title stringlengths 0 299 | text list |
|---|---|
How do mail-in rebates work? | [
"The benefit is the perception of a deal. Only a small percentage of the consumers follow through on. So many times a consumer will purchase something with a mail-in rebate and either be too lazy or forgetful to go through the steps of mailing it in. So, while the company has offered the money back to all, it only has to make good on that for a select few."
] |
When scientist clone animal the clone is fully grown up or is it start as a baby and then grow up? | [
"The animal starts as a baby. They aren't cloning the animal in the science fiction sense where they make an exact duplicate at the same age - what they're doing is creating a new animal embryo with the exact same genetic code as the one they're cloning. The result is that when it grows up, it's identical to the first one.\n\nScientists have made embryonic clones of humans, which is to say, an embryo that has the same genetic makeup as an adult human subject, but this was more of a 'proof of concept' - there are no human clones walking around anywhere.",
"The clone is an embryo, it then has to be implanted in a surrogate mother sheep and be born as a baby. The clone is genetically identical to the donor. No, we have not clones humans for legal and moral reasons though it would be possible by the same method."
] |
Why does it get harder to remember new things when we get older? | [
"It's more about conflicting information than about storage. Using your example, when you use a language 24/7 for 20 years you get used not only to its words, but with its structure. When you try to learn another language, you'll have to devote some time learning to not use what you already know. \n\nThings get weirder when you have to flat out un-learn something (for example, when I started my psychology degree and had to unlearn basically everything I thought I knew about how behavior works).\n\nI beg you pardon for the sometimes faulty english of a brazillian who seriously needs to sleep."
] |
How do popular highways get backed up even though everyone is going in the same direction? | [
"The volume of vehicles is the biggest issue. Only so many cars can travel on a given lane in a given time period before the car spacing is too close for the perceived comfort of the drivers. That gets compounded by lane merges, exits and entrances.",
"The problem isn't the traffic on the highway, it's the traffic entering and leaving the highway. If more traffic is entering than the road can handle, everyone behind the inlet will back up as the forward traffic has to accommodate for the incoming vehicle. If you're near a large city with a major thoroughfare, then you have to consider that the surface roads probably don't have the capacity to handle the exiting traffic. The city is congested with people trying to get to their destinations, and so traffic backs up the exit ramps.\n\nThe ways we know to deal with congestion is to carpool, live closer to work to minimize your road use, use the zipper method when merging, and self driving cars are more efficient than manually piloted vehicles. But the inherent problems remain, given enough traffic.",
"Just like a water pipe, a highway has a limited flow capacity. The usual constraint is places like exits, mergers and entrances. Each of these cause slowdowns of some sort - e.g. they contain capacity and upstream cars must wait."
] |
From a psychological/sociological perspective, why does it bother us so much to be ignored or to feel like someone forgot about us? | [
"Humans are by their nature a social animal. We evolved to be clawless, fangless, and not that strong. We are intelligent and work together in a group to cover over our weaknesses. Humans are basically a herd animal, and we derive our security from that herd. From our community, from our friends, being a part of that is something we evolved to do. \n\nBeing ignored or forgotten threatens our most base and fundamental source of safety. Evolution doesn't know you were going to be able to own a gun, that you would have a house that could keep wolves and cougars out. When man was coming down from the trees it was the complicated language, the coordinated behavior that defended him. \n\nFeeling hurt is natures way of saying don't do that thing. Whether it be getting a burn, trying to put weight on a broken leg, or emotional pain that undermines the social cohesion that protects us. Feeling sad is a state of being that makes you less likely to take chances, you're sad when you're forgotten and ignored because you're not as safe as when you have people actively caring about you."
] |
Why do numbers in digital clocks jiggle when we chew something crunchy? | [
"The digits are multiplexed. That means that each is driven in turn at high brightness for 1/6 of the time. Then the next one is turned on and so forth. It isn't normally noticed but sudden movement causes the on/off cycles to be noticed as your eyes get a slightly different image position each time. \n\nMultiplexing is used to reduce the wiring needed. Without multiplexing, you would need 6x7 or 42 signals to drive the display. (six digits and seven segments/digit). With multiplexing only 6+7 or 13 signals are needed."
] |
Why do Flights from NYC to China go North above Alaska then back down, rather than Bee line to China | [
"Because that's the shorter route. Flat maps sometimes don't do a good job of representing a spherical earth, especially at the poles. If you look at a globe, you can easily see that this is true.",
"The earth is a globe, not a flat map. The northerly route is shorter when drawn on a sphere.",
"Because that curve on the map is actually a straight line on the ground. It is called a \"Great Circle\" route, because it follows one of the straight lines that go all the way around the earth.\n\nWhen you see the direction of those flights, you realise what it means for the earth to be round. If you look at that flight's path on a [Polar Projection](_URL_0_) map of the earth, which is a map centered on the north pole instead of the equator, those 'over the pole' flights make sense.\n\nThere are two reasons why flights can now take these routes. One is that planes are now reliable enough that the cold over-water (or ice) routes don't carry too much risk; the other is the end of the cold war means that planes from the west can overfly Russia.",
"Removed as a repost, though the specific places named are not always the same."
] |
Why does tap water from the kitchen sink taste slightly different than tap water from the bathroom sink, despite having the same source? | [
"First step is a blind taste test to see if the effect is real or only in your head.\n\nGet someone to fill two glasses, one filled from each source. Then see if you can identify which glass was from which source. \n\nIf there is an effect, repeat it at other people's houses to make sure that it isnt your house's pipes specifically.",
"It depends how much each faucet is used. The one that gets the most use will collect more build up on the other side of the little screen where the water comes out, which will cause a different taste. Depending on where you live, that build up can either be regular build up like on your shower walls, or it could be literal pebbles.",
"Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: Why does water from the kitchen sink taste better than water from the bathroom sink ](_URL_2_)\n1. [ELI5 Why does bathroom tap water taste \"different\"? ](_URL_1_)\n1. [Why does kitchen sink water taste better than bathroom water? ](_URL_4_)\n1. [ELI5: Why does kitchen faucet water taste different than bathroom faucet water? ](_URL_5_)\n1. [ELI5:why does water from the bathroom tap taste different to water from the kitchen tap? ](_URL_3_)\n1. [ELI5:Why does bathroom tap water taste so much better than kitchen tap water? ](_URL_0_)",
"Check under your sink. If you're noticing a different taste, odds are your kitchen sink has a built in filtration system."
] |
Scientists say by 2050 there will be up to a 30% increase in world population, causing a 70% increase in necessary food production. Why won't there be a proportional increase in required food? | [
"Because there is a trend to move from grains and veg towards meat which require crops to be grown to fed to the animals before they can be turned into meat."
] |
How is this new forged carbon stuff stronger than traditional carbon fiber? | [
"Without going and reading about this 'stronger' typically means a specfic type of strength - how hard you have to pull on both ends to tear it.\n\nIn which case an obvious example is plastic. Plastic polymers look like a heap of tangled worms at an atomic level, and this gives them much more of a specific type of strength than could be obtained by lining them all up.\n\nIt's also responsible for the ability to bend back into the original strength, and I would suspect this forged carbon also has shape memory.\n\nIn contrast -edit- graphite is composed of parallel sheets of perfectly aligned carbon atoms and it's very easy to sheer off a chip or cut it in half because the sheets of carbon don't attract each other as much as they attract atoms in the same sheet.",
"From what I've gathered it comes down to surface area and how close those fibers get to each other. Take super glue for example, when you have to superflat clean surfaces, super glue can make a bond capable of picking up hundreds of pounds. In forged composites it seems that the fibers are alot smaller therefore higher density and surface area to bond to all the while reducing how much resin is used. \n\nYou could also think of it like two phone books where the pages are interlaced if you have ever seen that."
] |
Why does it seem that flies and other pesky household pests, get into your house so easily, but when you open a door or a window all the way they can't ever find their way out? | [
"A multitude of reasons, the main one being confirmation bias. There are billions of insects outside, if one gets inside when you left your window open for 5 hours, it probably wasn't that easy, but very very lucky. Billions more DIDN'T get inside.\n\nThough insects do get in your house for a multitude of reasons. For example, if you're cooking when your windows are open, they might be attracted to the scent. If it's dark out, and your lights are on, insects will be very attracted to the light. If it's super hot they might go in your house because it's cooler, and vice versa."
] |
What is the benefit of "pre-purchasing" a game? | [
"PC games: if the game is bought on Steam or some other DRM manager, the game is downloaded beforehand and installed, and the game is ready to be played the very minute it is released. \n\nConsole games: games bought in store have the possibility of being sold out before you have the chance to buy itit, even if you go in on the release date. Youpre-purchased copy is added to the numbers ordered by the store, and your name is written on it, so it is not sold to anyone but you. In reality, and in most cases, the company will order plenty for release. \n\nSource - worked for EB Games AU. Never again.",
"Games companies will generally offer a little more for people who pre-purchase. An extra level, or some DLC for free. Occasionally you may get early access (be allowed to play the game before it is finished), which helps to fix bugs and perhaps change the gameplay to a way that suits you better.\n\nGames companies do this to raise funds, which they can use to develop the game (eg paying the developers and QA staff). \n\nHowever, the customer runs the risk of the game not being finished, or turning out to be a stinker.\n\nAnd since the game is likely to go on sale within 1-2 years, pre-purchase is quite an expensive thing to do. If you want the game ASAP and will be paying full price when it comes out, regardless of the reviews... then pre-purchase may be for you. If you don't mind the risk of the company going bust and your money vanishing."
] |
can current events in Ukraine be considered a genocide? | [
"It's not applicable to groups of the same ethnic background, but that's not what Russia alleges. Although Ukranians and Russians are related peoples, they have since diverged into separate ethnic groups. Russia is claiming that the ethnic Russians within Ukraine's borders are being subjected to genocide.\n\n(The claim's not true; a single mob attack can be called a hate crime, but isn't on nearly the scale necessary to support a charge of genocide.)"
] |
Why do men have nipples | [
"Its simple. The default human state is female, so when the fetus is in the womb, it starts developing as if it was a female, and builds nipples. Only later do male hormones kick in and build decidedly male structures.\n\nThere is no real evolutionary advantage to NOT having nipples, and they don't cost that much to build, so natural selection has not selected against men having them.",
"Men don't just have nipples, we have mammary glands (boobs). They just never developed because there's no (or little) estrogen in our system.",
"Simple, we develop our torso (nipples included) before our sex organs."
] |
why do churches and cathedrals need buttresses but not skyscrapers? | [
"Cathedrals are made out of stone, so it isn't easily self-supported. The wall can't support much more than the weight of the wall. Also, the walls are individual stones that are loosely mortared together (assuming they are mortared). The extreme weight of the roofs pushes outward against the walls, rather than straight down. Without a buttress roughly in-line with the force, the walls would fall apart.\n\nWith skyscrapers, the support beams is most of the weight of the building. They don't have to do more than support themselves, and provide more support per pound. They have no roofs to speak of, so the weight is straight down. They also have deep foundations and support pylons to distribute the weight into the ground, which have the same function as flying buttresses, but in-line is into the ground.\n\nedit: As ZarathustraEck phrased better than I did, a cathedral is wide open, with a roof. A skyscraper is a lattice of supports all the way through it. A better modern analogy would be a stadium, which often do have buttresses (though the weight is distributed so oddly, they may not be readily visible).",
"If you're speaking of churches and cathedrals with a ton of stained glass, it's because they couldn't figure out another way to keep those walls up. We're talking about some relatively fragile walls that needed extra support, and there wasn't much inside; churches and cathedrals are mostly a shell with an open area inside for people. Bring on the buttresses!\n\nNowadays, we've got things figured out. Skyscrapers are not shells the way those old churches are, and modern engineering and materials mean we can build a pretty solid core and still make all the outer areas of the building glass.",
"Buttresses were used before we had the materials and construction knowledge to build without them. If a newer church has a buttress, it's purely cosmetic."
] |
How can an electron emit x-rays? | [
"Electrons orbit the nucleus of atoms, they can change how far their orbit is, but they need to change how fast they are going. To slow down and get closer, they need to get rid of energy. When they get rid that energy, the energy leaves in the form of a photon (what you know as a wave of light). The energy put into the photon defines if its a radio wave, light wave, X-ray etc. (X-ray is a high energy photon).\n\nThe reason it will move down is if the election is in an excited state, which happens when the atom absorbed a energy from a photon or a collision with another atom (collisions happen when the atom gets really hot)."
] |
Can someone explain to me who typically chooses the codenames for military operations? | [
"General: Why are you requesting 100,000 pairs of green tights!?\nAcquisitions Officer: It's for Operation Peter Pan sir, and it's top secret.\nGeneral: I like the cut of your jib sergeant... Approved!",
"Typically it was the job of the officer planning the mission. I believe now days it is computer selected so as to not divulge the mission objectives. But I'm not a military planner.",
"I cannot speak for the American military but the Canadian military has the operations officer in charge of drafting the Operation Order would choose the names. A lot of the time but not always they have a theme such as: brand names, super heroes etc. I do not see an advantage to computer generating the names. It's just a name and shouldn't have any indication of what the mission is if secrecy is paramount. If I have Operation Budweiser and Operation Batman could you tell from the names what I am planning to do? So long as it doesn't give away what they're doing such as: Operation Bridge Build.\n\nEDIT: Sometimes the commander in charge of a bunch of ongoing operations would give parameters for the names. So all training exercises would have to start with the letter T. All operations would start with R and maybe even split them up by area or sub-unit.",
"When I was with the Seabees, I got to pick the names for the patrols. There were 3 groups. Their names were Pink taco, Ham wallet, and Blue waffle. I giggled every time one of them called the other. Blue waffle, this is Pink taco, All conditions normal. Just that was enough to do it for me.",
"Some other choice cuts:\nOperation Beastmaster\nOperation All American Tiger\nOperation Peter Pan\nOperation Acid Gambit\nOperation Urgent Fury",
"They are picked randomly so the details of the operation are not given away."
] |
Why do most cakes and dessert recipes call for eggs? | [
"In a cake, eggs act as a leavening agent, thus making cake light and fluffy. In baked foods like cookies, muffins, etc, eggs add moisture and act as a binder. I don't eat eggs, so I always look for the eggless version of things. There are substitutes for eggs depending on what you are baking.",
"When a cake bakes, what's happening is that you're turning a liquid into a foam solid. Two things have to happen. The liquid has to solidify and as that happens it has to form gas bubbles to form the foam pockets. \n\nIn baking, living yeast is where the gas bubbles come from. Yeast is a mold of fungus that is added as a power of tiny seeds. Yeast are more active at higher temperatures and the yeast eats sugar (flour) and exhales carbon dioxide gas just like humans do. This adds bubbles so the liquid is more like soda now. \n\nBut you still need it to become a solid. Egg is made of proteins that stick to water, oil, flour - basically everything in the cake - but that also \"crosslink\" or \"thermoset\" (turn solid when heated above a certain temp). Just like it does when frying an egg in a pan. \n\nEgg cooks to a solid the same way that many plastics do. The molecular chains in the carbon molecules reach across to their neighbors and form permanent new molecular bonds - making one giant molecule. This solidifies the cake while sticking to the flour parts. This is why you can't unbake a cake any more than you can melt vulcanized rubber.",
"According to [this site](_URL_0_), eggs add structure to baked goods, act as a leavening agent, provide richness and affect the color."
] |
The relationship between Monks and beer | [
"Monks need money, people like beer, beer making is a lot sitting around in silence, monks do a lot of sitting around in silence. It's a match made in heaven.",
"* monasteries often cultivated a craft that helped them raise money...some made honey, others made beer \n* many monasteries had a tradition of fasting...beer is a fairly nutrition and filling drink that can replace food for a while"
] |
How does scam message stay open? | [
"When you click the red X, you ask the program politely to close. It's supposed to be used so programs can clean up after themselves and save your work before they quit. Poorly behaved programs, like the scam messages, can just not close down when they receive the polite request.\n\nWhen you use \"end task\" through task manager (or through a \"this program is not responding\" message), your computer stops asking nicely. It just kicks it out the door and throws whatever the program was working on in the trash, which is why that will always work."
] |
How can movies be remastered into HD when they were originally recorded in standard definition? | [
"All \"old\" films are still saved on their original film reels. Film is actually extremely high quality and still better resolution than any current digital resolution. The original reels are scanned into computer files at a high resolution, nowadays probably at 4k , and the entire movie goes through the post-production process again using current techniques. Things like scratch removal (small scratches on the physical film), color correction, visual effects, etc. Stuff that just wasn't available 20+ years ago. This gives the movie that modern look that we all are used to.",
"They weren't. They were recorded on film.\n\nYarr, ye forgot yer searchin' duties, for ['twas asked by those what came before ye!](_URL_0_)"
] |
Why do most foods taste completely different when hot or cold? | [
"1/2 of the time we eat, what we smell usually helps us define what we taste. If the food is hot, naturally it’s scent would be more present opposed to being cold.\n\nTry pinching your nose when you eat. Not the same exact effect but close.\n\nAlso, you know. Your brain and shit.",
"Same reason when you heat something up it feels different, pizza for example gets all floppy and wet, you are melting all the greases and sugars in the food changing the composition of the food."
] |
Are organs the same size for everyone or are they bigger for naturally bigger people and vise versa? | [
"While there is some amount of variance, the average dimensions and weight of organs are the same throughout all of humanity according to a rough *height* metric. A 6'5\" adult male would have about 30% larger lung size than a 5'10 adult male, assuming all other factors are \"average\".\n\nFatter people will have heavier organs due to fat deposits, but the overall size of the organs won't change based on their current weight. A 5'10\" fat person will have the same rough size/shape organs as a 5'10\" anorexic, just with extra fat.",
"Of course, Organs needs to grow proportionately to the size of the person so they may function properly. A good example is the heart. The heart from a small person may not function properly on the body of someone with a bigger build, due to how hard it needs to work in order to circulate blood around the bigger body."
] |
Why haven't we evolved to require less sleep? | [
"Because that isn't how evolution works. Something we don't need anymore doesn't just go away as soon as we don't need it. Something better needs to come along to replace it. The people able to function on less work may be more successful in life, but it doesn't necessarily mean they will be able to reproduce better or more.",
"All mammals sleep and most animals sleep. Why should humans be the ones to evolve beyond sleep?\n\nAlso even though we are not conscious our bodies are still working so you shouldn't think of it as wasting a third of life. It is a part of life."
