density perspective?\n\n* Would a storm system be able to create this rate of rainfall, even momentarily?",
"Here is a link to a blog by Chris Burt from Weather Underground regarding rainfall rate records. [link](_URL_1_)\n\n[And a handy chart.] (_URL_0_)",
"Civil engineers may use a \"probable maximum precipitation\" which is like what you have described. This rate differs from location to location, and is dependent on factors like local weather and geography. In the US, the [National Weather Service](_URL_0_) has documents that describe this rate for different regions. As mentioned by /u/GreenTeaForDays and the paper below, there are alternate ways of describing the maximum rate using probability distributions.\n\n_URL_1_",
"Let's assume we start with a mass of air covering one square kilometer and extending to the top of the atmosphere, and that it's at 100% humidity at a very high temperature, say 40 degrees.\n\n40 degree air holds 50g water per kg of air.\n\nAt atmosphere of pressure is 101kPa, which means a column of air of 1m^2 weighs about 10^4 kg, so our 1km^2 air mass weighs 10^10 kg. Therefore it holds 5x10^11 g water.\n\nThat's 5x10^8 L, or 5x10^5 m^3 , which is enough to cover 1 km^2 to a depth of 0.5m.\n\nSo if we have a mass of fully saturated atmosphere, and dumped all the rain out at once, we would get 50cm of rain. \n\nNote that if the fully saturated atmosphere is 50 degrees instead, that roughly doubles the carrying capacity and we can get 100cm of rain.\n\nThe only question left is how quickly can we do that? I'll leave that to someone more qualified.",
"Engineer here. What you're referring to is the \"Probable Maximum Precipitation\". Civil Engineers typically design to protect the public during a 100-yr storm event (ie: a 1% chance of occurrence per year) and sometimes a 500-yr storm event (0.2% chance), there are mathematical models, however, that can theoretically estimate just how much rain can physically occur. Further information here [NOA PMP](_URL_0_)",
"Woo, it's good to be a hydrologist sometimes!\n\nWhat you're referring to is called probable maximum precipitation (PMP). It's a theoretical maximum that's used for the design of dams and other things that would necessarily need to know something like that.\n\nThe short answer is: There is no short answer. It's very location dependent. The way that we do it is basically by maximizing everything that goes into rainfall (lift, available moisture, etc.) and then running a model and seeing what comes out. We basically turn the model up to 11. But that varies depending on where you are. Some places just don't have the lift source that others do, or the available moisture in the air.\n\nHere are some references if you wanna get detailed about it.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nBut since we're all looking for numbers, the maximum *rate* is incredibly high, in the tens of inches per hour. However, it quickly becomes a question of how long that rate can keep up. Rain sucks energy and moisture out of the air. It can't just keep raining like that forever, so there's a maximum instant rate, a max 1-hr total, max 3-hr total, and so on out to a couple of days. ",
"The question can't be definitively answered. If you could control all variables at will you could get a 1x1x1 mile sheet of water to fall at once. You'd just need enough cloud cover and to change the temperature fast enough to instantly condense all of it to water. Obviously something like that would be practically impossible.\n\nHowever, a maximum actual rainfall is beyond our ability to usefully calculate. There's lots of answers in here with suppositions about terrain channeling or other enhancing factors, but at that point everyone is just guessing about random things. \n\nIf you want to know the maximum rainfall rate (mm of rain/unit of time/unit of area) that is possible in naturally occurring conditions your best bet is to look at the historical answers people are posting. Anything else is going to be a thought experiment that is both going to be highly dubious in terms of considering all relevant variables and totally baseless in terms of whether their assumptions are possible.\n\nIn addition, the measured area is a very important characteristic that you can't just offhandedly say 1x1 miles or something. If you went small enough you could have 1 drop land there and have a rainfall of hundreds of meters of rain per second per square meter. Obviously that's a misleading result. I think the better way to think about it is, how fast can a cloud condense. This gets to the heart of the matter, how fast can rain be generated, without needing to consider anything else. \n\nI don't have time to look up atmospheric values and consult my psychrometric tables, but I'm sure someone here could perform such a calculation by making some reasonable assumptions.",
"Well I don't know about on earth, but you could theoretically have a planet whose atmosphere was composed of super critical H2O then have it cool. The atmosphere would exit the critical phase and become liquid water. If the entire atmosphere were like this though then it would be a lot less like rain and more like an amorphous hovering blob of water whose edges were fuzzy as it bordered on the critical point. It wouldn't really fall because the atmosphere would have approximately the same density as the water and it would be constantly entering and exiting liquid phase as the temperature and pressure shifted locally. ",
"The thing you're asking for is called \"[Probable Maximum Precipitation](_URL_0_)\" and is defined for different areas and time periods. The shortest period and smallest area you're going to get an answer for is 6 hours and 10 mi^2, respectively. \n\nThe numbers are remarkably high - for the northern midwest the 24-hour 10 mi^2 PMP is on the order 30\", which is near the mean annual rainfall. For comparison, the 100-year 24-hour storm in the same region is roughly 7\". \n\nWhat controls the PMP is that there is nowhere near that much moisture in the atmosphere at any given time - from the earth's surface to the top of the atmoshere at any given point there's only enough moisture, roughly, to create 1 inch of rain. So to get more than that you have to transport moisture in from the oceans, and the air currents that carry that moisture only move so fast. \n\nThe link above will lead you to information on how these figures are estimated - it's complicated. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.appliedweatherassociates.com/uploads/1/3/8/1/13810758/ne-region-asdso-smethport-reanalysis.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://icons.wxug.com/hurricane/chrisburt/usarain.jpg",
"http://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/what-is-the-most-rain-to-ever-fall-in-one-minute-or-one-hour"
],
[
"http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hdsc/studies/pmp.html",
"http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228762906_A_probabilistic_view_of_Hershfield's_method_for_estimating_probable_maximum_precipitation/file/9fcfd50eb040ecebd6.pdf"
],
[],
[
"http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hdsc/studies/pmp.html"
],
[
"http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hdsc/studies/pmp.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hdsc/studies/pmp.html"
]
] |
|
9b0ii6
|
Do the Strong and Weak Forces have a field like Gravitation and EM?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9b0ii6/do_the_strong_and_weak_forces_have_a_field_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e4zh7w2",
"e4zhuxl"
],
"score": [
15,
3
],
"text": [
"Yes, but unlike gravity and EM, their fields have very short interaction lengths. They are mediated by W+-/Z bosons and gluons, respectively. ",
"The strong force has 8 gauge fields (the gluon fields). The weak force has the complex W field (so there is a particle and antiparticle), and the real Z field."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1p4kfg
|
What are some lesser known epidemics of the past?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1p4kfg/what_are_some_lesser_known_epidemics_of_the_past/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccypg6r",
"ccyqi4n",
"ccyu9r0"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The bubonic epidemic no one ever hears about: [The Plague of Justinian](_URL_0_). \n\nIt is estimated to have killed over twenty-five million people, only 25% of the casualties caused by the Black Death, but the PoJ was the first recorded instance of a (confirmed) Yersinia pestis epidemic. ",
"Everyone knows about the mortality following infectious diseases brought by Europeans to the New World, but not many people seem to know about a likely home-grown epidemic of what appears to be a viral hemorrhagic fever referred to as cocoliztli. In 1545 and 1576 the two epidemics of this pathogen killed twice as many people as the 1519-20 smallpox epidemic in the Aztec homeland.\n\nThe smallpox epidemic of the 1519-1520 decimated the population of Mexico. Estimates vary, but perhaps 5 to 8 million people perished in the epidemic. Less than a generation later, an epidemic of [cocoliztli](_URL_2_) burned through the Aztec heartland, followed by another in in 1576. We have only rough estimates of the death toll, but conservative figures put the tally for the two epidemics at 10-15 million people. \n\nThe infection was quick onset, with mortality occurring in a matter of days, and was highly contagious. Victims had high fevers, abdominal and chest pains, dysentery, seizures, and blood flowing from the ears and nose. These symptoms differ from smallpox, and doctors at the time were careful to distinguish it from the earlier epidemic. Today, the consensus is a viral hemorrhagic disease, perhaps similar to [Hantavirus](_URL_1_), was the cause of cocoliztli. Researchers have linked [climatic patterns](_URL_0_), notably a drought followed by extreme wet periods, to the timing of the epidemics, and think a population explosion of the rat host accounts for the spread, and ferocity, of the two catastrohpic cocoliztli epidemics.",
"This question is too broad for this subreddit, falling under the [no \"Throughout history\" questions](_URL_0_). However, it would be a good topic for a Tuesday Trivia feature post, so if you're interested in seeing it used that way (and credited to you), please message the mod responsible, /u/caffarelli. Thank you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_of_Justinian"
],
[
"http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2013/08/01/climate-not-spaniards-brought-diseases-that-killed-aztecs/#.UmlMpxBmQdU",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hantavirus",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2730237/"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_no_.22in_your_era.22_or_.22throughout_history.22_questions"
]
] |
||
43xvog
|
why can you only know an electron's position if you give up on knowing its momentum and vice versa?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43xvog/eli5_why_can_you_only_know_an_electrons_position/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czlvlww",
"czlvmkz",
"czm0ag8"
],
"score": [
3,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Imagine you wanted to take a detailed and clear photo of a mosquito buzzing around your room. You'd have to zoom in really close to get such a picture. Imagine then that you've zoomed in far enough so as to be able to clearly see the mosquitoes features and decide to snap a photo. What do you see? A mosquito stuck in time. How can you possibly tell from that still picture where the mosquito will fly to next or even at what speed its flying at. The same is true for the opposite. To be able to see the mosquitoes movements and speed you'd have to zoom out, but then the mosquito becomes a small insect buzzing around the room and you've lost any sense of detail and picture quality.\n",
"It's not that you don't *know* the electron's momentum and position at the same time. Electrons don't **have** well-defined momentum and a well-defined position at the same time.\n\nElectrons operate under the rules of quantum mechanics, where they actually exists as a probability wave. And the position and momentum of a subatomic particle share the same relation as position and wavelength for a normal wave: If you drop a stone in a pond, the wave radiates outward, dissipating as it goes. So you can *kind* of define its position, in a fuzzy sort of way (its position is spread out across part of the surface of the pond), and you can *kind* of give an average wavelength (but since the wave dies out as it travels, it's not super accurate either), but you don't have either very accurately.\n\nThe more confined you make the position of a ripple like that, the less-defined its wavelength becomes, to the point that a ripple that exists in a single, well-defined spot has no wavelength at all. And if you want a proper wavelength, you have to spread the wave across the entire pond, in which case the wave has no position.\n\nThat's the same relation as the one between position and momentum in a subatomic particle.",
"Imagine taking a photo of a ball in the air.\n\n[In this photo](_URL_1_), you can see exactly where the ball is. Its position is totally clear. But you have no idea of its movement. Is it falling down? Moving rightwards? No way to tell.\n\n[Now look at this photo.](_URL_0_) You can tell by the blur that it's moving vertically, so now you know its momentum. But it's so blurry that you can't tell its position. Is it at the top of that blur at that instant? At the bottom? You can't tell.\n\nTaking a photo of a ball, you can't know its *exact* position or its momentum at the same time. Same thing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_2UEe1TisJCU/TO0w2l0YGSI/AAAAAAAAAEY/DYeTh8Ap3wQ/s1600/Tennis%2BBall%2BFalling.jpg",
"http://www.wallcoo.net/sport/ball/images/%5Bwallcoo.com%5D_EL128.jpg"
]
] |
||
omav3
|
Are thoughts physical objects?
