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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4ijes4 | how are lakes created by nature (not man made lakes) and how did fish get in them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ijes4/eli5_how_are_lakes_created_by_nature_not_man_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2yjihp",
"d2yk5mi",
"d2ypphj",
"d2ypr2i",
"d2z3v6t",
"d2zdyyp",
"d2zmper",
"d2zv2jl"
],
"score": [
623,
34,
13,
12,
2,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Land is not level. It's full of crinkles and mashed together piles, and flat areas too. That creates very low areas (ocean), low areas (lakes) and high areas (land), with rain refilling the second type with fresh water. Rainwater runs downhill and has a tendency to accumulate in any sort of depression, so a lake is often \"fed\" from a very big area where uphill rain or snow has fallen, and that's called a watershed.\n\nThose lakes quite often aren't physically closed off, they usually have either permanent outlets that flow to other lakes in the form of streams or rivers, or they can create temporary passageways when flooding conditions occur such as if a beaver builds a dam. Fish then swim up these access points, and some like eels that migrate through wet woods are really good at it. And if the lake they find is healthy and that stream closes off, once they're there, they're there for good.\n\nNor are those lakes permanently stuck in one place in many cases. Some of them have had fish for millions of years back before fault lines caused a lake to split in two, or stopped an access stream or cut off access to salt water because it was redirected by a landslide or a growing peat bog or beaver dam.\n\nEven remote lakes with no apparent historical access to other bodies of water at all can have fish in them though. They can possibly get there by being transported accidentally by other creatures (e.g. fish eggs stuck to a waterbird's feathers, or in water-weed nesting material that a flying bird drops).",
"Some of them, such as the great lakes, I believe were made by giant glaciers carving their way through the land, and then later receding.",
"Speaking only to the \"how did fish get in this lake?\" question, I looked into that and came away with the distinct realization that the amount of human intervention is much more than you would ever expect. Donkeys carrying fish in barrels over mountain passes? Yup. Children tossing buckets of baby catfish into a pond miles away? Yup. If you went back in time, most large spiny ray fish, like bass and bluegill, in west coast lakes would not even be there.",
"There are a number of ways that lakes form. A common one in the northern hemisphere is depressions from glaciation, in which heavy glaciers caused the land to sink. These depressions then filled with water after glacial retreat. Very deep lakes may result from tectonic rifting, where plates spread apart due to continental drift. The deepest lake in the world, Lake Baikal, is a rift valley lake and holds 20% of earth's liquid freshwater. Another type of lake is an oxbow lake, in which a river 'meanders' (becomes more and more loopy) until it cuts off at the base and becomes a crescent shaped lake beside a river. This is common in floodplain areas, and they may be seasonally joined to the river. Lakes are typically a temporary feature of a landscape, as they with sediments over time (deposition of little particles of silt, sand, and clay from another location). Canada is full of lakes, particularly because our rocks are not easily weathered (broken down). Siberia once was full of glacial depression lakes which were filled in relatively quickly due more effective rock weathering. ",
"Natural lakes are formed by a depression in the watershed where run off collects and fill the low lying area until it overflows and the water can continue on its way. Remember, with a few exceptions(like the great salt lake basin) all watersheds and flows eventually lead to the ocean.\n\nAs said, man has been a major contributor to the spread of fish species around the world but I am pretty sure that when Europeans first arrived in the Americas, they found trout and other salmonides everywhere. Trout live and breed in flowing water but can exist quite nicely in lakes. Salmon and some species of trout can survive in both salt and fresh water (cutthroat and steelhead at least) and can spread from one stream to the next and into a lake and from there up another stream and so on. From there, changes in a stream flow can spread trout to another lake within the watershed.",
"The Sun causes water to evaporate off the oceans and go into the air. When the air cools down, the water comes together into clouds. Eventually the water in the clouds collects into raindrops or snowflakes, which fall to the ground under the influence of gravity. The water on the ground flows in accordance with gravity, always flowing along the steepest possible downhill slope.\n\nBut the steepest possible downhill slope doesn't necessarily lead directly back to the ocean. Sometimes it leads into an area of low terrain surrounded by higher terrain. In that case, the water at the bottom of the low area has nowhere to go and just starts collecting there, forming a pool. The pool gets larger and larger, fed by the water flowing into it from higher areas. Eventually it gets large enough that part of it hits a point where there's a gap in the high terrain that leads to even lower terrain. Then the water starts to spill over the gap. But the low area is still there, so all the water below the level of the gap is unable to spill over. You end up with a lake in the low area, with water coming in from the higher terrain around it (often along a particular river) and then flowing out through the lowest gap that leads to other, lower terrain. The water that flows out may end up going directly into the ocean, or it may form another lake at some lower level first. Eventually, all the water ends up back in the ocean (unless it evaporates first).\n\nIf a lake is upstream of the ocean (or another lake) along a relatively flat, slow-moving river, fish are able to swim up against the current just by moving fast enough, and make their way to the lake. As for lakes that *aren't* connected to the ocean by a slow-moving river, that's a more complicated matter. Depending on how the flow of the water changes with time (erosion and volcanic activity can change the shape of the land and make new paths for rivers to follow and new lakes where there were none before), it may be that fish populate a particular lake when it has an easily navigable path to the ocean, and then that path later gets cut off, but the fish continue to survive in the lake, so you see them there even with no obvious way for them to get there. Additionally, there are other conceivable ways fish can be spread without any obvious path. There can be a rare flooding event that forms water pathways between lakes that are normally disconnected. Or a fish may be carried by a fish-eating predator (such as an osprey) and then accidentally dropped into another body of water. Also, some lakes are connected to other bodies of water through underground rivers that can't be seen by a person standing above the ground. And in some places, tornados or other extremely strong winds can even lift fish out of the water and carry them through the air.\n\nSome species of fish even have evolutionary adaptations that allow them to spread along non-obvious paths. The [nopoli goby](_URL_1_) is a fish that has a strong sucker-like mouth that it can use to climb up waterfalls intraversible to normal fish. And the [walking catfish](_URL_0_) has the ability to breathe air and move about on solid ground by flipping its fins and tail around, and can make its way some distance across land between isolated bodies of water. Even lake-dwelling fish that do not currently have these abilities may have developed from ancestors that did, millions of years ago.",
"Lakes can also form from \"Ox bow\" or dead channels from rivers. In the north, most lakes are the result of glacier activity as moraine deposits form natural barriers and the glaciers gouge depression in the landscape one example of this is Paternoster Lake formation. In the alpine lake forms from the falling weight of a glacier forming depression or a Tarn, you will often for the classic bowl at in the mountain lake. \nAs for fish... many isolated lakes in the US and Canada were populated by enthusiasts in the 19/20th century. Most non introduced fresh water fish reach isolated lakes during flood events. \n\non a side note...\nThere can me many different physical block to fish migration, airdrops, supercritical velocity flows or even flows faster than the burst speed of the species(I have to take into account when designing culvert), some don't like to enter structures(cuverts-brown trout) other deterrents are low DO/highwater temp and water chemist. I've seen a river that flows through a porous lava field, the steelhead get trapped by an air drops in a lower pool and forced to become endemic. they become eel like and will hit your lure ",
"Let's not forget beavers. They dam streets to the point that they become lakes (stream is diverted and goes around the blockage at times) . Once they do their thing they often move on and do it again. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walking_catfish",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicyopterus_stimpsoni"
],
[],
[]
] | ||
30rp1b | humans and dogs have been living in close proximity for at least 11,000 years. why aren't there more zoonotic disease that are transmissible between the two species? | I'm sitting here with a cold, and my dog is happily snuffling away at my face with no danger of getting sick. I demand to know why nature allows her to taunt me like this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30rp1b/eli5_humans_and_dogs_have_been_living_in_close/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpv7etn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Well we've probably built up an immunity to any disease that spreads between out two species. Also most animals only act as carriers of the disease, spreading it between humans. We aren't getting infected with the animal's disease. Also most diseases require a specific set of closely related species as hosts. The ones that do mutate to infect another species usually have a close relative that also infects that species. For example, the flu infects pigs and birds. When humans get the \"bird flu\" we aren't getting the actual pure bird flu strain, we are getting one that mixed with a human strain. But something like fleas or heartworms are not suited to infect/infest humans and to do so would require a huge evolutionary leap that's just not probable.\n\nStudies have shown that humans do share with their pets a lot of the same skin, oral, and gut bacteria, compared to humans without pets. Similarly to how people who live together share more bacteria with each other than with people who don't live together. In most cases this is beneficial bacteria, or benign bacteria, or bacteria we have good immunity against.\n\nCats can get a virus similar to HIV, but the dna difference is too great that having sex with or eating your cat will not infect you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
46myge | when a company pays it's employees, through check or direct deposit, does it just come out of some giant loaded bank account for the company designated to paychecks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46myge/eli5_when_a_company_pays_its_employees_through/ | {
"a_id": [
"d06dd1n",
"d06dz4a"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"If the company does its own payroll, there is a separate bank account for payroll. The gross payroll amount, plus employer burdens, e.g., employer FICA in the US, is transferred from an operating account into that account for each pay period. \n",
"I don't know about large companies, but at the small business I run, payroll comes out of the same not-so-giant bank account all of the other expenses for the store come out of and money from the store's sales goes into. It's not a separate account.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
6s3lsc | how can autonomous cars work without fail if there are still human drivers on the road? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6s3lsc/eli5_how_can_autonomous_cars_work_without_fail_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"dl9sny0",
"dl9spsm",
"dl9sqsz"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
13
],
"text": [
"Nothing works without fail....But it is rapidly becoming possible for the combination of sensors and computers to manage the necessary tasks to maintain safe vehicular control EVEN with the random behaviors of the world and meaty drivers factored in. ",
"By cameras and sensors it maps out the vehicles and pedestrians, stop signs and stoplights, allowing it to know when it has to stop, turn or go. Cars are \"seen\" by the car and can turn, stop or slow down according to speed and emergency.",
"They can detect and react to human drivers faster and more accurately than a human driver could.\n\nThey can't work *without fail* ever, since sometimes things happen that simply couldn't be avoided, such as if you're following all the normal traffic laws and going through an intersection just as a speeding car turns around a corner and T-bones you. *Maybe* you could have swerved out of the way or slammed on the brakes or the gas with the one second of warning you might have, but even that could cause you harm. An autonomous car might even be able to do better!\n\nThe point isn't to make them work *without fail*, but to make them work *with less failure than human drivers*, which is actually already pretty much the case."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
nkipa | how people can be better at different things. | Seems like a simple question, but really I can't wrap my head around why my friend is an amazing artist, but I draw half-autistic stick figures. Or why I am amazing at computer diagnostics, but my friend can't figure out the Microsoft Word. Analogies are welcome. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nkipa/eli5_how_people_can_be_better_at_different_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"c39v4lb",
"c39v4lb"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"The reasons behind it are a blend of nature and nurture. \n\nNature can give one person a brain that is more advanced in certain lobes, providing artistic or logical abilities. Or your dexterity or vision could be different.\n\nNurture will give a person THE DRIVE to be passionate about a particular subject. It can create a situation where someone with little natural ability can excel if they educate their body and mind on it. ",
"The reasons behind it are a blend of nature and nurture. \n\nNature can give one person a brain that is more advanced in certain lobes, providing artistic or logical abilities. Or your dexterity or vision could be different.\n\nNurture will give a person THE DRIVE to be passionate about a particular subject. It can create a situation where someone with little natural ability can excel if they educate their body and mind on it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
2d2b8k | counter steering on a motorcycle | I ride and understand that turning left (with some speed) will lean, and consequently turn the bike right, but if someone could explain the physics, like I'm 5, I'd be very appreciative! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d2b8k/eli5_counter_steering_on_a_motorcycle/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjlddn3"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Here's how I think about it.. \n\nBecause the bike is moving quickly and heavier than you, you can't exactly muscle the bike into a lean like a bicycle.... so you initially kick the bottom out from under you in the opposite direction to generate the lean you need for the turn. after the lean is generated the bars revert to the expected direction..\n\ntl/dr: you don't fall *into* a turn, the bike moves *out* from under you"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
7jwiv6 | why does audio recorded from speakers sound horrible, while audio recorded naturally (irl) sound so much fuller and better? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7jwiv6/eli5_why_does_audio_recorded_from_speakers_sound/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr9ss34"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"A similar question was asked in r/NoStupidQuestions with a great [answer](_URL_0_) by u/Afflo. For the lazy:\n > If you record a speaker with someone's voice, it will sound bad. I'm assuming you aren't using studio grade speakers and studio grade microphones.\n\n > A speaker will have a frequency response that doesn't quite match reality.\n\n > A microphone (especially a cheap one) will have a frequency response that doesn't quite match reality.\n\n > When you play something recorded from the speaker, you are essentially layering three levels of degradation - the original speaker output, microphone input, and final speaker output... And this doesn't even consider the acoustics of the room.\n\n > If you take a picture of a picture of a picture of a pictures, you'll do the same - layer after layer of color and detail loss from printing and capture. Even the classic \"mirror facing a mirror\" will illustrate this - as you look through the infinite hall of mirrors, the reflection fades and distorts as you combine the imperfections over and over.\n\n > If you have a high quality studio and fine tuned equipment, the loss of fidelity can be managed to some extent. If that's the case, you're also probably an experienced audio engineer!\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/37ibfu/why_does_audio_from_a_speaker_sound_so_bad_when/crn9h3s/"
]
] | ||
8gg919 | why does your body get more of an urge to use the toilet when your arrive home | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8gg919/eli5_why_does_your_body_get_more_of_an_urge_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dybfdyu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Essentially, your body gets into rhythms - it gets used to whenever you normally go to the toilet and is ready to go then and inhibits that urge somewhat outside of that time. You can retrain yourself by not going at that time and going at a different time (or no specific time at all).\n\nHowever, certain times of the day are more likely for, say, a dump, or whatever else, due to your body’s physiological circadian rhythm (fluctuating hormone levels, cell/organ function, etc.) - this is mostly likely soon after waking."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
23r4z8 | why are people of hispanic origin often referred to as being "latin"? when they have little to do with ancient rome? | To my understanding the Romans were Latin, and Latin was the language they spoke in Ancient Rome. Spanish is a common language among hispanics and one of the 5 Latin-based languages along with Italian, French, Portugese, and Romanian.
So If it's a language or religious affiliation, then why aren't the Italians, French etc. Also called Latin? What is the connection with modern day hispanics? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23r4z8/eli5_why_are_people_of_hispanic_origin_often/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgzrsaz",
"cgzrv2v",
"cgzrw5d",
"cgzsr1l",
"cgzu8ns",
"cgzv7x7"
],
"score": [
4,
23,
2,
13,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Hmmm...I never though about this before. A quick trip to Wikipedia shows \"...can be traced back to the 1830s, in the writing of the French Saint-Simonian Michel Chevalier, who postulated that this part of the Americas was inhabited by people of a \"Latin race\" and that it could, therefore, ally itself with \"Latin Europe\" in a struggle with \"Teutonic Europe\", \"Anglo-Saxon America\" and \"Slavic Europe\". The term Latin America was supported by the French Empire of Napoleon III during the French invasion of Mexico, as a way to include France among countries with influence in America and to exclude Anglophone countries...\"\n\nWiki is our friend.\n\n",
"The area is called latin america because it was colonized by European countries with latin-derived languages - mostly Spanish, but also French and Portuguese.",
"It's a cultural thing. French people are technically \"Latin\" by definition of speaking a Romance language and Roman cultural influences, but their culture is much more based on being \"French\" by its own merit than being derived from the Latins or the Romans. There's much more emphasis in Spanish and Portuguese cultures, and when they go on to settle an entire continent, it becomes widespread.",
"As someone who was born in Brazil and lives in the US, I believe that originally this had some cultural truth to it: as others pointed out, most countries in Central and South America speak a Latin language and have somewhat common Roman origins. But today it has almost nothing to do with that.\n\nThe Americas were colonized some 500 years ago. Five hundred years. The many cultures in all Americas have diverged quite a bit not only from their original European origins, but from each other. Colombia has its own culture, people, heritage, which as this point is very different from that of, say, Argentina. In the case of my own country of origin, Brazil, we don't even share a language with the rest of the continent, and we are larger than all of them combined by any measure (with the exception of Mexico, and that's in North America). In my mind, there is some meaning to saying that both me and a Chilean are South Americans, because that's the truth, we share the accident of the continent where we were born. By the same token, a Norwegian and a Greek are both Europeans, but that's about all that they have in common.\n\nSo why are we all lumped together under the expression \"Latin American\" in this day and age of 2014, in the US?\n\nI believe that it is a little bit convenience, a little bit prejudice, a little bit bias. For all sorts of applications, from immigrant participation in the census to corporate relations with the region, it is a lot more convenient to pretend like we are all one people. Can you imagine having a more than 30 extra boxes on the census form? Likewise, it is easier for Microsoft to have its \"LATAM\" offices located in Miami and call it good, than to try to localize its products in more than 30 different markets.\n\nFor the prejudice part, for a (fairly small) part of Americans, they really don't care and can't be bothered to understand that Jose, the guy down the street, does not understand Spanish, considers himself Caucasian because his ancestors came from Italy and Germany, and pronounces his name closer to what it would be pronounced in English, because in Portuguese the J has the same sound as in English, while Jose, the guy from work, speaks Spanish, considers himself Hispanic, and had never seen a burrito before he came to the US. For some of these people, they are both the same: Mexican if this is in the West, Cuban in Florida, Puerto-Rican in New York, and all conveniently tucked into the term Latin American, which is almost an euphemism, a politically correct term like African American.\n\nThe bias part comes from the origins of the term Latin America, when in the 19th century the theory was that Latin America had bonds with Latin Europe and could be considered aligned with Latin European countries like Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, in opposition to \"Anglo Europe\" and \"Slavic Europe.\" It provides a sense of \"us and them.\" Even my most enlightened friends in the US, who are not racist by any definition of the word and would be shocked to think they have a racist bone in their bodies, still make this distinction: somehow I am supposed to be closer to an Argentinian than to my Anglo neighbors.\n\nFinally, I believe a lot of the responsibility for the misuse of the term Latin America comes from us, who were born in \"developing America\" (which is the economic definition of Latin America, I think). I believe that we need to assert our multiple cultures, ethnicities, languages, geographies, origins, more than we usually do. For my part, when I am called Latin American I usually point out that the term makes no sense to me. Call me South American, call me Brazilian, those terms make more sense.",
"Seems to me the bigger question is why Italians aren't called latino. All these explanations and I still don't understand that one.",
"The terms \"Latinoamérica\" and \"latinoamericano\" were coined to include Brazil and Brazilians when referring to \"people who live in South and Central America\", since Brazilians don't speak Spanish and could not be properly referred to as \"hispanoamericanos\". The reasoning is that both Portuguese (spoken in Brazil) and Spanish come from Latin. \n\nSo all Hispanic (hispanoamericanos) are Latin-Americans, but not all Latin-Americans (latinoamericanos) are Hispanic, because you have to speak Spanish to be Hispanic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
87kolx | why picking only 10 people for a data study is worse than picking > 30 people. | I have been trying to answer this question for a friend who REALLY doesn't seem to understand outliers and how they affect data. He doesn't have a math background, and really doesn't understand the concepts behind a good sample size.
We are trying to come up with a means to collect data on athletes and their performance in certain areas, and my friend only wants to take data from the best 10 and I am saying we need a larger sample size to have relevant data.
