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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ffsmf8 | how do the a/c and heat work in a car? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ffsmf8/eli5_how_do_the_ac_and_heat_work_in_a_car/ | {
"a_id": [
"fk0cz1l",
"fk0d5fv"
],
"score": [
13,
2
],
"text": [
"Similar to how they work in your home. The cars heater takes engine heat that is usually vented through the radiator and uses some of it to make the inside of the car more comfortable - that's also why it takes a little while for the heater to start working if you just started the engine. In your home a gas or electrical furnace generates the heat, but in a car there's already plenty of waste heat so no \"furnace\" is needed.\n\nThe airco is basically a pump that compresses a liquid (a compressor) - as the liquid is squeezed together it heats up. The heat is vented to the outside air. The liquid is then sent through a heat exchanger where it is allowed to expand again, as it does so it cools and takes heat from the air sent along the heat exchanger. The cool air is blown into the cars interior. Home aircons use an electric pump (that humming noisy thing outside when the thing turns on), but often a car airconditioner just uses the car engine itself to run the pump. Which is also why the airco won't work if the engine isn't on.",
"AC works using an engine driven compressor, using a refrigeration cycle much like the mechanism in a home refrigerator works. \n\nRefrigerant is compressed, this heats it up, it goes through a radiator (condenser) to sink off the heat, then it goes through an expansion valve which lets the pressure go, and with it, pulls in heat. That is the point of the sealed loop that is routed past the airflow and generates the cool air. Then the refrigerant goes back to the compressor. \n\nThe heat is simply done using excess heat from the engine itself. \n\nThe engine has a water loop based cooling system (much how a PC water loop works) with a pump, radiator all that, there's just an extra little radiator in the loop called the heater core which airflow from the car's blower goes past when the heat is selected."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
5u6az5 | why did knights continue to carry swords after plate armor came into existence? | Given that plate armor protected extremely well against swords, why were they still used? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u6az5/eli5_why_did_knights_continue_to_carry_swords/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddrobe2",
"ddromd6",
"ddrpqpq"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Knights would often not battle against each other on the battlefield. Knights were a kind of a special unit, much better protected than your usual peasant grunt with barely no armor at all. The knight would use his sword mainly against enemy soldiers without sufficient armor.\n\nAlso, carrying plate armor made it practically impossible to use any weapon that would penetrate armor, such as a leg bow or a long bow. You will see knights depicted with long spears that would penetrate armor better than a sword. This weapon would be deployed on battlefields where mainly armored units were to be expected on the opposing lines.",
"Not everybody that they fight will be wearing plate armor, so the sword would still be useful against certain enemies and also against horses.\n\nPlate armor has gaps too. So if they can get an armored enemy to the ground or catch them unaware they can slide the sword between gaps in their armor and kill them.\n\nAnd like somebody mentioned below, it would be one of the most convenient weapons to use whilst wearing heavy armor that limits your range of movement.",
"1) you can still get swords between plates\n\n2) poorly made plate armor with very well made swords still means getting stabbed\n\n3) many knights would be on a horse and be screwed without it so slicing the horse also knocked the knight down good and hard"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
lkryd | explain like i'm 5, marcus aurelius | Explain the brief life story, the impact, and why he has such great quotes. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lkryd/explain_like_im_5_marcus_aurelius/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2thc9g",
"c2thv7k",
"c2thc9g",
"c2thv7k"
],
"score": [
24,
4,
24,
4
],
"text": [
"Marcus Aurelius was a philosopher/warrior. The unique point of view he got from commanding the massive roman war machine as its emperor during it's most powerful era gave him the ability to reflect on life and the workings of government and its function to the people.\n\nLater in life, he took public speaking lessons from 3 great Greek teachers and this allowed him to convey his musings to the masses in a way that stands the test of time until today.",
"This sounds like a homework assignment. =_=",
"Marcus Aurelius was a philosopher/warrior. The unique point of view he got from commanding the massive roman war machine as its emperor during it's most powerful era gave him the ability to reflect on life and the workings of government and its function to the people.\n\nLater in life, he took public speaking lessons from 3 great Greek teachers and this allowed him to convey his musings to the masses in a way that stands the test of time until today.",
"This sounds like a homework assignment. =_="
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5yj4dc | how can time be different in 2 different places? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yj4dc/eli5_how_can_time_be_different_in_2_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"deqgf5n",
"deqgovt"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"1. yes, this is due to time dilation and relativity. you can google for some basic answers to that. \n\n2. due to time dilation and relativity, the closer you are to a black hole the \"slower\" time is for you. 1 day for you might be 1 year for someone further away. in the movie, the planet was much closer to the blackhole than the guy on the spaceship. ",
"Time moves slower in regions of high gravity. The people on the planet are further down the gravity well than the guy in the space ship. If the guy up in the space ship looked down at the planet with a high powered telescope he would see everything moving very slowly, looking almost like it was frozen in place. It is scientifically accurate. \n\nI'm sorry I couldn't do a better job of explaining this but it requires diagrams and images to really convey the point. I would recommend the wiki page:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation"
]
] | ||
1udw2u | why did george lucas make the last 3 movies instead of beggining with the 3 first movies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1udw2u/eli5_why_did_george_lucas_make_the_last_3_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceh2926",
"ceh2e29",
"ceh2iip"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When he made the first film (Episode IV), he didn't know it was going to be part of a 6-film franchise. He was just making a film. Sequels followed naturally, and I guess at some point he decided to do the prequels.",
"Star Wars was an affectionate homage to early 20th century adventure serials like \"Flash Gordon\" which were shown in movie theatres in episodes, with a brief recap of the story at the start. The opening of Star Wars was designed to make you feel like you were watching an episode from the middle of the serial, as a nostalgic nod to the way those old series were shown. IMHO, all the \"I always intended it to be a serial of films\" is just marketing.",
"Because he lied about the history of his own movies.\n\nThe original \"Star Wars\" was released as just \"Star Wars\". It wasn't until the release of \"Star Wars Episode V The Empire Strikes Back\" that the original movie was retroactively renamed to \"Star Wars Episode IV A New Hope\".\n\nOver time many people forgot that the original was retroactively renamed and just believed in Lucas' bullshit about it always being planned as 6 movies with the first 3 being the last 3. At one stage he claimed that there'd be no eps 7 to 9 either. What are we getting, next year is it?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
9yvxku | phone/internet data usage. | Why do I pay for a set amount, rather than simply paying for access to the service? Is there really only so much to go around? Is it just a scam? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9yvxku/eli5_phoneinternet_data_usage/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea4gfl4",
"ea4h57d",
"ea4o0ws",
"ea4t35s"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think the amount you have reflects on how much you'll be using it. People who have less will spend less time on the internet. I think it's effectively renting the internet time.\n\nWould be interesting to know actually.",
"Im going to say the same reason cruise ships charge higher pricing for wifi; usuage control. It lowers the strain put on the network. \n\nIf you know you have a limit, you'll be more inclined to spread it out over the monthly period For free roaming, everyone would be on it all the time and it put a huge strain on the network. \n",
"It's mostly a scam.\n\nBandwidth is not an expendable commodity like water or oil, bandwidth is a measure of how wide the pipe is to transport your data. There is always a fixed amount of bandwidth available in a given area, what changes is the demand on that bandwidth.\n\nFor example if you use less bandwidth during the day, it doesn't mean there will be more available at night. The amount of bandwidth available doesn't change.\n\nWhat does change is that more people use the internet at night than during the day. Since the demand is higher, there is less bandwidth available for everyone to share.\n\nLogically consumers should be paying an access fee for the internet, not paying by the MB. But the billing model is based on the telephone service model. You pay a premium based on how much you use the service. From a billing perspective this makes sense only because it's easy to quantify for your bill.\n\nCellphone data in particular is grossly overpriced. The cost is meant to justify the incredible amount of investment that needs to be made to build and maintain the cellphone network, but at this point it's little more than price gouging.\n\nAlthough there has been considerable improvement in the last few years North American's still pay absurdly high rates for bandwidth compared to many other nations and many people pay that price for speeds that can't legally be called broadband in many nations.\n\nMany industry insiders suspect that the high costs of bandwidth are meant to offset profit losses from ever shrinking TV and traditional telephone markets.",
"Think of using data as crossing a bridge. Once a bridge is built, there's no limit to the number of people that can cross, and allowing a person to cross doesn't cost the bridge operator anything. BUT if too many people try to cross at once, the bridge will get clogged, and additional bridges will have to be built. That DOES cost money.\n\nIf you charge people a fixed price to access the bridge, they will likely cross way more frequently than if you charged per crossing. That means the bridge will reach capacity faster and you will have to build new infrastructure sooner."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2g5kku | the difference and role in usa between police, fbi, sheriff's dept, marshall's etc | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g5kku/eli5_the_difference_and_role_in_usa_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckfu4c8",
"ckful8z"
],
"score": [
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Alright. So police and sheriff are state law enforcement. They monitor any laws within the state; a sheriff will have county's in which there jurisdiction lie. The police are similar, but their jurisdiction is the city in which they are employed. US Marshal is similar to a bounty hunter, they will go get people who skip out on bonds, have a federal warrant, and they also serve the courts. FBI handles federal crimes and information, they will handle trafficking of drugs/people, and assist with gathering knowledge of terrorism.\n\nThey all have their jobs and none outranks any (just making that clear). Also the examples I provided are just small things they do, there is actually much more to each profession I just wanted to give a general idea.\n\nSource: Criminal Justice Major.",
"Police: City level law enforcement. \n\nSheriff: County level law enforcement. Primarily focusing on the areas outside of cities. They tend to run the Jails, and will often provide police services for those towns too small to have their own police departments.\n\nState police: State level law enforcement. \n\nFBI: Federal level crime enforcement. Missing persons, multi-state crimes, serial killers, drug trafficking, people trafficking, terrorism, etc.\n\nUS Marshal: Federal level law enforcement, focusing primarily on those that skip out on bonds. They also protect those in witness protection program. \n\nSome States also have elite police units like the Texas Rangers that function like the FBI but limited to their state. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
nth0f | how does my browser translate the website url into the website ip? | Is there a big database somewhere? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nth0f/eli5_how_does_my_browser_translate_the_website/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3bsov0",
"c3bt4hm",
"c3bsov0",
"c3bt4hm"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"It works through DNS:\n_URL_1_\n\nbasically... your computer sends the address to say... your isp... your isp uses the address to see which top level domain it belongs to... thats the .com or .net or .gov... then it uses the address to go to that top level domain and find the host name... which is _URL_0_... the way it does THAT is through a name server which has an ip address associated with all the host names... then it just connects you to that ip address...\n\nI think thats pretty much covers it.",
"Q: \"Is there a big database somewhere?\"\n\nA: Yes there is a big database somewhere. There are many.\n\nThe Webbrowser does not act alone in translating URL to IP. The process is involves also the underlying OS. The browser first sends the request to the OS. The OS checks its local store (eg: C:\\windows\\system32\\drivers\\etc\\hosts) and then sends the request to a remote DNS server (database). The DNS server may be at your ISP, or it may be public (eg: 8.8.8.8 Google DNS). The DNS server replies with the IP of the requested domain.\n\nLists of domain names and IP addresses are maintained by the various domain registrars, and they are constantly aggregating with each other with any changes to IP/domains that occur. Changes to an IP address of a domain can take up to 48 hours to propogate world-wide, but usually occurs much quicker.",
"It works through DNS:\n_URL_1_\n\nbasically... your computer sends the address to say... your isp... your isp uses the address to see which top level domain it belongs to... thats the .com or .net or .gov... then it uses the address to go to that top level domain and find the host name... which is _URL_0_... the way it does THAT is through a name server which has an ip address associated with all the host names... then it just connects you to that ip address...\n\nI think thats pretty much covers it.",
"Q: \"Is there a big database somewhere?\"\n\nA: Yes there is a big database somewhere. There are many.\n\nThe Webbrowser does not act alone in translating URL to IP. The process is involves also the underlying OS. The browser first sends the request to the OS. The OS checks its local store (eg: C:\\windows\\system32\\drivers\\etc\\hosts) and then sends the request to a remote DNS server (database). The DNS server may be at your ISP, or it may be public (eg: 8.8.8.8 Google DNS). The DNS server replies with the IP of the requested domain.\n\nLists of domain names and IP addresses are maintained by the various domain registrars, and they are constantly aggregating with each other with any changes to IP/domains that occur. Changes to an IP address of a domain can take up to 48 hours to propogate world-wide, but usually occurs much quicker."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"example.com",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System"
],
[],
[
"example.com",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System"
],
[]
] | |
2es4e2 | why are all the top youtube comments the most bigoted or close-minded? | It seems to me like the comments that would make it to the top would be typical opinions since they have to be voted up, but it seems as though the ones that reach the top are always hate-filled garbage. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2es4e2/eli5_why_are_all_the_top_youtube_comments_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck2emnn",
"ck2epwa",
"ck2fqj9"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Because, despite how much of an optimist you are, most people have hate buried deep in their heart. It is hard to express this hate in day to day life out of fear of prosecution or violence against them. However, the internet is generally anonymous and the constitution provides us free speech, even if we type it. Thus, many bigots that would otherwise never make a peep about their racism and hatred in the real world, suddenly they arise from the woodwork in droves with the internet as the proverbial shield, protecting them from what they fear.",
"Because hate comments upset people and make them reply. Comments with the most replies are displayed at the top. So there you have it, people write offensive comments to be at the top.",
"YouTube rates comments based on how much of a response they get, not whether they're nice.\n\nDon't respond to jerks. Instead post positive content."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
44v7q5 | why sunscreen is so vital, when ancient humans did not wear it. | I searched and found nothing really similar to what I am asking. So basically my question is, with all the sunscreen pushing we have now, what did people do in ancient times?
It's like a crime to go out without sunscreen nowadays but what did early greeks, englishman, chinese, etc. Other melanin-lacking people do? Did they all just contract skin cancer and die or...? And why is sunscreen even necessary?
Because it seems weird to me that the human body would react so negatively to the sun- something we naturally need. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44v7q5/eli5_why_sunscreen_is_so_vital_when_ancient/ | {
"a_id": [
"czt5x8b",
"czt5y4j",
"czt5yrd",
"czt648g",
"czt6ugu",
"cztchld",
"cztibeh"
],
"score": [
65,
16,
7,
33,
7,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"We've been gaining longer and longer lifespans the longer time goes on. We're also diagnosing things a lot more often and efficiently.\n\nBack before sunscreen people still would have gotten skin cancer and died from it, but maybe it wasn't reported or they just attributed it as 'death by unknown causes'.\n\nIn Australia at least we have a MASSIVE hole in our ozone layer. Us white Australians really aren't suited to this sort of environment, we belong where it's cold and there's no sun most of the time. We'd still get sun there, but not so much as to cause sunburn on a regular basis.",
"Ancient humans didn't consider laying out in the sun almost naked to be recreation. When it was hot they sought shade. They also didn't plan on living nearly as long.",
"We live 2-3 times longer than we did in antiquity. That gives a lot more time for cancer to form and kill us. ",
"Most of the worlds population, including nearly everyone whose ancestors come from very sunny places, has brown skin. The sunnier the place, the browner, in general. Sunscreen is most important for pale-skinned people whose ancestors lived in non-sunny places, but who have migrated to sunny places. ",
"UV radiation damages our DNA every time we go out in the sun. We have stuff that repairs our DNA, but it's not perfect. After decades of continuous UV damage, we can develop cancer because of the compounded damage to our DNA.\n\nBrown people have melanin, which is like a little umbrella sitting on top of their DNA, protecting it from UV radiation. White people have much, much less melanin, which is why we're so much more susceptible to skin cancer than our darker neighbors.\n\nIgnore the life expectancy crap. The average life expectancy is erroneously low because children tend to die. [If you lived til 21, it was typical for you to live into your 60s](_URL_1_), which is definitely long enough for you to develop skin cancer. \n\nThe real reason is, skin cancer takes decades to develop. [The average age at diagnosis for melanoma (the deadliest form of skin cancer) is 62](_URL_0_). People have generally stopped procreating by the time they're 62... or even 52, and often even 42. So although skin cancer can be deadly, it generally strikes long after folks have already procreated, so although the risk to the *individual* is high, the risk to the *species* is low. In the grand scheme of things, so what if 2% of the human race dies at age 50 to skin cancer?",
"Sunscreen is necessary for people whose skin is white as mine who can all but feel the skin cancer developing as I stand in the sunlight. Ancient humans were adapted to live in their specific geographic locations. \n\nPeople living in Africa, for instance acquired darker skin pigmentation to provide UV protection through natural selection; thus eliminating the need for sunscreen. \n\nMeanwhile, people living in England naturally receive less direct sunlight as a result of their climate and angle to the sun. Therefore, they never needed to adapt by developing dark skin pigmentation. In the modern world, people of all different ancestries and lineages travel and live where they please and often chose to live in places they may not be perfectly adapted to. i.e A person of European descent living in the sunny southwestern states of America.",
"No one else has mentioned the use of clothing as \"sunscreen\". Ancient humans may well have had shorter lives and not died of skin cancer but they certainly got painful sunburns. In more historical times fashion decreed much of your body be covered. There is a good chance \"fashion\" was practical in this regard."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cancer.org/cancer/skincancer-melanoma/detailedguide/melanoma-skin-cancer-key-statistics",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy#Human_patterns"
],
[],
[]
] | |
9118hx | how are infants and toddlers able to take so much (relatively minor) head trauma on a regular basis? | It's pretty common that infants and toddlers are clumsy and, therefore, vulnerable to bonking their heads either by falling to the ground or by running into things. From what we know about head trauma and the pernicious effects it has on the brain, how are these younglings able to deal with such a regular amount of it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9118hx/eli5_how_are_infants_and_toddlers_able_to_take_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2uommm",
"e2urfgd"
],
"score": [
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Their skulls are not fully formed yet and still contain areas of membranous, yet strong tissue that can help absorb the impact of a fall. These areas are called fontanels. A primary function of these spots is to help the baby’s head contort a little more easily through the birth canal during delivery. However, it is said that a direct hit on one of these spots can be dangerous. ",
"Compared to adults, kids are lightweight and low to the ground. A full on face plant for a toddler involves *way* less energy than it does for an adult. \n\nIf you want to work out how much exactly, you’re looking at half the mass times velocity squared. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
3fkzsm | why is an iphone lightning cable more expensive than 5 high quality micro usb cables? | I could get [this](_URL_1_) lightning cable for £15 or I could get 5 high quality, colour coded, braided [Micro USB cables](_URL_0_) (which are universally accepted by this point) for £11.98 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fkzsm/eli5_why_is_an_iphone_lightning_cable_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctpkwub"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Apple products are different, they don't use Micro USB because then you have to go out and buy an Apple wire. Plus they change with every couple of phones/tablets, so that you have to buy a new wire. Since they are creating the demand, the price can be higher. It is one of the reasons that I hate Apple. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B00TE42QD2/ref=s9_simh_gw_d0_g23_i1?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=mobile-1&pf_rd_r=0WPT4CEVZSQYE9GASBZE&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=507564347&pf_rd_i=mobile",
"http://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MD818ZM/A/lightning-to-usb-cable-1m?fnode=3a"
] | [
[]
] | |
5ubgzg | politically, what does russia want? what is their goal, their endgame? | From what I've gathered reading recent articles, it seems like Russia seeks to destabilize the US and, by extension, NATO. I don't know much about history/international relations, so I'm wondering - why? What do they want? What advantage does having a weakened US give them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ubgzg/eli5_politically_what_does_russia_want_what_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddss0az",
"ddssr2g"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"They want their sphere of influence back, as well as their economic/political/military prestige. That sphere of influence used to extend halfway into Germany, now NATO is on their border. Basically they want Russia to return to being what the Soviet Union was before it collapsed minus the governmental system. ",
"Greater regional influence. They seem to consider their region central Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
frzavu | why does milk allergies sometimes go away when you get older and then return when you’re elderly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/frzavu/eli5_why_does_milk_allergies_sometimes_go_away/ | {
"a_id": [
"flyqujt"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure about going away when getting older but dairy is the most common adult-onset allergy. This basically happens because a substance your body produces to break down lactose (sugars present in dairy products) can 'run out'. This makes it harder for your body to digest and causes the symptoms of allergy/intolerance."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
5kgzmk | it is common knowledge that the holocaust happened. i know some people deny it, can someone explain the negative effect denial has? | It is an event of history, if the majority of people know it happened, why does it matter if some people don't believe it?
And linked to this, why is holocaust denial so shocking, while denial of other genocides doesn't seem to evoke as much public opinion.
Serious answers only please. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5kgzmk/eli5_it_is_common_knowledge_that_the_holocaust/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbnv7vo"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"denying holocausts/genocides/other acts of violence in the past can be very dangerous. Some Japanese deny what the Imperial Army did in China, some Turks deny the Armenian genocide and some people deny the Jewish holocaust. The reason why is because they're hateful right wing nutjobs that have a ton of beliefs that don't have anything to do with reality. However some are credible historians who just want to question historical facts and have some doubts, yet they still fuel the deniers. It's important that a society recognises where it comes from and where it is now, ever heard the phrase 'history repeats itself'? It applies with a lot of things, war, refugees, economic disaster, fact is denying the ugly bits of our past means they might come back and remind us why they're ugly.\n\nWhy is the Jewish holocaust so controversial? Because it had a big effect in the West, if you lived in China or Armenia and denied the atrocities they faced it would be the same response. Also the Jewish holocaust is well documented, there were survivors, and it's just super obvious that deniers hate Jews."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
zr28l | how do large fast food chains, like mcdonalds, prepare for new menu items and have enough to distribute to all the stores despite it requiring a new process to manufacture? | It seems like large fast food chains require a lot of resources to provide all their stores with new menu items, and if it is something completely new (such as the McRib when it was first introduced), it would require brand new processing plants. So how do they manage it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zr28l/eli5_how_do_large_fast_food_chains_like_mcdonalds/ | {
"a_id": [
"c66zofi"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"They don't roll out new products until they have all those processing plants built."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
6gvydr | how can a software 'age'? | As in "software aging", not as in software getting dated.
EDIT : "all software's tendency to fail, or cause a system failure after running continuously for a certain time"-Wikipedia is what I'm asking about.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gvydr/eli5_how_can_a_software_age/ | {
"a_id": [
"diticjv"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"So I had to google that article, and I still don't know why you didn't just link it, but ok.\n\nThe article itself describes what they mean by it.\n\nPrograms that run for a long time tend to fail at some point for simple reasons. The most important is, that any program that will run for some time and do something actual useful, is inherently complex.\n\nThose tend to be error prone, and those errors accumulate over time. Most programs can handle some errors coming in, but it becomes more and more likely with each error that one might slip due to unforeseen consequences.\n\nIt could be a timing error. Imagine a clock going 1 second per day slow. You don't see that error for a day. Or even a week. Even a month will go by just fine. A year? Well that is 6 minutes, something that is actually visible.\n\nThat sort of error can be anything in a program. A timing error which accumulates just like the clock example. A very minor memory leak that leaks a few kb per hour of RAM, ever increasing the amount of RAM required by the program, or something that adds or substracts a slightly wrong value in each iteration.\n\nThe longer a program runs, the more those tiny mistakes build up, until the system fails."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
28e2dp | what is heat and why does it hurt ? | I'm a pizza delivery guy and I keep burning my fingers when touching the aluminum " bowls " that we deliver our hot food in. So I wondered what heat is and why it hurts me ... and now that I'm thinking of it , what is fire and how dies it kill you ?(other than suffering a leck of oxygen ) Sorry for the horrible english, I'm from germany :) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28e2dp/eli5_what_is_heat_and_why_does_it_hurt/ | {
"a_id": [
"cia0w7h"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"In Physics, Heat is a transfer of energy from one substance to another, due to a differential in temperature. Colloquially, we also commonly use it to refer to a higher temperature, which is the measure of an object's kinetic and potential energy. \n\nIt hurts you because, above a certain temperature (about 44 Celsius) proteins in your skin begin to break down, which results in both cell damage and possible loss of function. \n\nFire is a rapid oxidization reaction, basically a chemical reaction that releases heat and light. The flame itself (the lighted part) is a visible release of energy from excited gaseous particles. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
31na3z | what is that 'white stuff' at the bottom of a hair follicle? | When you pull a hair, (whether it be eyebrow, moustache, etc) there is a little white substance at the 'root' of the follicle.
What is this, and what is its purpose? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31na3z/eli5_what_is_that_white_stuff_at_the_bottom_of_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq351ib",
"cq35bk4"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"It's the root. It connects the hair to your body. _URL_0_",
"The white oily waxy stuff is called *sebum,* from the *Sebaceous gland.* It helps lubricate and waterproof the hair. When you're overheated it also helps keeps moisture near your skin as opposed to dripping off with the rest of the water in your sweat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.proprofs.com/flashcards/upload/a4914017.gif"
],
[]
] | |
28uptr | why can a computer handle a full hd movie without lag but it can barely handle sd on some video games? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28uptr/eli5_why_can_a_computer_handle_a_full_hd_movie/ | {
"a_id": [
"cienwba",
"cienyg7",
"cienypk",
"cieo249"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Movies are pre-rendered, unlike video games, which are displayed in real time and require much more processing power.",
"A few reasons:\n\n*A movie is not interactive in the way a video game is. There is less demand on the CPU as it's not trying to process input and send output to the GPU for rendering.\n\n*More importantly, a movie is a stored video file, not a 3-dimensional image rendered on the fly. It's the same reason why video games from 10 years ago had cut scenes that were of much higher quality than the gameplay. The computer is just playing a saved video file. Visual output of a video game involves constructing polygons, applying maps, applying light effects, etc.\n\n",
"Most video chips on computers nowadays have built in HD video decoders - parts of the chips that are designed to decode HD movies. In most cases, this is simply decompressing video streams which are highly compressed.\n\nIn video games, the graphics chips aren't simply decoding compressed video streams - decoding isn't (relatively speaking) computationally hard. In video games, graphics chips are called upon to \"render\" the visual aspects.\n\nRendering is where the 3D geometry is calculated (the \"models\" of aliens or spacecraft or player figures, buildings), surface textures (whether something looks like water, glass, or a matte surface) are applied, and lighting effects (like lit by sunlight or there's a light source, say a light or an explosion) are calculated and the end result is displayed. This is very \"hard\" work. In the case of a movie, all this rendering is done by computers at the special effects studio and in video editing. In the case of a video game, its all done by your graphics chip. In (close to) real time.",
"To add to this, if you're wondering how long it takes to render a movie before it hits your screen, consider this: rendering a single second of an HD live action movie can take over an hour. As for animated movies? [This animation from Frozen](_URL_0_) took over five days to render!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://rotoscopersblog.rotoscopers.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/tumblr_inline_mvm5ncx4A61qhhciy.gif?8ed20f"
]
] | ||
ayvg70 | how do offshore oil rigs keep their drill pipe straight? | I know there are alot of posts regarding oil rigs, but most of them have been archived and don't answer my specific question that I'm curious about. This might be a stupid question.