] |
What actually is snot (nose mucus)? | [
"Your body is only really capable of producing a few substances, in different quantities... so things like mucus, wax, sweat, semen, saliva, or milk tend to be made up of varying concentrations of salts, sugars, proteins, antibodies, other cells, and water.\n\nNow, *mucus* is produced by special cells in your body (not any one gland). It is mainly a mixture of water and glycoproteins (which are proteins that make the mucus viscous).\n\nThese mixtures also have salts that make it unfavorable for bacteria/fungi to grow, enzymes designed to eat away at viruses/bacteria/fungi, antibodies, and some other immune-related proteins.\n\nSo mucus is basically a sticky solution created by cells as a part of the immune system to protect you from bacteria and viruses and coats sensitive areas of the body, like the throat, nose, lungs, vagina, etc, etc.\n\nNaturally, the respiratory system (mouth, nose, throat, and lungs) need a lot of mucus because it has to deal with the most outside invaders... all the bacteria and fungi that you inhale. When the cells in your body realize that you've gotten sick, they produce more mucus to expel the invaders of your body... you end up coughing up lung mucus and dripping nose mucus because your body is removing bacteria to make you healthy again and prevent you from getting more sick.\n\n**TL;DR If bacteria was in an adventure story, mucus would be a cross between quicksand and a piranha pit... not only is there no escape, but you get eaten while you're trying.**",
"Really glad you put nose mucus. I was baffled as to what this 'snot' concept was...",
"So if mucus is trying to protect us, is it in our best interest to stay away from medicines that reduce mucus?",
"Ever since my head tumor surgeries, I conditioned myself to hold in/suppress my sneezes, even when I'm sick. Is this keeping bad stuff in or is that a myth?",
"I also wondered about this and if whatever makes the snot makes other bodily discharges too...?",
"yeah, being sick isn't all that bad unless you're like me and have over-productive mucous glands...so clogged nostrils and coughing up stuff all year round? fuck yeah. it's kinda like my body is a hypochondriac, since it pretty much overreacts to every little particle that enters my nose...",
"Saved for the next time my 4 year old asks me this"
] |
What is the difference between Smiley Smile (1967), Brian Wilson Presents SMiLE (2004), and The Smile Sessions (2011)? | [
"Pet Sounds isn't like SMilE in the least. But...you'll probably end up liking it anyway. Go with The SMiLE Sessions. \n\nPet Sounds is grounded in reality - SMiLE is a colorful fantasy trip.\n\nAnd hey. Try Sunflower. Also Friends.",
"**Smiley Smile (1967)** is the follow up to Pet Sounds. It was originally intended to be this large vast sounding album but Brian Wilson ended up deciding not to use a lot of previous material and a dramatically scaled down album was released instead. \n\n**Brian Wilson Presents SmiLE (2004)** is Wilson and Van Dyke Parks attempt at finishing the album SMiLe. It received a lot of critical acclaim after its release. \n\n**The Smile Sessions (2011)** is a compilation of the original Smile recordings that weren't used."
] |
Debt as the dollar inflates/deflates | [
"> Making another extreme assumption; this does not affect the economy significantly\n\nYou can't do that, sorry. Such a marked deflation in the dollar would destroy the economy, pretty much a law of nature on that, which is kind of a failsafe in and of itself. The [1923 \"hyperinflation\" in Germany](_URL_0_) is an example where hyperinflation was so bad they had to completely reset the system and never really paid off their incurred debt. So your thought experiment kinda fails at this point. \n\nEven a gentler deflation of the dollar's value would have direct repercussions on the other measures within the economy. Inflation caused by erosion of purchasing power, is tied to interest rates for any securities you're trying to sell or renew as part of the next budget's borrowing or as part of refinancing existing debt that's expiring. You can't look at these things one at a time, unfortunately. \n\nWhat countries can and do though is focus more on avoiding deficits and paying off debt when interest rates are high, in the same way you try to time mortgage renewals at your house for when interest rates are low, and pay off your mortgage faster when interest rates are going to be high."
] |
Why words stop looking like words after you type them repeatedly. | [
"_URL_0_\nFrom what I can tell, your brain recognizes the same word over and over again and gets bored.",
"I would have thought it would have been the opposite to what these other redditors said: I think it's over-focussing rather than getting bored and moving on. Because the connection between a set of symbols (a bunch of lines and curves etc) and the semantic meaning is arbitrary, the more you focus on this set of physical lines and curves, the more you notice how random those symbols look. Whereas when you're reading relatively quickly, your brain short-circuits through to just grabbing the actual meaning of the symbols rather than getting bogged down in them",
"bowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl\nbowl",
"/r/answers gives you answers to questions, ELI5 explains those answers in a way that is easier to understand. This belongs in /r/answers. Not a big deal but consider what you're asking for next time."
] |
If it takes 3 hours for the sun to set in NY to LA, why doesn't the line of shadow move at 1000 mph? | [
"I think you might be asking about the [**Solar Terminator**](_URL_0_) which does move across the Earth (at the equator) at about 1000 MPH, but due to the scattering of light in our atmosphere (the same reason you can see inside shadows and they are not completely black) the terminator line is not clearly visible on the surface of the Earth.",
"The terminator (the line dividing the light and dark sides of the planet) does indeed travel at 100s of miles per hour (depending on your latitude); you would be able to see this more clearly if the Earth was a perfect sphere. To give a specific example, if you were in NYC and decided to travel westward so that the sun stayed in the same position in the sky (say, just above the horizon), you would need to move at about 800mph.\n\nYou may be confusing the planet's shadow with the shadows cast by other objects (like hills, clouds etc). Those shadows would not be moving at such high speed."
] |
What is deconstructive criticism and it's role in group assessments? | [
"It is when you just say things like \"That's stupid and you're shit at everything\" and it totally hurts morale and discourages people.",
"It isn't the opposite of \"constructive criticism\". Rather, it's criticism (i.e. opinion given for the sake of advice) which is done using the framework of post-structuralist theory. That is to say (without going into a long winded explanation of structuralism/post-structuralism/etc...): it is the analysis of a given work (be it a book, or a speech, or a videogame) in which the analyst attempts to explore/explain its meaning as it relates to the texts/culture that surrounds it. To \"deconstruct\" a text is to pick apart not only its meaning, but also the means through which it conveys that meaning. I have no idea how this relates to group assessments though, because fuck those."
] |
Why I sweat more than everyone else. | [
"See a doctor if it is a serious problem. ELI5 is a horrible source for medical advice."
] |
If the same animal with different fur color is considered a different species, why aren't humans classified as different species based on hair color or other varying traits? | [
"Physical features have nothing to do with being a species. Being a part of the same species is defined as being able to breed and produce offspring that can then produce more offspring.",
"The same animal with a different fur color is not a different species. It is just different colored. All cats are from the same species regardless of what color they are. Two animals are considered different species if they are unable to produce offspring that are fertile."
] |
The EU's Immigration Policy. Can EU Members Travel Freely Without Being Documented? | [
"There are two factors to this:\n\nThe Schengen area: A political agreement between a bunch of European nations (most of which are in the EU) that borders are open and no special documentation is required to pass over them. You can drive from the southern tip of Spain to Finland without ever having to present a passport.\n\nThe EU (And the EEA): All citizens with a EU or EEA nationality (with certain exceptions) can move, live and work in any of the other EU or EEA countries with *minimal* effort."
] |
How is it possible to track down the owners of illegal websites? | [
"Unless they mess up and do something silly and self identifying. That's especially easy if the FBI or whoever can compel the hosting service to give them access to the server and plant some things to try and weasel identifying information out of the connection. (Which, if you're using a browser without noscript, is quite likely to work.)\n\nEven with TOR you have to take a lot of additional steps to ensure anonymity."
] |
How is point Nemo, a sea point which is the farthest from any land mass, calculated? | [
"Here is how I would do it manually:\n\nFor a start, much of the sea can be dismissed as a matter of course. E.g. the entire Mediterranean Sea is nearer to land than a point in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.\n\nThe next step would be to take a compass set at some set range (say 1000 miles) and draw outlines from prominent points - Western Australia or Hawaii for example. Point Nemo must be outside these lines. By increasing this in steps, the area where point Nemo can be decreases. Eventually you get down to a single point.\n\nYou would need to use a globe for this method due to the inaccuracies in flat projections.",
"With proper maps (and especially with computers) this problem is trivial. Could you clarify what you mean?\n\nWith a computer you could step through the map and measure the distance from each point to the nearest land, keeping track of the current farthest distance/point. It's a search-for-max problem. I'm sure there's a clever algorithm that could speed up the search, but ultimately it'll rely on the quality of the maps. If the maps are wrong, finding point Nemo would be very difficult."
] |
Why do cabbage leaves grow rolled up in a ball where they're guaranteed not to get any sunlight? | [
"Cabbage are artificially selected and bred. The wild cabbage leaves are not not balled up like that. In fact the cabbage is the same plant as broccoli and cauliflower."
] |
How are dogs bred for specific purposes? | [
"Over generations breeders select for traits that make the dog better suited to a certain task. Your dog won't inherently know how to \"rat\", but will probably enjoy chasing small critters and he/she is physically suited to digging and pushing into small crevices/tunnels in which rodents may live.",
"Dogs have a lot of natural instincts, the strength of which vary from individual to individual. By selective breeding dogs with stronger instincts, you basically get a dog with OCD for chasing prey.\n\nCombine this with breeding for a size that makes it small enough to chase rats where they might hide, and big enough to kill a rat, and you have a breed well suited for ratting."
] |
Physiologically speaking, why do certain people react differently to marijuana? | [
"There is *only* science to this, in fact. \n\nThere are a few active components in marijuana. First is cannibinol, which produces the \"stoned\" effect: it is the depressant. \n\nTHC is the most notable component. THC gets you 'high'. It has a mild stimulative effect, and in large doses, hallucinatory effects. \n\nThere are different types of tolerance; dispositional tolerance (based on your genes), dynamic tolerance (based on how often you use the drug), and behavioral tolerance (if you're comfortable and relaxed in the place you use a drug, you will be more tolerant to it, less likely to feel extreme effects or complications when it comingles with adrenal responses). All of these three factors combine in complex and constantly evolving ways to produce your reaction to a drug.\n\nOthers can be more susceptible either to cannibinol, or THC, or both. Your brain has receptors for both of these (sites where the drug binds to your cells to produce an effect). The more *sites* you have, the more *effective* the drug will be, in general. \n\nIt is possible you have very *few* cannibinol receptors, and a relatively *high* number of THC receptors. \n\nIf this were the case, you would get almost none of the \"depressant/relaxing\" effects, and too much of the \"stimulant\" effects. The stimulating / hallucinatory effect of THC, when it hits too strong and too fast, can bring on that \"paranoid\" factor. \n\nThe strain of marijuana you take also has an effect. Different strains have different relative levels and concentrations of active components, and therfore, give you different \"highs\"."
] |
How does Candy Crush recommend your next move? | [
"This is haRd to answer because I don't have source code for it, but my guess is it does not know what is coming (this is easier to code, if it randomly picks instead of figuring out ahead of time) and it determines the \"best\" move by looking at all available legal moves and picking one by some method (likely the highest scoring move or, the easier way, the move closest to the bottom of the screen that is clearing a horizontal group)",
"Candy crush isn't recommending a best move per se, the game knows what shapes are on the board and likely just looks for the first potential one it finds.\n\nThe game drops candies semi randomly based on difficulty. Most games like this have a ratio or chance of dropping something, as well as a maximum number any item that can appear, and then roll the dice, the game knows what's going to fall after calculating it right before the drop down animation (when you see it)"
] |
why do car rental companies give you both sets of car keys attached to one keyring, where they can't be removed and used separately? | [
"I feel like this is specific to the rental company you are using; cars I've rented have always given me two separate keychains :/",
"Rental companies eventually sell the cars, and they need to have both sets of keys. They don't want the second one floating around once they no longer own the car, so linking them together allows them to keep both sets of keys accounted for for the extent they own the car, and they don't have to worry about customers or employees losing the second key. For the purposes of renting the car out, it's not really necessary to be able to give multiple people the key (in fact, I'm sure the agency would prefer only the customer drive the car); but for purposes of resale, 2 keys is pretty important. And now that keys/fobs are integrated, laser-cut, etc., replacement could cost hundreds of dollars. Better to slightly inconvenience you now so they can save a few hundred bucks down the road.",
"I work for enterprise and the way I see it is you are far less likely to lose the keys altogether if they are connected. You only have to keep track of one \"item\" instead of two separate ones. And as far as enterprise is concerned we have to have both keys because the car may end up being a one way vehicle and may not stay at the same branch. When the car gets sold if it only has one key, then the folks at the admin office have no clue which \"branch\" \"owned\" the car when the key was lost."
] |
How do you get a second job? Are you supposed to keep the first one a secret? | [
"When you got your first job, did they give you a time table on when you are available? You can usually change it (start of the school year would be a great time to do it, many students will schedule around their classes). For the second job schedule time around the first job (although you might want to figure out when each job need the most hours).",
"No not at all.\n\nYou just go apply. You tell the second job that you are currently employed and where, and try to set your schedule around that. \n\nOf course if your jobs frequently collide then you will likely have to quit or be fired from one."
] |
What is quantum tunneling? | [
"Particles that shouldn't be able to go through stuff, go through stuff.\n\nIt's like if you kept throwing a ball against a wall and eventually it just went right through it.\n\nIt's sort of like a leak. See quantum mechanics is based on a concept that quantum particles exist in two different forms - a wave and a particle. So sometimes they're like hard balls and can't go through stuff while other times they're all wavy and shit so they can zoom through."
] |
How did early humans develop opposable thumbs? | [
"Evolution does not work that way.\n\nIt isn't as if some creature is sitting around thinking \"this mutation woukd really help us\" and suddenly his kids develop the mutation.\n\nThe mutation occurred randomly and the environment was so that he survived while his non-opposable thumbed brethren did not. This meant he passed on his genes **THAT OCCURED RANDOMLY**",
"Even the earliest humans already had opposable thumbs. That particular mutation occurred far earlier in our ancestry.\n\nThat said, the mutation occurred randomly, as did all evolutionary mutations. It's not that the environment warranted the need for opposable thumbs, it happened by accident, and those with the thumbs happened to survive, while those without died out, or evolved into other species."
] |
Why are ships referred to as "her" or "she"? | [
"Because it's mostly men who own them, they're super expensive, they cost a ton to maintain, and they're hella fun to ride.",
"A lot of guys + a lot of water + no/few women = things become she/her",
"Something a lot of men are in charge of? Must be a female.",
"Honestly, anything that's in the transportation catagory or that is not a common possession will be considered a \"she\"."
] |
How can acid eat through metal, but not a glass/plastic cup? | [
"I'm not sure about the exact solution they are using, but I'm going to use aqua regia as an example. \n\nSolid metals are composed of metallic atoms arranged in a metallic lattice, with metallic bonds connecting them NOT chemical bonds. These are much weaker and can be sheared with less energy. \n\nGold, as we know, is very unreactive to most things (one reason why it's used in coins and jewelry). However, aqua regia (3:1 mix of hydrochloric acid and nitric acid) is a special mixture that produces extremely reactive atomic oxygen. This mixture reacts with the gold and forms chloroauric acid that is soluble in water. \n\nOn the other hand, glass is a very stable material and tightly bonded, which prevents most chemicals from breaking the bonds inside it and causing cracking. One exception is hydrofluoric acid, which is used to etch glass and must be stored in even more unreactive polymeric containers, like polyethenes and such.",
"In that gif it is not an actual acid being used, if you watch the video it explains it is actually mountain dew, its just that the spoon is made of a gallium-aluminium alloy which effectively disintegrates in the water"
] |
the use and purpose of pointers in C. | [
"The name is more helpful than people realize if you try to think of it visually. It's literally a variable that POINTS to something.\n\nSo let's say we're playing hide and seek. John is hiding under a box. Sally saw John go hiding under there. Now I walk into the room trying to find John. I find Sally and say \"Sally, give me the location of John\". Sally is our pointer. I don't want to know about the object John (his height, weight, name, etc), I want to know about the **LOCATION** of John. So Sally, being kind of a bitch (or just really bad at hide and seek), points to the box, saying \"He's under the box, at that location\".\n\nNow, we have John's location. Now let's say we want to actually look at John and find out what color shirt he's wearing. This is where we **DEREFERENCE** the pointer (in C, this is done with the & operator). We (the computer) goes to the location of John and looks at the value there (in our analogy, the object \"John\" is the value). \n\nSo if we had an int pointer int *c, and we say int a = & c, that means a now has the VALUE of whatever was stored in memory at the address stored in c.\n\n\nSorry if that's not more clear. Pointers can be tricky to understand, but they can be very useful in some situations. Academia is a great example, as you'll often be asked to implement your own versions of common data types in order to gain a deep understanding of how they work (linked lists come to mind. it's like an array, but unlike a normal array, where everything is stored in one sequential block of memory, items in a linked list are stored randomly, alongside a pointer which points to the next item in the list).",
"There has never been a more appropriate time to post a link to Pointer Fun with Binky:\n\n_URL_0_"
] |
What is an itch, why does it bother us, and how does scratching it make it go away / feel better? | [
"Scratching an itch, releases endorphins instantly into the surround nervous system area. It provides instant gratification but ultimately makes the itch worse. Like smoking crack and getting an instant high but then coming down. I actually have no idea what I'm saying.",
"Skin is usually itchy because of a foreign irritant. Our skin sends signals to our brain that it is irritated by the foreign object, so we feel an impulse to scratch off that object. This is a useful defense for small insects, or anything potentially dangerous to the body."
] |
Why SSD is better than Hard Drive? | [
"For one, they're faster. *Much* faster. Insanely faster. It's not even close. If you were to compare it to running, it'd be a bicycle vs a car.\n\nAdditionally, SSDs can be much smaller in size, are more durable, and use less power generally.\n\nMuch of this is due to physical HDDs' physical limitations. In a HDD, there are actual magnetic disks which must spin for you to read or write data, while SSDs, like their names imply, do not. While this means that, with today's disk technologies, storage space is insanely cheap with HDDs, they lose out in pretty much every other aspect to SSDs.",
"SSDs can read and write faster than hard disk drives.\n\nThey also have no moving parts, which means they are generally less likely to fail."
] |
In baseball, why do they change out the baseball every time it touches the ground? | [
"Balls covered in dirt are harder for the batter to see, which could present a safety issue when dealing with projectiles coming in the vicinity of player's faces at 100 mph. Dirty balls may also move erratically because of the uneven scratches and dirt accumulation on different parts of the ball.\n\nGetting rid of baseballs isn't a big deal because the teams need a lot of balls for practicing before games. If a ball's removed from a game for a little bit of dirt, it can then be used during practice, and a new ball can be used during the game.",
"Dirt getting on the ball changes the balance, and it is illegal to do that on purpose. It is the same reason spit balls are banned."
] |
How do animals in eggs know when to hatch? | [
"Genetic programming.\n\nRemember how you latched onto your mom's boob for your first meal? OF COURSE NOT. But you did, because it was genetically programmed that you had an instinctual latching-on process to get that milk into you (or, alternately, from a bottle if you weren't breast fed).\n\nAnimals are the same. They bust out of the egg when their genetics tells them it's time to based on their level of development, whether or not they have a yolk sac still attached (like many fish do) or they're pretty much 100% complete and ready to go.",
"It is determined based on when the animal is finally hungry because it has no more nutrition left in the egg. The egg provides nutrition for the animal to grow within the egg (specifically the white part), and once all of that is gone, the animal is left hungry and wanting more food/protein to keep growing. It is at this time that the animal breaks out of its shell in search of more nutrition :).",
"I think you might have better luck finding the sort of answers you're looking for on /r/askscience :)",
"It's mostly genetic, but in birds at least the chick can actually communicate with its parent while still in the egg and tells it it's going to hatch. In a large clutch, the chicks communicate with each other while still in their eggs to coordinate their hatching so they all come out at almost the same time, which I think is just super cool."