If someone could REALLY simplify this down, in a easy and visual way to explain this, I would be very very appreciative. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/87kolx/eli5_why_picking_only_10_people_for_a_data_study/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwdj7qy",
"dwdk1d1",
"dwdpph5",
"dwdx44y",
"dwe3pnr",
"dwesqph"
],
"score": [
19,
6,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Use some dice.\n\nThe average value of any single die being rolled should be 3.5(that the average of 6,5,4,3,2 & 1). However when you roll it once it's very possible for you to get really far away from that 3.5 number.\n\nPersonally I just rolled a 6. That's super far away from that 3.5 we suggested earlier. Do you think rolling the die once was a good estimator? Probably not. Ok I just rolled again and got a 2. That's an average of 4, I got closer! Rolled again for a 1, that's average of 2.3, ouch we moved further away.\n\nJust keep rolling dice and judge how far away you are from the average after 10 rolls and 30 rolls.",
"If someone doesn't understand math, you have your work cut out for you.\n\nThere's no way to prove that asking a subset of a group of people tells you anything about what the whole group thinks. They might think something else! This is particularly the case if the people you ask are somehow different than the group as a whole. For example, the attitudes of the ten best athletes might not be the same as the typical athlete. \n\nThe two things you can do to try to ensure that your group subset is typical of the group are:\n\n- Try choose the subset randomly. That will reduce the instance of bias in your selected subset. \n\n- To your main point: try to pick enough samples that your results are not thrown off by any one (or small number) of people. Asking one person isn't very reliable as a way to capture the thoughts of a group. Asking ten people might work for a group of 20 if you are OK with your answers being plus or minus 20% on a 50:50 question. (It's easily to explain that just one person of your group of 10 can change the results by 10%.) So you can see that even this is not too good.\n\nTo put another data point on it, if you had a group of 100 people, you'd need to sample fifty of them to get to a margin of error of less than 10%. But, on the bright side, you can use a sample of only about 600 people for the whole country with a margin of error of 4%. \n\n_URL_0_",
"If I tell you I have a dice that just output 2, 4, 8, 6, 4, 8, 10, 10, 6, and 8, how likely are you going to be at describing the type of dice I just rolled?\n\nHow many sides does my dice have?\n\nWhat's the sequence of numbers on my dice?\n\nWhat are the odds of rolling any single face?\n\nDo you think you would be more likely to correctly describe the dice I rolled if you had 30 rolls of the dice?\n",
"If you haven't collected data about a larger group than 10, how can you possibly know which 10 are the best 10?",
"Okay I'm no good at exactly what you're talking about, but here's a bit of a visual that helps me understand in a similar but different situation.\n\nThink about it as if researchers wanted to know all they could know about California and so they went to California and landed in the middle of Joshua Tree desert, then grabbed a few species of snakes and insects Flora and Fauna, etc that tiny desert area. They then left, studied their findings, and then told everyone that they now know everything there was to know about California, when in reality they know absolutely nothing about California.\n\n\nFirst time answering anything really, cuz I don't really know much and this is my time to shine, so I probably f***** it up in some way so have mercy on me Reddit! ",
"Think of it this way:\n\nLet's say you think that half the people in the phonebook are female, but you want to check. So you go to the phone book and pick one name **at random**. This person will either be 100% male or 100% female. So your chances of reaching a conclusion that is wildly wrong is virtually guaranteed. \n\nSo you pick two names **at random**. How likely that 1 is male and 1 is female? Possible, but it's equally likely that both names are the same gender. So you've got a 50% chance of reaching a conclusion that is wildly wrong.\n\nImagine you pick three names **at random**. You might pick MMM or FFF, but you might also pick MMF, MFM, FMM, FFM, FMF or MFF. In short you have 6 ways of randomly picking two names of one gender and one name of the other gender, and only two ways of picking all three names of the same gender. In short you have a 2 in 8 chance of being wildly wrong and a 6 in 8 chance of being within 15% of the correct value.\n\nIt keeps going like this. As the size of a sample rises, the number of ways that you can randomly pick a sample that is close to the correct answer rises quickly while the number of ways you can get a wildly wrong sample rises much more slowly.\n\nPick 30 names and the number of ways of being within 15% is 500 million, while the number of ways of being wildly wrong is 33 million.\n\nIn short, if you randomly picked 16 groups of three people, 4 groups would be wildly unrepresentative. If you randomly picked 16 groups of 30 people, only 1 group would be unrepresentative.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
udyy0 | differences between cdma and gsm, and why some carriers don't support one or the other. | There's a phone I REALLY want, but my carrier doesn't support it. Why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/udyy0/eli5_differences_between_cdma_and_gsm_and_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4ujtv0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You're playing with a toddlers toy that has two holes, one square and one triangular. Now the two wooden pieces that go into this are square and triangular. Both of these accomplish the same thing, they both go through holes. All phones make phone calls. Unfortunately the networks (the holes) are made with different technologies and wavelengths (different shapes) each of these technologies only works with the network it was made for. \n\nCDMA has a few disadvantages over GSM. GSM is used almost worldwide. You would be hard pressed to find a CDMA network outside of the US and China. That's why in America GSM phones are known as \"world phones\". Also you cannot use the Internet and talk on the phone at the same time with CDMA. It does have the advantage of not requiring a sim card however. CDMA phones also used to have the advantage of more battery life but that is pretty much gone now with smart phones. They also supposedly have the advantage of better call quality and less interference but these are really not problems anymore. The main difference is between Verizon and AT & T. Which do you want?\n\nSome phones including the iPhone 4S have both technologies included so the phone will work on CDMA if you have Verizon in America, but you can put in a micro-sim and go exploring the world on GSM. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
cxpzup | why is pi considered infinite but the diameter will fit around the circumference at some point | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cxpzup/eli5_why_is_pi_considered_infinite_but_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"eymotye",
"eymouoo",
"eymp9u5"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not infinite: it is a finite quantity. \n\nIt's just that quantity is not a valid that can be expressed as a decimal of fixed length or a ratio of two integers.",
"Pi isn't considered infinite and whoever told you it was was wrong.\n\nPi is, instead, *irrational,* which doesn't mean \"insane,\" but rather \"not a ratio\" (fraction). It isn't the quotient of any whole number divided by any other. One result of this fact is that the decimal representation of pi never settles into an endlessly repeating pattern; its digits go on forever with no apparent sense, into tinier and tinier decimal places.",
"The \"infinite\" you're referring to is that Pi has an infinite amount of decimals, and they do not follow a pattern (such as 0.33333, 0.123123, etc), making it an \"irrational\" number, not that Pi is infinitely large."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2jnwdu | do blank cd's, vhs tape's, mini disc's etc weigh less than when they are filled with data? | Was wondering, could not find a scientific answer. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jnwdu/eli5_do_blank_cds_vhs_tapes_mini_discs_etc_weigh/ | {
"a_id": [
"cldfzv4",
"cldg81g",
"cldgv8c"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No. Data is not a physical \"thing\". Data is when you take an existing medium and rearrange parts of it in a way that represents some sort of information. For instance, for magnetic storage (VHS and non-SSD hard drives), the data is stored as the specific alignment of magnetic domains on the tape/platter. The magnetic fields are *always there*, and you just change which way they're pointing to represent different data.\n\nIf you want to go to the simplest possible example, a light switch can be thought of as a one-bit data storage device. It's either off or on, which is one bit of information (0 or 1). But the switch doesn't weigh more which you flip it from off to on (or vice verse).",
"Not really, no.\n\nCDs write data by melting pits and grooves into the data layer of the disc using a laser. Since the data layer is sealed inside the plastic layers, no material really goes anywhere and so the mass of the disc stays the same. All optical media are the same.\n\nVHS tapes and other magnetic media like hard drives weigh the same regardless of the amount of data they have stored on them. These types of storage are basically made up of tiny magnetic domains, which are flipped to store binary data; one orientation is a \"1\", the other is a \"0\".\n\nElectronic storage media like the flash memory used in your phone and SSDs do weigh more when they're full. These types of storage store data by trapping electrons in a floating (insulated) layer. These extra electrons increase the mass of the device, but the actual difference is tiny, something on the order of trillionths of a kilogram.",
"In the case of magnetic media: (VHS, Hard Drives, etc) Technically, yes, but it's absolutely insignificant, and impossible to measure with our current technology. The rest mass of an electron is 9.11x10^-31 kg, which is infinitesimally small. The electron count on an HD changes when you store information, so, yes, mass does increase and decrease, but it's insignificantly small. \n\nIn the case of Optical media: The laser is melting the metal alloy making the recordable part of the CD, but it's not hot enough to evaporate any of it, so most likely there's no noticeable mass change either, although the friction the CD experiences when spinning will certainly shave very small quantities of material here and there, so it's possible the CDs are losing mass during recording and playback. Again, this would be also insignificant and probably impossible to measure. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
2gwiqr | why does a hairline fracture hurt if there are no nerves in our bones | I have a small hairline fracture on my pinky from two weeks ago. I understand why it hurts in the moment it happens (joints bending and the momentum hitting the bones and nerves around it) But why two weeks later does it still hurt? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gwiqr/eli5_why_does_a_hairline_fracture_hurt_if_there/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckn61r1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because there's nerves all over and around your bones. Not to mention the \"lesser inclusive\" damage to the area caused by whatever happened to cause the fracture in the first place."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
d6i4xy | how does transportation funding work in the us? is it federal? state? what are the sources and mechanisms? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d6i4xy/eli5_how_does_transportation_funding_work_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0t9vn2",
"f0tbs9v"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There are multiple levels to transportation and who pays for it depends on its level. \n\nFor federally owned and operated interstates (I-10, I-75, etc.), the federal government has the responsibility of maintenance and therefore the financial responsibility. However, the Federal government may delegate this to the state(s) the interstate passes through and typically gives funds to do so. \n\nFor state highways, such as FL 231 or GA 14A, the individual state government is responsible for maintenance and funding. Most states will have some form of tax whether income or sales that helps cover this cost. Some states have specific vehicle taxes that cover transportation costs. \n\nFor more local roads, such as county highways or the roads in a town, the local government is responsible for maintenance and funding. Property taxes usually help cover these costs. Public transportation, such as buses, subways and trains, fall under this category. Most cities typically contract out to a private company the day to day maintenance and operation of such services. \n\nFor both State and Local level governments, there are numerous Federally funded grants/loans that can be used to help offset costs for repairs and upgrades usually through the USDA Rural Development or the US Department of Transportation. Application processes are slow and can delay a project.",
"You might get a better answer at r/AskAnAmerican \n\nGenerally, funding comes from the federal, state, and local levels, but it also depends if by transportation you mean roads or public transit. Amtrak (the closest thing we have to a national rail service) gets subsidies from the federal government and the states, while also operation as a for-profit corporation. The Interstate Highway System receives funding from the federal government as well as state and local sources. Local roads and public transit systems are generally funded by the municipality in which they're located with additional funding provided by the state, and, in the case of public transit, collecting fares. There's generally no regular federal funding for local transportation, although there are various grants and subsidies that exist and can be applied as needed.\n\nAlso fwiw, transportation in the U.S. is really not a hot topic during elections besides broad strokes like \"better infrastrucrure\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
1m1ihp | why the nra is such a powerful lobby | Edit: Trying not to sound bias - I'm not, just curious - I've heard many negative things about the NRA, specifically about their methods of coercing government officials and where they spend their money. Just hoping people can elaborate, and also explain how something like this can have SO much traction and power when only a small percentage of citizens are members | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m1ihp/eli5_why_the_nra_is_such_a_powerful_lobby/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc4uxp7",
"cc4uy2v",
"cc4v71o",
"cc4vftt",
"cc4vk59",
"cc4vskq",
"cc4wduv"
],
"score": [
24,
4,
13,
14,
4,
16,
10
],
"text": [
"Alot of people are members. These members pay dues. The NRA has alot of money to spend on donations and lobbying. ",
"The NRA is able to mobilize vast numbers of single-issue voters to vote for its interests. Crossing the NRA can unleash the full force of its fundraising and organization to de-seat any elected official. ",
"money and members. and guns are fucking awesome",
"As a member, I'll give you my viewpoint. The NRA stands for one political topic and one political topic only, the second amendment. We don't focus on women's rights, gay rights, global warming, healthcare, etc. For member dues of $35.00 a year or more depending on your level of membership, and with additional fundraising, we educate and lobby for provisions that could affect gun rights. Because the goal is simple, and we have less of varying opinions and viewpoints, the NRA is able to gather a large amount of support from varying political backgrounds. Actually there is a large of amount of registered democrats as well as republicans. This is because everyone is focused on one goal, protecting the second amendment. And guns are fucking awesome. ",
"Gun Manufacturers make up about half of the money they raise. Of the almost $230 million the NRA raised in 2010, less then half came from due from the members. Much of their funding comes directly from the manufacturers, as it is in their interest to make sure that everyone (even blind people) can buy a gun. As a gun owner myself I think advocating for violent criminals, with little more than a simple ID, to be able to buy and carry guns is a bit over the top..",
"It's not just the NRA doing the lobbying. Supporters of gun rights generally are [more politically active](_URL_0_) than supporters of gun control. They donate more money and spend more time contacting their public officials to express their views.",
"They represent a lot of gun owners, both members, (over 4 million), \nand many more non-members.\nTheir 'power' is in the number of voters who share their opinions.\nThere is a large 'pro-gun' segment in the population in spite of the \nmedia campaign.\nWhen legislators are reminded of this, they listen.\nThe media, who oppose them don't like to be reminded of this fact, and try to demonize them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/poll-gun-rights-supporters-donate-far-more-on-the-issue-than-gun-control-advocates"
],
[]
] | |
j676w | (or 12) -- logical fallacies | I mix them up so often because I can never remember which is which! Besides, I thought this would be fun to see if someone could actually explain this like I was 5 (or 12). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j676w/eli5_or_12_logical_fallacies/ | {
"a_id": [
"c29j35d",
"c29mabi",
"c29j35d",
"c29mabi"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"[This](_URL_0_) is a good page that explains 20 logical fallacies.",
"A logical fallacy is when given a scenario, we fail to understand its real meaning.\nA good reason to learn about logical fallacies, of course, is to not be misled by words, but rather understand the meaning behind those words.\nAn example: Your boss tells you that homeopathy is the best kind of medicine, you say you dont believe in homeopathy. Some people, if they listen to the conversation, will tend to belive your boss, because he is the boss, even though, he is not an expert on the subject. This is the fallacy from autority.\n\nIn reality, your boss is not an expert, and neither are you, each persons arguments must stand on their own.",
"[This](_URL_0_) is a good page that explains 20 logical fallacies.",
"A logical fallacy is when given a scenario, we fail to understand its real meaning.\nA good reason to learn about logical fallacies, of course, is to not be misled by words, but rather understand the meaning behind those words.\nAn example: Your boss tells you that homeopathy is the best kind of medicine, you say you dont believe in homeopathy. Some people, if they listen to the conversation, will tend to belive your boss, because he is the boss, even though, he is not an expert on the subject. This is the fallacy from autority.\n\nIn reality, your boss is not an expert, and neither are you, each persons arguments must stand on their own."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx"
],
[],
[
"http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx"
],
[]
] | |
3kd8cj | how is unemployment rate around 5% yet it feels 10x harder to land a good job than a decade ago? | And why don't we use a better method since it can be so deceiving? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kd8cj/eli5_how_is_unemployment_rate_around_5_yet_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuwjtdt",
"cuwka7d",
"cuwkhti",
"cuwkno2",
"cuwkw0n",
"cuwnmjw",
"cuww28e",
"cuwzedd",
"cux3gaw"
],
"score": [
17,
18,
4,
2,
24,
3,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
" > Why does it feel harder to land a good job\n\nPart time jobs are much more common now. Underemployment is a serious issue. In order to evade Obamacare, a lot of companies replaced a bunch of full time employees with twice as many part timers, leaving a lot of people with multiple jobs and no benefits.\n\n > Why don't we use a better method\n\nYou can use any method you like. The [underemployment rate](_URL_0_) is 14.5%. Politicians prefer the unemployment rate because it makes them look better, but that will change in this election, with underemployment becoming an issue.",
"In addition to underemployment, people who give up and stop looking for a job are no longer considered unemployed. They just drop out of the statistics.",
"Perhaps it is because these kinds of statistics are hilariously easy to manipulate?",
"Cost of living has gone up a lot. Average wage has stayed exactly the same. Therefore, what once were good jobs are slowly eroding into shitty ones.",
"One reason is that people who have given up on looking for jobs are no longer considered unemployed. \n\nIt makes as much sense as cutting bread with a spoon. ",
"Because you are looking at the U3 unemployment number, which only measures people looking for work. You want the statistic of how long people are unemployed for.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIt's still going down, just not at pre-recession levels. ",
"Everything thats mentioned, and it also encompasses all jobs.\n\nIt doesn't mean that its a job that would allow you to live at the lifestyle the job you had prior allowed you to, as well.\n\nPlenty of fast food and other jobs that pay minimum wage or slightly better are available. It doesn't mean people want them, obviously. But they do count towards the figure.\n\nHence the push you're seeing for $15 minimum wage. Plenty of jobs out there, but very hard to live off of them in a way people feel they should be living because they have a job. Meaning, not paycheck to paycheck, an iPhone in their pocket, a nice SUV in the driveway, etc etc. Or whatever they view the American Dream as.",
"Because the jobs that are being created are not \"good\" jobs. They are part-time minimum-wage jobs from a handful of major retail and restaurant companies. The economic philosophy that drove the past few decades was predicated on a belief that investment would be given to domestic prospects (local factories). Instead, the investments were made in developing countries with no environmental standards, minimum wages, or entitlement programs. In the U.S. it costs something like $45 an hour to employ a factory worker; in India it costs just $2. We would have more jobs at home if developing countries weren't so savage about their labor and economic practices. It isn't greed on the part of American companies either, as many anti-rich, 99%'er hipsters would argue: our corporations are simply making a good business decision. It is the greed of leaders of frankly crappy developing countries in Asia and Latin America.",
"One reason is if you're a millennial, you're part of the largest generation in the US, ever. You are competing against a shitload of other people in your age range at relatively the same point in their careers."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.statista.com/statistics/205240/us-underemployment-rate/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.deptofnumbers.com/unemployment/duration/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
6j3knx | what's the evacuation plan for places like hospitals that have many people who have trouble walking or cannot walk at all? | Title. I spend most of my days at hospitals and I've always wondered how the hell they're supposed to get everyone out in the event of a fire or something | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6j3knx/eli5_whats_the_evacuation_plan_for_places_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"djb83qr",
"djb8pk9",
"djbc4oa",
"djbe564"
],
"score": [
23,
4,
12,
5
],
"text": [
"In the event of a small fire patients, staff and visitors can be evacuated from the affected area and relocated to a different unit on the same floor; lateral evacuation its called. Hopefully the fire can be contained to the affected are by sprinklers, doors, extinguishers etc. negating the need to move people off floor. However a bad situation will require a full evacuation. In that case special evac chairs or gurneys that can go down stairs are available and staff will have to team up to hall people down.",
"They will have various plans depending on the severity of the incident, they can get staff from the surrounding facilities to come and help.\n\nThere are devices like this too on the walls to get people down the stairs: _URL_0_\n\nAnd another: _URL_1_",
"While not exactly your question, there was a good NPR Radio Lab spot from about a year ago that deals with triage, and specifically goes through a story about evacuating a hospital in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster (among a few other stories of triage). \n \n_URL_0_",
"Priorities first in places like nursing homes, with people with dementia, at night they are understaffed and completely incapable of getting everyone out safely. As such if there is a fire that is spreading they will be forced to leave the completely bed ridden and lost patience while taking the others out. Of course if they are able to take more out they will, but they need to have at least 1 person stay with them outside, so it makes it even less likely to save everyone. It's a difficult thing that they are all aware of. People have survivor ratings, not official I don't think, but it's something to think about "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbLpioOu9ok",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqXtEtwE6Kw"
],
[
"http://www.radiolab.org/story/playing-god/"
],
[]
] | |
2ro6n1 | with all these police shootings going on, would it not work to have police armed with instant tranquilizers as another option to bullets? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ro6n1/eli5_with_all_these_police_shootings_going_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnholgo",
"cnhomcu",
"cnhorhr",
"cnhovp3",
"cnhpq9v"
],
"score": [
10,
10,
2,
20,
2
],
"text": [
"There's no such thing as an instant tranquilizer dart.",
"Well the biggest thing is there is no such thing as \"instant tranquilizers.\" Anesthesiologist get paid a lot of money for a reason. It takes an exact amount of a drug to work the way it is needed to. Too little and there is no effect (or the effect is very minor), too much and the effect is death. There are a lot of factors such as gender, weight, height, etc. So to incapacitate someone you need an *exact* amount of a drug in a dart otherwise we have the same problem. ",
"With tranquilizers there is a very fine line between being knocked out and being dead.",
"Tranquilizers don't work like they do in the movies. \n\nDo you happen to know who in a hospital has the biggest paycheck? It's not the radiologist, it's not the brain surgeon, it's the anesthesiologist. This guy's only job is to keep you unconscious, but not dead, and doing that requires information about everything you've consumed in the last several days, along with at the moment measures of your pulse, blood pressure, weight, and exactly what chemicals are already in your blood, and with this information he supplies you with a precisely measured cocktail of extremely dangerous drugs. \n\nThis is not the kind of thing you can load into a gun and give to every police officer. \n\nIn addition, there are non-lethal police options. Tazers are one, some others are bean bags, rubber bullets, pepper balls, and the plain old fashioned beatin' stick. The problem is, these solutions occasionally kill people too. They're known as \"less than lethal\", and aren't carried on a regular basis by police, first because we think they'll be overused (which turned out to be true, studies show that police use tazers *way* too often), and second, to save them from lawsuits related to accidents. \n\nUltimately, this boils down to a misunderstanding of *why* the police carry guns. They are not there to kill people, they are not there to threaten people. Most police officers will never draw their gun in the field. The guns are there to *protect* the officer, by stopping dangerous threats, and if the threat is a lunatic hopped up on heroin with a gun shooting back, no non-lethal option will ever be good enough. ",
"Because there is no such thing as instant tranquilizers and bad guys carry guns. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
8dpkkl | can the average human brain create/imagine a unique human face or is it all based on faces already seen/remembered? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dpkkl/eli5_can_the_average_human_brain_createimagine_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxp0bhn"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"There really isn't any way to answer this question scientifically. But the human imagination is actually not that great at coming up with entirely new creations. Almost anything that you can possibly imagine is a combination of other things that you've seen before. That's why it's impossible to imagine a new color."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1u6ww5 | how does decomposition of plant and animal matter differ in space compared to here on earth? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u6ww5/eli5_how_does_decomposition_of_plant_and_animal/ | {
"a_id": [
"cef910o"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Thing don't decompose in space, since there are no fungi or bacteria to decompose it. A dead organism in space remain there forever."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
an216h | considering all the talk of colonising marss, wouldn't it be easier to just make a moon base? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/an216h/eli5_considering_all_the_talk_of_colonising_marss/ | {
"a_id": [
"efq3y6e",
"efq4845",
"efq7bjd",
"efq905o",
"efqqlyc"
],
"score": [
15,
7,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are pros and cons either way, as I understand it. For instance: the moon is closer, but mars has enough gravity to be more comfortable (and healthier), enough atmosphere to make insulation a far simpler problem, and enough weather that erosion has made the dust similar enough that we can say with confidence that we know how to deal with it - unlike the regolith on the moon which is a bit nightmarish. ",
"It would be easier, but for many other reasons, it's not very useful. There has been talk of how a moon base could be important for long-distance space exploration, as it has a much lower escape velocity (how much energy is required to get off the planet), but the moon is not survivable because of its low gravity, minimal atmosphere, and no surface water. Also, we already know quite a bit about the moon, but Mars has the possibility of fossil life and the possibility of terraforming (transforming the climate of a planet through artificial means).",
"Yes it would be easier. The problem with the moon is the lack of essential elements for life. \n\nThe moon would be an excellent source of material for construction of structure in orbit of earth or spacecraft for interplanetary travel, but it lack element that support life. It got aluminium, silicate for electronics, magnesium, titanium, etc. It got oxygen, but lack nitrogen and water. There is probably some amount of water, but not enough for a large scale colonisation. In addition, the lack of gravity mean that we would need energy to produce rotating habitat to keep people healthy, would would cost more. The moon will most likely never go beyond a source of material for orbital construction and scientific experimentation.\n\nMars have a bit of everything when it come to element. It's not sure how much water there is, but it's enough to keep a decent amount of people alive on long term. Of course, the gravity isn't as high as the earth, but it could be enough for people to live healthy life. \n\nTransporting element that are needed on a daily basic from earth isn't possible for colonisation, so if it's not in place, it's not an option.\n\nIn my opinion, we will see an large scale industry on asteroid, before we anything permanent on Mars. The reason is that asteroid got something to sell to Earth and Mars doesn't.",
"The moon is closer so it has that going for it, but Mars is a proper planet with real planet like gravity and an actual (albeit very thin) atmosphere and even a day night cycle that humans might be able to adapt to (40 minutes longer than on earth). So if you want to build a home in Earth-like conditions Mars is much closer than the Moon.\n\nThe moon will be a necessary waystation to other worlds, but it doesn't really have much going for it in terms of colonization: A small gravity well, a bunch of moon-rocks and maybe water, plus a view of earth or a sky without earth depending on where you settle down.\n\nThe moon is a nice place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live there.",
"Along with everything said already, it's important to remember that all this talk is just talk right now. While we're definitely shifting towards the expansion to space, there's no formal plan or direct study on to what we're actually going to do, hence the discussion right now.\n\nI do think that colonizing Mars is far-off technologically and economically, we'd probably expand first via hauling asteroids and building up our space infrastructure and space colonies before starting off in Mars with zero practice. At that point though, I'd guess Mars will be closer to a luxury like Earth than a practicality to achieve."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
3egr4j | the raised middle wheel axel on some trucks with 3 axels. why not have all 3 wheel axels on the ground for better weight distribution of the truck? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3egr4j/eli5_the_raised_middle_wheel_axel_on_some_trucks/ | {
"a_id": [
"cterpac"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The more wheels you have on the road, the higher your roll resistance is, and also it wears down all wheels (while if they are raised they don't experience wear for obvious reasons). So ideally you only have as many wheels on the road as are absolutely required for carrying the load you have."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
azh6n6 | cheap flight finder sites like scottscheapflights? | How does Scott or other people that operate similar flight deals find the deals? I know that Scott had an AMA and I think he mentioned that he gets some inside tips, are the rest just him sitting 'looking for deals' or are there some bots? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/azh6n6/eli5_cheap_flight_finder_sites_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"ei7q0hh"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Nearly all of these sites are basically snake oil and/or misleading.\n\nThere are just bots, scripts and programs (and APIs) in the travel community that hunt out and search the airline and travel algorithms and sites and report back, and there are so many variables out there, that nearly everything turns back nothing interesting, but maybe some random pairing of cities and dates, out of a hundred thousand combinations turns out something \"cheap\" by some unknown or simply made up definition of cheap or \"less than usual\" based on historic records.\n\nThey they display this \"cheap\" fair as something \"OMG Amazing\" even though it does not apply to 99.9% of their audience... but the audience is dumb, so they think that hey maybe one day one of these will work for me. Even the airlines do this as well with lots of deals (In the US, Southwest notoriously does this with certain city pairings on off-peak travel days).\n\nEven deeper, none of these \"cheap flights\" site are going to come out and tell you they're not doing anything special, they will all claim to be the best, have the best deals, have insider info and such -- none do, thats just the marketing tagline. For a while (not sure if its still around), there were semi-pre-made templates to spin your own \"cheap flight\" site that did most of the work for you and you just hosted the site, but most died as this is entirely and marketing exercise to get people to your site, even though you offer the exact same flight as everyone else.\n\nBasically, these sites are just pure marketing, and most of their \"deals\" can be found by you easily, but would not apply to you anyways, so you'd never look for them. If you live in LA, you're not looking at Miami to Bangkok flights tuesday to sunday, but a cheap flight site will highlight that random flight to you, so you think \"OMG this guy finds deals\"\n\nThese sites are one of the laughing stocks of the travel world. I'm sure /r/travel or one of those subs will just laugh at you about this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2c57bd | why are water mains buried beneath streets? | It seems like having water mains and other infrastructure under roads creates more work and costs more money when repairs/changes need to be done. Why not have these structures in a spot that is easier to access, like under the grass between the sidewalks and the road (i.e. terraces)? Are there any advantages to having them under the streets? Any history? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2c57bd/eli5_why_are_water_mains_buried_beneath_streets/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjc144c",
"cjc2v65",
"cjc3fo8",
"cjcfx5x",
"cjcg5gp",
"cjci4kd"
],
"score": [
7,
31,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that's private property very often and a pain in the ass to get full access to for a route. Much easier to build infrastructure where you already have right of way established (like, where roads already are) then to have to deal with getting permission from the 8k private land owners you want to put your water main through. One person denies access? lolreroute. ",
"Engineer for the Highway Dept. here:\n\nSince public utilities are installed to benefit...well...the public, they are installed along the road which is also known as the public right-of-way and owned and maintained by the municipality. Installing these big public water/gas/telecom/electric etc. lines through private property means tons of paperwork, easements, and legal agreements between the utility and who knows how many property owners.\n\nRegarding your specific example of installing them along the \"grass strip\" yes that is usually also in the public right-of-way and sometimes yes, the lines are installed there. You have to remember though, that the water lines have to share space with all the other stuff in the ground, sewer mains, gas mains, buried fiber optics or electric, storm drainage pipes, there's a ton of shit buried under our roads. Sometimes it just comes down to using whatever little strip of land is left in the ROW for installing the main.\n",
"They could bury it under the grass and I would think that sometimes they do. The public right of way usually includes the road, the sidewalks, some amount of setback from the sidewalk to the property line, and any landscaping in between those elements.\n\nHowever, the landscaped areas often aren't just simple grass. They often have more complicated landscaping like bushes, flowers, trees, etc. And when you're talking about those types of landscaping, especially trees which take decades to grow to an impressive size and where large trees are highly valued and improve nearby property values, its probably less disruptive to just dig up the street. \n\nMy city would go apeshit if you removed a tree to install a water main. You aren't allowed to cut down any tree without applying to the city government where you must prove either that its dead or dying of disease, or that it is absolutely necessary to cut down the tree as part of an approved construction project. And in the latter case you pay a $200 per tree fee.",
"It it were above the ground you'd trip over it :) ",
"Water lines are typically buried beneath the frost line so they don't freeze. ",
"Cuz they would be hard to drive over if they were above ground."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
206zly | what exactly do the terms "neo-liberal" and "neo-conservative" mean? what do they stand for? what about their beliefs warrant the prefix "neo"? | Just looking for a very simple and objective explanation of these terms. I hear them greatly on news media and talk radio, always in a pejorative manner though which is not helpful. I am curious to know what they mean and just as importantly, how they are different from someone who is regarded as simply conservative or liberal.