|
I know it's a strange question, but I have a hard time thinking about it. How do we see and hear thoughts, are thoughts three-dimensional?
Thank you very much for the enlightening responses, they help tremendously. For anyone else interested, this might set you on the correct path- _URL_0_ . If somebody has a more legitimate source, please post a link. I'm very skeptical of that website.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/omav3/are_thoughts_physical_objects/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3idg0j",
"c3idvr8",
"c3idyy1"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Thoughts are to your brain like Walking is to your legs.\n\nThoughts are an emergent property of brain activity, just like walking is what happens when you legs work.\n\nYour brain is a physical thing, your legs are a physical thing. Thoughts aren't, walking isn't. Can you pick up \"walking\" and put it in a jar? Where does \"walking\" go when you stop moving your legs? Do you see?",
"Thoughts are webs of electricity traveling through different sections of your brain. Most are reactionary responses to outside stimuli, and then chained together based on memories that surface during the process... \n\nI try not to think about it really; that our entire lives are just a chain of reactionary electric charges pulsing on a lump of meat...\n\nI'm sad now. ",
"They're physical, but not objects exactly, more like patterns of energy and matter moving around inside the brain.\n\nThink about a flashlight. It's a physical object. Turn it on and electricity flows through it and light comes out one end. The electricity and light are physical, but they're not objects (unless you count electrons and photons as objects).\n\nBecause our brains (and the rest of our bodies) are three-dimensional, all brain (and other bodily) activity is three-dimensional.\n\nIt *is* really hard to think about this stuff!\n\nI'm going to try to answer what I think is the heart of your question: we perceive physical objects \"out there\" in the universe. Since we perceive thoughts in a similar way, is that because they're like the \"real objects\" we perceive with our senses?\n\nThe answer is no, you've got it backward. We don't really perceive physical objects directly, we just perceive the effect they have on our brain. Thoughts, already being in the brain, aren't perceived by the senses, but more directly by the brain. So it's not that thoughts are things, more like things are thoughts.\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.edeycaldwell.com/thoughts-are-physical-things/"
] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3fzshs
|
why on mobile devices can i find nothing except live and cover songs on youtube?
|
Gunna throw my fuckin phone shortly. Even went to desktop version, found the song, switched back to mobile, video not available. Losing it here.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fzshs/eli5_why_on_mobile_devices_can_i_find_nothing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctthnmc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Youtube checks the user-agent header and blocks certain videos from appearing on mobile. Music videos seem to be a popular choice for such filtering. I don't know why it's done, but you can get around it.\n\nYou need to change your user agent header so you appear to be coming from a desktop browser. (or strip it altogether - I don't know how YouTube reacts to this but it should work). If your phone/browser is locked down and doesn't allow you to do this, and you don't want to root it, you could set up a proxy server on a Raspberry Pi or similar low-cost device, and have that spoof the user-agent for you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1py4v4
|
why is the distribution of elements on earth not uniform?
|
Its one of these questions I'm embarrassed I don't have an answer to by now. I tried googling for it and couldn't find an answer.
My logic is that seeing how the heavier elements are created from supernova explosions, I'd expect them to be scatted uniformly over the Earth, or at least uniformly over the outer layer.
Instead we have gold mines, coal mines etc.. Whats up with that?
Thanks!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1py4v4/why_is_the_distribution_of_elements_on_earth_not/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cd79ebk",
"cd79l41",
"cd79px2",
"cd7blmb",
"cd7fb9n"
],
"score": [
2,
20,
3,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"there is difference between coal and minerals. coal is now there, where were many trees/plants.\n\nminerals were \"pushed\" near surface by few things (like volcanos or seismic movement) so from this is irregularity.",
"Basically because each element is chemically unique, and therefore behaves differently to other elements in given conditions. \n\nTake for example crystallisation from a magma. As the magma cools, certain elements are able to form stable crystalline structures (minerals). Different minerals can start to crystallise at different temperatures, and different minerals have completely different chemistries. So, for example, pyroxene (which crystallises early) can crystallise out lots of aluminium, whereas quartz (which forms late) mostly only crystallises out silica. This gets even more complicated when you realise some elements can substitue for others in crystal structures, so for example [Europium can be preferentially substituted into plagiclase feldspar](_URL_0_) in place of Calcium.\n\nThis kind of chemical differentiation is very common, and there's lots of different processes in which it is important. But there's other differentiation processes too. For example, simple density sorting can be really important. The reason we find large concentrations of gold in many places is because gold-rich rocks have been eroded by rivers, and the gold grains have been deposited by those rivers simply due to density contrast. That leads to a secondary 'placer' deposit of gold which is far more enriched than the rocks from which the gold originally came. \n\nThe processes which form oceanic crust are different to those which form continental crust, so again the mineral assemblages (and therefore elemental distributions) of the two systems are very different.",
"The earth was molten for a long time after it's formation. Over the millions of years that this took, much of the heavier elements sank to the center of the earth, which is why we have a core mainly of iron and nickle. \n\nSome iron was left on the surface of the earth(or deposited by ateriods), mainly dissolved in the ocean. When Cyanobacteria evolved and started producing oxygen through photosynthesis, the oxygen reacted with the iron and sank to the bottom the ocean, causing the banded iron formations that we often mine. \n\nI don't know about other elements, but I would imagine other physical processes caused them to react and become accumulated in certain areas. \n\nA quick wikipedia search on Gold says that most of that also sank to the center of the earth and most of what we have now is from asteroids. \n\n\nAnd then there's things like coal and oil which are not natural elements but the result of dead plant life and the carbon in cells. Over millions of years plant material accumulated and at some point became trapped under the ground. Depending on the pressure and temperature generated by the earth above it, the carbon in the plant material is transformed into coal, oil, natural gas, ect. ",
"The distribution of elements on earth can be traced back to the big bang. In the beginning we only saw hydrogen(H) and helium(He). Through fission and fusion reactions the rest of our elements where produced with even numbers elements being more abundant due to the fact they are slightly more stable then the odd numbered ones. This ratio of elemental abundance can be seen as fairly standard across the universe (due to analysis of objects that made their way to earth). With all of these elements we see different density due to a range of atomic radii. In terms of elemental distribution on earth it can be seen much like adding different solids to a glass of water some will mix together some will not. Some will float due to the density difference and some will sink. The earths mantle, much like the ocean has convection cells within it can can take what maybe was a uniform disposition in early earth and turn it what we see today.\n\nTl;Dr The earth is much like the ocean, convection cells are key to dispersion. ",
"I think the other answers have missed what I think based on your wording is your primary misapprehension.\n\nWhen we say that heavy elements in the Earth were created in supernovae we do not mean that the earth was sitting here and then a supernova went off nearby and some of the material from the explosion rained down on the planet.\n\nThe supernova that created the heavy elements in the earth went off a long time (I guess billions of years although I'm not sure) before the solar system even existed. The solar system then formed from a molecular cloud which contained elements created by earlier supernovae.\n\nOnce the Earth actually formed in orbit around the sun the processes and forces that other replies talk about lead to the distribution of elements in the crust."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europium_anomaly"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
et2i2j
|
