q_id
stringlengths
5
6
title
stringlengths
3
296
selftext
stringlengths
0
34k
document
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit
stringclasses
1 value
url
stringlengths
4
110
answers
dict
title_urls
list
selftext_urls
list
answers_urls
list
by8ibt
how can a photon move an electron if it has no mass?
I'm trying to understand how a solar panel works but I'm having trouble. How can something with no mass move something with mass?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/by8ibt/eli5_how_can_a_photon_move_an_electron_if_it_has/
{ "a_id": [ "eqekmvb", "eqekwat", "eqfxm00" ], "score": [ 2, 6, 2 ], "text": [ "Tldr: the object causing the electrons to move is actually a distant electron in the light source. The photon is basically the \"force\" \n\nA photon is actually a disturbance in the electric/magnetic field. It has more in common with a FORCE, not an object.\n\nAn electron can cause another electron to move without touching it using an electric field. So an electron the light source shifted. This means other electrons will be shifted as it's electric field is now over there. This shift in the field travels outwards, very quickly, as a light wave (or photons). When it reaches the distant electrons they shift and jiggle in response.", "Photons are little packets of energy that electrons absorb. It doesn't *move* the electron so much as energizes it into a higher energy state. There really isn't a good analogy, it's just how photons work. When electrons absorb a photon, they move up in their energy levels - essentially, a higher \"orbit\" around their atomic nuclei.\n\nSolar panels work by putting together materials so that there's a sandwich of three things: a side with slightly too many electrons, a side with slightly too few electrons, and a material in the middle that doesn't conduct electrons very well but *can* under certain circumstances.\n\nPhotons hit the side with slightly too many electrons, which energizes them into a higher \"orbit\" which is a bit farther away from the nucleus. That means the nucleus can't hold onto the electron quite as well - the electron is normally attracted to the positive protons in the nucleus, but the farther away the electron is, the less force there is pulling it towards the protons.\n\nSo the electron is already kind of precariously whizzing around the nucleus, not held down super well. When it absorbs a photon and moves even farther away from the nucleus, it's really not being held by that nucleus much at all. That won't automatically make an electron leave, though, because the electron doesn't have anywhere to go. That's what the other side with slightly too few electrons is for. That energized electron now has somewhere to go, that has a slightly positive pull (because there are protons without matching electrons). So, poof, it zips across that semi-conducting barrier and *flows* to the other side.\n\nThat creates a new hole where the electron used to be, so a new electron jumps into that hole. *That* electron leaves a hole, so an electron behind it jumps into *that* hole, and so and so forth so that when you connect the two sides of the solar panel material sandwich, you get get a circle of electrons getting bumped across the barrier and pushing each other into the empty spots left by those electrons.", "Well, for one, photons have momentum that they can transfer.\n\nTwo, a photon is an electromagnetic field with the Electric (E) field and Magnetic (B) field perpendicular to its direction of travel. When the photon interacts with the electron, the E field exerts a force on the elctron in its direction, causing the B field to force the electron in the direction of travel. \n\nI don't know if that made sense to read, sorry." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
2ce55t
how to hospitals disinfect a room that housed a patient with ebola? or prions?
[I was watching the news and saw 2 Americans contracted Ebola Virus, what will the hospitals do once these patients leave their rooms?](_URL_0_) What about prions. If those were in a hospital room, how would they rid of them? Ignite the room?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ce55t/eli5_how_to_hospitals_disinfect_a_room_that/
{ "a_id": [ "cjekjh4", "cjeo2am" ], "score": [ 5, 2 ], "text": [ "Caustic cleaning solutions, Ebola like most viruses is killed with cleaners. They burn the clothes and biohazard stuff and then flood the room with cleaning solution. They will be put in special isolation rooms built to be decontaminated.", "The protocol is similar to that for some fairly common infections. Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or Clostridium difficile (C. diff) infections are both problems in hospitals that will result in patients being quarantined. In general, the room is sealed, kept at lower pressure than the hospital (so air only flows in), the air pumped out is sent through several filters, anyone entering the room has to put on a gown, mask and gloves, which are all thrown out (and burned) or put in the laundry on the way out of the room, and equipment like blood pressure cuffs are dedicated to the room. Finally when the room is vacated it gets cleaned. C diff is particularly difficult because it produces spores, so and curtains are taken down and the room is washed down twice with a strong chlorine solution (it's strong enough that people need to wear respirators to use it).\n\nWith something like ebola, I wouldn't be surprised to see even more stringent requirements, including actually fumigating the room, and burning anything disposable.\n\nPrions are actually reasonably easy to deal with. They bind tightly to surfaces, but they are proteins so they can be destroyed in place by alkaline and enzyme detergents. Heat will also work, so a hospital's laundry is effective for fabrics. It took a while to figure out what worked, but now it's pretty straight forward.\n\nWith some previous ebola outbreaks the African quarantine procedure was to put the person in a remote hut, use poles to push food to them, but then leave the poles and food where it is. If the person dies, burn the entire thing. If the person lives, push then water to clean, then they can leave and the hut still gets burned." ] }
[]
[ "http://wpri.com/2014/07/31/hospitals-in-ri-mass-on-the-lookout-for-ebola/" ]
[ [], [] ]
638c05
why does jamaica produce such incredible sprinters, whereas surrounding caribbean countries produce average-to-slightly-above-average sprinters?
EDIT - I've googled this numerous times and have been unable to narrow it down.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/638c05/eli5_why_does_jamaica_produce_such_incredible/
{ "a_id": [ "dfs337h", "dfsi406", "dfsqiyf", "dfsrefb", "dft0tb2", "dft0zyl", "dftif6e" ], "score": [ 128, 35, 15, 7, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Current College Sprinter here, I think I got this one.\n\nIf you look closer alot of Caribbean Countries and Islands do end up actually producing very good sprinters.\n\nExplained to me by a Jamaican coach:\n\nIf you are a young Caribbean/Jamaican resident, your future is most likely low paying tourism related jobs. Similar to An inner city kid playing basketball, boxing, or football, Sprinting allows you to hopefully escape to a more succesfull life financially.\n\n Also Track and Field is Jamaica's National Sport so theres that.\n\nHope that helps.", "Same reason there are a ton of great Canadian hockey players or great USA basketball players. Nationalism and culture have a massive impact. ", "Okay there are some good responses so far but it really comes down to the combination of a couple of thing;\n\n1. Jamaica is a small and quite poor country, they don't have the resources to support any sport with any real financial barrier to entry. Running is free, other than a pair of shoes which you need anyway.\n2. While rich countries have the resources to support athletes across a wide spectrum of sports, smaller and poorer countries tend to focus in on 1 or 2 sports which may give them some international recognition. For Kenya its long distance, for Jamaica that's sprinting, etc.\n\nWhich sport a poor or small county winds up focusing on also depends on cultural and historical factors that I am not qualified to mouth off about.", "How has nobody commented that most of their top sprinters not named Bolt have been caught doping, despite an extensively documented lax anti-doping program?", "Get a national sports icon, and many kids wants to be like him, which leads to more talents being found. Sweden had that when Björn Borg was the big tennis name, and that means that we got a bunch of other really good tennis players. The same with Ingemar Stenmark and Gunde Svan for skiing.", "Three words: *massive institutional investment.* \nAlso, national love for the sport. \n\n^((source: am Jamaican, did T & F)^)\n\n & nbsp; \nHere's a nice not-too-long article on both:\n\n* [The Secret of Jamaica's Runners](_URL_0_)\n\n & nbsp; \nAnd a couple others on the topic, just cuz:\n\n* [How tiny Jamaica develops so many champion sprinters](_URL_1_)\n\n* [The young runners of Jamaica's 'sprint factory' in action](_URL_2_)", "In case you guys are wondering, here's where I got the idea of aluminum and fast genes and shit (and it had something to do with fast twitch muscle fibers, not the production of genes lol, I'm dumb)\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [ "https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/14/opinion/sunday/the-secret-of-jamaicas-runners.html", "http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2008/0628/p01s01-woam.html", "http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/jamaica/7721427/The-young-runners-of-Jamaicas-sprint-factory-in-action.html" ], [ "https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/21/jamaicans-sprinting-athletics-commonwealth-games", "http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/08/18/490346468/a-surprising-theory-about-jamaicas-amazing-running-success" ] ]
4ol1vx
why can we hear the difference in someone's voice when they're smiling?
Most people seem able to identify when someone is smiling over the phone or on the radio, but what's the differences that we innately pinpoint? How are we able to do this without deep analysis?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ol1vx/eli5why_can_we_hear_the_difference_in_someones/
{ "a_id": [ "d4di4kv", "d4dm06u", "d4do1l2" ], "score": [ 25, 8, 5 ], "text": [ "Try this:\n\nMake a constant tone with your voice with your lips in a neutral position. Now **slowly** smile. \n\nNotice the change in pitch?\n\nThat's why", "Listening to and interpreting human speech is deeply rooted in our brain. Our brains are able to pick up on such influxes and changes in speech, but mostly with speakers of our native tongue. It can be difficult between languages.", "Smiling alters the shape of your mouth, which has a big effect on the tone of the sounds coming out." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
1lagld
what is consumer debt?
You always here stories about it on the news. But what is consumer debt?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lagld/eli5_what_is_consumer_debt/
{ "a_id": [ "cbx9xlz" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Consumer debt is the debt that everyday people have (credit cards, home loans, auto notes).\n\nIt is differentiated from business debt (money borrowed to expand/run a business) and sovereign debt (money borrowed by governments by selling bonds) because the three have very different implications to an economy." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
568tgj
what makes spider silk so strong, and what separates it from other similar materials?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/568tgj/eli5_what_makes_spider_silk_so_strong_and_what/
{ "a_id": [ "d8hcwkq", "d8hd5a4", "d8hhfdd", "d8hjlug", "d8hm615", "d8hmek1" ], "score": [ 84, 436, 147, 3850, 120, 17 ], "text": [ "The bigger question I've always wondered is, why don't spiders get stuck on their own webs?", "A simple answer is it is just a set of compounds woven together tightly into proteins. These compounds are generated biologically rather than in a factory. They are mostly composed of Alanine and Glycine which are major amino acids. This is called Fibron. Creating this on a large scale would be major expensive and not practical. Most other materials are produced in mass quantities by large animals (like wool on a sheep) rather than in tiny amounts in tiny arachnids.", "Just to add to all the explanations here, the best simple explanation I have ever heard was this, the chemicals essentially behave like legos, [similar to this](_URL_0_). Imagine trying to pull this thing apart at the sides, not at the top and bottom, but at the sides. This is how spider web is chemically, the chemicals are interlocked like this, giving it a very strong structure.\n\nEdit: Clarification.", "**Disclaimer:** I am a molecular biochemist. Was a spider-butt scientist for years. Materials scientists and engineers please feel free to correct me.\n\nSpider silks, like silk worm silk, are made of mostly protein. Spiders can produce many different kinds of silk proteins, which are mixed and matched into different kinds of silk that they use for different purposes, such as egg sacs to protect their eggs (tubularform silk), prey capture (acinoform silk), web capture spiral (flaggeliform silk), and structural silk (dragline/major ampullate silk). Due to the specialized mixture of protein in each of these types of silks, they display very unique properties.\n\nThe most well known/studied silk type is the dragline silk, which is used by the spider for many purposes, such as the structural struts of their web (not the spiral on the web) and the silk they put down when they walk around in case they fall, hence the term \"dragline\" (sometimes also called lifeline silk).\n\nDragline silk is for the most part composed of two kinds of proteins, MaSp1 (major ampullate spidroin 1) and MaSp2. The specific ratio of these two proteins vary widely from species to species, and even within an individual based on health/diet. As mentioned earlier, the different proteins contribute to the overall silk's properties.\n\nAt this time, there is something that needs to be clarified. The term \"strength\" is often just used as an umbrella term. The term \"strength\" technically refers to the amount of force required before the material \"fails\", or breaks. The term \"extensibility\" ~~or \"yield\"~~ or \"strain\" refers to the material's ability to stretch before failing. If you plot these two properties on a graph, the area under the curve is the \"toughness\", which roughly equates the amount of energy the material can overall dissipate before failing.\n\nA \"strong but stiff\" material is something like kevlar. It can withstand a lot of force before it breaks, but it doesn't stretch very well. A \"weak but stretchy\" material would be something like rubber, which is the opposite. However, if you look at the toughness of these materials, they cannot absorb much energy before breaking relative to a material that is both \"strong and extensible\". The unfortunate thing here is that most materials, due to our understanding, cannot be both strong and extensible. Spider (dragline) silk is unique in that it has a relatively high strength (still much weaker than kevlar), and relatively high extensibility (but not as stretchy as say a rubber band). This results in a much higher overall toughness that is rarely observed.\n\nBack to your original question. Spider silk is mostly protein. These proteins self-assemble (with help from the spider) into fibers. On a molecular scale, these proteins assemble into two types of structures: unstructured \"amorphous\" domains and structured \"crystalline\" domains. The amorphous domains - imagine very tangled strands of headphone wires. If you pull on it, the overall fiber stretches to a certain point. This is thought to contribute to the extensibility of the fiber. The crystalline domains - imagine layers of double sided velcro. It is very hard to pull out a single layer of velcro from this stack. These highly structured domains are thought to contribute to the strength of the overall fiber. It is the finely tuned interplay of these domains that result in the unique balance of strength and extensibility - resulting in high toughness.\n\n It is very hard to reproduce these material properties synthetically. We have gotten very good at engineering the extremes. Very molecularly structured materials end up very strong, but stiff (think kevlar or carbon fiber). This is due to high \"bond density\" - there are a lot of molecular forces packed together holding the molecules together. These bonds are so well organized that when it fails, all the bonds let go at the same time. Very molecularly unstructured materials are stretchy but weak. This is because there are less bonds per volume (or weaker bonds) that hold the material together, but these materials tend to be able to rearrange their bonds as the material is stressed, thus not instantly failing when deformed.\n\nWe are actually able to make many materials that are pretty strong, and also pretty stretchy. Plastics are a great example of this. However, we are just not able to control the molecular organization of plastics to get both high strength and extensibility. edit: As /u/PhaedrusBE points out, steel is a great comparison as well.\n\n**tl;dr** - Spider silks are made of proteins which assemble into domains that contribute strength and extensibility. It is the unique ratio of these two properties that grant spider silk it's high \"toughness\".\n\n**Edit: ELI5?** - Spider silks are made of long entangled strings. Some parts of the strings are stiff and strong, some parts of the strings are stretchy. The combination of the two properties allow the silks to absorb a lot of energy and not break easily when you pull on them.\n\nPS. The next time you meet a shady merchant, you should never buy spider silk armor. That stuff ain't gonna protect you much even if it doesn't break if it deforms up to 30% into your body. Buy kevlar if you can't afford mithril.", "Seamstress here: From a fabric standpoint, natural fabrics are made of almost exclusively spun fibers. The act of spinning gathers up small bits of fiber, and the longer the fiber bit (or staple), the stronger it is. However, since they're small bits of entwined fiber, there are natural weaknesses, especially compared to a protein fiber like silk. Wool is a protein fiber, but again, it's made up of small strands of wool, rather than a continuous strand of considerable length. While spider silk specifically is almost ridiculously difficult to make fabric out of, it's not because of its strength; rather it's because of scarcity. It's easier and more commercially viable to raise and farm silkworms than it is spiders who produce enough silk. It has been done, most famously in recent memory with over a million female Golden Orb Spiders. The fabric produced is naturally golden in color, and is breathtakingly lovely. There have also been historical pieces of fabric recovered and studied made of spider silk, but again, the scarcity and complexity make them almost priceless.\n\nCommercially available silk is made by farming silkworms of a specific genus (Bombyx mori), and feeding them a diet that is almost exclusively comprised of the white mulberry. Their diet produces fine, strong silk, though they can eat other types of plants. The traditional method is to allow the caterpillars to spin a cocoon, and then pluck them, boil them, and unspool the silk from the dead caterpillar. This silk reaches the highest prices since it's in fantastic shape. The silk can be over a mile long of unbroken protein strand. If the caterpillar is allowed to emerge as a moth, it releases a chemical that allows it to burrow through the cocoon, which damages the unbroken fibers. That silk is used for stuffing, poorer-quality fabrics, etc.\n\nCommercially available silk in fabric comes in a lot of varieties, but the kind with noticeable lines and tufts is called dupioni. It's made up of \"raw\" or \"natural\" silk. That basically means it's the crappy silk from old, damaged, wild, or leftover silk after the process to spool off the fine, unbroken silk from the cocoons. The fine, almost completely flat shiny silk is typically called crepe or taffeta (though taffeta is a specific type of woven silk that color shifts because of the dye job). It's made up of the finest, most unbroken strands of silk that have been twined into long, strong, thin yarns. Since there's almost no break of the silk staple, there's an incredible amount of strength it can withstand. Combined with 3 or more other strands into a multi-ply yarn to be woven with other like yarns, you get a pretty strong piece of fabric that can withstand snagging, cuts, etc. Silk thread for sewing is made up of a combination of the poorer, shorter strands, and some of the longer that might have broken in processing. It's spun much the same as a traditional yarn, which adds strength.\n\nHope this helps!", "Read Mechsheep's full post on the details, but essentially spider silk, while not as strong as some materials, nor as flexible as some materials, is impressive in its combination of being strong and flexible.\n\nConsider how strong glass is, for instance, but it's incredibly brittle and won't strain much before fracturing. Rubber bands likewise are incredibly stretchy, but can't handle much stress before snapping. Something that both requires a lot of energy to stretch, *and* can stretch a significant amount before yielding, is labeled as 'tough'.\n\nSo then the question comes to: *\"Why is Spider-Silk given so much praise? How can it be considered tough when compared against the materials born from modern science? If it's better, then why can a spider's butt still outperform us?\"*\n\nSpider-silk is a biological protein. Protein structures can have a lot of desirable properties difficult, or even impossible for us to currently replicate in synthetic products.\n\nThe reason is that proteins have very specific molecular structures. We're talking about refined structure on the molecular level. For us to produce this sort of thing, we need to rely on spontaneous assembly of one form or another. While the sophistication is great, it basically boils down to throwing all of the ingredients in a blender under good conditions, and hoping they all combine in the patterns we want them to.\n\nWhen this happens, we'll get *some* proteins that are perfect, and a lot of proteins that are close to perfect, and a lot more that are really imperfect. And the more imperfections there are, the more compromised the desired properties can be. \n\nSo if we tried to replicate spider silk in a test tube and get all the proteins to bond together into a string, it might have some good properties, but it likely wouldn't hold a candle to the real thing. Why's this? Because the string is made of both perfect and imperfect proteins; proteins of non-uniform quality. And a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.\n\nUnlike our synthesizing methods that rely in one form or another on spontaneous organization, however, the *real* proteins are *built* piece by piece more or less perfectly by cells. Cells are little molecular factories, and the variance on the bell-curve when producing proteins is incredibly narrow, if not non-existent.\n\nMaterial science over the last few hundred years has culminated in wondrous things like Stainless Steel, tungsten-carbide, or anodized aluminum. Impressive materials whose properties for strength, hardness, corrosion resistance, magnetism, etc we can tune by adjusting the balance of alloying metals contained within, or by changing the smelting temperature or cooling rate, or by giving it a surface coating. Incredibly impressive, but still dealing with largely bulk properties and surface properties, and leaving the molecular structure to general manipulation on the macro level. The manufacturing is different, but the gist remains pretty much the same for dealing with things like plastics and ceramics. Bulk and surface properties by material composition, surface treatment, and macro-manipulation.\n\nWith the electronics and tools developed over the last few decades, *modern* material science - nano-materials, meta-materials, etc - is concerning itself more and more with designing and manipulating the *exact* molecular structure of materials. The molecular organization of carbon alone gives us everything from graphite to diamond - and now carbon nanotubes and graphene. \n\nWhat we're just starting to do, biology has been doing all along. So it shouldn't be surprising that some biological materials will still command unique properties beyond our current capabilities, because they build their materials [perfectly] from the ground up." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "http://p.motionelements.com/stock-video/industry/me1191189-lego-wall-italy-hd-a0191.jpg" ], [], [], [] ]
302uol
how do they keep food hot in restaurants when my cooking is always cold by the time we start eating?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/302uol/eli5_how_do_they_keep_food_hot_in_restaurants/
{ "a_id": [ "cpolini", "cpolmtl" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Most restaurants use warm or hot plates.\n\nIf you're using cold plates at home, they'll suck a lot of the heat out of your food.", "When you serve yourself at home, you take the food off the stove, put it on the dinner table, put it on everyone's plate, sit down and eat.\n\nAt a restaurant the food goes straight from a stove to a pre-heated plate, to a holding shelf under heat lamps, and to your table." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
2k38j8
what casues our weight to fluctuate during our sleep.
I weigh myself before I go to bed and when I wake up in the morning. Sometimes I lose as much as 6 pounds during my sleep. I didn't go bathroom, I am just sleeping during this time. What causes this?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2k38j8/eli5_what_casues_our_weight_to_fluctuate_during/
{ "a_id": [ "clhgx5j" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Your body 'burns' fuel, and you exhale the 'exhaust' as carbon dioxide." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2u150j
why don't i doze off while spending countless hours bored on reddit, but can't keep my eyes open during interesting physics lectures?
I know I don't sleep enough, but why dozing off while interested vs. being bored
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2u150j/eli5_why_dont_i_doze_off_while_spending_countless/
{ "a_id": [ "co462fy", "co47dhg" ], "score": [ 12, 7 ], "text": [ "Reddit is interactive.\n\nA lecture isn't, so you can doze off easily", "Agree with Paddywhacker....Reddit or any web browsing is interactive...plus, the content and format is constantly changing so your brain is \"refocusing\", thus preventing you from falling asleep....try staring at one reddit page for 10 minutes and you will fall asleep :)\nI watch some youtube videos that help me fall asleep because the tone is soft and the content moves very slowly (for e.g. massage videos on the PsycheTruth channel)\nYou need to tell your physics professor to \"liven it up\"...I've heard Feynman was such an interesting lecturer that people who weren't even taking that course would attend" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
g051vg
how do hashtags on twitter start trending? who decides that everyone will start using the same exact hashtag at the same exact time?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g051vg/eli5_how_do_hashtags_on_twitter_start_trending/
{ "a_id": [ "fn7s9d9" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "They don’t unless an official group puts it out with notifications \n\nElse it’s seen and adopted" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
c9czpe
how is all money debt? is all money debt?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9czpe/eli5_how_is_all_money_debt_is_all_money_debt/
{ "a_id": [ "eswcczi", "esz9nwe" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "There’s no money in existence and I am a bank. You come to me to borrow ten dollars. You must pay me back the ten dollars. Plus interest. The ten dollars I gave you is the only ten dollars in existence. You can never pay off the debt.", "Is all money debt? No. Gold coins or bars can be used as money, they aren't based on debt. Goods like cigarettes or ramen noodles are sometimes used as money by prisoners in prison. This is called *commodity money*, and it's how money worked for most of history.\n\nThere are two ways in which today's money differs from commodity money.\n\n- Today, most people keep most of their money in bank deposits. A deposit is basically an IOU from the bank. If the bank goes out of business, your IOU might not be paid. \"IOU\" is another word for \"debt.\" So if you have money in a bank account, that money's a debt from the bank to you. [1]\n\n- Most people don't use gold for money any more. They use US dollars, European euros, Japanese yen, etc. These are examples of \"fiat currency.\" The currency is \"printed\" [2] by a \"central bank\" [3] operated by the government. Newly printed currency is used to buy IOU's from the Treasury [4] [5]. In other words, new dollars come into existence by the Fed buying Treasury IOU's. And current dollars cease to exist when the Treasury pays off an IOU held by the Fed. Because of this, you can say that \"dollars are debt.\" (Euros, yen, and others all use a similar system. So this applies to the currency of most countries in modern times.)\n\n[1] If your bank account's risky, should you take your money out and put it under your mattress? Maybe not, that's risky too, you might lose it to a thief or a fire.\n\nBank accounts in the US are generally pretty safe. Banks are heavily regulated by the government, and are legally prevented from using risky business strategies. Banks do go out of business, but they're usually purchased by another bank, which honors deposits at the old bank.\n\nWhat if that doesn't happen? Banks are required to have government-run insurance which will pay their IOU's to depositors if the bank goes out of business and doesn't get bought by another bank. (The government-run insurance provider is called \"FDIC,\" or Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in the United States.) As long as the US government's in business, you'll get your money, as long as you're below the insurance cap (which is hundreds of thousands of dollars per depositor).\n\nIf you're worried about your bank going out of business, or you're in the fortunate position of having enough money that the insurance cap's a concern, you can always keep your money in multiple accounts at different banks.\n\n[2] By \"printed,\" I mean both physically and digitally. Physically, in the form of physical pieces of paper going into a printing press and being stamped with green ink to turn them into dollar bills. Digitally, in the form of the Fed increasing the number of dollars in the Fed account of one customer, without correspondingly decreasing the number of dollars in the Fed account of another customer. Since the Fed lets its customers trade their account balances for physical dollar bills (and vice versa), \"digital printing\" is basically equivalent to \"physical printing,\" but it's more secure and efficient than printing and shipping truckloads of $100 bills around.\n\n[3] In the US, the central bank is called the Federal Reserve, or \"The Fed\" for short.\n\n[4] It's not easy to keep politics and money separate. But they try to keep the central bank organized so it's run by technical experts who don't participate in politics, instead they use statistics, data and computer models to decide how much money to print, with the goal of keeping the economy running as well as possible, and keeping the value of money from rising or falling too far. The politicians (President / Congress) can't print money, they have to get it by either taxes or selling IOU's.\n\n[5] The Fed's also been buying IOU's based on mortgages since the 2008 financial crisis. This was a temporary response to the crisis, soon the Fed is going to stop buying those IOU's." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
bxnrma
i’m in the northern hemisphere, why does the sun seem like it is setting in the north west?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bxnrma/eli5_im_in_the_northern_hemisphere_why_does_the/
{ "a_id": [ "eq8i5qc", "eq8ife9" ], "score": [ 13, 2 ], "text": [ "Tldr: Because it is. It's not an illusion.\n\n\nThe Earth is tilted compared to it's orbit. This means the sun varies in it's position from overhead depending on the time of year.\n\nIf you position yourself at the equator this means that half the year the sun is to your North, the other half it's to your South depending on if the Earths North Pole is tilted towards our away from the sun.\n\nNow let's take the extreme and place you beat the North Pole in summer. From there the sun never sets at all. It'll Skim the horizon but never set. Where you are it's going to be in between.\n\nHere's an image:. _URL_0_", "The answer is pretty simple. In the summer it sets further north and in the winter it sets further south. The reason being because of the tilt of the earth. There is a common misconception that the seasons are caused by the proximity to the sun, but that's false. The earth is tilted at an angle and as it goes around the sun the the pole that's tilted towards the sun changes. The result is that when it is winter in the northern hemisphere it is summer in the southern. So because it's summer in the northern hemisphere the North Pole is tilted towards the sun which causes it to set further north. If you watch a sun rise you'll notice the same phenomenon. In the winter it is the reverse with the sun setting a little further south." ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "https://maas.museum/app/uploads/sites/6/2014/01/Motion-Sun-solstices-equinoxes_Nick-Lomb.gif" ], [] ]
3tfopb
why would ordinary people donate money to a political campaign?