Also if you have the time, ELI5 the term *Paleo*-Conservative.
Thanks so much for helping me understand this stuff! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/206zly/eli5_what_exactly_do_the_terms_neoliberal_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg0eu2e"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"[Neoliberalism](_URL_0_) is a belief in unfettered, laissez-faire capitalism, deregulation, free trade, and such. You almost never hear the term these days, because its tenets are generally held by conservative parties (the Republicans in the US, for instance), who dislike the term \"liberal\". The reason both modern conservative and modern liberal ideas are called \"liberal\" is because \"liberal\" in the [classical sense](_URL_2_) was a movement for individual liberties above all else, in opposition to monarchist and collectivist movements.\n\n[Neoconservatism](_URL_1_) has meant different things at different times. But the general main thread of it (and what people usually mean when they refer to \"neo-cons\") is a belief in activist foreign policy - anti-isolationism and spreading democracy to other nations, by force if necessary."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism"
]
] | |
6drhbg | how does soup preserve the meat that it contains? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6drhbg/eli5_how_does_soup_preserve_the_meat_that_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"di4vmix"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The meat isn't preserved by being in soup. It's preserved by being canned.\n\nThe soup + meat is heated to kill bacteria, and then sealed in an airtight can while still hot. This means that the contents of the can are sterile, which keeps the food from decomposing (since that's caused by bacteria eating the food)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
fnrx0e | if rf radiation is really safe why people that operate big antennas tell otherwise? | Over the years I met several big antenna operators (mostly TV broadcast repeaters and mobile networks combined) that told me how they don't like to be near them longer than necessary due to enormous power, frequent headaches, dizziness and possibly carcinogenic properties.
Now, what I read on reputable sources, RF as non-ionising radiation should be safe, always. Yet, not only people that operate those big antennas are very cautious, but on the internet as well, here and there I can find how both mobiles and wifi's are still young technologies to be thoroughly evaluated and examined and how brain tumors can be linked to long RF exposures. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fnrx0e/eli5_if_rf_radiation_is_really_safe_why_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"flb59j5",
"flb6t0s",
"flbagjv",
"flbiqes",
"flc0vda"
],
"score": [
37,
9,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Big antennas can be dangerous in some parts of the spectrum because they operate at insanely high power levels. High energy RF/microwave transmitters can cause heating and induce voltages in metallic objects. They're also just generally dangerous industrial workplaces due to their height, remote locations, and high voltage power.\n\nMobile/WiFi transmitters operate on a tiny fraction of the power of a big transmission tower, and are an extremely well studied field healthwise.",
"RF is not \"always safe\". RF is only dangerous in the electric currents it generates within your body. This is in sharp contrast to ionizing radiation.\n\nNobody's scared to touch batteries because, despite generating small electric currents in our bodies, we know that these currents are small enough to do nothing. The same goes for low-power RF. Your phone, for instance, uses very little RF. A many-watt or even kilowatt antenna is stark contrast to that. It's the difference between touching a AA battery and touching an industrial powerline.",
"ILE5: A candle is not hot from 30cm away, but it is if you put your finger right next to the flame.\n\nFull answer: there is a spectral component to RF signals. Certain materials absorb certain frequencies. Which isn't always bad if it's a weak signal. Like water absorbs for instance at 2.4 GHz, that's how your microwave works (500-1000watts) but your Bluetooth at 2.4Ghz will not warm that same cup of water with it's few milliwatts.",
"The RF power comes out of the big antenna, right? So when you're up close to the antenna, there's a lot of power in one spot. If you wrap your hand around the antenna (assuming it's small enough), **all** of the RF is going through your hand. But if you go a few metres away (10 feet), most of the RF misses you because it goes in other directions.\n\nThe problem with too much power in one spot is that it burns you. Microwave ovens work by putting lots of RF power inside the oven, and it cooks your food. They won't turn on when the door is open, obviously, but if they did and you put your head in front of the open door, you'd be cooked too, because all of the power would come out the door and go through your head. But if you stood maybe 20 metres away (60 feet), you'd be fine - because most of the microwaves would go in other directions and not go through you.\n\nIf you were right up close to the sun, you'd burn instantly. Here on Earth, it's warm enough, but it's not so warm that you burn instantly. If you went out to Pluto, you wouldn't even feel warm (but you could still see it). The sun on Pluto is about as bright as the moon is on Earth. The same thing happens with RF.",
"Sticking your head in the microwaves is dangerous because it will boil your brain. So will sticking your head in a camp fire. Standing 3 feet away from the microwave door/camp fire is safe because your brain is not boiling / you're not on fire. \n\nRadio waves from towers that broadcast over hundreds of miles are very much like very very large microwaves in that if you stick your head against a transmitter for a long time, it might boil something important, but you're very safe standing a dozen or so yards back."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
732egd | what are open and closed systems in terms of data and information? | Hi reddit. I need to know what open and closed systems are within data and informaiton, but Im not too sure wether the information I have been researching is reliable, because they all seem to say different things in terms of open and closed systems.
Any answer is greatly apppreciated
Thank you :D | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/732egd/eli5_what_are_open_and_closed_systems_in_terms_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnn96nf",
"dnnh3d3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends a bit on the context, as there's a few things this could be referring to.\n\nOne definition is open to the public vs. closed to the public. In this context, an open conversation can be seen by anyone. Posting on reddit is having an open conversation: you are technically replying to one person, but everyone else can see what you're saying. A closed conversation can only be seen by the participants.\n\nAnother definition relates to control systems and feedback loops. When you have a system with an input and an output, a \"closed loop\" adjusts the input based on looking at the output. An \"open loop\" does not. Take for example driving a car. The input is your foot on the gas, and the output is how fast the car is going. Under normal conditions, pressing a certain amount on the gas will cause the car to go a certain speed. It's pretty predictable, so you could theoretically know your speed just based on what your foot is doing. That's an open system. But it's not perfect, because your car will slow down on uphills and speed up on downhills. So if you want to keep your car at a precise speed, you have to look at the speedometer and adjust your foot: press on the gas harder on uphills, and lighter on downhills. Your input (foot) causes the output (speed), but then you look at the output to adjust the input - it loops back around. That's a feedback loop (sometimes visualized [in diagram form](_URL_0_)). And since it makes a full loop, it's called *closed*.",
"There are indeed several aspects in which an information system can be closed or open. Other than what was already mentioned, an information system is closed if the data consists of predetermined data sets and open if the data can contain anything. For example, sex can only be M or F (closed) but the name can be anything (open)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/General_Feedback_Loop.svg"
],
[]
] | |
3coe8j | are there any other societies like the amish that stopped with tech at different points in history? | They Amish chose not to use any technology after a certain point. Are there people out there that stopped even before the Amish or more recently? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3coe8j/eli5_are_there_any_other_societies_like_the_amish/ | {
"a_id": [
"csxefjx",
"csxehmz",
"csxgbsa",
"csxjif5",
"csxkkwb",
"csxq7nj"
],
"score": [
4,
15,
6,
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There are the [Mennonites](_URL_0_). Unlike the Amish, rather than just staying frozen in time, Mennonites evaluate every new technology and decide among themselves whether or not they should be allowed to use it. Some are more conservative than others, but most can, for example, use cars.",
"That's not how the Amish choose what tech to use or not use. They didn't 'stop at year xyz.' They evaluate technological innovations amongst their communities and determine what technologies are considered useful enough, and what technologies are too disruptive to their way of life. Some use cars, some use phones. Each community has its own rules on technological usage, and the determining factors tend to be the protection of the family unit and guarding the self against sinful excess, sloth, greed, and the like. ",
"Part of North Korea's society that is far away from Pyongyang and China stopped at the 70s', Pyongyang outskirts and areas that are close to China stopped at the 90s or early 00s. Pyongyang itself is probably in the 00s. ",
"There are cultures that don't stop so much as they \"stagnate\". Technology is driven by two main factors: Need and Complex Economy.\n\nMany cultures are in environments that are stable and where resources are generally plentiful. Combined with a low population, and a culture tends to stop innovating. Examples include the continued existence of basic hunter/gathering tribes in the Amazon.",
"Certain tribes in Africa choose not to integrate with the culture around them or to catch up with the times technology wise. Many of them are seeing population drops because they may send out children to get a formal education and many of them prefer not to come back\n\nedit: easy example _URL_0_",
"The Bedouins of the western Middle East (Israel, Jordan, etc) don't disdain new technology - they have cell phones and cars - but they maintain a nomad - style lifestyle, living in tents of wood and wool, herding camels and goats and sheep and such."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mennonite"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himba_people"
],
[]
] | |
42zp2n | - why are humans the only animals that seem to need toilet paper? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42zp2n/eli5_why_are_humans_the_only_animals_that_seem_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"czebetz",
"czebhny",
"czeeg6j",
"czej5pi",
"czejnit",
"czenlzv"
],
"score": [
58,
45,
10,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is noticeable poop on their butt. Also dogs lick their buttholes.\n\nWe need toilet paper because we don't like being covered in shit. Other animals fucking love it.",
"Form my understanding is that we are doing it wrong. We evolved to poop in a full [squat](_URL_0_) and pooping on the toilet doesn't create as much space as the aforementioned position. Also diets lower in fiber create messier poops ",
"In addition to other comments, I've heard that it is because we have larger butts from evolving to stand upright. The larger butt muscles create the necessity for post dump wiping.",
"I dab my dogs butt with a damp paper towel after he shits. It's usually pretty clean but RARELY spotless, so that's flawed thinking. Not all animals have clean butts after crapping.",
"We can't lick our butts (dogs, cats etc) and we don't have a tail to swish away the flies (cows, horses etc)?",
"No one really got it right, but most animals prolapse their anus out while they poop, including dogs. So there's nothing to clean up. Now that you know you'll notice how gross it is when you see your dogs butthole sticking out next time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://sock-doc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Full-Squat.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
4ttujy | why if i bend me knee at a certain angle and lift my heel up, while keeping my forefoot down, why will my leg continue to shake? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ttujy/eli5_why_if_i_bend_me_knee_at_a_certain_angle_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5k9bju"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"In rock climbing, it is usually called sewing machine leg. When you are walking or running, there is a constant cycle of contracting and resting the calf muscles as you alternate legs. If you keep your heel slightly off the ground, often halfway between contracting and resting, the calf gets tired quickly and spasms by trying to do both - resulting in the heel quickly bouncing up and down. If you push your heel down or lift your toes up, it breaks up the spasm."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
3it0vb | why are there no new superheroes? | Or maybe, why isn't the general public interested in any of the new superheroes? Either way, lemme know! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3it0vb/eli5_why_are_there_no_new_superheroes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cujdwmc",
"cujeeu7"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Spider Gwen has been a huge hit since her debut in February.\n\nBut in general, as far as superheroes go, no one has really come up with a new and unique idea for one. Most recent superheroes are just slightly different people with the same powers as other more popular heroes (Incredibles im looking at you)\n\n",
"There are- depending on what you consider new I like a lot of new people. If we consider that the most popular ones that people have heard about are from the 30 - 60s (Flash, Captain America, Batman, Superman, Iron Man, X-Men, F4, etc) Young Avengers was a good run- they had new characters in it. A lot of them are \"Debut in the mid-2000s\" new. The Authority is a great comic that I love that is new as of the 90s. Great characters and characterization. Deadpool is an extremely popular character that debuted in the 90s. I'd say he is solidly mainstream.\n\nThe general public may not hear about them because last time comics had their hay day was in the, the 60s - 80s. With tv shows, movies, so on and so forth- I feel like comic heroes were largely relegated to kids-shows for about 20 years after that. We've really just hit our stride in mainstreaming comic heroes through movies and tv again so this will be the 'new' character's first chance to be exposed to the general public. Whether they will or not is a different matter entirely. \n\nI can go on if you want or stop there =3"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
1zbxl3 | why with such high unemployment, the gov't cant just implement a massive public works project like they did with the new deal? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zbxl3/eli5why_with_such_high_unemployment_the_govt_cant/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfsb013",
"cfsbov1",
"cfsbuq4",
"cfsbwkz",
"cfsbyd0",
"cfsciws"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
6,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"A lot of public works require training, they take time and money to train and license people to do stuff. Even road work takes people knowing how to use machinery, etc.\n\nNot to mention they have tried that. Over the past few year there has been lots of road work, infrastructure upgrading, etc. around North America in an attempt to try and get more people employed and working.",
"Republicans, Fox News and failure of people to look beyond the Strawman arguments.",
"Heh.... Watch This:\n\nHeyyyyyy..... what if the public works project was to run FIBER coast to coast? Hmmmm? Where are your objections now, naysayers?",
"The conter-intutitve idea that in a recession the government should spend more money, not less, was largely proposed by the economist John Keynes and were widely taken up by governments all over the world in the 1930s, with varying degrees of success.\n\nSince the 1980s, however, Keynes's ideas have been largely out of political and economic fashion, and the world has moved again far closer to classic laissez-faire economic liberalism. A few countries have tried Keynesian spending during the current economic crisis, again with mixed results, but all of the largest economies in the western world have implemented austerity measures of one kind or another.\n\nTLDR: a \"New Deal\" style works programme would be almost impossible to get passed given current trends in politics.",
"You can have full employment if you gave half the unemployed jobs digging holes, and the other half filling them back up. Jobs in themselves are not the answer. The jobs have to be PRODUCTIVE to actually have any benefit to society. \n\nThat and, the New Deal didn't end the Depression, it didn't actually end until 1946 when the government drastically cut spending and taxes. ",
"The money has to come from somewhere: In your case, the government treasury. \n \nThe government is already incurring 1 trillion deficits each year. Implementing a massive public works project like you suggest to a magnitude able to reduce unemployement to normal levels would easily double, possibly triple, the current deficit. This would lead to more frequent government shutdown, gridlock in Congress, interest expense approaching 50% of Government revenues, a further decreased credit rating, and possible loss of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency. \n \nThese downsides could scare investors, likely having negative effects on the stock market. If the scare is large enough, it will cause businesses to constrict, laying off workers, and leaving us where we were in the first place with regards to unemployment. \n \nBy the way, the Dollar is already starting to be challenged as the world's reserve currency: \n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-26/mersch-says-renminbi-may-challenge-dollar-as-reserve-currency"
]
] | ||
24uqms | how can google translate go between (somewhat) obscure languages such as urdu and swahili? | I'm thinking that they translate through a language such as English? (Urdu- English, English-Swahili) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24uqms/eli5_how_can_google_translate_go_between_somewhat/ | {
"a_id": [
"chaucsp",
"chaudhr"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Maybe it tries to parse the sentence, and a short phrase or a few words, is a more or less direct translation. Google might have less to allow for the logical consequences of the phrase 'have a lot of storage, so you can suggest a better translation for sentences.\n\n**BTW** this was translated from English to Urdu and then back again\n\n**edit** wtf;dr: My best guess is that it looks at short phrases and single words, of which it has stored the \"correct\" translation. I think that they do a direct translation, as the text becomes more obscure every time it's translated.",
"Why would you assume that?\n\nAnd Urdu and Swahili are not at all obscure. Urdu is an official language in two countries and has about 65 million native speakers (that's about the population of France); Swahili is lingua franca for much of eastern Africa and an official language in three countries, and is spoken natively by 15 million people and as a second language by possibly 45 million."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
6yzar6 | why are nasa spacesuits so bulky and space-x spacesuits are so sleek? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6yzar6/eli5_why_are_nasa_spacesuits_so_bulky_and_spacex/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmrb4gc",
"dmrcgz0",
"dmrdrin"
],
"score": [
18,
10,
8
],
"text": [
"The spacex suit you saw pictures of today is for transitions between craft, not full vacuum. \n\nAlso they're brand new and NASA's aren't. But mostly the first thing.",
"There are two kinds of spacesuits: Pressure suits to keep astronauts alive inside the spacecraft in case it depressurizes, and EVA suits for when you actually go outside into space. The latter have to be much bulkier to protect you from all the hazards of space (debris, radiation etc) for a long period of time, rather than just having to protect you from vacuum for the time it takes the spacecraft to land. Also, EVA suits need a self-contained life support system (the backpack) rather than just getting air from hose connections to the spacecraft.\n\nThe NASA suits are EVA suits, the SpaceX suits are not.",
"Nasa has a compairable one. Musk is just very good at reinventing the wheel then blasting social media and tech blogs with his breakthrough.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-spacesuit-unveiled-for-starliner-astronauts"
]
] | ||
2gl4m2 | when at the bank or pharmacy drive through, how does the cylinder capsule that you send back and forth to the teller operate? | How does it shoot up through a tube vertically and then return through a different tube? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gl4m2/eli5_when_at_the_bank_or_pharmacy_drive_through/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckk480a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It uses compressed air and vacuum pressure to push/pull the canisters through the tubes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
1wt6ka | are reflective objects reflective in all spectrums of electromagnetic waves? also, how do objects "reflect" heat when heat is something else entirely? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wt6ka/eli5_are_reflective_objects_reflective_in_all/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf54ul9",
"cf54xe3"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"Nope. Nor are they transparent across the whole spectrum.\n\nFor instance, many optics used in infrared research have lenses made out of germanium. It's not transparent to us in the visible spectrum but it is transparent in the infrared. Another example is x rays, which are a much higher frequency electromagnetic radiation than visible light. Your skin and flesh are transparent to x rays but your bones are not, so you can use them to look at your bones. There is even a part of the spectrum, mid infrared, where air is not transparent. So every physicist who works in the mid infrared has a hard time doing his experiments because he has to get rid of all the air in order to see anything.",
"Objects reflect in a certain spectrum. So a mirror for example is very good at reflecting visible light, but might be a really bad reflector of radio waves. Or a [radar reflector](_URL_0_) which is painted black is still a very good radar reflector, but doesn't reflect visible light.\n\nHeat is an electromagnetic wave, too, which can traverse space. Don't confuse this with \"warm matter\" (warm air, warm object). \n\nSo basically you take an object. It has a certain temperature, say 1200 degC, and sits in a 20 degC room with air, and you touch it. Now what it does is three things. \n\nOne is that it conducts heat energy to your hand. This you can feel because your hand is getting warmer. And burns to charcoal. \n\nSecond is it conducts heat energy to the air around it. The air heats up, and through convection the warm air eventually reaches you, where it heats up your remaining skin and you can feel it. \n\nThird is it radiates heat energy in the form of electromagnetic waves. You can also feel this in your face without the warm air around. You can try this effect at a bonfire for example - go close enough to feel the heat in your face (but not so close that you are set on fire or stuff. Have the fire brigade near and don't try this at home and yaddayadda). Now hold your hand in front of your face shielding it from the fire, and you will notice that the sensation of really-hot goes away instantly. That's the radiation part. Fun fact: objects that are good at radiating heat are also shitty heat reflectors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corner_reflector"
]
] | ||
mqmnl | the difference between keynesian and monetarist economics. | What is the difference between the various major schools of economic thought, namely Keynesian and monetarist? I understand that these schools often use the Great Depression as examples of their own merits, but I'm confused as to how they can make the same data point work for them in different ways. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/mqmnl/eli5_the_difference_between_keynesian_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c33346w",
"c334knx",
"c33346w",
"c334knx"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
10,
4
],
"text": [
" > I'm confused as to how they can make the same data point work for them in different ways.\n\nWelcome to economics. \n\n > What is the difference between the various major schools of economic thought, namely Keynesian and monetarist? \n\n\nOkay, I'll start with the main thing that the Keynesians and the Monetarists have in common, and then we'll go from there. Both believe that you can have an impact on how much stuff is bought and sold in the economy by changing the money supply. This is more controversial than it might sound at first—[there are schools of thought](_URL_0_) which do not agree with this premise. If you imagine the government announcing tomorrow \"starting today, all one dollar bills are worth ten dollars, all five dollar bills are worth fifty dollars, all ten...\" and so on, you would instantly have ten times as much money as you have today, but it seems reasonable to predict that stores, knowing that you have ten times as much money as you had before, will just multiply all their prices by ten as well, and no one will be any richer. [So all though your bank balance will be ten times what it is today, you won't be any richer in *real* terms—only in *nominal* terms.](_URL_1_) But both the Keynesians and the Monetarists agree that if the government does it right, they can sometimes have an impact on *real* stuff, at least in the short run. This is largely because they believe that prices and/or wages are \"sticky\" in the short run. That is, stores are a little bit slow to change their prices and people are a little bit slow to negotiate their wages, so after the government announces that all ten dollar bills are now one hundred dollar bills, there is maybe some kind of window of opportunity where people really can buy more stuff.\n\nWhere they differ is in deciding how and when to use this power. The Keynesians are really focused on the general premise that when times are tough, it's cause people aren't buying as much stuff as they should. To phrase it with the correct jargon, *aggregate demand* is insufficient. Now, lately there has been a large resurgence of Keynesianism in general discussion, so you might believe that that's something all economists believe. That's not true. Lots of economists believe, for instance, that if times are tough it's because we've got too many of one type of factory and not enough of another type of factory, and so resources are being used inefficiently. These economists might believe that if people aren't buying much, it's not that they aren't buying enough—it's that firms are producing the wrong stuff, in which case the best move isn't to try to get people to buy more stuff but to try to get firms to make different stuff. But those economists aside, the Keynesians (and to an extent many monetarists) believe that a) recessions are bad and b) recessions are demand driven. Given these two premises, and the premise from the first paragraph that government has the power to affect aggregate demand by manipulating the money supply, a Keynesian will argue that the government has a responsibility to take action to increase aggregate demand during a recession using monetary policy. Keynesians also tend to be big fans of *fiscal policy*, which is the use of government spending, taxes, and transfer payments (think stimulus packages) in order to affect aggregate demand, so they're not solely focused on the money supply for influencing these things.\n\nMonetarists believe a lot of the same stuff as Keynesians, and in fact a lot of people see monetarism as a special case of Keynesianism. They believe that changes to the money supply have real short-run effects and lots of them believe recessions are demand driven. However, monetarists typically argue less in favor of discretionary monetary policy à-la Keynesian, and more for a rule-based monetary policy that would have the money supply increase by some fixed number each year. They see fluctuations in the money supply as the source of the aggregate demand fluctuations that the Keynesians worry about, and prescribe a predictable and relatively rigid monetary policy. They also tend to be less in favor of fiscal policy to stimulate aggregate compared to monetary policy. In short (and sort of tongue-in-cheek), monetarists believe there's not an economic problem that can't be solved by just printing some more money (but not *too* much more money).",
"[\"Fear the Boom and Bust\" a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem](_URL_0_)\n\n[Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two](_URL_1_)\n\nThese are not bad as a basic overview. EconStories makes good stuff.",
