q_id stringlengths 5 6 | title stringlengths 0 304 | selftext stringlengths 0 39.2k | document stringclasses 1 value | subreddit stringclasses 3 values | answers dict | title_urls dict | selftext_urls dict | answers_urls dict | split stringclasses 9 values | title_body stringlengths 1 39.1k | embeddings list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4aiemq | What's the difference between intolerant and allergy. Why can't it be peanut intolerant or lactose allergy? | Why is lactose specifically intolerant? Just wondering... | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d10kca7",
"d10kah4"
],
"text": [
"Allergy is when your immune system is the issue, intolerance is when it's some other body issue like incorrect digestion or wrong chemical pathway. A milk allergy (which is rare) would be your immune system attacking milk like it was an intruder. lactose intolerance is your body being unable to digest milk sugar well and the issues of having a bunch of indigestible sugars hanging out in your guts.",
"Lactose intolerance is due to not having the enzyme to break down lactose. An allergy is an immune response to something your body thinks is harmful."
],
"score": [
28,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What's the difference between intolerant and allergy. Why can't it be peanut intolerant or lactose allergy?
Why is lactose specifically intolerant? Just wondering... | [
0.07126826792955399,
-0.09675060957670212,
0.002045811852440238,
0.01194830983877182,
0.06156623363494873,
0.05990906059741974,
0.02570965513586998,
0.1463615447282791,
-0.07888852059841156,
0.014489016495645046,
-0.021557936444878578,
-0.007171920035034418,
-0.03805746138095856,
-0.054445... | |
37tpda | - Would meat rot in space? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"crpqyso",
"crprp4s",
"crpr6el"
],
"text": [
"Some bacteria are anaerobic, i.e. they do not need oxygen to survive. So those would continue to cause the meat to rot in space, yes. However it would be much slower, as all the organisms that need oxygen to live like aerobic bacteria or yeast would not be capable of life.",
"How big is the meat comet? Does it have an atmosphere?",
"It depends on the environment.\n\nIn hard vacuum the meat would be preserved pretty well and not rot owing to the lack of water and oxygen in it and it would effectively be mummified."
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | - Would meat rot in space?
| [
-0.005507218185812235,
0.009506959468126297,
0.03614538535475731,
0.040336694568395615,
0.0111548425629735,
-0.07935494184494019,
-0.009823429398238659,
-0.0246503297239542,
0.04564321041107178,
-0.010166884399950504,
0.06425385177135468,
0.048397716134786606,
-0.045736197382211685,
0.0505... | ||
5y9cfr | What is that sensation you get in the jaw/mouth when you have not eaten anything is a while and why does it happen ? | I tried my best to provide a thorough description and this is the best I could find : often when I have not eaten/drank anything for a couple hours, the first thing I put in my mouth (food, not drinks) creates a weird sensation in the back of my jaw. It only lasts a couple seconds but is rather intense, not painful but uncomfortable. The sensation resembles the one you get when eating sour candies. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"deo6v7m"
],
"text": [
"As soon as you think of food or begin the process of eating something, the body goes into 'digestive mode' and begins the secretion of saliva, gastric juices and other digestive juices. \n\nThere are 3 major pairs of salivary glands in the mouth. The parotid, submandibular and the sublingual glands. Saliva contains digestive enzymes and also helps in making the food into a ball to facilitate easy swallowing. \n\nThus when you keep some food in your mouth, the salivary glands get 'activated' and start secreting saliva. This sudden neural and somatic activation (of the parotid) and the secretion of saliva causes that weird pressure behind the jaw, more so when sour food is taken."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is that sensation you get in the jaw/mouth when you have not eaten anything is a while and why does it happen ?
I tried my best to provide a thorough description and this is the best I could find : often when I have not eaten/drank anything for a couple hours, the first thing I put in my mouth (food, not drinks) creates a weird sensation in the back of my jaw. It only lasts a couple seconds but is rather intense, not painful but uncomfortable. The sensation resembles the one you get when eating sour candies. | [
-0.009133013896644115,
-0.057590652257204056,
-0.055269401520490646,
0.08259215950965881,
-0.0629633218050003,
0.006696702912449837,
0.043024301528930664,
0.06099861487746239,
0.05237403139472008,
-0.04803609475493431,
-0.027622053399682045,
-0.09962578117847443,
0.024654630571603775,
0.02... | |
4ruogw | Why does your brain not mute chronic pain? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d548bqb"
],
"text": [
"Pain serves a purpose, it exists to limit further damage, and anything which 'removes pain' is a very risky proposition. If you're ignorant of damage, you may continue to damage yourself, and that can be anything from inconvenient to deadly.\n\nEvolution itself isn't really perfect or anything, it doesn't have a good way to know that pain is \"chronic\" or not. It just knows that those sensors are sending signals, and so it reports pain. \n\nIf chronic pain was a big enough issue that it dramatically reduced reproductive success odds, we might see evolutionary pressures towards dealing with that, but it is likely the case that 'loss of pain sensitivity' would be far more dangerous to reproductive success odds, unless it somehow happened to evolve just 'perfectly' which is quite unlikely."
],
"score": [
12
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does your brain not mute chronic pain?
[removed] | [
0.0910080298781395,
-0.09566570818424225,
0.03377912566065788,
0.07812188565731049,
-0.044019363820552826,
0.03167307376861572,
0.05971955135464668,
0.0081551568582654,
0.07083864510059357,
-0.058242037892341614,
-0.06159745901823044,
0.03940342739224434,
-0.03904639184474945,
-0.003172812... | |
1acu0a | What are "whale trades" that JP Morgan did in London and lost $$$? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c8w6twb"
],
"text": [
"JP Morgan had a trader in London, Bruno Iskil, that was known for making extremely large bets on the stock market using very complex ways of making trades. Bets so complicated even his bosses had no idea what he was doing. The trades themselves involved something called credit default swaps, which are bets that a company or fund will go bankrupt.\n\nGamblers like to use the term \"whale\" for people that bet massive amounts of money in casinos, and Iskil got the nickname \"The London Whale\".\n\nIskil made a bad bet in early 2012 that cost his company a lot of money, and the bets were so complex that nobody had a real clue how much money could have been lost. At first it was thought to be USD $2 Billion, but now it looks more like more than $9 billion. '"
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What are "whale trades" that JP Morgan did in London and lost $$$?
| [
-0.007653582841157913,
0.0495598278939724,
0.04014744609594345,
0.08181614428758621,
-0.022884098812937737,
0.019162097945809364,
0.09045461565256119,
-0.0005676259170286357,
-0.0694630891084671,
0.011849177069962025,
0.02842039242386818,
-0.0551753044128418,
-0.03062615543603897,
0.066348... | ||
2rau0r | How do Majors and Minors in US colleges work? | Say, from all the 'concentrations' available, i want to do Computer Science, Physics, and economics... How does this work?
Which is the major and Minor? Can you have more than one minor, or none? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cne3i0x"
],
"text": [
"You take individual courses, such as intro to computer science and so on, each major and minor will have requirements so if there is some overlap or you can cope with the course load you can double major. The major is the focus of the studies, a minor is a semi-focus, not as much as a major but not just a regular course you decide to take. I would have thought you can double minor as well, but the university can tell you more specifically. \n\nWith yours it's likely that there isn't as much overlap, so I would choose either physics or compsci, minor in econ but take classes in the other one, unless the requirements do overlap enough."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do Majors and Minors in US colleges work?
Say, from all the 'concentrations' available, i want to do Computer Science, Physics, and economics... How does this work? Which is the major and Minor? Can you have more than one minor, or none? | [
0.11528821289539337,
-0.03828924521803856,
0.048430878669023514,
0.021534040570259094,
0.05070245638489723,
-0.0483296774327755,
-0.0516713410615921,
-0.026385469362139702,
-0.01254655048251152,
0.06000322476029396,
-0.06286411732435226,
0.01780717633664608,
-0.03899245709180832,
-0.000227... | |
2d94dc | Why aren't "Ask..X" Subreddits more famous than the outdated Yahoo answers? | "The front page of the internet" pretty much the front page of the internet exclusively for Redditors. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjn9ezk",
"cjnapuz"
],
"text": [
"Have you seen the answers on those Yahoo forums? My god it's some of the worst misinformation I've ever seen.",
"Because [these](_URL_0_) have a much greater entertainment value."
],
"score": [
7,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/yahooanswers/"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why aren't "Ask..X" Subreddits more famous than the outdated Yahoo answers?
"The front page of the internet" pretty much the front page of the internet exclusively for Redditors. | [
-0.025876007974147797,
-0.11645589768886566,
0.06863143295049667,
-0.008406092412769794,
0.07059543579816818,
-0.06466662138700485,
0.05773542821407318,
0.022916318848729134,
0.0725315660238266,
-0.0584644116461277,
-0.030541779473423958,
0.07320448756217957,
0.025727620348334312,
0.008773... | |
z0uf1 | Mechanically what is the difference between a fixed- gear & single-speed bike? | I know that they behave differently, but why? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c60j47b",
"c60jqw7"
],
"text": [
"I write as a rider of \"both.\"\n\nTechnically, a \"fixed gear/fixie\" is a single-speed, but slang and marketing has created the distinction you make. I will explain this distinction. \n\nFixed gear bikes, which are raced in velodromes and ridden on the road , do not have a free wheel mechanism in the hub of the rear wheel. This means that you cannot free wheel a fixed gear bike. Imagine if you will, that the cog at the back is welded to the hub. This means that your pedals will always move at a speed proportional to the bikes speed, as as long as the bike is moving, so are your pedals.\n\nWhat are marketed as 'single-speeds' are very similar in design, except that the rear cog (using a system of ratcheting teeth) does permit freewheeling, so if you are at the top of a hill, you can sit and coast all the way to the bottom without having to pedal. \n\nSome extra details if your are interested:\n\nDebates aside, on a fixed gear bike, because that rear cog is \"welded\" to the rear wheel, you can slow your speed by resisting the turning of the pedals or by stopping the pedals altogether and skidding the rear wheel. This means that you sometimes see them on the street with no brakes, which is in most places technically illegal but when in a velodrome, is required. \n\nVisit the legendary [Sheldon Brown](_URL_0_) for more info.\n\nEdit - link added.",
"With a fixed gear bike, the pedals are always in motion when the bike is in motion. Fast, slow, even backwards, the bike and the pedals are in sync.\n\nA single speed bike has a freewheel on the hub of the rear wheel. This lets you coast without pedaling. It also means you can't slow your bike down just by pedaling slower, you need a hand brake or a coaster brake."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://sheldonbrown.com/singlespeed.html"
]
} | train_eli5 | Mechanically what is the difference between a fixed- gear & single-speed bike?
I know that they behave differently, but why? | [
-0.04917774349451065,
0.028342319652438164,
0.02160055935382843,
0.040599048137664795,
-0.001651172642596066,
-0.0013016455341130495,
-0.056433480232954025,
0.013573014177381992,
0.029203113168478012,
0.02747770957648754,
0.06113428622484207,
0.019027503207325935,
0.06042889133095741,
-0.0... | |
1src9a | The Holographic Principle and String Theory | I've always tried to read up about the holographic universe theory, but I always seem to get in over my head and have to read about five other things just to being to understand, as I don't have a strong science background. Can anyone make this a bit more lucid for me? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ce0fg20"
],
"text": [
"I'll link you to a similar concept, and before everyone jumps all over my shit for this... I will make the disclaimer that I am NOT an expert BUT, this is a pretty good explanation of dimensional projections in a general sense of the word and may help OP with tackling the abstractness of string theory and the newest simulated results we've been reading lately.\n\nCarl Sagan - _URL_0_ \n\nEdit: in other words, the new studies have begun to show us that all of the universe that we know and observe is just a projection of the underlying principles at work"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://youtu.be/UnURElCzGc0"
]
} | train_eli5 | The Holographic Principle and String Theory
I've always tried to read up about the holographic universe theory, but I always seem to get in over my head and have to read about five other things just to being to understand, as I don't have a strong science background. Can anyone make this a bit more lucid for me? | [
-0.010493469424545765,
-0.04090888053178787,
0.044236648827791214,
-0.010081173852086067,
-0.04799196496605873,
0.005751668009907007,
0.003558442695066333,
0.022059762850403786,
-0.01194107998162508,
-0.019687574356794357,
-0.028636904433369637,
0.06185223162174225,
-0.08348263055086136,
-... | |
27fc9y | The difference between Holland, the Netherlands, Dutch people, etc. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ci0956o"
],
"text": [
"Holland is north and south Holland within the Kingdom of the Netherlands, whose people and language are Dutch."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The difference between Holland, the Netherlands, Dutch people, etc.
| [
0.08801722526550293,
0.01680036634206772,
-0.009242062456905842,
-0.02969128079712391,
0.03906365856528282,
-0.01103175338357687,
-0.03633344918489456,
-0.022208651527762413,
-0.0019624335691332817,
0.00292207021266222,
0.08515755087137222,
-0.06342810392379761,
-0.09352825582027435,
-0.01... | ||
3jo9ej | Why are concussions in the NFL so frequent with players using advanced helmets vs rugby players using no helmets? | Sure I am a bigger fan of football then I am of rugby but I never hear anything about concussions in rugby at all. There is a documentary on NFL concussions and soon a hollywood film but nothing about rugby. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cuqxng9",
"cuqxh96",
"cuqy281",
"cuqxix8",
"cuqxok4"
],
"text": [
"Blocking. It is legal in NFL, it is not legal in Rugby. In NFL and other American Gridiron leagues, every player on the field is a valid target for a hit. Everyone is always running full speed into everyone else. \n\nIn rugby, only the person who is currently in posession of the ball can be hit. It is a foul to touch any opponent who isn't holding the football. For this reason, getting hurt in rugby is much, much less common than in gridiron. \n\nEdit: silly me, it's a football, not a \"rugbyball\".",
"its's the same reason why houses with fire insurance are more likely to burn down than those without fire insurance.\n\nplayers in the NFL use their helmet to absorb shock when they should be avoiding the shock like they do in rugby. they think that they are safe from all hits b/c they are wearing a helmet, where players in rubgy just do whatever they can to avoid hits to the head. \n\nit's like if you're wearing padded gloves, you'll punch a wall as hard as you can b/c you think you're safe, whereas if you aren't wearing padded gloves, you wouldn't punch the wall at all. \n\ntl dr; because players in the NFL are taking hits in the head, when players in rubgy are avoiding hits to the head.",
"Concussion is very big in Rugby, with new laws in place just recently. \nThe difference is that Rugby players are taught to tackle differently than NFL. \nSure Rugby guys like McCaw and Hooper put themselves in some bad spots, but they know how to take the hit and also the guy tackling knows there are strict rules on the way he can make contact. Generally, no professional wants to \"end a guys career\", as that's just a dick move. \n\nI'm no expert or fan of NFL, so I won't pass judgement on the game. \nBut I would have thought that with all their padding it would offer a false sense of security. So maybe they throw themselves into tackles/dives thinking they are going to be ok, when it's not. \nAlso, it must be hard to brace when you don't see a guy sprinting at you from behind or side on? Peripheral vision must be shit in those big helmets.\nIn Rugby, that would be illegal. Like shoulder charges. \n\nI think concussion is a big factor in both sports. The more coverage it gets in NFL, the more it will get in Rugby. Once they payout to ex NFL players to help medical, it will resonate throughout both Rugby Union and League.",
"Many studies have examined the backwards trend of new safety equipment causing more accidents than occurred before they were implemented. In the case of ABS being introduced to most automobiles people drove faster as they felt they had a safety device to fall back on. This caused more accidents than existed before ABS. The same is true for many other forms of protection, the more we feel we have, the more risk we are willing to partake in. The same may be true for these two competitive sports and while this is merely and observation of a trend rather than any form of analysis it does seem to at least on the surface fit many similar models.",
"Economists call that the law of unintended consequences. The most common example is usually seat belts -- drivers started driving more dangerously once they had seat belts, as the personal consequences of the behavior was lessened. \nThere have been several recent studies about helmet use in football, and how hits (and thus injuries) have gotten more severe as actual helmet technology has gotten better. \nMy assumption is that without helmets, rugby players (though obviously intense and manly and all that) instinctively have playing behavior that protects their noggins, as *they* know they're not wearing a helmet. Physiological instinct is generally to protect one's brain."
],
"score": [
15,
3,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are concussions in the NFL so frequent with players using advanced helmets vs rugby players using no helmets?
Sure I am a bigger fan of football then I am of rugby but I never hear anything about concussions in rugby at all. There is a documentary on NFL concussions and soon a hollywood film but nothing about rugby. | [
0.010936289094388485,
0.06723839044570923,
-0.016160747036337852,
-0.045036304742097855,
0.07895975559949875,
0.0777227133512497,
0.009932208806276321,
0.03046654909849167,
0.09481753408908844,
0.1482534110546112,
-0.013006758876144886,
0.0007621173281222582,
0.020928693935275078,
0.046768... | |
1gnd2q | The Mexican - American War and what was the role of Texas | Can somebody explain me how the Mexican - American war started and what the role of Texas was in it? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"calvzcp"
],
"text": [
"The short version:\n\n\nTexas breaks away from Mexico.\n\nMexico isn't happy but got its butt kicked in a lot of big battles.\n\nTexas joins America.\n\nTexas, as a state has a disputed boarder with Mexico. Neither America, nor Texas, nor Mexico can agree where the boarder is.\n\nSome small fighting happens around the boarder, mostly locals fighting over who's land it actually is.\n\nAmerica sends in troop's to occupy this area, claiming its theirs. \n\nMexico sees this as an invasion of their land\n\nohshitwar.jpg\n\nAmerican and Mexico go to war.\n\nAmerica creams Mexico, but Mexico won't stop fighting\n\nAmerica marches into Mexico City, Occupying the Mexican capital finally forcing an end to the fighting.\n\nAmerica wins the Texas boarder, and basically the whole western half of the US south of Oregon. \n\nThe slogan \"Don't mess with Texas\" becomes a thing."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The Mexican - American War and what was the role of Texas
Can somebody explain me how the Mexican - American war started and what the role of Texas was in it? | [
-0.03275264799594879,
0.021209849044680595,
0.008927450515329838,
0.056643012911081314,
-0.07464992254972458,
0.04970502853393555,
-0.015136931091547012,
-0.02860882319509983,
-0.0796024352312088,
-0.032527998089790344,
0.025598032400012016,
0.03979891538619995,
0.0868731141090393,
-0.0383... | |
51n1qb | What technology is behind HDR TVs? | So I'm watching Sony's presentation about PS4 Pro and they add feature called HDR to their system too. I totally understand what HDR does in photo (basically combines low-exposure and high-exposure image) but cant wrap my head about HDR in TV and why do I need special hardware for that. Is it just fancy name for 10bit monitor? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d7e06yf"
],
"text": [
"Copy/paste from my comment over at /r/hometheater: \n \nThere are 3 main things HDR adds to regular collection content:\n \n1. **Wide Color Gamut**. A color gamut defines the max saturation a color can have, a wider color gamut means more saturated colors can now be captured and reproduced (Note, this is not the same as increasing saturation on your tv). The standard for all non-HDR digital content is Rec. 709 and HDR is Rec. 2020, [comparison image](_URL_2_). As you can see, blue is pretty much the same and red is decently improved, the biggest improvement is in greens. \nThe way this is achieved in television sets is increasing how bright a pixel can get. However, no HDR currently goes past DCI-P3 (which was/is the 2K cinema standard for over a decade), [as you can see](_URL_1_), it's like the half-way point, it'll be a few years till Rec. 2020 coverage is accomplished (and affordable). \n \n2. **10-bit Color**. In Rec. 709 content, color is 8-bit, meaning 2^8 possible combinations for each color (0-255; however, that's for computers, tv is actually 16-235 and/or 16-240). 10-bit is thus 2^10, equaling 1024 (but as with the previous caveat, it is actually 64-940). What this means is there is more precision in what colors you can choose. As an extreme example, let's say you only had 2 choices for red, 100% saturation (pure red) and 0% saturation (white), adding in 1 option will allow 50% saturation (pink). So, this means there are more shades to choose from, making your picture more accurate. [I made a relatively realistic comparison image](_URL_0_) (ignore the slightly incorrect naming for the top image, it should be Rec. 2020 + 10-bit). \nThis is achieved by fine tuning the power distribution to each pixel, getting each shade (brightness of pixel) to be produced. \n \n3. **Peak Brightness**. This deals with how bright the max white brightness is. I believe HDR content is mastered at 10,000 nits (nits is the same as lumens, like for a lightbulb), but no tv can that bright (as that's insane, probably blinding). Typically, a tv can show a little bit of white brighter than a lot of white. A 2% white screen is the smallest measurement Rtings uses, where anything above 500 cd/m2 (same as nits and lumens, pretty stupid to have 3 names for the same thing) is usually perfectly fine for a 2% window (this is one of the only main areas where the P-series is outshined by Samsung/Sony). \n \nTo my knowledge, the Samsung KS8000 and the Vizio P-series are the two cheapest sets that allow full HDR (though I just previously said the peak brightness on the P-series is not fantastic, but it gets the job done)."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://i.imgur.com/mwHq3ja.jpg",
"http://www.avsforum.com/forum/imagehosting/17662543dab6fdc0b7.jpg",
"https://dotcolordotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/rec2020-vs-rec709-001.png"
]
} | train_eli5 | What technology is behind HDR TVs?
So I'm watching Sony's presentation about PS4 Pro and they add feature called HDR to their system too. I totally understand what HDR does in photo (basically combines low-exposure and high-exposure image) but cant wrap my head about HDR in TV and why do I need special hardware for that. Is it just fancy name for 10bit monitor? | [
-0.01869816519320011,
0.010954432189464569,
-0.011073996312916279,
-0.08157503604888916,
0.024451760575175285,
0.015890302136540413,
-0.02849053591489792,
0.04573578014969826,
0.019499365240335464,
0.03586255759000778,
-0.07088626176118851,
0.007746928837150335,
0.03268079459667206,
-0.006... | |
3awojt | Why do my eyes sting after waking up if I didn't get enough sleep? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"csgrnxh",
"csgvqn4"
],
"text": [
"This may be because of the [lacrimal gland,](_URL_5_) located just above the eyelid and just below the outside of the eyebrow. From under the skin, this lumpy-looking gland makes tears that lubricate the eye surface, keeping it damp, glistening and healthy. It’s also wired to the brain.\n\nIt's related to sleep. I think it’s the same mechanism that happens when you’re up late at night and your eyes feel tired then. It may be that the lacrimal gland stops putting out tears if you don't sleep enough.\n\nIt may involve that same circuitry: a signal that you're needing sleep, The gland says: OK, I need to get some sleep. I’m going to start shutting down so the body gets rest. Then you can’t tolerate the burning, stinging eyes so you sleep. You can’t bypass that feeling without sleeping.\n\nSore, fatigued eye muscles can give you that early-morning stinging.\n\nOveruse of the eyes can lead to eyestrain and cause people not to blink as often, especially if they are focused on a computer screen. Blinking allows our eyes to lubricate themselves naturally. When people do not have much sleep it often is because they have stayed up late to work, celebrate or stare at screens.\n\nSo, reduced late-night blinking means the eyes were dry when they closed for the night – and they remain dry when the alarm buzzes and the lids rise.\n**[-Source](_URL_1_)**\n\n & nbsp;\n\nThere are certain conditions that can get worse during the night when your eyes are closed. For example, if you have and eye condition called [blepharitis,](_URL_2_) which is caused by a common skin bacteria called [“staph epidermidis,”](_URL_3_) the waste products of the bacteria are very irritating. But with your eye closed that toxin is lying there all night.\n\nAnother possible cause is called “recurrent corneal erosion.” Think about pulling a scab off all the time. It starts to heal and you pull the scab off. If the surface of the eye gets irritated through dryness and sticks to the back of the lid, or through an injury, that tissue needs to heal. The good news is it heals very quickly. The bad news is it hurts a lot as I’m sure you’ve found. So it heals quickly but it doesn’t necessarily anchor itself. That thin, outer layer of the [cornea](_URL_4_) doesn’t anchor itself to the eye very fast, so you run the risk of re- irritating your eye even after you are feeling better. And when you do that over-and-over, it is called “recurrent corneal erosion.” You are basically tearing off the outer layer of the front of your eye. Classic sign is you wake up, you open your eyes and it hurts. Using ointments at night helps. Using an antibiotic ointment would help if you have blepharitis as well because it would treat that and give your eye a little more coating.\n**[- Source](_URL_0_)**",
"I posted this question 2 years ago! Glad to see I wasn't the only one curious about it.\n\n_URL_6_"
],
"score": [
17,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://info.sjogrens.org/symptoms-of-dryness/bid/351495/Ask-the-Eye-Doctor-Why-do-my-dry-eyes-hurt-in-the-morning",
"http://bodyodd.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/21/13992370-why-your-eyes-burn-when-you-wake-in-the-wee-hours",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blepharitis",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staphylococcus_epidermidis",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Cornea.png",
"http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/19671.jpg",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17dhta/eli5_why_do_my_eyes_burn_in_the_morning_when_i/"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do my eyes sting after waking up if I didn't get enough sleep?
| [
0.052886296063661575,
-0.028310013934969902,
0.007302555255591869,
0.12081935256719589,
0.10949098318815231,
0.03229130432009697,
0.07033302634954453,
0.003922904375940561,
0.013118266128003597,
-0.0001492398150730878,
-0.08736013621091843,
-0.04440119117498398,
-0.004241550341248512,
0.08... | ||
1prbbx | What makes the TSA worse than the security services that existed in the US before 9/11, or the security services that currently exist in other developed nations? | So apparently that shooter at LAX yesterday specifically targeted TSA officers and not just airport police or something.
I do agree with many here on Reddit that the TSA can be inconvenient, but not moreso than in any other developed country I've been to. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cd57elh",
"cd57a3p",
"cd5pr1i"
],
"text": [
"The majority of complaints made by non-paranoid flyers is pointless banning of many everyday items through security checkpoints, and that these rules differ in enforcement from airport to airport.\n\nNail clippers, nail files, scissors, water bottles (both full and empty), knitting needles, certain lighters, and some children's toys are banned by the TSA at security checkpoints. All of these items can be purchased at stores on the other side of the screening area. And aside from full water bottles, the enforcement of these restrictions varies from airport to airport.\n\nMany individuals consider the body imaging machines to be an invasion of privacy, and I think this is a valid opinion.\n\nHaving to remove shoes is another example of inconsistent security measures. Some airports now offer the option to bypass this requirement for children for a small fee.\n\nBanning objects that are readily available in the airport, and inconsistently enforcing policies do nothing to increase safety.\n\nIMO what it really boils down to is that the TSA had grossly overreacted to several legitimate security threats. These threats are never going to go away. Nearly every handheld object can be used as a weapon, and short of banning carry-on luggage altogether and background checking every passenger for combat training, there is no way to ensure 100% safety. The best option would be to ban all items specifically designed to be a weapon and start enforcing all security protocols equally across the board.",
"[Bruce Schneier explains it pretty well, I think.](_URL_0_)",
"The problem I have with them is that they are reactionary and subject to the whims of corruption. \n\nFor instance, they have millions of dollars of bomb sniffing devices sitting in a warehouse because they don't work. They also suck to use because you get locked into a phone booth thing and get blasted with little jets of air (I went through one in Denver years ago). If they don't work then return them for a refund. \n\nThe backscatter X-ray devices that they wouldn't let anybody test or even let the agents wear dosimeters. Then certain agents would funnel attractive women into them so they could look at them naked. \n\nThe millimeter wave machines have better privacy but have big areas where they don't scan, so they are pretty worthless. \n\nThey limit the quantity of liquids you can bring but they don't limit how many times you go through the checkpoint. \n\nYou can't bring a knife but you can bring small screwdrivers, car keys, small scissors, knitting needles, and a bunch of other similar items that can be used as weapons. There isn't much you can have that can't be used in some manner as a weapon. \n\nWith the 9/11 hijackings, box cutters were ok to bring on board at the time. What has changed is that the cockpit doors have been reinforced and people don't sit around waiting to visit Cuba anymore, they revolt and it is 150 against 2 or 4 people."
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VA4EyT4ezE"
]
} | train_eli5 | What makes the TSA worse than the security services that existed in the US before 9/11, or the security services that currently exist in other developed nations?