& #x200B;
I know that oil rigs are anchored and tethered to places, but how does the drill pipe not break apart from the force of the ocean current? Wouldn't the rigidness cause pipes to crack in certain places? (vertical pipes not horizontal pipes)
& #x200B; | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ayvg70/eli5_how_do_offshore_oil_rigs_keep_their_drill/ | {
"a_id": [
"ei3kujs"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I assume you mean while drilling. Ordinarily, there is a wellhead on the sea floor. The drill string runs from the platform to the wellhead, and the wellhead controls the drill string's entry into the sea bottom. It also helps keep the drill string from swinging around in the water column and helps it maintain its generally vertical orientation.\n\nThe currents, temperatures, and pressures do present challenges. A lot of this is controlled by materials selection. Some of it is in the engineering of the pipe. The drill string is comprised of multiple pipe sections and one can engineer the joints between them to handle some of this.\n\nI don't have any better technical detail. Maybe someone else can come along and provide better technical detail. But if you think about it, resistance to horizontal forces in vertical structures is a common problem. Every skyscraper, for example, has to do this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
dx631u | why is red wine kept in dark bottles where as white wine is generally clear bottles? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dx631u/eli5_why_is_red_wine_kept_in_dark_bottles_where/ | {
"a_id": [
"f7nllbt"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"Contrary to popular belief, red wine bottles being mostly green and white wine bottles mostly clear has nothing to do with the effects of UV light on said wine.\n\nThe reason is far simpler: it's due to happenstance, or, more accurately, to glassmakers historically making bottles from whatever sand and metal oxides (for color) were available locally when vineyards started to bottle wine in glass vessels. This is why, although most glass used for red wine is green, that's not always the case. Depending on it's national origin, the bottle glass can be various shades of brown, green and clear as these were the simplest colours to make.\n\nIt's only after WW2 that standards were drafted in Europe and, unless a client (vineyard) specifically orders a custom color, wine continues to this day to be served mostly in green or brown glass for red wines and clear for white wines, with a lot of Italian wines being sold in brown bottles.\n\nAs with most spirits, wine or otherwise, bottles should always be stored away from light sources, especially daylight, and ideally, in places where temperature varies little, which is why cellars are generally the best option, so long as they're not too humid.\n\nLastly, both red and white wines are equally sensitive to UV rays and will degrade when exposed to light, so if UV protection was the original idea -it wasn't- all wines would be sold in dark bottles instead of the current colours that are used."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
cvmms9 | how can fans cool water from room temp to below ambient? | The fans are just blowing 75 degree air at 75 degree water so how does the water end up below 75? And is there a limit to how low it could go? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cvmms9/eli5_how_can_fans_cool_water_from_room_temp_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ey51nom",
"ey5c7qe"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Water absorbs a certain amount of energy/heat when it evaporates. Heat gets used up when it breaks the bonds holding water molecules together as a liquid. \n\nIn principle as long as the air is dry you can pretty much indefinitely keep cooling. The air can only hold so much water though.",
"A fan by itself cannot cool below ambient temperature, if anything, it heats up the air due to electrical resistance of the fan motor.\n\nEvaporative coolers take advantage of the fact that water absorbs heat in order to evaporate. So basically they operate like humidifiers and introduce humidity in the airflow of the fan. The water absorbs the heat, causing the airflow from the unit to be more cool than the intake air. This only works in very dry climates. If the ambient humidity is high, it will not work.\n\nIt's not the fans that cool the water, rather it's the water that cools the air. This is why it cools off outside after it rains. It's not just because of the cloud cover blocking the sun, it's also because the rain begins to evaporate and takes heat with it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1zse0y | how do qr codes work, and will we ever "run out" ? how have we not already? | It seems to me that everyone and every product has a QR code, and to me, it looks like a 20x20 pixel box with random black and white squares. Maybe I am an idiot but wouldn't we run out of possible codes sooner or later? And why not sooner? How many possible QR codes can ever exist? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zse0y/eli5_how_do_qr_codes_work_and_will_we_ever_run/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfwiowh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"20x20 = 400 pixels\n\nEach pixel has 2 possible values (black or white)\n\nSo there are 2^400 = 2.6x10^120 possible combinations.\n\nSo no we probably won't run out.\n\nOf course there are some pixels reserved to help your smartphone figure out that it's a QR code, but still, the number is pretty big."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
4fwggm | i eat every day, so why aren't my jaw muscle totally ripped? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fwggm/eli5_i_eat_every_day_so_why_arent_my_jaw_muscle/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2ckrho",
"d2ckye9",
"d2cla2p",
"d2cmhr8",
"d2cnrty",
"d2cp2ow"
],
"score": [
24,
6,
2,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"To get that jacked jaw look that's all the rage nowadays, you need to progressively chew harder things. Start with almonds, work your way up to diamonds. You'll have the jaw of your dreams in no time. ",
"Same reason why your legs aren't totally ripped. Your leg muscles are already used to the amount of resistance they go through when walking all day. Your jaw is used to the amount of resistance experienced through daily chewing. Chew harder, tougher food, and you may build a chiseled jaw.",
"When you go to the gym, you are lifting heavier and heavier things, and tearing the muscles so they rebuild themselves larger. \n\nChewing typical things in your everyday life does not stress the jaw muscle enough to tear them. The are doing the exact job they evolved to do, and nothing more. They are as strong as they need to be, so they don't grow. \n\n",
"They are. Just hidden under a layer of fat. \n\nNo disrespect. Faces,without fat are not so good.",
"There are medical conditions where the jaw muscles grow really large. Check out the paper: [Surgical treatment of bilateral temporalis and masseteric hypertrophy: Report of a case](_URL_1_).\n\nThis paper includes a picture of the [patient with bulked jaw muscles](_URL_0_)\n\nSo yeah, that's what a totally huge jaw looks like.",
"They *are.* Your jaw is incredibly strong. You can crush an ice cube or a chicken bone between your teeth! (Or you can even break a tooth trying!) That's pretty impressive. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://file.scirp.org/Html/18-1460201/4e8a7793-63a3-44a0-8314-97bfc322f013.jpg",
"http://file.scirp.org/Html/18-1460201_29490.htm"
],
[]
] | ||
1uiotw | why don't planes break down midflight like cars do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uiotw/eli5_why_dont_planes_break_down_midflight_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceihrwe",
"ceihuvn",
"ceii786",
"ceija84",
"ceijl3y",
"ceimy0i"
],
"score": [
19,
5,
4,
9,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Planes are thoroughly inspected before every flight to ensure everything is ok. Do you inspect your car every day before your commute to work?",
"Planes are built so that pretty much everything has a back up. The chances of both systems failing is pretty small. Even when you do get a fault that takes out the primary and back up systems planes are designed to fly and designed really well in that aspect. ",
"The FAA has an inordinate amount of regulations to keep passengers safe. \n\nSafe Life, Limit Loads, Ultimate Loads. A car can go from design to production in a year or so; whereas aircrafts take several years through rigorous testing.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nLife Factor = (Time before failure) / (Service Life)\nFAA requires a Life Factor of about 3.\n\nLimit Load = maximum load an aircraft component will experience during its service life. It's improbably it'll ever be reached, but it's a predictable load.\n\nUltimate Load = FAA requires that the aircraft must stay together for 3 seconds at it's highest load before failure.\n\nSource: I studied Aircraft Structures in College.\n",
"In addition to all the comments referring to the numerous safety regulations I would like to add that planes still do infact break down midflight, like cars do. Just less frequently. \nThey are still machines.\n \nSidenote: Might I recommend a show called Air Crash Investigation (on youtube aswell). It is what you'd expect it to be. There are actually quite a few episodes where they cover planes just failing mid flight. I recommend watching a few episodes.",
"wait, your car breaks down mid flight? ",
"they do, actually. we're a lot more paranoid about an aircraft falling onto a city than a car derping on the road, so we are more careful with them. but aircraft do occasionally run into trouble. single engine craft in particular. should the engine stall or the propeller be damaged somehow they can be forced to land in unpleasant circumstances. \n\ngoogle around, you can find stories of airplanes landing on roads because of malfunctions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/faa_regulations/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
crjdxg | how did multiple species of "human" exist at the same time? | Im fairly new to the concept, but I've been reading and only today realized/read that homosapiens and neanderthals existed at the same time but basically we beat them out in collecting resources/surviving, but where did the two come from? I get this is part of a much larger question but im just confused where two completely different species can come from yet have so much alike | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/crjdxg/eli5how_did_multiple_species_of_human_exist_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"ex5qvcm",
"ex5rvec"
],
"score": [
11,
7
],
"text": [
"They branched of from a similar ancestor, but those branches ended, ours didn't. Think about it like dogs. There are multiple species of dogs all alive at the same time. Coyotes, wolves, dingos, etc.",
"I think maybe you need to understand more about the process of evolution and how a new species comes about.\n\nAt the root of the evolutionary process are random mutations, and survival of the fittest. Whenever an organism's genetic code gets replicated, such as every time a cell divides, or when sperm or eggs are produced, there is the chance for something to \"go wrong\". These changes are apparently small, but can cause big changes. \n\nConsider an image on a computer. If you go through the 1s and 0s and just change one of them it's a small change, right? But it's possible that one change swaps all of the green in your picture to yellow - the result is much bigger. It's also possible that the change could have no noticeable effect at all; or that it completely corrupts the image so you can't even view it at all. The same applies to genetics - a small change might alter hair colour, give someone an extra toe, have no effect, or become cancerous.\n\nSo whenever an organism reproduces there is some chance that the offspring might have a random mutation that's different to either of its parents or ancestors. A different colouring, enhanced sense, or a million other things. Now if this mutation gives the offspring a better chance if survival than its peers, its genetic material, including that mutation, is more likely to get passed on and spread around. A single mutation doesn't immediately make a new species; but at some point the cumulative effect of generations of mutations can mean that a distinct group emerges which we would describe as a new species. But the \"original\" species might still exist - as well as other species groups with different mutations.\n\nRemember, though, that these changes are usually extremely small and gradual. A big change might be more likely to cause the offspring to be rejected by its group because they don't recognise it, and its genetic material will never be passed on. It's an exercise in large populations and long periods of time.\n\nConsider a white moth living in a forest of pale trees. The moth is well camouflaged against the trees so it won't be eaten by birds. But then there is a fire in half of the forest, leaving all of the tree trunks blackened. Now any moths living in the burned half of the forest stand out against the tree trunks and will be eaten more frequently. If a random mutation is lucky enough to cause a moth tobecome darker, then it will be less likely to be eaten than those without the mutation; it will have more opportunity to pass on that mutation to another generation. But any of these darker moths which stray into the unburned half of the forest will be more likely to be eaten than the original white moths, so won't pass on their mutation as much in that group. As generations pass more mutations might cause further darkening, and the groups will mix less and less together. We now have two distinct groups existing at the same time.\n\nAnother good example (which you can actually watch: _URL_0_) is that of bacteria adapting to higher concentrations of antibiotics. \n\nBear in mind that there is no *guarantee* that a particular mutation will occur that gives any particular organism an advantage; the white moths could easily have all been eaten without any of them ever getting darker, and the slightly darker moths could have been unlucky enough to have been eaten before passing it on, and the mutation might never happen again. But when dealing with large populations and long periods of time, we often do see useful mutations occurring."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/plVk4NVIUh8"
]
] | |
3b4mfq | how come males can ejaculate so voluntarily during a "wet dream" without physical activity, yet can't do so when they're awake? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b4mfq/eli5_how_come_males_can_ejaculate_so_voluntarily/ | {
"a_id": [
"csit60l"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Ejaculating during a wet dream is not voluntary. That would mean it was done by the will of the person having the dream."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
23jbmn | why is it illegal for employers to pay employees under the table but cash tips are not? | First off, can someone explain how waitress / waiter wages work? Is it really legal to pay them less than minimum wage and expect them to make up the difference in tips? How does all of that work? Isn't paying cash tips the same as paying someone under the table to avoid taxes?
I mean it all has the same end result so I don't understand. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23jbmn/eli5_why_is_it_illegal_for_employers_to_pay/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgxk3fj"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Special laws are in place allowing tipped employees to be paid less than the minimum wage, so long as their tips take their income above the minimum wage. If the tips aren't enough the business is on the hook for the rest.\n\nTips are reported income, its on your W-2 and you pay taxes on it at the end of the year (assuming you owe any). Paying someone cash under the table is not recorded, not taxed and therefore illegal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2kandc | when i'm at the dentist, they wiggle the needle when injecting anesthetic. why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kandc/eli5_when_im_at_the_dentist_they_wiggle_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cljgdxb",
"cljm3cy"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"When someone injects you with a \"normal\" shot like a vaccine, they are putting it into a muscular area where the fluid will get absorbed into your bloodstream by your muscle fibers. Lidocaine is both difficult to get into the bloodstream and being injected into an area with comparatively little muscle. In order to actually shut down the pain and not just have a little ball of lidocaine and a bunch of nerves that aren't affected, they move the needle around inside to make sure everything gets shut down.",
"I'm a dentist. I'm not sure exactly what wiggling you are referring to. It's possible that they are aspirating the needle (drawing fluid back in to check for blood) to see if the needle tip is in a blood vessel. Or they may be redirecting the needle towards some anatomical structure like a nerve to get better anaesthesia. Or it may just be a distraction technique where the dentist is tugging on the tissue to keep your mind off of the injection."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
z1508 | why do we still have republican/democrat national conventions? | It seems that these conventions are just a massive circlejerk touting how great their party is and how stupid/ineffective the other one is. Is there even a point to having three straight days of speakers doing this?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/z1508/eli5_why_do_we_still_have_republicandemocrat/ | {
"a_id": [
"c60le9o"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The three days of dominating press coverage is a good reason for the parties to want to keep them. It's also around the time when low information voters start tuning to politics, so it's an opportunity to brand your candidate and your opponent. It's also a chance to let up and comers get some national media attention (Obama got the keynote speaker slot in 2004, Christie and Rubio both got prime speaking slots for the republicans this year)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
5urpmv | what is a 'port' (with regard to file sharing) and why are there seemingly tens of thousands to choose from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5urpmv/eli5_what_is_a_port_with_regard_to_file_sharing/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddwch1o",
"ddwch9v",
"ddwd8jh"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Your computer has an IP address, which is like the address of an apartment building. It tells the network where to send messages. \nWithin your computer there are multiple programs. Ports are like post boxes in the apartment building. They're there so that when a message comes in from outside the computer it knows which program it should be delivered to. \nPorts are identified by a field in the headers of TCP and UDP messages that is 16 bits wide. That means there are exactly 2^16 = 65 536 of them. Normally they're represented as the numbers 0-65 535 but we don't really do math with them - they're really just strings of bits we assign to particular programs for a while. ",
"It's just a more specific way of breaking down where to send a packet. \n\nFor example, your connecting to 7.12.54.75 over standard internet connection. Well, that IP address is used for many different protocols like web browsing, file sharing, email, encrypted web, etc. So you specify what protocol you're using. Http is port 80. So you're basically saying \"I would like to talk to 7.12.54.75 via standard internet\". You could also do it encrypted via port 443. \n\nIt's like adding a zip code to an address. It helps route things faster to the right destination, rather than trying multiple different post offices until you get the right one with 123 Main Street.",
"Lets say I have a apartment building address. You go to that address but you realise that you were not given the apartment number. Which apartment am I supposed to go to? This is when port numbers come into play. A port number is like a apartment number which tells where to send the packet (or in the analogy, the person) at the given IP address. \n\nLets say I have a apartment number 80 which is running a web sever. Now I know where to go since I have the apartment/port number and now I am able to retrieve/send anything from that specific apartment/server. \n\n192.168.0.1 would be the street name and apartment building.\nPort 80 would be the apartment number. This is usually displayed as 192.168.0.1:80"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1l9xw6 | the stages of cancer | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l9xw6/eli5the_stages_of_cancer/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbx5mk9",
"cbxaj7n",
"cbxcs84",
"cbxhu58"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"The criteria for stages differ between different types and locations of cancer. But generally it is based on overall mass, how much it has metastasized, and spread. Higher stages are more advanced, meaning there is a larger mass of cancer and it is more widespread than lower stages. This is a general explanation, there are much more detailed criteria for staging, but this is the general idea. ",
"Very generally:\nStage 0 = Cancer that hasn't spread\nStage 1 = Very local\nStage 2 = Growing but somewhat still contained. \nStage 3 = Containment breached\nStage 4 = Spread to other places in your body\n\nYou will find a bunch of subcategories as well that divides the stages depending on the type of cancer. (ex. 3A for example) Obviously lower is better.\n\n",
"Alright! Here it is generally broken down.\n\nStages are (usually!) based on what we call \"TNM\"\n\nT = tumor size/invasion\nN = lymph node involvement\nM = metastasis\n\nThese are combined differently for each cancer, and usually look something like:\n\nStage I\nT1N0M0\nT2N0M0\n\nStage II\nT1N1M0\nT3N0M0\n\nStage III\nAny TN2M0\n\nStage IV\nAny T Any N M1\n\nWhere T is defined by the growth stages by tumor, so for one cancer T1 might be 0.1-2cm and for another might be 1-3cm. Sometimes it could be 5cm and not be T2 until it grows through a certain tissue layer. It just depends.\n\n\nThe other thing to take into consideration is the \"grade\" or aggressiveness of the tumor. We decide this by looking at how much the tumor cells look like the original cells they start out as; how \"differentiated\" they are. The more they look not like the original cells the more \"undifferentiated\" we say they are.\n\n\nGeneral exceptions include pancreatic cancer, for which we say just \"resectable\" or \"unresectable\" and colon cancer which has its own staging system - as well as \"blood cancers\" which have their own staging too.\n\nThis is a simple version, and if you have information you'd like help interpreting of understanding for a specific cancer please let me know.",
"An example would be in my relapsed lymphoma. Initially it was stage 2 because 2 lymph node regions (in my neck) is the qualifier for stage 2. Upon relapse it was stage 3, which in lymphoma means multiple lymph node regions with some below and some above the diaphragm. So, yes, as NikkiP0P said, in blood cancers, it is different. Stage 4 is usually organ involvement. Also, currently cured, so fuck cancer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
453zlf | why computers can't be turned off automatically after a certain amount of time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/453zlf/eli5_why_computers_cant_be_turned_off/ | {
"a_id": [
"czuzdfv",
"czuzfeb"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Of course. This is default behavior for most operating systems. The computer can also hibernate after a period of inactivity, or just shut the monitor off.",
"Control Panel > Power options. There you can manage all kinds of stuff. In BIOS, depending on your BIOS, you can have an event to power your computer on as well at a certain time. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
23ough | how do we know what the universe looks like today when all the light we see is from millions or billions of years ago? | Shouldn't the universe we see be like a fun house mirror with everything distorted? in fact, shouldn't it be worse than that? Wouldn't it be like looking at a fun house mirror, but in addition to everything being in the wrong place, your head might be your current age and your feet look like they did when you were a baby? The Milky Way is 120,000 light-years across, and that's just one galaxy. Can we really extrapolate through billions of years to get an accurate picture of the universe now?
EDIT: Thanks to everyone for all the great answers!
I just want to say that I think it's legitimate to ask what the universe looks like "now," even with the lightspeed barrier. Saying that it "doesn't matter" or that there is no "real now" or that "now has no meaning" because the idea of "now" is defined by what information can reach us at the speed of light, I think is a cop-out answer.
If we ever discover warp drive, or wormholes, or whatever, then it certainly WILL matter. Plus, things we can't see presumably do still exist. I don't see how the lightspeed barrier affects this.
Lots of things — quantum computers, nuclear fusion, teleportation, artificial intelligence – are beyond our scientific capabilities now (and perhaps forever), but it's still worth thinking about. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23ough/eli5_how_do_we_know_what_the_universe_looks_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgz3f81",
"cgz3go7",
"cgz3j7a",
"cgz6k9j",
"cgza3bl",
"cgzb56y",
"cgzbfrg",
"cgzcnox",
"cgzczz7",
"cgzdazj",
"cgzdbmi",
"cgzddpb",
"cgzebnh",
"cgzfit1",
"cgzfof4",
"cgzgbe1",
"cgzgj23",
"cgzgsux",
"cgzh1pu",
"cgzh5el",
"cgzhby1",
"cgzkxou",
"cgznl7o",
"cgzo0et",
"cgzpj77",
"cgzpkmh",
"cgzql5h",
"cgzrzgj",
"cgzu5r0"
],
"score": [
26,
17,
1390,
4,
69,
3,
2,
2,
10,
29,
2,
13,
6,
2,
7,
3,
2,
2,
5,
7,
3,
4,
7,
5,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Think about it like looking at a mountain range through pictures which are 100 years old. Sure your information is dated... but the mountain isn't likely to have just picked up and moved in the interim, right?\n\nAstronomers keep in mind that their data is old, but the structures are absolutely enormous. It might take 100,000 years for us to see the other side of our galaxy, but it takes ~220 million years to make a rotation! ",
"We can only see what light shows us, so in a sense our view is distorted because the further away we look the further into the past we're looking. When we see the sun we see it as it was 8 minutes ago, not as it is this moment. There are parts of the universe we know nothing about because light from there hasn't had time to reach us since the beginning of the universe. That's what is meant by \"the observable universe.\"",
"The picture we have of the universe is a picture of the past universe. The reality is that what the universe is like **now** is irrelevant, because we won't experience that in any menaingful way until the future when the light reaches us.\n\nWe can of course make predictions about where these galaxies/stars are **today** even though we're seeing them thousands or millions of years in the past.\n\nThe only \"real\" universe is the one we can observe, and that's the one that's limited by the speed of light.\n\n**everything** is limited by the speed of light, even your kid's soccer game, but the difference doesn't really matter because it doesn't impact us. The same thing applies to space.",
"--Well, first off, we don't need to know what the universe looks like \"now\", because the fastest anything can travel is the speed of that same light, so nothing is really urgent enough to be of significant more warning than light.\n\n--Second, and more along the lines of what you're asking, the speed of light is far, faar, faaaaar greater than the speed of motion of whatever we're looking at. So the difference between what we see, and what we can infer to be, would be something like the difference between [this](_URL_2_) picture, and [this](_URL_1_) picture (in this case, less than a pixel)\n\n--Only in cases very far away, or in the presence of strong gravitational fields does this fun house mirror effect take over. \n\n^Relevant ^info ^[here](_URL_0_) ^if ^you ^want ^it",
"Does the concept of what the universe 'looks like now' have any real meaning? The idea that the stars out there are doing something \"now\" doesn't make any real sense does it? There's no objective time by which to measure what they're doing by, and the only way to exchange information with them is at light speed.",
"I knew this already. Still mind-blown by this fact. ",
" > Can we really extrapolate through billions of years to get an accurate picture of the universe now?\n\nWe can estimate how old some stars are and track their movement (relative to us) and build models that track all that and can even fast forward parts of it to see how the stars are actually placed in the night sky. \n\n > Wouldn't it be like looking at a fun house mirror, \n\nIt is a fun house mirror. Not only are we seeing the light of stars that is several years to thousands (and even billions) of years old but that light is also refracted by our atmosphere. Heck the twinkling effect of the stars is caused by the atmosphere. So yes it is a fun house mirror and those effects are part of the many obstacles facing astronomers. A significant part of astronomy is about figuring out those effects and counter acting them.",
"Just from an alternative perspective:\n\nPerhaps time and reality are mutually exclusive and reality is just where you are in time at any given point. If you look at it this way, the universe exists in billions of states in any given location, so who can say, and in the end - does it matter? Perhaps it has already ended. ",
"Doesn't the sun blow up/out in about 5 billion years? We won't be around to see what everything else looks like now.",
"I think the answer is probably \"if you're looking at a star, probably not too different. If you're looking at a galaxy, possibly very different.\"\n\nThe most visible galaxy, our own, is about 100,000 LY across. we're a little bit off to one side, but let's say the furthest arm is 150k LY away from us. It's safe to say those stars have moved a bit, aged a bit, maybe even some of them gone nova - but the time scale of those events makes 150,000 years into a very brief glimpse. If you were to make a real-time projection of how our galaxy looks based on the state of stars as we see them today, an astronomer with reference materials handy could tell the difference, me with my naked eye, probably couldn't.\n\nAt the other end, MACS0647-JD is the furthest constellation i could easily find. It is 13.3 billion light years away. It seems not unreasonable to expect that the little hint of it we can see with a telescope probably bears almost no resemblance to it's appearance (if it still exists at all) today.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nWhen the light given off by those stars left it's origin, our sun didn't even exist. By the time light from the birth of our sun gets to that distant galaxy, our sun will be a red giant, occupying much of the inner solar system, and sad to say, earth will not be here. Only an iPhone 4,059,029s will remain, under a contract you don't even want to know about.",
"I love threads like this. I have nothing to contribute but it inspired me to start listening to StarTalk again. ",
"[relevant xkcd](_URL_0_)\n\nSeriously though it doesn't matter what the universe looks like 'now', because light is the absolute speed limit of the universe. Anything happening where/when the light hasn't reached us can have exactly 0 effect on us.",
"Others have answered this well enough but I would add one thing that I've not seen mentioned. There is no \"now\" in the universe. \n\nWhat the universe looks like to us will never be the same as what it looks like to another off in another galaxy (or even in our own galaxy). Because of relativity and the finite speed of light, you can't define a \"now\" in the universe and as such, you'll never be able to really formulate one single map of what it looks like. Only what it looks like to you in your frame of reference.",
"\"Today\" is a very slippery and subjective concept on this scale, for exactly the reasons you state. The short answer is that we really *don't* know what most of the universe looks like \"right now,\" if 'right now' is reckoned as something like 'local time'. *E.g.,* those very distant galaxies we can see are probably all gone by 'now,' or at least greatly changed. On the other hand, we can extrapolate pretty confidently from the state of much nearer objects; so though we can't *prove* what those ancient galaxies are like 'today,' we can make some pretty good guesses about it.\n\nWhen we look deeper into space, we're looking further back in time. We know that the bulk of the universe is around the same age, and also that it's remarkably uniform, so what we see close to us is very likely what stuff much farther away is like 'right now' in 'local time,' even though we see it all as it was billions of years ago. In the same way, what we can see of very ancient cosmic objects offers very good clues as to what 'right here' was like 'way back then'.\n",
"I disagree with the answers you've gotten about how distant \"now\" won't matter until its light reaches us in the future. Because it doesn't go far enough.\n\nThe situation with relativity is that there *is no uniquely definable \"distant now\"*. In special relativity, space-time is conventionally divided into what are called \"hyperplanes of simultaneity\"—in other words, 3D snapshots of space throughout which all events are happening at the same time. There are two issues though: (1) this slicing up of space-time is observer dependent and, having established a convention for doing it, two people in relative motion will disagree about what events are simultaneous; (2) it's a *convention* in the first place: you could choose a different way of synchronizing your clocks than Einstein used and still have everything measurable come out the same in the end. (1) is usually mentioned when people are taught special relativity, but (2) is rarely given much attention, even though Einstein emphasized it strongly in his 1905 paper. The Einstein simultaneity convention is very simple and obvious, but there is no experiment that could distinguish it from any other. All this is to say: in special relativity, if you have two distantly enough separated events—far enough apart that nothing traveling at or slower than the speed of light could propagate between them—then you are free to declare them simultaneous, or not, as you like.\n\nAll this is admittedly a bit of a stretch though, because not using Einstein's simultaneity convention amounts to some very strange conclusions about how light rays propagate in any one direction. Non-standard conventions aren't really of interest to anyone except philosophers of physics. Still, even the relativity of simultaneity by itself is a strong indictment against putting too much stock in notions of \"right now\". Get up from your computer and pace back and forth for a bit. Using Einstein's simultaneity convention, each time you turned around and walked in the other direction, the event at a sufficiently far away star that was simultaneous with you—part of the \"universe right now\" according to you at that time—jumped back and forth by millions of years. That's relativity of simultaneity. Clearly, \"now\" isn't a very resilient thing.\n\nThe situation is even worse in general relativity, which is what you really need to describe the universe on cosmic scales. Here, any hesitation we might have about doing away with Einstein's simultaneity convention go out the window: we *can't* use it in general relativity, period. Space-time coordinates are completely, totally arbitrary. The only thing that matter are the invariants of the theory—as a rule, the outcomes of local experiments, which are inherently bound by the speed of light. There is no non-arbitrary way of slicing up space-time into 3D hyperplanes of simultaneity, period.\n\nIt's not that everything happening \"now\" that's really far away just doesn't matter. *There is no \"now\"*, except how you choose to define it. The question, \"How does the universe look today?\" does not have an answer; it's an (unintentionally) malformed question. Light and other signals propagating at, or slower than, the speed of light are all there is.",
"Go watch Cosmos.",
"I don't think that anyone has pointed out that it's not true that all the light we see is millions or billions of years old. Some stars are only a few light years away. Those stars probably haven't changed much in the last few years. \n \nThere are several galaxies (and therefore hundred of billions of stars) that are less than a million light years away. And galaxies take a long time to change. So we really have a decent idea of what some galaxies look like. \n \nIt's not perfect, but we can make pretty good guesses about how further galaxies probably evolve by looking ones that are closer to us. We can see newborn galaxies and we can see ones that are old, and we can see those that are in-between. So we make educated guesses about what's happened to those that are really far away.",
"Focusing on different regions of the galaxy give us a look at what the galaxy is and has been from the present to the beginning. The closer we look the more recent, the farther we look, the more we see in the past. We can make predictions of how the universe progressed by comparing the two \"focal lengths\".",
"In a nutshell, we don't!",
"This is an interesting question, but the answer isn't as straight forward as we would like. And to explain that I use a different example to it.\n\nSo often the question arises, how fast is gravity. Is gravity instantaneous, does it travel at the speed of light, can we measure its speed. \n\nThe question stems from ideas like if the sun suddenly disappeared and its light would take like 9 minutes to reach us, would its gravity take 9 minutes to reach us as well, or the lack of its gravity effecting us, would that take 9 minutes. The answer is, it doesn't matter. That will never happen. Something will never be there, then not be there.\n\nAnd it is the same for your question really. The universe that we observe, is the universe that for all intents and purposes is the universe that exists. You could say that it is the universe that used to exist, but we are only seeing it later, but that is inherently true for all observation. Nothing is as it was at the time of you measuring it. But what you measure is true and exists, so what we see is the reality that exists, even if we know it's a billion years old.",
"This is one of the only things people actually overestimate in space. There are plenty of stars within a few thousand light years away and to a star thats nothing. _URL_0_\n\nAlso we've been tracking stars for decades seeing their patterns. It may be a small time span in comparison to star life but we have no reason to think that far away stars are all dying at an unusual rate. ",
"just found [this](_URL_0_) over at r/comics",
"What if there were aliens, but when they looked at Earth, they saw dinosaurs. maybe that's why aliens have not contacted us yet...",
"The thing is, there is no single \"today\". That's one of the essential lessons of both theories of relativity, which is sometimes not communicated clearly enough in layperson explanations. What we see IS the universe today as far as we're concerned, and that's an entirely valid interpretation of what \"today\" is. So try not to think of there being a single, universal \"today\". Everything is relative to the observer.",
"For all we know entire galaxies are giant cosmic frozen yogurt stands by now ",
"Could you theoretically make a model to rectify the placement based on trajectories for a close prediction of the present universe?",
"It's only distant stuff that looks the way it used to. Stuff that's close by is the way it looks now. ",
"Today and now mean nothing. To the observer it doesn't matter how far in the past the stars are, only what effects they produce at the moment of observation.",
"Technically we don't. Theoretically you don't know if the person across from you is dead or alive. You only know if they were a tiny, tiny fraction of a second ago."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ0hS7l9ckY#t=5m50s",
"http://i.imgur.com/6aqIbnL.jpg",
"http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/milky_way.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.space.com/18502-farthest-galaxy-discovery-hubble-photos.html... | |
5u5rl6 | why do playing cards develop a bad smell when left alone for a long period of time? | A few years ago, my friend gave me a gag-gift: a deck of cards that appeared to be stuck inside a mason jar. I found the jar yesterday, and was actually able to take the cards out. And when I did, the cards reeked. I don't know how to describe it, but it smells almost like plastic. I was just wondering how the cards acquired this smell. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u5rl6/eli5_why_do_playing_cards_develop_a_bad_smell/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddrrzws"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You are not far off. Playing cards are laminated with plastic to make it water resistant and longer lasting. Just like laminated magazine paper or temporary ID cards. When kept in that mason jar for a long time, presumably in an attic or a storage closet. (both of them are in contact with the outer walls and can get quite warm in the summers) the heat is trapped in the mason jar. Kinda like a car in the sun. This caused the plastic to react, presumably melt, and give off the smell you said of.\n\nHope this helps"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
5n92qt | what is that pain you get sometimes in your head that feels like something popped and it feels kind of hot for a bit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5n92qt/eli5_what_is_that_pain_you_get_sometimes_in_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc9nzmd",
"dc9xgml",
"dc9xs21"
],
"score": [
7,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Oh, I know that pain! It's the pain you should ask your doctor about instead of internet strangers.\n\nBut seriously, even if there were a doctor on ELI5, it is impossible to diagnose someone over the internet. If it feels like something is wrong, talk to your doctor.",
"I think i know what youre talking about although it happens to me very rarely if i turn to look at something really fast. Its not like a normal neck strain or anything like that. It literally is like a pop, you feel it instantly. It feels very warm and tingly...very uncomfortable but it goes away quickly. Ive always wondered what it is as well but it just doesnt happen frequently enough for me to care that much!",
"This is caused most often by a pinched nerve in your head/neck. Most likely you have some sort of poor posture that will cause you to feel this from time to time, and simply fixing your posture should remedy this issue. This is usually nothing serious and is quite common in young adults and teens age 12-20 but is still possible even outside of that age range. \n\nIf you do fix your posture and this issue persists, you should consult a doctor. Having a pinched nerve for too long without redressing it will cause damage further down the road and can lead to severe chronic pain. \n\nLastly, be sure you stretch on a daily basis. Do some neck rolls, back twists, etc. This combined with improved posture can help quite a bit.\n\nSource: Mosby's medical dictionary and Thieme's atlas of anatomy (I took information from both)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1kzzb7 | how do electromagnetic brakes work? | Im doing a physics report for school and this is really confusing me! HELP PLEASE!