" > I'm confused as to how they can make the same data point work for them in different ways.\n\nWelcome to economics. \n\n > What is the difference between the various major schools of economic thought, namely Keynesian and monetarist? \n\n\nOkay, I'll start with the main thing that the Keynesians and the Monetarists have in common, and then we'll go from there. Both believe that you can have an impact on how much stuff is bought and sold in the economy by changing the money supply. This is more controversial than it might sound at first—[there are schools of thought](_URL_0_) which do not agree with this premise. If you imagine the government announcing tomorrow \"starting today, all one dollar bills are worth ten dollars, all five dollar bills are worth fifty dollars, all ten...\" and so on, you would instantly have ten times as much money as you have today, but it seems reasonable to predict that stores, knowing that you have ten times as much money as you had before, will just multiply all their prices by ten as well, and no one will be any richer. [So all though your bank balance will be ten times what it is today, you won't be any richer in *real* terms—only in *nominal* terms.](_URL_1_) But both the Keynesians and the Monetarists agree that if the government does it right, they can sometimes have an impact on *real* stuff, at least in the short run. This is largely because they believe that prices and/or wages are \"sticky\" in the short run. That is, stores are a little bit slow to change their prices and people are a little bit slow to negotiate their wages, so after the government announces that all ten dollar bills are now one hundred dollar bills, there is maybe some kind of window of opportunity where people really can buy more stuff.\n\nWhere they differ is in deciding how and when to use this power. The Keynesians are really focused on the general premise that when times are tough, it's cause people aren't buying as much stuff as they should. To phrase it with the correct jargon, *aggregate demand* is insufficient. Now, lately there has been a large resurgence of Keynesianism in general discussion, so you might believe that that's something all economists believe. That's not true. Lots of economists believe, for instance, that if times are tough it's because we've got too many of one type of factory and not enough of another type of factory, and so resources are being used inefficiently. These economists might believe that if people aren't buying much, it's not that they aren't buying enough—it's that firms are producing the wrong stuff, in which case the best move isn't to try to get people to buy more stuff but to try to get firms to make different stuff. But those economists aside, the Keynesians (and to an extent many monetarists) believe that a) recessions are bad and b) recessions are demand driven. Given these two premises, and the premise from the first paragraph that government has the power to affect aggregate demand by manipulating the money supply, a Keynesian will argue that the government has a responsibility to take action to increase aggregate demand during a recession using monetary policy. Keynesians also tend to be big fans of *fiscal policy*, which is the use of government spending, taxes, and transfer payments (think stimulus packages) in order to affect aggregate demand, so they're not solely focused on the money supply for influencing these things.\n\nMonetarists believe a lot of the same stuff as Keynesians, and in fact a lot of people see monetarism as a special case of Keynesianism. They believe that changes to the money supply have real short-run effects and lots of them believe recessions are demand driven. However, monetarists typically argue less in favor of discretionary monetary policy à-la Keynesian, and more for a rule-based monetary policy that would have the money supply increase by some fixed number each year. They see fluctuations in the money supply as the source of the aggregate demand fluctuations that the Keynesians worry about, and prescribe a predictable and relatively rigid monetary policy. They also tend to be less in favor of fiscal policy to stimulate aggregate compared to monetary policy. In short (and sort of tongue-in-cheek), monetarists believe there's not an economic problem that can't be solved by just printing some more money (but not *too* much more money).",
"[\"Fear the Boom and Bust\" a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem](_URL_0_)\n\n[Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two](_URL_1_)\n\nThese are not bad as a basic overview. EconStories makes good stuff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_business_cycle_theory",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_versus_nominal_value_(economics\\)"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_business_cycle_theor... | |
85g4nu | why should i not be terrified when a plane encounters moderate turbulence? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/85g4nu/eli5_why_should_i_not_be_terrified_when_a_plane/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvx6tab"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Planes are designed with a factor of safety 2, meaning that they are designed to handle twice the stress they are supposed to. Pilots also undergo rigorous training to handle all sorts of issues. Even if you hit turbulence heavy enough to shake off the engine the plane will be able to fly for 15 miles before the remaining engine fails and the pilot can still put the plane into a high angle of attack and take the plane down safely."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
5ofy02 | why are races usually measured in distance rather than time? e.g., 5k instead of furthest distance achieved in 15minutes. | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ofy02/eli5_why_are_races_usually_measured_in_distance/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcj1f3l",
"dcj1gho",
"dcj2b99"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
6
],
"text": [
"The finish ribbon keeps tearing as the two motorcycles keeping it stretched across the route try to remain 5m in front of the leader. ",
"Because being able to keep accurate time over short time periods is a relatively recent invention.\n\nFWIW, the 24 Hours of Lemans is run for distance, but I'm not sure about other endurance races?",
"Because to judge it you only need one person standing at the known finish point, instead of one judge per competitor who needs to be standing exactly where the competitor is after 15min (which itself is quite hard to know before accurate watches were invented), presumably the judge gets there by being an athlete who is as fast or faster than the olympic athletes you're measuring (in which case, why aren't the judges competing?)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
1bwzrr | the role of vitamin c in the human body | I was reading the comments of a Life Pro Tip earlier and found out that vitamin c is not actually proven to boost your immune system. I tried reading the wikipedia page to confirm this, but it was obviously written for someone with a degree in biochemistry. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bwzrr/eli5_the_role_of_vitamin_c_in_the_human_body/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9b4af4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I was donating blood the other day and I asked a phlebotomist why it's so important and she said it binds to iron which makes it easier to be absorbed by the body."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
8kv8ou | out of all minerals, why did salt become such a crucial cornerstone of our diets? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8kv8ou/eli5_out_of_all_minerals_why_did_salt_become_such/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzar2g7",
"dzar5iq",
"dzarrnn"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"A\\) It tastes good. B\\) We need salt to keep our osmotic pressure in our bodies \\(the differential between water and ions in a liquid\\)",
"It’s good at preserving meat so that we don’t get sick when we eat it and that was very important before refrigeration. Also salt is found in abundance compared to a lot of other minerals.",
"Our body's function on electrical impulses which are facilitated by electrolytes. Salt is very abundant so it would make sense for natural selection to favor the intake of salt. \n\nHow cells developed/evolved the sodium-potassium pumps is slightly beyond my understanding."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
d2e8v7 | what are those rubber cord things sometimes fastened to various roads for cars to drive over? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d2e8v7/eli5_what_are_those_rubber_cord_things_sometimes/ | {
"a_id": [
"ezub7vi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Pretty sure it counts cars on the road and times of day so they can better regulate the flow of traffic. Pretty much recording patterns in traffic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
38duhk | why are guitar, bass and drum kit the basic instrumental core of modern music? | Of all instruments (and of course a few of them are used very often - such as keyboards or sax, among others - though not as much as the "essential" ones in the title), why exactly is the vast majority of modern music genres based on those three instruments? Even the drum kit itself, why is it the way it is, with all the diversification of drums and percussion in the world? Is there a special reason for this quintessential instrumental selection? What made that happen, what explains its lasting establishment above all others and could they even become obsolete to music in the future? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38duhk/eli5_why_are_guitar_bass_and_drum_kit_the_basic/ | {
"a_id": [
"cru9urg",
"cruablg",
"cruajg1",
"crubkza",
"crudemd",
"cruf43i",
"cruh153",
"cruh2aa"
],
"score": [
15,
79,
7,
3,
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think there's a decent argument to be made that the synthesiser is, at least in many areas of music, replacing all of these. It's been a long time since physical guitars, bass and drums have been the primary instruments in the majority of pop songs. In whole genres (any dance music really, hip-hop and almost all modern pop) it is exceptionally rare to have guitar/bass/kit driven tracks.\n\nThat aside, they've become pretty ubiquitous for 'band' type music like rock, metal, blues, punk, indie etc for some good reasons.\n\nGuitars are relatively cheap, portable, very versatile and can fulfil multiple roles. A saxophone can play great melody lines, solos and riffs, but for them to provide effective harmonies you really need more than one, plus they're pretty expensive, take a fair amount of practice to sound good on, etc. A guitar, on the other hand, can do all of that and more - you can play chords, you can do melodies and, importantly, you can sing at the same time.\n\nI think the use of the bass guitar flows straight out of this. You really don't have to learn much switching from guitar to bass (or vice-versa).\n\nAs for the drum kit, that's an interesting question. I don't know a great deal about drums, I'd be interested to hear about the evolution of the kit.",
"They're the simplest method of providing a chord sequence, a harmonic backup, and a rhythm, all while being easy to learn, store, transport, and amplify.\n\nThe guitar and piano are the most common instruments capable of playing full chords - other lead instruments (think saxophone, trumpet, violin, etc) are only able to play a single note, requiring other band members to back them up to flesh out chords. Of the two, guitar and piano, guitar is a bit easier to learn and to play simple chord structures, and it's much, much easier to travel with and set up.\n\nThe bass is popular for the exact same reasons as the guitar, except instead of a chord structure, it gives you a harmony, countermelody, and bass support.\n\nThe drumset is simply the most convenient way for one person to provide any percussion needed to keep a rhythm in various styles. They're completely modular, meaning you can modify them with anything - tambourines, gongs, xylophones, whatever.",
"Rather than the core of all modern music, its that they are common instruments for pop, rock, prog rock, etc. used for representing portions of music - beat, rhythm, melody, tempo, texture, timbre, pitch, and key.\n\nSimplified, music has a pulse and feeling. You can craft this pulse and feeling by combining percussion, strings, winds, brass, electronics, voice, and generally anything that makes noise.\n\nIn general, the concept of the 'three-piece band' is so reachable because it can cover the full range of musical components - a drum can provide beat, a bass can provide rhythm and tempo, a guitar can provide timbre and texture, and all three can be tuned and played in the proper pitch and key. Really, they all inter-mingle (they all can contribute to each of the components individually or as a whole). They are relatively easy to learn without having an in-depth understanding of music theory. Personal opinion, but I think its harder to apply strings such as bass/cello/violin or keys without having a fairly good understanding of how things like keys and chord progressions work together, while with guitar/bass you can get a way with a lot knowing power chords and having a few effect pedals. Not to look down on that, its absolutely an interesting way to play, but there is a difficulty curve there that might make the integration of other 'classical' instruments into the rock-trio setup a bit rarer. \n\nEven that is simplified - what can you do with drums, a bass, and a guitar to take it beyond vanilla sounds?? Electronics play a heavy part in a lot of modern music - guitarists and bassists can take advantage of various effect pads to distort and alter the guitar and bass sounds, while drummers can employ synth pads, automated triggers, or exotic instruments to expand their reach.\n\nThis might make it seem like 'modern' music is dominated by this setup - but I would suggest that this is more due to the music that you have available to listen to, or are generally attracted to. Exploring different genres, you would likely find a significant amount of variation in instruments used in music. Consider bands like Pentatonix, Big Fish, Tool, Daft Punk, so on and so forth. There are a lot of new and interesting 'sounds' used by both indie and mainstream bands that are arguably 'modern' in their usage of sound that is not really traditional in any sense. Moreso in indie in fact - I would go so far as to recommend looking more into indie/unsigned artists, as there is a wealthy of interesting musical styles there that I think better represent 'modern' music.\n\nTL;DR There are a series of components that make up 'music' that are fairly accessible with the three-piece band. That is not to say that they are dominating modern music, its just that they are going to be more common. Alternative types and styles of music are still everywhere, its just a question of looking for them. It is highly unlikely that the three piece band would overtake or dominate other forms of music globally.",
"Surprised no one mentioned cost or portability yet. \n\nBack around the turn of the century there were travelling bluesmen that went from road house to road house (the most famous and influential was probably Robert Johnson, and he came towards the end of the era). They played and sang by themselves, and had to travel around. The best instrument for that is the acoustic guitar, because it's cheap and light, easy to play, and you can sing along with it. \n\nWhen they got to the cities, blues bands formed using the cheap instruments they had... bass and drums. They can be moved from venue to venue without much hassle, and when electric guitar pickups where invented they allowed the instruments to get smaller (in the case of the bass) and could be amplified without a microphone. You could have three dudes play for hours, with minimal setup and tear down, the venue only needed to pay three of them instead of a whole band, and rehearsals and that sort of thing is simpler when you only have a few people involved. \n\nSo convenience, price, and utility made the guitar, bass and drum set the staple of American music going into the 50s (ignoring big band and swing of jazz). ",
"The logistics of live music are probably a big part of it.\n\nUnless you're Dave Matthew's Band or something playing live music means having instruments that will fit in the back of a full sized van, will survive fairly rough treatment, can be set up and taken down by 4 or 5 guys relatively quickly without a lot of outside support, and which will still sound good in venues that are wildly different accoustically. The instruments you're talking about fit that bill pretty well, so you tend to see them around a lot.\n\nAlso, if you're trying to book shows away from your hometown you're going to be trying to convince some guy to hire you basically sight unseen on the basis of a phone conversation or an email. \"You know the Black Keys? We're kind of like that.\" is a much easier way to start that conversation than \"You know what a Theramin is? Well let me tell you about it...\".",
"As far as the drumset goes, watch these series of videos:\n\n_URL_0_",
"Because they are cheap, plentiful, portable and easy to begin to learn, socially acceptable and fun, as well as covering the rhythmic harmonic and melodic places generally required for a full sounding musical piece. Playing in a shitty rock band at school was awesome, and it's how most people get a start. ",
"Aside from the other comments posted, I think another reason is how these instruments cover pretty much the entire audible spectrum for humans, which is 20Hz ~ 20KHz. First, you have the bass which is way down there on the low frequencies spectrum, however, it also covers higher frequencies due to its harmonics. Guitar can cover mids and high frequencies, also covering lower and higuer frequencies, also thanks to harmonics. And the drums are pretty much all over the place as well. Bass drum and toms can cover low and mid-low frequencies, snare is also within low and mid-low frequencies but it has an bright attack which can be around 4Khz ~ 6 Khz (roughly), cymbals cover the high frequencies.\n\nWhy am I focusing on this? Because with modern music and I'm not talking about recent music but turn of the 20th century, we tend to like more whatever covers the entire spectrum, whatever feels like a full sound, even though it's only 3 intruments. Anyone can do the test, listen to a song with only drums and guitar with no bass, and then listen to another one or the same one with the bass and you'll feel the difference. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM869WYpp-0"
],
[],
[]
] | |
2x43i7 | how do we know the content of the bible has not been altered through its history? | Prior to the invention of the printing press in the 15th century, I assume the bible was spread by handwritten copies, so is there any way people can be sure that what they read is the same as what were supposedly God's words? By alter, I mean in the actual content, as opposed to a variation in translation/interpretation. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2x43i7/eli5_how_do_we_know_the_content_of_the_bible_has/ | {
"a_id": [
"cowogne",
"cowomj0",
"cowp0v9"
],
"score": [
16,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"It has been altered and edited by anonymous sources for hundreds of years. There's not much good reason to think it's reliable or accurate. ",
"We actually know for certain that the content of the bible has varied through history. There are more gospels out there than those that are currently included in the bible. In fact different denominations have different interpretations of what should and should not be included in the bible.\n\nWe also know that when historical scholars used to copy the bible, they would sometimes accidentally leave out a word or sentence. Often they would make a note of this in the margins but those notes were not always taken into copies of that copy.\n\nPlus we also know that some translations have introduced pretty big alterations into the content. ",
"Throughout all my study of history and religion, before the bible was printed and made available to the public, it was in Latin only. So only people that could read Latin could interpret it. Because of this, the churches could basically tell people whatever they wanted to and make them believe that it was in the Bible because they didn't know for certain that it wasn't. If you take a look at the crusades, for example, you'll kind of get what i'm talking about. Priests were promising men salvation if they went on these conquests for holy relics and holy land. They would lie to them and tell them that the only way they would ever be abolished of all their sins was if they went on these crusades. The church also used this method to extort money from the people.\n\nBack around this time, people where actually terrified of the power that the churches held. The church had the power to banish people and condemn them to hell, and since religion was so big in certain areas, this usually ended in death. Throughout the centuries, Churches have abused their power through favoritism, extortion, and violence.\n\nThe bible has been altered by man. Think about how many different versions of the bible there are. You can never be sure which version is true and which isn't. Ontop of this, several books of the bible are missing, leaving it incomplete. \n\nTL;DR - There are lies no matter where you look. Don't take them to heart, because it isn't worth it. Believe what you want to believe. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
ejexip | why is everyone so pissed off at the australian prime minister? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ejexip/eli5_why_is_everyone_so_pissed_off_at_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"fcx8oc8"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"It's because Australia has very, very strong brush fires right now that are threatening many people. Some people are even getting notifications that it's too late to evacuate and that they just need to stay in their house and hope for the best.\n\nAnd the prime minister has not taken it seriously at all. He refused to meet with scientists and firefighting chiefs months ago to discuss the possibility of these fires. He wants to cut funding to the firefighting services, and doesn't think the people fighting the fires now deserve to get more money (\"they volunteered for it, they enjoy it\"). And he's just completely disrespectful to the people who he's trying to engage with for these photo opportunities.\n\nIt's really sick."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
3iysqi | after the chernobyl accident the soviet government evacuated thousands of people and established a 30km exclusion zone. people died of acute radiation sickness... but some reactors at chernobyl npp continued operating until 1999? | Were these workers in danger? Did they wear dosimeters and decontaminate after every shift? Or is the plant just bigger than I'm imagining and the other reactors were a safe distance away? Wtf is up with this 10+ year period where people were continuing to work at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant after the accident? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3iysqi/eli5_after_the_chernobyl_accident_the_soviet/ | {
"a_id": [
"cukv9ba"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The people who died of acute radiation sickness were the intervention personnel who actively participated in the containment of the core. They needed to go into the building, in fact, right up close to the core in full meltdown. For many of them, there was no way of avoiding immense radiation exposure without doing the job they were sent there for. They chose to do their job, to prevent further problems for many other people.\n\nYes, the plant had four nuclear reactors, only one of them went into meltdown, the others were fine (albeit still a very, very dangerous design that nobody else was crazy enough to operate - but as you can see, even that \"dangerous\" design did fine for the other reactors; the accident was caused by monumental human error and bad planning, not just the dangerous design). The radiation levels were a bit elevated through the building, so through most of its operational history the workers there worked in multiple shifts to avoid too much exposure."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
cx8691 | for foods that are typically bbqued, why does it taste different if you were to cook it in the oven or stove? | Aren't you just cooking via heat application? Shouldn't the method of heat application have nothing to do with the taste of the food? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cx8691/eli5_for_foods_that_are_typically_bbqued_why_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyjg786",
"eyjir54"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"The heat source used for BBQ, most often charcoal or something like that, creates a lot of smoke. The flavor of this smoke flavors the meat while cooking it. This creates the tyical smokey BBQ flavor of BBQued meats",
"Smoke - The thing that makes BBQ \"BBQ\" is the smoke. Pitmasters (pros, and amateurs such as myself) spend a lot of time figuring out what flavor of smoke goes best with the spices in their rub.\n\nYou are correct about the heat. The meat don't care what is producing the actual heat. 250 degrees from a wood fire is the same as 250 degrees from gas or electric. There are even gas and electric BBQ smokers that use that fuel for the heat, and you add wood (pellets, chips or chunks) to add the BBQ flavor"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
38butc | if the whole world ran on clean energy, would it still be bad to waste electricity | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38butc/eli5_if_the_whole_world_ran_on_clean_energy_would/ | {
"a_id": [
"crtvqwe"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Waste is never a good thing, but from a consumer perspective, you'd still have to pay for it. There's still infrastructure to maintain"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
37s6fk | what causes a beer belly. what are the best ways to fright/ lose a beer belly? | Is it only beer? Is that a myth? If it is not a myth whats the best way to fix or prevent a beer belly? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37s6fk/eli5what_causes_a_beer_belly_what_are_the_best/ | {
"a_id": [
"crpe9g2",
"crpeab4",
"crpeb99",
"crpfet5"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The beer thing is a myth. It is simply abdominal fat from any source.\n\nThe best way to fix it, as with any fat accumulation, is a change in diet and exercise.",
"Every day you burn a certain amount of energy. Every day you consume a certain amount of energy. If you consume more than you burn then you put on weight, usually in the form of fat. Whereabouts that fat is stored is largely genetically determined, but for a lot of men it accumulates around the waist. Hence the image of the beer belly.\n\nNow, why the name beer belly? My guess: people that drink a lot of beer tend to consume a lot of calories in the form of beer and bar snacks. This causes a lot of energy in.\n\nThey are also probably not that physically active because a) they have a hobby of drinking beer and not exercising b) hangovers don't exactly help for exercising. This means that their energy expenditure is low. So the net effect is that they consume more than they burn, which loops us back to the start of my post.\n\nYou then end up with a bunch of fat people all sitting at the pub drinking beer. This leads to people relating drinking beer with having a big belly, and hence you have a beer belly.",
"Beer has loads of calories. If you consume more calories than you use for energy, you put on weight. ",
"Men accumulate fat around their midsection. Women accumulate fat on their hips and ass. When men start to get overweight, it shows on the gut first. If you have a \"beer gut\", it means you're overweight and you need to start cutting calories. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5pqipt | the earth has been around for millions of years. how can the last 12 years have been the warmest ever? further, how could humans have had such an impact in such a short time? | The 12-year quote is pulled from here:
_URL_0_
EDIT: I was incorrect in my quoting from the article. The nature of the question - of how humans have impacted the earth's temperature in such a short time - still persists. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pqipt/eli5_the_earth_has_been_around_for_millions_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcszvvb",
"dct06a3",
"dct0718"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"They are not the warmest ever. The temperatures we have now are about what they were during Ancient Rome (as per grape growing data in Europe). And during several prehistoric era temperatures were much higher than they are now. ",
"Not the warmest ever, but the issue is the rate of change.\n\nImagine you're in the passenger seat of a car. The car goes from 40 MPH to 50. And then 60. And then 90. It's accelerating faster than it ever has before.\n\nThe driver says \"Don't worry. It's gone faster than this before.\" But you're not thinking about that. You're thinking about his foot on the accelerator, the fact that he doesn't seem to care that there is a brake pedal, and the knowledge that sooner or later, you'll hit something.",
"Recent developments over (I'd say more than 12 years) have slowly heated the earth, but our population, the power required to sustain said population along with farming, traffic, air traffic, manufacturing. These all have an effect on the global temperature.\n\nWe managed to increase the population of the earth from 6 billion to 7 billion in just 15 years, this is a massive growth in the number of bodies to sustain, contributing to the aforementioned factors.\n\nFor a timeline of the Earth temperature, XKCD has provided [this](_URL_0_)."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/faq/how-is-climate-changing-and-how-has-it-changed-in-the-past"
] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://xkcd.com/1732/"
]
] | |
4ddxa9 | why do underwater images/videos never show up as blurry? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ddxa9/eli5_why_do_underwater_imagesvideos_never_show_up/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1q2b0q"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A drop of water refracts light differently than the air that the camera is looking through, so it will be out of focus.\n\nUnderwater, light is still refracted, but in one direction, so the camera is focused correctly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
6ashn1 | how did this guy survive by consuming only water for 28 days? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ashn1/eli5_how_did_this_guy_survive_by_consuming_only/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhh1ne0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The results you are seeing could not have happened from fasting. Fasting causes you to lose weight, yes, but before you lose fat your body goes for its protein reserves (muscle). \n\nIf he really fasted for 28 days and lost all that weight he would either be very frail or he would still have some fat on him, but none of the muscle.\n\nA subreddit that talks about Fasting and EDs (eating disorders) is /r/proED. They don't condone the behavior and understand it is a disorder which causes damage, but it's a resource for some people who do this.\n\nI would recommend not doing this. It would suck and you will feel weak constantly while doing it. Your body needs nutrition to function properly, not just water.\n\nIf you want to lose weight don't look up these quick methods. If it's too good to be true then it's too good to be true. The best way it to just do your research and get some discipline going with your diet as well as getting some regular excersize, but diet has been shown to be the most important part.\n\nMotivation to lose weight will help you gain discipline. The discipline will be the factor that will decide if you lose the weight.\n\nSorry if there is typos. I'm on mobile. Hope this helped."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2iwjev | what are the black spots that occasionally appear on our nails? | Hello
They are basically small dark spots that appear on our nails once in ages and s the nails grow, it moves upward and eventually you cut it. Once it got to the length where I could cut it, I tried to scratch it off, which I certainly could.