when smoking, why does your throat hurt only when you breathe in air?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/et2i2j/eli5_when_smoking_why_does_your_throat_hurt_only/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ffdqrt5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"You're breathing in hot air and chemicals that get absorbed by your lungs and cooled down by the time they're breathed out.\n\nYou should probably look into quitting it's super unhealthy :)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
d9vt3n
|
Why can Phosphate have five bonds? (More than an octet)
|
I was confused about PCl5 then I realized that phosphate can make five bonds with the chloride. I have looked this up on google and is still confused about it. Someone else explained it had something to do with hybridizations? Thank you
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/d9vt3n/why_can_phosphate_have_five_bonds_more_than_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f1ohate"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"First off, I want to say that d-orbitals are not involved in the bonding of hypervalent main group compounds like PCl5. The central atoms in molecules like PCl5, SF6, etc. still obey the octet rule. Many introductory resources claim otherwise, but there is ample computational evidence that that this is the case. I can provide references if you are interested.\n\nNow that that is out of the way, essentially what happens is that each phosphorous-chlorine bond has less than two electrons. You can have chemical bonds that have fewer than two electrons, a simple example of this is H2^+, which is a stable molecule even though there is only one electron holding the two H nuclei together.\n\nMolecular orbital theory explains this as I explained above: there are four bonding molecular orbitals that bond the phosphorous to the 5 chlorine atoms, each bonding orbital connects the phosphorous to multiple chlorine atoms. The rest of the electrons are in nonbonding orbitals on the chlorine atoms. If you know anything about molecular orbital theory, you know that this isn't strange.\n\nThe valence bond theory picture is perhaps more intuitive. You can think of molecules like PCl5 as a set of ionic resonance structures. That is, think of it as the ionic molecule PCl4^+ Cl^- with 5 resonance structures, each with a different Cl atom having the negative charge. The thing to keep in mind about resonance structures is that they do not distinctly exist: The real electronic structure of the molecule is the average of all the resonance structures together. This produces the same result as molecular theory: on average each P-Cl bond is less than two electrons."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
81powv
|
The New Testament largely covers the final three years of Jesus's life; is there any more known about the first 30 years of his life?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/81powv/the_new_testament_largely_covers_the_final_three/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dv4anl3"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"The simple answer is no.\n\nApocryphal sources exist but are universally pretty late. Even the length of Jesus' ministry isn't exactly known. We assume it was a three year ministry because of the Gospel of John, but the interesting point there is that the Gospel of John isn't a common source for information concerning the historical Jesus -- it's just too different from the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). But the synoptics do not specify how long Jesus was active. Gospel of John provides a clear time frame while the other Gospels do not. \n\nBut even the seem to disagree a lot about Jesus before his ministry. Mark has no infancy narrative, and while Matthew and Luke do both diverge in pretty significant ways. Luke's narrative include a story about Jesus as a child at the Temple while Matthew's infancy narrative is more concerned with Joseph than anything else. \n\nThe epistles are directed to communities who we can presume were already told the story of Jesus by whichever evangelist founded the community so those are more concerned with the theological implications of history. In general there's not a whole of history about Jesus there. \n\nDocuments like the Infancy Gospel of Thomas or the Protoevangelium of James do exist, but they're all later and, while interesting reads, do not appear to be historical accounts. Outside of Christian texts, when Jesus is mentioned by ancient historians Jesus is not really the focus -- there's more concern for Christians than for Christ."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3qwcl2
|
how wind can push my car sideways when my wheels are pointed straight forward?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qwcl2/eli5_how_wind_can_push_my_car_sideways_when_my/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwiw3n0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Eh? When does your car move sideways?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
avy48o
|
why is it that there are plenty of tropical small islands throughout the pacific (guam, us virgin islands, etc) but there are hardly such islands in the atlantic ocean?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/avy48o/eli5_why_is_it_that_there_are_plenty_of_tropical/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ehim7yg",
"ehimsjr",
"ehipobp",
"ehixdtp"
],
"score": [
44,
10,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"The pacific ocean is a hotbed for volcanic activity. Under water volcano explodes, creates an island, plants and animals move in. Pretty neat",
"There are a few volcanic hotspots that just happen to mostly all be in the Pacific. As the tectonic plates move, the islands shift with them, but the hotspot stays in place, resulting in island chains, like the Hawaiian Archipelago.\n\n\nThere are still some hotspots in the Atlantic Ocean, such as the Caribbean islands (not including Cuba).",
"Going down the middle of the Atlantic ocean is the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the longest continuous mountain range in the world. It's the separating point between two tectonic plates, basically one long hot spot where molten rock is constantly bubbling up from below. However, the tectonic plates are diverging, meaning they are moving away from each other. The rate of movement means the rising rock is never in place over the hot spot long enough to allow islands to form.\n\nIn the Pacific ocean there are lots of plates moving in different directions. When they push against each other it keeps rock in place long enough for it to build up out of the water to produce an island.",
"The entire Hawaiian chain and another chain of eroded islands are due to the hotspot under the Big Island of Hawaii having made islands for millions and millions of years as it drifted and the plates moved.\n\nThere are more plate tectonics going on in the Pacific than the Atlantic so more uplift and volcanic islands going on"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5wx6g9
|
how do night contacts work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5wx6g9/eli5_how_do_night_contacts_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dedhpxe"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"My understanding is they reshape the eye. The degree of how concave or convex the lens of the eye causes near sightedness or far sightedness. Sleep contacts temporarily shape your eyes back to neutral. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
thjts
|
based off of this photo that keeps going around reddit what would actually happen to the moon and this person.
|
_URL_0_
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/thjts/based_off_of_this_photo_that_keeps_going_around/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4mns6w"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Alot of shrapnel, if not that then the lack of oxygen after a couple of days."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/WRoIL.jpg"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1xzirz
|
The lack of a strong socialist party in the US linked to the absence of feudalism?
|
I've been reading various articles and a book by Lipset for the complete lack or a weak presence of a social democratic or socialist party in the United States. Hartz contends that the lack of a feudal tradition is one reason for the lack of a strong left-wing party in the United States; men were relatively 'equal' and as a result "no rigid and explicit class structure developed". However, in the American South, there is an explicit history of Black slavery, "a slave system that became a caste system, a very hierarchical social structure, and a very strong and repressive government apparatus" of which its implications continue to this day.
Assuming it didn't take deep root. why didn't socialism take root amongst African-American's in the South? Moreover, is there any difference amongst Europeans under a feudal system and African-Americans under slavery visavis the momentum of a socialist movement? Did African-Americans just lack the resources? Any ideas?
I know there's a myriad of reasons for the weakness of socialism in the US. However, I am looking for answers that are specific to European feudalism vs African-American slavery in the South. In Europe, were there relatively more workers who felt disenfranchised and had strength in numbers to mobilize? whereas in the American South, African-American slaves were relatively weaker? What accounts for the discrepancy for European peasants/workers to 'successfully' mobilize against capitalists and the failure of Black slaves in the US to fight for their emancipation early on under a banner of egalitarianism or socialism?