EDIT: It has been pointed out to me that this could mean several things, I meant for use with train brakes or in rollercoasters. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kzzb7/how_do_electromagnetic_brakes_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbuddbr",
"cbudkzw"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Electromagnetic breaks are like motors in reverse, you can run current through a copper coil to move a magnet, or move a magnet past a copper coil to [induce a current](_URL_0_). The electricity induced in the coil makes the motor harder to turn, and that resistance can be used to slow down the magnet. This principle can be used for [regenerative braking](_URL_2_) in electric cars, where the electric motor is used to recharge the battery while slowing down the car. \nA motor and a generator are nearly identical devices, just in one case you're putting work in and getting electricity out, and in the other you are putting electricity in and getting work out. \nThis video should help: _URL_1_",
"Electromagnetic brakes on a rollercoaster is just two magnets fixed to the carriages, and an aluminium bar fixed to the track that slides between them. \n\nBy now you should know that moving magnets near conductors create electric currents, and that currents near magnets create forces. The two phenomena are related, and the currents created by a motion create a force that resists that motion. It doesn't matter what these currents are, really - they will form in whatever way is needed to resist the movement. Use the right-hand-grip rule and the right-hand-palm rule to work them out if you need to.\n\nIn a solid piece of metal, these currents are useless - they just go round and round. But they are there. And the force is real. It slows the carriage down.\n\nWhere does the energy of the moving carriage go? Well, like any current, it faces a resistance. This resistance turns the electric energy into heat, warming the aluminium bar.\n\nThere are plenty of YouTube videos that demonstrate things like this. The simple one is a magnet and a copper pipe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCxmn1ERbXc",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_brake"
],
[]
] | |
2srxoj | how do critics rate movies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2srxoj/eli5_how_do_critics_rate_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnsbczs"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"However they want!\n\nWhen a critic reviews movies, they're typically giving two forms of judgement:\n- A review describing the movie, including critical analysis, how much they enjoyed the film, and who else would enjoy the film \n- A score\n\nThere's no standard way to score films, and the resulting score is entirely at the critic's discretion. This is actually a good thing: if you want to know what movies to see, the best thing to do is find a critic who likes a lot of the same films you do. Since you both liked the same stuff before, you'll probably agree on things coming out.\n\nRating methodology itself is a highly debated concept, and almost every reviewer does it differently since it's hard to say if one film is definitively better than another: How can you say a big budget action film is definitively better or worse than a small indie romantic comedy when all they have in common is the fact that they're both films? \n\nOf course, the critics would prefer it if you read their reviews instead of going only by ratings since it will tell you a lot more about the film and if you will enjoy it.\n\nThere are three basic types of ratings:\n\nSee it/don't see it - the simple thumbs up/down made famous by Siskel and Ebert. \nRating by interest - From \"so good everyone should see it\" to \"fans of this genre will like it\" and finally \"so bad no one will like it.\"\nStars - Usually 4-5 that give a loose best-to-worst rating.\n\nThis is a bit of a problem when it comes to agregate sites like Rotten Tomatoes: their scores are made up of lots of reviews, which means it's only a general consensus of the movie that may not apply to your tastes. To get a high rating, a movie has to please everyone, although other lower rated films may be really enjoyable to certain people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
86u0qv | if fruit is sweet to encourage animals to eat it and carry the seeds away from the parent tree, how do lemons and limes fit into this mix? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86u0qv/eli5_if_fruit_is_sweet_to_encourage_animals_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw7svk3",
"dw7t9mc",
"dw7tfnd",
"dw7tict",
"dw7uo80",
"dw7v3a6",
"dw7vbtj",
"dw7vnem",
"dw7xja9",
"dw7yvh3",
"dw80jcf",
"dw80m4o",
"dw82onn",
"dw839f6",
"dw83tvx",
"dw841so",
"dw84lqx",
"dw86sri",
"dw87iry",
"dw87o6a",
"dw89qmf",
"dw8ekbu",
"dw8hywg",
"dw8ph5t",
"dw8wzb7"
],
"score": [
53,
10755,
11,
10469,
499,
4,
5,
280,
68,
2,
2,
7,
61,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Iirc, the tartness and spicyness of some fruits acts as pesticides and insect repellents. Lemons and limes are still sweet, and peppers are super nutritious, so there are animals still interested in them.",
"**TL;DR**: *Because lemons and limes are crossbreeds that weren't actually a wild plant, and even if they weren't sweet, their ancestors still had sugars and that made them appealing for creatures to eat.*\n\nMost of the types of \"citrus\" plant that we grow and sell in produce sections now were crossbred from a mix of only a few original plants. Lemons come from \"Citron\", a really thick-rinded fruit with a small but sweet pulpy core, and \"Bitter Orange\", which is what it sounds like. Limes comes from a citrus-type tree called \"Micrantha\".\n\nBut even so, just because they taste sour doesn't mean that animals won't eat and spread them. A lemon DOES have sugars and, in the same way we humans like a little bitterness, animals may appreciate it too. Food doesn't have to taste sweet to be extremely healthy and an easy source of calories.",
"Lemons and limes are both man made fruits. Because they were created and cultivated, they're exempt from the sweetness theory. As crops their success depends on us planting them.",
"Most of the citrus, like almost all agricultural products are the results of centuries of selective/cross/hybrid breeding. Limes and lemons did not exist in nature. Citrus products are the result of cross breeding of 4 different original species.\n\nEdit: Since a lot are asking for a source, here's one: _URL_0_",
"Lemons and limes are sweet. They just also happen to be very sour. But if you didn't have sour taste buds, they would taste sweet. This is evidenced when you eat a \"miracle berry\", then eat a lemon or lime.",
"Other animals may interpret the bitterness as pleasant or actually sweet. Not every animal is the same as us",
"Some animals like lemons and limes the way that some people like mint or cinnamon. With taste is all about how you choose to feel about these things. You also need to understand that animals are different, they have different taste receptors. Cats don't like sweet things at all, but there could be animals that love bitter flavors. \n\nCarrots and beets back in the day had the highest sugar content for readily available food, so they made carrot cake out of carrots when sugar was scarce. \n\nConcerning the aforementioned fruit someone made limes and lemons. They were made through having specific grandparent fruits have family trees that would end up being the way they are when you eat them. Thin skinned and full of fruit instead of thick and less fruity. Although it sounds like a bad idea, orange juice reigns supreme over apple,and all other fruit juices, in the grocery store.\n\n\nBananas used to be more nutritious, and apparently tasted more like the banana runts than the taste that you are likely familiar with. \n\n",
"On top of spreading through poop, fruits have a backup plan of just rotting on the ground and using the fruit as fertilizer for the seed.",
"Animals actually like sour and sweet. Sour is how your tongue detects acid, which kills many germs and fungi and small bacteria. We (probably) evolved to like sweet+sour more than pure sweet because purely sweet things are more likely to be contaminated. That's why so many human recipes call for sweet and sour combinations. Would you rather drink lemonade or sugary water? Less importantly, sour might also be an indicator of the presence of vitamin C or other nutrients.\n\nFrom the fruit's perspective, it doesn't want to be infested by germs or fungi either. Fruits are picky about what eats them, and when. Fruits don't wanna be eaten at the wrong time or by the wrong creature. Often, fruits are extra sour or bitter when unripe, and turn sweet when ripe when they are ready to be eaten.\n\nYou can see this in practice in everyday life - notice how most vegetables and non-sour fruit such as cucumber need to go in the fridge to keep, whereas more sour fruits such as apples and oranges can keep outside?\n\nLemons and limes in particular are human bred to be particularly sour, but these would be the reasons the trait originally evolved for fruits in general.\n",
"I think, most of all, you should consider separating the idea that traits have purpose from their ability to have survived.\n\nWhat I mean to say: Fruit did not choose sweetness to encourage animals to eat it. Fruit that was sweet just survived better because animals did so. Different traits could also survive. Further, they may not be successful 100 short years later.\n\nI believe this way of explaining traits and survival is a biblical leftover. ",
"Keep in mind that the fruits we enjoy today have been selectively bred to increase their appeal to humans as foods. The original fruits as found in the wild are not as large or tasty.",
"Your question suggests that parent trees produce sweet fruit *for the purpose* of attracting animals. That's not how evolution works, and that kind of phrasing will lead to many points of confusion. \n\nThose trees survived because animals liked sweet fruit. And, over time, by selective elimination of the less sweet fruits, a point of ideal fruit sweetness was matched with the animal's-of-the-time preference. (Note: Fruits may have even become 'too sweet' but they've ended up where the current living animals preferred then).\n\nLemons and Limes work in a different way but other people have answered that question. I just think it's important not to get confused on how the process of evolution works.",
"Your question also contains a misconception about evolution. Organisms do not evolve intentionally. At some point in time a mutation would have occurred that created sweeter fruit. The sweeter fruit would have been the ones preferred by the animals that fed on it, and so it would have been consumed more often and become the dominant species. Less dominant species of plants will mostly die out over a long period of time since their seeds are being spread less, leaving mostly sweet fruit producing plants. ",
"Kinda want to hijack this question and ask my own.. What made the plants learn this migration method in the first place? How did a plant learn to Make fruit and Make fruit sweet for taste? How did it observe its enviroment at all",
"Animals also like to let fruit go a bit behind it's freshness and into a fermented stage. They get drunk off the fruits and the tree benefits by making the animal poop it's seeds out. ",
"Good thing I've memorized this sub, [because I've seen this before.](_URL_0_)",
"Another perspective: fruit is not sweet because it evolved to encourage animals to eat it. Sugar is just a molecule (C12H22O11), it doesn’t have an abstract flavor. Certain animals evolved brains to associate a sensation we humans describe as “sweet” with that molecule, because our brains evolved to encourage us to eat fruit which is rich in nutrients. The sensation of sweetness exists in the taster’s brain, not in the fruit’s sugar molecules. Another example - when a horsefly eats dog crap, for all we know, that stuff taste as sweet as sugar to it. It’s brain, or neuron cluster, associates something positive with the molecules in feces, just like our brains associate something positive (“sweetness”) with the molecules in sugar. ",
"its important to note that most fruits we eat today were heavily changed in the last few thousand years to improve their size and sweetness. in the past, most fruits were like lemons and limes in terms of sweetness.",
"Almost everything you eat, including the produce and animals, are not wild species left over from some all-nature time before people. They are species we have created by selectively breeding or cultivating the ones we like, century after century, until they become something delicious to us but not really resembling it’s ancestry much. This is what it means to “domesticate” an animal or plant. Domesticating an animal does not mean capturing an individual and taming its wild behavior. It means capturing individuals and then breeding the ones with the least wild behavior until it becomes a different animal which we like better, eg: wolf — > dog.",
"Most citrus fruits are bread by humans, but not all animals taste like we do. Birds for example can eat chili because they do not taste spice and thus the fruit is safe from predictors to the plant but can reproduce by birds.",
"Lemons are not naturally found in the wild. They were created by humans. So the phrase isn't when life gives you lemons, it's when humans give lemons to themselves",
"Also some animals do not give a fuck about sweets. I know some monkeys/primates will eat only fruits before they are ripe (less competition with other animals), and I'm sure other animals do this as well. ",
"You eat lemons right? So sweetness isn't a prerequisite for it to be desired.",
"Like bell peppers which get redder from green as they mature, blood oranges, oranges, lemons and limes all come from the same plant, called the \"Citree\", which is actually more a tall bush than a tree. It originates from the west coast of Africa, and was found originally by French colonists, who then instantly took a liking to it, exporting it basically everywhere. It was also famously used to prevent explorers from getting Scurvy while trekking the Kong mountain range.\n\nThe citree fruit starts out as a small lime, before turning into a lemon, orange, then blood orange, getting sweeter as it goes. A subspecies of citree grows the Grapefruit from the lemon, while another one is simply smaller and makes tangerines. It is a very unique plant.\n\nAs the greener it is, the more unripe it is, the citree follows the basic doctrine of making unready seeds not edible, hence why limes are more sour than lemons, and lemons more sour than oranges.",
"Clarification: fruit isn't sweet to encourage animals eating it. It wasn't designed. It happened to be sweet which is why animals ate it. Fruit that wasn't, had to possess different qualities to reproduce or they simply ceased to exist. Some had traits that made animals NOT want to eat it, making it easier to reproduce if the animal couldn't digest and poop out viable seeds. \n\nChanging your thinking around this cause and effect relationship is important to understanding evolution.\n\nEdit: not Eli5, but I think you'll find this paper in the evolution of different reproduction methods of trees fascinating. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citrus"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45gnn5/eli5if_fruits_are_produced_by_plants_for_animals/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
... | ||
62mymp | can someone explain how i'm "wasting water" when i'm turning my faucets on? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62mymp/eli5_can_someone_explain_how_im_wasting_water/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfns9j5",
"dfnslk5"
],
"score": [
7,
5
],
"text": [
"All of that process uses energy and resources. Your individual excess water usage might not really matter but if millions of people are doing that, that's heaps of resources devoted to making some noise while you brush your teeth.\n\nAlso depending on where you live fresh water might be scarce and letting it run for nothing (again multiplied by everyone in your city) is a huge volume of water used for nothing.",
"Water isn't generally recycled, it gets cleaned up a bit and is then dumped in the ocean or a river which ultimately carries it to the ocean. It may be used for purposes such as cooling power plants, in order to conserve fresh clean water, but it's not going to come back out of your tap anytime in the near future, not till it's ultimately run off to the ocean and evaporated to fall on the land as rain again.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://water.usgs.gov/edu/wuww.html"
]
] | ||
38b9eg | why do music chords give you emotional reactions? such as dissonant = unfinished | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38b9eg/eli5_why_do_music_chords_give_you_emotional/ | {
"a_id": [
"crtsn7q",
"crtu7wh"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"I actually did a research project in high school on a simplified version of this question years back. My study was about what mathematics said about musical harmony. While the project itself was pretty poorly done, I learned that the whether two notes are considered harmonious depends on the ratio between their frequencies. \n\nIntervals of octaves had a ratio of 2:1, perfect 5th (e.g. C & G) had a ratio of 3:2, perfect 4th (C & F) had a ratio of 4:3 etc. These ratios are simple ratios and therefore they are considered harmonious. When it comes to something like a minor 2nd (C & C#), the ratio is 16:15, and is considered much less harmonious.",
"Its a cultural thing. Its learned. Micro tones are widely used in classical Indian music, among other styles. same for polyrhythmic drums in other cultures. Western music uses a sort of 'set' group of notes to play around in, \"Equal Temprament.\" -- (_URL_0_) and so within this equal temprament, we have a certain amount of combinations of notes and we've decided what is harmonious.. there is some objectivity to it, but ultimately.. \"dissonance\" is in the eye of the beholder.\n\nThe major seventh chord used to be considered dissonant and now our ears think its pretty and rich. the \"tritone\" was considered evil, and now its \"cool\"\n\nit really is subjective and its culturally based. \n\n**we have to think of it like colors.. are any colors \"prettier than another?\" is this a \"proven\" empirical fact, or just a subjective standard shaped by society? color theory in some art classes might say certain colors dont look good next to eachother, but thats really not something you can objectively say. there is a THEORY behind it within a certain system but it's not intrinsic to color. the same applies to music**\n\nimagine you put a bunch of humans in a time-speeding up machine. they are a blank slate and know nothing of music. if you just put them in your incubator, and turned the switch and said \"100000 years later,\" do you think they will have invented music in the exact same way \"our\" humans have? id imagine they might have imagined completely different systems of notes. rhythm, harmony, etc. what a lot of experimental musicians are doing is seeing what can be done within the world of music that hasn't been explored before\n\nmusic is a language, shaped by the people who use it. there is nothing inherent about it. \ni also think this is an important thing to realize about art in general. the very \"systems\" or axioms that is built upon are very subjective. people love to fight over what is and isn't good art, etc. It's like arguing which culture has the best style of music. \"oh, well obviously african music is the best because X, Y, Z\" or \"Chinese classical is the best music because A, B, and C\"\n\nbut then again, those \"arguments\" sort of shape what people end up \"liking.\" its almost like, taste by committee. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_temperament"
]
] | ||
dhsgm6 | how do character models in video games nowadays move so fluently and realistically? | I can tell they probably aren't animated traditionally, so what do the makers of the game do to achieve that realistic movement? GTA and the latest Guitar Hero games are good examples. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dhsgm6/eli5_how_do_character_models_in_video_games/ | {
"a_id": [
"f3q237k",
"f3q289n",
"f3q9fne"
],
"score": [
16,
3,
9
],
"text": [
"Many use motion capture software to get a very precise idea of the movements and then just add small adjustments later. Other than that advanced hardware just made fluent and realistic animations easier to achieve.",
"I think there are motion capture suits they use to make it realistic, basically put the suit on a fella, point a bunch of cameras at him, get him to do the thing you need doing and boom, Put it in some software, rig it on the model and tweak where tweaking's needed and you've essentially got it done. But the stuff needed is expensive so you'd see it more in triple A games.\n\nFor indie studios that don't have enough for the suits and stuff I think there's plenty of stock animations to base it on and knowing anatomy can help alot too.",
"It isn't just motion capture! The technology that drives transitions and blending between animations has improved. As computers have become more powerful, game designers can increasingly use more sophisticated logic to blend a larger set of animations together in real time.\nCharacter animations are more memory intensive than you might expect, but modern gaming consoles and computers have far more memory than ever before. Now you can keep things like start and stop animations in memory, ready for use instead of just blending from \"idle\" to \"walk\" like we used to. Little things like this give characters a sense of momentum and weight.\nAdditionally, we can now afford to blend in physics driven animation to help ground animated characters into the world."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
1sh9ro | how does a movie (for example the hobbit) have wb, new line cinema, and mgm as their studio distribution? | I was watching the Hobbit and all 3 logos came up. I'm sure there's a thing with companies buying other companies and what not, but I was curious about the details.
Also with we could see an Avengers movie that had Sony, 20th Century Fox, and Marvel at the beginning so the entire universe could join together.... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sh9ro/eli5_how_does_a_movie_for_example_the_hobbit_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdxk0p0",
"cdxlm79",
"cdxlse9"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, New Line Cinema is a distributor that merged with WB in 2008. MGM is co-producing The Hobbit series with Warner - spread the risk, spread the reward.\n\nAnd yes, if a future Avengers film merged the universes (and if Sony and Fox still had film rights), then - hypothetically - all three could agree to co-produce/finance a film.",
"Basically they both invest in the movie to hedge their risk. A movie like the Hobbit is crazy expensive, if it flops (though unlikely) it could cripple even a big studio. A summer rom-com flopping hurts, but wont break you. A 3-part blockbuster that's loaded with CGI is a big risk. With two studios backing the movie they each have less risk, but get to share the likely profits. \n\nThis also sometimes happens due to different studios owning different rights to aspects of the movie, like for example super hero movies. Basically in some cases you can't make the movie you want without the studios agreeing to share.\n\nThen you sometimes have one studio making a movie, but selling the final product to another. The first studio gets a guaranteed paycheck, and the second takes the risk to make more off their investment.\n\n",
"Logos at the beginning of a movie aren't just distributors - they're for the financing studios and production companies involved as well. I assume you saw a Wingnut Films logo too - Peter Jackson's production company.\n\nSome more info on the Hobbit's production and distribution deals [here](_URL_0_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/The_Hobbit_%28films%29#Development"
]
] | |
9ms2lh | why are renewable sources not our major sources of energy yet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ms2lh/eli5_why_are_renewable_sources_not_our_major/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7gvj9e",
"e7gvkds",
"e7gwj7v"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"They’re expensive to implement, but the cost is ever decreasing so that it may become viable in the near future. ",
"still not as cheap/effective as non renewable sources yet. \n\nlets take solar power. it's only like 30% effective and costs a lot, is high variable in the output and can be undependable. so we still need power plants. \n\ncars? electric has range issues, battery production is costly and slow, infrastructure for charging is not as vast, and it simply just takes too long to recharge. ",
"Energy storage is still a major issue\n\nThe sun doesn't shine at night and shines way less in winter than in summer, and there are days with very little wind.\n\nSolutions like Tesla's battery farms are starting to pop up, but those are expensive and battery technology itself usually isn't really environmentally friendly in and itself. It also doesn't great energy security unless it's way over-dimensioned.\n\nBasically you need a technology that can store energy for months on end (store in summer, release in winter), and that can release said energy very quickly (responding quickly to demand spikes, just look at how the power grid in the UK needs to be able to respond to millions of kettles being turned on at once). We're not quite there yet."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1nk5ih | how do we (in the u.s.) actually make a change in our government? | What can we do to stop all the nonsense with healthcare/education being more expensive than the rest of the world, Minimum wage being too low, the Gov't shutdowns, and NASA not being funded. I'm being a bit dramatic, but I feel helpless with all that is going on that I feel the majority disapproves of.