] |
What are skin tags and why do we get them? | [
"A skin tag is actually a benign tumor that usually forms where skin creases, like the neck or armpit, and sometimes the eyelids. They are almost always harmless. They're very common (moreso in women than men), and thought to be formed by skin rubbing on skin, but the exact cause is unknown. \n\nThey're safe to leave and safe to have removed - they don't grow back. Be sure to consult a dermatologist for advice.",
"General medical terms for then is benign dermal papullomas. Something like half of all people have them. They increase as you grow older and occur in skin folds. Structurally, they are loose skin folds where collagen which is like the scaffolding of your skin gives away and the tiny capillaries dilate to accommodate this outward loosening and growth of skin. T he don't have nerve endings so if they give you grief you can cut them off or freeze them off. \n\nWhy they occur is more complicated than eli5. It has something to do with too much insulin- hyperinsulinism or insulin resistance. This is why you might notice that obese people have more skin tags along with something called acanthosis nigricans- thickened and darkened skin. Anyway, more insulin means more growth factors since insulin is an anabolic hormone. These growth factors are like stopgates for dams. Once they turn on a whole downward cascade comes on and many things happen. The growth factors induce something called fibroblasts in the skin which create more skin but not enough collagen so skin is loosened. \n\nAnal tags are an interesting example but they happen often when small tears in the outer skin heals and more skin is piled on than necessary. If they are painful, they are haemorrhoids."
] |
What is "Salisbury Steak" made from? And is it just a US commercially made food or does hit actually have roots in England? | [
"Its roots are in the USA, not the UK. It's named after Dr. Salisbury who invented it in the 1800s. It's mostly ground beef but may contain some pork depending on who makes it. [Details.](_URL_0_) There is a similar food in the UK, called a *grillsteak.*",
"I actually live in the medieval town of Salisbury England. You know the one with the Cathedral and the Stone Age henge and all that. Salisbury steak definitely has nothing to do with here."
] |
How come standard pixel widths (360p, 720p, 1080p...) correspond to the number of degrees in a/several full rotation(s) ? | [
"It's the beauty of maths. The two aren't related besides the fact they both divide down really well. 360 divides by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15 etc. \n\nAs a percentage of these lower numbers that's way more than almost any other (this is also why a lot of people have and still do believe that base 12 counting is superior to our base 10)\n\nIt's just simply that because they divide and multiply together so well they are so easy to use. Say you want to double a resolution at 360, well that's easy for any number. But say you want to shrink it to 75% size, or any other fraction.... Works super!",
"You're asking the wrong question. The proper question should be, why are circles divided into 360 degrees?\n\nThe answer is that back in the day they observed that it was useful to be able to divide stuff by as many numbers as possible. That's why days are in 2 sets of 12, divisible by 1,2,3,4, hours by 60, divisible by 1,2,3,4,5,6, and this in turn makes days perfectly divisible By these numbers also. That's also why there are 12 months, etc.\n\n360 was chosen as the number of degrees because these degrees are small enough to accurately measure an angle as well as 362 degrees would be, but a circle could easily be divided into half's, thirds, quarters, fifths, tenths, etc and because of this, coincidentally, a lot of even numbers, like 720, 1080, share factors with 360 and so are divisible by it.\n\nAlso, I'm sure someone took these same needs for picture scaling into account when they decided on common standard resolutions. You don't want to screw up the scaling of a picture when you reduce it to a third of its size, or a fifth of its size, or a quarter."
] |
Why does string theory require 10 dimensions? | [
"I am not a physicist, but I once asked a physicist to explain to me this very thing. Below is a reformulation of what he told me:\n\nWhat does it mean that there are more than 3 spatial dimensions, and what does it mean that they are \"curled up very small\"?\n\nImagine you're a billiard ball, living on the surface of table where the cover is on. Above you, just barely touching you, is the bottom of the cover. Below you is the felt. You and I know your world is 3D, but you perceive it as 2D, forward/backward and left/right. You and I know that the felt is not evenly compressible, so when a billiard rolls over it in a straight line, the balls moves ever so slightly up and down. This up and down motion though, is too small for you in billiard-ball-world to observe. You don't ever think about this though, because your 2D physics completely explains all interactions between other billiard balls that you observe.\n\n\nNow let's take it one step further. Imagine you're a billiard ball physicist. Just as before, your 2D physics completely explains all the interactions between billiard balls you observe. Your \"bouncing-off-bumpers\" theories explain how balls change angle and slow down when they hit a bumper, and your \"just-slowing-down\" theories explain how balls are always slowing down a little bit, even when they don't hit a bumper. You can very accurately predict where a ball will go by putting these two theories together. Many of your billiard ball colleagues are unsatisfied with this situation though. Both of these theories involve billiard balls slowing down, but the theories themselves are separate. One day, a billiard ball physicist colleague comes to you with a crazy idea. This colleague says that they can unify the two theories of billiard ball movement if you imagine that a ball slowing down results from that ball losing energy to the surface that it's directing a force against. However, this unified theory requires that there is a force pressing balls _down_ against the felt. Down is not a direction that exists! The theory only works if there is a _third dimension_.\n\n\nYou and I know your world is 3D and has the dimension up and down, but you, as a billiard ball physicist, cannot perceive this dimension. The hypothetical existence of this dimension though, allows for a theory of billiard ball physics that is simpler, more general, more elegant, and thus more appealing than the two separated theories.",
"This is a great question, but it's also really tough to answer because any in-depth explanation very quickly ascends to levels of terminology that sound like technobabble. The simplest answer is that the math requires the extra dimensions to explain the interaction of the quantum (subatomic) world with the macro (atoms, molecules and larger) world, to model them and the underlying rules they follow. This is obviously the least satisfying, because it's like a parent saying \"because I said so\".\n\nTo back up a bit, it's important to redefine the term dimension. We think of dimensions as basically \"something you can measure\" - length, width, height. In physics terms, they kinda are that, but kinda not. It's easier to think of them as ways of defining a specific parameter or quality of an object. Our main three dimensions define an object's size, which is easy to make sense of. It can also be a way of defining how an object moves through space. With String Theory, you're trying to explain the movement of and interactions with subatomic particles, some of which are very strange. All of these extra dimensions are not physical ones, but are said to be 'wrapped up at the subatomic level', which I think of as meaning they can't be measured with a ruler because they don't define a given space. They're not defining a physical thing, the way length, width and height do. What they do is allow subatomic particles to behave the way they do - [tunnel through barriers they 'shouldn't' be able to](_URL_1_), or the good ol' thing where they [act like waves and particles at the same time](_URL_0_).\n\nReally, rather than \"allow\" we should say \"explain why\", but then \"dimensions\" is probably one of the most confusing terms they could have chosen for what was being described, because it relies on a definition of the term is that isn't the way most people think about it.\\*\\* If a subatomic particle tunnels through a barrier that it shouldn't be able to, but you recognize that there is an additional parameter that applies to both the particle and the barrier - say, they only exist 99.999999% of the time in our universe, but pop out to a higher plane of existence than the physical (for the record, this is an extreme example made to illustrate the point, not what particles necessarily do), then you can say they have a measure of 99.999999 in the 'existence' dimension (again, made up for the explanation). If you combine these two numbers, you get the one-in-a-trillion chance of a particle 'tunneling' through the barrier.\n\nIt's also necessary to point out that ten dimensions is just the number that the kaluza-Klein Theory suggested (initially five, later ten). I've seen theories that extend to thirty dimensions.\n\nFor the record, I don't believe that String Theory is what it purports to be. I am only a failed physicist, and the people who are working on it are *far* smarter than I am, so if there is an empirical right and wrong on the issue, you'd be better off betting on them to be right. I come to explain String Theory, not defend it. String Theory fails to simplify the discussion, though, which is what the entire search for the Grand Unified Theory is supposed to be. Ultimately, the answer to the Universe - if we can ever discover it - will never be something you can adequately ELI5. I don't think it will rely on purely mathematical constructs for its explanation, and I think it is the purest of hubris to think that we can go from discovering atoms and nuclear forces to unlocking their underlying principles in (on the scale of the universe) a fraction of a blink of an eye.\n\n***\n\n\\*\\*Kinda like a scientific theory and a 'real world' theory - same underlying concept defining both terms, but they become very different things within their specific contexts.",
"Mathematically, it has to do with group theory, more specifically representation theory of Lie groups. These things are tough to explain to someone without a background in these things, so I'll keep this short and not super precise:\n\nSymmetries are of fundamental relevance in physics for numbers of reasons. This goes so far that you can basically define a symmetry and some other stuff and determine all the physics of the system from that. Large parts of the standard model of particle physics were found this way. Mathemetically, these symmetries are expressed in groups.\n\nNow if we want to create a new, more general theory from our old ones it needs to reproduce all the symmetries the old theory has. So mathematically we are looking for dimensions where there are relatively simple (read: small) symmetry groups that contain all the symmetries we know. It so happens that 10 is the smallest dimension where there is a [Majorana-Weyl spinor](_URL_2_) which is a good candidate for a number of reasons. Most common string theories use this or related symmetry transformations.\n\nString theories are then sort of constructed such that they have the imposed symmetry. So you start with 10 dimensions because your symmetries are nice there, and build the string theory around it - not the other way round.",
"Yo man, I respect this subreddit, but string theory might be a little too ambitious for ELI5.",
"Very few \"like you're 5\" answers available on this topic. I'll take my best swing.\n\nforget what you know about dimensions and think of a video game being played by a kid holding a controller. \n\nThe character in the video game can move in all of the spatial dimensions it exists in, like us. Forward, back, side to side, up and down.\n\nSo the kid finds a menu option called \"timeline\" and presses it. Now the kid sees a panorama of events that his character has experienced throughout the game. The difference between the player and the character is that the character has to experience the whole timeline event by event, while the player can see the timeline as a single object.\n\nNow you've moved up a dimension. We've collapsed direction, position, and time into an object that you can hold in your hands and manipulate. If you were able to hold a timeline in your hands like an object, you could change it and affect it like any other object you can interact with. \n\nBeing able to interact with an entire 3 dimensional timeline as if it were an object would make the kid playing the game 4 dimensional. \n\nIt gets weird when you start to consider that the entire environment that the kid playing the game exists in, must also be made up of existential versions of the ideas of existence similarly to how the character's three dimensional lifespan is simply an object in a fourth dimension.\n\nIt is much easier to explain a timeline as a chain of events rather than to try and tell someone that every event in their life exists as a single object in a higher dimension. \n\nThis is where math comes in. Mathematics and moreover physics deal with the footprints of these intangible creatures rather than the beasts themselves. And with our current understandings in mathematics, we see footprints which actually call for up to 11 dimensions. (including m-theory, there are 7, 10, or 11 expected dimensions). So it isn't so much that we've seen these 10-dimensional beasts making the footprints, it's more that we've seen footprints that must have been made by a 10-dimensional beast.",
"The cynical answer--which is not the whole story but has some truth to it--is that 10 dimensions are simply what is required to make the math work out. This is the big knock against string theory: it's very elegant mathematically, but it's not super clear how much *physical* insight it gives.",
"One very short and unsatisfying ELI5 answer is that if the number of dimensions is anything else, then certain undesirable infinities show up in the theory. Therefore the assumption of extra dimensions is made in order to avoid these bad things from happening. (The harder ELI5 is to explain why this assumption of extra dimensions is much more reasonable than a layperson would assume.)\n\nBy the way, just to clarify a point: The number of dimensions depends on certain specifics of the theory. Bosonic string theory requires 26, superstring theory requires 10, and M-theory requires 11. Superstring theory is what most people mean when they simply refer to \"string theory,\" since bosonic string theory is not realistic. However, superstring theory comes in various flavors, all of which are unified in some sense by M-theory. When we say that superstring theory has 10 dimenions, we mean 1 time dimension and 9 space dimensions, 3 of which are the ones we perceive and 6 of which are tiny, \"compactified\" spatial dimensions.\n\nImportant caveat: I am not even remotely a string theorist. \n\nEdit: Maybe \"undesirable infinities\" is not the right phrase to use (though I suppose one can probably get away with calling it that). It's more like you need a particular undesirable term that shows up to be zero in order to have the required symmetry.",
"Wait, if I remember correctly from pchem, it's 11 dimensions. I don't know why, but I'm fairly certain it's 11. Can anybody speak to or correct me of this?",
"This is a really great video explaining all the dimensions, this might give you the insight 'why' a 10th dimensions exists. \n\n_URL_3_",
"Arguably the most important principle in theoretical physics is symmetry. The first question a theorist usually asks about a theory is \"what are the symmetries of the theory?\"\n\nImagine holding a spherical ball in your hands. This ball has what we call rotational/spherical symmetry. Any way you rotate the ball, it will look exactly the same. \n\nNow imagine shrinking our spherically symmetric system down to a quantum mechanical size. Due to the funny nature of quantum mechanics, our system may no longer be spherically symmetric. When a system loses its symmetry upon quantization, we call the symmetry \"anomalous\". \n\nNow, string theory possesses a certain symmetry called Weyl/conformal symmetry. When we quantize our theory, we find that this Weyl symmetry is anomalous in every single dimension. EXCEPT in 10 dimensions. \n\nSo basically, in order for string theory to have the symmetries that it should have, we must require a 10 dimensional universe.",
"What is math? Math is logic. 1+1=2 is a logical statement. Every rule of math is just one more logical statement.\n\nWe ASSUME - and its a big assumption - that the universe, our reality, follows logical rules. Which in turn means that the universe can be described using math.\n\nSo we try to do that. We have a formula, we test it, it doesn't work. We try another formula, we test it, it doesn't work. We start to realize that whatever rules the universe follows, they are extremely more complicated than simple newtonian Force = Mass X Acceleration.\n\nThe problem is, as we start coming up with more and more complex formulas the rules of math start to limit our options. There is for example a mathematical set of logic that could describe the universe using ten dimensions (and really, really, big hat tip to u/TheCheshireCody for the best ELI5 description of a dimension I have ever seen being \"something you can measure\"). \n\nSo we figure that if we explore math we are actually exploring possibilities for how the universe operates and as we eliminate the simple ones and get more and more complex we have fewer and fewer logically consistent options to pick from. Which means 10 dimensions might be possible, but 8 isn't.",
"I see a lot of answers explaining why there can be 10 dimensions and we only see 3 of them. Cool stuff, but that's not what the OP asked to know.\n\nSo I know that the mathematics does not work out if you try to apply String Theory to less dimensions. I was hoping that someone here might be able to ELI5 what ends up going wrong with the math.\n\nIncidentally, I think TheCheshireCody came the closest to actually answering the original question, but I'm still hoping that someone else might take a crack at answering: why does the math not work out in fewer dimensions?",
"When they say \"dimensions\", they refer to a mathematical construct. Take, for example, the 3 dimensions, x-y-z. When the mathematics requires an extra dimension, they invent one and give it a name, say \"d\". If this represents an actual thing in reality, no one can say."
] |
Google's new parent company Alphabet? | [
"In short, Google had become a huge sprawling company made of a bunch of brands, and Alphabet allowed to separate all those brands and make them independent from one another, while still having the same people in charge at the top.\n\nGoogle has grown to a point where they are no longer just an internet tech company. They now provide widely different services, from home automation (Nest), to ISP services (Fiber), biotechnologies (Calico), robotics (Boston Dynamics), self-driven cars or R & D (X labs).\n\nBeing a company segmented into so many different divisions can become problematic. So they decided to create Alphabet, a parent company which will own all of those branches and separate them into their own independent brands. Google is therefore just an internet tech company now. This can be practical because some projects that wouldn't really make sense to put under the Google brand won't need to. There won't be Google hospitals, or Google Robots, things that wouldn't really sound in line with a company that brought us a search engine, Youtube and Chrome. This also allows them to make things like Army contracts with one company or major purchases without affecting the other companies. It's also pretty useful to dodge anti-trust investigations, and from an accounting standpoint, several small companies are much easier to manage than a huge one, so there's also an economical advantage.\n\n/u/lililililiililililil gave a good ELIDrunk explanation [here](_URL_0_), if you prefer analogies.",
"Alphabet is an umbrella company with Google as one of its subsidiaries. Unlike a corporate takeover, where one company purchases and generally absorbs another, Alphabet was created by Google in a bid to 'restructure' their sprawling organization.",
"Google was originally just a software company, offering things like Google Search, YouTube and Android. They started branching out to other areas such as Google Fiber (high speed internet), self driving cars, investment ventures, biotech, and many others. Google have decided to restructure, dividing their branches into separate companies, with Alphabet being the parent company, and Google goes back to being just a software company."
] |
How do movie makers hire actors to play 'ugly' roles. | [
"Many actors of course find it insulting, but work is work, and getting acting work you gotta take what you can get, its hard.",
"The actor might be a little insulted, but unless people are treating you poorly even when not acting, an actor will realize that it's just a role and nothing personal. Any half-decent director/producer doesn't want an angry actor coming back at them with a harassment lawsuit.",
"In fact there are certain talent agencies that choose to represent actors that don't fit the typical Hollywood mold for looks. Their rosters are filled with talented actors that are too short, tall, fat, skinny or unattractive according to the film industry standards of perfection. They don't sell the leading man or women to the studios, but the common man.",
"I was once turned down from an acting role ( well more of a glorified extra) because I was too ugly.\n\nI felt great that day",
"I thought about the OP's question when I saw the recent film Under The Skin with Scarlett Johansson. There is a man with a deformed face, played by Adam Pearson. I wondered how he felt doing this specific part. He is one of the most gentle dudes I've ever seen; he did an interview for some [British talk show](_URL_0_). Very like the personality in The Elephant Man.",
"Umm I am a PRIME CANDIDATE for one of these roles. So if anyone's hiring!",
"They usually hire attractive actors (which are not in short supply) and then \"ugly them up\" for the role.\n\nFor example, consider Ugly Betty, which kind of depends on Betty being ugly.\n\nActual actress: [hot](_URL_2_).\n\nWhile portraying Betty: [not](_URL_2_).\n\nThe Jack Black film in particular made use of fat suits as well.",
"Well, an option is to just hire beautiful [ladies](_URL_5_) and [gentlemen](_URL_4_) and ugly them up with a bit of weight and makeup. \n\nedit: and sometimes actors [get fat](_URL_3_) because they think that's how the character should look without actually checking first..",
"same as they do with fat actors. they use soft words and give no outwards offense. it's business relationship and the money takes the sting away enough for them to act.",
"Well, if you still want bums in seats, then you hire [a supermodel](_URL_6_) and use makeup to make them [ugly](_URL_7_).",
"They pay enough that ugly people aren't insulted."
] |
"Bladeless Fans" | [
"There's an intake vent on the bottom with a fan, and there's a little slit around the outside of the fan which the air comes out of."
