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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3r2ars
|
einstein's non-linear time
|
Gday, thanks in advance. In a nutshell, im struggling to wrap my head around this concept that Einstein appeared to touch on in this quote;
""...for us physicists believe the separation between past, present, and future is only an illusion, although a convincing one.""
Ive often heard about the concept of time as non-linear, thereby explaining the entropy paradox, but i just "dont get it".
Thanks once again
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r2ars/eli5_einsteins_nonlinear_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwka2yy"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"To us, time is linear and only goes in one direction. You can remember things that happened but not the future. Things degrade and erode but don't go the other way. Entropy increases instead of decreasing. The bit about it being an illusion is that *from a physics point of view* - i.e. just the maths - there's no actual difference between time going in one direction or the other and physicists are trying to understand *why* the 'arrow of time' points in one direction."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2qr21q
|
how do service dogs know when somebody needs an insulin shot?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qr21q/eli5how_do_service_dogs_know_when_somebody_needs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn8p4ui"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Smell. They can actually smell the difference in their owners sweat/breath/whatever it is that smells different."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6l7869
|
in the theory of infinite alternate universes, why isn't there one universe where said theory is false, screwing it up for every other universe, or is that our universe?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6l7869/eli5_in_the_theory_of_infinite_alternate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djrkwpn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"An infinite system can still be restricted. For example, in an infinite set of even numbers you'll never find the number three. So, in an infinite set of universes there may still be restrictions (e.g. entropy might be a necessary factor for a universe to be formed). Therefore, even in an infinite set of universes there doesn't have to be a universe in which the parallel universe theory is false."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
g23n9a
|
is it true that the missionary position was named after christian missionaries? if it is true why weren't tribes people already doing that simple position?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g23n9a/eli5_is_it_true_that_the_missionary_position_was/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fnjb6f6",
"fnjj2vq",
"fnjnhcg"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's certain that the natives knew many positions, including the missionary one. \n\nIn the Bible it uses the phrase to lay down with as a euphemism for having intercourse with. So some thought that any position were both were not lying down as somehow deviant. Hence, doggy style would be considered immoral.",
"Yes, and this isn't a case of Missionaries teaching sex education to the natives, it's a case of missionaries enforcing their own version of morality.\n\nDepending on how you interpret the bible a number of sexual acts are considered amoral. There's a reason that anal sex is referred to as sodomy, because it's an act associated with Sodom in the bible and therefore sinful.\n\nMissionaries would teach that partners laying down and facing each other was the only morally correct sexual position. Anything else was a sinful act.\n\nNo sex before marriage, Sex is for procreation not pleasure, birth control is a sin, etc.",
"From wikipedia:\n\nthe term probably originated from Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male through a confluence of misunderstandings and misinterpretations of historical documents"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ssxpy
|
inspired by the recent cairo front-page. is the fact that it is snowing in cairo and (apparently) not in some northern countries a weird thing with weather, or am i just missing something basic?
|
I hear some countries are having the coldest winters they've had in several decades, while some redditor mentions that Sweden is on its way to having the warmest winter it's had in a while.
I haven't really payed much attention to weather (considering I'm from Florida, where it's constantly too hot to live during the day anyway), so I'm just wondering is this relatively normal for certain countries that sound like they wouldn't snow (like Egypt) to snow, while some countries that you expect to snow (like Sweden) currently aren't? Or is this some sort of facet of climate change of some sort?
[Here's what I was reading, if you guys are curious](_URL_0_)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ssxpy/eli5_inspired_by_the_recent_cairo_frontpage_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce0wacs"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Common misconception about Global Warming - its not just things getting warmer. It means that the climate itself is changing, and weather patterns are becoming more unpredictable. \n\nThat includes snow in Cairo, or Texas, or warmer winters in Sweden, or what have you.\n\nWhile I've read that we are technically in a cooling trend, the effects of 'Global Warming' are at this point that the weather we have come to expect is changing, and potentially not for the better."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1sse8e/for_the_first_time_in_112_years_it_snows_in_cairo/ce0sem1"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
584jr0
|
how can this happen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/584jr0/eli5_how_can_this_happen/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8xcqj7",
"d8xcqk0",
"d8xct15"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"While I wasn't there to witness this, I expect snow fell on the slide and stuck temporarily, and then as a roughly bound-together mat slid off the slide, at a later time, as snow/ice, not liquid water.",
"The snow fell on the slide and stuck along the length. Then the slide warmed enough to melt the bottom layer, allowing the weight to slide the snow off the end where it folded neatly. It didn't freeze that way in one stage.",
"The entire sheet of ice/snow looks like it slid off the slide and fell like that. The slide would have have to have warmed after the snow fell, melting a thin layer of it and gravity took care of the rest. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3asbof
|
what if a witness says no when asked to take the oath.
|
If someone is called up as a witness in a trial what happens if they refuse to take the oath? (I'm referring to the "The truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth" )
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3asbof/eli5_what_if_a_witness_says_no_when_asked_to_take/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csfib76",
"csfioi4",
"csfjt82"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"A few things, really depends on the judge and what role you have in the case.\n\n1. if you're a minor witness they'll just tell you to leave.\n\n2. if you're a key witness or are the litigant/plaintiff/defendent etc. and have been legally subpoenaed then you can be held in contempt of court. This can escalate over time as you continue to be stubborn.\n",
"They just ask you to affirm that you will tell the truth. There is no legal consequence for not following the religious ceremony of swearing.",
"If you have a religious objection to swearing on a Bible, you can ask for an affirmation rather than an oath.\n\nIf you're on the stand because you are legally obligated to be there, and are legally responsible for your own actions (not diminished capacity, not a minor), then you can be found in contempt. The judge can fine you and/or throw you in jail _indefinitely_ until you choose to comply with the court order to testify"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
28a8d2
|
why do so many people enjoy modern ultra-realistic computer games simulating horrible things like war and murder?
|
Computer games these days are so realistic looking and the weapons are based on the real thing right down to the way they "feel". The way some games allow you to slow down and follow a bullet while the camera pans round as it enters and exits a soldier's body. The blood, the guts and the killing troubles me and I fail to understand why people enjoy them.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28a8d2/eli5why_do_so_many_people_enjoy_modern/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci8x76z",
"ci8x78p",
"ci8x7lu",
"ci8xjlc",
"ci8xu4g",
"ci8yb7t",
"ci8yv3q",
"ci8zcdd",
"ci924n5",
"ci930lq",
"ci93d1i",
"ci95ug6"
],
"score": [
26,
8,
9,
17,
7,
155,
6,
2,
3,
2,
13,
3
],
"text": [
"Because at the end of the day humans are violent. We can pretend we aren't, we can try and dehumanize killers while justifying soldiers and cops but at the end of the day humans kill humans. A simulation of this provides the excitement without the moral dilemma. The more realistic it is the more visually stimulating it is.",
"Because war and murder are unavailable to experience, but attractive in theory. I stress theory, because nobody likes the idea of somebody shooting AT them, but it's generally fun to shoot at other people. Hyper-realism allows people to more engross themselves in a situation while still maintaining their sense of safety (because it's just a game.).",
"The same reason that people have watched and read about similar acts throughout human history. Movies, books, plays, even sacred holy texts have all had depictions of violence.\n\nVideo games are no different.\n\nIf it doesn't appeal to you, great! It doesn't have to. Same way pickles do not appeal to me. ",
"The same reason we have ultra-realistic simulations of car racing or flying space ships. People want to feel like they're doing exciting things they can't do in real life (at least not safely).",
" > The blood, the guts and the killing troubles me\n\nIt's important to note that there *is* no killing, and most people understand this, regardless of their degree of involvement in the experience.\n\nTo understand why this sort of entertainment is so enjoyed, one would have to explore why humans like fiction at all.\n",
"It's not just games. Nearly every fictional entertainment medium we have is chock full of violence and hurt.\n\nWould you want to watch a movie where a fictional family of four goes on a nice picnic, enjoys some time in the sun, and has a great old time with no conflict? Would you tune in every week to see what the Richardsons put on their sandwiches? \n\nCompelling stories need conflict, and many of those conflicts explore fantasies that are beyond the reach of everyday people. What would you do as the CEO of Wayne Enterprises? What would you do if your uncle murdered your father and stole the throne? How would you fight Dracula? What would you do if ninjas broke into your house? \n\nGames aren't really so different. They're just one more piece in the puzzle. If they skew toward action, I think it's because they are so interactive, and players would get bored otherwise.\n\nSome movies get by with intrigue or comedy. Some games get by with puzzle or simulation mechanics. But both mediums tend to work simply when there's a dramatic enemy to be overcome.",
"People in Rome enjoyed watching real \"people\" die at the hands of gladiators, or gladiators kill gladiators, or lions kill gladiators, or mock naval battles in their colosseums. \n\nThe difference between now and then is that it was real, and now its fake and safe. People haven't changed in 2000 years. \n\n* I say \"people\" because a lot of them were slaves and were not regarded as people but more like animals thus circumventing some moral objections that might be raised either by the pleb or the nobility of the time.",
" The games you are more than likely referencing to are nothing like actual war. If a video game was modeled after what it was like to spend 7 months or more in a war zone it would not sale. The action scenes are over inflated on the amount of action that takes place. In a real combat zone it you are faced with a very extreme spectrum of nothing going on to shit hitting the fan with little to no deviation in the middle. \n\n Games like CoD and Battlefield have no moral basis, life in the game means nothing and you can respawn. I would also argue against the actual \"feel\" of the weapons as they really do not behave the same way as their real life counterparts. \n\n Think of it more like paintball games, yes you are actually shooting someone else, but I doubt very many people who play when they are \"in the moment\" are actually relating shooting someone with a paint ball to shooting them with a bullet.",
"Except they're not ultra-realistic. Play some of the more \"realistic\" shooters out there, like Call of Duty, or play some GTA. Then go look at actual pictures of gunshot victims. Realistic violence would be a turn off. Video games implement \"Hollywood realistic\" violence.",
"If anyone thinks video games are too violent, i recommend you read the Iliad (the oldest work of western literature). It's known for it's very graphic violence (among other things). Then you'll realize that us humans have always had a kind of fascination with violence and death, and that seeing it in video games is nothing new, and more importantly, nothing to be worried about.",
"Your question was actually \"why do people like things that I don't like?\" Do you actually need an answer to that question?",
"Sniper Elite is not a game that people actually play, by the way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8dfk8w
|
if we breathe in o2 and use the oxygen, how do we release co2? the same ammount of oxygen we took in, just an added carbon atom
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dfk8w/eli5_if_we_breathe_in_o2_and_use_the_oxygen_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dxmpccd",
"dxmpcyr",
"dxmpedy",
"dxmpm22",
"dxmxlqa",
"dxmxvze",
"dxmyd9u",
"dxn05pv",
"dxn0hpt"
],
"score": [
26,
3,
5,
147,
4,
2,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The carbon isn't coming from air we breathe in, it's coming from glucose that the body metabolized. Metabolizing glucose results in CO2, water, and energy. We use the energy and breathe out the CO2 and water. ",
"The oxygen plays a number of roles within the body to facilitate the process of cellular metabolism. Without the presence of oxygen, these internal cycles couldn't complete and your cells would begin to die.\n\nOne of the functions of oxygen is to bind with waste products of these processes and carry them out of the body, either as CO2 through breathing or H2O through urination.",
"Glucose (aka sugar from food) breaks down and gives us CO2.\n\nGlucose is C6H12O6 \n\nOxygen O2\n\nCarbon Dioxide CO2\n\nIf we have 1 glucose and 6 oxygens, that can give us 6 CO2 and 6 H20.\n\n",
"It comes from the food you eat. The nutrients that you consume get broken down to a molecular level during digestion, and changed into simple forms like Glucose, a common sugar. One Glucose molecule is made of six Oxygen atoms, twelve Hydrogen atoms, and six Carbon atoms.\n\nWhen your cells 'burn' glucose for energy by combining it with oxygen, the reaction equation looks like this:\n\n C6H12O6 + 6x O2 — > 6x CO2 + 6x H2O\n\n...which gives you Water and Carbon Dioxide in addition to useful energy.\n",
"You're not breathing out the air you just breathed in plus a Carbon. You're breathing out old air. Basically your body uses the O2 for stuff inside your body and those processes turn it into CO2. Then you breath THAT out.",
"The inhaled oxygen is different than the atoms of oxygen exhaled as CO2. The inhaled oxygen receives two protons and two electrons (two hydrogen atoms) and is excreted as two molecules of water, H2O. \n\n`O2 + 4 H - > 2 H2O`\n",
"Your lungs don't pick which gases to take in and release. There isn't a little sorting-protein that works out \"dump this CO2\" and \"take this O2\".\n\nYour lungs work through diffusion. Blood entering the lungs is higher in CO2 than the air you breathe in, so some CO2 gets released into the air in your lungs. And the opposite is true of oxygen: your blood is low in oxygen, but the air has more oxygen in it, so some oxygen moves into your blood.\n\nThen that oxygenated blood goes from the lungs, to the heart, through your entire body, back into the heart, and back to the lungs.\n\nOn its trip around your entire body, the oxygen and sugar (in a very complicated multi-step process) gets used up and becomes (mostly) carbon dioxide and water. And other things.",
"So the right answer has already been given: the carbon atom comes from what we eat and drink. What has not been said yet is that this process is in some ways comparable to fire. You are 'burning' the energy of that sandwich you ate this morning by moving your finger to type this. \n\nHow so? Basically by making the molecules smaller and smaller because every time you break the bonds that are keeping the atoms together, they release energy. Sugars are in essence a chain of carbon atoms all linked together with hydrogen atoms attached. Oxygen in a way is what is forcing the bonds of these atoms apart (well, in an ELI5 way) and takes its place, which is why you get C**O**2 and H2**O** from this reaction. \n\nWood is also a chain of C's and H's. If you light a fire, you are basically providing the energy to break the first couple of bonds, these broken bonds release their energy as heat and if the breaking of bonds releases enough heat to sustain itself, the fire will keep going until there is no bonds left to break, or no oxygen to break the bonds with. In your body, the process happens slower and more step by step, which is why spontaneous combustion is such a rare occurrence. \n\nHow does this bond energy get there in the first place? Sunlight! Plants use the exact opposite reaction in their mitochondria to 'glue together' carbon from CO2 in the air with hydrogen from water (H20) so in some ways, if you are getting hot from running around, you are getting hot because of the energy of the sun. \n\nAlso, if you want to know how much energy is in food, burn it under some water and see how much the temperature increases. Knowing that it takes about 1 calorie to heat up 1 gram of water by one degree Celsius, you can get an estimate (though it will always be too low since some of the heat will just go into the air/whatever is holding the water, so you don't measure that). ",
"CO2 is a reduced form of O2. So even though the same amount of atoms exist in both molecules, there’s a different amount of potential energy in them. O2 is extremely electronegative and it’s function biologically is to use that electronegativity to force electrons down an Electron Transport Chain in mitochondria which fuels an electrochemical gradient to produce energy in the form of cellular ATP. Once the electrons reach the oxygen it reduces the molecule to a lower energy state in the form of H20 (and relatedly CO2). So even though the equation is balanced on both sides, energy is released to the system which makes the process useful. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2osb3n
|
how come the dollar and euro are worth more than the nok and yet the economy of norway is doing so well?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2osb3n/eli5_how_come_the_dollar_and_euro_are_worth_more/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmq1k0d",
"cmq1tmv"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The price of one currency in another currency is not in any way an indicator of the relative strength of the economy.\n\nLet me ask you a question. If the US government decided tomorrow that they were no longer going to measure things in dollars but instead would be using pennies. Nothing of substance would change, we would just be moving decimals 2 spaces right.\n\nAn exchange rate that is 1 GBP = 1.5 USD. If this reflected the relative strengths of the economies we would conclude that the US is 1.5x stronger than the UK in this regard. Now, the US does away with the dollar, so now it becomes 1 GBP = 150 US pennies. So now it appears that the US economy is 150x the UK one, not 1.5. Nothing has changed other than the unit of measure in the united states. \n\nYou cannot use currency values to compare the relative sizes or strengths of economy in the way you are proposing. It simply does not work that way. ",
"A country's economy is like a pizza, and its currency is slices of that pizza.\n\nYou can have a large pizza with small slices, or a small pizza with large slices. One pizza isn't bigger than the other just because the slices are bigger."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2zczru
|
why can dogs stop their pee stream, carry on like normal, and pee again later on the same walk without seeming uncomfortable?
|
Once I start peeing I really can't stop mid-stream for more than a few seconds. There is no way I could stop, keep walking around for a few more minutes and then finish. Yet my dog, and lots of other dogs seem to be able to pee as they please.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zczru/eli5why_can_dogs_stop_their_pee_stream_carry_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cphzg0a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I can stop mid-stream and leave. I think it's just muscular control. \n\nAlso dogs have a special use for peeing which makes it necessary for them to do it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
8ovkpk
|
why is it hard to snap out of deep thinking
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ovkpk/eli5_why_is_it_hard_to_snap_out_of_deep_thinking/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e06fder",
"e06nwhm"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Serious comment and I’m not trying to make fun of you. You might actually have ADD. You’re basically describing it. ",
"I agree with /u/homebrew311evolver, you might have ADD.\n\nI say this because I have ADD and you are describing me."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
16h19g
|
graphing linear equasions.
