q_id stringlengths 5 6 | title stringlengths 3 296 | selftext stringlengths 0 34k | document stringclasses 1
value | subreddit stringclasses 1
value | url stringlengths 4 110 | answers dict | title_urls list | selftext_urls list | answers_urls list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4utju4 | what happens to underground creatures when it rains? | ants, bugs, rabbits, what happens to their burrows and caves when the weather turns bad? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4utju4/eli5_what_happens_to_underground_creatures_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5sq79n",
"d5t1ed7"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Some of them actually close the entrances when it rains.\n\nBut mostly it's a much smaller problem than you imagine - the water is simply soaked up by the soil.\n\nA *seriously massive* downpour can add up to 10cm of rain in a short time. For most kinds of soil, that amount is easily soaked up by 1m of soil. And most animals' burrows (including those of most ant species) reach far deeper than 1 meter.\n\nIt would really only be a problem when the water flows on the surface and accumilates in a place where there's an entrance, so that the rain water that fell on a large area flows directly into the burrow.\n\nI'm pretty sure evolution has taught animals not to place the entrances in such places, at least if they live in an area where large rainfalls are common.",
"Hi! I am not a biologist BUT I walk and hike a lot and I have noticed that the snakes and moles and foxes around here purposely put the entrances facing downhill and therefore the runoff of really heavy rains will mostly (but not all) rush other the entrances like running over a jump. I have also seen them put leaves in front of the little entrances. I know this because I have taken away the leaves and on my next hike through they have put them back! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
exzfp3 | how is michelob ultra turning farm land “organic”? | Saw their ad during the super bowl promising to turn 6sq ft of farmland organic for each 6pk sold. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/exzfp3/eli5_how_is_michelob_ultra_turning_farm_land/ | {
"a_id": [
"fh5v5bj",
"fgebcya",
"fgect4a"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"This *contribution* by Michelob is a load of bullshit. Here’s why:\n\n\n**1 acre = 43,560 sqft**\n**1 section = 640 acres**\n**640 acres = 27,878,400 sqft/section**\n\n•••\n\nWhy does this matter? Let’s ask ourselves how many cases of beer does Michelob have to sell in order to transition just ONE square mile of farm ground to organic, shall we?\n\nDivide 27,878,400 sqft/section by 6 sqft (ground Michelob is transitioning per 6-pack sold)\n\n**= 4,646,400 six-packs of organic beer Michelob needs to sell in order to transition just ONE section of farm ground to organic!**\n\n•••\n\nIdaho produces the most barley in the country. Average annual cash rent/acre of non-irrigated farm ground in Idaho is $160/acre. Translation?\n\nDivide 6 sqft transitioned to organic for every 6-pack purchased by the 43,560 sqft that make up 1 acre of farm ground. Take this multiplied by the cost of land rent at $160/acre. \n\n**Answer: $0.02 **\n\nMichelob contributes roughly TWO CENTS to transitioning farm ground to organic for every 6-pack of organic beer sold! This comes out to $0.003673 per beer! Are you f^^^ing kidding me?!\n\nThe average cost to run a 30-second commercial for the 2020 Super Bowl was $5.25 million. This means Michelob spent approx. $10.5 million on their one minute ad to promote their organic beer. \n\n•••\n\nMichelob’s push to make you feel good about buying their product because you are helping the US farmer is just another attempt to fool the unknowing US consumer. Don’t be fooled!\n\nIf you’re going to spend money on beer, buy one that doesn’t taste like watered down piss from a company who’s not out there trying to fool you!\n\n\nCheers!!!\n\n•••\n\nTL;DR: Michelob creates scheme to profit from uninformed consumers by coining themselves heroes of the organic movement.",
"They are using organically grown grains. Michelob would be a big buyer, they create a demand, so more farms change to meet those demands. I am an organic farmer, so that works for me.\n\nThe tricky part is there is more money in organic. Big ag/big business always follows the money and so they get into the organic scene. The bad part of that is they also had the power to water down the organic standards.\n\nThe Michelob beer is certified, and the certifier is a decent one. But ultimately it is beer",
"It’s not fully possibly in the strictest of terms. \n\nA true organic farm takes in to account that the soil itself is organic. If it has been farmed with today’s non organic practices - pesticides, fertilizers, GMO crops etc, they all leave a biological footprint in the soil. The biome that is the soil, the clay the microorganisms, the minerals, everything is contaminated from those processes. \n\nThe land would have had to been stripped from something else, something that was never a conventional farm for it to be actually organic. \n\nThe term is tossed around now to get you to pay more money for a product that used less damaging ingredients yes, but it still uses practices that wouldn’t actually be considered “organic”.\n\nThe challenge is the loose definition of the term organic. \n\nSome countries all it means is non toxic pesticides, non gmo seeds etc. It’s a marketing ploy to sell beer plain and simple, all while trying to connect(exploit) people who want to support ethical, sustainable or organic type farming. \n\nMind you it’s a good start, but it’s a misleading term to use when the label isn’t clearly defined in the first place."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
6fg4cp | why are tanks and armored vehicles usually carried on the back of a truck to the war? | I mean why don't they just drive the tank/armored vehicle to the front lines?
[Image example](_URL_0_)
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6fg4cp/eli5_why_are_tanks_and_armored_vehicles_usually/ | {
"a_id": [
"dihwcxq",
"dihwek1",
"dihwjz2",
"dihytpd",
"diib0dv",
"diiilzj",
"diiu823",
"diivkdb",
"dij2l9d"
],
"score": [
25,
14,
86,
11,
2,
2,
2,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Tanks have really poor gas mileage. The M1 Abrams gets about 0.6 miles per gallon. It's much more effective to transport them with something with better efficiency to save on fueling (you have to bring fuel to the front lines so its not just a cost problem).\n\nPlus, it wears down on the treads. You don't want that failing in the middle of an engagement or else you'll be stuck with an immobile turret.",
"2 big reasons:\n\n1. Speed; most heavily armored vehicles are terribly slow. Just a cursory search shows that tanks are lucky to have a top speed at 40 MPH\n\n2. Operating costs: Everything about operating vehicles like tanks is expensive. They get terrible gas milage, maintenance is expensive, etc. ",
"1) Tank engine are really strong, which make them ideal in bad terrain, but also make them use a lot of diesel per mile. If you put them on a specially design truck, you can drastically cut your diesel consumption. \n\n2) Tank are really expensive piece of equipment, they are a lot more expansive them these trucks that can carry them around. So if you can cut down on the driving time of your tanks when it's possible, then they will last you longer. Your trucks will last you less time, but they cost a lot less than tanks.\n\n3) Tank can create a lot of damage on road because their contact to the ground is make of steel instead of rubber. That's one of the reason why some urban fighting vehicle are on tires, to limit that problem.",
"You use the equipment best suited for the job. The best vehicle suited to transporting things long distance would be your freight haulers and long haul transport trucks. They are designed to travel hundreds and thousands of miles at a time without breaking. Your main battle tank, not so much. Plus tracks are hell on pavement. ",
"I was interested in tanks back in high school and looked up info on a specific model and was amused to see that the gas mileage was measured in gallons per mile. ",
"Tanks, even modern ones, are not very fast, do not have very good fuel economy, and are only marginally safe to operate on roads. The maintenance and wear and tear on them is also substantial. It makes sense to ship them to where they are needed which saves gas, wear and tear, the crew needed to operate the vehicle, and it gets it there faster. ",
"It's also not easy nor safe to maneuver a tank in traffic. While modern periscopes give 360-degree vision, and tank can basically turn around without moving, it's not very convenient, you can't see road directly next to the tank, and other drivers are not accustomed to such behavior. And should an accident happen, it's likely much more severe than a slow, tank-carrying truck would cause.\n\n\nMost efficient way to carry armor is not via trucks at all, but on a train or ship.\n \nWhich is also most common for long-distance deployment.",
"The treads arent good for roads and pavements as well, which isnt good if you happen to be travelling through friendly towns.\n\nAlso, you do have situations where the frontlines only require a new tank, whilst the existing crew is already ready and waiting at the frontlines. In that situation, you may not be able to find a tank crew to drive your tank all the way there (also quite stupid for said crew to then leave for home after handing the tank over to the waiting tank crew)",
"1. Tanks are waay less fuel-efficient than a truck, they're not built for highway cruising.\n2. Tanks rip the pavement up, the tracks are metal not rubber and they steer by skidding. Even rubber tracks (which can sometimes be fitted) cause damage and wear out quickly.\n3. Pavement is hard on tank tracks (bare metal on concrete/asphalt is like running on sandpaper) and tracks are expensive.\n4. Tanks are expensive to buy & maintain - maybe 10x to 100x more than a truck (wild guess - google would tell you), so you want to use it as little as possible unless you're doing something \"useful\" with it - training or fighting.\n5. Some trucks can move more than one tank/APC, or they can carry the tank plus a load of stuff the tank needs (spares, ammo, fuel)\n6. Tanks are not comfortable things to commute in, making the tank crew drive it miles and miles across country is not a good use of their time and is likely to wear them out / piss them off compared to loading them into a bus or airplane which will be faster & more comfortable.\n7. Tanks do not play well with other traffic, and tend to win in the event of an accident. Trucks have nice big windows, mirrors, good brakes, etc.\n8. Tanks are noisy\n9. You can pay \"cheaper\" civilian trucking companies to move your tanks for a lot less than the cost of your highly-trained tank crew & support. Also, the trucking co can use multiple trucks/drivers to run non-stop long distance whereas your crew need a rest.\n10. If a truck breaks down, no biggie. If the tank breaks down, that's a lot harder to sort out.\n\nRound our way we see plenty of FV302 (I think that's the right number) APC's commuting to & from Salisbury Plain as they're going relatively short distances, have rubber-footed road-tracks and are smaller, lighter, and less involved to drive than a full-fat tank."
]
} | [] | [
"http://imgur.com/a/f2geE"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2bb5fe | why do i have to pay a tow company to get my car back? | I understand that it's legal for them to remove my vehicle from a place where it is illegally parked. But, once they've moved it, why is it legal for them to keep my property unless I pay them?
If I just drove my car away without paying them, would I have committed a crime (besides trespassing), even though I was only taking back a car that I already owned? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bb5fe/eli5_why_do_i_have_to_pay_a_tow_company_to_get_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj3jri7",
"cj3k2mb",
"cj3m6rm",
"cj3n9zg",
"cj3p6fg",
"cj3pc1j",
"cj3ptso",
"cj3qc4q",
"cj3qkw7",
"cj3ser3",
"cj3sutk",
"cj3wwil",
"cj3zpai",
"cj47zmq",
"cj490ht",
"cj4b5mx",
"cj4e5z2"
],
"score": [
33,
9,
317,
72,
25,
8,
2,
53,
4,
2,
3,
2,
4,
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You are liable for the damages that arose from you breaking the law. This includes the cost of towing your car away.",
"The fine is due to the cost of the actual tow plus storage fees. The longer they keep your car, the more they charge for \"storing\" it. \n\nEven if you were able to get it out of the lot, which is doubtful since it is most likely kept in a locked, fenced in area, removing it will get you arrested for fraud. They provided a service (although, against your will) and failure to pay them will probably result in your arrest.",
"Cop here. The tow company needs to cite a legal authority to tow the vehicle (usually a subsection of 22651 cvc in california). After they tow it, you need to pay them for the tow and storage. If you take your car without paying you are probably going to be charged with burglary or theft. Not theft of the car...since you own it but theft of services.\n\nEdit: This blew up a little bit so I'll summarize a few of the other points that are made.\n\n1) There is a big difference between a public tow and a private property tow. Public Tows (such as police or code enforcement) can only take place on public land or roads. They always generate paperwork and always require some kind of authority that is specified in the Vehicle Code. A Private Tow takes place on private property at the request of the owner or their agent. An example of a Private Tow is if you have an assigned parking spot in an apartment complex and someone else is parking there. Private Tows **should** have some kind of local authority but they don't always. **Ninja Edit**: The city can tow a vehicle on private land if it impedes emergency functions (such as fire hydrants).\n\n2) In most states, a Tow Company cannot hold your car hostage for most Private Tows and some Public Tows. If you take your car out but do not pay the bill, they can and will eventually send it to collections. Check your local laws.\n\n3) The Tow Company does not always need your permission to tow your vehicle. There are various state and local authorities that give them permission to tow the vehicle at the request of the land owner. Police Officers always need to cite the specific ordinance and generate paperwork.\n\n4) I always always always suggest you get AAA or car insurance that provides the same benefit in an accident. If your vehicle is disabled, we will remove it from the roadway one way or another. ",
"ITT: Everyone explaining to OP that he should pay the fine because he broke the law.\n\nOP is not asking for your assessment of his guilt or innocence, but rather why it is legal for a private entity to tow your car and hold it. Is it a statute in the state's law books? Does is vary by municipality? Are there similar arrangements between municipalities and private companies (e.g. cable companies, garbage companies)? It is a good question I would like to see answered by a lawyer or someone knowledgeable.\n",
"Yes, I've always wondered how this was legal. I'm not talking about parking \"illegally\" (in cases where you've broken a written law), but about cases in which you've parked on private property, and the owner wants you off.\n\nIf I am in a movie theater, and the movie theater has a sign that says \"Cell phones will be confiscated at the owner's expense\", can they contract a company to take my cell phone and hold it until I pay $400?",
"It varies based upon country, and even state/locality (e.g. the laws involving towing/clamping in Scotland are vastly different to England/Wales). The typical way the law works is:\n\n* They must cite a law/statute/act passed by the government - without it, they cannot \"take\" your car (and in some localities like Scotland, can't \"damage\" it by clamping it either). This will usually involve applying for a permit. These laws are passed typically to allow people to provide a service to their customers or residents (parking) and allow them to punish people who impinge upon their ability to provide this service.\n* Once taken away/clamped, they have possession of your vehicle. In some localities, they would have to give it you back if you asked, in others, they would not. An interesting case (similar to this) came up some time ago in the UK, where a man \"stole\" his car from the repair shop instead of paying for it. The judge held that despite him being the legal owner, they were legally in possession of it, and thus he stole (his) car from them.\n\nFurther note: If they plan on giving it back to you (clearly they do if they are asking for money for it), then this would not constitute \"theft\" in the majority of countries - theft requires the intent to not give a possession back. As such, they may well be the \"legal\" owner of the vehicle - putting you in a similar position to the case outlined above.\n\nFinally, to emphasize once again - laws like this change wildly all over the world. There is no consensus globally over the limits people can go to, and so this is more of a broad primer, than a specific answer regarding your situation.",
"What is it with towing and America? Why so common? It's pretty rare here in the UK, it only happens if you park on Fire Lane double red lines, totally block a road or the car is declared abandoned/untaxed/unroadworthy, and cops normally have to get involved. \n\nYou can't even get clamped on private property anymore. All they can do is issue a Parking Notice (civil fine) and only in some cases are they actually enforceable (most people pay them though cus you'll pay more to a lawyer to tell them to bugger off)",
"I've had my car towed before and when I went to pick it up the tow company told me the bill was over $250 to release it. I told them the law states they can't hold my vehicle for ransom and that I'd give them a copy of my drivers license and they could send me a bill and release my car right now. They said no, \"that's bullshit, it doesn't work that way - pay your bill and you get your vehicle\".\n\nI told them that it certainly DOES work that way and if need be I'd call an officer to come and enforce the law. They said \"go ahead, waste your time\" and laughed.\n\nI called the police and they said they'd meet me at the nearby convenience store as soon as they could get there (it was a non-emergency), and it might take a bit. I went and waited about a half an hour and an officer showed up and gave me a ride back over to the tow yard and then waited inside by the front door while the scowling jerk at the front desk took a copy of my DL and address. I told them to send me a bill then I drove out of the yard with my car, thanked the officer and was on my way.\n\nI never received a bill from the towing company. \n\nI guess they figured that if I was savvy enough to know the law and to contact an officer to come help me, then I was savvy enough to know that I could safely ignore the bill as it would be too costly for them to pursue legal action to force me to pay, so in the long run it wasn't even worth the time to write up a bill and the cost of the stamp to mail it.\n\nFor them it's a numbers game; just move on and tow another schmucks car and strong arm them for a few hundred bucks.",
"What if you have a 4 wheel drive truck like some of my friends? When they park they enable the E-brake as well as the parking brake as an extra precaution with the icy roads. You wouldn't be able to budge these trucks. Are towing companies allowed to damage your vehicle in order to move it? Damage meaning you would kill the tranny if you dragged it as such...",
"Some states have laws specifically allowing regulated tow companies to keep legally towed vehicles until fees are paid and to sell the vehicles to recover unpaid fees.",
"So they take it and store it on their lot, then charge you for the tow and for services. Here's the big question:\n\nIf you stop them as they are hooking up your car, why can't you decline their \"services\" and not pay any fine?",
"In Quebec, you don't have to pay! Very few people know this, however, and the tow companies almost force you to pay, threatening to call the cops! They quiet down when you tell them to go ahead and call.",
"Please, no anecdotes or \"me, too!\" stories in direct reply to the original post.",
"I once got towed in LA because of a 6am \"half-marathon\" that was gonna go through my residential street. But, they didn't post any signs about this event until after 10pm THE NIGHT BEFORE THE EVENT. Still had to pay over $200 in total to get the car back (as well as the 80 or more others who were in the same situation). I guess the city needed more money, and this \"half-marathon\" (that never even went through my street) was one way to go about it. I still don't see how that was at all legal.",
"Short answer: **YOU DON'T** \n \nI know I'm late to the party but this is an issue that I'm very passionate about because I've had to deal with it first hand. No private party has the right to hold your property ransom for payment. It's pretty cut and dry. \nUnfortunately there is so much ignorance and misinformation when it comes to tow companies that a lot of people, including cops, don't know the law. \n \nMy truck was once towed and they tried to pull that shit on me. I had to talk to about 10 different cops but I finally found one that actually knew the law (it's the god damn 4th amendment!), and he met me at the tow yard and forced them to release my truck. They complied. \nThe tow company has the right to sue you for payment of their service, but they can't keep your vehicle until you pay. I don't care what anybody else tells you, OP, they can't do that. \nIf you're ever in that situation don't settle for anything less. Call the police department and keep asking to be transfered to different cops until you talk to one that knows the law. They'll get your car out for you. \n \n \nEdit: Furthermore, when they take you to court the tow company has to prove that you were parked unlawfully when they towed your vehicle. Since they're so used to holding your vehicle ransom in order to get paid, it's very unlikely that they properly documented the incident (by taking a photo, for instance), and therefore you're very likely to win the case.",
"I live in Tempe Arizona and my friend's cars have been towed multiple times at my apartment complex which is privately owned. I have gotten all of my friends cars back for free every single time they have been towed because in the city of Tempe there is a law called the linen law which states it's illegal for them to tow your car on private property and hold it. Trust me this has worked numerous times, we always go to the lot and they threaten us or don't say anything at all. Have lived here for 3 years and not one of my friends have gotten sent to \"collections\". Just make sure you know the law, they tried to argue with us numerous times and not give us the car back but if you go in and know what your talking about they wont hassle you. TRUST me this law has helped me out so much! And on top of that 160 is a lot for a college student. In Tempe its the worst because they prey on college kids and drive around 24/7 looking for cars to tow. ",
"Because they have to spend money on a towing vehicle, gasoline to drive to wherever your car is and drive back to the lot, and pay employees.\nAlso, having to pay money for this, makes you less likely to park where you aren't supposed to. (atleast, that's the theory)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2wp3wm | we all know how king and queen make sense, but in a deck of cards what is the origin of an ace or jack? were these actual titles? | It would be news to me. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wp3wm/eli5_we_all_know_how_king_and_queen_make_sense/ | {
"a_id": [
"cosu9x6",
"cot1kpe",
"cotecno"
],
"score": [
42,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"TLDR: Ace is from an old French word meaning 'a unit' (or referencing a single pip on a die), and Jack is an adaption of Knave, which was originally the lowest ranked face card.\n\nFrom [here](_URL_0_):\n\n > The word \"ace\" comes from the Old French word as (from Latin 'as') meaning 'a unit', from the name of a small Roman coin. It originally meant the side of a die with only one mark, before it was a term for a playing card. Since this was the lowest roll of the die, it traditionally meant 'bad luck' in Middle English, but as the ace is often the highest playing card, its meaning has since changed to mean 'high-quality, excellence'. This connotation has seen the word applied to an unreachable tennis serve, a successful fighter pilot and more generally as a person proficient in his or her field, especially a sporting field.\n\nFrom [here](_URL_1_):\n\n > The earliest predecessor of the knave was the thānī nā'ib (Second or Under-Deputy) in the Mamluk card deck. This was the lowest of the three court cards and like all court cards was depicted through abstract art or calligraphy. When brought over to Italy and Spain, the thānī nā'ib was made into an infantry soldier or page-boy ranking below the Knight card. In France, where the card was called the Valet, the Queen was inserted between the King and Knight. The Knight was subsequently dropped out of non-Tarot decks leaving the Valet directly under the Queen. The King-Queen-Valet format then made its way into England.\n\n > As early as the mid-16th century the card was known in England as the Knave (meaning a male servant of royalty). Although \"Jack\" was in common usage to designate the \"Knave,\" the term became more entrenched when, in 1864,[1] English cardmaker Samuel Hart published a deck using \"J\" instead of \"Kn\" to designate the lowest-ranking court card. The Knave card had been called a Jack as part of the terminology of the game All-Fours since the 17th century, but this usage was considered common or low class. However, because the card abbreviation for Knave was so close to that of the King (\"Kn\" versus \"K\"), the two were easily confused. This confusion was even more pronounced after the markings indicating suits and rankings were moved to the corners of the card, a move which enabled players to \"fan\" a hand of cards without obscuring the individual suits and ranks. The earliest deck known of this type is from 1693, but such positioning did not become widespread until reintroduced by Hart in 1864, together with the Knave-to-Jack change. Books of card games published in the third quarter of the 19th century still referred to the \"Knave,\" however, a term that is still recognized in the United Kingdom. (Note the exclamation by Estella in Charles Dickens's novel Great Expectations: \"He calls the knaves, Jacks, this boy!\")",
"So when and where did playing cards as we know them come into being anyways?",
"Ace and Jack were not really titles. \n\nThe French suits of cards (which are used in most of the world) have spades, clubs, hearts, and diamonds; each suit has a king, queen, jack, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, ace. The ace can have the value of \"1\" or a value even higher than king. So it seems to come mainly from 1. \n\nHowever, there's another kind of deck (which is used for trick-taking games in countries like Italy and Spain and is used in most of Latin America and predates the French deck) and it has the suits swords, staves, coins, and cups. Each suit has 13 cards: King (rey/re), Knight (caballo/cavallo), Jack/Page (fante/sota), 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 (called as/asso). The so-called Latin deck is closer to Arabic playing cards; the French replaced the knight with the queen and called the suits spades, clubs, hearts, and diamonds. Fun fact: in Portuguese speaking countries they use card decks with French suits but call them espadas (swords=spades), varas (sticks=clubs), ouros (coins=hearts) and copas (cups=diamonds). \n\nBoth of these card decks derived from the tarocchio, which was used in trick-taking games. It had swords, staves, cups and coins as suits; each suit 4 face cards (King, Queen, Knight, and Jack), and the 10 numbered cards. There was also a separate trump suit of 21-cards. \n\nTL;DR: Neither Ace nor Jack was a title. Jack/Knave was originally the servant or page of the Knight; in the French card deck, the Knight was replaced by the Queen but the Jack was maintained. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_%28playing_card%29#History"
],
[],
[]
] | |
5v8613 | why do almost all countries still have speed limits on highways, even though germany has no speed limit and has a low crash rate? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5v8613/eli5_why_do_almost_all_countries_still_have_speed/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddzyybk",
"ddzz1cv",
"de00nks",
"de04uuz",
"de07qr7",
"de07w0j",
"de0g2tr"
],
"score": [
2,
62,
3,
31,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In my mind, it's mostly a combination of great city planning and road conditions, together with (and most importantly) education and culture.",