My uncle recently attended a dinner for Jeb Bush which was $500 a plate. My uncle is fairly wealthy, but it didn't make sense to me that average people just throw their money at presidential candidates - money which they'll never see again - in order to gain...what exactly? And what's the incentive for people who donate money to candidates (like, for example, Rick Santorum) who have absolutely 0 chance of getting the nomination? Surely there must be some benefit for lower- and middle-class people to donate - otherwise why do it at all?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tfopb/eli5_why_would_ordinary_people_donate_money_to_a/
{ "a_id": [ "cx5pd7b", "cx5proi", "cx5q9y8", "cx5r6wl", "cx5ve0i", "cx5x63b", "cx5yrw6" ], "score": [ 12, 3, 22, 2, 4, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Belief in that candidate and wanting to support them is really what it comes down to. It's a way to be engaged in civics at some level, even if you don't have much to give, even if your $30 won't help much, and even if the candidate you support is polling at 1.2%. It's still participation in the civics system of this country, and that's something a lot of people believe in. ", "If for no other reason than within a party the various amounts of money raised by the different candidates sends a message to the party at large about where the zeitgeist of the party is at. This can lead to shifts in focus from the party in the future. ", "I'll add that \"voting with your dollars\" carries a lot more weight than simply casting a ballot on election day.", "People donate to see the people they want in power to be elected. Imo its far more effective to donate money to lobbying organizations such as the NRA or GOA since they will have an effect regardless of who is put in power.", "Speaking as someone who has donated to political campaigns before, it's an arms race. The Conservatives called the election early so they could use their corporate and rich-people donations to outspend the Liberals and NDP and monopolize the TV screen with ads around the clock (pretty much like they were already doing before the writ was dropped). So I chipped in a couple hundred bucks to buy the NDP some screen time and a big-ass lawn sign, because people vote for who they think will win, not who they want to win. I have one vote, and I can turn maybe a couple dozen votes through friends and social media and whatnot, but I don't have ads on national television or a crack team of Twitter hacker kids to turn the tide of the election.", "OK, rick Santorum has no chance of winning, but by supporting him monetarily and letting him hang in there as long as possible he is able to spread his message to more and more people. The next election cycle another candidate with his view points might not seem like such a long shot since this is not the first time that the public is being exposed to that kind of view point.\n\nTake Bernie Sanders. Although many felt, or still feel, that he doesn't have a shot, seeing a socialist on such a big stage might make it less shocking when a different socialist candidate runs in the future. Giving him $35 might only pay for a fat stack of high quality flyers, but if you believe in his politics it might be a good investment.", "Because they want that candidate to win enough to pay for it. What other answer were you expecting?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
3heet2
if a country were to print money in secret and distribute it in secret, would their economy grow richer?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3heet2/eli5_if_a_country_were_to_print_money_in_secret/
{ "a_id": [ "cu6ofeu" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "No, awareness doesn't matter. If you hoarded the money its no good to you really, yes you might have a million dollars but once you spend it its on the market and now there is a lot more money on the market that everyone now knows about, the currency is that much less scarce and therefore worth less. If you tried the same trick with a lot more money, people would get wise before you could spend it all and the price of the currency would drop before you could even get rid of it all, however some people could potentially benefit slightly one time, yes. Now your currency is worthless outside of your country though, nobody knows if you might just print a bunch more and give it to your citizens at any time, so its no longer a very good medium of trade." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
1xeeop
why doesn't light from distant stars ever reach us?
I've heard that space is expanding so the stars seem as if they're moving away until they're infrared, but why doesn't the light ever reach earth? Is space expanding too fast, or has none just reached us yet? I know that when we see light from a star, it's from the past but will that light from the star ever just travel all the way to here? I tried looking this up but couldn't find an answer that sufficed, maybe I'm just bad at that though.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xeeop/eli5_why_doesnt_light_from_distant_stars_ever/
{ "a_id": [ "cfal5kx" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "To get a good answer, you may need to rephrase your question. The light that you are seeing \"from the past\" is light from the star reaching us. much of it is redshifted because of expansion, as you note, but it is reaching us. What light specifically are you asking about that doesn't reach us?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
250y6q
what is epistemology?
What is it? How does it affect the way we approach things? Is it the same as methodology? Im sorry guys, I really cant wrap my head around the wikipedia article on this.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/250y6q/eli5what_is_epistemology/
{ "a_id": [ "chckrgi", "chcl5ay" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Epistemology is the philosophy of how we can know things. What are our criteria for knowing things, is there a / what is the distinction between belief and knowing, and so on. Once you've agreed on an epistemology (for example: we 'know' something when we can produce a desired result with it might be one standard), then you can design a methodology ('see if we can do something') to see if you've met those standards.", "It's kind of meta-philosophy. How do we know that we can know? what does it mean to \"know\" something? When do we really \"know\" it?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
7euykd
why scientists can’t create a living organism from scratch
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7euykd/eli5_why_scientists_cant_create_a_living_organism/
{ "a_id": [ "dq7m9ei", "dq7nixq", "dq7o4c9", "dq7pwxn", "dq7scky", "dq7vcwz", "dq7vkz1", "dq7ycyx", "dq7ykh9", "dq7ywap", "dq811mo", "dq81cgt", "dq81elb", "dq81ep1", "dq81tnv", "dq826jf" ], "score": [ 85, 5, 263, 18, 18, 6, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "This is called abiogenesis, and it is currently the biggest mystery in the field of cell biology. We can create semi-synthetic organisms (_URL_0_), but as of yet are unable to create completely synthetic organisms due to the problems that abiogenesis has thrown at us.\n\nScientists are actively researching and pursuing this particular problem, as it is currently the last major barrier in the way of creating completely synthetic organisms with expanded DNA/RNA alphabets as well as having an extremely important role in genetic modification and other medical research fields.", "Here are some nice yt clips about abigoenesis...\n\n_URL_0_", "A cell in itself is insanely complex. If a carbon atom is the size of a pingpong ball then an average cell would be the size of a large city in diameter. It is also as complex, regulating what enters and exits as well as creating and modifying molecules, performing a specialist task and if its a part of an organism, communicating with other cells and tissues as well as receiving information and reacting accordingly. \n\nThis is one cell. Trying to get billions/trillions to form a functioning organism with organ systems etc. is even more difficult than trying to build something as complex as a city in a jelly blob smaller than the diameter of your hair. \n\nTldr: life is far more complex than you’d think. \n", "Even creating a drug from scratch to interact at specific receptor is insanely hard. It requires years of research, millions and millions of dollars, and thousands upon thousands of man-hours. And that's just a single molecule. There is an insane number of unique molecules like this inside a cell, in an insane number of configurations. Also, they don't sit still like you're building a house out of bricks. Bonds are constantly forming and breaking, new compounds being formed all the time. A cell is a sea of active processes, many of which (hell, MOST of which), we don't fully understand.\n\nBuilding a cell \"molecule by molecule\" is like trying to build a functioning copy of the World Trade Center (complete with all the furnishings), using nothing but tap water as building materials and chop sticks as your own only tools. We are so far away from this that is might as well be science fiction.\n\nIf we were to achieve abiogenesis, it would be by dumping a bunch of naturally occurring compounds in a jar, adding energy in the form of heat and light, giving it a good shake, and hoping some shit happens eventually.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nWatch the first half of this video for an idea of the scale of the shit we're talking about.\n\nMaking specific strips of DNA or RNA is one thing. Building a cell from scratch is completely different.", "Ask your boyfriend why he doesn't make an iphone from scratch, from just elemental molecules with no tools or other modern technology he doesn't build himself. It's effectively impossible, until you have built the complete infrastructure of an industrial society to build new pieces of the infrastructure of an industrial society.\n\nThe problem is essentially the same for making cells. Basically, cells are made of machines so tiny we can't effectively build them using any technology we have, except cells themselves. It's almost like they are impossibly advanced alien iPhones that fell from the sky. We can understand some of what they do. We can play around and change the code some. But we can't build them from scratch with the tech we have right now.\n\nWe can write DNA instructions using just chemistry, but in order to convert from DNA to RNA and then proteins, we need the machinery that does that process, which is itself made of RNA and proteins. It's like trying to make an egg without a chicken, or a chicken without an egg.\n\n", "DNA synthesis isn't that difficult, machines exist to do this, mainly to make PCR primers. Little copies of the starting and ending place you want to get out of the larger piece of DNA and allow the polymerase to keep copying that smaller piece you want. \n\nTechnically, an organism has been created using artificial DNA but it was the most simple organism they could do and the procedure was not simple at all. \n\nNews report of study:\n_URL_0_\n\nActual study: _URL_1_", "It's mind boggling complex. Think of it this way. Lets say you wanted to make a cell part \"A\". You both realise how insanely difficult it is to make A. Now picture you have A and thousands of other similarly complex systems in a subsection of a cell, and hundreds of that in a section of the cell, etc. It's unimaginably difficult. Check out the coagulation cascade in humans. It's so perfect and intricate and well designed and beautiful that it literally brought a tear to my eye. And to think that this is only ONE of the millions of quirks our body has..\n\nAlso the fact that by going micromolecular, your tools that you use to construct the constituent molecules inadvertently react with them. Today's technology is far from being capable of achieving what you state. \n\nInterestingly, building a DNA code from scratch isn't difficult. It's being done on a small scale for things like protein manufacturing (check out artificial insulin). In reality it's far from just nucleic acids like DNA or RNA. You need lipids (bilayer, storage, steroid messenger) proteins (bulk of the requirements) carbohydrates sugars polymers and copolymers messenger molecules gasses metal ions minerals. All these only from the back of my head. Above all of these, they must interact with each other perfectly. ", "Even the simplest of cells, are astronomically complex and have many interacting parts. What you have at the cellular level is the interactions of elements and compounds, forming molecules, and macromolecules. All of these pieces form the cell. From lipid cell membranes, to dna. The chemical structure of these are very complicated, and its not like you can just drag and drop things. It would be different if you were able to manipulate things at the cellular level easily, but you cant. Complex life needs complex steps to achieve it. Theoretically, since we know what DNA is made of, if you took single components and tried to make DNA, you may be successfull. Whether or not its A.Usable, and B.Feasible. Search the chemical structure of DNA. Making that is not easy. You need specific things to create it", "May i recommend a book? It does not address your question directly, but definitely cover large parts of it. The book is The Vital Question, by Nick Lane.\n\nThe short of it is that cells are actually extremely complex. Furthermore, the current theory as I understand it is that there are certain aspects of life such its continuity and energy balance that limit a lot of how life can exist. ", "Tell him to stop watching full metal alchemist.\n\nFor a start we do not have the instrument precise enough to manipulate the molecules and arrange them in the right order. We've gotten quite good at synthesizing rather homogenous polymers like nylon and such in huge batches. but a cell is literally a small machine with many moving parts. We've only scratched the surface of 3d printing on a primitive level, so to imagine doing a full 3d cell on a microscopic level for which we sorely lack the instruments.\n\nFurther, we lack the understanding on how cells function. Take proteins for example, it is a vastly complex 3d structure that folds into its final shape, and can change shapes depending on different conditions, this movement is kind of the basic machinery of a cell. Current computers are struggling to simulate even a single protein, never mind how a single cell is composed of vast numbers of interactive proteins. So in terms of understanding how a cell works, we're far from it.\n\nAll in all we lack both the precise instruments to manipulate molecules and proteins, and also lack the knowledge on how a cell works. AKA we don't have the tools nor a blue print. So currently speaking its not possible.\n", "Quite some time ago I dated a woman who was a Biology Doctoral student who was slaving away in a lab until she convinced her advisor it was time to move on.\n\n\nShe would routinely respond, \"I spent all day replicating RNA strands, so awful\" when I asked how her day went.\n\n\nWe're closer than we think.", "It actually looks like they are making progress.... \n\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\n_URL_1_\n\n\nThere are even synthetic RNA companies...", "Building a cell molecule by molecule is far, far beyond our current technology.\n\nCreating artificial DNA however is very feasible, and it's only a matter of time before living organisms with 100% manmade DNA exist.", "If you have time for a movie, take a look at Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed by Ben Stein. It discusses the evidence for intelligent design of life. Seems very relevant to this discussion.\n_URL_0_", "Probably one problem is that neither you nor your boyfriend really understand how complex biology is. This is nothing to be ashamed about, it just isn't common knowledge or even anything that is really emphasized in biology classes.\n\nFor example, there are about 10 *trillion* cells in your body. Each one of those is tiny, too small to see. Tens of thousands of them could fit in the eye of a needle. But nonetheless, each cell contains *quintillions* of atoms. If every person on Earth, all 7 billion, started counting atoms at 1 per second (1, 2, 3, 4...), it would still take us *millions of years* to count all of the atoms *inside one goddamn cell*.\n\nNow imagine those atoms are grains of sand. That many grains is something like all the sand on all the beaches in Hawaii. Think of how complicated a sand castle could be if you built it with *miles* of sand. That will start to give you an idea of how complicated *each cell* in your body is.\n\nBeyond that, the huge amount of molecular machinery in each cell is itself very complicated. And there are millions of molecular machines in each cell to boot. They do thousands of different, intricate jobs, and we barely understand any of it at this point. You have lots of copies of your own DNA in each of your cells, for example, and DNA is a HUGE molecule - it contains billions of atoms. And each gets clobbered and smashed and broken by other molecules whizzing around inside the cell - and then repaired too by other molecular machinery - millions of times *per second*.\n\nThat's all just in every single cell. And you have 10 trillion of them. There are 100,000 cells in the *brain* of a damn *fly*, for christ sake.\n\nSo the reason why we can't build these things yet is because they are insanely, just *insanely* complicated. And they're wet, and everything inside them is moving at crazy high speeds.\n\nIt's not the same sort of answer other folks are giving you, but I hope it helps.", "They can.\n\nIt's just *insanely* complicated.\n\nBut if you think about it, so is the device you're reading this on." ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13314" ], [ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgQLyqWaCbA&list=PLInNVsmlBUlREtDyJ2VpCLWK50Ua-cegZ" ], [], [ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaGEjrADGPA" ], [], [ "https://huffpost.com/us/entry/5283095", "https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13314" ], [], [], [], [], [], [ "https://www.wired.com/2009/05/ribonucleotides/", "https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24669-synthetic-primordial-cell-copies-rna-for-the-first-time/" ], [], [ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5EPymcWp-g&feature=share" ], [], [] ]
5zcqwd
what is the highest yield nuclear weapon humanity could realistically produce?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zcqwd/eli5_what_is_the_highest_yield_nuclear_weapon/
{ "a_id": [ "dex17yx", "dex1cfd", "dex9vh4", "dexa5df" ], "score": [ 2, 2, 3, 4 ], "text": [ "The Russians built a 50 megaton bomb, so that's the lower limit.\n\nTheoretically there is no upper limit on how big they can be, but I'm not sure exactly how difficult the engineering is to scale them up.\n\nThere hasn't really been much drive to make them larger now that targeting systems have improved so much.", "I'm not sure there really is an upper limit. If so, it's probably because at some point your bomb starts to destroy itself before you can really get all your fissile material into the optimum pressures and such. Which, I believe, already happens a certain amount in modern weapons. \n\nBut if the only goal where to go as big as possible we could go really big.", "According to George Lemmer's 1967 *Air Force and Strategic Deterrence* 1951-1960 paper, in 1957, LANL stated that a 1 gigaton warhead could be built. Apparently there were three of these US designs analyzed in the gigaton (1,000 megaton) range; LLNL's GNOMON and SUNDIAL, and LANL's \"TAV\". SUNDIAL attempting to have a 10 Gt yield, while the Gnomon and TAV designs attempted to produce a yield of 1 Gt.\n\nThough never pursued, let alone realized, as of April 2016, Freedom of Information requests (FOIA 13-00049-K) for these weapon designs has been denied.\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_3_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nBowen and Little, \"AF Atomic Energy Program\" Vol I-V RS. Authors: Lee Bowen and Stuart Little.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_5_", "What's needed to set off a nuclear reaction is usually an implosion - compressing the material rapidly. This starts a fission explosion by increasing density so the reaction becomes prompt supercritical, or a fusion explosion by compressing the nuclei together so hard they are forced to fuse.\n\nModern nuclear weapons use the Teller-Ulam design. A chemical explosion implodes the primary fission stage which produces a relatively small nuclear explosion, and the energy from that is contained by a casing for just long enough to implode and set off a much more powerful fusion secondary stage. The casing can also be fissionable for even more power. For anything above 50 kilotons yield it's the most efficient design.\n\nThis can be extended to add even more stages, each one set off by the last and even more powerful. A few bombs have used tertiary stages. It's thought that there's no theoretical limit, and in principle we could make one big bomb with all the material we can get our hands on. So how much is that?\n\nIt's hard to estimate. The primary needs plutonium and a little tritium gas to boost power, the secondary needs more plutonium along with lithium and deuterium (a type of hydrogen). The radiation casing can be lead but uranium boosts power. Of those things everything is natural and plentiful except the plutonium. That has to be made in nuclear reactors. Current world production of plutonium is about 70 tonnes a year, however nearly all of that is 'reactor grade', it has impurities which means it's not good enough for bombs. To get 'weapons-grade' plutonium needs a reactor built to do that.\n\nSo let's suppose a superbomb project builds enough reactors to get 1000 tonnes of weapons-grade plutonium in ten years, which pretty much means doubling the number of nuclear reactors in the world. It's a huge project but an imaginable one. To estimate the bomb yield then requires figuring out how much plutonium is needed to get one megaton of nuclear bomb yield.\n\nThat's almost impossible to find out, the details of nuclear weapon design being top secret. But the W80 warhead weighs 130 kilos and yields up to 150 kt. I'll guess it has 15 kg of plutonium, and therefore a 1 megaton bomb needs 100 kg of plutonium.\n\nExtrapolating, the superbomb project produces a nuclear bomb with a yield of **ten thousand megatons*.\n\nTo put that in context. It's a gazillion times stronger than the Hiroshima bomb. 200 times stronger than the largest nuclear bomb ever detonated, the Tsar Bomba. 50 times stronger than the Krakatoa volcanic eruption. Stronger than all the existing nuclear bombs put together. The fireball would expand hundreds of miles out, the blast demolish just about every building within a thousand miles or more.\n\nThe biggest error in my estimation is probably the scale of the project. If it were many times bigger and ran for longer, the bomb could be 10, 100, even a thousand times larger. It's hard to know exactly, and it depends if you're considering economics and politics as part of your 'reasonable'. (And if you consider using the bomb to deflect an asteroid, you add the problem of building a rocket to launch it too.)\n\nOh, and it's only 0.01% of the asteroid impact that wiped out the dinosaurs.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nDang that's one of the longest answers I've done." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "https://web.archive.org/web/20140617080527/http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb249/doc09.pdf", "https://web.archive.org/web/20160304063659/http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/foia/FOIA%2014-00108-H.pdf", "https://books.google.com/books?id=ZzlNgS70OHAC&pg=RA1-PA376&dq=almost+unlimited+yield", "http://www.ieri.be/fr/publications/ierinews/2011/juillet/fission-fusion-and-staging", "https://books.google.com/books?id=B7RV_vASz0EC&pg=PA192&dq=arbitrarily+large+gains%22staged+Teller-Ulam", "https://web.archive.org/web/20161025114419/http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/04/f30/FIC-15-0005.pdf" ], [ "http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel-recycling/plutonium.aspx" ] ]
4b71zm
why are the chinese so obsessed with aphrodisiacs and sexual potency cures, and why does it always seem to involve killing endangered animals?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4b71zm/eli5_why_are_the_chinese_so_obsessed_with/
{ "a_id": [ "d16loo6", "d16oa0a", "d16olbh", "d16oxtp", "d16p6qv", "d16pdxu", "d16pg3q", "d16phxw", "d16pnkq", "d16pru8", "d16pt9v", "d16pw33", "d16q2d6", "d16q2qx", "d16qg9u", "d16qhcz", "d16qtmq", "d16qxv4", "d16qxxq", "d16r903", "d16rjal", "d16rl9y", "d16rmgu", "d16rus1", "d16s0ea", "d16s3i5", "d16s624", "d16s6xu", "d16sd9w", "d16sfp8", "d16sm34", "d16t0zd" ], "score": [ 47, 311, 7, 1111, 16, 134, 3, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5, 23, 3, 3, 7, 4, 3, 6, 23, 3, 2, 87, 2, 6, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Viagra has only been available since this year in China. As for the animals, it's probably the rarer and more impressive the better.", "Because it's not only about aphrodisiacs and sexual potency cures. Chinese medicine includes drugs for every possible ailment you can think of. Some of the ingredients, from endangered animals for example, can make a variety of medicines.\n\nThe media tends to focus on sexuality related drugs though, because let's face it, it attracts viewers better than any other story. This is especially the case when the ingredient required comes from a strange or endangered animal source.\n\n", "I think in many cases it's not that being endangered makes an organism a \"better treatment\", but rather the animals were driven to extinction because they were perceived to be healthy.\n\nThe perception causes the scarcity. The scarcity isn't the reason for the perception.", "Initially probably because virtually all Chinese medicine was/is based on herbal/animal remedies. This wasn't always without reason, eg the traditional treatment for thyroid problems is turtle's blood, which is high in iodine. Like every other ailment, aphrodisiacs were derived from plants or animals, although the only two that immediately spring to mind are tiger penis and rhino horn.\n\nWhy are they still popular and in use now? Status. They're rare and expensive, which makes them perfect for showing off how much money you've got.\n\nAnyone can buy Viagra. Where's the fun in that?", "The drive to source rare cures when modern medicine has eclipsed their perceived benefit means that the market is driven by emotion and scarcity, not reality. People buy rare tiger bones because they're super hard to get and cost a fortune, and even if they do nothing medically, the buyer at least gets to show off that they're important enough to source, and afford, tiger bones.\n\nThis self-important BS wisdom is passed down to children as fact, who in their own cruise through living underneath billions of people accept it because the alternative is reality.\n\nBasically it's a mix of ignorance, public perception, and status symbol.", "This will probably get downvoted but it's because China has loads of sales men selling snake oils for whatever ales you. Hell, most chinese are sick of it themselves and wish they had regulation on all the B.S. that gets sold to them. ", "Not all are endangered. It has to do psychosomatic issues. They don't just do it to wipe out endangered species.", "Conspicuous consumption, just like ivory these substances have historically been available only to royalty etc. Now that an \"average\" Asian/Chinese can \"afford\" them the demand has shot up", "Simply because Viagra wan't vetted to be sold through Chinese markets until recently. Now that there is a means that works we can hope it will help phase out ignorant folk remedies proven not to work. \n\nAlso, keep in mind that there are many drugs like extenze and enzyte that are equally ineffective and even harmful to people's health that made millions in Western markets because people threw money at them just on the basis that it couldn't hurt to try, and I suppose hope springs eternal. The only major difference is the devastation of the species the Chinese medicines are coming from.", "Traditional chinese medicine is not evidence based and is mostly placebo effects. Placebo effects are the strongest when the \"medicine\" used in them are perceived as rare and expensive. Hence the body parts of exotic animals and so on.", "A friend of mine went to china for med school and they are supposed to take one year of traditional chinese medicine which btw he said was taught just like any other of his subjects. He told me many practitioners, especially in areas outside of major cities, employ the techniques of TCM even if much of it is Pseudoscience or completely ineffective. \n\nIf trained physcians take it seriously how can we expect laymen not to?", "I think it's the assumption that natural = better.\nA lot of Chinese people don't really like chemicals in their food/medication, which is crazy because the amount of MSG that we use in our food is crazy. My folks don't like me using Head and Shoulders shampoo because it apparently gives you cancer, but they're fine with me eating a lot of processed food like Spam. Hence there's quite a market in China for natural remedies. My mum got some kind of mysterious natural remedy for anxiety shipped over from the US, it was quite expensive and when I took it for the first time, it tasted just like salty water. She paid over 100GBP for salty water, I didn't notice a difference at all.", "Chinese here. \n\nEastern medicine is mostly herbs and animals. They... don't always work. But it's really popular among us. It's kind of like feng shui and horoscopes. Most of it is culture and how we were brought up. We have herbs fkr everything. Some of it works, some are a scam.\n\nAnyway, a lot of rich Chinese also care about status. If you have money, you show it anyway possible. Like people are buying jars of air. So something like a tiger or rhino for a cup of tea is as expensive as it sounds exotic. \n\nSo back to the main point, Eastern medicine is nothing new at all. Its also not a passing fad. Media only cover things that make the majority of people care about. In this case, animal cruelty. ", "If one out of 10,000 Chinese buy any crazy thing, that's 140,000 buyers. There's just so many Chinese.", "As someone from a Chinese background and has been to China, I've asked myself the same question. I believe it is because in China, medicine (from pharmacies) aren't trusted and Chinese people prefer \"natural\" alternatives that they believe will work. The advertising is really good there and people will believe anything these days if it can help them achieve longevity (long life). Business is decent for shops that claim to be natural. It's also a wealth status. Being able to buy exotic things like shark fins, turtles (which claim to be superfoods) and consuming them in front of friends and family shows that you are wealthy. (a pretty big deal in China)", "I'll tell you right now that the misconception is that this happens a ton, it doesn't it's not always aphrodisiacs it's just that you guys like reading about how Chinese people are portrayed. No fault to you, Chinese media does the same to Americans and so do the Russians. \n\nFor your answer, Chinese traditional medicine has always been stemmed in animals, spiritually animals are seen as magical a long time ago, that's why Kung Fu was also modelled after them. \n\nThe market in some parts of China for these parts are still there, it's like Alchemy and places where superstition exists is where these items get sold. \n\nSome people believe that traditional medicine is also more \"natural\" and thus \"healthier.\"", "The same reason [all this](_URL_0_) and things like the supplement industry i.e. diet pills and high doses of vitamines, is huge in the US. People exploit ignorance.", "I always wondered this too. It's not like there was ever a population deficiency.\n\nI'm hoping we can evolve to be less virile and less stupid.", "Ok. No sources, so below mentioned points are what i know as a chinese. Take with a few pinches of salt.\n\nTraditionally, part of what influenced chinese medicine was a concept known as 以形补形,which roughly translates to \" nourishing parts by similar parts.“ A lot of primitive aphrosidiacs tended to be in the form of the penis of very large animals, tigers, bulls, and what have you. These creatures were thought of to be extremely masculine (since they were big,and violent, and scary), and it was believed that eating their penis would thus well, nourish your willy as well. Alcohol was also a rather 'yang' ( or masculine) nature substance,which might explain their obsession to soak penis in alcohol / very strong liquors.\n\nOh, for the rhino's horn the logic is pretty much the same: horn is big, long and hard; just like how I'd want my dick to be. \n\nThe obsession with virility / having kTee ids would be a bit more far fetched here, and I'm no sociologist / historian / anthropologist here. But from a very pragmatic angle, having more kids in the past often meant more people to help out in the fields. Also, having big family was a rather desirable trait in historical past ( especially sons) as sons were to inherit the family name and expand the family. BUT more importantly, in a very male dominated society where females were oppressed, masculinity meant everything to males, and one obvious way to show it was via virility. What better way to show off your masculinity and how much of man you are by impregnating your wife(s) like no tomorrow?\n \n\n", "Good god, the threads here....\nChinese Singaporean here, it's education time guys.\n\nTo simplify the MAIN reason: it's superstition. Since the good old days the Chinese have come up with a shit ton of cures for illnesses , and back then since they didn't know better they often linked the ailments and the cure to animals and what they represent.\n\nFor example, i came down with an illness when i was kid that resulted in my face swelling up like a pig. I still have no idea what i actually caught, but my parents used to call it “生猪” which roughly translates to \"develop pig\" , and the cure consists of writing the word \"虎” ,which stands for tiger, with a black ointment on my face. In case you don't get it, the \"tiger\" eats the \"pig\" and i was cured.That's the mindset you have to understand when you're looking at good ol fashioned chinese \"superstition medicine\".\n\nAlso consider that pig's brain soup is considered \"good for the brain\" because pigs are \"stupid\" and \"rarely used them\"\n\nso with these mindsets naturally there are alot of stupid cures derived from stupid myths, so that's one reason why it almost always involve killing these fierce predators that are commonly a sign of ferociousness blah blah whatever because they believe that it will transfer that \"property\" out of that animal that they are eating into themselves.\n\nThe thing with sexual potency and stuff came from the good old chinese days when men usually practice polygamy and have huge families,representing the man's potency,good health and wealth. moreso when they father a shit ton of kids\n\nthat aside, there's also reasons like some others have mentioned,being able to acquire these stupid expensive and useless parts of endangered animals are a display of wealth.", "Small point, it's not always the Chinese. The biggest market for rhino horn, for example, is Vietnam. ", "You have a lot of uneducated people living in a pool of old school money hungry \"witch doctors\". People don't realize the majority of the population there is still pretty back water. This coming from a person who was born from the source.", "Actual (Malaysian) Chinese here. Can't speak for aphrodisiacs specifically, but \"traditional herbal medicine\" is a thing in Asian communities for a couple of reasons: \n\n1. Peer pressure, from society, friends, relatives. Rejecting \"traditional medicine\" is rejecting your Chineseness, and your heritage. I've heard people scoff at \"oh so you think just because you speak English, went overseas, you know better than the collective wisdom of all your ancestors? /yes \n\n2. It's big business. Search for \" EU Yan Sang\" and be amazed by the size of their stores as opposed to regular pharmacies. They and their competitors are in all the major malls. Right next to tea shops selling \"slimming tea\" and some strange weigh loss devices (sit in this chair and it will vibrate your fats away). \n\n/lol", "Because there are 1.3 BILLION of them. There are gonna be so many weird stuff about them always. And then we will ask why all Chinese are into something? gg ", "There goes westerners projecting their morality and ethics on the entire world again. People look at missionaries preaching the word of god as extremely invasive and conceited, not to mention insecure. Remove the label of religion and these people cant wait to shove their sense of morality down your throat. Eatings dogs is plain wrong! But we will eat beef, regardless of Hinduism. And pork...regardless of Judaism and Islam. But dogs, no one should eat dogs!", "Initially probably because virtually all Chinese medicine was/is based on herbal/animal remedies. This wasn't always without reason, eg the traditional treatment for thyroid problems is turtle's blood, which is high in iodine. Like every other ailment, aphrodisiacs were derived from plants or animals, although the only two that immediately spring to mind are tiger penis and rhino horn.\nWhy are they still popular and in use now? Status. They're rare and expensive, which makes them perfect for showing off how much money you've got.\nAnyone can buy Viagra. Where's the fun in that??\n", "Ethnic Chinese here. The only worthwhile explanation lies in superstition and the clinging to muh 5000 years of tradition as if that legitimizes anything. I side with evidence-based science because I am educated, and the only retort TCM devotees have against me is that I'm a race traitor.\n\nMainland Chinese classmates also called me a race traitor when I refused to let them plagiarize my papers. Fuck them all.", "Can you tell me a culture that isn't obsessed with sex and sex related products? \n\nThe only difference is that eastern medicine is based on natural remedies and lacks oversight/regulation - which lends itself to snake oil type products. ", "Because they're superstitious people whose \"traditional medicine\" has little connection to real medicine and is based on mistaken information and magic. (This is not to say that the Chinese are stupid. They invented a lot of things our world takes for granted, but it doesn't make everything they think correct.) \n\nAs they enter the modern world these superstitions are being left behind, but a lot of older people need to die and a lot of of young people need iphones and lattes before you can wipe out centuries of tradition and superstition.", "This is not based on great expertise on Chinese culture, but the graceful movements of Chigong and those Chigong movements mixed with martial arts \"strikes\", are named for animals. Chigong first came about around 500BCE, reportedly after a devistating tri-river flood. Tai Chi started in a small village about 700CE where a single family noted that smaller animals could fight off larger animals using learned techniques. Tai Chi was born to protect a small village from larger villages.\n\nWithin a couple of generations, Tai Chi spread from the starting family to wider use, to much of China and most recently in the mid-20th century to other nations and cultures.\n\nThe movements and strikes still carry animal names. I find it interesting that Chinese writing also relies on symbols rather than letters.", "We're not all that obsessed. It's a small amount of the population that is. The problem is that when your population is 1/7th of the world and larger than the entire population of the West, all these problems tend to get magnified. \n\nAs for Traditional Chinese Medicine, a lot of it doesn't involve any of that. We have thousands of cures and believed medicines that don't involve killing endangered animals, but that's the only thing people tend to think about because of Western Media. \n\nThe best answer for your question is that Western Media makes it seem like the Chinese are obsessed with sexual potency and killing endangered animals. We do have some problems, but A) it's not only China; Vietnam drives the rhinoceros horn market for example, and B) Western Media tends to only focus on these and blame it on traditional Chinese medicine. In reality, there is a partial problem with people wanting traditional Chinese medicine but it's not only because of China, and it's limited to a small part of the population that is part of the newly wealthy class. That's actually where a lot of China's problems come from. The newly wealthy class, able to finally travel and afford some good things in life, still don't have the education and upbringing to back it up. As a result of the fact that they're quickly growing, we can also see a lot of new stereotypes form because of this class. Most of the old families in China, for example mine, that have been around for generations, (even since the early stages of the Communists) don't practise this type of stupid behaviour, but the wealth of the old families are also dying out so it's turning bad slowly. ", "**why**My personal view is that it hinges on one particular aspect of TCM (traditional Chinese medicine) - 以形補形 which roughly translates as \"rejuvenate an aspect using similar aspect\" (human penis takes on the power of a tiger by consuming tiger penis\"\n\nAphrodisiac and erectile drugs is big business in any culture (just look at how well viagra sells), through the belief in the aforementioned paragraph - by consuming a product from a ferocious animal such as a tiger then you will take on the prowess of the Tiger and gain the tiger's strength, therefore making the man as powerful as a tiger - TCM tiger penis etc. makes for an attractive product before viagra is widely available. \n\nTCM has deep roots in Taoist beliefs and can trace back to 5000 years of Chinese history, like all cultural beliefs that has taken root for such a long time it will take generations of education for people to learn and understand that such products might not help them. \n\nI assure you if a T-rex existed today they would be hunted to extinction by TCM believers for their penis." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "http://www.crispian.net/PTIR/Nonsense.html" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
5x16bj
why are 8-bit graphics so popular in video games?
