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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3fl83s | why don't tank guns use gas blowback systems like assault rifles? | When you fire a semiautomatic gun, some of the gas produced from the explosion is used to pull the bolt back and load another round. Why don't higher caliber tank guns use the same system? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ctpnawm",
"ctpnr83",
"ctpn4nc"
],
"text": [
"From: _URL_0_\n\nAutoloaders represent tradeoffs. I do think it is possible to design a compartmentalized autoloader that might be able to be as fast as a human and perhaps ammo change-out of ammo as needed. But it would be bulky, heavy and likely quite expensive. If you break the autoloader or take a hard hit, you could jam the autoloader even if the hull or turret isn't penetrated. \n\nKeep in mind the Russians went with autoloaders in the T-64, T-72, T-80 and T-90 designs as a way of keeping their tanks smaller. The lower profile and smaller internal volume made an autoloader desirable otherwise a human would be in a very cramped turret with the commander and gunner. Their tank design philosophy was simply different. Crew protection and survivability was not one of the driving factors.",
"Tank shells are a lot more heavy and powerful than an assualt rifle round. A M829A1 weighs 20.9 kg (46 lb). To extract the energy required to lift something that weighs more than the average 5 year old using only blowback would require a very sturdy and very complex mechanism. Such a mechanism would likely be too heavy and/or too fragile for battlefield use. \n \nAutoloaders (devices that automatically load shells) exist, but they are almost always externally powered so they don't have to deal with the engineering issues involved in redirecting an explosion powerful enough to send a shell moving at a super sonic velocity.These systems can usually fire about once every 5 seconds. \n \nThere is also the fact that it is vanishingly rare for a tank to need to fire more than 12 or so times a minute. Most tanks are destroyed in one shot, the crew then needs to find a new target then move the gun so it is pointing at the new target. This would probably take a few seconds, long enough for the loader to put in a new shell. Also tanks don't carry that much ammunition, it would be too heavy and too vulnerable to enemy fire. The M1A2 carries 42 shells for it's main gun. Even at the rate of 12 shots a minute all the ammunition is gone in less than 4 minutes. \nTo summarize, it's very difficult to build, something easier to build exists and they don't need to fire that fast anyway.",
"Size constraints. Also, a gas blowback system fouls the bolt and boltcarrier of an automatic rifle rather quickly when compared to say a bolt action weapon. This would also apply to a tank as well. Third, there would be a second tube running the length of the barrel to siphon such gas back into the system. And if it were damaged in combat, it would render the main gun usless. And also I for one wouldn't want to be inside the tank with all that gas being forced back and into the crew compartment."
],
"score": [
4,
3,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.quora.com/Why-dont-American-and-British-tanks-have-auto-loaders-so-that-they-dont-need-another-crew-member-to-load-rounds"
]
} | train_eli5 | why don't tank guns use gas blowback systems like assault rifles?
When you fire a semiautomatic gun, some of the gas produced from the explosion is used to pull the bolt back and load another round. Why don't higher caliber tank guns use the same system? | [
-0.015177303925156593,
0.05282878503203392,
-0.05322933569550514,
-0.04584497958421707,
0.0001001095661194995,
-0.019113050773739815,
0.0021277342457324266,
0.02991514839231968,
0.1004101037979126,
-0.011790777556598186,
-0.04135258123278618,
0.13897044956684113,
0.007945641875267029,
0.00... | |
1mp54r | Why do the Scottish want independence? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ccbbet3"
],
"text": [
"In addition, I would point out that it's not the Scottish people themselves pushing for independence, but the ruling SNP party - Nearly all public surveys on the subject show the Scottish people are generally in favour of the union:\n\nsource: _URL_0_"
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/scottish-independence"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do the Scottish want independence?
| [
0.0024716691114008427,
-0.029683342203497887,
-0.011976494453847408,
-0.04607303813099861,
0.11232339590787888,
-0.041143689304590225,
0.038955267518758774,
-0.11024391651153564,
0.0027332075405865908,
0.027323365211486816,
0.0007008720422163606,
0.03309233859181404,
-0.03334890305995941,
... | ||
35bhu1 | Interest savings account | Why do we even have it? From my knowledge right now, the bank gives you a certain amount money based on a percentage of how much is in your account at the end of the month. Why do they do that? Wouldn't I be able to exploit this? i.e. Get a loan near the end of the month and once I get the interest from my savings, give back the loan without any interest added onto that? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cr2tc4c"
],
"text": [
"The reason is to encourage you to put money in the bank. They then use that money to loan out to *other* people at a higher rate, thus making them money.\n\nIf you take a loan out from the bank, interest starts immediately, and it would be pro-rated whenever you paid it back. Therefore, you would lose money if you tried to do that."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Interest savings account
Why do we even have it? From my knowledge right now, the bank gives you a certain amount money based on a percentage of how much is in your account at the end of the month. Why do they do that? Wouldn't I be able to exploit this? i.e. Get a loan near the end of the month and once I get the interest from my savings, give back the loan without any interest added onto that? | [
0.02788694016635418,
0.03394873067736626,
-0.07612811028957367,
0.030227966606616974,
0.03050055541098118,
-0.017526846379041672,
0.05695711076259613,
0.026042677462100983,
0.13538464903831482,
0.07303808629512787,
-0.027793975546956062,
0.04264991730451584,
-0.026306310668587685,
-0.04321... | |
4kkygu | Why haven't avocados been bred to have tiny pits? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d3foy22",
"d3fuieb",
"d3fydik"
],
"text": [
"You can't just \"breed\" things arbitrarily to have whatver quality you want. You have to find one that naturally mutated that feature, then breed that plant. For example, no one bred seeds out of grapes. They found a grape vine that mutated to grow no seeds, then they grafted that vine over and over until seedless grapes were widespread.\n\nTo get avocados with tiny pits, you'd have to find a plant that grows tiny pits, then breed that plant. Until we find that plant, we can't breed avocados with tiny pits.",
"They have. When giant sloths were still the main consumer of avocados the pit was almost twice as big as they are now.",
"You are all thinking of this backwards! The avocados most of us see in grocery stores are just one kind. There are much bigger ones, but The Man is keeping them out of mainstream grocers. Here is a TIL for you _URL_0_"
],
"score": [
45,
4,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/aug/30/avozilla-world-largest-avocado-sale"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why haven't avocados been bred to have tiny pits?
| [
0.0836939662694931,
0.03461259976029396,
-0.003965295385569334,
0.03996642678976059,
0.04296135529875755,
-0.01834695227444172,
-0.0401265025138855,
0.01633787341415882,
0.024184944108128548,
0.0503508597612381,
0.04004298895597458,
-0.07457999885082245,
-0.1045403778553009,
-0.04839927703... | ||
5pti2o | Who/what is Anonymous? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dctpwf9"
],
"text": [
"Anonymous is/was a small group of highly skilled hackers, that were loosley organized together and somewhat activist or \"hacktivist\". They did some notorious hacks and denial of service attacks, and other cyber attacks. As well as being given hacked info that others did to help them and to distribute the hacked info. They were also known as LulzSec a group that existed before, though that name is less familiar than the iconic \"Anonymous\" and not all members of LulzSec moved over to the new group\n\n They also popularized the use of the Guy Fawkes mask, commonly known from the dystopian movie V for Vendetta.\n\nMost or all of the original members of the small group were eventually caught and charged with various crimes, with quite little fanfare, they were caught pretty solidly.\n\nAfter this, many other groups, related or not to the original group have also taken the \"anonymous\" title and headline as their names or who they represent, and often perform similar acts to the original group\n\nA good source for reading up more on the group, its origins, its people, and its begining, fall, and re-rise: [We Are Anonymous](_URL_0_) by Parmy Olson"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.amazon.com/We-Are-Inside-LulzSec-Insurgency/dp/0316213527"
]
} | train_eli5 | Who/what is Anonymous?
| [
-0.10941679775714874,
0.036038611084222794,
-0.072108693420887,
0.03413502871990204,
-0.032424140721559525,
-0.028519753366708755,
0.12451796233654022,
-0.03517743572592735,
0.0402449406683445,
-0.03425578400492668,
0.055956363677978516,
-0.013115841895341873,
-0.010734733194112778,
-0.104... | ||
4181h3 | If speakers are just magnets, what happens when you blow a speaker from playing audio too loud? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cz0b5bj",
"cz0b9fo",
"cz0b5q7",
"cz0bvn2",
"cz0riby"
],
"text": [
"You tear the membrane that the magnet is attached to, a thin surface that is meant to vibrate the air to make sound. [Here are some pics.](_URL_0_)",
"Usually you've torn the speaker cone, like the other answers say.\n\nSometimes you can damage a speaker by giving it too much power over a period of time, which I assume overheats it and damages the insulation in the coil or burns out a wire.\n\n(A speaker has a permanent magnet, and also a coil which acts as an electromagnet to push and pull against the first magnet; the moving coil is attached to a paper cone to help it transfer the vibrations to the air. The shape of the box it's in also helps it produce clear sound.)",
"They aren't just magnets. What \"blows\" is the cone, which is a thin piece of material, typically paper, which is moved backwards and forwards at different frequencies to make air move, thus reproducing sound. Make it move too hard and the paper can't take the strain. That's when it \"blows\". Where did you get the idea speakers were just magnets?",
"Speakers are magnets connected to something that moves air. Often this is paper or some sort of plastic cone. A blown speaker has somehow managed to tear the connection between the magnet and this cone.\n\nThe sound of a blown speaker is the sound of torn up shit flapping around.",
"A speaker is like a cars suspension. When you blow one out its like hitting a bump that's too big going too fast and the suspension is damaged."
],
"score": [
20,
6,
4,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://www.google.com/search?q=blown+speaker&espv=2&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X"
]
} | train_eli5 | If speakers are just magnets, what happens when you blow a speaker from playing audio too loud?
| [
0.0650755763053894,
-0.04913190379738808,
-0.01593732461333275,
-0.022402377799153328,
-0.06808638572692871,
-0.036795858293771744,
0.012943959794938564,
-0.03348443657159805,
0.05831778421998024,
-0.004395711235702038,
-0.018454620614647865,
0.059918973594903946,
-0.009031294845044613,
0.... | ||
2hij7i | When I eat a bunch of sour fruits, for example sour apples or a lemon, why are my cheeks and forehead sweating so much? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cksz7r5"
],
"text": [
"I never experienced this myself but was intrigued as to why, so I did some research and found this answer.\n\n > In general, sweating is caused by too much heat, even if you're not aware of the heat. This can happen if the bowel moves and so raises the core temperature. Such movement is often accompanied with sweating, and since you only feel the normal temperature on the skin, it is cold sweat. But at the same time your core is hot so you think it's cold, but it will later mix to normal.\n\n > Anyway, it points to unusual bowel movement. This can be due to food allergy or, in a milder form, in food intolerances which are quite common. When it comes to sour ingredients, they are often in fruits, so I'll make a shot in the blue and say that you have a food intolerance against some fruits. You can check this hypothesis by trying chemically pure acetic acid to sour your food. If that doesn't result in sweat/hotness then it's probably the fruits.\n\nSince it's found on the Interwebs I can't tell you for sure this is the answer but sounds likely.\n\n**EDIT** Forgot to add the link _URL_0_"
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/5156/does-sour-food-cause-sweating"
]
} | train_eli5 | When I eat a bunch of sour fruits, for example sour apples or a lemon, why are my cheeks and forehead sweating so much?
| [
0.010677571408450603,
-0.011997903697192669,
0.014270381070673466,
0.09749020636081696,
0.005711415316909552,
0.013796539045870304,
0.005967501550912857,
-0.01991400681436062,
0.012806642800569534,
-0.010300815105438232,
0.021338999271392822,
-0.15821990370750427,
0.004434629343450069,
-0.... | ||
3tm0y6 | Are the leaders of Islamic State actually religious, or do they just use Islam as a way to recruit followers? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cx7dg7e",
"cx7ne54",
"cx7b3vb",
"cx7f9i2",
"cx9ciws",
"cx7bmcc"
],
"text": [
"Let's take just one example from the scripture they say they follow:\n\n**And whoever kills a believer intentionally,**\n\n**his punishment is hell; he shall abide in it,**\n\n**and Allah will send His wrath on him**\n \n**and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement.**\n\nThis is from the Qur'an. Chapter 4, \"an-Nisa\", verse 93.\n\n.\n\nSo, are you a BELIEVER? \n\nAre you about to detonate a bomb that will kill YOU?\n\nThen you will have deliberately killed a believer - YOU - and off to hell you go.\n\nNOWHERE IN THE QUR'AN is there a \"get out of hell free\" card if the believer you kill is yourself.\n\n.\n\nConclusion, these people are like the Tamil Tigers, they do what they do for POLITICAL reasons only.",
"Islam is an integral part of the historical and cultural fabric of the region. It's less a question of religiosity, and more about using something familiar to advance an agenda. \n\n(I cite as an example how central to Western culture Christianity is. Whether or not the leaders who use the religion are actually religious is almost a moot point.)\n\n*EDIT* I see now that the submitter has an agenda, and this likely is not an honest question.",
"The idea that they aren't actually Muslims falls into a logical fallacy known as the \"No True Scotsman\" fallacy. \n\nFrom Wikpedia:\n\n\"No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim (\"no Scotsman would do such a thing\"), rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule (\"no true Scotsman would do such a thing\").\"\n\n\nIn fact, ISIS is probably the one group that has taken the most literal interpretation of the Koran.\n\nIt's like a bad Monty Python sketch:\n\n\"We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it.\"\n\n\n\"No you didn't.\"\n\n\"Wait, what? Yes we did...\"\n\n\"No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using \nreligion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons.\"\n\n\"WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers.\"\n\n\"No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so.\"\n\n\"Huh!? Who are you to tell us we're not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being.\"\n\n\"Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that's why you did this. We're sorry.\"\n\n\"What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians - disenfranchisement doesn't even enter into it!\"\n\n\"Listen, it's our fault. We don't blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out.\"\n\n\"Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we're not going to let you take it away from us.\"\n\n\"No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame.\"\n\n\"OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across?\"\"",
"They are essentially a doomsday cult that has gotten political and territorial power. I believe it was an article in the Atlantic that referred to them as being less like al-Qaeda and more like the Peoples' Temple in that sense. They are, quite openly, trying to create a situation that fits with the criteria for the end of the world in their version of Islamic end-times.\n\nAre they religious? \"Being religious\" as I think you're using it refers to ones individual level of belief and based on what I've read, these people do believe in what they preach or are very, very good liars. It's hard to say without talking to them personally but based on what I've read of their publications and seen of them, many of them are devoutly so. Islam is no freer than any other religion of people who are murderers and tyrants, unfortunately; just because someone is a Muslim does not mean they're a good Muslim or even a good person. \n\nThat being said, they *also* use religion pretty masterfully in their recruitment, both of people in areas under their control or near those areas, and people in the West who they try to get to come towards them. Media-wise, ISIS is frighteningly smart. Their magazine is a fairly sharp publication, they have a fairly good grasp of how to use social media, and while most people find what they're publishing horrifying, the people it's targeted at do not.",
"Both.\n\nSome believe they are doing the right thing based of twisted understanding and interpretations of the Quran but mostly Hadith/Sunnah.\n\nThere are thousands of Hadith (Narrations) of the prophet Muhammad. Some good, some bad.\nThese were written 200+ years after Muhammad died based off of 3rd hand 4th hand accounts, not first person accounts. i.e. game of broken telephone.\n\nSome just want conquest and domination like all political factions.\n\nSome are just funded by people in the shadows who have vested interests in the war/outcome of the war and conquest of groups like ISIS.\nThey use the commotion and disruption to their gain/benefit.\n\n\nELI5: Both.\nThe \"religious ones\" focus solely on a few religious texts and/or Hadith (narrations) and run with it.\nThe \"non-religious ones\" just manipulate poor, uneducated, substance addicted people and give them purpose/love/family in return for their help in their political agenda.",
"To take the very boring, but important academic spin on this: What do you mean by religious? This might seem like a silly question, but you will find that a lot of other philosophies and outlooks fit until you trim the definition down a bit.\n\nTL;DR: \"Being religious\" is a pretty wide concept, what is it that you really want to know?"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
3,
3,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Are the leaders of Islamic State actually religious, or do they just use Islam as a way to recruit followers?
| [
0.03810372203588486,
0.05787211284041405,
0.005013847257941961,
0.04983734339475632,
-0.03404434397816658,
-0.03061884641647339,
-0.06279197335243225,
-0.14686928689479828,
0.08275771141052246,
-0.013425604440271854,
0.014278849586844444,
0.014160501770675182,
0.040349848568439484,
0.04349... | ||
jcbqf | Can someone ELI5 what credit rating agencies are, what they do and why they have so much power? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c2ayznt"
],
"text": [
"**What they are and what they do**\n\nCredit Rating Agencies try to score corporations and governments (*\"bond issuers\"*) on the likelihood those bond issuers will pay back their debts (this debt takes the form of *bonds*, which are IOUs with interest). Three are three big credit rating agencies (and many more smaller agencies): Standard & Poor's, Moddy's, and Fitch. Credit bureaus look at the same thing but for individuals (see stranglelovemd12's comment for how those work).\n\nCredit Rating Agencies can see how a bond issuer is doing from financial statements. They make predictions about how the future will change, and under what conditions (and how) a bond issuer will default on its debts. Those predictions lead to a score, on the scale of AAA (the best) to D (in Default).\n\n\n**Why they have so much power**\n\nInvestors (are supposed to) pour through a bond issuer's financial statements in order to judge how likely corporations are to pay them back. Investors then only buy bonds (lend to bond issuers) if the interest rate being offered off-sets the risk of default. Investors rely on trusted the Credit Rating Agencies for a second opinion. However, often investors get lazy and take Credit Rating Agencies' word for it. \n\nThere is little need for more than a handful of Credit Rating Agencies, because (if everyone is doing their job properly) a bond issuer should be getting the same score from all of them. The handful Credit Rating Agencies have few competitors to state that they are wrong, and therefore have a huge amount of influence in how much bond issuers have to pay in interest."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Can someone ELI5 what credit rating agencies are, what they do and why they have so much power?
| [
-0.019416652619838715,
-0.10671286284923553,
-0.08835864812135696,
0.06195180490612984,
-0.02716246247291565,
0.047694601118564606,
-0.002427340717986226,
-0.0521838404238224,
0.04708322882652283,
-0.05098434537649155,
-0.044897161424160004,
-0.03171162307262421,
-0.02167464792728424,
-0.0... | ||
4a93pm | Why do we jump our clocks forward on the 13th? Why not on the vernal equinox instead? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d0ydajs",
"d0ydass"
],
"text": [
"Hour changes are generally planned for the early hours of a Sunday morning, so that not many people are up and getting confused when the clocks change. You go to bed in one time zone, and when you wake up it's another, rather than having to skip an hour completely or, worse still, have extreme confusion at two consecutive hours both having the same number. You can't schedule anything for that hour without being uncertain about whether it's the first or the second one.",
"Because the vernal equinox doesn't always happen at a weekend. Changing the clocks at the weekend is less disruptive.\n\nAlso depends where you are - in the UK it's the last Sunday in March."
],
"score": [
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do we jump our clocks forward on the 13th? Why not on the vernal equinox instead?
[removed] | [
-0.054876163601875305,
0.038879189640283585,
0.04076592996716499,
-0.06117000803351402,
0.06155193969607353,
0.03400920704007149,
-0.057465363293886185,
-0.023995431140065193,
0.11294866353273392,
-0.059713948518037796,
0.03137233480811119,
0.03591413050889969,
-0.12121123820543289,
-0.055... | |
8dg4jj | What happens to dust particles that get in to the eyes and lungs? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dxmtwmd"
],
"text": [
"If they truly get deep into your lungs, they may become trapped there, but that's a relatively hard place to reach. Most are caught before then in mucus lining your airways. Tiny moving cilia work in concert to gradually move this mucus towards your throat, where you either swallow it or cough it out. \n\nDust in your eyes is flushed out with tears, either onto the face if the irritation (And the crying) is great enough, or by draining into your nasolacrimal duct into the back of your nose/throat."
],
"score": [
52
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What happens to dust particles that get in to the eyes and lungs?
| [
0.028589030727744102,
-0.0376296266913414,
0.05909101665019989,
0.018485311418771744,
0.07649421691894531,
-0.026385538280010223,
0.08956949412822723,
0.012371893972158432,
-0.03839138150215149,
0.07394278049468994,
0.06101038306951523,
0.009956914000213146,
0.0066371578723192215,
0.018359... | ||
o9209 | The Tim Tebow Controversy | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c3fk410",
"c3fheay",
"c3ff8ad"
],
"text": [
"Say there's a kid at another elementary school near yours. He's the best player in your Little League, he has the most badges in Cub Scouts, he doesn't get into trouble with his parents, his teachers and coaches only have the best things to say about him and all the other little girls in your neighborhood think he's cute. He also loves Jesus and talks about him all of the time -- in fact, everything he does is about Jesus and if it isn't, like baseball, then he thanks Jesus for making him good at it.\n\nThen he gets to middle school and tries out for the JV baseball team. The thing is though, he swings weird. It doesn't look right and if he doesn't strike out, he hits it right to a guy. But he somehow makes the team and gets the winning hit in a couple of games and now everyone is talking about him all over again. Just when you thought he was finally going to fail, he somehow finds a way to win and everyone person in town is talking about how good he is, even though it seems he could barely play t-ball most games.\n\nThat's why people hate Tebow.",
"Some of it is team rivalry, and those people don't like seeing specific teams win or other (their chosen) teams losing. So, part of it is people getting their underwear in a knot over what is (in all fairness) a very good Football team.\n\nOn Reddit, specifically, the large Atheist community rejects athletes who pray for victory or thank God for victory, implying God's hand in the outcome. Tebow does this so publicly that he has become a lightning rod for those wishing to criticize such behavior (including myself).",
"Because if there was a jesus, he cares about someone scoring touchdowns."
],
"score": [
8,
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The Tim Tebow Controversy
| [
-0.005181312561035156,
0.06768326461315155,
-0.056556783616542816,
-0.022417863830924034,
0.02682882361114025,
0.06645411998033524,
0.05957214906811714,
0.010514896363019943,
0.06348729878664017,
0.03668666630983353,
-0.05929606407880783,
0.015344281680881977,
-0.03654882311820984,
0.02166... | ||
8lydcy | How do insurance companies deal with huge disasters, like hurricane Harvey or Katrina? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dzjfch9",
"dzjfbbo",
"dzjo638",
"dzjq5c0"
],
"text": [
"\"Reinsurance\". Basically insurance for insurance companies to insure against getting hit with too many claims.",
"You have a bunch of people who pay a premium and never or rarely have a claim that you hope balances out those who do. If you set the premiums right, you cover the claims you have to pay out, make a bit of profit and don’t piss too many people off in the end. It’s a legalized gambling, of sorts, with plenty of data and analysis behind it.",
"Well, in the case of Katrina, they claim all the damage was from flooding rather than wind and have federal backed flood insurance cover it.",
"By analyzing hurricane patterns and charging high enough premiums to people in hurricane prone areas to to make a really big payout a few times a decade. Also, insurance is highly regulated industry, they are required to follow certain practices to ensure they will be able to pay claims in these cases.\n\nAlso, they pay for insurance against the possibility of paying out a lot of insurance claims. Really, it is called reinsurance. Unless the insurance company is a complete fraud, they should be able to pay out most of the claims from a major disaster. Reinsurance pays enough to make up the difference so they can stay in business."