] |
Why do download speeds between ISPs vary, even though they use the same phone lines | [
"The factors affecting speed are:\n\n1) ADSL: The distance between your home modem and the ISP's \"DSLAM\" (big neighbourhood router). The shorter the distance, the faster the speed (to a limit).\n\n2) The brand, model and configuration of the end devices: Different home modems/routers have different limitations, likewise for the ISP's routers.\n\n3) The amount of bandwidth the ISP has purchased from it's \"peer\" networks and how over subscribed those links are. (i.e. they purchased 1 Gigabit worth of bandwidth, but are trying to shove 2 gbits through it).\n\n4) Whether or not your ISP strictly applies QoS on your service (Quality of Service) (aka. bandwidth capping). This allows them to do things like deploy a 50Mbit capable modem to 3 different homes side by side, and each having a different max speed limitation based on how much they paid.\n\n5) EMI (Electronic Magnetic Interference)... in other words, interference on your phone line will reduce your overall speed.\n\nIn general it's a fairly complex topic with many variables, but the above are some of the most common reasons.",
"Because they want you to pay for faster speeds. Its a 100% arbitrary markup to get more money out of you."
] |
Why is everyone criticizing the movie Stonewall? | [
"The producer is being criticized for whitewashing the cast of the movie, as well as not putting and transgender people in, or really, any type of person other than a 100% homosexual white man. He claims that \"back then\" there weren't (m)any transgender people among the population of those who were protesting (or, in existence, really, because these kinds of things only ever happened within the past 5 years /s). He also pointedly left out any POC characters (because, once again, ~back then~ they didn't *really* do anything to help this movement, amirite /s).\n\nWhen people were scrutinizing these things, he backed up his own view, ignoring what all the people were saying to him, and has said that the reason for his whitewashing is because he was trying to make the movie centered around someone who *he* can relate to, and he is nothing more or less than a white homosexual man. He didn't care about the millions, billions of other people who are looking for representation, and with this specific movie being about the movement being the revolutionary period for the gay rights movement, everyone in the LGBT community, *especially* those who are POC, would have expected to have some sort of representation, and rightfully so.\n\nSo, basically, he is being criticized for erasing the existence of people who really were a part of that history, and for essentially telling his potential audience to fuck off when they voiced that they were unhappy with the lack of equal representation. Which is the most ironic part of this entire thing."
] |
What exactly creates this 'second' tide? | [
"Because the moon and the earth aren't pulling each other like tugging a rope. They are falling towards each other but keep missing because they move forwards faster than they fall. The moon isn't just spinning around the earth while the earth stays still. They are orbiting at their center of mass. The center of mass of the earth-moon system happens to be inside the earth so we don't really notice it. \n\nOk so what does this have to do with anything? The water facing the moon is falling towards the moon faster than the water facing the other way. This makes the water on the far side lag behind giving it a bulge on the back as well as the front. So the water on the back end isn't being pulled away from the earth like you might have thought. The earth is moving away from the water before it catches up."
] |
How does lucid dreaming work? What are some of the most reliable methods to induce it, and how soon would you expect it to start 'working'? | [
"Here's a really fast rundown since I have to go to class soon. There are two most basic ways of inducing lucid dreams called MILD and WILD, each one with certain small variations.\n\n**MILD** stands for \"*mnemonics induced lucid dreaming*\". To achieve lucid dreams with this technique you have to affirm yourself that you are going to have a lucid dream when you are falling asleep. If all goes well the affirmations will follow you into your dream state and once you realize something in the dream is off, you will gain awareness and successfully induce a lucid dream.\nTwo things that help with MILD is doing **RCs** (short for reality checks) over the day and keeping a **dream journal**. There's plenty of ways to perform a RC in waking life:\n\n- Count your fingers. In a dream, the number of your fingers is off, especially if you double check.\n- Look at the clock, digital or analog. On a digital clock numbers tend to get messed up and you can't see the time clearly, while if you double check an analog clock the time tends to be different both times\n- Pinch your nose. In a dream you can breathe trough a pinched nose (this one is my favorite)\n\n\nThere's many more but I'll link you to some good forums at the end of the post so you can check it out for yourself. If all goes well, the habit of doing RCs will transfer into your dream state and there you will realize you're dreaming.\n\nDream journal, on the other hand, is important for your \"dream memory\". How often do you wake up right after a dream and don't even remember what it was about? It can happen with lucid dreams as well, it has happened to me before. You'd wake up in the morning and remember you were having a lucid dream, but you just wouldn't remember what it was about.\nTo prevent that from happening it's important to keep a dream journal. All it does is it trains your memory to remember your dreams after you wake up, but that's very important - what's the point of lucid dreaming if you can't remember any of it.\n\n**WILD** stands for \"*waking induced lucid dreaming*\". It means inducing a lucid dream directly from a waking state. In theory you could do that any time of the day if you're really good at it but WILD is often combined with **WBTB** (waking back to bed). What you do is you go to sleep, wake up as close as you can to a REM cycle (a phase in your sleep where you dream) which happens approximately every hour and a half (so you wake up after 4,5 hours, 6 hours, 7,5 hours,...), stay awake for atleast 10 minutes and then go to sleep. The chances of a successful WILD are much bigger this way since you're immediately going into a REM cycle.\nThere's tons of variations for WILD, the one I like most is **FILD** (*finger induced lucid dreaming*). The recipe for this one is as follows:\n\n- go to sleep\n- wake up before a REM cycle **BUT DON'T MOVE**. You can achieve that by getting an alarm that stops ringing by itself after some time, or if you're good at that just wake up by yourself.\n- stay still and **IMAGINE** moving your index and middle finger as if you were playing a piano (**don't actually move them!**). What this does is keeps you aware while your body falls asleep. You might experience sleep paralysis but that is normal and you should just push trough it.\n- if everything went well you are now lucid dreaming!\n\n\nThere's so much more to lucid dreaming than I mentioned here. It's a very interesting and broad topic and if you are really interested in it I suggest you visit [ld4all forum](_URL_2_) (a really nice community with tons of information on the subject) or [dreamviews](_URL_1_) which explains lucid dreaming better than I can and also has a [forum](_URL_0_) for discussion.\n\nAs for how long it takes for it to start \"working\". It depends. Some people are naturals and achieve it in the first week, others need months. I for example needed 2 or 3 months if I remember correctly, but it was definitely worth the wait!\nIf you need any further help regarding lucid dreaming feel free to pm me. I'm going to class soon so I won't be responding till late at night but I will definitely respond eventually. \n\nEDIT: couldn't figure out how to make lists. Also formatting.",
"I think some people can do it, and others simply can't do it. I've read some articles about it and a reliable method seems to be video gaming. putting yourself into some virtual reality for a long time seems to make it easier to trigger this lucid dreaming state. I've played ALOT of video games and MMO's and I'm pretty much aware in every dream I have, lucid dreaming is both a lot of fun, and a curse. It's a lot of fun to be able to control your dreams, but after a while you can start to feel \"disconnected\", you can experience a sorta Neo from matrix sorta feeling, if you are never able to truly dream. \nAnyhow - hardcore online gaming for 5-6 years should do the trick.",
"Watch the movie Waking Life. It does a very good job of explaining it.\n_URL_3_",
"Here's a pretty short description of what I know. Start by keeping a dream journal next to your bed at night. EVERY time you have a dream, right down what you remember as soon as you wake up(so you don't forget any details). Also, every time you go to bed at night, tell yourself that you will have a lucid dream(seriously).\n\nAfter a while, you will get better at remember your dreams. Then you need to start remember to look for \"tells\" in dreams. Think of these like Cobb's top from Inception. My personal favorite is to look for a light switch. If you find one in your dream, you will discover that you can turn it on and off without changing the lighting, because for whatever weird reason you can't dream in different lighting. \n\nOnce you find your \"tell\", you know you are dreaming. Then you can have fun and try to influence it.",
"read this somewhere on reddit: if you just pretend you're asleep and resist moving at all for a while (about maybe 10 minutes,no turning left or right), you can fool your body and suddenly it goes to sleep. I've actually done this and it works, but it's a bit scary, suddenly you have no body and feels like your brain is floating in space.",
"I've read on here that counting your fingers is a good step to take. Constantly counting your fingers on one hand whilst awake will hopefully trigger counting your fingers in your dream and as you count in your dream you should have trouble making 5. Which will let you know your dreaming."
] |
What are chefs talking about when they're talking about acidity and adding it to food, and why does it feel like I can't taste the difference? | [
"Acidity has a couple of uses in cooking. For one, acid breaks down other substances, helping to tenderize vegetables or meat for example. It initiates a chemical reaction. This is also the reason it is used on apples and some other cut fruits, because the acid prevents them from turning brown when being exposed to air. Lastly, cooking is about balancing flavors - sweet, salty, sour, and bitter (ignoring umami in this example). You can offset an overwhelming flavor (sweet or salty) or texture (oily texture of salad dressing) by adding acid. You might not taste it and think \"hmm, this is acidic\", but it provides a more complex flavor.",
"It's not really about the acid (bear with me here).\n\nIt's about balance. \n\nLet's use your apple pie as an example:\n\n* Apple, which is usually on the sweeter side when baked.\n* Baking spices, which are sweet/herbal - nutmeg, clove, sugar, vanilla.\n* Pie crust, which is egg and flour, rich and more base.\n\nSo, when you add the \"acidity\" it balances out all of those flavors, not overwhelms it.\n\nAcidity does two things:\n\nMakes fruit flavors \"pop\" or \"burst\" by enhancing their flavors.\n\nCleanses the pallet from richness."
] |
What makes a sports team/city a "big market" and why is it such a positive quality when talking about where a player will sign? | [
"Big markets are those with large populations, like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. Those teams usually have a lot of money (i.e. the Yankees payroll dwarfs that of the Pittsburgh Pirates). \n\nThe money can come from lucrative cable deals, or expensive tickets. The bigger the city, the more corporations are based there. They buy box seats to entertain clients.\n\nAnother factor: A player in a \"big market\" potentially has more sponsorship/endorsement opportunities. For example, when LeBron James was making his decision to leave Cleveland, the New York Knicks tried to pitch themselves, saying LeBron's brand value could be worth more than a billion bucks.\n\nAnd think about it this way, playing in a big city, and being a top player will likely give you a lot of recognition.\n\nThere are exceptions to this, of course. I don't think there are many people who haven't heard of Aaron Rogers in Green Bay. \n\nOn the negative side for the 'small market' teams, they don't frequently win. I mean, Kansas City, which is small, sucked for almost 20 years before winning the World Series. \n\nAnd, it could be argued there is less for an athlete to do in a small market. I mean, the club scene in New York is probably 100 times that of KC. Plus, there is also the ability to be anonymous in a big market. I mean, Derek Jeter could walk down the street a lot of the times without being mobbed. It may not be easy for his to do that in a small market.",
"In baseball, a big market means the teams have the ability to pay more due to larger payments from local TV deals. In sports with a salary cap, this is less an issue with salary but impacts things like endorsements, since a larger fan base and higher profile (access to people who makes such decisions) means it's more likely to get a bigger, national sponsorship deal. Also, there are quality of life aspects, where certain cities are more glamorous and fun for a rich person to live in. Among the cities typically referred to as \"big market\" are usually New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami. Next would be cities like Boston, Atlanta and San Francisco. Compare those cities to places like Sacramento, Kansas City, Buffalo, or Green Bay."
] |
If both parties agree gerrymandering is bad and accusing the other side of the aisle, what is truly preventing gerrymandering from being outlawed? | [
"Gerrymandering is only bad for one party, and it's great for the other. So despite both parties agreeing that it can be bad, they also know they can benefit greatly from it. The benefit for them outweighs the detriment, no matter how much they want to whine about how bad it is to appease to voters. After all, they might lose some districts if they end gerrymandering.",
"Gerrymandering is both bad and already illegal. The question is: how do you police it. Sure, districts LOOK bad, and have bad effects, but by what objective standard do you say - this district is wrong? \n\nThis has been an interesting field of study in mathematics for a long time, because the answer is very non obvious. And yes, we can, by gut feeling, tease some out we don't like. That's possible. But who decides when something is just too bad? And on what basis? This is what makes it hard. There isn't a gerrymander police is out there checking for it. Somehow has to have standing to sue, then the court has to agree, and then the remedy is to let more-or-less the same people redraw is a slightly less offensive way. For certain definitions of offensive. \n\nConversely - how would you draw districts that AREN'T gerrymandered. This, too, is a very nontrivial question mathematicians have long considered, especially when your goal starts being things like \"geographic cohesiveness,\" \"representativeness of the population.\" You can easily draw districts that are unbiased but also unrepresentative. \n\nTL;DR - it is illegal, it's just very hard to find objective definition of what is right, so we only fix what is heinously wrong.",
"Both parties agree that gerrymandering is exactly what they want. Gerrymandering allows both parties to carve out safe positions for themselves. Safe positions that allow politicians to have stable careers without worrying that they'll be voted out of a job in a few years time.\n\nSo gerrymandering remains, because it is in the best interest of all the politicians.",
"You can't just have a law that says \"Gerrymandering is illegal.\" You have to ban specific techniques and do so in a way that doesn't interfere with legitimate lines, which is not as easy as you'd think.\n\nAdditionally, sometimes gerrymandering is done for \"good reasons.\" There's a district in I think Chicago that is obviously gerrymandered as fuck because the lines are specifically drawn to enclose two different mostly Latino neighborhoods and not a lot else, virtually guaranteeing that the district will elect a Latino representative despite being located in a city that's mostly white. You can certainly argue that this isn't actually a good thing, but it's another argument that people can throw against change.\n\nLastly, states (mostly) have the right to draws their lines as they like, so the fight against gerrymandering must be won in each of them separately, and that can be extremely tough in states where one party is dominant. This is a US-specific thing, obviously. Some states actually already have some pretty good laws about it (you can easily tell which ones by looking at a political map and seeing reasonable lines).",
"Fixing gerrymandering is actually really tough, especially when you are trying to achieve a certain outcome--i.e. representing minority voices. A little bit of messing with the districts is good and necessary, but a lot is gerrymandering and bad, and this line is sometimes hard to find.\n\nFor example, it's very intuitive to take a bunch of towns right next to each other and make them one district, right? Well, if you did that, you'd have an overwhelmingly white-opinion Congress because white people are just a slight enough majority in most areas that they would be able to vote in whoever they wanted in just about every district. \n\nBut if you get *too* creative with the lines, mixing minority-majority and white-majority districts, then you get some really crazy districts and what is essentially on-purpose gerrymandering.\n\nThe moral of the story is that when you have a weak majority or a plurality in place, it's almost impossible to \"fairly\" assign one seat. America is *just* multicultural enough that there is enough opposition to majority opinion to make this issue very noticeable and very hard to fix.\n\nOddly enough, people mostly criticize the \"safe\" seats, where the district is written so that there is a clear majority. Even though it's pretty easy to see that just about everyone in the district is happy with the result, people object to the district being drawn in such a way. Districts with weaker majorities and more volatility (and also a much lesser population of the district actually voting for the guy in the seat) tend to get less criticism.\n\nSo the reason it's tough is because it's a very complicated issue of electoral organization, and most people do not understand electoral systems. And the ones that do recognize that the US has a particularly difficult time changing its electoral rules, which means that a real good solution to this problem is a very difficult and long-term process.\n\nEDIT: Many of these other answers are wrong. I studied this in school, and I can tell you it's not so simple as politicians protecting their jobs. Cleavages and majority-minority politics are the base of this problem, not greedy politicians.\n\nEDIT 2: [This link](_URL_0_) contains a bit more information about how the redistricting commissions are formed and how they vary by state. It's a remarkably fair process.",
"There are fair laws and court rulings about gerrymandering enacted in times past. The party in power tries to circumvent this. Gerrymandering is in truth illegal and courts will ban it if a case is brought forward to them. Perhaps it is a case of cynicism that a political party does not appeal. They think they will win an election in the future.",
"Gerrymandering is \"barking up the wrong tree\".\n\nAs other posters have already discussed, it is really hard to legislate against and really hard to objectively asses.\n\nIt would be better to have an alternative voting method than \"winner takes all\" First Past the Post (FPTP) method we have today.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nA ranked or proportional system would be more \"fair\" by most measures. It may require larger districts where more than 1 rep gets elected out of them. Though Montana and Alaska only has one congressperson.",
"What's a precise definition of \"gerrymandering\". There's dozens of things you want to look at when making districts, and no matter what politicians will be able to cherry pick things to argue for that give them more control. The only real solution is something like at large representation, where a district has multiple representatives awarded by how much of the vote different parties get.",
"Gerrymandering is often used to describe any sort of redistricting. In general, redistricting is not bad. If you have district that is split nearly 50/50, especially if that split is geographical , it would be much better to split that district into two separate districts or to merge those districts into other districts with similar constituents, so they could actually be represented.",
"how would you draw districts for representation? tell me your absolute fair and unbiased plan that most correctly groups together people without disenfranchising any.\n\nthere reason theres no end to gerrymandering is because there is no solution"
] |
velocardiofacial syndrome | [
"This syndrome is also known as DiGeorge syndrome. It is usually caused by a deletion of part of a chromosome (22, to be specific). This deleted portion normally codes for (has the assembly instructions for) about 30 genes. These missing genes cause a lot of problems with development of the fetus, and that's why people with DiGeorge syndrome have problems with several parts of the body not developing correctly (the palate, heart, parathyroid glands)"
] |
What exactly makes that knuckle-cracking-sound? | [
"When you release pressure on the joint, dissolved gases in the joint fluid expand. Then they immediately dissolve again and what you're hearing is the fluids \"slapping\" back together. So yeah, it actually is kind of like a bubble \"popping.\""
] |
Why doesn't a garden-hose eventually explode even when the tap is on and the nozzle on the other end is shut-off/closed? | [
"Your plumbing supplies water at a certain maximum pressure. That pressure is lower than the pressure required to stretch the hose. So it's less like blowing up a balloon, and more like blowing through a pinched straw. No matter how hard your lungs can blow, the straw's not going to explode.",
"Its simply because the pressure that is supplied in the hose is not high enough to cause an explosion. If it were the pipes inside your house would explode when you had it turned off at the hose connector inside your house.",
"People generally think of hoses as a constant-flow source, but that is not true. They are a constant-pressure source.",
"The hose or pipe is made to withstand a higher pressure than the water is capable of producing.",
"They do. I lost two this way this summer."