"I don't know much about the Hitler thing that other guy is talking about, but an important distinction for your question is that compared to America and the UK, Germany has extremely difficult driving standards. This is just a quick jump away from the idea that if your driving standards are higher, you will have less drivers in total, but those that do drive will drive on average at a higher caliber. With safer roads, better drivers, and safer cars, there is little need for Germany to have speed restrictions. \n\nEdit: Wikipedia states that the cost for the test and class alone in Germany is about 1800$, which was way more than the 200$ for the class and 35$ for the test here in California.\n",
"I used to live in Germany many years ago, so disclaimer that this info may be old. \n\nAlthough the Autobahn mostly has no limits, parts of it do (near exits, etc.) and there is a \"recommended\" speed for the rest... roughly 120km/h.\n\nGerman citizens have their permits for exactly a year, during which they are kept to strict standards about what it takes to A) keep it and B) obtain a license. When I was there, I had a friend who was 18, still on her permit. She refused to drive anywhere but from work to home, because she told me that if she gets into so much as one accident, she'd lose the opportunity to get a license. \n\nEven getting in trouble for speeding on the metered highways could result in bigger ramifications than it does in the United States. ",
"As a German, the reason lies probably in that you need to reverse your question – why has Germany not yet introduced a general speed limit? Because what really matters is what is by the countries seen as desirable and a thing to work towards. And a general speed limit is what is seen as the \"better\" thing, which leaves Germany as a bit of a holdout. \n\nThere are actually frequently noises made about introducing a general limit here, too, but no politician ever dares to make a serious move. We Germans are serious about our cars and driving, and there is a strong lobby working towards keeping things as they are and preserving the interests of all car drivers. The German automobile club ADAC is the biggest auto club in Europe and has currently over 19 million members (in a country with 82 million inhabitants), and they also have a thing or two to say whenever the idea of a general speed limit rises its head.\n\ntl;dr: \nGermany with its Autobahn with no speed limit isn't seen as something to aspire to by other countries, but is instead a lone holdout unwilling to change its way.\n\n[btw, there are actually large areas of Autobahn that do have speed limits. The no-limit thing only goes for stretches that are not marked otherwise, and those often end rather abruptly. We also have on the Autobahn a recommended speed of 130 km/h, which means if you get involved in an accident at a speed higher than that, you can still be regarded to be partly at fault even if you weren't the one who caused it]",
"~~Most~~ A lot of the German Autobahn is now speed restricted, I thought.\n\nSpeed limits have been in general introduced for one of two reasons. Either on the grounds of safety in response to public concern, for example in the UK the motorway speed limit came in after some major accidents caused by fog. Once in place, removing speed limits is not very popular - true, some motorists will welcome it, but safety worries are usually stronger.\n\nNote that most roads, including highways, have a \"design speed\" they're built for, with the expectation that traffic driving at that speed will be safe. Raising the speed limit beyond that would increase the risk. Doing 100 mph might be fine on the straights but come to a bend or a junction in the pouring rain and there's a risk of losing control. In the UK at least some curves in interchanges have advisory speeds posted - not legal limits, but a safety recommendation to drivers on a tighter-than-normal curve.\n\nThe other reason is to encourage saving fuel. Driving at 100 mph is considerably less efficient than driving at 70. It was in response to the 1970's oil crisis that a 55 mph limit came in on American highways",
"The question also combines two things that may not necessarily be related: speed limits and crash rates.\n\nI remember reading years ago some stats that the old Car & Driver magazine published; showing that the trend was consistent that the death rates on US highways declined after we adopted the national 55 MPH speed limit. However, they noted that the RATE was actually dropping faster before the national speed limit. It may not sound intuitive, but with adoption of safer designs of cars and tires, acknowledgement of the speeds people are actually driving would make the roads safer.\n\nWhat sets Germany apart in these areas? The roads are made with much higher quality than in the US. Truth is they have less roads to pave and maintain. The drivers respect each other differently. You always pass on the left. You always move over to the right if you are not driving faster. Tires in winter must be winter tires. Tighter automobile inspections (bald tires, etc) keep these hazardous drivers off the roads.",
"Well in the UK, it was a decision made 50 years ago that went unchallenged through parliament with little (if any) consideration.\n\nThe reason there is still a speed limit is because of political reasons. The motorways are the safest roads in the U.K.; no political party wants to be one that potentially brings 'deaths to the roads' even though it has been proven that speed does not kill.\n\nSo essentially it's politics and history "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
5d4bbk | why are jurors not allowed to ask questions during a trial, even if asked anonymously? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5d4bbk/eli5_why_are_jurors_not_allowed_to_ask_questions/ | {
"a_id": [
"da1mgth",
"da1mq6e",
"da1n4p5",
"da1o2gu",
"da1o5r8"
],
"score": [
2,
31,
3,
15,
3
],
"text": [
"Questions may sway the jury in a certain direction. In this instance, a juror would influence the jury, which is not intended.",
"Juror's are allowed to ask questions, at the discretion of the Judge presiding over the case. There are a number of reasons why this is not commonly practiced:\n\n1. Juries aren't supposed to be \"involved\" in the case. They are supposed to be impartial third parties evaluating a case based on the evidence provided to them.\n\n2. It increases the length and complexity of the trial.\n\n3. Jurors are lay people, so may ask questions that are inappropriate or irrelevant.\n\n4. It can emphasize or highlight bias on behalf of the juror asking the questions.",
"Jurors are allowed to ask questions, they just have to be approved by the judge first. The jury can't just interrupt a defense attorney in the middle of questioning a witness to ask a question.",
"In Colorado jurors may ask as many questions as they want. The questions have to be reviewed by the attorneys and the judge, but if they seek admissible evidence or clarify some legitimate evidence, the questions are almost always asked. There is a trend towards allowing questions by jurors. In the past, the questions were not permitted because jurors were supposed to judge evidence that was presented, not attempt to investigate the case themselves. The trend recognizes that there is no good reason to prevent the jury from considering evidence they legitimately think is relevant.",
"The first thing they would ask, is ask the defendant if he/she did it. (violating their fifth amendment rights).\n\nThe second thing they would ask is about some obvious hole in the case in which evidence has been excluded for some reason (thus violating the rules of evidence).\n\nThey would then proceed to ask a whole host of other questions which you, and I, might think are extremely relevant such as:\n\nWere you in a sexual relationship with this man before you say he raped you? Are you a prostitute? Have you previously been convicted of a crime? and so on and so forth, which a few hundred years of legal thought have gone into prohibiting from being asked."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2k3jd0 | what happen to world trade center 7? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2k3jd0/eli5_what_happen_to_world_trade_center_7/ | {
"a_id": [
"clhjp9u"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The old one or the new one?\n\n The old WTC fell down after it was damaged by debris and fire from the 9/11/01 attacks. THe new one was just fine when I passed it headed to work this morning."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2se8la | why do 4-wheel drive vehicles have their spare tires behind them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2se8la/eli5_why_do_4wheel_drive_vehicles_have_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnom2ej"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Offroad vehicles are designed to handle rough terrain and hold a bunch of cargo for 'adventures'.\n\nYou can't stick your spare tire underneath, because you might not be able to do it. If you put it inside, that's potentially valuable trunk space.\n\n...it's also a stylistic thing that makes them look more 'rugged'."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1ohdve | why could the us and ussr produce more than 120,000 nuclear warheads and smaller nations struggle for years to make one? | According to Wikipedia _URL_0_ the US has produced 70,000 nuclear warheads, and the former USSR produced 55,000. Why is it that these two countries could make so many and other determined countries like Iran struggle for years to build 1? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ohdve/eli5_why_could_the_us_and_ussr_produce_more_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccry9yt",
"ccrybxx",
"ccryd1a",
"ccrz7vh",
"ccrzb7w"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
14,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Because we're far richer, and far less discrete about our nuclear weapons production.\n\nEdit: We spent about 8.66 trillion dollars (inflation adjusted) on our nuclear weapons program from 45-96. Iran's entire military budget is 9 billion. Just for some perspective.",
"The main limiting factor for building nuclear weapons is enriching the uranium needed. The US and USSR, as superpowers, could enrich all the uranium they wanted. Other nations cannot because they don't have the facilities and when they try to build them the rest of the world steps in. Enriching uranium isn't necessarily hard but it's hard to hide.",
"The first one is the hardest. ",
"A lot of people here are saying, and aren't exactly wrong, that it's due to resources. That's not the whole picture though.\n\nThe USSR and USA were doing their production when there were no non-proliferation treaties and little pressure internationally for them to stop - none that mattered to them, anyway.\n\nToday nobody wants any more nuclear weapons so the international community hops on top of it immediately. ",
"A few reasons really:\n\n- As other have said, being one of the two superpowers means you have little to no accountability to the rest of the world.\n- Another major factor was the weapons race, whenever either countries was perceived to be having an edge in the nuclear race the other was try hard to play catch up. This in itself was a result of the MAD doctrine both countries were operating in, for MAD to work you had to have enough nuclear capabilities for a second retaliatory strike (Both countries' nuclear attack plans involved targeting the other's nuclear weapons). This led to the massive build-up of nukes on both sides. Interesting side note, El-Pentagon had calculated how many Russians and heavy industries they need to kill/destroy for the USSR to crumble.\n- Economies of scale are also a major factor, being two of the biggest, richest (ahem) at the time countries, both the US and USSR could take huge advantage of mass production of nuclear weapons, something which is simply not feasible any more in part due to the taboo that has been created around nukes and in part due to the next point:\n- Last but by no means least, depending on which flavour of IR theory you fall into: The NPT technically prohibits countries to have nukes, with the exception of well the guys who already had nukes but wanted no one else to have nukes, which are casually recognised as nuclear weapons states. India, Israel, Pakistan, South Sudan are the only countries that have not signed the NPT, with NK having withdrawn from the treaty in 2003.\n\nSome extra caveats:\n\n- There is a good chunk of IR theory that deals specifically with whether having just one nuke is enough to deter an attack by other countries. Sadly the Ivory tower inhabitants are divided on this, but with a bias towards the notion that yup one nuke is enough. The chance of not stopping one nuke are still high enough to act as a deterrent, historically, countries with very few nukes have had pretty much no foreign interventions since getting them.\n- Another part of IR theory also deals with the idea that if we give every country 1 nuke, the world will be extremely peaceful, not because we would have nuked each other to death, but because nukes teach responsibility. While on one hand, yes nuclear weapons make you feel more secure from foreign interventions, to some extent, you also become part of the exclusive \"'nuke get nuked club\". In that regard fears that some \"dodgy\" states will pass on nuclear tech to unfriendly organisations is mitigate by the traceability factor. You can easily trace from which country the nuke came from and nuke back (again a lot nuclear weapons states' doctrines dictate an automatic nuking should a nuke be used against them, this is so in case their govt gets nuke and there is no one to take the decision, imagine if the Secretary of Education in the US becomes the acting president and he/she has to all of the sudden decide on this. In the UK for example, each new PM that takes offices issues a secret command to the trident fleet that is only opened in case the country is nuked and the govt dead, which says whether to nuke or not to nuke back.)\n- Yes the briefcases with the nuclear launch codes exist and are real, you can google around the times they've been misplaced and forgotten, but still nukes teach responsibility.\n- Having enriched uranium, while not the easiest thing to achieve, is still rather worthless if you don't have a method of delivery, preferably in the form of a ICBM."
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
32fyfb | why is dog and horse breeding not evidence of evolution. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32fyfb/eli5_why_is_dog_and_horse_breeding_not_evidence/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqat8t8",
"cqat93w",
"cqatb2x",
"cqatgqk",
"cqatmw9",
"cqatt8a"
],
"score": [
22,
2,
3,
14,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Yes it is. Anyone who denies that is ignorant or trying to further some non-scientific agenda. ",
"It is. Who says it isn't? It's not a complete proof, sure, but it's reasonable proof that there's genetic differences between parent and child and that, in the face of a selecting factor favouring certain traits, those traits become much more widespread. ",
"The hardcore anti-evolutionists say that \"micro-evolution,\" change within a species is true, and that species can vary over time. However, they claim that \"macro-evolution,\" the evolution of new species, is impossible and that all species on Earth exist in distinct \"kinds\" from which they cannot evolve. Dogs will always look like dogs, whales like whales, and so on. This ignores the fairly obvious (in my opinion and frankly in the opinion of many people that know how evolution works) that if a species varies long enough it eventually won't be the same species as its' ancestor. ",
"As an ex-JW I suppose I have some pretty solid base to make my point:\n\nReligions that deny evolution do so by lack of correct education. They tell their followers a warped view of evolution, and teach about \"kinds\". Since there is no scientific definition of what a \"kind\" is it is very hard to make points against it. But in essence they teach that a salmon couldn't evolve into a snake or a dog couldn't evolve into a bear. They say that there cannot be a change in KIND, while variations within KINDS is perfectly fine. Since we don't have any living examples of changing from one KIND to another (while we now have tons of fossil and historic records) it is very easy for them to make up arguments against it.\n\nAlso it's important to remember that every breed of dog is the same species of animal as wild grey wolves - Canis Lupus. They can still all interbreed as a species should. \n\nAnother teaching is that the process is not a NATURAL one, and that evolution from KIND to KIND is not a process that can be done naturally.\n\nReligions that deny evolution do not make an attempt to argue against (I cant remember the word for it off the top of my head) the idea that your genetics can change from what they are currently and that dog breeds are not an example of evolution just simple genetic changes (again, there's a word I can't remember)",
"Dog and Horse breeding is exactly evidence of evolution. It's an form of artificial evolution because we, humans, select the traits we want and which animal gets to breed. \n\nA lot of people don't like that because it doesn't really fit the mold \"survival of the fittest\" and Creationists just dismiss it. In reality, it does fit the meaning of evolution since humans are what control the environments for dogs and horses so their survival depends on how much we like them. But you can't tell that to people who will try to dismiss evidence by using conjectures.",
"To be a little more particular, it's evidence of *artificial* selection rather than natural selection. But it's definitely evolution. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
436yap | what is going on with you tube? all sorts of fairly popular channels are being deleted, losing monetization, or having constraints placed on them and seemingly out of nowhere. is there new management, broken automation, or something else? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/436yap/eli5_what_is_going_on_with_you_tube_all_sorts_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"czg02qh",
"czg1u9n",
"czg5bcy"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"YouTube changes its policies around seemingly arbitrarily every few years, usually the change doesn't have the intended effect and needs to be fixed lol",
"The internet is still new. New things are being tried out. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's not. \nOther video services are beginning to appear. Some YouTubers may be moving their channels over to them but may have an exclusive contract clause meaning their videos can't be on YouTube. Others may just find it not financially viable anymore. Many animators quit making videos because the return is not worth the hours spent creating them. ",
"I'm not sure if this is what the OP meant to imply, but the limitations aren't being placed on specific channels, but are rather sweeping algorithm and policy changes that affect everything. \n\nThe two that seem to be causing the most grief are the switch from a per-view monetization plan to a per-minutes-watched monetization plan (although this happened a long time ago in internet standards) and the fact that their content-ID algorithm gives false flags to videos ALL THE GODDAMN TIME. When a video is flagged for copyright violation, the monetization is automatically disabled for that video. There have been cases of things like the *sound of rain* triggering the algorithm to flag a video for copyright infringement. \n\ntl;dr a combination of seemingly benign policy change and bad automation\n\n[Super Bunnyhop has a great video on this.](_URL_0_) It's from 2013, but it's still incredibly relevant."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfndDzWk1CA"
]
] | ||
4juprx | what happened in r/the_donald and why is there a new subreddit r/mr_trump? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4juprx/eli5_what_happened_in_rthe_donald_and_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"d39s6gb"
],
"score": [
66
],
"text": [
"As I understand it, here's how things went:\n\nThe initial mods of /r/The_Donald got doxxed and quit. This led to new mods being in charge who were trying to tone down some of the more outrageous commentary, especially in regards to Muslims, Islam, and the European refugees. \n\nAt the same time the Reddit admins shut down /r/European, which had become a white supremacist sub, and those users started to trickle into /r/The_Donald, whose top mod further cracked down on anti-Muslim commentary which ticked off the uses enough that she quit. \n\nThe new mods came in, made some commentary about how they were going to listen more to the rest of the mod community about how to run the sub. Every mod who participated in the discussion was then de-modded and the AutoModerator was set to filter their posts out. These mods got pissed off and then started /r/Mr_Trump. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1xjlfo | why do black women have larger and more pronounced butts than white women? | This may seem like a stupid question, but I've always wondered what was up with that? I'm hoping to find an actual reason besides just "genetics". | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xjlfo/eli5_why_do_black_women_have_larger_and_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfc20u3",
"cfc3ash",
"cfc68hz",
"cfc6gu9",
"cfc6ldn",
"cfc75v1"
],
"score": [
175,
509,
664,
13,
35,
100
],
"text": [
"[Steatopygia](_URL_0_) is your answer.",
"Keep it clean here, guys. No racism.\n\nAlso keep in mind that simply coming up with something that seems plausible is not okay. ",
"It is a genetic trait called [Steatopygia.](_URL_2_)\nThere are a few theories about why this trait evolved. Theories include: 1. Helping to carry children \n2. Being a fat reserve during times of famine \n3. Being an adaptive physiological feature for female humans living in hot environments because maximizes their bodies' surface-area/volume ratio but keeps enough fat to produce hormones needed for menstruation\n\nSources: \n1. [American Journal of Physical Anthropology](_URL_1_) \n2. [Akira Kato](_URL_0_) \n3. [Softpedia](_URL_3_)\n\nEdit: Words and links",
"Africans are actually the most genetically diverse race because only a few early humans, from whom everyone else has descended, decided to leave Africa while most stayed. ",
"One point a lot of evolutionary explanations seem to be missing - you should be asking why non-African women have smaller/flatter bottoms (if that is in fact true)\n\nAs humans originated in Africa, we'd be looking for reasons that this trait was selected against as waves of humans left Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago.",
"Locked-- this has been explained and most of the new comments are just racist. Better to do this than outright delete it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steatopygia"
],
[],
[
"http://barclay1720.tripod.com/hist/paleo/buttocks.htm",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=WIugAAAAMAAJ&lpg=PA201&ots=GgQMfyHnJE&dq=Steatopygia%20reason&pg=PA201#v=onepage&q=Steatopygia%20reason&f=false",
"http://en.... | |
1rxb0b | how does marine life tell direction when they're so deep there's no light? | Say a fish life's at point A and they go a few km away for food or what ever, how do they find their way back? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rxb0b/eli5_how_does_marine_life_tell_direction_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdru1as",
"cdrz8uy"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They rarely need to find their way back to a specific point they've been before. If there is something there that they want, they can head towards it, but in the deep, no random spot has more significance that another, unless it innately has something towards which a fish can travel.",
"Marine geochemist here. There are several issues here, one is that for some of them up or down is largely irrelevant, the currents constantly mix the ocean so there would be no real need to move since the deep ocean is stable chemically/energetically.\n\nFor things which do move there are a few different properties they can use to orient themselves, most obviously temperature, pH, and magnetism. I am sure they are many others, possibly endless methods when we start to understand microbes better. \n\nAlso, your question is kind of ambiguous. There are plenty of organisms that can detect sunlight at depths only very sensitive instruments can \"so deep\" is nebulous. If they are living on the bottom they can obviously use familiar scents or electrical patterns to navigate. If they live in the water between these they likely don't care if they don't get \"home\" since they spend their entire lives in the water column."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2mvglq | why are teeth such a mess? | If teeth help us process the food we eat, and therefore, they are very important for our health, why do they give so many problems, aesthetically also? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mvglq/eli5_why_are_teeth_such_a_mess/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm7xuso"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Mostly, it's the diet. Modern civilized humans tend to eat a diet that is rich in sugars and starch, which just causes tooth decay. Thousands of years ago, most humans ate what we would consider to be a very poor diet, but even though they didn't have toothpaste or regular checkups at the dentist, their teeth were in surprisingly good condition -- as an archaeologist might confirm."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2o5ec3 | why is there only a very small copetitive e-sport scene in japan compared to the rest of east asia/europe/north america? | For example the league of legends/starcraft scene is huge in south korea and china, but i never heard of a well known player from japan (speaking about lol now), or from an major tournament held in japan. Why is that the case? Because the gaming scene in japan seems to be quite large acctually | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o5ec3/eli5_why_is_there_only_a_very_small_copetitive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmjul1v",
"cmjxb8y"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"From what I know the gaming scene in japan seems mostly console based, while the most popular e-sports are usually on pc.",
"The gaming industry and habits are very different in Japan.\nThe old school players will go the the Arcade to play games (because they don't own a console at home) and the new wave of players play on their 3DS and on their smartphone!\nThe mobile game industry is huge in Japan with compagny like [Gree](_URL_0_)\n\nIn Arcade, one of the most popular type of game is fighting games (aside from weird robot games and crazy dance rythm games).\n\nAnd if you follow the e-sport scene of Street Fighter you will see a strong representation of Japanese players who absolutly crush everyone in tournaments.\n\n(sorry for my bad english)\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GREE"
]
] | |
4yysqy | how can pirañas detect a drop of blood from two miles away? | _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4yysqy/eli5_how_can_pirañas_detect_a_drop_of_blood_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6rgr6d",
"d6rk8vr"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"They cannot; this is a false rumor.\n\nThis fish cash smell a drop of blood in a few hundred liters of water. Not millions of liters, which is the amount you're talking about.",
"You just got finished at Taco Tuesday, get back home, and, as you walk into the door, you silently fart. Within seconds, your friend sitting on the couch looks ill. They smell it.\n\nBut the couch is 20 feet away -- so does that mean your friend can \"smell you from 20 feet away\"? No -- it means that after you farted, there was a high enough concentration of fart particles that traveled to your friend's nose. If you keep moving your friend back, at some point they will no longer be able to smell your fart -- but fart particles will still be reaching them (just not enough for him to know). \n\nIn fact, right this very moment, you are surrounded by particles in the air that are too few for you to notice... but some people, or animals, with more sensitive noses may. Why? Because their noses are able to detect small amounts of things in the air.\n\nSo when you hear things like \"sharks/piranas can smell a drop of blood from a mile away,\" the blood must actually be entering their sensory organs (if the drop of blood was actually a mile away, there would be no particles near the shark to \"smell\"). What this saying means is simply, \"Piranas can smell extremely small amounts of blood diluted in water.\"\n\nThey can use these tiny particles like breadcrumbs to follow towards its source/higher concentration... but ultimately, it starts with at least *some* detectible amount of blood touching the fish."