Like nostalgia seems like a tempting answer, but a lot of gamers today didn't play games, like youngish people (under 25ish) and people who weren't in the key demographics for gaming in the 80s (women, namely)
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5x16bj/eli5_why_are_8bit_graphics_so_popular_in_video/
{ "a_id": [ "deej6bx", "deemmbb", "deemv44" ], "score": [ 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "You don't have to have actually played or been alive in the 80s to understand the nostalgia of it. They know this is a call back to gaming's roots, whether they were there for part of it or not. It has a \"feel\" of being classic, whether they knew the original or not. They're also popular by virtue of being easy to program, less heavy on system resources, and because they're simpler and easier to work with, can be done *very* cleanly compared to heavier graphics, allowing for sharper, tighter images and more responsive movements and controls.", "One small note: The graphics themselves were usually not 8-bit, they were often 4 bit (sometimes 4 bit with a customized palette) or 6 bit hybrid solutions, due to memory constraints and constraints of the graphics chip.\n\nThe system had an 8-bit main CPU, though, hence the name.\n\nSo, the correct term would probably be something like \"8-bit systems graphics\" or something like that.", "You ever hear about people who read a book, and then go see the movie and are disappointed because it doesn't look like how they imagined it?\n\nA similar process is at work here. When you get enough information, it sparks your imagination, and you believe it. Suspension of Disbelief is one way to refer to it. Like if you watch a documentary about penguins, you believe you're looking at real penguins. And if you watch a cartoon about penguins, you don't immediately go \"that's bs! That's not a real penguin!!\" No, you accept the cartoon penguin in his cartoon world just as much as the real one. \n\nA book (or just text really) puts an image in your brain. But since you're not looking at anything visual, you have to imagine it, and therefore believe it. A picture doesn't leave much to be imagined. It's right there in front of you. So you may or may not accept it. \n\nMore abstract or stylized art can give you just enough information to spark your imagination, and yet not fully materialize the concept in front of you. So you have to fill in the gaps on your own. \n\nThose old 8-bit/16-bit games sort of sit in a sweet spot. The artists couldn't give all the information. But they could give just enough to send a message across. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
5mdqhe
if a nuclear missile is launched, why can't someone just shoot it down while it is still high in the air?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5mdqhe/eli5_if_a_nuclear_missile_is_launched_why_cant/
{ "a_id": [ "dc2qq4m", "dc2qq9o", "dc2qqx7", "dc2so1n", "dc3152a", "dc425tr" ], "score": [ 9, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Conceptually that is possible. However most of the time when we talk about \"nuclear missiles\" we are referring to the concept of an \"ICBM\" or intercontinental ballistic missile.\n\nThat type of missile fires between continents which means that its most vulnerable time, when it it is first launching, happens deep inside the territory of the nation which is performing the launch. Other people can't shoot it down because it is over the horizon from where they are and nothing they have could get there fast enough even if they could see it.\n\nOther stages of the flight are even harder to interrupt. The main cruise of the missile happens in space, a near-orbit curve that can lob the missile halfway around the planet. It doesn't even need engines at this point (hence the \"ballistic\" part) and it is difficult to even spot the object much less get to it.\n\nFinally it enters the atmosphere over the target *screaming fast*. Modern missiles can come in at about 7 kilometers per second, which means transitioning from space until they impact their target would take less than 15 seconds. If you want to shoot it down you have to get something to it, and 15 seconds isn't long enough to take a decent dump in your pants much less hit it with a rocket.\n\n\n\n", "That is possible, but very difficult.\n\nICBMs (Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles, aka the big nukes sitting in silos in Montana) are sub-orbital weapons. They fully leave the atmosphere before starting their descent onto the target. 95% of the missile you see only has the job of lifting the warhead. The nuclear weapon itself is contained in a very small reentry vehicle that comes screaming down from space at a ridiculous speed, trailing a giant streamer of superhot plasma behind it.\n\nJust tracking something that small going that fast is a very difficult problem. Actually hitting it with another missile is incredibly difficult and is made more difficult by the fact that modern ICBMs carry with them numerous very advanced penetration aids to confuse or decoy intercept systems. This is why early (and current Russian) anti-ICBM systems relied on nuclear interceptors with enhanced radiation warheads to fry incoming weapons with gamma rays and EMP. The problem there is that to intercept the nukes you're setting off hundreds of your own nuclear detonations in the sky above your country.", "The thing to realize is that, in an actual nuclear war, there wouldn't be a single nuclear missile launched. There would be *hundreds*, all aimed at different targets (and likely multiple aimed at each target). And ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles) are *fast*. They actually go up out of the atmosphere into a sub-orbital trajectory, and then streak back down at speeds of about 4 miles **per second**. Hitting even one of those with another weapon is *very* hard to do, and doesn't always work. Hitting dozens of them aimed at a city, for dozens of different cities? Probably no gonna happen.", "ICBM's are fast, they carry multiple warheads, and they are hard to track. There are so many missiles that the number of missiles required to destroy all of the missiles launched would be very high. Take into consideration that each ICBM carries multiple warheads, it further multiplies the number of anti missile missiles required. Some of the defensive missiles would miss. It would also be very expensive to make and maintain all of the defensive missiles. \n\nThe best time to shoot down an ICBM would be at launch when all the warheads are still in one place. This would require satellites with anti missiles missiles hovering over the launch areas. There are anti satellite missiles that can shoot satellites down. This is truly an arm's race that for every new offense, a new defence was created or dreamed up. For every new defence, a new offence was created or dreamed. Thus, diplomatic solutions were the only real feasible solutions.", "They go really, really fast. It is like trying to shoot down a bullet with a bullet.\n\nThere are anti-missile system out there, but they are very complicated, expense and not completely reliable. \n\nAny know what is easier then developing an effective anti-missile system? Building more missiles than it can handle.", "eventually they will be able to. Many systems are being made to try this. The one that looks most promising is a high-powered laser-system which would melt the side of the rocket and cause it to explode early. There was a plan for a portable system on a 747 as well. To be fast enough and powerful it's a chemical-powered laser, directly emitting the needed wavelengths from a chemical reaction, instead of charging batteries\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [ "http://hossamozein.blogspot.com/2011_07_31_archive.html", "http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-10682693" ] ]
90zn99
why does medicine have to be stored below a certain temperature?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/90zn99/eli5_why_does_medicine_have_to_be_stored_below_a/
{ "a_id": [ "e2ubg5m", "e2umwza", "e2unwjc" ], "score": [ 16, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Chemical reactions go faster when things are warm. The chemicals in some medicines will break down into other, useless chemicals under such conditions.", "It can be to prevent things from growing in it. Sometimes medicines can have preservative, so you can just store them on the shelf. It also matters whether or not it is dissolved in water or in a dry pill form. The presence of water make everything worse in terms of both chemical degradation and microbial growth, so aqueous solutions are more often stored in the fridge or frozen than dry goods.", "tl;dr - so it works like it should from the day you buy it until the day it expires\n\nDrugs over time can lose potency, and during its decay can introduce unwanted elements.\n\nWhen a drug company sets an expiry date for a given product, it does so because it has sufficiently demonstrated that a drug stored at the recommended conditions will still be as effective as the day it was shipped to the pharmacist.\n\nSometimes those conditions are more akin to room temperature, but some specific actives (the bit that does the work) require specific temperature in order to maintain its stability while in the consumer's hands.\n\nIf you want to explore this more, you can read up on pharmaceutal stability testing.\n\nEdit: the word \"lose\" " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
704vw7
what is actually happening when you charge an electronic device?
Obviously the battery is being charged...but...what?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/704vw7/eli5what_is_actually_happening_when_you_charge_an/
{ "a_id": [ "dn0jepg", "dn0jepg" ], "score": [ 10, 10 ], "text": [ "Battery is made of two parts, cathode and anode, separated by insulator. Anode is where the electrons are. Movement of electrons (electric current) is what the device does. Every memory access or processor instruction can be traced to electrons going places. That part is complicated so lets get back to the battery. \n\nSo, the anode is full of electrons and they want to go to the cathode. Why? Phisics tells them to. But there is the insulator in the way and the only way is to go around trough the complicated circuits of the device. Battery discharges. When you charge the battery you are using external power source to force the electrons from cathode back to the anode. Electrons don't want to, but external power source is stronger than their love for cathode.", "Battery is made of two parts, cathode and anode, separated by insulator. Anode is where the electrons are. Movement of electrons (electric current) is what the device does. Every memory access or processor instruction can be traced to electrons going places. That part is complicated so lets get back to the battery. \n\nSo, the anode is full of electrons and they want to go to the cathode. Why? Phisics tells them to. But there is the insulator in the way and the only way is to go around trough the complicated circuits of the device. Battery discharges. When you charge the battery you are using external power source to force the electrons from cathode back to the anode. Electrons don't want to, but external power source is stronger than their love for cathode." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
52vol2
if we were to make a armor out of modern day materials what it would be made of and how much protection it could provide agaisnt medival weapons such as swords and early gunpowdered weapons?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/52vol2/eli5_if_we_were_to_make_a_armor_out_of_modern_day/
{ "a_id": [ "d7noa25" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "If? We already do. Boron carbide. Ultra-hard, light weight ceramic. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
ja2hm
what do stock market numbers represent?
Presently Google Finance says the Dow Jones is at 11,504.74, up 121.06. What does 1 of these points actually represent? Does this mean that more stocks are being bought then sold? What exactly causes the numbers to go up and down?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ja2hm/eli5_what_do_stock_market_numbers_represent/
{ "a_id": [ "c2adqs9", "c2adqs9" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "The Dow is an index, called the Dow Jones Industrial Average. The index is not a measure of whether things are being sold or bought, but rather of the prices of 30 stocks of large companies (the \"Dow 30\"). It's calculated by adding all of the prices of the 30 stocks together, and dividing this number by the \"Dow divisor\" a number which is currently around 0.132. When the prices of the stocks go up, the DJIA goes up, and when they go down, the DJIA goes down. Sometimes if half of it goes up and half goes down, then DJIA could stay the same. An individual point represents a certain average gain in these stocks, but percentages often help more to make sense of the changes.\n\nTL;DR: The dow is an average of prices, and answers the question \"Are prices in the market moving, and if so, up or down?\"", "The Dow is an index, called the Dow Jones Industrial Average. The index is not a measure of whether things are being sold or bought, but rather of the prices of 30 stocks of large companies (the \"Dow 30\"). It's calculated by adding all of the prices of the 30 stocks together, and dividing this number by the \"Dow divisor\" a number which is currently around 0.132. When the prices of the stocks go up, the DJIA goes up, and when they go down, the DJIA goes down. Sometimes if half of it goes up and half goes down, then DJIA could stay the same. An individual point represents a certain average gain in these stocks, but percentages often help more to make sense of the changes.\n\nTL;DR: The dow is an average of prices, and answers the question \"Are prices in the market moving, and if so, up or down?\"" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
1mljj7
why have some dogs evolved floppy ears? doesn't it weaken their hearing capacity?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mljj7/eli5_why_have_some_dogs_evolved_floppy_ears/
{ "a_id": [ "ccacrew", "ccacsa3", "ccad8he", "ccajflp" ], "score": [ 3, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "All dogs are descended from wolves, and they have all been selectively bred by humans. Therefore any dogs with floppy ears have them because humans bred them that way. ", "Floppy ears are some selective breeding, not natural selection. Also there appears to be correlation between floppy ears and the docile nature of dogs which was discovered when trying to domestic foxes the foxes get floppy eared. ", "What the other commentors said. Also, floppy ears help catch scents on the ground. That's why you see them on hounds (dogs used to track) but not so much on shepherds (dogs used to watch). ", "Doesn't reduce hearing by a meaningful amount, if anything. The cartilage \"cup\" structure of the ear is still present in a dog with floppy ears, and that is the part that does the relevant work of deflecting incoming sound waves into the ear canal. The floppy skin flap is just the top part of their ear, and is not dense enough to obstruct the sound waves. They'll pass right through it. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
1t8n46
what hurts when i squeeze my testicles?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t8n46/eli5_what_hurts_when_i_squeeze_my_testicles/
{ "a_id": [ "ce5ga1x" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "i'm no doctor, but I'd say your testicles." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
6q3h1t
why does our body not mount an immune response to commensal bacteria that are constantly present in/on our bodies.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6q3h1t/eli5_why_does_our_body_not_mount_an_immune/
{ "a_id": [ "dku8px2" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "Generally, our microbiome sticks to areas in our bodies that our immune response can't reach, like the intestines or the surface of the skin. \n\nThis isn't a problem as they aren't causing harm to the system, and many in fact help us by producing obscure compounds our bodies either have a hard time making or simply can't make. (Vitamin K, for example) Yet others help break down foods to make it easier to absorb nutrients (After taking a small portion for themselves). There are also some that produce toxins that do not affect us where they're released, but make conditions nigh-impossible for bad organisms to gain a foothold.\n\nAll these tend to be well and good, a healthy symbiosis, so long as they remain where they belong. If they get into our tissues through a wound or something, that's when things go wrong. They start causing harm (eating our cells for nutrients, toxins in areas that hurt, depleting resources for our cells, etc.) And the immune response to this invasion happens. Sometimes they do nothing, but just being where the immune system can see them is enough to ID them as foreign.\n\nE. Coli is one that shows up often. When it hangs out in the colon, (hence the Coli in the name, \"of/from the colon\") it's harmless (At least most strains, some are just nasty no matter what). It's when they get outside the colon and onto food, or injury releases the organisms into other parts of the body, that Bad Things start to happen.\n\nI am not a microbiologist, please take this with a grain of salt. Any experts, please correct me where I've gone wrong." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
4kcwwr
when cooking, why does changing the quantity of items change the time required to fully cook?
If I'm cooking taquitos, why is there a 4 minute difference between cooking 10 and 12 taquitos?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4kcwwr/eli5_when_cooking_why_does_changing_the_quantity/
{ "a_id": [ "d3dz7jt", "d3e00qy" ], "score": [ 2, 3 ], "text": [ "I imagine it has to do with the heat distribution... like if you keep the same amount of heat, and you divide it between more objects, the amount of heat each object gets is gonna be less... right? I believe it also depends on how well the heat circulates, so it depends a bit on the type of oven/microwave etc that you're using. ", "Are you cooking in a microwave oven?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
11eo70
what is it with fluoride conspiracies?
I mean really, me and just about everyone in Australia have been drinking fluoridated water since at least 1956 and i haven't since any serious side effects, except great teeth.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11eo70/eli5_what_is_it_with_fluoride_conspiracies/
{ "a_id": [ "c6ltg0q", "c6ltnm0", "c6luems" ], "score": [ 2, 3, 4 ], "text": [ "Very interesting. A shame noone can explain this LI5.\nMaybe it's too complicated!", "Speaking as an American, many people believed in the 1940s and 50s (and still to this day, apparently) that adding Fluoride to the water supply was the work of communists trying to poison/take over the American people. There are various philosophies on how this would happen, but they essentially boil down to people thinking the Fluoride was actually a sort of poison to slowly kill us, or to people thinking that adding Fluoride to our water was just the first step in a massive mental and physical sublimation of America. It was thought that Fluoride would secretly sap the strength and brainpower of the people who consumed it, slowly but surely over the years. Others feared that in the case of a communist attack, tons of Fluoride would be readily available at water treatment plans, ready to be dumped into the water in lethal doses to destroy our population.", "Too much Fluoride causes thyroid disease.  Your body has this really important butterfly shaped organ in your neck called a thyroid.  It's right next to your adam's apple. It controls your metabolism.  In order to work properly, your thyroid needs to absorb iodine.\n\nIodine and fluoride (and bromide and chloride) are all part of the same elemental family.  But, fluoride, bromide, and chloride (or chlorine) are heavier than iodine.  They are the bullies of the Halide family.  Your thyroid will absorb them, instead of the iodine, and will not be able to work right.  This causes diseases like Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism, Graves Disease, Hashimoto's Disease, and Thyroid Cancer.\n\nUntil fluoride was added to the drinking water, the frequency of thyroid disease was going down.  This was because scientists figured out your thyroid had to absorb iodine in order to work, and they started adding iodine to common table salt.  \"A tablespoon of salt a day, keeps the goiter away!\"  However recently, because people are afraid of getting heart disease, they haven't been eating salt as much.\n\nFluoride was added to drinking water, to make your teeth healthy.  Chlorine (chloride) was added, as well, to make your water clean enough to drink.\n\nThen in the 1970s, they started using Bromide instead of iodine in store bought bread, because it makes the crusts soft.\n\nNowadays, because people are ingesting more fluoride, bromide, and chloride than ever before.  Thyroid disease and other metabolic diseases are alarmingly back on the rise." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
63dmcf
why do people think apple is revolutionary?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/63dmcf/eli5_why_do_people_think_apple_is_revolutionary/
{ "a_id": [ "dft85cp", "dft8v38" ], "score": [ 5, 5 ], "text": [ "Because they were the first producer of an extremely user friendly and affordable home computer, and they revolutionized the smart phone industry. \n\nNow though, people are just sheep. ", "I don't think most people do???\n\nI'm an Apple fan. I have an iPhone, an iPad, and I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro. But I don't think they're revolutionary.\n\nWhat they are very good at, though, is taking existing technologies, and making them useful and therefore popular.\n\nThey took the technology of using a mouse to point at things, which was developed in the 1970s, and made it mainstream. They took the idea of having a small device that holds your MP3s, built the iPod, and made the concept of MP3 players mainstream. Smartphones existed long before the iPhone, but the iPhone was the one which made smartphones mainstream. And so on.\n\nNone of which is why I'm a fan. I'm a fan because their products suit my needs right now. Simple as that." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
byz6d2
why is the chance of getting struck by lightning so low?
Apoatently statistics say you have a better chance of getting struck by lightning than winning the lottery. But with how often storms occur (especially here in Florida), why does lightning rarely hit people?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/byz6d2/eli5_why_is_the_chance_of_getting_struck_by/
{ "a_id": [ "eqnuu5p", "eqnvrs9" ], "score": [ 2, 11 ], "text": [ "because you're really really small compared to everything. Electricity always follows the quickest path to ground. if you aren't the tallest thing, you wont be the contact point.", "A few reasons:\n\n1) Few people are outside during thunderstorms.\n\n2) The Earth and the storm are huge and you're very very small.\n\n3) Although lightning doesn't *always* hit the tallest object in view, a tall object usually is the lowest resistance path. That means lightning is more likely to blow up trees and power lines and buildings - and also why you shouldn't shelter under a tall tree during a thunderstorm.\n\nPeople who spend a lot of time in tall towers during storms (like park rangers) get struck way more often than the general public." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
c5elvv
republican party in civil war was northern states, why is so much of their support base now in southern states
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c5elvv/eli5_republican_party_in_civil_war_was_northern/
{ "a_id": [ "es1du0s", "es1ea23", "es1ehsg", "es1enwp", "es1f243", "es1g798", "es1lobi" ], "score": [ 2, 6, 9, 11, 10, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "Because times change, people are born, grow old, and die, and the political parties of nearly 200 years ago are entirely different from the people and organisations making up the parties bearing the same names of today.\n\nBut more specifically it comes down to 20th century racism and opposition to the civil rights movement. Decisions were made, people aligned based on contemporary issues, and the result is that the mid-20th century Democratic party wound up being the party of those who supported nominal legal equality.", "You might be interested in researching the Southern Strategy. Prominent racism essentially caused changes in party ideologies.\n\n [_URL_1_](_URL_0_)", "Southern Democrats entrenched their political position after post-Civil War Reconstruction in the late 1800s, and by the early 20th century they had largely succeeded in disenfranchising blacks throughout the former Confederacy. This created a \"solid south\" voting bloc that allowed the Democratic party to dominate Southern politics until the middle of the 20th century, when national Democrats began to embrace social programs and the growing Civil Rights movement, both of which disproportionately benefited racial minorities and city dwellers.\n\nWhite Southerners fled the Democratic party in droves as a result of these policies, which led to the creation of the voting patterns we see today, where Democrats sweep most of the densely-populated urban areas (which are still disproportionately in the North) and Republicans win in the more sparsely populated rural ones.", "The change started in the late 1940s when Truman (a Democrat) desegregated the military. Then they became the party leading the Civil Rights movement under Johnson (also a Democrat) in the 1960s. Nixon and the Republicans decided to appeal to the southern conservatives who still opposed integration and equal rights. And at the same time there was a lot of population movement with black people in the south moving to the north for better job opportunities in factories.", "It's... complicated. Basically, it boils down to what's known as the [Southern Strategy](_URL_8_) of the Republican Party in the 1960s, but explaining why that strategy worked means going a little deeper.\n\nAfter the Civil War, the South had to deal with the problems of Reconstruction. After all, most of the slaves who were emancipated were located in the south. (In 1860, several states in the south were [majority black](_URL_7_); Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina all had more than 50% of their population who were African-American.) Because of relatively piss-poor handling of the issue by Andrew Johnson, the short version is that racial tensions were exacerbated when they could have been lessened; black people got the shitty end of the [Reconstruction deal](_URL_1_) as Johnson basically let the states themselves decide how to deal with the black population, and segregation became a legal way to keep them down. This happened under the Democrats, who were historically very popular in southern states. This is part of the reason why the Klan became such a major force in the south. Some Democrats became incensed at the idea that these newly-freed black citizens would have equal voting rights under the Fourteenth Amendment -- and would obviously vote for the people who, you know, fought to grant them such voting rights -- and considered it a blatant power grab by the Republican Party. It's a shitty period in the history of the party. After the Reconstruction Era settled down, Democrats began a major push to disenfranchise Republican-leaning black voters by instituting restrictions on black -- and poor white -- voters that made it so that the Republicans couldn't get a foothold in the region. The south went blue, and that was that.\n\nThen the Democratic Party changed, especially in the north. From WWII to the 1960s, the Democratic Party instituted legislation designed to promote civil rights. Truman desegregated the military, Kennedy endorsed the March on Washington (eventually) and promoted what would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and it was passed after his death by LBJ along with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. (That's not to say Republicans didn't work towards civil rights at the time -- for example, there was a limited Civil Rights Act passed into law in [1957](_URL_2_) under Eisenhower -- but it became a major focus for the Democratic Party in a way it never did for the Republicans in this time period.) Bolstered by the fact that the south was reliably blue, Democrats had the power to make sweeping and consequential reforms. In doing so, they won over a lot of black voters, just as the Republicans had won over a lot of black voters during the Reconstruction era. Turns out, if you give people equal rights as citizens and the other guy doesn't, they're *probably* going to be inclined to vote for you.\n\nGoing back to the south, however, these new laws didn't sit well with people who felt that the Democrats had 'abandoned' them; indeed, some Democrats had already begun rebelling against the party's newfound focus, separating out into what was called the [Dixiecrat](_URL_4_) movement in an attempt to deny Truman re-election in 1948 (which failed). Segregation ensured that black and white populations were never *truly* permitted to integrate into a workable society. In the 1960s, the Republicans saw an opportunity to exploit these racial grievances in the light of the Civil Rights movement (promoted by Democrats such as Lyndon B. Johnson) to wrest control of the southern states away from the Democrats. Nixon's campaign team basically built their southern strategy on the idea that the Democrats were abandoning white Americans in favour of minorities, and in doing so promised them a Republican party that would be beholden to the interests of white America. (Granted, they didn't do this quite so obviously, but by couching it in language that would easily be understood; this is now often called '[dog-whistle politics](_URL_0_)' today.)\n\nThey were *not* subtle about it. Here's a quote from Lee Atwater, the architect of the Southern Strategy, in 1981, in [what was at the time an anonymous interview](_URL_6_). (My apologies, but I'm not censoring history; it deserves to be called out for the bullshit that it is):\n\n > You start out in 1954 by saying, \"Nigger, nigger, nigger.\" By 1968, you can't say \"nigger\" – that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now, you're talking about cutting taxes. And all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me – because obviously sitting around saying, \"We want to cut this,\" is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than \"Nigger, nigger.\"\n\nThis interview finished Atwater's political caree -- nah, I'm just screwing with you. He was the campaign chief for George H. W. Bush's successful run for the White House in 1988, and would later become RNC Chairman and -- *somehow* -- a member of the historically black Howard University's Board of Trustees (at least, until student protests forced him to resign). The point is, the people behind this strategy were still at the upper echelons of GOP policy just thirty years ago.\n\nThe Southern Strategy included a major focus on the idea of States' Rights: namely that it wasn't the job of the federal government to decide what the states could or couldn't do, even if that included things like desegregation. There was an additional focus on Republicans as being the party of law and order, which sounds great until you realise that most people understood 'law and order' to include things like 'not protesting for civil rights' -- protests which were necessary in order to get people the rights they were due. Over time, this message became successful, with Nixon winning 70% of the vote in the Deep South, while still appealing to moderates in the north as being less extreme than, say, Alabama Democrat [George Wallace](_URL_5_) (who ran against Nixon in 1968, and was previously most famous for [physically blocking black students from entering the recently desegregated University of Alabama](_URL_3_).\n\nOnce the GOP realised that it was a strategy that worked, they doubled down on it, and the south has been reliably red ever since.", "Basically civil rights was never a partisan issue until the late 40s. You had northern democrats and republicans who where pro civil rights. You had southern democrats and republicans who where against it. It wouldn't be until race relations really started to hit their boiling point under Kennedy that a party would have to take a stand on the issue. The civil rights act would then be passed by a democrat (Johnson) and the party lines on issue where drawn. The following election Nixon republicans began to run on things like \"state rights\", with the implication being that it included things like segregation.", "The passage of the Civil Rights act flipped the racists from the Democrats to the Republicans. This isn't even an exaggeration. Johnson knew it was going to kill him with southern Democrats and there were large scale defections to the Republican party that at first, didn't want them. Then they did." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern\\_strategy" ], [], [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_era", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1957", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_in_the_Schoolhouse_Door", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace", "https://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/06/opinion/impossible-ridiculous-repugnant.html", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States#Black_population_as_a_percentage_of_the_total_population_by_U.S._region_and_state_(1790%E2%80%932010)", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy" ], [], [] ]
75qesx
why do minor holidays often push pay checks back a day, even if the holiday doesn't fall on payday or the day before?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/75qesx/eli5_why_do_minor_holidays_often_push_pay_checks/
{ "a_id": [ "do845jg" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Because issuing a whole bunch of paychecks is not a one day activity. \n\nTypically paycheck processing is outsourced to another company, like ADP. There are several dates your employer has to meet each cycle with information to that provider in order to meet the check deadline, and the holiday probably prevented them from doing so. \n\nYou should look up what infuriates means, I think that seems like way too strong a word. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3jui3o
if two rockets move away from each other at 0.75 the speed of light, would each appear to be going faster than the speed of light from the other rocket?