],
"score": [
31,
16,
4,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do insurance companies deal with huge disasters, like hurricane Harvey or Katrina?
| [
0.015277884900569916,
0.05732613429427147,
0.05782146379351616,
0.03173651173710823,
0.012942951172590256,
-0.026957804337143898,
-0.004603000357747078,
-0.009264795109629631,
0.03568459302186966,
0.002425953047350049,
0.042133621871471405,
0.05561158433556557,
0.03147419914603233,
-0.0220... | ||
79ugrp | Why do so few smartphone companies use stock Android? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dp4w56o",
"dp50cds",
"dp4xgwd"
],
"text": [
"Custom UI means the users get used to that one experience. Companies hope that users will keep buying their products for that experience (e.g. what Samsung is doing with TouchWiz).\n\nDifferences are mostly selection of default apps (branded apps by phone manufacturer) and UI when we are talking about traditional phone companies like Samsung, HTC, LG etc. OnePlus for example changes a lot more 'under-the-hood'.",
"In addition to the main answer (driving customer loyalty through familiarity and/or unique features), there is another factor at the bottom end of the market.\n\nSome companies will pre-load malware for money. \n\nThis is more prevalent in the PC market (where pretty much every big manufacturer takes money from McAfee to preload a 'free trial subscription' of that program), but it exists in the mobile market too.\n\nI've purchased a bottom-of-the-line tablet that came with preloaded adware that required root access to remove. It was pretty unobtrusive adware, showing up infrequent ads but it was there.",
"Let's be honest, stock android is cool but it doesn't have all the necessary features. It took ages to implement split screen functionality. While Samsung user had it for a long time.\n\nBasically, manufacturers try to attract user with unique features that are not available on stock android.\n\nMost of the times, these features are mere gimmicks, but every once in a while they tend to be useful. So much so that people might pick a based on that feature.\n\nAnd to be honest, most of these custom ROMs don't remove any stock features. \n\nStock android is generally smoother and performs a little better than custom ROMs but today, even entry level phones have processors good enough to run the phone almost lag free. So having custom features doesn't hinder performance as much and you get extra features to boot.\n\nI personally use a Xiaomi Redmi Note 4. Which comes with MIUI as stock. On all my previous phones I've used custom stock baser ROMs like Cyanogenmod and enjoyed them. But ever since I got my Redmi I tried using custom ROMs but the battery and performance of MIUI is so smooth, it really is no issue in terms of usability.\n\nI honestly think it's better than stock ROM. This is mostly a case of optimisation by Xiaomi which is better than what some random users can build on XDA, but still, my personal experience tell me the stock ROM is better.\n\nBasically It depends on the user rather than any objective differences"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do so few smartphone companies use stock Android?
[removed] | [
-0.025170467793941498,
0.017695944756269455,
0.08270314335823059,
-0.08373016864061356,
0.03734137862920761,
-0.019669950008392334,
0.019108684733510017,
0.0308306273072958,
0.0921192318201065,
-0.013827021233737469,
0.06260713934898376,
0.07375550270080566,
0.020647287368774414,
-0.052281... | |
3dq5zg | why is everything Windows (or at least not Mac) referred to as PC when PC is a general term for Personal Computers? | title | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ct7kywr"
],
"text": [
"It isn't a general term. Pc is a platform. It was originally an IBM trademark. Computers nowadays are PC clones."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why is everything Windows (or at least not Mac) referred to as PC when PC is a general term for Personal Computers?
title | [
0.06818857043981552,
-0.026275217533111572,
0.027858663350343704,
-0.023335350677371025,
-0.007628992665559053,
-0.022411387413740158,
0.06337068974971771,
0.04709652438759804,
0.06213558465242386,
-0.012415457516908646,
0.0027961391024291515,
0.02535753883421421,
-0.00811693910509348,
0.0... | |
36fgb3 | How come we see large bodies of Water as blue? | Water it clear and we all know that but how come with mass badies of Water such as the ocean, our eyes perceive it as blue and not crystal clear? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"crdiu1j"
],
"text": [
"Well, this is the thing. Large amounts of water appear blue right? Oceans, lakes, icebergs, swimming pools, even a white bath full of water will look slightly blue-ish. \n\nOf course it's because water *is* slightly blue. You just need a decent amount of it before that can be seen. A glass of water doesn't have nearly enough to appreciate the colouration, so it looks clear."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How come we see large bodies of Water as blue?
Water it clear and we all know that but how come with mass badies of Water such as the ocean, our eyes perceive it as blue and not crystal clear? | [
0.026877854019403458,
-0.04173240065574646,
0.10968559980392456,
-0.017436053603887558,
0.027049275115132332,
0.023742716759443283,
0.0855981707572937,
0.013838318176567554,
0.06475252658128738,
0.04708545282483101,
-0.027149993926286697,
-0.06731251627206802,
0.026990005746483803,
0.00553... | |
6ejquo | How do you become ambidextrous as a child? | I write with my right hand but throw and bat with my left. I have been this way since I was a kid. I would think nature would lead one to favor a dominant hand for all activities so unless you train yourself to use the other hand how else would you become ambidextrous? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"diaukyn"
],
"text": [
"I just am. No training or trying whatsoever. I do most fine motor skills with the left and most strength based stuff on the right. I can easily switch if needed but it can also make me very klutzy because I do not automatically hold anything the way it is intended. Can't play golf at all for example."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How do you become ambidextrous as a child?
I write with my right hand but throw and bat with my left. I have been this way since I was a kid. I would think nature would lead one to favor a dominant hand for all activities so unless you train yourself to use the other hand how else would you become ambidextrous? | [
0.08255161345005035,
-0.024899495765566826,
0.014291091822087765,
0.06932564079761505,
-0.07400631904602051,
0.03854309394955635,
0.027427488937973976,
0.008720922283828259,
-0.0017635602271184325,
0.1438324749469757,
0.005637012887746096,
0.011573927477002144,
-0.038405489176511765,
0.085... | |
63n1yv | Calories - Weight gain | For example if I put my BMI etc into a calculator and it came back to maintain weight I can eat 2.2k light exercise and the only thing I ate was 2.2k calories worth of chocolate every day would I gain weight?
Would it be any different than eating 2.2k worth of healthy nutrient foods? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dfvfqq8"
],
"text": [
"If you ate 2200 calories worth of chocolate, and you burnt 2200 calories a day, you would not gain weight. If you ate 2100 calories worth of chocolate a day and nothing else and you burnt 2200 calories a day, you would actually lose weight.\n\nThat said, there is a massive difference between weight loss and health. If you ate 2100 calories of chocolate a day, yes you would lose weight, but you would be severely lacking in fiber, vitamins, minerals, proteins (the things you need to stay healthy) which would lead to a host of medical issues which can then lead to a lot of nasty symptoms and illnesses. \n\nI hope that helps."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Calories - Weight gain
For example if I put my BMI etc into a calculator and it came back to maintain weight I can eat 2.2k light exercise and the only thing I ate was 2.2k calories worth of chocolate every day would I gain weight? Would it be any different than eating 2.2k worth of healthy nutrient foods? | [
0.010065588168799877,
0.023052744567394257,
0.0043631624430418015,
0.1462373584508896,
-0.06778257340192795,
-0.047574255615472794,
0.03987044841051102,
-0.015509769320487976,
-0.040875326842069626,
-0.018299508839845657,
0.022509783506393433,
-0.05561797320842743,
-0.045330535620450974,
-... | |
y4p98 | Why does water increase grip for fingers on pages etc? | Why does water decrease grip for most things like tyres on roads, but wetting fingers allows easier turning of pages/opening plastic bags? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c5sbaww"
],
"text": [
"Okay, imagine you just spilled some coffee on a book. You know how it sort of spreads out from where it originally hit the page and winds up being like twice the size of the original stain? This is because of how water interacts with paper--it's called \"hydrogen bonding\", but all you need to know about that is that it's way stronger than almost any other kind of surface-surface interaction. Some things hydrogen bond, others don't. Paper does, human skin does a little, and rubber doesn't at all. So, when you lick your finger and then touch the page, the water is bonded to your finger, the page, and itself, which winds up effectively bonding all three together much better than just the finger and page alone. This leads to easier turning of pages. \n\nTires don't hydrogen bond at all; in fact, they actively repel it (think of how \"waterproofed\" things are often covered in rubber). This means that this bond does not exist, and the water actually gets in the way of the bond that normally exists between the tire and the road, leading to decreased grip. Hope that helps!"
],
"score": [
12
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does water increase grip for fingers on pages etc?
Why does water decrease grip for most things like tyres on roads, but wetting fingers allows easier turning of pages/opening plastic bags? | [
-0.0564751923084259,
-0.031111760064959526,
0.09267627447843552,
0.058468662202358246,
-0.014599476009607315,
-0.025482602417469025,
0.059428829699754715,
0.0007583086262457073,
0.042155928909778595,
-0.01525157131254673,
0.00010479042975930497,
0.1002228781580925,
-0.00947196502238512,
0.... | |
3ez88w | Is it possible to make any made up chemical if you know it's exact composition from basic elements/chemicals (Such as making Au2 C6 CL K3 O from gold, carbon, chlorine, potassium and oxygen)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ctjsglh"
],
"text": [
"Perhaps. Just picking a random set of elements is no guarantee of a stable molecule. You need to make sure it doesn't break down instantly. For a given set of atoms, there might be several arrangements that are stable. Some molecules are \"handed\", they have a mirror image molecule made of the same components.\n\nChemical synthesis is a scientific/engineering field that figures out how to make the molecules people will pay money for from cheaper molecules."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Is it possible to make any made up chemical if you know it's exact composition from basic elements/chemicals (Such as making Au2 C6 CL K3 O from gold, carbon, chlorine, potassium and oxygen)?
| [
-0.033683888614177704,
-0.037491586059331894,
-0.0347074531018734,
0.03927056863903999,
0.026406118646264076,
-0.02482464723289013,
0.025107763707637787,
-0.00885260570794344,
-0.029037589207291603,
0.07116052508354187,
-0.06665348261594772,
-0.07648184150457382,
-0.02475610002875328,
-0.0... | ||
20w2fy | What is the best way this Ukraine/Russia hullabaloo can end? What is the worst? What is most likely at this point? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cg7a4yb"
],
"text": [
"Putin will get what he wants in exchange for some token concessions and everybody will relax. Soon after that, he'll do it again with another area. Same thing will follow. Then he'll get over confident and really step in it and a real conflict will erupt."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is the best way this Ukraine/Russia hullabaloo can end? What is the worst? What is most likely at this point?
| [
0.016087358817458153,
0.03474181517958641,
0.020880157127976418,
0.022660240530967712,
-0.0567658357322216,
-0.043827228248119354,
-0.06700857728719711,
-0.0004938539350405335,
-0.023707667365670204,
-0.004445650149136782,
-0.06826382130384445,
0.06130419299006462,
0.027641672641038895,
0.... | ||
oljld | ELI15: what is the difference between quantum mechanics and classical physics? | My teacher (grade 11) keeps saying how the stuff we are learning in physics is only clasical science, and with quantam mechanics everything get's altered... seems to me like they are all the same, just on different levels (quantum being atoms and such)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c3i7y9f",
"c3i7ym2",
"c3i829y"
],
"text": [
"> seems to me like they are all the same, just on different levels \n\nWell, they're both core areas of physics, but they are different because it turns out classical physics is plain wrong on the atomic scale. I guess you're currently doing stuff like springs, and accelerations, with equations like F=ma? Well, it turns out that if you try to describe atoms (and other objects on the same scale) like this, you simply get the wrong result, the theory is not correct.\n\nThis is where quantum physics comes in. It's called this because it turns out that quantities are quantised. To contrast, we can use classical mechanics to work out how fast the Earth is orbiting the sun, and see that if it had a different speed then this would lead to a different shape of orbit (or it hitting the sun or flying away), but any speed is allowed.\n\nHowever, if we try to take this idea to the quantum scale to describe electrons going around atoms, it turns out things don't work like this. The electrons can only have certain energies, the other possible ones simply don't exist and the electron can never have them. And if we start trying to describe things better we find the astounding fact that matter acts like both a wave and a particle at the same time! What's more, it doesn't even have a well defined position and momentum at the same time.\n\nScaling this up to everyday scales for an example, imagine if you repeatedly threw a ball at a wall and it sometimes just went straight through. That doesn't make any intuitive sense...but it's allowed in quantum mechanics. The rules are simply different to those that accurately describe things on the larger scale.\n\nIt is probably fair to say that quantum mechanics is more 'fundamental' than classical mechanics, in that it is a deeper theory. If you take the rules of quantum mechanics and apply them to large scale objects, you actually get classical mechanics as a sort of average of all the weird things that can happen. But you can't do this the other way, taking classical mechanics and applying it to small things to describe them, you get the wrong result.",
"I'm sure someone will come along and do some better justice, but let me give you my view. Toward the later parts of the 19th century, scientists mostly thought that the universe was figured out. Since the dawnings of the enlightenment, 250 years of solid research, theory and experimentation had turned up a number of laws that seemed to explain justa bout everything (e.g. gravity). Science was solved! Any unexplained phenomena was just a few experiments away from being worked out, using one of the existing laws, or with a little more math.\n\nThen, as they delved further into experimentation, scientists started noticing some very, very odd things. Some experiments showed that light was behaving more like a particle than a wave, overturning more than 2 centuries of thought. Other experiments showed strange 'rays' (electron beams or X-rays), which defied explanation. As more and more of these cases were turned up, it became clear that the existing scientific laws could never explain the behavior. It would be like trying to use the theory of gravity to prove that the sky is blue. It just didn't work out.\n\nToward the end of the 19th century, some staggering geniuses such as Einstein and Planck came along and completely overturned science. It is very difficult for me to communicate to you how much they changed the field, and in how short a time. Hell, they even took theories such as Newton's Theory of Gravity and completely rewrote the equations. \n\nOnce the dust settled, it became clear that most of the old laws of science were just approximations, which break down at very large scales (e.g. star sized objects, lightspeed velocity, etc), or at very small scales (e.g. scale of an atom). The new theories which emerged to guide science on the large scale were Einstein's theories of relativity. And the new theories which emerged on the smaller scale were the theories behind quantum mechanics.\n\nA few results from quantum mechanics which completely defy any classical explanation:\n\n* Not all information can be known. At subatomic scales, particles don't exist in one place; they have a *probability distribution* of existing in kind of a region. It's as if I asked you where your phone was, and you said \"I don't know, but I'm pretty sure it's within 10 feet of me.\"\n\n* Subatomic particles can tunnel through space, immediately appearing to leap into areas that classical theories could never predict. It's like if suddenly your toilet found itself in your living room. Without your bathroom door ever being opened.\n\n* Subatomic particles can communicate information instantly over arbitrary distances.\n\n* Light is not a wave (as described by classical theories). Nor is it a particle. It is both. At once.\n\nThat's just a few. There are more. \n\nDid this spell doom for classical mechanics? No. The old classical theories are still excellent approximations to the **true** physics, as long as you're not dealing with small, large or fast objects.",
"At the quantum scale, some aspects of classical physics don't work at all. \n\nAt normal scales, quantum mechanics still works because classical physics are a statistical approximation of quantum mechanics when applied to large systems (ie lots of particles). \n\nThe classical example is light. At our scale, light behaves like a wave. At the quantum level, it behaves both like a wave and a particle, the photon (this is the famous wave-particle duality)."
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | ELI15: what is the difference between quantum mechanics and classical physics?
My teacher (grade 11) keeps saying how the stuff we are learning in physics is only clasical science, and with quantam mechanics everything get's altered... seems to me like they are all the same, just on different levels (quantum being atoms and such)? | [
-0.02340352162718773,
-0.03297899663448334,
0.034348685294389725,
0.013889149762690067,
-0.0222324151545763,
-0.018905052915215492,
-0.08539742231369019,
0.0179073978215456,
0.032598648220300674,
0.05638269707560539,
0.040588412433862686,
-0.03595007210969925,
-0.05787261947989464,
0.03663... | |
1b3umi | How does sucking in your gut work? | Is it simply muscles pulling your organs into a different arrangement? Where does the mass go, and/or, when you release the clenching, what is filling in the void to make me look fat(ter)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c93bupd"
],
"text": [
"Your organs mainly go up. \n\nBetween your tummy and your chest, there's a muscle called the diaphragm. It is normally used to breathe (by pushing down to make room for air in your chest) but you can also use it to suck your gut in (by pushing up, so that there's more room in your tummy).\n\nYou may also notice that, when you suck your gut in, not only your tummy goes in but your chest goes out, which enhances the illusion that your gut is smaller. What happens is that basically you rearranged your organs, by pushing them up a bit, so that now the tummy is smaller and the chest is bigger."
],
"score": [
8
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does sucking in your gut work?
Is it simply muscles pulling your organs into a different arrangement? Where does the mass go, and/or, when you release the clenching, what is filling in the void to make me look fat(ter)? | [
0.04420066252350807,
-0.07824584096670151,
-0.02648530900478363,
0.07518190145492554,
-0.10439428687095642,
-0.026329804211854935,
0.03514108434319496,
-0.03021955117583275,
0.08212389051914215,
-0.0007065197569318116,
-0.0498821996152401,
0.01966860145330429,
-0.01790216565132141,
0.00707... | |
1vdnth | Do fish die going over large waterfalls like Niagara? | When I visited Niagara one thought I had is that, based on my experiences boating and fishing, and the size of that river, there are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of fish going over Niagara falls every hour. It seems like if these fish are simply splatting on the rocks below there should be dead fish everywhere and probably lots of birds scavenging, but I never saw that. So, do the fish go over the falls? And if yes, do they survive the trip? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cer79z4"
],
"text": [
"Actually most fish tend to avoid waterfalls.\n\nThat said, because of their small size they fall with less force than a human, meaning their terminal velocity is generally quite low. Most fish will survive a long drop into the water, and the smallest ones will even survive hitting the rocks."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Do fish die going over large waterfalls like Niagara?
When I visited Niagara one thought I had is that, based on my experiences boating and fishing, and the size of that river, there are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of fish going over Niagara falls every hour. It seems like if these fish are simply splatting on the rocks below there should be dead fish everywhere and probably lots of birds scavenging, but I never saw that. So, do the fish go over the falls? And if yes, do they survive the trip? | [
0.007691864389926195,
-0.004526540637016296,
0.04056670889258385,
-0.0006606756360270083,
-0.057112641632556915,
-0.03373389691114426,
0.0322953462600708,
0.0542709119617939,
-0.06725934147834778,
-0.0508357509970665,
-0.031333085149526596,
-0.0020641805604100227,
-0.10060045123100281,
0.0... | |
1w71oq | Why defaults have less mods than subreddits with fewer subscribers. | I see defaults with two mods and one mod bot while having millions of subscribers, but then I see subs with a quarter of the subscriber count having eight mods and no bot. Why is this? Shouldn't subs have more mods as they grow in size to handle the traffic? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cezacms"
],
"text": [
"It depends on what the mods want and how strictly the subreddit is regulated. In some cases, it's just a matter of the mods having their own opinions on how much work they need to do and how much work each of them is able to put in. Often, it's a matter of how tightly regulated the subreddit is. For example, in /r/videos, there are few mods, but there isn't much regulation needed. Sure people will occasionally get banned for posting spam or personal information, but pretty much every submission that's posted will meet the criteria of being an apolitical video. Another example is /r/atheism back when it was a default. That subreddit was infamous for its complete lack of regulation and as such, it was filled with non-stop reposts and instances of karma-whoring.\n\nOn the other side, look at something like /r/askscience. In that subreddit, there is very strict enforcement of all comments. In fact, in that subreddit, it's incredibly common to look through a thread and notice dozens of comments listed as having been deleted or removed. Needless to say, /r/askscience is tightly regulated. Since so much regulation occurs there, it makes sense that they have 55 mods."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why defaults have less mods than subreddits with fewer subscribers.
I see defaults with two mods and one mod bot while having millions of subscribers, but then I see subs with a quarter of the subscriber count having eight mods and no bot. Why is this? Shouldn't subs have more mods as they grow in size to handle the traffic? | [
0.01140633225440979,
-0.14693672955036163,
0.0469454862177372,
0.031063582748174667,
0.041022203862667084,
-0.055018942803144455,
-0.07978933304548264,
0.11496062576770782,
0.06769711524248123,
0.02632034383714199,
0.03876185417175293,
0.016063176095485687,
0.06173759326338768,
0.016337577... | |
63obkc | What causes the brown parts of a banana and should I eat it? | I usually eat it, but I can't help but wonder.. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dfvp1zd"
],
"text": [
"It's fine to eat, it's just because of a natural process caused by ethylene which is a natural compound released by almost all fruit during the ripening process.\n\nHigh amounts of ethylene cause the yellow pigments in bananas to decay into those characteristic brown spots in a process called enzymatic browning."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What causes the brown parts of a banana and should I eat it?
I usually eat it, but I can't help but wonder.. | [
0.026340603828430176,
-0.045244328677654266,
0.016844477504491806,
-0.015300171449780464,
0.024608075618743896,
-0.007482109125703573,
0.057633932679891586,
0.00040325388545170426,
0.011777718551456928,
0.0834592953324318,
-0.046747781336307526,
-0.08766638487577438,
-0.04353920370340347,
... | |
6ace50 | Why do we get bags under our eyes? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dhdgfw8"
],
"text": [
"There are multiple reasons - \n \n**Aging**\n \nWith the aging process, the ligaments underneath your eyes that hold back fatty tissue begin to weaken, and the tissue can fall forward to form under eye bags.\n \n**Tiredness or Sleepy Eyes** \n \nFluid accumulates into the skin under the eyes as gravity drags it downward whilst you are upright.\nSo when you lay down to sleep the fluid is able to drain away into the nasal passages.\n \nThere are drains that connect the nose and eyes and allow that fluid to move back and forth between wake and sleeps cycles. If you notice that you have bags under your eyes early in the morning but they're generally gone by noon, it probably means they're being caused by fluid retention. You might be able to reduce their appearance by simply using an extra pillow to elevate your head while you sleep.\n \n**Heredity** \n \nOne of the biggest reasons people get bags under their eyes is because their parents have them. It's in your genes, and -- aside from plastic surgery -- there's not much that can be done about it.\n \nSome other reasons - \n \n- Sinus infections can cause them as well, by constantly stretching the skin beneath your eyes. \n \n- Swelling (adema) or other infections."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do we get bags under our eyes?
[removed] | [
-0.011743949726223946,
0.05577569454908371,
0.02669341489672661,
0.11247627437114716,
0.07736019790172577,
-0.07050013542175293,
0.206047922372818,
-0.043462786823511124,
0.052775949239730835,
0.0011584456078708172,
0.057571668177843094,
0.012857111170887947,
0.0007049863925203681,
-0.0329... | |
6pvpfe | Despite living in famine stricken countries where food and medicine is in such short supply, why do people still have children when there's such high risk of child mortality? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dksho5k",
"dkshovj",
"dksieoc",
"dksikug",
"dkshnhv"
],
"text": [
"In many countries children are your retirement plan. If a country lacks the social safety net to protect the elderly then people tend to have large families so that their children can support them later in life. They invest time and resources into their children with the assumption that they will be paid back later. That's why you tend to see the birth rate drop as economic stability rises.",
"When people are living in a world of shit, and they don't have any other distractions available after toiling in the sun all day just to survive, they fuck.\n\nWhen women in these places don't want to do that, they often get raped. \n\nThese same places are usually *very* opposed to any form of birth control or abortion. Even the missionaries who come to these places to help often preach against contreception.\n\n\nYes, this is an oversimplification of the problem. It ignores factors like education, but it should be at least somewhat useful in understanding the issue at hand.",
"In addition to what other have said - all valid reasons - children are your workforce. If you are a subsistence farmer, you need all the help you can get earning money to make ends meet, so you rely on kids for help on the farm and/or wages earned by hiring them out. You have multiple kids because not every one of them will make it adulthood.",
"When you were a young male or female, didn't you have a sex drive? Did you get crushes or fall in love with others? Didn't you ever have an infatuation? If you didn't, it might be helpful to know that there are many out there who are sometimes gripped by powerful longings for the opposite sex (and people of the same gender, of course, but we are talking about pregnancy, which requires both genders outside of a laboratory)\n\nI'm always surprised that we forget how powerful those feelings of love and desire were for us, and that others have those feelings too. Do you think that poor people tell themselves \"no love for me. I can't afford it?\"\n\nSometimes when you are poor, all you have is love and family. That's the only gratification your life offers you.",
"A lot of these countries don't have access to birth control and there's little to know sex education."
],
"score": [
8,
7,
7,
5,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Despite living in famine stricken countries where food and medicine is in such short supply, why do people still have children when there's such high risk of child mortality?
[removed] | [
0.015261068940162659,
0.04166959598660469,
-0.010622348636388779,
0.0980215072631836,
0.07420240342617035,
0.049321360886096954,
-0.01392029132694006,
0.0524311326444149,
0.00649656355381012,
0.07769911736249924,
0.1286379098892212,
-0.01573822647333145,
-0.0002453295746818185,
0.014610318... | |
6sg24e | Why, when writing formal (letters), are (married) women sometimes referred to as Mr. (female's full name)? | I'm wondering if this is as simple as the somewhat old notion of men being the "important" ones in the family, or something else. Not trying to start a flame war.