]
} | [] | [
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MMD6sz5sn7U"
] | [
[],
[]
] | |
29wlsn | how come sharks and alligators stayed pretty much the same since the time of the dinosaurs? i was thinking that evolution (ie random mutation) was inevitable. shouldn't they have evolved frickin' laser beams on their heads by now? | Or at least a crazy tentacle appendage that helps grab food or somesuch. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29wlsn/eli5_how_come_sharks_and_alligators_stayed_pretty/ | {
"a_id": [
"cip6gm1",
"cip6krh",
"cip8a0t",
"cipb5td"
],
"score": [
38,
20,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"When it comes to non-human species, it's all about survival and these two creatures are perfect killing machines on the top of the food chain. As I understand it, evolution comes out of necessity and these two creatures don't really have any when it comes to survival. ",
"They've had lots of random mutations. \n\nYou don't see new/different phenotypes because none of those random mutations resulted in any advantages in living to be old enough to mate, or in the mating process.\n\nSuccess in survival and passing on genes = Evolution.",
"Sometimes a species fits into its niche so well that it doesn't need to change. Sharks, for instance, have changed in size dramatically over the years, but you can't really improve on a torpedo with teeth. Helicoprion tried but it didn't replace the basic body plan. \n \nKaprosuchus saharicus was an crocodile with long legs for chasing down prey at high speeds, apparently to catch dinosaurs, but it was obviously still a crocodile. \n \nEven the unchanging animals change a lot, but seem to revert back to that original body plan of awesomness.",
"Evolution is the gradual genetic adaptation of a species to its environment. They haven't changed much because they're already very well adapted. Species only die out when they're no longer adapted to some aspect of their environment (be it a climate change, new predator, lack of food, etc.). This hasn't happened to these animals enough for their population to die out. Certainly, there have been mutations like with any species, but those were less successful than the mainstream population because they're already so well adapted."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
bzzgn8 | first time being on own health insurance. how does one go about using it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bzzgn8/eli5_first_time_being_on_own_health_insurance_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqyta3p",
"eqz099f",
"eqz3g4o"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"You probably got a list of medical providers from your insurer. Look up a primary care provider. \nLook up reviews for the provider and the organization they work for. Repeat until you find a good one. \n\n\nCall them and ask if they're taking new patients. \n\n\nIf you have a specific ailment you want treated, make an appointment. Otherwise, wait until you're due for a checkup to make the appointment. Then go wild.",
"You go to the doctor, not knowing how much they charge for their diagnostic services.\n\nThe doctor tells you what's wrong and writes up a diagnosis and a treatment without telling you how much it is.\n\nYou do the treatment not knowing how much it is.\n\n30-60 days later, the bill arrives with the rate that your insurance company and the doctor had handshaked on in their provider contract, that you can't see.\n\nYou pay the bill that you can't verify the charges. You also get 10 other bills from other providers like labs and specialists that your doctor used, without telling you about or telling you how much they cost.\n\nLoving it so far?",
"Educate yourself on how your insurance covers ER visits. Some insurance charge you a copay. Some charge you a percentage of your total visit cost. Some charge you both. \n\nI have lost count of how many people who have previously been on either their parents insurance or Medicaid and are gobsmacked when I tell them their ER visit carries anywhere from a $100 to a $450 copay. \n\nYou should to take this into account and ask yourself if getting some IV fluids and Tylenol for your cold is worth the ER copay or if it would be ok to wait and call your primary care physician in the morning. Office visits generally run around $25."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
ofmbm | mosh pits | I don't go to concerts *too* often, but I've stopped trying to find my way up near the stage, because there's always some type of mosh pit going. I think there may be different types of pits depending on the style of music, but it's all very confusing to me. I'm all for dancing or singing along and enjoying the music, but what is enjoyable about 100 people all dance-brawling with eachother? People are catching elbows to the jaw and getting shoved every which way but loose. Why? WHY?? WHAT IS THE APPEAL?! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ofmbm/mosh_pits/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3guv8h",
"c3guwnj",
"c3gv2ft"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Have you ever just wanted to push someone really hard with no repercussions? ",
"Same reason people enjoy tackle football, or rugby, or fighting. Some people just enjoy getting rough.",
"Hm, not sure if this is really a ELI5 kind of question, because I would probably just tell a kid \"Well, because that's what they like to do.\"\n\nBut \"moshing\" (or \"slam-dancing\") is rooted in the early hardcore scene that sprung up around L.A. in the 80's. The music was aggressive, and the participants were usually young men with a lot of steam to blow off. As that style of music became popular and spread through the nation, the dance moved with it. As that style of music eventually morphed and blended into other style the dance went there too (heavy metal, skate punk, eventually \"grunge\" and even hip hop etc...).\n\nNow slam dancing is so far removed from it's origins that it's just a thing that people do at concerts, almost regardless of the style of music. It's become so common and acceptable that most of the participants probably don't even listen to the music from which it originated.\n\nHowever, as far as the \"why?\" goes, well, because that's what they like to do."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
ayswoy | how do film crews get in contact with big cartels and criminals and how are they allowed to not tell the police about gang’s location? also how can they trust these criminals? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ayswoy/eli5_how_do_film_crews_get_in_contact_with_big/ | {
"a_id": [
"ei3077i",
"ei3178k",
"ei3mssm"
],
"score": [
6,
34,
3
],
"text": [
"There is no legal requirement to report the location of criminals. Seeing a criminal and not reporting them to police isn't itself a crime. Reporters then can obtain interviews and write their stories without breaking any laws.\n\nNow how they get in touch will vary but presumably they talk to other people who can pass a message along to the criminal they want to interview. If the criminal trusts the reporter then they will meet somewhere for the interview.",
" > How do film crews get in contact with big cartels and criminals\n\nIANAL.\n\nYou start making phone calls and talking to people. You declare yourself a journalist and state your intent, you take a certain amount of risk, you try your damndest to establish credibility of the sources you establish and you establish trust, because depending on the nature of what you're doing, you're putting your life at risk.\n\n > how are they allowed to not tell the police\n\nDepending on what country you're in, like if you're reporting on American crime, we have a thing called freedom of association. It's not illegal to come into contact with suspected criminals. If you're in some other country, where you don't have that sort of freedom, you may have to go so far as to subvert the authority.\n\nFurther, as per the American example, reporters are not the police, and we are not obligated to report crime. There are such things as mandatory reporters, typically around child abuse, but journalists are not mandatory reporters. 18 USC Section 4, you are not allowed to obscure a crime if directly asked, but journalists are basically explicitly reporting on the crime, that's the story! Also, they operate under certain pretenses such as not knowing peoples real name, so that when directly asked, and they do get directly asked during an investigation, they don't have to lie.\n\n > Also how can they trust these criminals?\n\nIt's a risk.\n\nOverall, journalists work very hard to establish credibility and a neutral position, they're interested in the story whatever it is, and criminals typically are willing to work with journalists to get their story out. For example, gangs may want to raise awareness of poverty and inequality that spurns gang life. They know what they do and how they live is terrible. If they don't trust the journalist is going to tell the story they want told, they're not going to cooperate and collaborate. And one dishonest journalist who exploits their sources sours relationships across the globe, because if this journalist screws us over, others may, too - and I'm not going to be taken advantage of again. Right? And other sources may feel the same way, knowing that working with a journalist is already a precarious proposition. And there's a certain respect from all sides, government and criminals, (typically,) because both want to see what the journalist has to say - they tend to get into places no one else can go.",
"Police generally know who and where the bad guys are. It's not like it was a big secret that Al Capone was in charge of the Chicago mob and where he lived. But knowing something and having enough proof to convince a jury are two very different things."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
eujcye | why is hyperventilation bad and why do you need to breath in a bag? | I mean, isn't oxygen good fit your body? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eujcye/eli5_why_is_hyperventilation_bad_and_why_do_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"ffprhsc",
"ffpscbt"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Oxygen is good for your body (to a certain extent), but that's not what you worry about with hyperventilation. When you exhale, you blow off carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is one of the main players in your blood chemistry. If you hyperventilate, you exhale more and more carbon dioxide. You can end up exhaling so much carbon dioxide that you can cause respiratory alkalosis, which can result in all sorts of problems. By breathing into a bag, you can breathe back in some of the carbon dioxide you breathed out so you can maintain appropriate carbon dioxide levels in your blood.",
"TLDR; “Your body needs the right mix of air to work. Breathing into a bag helps keep the right mix”\nHyperventilation (rapid breathing or deep breathing, often caused by psychological stress) causes an imbalance of oxygen and CO2 (too little CO2) which leads to constriction of blood vessels, most importantly, to/from the brain. Should your blood vessels constrict too drastically for your brain’s oxygen requirements (i.e. strenuous activity while hyperventilating) you could pass out due to lack of oxygen to the brain. This is why doctors advise against taking a bunch of deep breaths before swimming distances underwater (military doctors). Breathing into a bag allows more CO2 into the lungs, helping maintain the O2-CO2 balance in the bloodstream, thus keeping blood vessels open and you conscious."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
3je8vw | why is advertising pushed so forcefully onto people who don't want to see advertisements? it seems counterproductive to their goals. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3je8vw/eli5_why_is_advertising_pushed_so_forcefully_onto/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuogter",
"cuogucd",
"cuogz2p"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Even if you don't want to see ads, you are still affected by ads.\n\nThe scenario that people will stop purchasing a product because they see an advertisement just doesn't happen. Even if you don't see the evidence of this being successful the billions spent on advertising are done by people who know if it's worth it.\n\n > Often times I will think \"I sure wouldn't mind stopping at sonic for some food... but I HATE those guys on that commercial. I will never go there for as long as I live\".\n\nIf this were a common belief the ads wouldn't run, but it isn't. This is extremely out of the ordinary, so much so that it's not even worth companies considering this rare person who actually feels that way.",
"Tv commercials and online ads ARE the fastest, most efficient, and most accessible ways of advertising. And for every person that gets spiteful and bitter like you do, there are many people that are swayed by advertising. ",
"It causes far more irritation in you than it does the average person. For most people the irritation is a very quick flash, but the product worms it's way into the brain. So weeks later they've forgotten the irritation entirely but not the product. \n\nSo the add gives a +10 to your brain's perception of the product. and the irritation gives you a -11, for a net of -1. But for most people the irritation is only a -9, so the net is a +1.\n\nFor that matter, it's likely that the irritation you experience is not as long lasting as you think it is. Every brand advertises, do you refuse to shop at every brand? More likely you are simply irritated in the moment but go right back to those shops as soon as you crave the food. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
bnfum7 | what's the difference between the different type of steaks? (ribeye, porterhouse, tomahawk, filet mignon, t-bone, etc.) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bnfum7/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_the_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"en56ups",
"en5c160"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Very simple answer: they come from different parts of the cow.\n\nslightly more involved answer: [here](_URL_0_) is an article explaining what all the different cuts are and where on the cow they come from",
"I'll give this a shot. I'll stick to practical differences. Also keep in mind that 'tender' can be cancelled out by over-cooking. Starting with ribeye:\n\nRibeye (also sometimes called Delmonico) will be a fattier steak. This is also why it will tend to be among the most flavorful. They also tend to be bigger steaks, a very 'meat and potatoes' sort of steak (not at all in a bad way). Can be very tender. My personal favorite.\n\nA tomahawk will be a bone-in ribeye, usually with a longer section of bone attached. Of course flavor will come from the bone, but it's definitely at least partly for show.\n\nStrip (NY Strip, etc) will be leaner than ribeye, fattier than filet mignon (which is just a pretty way people say beef tenderloin, so that's how I'll refer to it from this point on). Good in-between steak, the one I most often sold when I was butchering. By in-between I mean good mix of flavor & fat but not *too* much of either. \n\nT-bone is bone-in strip with a (usually very) small portion of tenderloin.\n\nTenderloin (filet mignon) is gonna be a muscle that gets very little action relative to others so that is why it can be the most tender. There's often a lack of fat in this steak so that means two things: less naturally occurring flavor and less forgiveness if it's overcooked since there is less fat to make up for it.\n\nPorterhouse is a t-bone with a larger portion of tenderloin (I believe at least 3/4 inch wide (not thick) or more to be considered porterhouse). So here you get two good steaks on one shared bone. \n\nThere's also a lot more that are good cuts but these are amongst the most popular as well as being the ones you listed. \n\nBonus: a good and usually pretty cheap steak is chuck eye. Think of a lesser version of a ribeye."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.clovermeadowsbeef.com/beef-cuts/"
],
[]
] | ||
39vzgc | amongst chess masters, why don't all chess matches end the same way? | Isn't there always a right course of action based on the board? Wouldn't chess masters always know the best move?
If not, how is chess, a game of no luck, no variables other than human decisions, able to be different every time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39vzgc/eli5_amongst_chess_masters_why_dont_all_chess/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs6z036",
"cs6z14u",
"cs6z1jo",
"cs6z1of"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3,
10
],
"text": [
"Chess is VERY complex, and masters do NOT always know the best move (especially as the difference in skill is minute), because the best move is different depending on what the opposition is planning.",
"There are plays which involve baiting the player, and if they follow, or don't follow the bait, that would already create a new outcome.\nAlso there can simply be more than one way into or out of a situation (While in a check scenario, you could move the king, or move something in the way of it, or kill the attacker). Also, there are many ways to start the game in the first place. There are a lot of simple moves that create a butterfly effect and most people can't comprehend 10 moves ahead.",
"There isn't always one best choice. And even if there is, it's impossible to think too far forward. The possibilities quickly becomes too many for any human to keep track of.\n\nThis is why a computer can beat even the best humans, as they can calculate millions of moves before making their decision.",
"Try to think of all to the stars in the sky. Now think how a small number of those things that look like stars are actually galaxies that contain more stars themselves than all the ones we can see from earth. Try to imagine how many total stars there in the entire universe. Now imagine you take all these stars and shrink them down to the size of a single grain of sand. Now imagine every grain of sand everywhere on earth, and each one containing all the stars in existence. The total number of stars in such a scenario is still less than the number of possible chess games that could be played.\n\nThe openings for chess are well understood, and the players are mostly playing a psychological game with each other to try to choose a set of openings, and counters, and counters to counters that leads to a certain style of game, with both sides making trade offs to try to get to the style that they think better suits them against this opponent. But eventually they make it to a point where neither of them has played from this exact position with any frequency, and they are no longer playing a set strategy. That's where the games are won and lost."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2aop7w | "nestlé wants to own all the water!" what's really going on? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aop7w/eli5_nestlé_wants_to_own_all_the_water_whats/ | {
"a_id": [
"cix8rgj",
"cix8tm6",
"cixcplw",
"cixj0ri",
"cixlht2",
"cixqul3",
"cixs3qo"
],
"score": [
51,
6,
2,
7,
22,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Nestle has purchased land rights to several water sources in Africa and denied access to the communities that previously relied on them. At one point the CEO of Nestle said water wasn't a [basic human right](_URL_0_)",
"[Because the CEO said Nestle should own all the water](_URL_0_)\n\nIn the video he says that water is not a human right and it should all be privatized. ",
"While Nestle is scary as shit. T. Boone Pickens is trying to suck up the ogallala aquifer. As a resident of Nebraska. I drink that water.",
"This happened in Bolivia too I think. They actually made it illegal to collect rain water so that everyone have to pay for utility water.",
"The war over water is afoot. Naturally, the front lines are impoverished countries keen to sell rights to enrich some small political faction. Read this back in '06 and don't know if it was ever substantiated but even if it was not, the writing is on the wall. _URL_0_",
"Nestle's bad reputation is based in part on some of the company's past conduct. [In the 1970s, Nestle was accused of giving away free baby formula in the world's poorest countries even though the company knew it was causing babies to starve to death.](_URL_0_) (If you stop breastfeeding, you stop producing breastmilk. The babies starved when the mothers could not afford enough formula, and because people did not understand it should not be mixed with contaminated water ... possibly as many as 1 million babies died per year). \n\nWhen you have done evil things in the past, people will tend to question your motives, and rightfully so. If Nestle is willing to starve babies in search of a profit, will they allow people to die of thirst in search of a higher profit? And, if so, it that really the company you want to own all the water? ",
"In regards to the Ogallala aquifer comments, it's being discharged at a rate of around 14% a year, and recharged at 7% a year. It's also comprised of numerous confined aquifers stacked on top of one another, and you have a risk of contamination breaking them open. \nAnd as a resident of the Midwest, most of us drink that water. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.trueactivist.com/nestle-ceo-water-is-not-a-human-right-should-be-privatized/"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEFL8ElXHaU"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/oct/23/mainsection.tomphillips"
],
[
"http://www.businessinsider.com/nestles-infant-formu... | ||
5s3ula | how a song you used to know, but after 10 years are unable to say a single phrase from it, once the music starts you suddenly can sing the whole thing without even thinking? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5s3ula/eli5_how_a_song_you_used_to_know_but_after_10/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddc6xp1",
"ddc9774"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"it's not about melody really. If you have some special memories about the moment when that song was played you would probably recall it either. it's cause our brain ties us pieces of memories together with association",
"All your memories are stored in your brain, you DO - as everyone - have autobiographical memory (short of any physical or genetic brain damage) l. It's just that you can't access those memories. But when you encounter a trigger or anchor your brain then attributes more instantaneous significance to those memories and you can recall them.\n\nPS: Deep brain stimulation offers evidence of memories being permanent. Hypnosis as well. There are simpler methods but that's beyond the scope of this question."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
3uno7f | how do researchers decide if ancient texts are facts or just novel stories, like we have both today? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uno7f/eli5eli5_how_do_researchers_decide_if_ancient/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxgasbe",
"cxgasbi",
"cxgd4hh"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"corroboration (if I'm using the word right) ie there is another piece of evidence that shows the same thing. Or at least helps",
"It depends on what other information exists to help verify the claims in it.\n\nSomething like the 'Epic of Gilgamesh' seems to only have scraps of archaeological evidence to support anything in it; whereas Livy's 'History of Rome\" can easily be distinguished from the mythological stuff written by a Roman poet.\n\nThey generally approach many of the texts with skepticism; but some texts straddle the boundaries because them seem to be rooted in factual analysis, with much unsuported speculation thrown in (i.e. Herodotus and his history.)\n\nWe can't predict the future, but presumably there will be more things that can be used to properly verify things that have happened in our time period. Even then, there might still be novels that seem like non-fiction texts. ",
"Its arbitrary. Generally, if we find the place somewhere happened, the tombs of the involved people, and plenty of tales of it, we assume it actually happened.\n\nSometimes, it is decided that things and places were fantasy and this gets revised after further findings, for instance, troy _URL_0_\n\nThat said, it is really difficult to tell if something was true or not, and a lot of novels/fantasy have true underpinnings (for instance Game of Thrones is based on the war of the roses, which did happen). Another good example is the nonexistent dinosaurs that were thought to be real at some point from finding bones of a few species mixed together.\n\nThe actual process that happens is something like this: You think something existed, or happened, or something that is considered a myth is actually real? \n\nYou write an argument with evidence for it, and get it published. If enough people agree with you, then its real, if not, then its not.\n\nThis consensus can change over time, for instance, look at the French Revolution. We know beyond fact it happened. But there is endless debate on why it happened, who was behind it, if the nobles were on board and the reforms would have occurred anyway, and so on.\n\nUnless we get time machines, my guess is it will always be based on who can make the most compelling argument with the existing evidence."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy"
]
] | |
23ld20 | snooker | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23ld20/eli5_snooker/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgy4k8r"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Beside the cue ball, you have 15 red balls, each worth one point, and then one each of the following:\n\nyellow (2 points) \ngreen (3 points) \nbrown (4 points) \nblue (5 points) \npink (6 points) \nblack (7 points)\n\nYou can divide each frame into two phases. In the first phase, you must first pot a red (for one point), and then any colour of your choice. You get the points for that colour as well, but then the colour (not the red) is replaced on its spot. You keep going like this -- red, colour, red colour -- until all the reds have gone (or you make a mistake and your opponent has a go).\n\nWhen all the reds have gone, the second phase begins. In this phase, you must pot all the colours in order from yellow to black, but now the colours are not replaced. The winner is the one with the most points at the end.\n\nThe highest possible break -- a \"break\" is the number of points scored in one visit to the table -- is 147: that's 15 reds and 15 blacks, followed by all the colours. But since you get 4 points if your opponent fouls -- e.g. by hitting the wrong colour with the cue ball, or potting the cue ball itself -- it's theoretically possible to get a higher score."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2gcw2b | why is shooting competitions divided into men and women? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gcw2b/eli5_why_is_shooting_competitions_divided_into/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckhvpw0",
"ckhx3zj",
"ckhxe6w"
],
"score": [
8,
29,
14
],
"text": [
"Even more baffling is why there is NO division into men and women in equestrianism. ",
"[It's explained over here](_URL_0_).\n\nTL;DR is that once upon a time (From 1968 through the 1980 Olympic Games) shooting was a mixed sports, and women can easily perform on the same level as men in the sport. But they divided it into men and women because far more men take up the sport than women, and they need to market the sport in a more friendly manner to women.",
"For pistol shooting events men have an advantage in that they can typically contol recoil better. In rifle shooting events women have an advantage in that the shape of their hips can give them a more stable shooting platform when shooting standing. \n\nBut mostly I think it's just because shooting is a largely male dominated sport. Having a specifc subdivision for women makes sense. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.usashooting.org/news/2012/2/28/195-usa-shooting-viewpoint--men-vs-women-in-competitive-shooting"
],
[]
] | ||
1wx78n | how did knowledge from antiquity survive until the renaissance? | Considering things like the sacking of Constantinople and the dark ages it's surprising how much remained to pave the way for modern science. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wx78n/eli5_how_did_knowledge_from_antiquity_survive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf66vqo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In Europe at least, civilization perhaps unwittingly protected itself from information loss by establishing a decentralized network of redundant repositories of information. (Of course, they wouldn't have conceived of it in those terms at the time.)\n\nBooks during the middle ages were all manuscripts in some form or fasion. There was no mechanical means of reproduction, *i.e.* a printing press. Rather, copies of new books were made by literally copying them by hand.\n\nIn the middle ages, literacy and the ability to transcribe a manuscript (which is *waaay* more technically involved than just writing something down on paper) were special skills, and the Church had those skills in spades. Abbies across Europe were populated by monks and other clergy diligently copying pages and pages of manuscript. These volumes were circulated here and there as clergy paid visits to various other townships and religious institutions, setting up something of an informal book exchange. (Of course, wealthier individuals were free to commission works for their own private collections, as well.) Consequently, Europe's historical knowledge base became quite resilient to sudden and catastrophic loss.\n\nMoreover, the Church's efforts were not limited to religious works (except perhaps in some religious orders). Herodotus, Homer, Aristotle, Virgil, etc. etc. were all readily available and thoroughly copied and proliferated.\n\nOf course, this system wasn't without limiting factors. Latin was the dominant written language then, so it was the common tongue among scribes. Some scribes were no doubt proficient in Hebrew or Greek as well - those being established languages in the Biblical tradition. Outside that, though, texts written in other languages were probably inaccessible to even well-educated clergy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
s4zx7 | what happened to google search? | I've been online since the nineties and toiled through the slip-shod functionality and helter-skelter results of the early Search Engines. When Google came along, it was like a miracle that you actually got the answers you were looking for, and usually on the first page.
I've been a bit of a Google Geek every since, and haven't looked back. But for a while now I've been increasingly disenchanted with my results. More often than not, I'm not finding even close to what I'm looking for. More often than not, I'm getting meaningless lists with no actual content - as my *top* results. And I swear this happens with things I once found answers to easily with the same search string.
In example, tonight I wanted to find out how to prevent my phone from entering sleep mode while charging. I tried various search strings, but found nothing that fit my actual query. On a whim, after giving up, I loaded Bing and gave it a shot. With one search ("[phone model] never sleep while charging") I found my answer in both top results.
This is how I remember Google working before. What changed?