] |
Measles have reapeared in the USA because of anti-vaccination movements. Why should I care if I'm vaccinated, aren't I protected from it? | [
"1. The vaccine isn't always 100% effective, and it's possible (though rare) for the vaccine to not work properly for some people.\n\n2. Many people can't be vaccinated (allergy to the materials in the vaccination, compromised immune systems, too young to be vaccinated, etc.), and those at-risk groups rely on everyone else being vaccinated to protect them.",
"Because my baby can't get the vaccination until she's 12 months old.",
"Maybe. While vaccination is very effective, it is not 100%. Some persons who receive the vaccine won't become immune - for some reason, the body does not produce antibodies for the disease.\n\nIf almost everyone was vaccinated, this wouldn't be an issue - the chances of that rare someone who was not immune coming into contact with someone with the disease would be extremely low if everyone has been vaccinated. But with so many persons refusing to be vaccinated, it becomes important.",
"You should also care because it's a lot more expensive to provide medical attention for someone with measles than it is to get vaccinated. We are all footing the bill.",
"How about caring for the sake of the children whose parents refuse to have vaccinated? They didn't ask to be brought into this world, nor is it generally their choice to not be vaccinated. Why should they suffer based on the ignorance of their parents?",
"So a couple of things. \n\n1) measles has never been eradicated (it's not smallpox) so there have always been people in the US and abroad getting measles each and every year. _URL_1_\n\n2) As the above article explains, about 28% of the people who contract measles in the US each year have traveled abroad and contracted it overseas and brought it back with them. The strain of measles contained in the vaccination does not necessarily match ALL strains of measles virus in the world and so it does not offer universal protection. \n\n3) Vaccines protect you for only a certain period of time. And even then they are not 100% effective and many people in this country who THINK they are protected because they have had vaccinations in the past as children, are no longer carrying sufficient titers to protect them as adults. This is one of the main problems with the theory of herd immunity because when the baby boomers received their vaccines, they were told they'd be good for life. When 30-somethings like myself received vaccines as kids we were told they'd be good until we got to adulthood and then maybe we'd need a booster. Now there is plenty of evidence that most vaccines' protection wears off after 10-15 years. So if you look at yourself, your friends, your parents, your kids' teachers, etc. you'll likely find a whole lot of adults who have not had a vaccine in recent memory and have no idea if they're still 'current' on their vaccinations. \n\n4) Vaccines more than likely protect only those who receive them. You being vaccinated does not make you less likely to transmit the diseases you are vaccinated against should you happen to get exposed yourself. Here is a very well done study regarding the DaTP (Diptheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis) vaccine in baboons which demonstrated that vaccinated baboons DID contract, harbor, and transmit the Pertussis bacterium DESPITE showing NO SYMPTOMS themselves. So the monkey didn't get sick or have any signs of infection, but was in fact infected and capable of infecting others. _URL_0_\n\nSo. TLDR: vaccines can help prevent many illnesses and diseases but people (mostly vaccinated people I might add) in the US continue to contract it in small numbers every year. Vaccines do not protect you forever, or against all strains of viruses, and most likely do not prevent vaccinated individuals from spreading the very same diseases they, themselves, are protected against. \n\nEDIT: thanks for the gold kind stranger! Now I'll have to figure out what I'm supposed to do with it:)",
"There is also the fact that some people can't get vaccines (I have a friend who has had a kidney transplant who could get severely ill if she got a vaccine since her immune system is compromised). If everyone around her is vaccinated, this puts her under a lot less of a risk of catching something like measles (or polio, or the whooping cough, etc), if they're not vaccinated, and are a carrier or sick with a disease and don't know it yet, they could infect and possibly kill her because her body is already weakened from her kidney transplant. People that are vaccinating themselves are also keeping people like her safe as well.",
"True story. My grown son, when he was 12 months old, developed measles. Immunizations for measles are not given until 18 months. All of our family had Always had their shots, so I have no idea Where he picked it up. This was in 1984.\n Well I was very lucky, as I KNEW he was not well, glassy eyes, fever, rash and I had an excellent long time family doctor. And even SHE called in another doctor to verify her diagnosis. They immediately gave him a gamma globulin shot (to this day not sure what that does!) but I had to keep him indoors, out of direct light and treat that fever.\n\n Children, many children, used to get very ill and die from the measles. There are two main reasons these diseases are re-rearing their ugly heads, and yes one is the anti-vaccination movement, a whole generation who has never SEEN any kid die from the diseases to they are unaware of the risks. and two, immigrant families who may not have had access to vaccines, have not gotten them yet, don't know to get them. It's not really Required til they start school y'see.\n\nIn the so -called 'olden days' the Public Health Dept still used a lot of pamphlets, posters, educational material to teach parents why innoculations were so important.\n\nNow we've got the generation who has never seen any kid with any of these diseases, suffer, and/or die. Education helps. Spread the word.\n\nI THINK, one gets boosters at age 11 and perhaps high school? It's been awhile, but vaccines are a miracle of the generation past. I HAD all those diseases and so did my sibs. They are very unpleasant, and yes, can Kill!",
"How do Vaccines Cause Autism..\n\n_URL_2_\n\n[Relevant - Please Up Vote.]",
"My GF was vaccinated against whooping cough. \nWell guess what she got 2 years ago... Whooping Cough.\n\nShe coughed a rib apart. \n\nFeeling secure is not enough. \nHerd immunity is still necessary.",
"Are there statistics available to show a direct proportional correlation between anti-vaccination adherents and an outbreak of a particular illness? Or is it possible there are other factors that might explain this resurgence?",
"Even if you were vaccinated for the measles as a child, you may very well be at risk as an adult because **[vacines wear off over time](_URL_3_).** That's why it's recommended to get a tetanus shot roughly every 10 years to keep your immunity up. Herd immunity *used* to be good enough to protect adults from possible resurgences of things like the measles, but we're now having to re-think that.",
"And by unvaccinated people tiny babies are in that list. Children too young to be vaccinated are at risk because of the bad choice of others. If either of my children got measles because some anti-vacc movement I would be murderous. It is negligent of the government to not require vaccines for being in public. You don't want the benefits of medical science go live in a mud hut some where else.",
"You should care about the well-being of all people, not only yourself.\n\nFirst time I actually answered as if talking to a 5 year-old. *insert success baby*",
"I have asthma and got whooping cough (pertussis) last year I am still feeling the effects today. I caught it off my son who picked it up from an unvaccinated kid at school. We were both vaccinated and I am glad of that because my son only suffered a very mild case but I was off work for a month and still find I hard to breath after climbing a set of stairs! I find it incredibly frustrating that my Heath and that of my children could be fatally effected by the uninformed fringe fanatics. \nI think this spells it right out \n_URL_4_\n\nWhy vaccinations are great!",
"Yes, you're safe if you are vaccinated. However, not all unvaccinated people chose to be. Some people can't get vaccinated for whatever reason (medical conditions, etc.). That's why getting vaccinated is important; if fewer people, in general, can get infected, then the vulnerable people who can't get vaccinated are less likely to catch that infection/disease from someone else, keeping them healthier.",
"Herd immunity. That's why you should care.\n\nIf everyone who can be vaccinated is vaccinated, then individuals with illnesses/immune deficiencies etc who can't get the immunization are protected. Also, babies who are too young to be immunized will be protected as well. If not? those people can die. \n\nIf people start opting out of vaccines just because, we could see things like polio epidemics again. \n\nIt's a matter of public responsibility. It's not enough to just look out for ourselves, we have to look out for each other.",
"You'll start to care when you have a baby that isn't old enough to be vaccinated who catches it because of some idiot lunatic cunts fucking up the herd immunity in your area.",
"What the hell is wrong with people that they reject vaccines? \n\nIt's not only endangering yourself (or your children) but also others, for example babies that can not have the vaccine yet, suddenly people around them start having diseases. \n\nAlso why don't the doctors notice that someone hasn't had his vaccines on checkups and educate people?",
"What's your source on your comment \"because of the anti-vaccination movements\"?",
"I was vaccinated as a kid and before I entered college I had to have a booster for the MMR vaccine. Two years later though I got the Mumps. It was horrible. I had a high fever and my face and neck swelled like a balloon which was very painful. I went to the ER and the doctor (she was young) didn't even know what the symptoms were and had to look them up on the computer. Still, even though I had all the symptoms she wasn't convinced and gave me antibiotics and sent me on my way. I visited my doctor the next day and he confirmed that I did have the Mumps. I had to basically stay in my room for over a week since my parents were never vaccinated. Needless to say sometimes the vaccines don't work or you lose immunity over the years. I now have my immunity levels checked ever so often since I'm still in school and definitely do not want to catch any other of those viruses.",
"I am highly allergic to the meningitis vaccine so all these stupid people who aren't getting vaccinated hurt people like me and a bunch of my family who are also allergic.",
"If you have kids, they can't be vaccinated for some things until a certain age. If everyone is vaccinated, they have some protection from exposure. If other people are carrying it, kids too young to be vaccinated will be the most vulnerable group.\n\nThis is why avoiding vaccination makes people so mad. One persons' fearful ignorance puts other kids lives at actual risk.",
"Say the herd immunity threshold for measles is 95%, and the vaccine is 98% effective. That is, of 100 vaccinated people who are exposed, only 2 will get it. (I made that number up.) If 100 people get vaccinated, only 2 are susceptible and thus an epidemic will fizzle out. But if 5 refuse the vaccine (crazy anti-vaccers + those with legit medical reasons + those who can't be bothered), now we're below the threshold and most if not all the unprotected people will get measles.\n\nAnd of those 7 people who get the measles, a significant chunk --2 --*did* get vaccinated.",
"I was vaccinated and my kids will be in the future but I can see why some people are sceptical, the majority of us don't understand what these vaccines are or what they contain and what effect they have on the body, couple that with corrupt government constantly and systematically lying to the electorate and your going to find people are naturally going to be cautious.",
"**Vaccine History and Effectiveness**\n\nVaccines are one of the greatest advances in the history of medicine, starting over 2000 years ago when the Chinese would administer the dried crust of small pox sores into the mucous membranes of the nostrils as a form of inoculation. This delivered a weakened version of the virus to the immune system, allowing a significant enough infection for immunity to develop without the considerable life threatening risk of a full blown infection. Treatment was 98% effective, but 2% still became disfigured and died as a result of treatment (Sears, 2012). The advent of more effective modern inoculation techniques eradicated of small pox worldwide, as well as reducing the number of polio and diptheria cases by 100%, 99% for rubella, mumps, measles, and H. influeza, and more than 90% for pertussis and hepatitis A within the United States (Anderson & May, 1985). Accordingly, vaccines have demonstrated themselves to be some of the most favorable disease prevention strategies. They are also one of the most cost-effective methods to control diseases. For example, when considering the direct medical costs and the in-direct time loss, there is an estimated saving of $80,000 through use of the pneumocccal conjugate vaccine (Davis, Zimmerman, Wheeler, and Freed, 2002). However, this great triumph for mankind has turned out to be a double edged sword.\n\n**Vaccination Effort Threats**\n\nThe massive reduction in the number of cases of these diseases has eliminated the majority of firsthand accounts of how horrible these diseases can be, making it difficult for parents to understand the magnitude of the threat these diseases pose. Without an adequate understanding of the threat, many parents have begun to minimize the importance of vaccinations for their child’s health. (Kennedy, Brown, and Gust, 2005). Instead they begin to focus on the generally unsubstantiated claims of adverse side affects spread by anti-vaccination campaigns, on-line websites, and books such as A Shot in the Dark (Wolfe, 2005). The suspected side effects range from autism, to neurological disorders and cancer. These are generally considered to be unsubstantiated because severe side-effects are so rare that they often cannot be measured to any statistic significance (Gangarosa et al, 1998). This is unlike the very real and proven risk of a life threatening and vaccine-preventable infection. For example, a study in Colorado determined that those unvaccinated are 22 times more likely to contract measles and 6 times more likely to contract pertussis (Smith & Barker, 2004). This ends up posing a threat not only to the unvaccinated child, but also poses a significant threat to the vaccinated public at large (Park, 2008). This is because vaccines are not 100% effective, allowing any individual to have a small chance of infecting even protected individuals. Thus, the threat to the public is minimized once a critical threshold is met that minimizes the probability of contact between vaccinated and non-vaccinated people. \n\n**Herd Immunity**\n\nOnce this threshold is met, it results in something called herd immunity. Herd immunity is the resilience of a population to a disease, and requires approximately 95% of the population to be protected against a disease (Cockman, 2011). Such a large majority is required because vaccines are not 100% effective, and a contagious individual may have the opportunity to contact expose hundreds of others to the disease. There is a risk of an epidemic if contact results in greater than one new infection. For example, a mathematical model reported that if the probability of contact from exemptors to nonexemptors increased from 20% to 60%, the incidence of acquiring measles increased from 5.5% to 30.8% within the population; this is more than double the linear effect. (Smith, 2004) The risk derived from not meeting the requirements for herd-immunity will disproportionately affect children below the vaccination age, the elderly, and the immuno-compromised such as those with HIV. Accordingly, since the 1980’s all 50 US states have enacted vaccine requirement laws for children entering school. However, there is a clause in 48 of the 50 state laws that allow a parent to opt-out for religious reasons (Gangarosa, 1998; Omer, 2006). This technicality is easily abused for non-religious reasons, and has allowed for a disturbing trend in the United States, where an increasing number of parents are opting out of vaccinating their children, citing conflict due to “religious reasons.” (Daniel Salmon, Johns Hopkins)\n\n**Sources:** \n\n-Alice Park. (2008, May 29). “How Safe Are Vaccines?” [Electronic version] Time. \nRetrieved from _URL_6_\n\n-Anderson, R. M., & May, R. M. (1985, November 28). Vaccination and herd immunity to \ninfectious diseases [Electronic version]. Nature, 318(1), 323-329.\nCenter of Disease Control. (2010). National Immunization Survey (NIS) – Children Only. \nRetrieved from _URL_5_.\n\n-Cockman, P. (2010, August 20). Improving MMR vaccination rates: herd immunity is a \nrealistic goal [Electronic version]. BMJ,343(1), 13-19. doi:10.1136/bmj.d5703 \n\n-Davis, M. M., Zimmerman, J. L., Wheeler, J. R., & Freed, G. L. (2002, December 5). \nChildhood Vaccine Purchase Costs in the Public Sector: Past Trends, Future Expectations [Electronic version]. American Journal of Public Health, 91(12), 1982-1987.\n\n-Gangarosa, E. J., Galazka, A. M., Wolfe, C. R., Phillips, L. M., Gangarosa, R. E., Miller, \nE., & Chen, R. T. (1998, January 31). Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story [Electronic version]. The Lancet, 351, 356-361\n\n-Kennedy, A. M., Brown, C. J., & Gust, D. A. (2005, May 28). Vaccine Beliefs of Parents \nWho Oppose Compulsory Vaccinations [Electronic version]. Public Health \nReports, 120(3), 252-258.\n\n-Omer, S. B., Pan, W. K., Halsey, N. A., Stokley, S., Moulton, L. H., Navar, A. M., & \nPierce, M. (2006, October 11). Nonmedical Exemptions to School Immunization Requirements [Electronic version]. Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(14), 1757-1763.\n\n-Salmon, Daniel. Mandatory Immunization Laws and the Role of Medical, Religious and Philosophical Exemptions. (Unpublished commentary). Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland\n\n-Sears, Duane. (2012, Jan. 7) Introduction to Immunology. Immunobiology. Lecture \nconducted from University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA.\n\n-Smith, P. J., Chu, S. Y., & Barker, L. E. (2004, July 3). Children Who Have Received No \nVaccines: Who Are They and Where Do They Live? [Electronic version]. Pediatrics, 114(1), 187-195. doi:10.1542/peds.114.1.187\n\n-Wolfe, R. M. (2005, February 28). Vaccine safety activists on the Internet [Electronic \nversion]. Future Drugs, 20(3), 240-24",
"My daughter is a population that while vaccinated would still be at great risk. \n\nAt age 2 she was so chronically and severely I'll that she had to undergo immunology testing. \n\nShe came back as having an autoimmune disorder. Auto means for some reason the body is attacking itself unlike acquired where you get it from someone else. \n\nHer diagnosis was hypogammaglobulinenmia I am sure I spelled that wrong. Basically she had little to no antibodies to things she had previously had been vaccinated for. Also things she had been diagnosised with while hospitalized by lab tests did not show antibodies. \n\nFor her, we had to revaccinate her which had to be done over time as if we did them all at once we risked making her serriously ill. She was also put on profolatic antibiotic treatment. Meaning she took antibiotics daily for a really long time (more then a year) even having done all that she was a sickly child. \n\nShe is 24 now and still ends up hospitalized at least once a year. Usually pneumonia that gets so out of control she needs 7 to 10 days of IV antibiotics along with respiratory therapy treatments. \n\nSo for someone like he coming in contact with an illness like measles could be deadly. \n\nThere are people out there who could me immuno compromised like her and be unaware they are \n\nAlso it seems that in the last 10 years or so colleges have wanted students to repeat the mmr vaccine as its protection begins to wear off.",
"Here's the concept.\n\nImmunize everyone who is able. Let's call it 95%. This excludes those who can't because of age, or allergy. That means that only 5% of the people who are wandering around can actually get the disease.\n\nIf they somehow contract it, their likelihood of spreading it is significantly reduced. Using a pool of 100 people, there would only be 4 other people who \"could\" get it. Everyone else is \"immune.\" \n\nBasically, most people are immune from the get go, which prevents an initial outbreak, and even if there was an outbreak, it is drastically reduced in size, because most people are immune.\n\nWe don't have small pox, because people are immune. We generally don't have Measles, Mumps, or Rubella, because we had MMR shots. The current generation got Chicken pox shots, which is giving people herd immunity to that and Shingles. Polio? When was the last time you heard of someone getting polio? \n\nVaccines, and Herd immunity is awesome.",
"You should care because of those fucking idiotic anti-vax douchebags running around promoting a fear-based, psuedoscientific agenda to impressionable young parents and the general public... You really should be more worried about these morons. They shouldn't be having kids. They should be vaccinated against life.",
"Reading the comments on that news article actually made me angry. I try to resist the instinctual \"someone is wrong on the internet!\" reaction, but this pushes a button. And it's impossible to argue with anti-vaxxers! There's nothing to be gained. It's disheartening.",
"Mutation.\n\n* Once a person/host contracts a virus it has an opportunity to mutate and then be passed onto a new host (pathogen transmission ie. coughing, sneezing, touching). The more the disease spreads, the more it has an opportunity to mutate, becoming a modified or new strain. Examples: Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B etc.\n\n* The new host contains a mutated/modified strain which may then not be recognized by the population that was vaccinated (their immune systems). \n\n* A vaccine works by helping the immune system learn how to kill the virus. \n\n* If the virus mutates (1) and is then passed (2) the immune system of the new host may not be able to recognize it as it was trained to do by receiving the vaccine (where new host was previously vaccinated against original virus, not the mutated one). And thus, the new virus can potentially kill the host even if he/she was vaccinated. The new strain can do damage because the hosts immune system cannot see it. It only knows how to kill the virus it was trained to kill through the vaccine the host received. (eg. I've been trained to see A, so I can kill A. I cannot see B, so I cannot kill B).\n\n* A great example of this is the common Flu (Influenza). It mutates every year. So that is why there is always a call to get a flu shot. It is transmitted easily, and has many more opportunities to mutate. So it mutates often. If you receive a flu shot, you are vaccinated against that seasons flu variant. It means you are less likely to carry the virus and pass it on, giving it a chance to further mutate.",