Observation: In Europe, the struggle against feudalism and the ravages of industrialization took on a class conscious character in a relatively homogeneous population, and this class based identity continued to develop. Some would argue that the Southern US did exhibit a feudal structure visavis the slavery of African-Americans. However I would contend that in the Southern United States, mobilization against slavery (which had qualities similar feudalism) took on a exclusively racial character, as the emancipation of Black folk, as opposed to being defined as a class struggle?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1xzirz/the_lack_of_a_strong_socialist_party_in_the_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfg48ce",
"cfhex0e"
],
"score": [
26,
6
],
"text": [
"I think the contention that feudalism was a heavy contributor to socialism is a pretty weak one. What is Lipset's evidence for that assertion? I think the rise of socialism is a heck of a lot more complex than \"the struggle against feudalism and the ravages of industrialization took on a class conscious character in a relatively homogeneous population\".\n\n\nIf we don't accept that as true, we have to look for other reasons that African-Americans didn't turn to socialism as an answer. On the other hand, it must also be remembered that the socialist movement in the United States was heavily involved in the civil rights struggle (and one of the justifications of the heavy handed FBI surveillance and infiltration of those civil rights movements).\n\n",
"Please do not ignore population density. It is such a huge factor that I don't understand how it always gets ignored.\n\nThe whole concept of social mobility or lack of a class system in the US rested or maybe still does on cheap land or homesteading, meaning theat people did not feel they are \"condemned\" to a life of being working-class employees and never starting their own business. I can't quote directly but I have heard Lincoln saying something like that the absence of a permanent working class makes American democracy possible, because after a few years of being a wage-earner people pack up and go on the frontier and become independent. What he may have meant with it, that democracy tends towards socialism in the sense that the poor will often vote to confiscating the property of the rich, but when they can just homestead land for themselves then not.\n\nEurope was basically... \"full\" for a long, long time. Sometimes wars depopulated a territory, e.g. the Ottomans parts of Hungary which means the Habsburgs brought in German settlers to repopulate those regions, but in general there was more of the indeed semi-feudal attitude that class barriers are fixed and born into because land was taken, so if your family had no property what could you do? No wealth, hardly any education meant you are working class forever. If you look at the British comedy You Rang Milord, you get the impression that it is somehow the same thing to be a Lord and own a factory. And it suggests that a working class person could not develop an own workshop into a factory because he would not have that style and dress and taste to be considered a classy gentleman, so it would be inappropriate for him to be a businessman. Working-class American millionaries who did not have gentlemanly styles and tastes and upbringing were often ridiculed in Europe up to say first decades of the 20th century, there was this stereotype of the crass Californian soap king who has money yet he talks like a working class person . So yes European capitalism was at least partially based on aristocratic elements at least in style and taste being gentlemanly.\n\nThe point I am making is simply that the lack of rigid classes in the US largely comes from low population density and thus free or cheap land, because anyone who did not want to work for others could as well become an independent farmer, a mini-agrobusinessman. In Europe if you are born working class, pretty much all the arable land is already taken, population density is so high that you could not walk 10km in a German forest without hitting a village, so you are probably staying working class.\n\nI was asking the same question as yourself from the exactly opposite angle: how is it possible that one simply cannot sell a right-libertarian, pro-capitalist political philosophy in Europe? And my answer was that due to high population densities, people do not feel independent enough, it is hard to own land, to own a house, they often feel they are stuck as employees and renters, thus the whole sense of independence needed for libertarian thinking does not appear, they think they are stuck with the boss and the landlord forever so they want them to be regulated.\n\nConsider the following. Victor David Hanson wrote a nice elegy about how his California Swedish ancestors were the perfect libertarians who always worked hard and never asked for government handouts. He just missed one, **crucially** important detail: they worked on their own land which they got back when it wa free or almost so. Why did those guys even have to move from Sweden to California and why did their relatives who stayed home probably became social democrats? In my opinion the evidence is very clear that it was population density, so free or cheap land that did the trick. They were condemned to be perpetual wage laborers in Sweden because all the good land was taken, which predisposes one towards socialism, they could find cheap or free land in California so basically they could work their own land, farm it and become middle-class, independent agri-businessmen, so for them accepting libertarian values was easy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
21qt5m
|
why do we still take test and learn the same as how people did in the whole of history when technology has advanced so far?
|
Technology has advanced to the point memorizing some things has become redundant. Is there no better way?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21qt5m/eli5_why_do_we_still_take_test_and_learn_the_same/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgfmaji"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Learning has advanced a great deal since formal education began. There are some things that have become redundant, and some things may seem useless. For instance, why bother learning that there are 4 quarts in a gallon when I can just look it up? But many people, myself included, would argue that a fundamental understanding of the simple elements is necessary for an understanding of the complex. Albert Einstein wouldn't have been able to come up with the things he had if he hadn't been good at math (he didn't actually fail math, that's an urban legend). Facts tend to rest on other facts in our minds, and rote memorization doesn't lead to understanding; a book can contain all the facts in the world, but it doesn't come up with new ideas."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3hv6j3
|
why is norway so horrendously expensive?
|
I just don't understand why everything in this country is so expensive - more than any place I have ever visited and I have done some international traveling. It's not like the country is in the middle of nowhere and has to import everything, they have oil reserves and great income from tourism. I was just riding the train with a nice lady from Tokyo and she said that it is 3 times more expensive than Tokyo, which I previously thought was the most expensive place in the world. Would someone explain what drives the high cost in this gorgeous, awesome country that I am thrilled to be visiting? Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hv6j3/eli5_why_is_norway_so_horrendously_expensive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuatg31",
"cuatiws"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"It is difficult to transport anything to Norway because the land is very difficult to traverse and the sea can be incredibly rough. However though it does have large income from oil it also has an extremely generous social welfare system and that means high taxes and that means expensive goods and services.",
"I think it has something to do with their ridiculously high taxes which support some really expansive government programs like their national health care and national child care systems."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
b3u5x9
|
Prior to the rise of Ataturk, what made someone in the Ottoman Empire a “Turk”?
|
Ataturk himself was born in modern day Greece, yet he identifies as a Turk. What was a Turk in the Ottoman Empire? What culture binded them together? And did they feel as if the Ottomans failed them too as the other groups under the Ottomans did?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/b3u5x9/prior_to_the_rise_of_ataturk_what_made_someone_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ej2j3q3"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Short answer: ethnicity and language (both in place well before the 19th century), plus some negative experiences with other nationalities (mostly in the 19th-20th centuries, triggering the rise of Turkish nationalism.) When you read the memoirs of the future political and military leaders of Turkey, at one point almost all of them mention a story like this:\n\nThe young X (the future leader) enters an elite Ottoman school/military academy. There he meets others from different parts of the Empire. He witnesses how Albanians, Arabs (insert any other nationality here) create societies and promote their national culture. Yet he does not belong to any of these groups, and often he insists on the shared Ottoman identity. He feels alienated. At some stage, he thinks this does not work anymore (1912 Albanian independence and the Arabic revolt during WW1 being primary turning points for many, apparently) and he becomes more Turkish than Ottoman. This general story is repeated so many times that it is fair to say the Turkish identity resurfaced in the late 19th-early 20th century as a negative reaction to other nationalisms.\n\nWhat Turkish culture is probably a question too deep for me to delve into here. The native tongues seem to have played a vital role in reinforcing unity among ethnic groups in the Empire, so Turkish as your native tongue (which often even though not always meant you are ethnically Turkish) plus undergoing experiences similar to the story I told made people Turks. A reminder though: it is simply a mistake to suppose that such individuals and modern states created the national identity of Turkishness. There are several much older occasions in which people spoke of themselves as \"Turks\" and clearly regarded others as non-Turkic/Turkish \"others.\" A 15th century Ottoman chronicle by Mehmed Neşrî Efendi, for example, describes how Murad I of the Ottoman Empire said he ached to showcase “the Turkish manliness” against the Serbian Army, in the 14th century! So what we are talking here about is the Turkishness as understood from the late 19th century onwards but “Turkishness” itself has deeper roots in history. \n\nFinally, I do not think that most ordinary Turks felt failed or ignored by the Ottomans. They did not really think of the Ottomans as someone else either, it seems. There was a time following the foundation of the Republic of Turkey in 1923 when the state sought to instill such a mentality (now largely exaggerated for modern political purposes). Indeed, there are speeches by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in which he criticizes how the Ottoman conquests were merely for the benefit of the Palace and the Sultan but at the cost of much Turkish blood. The Ottoman past was often used as a yardstick to demonstrate the success of the Republic, one success being the more clear expression of Turkishness in the Republican era. But at the end of the day, I highly doubt even the elites regarded the Ottoman Empire as an enemy per se. The confrontation with the Ottoman past in the Republic of Turkey never reached levels witnessed in the French Revolution or in the Soviet Union. It was never an issue of nationality alone anyway since the Ottoman past was often criticized also for not being secular, modern and independent enough too.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
x3vdo
|
I hoped this isn't looked down upon in this subreddit, but I think that it's inevitable. Either way, I'm curious. How accurate are the age of empire games?
|
I assume that some of the 30,000 of you have played it, and I know that the game is hugely based on history, but are they entirely accurate? Do you think they did a good job?
When I ask this, I want to include all 3 of the games into consideration.