And are there any alternative Search Engines, obscure or otherwise, that you guys would recommend? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/s4zx7/what_happened_to_google_search/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4b4jp1",
"c4b4mv4",
"c4b4u3u"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
8
],
"text": [
" > And are there any alternative Search Engines, obscure or otherwise, that you guys would recommend?\n\nI've heard about [DuckDuckGo](_URL_0_) a few times recently, and tried to start using it. 'Privacy first' is a nice thing to hear nowadays.",
"DDG is good; I also use [these guys](_URL_1_) sometimes. As for your question, it's hard to say, but I think they got a too clever for their own good. Everything is based on popularity, not accuracy. Popularity was always an important part of PageRank, but they've taken it too far, imho.\n\n*Edit*: P.S. If you've been on the 'net for that long, don't forget that [these guys](_URL_0_) never went away! :P",
"People have gotten very good (and very rich) at learning how to trick google's algorithms.\n\nSee: SEO."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://duckduckgo.com/?t=ous&q=duckduckgo"
],
[
"http://www.dmoz.org/",
"http://yippy.com/"
],
[]
] | |
1svwbt | why do sweetened drinks taste less sweet after i eat something sweet? | I'm sure everyone has had this happen to them before. Scenario: you're drinking a Gatorade and eating a donut (why those idfk). While you're drinking you're simultaneously eating the donut. Why does the Gatorade then taste like unsweetened donkey semen while the donut still tastes fine? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1svwbt/eli5_why_do_sweetened_drinks_taste_less_sweet/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce1vhoz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They're relative to one another. \n\nYou ate the donut first - doughnuts are really sweet. Then you drank gatorade, which is also sweet, but when compared to a doughnut, is not so sweet. \n\nThe doughnut is your reference point, it will taste like it normally would. \n\nIf you had drank the gatorade first and then ate the doughnut, the gatorade would've been sweet and so would've the doughnut.\n\n**TIP/TL;DR:** Drink gatorade before you eat doughnuts so everything tastes good. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
3matyb | how come my beer will take less than an hour to come to room temperature after being removed from the fridge, but take 4 - 6 hours to come to fridge temperature when put in the fridge? | It's just not fair!! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3matyb/eli5_how_come_my_beer_will_take_less_than_an_hour/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvdh6kn"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You're putting a closed container into a cold environment, and relying on energy to be transferred from the warm (higher energy state) beer to the cold (lower) refrigerator air.\n\nWhen you open a beer, you drastically increase the surface area exposed. Besides, it's a lot easier to add energy than take it away.\n\n\nTry wrapping your bottles in wet paper towels, and putting them in the freezer for a few minutes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
62gh6y | what happens if the president won the election due to foreign intervention? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62gh6y/eli5_what_happens_if_the_president_won_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfmdx2l",
"dfmf21o"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Russia parties down and said president gets closer to his claimed level of wealth. Meanwhile the other two branches of our government being controlled by republicans means everyone gets away scott free.",
"The USA does not have a good mechanism in place for handling the case where the Presidential election's outcome is questionable. If the situation clearly showed that the outcome was reversed by fraud, then the outcome could be corrected (other candidate moves into the White House) by action of the Supreme Court. But this isn't such a case. So frankly no one knows if anything could be done."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
2bcdin | when you 'smell the sex' on someone, are we literally smelling pheromones or we just gathering visual clues? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bcdin/eli5when_you_smell_the_sex_on_someone_are_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj3x1e5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's more the mixture of two people's sweat, stank, and juices that constitutes \"the smell of sex\" than pheromones. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
4pieid | why does the grape powerade zero turns green when frozen, and back to purple when it thaws (link inside) | [I saw this link on reddit](_URL_0_)
Why does that happen, and does it happen for other colors too, and why only Powerade zero? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4pieid/eli5why_does_the_grape_powerade_zero_turns_green/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4l8ojx"
],
"score": [
30
],
"text": [
"The powerade zero family of beverages has a special pigment known as [anthocyanin](_URL_0_). Those pigments are notable because they can change colour depending on the pH of the solution.\n\nOne of the factors that [affects the pH of a solution is the temperature](_URL_1_), when you freeze the beverage, all the ingredients inside it respond accordingly, in the case of this particular pigment, it changes from purple to green.\n\nIf you were to unfreeze and freeze again, you would be able to see this phenomena over and over."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/2br057/my_purple_drink_turned_green_when_frozen_and_then/"
] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthocyanin",
"https://www.utdallas.edu/~brikowi/Teaching/Field_Methods/WaterQuality_Background.html#f-pH_vs_T"
]
] | |
782r95 | why do clarinets overblow at the 12th, but saxophones overblow at the octave? | I know the clarinet has a cylindrical bore and the sax has a conical bore, but how does the bore shape affect how an instrument overblows? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/782r95/eli5why_do_clarinets_overblow_at_the_12th_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"doqnihg"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The bore shape is part of the issue, but the other part is that the clarinet is *closed at one end*.\n\nAny tube is going to produce harmonics: the fundamental is the first harmonic, the octave at the second harmonic, the 12th at the third harmonic, and so on. An ideal closed cylindrical bore doesn't produce even-numbered harmonics, so it can't overblow at the octave. In practice, a clarinet produces very weak even-numbered harmonics in the first (chalumeau) register, so it overblows at the third harmonic, which jumps up a twelfth.\n\nFor comparison, a conical bore that's closed at one end (a saxophone) or a cylindrical bore that's open at both ends (a flute; your mouth doesn't block the hole in the mouthpiece) produce stronger even-numbered harmonics, so they can overblow at the octave."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
1zv0zz | if bigfoot were real, would they not have found some dead ones/ remains or even bones? | I love to watch all Bigfoot program's that I can find on my tv planner, and some times evidence can seem quite convincing. But how come they don't find corpses, bones or even Bigfoot turd anywhere? Some thing that big MUST leave something. It's hard to believe in but there are thousands of "witnesses" and "footprint casts" etc. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zv0zz/eli5_if_bigfoot_were_real_would_they_not_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfx7yfg",
"cfx7zu2",
"cfx8mk7"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The fact that they don't leave anything is exactly why we know they don't exist. Something that big *would* leave evidence. There is no evidence, ergo there is no thing. ",
"That's the point",
"You are correct, lack of fossil evidence, dung, remains, anything related to a bigfoot is a big black mark on the idea of it existing. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
4bs0cu | why is there such a strong assumption online that sweden has been culturally destroyed by immigration? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4bs0cu/eli5why_is_there_such_a_strong_assumption_online/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1buhqn",
"d1bviq7"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The country is accepting more refugees *per capita* than others, so it really is changing the nature of the population more rapidly than the newcomers can be assimilated. And their culture is very different indeed.\n\nSome Swedes do think it's going to wreck their country.",
"This post is not asking for a layman-friendly explanation to something complicated or technical, so it doesn't belong here. Entirely subjective questions generally belong in /r/askreddit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
319xr4 | how can anyone believe scientology's doctrine and religion when it developed by a science fiction writer? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/319xr4/eli5_how_can_anyone_believe_scientologys_doctrine/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpzo4jx",
"cpzo4or",
"cpzo7s2",
"cpzoqla"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They made it very clear in the HBO film \"Going Clear\" that there is not a shred of proof and that they are functioning on faith alone\n\nThey made a point of explaining that even though they say that free thought is a corner stone the film accurately proves that free thinkers need not apply. In fact free thinkers are very strictly punished and disconnected from their friends and loved ones\n\nYou should see it if you have not already - crazy!",
"all i know about it is what i learned from South Park and also from the \"Going Clear\" documentary, but it seems that they hold that information secret until the rubes are so far into it, years into it, likely have family or loved ones into it that there's no turning back when they reach the level of involvement where the Xenu stuff is finally revealed.",
"You might as well be asking why anyone believes in anything. Christianity. Judaism. Islam. Buddhism. Shinto. Hare Krishna. Democracy. Communism. Libertarianism. Socialism. etc.",
" > Do Scientologists consider L. Ron Hubbard to be a prophet or something? \n\nNo, Scientologists do not consider him a prophet, at the very least he was an assessor and compiler of data, at most he can be considered a good friend.\n\n > Is there any evidence whatsoever that Scientologists present or believe in to support their religion and some of the beliefs such as those about aliens and the origin of humans?\n\nThe belief structure of Scientology is vastly different than other religions, and on this point alone causes probably the most confusion. Scientologists are free to follow whatever belief they may choose, whatever path. Scientology does not dictate and state \"This is what you must believe.\"\n\nTherefore, the idea that Scientologists believe in aliens or the origin of humans may actually be true - but only to a few individuals, and not to the group as a whole."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3gxvu4 | how do companies like red bull make profit from competitions? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gxvu4/eli5_how_do_companies_like_red_bull_make_profit/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu2h1cw",
"cu2jc8s"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The same way anyone makes profit from competitions. Advertising. I assume you're talking about things like Battlegrounds? Red Bull puts their logos all over the place, so it is constantly in the face of those viewing. People who see red bull advertisements are more likely to buy red bull. Similarly, lots of other companies would *love* to have the eyes of those customers, so red bull sells advertising space to others. ",
"Companies like Coke, Pepsi, and Red Bull sell products that need to stay relevant. There needs to be some situation where you think, damn I really want a Mountain Dew and I'd like to pair them with Doritos. For that reason Xbox and Xbox tournaments are almost entirely marketing using Dew and Doritos. Now they're more or less the jokingly official drink and chips of gamers.\n\nRed Bull needs to stay culturally relevant. Red Bull makes big money off of sales from large events, bars (Jagerbombs), and night shift workers. They need to be the energy drink on the tip of everyone's tongue because drinks like Monster and Rockstar are moving on in."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
2lx82x | how is it physically possible for the nsa read all the worlds data and make sense of it all? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lx82x/eli5_how_is_it_physically_possible_for_the_nsa/ | {
"a_id": [
"clyzx6z",
"clz033g"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"They don't. Gathered information is run through computer programs which analyze the content. Certain key phrases, words, people, locations, etc. will flag a piece of information for further review, and it will then be looked at by a human being. The majority of collected information is essentially ignored, and only a very small fraction is actually \"made sense of\". This is a small comfort.",
"They're basically looking for patterns that match things they're interested in. Unless they have a known suspect, no one is going to be listening to every conversation. Most of their analysis is going to be between people/nations/neighborhoods that have something of interest to listen to, such as if a bunch of Swedes were terrorists, they might concentrate on communication between the US and Sweden, Swedish neighborhoods, keywords like the Swedish Chef Terrorist Club, and things like that.\n\nGrandma in Spokane talking to her grandchild in Duluth is probably not top priority. There are limits to the amount automated searching and human analysis that can take place, so it makes sense to focus on enemies (Swedes) of the state as they have the most likely chance of being someone we need to be listening to and establish who they have communication relationships with."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
5j0lox | when usps, ups, or fedex says the package you're sending will arrive on a specific date, but it's not guaranteed, what extra work do they do when you pay extra to "guarantee" it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5j0lox/eli5_when_usps_ups_or_fedex_says_the_package/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbcdimg",
"dbcdrbc",
"dbcdsr7",
"dbcdt4u",
"dbce0vr",
"dbcezze",
"dbcf1h7",
"dbcf21d",
"dbcf32c",
"dbcf62n",
"dbcf6bx",
"dbcfkm5",
"dbcg2ly",
"dbcg7ls",
"dbcgjwg",
"dbcgs9p",
"dbcgwfi",
"dbch4vc",
"dbchg3i",
"dbchy0r",
"dbci2so",
"dbcio3k",
"dbciqsu",
"dbcirtp",
"dbcizee",
"dbcj13v",
"dbcj356",
"dbck61y",
"dbckd1v"
],
"score": [
79,
15,
28,
3,
8,
3,
814,
5,
13,
3,
29,
9,
2,
6,
3,
5,
4,
4,
5,
2,
2,
3,
3,
3,
3,
6,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sometimes they only have one plane going from the shipping spot to the delivery spot. If there are two planes worth of packages, half don't get on that plane, and end up delayed. Paying for the guarantee makes sure that yours is in the half that gets onto the plane. ",
"I used to work for UPS, and we only had 1 plane that went to the next stop, the rest were sent on trailers. Paying extra meant your package went on the plane:)",
"Each company handles their logics differently. But usually a guaranteed delivery date means faster which often means putting it in a plane instead of a semi-truck. Once The air shipment is delivered near your home city a guaranteed package is sorted in a smaller pile of guaranteed deliveries as opposed to the ground. ",
"While this may vary a bit between services and exact logistics decisions, in general, a guarantee means the guarantor (i.e. the shipping company here) is willing to commit to certain compensation in the event they don't fulfill their promises. Decisions about what packages to put on which planes and trucks depend on what delivery guarantees were in effect. \n\nThey would usually offer a standard guarantee for all packages under a particular class of service, and include the likely payouts for delayed shipments in the price for services where the guarantee is in effect, rather than charging a special extra fee to guarantee a particular shipment. \n\nAgain, this is the general policy for their standard services, not necessarily the case for unique service terms for e.g. special handling of certain types of shipments. ",
"The \"guaranteed\" aspect has been covered pretty well, but here's another point of interest. A USPS manager told me one time that the different levels of service (media mail, first class, parcel, Priority, Express, etc) basically revolve around what gets put on the truck/plane first. So if you have two packages sitting in the loading dock, the Priority package will get loaded before the media mail package. And if the truck is then full, the media mail package will sit until the next day.",
"The post office will make special trips (sometimes even sending the manager out) to deliver express mail. If it is not there by the guaranteed date and time you get your shipping fee refunded",
"I currently work at a UPS store so I can add a bit as far as UPS goes. Ground is the \"unguaranteed\" shipping service. 3 Day Select, 2nd Day Air, and Next Day Air all have \"guaranteed\" delivery dates. Both Ground and 3 Day Select typically travel by ground, usually by large bulk transport from one hub to the next, then the smaller delivery trucks from the hub to the destination. 2nd Day Air and Next Day Air typically travel by air, of course, taking a plane from one hub to the next and then a delivery truck from the hub to the house for delivery. Since both Ground and 3 Day Select travel by ground, what do you imagine happens, say, during this holiday season when UPS is bogged down by boxes? If they have more boxes than they can handle, the 3 Day Select all get loaded before the Ground does. If they can't fit all the Ground, that is considered acceptable. All Air parcels are guaranteed, so the extra you pay for is sometimes just profit for UPS, sometimes the extra you pay goes into buying space on another plane for just a few packages. There may be only, say 100 air packages remaining for a day that go on a plane that can fit 5000 packages. The extra you pay for on the Air service helps keep Air shipping profitable. Another difference is that 3 Day Select, 2nd Day Air, and Next Day Air can all have claims be paid on the shipment if they are simply late to arrive. If a Ground shipment arrives late, you'll simply be told that Ground is not guaranteed. Sorry, that was kind of long-winded. Hopefully that answers your question at least. ",
"Stupid example, but years ago worked at a dry cleaners. Paying for the top quality service, including same day service, meant a special tag gets put on. From initial sorting to final loading, everyone looked for special tags and tried to move it ahead in the process. Still went through each step the same way, but that nudge at each step pretty much made sure the stuff made it back from the plant to the store on the same day.",
"They put the equivalent of what you paid for the guarantee into a reserve account and when it arrives timely they then recognize it as revenue. If it's untimely, they recategorize it in another reserve account and hold it there until you ask for a refund and give you your money or the probability that you will not ask for a refund is high and recognize the funds as revenue at the time.",
"There is nothing you can do to guarantee it 100%. With FedEx and UPS (I'm not familiar with USPS policy), you have a variety of service options that do have a time and delivery date commitment but there are factors that can prevent it from getting there like weather, mechanical, or someone screwing up. With both companies, if your package does not make it to its destination on time and it was not because of weather, you are entitled to a money back guarantee. You simply just call the customer service and they will credit your shipping charges. \n\nIf this question is because of a package sent during the holidays, both companies do away with the money back guarantee during December due to the high volume. ",
"My time to shine,\n\nFedex Ground and Fedex Express are actually two different companies. When sending something time sensitive they give it to express. Express tags it more and scans it more and has more \"eyes on your package. They also put it on a plane to avoid traffic back ups and other typical ground problems. Ground also has a knack for not tracking your package as much. AND they often don't scan a whole lot and often miss certain scan checkpoints. ",
"\nGuaranteed means they will load first, the issue comes when there is not enough room on the vehicle /aircraft allotted for that run. The extra work/cost is having a larger truck/aircraft available for the run. Companies have dept trying to predict the volume of packages. This way they can have appropriate vehicle /aircraft to move the freight, charging the customer for that premium service. If they guess correctly the company makes higher yield per package, guess poorly resources; vehicles, aircraft, overtime, are mobilized to pick up the slack, unhappy customers are not repeat customers. \n\nNot guaranteed means cheapest mode of transport, it gets there when it gets there. ",
"Lol....There is no \"extra work\" to \"guarantee\" your package. You are one out of a few million customers. If anything, they may let help routes work more hours because of the volume of freight. \n\nSource: 14 years of this shit",
"Not guaranteed means you won't get your money back if it doesn't make it on time. Guaranteed means you will if you file a claim and it wasn't late due to an act of God, like a weather delay.\n\nAs far as extra work goes. There usually isn't a lot of extra work. What they do is process the guaranteed pieces first and they go out on an earlier flight.\n\nIf you pay for guaranteed ground odds are that it would make it there at the same time anyway, however some companies, like fed ex will actually hold the piece until the paid for delivery date. The post office will deliver it if they have it. ",
"UPS loader here: \n\nThe Next Day Airs come at the end of the shift with one or two exceptions. These are clearly marked and the vast majority of the time are envelopes. The load sheets for each truck say how many they are supposed to get, they are to be placed separate from all other packages(either on the drivers seat or in a pile outside the truck) and the drivers count them first when they come in.\n\nMis-loaded air is a big no-no for loaders and drivers alike. Air is also always the first delivery, no exceptions.",
"I work for FedEx express canada. \n\nI'm not sure about the states but all of our packages are guaranteed, there isnt a non guaranteed option. So, if you send it priority overnight it's guaranteed to arrive at a certain time overnight no matter what. Even economy / 2 day shipments are guarantee by end of day 2 day / multiple day. \n\nYou can't save money by not having it guaranteed. I'm not sure if it's different in the states, seems strange that a bigger operation would skimp on that. Our slogan after all is \"the world on time\". \n\nTheres no extra work involved either, our entire infrastructure is based on the one premise that everything is done insanely quickly and very finely tuned intervals. We've got tiny windows to do everything. International needs to leave at no later than a certain time, certain domestic leaves at a certain time, etc. \n\nSo in short, even the slowest delivery options via express (not ground, two different companies) have a guaranteed delivery time. ",
"What are you waiting on op? ",
"A USPS priority mail \"express\" package is our only guaranteed service, with the shipping price completely refunded if it doesn't make it. \n\nI can only speak for the starting and finishing line, since I work at a local post office, but when you purchase a package with our express service, it is isolated from everything else, put in a yellow and blue bag with the other expresses and treated completely separately. ",
"I worked for Airborne express and after the buyout DHL, we offered ground, 2 day and next day and next day before 10:30. Basically as other said. You pay to basically get your package expedited onto a plane. All our ground packages at the time went by truck to the southbend Indiana hub (and surrounding states second day freight. All next day or second day outside our region was trucked to the airport and put on our DC9 aircraft then flown to Ohio to our express hub then flown to its destination. I do know that for us next day and especially the next day before 10:30 packages where a priority. We had repercussions for drivers not making time deadlines and even ourselves from the top down where yelled at if we where unable to make it on time. So believe it or not companies do recognize that you are paying for a service and if we do not hold up our end we hold ourselves responsible. (Do remember though the small print. War, acts of god, etc means no package is always guaranteed). I miss my friends from DHL but no room for advancement and my calling was elsewhere. (Worked at airborn/DHL from 2002-2008)",
"If inclement weather struck we also used to go through every package with a delivery guarantee and prioritize those deliveries. The ground packages may have not even gone out of the weather was bad enough. ",
"I work for DHL and we guarantee transit day and delivery before 9, 1030, or 12....the jist of it is that we segregate them, tape and sticker them with a bright pink tape, we put it on different aircrafts and we load it last so it will come out first.\n\nWe take it very seriously and have metrics showing how well we're connecting these shipments so we know where we're at",
"Truck driver here, if we get an Amazon load we get a date UPS or Fed Ex wants us to be at their facility. Once there we drop the trailer there and then it's up to them to get your packages out there",
"Former USPS employee here\n\nTo give the tl;dr version\n\nWhen you pay for express mail, whether it be at the front counter inside of the office, or print a label at home for pick up, that package gets ultimate priority.\n\nMeaning, that package is the first to leave the carrier annex, which then goes to the local sorting plant, which finally makes it to the fastest distribution center.Where it goes onto their planes,and redelivered to your local carrier annex, which is then prepared for noon delivery by your mailman. \n\nOne little piece of info that most people don't know about is that USPS,FedEx,and UPS work in tandem to provide optimal delivery times.\n\nThat's express mail, priority mail is treated ALMOST the same, except that priority mail is simply given the most cost efficient route, instead of the fastest. ",
"I work at UPS Freight, with several employees from UPS. At Freight, most decent building typically hit the estimated delivery date over 90% of the time. We offer an expedited service that guarantees a date. If for some reason that shipment will not make it on time, we usually have an outside carrier come pick up the shipment and take it directly to the customer. On the package side of things, if a next day air gets left in the building, I have frequently heard that a supervisor will personally take it to the airport in order for it to make service.",
"I'm a freight handler, but the way it usually works is if it's a guaranteed shipment usually we'll HAVE to put it on the trailer by any means necessary, so if it's a full trailer, we'll either have to make space, put it in the nose of the trailer or in the trailer as soon as possible for it's guaranteed spot, or we'll put it on another pup/van to go to the same service center or onto one of our break bulk terminals. If it's a noon/day definite piece of freight (next day or 2 day shipment) it'll have to regardless of the situation involving our trailers. If the shipment isn't guaranteed then typically if the trailer is full we'll hold the freight till the next day where we'll put it in the trailer at the beginning of the shift!",
"Former UPS supervisor here. \n\n\nNothing is truly an unnecessary upsale (get it? UPSale?... sorry).\n\n\nThe first thing that should be noted is that when a package is sent anywhere, it passes through the hands of at least 8 people. That's at least 8 people who can screw something up. Through logistics, training, and technology, those screw-ups are minimized and those people should serve as a check on each others mistakes. That said, mistakes occasionally happen. When you purchase a guaranteed delivery date, you ask the company to work harder to hedge our mistakes. \n\n\nIf you send a package from Philadelphia to Baltimore, it should get there in 2 days by ground, thus making 2 day guaranteed overkill. However, that package may accidentally get put in the wrong truck, let's say it goes to Pittsburgh. If you have regular ground service, it will get put on a truck in Pittsburgh to sent to Baltimore via the normal Pittsburgh-to-Baltimore route. It will likely arrive 2 days late. If you've purchased 2 day guaranteed, it SHOULD get pulled out in Pittsburgh, put on a plane, and delivered in Baltimore the next day. \n\n\nIf you're sending something from Philadelphia to Dallas, it will likely take about 5 business days and it will move from a series of trucks and maybe trains. If you send it 2 day, it won't ever enter that ground system. It will make it to its first sorting center, and get routed to the nearest airport that evening. It may even make it to Dallas the next day.",
"Two packages, one with next day air guaranteed, the other with regular post. Pretend you are the package travelling from one destination to the other via planes and buses just like the packages. The one with next day air gets to cut all the lines and be first on everything. The other gets to wait his turn patiently and if the plane or bus he's waiting on right now gets full before his chance to board then he waits some more. ",
"I work at a \"shipping\" company. Basically, we get order sheets and all \"rush\" orders must be picked, packed and loaded on to the trucks (can be ups fedex ect) before regular orders. ",
"I work at FedEx.\n\nFedex Ground and Express are two separate distribution systems. Express uses aircraft to transport goods and packages between major hubs/cities. This allows them to get it there overnight, or for cheaper options there's 2 day and 3 day as well.\n\nGround uses only trucks and thus can take much longer as packages hopscotch from hub to hub to their destination.\n\nExpress is always guaranteed, no matter the time of the year. It's just included in the price. They will even guarantee it by certain times of day (8:30a, 10:30a, 12p etc.)\n\nGround on the other hand will only guarantee it by a certain day, say 3 business days. So it could arrive anytime on the 3rd day from 8a to 8p. However during the week leading up to Christmas, they stop guaranteeing by specific day due to the sheer volume.\n\nI don't think I can go into the specifics of how the networks work, but suffice it to say that jet fuel, planes and paying people to work at night are more expensive than diesel, trucks, and more regular working hours."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
cfpem6 | do wasps inject the same amount of venom with each sting? | I've heard that some insects such as wasps are capable of stinging multiple times because their stingers aren't barbed. But do they inject the same amount of venom each time, or do they "run out" after a certain number of stings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cfpem6/eli5_do_wasps_inject_the_same_amount_of_venom/ | {
"a_id": [
"eublv4i"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yes they do run out. They have a sack of venom near the stinger. The amount it releases in each sting will varry until the sack is empty. Usually its empty after 2, 3 stings"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
40rckd | how is dna pulled from a living being and turned into computer code? | Maybe this is stupid... When watching crime shows they find a hair, then they somehow extract the DNA and analyze it as a computer code string. How does it get from physical to digital? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40rckd/eli5_how_is_dna_pulled_from_a_living_being_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cywgzcq",
"cywj37x",
"cywsmbw",
"cyx2c3c"
],
"score": [
47,
9,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"They don't extract it as a computer code string, they do something called \"sequencing\" that converts it into an easy-to-follow reference using four letters of the alphabet. [edit: corrected thanks to /u/old_qfwfq] \n\nDNA stands for Deoxyribonucleic Acid, a molecule that is very complex and has a cool double-helix shape that is essentially a long twisted pair of spirals. If you took a standard very very very long ladder that's made out of something really flexible and then held one end while spinning the other like a top, you'd get that shape.\n\nIts instructions are in the rungs you stand on. Each rung has two connected parts that are glued together. To build this ladder (DNA molecule) you take a pole (a backbone) and jam half-rungs (bases) into it every so often. Each rung can be one of four materials - say ash, teak, gumtree and cedar (adenine, thymine, guanine, cytosine), represented by A, T, G and C. Then you glue the ladders together (connect them with hydrogen bonds). You can still \"read\" the ladder (transcribe the DNA strand) by following the poles (strands) and writing the letters like this ATGCCGTTACTAA... \n\nBiologists use a process called DNA sequencing to figure out the structure of those rungs, then write them in the sequence of representative letters like above. That becomes a text string in a computer that's used to coordinate and complete the equipment that performs the sequencing.",
"Hi, DNA Sequencing scientist here. I pretty much do this daily for thousands of DNA samples.\n\nThere are different methods that we do the conversion which are called sequencing techniques. \n\nThe most popular and golden standard, is Sanger sequencing. We take the DNA molecule of interest and amplify it using fluerescently labelled nucleotides (DNA building blocks). These labelled nucleotides are run in a machine where a laser excites them and causes them to give off a signal. We have different colored signals for each DNA base which constitutes the DNA code (blue/red/green/black for T/C/A/G). The sequence of these signals gives off the DNA sequence which pretty much resembles what is generally regarded as \"the DNA code\".",
"Essentially there are two ways: DNA Fingerprinting, and sequencing.\n\nDNA Fingerprinting is much more common than sequencing for crime solving. It involves using some enzymes calls restriction enzymes. Think of these are tiny scissors which cut DNA when they see a certain sequence.\n\nBut using these, you can cut someone's DNA into a large number of small sections. Depending on their own DNA make-up, these sections will be different lengths depending on where they have the cut sites in their genome. (Something like AGCTAGCA). Then you essnentially sort these segments by size by chromatography (think sweets on filter paper to reveal the different colours) and add a dye so you can see the different sized bits of DNA.\n\nThen you compare this DNA fingerprint to your other sample, and see if they match.\n\nThe other way is you sequence. The modern way to do this is called NGS (NextGenerationSequencing) and essentially involves chopping all the DNA into small sections, then replicating the DNA with tagged DNA bases you can read by florescence. The colour tells you which base was added. You keep adding a single base, scanning to see the colour, add a single base, scan etc until you have your sequence. This is all stored by the machine in a large data file. (It reads millions of sequences at once, so you get a few million reads of ~600 bases. If you want to assemble the genome completely, you need to join them all up in a giant jigsaw game, if you already have a genome, you just align them all to that.)",
"Hey, actual biologist here, I work in a Cell Developmental and Integrative biology lab in downtown Birmingham at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. I don't actually go to school there I just work at a lab they fund. Anyway part of what I do is extract and sequence DNA in order to determine the particular alleles of an individual organism or find the best spot along its genome in order to genetically modify it's sequence. How do I do that?\nLet's use a mouse as an example. I begin by taking an ear sample of a mouse, essentially I just hole punch it's ear. It feels just like if you were to get your ear pierced. I then extract the DNA using a series of enzymes that we buy as a lab from a company that makes DNA extracting kits. What these enzymes do is break down the individual cells of the sample and it really is as simple as that. Once the enzymes are activated by a heating block or a water both, they are temperature activated, they go to work in extracting the DNA. Then a stabilization solution is added to prevent the enzymes from destroying the DNA. The enzymes are very effective as labs are actually hired to engineer and perfect these enzymes so they can sell these kits to other labs. At this point, the DNA is suspended throughout the solution and the sample is still in the solution which is not good for sequencing. So I remove the sample and centrifuge the solution with the suspended DNA which spins the DNA down into the bottom of the tube where the DNA congregates into a pellet. If you look you can actually see a white translucent pellet at the bottom of the tube. I then suck the excess solution out of the tube to leave just the pellet. Next I add a certain amount water to suspend the DNA at a particular concentration for sequencing. Luckily there is another lab in the same building as mine that sequences DNA and luckily for you I know how it works. The sequencing lab puts the tube of suspended DNA in a sequencing machine that does all the work for us. What it does is feed one strand of DNA down a tube and shines a laser at every base along the strand. The laser is affected by the base of the DNA and actually changes color depending on what base the laser goes through. The machine then reads and analyzes what color the laser changes too after passing through the base and gives you a an A a G a C or a T in order to identify what the base is. It does this for every base found along the Strand of DNA and gives you essentially a long list of A's G's C's and T's which are seemingly random but are actually the genetic code of whatever you had sequenced, in this case a mouse. Thank you for reading!\n\nTLDR; biologists extract DNA using a DNA extraction kit then concentrate the DNA, resuspend it, and put it in a special machine that shines a laser at each base and analyze the change in the laser color through each base which identifies each base along a strand of DNA."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