|
For example:
4x - 6y = 12
x/2 - 4y = 4
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16h19g/eli5_graphing_linear_equasions/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7vyl2h",
"c7vyo4y"
],
"score": [
4,
11
],
"text": [
"There are two good ways to graph a line when it's in the form Ax + By = C. Let's just look at the first equation, 4x - 6y = 12.\n\n**Slope-intercept form**: When a line is in the form y = mx + b, this is called slope-intercept form. It's really useful, because it's easy to see the information you need to graph the line right away. Let's solve for y:\n\n 4x - 6y = 12\n -6y = -4x + 12\n y = 2x/3 - 2\n\nb is called the *y-intercept* - it's where the line crosses, or intercepts, the y-axis. Here, our b is -2. That means our y-intercept is at (0, -2).\n\nm is called the *slope* of the line. Here, our m is 2/3. That means that means for every two units the line goes up, it'll go three units to the right. So, for example, you'd have a point at (3, 0), at (6, 2), and so on. This should give you all the information you need to draw the line.\n\n**Finding the intercepts**: In order to graph a line, you really only need two points on it. The easiest way to do this is to find the x-intercept and the y-intercept.\n\nx-intercept:\n\n 4x - 6y = 12\n 4x - 6(0) = 12\n 4x = 12\n x = 3\n\ny-intercept:\n\n 4x - 6y = 12\n 4(0) - 6y = 12\n -6y = 12\n y = -2\n\nSo now we know our line has two points - one at (0, -2), and one at (3, 0). Draw a line between them and extend it out from there.\n",
"A graph is nothing but a whole bunch of points (x,y). If you wanted to, you could graph the following points\n\n(0,0) \n(0,1) \n(1,0) \n(1,1)\n\nThat's a perfectly good graph. If you plot those points on a plane you'll get something that looks like the corners of a square. You could have any other set of points too, and if you graph them, then you get some graph.\n\nMost of the graphing that you'll probably come across in your math classes will be graphs of sets of points (x,y) where the x and the y are related somehow algebraically. That is, you have some formula where if you know the value of x, then you automatically know the value of y by plugging x into the formula. When you have this kind of a situation, where knowing the value of x tells you exactly what the value of y is, then you have something called a *function*. In particular, here we say that \"y is a function of x\".\n\nThere are a lot of different kinds of functions. One important kind of function can be expressed as a linear equation. This kind of function, when you plot all (infinitely many) points of it onto a plane, will make a line. One nice way to express this type of function is like this:\n\ny = mx + b\n\nWhere m and b are some numbers. You can fully describe any line (except for a vertical one) that you can draw on the plane by putting it into this form, and the nicest thing is that it's easy to find; all you have to do is to do algebraic manipulations that get y all by itself on the left side of the equation. Then you have a *function* of x, meaning as soon as you plug in a value for x, it spits out the value for y.\n\nSo if we have say 3y-6x=9, this describes a line. However, it's hard to see exactly which line it describes when it's in this form. The best thing to do is to try to get it into that \n\ny = mx + b\n\nform that I mentioned above. So (check this) we do maths to find that we can write that as \n\ny = 2x + 3\n\nWhich is much nicer. Now we can just plug in values of x to get the associated value of y:\n\n x | y\n 0 | 3\n 1 | 5\n 2 | 7\n 3 | 9\n\nand so on. Then you can pull out your graph paper and carefully plot those points onto the graph. One nice thing is once you plot them, you'll notice that they're all on the same line. But we knew that would happen, since anything that looks like \n\ny = mx + b\n\nmakes a straight line. So you can \"fill in the blanks\" so to speak by pulling out your ruler and lining it up with those points, and then drawing a line that connects them all and goes out to (±) infinity in both directions.\n\nOnce you do this a few times, you might notice a pattern for how it works. When you have \n\ny = mx + b\n\nthen it doesn't matter what m is, when you plug in 0 to x, you always get y=b. That's easy to see because you have \n\ny = m0 + b\n\nand 0 times anything is 0, so you're just left with\n\ny = b\n\nwhen x = 0. So without even doing any work, you know immediately when you see \n\ny = mx + b\n\nthat you can put a point at b on the y axis (where x = 0). \n\nNow you might notice another pattern. Let's have another look at the table I did above\n\n x | y\n 0 | 3\n 1 | 5\n 2 | 7\n 3 | 9\n\nDo you see a pattern in the y's? Every time x goes up by 1, y ~~goes up by 3~~ goes up by 2. That's no accident; it's because for this line ~~m = 3~~ m = 2. This value, m, is called *the slope*, and it is *very important*. It's essentially the backbone of a lot of what you'll be doing in calculus, so if you plan on doing more math it's important that you understand exactly what is meant by this number. It's not very complicated, but it *is* very important. It is the change in y for every change in x.\n\nOnce you know the slope of the line, you can draw the line without actually making a table. Since you already know that there's a point at x=0 and y=3, you can figure out that there must be a point 1 over and ~~3~~ 2 up, since ~~the slope is 3~~ the slope is 2. So you draw that point, and then pull out the ruler and connect the two points, and you're done.\n\n**EDIT** Fixed stupid."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1szbkv
|
what is the highest somebody can skydive?
|
I know this is a bit hypothetical. But I saw the Baumgartener spacejump. Just got finishied watching Gravity. How high can somebody in an astronaut style space suit jump from, and still have gravity pull them in? Even with a "booster pack" to get them pointed in the right direction, would a human "burn up?" given our mass is so low, relatively speaking? Does Nasa toss suited up "dummies" out of the ISS to test any of this? Is there any kind of theoretical limit as to the altitude a human can jump from, and make a sucessfull landing? If Baumgautner can make it from a 120k feet... Then why not 240K? So on and so forth.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1szbkv/eli5_what_is_the_highest_somebody_can_skydive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce2rnf9",
"ce2unr6"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You have to go something like 2/3 of the way to the Moon before if you slowed down you'd be fall towards the Moon instead of the Earth. If you had a suit with heat shields that could survive reentry I guess that distance is your hypothetical height. That's hundreds of thousands of kms. ",
"In terms of NASA, the answer is surprisingly yes, though not directly to test survivability. See [SuitSat](_URL_0_). "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuitSat"
]
] |
|
f3i4oc
|
why do codeine-based painkillers cause constipation?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f3i4oc/eli5_why_do_codeinebased_painkillers_cause/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fhiybpz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's not just codeine, but all opioids. Opioids are a central nervous system depressants. They block pain receptors in the body, and this reduces pain. One of the side effects of slowing down the central nervous system is that it affects involuntary movements in the body, for example, the movement of food through the digestive system, resulting in constipation. As the muscle contractions that move food through the gut slow down, the walls of the intestine absorb more fluid. With less fluid in the intestines, stools to become hard and constipation develops."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4gbdq6
|
how does the glass from a car shatter into small, almost uniform bits, while most other glass shatters into random shards.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gbdq6/eli5_how_does_the_glass_from_a_car_shatter_into/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2g3fzy",
"d2g3htx",
"d2g72yt",
"d2gdimn"
],
"score": [
25,
15,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's tempered so it does that. It's much less likely to seriously hurt you because there's no huge chunk to stab you. Also, if you roll you can exit quickly.",
"Car glass is all a specifically manufactured *Safety Glass* designed to crumble instead of creating shards. \n\n_URL_0_\n\n \nIt's done that way to prevent people in car accidents from being injured by long shards of broken glass.\n\n\n",
"There are two varieties of glass, created by different cooling methods. Annealed glass is cooled quickly, and when damaged is broken into shards of irregular shape and size. It is not particularly strong and breaks rather easily. Tempered glass is cooled slowly resulting in more compression of the glass surface. It is squeezed very tightly internally and left under tension. This makes it more resistant to heat and pressure. Once broken at any point the tension is released across the entire surface all at once as it snaps into mostly uniform cubes. Tempered glass can be identified through the light of a polarized lens (like some sunglasses), where you will notice a wavy or gridlike pattern in the light passing through.",
"It shatters like that because the glass is under large amount of tension. This tension is created by cooling the glass very fast - the outer parts of the compound cool faster and contract. This in term \"pulls\" on the inner parts creating a lot of tension beneath the surface.\n\nOnce you break it (usually at the edge) all the tension is released and the glass shatters.\n\nIt's similar to Prince Rupert's Drop.\n\nHere are some nice youtube videos explaining how the car glass breaking works:\n\n_URL_1_\n\nAlso, from the same author, how Prince Rupert's Drop works:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_glass"
],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe-f4gokRBs",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i5rycLJ3D8"
]
] |
||
49fpt1
|
growing up i was told that pc gets more virus/ malware problems because of the massive user base. a lot more people have macs now - how are incidents like the transmission ransomware still so rare?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49fpt1/eli5_growing_up_i_was_told_that_pc_gets_more/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0rfykz",
"d0rfzni",
"d0rgcun",
"d0rh014",
"d0ro4gi"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
45,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"While a lot more people have Macs than before, the marketshare is still solidly controlled by non-Mac PCs. [This article](_URL_0_) illustrates this pretty well. While Mac sales have surged, they still only account for < 10% of PC sales. It's still far more worthwhile for virus/malware creators to target PC's with Windows.",
"There might be \"more\" Macs now, but they're still nowhere near as many as Windows PCs. Windows is still very much the king of the PC space. \n\nThere are a lot more mobile devices, but that's a completely different story. ",
"believe it or not, worldwide, mac users still make up less than 5% of all computer users. \n\nsource: _URL_0_\n\nso it still just is not profitable enough to develop malware for that platform.\n\nI can see how you may think there are a LOT of mac users out there, but keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of them are in the US. Mac are almost unheard of in Asia, for instance, which is where the actual majority of internet users are. ",
"An important difference between PC and Mac is their culture and environment. Mac is very very centralized and controlled unlike PC. If somehow a virus, that can do real damage to a Mac, is found out Apple will release a fix-it update ASAP. Since all Macs are generally the same machine, this one fix-it update works for all Macs and makes the virus powerless. \n\n\nMacs do get a lot of virus/malware but none that is really newsworthy. \n\nThis does not discount the user base percentage as a big contributor. ",
"As someone who works in tech support, I want to punch everyone who tells me their Mac or iPhone can't get viruses."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://bgr.com/2015/07/11/mac-vs-pc-sales-2015/"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Operatingsystem_market_share.svg"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
89vyno
|
why is everything 2.4ghz?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/89vyno/eli5_why_is_everything_24ghz/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dwty8kr",
"dwtyfbf"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Because its a special uncontrolled radio frequency band. \n\nTthe band is intended for industrial, scientific and medical short range transmissions; the ISM band covers a larger range of spectrum, but the 2.4GHz part is allowed usage for non-ISM products like wifi and bluetooth.... so long as its short range. If you pulled a Cristian Slater and managed to send a powerful signal on this band the FCC will find you and have a word with you. Basically you can make use of that band so long as you accept not dicking with other transmissions (or trying not to in the case of a microwave oven) and agree that your transmissions may be dicked with. i.e. you implement your own channelling and compensation and error correction. \n\n\n\n",
"There is a magic spot in the radio with relatively few rules provided that nobody screamed over each other they were allowed to have conversations. that area is the 2.4 gigahertz band. you can go into other bands but then you need to follow a bunch of rules\n not only can you not talk too loud but you also have to talk in a certain way and you have to have somebody certify that you are going to talk in that correct way. Some of those places you need to purchase the right to go and talk in that certain way have that certain times. But the 2.4 gigahertz is again relatively open provided you're not too loud you can say whatever you want you just can't do it too loudly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
93hk39
|
why do flies and bees etc wings sound so loud when they fly?
|
For such small animals the sound of them flying is really loud and noticeable,why is that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93hk39/eli5_why_do_flies_and_bees_etc_wings_sound_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3de79t"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Your ears are vibration sensors; sound is the air vibrating. Insects have to flap their wings hundreds of times per second to stay in the air. The flapping motion of their wings causes the air to vibrate back and forth hundreds of times per second also, which your ears then detect and call a buzz."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4hdriw
|
why are we taught different explanations and understandings of historical events at different levels of education?
|
At least in U.S. public schools, I have been taught multiple explanations for why/how historical events unfolded, depending on my grade-level at the time. The explanation given for the discrepancies are typically along the lines of- "It is simpler for lower-level teachers to give you a cleaner, neater answer." I was always frustrated by this because it gave me a greatly reduced confidence in my knowledge on the whole, and it seemed like a waste of time in the classroom on the aggregate.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hdriw/eli5_why_are_we_taught_different_explanations_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2p7ltb",
"d2p8sp3"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"So, basically, you want college students to learn history in ways that also make sense for eight year olds? ",
"You have to build an education on a foundation. If you are talking to a five year old person, they can understand my country 'tis of thee, and the date on which it was born. July 4th, 1776 has a lot of meaning to a young kid because they remember the picnic they went to two months ago. You don't bother explaining that fighting began on April 19th, 1775 in Lexington and Concord - that's more useful info for middle school kids and they are much better suited to learn about specific battles and dates. Something like the Boston Tea Party works well for these middle schoolers too, but it probably takes a more mature high school mind to understand national debt from the French and Indian War, the Stamp Act of 1765 and the Tea Act of 1773. \n \nIf you didn't know the kindergarten stuff, then in middle school you would've been the dumb kid going \"Declaration of Independence from what?\" You have to build on a foundation in history just like you have to in math.\n \nAs far as patriotism goes, there is a veil of propaganda in a public school education, sure. Governments are paying the bills after all. Maybe children should be taught the ugly stuff of history when they're young, but the general agreement is to teach pride of one's country and state at a young age. There's plenty of time to become jaded later, as you are currently learning."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
u2xbw
|
why do computers sometimes incorrectly read discs?
|
Right now I've got a commercial DVD that my computer insists is blank. It was running just fine last night, and this isn't a common problem with my computer. I've also (with other computers) had my computer fail to recognize a blank disc, as if there were no disc in the drive at all.
What gives?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u2xbw/eli5_why_do_computers_sometimes_incorrectly_read/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4rvn61"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It is easy for us to take things like disc drives for granted without appreciating that they are actually very complex systems with a lot of different pieces of hardware and software. A lot of things have to go *right* for a disc to be read. \n \nThe read head must find and read the tracks that tell it that a valid disc is in place. That requires that the head go to a place that is close to the correct track and then successfully sense the pits or magnetoptical domains on the disc along the track, without sensing ones in adjacent tracks instead. The pits have to be correctly converted from off/on information into binary data and coverted to a different format, and that data needs to be sent on to the disc controller so that it can decide that the right kind of disc is present, so that it can sent a message to the computer's CPU, so that it can respond to the Operating System correctly. \n \nIn other words, there are literally millions of things that have to happen correctly. Many of those things have been made relatively foolproof, and many of them simply aren't the kinds of things that often go bad. Since there are so many potential sources of failure, it's only speculation to say what is happening in a particular situation. \n \nMost of the *likely* culprits are things that are mechanical in nature, because that's the kind of thing that can just plain wear out. The most probable point of failure is getting the read head to align near the correct track and read it correctly without getting data from the nearby tracks. If the disc has gotten scratched or smudged, if the hole in the center has gotten worn or is poorly centered, if the read head has gone slightly out of mechanical alignment, if the temperature of the drive mechanism has gotten too high, if the driver firmware has gotten corrupted, etc. etc. then something might fail in a way that can't be corrected for. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5doah9
|
amortization - what does that mean?
|
As seen on financial reports of companies.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5doah9/eli5_amortization_what_does_that_mean/
|
{
"a_id": [
"da61jg7",
"da62gk0"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The easiest parallel would be depreciation of a tangible asset, your car gets used, and is worth less money, that is depreciation.\n\nwhen you do this to an intangible asset, its called amortization.",
"An amortization has two general uses:\n\n1. When paying a loan\n2. To spread the cost of a long-term usage item over many periods\n\nIn the first case, the amortization is the planned series of payments you would make in order to repay your loan. Using the starting principal (the amount you are taking as a loan), the interest rate (determined by the lender), and the payment schedule (will you pay back once a month over 5 years, or once a week for 6 months, or however long), you can calculate what the per-payment amounts will be. The amortization table will then display what your starting balance is, what your payment is, how much of that is going to principal vs interest, and what the balance will be after that payment. This will show the effect of every payment you make (assuming done so on time) with the last being to close out the balance.\n\nIn the second case, many businesses purchase expensive items intended to be used for a long time. These are really investments, not 'supplies'. Example a business might report it bought $100 of paper each month. No issues there. But reporting that they just bought a $10,000 new printer might make that quarter's report look really skewed because suddenly they would show a big expense. What the business will do instead is determine \"Ok, this printer is intended to last for 6 years after which it will have no remaining value\". So instead of reporting a $10,000 purchase as \"Paid cash, incurred $10,000 expense\" what they will instead do is the following:\n\nPaid $10,000 cash\nReceive $10,000 asset\n\nAnd every month, they will do the following:\n\nDecrease value of asset by $138.89\nIncurred expense of $138.89 (depreciation)\n\nThat is called amortizing the depreciation expense of the asset over its expected lifetime. It will reduce the month-to-month effect of buying that asset by showing it as a smaller expense over a longer period rather than a huge expense at one point.\n\nIt's also used for other things like patents to slowly decrease its value over its lifetime."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
727vj9
|
what is that little floating thing that we see when our eyes are closed? why do we see it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/727vj9/eli5_what_is_that_little_floating_thing_that_we/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dnghw8r",
"dnguv6o"
],
"score": [
21,
5
],
"text": [
"The floaters? When you squint? They're shadows formed by the light. When light enters our lens, it passes through a clear fluid called vitreous humour and it may have lumps broken off that wander around. You're basically seeing their shadows. About a year ago, a big chunk broke off in my eye. It was really annoying at first because I didn't need to squint to see this one, and was interfering with my vision, but the brain gradually gets used to it and starts ignoring it. ",
"In anatomy and physiology we learned that floaters could be the breakdown of collagen fibers going by the iris.. Who knows. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
20xkfd
|
in america, what is meant by college? is it the same thing as university or are they separate? what different qualifications do american's receive throughout education?
|
In Britain is goes:
- Primary school (ages 3-11) -- SATs
- Secondary school/high school (ages 11-16) -- GCSEs
- College (ages 16-18) -- A levels
- University (ages 18+) -- Degrees
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20xkfd/eli5_in_america_what_is_meant_by_college_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg7nt8m",
"cg7nwe1",
"cg7o7d1"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"College and universities are both post-secondary education in the US. However, Universities tend to be larger institutions and more research-oriented than college with more advanced degrees offered, but the words are mostly interchangeable in everyday language.\n\nEDIT: In the US, it generally goes (and this is flexible depending on the school):\n\n- Under 5 - Preschool (usually optional)\n- Age 5 to 12 - Elementary School (Kindergarten to Fifth or Sixth grade\n- Age 12 to 14 - Middle school (Grades six or seven to grade eight)\n- Age 14 to 18 - High School (Grades nine to 12)\n- Age 18 and up - College or university. Most people take 2 years to get an associates or 4 years to get a bachelors. A Masters is usually 2 years on top of the Bachelors.\n\nEDIT 2: We also don't say that someone \"goes to university\" the way it's common in the UK. We say they \"go to college\", even if that college is a university.",
"In the US, secondary school goes to age 18, and post-secondary schools are called colleges or universities. the difference between then is that colleges typically offer degrees in a set of related areas and universities are more broad, sometimes containing colleges within them. For example, Ohio State University contains different colleges for Arts and Sciences, Engineering, Business, and so on.",
"For the most part, university and college are used interchangeably in the US.\n\nTechnically, a college focuses on one broad field of study (Engineering, Liberal Arts, Music), while a university is a collection of colleges.\n\nBut when someone \"goes off to college\", it is a general term for post secondary education."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3gxbxi
|
what causes the noises that come from the walls and ceiling in my house?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gxbxi/eli5_what_causes_the_noises_that_come_from_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu2bjqd",
"cu2blkj",
"cu2boiu",
"cu2br9x"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"not entirely sure, but possibly a combination of dirt moving below the foundation, andwood expanding and contracting. or it could be a family member walking around, or a ghost",
"Ghosts!\n\nHaha but in all seriousness this looks like a pretty good source of info for ya _URL_0_\n\nP.S. sorry if this isn't good reddiquette I noob",
"Im not very good with explanations, but it basically has to do with the house expanding and contracting when the temperature fluctuates. So the materials of the house seem to \"pop\" and \"twist\" making the noises you hear. When the temperature gets colder things shrink, during the heat of the day in direct sunlight they expand some",
"Heat makes things expand, and cooling down makes them contract.\n\nSo it is parts of your house rubbing against other parts and settling.. \n\nYou are most likely to hear it at night when you are usually lying quietly in bed. Perhaps also since things fall back into position, giving a thump.\n\nOr you have pests or someone is squatting in your attic."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://lifehacker.com/strange-house-noises-explained-and-how-to-fix-them-1569420462"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ommcc
|
why do i feel like i can only fall in love with a woman because of her looks, and not her personality even though i want it vice versa? what psychological explanation is there?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ommcc/eli5_why_do_i_feel_like_i_can_only_fall_in_love/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cctfgmd",
"cctfhfd",
"cctg5s3"
],
"score": [
18,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Because you haven't fallen in love with a woman yet.",
"Either you're just shallow or you haven't met the right one yet, you'll know.",
"You've attached your own personal status to her looks. You're measuring your own success by the attractiveness of, well, what you can attract. Worse, your ability to project success to others (other guys *and* girls) is tied to how hot the girl is that you're with.\n\nThe actual experience of a positive relationship is competing with this alternate set of metrics. You are a collection on many wants, only some of which you're necessarily aware of."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2mawtc
|
are all dogs able to howl?