Thanks | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2iwjev/eli5_what_are_the_black_spots_that_occasionally/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl6afj6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends, black lines can be a sign of melanoma and certain spots can be indicative of a heart issue. Knew someone that actually went through this, had to have a sample taken from is finger, fortunately didn't have melanoma."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
36owy7 | why do people get married? | I don't get it. Why does anyone ever get married? I mean, perhaps some marry for religious reasons, but I'm talking about folks who just get married cause they love each other. What's the actual benefit of it?
I'm asking not to be a dick or insult married people, I'm actually considering marriage myself. I'm making a pro/con chart, but I can't think of much for the pro side.
Thanks for your answers!
EDIT: Specifically, I'm looking for benefits on top of being partners/boyfriend and girlfriend. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36owy7/eli5_why_do_people_get_married/ | {
"a_id": [
"crfska3",
"crfsltd",
"crfslum",
"crfsmu4",
"crfsocb",
"crfsrmt",
"crfssyr",
"crfsxki",
"crfv656"
],
"score": [
15,
10,
21,
2,
3,
5,
2,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"For legal reasons. One specific reason is if you or your partner is in an accident that lands you in the hospital, not being married excludes you from being included in making any of the big decisions when it comes to how they are treated. Pull the plug or no? Do the operation that has a low to no guarantee of working out, or no? ",
"Legal recognition of your family status is a big one.\n\nThis means all sorts of things - it has tax implications, it has insurance implications, other financial implications...\n\nIt also means that your spouse is designated as the person who makes decisions for you when you become incapacitated. I've read stories out of the USA in non-equal marriage states, where the hospital has ignored the patient's wishes as conveyed through their samesex partner, in favour of the patient's family. Maybe not a huge deal, but if you're estranged from your family, it's important that your spouse be legally recognized as a family member.",
"Tax breaks. When you file jointly, you wind up paying significantly less income taxes. \n\nMedical coverage - you can generally add your spouse to your jobs insurance plan at little additional cost to you.\n\nvisitation rights in hospitals - if one of you winds up in critical care, you won;t be considered family and allowed to visit unless married. \n\nInheritance - if one of you dies with no will, good luck keeping the others property unless you were married.\n\nSocial security - if one of you dies when you are old and on social security, that persons benefits continue to be paid to the survivor.",
"Multiple reasons beyond love. Getting to hang out with your best friend all the time. Sharing the expense of just living. Having someone you can always count on. Sharing stupid moments with someone that \"gets\" you. Laughing at farts in bed. The feeling of doing something to make them happy...because making them happy makes you happy. I could go on.",
"Social conditioning and expectation has got to be one of the biggest reasons. Fear of loneliness is another huge one. Then there are the practical things: joint tax filing, hospital visitation rights, etc. \n\nThe most important reason has got to be having someone to raise a kid with - really, parenting should be a bigger consideration than marriage. Love is a nice idea, but I'm not convinced it's one of the top reasons. \n\nThis is a great relevant video on the subject, from the School of Life: _URL_0_\n\"Why you will marry the wrong person.\" Definitely watch and consider before getting married!",
"I have almost been married for a year now (married young).\n\nI married my wife because I love her and want to be with her for the rest of my life. Sure, we could have said \"screw it\" and just lived together. But by putting our promise in an official contract, it really legitimizes our love.\n\nWhen just in a relationship, it is much easier to break things off - marriage forces individuals to deeply consider their relationship before ending it. This is because divorce is costly, lengthy process, and embarrassing.\n\nAdditionally, as a young married man, I have been treated with far more respect and honor since getting married last July. Something I was not expecting, but it has drastically changed the way people have treated me.\n\nAlso, having the ceremony and the after-party is a way to celebrate your joint love with all of your friends and family.\n\nI read somewhere a while ago that it has been proven that children who grow up with married parents (not trying to start marriage equality war - but the study only considered heterosexual marriages) tend to be more successful, less violent than those with unmarried parents. (Not really sure about the explanation about this)\n\nNot to mention filing taxes and many other paperwork for bureaucracy as a married couple is far easier than separately as well.",
"Others have already spoken about the advantageous tax position and the legal ability to better represent the other person, and religious reasons was also hinted at. Here are some others, and they differ in strength for different people.\n\n* A complete affirmation of the relationship between two people. Easily the most romantic of my summary. Compare \"I am happily married to this woman!\" to \"Yeah we're shacked up and boinking a lot.\" \n\n* Social pressure and fitting in. Common-law is not considered as upstanding as marriage in some social circles, and that may matter greatly to some people.\n\n* Dream weddings. For some girls it's a huge life event to have the expensive ceremony.\n\n* It's a business transaction of sorts. The pretty blonde marries the rich tycoon for the money and lifestyle, while he gets a trophy wife in return.\n\n* Family tradition. Your gramma always wanted to see you married before she dies, so you'll feel better that you granted her your wish.\n\n* A second form of family tradition is that a lot of people think you get married first and have kids second. If they really want the latter, and a lot of people do, they feel they have to be married first.\n\nThere's probably lots of others that apply to individual cases.",
"Nobody mentioned this because it sounds pessimistic, but protecting both people in the event of separation is a good one!\n\nIf two people live together and aren't married, and one works while the other stays home to raise the kids, if they later separate the one staying home gets screwed - they'll get child support but no alimony. If they're married, the one who makes less money gets some alimony.\n",
"Probably because of perception. I've read a lot of responses saying that everything you can do in a marriage you can do in a committed relationship, and that's true. I'm 50M and we're coming up on our 25th anniversary, 3 kids 14-22. It's how I want to be perceived by others. I'm a family oriented person and always have been. My parents are still married, and my 2 older sisters are too. It's important to me, and I wear it like someone else wears a North Face jacket. It's written on me, and I want you to know that is the type of person I am. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/zuKV2DI9-Jg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
a4g0tu | how do christmas trees continue to take water and live after they have been chopped down and sitting out for a while? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4g0tu/eli5_how_do_christmas_trees_continue_to_take/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebe3ry0",
"ebef27k",
"ebegm4t"
],
"score": [
17,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"A combination of capillary action and suction.\n\nThe leaves are still alive, they are drawing the moisture and nutrients up from the base of the tree and expelling some of the water through tiny pores in the cells of the leaves. Or return it back down to what would have been the roots.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nSo dipping a cut tree or flower will suck up some water and prevent it from drying out.\n\n",
"Trunks of trees are made of tiny tubes. Water runs up them in the same way it soaks up into tissue paper. (Capillary action) But this isn't powerful enough and so the water evaporating out of the needles creates suction and draws the water the rest of the way up. ",
"Sounds similar to cutting off a branch of a willow tree, planting it & it turns into a new tree. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpiration"
],
[],
[]
] | ||
1kjro4 | what is happening to my nervous system when doctors numb an area of my body? | I recently had my wisdom teeth removed and the dentist numbed the back of my mouth. Then, proceeded to yank two huge wisdom teeth out while blood was spouting everywhere. All the while, even though I was conscious the whole time, I felt nothing. Why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kjro4/eli5_what_is_happening_to_my_nervous_system_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbpnh8s",
"cbprdnt"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"You feel pain (as well as touch) via nerves that transmit 'information' from your mouth and around your teeth to your brain. The information your brain receives is interpreted, where you consciously sense it.\nAnaesthesia is a medication that acts to block the nerve, thereby not allowing it to transmit any information. This is usually injected to the area needed so it will only block the close nerves where it would have a local effect only (i.e. it won't travel far into your body to have any effect on the remaining nerves).\nNo nerve conducting information to brain means no sensation of pain or touch in that region. When the drug's effect wear off, nerves conduct again and you feel normally again.",
"Your sense of touch and pain is carried to your brain through nerves. Nerves are basically strings of long nerve cells which send tiny electrical pulses down their length. This is done in a way that is a bit different than a typical electrical circuit in a say a radio. \n\nSalt is an 'ionic compound' meaning it is made of electrically positive bits and electrically negative bits. Your nerve cells have many little 'doors' along their length that can open and close. These salt ions all line up along the cell with the negative bits inside and the positive bits on the outside. When the nerve cell 'fires', the first door at one end of the cell opens and the ions switch places. This causes their neighbors to flip and and so on creating a ripple down the length of the cell. Like a chain of dominoes, it then takes a small input of energy to 'reset' the cell to be ready to fire again.\n\nMost local anesthetics more or less block/plug the little doors from opening/resetting or letting anything getting through them. Imagine dunking your chain of dominoes under thick honey. If you knock one end, the wave gets stopped and never makes it to the end."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
38zskw | why an astronaut's space suit doesn't crush like a tin can in the vacuum of space? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38zskw/eli5why_an_astronauts_space_suit_doesnt_crush/ | {
"a_id": [
"crz66r1",
"crz6b6n"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Why would it? All the pressure is on the inside. A spacesuit is more like a balloon than a tin can. A well reinforced balloon. ",
"As the other redditor said, all the pressure is on the inside of the suit. It is as he said more like a balloon, and if you put a [balloon in a vacuum chamber](_URL_0_), it will inflate (Beware the audio on that linked youtube video). The prediction wouldn't be to crush the suit, but instead to explode it. It doesn't explode because it's made of very tough materials. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8T6Zf4UEnA"
]
] | ||
9qad78 | why does the sound of an engine change when it drives past you? | Cars, planes, jets anything with a motor. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9qad78/eli5_why_does_the_sound_of_an_engine_change_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"e87w12x",
"e87w5kf",
"e87wpm5",
"e87wyq8"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
73,
2
],
"text": [
"Okay so I'm not a scientist so I'm gonna try to explain what I remember from high school.\nIt's because the sound waves hit your ears differently, when the sound waves and the vehicle are coming closer to you the waves are squished as their being pushed by the source of the noise. As the vehicle is going away from you the waves are aboe to stretch more which changes the tone. \nSomeone else can probably explain it more in depth but that's what I remember.",
"It's called the *something I'm not sure of* effect, both sound and light travel at a constant speed, but their wave lengths get shorter or longer, depending on whether they are moving towards you or away from you. So basically what it means, is that the sound waves from a motorcycle move away from it at the same speed in all directions, but if it's coming towards you, then the sound waves get stacked closer and closer together, so the frequency goes up and the sound gets higher.\n\nSource: Malcolm in the middle",
"The Doppler Effect is super easy to understand with a good animated diagram, that you can find easily with Google. But I’ll try to explain it in text.\n\nImagine your annoying friend is pelting you with balls. He throws the balls at you at a constant rate, for example once every second.\n\nIf he’s running toward you while throwing the balls, the balls hit you more frequently. That’s because each ball has less distance to travel. As your friend gets closer to you, the balls can reach you more quickly.\n\nOn the other hand, if he’s running away from you, each ball has more distance to cover than the last, so you don’t get hit as frequently.\n\nSound waves are like the balls, and the pitch of a sound depends on its frequency. When the source of sound is moving toward you, the sound waves hit you more frequently, so you hear a higher pitched sound, and the opposite when it’s moving away.",
"I saw this question and the number of comments and thought, gleefully, “Someone is going to learn about the Doppler effect!”"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | |
41rabi | how is a printer able to seperate papers taken from the tray so successfully, while i struggle every time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/41rabi/eli5_how_is_a_printer_able_to_seperate_papers/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz4irp6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A tray will hold a stack of paper still while a rubber roller grips and pulls the top sheet off. \n\nSort of like how you can grip your bed sheet and your mattress cover doesn't come off with it at the same time. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
ah7y2q | why does periodic table look different in different countries? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ah7y2q/eli5_why_does_periodic_table_look_different_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"eec61da"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Are they?\n\nI thought it was all standardized to the point where even the letters of the elements (H, He, Li etc) was the same regardless of the language or alphabet used"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
bh7u1y | what determines penis/breast size, and why does it differ, generally, around the globe? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bh7u1y/eli5_what_determines_penisbreast_size_and_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"elqm7xu"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"It is mostly genetics. Shape and size vary so much because there is no one single Gene that covers it. These are both traits that are affected by a wide variety of genes.\n\nDiet and nutrition also plays a part, especially for breasts, because breasts are mostly just fat tissue and a Diet severely lacking a nutrition will obviously result in the collection of less fat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
16ygoe | what is the deal with measuring cups? | Simply why are all american recipes measured in cups? I understand the difference in measuring by volume for liquids/solids (including i.e. flour and sugar) but why don't people just measure by weight?
Enraged five year old European here who just wants to make some cake without any cup shenanigans. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16ygoe/what_is_the_deal_with_measuring_cups/ | {
"a_id": [
"c80j0ms"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"1. It's always been done that way.\n\n2. Measuring cups are cheaper than a scale"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2qcdy6 | why is cut faster than copy on a pc? | Since you're not physically moving a file, I would expect it to be slower, as the computer also have to delete the original. Yet, cutting always seems faster than copying. Why so? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qcdy6/eli5_why_is_cut_faster_than_copy_on_a_pc/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn4ts3f"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"You may imagine that cutting requires additional time to write zeroes to the old places on the disk aside from writing in the ones to the new places, rather than copying which just writes the ones, and as such cutting will take additional time because it's actually a copy-first, then-delete process.\n\nHowever, that is untrue. Most modern OSes do it by a little bit of cheating. Rather, information about the placement of all files on disk is written to this giant file called the index; when you copy files, indeed there is physical writing done on the new spots and the index is updated to tell the filesystem that now it has a new file at the new spots. However when you cut and paste files, no physical writing is done; simply the index is updated to tell it that the file now should be known by another name (its full path with the new directory). On our file explorer interface, it looks like the file has really \"moved\" but actually it's just our filesystem showing it at a different directory, no physical change on the disk level has been made. It's thus a much more efficient and shorter process than copying. \n\nIf you have heard people talk about drive fragmentation, this is how it happens over time when files within the same directory are actually dispersed across different parts of the physical hard disk. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
83t4al | the role of chromosomes in the inheritance of genes | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/83t4al/eli5_the_role_of_chromosomes_in_the_inheritance/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvkd4dk",
"dvm03hj"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Chromosomes ARE genes. All your DNA is wrapped up in bundles, and those bundles are chromosomes. \n\nChromosomes are copied every time as cell divides so your cells all have a copy, except sperm cells/egg cells which get *half* a copy, and that half gets put together with someone else's half to make a full set again",
"A chromosome is a very long string of DNA that has been tightly compacted so it can fit inside of a cell. Each gene is a specific section of that DNA. The DNA sequence in this area can differ slightly between individuals of the same species. \n\nAll human cells (except sex cells) have two chromosomes, and they also can have slightly different sequences. Each human has their own unique set of 2 chromosomes that exist in every cell. Sex cells (egg or sperm) only have one of these unique chromosomes. When the sex cells combine, it creates a new fused cell that now has two chromosomes; one from the father and one from the mother. (that's you!) \n\nWhich chromosome you get from your mother/father is random. \nThe chromosomes you get from your parents will determine which genes you get. And Since mothers and fathers both have two different chromosomes, there are 4 different genetic combinations your parents can produce. This why you and your siblings might have different genes. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
2trqic | how is the quality of a projector measured? in resolution, like other displays? do projectors even have a resolution? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2trqic/eli5_how_is_the_quality_of_a_projector_measured/ | {
"a_id": [
"co1pzed",
"co1q6qc",
"co1qc59",
"co1riym"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Resolution will give you a good idea of the general picture quality, but you'll also want to pay attention to the lumens (brightness) and color quality.",
"Yes, like monitors, projectors have predetermined native resolution which is one of the key specifications used to determine the visual quality of the projected images. Like a monitor, a high resolution projector will be able to produce higher detail images than low resolution projectors.\n\nAs /u/h0nest_Bender has pointed out, the brightness (and contrast) and color quality of the projector are also important. I would actually say that brightness is perhaps the most important specification because a bright low-resolution projector will always look better than a faded high-resolution projector (where you're hardly able to see any detail anyway because of the low brightness and contrast).",
"Home video projectors do have a resolution, just like an LCD (which a lot of them use). So they'll have the same (example) 1600x900 horizontal/vertical resolution.\n\nSome other important measurements are lumens (brightness), throw distance (to make sure you can project on the screen based on a room size) and sound level (some very small projectors have fans which can be annoyingly loud in a home use).\n\nYou might also consider the refresh rates - if you're watching movies, a good projector can match the 24fps of good blu-rays without any more blurring/smearing than necessary.\n\nAlso look at the inputs (i.e. DVI or HDMI) and the cost of replacing a bulb (can be pretty expensive) and how many hours (1000 is typical) they last for.",
"Resolution\n\nColor quality\n\nBrightness\n\nContrast\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
5ygd0p | why does the internet get slower when my laptop is further away from the router? isn't the data still traveling at the speed of light? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ygd0p/eli5_why_does_the_internet_get_slower_when_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"deprngp",
"deproo1",
"deprppf",
"depvgw9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
9,
6
],
"text": [
"wireless signals are not perfectly transmitted and received due to interference. when a packet is not received, it takes time to acknowledge and resend the packet. that reduces your correct data throughput ",
"The issue with wireless distance is interference. If some communications are garbled that slows throughput, and the chance a particular packet will be garbled increases with the distance it needs to travel.",
"The waves travel at the same speed, but as you move further away from the router, the strength of the signal decreases, and becomes more prone to interference from other sources. When this happens, it becomes harder for your computer to determine what's part of the signal, and what's part of the environmental interference. When this happen, the laptop needs to ask the router to send the data once again, and hope it doesn't get too distorted by interference this time.\n\nHowever, your computer's request for re-transmission might also be hard for the router to interpret because of the same interference, and then you're really starting to feel the lag. Retransmission holds up data packets and lowers the average throughput of the link",
"Have a conversation with someone sitting next to you. Chances are you won't have to repeat things often, because you can easily hear the person next to you.\n\nNow have a conversation with someone on the other side of a busy street. You have to yell, and when cars go by you might have to repeat yourself to be heard.\n\nThe further you are from your router, the harder it is to communicate with it (interference and power needed)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
2upng7 | why does stuff sound louder for a moment every-time i yawn or burp? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2upng7/eli5_why_does_stuff_sound_louder_for_a_moment/ | {
"a_id": [
"coamyda"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Sorry i cant give a good scientific proof, but i THINK it may have to do with eustachian tube which controls pressure in your ear. Most likely when you yawn pressure somehow increases or decreases. Im probably wrong on this one but Id live to see the real answer to this one cool question! :))"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1kaue3 | what's the difference between me hitting credit or punching in my pass code when i use a debit card for a purchase? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kaue3/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_me_hitting/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbn2e74"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Both ways you process it, it is a debit transaction. Credit transactions costs the store a little more and takes longer to hit your checking account. When you charge credit, your debit card goes through the credit card network and when you charge debit it goes directly through your bank. Also, choosing debit at some stores allow you to get cash back.\n\nI'm sure other people can expand on this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2dj5v2 | will screens continue to have more and more pixels indefinitely, or will we soon reach a point where humans won't notice the difference between, say, 1000 pixels per inch and 2000 pixels per inch? | I recently was looking at the specs of different generations of iPads and noticed that between the 2nd gen and 3rd gen (IIRC) the number of pixels per inch doubled, purportedly resulting in a significantly more aesthetically pleasing experience for the user.