267e2m | how is there still room in the brain to learn new things as we get older? | For example, I lived in Germany in my 20s and learned how to speak German. Now I'm in my 30s in a French speaking land, and I'm learning how to speak in French. How does the brain find places to store these new language centers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/267e2m/eli5how_is_there_still_room_in_the_brain_to_learn/ | {
"a_id": [
"chodeu2"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The brain doesn't work like a regular silicon based computer which has a finite storage space. On your computer there's a specific spot for \"stuff\" and it's stored as zeroes and ones. In the brain your brain literally builds the information out of connections between neurons. It's not putting stuff in a slot which was vacant, it's literally building a slot for the information to go."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
bfl56q | since the body moves via electrical signals from the nervous system, is it possible to feel the electricity that makes our body move? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bfl56q/eli5_since_the_body_moves_via_electrical_signals/ | {
"a_id": [
"elejav4",
"elekfbx",
"elel5ow",
"elgy522"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The “electricity” used to move the body it’s not enough te be felt by nervous system, you can do the test with a voltmeter. Plus remember that the brain can focus on different things and forget the “pain” by small electrical currents.",
"Have you ever sat on the toilet for a really long time? Then when you get up your legs have fallen asleep? Then after a few moments you feel pins and needles in your legs? That's the electricity that makes your body move.\n\n_URL_0_",
"I'd like to first say that the kind of electricity the body uses isn't the same thing as electrons going through a wire... It's actually movement of potassium ions and sodium ions (which are positively charged) sort of like a relay-race, regulated with opening or closing of tiny gates. But this isn't the answer.\n\nWhat does it mean to 'feel' electricity?\n\n1) It feels a bit like heat, because it DOES heat the body. And does actually cause burns in severe cases.\n2) It messes with our own electrical system which i mentioned above, which might result in tiny twitches or tingles, or in severe cases, huge involuntary muscle contractions or heart quivering and cardiac arrest. Current passing through the head can just immediately stun or make us lose consciousness.\n\nSo, when our own body moves using electrical signals... Is either one of those two things happening? Seems like if it's the normal case, so it works fine, so the answer is no.\n\nBut there's also the pins-and-needles feeling that we get sometimes if we put too much weight on a limb, or that burning tingling feeling in when you type for too long or hold your hand in a bad position for a long time. This sort of counts, maybe? If there's pressure on the nerves causing signals to be restricted from going there properly, the limb feels numb. And when the pressure is released, it has that brief tingling feeling while it gets back to normal.",
"The electricity in our body is salt moving in and out of cells. This produces some electricity but we are talking like milivolts. \n\nYou detect this salt movement by ion channels and receptors but this is detection is fundamental to how nerves work. So you can't exactly feel something that is responsible for feeling in the first place. The feeling of electricity when you get electrocuted is pain receptors being activated. So our cells can perceive electricity but our brain and body as a whole can't"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=58"
],
[],
[]
] | ||
8rueal | the term “fixed income” | I’m confused on the term. I hear senior citizens yelling at me at work that they are on it but so am I. That’s why we have budgets, right? We all live on fixed incomes. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8rueal/eli5_the_term_fixed_income/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0u93w2",
"e0ud02o",
"e0udhtk"
],
"score": [
13,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"\"Fixed income\" refers to things like Social Security, pension plans, annuities - defined payment plans that the recipient cannot do anything to change. \n\nWhen you work for wages, you can negotiate with your employer, get a different job, get a second job, start a business. You can do anything. ",
"I am sorry you are being screamed at. But \"Fixed Income\" implies that all of their income sources, such as social security or pensions, are set and will only slightly rise based upon, basically, inflation rates. Where as non-fixed income, like yours, implies that you can improve it by getting raises, shifting jobs, adding over time, whatever. It's not a judgement about the effort you put in, just a way of categorizing and describing income. ",
"What I haven't seen here yet is why yhe uh are screaming about a fixed income. As others have said, it means that their income will generally stay the same each year. There may be minimal raises for social security bit annuities will stay at a fixed payout forever so their income does not rise.\n\nWhat that means for people living on a tight budget is that for everything that rises on price, they need to find a corresponding cut somewhere else. So when gas prices were going nuts a few years ago, all energy went up, food went up. So someone who was already spending every dollar they have coming in, that means they need to come up with those extra dollars by cutting something or do without."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
4joo6o | what's a "short circuit" and why is it bad? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4joo6o/eli5_whats_a_short_circuit_and_why_is_it_bad/ | {
"a_id": [
"d38eg1o"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Circuits have two basic elements, a source and load. The electrons want to get from one side of the source to the other. We take advantage of that by directing them through the load. There they do some kind of work like providing light, or heat, or millions of other things.\n\nIf something happens and the electrons bypass the load and go straight to the other side of the source, that's a short circuit. \n\n\nThis can be bad because it's the load's job to use up the energy from the source. If there's no load, then there's too much energy moving through the wires and they can heat up to the point where the melt or catch fire which can be very dangerous. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
3bw8gc | the difference between "civil right", "constitutional right", and "human right". | And which one/ones bear on recent issues like:
Right to Marriage (straight/gay/poly)
Right to Internet Access
Eg., I've seen marriage called a constitutional right, a civil right, a fundamental civil right, mostly by non-lawyers. Which one is it? Or is there overlap? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bw8gc/eli5the_difference_between_civil_right/ | {
"a_id": [
"csq3vmx",
"csq50r3"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Regarding constitutional right and fundamental right. The Supreme Court has held the due process clauses in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment protect certain unenumerated \"Fundamental Rights\" including a right to privacy (very specific, legal meaning, basically protects certain medical decisions like abortion), to raise one's children, to get married, and a few others. \n\nHowever, there are other constitutional rights which are not technically fundamental rights. For example, there's a right to a jury in a civil case at law in federal court, but this right is not so fundamental as to apply in state court. \n\nHuman rights are rights people possess by virtue of people's humanity. These are going to be different depending on someone's philosophical point of view but they exist independently of government or society. \n\nA civil right is used differently depending on context. One use is that a right acquired from the government. A more broad definition is any old enforceable right. The most common use of civil right that I've seen relates to a right to be treated equally irrespective of race, gender, religion, etc.\n\nAs you might guess, there is a lot of overlap. Something can be a fundamental, human, constitutional, and civil right all at the same time.\n\nRegarding right to marriage. It's a constitutional right because it is a fundamental right, as per the Supreme Court of the United States. Some would say it's a human right and a civil right. \n\nRight to internet access is not a constitutional right or a fundamental right (or, at least no American court has said it's a right). I guess someone could say it's a human right (personally, I think that's goofy, but whatever).",
"**Civil rights** are technically any right of citizens, but typically it gets associated with the current underdog righting \"the man\". 1800's Britain: Catholics. 1860 USA: freed slaves. 2000's USA: Gays. Any sort of legal right would fall under it, especially if it's currently contentious or disallowed to a beaten-down subset of the populace. \n\n**Constitutional right** are the ones spelled out in the constitution, especially the bill of rights: freedom of speech, freedom of/from religion, freedom from warrantless searches, right to bear arms, freedom from having troops sleep on your couch in peacetime. Serious legal rights that trump tiny tyrant laws.\n\n**Human rights** are more fundamental and have to do with basic treatment and generally get defined by international entities. Food, water, shelter, freedom from torture. Violating civil rights gets you sued, violating human rights makes you a monster. But these typically only apply to large organizations and nations themselves. \"high-law\", if you will. \n\n\nGay's marrying would be a civil right. The ones calling it a constitutional right probably think marriage is tied to the hip with religion, which is covered by the constitution. I think they're wrong, but it's a matter of perspective. \n\nRight to Internet Access (which doesn't exist in the USA) would be a technical civil right, but I don't think anyone's really downtrodden enough for the classical sense. Some people in Europe might try and say that internet access is a human right, but I think that's a bit of a stretch. I mean, it's crazy useful and practically a requirement to engage in modern society... but a human right? meh. How about a new term? \"Civilized right\". The rights of the civilized. If you aren't provided these things, or access to these things, then you are not in civilized society. \n\nThe right to unrestricted internet access, in the sense that you have the opportunity to get onto the internet, and when you do it's the whole internet and not some heavily filtered, censored, walled-garden, bullshit version of the Internet.... well that's what the FCC is thinking about."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
bi46lp | what is a light cone? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bi46lp/eli5_what_is_a_light_cone/ | {
"a_id": [
"elxy68e",
"elz5i48"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Say you take a picture, and your camera's flash goes off. That flash sends a pulse of light in a sphere that radiates outward (gets bigger) until it gets absorbed or scattered by something else.\n\nAs the sphere gets bigger, looking at it from one angle, it is a circle that keeps getting bigger and bigger. If you stack bigger circles on top of smaller circles, you get a cone shape.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSo a light cone is like a cross section (cutaway) of all the places the light is going. You can then use that cone to predict all the places that light might reach in the future.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nWhen drawn on a piece of paper, objects are often drawn with a future light cone, showing all the places that object could send light to in the future, and a past light cone, showing all the places light could reach the object from other places.\n\n & #x200B;\n\n\\*not a physicist, likely unsatisfactory answer",
"In terms of physics, the light cone is very important in terms of the effects of objects on each other in the universe. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, including transferring information, so your light cone indicates what effects you can have going forward into the universe. Things in the past can only affect you now if you are in their light cone. \n\nThis is all important because relativity deals partly with causality, and how different events can be observed by different observers (observation is a kind of effect) in different orders. The idea of 'simultaneous' events is far more complex than it feels intuitively. See: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDwXOH16USg"
]
] | ||
1fljy5 | what exactly happens to the human body experiencing hyperthermia? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1fljy5/eli5what_exactly_happens_to_the_human_body/ | {
"a_id": [
"cabi394"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"if you want the exact answer you should post to /r/askscience, this subreddit is to give simplified answers to complex discussions. \n\nJust to be sure, you do mean *HYPER*thermia as in overheating or heat exhaustion, right? Your question is what is happening internally during hyperthermia, not the symptoms (what can be easily observed) but what is happening at the biochemical level, right?\n\nAlso, a great starting place is the [**Wikipedia Article**](_URL_0_) you can copy and post confusing sections for clarification."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthermia"
]
] | ||
2kz71e | friction | How does friction work, on a molecular level? For example, how can I hang a towel over the shower curtain rod with one side longer than the other and the longer side doesn't make it slip off? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kz71e/eli5_friction/ | {
"a_id": [
"clpzxdv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Friction itself is fairly simple. Materials have imperfections: bumps, troughs, rough patches, etc.. When two materials come into contact, the bumpy bits get caught on each other and resist movement. In your shower curtain example, two factors prevent the towel from falling down. \n\n1. The coefficient of friction. The coefficient of friction, μ, is a value that relates the strength of the force squishing two objects together to the strength of the friction between the two objects. \n1. The squishy force. The force pressing the two objects together can come from anything, but in a lot of cases, including the example, it comes from the normal force exerted by the bottom surface and the top surface. If you've ever heard of Newton's second law, equal and opposite reaction and such and such, the Normal force is essentially the reactionary force to gravity. The more massive the object is, the greater the normal force. \n\nSo. We have the coefficient of friction between the towel and shower curtain and the normal force exerted on the towel. Those two quantities multiplied together produce a friction force (f=μN). What that equation essentially means is that if you increase the roughness of the object(s), or the force in which the objects are being squished together, you increase the friction force.\n\n As long as the friction force is greater than the tension force produced by the long end of the towel, the towel stays put.\n\n**tl;dr:Friction is governed by the force pressing two objects together and the roughness of the two objects. If the objects are rough enough or being squished enough, they don't move.**"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
8e4nqq | why are the trees dieing from extra co2 at horseshoe lake, ca if they feed of of it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8e4nqq/eli5_why_are_the_trees_dieing_from_extra_co2_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxsc5ny",
"dxsdodv"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Every typical animal, plant, or fungus needs oxygen to *burn* sugar for immediate energy— an important step in performing basic biological functions. \n\nTrees can use CO2 to *produce*... or really to *store*... energy by creating sugar. They produce oxygen in this process, and while they’re actively growing they put out more oxygen than they consume.\n\nBut any oxygen they produce mixes away into the air. There needs to be an appropriate balance of oxygen in the air for it to later be available for the tree to burn sugar and extract energy.\n\nThe problem here isn’t *exactly* the presence of CO2 but the lack of oxygen.\n\nThough excess CO2 can make water (or fluids inside plants or animals) acidic which is its own, pretty serious issue. ",
"It is soil vs air. \n\nPlants actually need a minimal level of O2 in soil to absorb the various nutrients via their roots. The CO2 is volcanic in origin and permeating the soil, displacing the normal O2 levels and changing the chemistry enough that they the plants cannot properly absorb nutrients. So the issue is not the high levels of CO2, so much as the lack of O2. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs172-96/"
]
] | ||
aplt2n | when a building is made weather proof with windows and stuff, how do they remove the moisture already inside? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aplt2n/eli5_when_a_building_is_made_weather_proof_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"eg9f9fd"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Moisture is drawn out of the building through the air conditioner the air conditioner coil gets very cold and moisture condenses on it like a glass of iced tea in the summer this moisture drips down the evaporator into a pan and is drained away through a pipe to the outside. The moisture in the building comes from people breathing and when doors are open moist air is introduced"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
605dxo | what is unix time and what is it used for | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/605dxo/eli5what_is_unix_time_and_what_is_it_used_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"df3kxj9"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Unix time is how computers keep track of time. Unix time is the binary number for how many seconds have passed since 00:00:00 UTC on 1 January, 1970.\n\nIt is used to keep track of the date and time in pretty much every application on computers and phones because it's such an easy algorithm to use. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
jmvt7 | the difference between javascript and php/python | I'm a complete noob to programming and I'm just wondering what's the difference... all three can create dynamic webpages can they not?
Also, why is PHP considered really bad? Yeah, it may not be good for large applications but for hacking together something really quick it's been really useful to me... (not to mention it's really REALLY easy unlike javascript) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jmvt7/the_difference_between_javascript_and_phppython/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2demnr",
"c2dexa0",
"c2demnr",
"c2dexa0"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"PHP isn't really bad. (Where did you hear that?)\n\nJavascript runs on the client-side, PHP/Python runs on the server side.\n\nTo be \"dynamic\" you need to run on the client side.\n\nJavascript is just as easy (if not easer) than PHP imo.",
"Imagine that the web site you're trying to reach is a piece of furniture that you want to build and place in your house (aka your web browser). JavaScript is more like a carpenter at your house itself who is helping you. He knows how to do some cool stuff, and can definitely make a nice end product, but he's only one man. \n\nSometimes, there are custom orders he can't do. So instead, you call the factory (aka the server) which has its own set of talented carpenters (any server-side language). Since these guys are in a factory, they have all of the supplies (data) and machinery (processing power) you may ever need - far more than you could fit inside your house (once again, web browser). Once they build the site (which usually takes less than a second) they ship it off, where Javascript and his helpers can install it.\n\nPHP can be considered the Ikea in this metaphor. Yeah, they're the established brand, but they're also very bloated and stubborn about some things (which other people have already listed). Sometimes, when you're looking for something specific, like an nice looking dining room table, you'll need to turn to a more reliable brand. But if you're just looking for a shelf to mount in your basement, they should be able to provide.",
"PHP isn't really bad. (Where did you hear that?)\n\nJavascript runs on the client-side, PHP/Python runs on the server side.\n\nTo be \"dynamic\" you need to run on the client side.\n\nJavascript is just as easy (if not easer) than PHP imo.",
"Imagine that the web site you're trying to reach is a piece of furniture that you want to build and place in your house (aka your web browser). JavaScript is more like a carpenter at your house itself who is helping you. He knows how to do some cool stuff, and can definitely make a nice end product, but he's only one man. \n\nSometimes, there are custom orders he can't do. So instead, you call the factory (aka the server) which has its own set of talented carpenters (any server-side language). Since these guys are in a factory, they have all of the supplies (data) and machinery (processing power) you may ever need - far more than you could fit inside your house (once again, web browser). Once they build the site (which usually takes less than a second) they ship it off, where Javascript and his helpers can install it.\n\nPHP can be considered the Ikea in this metaphor. Yeah, they're the established brand, but they're also very bloated and stubborn about some things (which other people have already listed). Sometimes, when you're looking for something specific, like an nice looking dining room table, you'll need to turn to a more reliable brand. But if you're just looking for a shelf to mount in your basement, they should be able to provide."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
7lzs8r | why do officers in world war 2 use only a pistol while the soldiers get to use rifles and machine guns. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7lzs8r/eli5_why_do_officers_in_world_war_2_use_only_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"drqb78w",
"drqbi9t"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Rifles are for engaging targets (shooting people and stuff) at a significant distance. That's not the main job of an officer -- their job involves strategy, tactics, and command and control.",
"If an officer is actively engaged in a firefight, many people have already failed. An officer's job is to make command decisions about where the unit under them goes. They're not even the ones that (generally speaking) directly control the soldiers actively fighting - that's what higher ranking *enlisted* soldiers are for. An officer should be a fair distance away from the direct fighting where they have the safety and security to make informed decisions about what to do next.\n\nA high-ranking enlisted soldier is there to say, \"You four soldiers go around this building to flank the enemy while I take these eight soldiers and hold this line to distract them,\" while bullets are flying around them. An officer is there to say, \"There is an enemy infantry unit advancing our direction that will arrive in three days. We have to protect our supply lines, so send a unit here and here, and keep these units here to protect our front line.\"\n\nWhile it's important for an officer to be battle-hardened enough to make command decisions even under the stress of fighting and shooting, it's also in the military's best interest to keep them as safe as possible so they can worry more about their decisions than not getting shot. It's also important to protect them since they will have more information about what's going on and what should going on, so if they die the unit might not have clear direction on what to do next.\n\nTo that end, officers don't need rifles. Rifles are heavy and cumbersome, so it would just get in the way when the officer is going about doing their duties. Officers are also going to have guard details with them or very nearby in case of an emergency, and those soldiers will absolutely have rifles. All of that said, officers do still spend time near, and often *on* the front lines directly involved in fighting. Leaving them defenseless would be dumb. So they carry pistols for their own personal protection in case they do need to do some fighting."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
38qkul | what is a historical analysis? | I'm trying to get an A in a 203 history course and the teacher keeps telling me to further analyze the information and primary sources. I do not understand what she wants. I do not understand how to analyze history, it's sources or events. This is killing me. Please help. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38qkul/eli5what_is_a_historical_analysis/ | {
"a_id": [
"crx2fjf",
"crx2ikf"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"To analyse history is to dig deeper than the surface information. It is a common misconception that history is simply the regurgitation of facts names and dates. The truth is that history is understanding cause and effect. (this is putting it simply) For example if i were to offer the question; How did the French revolution impact the way contemporary society operates?... This is history. To answer this question you need to begin with the cause of the French revolution. What led to this event? In doing this you also need to cover all the basic pillars of society i use a simple acronym to help me remember;\n\nS.P.E.R.M. \nYes! Sperm.\n\nSocial\nPolitical\nEconomic\nReligion\nMilitary\n\nOnce you cover all these bases you should have a full understanding of the situation and the event. now come the analysis. Once you have answered the Cause you need to asses the effect. What happened as a result of these events, how has this effected the SPERM. How has this event benefited or impacted the world? And (this is important in an essay for school/uni) why is the event so significant?\n\nMake sure you look for a biased in sources (even secondary). Utilise Google Scholar and any resources your school provides. Make sure all sources are relevant and why they are relevant. REFERENCE!!!!!\n\nAnd most of all good luck and enjoy. History can be incredibly fun and fulfilling so don't stress too much. Focus on the who, what, when, where, but remember the most important is the how and the why. ",
"Analysis basically means thinking about something as deeply as you can to understand what was going on. So, for example, if you are analyzing a historical event, you want to ask yourself questions like these:\n\n* Who was involved in this event?\n\n* Why did each person/group do what they did?\n\n* What factors led to or caused this event?\n\n* What were the results, the repercussions or impact, of this event? (Be specific as possible... one group might not experience the same impact from something as another group, for example.)\n\nIf you are evaluating sources, you might ask:\n\n* Where did this primary source come from? Who wrote it?\n\n* What can we learn from this source? What can we not learn from it?\n\n* What were the biases of this source? How do those biases affect what we can learn from it?\n\n* What is the original document(s) for this source? How reliably do we know that it is really a primary source?\n\n* How does this source compare to other sources? Do they match? Or are there differences? How do we reconcile those differences?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
dpxqoh | is there any downsides to planting trees/flora in every place on earth that we can? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dpxqoh/eli5_is_there_any_downsides_to_planting/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5zctxb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I'm not an expert on this but I could imagine that it depends on what plants you plant. Whenever humans try to increase something natural they end up messing with ecosystems to some point often introducing harmful invasive species. However, I'm assuming you are talking about urban reforestation and in the creation of cities humans have already substantially messed with mother nature. \nThat said there is research on the benefits of urban reforestation and increasing urban greenery in general ranging from cleaner air to lower noise pollution. \nUltimately the question is whose perspective are you asking from. Health professionals will tell you it's good because of cleaner air. Some urban developers might say that it is wasted space. Depending on where you plant these plants it might also be problematic. For instance if rich white neighborhoods say \"hey we need more fresh air, let's plant some trees\" it might end up that they plan to do so in lower income and/or predominantly black or hispanic communities which could end up being a massive downside to those communities (think gentrification). \nSo all in all, in my non-expert opinion I would say it really just depends on your goals and on proper execution."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
8xe0ye | why do governments and companies destroy hard drives for security instead of just writing over all of the data 100% and why does it take multiple passes to make sure the data is gone? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8xe0ye/eli5_why_do_governments_and_companies_destroy/ | {
"a_id": [
"e22kqw1",
"e22l5t7",
"e22lw2i",
"e22oksv",
"e22pwuz",
"e22q5r6",
"e22xl3f"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"One of the reasons is dead zones on a drive. Areas that can no longer be written over. The areas could have information on them that would not get deleted by overwriting the entire drive.",
"It takes a lot of time to overwrite drives like that, this consumes electricity and occupies a computer/employee which could be doing something else. Lastly, it requires that the drive be *working properly* and that's not a sure bet with old equipment.\n\nAnd why not destroy it? You could get some money by selling it, but then you need to *take time* (assign a paid employee) to the task of selling those drives in an attempt to make money back. Seems counterproductive. \n\nIt's sometimes claimed that after a drive is overwritten, the \"strength\" of the magnetization can be used to find out what was written before. But my understanding is this doesn't work *or at least hasn't been demonstrated* in practice, and that writing random data (rather than all 0s) more than once would seriously hinder this process, if it was real to begin with. I think the main point is economics, speed, and ease. ",
"It's all about time and money.\n\nIt's cheaper and faster to destroy it. The machine for destroying it is a little more than a PC, but it works with all sorts of drives, even ones that don't work. It takes 10 seconds and is 100% effective. That's a bargain.",
"Also take into account the fact that a lot of large companies and governments use tech long past it’s obsolescence. The value of these old units means the cost of secure deletion is even less value for money.",
"It is cheap and fast to throw a hard drive in a wood chipper.\n\nIt is cheap and time-consuming to do an every-sector rewrite of a hard drive seven times (or whatever current guidance is).\n\nIt is expensive and fast to pay someone to make sure a hard drive went through a wood chipper.\n\nIt is expensive and time-consuming to pay someone to make sure no data can be recovered from an intact hard drive.\n\n",
"Actually, (insert bad meme picture here), they often do both. In fact, at a certain level, it is required.\n\nHard drives (the platter/disk kind, as opposed to solid state drives or SSDs) have magnetically aligned bits that are used to store and read the data. It takes a pretty strong magnet, really close to the surface of the plate to change the polarity of the bit, but the reading is much easier. You can still read a bit that has been written over 100's of times. Its not practical, but it can be done, and there are those that have the money and power to make it happen...I'm looking at you Putin.\n\nWhen a highly classified drive needs to be destroyed, it will first be checked and made certain that the information on it has been properly transferred or is actually no longer needed. Then it is ran through a rewriter program, like you suggested, several times. Then, it is passed through a device that completely shreds the entire device. This includes the cache, because those things can still contain traces of the data long after power has been lost.\n\nI left the service before SSDs were much of a thing, so I dont know the exact process for those, but I imagine that it probably involves a MRI-like device.",
"They destroy drives because it's cost effective and ensures no mistakes are made leaking sensitive data. Hard drives are cheap.\n\nHard drives today don't need multiple passes. One pass is typically sufficient. Demonstrations of recovering wiped data typically only work in very controlled settings, and no data recovery servicer has demonstrated the ability to recover anything from single pass zeroed drives.\n\nIt wasn't always this way. Data is stored on the magnetic surface of platters in tracks. It used to be there was wasted space between tracks that could contain latent fingerprints of original data, and that could be recovered, but now the gap between tracks is almost non-existent, in order to increase data density. There are outstanding challenges with money prizes if you can recover simple text files from single pass zeroed drives that haven't been claimed in over a decade.\n\nYour data, at least, is safe, if you wipe your drives. But it's cost effective for you to do so. And some entities may want to recoup value in selling used drives - there are degaussers, glorified magnetic fields wrapped around conveyor belts, that can wipe drives en-mass. But again, storage is so cheap today, and used storage medium isn't all that appealing because of their high fail rate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
abv6d4 | how does new horizon send pictures back to earth from 4 billion miles away? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/abv6d4/eli5_how_does_new_horizon_send_pictures_back_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ed3564k"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Radio waves. They travel at the speed of light. So from there, it takes a few hours to get back to us. There's nothing obstructing radio waves all the way back to Earth. It's a straight line (as opposed to terrestrial radio which is hampered by mountains and the curvature of the Earth). It's just not terribly strong, so we have to have big dish arrays to hear the signal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4gbg2e | how can video streaming services support millions of viewers viewing the same video at the same time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gbg2e/eli5how_can_video_streaming_services_support/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2g4jn6",
"d2g6yp3",
"d2g8aom"
],
"score": [
32,
15,
3
],
"text": [
"They can have many copies of the video stored on many servers and then use load sharing mechanisms to distribute the load so that each server can keep up. Big services will automatically make videos available on sufficient servers to meet demand. If capacity is exceeded they will refuse newcomers rather than degrading service to existing viewers beyond a certain point.",
"they also use CDNs (content delivery networks) to distribute copies of videos to servers more local to the viewer. if you are in the US and want to watch a video on netflix it will redirect you using your ip address to the cached version of the video on a US based server. if someone in the UK wanted to watch the same video they would be redirected to a cached version in europe. ",
"This happens through the magic of content delivery networks (CDNs). Basically services like Netflix, HBO GO, etc do not want host their content on their own datacenter because it costs a lot and would cause a problem if all people tried to access it at the same time. So they outsource this part to other companies which have datacenters that are lying around all over the world (ex. Akami, Amazon, Azure, Google). The service knows your location based on your IP address and directs you to the nearest datacenter of the third party company that has your content.\n\nHow these companies handle traffic to their datacenters is usually through a technology called \"Load-balancing\" which redirects users to different servers within the same datacenter to handle the load."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
6drgk0 | why are the president's connections with russia bad, but everyone's connections with every other country are good? | First, spare me any, political tongue lashing and down talking. I don't care if you're right or left or middle, or all three. I'm none of the three, I just want to know why I should care, and want to have a clue when my BF talks about it because it seems backwards to me.