So apparently that shooter at LAX yesterday specifically targeted TSA officers and not just airport police or something. I do agree with many here on Reddit that the TSA can be inconvenient, but not moreso than in any other developed country I've been to. | [
0.001523118349723518,
-0.011424984782934189,
-0.014722953550517559,
0.024427693337202072,
0.07086469233036041,
-0.003185684559866786,
0.04060061275959015,
0.032192766666412354,
0.027267003431916237,
0.02969123236835003,
0.03671572357416153,
0.11508488655090332,
0.03118501976132393,
0.09923... | |
1xq74u | What happened to Maverick and Goose's F-14 that caused it to go into a spin and lose control in Top Gun? Is it plausible? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cfdq52y",
"cfdt5yj",
"cfdlzph"
],
"text": [
"When Iceman pulls away to let Maverick take the shot, the jet wash from the engine disrupted the airflow into one of the engines of Maverick's jet. Because of this the engine had a burnout, meaning that it stopped working. Because of this, the plane was not getting an equal amount of thrust. This caused one side of the plane to go faster than the other, meaning that it started to turn (yawing). This yawing action was too rapid and powerful and rapid for Maverick to recover and the plane stalled.",
"The previous poster is correct the flat spin was caused by one engine flaming out due to jet wash, followed shortly by the other (both flamed out). \n\nJet engines require sub sonic air prior to intake and presumably the jet wash was super sonic which would cause a flame out. So this is possible. However Maverick being the awesome pilot he was portrayed as should have been aware of this basic principle and avoided it. \n\nSecondly ejection seats are connected to the canopy in such a way that the seats only egress once the canopy is well clear of the aircraft. The argument is that normally the ram air from forward flight would rip the canopy back away from a forward traveling aircraft and since Mav's f14 was in a flat spin they were no longer moving forward which is false. The aircraft's would still have forward momentum from prior to the flat spin so the canopy should still have been clear. \n\nAdditionally the top of ejection seats are designed to break through the canopy but depending on how tall Goose was his head might have cleared the canopy breaker.\n\nPlausible, yes but barely.",
"Call Flat Spins, or Tail Spins [spins](_URL_0_) happen. \n\nFamously the F-14 could enter into a very fast flat spin.\n\nThe cause for spinning is normally caused by a miss-placed center of gravity and the aircraft entering a stall."
],
"score": [
12,
6,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_%28flight%29"
]
} | train_eli5 | What happened to Maverick and Goose's F-14 that caused it to go into a spin and lose control in Top Gun? Is it plausible?
| [
-0.07455059140920639,
0.016195688396692276,
-0.022752685472369194,
0.03955673798918724,
0.04385427385568619,
0.071797676384449,
-0.0662885457277298,
0.06319227069616318,
-0.01949692890048027,
0.059375934302806854,
0.024515099823474884,
0.19794861972332,
0.034991782158613205,
-0.06723762303... | ||
2chr87 | What is happening when I accidentally crash an app or a program simply by clicking on the screen or clicking the mouse button when the software is loading? | This happens to some programs but not all. I would guess it has to do with some kind of stress to the application? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjflelt"
],
"text": [
"Not really 'stress', more likely you caused a sequence of events to occur which the programmer never thought of and never planned for.\n\nHere's a possible scenario (warning, simplifications coming here):\n\nSince the programmer knows how they expect the program to work, they might wait patiently for all the loading and setup to occur every time they test it. Clicking on the program or screen issues 'events' that the operating system sends to the current program. Suppose the normal behavior for a mouse click is for the program to make a certain window open up. But you have clicked before that window is created. The programmer has made a faulty assumption that the window will always be created (but hidden) and ready to go when a mouse click comes in. They end up accessing invalid memory and 'boom'.\n\nObviously thorough and proper testing should reveal flaws like this. But because events from the user are 'asynchronous', that is, they can occur at any time relative to the inner workings of the program, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to perfectly test for every possible case."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is happening when I accidentally crash an app or a program simply by clicking on the screen or clicking the mouse button when the software is loading?
This happens to some programs but not all. I would guess it has to do with some kind of stress to the application? | [
-0.014490384608507156,
-0.02358471415936947,
0.07752858102321625,
-0.007251373492181301,
0.0401274748146534,
-0.0055132764391601086,
0.12520749866962433,
0.09868906438350677,
0.028745517134666443,
-0.013002689927816391,
-0.09907248616218567,
-0.0016935907769948244,
-0.006465403363108635,
-... | |
4c9i11 | Why are the bonus features disappearing from DVDs? | 10 years ago (or even earlier!), you got loads of bonus features on your DVDs from commentaries to featurettes to even some theatrical trailers! Now, look at the UK DVD version of Spectre. You only get about 6 video blogs, and that's it.
Where did the bonus features go? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d1g63yz",
"d1g63vn",
"d1g659p",
"d1g8j8r",
"d1hm57z"
],
"text": [
"Cost cutting and probably user feedback. In an age where people are happy to pay for a stream / rent a stream and you just get the film for a set period, studios realise that the effort in producing such content isn't cost effective and isn't really demanded. Plus they've got to pay people to produce the additional content and then edit it. All of this takes time and money. DVD's are sold for so cheap now, studios would just keep losing money on a service that I personally have not used since the 8 Mile behind the scenes battle raps.",
"You're seeing the technology becoming mainstream. When DVD was first hitting the market in the late 90s and reaching market saturation in the early 00s, you had to have something to lure people away from buying things on video - the public already had video players, so they had to buy a new machine (which were quite expensive at first) and so the extras were a little something extra to tempt people to leave video tapes behind.",
"DVD's, in general, are increasingly becoming a less popular item.\n\nSo, studios have 2 options in order to react to the market:\n\n1. Pack DVD's with more bonus material and make DVD's more enticing for a consumer.\n\n2. Divest company energy from DVD sales, as the DVD format itself is becoming obsolete. Focus energy in new media and more profitable areas.\n\nSo, studios chose option 2 because they concluded that even if DVD's were filled with extras, this wouldn't much improve DVD sales. Those who buy DVD's are a dwindling niche market not worth appeasing.",
"Well, you're buying DVD, that's the problem. Besides the obvious quality difference, the companies want to add a little extra to incentivize Blu-ray purchases. \n \nHowever, I actually love 0 bonus features, unless on an extra disc. The dics are physical, they can only hold so much data, the more extras, the lower quality the movie. The Blu-ray version of ~~Specter~~ Spectre has those video blogs and trailers, plus a 20-min BTS of the opening sequence and overall production/BTS photos. With that, ~~Specter~~ Spectre is only 24Mbps, which is usually the lowest you ever see, 28Mbps-32Mbps is normal. So, any more extras and you would see obvious artifacting due to compression. \n \nI would highly advise buying a cheap Blu-ray player, or use a PS3/PS4 or XB1. They will do some upscaling to your DVD's to make them look better, and you can always buy some cheap Blu-ray's and enjoy the great quality, Walmart has a huge bin of Blu-ray's for $8, you can buy the LOTR trilogy (theatrical, not extended, which is good because they changed the color-grading and it looks worse) for $15.",
"Better question is, why are DVDs still a thing? I didn't know they were until I moved to the UK - I half expected to see advertisements for VHS tapes too.\n\nBut, there are two main reasons bonus features are disappearing. One is cost... DVD and Blu-Ray sales aren't nearly what they used to be and it's hard to justify producing all that extra content. The other is the limited space of DVDs - to put a movie/show on a DVD you have to trade quality for space, a limitation that Blu-Ray doesn't have (except maybe with 4K)."
],
"score": [
7,
6,
5,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are the bonus features disappearing from DVDs?
10 years ago (or even earlier!), you got loads of bonus features on your DVDs from commentaries to featurettes to even some theatrical trailers! Now, look at the UK DVD version of Spectre. You only get about 6 video blogs, and that's it. Where did the bonus features go? | [
0.005904995370656252,
-0.09014426171779633,
-0.005894287955015898,
-0.058390211313962936,
0.09226562827825546,
0.12657774984836578,
-0.018316376954317093,
0.01817636936903,
0.018500227481126785,
0.02843323163688183,
0.05075652524828911,
0.08803008496761322,
-0.03886121138930321,
0.07028011... | |
578hqp | Why are noises like scratching a chalkboard or styrofoam squeaking and others so annoying to alot of people? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d8pw45j"
],
"text": [
"An audiologist or a acoustical engineer could explain this better, but basically the human ear is shaped in such a way that it makes higher pitches (between 2 and 4 kilohertz) sound louder and it's literally painful for a human to hear these pitches above a certain volume.\n\nThe reason our ears evolved to be sensitive to these frequencies is because shrill sounds tend to be important ones--a child's cry, a shout for help, birds fleeing a predator on the ground, etc."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are noises like scratching a chalkboard or styrofoam squeaking and others so annoying to alot of people?
[removed] | [
0.0923139899969101,
-0.1316424012184143,
0.06994973868131638,
-0.015221797861158848,
-0.026875240728259087,
-0.00032282984466291964,
0.09156034141778946,
-0.010660870000720024,
0.00953514315187931,
-0.04361170157790184,
-0.025119666010141373,
-0.08530201017856598,
-0.00763942115008831,
-0.... | |
26y19a | Why do we have to open window shades in an airplane during landing and takeoff? | A friend asked when we were landing this morning and no one knew the answer. Not even the crew. Is it a safety issue? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"chvk5hr",
"chvkbk2",
"chvq86e",
"chvmza2"
],
"text": [
"The cabin crew should know the answers.\n\nFor emergency purposes:\n\n1) cabin crew can see out the window to better assess the situation should one arise.\n\n2) Your eyes are already somewhat adjusted to ambient light if you have to evacuate following an incident\n\n3) If there is an emergency landing and the emergency lighting doesn't go on for some reason, windows may allow light into the cabin to help people see what they are doing. \n\n4) People outside, rescue services can more easily obtain a visual on what is happening inside the cabin",
"I've flown a lot, and I've never been told to open the shades.",
"I have never had this happen or seen it happen. I've landed and taken off with the shade down multiple times.",
"It's because the little sticker at the bottom of the window says to do that."
],
"score": [
28,
5,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do we have to open window shades in an airplane during landing and takeoff?
A friend asked when we were landing this morning and no one knew the answer. Not even the crew. Is it a safety issue? | [
0.10004043579101562,
0.0643543154001236,
0.011448241770267487,
0.03417309746146202,
0.07289208471775055,
0.04098203405737877,
0.1227278932929039,
-0.028326135128736496,
0.081822969019413,
0.05205415189266205,
-0.003832094604149461,
0.08714763820171356,
-0.0328541174530983,
0.03929655253887... | |
2y1jpw | Why is Every Program not Multi-Platform when Programming Languages Are? | If all the major programming languages (C,C++,Java) can all be written and compiled on all major OS's, why can't every program? If a program is written in C, why can't it just be compiled to an exe for Windows, a dmg for OSX and a tarball for Linux?
Further, even Gaming Consoles use the same basic programming languages. Why is it such a difficult and time consuming process to port a game? Why can't the source just be recompiled on the target system? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cp5cos0",
"cp5cywl",
"cp5czhz",
"cp5d6qw",
"cp5u95c",
"cp5cvbd",
"cp5chow",
"cp5qmp4"
],
"text": [
"Because there are details of how the programs written for all the various OSs work. Say you're writing a windows program. You're not going to write every last bit of code for it, you're going to use various windows APIs to access the file system, draw things in the windowing system, access the graphics system using DirectX, and the sound system. Now take that exact code, and compile it for Linux. Are the windows APIs going to work? Will they even exist on that platform? Absolutely not. To make your program work there, now you have to rewrite all of the windows specific stuff to play nicely on that platform. Now do the same thing for OS X, iOS, Android, etc. This is all work that doesn't do anything to make your program work better on Windows, or any of the basic functionality. You could be \"done\" already, and selling your software on Windows, but instead, you're spending time rewriting existing code to work on the smaller fraction of computers that aren't windows computers. Some of the bigger companies out there can afford to do this, and some can't/decide it's not worth it. So really, it's not like any program can be written, and the \"Compile for [whatever OS]\" button is pressed at all. This may work for the basic \"hello world\" command line based program, but beyond that, it doesn't work at all.",
"Although many programming languages are cross-platform, a lot of the code/libraries/APIs you use to build an application may not be cross-platform. \n\nThis is particularly the case with regard to Graphical User Interface components. The Application Programming Interface (API) calls you make on a Mac and Windows PC for building graphical interfaces are completely different, like they're really many miles apart. You can't just directly convert a native Mac graphical software interface into a Windows one or vice versa.\n\nOn top of everything else, the graphical guidelines (for what is considered acceptable or 'best practice' when building user interfaces) is very different for Mac and Windows, so even if you did essentially just copy the user interface exactly from one platform to the next, it probably wouldn't be compliant with the user interface style guidelines for at least one of the platforms.\n\nJava is a bit different though. Java has its own graphical user interface library you can use that will look just the same on a Windows or Mac computer. There are also software libraries for other languages you can use that achieve the same effect (instead of calling the native Mac/Windows API calls, you call the functions in the custom GUI library).\n\nThe problem is, as I hinted at earlier, these programs don't look like they are designed natively for the platform you're running them on. They typically don't properly follow the style guidelines of the OS and they often have a distinct look/feel that is different from other applications.\n\nAlso, it's not just Graphical User Interface libraries that are different. Tons of the underlying APIs / system calls for Mac and Windows (and Linux) will be completely different. You're still writing the software in the same language, but now you have to re-code a lot of the stuff involving system calls for the particular platform you want the program to run on. It's kind of like the difference between speaking in a British and American accent; it's still English, just a different dialect that occasionally uses different words and phrases to mean the same thing.\n\nGame consoles have the same sort of issue, although usually to a lesser extent since most of the GUI components are custom for the game (as opposed to using native Operating System graphical components). Nevertheless, there are still a lot of things that need to be changed with there again being different types of system calls / APIs available that are platform specific.",
"Operating Systems provide much needed services for programs. They provide a means of accessing the file system, communicating over a network, drawing to the screen, reading input from the keyboard, obtaining the current date and much more.\n\nDifferent Operating Systems provide different services, expose those services in different ways and make different choices. A simple example is the path separator used in the file system. On a Linux or a Mac, directories are separated by a forward slash. e.g. `/usr/bin` but On Windows, directories are separated by a backwards slash. e.g. `C:\\Users`.\n\nIn order to make a program *portable*, a compatibility layer or *library* is usually written. This provides a uniform interface to some Operating System service or functionality, but hides all of the platform differences inside.\n\nSometimes a programmer will make use of libraries that don't work across many platforms, however. For example, you may know that many games use something called DirectX. DirectX is a set of Microsoft game programming libraries, and they're specific to the Windows platform. They don't run on Linux or Mac or mobile phones natively (a compatibility layer can be inserted between the OS and DirectX, but that's a lot of work).",
"Think of a program as giving somebody directions to a restaurant in your city. Say, Chipotle.\n\nYou tell them that if they're starting from your house, they go down the road, take a left, get on the highway, take exit 42, turn right off the ramp, drive down the road, and they'll see it on the left.\n\nThese instructions *only* work for the city you live in. You can adapt them, because you know your way around town pretty well.\n\nUsing a program that's written for your \"city\" on a different platform is like trying to use those same directions to Chipotle in a different city. Different operating systems store files in different locations, under different structures. If your program is written with the expectation that the files will be there, and they're not, the whole thing collapses.",
"Ignoring hardware, you still have runtime libraries and the kernel. The OS/kernel restricts how directly a program can control the hardware, thus the program must use special runtime libraries to access the kernel APIs, which will then interact with hardware directly. These libraries are largely unique to the OS, this programs must change to work with the OS they will run on.\n\nJava abstracts this out. The Java Virtual Machine is a standard program recompiled for the OS it is running on. The JVM then provides its only level of abstraction that is consistent across platforms.",
"Because the compiler only knows how to make one.\n\nThat being said, there are some compilers that are working and being able to make all three.\n\nStencyl comes to mind\n\nMicrosoft has one upped it though with .net in that newer versions will supposedly work across different platforms since it's compiled at runtime, they just needed to work out the details of how to get it to work on osx/linux. I'm sure they could have done it years ago but for business reasons didn't.",
"There are some platform specific things that are done differently from OS to OS such as system calls, directory structure, etc. \n\nStill, by now we could have solved most of those problems by now if it were not in the interest of software companies to try and keep you locked into their platform.",
"Because the language does not include all of the libraries the program uses.\n\nThe C++ code to show a window on Linux is different from the C++ code to show a window on OSX is different from the C++ code to show a window on Windows."
],
"score": [
9,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is Every Program not Multi-Platform when Programming Languages Are?
If all the major programming languages (C,C++,Java) can all be written and compiled on all major OS's, why can't every program? If a program is written in C, why can't it just be compiled to an exe for Windows, a dmg for OSX and a tarball for Linux? Further, even Gaming Consoles use the same basic programming languages. Why is it such a difficult and time consuming process to port a game? Why can't the source just be recompiled on the target system? | [
0.02925460785627365,
-0.00785710196942091,
0.029105039313435555,
-0.07007556408643723,
0.058020107448101044,
-0.053217291831970215,
-0.06099136918783188,
0.06469642370939255,
0.08998116105794907,
0.017374401912093163,
-0.101329505443573,
-0.051969900727272034,
-0.039876386523246765,
-0.007... | |
2jk244 | Why are people so adamantly against Japanese anime dubs, particularly English, and prefer subs? | I did a search but only found a question 8 months ago asking 'why are dubs so bad?'.
While I agree that old dubs can be horrible at times, I'm not quite sure why there are so many purists out there who prefer the subs. Today's modern voiceovers seem to be a lot better, yet for every person I run into who doesn't mind an English dub, I'll run into two people who hate it them with a fiery passion, and yet only seem to be able to give the same lackluster answers when I ask why.
I don't speak Japanese, and while I'm not a slow reader, I find that when my eyes are on subtitles they're not on the frames and with this I lose immersion. Also, because I don't comprehend the language, if they're better, how am I supposed to enjoy the nuances when I don't even know what word they're saying?
Bad translations exist, sure, but from what I understand this has been mostly corrected recently by not taking as much of a creative license when translating to something to dub.
I get the 'do what you enjoy' thing, and I'm not trying to force anyone to my perspective or force myself into anyone else's. I'm just wondering why, after much improvement, people still hate anime that's in a language that they can understand. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"clcghvh",
"clci3pu",
"clcgab9",
"clcg15c",
"clcjtow",
"clcgbd4",
"clcgo3i",
"clcq5a2",
"clcgzvn",
"clcghfe"
],
"text": [
"In order to sub or dub a foreign work, you first have to translate it.\n\nIf you are making subtitles, you then just chop up the translation and set up timings so that the right bits of the translation appear at the right time (and perhaps put in some fancy typography for fun).\n\nIf you are dubbing, you then have to re-work the script even more to fit the native-language to the video. You also have to hire actors to read the script and their performances are likely going to differ from the performances from the original. More of what went into the original work is lost and transformed through the process of dubbing.\n\nHowever, a more cynical analysis will say that many of the people who enjoy imported works also enjoy some of the exclusivity their interest has. Subtitles are a barrier to wide acceptance of a work, particularly in the English-speaking world and insisting on subtitles will turn away a lot of people. Many of these fans will scoff at efforts to make these works more accessible to wider audiences such as dubbing.",
"From my own experience, dubs usually sound really cheesy. It sounds like some fanboys and fangirls got together in someone's basement and did a recording rather than hire a professional voice actor. No show in particular, just a bunch of different ones that I've heard.\n\nPlus, I enjoy the authenticity, if that's the right word, of the original voices.",
"Its the voice acting. \n\nEnglish voice acting overall has gotten better but it is no where close to the quality of Japanese voice acting. \n\nAn analogy I would do is when a blockbuster movie is compared to a B-movie. The acting of the B-movie is acceptable but when compared to a blockbuster movie the acting in the B-movie is crap.",
"Not a huge fan of the genre but I'd say it's because part of the personality is lost when you remove the original voices.",
"- Poor quality of English voice acting. All too often, the English VA's sound like they're reading from a script.\n\n- Dubs usually take some time to come out. If you want to watch a new show right away, then subs are often the only way to go.\n\n > while I'm not a slow reader, I find that when my eyes are on subtitles they're not on the frames and with this I lose immersion\n\nI don't find this happens with me. I read the subs so quickly that I can still focus on the action and I barely notice the characters aren't actually saying what's in the subs. Maybe it's different from person to person.",
"If the voice of Aladdin had been Dave Chapelle, it wouldn't be the same movie. A casting choice can really make or break a film.",
"It's the same as when movies are dubbed in different languages...\nUsually the voices don't match the character or the emotion. In some other instances the timeframe on which the animation \"talks\", isn't long enough to finish a worthy translation (Japanese is compactable, you can say \"I want to eat\" with 1 word in Japanese \"Tabetai\").",
"I live in Japan and speak Japanese. I've switched to the dub of some of my DVD's and the results were cringeworthy. The acting was terrible. The voices didn't match the characters. Often the translations they chose didn't match the original sentiment, imho. It works the same way when foreign movies (mostly animation) are brought over here and dubbed into Japanese. Frozen was oh so bad when dubbed.\n \nBut your question is why some people are adamantly pro/con. \n \nAs an American I can say with confidence that American's are too lazy to read a movie -- and that is partly because our market is so large that artists are willing to change their work to enter it. That pisses off a lot of people who consider that selling out. Myself not included. \n \nPersonally, as a consumer, I'd prefer the option for dubbing and subtitles. I would never use the dub but it's the best way to please both groups while increasing the distribution of any given work.",
"I don't know the language either, but after watching a lot of subbed animes, I feel like I totally pick up on the nuances. I've even started to learn a few words. I think after watching subs for so long, I'm used to it, and the few dubs I tried to watch sucked, so I don't even bother anymore. Even if it was a good dub, I would rather watch subs. I'll save the english speaking stuff for when I watch a Pixar movie or something.",
"Has a lot to do with localization and of course voice quality, a lot of wordings, jokes, foods, places, etc. have their names and meanings changed to make more sense to a western audience in turn losing their original meaning from the original publisher. \nA classic, but far from perfect example of this [imgur](_URL_0_). That's a rice ball, not a doughnut."
],
"score": [
12,
9,
7,
7,
5,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://imgur.com/GfbvzZU"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why are people so adamantly against Japanese anime dubs, particularly English, and prefer subs?
I did a search but only found a question 8 months ago asking 'why are dubs so bad?'. While I agree that old dubs can be horrible at times, I'm not quite sure why there are so many purists out there who prefer the subs. Today's modern voiceovers seem to be a lot better, yet for every person I run into who doesn't mind an English dub, I'll run into two people who hate it them with a fiery passion, and yet only seem to be able to give the same lackluster answers when I ask why. I don't speak Japanese, and while I'm not a slow reader, I find that when my eyes are on subtitles they're not on the frames and with this I lose immersion. Also, because I don't comprehend the language, if they're better, how am I supposed to enjoy the nuances when I don't even know what word they're saying? Bad translations exist, sure, but from what I understand this has been mostly corrected recently by not taking as much of a creative license when translating to something to dub. I get the 'do what you enjoy' thing, and I'm not trying to force anyone to my perspective or force myself into anyone else's. I'm just wondering why, after much improvement, people still hate anime that's in a language that they can understand. | [
0.019766075536608696,
-0.12069601565599442,
0.07990849018096924,
-0.03293200209736824,
0.022890642285346985,
0.03151434287428856,
0.04100935533642769,
0.08599528670310974,
0.0657138004899025,
-0.06289015710353851,
-0.06236196309328079,
-0.036605268716812134,
-0.00048115476965904236,
-0.002... | |
15wfk1 | What would happen if everyone took all of their money out of a bank simultaneously. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c7qf51y"
],
"text": [
"[It's called a bank run](_URL_0_). And basically, the bank would have to borrow more from somewhere else, like another bank or from [the federal funds](_URL_1_). Banks don't just let your money sit in a vault; they take it and invest it, or loan it out to people so that the money grows. So they don't have enough cash on hand to give everyone their money, which is why they would need to borrow it in the short term."
],
"score": [
7
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_run",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_funds"
]
} | train_eli5 | What would happen if everyone took all of their money out of a bank simultaneously.
| [
-0.011915653012692928,
0.013098579831421375,
-0.06802511215209961,
-0.02945094183087349,
-0.046485770493745804,
-0.08306250721216202,
0.036318209022283554,
-0.016428638249635696,
0.015242598950862885,
0.014903363771736622,
0.08783557265996933,
0.08321574330329895,
0.02770410105586052,
-0.0... | ||
3bk6jl | Why are most studio albums between 40-50 minutes long? Is thay an industry standard? | Just a shower thought I've been thinking about. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"csmvfxm",
"csn29y7"
],
"text": [
"I think it's probably mostly tradition.\n\nThe LP has a maximum playing time of 45 minutes.\n_URL_0_\n\nThe CD has a maximum playing time of 74 minutes.\n\nSo it makes sense that most studio albums would be within those ranges. But since vinyl is making a comeback, it would make sense for albums to be in that length.",
"For most analogue recoding mediums, it is a good medium between maximum length and best quality. There is also the optimum song length for radio (4-min) to think about, as well as the length of an album - US record contracts usually state that an album is 10-songs, and you will only be paid for 10... put 15-songs on, you will still only be paid for 10. \n\n10 songs, 4-min a song = 40 minutes as an optimum length. \n\nThe last 10-years has seen a greater acceptance in longer songs for the radio, so we are seeing longer albums come out of the U.S. with \"bonus tracks\" being added to special buys."
],
"score": [
6,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LP_record#Playing_time"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why are most studio albums between 40-50 minutes long? Is thay an industry standard?
Just a shower thought I've been thinking about. | [
0.05119800940155983,
-0.019129907712340355,
0.08543597161769867,
-0.038546472787857056,
-0.0032145967707037926,
0.0682951956987381,
-0.0962766781449318,
-0.017196575179696083,
0.09935977309942245,
-0.021404001861810684,
-0.035070762038230896,
0.08347562700510025,
-0.008340857923030853,
-0.... | |
75xo7r | How do testicles make sperm? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"do9or46"
],
"text": [
"[This diagram can show what I'm talking about better than I can explain it, but I'll give a super basic answer](_URL_0_)\n\nBasically, your testicles contain stem cells, which can continuously divide to produce sperm. The stem cell divides, and one of the two new cells is activated to become a sperm, while the other one stays. \n\nFrom there, this little baby sperm goes on a journey through various parts of the testicle and associated tubing, where it slowly grows into a mature sperm cell and gets put in storage until it's eventually called to action."
],
"score": [
14
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/49/135449-004-F2AB0A3F.jpg"
]
} | train_eli5 | How do testicles make sperm?
| [
-0.022702988237142563,
-0.00012365910515654832,
-0.07700800895690918,
-0.006658417638391256,
-0.05408120155334473,
-0.0507228747010231,
0.09693785011768341,
0.0005209539667703211,
-0.010483136400580406,
0.09225298464298248,
0.045171309262514114,
-0.008529777638614178,
-0.027369970455765724,
... | ||
jf8yg | The "Greedo Shot First" Controversy | I think this has been around for a while, but I'm not sure what this whole thing is about. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c2bltqz"
],
"text": [
"There's a scene in the first Star Wars (A New Hope, episode IV) where Greedo, a bounty hunter, tracks down Han, who has a price on his head. In the original version, Han shoots Greedo first, which establishes him as kind of a badass. In the special edition released in the 90s, George Lucas felt the need to change it so that Greedo shoots first, misses, and Han shoots and kills him in return. Other than changing the effect the scene had on Han's character development, it doesn't make much sense - they're literally across the table from each other, so it's hard to believe Greedo would miss. It's also sort of a symbol of all of the changes that Lucas made in the special edition, that either didn't add much, or made the movie worse."
],
"score": [
9
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The "Greedo Shot First" Controversy
I think this has been around for a while, but I'm not sure what this whole thing is about. | [
-0.08965398371219635,
0.06272394955158234,
-0.06368748098611832,
-0.008655697107315063,
0.06676632910966873,
0.029288727790117264,
0.0039904117584228516,
0.07348205149173737,
-0.06650230288505554,
0.051365382969379425,
-0.0019201376708224416,
0.12966454029083252,
-0.0363590382039547,
0.003... | |
1lvezd | Why is it that after I exercise parts of my body (namely the fat parts, i.e. stomach/butt) are noticeably colder than the other parts of my body? | Why is it that after I exercise parts of my body (namely the fat parts, i.e. stomach/butt) are noticeably colder than the other parts of my body? I know someone on here as a good explanation. And sorry if it's been explained before but I am curious! | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cc34ipj"
],
"text": [
"Blood is being directed more to your muscles, but your whole body is sweating. So the fat parts are being actively cooled by evaporation, but not heated as much by blood circulation."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is it that after I exercise parts of my body (namely the fat parts, i.e. stomach/butt) are noticeably colder than the other parts of my body?
Why is it that after I exercise parts of my body (namely the fat parts, i.e. stomach/butt) are noticeably colder than the other parts of my body? I know someone on here as a good explanation. And sorry if it's been explained before but I am curious! | [
0.05993812903761864,
-0.07492267340421677,
0.007021896541118622,
0.08980201184749603,
-0.037855491042137146,
-0.00948726199567318,
0.02304213121533394,
-0.03067753277719021,
0.08969693630933762,
0.0027843425050377846,
-0.0677613765001297,
0.04622751474380493,
0.07704613357782364,
-0.018155... | |
p2kqs | basic computers. How can circuitry help us do math? | I don't mean the complex computers we all use today. I'm talking about basic computing. how does it work? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c3m2mpi",
"c3lz8ba"
],
"text": [
"[This](_URL_0_) video of basic mechanic binary calculator may help. Understanding of binary numbers is not required, but helps.",
"there is no simple 5yr old answer to this question, even in its most basic form it requires knowledge of transistors."
],
"score": [
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcDshWmhF4A"
]
} | train_eli5 | basic computers. How can circuitry help us do math?