Will screen resolutions continue to get better and better, or will resolutions eventually plateau? If screen resolutions will plateau, at what point? Are we likely to see it in the next decade? In the next century? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dj5v2/eli5_will_screens_continue_to_have_more_and_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjpyxva",
"cjpz2c2",
"cjq05qv",
"cjq1mvd",
"cjq2njv",
"cjq2uee",
"cjq4xeo",
"cjq6agn",
"cjq7w97",
"cjq85pz",
"cjq8ahj",
"cjqc41x",
"cjqnewc",
"cjqqlb5"
],
"score": [
31,
240,
15,
136,
8,
21,
2,
3,
4,
4,
6,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I used to repair photo developers for a living. All our digital photo developers printed at 300 pixels per linear inch. At a training class for one machine, I asked the engineer if future models would have a higher resolution. His reply was along thee lines of there not being a need, as it was already higher density than people could distinguish.",
"All of these answers are correct, but I'd like to add that viewing distance also plays a big role in one's ability to distinguish individual pixels. Just like a building looks smaller when it's further away, so do pixels. Therefore, when using a smartphone, which you hold inches away from your face, you'll want a higher density (smaller pixels, more packed together) than on a TV, which you view typically from many feet away (larger pixels). That's why your phone and your TV can have the same resolution, but wildly different screens.",
"Steve Jobs famously introduced the iPhone 4 as having 326 PPI and said that the human eye cannot distinguish more than 300 pixels at 12 inches away... \n\nThere are a few factors at play here, how far the screen is from you, how big the screen is, and how dense the pixels are. \n\nIf you're 50 feet away from a TV with 1080p, and a TV with 4K resolution, you won't be able to tell the difference. \n\n5 feet away, the 4k TV blows the 1080p one out of the water.... but yeah for phones and such 300ppi is pretty much as much as you need. ",
"The human eye has an angular resolution of about one arcminute. This means that if two points of light are less than 1/60 of a degree apart, they will resolve to a single point (the eye can't tell them apart). What this also means is that maximum resolution is dependant on distance. For example, doing some quick trig, at 12 inches, that comes out to .0035 inches. Invert that, and you get about 300 pixels per linear inch. Modern smartphones are capable of this, so you can say we've already reached that plateau.",
"People always claim the limits of the current technology are beyond what is indistinguishable to humans, but then the next generation of technology comes along and it's hard to imagine how we ever thought that. ",
"The definition of 20/20 vision is being able to see details at \"1 arcminute\", which is a weird, distance independent way of recording resolution.\n\nLuckily WolframAlpha can tell us what that means in actual terms, which is [someone with 20/20 vision can see something 12 inches away at around 286dpi](_URL_1_).\n\nNow that's just for detail though (for example being able to see jaggies in letters made of pixels). Further eye studies have shown that we can see texture (eg the difference between horizontal black and white lines and a grey square) at 0.3 arcminutes, which makes [955dpi at 12 inches](_URL_0_).\n\nSo for most cases you're not going to see any difference in screens we already have held at around 12\", tho you can still see texture up to around 1000dpi.\n\nOf course distance is important, you know how crisp digitally projected movies at the cinema look right? Most cinemas have 2K projectors showing at 2048×1080, which is lower resolution than some new phones have. The difference is you're so far away you can't see the pixels anymore.",
"They'll get to a point when we can't tell the difference between screen quality. Humans have a limit to how many 'pixels' that our brains can process -- give us a cyborg eye camera that's 20 times human vision and we can't tell the difference. The same can be said for screens.\n\nOf course, eventually companies will make different types of screens such as holographic or projected.",
" > If screen resolutions will plateau\n\nScreen pixel densities pretty much have plateau'd. As other people pointed out, it's rare you look at a screen closer to your face than 12 inches, and you need about 300 PPI for that to look as good as it is going to get for someone with normal 20/20 vision. \n\nIf we try and put in say 3D VR headsets we'll need higher density, but not many orders of magnitude higher, just a bit higher. Something like 1200 PPI (_URL_0_). And there's no real reason we won't be able to make screens that dense in a year or two, but no one bothers to right now because there isn't much point. \n\n\nScreen resolution depends on the size of the display, and you can expect those to get bigger. It wasn't that many years ago that 60 inch TV's were 100k, now you can buy them for 1k. 80 inch TV's are entering the realm of affordability, and probably 110inch will follow. I suspect much over 150 or 200 inches and we'll be stuck on screen sizes as well, as most people can't fit a display that big in their house. A 1200 PPI display on a 256000 x 144000 display, which is 10 feet tall and 17 feet wide would be a 236 inch TV, and I would seriously doubt most of have room for anything that size. \n\n\n\n",
"I remember when the iphone 4 came out as well as the first 720p android phones and every tech blog raved about how clear the displays were, how this was as good as it was going to get because anything over 300ppi wouldn't be noticeable to the human eye. \n\nFast forward a year and the first 1080p phones came out and were noticeably better looking with PPI over 400. Once again all the tech blogs were adamant that this was indeed the best looking displays humans could possibly see.\n\nNow with phones like the g3 coming out with 2k displays (2x the resolution of 1080p) and continuing the trend of noticeably looking better then phones with lower resolutions I'm going to call bullshit on all the tech blogs.",
"great question, if it can be made cheep and considered a selling point, apple is going to do it, even though no one can actually perceive it.",
"Screen density will continue to rise, not for 2D, but for 3D. With enough pixels you can render light at each angle, giving you more of a \"window\" than a \"sheet\" of illuminated surface. This is called Light Field technology, I've seen early versions, and it's pretty incredible.",
"I thought the law of diminishing returns would apply here like the whole polygons thing with graphics ",
"I was very intrigued by this question and ready to hear some answers..until everyone decided to NOT explain like I'm five. ",
"Aren't we already at that point? It's not like I can see the pixels in my 5S"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1+inch+%2F+%280.3+arcminute+at+12+inches%29",
"http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1+inch+%2F+%281+arcminute+at+12+inches%29"
],
[],
[
"http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1+inch+%2F+%281+arcminute+at+3+inches%29"
],
[],
... | |
2hfgmg | why aren't more car engines rear/mid mounted? | It seems like they're higher performance, and lower tier cars have had rear engines in the past, like any early VW. So, what gives? If rear/mid mounted engines are so much better, why aren't they being used in more cars? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hfgmg/eli5_why_arent_more_car_engines_rearmid_mounted/ | {
"a_id": [
"cks5b3r",
"cks5e3i",
"cks5gb4"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In short, its cost and practicality (which are main features for lower-priced cars).\n\nGenerally speaking, the hood of your car is larger than the rear portion of your car. Mid-engine cars are typically two-seaters because the engine takes up so much of the rear compartment. The only ways to compensate are to make the car longer, which is more expensive, or to make your engine much smaller (not a popular option for four-door sedans/saloons). Cars with mid/rear typically don't have a great deal of interior space.\n\nCooling is another issue. Front-engine cars can just have fans and vents on the front grill, but mid/rear require more engineering to direct air to the necessary parts of the car. Its do-able with today's technology, but it does mean it'll make for a more expensive car.",
"Placement of the engine has different advantages and disadvantages. A front placed engine will give you ample space in the car, you can sit 6 people if you want, with a mid mounted you could reasonably only fit 2 since the engine will take up the back seat. A rear mounted engine gives you a bit more space but it will still be a smaller compartment than the front mounted engine. A mid or rear mounted engine will also raise noise levels, especially the mid placed engine.\n\nWith mid and rear mounted engines you will have rear wheel drive, and while that gives you shorter breaking distance it is perhaps not the best for inexperienced drivers. Rear wheel drive cars typically have a tendency to fishtail and it is harder to correct that than a understeering problem when your front wheels loose traction. New cars have modern tracking systems that typically helps to alleviate the fishtailing but it probably came too late to help battling against front mounted engines place as number 1 configuration.",
"Practicality is the main issue. If you want a mid mounted engine you need to give up the back seats and trunk. And if you can mount the engine way at the back and maintain some back seats, the trunk in the front can't be very big due to aerodynamic constraints. \n\nNot to mention that FWD cars are easier to drive."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
1n988q | why do personal computers, smartphones and tablets become slower over time even after cleaning hard drives, but game consoles like the nes and playstation 2 still play their games at full speed and show no signs of slowdown? | Why do personal computers, smartphones and tablets become slower over time even after cleaning hard drives, but game consoles like the NES and PlayStation 2 still play their games at full speed and show no signs of slowdown? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n988q/eli5_why_do_personal_computers_smartphones_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdu2ydp",
"ccghjs6",
"ccgjtkn",
"ccgk4ix",
"ccgklnu",
"ccgkpn4",
"ccglg77",
"ccgmdkf",
"ccgmn7b",
"ccgmyx9",
"ccgndhh",
"ccgnnru",
"ccgo6t8",
"ccgp3ml",
"ccgql8b",
"ccgrnkx",
"ccgt4g4",
"ccgtikx",
"ccgtw6u",
"ccgu1cd",
"ccgvbnr",
"ccgykvh"
],
"score": [
2,
1285,
92,
3,
5,
35,
6,
3,
29,
6,
10,
5,
8,
11,
2,
3,
3,
5,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Picture your computer as a warehouse that is analogous to your memory and mechanical Hard Drive, your processor is a forklift. You start filling up your warehouse with things you install, look at, everything has a place in the warehouse and you move it around accordingly; depending on how fast your forklift is and how much it can carry. Sometimes you drop things off the forklift, don't pick up enough of the right items and you have to make two trips, you have to remember where everything is and you get slower and slower as you run out of space to maneuver within your warehouse because it's getting so full. If you had a 10% full HDD you would probably be zipping, pulling donuts and shit, if you had a 99% full you are just stuck doing 3 point turns everywhere and it takes hours to get to all the things you need in the back. You ever clean your basement or garage after years and want to keep it all? Yeah it sucks. Also your registry is like a manifest of all the things in your warehouse, and how to properly get to them. Yet occasionally you don't keep up with it and you make redundant mistakes and your forklift operator thinks there are things and instructions that are there, when really you got rid of that a long time ago and its just useless time wasting trips. Clean your registry with an appropriate program.\n On top of this, people keep adding things to your boxes that you didn't know were there and so they get heavier and heavier (Bloatware, Spyware, Malware), oh wait now i have to take 7 boxes connected to each other by this crazy tape.... sometimes your warehouse needs physical repairs as a HDD is made from moving mechanical parts that wear out from time to time (many years) or from accidents. \n\nTo prevent this your best bet is to get top of the line hardware, the more space the better, the faster processor the better, more memory why not!? ect. For traditional mechanical hard drives you want to defragment them on a weekly basis, keep them clean from anything you don't want installed. Use an antivirus software and scan for malware or spyware on the reg as well. Also open msconfig and look at your startup programs, look for things that don't belong or you don't use often and disable them. Why do I need all this apple shit when I don't even use QuickTime or Itunes !? Also many programs insert things into startup that just bog your computer down. AVG PCtuneup is great for solving all these problems. \n\nAlso they have something called a Solid State Drive which is more expensive than a traditional mechanical drive but is really like night and day. Its all flash memory so there are no physical disks that spin and have to be read with magnetics or something IDK I just know it works amazingly. Keep your operating system on your SSD and any programs you use on the reg, and have a massive traditional HDD as a media drive, all your pictures, movies, music, large install files ect will go here rather than on the SSD. SSD do not have to be defragmented. \n",
"In general, computers *don't* get slower over time. The difference comes from two main sources:\n\n1. You often install all kinds of stuff on a computer. The various applications that are running all have to be allocated memory and processor time. With a console, it's only ever running the current game. So the longer you've had a computer, the more crap you will have installed on it, and thus the less responsive it becomes. Reinstalling the OS from scratch will fix this.\n\n2. Newer versions of PC software will be designed to be more powerful. So every time you upgrade a program to the latest version, it's probably going to use a little more RAM, for instance. This is done because software developers know that computers are getting more and more powerful, and thus have more and more resources at their disposal. Contrast that with a console, whose specs are set in stone.\n\nSo if you were to wipe your hard drive, reinstall an old version of Windows that existed when you first got the computer (without any of the updates released since then), and installed old versions of all of your software, it would be exactly as fast as when you first got it.",
"Up until recently, Android devices didn't employ [TRIM] (_URL_0_), reducing performance over time as \"fresh\" blocks in the flash drive became rarer and rarer. That's one specific example of an effect that could reduce performance over time.\n\nThe other posters are correct in that 95% of the time, it's because the software has changed, not the hardware.",
"Other people have some generally good explanations - but on tablets particularly.\n\nBecause they're all using this relatively new type of storage (solid state drives) which 'clean' differently than traditional hard drives, if your manufacturer screwed up how they deal with that 'cleaning' the device will degrade in performance over time fairly rapidly. One version of android (4.2 I think) does this to nexus devices. It can be fixed with a software update, but for that you're waiting for a software update. This can happen on PC's as well. \n\n\n\n\nIn general a computer, smartphone etc do not actually run slower over time other than for potential overheating issues. You just install more software on them, that uses more memory, and operating system updates etc. use more memory and processing power to do more things. ",
"Personal computers, smartphones, and tablets regularly have new models come out with faster hardware and newer software. People using the older models want to run the newer software because it has new features and can run newer programs, so the makers adjust it to run on the older models. It doesn't run as well as the older software, since it was designed with the faster hardware in mind.",
"Semi-related: What's the best way to clean the dust out of the inside of your PC? \n",
"One thing people forget to mention is that transistors on chips are usually around 50 nm wide. 50nm is apx 500 atoms. Think about that-- 500 atoms.\n\nWith something that small and having close to 100 million transistors on a chip, there is a very high likely hood that there will be failures. \n_URL_0_\n_URL_3_ \n\nThe latter points to links where just natural breakdown of radioactive elements can cause chip failure\n\n\nThere are advancements made such that, chips can heal themselves\n_URL_1_\nand\n_URL_2_\n\nThese allow the hardware itself to correct itself.\n\n\nGenerally older hardware, NES and Playstations used a more robust manufacturing system -- much larger gates (12 and 9 microns).",
"Take a computer that you believe has slowed down over time, and wipe the drive and install whatever operating system fresh. Barring any hardware failures that you may have incurred, your computer will still be as fast as the day you bought it.\n\nI work in IT and I have people come in every day with laptops full of bloat that they never use. Fresh copy of Windows goes on it and it is fast as hell. ",
"I agree with the comments that the slowdown is usually due to software.\n\nBut there is a way that this can happen to the hardware. If a computer gets very dusty inside, this can impede the cooling ability of the fans, causing the CPU to run at a higher temperature. When a CPU gets too hot, it will automatically shut down. But when it is getting hotter but not quite too hot yet, sometimes it will try to run at a slower speed to try to get the temperature down. It does this to avoid having to shutdown suddenly.",
"I've never had a linux box 'slow down on me' over time. At least from installing more and more softwares. I've had the occasional update to say gnome or kde do it and then only affecting the UI, but usually subsequent patches fix that too.\n\n\"Bit rot\" is largely a windows problem. Registry getting shat on by software that changes performance settings, leftover crap no longer used ( remains of com services, startup stuff, etc ). ",
"The games you're playing on the NES and PS2 were designed completely around the NES and PS2 hardware. The games/software you are using on the PC, smartphones, and tablets with hardware that varies and increasing in power. A lot of the new software is designed to take care of the power that the new hardware puts out. The older systems seem to slow down because the software is optimized for newer hardware.",
"You dont download depraved pornography on an N64",
"Because you can install shit on computers, smart phones, and tablets. For many reasons, the more shit you have installed, the slower your device will be. You can't install shit on game consoles.",
"Consoles are stationary targets. There's one console (perhaps with a couple of variations that don't change the fundamental design, like a slimmer form factor or different sizes of internal storage) for the company to create, and for game developers to target. The console only fulfills a few roles. Its purpose is clear: games, and maybe a few other entertaining things.\n\nSince there's one set of \"reference hardware\" that developers can rely on everyone using, they can tweak their code to get every last bit of power out of the console. The code will only run on that console, and relies upon weird tricks specific to that console in order to run smoothly, but since everyone has the same hardware, they can make those tweaks.\n\nThe tablet and PC are general purpose. You'll probably do many things at once, and the creators don't know in advance what that might be. You end up with software for doing practically anything, and hardware that is also general-purpose. Jack of all trades, hopefully master of a few, slow for others. The operating system, e.g. Windows, has to try to do everything you could possibly want, and run on all hardware combinations. Your NES just has to run one game at a time, and the game just has to run on the NES.\n\nThe general-purpose platforms are also moving targets. Whereas a console is the same piece of hardware over time, the PC that developers are targeting changes as time goes by. The \"reference hardware\" is becoming faster each year. The PC you bought five years ago may have been a bit better than the reference, then was at the level of the current reference after a couple of years, and is now slower than the reference hardware that most programmers are targeting. The software manufacturers aren't going to target old machines when they can showcase new games (or video editors, DAWs, databases, etc.) on the latest hardware. Programmers can use up more resources as the reference becomes more powerful over time, so it seems like your computer is becoming slower - when in fact, it's just that the software is becoming more demanding at a subtle rate.\n\nGeneral purpose computers can be programmed by anyone, and the multitude of options for doing so are staggering. This means low barriers for entry - both for the genius and the moron. With a console, you usually have to fork over for a dev kit, and to ever get the game to market, you usually have to know what you are doing. With something like Windows on a generic computer, any fool can write a bloated program in Visual Basic and distribute it to the world.\n\nIn between the PC and consoles are Apple computers, which have a general-purpose operating system on top of mostly-static hardware. OSX and the software that runs on it have a small set of hardware combinations to target, compared to the nigh infinite possibilities of PC hardware combinations. Having stable hardware makes it easier to tweak software for performance, and to know what amounts of resources you can use.\n\nFinally, a few words on Linux, GNU, BSD, and company. Whereas Windows, for example, is not tweaked for your particular system, but is a general purpose platform, a FOSS install allows you total freedom to tweak your software to your particular setup. You could install Gentoo, compiling every piece of code so that it takes advantage of any tricks or special functionality in your specific hardware setup. You could also strip out the packages you don't want, and tune the ones you use. This is why a new Windows 8 laptop might seem a little slow compared to an old Debian install that hums away on old hardware.\n\n",
"I think what a lot of responders are overlooking, at least when it comes to tablets and smartphones, is forced obsolesence. Apple wants you to buy a new phone every 2 years, and they will make sure that when it comes time to upgrade your phone will be annoyingly slow. I just upgraded my 4s to iOS 7 and now Skype is incredibly laggy. There is no good reason for this, I didn't even update the Skype app, it's just Apple.\n\nNo matter how many generations of smartphones we go through it will always be the same situation, after 2 years it will be slow and you have to buy a new one. 50 years from now your phone will still be slow after 2 years, at least if Apple has their way.",
"Well, in the case of older consoles such as SNES, NES, N64, and Playstation/2, it is important to note that these devices did not typically run games off a mechanical hard drive.\n\nNow, on a personal computer, in terms of performance, the hard disk is the bottleneck. That is to say that out of RAM, CPU, and disk, the disk is the slowest component.\n\nThe hard drives on personal computers contain moving parts (a spinning disk and write head) that inevitably degrade over time. Also note that unlike these older consoles where data is only being read from a cartridge/cd, the disk drive on your computer has to do a lot more work since it has to carry out both read and write operations.\n\nThe real reason why you notice a decrease in performance is because the cpu has to wait on input/output operations from the disk. This is also where the overallocation of resources ties in. When you allocate more memory than the system has available, the system will start to use swap (known as virtual memory in Windows) where it starts using the disk as if it were RAM. The thing is that the disk is much slower than RAM so the cpu gets delayed having to wait on the disk, processes start stacking up as the cpu is busy waiting for the disk and you notice your machine being sluggish.\n\nThat said, I expect drive failure to become and issue with the PS3/XBOX360/Wii as they continue to age.",
"Easiest way to make the software slowdown a treatable problem. Obvious to IT people, but in my experience, mind blowing to non technical folks:\n\nKeep all your important shit on a separate partition/disk. OBVIOUSLY BACK IT ALL UP ELSEWHERE, but keep the primary copy on a separate partition. This way, when you have this issue, you just nuke your boot partition without worrying about your files getting caught in the blast.\nTakes a little work in windows setup to redirect all your documents/libraries folders, but worth the hassle later on when this becomes a problem.",
"Software creep. While computers do slow down as the hard drive gets fuller, that is not the main problem which is why clearing a hard drive has little effect. Installing, running and updating more apps all the time means more of your systems RAM and processing power is going to be used up. You can mitigate this on a PC buy getting additional RAM and a better processor.",
"I dunno man I've been playing GTA 5 on an Xbox and it lags like a motherfucker.",
"Digital is figital. Analogs your dawg.",
"Computers are just as strong as they were when they were new. It is just that everything they run and load gets heavier as it gets changed and updated. ",
"I don't know if your premise is true. I still play smash brothers melee on the same GameCube my parents bought me 12 years ago and some maps (Venom especially) lag quite a bit more than I remember them doing a few years ago."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM_(SSD_command)"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_(semiconductor)",
"https://www.google.com/patents/US5278839?dq=5278839&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gdlFUpqoEoHs8QSrjoHoDw&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA",
"http://www.intel.com/con... | |
e749u5 | how do houses made out of brick collapse when on fire? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e749u5/eli5_how_do_houses_made_out_of_brick_collapse/ | {
"a_id": [
"f9v96eu",
"f9v9a93",
"f9v9crw",
"f9v9xze",
"f9vbmtq"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"They are brick with timber supports the bricks stay in place the timber burns placing stress and strain on various parts of the brickwork, alternatively the bricks may get hit when parts of the building collapse.",
"Bricks don't like heat. They expand unevenly because in fire they are heated unevenly. Mortar just the same, plus it expands at different rates than bricks. This causes bricks and mortar to separate.\nThe floors are either from steel-reinforced concrete or straight up hold together with wooden studs. Wood burns and steel softens and expands way more than concrete in fire.",
"Bricks are great in compression, not so good in tension.\n\nSo the house would usually have wooden beams supporting the upper floors and the roof, as opposed to being 100% brick. That wood can burn, and then cause the roof to collapse.",
"In the US at least most \"brick\" houses are really just \"masonry facade\" homes - wood framed and brick exterior for long term weather resistance.\n\nWhen the home burns down, the wooden ceiling and interior frame that the facade was tied to is destroyed leaving only a completely unsupported sheet of bricks. This provides little structural strength on its own and falls over under its own weight.\n\nTrue masonry structures like cinder block or concrete warehouses are pretty tough to light on fire, but if you do manage it the intense heat can eventually chemically destroy them and collapse the building. They don't burn, but they will disintegrate under excessive heat.",
"Brick houses in most places (in the US) is not structural, it is a masonry facade placed outside a standard timber framed wall. \n\nBut fire can damage bricks. Bricks not intended for use in a kiln or other place intended to be lit on fire can have somewhat uneven expansion when heated due to moisture content of the brick and materials used in its creations. This is true even for fired bricks if the extra steps and standards used for kiln bricks are not used in their creation. This uneven expansion can cause the mortar to crumble as well as cause the bricks to crack. The mortar itself can also \"over dry\" and become crumbly on its own if it is not a mix intended for high heat or fires even without uneven expansion of the bricks which can cause enough structural weakness for the wall to collapse. \n\nYou also have the fact that even houses that are structurally Brick will often have timber interior walls, timber flooring, and timber roofing. When those burn out, even if the exterior walls survive the roof and everything inside will collapse."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
3vc5kq | how come att can't give me the prices that cricket uses? att owns cricket, another cell phone provider. they have completely different plan options, but will not offer them through each other??? | I feel that if ATT can afford to have those prices with Cricket, then they should be able to sell them to me through ATT. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vc5kq/eli5_how_come_att_cant_give_me_the_prices_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxm7533",
"cxm7neb"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They probably offer lower end devices or different quality of service for Cricket to offset the price difference. Similar scenario with Sprint and Boost. Just trying to attract a different audience. ",
"Pricing usually is not set at the cheapest level \"they\" can afford, but is designed to maximize profit.\n\nSetting different prices for different customer groups, if properly done, will allow them to earn more money than offering everyone the same price. \n\nHaving two separate brands for a similar product or service at different pricing is one way to do it. If they can use marketing and other options to nudge [part of] the \"better\" customers away from the \"cheap\" brand, then the product or service may even be completely identical, and it still is worth it to maintain separate brands just to earn more money by these price differences."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
a4brlw | in music theory, what determines a chord's name? | Major? Minor? Suspended? Diminished? Dominant? Augmented? What does it all mean?? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4brlw/eli5_in_music_theory_what_determines_a_chords_name/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebd2nbi",
"ebd5q4l",
"ebd6bho",
"ebdl7qk",
"ebe5d0l"
],
"score": [
7,
40,