I'm just legitimately confused why I should care about the relations with Russia. Things seem somewhat friendly, shouldn't we want to be on good terms with them? Wouldn't they want to be on good terms with us? I don't get it. Admittedly, I don't pay alot of attention to this stuff, but it kinda seems like BS. Like they're trying to scare people by saying "ooooh its the Russians...." like it's 1955 or something.
EDIT: 1. Thank you for all the responses, these make it much more clear to understand. So thank you :)
2. How the heck do you downvote an honest question? Really? Lol geez | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6drgk0/eli5_why_are_the_presidents_connections_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"di4tl85",
"di4u948",
"di4uqa1",
"di4v7ps",
"di4v9cg",
"di4wf3k",
"di518s1",
"di5zcw1",
"di62lv5"
],
"score": [
31,
6,
5,
5,
6,
2,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Being on good terms with foreign governments & working for the benefit of Americans is good. Conspiring with them in secret to manipulate the public opinion in exchange for favorable business deals is not.\n\nWe've got a lot of very rich people with questionable ties to the Russians who have consistently lied about it. This is a strong indicator that there's some serious corruption going on somewhere in Trump's organization. This is what people are upset about - our leaders trying to benefit themselves and the Russians more than they're benefiting America.",
"The problem is the secrecy and the money issues. Foreign relations are done by all levels of government but usually they follow a pattern of disclosure thru the proper internal channels and the objectives are aligned with government goals and strategy.\n\nWhen members of government work to conceal foreign contacts, relationships and contracts a suspicion of illegal activities (bribery, espionage, treason) becomes high. ",
"The US only has one President at a time, and that's important to keep a consistent foreign policy. So, making deals with the Russians then somebody else is President, saying \"When I'm President I'll do X if you help me get elected.\" is NOT OK.\n\nEven though it's not 1955, the Russians are generally willing to make the US look bad so that they don't look as bad in comparison. That's not in the best interest of the US.",
"Imagine your boyfriend has a lot of friends who are girls. Some are his best friends, some are good friends. You like some of them a lot, other ones you can barely stand, but he has reasons for being friends with all of them.\n\nThere is one girl who he swears he isn't friends with at all and in fact he says he doesn't even know her. Then you find out they went out for dinner a few times. And he stayed over at her house a few times. And all of his friends are friends with her even though they keep telling you there's nothing for you to worry about. Then you catch them together when they think you're out of town.\n\nThis is the political version of that. Maybe it's really important, maybe it isn't. A closer relationship with Russia might be fine if there are diplomatic reasons behind it. But the Trump administration's reaction to any mention of Russia is what makes it seem like there really might be something concerning in that relationship.",
"ELI5 - It's not the fact that he may have a relationship with Russia that's a problem, it's the potential *nature* of that relationship.\n\nRussia is in the middle of doing some pretty nasty stuff around the world, and also has well documented plans to upset the current structure of the world's governments in order to try to get back into power. Part of achieving those goals is allegedly interfering with democratic elections in powerful countries around the world. \n\nThere are some money related issues with sanctions and enormous oil deals that are currently not going well for Russia, but can very easily be changed with some new friendly leaders in the UN and around the world, so if Russia *did* have a hand in getting Donald (and other right wing leaders) elected, and they are friendly to Russia, they can ease sanctions and support major oil deals with give enormous power and influence back to Russia, which is good for them, and not so good for pretty much everyone else. \n\nIf Russia was behaving, and had nothing to do with influencing elections for their own benefit, then being friends with them would be just fine.",
"First: it is against the law, a felony, in fact, to take money from a foreign government to aid you in a campaign for a national office. You also can't take services that have monetary value. If the Trump campaign took money, or services that had monetary value from Russia, or Russian agents, they broke the law. If the President knows and doesn't turn them in, he's violating his oath of office and committing obstruction of justice.\n\nSecond, it's against the law, also a felony, for a private citizen to negotiate with a foreign government on behalf of the US government. It's the Logan Act. Until he is sworn in, the President elect is a private citizen. His transition team members are private citizens. If they entered into negotiations with any other government on behalf of the incoming government, the people who did it broke the law. \n\nThird, all negotiations with foreign governments involve all parts of our government. Now there is an investigation that members if Trump's advisors tried to create a secret channel to a foreign government without any oversight from other agencies. In fact it has been intimated that the conversations would be stored on a foreign owned server. If Hillary Clinton was committing treason to store official communication on a private server, it's even more obviously treason to do the same with a server under foreign control of any foreign government. \n\nSo, if these actions had happened with any government: British, Australian, Chinese or Russian, people should go to jail and if Trump knee, or worse, ordered it, he committed treason. ",
"It's a circus. Trump's relationship with Russia is fairly good, and the globalist wing of our govt. don't want that. If something comes up that shows collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to steal the election (which is what's being alleged), then it's a bad thing because it means Trump committed treason in order to perform a coup. So far, that hasn't been proven, and many higher ups in the DNC are backing off from those statements, so it's starting to look like the piss matress thing again. ",
"It's purely political. There is no proof that Trump's connections to Russia were used for any nefarious purpose, politically or personally. Even the most left-leaning credible news sources agree on that. Most of the accusations flying around would not be illegal even if they were proven 100% true. An easy way to reality check things is to ask yourself \"collusion to do what?\" and \"is that illegal even if it's true?\". ",
"The truth is we the common people will never know the truth. \n\nI mean Hillary was exposed straight up and nothing happened. \n\nObama lied and stole money by using tax payer money for his bills. \n\nGeorge bush attacked a whole country without evidence. \n\nBill Clinton flew buncha times on Lolita express. \n\nWe will never know the truth and it will never be exposed to us. With that said, I voted and still support Trump."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5ra6mb | how does a die-shrink gives "more room" for improvements? | In CPU and GPU's specifically where I've seen this the most, how? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ra6mb/eli5_how_does_a_dieshrink_gives_more_room_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd5lk1r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A processor (cpu or gpu) is a bunch of little switches. Like light switches. If your light switches are big, you can control fewer lights with an amount of wall. If your light switches are small, you can control more lights with an amount of wall. If you already control all the lights you need with the switches you have, you can still make the switches smaller. Then, you can hang up pictures and stuff that you also like."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
320rz3 | is there any natural benefit in having night terrors? why does the mind give you nightmares when you are trying to sleep? | Woke up last night from one such thing, and it was a long time before I was calm enough to go back to sleep. It doesn't seem to be beneficial. So, what makes us have Night Terrors and is there a reason for them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/320rz3/eli5_is_there_any_natural_benefit_in_having_night/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq6sotb",
"cq6t53a",
"cq6tq77",
"cq6uz7o",
"cq6vt42",
"cq79at9"
],
"score": [
107,
5,
3,
11,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I've heard dreams (nightmares specifically) are your brain training you to survive. Your brain subconsciously will train your mind to survive via dreaming, including nightmares, which in this context can be viewed as 'worse case scenario' training. After having a nightmare, your brain files it away in to its big brainy memory bank for later usage. \n\nLater on in life, you may be faced with a situation *similar* to being chased down an alley by a creepy clown with a machete. Your brain has subconsciously given you the tools to survive the encounter, because you dreamt about this umpeenth years ago, and survived (in your dream). \n\nWhen people explain 'I saw my life flash before my eyes' in near death experiences? It's your brain working on overdrive, filtering through every dream and memory and sensation you've ever had, searching for something similar to what you're experiencing to help you survive an adverse encounter. \n\nSo to answer, while it may not immediately feel as such, there are some very beneficial reasons to having nightmares. \n\nEdit: It appears many of you are interested in sources of this theory. For those of you too lazy to do their own Googling, here you go. Here's a handful of articles pertaining to Dream Survival Theory. \n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nKeep in mind this is a scientific theory, delving in to one particular reason for dreaming. Some of you have cited Freud's study and theories for dreaming. One doesn't necessarily outweigh the other, it's just a theory. ",
"If there was an animal or some other enemy out there, going back to sleep would be dangerous. Waking up at the sign of danger, and staying up until you are sure the danger is over, is important to survival.",
"No one has yet to comment the right reason for this answer. Nightmares often occur when individuals sleep on their back. If you fall asleep on your side or stomach and then flip to your back, you are most likely to have a nightmare. This is because while on your back, your body can sense that all vital organs are in their most exposed position, which is facing up. This makes the body nervous, and the response is to warn your mind during a deep sleep. This comes from years of sleeping in the wild and the dangers that come with that.",
"My twin brother grew up with, and eventually out of, Night Terrors. The funniest part is that he would never remember having an episode so effectively, the only people being terrorized were me and my parents. I mean fucking terrorized. \n\nHe would wake up from a dead sleep, eyes-wide and scream bloody murder. He would look at you, but also through you. He eventually graduated to walking and running as a part of the episode. This is when it gets really good.\n\nOne night he walked into my room, made a little noise and as soon as I got up to guide him back to bed he went into a full throat banshee scream. \n\nSo I don't know if there is any natural benefit, but if you want to fuck up your family's sleep habits, you will succeed. ",
"If you have had night terrors frequently over many years to the point that you no longer have any sense of fear during the most horrifyingly scary dreams, are they still night terrors?\n",
"Maybe not, but since they don't significantly impair reproductive success, there's no selective pressure for them to be weeded out over generations. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n02/mente/significado_i.htm",
"http://www.ask.com/world-view/dreams-survival-theory-7d406b23316f9e3d",
"http://dreamstudies.org/2008/08/01/an-evolutionary-theory-of-dreaming/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
40ufmj | how did humans come to agree upon the meanings of words? | I've always viewed this as sort of similar to the conundrum of how life formed from non-life. How did it become agreed upon that certain sounds mean certain things? In other words, how did languages develop?
There is a word in Yaghan, "Mamihlapinatapai", which means "a look shared by two people, each wishing that the other would initiate something that they both desire but which neither wants to begin". How the hell does a large group of people come together and decide that this sound means that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40ufmj/eli5_how_did_humans_come_to_agree_upon_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyx6ixd",
"cyx6rg6"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
" > How the hell does a large group of people come together and decide that this sound means that?\n\nSimply put, they dont.\n\nIt starts like this one guys sitting around a fire and points at a rock and says \"Rock\" The other guy figures out what he means and also starts using the same word. Other people in other places may have come up with different words but slowly rock won out over everything else in the area. THe group never gets together and agrees, certain words just randomly become popular in the population and thus language evolves.\n\nNow this is simplified, humans never really existed without some form of verbal communication. Itd be like pre-humans that did this.",
"Simple concepts are easy to convey. Many animals have multiple calls, which can have meanings ranging from, \"danger, predator!\" to, \"hey baby, let's get freaky ;)\" It's not difficult to imagine early humans having similar calls or vocalizations. As we developed larger brains and more complicated social structures and tools we also developed more complicated words. Some of these words were probably just fusions of old words while other words were entirely new. Slang terms and shortened words emerged and changed the vocabulary of the language. As languages developed they increasingly became more complex because they can build on themselves over time from generation to generation. For your example, it's likely that the Yaghan people already had the concept first before they developed the word, they just started trying to describe the concept as they understood it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
c1ehj3 | why do some tail lights appear to flicker in dashcam videos? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c1ehj3/eli5_why_do_some_tail_lights_appear_to_flicker_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ercoxky",
"ercrc2l"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"I am by no means an expert so this can suffice until someone more knowledgeable comes along. \n\nAs I understand it, the lights on a car are in fact flickering (strobing) at a certain frequency, relative to the engines power. So, if the dash cam’s frequency is close to, but not the same as, the frequency of the light (on the car) then you will notice it flickering on video.",
"Old filament lights won't do this, modern LED lights will, the brightness of the light is varied by switching the supply on and off rapidly the on time and off time can be varied, the longer it's on the brighter the light, this switching happens at something like a thousand times a second, the human eye can't detect that flicker but the dash cam has a frame rate that, although different from the LED flashing speed, will occasionally syncronise and capture several frames when the LED is off. It won't capture the same off event but just a series of different ones but it allows you to see the flashing, it is called aliasing, and it happens with digital sampling of many different types of signals."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
83e4jo | why is it always shown to be important to keep people conscious when trying to keep them alive? ex. injured/ trapped in the cold weather overnight | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/83e4jo/eli5_why_is_it_always_shown_to_be_important_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvh4hn3",
"dvh6a54",
"dvh8gd7",
"dvhbyvi",
"dvhd2kj",
"dvhf7pg",
"dvhhmdi",
"dvhi0zg",
"dvhkjd0",
"dvhlr5z",
"dvhnfrd",
"dvhqsdy",
"dvhqug1",
"dvhsr2c",
"dvhtcgh",
"dvhzvzc",
"dviahqh",
"dvicx2d"
],
"score": [
60,
36,
6,
19,
530,
84,
5275,
133,
2,
3,
4,
2,
3,
2,
71,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"When you go into shock, your body starts changing blood pressure and temp to save important things. But many times this system can over react shutting down too much causing permanent damage. Brain damage, loss of limbs, ect. It's an evolved system that is no longer ideal for humans, but it is much older than humans themselves.\n\nStaying concious can keep the levels of shock from progressing too far.",
"AFAIK it's more of a diagnostic tool than anything else. Paramedics will sometimes try to keep patients conscious, as inability to do so will be a symptom of various things. Also communication between paramedics and patients is important for passing relevant information.",
"Deteriorating neurological state is an indicator and holds prognostic value for morbidity and mortality in a wide range of physiologies.\n\nKeeping them conscious and alert is an easy way to monitor that. If they're alert, and answer your questions whole making sense we can normally give them full marks for state of consciousness.\n\nIf they fall asleep/unconscious it takes an extra step to determine that, they automatically lose points (eyes open to speech vs spontaneously) and we need to check again in 5 minutes even if they appear fine after waking them up (early indicator vs benign state).\n\nSo to answer your question : it saves effort to keep sick people talking.",
"It is so you can assess for altered mental status, which you cannot do if they arent awake. If called to a scene we will generally ask the person if they know there name, where they are and that time it is. If they respond correctly to all three it is referred to as A & O x3...they are alert and oriented to person, place and time. \n\nIn the event there is a head injury, stroke or if they are unconscious, we will use the [Glasgow Coma Scale](_URL_0_). \n\nThis means we assess whether they will look at us spontaneously, respond to commands or respond to pain. The scores range from 15 for a normal, healthy person to 3 for someone that is most likely dead. For perspective, an old tire laying in a ditch has a GSC of 3. At any rate, the GCS is a good indicator of how bad off the person is. \n\nHow this applies to your question is that if they are not awake, then it is hard to assess this. If someone is initially A & O x3 with a GCS of 15 after a head injury, and we transport them, they may become A & O x2 with a GCS of 14 while on the way to the hospital. This would indicate there is a problem somewhere.\n\n",
"Doctor here. It’s not. Everyone here is saying it’s to monitor their neurological status, which is important to do, but if you want to do that you can just wake them up. Everyone who is admitted to the hospital with a head injury is allowed to sleep and we just wake them up every hour to two hours (depending on the severity) to check their neurological status. ",
"It's a structural pressure in film because otherwise you have one character standing over a sleeping character with nothing to say or do other than periodically take a pulse.",
"Physician here.\n\nI think there are a few reasons. But let me preface this by saying that in the hospital, we don't really try to do this. This is a non-medical thing that has crept into the collective consciousness. Having said that, if a trauma health care provider knows something more, I am willing to be corrected.\n\n1) Reassurance. It's more reassuring to have someone awake and communicating as opposed to being unconscious;\n\n2) If a trauma victim can maintain consciousness, it's considered a good sign - they have enough perfusion, oxygen/blood supply to the brain;\n\n3) **Medically** however, if you are unconscious, you cannot protect your airway. You can obstruct your airway and now the care provider has to worry about maintaining your airway.\nYou can vomit and aspirate (inhale) the vomit which is *no bueno* medically speaking.\nUnconsciousness indicates a deteriorating health status and knocks down your [Glasgow Coma Scale](_URL_0_) points. ",
"To keep it really simple.\nIf you're awake you're not dead. A doctor would be able to define the line between the 2 points better, but with no medical training \"awake means not dead\".",
"Also, conscious people can maintain their own airway. As an ex-EMT when someone is conscious and in pain they are usually very vocal about it. As long as you're awake and talking I can focus on the bleeding, treating for shock, or whatever else. But if I have to breathe for you... Now I am 100% dedicated to your airway which is a very dangerous situation to be in. Just better for everyone if you stay awake.",
"EMT here. It’s not necessarily “right” to keep them awake, however we do measure consciousness on the AVPU scale (alert, verbal, painful, unresponsive). It gives us an idea of if there’s enough oxygen/blood perfusing the brain. ",
"I have advanced first aid training and have had a victim of a serious concussion left in my care. It really depends on what’s wrong with the person. This is what i was told to do by medical professionals. \n\nBecause our bodies heal while we’re at rest, it’s hard for the brain of a victim of a concussion to recover if you’re constantly keeping it alert. What I was told to do was allow the person to sleep and do wellness checks every couple of hours, making sure he stirred if I prodded him a little. \n\nFor a lot of other scenarios, there are situations where you want the victim to stay awake. Like during a heart attack. But most of the time, once you’ve treated an injury, you can just put the person in the recovery position until help arrives. If they go to sleep at this point, it’s fine. I even fell asleep like this during training. ",
"Tl;dr version: we generally like patients to remain conscious more for neurologic trending purposes. There's a number of ways to monitor a patient, but direct patient feedback (either verbal or non-) is one of the easiest. Regardless, there's a host of other things being monitored anyway. \n\nRelatively full version: I can really only speak to the prehospital end of things: we generally like patients to remain conscious more for neurologic trending purposes. We do/have done things to make people either keep conscious or regain it, but it's not specifically for consciousness of whatever status (ie: some sort of airway related event that was corrected or mitigated that returned some sort of function to the airway which then allowed the patient to regain consciousness.).\n\nThat aside, there's \"not really\" a way to keep people conscious without potentially effecting something else (sometimes negatively), so consciousness, as far as something that would be treated specifically in and of itself, isn't necessarily a priority. Without knowing the specifics of why whichever individual is unconscious, it's hard to give a black and white answer on the matter. \n\nSince it is what was brought up in a previous comment, trauma is mostly a thing either treated on the street or something that requires sanctioned ER trauma intervention. Such ER required events can have a patient unconscious for any number of reason with any of those reasons effecting major body systems, so consciousness, again, isn't the priority (it is possible for one to survive while unconscious, but not with a major event such as mass bleeding, impeded airways, etc.).\n\nNon-traumatic and strictly medical reason can take forever to explain. To the OP's example, though, the body has ways of warming itself and, though it's obviously not doing that well if they're hypothermic, the little that it can help is \"most effective\" when one is conscious. Like trauma, though, it's not the most imperative thing and there are other ways of monitoring/treating that are probably happening anyway. ",
"It's more about monitoring them, their mental status, as changes can indicate this or that or worsening condition.",
"Wilderness EMT (WEMT) here.\n\nAs others have said, I’ve been trained to keep folks awake long enough to find any trends in their level of responsiveness. However, at my most recent recertification, we were told that after a few sets of vitals are taken, if the patient wants to sleep we should let them and perhaps try to wake them every few hours to take another set of vitals (including LOR).\n\nMind you, this is focused on a wilderness setting when emergency personnel are hanging out with the patient for an extended period of time while awaiting definitive care.",
"I didn’t read every single response but all the ones I did read are only focusing on the trauma part so I’ll address the cold weather overnight part. \n\nStaying awake in this situation can be the difference between life and death because if you start to freeze to death while asleep you’re very unlikely to wake up during the process. Staying awake allows you to keep moving and generating body heat when you get too cold (assuming you have the willpower to do this instead of passing out, which being too cold can do to you). ",
"It sounds like personal survival scenarios have been incorrectly generalized to all survival scenarios. You hear accounts of people with hypothermia saying \"I knew if I went to sleep I'd never wake up\" and that's probably true, because in hypothermic conditions sleeping doesn't give you a way to warm yourself up.\n\nFrom the medical professionals in this thread, though, it's not actually vital to keeping someone alive if they are being cared for by others.",