Edit: After reading several comments I realized I misspoke. What I meant was when a married woman is referred to as Mrs. (Husband's name) thanks everyone for pointing that out. (Not sarcasm) | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dlcgsfk",
"dlcgdw4",
"dlcfzy8",
"dlcgdgj",
"dlcfzfl"
],
"text": [
"If you know it's a woman, Mr. would be an error.\n\nSome women see this mistake, I have a friend called Gene Smith, her real name is Genevieve. She pronounces Gene like gene (the bit of DNA). She gets a lot of mail to Mr. Gene Smith, because if you google \"gene smith\" you get images of a bunch of guys.\n\nIn workplace writing Ms. is the safe personal title for all females, marital status isn't a factor.",
"Traditionally, in English and American society, the family line goes through the man. When a woman is married, she leaves her former family and joins a new family. The husband is the head of that family; his legal authority over their household is balanced by a duty to protect his wife and children.\n\nAlthough most people would now consider husband and wife equal, and that's their legal position in most English-speaking countries, the custom of referring to a wife by her husband's surname comes from this system. When Miss Jane Doe marries Mr. Richard Roe, she may henceforth be referred to as \"Mrs. Richard Roe\" or simply \"Mrs. Roe.\" (She could still be called \"Miss Doe,\" though perhaps the husband might take offense, but \"Mrs. Doe\" would be simply incorrect.) Today, if a woman keeps her previous last name but still wishes to be referred to as \"Mrs.,\" she has forgotten the origin of the practice.",
"You're right this is something from yesteryear. Let's say the man was named James Smith. The wife would be referred to as Mrs. James Smith. We later dropped this and now would say Mrs. [her name] Smith. Some people today are now not changing their last name for the husband.",
"Where have you seen that? Common though older usage is Mrs. < husbands name > , or Mrs. < womans name > , Mr. < XYZ > is always referring to a man, and anytime I've seen a Mr. < womans name > it's because someone sent a letter and assumed they were a man because they either didn't know and guessed, or it was a computer system that just assumed that (didn't have the capability of determining if it was a man or woman).",
"...really? Mrs for married. Ms for unknown or unmarried."
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why, when writing formal (letters), are (married) women sometimes referred to as Mr. (female's full name)?
I'm wondering if this is as simple as the somewhat old notion of men being the "important" ones in the family, or something else. Not trying to start a flame war. Edit: After reading several comments I realized I misspoke. What I meant was when a married woman is referred to as Mrs. (Husband's name) thanks everyone for pointing that out. (Not sarcasm) | [
-0.005499802529811859,
-0.01612207293510437,
0.03720449283719063,
0.0682181566953659,
-0.10188698023557663,
-0.026536470279097557,
-0.020353468134999275,
-0.03398582339286804,
0.05814993754029274,
0.005589616950601339,
-0.052783891558647156,
0.018892161548137665,
0.0004919100902043283,
-0.... | |
1moe1c | Rather than have two separate sexes, why are not all species hermaphroditic? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ccb5cfy",
"ccb891v",
"ccb8b9k"
],
"text": [
"Organisms that exchange genes change more per generation than organisms that don't. \n\nAs such, sexual organisms tend to evolve a lot faster relative to generation length than asexual ones.\n\nNot only does this allow them to more rapidly exploit ecological niches and adapt to change (thus standing a better chance of avoiding extinction), but it allows them to be *more different* than their peers - which means that a lot of the biological diversity out there *is the result of* sex-driven evolution. \n\nAs with most evolutionary concepts, you kind of need to look at these things in hindsight. Species that haven't changed much over the eons... are the weird primitive things you find under rocks in ponds, because that's where they started, and they just haven't moved on. \n\nAny species that turns hermaphroditic (there are even some lizards that have) is retiring from the rat-race, because it lives in an environment so stable that mutations allowing self-fertilization provide less disadvantage than the cost of maintaining males. This doesn't tend to happen very often - and even when it does, it doesn't tend to spread, because a stable species doesn't split into new species.",
"All the previous commenters are talking about animals that practice self fertilization or are asexual. I think you are actually asking about animals where each individual produces both sperm and eggs, and any one animal could have the choice to be pregnant or impregnate another?\n\nIn animals that are hermaphroditic, like snails, they compete to be the one that gives sperm to the other, and sex is usually very dangerous and violent. Being pregnant takes a lot of extra nutrients and is hard on your body. Sometimes they fight to the death over who's going to have to do all the work of being the \"female\". It's a lot simpler when there's already agreement about which partner is going to carry the offspring in their body.\n\nI'm glad humans don't have to [fence with our penises](_URL_0_) or impregnate each other by firing [love darts](_URL_1_) into each other's flesh.",
"Why isn't there a third sex?\n\nWhat would that entail?"
],
"score": [
15,
13,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_fencing",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_dart"
]
} | train_eli5 | Rather than have two separate sexes, why are not all species hermaphroditic?
| [
0.070683054625988,
-0.034384358674287796,
0.0375269390642643,
0.008939008228480816,
-0.01611297018826008,
0.0037833754904568195,
-0.050605833530426025,
-0.026629183441400528,
0.03207453712821007,
0.08952268213033676,
0.0032996446825563908,
-0.12010888755321503,
-0.057970598340034485,
-0.02... | ||
28qqum | Why is it that when I'm not hungry but I eat something anyways, I instantly become hungry? | I notice this mostly when I eat breakfast. Often times when I wake up I'm not hungry at all, but I have to eat something anyways because of my medicine. Usually after I start to eat something I start to become hungry. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cidkl8e",
"cidkhj6"
],
"text": [
"The human body has a mechanism to ignore hunger if it goes on without food for a certain period of time (To stop the feeling of hunger so you can focus on finding food) so now that you got food it says, \"Oi mate, that's my part, you need more food.\" \n\nOn a more technical side the brain [stops releasing the leptin and ghrelin](_URL_0_) (Which cause the feeling of hunger) so you don't feel it and are able to focusing on getting food.",
"When you start to eat something, your body becomes aware that you are eating something. It starts to digest and process the food. Even if you only eat a little bit of food, your body is preparing for more food. Also, when you start eating, you think about food more."
],
"score": [
11,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry#Biological_mechanisms"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why is it that when I'm not hungry but I eat something anyways, I instantly become hungry?
I notice this mostly when I eat breakfast. Often times when I wake up I'm not hungry at all, but I have to eat something anyways because of my medicine. Usually after I start to eat something I start to become hungry. Why is this? | [
0.050478626042604446,
-0.025814557448029518,
-0.004506743047386408,
0.024549715220928192,
0.061899323016405106,
0.005641202442348003,
0.060458436608314514,
0.014835228212177753,
0.12235882878303528,
-0.05930100381374359,
-0.10553279519081116,
0.00472206762060523,
0.0017420205986127257,
-0.... | |
17vfq3 | What is a subsidy? | I was reading this thread
_URL_0_
And i know ive heard this word before but i am barely knowledgeable in any kind of financial way.
Googling this only led to more questions :( | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c896qda",
"c896xea"
],
"text": [
"Very simply, a subsidy is when the government offers money to a group, usually corporations, to achieve various results. This can range from lower prices for the consumer, to help researching new technologies, to an effort to stabilize prices. \n\nA great example in the US is farming. As we all know, farming is largely dependent on the weather. This means that some years too little food is produced. This would cause prices to rise, which would in turn make food more expensive. A subsidy, in this example, would pay part of that additional cost to keep the grain cheaper for the end consumer. In the reverse situation, a year when too *much* grain is produced, prices can drop. If the cost drops too much then the farmer might not make any money (or even lose money to ship the food to its markets). In this case, a subsidy would help raise the *farmers* profit while again keeping the end costs low. \n\nThese are examples of fairly direct subsidies, but the government can subsidize almost anything. And they can do it to achieve different results. Changes in farm subsides recently have promoted the growth and use of corn in many different products (including gasoline!). They can promote the growth of one sector over another. \n\nIn the case of this article (which Ive just skimmed) it seems that the government would be subsidizing the cost of solar plants so that it becomes a cheaper alternative to coal. If people are given a choice between coal and more expensive solar, they would chose solar. This would (hopefully) have an environmental impact, and so would desirable, but its a very expensive technology. The government then steps in and takes some of the financial burden in order to promote the growth of solar power.",
"Free money. Literally.\n\nIn example: The gov't of China offers a $19,000 subsidy to anyone who buys an electric car. That means that if you buy an electric car they will give you $19,000 at the same time, which means you pay $19,000 less. Usually it's included in the price when you go to the store."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/17uywm/solar_power_to_be_sold_for_less_than_coal/"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is a subsidy?
I was reading this thread _URL_0_ And i know ive heard this word before but i am barely knowledgeable in any kind of financial way. Googling this only led to more questions :( | [
-0.09766168147325516,
-0.037249334156513214,
-0.035363275557756424,
-0.01771441474556923,
-0.005331696942448616,
0.06865350157022476,
0.006412206683307886,
0.0037815941032022238,
-0.08659829199314117,
0.03652633726596832,
0.08931952714920044,
0.046285904943943024,
0.02744831144809723,
0.00... | |
1wy03g | Apache (The software) | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cf6e0dj"
],
"text": [
"Apache is a web server.\n\nWhen you make a website it is a collection of files on a computer somewhere. When somebody wants to see your web page, they type in your address and a request goes to your computer. The web server software gets that request and sends you the correct files, including any needed processing, scripts, code, data, etc. \n\nApache is notable for being fast, efficient, and free."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Apache (The software)
| [
-0.016984717920422554,
0.020459139719605446,
-0.07199504226446152,
-0.06614559888839722,
-0.047179900109767914,
-0.05851961299777031,
-0.030348695814609528,
-0.00400196760892868,
0.04342412203550339,
-0.0073544299229979515,
0.06020089238882065,
0.038172975182533264,
0.01388027798384428,
-0... | ||
19zn9y | Why is it so hard to make realistic water/liquids in video games? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c8sr0dj",
"c8srryb"
],
"text": [
"Water is made of lots of tiny particles, and these particles are constantly moving, colliding, and changing velocity. \n\nSolids have lots of particles, but they don't move, and you don't have to calculate their speed, or how they change position. \n\nIt's harder for a CPU to calculate how to display water since there's so many calculations. Each time one water particle changes position, it will affect the ones next to it, which end up affecting all of the water particles. Forget making it look pretty, even trying to simulate water flow is hard, and there aren't precise equations to deal with laminar (smooth) and turbulent (rough) water flow. We can't simulate the path of each individual molecule accurately, so instead we guess and fudge it a bit. \n\nIt's much easier to make realistic solids, since you don't have to worry about what's happening inside the solid, and the surface isn't changing much, if at all. \n\n---\n\nTL;DR too many calculations",
"Accurately calculating physics of movement and collision of thousands, millions of tiny objects require a lot of calculations, especially when you take into account that water doesn't behave like normal stuff. It needs to dynamically break in every place, form bubbles if viscosity is right and always maintain its volume. \n\nAnother problem with water is light. You can't really have reflections and refractions on uneven surface. The problem is that light and shadows cannot be calculated in real time, so certain techniques and approximations are used. You can't have mirrors without cheating in some way. Round mirrors especially won't reflect anything that wasn't already calculated, that means they won't reflect players. It also means that if you moved such a mirror, it would still act as if it was reflecting previous room."
],
"score": [
9,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is it so hard to make realistic water/liquids in video games?
| [
-0.01131612341850996,
-0.060067493468523026,
0.06977111101150513,
-0.03252596780657768,
0.03602452948689461,
-0.052765410393476486,
0.01858934946358204,
0.013782404363155365,
0.029010875150561333,
0.0002344078238820657,
-0.11425821483135223,
-0.08367929607629776,
-0.057556118816137314,
0.0... | ||
5vkzcl | Why is way harder to find species where females have to impress males for matting? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"de2vo30",
"de2w8xl"
],
"text": [
"Because growing a baby intrinsically requires more resources than providing sperm, therefore more care must be taken in selecting a mate. Waste a bit of sperm on a bad genetic partner? No big deal. Waste a pregnancy on one? Big deal.",
"1 male can impregnate many females.\n\n1 female can only be impregnated by 1 male.\n\nFor the survival of the species, the best individu should pass on his genes. Females have to be selective in their choice of partner, otherwise they will have offsprings with poorer genes. Since they can procreate a limited number of time, the selection of good mating parter become even more important. \n\nIf it was the other way around, males with poor genes would have as much chances than males with good genes to mate with a female."
],
"score": [
9,
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is way harder to find species where females have to impress males for matting?
| [
0.03893919661641121,
-0.041893962770700455,
0.08360365033149719,
0.018757658079266548,
0.05168347433209419,
-0.052448827773332596,
-0.015936214476823807,
-0.055969271808862686,
-0.007163892965763807,
0.07856198400259018,
0.02470414899289608,
-0.14180631935596466,
-0.000039564598409924656,
... | ||
3zye88 | Why do some flavor combinations taste so well together (Peanut butter & Jelly, pork chops & apples, Lamb & mint, etc)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cyq264n"
],
"text": [
"Contrasting flavors are often a successful combination because they balance each other; this prevents you from feeling that a given flavor becomes excessive. So considering the 3 examples you give, we have salty/savoury flavors of peanut butter, pork chops, and lamb, which are combined with tart/fruity flavors of jelly, apples, & mint. \n\nSince we human beings generally enjoy complex flavor combinations there are lots of ways to make interesting recipes, not just savoury + fruity, but that is one of the very successful methods."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do some flavor combinations taste so well together (Peanut butter & Jelly, pork chops & apples, Lamb & mint, etc)?
| [
-0.022182224318385124,
-0.10267004370689392,
0.021762706339359283,
0.029066184535622597,
-0.07511991262435913,
0.02121908776462078,
-0.02894221618771553,
0.0037141386419534683,
0.07447098940610886,
-0.06327152252197266,
0.00902758538722992,
-0.026146840304136276,
-0.012699335813522339,
-0.... | ||
4f860s | Why is japanese porn censored? NSFW | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d26ngd3",
"d26t7nf"
],
"text": [
"Porn was first seriously restricted in Japan in the Meiji Era, when materials deemed “injurious to public morals” were banned [thanks to the introduction of Victorian morals from the West]. After Japan’s defeat in WW2, American occupation authorities changed many of Japan’s laws to guarantee freedom of speech and expression. Sadly, the occupation authorities decided that the pre-existing law regarding pornography didn’t need to be changed. It has remained in effect to this day.\n\nWhile the 60 years after World War II saw the acceptance of uncensored pornography as freedom of expression in the West, Japan continued to consider it “injurious to public morals.” One still cannot legally buy a movie featuring fully visible hardcore action.\n\nIn recent years it seems that the definition of “injurious to public morals” has been relaxed. Ten years ago, pubic hair was censored: now it is not. Last year, the American film Kinsey was allowed to air in Japanese theaters uncensored. The scene in which Dr. Kinsey is giving a slideshow of penis/vagina picture made history as the first ever scene showing human genitalia allowed by the censors.",
"Follow up question: Is there a name or category name for non censored japanese porn?"
],
"score": [
28,
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is japanese porn censored? NSFW
[deleted] | [
0.010673397220671177,
-0.014612259343266487,
-0.023064127191901207,
-0.008612074889242649,
0.09203825145959854,
0.01322631724178791,
0.09528841078281403,
-0.08670318126678467,
0.06515813618898392,
-0.013290847651660442,
0.07846970111131668,
-0.0008591582300141454,
0.018939442932605743,
0.1... | |
538ocz | How long will ball bounce in vacuum | Ok if you throw bouncy ball in air and bouncy ball in vacuum from the same height will they both stop bouncing at the same time or will the one in vacuum stop bouncing after the one in air?
^sorry ^for ^my ^bad ^english | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d7quzps"
],
"text": [
"All other things being equal, the one in the vacuum would bounce longer as no air resistance is slowing it down."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How long will ball bounce in vacuum
Ok if you throw bouncy ball in air and bouncy ball in vacuum from the same height will they both stop bouncing at the same time or will the one in vacuum stop bouncing after the one in air? ^sorry ^for ^my ^bad ^english | [
0.09116395562887192,
-0.04630742967128754,
0.03673023730516434,
-0.05497148633003235,
-0.03659958019852638,
-0.04221653565764427,
0.0010761851444840431,
-0.01983080618083477,
0.004325350280851126,
-0.07876785844564438,
0.04135025292634964,
0.02071305550634861,
0.012843466363847256,
-0.0765... | |
48pbxp | Weakly dominant vs Strictly dominant in game theory. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d0lg2nw"
],
"text": [
"Weakly dominant theory means that a player will get *at least* as much positive value as any other player regardless of their choice. Strictly dominant means they must get the *most* positive value of any other player with their choice.\n\nWeakly Dominant: Choose A and everyone gets $0, Choose B and you get $100, Choose C and everyone gets $100. Choosing B or C would be weakly dominant.\n\nStrictly Dominant: Choose A and everyone gets $0, choose B and you get $100, choose C and everyone gets $100, or choose D and *you* alone get $200."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Weakly dominant vs Strictly dominant in game theory.
| [
0.1273147314786911,
-0.015357337892055511,
0.01476915180683136,
-0.09101101011037827,
-0.006547302473336458,
0.025372155010700226,
-0.01622849889099598,
0.07391968369483948,
-0.05464090034365654,
0.0662030577659607,
-0.062332186847925186,
0.09819404780864716,
0.030396291986107826,
0.025178... | ||
7c4md5 | Why does bread get tough when left outside a bag/box for some time, but crackers get soft in the same situation? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dpn4so1"
],
"text": [
"Bread has a lot of moisture (google says 40%). So, leaving it out leads to the liquid evaporating out and drying out the bread. Crackers have very little moisture, that's why they can last much longer than bread. So, when you leave them out, they absorb the moisture from the surrounding environment."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does bread get tough when left outside a bag/box for some time, but crackers get soft in the same situation?
| [
-0.042068883776664734,
-0.06208323687314987,
0.03311990201473236,
0.08256971836090088,
0.03714263439178467,
-0.08956649899482727,
-0.05601530894637108,
0.06117548421025276,
0.0022315483074635267,
0.06404487788677216,
-0.059839893132448196,
-0.007787751499563456,
-0.0045341188088059425,
-0.... | ||
xvssu | What did Obama do to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c5q0l6w",
"c5q07as"
],
"text": [
"He didn't deserve it. Even Obama acknowledges that.\n\nIt's been said that it's sometimes given as a form of \"pro-active shame\" on somebody who might be a war monger. As a way to encourage them to be peaceful.",
"The Nobel Peace Prize 2009 was awarded to Barack H. Obama \"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples\"."
],
"score": [
11,
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What did Obama do to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize?
| [
0.009567667730152607,
0.13061726093292236,
0.020809294655919075,
0.009174819104373455,
-0.06207239627838135,
0.04409520700573921,
0.06919699162244797,
-0.0162169449031353,
-0.023851441219449043,
0.04458899050951004,
-0.031222783029079437,
0.008152579888701439,
0.011876809410750866,
-0.0039... | ||
8u4ey2 | why do they always the need to change up the UI of a big social media app? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"e1ciqcn"
],
"text": [
"It’s so they can tell their shareholders/stockholders that they are adding value and keeping their product “relevant”"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why do they always the need to change up the UI of a big social media app?
[removed] | [
-0.03425859287381172,
0.027033530175685883,
0.07625917345285416,
0.00033416406949982047,
0.09356401115655899,
-0.058029722422361374,
-0.0713728740811348,
0.01110134832561016,
0.0426427386701107,
0.03730218857526779,
0.011608222499489784,
0.13921253383159637,
-0.023907816037535667,
-0.04260... | |
mvjxp | Campaign financing - Pros and Cons | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c347vbu",
"c346ps3"
],
"text": [
"The question is a bit incomplete - the current campaign financing system? Public financing? Campaign finance reform? This answer, by the way, isn't really at a 5-year-old level (first time I'm doing this...) but is hopefully helpful.\n\nUnder the current system at the federal level, the following rules (incomplete list) apply:\n\n* Individuals can contribute $5,000 ($2,500 primary election, $2,500 general).\n* PACs (political action committees) can contribute $10,000 ($5,000 primary, $5,000 general). Most PACs are connected to a company (such as Boeing PAC) but must remain legally separate, and can't co-mingle funds.\n* Particularly in Presidential elections, candidates can also raise toward a party committee (Democratic/Republican National Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, etc.), up to $30,400. This is why you'll see President Obama holding $35,400-a-plate dinners.\n* All of these contributions must be reported publicly, on a regular basis (quarterly, or as soon as within 48 hours if an election is about to occur)\n* Outside groups can spend unlimited amounts on elections, and by creating two separate legal entities - contributions are made to Entity A, which doesn't have to report contributions, and those are then funneled to Entity B, which merely reports a contribution from Entity A.\n\nThe outside group spending has not been an issue in previous presidential elections, having come about in 2010 as a result of a Supreme Court case, [*Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission*](_URL_0_). So, we don't know how much of an effect it will have. These groups were involved in the 2010 mid-term Congressional elections, and spent heavily. Immediately following the decision of *Citizens United*, Congress considered requiring outside group to disclose all donors more publicly (legislation supported by Democrats and opposed by Republicans) but this legislation was not passed.\n\nMost public finance suggestions would be considered unconstitutional by the current Supreme Court as a violation of free speech - they interpret money as speech. Under our current system, Presidential candidates can elect to accept public money, which comes with strings - in the primary election, viable candidates can receive matching funds in the primary election, and for the general election, can forgo private contributions altogether, taking only public funding. In 2008, John McCain did so in the general election, receiving $84 million. This was dwarfed by Obama's fundraising, so the Republican National Committee paid for much of the advertising on the Republican side.\n\nThe state of Virginia is an interesting example of a different approach. For state elections, there are no limits whatsoever. Both individuals and corporations are allowed to contribute unlimited amounts directly to candidates, or to PACs. But the contributions are disclosed publicly, and more frequently than at the federal level. This sort of system can be gamed somewhat, however; due to various loopholes, many candidates for Virginia's State Senate this year received support from the Governor's PAC (Opportunity Virginia PAC) that they were able to avoid reporting until after the election.",
"off the top of my head\n\nPros\n\n- tax payers are not funding the bill for campaigns.\n- governments can spend more than their budget.\n- (some) businesses can get what they want\n\n\nCons\n\n- not representing the views of the people, answering to the highest bidder.\n- technically bribery\n- not really in the spirit of a democracy"
],
"score": [
4,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission"
]
} | train_eli5 | Campaign financing - Pros and Cons
| [
-0.013082199729979038,
-0.00413387781009078,
-0.000220328540308401,
-0.011117145419120789,
0.10471218824386597,
0.10077915340662003,
-0.025033477693796158,
0.05710211023688316,
-0.010944723151624203,
0.05202937498688698,
-0.03192080929875374,
0.05491591617465019,
0.026519516482949257,
-0.0... | ||
3erlqp | Why is it that normal pencils will rub off with an eraser, but color pencils won't? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cthp1p4"
],
"text": [
"Color pencil pigment is carried by wax, which only smears around when it's written on something and then erased. You're essentially writing with a form of grease that carries a coloring agent, and like rubbing your finger across a greasy frying pan, doesn't remove it that well without some other form of chemical help (which would likely destroy the paper it's written on in the process).\n\nPencil leads are made largely from graphite, a naturally black carbon form that transfers very well to paper in a tacky powder of sorts. Because it doesn't require any sort of glue to stay in place, and because it doesn't need any sort of wax to carry a different pigment (which is composed of different molecules for different colours), you only really need pressed graphite in the lead. \n\nTacky rubber or plastic erasers remove graphite from paper very well because that substance sticks to graphite better than paper does, so it lifts it off and removes it in the little flakes that come away from your eraser as you use it up."
],
"score": [
34
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is it that normal pencils will rub off with an eraser, but color pencils won't?
| [
-0.053105469793081284,
-0.0739981085062027,
0.049714867025613785,
0.04802083969116211,
-0.028713800013065338,
-0.026878658682107925,
0.04544522240757942,
-0.05401768162846565,
0.027728086337447166,
0.04108988493680954,
-0.008646618574857712,
0.10951999574899673,
-0.03388388454914093,
0.069... | ||
40bv7k | What is happening when the internet stops working, and then somehow working after i replug/restart it? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cysymbf"
],
"text": [
"I assume you mean the router/wifi.\n\nA router takes internet traffic from all the devices in your house with internet and funnels it out to your provider. Then all the returning traffic (websites, videos, etc. your devices asked for) has to be sent out to the right device. It's sort of like working in a mailroom, but at very high speeds.\n\nDoing this is complicated and takes a lot of memory and processing power. Eventually the router gets overwhelmed and its memory gets full. When this happens, internet stops working or is really slow. When you power it off and back on, that memory is reset to blank, a clean slate.\n\nI have mine on a timer to shut off for 15 minutes at 2:30am everynight, to help with this. Otherwise, just pull the plug when it gets bad."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is happening when the internet stops working, and then somehow working after i replug/restart it?