"I haven't seen an actual answer really in the top comments. So I assume it has not been given. \n\nViruses can mutate. They can only mutate in someone who can carry the disease, these are non vaccinated people. If the virus mutates in such a way in someone, that it becomes immune to vaccines, you have a new disease in the country with no effective barriers in terms of people who are immune to it. It can cause incredible damage if not deaths. \n\nSo everyone needs to vaccinate in order to protect the collective. People who don't vaccinate are an effective source of harm. \n\nIf you're more in IT; would you like to accept files from someone you know got a computer virus, thinking \"oh, my antivirus\" will block it? You'll likely want to pass on that with some common sense regardless.",
"Immunity doesnt mean what you think it means. Its not absolute. Kids with compromised immune systems can still get measles even if theyve been vaccinated. Hospitals and waiting rooms are common places where people get sick because thats where youll discover both infectious diseases AND delicate immune systems. Its a recipe for disaster.\n\nIn my experience, many antivaxxers are mothers with autistic children. I guess through denial they find meaning and purpose in their lives. They need someone to blame, someone to hold responsible, a reason to wake up in the morning. No mother wants her child to be born autistic. But it happens, and often without rhyme or reason. And thats the sad cruelty of nature. So while theyre wrong, both scientifically and ethically, I understand why they think the way they do.",
"... How does the author know that this new outbreak is the result of \"anti-vaccination\" movements. Restate: how does Mr. Russel Sanders writer for The Daily Beast and pediatrician know that this new appearance of the measles virus is a result of people refusing to vaccinate? Does he have records backing this up?\n\nThis article is complete opinion with absolutely no scientific data to back it up. Absolutely none. \n\nI personally believe that the vaccine is worthwhile and will make sure that any kids of mine have the vaccine, but there is nothing in this article that supports the argument that the author is making. He's just stating an opinion and claiming that because the disease has resurfaced he has proof positive that the anti-vaccine movements are to blame.",
"People can still pass it on. If your unlucky like me a few years ago someone passed the mumps onto me even though i had the immunization for it. I spend two weeks in pain due to that. I'm just lucky that it wasn't as bad as it could have been.",
"Because even if you were pro-vaccination, there's a period of time before your children would be old enough to be vaccinated, so if the virus is rampant in the community those least prepared to deal with it have a high chance of infection/death (due to the super weak immune system).",
"The virus can mutate in ways inside of other people that would cause the vaccines to become ineffective.",
"ELI5 : why can't \"Anti-Vaxxers\" stop being so stupid.",
"TL;DR Slightly related rant, get yo shots kids or you're a biological terrorist\n\nUnrelated to the question, BUT:\nWhat the fuck is wrong with people? I mean, I've known that people have been against vaccines for whatever reason for awhile now, and earlier on it was easier to understand; it was 'new' and essentially injecting a often devastating sometimes lethal pathogen directly into the body. But years, DECADES, of WIDE RANGE, LIVE HUMAN USAGE (Which, by the way, is what doctors and scientists do to ensure it's safe and effective, it's called testing then. Then again, there's holistic medicine people out there, but that's a different rant) which have yielded VERY few adverse results. Now with the measles vaccine (as well as some others), it's different cause people are allergic to some things in it. But it's more rare than common, so there is literally no reason not to. Scared of a tiny sliver of metal putting dead/functionally disabled cells into your body? How about being a willing vector of a virus that is (usually) TOTALLY preventable? Obviously some people are legitimately exempt, AND WHO RELY ON YOU TO BE VACCINATED so they don't die. You're essentially committing biological warfare! Okay, not really, but point implied: people could die because of you, like driving drunk, choosing to drink and drive is like choosing to not get vaccinated, someone could be hurt, be it you or someone else. Some people are afraid of the possibility of an adverse effect of it, but that probability is so low it hurts to be used as a fear argument. I don't remember the exact figure, but I think it's as low as getting into a plane crash (although that does seem to be happening more and more...). For context, airports (well, air traffic and planes) are regulated by some of the highest expectations for a job, up there with doctors and engineers. Sure, some smucks get through, but the HUGE majority know what they're doing, and often have done it for HOURS before you ever fly in their first commercial flight. Anyways, the point is, there is almost NO reason to not get vaccinated. Of course, those that don't probably aren't that fit to survive, so I guess their helping out the greater good in a way. \nSorry if I offended anyone, I'm an asshole and fuck your feelings if you were offended, I don't care. Sue me",
"An individual being vaccinated against a virus does not necessarily have immunity to that virus. Some vaccines do provide high immunity but In general that is not how vaccines work. \n\nA general example\n\nA vaccine raises immunity to a virus slightly. If 95% a population agrees to a vaccine then all of them become slightly more resistant to the virus. Because of this slight increase in immunity to the virus the virus finds it hard to spread and maintain an infected population. Eventually with continuous vaccinations throughout the population the virus is unable to spread effectively and its infected population size dwindles and it dies out within the population. This is called herd immunity. It is important to maintain herd immunity as some people are unable to get vaccinated for medical reasons. Some vaccines are almost useless when taken individually or below a certain percentage of the population. That is why measles are making a comeback in the U.S.\n\nHaving a vaccine does not necessarily make you immune to a virus.\n\nIn order for several of the vaccines to work they require that a certain proportion of the population takes the vaccine if not the vaccine is not effective.",
"I have a young son and continually struggle with the question of what vaccinations to get and when. I don't trust the drug makers, I don't trust simplified science, I don't trust anecdotal evidence. It is difficult to evaluate risk vs benefit when neither are clear. What I am sure of us that he shouldn't get too many in one appointment so we stagger them and make extra appointments. The causes of autism remain mysterious. But I would rather have an autistic child then a dead one. So I vaccinate for the illnesses that I believe are are true threats.",
"Do you plan to have children? They aren't born immunized and the first dose is at 12 months. Young children are protected by herd immunity until they get the vaccine. If people choose not vaccinate they are relying on you and everyone else to protect them and their children. If they get exposed then they are a threat to your children.",
"> Aren't only unvaccinated people at risk?\n\nLargely. Other people have covered the health risks for you as a vaccinated persons. \n\nBut that still matters to you as a taxpayer and as a consumer of healthcare services. Because it's the same hospitals you would use, the same doctors you would see who now have to waste time helping people who were too stupid to do what they should have. \n\nIf kids (particularly kids) get sick from this it's you as a taxpayer on the hook for the bill if the parents cannot or will not pay for treatment. It's you as a person trying to sell a product or service that suffers if other countries start to restrict travel to or from the US because of this sort of thing. Just because you're vaccinated doesn't mean you can't be a carrier (of some diseases anyway) for a brief time, do you really want to end up in quarantine every time you travel?",
"I have lost many acquaintances to this very debate. \"How can that many shots in that short of time be good\", they cry. \"Google baby with tetanus\", I reply. Seriously if I had to get poked a hundred times a year just so my daughter would not have any chance of getting sick from me I would roll up my damn sleeve and say let's do this. If she had to as well I would help keep her calm but, I would make sure she got every single shot.",
"First of all, these kids are now suffering from a disease that their parents could easily have prevented if they had just had them vaccinated. Maybe someone can ELI5 how that isn't a form of child abuse.\n\nSecondly, because now this measles outbreak puts an additional strain on the healthcare system, which drives up costs for all of us. Parents who choose not to vaccinate their kids should have to pay a hefty additional fee on top of their health insurance premiums.",
"1. Mutations - the longer the disease exists, the higher the chance it could mutate into a strand that we do not have a vaccine for.\n\n2. Your children/nephews/nieces/etc. cannot be vaccinated until a certain age. They will be at risk until that age because herd immunity no longer exists.",
"Babies aren't vaccinated right away when they are born. You could worry that some dummy will be the reason your baby gets very sick or worse. As a father of a two year old girl (and another kiddo on the way), this thought makes me furious.",
"Smokers cannot smoke in public areas for second party health reasons. Those not vaccinated shouldn't be allowed in public areas for second party health reasons.",
"herd mentality friend. less than 95% of the herd immunized, means it's useless.",
"I'ts called herd immunity, and its very imoprtant to maintain it.",
"Because it is important to care also about other people.",
"Virulence. MMR vaccine is 88% effective, and has a set infectious amount of days. If population of X% is 88% immune, how many Y% of non-vaccinated people do you need to infect the populace? That is the question.\n\nSo normally, you'd be safe because in a standard population where everyone is 88% immune, there will be no virulence.\n\nBecause 88% resistance in reality means much more - diseases cant just enter your body willy nilly. There is barriers. Licking a person with measles, wont guarantee infection you see. But in a scenario where it would a vaccinated person would resist it 88 attempts out of 100. \n\nWhich means, that when vaccine is introduced in a populace, that due to the lesser virulence, it will eventually die out. As it did in the developed world. But now it's back as we 1) Travel more. 2) Have anti vaccine people to such a degree that it allows virulence high enough to matter.",
"The best way to think about it is this: your vaccination is a small dose of the virus that generates a moderate immune response that protects you from future small doses of the virus (through incidental contact). Your moderate immune response is enough to stamp out whatever little amount of virus is around in everyday living, and thus you remain disease-free.\n\nBut when someone who isn't vaccinated acts as an incubation chamber for the virus, they build up a very concentrated dose of the virus that overwhelms whatever small immunity your vaccine has given you, and thus you can become ill from their concentrated virus. This in turn puts others at risk and so on.\n\ntl;dr: you have a dilute immunity from vaccination which is prone to infection from a concentrated virus.",
"Well, let's see. Do you have an infant who is too young for the vaccine? The baby is at greater risk if s/he gets a preventable childhood disease. Do you have a relative who is immunocompromised? My husband is diabetic; he almost died in the emergency room of pertussis. Of DTP fame. Also known as whooping cough. :/ \n\nI blame the generational disconnect. Infant mortality is such a foreign concept in the first world -- if more people had access to their (great?) grandparents and could hear the stories of the ravages/body counts wrought by polio/measles/scarlet fever, they would be lining up to get the vaccine.\n\nThanks, Andrew Wakefield! You are a disgrace to your former profession, and the reason for the vast majority of these outbreaks.",
"It isn't just the folks who are against vaccinating that are causing the problem. It's also folks who have immigrated to this country without ever having received a vaccine for anything in their country of origin. If you look through the employee handbook for places that have a large number of (legal or illegal...it doesn't matter) immigrant employees, the employer tends to have a zero tolerance policy for illness. If they're at work w/a fever, rash, vomiting, etc., they are sent home immediately. Employers know how quickly these things can tear through a plant/office. TB is also becoming an issue in certain regions. It's not just the Jenny McCarthy followers who are messing with fire.",
"Hey guys, Nanny here.\nI currently work with a child in the spectrum, and his typically developing sibling.\nAutistic child is 6, and partially vaccinated. He was diagnosed at 18 months.\nI asked Tina (mom) a few weeks ago if her children were immunized against measles (shes a professor at UC Berkeley, and takes BART in the am, potentially being exposed to measeles, as she was in the same train as the unvaccinated Filipino with measles)\nShe replied \"No, well Niko is partially immunized, Dominiki isn't, but look! She survived until her 2nd birthday, and hopefully longer\" this coming from a Grad. Engineer Professor.\n\nWhat the what. Damn Religion and Jenny McCarthy",
"Herd immunity is like lining up politely for something. One or two people might butt into the line, but the more people that do it, the less it is a line rather than a shoving match. \n\nWhy should you care? As others mentioned, some people can't tolerate the vaccine or are too young. Also, money spent on (preventable) disease treatment subtracts from that which could be spent on better things. People without health care are going to cost the taxpayer.",
"Some people (like myself) lose immunity over time (blood tests when I was 18 showed I was immune but ten years later they showed I wasn't). So unless I get a booster shot, I'm vulnerable to infection from measles. Also kids/babies who aren't yet vaccinated are susceptible and some people can't get vaccinated for medical reasons and they depend on herd immunity for protection. If enough people in the \"herd\" don't get vaccinated, it puts more people at risk.",
"Been lurking for almost a year and never posted.....now I have something to ask though.\nIf those that don't get vaccinated or don't get their kids vaccinated are to blame for this, then why are the people who are getting sick the ones who have gotten the vaccine? To me it would make a lot more sense if those who never got the vaccine at least got sick...\nHere's what I read. \n_URL_7_",
"Vaccines aren't a 100% thing, and of course they don't last for an infinite amount of time. Some people's immune system (those with HIV and AIDS) may have trouble working with these small vaccines and may get sick from even a small dosage of that disease. While that sometimes is OK, their systems still may not immunize to it properly.\n\nSorry for posting after solved, but I wanted to add a bit more.",
"ELI5: how is this quote from the article statistically relevant to what the author is trying to prove? \n\n > \"Over a dozen people around Los Angeles have been diagnosed with measles already this year, nearly half of them intentionally unvaccinated.\" \n\nSo over half either had the vaccine and got sick, or they are unintentionally unvaccinated? Why did these people get sick?",
"I saw this one video (can't remember where) but some people can't get immunized due to various factors such as allergies. \n\nTo prevent these people from getting said disease, they rely on everyone else to be immunized and not have the disease.\n\nAlso, immunizations only last a few years I believe, although I think some last up to 10 years so....",
"People all start out unvaccinated. Rubella, aka German Measles is particularly nasty in utero and can cause hearing loss, heart damage and brain damage depending on when a pregnant women is exposed. The window before kids cannot be vaccinated extends back before they are born and infections can be even worse in utero when organs are busy forming.",
"Is there actual evidence that the resurgence of the disease is due to anti-vaccination activists? I just don't feel that the article actually makes any strong case. I obviously agree that people should be vaccinated, but I just can't take statement attributing particular causation without some numbers. \n\nCitation for \"measles have reappeared *because of*\" anti-vaxxers?",
"You shouldn't be concerned with it in regards to your own health; it's more of an ethical issue. While all of us who are vaccinated are safe, it is still deeply troubling that this movement exists and that countless children are being put at such an unnecessary but serious risk.",
"the vaccine has an efficacy of 70%, this is why mass immunisations are required, so that the 30% who don't get full immunity have little chance of encountering a carrier. measles is popping up in areas where herd immunity is down",
"I have cousins that are Anti MMR. Would really like to know a decent way to convince them that people don't suffer from \"autistic states\" in some cases of the MMR vaccine without being reactionary or reductive.",
"You should care because not everyone is vaccinated. Maybe your wife isn't vaccinated, or your mother, or your sister. You should care because your a human being, and you should care about your fellow human beings.",
"People travel. Some country doesn't have vaccination program and cost money to do. A person may pick up the virus while traveling to other country.",
"The State of Colorado has just passed a law requiring children to have all vaccinations prior to attending public school. No exemptions any more.",
"Vaccines don't work on all people, but if everybody is vaccinated it is enough to wipe out the disease so we are ALL safe.",
"I found this article interesting. _URL_8_\nThe church advised its members to avoid immunizations and now have an outbreak among its members.",
"There are 10^31 viruses on Earth, I'm vaccinated against 10 of them, so at least I got that going for me.",
"While the vaccine does provide protection from the disease, it does not work 100% of the time.",
"Where are the anti-vaxxers or anti-vaccination websites? I hear all about them but never met/seen one...",
"You should care because your neighbors might be stupid enough to not vaccinate their children.",
"Isn't it the greater good to let those die who refuse to get vaccinated?",
"Jenny McCarthy is about as smart as a door knob. WHO'S WITH ME?!",
"What are the chances of it mutating and the vaccinations becoming ineffective?"
] |
How does the genotyping process that 23andMe use work? | [
"Check out Smarter Every Day's video for a behind the scenes at the factory with loads of useful info:\n_URL_0_",
"23andMe uses a type of sequencing called [SNP genotyping](_URL_1_) to look for general trends in your genome that indicate genetic history. It relies of the concept of SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms), which are single positions in the genome that tend to vary between populations.\n\nPicture a double-stranded molecule of DNA. Unwind it, and you end up with what basically looks like a ladder. You can then assign every base pair (\"rung\" of the ladder) a number, from one to ~6.2 billion, moving from one end of the molecule to another. The very first base is position one, the next is two, and so on. Each position can be one of the four bases (A,T,C, or G). \n\nAs it turns out, there are certain positions in the genome (based on the numbered order) that stay relatively constant between people that are more evolutionarily similar, and vary between other populations. \n\nFor example (and I'm just making all of these up to illustrate) let's say that at the 512,431st position in the genome most people from Eastern Europe have an A, the Middle East have a C, South America a T, and North Africa a G in that position. If I know which of the four bases is in your genome, I can compare it to a library that tells me which populations have that same base pair. Multiply that by ~~thousands~~ (Edit: about 600,000 SNPs for 23andMe) of these SNPs throughout the genome and you can get a fairly accurate sense of someone's ancestry without having to sequence and compare the entire genome.",
"[SmarterEveryDay did an episode on this](_URL_2_) when 23andme wanted to sponsor an episode.\n\nTL;DW Genotyping looks for the presence of specific genes using a gene sequence probe. However, genotyping is also dependent on the accuracy and fullness of the non-biological information provided by the respondents."
] |
Penny stock fraud (i.e. Wolf of Wall Street) | [
"Buying and selling penny stocks is normal.\n\nSelling penny stocks to investors and lying about what they are (eg A great opportunity, as good as a blue chip, the next Microsoft etc. etc.) is illegal.\n\nThat's what the Wolf was doing."
] |
Why do some artists sign to record labels and become famous within 6 months-a year while others sign to the same record labels and are worse-off in 6 months to a year when both artist's music/commercial potential is about the same? | [
"> ...when both artist's music/commercial potential is about the same?\n\nThis is your subjective take on the matter. Perhaps others would be inclined to agree? Besides, music trends aren't always about good sounding music but just what happens to get popular anyhow."
] |
What became of the 'rags to riches' soccer team? | [
"You are talking about the English team Leicester City F.C. and they are still currently at the top of the Premiere League."
] |
Can birds fly in a moving car? If so, how? | [
"If the acceleration of the car is zero, i.e. it is moving at a constant velocity, you might as well imagine it as being stationary. Think of an airplane cruising at 400 mph, people aren't being flung to the back of it, you can walk around, go to the bathroom, and function as if the plane isn't even moving at all. The key here is the acceleration. If you floor it in a car, you feel yourself pushing into the seat, if you brake, you fall forward. But if you're moving at a constant speed, you don't feel anything. Because the car is sealed, air resistance is not a factor, so a bird could fly just as you and I can walk on a moving train or airplane.",
"Yes, the bird can fly. There's no added air resistance inside the car, and the bird will already be traveling at the same speed, so until it gets tired it can fly as normal.",
"If a bird can fly in a room, it can fly inside a car. your talking about with windows closed right?"
] |
How network bridges work in Windows (not hardware switches) | [
"Network bridging turns your computer into a network switch, combining two physical network adapters into one. They share an IP address, but still have separate physical (MAC) addresses. The computer compiles a list of every MAC address it sees on each physical adapter. \n\nWhen a computer on either segment (physical network) sends a frame looking for a MAC address on the other segment, the bridging computer receives this frame, forwarding it out the appropriate interface (if not the one on which the frame was initially received), after which point the destination computer receives and processes the frame accordingly.",
"A network bridge will take two or more networks and bring them together so that you can talk to machines on either network as though it were all one network.\n\nThe way it does it is by [learning](_URL_0_) where the machine you want is and building up a lookup table or IP address and MAC addresses etc. It can do this by broadcasting the packets you need sending to both networks and figuring out where the machine is, OR by looking it up using ARP."