"If you are hypothermic, your body has cut off your extremities and the blood in those extremities has become very cold. If you pass out, your arteries and veins relax, and your core temperature plunges. Your heart slows way down, you turn purple, and they declare you dead to make room for obese hospital patients who have too much money and need laparoscopic surgery.",
"I note the EMT and medical responses. As a CCU and Neuro ITU nurse of 30 years and as someone who trained mountain rescue teams I have to agree with the GCS score as the main reason to keep someone conscious where possible. \n\nIt should be noted that blood pressure naturally falls as altitude increases and so you may have an averagely lower blood pressure for each given altitude even in a non-traumatized person. Tissue survival will also depend on core and ambient temperatures on scene. As well as the age and general health of the individual. When giving general advice to fit all circumstances it is better to err on the side of caution. It won't hurt at sea level to undertake maneuvers to keep blood pressure up, so don't over complicate training of non-medico's making a distinction if it isn't necessary. \n\nAny attending or receiving professional will ask for a history and even a lay person can tell us when or if a person became unresponsive. The rapidity of any deterioration can aid in the diagnosis and even to a certain extent dictate what your first moves are going to be in treatment.\n\nI have also taught first aid at all levels to the public and professional organisations, it is a subject I used to read and research a great deal since prior to becoming a nurse I worked in medical research. \n\nThere is another more subtle reason for trying to maintain consciousness in someone requiring urgent medical treatment and the reason goes back to the original 'Golden Hour' trauma research that was done in the 1970's. \n\nA conscious person will maintain an averagely higher, and more responsive blood pressure and vaso-vagal responses than an unconscious person, you may literally 'shout and shake' a person to an extra 5 minutes or so of tissue perfusion - as health professionals we know that few minutes can make all the difference. You can attempt vaso-vagal maneuvers in a conscious person in cardiogenic shock in a way you cannot with an unconscious person. The vaso-constrictive effects of adrenaline and increased cardiac output will diminish after loss of consciousness. It is easy to forget that the fight or flight response is designed to maintain perfusion and prolong vital organ function, since fear and pain become less of a factor in a semi or unconscious individual some of that effect is lost.\n\nSo we can see the first responder is not only assisting an attending/receiving medically trained professional with accurate history, they are also contributing to extending the tissue viability of vital organs due to maintained adrenaline assisted priority perfusion blood flow. \n\nThere is one more benefit to anyone requiring first response medical aid and it is by no means a small one, that benefit is bestowed upon the first responder primarily. A person will likely work harder and for longer to aid the survival of an individual if they think that the person has not deteriorated beyond their level of competence to assist. A responsive casualty exhibiting suffering is more likely to illicit an active humane response from another human being. At every First Responders conference I have ever attended the main stress to aid survival was always, \"Do something, keep doing it as long as you possibly can\". Medical professionals can assess a patients condition due to years of training and experience. We NEVER train first responders to do anything other than respond as trained to what they find. \n\nWe cannot burden them with the responsibility to diagnose and assess likely outcomes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Coma_Scale"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Coma_Scale"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
4ljq3d | why does water seem to reach room temperature more quickly than cooling it in the refrigerator? | It seems like it takes 20 minutes for cold water to warm up, but it takes 1-2 hours to chill in the fridge. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ljq3d/eli5_why_does_water_seem_to_reach_room/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3nve7g",
"d3nzzb8"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Assuming your tap water is around 8°C and your room around 19°C, then it has to rise 11°C. That's OK, because the air can circulate freely around the bottle, warming the contents easily. Even a slight draught can carry away the cold air surrounding it, bringing in fresh warm air.\n\nIn the fridge, you're going from 19°C down to around 4°C, which is a 15°C gap, so it's got further to go for a start. In the fridge, however, there's very little air circulating, so the bottle can't lose heat so easily. Yes, there will be convection around it, but not much, and certainly no breeze.",
"the biggest effect so far not mentioned yet is condensation . water vapour in the atmosphere condense on the cold vessel, releasing huge amounts of latent heat of vaporisation into the vessel and liquid in it"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2fzyh4 | how is the bose einstein concentrate similar/ different to a superfluid? | {EDIT: Condensate*... Im a noob.} I may be barking up the wrong tree, I just notice the whole coalescence of the many atoms into "one". | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fzyh4/eli5how_is_the_bose_einstein_concentrate_similar/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckeb1ed"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Similarity stems from a BEC being cold enough to be a superfluid, whether fermionic or bosonic. Therefore enough BECs fluid at ultra-cold temperatures will act as a superfluid, provided they don't decide to merge into one BEC."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2gc6pm | what causes those instances where you feel as if you have gotten alot of sleep when its still early in the morning? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gc6pm/eli5_what_causes_those_instances_where_you_feel/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckhni26",
"ckhnk32"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's when you wake up in the break between sleep cycles instead of in the middle of them (so, related to REM sleep)..\n\n_URL_0_ says that they're typically 1:30 long, so if you count your sleep in increments of sleep cycles, or you use their handy calculators (I don't know them, I just love the site) if the math says to wake up at 5:40 instead of when you'd normally set your alarm to 6.. being up that extra 20 minutes is worth way more to feel great first thing in the morning instead of whatever initial pleasure being in bed another 20 minutes would have given.\n\nThe reason \"getting a lot of sleep\" feels so good is that once our body has naturally maxed out, it waits til the end of a sleep cycle then wakes up, so when we can't get the huge amount our body needs, we just have to trick it a little and get it up at the right time.",
"Whether you feel sleepy or not depends on what stage of sleep you wake up in. If your alarm causes you to wake up while you're in deep sleep, you feel groggy. On the other hand if you wake up while in light sleep, you feel more alert and stuff so it feels like you've gotten a lot of sleep."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://sleepyti.me"
],
[]
] | ||
3525eg | how can the friends tv series be shown in a 16:9 aspect ratio on netflix without seeming recut when it must have been shot in 4:3 like any 90's show? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3525eg/eli5_how_can_the_friends_tv_series_be_shown_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr07h37",
"cr0axis"
],
"score": [
5,
6
],
"text": [
"The actual film that was used to record the TV show will not have had a 4:3 aspect ratio. The film will have been remastered to produce a 16:9 image in HD for modern viewing.",
"It wasn't actually shot in 4:3. It was shot 'Academy', or 1.37:1, which is wider than 4:3. To show it on TV and DVD, they chopped the sides off.\n\nNow, to show it in 16:9, they put the sides back on, to make it wider, and chop the bottom off, to make it wide enough. \n\n[Here's a diagram approximating it.](_URL_0_) Neither the 1995 or 2015 versions have the full image in them, and you will see different parts of the image depending on which one you watch.\n\n*Most* stuff shown on TV is cropped in some way. TVs are in the shapes 1.33 or 1.77, but film cameras shoot 1.37, 1.85, or 2.25+ (minus special cases like European 1.66 movies or House of Cards which is 2.0). You either get black bars or cropping on most of your content."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/sbdIoxd.jpg"
]
] | ||
6bdinz | how are victims of severe starvation (such as holocaust survivors), safely brought back to a healthy weight? | I remember reading somewhere that many of the liberated people from the holocaust were accidentally killed by soviets, because the soviets would feed them and their bodies just weren't prepared, or something of the sorts. It does make sense though, since they probably don't have the digestive systems they once had. So how exactly were they properly brought back to normal weight? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6bdinz/eli5_how_are_victims_of_severe_starvation_such_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhlqp75",
"dhlr6cn",
"dhlrven",
"dhlspb3",
"dhltoxq",
"dhlyy7m",
"dhlzras",
"dhm3sr9",
"dhm8yxv",
"dhmlwkp",
"dhmnagt",
"dhmuq12",
"dhmwp79"
],
"score": [
229,
187,
46,
32,
13,
491,
11,
6,
6,
3,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I got really really sick a while back and lost about 40 pounds, dropping below 100. I'm a 6 foot tall guy, so obviously that's a dangerously unhealthy weight. The key is pacing and content. I was forced to stick to easily digestable food, like oatmeals, toast, soft fruits, rice, stuff like that, and i was basically told \"eat until you feel full and then stop.\" Then i had to wait a certain time period before i was allowed to eat again, give my body time to digest, and then hopefully next time I ate, I would eat more. It was a slow process, and there was a lot of vomiting involved when I ate too fast or didn't give myself time to digest. ",
"It's called refeeding syndrome. It's not that you can't digest the food, but that your body reacts to the increased calories by making enzymes to break down the food. But you're so malnourished that you don't have the right building blocks so you end up with all sorts of electrolyte disturbances which can cause arrhythmia and stuff.\nBasically you have to introduce them to food very slowly, and/or monitor them and replete the electrolytes that they need asap.\n\nEdit : Source : am doctor ",
"I read that after many concentration camps were liberated, the troops would lock the prisoners back up for a few nights, as this was the only reliable way to prevent them from engorging themselves on food from the nearby villages, doing huge damage to their bodies in the process. This allowed them to carefully reacclimatise their digestive system. Just imagine how painful it would be, for both parties, to see those big metal gates locked shut once more time. ",
"Starving kids in African countries are fed Plumpy'nut, which is basically peanut butter with added vitamins and nutrients. They use peanut butter because it's fairly easy to eat, doesn't require a lot of chewing, etc., and peanuts are easy for the body to digest. They also help build up fat quickly, which is necessary for survival in periods of starvation.\n\nSo starving people pretty much just have to be introduced to food very slowly, a little bit at a time. Peanut butter or something similar seems to work well, so long as the starving person doesn't eat too much at once.",
"Apparently if an adult male gets below 40kgs its very difficult to come back from that. This was learned from Australian Prisoners of War of the Japanese at the end of WW2. So even though these POWs were liberated alive those below 40kgs struggled to regain weight and in many cases did not survive. ",
"In an ideal clinical setting, a person with malnutrition will be monitored very closely for changes in electrolytes. These electrolytes, usually potassium, phosphorus, and magnesium in particular, will probably need to be supplemented. Thiamine (Vitamin B1) should also be supplemented. Fluids should be monitored and may need to be limited at first. When you first start feeding someone that is malnourished, you \"start low and go slow,\" mainly in regards to carbohydrates which will affect the metabolism of those electrolytes. This process is typically the first few days of feeding a malnourished person. \n\nSource: ICU dietitian, I specialize in feeding these patients",
"For some reason this reminds me of that scene in Castaway where FedEx throws a party with a seafood buffet and Tom Hanks just looks at it like \"ugh.\"",
"I remember a Christian bale interview where he said he craved apples due to starvation. But they had to\nEssentially ween him on food so he didn't have a heart attack",
"I remember seeing this in the TV series Band Of Brothers, which is based on true events, when soldiers find a concentration camp, they just distribute food to the survivors, but the medical officer asks them to take the food back as this would kill them since the camp survivors are severely malnourished.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThis is the YouTube video of that particular scene. ",
"I think the last victim of the Donner party was a child rescued from starvation. After his rescue he snuck into the food and ironically died from eating too much.",
"I don't know if this counts as \"severe starvation\" but I've been hospitalized for anorexia, I was pretty bad as were my fellow patients (it was an ED unit). Depending on the severity, they'd work us back up to normal calories slowly to avoid refeeding syndrome. Basically, the body's electrolytes and metabolic levels get all borked if you're not careful reintroducing nutrients. This has been explained better by other doctors in this thread.\n\nWe were, however, pushed to eat well beyond when we felt \"full\" because we had to get used to eating normal meals again. I imagine this policy differs for those who were truly starving and actually want the food being offered. ",
"Didn't the allies have to actively prevent the liberated prisoners from eating? They basically decided who was to die by starvation and who would be fed, because they believed some of them were already basically dead and giving them food would have prolonged a painful death for them? That's what I heard anyway.",
"It must be very gradual. There were countless Holocaust victims who were liberated only to die a few days later after eating too much too quickly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/Gt4jnK0MJOw"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2do294 | why don't we pay taxes at a garage sale? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2do294/eli5_why_dont_we_pay_taxes_at_a_garage_sale/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjrcruf",
"cjre4gs"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If you buy stuff for the purpose of selling it, the IRS does require you to pay taxes. This is the same as running a business on ebay. But if it's thing you already owned, the assumption is that you're not making a profit off of it, so there is no taxable income. \n\nEDIT: I just realized you may have meant sales tax. Most states treat occasional sales of items below a certain threshold as exempt. If the seller doesn't regularly sell items, it's a \"casual\" sale and the seller does not need to collect sales tax. Limits vary by state. ",
"Technically, you should in almost every state. Actually, the person selling the stuff should pay income tax on everything they make at the sale if you want to get picky. The same goes for babysitting. Babysitters who don't report their income are treading the line for a felony. The only reason we don't pay taxes on income from garage sales and baby sitting is because the IRS has bigger fish to fry. Where I find issue with it is that they COULD come after you. It's like when a string of lemonade stands run by kids (read 10 and under) on streetcorners got shut down by police and federal agents a few years ago for not meeting certain health codes.\n\nIt's dumb, but it's on the books."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
7st8cf | what does it mean for a currency to be backed by gold? | What are the advantages and disadvantages of having a currency backed by gold, and how are other currencies not backed by gold worth anything or why don’t all countries have currency backed by gold if they can? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7st8cf/eli5_what_does_it_mean_for_a_currency_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt7as9j",
"dt7ayhs",
"dt7c0q8"
],
"score": [
7,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"For a currency to be backed by gold (or any other commodity) means that the government issuing the currency promises, on request , to exchange it for the commodity.\n\nMost modern currencies are not commodity backed. They are backed by faith in the financial system that issues the currency. The US Dollar for example holds value because people have faith that they can trade a dollar in currency for a dollar worth of goods or services. The US economy and monetary system are *very* stable. So there is no fear that a dollar you get today will be worthless tomorrow.\n\nThe reason modern states don't back their currencies with precious metals any more is because faith is a lot more stable than the commodity market. It puts a country in a very dangerous position if its currency can change wildly in value based on outside factors like a gold strike, a mine collapse, or trade dispute.",
"This is a big question. So, when a currency is backed by gold, it means that the government issuing the currency literally owns a stockpile or gold. Each dollar, pound or whatever currency will equal a specific amount of gold and can be exchanged for that amount at any time.\n\nHaving a gold standard limits government spending and prevents vast expansionary policy, such as quantitative easing. That's both a pro and a con; one of the reasons the Great Depression was so bad was because the dollar was on the gold standard which constrained the US government at the time.\n\nAs far as I know, no country is on the gold standard any more. The problem is that it is simply too restrictive. After World War Two, an international agreement was reached which nominated the United States Dollar as the world's reserve currency, and every other currency was tied to that; in effect, the world (or most of it) was on a *dollar* standard. The US dollar, meanwhile, remained on the gold standard until 1971. It then became a fiat currency; that is, the currency is backed by nothing except the faith the world has in the US economy. This is why whatever happens in the US affects everyone else. The dollar is still the world's reserve currency.",
"For the record, I found this question and its responses interesting because Venezuela is trying to peg their currency the petro to be worth one barrel of oil (crude?). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
bvk75u | lng gas process? | Watched this video a couple times just need the process dumbed down please?
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bvk75u/eli5_lng_gas_process/ | {
"a_id": [
"eppylpz"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Natural gas is formed under the earth from the remnants of plants. These gases are pumped from the earth but contain a lot of impurities. It goes to a complex process that removes the impurities and is then cooled to liquid form where it is transported for use."
]
} | [] | [
"https://youtu.be/s9oMknya7Rg"
] | [
[]
] | |
2p0jxl | why do we think of our brains as separate entities than ourselves - when we're really just a brain? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2p0jxl/eli5_why_do_we_think_of_our_brains_as_separate/ | {
"a_id": [
"cms7urp",
"cms86md",
"cms8fhf"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure there's an objective answer to this, but I think it's because we only know that we *are* just a brain (in the sense you're talking about) because of biology. Without science, it would seem that what we \"are\" are human bodies. And if you look at a body without knowing what things are for, the brain is just another mysterious organ, no more \"us\" than our liver. Maybe in a few more centuries we'll really internalize the viewpoint that we are a brain... but I doubt it, because the fact is that we're *not* just a brain... the brain only does what it does in the context of a body.",
"Biological determinism hasn't been proven, and there isn't any strongly suggestive evidence for the hypothesis either. And it isn't clear, both philosophically or biologically, how exactly consciousness or self-awareness arise within the human brain. The concept of consciousness being separate from (but linked to) the human body developed alongside questions related to these facts, and originated for the most part with the philosophies of Aristotle and Plato. In short, Aristotle and Plato concluded that the consciousness is separate and distinct from the human body because it's difficult (if not impossible) to quantify certain mental processes as *physical processes* specifically. This philosophy is widely known as *dualism*, and had a tremendous influence on Christian thinkers, Descartes, and Western societies overall. At one time it was thought that the neurosciences would settle the matter once and for all, but while the neurosciences have been enlightening there is still a great deal of confusion and uncertainty between neurological processes that lead to thought and thoughts which lead to neurological processes. In other words, it isn't clear if \"we're really just a brain\".",
"We're not a brain. We're a whole organism, the brain is one part. It may be the CEO of corporation You, but it's nothing without it's employees.\n\nWe don't call Facebook \"Zuckerberg\" because the processes needed to make Mark function and the processes necessary to make Facebook function are interrelated, but are not identical."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
19zbes | who was hugo chavez, and why do some people think he was a devil and others think he was a hero? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19zbes/who_was_hugo_chavez_and_why_do_some_people_think/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8sx22q"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I don't think this really has been answered sufficiently...'divisive' is an understatement.\n\nBut /u/billy8988 came to our rescue when Reddit initially posted about his death, with a CNN comment surprisingly well-balanced. Of course, it seems sources really are scarce these days... Either you live it, or you don't, I guess. (Columbia hasn't been known for its open media in the time of Chavez... I once knew someone who wanted to volunteer to become a Columbian reporter, simply because they had no family and nothing to lose but wanted to do good for humanity. It's that bleak.)\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/19qf6v/venezuelas_hugo_chavez_dead_at_58/c8qeozj"
]
] | ||
cak78a | how do companies deliver packages overnight from one part of the country to another? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cak78a/eli5_how_do_companies_deliver_packages_overnight/ | {
"a_id": [
"et96ob0",
"et9ax0j",
"et9z4iq"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"UPS and Fedex have their own fleet of planes. You can fly anywhere in the continental US in around 6 hours.",
"Private fleet of planes, trucks, distribution hubs and private airports located at places that are optimal for this kind of logistics.",
"[Here's a really informative video about overnight shipping and how it works](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qfeoqErtY"
]
] | ||
1fmxl0 | what is the cause of the initial neuronal firing in a thought or action? | If every thought or action is a result of a cascade of neurons firing, one after the other, what is it that sparked the first one in the series? Does our brain have a way of knowing what it wants to do before our consciousness is aware of it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1fmxl0/what_is_the_cause_of_the_initial_neuronal_firing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cabt6li",
"cabt8ho"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Neurons are constantly being given signals called Post Synaptic Potentials (PSPs) by the other neurons connected to it. The signals can come from a whole variety of stimuli from pressure receptors in your skin to hormones. These PSPs can either be excitatory (increase the chance of firing) or inhibitory (decrease the chance of firing). If the number or rate of excitatory PSPs (EPSPs) outweighs the number or rate of inhibitory PSPs (IPSPs), the neuron will fire, and then release its IPSPs or EPSPs onto the neurons it's connected with, triggering the cascade. \n\nAs for your second question..yes. Our consciousness (thought to be located in the left frontal lobe) exists essentially to explain and rationalize the workings of the rest of the brain, which function largely independent of its influence. ",
"Sam Harris has a great lecture on the subject if anyone can find it. In it he argues that humans aren't the philosophical free thinkers we think we are and actually still just a dolled up reactive creature using primal instincts. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
45qu46 | probability of choosing a number from infinite numbers | When you have to choose a number randomly, ranging from one to infinity and someone bets on, for example, the number seven, how high is the probability of choosing seven? I would say it is 1:infinity, but wouldn't that mean that it's impossible to choose the number seven?