Update: OK! The answer seems to be a resounding "educate yourself about the issues and candidates, and vote"
bonus question: what can we do between elections, I feel like calling and writing my congressman (i'm in FL) is pointless. any other techniques to inspire change in my state? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nk5ih/eli5_how_do_we_in_the_us_actually_make_a_change/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccjegfu",
"ccjehsv"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"First of all, let me applaud you for taking an interest in making this country a better place. There is too much apathy, especially amongst young people regarding politics.\n\nThe single most important thing you can do as a voter is to educate yourself about the issues. Understand (at least on a broad level) what ObamaCare is, how it works, what it is *not*, and the arguments for/against it. \n\nThe 2nd most important thing you can do as a voter is...vote! Democracy is a precious thing; Don't squander it because you couldn't be bothered to go to the polls and vote.\n\n(Incidentally, the next election is Nov 4, 2014. It's a mid-term election, which means you only vote on members of congress, not the president)\n\nFinally, you can contact your members of congress. You have 2 senators representing your state, and one congressman representing a district within you state. Go to _URL_1_ and _URL_0_ to find out who your elected officials are, and let them know how you feel.\n\nRemember, you are the boss of Congress! They work for you.",
"Read about the candidates, vote for who you believe in. Not who has the best social media presence. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"www.house.gov",
"www.senate.gov"
],
[]
] | |
6a6uef | my house wasn't "grounded". what does that mean? | We bought a new house but we are spending more time renovating it than we thought. Mainly because the house was dangerously out of code. One them was the electrical system; our electrician said that the house was not grounded. What does that mean and what could happen if the house does not get grounded? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6a6uef/eli5_my_house_wasnt_grounded_what_does_that_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhc4xov",
"dhc78ew"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"Grounding essentially is wiring a house so that if for instance it gets struck by lightning, or there is a power surge, the energy has somewhere to go. that isn't the wiring in the house.\n\nGrounding allows excess electrical to go into the ground where it dissipates \"harmlessly\". Also when working with electrical circuits, if they aren't grounded, and you by chance tough a live wire, YOU just became the ground, and you could get electrocuted.",
"Each outlet has 3 prongs: live, neutral, and ground, with the electricity basically being provided as a live-to-neutral circuit. The ground wire is supposed to connect to the ground; a lot of appliances (washer, dryer, electric stove, etc.) connect their metal frame to the ground wire, so that if there's any short-circuit or defect inside the appliance, you don't get electrocuted when you touch it.\n\nSo \"grounded house\" means that all the electrical wiring provides 3 wires (live, neutral, ground) and the ground wires are all connected together and connected to the actual ground. In a lot of cases they also require the electrical wiring to be installed inside metal pipes and junction boxes, with those metal pipes / junction boxes also being connected to the ground.\n\nEDIT: If the house is not grounded, then the outer metal frame of your appliances doesn't connect to anything. If any of your appliances get a short-circuit inside, where the live wire touches the metal frame, you will get electrocuted when you touch the appliance. Keep in mind that \"touch the appliance\" may include all the metal ducts for your air conditioning system, and/or all the metal pipes for your water heater (if it's electric), so there's a lot of possibilities for touching, if an electrical fault develops."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
5nrpvb | why can we see gases when it's cold that we can't at normal temperature? (eg breath, exhaust) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nrpvb/eli5_why_can_we_see_gases_when_its_cold_that_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcdrh0v"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You don't!\n\nYou are not seeing *gasses* when you see a puff of breath in cold air, or from a car's exhaust. you are seeing particles, especially *water droplets*, that are forced out of solution.\n\nWater vapor = invisible water in the air\n\nwater droplets = visible drops floating in the air\n\nCold air holds less *water vapor* than warm air, so warm moist air leaving your lungs and entering the cold air suddenly has to lose its invisible ,dissolved *water vapor*, which turns into much bigger *droplets*, and put enough droplets in one spot and you can see them floating around. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
3nia6w | if the stock market always goes up, then why would anyone sell at a low point? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nia6w/eli5_if_the_stock_market_always_goes_up_then_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvobtao",
"cvodnqi"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"The stockmarket in general has an upward trend, but that doesn't mean every individual stock will always go up. Plenty of them stagnate, or continuously lower in value until the company goes bankrupt. Additionally, even if a stock is going to go up again, that doesn't mean it will go up in a reasonable time frame, nor does it mean you can't make more money (and more quickly) by selling at a slight loss and investing in better earning stock. ",
"They're cutting their losses. If a stock is dropping too much, there is no sure way to know if it'll go back up, so you sell your stock to try and recoup some of the money you put in. The funny thing about that, is that that person selling their stocks adds to a trend of even more people selling their stocks, so it drives down the price even more"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
aa72hs | why do rainwater reflections always go straight down, regardless of angle/perspective? | For example, [this picture](_URL_0_). | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aa72hs/eli5_why_do_rainwater_reflections_always_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecpiqi7",
"ecpl5mw",
"ecpnk1n"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Puddles are generally on the ground, so the reflection will be vertical (assuming you're standing upright). If you were to lay down on the ground, the reflections would be horizontal from your perspective. Most people don't like laying in puddles though.",
"You only see the light thats bouncing off of reflective (wet) surfaces towards you. So anytime you move your perspective, youre only seeing the light bouncing directly toward you, despite the fact that the light is being bounced in infinite directions. ",
"It's not just the puddles, it's any reflective surface, as long as it is laying down on the floor. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://40.media.tumblr.com/690dfe449fbaf4ff62de5b372c890e59/tumblr_ncobyiJ0EK1tgmvjco1_500.jpg"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
4swyug | the ins and outs of libertarianism and how gary johnson stands in relation to core libertarian, republican, and democratic values | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4swyug/eli5_the_ins_and_outs_of_libertarianism_and_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5cvwy4",
"d5cwmmj",
"d5d3brf"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
2
],
"text": [
"I like to think of the whole political system as a spectrum, sort of like light is a spectrum. On one side you have a more conservative view, the other you have liberal. Democrats and republicans are closer on the spectrum that most people would like to admit, but it's in order to get enough votes, most parties like to play on the fence in order to get either sides people depending on the issues. \n\nHowever there are extremes on this spectrum, which libertarianism is one of them. It is very \"hands off\" -Lassaiz fair- government involvement. Especially they think the government should have no involvement. My friend in college liked this point of view (we were both in the political science department in some way, her it was her major, mine was a minor), and she always said that it was about people being able to run themselves, and the society and government evolving and running on its own, essentially. Lots of trust in its people and their knowledge, the market weeding out things on its own. \n\nSome people say socialism is on the other side of the extreme spectrum, the liberal side being less critical of government policy, involvement, and what have you, and wanting it and finding it necessary. \n\nGranted, political science is an ever changing system, especially in the US. From what the first document established and the system that it is now are very different outcomes, not necessarily bad or good. I'm not answering this to cause a rift or make you see one way or the other, that's the beauty of choice. I just wanted to provide you with a start of knowledge on this. Research and knowledge is powerful. \n\nGary Johnson, well he's probably somewhere in the middle since he's in a party. ",
"I'm a Libertarian.\n\nLibertarianism, in its most basic form, is an advocation of increased freedom in all aspects of life. Increased economic freedom and increased social freedom. Basically, it's the argument to keep government out of your life.\n\nThere is no such thing as an \"average\" Libertarian because everyone has slightly different beliefs, but most Libertarians have similar beliefs. In the US, most libertarians favor leaving the governing to the states instead of the federal government and following the constitution to the letter.\n\nSocially, Libertarians tend to be:\nPro-abortion, pro-gun, pro-marriage equality (most want the govt to be out the \"marriage business\" completely and just leave marriage as a social contract), pro-drug legalization, pro-easy immigration, anti-war, anti-military spending, anti-death penalty, etc.\n\nEconomically, Libertarians tend to be:\nAnti-corporation, anti-handout, anti-tax, anti-government contract, pro-privatization (of a lot of things), pro-free-trade (wanting less tariffs, less limits on trade, less taxes for businesses, anti-welfare state (govt handouts and social programs) anti-foreign aid, less laws regulating businesses) etc.\n\nBasically, they're obsessed with maximizing freedom. They want people to be as free to do what they want as possible. \n\nA lot of people compare libertarians to anarchists. Libertarians still believe in a government, but a small one. Most Libertarians will tell you that they still want a police force, government courts, a congress, senate, voting rights, supreme court, different political parties arguing, etc. Essentially, Libertarians *accept* some government spending, but only if that government spending is used *directly* to enable the furthering of their freedoms or to protect/safeguard their freedoms (and is not too expensive). \n\n____________________________________\n\nWhy do Libertarians hate taxes and government institutions?\n\nBasically, because they see it as reducing your economic freedom. You work for your money, then the government takes it from you. That sucks to a Libertarian. They say, \"hey, I made that money. Why do you get to take it? I may not even ever benefit from some of the stuff you're doing with my money, that I earned, by myself. Heck, if I wanted stuff done, why does the government need to do it versus some guy I can hire to do it for me? He's probably faster and better at it\".\n\nLibertarians hate taxes even more because resisting taxation leads to arrest and fines and possible jail time, which reduces freedom even more.\n\nTherefore, Libertarians don't believe in most government institutions because they require tax money to run, and generally more institutions mean more laws and therefore less freedoms. Libertarians think that the jobs of government institutions are better handled by volunteers, private companies that citizens can hire, or should be left up to individuals to deal with. \n\nFor example, citizens notice that the river they live close to begins to flood. Instead of a government agency coming in to barricade everything off, the citizens hire a company to do it instead. Rather than constantly paying taxes to a government agency, these citizens paid one time to have a company do it for them. To a Libertarian, this is a better scenario than everyone in the country paying money for a government agency that may not ever help them. \n\n___________________________________\n\nGary Johnson is kind of a \"let the States deal with it\" kind of Libertarian. Instead of being entirely for the decriminalization of drugs, he instead says \"let each state make its own drug legislation\". Let the states decide how to implement energy solutions. Let the states decide how they will clean up environmental problems. All similar stuff. Other than this, he wants to simplify taxes on a federal level, and he would not let states make their own rules for fundamental freedoms like first and second amendment stuff, for example. He's not a super-hardcore Libertarian and I think he represents most Libertarians in the USA. \n\n____________________________________\n\nHow is Johnson different from a Republican?\n\nHe's different from the typical Republican because he doesn't support military spending, or spending people's money in general. He's against typical Republican ideas like strong border control, terror watch lists, \"hard on crime\" legislation, and more.\n\nA Conservative Republican (imo, different breed of Republican) would be against abortion, where as Johnson would be in favor of having it be legal. They would be in favor things like limiting marriage to men and women (getting govt involved in marriage) and such.\n\nEconomically, republicans and libertarians kind of disagree when it comes to corporations. Corporations are government-created/recognized entities. Some Libertarians don't like that. Gary Johnson is for giving corporations more freedom in terms of the money they pay to the government - essentially lowering taxes on them. He is very much like a Republican in this way.\n\n_________________________________\n\nHow is Johnson different from a Democrat?\n\nHe's different from a typical Democrat because he doesn't support military spending, or spending money on people in general. He doesn't support giving money to groups to \"combat poverty\" or for \"women's rights\", he doesn't support giving money for social causes, he against regulating firearms, he's against the welfare state, he's against affirmative action, etc.\n\nJohnson agrees with democrats on *most* social issues. He agrees in marriage equality (wants to get govt out of marriage so people can marry whoever they want), he agrees women should have abortion rights, he agrees that drugs should be legalized, etc.\n\n\nI tried to make this post as even/non-biased as possible. In all, many different types of Libertarians exist. Another Libertarian in mainstream politics is Rand Paul. Rand Paul is a very republican-leaning Libertarian. While the core of his ideology and ideas may be Libertarian, he accepts and integrates some very republican-style ideas (like a stronger military) into his political philosophy.",
"Going to paint with a very broad brush here. Republicans are not necessarily conservative and Democrats are not necessarily liberal but that's another discussion. \n\n\n\n* Republicans/ Conservatives: Think that the primary role of government should be to maintain the status quo. So: social mores, economic/ class systems, American hegemony on the world stage, demographics. They think these should stay the same and it's the government's job to keep it so. Support taxes for things like military, policing, religious funding. Think that the government should be able to use force via arms to achieve its ends. Usually fine with deficit spending as long as it's for the things they want. They like to create tax loopholes for their corporate buddies and get pork for pet projects, all while decrying how out of control the federal debt is. A lot of them are very sexually confused and want to take it out on everyone else. \n\n\n\n* Liberals/ Democrats: Think that the primary role of government is to eliminate wealth inequality and to provide for the populace. So: universal healthcare, welfare benefits, affirmative action. Support heavy progressive taxation and wealth redistribution. Think that the government should be able to use force via taxation and seizure to achieve its ends. Usually fine with deficit spending as long as it's for the things they want. They like to create tax loopholes for their corporate buddies and get pork for pet projects, all while decrying how unfair it is that corporations pay so little tax. Chide police for shooting US citizens while authorizing drone strikes on brown children overseas. \n\n\n\n* Libertarians: Think the primary role of government is to protect individual freedoms, often blurring the line into anarchism. They don't want regulations on personal choice: taking drugs, getting married, or even wearing a seat belt. The \"invisible hand of the market\" is the best way to run the economy but also like to ignore externalities. Want to reduce scope of federal government to what is listed in the Constitution and return power to the States. Do not think the government has the authority to use force except in cases of an imminent threat to public safety. The US should engage in as much free trade as possible but not be the world's police force; respecting other nations' sovereignty is paramount. A lot of them probably spend way too much time on infowars. \n\n\n\n\n* Gary Johnson wants to reduce US involvement in foreign conflicts, legalize drug use and prostitution, end corporate subsidies, balance the federal budget, and simplify the tax code. A particularly important issue is the intersection of the war on drugs, police brutality, mass incarceration, and racial inequality. Namely that the war on drugs is a big driver of the other problems, and we spend way too much money and blood enforcing insane drug laws and locking all these (disproportionately black) people up. He runs marathons and eats pot brownies. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
blmhpn | why one struggles to sleep in the start but quickly falls back to sleep after snoozing the alarm? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/blmhpn/eli5_why_one_struggles_to_sleep_in_the_start_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"empm2qj"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Newton's first law: objects in motion tend to stay in motion, while objects at rest tend to stay at rest."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
b3fexr | why is the human eye unable to slowly move between two focal points? and why can they smoothly track an object when the observer or the object is moving? (like staring at a lightpost while in a car, or waving your hand) | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b3fexr/eli5_why_is_the_human_eye_unable_to_slowly_move/ | {
"a_id": [
"eiz8byl",
"eizaxz7"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Basically the human eye “looks” with movements called saccades, which means the eye rapidly jumps from one focal point to another, rather than smoothly moving. That’s why the hand waving motion is easy to to track because essentially it’s just rapid back and forth. Everything in between your brain fills in. ",
"It's not that our eyes are unable to slowly track (we can do so voluntarily, it just takes more brainpower), it's just more efficient to jump from one interesting thing (visual stimuli) to the next instead of worrying about the \"boring\" stuff in between. The part of our eye that senses very high resolution images (the fovea) can only sense in a very narrow field of vision, so by rapidly moving our eyes from point to point, the brain can scan the most important parts of our vision field and fill in the rest. We call these quick jumps saccades.\n\nIt's like connecting the dots to make an image of an apple and halfway through connecting said dots, your brain figures out it's an apple - vs - tracing the exact outline of an apple which would take longer.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nOn the flip side, if there's something you consciously or unconsciously deem important to focus on, your brain has mechanisms to fix your vision on said thing to take in more information."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
6w37c0 | why is it bad to have two anti-virus softwares installed? | I've heard that having multiple anti-virus/malware programs installed can create a lot of problems. Is this true? Why or why not? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6w37c0/eli5_why_is_it_bad_to_have_two_antivirus/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm52xtq",
"dm53ja5"
],
"score": [
9,
5
],
"text": [
"Because when a antivirus scans your pc, what they actually do is scan your HDD for files, meaning, they put your pc under a lot of stress reading a lot of files and processing them looking for patterns of known malware and suspicious behaviour.\n\nAdd another software that does the same and you have 2 processes fighting hard for disk (and other resources) access. Lowering the life of those devices considerably.\n\nAlso they fight, over everything, one finds a suspicious file and quarantines it, the other found the quarantine folder and quarantines it again until the first one found the other quarantine folder, etc...\nAnd they also see the process of the other accessing a LOT of files and then each try to kill that suspicious process.",
"In a nutshell, AV software acts very much like the malware it tries to prevent. It parks itself in memory, monitors or tries to intercept processes etc. When you have more than one installed, they will often identify each other as suspicious or potentially malicious. Not only will this cause you a lot of false warnings, but it can cause severe system instability as they both attempt to take defensive measures against each other."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
8lxejk | how do video game knock-offs exist? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8lxejk/eli5_how_do_video_game_knockoffs_exist/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzj5hpx",
"dzj5lfn",
"dzj6vgh"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Copyright laws apply to specific things. \nIf something else is created out of copying a specific thing, but results in something that is no longer that other thing, than it can exist. \nBecause it’s a different specific thing.",
"Simply because they are similar enough to garner interest in people who do play MOBA games like League of Legends but also maintaining enough of a difference so as to not get sued for copyright infringement . I do agree with you though, personally . Most of the times , just cheap poorly made knock-offs. ",
"You can't copyright game mechanics. As long as the name is distinct enough(trademark), and the art/text/code isn't actually copied(copyright), they're in the clear."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1dw6yy | emulsion | How do two unmixable liquids appear uniform (unlike oil in water), and stay in solution (do not separate)? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dw6yy/eli5_emulsion/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9ufty4",
"c9uilhc"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Oil and water don't mix because water is polar (has + and - charge on different parts), and oil is non polar (netural charge all over).\n\nIf I add a chemical that has a polar part and a non polar part, the water can stick to the polar part, and the oil can stick to the non polar part, and form a solution. This is an emulsifier.\n\nAn emulsifier is like two sided tape. By sticking both water and oil together, they can form a solution and not separate.",
"First: what happens when oil and water separate: \n\nLet's say Cowboys fans and Redskins fans hate each other. They don't want to be anywhere near each other. So when Cowboys fans and Redskins fans get together at a game, they try to avoid each other as much as they can. So they sit in separate sections, like this (O = Cowboys, _ = Redskins): \n\nO O O O O O O \nO O O O O O O \nO O O O O O O \n_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. \n_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. \n_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. \n\nThe people in the first two rows are happy because they're surrounded only by fans of the same team. The people in the third row aren't very happy because they have to interact with fans of the other team, but overall everyone is much happier because there are minimal interactions between the two groups. \n\nHow does emulsion work? Well, say there's a strong earthquake causing people to fall over, mixing up the seating arrangements! Temporarily, everyone will be all mixed up and there will be Cowboys fans next to Redskins fans. This won't last though, because nobody is happy in that situation. \n\nThen say we add in some neutral people (N). These people are friendly to everyone and they get along well with both Cowboys fans and Redskins fans. So what what happens is a group of neutral people will sit in a circle around the Redskins fans, isolating them from the Cowboys fans, like this: \n\nO O O O O O O O O \nO O O N N N O O O \nO O N _ _ _ N O O \nO N _ _ _ _ _ N O \nO O N _ _ _ N O O \nO O O N N N O O O \n\nThis is just one section of the stadium. What happens is these little clusters of Redskins fans surrounded by neutral people are dispersed all around the stadium. Now everyone gets to sit next to people they like so everyone is happy!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
6w9rk5 | when hunting, what's the point of wearing camouflage if you're just gonna wear a bunch of bright orange stuff along with it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6w9rk5/eli5_when_hunting_whats_the_point_of_wearing/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm6dhli",
"dm6dmw3",
"dm6dngs",
"dm6gf2n",
"dm6jwyn",
"dm6k84k",
"dm6kjow",
"dm6l4fd",
"dm6l4zs",
"dm6luzs",
"dm6m3r5",
"dm6m73q",
"dm6mffa",
"dm6mxrf",
"dm6n2gr",
"dm6n7ha",
"dm6n95i",
"dm6nc3k",
"dm6ndq1",
"dm6o4rc",
"dm6oxaz",
"dm6oy3n",
"dm6ozcq",
"dm6pbrt",
"dm6q3au",
"dm6q93r",
"dm6q9nb",
"dm6qbmj",
"dm6qopo",
"dm6r91l",
"dm6rac9",
"dm6rlar",
"dm6s3b4",
"dm6sdq3",
"dm6soln",
"dm6sult"
],
"score": [
5897,
643,
3425,
498,
91,
26,
8,
56,
5,
16,
7,
4,
11,
2,
2,
9,
2,
4,
244,
3,
4,
15,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
9,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Deer can't see color, people can...its supposed to keep you from getting shot by another hunter ",
"The point is to break up the human shape with different shadows (or what looks like shadows) and such in various shapes like what is natural in the background environment you are hunting in. Most animals that we hunt are color blind and cannot see the color orange so that is not an issue, but the human shape is an issue. So you want to look like the forest background, or grassland background, etc to blend in and break up your human shape. ",
"* game can't see that shade of orange, but people can\n* game can see shapes, which camouflage helps obscure",
"In Wisconsin, blaze orange (and now pink) is worn during deer season as well as upland bird hunting(pheasant and grouse). This is done for visibility. That said, it often helps to have patterns in the blaze orange (camo patterns or black stripes) to break up a silhouette. Some states require a minimum Sq ft of unbroken blaze. Waterfowl and turkey hunting typically does not require blaze. Most birds have incredibly good eyesight and can see some colors so it is essential to blend into your surroundings to the point where your camo patterns should match your natural patterns (spring and fall forests, snow, reed canary grass).\n\nTLDR: the camo patterns with blaze orange helps break up a silhouette so while the game may not see orange, they don't see a solid grey blob.",
"It can be any color as long as it's not solid. I hear it's because color blind animals see pattern disruption more easily. My history teacher told us colorblind soldiers could spot hidden enemy snipers in ww2 more easily if the sniper had a solid color uniform on which is why they were usually put in a scouting role but I'm not sure if that's true. I know turkeys can see color and wearing certain colors can make them fear or want to assault you. Reds and blues I think.",
"Follow-up: When hunting sure, but what's the point of wearing camouflage if you're just gonna wear a bunch of bright stuff along with it *in the military*?\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\n",
"You wear orange when deer hunting because they are color blind, but you have to wear camo when hunting turkey because they can see colors and can see you.",
"Dad and I wore jeans, flannels, and bright orange vests forever. Never stopped us from filling our tags. \n\nI think a lot of what I see is just men trying to play commando. ",
"Camo breaks up the human sillouette even if they seen colour the exact same way we do, they would see a bright colour and think for a second or two if they want to run or not.\n \nThey dont see things like we do, and thus the reflective vest isnt a big factor.\n \nTldr: camo breaks up the human silloutte which is why it works.",
"Seems to be that it's because of outdated information. Most recent articles I could find (a few years old and from newspapers) indicated that deer are RG colorblind. So they can see orange, it just looks like a shade of red.",
"Camouflage is needed to obscure the edges of your outline so that the animals can't make out a figure. The orange portions don't compromise that. ",
"Theres many good answers here so far. Another point that I didn't see mentioned is that many people will wear blaze orange to walk to their stand, and again later to walk out. But when they are in the tree or in a blind, they take it off.\n\n",
"Turkey : great eyes. No orange required when hugging. \nDeer: No orange needed for bow hunting, and you probably gun hunt in a blind unless your driving or something. \nDuck/ waterfowl : no Orange required. \nUpland bird: orange needed to not get shot in the face. At least in michigan. By its so thick the birds can't tell. ",
"For the most part, with deer hunting, the orange is so you don't look like a deer, and the camo is so you look like a hunter. I only wear camo when its bow season, or I'm hunting turkey or duck. ",
"Deer cannot see orange. \nI believe that, like horses, they see blue and yellow and of course greens. \n\nThe actual camp is for blending in to the plants and looking less human. \n\nThink if you were looking at black and white photos, are you going to see a person easier if they are wearing solid colors or patterns not found in nature, or a person wearing \"plant print\". In those grayscale pictures you would definitely see something is off and spot the human in non-nature clothes, but have to search as you passover the nature print clothes.",
"Like others have said, many animals can't actually see colour. This is where the \"5 S & M\" of stealth come in:\n\n* Shape\n* Silhouette \n* Shadow\n* Smell\n* Sound\n* Movement \n\nIf you can stop any of these appearing human then it increases your chance of not being detected by said animals.",
"I don't know what the hell these other dudes are talking about, it's just legally required you wear it so you don't get shot on accident.",
"Some animals see the orange, so for them you wear just the camo, mostly bird I believe. Other animals cannot. \n\nThe method of hunting also dictates the need for additional bright colors. If there are deer hunters in the area you definitely want to be visible, because they may be shooting a long range weapon at an animal and not see you in the brush behind it. I believe this may also be why rifle season is outside of the season of other small game, but that is just a guess. \n\nAs for someone who only hunts in bright orange, its just not really made, partially because it looks silly, partially because you can buy a 200$ pair of insulated coveralls and a 10$ hat/vest and get an outfit for both situations instead of buying two sets of coveralls. ",
"For upland game birds (e.g. Pheasants, dove, quail) wearing orange prevents you from getting shot since to hunt them you commonly see people hunting in groups and the birds they have to be flushed from usually tall grass and bushes, so camo is not really a necessity. However, since a lot of camo gear can have water resistance and are good in cold weather you will commonly still see hunters wearing it since its practical for morning cold weather....and probably where you will likely see hunters wearing camo that absolutely doesn't match the environment because it's not a big deal.\n\n\n\nFor waterfowl (geese and ducks), you are going to be stationary so the risk of getting shot is minimal, and iirc if you aren't in full camo without orange the birds will not fly in. Orange not really a necessity, but typically a camo pattern resembling reeds is.\n\n\n\nTurkeys can see color. They are one of the smartest things you can hunt, but then if you're everyone's favorite dinner you evolve to be smart af. Wearing camo and likely sitting in a pop up blind is likely going to be the only chance you have at drawing them in close enough. You cannot wear orange because the bird will know what's up. Makes a risky hunt if other hunters don't know where you are.\n\n\n\nFor larger game like deer, yes most can't see color but they really can differentiate between the black and white and gray shading they see on the world, so camo that matches the geography around you is needed- woodland pattern in woodlands, sage for high desert, etc. typically one can also have orange intermingling in the design of some of the camo, but you'd also hope if someone is targeting a deer they've got a scope and are looking at their target, knowing not to shoot you if you are not wearing orange.\n\n\n\nTL;DR- geography and the animal being hunted determine necessity of orange, or a particular pattern of camouflage.",
"Bow hunting is often done within very close distances to the prey. Say, stalking a deer and trying to come within 40 meters of it. You need all the stealth in the world on your side for this.\n\n\nYou need to be in full head to toe camo for this. \n\n\nFor hunting with a rifle however, you can engage as far aways as you can accurately shoot. Maybe out to several hundred meters. You may see what you think is a deer in the binocs, put them down, pick up your rifle and place the reticle on whichever moving target you find first. If a hunter in the distance is wearing full camo, they may inadvertently become a target in this scenario. The other hunter may have been stalking the deer from the other direction. Especially if the wind ended up in his favor. Had they worn orange, even just a vest, or orange gloves, or a hat, it would have been more obvious. Accidents happen occasionally when a hunter is on his private property, and is shot by another hunter either aiming into property which is not his, or is straight up hunting illegally on someone elses land.\n\nTl:dr Using camo is sometimes entirely necessary (walk and stalk with a bow), and other times entirely unneccessary (rifle hunting, at longer distances). \n\n\nPS, \n\n\nSomething else important to note, bullets are cheap, and arrows are expensive. Rifle/shotgun Hunters have been known to get trigger happy and the more bullets put down range, the better chance that one hits something it shouldnt. And from the shooters perspective, more bullets down range equals a high chance of hitting the intended target. \n\n\nPPS,\n\n\nALWAYS KNOW WHAT LIES BEYOND YOUR TARGET, AND NEVER TAKE A SHOT IF YOU CANNOT GAURANTEE YOU WILL HIT WHAT YOU ARE AIMING AT (beyond a reasonable doubt, at least, no one is 100% accurate).\n",
"Many have answered it, but here is a real life example called \"Dazzle Camo\"\n\nLook at this ship: _URL_0_\n\nSee how its outline is obscured and it's awkward. If it were one flat color it'd be easy to gauge what it is. So the camo outline help break up the shape of the person. ",
"the very unpopular truth is that its pointless. people LOVE their camo and feeling like they are doing every little ritualistic preparation to enhance their chances of success. the reality is that people have been successfully hunting for thousands of years before expensive camo patterns were invented. deer are not people, they are not looking for the silhouette of a person, hell they likely dont even know what a person is. They do, however, understand movement, sound and scent, any of which can put the animals on edge.",
"Short answer: despite wearing the orange vest, it helps break up your shape and make you a little bit less conspicuous to your quarry.\n\nReal answer: It makes you feel cool as fuck, like some hunter spec ops shit, and you spent like 300 dollars on it so you're goddamned right I'm going to get some use out of it.",
"To make yourself feel like you're becoming one with nature. Seriously though, back in my grandpa's day, they used to hunt in bright plaid flannel shirts and jeans and they were just as successful as the guys nowadays who \nwear $1000 hunting outfits and special scent blockers. It's not the gear, it's the hunter.",
"More importantly, what's the point of camouflaging your baby's onesie when you're nowhere near the woods?",
"I'm going to try give this answer as simple as it is in my head. So we wear camouflage in various situations not only during hunting scenarios but also Combat. The reason for the camouflage is to mainly break up the outline of a figure, this is so it is deceived differently to that of a human or an animal. \n\nThe orange tags used are to ensure you don't get shot by other hunters, the reason these aren't an issue is that most animals are colourblind - including deers. So out of all the camouflage the tags would be seen as no difference to the rest of the camouflage.",
"Because deer can't see color and humans can. The camouflage is there because deer can identify shapes of predators and camo helps disguise your shape amongst the bushes and trees and shit. ",
"There are some pretty interesting speculations in the answers. Here are the actual basics.\n\n1) Camoflauge is about breaking up pattern recognition. Our brains recognize patterns and pick them out very quickly. Wearing camo helps get around an animal's keen ability to pick out shit in its environment that doesn't belong there or doesn't look right and avoid it.\n\n2) Orange is about hunter safety and that's it. It's also required by authorities during certain seasons for different types of hunters. In the U.S., each state determines its own rules. It sticks out like a sore thumb to other humans, hunter and non hunter alike.\n\n3) In line with each state's rules are determinations as to how much orange a hunter must where and whether the orange can be broken up or must be whole. In my state, all small game hunters and upland bird hunters must wear orange. Archery hunters and geese/duck hunters as well as turkey hunters do not have to wear it. Except, during the two weeks of deer gun season. Everybody must wear it. In turn, in my state, the orange must be visible completely at all angles (360 degrees of coverage) and up to 50% mixed camoflauge is acceptable. Some people wear a hat, some people wear a vest, some people wear a full outfit (especially once the cold weather wear is needed).\n\n*note* Please, if you're going to be in an area where hunters are during hunting seasons, get your doggy an orange vest. They're like $10 or $20 and they help us see them. I don't shoot at noises or movement but, unfortunately, not every hunter is responsible. It helps protect everybody. I don't know how many times I've heard a crashing through the woods towards me and pulled up to ready to have a cute doggie unleashed come running to me.",
"there is no point to camouflage in 90% of hunting. in most cases the animal can't differentiate between the colors, or you're up in a tree where they won't look anyway. deer walk right past the brightest colored objects you've ever seen(like road cones with hazard lights blinking on top of them), and they don't care.\n\nsimply holding still is an order of magnitude more effective than the best camouflage ever made. if you're holding still they won't notice you. they can see you but to a deer you're just another non-living object that's no threat. you could be cosplaying as an overwatch character with blinking LEDs and they wouldn't care as long as you held still enough.\n\nthe reason people buy it is the same reason they by a special set of clothes for whatever else they're doing. hiking, running, whatever other hobby all have costumes associated with them. camo is the costume for hunting. but that's all it is.",
"Plenty of people have been shot by friends who didn't wear orange. Despite what's shown on TV (no alcohol), a number of hunters are drunk so that affects more people getting shot too.",
"Who the fuck wears bright orange vests when hunting? Im from nz and hunt for wild pigs and other game every weekend and dont wear fluorescent clothes...",
"Generally speaking, hunters only wear blaze orange to prevent any kind of hunting accident...the kind where one hunter shoots another hunter thinking that it's some kind of wild game. And from my experience, if deer can't see the color itself, they certainly can see the change in pattern from camo (which involves a lot of broken up lines) to a solid color (which forms a solid shape). \n\nOverall though, if given the choice of wearing blaze orange or not wearing blaze orange...I'd take the blaze orange every time. If it scares off wild game every now and again but keeps you from getting shot at, then I'd say it's a worthy investment.",
"There's two kinds of hunting: big game and quarry.\n\nBig game are often things like deer and elk. Quarry are smaller things such as rodents and birds. Both kinds have very different quality of vision.\n\nBig game tends to have terrible vision - so bad in fact that entire parts of the spectrum are missing. They rely instead on sound and smell.\n\nQuarry on the other hand has VERY good eyesight and will see you coming unless you try to blend in visually with your surroundings. For this reason you want to wear things like [RealTree](_URL_0_), as quarry has a hard time determining your size, position, shape and even existence when you're fully dressed in this.\n\nWhen you're hunting one of the most dangerous risks is being shot by another hunter. For this reason hunters wear blaze orange, a colour that deer and elk are blind to. Nobody wants to be completely dressed in orange though, so for the rest of a hunter's outfit they'll try to blend in. That means it's OK to wear camo and orange, but bright blue would be a problem. For this reason you see hunters in camo putting on blaze orange vests.\n\nBeing shot by other hunters is such a big problem that here in NZ we have rules such as \"completely identify your target - do not rely on sight, sound or movement alone.\" There have been many cases of hunters carrying deer they have killed out on their backs only to be shot because someone thought it was still alive. A common thing to do is to wrap the antlers or dress the deer in an orange vest.\n\nHunters feel slightly better about blending in with the surroundings when it comes to quarry because the calibres are smaller or they use birdshot. It's much easier for another hunter to tell a disguised human from a bird as well. \n\nIn fact, when you're hunting quarry the most dangerous aspect is still other hunters, but the risk is generally from other hunters not checking their field of fire. What may be beyond their target, or the risk of ricochets from hard surfaces and water, etc. When hunting ducks for example there will be many hunters positioned around a lake - for this reason it's illegal to shoot at birds on the water as you may ricochet or shoot another hunter across the lake directly. When discharging a shotgun at quarry you must be pointing at a bird in flight.",
"I wear it because it's equipment clothing, has extra pockets and I don't care if it gets dirty. You could wear a nice pair of jeans and shoes, but why risk ruining nice clothes?",
"Hunter here. I think non-hunters fail to recognize how much of a fashion show hunting is to some guys. If you go hunting but don't look the part, your Facebook selfies will be terrible. Not everyone hunts because they love the outdoors and prefer organic, humanely-raised meat; for many it's about selfies, shopping for gear, and playing dress up. \n\nFor my part, I wear camouflage for duck hunting because I don't hunt from a full blind. For deer and upland birds, I just wear whatever is weather appropriate and an orange vest or jacket over it. Then again, I don't have a Facebook page and don't take selfies.",
"While a lot of people are correctly stating that camo helps break up your outline, I feel the biggest reason has been missed. Orange vests are only required during deer rifle season; during bow season and a lot of other hunting seasons, blaze orange is not required. Full camo is effective at making you blend in, the blaze orange vest ruins that a quite a bit because it is a solid color. The hunters probably only have one or two nice warm hunting jackets and pants that they also use during bow season and other hunting seasons, so they just wear those even though they're going to slap a bright orange vest over it.\n\nThere is a such thing as blaze orange camo, that breaks up the outline of the hunter more, but it's not legal to use in my state during deer season."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/26/article-2589722-1C8E3A0500000578-6_634x506.jpg",
"http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/26/article-2589722-1C95CCDE00000578-820_306x423.jpg",
"http://starecat.com/content/wp-content/uploads/do-you-want-to-be-seen-or-not-mate-cam... | ||
jn1eg | how does surface tension work? or, how i explained surface tension to my five year old when we were blowing huge bubbles... | My daughter and I have been studying stages of matter, properties of matter, and surface tension. One day, we decided to have a day exploring surface tension by blowing bubbles. After trying to figure out how to explain surface tension to her, I think I finally got it right....