And if not, why not?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jui3o/eli5_if_two_rockets_move_away_from_each_other_at/
{ "a_id": [ "cuse94g", "cusec06", "cusekwh", "cusgl0v" ], "score": [ 108, 3, 7, 2 ], "text": [ "No, they'd see each other moving at 96% of the speed of light due to special relativity. Strictly speaking, if the rockets were moving at 100mph then they'd see each other moving at very slightly less than 200mph, but it's so close as to make no difference. Once the speeds get higher, you start having to worry about the difference.", "Pretty sure this will have been answered much better elsewhere, but the basic idea is this (I think):\n\nThe speed of light is not really just a speed quotient. It represents a limit of space-time.\n\nIn your example, imagine you're on one of those rockets. Since you're a travelling at a significant portion of the speed of light, you actually experience time at a different rate to others. The other ship is travelling through time much slower, while for you time still moves at what feels like a normal speed. An observer on the ground (who would appear to move slowly to the rocket pilots), would see each ship moving extremely fast, away from each other.\n\nIf the ships were travelling directly away from the person on the ground, the light from their engines would reach them, but would be experienced very differently since its position is changing so quickly relative to how it is observed.\n\nI'm sure I've missed most of the nuance, but at relative speeds, things change drastically depending on the observer.\n\nIf you want to experience this, have a go of this free game from the boffins at MIT. It's mind blowing.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nEdit: a words.", "Here's a question:\nSuppose someone is on a rocket travelling close to the speed of light for a few years. As I understand it, when they return, they will have aged less than everyone else. Is this correct? What I don't understand is that surely, relative to the traveller, the whole world had been travelling at close to the speed of light for a few years, so by the same logic, shouldn't the world have aged less than the traveller?", "If Alice and Bob are zooming away from earth in opposite directions at speeds Valice and Vbob, then the speed Alice sees Bob zoom away at (Vcombined) is not simply Valice + Vbob.\n\nIt's actually:\n\n Vcombined = Valice + Lfactor * Vbob\n\nWhat is the Lfactor? And why don't we notice this normally?\n\nLfactor is the \"Lorenz factor\" _URL_0_ and it's a number which is always a bit less than 1, but unless the speeds you're dealing with a significant proportion of the speed of light, it's so close to 1 that we don't notice the difference - so we \"grew up\" thinking you just need to add the speeds. \n\nAnd the way the Lfactor works is that no matter what Valice and Vbob are, adding them together will never get you a Vcombined bigger than the speed of light." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "http://gamelab.mit.edu/games/a-slower-speed-of-light/" ], [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation" ] ]
2lwm74
what are the protocols for surgeons when they are in the middle of a surgery but the power goes out?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lwm74/eli5_what_are_the_protocols_for_surgeons_when/
{ "a_id": [ "clyu1cm", "clyu1j8", "clyu49y" ], "score": [ 5, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Wait 0.5 seconds for the generators to kick in.\n\nIn developing countries, I don't know. My guess is there aren't a ton of \"protocols\" in such hospitals. Maybe if it's daytime they just go outside.", "they turn on the backup generator or generators. shit like this has been anticipated and planned for. however, if all the power goes out for some reason, then they make do with what they have (such as using flashlights, portable lamps, cell phones for light), main priority is to stabilize the patient until power comes back. or if they can't stabilize the patient they abort or complete the procedure the best they can. \n\nnormally, short of a huge natural/man made disaster, it's extremely rare for a total power outage and if it ever happens, there're probably bigger things to worry about. ", "There are emergency hand pumps for anesthesia to keep the patient sedated and hand pumped ventilators to keep the patient breathing. The you wait for the emergency generators to kick in.\n\nhere is a case report of what to do when the power goes out in a major surgery and the generator failed too.\n\n_URL_0_" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2527046/" ] ]
23auaq
since when did eli5 become explain like i'm an educated adult
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23auaq/since_when_did_eli5_become_explain_like_im_an/
{ "a_id": [ "cgv65o1" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ " > Since when did ELI5 become explain like I'm an educated adult\n\nCheck out the rules in the sidebar:\n\n > LI5 means friendly, simplified and layman-accessible explanations, not for responses aimed at literal five year olds (which can be patronizing).\n\nAnswers are supposed to be simple enough for the average adult to understand, and not simple enough for a literal five-year-old to understand.\n\nThat said, if you're having difficulty understanding an answer, by all means ask for clarification. We've got a lot of smart people around here who are more than happy to tailor an answer to your current level of understanding of the subject." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3ei0az
why are we able to nap and wake up shortly after instead of just going into deep sleep mode?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ei0az/eli5_why_are_we_able_to_nap_and_wake_up_shortly/
{ "a_id": [ "ctf8t2m" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Deep sleep is REM sleep, which is the final stage in chronological order when you sleep. If you sleep for a few minutes, you only enter the first stage of sleep which is easy to wake up from. The longer you sleep, the harder it is to wake up, to a certain point where the sleep stage fluctuates between REM and the previous stages of sleep. \n\n\nI think. \n\nSource: psych 101 class I took last quarter. It's summer, so if someone could correct me that would be awesome " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
1z6g5v
how do i vote?
I see that there's a congressional election this year and I really want to participate, but I have no idea what that entails
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z6g5v/how_do_i_vote/
{ "a_id": [ "cfqx38a", "cfqx3wr" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Contact your state election board and fill out the process they have to become a voter. They most likely have a website that will allow you to register if you are eligible. \n\nOnce registered you will be given a polling station which is the place you vote. On election day you go there, depending on the crowd will wait a bit, then be taken to a booth where you will fill at your ballot on any state, local, and federal elections happening where you live.", "You first need to register to vote. [This website](_URL_0_) will get you started and give you information about how long before an election you can register and still participate. \n\nAfter submitting your registration form, you'll get notification in the mail telling you what your district is, where your polling place is, etc. Keep this information.\n\nMany places allow for early voting, though many more do not. If you are permitted to vote early, try to do so since lines are usually longest on voting day. (This is especially so if you live in a large city.) " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "http://www.usa.gov/Citizen/Topics/Voting/Register.shtml" ] ]
66l7qj
how are news outlets able to determine how many thousands/millions were affected by or took part in x?
Ex: 2.5 million Venezuelans are protesting today, etc.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66l7qj/eli5_how_are_news_outlets_able_to_determine_how/
{ "a_id": [ "dgjcfww" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "They estimate crowd sizes from arial photographs and estimates based on known values such as approximately how many people can fit in a certain area and do math based on that. The national park service in the US I believe does all sorts of these estimates by looking at the area that crowds take up based on the size of the area. They may also use secondary data such as ticket sales from trains, cab fares, etc.." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
4d9dc7
why does a sudden introduction of fiber into our diet cause excessive gas and bloating?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d9dc7/eli5_why_does_a_sudden_introduction_of_fiber_into/
{ "a_id": [ "d1oy8zh" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Fiber is what we call any substance in food that we cannot digest with our human digestive system. It can cause gas and bloating in two ways.\n\nThe most likely way is that you have suddenly increased the food for the bacteria living in your large intestine. These bacteria sit at the end of your digestive system, feeding on the things your body can't digest. The bacteria produce gas as a byproduct of their digestion, so increasing fiber increases the food to the bacteria and thus increases their gas production quite suddenly.\n\nThe second way is that fiber can change the speed which food travels through your intestines. Some types of fiber (for some people) can speed up how quickly the food travels through their guts, which leaves your digestive system less time to digest the food and makes it more likely nutrients will make it through to the bacteria for them to eat. Some types of fiber can slow down the passage of food in some people, which may make you constipated, giving the bacteria more time to eat the fiber and produce gas.\n\nEventually, after having that amount of fiber for a while, your bacterial populations will adjust and your gut will alter its transit speed to compensate for this fiber, and you will stop feeling so bloated and gassy. But there are limits to how much you can compensate for this fiber, so see a doctor if symptoms persist." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
22b9g9
why are basketball shoes so expensive and loved by young basketball players?
I see all of these kids with expensive basketball shoes that look like they were made in a sweat shop. Do they help them run faster or is it all just for show?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22b9g9/eli5why_are_basketball_shoes_so_expensive_and/
{ "a_id": [ "cgl40x3", "cgl4pwx" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Its really for the show. They all love the brand and compete with each other to see who can have the most unique or expensive shoes. They honestly don't make that much of s difference but mentally I'm sure some kind of impact is made. ", "The makers of the shoes know that the people buying them(which is mostly upper middle class) will pay the extra for it, even if it it is not worth it, mainly because there are not other choices. Sorry for the potato grammer." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3sdrln
why do mosquitoes never sting in the palm of our hands?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sdrln/eli5why_do_mosquitoes_never_sting_in_the_palm_of/
{ "a_id": [ "cwwb9eq" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "hands are more sensitive to touch so you would obviously feel and kill that fucker, but on the arm, back, or leg is less sensitive so you wouldn't know it bit you until it already has flown away. I can't back up any scientific support but I'm sure years of mosquito evolution had guided then to land on the body part that doesn't do the slapping.\n\nI've been bitten on the knuckle before but not the palm; swelled up pretty bad and sucked more than if I had a bite on the arm or leg" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
eab6jj
how can drugs like crack, meth, etc make you look so old and bad, but you go back to looking young and good again when you stop using?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eab6jj/eli5_how_can_drugs_like_crack_meth_etc_make_you/
{ "a_id": [ "fap0rmo", "fappbxa", "faq2xwj" ], "score": [ 14, 5, 3 ], "text": [ "It’s not just the drug itself but the fact that people stop giving a fuck about everything else except for the drug", "The effects are dehydration, malnourishment and lack of sleep. Usually once those have been fixed the body rebounds.\n\n\nThat's not to say that everything gets better but your appearance does improve.", "Don't know. Some people never come back. Lindsay Lohan is in her early 30s.\nAs mentioned here, lack of diet and exercise. Some users also pick at their skin. This creates a ghoulish appearance." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
8dih09
if a child is born with an allergy, say to peanuts, why wouldn’t the mother miscarry if she ate peanuts while pregnant with it?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dih09/eli5_if_a_child_is_born_with_an_allergy_say_to/
{ "a_id": [ "dxniy0v", "dxnm5vh" ], "score": [ 5, 2 ], "text": [ "You don’t have an allergic response with first exposures. You build up your antihistamines to an allergen. \n\nThat doesn’t answer the spirit of your question though. The baby and mother have separate circulatory systems so the offending item never is exposed to the baby. ", "Fetuses don't get food, per se, from the mother. It's not like I eat a bite of PB & J, those actual food particles travel to my uterus, and the baby also snacks on PB & J. Instead, I eat that PB & J, digest and metabolize it, and my blood carries the nutrients through the placenta via the umbilical cord to the fetus. A similar process happens with breastmilk production. My breastmilk doesn't have mushed up peanut butter in it, it has nutrients from the peanut butter my body digested and converted to breastmilk.\n\nFood allergies tend not to manifest until a baby is starting to eat solid foods and thus be exposed to the allergen in question. \n\nOn the other hand, there are a lot of unanswered questions about the immune system and pregnancy, especially where things like this are concerned. Not peanut butter or other food allergies, but for example there's an illness called PUPPS where some pregnant women get an itchy rash throughout pregnancy. Nobody knows why this happens, but it's pretty clearly an immune response. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
5nv695
if vanta black absorbs 99.9965% of all light energy, what does the energy dissipated? [physics]
Is the energy predictable as to where it goes, and if so, how is this not highly efficient at creating solar cells? [Physics]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nv695/eli5if_vanta_black_absorbs_999965_of_all_light/
{ "a_id": [ "dcek286" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "the energy is converted into heat. solar cells need a special material that absorbs the energy, and converts it into an electric current. as far as i know, this material just converts it to heat." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
bryxm3
how do epsilon delta proofs work in math?
I have been trying to understand this part of math for a while, and no matter what it just seems very confusing.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bryxm3/eli5_how_do_epsilon_delta_proofs_work_in_math/
{ "a_id": [ "eohpsj6" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "Say you own a factory that purchases x's and manufactures them into y's.\n\nThe people buying your y's call one day and say \"Listen, there was too much error in this last batch of y's. We need you to stay within [epsilon] of your target from now on, okay?\"\n\nSo you call up your supplier and say \"Hey, we are trying to run a tighter ship here and the incoming x's seem to be an issue. Can you keep them within [delta] of the target from now on? Then the y's coming out should be close enough for our new expectations.\"\n\nAn epsilon-delta proof is figuring out how much error tolerance you need to demand from your suppliers (delta), based on how much is expected of you from your buyers (epsilon). If you can come up with a rule to pick an appropriate delta for any epsilon the suppliers may throw at you, then you are in good shape. Your factory can produce arbitrarily accurate y's, given sufficient accuracy in the incoming x's. We would say your factory is continuous (at that particular x value)." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2r96yn
considering the earth's elliptical orbit, if the earth is 3.3% closer to the sun during aphelion compared to perihelion, why is there absolutely no impact on weather/temperature? 3 million miles closer is a lot!
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r96yn/eli5_considering_the_earths_elliptical_orbit_if/
{ "a_id": [ "cndmdpz", "cndmj8x", "cndmvnb" ], "score": [ 6, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "Not on astromincal terms. 3 million miles is a baby step. ", "Despite the average intensity of sunlight falling on Earth during aphelion being about 7% less than during perihelion, the Earth is actually on average about 2.3°C warmer during aphelion, when it's furthest from the Sun. This is because there is more land in the Northern hemisphere and more water in the Southern hemisphere, and land heats up faster than water. i.e. water has a high heat capacity compared to land. So even though we're closer to the Sun in January, it's the coldest month on average because the side of the planet that's facing the Sun is mostly water, while in July, the hottest month despite the planet being furthest from the Sun, the side facing the Sun has more land and heats up faster.", "There is an impact. It's just smaller than the seasonal variation and the many effects in Earth's atmosphere and oceans." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
2nbb7x
why do people in congress bother arguing if they vote by party anyway?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nbb7x/eli5_why_do_people_in_congress_bother_arguing_if/
{ "a_id": [ "cmc1wfi", "cmc23nz" ], "score": [ 7, 2 ], "text": [ "They don't always vote by party. Most of the time, but not always. If you want to pass a bill, you usually need at least a few of the other guys to vote your way in order to get it done.", "So people will see them supporting the issues and vote for them again" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
cn5hg0
sewer sloping in hilly areas
I was thinking about this driving in my neighborhood. How is it that a city sewer system can be built to always slope toward the treatment plant? I would think that in hilly areas like where i live you would need to dig through a small mountain to maintain the proper slope.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cn5hg0/eli5_sewer_sloping_in_hilly_areas/
{ "a_id": [ "ew757xe", "ew7t16i" ], "score": [ 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Big sewer lines are like tunnels. They are bored at the desired depth and slope rather than digging all the way down to the depth of the tunnel.", "In areas where it's not possible to route a sewer line in a way that is angled towards the treatment plant, a screw pump is used. It will have sensors to detect when it needs to run and for how long. Similar things are used in basements where a drain is needed but in a spot that is too far away from a drain pipe." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
1luq3l
cryptography. how it works, how the nsa has compromised it, and what does it take to be strong and work for privacy/security?
I guess the topic kind of says it. I am in IT, but I don't have a security background so I figure I'd like to get some answers here that give me an overview of how CAs work, how the NSA could compromise things, how certificates work, etc. Links would be greatly appreciated as well (for further reading!). Thanks!
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1luq3l/eli5_cryptography_how_it_works_how_the_nsa_has/
{ "a_id": [ "cc2xn3z" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Certificates are encryption keys. CAs are organizations responsible for keeping the \"official\" encryption keys so that when you do an online transaction with your bank or something your computer knows it can trust the bank because the bank has an encryption key signed by the CA.\n\nThe details are slim but it looks like the NSA obtained certain encryption keys from the CA that allow them to impersonate the CA and thereby view encrypted data." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2adq0w
why do i feel the need to "pop" my neck and back many times throughout the day.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2adq0w/eli5_why_do_i_feel_the_need_to_pop_my_neck_and/
{ "a_id": [ "ciu10hv", "ciu1hue", "ciu1kk0", "ciu2cfj", "ciukd8x" ], "score": [ 3, 3, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ " I would assume it is the same reason why you feel the need to crack your fingers- to release the gas that builds up between your joints.", "Is it true that the more often you pop these areas, the more often you feel the need to pop them?", "popping your neck generally means that your joints are way too relaxed than what they should be (Hypermobile). So your muscles are too tight in order to provide stability. So in order to 'relax' your muscles you pop your neck which then stretches them to provide momentary relief. The problem with this is that when you pop your neck you actually stretch the joints and ligaments more making the situation worse leading to hypermobility sydrome, arthritis, tendonitis, dislocations or worse.\n\nI had a huge problem with this when I was in highschool until I landed on my head wrong while doing powertumbling/gymnastics. The next morning I went to crack my neck to relieve stress and displaced a disc in my neck and caused immediate tenosynovitis. So be careful and try to gradually stop the process, it is pretty addictive though, as it is a relief to stressed muscles.", "Go see a chiropractor. ", "Thanks for the information and advice everyone. I'll probably go see a chiropractor and try to figure out a way to kick the habit. I'm in my early twenties so I should probably take my joint health seriously to prevent tons of discomfort later in life. Thanks again!" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [] ]
1zc4ks
why is everyone against russia over the ukrainian crisis?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zc4ks/eli5_why_is_everyone_against_russia_over_the/
{ "a_id": [ "cfscoz6", "cfscpcj" ], "score": [ 5, 3 ], "text": [ "Because it's Russian army inside Ukraine and not the other way.", "I have heard from a Ukrainian that a bill was proposed to remove Russian as an official language by the ultra-right wing party, which was defeated. That is the extent to which my knowledge corresponds with your understanding, besides awareness of the claim that the protestors in Kiev are a bunch of US-funded Nazi gangsters.\n\nConsidering the measures which the former Ukrainian president took against his own people in order to maintain his rule, I am somewhat sympathetic to his opponents until they actually demonstrate some of this supposed Nazi-gangster-Americanism." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3pzsxs
why do people buy 4k tvs without 4k content?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pzsxs/eli5_why_do_people_buy_4k_tvs_without_4k_content/
{ "a_id": [ "cwav13m", "cwav3ta", "cwawjaj", "cway6h5", "cwayzql", "cwazdcm", "cwazlnt", "cwb0bwd", "cwb0ebl", "cwb0n4f", "cwb0pzh", "cwb2ilu", "cwb39dv", "cwb3s3y", "cwb3zjc", "cwb413x", "cwb4lv8", "cwbclie" ], "score": [ 456, 28, 89, 14, 9, 10, 2, 3, 7, 8, 2, 39, 6, 3, 5, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Because they dont want to buy a 1080p one now and then when 4k is available have to buy another one to watch 4k. Or it could be that the salesman duped them claiming it would help them watch 1080p clearer. ", "Marketing, then placebo effect.\n\nThe marketing says the 4k TV (which is actually UHD, not 4k) has a \"clearer\", \"sharper\" picture. \nThe placebo effect kicks in and they \"see\" how amazing it looks, even though they're looking at nothing more than 1920x1080 content upscaled to 3840x2160.\n\nThe good news is, there is more and more (true, cinema standard) 4k content being put out. It's not worth it yet in the TV world, but in PC gaming it's becoming more worth it as the hardware becomes more affordable, therefore making UHD gaming cheaper to do.", "Ex-highly trained TV salesman, Samsung specifically. Many cable companies have announced they will soon or already have begun to broadcast 4k. Also, many of the TVs I sold came with an external hard drive that contained over 1000 hours in movies in documentaries shot in 4k. Also, there's 4k content online that isn't hard to find that most 4k TVs (being smart) can view as well. Plus digital upscaling.\n\nWith 4k being right around the corner and certainly more affordable than it has been in previous, it's either smart to pay the difference to go 4k and save yourself the trouble of having to buy another TV when it's standard, or just wait.", "It actually looks better. Upscaling is an improvement on the image, but it is not as good as actual 4k content. \n\nPeople want something that will improve their experience. Buying a 4k tv is a better experience. Even watching 1080p content IS better, many people see it as worth it. \n\nELI5: it's like already having a 16 oz cup of water. Someone then offers you a 24 oz cup but it only has 20 oz of water in it today. Later on, you will get the other 4 oz. so, even today you are getting more then what you had, and in the long run it will be even better. \n\nThere's more to picture than just resolution. Picture quality can really be distilled down to four parts\n\n-resolution \n-Color\n-Contrast\n-Motion rating \n\nA 4k tv today is ALMOST always an improvement in two or more of those categories. \n", "I think its not just one reason.\n\nHome TVs are becoming more than just a screen to output things to and often the latest tech comes in generations. To keep up with the bleeding edge with everything else (needing latest tv gadets, latest tuner, latest scaler, connection methods, services, storage, networking etc) means those models are starting to have 4k screens too now.\n\nAlso there hasnt been any real new wave of tech for AV enthusiasts to buy into lately, we stopped at 7.1 a while ago, everyones over having to rekit with bluray, 1080 is getting long in the tooth, panel sizes have been creeping up hitting lower and lower price points but nothing really exponential to force a buying wave and 3D, while being a niche developing interest for some has come really thanks to improvements in panel tech (faster refreshes) and has been part of all high end panels for a while now so 4K is going to be the new 'i need to buy myself a new toy' for techies and AV lovers alike.\n\nThen with 4k expected to be adopted by the mainstream there becomes a point where the production sweet spot moves up to the new tech and even if you only want to play a few blurays ultimately you dont want to get caught on an old platform, that 'I bought a lemon' feeling is powerful so naturally when a salesman labels something as new vs old it will sell just through fear of obsolescence.\n\n", "I have a samsung 4k tv, and my roommate has a slightly smaller 1080p samsung tv, and I can tell a pretty big difference between the two. I can't make out individual pixels on the 4k like I can on the 1080. It is a clearer picture, it's like looking at the old non retina ipad or iphone, then looking at the retina display phones. Even if the content is the same resolution, the picture is still clearer.", "Many of the people I talk to inexplicably say that they can't even tell the difference between DVD and Blu-ray. It's not even just older people either. I can't see many of them rushing out to buy 4k TVs.\n", "Shouldn't be the distance to your TV the main argument for the screen resolution?\n\nCan someone tell the difference between 1080p and UHD on a 55\" screen 12 feet away?", "Because all high-end TVs are 4K now. Even if you don't care about 4K, ff you want the best quality (black/grey level, ghosting, etc), 4K is your only option. 1080p screens are now strictly cheap or mid-level at best.\n\n", "I don't have a 4k tv but i find the screen realistate of my uhd monitor very helpful for 2d art, 3d work, and video editing. ", "We had 4k content in India for a month. When the cricket world cup happened. Nothing after that. You can buy a 4k set top box from this company called 'TataSky' (Sky for you peeps in England). But I don't think there's any content except reruns of that.", "For the same reason why my parents buy a 1080p Tv and hook it up with a red and yellow av cord and act like they have high def. ", "My last tv was a 1080p lcd that I bought in 2007, a sharp aquos. \n\nIt still works fine but after 7 years I decide to upgrade so I got a 4K tv. \n\nThere is some content, I just researched breaking bad in 4K. And YouTube has a lot of 4K content, although it's nature type stuff. \n\nIt's not about now, it's that I keep tvs for a long time. ", "The top comments are mostly saying people were suckered into it. I know several people who have bought 4k TVs, and it's because they want to be future-ready. 4K Blurays will be here in 2-4 months, Netflix, Amazon and YouTube stream 4k now.\n\nIf you still suck from the teat of cable, then you'll be waiting much longer for 4k content.", "Firstly there is Ultra HD content (4k isn't really the correct term for consumer UHD). There have been devices that produce UHD content for about 10 years now (cameras with 10MP+) and more recently we've seen video cameras that can also shoot in UHD. You can also view Ultra HD video on Netflix and Youtube. Some countries also have Ultra HD TV broadcasts, for example in Britain BT launched a UHD TV service this summer and brodcast Premier League games in UHD to those with the right STB.\n\nSadly watching streaming video isn't going to give you the optimum picture quality, the bitrate has to be lowered so that people can watch on their broadband connections. Ultra HD netflix might only be as good as Blu-ray and while broadcast TV should be better it still has bandwidth limitations. We'll have to wait for Ultra-HD Blu-ray to get true UltraHD picture quality.\n\nSo if the question is why do people buy UHD TV's when Ultra HD blu-ray isn't available I'd have to say that a lot of people don't want to wait. Those who've bought already can still enjoy some Ultra HD content while they wait for UltraHD Blu-ray and when it goes on sale in a few months they're ready to go. Also, as someone pointed out, if you need a new TV and you intended to buy a UHDTV anyway it's easier to buy one now than get a HDTV for a year or two.", "Perhaps a better question is, why do people want to buy a 4K enabled laptop when, given the screen size in question, the human eye would need to be about 1 inch away from the screen before it is physically possible for the average human eye to tell the difference between it and 1080p?", "A great way to utilize a 4K TV is hooking up the computer and playing games in 4K. You need a bit beefier graphics card of course, but it will look amazing. There's a LOT of content in 4K if you consider games content as well.", "These are the same people who would buy a new iPhone every week if a new iPhone came out every week" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
1cs842
why do we have the atf?
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives seem like a very odd combination. Why?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1cs842/eli5_why_do_we_have_the_atf/
{ "a_id": [ "c9jgwn5" ], "score": [ 6 ], "text": [ "These items are the most likely to be trafficked for illegal usage so the government deems it necessary to have a separate agency to monitor them. \n\nThe name is retained from it's previous histories, It was once the Alcohol Tax Unit to enforce prohibition, When prohibition ended it became the Alcohol and Tobacco tax division. And later firearms were added because of the 1968 Gun Control Act. And later because of the 9/11 terrorist attacks it had explosives added to it's name but still referred to as the ATF since that's its name for a much longer time and making it ATFE wouldn't of stuck. Plus if they had to change the official acronym again it would of cost millions of dollars(New uniforms, new logos, new id's, change all the names, new computers, editing files) making it a waste." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
1xg6jg
how come our body makes our perception of time slow motion? why do times of panic like car accidents does it induce it? is there anyway in the future there will be a way to induce it by a drug?