|
I have 2 dogs, ones a terrier mix the other is a schnoodle. The schnoodle "sings", the terrier never does though he sometimes will bark along with us. Would he still be able to howl if he wanted to or do some dogs not have the physiology?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mawtc/eli5_are_all_dogs_able_to_howl/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm2iuvb",
"cm2iv9h",
"cm2ltfl",
"cm2ocoe"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Mine can't.\n\nShe attempts whenever my roommates dog goes on a really long tear with any sirens outside but it comes out as a whiney chattering. Totally adorable.\n\n\nWe had taken to howling along with the other dog to try and teach her but I think it just stresses her it so we've stopped. ",
"My parents have a schnoodle and a bloodhound. They get into noise competitions every time someone in the family shows up, which eventually turns into both of them howling.\n\nI think every dog can howl, but some of them need to \"learn\" how, or at least have another dog around to try and out-noise.\n\nDogs are noisy.",
"I have 2 pugs and a Weiner dog that can. Usually started when I whistle to then in a high pitch",
"My old lab never did until he stayed in a kennel for a couple weeks, he learned how to there"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2fzb9u
|
why do instructors scream so much in the army?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fzb9u/eli5_why_do_instructors_scream_so_much_in_the_army/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cke5jig",
"cke5msy",
"cke5r6m",
"cke5smr",
"cke71td"
],
"score": [
10,
25,
6,
9,
5
],
"text": [
"To break you out of your comfort zone",
"The idea is it gets soldiers used to following instructions in stressful situations.",
"Essentially to break you down to build you back up.\n\nThe slightly longer format. We're all people with different likes, schedules, personalities, behaviours, ways of thinking. When you're on your own doing your own thing that's fine, when you're a cog in a greater machine, not so good.\n\nEveryone gets yelled at in basic, everyone gets treated like soft squishy meatbags (in Australia, new recruits in basic are often called 'jubes' after the [jelly lollies](_URL_0_) ) the goal of the instructors is to make you all equal, make you all leave your prejudices at the door, and see each other as equals, and work together as such, using individual strengths to cover other's weaknesses as your own weaknesses are covered by other's strengths, essentially working in a unit. \n\nThe yelling you see in movies is a little more overstated than what it actually is, but once again, if one gets yelled at you all get yelled at. \n ",
"The idea is to induce stress. It's to make you used to following commands even when you are too stressed out to think.\n\nThat way, later on, when lives are on the line you'll storm the beach or be quiet or whatever. You've been trained.",
"[Here's an article by a former drill instructor on some of the thinking/psychology behind military basic training.](_URL_0_)\n\nTL;DR: Train people to work under stress"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://nsm.com.au/wp-content/themes/NSM/includes/timthumb.php?q=100&zc=1&src=http://nsm.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Jubes.jpg&w=230&h=150"
],
[],
[
"http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2013/03/05/why_is_boot_camp_so_intense.html"
]
] |
||
x08dy
|
the elephant's foot at chernobyl, and some other questions.
|
1. I'm kind of confused as to what the Elephant's Foot at Chernobyl is, and why this quote is often accompanied with photos I see of it: "If you were to look at this, you would die instantly." Do they mean that the heat given off of it would kill you instantly? Or the radiation it gave off? How does the radiation kill you instantly?
1. This video (_URL_0_) shows a helicopter that was going to drop off clay and sand, yet suddenly just seems to fall out of the sky. Was this due to the heat of the reactor or the radiation? Again, if radiation was the cause, how could it do that?
1. This is probably along the same lines as the first, but a quote from one of the firefighters who were there to put out the fires was this: "Misha filled a cistern and we aimed the water at the top. Then those boys who died went up to the roof – Vashchik, Kolya and others, and Volodya Pravik.... They went up the ladder ... and I never saw them again." Again, did they die from heat exposure or radiation? How does it kill someone so rapidly?
Thank you... the whole thing is so tragic but I really want to try to understand what happened there.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/x08dy/eli5_the_elephants_foot_at_chernobyl_and_some/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5i14fc"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"i used wikipedia and other sources of the internet. i am by no means an expert. your question made me curious and i figured that answering you was a fast way to learn. :)\n\n1) the elephant's foot at chernobyl is essentially a big melted hunk of nuclear fuel fallen onto the floor. because it's been treated to stay more radioactive than can be found in nature for a very long time via an enrichment process and all the systems meant to keep it cool for use as a fuel source are gone, it's very, very radioactive and all of this is dispersed into the matter around it as it undergoes radioactive decay. it is likely in my opinion that severe, acute radiation sickness prevented anyone who went into the disaster from escaping before exposure to the heat and continued exposure to a lot of radiation killed them quickly, but not instantly. the elephant's foot and other structures like it still present at the accident site will still kill people because they are still undergoing radioactive decay now.\n\n2) that specific helicopter crashed because it's main rotor connected with the crane you can see in the video near it, it was not due to the radiation or the heat.\n\n3) radiation kills people because radioactive masses throw out unstable particles as they decay, which damage other molecules nearby by binding to them or taking away some of their atoms. the effect on a living thing is something like a burn, with the tissues taking damage to the parts that make them up and causing individual cells to die. if there is enough to kill many cells, it will become bad enough to kill the victim. At very high doses as seen in the Chernobyl event, the radiation harms the central nervous system and incapacitates a person, since their brain and spine are damaged and cannot send proper signals to the body allowing them to escape. in addition to having seizures, tremors, headache, and impaired ability to think because of the damage, their body will also react as if to a poison and attempt to purge the digestive system. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://youtu.be/rvAJ_u3Q0Hw?t=43s"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ofk4s
|
where does the water in water bottles actually come from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ofk4s/eli5where_does_the_water_in_water_bottles/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccrhkd9",
"ccrhke6",
"ccrhqlw"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Depends on the water bottle.\n\nBut often from public water supplies, like what comes out of your sink. Many water bottles will specifically state the source in some small print somewhere on the bottle.",
"bottling plants. some from a natural spring that comes from underground water source. others from filtered municipal water (aka tap water)",
"Its usually just local tap water filtered a bit more and sold at a nice fat markup "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2o5txg
|
why are musical notes the frequency that they are? is there some science behind musical scales or is it completely a "learned" appreciation?
|
Why is the frequency spread between notes what it is? Is there some math behind why some notes work in chords with others but some don't? If someone chose a different arbitrary frequency spread for notes and then exposed a child who has never heard music to it, would the child appreciate that as music or does something draw us back to the scale and notes we have now?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o5txg/eli5_why_are_musical_notes_the_frequency_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmjz2de"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"In western music our tuning systems (as there are more than one) date back to the Greeks. They were obsessed with numbers, and when they discovered an octave on a lyre could be played by a string with half the length of the root, they sought out other ratios for other notes. The series of notes we have now is based off of integer ratios of the root note. \n\nHowever there is a major problem. If you only go up by the ratios you will eventually go out of tune with the doubling of the octave. This is why they created the equal temperament tuning system, where the intervals aren't exactly integer ratios but they are the same across all octaves. \n\nEdit: what the Greeks considered to beautiful notes were ones based off those integer ratios. There's also a relationship with how instruments actually work, especially wind instruments like flutes which are among the oldest instruments. Strings are somewhat unique in the fact they can be used to play scales that aren't based on integer ratios. That's kind of how/why other tuning systems like from the Middle East, India and Indonesia aren't based exactly on those ratios while the western ones are. There's a sort of deeper question there on whether tuning and what notes we like is cultural and based on what we've learned to like versus something more related to our physiology and brains that's true of all people and not just cultures. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
bw6drw
|
cooling sheets/pillows magic?
|
How do cooling sheets and pillows work? I bought some for the coming summer as my room has poor A/C. Now I find myself laying awake at night, wondering how they work? And they appear to have a limit to how cool they can get as I’ve already had some very hot nights that they feel just as warm. Is it a gel? Special fabric? Science explain.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bw6drw/eli5_cooling_sheetspillows_magic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"epvm4g7"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"To understand that, you need to know that there is more than temperature of an item that determines how hot/cold it feels. It is mostly about how quickly heat enters or leaves your body, which is dependent on a property called thermal conduction. Something very conductive, like metal or stone, will feel much colder on a cool morning than something that is more of an insulator, like carpet, even though they are exactly the same temperature when you walk across them in the morning. \n\nSo, to answer your question, the way to make something feel cooler would be to make it out of more thermally conductive materials, spread your heat over a bigger area, which will more efficiently transfer your body heat out f your body to the room making you feel cooler."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4zmqgi
|
why are all of the planets orbiting outside of mars gas giants (excluding pluto and that other new, basic maybe-planet.)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zmqgi/eli5_why_are_all_of_the_planets_orbiting_outside/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6x3gox"
],
"score": [
41
],
"text": [
"Good question!\n\nThe planets in our Solar System formed from the solar nebula – the disc of gas left over from the formation of our Sun. Over time, this material began to collide and stick together, forming larger clumps that could collide with other larger clumps and gradually gather more and more matter. All of the planets in our Solar System began to form this way, but close to the Sun the temperature was too high for volatiles (gases like water and methane) to condense, so only the materials with a higher melting point (and higher density) were able to form at this point. The gas giants on the other hand, formed far enough away from the Sun that the temperature was cool enough for these volatile gases to condense, and form these huge, less dense planets.\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.spaceanswers.com/solar-system/why-are-planets-closer-to-the-sun-more-dense/"
]
] |
||
3qidzc
|
the difference between processed meat and non-processed meat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qidzc/eli5_the_difference_between_processed_meat_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwfh6ey"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Processed meat has been salted, cured, fermented or undergone other processes to enhance flavour or extend preservation.\n\nProcessed: hot dog, bacon, jerkey\n\nNot processed: fresh fish, chicken breast, steak"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
48b82f
|
how do experts in photograph analysis know that a photo hasn't been doctored?
|
Is there science to it?
Is it like a crime scene where you just have to infer something from certain clues and cues?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48b82f/eli5_how_do_experts_in_photograph_analysis_know/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0i8phi",
"d0i8pjt",
"d0i99ew",
"d0iszva",
"d0j3jxy"
],
"score": [
18,
4,
386,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"You have to carefully examine the image. In digital photography, there may be pixelation or other clear signs of modification. Inconsistent focus or lighting are big clues--shadows should properly cast themselves on all subjects in the picture, for example, and objects at the same distance from the viewer should normally be in the same focus.",
"There's some science. Many photo manipulation techniques leave little traces if you look at the pixel level. If the image is a composite, it's hard to get the edges looking exactly the same, the angel of the lighting just perfect, etc. But it's one of those things where absence of the tell tale signs doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't manipulated, but if you find them it almost certainly was.",
"A bit of both.\n\nThere can definitely be science to it:\n\nScience\n-\n\nIf you **adjust the \"levels\"** (hard to explain, but kind of like adjusting the contrast at different brightnesses) you can sometimes physically see the modification. For example in a recent controversy, this photo won an award: [\"Original\"](_URL_2_).\n\nCan you see what's wrong with it? (Clue: it's possible to see by looking closely at the right place)\n\nIf you said the plane has been photoshopped in, you'd be right. And if you didn't already see it, maybe you can now. If not, how about we adjust the levels: [Adjusted image](_URL_4_)\n\nWell, that's dramatic, isn't it?\n\nThis is a fairly obvious one where, to be honest, the photoshopping wasn't done that well - but it can still work pretty well for detecting this kind of image made from other images. This works because an image edit is done to fool the human eye - people will edit the picture enough to fool someone looking at it, and not much more. To counter it, we change things enough that we're limiting the amount of information. By removing the colour and bumping the contrast up, we can see small changes much more clearly.\n\nThen there are other techniques: you can **compare the compression ratio on different parts of the image**. Basically this involves looking at a group of pixels and (with knowledge of how an image is compressed) working out whether different areas of the image have different compression ratios by seeing how many mistakes there are. These can't be seen (easily) by the human eye, but can be calculated by a computer.\n\nWhy does that matter? Because if you can tell that two different part of the image have been compressed by different amounts, that's a pretty obvious sign that the image has been modified: one part has been compressed more times than another part, so the part with fewer compressions can't have been there in the first place.\n\nExperience-science\n-\n\nSometimes you can apply a scientific technique based on experience. For example if you know the camera that made an image, you may know that the camera has a \"signature\", eg an unusual colour balance. Some camera phones, for example, have an unusually blue hue to photos. If the photo was taken by that phone, but has a different hue to others in the series, it may have had the colour adjusted. This is where we start to get into experience, rather than straight up analysis.\n\nThere may well be other techniques I'm not aware of, but those will catch a lot of edits.\n\nKinda-science\n-\n\nThen there are simpler checks: some image editing programs will add information to the file to state that it was saved by that program, or the date may change: eg if you send me a series of 6 photos from the same place, and all of them have a \"last modified\" date that fits, but one is a few days/weeks later, that's a fairly clear sign the file has been changed... a clever editor will usually change these, but you may forget or miss one.\n\nExperience\n-\n\nAnd then we have the truly \"experience\" stuff, where it comes down to knowing what to look for and finding clues or evidence. For example on that plane photo, it was originally caught out because people looked closely and caught the telltale \"rectangle\" shape around the aircraft that shows it was copied in and then attempted to blur the two images together.\n\nIn other photos, they may look for things like missing fingers or limbs (surprisingly common, [example](_URL_1_)) in photos of people, or for straight lines \"bending\", eg if someone has tried to adjust a person's figure to make them look thinner/fatter, sometimes they will accidentally move a nearby doorframe or stripy carpet. [Example](_URL_0_)\n\nOther things to look for are \"perfect\" hair or where someone has over-done the photoshop, making things a little too good to be true. Hair is always a good one to look at, as it's very difficult to edit perfectly, and you can sometimes find strands that are a different colour where they were missed. Reflections are always a great one for this: [Example](_URL_3_)\n\nWith hair particularly, but also generally, you can look at the areas between colours and see if the editor accidentally slipped over onto the \"next\" area when modifying them.",
"You cannot really know with absolute certainty that one hasn't been doctored. This may be a semantic point, but a slightly more accurate way to ask the question would be to ask: \"how do experts know that a photo has been doctored.\" ",
"Hi dctrhu,\n\nYou asked two questions:\n\n1. Is there science to it? Absolutely.\n2. Is it like a crime scene where you just have to infer something from certain clues and cues? Definitely.\n\n(Full disclosure: Doing digital photo analysis is a big part of my daily job. And I created the _URL_0_ web site as a means to get other people interested in this field.)\n\nThe scientific method is based on logical reasoning. There are two main types of logical reasoning: deductive and inductive. (There are others, but these are the two main ones that people typically discuss.)\n\nDeductive reasoning is based on causality. \"A\" leads to \"B\" leads to \"C\". For example: Neal is typing on his computer. Neal's computer is in his office. Therefore, Neal is in his office.\n\nDeductive reasoning is objective (it doesn't matter what you think; these are the facts). In contrast, inductive reasoning is subjective and based on experience. This is often used for predicting, forecasting, and behavioral analysis -- situations with inherent uncertainty. (\"Did someone alter this picture?\" or \"did a camera generate this?\" evaluate behaviors with inherent uncertainty.)\n\nTo quote a paragraph from _URL_1_:\n\n > Inductive reasoning is the opposite of deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning makes broad generalizations from specific observations. \"In inductive inference, we go from the specific to the general. We make many observations, discern a pattern, make a generalization, and infer an explanation or a theory,\" Wassertheil-Smoller told Live Science. \"In science there is a constant interplay between inductive inference (based on observations) and deductive inference (based on theory), until we get closer and closer to the 'truth,' which we can only approach but not ascertain with complete certainty.\"\n\nAs an example, if you have ever broken a bone then you likely had an X-ray. The X-ray permits an analyst to view details that would otherwise go unseen. The X-ray is objective, not subjective. The X-ray system is based on deductive reasoning. (We shoot X-rays into an arm and the bone absorbs/reflects differently than the soft tissues. This permits visualizing the bone without cutting open the arm.)\n\nHowever, the X-ray image does not draw any conclusions about the subject matter. When the X-ray technician says, \"I cannot tell you that it is broken because a diagnosis requires a doctor\", then you enter the realm of the subjective. (This is why you can ask for a \"second opinion\" -- opinions are subjective.) Diagnosis are based on inductive reasoning. Continuing the example: arm hurts, X-ray shows a break in the bone, so the diagnosis is a broken arm. This conclusion is based on experience: I've never seen a broken arm without a break visible in the X-ray, and I've never seen an unbroken arm with a break in the X-ray, so it is very likely a broken arm.\n\nMost photo analysis methods act like an X-ray, permitting the visualization of otherwise-unseen attributes. The interpretation of the results requires a human to make a subjective determination based on specific factors (inductive reasoning).\n\nIn the case of digital photo forensics, it is usually difficult to prove that a picture is real or untampered. However, there are some telltale signs that can indicate alteration. These indicators can be used for deductive reasoning. (E.g., If it's supposed to be directly from a Nikon camera and it's missing Nikon metadata, then it isn't directly from a Nikon camera.)\n\nWe can also use these artifacts with inductive reasoning. For example, if the picture is supposed to be unaltered and one section has a significantly different noise signature and compression ratio and coloring than the rest of the picture, then it was likely altered. The word \"likely\" is predictive and requires inductive reasoning. Depending on the algorithm, we can even identify a confidence interval for the accuracy (likeliness) of the conclusion. For example: \"I compared the noise signature to that of 1,000 camera original pictures covering 200 different similar camera models. None of the camera originals had noise patterns that varied by region. So my confidence is in excess of 99% accuracy.\" -- after showing that 1,000 pictures from 200 cameras is a good-enough sample size.\n\nConclusively proving that a picture is real/unaltered can be difficult. (E.g., \"I saw him take the picture with the camera and this picture came straight from the camera.\") However, using inductive and deductive reasoning, we can rule out options. For example, if Adobe always leaves telltale artifacts and none are present, then we can rule out Adobe. Gimp leaves other artifacts, so we can rule that out. If we can rule out all of the common alteration methods, then we can conclude that it is likely real/unaltered.\n\nMore often, we conclude with something like \"based on the tests performed, there is no indication of tampering or alteration\". This doesn't mean it is real; it only means we didn't detect anything wrong. And if we have no reason to suspect sophisticated tampering outside of the scope of the tests performed, then we can induce that it is likely real/unaltered."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://lh6.ggpht.com/_9F9_RUESS2E/TFbO35gYj8I/AAAAAAAADZw/5QDbxeydpQk/s800/photoshop-mistakes-enlarge-fail.jpg",
"http://photoshopfail.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Photoshop-Fail-Ann-Taylor-Missing-Arm.jpg",
"http://www.diyphotography.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Nikon-Fake-2-670x445.png",
"https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/08/ec/b0/08ecb07b8f12639509dba662e090683d.jpg",
"http://www.diyphotography.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Nikon-Fake-7-670x445.jpg"
],
[],
[
"FotoForensics.com",
"http://www.livescience.com/21569-deduction-vs-induction.html"
]
] |
|
6nfddx
|
how do missiles from fighter jets that are fired have such good accuracy? how can they change their direction in mid air by themselves and hit a moving target?