"Let's think of a water molecule as a little teddy bear. We'll give it 2 Hydrogen ears and 1 Oxygen nose (this is a pretty nice visualization of H2O). When water is in its liquid form, all these little teddy bear water molecules want to hang out and play together. When they look up, down, left, and right, all they see are more teddy bear molecule friends. There sure are a lot of them! All these teddy bears are really happy. They get to relax, hang out, and have pretend tea parties. In the water, life is great.
Near the surface, however, things are a little different. For these teddy bear water molecules, life is great as long as they don't look up. If they look down, left, and right, they've got lots of teddy bear water molecule friends. However, if they look up, everything is different! This freaks them out. They want to be with their friends and join in the fun and stay in their liquid bubble forever and ever! They cling together, and buzz around with a lot of energy, constantly trying to get close in a little bubble of liquid playtime. This energy causes the surface tension that we are so familiar with. When an insect lands on the top of a pool of water, it can walk around on it because of all of the buzzing and jiggling molecules that are vibrating near the surface.
Now, this is great for understanding surface tension, but what does this have to do with bubbles?
Have you ever tried to blow bubbles out of plain old tap water? The surface tension is too strong, you can't do it! However, if you add a detergent, such as dish soap, the molecules will slide in between the water molecules, breaking that surface tension. Some of the atoms in the soap molecules really like water (hydrophillic), and some of them really don't (hydrophobic). The atoms that don't like water will squeeze in between the surface water molecules, breaking through until they're as far out of there as they can go. Because of this, the soap will form a thin layer around the water, which will help protect the water from evaporation. This is why you're able to blow bubbles once you add soap to your water." | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jn1eg/eli5_how_does_surface_tension_work_or_how_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2dfz9q",
"c2dfz9q"
],
"score": [
7,
7
],
"text": [
"Also, if you guys want a ridiculously awesome bubble blowing recipe, here you go. This will give you huge bubble tunnels, and awesome large spherical bubbles: \n\n* 1 pkg unflavored gelatin\n* 1 cup of hot water (just boiled)\n* 2 ounces of glycerin\n* 8.5 ounces (just over a cup) of Johnson & Johnson's baby shampoo\n\nDissolve the gelatin in the hot water. Add the shampoo and the glycerin. Stir gently. This solution will cool to a usable temperature rather quickly. It will begin to gel if it gets too cold. If it does get too cold, you can reheat it in the microwave for about two minutes. However, we didn't experience the gelling, as we used it all pretty quickly.\n\nFor our utensils, we used 3 pipe cleaners connected into a circle, as well as yarn fed through four milkshake straws and tied to a circle. We put the solution into a shallow baking pan (or tupperware), and rocked out with a bunch of kids at the park for an hour or so. ",
"Also, if you guys want a ridiculously awesome bubble blowing recipe, here you go. This will give you huge bubble tunnels, and awesome large spherical bubbles: \n\n* 1 pkg unflavored gelatin\n* 1 cup of hot water (just boiled)\n* 2 ounces of glycerin\n* 8.5 ounces (just over a cup) of Johnson & Johnson's baby shampoo\n\nDissolve the gelatin in the hot water. Add the shampoo and the glycerin. Stir gently. This solution will cool to a usable temperature rather quickly. It will begin to gel if it gets too cold. If it does get too cold, you can reheat it in the microwave for about two minutes. However, we didn't experience the gelling, as we used it all pretty quickly.\n\nFor our utensils, we used 3 pipe cleaners connected into a circle, as well as yarn fed through four milkshake straws and tied to a circle. We put the solution into a shallow baking pan (or tupperware), and rocked out with a bunch of kids at the park for an hour or so. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
4vheju | can you feasibly get rid of/fix negative interest rates? | I understand negative interest rates but is there a means to combat them? Go back to the good ole' days of making return on your invested money? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vheju/eli5_can_you_feasibly_get_rid_offix_negative/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5ydzi8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's not like every interest rate on earth went negative. Just very specific types of government to bank interest rates. There is other investments that have returns. The point of negative rates is to say \"hey, maybe put your money in the thing we want to be growing right now, not this thing\". "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
28x5r1 | why do we stare? what happens in our brains when we do ? | Why do we stare? What is happening in our brains when we do, especially in the occipital lobe? Also, why does it feel mildly good and can be somewhat difficult to pull yourself out of a stare? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28x5r1/eli5_why_do_we_stare_what_happens_in_our_brains/ | {
"a_id": [
"cifj9ee"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Generally, our brains actively sort through the stimuli we revieve before passing it onto the frontol cortex for processing into our conscious minds. When we \"zone out\", this process begins to bypass the occipital lobe, meaning that visual stimuli are not processed into our conscious minds.\n\nThis feels good, because our brains now have to do a lot less work than before. Suddenly a whole lobe of the brain is largely inactive, saving energy.\n\nIt is thus difficult to pull put of this haze, because our brain must now begin to consider all the stimuli coming from that area, requiring a large initial effort investment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2cvc32 | why do we get jealous and how can we overcome it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cvc32/eli5_why_do_we_get_jealous_and_how_can_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjjdy8x",
"cjjflc9",
"cjjg4la",
"cjjhey9",
"cjjlm8z"
],
"score": [
91,
11,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"You get jealous when you invest your own self-worth in another person. So if that other person is not paying attention to you, it makes you feel like you are somehow being cheated. Overcome it by recognizing your own self is not dependent on what others choose to do. ",
"Jealousy is the fear that you're losing something / someone to someone else, and evolutionarily it would benefit us by driving one to try and take it back, whether it be a partner, a social standing in the group, etc. Typically it's associated with losing a partner, and that's where the biggest benefit would come from. If Kronk steals my girlfriend, and my jealousy prompts me to smash his face with a rock and take her back, I win and reproduce. If I don't feel jealousy, I lose and do nothing about losing my partner.\n\nAs for getting over it, all you can really do is evaluate your own shortcomings and rationalize. Perhaps your jealousy is unwarranted, and you have control issues that you should address. If someone left you, ask yourself if it's something you did wrong, or if it's simply something that they need that you can't possibly provide them. If it's something you did wrong, you can improve yourself, like not being so negative, or learning when to give someone space, etc. If it's something you couldn't provide them, you learn more about what kind of person would make a more ideal person. For instance, if they are looking for someone to travel the world with and you're a homebody, that could be a pretty bad match, and you should look for other homebodies to associate with.\n\nEither way, jealousy is almost always a sign that it's time for you to reevaluate yourself and your priorities. Once you get re-situated to a place where you feel like you're in control of your life again, that should alleviate the jealousy you feel.",
"Part of the problem is in seeing it as \"getting jealous\" and \"having jealousy\". These difficult emotions aren't things we have inside us, they are mental activities we perform. They generally begin with a thought, which is then reflected in emotion and physical feeling. The brain produces thoughts constantly and automatically, but you can choose which thoughts to give attention to.",
"Jealousy is similar to envy because it focuses your attention on your desire of a targeted thing (material or relationship). Be careful when talking about Jealousy & Envy as they are not the same - envy is focused on the master of the desirable object and jealousy is more focused on the object. So how do we deal with that? A short & quick answer is to give the beast what it wants. \n\nOk, onto my interpretation. Jealousy is a useful psychological cue to keep you focused on your goal/carrot. Ignoring that you can't obtain what you want (like most things in life), jealousy is a hurtful feeling because societal influence has taught us that envy is a negative emotion -which causes conflicting emotions - which makes us feel guilty/awful. \n\nOther people have identified other great envy strategies, but I will try to a more generalist approach. If you can understand the cause of your envy, you will be better equipped to quench the desires of your brain to better itself. Do you want a fancy car, or is what you want the adrenaline from driving it, or the power & status associated with the car? Bungee-jumping is a lot cheaper than an occasional drive of a luxury sports car. Yes life is complicated than that, but it is a way you can overcome your jealousy. If you are focused on an Ex, then another loving relationship is the answer.",
"Sorry about my English, I'm doing my best!\n\nSome of the biology behind jealousy (as I've understood it, not an expert): As a man, you would want to make sure the child you're bringing up is your own, so you're actually benefiting your own genes and not somebody else's. Thus, you want to prevent your partner from mating with somebody else.\nAs a woman, you of course do not have the similar problem of identifying the offspring as yours (for obvious reasons), but since the female has to invest so much more to the reproduction, the contribution of the male is desired and required. Thus, you want to prevent your partner from mating (and clubbing together) with another female, since that very likely reduces his contribution to your offspring.\n\nThis is of course very simplified, and jealousy is much more complicated issue as a whole, and other people have put in words in this thread already.\n\nOvercoming jealousy varies a little bit depending on if you just want to deal with paranoid jealousy in a (honest) monogamous relationship, or if you're trying out an open or a polyamorous relationship and need to deal with your partner actually being intimate with others. \n\nFor both the key words are still trust & confidence. If your relationship is healthy and you can actually trust your partner to be honest with you, the jealousy issues are most likely caused by insecurity and low self-esteem, and should be dealt as such. So, try to avoid repeatedly accusing and interrogating your partner when there is no evidence, because this can be very hurtful to the relationship. Communicate about your feelings honestly and calmly so you can maybe try and find solutions together."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
eiswfs | when you scare someone why can it possibly induce a heart attack, what happens within a persons body for this to happen | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eiswfs/eli5_when_you_scare_someone_why_can_it_possibly/ | {
"a_id": [
"fctatji",
"fctc230"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"When you are scared, your fight or flight response is activated. You body is preparing you to deal with danger, either by running away, or by fighting back. Either way, it begins optimzing your body for strength and speed, pushing the body a bit further than is normally safe. This includes pushing the heart, muscles, ect. \n\nA healthy person can handle this for a few minutes no problem, but if someone already has a weakened heart which is barely hanging on at a normal level, pushing it like this can tip it over the edge, triggering a heart attack or other problems. It's like pulling a muscle if you workout at a level your body isn't strong enough to handle, only the muscle is your heart.",
"A heart attack, is a condition where the oxygen demand of the heart muscle cannot be met by the pumping of the heart. Usually, it is due to underlying heart disease - either weakness of the muscle fibers themselves, (more commonly) thinning of the arteries that would provide the muscle with the oxygen and nutrients needed to work, a dislodgement of arterial plaque - which causes a total blockage of blood flow to a section of muscle, or (most likely) a combination of the previous.\n\nIn the event of a good scare, there is an adrenaline based fight / flight / flee reaction, causing a sudden boost in heart rate, which then cycles the above heart attack process of the heart demanding more blood flow than it can itself provide.\n\nIt's not just scaring someone that can induce a heart attack. Anything that suddenly elevates the heart rate can do it - laughing to death is possible, by heart attack as well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
8s7kmr | the relation between fractal and emergence. | Why fractals are considered system with an emergent behavior? what are their emergent properties?
in both [Emergence ](_URL_1_)and [Fractal ](_URL_0_)Wikipedia pages this correlation is cited. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8s7kmr/eli5_the_relation_between_fractal_and_emergence/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0x5bw7"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Basically a fractal is a special case of emergence with more restricted parameters than the wider set of emergence. "
]
} | [] | [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal#Characteristics",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence"
] | [
[]
] | |
415nrn | in a trillion years what will the universe look like? will there be anything left? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/415nrn/eli5_in_a_trillion_years_what_will_the_universe/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyzt649"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_ This is a great listing of stuff that'll happen in the very very far future. My favorite one is how if the Proton doesnt decay, then in 10^1500 years iron stars could form - stellar mass spheres of cold iron. Universe does some weird stuff later on if the proton doesnt decay."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future"
]
] | ||
2vgz65 | all beers generally have the same ingredients, how do they differentiate taste by so much? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vgz65/eli5_all_beers_generally_have_the_same/ | {
"a_id": [
"cohjhjs",
"cohjxjd",
"cohjyyv"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"By the type of yeast used, the amount of the various ingredients, extra ingredients (like orange peel), what they are brewed in, the temperature they ferment at, how long they ferment, how they are processed after fermentation (filtered through hops and the like), the water used in making it, and many other subtle factors. ",
"All shades and colors are made from the same three colors, red blue and yellow, but there are millions of different colors.",
"I'm a homebrewer and self proclaimed beer nerd. If anyone has anything to add I'm more than willing to receive corrections and comments.\n\nThere are 4 key ingredients in a majority of beers and I'll break them down line by line:\n\nWater: Sam Adam's recreates Boston's water at breweries outside of Boston. I know that certain English styled beers tend to have a higher sodium content from the water available and a Czech Pilsner tends to have the purest water. I wouldn't focus too much on this, but it is a factor and having a clean water is very important for obvious reasons.\n\nYeast: HUGE factor in flavor. From the strain of yeast, the temperature the beer was fermented to whether or not the yeast was filtered out before being bottled/served. Yeast turns the sugars into alcohol and CO2. Again, easy examples: A hefeweizen will normally have its yeast still in the beer while it's served and it's normal to mix up the beer a little to ensure the yeast is suspended in the beer. If a hefe yeast is fermented at a cooler (62-65 F) temp it'll have a clove flavor and if it's at a slightly higher temp (70-72 F) it'll be more banana. Lager yeasts (Sam Adams Boston Lager, Heineken, Budweiser) tend to be colder fermenting (35-45 F) and have a cleaner flavor. The yeast is also filtered out for clarity. However even then the year imparts a flavor on the beer based on how its digested There are literally hundreds of yeast strains and, in my opinion, they impart the biggest variety of flavors. It's common for homebrewers to split a batch of wort (the unfermented sugar water) and to do everything the same but utilize different yeasts to taste the difference in flavor).\n\nMalt: Basically the sugar that's turned into alcohol. The more ferment able sugar there is the more alcohol there will be. Normally it's barley but it can be wheat, rice (common in mass-produced beers and Asian beers), corn sugar, oatmeal and whatever else people come up with. Of course they'll impart different flavors but a large factor is the roast of the malt. Basically the variations of how long and how intensely the malt was roasted. A majority of the beer is very lightly roasted and imparts a majority of the ferment-able sugars that turn into alcohol. Now it's common to heavily roast a smaller portion (normally under 20%) of the mix to adjust flavors. In example, a very dark beer (Guiness, Porter, Dark LageR) will have a heavily roasted malt to give it that dark color and thick flavor. A lot of Lagers have very little roasted malts so you're not going to be getting a whole lot of flavor from the heavily roasted malts. A nice Amber Ale will be right in the middle. Again, there are thousands of variations and recipes.\n\nHops: It was initially added as a preserving agent. Basically Hops is added to the beer during the boil or after. Early in the boil it's a \"bittering\" hopes, later in the boil it's a \"flavor\" or \"aroma\" hops. Again, there are hundreds of varieties imparting every flavor from Citrus to Grass to an Earth aroma. Also important is the amount that's used. A Lager, Hefe or Amber ale typically doesn't have a lot of Hops. An Indian Pale Ale, Double IPA or Barley may have a lot. For what it's worth Hops content in a beer is measured in IBUs. 5-25 to be very mild, 26-45 will be fairly mild. 46-80 is going to be a good punch in the face. 81+ is going to huge. A good example of this is Dogfish Head's 60 minute, 90 minute and 120 minute offerings. To my understanding they're respectively at 60, 90 and 120 IBU. Give them a try sometime and you'll taste the difference. \n\nLastly it's common for brewers to add different spices and sugars. Fruit beers will have added fruit. Pumpkin will have added pumpkin and pumpkin-pie spices to get the pumpkin flavor. Normally this is highlighted on the bottle so I don't think I need to go into too much detail on this.\n\nSo yes, all of these factors are mixed up to create the various beers out there. The interesting thing that is done now is to mix styles. In example: a Wit beer (typically a beer that gets its flavor from the yeast) that's brewed with a lot of Hops to give it a very unusual flavor. Cali-Belgique by Stone is a great example of this. Another is Indian Brown Ale by Dogfish Head that's a brown ale (typically low to medium hops, lots of dark roasted malts) with a large dose of hops. \n\nI hope I provided some clarity and didn't just info dump."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3drimk | why can't horses get rid of flies on their eyes? | Watching a video on horse training and he mentions it wears a fly sheet to protect its eyes from flies that feed on the corners of their eyes.
This might be a very silly question but whats stopping the horse blinking and getting the flies off themselves, surely in wild they didnt have fly sheets so there must be a reason? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3drimk/eli5_why_cant_horses_get_rid_of_flies_on_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct7xww0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They blink, the fly flies off, goes about two feet, pulls a u-turn and goes back to the eye. \nThey can get rid of them, but they can't keep them away. \n \nReally, the ancestor to the domestic horse wouldn't have had this problem because they didn't live in stables. \nIt's the domestic horse's enclosure that attracts the flies, gives them a breeding ground, and traps the horse so it can't get away. \n \nIt wouldn't be a problem if they didn't live in the environment we put them in. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
8zeqh6 | why do planes often pass the destination airport and land from the other direction? | I frequently travel for work and notice that when I'm flying home from the south (travelling north), the plane will land from the north side, but when coming from the north, the plane lands from the south side. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8zeqh6/eli5_why_do_planes_often_pass_the_destination/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2i53xx",
"e2i5xeo"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"As a rule, planes take off and land into the wind. This means the speed over the ground is lower. Air is very much like a river. If you are swimming up the current, you are traveling slower in relation to the shore. Going with the current, you travel much faster. In both cases you are swimming at the same speed through the water.",
"Whenever possible, planes land flying against the wind. This gives them more lift, meaning they can approach the runway and touch down at a lower speed. This reduces the length of runway needed to stop and also reduces the wear on the tires. Of course, this means that if the plane was flying with the wind during the flight, it has to go past the airport and come back around to land against the wind."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
5j5vm6 | how do geckos stick? | ... to walls, glass and upside down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5j5vm6/eli5_how_do_geckos_stick/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbdna85",
"dbdncpj",
"dbdnfhh"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Geckos use what are called Van der Waal's forces, or induced dipole forces, to stick to objects. Van der Waal's forces are extremely weak electromagnetic forces which exist for an extremely short time between all molecules. They work something like this:\n\n1. An atom gets close to another atom. \n\n2. The electrostatic force of electrons on atom 1 pushes all the electrons on atom 2 over to one side very briefly. \n\n3. Atom 2 now has a dipole - it is slightly negatively charged on one side, and slightly positively charged on the other (the side closest to atom 1).\n\n4. The slight positive charge on atom 2 pulls the electrons of atom 1 towards it, creating a weak, instantaneous force of electrostatic attraction between the two. \n\nThis happens for all molecules. Geckos have evolved extremely tiny hairs on their feet, which get right into the contours and ridges of surfaces. This means they have a very large surface area of their body in contact with the material, meaning lots of Van der Waal's forces between them and the surface - enough to hold them on. ",
"Fun fact: Over the years, we've had several explanations for how that works, and they were all wrong. The actual, proper explanation is borderline absurd: it's literally just the molecules on the gecko's feet attracting the molecules on the walls.\n\nBasically, their toes have pads. Those pads have [setae](_URL_1_), which are kind of like hairs. Those setae are themselves covered in spatulae — sort of like tiny hairs on the surface of the regular-sized hairs. According to wikipedia: \"Each spatula is 0.2 μm long (one five-millionth of a meter), or just below the wavelength of visible light\".\n\nIn between the roughness of the walls and those hairs, the area of contact is absolutely massive, and a a very weak low-level inter-molecular phenomenon called [Van der Waals forces](_URL_0_), multiplied by all that surface area, becomes strong enough to hold over 100kg in weight.",
"How does stuff hold together? I mean, stuff is just lots of molecules. The molecules are atoms held together by strong bonds, but what stops, say, a piece of wood from just falling into a pile of sqiggly cellulose?\n\nThe answer is weaker forces between molecules. These are known as Van der Waals forces, after a Dutch scientist.\n\nIt turns out that you get these same Van der Walls forces whenever two things get close enough. But by 'close enough', we mean very, very close - close like the size of a atom. And surfaces of things, even things as smooth as glass, are rough on an atomic level. So we never experience these bonds when we just put two things together, because only a tiny, tiny part of those items are really, atomically, close.\n\nBut the Gecko can. It's feet are covered in lots of tiny hairs, and each hair tends to split up into many even tinier fibres. These fibres fit into lots of small gaps, making close contact with the atoms and molecules in the surface, each fibre getting stuck, very weakly, to that surface.\n\nBut each hair has many fibres, every foot has lots of hairs, and all those small forces together produce enough stick to allow a gecko to run, upside down, on polished glass. It is a remarkable animal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_der_Waals_force",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seta"
],
[]
] | |
f7mfen | how can russia affect the presidency. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f7mfen/eli5_how_can_russia_affect_the_presidency/ | {
"a_id": [
"fic8j4h"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Internet 'people' passing on 'information' that plays into certain peoples' preconceptions that harden their positions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2x11dn | if public toilets are hard to clog, why don't we use the same technology for home toilets? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2x11dn/eli5_if_public_toilets_are_hard_to_clog_why_dont/ | {
"a_id": [
"covwxq3",
"covzmru"
],
"score": [
25,
3
],
"text": [
"If you want to pay $300 or more for a toilet, go ahead, you can get a toilet that's almost impossible to clog.\n\nMost people will stick with their $80 toilets.",
"Cost is definitely a main issue, but in some cases, the plumbing may also not be able to handle the commercial toilets. Homes have less water pressure than some businesses and the return plumbing may not be able to handle the volume of the water put our by those high pressure toilets."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
13pf1p | what would happen if the us government attempted supply-side economics today? | Quick Description of Supply Side Economics:
Essentially the government drastically lowering taxes, allowing the people to have more money to spend. More money to spend goes towards goods, therefore increasing demand and supplying jobs because the businesses have more money to hire workers. Then, the government making money through taxing businesses.