Was watching the movie DREDD on netflix, and was just wondering :)
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xg6jg/how_come_our_body_makes_our_perception_of_time/
{ "a_id": [ "cfb408i" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "We actually don't see in slow motion, but rather remember it in greater detail, tricking our mind into thinking it was slower. Good video that shows we don't see in slow motion: _URL_0_ (stars at about 0:50 into the video)" ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://youtu.be/tdXMQoU_AeQ" ] ]
3s52i1
how do us sugar subsidies keep sugar producing caribbean nations in poverty?
Currently the US subsidies domestic sugar producers by guaranteeing a higher world market price. At the same time it allows certain countries to export their sugar to the US to avail of the higher than world market price, thereby subsidizing both domestic farmers and select foreign ones.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3s52i1/eli5_how_do_us_sugar_subsidies_keep_sugar/
{ "a_id": [ "cwu4wsh" ], "score": [ 6 ], "text": [ "The main US sugar subsidy comes in the form of a rather small quota of allowed sugar imports, which [dramatically raises](_URL_0_) US sugar prices over the world price. The quota greatly limits sugar imports, so nations that would be outstanding for growing sugar to export to the US, aren't allowed to export almost any sugar to the US. The US only imports about 10% of the US sugar supply or about 5% of all sweeteners (including corn, honey, maple and sugar). " ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://public.wsu.edu/~hallagan/EconS327/weeks/week5/Sugar/sugarprice.gif" ] ]
6wtt0h
why do advil (ibuprofen) bottles require a child-resistant cap, while tylenol (acetaminophen) does not?
Note: I am Canadian, and I'm unsure if this is the case everywhere.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wtt0h/eli5_why_do_advil_ibuprofen_bottles_require_a/
{ "a_id": [ "dmatcs2", "dmauw8k" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "At least in the USA, Tylenol does require a child resistant cap. If it doesn't somewhere else then I don't know why, as it doesn't take much Tylenol to overdose and permanently damage your liver.", "I don't think the two drugs are actually being treated differently. The Canadian rules seem to be that drugs intended solely for children can only be sold in child-resistant packaging, but other drugs only need to be *available* in child-resistant packaging. As long as one size is child-resistant, other sizes can be sold in non-resistant packaging." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3r2lv1
how does my hard drive recover more formatted data than it can actually store?
Basically I went to format my SD card one evening, but accidentally did it to one of my hard drives instead. In a frantic 'oh shit' moment, I found an application which managed to recover every single thing I had ever deleted on the drive, right back to when it used to be my main C drive a few years ago. Naturally it told me there wasn't enough capacity to recover everything it found, but how did it manage to find all these media and Windows files (mainly videos) that go beyond its capacity?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r2lv1/eli5_how_does_my_hard_drive_recover_more/
{ "a_id": [ "cwlbv61" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "As people said, when you delete something, it's not deleted, it's just marked as available for future use. So, if future data overwrites old data, how do you end up with more data than could have been stored on the drive at any given time? Let's say you have a text file that uses sector number 50 (among others). You delete that file. Later, you save a picture file that uses sector 50 (among others). You delete that file. Over the years you save and delete multiple audio/video files that use and then release sector 50. In the end, a dozen different files have stored data in sector 50 at some point or another. Sector 50 can only store one set of data, most likely belonging to the file which lived there most recently, so only that file can be (possibly) completely recovered. However, the second most recent file might be mostly recoverable, so let's save that entire file including the wrong information from sector 50. The next most recent file might be only partly recoverable, but let's save that entire file including the wrong information from sector 50. And so on for the who dozen files, including the probably wrong information from the same sectors over and over again, which adds up to a lot more data. Most recovery software will only recover files that can be completely recovered, but some will recover files that have any original data in the hopes that the tiny snippet it can recover is the part you're looking for. Even though the file is 1MB and we've only recovered 1KB, we'll write out the whole 1MB in a new file, which for a lot of files can add up to more data than you have the capacity to store. (Also, it's best to recover data to another drive, so that you don't overwrite other data you're trying to save from the original drive.)" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
4w3ur8
what is .net?
Even as a CS major and hearing about .NET constantly and even reading about it, I have a hard time wrapping around my head with as something specific
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4w3ur8/eli5what_is_net/
{ "a_id": [ "d63qnxz", "d63qorr", "d6403hv", "d6404w3", "d648t1f", "d651pjn" ], "score": [ 157, 9, 41, 7, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "long story short .NET is a framework (a bunch of premade functions) for the Microsoft languages (C#, ASP etc).\n\nit's like cooking food.\nthe framework is the kitchen with all the pots and stove, and you want to make meatballs.\n\nif you first have to make the pots and pans not to mention putting together a stove, it's going to take a long time, but if you already have all of those you can focus on just making your dish.", ".NET is a computing framework.\n\nWhat that means is that it's an environment in which computer programs can run.\n\nSome of the key components and terminology are:\n\n- Assemblies, which are typically .EXE or .DLL files that contain compiled code which requires .NET to run\n\n- The Common Language Runtime, or CRL. This is a set of Windows libraries whose job is to run assemblies\n\n- Class libraries - a set of object-oriented APIs which can be used by assemblies\n\nIt's possible for anyone to create a compile that compiles a language for .NET, but the most common languages that use .NET are C# and _URL_0_.", ".Net is not just a framework for application development like other said, it is also a dependency packages for programs to run on any computer(which need this framework to run .net dependent programs). \n\n\nYou can think of it as two parts imagine you are .NET developer,\n\n & nbsp;\n\n**For Development:** \n**1.** .NET contains a large set of programs which you can call through your program. These are the programs which contain simple functions like join two arrays to complex functions like translate voice to text /or recognize red object in a image(image analyses) etc, Provide functionality to make a internet application, mobile application etc, alot of them are provided(you can call those functions from your program). The .NET libraries are soo vast that you can program Robots/Arduino etc to develop signal processing, image analysis, large set of web application frameworks, etc. visit _URL_0_ \n\n & nbsp;\n\n & nbsp;**2.** It maintains a common language underneath and allows you to program in different higher level languages like C#, VB, IronPython etc. When you compile it convert to a common language. It provides different set of build tools to develop applications, integrate, add other frameworks, allow others to easily write frameworks, etc.\n\n & nbsp;\n\n\n**For End User:** \nWhen you develop a program in .NET(or you can say using .NET) to run this program on many other computers you need to have a corresponding .NET framework available on that computer. So you have to install the .NET framework before you run your program. The .NET framework which you install on different computers have all the functionality your program needs but it wont have the tools for compile/build/develop .NET applications(because those are not needed on the end user machines. They also ported this framework to Linux so you can run .NET applications on Linux platform.\n\n & nbsp;\n\nEdit: correction", "Imagine you have unlimited raw lego to build whatever you want (programming language C# or VB), if you build many things you may find you keep building the same thing over and over e.g. houses, people, ships, cars. The makers of lego (Microsoft) also decide that it will be beneficial to give you unlimited templates of the things people build most often (.Net) which is reffered to as a \"library\" or \"framework\". \n\nNow if you want to build a city, you just use the house templates, road templates, car templates etc. And you know that you wont have any issues with roads linking together, cars being too big for the road, traffic lights not going from red to green or any multitude of issues which can arise from something as complex as a city.\n\nAs a bonus, let's say your friend has that weird ass chunky lego nobody likes, the original lego company (Microsoft) will give your friend some lego which will connect the chunky lego to the good lego. If your friend doesn't have these special pieces the city will shout at him with gibberish like \"This requires .NET version 4 to run\".", ".Net is a platform for running various (managed) applications. At it's core is the CLR, or \"Common Language Runtime\", which is essentially a Virtual Machine, invented by Microsoft, when their Java license got revoked by a court of law. It supports a wide array of languages like F#, C# and Visual Basic. Other similar platforms, include Oracle's Java Virtual Machine which supports languages like Java SE, Closure and Scala. Facebook's Hip Hop VM, which supports languages like PHP and Hack.\n\nTheoretically this allows you to write portable programs (Java for example is famous for it's \"write once, run everywhere\" mantra, which to most Java developers has become a bit of a joke, write once, debug everywhere). But in the case of .Net this has not really been the case as most implementations have been locked to a major release of a Microsoft OS.\n\nRecent developments (.Net Core 1.0.0) aims to change this however, and could possibly deliver on the promise of VM's, but it remains to be seen if Microsoft will throw enough support behind it, and if enough developers will switch to give it enough momentum, to be used more professionally.", "Who tagged this as engineering? This isn't engineering. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "VB.NET" ], [ "https://www.codeplex.com" ], [], [], [] ]
7093t2
nasa is destroying the cassini probe in saturn's atmosphere to prevent from contaminating titan and enceladus (which could harbour life). so why aren't they worried about the huygens lander that's already on titan doing the same thing?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7093t2/eli5_nasa_is_destroying_the_cassini_probe_in/
{ "a_id": [ "dn1ce3u", "dn1cyvf", "dn1em61", "dn1fep4", "dn1ce3u", "dn1cyvf", "dn1em61", "dn1fep4", "dn2crhu", "dn2tul0" ], "score": [ 34, 10, 3, 6, 34, 10, 3, 6, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Probes that are *meant* to land on other worlds are meticulously sterilised before launch. \nSince this is an expensive and time-consuming procedure, this step is foregone in other probes, and they are safely destroyed by crashing them into gas giants. ", "Enceladus is considered to be the real risk. Huygens landing in Titan was a \"Category II\" mission, meaning that \"there is only a remote chance that contamination carried by a spacecraft could compromise future investigations\", so sterilization was not required. Landing on Enceladus would be a \"Category IV\" mission, (\"scientific opinion provides a significant chance that contamination could compromise future investigations\").", "Cassini is also powered by a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG), which converts decay into electricity and has been previously used on other long-range probes like the Voyager series. If a probe like Cassini were to crash on Titan or Enceladus, it would render the region around the site uninhabitable and potentially unusable (think dirty bomb). ", " > So why aren't they worried about the Huygens lander that's already on Titan doing the same thing? \n\nThey aren't *really* worried for Cassini either, the risk is really minimal that it'd randomly crash there in the first place, let alone start spreading microbes. They are just avoiding an unnecessary risk, no matter how small.\n\nThe Huygens lander on the other hand, well.. the intention is to land there, so you kind of have to take that risk.. (it's also prepared for that as /u/Concrete-Jungle desribed).", "Probes that are *meant* to land on other worlds are meticulously sterilised before launch. \nSince this is an expensive and time-consuming procedure, this step is foregone in other probes, and they are safely destroyed by crashing them into gas giants. ", "Enceladus is considered to be the real risk. Huygens landing in Titan was a \"Category II\" mission, meaning that \"there is only a remote chance that contamination carried by a spacecraft could compromise future investigations\", so sterilization was not required. Landing on Enceladus would be a \"Category IV\" mission, (\"scientific opinion provides a significant chance that contamination could compromise future investigations\").", "Cassini is also powered by a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG), which converts decay into electricity and has been previously used on other long-range probes like the Voyager series. If a probe like Cassini were to crash on Titan or Enceladus, it would render the region around the site uninhabitable and potentially unusable (think dirty bomb). ", " > So why aren't they worried about the Huygens lander that's already on Titan doing the same thing? \n\nThey aren't *really* worried for Cassini either, the risk is really minimal that it'd randomly crash there in the first place, let alone start spreading microbes. They are just avoiding an unnecessary risk, no matter how small.\n\nThe Huygens lander on the other hand, well.. the intention is to land there, so you kind of have to take that risk.. (it's also prepared for that as /u/Concrete-Jungle desribed).", "This policy assumes there is no life in Saturn's atmosphere to contaminate, which seems rather presumptuous to me.", "Basically, it is a decision made on how likely a spacecraft or probe is to have a hitchhiker onboard and how likely the place it is going could support life to begin with. Just the fact that it is a probe doesn't mean anything by itself. \n\nIf you want to send a probe into the sun, go for it. No problems. If you want to send a probe to a world with liquid water or other parameters that we think make it more likely there could be or may have been life, then you have to work harder to make sure your spacecraft is clean. \n\nHuygens wasn't sterilized because it's construction didn't provide a lot of good places for hitchhikers to survive the ride and Titan wasn't thought to be a exceedingly friendly place for lifeforms from Earth. They actually discovered that Titan was a better place than they first guessed for life so.... oops. \n\nCassini on the other hand was huge and kept its interior electronics at a pleasant 72F the entire time. \n\nHuygens is known to be on Titan so it will never end up on Enceladus, which we think is much more habitable to Earth-like life. \n\nCassini is (was) out flying around in space and could (theoretically) hit something or interact with something in space that would cause it to crash on Enceladus. If we left it in a stable orbit around Saturn we would have a forever risk of it ending up somewhere we don't want.\n\nSo, we put Huygens somewhere safe and out of the way, and we put Cassini somewhere safe and out of the way. \n\nProblem solved. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
2thxqy
terrorists that demand money to be transferred into a bank account - why can't banks wire the money and then reverse the transaction?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2thxqy/eli5_terrorists_that_demand_money_to_be/
{ "a_id": [ "cnz7gmt", "cnz7rb4" ], "score": [ 2, 5 ], "text": [ "The terrorists (just like anyone who is demanding a ransom) would expect to be paid in cash. Yes, all $200 million worth of it.\n\nOr if it does end up being wired, they'd wait until they'd then transferred the money elsewhere before releasing their hostages.\n\nThere's nothing special about terrorists as compared to any other criminal who takes a hostage and demands a ransom, so they'd use similar techniques to make sure they don't lose the money.", "Remember the old adage ? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter ? They wire the funds to a bank in a friendly country. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
f80yj9
how do clothes get dry from being outside or on radiators?
I understand how water molecules become gaseous when heated to 100 degrees, but there is no point in drying when the clothes would get that hot, so how does the water leave the clothes?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f80yj9/eli5_how_do_clothes_get_dry_from_being_outside_or/
{ "a_id": [ "fiib718", "fijn705", "fihzj5j" ], "score": [ 5, 3, 29 ], "text": [ "At 100C and normal preasure the water will want to be at the same pressure as air, meaning it could replace the air completely and stay as a gas.\n\nAt lower temperatures it can only fill a part of the air, \"a part of the pressure\". That's why its not boiling, because it cannot form gas inside the liquid, only on the surface.", "There's a limit to which air can carry water in it. And this is usually expressed by its temperature. So the amount of water air can carry depends on the temperature of the air. Now air is a composition of many gases. Oxygen, nitrogen etc all of them are in their gaseous forms. All of them exert some partial pressure to sum up to atmospheric pressure(at sea level) and more a particular gas is in the air, more partial pressure it exerts. And this should include water as well. At normal pressure of 1atm, water boils at 100 degrees Celsius. But when you take water at a lower pressure, if boils at lower temperatures and you can see this in regions of higher altitudes where you can find water boiling at 70 degree centigrade. Similarly, at room temperature, there exists a pressure value that water can boil at which is lower than atmospheric pressure. And when you start with dry air and put water in it, slowly the water will start to evaporate until the partial pressure of water reaches the pressure water will start to boil. So, to dry clothes there are several factors that'll help, you need to increase the airs temperature so as to increase its water carrying capacity, increase air flow to facilitate the boiling process or supply it with dehumidified air. Radiators supply heated air and if it's put outside, the air velocity will help with the boiling of air and if it's under the sun, it'll keep the temperatures up.", "Partial pressure difference. There’s more water in your clothes than in the air surrounding it; water molecules will leave the clothes until the pressure is equalized. Water evaporates from seas/lakes/rivers/oceans at all temperatures, not just at 100C. Adding heat just adds energy that makes it easier for the molecules to detach from each other. Have you noticed how it takes longer to dry your clothes when the day is humid, like after it rains, when there’s more water in the air already." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
6frofe
how many hours a week does the usa president work?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6frofe/eli5_how_many_hours_a_week_does_the_usa_president/
{ "a_id": [ "dikglet" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Which president are we talking about here?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
27zmh0
what's the big deal with electric vehicles? doesn't coal still have to burn somewhere to provide the electricity to charge the car, which means that they're still releasing co2 into the air?
Edit: Thanks so much for all the replies everyone! Definitely learned a lot from all of them. It seems to me that what it boils down to is that 1. power plants are much more efficient at generating power than a car engine and 2. the electricity used to power a car can come from cleaner sources of energy, like wind and water.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27zmh0/eli5_whats_the_big_deal_with_electric_vehicles/
{ "a_id": [ "ci5x89h", "ci5xh24", "ci5xjeq", "ci5zhwq", "ci645bv", "ci651kk", "ci6ayo7", "ci6fnu6" ], "score": [ 28, 4, 14, 2, 2, 6, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "The coal plant is more efficient and more cost effective than a car engine at producing power and scrubbing pollutants.", "No, it doesn't HAVE to. It's just currently one of the cheapest and most common ways to generate electricity. Once our population, as a whole, starts caring more about long-term survival of our species and less about short-term profit and convenience, this will likely change.\n", "Far more CO2 is emitted from your inefficient combustion engine in your car than from a coal plant in the process of producing enough electricity to power your neighbors electric car.\n\nCoal plants aren't bad for the environment because they produce the most CO2 per unit of power. They're bad because they produce a huge amount of CO2, even while producing an enormous amount of power. Your car, in comparison to the power it gets out of the engine, pollutes far more than a coal plant, even the oldest dirtiest coal plants.", "If the goal is the total elimination of CO2 *anywhere* in the atmosphere, no. Luckily, that's not the goal. Merely by *reducing* the number of cars that must burn gasoline (they're are one of the single largest consumers of fossil fuels) by replacing them with electric cars, *that* helps reduce pollution and CO2 emissions, and reserves oil for manufacturing and energy for factories and such.", "Most electricity in Canada is from hydro.", "Look at it this way. Burning gas is inherently dirty. From lead to carbon dioxide, there is always going to be a byproduct you don't want released. So you're going to need to either have some form of scrubber or capture system, or you're just going to have to pollute. \n\nWith a stationary power plant, that scrubber can be as big, heavy and cumbersome (and efficient) as it needs to be. After all, it doesn't have to move. It can also expect regular service to keep it in top condition as part of the regulations for operating a power plant. And we only need a few thousand of them.\n\nWith a mobile power plant like a car engine, the scrubber must be light and able to be duplicated in the millions. That limits what can practically be done. Every car sold today has to carry about ten pounds of catalytic converter around. And we need millions of these things. And you can bet that keeping the catalytic converter running at peak efficiency isn't necessarily on everyone's priority list. \n\nThis doesn't even touch on other important arguments such as using renewable resources. Just a straight argument that a few, large, stationary plants will *always* beat millions of haphazardly maintained mobile plants.", "Since serious answers have already been given.. here's the half-snarky one:\n\nGo drive a Tesla.. and you'll understand the big deal. It's not all electric cars that are a big deal - but THOSE electric cars certainly are.", "Your intuition is spot on. A key nuance is that the environmental impact of an electric car will depend on where it is charged because the mix of fuels used to generate electricity varies by region. Charging in a coal-heavy region like the US south will be worse than charging in a region with a lot of renewables, like California.\n\nThe really interesting thing is to compare the environmental impact of normal hybrids like Priuses to electric-only cars like Teslas. I actually did this for a work project about 10 years ago. We found that electric cars only have an advantage in areas with the very cleanest energy mixes (Cali, the Pacific NW, Maine, etc). In other words, normal hybrids at the time were cleaner than electric cars in most regions. This might be different today as the overall fuel mix is more dependent on natural gas, which is cleaner than coal, but I bet it's still generally true." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
3opgn4
what is "umami" and how do you recognise it when tasting food?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3opgn4/eli5_what_is_umami_and_how_do_you_recognise_it/
{ "a_id": [ "cvz9blg", "cvz9xjv", "cvzcc9n", "cvzfgq7", "cvzgpl7", "cvzh327", "cvzibjb" ], "score": [ 127, 88, 11, 6, 12, 4, 5 ], "text": [ "Meat (and a few other things) contains an amino acid called \"glutamic acid\". You've heard of the synthetic/isolated version of this, MSG. Umami = MSG.\n\nIt has a sort of subtle flavor, in that if you put a pinch of MSG on your tongue, it won't taste *good* (you'll taste it, but it just doesn't taste \"right\" by itself). If, however, you add that same pinch to your dinner (any dinner, doesn't matter what), *BAM*, suddenly you have the best Kraft Macaroni and Cheese *ever*.\n\nOpinions vary about whether or not it actually counts as bad for you. IMO, this falls into the same category as gluten, where you have a tiny minority of people truly sensitive to it, and millions of people terrified of something completely harmless.\n\n", "Umami is the \"5th taste\" following on from Sweet, Sour, Salty and Bitter. Chefs use these 'tastes' to balance dishes. Umami can best be described as savoury. Good examples with a strong umami flavour are Parmesen cheese, beef and pork, mushrooms and Soy sauce.", "It's that \"savory\" flavor that you probably already know. It's become more of a marketing term as of late since it sounds mysterious and exotic if you call it that way. ", "Umami comes from the word 'umai', which means delicious.\nThe 'mi' suffix indicates the adjective has become a noun. So for example, instead of 'delicious' it becomes 'deliciousness'. \nThere really is no set definition of umami but one example is when meat is a little high in fat and very soft and savoury it would be described as having umami vs. a tough, dry cut of meat. Rice with a little rice vinegar and light salt like that used in onigiri would have more umami vs. plain white rice. ", "Mushrooms are the best example, especially raw and unseasoned.\n\nTaste it and ask yourself:\n\nIs it sweet? No, not really.\nIs it salty? Maybe, but not exactly.\nIs it bitter? I can't say it is.\nIs it sour? No. (I hope not.)\n\nThat's umami for you. ", "Some people simply can't taste it. \n\nMSG is pure umami. If you put some on your tongue it has a taste, a bit like salt, but very similar to the aftertaste of a good tomato.", "It's easier to think of it as a combinations of taste/flavors. Singling it out can be a bit confusing. If you've ever had a [Banh Mi sandwich](_URL_0_) (which i highly recommend) it is, in my opinion the living embodiment of Umami." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "http://s3-media3.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/m8h4FlM55F6TOOA585RPOg/o.jpg" ] ]
2rpxsi
why are we able to see light particles if they are photons moving in a specific direction?
Take a star for example: We are capable of seeing a star's light from billions of miles away. Photons are released and they travel in a specific direction (from what I understand). Do stars or other light sources such as light bulbs release so many photons that there is one traveling in every direction?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rpxsi/eli5_why_are_we_able_to_see_light_particles_if/
{ "a_id": [ "cni61l3" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Photons aren't little beads of light - they act in many ways like waves. You can get dark spots in some situations through destructive interference of two of these waves, but not from being \"between photons\" - that simply isn't a meaningful concept on that scale." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2nmo2n
if our brain runs on glucose, why doesn't eating more sugar make our minds more powerful?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nmo2n/eli5if_our_brain_runs_on_glucose_why_doesnt/
{ "a_id": [ "cmey4sz", "cmeyavn" ], "score": [ 9, 46 ], "text": [ "Our bodies are really good at clearing out excess glucose from the blood so that it stays in a very narrow range. Even for people who eat no sugar (or other carbohydrates), the liver then just generates glucose from protein and fat to help keep that narrow range.", "It's kind of like asking \"if our cars run on gas, why doesn't filling the entire car with gas make it go faster\". You just need enough fuel, excess doesn't help and may actually hurt." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
aw2pnv
if coke is so corrosive, how does it not corrode the bottles they put it in?
I've read many times that it could obliterate your nails if you dip them in Coke long enough, how does plastic survive?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aw2pnv/eli5_if_coke_is_so_corrosive_how_does_it_not/
{ "a_id": [ "ehjjzhk", "ehjk1ta", "ehjk2rb", "ehk2x2n", "ehk8qhd", "ehkgnpd" ], "score": [ 104, 2, 52, 3, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Different substances react differently. Same reason why damp atmosphere causes iron to rust, but your skin is fine.\n\nPlastics in particular are pretty unreactive in nature.", "Plastic is known for its unique chemical inertness, BUT, it doesn't work for every type of acid. The plastic used for coke bottles is specifically designed to be inert against phosphoric acid, which is inside coke. If I use coke bottles to store instead aqua regia for example, its gonna melt in an istant.", "Not everything is dissolvable in acid. Two things that may seem like they should have the same resistance to acid can have very different chemical properties, and not all acids work the same way, either.\n\nThe pH of Coca Cola and similar drinks is 2.5. Lemon juice is more acidic.\n\npH of 2.5 is definitely enough to dissolve minerals like tooth enamel, eggshells, make bones soft like rubber, things with minerals that can be dissolved.\n\nPlastic has long polymers and just does not react with acid in the same way as fingernails.", "Plastic and glass are pretty inert and don’t react to the acid in the coke. The cans, however, have to be lined with plastic otherwise coke will eat through the can. \nSource: In laws work in a related industry ", "Did you learn NOTHING from Breaking Bad? Even hydrofluoric acid won't eat plastic. Flesh, bones, metal - but not plastic. ", "Coke is not corrosive, this is BS, there is a Snopes page on thishttps://_URL_0_ " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [ "www.snopes.com/fact-check/coca-cola-acids/" ] ]
d15ppe
the emotional impact of instrumental/orchestral pieces, despite the lack of lyrics
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d15ppe/eli5_the_emotional_impact_of/
{ "a_id": [ "ezi43on" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Too big a topic for a proper ELI5, but I'll try to explain a specific example. Listen to the beginning of [this piece](_URL_1_) for a minute or so. Pretty chill, right? You feel pretty comfortable with this music, perhaps relaxed in some way, partly due to the slow tempo and repetition of the two note figure that moves downward by half step. So many more things to discuss, but for now, you can see how tempo and repetition lead to a sense of calm/security in that you can comprehend what is going on and predict what happens next.\n\nThen, listen to [26:59](_URL_0_) until about 27:50, preferably with headphones, and don't read on until you have done so.\n\n > !That organ entrance probably scared the shit out of you. Why? It's loud and unexpected. Why does that scare a human? Loud = power and unexpected = danger. You might be able to understand this better if you think about the situation of ancient humans, or even other animals: \"Did a tree just fall down? Is there a predator suddenly barreling towards me? Is lightning striking close by?\" Danger. Although this is only one avenue towards understanding music's effects, you can understand that music mimics the aural cues of everyday life and aestheticizes them (why doesn't the audience run and cower in fear after hearing the organ? They understand it is just a musical performance and there is nothing to be afraid of). Same reason that people are momentarily terrified before realizing everything is ok if, for example, you surprise them at a surprise birthday party and everyone jumps out from behind cover. ! < " ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "https://youtu.be/nDxGQ5t4lvI?t=1619", "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDxGQ5t4lvI&amp;t=1355s" ] ]
yatwa
high-frequency trading
What is it and what are the benefits? Are there risks? Is it stock companies that do this or personal investors? Also why has it increased so much in the past few years?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/yatwa/eli5_highfrequency_trading/
{ "a_id": [ "c5twn1v" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Large banks on Wall Street and other trading institutions such as hedge funds create complex algorithms which are then used to write computer software. These computers make trades based on any number of factors spelled out in the code, usually very small and very fast changes and patterns in the market price of a given security. They are events that humans do not have the speed or mental capacity to process, thus the computer recognizes the set of conditions and places trades itself without the need for constant human interaction. Such trades occur in hundredths of a second. Basically it is a completely objective, lighting fast, computer based way of trading securities, one that extremely controversial, despite being responsible for nearly 70% of trades now placed on the New York Stock Exchange.\n\nTL;DR Computers can trade securities a lot faster with more objectivity than humans, thus banks are using them more and more" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2davwn
if the apollo spacecraft had the computing power of a modern calculator or phone could you theoretically build a spaceship using a phone?