I don't mean the complex computers we all use today. I'm talking about basic computing. how does it work? | [
0.017931070178747177,
0.019173571839928627,
-0.014176559634506702,
-0.04323749244213104,
-0.1042945608496666,
-0.07208140194416046,
-0.01680627651512623,
0.04549633339047432,
0.0299384668469429,
0.06231919676065445,
-0.01786801964044571,
0.00876365602016449,
0.05687304958701134,
0.03542841... | |
24juxz | How do some people become the mod of dozens of subreddits? | This goes along with the drama over at /r/technology How can users like /u/qgyh2 who mods 126 subreddits and /u/anutensil (94) become the moderator of so many sub reddits. How can they be expected to do any mod work when they have so many responsibilities? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ch7tuya"
],
"text": [
"You'd have to ask the people who made the decision to add them, we don't know. The thought process for each individual mod invite was probably different.\n\nI'm not sure but it's also possible that they did stuff like CSS work. There are some people who do design and CSS stuff for lots of subreddits so they have mod powers, but they don't actually moderate much. We had /u/gavin19 on our staff here for a while while he helped us out with some stuff, for example, and we could have left him on if we wanted even though he never did any moddy work."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do some people become the mod of dozens of subreddits?
This goes along with the drama over at /r/technology How can users like /u/qgyh2 who mods 126 subreddits and /u/anutensil (94) become the moderator of so many sub reddits. How can they be expected to do any mod work when they have so many responsibilities? | [
-0.049934856593608856,
-0.05853581055998802,
0.012833218090236187,
-0.028123334050178528,
-0.014582892879843712,
-0.07208045572042465,
0.07377243041992188,
0.0210399329662323,
-0.029456840828061104,
-0.03819805756211281,
-0.03076198324561119,
0.0038318252190947533,
0.06774668395519257,
-0.... | |
2es3iu | Why is Russia now invading Ukraine? What are the economic and political advantages of this despite clear outcry from the international community? | _URL_0_
Just read this article. I understand the military advantages of taking over Crimea, but taking a big chunk of Eastern Ukraine just doesn't make sense. Wont this start wars? Will NATO do anything? UN? Or not because of a fear of WWIII? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ck2jrkj",
"ck2ek56",
"ck2ihxh",
"ck2gqx0",
"ck2hr9l",
"ck2ks4s",
"ck2esfh",
"ck2l3au"
],
"text": [
"Long post:\n\nNot everyone was happy that the USSR broke up, Putin among them. He was a KGB agent, which is important because there was a certain way people in government in the USSR were expected to think and act. Words like \"Facist\" there often meant \"Non-state sanctioned communism.\" You'll hear Putin and state news there calling the Ukranians \"Nazis,\" which now just means \"actual fascists who we hate.\" It's also worth noting that they had similar levels of paranoia during the cold war over there. They loooooved conspiracy theories, and didn't have a lot of trouble entertaining several conflicting ones at once.\n\nIt's important to understand Putin's background because Russia is capitalist, but is also an oligarchy. There are a handful of people with political power, many of them through the natural gas industry.\n\nUkraine has one of the major natural gas pipelines to the rest of the EU running through it. Several of the Ukraine's political players have something to do with natural gas. Some of them benefit from Russia's involvement, some do not. You can't boil it down to JUST \"these politicians' interests align with Russia,\" and \"these don't,\" but a lot of them do break down along those lines.\n\nUkraine was broken off of Russia many years ago, and it was a satellite state of the USSR. The USSR didn't benefit from running every country it influenced directly, so it had client states that it essentially controlled. Think of when a company hires contractors. They produce things you need for cheap, or they buy things you make for more than if you had one unified economy.\n\nUkraine *was* a major food producer. It's not so much anymore. Natural gas is the big deal.\n\nYounger people in Ukraine generally like the idea of being more aligned with the EU, as do people in the west. Older people and people in the East generally prefer Russia. The EU is a bit more modern and economically vibrant. Russia frankly has less to offer them, so Ukraine has been drifting that way for a long time. But because Russia's most lucrative export is going through Ukraine to the EU, Russia would REALLY prefer to be more influential in the Ukraine than the EU is. The EU wants to say on Russia's good side (since they NEED the natural gas), but TBH, they need the natural gas so they'd love to be a little more powerful in order to negotiate.\n\nUnlike in America, which considers citizens citizens because we declare ourselves American, that part of the world has a strong cultural citizenship identification. You can be Russian because you're from Russia, or because you're ethnically Russian. There are a lot of ethnic Russians in Ukraine.\n\nI am a little fuzzy on the people and parties in Ukraine. Broadly, the Ukraine previously had a pro-Russian regime in place, and has drifted toward less and less democratic regimes for some time. Specifically, jailing a lot of dissenting politicians. Younger people and people in western Ukraine had been increasingly unhappy with this, and revolted. I have no idea who is actually more popular. A lot of the unrest had more to do with the fact that, no matter what, the pro-Russians weren't ever going to let pro-EU politicians have any power despite what any election would say.\n\nSo people revolt. Rebels form a new government (that means something a little different in a parliamentary system, a \"new government\" is formed any time a new party, PM, and cabinet are installed, the bureaucracy remains intact). Old PM flees. Putin invades Crimea. EU and US put sanctions on the oligarchs in Russia, EU makes slightly dissatisfied noises. Putin stops for a little.\n\nIt's hard to know how serious Putin is, but he's said a lot of things about Nazis and fascists, and has cut off food imports of certain things (which is kind of bad because Russian food's really expensive; it hurts the EU more than the US definitely, but Russia probably hurts the most). I don't think he's a super genius. I think he thinks he should have won the cold war. I think he and a lot of Russians would like to be a super power, in the same way a lot of nationalist countries have reacted to defeat. He's kind of in a double bind. Whatever he does to \"hurt\" anyone else tends to hurt him just as much or more. The EU is now really annoyed with him and willing to go through *a little* hurt to spite Russia, which is not what he wanted. Crimea by itself really sucks, because all the roads from there to Russia go through the Ukraine.\n\nPutin's main advantage is he's REALLY willing to hurt Russia more than other countries are willing to get hurt as long as it's patriotic. I don't think they're thinking much about how it'll practically advance them. That's about it.\n\nIt's hard to overstate how much the EU does NOT want to go to war with anyone ever again at this point. WWI and II were horrific. Russia's certainly more willing (and eager) to go to war than the EU is willing to go to war to stop them.\n\nAnyway, yes, Putin's not really making a lot of sense if you just look at it from \"why would you want that land?\" point of view. It makes a little more sense if you know a little bit about what's involved (controlling natural gas, nationalism, and a whole lot of USSR-era paranoia).",
"The Ukraine was the USSR's second largest economic area, behind Russia itself, and was a major industry center: vehicles (ground, air, and spacefaring), military equipment and small arms, and a decent amount of crop production. If Russia annexed it, it would again enjoy these benefits and boost its own economy. \n\nBasically, Russia wants to start a new USSR.",
"No one on Reddit ever brings up that eastern Ukraine and Crimea were both parts of the Russian empire given to Ukraine for administrative purposes by the USSR (which was believe it or not ruled by many non Russians). New Russia (as eastern Ukraine was called) was not a part of Ukraine. Its not a coincidence that Russians are in Ukraine. Its because Russia was put into Ukraine. Recently Russia feels strong enough to get these territories back. So its going to. Simple as that. There are advantages to this but I doubt that they come before nationalism.",
"Much of Russian history consists of European rulers invading Russia from the west and getting ruined by the Russian winter, but not before doing tremendous damage to Russia. As a result, Russia is positively paranoid about getting invaded and is absolutely convinced that it needs a buffer zone for its own security.",
"As for why Putin is not afraid, it's because Russia is a nuclear armed nation. It's generally agreed that nuclear armed countries don't go to war with each other, for the sake of all mankind. The point of nuclear arms in today's world is to prevent yourself from being invaded. This kind of \"gentleman's agreement\" between nuclear nations to not attack each other effectively gives Putin immunity from serious reactions by the west, aside from economic sanctions, which Russia can survive, having such great resources, and will end up forming solidarity amongst the Russian people against the West, which is exactly what Putin wants. .",
"Crimea wasn't the first time in recent years Russia had occupied former Soviet Union regions with high Russian populations. Since the Russo-Georgian War in 2008, the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia have been under Russian military occupation. Russia is clearly trying to expand its sphere of influence and try to regain the standing it had during the days of the USSR. Since the pro-Russian government in Ukraine was ousted and replaced with a government that supported closer ties and maybe even integration with NATO and the EU, Russia has lost a lot of the influence it had over Ukraine.\n\nThe US and NATO would be very reluctant to go to Russia over Ukraine. Ukraine is not a NATO member, and sending troops to Ukraine would be a very unpopular decision in any country. War is not in the interest of any nation involved, especially because both NATO and Russia have, along with nuclear weapons, huge militaries. If NATO got involved and things escalated, the consequences would be unpopular at best and catastrophic at worst.\n\nAs for the UN: Pretty much anything binding, like sanctions or military action, has to go through the Security Council. As one of the five permanent members (along with the US, UK, France, and China), Russia has veto power. The only binding thing that can be done without the Security Council is the amending of UN procedures and the UN Charter. However, there is an entrenched clause in the Charter that prevents permanent permanent Security Council members from being deprived of their veto right, even by Charter amendment. And the Security Council must approve any expulsions, so Russia could not even be expelled from the UN without their own consent.\n\nLikely, all that will happen is more sanctions from Western countries. However, the US accounts for only a very small portion of Russia's trade, and European states can't impose enough sanctions to seriously damage Russia's economy without damaging their own economies. And while serious sanctions could damage Russia's economy, they will also isolate Russia even more from the West, which means will lessen the amount of influence the West are able to exert on Russia.\n\nTL;DR: Russia is trying to maintain/establish its sphere of influence in the former Soviet states. If it wants to, Russia can invade Ukraine without worrying about serious international consequences other than sanctions.",
"As previously mentioned, it is true that Russia is attempting to reform the evil empire. Look at the Eurasian Economic Union, an EU-style supranational organization of former Soviet states, headed of course by Russia.\n\nHowever, another important part of the Crimean Peninsula are the offshore drilling sites off its coast. Because international law sets the area 12 nautical miles off the coast as part of a country's sovereign territorial waters, Russian possession of Crimea grants them an ostensible claim to the extensive and lucrative drilling sites in the Black Sea.",
"Just to be clear, Russia has not invaded Ukraine yet and it doesn't look like it's gonna happen anytime soon.\n\nOne must also understand that the whole conflict is not something that just happened overnight. The new Ukraine has spent 20 years trying to \"ukrainize\" the eastern parts of the country. And at some point people got fed up and things turned violent."
],
"score": [
16,
15,
10,
8,
5,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/world/europe/ukraine-russia-novoazovsk-crimea.html"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is Russia now invading Ukraine? What are the economic and political advantages of this despite clear outcry from the international community?
_URL_0_ Just read this article. I understand the military advantages of taking over Crimea, but taking a big chunk of Eastern Ukraine just doesn't make sense. Wont this start wars? Will NATO do anything? UN? Or not because of a fear of WWIII? | [
-0.06335596740245819,
0.03492926433682442,
0.050758007913827896,
-0.021098274737596512,
-0.029301615431904793,
-0.01017110887914896,
0.04096969962120056,
-0.05022209510207176,
0.018994970247149467,
-0.020781559869647026,
-0.1327863335609436,
0.09897352010011673,
-0.008290113881230354,
0.08... | |
5vblhu | car guys, what's the draw to e85 gas? | Is it really beneficial to performance gains? Is it only worth it with a tuned car or would something that is stock still see the same results? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"de0u4c2"
],
"text": [
"In a performance application the benefit comes from it's octane rating. Most e85 is between 100 and 105 octane, quite a bit higher than premiun fuel. The downside is that it can eat up fuel system components thay are not designed to handle it.\n\nA higher octane fuel is more resistant to pre-ignition so more agressive tuning is possible. For example, I had a little VW that I put a VR6 and turbocharger on. Using premium fuel (93 octane) I could only run 23 degrees of ignition advance and it made roughly 340hp. I had a separate fuel map for track days and 115 octane fuel that made 412hp because I could increase my ignition advance to 34 degrees.\n\nThe thing to consider with e85 is that the density, as Numbbskull mentioned, is lower. This means you may need larger injectors depending on application. Most stock cars have injectors sized just big enough for full throttle to make it easier to tune a nice smooth idle at all temperatures."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | car guys, what's the draw to e85 gas?
Is it really beneficial to performance gains? Is it only worth it with a tuned car or would something that is stock still see the same results? | [
-0.042906373739242554,
0.11847929656505585,
-0.022501265630126,
0.009755028411746025,
-0.0043647498823702335,
0.03520819917321205,
0.04947590455412865,
0.09542494267225266,
-0.03207306191325188,
-0.047725655138492584,
-0.05985561013221741,
0.0636952593922615,
-0.028924420475959778,
-0.0530... | |
5e6yni | Why has the USA's Money Supply (M0) increased so much since 2008? | Here is a historical chart of our M0 assets: _URL_0_
This seems like extreme inflation, am I wrong?
What exactly is going on here? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"daao53x"
],
"text": [
"M0 is the measure of monetary reserves, which the Fed creates when it makes asset purchases. The increase is mostly due to it's large scale asset purchases, ie. quantitative easing. \n \nGrowth of M2, or broad money, has been much more subdued as shown [here](_URL_2_). Also the velocity of M2 - ie. the rate at which it changes hands, has dropped significantly, shown [here](_URL_1_).\n \nIt's important to realize that the term inflation got it's reputation at a time when it was believed the amount of money in circulation was directly proportional to prices, something called Quantity Theory of Money. That is, if you inflate the supply of money, prices go up accordingly. Or simply inflation = rising prices. But after many decades of observation we know that this is not the case, and there are many other factors at play. Here is the negligible [price inflation](_URL_0_) that occurred at the same time M0 was increasing drastically.\n \ntl;dr - monetary inflation =/= price inflation"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user196978/imageroot/2016/05/19/monetarybase_fredgraphjuly13.png"
]
} | {
"url": [
"https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FPCPITOTLZGUSA",
"https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2V",
"https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why has the USA's Money Supply (M0) increased so much since 2008?
Here is a historical chart of our M0 assets: _URL_0_ This seems like extreme inflation, am I wrong? What exactly is going on here? | [
0.002646396169438958,
-0.07856384664773941,
-0.004645803943276405,
0.043503664433956146,
0.004973328206688166,
-0.008962038904428482,
-0.02081633172929287,
0.022487802430987358,
-0.04019475355744362,
0.045526131987571716,
0.01896258257329464,
0.03411358594894409,
0.023643597960472107,
0.02... | |
2yxdlx | Why do I see things move slower and in a higher frame rate on the edge of my visual field than in the center? | I noticed it at work while rotating a metal pole. When i looked directly at it I was unable to see the structures moving, but when I looked beside it I saw it moving way slower and sharper. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cpdtvru",
"cpdtfcr"
],
"text": [
"The two major types of light-detecting cells in your eye are known as cones and rods. Their distribution from the center of the eye can be seen here: _URL_0_\n\nCones are the color sensing cells concentrated in the center of our vision. Because they are packed so tightly, they allow us to distinguish very fine details when we look straight at them. This is known as having high spatial resolution. However, cones require more light than rods to function so they don't work well in low light environments.\n\nRods generally detect only brightness and are concentrated away from the center of your vision. Rods are extremely sensitive to light so that any change in light intensity, say from a fast moving object in the side of your vision, will cause a response. This makes rods more sensitive in time to light changes which means they have better temporal resolution than cones. In low light conditions, only your rods are functioning which is why things look desaturated or even black and white in low light conditions.",
"The peripherals are designed to be good at detecting movement. Its some evolutionary thing for noting predators sneaking up on you. Something to do with the density of cone and rod cells."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/imgvis/rcdist.gif"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do I see things move slower and in a higher frame rate on the edge of my visual field than in the center?
I noticed it at work while rotating a metal pole. When i looked directly at it I was unable to see the structures moving, but when I looked beside it I saw it moving way slower and sharper. | [
0.0749712660908699,
-0.09001129865646362,
-0.0196211114525795,
-0.05454593896865845,
0.09455876052379608,
-0.05053313449025154,
-0.01713152602314949,
0.00893466453999281,
0.14083385467529297,
-0.01916668191552162,
-0.0065193939954042435,
0.02725488878786564,
-0.08485070616006851,
-0.002003... | |
6ca2a9 | How do DJs give live concerts if all of their sounds are digitally created and recorded? Seems to me they could just hit the play button, which would defeat the purpose of a live performance. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dht4ao9",
"dhtby8s",
"dhtavnt",
"dhta1wd",
"dhtis1n",
"dhtjrzk",
"dhtdoam",
"dhted0t",
"dhtdmsq",
"dhtkcfz",
"dhtcbmh",
"dhtfgi2",
"dhtccdn",
"dhtkjbc",
"dhtz6bl",
"dhtepqh",
"dhu79c5",
"dhtdg7l",
"dhtiwdd",
"dhtbb96",
"dhtg1lt",
"dhtegvd",
"dhthxxw",
"dhtbuy3",
"dhtcsib",
"dht5zfy",
"dhtbzli",
"dhtjyzj",
"dhtvjx0",
"dhtr5tt",
"dhtmdic",
"dhtw38n",
"dhu7feg",
"dhtzzoq",
"dhtmbq0",
"dhtpk91",
"dhtxnh1",
"dhtgbzi",
"dhu0b5a",
"dhuc1z7",
"dhtlp4j",
"dhtph9u",
"dhtrin7",
"dhtg8nx",
"dhtv3re",
"dhtgpvq",
"dhtne0n",
"dhthchz",
"dhteex2",
"dhtza7w",
"dhtb69r",
"dhtj26m",
"dhtztrz",
"dhtd2p8",
"dhtpjm7",
"dhtu0dq",
"dhttyr3"
],
"text": [
"Haven't seen a legit answer yet so I'll give it a shot.\n\nYou are right in that many DJs perform by 'hitting the play button'. However, there are several other methods to perform live as a DJ as well. \n\nUsing Ableton in [performance mode](_URL_0_), is a popular choice for many DJs and allows you to manipulate which tracks play in real time. For example, the DJ might have isolated vocal mixes and isolated pre-made backing tracks (these isolated tracks are called *stems*) and might mix and match them to create music in real time. \n\nAnother alternative is to play parts on a synthesizer and sampler/drum machine live and record them into a step sequencing machine, which loops the patterns, allowing you to manipulate the sounds on the synthesizer(s) and add layers to the song, a technique demonstrated [here](_URL_3_). \n\nAnother option is to use a DJ deck in order to mix and match backing tracks and vocals or other instruments, allowing you to create unique mash ups. [Here is an example of this method in action](_URL_2_). \n\n\n**TLDR** There are different styles of performing electronic music live and it's entirely dependent on the DJ for whether they want to 'hit the play button' or not. \n\n\n[Here](_URL_1_) is an interesting article about performing electronic music, with some comments from Deadmau5.",
"The vast majority of EDM DJ's use the Pioneer CDJs and mixer that are at the venue – they are essentially digital turntables.\n\nBefore a gig, a DJ uses Pioneer's Rekordbox software to analyze all their tracks to get the tempo, key, and cue points they may have set, and then they typically export their set (playlist) onto a USB flash drive. When it's time for the show, they plug the USB into the CDJ/mixer setup, and then they can instantly access all of their music; the equipment allows them to do things like change tempo, sync tracks, apply turntables FX (vinyl stops, etc.), mixer FX (delays, reverbs, etc.), and even beat juggle and scratch if they want to/can.\n\nThe advantage of this system is that you: don't need to bring your expensive computer into the booth where it's liable to get stomped on, have drinks spilled on it, or even stolen; there is very little chance of having a software issue – e.g. the computer operating system crashing; if you lose the USB, you can just create a new one; you can store an absurd amount of music – more than any vinyl-vased DJ ever could – on a single USB; and, lastly, when you don't have a computer screen in your face, you can connect with the audience a lot more easily – nothing is less appealing to a crowd than seeing someone up on stage with that glaring white light splashed across their face while they scroll through songs or their email or Twitter feed (yes, this happens 🙄).\n\nI have met DJs, famous and not famous, who use Ableton to DJ, or just push play; if that's how they want to do things, well, no one is going to stop them, but I, personally, love mixing tracks live without a pre-arranged set. It is just like playing an instrument, and it allows for all sorts of awesome, happy accidents to occur; also, if the crowd isn't feeling a track, it gives you the flexibility to mix out quickly and switch up the vibe. Lastly, it's just more fun; mixing live is challenging, and I would be bored to tears if I were just standing up there while the music played.\n\nI hope that helps! I started on piano when I was 4, and I dropped out of med school to pursue music. I have been Producing/DJing since 2012, and I have played at EDC Las Vegas, Life in Color, Beyond Wonderland, Trapfest, Freaknight, What the Festival?!, Foam Wonderland, and I have been direct support for people like Datsik, Flux Pavilion, Dillon Francis, Antiserum & Mayhem, Blasterjaxx, Herobust, Wuki, Loudpvck, Gladiator, Riff Raff, Lil Debbie, Brillz, Milo & Otis, TJR, 12th Planet, and a bunch of other folks.\n\nI'm happy to answer any other questions regarding behind-the-scenes DJ/Producer stuff; I've seen so much bullshit backstage and at after parties, and it's really obvious who makes their own music and who doesn't, and who knows how to DJ and who doesn't.\n\nThe best DJ I have ever seen, still, to this day, is DJ Craze. He is unreal, and I am thankful I got to peek over his shoulder at a sold out show. Mind = blown.",
"DJ here. When it comes to DJs with ACTUAL talent (and there are a lot of hacks in the industry doing the above), it's about using technique (mixing, cutting, scratching) to create one large music piece out of many other music pieces, as well as creating entirely new pieces of music out of elements of others (mash ups). For example, for a show tonight, im doing a live mash up of an Odesza track with the vocals of \"black hole sun.\" I do it live, so i use the decks to manipulate the vocals (using cue points and controlling the speed) and layer it over the track in a coherent and believa ble fashion. this live mashup is then mixed in from another track, and mixed out into the other track seamlessly. Coupled with everything else, the point is to tell a story live to the listener that blends and moves seamlessly as if one piece.",
"The skill in DJing comes from making two already existing songs blend together so that you don't notice where one ends and the next begins. You need to match the tempo, phrases, and work the EQ so that it doesn't sound like a mess.\n\nYou also pick songs based on crowd reaction and atmosphere. Most festival DJs don't do this though - they roll up with a predetermined playlist. Any DJ worth their salt should play with little preparation. Just arrive, feel out the vibe, and go from there.",
"I used to work in a mega club, so I feel like I should chime in something. The top comment right now, is right to a certain extent. There is a degree of deconstructing and reconstructing going on. Though a large majority of the time, it is not happening live. A lot of EDM and Dubstep dj's would love to have you believe they're manipulating all this wildness in real-time, but it just isn't happening. \n\nMy job was L2, which basically means, I was the back-up lighting guy. I would fix a light if it started to wig out, swap a light out entirely if needed, refill foggers and gazers, operate lights when the main LD wants a break. Many times, I would find myself on stage teching a light next to the dj. Generally, after I would fix them, I would hang low and out of sight for a minute or two behind the dj to make sure it was working fine. \n\nSometimes while doing this, I would look at what the dj was doing... if you saw two tracks playing at the same time in Serato or Traktor, you knew he was mixing. Although, most, if not all use Auto-Sync these days. Their reasoning is that it sets them up to do more \"performance\" oriented stuff like a filter sweep. Other times, if you only saw one track playing and the wave form barely moved at all, then you knew that they're just hitting play on a pre-mixed set at home and twiddling knobs to empty channels. I've seen amateurs do this, and I've seen the highest paid \"professionals\" do this.. My problem with this is, we (the club) are paying you 75,000$ for 3 hours, and you come in with a premixed set and fake everything. On the flip side to that, if you come in with a premixed set but have a video guy and lighting guy that know that set by heart and have content made for it, then that premixed set can be a REALLY awesome experience... Most notably, Paul Van Dyke and Excision.\n\nWhen I worked there, the idea of premixed sets pissed me off to no end. It jaded me a lot on dj culture and the entire idea of what djs do. But, now that I'm older, I've just learned to ignore and try to have a good time.",
"So I know I'm late to this post but I hope some people that have the same question as you, see this. There are plenty of \"press play\" DJs that are more about the spectacle than the music (think Steve Aoki with his cake throwing and crowd innertubing), but there are lots who either still use vinyl or do the equivalent of live mixing, just with digital files instead of records.\n\nBut there's a new wave of DJs really trying to step things up and change the game. I'm biased but one of my favorites is Derek Vincent Smith, aka Pretty Lights. He started as a live mixing digital DJ but with a twist, he had a live drummer (Adam Deitsch) for the first few years. He went solo for a while but became bored and really stepped things up.\n\nHere's where the Analog Future band comes in. Derek mixing in the middle, occasionally playing some bass or other instruments. Keyboard. Horn sections. Guitar. All with a crazy light show and being mixed. _URL_4_\n\nNow he's doing something even crazier... On recent tours he's doing an \"Episodic Festival\" thing and they have improvisational breaks thrown in, even the mixing. \n\nBeyond all that he started the Pretty Lights Music label that has brought us some of the best contemprary names in the game... Gramatik, Michal Menert, Break Science. \n\nDerek is a goddamned musical genius and I fucking hate that Pretty Lights never gets the credit he deserves. Check out some of the Analog Future and Episodic Festival gigs and tell me he isn't singlehandedly changing the game right now.",
"There's a pretty big difference between a DJ and what we (European underground electronic music scene) call a live performance.\n\nFirst off, a DJ plays records, cd's or any other music format on 2 or more cd players and / or turntables. He uses a mixer to mix the records together and to create fluent transitions from one track to the next.\n\nA live performance is an artist (who sometimes might also DJ on other occasions) who will use hardware (drumcomputer, synthesizers, sequencers and effects) to create a set. The tracks the artist plays are usually his / her own productions, remixes or edits and sometimes it's purely improv. As mentioned elsewhere; a laptop with Ableton or a simmilar software will do the same thing, but replaces most of the electronic instruments with samples (sounds) that are in the laptop instead of being produced by the hardware.\n\nWhat David Guetta / almost all other EDM 'dj's' do, is not real DJ-ing. They are popstars, they put on a show for massive crowds which take a lot of effort to put together (video, lights, pyro). Due to all these things, they don't have the freedom to really experiment or improvise. They hit play and jump around, clap their hands and drink champagne. They do not DJ!",
"I'll give this a try.\n\nSo there are varying degrees of difficulty that a DJ or electronic music producer can put in front of them. Some are simply DJs, people who play tracks produced either by themselves or from other artists. DJs rely on crowd energy levels, type of gig, time of day, locale, and even mood. The idea is to mix various tracks together to create a single piece of constant music without losing the energy they've created. It takes time. You learn to cultivate your music selection. You listen to each track dozens of times and attempt to mix these tracks seamlessly from one to the other without making it obvious (some exceptions, but for the most part, acccurate). DJs will often only play for about an hour or hour and half. They typically play one DJ after another in a given night.\n\nHere's some examples of DJs:\n\nThis is Andy C. He's using a hybrid of analog turntables with digital functionality to manipulate tracks in real time. In this video, he's using three turntables and a mixer. Notice he's constantly monitoring his levels, EQ, filter and pitch control on the decks. He's also got a small controller in front of his mixer that has macros/shortcuts to load tracks.\n\nHe's not trying to play to a crowd here, he's just performing in a small window of time to show off his skills.\n\n[Andy C on Annie Mac's Radio Show, Mini Mix](_URL_5_)\n\nHere's another video of a DJ performing with almost the same type of equipment. He's using CDJ turntables. These allow someone to plug in a USB memory stick with tracks loaded onto them. The equivalent or bringing a crate of records to a gig (without the added weight of course). He's playing to a small crowd of people in front of him. They're most likely dancing and he's feeding off the energy they give to play the tracks in a cohesive order based on feeling. It's hard to explain, but it's not exactly random. It's not exactly pre chosen either. He's playing first in a gig for three other DJs that will come on after him.\n\n[Lenzman, MixMag DJ Lab. With Jubei B2B Ulterior Motive](_URL_6_)",
"there's a difference between DJing and Live PAs.\n\nDJing, at its simplest, is the playing of a record. you're right, at its core, there's little performance involved. however most DJs mix- that's the non-stop transition of one song into the next. this takes some skill and expertise to do *well*, to make each track flow into the next appropriately. this involves \"mixing.\" mixing began back in the 40s or so when people throwing parties playing jazz records hooked up two record players and faded their volumes out from one record into the other for the sake of keeping the music continually playing. your typical media player can do that by default.\n\na Live PA is the actual performance of samples and sometimes instruments- artists such as daft punk have their own music broken down into tiny elements- maybe as simple as separating the drum beat, the bassline, the main synths, the vocals, into separate tracks- of which they use software to mix and match different elements of the same or different songs together into a cohesive whole. this is why, again, from daft punk in their Alive 2007 album, for example, their tracks are a mish-mash of a bunch of different productions of theirs- in essence, they are remixing \"on-the-fly.\" for example, the vocals from \"technologic,\" the percussion line from \"harder better faster stronger,\" and the synth line from \"aerodynamik.\" these elements of different pieces are typically triggered via myriad types of hardware. other elements of a Live PA can include anything else related to live performance, such as the performer singing along to it, or playing the keyboard along with it, whatever.\n\nA Live PA blends the art of mixing and traditional performing, basically.\n\nA certain skill in the world of DJing- turntablism- ie \"wikka wikka WOW\" scratching and whatnot- can itself be a performance- see the yearly DMC turntablist competitions- but that's another subject entirely.\n\nso as you can see, DJing at its core nowadays is the mixing of two tracks together, but can incorporate many elements of performance into it such as turntablism, all of which has evolved into a complex amalgamation of performance, musicianship, sampling, and remixing in the broad term of \"Live PA\".\n\nas to your musings regarding the potential for \"fakery\"- it fuckin' happens and probably some of your favorite DJs are guilty of it. they're hacks. some of these guys record a set beforehand and just hit play and fake it on stage. there's been photos of DJ setups where the mixers aren't even plugged in- Peter Hook, the bassist of New Order, has been busted out doing it, for example. i knew a guy that went around to the local venues in the area handing out his \"demo\" to people, when in reality what he did was cut a section of Nic Fanciulli's Essential Mix and pass it off as his own work. fucking hacks.\n\nsource- dj and producer edit- apparently can't self-promote here",