I don't know much about it, but I really like what they did in the third game with having the Indian campaign refer to the British East Indian Company's control of India.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/x3vdo/i_hoped_this_isnt_looked_down_upon_in_this/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5iy8y5",
"c5j3fw3",
"c5j6kcj",
"c5j6kom",
"c5j8621"
],
"score": [
12,
7,
3,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Off the top of my head:\n\nAge of Empires 3 is completely made up.\n\n* Specifically, there were no Ottomans in the New World and no Russians except on the Pacific Coast\n\n* The Ottomans did [invade](_URL_1_) Malta in 1565. New Brunswick is a real place.\n\n* The [Sepoy Rebellion](_URL_2_) really did happen, and I remember some of the reasons for it being depicted accurately in the game. The campaign ends before getting to the bloody bad ending, though.\n\n* The China campaign is based on fanciful [speculation](_URL_0_) \n\nAge of Empires 2 used more real history in its campaigns, but took significant liberties as well. I think most of the battles really happened but were nothing like as depicted in the games, such as the [siege of Acre](_URL_3_)\n\nAs far as I know the weapons, units, buildings, and nations in the games are mostly real. Though in Age of Empires III most of the national leaders were not alive at the same time.\n",
"Playing Age of Empires to figure out history is like playing Warcraft to figure out the plot of Lord of the Rings.",
"The encyclopedia in AoE2 was really solid, taught me much the younger version of me would never have learbed otherwise. ",
"It has been a very long time since I played, but I remember the stories surrounding the campaign modes being fairly accurate.\n\nAll the factions were real and existed at some point. Often they did not exist simultaneously--AOE is the most egregious offender, with the Shang and the Romans--the game sometimes uses weird names (like Saracens and Tuetons).",
"\"So! You have come to hear the tale of Frederick Barbarossa?\"\nI can't tell you that these games are particularly accurate, but they helped plant the seeds which created a love of history for me."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Malta_%281565%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sepoy_Rebellion",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Acre_%281189%E2%80%931191%29"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7m9evl
|
if trees initially were non-biodegradable, and a fungus adapted to degrade them could the same be done for plastic?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7m9evl/eli5_if_trees_initially_were_nonbiodegradable_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drs9y00",
"drs9yi5",
"drsa3nh"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Sure and we are working on it. But its a slow process and we are producing literally thousands of tonnes of plastic every day. \n\nRecycle.",
"Yes! Exactly this is being done, and micro-organisms have already been bred that (for example) love to eat spilled petroleum. ",
"_URL_0_\n\nThis was recently covered in today I learned and a few times in r/askscience"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/7lbulh/til_for_the_first_40_million_years_that_woody/drl2t2h/"
]
] |
||
1g9n08
|
what is software and how does it all work?
|
Ashamed to say this - but totally clueless - how does software work? For that matter hardware too. So guess my question is all about computing? I hear these terms - application, server, middleware. How do they all work together? When I read something like - "x application was built on top of y server" - what does that mean? I know the majority of the Reddit community is tech savvy - so please explain this to a dummy like me. I want as much detail as possible, in an understandable way, with any helpful links or illustrations. So something like - first there was __, then there came___ - like that simple. Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1g9n08/eli5what_is_software_and_how_does_it_all_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cai3gyu",
"cai649r"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"That's a **very** broad question, so rather than go into detail, I'll just give some very high-level answers, and you can ask for clarification as needed.\n\n > how does software work?\n\nSoftware is simply a set of instructions for a computer to follow. The \"how\" is fairly complex, but it boils down to setting voltages on billions of tiny circuits inside the computer in a very specific way.\n\n > For that matter hardware too\n\nHardware is generally composed of billions of transistors, which are like tiny electrical \"switches\". A signal to one part can switch the transistor on or off, allowing other signals to either be blocked or allowed through.\n\nUsing transistors, you can build logic gates: circuits that perform operations like AND (give a high-voltage output only if both of the inputs are high-voltage), OR (give a high-voltage output if *either* of the inputs are high-voltage), NOT (give a high-voltage output for a low-voltage input, and vice versa), etc.\n\nUsing logic gates, you can build slightly more complex things, like adder circuits that can add binary numbers.\n\nUsing those more complex circuits, you can build even more complex things, like a CPU that can act on certain pre-defined instructions.\n\n > I hear these terms - application, server, middleware.\n\nAn application is just a piece of software, and is generally used to describe something that needs an operating system to run (the Operating system itself is just a very complex bit of software, but is generally not referred to as an \"application\"). Internet Explorer is an application, for instance. So is iTunes. And Steam. And anything else that your computer can run.\n\nA server is a computer that is set up to listen for network requests and respond to them (usually \"serving up\" webpages, hence the \"server\" name).\n\nMiddleware is a bit abstract. It's specialized software that exists to make it easier for other types of software to communicate with each other.\n\n > When I read something like - \"x application was built on top of y server\" - what does that mean?\n\nIt's hard for me to say without knowing what X and Y are. My guess is that they're using the other definition of \"server\" that I haven't mentioned. Software that takes requests and sends responses is also referred to as a \"server\". For instance, when you check your email, your computer contacts the \"mail server\". In one sense, this describes the computer that is responding with your email. But in the other sense, the \"mail server\" is the specific application/software running on that computer that does all the mail-related stuff. The same computer might also serve up web pages, and the application that does that would be a \"web server\". The computer itself can be referred to as either a \"mail server\" or a \"web server\" depending on context (though it's pretty standard just to call it \"the server\").\n\nAlso, the opposite of a \"server\" is a \"client\". Whatever application/computer consumes messages sent by a server is referred to as a client. So Internet Explorer is a \"web client\", for instance. If you play online games, the game software itself is a client.\n\nSo \"x application was built on top of y server\" probably means that \"x application\" is some type of middleware that acts as both a server and a client, taking requests from other programs, modifying them somehow, and passing them on to \"y server\".\n\nBut again, without specifics, it's hard to say for certain.",
"Thanks to all who replied - for your time and answers. And for not putting me down for my lack of knowledge."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1u2p2s
|
why do different regions of usa sell varying octanes of gas? i can buy 85 octane in idaho, but can't find anything less than 87 in arizona.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u2p2s/eli5_why_do_different_regions_of_usa_sell_varying/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cedx6c9"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Elevation.\n\n\"Octane\" is a description of how much compression the fuel can be put under before it spontaneously ignites. The higher the octane number, the more pressure the fuel can take before it just ignites. An engine wants to take the fuel/air mixture as close to this point as possible (but not past it) before the spark plug sparks and lights the fuel. This (I think) ensures the most power for a given amount of fuel.\n\nWhen you go to a higher elevation (like the mountains in Idaho), the air is thinner. This means the pistons in the engine can't compress the air as much. Since the pressure in the engine can't go as high, you need to use a fuel designed to ignite at a lower level of compression, a.k.a. a lower octane number."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
tat36
|
what causes laziness? is it a physical condition?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tat36/eli5_what_causes_laziness_is_it_a_physical/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4l0zib",
"c4l1880",
"c4l1dk9",
"c4l1k55",
"c4l1rwr",
"c4l1wba",
"c4l321l",
"c4l32ob",
"c4l3ent",
"c4l3h23",
"c4l4pva",
"c4l593p",
"c4l5chj"
],
"score": [
16,
8,
616,
15,
10,
5,
14,
8,
2,
3,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Recent studies show a link to [dopamine](_URL_0_) which is a brain chemical. ",
"A lack of feeling of self-efficacy or not feeling that your actions are effective in producing the results you want. ",
"I guess everyone is too lazy to reply, OP. There are some good explanations for this, but my vague, non-scientific understanding is, it is indeed a physical condition, one that we inherited from our ancestors. I'm sure you can find a more technical/accurate/correct explanation of this, but here's the gist of it.\n\nOur brains have a vulnerability that makes it extremely easy to get addicted to things. Watching TV can stimulate you (you are rewarded with dopamine). The more TV you watch, the more you want to watch it. The brain is rewiring itself to crave TV, because it was a source of dopamine release. Why does the brain do this? Because it worked to our ancestors favour. Their brain would be wired to be 'addicted' to gathering food, because it was necessary for survival and even the act of simply gathering the food would be rewarding to them, giving them a higher chance of surviving the next drought. This routine of gathering now becomes ingrained.\n\nSo after a while, any moment you are not watching TV, your brain will be agitated, because your primitive brain isn't doing something it thinks is useful (because you're not getting dopamine) so you will crave TV. So basically, you are addicted to a low energy, highly stimulated state, it's as simple as that. Ever notice that you browse reddit for hours, even when you've seen everything, and there's nothing even remotely enjoyable about it? It's your brain telling you \"keep looking, you'll find it! (dopamine)\". As your brain continues to rewire itself, it also starts to cull the circuits in the brain that it deems 'un-useful', such as the ability to learn. Soon, TV will be the only thing that gives you a dopamine fix, which means everything else in the world will seem boring, and this is the root of laziness.\n\nOur brains are still plastic, however. Abstain from TV for a long enough time and you will no longer be addicted to it. Don't game for a few years, you will never be compelled to game again. \n\nHere's a study that examines the physical changes in the brain when addicted to internet use, and the similarities to drug addiction: _URL_0_\n",