[removed] | [
-0.013212835416197777,
-0.08648192882537842,
0.04160374402999878,
-0.0142070846632123,
0.016473332419991493,
-0.05867045745253563,
0.010161335580050945,
-0.09859836846590042,
0.01299185398966074,
-0.03953656181693077,
0.02706105075776577,
0.07594034075737,
-0.1054360494017601,
0.0207683686... | |
vjadd | Why do TV shows and movies look "different"? | I can't quite explain what I feel is different, but I can almost always tell when something is a TV show, and when it's a movie. Something about the colors, etc. Anybody know the technical difference? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c54zmvz",
"c5503tr",
"c54zhmm",
"c54zrfo",
"c550rq9",
"c551kx4",
"c550x20",
"c5507l4",
"c555z1v",
"c553koc",
"c54zb9a",
"c559erq",
"c54zfwo",
"c551e2p"
],
"text": [
"Most films are filmed in 24 frames per second. Where as most TV is filmed using higher FPS, like above 30FPS.",
"Movies tend to be shot on film, which means that the device being used to record the movie is one of those movie cameras with reels spinning around inside to capture the scene. Movies are expensive because to take one shot takes a really long time. The lenses on a film camera need to be adjusted properly to capture the action either clearly or just how the cinematographer wants. The cinematographer also decides about how the lighting will affect the image being captured, so outside the edges of the movie there will be a number of lights, sometimes few, sometimes many, all set up in a specific way to get the image just right. It's like painting, but with light. For this reason movies take a long time to make, and time can be put into making each shot look just right.\n\nTV tends to be shot on tape. Think of a really really good version of those camcorders you used to see being used in the 80s and 90s. Same principle. The texture of tape is different to that of film. Film can be said to be 'grainy' for example. Tape, on the other hand, tries to capture a much clearer image, so all of the subtle things like lighting set-ups are harder to capture on tape. It's less reactive to things like light than film. \n\nThis being said, things in recent years have been changing in both TV and movies, so the two can sometimes look similar. First of all, TV dramas at first used to be shot on film, and then they were shot on tape and film, and then they were shot on tape, and now they are shot on mostly tape and digital (another format I'll come on to). \n\nIn the same way as TV, not all movies are filmed the same way. It used to be the norm for movies to be made on 35mm, but they can be made on any size film (16mm for example). In recent years film as a stock has started to stop being made. This means that a lot of the movies you see nowadays are actually shot on digital. So, there is no physical film anymore, but the same principles (like the lighting and lens set up I explained before) are used to achieve the same effect. Really new movies like the Avengers were probably shot on digital film, whereas really old movies (if you have seen something like Indiana Jones) were shot on film, so you can even sometimes see the picture flicker or little scratches on the screen. That's not your TV, it's the effect of the movie being shot on film.\n\nNow, there are always exceptions to this, so like I say it's hard to tell sometimes whether a movie or TV show is shot on digital, tape or film, but a general rule is that most big hollywood movies before 2005 or so were shot on 35mm and nowadays they tend to be digital. There are lots of different types of TV shows too, so for example something like the talk shows you see in the mornings and afternoon are probably shot on tape, to save money, and the big dramas on in the evenings have higher budgets and are probably shot on digital or even film (for example, the first season of the TV show Lost was shot on film, and then after that it was shot on tape. The tape, however, is very good quality so most people wouldn't notice the change.)",
"different cameras, different lenses, different post-production effects, and most importantly, budget.",
"Don't quote me on this but a film student friend of mine claims it's the frame rate.\n\nAnimation tricks the brain into thinking that 2D images are moving by flashing a sequence really fast, right? Well, the speed that it's flashing plays a big role. Most movies are shot at 24 frames per second (fps). That's the standard--24 sequenced images per second. TV shows are often shot at a HIGHER frame rate--more than 24 fps. \n\nThis is a little counter intuitive seeing as one would imagine a higher frame rate means a higher quality image. While that's true, movies have been shot at 24 fps since you were born, I can almost guarantee you. It's a convention that our brains have gotten used to and that the reason for a different \"feel\" that can't really be explained by lighting. Peter Jackson's actually trying to change that convention with the new Hobbit movie (bumping it up to 48 fps) and it's creating quite the controversy. Anyway, that's not to say lighting and budget don't play a huge part.\n\nWatch a big budget movie and a TBS sitcom side by side and lighting is obviously different. The sitcom will be much less dramatic. Also, it's shot with much less intensity. Camera angles are limited. Usually a classic sitcom is shot on a set with one open face toward a live audience with about five cameras to capture the action. Because of this the shots are usually really similar and pretty boring by movie standards. Another reason for the different feel.",
"While frame rate and the differences between video / film do play a part, the main differences are budget and lighting. First: budget.\n\nFilms generally have more money to spend on scenery, costumes, location shooting, and everything else involved (including talent). They don't have to stretch their budget out across 13 - 26 episodes, they don't need to worry about being renewed (although sequels do play a part in some films), and they don't need to recreate their locations week after week for years. They can build a set for one purpose, one shot; make it look great for that one scene and not have to worry about next week's episode might need a shot from another angle so we need to build the back of the room too. It allows the director, DP (director of photography, you perverts), cameraman, and set decorator to spend more on the parts of the set for their shoot. The quality of things like costumes and props are higher as well. There are exceptions to these rules, like most of the original shows on HBO or AMC, but most TV is like this.\n\nNext is lighting. Lighting for film and lighting for TV, while very similar techniques, tend to look very different. [This video has a great example of the contrast between the two styles.](_URL_0_) TV lighting tends to focus more on even, brighter lighting allowing viewers to see everyone and everything in the frame. Film usually uses more shadow and highlight, giving the shot a more textured and dramatic feel. This all has to do with video not taking light the same as film, and not being able to show low light situations as well, as well as the fact that most people watch TV on a set that is much smaller than your average feature film, so being brighter makes it easier to see. \n\nMost people don't pay attention to the lighting in a TV show or film, because it's something we don't really think about. Try to look for it the next time you're watching TV. Keep in mind where things like windows or lamps are in the scene. Look at shadows and the direction they fall. Look for things like color tone and intensity, and note how an actor can look paler on TV than in a film.",
"Film for some bizarre reason is still filmed at 24 frames per second, TV tends to be higher and ironically low budget soap operas tend to be even higher. As a result people associate high frame rates with a low quality product and attempts to produce films at a higher frame rate are poorly received because of this.",
"People answering your question are leaving out a key concept: direction + cinematography.\n\nFilms are shot using tactics designed to look good on huge screens. TV shows are shot in a way that look good at a variety of smaller screen sizes, but would probably look off if shown on a large projector.",
"I didn't want to make a new thread so I'll ask here. What about live and recorded TV? As a 30 Rock fan I noticed the scenes for the live show looked much different than how the show normally looks",
"**Camera**: A film is made with an expensive camera capable of vibrant colors, low-light shooting and more importantly, shallow depths of field. With the recent availability of video-capable DSLRs, this has become less of an issue. However, they still wouldn't be able to create fast-moving shots of an object without a dedicated focus puller.\n\n**Lighting**: Like in photography, how the lighting is set up would determine how professional the scene being shot would look like. Amateur movies and photography tend to have whatever lighting is available to them at the time.\n\n**Frame rate**: Movies are shot at 24 fps while normal videos are at 60 fps. The perception of motion is easily distinguishable between those two rates. 60 fps is more lifelike and thus less movie quality. Interestingly, the upcoming The Hobbit movie would be filmed at 48 fps, causing some controversy.\n\n**Audio**: This is a very important factor that many here have overlooked. Films have dedicated people pointing extendable microphones at the audio source. This results in clear audio quality with virtually zero noise from moving camera elements or the wind. Sometimes they even re-record the voices in a studio to ensure pristine audio.",
"Also, why can I always tell that I'm watching a soap opera... There something different about them too",
"Usually different cameras. Some shoot video, some shoot film.",
"**Ah, I see you're talking about my life's work.**\n The answers that most of you are giving is correct. When we're talking about frame rates and such. Correct. A lot of you have forgotten that there are also *interlaced* and *progressive,* as well as *global shutter* cameras. Anyway, that's not the whole story.\n\n If you're a DP, videographer, whatever in professional video or film, you're messing with more than framerates, you're trying to 'con the camera' into seeing more than it can. Cinematographers make extremely technical decisions, and then they have to be artists with light as well once they choose the camera and package with it.\n\n Why do some look better than others? Why do the colors look better? Most of the time, it's the cinematographer, and the time set to that DP (Director of Photography on set) and his team to get to work that.\n\n So why does film look different? Latitude. Film is, like your eye, a chemical system. Only until recently did the lattitude (difference of brightest vs. darkest in an image, or in short, how much you see in the whites in the sun, or the shadows of a cave) of 15 T-stops get achieved in digital cinema cameras. Film was set a long time ago at 24 frames per second because it matched the refresh frequencies of your eyes. 23 frames would drive you nuts for a static image. Movies are also shot in a certain style to avoid 'judder' which is locked down tripods and dollies, with small motion. If you whip pan (spin around) with a film camera, it causes the 'jaggies' where the frame rate cannot keep up with the movement. \n Because film is exposed at the lowest rate of 24 fps, it's getting the maximum amount of time for exposure, which light being an analog wave that carries colors in frequencies, also means the target (film) is getting the maximum color saturation, on a chemical medium, with lenses that are more like telescopic elements than lenses that you and I would know from our home cameras (A complete set of Cooke primes can set you back easily $75,000 USD).\n\n That's just camera tech. The DP is also an artist, who gets the opportunity to work the location and lighting as well as the camera. If you're shooting a scene next to a window, and the director says, \"I like her look, but the rest of the room is too much,\" you have choices. You dim the lighting, add in, take out, scrim, dial-out, push the stock, smoke the set, fake the windows, filter the camera, or even go so far as have someone on set mix you up some high speed drying paint and have the grip paint the wall in fifteen minutes to drop the background. All of these choices effect the look, and that look results in a final image that is, well, different than an episodic television slam through job. Only the CSI shows and similar stripes put that kind of whoopin' in to it, even though dramatic TV right now is amazing. \n\n I hope this gives you a taste. Cinematographers, the great ones, are usually 65 year old guys in beards who have been doing this their whole lives, and you're playing with a person who's a brilliant flippin' technical genius, who is actually an ARTIST FIRST when you're going against them. \n Behind the director, they are, without a doubt, the most important person on the set. They are the directors most trusted ally, and they're actually the first person picked in a production, unless a 'star sign on' starts the film.\n\n There is a magazine called 'American Cinematographer.' Look it up. If you're interested in how movies are made, it's the amazing, dirty, incredible side of how people bend light and a film pops out the other side. \n I hope some of you come on the journey with us, if this taste helps inspire you. \n\n **TL;DR: The reason that movies look like that is a rumpled, grumpy old man in a beard standing right behind the director.**",
"Budget. \n\nMovie studios have more money per movie and generally only one shot at making it right so they use the best equipment to help ensure the best experience.\n\nTv studios will often put out much more content faster because of the nature of episodic content. To achieve this they spend less time editing and less money on cameras. \n\nThis isn't true of everything though. If you look as low budget movies compared to higher end larger budget tv shows you will see better quality in the tv show usually.",
"Really, guys, most television shows are NOT produced at a higher FPS than movies, nearly all scripted television is produced at 24 fps... typically only reality type shows are filmed in video format."
],
"score": [
177,
61,
32,
24,
6,
5,
5,
5,
4,
4,
4,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://youtu.be/h06WKYFYdlo#t=05m51s"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why do TV shows and movies look "different"?
I can't quite explain what I feel is different, but I can almost always tell when something is a TV show, and when it's a movie. Something about the colors, etc. Anybody know the technical difference? | [
0.018463877961039543,
-0.08808781951665878,
0.025641977787017822,
-0.06422378867864609,
0.026677850633859634,
0.05441957712173462,
0.000028784612368326634,
-0.020792830735445023,
0.1654258519411087,
-0.04703625291585922,
-0.0684000551700592,
0.026672611013054848,
0.02077558822929859,
0.021... | |
2mgy2d | Why light travels at that precise speed in vaccuum (and not higher)? | Is there something pulling it back? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cm44qbk",
"cm46wfe"
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_ \n\nCheck out the top comment. Doesn't exactly answer your question ( I don't think anyone has an explanation for why the speed of light is exactly what it is ) but should help wrap your mind around why that speed is significant.",
"Typically the speed of light is thought of as simply THE maximum speed. We then use this fundemental speed to define other properties.\n\nHowever, we could chose to define some other properties as \"fundemental\" and use those to calculate the speed of light. An interesting historical note is that it was discovered that electricity and magnetism were related and there should be an elecro-magnetic wave that could travel through free space. The speed at which this wave should travel was a function of the elecrical permitivity of free space and the magnetic permeability of free space. The speed was calculated and found to be very close to the speed of light. Only then was it realized that light WAS an elecromagnetic wave."
],
"score": [
5,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22pi7o/eli5_why_does_light_travel/"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why light travels at that precise speed in vaccuum (and not higher)?
Is there something pulling it back? | [
0.03502577543258667,
-0.05357450619339943,
-0.025409558787941933,
0.06390180438756943,
-0.07015914469957352,
-0.019597170874476433,
-0.019230877980589867,
-0.009424764662981033,
0.0627397745847702,
0.007073278538882732,
0.13725867867469788,
-0.04068204388022423,
-0.11535748094320297,
-0.07... | |
54w2nf | Why does your body's immunity tank with sleep deprivation? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d85jnkj",
"d864kcn",
"d86fu0m",
"d85ypb4"
],
"text": [
"When you don't get enough sleep there is a decrease in the number of T cells (major player in the immune system) and an increase in the factors that cause inflammation. Inflammation without reason can lead to tissue damage, which also makes it easier for pathogens to start an infection because part of your immune system will be concerned with damage and not so much with other areas of the body. T cells along with a lot of other proteins and hormones are made while you sleep, and if you don't sleep long enough you will not have made enough of these cells and molecules.",
"The stuff that your body uses to fight off infections is made while you sleep. If you don't sleep, you're not making them, so your body can't fight off the infection.",
"There are several paths that contribute. The one Im more familiar with is cortisol.\n\nBasically, cortisol is your major \"stress\" hormone. It can affect sleep, hunger, learning, behavior, sine other crap and immunity. For immunity, it affects how your body does inflammation. Inflammation is one of your first lines of defense against bacteria. It's a bit more complicated than saying more cortisol, less inflammation, more sickness though. Cortisol levels follow your day/night cycle which is also affecting when you sleep (also when you sleep affects your cycle). When you dont sleep, you mess up cortisols cycle and that messes up the way cortisol regulates all the other things like hunger, blood sugar, immunity...etc.\n\nSo basically sleeping messes up cortisol, messed up cortisol means messed up other things. One of those things is how you fight bacteria which then makws you an easier target for bacteria. You get sick easier, you stay sick longer. Works on injuries as well.\n\nOf note, this is also one of the things that contributes to people who dont sleep being susceptible to developing diabetes.\n\nFew things in the body are as simple as one hormone, in this case especially. There are a ton of other regulatory things that interact but cortisol would be a decent place to start if you wanted to dig more into it.",
"It doesn't \"tank\". It experiences statistically significant decline.\n\nBut \"statistically significant\" _doesn't_ mean \"significant\" or even \"important\".\n\nStatistical Significance is met when the numbers are _just_ _barely_ but _certainly_ altered. A statistical significance is anything known to be changed. It means \"at least barely measurable.\"\n\nNow there is no upper bound to statistical significance. A micrometer too long and a mile too long are both too long. But if something is more than statistically significant then then the author will likely use another term like \"significant\" or \"dominant\".\n\nWhen you see someone report that scientists found a statistically significant correlation between X and Y you should read those words as \"Barely Measurable Correlation\".\n\nNow, with that knowledge in place...\n\nStress causes your body problems at many levels. Not all levels are understood. Sleep Deprivation is a stressor. There is no such thing as \"stress-free sleep deprivation\" that we know of. Additionally stress itself messes up your ability to sleep. So the two tend to go hand in hand.\n\nBut \"idiopathic hypersomnia\" (getting too much sleep) does many of the same things to your immune system.\n\nBasically once you start blowing up your regulators all sorts of things become unregulated.\n\nSo reving a cold engine causes excessive wear, but so does running an engine too hot.\n\nAnd getting too little sleep messes up lots of stuff, like the number of T-cells in your body and the number of inflamatory chemicals as well... but getting too much sleep can do the same, or very similar, things.\n\nHow much your individual body's numbers go up or down will, however, vary.\n\nAIDS is an example of your immune system \"tanking\". Sleep deprivation just lightly sucks, and probably to the same degree as having to move out of your apartment unexpectedly. That is it sucks, but if it doesn't happen too often then it's just a normal variation."
],
"score": [
43,
10,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does your body's immunity tank with sleep deprivation?
| [
0.027415547519922256,
0.09354939311742783,
-0.01709851436316967,
0.10240467637777328,
0.09507867693901062,
0.06055019423365593,
0.052802421152591705,
0.06615713238716125,
0.051386162638664246,
-0.026325497776269913,
-0.11665249615907669,
-0.03179226443171501,
0.09994059801101685,
0.0602370... | ||
77krjp | On most microphones there is a metal grate that you sing or speak into, why does this not distort or muffle the voice? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"domnlkb",
"doty03h",
"domqhtu"
],
"text": [
"The short answer is that the openings in the grate are wide enough to as to avoid any major impact. It *probably* does make a tiny difference, but it's an acceptable trade-off for the sake of the microphone element's protection.",
"The metal grill's purpose on microphone models like the most common live vocal mic, the SM58, is designed almost entirely for the purpose of keeping the vocalist's mouth (and thus, spit) far enough away from the microphone. The Shure SM57 (no domed grill, one of the most popular instrument mics) and SM58 (domed grill, one of the most popular vocal mics) are the same exact microphone, with the only difference being the grill. Under the grill is a layer of foam designed, again, to keep spit away from the capsule, as well as to lessen the impact of air blown into/toward the mic by the singer on the capsule (a \"wind screen,\" technically, rather than a \"pop filter\"). All of this is to say that, essentially the sound would be MORE muffled without the grill, in the application of using a mic like this for vocals.",
"This is called a pop filter, and it's used to stop the 'popping' sound caused by sharp breaths when speaking, such as words with 'puh' sounds."
],
"score": [
14,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | On most microphones there is a metal grate that you sing or speak into, why does this not distort or muffle the voice?
| [
-0.06996545940637589,
-0.01134441141039133,
0.05206875875592232,
-0.025064829736948013,
-0.036722391843795776,
-0.09568313509225845,
0.12675686180591583,
-0.05840614065527916,
0.0650419071316719,
-0.11753546446561813,
-0.055167023092508316,
-0.09968864917755127,
-0.008201336488127708,
-0.0... | ||
649ad5 | ELI5: Please explain how nuclear fussion works in a hydrogen bomb? | I need a clear, precise, and detailed explanation for some indapendant research iḿ doing. Im having trouble grasping the subject. Thanks a lot! | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dg0cyf8"
],
"text": [
"Fusion or fission? They are two separate mechanics."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | ELI5: Please explain how nuclear fussion works in a hydrogen bomb?
I need a clear, precise, and detailed explanation for some indapendant research iḿ doing. Im having trouble grasping the subject. Thanks a lot! | [
0.03309782221913338,
0.04578317701816559,
-0.02479679137468338,
0.019486822187900543,
0.032615840435028076,
0.02917858585715294,
0.09902866929769516,
0.10549797117710114,
-0.12904776632785797,
-0.011166962794959545,
0.016475297510623932,
-0.001688780845142901,
0.031968627125024796,
-0.0510... | |
5ickcc | Why do people lose weight during sleep? | Basically the title. About 3 months ago I started to log my eating habits as well as weight loss/gain. Measuring at night, I noticed that in the mornings sometimes I could go down as much as 2 pounds. Anyone care to explain? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"db72zcf",
"db72tsc",
"db72prt",
"db72sr9"
],
"text": [
"You body is taking in oxygen, and breathing out oxygen plus hydrogen (water) and oxygen + carbon (carbon dioxide). \n\nThat is basically how *all* long term weight is lost, and over the course of 8 hours, it adds up. Also, you perspire while you sleep, and that contributes too.\n\nIn addition, bathroom scales are not terribly accurate, and differences in temperature and humidity between evening and morning can skew their results.",
"Two main things.\n\nOne is just that you exhale and sweat a fair amount of water all the time - at night, you aren't replacing that at all, so you lose some water weight. (Typically why a lot of people are thirsty first thing in the morning.)\n\nBut also because you are constantly exhaling weight - this is actually the main mechanism that you lose weight period.\n\nYou inhale oxygen (o2), and breath out carbon dioxide (CO2) and water. Your body took the oxygen and reacted it with sugars in your body (made from carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen), which result in the gases you exhale. When you lose weight, it's because of the carbon and hydrogen you are adding to your exhaled breaths.\n\nRelated fact - most of the mass of plants comes not from their roots but from the air - they take in CO2 and release O2, keeping the Carbon to build their tissues.",
"water loss, either through sweat, pee, or just the humidity in your breath.\n\nthe other is carbon dioxide, inhale oxygen, exhale CO2. Add up all those carbons and you can get a measurable amount of weight.\n\nBut of your 2lbs, i would be sure atleast 75% of it was water.",
"You're still breathing, heart's still pumping, brain's still thinking right? All of that requires energy from food in your belly or fat reserves. \n\nThe mass lost leaves mostly through sweat, CO2 when you exhale, and that one time you pooped the bed."
],
"score": [
8,
5,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do people lose weight during sleep?