"DJ here, /u/thvid. \n\nI've been doing it both as a hobby or for work continuously for the last 9 years or so. I was a nightclub resident DJ for over a few years as part of my resume. I do it strictly as a hobby these days, not really interested in all the demand in time and networking it takes.\n\n~~~\n\n**1. A DJ set is about 'story telling' through sound.**\n\nI'm not talking about those annoying EDM festivals. Talking about people like Sasha (first that comes to mind). Their style is determined by what music they choose to play. That music can either be other people's work or their own productions. Leads into #2. A true DJ is someone that can take all of those pre-existing elements and seamlessly mix them into something you can spend hours getting lost in. They can bring up energy, bring it back down, calm things for a while, evoke emotions of fear, love, anxiety, rage, and whatever else you can think of. Also, a good DJ plays for people assuming they are **not** under any kind of influence; if you are so insulting to think that everyone is just fucked up somehow, then you're not playing to the sharp sober mind paying attention to every little thing you do as a DJ.\n\n**2. A DJ is not as easy to define as it once was.**\n\nUp until about 2004 when the Pioneer CDJ's were released, DJ'ing was as straightforward as mixing one actual vinyl record into another via beatmatching. After the CDJ-1000's were released it *started* to become more fragmented of a definition because of looping and effects which allowed for more creative approaches to performance. Skip forward to the Pioneer CDJ 2000's. These completely changed things in such a way that the industry was demanding since the 1000's were released: quantized looping, improved effects, and biggest of all - no need for CD's; play by USB thumb drives. Best part about this was once you're able to hook up about 4 CDJ's things became really fun for overlaying loops on tracks times 4. Anyway, prior to the 2k's Traktor or Serato were the go-to's for DJ's like myself that would play for hours on end and made burning CD's impractical and just really fucking annoying. Those applications allowed for (albeit complicated and unreliable) 'hacking' of the CDJ 1000's via timecode through an audio interface. Now with the 2k's it was as easy as prepping your library in Pioneer Rekordbox, uploading to a USB, and bringing that with you and your headphones.\n\n**3. DJ'ing isn't just playing other music.**\n\nOne thing I alluded to in #2 is that a DJ isn't as easy to define anymore as it once was. Sure looping and effects came into play, but the real MVP is Ableton Live. My god this changed everything. In fact, when I first began performing I chose to use only Live. What is live? It's essentially a \"digital audio workstation\" or DAW that is pretty much an entire music production studio in your laptop - **that you can also perform live from**. This changed the game entirely for the creative aspect of performance because no longer is is about playing other peoples finalized productions, but it's now about constructing, deconstructing, or reconstructing, or all of the above on the fly making performances unique and vastly more complex than they could've been before. When I performed using Live at my residency, I did anything from mixing CDJ's into my Live (everything goes out through one main output from 2 separate inputs) or mixing tracks in Live underneath percussion loops, synth riff's I'd record previously at home, or depending on how I felt that night maybe looping about 5-10 elements of existing tracks over eachother simultaneously to make something never heard before that moment. As exciting as that was, it was also incredibly risky since crashes are always a worry, which is why you'd have a CDJ at the ready in case anything explodes.\n\n**4. If you're not producing then you're not DJ'ing. If you're DJ'ing and not producing, then you're promoting.**\n\nPretty straight forward. Just says a lot about the industry as a whole. Great DJ's today are expected to do more (see all of the above) and if you're not producing, then don't expect to stand out from the noise (the whole \"everyone wants to be a DJ\" thing). Those that aren't producing but are working are promoting and are typically just very very connected people, in which it's only a matter of time before they start producing.\n\n~~~\n\nSo with that lengthy description, here's some cool videos from a couple of the masters that really explain just how complex and technical DJ'ing can be.\n\n* [Sasha @ Dubspot - Full Live Streaming Workshop Rebroadcast! 'Involver 3′ w/ Ableton Live](_URL_7_)\n* [How I PLAY: Richie Hawtin MODEL 1 DJ Setup](_URL_10_)\n* [Roger Sanchez on: DJing, Creativity & Ableton Live](_URL_9_)\n* [Laidback Luke - Seminar 'Real DJ-ing' @ Dancefair, The Netherlands \\(2015\\)](_URL_8_) *(Not really a fan of his music, but the dude is one of the most genuine and professional in the industry and really goes out there to teach people how to treat DJ'ing as work and a craft and not just something you jump into)*",
"Many do just \"press play\" for reasons stated in other comments, but compare it to the movies.\n\nThey release movies in a movie theatre at first that you have to go pay and see \"live\". It's a good time with a great video/audio viewing experience. Yet after a few weeks or months, they release to digital copies you can buy at home.\n\nLive electronic sets are the same way. You go experience them live because they are new music mixes that nobody has ever heard, and could potentially be awesome. Then, they are (sometimes) released on popular music streaming sites.",
"Producer / DJ and performer here. The top answer is pretty spot on. \nThere are many ways in which a DJ can perform a 'set'.\nThere's the straight forward pre-recorded set which does happen with some of the big names in house music and such (David Guetta). This is pretty much as you say. Fire and forget but there would still have been many hours of preparation but it's just not done live. \n\nSome DJ's (more traditionally) mix songs together whilst cutting off specific frequencies at the right time so sounds don't clash, also the beat needs to match which can be done with sync (again some use sync and some don't ). Using sync makes beat matching a lot easier but also lends a lot of time for creativity for DJ's. Not using sync and actually beat matching yourself can take a lot of focus and time so the mixes might be more straight forward and predictable / linear but very smooth.\nThe DJ who is using sync can forget about that and use his time to add vocal shouts / added samples from a button activated sample bank, do live record scratching, layer up a beat on top using a beat maker similar to an MPC, perform live vocals etc. \n\nSome DJ's don't know what they will be playing before they start and some DJ's will know exactly what part of a tune will be playing at 32 minutes into the set and what vocal samples they need to queue up or scratch at that precise time.\n\nIt's really all down to the style of the DJ and how they prepare for a set.\nPersonally I will arrange an hour of music with chord progressions between songs and musical keys that compliment each other and once I'm happy with the compilation I will then start making edits of certain tracks and extract parts of audio, e.g a horn loop and resample it so that you can queue it live over the next song, effectively creating a live instrument that can be played on a keyboard which also responds to pitch, so I could even create a new melody with the same guitar sample whilst playing live. The same is done with vocals, edit the familiar phrase from the last song into 4 or 5 samples, assign them to a beat machine and then when I've finished mixing into the next song I will grab my beat machine, select the vocal samples and then replay them live with the best machine and create new phrases with the syllables I have sampled.\n\nIt really depends on the effort the DJ wants to put in. \n\nSo if you get the chance to see a DJ perform, if they look incredibly busy then they have probably put it tonnes of effort and are performing live for you. If they are standing still like David Guetta then the effort was done at home. If they just look like they're having a great time but have been asked a really difficult question then they are picking songs as they go :P\n\nI hope that helps.",
"There's some decent answers here already. I think it boils down to a couple of different approaches. \n\nThe most obvious is \"just press play\" and jump around acting like you're doing something. This isn't strictly done for reasons of laziness. The reality is that audiences have been demanding crazier and crazier visuals to go along with their music year after year for awhile now (we are becoming a more image based society, and lights look good on social media). It's very difficult to create a complicated light show to music that isn't pre planned. So to everyone ripping on \"just press play\" type acts, I agree with you but these artists are giving the people what they want for the most part. \n\nAnother classic approach is to combine lots of pre recorded sound in interesting ways, layering songs over each other and creating exciting transitions. With the help of equalizers and filters you can sort of play just a part of one song (low, mid, high). If you do this at a small enough scale with enough material I think you have effectively created something \"new\" or at least new enough. This approach was a lot more impressive when people did it with turntables that naturally fall out of sync as it was much harder. \n\nDJ's probably have access to unreleased and obscure music that most of us don't so that can add interest as well, although this approach has waned with the rise of the internet.",
"I saw Infected Mushroom a few years ago and was lucky enough that it was one of their Live Band shows. They sung the vocals live, the beat was played by a drummer on an electric kit, all the synth stuff was played and managed by a keyboardist, they had a guitarist.\n\nObviously not all electronic music can be done this way and they seemingly built their music around this, but you would never know listening to their stuff that it could be played live like that. It was awesome.",
"My live sound teacher worked a festival at which Steve Aoki was headlining. Aoki was paid somewhere in the ballpark of $200k for the gig. While my teacher was setting up the LED dome he would be DJing in, he realized none of the decks were actually hooked up properly, but iTunes was open to a track called \"ULTRA 2015 set\" (Ultra being the name of the festival).\n\nFun fact: Steve Aoki's father founded Benihana, the famous hibachi restaurant.",
"Um....they hit the play button. That's why DJs are universally hated by musicians. Wave your arms twiddle some knobs. Eat some Ecstacy. Maybe mix in a new song (which is the easiest thing in the world since there are algorythms that calculate BPM and really thats the only thibg you need to match...that is what MIDI was designed for). Its a racket.",
"Oh you done done it now. DJs hate this question more and more because one jerk after another has tried to steal their job and wear their title because they have an iPod or cellphone and a playlist they made. Sorry, that ain't it.\n\nHistory time. DJs were originally just people who spun records for clubs and the radio. Their job was to make a set and gather a good collection of vinyls and maintain an energy for people to dance, party, or whatever the scene demanded. Eventually, hip hop became a thing and folks wanted to rap or sing over a beat. So, a new breed of DJ was born. These ones found drum breaks and instrumentals in vinyls and learned to loop them on two tables with the same record. Mastering the timing, they were able to keep a beat going as long as an MC needed to rhyme. It also let them really find the best parts of a song for parties. I like to think of it as music extract. None of the fluff and all the attitude. These guys also invented another dj technique, the scratch. They could work that cool, stylish sound into their breaks and samples. It became a mainstay for hip hop and, when the first hip hop albums got produced, it became a main function of the DJ. Obviously it would have cost a ton to license a song to loop and scratch for a whole new song. Now, people get away with it for various reasons today but back then it made more sense to hire a band than pay for the rights. So, hip hop DJs became a thing for live shows mostly. Eventually this changed, especially when DJs started producing with keyboards and mpcs and bands became less used for hip hop. Now they could be on an album and at a live show.\n\nOkay, here's where things get modern and funky... As DJs also became producers, hip hop took off big time. This meant you had a million different styles from LL to Wu Tang to EPMD to Tupac. This meant that the DJ role was going to change a lot too. Now, they were producers, really, or sometimes specialists in scratching samples from recordings. Today, you might hear a hip hop or rap DJ looping a beat, cueing up new songs, scratching a break, or freaking the digital end of things for crazy effects. All of it works the crowd.\n\nIn the same way, genres like techno have grown from the manipulation of pre-recorded sounds. Whether they do that with turntables, mpcs, keyboards, or a computer program, they do the same basic thing. They use an arsenal of sounds, effects, and live elements all in one song, then for a whole set upwards of a few hours long. A good DJ has a ton of gear, a massive collection of sounds to play like digital instruments, and a very very carefully practiced composition. They get so good and so familiar that they can and do improvise with these elements so as to create music live for an audience.\n\nNo play button DJ will ever bring down the house like a legit one will. They will throw a lame party full of odd gaps between songs that kill the energy. They will have no sense of the energy in a room. They are so transparently terrible that they won't get invited back. All their friends will talk smack behind their backs. Their s/o will leave them. They will end up on Youtube in an embarrassing video of them failing with awful graphics and captions made by a twelve year old. It's always tragic.",
"I was a DJ in the 90s / 00s, during the EDM vinyl period, CD turntables came out during that period, but were only so-so. Traktor & the vinyl-backed software DJing came out right at the end (mid-00s, IIRC?)\n\nThe \"live performance\" value proposition for a DJ is predominantly in song selection (reading the crowd and adapting to what they're enjoying) as well as technical skill of beatmatching (making sure both songs are playing at the same tempo, in phase) & mixing/blending (if the audience can't easily tell when one song ends and the next begins, you're doing it right!).\n\nA good DJ plays songs the crowd likes and wants to dance to and is able to keep the energy (read: \"Desire to continue dancing and having fun\") going.\n\nI want to be clear that I do not consider \"DJs\" to be \"musicians\" (Turntablism being an exception), though I also don't think it's \"talentless\" -- it's tricky to do it right and it takes a lot of practice to do it well. The fetishism over DJs (cf. any Tiesto \"performance\") with them being on a massively lit center-stage with everyone watching them, just BOGGLES me. They're literally doing nothing other than playing other people's music (or pre-recordings of their own music) and there's really NOTHING interesting happening up on stage that you'd be able to see from the ground. It seems like our interaction pattern of \"seeing a music performance requires staring at the performer(s) on the stage\" has been exapted into DJ appearances, supplanting the pattern of \"listen to music, dance, and enjoy the visuals of flashing colored lights\".\n\n(There are also \"Live PA\" [\"Performance Artists\"] that bring their racks of gear and produce / perform the songs live via synths & sequencers, but those aren't strictly \"DJs\" -- I saw DJ Spooky in Indianapolis years ago and it was pretty incredible to watch him play a bunch of Instruments. I've heard BT was like that too.)\n\nI've been out of the game a long time, but it seems like modern DJs are almost all software-based, and not using Traktor or similar (ie. all mixing, if it happens at all, happens within the music app). The events I've gone to (mainly bar/nightclub) where there has been a \"DJ\" I only hear actual beatmatching about 1/4 of the time anymore, and most of them don't even bother mixing (either hardcut or playing songs end-to-end with talking in between)\n\nI've not seen people just playing a playlist (ie. \"hit play and stare at crowd, flailing arms\") but I could see that happening. If that's the case, the audience loses the value of the DJ reading the crowd and adapting to what the crowd likes, as well as keeping the music nonstop.",
"Okay, let me clarify all the bullshit here: most main stream DJs (e.g., most people at main stage festivals, or anyone who DJs edm \"top 40\", the Chainsmokers, Steve Aoki, etc) pre-record their mixes, then pretend to play them live.\n\nYes, it's true. When you're a mainstage DJ, you're getting paid tens of thousands for a one hour set: wayyy too much to afford the risk of mixing live and possibly messing up.\n\nGood DJs (like deadmau5, Eric Prydz, almost all trance DJs, etc) actually play live though.\n\n\nIf you don't believe me, there's a glorious clip on YouTube of Steve Aoki getting a concussion while doing stupid trampoline antics during his set, and his songs are transitioning on and off while he's being carried off on a stretcher... Or another one of David Guetta *absolutely* tripping balls (dude was seriously on a different plane of existence) while somehow playing a flawless set. There's another video of that. Shameful pre-recorded sets.\n\nSource: I've seen literally hundreds of DJs preform.",
"Guetta does just press the play button. Plenty of videos online showing him faking it live and just playing a pre made show off a memory stick while he pretends to do stuff with his decks.\n\nLoads of people do it, and personally it disgusts me that they're effectively cheating people out of their money. Same for any bands who's singer uses track rather than actually singing.",
"Here's a pretty well known short video where Madeon, a very populer producer now, combines 39 songs all into a single 3 minute performance. This might help you visualize it \n_URL_11_",
"when I go see a DJ live it's not really to watch their performance, as much as it is to go to a huge party and dance with hundreds of people.",
"The legitimacy or \"worth\" of a performance has nothing to do with what's happening on stage, it's all about how the audience or crowd reacts to what you're doing. It doesn't matter if you're a one man band playing five different instruments at once, if the audience isn't entertained and thinks you're doing a shit job, your performance is worthless. There are millions of amateur and semi-professional musicians that are very technically proficient, but either don't have the songwriting chops or don't know how to appropriately read a crowd, and they spend their entire careers playing bars and weddings.\n\nAs others have pointed out in this thread, there are varying degrees of \"performance\" or \"effort\" happening on stage during an electronic music performance, but the end result is unrelated to the amount of physical effort or proficiency the DJ is displaying on stage - either the crowd is entertained or they aren't. Those that just \"hit play\" are taking a risk, because if their pre-programmed set doesn't light up the crowd, they're dead in the water. Good DJing is just as much about reading and reacting to the crowd as it is mixing songs.\n\nHere's another way to look at it: if you're a DJ who's super famous, with a cult of personality, fist pumping the crowd may be all you have to do to give your fans an entertaining show, and you've done your job and earned your paycheck. The guitar virtuoso who's attracted a crowd in the tens at a bar down the street can be as envious as he wants, the music fans have voted with their feet and their wallets.\n\nEDIT: typos, etc.",
"Only the really popular DJs press play because the mainstream audience doesn't know any better. \n\nUsually a DJ will do a live mix. It's different to mainstream genres and artists because usually you don't just go to see a DJ based on their production alone. Some people might but their performance is ultimately their ability to mix, track selection and getting the crowd moving. \n\n\nSome artists use MPCs like the Akai and the Maschine. They have pads on that you can assign sounds and samples to, so you can finger drum a live performance. \n\n\nAlso beat juggling goes back to the vinyl turntable days, usually hip-hop. This is what you see at the DMC championships. The DJ spins the same record on both turntables, one slightly ahead of the other. Using specific parts of the track they create their own little break down. \n\n\nMay come back and post some examples when I'm not on my phone.",
"Disclosure actually pulls out guitars, drums , and piano keys and mixes live. Def raised the bar in what I want to see my DJs do in a live performance.",
"A conductor/DJ's job is coordinating a performance and changing the atmosphere at a venue. At a large venue, this is done by a team helping out with the lights, pyrotechnics, speakers/amplifiers, and other control systems. Specifically DJs have to hone some skills like timing, pre-fade listening, reading the audience (especially if things go sideways), marketing (bringing in a crowd), and back in the day, turntablism. It's not a job everyone would be succesful at. In fact, a lot of low-key DJs are starving musicians and whether its at a house party or concert hall, they want to stand out and share their interpretation of the pre-recorded music through their set (of songs chosen). Music is like energy, it has changed into what we hear, and is still changing every minute. The shift from analog hardware to digital creation and recording was made possible by an interface with which sound can be manipulated, and anywhere people are pioneering new and interesting ways to express music, there is innovation. That to me is the purpose of a live performance... I want it to blow my mind.",
"I'll try to make up an example:\n\nYou're playing Darude \"Sandstorm.\" When it kicks in, you mix in the instrumental from Katy Perry's \"Dark Horse\" over top of it.\n\nMeanwhile you have the acapella of \"Dark Horse\" cued up to the \"There's no going back\" sample. So while you're cutting between the two songs, you might be tapping the cue button so the sample is stuttered over that like *th th there's no th th th th th there* etc.\n\nAlso, you can have individual elements of a song loaded as separate sounds that you're activating and deactivating to make a live remix.",
"Getting a group of strangers to tacitly agree to dance and have a good time in stead of standing around is harder then you might _URL_12_ might be easy to play one song people like but try chaining 3 or 4 or 10 of them seamlessly together.\n Just because it looks easy doesn't mean it is easy 😂",
"Don't make the mistake of turning on your tv and seeing Guetta and his ilk throwing up heart signs and pandering while doing nothing, and think that's what an entire industry does. You'd be wrong...",
"Nothing beats that legendary time when Aphex Twin did a show in Philly where he literally walked out on stage, sat down on a couch there, and pressed play on a CD on his tunes.",
"While there is some obvious talent required, it's certainly not the same as actually performing with an instrument. It's 'real', but it's really not. They're overrated and really not talented.",
"To understand why a DJ would \"perform\" you have to understand the history of hip hop and the state of technology in the late 70s/early 80s, which was primitive and required a DJ to physically manipulate the turntables to control the sequence of sampling from the wax records. \n\nSo let's go back to The Bronx in the mid 70s, in a time before the digital revolution permeated every facet of American consumer society and made many media related processes incredibly easy, cheap, and fast. \n\nDuring this time disco music and disco clubs were emerging as all the rage in the NY night scene and most of the impoverished communities of The Bronx were systematically and financially excluded from the burgeoning Manhattan scene. Their alternative were large parties where DJs from the neighborhoods would spin wax and people would dance in whatever spaces they could use. One such party took place in the community room of the projects located at 1520 Sedgwick Avenue. **It was here that hip hop was born when DJ Kool Herc entertained the crowd with a sound system equipped with two turntables and two copies of the same records. DJ Kool Herc wanted to keep the crowd amped by continuously cycling the instrumental breaks in the songs on the records. To do this he would play the instrumental break on one record and then crossfade (lower the volume on one turntable and raise it on the other) to a queued version of the instrumental break on the other, thus creating a loop and what we refer to today as the sample or the beat/breakbeat in a rap song.**\n\nThis is how hip hop was born and it introduced the opportunity for people to get up and MC a track by \"rapping\" over it. And the culture extended to the audience who were competitively dancing to the instrumental breaks, thus they were \"break dancing\". **During this time Hip Hop was thought of as a live performance and the concept of a hip hop or rap album was unthought of until it spread across the NYC burrows. So this act of hip hop DJing became a performance art in its own right and birthed the idea of the DJ as an artist.**\n\nBut DJ Kool Herc's method was flawed because the DJ had to guess where the track was on the record. Thus the break beats didn't always loop smoothly between two records. To create smooth instrumental loops between records on the turntables Grandmaster Flash pioneered a technique to trace the track on a record with a crayon. Prior to the performance Flash would find the instrumental track on the record and trace this area (where the needle struck the record) with a crayon. Then he would draw a line from the center of the record to the track and count how many times the line passed the needle head/arm to know the length of the beat. During performance he would start the first record, cue the second, fade to the second when the loop needed to continue, and reverse the first record (counting the passes of the crayon marked line through the needle) to the cue on the break beat. This method allowed him to seamlessly loop break beats between albums and keep his mix going when switching/fading between new records and break beats. This was also the birth of scratching and the base for most other innovations in DJing that continue to this day.\n\nSo today a DJ could just play a set list, but the art of DJing involves improvisation, audience connection and feedback, and the chance to switch up your set list and keep it fresh from show to show. Now with digital technology its almost as if a DJ is a live producer with nearly endless options for the creative mind to pursue.",
"At the most basic level, DJing is the art of picking songs for you to listen or dance to and making them more or less seamlessly blend together. The actual tracks they are playing may be recorded to a final mix, therefore not live. However, the transitioning of one track to the next is where the real time element comes into play. Every DJ has their own style or way of blending tracks. There are particular techniques that are used and generally accepted, such as a \"hard cut\". \n\nSure, you just hit play and then what? Who's gonna select the next song and serve it up while all the partygoers are on the dance floor?\n\nLive DJ sets are another thing. With a program such as Ableton Live, one can perform a live DJ set. Even though it is all digital, it still requires a bit of knowhow in order to make the dang program obey your commands. You don't just open up Ableton and hit play. \n\nAbleton can be simply organized into a series of music clips. A single clip can be as short or as long of a musical phrase as you want. Live DJing is basically being really good at firing off those clips (that you programmed, composed and arranged) in real time. So it goes an extra step beyond simply choosing the songs. Now you're creating the songs in real time. You're choosing every single drum hit, bass sound, background noise, you name it. Yes these hits may mostly be pre recorded, however knowing which sounds work and when they work and how to fine tune them to work beyond the normal situation is the hard part. Taking a dozen random drum hits and making them all sound like they are part of one unit is more than hitting one button.",
"Disc Jokeys were playing high school dances and sock hops before EDM was a thing. Yes they are \"playing\" pre recorded music, but much like a sommelier the jockey's role is to have better taste than you and it is thier job to guide you throguh your listening experience. This is the service you pay for.\n\nTechnology and innovation has lead to a lot of possibility for artistic expression through looping and mashing pre recorded audio and this has brought up the debat of if DJ's are musicians.\n \nI think DJ's can be musicians but thier primary role has always been the same. Get the audience engaged in the music they are listening to. If that means twisting buttons so you have something to do with your hands, go for it.\nA DJ isn't always a musician but they are always a PERFORMER.\n\nCheck this guy's performance out. See how little he does and how awkward he looks. Compare that to a molly fueled filled laser light show presented by a giant mouse head or 2 robots. I know despite my musical taste leaing towards the video id got for the full experience theatrics and all. \n\n_URL_13_",
"I'd like to answer this from a musician's point of view: I've been making music on several instruments since I was a kid and have played everything from classical pieces to grindcore to folk to edm and pop, so I know Ableton and its use in live DJing fairly well. I was fortunate enough to see numerous DJs in their \"working environment and even though there are some that stand out in a positive way I'd say 99% just start their playlist. For extra credit some add optional filters or some cosmetically Ableton touches, but I rarely see some really interesting stuff happening there (at least live). Henry Rollins goes so far and calls them record player players. 😉\n\nEdit: I also read a lot about \"live mixing\" as if it was an art form. DJs pick tracks that fit the mood, match the bpm (mostly automatically in their hard or software, (incredible rarely) pitch it to match the key and push the fader over. TBH that hardly qualifies as more than pushing a button.",
"The ones that are there that just \"hit the button\" are really there to hype people up, perform stage antics, make it a fun and unique experience, and depending on their setup, change the music according to the crowd's energy level. Think of what they do live as promoting the music rather than playing it, and in turn, the music sort of promotes them and supports their lifestyle. As it has been since the dawn of time, the music is just there to get them laid. \n\nSome non-DJ reasons people attend:\n\n* It's more fun dancing at a live event with lots more people then you can fit in your dorm.\n\n* Venues generally give a different experience (light effects, bubbles, foam, etc) than you get in your bedroom. \n\n* The sound systems are usually better than the tinny little speaker you plug your iPod into. \n\n* You've run out of drugs and you need to score some MDMA.",
"Good DJ's vary their mix on how the audience is reacting, within a larger coherent framework. It works in that way like a lot of other live performances. Like a comedian that varies their jokes timing, delivery and even which ones based on an audience, or a band that mixes up their set list based on the audience and maybe goes longer if they're having fun. There's a part that's fixed and a part that's improvised. There's much better answers about the actual tools that modern DJs use.\n\nBut there are some reasonably high profile 'DJs' that basically just play a mix they made earlier.",
"What does it matter as long as the audience is having a good time? The vast majority of people have no idea what a DJ actually does. The vast majority of people will also not appreciate the subtleties and nuances of live mixing/triggering. What matters is that they see someone on stage who at least appears to be \"in control.\" People here are picking on David Guetta. He performs regularly to sold out crowds who have a great time. Who cares? It is about perception and not reality. And in the end its just about having fun with a large group of people.",
"They mix the songs together using effects and modifying them on the fly to make them mix together smoothly.you can press play or you can do some really crazy stuff. Pressing play is a very cut and dry way to say it. Playing a piano is just pressing a button and driving a race car is just hitting the gas.",
"Super random and kinda late but after reading these posts and having conversations on this topic I'm have to say that everyone here has a very important input to DJing and the culture, and there is not one person on here that has made a negative impact on this discussion. This is why I fucking love Reddit.",
"I saw David Guetta live at a festival and during Titanium he literally did just press play, then occasionally knock down the volume slider so the crowd could sing \"fire away, fire away\"- though not always at quite the right moment. The rest of the time, he spent waving his arms about. Quite a strange experience.",
"So many takes on this topic. \n\nA musician practices playing his instrument to the song. He could record it, or he could preform it. If that musician's instrument is a computer, he is playing multiple parts of the song.\n\nSometimes musicians lip sync to emphasize the visual aspects of the show.",
"\"here's a new song, that sounds exactly like the last song and every song that was played here today.. in fact, you cant tell which DJ plays which music!!\"\n\nOOnnntz OOnnntz OOnnntz OOnnntz OOnnntz ...wait....\"bass drop\" alarm sound OOnnntz OOnnntz OOnnntz",
"This is honestly the reason/criteria by which I decide to go to an EDM performance or not, or how much I'll appreciate the artist's craft afterwards.\n\nHaywyre is an outstanding example of an artist who actually puts on a performance.\n_URL_14_",
"Here's something I'm not sure if others have posted yet. It's just another way of playing electronic music live that involves a lot of prep panning and good timing to do. \n\nAnd it's all very nicely visualized for you. \n\n_URL_15_",
"Simple answer: most modern electronic \"DJs\" pre-record and then break up their elements so they can \"jam\" and \"mix\" parts on a live set. Quite underwhelming when you see they don't do much except mute one section here and there.",
"Watch Pendulums 2016 Ultra set. It starts off with DJ's mixing songs together, then you get to see what that kind of \"Beep Boop\" music looks like when it's played live with a band and instruments and stuff.",
"Not to put DJs down, but being a real musician is much more difficult than just playing with tracks and mixers. Performing live for a musician is extremely stressful as mistakes become readily evident. Just my opinion.",
"Most do hit play and go through the motions of moving tracks around and adding in a sound here or there. No different than a club DJ in the 80s and 90s :)",
"If anyone is interested in seeing what DJs actually do when they're performing, even just the \"press play\" DJs, I recommend watching some [Pioneer DJ Sound Show](_URL_16_) or some live boilerroom sets.",
"Back in my dubstep days I saw Modestep live and was expecting just some dudes pushing some buttons. But damn it was more of a live band electronic experience, was blown away",
"Back in the old days there were turntables and records. You had to physically manipulate them like playing an instrument. Hope that helps. Digitals a joke. Don't call them Djs.",
"You can't read music and you're not a musician. You just stand near music. Learn to spin records or just call yourself something else. EDM Bro might work.",
"if you want a good reference for what it looks like to DJ a live performance, look up pictures of the inside of Daft Punk's pyramid.",
"Check out this one - Jeff Mills (a phenomenal techno dj) playing one of techno classics The Bells, using live sounds from Montpellier Philharmonic.\n\n_URL_17_",
"This is a better example of a dj giving a live \"concert\" performance:\n\n_URL_18_",
"They mix tracks together....\n\nHow can someone seriously not get this?"