2,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"I learned this a few months ago for guitar its a little far in my memory but here goes. \n\nMinor and major refers to what 3rd is being used. Theres the major 3rd note and minor 3rd which is determined by the scale major or minor. \n\nSuspended (i may be mistaken) a doesnt have a 3rd in it so it can be used in both major and minor contexts. \n\nAugmented is normally with the 5th, instead of playing the 5th youd play the 5th sharp. \n\nDiminished is similar, normally a 5th but now its a 5th flat. \n\nDominant is any chord built on the root's 5th note. \n\nYou have 12 notes in the chomatic scale, in western music we have 8 notes in our typical scales. Each associate with a number. Major, minor, augmented, diminished, theyre all associated with a change of note in a given chord. A chord is a combination of at least 3 notes. Typically it includes the root, a 3rd and the 5th but there are hundreds of variations. \n\nI was taking jazz lessons and had learned all of this but i havent practice jazz in a while ive switched to classic guitar but ill get back to it always do. Guitar is such a versitile instrument its hard to get bored. ",
"Short version : the distance in pitch between the individual notes in the chord.\n\nLong version: a chord is 3 notes or more played simultaneously. As you may already know, there are 7 \"whole\" notes: A B C D E F G. It's the distance between notes in that chord that give the chord its \"name\".\n\nAbout how we measure the distance in pitch in music:\nThe distance in pitch between A and B for example is called a tone. Same between C and D, D and E,and so on. So, are all notes distant in pitch from the next one from a tone? Almost. B to C and E to F are only distant from a half-tone (yeah it can seem random but don't bother why for now, that's a different topic ;) \nSo, for example, C is 2 tones away from E:\n- > C to D = 1 tone\n- > D to E = 1 tone\n== > C to E = 2 tones.\n\nA is only 1,5 tones away from C:\n- > A to B = 1 tone\n- > B to C = 0,5 tone (as mentioned above)\n== > A to C = 1,5 tone\n\nWith this system, you can write in number the distance in pitch between any notes. We use a word for each of the possible distance between notes: it's called Intervals. \nThat's where those major and minor stuff comes in play. \nFrom A, the second note is B. It's called a second. From A again, the third note is C. It's called a third, and so on ( fourth to D, fifth to F...)\nBut wait, if I go from B to D, the half note thing is messing with our nice intervals, isn't it? Why should A to C (1,5tones difference) and C to E ( 2 tones difference) be called the same? They are clearly different to human ear!!\nC to E is a Major Third (2 tones distance)\nA to C is a minor Third (1,5 tones distance)\n\nThat's why you call C-E-G a Major Chord (remember we need 3 notes to make a Chord) : it starts with a Major Third ( C to E). \nAnd A-C-E is a minor Chord : it starts with a minor Third (A to C are only 1,5 half-tone distant)\n\nAnd what about this third note? Well, its distance from the first one will also be indicated in the chord's name. If you have a 4 or 5 notes chord, same deal, it changes the chord's name.\n\nI will admit something though. I kinda lied. If you go half a tone ( also called half a step) higher than A, you get something that is also a note : A sharp. Half a tone below A is A flat. So you could say that there is really 12 notes in the western tonal music. I'll let you try and count - fun times. And just to mess with you: B sharp exists, C flat also, they are the same note on a piano but we sometime need to differentiate them. \nTold you, fun times.\n\nHope it helps, don't hesitate to check for more info or PM me, I learned music in a different language so I might have made little mistakes!\n",
"Not really ELI5 and I am 100% many people will explain this much better, but a major chord includes the 1st note, the 3rd and the 5th of the major scale. A minor chord includes the 1st, the 3rd and the 5th of the minor scale. \n\nDiminished arpeggios move up or down indefinitely in minor thirds, which is a whole tone plus a semitone. A diminished chord is really a minor chord that flats the 5th note. There is a whole-half diminished scale and also a half-whole diminished scale, that's pretty self explanatory, you either move up a whole step then a half step and repeat or you move up a half step then whole step and then repeat.\n\nAugmented arpeggios move up or down indefinitely in major thirds, which is two whole tones. Augmented is a major chord that sharps the 5th note. I think this is based on the whole tone scale which is just raised whole tones, just keep ascending or descending in two note increments. \n\nA dominant is a hybrid of a major and minor and has a major 3rd and a minor 7th. Look into the dominant 7th arpeggio, it's the major scale with a flat 7th and it gives a bit of a ragtime sound. This is based off the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th of the mixolydian mode. \n\nLook into the Phrygian dominant scale, which is the Phrygian mode, the 3rd mode of the major scale. The Phrygian mode is a minor scale but with a flat 2nd. So the Phrygian Dominant is the Phrygian mode, a minor mode, but it has a major 3rd instead of a minor 3rd, the minor 7th is already there so it doesn't need to be flatted. This gives a classical sound. \n\nSuspended 4th is where you play a major chord but use the 1st, 4th, plus octave. Then to resolve the chord you can just lower the 4th back to a major 3rd, which is the major chord, we hear this in church every sunday. \n\nSuspended 2nd is where you play a major chord but instead of playing the major 3rd you drop it down a whole step to the 2nd note. Another thing we hear in church is a Suspended 4th resolve into the major chord, then to a suspended 2nd and then back to the major chord. That's typically used to end a song. Using suspended chords without resolving back to the major chord usually offers the most unique results because the ear will always want to resolve it back to the major chord, so the unexpected lack of resolve is surprising. ",
"The king, or the emperor, is the tonic. This is the most important chord. C is for Caesar.\n\nNow, wherever Caesar goes, he has two companions. When he needs to defend his country, he sounds very proud, because he has a Major, but when he has to deal with problems inside his own country, he gets a bit sad, because instead of the Major, he now has to speak to the miner (or \"minor\"). And of course, you can't spell Caesar without an E, so the E has to be a Major or a Minor. Now, Julius Caesar's first name was actually Gaius, so he carries this G for Gaius with him, wherever he goes.\n\nC E G is the tonic. Here E is major. And the minor is one step below (b), so we have E + b = Eb. So tonic in Minor is C Eb G.\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nNow, Caesar always has trouble with the Gauls, so whenever the Gauls are making noise, he has to set down his foot, because the Gauls are very dominant. Whenever the dominant G B D is sounding, Caesar has to engage: C E G.\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nNow, Caesar sometimes can't decide if he should think about the country and his Minor citizens (who work in the mines all day) or start a war together with his Major. Because he is a little undecided, he thinks he should probably rest a little before making a minor/major decision. Gaius Julius Caesar decides to hang out with his Friends instead:\n\n \nC F G (suspended) \n\n\nBut eventually, he has to return to his duty as the emperor and lead the country, like this:\n\nC E G\n\nor like this:\n\n & #x200B;\n\nC Eb G\n\n & #x200B;\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nNow, Caesar is thinking that he should probably give himself (Gaius) a raise for all the good work he did. So he calls his lawyer on the telephone \"#\" to make the necessary arrangements and his chief economist promises him a raise before August. Now, G becomes G# and an augmented chord is:\n\nC E G#\n\nNow, back in his home, Caesar is thinking about a plan against the Gauls. What if I could dominate the dominant, somehow? Well, he could treat the dominant as a tonic instead by introducing the the secondary dominant - this is the dominant that will make the Gauls sound their horns. Hmmm... Caesar is thinking. Maybe we should try D for dominant?\\* And so, D is the secondary dominant. That makes the Gauls alert and activates the G chord, which is the dominant to C.\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nBut how should he get there? He asks his Major, but the Major sounds confused and suggests that he speaks to his plebs (the people). Caesar becomes a bit sad and sits down with the minor for a chat. Now, this makes the minor also very sad and not gay (happy) at all, so Julius Caesar is no longer Gaius, but feels a bit dim, so we have the diminished:\n\nC Eb Gb\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nNow, Caesar is suddenly feeling a bit lucky (a lucky seven 7), so he moves the diminished chord (Cdim) to the secondary dominant D7, which then leads to the dominant, like so:\n\nC Eb Gb.\n\nC D F.\n\nG B D.\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nCaesar is not the only emperor (Brutus will betray him at some point...) but this is the general principle for all the scales. The tonic and the dominant chords are so important, because together, they make up all the notes of the scale except the 4th and the 6th (but then we would also have to talk about subdominants and parallel modes).\n\n\\*\\*\\*\\*\n\nEDIT: \nThank you kind stranger for silver! As this post has received silver, here's a [PDF (OC)](_URL_0_) with better formatting and some bonus information.",
"All the answers here already answer this quite thoroughly, so to avoid being redundant, this is what I'd tell an actual five-year-old:\n\n\nMajor is when you feel happy\n\nMinor is when you feel sad\n\nDiminished is when you're in trouble\n\nDominant seventh is when you feel funky\n\nAugmented fifth is when you feel bad\n\nSuspended fourth is when you feel tense\n\n\nAll of this is subjective and depends a LOT on context.\nBonus video on an attempt to assign emotions to chords:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://ufile.io/st6me"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln5O1LuItrs"
]
] | |
5yxyyd | how does dopamine work in our daily lives and how can we expend it on work rather than procrastinating? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yxyyd/eli5_how_does_dopamine_work_in_our_daily_lives/ | {
"a_id": [
"deuext6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Neuroscientist here.\n\nThere's a staggering amount of misinformation about dopamine floating around in popular culture. \n\nThe truth is, dopamine is just a neurotransmitter: a chemical that neurons use to send signals to other neurons. One dopaminergic neuron in one brain area could release dopamine, but that signal is *only going out to the neurons that neuron is connected to.* The amount of dopamine some other neuron in a different part of the brain is releasing is totally unrelated.\n\nYou think of neurons as people, then you could think of neurotransmitters as balls of different colors that the neuron-people throw to each other. \n\nNeurons transmit information this way, but the information and the signal that carries it are two different things. Alice might sometimes tell Bob she wants to a movie by giving him a red ball. From this, you might conclude that red balls are a \"go to movie\" signal. But Cedric tells Dan he wants to go to a movie by using a blue ball. And the town's police chief uses red balls to give people speeding tickets. What gives?\n\nThis is basically what's going on with dopamine. Dopamine is just a way one neuron can signal another. In fact, it can have totally different effects on different cells, because different types of dopamine receptor can be excitatory, inhibitory, or something a bit more complicated. \n\nIn fact, dopamine is used in many different systems. The brain circuit that controls lactation includes some neurons that signal other neurons using dopamine. But, like virtually every brain circuit, that's only one of the types of neurons in the circuit. One of the brain's movement related circuits includes some dopaminergic neurons (again, among several other types of neurons), and if the dopamine neurons in that circuit die, you get Parkinson's disease. \n\nIt IS true that there is a brain circuit, referred to as the mesolimbic pathway / system, that is involved in motivation, and that that circuit includes some dopaminergic neurons (among others). But it's not that simple. The dopaminergic part of that circuit is active when an unexpected good thing happens, but it can ALSO be activated by an unexpected BAD thing. \n\nSo if the so called \"reward circuit\" isn't really a reward circuit exactly, and it's not really a dopaminergic circuit (any more than the other half dozen neurotransmitters the circuit uses), and dopamine is also used in plenty of other circuits, how do I answer your question?\n\nThe answer: There is really no point in trying to understand motivation and goal directed behavior in terms of dopamine. They simply aren't connected in a way that's super meaningful."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
2d537c | why does facebook need so many seemingly intrusive permissions? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d537c/eli5_why_does_facebook_need_so_many_seemingly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjm5cro",
"cjm5v6q",
"cjm8xfw",
"cjmbjfb",
"cjmew2z",
"cjmmnuf"
],
"score": [
15,
2,
17,
9,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"I assume you're talking about the mobile application?\n\nI don't know the entire list of permissions off the top of my head, but I can give an example for a few. \n\nFirst off, the contacts permission would obviously be so the application can sync your Facebook friends into your contacts and vice versa.\n\nSecondly, Facebook may want permission to access your phone's photos. This one's quiet self-explanatory. If you want to post a photo from your phone to your Facebook, it has to grab the photos from somewhere right?\n\nIf you want to know something specific, ask me.",
"that's how they make money.",
"[Facebook Messenger permissions: Not as scary as the stories might have you believe](_URL_0_)",
"If you believe facebook is a social media business you're sorely mistaken. Facebook is a marketing tool. It needs those permissions to complete it's goal of targeted advertising, and following which products are trending up and down the market. ",
"The more important question is, why is the system set up so that you have to give an app every permission it asks for? Some of them are about features you don't use so you shouldn't have to grant them.",
"Part of the issue is also people don't understand why an app would need access to certain features. Example, many flashlight apps say they need access to the phone / calling features. Why on earth would a flashlight app need to make calls!!\n\nIt doesn't. The flashlight app though needs to be able to see when a call is happening so that it can shut itself off. The problem is the phone permissions aren't spelled out in a nice and neat way, its either all access or nothing, even if they have not use for the full functionality they do have access for."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.androidcentral.com/facebook-messenger-permissions-not-scary-stories-might-have-you-believe"
],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
dyb88e | when we drink cranberry juice or coke why doesn’t our pee turn purple or brown when we drink them | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dyb88e/eli5_when_we_drink_cranberry_juice_or_coke_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"f8007v5",
"f80h7dw"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"There isn't a direct link from your mouth to your bladder. Things are absorbed in your gut, metabolized, and then water and waste products are taken out of your blood in your kidneys and turned into urine. Your poo is usually dark because there is a pigment that is a breakdown product of haemoglobin/bile which is very dark and kind of dominates any other colour that may be present. Certain things (some medications for a start) can change the colour of your urine though.",
"Our body does things with what we eat that is very interesting, including adding colors to our different waste streams than we know about. Our urine is yellow because of dead red blood cells that are filtered out. Our poop is brown in part because of the greenish yellow bike that our body makes to help nuetralize acid from our stomach. If you drink a bunch of beet or pomagranate juice, your urine will go very red. If you eat a bunch of blueberries or blue cake icing you will poop very green."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
13lqgx | why does drinking a warm drink on a cold day make my whole body feel warm? | When I drink something like coffee or tea or hot chocolate on a winter day, I feel completely warm, from my core to my extremities. I understand my throat or stomach feeling warm, but what's the explanation for EVERYTHING feeling warmer? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13lqgx/eli5_why_does_drinking_a_warm_drink_on_a_cold_day/ | {
"a_id": [
"c751tiq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"the heat transfers into your blood, which is carried to your limbs"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
2mvczk | why do we hear about some people who evade taxes or have unpaid taxes when the federal and state government take taxes right out of my paycheck? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mvczk/eli5_why_do_we_hear_about_some_people_who_evade/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm7w9do",
"cm7wh9k"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"They take it out of your paycheck because you told your employer how much they should take out of your paycheck each pay period. That was one of the forms you filled out when you started.\n\nThese people may have told their employer to not take out any. A person not wishing to go to jail might do that if they wanted to pay all their taxes at once, and that's perfectly legal.\n\nThese people might not have employers. If you run a business you don't have the same setup. If you make your money through non-paycheck means (like investments) you don't have the same setup. These are both legal, but you have to pay taxes on that income at tax time. These people don't.\n\nOr these people might have employers but they were paid under the table, no official paycheck, no forms, no taxes. This is illegal.",
"Because the Federal and State government's *don't* take taxes right out of your paycheck, you *give* it to them right out of your paycheck.\n\nWhen you apply for a job, you will have to fill out a W4 form, which tells the employer how much money to take out of your paycheck to give to the Federal and State governments. Technically, you can put whatever you want.\n\nThis is why employers are required to submit W2's to the IRS. The W2's tell the IRS how much the employer paid each employee and how much in taxes were taken out, and the IRS uses this (along with other information you give them) to determine whether you owe more or are deserved a refund.\n\nBut W4s and W2s only apply to certain types of income. Basically the wages, salaries, and tips of actual employees. Independent contractors, for example, don't do this. The money they get from a source is usually without taxes taken out. It's upon them to report to the IRS how much money they received and to give the taxes they owe.\n\nBasically, it works mostly on the honor system. The IRS only knows how much taxes you owe based on how much money you make, and they only know that based on what they are told. It's stupid to try and \"evade\" taxes on your actual salary and wages paid through an employer because the employer tells the IRS what you made and how much of that was taken out for taxes.\n\nBut for many other sources of income, it's the honor system. You tell the IRS what you made and they determine what you owe. So many people think they can get away with lying about what they made, either misrepresenting it, or failing to report it at all. And many do get away with it. But it's a risk: if you file at all, you may be subject to a random audit, or engage in behavior that throws up red flags. If, for some reason, you don't have to file, then you probably could get away with it so long as you don't make a lot of money. If the IRS catches wind, for example, of some guy getting $1M, they can rest assured they're going to find some way to getting their slice of that pie."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | ||
1j3h1i | if all internet service providers suddenly went bankrupt (e.g. if a global economic collapse happened) how would we access the internet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j3h1i/eli5if_all_internet_service_providers_suddenly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbapfrn",
"cbapxny",
"cbaz3fl"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The stuff that's used to connect to the internet would not all of a sudden stop working just because a company ran out of money.\n\nSomeone would buy it, and make money selling the service to other people.\n\nIf no one bought that stuff, someone would see the enormous amount of money they could make and they'd set up a new ISP quickly and people would use that.",
"If all providers went bankrupt, and the social unrest was sufficient so as to prevent another ISP from setting up to replace them (it would need to be significant as the profit opportunity would be large) then we would not be able to access the internet at all. ",
"Worst case scenario, we just set up a mesh P2P network which would be completely de-centralized. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
1nazwh | what is happening inside when i'm losing weight? | I know you have to eat less and move more - I'm not asking about that. I want to know what sorts of things are going on inside my body when I start eating less and moving more. Is my body kind of cannibalizing itself at that point? I figure if I know what's going on in there, maybe I can tweak the process to make weight loss happen faster. I'm not a biology major, so I don't want to ask this in a science sub because I'm pretty sure I won't understand the answer. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nazwh/what_is_happening_inside_when_im_losing_weight/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccgya09"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Usually, when the body gets more energy (calories) for what it needs for its internal functions (cell multiplication, moving muscles and heart beating, thinking, every single one of those would use up incredible amount of energy), it simply stores them as fat stored in several parts in your body for when it would need it.\n\nWhen you \"eat less\", you simply offer less energy for the body and forces him to use up what you have of stored fat when it \"moves more\", causing weight to drop. No cannibalism here :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
1hhxyc | why do we need to go through a company to access the internet and why can't we come up with a way of accessing it ourselves? do they own the internet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hhxyc/eli5_why_do_we_need_to_go_through_a_company_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cauhndy",
"cauho1f",
"caui1w7",
"cauklu9",
"causx64"
],
"score": [
4,
10,
16,
15,
3
],
"text": [
"In order to get access to all the sites everywhere you need to make deals with all the people that provide those sites and services. ISPs do all of this dealing behind the scene so you don't have to speak with dozens or hundreds of people to organize some kind of deal. The result is you get one price.\n\nYou could become an ISP yourself, but all of that work and other fees related to it would set you back millions if not more.",
"Yes, companies own the Internet. It's a big group of interconnected private networks. ",
"The internet is not owned by a single company. It's a network of computers (called servers) spread throughout the world. However, to be able to connect to all these other computers, you need some type of infrastructure that connects you to the 'net. That's what the ISP provides. They don't own the internet, but they make it easy to connect to it.",
"Think of the internet like you think of your plumbing (it's a series of tubes...). Your house is most likely not next to the source of fresh water in your area (say a lake), just like your most likely not living next to a Google server. Your ISP is a lot like your water company, they get things from point a (the lake or a server), to point b (your house).\n\nYou could go around and create wires from your house to all the servers you care about, but it would be a lot cheaper if there was someone you made it their job to create a network of wires that connected to everything. This network is your ISP.",
"There are small projects to create 'mesh networks' of peers, connected via P2P WiFi to create a distributed internet\n\nBut I guess you mean 'why can't I connect to the internet like an ISP does?'"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
24hli0 | why don't humans produce the enzyme required to digest cellulose? | Cellulose is in a lot of plants we eat, like corn. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24hli0/eli5_why_dont_humans_produce_the_enzyme_required/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch773n7",
"ch78exx",
"ch7a5u1"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Because we instead produce the enzymes and have a digestive system capable of digesting meat. The critters that can eat cellulose generally are full herbivores and can't do that, because their digestive systems are entirely geared around digesting cellulose.",
"inspired by the grass thread lol",
"We do however these bacteria are located in the caecum area of the intestines. Through evolution with humans needing to digest less cellulose the caecum has reduced in size however it is still there. Herbivores will have a very large caecum and longer intestines as cellulose is much harder to break down thus a longer intestine allows for more time to digest before you shit it out."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
4xodjd | why does an ideal gas heat up when it's being compressed? | I understand it in terms of energy transfer, but thinking of the gas particles as billiard balls flying around, I don't get it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xodjd/eli5_why_does_an_ideal_gas_heat_up_when_its_being/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ha0jo"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Let's change up the analogy a bit. Let's think ping pong balls, since they're easier to picture bouncing around. \n\nSo imagine dozens of ping pong balls in a big glass box, the size of a tennis court. This is our ideal gas, they bounce off the walls, the ceiling, the floor, each other. The collisions are elastic, no energy is being lost to our magic box, and so everything just keeps bouncing. \n\nBut now, all of a sudden, you decide to experiment with some thermodynamics. You take a comically oversized hammer, and smash the far wall of the box, so that the whole thing is now only a few inches wide. \n\nThe balls keep bouncing, but over shorter and shorter distances. AND, more importantly, a whole bunch of balls got hit by that fast moving wall, and so all the energy from your hammer swing is now in there as well. \n\nIn this scenario, it's easier to see why \"compression\" would add energy. A big fucking wall hit a whole bunch of ping pong balls, which would definitely make them go faster. The trick is that the same would apply even if you moved the wall in very slowly. That energy is still being added by the movement of the wall (if it wasn't, the ping pong balls would be able to keep the wall from closing in). \n\nIs that more intuitive?\n\nFor a shorter one, you could imagine that instead of \"compressing\" a gas by shrinking the container, I compress it by hiring tiny, quantum designated hitters to smash any molecule that would cross X line with a tiny quantum bat. They'd be doing effectively the same thing as a wall, but it's easy to see how they are adding energy/speed/heat to the system."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | |
3sa1ir | university of missouri protest | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sa1ir/eli5_university_of_missouri_protest/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwvf6m4",
"cwvfn0q",
"cwvggoq",
"cwx4o4f"
],
"score": [
11,
13,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There has been an underlying race issue at Mizzou long before this week. This is just the first time it has boiled over into a national news issue. Though I am white and never experienced racism first hand, I was not oblivious to some of the issues on campus. Mizzou is a melting pot of urban African Americans and rural White people. Missouri was once a slave state, was founded by slave holding men, and partially built by slave labor. The seeds of racism are long standing, however the administration has been inactive standing up against acts of racism on campus and that's what the issue is. Source: I attended Mizzou",
"A bunch of events have led to this. The big one was a backwards swatstika drawn in human feces in a dorm bathroom. Probably done by some drunk guy. Black students have reported being called the N-word. I think it went as far as kids throwing buckets of cotton balls on the lawn of the Black Heritage building. During one protest, the president came in in his car, and when students blocked his car in an attempt to explain their grievances with him, he nudged them out of the way with the car. It came to a head this week when the football team, backed up by the coach, threatened to stop playing. That could cost the university millions. That's what finally convinced him to step down.",
"Mizzou student here, to be quite honest we arent completely sure ourselves but it's true several incidents have led to the resignation of our chancellor and president. From what we know, the student body president was called the n-word walking down the street and at a different event organized by the black culture center a drunk man got on stage and started spouting hateful things, he has since been expelled. But still even for us here it is very confusing.",
"Can someone explain why the crowd was so adamant in not being filmed? I can't find an answer anywhere."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
13ziw5 | how black holes and anti-matter work. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13ziw5/eli5_how_black_holes_and_antimatter_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c78idli"
],
"score": [
44
],
"text": [
"Black holes: All stuff (matter) in the universe pulls on everything else. This force is called gravity. If you bring enough matter together in one place it will clump together. This is why planets and stars don't just fall apart. The more stuff you put in one place the stronger that it will pull itself together. Eventually the effect of all of the pulling will cause the stuff to collapse in on itself. Once you reach a critical limit it will keep pulling until the stuff is condensed into such a small space that not even light can escape its pull. The area around it will look black because light can't escape. Hence, black hole.\n\nAnti-matter: Everything in the universe is made of a handful of fundamental particles: proton, neutron, electron, etc. These particles have an electric charge. Electrons have a negative charge, protons a positive charge and neutrons have a charge of zero. Each of these particles have a pair that is identical in every way (mass, spin) except it has the opposite charge. So, a positron looks exactly like an electron except it has a positive charge. If an electron and a positron meet they will destroy each other and generate pure energy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1gwljr | why can't android run on iphones and vice versa? | When it comes down to it, aren't all cell phones pretty similar? They have most of the same parts.