I don't think that I really worded this one well but I can't think of a better way to sum up my question. Basically I've heard that the original Apollo spacecraft's computer systems had about the computational power of a modern calculator or smart phone (depending on who I've asked). So I'm curious, if I gave a NASA engineer my phone or calculator could they theoretically use nothing but that phone/calculator to create all of the ship's computers and such. Or in shorter terms could they build a space ship from a smart phone?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2davwn/eli5if_the_apollo_spacecraft_had_the_computing/
{ "a_id": [ "cjnryrp", "cjo0hau" ], "score": [ 8, 3 ], "text": [ "Your phone could do the calculations and the control aspects if an interface were developed. Bit recognize that the moonshot was really not terribly complicated in its basics. You have a massive tank of fuel that shoves guys \"up\" for miles, then they drift for days before carefully moving apart, landing, and doing their thing. \r\rThen, they get on a tiny missile, reconnect, and parachute into the ocean. The computing is easy, the engineering is hard. ", "Basically, yes. The calculations involved for the moon landing are not very difficult, especially given there was a large amount of manual piloting for some of the more important parts. Most of the things the computer actually did were monitor the spacecraft for problems and track their position and velocity.\n\nSo yeah, you could write an app for your phone, plug it into a dock on a simple spacecraft, and fly it to the moon, assuming you had the spacecraft to begin with." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3p1tkf
why is a beautiful view beautiful?
Is there some evolutionary adaptation to experiencing a beautiful view? When I'm up high looking down on a mountain landscape, or a cityscape at sunset. Does that perspective make me feel safe and secure because I can see everything and better avoid predators? Why am I so captivated by rolling hills of pine trees and majestic rivers? I would love to understand this better. Thank you.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p1tkf/eli5_why_is_a_beautiful_view_beautiful/
{ "a_id": [ "cw2f98m", "cw2lafe" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Crazy! I just asked pretty much the same question and then saw this post. I'm trying to remember what triggered me to ask the question.", "Answer: Much has been written on the subject of esthetics, it's a major branch of philosophy. One good avenue of inquiry is to check our different ideals and attitudes across culture lines, look for universals. Likely a very subjective item. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
30ol2b
so now that the world knows that the nsa is spying on us, why is it not a bigger deal than it is/should be?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30ol2b/eli5_so_now_that_the_world_knows_that_the_nsa_is/
{ "a_id": [ "cpubyur", "cpuc8q4", "cpucg3k" ], "score": [ 4, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Most of the other nations are carrying out similar activities, they just haven't been caught. It isn't clear if they're all carrying out these activities to the extent of the NSA, but you can be certain that a few of them are. And those that aren't would probably like to. Britain has the GCHQ. Russia has the FAPSI. Canada has the CSE. China has the \"Third Department of the General Staff Department of the Central Military Commission\". Sweden has the DRI. France has the DGSE. And so on and sort forth.\n\nAnd let's be clear here: the NSA doesn't give a damn about you unless you're a terrorist, a spy, or a military entity. That doesn't make their infringement on your privacy any less disturbing or unethical (although advertising companies and telecoms infringe on your privacy *almost* just as much for commercial purposes -- where's your outrage about that?).\n\nHaving said that, ultimately the reason that the NSA's activities are \"not a bigger deal than it is/should be\" is because their activities aren't affecting the day-to-day lives of the vast majority of people. There's certainly a fear that they could have such an affect, but at the moment that's certainly not the case. You and I, and almost everyone else in the world, can carry on like the NSA doesn't even exist.", "US Patriot Act of 2001?\nSacrifice your privacy for the greater good ", "Because the government has lots of guns and you have no way to stop the NSA even if you wanted to.\n\n[The will of the average person has no measurable impact on public policy.](_URL_0_)\n\nSo why bother." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzS068SL-rQ#t=705" ] ]
1bwnnr
why the australian dollar is doing so well against the japanese yen at the moment.
The current rate is 102.6 JPY to 1 AUD. I have been watching it lately (as I am visiting Japan soon) and the AUD keeps going up and up. I have a pretty limited knowledge of economics so I was hoping someone could explain. Thanks!
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bwnnr/eli5_why_the_australian_dollar_is_doing_so_well/
{ "a_id": [ "c9av518" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "From very recent events, their central bank, the Bank of Japan, has started a new monetary program of \"Quantitative Easing\".\n\nI'm not sure if a 5-year old can understand inflation, debt, and other complex matters about the economy, but here's a simplified explanation of Quantitative Easing:\n\nThe goals of most central banks is to stabilize prices (keep inflation as constant as possible), grow the economy, and keep employment levels high.\n\nTraditionally they do this by controlling interest rates. When the economy gets into a slump like it is now, they try to stimulate economic activity by lowering interest rates. This means they will lend to banks at low rates, to make borrowing attractive. By making it easier to borrow, the hope is that it will fuel more spending and cause economic activity.\n\nHowever, what happens when you lower interest rates so much, that it's near 0? You can't have negative interest rates.\n\nSo there's a new type of policy that the central banks in the world are using called Quantitative Easing. Now that those banks can't lower interest rates any further, they will actually purchase bonds from financial institutions as a way to increase the supply of money in the economy.\n\nAnyways, how does this affect the Australian-Japanese rate?\n\nIt's simply because the Japanese dollar is now being depreciated by the flood of more currency in their economy. This means that 1 AUD can purchase more JPY because the JPY is worth a bit less now." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
arm8y8
what are the usual “natural flavors/colors” in foods, and why are companies getting away with using these vague descriptions?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/arm8y8/eli5_what_are_the_usual_natural_flavorscolors_in/
{ "a_id": [ "ego43ir", "ego6f2c", "egoc1fj" ], "score": [ 4, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Natural colors can be things like annatto, a reddish-orange dye made from the seed of the achiote or caramel coloring, made from caramelized sugar.\n\nExamples of natural flavors are compounds derived from spices or fruits.\n\nThey can use such vague descriptions because there's no law requiring them to be more specific and companies have a vested interest in keeping their formulas secret. If there is a specific colorant or flavoring that is known to cause issues for some people then the government usually requires the producer to list it out as its own ingredient.", "A natural flavor or coloring is sourced from a mineral, a plant or animal. It's grinded and refined into the flavor or coloring. \n\nOne natural red coloring is made from the shell of a bug. Another from beets. Or paprika. Or others.", "It’s because the companies don’t have to say, so why would they. It’s the same with cosmetics and perfume, by law they just need to say fragrance, not what is used to make the scent. \n\nHave a look at product ingredients, companies will always try to get away with putting as little information as possible on labels. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
38fg37
is 90% of communication really nonverbal?
do people take this seriously? i get it that a psychology experiment was done but come on...take 2 people with different language skills and i will tell you that they will not be able to effectively communicate 90% of what they want to say. what do psychologists REALLY say? i can't believe ppl throw this crap around especially in negotiation classes.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38fg37/eli5_is_90_of_communication_really_nonverbal/
{ "a_id": [ "crumk3m", "cruvd1r" ], "score": [ 6, 2 ], "text": [ "The specific number 90% maybe isn't right, any proposed means of measuring the amount of communication happening is going to be controversial.\n\nThat said it's obviously a lot that's nonverbal. I might have some big trouble communicating certain things with someone that only speaks Hindi, but we can still communicate readily.\n\nPop quiz: What is [this guy](_URL_2_) trying to tell you? You can obviously understand he's pissed, and at you in particular for something.\n\n[How about this](_URL_0_)? I imagine you can make out what it means readily.\n\nWatch [this](_URL_1_) on mute and tell me how these characters feel about one another and tell me at least vaguely what's happened. \n\nThere's a huge amount of information that, whether you realize it or not, you pick up on to supplement words when you're not on the internet reading and therefore have no non-verbal means to communicate.\n\n", "That is one of those things that is mostly false, with a small dash of truth sprinkled in just to confuse you. Once upon a time some researcher estimated that when attempting to communicate a feeling to another person in a face to face setting, body language and tone carry about 90 percent of the meaning because words are very inefficient at expressing feelings and emotions.\n\nFast forward a few years and now you have a bunch of self help shysters and buisiness communication \"experts\" telling everyone that 90% of communication is non verbal and most people dont even know how to do it! But dont worry for the low low price of $10,000 I will give your employees a seminar on how to do it." ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/23/33283987_c2ba2b2cc5_b.jpg", "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozq3_cWia3s", "http://cf.ltkcdn.net/stress/images/std/123680-425x300-mad1.jpg" ], [] ]
2m2rdd
why doesn't president obama fire tom wheeler and appoint someone else who will follow his suggestions on net neutrality?
So Tom Wheeler, the appointed head of the FCC, says that he may ignore Obama on Net Neutrality. Why doesn't Obama just fire him and appoint someone else who will reclassify ISPs under Title II? Obama would be able to do it and get him replaced before January 1 while the democrats still have control. _URL_0_
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2m2rdd/eli5_why_doesnt_president_obama_fire_tom_wheeler/
{ "a_id": [ "cm0e4tq", "cm0kb85" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Because any new appointee has to be approved by the senate. Obama has struggled getting his appointees through the senate and he does not want to risk another unfilled position. ", "Don't dismiss the possibility that Obama's professed support of net neutrality is mere rhetoric designed to bolster his image. He appointed Wheeler with full knowledge of where he came from and where his loyalties lie.\nCable companies have given just as much money to Democrats as they have to Republicans. So, Obama can let Wheeler take all the blame for destroying net neutrality and Obama comes off as the good guy, even though he has no intention of doing anything that would hurt cable companies'profits." ] }
[]
[ "http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/12/fcc-chairman-i-am-an-independent-agency/" ]
[ [], [] ]
2gv3gb
what would it take to successfully sue for copyright infringement in china?
I assume being Chinese is a good start.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gv3gb/eli5_what_would_it_take_to_successfully_sue_for/
{ "a_id": [ "ckmrk48", "ckmt3e5", "ckmul2u", "ckn49u9", "ckn8me7" ], "score": [ 10, 9, 3, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Have an \"in\" with a prominent Party member.", "Yea so there was a perfect copy of the BMW X5 SUV being made and sold in china. BMW sued and Chinese courts basically said \"we don't see the similarity.\" this was on an episode of top gear. Chinese courts operate like this: political party can always send a memo to change a ruling, most rulings can be bought for a price, and occasionally the law is applied.", "You would be laughed at.\n\nSource: Currently works in China.", "\"Each country in the world creates, interprets, and enforces its own copyright laws. The force of those laws reach no further than the country's borders.\" (Taken from Terry Fisher's Copyright course available for free on the edX platform.)\n\nHowever, there are multilateral treaties such as the Berne Convention, Rome Convention (US is not apart of this one), and the TRIPS agreement. These treaties force member countries to respect each others' copyrights and intellectual property; however, the intellectual framework is far from perfect. \n\nChina joined the WTO in 2001 and as a requirement for membership, made policy changes for copyright under the TRIPS Agreement. However, while US has filed complaints about China, the process has been largely ineffective. \n\nTo successfully sue for copyright infringement in China, the offender would most likely have to be tried on US soil. \n\nThis is a pretty good explanation of the copyright history of China and US. \n_URL_0_\n", "China is that friend you invite over to play Monopoly and eats snacks. You both set up the board and choose your pieces. Right before you start you go in the kitchen and grab some foodage. Then when you walk back out you see your friend waiting for you. But in front of him is 80% of the properties, most the 500 dollars, and hotels on all his properties. You might say what the fuck dude but he will be like \"what? whats wrong?\" You try to point out you two didn't start the game but he already has all those properties and cash. He gets offended and defensive that you would even possibly hint that he is cheating. All the while still denying and playing dumb. He will not budge from that spot." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [ "http://www.law.drake.edu/clinicsCenters/ip/docs/ipResearch-op5.pdf" ], [] ]
650ocl
how is russia allowed to veto a resolution that they are involved in?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/650ocl/eli5_how_is_russia_allowed_to_veto_a_resolution/
{ "a_id": [ "dg6hbmx", "dg6hmge", "dg6ibsm", "dg6iclq" ], "score": [ 10, 2, 2, 3 ], "text": [ " > Are there limitations to this veto power and are there ways to overrule a veto in situations like this?\n\nNo. The SC is made up specifically so the most powerful countries can always have their way (or at least doesn't get resolutions set against them).\n\nOf course, the US could just say \"fuck the resolution\" and do shit anyway, like they do a lot of times.", "Being a permanent member of the SC gives you veto power. Since the UN is just diplomacy, any country is free to act unilaterally outside of the SC discussions. They do risk possible sanctions from the other countries but a lot of the time that doesn't mean much.", "The United Nations was set up by a handful of large powerful nations. They had no intention of letting their own creation harm their interests in the future. That is why countries like the US and Russia can veto resolutions they are involved in. ", "There is no way to override the veto, and countries routinely vote against or veto situations that they are involved in. And that's how it should work.\n\nThe reason that those five countries get a veto is that anything the Security Council does is useless and toothless unless those five countries are in agreement. So, to reflect that very practical reality, any Security Council resolution requires that none of the five permanent members vote against it." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
51owa3
- i'm considering getting lasik. what should i know to make an informed choice?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/51owa3/eli5_im_considering_getting_lasik_what_should_i/
{ "a_id": [ "d7dnd7k", "d7do2ce" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "A girl I know just got it done and she said they just made a small cut somewhere near her cornea after she was numb, the doctor said she would be blind for like 30 seconds and it'll come back. And it did. Crazy simple I guess.", "You have open lacerations on your eyeballs. You need to stay away from smoke or anything that can cause an infection. I had lasik about 4 years ago, and im needing glasses again.. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
5q8nap
how is the oil from oil spills cleaned up?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5q8nap/eli5_how_is_the_oil_from_oil_spills_cleaned_up/
{ "a_id": [ "dcxa8hb" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "This is a question that many engineers are working on right now and have been from a long time. Oil spills can be very detrimental to the enviorment and gettinging them cleaned as fast and non-invasive (and cheap) as possible is important.\n\nSince there are many ways to clean oil spills and I don't want to make this extremlly long, I have put the 5 most common ones below in order by popularity and viability. You can click [here](_URL_0_) to learn more if you would like.\n\n**1. Booms and Skimmers** \n - Long, buoyant booms, which can be solid or inflatable tubes, surround and isolate the oil slick. The booms rise about 3 feet (1 meter) above water level, and are attached to a skirt that hangs underwater. From the surface, skimmers suck (using a pipe) or scoop (using a sponge like material) the oil into containment tanks on the shore or on nearby vessels. However, it is more difficult to use booms and skimmers on the high seas and under conditions of high winds.\n\n**2. Dispersants**\n - Chemical dispersants can be used to break down the oil and speed up its natural biodegradation. Dispersants break the slick into droplets of oil, which makes it easier for the oil and water to mix, and for the slick to be absorbed into the aquatic system. This method is not appropriate for all oil spills, and especially not in all locations. Dispersants should not be used when it can affect marine organisms, as the chemicals and broken-down oil can be absorbed by marine life including sub-tidal seafood that can enter into the food chain.\n - This method is usually used in places that don't have much marine life\n\n**3. Biological Agents**\n - Oil that has washed up along a shoreline can be broken down through a process called biodegradation. Biodegradation occurs when bacteria and other micro-organisms break down the oil into harmless substances, such as fatty acids and carbon dioxide. Clean-up crews can speed up this process of biodegradation by adding fertilizing nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous, which encourage the growth of micro-organisms.\n\n**4. Controlled Burns**\n - Booms (devices used to surround and isolate the floating oil into a certain area) are used to make a pocket of oil a certain size and then the pocket is lit on fire which burns the oil away The burning of oil in this manner has to be highly regulated and can release many contaminants in the water as well as greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.\n\n**5. Leave the Oil Alone (Natural Breakdown)**\n - If there is no possibility that the oil will pollute coastal regions or marine life, the oil could be left to disperse naturally. The sun, wind, currents and waves can disperse and evaporate most oils. Lighter oils can disperse quicker than heavy oils.\n\n*If you have any questions don't hesistate to reply below and I will answer your question(s) to the best of my ability. If you thought my answer was helpful, please just take a few seconds to leave an upvote. Thanks! :)*" ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://www.cnbc.com/2010/06/09/17-Ways-To-Clean-Up-The-Gulf-Oil-Spill.html?slide=1" ] ]
708t8u
why can't the u.s. send in special forces like a seal team to eliminate kim jung un and his loyal followers?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/708t8u/why_cant_the_us_send_in_special_forces_like_a/
{ "a_id": [ "dn1abip", "dn1ac84", "dn1abip", "dn1ac84" ], "score": [ 2, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Getting in and doing the job has a good chance of succes. Getting out alive seems almost impossible. If you know what it costs to train those guys you can probably guess why they don't get send on a suïcide mission.", "Sure. They can. It's feasible. The CIA has changed more than one government in south america.\n\nAnd what next? You need to kill him and replace him with a puppet. This might be the greatest problem. Finding one that is not too obvious and that makes the world happy. In general, other countries frown when the US decides something that affects everyone... unilaterally. It might be better to keep him under control (for now).", "Getting in and doing the job has a good chance of succes. Getting out alive seems almost impossible. If you know what it costs to train those guys you can probably guess why they don't get send on a suïcide mission.", "Sure. They can. It's feasible. The CIA has changed more than one government in south america.\n\nAnd what next? You need to kill him and replace him with a puppet. This might be the greatest problem. Finding one that is not too obvious and that makes the world happy. In general, other countries frown when the US decides something that affects everyone... unilaterally. It might be better to keep him under control (for now)." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
7z443j
in figure skating, what's the difference between a (triple) lutz vs loop vs flip vs axel vs salchow?
They all look like they're just jumping and spinning?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7z443j/eli5_in_figure_skating_whats_the_difference/
{ "a_id": [ "dul8ku8" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "The difference is in how the skates interact with the ice when they're taking off and landing. The variables between different jumps are:\n\n* Whether they jump using the edge of the skate or the toe pick.\n* Whether they enter the jump using the inside or outside edge of the skate.\n* Whether they land on the same skate or the opposite skate that they took off from.\n* Whether they take off facing forwards or backwards. (All jumps land facing backwards.)\n\nSo, for example, an Axel jump uses the edge of the skate, is entered facing forward on the outside edge of the skate and lands on the opposite skate, whereas a flip jump uses the toe of the skate, is entered facing backwards on the inner edge of the skate, and lands on the opposite skate." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3vxn1z
why does packing a wound with gauze, effectively keeping it open, cause it heal faster?
It seems counter intuitive that if you make an effort to keep the wound open, the opposite happens.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vxn1z/eli5_why_does_packing_a_wound_with_gauze/
{ "a_id": [ "cxrkehb", "cxrkjg8", "cxrqiti", "cxrszle", "cxrtbj3", "cxrujgz", "cxrunq3", "cxrvddf", "cxrwsb0", "cxrxazt", "cxs0iwj", "cxs1utr", "cxs29na", "cxs2b66", "cxs2zah", "cxs38nj", "cxs3bjz", "cxs5af3", "cxs7473", "cxs8jxm", "cxsaxzt", "cxse484", "cxset64", "cxsfo6a", "cxsfss6", "cxsgv44", "cxshh94", "cxsikjz", "cxsjdr3", "cxsna7b", "cxsns4u" ], "score": [ 54, 1003, 359, 2, 4581, 4, 25, 2, 2, 15, 2, 2, 5, 6, 7, 21, 36, 2, 19, 11, 2, 11, 2, 2, 3, 7, 2, 7, 4, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "depends on the type of wound. \n\nfor the most part, our body overreacts to everything. swelling is a great example. \n\nwhen we have an open wound, our immune systems sends its fighters in to deal with any bacteria. and there will be some, because bacteria is everywhere, your skin especially. \n\nas these fighters die off, they inadvertently use a 'scorched earth' strategy. their dead bodies and guts make it difficult for anything to live around where it died. these fighters basically swallow the bad guys and poison themselves, eventually bursting open and spilling their toxic insides. this is a big problem for the bacteria. and a minor problem for your living tissue. as your tissue will just regrow from underneath the 'salted earth' or just walling the whole area off with fibrous/scar tissue. \n\nback in the day, before modern medicine, this is a good thing. our bodies really don't like infections so an overblown response is better than playing it safe and not sending enough troops. \n\npacking it with gauze is a more primitive way of using vacuum therapy on a wound. it helps to wick away some of that nasty that's slowing growth/healing. \n\nThis doesn't work for all wounds, and it works best for festering wounds such as ulcers or burns. its less effective against something like a really bad gash (such as a stab or bullet wound). it essentially keeps the immune response to something more sane. you keep the wound clean because the gauze is probably sterile and also likely has anti-bacterial properties. you also bolster the immune system with antibiotics. you can focus keeping the wound area primed for healing. ", "As a first aid technique, the objective of wound packing is not healing, but bleeding control. By preventing the loss of blood, you maintain blood pressure and delay hypovolemic shock. The packing promotes coagulation and prevents blood pooling in the interstitial spaces. Once the patient is in surgical care, the surgeon will remove the wound packing before suturing.", "Healing by secondary intention isn't faster, it just promotes healing from the bottom up, thus avoiding pockets of infection developing in wounds where infection is a greater risk. The gauze (e.g. iodoform gauze) is usually put into an infection (e.g. an lanced boil) and a little bit pulled out each day until the wound heals...I've heard this procedure called a 'poke & pack'.", "The wound is packed so that it heals from the inside out. It's not done to make it heal faster, it's done to make the wound heal properly.", "I am a ED doctor we pack wounds to keep them open\nThe preferred method of eoundmanagnent is primary closure sutures, stables strips etc.\n\nThis is a fresh clean wound.\n\nIf not fresh and therefore likely to be dirty we do not want to close this as it'll trap the shit in there.\n\nSo we go to heal by secondary intention\n\nSo we clean it and hold it open. This way the body can heal from the bottom up clearing and fighting and pushing infection out.\n\nWithout the packing the skin would heal first ( skin heals very fast compared to deep wounds) so the skin would close the body off forming a pocket.\n\nThen the pocket could become a site for infection.\n\nI'm on my mobile so will maybe elaborate later.\n\nEdit: Will try and answer all replies and then burn this account.\nBTW: house_fag_87 was another one of my burners... so much karma.", "This is easily simplified in the Army CLS (Combat Life Saver) course given during BCT (Basic Combat Training). We use somethin we call \"Quick Clot,\" applying gauze and a chemical agent which cauterizes the wound which stops the bleeding while the gauze let's the wound breathe. If I recall correctly (it's been a while since I got out, so bare with me), the gauze not only lets the wound breathe and absorbs/stops the blood flow from the wound but also it's sterilized which means the wound can be sterilized by it (I'm not sure to what degree, just going through the motions here). I'm told it burns like a sonofabitch, which means painkillers like morphine would probably be administered if deemed necessary (which I can only imagine being necessary if you're getting chemicals and gauze packed into you). After that the field medic should hopefully have arrived and if not the wound should probably be wrapped carefully depending how badly the situation is deteriorating and how much time you have to move the wounded. Basically, gauze is used to sterilize the wound, stop blood loss, let the wound breathe and aid in coagulation which buys time for whoever is treating the wound. It's very important to use gauze when treating a wound when necessary. \n\n-sighs- \n\nDamn that felt like a lot to type, whew...hope that helps answer your question. \n\nEDIT: Grammatical revisions", "Nursing student here who did a rotation with a wound care nurse.\n\nA wet to dry dressing, which is the most common form of wound dressing, is when a wound is packed with moist gauze, then covered with dry gauze and finally covered by an ABD pad. This serves 2 primary functions: \n\n1) Infection control. The gauze serves as a sponge for fluids and cells in the wound which would lead to infection. As a nurse, we look at the drainage on the gauze to determine if this is effective. We want no drainage, or a pinkish drainage (called serosanguinous).\n\n2) Debridement of the wound. This is the removal of dead tissue (slough or eschar) from the wound. This dead tissue will prevent new tissue from forming and prevent the wound from closing and healing. The dead tissue also serves as a breeding ground for infection.\n\nTl;Dr: Infection control and removing dead tissue.", "it doesn't. there are debates going on right now, for example, about whether packing recently drained abscesses helps or hurts the patient. I believe in the US the practice is still commonly done, but in the UK it is not.", "Thank you for sharing anyway though, I had a pilonidal cyst removal as well as prescribe antibiotics to fight infection.", "It's called healing by second intention or granulation. In cases of cysts or abscesses, closing them up creates what's called a \"dead space\" A pocket that still has remnants of infection. You seal it up and the infection comes back, only this time, worse. By keeping the wound open, and packing it, you allow the wound tract to heal from the inside out. It prevents any dead space and allows for a full closure.\n\nEdit: changed third to second.... it's been awhile.", "Packing wounds is highly debatable now. If your doctor is stating it's completely necessary I wouldn't doubt them-- but it can't hurt to ask for a second opinion. In 2006-2007 I spent an entire year packing, removing, and replacing gauze in my arm (where they removed a cyst) 2-3 times daily for over a year and the results were awful. I got various infections, was put on a wound vac, and was told I might die. I stopped packing mid-2007 and it began to close & heal on it's own and the infections completely stopped. Doctor was mad, but hey, I was 18 and was sick of being prevented from living my life. Never came back and I have yet to experience any related symptoms. Recently had the same procedure on my leg and they stated that they don't leave cysts open for packing anymore (at least in their office) because of various problems like the ones I experienced. Needless to say, this time went much better and I was functioning after 2 days. \n\nNot all procedures are the same, but if you have the time to look into it a bit more I highly recommend it based off of my personal experiences.", "My grandmother would grab spider webs and patch wounds with it.\n\nIf you ran out, egg white, vinegar and cane sugar. ", "I had a cyst removed about 3 years ago on my tail bone that left a open wound that was about 3 inches long, 1 inch wide and 1.5 inches deep. The doctor's had to keep it open for about a month to prevent it from getting infected from the inside, and I had to pack it with gauze every day and take a bath. After a month they closed it, and in that time it had heal quite a bit from the inside out. Keeping the would open and sticking it with gauze keeps it from trapping an infection.", "To provide an example of what eoundmanagent said, my dad. He stepped on a stick in the garden, and thought he could just wash it with betadine and stick a bandaid in it. \n\nThe skin healed before the body could properly process all of the microsplinters left in his flesh. \n\nAfter six months of continuous severe pain at the site of the original wound, he got investigative surgery. He'd basically created a bubble of puss and necrotic flesh in his foot.", "Since no one else has mentioned it *Clostridium perfringens*, the causative agent behind gas gangrene, is an anaerobic bacteria. This isn't such a concern these days with knowledge of germ theory and aseptic techniques and antibiotics. But in WWI a lot of soldiers lost limbs or died because their wounds had been closed up thus trapping the bacteria inside in a nice warm, moist home without any nasty oxygen to bother them. ", "The packing doesn't really increase healing speed like you're thinking. Skin grows very quickly. Too quickly in some cases. Packing keeps the skin from growing back together and sealing in a pocket of bacteria and dead tissue. Keeping it packed allows it to heal from the bottom up.", "If skin closes before deeper wound heals, pocket of maybe bad stuff could form and maybe cause more bad stuff.", "The gauze provides something which allows the cells to grow against. Skin cells need something to grow onto. This is why scabs are formed. \n\nBut it has been found that dry conditions do not promote the optimal healing enviroment for cells to grow (eg. a scabby wound). So moist gauze has been used. More recently, special gels are also used.", "If you sew/staple the skin together over a dirty wound, you're essentially trapping the bacteria inside where they'll cause the infection to just worsen.. next thing you know you'll have an abscess or worse..\n\nBy leaving the wound open, you're preventing the skin from closing over the wound.. the purpose of the \"packing\" is to keep the skin edges apart to prevent closure.\n\nInstead what happens is that the wound granulates from the bottom-up and heals from inside-out..\n\nit takes a bit longer, but it minimizes infection, so overall it's the preferred management..\n\nso for DIRTY wounds, packing is beneficial and faster for healing.. For CLEAN wounds, we just sew them up.. that's why when you have surgery, we never close you up with packing, we sew you back up.\n\nwe open and pack abscesses and infected wounds for the most part.\n\nsource: i'm a surgeon.", "There are different types of wounds. Surgery for example is a purposeful, sharp wound that can be closed with suture and heals by what we call \"primary intention\". The tissue edges are nicely apposed (brought together) and allows for faster healing and better cosmetic appearance.\nCounter that to a traumatic wound, where there is significant tissue damage, and some tissue is already dead or contaminated with debris and bacteria. Depending on the severity of the wound, and the ability to close it with suture by primary intention, we may elect to use specific bandages to let the wound heal by \"second intention\". This is where you can't appose the skin edges together nicely without tension, and therefore elect the have the wound heal from the bottom up. So the exposed subcutaneous or muscle tissue will heal and form layer upon layer of \"granulation\" tissue (aka, temporary healing tissue) that is later replaced by fibrosis (scar tissue). Generally second intention healing is not nearly as cosmetic and requires a lot more care in the few weeks following the trauma, with frequent bandage changes and monitoring. \nThere are sometimes \"reconstructive\" surgeries that move nearby skin flaps over to the wounded area in order to allow for primary intention healing. These are awesome in certain scenarios, but tension can become a bigger issue sometimes.\nTension is your biggest enemy in surgery. If the apposed skin edges are under tension, there is a much greater risk of failed wound healing and \"dehiscence\" (separation of edges, re-opening wound).\n\nTLDR - bandages leaving wounds open is usually because it cannot be closed in the ideal way with sutures.\n", "It acts as a physical \"lattice\"or wall for blood to clot against. Platelet aggregation is one of the first things to happen during any bleeding wound. \n\n3 stages of healing are: Inflammatory stage, Fibroblastic stage, Remodeling stage. \n\nInflammatory stage is broken into 2 \"phases,\" the vascular phase in which clotting and platelet aggregation occurs and then the cellular phase where your leukocytes, macrophages, and lymphocytes get together and kill off any debris, foreign cells, etc. Your immune response is at work.\n\nThe macrophages are clutch because they release these growth factors that signal fibroblasts to proliferate and multiply and eventually enter the wounded site. \n\n\nLong story short fibroblasts and collagen and some vasculature all come together and in 8 weeks your tissue will be at about 80-85% maximum strength compared to the non wounded tissue. \n\nThere's more to it but Eli5ish?\n\nOh and the top response mentions secondary intention. Primary intention is the cleanest cut you have ever had with no tissue loss. Think of a paper cut. The severed tissues are just lying against eachother and that makes healing really efficient. \n\nNow think of some flesh actually missing and there's a gap. The tissues needs to get back together again, so what does it do? Proliferates until one end reaches the other. This is secondary intention.\n\nTooth extractions sites is a fine example of secondary intention healing. ", "Story time: I was in labor with my first child for 15 hours, no pain blockers. Time to push. I pushed for three hours. The head was crowned but would not go any further. Baby's heart stopped. Nurse hits panic button on wall and what seemed like 50 people rushed into the room. The bed started rolling before I knew what had happened. They shaved my stomach while running me and my bed down the hall. By the time we reached the OR they had me on my side and the doctor was feeling my spine for the block before the wheels were locked in the bed. I was cut open within a few minutes. The doctor could not pull the baby out, her head was literally stuck. The nurse helping in the surgery went between my legs and pushed the head inward while the doctor pulled the rest of her from the incision. That nurse, once baby was out, came back to assisting in the surgery, without changing gloves. \n\nNICU team gets baby's heart going and wish her away. We stayed 8 days in hospital. Day after going home I was getting up from bed to go check on my new angel and I feel a big pop and a gush of fluid. The entire c-section incision had burst and out poured a gallon of infectious bile. I was horrified. \n\nHusband rushed me to ER. The infection had been building since the surgery but because I was on tylenol for after surgery pain I never ran a fever. \n\nThe open wound was massive. I had to pack it 2 times a day for 7 months. Also learned I am allergic to formaldehyde during this. The gauze at first was soaked in it, not sure why, but it broke me out in blisters anywhere it touched. \n\nI had to have surgery to remove scar tissue from the area. It felt like a bowling ball cemented to my abdominal muscles. The only other lasting effects is some sensation loss in the area, there's a part of my stomach I could be stabbed in and wouldn't know it. \n\nNearly 13 years later that baby girl is a happy, healthy, smart, call of duty black ops loving firecracker. 10/10 would do again for her. ", "Also depends on the type of wound. I've also had an abscess that required the skin be sort of peeled up and cleaned underneath. THAT was packed with sterile gauze. We changed the packing daily, flushing the wound with sterile saline and wiping it completely with isopropyl alcohol to air-dry. The big, BIG deal was being able to disinfect it every day. I would have packed that wound for months if necessary to make it heal right. It didn't heal \"faster\"; it healed very neatly and under close supervision.\n\nAllowing a loose sheet of skin to just fall down, it would reattach irregularly and have loose bubbles under it. Keeping it packed forced it to reattach neatly from the outside-in, like a zipper or a roll of tape. I barely noticed the change until about a week later, when it was suddenly so much harder to stuff the sterile gauze in.", "In some instances you want the mesenchymal layer to proliferate and not the epithelial layer so you'll intentionally delay healing.", "I remember I got bit by a Brown Recluse. The bite wasn't so bad it was the Navy Corpsman who had to express the puss from the wound and then repack it with gauze. \n\nThey told me that it was basically making the wound heal from the bottom, so to speak, otherwise the skin would heal over the top and leave an abscess wound under the top layer of flesh.", "That's more like a first responder's move to temporarily prevent excessive bleeding. You want the blood to clot from the bottom up to push infection out. Think of wounds as layers that you need to replace, and if you stack the layers from top to bottom, they will not have a sound foundation. Like how you wouldn't building a house without supports, your layers of skin need to be rebuilt bottom up. Eventually gunk will build and ruin parts of the house, eventually the microbacteria stuck in the pocket from healing wrong will infect you. It works sort of like that.", "Got an ear piercing which came with info that relates to the question here - wounds don't heal at the same rate. You want to keep the top \"open\" so the skin doesn't heal and potentially form an abscess. Keeping the skin open forms a drain for fluids.", "So another Emergency doc here. There is a lot of decent information below but some of the better points are lost in medical speak. So here is a concise lay person version. Either you have a cut, or there is a reason for me to cut you. Having a cut is usually a knife or traumatic injury or dog bite. Generally cuts that happened very recently can be closed by \"primary intention\" which means your own skin will heal together. Closing can be with glue, steri strips, staples and obviously stitches. In some cases i.e. Skin is too damaged or gone; animal bites (because high risk of infection think sharp teeth pushing bacteria inside you) or if you have waited to long you basically start to heal and the new surface cannot heal to the other, will usually scar worse but unless it's near a joint or other important structure won't make a big difference. In the setting you need an incision 90% of the time an abscess you have infection that needs out, you cut to give an avenue for the infection to exit. Your body is in the process of doing this already it's why they come to the surface and will eventually drain themselves. In this situation packing used to be performed to achieve control of bleeding, preventing recurrent infection by keeping wound clean and open. Well studies show that it pretty much doesn't do anything and has little affect on outcomes and is painful. However it can still be useful for those reasons, if there is continuing bleeding packing slows it and allows pressure to stop the bleeding. Particularly nasty ones that are at risk for closing again. But even then for only 24 hours. Because the way these heal opposed to the cuts with stitches is from the inside \"secondary intention\" you have to let abscesses heal from inside and they heal surprisingly well. There are exceptions to this. ", "I had the joy of experiencing this kind operation on my knee. Yes they left the wound open. Yes the skin healed onto all the gauze they stuffed into my knee. Yes I screamed so loud when they ripped the stuff out a nurse held a pillow over my face. Yes they saved my knee but I was almost suffocated in the process. Don't ever have this operation...ever!", "Also the gauze is often soaked with a silver solution, which helps the body heal quicker from the inside outwards.\n\nUnless you're a werebeing.", "Recurring abscess patient here.\n\nIf the source of the infection is sub-dermal, there's a good chance your body and white blood cells can't discharge all of the dead bacteria from the wound (no exit door), and this creates the opportunity for things to get septic. This is when it smells the worst - like a fart that's been brewing for days\n\nSource: they laid open a tract 2 inches inside my bum and I had a vaginanus for 12 months whilst it healed slowly from the bottom up [sic]" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
2vdemt
why do people gift reddit gold to throwaway accounts?