Basically the title. About 3 months ago I started to log my eating habits as well as weight loss/gain. Measuring at night, I noticed that in the mornings sometimes I could go down as much as 2 pounds. Anyone care to explain? | [
0.04275598004460335,
0.04865143075585365,
0.0014346787938848138,
0.12277749180793762,
0.03719788044691086,
0.012284249998629093,
0.020473802462220192,
0.05250868573784828,
0.09160898625850677,
0.027454571798443794,
-0.13931675255298615,
-0.04121371731162071,
0.0007600190001539886,
-0.00385... | |
3wusfu | How important a consistent sleep schedule is? Why? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cxzacc3",
"cxza95s",
"cxzavqx",
"cxzabsh",
"cxzayah",
"cxzal16",
"cxzb0bz",
"cxzajpc",
"cxzb5hy",
"cxzajef",
"cxza867",
"cxzasxx",
"cxzco62",
"cxzcvw5",
"cxzcwi0",
"cxzbej1",
"cxzb6hs",
"cxzbf1h",
"cxzcchg"
],
"text": [
"For starters you title your ELI5 wrong when sleepy. The real issue is that your body has a natural sleep rhythem an as a result you will feel sleepy at certain times more than others. This sleep rhythm is slow to change, and sleeping at times when you are normally awake will cause your sleep to be lighter and shorter than if you slept during your normal sleep hours. If you spent several days on a weird sleep schedule, even if you slept the full 8 hours, you'd still be groggy and tired from not getting a decent amount of sleep and being awake in the \"wrong\" hours. It might even make it impossible to sleep at some points, or cause you to oversleep depending on the hours and times of your new sleep schedule.",
"Very important. Fatigue, exhaustion, stress all can happen if you're falling asleep at extreme time differences each night. There's also things like weight gain and depression. It has been also studied that those who don't get enough sleep may have a higher risk of developing Alzheimer's disease.\n\nConsistent sleep helps your body maintain and regulate itself.",
"[Here's a good article outlining some of the more serious effects of abnormal and irregular sleep.](_URL_0_)\n\n\"Serious impact on our health ... Some of it may have to do with the lifestyle that shift work encourages. The rest has to do with our biology.\"\n\nLifestyle:\n\n - sleep disturbances/sleep loss\n\n - isolation from friends and families\n\n - harder to exercise\n\n - tendency to resort to junk food\n\nPhysiological (short-term):\n\n - Gastrointestinal symptoms like upset stomach, nausea, diarrhea, constipation, and heartburn\n\n - Increased risk of injuries and accidents\n\n - Insomnia\n\n - Decreased quality of life\n\n - General feeling of being unwell\n\nPhysiological (long-term):\n\n - Cardiovascular disease (heart attacks, heart disease)\n\n - Diabetes and metabolic syndrome\n\n - Obesity\n\n - Depression, mood disorders\n\n - Serious gastrointestinal problems\n\n - Problems with fertility/pregnancy\n\n - Increased cancer risk\n\n > After just 10 days, he found that they all had lower leptin levels (which would increase appetite), higher blood pressure, and worse sleep.\n\n > Most disturbing, three of the adults showed higher than normal blood sugar levels -- high enough to qualify as prediabetic.\n\n > \"The changes were very rapid,\" says Scheer. \"It didn't take years for disruption to the circadian rhythm to have medical effects.\"",
"I Slept for like 12hrs straight because i got caught up in a dream... now i suffer. So sleep deprivation because of sleep...",
"you're probably better off asking /r/askscience if you want a real answer. or at least something more than \"really, really important.\"",
"It's one of the reasons why when you work an alternating shift pattern you get a shift allowance, they are paying you extra because you are harming yourself by doing it.",
"So, what you're questioning isn't how sleep deprivation (chronic or total) impacts your life, but rather, assuming you're sleeping the same period of time, what difference the specific hours you're actually sleeping make.\n\nThis is a rather complicated question, because there's a wide range of variables that I'm going to try and nail down to give a clear answer.\n\nFirst, I'm going to take your username, and your phrasing of the question to make some inferences. I will assume that you are going to sleep at 8pm consistently, on a regular basis. You are planning to travel, at which point, you might be going to bed at 4 am one night.\n\nWith this, you're going to be quite likely to wake up early - undersleep, because you're coming off of a specific sleep schedule (Presumably one that is from 8pm-4am already), and you're quite likely to wake after a single REM cycle as your body thinks it is oversleeping, or from audio/sunlight triggers. It will likely be difficult to get back to sleep.\n\nIn this example, sleep schedule is important, because the habits of good sleep you have will be fighting with your ability to stay up. If your travel includes 'jet lag,' going east- > west is far easier than going west- > east, because of how it shifts the sunrise. You will likely undersleep, not get as many hours as you need, feel less fulfilled, and mentally sluggish for several hours the following day, due to the difficulty of convincing your body to stay asleep to get the stage 4 sleep that's most beneficial. This said, ultimately, you'll be fine.\n\nSecond, the other possibility is if you constantly shift your sleep schedule. If you normally go to sleep at odd times on a regular basis, which would be going to bed at 8 PM, then 12 AM, then 3 AM, then 10 PM again, then 5 AM, etc.\n\nMany people can manage this with mostly minimal effect, although it isn't as good for you as having a regular, consistent schedule. Two of the biggest problems this causes is an inability to get to sleep when you want to (There are many possible cures for this, like only associating your bed/bedroom with sleep, exercise, targetted exposure to sunlight), leaving you with a 'tossing and turning' state for perhaps hours before you actually manage to sleep, and prolonged exposure to such sleep cycles can lead to [shift work sleep disorder](_URL_1_), which I feel is a misnomer, and should be called [Being a human being told to keep a stupid schedule by people who have a hard time with understanding how days work](_URL_1_). It can cause heart troubles, digestive issues, and, more unexpectedly, has shown possible links with cancer, and leads people to have general trouble with cognition due to, ultimately, their insomnia.\n\nThird, you're talking about having a sleep schedule that wraps completely around (like a 25 hour day), where you sleep at 8 PM, then 9 PM, then 10 PM, and a few weeks later you're going to bed at 8 PM again. I'm not familiar with how this schedule impacts health and mental functionality, though if anyone else has a study, I would be happy to incorporate it.",
"Sleeping at drastically varying times each day will mess up your circadian rhythm. As long as you're getting at least 8 hours, you're still going through proper REM (rapid eye movement) and non-REM cycles where memory is being consolidated, but if you change the hours at which you sleep you're messing up internal light/dark cycles, which also messes up other internal regulatory processes that are dependent on and controlled by the same part of the brain (superchiasmatic nucleus). Just try to keep your schedule relatively normal, or be in for fatigue, diminished cognitive ability, and other signs of erratic sleep cycles and sleep deprivation.",
"I have insomnia and it occasionally gets pretty bad. Having a set to go to bed, that I don't vary by much, along with a routine I go through to help me sleep. \n\nWhen I vary my bed time by more than an hour or so I have a really hard time getting to sleep the next night. \n\nYMMV",
"Bandwagoning on this thread. How much time do you need to adjust to a new timezone, i.e if you go from europe to japan. How long does it take you to fix your sleep schedule?",
"I get some sleep every day between 7 and 8 hours. You don't want to screw yourself over by getting like 4 hours of sleep, and don't want to sleep horrifically late because y'know life.",
"Really important. Your body doesn't adapt to [changes](_URL_3_) in [sleep](_URL_2_) very well. Your brain deterioriates faster, doesn't cope, and just messes you up.",
"Nutritionist here. May not be totally ELI5 but I'll take a stab at it. \n\nYour body essentially has a sleep-wake cycle which is regulated by hormones. This is the circadian rhythm. The principal \"sleep\" hormone is melatonin, and Is typically high at night to encourage you to be sleepy and fall asleep. Melatonin is secreted in times of low light and darkness, ie night, and suppressed in daylight or by \"blue light\" (like phone screens or TV). This signal is interprets byte brain via light entering the eyes. It's important to remember that humans evolved with a daylight/darkness cycle, which is reflected in the function and secretion of these hormones. \n\nA sleep routine is important because your body gets use to this circadian rhythm, the balance between high melatonin at night and high cortisol in the morning (to wake you up). Going to bed at the same time keeps these hormone levels where they should be at the right times of the day, meaning you get better quality sleep during the night, find it easy to fall asleep, and wake up easily in the morning. \n\nThe body also uses sleep time to do maintenance, which certain organs being more active during certain times at night. The liver for example is typically found more active at around 3-4 am, and may be beneficial for detoxifying the body. If sleep is inconsistent, certain maintenance functions of the body may be impaired, and contribute to the feeling of lethargy and fatigue the next day. I remember reading a paper a while back discussing how the fluid in the brain may essentially \"flush out\" waste during the night. \n\nGoing to bed a little later one night won't affect your circadian rhythm too much, but an inconsistent pattern like shift workers can cause funky things to happen with these hormones (melatonin and cortisol) and can contribute to a lot of health consequences discussed in this thread.",
"Your body wants to sleep sometimes and wants to be awake at others. This is your sleep/wake cycle. You can force shift that cycle forward or backward up to about two hours a day. Trying to shift it more than that will likely leave you feeling jetlagged. If you're way off when your body wants to sleep, it is harder to sleep, and you don't get as good quality sleep. Going to sleep at the same time every night is part of good sleep hygiene.\n\nYou should also note that blue/green light inhibits your body's melatonin production. Melatonin is the thing that tells you you're sleepy. Computer monitors, smart phone screens, and tvs all put out a lot of blue/green light.",
"So I have less an explanation and more of first hand knowledge but....\n\nAs a Paramedic I worked 24 hrs on and 48 off. During those 24 hrs we would nap or sleep when we could. We never knew if we would get 30 mins or 8 hours of sleep. It was always different and always way less then 8 hrs and I always felt like dog shit!!!\n\nWorking now full time day shift M-F 7-4 I go to sleep about the same time and wake up about the same time and get about 7.5 hrs of sleep. I FEEL GREAT!\n\nto:dr. Important as hell if you want to feel well.",
"There's a lot of information about Sleep Hygiene, which is the practice of doing everything right to get the best sleep you can. A lot of it is based off an idea that your brain likes pattern and structure, if you do the same things all the time, your brain will know what's up and will respond accordingly. So if you climb into bed at 10pm every night, your brain will start to realise that when you get into bed, its time to sleep.\n\nThis is my favourite publication, its easy to read and nice and simple (click on number 4 to see the PDF)\n\n_URL_4_",
"I can't say what happens when you go to sleep at different times, but when I go to sleep it is almost always withing half an hour either way of the same time each night. I'm never tired during the day, fall asleep easily, sleep around 5 hours, sometimes a lot less. I don't use an alarm, I just wake up. I think it is due in part to the consistent schedule. .",
"Well your brain uses sleep to process and sort through information that you have learned throughout the day \n\nIf you don't sleep you won't remember that cool new pokemon tomorrow little jimmy",
"As somebody without any kind of sleep schedule I can say it's very important, you will eventually go insane."
],
"score": [
65,
40,
10,
8,
7,
4,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/excessive-sleepiness-10/shift-work",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shift_work_sleep_disorder",
"http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29879521",
"http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33638905",
"http://www.cci.health.wa.gov.au/resources/minipax.cfm?mini_ID=25"
]
} | train_eli5 | How important a consistent sleep schedule is? Why?
[removed] | [
-0.026693617925047874,
0.06404874473810196,
-0.009481127373874187,
0.09112072736024857,
0.08604593575000763,
0.03469638153910637,
0.005567442160099745,
-0.03847282752394676,
0.06418248265981674,
-0.05076729878783226,
-0.10316891968250275,
0.09272603690624237,
-0.026850929483771324,
0.01200... | |
1rn136 | Cable Modems | I understand networking pretty well, but my little brother (who was a cable installer for a bit and has a basic understanding of networking) keeps asking me to explain and now I feel retarded being unable to.
Basically, how does the cable company connect to your modem? Does it just send the same signal down the entire line and all the modems have to "decode" your traffic?
Any direction/explanation would be helpful, thank you! | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cdoxsj8",
"cdp0c2f",
"cdowf7p"
],
"text": [
"In theory yes, the cable company sends the same signal down the wire to everyone and the modem knows which bits to grab and turn into ethernet bits to send out the modem port.\n\nIn reality, the cable company breaks up neighborhoods and streets so that a few people playing Warcraft while torrenting and watching Netflix doesn't bog down the entire town. So the cable company will run fiber optics to boxes in local neighborhoods and then the signal is translated back into cable signals in your group.",
"Think of it like a dial-up modem, but using the existing cable infrastructure instead of the phone lines, and a bit more complex. It is essentially still handling the modulations of analog data into digital form for your Ethernet based network. Some hybrid cable systems will run fiber optic to an area or neighborhood where the digital signal is then converted back into an analog signal for the cable equipment to receive and interact with.",
"Networking equipment sends and receives data one way, cable television equipment does it a different way. The cable modem translates between the two."
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Cable Modems
I understand networking pretty well, but my little brother (who was a cable installer for a bit and has a basic understanding of networking) keeps asking me to explain and now I feel retarded being unable to. Basically, how does the cable company connect to your modem? Does it just send the same signal down the entire line and all the modems have to "decode" your traffic? Any direction/explanation would be helpful, thank you! | [
0.03677178919315338,
-0.04342228174209595,
-0.012930557131767273,
0.027627766132354736,
-0.07580117881298065,
-0.01070872601121664,
0.02166265808045864,
-0.02450999617576599,
-0.02307281456887722,
0.0363847017288208,
-0.01764778047800064,
0.06566500663757324,
0.00883107166737318,
-0.091902... | |
5pt3ej | Why do most men get a feeling of regret right after finishing jerking off? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dctlh4v",
"dctl684"
],
"text": [
"Woah, that can't be right. Masturbation is one of mankind's best tools. When I was single and thought I liked a girl I would spank it before calling her. If I still wanted to talk after getting off that was a good sign. I have never felt guilty about masturbation btw.",
"Here are you getting this assumption? By saying most men, you mean over 51% which I feel is very very high."
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do most men get a feeling of regret right after finishing jerking off?
[removed] | [
0.048784710466861725,
-0.026154670864343643,
0.04872611537575722,
0.07791754603385925,
0.028029324486851692,
-0.013271459378302097,
0.10288099199533463,
0.041830096393823624,
0.07936535775661469,
-0.038147661834955215,
-0.02068815752863884,
0.03880389407277107,
-0.0236537866294384,
-0.0086... | |
2q5b1z | Why do our bodies feel so cold when we're sick? | I'm wearing 5+ layers of clothing and it's still freezing cold. Why can't I get warm when I'm sick? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cn31ab6"
],
"text": [
"It's going to blow your mind, but you're not actually cold when that happens. Chances are you actually have a high fever. This most commonly occurs as a fever \"breaks:, or reaches it's maximum. The chills are not actually the result of you feeling cold, they're the result of muscle contractions your body is doing to raise it's internal temperature(much like when you're cold, but that's not the cause of this) to help fight the infection."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do our bodies feel so cold when we're sick?
I'm wearing 5+ layers of clothing and it's still freezing cold. Why can't I get warm when I'm sick? | [
0.007827778346836567,
-0.06903139501810074,
0.017388632521033287,
0.10571793466806412,
0.09077342599630356,
0.05086711794137955,
0.0763879120349884,
0.046659667044878006,
0.02587074041366577,
0.02784324251115322,
-0.06255657970905304,
-0.060199201107025146,
0.08931449800729752,
0.010185983... | |
4vkd99 | What is actually happening in a person's body when they build up a tolerance to a drug or alcohol? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d5z43m7",
"d5zg85h"
],
"text": [
"\"Reward\" or \"pleasure\" comes from your Nucleus Accumbens in the brain, which is partly mediated by the Ventral Tegmental Area. Along with other structures, the VTA stimulates the Nucleus Accumbens with neurotransmitters, most commonly dopamine. Drugs alter the effectiveness of this stimulation. After awhile, your body automatically adjusts the amount of dopamine released in anticipation of this alteration. Like when you break out your bowl and grinder, your brain automatically adjusts the level of dopamine released to \"prepare\" itself for you smoking weed. So you then require more smoking to counteract your body's changes. It also has to do with a change in the number of drug receptors in your brain too. More receptors = more drugs required. At least, that's what I remember from school.",
"There are a lot of ways this can happen, depending on how the specific drug works.\n\nSome work by filling receptors that normally are used by signalling molecules, thus preventing the cell from receiving signal. In response, the body may produce more receptors for the signal molecule, or a larger amount of the signalling molecule to compete.\n\nA different type of drug may inhibit enzymes responsible for removing the signal molecule once it has completed its job, thus extending the lifetime of molecules that are perpetually in a \"bind, signal, release\" type of equilibrium until digested. The body could respond here by eventually producing lower levels of signalling molecule to restore \"normality\", or by increasing the production of the inhibited enzyme.\n\nThat's just two random examples, but I'm sure you get the idea. From that, think about how changing what the body \"perceives\" as normal causes withdrawal symptoms.\n\nTLDR: The body tries to behave normally while on the drug if it's in the body long enough."
],
"score": [
6,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is actually happening in a person's body when they build up a tolerance to a drug or alcohol?
| [
0.08884836733341217,
-0.06744150817394257,
-0.047519855201244354,
0.08545661717653275,
-0.014729098416864872,
-0.014245088212192059,
0.0394844226539135,
0.06252305954694748,
0.02261173352599144,
-0.0978177860379219,
0.0036207041703164577,
-0.0025435613933950663,
-0.04053549841046333,
0.031... | ||
2zo5b3 | Why not go for the backboard? | I'm not big on basketball, but I do enjoy watching the NCAA tournament this time of year. One thing I noticed, you rarely see players use the backboard for field goals and three pointers (obviously not counting layups). In the games today, I saw only one three pointer off the backboard.
From someone like me who is inexperienced in the sport, it just seems like it would be easier to bank it off the glass instead of trying to arch it perfectly into the hoop. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cpkqt0o",
"cpkrd1f"
],
"text": [
"I am no expert here, by far, but, it seems like the backboard is another unnecessary step in getting the ball in the hoop. If you can get the ball to go directly into the hoop why would you try and make it bounce off something before going into the hoop. The fewer steps the better right?\nI also know it's kind of a trophy to get \"nothing but net\" when you make a basket so swishing it in is more desirable to the player and probably makes the player more desirable, than it would to bounce it off the backboard.",
"Players bank shots off the backboard a lot when they are within about 15 feet, and the angle of the shot is in the vicinity of 45 degrees off the backboard. The payoff there is really high. You get some extra height on the shot, over defenders. The box drawn on the backboard is a really helpful target. And, somehow, the backboard just somehow feels more forgiving there. \n\nFrom other angles and distances, I think the biggest issue is that you have to think about it. When you're shooting at the rim, you always aim at the same spot, relative to where you are. For most people that's the opposite side of the rim from where they are. Banking it off the backboard, on the other hand, involves just the tiniest extra bit of effort to figure out how your angle and distance affect your target. Plus, with modern clear backboards, actually seeing and choosing your target can be a challenge. And, as you get further away, the extra height and distance becomes a challenge. It's significantly harder to bank a 3 pointer off the backboard, just because you have to shoot it an extra two feet. And, at those distances, they key to success is consistency. Every shot should be exactly like the shot before. Using the backboard at different angles just complicates that rhythm.\n\nFinally, I think there's a social/psychological component. A swish is a beautiful thing, admired by all. A shot that rattles out of the rim is an honorable attempt. A brick is a disappointment. An airball an embarrassment. Where does the backboard fit in? A \"normal\" bank shot feels routine, almost clinical, whether it goes in or out. But if it misses the rim entirely, or clangs hard without having a chance to go in.... that's more embarrassing than an airball.\n\nThere's also sort of a gentleman's rule that you're supposed to \"call it\" when you use the backboard, especially on longer shots. So if you shoot a three pointer off the backboard, you're supposed to yell \"bank\" or \"glass\", ideally before the shot but at the latest as it leaves your hand. If you don't, other players will assume it was an accident and make fun of you. I played through high school, and even in games guys would still call out their bank shots. I have no idea if collegiate and NBA players actually call their bank shots during games, but you definitely see shooters cringe sometimes when they hit the board, and from their reaction you can see a bit of what I'm getting at... there's some sort of prestige in being a pure shooter, and some shame associated with using the backboard, especially on a miss or on accident.\n\n[Edit: One of the big perks of bank shots, though, is that they make offensive rebounding easier. (I wish I had stats to prove that, but I don't). But the shooter has an improved chance of rebounding his own miss because he has more knowledge about where it's likely to bounce. This is always true, on any shot, but it's amplified a bit by the bank shot both because the angles that result are more severe and because it's harder for the non-shooters to read the shot. In addition, missed bank shots tend to skip off the rim, creating long rebounding opportunities which improve the odds for the offense a little. ]"
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why not go for the backboard?
I'm not big on basketball, but I do enjoy watching the NCAA tournament this time of year. One thing I noticed, you rarely see players use the backboard for field goals and three pointers (obviously not counting layups). In the games today, I saw only one three pointer off the backboard. From someone like me who is inexperienced in the sport, it just seems like it would be easier to bank it off the glass instead of trying to arch it perfectly into the hoop. | [
0.09205951541662216,
-0.03880070894956589,
-0.05939922854304314,
-0.1072518453001976,
0.012621724046766758,
0.03419481962919235,
0.020384185016155243,
0.005987308453768492,
0.1493205726146698,
0.04823007434606552,
-0.1143672987818718,
0.06836888194084167,
-0.08744490891695023,
0.0546366088... | |
18ly1j | LD50 or LC50 | I do not understand exactly how LD50's or LC50's work and I do not understand how to calculate them. Please explain it to me like I'm 5. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c8fy41r",
"c8fzclp"
],
"text": [
"I've never had to calculate them, but I can try to explain. \n\nLD50: Lethal Dose 50%. An amount of medication/chemical/whatever that kills 50% of the people that take it. Usually this is used to determine how bad something is to the body. Example: Scientists give 5 grams of tylenol to 100 people and 50 of those people die. This means 5 grams would be the LD50. \n\nLC50: Lethal Concentration 50. The blood level of a drug that kills 50% of the people. Say that same 5 gram dose of tylenol achieves a 400mcg/ml concentration in the blood, and kills 50 of 100 people that ingest it. This would be the LC50. \n\nThe only real way to calculate this value is to take data from people that have taken large amounts of medications and see what dose the person took and how it affected them.",
"These calculations are done in animal models. They give different dosages to rats/mice/rabbits to determine the concentration/dosage that kills 50% of the test animals (a single dosage for LD50 (you may see different LD50s for different kinds of exposure: oral vs injected vs skin contact), for LC50 it's a single timed exposure (usually 4hr)).\n\nFor LD50 it's usually expressed as mg/kg of body weight, whereas LC50 is usually in ppm (parts per million)."
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | LD50 or LC50
I do not understand exactly how LD50's or LC50's work and I do not understand how to calculate them. Please explain it to me like I'm 5. | [
0.0009038729476742446,
-0.013913268223404884,
-0.03958261385560036,
-0.0718030110001564,
0.001915773143991828,
0.039687834680080414,
-0.035098765045404434,
0.09191189706325531,
-0.06816282868385315,
0.038807518780231476,
0.05669739469885826,
-0.003467821516096592,
0.05335480347275734,
-0.0... | |
1ly105 | Why do some people move a lot in their sleep whilst others stay still? | I know the brain releases a chemcal when you sleep to stop you from acting out your dreams, is it released in different quantities between people? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cc3uy10"
],
"text": [
"I've always kind of wondered this. One time when I was little I had a dream that I fell off a cliff. I woke up the next morning on the floor and couldn't remember how I got there."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why do some people move a lot in their sleep whilst others stay still?
I know the brain releases a chemcal when you sleep to stop you from acting out your dreams, is it released in different quantities between people? | [
0.12727168202400208,
-0.04523148015141487,
-0.020926591008901596,
0.04802261292934418,
0.014294827356934547,
0.03582362085580826,
0.05463981255888939,
-0.019203737378120422,
0.15685902535915375,
-0.040352582931518555,
-0.034401193261146545,
0.03882499039173126,
0.012012504041194916,
-0.038... | |
4jc8oo | How is currency/money in banks and other financial institutions safe-guarded from computer-based attacks? | Numbers on computers are just stored in memory, no? Couldn’t hackers just hack into banks or any agency that has any accounting elements and just edit the requisite numbers? Say, hack into a bank and just add five or six zeros to their own bank accounts, or a huge swath of people to conceal their identities?
Further still, couldn’t they hack into banks and mess with the way fractional-reserve banking works? Manipulating the reserve-base or the amount loaned out?
I ask because it seems this kind of attack would be not un-difficult for a nation-state at war – and it generally seems like it should be the most common scam. Shouldn’t inflation be rampant right now? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d35gb2c",
"d35qd4d"
],
"text": [
"Insane amounts of backups. The record keeping is highly regulated and by law the banks/financial institutions must follow the rules of having the information secured, AND backed up in a number of ways. Worst case scenario, they would have to stop all transactions and fix their databases. \n\nSource: I build these systems.",
"The Clark-Wilson security model is like double-entry bookeeping. Money can't be put in your account without a matching debit somewhere else."
],
"score": [
9,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How is currency/money in banks and other financial institutions safe-guarded from computer-based attacks?
Numbers on computers are just stored in memory, no? Couldn’t hackers just hack into banks or any agency that has any accounting elements and just edit the requisite numbers? Say, hack into a bank and just add five or six zeros to their own bank accounts, or a huge swath of people to conceal their identities? Further still, couldn’t they hack into banks and mess with the way fractional-reserve banking works? Manipulating the reserve-base or the amount loaned out? I ask because it seems this kind of attack would be not un-difficult for a nation-state at war – and it generally seems like it should be the most common scam. Shouldn’t inflation be rampant right now? | [
-0.010367922484874725,
0.012026455253362656,
-0.08291420340538025,
-0.006830296479165554,
-0.039052244275808334,
-0.007377344649285078,
0.07314852625131607,
-0.030383305624127388,
0.07287278026342392,
0.024103043600916862,
-0.03821863234043121,
0.0459991991519928,
0.04544202238321304,
-0.0... | |
5ii0l8 | When a live sports replay is "brought to you by Home Depot" and other oddities, how is this effective marketing? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"db89chs",
"db8aj1y",
"db8avh7"
],
"text": [
"It's known as brand building. They are trying to make you remember their brand name on a deep, visceral level. Their name just becomes part of the language. So, the next time you think about needing a tool or building material the first name that springs to mind is Home Depot. They're hoping that this association is enough to prevent you from looking for any other home improvement store since you already remember their name.",
"You know how you remember it and are now talking about it? That seems pretty effective, right?",
"Those are usually premium spots I think because they are 'captive'. It's usually an interrupt on the broadcast rather than a commercial break so many more people see them while paying attention. Also it's more exclusive. Less advertisers at more opportune times."
],
"score": [
13,
6,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | When a live sports replay is "brought to you by Home Depot" and other oddities, how is this effective marketing?
| [
-0.0334211029112339,
0.025568963959813118,
0.000987828359939158,
-0.11548867076635361,
0.12273077666759491,
0.07742320001125336,
0.036527324467897415,
0.004861428868025541,
0.08453308045864105,
-0.03249151632189751,
-0.009814159013330936,
0.07331166416406631,
0.002496263710781932,
-0.03485... | ||
41zu84 | With almost everything having a generic version these days, and all of the competition in the furniture business, why isn't there a Sleep Number clone on the market? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cz6g3kw",
"cz6fqo3"
],
"text": [
"If there's no competition for a product, it could mean a few things:\n\n* The company making them holds a bunch of patents which prevent a competitor from legally making clones\n* The start-up cost is really high to start producing clones\n* The inventing company has so much name-recognition that it's impossible to compete against their advertising\n* There's not a large enough potential market to justify the expense of trying to compete",
"Sleep number is shit. Who wants to sleep on an air mattress?? I'm not camping...\n\nTempurpedic is where it's at ;)"
],
"score": [
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | With almost everything having a generic version these days, and all of the competition in the furniture business, why isn't there a Sleep Number clone on the market?
| [
-0.05984504520893097,
-0.04165042191743851,
0.01622835360467434,
0.004793553613126278,
0.014857091940939426,
0.06348711997270584,
-0.02362806536257267,
-0.03504302352666855,
0.09866490215063095,
-0.014312452636659145,
-0.04999431222677231,
0.052319321781396866,
0.016520708799362183,
0.0014... | ||
2t28zo | How does karma, reincarnation and all that work in Hinduism? | Also do you go to heaven how does the caste system work? I know nothing about Hinduism, but am ready to learn. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cnv3huw"
],
"text": [
"An incarnation is like a character that the soul plays in a play or a game. Each character has a \"right way of doing things\" (*Dharma*).\n\nIn the case of humans, each caste has its own right way of doing things. Behaving according to this way improves your *karma*, and behaving against it degrades it (*Karma* roughly means \"deed\", and in Hinduism you become what you do).\n\nWhen a character dies, the actor (*Atman*; soul/self) goes on to play another character (reincarnation). Poor karma leads to a less favourable character (a lower caste, an animal, plant, demon, etc.) and good karma leads to a more favourable character (a person, a being in heaven, or a god). In this new role, you get another chance to improve your karma, and the game (*Samsara*) goes on. Note that even if you end up in heaven, or as a god, you are still playing the game and will eventually die and be reborn according to your karma.\n\nIf you wish to escape the game (attain *Moksha*), you need to devote your life to practicing one of many meditative techniques (there is no agreement as to which ones are correct or optimal). This practice leads you to the realization that the actor is not a separate entity, but part of a fundamental, unchanging reality (*Brahman*). According to certain traditions, it's becoming unified with God."