] |
how does chemotherapy work without killing us? | [
"Chemotherapy attacks rapidly dividing cells- so you're hoping cancerous cells that are wrecking havoc on your body, but unfortunately this also means it attacks other cells that normals divide rapidly like blood cells and follicle cells, which is why chemo patients often lose their hair and may require blood transfusions. Different classes of chemos attack cells in different ways, which is why some are harder on patients than others. Very simply put, it is a delicate balance between attempting to destroy as many cancer cells as you can without causing so much collateral damage within the patients body that they do actually die.",
"They focus primarily on killing cells that undergo higher rates of division, which cancer cells fall into. Their exact mechanisms can vary, but as a whole they impede cellular division, causing the cancer cells to die when they divide.\n\nUnfortunately, a lot of cells in the body under relatively high rates of cellular division as well (though not as much as cancer cells). For example, the lining of your intestines are shed and regrown every several days, so these cells wind up being destroyed to a small extent as well. This is what causes the intense nausea that most chemo patients experience. Hair follicles are another example of cells that undergo rapid division, and thus die out during chemo.\n\nAvoid killing the patient outright is handled by careful administration of the dose. Its why chemotherapy is done over several weeks and at intervals - it gives the cells in the body time enough to recover before being hit again by the chemodrugs.\n\nIn short, chemotherapy hits the body and cancer cells, but hits the cancer harder. They spread the treatment out over time to avoid overwhelming the healthy cells in your body."
] |
Why does America(among others) have different laws for different states and other countries just have the same laws throughout the country. | [
"Federalism! \n\nAmerican federalism emerged from the particular way in which the states declared independence from Britain-becoming, in effect, separate countries-and then joined together to form a confederation and then a single nation. Recall that the framers of the Constitution turned to federalism as a middle-ground solution between a confederation form of government-which was deemed a failed model based on the experience of the United States under the Articles of Confederation-and a unitary form of government-which a majority of states, jealous of their independence and prerogatives, found unacceptable. Federalism was also a form of government that was consistent with the eighteenth-century republicanism of the framers because it helps fragment government power. But we can gain further insight into why the United States adopted and has continued as a federal system if we look at what other countries with similar systems have in common.\n\nFederalism tends to be found in nations that are large in a territorial sense and where the various geographical regions are fairly distinctive from one another in terms of religion, ethnicity, language, and forms of economic activity. In Germany, for example, the conservative Catholics of the south have traditionally been different from the liberal Protestants of the north and east, while the former communist territories of the former Germany Democratic Republic differ markedly in living standards from the prosperous West. In Canada, the farmers of the central plains are not much like the fishers of Nova Scotia, and the French-speaking (and primarily Catholic) residents of Quebec differ markedly from the mostly English-speaking Protestants of the rest of the country. In Spain, deep divisions along ethnic and language lines (note the distinctive Basque and Catalan regions). Other important federal systems include such large and richly diverse countries as India, Pakistan, Russia, and Brazil. In these countries, federalism gives diverse and geographically concentrated groups the degree of local autonomy they seem to want, with no need to submit in all matters to a unified central government. In Iraq, the question of the relative degree of autonomy of Kurdish and Shiite provinces in a federal Iraq was the most important point of contention over adoption of a new Iraqi constitution in 2005.\nThe United States, too, is large and diverse. From the early days of the Republic, the slave-holding and agriculture-oriented South was quite distinct from the merchant Northeast, and some important differences persist today. Illinois is not Louisiana; the farmers of Iowa differ from defense and electronics workers in California. States today also vary from one another in their approaches to public policy, their racial and ethnic composition, and their political cultures. In The Federalist Papers, the Founders argued that this size and diversity made federalism especially appropriate for the new United States.\n\nWhile the American system of federalism was truly exceptional at the founding, other large and important countries have taken on federal forms in the years since, especially since the end of World War II. To this extent, the United States is no longer the single exception or one among a handful of exceptions to the unitary nature of the majority of the world's governments.",
"The term we use would be \"decentralized\". Whereas, say, Canada is more centralized than its southern neighbour. In a way, it's more effective to have a centralized government, as you can apply changes throughout the entire country without worrying about a concentrated minority being different (the best examples are far left issues such as abortion or LGBTQ rights, which pass fine in liberal or centralist areas, but meet stiff opposal in conservative areas. Sometimes that can be a bad thing, as the small region is forced to have a law that they didn't necessarily want (even though we may see it as \"wrong\", democracy is supposed to be the choices of the people, and, perhaps unfortunately, everyone's vote is equal). At other times, however, it can be a good thing, as it can allow a law that's generally considered to be \"good\" to apply to an entire country, without being held back by a small (but concentrated in one area) group.\n\nWhen the Americans set up their government, they decided to give the States a lot of power, whereas most other countries preferred to save most of the power for the federal government (easier to control). Being Canadian, I'm going to be using our government as an example of a more centralized government, since it's the one I'm most familiar with. Now, we have to remember that Canada started as a British colony, and for a long time, was just two regions, upper and lower Canada (at which time, the States were the original 13 colonies). The provinces of Canada were very culturally different, but were controlled by Britain, so in order to maintain control, a very centralized government was necessary (for the most part, Upper Canada was of British origin, while Lower Canada was mostly French). The States, on the other hand, were more independent, and essentially \"threw off\" the British rule (the war of 1812). This didn't happen with Canada; Canada peacefully declared itself a country of its own with the constitution act of 1867 (then the British North American Act). However, it remained linked to British rule for many years. It wasn't until as recently as 1982 with the Constitution act of 1982 that the very last \"link\" of British power was removed from the Canadian government (it basically gave our courts power). Anyway, with British rule being so slowly removed, the centralized government remained.\n\nNow, a good portion of Canada's government is controlled as an \"unwritten constitution\". The \"rules\" are just traditional, rather than being written down. The division of power is one of those things. Officially, the federal government controls things like the military, copyrights, the postal service, and criminal law (the full list is [section 91 of the Constitution act](_URL_0_)). The provinces control things like the management of land and facilities such as hospitals and prisons ([section 92](_URL_2_)). Healthcare is an interesting example; it's considered to be fully under the control of the provinces, but the federal government covers a large portion of its funding (we have universal healthcare). Unfortunately, provinces control too much. Even though we all have universal healthcare, it's not distributed the same to each province. A good example is cancer treatments. In BC, 29 out of 33 approved cancer drugs are covered by the province, while in PEI, only 15 of those 33 drugs are covered. The western provinces tend to spend more, and thus have a higher cancer survival rate.\n\nBut anyway, back to the states. As I mentioned, Canada has a written constitution that sums up a few basics to the division of power (federal vs provincial), but the rest is an unwritten constitution (fun fact: nowhere in our constitution is the role of a prime minister described). The States basically say what the federal government controls what affects the entire country (or extraterritorial matters), while the states have power for whatever happens inside of them. This is in their constitution, added by the [tenth amendment](_URL_1_). So in other words, each state has a lot of power. They can set their own gun laws, they can define their own definitions of marriage, and so on.\n\nWhether this division of power is good or bad is a toss up. It depends entirely on perspective. On one hand, the law represents the people who live in that state better. If everyone in an area believes something should be the law, then it can be the law. On the other hand, not everyone can agree with the choices each state makes, and if you travel to another state, you might find the laws very different. The only real limits to the state's ability to change the law is the constitution (which has amendments protecting things like free speech or the right to bear arms) and laws that could affect other states.\n\n**TL;DR: The Americans didn't like how centralized British rule was, and feared a too centralized government. This was set in place by the tenth amendment, which says that the states choose the laws that affect internal matters. Based on the people who live there, the states choose their own laws accordingly.**\n\nEDIT: Damn, that ended up way too freaking long. Anyway, the States seem to get a lot of bad rep over their decentralized government. I hope that my explanation of its original intent (to prevent the federal government from being too powerful) helps clear things up. It was well intended, and in some ways, it works (the federal government can't force the states to do what they don't want, which can include controversial topics like gay marriage). Of course, whether or not it's good depends on where you stand. For example, to a liberal outside of a conservative state, they seem stubborn, but to a conservative inside the state, it simply seems like the government is doing what it's people want (so the liberal would be better off looking at the people as the problem, rather than the government system).\n\nCentralized governments aren't perfect, either; they have their own problems. For example, marriage is mandated by the federal government here (per section 91 of the constitution act). If a province wanted to change who could get married, they'd have to appeal for the federal government to do it, as that's not within their power. Likewise, it's difficult for some provinces to get along. For example, rich, English-speaking, technological, oil-haven Alberta is very different from artistic, French-speaking, economically-troubled Quebec.\n\n\nPS: OP, the thread title needs to start with \"ELI5:\".",
"In a few words, besides he procedural reasons, it allows the states to be \"laboratories of experimentation\", law can be \"tested\"mad if they ork they can be made into federal law.\n\nThis isn't WHY, but it is a good part of It.\n\nSorry, I know I didn't answer the question but I just had to say something"
] |
Why does water seem so cold in my mouth while i chew gum? | [
"When you have \"cool\" water (say, 10C or 50F) in your mouth, it is draining heat out of your body at a certain rate. If you have ice water in your mouth (0C or 32F), it is draining heat out of your body much faster.\n\nMenthol (what makes things smell minty) is an irritant that increases blood flow. More blood flow means a faster exchange of heat. So the cool water is now draining heat out of you much faster, and your brain interprets that as meaning that you've actually got ice water in your mouth.",
"It works pretty much with anything minty. I don't have any education or research behind it, but what I quickly read from wiki on the factoring ingredient - menthol - it enhances local blood flow and expands vessels for the time it's in effect, but most of all it, by itself, causes a sensation of chill/cold. Add water to the poor tongue and feel a bit similar to if you were to dip your tongue into snow and then take a glass (or a mouthful) of water. \n\nTLDR; Menthol gives a sensation of cold to the area where it affects.\n\nE* It's all new information for me as well, so don't quote me on this :P",
"In the same way that chilli (capsaicin) activates nerves that detect heat, thus fooling you into thinking that your mouth is really hot when it isn't, menthol activates nerves that detect cold, fooling you into thinking your mouth is cold when it isnt. \n\nI believe water further enhances this somehow, but im not sure of the mechanism",
"It occurs in the same way that capsaicin in hot peppers causes a burning sensation, and further an increase in perceived temperature of heated food in the mouth. Capsaicin causes a burning sensation because it binds to a particular TRP receptor (TRPV1) in the mouth primarily responsible for detecting changes in temperature on the hotter end of the spectrum 37C+. TRP receptors are a class of both C and A delta fibers which perceive physical stimulus of temperature, pressure, inflammatory agents, etc and send the information via electrical signal to the brain (via neurons). With capsaicin already bound to these receptors in the mouth, the afferent neurons (cells in the body which carry electrical signals TO the brain) associated with these receptors become excited above their baseline state, and are both more easily activated (closer to threshold) and more strongly activated when another heat source is applied (such as warm food).\n\nNow the exact same thing occurs when you are chewing minty gum where the active ingredient is not capsaicin, but menthol. Menthol also binds to a particular TRP receptor (TRPM8), but a completely different one from capsaicin. So when you are chewing minty gum containing menthol, the menthol is exciting the neurons which accompany the TRPM8 receptors, exciting them, and making them more easily activated as well as more strongly activated when a temperature stimulus less than 37C is applied. A temperature stimulus less than 37C is then going to be interpreted and perceived as being much colder than it actually is, whether it be a sip of room temperature water at 24C feeling like ice-chilled water, or a breath of fresh air tasting cooler than it actually is.\n\nBoth these chemicals are actually used in a large number of OTC products like Icy Hot, Vicks, BenGay, etc."
] |
Why are there jokers in card decks? | [
"The joker is still used in games like Canasta, Gin Rummy and Euchre. By removing it, those games would have to change their rules, which would annoy more people than simply leaving the cards in.",
"> The joker did not appear until sometime around the 1860s. At that time, the game of euchre was extremely popular (it was later unseated by bridge). In euchre, under the British rules, there is a card known as the Imperial Bower (or Best Bower) that trumps all others. Decks of cards began to include a special Imperial Bower card, and it later morphed into the joker card that we know today.\n\nThey're still included most likely due to tradition, novelty, and deck padding.",
"One thing to keep in mind is that, when printing the cards, they come in [large sheets](_URL_0_).\n\nIf you're *just* printing 52 cards, you're looking at a 4x13 or a 2x26 spread to make a single deck, which is a large, unmanageable sheet. With 54 cards (2 jokers), you can do a 6x9 sheet. With 56 cards (2 jokers + 2 info/junk cards) you can hit 7x8 for a single deck without any waste."
] |
Why do stores leave some lights on even when closed? | [
"So that if they get broken into overnight the surveillance will actually be able to show something.",
"Boogeymen are everywhere, not just in the closets or under the bed."
] |
Why do humans crave sugar? | [
"Sugar, fats and starches are all high-energy food sources. During most of human evolution, we didn't have consistent access to these foods. Our bodies evolved to crave them so we would seek out energy sources (think \"fuel\" for our bodies). A few more berries or a handful of legumes gathered could fuel our muscles for a few more hours in a day.\n\nToday in our industrialized world, fats, refined sugars and carbs are about the cheapest foods we have access to. Since we still crave them from when they were scarce, we are now faced with the reality of overindulgence in these foods which can lead to obesity and diabetes.",
"The evolutionary aspects for it are obvious, but it should be made clear that liking sugar and having a craving for it are two different things. The pleasure derived from sugar has to do with our sugar-sensing taste buds, which then in turn enter the brain for the experience. The craving of sugar is due to the dopaminergic diffuse upper pathway, which is responsible for all other cravings. Stimulation of this diffuse pathway (which consists of many nerves grossly connecting with the frontal lobe of the cerebrum, i.e. the site of higher thinking) by means of pleasurable stimuli reinforces the behaviour that led to gaining that stimuli. Because drugs can directly stimulate the dopaminergic system, the behaviour that would be reinforced would be the intake of the drug. But, in normal circumstances as with sugar, we stimulate our dopamine pathway indirectly.",
"We evolved in a state of near starvation like most animals in the wild. As such we evolved to seek out foods that have the most nutrition for the least amount of effort. Those foods with lots of sugar or fat.",
"We haven't found anything sweet in the natural world that can kill us. Part of the theory is that sensitivity to sweetness helps us identify safe foods.",
"Sugars consists of carbohydrates, which are a stable energy source for, well, everything alive. High sugar means high energy which in turn promotes survival."
] |
The Control Group of a science experiment. How does giving a placebo to a control group do anything? | [
"Let's say you invent a drug that prevents cancer. You have a group of people who are taking it, and another group of people who are taking a sugar pill. You're going to monitor them for 10 years and see which group has better cancer outcomes. \n\nOver the course of those 10 years, though, the city realizes that the air and water are super polluted and causing people to get cancer. So they clean it up. \n\nAt the end of 10 years, both groups have gone down in cancer, but the group taking your drug went down more. Without the control group, you'd have no way of distinguishing the effects of your drug from the effects of other changes in the environment.",
"It turns out that people are complex and by simply taking a pill, you can start to feel better, even if that [pill has no active ingredients.](_URL_0_)\n\nSo, to adjust our comparisons, we give one group a sugar pill and another the real drug to account (control) for the psychological and physiological benefits from just thinking you're taking a drug.",
"Basically in any study you have 1 control group, and then various other groups that receive various changes to their environment/intake/whatever. \n\nIn the case of a drug trial you have a control group and an experimental group.\n\nThe experimental group is obviously given the drug, and you'd assume it does something, right? Well... not always. Sometimes it's completely ineffective and to test that, we put them against a \"control\" group that's given sugar pills. \n\nIf the control group shows better or similar results to the experimental group, it indicates that the drug doesn't actually do anything.",
"If you're going to say \"X cures cancer\" you need to show that it's better than doing nothing at all (or the established best cure) so you can tell if X has anything to do with it. Knowing that 10% of your test subjects get better is useless unless you know what the normal rate of recovery is. If 15% of people *without* the drug get better, your drug sucks. If only 5% get better without it, you might have something worthwhile.\n\nIn a double-blind study, the doctors treating your control patients give them all the same treatments *except* the drug you're testing and *they don't even know the difference*.",
"The control group must be treated the same *except for the one thing you are testing.* So having them take a pill *except it's missing the experimental ingredient* accomplishes this.\n\nYo ho ho! Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: A control group in a psychological study ](_URL_4_) ^(_3 comments_)\n1. [ELI5:why are control groups considered so important to a research study ](_URL_4_) ^(_5 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Why do science experiment control groups use sugar water instead of just water? ](_URL_4_) ^(_5 comments_)\n1. [ELI5:What is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled experiment? ](_URL_4_) ^(_11 comments_)",
"When doing placebo trials, the Control Group is given the placebo, a harmless sugar pill, and told it is the drug. If a larger number of people in the Drug Group become affected by the drug than the people who simply think they are on it, then the drug is effective.\n\nIn any experiment, the Control is the group that has the least changes made to it.\n\nWhen testing a drug, they use placebos to ensure the Control Group doesn't know they are in a Control Group."
] |
Why do touchscreen phones never lose calibration? | [
"Most (if not all) phone touch screens use capacitive touch, while other things, like computer touch screens use resistive touch. I'm no expert, but you can find more information on this article:\n_URL_0_",
"the one you mention sound like a resistive touch screen, resistive touch screen there is a gap between the touch part and the actual screen behind it. the touching detection is dependence on the gap different. thus is require calibration in order to capture a true result.\n\ncapacitive touch screen are modem days handphones, they are programmed to just reflect light off to determine if it is touch or not. hence or unless the screen is broken, it does not require calibration."
] |
What makes a song part of the Pop genre? | [
"\"pop\" is short for \"popular\" and it's more of a status than a genre."
] |
Video Compression | [
"The next time you watch a movie or TV show look at how little changes from one frame to the next. For example, if you have two people talking to each other the background isn't going to change much. So, instead of storing a picture of the background twice they simply include the pieces that changed. Then they can throw out the rest of the data.\n\nNext, imagine a really chaotic action scene with multiple, fast cuts. No image is on screen long enough for your eyes to really focus well. So, you can throw out a lot of the data and use lower quality images since it's all moving too fast to notice.\n\nThese are just two examples of how they compress video. There are numerous other tricks they use to remove non-critical information.",
"If there are pixels that are repeated in the same frame. I.e colours or very similar shades then instead of having all the date for that pixels colour etc, it just points to a location where that colour is already used thus using less bits. The higher the compression the further away the colour can be from it's true colour."
] |
If germs are the biggest killers in hospitals, then why don't they have security checkpoints at the entrances and key areas where people have to disinfect their hands and stand under UV lights for a few seconds? | [
"Germs are the biggest killers in hospitals because hospitals are clean. The disinfectants can't kill all germs and the ones that survive are ones that have grown resistant to the cleaning so when they infect someone antibiotics won't work well."