],
"score": [
10108,
396,
318,
95,
47,
40,
31,
26,
20,
12,
11,
9,
9,
8,
8,
8,
7,
7,
7,
7,
7,
5,
4,
4,
4,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj6M_rpDOCk",
"http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/deadmau5-clarifies-press-play-comments-about-fellow-djs-20120625",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmMRIOOABBg",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE25XQpFW7M",
"https://youtu.be/ZymzS8ntxZ0",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgHaP3BY-E0",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cd8DJnLdOQ&index=24&list=PLsf0oqzlpO9LvfucpFICmamwnyXFq7jNL&t=84s",
"https://youtu.be/hE722WuiMwU",
"https://youtu.be/sQ86-ON5LBg",
"https://youtu.be/ebLftV5Eclc",
"https://youtu.be/aan_g8G2k3s",
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lTx3G6h2xyA",
"think.It",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obXZLSKGpic",
"https://youtu.be/MV9-VMLsNCI",
"https://youtu.be/3hWp_VpAzUM",
"https://www.youtube.com/user/pioneerdjsounds",
"https://youtu.be/STpOak4iAJY",
"https://youtu.be/8bBdF0_1c00"
]
} | train_eli5 | How do DJs give live concerts if all of their sounds are digitally created and recorded? Seems to me they could just hit the play button, which would defeat the purpose of a live performance.
| [
0.04041469097137451,
-0.042296312749385834,
-0.08368094265460968,
-0.06548405438661575,
-0.04245120286941528,
0.05441850423812866,
0.024394243955612183,
-0.07986731827259064,
-0.000054755302699049935,
0.017136819660663605,
-0.03169579058885574,
0.027821393683552742,
0.004334278870373964,
-... | ||
2mc3nw | What is a quantum dot? | Just heard of a seminar about quantum dots and using them for solar energy. Curious about what they are, how they're made, and how they work. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cm2voft"
],
"text": [
"Heads up, there isn't an ELI5. I'll give it a shot, but its going to be a little complex and I'm probably going to assume something you don't know or use some jargon. There's not a way around it, each paragraph will be almost a very brief summary of what could be an entire university course or more. \r\r\rLet's start with basic stuff that someone in high school would probably know. Electrons orbit atoms, but they are only allowed to at certain energy levels. An electron can't orbit with any energy it wants, it must be in one of these energy levels with a corresponding orbit. The number, type, and energy of these levels or states depends on the atom. The electrons fill the inner most states first, leaving the outer ones empty. If excited with the corresponding amount of energy, an electron can move up to a higher energy level. It can also move back down, releasing the energy difference as a photon (light). I'm hoping you already knew that, as it's only going to get worse. \r\r\rSo now what happens when we put a whole bunch of atoms into a material? These levels don't overlap, instead they move slightly off of each other to not be the same. This forms a series of energy bands rather than levels. These energy bands are really dense packings of energy levels, and where the bands energies are relate to the orbitals from the base atom that formed it. This is called band theory. We will only focus on the outermost, least energy bands, as they are the ones of interest. Like atoms with occupied orbitals and higher unoccupied ones, the same applies for bands. \r\r\rIn band theory, there are 3 basic types of materials. Metals, semiconductors, and insulators. Metals have the highest occupied band and the lowest free band touching, no so called band gap between them. This makes them good conductors as the electrons can freely move between the lower filled band (valence) to the higher band where they are free to move (conduction). Semiconductors have a small energy gap between the valence and conduction bands. This means they can conduct, but it takes a little bit of energy to move an electrons up so not as well as metals. Insulators are like semiconductors, but the energy gap is huge so very few electrons get enough energy to move up so they are poor conductors. \r\r\rIn semiconductors, when an electron moves up it leaves a hole behind in the valence band. This hope acts like its own positive particle. Like if there was a row of seats with one chair missing, and people progressively hoped chairs it would look as if the open chair was moving large distances rather than various people hoping one chair. The same applies here with the missing electron spot, so we pretend this missing electron spot is a new positive particle called a hole. We take full advantage of many effects of this extra particle, they are the basis behind the modern age. It's why computers run, it's why the power grid is stable, it's why LEDs emit light, it's why solar panels work, it's why pretty much any electrical or electronic device works. Some of it we could do before semiconductors, but not as well or as efficiently. \r\r\rIn some semiconductors, the hole and electron go one there ways once formed. In others, the hole and electron in the conduction band don't move far away enough from each other. They are attracted by their opposite charges, and behave much like a hydrogen atom (where the hole is the proton). This yet another imaginary particle is called an exciton. This exciton, like the atom it is similar to, has something known as a bohr radius. Just think of it as how big the exciton is. Excitons' bohr radii are quite big, bigger than hydrogen by a lot. \r\r\rSo now I will actually talk about a quantum dot. A quantum dot is a nano semiconductor crystal. It's size is near or less than the exciton's bohr radius. The result of this is the exciton becomes what is known as quantum confined. This effects the energy associated with it, whether that be absorbing light to be created or emitting light to recombine (electron fills in hole) or just general electrical properties. The since the energy is related to the confinement, changing the confinement (size of the quantum dot) changes the energy and hence all these properties. They are useful do to this ability to tune them based on how big you make them, and they also have many unique properties and quantum effects to exploit. In reference to your use for solar panels, they have the ability to form multiple excitons per photon. Normal solar cells only produce one exciton or unbound electron-hole pair, and any excess energy goes to heat. Using the extra energy to make more could greatly increase efficiency. As for how they are made, I don't really know enough to speak on that."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is a quantum dot?
Just heard of a seminar about quantum dots and using them for solar energy. Curious about what they are, how they're made, and how they work. | [
-0.1067284569144249,
0.005736918654292822,
-0.06206832081079483,
0.08064719289541245,
-0.074671670794487,
-0.025327036157250404,
0.062198132276535034,
-0.01686767116189003,
0.010221922770142555,
0.012753107585012913,
-0.013656090013682842,
-0.017978165298700333,
-0.018227240070700645,
-0.0... | |
1jzux4 | Why do people fling their arms around when they're falling? | After watching that GoPro footage, and thinking about it, why do we have this urge to throw our arms around when falling for 10+feet. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cbjzdw2",
"cbjxgg6"
],
"text": [
"Arm and upper torso movements are half instinctual, and are a method to regain your balance. To test this, stand up, and lean your body to one side as far as you can. Let your arms move where they may.\n\nNotice how the farther you lean, the more your opposite arm stretches out to try to counterbalance you? You can override it if you really try, but then other muscles will take over and your trunk will shift to keep you from falling. That's your spinal cord and cerebellum's natural response. Your brain and spine do thousands of tiny corrections each time you get up or take a step, moving your arms, torso, head and legs in minute amounts to keep your balance. That's how you stay upright.\n\nSo, think about it this way. If it takes thousands of little movements to maintain your balance when walking in contact with the floor, what do you think your brain feels you need to maintain balance when it can't feel *anything?*",
"When you suddenly lose your balance, you sense it in your inner ear. The natural reflex is to pinwheel your arms to regain balance.\n\nFalling gives a similar sensation, so you think you are suddenly losing your balance for longer time."
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do people fling their arms around when they're falling?
After watching that GoPro footage, and thinking about it, why do we have this urge to throw our arms around when falling for 10+feet. | [
0.04988180845975876,
-0.013993056491017342,
0.09229891002178192,
0.001750448253005743,
0.057022612541913986,
0.07380400598049164,
0.09238144755363464,
0.11265301704406738,
0.07474780082702637,
-0.023825621232390404,
0.044257838279008865,
-0.002354051684960723,
-0.004349489230662584,
0.0369... | |
omlpb | - 401k, Roth 401k and a 457 | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c3ihciw"
],
"text": [
"In a nutshell:\n\n* *401k* is a piggy bank that you can put money in for retirement. It can come from **pre-tax or post-tax** earnings, but you must pay taxes on any money it gains when you withdraw it. There is a 10% penalty if you withdraw early.\n\n* *Roth 401k* is a piggy bank that you can put money in for retirement. It **must be from post-tax** earnings, but you usually do not pay taxes on any money it gains upon withdrawal. There is a 10% penalty if you withdraw early.\n\n* *457 Plan* is a piggy bank that you can put money in for retirement. It is taken from your salary **pre-tax**. There is no penalty for withdrawing early, but you must pay income tax on the money. These plans are currently for some government agencies and some non-profits. Some plans allow for \"Roth-style\" contributions.\n\n* *Roth IRA* is a piggy bank that you can put money in for retirement. It **must be from post-tax** earnings, but you usually do not pay taxes on any money it gains upon withdrawal. There is a 10% penalty if you withdraw early. There is a yearly limit to the amount you can contribute - currently around $5,000. [Everyone, especially younger people shoulder have one].\n\n**All plans have contributions limits.** Employers may match money that you contribute to your plan.\n\n[Relevant](_URL_0_)"
],
"score": [
8
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oijia/eli5_how_to_invest_in_stocks/c3hn29p"
]
} | train_eli5 | - 401k, Roth 401k and a 457
| [
0.0014746711822226644,
0.10052917897701263,
-0.062275275588035583,
-0.002130068838596344,
-0.03216591104865074,
0.019924189895391464,
0.018946098163723946,
0.0010874238796532154,
-0.007524312473833561,
-0.04244605079293251,
0.01296678651124239,
-0.020102672278881073,
-0.019313637167215347,
... | ||
6qsqvh | How did xoxo come to mean hugs and kisses? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dkzppt8"
],
"text": [
"The \"X\" was derived from very early Christians...it looked like a cross, so when documents were \"signed\" with an X added, it meant a degree of sincerity. As part of lore, the cross was often kissed (kissing crosses was a popular thing) and so, X began to mean a kiss. The O is a bit muddled, as a hug... but there is evidence to show it was common among Jewish immigrants to the USA to use an \"O\" in signing documents. Not sure how it became a hug."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How did xoxo come to mean hugs and kisses?
| [
-0.06720806658267975,
0.07333523035049438,
0.03594683110713959,
0.04965879023075104,
-0.019027726724743843,
-0.01908566802740097,
0.09823253750801086,
-0.005584504455327988,
-0.016005737707018852,
-0.09467168152332306,
0.046492669731378555,
-0.03179507330060005,
0.022243771702051163,
-0.00... | ||
100bx7 | Is Aspartame (aka Artificial Sweetener, 951) actually harmful to your body? | Commonly found in Diet drinks, for example, Diet Coke, Pepsi Max, and also in Artificial Sweeteners, such as Equal.
Chemical name is Aspartame, also known as E951/951.
_URL_0_
There are a lot of mixed messages about whether this chemical is bad for you. Many studies say it is, but then other studies say it's a complete myth. A lot of people I know say they never drink diet drinks because "they are worse for you than the regular sugary alternatives". Not really sure what to think. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c69aykc"
],
"text": [
"The short answer is \"no\".\n\nThe longer answer is \"yes, but not at any dose that you could realistically consume\".\n\nLots of things are harmful if you eat/drink enough of it. Water and oxygen are two substances that we absolutely need but that are quite harmful if we have too much.\n\nAspartame is something that we don't need at all. In fact, we can't use it to make anything that our body wants or needs. However, there are some toxic substances that do occur when we eat aspartame. Formaldehyde (the stuff that they use to embalm dead bodies) is one. However, to get any harmful dose of formaldehyde, you have to eat so much aspartame that you're probably in danger from sugar, caffeine and possibly water toxicity too."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Is Aspartame (aka Artificial Sweetener, 951) actually harmful to your body?
Commonly found in Diet drinks, for example, Diet Coke, Pepsi Max, and also in Artificial Sweeteners, such as Equal. Chemical name is Aspartame, also known as E951/951. _URL_0_ There are a lot of mixed messages about whether this chemical is bad for you. Many studies say it is, but then other studies say it's a complete myth. A lot of people I know say they never drink diet drinks because "they are worse for you than the regular sugary alternatives". Not really sure what to think. | [
0.0008281284826807678,
-0.08566490560770035,
-0.03173426166176796,
0.10128765553236008,
0.016677048057317734,
0.03885100036859512,
0.04182581976056099,
0.13114586472511292,
-0.06885195523500443,
-0.00477187754586339,
-0.09131968021392822,
0.04781593009829521,
-0.030597267672419548,
-0.0459... | |
1ujqr3 | Orthodox Christianity | Can I have an explanation of Orthodox Christianity?
How are its beliefs different from Catholicism?
Is there a priestly hierarchy like there is in Catholicism? If not how did it fall apart? (There was a pope initially right?)
And any other facts would be great/just a more in depth general summary please. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ceis1ll",
"ceiucl3"
],
"text": [
"Orthodox Christianity originated in the Eastern Roman Empire, after the Great Schism. It had a ''Pope'', but he was called the Patriarch. The Orthodox Church divided, mostly by nationality. Mass is called Liturgy and it is conducted in the local language, instead of Latin. Priests can marry and have children. There is a Hierarchy that is almost identical to the Catholic one.\n\nThink of it as a more liberal Catholicism divided by nationality.\n\nEDIT: We also do that crossing yourself thing with three fingers instead of five, there are no benches in churches, priests grow beards. Also, not all Orthodox Christianities are the same. For example, the Serbian Orthodox Church kept many pagan traditions such as [Badnjak] (_URL_0_) and [Slava] (_URL_1_). Some Orthodox Churches use the Roman Calendar instead of the Gregorian one. (Some use the Roman calendar, but celebrate Christmas according to the Gregorian calendar- it's pretty weird.) For example, Christmas is tomorrow for me.",
"I am a non-practicing Greek Orthodox Christian. Definitely not ultra conservative form of The Catholic Church.\n\nOrthodoxy claims apostolic roots, the pope in the early church is not like the Pope we see today. Ecumenical councils directed the church with 5 patriarchs in the major Christian cities of Alexandria, Antioch, Rome, Constantinople, and Jeusalem. Like the apostles after the death of judas, the early church relied on a council to make decisions, hoping the Holy Spirit intervened and produced God's will.\nThe Catholic Church is a direct result to the political instability in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. The Roman Pope claimed political power in the vacuum of stable rule in Western Europe, Orthodoxy, under the Byzantine empire, did not have deal withy the various power structures European Christians did. I believe that in the 60s reconciliation began, and the two religions are viewed as one disputed church.\n\nSimple differences are in the creed (Filioque), Eucharist, church hierarchy (orthodox do not have Pope), clergy and marriage, architecture, and liturgy.\n\nThere is an eastern rite of Catholicism that blends he two traditions and follow the Pope.\n\nKalistos Ware writes about orthodox tradition, and some good authors on early western Christianity are:\nBrown, Peter. The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity, A.D. 200-1000. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 2003.\n\nSouthern, R. W.. Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages. New York: Penguin. 1990"
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badnjak",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slava"
]
} | train_eli5 | Orthodox Christianity
Can I have an explanation of Orthodox Christianity? How are its beliefs different from Catholicism? Is there a priestly hierarchy like there is in Catholicism? If not how did it fall apart? (There was a pope initially right?) And any other facts would be great/just a more in depth general summary please. | [
0.08199205994606018,
-0.029209032654762268,
-0.0038937546778470278,
0.05252182111144066,
-0.023816809058189392,
-0.048846401274204254,
-0.06104901432991028,
0.02924537844955921,
0.05762960761785507,
-0.07641886174678802,
-0.06471499800682068,
0.022757638245821,
-0.12648285925388336,
0.0105... | |
8cjwzv | Why does Japan practice whaling? | I've read that 95% of Japanese have never or very rarely eaten whale yet Japan illegally hunts hunt 333 Minke whales every year.
Why does Japan practice whaling if it's not an essential part of Japanese cuisine ? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dxfin5w",
"dxfl9lo",
"dxfw9n6"
],
"text": [
"Why Japan continues to practice whaling:\n\n1. **Culture** - Some Japanese believe that killing one animal (e.g. a Whale) is more humane than killing thousands of animals (e.g. a school of fish or a ton of shrimp). This somewhat relates to Shintoism and the concept of everything having a \"spirit,\" but again it's more cultural than religious.\n\n2. \"**Research**\" - This is a controversial issue, but let me see if I can take an unbiased approach to it. The International Whaling Commission has an exemption for whaling that relates to medical research. So a Japanese organization known as the Institute of Cetacean Research conducts whaling operations under this IWC exemption. However, there is also a law in Japan that states that when a whale is killed no part of the body may be discarded as waste. So the ICR packages the whales (after they have done their research) for consumption/sale back in Japan. This is where organizations like Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace argue that Japan is using the clause in the IWC charter to engage in commercial whaling, which should technically be illegal. \n\n3. **National Pride** - Japan has had a long tradition of strong national pride, where they do not appreciate being dictated/told what to do by other countries. There is a fringe within Japan that sees whaling as something that only the Japanese should have a say in, and do not want to be seen as bowing to pressure from western countries.\n\n4. **Commercial Value** - This hasn't proven true in 5/6 years, but there is a market for whale meat. Were Japan able to haul in as much whale meat as they had intended, there is enough interest in the value of whale meat to fund the operations needed to hunt it. That being said, the folks from Sea Shepherd have had an enormous economic impact on commercial whaling in Japan.",
"\"Illegal\" is an interesting term to use. Japan could have avoided that tag by simply registering an objection to the IWC ban on commercial whaling in the 1980's, which is what Norway did, or by not signing up at all.\n\nGreenland, Canada and Norway catch more whales than Japan. USA catches slightly less than Japan. The numbers become even more skewed if one counts the mammals that IWC doesn't cover, including porpoises.\n\nGreenland, population 56,000, catches around 900 whale-category mammals per year, and more than 2000 porpoises.\n\nIn context, Japan's dislike of being singled out is probably understandable.\n\nMost things probably aren't an essential part of a nation's cuisine. Japan used to identify around 100 cuts of whale meat, which suggests it was not a marginal foodstuff at that time.\n\nAlso, if you've been to a Japanese school, you've probably eaten whale.",
"I lived in a Japanese whaling area. My impression is that there's a resentment at other cultures imposing their values on Japan. A lot of Japanese people have fond memories of eating whale meat in their youth. Particularly in the earlier years of privation in the 1930s-1950s, it was the only red meat many kids had. They don't understand why they should stop doing something that they've done in their country for centuries just because some other countries want them to. It's like, should Americans stop boiling lobsters alive just because ? Also, it does continue to have cultural relevance. In the area where I lived, whale was a local cultural delicacy that lots of tourists came to eat, and the situation was similar in other areas where whaling was done."
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does Japan practice whaling?
I've read that 95% of Japanese have never or very rarely eaten whale yet Japan illegally hunts hunt 333 Minke whales every year. Why does Japan practice whaling if it's not an essential part of Japanese cuisine ? | [
0.04916244372725487,
0.02244454063475132,
0.1044529527425766,
0.036470722407102585,
0.011611267924308777,
-0.025090672075748444,
0.004292419645935297,
0.02862776815891266,
-0.07902135699987411,
0.011252994649112225,
0.08685814589262009,
-0.05599968880414963,
-0.07683775573968887,
0.1195450... | |
566brg | What did Native Americans know in advance of hurricanes and how did they know it? What about animals? | I live in Central Florida. Hurricane Matthew is about 18 hours away. We have radar and satellites, but what foreknowledge did Native Americans have before a hurricane and what do animals know in advance? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d8gnh09"
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure of they did or not but you have to remeber that villages and gatherings of people were relatively small and didn't have a lot of \"stuff\" like we do today. Homes weren't as big or as complex, there were no cars or sheet metal etc. So storms wouldn't have been as deadly and as destructive as they are now."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What did Native Americans know in advance of hurricanes and how did they know it? What about animals?
I live in Central Florida. Hurricane Matthew is about 18 hours away. We have radar and satellites, but what foreknowledge did Native Americans have before a hurricane and what do animals know in advance? | [
0.023905303329229355,
0.027165094390511513,
0.03813745826482773,
0.12815284729003906,
-0.0006744125857949257,
-0.04430582746863365,
-0.012545316480100155,
-0.06658285111188889,
-0.053144633769989014,
0.06720618903636932,
0.040229931473731995,
-0.044736266136169434,
0.007030048873275518,
-0... | |
1gw4hy | What is laughter? | I know what laughter is but where did the sound originate from? Is it something we're all born with and something that is "pre-determined" or do we learn how to laugh? Is laughing defined by the way we do it or could it be something else? Help. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"caoie84",
"caoerba"
],
"text": [
"All cultures do it, though sometimes because they are nervous or embarrassed, but mostly as a result of realising something to be funny.\n\nOn youtube, there are quite a few videos showing babies of a certain age laughing hysterically over the sound of paper being ripped. One video shows rats being tickled - an ultrasound recording revealed chirping noises that sounded like laughing. I'd swear my dog is ticklish - and would laugh if he could!\n\n\nSo it would seem as if laughter, as with crying, is a fundamental reflex we are born with, but what causes the reflex to spring into action is something that occurs during life, directly via some stimuli (e.g. physical tickling) or indirectly (e.g. some mental realisation based upon the ideas and experiences you have gained).\n\nSadness and Crying, Joy, Happiness, Laughter, these and a lot more emotions seems to be a reflex that results when the mind acknowledges a change in your relationship to some value you held. Crying results when the mind acknowledges a loss of something that was important. Happiness, to some type of gain that was important. (Curiously, laughter and crying sometimes sound quite similar, from a distance!)\n\nLaughter seems to be the reflex result when your relationship to a value is (suddenly) realised to be *not* important.\n\nThe mountaineer laughs for joy at the top of the mountain, because the fear he had was suddenly realised to be silly, ridiculous, and not a valid fear after all. The students laugh hysterically when the stern professor farts, because the reverence they once held him has been destroyed. Or, a connection and contrast is made that is ridiculously trivial in a serious context, or ridiculously serious in a trivial context. All highlighting, in some way, that a contradiction isn't something to fear! \n\nAs to why we possess this ability? Both Laughing and Crying are \"cathartic\"; we feel better afterwards, and sometimes a lot better. A really hysterical bout of laughing, like a hard cry, can leave us feeling clearer, more adjusted to reality, stronger. It's almost as if the physical action helped our brains expunge the contradiction, and adjust our belief system to be more \"in line\" with reality! \n\nAnd the more in tune with reality your beliefs are, the better. (And that's where \"for survival and all that Darwin stuff\" comes in!)",
"This is incredibly theoretical... I love it. According to Wikipedia,\r\r*\"Laughter is a part of human behavior regulated by the brain, helping humans clarify their intentions in social interaction and providing an emotional context to conversations.\"*\r\rIn personal opinion, laughter is instinct. It is something we as humans are born with the knowledge. Just my two cents."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is laughter?
I know what laughter is but where did the sound originate from? Is it something we're all born with and something that is "pre-determined" or do we learn how to laugh? Is laughing defined by the way we do it or could it be something else? Help. | [
0.038092583417892456,
-0.07299962639808655,
-0.04600905254483223,
0.04255647957324982,
0.009783132001757622,
0.060752399265766144,
0.07724042236804962,
0.003469577757641673,
-0.03234684467315674,
-0.04284564033150673,
0.024904780089855194,
-0.03956478089094162,
-0.00006807161116739735,
-0.... | |
pjvd4 | How do they figure out how many calories are in my food? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c3pxv74",
"c3pyj0z",
"c3q18no",
"c3q1uoz",
"c3q11c2",
"c3pywb2",
"c3q32yf"
],
"text": [
"Calories are a measure of energy contained in the food.\n\nTo calculate the amount of energy in the food we need to release it. This is done by burning it completely in an oxygen atmosphere.\n\nTo measure how much energy is released they may use something called a \"bomb calorimeter.\" Basically it is a chamber (in which a known weight of food is burned) surrounded by a known amount of water. They measure how much the temperature of the water increases. By knowing some properties of the water, how much water there is and how much the temperature of the water increases, they can calculate how much energy was released by burning the food. One calorie is the amount of energy needed to heat 1L of water from 14.5ºC to 15.5ºC.",
"Here's the 5yo. version:\n\nThey light it on fire and measure the heat it makes.",
"I have nothing substantial add, I would just like to say: good question. That's something I had just resolved to \"accept what the package says\" until I read that question. Thank you.",
"A bomb calorimeter that has about 30ATM of oxygen set off in a uber strong vessel in a liter of water. Based off the temp diff you can figure out the amount of calories. \n\nMass spec to figure out the %age of stuff that makes up the cal?",
"also, if you what the food macros are, you can easily figure it out:\n\n* 4 kcal in 1 gram of protein\n* 4 kcal in 1 gram of crabs\n* 9 kcal in 1 gram of fat",
"And it's also not a precise number, more of a ball park figure. Simply because your body never lights food on fire.",
"It takes 1500 Calories to heat 40L of water (approximately how much is in your body) 37.5 deg Celsius (body temperature). That's about how much you eat in a day."
],
"score": [
125,
39,
5,
3,
3,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do they figure out how many calories are in my food?
| [
0.029244691133499146,
0.05024949088692665,
-0.047682080417871475,
0.03918495401740074,
-0.02461520954966545,
-0.028142791241407394,
0.02885681763291359,
-0.03907948359847069,
0.06897196173667908,
-0.02177395485341549,
0.02081049606204033,
-0.08472076058387756,
-0.04655342176556587,
-0.0687... | ||
p0ljz | Why was a constitutional amendment required to prohibit alcohol, but no such amendment is needed for the prohibition of other drugs? | I was just wondering why it seems like the government can ban whatever substance it wants today, but at the beginning of the 20th century they could only ban alcohol after amending the constitution (which is a lot of work). How are they able to just ban marijuana or even hard drugs without going through that whole process again? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c3lj8up",
"c3lkhhi",
"c3lj7z2"
],
"text": [
"*Just spitballing here, but this is what I'm thinkin...* Drugs aren't banned, per say, as alcohol was during Prohibition. You never hear people charged with having \"illegal\" substances, only \"controlled.\" It's a longstanding tradition in government to regulate the whole living hell out of anything you don't think you can get away with straight-up outlawing. Guns, for example.",
"ELI5 - When Prohibition was enacted, the Federal Government did not have the authority to perform bans without a Constitutional amendment.\n\nELI15 - You could think of this as two very different snapshots of Federal power, 50 years apart. Prior to US nationwide Prohibition, [some states had their own prohibitions and alcohol standards](_URL_2_). There was no unified controlling bureau. So, a nationwide Prohibition took the form of a Constitutional amendment to facilitate nationwide compliance. Keep in mind that [the BATF, controlling bureau for alcohol, tobacco and firearms, was originally a division of the treasury.](_URL_0_) They could tax, but not ban. (And, actually banning was counter to their model and mandates.) By the time the [Controlled Substances Act](_URL_1_) came into being two world wars and many federal bureaus later, nobody really questioned that the DEA and the FDA had nationwide controlling authority to regulate and ban whatever the bureaucrats deemed necessary.",
"The \"ban\" on drugs is not done by a congressional process. Due to the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, the DEA or HHS has control over what schedule a drug is placed in.\n\nThe prohibition of alcohol was enacted (and repealed) under a specific amendment to the US Constitution."
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Alcohol,_Tobacco,_Firearms_and_Explosives#Organizational_history",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States#Development_of_the_Prohibition_movement"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why was a constitutional amendment required to prohibit alcohol, but no such amendment is needed for the prohibition of other drugs?