|
[Here is an example of what I mean](_URL_0_)
How does the missile turn so well and have exact coordinates?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nfddx/eli5_how_do_missiles_from_fighter_jets_that_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dk91ja5"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"There are a couple of ways missiles can be guided:\n- Through infrared tracking. The missile has a heat sensor on it that finds the massive amounts of heat put out by a jet engine and points the missile at it.\n- Through laser designation. The missile or a ground, sea, or aeroplane based laser points at the enemy craft and the missile has a camera that picks up on the very specific wavelength of the laser as it scatters off the enemy hull. When you see a fighter get a 'missile lock' on an enemy, this is usually what's its doing.\n- Radar tracking. Bounces the radar off the enemy to find it.\n\nThese are augmented with onboard computer systems and software that help the missile figure out what's an enemy craft and what's the ground, reflections off clouds, friendly craft, etc. \n\nAs for actually turning, missiles are lightweight and traveling at high speeds. Small adjuments to the fins create a high torque that can point the missile where it's aiming, generally much faster than a plane can maneuver with its much higher inertia (also a plane has to not kill its pilot with high G-force when maneuvering). Some missiles may use gimbaled thrusters, where the nozzle of the thruster can rotate to orientate the missile.\n\nSimilarly, because a missile is mostly fuel and a small amount of payload/electronics and is rocket opposed to jet powered it can produce very high accelerations hence getting to very fast speeds quickly.\n\nWhere the missile is pointing is determined through gyroscopes, accelerometers, and onboard cameras. These are all electronic and can give feedback many times a second to the fins allowing it to quickly change course.\n\nThe big factor is the speed at which electronic systems operate, able to process information and make corrections much faster than any human controller ever could. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdWBjhUrw5U"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1n61ok
|
why do i need to pee more frequently once i've "broken the seal" ?
|
Not that I'm drinking right now...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n61ok/eli5_why_do_i_need_to_pee_more_frequently_once/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccfp09d",
"ccfp0mm",
"ccfp1d2",
"ccfpng2",
"ccfqste",
"ccfzxxo"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"At a certain point, you're putting more in than what's coming out.",
"alcoholic beverages can be a bladder irritant for many people and the carbonation of drinks like beer and champagne can cause gas and pressure that contribute to that irritation. As your bladder fills up again after the initial pee, all that irritation can create a very strong urge to pee some more and make your bladder feel fuller than it really is, sending you running to the bathroom over and over again throughout the night.\n\nRead the full text here: _URL_0_ \n--brought to you by mental_floss! ",
"I believe it's because, like tea and coffee, lager and beer are diuretics. These are any type of stimulant that boosts the production of urine. I think it is a way to keep a correct balance of certain fluids in the body.",
"You don't really \"break the seal\". When you get to the bar, you start intaking fluid at a much higher rate than you were throughout the day. Therefore, you start putting out fluid at a correspondingly higher rate.\n\nIt seems like you are \"breaking the seal\" because after the first one you keep going again and again, but that is only because you keep drinking more and more.",
"Alcohol is a diuretic, it inhibits the action of aldosteron (hormone responsible to recicle the water you were about to waste in urine back to the organism). So it makes you pee more. That's why you should drink the same amount of water as alcoholic beverages. If you don't, you'll get a hangover, that is mostly caused by the dehydration of your brain.",
"a friend of mine who works as a doctor told me a fun fact once about this. im not clear on exactly how it works but essentially as she explained it- alcohol is a muscle relaxant. when you feel like you have to pee- its because of the pressure on your bladder- when you're drunk you feel that less. so when you're peeing while drunk, youre not really getting everything out, just enough to end the discomfort, and then only think youre done because your bladder is drunk and lazy. she told me that when i pee while drunk, either unclench the pee muscles, or just stand up for a sec, and then try to pee again- every time ive done it more comes out! so yeah obviously drinking more liquid will make you pee, but if you make sure you actually empty your bladder everytime, you wont have to go as much. ive been doing it since she told me about it and she's totally right!\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://mentalfloss.com/article/31408/science-breaking-seal#ixzz2fzbbVY9l"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
g3lfu0
|
why is a vacuuman empty space when it's also just space below the atmospheric pressure?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g3lfu0/eli5why_is_a_vacuuman_empty_space_when_its_also/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fnrz851"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"In an atmospheric sense, a vacuum is any absence or lack of pressure. A pure vacuum would contain no molecules of any gas (even outer space isn’t a truly pure vacuum but it’s pretty close). \n\nBy definition an ‘empty space’ would be a vacuum because there is nothing in it to provide pressure. \n\nIn space, SPACE is a vacuum, because it exerts near-zero atmospheric pressure on anything. Things inside outer space can have their own atmospheres (and therefore atmospheric pressure) but outer space itself is a vacuum. \n\nVacuum is a relative term, a low pressure system on earth can be called a vacuum, but if you took that into outer space, it would have immense pressure relative to space and not be considered a vacuum. \n\nThings ‘float’ in outer space because of weak or no gravity. If you were on the International Space Station and threw a wrench behind you it would fall to earth. If you were light years from anything with large gravity things would appear to float because any gravity acting on it is very weak. It has nothing to do with the vacuum itself. \n\ntrue ELI5:\n\nwhen there is less air than somewhere else we call that a ‘vacuum’. Outer space has very little air so we call that a vacuum too. A perfect vacuum has no air (an empty space) but they are really hard to make. \n\nThere are things in space that have enough gravity to hold more air than outer space, but space itself still has very little air. Things float in space because they are too far away to be pulled by gravity."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
58pjrk
|
how does the fbi track people's computers and since they can track it how do they not easily catch all the criminals and paedophiles who do stuff like buy drugs and look at child pornography?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58pjrk/eli5_how_does_the_fbi_track_peoples_computers_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d92a8ek",
"d92anzm"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > How does the FBI track people's computers\n\nI'm not sure exactly what you mean by \"track\", but the FBI can find out who downloaded a file by finding out the IP addresses that downloaded the file and and then getting the information connected with the IP addresses from the relevant Internet Service Providers (ISPs). That's the same thing music and movie companies do when they catch people downloading files (except they usually have to get a subpoena to get the information from the ISP).\n\nIn order for the FBI to more closely control your computer, you would have to download something that gave them access. The FBI does have methods of putting programs onto computers or for tricking people into downloading programs, but they're mostly targeted at hackers who steal money and people who distribute child pornography.\n\nIn pretty much every case, the FBI has to already be targeting a particular individual or investigating a particular illegal file/site.\n\n > since they can track it how do they not easily catch all the criminals and paedophiles who do stuff like buy drugs and look at child pornography?\n\nThey can't easily \"track\" people's computers. It takes a fair amount of legwork just to figure out the identity of one person who has been downloading illegal files. If they do have some secret way of tracking everyone, they haven't revealed it and they're not utilizing it very effectively.\n",
"The governments, especially the US, has a lot of zero-day exploits in their sleeve.\n\nThe reason they don't use these against paedophiles and junkies is that we are very low priority targets. Political and financial issues are much more important to them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2f6u0q
|
how hard would it be to find the hacker who leaked the nudes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2f6u0q/eli5_how_hard_would_it_be_to_find_the_hacker_who/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck6fjri"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"He would have to be a complete amateur to post them from his home IP address. He either used a proxy, or uploaded them from somewhere else. Someone who'd make a rookie mistake that bad almost certainly wouldn't have the skill to get the pictures in the first place. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
n4zuf
|
why are countries like great britain in the european union but they do not have the euro?
|
I guess I understand that they simply chose not to switch their currency, my question though is, what lead them and others to decide this? What sorts of costs or benefits does their choice give them?
This question came about as a result of my reading [this NYT article.](_URL_0_)
Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/n4zuf/eli5_why_are_countries_like_great_britain_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c36a01m",
"c36a0qv",
"c36a01m",
"c36a0qv"
],
"score": [
9,
13,
9,
13
],
"text": [
"only 17 of the 27 members of the EU use the Euro. ",
"Switching your currency to the same currency as the other countries in the eurozone means that they are no longer in as much control of the value of their currency. The value of the pound is controlled by the value of the british economy, whilst the value of the euro is controlled by the value of the european economy. So if something goes wrong in another country with the euro (like greece or italy right now) the euro will suffer and the other nations that didn't fuck up economically have to face the consequences. Britain most likely chose to not switch their currency because of this risk. ",
"only 17 of the 27 members of the EU use the Euro. ",
"Switching your currency to the same currency as the other countries in the eurozone means that they are no longer in as much control of the value of their currency. The value of the pound is controlled by the value of the british economy, whilst the value of the euro is controlled by the value of the european economy. So if something goes wrong in another country with the euro (like greece or italy right now) the euro will suffer and the other nations that didn't fuck up economically have to face the consequences. Britain most likely chose to not switch their currency because of this risk. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/08/world/europe/britain-suffers-as-a-bystander-to-europes-crisis.html?partner=rss&emc=rss"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2v95gr
|
why can i focus on my work when i listen to music, but when i'm listening to the tv. it ruins my concentration?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2v95gr/eli5why_can_i_focus_on_my_work_when_i_listen_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cofjy0o"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because it takes different parts of the brain. When listing to someone talk on TV you are trying to understand the context and keep up with what is being said in a way you don't do in music."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
fiyh26
|
do hospitals in the us just let homeless people die because they have no money or insurance to pay medical bills?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fiyh26/eli5_do_hospitals_in_the_us_just_let_homeless/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fkjwq41",
"fkjwtuy",
"fkjwvip",
"fkjx0wj"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
20,
9
],
"text": [
"No, homeless people are generally poor and thus covered by Medicaid which is basically government insurance that pays for medical care for poor people.",
"In theory, almost every hospital is required to provide life-saving treatment and deal with payment later, so the indigent person should receive care no matter what. Then the hospital is stuck with an unpaid (and unpayable) bill. Less severe cases can be turned away (usually referred to other service providers who provide non-hospital care for those unable to pay).\n\nIn practice, many (most) hospitals do in fact provide some life saving measures, at least to the point of stabilizing a patient. Some fail to do this either by (illegal) direct denial, or by allocating resources in such a way that the indigent person leaves without receiving care (or dies). For the majority of hospitals that provide services to those unable to pay, the hospital and doctors absorb the costs - in a sense the cost to treat the indigent is built into the pricing of those who are able to pay, since they have to cover their costs plus the costs of unpaid services (plus the hospital's overhead and profit).",
"There's an indigent fund and Medicaid or Medicare depending on their age. \n\nThe problem is not being poor. It's being lower middle class. Make just enough to get insurance from employer. Insurance has a 20% copay. You fall and break your bone or have a baby. You pay 20% of that cost. There are some insurances with caps that can cap your cost at like $3000 to $12000 depending on the terms. Honestly that will vary a ton but it's at least a guaranteed max out of pocket. But not all have that cap.\n\nThat cost can be anywhere between $2000 to 2mil depending on what happened and how much saving your life cost. And you have to pay 20% of that. Some people refuse medication in the hospital because the co pay after they get out is too much. They deny necessary medication because of cost.\n\nIn 2014 I had a c-section go very bad. I spent 9 days in ICU and 18 in recovery. I had 1 major surgery and 8 more minor ones after the initial c section surgery. The final cost was 1.45 million. I thankfully had insurance from the govt and had no copay as a result. But I could have had to pay 20% of that 1.45 million. My daughter is happy and healthy, unaffected by what happened. \n\nOther than how much my bill was, these numbers are all hypothetical based on what I've seen offered at my job and other jobs before. 20% overall Co pay is very common, caps are less common from my experience.\n\nEdited to add it gets extra complicated when you factor in that hospitals do not all charge one cost and there's a different cost if you tell them you're paying cash sometimes. You have no way of knowing how much anything will be from any one hospital until you get the bill. They can charge as much as they want for some things. One of my line items was $5 for a hotel size bar of hospital soap. Some places now are adding laws that hospitals must clearly state the cost of things to the patient. But that doesn't change that it's a free market when it comes to pricing and people are not often in the position to \"shop around.\"",
"In the US, there are laws requiring hospitals to render emergency medical care to anybody who needs it. They're not allowed to turn you away if you actually need help. They're supposed to worry about the bill later. Sometimes the local government steps in to pay for care rendered to homeless people. Sometimes the hospital just takes the loss on it, and accepts that they're not gonna get paid.\n\nHowever, all of this is regarding *emergency* care, like you're seriously injured, or actively bleeding, or going to die. If you have a chronic condition like diabetes, they're not going to give you the medicine you need for it. If you have cancer, you can't go to the emergency room for your twice-weekly round of chemotherapy.\n\nThere are some other programs that try to provide care for the poor. We have Medicare, which provides healthcare to all senior citizens and most disabled people. We have *Medicaid* which is for people who earn below a certain amount of money (I think it's 125% of the poverty line or something like that). And there's a few other federal healthcare programs like the Children's Health Insurance Program. All of these are basically government-run insurance. You go to the doctor or to a hospital, and the bill is sent to your insurance. For about half of people, that's private insurance, for the other half, it's one of these government programs, or the 5-10% of people who have no insurance at all. Also insurance often doesn't cover the whole bill. There's usually deductibles and copays and other payments and such. It's a bureaucratic nightmare. I'm happy to go into more detail but this post is already a novel."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
53l0tb
|
the difference between a historian and someone who just really likes history?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53l0tb/eli5_the_difference_between_a_historian_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7tzvwi",
"d7u06h7",
"d7u1423",
"d7u3q67"
],
"score": [
5,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Historians would almost always have an academic degree, higher than undergrad (ie masters or above) and usually with a concentration in some specific area and/or timeframe they are experts in. Also, they probably work as a historian (or professor, academia, research etc) and hence get the title \"historian\".",
"Historian: has academic degree and works in related field\n\nPerson who likes history: reads Wikipedia articles in bed",
"This has already been said but a historian likely has a specialty, analyzes and applies all aspects of history to said specialty, writes a fuckton, works in a university. \n\nPerson who likes history - takes a bunch of extra history classes in undergrad because it sounds fun, ends up with a double major in history, then rapidly consumes information for the rest of their lives. This is me, if you've not guessed. ",
"I'd say the difference is original research.\n\nI disagree that an academic degree and/or job/profession delineates the two. It is entirely reasonable for someone with the wherewithal and motivation to go digging in library archives, birth/death/government records, do field research by visiting/documenting grave stones/ancient-ruins/where-ever and otherwise seek primary sources, - even as a hobby - to be considered a legitimate historian. Even if you don't go searching/investigating in the mold of traditional scholars, if you can analyze data - say by scouring google maps or satellite images in a historic context, I think you qualify. If you are capable of adding knowledge and insight to the past, there is no reason why you can't wear that label with pride."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
44leje
|
why is the maximum volume on tvs so high?
|
Well, at least mine, anyway - the maximum volume goes up to an arbitrary value of '100', though I rarely ever go past 15. Even with a larger group of people, where background noise is usually pretty loud, I don't need to go past a quarter of the maximum threshold.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44leje/eli5_why_is_the_maximum_volume_on_tvs_so_high/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czr0fq2",
"czr1lnp"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"could be that some channels are low volume so its nice to have that high number; \nalso you could connect your tv to another device so you make your tv to loudest and then control the volume with the other device.",
"The max volume produced is determined tv's hardware (how loud the speakers can get), the tv's software doesn't take that into account. \n \nThere are times when you get a super soft source, either from a different channel, a game console, etc. There are some channels where my volume is 25/100 and others when it's 75/100 due to the loudness of the two sources."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
cn2rgp
|
how do meat tenderizers work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cn2rgp/eli5_how_do_meat_tenderizers_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ew6e3yl"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"When we look at a cut of beef, we're seeing a collection of muscle fiber. What we're *not* seeing, but what makes the meat difficult to cut through and chew, is the elastic-like web of *collagen,* a structural protein that binds muscle fibers together.\n\nThe purpose of tenderization, be it mechanical or chemical, is to break down this collagen web to make the meat easier to cut apart and eat.\n\nMechanical tenderization -- that is, smacking the meat with a tenderizing mallet -- is pretty self-explanatory.\n\nChemical tenderization involves a couple of different enzymes in powder form that you sprinkle onto the meat that then attacks the collagen."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2x6f6u
|
why are murderers and serial-killers so notoriously famous in america?