"If you describe laziness as \"not wanting to do things that you dislike\", then I think that answers the question in itself. I dislike an action, therefore I choose not to do it. Some people are able to recognize that they should do things they dislike but do them anyway, like exercise or study for school. But others don't care/want/think that the outcome is worth the cost of action. So they just don't.\n\nIMO it comes down to a matter of perception. The way you *think* causes you to be lazy or not, but even the word itself is subjective. ",
"Depression, Stress, Dopamine Addiction are one of many top valid reasons to why a person is lazy. ",
"I don't know if laziness itself is a physical condition exactly, we don't seem to have too much real information on it. Many animals are fairly sedentary when their resource needs are already met, though. Perhaps it has something to do with conserving energy. Fatigue, on the other hand, which is sometimes mistaken for laziness, most certainly is a physical condition. Fatigue is an inability to make use of muscle strength to the degree that wouldn't be expected considering the person's physique. It can make it hard to lift things, to walk around, or even just to get out of bed. It can be temporary, due to a minor illness, or it can be chronic due to something more serious, ranging from autoimmune diseases to cancer to mood disorders.",
"Humans have evolved to be lazy about anything but survival. This was for good reason - getting carried away wasting energy on non-survival tasks was a luxury you couldn't afford when food was scarce.\n\nNowadays, we can trivially meet all our survival needs. It takes no effort at all. Our bodies thus don't want us to do anything - they want us to sit on the couch doing nothing just in case there's an emergency and we need that saved energy.\n\nThe biggest first-world problem is that our bodies don't like living in first world countries.",
"It's natural to try to find the least energy-consuming route which fills all of your needs, it makes sense evolutionarily to live while requiring as little food as possible by not wasting calories unnecessarily.\n\nThere's a study floating around the internet somewhere about chimps who were taught to paint for money (which could be spent on food etc). The chimps originally enjoyed painting, but eventually they realised that they would get paid no matter how little effort they put into it, and so they started to try to do the absolute minimum required to get the money, and stopped enjoying it. I think humans are the same, with all things we perceive to have rewards (that use up energy). Low energy pursuits like watching TV and surfing online are easier to persuade our body to do because it knows we'll waste less calories doing it than other activities, while still getting a reward.",
"Despite better responses than my own, I wanna post. So there.\n\nI heard about this on a Nat Geo program about huma nevolution. Basically laziness is the evolutionary way to conserve energy. Do as little amount of physical activity, and you need less energy = less food = less time hunting/scrounging for food = less danger.",
"It's often a question of what people are motivated by. For example, in a classroom, some people are motivated by getting an A. These people will study hard and do all the homework so that they get the A, even if they don't fully understand what they are doing.\n\nOther people are motivated by understanding the subject instead. They will study hard to understand the basics, but not worry about details, and then they happily get a B, but end up having a much better understanding than the A students. \n\nSo each of these groups might consider the others lazy...",
"This is definitely an /r/askscience question.",
"Low blood methylphenidate levels. ",
"This is indirectly why I take Adderall. For a free dopamine spike. Try to avoid judging me too quickly, because I know that sounds like I abuse it, but I only have a small Rx and it is legitimately for ADD. But if you think about it, the extra dopamine and therefore \"reward\" the brain is getting, helps one focus on mundane tasks, which is why it works.\n\nThe brain is \"rewarded\" or at least feels like it is rewarded, no matter what task you undertake, because the Adderall is providing the dopamine the brain so desperately wants. Even if I am reading a boring article on a topic I have no interest in, or painting the walls in my house, my brains still says \"this is cool, I like this\" since I have that extra dopamine.\n\nDopamine spike = motivation basically. The motivation you need to mow the lawn, clean the house, do your homework, whatever else you normally put off or never do otherwise."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.livescience.com/20026-brain-dopamine-worker-slacker.html"
],
[],
[
"http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/addicted-scientists-show-how-internet-dependency-alters-the-human-brain-6288344.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
214xta
|
What was the basis of the Nazi war machine? How did the managed economy of the Nazis work?
|
I was reading [about cash and carry](_URL_0_), which stated that the Germans had no funds for their war effort. I further understand that the Nazis had a managed economy. Why was the German managed economy more successful than the USSR's managed economy of the 1970s and 80s? How did the Germans keep up in research, resource production and manufacturing for so long? Why was their managed economy successful in bringing them out of the Great Depression so much sooner than the US?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/214xta/what_was_the_basis_of_the_nazi_war_machine_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg9p4kk"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The Nazis did not nationalize all off industry; now they forced Jews to sell their businesses for peanuts to non-Jewish owners, under the policy of Aryanization/Arisierung - that was in 1938.\n\nHowever they placed limited on what owners could do with their property, effectively the nazi state managed an increasing part of the economy - this tendency began in 1936 (the Nazi's had a four year plan between 1936-40); from 1939 this the economy switched to war economy and between 1942-45 most of the economy was managed directly by the state.\n\nFor instance farmers would be told what they should plant (they also did price fixing), and factories would be told what to produce; however the old manager was still in charge, provided he was not Jewish. \n\nMuch of the free market was gradually abolished; by 1936 prices and salaries were fixed; the central bank lost its independence; etc.\n\nMuch of the prewar years was based on deficit spending; actually the Bruehning government started this, but because of Versaille/Young plan he was not allowed to finance these measure by inflation. The measures were efficient at stopping unemployment; however the planning body was a mess of different interest and priorities, the office of the four year plan (Goehring) would quarrel with leader of war economy (Schacht) vs. Wehrmacht officials, etc.\n\nAlso deficit spending had the result that there were no currency reserves left by 1939.\nSo it is correct to say that eventually the business plan of the Nazi system was war, also planning went for war in 1939; the second four year plan would have ended early in 1940, the object of the plan was to create a self sufficient economy/decrease dependence on imported raw materials and to prepare for war.\n\n----\n\"Deutsche Wirtschaft und Wirtschaftspolitik 1914 - 1945\" Prof. Dr. Rainer Goemmel\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_and_carry_\\(World_War_II\\)"
] |
[
[
"http://www-wiwi.uni-regensburg.de/images/institute/angegliedert/goemmel/Deutsche_Wirtschaft_und_Wirtschaftspolitik_1914-1945-komplette_Vorlesung.pdf"
]
] |
|
1i628l
|
how to talk to children
|
Usually ages 5-12
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1i628l/eli5_how_to_talk_to_children/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb1c6g6",
"cb1ct3q",
"cb1ctfz",
"cb1huz7",
"cb1k8jn"
],
"score": [
9,
15,
8,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Use simple words, but otherwise talk to them the same way you'd talk to a regular person. If they don't understand, they'll let you know - they're kids.\n\nAlso, some people tend to talk to children like they're stupid. They're (usually) not. They just don't have your experience or command of the English language. Most kids are reasonably perceptive; they pick up on context, draw inferences, and take visual cues in communication just like an adult.",
"Reading your username makes me question your intentions. ",
"First of all, don't tell them your name is ANAL_ANARCHY.",
"That's a pretty wide range. I was a counsellor at a day camp , and these are the differences I saw: \n\nAge 5-8ish: Explain things calmly, ask them what they like - like the things they like. Ask questions, answer questions. Be kind. Granted I was in a very specific circumstance, but generally all my interactions felt slightly \"parental\". \n\nAge 8 -12: Act like they're you. Growing up, I hated being talked down to. They'll ask if they don't understand something. ",
"No one here said to squat down and talk to them at eye level. It helps them take you more seriously without them feeling threatened by grownups they don't know."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
apsr8l
|
did thousands of people die trying 'food' that we now know is poisonous?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/apsr8l/eli5_did_thousands_of_people_die_trying_food_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egaumyy",
"egax0k6"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably. And more than a few avoided food that we know is fine. Many people in Europe in the 1400s thought fruit was slightly poisonous and shouldn't be given to young children. Many people used to think tomatoes were toxic.",
"Probably more like tens of millions, especially when it came to spoiled food. If someone ate cheese it means someone else ate rotten meat and fish."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
phqs3
|
When people say some metals are "better" at conducting electricity what does this mean, do they conduct faster or more efficiently?
|
Also what effect does this have on a normal circuit, I.E. if you replaced a house's copper wiring with silver wiring? Thanks for your time!
Edit: upvotes for all thanks guys!! :)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/phqs3/when_people_say_some_metals_are_better_at/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3plk6r"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Both. The conductivity of a material is the constant that relates the current per unit area to the applied electric field. σ = J/E. So using a more conductive material you could design a circuit that moves the same amount of current using a weaker field (more efficient) or moves more current at the same field (faster) or somewhere in between."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1f6i12
|
3g/4g.