Like I know it's very nice of someone to do it. But the person will say in the beginning "This is a throwaway account" and then 10 minutes later they get gold. EDIT: Howd you know?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vdemt/eli5_why_do_people_gift_reddit_gold_to_throwaway/
{ "a_id": [ "cogn3qg" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "Reddit Gold pays to host the servers. You don't have to gift gold because you want that person to have a better experience, you could gift gold because you especially enjoyed that content. Other people will see they got gold and then strive to create better content to get it themselves. Gifting gold to throwaways that create good content will make others create better content, increasing the quality of the website as a whole\n\nThat is, at least, the theory\n\nIn reality you just sit in a circle and jerk off" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
6i00my
why are powerball and megamillions paid out by the state that the winner resides in?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6i00my/eli5_why_are_powerball_and_megamillions_paid_out/
{ "a_id": [ "dj2gb21", "dj2gch6", "dj2hogz", "dj2nvob" ], "score": [ 34, 9, 34, 2 ], "text": [ "The state is typically the body that sets up and runs the lottery. The ones you mention do cross state lines, but ultimately the state still had to allow the lottery to come there in the first place. The state reaps millions of dollars from the ticket sales, therefore they are also responsible for the payout.\n\nIt's been said that the lottery is just a tax on stupid people. It's not too far off, considering it is literally taking the most money from the poorest group of people and funneling it back into the govt.", "They exist as an agreement between the member state lotteries. \n\nThe winner state is not paying an unfair share out of pocket. The centralized part pays to the state, then the state pays the winner.", "The lottery is paid by the State where the ticket is sold, not by your State of residence. ^[[Source](_URL_3_)] \n & nbsp; \nEach State that hosts a lottery enters a cooperative agreement with other States. ^[[Source](_URL_2_)] Every time a ticket is sold, some of the money goes to the State for State-run programs, some to MUSL, and some into the Jackpot. \n & nbsp; \nWhen the lottery is won in a State, that State negotiates with the winner to setup the earnings payout, handle taxes, and to lobby for the Annuity (currently $64M for Powerball). If the winner chooses the Annuity, they agree to let the State invest the lump sum (currently $40.6M for Powerball) over a 29.5 year period and receive payouts over that period. Taking the lump sum benefits the recipient immediately. ^[[Source](_URL_6_)] ^[[Source](_URL_4_)] \n & nbsp; \nAnother benefit that the State receives is taxation on the earnings. Some States, such as Wyoming and South Dakota, don't tax, or have an effective 0% rate. ^[[Source](_URL_7_)] On the other hand, some States *and* Municipalities will tax the winner. For example, NYC is the highest at a combined 12.7%. ^[[Source-Forbes](_URL_0_)] Your State of residence may also tax you; this is especially common for Commonwealths (such as Virginia). This is on top of the 39.6% max Federal Taxes on earnings. ^[[Source](_URL_5_)] This means that for the $64M Powerball, if you take the lump sum you will be left with $24.16M if you play in SD, or $19.52M if in NYC after taxes. Also to note is that your other sources of income are also taxed higher for both Federal and State, and you lose almost all deductions and benefits as the income thresholds are reached. ^[[Source](_URL_1_)] \n & nbsp; \nI hope that this has provided a little bit of information for your question. If you wish for clarification or have more questions, feel free to post away! ", "It's to make sure the state where the ticket was sold gets its share of the income tax (because it has all the cost of running the lottery in its venue). Say you bought the ticket in NY which has a high resident state tax. To avoid paying the NY state income tax, before you claim the jackpot prize, you move your residence to Fla or some other state with no state income tax. You would still have to pay the federal income tax, but no state tax. So, the rule in the lottery is you have to claim the jackpot in the state where the ticket was bought/sold and that state gets its tax. It gets complicated some times because, if you bought the ticket in a different state from the one you live in, you have to pay taxes to both states. But usually the two states split the amount, so you still pay the same amount of state tax but to two different states. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2013/03/23/tax-on-320-million-powerball-jackpot-millions-more-than-in-2012/#26950b7f1c6e", "https://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch29.html", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-State_Lottery_Association", "https://lottery-pa.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1779/~/how-do-i-claim-a-prize-from-out-of-state%3F", "http://www.powerball.com/pb_contact.asp", "http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/08/pf/taxes/powerball-jackpot-tax-bill/index.html", "http://www.powerball.com/pb_home.asp", "https://taxfoundation.org/what-percentage-lottery-winnings-would-be-withheld-your-state/" ], [] ]
3eumro
why are more attractive and taller people viewed as more credible, trustworthy, and powerful?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3eumro/eli5_why_are_more_attractive_and_taller_people/
{ "a_id": [ "ctip826", "ctitp9k" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "You may subconsciously associate them with your parents which are figures of authority.\nAlso our brains could be wired (partially genetically and partially as a result of social conditioning) to subordinate to physically big and attractive individual. We have spent at least several 10 of millions of years as more or less social animals. It must have left something in our genomes.", "I read once that a study showed that, because children get taller as they get older, when they see two people they assume the taller one is older, and presumably more in charge. There were no real details in what I read, like, what age were the children, does the effect linger over the years and train us to respect tall people?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3ae1u3
i just learned some stuff about thorium nuclear power and it is better than conventional nuclear power and fossil fuel power in literally every way by a factor of 100s, except maybe cost. so why the hell aren't we using this technology?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ae1u3/eli5_i_just_learned_some_stuff_about_thorium/
{ "a_id": [ "csbqeu4", "csbqfzc", "csbqrbg", "csbr6ir", "csbr6wh", "csbr8mb", "csbrtlr", "csbrxdz", "csbu1ul", "csbwadm", "csbwo05", "csbwu7a", "csbxamj", "csbymmx", "csbzyzp", "csc0365", "csc0avc", "csc0omf", "csc0ts3", "csc1no2", "csc1z34", "csc23b2", "csc263d", "csc2ewn", "csc2f03", "csc31by", "csc36t5", "csc3dol", "csc4dx4", "csc4nyp", "csc4q5j", "csc71so", "csc7k8p", "csc7sjm", "csc8uei", "csca4mg", "cscans9", "cscbbzo", "csccegm", "cscd9zr", "cscfpnd", "cscjse6", "cscke8c" ], "score": [ 10, 59, 4, 1647, 16, 2, 4, 16, 5, 6, 8, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1107, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 28, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 19, 4, 2, 3, 6, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Well, first, cost is definitely an issue. And it's not as simple as just saying \"we're going to use thorium now\". Getting a license to construct a nuclear plant, at least in the US, is an INCREDIBLY expensive and difficult undertaking. It's not unheard of for a company to just abandon a plant mid-construction because the costs are getting too high. But consider this; suppose it really is better by \"100s of times\" than conventional nuclear and fossil fuels. That doesn't mean it's better than other forms of power. It would be better, even for a large company and particularly long-term, to invest such huge amounts of money into renewable energy.", "During the early development of nuclear power, the US and USSR decided to develop the processes to use Uranium and Plutonium as a fuel as it could also be used for nuclear weapons.\n\nThorium (and other molten salt) reactors were researched at the time, but more efforts were put into \"conventional\" uranium reactors.\n\nAt the moment research into thorium reactors is continuing, but they still have their issues.", "In the dawn of the nuclear era, while energy generation was important it took a back seat to weapon-making. Thorium is pretty useless for that. In that era we weren't really short on energy generation, worried about carbon emissions, or concerned that the plants could blow up (since it really hadn't happened yet).", "**Credit to** /u/whatisnuclear from [this post](_URL_0_)\n\n\n**Edit: /u/whatisnuclear has arrived on scene below me so give him the upvotes and replies.**\n\n > Oooh man. Here we go again.\nOk so I'm a nuclear engineer (specializing in advanced reactor design). Thorium nuclear fuel is really cool for a lot of reasons. But there are a lot of clarifications I like to make when discussions about this stuff come up. I find that the Thorium Evangelical Internet Community spreads a lot of questionable information while advertising their fuel. I get it... they're trying to rebrand nuclear energy to get away from the negative implications. Maybe they're right to. But in my opinion, nuclear energy is what's awesome and Thorium is but one of many options that we have that are totally sweet.\n\n\n\n\n > The thing I want you all to know is that there are literally thousands of nuclear reactor design options based on different combinations of coolant (water, gas, sodium, salt, CO2, lead, etc.), fuel form (uranium oxide, uranium metal, thorium oxide, thorium metal, thorium nitride, TRISO, pebble bed, aqueous, molten salt, etc. etc.), power level (small modular, large, medium), and about a dozen other parameters. We really only have 1 kind in commercial operation (uranium oxide fueled, pressurized water cooled reactors) and it has a lot of disadvantages over some of the other possibilities.\n\n > Among all these options, there are a whole bunch of combinations that give performance far superior to the traditional reactors in terms of cost, safety, proliferation, waste, and sustainability. Thorium-based ideas are among them, but Thorium isn't some new thing held back by conspiracy.\n\n\n\n > The key advantage of Thorium over all other things is that it uniquely allows you to make a breeder reactor in a thermal neutron spectrum. This advantage is subtle and fairly minor compared to the advantages that it shares with uranium fuel in advanced reactors.\nAnyway, this video brings up two of the clarifications I like to mention:\n\n\n > Clarification 1: Lots of reactor concepts operate at low coolant pressure and can be passively safe\nThe first part of this video discusses why high pressure coolant is a problem in decay heat removal. This is true! \nBut, there's nothing Thorium-specific about the ability to operate with low-pressure coolant. That's a function of which coolant you choose (not fuel). \n\n > For instance, sodium-cooled fast reactors operate at low pressure and the sodium-cooled EBR-II reactor in Idaho was the first and only reactor to demonstrate the ability to survive unprotected transients (meaning the control rods didn't even go in!!) This is incredible safety and is great. \n\n\n > Other reactors that can do passive decay heat removal include:\nSalt-cooled, solid fueled reactors like the FHR\nLead-cooled reactors\nLots of other Molten Salt Reactors, including Uranium-fueled ones (The Thorium-fueled MSR is just one kind of MSR).\n\n\n > Clarification 2: \nFYI, there are also non-Thorium breeder reactors\nKirk says this at 2:51:\n\"We could use thorium about 200 more efficiently than we're using uranium now\"Ugh. \nThis statement is technically accurate. But it's totally misleading in this context. Any breeder reactor can get ~200x more energy out of its fuel, whether it's Uranium-Plutonium in a fast breeder reactor or Thorium-Uranium in a thermal molten salt reactor (MSR). So nuclear power is awesome! In the USA, the Dept. of Energy spent like infinity money trying to commercialize a uranium-plutonium breeder reactor that eventually got canceled.\nUsing any kind of breeder reactors, we will not be running out of Uranium or Thorium any time soon.\n\n\n > I've argued these points and others a bunch of times. I've even published a Thorium Myths page on my webpage. \nI even made /r/subredditdrama when one guy and myself argued 90 comments deep into a thread. I think I did fairly well but if you want to check it out here's the link to that thread and the subredditdrama discussion about it.\nI just really wish these folks would promote advanced nuclear in general instead of just focusing on one aspect of it. Maybe I'm just complaining about a reality of marketing.\n\n\n > EDIT: expanded acronyms\n\n\n**credit to** /u/whatisnuclear\n\n\n", "The other answers on here aren't quite accurate. Yes nuclear power plants are expensive but they are NOT less efficient than green energy, in fact nuclear power is the most effecient energy there is at present. The issue for nuclear power plants isn't really price, but stigma. The reason you don't see nuclear plants popping up everywhere is because people are terrified of nuclear energy. They're scared by events such as Japan, Chernobyl, etc., they don't want this stuff in their backyards because they're scared. As it goes their fears are uneducated as peoples fears usually are, and nuclear energy is the way of the future in terms of environmental friendliness and efficiency, but people are scared of what they don't understand \n\nTLDR: Nuclear power isn't predominantly used because people are scared of it because of meltdown catastrophes like Chernobyl. ", "In addition to what other people said, there is the issue of supply chain. Getting from uranium ore to the uranium pellets used in nuclear plants is a whole industry. Much R & D went into that. It is also a profitable industry.\n\nThe startup cost for a new supply chain is enormous. You need the ore, the thorium extracted, then conditioned, and on top of that you need the power plants to sell it to. A bit of a chicken and egg problem to make any of it commercially viable. Each of these steps requires costly R & D, then a lot of hardware investment.\n\nPublic funding is often required for such high cost research. For the uranium supply chain, there was a will. Not so much for thorium.\n\n", "We built one in the US at Oak Ridge national laboratory in TN. The reactor experienced multiple accidents, some fatal, and was primarily an experiment in the feasibility of the design. The biggest challenges to wide spread adoption are techniques used to make the components, chemical separation of 'neutron sinks' (daughter products that slow to stop the reaction like protactinium), and the construction materials. Further, the medium used to move the heat for power production is nasty, nasty stuff. Molten salt is highly corrosive, making containment of the heat transfer medium very, very difficult, (which was coincidentally what many of the facility accidents involved).", "If you're asking why we aren't switching over to thorium today, cost and technology are the two main prohibiting factors. \n\n* Any new nuclear power plant is extremely expensive to build, and requires going through a rigorous approval process with the NRC. It's been around 20 years since a new commercial reactor was brought online (though political movements have a lot to do with that, and it's possible a new one may be brought online this year).\n* Far more research is needed before commercial LFTRs can be built. Many issues, including graphite moderator lifetime and corrosion caused by fluoride salts, need to be addressed. Some of this research could take decades, even if it were well-funded (most of today's research goes into improving upon current reactor designs, making improvements to reactors already in use, and developing novel reactor designs other than LFTRs).\n* To start up a LFTR, you would need a critical mass of U-233. There are currently no U-233 enrichment facilities, so these would need to be constructed.\n\nIf a business were to build a new reactor today, they would likely want to choose a well-understood design that they knew they could get NRC approval for, that operators and engineers have experience with, and that uses a fuel that can be obtained through an existing supply chain. \n\nIf you're asking why humanity decided to pursue U-238 water-cooled reactors instead of LFTRs early in the developing of nuclear power, the short answer is that it is much easier to obtain material for nuclear weapons from the waste products of a U-238 reactor than from those of a thorium reactor.", "Because out of used thorium you can't make nuclear weapons.\n\nIn the Cold War nuclear power plants weren't built for power purposes, but to make resources for nuclear bombs, and uranium is best for these bombs, the power generated is just a side effect.\n\nNow, as a side effect the uranium reactors got more research and made a lot of progress and are the most developed, while thorium is still kinda experimental.", "Because our country doesn't care about long term planning or being brave enough to pioneer the unknown anymore. Now it's all about short term profits and politicians who only care about getting re-elected and the clueless public doesn't want \"nuke\" plants in their backyard. It's probably for the best anyway, decentralized power grids based on solar energy is the way to go.", "Because the word nuclear is scary. It makes people who don't understand almost anything about it think of nuclear weapons and Chernobyl. A vocal minority screams and shouts we're killing Mother Earth every time anyone tries to build one. Renewable \" green \" energy will be great, but is no where near as useful as nuclear power is now, nor can it serve a base load nearly to the same extent. \n\nIn addition, how many nuclear power plants have been built in the us in the last 5, 10, or 15 years? With all of the costs and complexities of getting approved, it is much easier for a company to reuse a plan of an older reactor and say, see, it hasn't blown up in 20 years and is safe. That means this one will be safe too. Major design changes like thorium would require reproving the tech to the hippies, city, county, and state politicians as well.\n\n\nTldr; dirty hippies and undereducated people ", "pretty sure they decided against thorium reactors back in the day because its waste product could not be used in nuclear weaponry.. uranium on the other hand, those reactors will provide elements needed for nuclear weapons!\n\nedit: elements/element; probably the ladder", "Ok so im sure this has been asked and may even be a childish question but here i go. If nucleur waste is so bad is there amy reason why we dont just build a huge cannon and shoot this shit into space outside of cost?", "Anytime someone asks \"Why the hell don't we....\" or \"Why the hell do we...\", the answer is almost ALWAYS \"Money.\". ", "In a way your question answers itself. You only just learned about the benefits possible with Thorium (and other advanced nuclear). ELI5: why didn't you know about them yesterday? Yesterday you probably thought that nuclear was all Chernobyl and Fukushima all the time. And as long as most people think that, we will not see the big investments in nuclear that we need to advance the field.", "Posted this as a reply to a comment but should reply here since it's ELI5. \n\nThe main reason is momentum. Nuclear energy isn't like software in that you an just have rapid transformations overnight. The industry moves at a snail's pace in innovation these days. It's so hard to even make small changes to conventional reactors with all the people suing and all the regulators being extra careful to protect the public. The Navy developed light water reactors to propel submarines as a war-time need. This development transferred over to industry and we've kinda been stuck with it. Forays into advanced reactors were made. The USG spent a lot of money on liquid-metal cooled reactors, but they became politically unpopular and very over-budget and were eventually axed by Congress. Smaller efforts were made to develop molten salt reactors that are good with Thorium. Reasons for their cancellation have been quoted as:\n\n1. The existing major industrial and utility commitments to the LWR, HTGR, and LMFBR (AKA other advanced reactors)\n2. The lack of incentive for industrial investment in supplying fuel cycle services, such as those required for solid fuel reactors.\n3. The overwhelming manufacturing and operating experience with solid fuel reactors in contrast with the very limited involvement with fluid fueled reactors.\n4. The less advanced state of MSBR (thorium) technology and the lack of demonstrated solutions to the major technical problems associated with the MSBR concept.\n\n[[Source](_URL_1_)]\n\nNuclear innovation takes a very long time, lots of money, and very serious commitment. It's just not popular enough to get these in current democratic societies. \n\nALSO, see earlier comments about thorium that [were reposted here](_URL_0_). \n", "Because nuclear power creates jobs in enough congressional districts that Congress would never allow an alternative that could possibly alter the status quo. ", "Simply put, the common person still feels nuclear = unsafe, even though there have been more deaths from fossil fuel extraction than nuclear activity. This is the one reason I can think of as to why the switch isn't being made indefinitely. ", "The real reason we use Uranium over Thorium is because Uranium-based reactors produce Plutonium — handy for making nuclear weapons. Thorium doesn't have the same 'benefit' producing as much nuclear bomb fuel as Uranium does. ", "Great question. France has been leading the way with Nuclear, and powers most of the country with newer, safer reactors and their total waste produced via those methods is tiny compared to ours, and is lower level as the fuel is constantly recycled.", "Because on the one hand you have people freaking out any time they hear \"nuclear\".\nEven though they receive more radiation from coal plants pollution (and Mercury as a bonus).\n\nOn the other you have the people who want wind and solar power to be a thing.\nDespite those both having their own issues and opponents who basically stalemate those attempts (see Long Island fight against wind towers off coast).\n\nEventually we will do the right thing, after we have exhausted every other option.", "There's a strong societal stigma when it comes to nuclear energy, and it's generally a point of view that is not aware of the outdated and inept practices which led to the past disasters from which it stems. Unfortunately, when lazy for-profit energy/fuel companies like BP, or Duke Energy, etc. fuck up, we have some bad environmental clean up to see to. But when it's a company like Tokyo Electric, we (as in the humans of earth) have a real crisis on our hands. Accountability and modernity would go a long way to fixing this, but unfortunately, we often see the opposite.", "Because it's too expensive.\n\nI don't know anything about nuclear engineering. I know about electric utility resource planning. For me, a nuclear power plant is a black box with the following details:\n\n * capacity (MW)\n * fuel cost ($/MWh)\n * expected annual capacity factor (MWh / (MW * 8760), expressed as a percentage)\n * summer capacity credit (for nuclear, very nearly capacity)\n * construction capital cost ($/kW)\n * Fixed O & M -- annual costs to simply exist ($/MW)\n * Variable O & M -- non fuel annual costs per MWh electricity generated ($/MWh)\n * lead time to build (years)\n * expected lifetime (years)\n * emissions (CO2, SO2, NOx, PM, etc)\n\nYou give me that data, plus perhaps a few other items I've forgotten at the moment, and you do it for nuclear, combined cycle gas, combustion turbine gas, wind, PV, concentrating solar, large scale storage, transmission alternative, energy efficiency, demand response, and perhaps a few other locally relevant technologies, and I figure out what the utility should build and when to minimize total costs. Obviously, load (and growth), expected environmental regulations, the existing fleet, and 100 other details matter in the calculation.\n\nNow, here's the result, every single time: *nuclear is too expensive*. Why is it too expensive in 2015?\n\n * Natural gas is cheap, so we can have high uptime generation and capacity via combined cycle gas for lower total costs.\n * We don't charge anything for CO2 in most places, and only a little bit in the Northeast and California. An advantage of nuclear (and most renewables) isn't monetized.\n * We charge relatively little for SO2 and NOx and other criteria air pollutants. An advantage of nuclear (and most renewables) isn't monetized.\n * Where energy is valued but capacity isn't as important, wind power and recently PV beat out nuclear on costs in most parts of tUSA.\n\nIf you want a future with a bunch of nuclear power, you've got to compete with gas, which means reducing:\n\n * the capital costs\n * the ongoing O & M costs\n * the time to build\n\nand/or increasing\n\n * CO2 price\n * criteria air pollutants price\n * costs associated with fracking\n\nAgain, I can't tell you a thing about thorium -- but I do know about utility planning (it's my day job). Nuclear doesn't even sniff cost-effective in 2015.", "Give these videos a view. It might be a bit helpful. \n\n[Part 1](_URL_2_)\n\n[Part 2](_URL_0_)\n\n[Part 3](_URL_1_)\n\nBy Kurz Gesagt", "I live in near the fallout zone or a nuclear plant. I can see the exhaust clouds from my house. But I feel the biggest reason we don't use that tech is due to cost. The environmental regulations make it very difficult and costly to even get a new power plant. Also the companies that supply the uranium would want to prevent a fuel switch. ", "Mostly because morons are scarred and believe blatantly false things. Therefore the governor's etc refute the use of nuclear because a few of their crazy and loud constituents are against it... Then they don't get built.\n\n\nWe should be using a ton more nuclear, but then energy companies suffer and have serious lobby power", "Obviously the people involved won't make shitloads of money if they use the most recent/efficient technology. Better fuck everyone else in the ass as long as there's money to make ! ", "I'd also like to throw out that America owns a large majority of the remaining fossil fuels on earth. That just might be another reason why we aren't using more efficient systems.", "Because the Department of Energy turned it down in the 70s because it creates so little weapons grade nuclear material. ", "Say you have about 100 old bikes passed down from your grandpa. Some of those you wiped out on and seriously hurt yourself, and your mom stopped buying you new ones. And you saw a kickstarter for a new type of bike that claims you will never into another accident ever again. It just needs a goal of 5 billion dollars. \n\nYou go running to your mom asking her to fund a million. She says hoverbikes don't exist honey. Why don't you just fix up one of your old grandpa's bike and ride that? You argue that it's not safe. She tells you to wear Kevlar, rubber gloves, carry a fire extinguisher, and only ride on the sidewalk from now on. You think your mom is an idiot, and she thinks you are just wasting money. That is why we don't have new nuclear powerplants. \n\n\n", "Check out the documentary on Netflix called \"Pandora's Promise\". They highlight the reasons its not more widely used and it's a good watch.", "The LFTR Isn't better in *every* way.\n\nThere are clear benefits, but if you talk to a nuclear scientist, they would tell you that, like any emergin technology, there are problems and issues to be worked through. Many of them might seem minor, but remember one mistake with a nuclear reactor spells disaster on a large scale, so nuclear reactors have to be built to withstand a lot. Add that level of security to a new technology, and it just takes a while to establish such a technology.", "Thorium nuclear power is a huge step into the unknown, and requires a lot of preparation - decades worth.\n\nPotential complications are:\n1. Thorium is not a nuclear fuel. If you put it in a reactor it doesn't burn. You have to exposed it to a carefully measured dose of radiation in a reactor, remove it, let it stand for a month, and then separate the uranium fuel that gets produced. If you under-dose it, you don't much uranium fuel produced. If you over-dose it you waste the thorium and produce nasty radioactive waste instead.\n\nSome countries extract plutonium from used nuclear fuel already - this is a ton simpler than thorium irradiation and uranium extraction - but it's barely economically viable, and many countries, like Japan and the UK have virtually abandoned this process, because it is so difficult and dangerous.\n\n2. The thorium nuclear cycle is very \"neutron poor\" - which requires very neutron efficient reactor designs. This means you can't use normal water (light water) as a reactor coolant - light water simply swallows too many neutrons. 95% of all nuclear reactors in the world are light water reactors (Canada has some heavy water reactors, and the UK has some gas cooled reactors - but even these designs likely wouldn't be neutron efficient enough)\n\nThis needs a radical design of reactor, such as a molten salt reactor. This is a big problem for many reasons:\n\na. There are no known materials which you could make a reactor out that wouldn't be damaged by the salt, the temperature or the insane levels of radiation in the core (hundreds of times more damaging than a regular light water reactor). There have been prototype molten salt reactors, but the things they were made of wouldn't stand up to 60 years of full power operation without being demolished by either corrosion from the salt, radiation damage or heat. Research on advanced composite materials such as carbon-carbon composites, or silicon carbide-carbon composites would be needed to try to develop suitable materials.\n\nb. A molten fuel salt reactor, which would be needed for a thorium fuel cycle, requires the extremely compelex thorium processing chemistry to be done online, in real time, with red-hot molten salt, with insane levels of radioactivity. Even in plutonium processing, where radiation levels are less than 1% (because the used fuel can be allowed to \"cool off\" for several years before processing) has been extremely unreliable and difficult, because the radiation keeps damaging the equipment. We have got a basic idea of the chemistry, and people have demonstrated it in test tubes, but getting it to work safely and reliably at red-hot temperatures in a high radiation environment for years on end at an industrial scale, is a whole different story.