],
"score": [
8
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | How does karma, reincarnation and all that work in Hinduism?
Also do you go to heaven how does the caste system work? I know nothing about Hinduism, but am ready to learn. | [
-0.007493216078728437,
-0.03687713295221329,
-0.07010794430971146,
0.005780584644526243,
-0.04484793171286583,
0.027456961572170258,
0.06616653501987457,
-0.09536399692296982,
0.055898331105709076,
-0.009406701661646366,
0.027984365820884705,
0.003743724897503853,
-0.0513588972389698,
-0.0... | |
1izsxy | why do computers use exponents of 2? ie 32, 64, 128, 256 etc | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cb9nhg3",
"cb9qir6",
"cb9nn57"
],
"text": [
"Because computers are all based around binary (base 2) math. Computers use binary, as oppose to base 10 or any other style, because the simplest form of data transport and storage is a system that only knows 2 states. Computers are really all about taking very big hard problems and breaking them up into massive numbers of very small problems, and then solving those small problems very very fast.",
"Computers deal with information in a very very easy method. \"Yes\" or \"No\". \"On\" or \"off\". Things are just easier that way, especially when electronic computing was first conceived.\n\nNow, what is the most effective way of using this method to show the most amount of information?\n\nImagine a machine with 5 light bulbs. The first light bulb shows the number 0 or 1. Zero if it's OFF, 1 if it's ON. The second shows the number 2. Zero if it's OFF, 2 if it's ON.\n\nNow here's where it gets interesting. Do we need the third light bulb to show the number 3?\n\nNo.\n\nWe can just turn on the first AND the second light bulb. The user can add the two up and get the number 3.\n\nThen what does the third light bulb represent? Well, the next number, which is 4. Now we can get the following combinations. \n\n 0+0+0 = 0\n 1+0+0 = 1\n 0+2+0 = 2\n 1+2+0 = 3\n 0+0+4 = 4\n 1+0+4 = 5\n 0+2+4 = 6\n 1+2+4 = 7\n\nIncluding \"0\" that means we can represent 8 different numbers using just 3 light bulbs. Or 2x2x2 = 8. Or 2^3 = 8.\n\nThis is why when you deal with computers you run across numbers that are exponents of 2, frequently. It's just how they do things. The machine we described would have 2^5 maximum combinations. Or 32.\n\nA rich neighbor who buys the more expensive model which comes with 6 light bulbs would be able to count to 64. ETC ETC ETC",
"On a simple level, it has to do with how binary works. There are other more complicated hardware reasons, too.\n\nThe idea with binary is that it's counting how many powers of 2 are in the number. The regular decimal system actually works the same way, just with powers of 10, though you don't think about it.\n\nAnyway, let's start with a basic example.\n\n**0110**^(binary) = (**0** x 2^(3)) + (**1** x 2^(2)) + (**1** x 2^(1)) + (**0** x 2^(0)) = **6**^(decimal)\n\nThis is the fundamental way that a computer reads numbers. Each digit in binary is a power of 2, starting at 0 from the rightmost digit. Computers use binary because \"0\" and \"1\" can correspond to \"on\" and \"off\" in their internal circuitry.\n\nSo, let's say I have eight binary digits (bits), which is one \"byte,\" and I want to represent a positive number (including zero). The smallest number I can make is\n\n00000000^(binary) = 0^decimal\n\nand the biggest is \n\n11111111^binary = 255^decimal\n\nWhich means that there are 256, or 2^8 (8 bits!) possible numbers I can make."
],
"score": [
10,
9,
6
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | why do computers use exponents of 2? ie 32, 64, 128, 256 etc
| [
0.03727419674396515,
0.02060590125620365,
-0.08455891907215118,
-0.004367724061012268,
-0.02304166741669178,
-0.11720360070466995,
-0.06267479807138443,
0.05685936287045479,
0.1494753509759903,
0.02786058560013771,
-0.0028775192331522703,
0.024312952533364296,
-0.012818151153624058,
0.0214... | ||
na0y8 | Can somebody tell me how Tobin Taxes work? | _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c37jhul"
],
"text": [
"When you think of buying something, what you are usually doing is trading your dollars for candy, or movie tickets, or whatever you're buying.\n\nIf lots of people want to buy candy, the candy salesmen can raise the prices and make more money. This is called demand.\n\nOf course, if you're buying candy in, say, Germany, you would buy the candy with Euros instead of Dollars. What if all you have are Dollars? Then you would have to use your Dollars to buy Euros, and then you could buy your German candy.\n\nRemember how if everyone wants candy, the candy sellers can raise their prices? The same is true for money. If people think Euros are a really good currency, people can say they want more Dollars for a Euro. For example, People want Pounds more than Dollars, so you have to spend 1.5 dollars to get a Pound (or you used to, I don't know the exchange rate now).\n\nSome people realized they can buy lots of a particular currency when nobody wants it (demand is low) and then sell that currency when everyone wants it (demand is high) and make a lot of money doing that. For instance, you might buy 100 Japanese Yen for a dollar today. Tomorrow, the Yen is worth more, so you can buy 2 dollars with your 100 yen. You just made money trading currency!\n\nWhat happens if lots of people try to make money this way? The prices of different currencies can fluctuate up and down a lot, more quickly than normal. This can cause problems for the economy that uses that currency.\n\nIf you put a cost on trading currency, people won't buy currency unless they need it or are really sure it's a good deal. This is called the Tobin Tax (named after a guy named Tobin). Since fewer people are buying and selling currency, the price of the currency doesn't change so much, so it's easier for economies to adjust."
],
"score": [
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Can somebody tell me how Tobin Taxes work?
_URL_0_ | [
0.007098803296685219,
-0.025789661332964897,
-0.025687195360660553,
-0.02061515673995018,
0.023905187845230103,
-0.037325773388147354,
0.0805138647556305,
0.014367591589689255,
0.011817393824458122,
0.025341128930449486,
0.02965432219207287,
-0.001460755942389369,
-0.0628684014081955,
-0.0... | |
5ec9y4 | Why have a European Union and not just massive country? | In my understanding, the EU is similar to a country (shared currency, right to reside and work anywhere within). So why not just have a big EU 'country' with the current union members all becoming states?
Similarly, since everyone raves about the advantages of having a European Union, why are other countries (for example USA and Canada) not making similar unions to reap the benefits? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dabalvm",
"dabalsy",
"dabjm77",
"dabavfg",
"dabm5bx"
],
"text": [
"Forming a big \"country\" comparable to the United States would mean the creation of something like the USA's federal government. This means that the individual states would have to give up some power and control over their own rules/people to this government. This is a tough sell.\n\nThe European Union grants them a lot of those country advantages (like you said shared currency and right to move/work wherever freely) without one country having to give up total power over their turf.",
"> So why not just have a big EU 'country' with the current union members all becoming states?\n\nFunny thing about people living in countries with centuries of history: They don't really like giving them up. Existing countries don't want to give up sovereignty just like that.",
"There are a whole ton of reasons that are not really within the scope of ELI5. Here is a brief sample of the heavy hitters:\n\n1) Federalism - Each of these nation-states in the EU already have their own federal governments. Federal governments with their own law structure and their own political caste. People do not want to give up power over their own affairs. This is a problem with any political union, but doubly a problem when trying to combine fully independent (and fully mature) nation-states under one super state. \n\n2) Nationalism/racism/culturalism - A lot of 'isms here, but it basically comes down to the fact that almost every nation in Europe is OLD. Emphasis on OLD. France considers itself as the guardian of the French people (which is considered either a cultural or racial identity depending on what sociologist you speak to), Germany for the Germans, Italy for the Italians, Poland for the Polish - you get the idea. \n\nThe EU, however, is extremely young. There really is no pan-national EU identity - especially for the vast, VAST majority of EU citizens. They identify as French, English, Spanish, Italian, etc first, and as a EU member a very distant second. Trying to create a singular EU identity out of such a distinct and, once again, very old national identities would be an extremely difficult affair.\n\n3) Last but not least is economic concerns. The founding members of the EU are old, rich nation states. The new members are mostly former Soviet Union Warsaw Pact members that had their economies crushed under the command economy. As a single federal entity a large portion of the tax base of the original members will be sent to try to prop up crumbling economies. This is still being done to an extent even now in the EU, but not nearly on the scale that a single federal government would do. There are very strong economic reasons for the richer nations to avoid full integration as they believe it will impoverish their own citizens.\n\n** ) Bonus Round! \nIn addition, as we saw with the influx of Middle Eastern refugees in the wake of the Syrian conflict, a Federal EU would have complete control over immigration policy. A large number of EU states refused to take Muslim immigrants in any remotely reasonable number. They would lose all control over immigration policy and, going back to number 2, lose the ability to (in their mind) protect their culture/race/nation. Multiculturalism may be the buzzword, but in practice diluting the majority with a rapidly increasing minority brings social upheaval and a heavy lashing out from the class that is being diluted. This is a significant issue for any free nation with large immigration movements.",
"The current member states still have their sovereignty and sovereignty (i.e. the ability to make and abide by your own decisions no matter what) is the most precious thing to a nation-state. \n\nThe members of the EU will abide by the rules that are negotiated and beneficial to them but anything that appears to erode their sovereignty either won't pass in the EU parliament or the state in question might just ignore it. That's how you get a lot of exceptions to various EU features like shared currency or travel.",
"Looks like there's a few solid answers to the primary question already so I'm just here to point something out in regards to the second part about \"North American Unions\"... That's exactly what the United States already is. Canada as well."
],
"score": [
26,
14,
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why have a European Union and not just massive country?
In my understanding, the EU is similar to a country (shared currency, right to reside and work anywhere within). So why not just have a big EU 'country' with the current union members all becoming states? Similarly, since everyone raves about the advantages of having a European Union, why are other countries (for example USA and Canada) not making similar unions to reap the benefits? | [
0.07012122869491577,
-0.030969219282269478,
0.05801376327872276,
-0.0009091026149690151,
0.029414771124720573,
0.035581380128860474,
-0.0719079002737999,
0.004736706148833036,
0.0528460331261158,
-0.01874309405684471,
-0.07810663431882858,
-0.054714225232601166,
-0.017746489495038986,
0.04... | |
5lcp4z | Why are electrical lines slack between poles? | Is there a good reason or is it just that they're too heavy to be pulled taut? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dbuoo06",
"dbuoo4s",
"dbuqanf"
],
"text": [
"Because if they were pulled taut, then a strong wind could bend the poles away from each other and snap the lines, loosing high energy power lines onto the ground below which can be extremely dangerous.\n\nA little bit of slack is just fine.",
"There are a few reasons. First, they're metal. Metals expand and contract with heat--if there was no slack, they'd possibly break under extreme temperature changes.\n\nSecond, birds and debris sometimes land on them. You need them to be able to take some weight, which means they can't be stretched too tight.",
"The lines have mass. So there is something that needs to hold them up. Any force is composed of a horizontal and a vertical force. And a line under tension have a force following the line. So in order to keep the line up you need a certain force up on each pole in addition to the horizontal force. You could increase the horizontal force which would make the line more straight but it would still have some slack in them. You can not get rid of it. The amount of slack in a power line is a compromise between the force that can be applied to the lines before they or the poles snap in wind and how tight the lines have to be to not hit each other or the ground."
],
"score": [
9,
6,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are electrical lines slack between poles?
Is there a good reason or is it just that they're too heavy to be pulled taut? | [
-0.056360844522714615,
-0.0010414966382086277,
-0.021076582372188568,
0.006056708283722401,
0.0016600756207481027,
-0.032360635697841644,
0.006570734549313784,
0.10881073027849197,
0.038933537900447845,
0.04428507015109062,
-0.016939474269747734,
0.05900256708264351,
-0.05090248957276344,
... | |
2av0d4 | What happens to a text message when the receiving phone is turned off? | And also, once the receiving phone is turned on, how does the text message service detect that? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ciz0ohi",
"ciz0jcg"
],
"text": [
"> And also, once the receiving phone is turned on, how does the text message service detect that?\n\nWhen your phone connects to the network, it performs what's evocatively known as a \"handshake.\" This process of establishing the connection informs the network where to direct a call that will terminate on your handset, so the network has to keep a log of which handsets are connected and which aren't, otherwise you couldn't get calls.\n\nAs part of this handshake, the network also checks if you have pending messages, and if you do, it delivers them.",
"Waits on the service provider's servers until a network is established. Once established it's sent. It's all kept \"encrypted\" of course."
],
"score": [
22,
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What happens to a text message when the receiving phone is turned off?
And also, once the receiving phone is turned on, how does the text message service detect that? | [
-0.011367210187017918,
0.01134441141039133,
0.05286179855465889,
0.015592258423566818,
-0.00824898574501276,
0.02333787828683853,
0.08358097821474075,
-0.007945552468299866,
0.07652917504310608,
-0.05014738440513611,
0.033697325736284256,
0.07330809533596039,
0.07554993033409119,
0.0036468... | |
3qilut | Why is Android Insecure if Linux is Generally Very Secure? | Android vulnerabilities have been in the news a lot lately, and it made me wonder what differences between a desktop Linux distribution, and Android, account for them. I haven't had any trouble with viruses in Linux, and that is often touted as one of its strengths. If there were design decisions behind the making of Android that reduced security, what were the trade-offs? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cwfiuk1",
"cwfoase",
"cwg3yvn",
"cwg2b2b"
],
"text": [
"Who told you that Linux is secure ? vulnerabilities keep popping up everyone and then, some of them are huge !!\n\n\n\n\nIn fact, vulnerabilities in things like bash mess up everything based on that bash, so vendors have to change their proprietary firmware to address the vulnerabilities. \n\n\n\n\nAndroid seems to be more insecure because it has the largest market share among anything Linux. Large market share makes it lucrative for attackers as if they find a vulnerability, they'll have a huge user base to try and exploit.",
"Linux proper is just the kernel, the part that handles the hardware and provides for a low level API for applications to use. That in turn gets used to build different systems.\n\n* GNU/Linux, as Stallman likes to call it. This is what a common Linux distribution such as Ubuntu or Fedora uses: a Linux kernel, a set of UNIX tools reimplemented by the GNU project, plus desktop environments, games, applications, etc.\n* Android. It takes the kernel and runs Dalvik, a virtual machine on it. The way Android runs has little to do with the way something like Ubuntu works.\n\nNow there are plenty technical differences, but the main relevant one would be actually in packaging.\n\nGNU/Linux has an enduring concept of the \"distribution\". Which means that somebody packages, tests, and distributes a set of supported software for you. When you install LibreOffice on Fedora, for instance, somebody from the Fedora project was involved in deciding which version of LibreOffice to ship, whether to ship it at all, what components to ship, how to configure the default install, tested that installing it won't break anything, etc.\n\nDistributions also overwhelmingly stick to Open Source software, and if they ship closed source at all it's as an option.\n\nWhat does this mean to the user? That all your software has been tested to perform according to some number of distribution enforced guidelines. Somebody in Fedora has staked their reputation on that the OpenOffice package they ship isn't going to eat your data, or to send all your private documents somewhere. As a result, if you stick to installing software from your distribution, weird shenanigans like trojans, spyware, and undesirable functionality are extremely rare.\n\nAndroid on the other hand has no such coherent process. If it got into the store you can install it and there is little oversight. Additionally the overall attitude is more permissive towards intrusion than a Linux distribution would be. \n\nAs far as exploits go they would be about the same. Where Linux wins is in that the process a distribution follows doesn't admit much of the suspicious software one can install on Android.",
"Linux has the potential to be very secure but it's actually far less secure than something like Window or iOS when it's being used by someone who doesn't know what they're doing.\n\nThe only computer I've ever own the got hacked was a linux server I was running. Many Linux distros are geared for people who want lots of control over their computer and so don't have many security featured enabled by default. \n\nIt's like buying a door with a lock built in or buying a door with no lock. Some people want to put their own locks in the doors, but obviously it's totally insecure to hang a door with no lock. \n\nThat was me and linux, essentially left my computer wide open. It's not as obvious to a computer user than it would be to someone buying a door when something like that happens.",
"Linux distros aren't really much (any?) more secure than anything else, its just that so few machines are running Linux that there is nothing to gain from attacking any given Linux distro. Windows on the other hand is on millions of computers, so it is worth throwing lots of time and effort at finding a vulnerability. On the flip side, lots of phones are running android so attacking android makes sense."
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is Android Insecure if Linux is Generally Very Secure?
Android vulnerabilities have been in the news a lot lately, and it made me wonder what differences between a desktop Linux distribution, and Android, account for them. I haven't had any trouble with viruses in Linux, and that is often touted as one of its strengths. If there were design decisions behind the making of Android that reduced security, what were the trade-offs? | [
0.026033204048871994,
0.028355246409773827,
0.04814409092068672,
-0.09477144479751587,
0.07410561293363571,
0.008659674786031246,
-0.05686577409505844,
0.14921921491622925,
0.08150415122509003,
0.005932243540883064,
0.0012055254774168134,
-0.0025591859593987465,
0.07699178904294968,
-0.050... | |
3u84jc | Whats so bad about the Koch Brothers | I have a huge project due in a week and so far all the articles go on about the history of Koch family and about how they're factories screw with the environment. So how exactly are they doing this? What exactly do they do politically? Sorry in advance for any errors I'm on mobile | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cxcnbn3"
],
"text": [
"Specific political agendas and corporate greed aside...\n\nThey symbolize the dying of democracy. Basically, we vote based on the familiarity and likability of our candidates. When someone gives millions of dollars to a candidate then they have an advantage over other candidates that increases their ability to get elected. Money talks in politics! A healthy democracy requires that all voices get heard and all candidates get their message out in a moderately fair manner. If one candidate has bazillions of dollars for ads and campaign teams, they have an unfair advantage. Anyone with massive amounts of money essentially gets their agenda noticed over many average people with a different agenda.\n\nNo, they don't force us to vote for some goober we hate. But, huge money helps select our choices and this determines government policy in an unfair and undemocratic way. You see this in a system that oftentimes creates a choice between a Democrat and a Republican who BOTH favor rich corporations over actual people. Meanwhile, the same money vilifies the third-party candidates who don't usually have a chance anyway but might have if big money weren't involved."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Whats so bad about the Koch Brothers
I have a huge project due in a week and so far all the articles go on about the history of Koch family and about how they're factories screw with the environment. So how exactly are they doing this? What exactly do they do politically? Sorry in advance for any errors I'm on mobile | [
-0.010129368863999844,
-0.0005549994530156255,
0.03575140982866287,
0.05195245146751404,
0.03155200183391571,
-0.004206805024296045,
-0.06210598349571228,
-0.03076503612101078,
-0.059663075953722,
-0.08272890001535416,
0.009614543989300728,
0.01836218312382698,
-0.0792514979839325,
-0.0860... | |
7xo9ws | Whatever happened to all those 1-900 psychic / astrology lines from the 1990's and early 2000's? Why isn't that a thing anymore? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"du9vx3i",
"du9w54m",
"du9vuqd"
],
"text": [
"They moved online, hotline number s like that just changed with the time as More people got intratnet.",
"I had a couple of friends who worked as phone psychics in the '90s. It was a rather slow decline; they went from working in offices at large cubicles for a few years to working at home with a company-installed line. They told me at the time that it was a great job: getting paid to sit at home in your underwear, get high all day, flip Tarot cards, and talk lonely people out of their money one minute at a time. Some of those people requested them by their \"psychic name;\" these were the employees who made the most money.\n\nBut then the company they worked for went out of business. You'd think they would have seen it coming. The story from my friends was that it came down to poor management and extravagant spending by those at the top. I believe the advent of the internet put the final nail in the coffin; cheap telephony via landlines made the world a bit smaller, but the instant connectivity of the internet made it small enough to fit in your desktop.",
"As I like to say, 9/11 killed the whole industry. The psychics did not see that coming. The X Files also was killed off. People also stopped talking about angels."
],
"score": [
6,
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Whatever happened to all those 1-900 psychic / astrology lines from the 1990's and early 2000's? Why isn't that a thing anymore?
[removed] | [
-0.07375259697437286,
-0.05645156651735306,
0.05203339830040932,
0.023630160838365555,
-0.01801290363073349,
0.002910561626777053,
-0.0718308538198471,
-0.01489995513111353,
0.07185997813940048,
-0.11334157735109329,
-0.030620746314525604,
0.08907999098300934,
-0.06214960664510727,
-0.0482... | |
27h7yh | What's with getting goosebumps when you have the craps? | Maybe this is posting diarrhea but if you have unexplainable goosebumps when reading this then I demand answers! | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ci0ucpy"
],
"text": [
"Probably the diarrhea is due to your body detecting some poison or pathogen attacking your body. One way to help fight it off is to increase the temperature in your body, and the hypothalamus turns up the normal temperature your body tries to maintain. Your body then recognizes that it is colder than it thinks it should be, and activates the arrector pili muscles at the base of your hair follicles to fluff out your fur to keep in more heat.\n\nExcept you don't have fur anymore, just a bit of hair that gets goosebumps while you sit on the pot."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What's with getting goosebumps when you have the craps?
Maybe this is posting diarrhea but if you have unexplainable goosebumps when reading this then I demand answers! | [
-0.031284451484680176,
-0.055996719747781754,
0.06801702082157135,
0.09138617664575577,
-0.010185888968408108,
-0.03119075857102871,
0.06728155165910721,
-0.03963755443692207,
0.03296620026230812,
-0.10451491177082062,
-0.0004983882536180317,
-0.06988727301359177,
0.0455215759575367,
-0.02... | |
65i6uf | Why are western countries not investing more heavily in renewable energy when they're spending £Billions on foreign oil | I don't understand why western countries, like the UK for example, aren't prioritising becoming energy self sufficient when so much money gets spent on foreign oil.
If they took a 'moon shot' approach to becoming self sufficient with things like solar panels on every roof, massive wind farms, hydro etc... Wouldn't that quickly start to pay for itself?
With electric vehicles on the precipice of being viable for virtually everyone, being virtually oil free *seems* achievable in the short to medium term if governments set their minds to it.
Then there's all the jobs such a project would create.
Why is this not a complete no brainier?