|
Basically, how does 3G/4G work? Is there just a magical satellite? I don't understand and wikipedia hurts my brain so...Really, please actually explain it like you would to a 5 year old.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1f6i12/eli5_3g4g/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ca7aelp",
"ca7cch6",
"ca7d321",
"ca7d44g",
"ca7kton"
],
"score": [
20,
10,
768,
13,
2
],
"text": [
"Awesome question!\n\nBasically, telecom companies install cell towers, which allow you to connect your phone with a wireless connection. Similar how you connect a laptop to a wifi access point, you connect your phone to a cell tower.\n\nIf you're close to the tower, and your phone is set up to connect to that particular type of tower, you get a connection. The tower is connected to the internet with wires, and everyone is happy.\n\nHope that helps :)",
"3rd generation and 4th generation. Some phones and cell phone carries still use 3rd generation speeds(3g) and technologies while others use 4th generation(4g) speeds and tech which is faster. It's like the internet then verses the internet now. Like Verizon DSL I think only offers 1.5M/s while the newer fast fiber services can offer much much more.",
"That's a pretty broad question. I think it's really 3 questions in one, so I'll try to tackle each one individually.\n\n\n**What's the difference between 2G, 3G, and 4G?**\n\nImagine there is a deliver service. At the beginning they have a very basic setup of just a few horses that run on small local roads. It can only deliver a small amount of packages a day because of constraints on the delivery center, the amount you can put on your horses, and the 1 lane roads you're stuck using. That's basically 2G or EDGE service.\n\n\nA few years later after government regulators agree that they're doing a good job and will help widen the roads and everyone thinks it's a good time to update the entire delivery centers and buy some trucks. Now everyone have a much larger facility for moving packages/data from point A to point B. There are also new larger trucks that can fit more per load, and the roads are now bigger for everyone to drive more load through. Great! You've got 3G! \n\n\n3G operates pretty fast but soon everyone and their mom want to send packages so the government says ok, we'll reserve some highway space, some 16-wheeler trucks, and automated systems in delivery centers to get packages moved as quickly as possible. Now you're at 4G speed, you can now move A LOT of data at once.\n\n\nIn this analogy the delivery centers are the switch centers at the major telecom companies. To move more data through with each new generation of service (2G, 3G, 4G) the equipment need to be updated. The roads in this are basically spectrum frequency. Which are regulated by the government/FCC. The feds have to sell or free up additional spectrum for telecom companies to operate more data on the higher frequency channels. Trucks are basically the underlying internet backbone that can accommodate for more and faster data transmission. Without all 3 upgrading almost at the same speed, it's impossible to move from from one generation to the next. Also, your cell phones have to upgrade to the latest generation of processors too because high data-speeds require faster chips to process it. \n\n----------------\n**So how does my cell phone communicate data wirelessly?** \n\nThink of your phone as a just like a mailbox that you leave a request letter in the morning for Youtube. The delivery guy picks up your letter requesting a large order of videos from Youtube and delivers it to them. In the letter you ask \"Please send me a video on XYZ to my address.\" When Youtube gets your request via the delivery service, it will package it all up and send you the video as many large packages. Depending on the speed of the delivery centers, size of the trucks, and width of the road the packages can arrive slowly one by one or really fast almost instantaneously. 2G, 3G, and 4G are just different agreed upon standards the service centers, trucks, and roads that are built. The newer generations are faster at delivering packages. \n\n\nThink of your phone as almost like a mailbox. With each new generation of technology, it has to be bigger, stronger, and more automated to support all the packages/data that you've ordered. If you have an old phone that's using 2G, it's pretty much like a tiny mailbox that the deliver service just says \"Nope, it won't be able to handle the load. If you want to use our 3G service, upgrade it so we can fit these larger boxes in.\"\n\n\n------------------\n**How does the data go from your phone to the receiving tower and then get moved to Youtube?**\n\nScatter around the entire world are cell phone towers, hundreds of thousands of them. They're like listening stations that can talk directly with your phone when it's near. When you turn your cell phone one or walk within range of a new tower, the phone will ask \"who's the closes cell tower?\" A lot of towers will reply by shouting back \"Tower XYZ, I'm here!\", \"Tower ABC, I'm here.\" Depending on how clear your phone hears the response, your phone will start a conversation with one that has the highest quality connection and sounds the clearest. Each cell phone tower is connected to a landline that's hookup to the internet. It acts as an intermediary that passes on your request from the phone, to the tower, from the tower through the landline, into the internet, and through to Youtube. Youtube then replies, passes the video right back. No magical satellite is needed unless you're somewhere super remote and it's cheaper for the cell tower to talk to the satellite than it is to lay down some land lines to the tower.\n\n\nIf you want to get a bit more technical, 3G and 4G differences are more than just more bandwidth but requires all new equipment by the cell phone carriers to handle all of the new extra load. It takes forever for some places to move to 4G from 3G because of the cost of setting up new infrastructure. Upgrading costs millions of dollars that require faster computers, more expensive connections, and new software to handle everything. None of it is cheap or easy. Which is why it's taking forever for 4G to move forward.\n\n\nIf I made any technical errors, please excuse me, I'm trying to remember as much as I can from college 11 years ago.",
"I expected to learn so much about the technological differences between the different data types, 2G, 3G, 4G, 4G LTE, and 4G WIMAX. So disappointed.",
"There's a very, very good talk given by a Google performance (Make The Web Fast team) guy on the efforts required to get a page to display on a cellphone in under 1000ms (1 second). It isn't ELI5-type material, but it gives a LOT of technical specs on the different cell phone modes, different technologies and the way connection setup, data transmission and screen rendering happens on a mobile device. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il4swGfTOSM"
]
] |
|
fjz4f
|
Does "smell" expand at different rate, due to surrounding temperature?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fjz4f/does_smell_expand_at_different_rate_due_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1gkab5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Absolutely. When you smell something, molecules from whatever source you're smelling are in your nose. But they had get there from the source - they had move. As it happens, temperature is actually a measure of molecular motion; when things get hotter, the molecules are moving faster. And if the molecules are moving faster, they get to your nose faster."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2ejkw8
|
Why did American snipers in World War 2 were given the Springfield 1903 when the M1 Garand uses the same type of ammunition and is Semi-Automatic?
|
Why did American snipers in World War 2 given the Springfield 1903 when the M1 Garand uses the type of ammunition and is Semi-Automatic?
EDIT: a word
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2ejkw8/why_did_american_snipers_in_world_war_2_were/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck0ajjb",
"ck0m7qe",
"ck0yvbb"
],
"score": [
45,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Short answer. Because that's what they had on hand. \n\nShort answer number 2. Because nobody had bothered developing the M1 as a sniper platform until late in the war.\n\nLong answer. Well, nobody was bothering with the M1 until late in the war. Seriously, that's about the gist of it. None of this mess about \"Semi autos being inherently inaccurate compared to bolt rifles\" (The Russians would like to introduce you to the SVT 40, and some of the lovely and lethal ladies who used it to great effect on the Eastern Front) or pinging clips and such. \n\nWhen the US entered WWII they didn't even have enough M1 Garands to go around yet, famously the Marines started the war with a large quantity of 03 Springfields on hand, as they had yet to fully transition to the M1. The first priority was getting standard M1's out to all the troops, and ramping up production of them to match the needs of the rapidly growing armed forces.\n\nSo, when a sniper rifle was needed, it was simpler to use the existing 03 Springfield platform to use as sniper rifles. They had been built in sniper configurations before, the tech was all worked out, there was a ton of civilian knowledge on how to turn them into scoped rifles. It was easy, simple and straightforward. The M1C and D rifles didn't make an appearance until 1944 and beyond, because of the need to first focus on getting standard rifles to the troops, and the fact that an entire program of turning the M1 into a sniper rifle had to be started up. \n\nThe M1 C and D were standard sniper rifles during the Korean War, and served quite well there, which should settle the myth of the weakness of a semi auto platform as a sniper rifle. You can also see the Russians have fielded many successful semi auto sniper rifles, such as the SVT 40, and the famous Dragonuv. The M1 was not a standard sniper platform in WWII, because it had not been developed as such yet, nothing more, nothing less. \n\nAre bolt guns more inherently accurate? On off the shelf rack grade units? Probably. But when you start building match grade semi auto and bolt action rifles, I don't think it really matters anymore. Modern out of the box AR 15's get exceptional accuracy, and it's not uncommon to find or build sub MOA units for competition or varmint hunting. It's not the action of the gun, as much as it is the way it is built. ",
"Here is a [good article](_URL_0_) on the development of the M1 Garand sniper rifle. Note that it wasn't until 1943 that they even thought about developing one as a sniper. The first prototype was rejected because it was an unsatisfactory attempt to use existing off the shelf components that were largely incompatible with how the Garand operated. After the first prototype, the Army developed a series of guidelines specifying how the scope was to be placed, and how the weapon should function in terms of adjusting eye relief of the scope, use of iron sights and ability to easily insert a fresh clip. The ultimate end result were the M1C and D snipers used late in the war and in Korea. ",
"Aside from some of the excellent info already listed here, I've seen no mention of the nature of the Garand receiver's method of loading compared to the Springfield.\n\nThe Garand loaded from the top in an 8 round en-bloc clip, which meant that any optic mounted on its receiver had to either sit significantly forward of the action or off to one side. Neither of these is conducive to accuracy, even if an experienced shooter on another platform may be able to adapt to it with practice.\n\nThe Garand's direct descendent, the M14, was much better suited to a sniper role (and has filled this role from Vietnam to the present day in US service). It is fed from a 20 round box magazine underneath the receiver rather than on top, so any optic mounted to it can sit in a more conventional location. Two highly accurized versions, the M21 and M25 feature heavily in long range lore, with the name Carlos Hathcock coming up often.\n\nWhile it's now possible to make a semi-auto rifle as accurate as a bolt gun, there aren't a lot of people who would doubt that a bolt gun can be fitted to a sniper role for a lot less money than a semi-auto. It's worth looking into the M24 program, which didn't come around until the late 1980s, and was based on the Remington 700 bolt action rather than the large reserves of M14 receivers that the DOD already had in inventory. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.nramuseum.org/media/940657/sniper%20garands.pdf"