It seems like a great idea. What would happen? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13pf1p/what_would_happen_if_the_us_government_attempted/ | {
"a_id": [
"c75z7dn"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Supply-side economics is a bit different from what you're describing. It involves lowering taxes on *suppliers*, which is intended to produce lower prices, which then spurs purchasing, growing the economy, which in turn leads to higher tax revenues. In particular, it tends to focus on lowering capital gains taxes as well the top income tax rate, as these are taxes often said to be paid by 'job creators'.\n\nDiscussion of tax rates relies on concept called the [Laffer curve](_URL_1_), which describes the relationship between tax rates and revenues. Essentially, the Laffer curve starts with the premise that no revenue will be raised at a 0% rate (for obvious reasons), and no revenue will be raised at a 100% rate (because nobody will do any work if you take all the income it generates). Between these extremes, the amount of collected tax revenue will vary, peaking at some particular tax rate. Those who suggest that cutting tax rates will increase total tax revenue are effectively arguing that current tax rates are above that peak-revenue tax rate.\n\nAssuming we're talking about the US here, this is probably not true. Tax rates, particularly for the highest income earners, are already near historical lows. Wikipedia has some nice charts [here](_URL_2_). Some estimates suggest that the revenue-maximizing tax rate may be something like 70%, far above current US tax rates.\n\nIgnoring government revenue, and focusing simply on economic growth, the CBO recently released a [study](_URL_0_) of the impact of top marginal tax rate and the capital gains tax rate on economic growth since 1945, which concluded that:\n\n > The top income tax rates have changed considerably since the end of World War II. Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s; today it is 15%. The average tax rate faced by the top 0.01% of taxpayers was above 40% until the mid-1980s; today it is below 25%. Tax rates affecting taxpayers at the top of the income distribution are currently at their lowest levels since the end of the second World War. \n\n > The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.\n\nOf course this is a very politically charged issue, and you will find other people arguing things that do not seem compatible with this data. Congressional Republicans actually demanded that the CBO withdraw the above study, although they didn't advance substantive objections.\n\nThe truth is, it's very easy to make a case for whatever economic policy you want by carefully picking the data you present. As you look into this subject more, I'd advise you to be very aware of what motives any sources you rely on might have, and I'd suggest distrusting any data that focuses on short time periods or narrow policy changes, rather than broad long term trends. It's also probably advisable to trust academic economists over anyone directly associated with the political process, and you may also want to look at international views to see what people who are outside of the standard US debates on these issues have to say."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States"
]
] | |
3ei6l2 | how can an object enter a black hole if it stops in time when being observed from a distance? | I have been very interested in black holes lately and one thing that baffled me was the premise of time. Apparently if you are a distance away from a blackhole watching an object fall into it, it will stop in time. Not only does it stop but it will remain so (from our perspective) and indefinite amount of time. So in all of existence, nothing has ever fallen into a black hole unless you are the actual object that is falling in?
Also if from our perspective an object stops in time while entering, why don't we see clusters of stars literally frozen in time around the black hole as it tries to eat them but can't due to the time dilation?
Thanks :) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ei6l2/eli5_how_can_an_object_enter_a_black_hole_if_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctf6b0y",
"ctf6fth",
"ctf6svy"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Time dilation effects the object falling in, not outside observers. And while it grows slow, it never stops. Like going faster means you are still going less that light.",
"I'm on the side that says objects can't fall through the event horizon for this very reason.\n\nAn infalling object would experience free fall and, in its own timeline, fall through the horizon in the expected amount of time for freefall, normally.\n\nHowever, for that to happen, due to general relativity an infinite amount of time would have to first pass in the outside world. Since black holes evaporate, there is no such time available. The infalling object is simply instantly \"thrown\" into the black hole's evaporating future, experiencing a very short fall right up to the event horizon. Of course, the shrinking black hole's tidal force, and the blueshifted infalling light would completely evaporate said object and it would leave the black hole as Hawking radiation, like *all matter that ever entered the black hole*.",
"Yeah, fascinating topic!\n\nI have fallen into the same missconception when I wrote a paper (not sure if this translates correctly) about black holes in school. The time stopping at the edge of a black hole is best be understood as a threshhold phenomenon.\n\nImmagine a hare catching up to a tortoise from a distance. There is a point where he has caught up half of the distance to the tortoise. Then there comes a point where he has caught up to a quarter, then to 1/8th, 1/16th, 1/32th. If we keep measuring everytime the hare halved the distance to the tortoise, we never stop measuring, thus we might fall for the illusion that the hare never reaches the tortoise.\n\nNow time goes ever slower the closer an object gets to the black hole but it actually doesn't stop until the object has acutally crossed the event horizon. At that point time stops for the object from our perspective, since no light from the object can reach us anymore. This is due to the definition of relative time.\n\nSince the speed of light is postulated as constant, but a light pulse from the object will NEVER reach us it is follows that space-time between us and the object must be infinite"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
1wu7ia | if you ate meat from an animal that had been given a hormone for weight gain, would the hormone pass to you? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wu7ia/eli5_if_you_ate_meat_from_an_animal_that_had_been/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf5e7yp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because your post isn't asking a simplified conceptual explanation, but rather for an answer, its been removed. \n\nYou should try /r/answers, /r/askreddit or even one of the more specialized answers subreddits like /r/askhistorians, /r/askscience or others too numerous and varied to mention. \n\nRest assured this doesn't make your question *bad*, it just makes it more appropriate for another subreddit. Good luck! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
56szxk | why is it that a building with the ac set to 70 degrees on "cool" mode is colder than a building set to 70 degrees on "warm" mode? shouldn't they be the same temperature? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56szxk/eli5_why_is_it_that_a_building_with_the_ac_set_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8m2hxp",
"d8m2ibv",
"d8m2k1w"
],
"score": [
4,
23,
2
],
"text": [
"part of it is perception, you come in from a cold outside temp, you will want to warm up, and 70 doesnt really do that, likewise when its hot and you want to cool down.\n\nBut the other half is drafts. you typically put the thermostat on an interior wall, which is probably an idea spot from a temperature gradient point of view, as you walk away from the center, the temperature goes in the wrong direction, cold drafts in the winter, hot in the summer.",
"Upper and lower boundaries. Cooling to 70 activates cold AC when temp goes ABOVE 70. Warming to 70 only activates heat AC if temp goes BELOW 70. If the building is above 70 then heat AC will never turn on because it's waiting for building temp to drop below 70.",
"If you lived in a perfect building that had everything perfectly designed they would be. In a perfect world the heating and cooling would be spread perfectly evenly to every inch of the building exactly evenly. \n\nIn actual design most buildings just spray some air whatever way was cheapest and easiest and the temperature is largely controlled by what specific air temperature the air being blown on you is. Instead of it being a temperature control that is evenly released through the entire surface of the interior. \n\nIn a really nice building 70 is 70, in most building 70 on warm is a hot air vent blowing on you directly and 70 on cool is an AC vent blowing in your face. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
7kdj4z | how do restaurants know how many portions of slow cooked food to prepare? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kdj4z/eli5_how_do_restaurants_know_how_many_portions_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"drdgaa0",
"drdrtb2",
"drdrw9k"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When I worked in restaurants, we had prep guides that compared the last week and last year sales of items. It gave us a rough estimate of what we needed. Sometimes it is too much, sometimes too little. ",
"LPT: when eating at a restaurant ask what last night's special was. Then see what leftovers are in tonight's \"special\". ",
"I hate food waste too!\n\nThey mostly guess based on the particular day of the week, weather.. as to how popular something tends to be.. and how busy they expect to be that day. \n\nOften they have other plans for such meat if it's not used that day. The following day they might use it in a soup, or in a sandwich (such as a beef dip)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1o0fkx | why are religious conservatives opposed to social safety nets for the poor? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1o0fkx/eli5_why_are_religious_conservatives_opposed_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccnq8sa",
"ccnq902",
"ccnqngb"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This is still phrased in a loaded way. You were asked to phrase it neutrally, but you didn't.",
"A few decades back, the republican party decided to adopt some religious conservative ideologies in order to court the votes of the rather large population of religious conservatives in this country. It was a pretty successful move in terms of winning elections.\n\nAnd over time, just as these conservative religious priorities spread throughout the republican party as a whole (gay marriage, abortion, etc.), some of the existing conservative fiscal/social priorities spread back to the religious conservatives. \n\nThey've become very intertwined. Add to that the more recent drive for \"idelogoical purity\" within the GOP, and people who don't agree with all of these priorities have been marginalized within the party. ",
"The short answer is who is in charge, the long answer is one of spreading ideology.\n\nThey aren't opposed to social safety nets, they're just opposed to someone else running the social safety net. \n\nOn Who is in charge:\n\nSince I'm smarter than you, I should be in charge. The Government/other aid group/etc. isn't going to do it properly. Whatever those mean to any particular group. Maybe they won't help you if you drink, maybe they won't help you if that includes contraception, maybe they won't help you if that means you use electricity. Maybe they just think the government doesn't provide efficient care and it would be better to give them (the religious organization) the money, and then they could use it more efficiently. \n\nIf you make social safety a moral judgement then you're doing something the government can't - smokers in civilized countries still get healthcare, even though they're costing themselves and their fellow taxpayers a huge amount of money. Same with someone driving 200Km/h on the highway and crashing into someone. \n\nOne of the common complaints about welfare is that it's just used to buy alcohol by bums. Not really true on the whole, but not 100% false - some bums probably do collect welfare and buy booze with it. If you decide that the solution is to purge the moral corruption of booze and aid is contingent on that then you're not going to like the government doing what it does. The same sort of thing with unwed mothers and contraception- people get very upset at the prospect of money being given to things they don't like, even if that is an insignificant portion of their money. \n\n\nThe second point I made was spreading ideology. You want your organization to spread your ideology, just as much as you don't want other organizations spreading theirs. If you believe Islam is an affront to civilization and that they are the worst scum of the earth possible, an Islamic aid organization - even if it only provides an inconsequentially small part of overall aid, must be driven out. The government as a whole can't and won't do that. \n\nSo it's some part the typical turf war squabbling - my organization wants to be in charge because I'm convinced you can't do anything right. And some of it is crazy people being paranoid.\n\nThere are some side incidental things. Social safety net organizations are, occasionally, fronts for funnelling money to various non safety net things. And the government doing it cuts of their supply of funds. If you're sending money to the IRA or Al Qaeda or a political action committee you want your funding to keep coming. That sort of thing isn't so much of an issue now. In the same way there are organizations that probably would rather not help blacks (cough, the KKK, cough)- but that's mostly ancient history these days, those types did and to some limited extent do exist, but they're not the problems they once were. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
10ergl | how can parking garages hold so much weight? | To me it just seems like these structures support so much weight constantly and consistently. Is there anything different about the way they are constructed? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10ergl/eli5_how_can_parking_garages_hold_so_much_weight/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6cu0ko"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Lots and lots of concrete, reinforced with steel bars inside, good placement of columns, arches, and other support structures, all built on a solid foundation.\n\nOne important concept here is weight distribution. If a car parks directly above a column, most of the weight of the car is being supported by just that one column. But if it parks in-between columns or load-bearing walls, then the weight of the car is supported by both."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
13wvyc | why do women get sweet cravings more than men? | Or do they? Is this just a stereotype? THANKS! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13wvyc/eli5_why_do_women_get_sweet_cravings_more_than_men/ | {
"a_id": [
"c77vgpf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Not sure they do. I can tell you that my wife craves chocolate at certain points in a 28 day cycle. That time corresponds to an increase in my whiskey intake."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
divt2u | why does it feel satisfying to sigh when you’re sad? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/divt2u/eli5_why_does_it_feel_satisfying_to_sigh_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"f3zo1ky"
],
"score": [
29
],
"text": [
"This **is** because when you **breathe** deeply, it sends a message to your brain to calm down and relax."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
4nvp43 | what molecular attribute governs bouncy-ness | More specifically why does a bouncy ball on contact with a solid reflect it's direction. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nvp43/eli5_what_molecular_attribute_governs_bouncyness/ | {
"a_id": [
"d47aphz"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Elasticity and electromagnetism. Basically, when the ball hits the floor, it deforms elastically. Atoms and molecules are pushed together, against their own repulsive forces. This stores energy. Once there is no more energy to store (the ball has stopped), the molecules use that stored energy to return the ball to its original form, which pushes it up. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
3i6kz3 | what's happening to the global stock markets right now? | Bonus question, is this the 2008 GFC all over again? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i6kz3/eli5_whats_happening_to_the_global_stock_markets/ | {
"a_id": [
"cudsb8a",
"cudtm5n",
"cudwnft",
"cudx2bw",
"cudxm76",
"cudy2dw",
"cudy3bz",
"cudyewq",
"cue8fy1"
],
"score": [
29,
13,
29,
6,
2,
2,
2,
187,
2
],
"text": [
"Imaging the investors in the stock market as a bunch of pannicky squirrels. \n\nAll these squirrels have invested alot of money in China. But know they fear that the chinese economy will not grow as much as it has been for the last decade. They think the Chinese goverment has hidden from the public how bad the economy in China is. They think that Cina devaluing it's currency is evedenc of this. \n\nSo these frighteed squirrels are doing what frightened squirrels to and selling all thier stock ( not that they should have paid the price they did for it in the first place ).\n\nNot many want to buy stock, which meean high volume and low demand sending prices tumbling downward.",
"Here's a thoughtful breakdown from a friend of mine. But someone will have to ELI5 it, cause I have no idea what it says:\n\n\"In October 2014 and February 2015, the headline indexes came down and breached the 200 day moving average and 12 month moving average, those are critical support levels beneath which big trouble arises, as was seen this past Friday. Bullard and Fisher both saved the day on each of those days by jumping on the mic and saying the FOMC will maintain 0% interest rates and even reinstate QE3 if necessary, effectively promising to backstop traders against any losses and the markets turned green and never looked back. I remember it well because I was shorting the market on those days and both Fisher and Bullard cost me a shit ton of money with their jawboning. However, this past Friday, most traders expected a bounce after the heavy selling on heavy volume all week, but Bullard got on the mic this time and did the opposite of his usual antics, he did not promise liquidity assistance nor 0% interest, instead he promoted a rate increase, he pulled the backstop away from traders during their worst hour.\n\nIt is hysterical on so many levels because Bullard and Fisher have been pumping markets with these speeches for years and now they turned their backs on traders and forced them to absorb losses and allowed the volatility index to float its biggest weekly gain ever in financial history.\n\nOn to China...\n\nThe benchmark SSEC index is down around 45% off its June high. Since the June high, the PBOC and Chinese government have tried to stop the selling by criminalizing short selling, cutting interest rates, nationalizing stocks (Yes, there is actually a bureau of stocks now in the Chinese Government), and devaluing the Yuan by 4%, which is the greatest devaluation in 20 years, in an effort to stop selling. None of it worked.\n\nChinese officials then instructed mainland hedge funds to toe the 200 day moving average at any cost. They did so and managed to hold the 200 day moving average 5 times over the last 7 weeks. The market has barely hung on to the 200 day moving average as Communist leaders threatened fund managers if they should fail the 200 day MA...\n\nDespite the central bank's best efforts and the government interference and threats...The SSEC finally lost the 200 day moving average in glorious fashion on Thursday night. The loss of the 200 day MA despite this much interference and pumping by the central bank speaks volumes about the fact the China has completely lost control over the inflated stock market run that the central bank fueled.\n\nWall Street is hoping that this weekend China provides further stimulus to stem the losses on the SSEC and other Chinese indexes on Monday, but judging by the ineffectiveness of all the ongoing easing measures, it isnt going to work. There is nothing China can do to stop the selling at this point, this is what is meant by a central bank losing control, they become powerless to stop natural market forces from emerging, a fact that has become painfully obvious in China and will soon become painfully obvious for U.S. equities.\n\nI also see on a technical basis, the benchmark U.S. indexes are just getting started to the downside. Monday morning will be a red open, how much red is the only question. Dip buyers will likely emerge and they will likely be slaughtered upon on entry, as markets sucker in dumb money while smart money has already left the party. Markets prefer the path of maximum devastation. Charts suggest heavy selling pressure is on deck for the coming weeks and months and the S & P 500 ended the 6 year bull run at its peak value of 2135, it will not reach that price again for many many years, even if the FED reinstates QE3, it will not breach this peak level.\n\nIt is overwhelmingly obvious that the smart money has already left the party, only inexperienced retailers will buy this market now. Google accumulation-distribution and McCllellan oscillator. We have been watching distribution from smart money to dumb money all year as the A-D trend has been down for 10 months, it was the opposite during QE3, smart money bought stocks with both hands during that time. Now when I leave my house, I hear all this excitement amongst the masses that there is a buying opportunity. Oh my, how Wall Street is fucking genius like that. The retailers are dead on the weekly, monthly, and yearly basis. Every good bull run needs bagholders.\"",
"The Chinese market shot up last year and now it's crashing back to reality. Investors cover their losses by selling other investments, so lots of markets fall like dominos. When lots of markets fall, then people panic sell because they fear losing more money. Now everything is in free fall. This is not as bad as 2008. There may be systemic problems in China, but the US is healthy though overvalued. \n",
"Pretty much all stock movements are driven by forces so complex that they may as well be random (or are in fact, actually random).\n\nHumans are really good at telling themselves stories, so every time the markets go crazy, everyone competes (after the fact, mind you) to find the most believable story.",
"Everyone was super excited about China's recent economic success, and all thought it could only get better from there, the massive growth rates would persist until China had caught up and surpassed the West. \n\nTurns out high growth is not something that persists forever no matter what. \n\nUhoh, I geuss everyone will be scrambling to sell their stock now! Better hurry and sell yours too before its too late!\n\nYes it is pretty much the same as any other bubble.",
"_URL_0_\n\nChina relaxed restrictions on margin trading, taking out loans to buy shares. This resulted in a speculative bubble because the market had not adapted to these changes.\n\n_URL_1_{\"range\":\"2y\"}\n\nThe usual thing happened, people bought because they expected the price to rise, when there were no more buyers the price stopped rising and people started selling. Most people were aware it was a bubble so I don't think there will be too much collateral damage, an index like the Shanghai Composite with many large mature companies does not double within 8 months for sensible reasons.\n\n_URL_2_\n\nAt the same time in the US we have been in a bull market for 2½ years and there are many stocks that are overpriced, the market is spooked.\n\n_URL_3_{%22range%22:%225y%22,%22allowChartStacking%22:true}",
"China has been claiming that their economy is growing at 7%. Nobody believes China and it is widely believed that they cook the books. Still, people think China has been growing pretty well, just not as well as claimed. China recently devalued their currency. People have taken this as a sign that things are much worse than China had initially said. China is the second largest economy in the world. Its growth has been a large part of expectations that companies will grow as they penetrate the Chinese market. In addition, China is a critical manufacturer for everyone. They are the largest consumer of energy. If China is in crisis, everyone is. Now everyone believes China is in crisis, and indeed their stock market is tanking. Because China is a big deal, and integrated into the world economy, many other stock markets are dropping as well. Everyone is panicking and jumping out of stocks to buy things that don't go down when stocks tank: U.S. dollars, treasuries, bonds, etc... ",
"Ok, here's my go. On mobile so please forgive the inevitable spelling errors. There's no way to really explain this to a five year old, but this is as low as I can make it. \n\nThink of the stock market as block towers. Money is the blocks. Your goal is to have the biggest tower. When a block touches the ground, the money goes away. \n\nChina spent a lot of money to make their tower. China started to get a really big tower! Other people noticed this. They began to give China new blocks for the tower. If they help China make a big tower, they can get more blocks for their towers. \n\nThe tower got too big for China to hold up. Some blocks started to fall off. For a while, China kept catching the pieces them putting them back up. Other people didn't see the falling pieces, so they kept giving China more blocks. Big towers are better after all.\n\n China needed help keeping the blocks up. They tried getting others to help keep the blocks up. But too many pieces kept falling off. They tried making all the blocks smaller. That didn't work either. Nothing worked. The tower started to fall down.\n\nSome of these blocks that fell were from other people. These other people live everywhere around the world. They have their own block towers. Now they see China losing blocks! Nobody wants to lose blocks! Even worse, some of the blocks they gave to China belonged to their friends. Those friends will want their blocks back.\n\nThis is bad. Everyone wants their blocks back. Because China lost some of them, everyone else is worried that they'll lose blocks too. So they start to put away all of their blocks. This makes the towers smaller. But this way they don't lose their blocks.",
"It's not written for a 5-year-old, but [this article](_URL_0_) does a good job explaining a lot of what's going on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://qz.com/308153/the-shadowy-trading-behind-chinas-stock-market-boom/",
"http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=000001.SS+Interactive#",
"http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/03/31/chinas-stock-market-sure-looks-like-a-bubble/",
"http://finance.yahoo.c... | |
7re0ox | how does the electric company measure how much electricity you are using during different times of the day. (peak vs non peak hours) if they only read it once a month. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7re0ox/eli5_how_does_the_electric_company_measure_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsw860n"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"If they're billing you for power you're using at different times of day then they are either reading it multiple times per day or they have a smart meter that is storing the data and being read out once a month\n\nOld power meters were dumb, they were just a dial that spun up quicker the more power you used. Modern power meters have communication built in. Some communicate via 4G and cell towers, others communicate over the powerlines using a system like TWACS. If they read your meter at the beginning and end of peak hours then they know how much you used during peak. If they use 4G to send back hourly readings then they can give you a graph of how much power you used each hour.\n\nThe alternative solution is a smart meter that records the data and then someone plugs into once a month, but systems like TWACS and 4G are preferred because you no longer need a dude driving around in a truck just to read meters."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
192mn1 | yawning and hearing | I play the drums, and sometimes when I practice, I play with hearing protection headphones designed for shooting ranges. If I yawn and open my nasal cavity at the same time while my ears are protected, the sound changes and sounds clearer, and no, it sounds nothing like the normal sounds I would hear if I didn't have earphones on. Am I hearing out of my nose or mouth or something? I know this is *clearly* a question from a stupid drummer, but it's pretty crazy to hear while playing. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/192mn1/eli5_yawning_and_hearing/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8kasfw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Yawning opens up your [Eustachian tubes](_URL_1_), which are like the pressure valves for your middle ear. This tube normally stays closed, and so the air that's in your middle ear (which pushes against the inside of your eardrum) is trapped there. It's usually at the same pressure as the air outside, so no big deal.\n\nWhen you make a yawning face, you open those tubes and un-trap the air that's normally kept stuck at a constant pressure inside your ear. This changes the way the vibrations from the eardrum are sent to our inner ear, and therefore changes the way we hear sounds. There's a little more info in [this section of the Wiki article I linked above.](_URL_0_)\n\nThis is the same reason your ears \"pop\" when you're in an airplane or tall building - it's that trapped air equalizing its pressure with the outside air.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustachian_tube#Pressure_equalization",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustachian_tube"
]
] | |
lgsw6 | string cheese | Why does string cheese pull apart in strands unlike other cheeses? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lgsw6/eli5_string_cheese/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2skh6y",
"c2skh6y"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"have you ever tried pulling apart other cheese like that?",
"have you ever tried pulling apart other cheese like that?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
5vvhk5 | why does spaghetti sauce stain certain plastic containers so badly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vvhk5/eli5_why_does_spaghetti_sauce_stain_certain/ | {
"a_id": [
"de5b7a2",
"de5opue",
"de5xsmi",
"de62bzq"
],
"score": [
296,
10,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Plastic containers are to various extents permeable. Spag sauce is oily and deeply pigmented.\n\nWarming oils makes them less viscous, making them more easily penetrate the porous plastic, staining it. This process is enhanced by the significant volume of pigment.\n\nSince the pigment is easily seen, even small amounts are visible. To shift the stain you'll need patience, washing soap and more heat.\n\nSeal your spag sauce in glass containers and never have this problem again.\n",
"Lycopene is water-insoluble pigment (particle) becoming trapped in pores. Can remove with mild abrasive like baking soda paste, or discolor with *very* diluted bleach soak.",
"Most dishwasher manuals state not to rinse dishes with spaghetti sauce on them before washing as the water rinse will set the sauce in the pores of the dish, whereas the washing soda in the dishwasher would scrub it off before it can sink in.",
"This. This is the biggest problem I have when I make or order Korean food. Warm water and some dish soap to the rescue. Dishwasher just doesn't cut it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
a6bh1v | horsepower. if a car had 1hp it wouldnt move an inch but a horse would have no problem pulling a car. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a6bh1v/eli5_horsepower_if_a_car_had_1hp_it_wouldnt_move/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebti8br"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Sure it would move, just slowly. A tiny smart car can go 60 MPH with only an 80 horsepower motor. It could easily travel slowly with a 1HP motor, since drag is a function of velocity squared. 30 MPH should take only 20HP and 15MPH only 5HP. that should let you travel 6-7MPH at 1HP."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
cuolrq | how do governments enact and enforce tariffs? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cuolrq/eli5_how_do_governments_enact_and_enforce_tariffs/ | {
"a_id": [
"exwrfr6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There's customs at the border. All goods that enter need to be declared properly before being let in. If whatever being let in is subject to import taxes or tariffs they will send a bill to the recipient. In some cases the goods may even be stuck in customs until that tariff is paid."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2pa2nk | dogs eat "dog food" everyday and it has everything their bodies need, why isn't there a human equivalent to "dog food"? | The kibble dogs eat supposedly contain everything a dog needs to survive and be healthy. Why isn't there a human version of this concept? Eating can be such a chore sometimes, as well as worrying about the health consequences of eating the wrong stuff. Some days I wish I could just fill up the tank.
EDIT: Well it has been an informative evening. It seems the elusive superfood that tastes good and provides everything the body needs, doesn't exist. Shakes and nutrition drinks come close but miss out on the satisfying factor. Runners-up include MREs, nutrient enriched pizzas, and potatos. A startup in California has an interesting new food they call the Burweedo which looks very promising.