|
People like Bundy, Gacy, Dahmer, why do they seem so common in comparison to other countries and why are they glorified?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2x6f6u/eli5_why_are_murderers_and_serialkillers_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"coxb0oe",
"coxb14t"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They aren't glorified, people just remember what they did because it was that messed up. It's part of our history to be messed up in the head!",
"Same reason people like horror movies, tragic stories, and Liveleak. Its entertaining."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3gcdjb
|
why does it seem that people always have more sad thoughts/are in their feelings in the nighttime compared to the day?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gcdjb/eli5_why_does_it_seem_that_people_always_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctwt5ip",
"ctwuo47",
"ctwus6k",
"ctwvd8j",
"ctwvnbh",
"ctx2khe"
],
"score": [
4,
31,
10,
3,
33,
2
],
"text": [
"At night, the sun has gone down and aside from artificial lighting, it's pretty dark out. Moods of people can be affected by their surroundings.\n\nAlso, for most people who live the 9-5 life-style, nighttime is when most people are feeling tired and don't have the energy that they had during the day. Or they work somewhere that requires them to be on \"cheery\" behavior all day and are emotionally exhausted come the evening.",
"I assume its because this is when we go to bed, and when we are in bed there is nothing to do but either sleep or think about things. So this is where everything bad has a chance to catch up on us and we end up with bad depressing thoughts at night.",
"Apart from whats been mentioned about energy being at a minimum, I'd say due to lack of distractions. During the day its easy to be distracted from all the stuff that we're doing and thats going on around us. At night (when you're lying in bed with your lights off) there's far less external stimuli available, and with less to see or hear we get more sucked into what we're thinking.",
"Basically you spend the day doing things, night time is when you stop doing things. Your thoughts just catch up to you.",
"There's a hormone your body produces called cortisol. This does a LOT of things, but importantly when there's plenty of it it makes you feel like you're more energetic which often corresponds with mood. Your cortisol levels change throughout the day, with their highest levels in the late morning and their lowest levels at midnight/in the early hours of the morning. This is also a very noticeable thing in people with depression - they often feel significantly worse in the mornings. This won't be the only reason, but it probably is one.",
"I remember reading somewhere that when you're tired, all your emotions are amplified. That's why a dumb joke that would just make you blow a little air out your nose about at 4pm makes you giggle uncontrollably at 4am. Or if you were to watch The Fox and the Hound when you get home from work, everything would be okay, maybe a couple sniffles, but if you watched it late at night instead your world would crash down around you and why can't they just be friends? Life isn't fair!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
zi7hy
|
how insurance companies can claim an incident is an "act of god."
|
Just curious as to how an insurance company can say an event is an "act of God." Especially in the United States where the pot is mixed with different religious backgrounds.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zi7hy/eli5_how_insurance_companies_can_claim_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c64seip",
"c64uema",
"c650rjw"
],
"score": [
64,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a legal term, and essentially refers to unforeseeable events for which nobody can be held responsible. It could just as well be called flibbolugy, the fact that it refers to God is legally irrelevant.",
"If you're interested in a funny movie about this exact idea, watch The Man Who Sued God! \n\nIt is funny for an insurance company to get away with that reasoning since if another person/entity commits a wrong/damage, they can be sued for the amount in damages. Insurance ~~is~~ should be for unpredictable yet foreseeable circumstances like a tornado in the Mid-West USA.",
"A bit off topic but have you been watching Ricky Gervais, Science?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
j3qzz
|
can anyone explain texas hold 'em li5?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j3qzz/can_anyone_explain_texas_hold_em_li5/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c28vz4o",
"c28wa29"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Texas Hold 'em is a type of poker where the dealer gives each player two cards. After this, the dealer lays down three cards (called the flop), then one card (the turn), then one more card (the river).\n\nThese five cards can be used by all players to create the best set of cards.\n\nBetween each step of the game, the players go around the table placing bets based on how good of a hand they think they have.\n",
"Each player has two cards of their own, and there are five community cards that everybody can use...which are revealed three at once, then the next one, then the next one. \n\nOut of these seven cards that each player can use (five of which everybody can use and see, hence their name community cards), each player must make the best five card hand.\n\nRounds of betting occur after players get their two hole cards, after the first three community cards are revealed, after the fourth community card is revealed, and finally after the fifth community cards are revealed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
zgmqk
|
why are there so many posts in r/science about breakthroughs, but i haven't seen anything about them anywhere else?
|
Maybe I worded that weird, I mean like I see all these posts in /r/science like "Male birth control available soon" or "Cure for cancer sitting on the shelf in Sweden," but none of them have come to light yet? I haven't heard of any of these things happening outside of the scientists' testing of them. If they're so amazing, why aren't they being utilized?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zgmqk/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_posts_in_rscience/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c64f0ib",
"c64gg3s"
],
"score": [
16,
3
],
"text": [
"It's mostly because of poor science journalism trying to sensationalize anything.\n\nFor instance, if a paper is published with an abstract that essentially says \"We've done a study and found that people with Gene X have a higher likelihood of developing cancer of Type Y\", science journalists will write an article \"Genetic key that causes cancer is discovered\". \n\nWhile the actual research is an incremental step towards making a huge breakthrough, that is boring to most people. You don't care if scientists are a little closer to understanding how a certain disease works. You're not going to read an article about that. You are going to read an article about \"possible cure\" or some other sensationalized crap. Science research generally isn't really relatable to most people, so journalists will throw in a lot of loose terminology and a lot of their own unfounded speculation in order to hype it up and make it seem more exciting. \n",
"There's a big difference making something work in a lab with a handful of case, and making that solution widely available and affordable. If someone discovers a cure for AIDS, but that solution requires a very precise method that involve very expensive materials and equipment, and they could only produce a few dozen doses in a year, that wouldn't be of very much use to the millions of AIDS victims in Africa."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
b5u5gb
|
is there any science/research behind why certain people find trolling fun? if so, what's the overwhelming consensus?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b5u5gb/eli5_is_there_any_scienceresearch_behind_why/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejg6dlb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It would be an act that would appeal to psychopaths, Borderline Personality, Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Psychopaths have very muted emotions and pleasure and don’t empathize well, so the excitement of the drama, sense of superiority it gives them would be appealing. BPD tend to see everything in black and white, good guys and bad guys, and to catastrophize, so trolling would be them fighting WW2 singlehandedly against the Nazis. ODD have a persecution complex: every authority is out to get them and is unworthy of being an authority. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1v5m0v
|
are there dead whales/giant mantas/other big marine animals just sitting at the bottom of the oceans?
|
I feel like with all of the life down there, I'd have seen a photo or two of a big whale or something dead at the bottom of the ocean. I tried to imagine it but I couldn't, mostly because I have nothing to base it off of.
Obviously smaller fish and other marine animals that have died would be hard to notice, but shouldn't there be a handful of hard-to-miss dead blue whales every once in a while?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v5m0v/eli5_are_there_dead_whalesgiant_mantasother_big/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceoxbys",
"ceoxpok",
"cep076p"
],
"score": [
18,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"They do sink to the bottom but they don't last very long. They get decomposed. Just like if an animal dies in the forrest, it gets broken down by insects, fungus, bacteria, worms. The same thing happens at the bottom of the ocean. Sea Worms, starfish, fish, and other things decompose the dead whale. \n\n[The Great David Attenborough](_URL_0_) explains.",
"Yes, that's exactly what happens. Eventually bacteria and larger animals find the corpse and eat it just like if the animal was lying on a beach. You don't see pictures very often because this process is pretty quick.\n\nA group of scientists placed a dead whale in a known location on the sea bottom and returned to the site several times to capture this process in detail. It's amazing to see the kinds of stuff that showed up to eat the corpse - huge bug-like creatures called Arthopods were the most bizarre.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIn fact, large dead animal corpses are a mechanism by which life can move from point to point across the ocean. They are temporary oasis of nutrition in an otherwise dead landscape.\n\n",
"There are actually some surprisingly large bottom-dwellers that live in the ocean and munch on the carcasses. Even some crabs that are 3m in size! Planet Earth videos are great. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG17TsgV_qI"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdI3eFrTGs8",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQbGk4sHROg"
],
[]
] |
|
b7z347
|
why is long eye contact with others seen as abnormal?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b7z347/eli5_why_is_long_eye_contact_with_others_seen_as/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejv20xe"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In most mammals/birds a long look is seen as predatory, which is the same reason that its creepy when people dont blink.\n\nSource: Falconer, Me"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2fxt5v
|
the government of the united arab emirates.
|
What is an Emirate? How and why did they become United? The Arab part I get.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fxt5v/eli5_the_government_of_the_united_arab_emirates/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckdqinc"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"An emirate is similar to a kingdom. So think United Arab Kingdoms. When the British relinquished control of their territories in the area, new countries formed from former emirates. UAE started out as two emirates, Abu Dhabi and Dubai and later included Ras al-Khaimah forming the modern day country. They offered two others to join, Bahrain and Qatar, but they declined. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ftwupf
|
why does soda fizz a lot when you pour it into a glass, but sparkling water doesn’t? they’re both carbonated, is it just different because of the sugar?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ftwupf/eli5_why_does_soda_fizz_a_lot_when_you_pour_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fm9oz4k",
"fm9p3us",
"fma7o7s",
"fma907r",
"fmadj4k",
"fmadx9b",
"fmaf85y",
"fmagfcg",
"fmaotpz",
"fmb8xfy"
],
"score": [
3134,
11,
75,
31,
3,
10,
3,
6,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Soda is filled with sucrose which disrupts the hydrogen bonds in the liquid. Alcohol, sugar and salt all play a role in weakening these bonds which opens more pathways for carbon dioxide to escape. That's why champagne loses its fizz quicker than sparkling water as well.\n\n\nEdit:\nHi ELI5 community; my inbox has been blowing up, and I've literally been at this post for 14 hours straight, so I wanted to add some things that may clarify additional (and repeated) questions.\n\n1. Please remember, this is ELI5 and in that spirit I am painting with a VERY broad brush for a basic overview of these reactions. I didn't address this question on AskScience\n2. Why do you keep saying hydrogen bonds and not surface tension and/or solubility?\n\tThink of them as interchangeable terms (see item 1):\n_URL_12_ (also van der Waals forces)\n_URL_3_\n_URL_11_\n_URL_10_\n\n3. Why do you say it's only sugar, salt and alcohol that breaks the bonds?\n\tIt's not, there are many additives and even water imperfections that cause the carbon dioxide to fall out of solution.(see item 1)\n4. I don't like your second post analogy!\n\tSorry, but too bad... I'm not a writer. If you got the gist of it through either of the posts then it did the job.\n5. Why do I experience X when you said Y?\n\tChemistry is testable, observable and repeatable in a controlled environment then it gets sent out into an imperfect world. I can't account for environmental variables, including: elevation (yes, that matters here), manufacturer's formulas (they very well can saturate the solution with more carbon dioxide than their competitor), cup you poured it in, ice you used, how much you hate carbonated beverages, etc...see item 1.\n\n6. What about beer foam and champagne?\n\tI'm not addressing head on beer, just the 'fizzyness' of the different drinks but protein chains help to form the foam structure;\n\"Beer is a complex mixture of over 450 constituents and, in addition, it contains macromolecules such as proteins, nucleic acids, polysaccharides, and lipids. In beer, several different protein groups, originating from barley, barley malt, and yeast, are known to influence beer quality. Some of them play a role in foam formation and mouthfeel, and others are known to form haze and have to be precipitated to guarantee haze stability, since turbidity gives a first visual impression of the quality of beer to the consumer. These proteins are derived from the malt used and are influenced, modified, and aggregated throughout the whole malting and brewing process.\" _URL_7_\n\t Champagne is served in a champagne flute for a reason, see /u/cab354's fun fact!\n7. What about diet soda, why doesn't it fizz as much?\n\tDiet soda uses sweeteners that are much sweeter than sugar, so less needs to be used. Less used, less nucleation sites.\n8. What are nucleation sites?\n\tWikipedia\n9. Why does ice and Mentos make things super fizzy/violent?\n\tIce isn't all that smooth, the water layer on top is what actually makes it slick (that's how ice skates work). The rough surface of ice, relative to tiny molecules, create nucleation sites in the water where the bubbles are able to form. If you look closely, there are tiny bubbles clinging to the surface of your ice cube, that's the carbonation. Add that to the general agitation of the drink by dropping a solid into it and you have fizz producing actions on two fronts.\n\tBelieve it or not, the Mentos reaction NOT a chemical reaction but the same physical reaction as ice, but the surface of a Mentos is super rough, creating more of those nucleation sites for the carbon dioxide to fall out of solution. There is no magic chemical in the candy, it's just a texture thing. It works better in diet Coke because there is less sweetener in it to naturally create these nucleation sites (aspartame is a very effective sweetener)\nHere is an article on the Mentos and Coke reaction:\n_URL_8_\n10. How do you know all this?\n\tIt's highly related to my job.\n11. Is there a better explanation than what you have given me?\n\t_URL_6_\n12. Why do you have so many grammar/spelling mistakes?\n\tI've been at this post for 14 hours (and see item 4)\n13. Do they have to be squares or can they be triangles? (in reference to my second post analogy: shout out to /u/dvorahtheexplorer)\n\tThey can be tetrahedrons if ionized, that's basically 4 triangles stuck together! 4X the triangles!\n14. What was that thing about ionization?\n\tNot mine: _URL_2_\n15. Why does my coke act differently than this when I pour it into my (alcoholic beverage of choice)\n\tIntroducing the solution to alcohol is different than having a carbonated alcoholic solution. The order chemicals are introduced to and in a solution are very important in chemistry. Here are a few starter resources as a jumping off point as I am only capable of this hyper-simplified explanation right now (been at this post for almost 12 hours straight):\n_URL_9_\n_URL_5_\n\n16. So if you put X in sparkling water/seltzer/fizzy water it would fizz up?\n\tOh yeah, in any carbonated drink!\nHere's a fun experiment to live vicariously through YouTube until your isolation is complete (and thanks for self-isolating, it helps me keep my team and me healthy and your power and water running!):\n_URL_1_\n17. Aside from things that won't mix with water or rare exceptions, anything that isn't water reduces water's ability to hold CO2 with stability. - not a question but put so simply and elegantly by /u/Gibborim I had to include it!\n18. Is this why sparkling water fizz feels a lot stronger?\n\tYup, mouth feel is a hell of a thing!\n19. Anything medical:\n\tNope, not a Dr.\n20. What about temperature?\n\tSee /u/ThMogget , A cold solution will hold their bonds much better than a warm one. Remember, temperature is one of the byproducts of atoms in an excited state.\n21. What about fizzy mineral water?\n\tMineral water usually has salts and sulfurs in it, it's actually just a fancy pants way of saying it's spring water that hasn't gone through some sort of purification process (like reverse osmosis). These imperfections in the water break those hydrogen bonds just like sugar so depending on where the spring is and how many impurities (minerals) there are in the source, they could very well be just as fizzy.\t\n\tGood way to test the purity of beverages is to let them go flat, like completely flat, but protected from outside contaminates (like dust) and put it in the freezer for a few hours. If it's super pure, it will stay in liquid form until you agitate it (give it a knock). That will introduce nitrogen (most of the air we breathe) and create a nucleation point for the water to form crystals around. You will literally see ice rapidly form in front of you.\nCheck out these two super short videos:\n_URL_4_ \n_URL_0_\n22. It's not the sugar!\n\tIt is the sugar. Now go brush your teeth.\n23. But it's sugar free!\n\tOK, but it's not additive and impurity free (see item 8 and still go brush your teeth)\n24. You are misleading people by omitting X,Y, and Z!\n\tSee item freaking 1\n25. Are you a teacher?\n\tNope, not anymore – but I was in Japan, Germany and Korea for a long time.\n26. It's about the carbon dioxide saturation level.\n\tSaturation of carbon dioxide is indeed a huge contributing factor, but it's not the mechanism by which it's released from solution.\n27. Could you explain the effects with alcohol more? I’m a bartender and noticed how there are far less bubbles when the liquor is in the cup first (Shout out to /u/kitcatpaddywhack and first direct addressing of surface tension)\n\tBasically all the same as sugar. The difference between bottles and open air is pressure. To go with the house analogy, the bottle (or keg, or can) is like a tarp over the holes that the termites ate in the roof. They keep the pressure in the house and help hold the roof together so the balloons can't get out.\nNotice that if you pour some carbonated beverage on the ground, it goes flat much quicker than in an open cup, even though both are exposed to open air? That's because the gaps between the molecules are further apart allowing the pressure to regulate quicker.\n\n28. Part of that is probably because alcohol has a much weaker surface tension than water, meaning it isn't nearly as capable of holding bubbles. When you mix alcohol into anything, it'll go flat much quicker. That's why it's impossible to buy anything fizzy stronger than maybe 13%. (Shoutout to /u/XMilkyMoo)\n\tRight, not only does it dilute the solution but it weakens the bonds (surface tension). For a more in depth dive, take a look at competition between van der Waals forces and hydrogen bonds in relation to an alcohol solution (you will probably have to replace alcohol with ethanol for the right research papers). I know my wording is way off, but Google scholar will get the gist.\n\n29. See item 1",
"It's not the sugar, I drink a lot of seltzer and have long noted that the flavored kind (which has no sugar nor anything else of such note that it would be listed on the ingredient statement) creates a head while the unflavored kind does not (unless poured very quickly indeed and then only very briefly). Unfortunately I don't know the answer beyond this; ages ago in High School I asked my biology professor (who was learned quite broadly in the sciences besides) and not only did he not know, but neither did his son, who was a brewer!",
"Dunno where you are posting from OP. But Schweppes Sparkling Mineral Water in Australia is just as fizzy as any soft drink. \n\nAnd the soda water in Thailand too. Rock Mountain Soda Water is possibly the fizziest substance in existence. You can pour it in a glass and leave it on your nightstand. It will still be sitting there, loudly fizzing away the next day.",
"Follow up questions: Why does calm soda in a glass fizz when ice is put in it?\n\nWhy does mentos and coke have such a violent reaction? Why doesn't the same thing happen if I were to just pour grain sugar into a coke?",
"When it first leaves the factory, bottled water is even more fizzy than soda, practically impossible to open the bottle without some of it pouring out \n\nSource: went to a trip to a water bottling factory in grade school and they gave us some fresh off the conveyor",
"Are they stored at the same pressure? Did the sparkling water make a big pssshhh! when you opened it? \n\nA lot of factors go into carbonation level and bubble generation...but high pressure, low temperature, high carbon dioxide, low additives, and few nucleation sites keeps the most gas in the solution.\n\nAs someone who likes to carbonate random stuff with dry ice, I can tell you that not all ‘carbonated’ liquids hold gas the same and you can add different amounts to it. Even among sodas, barqs has bite and mountain dew is smooth on purpose.\n\nReally easy to make water and watery drinks like koolaid very painfully fizzy, while OJ and milk don’t hold it.",
"Soda or soda water under pressure is a supersaturated solution of carbon dioxide in water. The difference is with soda that there are more impurities in the water. Each of these impurities is a \"nucleation site\" that allows the CO2 to create a bubble. You'll notice more bubbling with carbonated juice or tea, for instance, because there are more particulates than soda.",
"It’s also often to do with how much the drink is carbonated to begin with, like mr science guy said the sugar makes the drink thicker so more pressure is needed to force the drink into carbonation.\nWith the sparkling water it’s all dependant on who makes it. Sparkling water is often designed to be lightly carbonated hence the name sparkling water and not soda water. Soda water will be carbonated more as you often use it as a mixer with other drinks, whereas sparkling you drink by itself.\nSparkling water was pioneered by fine dining restaurants to enhance the dining experience, the slight carbonation helps to clean the palate and “open” up the flavour receptors more to make the food taste better! And often they look at the PH levels which is how acidic or alkaline the water is. Evian is lower in PH cause of the minerals found in the water from its natural source. This is also why we have people like this [water sommelier!](_URL_0_)",
"Ever tried to use a Soda Stream with the mixture in? That's how I found the answer to this question",
"Reddit is slowly losing it's impact on me.\n\nVirtually all posts in this sub (and others like it), with the exception of some science questions, are misleading or at least missing something in some way. None of the top comments (gold, silver and 1000's of upvotes) mention pressure and amount of carbonation which are the most determining factors. You have to scroll down to see anyone mention it and the few people who mentioned it in the top comments sub chain are being denigrated or argued with...\n\nIt's sad because when you see one like this that you know something about, it shakes your faith in all the rest.\n\nWhile an *exactly equal amount* of carbonization in Sparkling water and soda ***would*** produce less bubbles in Sparkling water, the reason, that we see it in practice, in store bottles is not because of the reaction, it is because of the difference.\n\nIf a 16 ounce bottle of sparkling water and a 16 ounce bottle of soda were carbonized exactly the same, with exactly the same process, you would barely see a difference. \n\n***You do not have to take my word for it (like we do with random redditors) you can literally test this with a soda stream.***\n\nThe top comment(s) are correct technically, but not practically.\n\n\nELI5 should literally include the LI5 version."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://youtu.be/Fot3m7kyLn4",
"https://youtu.be/XczcDe7_sLE",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4175435/",
"https://socratic.org/questions/how-do-hydrogen-bonds-affect-solubility",
"https://youtu.be/NMSxuORKynI",
"https://chem.libretexts.org/Courses/Winona_State_University/Klein_and_Straumanis_Guided/13%3A_Alcohols_and_Phenols/13.1%3A_Physical_Properties_of_Alcohols%3B_Hydrogen_Bonding#Solubility_of_alcohols_in_water",
"https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/hydrogen-bonds-keep-soda-fizzy-for-longest/3008613.article",
"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226773564_Protein_changes_during_malting_and_brewing_with_focus_on_haze_and_foam_formation_A_review",
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bring-science-home-coke-mentos/",
"https://www.chemguide.co.uk/atoms/bonding/hbond.html",
"http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_hydrogen_bonding.html",
"https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/General_Chemistry/Book%3A_CLUE_(Cooper_and_Klymkowsky)/6%3A_Solutions/6.3%3A_Hydrogen_Bonding_Interactions_and_Solubility",
"https://www.cscscientific.com/surface-tension"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://qz.com/300351/inside-the-44-page-menu-of-americas-only-water-sommelier/amp/"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
9d066a
|
what is the difference between a complex and non complex carbohydrate?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9d066a/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_a_complex_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e5eg5jl",
"e5eg9v8"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Carbohydrates are composed of a whole lot of sugar molecules stuck together. Complex carbohydrates are made of way more sugar molecules than simple carbohydrates. \n\nCompare [sucrose](_URL_1_), table sugar, which is a simple carbohydrate made of two different sugar molecules stuck together, to [starch](_URL_0_), a complex carbohydrate that could be hundreds of glucose molecules stuck together. ",
"simple carbohydrates are sugars that are absorbed quickly when eaten, Complex carbs are long chains of sugars (e.g. starch) that are more slowly broken down and absorbed by the body. The body cannot use starch directly, it has to break it down to glucose during digestion before it can be absorbed and used. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://d2vlcm61l7u1fs.cloudfront.net/media%2F591%2F5918dad3-68c1-4938-bdce-815da7607533%2FphpdORU0S.png",
"http://www.nutrientsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Sucrose.jpg"
],
[]
] |
||
3bizoh
|
is the federal reserve bank owned by the u.s. government?