],
[]
] |
|
4bbtwe
|
why are asians buying real estate all over the world, causing a housing crisis in various cities?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4bbtwe/eli5_why_are_asians_buying_real_estate_all_over/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d17pqb0",
"d17pwri",
"d17qhj4",
"d17skfx",
"d17syvu",
"d17uel6",
"d17uqxh",
"d17utlo",
"d17v3x3",
"d17v4nu",
"d17vdws",
"d17ve5s",
"d17vfll"
],
"score": [
38,
24,
1219,
12,
5,
3,
11,
37,
2,
3,
6,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Because ownership of real property is, for the most part, a fundamental part of the country in which they are purchasing it in. \n\nThey do not have the ability - or confidence - to put their cash into a fixed asset that can reasonably be assured to keep its value in their own country, in particular, China.\n\nCash is fickle and does nothing in a bank (and can be seized). Ownership of property is as good as cash, especially if the market value increases over time, and if owned elsewhere is harder to seize.",
"The majority of Asia is getting more wealthy, in part (at least in China) de to a real estate bubble 10 times the size of the American one that popped last decade. The small percentage that are investing in foreign markets are preparing for the worst and rightly so. Brace yourself. ",
"It's not \"Asian\", it's only Chinese. China is about to implode and the people know it. The Chinese stock market is ludicrously overpriced because everyone in China buys stocks on margin, and when the price blips, everyone is leveraged to ridiculous levels and goes bankrupt overnight, so the blip becomes a catastrophe. People want to get their money out of China and into somewhere safe. If you have money to put somewhere, the options are real estate or offshore investment.\n\nChina is so paranoid that they will not allow people to move money out of the country, (the limit is something like $5000/day and only with a foreign passport), so that makes it impossible to *legally* invest in foreign stocks, leaving only real estate. (note that it's at the point now that Chinese companies are suing their own subsidiaries in America, so they have to pay themselves a settlement into their own American account, which *is* legal - sort of)\n\nChina is so paranoid that they will not allow people to buy land - if you buy an apartment, you don't own the land it's built on. And looking at Chinese real estate (remember those entire cities for 200,000 apartments, all of which are empty?), Chinese people are too smart to huff what the government is selling, so they need to buy real estate off shore. This is different to buying stocks off shore for legislative/tax reasons (I think the investment property is a business, but there are also people buying properties for their kids to stay in whilst studying as an excuse etc)\n\nAs for why it forms a bubble, that's because foreign governments are eyeing building industry bribes/donations/kickbacks along with wages for union members, stamp duties and other land taxes for treasuries and deciding that a bubble is a good thing.\n\nThis in turn means the people in Sydney, Auckland, Vancouver etc are buying real estate at greatly inflated prices on mortgages (i.e, buying on margin), so when housing prices here blip, everyone goes broke and the blip becomes a catastrophe. And the cycle repeats. Thanks China!!\n\n\n\nedit: For the $0.50 brigade who think China is too strong to fall: We saw exactly this happening in the 1990's with Japan. Everyone was worried that the Japanese were infinitely rich with foreign currency from their exports inflating their markets beyond reasonable levels; we said they were buying too much property, racists/nationalists were saying they were buying what they couldn't conquer in WWII. Reality kicked in, Japanese stocks fell to realistic levels, everyone went broke and the Japanese economy is, even 25 years later, in such a bad shape that interest rates are negative.",
"I'm chinese,I think I can answer this _URL_0_'s factor of culture.we think real estate is the real treasure.and home make us feel _URL_1_ the ancient china, we also kept gold, silver to keep safety.we don't trust cash,because it always devaluate.you also can hear some news of chinese collected gold all over the world.",
"Asians?\n\nThey're just the latest buyers in a real estate cycle managed by real estate agents who's made money over and over again on the same properties once sold to whites, jews, Japs etc etc. \n\nThe rich Chinese are actually paying the most for housing because they've got the most money to spend right now. Next will probably be arabs.",
"One more thing that other people haven't touched upon is that China in particularely, and most Asian countries in general, are quickly becomming much more integrated into the global trade and travel networks. Visa and integration requirements for Chinese migrants and visitors have been relaxed repeatedly over the past decade and flight connections have gotten a lot cheaper, quicker and more reliable. In fact, a retour ticket Amsterdam-Bejing is often cheaper than a retour ticket Amsterdam-New York; at roughly 500 - 700 euros for a retour ticket between Europe and China, it's very affordable even for middle class Chinese to travel between Europe and China regularly.",
"Why don't we only allow citizens to buy real estate? Many countries have this law and we have enough wealth here that it wouldn't impact local economies.",
"There's a lot of good explanations here, but I'm not sure any of it is really ELI5. I'll try. \n\nSo the Chinese economy is in a precarious position because everyone there is buying on margin. Let's say you take out a small business loan to open a sushi joint. The guy selling you fish also took out such a loan to sell fish. And the guy supplying your knives took out a loan to open a knife shop. And someone down the street has a sushi delivery business and you supply his sushi. Now imagine what happens if even one of those businesses goes away. Let's say the knife guy has a sudden financial problem (he needs knee surgery or whatever). He can't pay his loans and now he doesn't have a knife supply company. So you don't have knives. You can't make sushi without knives so you no longer supply to the guy delivering and he goes out of business, too. Also, the guy supplying your fish just lost his biggest customer, so he ALSO goes out of business, as do all the other sushi places he supplied for. That's basically the way a bubble like this bursts: one problem creates a ripple effect and before you know it it's everywhere. \n\nSeeing that this is going to happen (or fearing it) a lot of Chinese are nervous (because they saw how our own housing bubble went). But they're not allowed to invest in foreign markets and they are not allowed to own land in China, so they're putting their money someplace more stable: into real estate away from China. If china's stocks die, it won't hit real estate in other nations very hard. \n\nThis is tricky in other places because now the Chinese own a lot of land they're not using. They own houses they're not living in and buildings that they're not renting and warehouses they're not working in. So there's less housing available on the market. Because of supply and demand, this means that prices are rising despite the fact that there are not more people actually living in these places or using this property. That works a bit like this: \n\nyou and your friends go to a market to buy clothes. The guy at the stall says he can sell you shirts, which is cool, but when you get there half his stock is already spoken for and \"sold\". He's got money and he's got people who say they're coming for that sweater you want. So he has less he can sell you and he has no motivation to sell it to you for less, because he's not hurting for sales. That makes the market worse for you as a buyer, because you have less to choose from AND you have no leverage. ",
"Why does my mom own 12 houses? 3 in the same neighborhood?\n\nWhy do new land developments crop up when the old houses go unlived in?",
"Wealthy people in China taking their money out of the country. If you make obscene amounts of money you need to figure out ways to protect it so they don't really mind overpaying a bit. Plus they can send their kids overseas to live there and go to college, etc. There are so many of them that everyone notices. ",
"Because every other asset in China is a bubble or has a huge problem with it.\n\nSource: Was investment banker there for 3 years, every single deal that involved a Chinese company/asset went wrong in some way. Most of them were \"walk aways.\"",
"The housing crisis in my region is caused by 'ghost houses' people use for indoor marijuana grows. You get used to only half the homes on your street having people in them. It sucks most of all for kids, because it guarantees parents have to schedule and drive their kids to playdates because there's likely no other kids in your neighborhood. And if there are kids, and there's growing going on in the home, you'll never be invited inside, and you probably don't want your kids there anyway because a grow house is still a potential target for a home invasion or fire due to amateur electrical wiring. They really can't legalize and regulate the industry fast enough.",
"As someone from Vancouver, our provincial government is corrupt as fuck and is doing nothing to stop the foreign investments into real estate, meaning you can own a nice 1br condo in Vancouver for a cool 700k...\n\nNot to mention a lot of it is dirty money made in ways that wouldn't be legal if it wasn't made in China. A lot of people here own a nail salon, or a hair cutting place and drive a 80,000 car. Half of the new developments here sit empty and the developers are taking a huge advantage of it by building more and even going so far as to market these developments in China."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"question.it",
"safety.in"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1kt2rm
|
why can we tell an airplane is pitched up when looking straight down the aisle.
|
I know it probably has to do with our sense of balance, but its weird that you can tell even when you cant see out a window.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kt2rm/eli5_why_can_we_tell_an_airplane_is_pitched_up/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbsat1n",
"cbsawru"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Cause of your ears. Your ears have, on the inside of your skull, structures in them that are filled with fluid. The insides of these structures are lined with little sensory nerves that \"tell you\" where the fluid is. Since gravity pulls the fluid downward, these organs tell you which way is down.",
"/u/captainarbitrary nailed it. However, you may also be able to tell by the slight change in g forces. Although a good pilot (or good autopilot) can handle the plane in such a way that you only ever feel lighter or heavier, as opposed to much side to side or front to back force.\n\nFun fact, the phrase \"flying by the seat of your pants\" refers to WWI pilots that flew planes without many instruments, and used the g forces they felt in their butt against the seat to help them know what the plane was doing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.