It seems humans are a bit more complicated then dogs, and dog food isn't all that healthy to begin with.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pa2nk/eli5_dogs_eat_dog_food_everyday_and_it_has/ | {
"a_id": [
"cox6n59",
"cmup4vx",
"cmupblf",
"cmuprnr",
"cmuq3dr",
"cmuqcrz",
"cmur6ml",
"cmurf6m",
"cmurknh",
"cmurq2k",
"cmus7iy",
"cmutkvc",
"cmutlmj",
"cmuuf1n",
"cmuuody",
"cmuv01v",
"cmuvkz2",
"cmuwea4",
"cmuwet9",
"cmuwi13",
"cmuwo73",
"cmuwtoy",
"cmuwyh4",
"cmux4ee",
"cmux52x",
"cmux7uq",
"cmuxfxz",
"cmuxhdj",
"cmuxi7i",
"cmuxmf5",
"cmuxn7m",
"cmuxobh",
"cmuxpx8",
"cmuxqnz",
"cmuxtvq",
"cmuxxd7",
"cmuy071",
"cmuy2yc",
"cmuy4du",
"cmuy4ne",
"cmuy8va",
"cmuyfru",
"cmuyh90",
"cmuyi53",
"cmuynch",
"cmuyp45",
"cmuyqyd",
"cmuyu79",
"cmuyuoi",
"cmuyv7q",
"cmuywbj",
"cmuyx62",
"cmuyy1q",
"cmuz088",
"cmuz8hg",
"cmuzaei",
"cmuzimy",
"cmuzkse",
"cmuzljo",
"cmuzpuw",
"cmuzqhc",
"cmuzweo",
"cmuzz4v",
"cmv01kh",
"cmv04t7",
"cmv0ogv",
"cmv0tx6",
"cmv0yvz",
"cmv14pz",
"cmv1550",
"cmv1g1i",
"cmv1h5c",
"cmv1p8j",
"cmv1thx",
"cmv1uqo",
"cmv1x8z",
"cmv236w",
"cmv23oq",
"cmv27kj",
"cmv28ni",
"cmv2e0d",
"cmv2kiy",
"cmv2lj7",
"cmv2n2e",
"cmv2rna",
"cmv2t4d",
"cmv2u8i",
"cmv2v3d",
"cmv31r7",
"cmv32r6",
"cmv33f0",
"cmv36i0",
"cmv377j",
"cmv39f0",
"cmv3eqy",
"cmv3td7",
"cmv3y0q",
"cmv43x0",
"cmv4b6k",
"cmv4bla",
"cmv554q",
"cmv55ew",
"cmv58jc",
"cmv58oa",
"cmv5ae3",
"cmv5alh",
"cmv5cbp",
"cmv5dm8",
"cmv5j7a",
"cmv5ktp",
"cmv66yk",
"cmv6g46",
"cmv6l1x",
"cmv6po4",
"cmv6s1u",
"cmv6vqi",
"cmv6x7c",
"cmv7k23",
"cmv80h2",
"cmv80kc",
"cmv81q8",
"cmv86e3",
"cmv8wcu",
"cmv8z8o",
"cmv92s4",
"cmv98xx",
"cmv9ibm",
"cmv9n6a",
"cmv9qo2",
"cmv9rc2",
"cmvabcd",
"cmvaywm",
"cmvb2tf",
"cmvc8lr",
"cmvcmtd",
"cmvcryp",
"cmvcsam",
"cmvd3z4",
"cmvd9gd",
"cmvd9vp",
"cmvdmno",
"cmvdqkw",
"cmvdu3i",
"cmve344",
"cmve3bw",
"cmvebmg",
"cmvefcm",
"cmvehx3",
"cmves4m",
"cmvfcyp",
"cmvfghn",
"cmvfpy3",
"cmvfrpu",
"cmvfucj",
"cmvfvxe",
"cmvg0u0",
"cmvg43h",
"cmvgbb9",
"cmvglv2",
"cmvh51a",
"cmvhpo3",
"cmvidpq",
"cmvikly",
"cmvj1q5",
"cmvjltl",
"cmvk14x",
"cmvkb9t",
"cmvl08v",
"cmvl257",
"cmvlf3l",
"cmxu3hd"
],
"score": [
3,
118,
31,
3857,
77,
49,
1326,
61,
533,
3,
2,
986,
95,
3,
2,
563,
2,
9,
10,
2,
4,
5,
2,
3,
71,
12,
11,
2,
2,
3,
92,
4,
2,
2,
2,
5,
4,
2,
2,
9,
91,
5,
3,
2,
2,
6,
19,
5,
3,
194,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
3,
2,
14,
2,
5,
2,
2,
7,
2,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
4,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
7,
15,
2,
6,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
3,
5,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Pretty sure breast milk falls into this category?",
"You can make a shake or salad that has everything you need",
"They do make that sort of thing though. Think of people in hospitals who have feeding tubes. They get a balanced intake of necessary vitamins, minerals, etc. but not a lot of unnecessary fat, sugars, or flavor/color additives.\n\nI would say the \"everyday\" version would be nutrition drinks, which in my experience don't taste nearly as delicious as food. ",
"There are quite a few products like that the most well know of which being [Soylent](_URL_0_). The only real problem with them is that humans really like eating and eating things of varying taste and texture, which means it's likely never going to be a very popular thing.",
"[I watched this British documentary about a girl who couldn't physically eat.](_URL_0_) She survived until the age of seven on nothing but a feeding tube pumping nutrient-rich \"food\" straight into her stomach, and it kept her alive and healthy.\n\nSo yes, it can be done, but you'll have no variety of flavours or textures which is reason enough for most people to not want to try it. Plus I imagine that food mush stuff gets pretty expensive.",
"You can and there is. You can even live of potatoes and butter indefinitely. Will be a tad boring, but it's possible.",
"Theyre called field rations in the armed forces and no you do not want to eat them.",
"I'm assuming one could live on 'meal replacement' drinks like Boost or Ensure? And those pouches of 'food' astronauts took up to space might qualify. ",
"Because eating real food is better. Why do you think dogs jump at any chance at human food? I'm sure if dogs could choose, they would say \"I'll have the steak.\"",
"I too could produce some cheap balls of crap and tell you that it is all you need to survive. \nHowever, there is a large difference between survival and thriving. \nDog food companies don't care about that, and people believe it because it is convenient. \nTl;Dr kibble is not a balanced diet for dogs.",
"Because we don't want to eat the same kibble every day.",
"There is, it's called nutriloaf. It's served to my clients in jail all the time as a disciplinary measure. Source: my clients always want me to file 8th amendment suits on their behalf. ",
"Because humans enjoy the act of eating for all the different smells, tastes, textures and colors. Eating is both physically and emotionally fulfilling. \n\nDogs will eat garbage in the street. \n\nOr, in the case of my dog, her own turds.",
"Please keep in mind that the majority of commercial dog food does not have everything a dog needs nutritionally, quite the opposite actually. If you are a pet owner please check the label and ensure you understand it. \n\nDerivatives of vegetable origin? Sawdust.",
"Selection pressure has driven us to want/enjoy as much variety as possible, since focusing on any single natural food would lead to malnutrition and death. We can eat almost anything, which is a huge advantage over most other animals.\n\nMaybe dogs and cats have that same drive, but we humans just don't care what they want enough. It would explain corprophagia (eating their own poop), if they really wanted to taste anything other than kibble for the 400th meal in a row.",
"Purina makes Monkey Chow.\nI've always wondered how far we could go on that.",
"Not sure if this is what you're asking, but as primates, we are programmed to seek out a varied diet. There's a reason humans get sick of eating the same meals over and over.",
"I remember reading that breast milk was the only nutritionally complete food.",
"As it's been said many times in this thread, it exists, but it's not widely accepted/famous because we don't like to eat the exact same dish every day during the rest of our lives.",
"I have heard a few times that humans could live entirely off of potatoes, but I don't have a source",
"I thought about this awhile ago. My conclusion was that cereal is basically just that.",
"There is. Purina made feed for primates (for labs) a while back. You, as a primate, could have subsisted on a diet of Purina Primate Chow.",
"soylent. it's a thing. also that kibble is like cocoa puffs for dogs, it won't kill them but it's not particularly the best diet.",
"Because humans don't want to eat a human equivalent of dog food.",
"You should look into Soylent, Ambronite, and MealSqaures. \nMealSquares are a little bland, but they get the job done. ",
"Is anyone aware if dogs are happier where there is variety in their diet?",
"because kibble is shit. It's not meant to be healthy, it's meant to be cheap. \n\nDogs die young regardless of their diet. It would cost 5-10x more to feed a dog like a human, for a year or two gain in lifespan. \n\nCats are actually much more susceptible to dry food than dogs. Dry food is loaded with corn usually and cats, as strict carnivores, don't process it properly. That's why many common diseases in household cats don't occur almost at all in the wild (even in cats in the wild who survive to old age). \n\nSo yes, you could eat dog food. You'd live. You would probably be very unhealthy. ",
"Human versions of this have been around for a long time. You can buy Ensure anywhere, for example. ",
"Èxcept there isn't a \"everything\" a dog needs food, it's all marketing and lies. Dogs need good diet just like humans do. (but with more meat)",
"My dog still prefers a steak and roasted rosemary potatoes... ",
"i wish more than anything i could go buy a big sack of bachelor chow. it would probably come in different flavors like chips or ramen noodles",
"There is: it is called NutraLoaf, and prisoners hate it.",
"We do have something like that, it's called:\n\n- lean meats\n- fish\n- vegetables\n- fruits. \n\nThat is, in fact, exactly what your body needs. Problem is, like you said, you have to put it together. Unfortunately health is not yet available in pill form or convenient package. Whenever we do make something like that it is either:\n\n- tasteless\n- actually bad for you\n- missing something you need because we didn't know you needed it, because the science doesn't understand it yet ",
"It is called gangreen or something. Tastes like bland peanut butter. ",
"I think /u/killing_sin hit the nail on the head with soylent in answer to your question. If you were interested though, many children and adults are unable to eat, because they have an unsafe swallow and risk aspirating anything they eat/drink or they simply don't have the cognitive function. \n\nIn this case, they have either a nasogastric tube or gastrostomy, and are tube fed milk type feeds that contain everything they need! This also bypasses actually having to eat/drink as its tubed right into the stomach.\n\nSome feeds include: paediasure, fortisip, ensure. There are ones with more fibre, lactose free, allergen free.. etc. There are hundreds.",
"heres a documentary about a food equivalent you can live off _URL_0_\n",
"Dog food does not have everything dogs need for their bodies. Far from it, actually. It's like eating McDonald's all their lives. It may taste good but it's not good for them.",
"Soylent is shit nutritionally. The bioavailability of the vitamins yhey chose to use is in the toilet.",
"Plus dogs have a much shorter life span, so nutritional needs may be less complicated than humans.",
"Pretty sure you can survive entirely on Potatoes and butter.",
"It would, in fact, be pretty trivial to do this for humans, but note that there is no evidence to support the idea that kibble is an ideal food for dogs. There are plenty of maladies that we consider \"normal\" for dogs that may or may not be something that a better more varied diet might help. I've heard plenty of (anecdotal) evidence from pet owners who switch to rmb or a raw food diet for their pets that are noteworthy in that way. \n\nEdit. Apparently I a word. ",
"its called a sweet potato. has every nutrient you need and populations have lived on them for long periods of time. ",
"It was called Soylent Green but I don't think you really want to eat it. ",
"Because it sucks ass. Everybody wants food that tastes good and has some variety.",
"According to trustworthy advertisements, I believe McDonalds is the healthy choice to get your human equivalent of \"dog food\".",
"\"No, it doesn't have everything the body *needs*\"",
"Its called pemmican and the inuit survive off it for 6 months a year\n\nCrushed dehydrated meat mixed with rendered fat. That's all you need. Dehydrated crushed berries for flavor are optional",
"Yeah people have gotten behind a new product like this called soylent green. Its quite good. And I hear the homeless population has gone down because of all the jobs it makes. ",
"ELI5: There is. You can eat hot pockets for 40 years and not die.",
"Surprised there are no ag-science majors here.\n\nI remember my husband mentioning years ago that there was only one perfect food; all main vitamins, minerals and amino acids. That one food is beef liver. Sweet potatoes are missing one amino acid. \n\nI have never verified. He has 2 degree in agriculture. That is good enough for me.\n",
"Many of the comments in this thread remark upon the tendancy of people to like variety, especially in taste and texture. I can see the benefits of incorporating drinks like soylent into a diet for either supplementation or as a meal replacement, and doing should not necessary imply complete dependancy on that product. However it is possible, and many people eat a staple diet and can rarely, if ever, mix things up either for fiancial, dietry, religious, or practical reasons. \n\nI think the rejection of eating/drinking the same thing all the time shows more about the societies in which we live than blthe products in question. We have access to an increasing variety of different foodstuffs, and taking that away couls possibly cause some adverse issues. But I'm sure if you made a long term committment to a singular food source with all necessary nutritional content, then soon enough variety would seem odd.",
"It's called baby formula, I wouldn't recommend it. In all seriousness there are legit meal replacements like [Metagenics UltraMeal](_URL_0_) that are medical grade meal supplements. I don't trust the quality of stuff like Soylent.",
"Some guy actually made a drink like that called Soylent obviously based of off the movie Soylent Green.",
"I often wonder what I would eat if for whatever reason I lost my sense of taste... Probably soylent",
"I routinely skip meals as an alternative to eating the same thing on consecutive days. I'm as picky as they come, and eating the same thing every day would physically harm me. It's incredibly unhealthy and sounds spoiled, but sometimes I literally get nauseous if I force myself to eat leftovers.\n\nCurrently browsing at reddit before going to sleep, having skipped another dinner because leftovers won't cut it.\nI blame being raised in Singapore. It spoils you rotten with food choice the same way having all the toys you want will make you a brat.",
"Pizza humans have pizza. You can eat it warm or cold morning, noon, night.",
"Soylent green is named after a movie (which is an interesting decision considering the movie's content) that seeks to be just that.",
"Cheap grain, fortified with vitamins, fiber, and protein?\n\nSounds like breakfast cereal to me. ",
"Rice is almost perfect. It's only missing a few amino acids, which can be supplimented with beans. So, rice and beans is human food. ",
"There is, It's called Pizza. \nAll four food groups. \nGrains, meat, dairy and vegetable.",
"Canines are specialists. They eat only meat and can subsist on only meat. Humans are the ideal generalist. We eat a little of anything. We may not be perfectly healthy, but we can survive in any biome because of it.",
"Be me living on a farm. The only food I really eat is grains from my field. Im a cow",
"[Nutraloaf](_URL_0_) tastes like shit bit you can live on it. ",
"When I worked in a prison we called it nutri-loaf. ",
"A close natural equivalent would be milk. High in whey and casein proteins, as well as containing a menagerie of vitamins and minerals, there's a reason why humans survive solely off the stuff in their early developmental years. ",
"Porridge. People survived on it for centuries.",
"You could live on breastmilk your entire life. You're not going to be the healthiest though.",
"Pretty much quinoa. It's a complete protein so it provides your body with all 9 essential amino acids which can provide for most of your nutritional needs.",
"Dogs can survive on dog food but that doesn't mean it has everything their body needs. Most dog foods are filled with fillers their bodies don't need and contain very little of what they actually do. Quality sources of protein are too expensive so most foods contain a lot of grain or carbohydrate sources like potatoes. \n\nSame goes for human food. Grains and simple carbs are abundant and cheap. While an equivalent to dog food is entirely possible and already does exists, think cereals, it's not necessarily something we should live off of. \n\n",
"There is, it's called Insure.\nThe medical form is called two cal I believe.\n",
"i would choke a bitch if i had to eat the same thing every day.",
"Considering my dogs' favorite things to eat are poop and dead things, I'm not sure I'd want to see (or smell) the \"perfect\" dog food.",
"There is, its called Soylent, _URL_1_, you can make it yourself (though you have to buy the stuff in bulk and its pretty complex) or buy the powder and mix it with water and veg. oil you can survive purely on that and the founder and another person have for about a month, heres a more in-depth video _URL_0_ .",
"Burweedo? I've never heard of that, and the only google searches I found reference the Workaholics TV show, and describes it as a burrito with weed. The *real* life food you might be looking for that's the human equivalent to dog food might be Soylent. It's a crowdfunded food that supposedly replaces all of your meals.",
"If you only needed to survive for 12 years you could probably eat garbage too",
"mc donalds\n\nseriously, most \"dog food that has everything your dog needs\" is bullshit",
"You're assuming dogs LIKE the food they're eating, but anyone that has a dog knows if you give it real food it'll almost always shun the regular crap they were eating before...",
"Wish there were such thing for a diet. I would totally eat that for a month, if it tasted and smelled ok.",
"Döner contains everything you need. But the main problem is, that human beings want to eat different things all the time. Sweet, spicy, salty, sour. We need all, but not at a time. The dog wants meat. It doesn't give a damn what meat it is. As a carnivorous animal, that's everything it needs. ",
"You mean, Bachelor chow?",
"I think there is a ted talk about the psychology and nutritional reasons behind why we need different types of food on a regular basis. It's not just the mental stimulation that comes from new and interesting tastes/textures.",
"_URL_0_; for people that don't want to cook or clean.",
"There is something that is used in prisons called Nutraloaf. The recipe varies from place to place, but the it is always used as a punitive measure. People are places on \"the loaf\" until they learn to behave. It is pretty much nutritionally complete, but is described as being extremely bland and tasteless. ",
"I think I remember hearing on Vsauce that breast milk is the only, or maybe only natural, equivalent to dog food.",
"Unfortunately \"dog kibble\" does NOT have everything a dog needs to be healthy. Survive for years, yes, but people can survive on barely anything for years and years as well.\n\n\"Kibble\" is a gross lie for people who like convenience and don't want to feed their pets real food... and this is coming from someone who did that to her pets for a long time.",
"The natural human equivalency is actually breast milk ",
"Why is the top comment not breast milk?\n\nProvides everything you need but vitamin D, which you produce on your own anyway. That includes calories if you drink enough of it.",
"A someone who's single, poor, busy, and lazy with food prep, I wonder thi all the time. There's soylent, but it's not cheap.",
"I present you Soylent, a liquid that has everything the body needs. _URL_0_",
"This is incorrect. The \"dog food\" does not have everything they need. Not in all cases anyway. Many dogs have special dietary requirements and many require supplements. Not only this but also you will find it hard to find one dog owner that only feeds his/her dog the one exact type of food from birth to death. Most dog owners will supplement with food scraps, bones, dog snacks, different styles of food.\n\nMy dog was on regular dog food for years until I switched him to raw dog food with minced raw meat, eggs, oils, garlic, seeds, fruits and vegetables. In our opinion and also out Veterinarian he is much healthier for it. He had early onset of osteoarthritis, he had a mast cell tumour removed from his thigh and constant skin allergies etc.\n\nIt's no different to you eating a liquid food supplement e.g. Soylent, sure you would live but you would not be healthy or as healthy as you could/would be if you ate whole foods, grains, fruits, vegetables, fish etc.\n\np.s. my dog eats poop, he is an idiot and does not know what good food is.",
"Wow I wish more OP's edited their post with findings and a brief summary of what was discussed like /u/MrCobs. You da real MVP.",
"There are liquid meals designed for feeding people who have feeding tubes. People who are in comas or have advanced Alzheimer's or some other medical problem. Jevity is one brand no doubt there are others.\n\nIn prison there is some sort of \"loaf\" that's made for vegetarians and people with religious restrictions on what they can eat. See _URL_0_",
"B/c I don't care to eat the same shit every day...",
"I'm proof you can eat breakfast cereal (mostly Cheerios and frosted mini wheats) every meal for a few years and be seemingly ok. Most of them are enriched with vitamins and the milk provides extra fats, protein, and vitamins. I love me some cereal",
"Related story: I am a nurse aid at a hospital and there was this gorgeous dietitian I saw from time to time. Never really had a chance to talk to her, except one time she was sitting at the nurse's station instead of the side computers. \n\nSo in my panic I asked her if we could make dog food but for humans. She gave the explanation that yes we can, but as the top comment says, we like variety and texture and shit. Also gave me some weird looks\n\nWe never ended up dating. ",
"Soylent has been mentioned as something you can buy, but lots of people have developed their own DIY versions. One the most popular versions is [People Chow](_URL_0_)",
"Best post edit ever. \n \nYou summarized exactly what I came here to read. Thank you. \n \nOP, for the first time ever, you da real MVP...",
"Maybe it has to do with a perception that it is inhumane to feed humans a complete, tasteless supplement that replaces food, and is more efficient than 'raw food' (consumption, distribution, digestion, etc). On the other hand though, human beings know what we can feed ourselves, but dogs, for example, can't tell us \"hey, I'm off to hunt. Be back in a few hours\", or \"hey, could you feed me one of those vegetables that I like to eat sometimes?\". So to avoid an incomplete diet, we feed a more practical solution.",
"Bachelor chow its delicious and a lil water added makes gravy...",
"Well, I wouldn't say that it has \"everything their bodies need.\" \nDog food keeps them alive and without deficiencies etc, but for your dog to be healthy he also needs exercise, fun, sunshine etc. If you apply the same logic to humans, humans are not looking for something to just keep them alive without deficiencies. Nowadays, everything seems to be fortified and you need to actually try to be deficient in something to the point that is threatening to your life (very restrictive diet.) Even if you believe that in the western world someone really needs to cover his basic vitamin needs, there is a product for that: the multivitamin. Now products like Soylent are getting some popularity but the truth is Soylent is just a multivitamin with calories. Where does a \"vitamin pill\" end and a \"food\" starts? The answer is calories I guess. However, most people are not looking to just survive but they are looking to thrive, bringing in the concept of health not as a mean of not dying, but something supplementary: improved cognition, performance, body composition, mental health along with reduced mortality and aging. From this concept of \"health\" the supplement industry is making a billions of dollars supposedly selling health in a pill, and since \"health\" is so abstract, the claims they are allowed to make are pretty confusing to the consumer. Point being, if you live in the Western world and you're looking to find a means of giving your body \"everything it needs\" you should realize the answer is not in a product or a pill, but in front of your eyes: whole foods, exercise, sleep, socializing and moderation \n \nTLDR: for dogs \"health\" implies \"keeping them alive without deficiencies\" , for humans \"health\" = improved/optimal function of their bodies",
"Breast milk is the only thing you can drink and get everything you need for nutrients.",
"There is. Potatoes and butter has everything your body ever need to live.\n\nBut do you really want to eat just potatoes and butter all your life?",
"I know I'm super late to this, but there is. Breast milk. Babies eat (drink) nothing but breast milk for the first 3-4 months after being born!",
"Basically because people aren't satisfied with having the same thing every single day. For example, there is [this] (_URL_0_), but most people probably will not be satisfied with drinking it every day.",
"eventually there will be bland synthe-food that nourishes the entire body and flavor, texture, and appearance will be enhanced by the computer implants in our brains",
"Probably because it would taste like dog food...",
"NEW FROM THE MAKERS OF FOOD!!! Soylent green! Made of everything humans need because it's made of everything a human needed!",
"Dogs are much better off with a raw meat, organ, bone diet. Dog food is crap.",
"I believe I read something that said that human breast milk is the only thing that humans can eat in this manner; as dogs eat dog food. Also, I don't know why, we just need more nourishment.",
"I get Ensure fed to me through an IV and I'm not dead yet, so it probably counts.",
"Damnit I wish people would shut the fuck up if they do not have a legitimate answer. \n\nPages of bullshit...\n\nAnswer: Soylent Green or similar, but mixing all our dietary needs into one shake is fucking gross why do you think dogs like people food so much?",
"I've heard that the closest natural thing that humans could have a diet composed of is human breast milk\n",
"For the exact same reason that you have more than one set of clothes and live in a space larger than a 6x8ft cubicle.",
"Because there's such a thing as human dignity.",
"Dogs like eating various things too. It's not like they really have the ability to complain verbally though.",
"If I ate cereal (not the sugary ones) and milk for every meal, would this be healthy?\n\nIt has vitamins, minerals, fibre, protein, energy etc. What would I be missing?",
"there is, it's called nutra-loaf and here in the US we feed it to prisoners. You know how ascetics used to dump ashes in their food so as to deny themselves all worldly pleasure? Same thing in prison, only its against your will. My bro lived on the shit for a year in solitary (those in general population get actual food). He weighed 180lbs when he went in and 113lbs when he came out...his skin was nearly translucent and couple of teeth fell out, but he's better now. The guards said that it contained all the essential nutrients/vitamins. ",
"You want the human equivalent of dog food? you get the human equivalent of dog food. (yes it's a liquid but it's still nutritionally complete)\n\n[wiki article](_URL_1_)\n\nyou want Stephen Colbert to interview it's creator? you git Stephen Colbert to interview it's creator!\n\n[here](_URL_0_)\n",
"I remember breast milk having this capability. Everything we could need in a titty milk form. \n\nSource : read it on reddit forever ago. ",
"Nepalis eat Daal Bhat every single day (seemingly). No exaggeration intended.\n\nRice and Beans is prevalent throughout the developing world because it provides the vast majority of things the body needs.\n\nI believe (but could be wrong) that quinoa is similar to this.",
"Human breast milk. It's high fat and sugar, but according to QI it's nutritionally complete.",
"Dog food really isn't all that healthy for a dog. Since dogs are carnivores and their digestive systems are designed for this, raw meat with a little veggies is what is best for them. Dog food is the dog equivalent of cereal with 12 essential vitamins and minerals.\n\nMoral of the story is, natural food is best for all animals.",
"Soylent. Nutraloaf. MREs. Ensure. Jevity. These things exist, but nobody likes them much.",
"It's a myth that kibble is ALL a dog needs to eat.",
"There's an equivalent for Mexican humans: _URL_0_",
"Stew. It's called stew. A hearty soup that has everything. Meat, veggis, proteins, carbs, etc. I've been eating stew as my main meal for approaching a year or more. You can swap up the flavors and ingredients. I usually get the base soup off the shelf at the grocery store. \n\nusual ingredients : beans, rice, lentils, quinoa, chia, mixed veggis, chicken, turkey, potato, etc.\n\nits easy to make cheap stores in the fridge well and reheats easy.\n\n2200+ comments and I'm the only one who mentioned stew.\n\nyou're welcome world.",
"They make food for primates in captivity. A (Canadian?) guy was big on reddit years ago for living off of it for a week or so; it's pretty hilarious..\n\n[The Monkey Chow Diaries](_URL_0_).",
"Brewers yeast actually does. Egyptians thousands of years ago used it really heavily in beers that would supply them every nutrient humans need. Basically, learn about how to use brewers yeast, drink beer forever, stay healthy. Win",
"Does anyone else feel like the video is the kind of commercial that plays right before a post-apocalyptic movie, in which, the product detailed is the cause of said apocalypse?\n\nI think I'll wait 5 years after the majority of the population has started consuming this for at least one meal before I enjoy it...",
"There is - its called 'dog food'. \n\nSeriously: I worked in a kmart for about 3 months (it was that bad of a job). One day I was stocking the dog food aisle and a manager got in my face because I put a bag of dog food on the ground. Apparently, in their minds, homeless people would purchase and eat it when they didn't have enough money for real food. Never once saw a homeless person in the store...(and I live in an area where I don't think we have homeless people? Pretty small town, maybe 30k residents)",
"There is a diet like that. You just keep dog food in a baggie in your pocket, and any time you get hungry you just eat a couple pieces of kibble. You've got to be careful, though. One time I ended up in the hospital. I didn't have a bad reaction or anything, I just got hit by a car while I was in the street licking my balls.\n\n-Stolen from, \"The Counsellor.\"",
"There are many foods we can survive on. Potatoes, sweet potatoes we can survive on solely. We can live on most grains and legumes if we add a source of Vitamin A and C, for example an orange or so a day. We can survive on bananas.\n\n > It seems humans are a bit more complicated then dogs, and dog food isn't all that healthy to begin with.\n\nNutritionally we are not more complicated no. All animals have essentially the same requirements, the only difference is they have learned to synthesize different nutrient. For example vitamin C is a vitamin to us, but it's not to dogs because they can make it themselves. Predators make fewer amino acids. Cats have 12 amino acids (IIRC) that they cannot make themselves while we can make all but 9 or 8. No animal can make omega-3 or omega-6 fats because they can't unsaturate fats that way. Other than some of those exceptions, we are essentially the same.\n\nI think the main difference between us and dogs is we care more about what we eat. We have also evolved to seek diversity in our food. Specifically for colors (it has been speculated that we seek antioxidants), we will eat more if there are more colors of food. You can try it with smarties, for example. Have a bowl of one colored smarties and a bowl with a diverse color of smarties. The multicolored bowl will be eaten first, because we see it as more appealing. I don't know if that is true for dogs, dogs are meat eaters in a way that we are not (we are not natural hunters, and our closest ancestors are primarily frugivores).",
"There's also something that they serve in prison called nutriloaf. It's meat, vegetables, tomatoes, and bread. All the good stuff your body needs. ",
"There is. Its called breast milk.\n\nFor those seeking more ~~sensible~~ boring options, there's soylent. A sugary mix of all necessary nutrients and vitamins.",
"Dogs live for 12 years. I bet you could live for at least 12 years eating only dog food. Mad Max was looking okay. \n\nAnd let's not forget in some of the tougher parts of the world where tribes live off just grains, dairy from a Yak and whatever they scrape off the underside of a rock. And they live till about 50! ",
"quinoa, olive oil, vegetables, nutritional yeast + spices = boom, set for life. you could blend it into a paste, bake it into pellets, whatever gets you off ya sick baastad. ",
"FYI: That dog food actually isn't healthy. Many dogs suffer from various ailments if they are fed only kibble. For Dog's sake, people, feed your dog raw meat, bones, intestines, vegetables, and the occasional lick of olive oil.",
"Supposedly is a pretty big part of the picture here.\n\nThey don't give dogs everything they need.\n\nSure, dogs can survive on it, but humans can survive on a lot of deficits, too. It's not the healthiest thing out there for your dog. It's actually pretty bad for them, most of the time.",
"Dogs need meat. Cheap do food consist of a lot of \"fillers\" that might make the dog feel full but doesn't give it everything it needs. It's like if a human ate just bread, or pasta",
"Veterinary student here, there's actually quite a lot of controversy over dog food (or pet foods in general) and whether or not they actually provide all that the animal needs (especially among the cheaper pet food) however no one has done any solid research into it....",
"Rice and beans. A great percentage of the world survive on those two foods.",
"There is one thing, breast milk.\nWe come a long way on potatoes and butter as well.",
"Can I maybe add to this (a little late)\n\nOne of the real difficulties is covering all the needs of humans from a macro and micro level - we have a far more complex set of needs than a dog. It is also hard for humans to absorb their daily requirement of nutrients in one sitting, the body will absorb a certain amount and secret the rest, it won't be saved for later use (a key example of this is B vitamins which make your pee turn yellow - and indication you've pee'd out what your body can't absorbed)\n\nIt may also be worth noting that a dogs life is far shorter than a humans. There are humans who live (although not comfortably) on a very minimalist diet, for a couple of decades. However the sustainability to do this over a lifetime is very difficult and will inevitably result in some kind of illness/disease ",