|
I read somewhere that it was created by Congress but wasn't actually a part of the government as a whole. What's going on?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bizoh/eli5_is_the_federal_reserve_bank_owned_by_the_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csmkzz2",
"csmmgwl"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not really owned by anyone, just like Congress isn't really owned by anyone. The President appoints its top leaders, and Congress can tell it to do or not do certain things, so it's certainly controlled by the government.\n\nSome people get confused about that, because private banks *do* have something called \"stock\" in the regional Federal Reserve branches. But that's not like owning stock in a company; owning Federal Reserve shares is a legal requirement, and doesn't mean you get to control what they do.",
"It's an organization which has been given authority via congressional act. It's not directly dependent on congress for funding (because of it's nature as a bank) so it is more independent then most similar organizations, but congress can certainly pass legislation which would modify these powers if they so choose. They don't often do this though.\n\nIt's leadership is appointed by the president (and approved by the Senate) but it also has important members from the private banking industry.\n\nThis dual leadership role is intentional as the bank is supposed to serve both the government (and people) and private industry.\n\nSo it's \"owned\" in the same way the EPA is owned, legislation by congress created it. But it's also independent in that congress can't easily cut it's funding to change it's behavior, or fire it's officers.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2rnljf
|
what things do i need to know about personal finance by the time i'm 25?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rnljf/eli5what_things_do_i_need_to_know_about_personal/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnhiuhi",
"cnhj4n1",
"cnhj6gc",
"cnhk0pg",
"cnhliy2",
"cnhlpah",
"cnhmsy7",
"cnhnvao",
"cnhpatt",
"cnhqsv9",
"cnhqw8o",
"cnhsm8h",
"cnhtduf",
"cni00hn",
"cni21av",
"cni29rq",
"cni6la0"
],
"score": [
3,
115,
8,
6,
3,
2,
19,
2,
2,
5,
5,
7,
3,
2,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"r/personalfinance\n\nSorry, I'm on mobile and don't know how to link.",
"1) Learn to budget\n\n2) Budget before moving to a new city to work. Too many people move places like NYC without making a budget first and then run into issues. Your budget should tell you what you can afford to pay in rent and such, not the other way around. Determine a value you want to save each month to reach your various goals and then budget around this number.\n\n3) Begin accruing an emergency fund. You should have 6-12 months of living expenses held in cash in case you ever lose your job, the economy takes a dive, you get sick and need coverage beyond insurance, or your car breaks downs, etc.\n\n4) Set up your 401(k) or Roth IRA as soon as you can; take advantage of employer matches and contributions; pay attention to when these contributions and matches vest. [Thank yourself later](_URL_0_)\n\n5) Invest in Vanguard index funds. They are the cheapest, are not actively managed, and diversified.\n\n6) Make a financial plan. When do you want to buy a house? When do you want to get married? When will you need to buy a new car? How much money do you need to save for these things? Determine when it makes sense to start saving for these things. This doesn't nessisary need to be super detailed, but one normally doesn't accidentally stumble into home ownership - saving up a down payment usually requires a plan. \n\n7) Open a high yield savings account; no reason why you should be earning 0.05% through Wells Fargo or BoA when you can be making 0.75% through Capital One, 0.95% through GE Capital, American Express, Schwab, etc. Put your emergency fund here.\n\n8) Open a basic credit card and pay it off each month. Don't spend more than you earn. Build your credit score slowly; thank yourself later.\n\n9) If you have no debt, are contributing to a 401(k) or IRA and still have excess money, then open a brokerage account with whichever brokerage works best for you. Popular ones are Vanguard, TDAmeritrade, OptionHouse, Fidelity, E-Trade, Sharebuilder, etc.",
"The basics:\n\n-How to manage cash flow (paycheck to bank accounts)\n\n-The time value of money (why saving now is 10x more imporant than saving 20 years from now)\n\n-How to properly and safely get and use credit\n\nIf you know these three things you're better off than the majority of people.",
"1) How to manage a bank account (e.g., balancing and reconciling a checking account).\n\nIt is always important to know how much you have available in a bank account, especially when (as in the US) it can take days for a non-cash transaction to clear. If you can maintain a running balance, you will know how much you can spend without overdrafting, even if the bank swears you have more on hand at the moment.\n\n2) How to manage the \"I get paid weekly but have monthly bills\" conundrum.\n\nIt is easy to get into the trap of \"I have $x in my bank, so I can spend it\" and then find that you don't have enough to pay a necessary bill, or find that you can pay your bills this week if you don't do minor things like eat or buy gas to get to work. It's especially easy when you are young and unfamiliar with handling your own finances.\n\n3) How to budget, including how to set priorities, and how to keep to a budget.\n\nBudgets are plans for how you are going to spend your money. They are inherently personal, based on your needs and priorities -- you may prefer to spend $50/week on ramen and Coke for food, and $250 on video games; someone else may prefer to spend $250/week on food, and $50 on books, and both budgets are good. Budgets allow you to balance income and expenses, to make sure you can meet all your needs.\n\nItem (2) above is part of the \"how to keep to a budget\" issue. If you earn $1000/week, but have an annual $3000 property tax bill, a budget will help you plan to have the $3000 on hand when you need it.\n",
"If you haven't yet, I'd recommend checking out /r/personalfinance. Their FAQ has some pretty useful information.",
"Random tips that I've learned myself:\n\n1. Banks are terrible! Do your research and find a great credit union in your area instead. They usually have lower/no fees, often have interest bearing checking accounts, refund ATM fees that other banks' ATMs charge you, etc. And their customer service is usually way better. My credit union for example pays 1.5% interest on its checking accounts and refunds all foreign ATM fees, nor charges any fees of its own (the only requirements were to have direct deposit to the account and a certain number of debit card transactions per month), and comes with other features you'd expect from big banks like free check writing, mobile banking/check deposit, etc I personally don't understand why people use large banks when the advantages of credit unions are so obvious.\n\n2. Learn to budget. Do not be tempted to live paycheck to paycheck, always set aside savings for emergencies (medical, job loss, or otherwise). As others suggested, especially if you're moving someplace where the cost of living may be different than what you're used to, research what the actual cost of living in that area is, make a budget for rent, utilities, food, other living expenses, etc so you know how much money you actually have when all is said and done. As far as taxes go, you should basically assume that 35-40% of your gross income will be withheld. As a rule of thumb you should try to spend no more than about a third of your net income on housing (unfortunately sometimes easier said than done in some extremely high cost of living areas like NYC and SF).\n\n3. Use credit responsibly. I would disagree with anyone who says \"don't get a credit card\"; having a credit card, even if you never use it, helps establish a credit history which makes it easier to be approved for loans in the future. In a lot of housing markets (especially areas with a housing shortage, such as SF) landlords will also perform credit checks before renting to somebody, so having no credit will definitely hurt you there. If you do end up using credit cards, always try to budget accordingly and pay the balance off in full each month; do NOT fall into the trap of a credit card being \"free\" or \"extra\" money when your bank account runs dry, if you carry a balance the card company will begin to charge interest, and interest rates on credit cards are extremely high. Use services like [Credit Karma](_URL_0_) to monitor your credit, it's free. Once you have enough credit you could look at getting a card that provides rewards such as frequent flyer miles and cash back, this is basically free money in your pocket (again so long as you budget accordingly and never carry a balance on the credit card).\n\n4. Start saving for retirement ASAP. Take advantage of 401(k) and similar plans that your employer provides, especially if they are willing to match your investments. 10% of gross income is a good start if you can afford it. One advantage of contributing to a 401k is that the contributions are pre-tax, which reduces the amount of taxable income you have (i.e. your overall tax rate may be lower since that may put you into a lower tax bracket). I've always felt a good rule of thumb is to try and aim for having at least $100k saved by the time you're 30, if that's possible, to ensure you'll have enough money to retire at a reasonable age.\n\n5. Plan, prioritize and be realistic according to your current income level. Don't go buying expensive things you don't need and can't really afford, like a brand new BMW when something more economical would be just fine. You'll have plenty of time and opportunity to move up the career ladder where affording luxuries like that will be more reasonable. Plan for major financial goals like eventually buying a house and save money where you can. Don't let money \"burn a hole in your pocket\" and go spending all your leftover income on things you really don't need.",
"Live below your means. \n* You don't need the latest smart phone. \n* You don't need a 50\" flatscreen. \n* You don't need a brand new vehicle. \n* You don't need HBO, ESPN, NFL Sunday Ticket, Etc. \n* There's TONS of games for the previous generation of console. \n* The Joneses didn't look so cool after the economy crashed in '07 and they lost their house, car, TV, etc. ",
"To add to what every one has already said, list down all your expense, I mean ALL, to the last cent, in an excel sheet. This way you have an overview of your spending habits and you can get interesting insights like average spending for lunch, average spending for transportation, month with highest spending, etc. ",
"Learn to save, then learn to NOT spend your savings.",
"Budget Budget Budget!!!\n\nObviously you know you should budget, but for almost all of us, sticking to a budget is easier said then done.\n\nThis method for actually sticking to my budget has worked incredibly well for me:\n\nStart tracking your expenses (you can go back through bank and credit card statements if you want to start without waiting for new expenses to build up) and calculate what your average spending is on each thing aspect of your life that you spend money on.\n\n(If you have the time to learn a little double-entry bookkeeping at create a set of books for your personal life, that would be ideal, but not absolutely necessary)\n\n**Separate all of your expenses into these categories: Bills, Necessities, Spending Money.**\n\nBills include rent or mortgage payments, personal property taxes, utilities, phone/internet bills, insurance, medical, car payments/maintenance, income taxes. Figure out how much it costs (round-up) to cover all of this for a year, divide by 26 (or however many times you are paid in a year). **Take this amount out of every paycheck and put it into a bank account, and pay these things and only these things out of it.**\n\nNecessities: Groceries, housewares, prescriptions, gasoline, clothing. Once again, calculate average spending per pay period, create a bank account and put in appropriate amount from each paycheck and pay these things and only these things out of it.\n\n(If you have any savings to begin with, you'll ideally want a starting buffer in each of these accounts so you don't overdraft during weeks when you pay/buy everything at once.)\n\nSpending money: Your salary, minus what goes into bills and necessities is your spending money (restaurants, booze, recreation, entertainment, frivolties). Create a third bank account for these, try to keep this spening low enough to keep a goal of moving at least an extra $50/month from this account into your savings.\n\nIn the short run, look into a high-yield savings account. \n\nOnce you reach a point where you can/want to start investing, avoid get rich quick nonsense, and don't put all of your eggs in one basket. Diversify your investments and *on average*, they'll do well in the long run. \n\nLastly, start building credit now. \n\nMy method is that my \"necessities bank account\" is a credit card. It's attached to a bank account that always has enough money to keep paying it off on time.\n\nBuilding credit is not as complicated as some people make it sound. All it requires is borrowing money and making payments on time. \n\nIf you have no credit, you can always get a secured loan or credit card. They seem pointless because you are literally loaning the bank money at no interest, which they are then loaning back to you with interest. However, you can build up good credit fast this way. I went from no credit to good credit in under one year with a $300 secured credit card and a $500 secured loan.\n\nOnce you have good credit, it is an amazing safety net. If you don't abuse it then it will remain available to you when you need it and will make a HUGE difference on the amount of interest you pay on car and mortgage payments down the road.\n\nI wish somebody had told me all of this 10 years ago, I didn't really start to figure it out until 30.\n",
"This might get buried but just one very practical tip to add to the many awesome, detailed ones already here...\n\nDon't shy away from room mates. Sure, it can be a hassle and there are definitely situations where you may have trouble finding suitable housing situations (kids, pets, living with your SO). Sharing the financial burden of housing is tremendously beneficial and at this point in your life (unless you have kids) the focus of your life will be career and leisure. Unless you get shitty roomies, you will not miss the freedom of your own place.",
"Turns out, it's cheaper to not order pizza every night...",
"Read up on the time value of money. That is to say, why 100 today is not the same as 100 in a months time. Being able to calculate the epv of cashflows will let you compare different bank offerings, and products such as pensions/annuities etc. understand how compound interest works.\n\n",
"_URL_0_\n\nWhy wealthy people still use credit. This was an excellent and quick read that really helped me adjust my thinking about credit. ",
"1. Don't go to college unless you've got a drive and passion for what youre studying, not just because \"you're supposed to\".",
"I am way beyond your peer group. But here is how i've managed. I always had a 5 yr plan, i set goals, direction i wanted to move in financially and with life....i didn't write them down, but many of my actions were guided by that goal. Took a lot of detours deciding what i actually wanted to do in life, but decisions were made and things have worked out well for me..financially but much more importantly with happiness. I tried to make happiness and serving others a priority. Everything else fell into place. Don't overthink this...outline a plan and work towards it..things will work out. Best of fortune to you.(p.s) i wouldn't change places with you for any amount of money.",
"I'm worried this will come across as a shameless plug, but check out the book [Millenial Money](_URL_0_) - I'm about 2/3 of the way through it and already feel like I've learned an immense amount about some of the risk/reward that comes from investing in the stock market, specifically that on a long enough timeline (which we in our early- to mid-twenties have the luxury of) most of my conceptions about the inherent risk of the volatility of the stock market are actually misconceptions. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.businessinsider.com/compound-interest-retirement-savings-2014-12"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.creditkarma.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/06/29/5-ways-rich-people-use-credit.aspx"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Millennial-Money-Young-Investors-Fortune/dp/1137279257/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420701182&sr=8-1&keywords=millenial+money"
]
] |
||
16gt7r
|
t-test and anova
|
I searched and found an explanation but it didn't really help. Could someone explain these 2 terms in true 5-year-old terms? An example or two will be appreciated as well.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16gt7r/eli5_ttest_and_anova/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7vz0zw"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"To put it like you're five the best I can: when scientists observe something, like say the height of a five-year-old, they don't expect everyone to be the same size. Of course most of the kids are *about* the same height, but there are always kids who will be taller or shorter than everyone else. This difference in heights is called \"variation.\" We'll come back to this later.\n\nAnother thing we have to think about is how scientists observe things. How can we measure the height of a five-year-old? Of course, you could measure every single five-year-old, but there are tens of millions of them around the world. Hell, there are tens of thousands of five-year-olds in your state! Surely we can't measure them *all*, that would take forever!\n\nInstead, scientists take a \"sample.\" Instead of measuring every single five-year-old, they only measure a small number of them. The idea is that since *most* five-year-olds will be the same height, we can assume this sample will be like the population (that is, the set of all five-year-olds). But this isn't always true.\n\nThat's because nature can be unpredictable and often has *a lot* of variation. So when we see a pattern, we don't know if it's a real pattern, or if we just picked a weird sample due to that natural variation. Like say the average height of five-year-olds in Bigtown is an inch taller than the kids in Littletown. How do we know for sure that we didn't accidentally pick an unusual amount of tall kids in one of the samples? How do we know that the kids in Bigtown really *are* taller? **How do we know that the difference in heights isn't due to chance alone?**\n\nThat's where the T-Test comes in. The T-Test allows us to compare results in terms of that variation. It allows us to say with confidence that the kids in Bigtown are taller than kids in Littletown (we call this \"statistical significance\") or that the 1-inch difference likely was found due to natural randomness in our samples.\n\nNow ANOVA also deals with variation (in fact ANOVA stands for \"Analysis of Variance\"), but in a slightly different way. When comparing two or more groups, say the height of the five-year-olds in Mr. Smith's, Mrs. Jones, and Dr. Baker's classes, we want to know if there really is a significant difference in height. We do this by comparing the amount of variation *within* each group, vs the amount of variation *between* each group. If there's a lot of variation within each class (lots of tall kids and short kids), and only a little bit of variation between each class (the average height of each class is about the same), then it's harder to say that the result is \"significant\" -- it might be due to chance alone. However if it's the *other* way around, then we can be relatively confident that the difference is real."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
497c6z
|
how does simultaneous incoming calls work
|
A house phone can only receive a call in or send a call out. If line is busy then other people can not use it.