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dgah4j2"
],
"text": [
"Because they honestly. Don't want to.\n\nThe places that are trying, are doing relatively well with it, but honestly it all ties into capitalism and the lack of want to try new things. Until we actually run 100% out of any source of petroleum product, be it cornmade biodiesel, used vegetable oil, etc, only then will we probably embrace solar/wind/nuclear.\n\nBut almost all modern vehicles are still gasoline. Even the hybrid ones require gas, you can't run them on electric only, or at least not very long. Lots of machinery still requires oil of some type, be it artificial or a crude derivative.\n\nThere just isn't enough industry/market/government pressure for renewable and clean energy. There are modern world leaders who still deny climate change for fucks sake.\n\nTl;Dr, big business and shitty people running the world don't want to stop the oil business.\n\nEdit: addendum - things like solar and wind can only be put in so many places. With solar being easier than wind. But coastal countries/provinces/states/cities could use underwater current spun turbines for power. Geothermal could be used in more places. Nuclear is honestly safe as fuck if you don't get hit by a tsunami or build your safety walls out of plywood and embezzled funds. But due to the fear of nuclear and the 'its too hard' nature of wind and solar and hydroelectric only being feasible on large rivers, oil/coal stay in charge."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are western countries not investing more heavily in renewable energy when they're spending £Billions on foreign oil
I don't understand why western countries, like the UK for example, aren't prioritising becoming energy self sufficient when so much money gets spent on foreign oil. If they took a 'moon shot' approach to becoming self sufficient with things like solar panels on every roof, massive wind farms, hydro etc... Wouldn't that quickly start to pay for itself? With electric vehicles on the precipice of being viable for virtually everyone, being virtually oil free *seems* achievable in the short to medium term if governments set their minds to it. Then there's all the jobs such a project would create. Why is this not a complete no brainier? | [
0.016304461285471916,
-0.02430182695388794,
0.106263667345047,
0.01314393151551485,
0.05307760834693909,
-0.032991923391819,
-0.043100129812955856,
0.00957054365426302,
-0.008776209317147732,
0.005158897954970598,
-0.03224746510386467,
-0.015777023509144783,
-0.0302546676248312,
0.00476208... | |
2gyrzb | Why are firearm designs so old, specifically handguns? | The 1911 is over 100 years old. Popular revolver models date back to the 1920's. Even the "new age" Glock is largely unchanged since the 80s. Why is it that the firearms industry is so lock-step devoted to these very old designs? Have humans really made all the progress there is to make in terms of handguns? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cknqarz",
"cknqsj8",
"cknqxvt",
"cknqs3o",
"cknqzqx"
],
"text": [
"Because they are reliable. And there is a small reason for making a new design when the old one is still making money. Hope that helps :)",
"Simplicity and reliability. Firearms use very basic mechanics. An explosion of gasses pushes out a projectile. When dealing with basic mechanics the simplest designs usually work best. Circles and straight lines.\n\nAdding rifling to impart spin took a very long time to work out so that the benefit of the rifling was greater than the disadvantages involved in loading a rifled barrel.\n\nChanging from single shot to revolver then to magazines also to a very long to make them reliable.\n\nGiven the theoretical use of guns for self defense, it takes an incredible advantage to make up for a loss of reliability.",
"There really isn't much more you can do to modern firearms without reinventing them completely. The actual mechanisms are pretty simple, and there isn't any reason to change that. The one exception is from the argument of 3-D printing of weapons, due to the fact that the material itself is not conducive to making a reliable weapon.\n\nThat being said, they are *continually* upgrading the internal features to make them more reliable, as with any device.",
"We haven't reached the end of the road, but we have reached a plateau. When someone buys a gun, they're making choices about a few major factors. Ease of use, reliability, stopping power, price, availability of ammunition, and similar things. I *could* spend $4000 and get a top of the line, custom, prototype pistol which fires unique triangular flechettes at the cost of $14 a round. *Or*, I could spend $300 and get a revolver based on a 100 year old design, which fires common ammo and will still kill someone just as dead.\n\nSee, guns are always getting better, but new models aren't usually better enough to justify completely replacing old and proven models. Especially for civilians, who are almost certainly never going to be shooting at someone wearing better armor than a leather jacket, an old 9mm/.38/.45/whatever is going to be good enough. It's the same deal with the military; the SCAR might technically be better than the M-16, but it's just not worth it to spend tens of billions of dollars to replace a proven system with one which is only marginally better.",
"The development of technology is kind of like evolution. It's not moving to a particular goal, we try new things, if they work, we keep them, if they don't, they're forgotten. There isn't really any improvements you can make on a handgun design that makes it better or more useful than the 1911. All of the new things in handgun design are peripheral, like rail mounting systems, laser sights, etc."
],
"score": [
5,
4,
4,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why are firearm designs so old, specifically handguns?
The 1911 is over 100 years old. Popular revolver models date back to the 1920's. Even the "new age" Glock is largely unchanged since the 80s. Why is it that the firearms industry is so lock-step devoted to these very old designs? Have humans really made all the progress there is to make in terms of handguns? | [
-0.04788319021463394,
0.03689795359969139,
0.026534155011177063,
0.004699335899204016,
0.02948521450161934,
0.07631521672010422,
-0.07436779886484146,
0.0002068894827971235,
-0.016090720891952515,
0.007628199178725481,
-0.0010541033698245883,
0.13239355385303497,
0.038377948105335236,
-0.0... | |
2pj4kj | Why is turning it off and on again so effective? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cmx60o3",
"cmx6wuj",
"cmx5oj8"
],
"text": [
"Think of it as priming a pump. If there are bubbles in the piping, a pump won't be able to push through. But drain and then refill the water, which will most likely have no bubbles and the pump will work fine.\n\nThere are problems like this in electronics as well - where they can reach a problem that is stable (for example an infinite loop due to a bug in a program), but could be easily solved by draining the system of electricity and starting it up again - thus beginning in a known,well tested and stable state.",
"If the problem is the current state of the computer, restarting - an operation which wipes a portion of the current state and regenerates it from new - can be very effective. It just so happens that many low-level problems are in the portion of the state which is regenerated, rather than some more long-lasting portion of the state.",
"An awful lot of things that make your computer break are due to issues that are corrected by restarting the operating system from scratch. Memory leaks, crashed drivers, rogue processes etc can all be fixed this way."
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is turning it off and on again so effective?
| [
0.0228581465780735,
-0.006369039881974459,
0.07438036054372787,
0.10482867807149887,
0.051579851657152176,
0.03131157159805298,
0.024657201021909714,
0.04499199986457825,
0.10863857716321945,
0.0027503171004354954,
-0.03990567848086357,
0.12757708132266998,
-0.03773238882422447,
0.00923202... | ||
6yyrjq | Why does very famous and well-known companies like Coca-Cola keep spending millions on advertisements? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dmr6nqq",
"dmr6oty"
],
"text": [
"Simply put, new buyers are being born every minute, and they have to be marketed to or they will go to whoever is marketing to them instead of you.\n\nDoes Coca-Cola or other huge names benefit from a massive momentum due to market share? Yes. But this would drift down steadily if they did not keep marketing to people. Keep in mind, Coca Cola sells great, but so does Pepsi. They spend a lot of money trying to out-shout each other to keep consumers.",
"Upkeep being my best guess. Maintaining a presence as well as subliminal marketing. You know what Doritos taste like, so when you see a commercial and think \"damn I haven't had Doritos in a while\" and go get some, then bam. Another purchase for them. Do this on a global market and you'd be surprised how many people do that exact thing."
],
"score": [
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does very famous and well-known companies like Coca-Cola keep spending millions on advertisements?
[removed] | [
0.0035225150641053915,
-0.041473668068647385,
0.007366130594164133,
0.056575048714876175,
0.11777006834745407,
0.001570838619954884,
0.08563053607940674,
0.02237793616950512,
0.047122009098529816,
-0.104863241314888,
-0.014808154664933681,
0.048656951636075974,
-0.002373858354985714,
-0.03... | |
4s7q7c | What does it mean when a drug addict has "collapsed veins"? Why do they have to keep looking for different veins over their bodies? | I've heard of people shooting up into their eyes, tongues, etc. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d57di1c",
"d577mfi"
],
"text": [
"Because when a vein is injured, as it is normal with the rest of our body, it starts an acute inflamatory response. \nThe idea of an inflamatory response is to repair the tissue to what it was before. \n\nWhen a tissue is repeatedly injured in the same place over and over again, the inflamatory response turns to a chronic one. The difference with this one is that it involves fibrosis. This is the thing that collapses the veins, filling them with fibers that don't let blood flow and ultimately make them unusable. \n\nThe same thing happens to people that are in dialysis for several years.",
"From the Wikipedia article on [collapsed vein]( _URL_0_):\n\nVeins may become temporarily blocked if the internal lining of the vein swells in response to repeated injury or irritation. This may be caused by the needle, the substance injected, or donating plasma. Once the swelling subsides, the circulation will often become re-established."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapsed_vein"
]
} | train_eli5 | What does it mean when a drug addict has "collapsed veins"? Why do they have to keep looking for different veins over their bodies?
I've heard of people shooting up into their eyes, tongues, etc. | [
0.019880514591932297,
0.023156333714723587,
-0.021299898624420166,
0.03910914435982704,
-0.030411958694458008,
-0.01909870095551014,
0.07018354535102844,
0.11658793687820435,
-0.03470213711261749,
-0.047966133803129196,
-0.02146974205970764,
0.027523603290319443,
-0.02706012688577175,
0.03... | |
6c6pik | What the proposed Tory social care reforms are, and why some people are calling it the "dementia tax". | I'm not sure I totally understand it and why it's so bad. Isn't it essentially making rich old people look after themselves, which I think is perfectly reasonable? What's it got to do with dementia? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dhsh9ke"
],
"text": [
"There's multiple components to it.\n\nDavid Cameron worked to put into legislation a cap of 72,000 pounds sterling on social care bills to be introduced in 2020. The idea was that middle class retirees with long-term care conditions such as dementia wouldn't have to sacrifice everything they owned to pay for that care. May is moving to remove that legislation, hence the \"dementia tax\". May is going further and stating that an elderly person will be responsible for their social care until their estate goes below 100,000 pounds sterling in worth. That person's property is being valued in that estate. That is huge in a country where home ownership is a big deal, and it's basically saying, \"if you're middle class, and you have a social care condition, we will tell you to sell your house if it comes to that\". \n\nAdditionally, the overall pension is being reduced, with increases to the pension being determined solely by wage growth and inflation rather than a combination of wage growth, inflation, and a flat amount. May also intends to introduce means-testing for winter fuel payments, which can pay out up to 300 pounds sterling a year. Margaret Thatcher took away free milk from student lunches, Theresa May wants to take away free firewood from the elderly. \n\nI'm American, and the thought of taking away free fuel doesn't resonate with me at all, because we've never really had that to begin with. But the thought of the government telling people to give up and sell their property, that is outrageous to me, and I don't even own a house."
],
"score": [
4
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What the proposed Tory social care reforms are, and why some people are calling it the "dementia tax".
I'm not sure I totally understand it and why it's so bad. Isn't it essentially making rich old people look after themselves, which I think is perfectly reasonable? What's it got to do with dementia? | [
-0.03214364871382713,
-0.005735150538384914,
-0.006464114412665367,
-0.017552433535456657,
-0.016086596995592117,
0.11435472965240479,
-0.004583166446536779,
-0.01839287020266056,
-0.1359853744506836,
0.048143915832042694,
0.02194667048752308,
0.12874870002269745,
-0.059530436992645264,
-0... | |
5w0qex | Does the ban on news outlets from the White House press briefing violate freedom of the press? | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"de6e672",
"de6ekcb"
],
"text": [
"No.\n\nThose outlets remain free to report whatever they want to report. The 1st Amendment does not guarantee anyone access to White House press conferences.",
"Can someone explain honestly why they got banned?"
],
"score": [
67,
7
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Does the ban on news outlets from the White House press briefing violate freedom of the press?
[removed] | [
-0.025595275685191154,
0.0378117673099041,
0.05257289484143257,
0.026128029450774193,
0.07255418598651886,
0.04622833803296089,
-0.00648128055036068,
-0.1330311894416809,
-0.008405650965869427,
-0.04193216562271118,
0.020067568868398666,
0.12708397209644318,
-0.007052221801131964,
0.010765... | |
2l4t8o | Why is it when it rains in a baseball game the game gets postponed til further notice but in American football the players play through any weather? | wouldn't there be more harm for injury for the football players then the baseball players? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"clriijf"
],
"text": [
"I was a house league umpire for a few years. For us, we would play in the rain until we had puddles forming. Most baseball diamonds are made with very rough dirt that can not only get extremely muddy, but can cause some nasty infections if you end up slipping in/on a puddle and cutting yourself on the rough dirt (I'm talking thousands of small, not tiny, rocks). \n\nFurthermore, when there's rain, there's often a risk of lightning. The metal cage, around the infield and home plate can conduct the electricity from the lightning and can electrocute those close to it, or those standing on the damp field.\n\nAt least, that's what we were told in our training.\n\nTL;DR: Infield dirt is made of tiny sharp rocks, slipping on wet muddy field can cut and cause infections. With rain, comes a risk of lightning and electrocution from the metal bats and cage around home-plate and the infield."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is it when it rains in a baseball game the game gets postponed til further notice but in American football the players play through any weather?
wouldn't there be more harm for injury for the football players then the baseball players? | [
0.05243571102619171,
0.018029751256108284,
0.09537734091281891,
0.004026379436254501,
0.09593011438846588,
0.04894620180130005,
0.009134175255894661,
0.02577931433916092,
0.06167101487517357,
0.10256583988666534,
-0.05859982967376709,
0.04065343365073204,
-0.04321352392435074,
0.0262794215... | |
2z10xz | If circles and spheres are actual physical things in the universe, and Pi helps define circles and spheres, doesn't the fact that Pi is an infinite non-repeating decimal say something important about the physical structure of the universe? If it does, what is it? | I hope someone knows what I'm trying to ask, because I'm not sure I do.
EDIT: Sorry, I probably should have taken the time to craft this question more precisely and then asked on /r/askscience. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cpet6ab",
"cpes2y4",
"cperd1g"
],
"text": [
"I have read every comment here, and I have no idea what you're asking. \n\nPi is a number. It is irrational, but it's just a ratio between two things. There are many irrational numbers, and it doesn't mean anything.",
"The fact that pi is irrational(can't be represented as ratio of integers or a terminating/repeating decimal) is not what makes it special. There are an infinite amount of irrational numbers. \n\nAlso, you shouldn't call pi infinite, it's a finite number. I know what you mean when you say pi is infinite(should say non repeating/terminating/irrational), but you're misusing the term.",
"Non repeating decimal, who says the Universe use base 10 numbers? That's a human construct."
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | If circles and spheres are actual physical things in the universe, and Pi helps define circles and spheres, doesn't the fact that Pi is an infinite non-repeating decimal say something important about the physical structure of the universe? If it does, what is it?
I hope someone knows what I'm trying to ask, because I'm not sure I do. EDIT: Sorry, I probably should have taken the time to craft this question more precisely and then asked on /r/askscience. | [
-0.05076383054256439,
-0.06638235598802567,
-0.05880052596330643,
0.0548846609890461,
-0.02230093814432621,
-0.017041346058249474,
-0.008353127166628838,
-0.02131441794335842,
0.13048800826072693,
-0.057341013103723526,
-0.017916396260261536,
-0.014021797105669975,
0.008679414168000221,
0.... | |
6910rp | Why isn't it good to have a lot of vitamins at once? | I'm specifically talking about gummy vitamins/pills. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dh2tuul",
"dh2uhkk",
"dh2xvbo"
],
"text": [
"The difference between a thing being healthy, and a thing being unhealthy, is quantity. Vitamins are necessary for human survival, but you can also overdose on them. Overdosing on vitamins can have various dangerous effects, depending on the particular vitamin.\n\n That being said, even if you don't eat enough to suffer complications from overdosing, then it is likely excess is going to be removed from your body. In other words, you're buying expensive candy and making expensive pee.",
"Your body can only absorb and store a certain amount of vitamins at a time.\n\nIn some cases, the excess is just thrown away and wasted. In other cases, too much can actually make you sick.",
"There are two types of vitamins: fat-soluble and water-soluble. The water soluble vitamins are more common so if you take too much of these, you'll just pee them out. They do no harm.\n\nHowever, the fat-soluble vitamins are very harmful because they stay in your body and if you have too much, you can get very sick. For example, if you take too much vitamin D you might experience nausea, a loss of appetite, and vomiting. This is because too much vitamin D causes calcium to build up in your blood.\n\nTaking too many vitamins can be very harmful, just like most good things."
],
"score": [
7,
5,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why isn't it good to have a lot of vitamins at once?
I'm specifically talking about gummy vitamins/pills. | [
-0.03143260255455971,
-0.11489159613847733,
-0.061227086931467056,
0.04738524928689003,
-0.05034804344177246,
-0.05143561214208603,
0.01966412365436554,
0.06462351977825165,
0.054028935730457306,
0.0116276191547513,
-0.00828746147453785,
0.07375717908143997,
0.018511004745960236,
0.0128230... | |
1xsbd1 | Announcers always say that downhill skiers should be "in the air" as little as possible because it slows them down. It is faster when skis remain on the ground. How could that be? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cfe73ad",
"cfe6rrh"
],
"text": [
"Consider a uniform 45 degree slope. The shortest way down is along the plane of the slope. The curved path through the air that results from a jump is a longer distance.",
"It depends on the exact incline of the jump, but for the majority of jumps the decreased friction isn't worth the loss in forward momentum resulting from the skiiers gravity pushing down on the ski slope."
],
"score": [
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Announcers always say that downhill skiers should be "in the air" as little as possible because it slows them down. It is faster when skis remain on the ground. How could that be?
| [
-0.019283771514892578,
0.03778938576579094,
0.03765765577554703,
0.028234025463461876,
0.00711494917050004,
-0.06023959815502167,
0.02597721666097641,
0.022947514429688454,
0.05468199774622917,
0.08208388835191727,
-0.006955278106033802,
0.084346242249012,
0.007277567405253649,
0.002030238... | ||
2gojcd | What would happen if you took off your helmet in space ? | Like i know you would die, but would it be an instant death or would u suffocate ? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"ckl1g4i",
"ckl1hen",
"ckl1kgh",
"ckl7a4m",
"ckl5gez",
"ckl6612"
],
"text": [
"You definitely wouldn't explode or anything dramatic like that. There have been a few astronauts who were exposed to vacuum or near vacuum and were successfully revived. IIRC less than 45s or a minute is survivable.",
"You would suffocate. If you had a lungful of air it is also possible it would evacuate from your body forcibly enough to cause injury. \n\nYou would not freeze to death, the cooling process would be relatively slow because you can only shed heat through radiative cooling, and you would not explode, as your skin's tensile strength is high enough to 'hold you together.' You'd likely experience swelling and the saliva in your mouth and tears in your eyes would evaporate rapidly, cooling those areas.",
"In the film event horizon there is a scene where an unsuited astronaut needs to escape a damaged ship. He is told to empty his lungs as best he can and jump. I believe it was an accurate representation of what would actually happen.",
"Astronauts/Cosmonauts have on occasion been exposed to the vacuum of space. Immediate exposure is harmless, but the 0 pressure does cause all liquids to boil instantly. I do believe one astronaut reported that the spit on his tongue started to sizzle and bubble. The extreme cold isn't fatal for short periods either, just like sticking your hand in liquid nitrogen - for a brief time your body's warmth has more of an effect on it than it has an effect on your body.\n\nOf course long term exposure would result in all the fluids in your body boiling (explosive decompression) while freezing you solid at the same time. A frozen and partially ruptured corpse, most likely.",
"Additionally, the bowel gas and probably solid matter would be expelled, possibly.",
"It would hurt for a bit, then you would die."
],
"score": [
13,
11,
11,
3,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What would happen if you took off your helmet in space ?
Like i know you would die, but would it be an instant death or would u suffocate ? | [
-0.00819914136081934,
0.10064153373241425,
0.0010713919764384627,
0.006105551030486822,
0.07412032783031464,
-0.0016030261758714914,
0.045285895466804504,
0.023639313876628876,
0.035699263215065,
0.029767001047730446,
0.09235850721597672,
0.02730010263621807,
0.02129858359694481,
0.0140140... | |
6vcuyu | How do car parks know how many spaces are available? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dlz8qc4",
"dlz9812",
"dlz8muo"
],
"text": [
"Is there a barrier on the entrance and exit? Barrier on the entrance goes up, -1 parking space. Barrier goes up at the exit, +1 parking spaces. Start with a known quantity, cos we can count the number of bays, deduct 1% to allow for dicks parking in two or more bays, and away you go.\n\nWhen the number reaches Zero, the car park is full. Illuminate the neon sign that says Car Park Full.",
"There's two popular methods you'll see in most garages these days. They either work on a per-garage or per-space basis.\n\n**Per-garage:** Generally done with induction sensors. These are the same sensors used to trigger traffic lights. If you ever notice [these sorts of shapes](_URL_3_) in the road as you're coming up to a light, you've noticed an induction loop sensor. It's a common misconception that these are weight sensors; they're not and weight sensors (they look like big metal plates) never really reached wide usage because induction loops are easier to implement and less intrusive.\n\nEssentially, your car disrupts the magnetic field being created by the induction loop buried beneath the concrete, which triggers a response in the system. In a parking garage there will usually be two sensors: one at the entrance and one at the exit. That way, they can simply count number of cars in, number of cars out, and subtract from the total number of spaces to give an idea of how many spots are available. The major problem with this is with false positives; multiple cars passing over a sensor in rapid succession may get flagged as a single car. That's why the count is often off.\n\nThe counting option for ticketed garages is simple: take the total number of spots, subtract the number of tickets which have been taken and add the number of tickets which have been returned to get a count of available spots. Same goes for garages with barriers/gates.\n\n**Per-space:** These are the systems you see where there's a board that has a count per floor of the garage. \n\nThere are a few technologies for this but ultimately it boils down to putting a sensor above or below every parking spot in the garage to detect if there's a car on it. Sensors can be ultrasonic, magnetic, or infrared, or a combination (the type depends on the environment). Each sensor is connected to a centralized system (either wired or wirelessly) and reports whenever a space is empty or full. These systems are much more accurate, with > 99% accuracy in most cases.\n\nSources: \n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_0_",
"There are little sensors that detect when any particular slot is open (most garages that do this also have little \"occupied\" signs for each slot.) They're all networked together. From there its easy math for a computer to display a count."
],
"score": [
24,
22,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://indectusa.com/single-space-sensors/",
"http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/everyday-tech/how-parking-garages-track-open-spaces-why-they-often-get-it-wrong.htm",
"http://www.nedapidentification.com/solutions/cases/the-parking-space-race.html",
"https://cdn.instructables.com/FNM/M85W/F6S98E5S/FNMM85WF6S98E5S.MEDIUM.jpg"
]
} | train_eli5 | How do car parks know how many spaces are available?
| [
0.09341012686491013,
-0.04276391491293907,
0.012362627312541008,
0.003315915120765567,
-0.007667384576052427,
0.038844455033540726,
0.008259196765720844,
0.0006332796765491366,
0.09147435426712036,
-0.019555311650037766,
0.0010479706106707454,
0.01756715402007103,
0.018601465970277786,
0.0... | ||
4wyex8 | Why does Soda become flat(uncarbonated) when you shake it? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"d6awco2"
],
"text": [
"Left alone, CO2 dissolved in the soda will come out of solution and go into the air. Shaking it provides way more opportunities for an individual CO2 molecule to be exposed to the air and in a position to leave the solution, so the rate of CO2 leaving the solution increases."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why does Soda become flat(uncarbonated) when you shake it?
| [
-0.054145123809576035,
-0.07440779358148575,
-0.007215035147964954,
0.0060537224635481834,
0.023871177807450294,
-0.027961039915680885,
0.018406199291348457,
0.09401711076498032,
-0.00015117051952984184,
-0.08195635676383972,
-0.08114931732416153,
-0.0551835335791111,
0.010212471708655357,
... | ||
2ydaj7 | What causes differences in the appearance of ice (ex. see-through vs. white)? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cp8fres",
"cp8fm2q",
"cp8frgd"
],
"text": [
"It's the purity of your water. I saw it on Nat geo on a show called \"going deep with David Reese\" the purer the water the clearer it is",
"I believe that it's mostly the air in the ice. Supposedly if you boil water and freeze it after, it should be clear.",
"The short answer is: impurities and defects in the crystal structure. Ice that forms with excess gasses in the solution may form voids with trapped gasses. These voids scatter light and make the ice less transparent. Almost nothing is soluble in ice, so any extra impurity like bits of dust or dirt will lead to defect sites that also ruin the transparency. Cracks in the ice can also scatter light. If the ice forms such that it's not a single crystal but a collection of smaller crystals fused together, perhaps because it was very rapidly frozen or because of impurities in the water, the boundaries between those little crystals will scatter light and make it less transparent."
],
"score": [
4,
4,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What causes differences in the appearance of ice (ex. see-through vs. white)?
| [
-0.0540599450469017,
-0.023667652159929276,
0.05266464129090309,
0.09601761400699615,
0.09432967752218246,
-0.019259238615632057,
0.008253665640950203,
0.05067303776741028,
0.087898850440979,
0.011342000216245651,
-0.0649825930595398,
-0.0390273854136467,
0.021220341324806213,
-0.027977522... | ||
2zquct | What exactly happens when you look at an eclipse without eye protection? Is it the same as looking directly at the sun on a normal day? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cplghon",
"cplg9b2"
],
"text": [
"You really should do a search before posting, but since you're here, and since I know the answer, I'll respond. Looking at a solar eclipse without eye protection is just as dangerous as looking at the sun on a normal day, and possibly even more so. You see, on a normal day, with the sun shining brightly, you may find it very difficult to stare straight at the sun, because to do so is painful. When lights hits your eyes, your pupils contract and let in less light. If the light is very bright, your pupils try even harder to contract, and that's why when you step out into bright sunlight after being in a darkened room, the sun \"hurts\" your eyes. That's your eyes trying very hard to contract to prevent you from taking in too much light. If you take in too much light, the solar radiation can damage your eyes and render you blind. \n\nNow, the thing about an eclipse is that you still receive just as much damaging solar radiation, but the light doesn't appear to be as bright. So when you look at the sun without eye protection, your pupils don't contract, and may even dilate, letting in even more solar radiation than usual, which could actually damage your eyes faster than if you were looking at the full, unclouded sun on a particularly bright day. And, because it's darker out and the light isn't as bright, you might not even feel any pain. That's why it's actually more dangerous to stare at the sun during an eclipse without eye protection -- you could do irreparable harm to your eyesight, and not realize it was happening until it was too late.",
"For the love of all that is good and pure, do a search before posting. This has been asked 4000 times in the last day."