"There actually are a lot of foods that do cater to every human nutritional need. Most recently I guess would be Soylent shakes. It is becoming more popular and may branch off to cater for more individual dietary needs, but at the moment it just sustains human life comfortably. So there is no real danger of it ever overtaking real food any time soon, if ever.\n\nThe problem is with this 'all in one food' type is that it has a very noticeable psychological effect. Humans like eating things, it is quite literally wired into our brain to want to eat things that look and smell tasty. Condensing all the meat, the veg, the fruit, the nuts, the oils, the fats, all the beautifully textured, varied, taste extravaganza's into what is essentially an avocado green milk shake does all sorts of things with your mood. \n\nPeople who have gone for months with eating just Soylent have almost always come back as feeling quite depressed. Humans need food. And we need variety in our good. It is in every sense of the word, good for us. \n\n",
"who wants to eat the same thing every day....people dont pets too but most humans are too stupid and feed a pet the same thing every day",
"We can live with consuming nothing more than human breast milk for the rest of our lives, but umm yeah fuck that lol.",
"dog food itself would give you what you need to survive on.",
"We actually have two human equivalents, a liquid and a solid. The liquid is called, \"Ensure\", and the solid is called \"Plumpy'nut\". Both are airdropped to starving nations and used to nurse malnourished children and adults back to complete health.",
"As a Marine, we have these things called \"MREs\" or \"Meals, Ready to Eat\". These suckers contain everything you need to basically live. Main entree, sides, snacks, candy, it even has a drink mix, dessert of some sort, and forks/knives with condiments. Not to mention it's designed to back dat tract up so it makes the enemy harder to track us if we're doing spec ops type shit (pun intended). \n\nPersonally, I'm not 100% sure if you could survive solely on MREs. They're not as bad as people make them out to be, but that may be because I'm 130lbs and will basically shovel any sort of food into my mouth. There are even ones with higher calorie count designed for mountain/winter warfare. ",
"In prisons they have \"food loaf\". It is a punishment and is basically other foods processed into a loaf. It has everything you need to survive but that's about it. ",
"Where's my bachelor chow, damn it ?",
"tastes like cream of wheat. then again, how do you really know what cream of wheat tastes like?",
"There is. It's called pizza. And it's delicious.",
"Bachelor chow anyone?",
"Humans desire variety in taste because we're emotional messes that connect eating with feeling good. Eating the same thing all the time would probably push some people to suicide, tbh. Dogs, on the other hand, eat poop and garbage - that same taste everyday could be hot trash flavor and they'd destroy it every time. ",
"Futurama references bachelor chow in the opening. ",
"ramen noodles. it was everything i needed to survive college ",
"There is, its called Soylent, however we prefer to eat other stuff as pizza, icecream and so on and drinking a shake for every meal seems a bit weird",
"Yeah if we could get an AMA for Soylent, that'd be great. ",
"It was actually found out that a person could survive solely on breast milk and get all the nutrients they need to survive.",
"A couple years ago Scottish scientists created a [pizza that is pretty close](_URL_0_).",
"Haven't you ever been to McDonald's? That's about the equivalent. Everything is the same d-grade protein mush just formed into what you think are different food products.",
"There's also breast milk which can supplement you. Though i feel that wouldn't be a very popular diet...",
"[Eating doesn't just fill a need for nutrition. It also fulfills a psychological need.](_URL_0_) I don't know if there have been experiments on it but lots of science fiction universes from the Matrix to Metal Gear touch upon this. I imagine this is also part of the reason we are supposed to keep scheduled meals even when we lose our appetite from illness. Obviously the nutrition is important for fighting infection but mindset plays a huge role as well. Honestly, I only commented to reference Futurama. ",
"Ever hear of Soylent? It's a powder that has protein, carbs, and fat, as well as a full spectrum of micronutrients (vitamins and minerals). It taste like shit but it's basically kibbles and bits for humans. ",
"\"Dog food\" is a relatively new commercial invention promoted by industry. Tons of people (self included) have taken dogs off \"dog food\" and feed them raw meat. My dog LOVES her chicken livers and she's better for it. Their digestive system is unchanged from when the were wild-same as wolves today. Think your dog doesn't have taste buds? Give 'em a choice!",
"I think human food is commonly referred to as 'Pizza'.",
"You mean like bachelor chow? ",
"Dog food is actually pretty shitty for dogs! They contain a lot of grain which dogs aren't designed to process, so it ferments in their digestive system and makes them fart and makes their poop smellier. \n\nThere's some other stuff too. The actual best food for dogs is almost like how a human has a balanced and varied diet, except more geared for the canine digestive system - Lots of meat (raw is best), some rice (for carbs), include things like fish and bones, and the dog will naturally fill the other bits in when they can (eating grass and stuff). \n\nA healthy diet for a dog also makes their poop less stinky and they'll poop less. Which is great, because less to clean! \n\nSource: Have had two dogs, the last died early of diet-related illnesses and so was recommended this diet by the vet",
"Sometimes I look at my cat and think, \"you turn cat food into fluff and poop...\"",
"Human dog food exists. Its called pemmican. It is an energy bar made from dried meat, dried fruit and fat. It was invented by the Plains Native Americans, and was used by the south pole expeditions/ "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.soylent.me/"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vIjIqPPUSU"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.yo... | |
1nzc40 | what exactly is "net code" and what problems does it actually cause in gaming? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nzc40/eli5_what_exactly_is_net_code_and_what_problems/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccng54p",
"ccng715"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Net code refers to any code that is involved in making a game's multiplayer work over the internet. \n\nThe biggest issue net code faces is latency and trying to make sure you and the other players all see everything at the same time despite all of you communicating with the server at different rates. ",
"The challenge online gaming faces is that the internet can be slow. Latency between two players often is 100ms or more, which is 1/10th of a second. In some games this isn't too much of a problem, but in others (first person shooters), 1/10th of a second is the difference between life and death.\n\n\"Net code\" typically refers to the game developer's attempt to solve this problem. By using techniques such as predicting a player's actions, the game tries to make sure that each player has a real-time view of what's going on.\n\nProblems occur when the \"net code\" over/under compensates. Call of Duty players, for example, have problems with getting shot around corners, even though they made it to cover in time on their screen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
jwdmt | storm surge | When they say there will be 5-10 foot storm surge does that mean water is going to be 5-10 feet high? As in on the street? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jwdmt/eli5_storm_surge/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2fn8gt",
"c2fn8gt"
],
"score": [
7,
7
],
"text": [
"storm surges are caused by the lower atmospheric pressure associated with a hurricane. hurricanes are basically giant low pressure systems, and because the atmosphere isn't pushing down as much on the ocean, it rises.\n\na 5-10 foot storm surge means that the water under the system will be 5-10 feet higher then normal. which the wind then adds waves on to.",
"storm surges are caused by the lower atmospheric pressure associated with a hurricane. hurricanes are basically giant low pressure systems, and because the atmosphere isn't pushing down as much on the ocean, it rises.\n\na 5-10 foot storm surge means that the water under the system will be 5-10 feet higher then normal. which the wind then adds waves on to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
495cm7 | why landing a rocket is so difficult? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/495cm7/eli5_why_landing_a_rocket_is_so_difficult/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0p5qbf",
"d0p6517"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Depends on your definition of \"land\". Dumping them via parachute in the ocean is pretty easy. But I'm going to guess you mean what SpaceX is doing.\n\nMost of the fuel on a rocket is used not to go up, but to go *fast*. Really fast. Almost 8km per second! (A bullet only goes around 350 *meters* per second). So there's a lot of momentum you have to deal with. In addition, they're trying to land it on a specific spot, and the Earth is really big. So you can't just hit the breaks, you have to hit them at the right moment. Plus they have to have the rocket oriented the right way so it doesn't burn up in the atmosphere on the way back down, *plus* they have to have it oriented a completely different way to land upright, *plus* rockets aren't exactly small, so while it's supposed to be as aerodynamic as possible, it's still going to catch a lot of wind, especially from the side, which can really throw off the very careful balance.\n\nSo, they're launching a rocket designed as hard as possible to be good at one thing - going up really fast - and making it change direction, slow it down *just right* so it lands right where you want it to, turn it over, turn it over again, and balance it like a very big stick on the end of your finger. All done via remote control.",
"[This article says](_URL_0_), SpaceX has publicly compared the engineering challenge of stabilizing their 14-story rocket as it falls from the sky to \"trying to balance a rubber broomstick on your hand in the middle of a wind storm.\"\n\nSpaceX's rocket landings are all failing for different reasons - a stuck valve, running out of hydraulic fluid, broken landing gear. It seems as if a rocket is just a really complex piece of machinery and SpaceX is the first one to do the testing on an earth-to-orbit design to learn all the things that can go wrong on landings."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14028/why-the-spacex-platform-rocket-landing-is-so-damn-hard/"
]
] | ||
1sfulg | why will a digital camera focus on the object you want perfectly, then unfocus and say it's unable to? | Why doesn't it just stay focused?
For example, if I'm trying to get a macro photo of a flower or something, and I try to focus on one petal, as the camera is trying to focus, I can *clearly see* it focus successfully, but then it will unfocus almost immediately for no reason.
Thanks, hopefully. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sfulg/eli5_why_will_a_digital_camera_focus_on_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdx6xtj",
"cdx91u8"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because cameras are assholes",
"It doesn't mean it can't focus.\n\nIt means it can't *tell* that it's focused.\n\nIt might be, for example, that it uses the edge of shapes to tell when it's focused. If the entire shot is filled with a part of a flower petal, even if there are patterns and shapes within that petal, it may be that the colour changes between the background and the patterns and shapes are not defined enough for the camera's processor to work out when they're in focus."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
3pnxwt | my understanding of black holes is that it's an object of very big mass and density so that even light can't escape it's mass, therefore the "black" hole. is there more to it, why are there theories that the black holes are some sort of wormholes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pnxwt/eli5_my_understanding_of_black_holes_is_that_its/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw7wgo9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"/u/SavageAuthor is correct with the wormhole part. I'm just expanding on [his comment](_URL_1_).\n\nFirst, black holes are holes in space-time. What that means is that they are a collection of events and object that are erased from time, and that the event horizon is actually the last moment those items existed, frozen forever in time, and red-shifted into invisibility. \n\nSay a monkey fell into a black hole. Assuming that it could survive the entry (unlikely, but possible), we, the outside observers, would see it freeze in place just on the horizon. To the monkey, it would enter without noticing the actual crossing. Furthermore, it would continue acting (that is, its body's atoms keep moving) even when the rest of the universe thinks it has stopped. In essence, the monkey is now outside of time and space as we know it, in a place where there is no way to exit (all possible directions of movement end up wrapping around and pointing back to the singularity at the center).\n\n[Here's a great video on it.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNaEBbFbvcY",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pnxwt/eli5_my_understanding_of_black_holes_is_that_its/cw7vtwf"
]
] | ||
6wjfws | how is harvey an example of global warming and not just a "once in 500 years flood" like the president said? | The President tweeted _URL_0_
Can anyone explain to me how this isn't an exact example of Global Warming? For years they've been saying we will start getting bigger storms with larger flooding and here it is, right? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wjfws/eli5_how_is_harvey_an_example_of_global_warming/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm8fqlb",
"dm8gd6c",
"dm8hr2w",
"dm8ii7w",
"dm8ik4d",
"dm8ofv9"
],
"score": [
25,
7,
5,
11,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, you're pretty much right (although Donald was, for once, also kind of right). We measure large natural disasters, amongst other things, using a \"X year\" scale. For example in the UK we have \"100 year floods\". What this means is that floods, or storms happen quite regularly, but are often not very bad. However due to a variety of reasons, every once in while they're really, really bad. Since we have good historical records most of the time, and since we can roughly work out the probability of occurrence for storms / floods of various scales, we can give them their \"X year\" rating, which just means \"how long would you have to wait, on average, between events of this magnitude\".\n\nEDIT : the above section on probabilities is not exactly correct. Thanks to /u/skimbro for pointing this out. The \"X years\" is based on the probability of it occuring in any given year. So a 100 year event has a 1% probability of occuring in any given year. This is not quite the same as what I said. In the example of a 100 year event, over a 100 year period the odds of an event like this occuring are approximately 64%, or very nearly 2/3rds. You can work out the odds of an event of this nature occuring in a given time period with the following period : probability of failure(so 100 years = 1% = 0.99) to the power of the number of years you are interested in. 0.99 to the power of 100 = 0.36, minus this from 1 and multiply by 100. This is the probability of your event happening within the time period you desire to know. So a 500 year storm over a 500 year period = 0.998 to the power of 500, etc = 64% odds it occurs in a 500 year period, 34% odds it does not\n\nWhere global warming comes into this is by modifying the frequency and / or magnitude of the events. For example, without global warming the hurricane would likely have still happened (leaving aside chaos theory butterfly stuff etc for now). However, it probably wouldn't have been AS bad. Maybe more like a 300 year storm, or something like that. In addition, because storms are worsening, the \"X years\" scale is becoming wrong - you're getting floods that ought to be \"100 year\" floods every decade or so - by worsening the local climatic conditions, we affect the frequency of serious events.\n\nSo Donald could well have been right by calling it a 500 year storm. They do happen, and its a meaningful scale used for these kinds of events. However, global warming suggests that its impact was probably worsened, and its frequency increased, as a result of global warming.",
"Statistical validity is the crux of the matter. \n\nThe thing is that there is no statistics proving Trump to be anything than right, right now. We don’t have the data to suggest it isn’t so he’s statistically correct (since we’re just now entering into new, statistical waters due to climate change). But everything points to a future where this isn’t a “once in 500 years flood” but maybe a “once in every ten years flood”.\n\nWhen more of these things have occurred the statistics will change dramatically and no one can any longer deny that things haven’t changed ",
"It is just generally inappropriate to talk about weather as being \"caused\" by Global Warming. Global Warming is about the climate, a single hurricane is a weather event. In relation to climate change what has to be looked at are hurricane statistics: across the globe over many years. The effects of climate change will be seen there. Pointing at one particular hurricane is just as bad as pointing at a 60F day in July and saying \"See, there is no Global Warming, the weather on this day was much colder than normal\". There is no way to know if Harvey specifically would have been worse or better with a different average global temperature.",
"a single storm is not, in and of itself, a sign of global warming.\n\nWhat is a sign is that we have had a \"once in a life time\" level storm or weather event like this at an increased rate. To the point where they are not once in a life time anymore and people are experiencing several over a relatively short period of time.",
"You can't point to any one storm as a precise proof of climate change any more than you can point to any particular pack of cigarettes as causing a person's lung cancer or any particular cheeseburger as having caused someone's diabetes. This is also why no one can bring a snowball into Congress and hold it up as \"evidence\" that climate change is a hoax without himself becoming a joke.\n\nWhat you *can* point to is the evidence of past climate and atmospheric composition in comparison to today's and make very educated guesses about what those differences are likely to produce: wetter wets, drier drys, bigger storms, and overall rising temperatures.",
"Climate change is about statistical trends, not individual events. In an area that has regular hurricanes, you can't point to a single one and say \"there, that's definitely climate change\". You have to look at the frequency and intensity of hurricanes over several decades. When you start having 500-year floods more than once every 500 years, you know that something is up.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/901797906046439426"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
1sxh9v | why can we eat our beef steaks rare, but need to eat pork well-cooked? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sxh9v/eli5why_can_we_eat_our_beef_steaks_rare_but_need/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce26wum",
"ce26z87",
"ce27bfe",
"ce28p4y"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
12,
3
],
"text": [
"You can eat both rare but there is a higher chance of getting sick or catching a parasite from raw pork.",
"There was a long period of time when there was a good likelihood that tapeworm could be picked up from undercooked pork. Now that is not an issue so much.",
"Chef here,\n\nThere is a higher risk of being infected by parasites or bacteria from raw pork, pork is classed as dirty meat because of the diets and upbringing of the pigs and a little bit of evolution thrown in. You can also be infected from beef as well, but its not as common as bad pork.",
"You won't find any recommended internal meat temperatures lower than 145°. Most of us bend that rule on beef steaks and some roasts like prime rib etc. It's not a good idea to serve ground beef cooked to less than 160° because any surface contamination gets mixed in during the grinding process.\n\nThe USDA used to have a recommended temperature of 165° on all pork products. However a couple of years ago they lowered the safe internal temperature for whole muscle pork (roasts, or chops) to 145°. ground products like sausage still should be cooked to the 165° internal temperature.\n\nThe recommended internal temps for chicken remain at 165° for all products. Dark meat actually is best when cooked to 175° or so."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2levic | is there a good chance that time-dilation will be used one day to "speed up" time? | Let's say we have a very rich but aging person who wishes to leave earth and come back 50 years later when medical technology is presumably better. He can board a spaceship that travels close to the speed of light, and stay on board a few years before he comes back, by which time decades on earth have passed.
My question is that is there a good chance that such a concept will be utilized in the future, or are the engineering challenges too great to imagine it being done within the next 100-200 years?
I expect a big challenge for such a spaceship would be that slamming into a tiny asteroid at near the speed of light can entirely destroy the spaceship. There are probably other big challenges. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2levic/eli5_is_there_a_good_chance_that_timedilation/ | {
"a_id": [
"clu4ae0"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The amount of energy required to accelerate a manned spacecraft to any significant percentage of the speed of light, much less close to the speed of light, is well beyond anything we can manage with current technology. \n\nAccording to Wolfram Alpha, the relativistic energy contained in a 10,000 kg object traveling at .5c is 1.038×10^21 joules. That's about how much energy it would take to accelerate that object to that speed. Just as points of comparison, 10,000 kg is a bit less mass than the Apollo command modules had, and that amount of energy is approximately 1/7th of the energy contained in the entire world's estimated oil reserves.\n\nBaring some really really serious energy technology breakthroughs, we shouldn't expect to be able to put that much energy into a spacecraft for a long time. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
453q4j | why does the united states on a whole go through so many periods of xenophobia, when it is and has mostly always been an immigrant country? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/453q4j/eli5why_does_the_united_states_on_a_whole_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"czuzban",
"czv1qu7",
"czv1qv5",
"czv46ps",
"czv6yf9",
"czv9lp9"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
32,
7,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Before it was uneducated people making natural assumptions based on their flawed psychological functions.\n\nNow we live in a system that we pay for. Rational people do not want others to come in and benefit from the system without first paying into it. It increases the costs for all the people who pay into the system while simultaneously reducing the benefit. Its only logical to not support mass immigration of unskilled people belonging to a culture that, for the most part, undermines ours. ",
"First, the US has not always been an immigrant country. The % of Americans born abroad is currently at a historical high; the number in 1924 was also historically very high, but after new immigration laws the % immigrant fell from 1924 until the immigration laws were relaxed in 1965.\n\n(If you want to read some promises from the authors of the legislation about what effects it would have, [read here](_URL_0_).)\n\nHumans are animals, and animal populations move. If you go to any region in the world, with the exception of a few hunter-gatherer tribes in Africa, we can pinpoint the *exact* time in the historical record when the ancestors of the current inhabitants replaced the previous inhabitants. That doesn't mean that *every* country is an \"immigrant country\", except as a meaninglessly vague metaphor. An immigrant is someone from another country; an immigrant family is one where the parents or grandparents came from abroad and are passing on foreign customs and languages to their children; an immigrant society is one where a very large proportion of the people are immigrants. \n\nImmigration upsets people in general for three main reasons, and Americans are no exception.\n\n1. Communities are people. There is no magic dirt in Peoria, IL that makes Peoria different from Guatemala or El Salavador; it's the people in Peoria who have customs and institutions that create a happier society. If a bunch of Guatemalans go to Peoria because they like the effects of living near people who live like Peorians, then the Peorians need to deal with the effects of living near people who live like Guatemalans; and since the Guatemalans themselves wanted to move away from Guatemalans to be near Peorians, the Peorians probably won't like it much, either.\n\n2. Prices are determined by supply and demand. More workers equals lower wages, no exceptions. Right now there are 320 million legal American residents, of whom about 45 million are legal immigrants; that means at least 15% of the (legal) workforce is immigrants, but the true number is probably even larger because immigrants tend to be working age rather than retired or infants. On top of that there are 10-15 million *illegal* immigrants. There has been very little wage growth, despite a large growth in GDP, since US immigration laws were loosened in 1965; it's likely that the reason is immigrants, and voters aren't stupid to draw the connection, just like voters from 1880 weren't stupid to draw the exact same connection.\n\n3. In the medium-run, immigrant groups become political constituencies for their own special interests. The less homogenous a society becomes, the more it is reduced to bickering over petty special interests. Minorities are well-positioned to win this fight because they are smaller and thus care less about the common good and more about their narrow advantage.\n\nI would say of these concerns, people in the US are 45% worried about the first, 45% about the second, and 10% about the third. The more immigration and illegal immigration there is, the more of an issue it is.",
"While the US is indeed a country of immigrants, the era of mass immigration was far enough in the past that many Americans do not associate it with their own experience of the country. They understand it as a historical component of the country's founding, but do not associate themselves with the phenomenon of immigration since they, their parents, and their grandparents were all born American.\n\nYou need to think not just about history, but the *experience* of history, which you can offhandedly consider in three categories, each further detached from personal experience:\n\n1. History that has occurred within your own lifetime (first-hand history)\n\n2. History which occurred before your lifetime, but during the lifetime of people you know (second-hand history)\n\n3. History which exists outside the lifetimes of anyone you know (abstract history)\n\nFor most of us, 9/11 is a very tangible event because we lived through it. This is first-hand history, and has a very real immediacy due to having occurred in front of you. The Vietnam War, on the other hand, is more abstract for many of us, since it did not occur during our lifetimes. However it still has a certain accessibility if you have parents, grandparents, or other acquaintances who lived through that era, and can provide a second-hand account of those events, making it still seem somewhat \"present\" in your life.\n\nYet the American Civil War, the Crusades, or the time of the dinosaurs all tend to feel very abstract to most people. We can read about them in books, but we don't have any direct personal connection to them. And for many, America's roots in immigration also falls into abstract history: it's a thing they learn about in school and then put out of their minds. To them, America is simply a country of white people of European descent, with a significant minority of black people of African descent, along with some others small numbers mixed in. There may be a history of immigration (and slavery) that explains that demographic makeup, however that history doesn't manifest itself in their day-to-day lives, so it's not something they intuitively think of.\n\nAs such, xenophobia manifests in most Americans just as readily as it does for anyone else: the country's demographic makeup, as it exists now, feels familiar and \"safe\", while any change to that feels unfamiliar and alien.",
"You will likely have a much better result asking this question in /r/asksocialscience. I would actually question the basic assumptions inherent in your question before even trying to answer. Has the US gone through several different periods of xenophobia, or do the same xenophobic groups just catch the public attention intermittently? Is the US actually an immigrant country? And assuming the underpinnings of your question are true, is xenophobia in the US significantly different than other developed western nations?\n\nPeople can try to ELI5 this all they want, but this is one of those things that can be looked at from so many different angles that you will want some common definitions and assumptions before you can really get a competent answer.",
"You and your friends are sick and tired of being picked on for playing the Pokemon TCG. So, you decide that you're going to all group up in the jungle gym, and declare it the United States of Westdale Elementary. You're having a blast, playing Pokemon and not being judged. \n \nSuddenly a couple new kids come along and say that they want to join the USWE. The problem is that they play Magic: The Gathering instead of Pokemon. You don't want to play MtG - that's why you came here in the first place! At first you try to kick them out. They insist and keep coming back though because they like playing card games in your jungle gym. You eventually relent - \"They can play MtG, and we can play Pokemon, and everyone can be happy.\" \n \nThis goes well until *another* group of kids come along who also want to join. You all give them blank, too-polite stares when they pull out their Yu-Gi-Oh cards. The pokemon lovers protest \"The jungle gym is too crowded! Let's leave room for people who want to play *real* card games!\". The MtG players cry \"We have a long history of just playing these two card games, we don't need your kind here!\". But, like before, the Yu-Gi-Oh players are insistent and eventually join, and eventually are assimilated. \n \nThis same cycle repeats. In short, people get comfortable being with a certain group of people. When you bring new people in to the mix, with new customs, languages, looks, etc - it's uncomfortable for everyone who is there, *including* the previous immigrants. It just comes and goes in waves. \n \nEdit: I should point out that I'm not trying to insinuate that OP is an elementary schooler, just using the scenario as an example.",
"You are a guest in someones house, and then not only refuse to leave but hurt and kick the owners out. Would you be trusting of anyone who then came and tried to stay with you? nope. Cause deep down you feel like it would happen to you. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.thesocialcontract.com/pdf/nine-three/ix-3-174.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
az5bq3 | how come when breathing through our mouths it dries up quickly but we can breathe fine through our nose all day | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/az5bq3/eli5_how_come_when_breathing_through_our_mouths/ | {
"a_id": [
"ei5d6b3"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because of the way our bodies are!\n\nAir coming into the body isnt as humid or moist as the air inside our lungs. Our nasal passages and sinuses DO dry out but they continually provide moisture in the sinus cavities to humidify incoming air, they warm up and add moisture to it so it doesnt steal the moisture from our throat and dry it out on the way to the lungs.\nBy mouth breathing, the moisture the warm air evaporates is our saliva instead of the moisture our sinus cavity would add to the air, causing our mouth to dry out.\n\nTLDR: when nose breathing the air is warmed and humidified by the sinuses, when mouth breathing it steals the moisture from our saliva "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
d1jtkj | why is an emulator required to play playstation/xbox/nintendo games on a pc? | After all, doesn't a PC contain all of the same components as video game consoles? (Hard drive, GPU and CPU, etc.) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d1jtkj/eli5_why_is_an_emulator_required_to_play/ | {
"a_id": [
"ezmg8kt"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"PCs and game consoles both contain CPUs, yes, but they speak different languages. You need an emulator to translate back and forth between console-speak and PC-speak."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
3aho0n | who would win in a fist fight? a human or a monkey? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3aho0n/eli5_who_would_win_in_a_fist_fight_a_human_or_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cscq3ol"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Unfortunately, we have some real-life examples to inform the answer to this question. \n\nThe monkey wins. Always. Most of the time fights like this happen it doesn't end well. Travis the Chimpanzee comes to mind. He killed one person, and bit off the hand, eyes, and jaw of another. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.