I was just wondering why it seems like the government can ban whatever substance it wants today, but at the beginning of the 20th century they could only ban alcohol after amending the constitution (which is a lot of work). How are they able to just ban marijuana or even hard drugs without going through that whole process again? | [
0.04649563133716583,
0.0008027181029319763,
0.041609298437833786,
-0.06829328089952469,
0.040623124688863754,
0.07471545040607452,
-0.05809302255511284,
0.021466443315148354,
-0.004312051925808191,
0.014008430764079094,
-0.02004030905663967,
0.13135045766830444,
-0.05368026718497276,
0.042... | |
1ujxws | Why can we sometimes "feel" when a person is staring at us? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ceitsj6"
],
"text": [
"You can't. You just selectively remember when you guessed right."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why can we sometimes "feel" when a person is staring at us?
| [
0.01949775218963623,
-0.09029410034418106,
0.05478372052311897,
0.014529183506965637,
0.08028487861156464,
-0.03983084857463837,
0.09471410512924194,
-0.0357745997607708,
0.10858190804719925,
-0.0646350309252739,
-0.036966681480407715,
-0.05888177081942558,
-0.024387303739786148,
-0.040972... | ||
5t3vqj | Is there an RGB-printer or a CMYK-monitor? Is it possible, or even common? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ddjxlpp"
],
"text": [
"Not really. CMYK is subtractive because when light hits the surface some of the light is absorbed and only the light that isn't absorbed bounces back to our eyes. Cyan absorbs red light. Magenta absorbs green light. Yellow absorbs blue light. That's how we can print to make most of the colors we can see since our eyes can only *detect* those three colors.\n\nRGB doesn't work for printing because a green pigment would absorb both red and blue light and reflect only green light, so if you mixed that with blue pigment (which absorbs red and green light) it would just absorb all the light and look black.\n\nRGB works for monitors because it actually is *emitting* light. Again, cyan light would be a combination of green and blue light (and no red light) since a cyan pigment would absorb red and reflect all other light.\n\nBut if you only had lights that made Cyan light and Magneta light and Yellow light, you couldn't get any green light without having other colors present (if you want green light you would either have to add red light by making yellow light, or add blue light by making cyan light).\n\nSo that also doesn't work."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Is there an RGB-printer or a CMYK-monitor? Is it possible, or even common?
[removed] | [
-0.030266493558883667,
0.01365043967962265,
-0.08328217267990112,
0.03138822317123413,
0.021808907389640808,
0.012705679051578045,
-0.0001480981009081006,
-0.06200813129544258,
-0.05346522480249405,
-0.040873508900403976,
0.0054254052229225636,
0.024287885054945946,
0.04675198718905449,
0.... | |
5b46nj | Why does the universe form multiple galaxies instead of one super galaxy? | This image got me thinking
_URL_0_
why/how do multiple galaxies form instead of having just one super galaxy? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d9llled",
"d9lpkid",
"d9lt4pw"
],
"text": [
"Galaxies are gravitationally anchored by extreme masses like supermassive black holes at their cores. A \"universal galaxy\" would require a single core that is able encompass the whole universe within its dominant gravitational influence. Gravity is too weak to work so effectively across such universe-spanning distances. The idea is that there would always be a more local dominating field for matter to fall into. The presence of multiple accretion points like that across the universe pulled matter into the relatively distinct clumps we see today. The universe also continued to expand between these clumps to push them apart and further highlight the distinction.\n\n\"Why was the universe lumpy in the first place?\" is a big unknown.",
"The early expansion was so fast that large regions were fundamentally disconnected (as in, they didn't feel eachother gravity) Later as the universe cooled and the expansion slowed, gravity reversed the expansion in denser regions which would collapse into stars and galaxies. \n\nAnother thing is that the large scale distribution of matter in the universe is homogenous, so large regions actually feel as much pull outwards as inwards, so that gravity can only \"work on\" local differences in density \n\nYou could imagine a scenario in which the overall speed of expansion is slow enough that gravity could eventually reverse the entire universe, but this would result in a \"Big Crunch\" rather than a giant galaxy",
"Another way to view this is to consider that \"galaxy\" is a human made concept, its a way to classify what look to us to be groupings of matter. Having said that, another way to phrase your question would be: Why is it that matter isn't evenly distributed across the universe?\n\nThe simple (and incomplete) answer is gravity. Objects attract one another. The bigger they are, the harder they pull; the farther away they are, gravity's pull is weaker.\nThis means that after the big bang, matter started to pool into localized regions like nebulae, planets and the galaxies that we see today."
],
"score": [
23,
6,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Hubble_ultra_deep_field_high_rez_edit1.jpg"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does the universe form multiple galaxies instead of one super galaxy?
This image got me thinking _URL_0_ why/how do multiple galaxies form instead of having just one super galaxy? | [
-0.044558484107255936,
-0.09671532362699509,
0.015919607132673264,
0.03489478677511215,
-0.03358656167984009,
-0.027003461495041847,
-0.10495690256357193,
0.06778881698846817,
0.10804647952318192,
-0.02102440409362316,
0.021776441484689713,
-0.06892410665750504,
0.01636156253516674,
-0.031... | |
4ur9xe | Does your body burn more calories in natural heat v air conditioning? | If I run a mile on a treadmill in a room air conditioned to 68 degrees, will I burn less calories than if I ran a mile on that same treadmill, but outside in 92 degree heat? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d5sg8s8"
],
"text": [
"You actually burn more calories in cold temperatures. Your body works harder when cold to stay warm trying to keep homeostasis. That is why people who live and work above the arctic circle tend to need 4000-6000 calories a day to maintain proper weight and energy levels in comparison to the standard 2000 calorie diet most need."
],
"score": [
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Does your body burn more calories in natural heat v air conditioning?
If I run a mile on a treadmill in a room air conditioned to 68 degrees, will I burn less calories than if I ran a mile on that same treadmill, but outside in 92 degree heat? | [
0.05670497938990593,
-0.028352318331599236,
-0.041038449853658676,
0.0656401738524437,
0.0451602078974247,
-0.08326265215873718,
-0.05898690223693848,
-0.015539873391389847,
0.02684439904987812,
-0.015576078556478024,
0.049371421337127686,
0.006822800263762474,
0.047061000019311905,
-0.040... | |
1lhpxg | How are point spreads for sports betting made and how are they so accurate? | They do seem very accurate most of the time which makes betting very hard | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cbzg72j",
"cbzg3b4"
],
"text": [
"An expert picks an initial spread. And as bets are made, the casino moves the spread until there are equal amounts of money on both sides of the bet. \n\nSo the bettors are pretty much doing all the work. So long as the initial guess isn't too far off, the casino will make money.",
"I am not sure how the initial spread is determined, but the casinos and bookies regularly revise the spread based on the betting pattern. The goal of bookies is to have the same amount of money bet on each team, so that the losers essentially pay the winners. The bookies/casinos keep a customary percent of all bets, which is where they make their money. \n\nSo imagine a game between team A and team B. The casinos give an initial spread of 5 points, with A being the favorite. When betting starts, gamblers start betting heavily on A, because they think that A is going to dominate B, and therefore that the spread is too low. The casinos then have to increase the spread until an equal number of people bet on A and B. So basically the final spread is determined by the gamblers' hivemind."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How are point spreads for sports betting made and how are they so accurate?
They do seem very accurate most of the time which makes betting very hard | [
-0.01383102498948574,
-0.0010286938631907105,
-0.03760175406932831,
-0.044335950165987015,
0.005402674898505211,
-0.00781301874667406,
-0.011652661487460136,
0.017789149656891823,
0.1474580466747284,
0.009425558149814606,
-0.10882560163736343,
0.05412483960390091,
0.025178391486406326,
0.0... | |
3bmk25 | Was there a term for civil war before the American Civil War, or are we just unoriginal? | Did we invent the term in the 1860s and apply it to every such war, or did we just call it the established term? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"csngwjh",
"csnjjeu",
"csnhb3g",
"csnhgn8",
"csnkbbz",
"csnt0k4"
],
"text": [
"The Latin term bellum civile was first used of the Roman civil wars of the 1st century BC. The term civilis here had the very specific meaning of \"Roman citizen\". The English term civil war was first used in 1651 to refer to the English Civil War. Since the 17th century, the term has also been applied retroactively to other historical conflicts where at least one side claims to represent the country's civil society (rather than a feudal dynasty or an imperial power).\n\nThe terms internecine war and domestic war are often used interchangeably with \"civil war\", but \"internecine war\" can be used in a wider meaning, referring to any conflict within a single state, regardless of the participation of civil forces. Thus, any war of succession is by definition an internecine war, but not necessarily a civil war. In modern geopolitics since 1945, \"civil war\" is also used in a loose sense to refer to any large scale military conflict within a single country (i.e. used as a strict synonym of the generic term \"internecine war\"), creating terminological overlap with insurgencies or coups d'état.",
"Interestingly enough, the American Revolutionary War could be classified as a civil war as well, and the American Civil War could be classified as a revolution (and in fact, some people still claim that calling it the Civil War is a misnomer and inappropriate to what it was).",
"\"Civil\" war means war within one single nation state where factions fight each other. This was the case before the American civil war, and there were \"civil\" wars throughout history. No, we Americans did not invent the term.",
"Wars tend to have very generic names when they're actually in progress, and get more distinctive names applied later - and usually then only to avoid confusion. See, for example, World War I, which was simply called The Great War until World War II was imminent. In the case of the Civil War, there's only been one in the entire history of the nation, so there hasn't been a need to rename it to anything more descriptive.",
"war between the states seemed to be used a lot years ago, I would think that civil war came about as a short description from some newspaper headline, If i had a better handle on how to get back here I would - I am going to look at some newspaper articles from the period and check it out.",
"The English Civil War (1642–1651) was not called anything like that until after when the historians had to hang a name on it. I suppose the Americans did much the same. Names for wars often occur after the war, rather than in the middle of it."
],
"score": [
12,
7,
5,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Was there a term for civil war before the American Civil War, or are we just unoriginal?
Did we invent the term in the 1860s and apply it to every such war, or did we just call it the established term? | [
-0.014700032770633698,
-0.032059282064437866,
-0.020046761259436607,
-0.006641820538789034,
-0.11406687647104263,
0.06787517666816711,
-0.04500149190425873,
-0.060967106372117996,
-0.016970163211226463,
0.001949923112988472,
0.024954846128821373,
-0.006936050485819578,
0.05146721377968788,
... | |
2bu7wt | How come after i stare at a computer/tv screen, when i look away my vision is blurry for a few minutes? | I don't have good vision and wear contacts and glasses, if i stare at a computer screen/television up close i have a considerably different view when i look away from the screen, why is this? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cj8y747"
],
"text": [
"Your eyes are adjusting from the light on your monitor to the light in your surroundings. They differ in brightness and your eyes need to adapt to these lighting changes.\n\nTo avoid straining your eyes too much, you can direct your gaze away from your monitor for a few moments and blink your eyes every so often to keep it moisturized. I've found that this helps lessen eye-fatigue effectively."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How come after i stare at a computer/tv screen, when i look away my vision is blurry for a few minutes?
I don't have good vision and wear contacts and glasses, if i stare at a computer screen/television up close i have a considerably different view when i look away from the screen, why is this? | [
0.013359066098928452,
-0.05439099296927452,
0.020496664568781853,
-0.04592412710189819,
0.04998393729329109,
-0.006129719316959381,
0.061038754880428314,
0.035925064235925674,
0.0795191302895546,
-0.052952878177165985,
-0.013252966105937958,
-0.0052198003977537155,
0.01566239818930626,
-0.... | |
5vko83 | How do some medicines cause weight gain if you eat and exercise the same while taking them? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"de2spmy",
"de2tq48"
],
"text": [
"It affects your sense of hunger and satiety, making you more likely to eat more.\n\nYes, if you hold everything constant, you're not going to gain weight (well, you still might - some medications make you retain water).",
"If a medication changes the way your hormones work, then this can decrease what is known as your basal metabolic rate. This is basically how hard all of your cells are working when you're just resting. \n\nIf a medication decreases your basal metabolic rate, then you will use a lot less of the energy that you eat. But you will likely also feel tired, lethargic and not be able to think as fast as a result. \n\nIt is as simple as calories in vs calories out, but the calories out is *much* more dependent on your basal metabolic rate than it is on how much exercise you do. So medications or diseases that disrupt this can have profound effects on weight gain/loss.\n\nThere are other factors such as some medications which cause more glucose to be turned into fat and less to be used for energy (such as some diabetes medications, which is a problem since you don't want diabetes patients to get even fatter), and also medications that increase or decrease your appetite or desire/ability to do exercise. Also, some medications don't change the total amount of fat, but cause fat to be redistributed from your limbs to your torso ('central adiposity')."
],
"score": [
5,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do some medicines cause weight gain if you eat and exercise the same while taking them?
[deleted] | [
0.0061181155033409595,
-0.02637265995144844,
-0.008961022831499577,
0.040568575263023376,
-0.050946593284606934,
-0.042639825493097305,
0.062281567603349686,
0.055015869438648224,
-0.00033202627673745155,
-0.0069738151505589485,
-0.03841708227992058,
0.06597814708948135,
0.046558525413274765... | |
5jbl80 | Is it possible that something bigger than a blue whale lives deep in our waters? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dbew08g"
],
"text": [
"I suppose it's possible, but it seems quite unlikely. For one, it takes a lot of food to sustain such a large animal, and food is relatively scarce over most of the ocean depths compared to what's available closer to the surface. Secondly, things get washed up from the depths by tsunami and dragged up in nets all the time. We knew about giant squid long before anyone recorded a live one for that reason. So far there's no evidence of anything bigger than a blue whale."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Is it possible that something bigger than a blue whale lives deep in our waters?
[removed] | [
-0.015698103234171867,
0.03456282988190651,
0.06306403130292892,
0.03156757354736328,
0.021271349862217903,
-0.0926462709903717,
0.005619951523840427,
0.014934837818145752,
-0.03869638592004776,
0.06166348606348038,
-0.022638697177171707,
-0.07097884267568588,
-0.02695632167160511,
0.09504... | |
46vloo | Why has the Disappearance of Madeleine Mccann continue to appear in the news even though she has been missing for almost 10 years? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d0865n4",
"d085476",
"d087mvx"
],
"text": [
"Because of the odd circumstances, the international nature of the investigation between UK and Portuguese authorities, and the wide reporting that it saw in the beginning, so it gets followed up on. Also, the family is well-off and has done a lot to keep it in general public consciousness.",
"The right demographics of the victim, the oddish circumstances of her disappearance and very little evidence to go on. Personally I think the major thing is the demographic, though.",
"Because it sells newspapers. I believe she or Diana featured on the front page if one \"newspaper\" for a year.\n\nIf it didn't sell papers, it would be relegated to places you wouldn't notice"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why has the Disappearance of Madeleine Mccann continue to appear in the news even though she has been missing for almost 10 years?
[removed] | [
-0.0034200740046799183,
-0.011712281964719296,
0.08544714748859406,
0.09391963481903076,
0.09861752390861511,
0.08536700159311295,
-0.06937296688556671,
-0.0013438682071864605,
0.05811375752091408,
-0.04617141932249069,
0.0736609473824501,
0.021556153893470764,
-0.08782017230987549,
-0.036... | |
6o5h6n | What's the reason most trains don't know their assigned tracks until right before arrival when most planes have assignments up to a day in advance? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dket4he"
],
"text": [
"I think Its because they only can go on certain ways where are railroads, and If only one is late, then the whole thing is messed up (like 2 train arrives to the same track because one of them is late). Meanwhile planes can go almost anywhere they want, changing route is not that hard to do, and even if one of them is late they can just assign it a new Terminal spot for it if the original one of is taken."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What's the reason most trains don't know their assigned tracks until right before arrival when most planes have assignments up to a day in advance?
| [
0.004354657139629126,
-0.062012605369091034,
0.016119202598929405,
0.1574132889509201,
0.02890896052122116,
0.0350506491959095,
-0.03255641087889671,
-0.017970923334360123,
0.021819336339831352,
-0.02289777249097824,
-0.0366605669260025,
0.10217930376529694,
-0.07746894657611847,
0.0563827... | ||
qshx0 | Nuclear power fueled by Thorium | I keep hearing about how well Thorium would be as a nuclear power source.
Especially as in the LFTR(Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) design.
Could someone explain in laymen terms how it generates power.
Follow-up question
Also if it is so good as many have said why isn't the public using this type of system? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c40ahb5",
"c40ame2"
],
"text": [
"Thorium undergoes nuclear fission in the same basic way that Uranium does. You put a bunch of it together in a lump, and neutrons start flying around. Some of the neutrons hit the nucleus of a thorium atom, and the nucleus splits apart, creating different kinds of atoms, and releasing some heat and a bunch more neutrons. The heat is used to boil water and the resulting steam spins turbines that are attached to electrical generators.\n\nLFTR reactors are just a good way to get a bunch of Thorium atoms together in a lump so they'll do this.\n\nLFTR technology has some problems you won't hear the advocates talk about much. The primary problem is what happens when (not *if*) one of the reactors overheats and breaks open. It'll release some really nasty fluorine acids, and consequently be horribly chemically hazardous as well as radioactive. Cleanup of a broken LFTR would be a double nightmare.\n\nThis isn't to say we shouldn't use LFTRs. They may be the right solution. I'm just saying, you should be skeptical when people claim the LFTR is the greatest thing since sliced bread. It has its strengths and weaknesses just like anything else.",
"LFTRs have been romanticized on Reddit, but you never hear about their downside- always just pie in the sky perfect-world scenarios with them.\n\nEvery intricate and highly complex technology has down sides. Please keep this in mind."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Nuclear power fueled by Thorium
I keep hearing about how well Thorium would be as a nuclear power source. Especially as in the LFTR(Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) design. Could someone explain in laymen terms how it generates power. Follow-up question Also if it is so good as many have said why isn't the public using this type of system? | [
0.023388424888253212,
0.018733441829681396,
-0.0726737305521965,
0.08163323998451233,
0.07490625977516174,
0.03184038773179054,
-0.04087434709072113,
0.05793404579162598,
0.015929117798805237,
0.012075266800820827,
-0.029341308400034904,
-0.0009371740743517876,
0.12392574548721313,
-0.0115... | |
7m3rh4 | Why can phone cameras record in 4K but not take 4K still photos? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"drr4132",
"drr4ahr"
],
"text": [
"The photos are higher res than that... if you want them smaller just downsample or crop them.",
"....phones have been taking 4k photos for quite some time already. 4k is 8MP. \n\nthe iphone5 was taking 8MP photos"
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why can phone cameras record in 4K but not take 4K still photos?
[removed] | [
0.022580869495868683,
0.10995520651340485,
0.01694929413497448,
-0.02804671786725521,
0.017576677724719048,
-0.085838682949543,
-0.021938076242804527,
-0.01798049546778202,
0.039070095866918564,
0.01539135817438364,
0.006065052002668381,
0.00996724795550108,
0.024650558829307556,
0.0312449... | |
240szt | why don't woman grow facial hair | Why don't woman grow facial hair like men. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ch2ha1i"
],
"text": [
"Hormones. Testosterone levels high in men which promote male features. Estrogen in females."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why don't woman grow facial hair
Why don't woman grow facial hair like men. | [
0.0019340489525347948,
0.016839975491166115,
-0.02677837945520878,
0.0017702641198411584,
-0.028172414749860764,
-0.037030771374702454,
-0.04909836873412132,
-0.0970577523112297,
-0.04353829845786095,
0.08694131672382355,
0.08683139085769653,
-0.07439734786748886,
-0.07314381003379822,
-0.... | |
2ftewq | the difference between a theoretical physicist and a "normal" physicist. Also a rogue physicist versus one that's none rogue. | If all the rogue ones and theoretical ones are coming up with crazy mind bending shit, what are the normal ones doing? How come the fantastical ones get all the air time? What do we actually know then if these guys are throwing science at the wall to see what sticks?
I'm just very confused ._. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ckcjnrn",
"ckckdj8"
],
"text": [
"The difference between theoretical and experimental physics is a difference in technique. For the most part theoretical physics is trying to answer many of the same questions as experimental physics, even of the mundane how do we make device A perform better.\n\n The majority of physicists are employed in condensed matter research that is about determining the properties of, normally, solid matter. This has uses in designing better computer chips, hard disk drives etc, wind turbines as well as the speculative technologies like quantum computers. \n\nExperimental physicists would use lab equipment to make and then try to work out the properties of the material. This is generally very expensive and gives little insight into why the properties are the way they are. Theoretical physics uses maths and computers to simulate the material using a wide variety of models, in some cases by trying to solve the fundamental quantum mechanics. When successful this can give more insight into why the material behaves the way it does, and can be used to predict interesting materials much cheaper than the try to make everything approach of experimental physics. The drawback being the results are only as good as the model, which inevitably means that the results are less conclusive.\n\nIn practice this form of experimental and theoretical research may be conducted within the same research group and both guide the other. \n\nThe popular image of theoretical physics, string theory and the like, only employs a relatively small number of people. They are trying to use the tools of theoretical physics to produce a unifying theory of physics that includes both general relativity (the physics of the very big) and quantum mechanics (the physics of the very small). This is hard to experimentally test as such conditions don't really exist on earth, nor can they be created.\n\nWe can sort of test if such a model is reasonable as it must under the appropriate conditions reproduce current physics, something string theory does which is why it is considered promising.\n\nRogue physicist is a purely critical term, nobody would call themselves as such, but generally those called it are people whose models of reality break some of the generally accepted rules of reality. An extreme example would be a unifying theory that meant energy conservation didn't apply.",
"A more ELI5 explanation for you.\n\nTheoretical physicist: works only on paper or computer making new hypotheses or models.\n\nExperimental physicist: tests hypotheses using real world experiments.\n\nHybrid physicist: does both theoretical and experimental work.\n\nPopular media physicist: explains science to the general public. May or may not do real science in his/her professional life.\n\nRogue physicist: not really an official term. Just a guy who may have hypotheses that are more 'out there' than most.\n\nCrackpot: self appointed types who write about faster than light phenomena, perpetual energy machines etc."
],
"score": [
3,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | the difference between a theoretical physicist and a "normal" physicist. Also a rogue physicist versus one that's none rogue.
If all the rogue ones and theoretical ones are coming up with crazy mind bending shit, what are the normal ones doing? How come the fantastical ones get all the air time? What do we actually know then if these guys are throwing science at the wall to see what sticks? I'm just very confused ._. | [
0.019656509160995483,
-0.0786750540137291,
-0.02048281580209732,
0.10664842277765274,
-0.00994873046875,
-0.1011773869395256,
-0.03011191077530384,
0.026683969423174858,
0.03701039403676987,
0.006846658419817686,
0.0024841423146426678,
-0.012086708098649979,
-0.08406379818916321,
-0.015939... | |
7gypzw | How long would it take to heat a bathtub of water with a lighter? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dqms6vi",
"dqmrn2p",
"dqmrj6x"
],
"text": [
"171 hours, 11min\n\nAssumptions: \n\nNo loss of energy\n\n80 gallon tub\n\nStart/finish temp: 68F/103F\n\nHeating power: 40 watts (consensus found online for a candle)",
"In practice, you'd lose significantly more heat than you'd be adding. A bit like blowing air into a blimp that has a huge hole in it. The minimal heat from the lighter would be lost to the cooling of the tubs surface water.",
"With a single lighters? I don't think it'll ever happen."
],
"score": [
7,
5,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How long would it take to heat a bathtub of water with a lighter?
[removed] | [
0.013870194554328918,
0.01868806779384613,
0.015162334777414799,
0.02481289766728878,
-0.02305326983332634,
-0.07819633930921555,
0.00009174845763482153,
-0.026926318183541298,
-0.044964082539081573,
-0.002437290968373418,
-0.0050953589379787445,
0.011342333629727364,
0.06626640260219574,
... | |
tbjor | What's the difference between multi-grain and whole grain foods? | See above. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c4l870e",
"c4l79ul"
],
"text": [
"Multi-grain means that several sorts of grain are used. The opposite is something that would only use one kind of grain.\n\nWhole grain means that it uses the grain with its \"skin\" (the bran). The opposite is refined grain, which removes the \"skin\", like for the flour that's used to make white bread.\n\nSo a product can be both whole grain and multi-grain if it uses several sorts of grain, and that the \"skin\" of the grain isn't removed.",
"Typically Whole Grain foods have one, or occasionally, two types of grains used in the production of the product. Multi-grain foods have more than that. Many bread products will actually list the grain count, such as \"7 grain\" or \"12 grain.\" \n\nUnless you were asking about the difference between Whole Grain and Whole *Wheat*, in which case the difference is between a product made mostly with grains and the other with wheat."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What's the difference between multi-grain and whole grain foods?
See above. | [
0.009679269045591354,
-0.03289404883980751,
0.054545529186725616,
-0.01780858263373375,
0.025850839912891388,
-0.058911245316267014,
-0.057124536484479904,
0.00907499622553587,
-0.0012603970244526863,
-0.014741569757461548,
0.03603909909725189,
-0.04083603248000145,
-0.03172612562775612,
-... | |
2gly05 | What exactly am I downloading/uploading on a speedtest? | How is speed measured, and what exactly am I downloading/uploading when doing a speedtest? Is it empty/junk info, or is it some standard file? Also, should I be worried that it might contain spyware/viruses?
Edit: Thank you for the explanations! | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ckkcv04",
"ckkefka",
"ckkmvk5",
"ckkpbl4"
],
"text": [
"I've looked into this. I was not able to recognize a file format. Here's how I'd do it:\n\nDOWNLOAD TEST:\n\nI'd make sure the client pulls data and then deletes it quickly. You don't want to have a producer/consumer problem throw of speeds so it's not going to let the browser cache the file on the local dist. I'd guess it's just random bits, or...if not, it's treated as if it is. For this reason, i don't think you need to worry about viruses - the data is never re-constituted into a file and never persisted on your local computer.\n\nUPLOAD TEST\n\nI'd have the client generate data. I'm pretty sure that speedtest is doing this because it doesn't persist the download file (in memory and on disk would both be observable) so it doesn't have a big file to upload. So..it generates data. Plus, it can easily pace data generation without having to worry about file reading slowness, so it's better results regardless.",
"It's generally highly incompressible data, like MP3 audio or H.264 video.",
"it's essentially static. random or pseudo-random information is completely incompressible.",
"Download\n\"Your computer downloads small binary files from the web server to the client, and we measure that download to estimate the connection speed.\"\n\nUpload\n\"A small amount of random data is generated in the client and sent to the web server to estimate the connection speed.\"\n\n_URL_0_"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://support.speedtest.net/entries/20862782-How-does-the-test-itself-work-How-is-the-result-calculated-"
]
} | train_eli5 | What exactly am I downloading/uploading on a speedtest?
How is speed measured, and what exactly am I downloading/uploading when doing a speedtest? Is it empty/junk info, or is it some standard file? Also, should I be worried that it might contain spyware/viruses? Edit: Thank you for the explanations! | [
-0.015479792840778828,
0.02332070842385292,
-0.08009421825408936,
0.01546239759773016,
0.054938897490501404,
-0.044382765889167786,
-0.012983957305550575,
-0.01896304450929165,
-0.010259120725095272,
0.021876001730561256,
0.07179860025644302,
-0.010721121914684772,
-0.07959030568599701,
-0... | |
3w57zf | Why, when you rotate a glass of liquid with ice cubes in it, does the ice not rotate with the cup? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cxthevi",
"cxtgvqe"
],
"text": [
"Inertia.\n\nEverything in the universe is trying to carry on the way it is - moving or stationary. When you push yourself across the floor on your office chair (don't pretend you don't) when you stop pushing, you carry on.\n\nWhen you push the glass round, the ice wants to stay still. There's very little friction between the cup and the ice - so there's not much force pushing it round.",
"If you rotate it slowly enough long enough it will. Actually the rotation speed does not matter. You must wait for the rotation speeds to match up. Very slowly they will."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why, when you rotate a glass of liquid with ice cubes in it, does the ice not rotate with the cup?
| [
0.039660416543483734,
-0.04848513752222061,
-0.04412570595741272,
0.0033543275203555822,
-0.01606644131243229,
0.01569724828004837,
0.04568055644631386,
0.014322655275464058,
0.1321256458759308,
-0.04910372942686081,
-0.057509731501340866,
0.03950204327702522,
-0.008144200779497623,
0.0194... | ||
8nk8ax | I sometimes see [brackets] used in things such as interviews. What do they mean? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dzw2nej"
],
"text": [
"It means the quote was paraphrased by the interviewer for clarity. For example, if the interviewee said \"I met John, he is a nice guy\" then the interviewer might print it as \"[John] is a nice guy\"."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | I sometimes see [brackets] used in things such as interviews. What do they mean?
[removed] | [
-0.09615183621644974,
0.11600430309772491,
-0.021348901093006134,
0.0067104375921189785,
-0.002072299364954233,
-0.009171590209007263,
0.03146696090698242,
-0.0058023822493851185,
0.040042977780103683,
-0.09926457703113556,
-0.03432966396212578,
0.029388004913926125,
0.020198523998260498,
... | |
2npygq | Why does pain tolerance differ in people? | Does it also differ in race and sex? If so, what country has the highest/lowest? Why? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cmg1d7l"
],
"text": [
"There's really no one answer for this. It's thought to be partly genetic, partly psychological and partly due to gender (females tend to have a higher pain tolerance than males, something to do with oestrogen). \n\nCurrent thinking (on my phone, can't link) is that two people can actually tolerate the same level of pain, person one gets on with their day (which could be due to cultural reasons - complaining is a sign of weakness), person two complains, cries, pops pills and is bed ridden. Their actual level of pain is the same but person one is mentally stronger."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does pain tolerance differ in people?