When you call different businesses, whether a vanity number or not they are able to receive in multiple calls at one time and line don't normally go busy. Having thousands of people call in simultaneously how does that work but house phones only accept a call at a time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/497c6z/eli5_how_does_simultaneous_incoming_calls_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0pkix0",
"d0plnt7",
"d0pmiol"
],
"score": [
17,
2,
15
],
"text": [
"The only reason house phones only receive a single call in at a time is because you're only paying for that service. Most phone companies can and will upgrade your home's number of lines if you want them to, or sell you an appliance or service that allows you to handle multiple calls at once by placing one on hold. But most people don't need that, and don't want to pay the extra cost for it, so a lot of people aren't aware it's an option.\n\nThe technology is easily there to allow you to have a multi-line phone that places your call in a queue until someone can get to it. Then it transfers you to an individual other phone line at someone's desk as soon as it detects that the person at that desk has hung up from their previous call. This is how call centres handle their volumes.",
"Businesses have what are called a \"Hunt Group\" which identifies a group of numbers going into an office.\n\nSo, a business number is 123-4567. But they also have numbers 123-4568, 123-4569, and 123-4560. When you call 123-4567, and that line is busy, the phone system will automatically route you to 123-4568. If that number is busy too, it will route you to 123-4569 and so on. If there are no available lines, you could be routed to a voicemail system.",
"When you get a phone line at home, you get a line that can carry one voice call at a time, and it comes with a single phone number. This is called a POTS line, for Plain Old Telephone Service. Yes, seriously.\n\nThe types of phone lines that businesses tend to get are different. They order lines called T1s or PRIs that can carry more than one call at a time: 23 or 24. These are plugged into systems called PBXes (private branch exchange), which then deal with routing calls between the T1 and the phones on people's desks. In addition, there is not a direct relationship between the number of voice calls that the line can carry and the number of phone numbers. There may be as few as one (incoming calls get edited to an attendant, either a real person or an automated system, who connects the incoming call to the right phone) or an effectively unlimited number (you might have 500 employees, each with their own direct phone number, but only be able to support 24 simultaneous calls). The line and the numbers are billed independently.\n\nThere is a little bit of North-American-centrism here; it's a little different in other parts of the world, but it's similar. It also ignores VoIP in favor of the traditional phone system."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3g65ei
|
how come 3g/4g can transmit so far from one station, but im lucky if wifi will even transmit outside my lawn
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g65ei/eli5_how_come_3g4g_can_transmit_so_far_from_one/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctv7lw9",
"ctv7sl2",
"ctv7xht"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Cellular signals are carried by structures commonly referred to as 'towers.' You could put one on your roof, but the neighbourhood association would probably object.",
"The transmitters and receivers on cell towers are much, much more powerful than your wireless router.",
"Three reasons:\n\n1. Elevation. The towers are up high and that increases reception.\n1. Signal strength. The towers have powerful transmitters.\n1. Licensed bandwidth. This is a biggie. The cell company has licensed the part of the radio spectrum that it's using, which means that nobody else is using it. Wifi is unlicensed, and there are lots of things on the same wavelength (other wifi routers, security systems, microwave ovens, etc)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
c5rgir
|
why do tracts in the central nervous system mostly have a projection on the opposite hemisphere?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c5rgir/eli5_why_do_tracts_in_the_central_nervous_system/
|
{
"a_id": [
"es3t0y1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There's a few ideas out there about why the decussation happens, most seem to suggest that it facilitates organization. I had the exact same question for my neuro professors, no one really knows for sure if it provides any sort of evolutionary advantage or if it was just an accident."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2s87c6
|
how did ancient society forge gold coins? and how did they make sure that they were made of real gold?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s87c6/eli5_how_did_ancient_society_forge_gold_coins_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnn2ld7",
"cnn2rb1",
"cnn2x29"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I want to say that they were struck rather than forged. As far as making sure they were gold, that's why you see people biting coins in movies based way in the past(gold is much softer than other metals). ",
"As mentioned, they were probably struck not forged. \n\nWith respect to making sure they were made of real gold, that could be serious problem if a counterfeiter started introducing their own coins. For the average citizen, it would simply be taking it on faith that the coin was genuine, just as how nowadays we don't proof every dollar we get. However, one of the most basic principles could be used to check for purity. Knowing the size and weight of a coin, you can determine it's density. If it doesn't match that of gold, it is probably alloyed in an attempt to pass of a less worthwhile coin as something more. ",
"Gold is a very soft metal so forging it is a relatively easy feat. The task of determining whether or not an object was pure gold is famously attributed to Archimedes. A brick of pure gold of equal weight to the object in question would be placed in a container of water and the amount of water it displaced would be measured. If the object in question displaced the same amount of water it was assumed to be pure gold. If other metals were mixed in, the object would have a different mass and therefore displace a different amount of water. While not perfect, this method would prevent the need to physically melt the object into a brick. In Archimedes case, the object was the kings crown and melting it would have meant a certain death.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://physics.weber.edu/carroll/archimedes/crowntst.htm"
]
] |
||
2y1lja
|
how does oil move from arabian oil fields to us markets?
|
Is there an American go between? Or is it purchased by the government?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2y1lja/eli5_how_does_oil_move_from_arabian_oil_fields_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cp5epn1",
"cp5t278"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"I work in oil and gas in the US so i can give a tl;dr shot at explaining it. In the US we mainly operate off two different markets for crude oil, BRENT and WTI (West Texas Intermediate). Countries can be viewed as as business entities, so yes the government does technically buy, but mainly its businesses (who pay a lot in taxes). So its usually based off whats called a futures contract, where you say ill buy x amount from you, at this price, and you will deliver it on x date. prices of commodities depend on which market they are on, along with copious other factors. this is how they can somewhat reliably predict what gas prices will be in the not so distant future. that's the real basic explanation, might have butchered some of it trying to simplify it. but if you take some college level econ classes they will explain it. ",
"Oil is typically purchased by the american supermajors--ExxonMobil and Chevron--pursuant to a futures contract like what ApatheticBear described. The oil is acquired in crude format in Saudi Arabia and shipped by tanker to ports here in the US like Elizabeth in New Jersey and Houston and others. After that, it’s sent to a refinery where it’s turned into various products: gasoline, jet fuel, heating oil, diesel, asphalt base, etc. Then it’s transported by rail, truck, or other means to the end users. The US government might directly purchase some relatively small amount of crude oil but the vast majority of the oil entering the US is through transactions involving private parties. It’s not as if the US government is an intermediary in most oil market transactions.\n\nSource: American oil & gas attorney"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4uv7f9
|
how does the wayback machine (_url_0_) decide when to snapshot a webpage?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4uv7f9/eli5_how_does_the_wayback_machine_archiveorg/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5t32ye"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The Wayback Machine does not operate like a search engine, so it does not continuously crawl the web for updates. They work off a variety of data (including user-submitted and 3rd-party information) because of that archiving is almost random and rather slow.\n\nSo, how does it \"decide\"? It just gets to it when it gets to it. Further information [here](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[
"Archive.org"
] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/01/18/the-internet-archive-turns-20-a-behind-the-scenes-look-at-archiving-the-web/#71a18f978002"
]
] |
||
21xb1e
|
marketamerica's "legal" pyramid scheme
|
I have a friend who's entering a new business called MarketAmerica. After doing some research, I found a lot of mentioning of "legal pyramid schemes". So I was hoping someone could explain how one makes a pyramid scheme legal, and how MarketAmerica works in relation. I want to help my friend make a good decision.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21xb1e/eli5_marketamericas_legal_pyramid_scheme/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cghbvsh",
"cghbwo4",
"cghlhuv"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"They actually sell a product. \n\nPyramid schemes become legal if they have some sort of product they are \"technically\" selling. However, their core element is a pure pyramid scheme.\n\nI would advise your friend to get a real job, MarketAmerica seems pretty obvious as a pyramid scheme. No matter how much money they \"promise\" you'll make you won't make it. You'd be better served working at McDonalds where you get a paycheck every week.",
"If the pyramid makes it's money from people paying to join the pyramid, then it's illegal.\n\nIf the pyramid makes it's money from selling products to people outside the pyramid, then it's MLM.",
"How could anyone buy into this idea? Not even considering that this is an obvious pyramid scheme, their \"products\" are all total nonsense. It's all bullshit fake cosmetics and non FDA regulated nutritional supplements. This garbage probably cost pennies to make and the wholesale markup is over 1000%.\n\nFavorite product promise \"Helps provide revitalized radiance\"\n\nThis shit is nothing but snake oil.\n\n\n\n\n\"You can earn 30-50% retail mark up.\" Normal retail markup is 100% minimum."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
49jna7
|
why can a average computer display beautiful hd video, but struggle with gaming graphics?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49jna7/eli5_why_can_a_average_computer_display_beautiful/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0s9se0",
"d0s9ylc",
"d0sa1or"
],
"score": [
37,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"When you're gaming, the computer has to generate the graphics on the spot 60 frames per second, instead of just reading a file.\n\nIt's the difference between looking at a picture of a cake and baking 60 cakes per second.",
"The key here is someone already made the 'beautiful HD video' Your computer is drawing the gaming image right now, because it has to take into account what you are doing 'live.'\n\nBob Ross could show you a gallery of his paintings much more quickly than he could paint a sequence of pictures based on some instructions you give.",
"It's the difference between showing you a bunch of paintings that someone already made, and painting my own pictures 60 times per second. \n\nShowing you a video is pretty easy... Here's the thing I need to show you, then here's the next thing, and so on. But a video game is a bit like creating a video one frame at a time, based on your inputs. Which is naturally harder for the computer to do."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1tmkvq
|
why do people like guy fawkes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tmkvq/eli5_why_do_people_like_guy_fawkes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce9fepr",
"ce9fi2k"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the movie V for Vendetta made it cool to like him. Most Americans have no clue what he really stands for.",
"Mostly because of 'V for Vendetta'. This is a graphic novel and later a film. In these, the main character (V) is a revolutionary fighting against a fascist state in the UK. He is explicitly linked to Guy Fawkes through his actions and clothing. In the film version, the opening scene depicts Fawkes as a noble idealist, similar to the main character, V. \n\nThis has led to Fawkes being linked to the ideal of revolution against a repressive fascist state. In reality, of course, Fawkes and the other conspirators wished to kill the King and the entirety of Parliament and to place a far more autocratic Catholic monarch on the throne. So an attempted revokutionary, yes, but not for noble ideals\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
9y8k28
|
why does the battery life of brand new phones crater after a few months?
|
This has happened with every smart phone I've e ever owned.
For the first few months the battery life will be as advertised. After a few months the phone can't even make it through half a day. My type of usage remains the same.
For instance, I recently got a galaxy S9. Used to last two days between changes. Now lasts about 6 hours.
Why does this always happen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9y8k28/eli5_why_does_the_battery_life_of_brand_new/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e9zha10",
"e9zin56",
"e9zkg31",
"e9zujjh"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Batteries get worse and hold less charge the more you use them. So over time it can't store as much charge.\n\nYou could also have a lot of background stuff happening information as you download more. Especially if you don't close stuff. ",
"it's something called planned obsolecense. Manufacturers make things to last only a certain amount of time before failure occurs and this is known. If you bought a car that would last forever then you would never buy another car. Items are tested before putting them into production and they know exactly how long they will last before critical failure. Batteries could be made to last significantly longer but then you would never buy another battery.",
"Older cell batteries were NiMH and benefitted from full discharge. New smartphone batteries are lithium ion and are damaged with a full discharge. There seem to be conflicting answers on what the best charging procedure for extending the life of the battery, but sufficed to say that fully draining or over charging is bad for them.\n\nAs far as I’ve read keeping a lithium ion battery charged around 80% is best for its health, which I believe means more shorter charging sessions. Could be wrong though.\n\nMy IPhone 6 battery lasted about 3 years until it needed replacing and the charge was reasonable leading up to about 2-2.5 years. \n\nAre you using more data where you are now compared to when you first bought it? Leave your Bluetooth on? Brightness all the way up? Background app refresh on? Battery saver function turned off?\n\nThere are a lot of ways to keep your battery from draining too fast. Do some research on your particular model too see what can be done.",
"With Lithium ion batteries as a whole, overcharging is a problem. I’ve seen conflicting information on that for smart phones as well. Some say charging overnight is a no-no, while others say modern smartphones have fail-safes in place that stops the power draw once 100% is reached."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8tu2zy
|
without entering political debate, what are the good and bad things about privatising a big public company (e.g: energy, airports) ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8tu2zy/eli5_without_entering_political_debate_what_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e1a89zv"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Privatizing as a concept leans on the hypothesis that, in the pursuit of profit, private business will be able to do the same job for less cost than a public entity that isn't trying to turn a profit. The motivation for profit drives innovation.\n\nAs far as pros and cons, it requires some hindsight. Until you privatize something, you won't know if it's the correct decision. It will all be hypothetical.\n\nThe pro's are a potential for lower operating costs, which would hopefully lead to better pay for workers and possibly more jobs. Again, no one knows if those results will actually happen. We make the assumption that if management has more money, they will do those things. They could just pocket the money.\n\nThe biggest con in privatization is that they do not directly answer to the public. If an airport is run by the city, then the city council is responsible, and can be voted out of office, or approached directly by the public in required public meetings. A private company can't be held directly responsible in the same way. It would have to be done through the political process to get them to change the private business. It may not have the same oversight that a public entity has."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
eaxc8v
|
how can we sometimes tell exactly what time is it, the moment we wake up, without looking the at the clock?
|
Today, when i woke up the fisrt thought i had was: i better get up, 11 is late even for a Sunday. Then i looked at my phone and sure enough, the time was 10:55. And it wasn't the first time i did that guess. Is it pure luck or something more?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eaxc8v/eli5_how_can_we_sometimes_tell_exactly_what_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"faz83fe"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's a mix of pure luck and educated guesses. One factor is you can more or less know what time of the day is depending on your normal sleep schedule and how bright is outside. This second one is only true when you've been somewhere long enough to get used to the day/night cycle.\n\nThe other factor is knowing what time was before you went to sleep. If you took a nap at 1pm and when you wake up is still day outside, you know it's somewhere between 1pm and whatever time the sun sets where you live. If you went to sleep at night and you have a more or less normal sleep, you know it's something between sunrise and noon. You simply say a number between that and probabilities to pick it right are relatively high"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1bkpul
|
what do scientists' who are looking for cures to diseases normal work day look like?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bkpul/eli5_what_do_scientists_who_are_looking_for_cures/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c97jl9e",
"c97k9nv",
"c97mayj",
"c97nd2w",
"c97r0b6",
"c97urih"
],
"score": [
118,
42,
10,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you've ever taken a biology or chemistry class in High School you already know pretty much what's involved. Just instead of your teacher and a book telling you what you need to know and what to do next it's spent reading journals and research papers trying to figure out what to do. You spend roughly 95% of your day either reading what other people have done or writing down what you've done. You're trying to narrow down what will work.\n\nThe remainder of the time you're acting on what you've learned and written down by doing experiments. What you want to happen or what you expected to happen almost never does. You learn from what happened and start all over.\n\nI don't know who said it but a quote I'm going to get wrong but like anyways goes something like, \"Scientific progress is never heralded by shouts of 'Eureka!' but by a muttering of 'Well that wasn't supposed to happen...'\"\n\nThere is of course other normal work day stuff like wishing you had a better parking spot, sitting in on meetings, emailing your boss to explain why you need to go home early next week Friday, working up the courage to ask the cute girl at the front desk out on a date, etc...",
"I do drug discovery as a Ph.D. student, I work on viruses. A normal day for me would be like this one:\n\n* Take care of the cells I use to grow and test my drugs.\n\nIt requires about 15 min every 2/3 days. (Make sure they have enough nutrients and they do not overgrow)\n\n* Prepare experiments for the next days.\n\nIt can take a few minutes up to a whole day depending on what experiment we want to do, what reagents or protocols we need. It also includes ordering stuff of course.\n\n* Do experiments.\n\nFor instance testing new molecules to see if they can block infection of my awesome little cells. This can take 3 days, so I would infect on day 1, and get results on day 4. Doing the infection can take 3h, with some incubation time to do something else in between. Obtaining the results would also take about 3h, up to a whole day. Some experiments take longer, some are fairly quick.\n\n* Read. And write.\n\nAnd read. And write again\n\nOh, and read too.\n\n\n\n",
"I am working on a kind of immune cell called a natural killer cell (or NK cell, for short). NK cells kill virally infected and cancerous cells, so my work is likely to have an impact on these areas. At the moment, I would say the thing we are “closest” to curing using NK cells is a kind of blood cancer called acute myeloid leukaemia.\n\nI should say that I am very close to the coal face, in that I spend a lot of my time in the lab doing experiments. People like my boss spend more of their time reading papers, coming up with ideas and trying to get funding than I do, although I do still do quite a lot of reading.\n\nThe beauty of medical science is that there’s no such thing as a typical day. That’s why it’s interesting. I will tell you what I am up to today, though, to give you an idea of the sort of thing we do.\n\n9am – noon: Start the day with three solid hours in the lab. I am on day two of a three day experiment, which I started yesterday evening. The aim of the experiment is to see if a particular gene that I am interested in controls the expression of some other genes (I’m doing it by ChIP, for anyone who is interested in the more technical explanation!). In practice, this three hours is spent adding small volumes of cold reagents to my sample, incubating it at 4 degrees C (that’s fridge temperature) and then removing the reagents again. I do the incubations in what is essentially a walk-in fridge, so I can choose between standing in the fridge (cold) or walking back and forward between the fridge and my workbench every five minutes. I choose the walking option. Whenever I take my samples out of the fridge, I make sure they are on ice. Most of this job is paying attention to the small things (like constant temperature) and being careful.\n\nNoon: At this point my samples have to sit at 65 degrees C for four hours. While they're doing that, I go and have lunch.\n\n1pm: (That was an unusually long lunch, but it was good to catch up with my colleagues in other labs, to find out what they’re up to both in the lab and in their personal lives. Science is very collaborative and it is important to maintain good relationships.) \n\nI go to have a meeting with my boss and the other person who works on the same project. She is three weeks into a five-week experiment and we are trying to decide when we should start taking readings. We only have three chances to take readings, so we don’t want to take them too late, or too early. We did a pilot experiment to help us decide the best time to take the readings, but we are worried that some things may have changed between the pilot and this experiment that will change the way it behaves slightly. We also need to decide exactly what readouts we are going to take. These meetings always go on for ages.\n\n3pm: Finally done! Now I have time to look after the cells I use for some of my experiments. I feed them by giving them fresh medium. If the cells are overgrown, I throw some of them away and move the rest to a new container. This won’t quite take an hour, so I will have the chance to look at the news, check my emails and maybe even have a cup of coffee before I have to do the next thing.\n\n4pm: I return to my original experiment. It just needs a few more chemicals adding to it and moving to a different temperature, where it will sit for a further two hours. During these two hours, I plan to do some work on some lectures I am giving next month. However, it is likely that my automatic alert will come up with some papers that have been published today that are relevant to my research. If so, I will read these instead. I might also have to deal with emails from my students who are on Easter vacation, but have a report to hand in when they get back.\n\n6pm: Back to the experiment again. I am working at room temperature now (yay). I spend an hour or so cleaning up the products of the experiment. If I wanted to push myself, I could continue working, but I am now at a point where I can put the experiment in the freezer and continue working on it tomorrow, so that’s what I’m going to do.\n\n7pm: Go home.\n",
"Ph.D. scientist (Biochemistry) here - don't know if I can ELY5, but maybe I can ELY15. \n\nI work in a lab at a research university studying a very specific pathway involved in liver cancer. One of the first things to understand is that the majority of people doing research at this level are not actively looking for \"cures.\" We are looking to have a better understanding of the living (biological) system and how it changes under different conditions. \n\nThese conditions range from different types of stress such as heat-shock or exposure to UV (which damages DNA) to altering the enzymatic makeup of the cells (inhibiting or inducing a certain protein). There are many types of conditions that can be tested, and it depends on the field of study of what exactly you are testing.\n\nFrom these types of scenarios, we then use many different methods to observe the changes in the cells and, what I do, the levels and activity of proteins in those cells. More specifically in my line of work, I have the same experiments going in both normal cells and cancerous cells. I am mainly interested in one specific protein and how it changes upon different conditions in these cells. When I see a change (up, down, whatever) I then design an experiment to see what around that protein changes (from reading others' research, I know other proteins that my POI (protein of interest) interacts with - so I start with looking at those as well). \n\nTaken together, all of this gets us a better understanding of how a certain biological system works. I can spend a couple years just learning about a certain interaction my protein makes with another protein, and what changes downstream in the system when this interaction takes place. ",
"I work on cancer drug delivery particles. I mostly sit around waiting for reactions to happen, or purify products. But on some days I have to harvest tissue samples of a metric fuckton of lab mice. ",
"It really depends on the disease because they're all so different, but I can tell you about how the lab I'm working in is looking to cure Huntinton's disease. DNA is a sequence of molecules labeled C, A, G, and T in a certain order. When someone has a bunch of CAG repeats (i.e. over 25 repeats) the person is likely to develop Huntington's disease. In our lab, we take DNA sequences with those repeats and look at what makes them so stable. Then, we study how different proteins can cause chemical reactions that delete some of the CAG repeats."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
13pb8r
|
why can people live on an all or almost all junk food diet without getting really sick?