] |
Who is Guy Fawkes, why is he so important, and what is the big deal with his mask? | [
"Guy (Guido) Fawkes planned to blow up a few very important buildings. The Gunpowder Plot, as it was known, was going to blow up the House of Lords, but he failed when someone tipped off the feds.\n\nOn Nov 5 they found him with a bunch of gunpowder and and they executed him (he actually sort of executed himself, but that's another story) \n\nSo on the 5th of November people let off fireworks. It's sort of a weird holiday, since they blow stuff up in honor of the fact that stuff was not blown up, but there it is. \n\nThen there was media. With movies and comics like V for Vendetta and the internet group Anonymous picking up his mask as a symbol for revolution, it became a much bigger deal than it ever was. In V's case, the mask was steeped in symbolism concerning the plot of the media (V blows up parliament and brings about social change) \n\nIn Anon's case, I think it's more of an irony. No one knows who you are under a mask (being anonymous) and some trolls undoubtedly argue that they are fighting for social change.",
"Guy Fawkes was a guy who tried to blow up the British Parliament in 1604. More recently the mask that bears his name was used in the movie V for Vendetta, where V started a revolution against a futuristic fascist British Government"
] |
Why did a nest of ants suddenly die off? | [
"Where? Urban, suburban, or rural?\n\nFor suburban/urban, insecticides like Borax may have been carried into the nest. In rural areas, it is likely flooding, or in the winter, freezing.\n\nAn interesting rare event is a \"death spiral,\" where an ant will accidentally walk in their own closed pheromone loop, and more ants join in. Soon, the whole nest will enter it and starve.\n\nQuick, put a category on!"
] |
Glass and ice. | [
"1) your house is warm, and hence the glass is warmed as well. Frost won't form on a warm surface, since the ice would just melt. your car sits outside all night and the glass cools down, allowing ice to form on it.\n\n2) your house windows CAN condensate and freeze on the inside if it is cold enough outside, IF they are single pain. Most home windows today are dual or triple pane, where it's multiple sheets of glass with a gas barrier between them. that gas between acts as an insulator, so the outside window can be cool and the inside window can be warm, preventing condensation and making them more energy efficient."
] |
Why do some songs on pop radio stations just now start to be played when they are months to a year old? | [
"The record labels control when radio starts playing music. I don't listen to pop radio much, but I feel like \"Take me to Church\" became popular without radio, then the label released it to radio.",
"It takes a while for shit to stack, then once it does it all comes falling at once."
] |
When you smell someone's fart, are you inhaling microscopic vaporized pieces of decal matter? | [
"Most of what you smell is methane and other gases produced during digestion. Not fecal matter.",
"No, it's just gas. [Mercaptan](_URL_0_) being a primary component.",
"Your question is essentially correct with the fecal matter theory. You are inhaling microscopic molecules of shit. Methane is odorless but carbon disulfide (CS2) and Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) are not.\n\nThere are other bacteria in the gut that produce odors such as indole, skatole, and thiols, that all stink!\n\nYou'll also take in carbon disulfide, which gives you that nasty refuse like odor. H2S has that sulfur smell"
] |
When a video is uploaded over and over again on youtube, what is physically happeening to make the video quality get worse each time? | [
"Compression. A typical camera records 1080p 30fps at 17Mbps, which is just under 1GB/min. Whereas a typical bitrate on YouTube is ~3Mbps, which is < 1/5 the size. \n \nEvery time you re-upload it, YouTube goes through the whole compression process again. \n \nCompression is where they take a group of similar looking colors and make them a single color (less variation means less data). So, when you re-upload it, the video already has a lot of these groups of similar colors, so it makes these groupings even larger by combining some portions from another group, and so on and so forth. \n \n[Here is an example of extreme compression](_URL_0_).",
"Video as a format is very tricky, since you're trying to store hundreds of thousands of pictures in a single file. Converting each frame into a .png would inflate the file size of any video to absurd proportions.\n\nThat is because .png is a lossless format designed for images, which means that zero information is lost when recording the pixels. JPEG is slightly better when it comes to storing complex images with small file sizes, since it approximates a bit to make the files compress nicely. A small amount of data is lost, but the end result is nearly identical to the original one so the human eye can't see much difference.\n\nVideo files work like JPEGs. They take a lot of shortcuts to keep the file size down, which is helped by a fact that a lot of the frames are very similar to the ones after and before them.\n\nInstead of storing each pixel individually, you store them in blocks and keep track of which blocks are repeating. Then you can make small adjustments to them and replace almost similar blocks with identical ones with little loss of quality. Or you can pick a frame and then only record the differences between it and the next few dozen ones.\n\nWhen you do this over and over again, the shortcuts add up. Each trick the compression algorithm does loses some of the original data, and if you recompress the file enough you end up with nothing but white noise and arbitrarily colored shapes when the data is constantly being lost."
] |
Regarding when people say the baby boomers or gen X ruined the housing market for us millennials, what exactly did they do and how are they to blame for the state it's in now? | [
"When population grows and the number of housing units doesn't grow proportionally, property prices go up, just due to the law of supply and demand. This is good for people who already own property and bad for people who want to purchase property. Typically, people who already own property are politically far more powerful than people who don't yet own property (both because they're more wealthy on average and because they're existing members of the community rather than newcomers), so they tend to be able to get their way.\n\nOver the past 50 years or so, that's resulted in a lot of anti-development policies, along with other reasons why existing property owners don't want new development, chiefly that they simply want to live in a less-dense neighborhood. It's hard to build new housing in many places, which means that new development has slowed and prices have risen significantly. Combined with stagnating real wages, that means that it's a lot harder to buy a house for a young person nowadays than it was 50 years ago.",
"They're being blamed for having their careers at a time when there was more plentiful opportunity and cost of living was much lower. There are so many factors, none of which they directly caused. \n\nGenerally speaking, more competition for the same number of things. A globalized economy meant that a lot of jobs moved to countries with lower standards of living and therefor lower cost. Especially manufacturing and resource extraction, jobs that used to pay well and often didn't even require you to finish highschool. \n\nInflation of the post-secondary education system has been a big deal as well, any old degree used to get you in the door for some great careers. As a result this generation heavily encouraged their children to pursue the same path, to the point of instilling a belief that going to university IS success in life. The same education got a lot more expensive and a lot less useful, and not just in the liberal arts.\n\nI think the reason baby boomers get a lot of hate is so many of them don't see why they had an easier time. And have also continued to benefit without realizing why that is, either. Through inflated property values, cheaper consumer goods, and holding onto lucrative careers and pensions. It just boils down to a generation that lived through something of a golden age looking down on the next generation that has a much rougher go of it. It can also be infuriating that people of this generation tend to get more conservative as they get older, though we erroneously think of them now as being anti-authoritarian hippies in the 60s and 70s. Of course all generalizations of entire generations are mostly wrong. And breaking down populations into categories like 'boomers,' 'gen x,' 'gen y,' millenials, etc falls apart under any real scrutiny."
] |
What is a covered bond? And how do they work? | [
"Covered bonds are bonds that are secured by an underlying pool of assets, known as the cover pool. Investors buy covered bonds and so they have claim on the underlying pool. The underlying pool (typically mortgages or loans, but can also be ships, aircrafts, etc) generate cash flow, and that cash flow is passed on to the covered bond holders."
] |
The Ryan Budget Plan | [
"* Single-payer health insurance is insurance that's provided by one entity. At the cost of bureaucracy, this provides huge economies of scale (imagine what a deal you could get on toilet paper if everyone in your town decided to negotiate with Charmin as a group to arrange a single contract). Medicare is a single-payer health insurance plan, administered by the federal government, that anyone over 65 can join. The Ryan plan ends it for anyone currently under 55. Instead, when you turn 65, you get a subsidy (tax rebates, probably) to buy private insurance. This may have anti-bureaucracy benefits, but it costs huge in terms of economies of scale; the poorer your health is, the higher your health insurance costs typically are (if you can even get coverage), and the elderly are generally in poorer health than the young; it's called getting old and it sucks.\n\n\n* Medicaid is a similar plan to Medicare, except it's provided by individual states, and it's primarily for folks without much money. Currently, the federal government matches state spending on Medicaid (more state spending = more federal money = more people covered, at the cost of higher national taxes). Under the Ryan plan, these payments would instead go to a single payment amount regardless of state spending. (This saves federal taxpayer money, but reduces state incentive to spend. At best, it leads to higher state taxes for insurance in states that want to maintain quality of care. At worst, it leads to decreased care for states that go through tough financial times.)\n\n* The Ryan plan lowers corporate tax rates from 35% to 25%. It also lowers the highest marginal tax rate from 35% to 25%. \n\n > > (Marginal tax: Say the highest tax bracket (family/individual earnings) is 35% on income over 250,000, next highest is 28% on income over 150,000, next is 25% on income over 75,000, and last is 20% on income under 75,000. (I'm making the numbers up, I don't have the brackets in my head). So if you earn 500,000, you pay 20% of the first 75,000, 25% of 75,000 (from 75,001 to 150,000), 28% on 100,000 (from 150,001 to 250,000) and 35% on 250,000 (total over 250k). That's marginal tax rates)\n > > Under the Ryan plan, the top rate is adjusted to 25%, so (if my numbers were accurate, which they probably aren't), you'd pay 20% of 75k, 25% of 75k, 28% of 125k, and 25% of 250k. If top-down demand actually drove economies, this might be beneficial, as it would free up money for spending/investment, actually raising tax income and creating jobs as more stuff is bought and made. Since demand is almost always bottom-up (the many buy more than the few; how many [x] can one person own, compared to 100 people?), this move would seem to actually end up costing jobs and tax revenue.\n\n* Repeal of health care admin enacted in 2010. I'm not sure whether this would be a net benefit or not; going to single-payer would seem to present huge cost savings, but the health care act didn't go in that direction. I'm not sure whether what was actually enacted will actually be effective, so I'm not sure whether its repeal would be a net positive or net negative.\n\n* By 2021, Discretionary spending (money not directly allocated to programs like Social Security or the military) to be reduced to 6% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from the current 12%. This could happen through rapid expansion of GDP and maintenance of/modest increases to current spending, or through spending cuts. Probably the latter. Discretionary spending includes the parks service, the EPA, the FDA, the SEC, education, farm subsidies, etc., etc.\n\n* Some tax deductions and exemptions would be ended.\n\nThe [Wikipedia](_URL_0_) entry is actually pretty good on this one."
] |
Why does gas you get in the US have so much lower octane numers than in germany? | [
"Your octane numbers and our octane numbers don't mean the same thing. From an engineering perspective the octane number is actually a kind of hilariously arbitrary number that basically boils down a bunch of different fuel qualities, that all both individually *and* collectively control a fuel's likelihood to knock, all into a single number, and because of that the precise testing for octane numbers changes depending on the body doing the regulation. So it would be entirely possible for two utterly identical batches of fuel to get different octane ratings when tested by different countries.\n\nHowever, our fuels are also slightly different, as Europe is going to have a slightly different set of additives than we get in the US, but that doesn't really account for most of the difference; the differing standards do.",
"It's not. US and Canada uses RON(Research Octane Number)to measure octane while most of the world uses AKI(Anti-Knock Index). 87RON is the same as 90AKI for a reference point.",
"There are different ways of rating octane. The fuel is the same. \n\nFrom Wikipedia:\n\nResearch Octane Number (RON)\nThe most common type of octane rating worldwide is the Research Octane Number (RON). RON is determined by running the fuel in a test engine with a variable compression ratio under controlled conditions, and comparing the results with those for mixtures of iso-octane and n-heptane.\n\nMotor Octane Number (MON)\nAnother type of octane rating, called Motor Octane Number (MON), is determined at 900 rpm engine speed instead of the 600 rpm for RON.[1] MON testing uses a similar test engine to that used in RON testing, but with a preheated fuel mixture, higher engine speed, and variable ignition timing to further stress the fuel's knock resistance. Depending on the composition of the fuel, the MON of a modern pump gasoline will be about 8 to 12 octane lower than the RON, but there is no direct link between RON and MON. Pump gasoline specifications typically require both a minimum RON and a minimum MON.[citation needed]\n\nAnti-Knock Index (AKI) or (R+M)/2\nIn most countries, including Australia, New Zealand and all of those in Europe,[citation needed] the \"headline\" octane rating shown on the pump is the RON, but in Canada, the United States, Brazil, and some other countries, the headline number is the average of the RON and the MON, called the Anti-Knock Index (AKI), and often written on pumps as (R+M)/2). It may also sometimes be called the Posted Octane Number (PON).\n\nDifference between RON, MON, and AKI\nBecause of the 8 to 12 octane number difference between RON and MON noted above, the AKI shown in Canada and the United States is 4 to 6 octane numbers lower than elsewhere in the world for the same fuel. This difference between RON and MON is known as the fuel's Sensitivity,[4] and is not typically published for those countries that use the Anti-Knock Index labelling system.\n\nSee the table in the following section for a comparison.\n\nObserved Road Octane Number (RdON)\nAnother type of octane rating, called Observed Road Octane Number (RdON), is derived from testing gasolines in real world multi-cylinder engines, normally at wide open throttle. It was developed in the 1920s and is still reliable today. The original testing was done in cars on the road but as technology developed the testing was moved to chassis dynamometers with environmental controls to improve consistency.[5]",
"In the US octane is calculated two different ways and then averaged over those calculations (IE (rating1 + rating 2)/2). What this does is show a \"lower\" octane rating for US gas in general compared to EU countries because in Europe they only calculate octane once (no /2).\n\nAs for WHY we don't make more other octane levels rather than the \"standard\" 87/89/91 is because of cost.\n\nNot long ago I could go to *some* gas stations and fill up with 95 octane (Sunoco for example 20 years ago) if I so chose, but those days are long gone because no cars sold in the US require that much octane and nobody wants to spend extra money filling up with more octane than is required.\n\nYou CAN however go buy cans of octane boost if you choose at pretty much any auto store which advertise up to 101 octane per tank.",
"Octane primarily deals with the ignition pressure of the fuel. Lower octane fuel will self ignite (without a spark) at lower pressure than higher octane fuel. Cars with engines that operate with high compression ratios (mostly turbo charged and otherwise high performance engines) need higher octane fuel so that the gas doesn't pre-ignite and screw up engine timing/efficiency/performance. Because if it pre-ignites the fuel in the cylinder, not all of the gas will burn off, so the exhaust mix is screwed up, which makes the sensors angry, and you use more fuel than you should, and you lose some output power. \n\nAs someone who has almost exclusively had German cars, and a former employee of a Volkswagen/Audi/Porsche dealer, I can tell you that there are very few German cars produced in the last 25 years or so that don't require high octane fuel, because of high compression. So this is a factor, as well."
] |
Why is Japan receiving the most hatred for whaling when other countries such as Norway and Iceland is doing it as well ? | [
"Many other places that hunt whales have strong cultural history of whaling and/or an actual need for whale meat as a food staple. Japan (arguably) has neither and yet has been one of the most ardent pro-whaling nations on earth. They continue to ignore International rules on whaling for food and instead hunt on the flimsy pretext of 'research'. Nations like Greenland and the Faroe's admit that their whaling is for food and materials and keep within international whaling guidlines.\n\nIt also doesn't help that Japan sends massive fleets half way around the world into other nations regions to hunt whales, while other nations generally whale within their own geographical region.",
"Norway and Iceland whale mostly Mink whales that are nowhere near endangered. They keep careful tabs on whaling licenses and do it sustainably.\n\nThis is not the case with Japanese whalers, who often hunt endangered whales in international waters. They also often catch and kill dolphins, which are widely regarded as nearly sentient, or at least intelligent."
] |
How did they do the dinosaur sounds for Jurassic park? | [
"This is the first write up I found with a simple google search: _URL_0_"
] |
How can humans sense when they are being watched? | [
"We can't. It is confirmation bias in action. Basically, you have been watched countless times. One of those times you got a funny feeling and happened to notice someone watching you. Ever since, whenever you get that feeling, you believe someone is watching you.\nEdit...wrong phrase.",
"we cannot. in no rigorous study has it been proved we can tell when others are watching us without being able to see them",
"your eyes can see a lot more than you consciously realize, in some ways - so sometimes you just see someone in the extremes of your peripheral vision, and your brain can still tell they're looking at you. We're really good at picking out human faces and what they're doing, even if we can't see it in very much detail. (This is in addition to the \"you can't\" answers, which are correct if the person's behind you - that's just luck and/or hearing.)"
] |
What is the purpose of creating super-huge elements that only last a few nanoseconds. | [
"Often times, science isn't done with any practical application in mind. It's all about discovery. Perhaps, in the creation of a super heavy element, we discover some new field of quantum physics. Making them stable is less important than just seeing what happens as they're made and decay.",
"It helps us to learn more about how atoms work. But no, these specific elements are not going to be stable. A few even bigger ones might be *somewhat* stable.\n\n_URL_0_",
"its just experimental. \nmaybe the element they get out has interesting or very useful properties, you don't know until you try"
] |
Why do so many people get "stuck" in a retail job? | [
"Same reasons anyone gets stuck anywhere. Pay and circumstance a lot of times. Job security is another. The other overlooked aspect is the people. It sounds corny, but at bestbuy we were literally a family. I still regularly hang out with people I worked with there, that are still working there. I have not worked there for about 3 years now. \n\nAs an example, when I left geeksquad for an actual IT job, I was going from full time employment, vacation pay, benefits, etc to a contract to full hire position with no benefits until fully hired (minimum 90 days) and actually a very very substantial paycut ( < 30% cut during the contract portion), while tripling my commute.\n\nIt fucking sucked. I literally ate ramen for the last two months of that because I had some unexpected bills. If I had a kid or any other obligations other than basic food/shelter etc I would have NEVER been able to do that. I was essentially losing money for what wound up being about 4 months just so I could get a better job.\n\nIt worked out, and I am in an infinitely better position than I was then, but I'll be damned if it wasn't scary as shit. This was all with a bachelors degree in hand. I could have very easily have gotten stuck where I was. To add to it, there is something very comforting about going to a job where you are grossly overqualified (but also slightly overpaid for the work). Most people I worked with were, and that was a contributing factor. One guy I worked with has a recurring medical condition, where even with insurance he pays XXXX a month for medications/etc. Any entry level job somewhere else and he literally would not be able to afford to eat. \n\nOne other example is if someone is working on something else, such as an app, a music career, shit like that. Retail jobs with their rotating schedules, even in the middle management roles typically are jobs where you don't take your work home with you. When you punch out, you are out. Work is out of site out of mind. Worked with a couple guys that started doing a food blog together in their spare time. Eventually that shit blew up, and they don't work there anymore because of it. I have found I have less time to spend trying to work on android apps now that I have a regular 9-5.\n\nTL:DR sometimes people get stuck, but sometimes 'being stuck' is literally the best option.",
"Because it's easy.\n\nBecause retailers generally always need new employees.\n\nBecause it's mostly mindless.\n\nBecause it can be done in pretty much any small town or big city.\n\nBecause it's usually \"good enough\" to get by.\n\nBecause not changing is easier than finding a new job prospect, interviewing, and hoping that you get it over all the other applicants.\n\nBecause sometimes momentum means just doing the same thing rather than actually moving forward . . .",
"In addition to these other answers, retail management sometimes can make some decent money. Upper level management at a Walmart can make six figures, for instance. \n\nBasically, entry level gets paid shit, but if you can work one or two steps up, the pay isn't that bad."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.