\n\nc. The hazards of molten salt reactors are not well studied or understood. There is an enormous history and operational experience with light water reactors. This makes it difficult to evaluate safety systems for reliability and performance. There may be unknown or unexpected safety problems - for example, the prototype reactor allowed uranium to evaporate and it got collected in filters. No one really noticed this, until they decommissioned it, and they cleaned out the filter cavity and found a pile of near-weapons grade uranium lodged in the filter which was worryingly close to going critical. \n\nd. The thorium fuel cycle inherently produces highly pure weapons-grade uranium. Although weapons grade, it's not ideal, in that it is highly radioactive and has a short half-life - but it is produced in a highly pure form. You can deliberately contaminate a thorium fuel cycle reactor with normal uranium which would denature the generated uranium - but if you've got chemical separation technology, then you can still separate the uranium precursor chemically.", "I hope I am not too laye to this thread!\n\nBack in university I did some heavy reasearch into the Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactor, or LFTR (lifter), and came to some startling conclusions.\n\nBack in the 1940's the Manhattan project actually had multiple divisions of their nuclear research. There was the fast reactions of plutonium/uranium that Eintstein worked on, and the slower thorium reaction that another scientist worked on whos name escapes me.\n\nWhen the time came that the United States military called upon the research of the project, Einstein proved that his reaction was a much more invigorating reaction that would cause more energy to be released instantaneously over the slower thorium reaction.\n\nAll funds were completely diverted to the uranium/plutonium fast reaction for the next decade and research came to a halt on the thorium reaction chain for nearly half a century.\n\nComing out the other end of WWII, almost two decades into uranium/plutoniun research, the world needed a relatively safe, reliable, and clean energy source to avoid an economic collapse due to how much financial burden the world took on to end the war. Instead of jumping back two decades in research, the decision was clear to continue with their proven U/P reaction.\n\nHere is one of the more interesting parts to this comment. USA has actually been stock pilling thorium since the 70's and has amassed, if my memory serves me correctly, nearly 300,000 tonnes of thorium which has been estimated to produce enough energy for the country for a few decades.\n\nIn my correspondence with a leading researcher in the current LFTR field, it was brought to my attention that his research program recently (2010ish?) had their documentation purchased by a Chinese power company whos name the researcher was not able to disclose.\n\nLike many comments have said, the energy companies have been slow to act for the betterment of the world and countries ever since the inceptio of energy companies. Be it coal, oil, karosene, lumber, electricity, or water, the longer they can monopolize a higher profit margin the longer they will cease to alter their operations.\n\nI really do hope more people look into the history of the thorium reaction chain and start asking questions about this topic on a public forum. It is cleaner, safer, and produces almost 400% more energy per consumption basis than U/P reaction chain.", "I'll chime in as a nuclear energy worker in Canada. \n\nOur government agency responsible for R and D in nuclear, A.E.C.L., was split up and sold by the Harper government in 2011. Since then, it's been basically impossible to perform new research except in private industry or academic facilities, which are scarce (search SLOWPOKE decommissioning for more info on that).\n\nHarper basically stopped and scrapped an entirely new reactor design, the ACR1000, which was supposed to have been able to run on thorium recycled from older CANDU6 reactor's spent fuel. He sold the company to SNC Lavalin group at a loss to Canadian taxpayers if anyone is interested in further research. You don't hear about it on the news.\n\n#harpoonharper ", "I actually was speaking with someone (who works for a Thorium fuel company) about this exact topic. He has become a bit jaded over time, but essentially here is the argument that I got.\n\nYes, theoretically 1 unit of Thorium can produce more energy than 1 unit of standard nuclear fuel (U235 or the like) but that is only because we assume 100% burn-through for the Thorium in a theoretical LFTR reactor. \n\nIn reality while there have been molten salt reactor prototypes, there has never been a successful LFTR reactor built, and creating one is an enourmous engineering challenge. In addition if 1 unit of U235 was instead used at 100% burn-through, it would produce far more energy than the Thorium.\n\nThe reason for this? Thorium itself must be bred into U233, and while that can be done in a breeder reactor, to do so 'consumes' one neutron. So essentially with Thorium you might produce the same number of neutrons from splitting the U233 you breed from it, but to create the U233 in the first place you must consume neutrons as well. This makes the fuel less efficient in reactors.\n\nThe one exception to all this is there are some gas-cooled super hot burning graphite reactors which have been designed and tested which can get close to a 100% burn-through but they are unpopular because they are not mainstream enough, and there is really no cost savings or great benefit switching to them. Uranium is not very abundant, but it is also not in danger of running out (especially with recent discoveries on extracting it from sea water).\n\n\n\nTLDR: 1 - Thorium IS NOT superior to our current nuclear fuels because it is not directly fissile, you have to put in energy to transmute it to U233.\n\n2- The designs for reactors to use exclusively Thorium have huge engineering hurdles which have not been overcome.", "Beyond the technical reasons that have been expertly articulated already, the answer is that cost is the most important one. If the thermal efficiency is 100x better with one device than another but the better device costs 1,000,000x the crappier one then it doesn't really matter that the crappy one is crappy because you can build 1000000 of them for the same price as the good one.\n\nIt's the reason we aren't all driving electric cars *right now*. Sure the miles per gallon equivalent is better than any hybrid can do but the upfront cost is so much higher that the fuel savings never make up for it.", "Hundreds of potential candidates for Nuclear Reactor Technology. Thorium is safe and efficient so it's upheld by many.\nBut it's all about the technology, the money invested and the decades it takes to conceive, build, test and spread the Thorium reactor. Like all other potential nuclear energy processes.", "1. It's difficult to get new nuclear plants built. Reactors currently in use are old. Like, there hasn't been a new commercial power plant since before the turn of the millennium. Back then, Thorium was not a viable source of power. So now you have to convince government and companies and people that it's worth it to expand *the* most distrusted source of power (nuclear), despite it being wrongly maligned.\n\n2. Thorium still has problems. Molten Salt reactors have problems with heavy metal buildup. They're much more complex than simple BWRs and PWRs. And there are still some kinks to work out.\n\n3. Money. Nuclear is a source of energy that has a really high initial investment, but provides clean, consistent, high-efficiency energy for decades afterward. It's all too easy for power companies to just ignore those benefits and opt for the cheaper sources of power.", "Generally not a good practice to claim that something is, \"literally better in every way\" when you are first learning about it. ", "As a uni project I looked into making a documentary on this subject and emailed the UK energy minister (or whatever position it is, cant remember 100%) and basically the reply was there is no recent research on the subject so the UK government is not at all interested in looking into this type of nuclear energy. \n\nSo yeh for the UK to look at using it you will need to have either another government use it first or have the private sector fund it 100% or at least mostly", "ELI5? Stupid people think nuclear power = nuclear bombs, or that nuclear power is unsafe (despite it killing fewer people per megawatt than current means AKA fossil fuels, being cleaner and even puts LESS radiation out than coal plants...)", "Thorium reactors have been a known thing for about as long as conventional nuclear reactors. The main reason they didn't catch on was because nuclear weaponry cannot be made with thorium byproduct. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [ "https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/30pryr/thorium_why_arent_we_funding_this/" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ae1u3/eli5_i_just_learned_some_stuff_about_thorium/csbr6ir", "http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/WASH-1222.pdf" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVbLlnmxIbY", "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEYbgyL5n1g", "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcOFV4y5z8c" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
3jn635
how does family guy get away with all their racist jokes?
And all their inappropriate stereotypical ones.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jn635/eli5_how_does_family_guy_get_away_with_all_their/
{ "a_id": [ "cuqmwd3", "cuqmxk6", "cuqmxog", "cuqmzt2", "cuquzag" ], "score": [ 7, 2, 8, 7, 2 ], "text": [ "What do you mean \"get away with?\"\n\nIs there supposed to be some sort of punishment beyond just being widely known for low-brow, lazy humor?", "What consequence do you expect? They have the freedom of speech to say whatever they want. ", "People just don't mind racist jokes very much, as long as it's clear that the person telling them doesn't hate other races.", "* Freedom of speech.\n\n* Freedom of media.\n\n* Money.\n\nYou can't really sue them for using one of the basic rights they have got by constituiton. And if someonw did actually sue them, they have enough money to pay the punishment.", "They are jokes. Jokes. Sometimes shit can be funny. There is not always intent to offend. Shit, George Lopez, and half the comedians of any ethnicity other than Caucasian can mine this fertile soil anytime they want." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [] ]
3s2jqq
what is the situation with the us, israel, and iran? is iran close to having nuclear weapons?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3s2jqq/eli5_what_is_the_situation_with_the_us_israel_and/
{ "a_id": [ "cwty8gh" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "There was never any evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran, that was just more hype intended to justify a policy if imposing regime change there, just like \"WMDS in Iraq\" was a lie and pretext.\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n\nMore than 40 nation on Earth have the *capability* to make nukes,\n_URL_3_\n\nThe reason they don't is because nukes are overrated\n_URL_5_" ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/17/us-nuclear-iaea-iran-sb-idUSTRE58G60W20090917", "http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-says-no-evidence-iran-working-on-nuclear-arms/24699595.html", "http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/12/us-iran-nuclear-iaea-idUSL1283850220080212", "http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20040921&amp;slug=nukes21", "http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/03/us-nuclear-iaea-iran-exclusive-idUSL312024420090703", "http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/ten-reasons-iran-doesnt-want-the-bomb-7802" ] ]
42lmqm
how does your body know not to roll over and crush that baby you're sleeping next to especially if you're a fidgety sleeper?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42lmqm/eli5_how_does_your_body_know_not_to_roll_over_and/
{ "a_id": [ "czb8b65", "czb8l7s", "czb8uco", "czbleif", "czbmk4y" ], "score": [ 4, 10, 2, 8, 3 ], "text": [ "Sometimes it happens. It happened more when there were large families, no birth control, little to eat, and mother was tired, very tired from working all day.", "You are opening a huge can of hate worms here, but I'll give you an answer on the reasons against side of things. \n\nTerrie Petrie being one of the most unfortunate on the bad luck / bad decision scale. She was very pro co-sleeping, but also not against having a few glasses of wine. 3 of her 4 children died while sleeping in her bed. She appeared on HBO's Autopsy program looking for answers. \n\nThe doctor basically ruled out SIDS and ruled the deaths as suffocation due to smothering. She either rolled on top of the children, or accidentally placed pillows or blankets over their faces while inebriated. It was terrible to watch.\n\nEdit... removed opinion before second paragraph, as I'm a single male and have no basis for my personal opinion.", "Ill tell you what happens with myself. I do not drink or take drugs. I can feel his body next to mine. I make sure that i wear only a bra and shorts to bed and baby in a diaper. I find that my skin feels the temp changes better like this. I am in a constant wake/sleep cycle and can be roused out of rem easily by movement and noise. He stays snuggled up against me at the breast and suckles almost all night. I am on my 5th baby doing this. Never had even a close call. ", "It doesn't work for everyone. I've cared for 6 babies suffocated by their parents by accident over the past 7 years as an ER nurse. Everyone thinks they will wake up... but when you're dead tired/sleep deprived bad things happen. Put your baby in a \"rock and play\" or something of the like beside your bed. $45. Cheap insurance to keep your new baby from suffocating. ", "But does it though?\n\nDuring our prenatal \"training\" we were advised not to sleep in the same bed as the baby (and some heartbreaking recent cases were referred to) due to the risk.\n\nIf we've got our boy in bed with us I simply can't sleep because I'm too worried about the thought of waking up to the worst thing imaginable.\n\nBTW I'm not telling anyone what to do - just relaying my own experience." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [] ]
3mzuut
why "universal basic income" as opposed to "universal basic provisions"?
I understand the concept of universal basics income. Simply put, people receive a minimum amount of money (for whatever reason) that's to be used for basic living expenses. My question is why is money involved at all? The recipient doesn't need money, they need food, clothing, shelter. So why not make it "universal basic provisions" and supply the things that the recipient is expected to spend the money on?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mzuut/eli5_why_universal_basic_income_as_opposed_to/
{ "a_id": [ "cvjjngi", "cvjk5g5", "cvjm8f9", "cvjsdmj", "cvjstam", "cvjud0s" ], "score": [ 53, 10, 4, 5, 2, 4 ], "text": [ "Because the idea of Universal Basic Income, is in part, to avoid serious bureaucracy. \n\nGiving everyone basic food, clothing, shelter and whatever they need results in serious administrative overhead, as you need to organize all those services (which are entirely separate from civilian services already existent), then check if those are adequate for everyone, to avoid wasting resources that some people don't need, or that are misappropriate.", "This can also be applied to salaries. Why do companies pay salaries with money? Why don't companies compensate work at least partly with food, clothing and shelter to the employees instead of giving money?", "Because freedom? What if I don't want x amount of clothing. What if I want x-3 amount of clothing and I want x+3 food instead? Money solves that.", "Because the needs for various provisions like food, shelter and clothing vary by circumstance more than the need for an income. An office worker's suit costs more than a construction worker's boots and jeans. Some people can do just fine without a cellphone, but most of us need one to be in contact with work and family. I once went three months eating nothing but potatoes and fried veggies because I was so poor but if a 70-year-old did that instead of a 21-year-old they might run into some health trouble. It's more efficient to give people the money and trust them to be adult enough to budget it in a way that suits their needs.\n\nYou might as well ask why we have currency instead of a barter system. Money is a universal medium of exchange with a pretty stable value. If you go to the coffee shop and pay $2, that's more useful to the both of you than trying to pay with a sack of potatoes. You'd be standing in line haggling over 1 sack of potatoes and a carrot for a small coffee while everyone in line behind you is impatiently waiting with 2 scoops of cat litter or a can of gasoline or a fistful of batteries or a carton of warm milk (if it's cold it's worth at least a medium coffee). If the sign said \"small coffee = $2\" then everyone who wants a coffee will be able to go there because everyone has $2. If it said \"small coffee = a stick of deodorant\" because the barista smelled like shit then everyone would be running home to find a spare stick of deodorant because last week a small coffee cost a loaf of bread and a medium coffee cost one of the nice loaves with seeds in it you usually only buy when they're on sale because the barista was hungry and now they've gone and changed their prices on you.", "2 big reasons:\n\n1,as other mentioned, it's easier to send people pieces of paper.\n\nThe 2nd is you still get benefits from markets/competition.if you give people money,they can go to the best grocery store.if you just contract it out,there's no incentive for the grocery store to minimize cost and maximise value,and you get efficiencies.\n\nA possible 3rd is that there's also some _URL_0_ allows someone to buy the type of food/brand they prefer.also most UBI ideas involve some level of discretionary income,it's not solely purely survival. This also let's them interact with the broader economy beyond just food/shelter (demand is important )", "Outside of being incredibly depressing where everyone is wearing the same clothes, eating the same food etc, you want to ensure competition between businesses rather than just giving a couple of them a monopoly. \n\nAnd then there's the bureaucracy of it all, it's much easier to give someone a cheque than try and organise several different inept government entities to get them a list of items that would have to be personally tailored to them- when the recipient of the money could get themselves all that far more quickly and efficiently.\n\nYou're not thinking about basic income right, you're seeing it as a different form of current day government benefits, the kind where the government and many citizens resent all those on benefit and just wish they'd disappear.\n\nBasic income isn't' for now, it's for a few decades in the future where unemployment has risen dramatically thanks to automation of damn near all menial jobs. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [ "discretion.it" ], [] ]
4e3ghq
why did the use of the contraction "'twas" fall out use? we still have "it's" for "it is", but the similar contraction for "it was" seems to no longer be used anymore?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4e3ghq/eli5_why_did_the_use_of_the_contraction_twas_fall/
{ "a_id": [ "d1wydsy", "d1x3hjt", "d1x7i0x" ], "score": [ 4, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "When speaking, saying \"twas\" is only slightly different to saying \"itwas\".\nWhereas, \"it's\" is one mouthing vs. two for \"it is\".\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if it's because we're lazy shits?\n\nI don't know why \"twas\" is so archaic though. Could be just a secondary consequence. edit: interestingly I used \"could be just a...\" instead of \"It could be just a...\" and I do the same with \"was\", often starting the sentence without an \"it\" at all, i.e. \"Was a great night...\"", "It's certainly interesting to note that this is one of the few cases where language bucks the trend of becoming simpler and shorter. Typically you see new contractions being used, or used more often.", "The present tense of 'twas is 'tis, which got utterly usurped by it's. Check out Deck the Halls." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
2lawb2
why do we vote for judges? shouldn't they all technically be the same (unbiased)?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lawb2/eli5_why_do_we_vote_for_judges_shouldnt_they_all/
{ "a_id": [ "clt1om8" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "Some places have judge elections, some do not. It's a double-edged sword. One on hand, you get judges that are much more reactive to popular opinion rather than an unfettered application of the law if they are elected. On the other, you can get judges that essentially have unlimited tenure where they can get lazy or even more ideological because they don't have the answer to the people during elections. It's kind of a lose-lose." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
622tc7
are we allowed to buy our politicians internet histories now?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/622tc7/eli5_are_we_allowed_to_buy_our_politicians/
{ "a_id": [ "dfj9cgn" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "If it takes a crowdfund, I'm in! To your second point, I've experienced the same frustrations, both submitting and responding. It's very annoying, especially from a mobile.\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3ec767
why is it so easy to tell when you make eye contact with someone?
It seems to be really obvious when you make eye contact with someone, even though the position of the other person's pupils barely moves compared to when you are not making direct eye contact with them.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ec767/eli5_why_is_it_so_easy_to_tell_when_you_make_eye/
{ "a_id": [ "ctdicen", "ctdx34k" ], "score": [ 17, 2 ], "text": [ "Eye contact is actually an extremely important form of communication in humans. We can impart a *ton* of information with only our eyes and no other gestures or words. \nIt's even important for infants who stare at their parents to get their attention. So it's in us from birth. \nThere are actually parts of our brains that are so good at detecting eye contact that those parts wont fire if the gaze is only off by a few degrees; like someone looking at a clock over our shoulders. \n \nSo in answer to your question, it's so obvious because there are parts of our brains that fire specifically for that reason and they only fire for that reason. \n \nIncidentally, this is what's responsible for the 'psychic staring effect', which is the feeling that you're being watched from someplace outside of your vision -- when that feeling is accurate. \nWhat happens in the psychic staring effect is that you turn your head just enough for only a fraction of a second, that the stare enters your peripheral vision for only a fraction of a second and you don't consciously notice it. \nBut those areas of your brain fire and the feeling is strong enough that it lingers. You eventually look around and find that the person is still staring at you. ", "What about eye contact not only being applied to communication but also defensive mechanisms. What if that feeling we get when we can detect someone staring at is is our brain firing some sort of defensive warning, even though we have not made direct eye contact ourselves we see them somewhere within the edges of our vision.\n\nJust an idea, I know nothing on this topic :P. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
eljz9y
for central air- what’s the difference between the 70 degree cool setting and the 70 degree heat setting?
I would think that 70 degrees means 70 degrees... but it sure feels different!!
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eljz9y/eli5_for_central_air_whats_the_difference_between/
{ "a_id": [ "fdie2uy", "fdie6el", "fdie9cu", "fdiei9b", "fdiur1n" ], "score": [ 2, 6, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Cool is for hot days when you need to cool the house down to around 70.\n\nHeat is for cold days when you need to heat the house up to 70.\n\nIt is two different processes. When you cool the house it tends to dry the air out a little, so if feels dryer when you come in but the relative humidity is still typically kind of high. When you heat the air you drop the relative humidity. This also affects how it feels.", "I believe one setting operates the furnace and will only provide heat to raise the temperature while in a cold environment. The other only operates the air conditioner to lower the temperature in a warm environment. \nIt has more to do with the electronics to operate the correct machine (furnace or a/c) rather then the desired temperature.", "If the outside environment is warm, then setting 70 deg cool will allow the air-conditioner to turn on and cool the house down to 70 deg. If the environment outside is cool, then 70 deg warm will allow the heater to turn on to warm the house.\n\nIf it is hot outside and the setting is 70 deg warm, the air con will not turn on and likely the house will heat up past 70 deg. Vice versa if cold.", "If in the cool setting the furnace (sometimes auxiliary in a heat pump) will not turn on. In heat setting the compressor for the heat exchanger will not turn on. It was explained to me years ago that air conditioners do not cool air, they remove heat from air. I understand the concept but I am not an HVAC person, so I cannot explain it well. My only real experience is with 2 and 4 pipe Fan coil units functioning on chiller and boiler systems.", "70 degrees is not the only aspect of temperature. What we typically see on the thermostat is the dry bulb setting. However, humidity plays a huge factor in determining your comfort level. In the summer months, the humidity level is higher so cooler air feels better because it dehumidifies the air allowing the natural evaporative cooling process of your skin to be more effective. In the winter months, the air is already dry so when the furnace heats the air, it doesn't contribute any additional moisture. That is why your skin dries out.\n\nThere are other factors too. I read sometime ago that in the winter human skin actually stores more carbon, which acts as a natural insulator." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [] ]
j3n7f
who are born again christians?
I'm not even a Xtian. So please explain like I'm a five year old Hindu.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j3n7f/who_are_born_again_christians/
{ "a_id": [ "c28v0sm", "c28vcg6" ], "score": [ 2, 3 ], "text": [ "The definition has changed over the thousands of years Christianity has existed. Today it usually refers to an adult who, after not being very religious, decides to convert themselves fully to Christianity.", "There is no clear definition of 'born again,' but it's often colloquially used to describe those who converted to Christianity. The term comes from the story in John 3 about Nicodemus but to be honest the term is taken way out of context most times you hear it." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
4sd8ad
if a doctor has to prescribe opiates like oxycontin, how do so many pills end up on the black market?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4sd8ad/eli5_if_a_doctor_has_to_prescribe_opiates_like/
{ "a_id": [ "d58d1cq", "d58d3ns", "d58frdg" ], "score": [ 3, 5, 2 ], "text": [ "People fake symptoms in order to a get a prescription they aren't actually planning to take, or they go to several doctors (and pharmacies) getting the same prescription repeatedly.\n\nAnd there are some criminals who are also pharmacists or doctors, and therefore have access.", "Doctors and hospitals have to buy it somewhere...there are crooked people involved in the manufacturing and distribution of opiates. Also a LOT of people get fake prescriptions. Opiates are pain relievers and there's no surefire way to prove whether or not a patient has pain so often Opiates are prescribed to liars who then pick them up from pharmacy and sell them.", "My g/f of three years worked as a pharmacy tech, had to do modules related to learning the laws of pharmacy operation. I helped her with them here and there, despite having no prior experience, and learned a ton.\n\nThey call it \"diversion.\" Typically, it involves someone with a legitimate prescription (meaning actually issued by a doctor, regardless of reason) selling or giving away their pills. There are other instances, like pill mills (FL had a rash of these for awhile) where doctors and pharmacists work together to distribute mass amounts of meds, doing pretty much the worst thing their degrees can do, and make a shit ton of profit in the process because this is typically cash-only with jacked-up prices. Some people in my town got busted running a major drug ring with pills they got from FL pill mills, one trip down there per month, they'd come back with loads of painkillers, Xanax, Adderall, you name it, and then sell it. \n\nAnother way is that they come from inside hospitals, snagged by nurses and other employees and sold. A guy I knew who was a nurse got busted for this, he was stealing morphine.\n\nThere are plenty of ways this stuff makes it into the street, though typically there aren't enough pain meds on the street for it to become an epidemic, that's where heroin comes in. A city in my state is going through a pretty nasty epidemic of heroin use, much of which turns out to be fentanyl, an extremely strong opiate, and rarely prescribed compared to oxycodone or hydrocodone. Lots of ODs and deaths. There was a bust in Canada recently where police seized enough fentanyl-precursor powder on the street to make millions of pills. [38 million, to be exact, according to Vice.](_URL_1_)\n\nOpiates are here, and they aren't going away. The Canadian bust proves that doctors and prescriptions aren't always needed to create an opiate problem on the street. \n\nFor some more info, this is a great post where an independent drug researcher answered some questions I had about opiates, both prescription and non, and provided some great links.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "https://www.reddit.com/r/Drugs/comments/4rh6xo/dear_druggitors_i_am_currently_working_on_an/d51qpkf", "https://news.vice.com/article/canadian-police-just-seized-enough-powder-to-make-38-million-fentanyl-pills" ] ]