Thank you in advance. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45qu46/eli5probability_of_choosing_a_number_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"czzl42w",
"czzmkyb",
"czznds2",
"czzp6t1",
"czzrvd0",
"czztkrm",
"czzu465",
"d00bto9"
],
"score": [
25,
6,
3,
16,
67,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If the probabilities are uniform (all number have the same chance of being chosen), the probability that any specific number is chosen tends to 0 as the number of numbers to choose from tends to infinity. So if the amount of numbers to choose from is infinitely big, the chance of picking a particular number is infinitely small (yet not equal to zero).\n\nYou can however have non-uniform distributions where you can determine the probability to get a specific number, while still having the possibility to get any number. For example:\n\n|Picked number|Probability|\n|------------:|----------:|\n| 1| 50 %|\n| 2| 25 %|\n| 3| 12.5 %|\n| …| …|\n| n| 1/(2^(n))|",
"The probabillity of choosing one out of infinity is indeed 0. Statisticians therefor use the probability of hitting let's say scoring '5 and below', or '6 and higher'.\nThis is done by integrating a density function (such as the density function for the normal curve).",
"The probability is 0. When speaking of infinite sets you speak in terms of limits, the limit of 1/n approaches 0 as n approaches infinity. Also, assuming we're speaking of whole numbers, which is considered a countable infinite set, even if you pick a number from the set of whole numbers an infinite amount of time you still have 0 probability of the number 7 being picked. As the second infinite set (the numbers picked) is derived from the first infinite set (every whole number)\n\nNow to flip it around. If you have the countable set of all whole numbers and out of that set you pull all whole numbers(the entire set) your probability of getting the number 7 is infinite. As the chance to get any number is 100% but you also get every other number with a 100% chance. ",
"As I recall (hopefully I'm not too far off the mark):\n\nWhen you **sample** a [**random variable**](_URL_3_) the probabilities of the various outcomes have a [**distribution**](_URL_2_); a function that, for each possible outcome, tells you what its probability is. For example, the famous \"bell curve\" ([normal distribution](_URL_0_)) is a probability distribution—one that ranges over an infinite set (the real numbers)\n\nOne of the laws of probability distributions is this:\n\n* The sum of the probabilities of all of the possible outcomes must add up to 1.\n\nSo for example, if you're throwing a die, there are six possible outcomes, and each one has a probability of 1/6, so they add up to 1. This is a very common distribution called a [**uniform distribution**](_URL_1_ are *n* possible outcomes, and the probability of each outcome is 1/*n*.\n\nNow, if we have a random variable whose values range from one to infinity, we can say for sure that it's impossible for this to have a uniform distribution, because it would violate the law that the probabilities for all the possible outcomes must add up to one. The probability for any one item to be chosen would have to be the same number *p*, but:\n\n* If *p* was greater than zero, then the sum would not have a limit (it would go to infinity).\n* If *p* was zero, then the sum would be zero.\n\nOr in other words:\n\n* You **can** pick a value with equal probability among finitely many alternatives;\n* You **can** pick a value with unequal probability among infinitely many alternatives;\n* But you **cannot** pick a value with equal probability among infinitely many alternatives.",
"The question is, unfortunately, meaningless. I know this isn't a very satisfying answer, but it's pretty much the only possible one.\n\nThe problem with questions about infinity is that trying to use \"common sense\" to answer them often leads us to wrong results. Our intuition for dealing with this kind of problem is simply very bad - try asking any first year math student who's taking a discrete mathematics class.\n\nSo, to give a meaningful answer, we'd really need to treat this rigorously. In particular, we need to decide what \"choosing randomly\" means. Now, the common-sense meaning of this usually corresponds to using a \"uniform distribution\". A uniform distribution over the numbers 1 - 10 is defined exactly as you'd expect - the probability of choosing a specific number between 1 and 10 is 1/10th. We call the set of numbers 1..10 the \"support set\" of the distribution. What you're asking is - if the support set of a uniform distribution is infinite (1..infinity), then what is the probability of choosing a specific number. It looks like there is no good answer to this question - any answer seems contradictory.\nAnd you're right, it IS contradictory. In fact, this is exactly how one would prove you *can not* define a uniform distribution over an infinite support set.\n\nWhat you can do, however, is define a different method of \"choosing randomly\" (that is, a different distribution), for which the question makes sense - and in fact, there are already some examples of that here.",
"Don't believe it is possible to randomly select a number between 0 and infinity with equal distribution.",
"It's impossible to generate a random number between 1 and infinity where every number has an equal chance of occurring. The premise makes no sense, hence the conclusion that it's impossible to pick 7.",
"Consider the classical example of probability distrubition, identified as probability of event (7) chosen from the set being infinity.\n\nO(7)/infinity.\n\nSo this is the outcome 7, from the set of infinitely large outcomes, infinitely small outcomes, though all intergers. (Call it S), \n\nyou have a 1/infinity chance to select 7.\n\n1/infinity is a quantity that we see when something tends to 0. this number will get as close as possible but yet never make it there. the limit goes to zero.\n\nSo you can say that this litteraly is a zero chance that you can get a 7 out of infinite numbers.\n\nJust think about actually doing this expirament. You will take a randomly chosen number out of the set of infinity. The issue is you cannot logically summate an actual probability out of the infinite set. Every time you think there is a probable chance you can grab a 7, that chance will be expanding even more, its tending towards zero anyways, (imagine the denominator getting infinitely huge, your chance is pretty much zero, but not entirely, unless you assume that limit.)\n\nas x (the event that 7 is an outcome chosen) approaches zero, the chance approaches zero.\n\nNow without the mathmatical jargon imagine this: Probabilities are constructed from 0 to a whole number 1, or 100%. There is no 100% of infinity, it can't be quantified with an end, like 100% gives.\n\nSo you go to draw from an infinite set, you could get a 7,perhaps, if the set was not infinite. The issue is there is no probability to actually define, because everytime you were to take a number that probability is infinitely shrinking.\n\ninfact you would not be able to actually draw a single digit number at all, if you're using a method to draw a random digit (interger) from the infinity set. the chance of you taking a number would not matter, because the actual outcomes are increasing forever. So imagine that possibility, where we can get one outcome from that list, and imagine you went to draw a number. BECAUSE this set keeps getting bigger, The chance for you to get ANYTHING is nothing.\n\nIf you were to try and draw any value from infinity, you would not have a probability of getting any digit at all. You cant have an infinite number of possibilities, because that's not possible. You can take an infinite set, and assume to either get ALL of the set, or the null set, which is no digits at all. This is why we only see infinity in cases were there isn't a possible outcome in probability. \n\nIn essence, most things can be described as random, yet their outcomes are not random. Only the system to obtain those outcomes are structured in a random way. We describe randomness with this, and because we have a set to chose from, the randomness can be summated (your set is not infinite).\n\nWhen you take an infinite set, and want one outcome, the system will be random to select an outcome, and the result is also completely random, so you cannot accurately give this a probability chance.\n\nHowever, if you bet someone you would get a number from the set, any interger, you will be 100% possible. If you said i won't get any number at all, you would get 0%. that's the only two outcomes that are not random in the thought expirament, so theres a chance to have an outcome."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_distribution_(discrete\\))—there",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_variable"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
7h0bf6 | what's the point in having arched feet? | Why isn't it better to NOT have an arch and why does it cause pain for people when they have fallen arches? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7h0bf6/eli5_whats_the_point_in_having_arched_feet/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqn5k6p",
"dqnc15p"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"Too much of an arch will cause you to put a lot of weight on your heel. Which causes pain.\nToo little will cause issues with posture and issues with walking, since they can't support your body properly. It makes your legs rotate in when you take steps.",
"Humans are very good walkers and pretty good distance runners. We are so good at endurance that we can actually stalk deer to death. \n\nEndurance hunting was the primary mode of hunting before (and for sometime after) the invention of the spear. We would just follow deer for hours or days until the deer died of exhaustion. \n\nDeer can sprint. They essentially walk on their toes (the balls of their feet). They are way faster than a human - but only for a few minutes. Think PePe LePew. Humans can transition between their toes for running and a heel to toe walk for more efficient walking by simply transferring weight between their legs. Doing this for hours exhausted prey to the point of death. \n\nThis more efficient walking is why we can stalk deer to death. But it also requires a more complex foot that can “pronate” between flat and arched. A human without the arch will have ankle and shin pain because the leg is designed for this complex foot shape. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1ugu5s | if we are in the milky way galaxy, when people see it in the sky or see the photos of it, what part are we actually seeing? | just curious | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ugu5s/eli5if_we_are_in_the_milky_way_galaxy_when_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"cehxd85",
"cehxddc",
"cehxhsk",
"cei1sn8",
"cei4ghm"
],
"score": [
2,
19,
8,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"We're looking inwards, towards the galactic center.",
"We're looking \"across\" it. The Milky Way is shaped roughly like a disk and we're not in the center, we're about halfway between the center and the edge. When we look \"up\" or \"down\" there's fewer stars between us and empty space outside the galaxy because it's so thin. When we look towards the center, we see many more stars because it's so wide.",
"We are in part of the unfashionable western arm of the milky way galaxy looking towards the east",
"You are seeing what is basically a semi-transparent disk from the viewpoint of being inside it. You see the densest, most noticeable part of the disk material in the direction out through its flat extent, which surrounds you in a circular band. [This part](_URL_1_) of the popular \"The Known Universe\" video might help. Remember, the everyday experience of being in front, behind, or inside of things, like you experience in your normal surroundings, holds just the same all the way out as far as the whole galaxy, and further.\n\nIf you think about it, it makes sense that looking out from inside of [this](_URL_2_) will look like [this](_URL_0_). If you were floating in space, and had superhero night vision, you would see [this](_URL_3_) when you pan around. The bright area is the center of the galaxy.",
"The Milky Way is a spiral galaxy (just making sure everyone knew) and it has two to four arms. The arm that you see that stretches across the night sky is called Perseus. We are located on the edge of Orion's spur."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://mmerino.com/images-gallery/milky_way_sagittarius_04_hi.jpg",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=17jymDn0W6U#t=126",
"http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/sites/www.cfa.harvard.edu/files/images/news//su201245.jpg",
"http://media.skysurvey.org/interactive36... | |
bool78 | what are delegates and lambdas? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bool78/eli5_what_are_delegates_and_lambdas/ | {
"a_id": [
"eniq4c0",
"enj2jau"
],
"score": [
3,
10
],
"text": [
"I assume this is the case but you mean in programming, correct?",
"I know this is ELI5 but I'm going to assume you have at least a tiny bit of programming knowledge. Literally day one stuff.\n\nA variable is a value with a name. For example:\n\n let MyVariable = 5\n\nThe name is `MyVariable` and the value is `5`.\n\nA function looks something like this:\n\n function MyFunction(a) { return a + 1 }\n\nThe name of the function is `MyFunction`. Then there's another part of the function: `(a) { return a + 1 }`. You can kind of think of this as the \"value\" of the function.\n\nA lambda is simply a function value without a name. Just as you can think of the value `5` outside of the variable, you can think of the lambda `(a) = > a + 1` outside of the function (I switched up the syntax a little to match how lambdas usually look but it means exactly the same thing as the function code above).\n\nA delegate is a variable whose value is a lambda. So you could do something like this:\n\n let MyDelegate = (a) = > a + 1\n let MyNewVariable = MyDelegate(5) // this will store a 6 in MyNewVariable\n\nThen you've got a nice handle for your lambda. You'll notice this is a lot like a function, since it's got a name. However, delegates are a little more flexible since you can set them based on other variables, change them, pass them as parameters, and all the other things you can do with variables. You can even pass them to other delegates!\n\n let MyNewDelegate = (a,b) = > a(a(b))\n let YetAnotherVariable = MyNewDelegate(MyDelegate, 5) // this will set YetAnotherVariable to 7"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
eqxttd | how is there enough oxygen in huge cities where the plant to mammal ratio is extremely low? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eqxttd/eli5_how_is_there_enough_oxygen_in_huge_cities/ | {
"a_id": [
"feypshl",
"feypsl9",
"feys58y",
"ff02wbn",
"ff0oh9n"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
8,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"The wind circulates the worlds air. A city will simply get more oxygen by getting more blown in from the forests. Same thing at the CO2, it gets removed by wind into the forest",
"Wind. All you need is a small breeze to continuously mix the air in buildings and the surrounding air.",
"Gases don't like being in concentration so they will move themselves away from points where they are concentrated all on their own in a process called diffusion. Also wind, as others have mentioned.",
"Gases mix extremely fast. Each individual air molecule is pinging around at ~1000mph\n \nThis is why you can smell a fart very soon after it was dealt from across the room. \n\n\nThe average lifetime of an oxygen molecule in the atmosphere is around 4500 years, so it has plenty of time to get from the plant to your city.",
"That's not really how it works. First, terrestrial plants are only responsible for making a small amount of the planet's oxygen. Algae and plant organisms in the oceans make 80% of the oxygen on Earth. Second, the atmosphere is constantly moving and mixing, so everything gets dispersed and mixes with everything else."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
8ywqpq | why do newer cars seem to not have “fogged up” headlights for a few years, while older cars need their headlights cleaned every few months or so? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ywqpq/eli5_why_do_newer_cars_seem_to_not_have_fogged_up/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2ea67f",
"e2ebi60"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Better plastics are less susceptible to micro-abrasion and sun damage so they last longer without having to be cleaned and polished.",
"Headlights fog up mostly because of UV radiation from the sun breaks down the plastic (making them yellow and hazy). New headlights get a protective layer that prevents this for some time (until it gets abraded away by dust, wind, etc). Once this is gone, the headlight gets foggy, and you can remove the outer damaged layer of plastic, but without the factory protective layer, it won't last. You can apply some coatings to help prolong the life of a polish, but it's never as good as factory."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2cj2mp | when the concentration camps in nazi germany were liberated, why were people from local towns forced to bury the dead? | I watched a documentary recently regarding concentration camps and mentioned that German soldiers were forced to bury the dead from these camps but why civilians? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cj2mp/eli5when_the_concentration_camps_in_nazi_germany/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjfynoy",
"cjfyqwf",
"cjg5ecz"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Punishment for being complicit. ",
"The citizen should see the victims, which have been murdered.",
"It was because the soldiers liberating the camps were angry. Angry in a way that they had never been angry before, gut-wrenchingly furious. Wanting to lash out in some way. \n\nThey did it because they believed that if the German civilians knew about or not it then this would bring it home to them. \n\nMight be right, might not. But that;s how they felt. \n\nRelative was a soldier who liberated a camp."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
83iweq | why do chemical reactions produce energy? | I understand energy as the potential for something to move by a force. So heat is molecules move and so on.
but I don't quite understand why chemical reactions produce energy specifically. I find the same explanation being "bonds break" but what about the bonds breaking causes energy(or I should say work) to be produce is it the electron movement or something like in radiation? The closest answer I've found so far on the subreddit is that it has something to o with the electromagnetic force but does that mean when bonds break the atoms "scurry" away from each other? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/83iweq/eli5why_do_chemical_reactions_produce_energy/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvi6032"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"There is a huge misconception about the nature of energy from chemical reactions. Breaking bonds REQUIRES energy, think about breaking apart anything, energy is typically involved. Forming bonds RELEASES energy. The reason energy is released is based on thermodynamics. Basically, equilibrium favors low energy. When a system goes from a high energy state to a low energy state, energy is released in some other form as heat or motion etc. but always conserved throughout the universe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
5yj0yu | how are tattoos applied on actors for movies? | Is it applied like face paint every single day? It there like a stencil for them or are they free handed? Or are they more like temporary tattoos? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yj0yu/eli5_how_are_tattoos_applied_on_actors_for_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"deqfohv",
"deqn8vw"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"An artist will paint the tattoo on for the shoot. Yeah they do it every shooting day, sometimes along with hours and hours of other makeup.\n",
"Yeah it gets painted on.\n\nThis is not quite a tattoo, but for the full body paint of Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique(X-men)-\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIt would take them 7-8 hours for one full paint job. Doesn't say how many times they did it, but it was definitely more than once throughout shooting. This is one of the more extreme examples, but it's not uncommon for make up to be pretty arduous.\n\n > It there like a stencil for them or are they free handed?\n\nProbably depends on the tattoo. The artists have a lot of tools for the job."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.businessinsider.com/jennifer-lawrence-x-men-mystique-makeup-2014-5"
]
] | |
9d0gyx | why do foods continue to cook and get hotter after removing from them from the heat source? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9d0gyx/eli5_why_do_foods_continue_to_cook_and_get_hotter/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5eib0d"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Technically, it's not getting any hotter. But the outside of your food is hotter than the inside because that's where the heat was coming from. After you stop cooking the food, the temperature equalizes, making the inside hotter."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1k6rsc | in medicine, why is it considered good when something inhibits tnf (tumor necrosis factor)? | I would think that something that causes cell death of tumors is something people want! I get that TNF may worsen some inflammation disorders, but isn't taking herbs or supplements that claim to inhibit this a dangerous game that may result in tumor growth? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1k6rsc/eli5_in_medicine_why_is_it_considered_good_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbly1jr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"TNF is part of the body's inflammation response, which is normally a good thing, yes. But there are a lot of ways for the body's inflammation response to go awry, causing problems like rheumatoid arthritis. People who have those kinds of autoimmune diseases often have *too much* TNF, and can sometimes get relief by taking a synthetic antibody that binds to TNF and makes the body get rid of it.\n\nTaking \"herbs or supplements\" is *always* a dangerous game, and basically is never a good idea. Especially if the herb is cilantro. Blech."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
27bs1x | why is my mental image of myself very different from my actual appearance, and why am i unable to reconcile the two? | The way I visualize my appearance is very different from what I actually look like, but when I look into a mirror or at a photo, it feels almost like I am looking at someone else. I understand that it is me, but it doesn't feel like it is, if that makes sense. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27bs1x/eli5_why_is_my_mental_image_of_myself_very/ | {
"a_id": [
"chzepoz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Somewhat related: why do I think I look pretty good when looking in the mirror, but look far worse when I see a photo or (god forbid) a video of myself from the same day?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
25ptae | with 4k television content just starting to trickle out, and 4ks planned obsolesce by 8k just 3 years away, when do these resolution wars stop? | Edit: I suppose my title was poorly worded. It should have been more along the lines of what's the new selling point after people stop caring about higher resolutions?
----------
There has to be a point where the human eye can't tell the difference after a certain resolution/pixel density. No?
It's starting to feel like electronics manufacturers are selling razors: They keep adding more "blades" for no good reason. (Don't get me wrong, I've seen 4k content on 4k hardware and it's definitely better than 1080)
It also feels like the MHz wars on computers. They eventually hit the highest clock speeds that surpassing would yield diminishing, if not degraded returns.
Computer manufactures has to drop the MHz marketing gimmick as "the number" to use to sell to the general public. I guess they're still able to use that for memory but I feel that's largely targeting power users.
For the general public things shifted from marketing the MHz to the number of cores.
What's the analogy for TVs hitting their "resolution limit"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25ptae/eli5_with_4k_television_content_just_starting_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"chjjvci",
"chjjzkb"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"As of now, there is visually obvious and clear difference between 1K (1080) and 4K resolution. There will probably be a subtle, but noticeable difference between 4k and 8k. The difference between 8k and 16k will be subtler still. \n\nEventually, there will be a point where we just plain can't tell the difference anymore between nK resolution and n+1K resolution, at which point, people will have little reason to buy the new resolution. Once the demand disappears, the supply will stop trying. \n\nThere will still be a *few* people out there who want to buy the better resolution for bragging rights, but they will be the minority. ",
" > when do these resolution wars stop?\n\nWhen people stop buying."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2prmtx | what it means when a central bank imposes negative interest rates | The Swiss central bank (a.k.a. "SNB") announced today that it would cut interest rates for banks that keep large amounts of money at the SNB to -.25% ([source](_URL_0_)).
I assume that means that banks now have to pay the central bank for the privilege of them holding their money, but it hurts my head to think about why they would do that, and how the Swiss economy benefits (especially in respect of revitalizing their stagnant inflation). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2prmtx/eli5_what_it_means_when_a_central_bank_imposes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmzfc0h",
"cmzfedj",
"cmzi18m"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Well the SNB now pays the \"normal banks\" for loaning/holding their money, what it means is that SNB really wants to push up inflation. Inflation is wanted because it makes a good investing climate which will help lower unemployment and strenghten the economy. Remember that the SNB gives out different interest rates depending on runtime. For example the normal rate that we talk about is the overnight rate which is the rate the \"normal banks\" can loan to over the night, but the SNB also gives out rates for loaning on for example three months time and even 10 years time and those may still be well above 0%. How it's hurting the economy is that it devalues the Swiss currency and therefore makes it more expensive to import but it also increases export.\n\n\nMy own personal belief is that the interest rate war in Europe has gone too far, if everyone is devalueing their currency nobody will be left to import and therefore the devalueing countries export will still not go up. Instead we need a trustworthy political system that makes the neccesary cuts and that way rebuild the economy. \n\nEdit: I suck at spelling.",
"When negative interest rates are imposed, the costs of *storing* money becomes higher than actually having to *spend* it. It's weird when we think about it as consumers, but basically that's the economist's inflationary tool to keep investment and liquidity flowing in the free market. That -0.25% will now become a positive 0.25% rate of return bonus to every investment I make as an individual bank, which can force my hand on some of the more marginal investments which for instance initially were projected to lose 0.2% (hypothetically) yearly for early investors, with profits turning after 5 years or so; now it becomes profitable for me to invest in the business right (0.2 return on investment + -.025 cost of not investing = 0.05% ROI) from the start rather than keeping my money in storage!",
"The reason banks would pay to keep their money in the SNB is because they believe any other central bank is a higher risk (less likely to be repaid, or more likely to devalue over time).\n\nObviously, the SNB wants to discourage banks (and foreign reserves) being kept in their vaults, since their currency is too over-valued and is actually hurting their economy - so they're trying everything they can to stop banks hording money in their vault. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://qz.com/315621/the-swiss-are-now-at-a-negative-interest-rate-due-to-the-russian-ruble-collapse/"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
42xbb9 | how did organic life form in the universe if everything began as elements from the periodic table? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42xbb9/eli5_how_did_organic_life_form_in_the_universe_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"czds4r7",
"czdshx0"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Organic lifeforms themselves are comprised of elements from the periodic table. Try not to think of the universe as divided between 'living matter' and 'nonliving matter.' It's all just matter. It may be easier to think of life as a series of self-sustaining chemical reactions. There are plenty of those even among things we consider not-alive. Life's uniqueness isn't so much a vague concept of 'being alive' but rather that the reaction has become organized in such a way as to become increasingly resilient. That resilience has come at the cost of many many failures that sputtered out like a fire exhausting part of the fire triangle. \n\nAs to exactly how it started, we have theories but have not yet definitively pinned it down. Experiments have shown those elements from the periodic table when exposed to conditions thought to be like early earth, spontaneously generate amino acids, part of the building blocks of life. Perhaps enough of that mixing resulted in something that can reproduce. Or something almost there, but which failed. Then after many many more tries, maybe something arose that reproduced. The reproduction wasn't perfect, and had some other ability. Maybe it could metabolize a new fuel. Maybe it had a more robust exterior. And so on.",
"Your question makes me think of this quote:\n > If you wish to make apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe -*Carl Sagan*\n\nThere are multiple stages from the point where only elements exist to the point where organic life exists. Scientists know much more about the early stages than the later stages; conversely, the bits I know a lot about are the late stages, and not so much the early ones. So this answer will be weighted accordingly.\n\nYour problem is actually worse than your question suggests: you first need to invent elements. In the early stages of the universe, only very light elements - hydrogen and helium - existed. Over time, these elements fused into heavier elements, including carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and so on - the basis for organic life.\n\nThe next step (logically, if not chronologically) is formation of planets, another process which is pretty well-understood. In the case of Earth we're fortunate that the planet formed in a so-called 'habitable zone' - meaning it's near an appropriate star, not so close that the surface is scorched and water boils, and not so far that the surface is frozen. Earth is big enough to have an atmosphere and has a large amount of liquid water - possibly delivered by comets.\n\nClearly by this time, elements have fused into molecules - such as the minerals in the rocks of the earth, the molecules of gas that make up our atmosphere (such as nitrogen and carbon dioxide; not much oxygen back at the start), and indeed the water of our oceans. These can form in space - many elements will readily react with one another, and even those that tend not to will do so in the present of energy. That energy might come from light from stars, or from the energy given off when stars die, for example. Other molecules are formed on the Earth through geochemical processes such as volcanic eruptions, lightning strikes, or at deep-sea hydrothermal vents.\n\nSo what we have now is a tectonically-active planet with liquid water in which simple organic and inorganic molecules are present, whether synthesised on the planet by natural processes, or delivered from space (for example on meteors). How do these become life?\n\nWe don't understand this too well. It's clear that biologically-relevant molecules can be synthesised naturally - think of the famous Miller-Urey experiment, which simulated lightning strikes in the early Earth's atmosphere and found that amino acids formed. In fact, it seems that a limited set of natural circumstances can give us amino acids, simple peptides, nucleotides, lipids, and so on. What we really don't understand is how those molecules self-organised into a simple living system.\n\nThere are a whole bunch of competing ideas here. I'll sketch just one. If you have a site where simple polymers are being made, such as nucleotides, you'll end up with a population of millions or trillions of polymers with random sequences. These will fold into different shapes and have different functions - many, maybe most, will probably have no function. But some might be able to promote chemical reactions - perhaps the synthesis of fresh monomers, or perhaps they can copy other polymers. One scenario involves a molecule or group of molecules of this kind which develop the ability to self-replicate, meaning either one molecule copies itself, or a bunch of molecules all copy each other. It's widely believed that these molecules would need to be contained somehow to stop them washing away or being consumed by other, parasitic molecules.\n\nIt's a little unclear what happens next, but the general principle is that these molecules need to organise into a contained, self-replicating system - think of a little soap bubble that can grow and divide. At this point presumably natural selection can take over, as this population of simple self-replicating systems compete for resources and so on.\n\nThat's a hugely simplified sketch and by no means a consensus view in the field - but I think it illustrates that three things are needed: compartmentalisation, self-replication, and heredity."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
o70sc | why is my hearing so impaired when i have a plugged nose? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/o70sc/eli5_why_is_my_hearing_so_impaired_when_i_have_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3evoa5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There are little tubes ([Eustachian tubes](_URL_0_)) going from inside of your eardrums to the inside of your nasal cavity. When these get plugged, your eardrums can't pick up vibrations as freely, and your hearing is therefore impaired."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustachian_tube"
]
] | ||
295uua | how is additional time determined in soccer? | (how many minutes to add, why it would be necessary, benefits, etc.) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/295uua/eli5_how_is_additional_time_determined_in_soccer/ | {
"a_id": [
"cihphng",
"cihpil9",
"ciht9ll"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"The referee and officiating crew tally how much time was spent on injuries/throw ins/corners and goal kicks/free kicks/penalties/etc, and then add that to the end. There is basically never less than a minute, and rarely more than 5 minutes. Usually you'll see 2-3 mins in most games",
"The referees calculate how much time elapsed during the match due to restarts, injuries, fights, and pitch invasions, then after the 90 minutes of play this time is added on. It is necessary because otherwise the \"90\" minutes would not be correct due to play stopping but the clock continuing.",
"As a former referee, the additional time added is actually up to the center ref and usually factor in time lost from throw ins, corner kicks, etc. But it's important to note that the time they add is entirely up to the center ref."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.