If we can access all of the files, what stops us from being able to run Android on iPhones? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gwljr/why_cant_android_run_on_iphones_and_vice_versa/ | {
"a_id": [
"caoje9e"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"They are similar to look at and touch, and they are made up of the same basic pieces - processor, RAM, screen, etc. However, there is a significant design difference between Android and Apples IOS. \n\nAndroid has been designed to be open and to run on anything - anyone can take the source code to Android and modify it to work on their specific hardware. Therefore if you design a phone with a different processer, a different type of memory, a different WiFi connection, etc - then you can simply re-write Androids code to support your gadget. Therefore, in theory, if someone has the time - you could actually re-write Android to be installable onto an Apple device. Not only is this theoretically possible, but it has actually been done _URL_0_\n\nIOS on the other hand is closed. Apple write it specifically for their devicies. As such, the only people who can edit the IOS operating system are Apple themselves. Therefore if you make a new device with a new processer and different RAM etc, then the only people who can make IOS work on it are Apple..... therefore Apple are the only ones who can make new IOS devicies. \n\nEach approach has its pros and cons. Android is generally much more flexible, but it can be (debatably!) argued that because IOS is written for a very small specific hardware configurations, it can be better tested and made to be more stable and is easier (again, deatable!) for developers to develop for because its a guaranteed hardware platform whereas Android could be running on just about anything. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yO2KQHkt4A"
]
] | |
3bmlev | what does it mean to privatize marriage? what would that mean for marriage as we know it currently? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bmlev/eli5_what_does_it_mean_to_privatize_marriage_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"csnhc5w"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"I assume you mean by privatization that you mean getting the government out of marriage. It wouldn't mean anything for marriage except people getting married wouldn't need to go to the state and petition them for a license, essentially permission, to be married. Under this method, marriage is a private contract between two people that they can enter into without the government. The side effect is that the government also sanctions benefits to married people based on its rules of marriage and these would go away, like special tax rules."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
1yo1rm | adverse possesion or, squatters rights. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yo1rm/eli5_adverse_possesion_or_squatters_rights/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfm7eir"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Depending on the jurisdiction, if you occupy land in an obvious and overt fashion for an extended period of time (like, forty years) without being challenged by the owner, you BECOME the owner."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
5mljeh | why are there certain sounds men and women make sexually that aren't made in any other situation? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5mljeh/eli5_why_are_there_certain_sounds_men_and_women/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc4g6qi",
"dc4gj2x"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"You've never listened to women playing tennis or men struggling to lift something?\n\nMost sexual grunting and moaning is a result of strenuous exercise and tension, plus the sounds of pleasurable release (which people can often make in nonsexual situations as well).",
"Try running for a couple hours and you will reproduce every sound you have ever made in the sack"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] | |
4b9u79 | why exactly is english as a language so exception-filled and context specific? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4b9u79/eli5_why_exactly_is_english_as_a_language_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"d178rtl",
"d179yju"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
" > Germanic language with a hodgepodge of borrowed words from basically everywhere else, which might have retained their original rules despite being used in English\n\nThat really is the issue.\n\nI mean, you could say that English doesn't have some central authority that manages the language like [French does](_URL_0_), but, really, that's just French being weird. Most languages don't have that kind of central management. The issue really is that Great Britain saw waves of migration from different people over several centuries and the language became a mish mash of all of them.\n\n",
"English is *really* good at absorbing other words and phrases into it, and there is, in fact, a very specific reason for this! Before we get to that, though, recall that England has been invaded a few times by numerous people, and then the British Empire invaded numerous people, so there's been a *lot* of exposure to different words. Still, other countries have had similar exposure, so why did English absorb so many different words?\n\nEnglish is a Subject-Verb-Object language, meaning our grammar generally puts sentences in that order. That's really important, because as English lost a lot of the cases that other languages still use, we began to encode information in the order of the words, rather than the endings of words. So, let's look at Spanish as a counter example.\n\nYou can say, \"Yo hablo espanol\" (I speak Spanish), but you can also ignore the Yo and just say \"Hablo espanol\". The -o ending encodes the subject (I) without having to say it. Then you have phrases like \"Me gusta Reddit\" - it's translated as \"I like Reddit\", but that's not really what it's literally saying. If you transliterate it, you're really saying \"Reddit is liked by me.\" You could just as easily (if a little awkwardly) say \"Reddit gusta me\". In both of those sentences, Reddit is the subject, me is the object. Regardless of the order, you know that Reddit is the subject because the verb (gustar) is conjugated with that -a ending, which *only* encodes (in that context, anyway) that Reddit is the subject. If the speaker (I) were the subject, it would be conjugated as \"gusto\" (Spanish speakers, please correct me if I'm wrong! It's been a hot minute since I learned Spanish...). You can jumble the words completely around (\"Gusta Reddit me\") and while it may sound odd, the meaning is still very clear.\n\nSo, back to English. English still has verb conjugation, but it's a lot less specific. The \"speak\" in \"...speak English\" could have many subjects and still be grammatically correct: I speak, you speak, we speak, they speak...It's the same verb form. So you can't ignore the subject. As well, because of that, if you say something like \"I like you\" or \"You like me\" the verb \"like\" is conjugated the same. The *only* way you can know which is the subject and which is the object is by the order of the words (before anyone points it out, yes, \"I\" is changed to \"me\" as the object, but you get the point, eh?).\n\nThat's important because that means you can take **any word** and shove it into the correct spot in a sentence, and it *becomes that part of speech*. This is particularly clear with verbs. Since we know the first word is the subject and the last word is the object, the middle word *has* to be the verb. So you can throw literally any word you want between a subject and an object, and it's understood to be a verb, even that word isn't normally used as a verb, or even if the person listening has never heard the word before. Here's a quick example: \"I splounch you.\" Do you know what \"splounch\" means? No, but there is no question that it's a verb, right? On top of that, our verb endings are very clear and concise, and we don't change them for a lot of tenses. For instance, Spanish has different endings not only for past, present, and future, but also for all three of those in subjunctive tense, perfect, progressive, etc. Each combination of tenses will give you a different ending. In English, we still have those tenses, but we largely use modals \"I like you - > I liked you - > I wish I liked you\" (present - > past - > subjunctive). A great example would be the word \"rendezvous\", which in French means very specifically \"meet you\". Not just \"meet\" but \"meet you\". But in English, we use it as a general verb that means \"meet with\" and it doesn't specify with whom. We also use it as a *noun*, which is just silly, because it's definitely a verb in French, and we didn't bother changing the ending to a nouny ending, we just threw it in the object slot of a sentence and *bam*, now it's a noun (\"I have a rendezvous to go to at noon\").\n\nThe lack of case endings for nouns also helps us. For instance, in Russian (because my knowledge of Spanish is at its end), if something is *on* another thing, it has an ending that specifically means \"this noun is on something\". Kind of like in English, we use an -s on the end to say something is plural, they use an ending to denote that something is on another thing. But there's a *different* ending if it's being given to something, or being used by something. Each of those has a different ending. In English, though...it's all about word order and context, there are no case endings. This is *especially* useful because we don't have gendered nouns, either. That's important because for a foreign language like Russian, if you try to add an English word to it...is that word masculine or feminine? When you put it in genitive case, what kind of ending should it have? In English, who cares! Throw it after the preposition \"of\" and it's in the correct \"case\" and doesn't need a special ending. What that means is that, like the case with \"rendezvous\", again you can take literally any word and put it in the correct spot of a sentence, and it becomes that part of speech. Our rules for endings are super simplistic: verbs have -s, -ed, -ing, and that's it (otherwise, throw a modal like \"will\" or \"have\" in front) - any word can be a verb with those endings (\"I went clocking today. Today I clocked.\" Doesn't make sense, but you know it's a verb!); nouns get -s or -es to make them plural (\"I own several swims.\" Doesn't make sense, but you know \"swims\" is a plural noun!). There are more complicated rules for changing parts of speech in English, but the important thing is that even those rules are fairly simple.\n\nSo all this means that you can take any word from any language and add it to English and if you just throw it into the right place in the sentence, it more or less makes sense. Which brings us, finally, to the question of why that leaves us with so many exceptions.\n\nJust because you add a word to English doesn't mean it's always going to follow English rules all the time forever. Especially when the native speakers are still very active within the community, they might pluralize a noun the French way while still using it in an English sentence, or they might continue spelling it according to the original phonetics (see \"rendezvous\"). It still makes sense because of the context, though, so the listeners accept it. Over time, the exception ends up sticking because English doesn't need it to match the rest of the language as much to make sense.\n\nTL;DR: English is *really* good at eating other languages, because we don't use cases and care so much about word order. Because of this, we end up with a lot more foreign words that may or may not follow all the English rules.\n\nSource: Degree in English, and linguistics is *fascinating!*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise"
],
[]
] | ||
1dqlxh | why my perception of my face in the mirror changes as the day goes on. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dqlxh/eli5_why_my_perception_of_my_face_in_the_mirror/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9t3qjm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The lighting might affect your perception. Even if you're in a locked bathroom, natural light will get in in the morning, different light will be there in the afternoon, at dusk, and at midnight. Lighting DEFINITELY affects how you look in a mirror."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] | ||
45r211 | why do some animals hibernate in the winter instead of migrating or simply living somewhere warmer? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45r211/eli5_why_do_some_animals_hibernate_in_the_winter/ | {
"a_id": [
"czzl854",
"czznrsj",
"czzpsry"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are many strategies for survival. Species have been fine tuned to there particular habitat. Some migrate, some hibernate. ",
"A mouse would really struggle to migrate to somewhere else - they're just too small to cover any distance which would make a significant distance. And if they did, they'd be moving into areas which already have a small mammal population, which almost be definition is stretching the local ecosystem to its limit.\n\nThey stay put because that's where their evolutionary niche is, and they've evolved to exploit it when they can and snoozing when they can't.",
"I live in Canada, it's stupid cold today. Every year I think about going down south for the winter and coming back up in summer but I don't have the resources to make that trip. I could probably walk it but I have no idea where I'd get food during the journey and I'd have to cross a bunch of highways and shit. Even if I did make it I doubt I'd be able to compete in those messed up tropical-type areas against the people that live there year round. Instead, I'll just get cozy with my family, drink some beer, wait it out. That way I've got first dibs on stuff once it starts growing since I'll be here first.\n\nAnd then when all those guys come back up to celebrate the joy of spring in the north by breeding, I'll eat their babies.\n\nReally though it's more of a population-wide natural selection thing than any individuals choice. Think of the polar bear, at some point a brown bear had a mutated gene that turned it white and it just happened to live in an area with snow. It survived, had babies, and the white ones that moved south were outcompeted by their brown cousins but the white ones that stayed north were crazy successful and over time the instinct to migrate was replaced by the instinct to stay. Same with hibernation, if you have the ability to sleep a winter off in a safe spot instead of making a long dangerous journey then you are going to be more likely to survive. There are exceptions of course.\n\nSorry about the long post but I love this stuff. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | ||
5leb73 | why do we, as humans, crave social interaction and attention? | Just curious but why the hell does every person prefer to do things in the company of others. I questioned this as a came back from the bar alone for NYE. I was okay with being alone at the bar and listening to the live band as well as watching the terrible drunk people on the dance floor. I couldn't help but notice that i was the only one alone at the bar and every single person was with another person. So, seriously, why do people always prefer to do things with others? Are there not people who exist to do things alone, even if it's a holiday or something else? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5leb73/eli5_why_do_we_as_humans_crave_social_interaction/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbv1r7v",
"dbv66s9"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Lots of people prefer to do things on their own but these people usually stay home to do it.\n\nIt makes no sense to go to a social venue such as a bar to go and dance alone. You could just dance and drink at home. The venue is for the social gathering side of things for the people who prefer that.\n\nAs to why many people *do* prefer such social settings... Humans have evolved to be highly complex social animals. So it is not really that surprising that a large percentage of us will prefer to do social things a large percentage of the time.",
"The possible reason why some individuals prefer to be alone, or have fewer social interactions could be their intelligence, since intelligent people are more adept at solving problems on their own, they don't need the exchange of opinions happening in a group. Easier problem solving was one of the reasons people generally evolved to be social.\n[See article here](_URL_0_) "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.google.no/amp/www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/why-smart-people-are-better-off-with-fewer-friends-a6939751.html%3Famp?client=safari"
]
] | |
6usm8o | why do so many baby boomers have hep c? | I'm seeing this commercial over and over about 1 in 30 baby boomers having hep C..... why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6usm8o/eli5_why_do_so_many_baby_boomers_have_hep_c/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlv4726",
"dlv4j7b",
"dlv5h4m",
"dlvbil8"
],
"score": [
9,
14,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Before AIDS there was this thing called the sexual revolution and the Vietnam War. Lots of funky gettin' it on goin' on and not much that couldn't be taken care of to worry about, lots of blood being spilled, lots of needles getting passed around. \n\nYou're hearing a lot about it now because there are some new treatments that work really well apparently. ",
"Good question. Studies have pretty consistently found that the prevalence of hep C is [6x greater \\(approximately 2.6%\\)](_URL_0_) in those born between 1945-1965 than the general population.\n\nWhy is this? It's most likely that these people were infected by [contaminated blood products/medical equipment] (_URL_1_) before we had widespread screening (1992), disposable medical equipment, and a good understanding of bloodborne disease. While injection drug use or high-risk sexual practices are other contributing factors they're less likely to have caused the numbers we see. ",
"It's poorly understood *precisely* why they're at higher risk, but they sure are. Between the 1960's and 1980's, transmission rates of Hepatitis C were the highest. \n\nThere are a combination of factors at play.\n\nThat was before Standard Precautions were practiced in healthcare, and testing blood for transmissible illnesses wasn't possible. People were contracting it from blood transfusions, medical equipment, and organ transplants until the nation's blood supply began to be tested in 1992. \n\nOf course, the sexual revolution and free-love led to a lot of free STD's as well.\n\nIV drug use and sharing a needle just one time forty years ago could have caused infection.\n\nMost don't know how or when they contracted it, nor do they know they have it. Lying dormant for years, the chronic form of Hepatitis C often leads to liver cancer. ",
"Medical facilities and most importantly blood work never really thought about that kind of stuff until fairly recently. A large number of people got diseases just from contaminated blood. It's why they question you now for that stuff whenever you want to donate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=24737271",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27039040"
],
[],
[]
] | |
ahod40 | how does a modern warship get cleaned? | I’ve read that “swabbing the deck” was punishment for sailors back in the day. Do something bad, expect to be scrubbing the ship. How does this work in a modern navy? Do they really still have sailors scrubbing decks as punishment? Do they use modern equipment or just buckets and rags? Is there a civilian, janitorial service that accompanies the ships for this type of work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ahod40/eli5_how_does_a_modern_warship_get_cleaned/ | {
"a_id": [
"eegfj51",
"eegftxk",
"eegkyx2"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It wasn't really punishment to wash the deck. It was something everyone had to do on a regular basis.\n\nModern sailors clean and maintain their equipment constantly. If you aren't fighting, or training to fight, you're probably cleaning or painting something. Then every several years the ship goes in for an end-to-end overhaul at a yard.",
"Everyone is responsible for keeping their work spaces clean and orderly. The ship will be broken down into different work spaces and stations and each department on the ship is responsible for assigning personnel to clean those spaces and stations when necessary. \n\nIn the US Navy, undesignated Sailors (people who enlisted without a guaranteed \"rating\" [job] in their contract) and Boatswain's Mates (\"BMs\") will also do a lot of work on a ship to keep it in ship-shape, to include leading work parties, keeping the paint maintained, etc. ",
"A clean ship is a working ship. If you allow salts, oils and water to collect and accumulate it can cause rusting, doors to not operated properly and seals to either dry out/rot.\n\nI'm sure there have been occasions of discipline handed down to include extra cleaning but for the most part it's an 'everyone has a job' type of operation to keep it running smoothly.\n\nThe last thing you want is a gun to become inoperable, or a sea door to become broken in the heat of a crisis."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] | |
5oc0do | why can't people have purple, red or maybe solid blue eyes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5oc0do/eli5_why_cant_people_have_purple_red_or_maybe/ | {
"a_id": [
"dci6lxp",
"dcig3tn"
],
"score": [
7,
24
],
"text": [
"From my limited understanding of biology I believe there are multiple genes that affect say skin color, eye color, hair color. Any combination of variations can lead to a different skin, eye, or hair color. There isn't an infinite number of possible combinations so there is not an infinite number of possible eye colors.\n\nWhy eye colors are not purple however I believe is because of melanin and the amount of it that exists in a persons eye which determines eye color (maybe).\n\nSorry if this wasn't very helpful :P",
"Eye color is a result of pigmentation, and varying types of scattering (similar to what makes the sky appear blue). Eye pigmentation is largely the same as skin pigmentation, going from light brown to black. So if you have brown eyes, that just means you have a lot of pigmentation in your iris. Other eye colors are the result of the interaction of that pigmentation with the light scattering off the fine structure of the iris. Someone with blue eyes has fairly low concentrations of pigment in their iris, so the eye color is almost completely determined by scattering effects. Someone with hazel eyes has a medium amount of pigment in their iris.\n\nCertain people with albinism have eyes that look reddish, which is due to having even less pigment in their eyes than someone with blue eyes, to the point where the red of the blood vessels is visible.\n\nSo you don't see purple eyes because there doesn't seem to be a combination of pigment and scattering that would make an eye look purple. People don't have solid blue eyes because the structure of the iris is variable enough from point to point that light scatters differently (pigmentation also varies from point to point). If irises were more homogeneous the scattering effects would produce more solid looking colors. Keep in mind that no eye color looks \"solid\", even really dark eyes have variations in the color of the iris. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.