Does it also differ in race and sex? If so, what country has the highest/lowest? Why? | [
0.14181719720363617,
-0.049531154334545135,
-0.03575139865279198,
0.08901212364435196,
-0.04750026389956474,
-0.006982725113630295,
-0.0013598429504781961,
0.08299397677183151,
0.007609750609844923,
-0.04442870244383812,
0.06303340196609497,
0.029458511620759964,
0.009681595489382744,
0.03... | |
2denpw | How does it feel to finally grasp that someone has died | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjos5zh",
"cjos0gh"
],
"text": [
"There's about five stages that a person goes through when dealing with a loss. The first stage is isolation and denial. It's like you go into a state of shock and you can't believe what is happening is real. You may feel a flood of emotions from numbness to sadness to anger, but mostly you have a hard time accepting that the person is gone. You go into a deep depression and it's difficult to function or focus. It's like your mind goes on autopilot. \n\nOnce the effects of the shock wear off the pain reemerges and you become angry. You never had time enough to tell the person how much you loved them. You're angry that they let you down. You're angry that they're going to miss all the things in your life like marriage, children, grandchildren, pets, friends, and birthdays, holidays, and other life events. You feel very helpless which leads to the next stage.\n\nWe start to try to bargain because if only we had gotten a second medical opinion or if only we had pushed for them to eat right and exercise they'd still be here. We try to gain some sense of control through this stage and analyze what we could have done differently. Sometimes people find themselves bargaining with god to bring their loved ones back.\n\nThen we fall into a depression. We worry about things like the funeral costs and things like how to take care of the rest of our loved ones with the loss of support and income. Then there's another type of depression that happens where you miss them. You miss the way they smell, the way they made you laugh, their voice, and everything about them. Everything you see or hear reminds you of them from the food you eat to the songs on the radio. You can't escape because literally everywhere you turn there's something that reminds you of them.\n\nEach day slowly gets better until one day you realize that you've moved into acceptance. You can think back on the person without all the pain and you can remember how much they made you laugh and made you happy. \n\nThe thing about the stages of grief is that they don't have to go in order. You can experience one a particularly day and experience another one the next day or even in the same day. Normal grief can last up to two years and there's no right way to grieve. It looks different for everyone depending on how they choose to honor their loved ones. Some people heal relatively quickly and others take a lot longer.",
"Honestly, you can't really fathom it, your brain won't let you. You kind of self consciously put it to the back of your mind, but deep in your gut you feel it, you feel that fear that didn't even exist in your worst nightmares. For me personally it hits me at the viewings, that's when I realise that the love and support that person showed you is gone. It's gone forever and no one can fill that special love you and that person shared."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does it feel to finally grasp that someone has died
| [
0.026676185429096222,
-0.06456205248832703,
0.03213639184832573,
-0.04022247716784477,
0.0634375736117363,
0.018485603854060173,
0.08608358353376389,
0.022501366212964058,
0.12040591239929199,
-0.019959058612585068,
0.019476909190416336,
0.019190523773431778,
-0.05059429630637169,
0.033684... | ||
tap2n | The Godel-Turing Conclusion | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c4l1i8i"
],
"text": [
"Godel showed that mathematics wasn't a sturdy building made up from a foundation of sturdy well defined bricks. \n\nInstead it was more like the buildings in the drawings of [M. C. Escher ](_URL_0_) full with weird and wonderful loops and logical contradictions from which there is no escape.\n\nTuring drove the point home by showing that these problems would also not be solvable with a computer. And worse, there would be absolutely no way of knowing if a problem was just very hard, or truly impossible.\n\nSo the figures in the Escher drawing would never know, if they are just walking on a damn long stairway, or an infinite one."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://i.imgur.com/ulA6J.jpg"
]
} | train_eli5 | The Godel-Turing Conclusion
| [
-0.006273066624999046,
0.020063966512680054,
0.028861884027719498,
-0.05531754717230797,
0.0039046406745910645,
0.08711159229278564,
0.044337108731269836,
-0.003609912935644388,
0.07175934314727783,
0.007708249147981405,
-0.011077573522925377,
-0.017886580899357796,
0.059668462723493576,
0... | ||
45imt5 | What causes clogged arteries? Can it be reversed? If so, how? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"czy5qvj",
"czy7i3n"
],
"text": [
"Clogged arteries are caused by plaque, which is the result of a variety of substances building up on the walls of the arteries. It can be treated by adapting a healthier lifestyle consisting of balanced diets, regular physical activity etc.",
"Also, how do you find out how bad it is? I ate a pretty balanced diet up until the last five or so years but I'm worried those five years have done more damage than I think. Is there a test I can ask my doctor to do to tell me?"
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What causes clogged arteries? Can it be reversed? If so, how?
| [
0.015153955668210983,
0.02095223031938076,
0.044713620096445084,
0.061129361391067505,
-0.047583576291799545,
-0.0614125058054924,
-0.035521406680345535,
-0.07930626720190048,
-0.02737422287464142,
-0.01206920575350523,
-0.08601062744855881,
0.06256338953971863,
0.025675946846604347,
0.010... | ||
1qx7uq | If glass is transparent,why do we still notice that it's there? | For example, even if a drinking glass is completely transparent, we can still tell the glass is still there, even without water in it (which would refract light) | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cdhend9",
"cdheq1f"
],
"text": [
"For one, sometimes they're not completely transparent, just mostly transparent.\n\nSecond, the glass is refracting light -- bending it as it enters and exits the glass. This creates a distortion of the light coming through. We can recognize that this distortion has a shape and we see the glass.\n\nThis is also why a perfectly clean glass pane can look like a doorway. If the entire thing is uniformly distorted, it doesn't look distorted at all, and you walk right into it.",
"Considering how often I see videos or gifs of people walking through glass doors, I think that sometimes people *don't* notice :)\n\nthe thing is with most glass, is that it still absorbs some level of light that passes through it - and glass isn't perfect, there are usually some level of imperfections in the glass. So when light passes through it, we might notice that something isn't *quite* right. Furthermore, glass is reflective, so even if its nicely polished and transparent, we will often notice the glare of light on the glass, if nothing else.\n\nIf glass was completely and purely transparent - no refraction of light whatsoever, and no alteration of light that passes through it - then I would imagine we would have no idea that the glass is there at all, because there is no visual indication that its there in the first place."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | If glass is transparent,why do we still notice that it's there?
For example, even if a drinking glass is completely transparent, we can still tell the glass is still there, even without water in it (which would refract light) | [
0.07739673554897308,
-0.046382687985897064,
0.02130061760544777,
0.05383448675274849,
0.10421949625015259,
-0.009789392352104187,
0.10667689144611359,
-0.04324256628751755,
0.1045154258608818,
0.025937194004654884,
-0.010311540216207504,
-0.06390084326267242,
-0.01445353589951992,
0.030774... | |
4tvy7q | Let say we dig hole into earth, how is the atmospheric pressure down there? | Is it same as atmospheric pressure? Or is it as huge as one in the ocean? Or completely different? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d5kq46w"
],
"text": [
"Atmospheric pressure increases with depth, just like it decreases with altitude, because you have more air above you pushing down. However, you'd have to have a pretty deep hole to feel any noticeable effects - to feel 2 atmospheres you'd need a hole nearly 4 miles deep, because air is relatively light. \n\nContrast this with water: you only need to dive to about 10m / 30 feet to feel 2 atmospheres."
],
"score": [
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Let say we dig hole into earth, how is the atmospheric pressure down there?
Is it same as atmospheric pressure? Or is it as huge as one in the ocean? Or completely different? | [
-0.03903818875551224,
0.032578930258750916,
0.0375855378806591,
-0.037782203406095505,
-0.05501880124211311,
-0.04395194351673126,
0.05935077741742134,
-0.019817011430859566,
0.06521214544773102,
0.03326218202710152,
-0.06092505902051926,
-0.029131177812814713,
0.006370381452143192,
-0.049... | |
1h557r | Why do some songs or events give you the chills? | If you hear a really good song that suddenly changes tone or has a sudden rise... boom... chills. Why?
Goosebumps... chills.. goose pimples... whatever people call them... shivers... | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"carfj4q"
],
"text": [
"/r/asmr should give you a good example of sounds, /r/frisson should give you good examples of music that cause this phenomena\n\nEDIT: Never actually answered the question, there's not enough research on the topic yet.\n\nQuote from asmr wikipedia \" Professor Tom Stafford, an expert in psychology and cognitive sciences from the University of Sheffield, was quoted in The Independent, saying,[1]\n\nIt might well be a real thing, but it's inherently difficult to research. The inner experience is the point of a lot of psychological investigation, but when you've got something like this that you can't see or feel, and it doesn't happen for everyone, it falls into a blind spot. It's like synaesthesia – for years it was a myth, then in the 1990s people came up with a reliable way of measuring it.\"\n\nA very unsatisfying answer. I'm sorry."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do some songs or events give you the chills?
If you hear a really good song that suddenly changes tone or has a sudden rise... boom... chills. Why? Goosebumps... chills.. goose pimples... whatever people call them... shivers... | [
-0.03082195669412613,
-0.08175616711378098,
0.024629222229123116,
0.0780024603009224,
-0.011058809235692024,
0.042284153401851654,
0.09774443507194519,
-0.004677488934248686,
0.11846199631690979,
-0.09375490248203278,
0.02342594973742962,
-0.04981084167957306,
0.05259206146001816,
-0.13572... | |
8d8547 | Why do our voices sound different when heard back through recording? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dxl063f",
"dxl09km"
],
"text": [
"When you hear your own voice, the way it sounds to you is affected by your skull, jawbone, etc.\n\nTo the second question...it's because it's not how we are used to it sounding. It's the same as why we don't like how we look in photos - we're used to seeing ourselves reversed in a mirror.",
"Your head transmits sound, being mostly solid. That means when you talk you hear the sum of two signals: the sound your voice makes and the sound that travels from your vocal cords through your head to your ear. Everybody else only hears the first of those. The recording only hears the first of those. It doesn't sound \"like you\" because you're comparing it to something that nobody else can hear."
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do our voices sound different when heard back through recording?
[removed] | [
0.007510198280215263,
-0.042617011815309525,
-0.044663578271865845,
-0.04090981185436249,
0.0006527170189656317,
-0.03026696667075157,
0.047497477382421494,
-0.07544656097888947,
0.07494738698005676,
-0.12208615243434906,
-0.052331577986478806,
-0.023437000811100006,
-0.03986341133713722,
... | |
1z7b03 | I pay for 50Mbps internet speed, yet _URL_0_ routinely shows my speed being around 10Mbps. What's going on and is there any way I can improve it? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cfr5ki3"
],
"text": [
"You pay for *up to* 50Mbps. I'd bet that your plan specifically says Up to. Unless you are on FiOS, and even then there might still be that.\n\nReasons why?\n\n* Neighborhood network congestion\n* Local Network Infrastructure in larger area is crappy\n* Bad peering / connection to _URL_0_\n* Crappy home networking setup\n\nHow to fix?\n\nFor your home network, check out your router and make sure it has the latest firmware updates. This can sometimes fix problems with traffic / bandwidth. Update your computers network drivers as well.\n\nIf you are going wireless, consider getting a 2.4/5Ghz DUAL BAND router. That means both 2.4 and 5 at the same time. 5 tends to be a better option in dense areas where there are a lot of WiFi signals that cause interference.\n\nCheck your modem - sometimes the ISP provided one is shitty. Consider a compatible Motorola Surfboard instead. Plus you aren't paying to lease a modem from your ISP.\n\nFor everything outside your network, other than complaining, there is not much else you can do. If your neighborhood is just super congested, nothing short of you logging your speed using two or three network speed testing services and complaining on a daily basis will get anything done."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": [
"speedtest.net"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"speedtest.net"
]
} | train_eli5 | I pay for 50Mbps internet speed, yet _URL_0_ routinely shows my speed being around 10Mbps. What's going on and is there any way I can improve it?
| [
0.04751930013298988,
-0.0016426141373813152,
0.09157883375883102,
-0.016656868159770966,
0.013014028780162334,
-0.048410508781671524,
-0.016919268295168877,
-0.040630634874105453,
-0.0399467796087265,
0.023522604256868362,
0.004492355044931173,
-0.010503477416932583,
-0.11695636808872223,
... | ||
1zta7k | When, if ever, will Crimea officially be a part of Russia? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cfwre9m"
],
"text": [
"That's a difficult topic. As for the first part of your question: Officially and according to the Ukrainan constitution, Ukraine can only change its territory in an all-Ukrainian referendum, therefore, from the Ukrainian standpoint, a secession of Crimea will be illegal and Ukraine will most probably keep claiming Crimea for itself.\nThe question of when exactly Crimea legally will be part of Russia in case of a secession from Ukraine is even more complicated. It again depends on the standpoint. From the Russian point of view, it will legally be part of Russia as soon as the Russian parliament agrees to an accession. However, this doesn't mean that other states are obliged to consider Crimea Russian territory. The most likely outcome will be a global divide over the question, just like with Kosovo. While some states will recognize Crimea as a part of Russia, some others won't and will treat it as a part of Ukraine. If Crimea will join Russia, it will most probably remain a territorial grey zone of international law for decades."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | When, if ever, will Crimea officially be a part of Russia?
| [
-0.018759941682219505,
-0.004497421905398369,
0.0034346089232712984,
0.008060484193265438,
-0.08893366158008575,
-0.09112591296434402,
0.026982607319951057,
-0.06650438159704208,
0.030748257413506508,
-0.08364953100681305,
-0.11001057922840118,
0.09087155759334564,
-0.029447054490447044,
0... | ||
1w9zma | The current emerging market selloff | A ton of countries are having issues with their currency this week. Where did this come from and what are the drivers? What are the solutions?
I've read recent [articles](_URL_0_) on this and each article is a microcosm of the issue, nothing is comprehensive.
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cf01brp"
],
"text": [
"Interest rates on long term bonds are rising in the U.S. and a rate rise is expected in the U.K. pretty soon, so emerging markets - except, for example, Brazil - are looking less attractive for bond yields. There are other things at play, like the massive devaluations in Turkey, Argentina and Venezuela, and the less significant but more long-term devaluation of the rupee in India. The \"sell-off\" in Argentina, Venezuela and India is based almost entirely on their own monetary policy."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/search?q=emerging+market+sell+off"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The current emerging market selloff
A ton of countries are having issues with their currency this week. Where did this come from and what are the drivers? What are the solutions? I've read recent [articles](_URL_0_) on this and each article is a microcosm of the issue, nothing is comprehensive. | [
0.013653213158249855,
-0.01446776557713747,
0.0053141796961426735,
0.055247195065021515,
0.02103670872747898,
-0.07524161785840988,
-0.08688215911388397,
0.06863655894994736,
-0.06487149745225906,
-0.05122728273272514,
-0.016484932973980904,
0.0032638851553201675,
-0.11159098148345947,
0.0... | |
1uzcy0 | Are humans crippling natural selection through conservation efforts? | I was just thinking that before us, things died off if they could not survive on their own. We actively protect animals and plant life through various conservation efforts and I was wondering if this somehow is going to hurt us in the long run? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cen5jfr"
],
"text": [
"Not really, because most things are dying out as a direct result of our actions; hunting, destroying natural environments, etc. Most of the animals you hear the most hoo-hah about are ironically probably the ones we have most directly affected. In terms of the big predators that are in trouble it'd be an absolute ecological disaster if we stopped trying to save them because there is nothing that can fill that niche in the food chain so effectively. Even pandas, which I have the biggest qualm about trying to save, are as a result of cutting down natural habitat. Additionally, there is *always* a background level of extinction that is unavoidable and necessary for things to evolve, but our current levels are alarmingly higher than that.\n\nWhile you could argue that humans are a natural force and so have just as much impact on natural selection, the truth is that we are altering and removing environments so fast that there is simply no time for anything to be able to adapt.\n\nAdditionally, almost every single one of the world's most threatened species is as a result of human actions.\n_URL_0_"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_world's_100_most_threatened_species"
]
} | train_eli5 | Are humans crippling natural selection through conservation efforts?
I was just thinking that before us, things died off if they could not survive on their own. We actively protect animals and plant life through various conservation efforts and I was wondering if this somehow is going to hurt us in the long run? | [
-0.033588964492082596,
0.006170777138322592,
0.08602827042341232,
0.08819904923439026,
0.14865204691886902,
0.050375137478113174,
-0.07609625160694122,
-0.06185784935951233,
-0.020408377051353455,
0.0771690383553505,
0.0072555080987513065,
-0.03677288815379143,
-0.07099258899688721,
0.0102... | |
1wo2mr | How does Carbon Dating work, and how accurate is it? | A friend of mine (conservative evangelical type) states that carbon dating is not accurate, and they "showed proof at church" to that effect. Of course, when asked for the research they quoted, he was unable to produce anything.
With the "Y-Chromosome Adam" article that's circulating reddit, I wonder if someone can explain how carbon dating works, its accuracy, and how scientists can come up with a number like "208,300 years ago" (relating to the age of 'Y-Chromosome Adam'." | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cf3tk3i"
],
"text": [
"A specific isotope of carbon decays at a predictable rate after something has died. So by measuring just how much of it has decayed, scientists can estimate how long it has been dead. It's based on assumptions (such as the amount of the isotope has remained relatively constant), and there are lot of factors which can throw it off, but it can still make a fairly good estimate. \n\nMost of the arguments against its accuracy seem to focus on one or two outlier samples, claiming it invalidates the entire process. Like many other scientific procedures, taking multiple samples can often reveal outliers and show a more general distribution. And while there may be some instances where a test subject is too contaminated to test accurately, it doesn't invalidate its use on other subjects."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does Carbon Dating work, and how accurate is it?
A friend of mine (conservative evangelical type) states that carbon dating is not accurate, and they "showed proof at church" to that effect. Of course, when asked for the research they quoted, he was unable to produce anything. With the "Y-Chromosome Adam" article that's circulating reddit, I wonder if someone can explain how carbon dating works, its accuracy, and how scientists can come up with a number like "208,300 years ago" (relating to the age of 'Y-Chromosome Adam'." | [
-0.040770720690488815,
0.07150803506374359,
-0.0007959326030686498,
0.049556273967027664,
0.013681722804903984,
0.024705974385142326,
-0.10095695406198502,
0.041578810662031174,
0.030449487268924713,
0.07462859898805618,
-0.005959829781204462,
-0.027900299057364464,
-0.014788522385060787,
... | |
1vlx7b | When running, what causes a stitch? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cetk4o4"
],
"text": [
"It's breathing on the same time that one foot hits the ground- that can cause your diaphragm to cramp since one side is constantly stressed. \nTry and vary your breathing so the same side isn't striking the ground and it should be fine"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | When running, what causes a stitch?
| [
-0.0268623698502779,
0.0191181730479002,
0.009652039967477322,
0.030084911733865738,
-0.008736220188438892,
-0.05831572785973549,
-0.06597268581390381,
-0.00047271951916627586,
0.0039489720948040485,
0.011104267090559006,
-0.07483211159706116,
0.07036939263343811,
0.00897790864109993,
-0.0... | ||
44leje | Why is the maximum volume on TVs so high? | Well, at least mine, anyway - the maximum volume goes up to an arbitrary value of '100', though I rarely ever go past 15. Even with a larger group of people, where background noise is usually pretty loud, I don't need to go past a quarter of the maximum threshold. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"czr1lnp",
"czr0fq2"
],
"text": [
"The max volume produced is determined tv's hardware (how loud the speakers can get), the tv's software doesn't take that into account. \n \nThere are times when you get a super soft source, either from a different channel, a game console, etc. There are some channels where my volume is 25/100 and others when it's 75/100 due to the loudness of the two sources.",
"could be that some channels are low volume so its nice to have that high number; \nalso you could connect your tv to another device so you make your tv to loudest and then control the volume with the other device."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is the maximum volume on TVs so high?
Well, at least mine, anyway - the maximum volume goes up to an arbitrary value of '100', though I rarely ever go past 15. Even with a larger group of people, where background noise is usually pretty loud, I don't need to go past a quarter of the maximum threshold. | [
0.043582119047641754,
-0.043826278299093246,
0.050518833100795746,
-0.1215313971042633,
-0.0625639334321022,
-0.061911072582006454,
-0.0043863351456820965,
0.06831225752830505,
0.06419706344604492,
0.048212770372629166,
-0.05082332342863083,
0.016336221247911453,
0.006424072664231062,
0.03... | |
z9y9g | The current panic about Greece leaving the Euro | Why would the weakest link leaving the Eurozone damage the currency value? And why would other countries be more likely to leave if the least financially stable member left? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c62rjzs"
],
"text": [
"The problem is that, when *any* country leaves the Eurozone, it establishes the precedent that the Euro is the kind of currency which countries might decide to stop using. That doesn't encourage people to invest in the Euro."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The current panic about Greece leaving the Euro
Why would the weakest link leaving the Eurozone damage the currency value? And why would other countries be more likely to leave if the least financially stable member left? | [
0.06418604403734207,
-0.03369849547743797,
-0.023479271680116653,
0.01586650311946869,
0.1574241667985916,
-0.04834507033228874,
-0.03082996979355812,
0.06417608261108398,
0.03175624832510948,
-0.05762697756290436,
-0.030419720336794853,
0.03685538098216057,
-0.015383492223918438,
0.018099... | |
6kf0vq | how do you calculate the damage caused by an asteroid hitting earth? | How much damage would be caused by an asteroid 12-27m diameter travelling at 7.5km/s if it hit earth? Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"djlkwyr",
"djlkht1"
],
"text": [
"There are five main factors that influence how much damage an asteroid will do if it hits the Earth:\n\n1) Its mass. This is obvious - the more mass the asteroid has, the more oomph it is going to hit with.\n\n2) Its velocity. Again, kind of obvious - an asteroid hitting at 30 km/s will hit with four times as much energy than one hitting at 15 km/s.\n\n3) Its density. The denser an asteroid is (for the same mass), the better it is at penetrating the atmosphere - and thus the more of its energy it retains as it hits.\n\n4) The impact angle - the shallower the angle is, the more atmosphere the asteroid has to go through and the more it is slowed down before impact.\n\n5) What it hits. Depending on the material that is hit, there may be secondary damaging effects - for example, an asteroid hitting the ocean will cause a tsunami.\n\nFor your example... let's assume a 20 m diameter asteroid made of iron, with a density of 8000 kg/m^3. Let's also assume it comes in at a 45 degree angle, and hits sedimentary ground.\n\nThe asteroid will strike the ground at 6.74 km/s, with an energy of 180 kilotons TNT equivalent. It opens up a crater with a diameter of 577 meters and a depth of 177 meters.\n\nAt five kilometers from the impact point, the seismic shock (which arrives about one second after impact) will have a magnitude of 4.1 and a Mercalli intensity of IV to V - dishes and windows might break, and you will definitely feel it. The airblast will arrive 15 seconds after the impact, with a peak overpressure of 0.105 bar and maximum windspeed of 23.7 m/s (a severe gale, level 9 on the Beaufort scale), enough to shatter windows.\n\nIf you are just 1 km away, the airblast, with an overpressure of 2.07 bar, will be sufficient to cause multistory wall-bearing buildings and highway bridges to collapse - almost no residential structures will remain standing.\n\nI got these effects from the [Earth Impact Effects Program](_URL_0_) - you can enter some data yourself, see what happens with different asteroid sizes, densities and velocities.",
"When faced with a complicated, math heavy question like this, the first thing to do is find out if someone else has done the hard math and wrapped it up in a user friendly package.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nEnjoy.\n\nDoing it by hand is going to be a matter of modeling the initial energy (easy), energy dissipated in the atmosphere (hard), impact duration (hard), and the resultant behavior of the impacted surface (very hard)."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/",
"http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/"
]
} | train_eli5 | how do you calculate the damage caused by an asteroid hitting earth?
How much damage would be caused by an asteroid 12-27m diameter travelling at 7.5km/s if it hit earth? Thanks! | [
0.1046595498919487,
0.016125785186886787,
0.07069306075572968,
-0.01144060492515564,
0.007548367138952017,
-0.03697347640991211,
-0.018989091739058495,
0.17530712485313416,
-0.06798464059829712,
0.09012380987405777,
-0.02337602898478508,
-0.0440615713596344,
-0.015808062627911568,
-0.03145... | |
7ixzox | How do Lego bricks not lose tension/force through repetitive play? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dr29bz4",
"dr2etdw"
],
"text": [
"It's how the bricks are made. The LEGO term is \"clutch power\". You have the top cylinders on the top of the bricks and then on the inside you have inner cylinders. They do give out but after a LONG time. Here's an example _URL_0_",
"Basically, they do - but it takes A LOT of repetitive play and the design is such that it's meant to counter this as much as possible. The shapes click together, and are meant to click together so that the least amount of the plastic is abraded away (this is why you should stick them together straight up and down and not break them apart by wiggling them side to side!). \n\nSomething that people have noticed as Legos change in composition is certain aspects of their quality, particularly the weight/plastic content (up to 30% less plastic in some shapes!), and one of these factors is typically the height of the little button/\"cylinder\" on top that clicks (or clutches) together with the underside of the top block. The taller that cylinder is, the longer the Lego lasts. Newer Legos will not last for as many click-togethers as old ones did, but the precise decline in quality can't be accurately predicted yet."
],
"score": [
19,
13
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/1754/how-much-usage-can-a-lego-piece-take-before-it-loses-its-clutch-power"
]
} | train_eli5 | How do Lego bricks not lose tension/force through repetitive play?
| [
-0.0008054899517446756,
0.017121145501732826,
0.0642518699169159,
-0.009100859984755516,
-0.029152611270546913,
0.03803299739956856,
-0.04094827175140381,
0.0013861027546226978,
0.006301467306911945,
0.03985217958688736,
-0.04776932671666145,
0.023661324754357338,
-0.011332498863339424,
0.... | ||
7ftpye | I read an article stating that porn is a $94 billion dollar industry. Considering all the free pornography out there, how do they stay so profitable? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dqebokz"
],
"text": [
"Internet ads, membership sites with higher quality videos that also are safer from the threat of malware and viruses, and specialty services that let you hire a porn star or crew to make a specific scenario to your specifications (an expensive service, but it exists)."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | I read an article stating that porn is a $94 billion dollar industry. Considering all the free pornography out there, how do they stay so profitable?
[removed] | [
0.1061067283153534,
-0.07489131391048431,
-0.016574140638113022,
0.014409624971449375,
-0.014525815844535828,
0.04169818013906479,
-0.013226302340626717,
-0.017493780702352524,
0.015698984265327454,
-0.044017255306243896,
0.022968856617808342,
0.04413604736328125,
0.04331756755709648,
0.00... | |
2cpoc7 | How is the president protected from aerial assaults? | I recently saw a post showing how the president is protected from ground threats such as people walking up to the president with handguns. But say the president's motorcade is coming through my town. What's stopping me from renting a private air plane and crashing it in the middle of the motorcade? Does the secret service set up some type of missile defense? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cjhrquo",
"cjhrrpx"
],
"text": [
"There will be a no-fly zone in the space around where the President will be. The Secret Service will coordinate with the FAA on the routes POTUS is taking. If an aircraft comes too close, it will likely be scuttled.\n\n_URL_0_",
"I remember seeing a presidential motorcade years ago, and noting the military helicopters in the area. I am pretty sure they'd be able to take on your Cessna."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/05/02/no-fly-zone-to-be-enforced-by-shoot-to-kill-order-during-nato-summit/"
]
} | train_eli5 | How is the president protected from aerial assaults?