],
"score": [
3,
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What exactly happens when you look at an eclipse without eye protection? Is it the same as looking directly at the sun on a normal day?
| [
0.016530459746718407,
0.040960438549518585,
0.03788555786013603,
0.03366054221987724,
0.11061620712280273,
-0.03543465584516525,
0.037675246596336365,
-0.03036179207265377,
0.06404558569192886,
-0.0054361154325306416,
0.09263965487480164,
0.015270477160811424,
-0.00971948355436325,
-0.0671... | ||
3asw0o | During a divorce why isn't custody entirely up to the child? If they're old enough to properly understand and make decisions? | Sorry if this is a stupid question, I don't know terribly much about divorce but I mean it is their life so shouldn't it be their choice? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"csfniyw",
"csfpbtj"
],
"text": [
"Until a child is 18, they aren't considered developed enough to be making legal decisions. They can testify and favor a parent, but it doesn't make a definitive choice. Once that child hits 18, they're allowed to live with whoever they want.",
"As a society we like to pretend we care about \"the children\" but we give children zero rights at all. No matter how much children tell us they don't like something, we ignore them, all the hell we put them through is \"for their own good.\""
],
"score": [
5,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | During a divorce why isn't custody entirely up to the child? If they're old enough to properly understand and make decisions?
Sorry if this is a stupid question, I don't know terribly much about divorce but I mean it is their life so shouldn't it be their choice? | [
0.03177965059876442,
-0.020374266430735588,
-0.02386731654405594,
0.043088171631097794,
-0.00041105467244051397,
-0.03762831538915634,
-0.0649808794260025,
0.011805062182247639,
0.15446707606315613,
0.05967161804437637,
0.09462223947048187,
0.07963018119335175,
-0.021763667464256287,
0.016... | |
5iqbd6 | Different denominations of Islam | [removed] | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dba630y",
"dba5t6i",
"dba5yz9"
],
"text": [
"The two main denominations of Islam are Sunni and Shia. Essentially the differences between them boil down to the choice of who was to lead the Muslim community after Muhammad died. The faction that became the Sunnis supported Muhammad's close friends and advisers while the faction that became the Shias supported the prophet's son-in-law (none of Muhammad's sons survived infancy). Long story short, there were two civil wars for succession and a lot of prominent people died, including Muhammad's grandchildren. After that, the two sides have wanted basically nothing to do with one another; they are essentially out of communion, to borrow a Christian term.\n\nMost of the differences between the two main denominations are simply results of the two being separated from one another. They share the Qur'an but have arrived at different interpretations. For example, Sunnis generally believe that visual depictions of God or Muhammad are idolatrous and forbidden, but Shia don't; drawings of Muhammad are common in modern Iran.\n\nSunnis are the larger denomination, comprising between 80 and 90 percent of the Muslim population. Shia are the majority in Iran, Iraq, and Bahrain and are large minorities in Syria and Lebanon. Most major Islamic empires have been Sunni, with a handful of notable exceptions.",
"Islam has multiple sects, the largest of which are:\n\n* __Sunni__ - About 85-90% of all Muslims are part of this denomination. They follow the teachings of Muhammad(_pbuh_), and those of the first two generations of Muslims that followed him.\n\n* __Shi'ite__ - This group comprises of around 10-15%. They also follow the teachings of Muhammad(_pbuh_), but believe instead that his son-in-law Ali was the designated successor (_imam_), and that the Muslim faith should be lead by such a successor.\n\nThere are smaller sects in Islam, as well as branches of the two sects listed above:\n\n* __Sufis__ - They are considered to be \"Islamic mystics\". They go beyond what is normally expected of them, by seeking a personal experience with Allah through meditation and other spiritual means. They are not a separate branch as such, as many of them are Sunni, while the rest are Shi'ite.\n\n* __Baha'is__ - They consider themselves to belong to the newest of the world's religions, although they acknowledge that they originated from Shi'ite Islam (much like Christianity and Judaism).\n\nOther sects / branches include:\n\n__Ahmadiyyas, Druze, Alevis, Alawis [...]__ \\([Link](_URL_0_)\\)",
"For the two main ones, there was a disagreement as to who Muhammad's legitimate successor was. According to the Sunni denomination, the right leader was Muhammad's adviser Abu Bakr who was the first caliph. The Shiites believe that Bakr and the next two caliphs were illegitimate and that the fourth caliph, named Ali, should have been the first. That caused the initial split, and since then the beliefs have diverged slightly on things such as whether or not angels have free will, if you can take marriages that are supposed to be temporary, and what exactly it is that qualifies someone to be an imam. As for the others, I don't know enough to say."
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.dummies.com/religion/islam/muslims-adhere-to-different-islamic-sects/"
]
} | train_eli5 | Different denominations of Islam
[removed] | [
0.06684580445289612,
0.02383713237941265,
-0.04191707819700241,
0.01842454820871353,
-0.031950462609529495,
-0.001008527004159987,
-0.061154741793870926,
-0.161406010389328,
0.11665402352809906,
-0.12244057655334473,
0.07635288685560226,
0.03190530836582184,
0.0051006437279284,
0.009923027... | |
2jr1e3 | What exactly are dogs trying to find when they sniff around looking for a place to go to the bathroom? | When dogs walk around smelling the ground to find where to do their business what are they looking for? Some particular smell? Where they have been already? Where they haven't been yet? Or is it random and unrelated? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cleb9ty",
"clebm3r",
"clejage",
"clemsyo"
],
"text": [
"I think they're looking to see if other dogs/animals have left their scents around. Once they've figured that out, they leave their own mark signifying their claim on this territory: \"I know you peed here earlier but this is my land now.\"",
"Looks like science has an answer: Dogs use Earth’s magnetic field to decide where to relieve themselves. [Link to article on _URL_0_](http://www._URL_0_/newshour/rundown/dogs-poop-in-alignment-with-earths-magnetic-field-study-finds/)",
"As a german, I find the American desire to not use certain words very amusing... \"looking for a place to go to the bathroom\"? \nI heard they want to pee...",
"This is so crazy. I was just thinking about this last night when my dog was about to shit at least 3 times before moving to his final place. I was like \"I should ask reddit\" and then here you go."
],
"score": [
44,
13,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"pbs.org",
"http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/dogs-poop-in-alignment-with-earths-magnetic-field-study-finds/"
]
} | train_eli5 | What exactly are dogs trying to find when they sniff around looking for a place to go to the bathroom?
When dogs walk around smelling the ground to find where to do their business what are they looking for? Some particular smell? Where they have been already? Where they haven't been yet? Or is it random and unrelated? | [
0.06925709545612335,
-0.059428419917821884,
0.0954093411564827,
0.04586628079414368,
0.05017663165926933,
-0.03803589940071106,
0.04850192740559578,
-0.09694582223892212,
0.10277894139289856,
-0.03272589296102524,
0.03003614768385887,
-0.013241756707429886,
0.019460856914520264,
0.06349969... | |
5efy18 | Top people on Instagram likes | So on Instagram, if you go to your photos, it will say _____, _______, and x number of people liked your photo. How are these top two people determined? It seems to me like the top two people shown to me are people who I interact with a lot, but I'm not sure how that level of interaction is determined. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dac87q3"
],
"text": [
"It's a formula that is, as you've stated, based on your interaction. You like their stuff, they like your stuff, Instagram realises this and makes you see more of each other.\n\nFacebook does this too and so will almost every social media site."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Top people on Instagram likes
So on Instagram, if you go to your photos, it will say _____, _______, and x number of people liked your photo. How are these top two people determined? It seems to me like the top two people shown to me are people who I interact with a lot, but I'm not sure how that level of interaction is determined. | [
0.013303853571414948,
-0.08191391080617905,
0.014935648068785667,
-0.017851131036877632,
0.025407865643501282,
-0.020676402375102043,
0.08129684627056122,
0.08425143361091614,
0.06562686711549759,
0.011104452423751354,
0.02561819553375244,
-0.036375079303979874,
0.10521186143159866,
-0.063... | |
92ndxz | What are cycles in a log-log paper? Why do the scales from one to ten keep on repeating? How does plotting on it is done? | This is my first post here, so for any errors I apologize.
So I was learning about logarithmic papers and took a printout of one. And there is something called as cycles in them. I can't understand it. Why more cycles mean more lines? Why do lines get close from 1 to 10, and then develop gaps, and then move close together? I took out the slide rule my father gave it to me and observed C and D scales on it. Now I know that slide rule works on the basis of log values and translation of axis, but in them also I observed that divisions get close from one to two, then have gaps and then come close from 2 to 4, and so on, just like on the log paper. How does then it works? What's the sense behind such periodic behaviour of divisions on log paper and slide rule? I expected the divisions to be like the ones I have drawn on whiteboard(see picture), but got something else, which has confused me. Please, really explain like I am five!!
_URL_0_
EDIT : I have re-uploaded the image
Re-upload _URL_1_
| explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"e36y4ip",
"e36xvd7",
"e36xmur"
],
"text": [
"Now that I see your slide rule picture, I will tell you how to multiply with it.\n\nSlide the 1 on the C scale over the 2 on the D scale. Now read off under the 3 on the C scale, and you should see a 6 on the D scale, because 2X3=6\n\nFeel free to ask questions if you don't understand anything I posted.",
"As far as how Logarithms work, the scale is used for multiplication, so the same length, equals the same amount of multiplication. You'll notice the distance between 1 and 2 is the same as the distance between 2 and 4, and the distance between 3 and 6. So by putting logs together, like in a slide rule, you can pretty quickly multiply numbers just by using the sliding one logarithmic scale relative to another one.\n\nYou'll notice every cycle (order of magnitude) has the same length, because multiplying by 10 is the same distance every time.",
"Your Imgur link doesn't work.\n\nA cycle is just an order of magnitude, or multiple of 10. So 3 cycles covers 3 orders of magnitude or 10^3 =1000. 5 Cycles would cover 5 orders of magnitude or 10^5 =100000."
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"https://imgur.com/gallery/M51xTu0",
"https://imgur.com/a/uMLHgxs"
]
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What are cycles in a log-log paper? Why do the scales from one to ten keep on repeating? How does plotting on it is done?
This is my first post here, so for any errors I apologize. So I was learning about logarithmic papers and took a printout of one. And there is something called as cycles in them. I can't understand it. Why more cycles mean more lines? Why do lines get close from 1 to 10, and then develop gaps, and then move close together? I took out the slide rule my father gave it to me and observed C and D scales on it. Now I know that slide rule works on the basis of log values and translation of axis, but in them also I observed that divisions get close from one to two, then have gaps and then come close from 2 to 4, and so on, just like on the log paper. How does then it works? What's the sense behind such periodic behaviour of divisions on log paper and slide rule? I expected the divisions to be like the ones I have drawn on whiteboard(see picture), but got something else, which has confused me. Please, really explain like I am five!! _URL_0_ EDIT : I have re-uploaded the image Re-upload _URL_1_ | [
-0.07141885161399841,
-0.015477648004889488,
0.006300290580838919,
-0.01886180229485035,
0.02973393350839615,
-0.0561743825674057,
-0.06521540135145187,
0.015199003741145134,
0.09117840230464935,
0.009401286952197552,
0.012746733613312244,
0.03936116397380829,
0.02165655791759491,
0.019500... | |
3mobxd | What is China planning with docking their aircraft carrier in Syria? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cvgt8fp"
],
"text": [
"The middle east is in a real state of flux at the moment and the Syrian situation means that there is currently a struggle for power. Both the Russians and China are now moving in so that when the time comes, they will have a hand in dictating who comes to power, as it's in their interests to have influence in the middle east.\n\nBasically everyone is trying to get both a political and military presence and influence there, whilst at the same time not getting 'too' involved before it becomes clear which way the conflict is going to go."
],
"score": [
5
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | What is China planning with docking their aircraft carrier in Syria?
| [
0.0015484064351767302,
0.09848317503929138,
-0.017177823930978775,
-0.031777817755937576,
-0.015091857872903347,
-0.046710919588804245,
0.033727921545505524,
-0.03893650695681572,
-0.008778709918260574,
0.03941388800740242,
-0.00568070774897933,
0.038874123245477676,
0.021714868023991585,
... | ||
2mhxfu | Why is personal space so exorbitantly big in Nordic countries? | Does it have to do with the weather or something? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cm5f7ko"
],
"text": [
"My guess would be that because of the very sparse population most of the inhabitants in the past never had to face city conditions with compact space and large crowds. Personal space gets smaller only with urbanization and Nordic countries haven't had that large urban settlements to really change the perception of personal space. But this is just my guess. The way I see it no one knows where the habit originates, but people are just used to that being the standard. And if you break from the standard, you must have a motivation to do that, which makes people feel unease as they try to think what motives people have.\n\nI'm Finnish, and once while traveling in a same group this Swiss guy who was very cool with everyone started holding hand on my shoulder while we were drinking. That was strange to me and of course I thought that he must have some ulterior motives and he's hitting on me, and I kind of had a crush on him as a result, but it turns out he was just being Swiss."
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | Why is personal space so exorbitantly big in Nordic countries?
Does it have to do with the weather or something? | [
0.1270689219236374,
0.01476332638412714,
0.07203471660614014,
0.062616266310215,
0.11257202923297882,
-0.054541587829589844,
-0.001080570975318551,
0.031872496008872986,
0.07382390648126602,
0.056424714624881744,
0.026460058987140656,
0.013514086604118347,
-0.016333183273673058,
0.00050680... | |
2nmttu | If principle photography is done AND a teaser trailer is out, why wont the new Star Wars be in theaters until next December? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cmezpnr",
"cmf0yqt"
],
"text": [
"Post Production. This is when all of the CGI, sound mixing, editing, scoring and much much more is done.\n\nAdditionally, they're will probably be reshoots. Therefore, the one year gap gives them plenty of cushion time.",
"The majority of the man hours will be done in post production. They have a lot of green screen footage, now they have to turn it into a movie. Space battles set extension character animation. Foley, sound mixing, editing, scoring, compositing. The principal photography just gives them the building blocks to work with."
],
"score": [
23,
7
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | If principle photography is done AND a teaser trailer is out, why wont the new Star Wars be in theaters until next December?
| [
-0.009495620615780354,
-0.056898102164268494,
0.09910222887992859,
-0.08334994316101074,
0.05724799633026123,
0.03958366811275482,
-0.10490059852600098,
0.027657197788357735,
0.07045698165893555,
0.13598453998565674,
0.047850675880908966,
0.058713801205158234,
-0.032496556639671326,
0.0372... | ||
m5xjw | ELI11: Historically, why bladed weapons produced in the Middle-East/South Asia tended to be curved (like a scimitar), while in the West, straight (like a broadsword)? | Walking round the Royal Armouries last week, wondering what cultural factors could have produced [this shape](_URL_0_) as opposed to [this shape](_URL_1_), generally around the Middle Ages? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"c2yd1lv",
"c2yedct",
"c2yg6xo",
"c2yeyti",
"c2yjx7n"
],
"text": [
"There's a lot of factors, and there are definitely examples of Western curved swords (cavalry sabers, for example) and Eastern straight swords (the Chinese jian, for example).\n\nOne factor is the types of armor in common use. Some types of armor protect better against slashes, others against stabbing. Straight swords tend to be thrusting weapons, usually, with a bit of chopping, while curved swords are for chopping and slicing motions (generally).\n\nAlso, the presence or absence of mounted soldiers is a factor. Certain curved swords are easier to use from horseback than a straight sword would be.\n\nThere may be other reasons I'm not familiar with.",
"Weapon design, armor of opponents, and weapon style all influence each other. A big dynamic that occurred in Europe that didn't happen elsewhere was a increasing amounts of armor. First was chainmail, which tended to accumulate over time - people maintained them and passed them down to their children when they died or got old, and loss of chainmail happened slower than people made more of it. Plate came later, along with the breeding of heavy horses, but at this point people mostly figured out that swords aren't the weapon of choice against plate.\n\nAnyhow, the short story is that Europe was a bunch of people running around in chainmail, while the middle east and south asia wasn't, so both camps optimized their tools and tool usage for different tasks.",
"I'd like to know more about [The Kris](_URL_0_) and why it was made in such an awesome shape",
"First of all, curved swords were not used in ancient times. They first came into use (in the West) in Persia around 900 AD. This suggests an influence from Asian sword manufacture, particularly from Japan, which produced very high-quality blades. So there may have been a perception that curved swords were better swords, even though it was only the quality of the steel and not the design.\n\nThe main drawback to a curved sword is it is shorter than a straight sword for the same weight. However it is a better cutting weapon, since any attack adds a lateral movement to the blade (like drawing a knife back towards you when cutting bread). It may have worked better against the lighter armor types typically worn in more Southern countries, and is definitely the preferred shape when fighting from horseback (all later era cavalry sabers are curved).",
"Weather and climate had a huge impact on weaponry. Full suits of tight metal armor were impractical for the hot, desert climates. Also, ancient Middle Eastern culture had a strong, proud history of horsemanship and mounted combat. Hot weather plus mounted combat creates an emphasis on lighter armor, which does not require the extreme penetrative power of a straight blade. \n\n[Here is some Crusades-era Muslim armor](_URL_1_)"
],
"score": [
21,
16,
5,
3,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://www.safari-guide.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Scimitar-blade1.jpg",
"http://images.wikia.com/inheritance/images/d/de/Brdswordf.jpg"
]
} | {
"url": [
"http://images.wikia.com/deadliestfiction/images/c/c9/Kris_Sword.jpg",
"http://www.umich.edu/~marcons/Crusades/topics/war/Islamic_Armour.html"
]
} | train_eli5 | ELI11: Historically, why bladed weapons produced in the Middle-East/South Asia tended to be curved (like a scimitar), while in the West, straight (like a broadsword)?
Walking round the Royal Armouries last week, wondering what cultural factors could have produced [this shape](_URL_0_) as opposed to [this shape](_URL_1_), generally around the Middle Ages? | [
0.0352335087954998,
0.0880710631608963,
-0.025800367817282677,
-0.0013704622397199273,
-0.024343153461813927,
-0.04638412222266197,
-0.06754520535469055,
0.07622093707323074,
-0.05769031122326851,
0.06812089681625366,
0.052187394350767136,
-0.039103228598833084,
-0.0001648824691073969,
0.0... | |
3st5ay | The Call of the Void | Why do so many completely non-suicidal people get the urge to jump when they're at the edge of a cliff? I've felt it myself a few times even though I've never even considered suicide. I just felt the sudden urge to jump. One time it was so strong I had to back away from the edge because I was terrified I'd actually do it. So why does the call of the void happen? | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"cx05qej",
"cx0styz"
],
"text": [
"When you approach a cliff it obviously crosses your mind that you don't want to fall off of it. This is an actual threat to your survival, and it's killed plenty of us in the past, so it's built into the basic routines of your brain to be wary of edges.\n\nThe basic awareness of danger, even if you're not really in danger, can quickly grow into something else depending on how you respond to the thoughts and feelings of being near the cliff. _Especially_ if you try to suppress the thoughts of falling or jumping, they can easily snowball into something much more troublesome. This can happen in an instant, even below the radar of conscious thought.\n\nAfter all, only suicidal people would jump. Another part of your brain notices we're talking about jumping. Why are we talking about jumping? Should I be concerned about jumping? I don't want to jump. Does someone want to jump? Another sifts through your memories and conjures up videos of people you've seen jumping. Pretty soon, everyone's chattering about jumping, and if you tell them to stop talking about jumping you're adding another thought about jumping.\n\nAll it takes is one small thought \"I don't want to go off that edge\" to start the avalanche. We really have difficulty controlling what we want to think about. Suppression of intrusive thoughts tends to produce the opposite effect - if you talk to someone with OCD who tries not to think about the germs on the public bus, for example, you'll find that's all they tend to think about.\n\nFor me it happens with sex. My radar will scan the room and determine that no, I shouldn't think about screwing certain people. Don't think about screwing certain people. They're your coworkers and this is a meeting and don't think about screwing them. Definitely not about where or when or how. Hey, here are some helpful images of you in an orgy.\n\nThe thing is, I'm not some sex-crazed maniac who's about to bend Barbara from accounting over the copier. I'm just a guy who tried to suppress a random thought flitting through his head.",
"From what I have read before. It is your brain thinking throw possible scenarios and panicking a bit when you move closer as you start to think about it it gets harder to suppress the thoughts and your body pushes towards it. \n\nMy question is, I wonder how many people have jumped and been written down as suicides."
],
"score": [
99,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | The Call of the Void
Why do so many completely non-suicidal people get the urge to jump when they're at the edge of a cliff? I've felt it myself a few times even though I've never even considered suicide. I just felt the sudden urge to jump. One time it was so strong I had to back away from the edge because I was terrified I'd actually do it. So why does the call of the void happen? | [
0.04796908050775528,
-0.057386454194784164,
0.010553468950092793,
0.034649744629859924,
0.019058246165513992,
0.016360795125365257,
0.053352177143096924,
0.15165945887565613,
0.13369140028953552,
-0.0036593724507838488,
0.002097897930070758,
-0.027042068541049957,
-0.04035794362425804,
-0.... | |
271ohl | If you don't eat meat, you're a vegetarian. But what are you called if you don't eat fish. | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"chwj6kr"
],
"text": [
"No meat, but still fish = pescatarian \n\nNo meat, but still able to eat eggs and such = vegatarian\n\nNo meat at all, not even anything that comes from an animal (eggs, caviar, etc...) = vegan"
],
"score": [
3
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | train_eli5 | If you don't eat meat, you're a vegetarian. But what are you called if you don't eat fish.
| [
0.03273063525557518,
-0.01815219782292843,
-0.038058020174503326,
0.057200055569410324,
-0.08197316527366638,
-0.03301021084189415,
0.05199189484119415,
-0.03524288907647133,
0.00887380726635456,
-0.06816621869802475,
0.142498180270195,
-0.1210242509841919,
-0.0706244707107544,
-0.02317941... | ||
5qu84q | Why is Justin Trudeaus approval rating so low? | From an American perspective, it seems like he's a really great leader and doing a great job. Someone used this as a counter argument and I was completely unaware and can't find much to explain why | explainlikeimfive | {
"a_id": [
"dd25s6r",
"dd34ryb"
],
"text": [
"He's made some blunders with the Native communities with breaking a few promises. Major promises, even. Adopting the UN policy nited Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, going back on giving them the ability to beta development that affects natural resources, lifting a cap on funding for First Nations. \n\nHe's kept a lot more campaign promises than he's broken, that's for sure, and it's looking like with those currently in progress his achieved promises will only be rising with the coming years. \n\nThere was a point in November where he made a few blunders on some stances, including his response to Fidel Castro's death, and the approval of 2 out of 3 proposed pipelines. \n\nCome December: a lavish meeting he had for the Trudeau Foundation and rich, Chinese lobbyists were about. Same issue Clinton had running through her campaign. \n\nThis January: Alberta residents are unhappy about his phasing out oil sands as our economical driver (a necessary move, but a huge job market for people in that province). \n\nAll of these saw him finally drop below 50% approval, but he's still higher than the last few PMs at this point. \n\n[If you're curious about how he's holding up with his promises, there's record of that](_URL_0_)",
"Canada's population still remains mostly conservative because there are more elderly citizens in the country than younger millennials. The Liberal government is relatively new when compared to the long-reigning Conservative government that was only replaced a year ago. Many attitudes still remain with the conservatives because as progressive as Canada may seem, the outspoken \"old-stock\" Canadians resent the liberal agenda.\n\nHere's an interesting article to give you an idea.\n\n_URL_1_"
],
"score": [
9,
2
]
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": []
} | {
"url": [
"http://trudeaumetre.ca",
"https://www.google.ca/amp/s/sec.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-politics-of-2036-when-canada-is-as-brown-as-it-is-white/article33814437/%3Fservice%3Damp?client=safari"
]
} | train_eli5 | Why is Justin Trudeaus approval rating so low?
From an American perspective, it seems like he's a really great leader and doing a great job. Someone used this as a counter argument and I was completely unaware and can't find much to explain why | [
0.0660717710852623,
-0.053018271923065186,
0.11853188276290894,
0.0038854789454489946,
0.004294654354453087,
0.03615548461675644,
0.07535816729068756,
0.05722571909427643,
-0.024224426597356796,
0.043389175087213516,
-0.03778407722711563,
0.022681644186377525,
-0.0036597077269107103,
-0.02... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.