I recently saw a post showing how the president is protected from ground threats such as people walking up to the president with handguns. But say the president's motorcade is coming through my town. What's stopping me from renting a private air plane and crashing it in the middle of the motorcade? Does the secret service set up some type of missile defense? | [
0.03142885863780975,
0.01564616896212101,
0.04403218626976013,
-0.01570574752986431,
0.05067591741681099,
0.0655721127986908,
0.048308923840522766,
-0.024756228551268578,
-0.021652575582265854,
0.13967633247375488,
0.042132794857025146,
0.06043710932135582,
0.09390150755643845,
0.005600604... | |
21lvme | How much of a risk are birds to airplanes, and why haven't we solved that problem?! | With the news of the jetBlue plane having to make an emergency landing because it hit one bird, how is that even that big of a deal? It seems to me that it would just bang, hit the bird, obliterate it, and keep on flying. Is this still a risk for transatlantic/pacific flights? I hate the thought of my plane going down in the atlantic, just because of a little bird... | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cgea960",
"cgef8lj",
"cgebe6m",
"cgeanc1",
"cgeapcc"
],
"text": [
"I believe Mythbusters did an episode on what a bird could do to a mere car's windshield. Now, compare that to forcing a bird through a turbine (which is only meant to handle air). So yes, it's a risk for any aircraft, but most pilots know to avoid flocks, most planes generally fly far above where birds fly (except takeoff and landing), and many planes have multiple engines so they can keep going even if one gets seagulled.",
"Bird strikes are a huge problem during take-off and landing and frankly we can solve it but people get all excited when you say you're going to \"kill all the birds.\" Airports use pyrotechnics and landscape control to keep birds away from the airfield. I think I heard that the Port Authority in New York actually uses a hawk.\n\nHowever, even these methods can have problems. I worked at an airport and went out with the wildlife control guys one day. We had to call the local cops to tell them we were setting off pyrotechnics because neighbors had been known to report them as gun shots (which they are). Also the neighbors didn't take to kindly to the noise especially if we had to set some off at 8am on a Sunday morning.\n\nAnother problem is that birds can become desensitized to the things we do to scare them away. Recently they tried installing bird radar so that ATC can work around them if they are around the airfield.",
"Striking anything at several hundred miles per hour is going to be a problem - there's not really any way around that. Aircraft are designed to be as light as possible - which means their external skin is made of very thin aluminum. We can't use anything heavier that might better resist bird strikes without hugely affecting the aircraft's performance and efficiency.\n \nIt's also a problem for the engines because they're sucking in a truly massive quantity of air - which means that anything that gets close enough to the engine inlet is getting sucked in with it. As /u/Silent_Talker says, it's not as simple as putting some type of screen in front of the engine to keep objects out, as this would destroy the performance of the engine. \n\nReally the only way to avoid bird strikes is to avoid flying into birds.",
"For most of the flight you are way above where birds are, it's really only a danger at the start and end of the flight. \n\nPlanes have multiple engines.\n\nThere isn't much you can do to block the bird. The plane is going several hundred MPH, and the turbines need free airflow. There is nothing you can put in front of them that will block a bird while not impeding the airflow.",
"airports that regularly have bird problems will use air cannons or other means to scare birds away."
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How much of a risk are birds to airplanes, and why haven't we solved that problem?!
With the news of the jetBlue plane having to make an emergency landing because it hit one bird, how is that even that big of a deal? It seems to me that it would just bang, hit the bird, obliterate it, and keep on flying. Is this still a risk for transatlantic/pacific flights? I hate the thought of my plane going down in the atlantic, just because of a little bird... | [
0.11706443876028061,
0.0012079558800905943,
0.019531525671482086,
0.06927209347486496,
0.08007778972387314,
0.01970490626990795,
0.0336645282804966,
-0.007686424534767866,
0.07780104130506516,
0.05220593884587288,
-0.08970823138952255,
0.07780853658914566,
-0.05718950182199478,
0.056252747... | |
yn8re | Consenting, or not consenting to police searches. Of your pockets or your car. | How does it work? Is there a special way for me to word things if I don't want to consent to a search? I live in California if that changes things. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c5x4wr4"
],
"text": [
"Clearly and repeatedly state \"Officer, I do not consent to any searches\". Do NOT physically resist a search, even if it's an illegal search. Ask \"am I being detained or am I free to go?\" If you're not being detained, leave. If you ARE detained and then searched, keep your mouth shut and lawyer up, and assuming your lack of consent was caught on the cop's dashcam, you can get almost anything they found on you thrown out of court.\n\nDo NOT try to argue with the officer, beyond stating that you do not consent.\n\nDo NOT try to lecture the officer about what the law says.\n\nDo NOT physically resist, even if the officer is acting illegally."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Consenting, or not consenting to police searches. Of your pockets or your car.
How does it work? Is there a special way for me to word things if I don't want to consent to a search? I live in California if that changes things. | [
0.07086033374071121,
0.055005695670843124,
-0.02938167192041874,
0.012311355210840702,
0.03746865689754486,
0.04288572072982788,
0.03186586871743202,
-0.02306288853287697,
0.07327906787395477,
-0.07977747917175293,
0.05478695034980774,
0.04603169113397598,
0.046490028500556946,
0.024314515... | |
241b9b | why does the navy's new rail gun have and explosive discharge if it's powered by electromagnetic energy? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ch2mdyr",
"ch2m05f"
],
"text": [
"[This thread](_URL_0_) at r/askscience should help you out a bit.",
"It generates a ton of heat and pressure along with sparks, so the air ignites. the explosion is a result of the firing, not the cause of it. part of the reason we're looking at railguns is explosive launches of shells have an inherent limit on how fast they can propel the shell, the rail gun has a much higher one, meaning we can fire lighter shells that do more damage through pure kinetic energy instead of explosives, making the munition safer to handle and less bulky"
],
"score": [
6,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/22iqo3/why_does_the_us_navy_rail_gun_round_explode_into/"
]
} | train_eli5 | why does the navy's new rail gun have and explosive discharge if it's powered by electromagnetic energy?
| [
0.0007318375282920897,
0.058494146913290024,
0.03395006060600281,
0.048560626804828644,
0.04705856740474701,
0.0016792903188616037,
0.037523068487644196,
0.04882361367344856,
-0.011837190948426723,
0.0674251914024353,
0.013365301303565502,
0.0732257217168808,
0.01502091996371746,
0.0194273... | ||
3ebhl4 | With all the big shiny telescopes in the world, why can't they simply show 'moon landing deniers' proof of the Apollo landings? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ctdaotw",
"ctdar5r",
"ctdb1rl",
"ctdblp1",
"ctdeuw9",
"ctdb0rg",
"ctdcoxl",
"ctdd76n",
"cte7h01",
"ctde4rg",
"ctdql6a",
"ctdq5pb"
],
"text": [
"You could. Apollo 11 (and 14 and 15 I think as well) placed mirrors on the moon so you could laser measure it's distance. \n\nBut moon landing deniers have likely come up with some crazy theory to refute this by now.",
"Conspiracy theorists don't typically respond well to proof. They discard it, assume it to be a fabrication, or move the goalposts in some fashion. The whole problem is that conspiracy theorizing is not especially logical, so logical proof is not especially effective.",
"The biggest, shiniest telescopes can only resolve details on the moon down to the size of a football field. That is not enough resolution to reveal lunar landing sites.\n\nAlso, those telescopes are typically controlled by governments or groups who rely on government funding. Conspiracy theorists would unlikely to believe they were not in on the hoax.",
"Because they are way too small.\n\nBut they [are available](_URL_0_) from satellites around the moon.",
"There is a better way to prove the deniers wrong though:\n\nWhen was the moon landing faked? People saw the rockets blast off. The USSR's early warning nuclear launch satellites would have detected the launch and the USSR's radars would have tracked the apollo capsules in orbit before they set off towards the moon.\n\nHad either of those things not happened the USSR would have been jumping up and down screaming \"fake\" because this was a major embarassment to them at the time.\n\nOnce you have a launch, that leaves earth's orbit, and comes back a few days later, the easiest way to do this is to slingshot around the moon. Just flying out into space and turning around is a hell of a lot harder (because it uses more fuel).\n\nSo you mean to tell me we can put men into space, send them to the moon, but we decide to fake the actual landing? That part really isn't that technically hard. And its not like we were not prepared to do a dry run. Apollo 10 did a lunar orbit without actually landing.\n\nSo why not, with the next trip, take the next step? Why lie about it?\n\nDoesn't make sense.",
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.\n\nAll the evidence in the world isn't enough for someone who doesn't want to believe something.",
"It can be done. \nIt has been done. \nConspiracy theorists are unable to accept anything they don't agree with, so the proof is irrelevant.",
"Hubble's best resolution of the moon is about 40 ft per pixel. Ground based telescopes would have a higher resolution, but would have difficulty with atmospheric scattering and tracking. \n\nFortunately there are a number of orbiters around the moon. Here's a [NASA picture](_URL_1_) from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter showing Apollo 17's landing site. \n\nJust Google photos of lunar landing sites.",
"The LRO already did. Also, you assume moon landing deniers can be convinced. Sure maybe some, but most are conspiracy theorists who are set in their ways. Just like those who still believe the [earth is flat](_URL_2_); a belief that can be debunked with TONs of tangible evidence here on earth. There's just as much overwhelming evidence of the moon landings that deniers ignore or \"refute\" it with baseless accusations and whatnot. \n \nSo pretty much there's no longer any point in trying to prove it to deniers any more. The evidence is there, those who don't accept it will never be convinced.",
"I ran the numbers on this a few months ago. In order to visually see the ~1m flag on the moon, you would need a lens about 500m in diameter. Check the Wikipedia page on optical resolution and there's a formula for the necessary size of a lens in order to resolve an object of a certain size at a certain distance.",
"Telescopes are not yet powerful enough to resolve a landing area like that. We would need to put a satellite in orbit around the moon with an awesome camera.",
"The real question is \"Why not send a probe to take pictures?\""
],
"score": [
90,
37,
17,
15,
10,
9,
5,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.space.com/12796-photos-apollo-moon-landing-sites-lro.html",
"http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/584392main_M168000580LR_ap17_area.jpg",
"http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/"
]
} | train_eli5 | With all the big shiny telescopes in the world, why can't they simply show 'moon landing deniers' proof of the Apollo landings?
| [
-0.0010143565014004707,
-0.041430748999118805,
0.07181328535079956,
-0.024820130318403244,
0.04745617136359215,
-0.10399623215198517,
-0.03713477402925491,
0.014889730140566826,
-0.043047431856393814,
0.024426335468888283,
-0.06219158694148064,
-0.03275265172123909,
-0.000503039569593966,
... | ||
33ewrk | Orphan genes/orphan inherited disorders | What is an orphan gene and how does it relate to orphan inherited diseases, or does it at all? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cqk8f96"
],
"text": [
"Orphan diseases is just a term for rare genetic disorders. Orphan genes are genes that produce products that are not similar to gene products in other similar species."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Orphan genes/orphan inherited disorders
What is an orphan gene and how does it relate to orphan inherited diseases, or does it at all? | [
-0.0647939145565033,
0.029333122074604034,
-0.05823001638054848,
0.061905961483716965,
-0.030313881114125252,
0.04451814666390419,
-0.07663003355264664,
0.04037219658493996,
0.027008486911654472,
-0.03967112675309181,
0.08988261222839355,
0.0618646964430809,
-0.0037875142879784107,
-0.0396... | |
25m9ot | Why does a head massage feels so good if there are no muscle on top of your head? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"chik3t3"
],
"text": [
"Well, firstly, there are plenty of touch receptors there for feel-good fun, but in terms of muscles, there are muscles on the side of the head, and the muscles on the front and back of the head are continuous with (i.e. attach to) a [layer of tissue](_URL_0_) that covers the entire top of the head. A head massage can move this layer around (and manipulate muscles for relaxation or whatever)."
],
"score": [
10
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galea_aponeurotica"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why does a head massage feels so good if there are no muscle on top of your head?
| [
-0.02896229550242424,
-0.018495919182896614,
-0.022102005779743195,
0.001478782040067017,
-0.014612097293138504,
-0.034682828933000565,
0.07663129270076752,
-0.0162973552942276,
0.08180586993694305,
-0.0010713854571804404,
0.08140844106674194,
-0.02031370997428894,
0.04840228706598282,
-0.... | ||
68djbv | What made Coca cola so much more popular than Pepsi? | They are both very similar drinks and where only made roughly 6 years apart. What made people like Coca Cola more than Pepsi? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dgxugqh",
"dgxs05w",
"dgy49bw"
],
"text": [
"I'm going on a limb and just saying that it's the fact that Coke came first and Pepsi came later. Another example of this is the fact that Pepsi made Gatorade first and when Coca Cola tried to make a similar drink, Powerade, they also didn't do as well in popularity.",
"I am going to say that it is because Coke decided to give away their product in many places, installed their own hardware, controls the product. Pepsi kinda did this but lost Subway and others in the cola wars. The biggest winners are the companies that get free product and an end to end system in exchange for free marketing. \"Free\" might not be 100% but common $1 for a large....",
"Another reason coke focused mainly on coke and beverage products while Pepsi has PepsiCo which includes a vast array of chips/snacks . I think PepsiCo is actually a bigger company comparing the two"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What made Coca cola so much more popular than Pepsi?
They are both very similar drinks and where only made roughly 6 years apart. What made people like Coca Cola more than Pepsi? | [
0.005997796542942524,
-0.0811699628829956,
-0.044179853051900864,
0.04375611990690231,
0.028520748019218445,
0.027977457270026207,
0.015049268491566181,
0.10083223134279251,
-0.0381656289100647,
-0.053257789462804794,
0.0012719470541924238,
0.015274887904524803,
0.018362149596214294,
-0.01... | |
25mc9e | Why don't atomic explosions "ignite" the atmosphere. | [This](_URL_0_) wikipedia article about the manhattan project piqued my curiosity when it mentioned that one of the members of the team was concerned that a nuclear explosion might "ignite" the atmosphere. So, please ELI5: What do they mean by "ignite" the atmosphere? Why was it a concern? Why didn't (doesn't) it happen? Thanks | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"chikrhu",
"chimlbz",
"chilbnq"
],
"text": [
"The fear that was briefly held is that it would heat the surrounding air enough for the nitrogen in it to fuse. If this happened, they thought, this might release enough energy for even more nitrogen to fuse. And so on, in a self-sustaining fusion reaction across the surface of the planet.\n\nBut it didn't take much calculation to figure out that not only is it hard to make nitrogen fuse (a lot harder than, say, isotopes of hydrogen and lithium, which are what are used in H-bombs), but the reaction would not be self-sustaining at all. Any fusion that did occur would not generate enough heat for the reaction to continue; there are lots of processes by which the heat gets sapped away. In fact making thermonuclear reactions is very very hard even under very controlled conditions. \n\nThey did calculations that showed that even if you assume the reactivity of nitrogen is several orders of magnitude higher — that is, if it were thousands of times easier to make nitrogen fuse than it actually is — the heat losses would still be so significant that no reaction of consequence would take place. \n\nHow seriously did they take it? I don't think most of them took it very seriously — it was a \"flight of fancy\" idea that sounded cool at first, but didn't stand up to much scrutiny. However it did stick around as an amusing rumor, sort of a black joke, until the Trinity test.",
"So, the basic idea of a nuclear bomb is based on the fact that certain materials \"decay\" which means that their atoms naturally break apart, and emit high energy particles. When these high energy particles hit other atoms, those atoms too can \"break apart.\" \n\nImagine bunch of mouse-traps, each with a ping pong ball on the part that swings down when it's triggered. They're fairly stable just sitting there, but if one triggers, it will fling it's ball into the air, landing on another, and another, until all the traps go off. \n\nThat's sort of like the uncontrolled \"chain reaction\" in the material that is the \"core\" of the bomb. So, for a uranium bomb, you use explosives to keep pushing uranium closer and closer together, until the particles the atoms emit are so numerous and close together that a big part of that lump of uranium \"triggers.\" Since each time one of those particles is released, a little bit of matter is converted into pure energy, you get a huge explosion. \n\nThe fear was that the explosion would be so powerful that the released heat would compress something in the atmosphere, like nitrogen, and that nitrogen would be so compressed that it would start it's own chain reaction, releasing enough energy to push more nitrogen together, and on and on. If that happened, the fear was that it would spread through the whole rest of the atmosphere, until all the nitrogen was exhausted. Fortunately, nitrogen is too far apart, and the energy spreads out too much, for that to have happened.",
"The calculation for this is no longer classified and is publicly available (but a bit difficult to find). \n\nWhat they found was the energy released by fusion of particles in the atmosphere was technically enough to cause more fusion to occur, when you account for the fact that energy will rapidly disperse in all directions and there will be heat losses, there isn't sufficient energy density to make a self sustaining reaction capable of igniting the atmosphere."
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project#Bomb_design_concepts"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why don't atomic explosions "ignite" the atmosphere.
[This](_URL_0_) wikipedia article about the manhattan project piqued my curiosity when it mentioned that one of the members of the team was concerned that a nuclear explosion might "ignite" the atmosphere. So, please ELI5: What do they mean by "ignite" the atmosphere? Why was it a concern? Why didn't (doesn't) it happen? Thanks | [
0.0593477226793766,
0.035007111728191376,
0.031166551634669304,
0.062437258660793304,
0.10548628121614456,
-0.022324534133076668,
0.10555890947580338,
0.008488730527460575,
-0.007775351870805025,
-0.0023133810609579086,
-0.029593242332339287,
0.00743257999420166,
0.035375017672777176,
-0.0... | |
5x78ph | Why do candles smell strongest when you blow them out? | Some context, I was sitting in my bathroom doing my business when I realized it didn't smell so good. I considered lighting a candle but in my head I thought, "What good is it? It's not going to do anything until you blow it out." | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"defte6t",
"deg3qav"
],
"text": [
"The scent is often oil based. If you burn the oil, you destroy the scent. But blowing it out, allows it to smolder thereby vaporizing the oil scent and filling the air with droplets of scent. (The same principle with incense sticks when you light them on fire, they smell stronger when you blow out the flame).",
"u/Sounds_of_Spokane is thinking about scented candles, but is overthinking. He's kinda accidentally half-right.\n\nWhat's happening is inefficient combustion. If you have perfectly efficient combustion, you'll have carbon dioxide, heat, and light as the three byproducts of a chemical reaction. All pretty well odourless.\n\nCandles are reasonably efficient when they're burning. When you blow out the candle, you remove a lot of the heat from the reaction, lowering the efficiency, allowing all sorts of other byproducts to emerge in greater quantities.\n\nThese byproducts smell. You'll also notice that candles or matches rarely produce smoke when lit. It's when you extinguish them that you see the smoke. More smoke, more smell."
],
"score": [
49,
23
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do candles smell strongest when you blow them out?
Some context, I was sitting in my bathroom doing my business when I realized it didn't smell so good. I considered lighting a candle but in my head I thought, "What good is it? It's not going to do anything until you blow it out." | [
0.06509790569543839,
-0.014235615730285645,
0.0626564770936966,
0.014050514437258244,
0.013305535539984703,
-0.00730353407561779,
0.03860355541110039,
-0.016542157158255577,
0.06328631192445755,
0.055840570479631424,
-0.008378586731851101,
0.12045995891094208,
-0.06839997321367264,
0.04315... | |
10m8y9 | Why are there high tides on the opposite side of the world at the same time? | Apparently the tides are high on opposite sides of the earth at the same time. Also, if you have the moon travel directly above you at night, you still get another tide in the day when the moon can't be above you again. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c6eo7sh",
"c6eqt2u",
"c6eqpet",
"c6ex11c"
],
"text": [
"[This image explains it well](_URL_0_).\n\nBasically, tides are caused by the moon's gravity. The closer something is to the moon, the more it is affected by its gravity. So, the part of the ocean closest to the moon is pulled towards it, causing high tide. However, the part of the ocean farthest from the moon is not pulled towards it as much as part of the oceans in the middle, causing another high tide.\n\nThe fact that the influence of gravity can change so much over such a short distance is cool. In some extreme cases (like the moon Io around Jupiter), these \"tidal forces\" caused by the different amounts of gravity can actually stretch the ground and cause it to heat up. On Earth, it just sloshes our oceans around... but on Io, it causes the entire moon t have constant volcanic eruptions.",
"Since the question was already answered, I'll help further your education. There was one very famous scientist who tried to answer the question of why tides happen in the first place, dude by the name of Galileo Galilee. Anyway, you may know him from his confrontations with the catholic church over whether or not we live in a heliocentric solar system (Galileo and Copernicus believed the earth orbited the sun, rather than the sun orbiting the earth). Well one of his MAIN arguments was actually about tides, which makes the whole thing kindof hilarious. Galileo believed that tides worked like water in a bucket that you swing around does. By that I mean that the centrifugal force of the earth pushed the water around, and in combination with the rotation of the earth, we get tides. Its an interesting hypothesis, but this was one of the central arguments to his hypothesis of heliocentricity, as this centrifugal tides argument was only possible with the acceptance that the earth is moving. In fact, he even dismisses the very idea that the moon has any influence over the tides quite explicitly in one of his papers, calling that theory a \"chimera\".\n\n*the more you know*",
"Fun fact that is slightly related: the same thing that causes tides (ie, Moon's gravity elongating Earth and especially its oceans) also causes the moon to move *away* from Earth.\n\nThis blew my mind when I first heard it, since I'd assumed conservation of energy + friction would mean the moon is gradually getting closer. Energy *is* conserved, by slowing down Earth's rotation ever so slightly.\n\n_URL_1_",
"Tide goes in. Tide goes out, you can't explain that."
],
"score": [
50,
4,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/images/tideexp1.jpg",
"http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=124"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why are there high tides on the opposite side of the world at the same time?
Apparently the tides are high on opposite sides of the earth at the same time. Also, if you have the moon travel directly above you at night, you still get another tide in the day when the moon can't be above you again. | [
-0.018521906808018684,
-0.033209092915058136,
0.09105318784713745,
-0.0016275093657895923,
-0.09029335528612137,
-0.0426131971180439,
-0.030793804675340652,
-0.02658729813992977,
0.050559211522340775,
-0.05806255340576172,
0.017668161541223526,
0.007054012268781662,
0.01847034879028797,
-0... | |
2pkmz6 | lf our inside organs don't have nerves, how can we still feel when we're in pain? | For example we can't feel internal bleeding but we know when our appendix hurts or our stomach. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cmxjjxw"
],
"text": [
"I think this is a pretty straight forward explanation \n\n_URL_0_"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-feel-pain-in-any-of-your-internal-organs"
]
} | train_eli5 | lf our inside organs don't have nerves, how can we still feel when we're in pain?
For example we can't feel internal bleeding but we know when our appendix hurts or our stomach. | [
0.07958726584911346,
-0.17946770787239075,
0.016671760007739067,
0.03892463073134422,
0.04543726146221161,
-0.039272308349609375,
0.023718340322375298,
0.030873246490955353,
0.06778748333454132,
0.006944180466234684,
-0.025176774710416794,
-0.0532575324177742,
-0.021476222202181816,
0.0795... | |
378yac | the "plague" in World of Warcraft | I heard of the incedent through Honest Game Trailers and other brief mentions.
What happened?
I heard that player actions were used to model people's actions in the event of a real life plague, how?
And any intresting anecdotes if applicable | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"crkn7ks",
"crkn8ci"
],
"text": [
"The \"Corrupted Blood Incident\" started when Blizzard released a new boss with a debuff called \"Corrupted Blood.\" This attack hit anyone standing too close to the boss and would spread to anyone standing too close to people who had it, and did several hundred damage per second for a while. The boss chamber was designed to remove the debuff upon leaving so it couldn't spread among people who weren't trying to defeat the boss.\n\nHowever.\n\nPlayer pets could also get the debuff, and when you dismissed them, they essentially went into stasis, taking no damage and preserving any status effects. Players would get their pets infected, immediately dismiss them, and call them back in a heavily populated area.\n\nMass panic ensued.\n\nThe plague was only supposed to be on high-level players, and the amount of damage dealt killed new players instantly. What's worse, NPCs could contract the disease, but could not take damage from it. They acted as carriers, killing anyone who stood too close. Entire cities were abandoned as people fled from the plague, and Blizzard only managed to \"fix\" it with a hard reset of the server. Even to this day, there are still some pets infected with it, and outbreaks have been happening for years since.\n\nThe CDC and NIH both contacted Blizzard for any information about the incidebt, and it is still used as a model for how people might react if a deadly and immensely communicable disease ever arose in a heavily populated area.",
"Blizzard officially claims it is a bug, but it is interesting nonetheless.\n\nBasically a raid boss had a spell which when used on the player made their HP drain over time for a short period of time. If you had a pet in the raid, it would also affect the pet. HOWEVER, upon leaving the dungeon, your pet would still be permanently affected and the spell of the raid boss then spread to other players (including you) outside the dungeon.\n\nThe big difference here was that the spell was now permanent... Which means that every time you die, and you respawn, you die again. \n\nBasically, in real life it would be something like:\nPet gets virus - > The virus mutates - > Mutated virus spreads to humans - > Humans and pets infect even more humans"
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | the "plague" in World of Warcraft
I heard of the incedent through Honest Game Trailers and other brief mentions. What happened? I heard that player actions were used to model people's actions in the event of a real life plague, how? And any intresting anecdotes if applicable | [
-0.0662158876657486,
0.040755681693553925,
0.020571134984493256,
-0.04832199588418007,
-0.0018521709134802222,
0.04028636962175369,
0.016254305839538574,
0.03799624741077423,
-0.027730664238333702,
0.04049041494727135,
-0.01056587602943182,
0.020770760253071785,
0.016289548948407173,
-0.00... | |
2x45iz | What is the difference between Hepatitis A, B, and C? | In the 1970's I was diagnosed with Hepatitis, but I think it was a bad diagnosis. This much later would a blood test be of any use? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cowut9h",
"cowq6vi"
],
"text": [
"Hepatitis A is the kind you'd get if you ate contaminated fod or were otherwise exposed to fecal matter. Symptoms eventually disappear. There is a test but will only be positive in the acute phase. If that's what you were diagnosed with you would test negative now. There is a vaccine.\n\nHepB is caused by contact with infected body fluids. 15-25% develop chronic liver disease such as cirrhosis or liver cancer. There are several tests for this which, depending upon which one(s) is positive will tell you if you were recently infected and thus contagious or if you had it but are no longer contagious. There is a vaccine. (Vaccinated people will test positive for one of the tests (Anti-HBc IgG). \n\nHepC is transmitted by infected body fluid although it is less likely to be transmitted sexually than HepB. There is a much higher likelihood of developing chronic liver disease (60-70%). There is a test but it takes a while to develop antibodies so it doesn't show up right away. It will be positive even years later.\n\nThe symptoms of all three are relatively the same.",
"The simplest way to put it is that they are different viruses that all cause liver inflammation (hepar = liver, itis = inflammation). \n\nHere is a chart that shows the differences in detail: _URL_0_"
],
"score": [
3,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/Resources/Professionals/PDFs/ABCTable.pdf"
]
} | train_eli5 | What is the difference between Hepatitis A, B, and C?
In the 1970's I was diagnosed with Hepatitis, but I think it was a bad diagnosis. This much later would a blood test be of any use? | [
-0.03103599138557911,
0.03967384621500969,
-0.05458194762468338,
-0.043622199445962906,
-0.028127307072281837,
0.06658414006233215,
-0.09036073833703995,
0.09742524474859238,
-0.04513310641050339,
0.01126810722053051,
-0.012557409703731537,
-0.025273341685533524,
-0.024864332750439644,
0.0... | |
sycrr | Balance sheet vs. Income Statement vs. Cash Statement | What are the differences between the three? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c4i0758"
],
"text": [
"Income Statement: has all the revenue (sales) and expenses (cost of operating the business) and ends at net income\n\nBalance Sheet: snapshot of your company's assets, liabilities, and owner's equity. \n\nCash Flow Statement: starts with your net income from the income statement and shows the flow of cash in your company - what is the cash that is being spent going toward and where incoming cash (not sales) comes from (i.e. Operating Activities, Investing Activities, Financing Activities). After adding in-flows and subtracting out-flows, you end with remaining cash that goes to your balance sheet."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Balance sheet vs. Income Statement vs. Cash Statement
What are the differences between the three? | [
-0.06456182152032852,
0.062490399926900864,
-0.060744836926460266,
-0.020656302571296692,
-0.004668866749852896,
-0.00472600432112813,
0.03407047688961029,
0.05747859552502632,
0.10925580561161041,
-0.026740550994873047,
0.027247998863458633,
-0.05716121941804886,
-0.0410652793943882,
-0.0... | |
2vcq0w | How do the rovers on Mars navigate? | Are there satellites orbiting Mars allowing for GPS? Or MPS? Haha Mars positioning system? Does Mars have a magnetic north? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"coggzb5"
],
"text": [
"It's nowhere close to that automatic. The chain of commands will go something like this.\n\nFirst, the rover will evaluate where it is by taking pictures of it's surroundings. Using this data, and scientific observations from satellites, a scientist or group of scientists will determine where the rover's next area of scientific study will be.\n\nTaking that destination, the starting location, and the data from the rover's navigational cameras, an engineer or group of engineers will determine a pathway to reach the destination, and the number of revolutions of each wheel that is needed to get there. Some real time work is done by the rover to evaluate how close it is to it's predicted path, and if it needs to make very minor corrections, but this is very expensive to do on Mars and very cheap to do on Earth, so we mostly just tell the rover exactly what it needs to do. The rover basically just has override if it senses dangerous conditions, like a big rock in the way, so that it can stop before it runs into it.\n\nAs a side note, Mars has a very weak and disjointed magnetic field, as seen [here](_URL_0_). Rather than a single continuous field like we have on Earth, it's more akin to localized bubbles of magnetism, likely leftovers from early volcanic and possibly tectonic activity on the planet."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/mars-magnetisim-map.jpg"
]
} | train_eli5 | How do the rovers on Mars navigate?
Are there satellites orbiting Mars allowing for GPS? Or MPS? Haha Mars positioning system? Does Mars have a magnetic north? | [
0.04944045841693878,
-0.0628892183303833,
-0.06560751050710678,
-0.050519414246082306,
-0.01041903905570507,
0.003450664458796382,
-0.06056538224220276,
-0.04539243131875992,
-0.05238991603255272,
0.05288734287023544,
0.01450448390096426,
0.08823428303003311,
0.0380791500210762,
-0.0617830... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.