|
Some people don't even gain weight while living this way. Mostly or even all nutritionless and high sugar/fat/sodium etc. diet, and usually not much exercise. How come you don't see a whole bunch of college students keeling over from heart attacks after living a year on ramen noodles and cheetos?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13pb8r/eli5_why_can_people_live_on_an_all_or_almost_all/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c75xkvt",
"c75y9k4",
"c75yrc3",
"c75zrn5",
"c760bsk",
"c761pyz",
"c761qq0",
"c761uej"
],
"score": [
15,
10,
19,
9,
8,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I think they are getting enough nutrition to live, but not feel great probably, and that the problems will show up later, like colon issues, diabetes,,etc",
"Because the body is a remarkable thing. It is designed to take care of \"bad stuff\" and bad things that get in your body. I don't have enough space to even begin telling you how it does it, but the digestive system is remarkable. When cells begin to really age, (middle aged ppl), that's when systems don't functional well as they used to. College students can ingest so much crap without anything happening to them because they are still young and healthy, regardless of what goes in their mouth. Obviously not every student, but a majority of them. Metabolic rates are more efficient. At that age, the body is just better handling that crap. They won't live as long, but for the meantime, they'll be fine.",
"You say \"nutritionless\", but modern processed foods are *extremely* nutritious when compared to anything but a modern balanced diet. They have vitamins and minerals and stuff dumped into them; not perfectly, but enough so that it's hard to get any nutrient deficiency.",
"One thing I've noticed at my workplace is that those who drink a bunch of soda and eat junk foods (while they sit at their desk all day) are the ones who continuously get sick with coughs, colds, etc and have to call in. They're relatively young (20s) and while they may not be obese or anything you can tell that they're not healthy just by looking at them. \n\nLike some others have said, I think a lot of the ill health effects of such a diet or lifestyle will probably come later in life, for example having a heart attack at the age of 40 or something.",
"Well have you ever heard the expression: You are what you eat? Well, it might be more accurate to say, ' You are what you have been eating for the last 10 years.' It takes time for the negative effects of dietary-induced inflammation to express itself in the body.",
"Weight isn't health. How do you mean not get sick? Heart disease and cancer do not occur over night.\n\nAlthough I cannot attest to the generalizations you are speaking of concerning malnourishment, there are infinite variables here. I can say that the processed foods have very negative effects on the body on their own, ones we as a species are often far from fully understanding. If you look into ideas like diabetes, heart disease and cancer, they are on a tremendous rise. This is related to the processed ingredients and preservatives, artificial sweeteners and so on that some consume vast quantities of.",
"I have a poster in my kitchen that says, \"EAT SHIT AND DIE!\" First I feel offended, but then it makes me think about what I eat.",
"They won't get sick just yet. You have to wait a decade or two. If you want to see those types of people get sick *right now*, take away all their soda, candy and junk food snacks and replace it with water, fruits, vegetables and fish.\n\nNot only does the physical shock of reducing their fat, sodium, sugar and carb intake throw their body for a loop, the psychological effects can be just as hard on them, if not worse."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6kd010
|
why in english can one say "i used to think so" why can the word used be applied in this way?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6kd010/eli5_why_in_english_can_one_say_i_used_to_think/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djl4gdz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Another definition of the verb 'used' is \"describing an action or state of affairs that was done repeatedly or existed for a period in the past\"\n\nFor example \"that house used to be an empty lot\"\n\nIt's only used in the past tense in this way.\n\n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6b165e
|
is there an explanation for when you're watching a movie you've already seen 20 times and then all of the sudden you come across a scene you have no recollection of at all?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6b165e/eli5_is_there_an_explanation_for_when_youre/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhiywp5",
"dhiz2qo"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Yeah, it's because your kids watched it so many times, and after a while you find that its been on your television 24/7 for the past month, but you've been blocking it out so you don't have a complete mental breakdown. Then you eventually sit down and realize there is more to the movie than your brain wanted you to remember. ",
"Sometimes when movies are broadcast on TV they add in scenes that were cut from the theatrical release. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1s9fir
|
why do we cringe? and why, even though its an uncomfortable feeling, do we keep watching whatever is making us cringe?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s9fir/why_do_we_cringe_and_why_even_though_its_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdv91tj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's the 'flight' part of our instinctual [fight-or-flight](_URL_0_) reaction to dangerous or unpleasant things. Cats and other primal animals are much more subject to their instincts, and will flee the scene immediately upon encountering something (a loud noise, an unpleasant sound, odor, bright light, something approaching them too quickly, etc.) along the lines of what makes us cringe. The reason we cringe instead of fleeing altogether is our conscious brain overriding the instinctual reaction."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight-or-flight_response"
]
] |
||
1swk4r
|
cases in language.. accusative, nominative, dative, genitive, etc.
|
I've been trying to learn German recently and can't get my head around these concepts..
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1swk4r/eli5_cases_in_language_accusative_nominative/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce1xf72",
"ce1xvbm",
"ce1y7gq"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Cases are sort of like tenses for nouns. They indicate the role the noun is playing in a sentence. The explanations I'm about to give are from Latin, so there may be slight differences.\n\nNominative indicates that the noun is the subject of a verb (it's doing something). In Latin, for example, we might write \"Quint**us** cenam parat\" (\"Quintus prepares/is preparing dinner\") with the *-us* ending indicating the nominative. *Quintus* is the subject of the verb *parat*.\n\nAccusative indicates that the noun is the direct object of a verb (something is being done *to* it). In the above sentence, \"cen**am**\", with the *-am* indicating accusative case, indicates that \"cenam\" ('dinner') is the object of the verb \"parat\" (prepare).\n\nDative is like accusative, but for indirect objects. Indirect objects indicate *how* a verb does its action. For example, in the sentence \"Joe threw the ball to Steve\", Joe is the subject (nominative), the ball is the direct object (accusative), and Steve indicates the manner in which the ball was thrown (dative).\n\nGenitive indicates either possession or relationship. For example, the Catholic phrase \"in nomine patris\" (in the name of the father) has \"patris\" (father) in the genitive case. It's the father's (patris) name (nomine), the name is described or qualified by the father. It can also just mean possession: Quintus' dinner = \"cena quinti\", cena = dinner (nominative), quinti = of or relating to Quintus (genitive).",
"It's confusing because in English these sorts of things are denoted mostly by word order. In German they're denoted by doing things such as changing the articles being used.\n\nExample.\n\nDer Hund beißt den Mann.\n\nDen Mann beißt der Hund.\n\nBoth are saying, \"The dog bites the man.\"\n\nBoth 'Mann' and 'Hund' are masculine nouns. In the Nominative case that is indicated by 'der' which when you're learning words it is the definite article you learn with the noun. In the Accusative case that is represented by 'den'. It is the 'den' before \"Mann' that is telling you that he is the one being bitten even if you put \"Den Mann\" at the start of the sentence. \n\nNote though that even though 'Den Mann beißt der Hund' is grammatically correct many Germans consider it to look/sound stupid.",
"**Accusative** is refered to as the direct object; the part of the sentence you get when you ask the question \"What does the subject (verb)?\". \nFor example: Der Mann hat einen Kugelschreiber (The man has a pen). Here the Akkusativ Case is \"einen Kugelschreiber\", because it is **what the subject has**. \nAnother example: Der Mann trinkt den Kaffee (The man drinks the coffee). **What does the man drink**? The coffee.\n\nIn this case (the akkusativ case), the article of the noun changes depending on its gender (actually here only the masculine changes):\n\n* Der (masculine) -- > Den\n* Die (feminine) -- > Die\n* Das (neutral) -- > Das\n* Die (plural) -- > Die\n\nAlso the akkusativ case works with preposition as to explain movement. It is not the same to say \"Die Schlüssel ist auf dem Tisch; The keys are on the table\" (Here *dem* Tisch is dative) as to say \"Ich stelle die Schlüssel auf den Tisch; I put the keys on the table\" (Here *den* Tisch is accusative). It is easier to learn the prepositional form of learning the cases as it is to learning the first way I explained it, but it is obviously used both ways.\n\nThe **Nominative Case** is simply the subject that does the action:\nDer Mann trinkt Kaffee. The nominative case is \"Der Mann\".\n\nHere the articles stay as you have learned them:\n\n* Der (masculine) -- > Der\n* Die (feminine) -- > Die\n* Das (neutral) -- > Das\n* Die (plural) -- > Die\n\nThe **Dativ Case** case is much more harder. It can be identified as the \"indirect object\", or as \"**What does the direct object have? or \"To/For whom?\"**. \nFor example: Ich gebe den Kindern einen Hund. (I give the children a dog). Here the accusative case would be \"einen Hund\" and the dative case would be \"den Kindern\". Because you give (what)? a dog (to whom?) to the children. \n\nThe Dative case also includes a prepositional form of writing, meaning that there are certain prepositions that, like accusative, are only for their respective cases.\n\nThe changes for the articles are:\n\n* Der (masculine) -- > Dem\n* Die (feminine) -- > Der\n* Das (neutral) -- > Dem\n* Die (plural) -- > Den \n\nThe **Genitive Case** is the case for possession. It is fairly easy to identify as it means that someone owns something, for example: \"Der Hund des Mannes\" (The man's dog). When the Genitiv case is a masculine or neutral, you add the ending \"-es\" to the noun, hence des Mannes. (It can be understood as adding 's to a noun).\n\nThere are also various prepositions that work uniquely for the genitive case.\n\nThe article changes are the following:\n\n* Der (masculine) -- > Des\n* Die (feminine) -- > Der\n* Das (neutral) -- > Des\n* Die (plural) -- > Der\n \n\nAnd that's it.\n\nThe full article table is [this](_URL_0_)\n\nIf you have any further doubts feel free to contact me.\n\nSource: fluent german speaker.\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/3623111_700b.jpg"
]
] |
|
59q9vw
|
health insurance deductibles
|
My company has open season for insurance and I am trying to figure out health insurance deductibles and how they work.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59q9vw/eli5_health_insurance_deductibles/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9ahd6r"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"The way it usually works is this:\n\nPremium - Monthly fee, always the same. Your work might pay all or some of this for you.\n\nDeductible - Total amount you have to spend on health-related costs before insurance starts to pay. This is often something like $2000. The first $2000 in health fees you incur in a year you pay for; after that, your insurance \"kicks in\" and starts paying for some or all of any future costs\n\nMax Out of Pocket - You've met your deductible already and insurance pays for, say, 70% of all expenses. Once you hit this secondary level of spending, insurance will begin to pay 100% of all expenses."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3d7k3k
|
what would happen to north korea (and subsequently the world) if kim jong un suddenly vanished?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d7k3k/eli5_what_would_happen_to_north_korea_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct2r002"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It would be kept silent for weeks at first while they tried to locate him. North Korean news might fabricate some stories about what he's up to here and there, but mostly they won't talk about him.\n\nSomething similar happened last year when he took some time off for his health.\n\nThe entire country would be completely locked down. No unnecessary travel permitted. The Kaesong Industrial Complex will be shutdown. Nobody will answer the hotline phone. Everyone will know something is up.\n\nAfter a while, the military will take over. Everyone in the country will be ordered to tune into television at a certain time for an important announcement, similar to what happened when Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung died.\n\nThe newscasters will announce that Kim has vanished and that the US are almost certainly to blame. They'll announce that the military is working to figure out exactly what's happened and name whichever general is now in charge of the country (perhaps Hwang Pyong-so) as leading the investigation.\n\nAfter that, who knows? The North Korean military aren't dumb; they know that all-out war would be hell, but whoever winds up in charge is likely to be twice as old as Kim Jongun and nostalgic for the days where North Korea was truly prosperous.\n\nOther world powers will start talking with this new military leader, in secret at first. They will probably be generous with the new leader, trying to court a friend and not wake the giant. Other countries will probably offer enough good deals to placate the new leader, and the status quo will be maintained."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
91hocy
|
what happens when social security runs out?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/91hocy/eli5_what_happens_when_social_security_runs_out/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e2y1rj4",
"e2y2vkg",
"e2y4ddc",
"e2y7acu"
],
"score": [
11,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It’s not going to run out. Tax structure will be changed to match contributions to cost. Even if they let it go insolvent before it’s fixed the government still has an obligation to pay its debts, so it would just add to the increasing national debt (more loans to pay for obligations)",
"First note that \"run out\" here means \"unable to meet 100% of obligations.\" That doesn't mean social security payments stop entirely, it means that benefits must go down or revenues must go up.\n\nIdeally the solution would be hashed out ahead of time, but it's also possible to debt-finance the program short term while the government bickers it out.\n\nLong term, some mixture of benefit restructuring and tax adjustments will be required.",
"When the Social Security Trust Fund is exhausted, benefits are reduced - not eliminated. \n\nJust because the program reduces benefits by 20% does not mean that everyone will get the 20% reduction. While we know that overall benefits would be reduced, we do not know how the individual will be affected. For example, people may get 100% of their benefits but not on the due date. You might apply for benefits at 67, and the first check arrives when you are 68. Individuals might get reduced nothing or everything. If you would like the Congressional Research Service info on this, just ask.\n\nThe SSA believes that about half of the people turning 71 today will be turning 87 in 2034 - an optimistic outlook for the Trust Fund. So this issue will affect people who are now well into retirement.",
"One thing that hasn't yet been pointed out: Social Security (and Medicare) is not means-tested. Therefore, you will receive it no matter how much money you already have in the bank, regardless of any 401k or pension plan. Warren Buffet still gets his checks.\n\nYou paid into it, therefore you deserve it no matter what. This is different than other insurance - where you receive benefits only *if you need it*. \n\nBefore we significantly change our tax structure, before we add to our national debt - I believe we'll see these things become means-tested. According to [_URL_1_](_URL_0_) - 54% of American Workers participate in a workplace retirement program. Even if the benefits aren't enough to live off for many of these workers, it could offset SSI costs (as it would be supplemental). \n\n\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many-american-workers-participate-workplace-retirement-plans",
"PensionRights.org"
]
] |
||
a9q4rq
|
how do the stars remain in the same spot every night if the planet is both orbiting the sun and rotating at the same time?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a9q4rq/eli5_how_do_the_stars_remain_in_the_same_spot/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eclfcxc",
"eclfnxm",
"eclfoo1",
"eclfxxr"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They don't. They just move very, very slowly because they're very far away.\n\nImagine driving on a road and looking at a mountain at the horizon. The mountain doesn't look like it's moving because it's far away, but it's obviously moving in relation to you, and after a while it will be obvious.",
"They actually don't. The night sky changes according to the month you're in and some constellations can be seen only during certain months of the year. As the earth rotates, the sky seems to rotate too, but too slow for us to perceive. Looking at shadows during daytime or when the moon is out often helps see the rotation.\n\n",
"They don’t. And is very easy to notice. Look for any constellation on the night sky and then look for it a few hours later. It will be in a different position.\n\nPhotographies of the night sky with high time exposure show this very well.\n\nOnly a few stars remain “in the same spot” like the North Star. It does because it is perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the Earth, but even so, it changes it’s position a little bit depending on the season, but we don’t notice because it is too far away.",
"The stars (apart from polaris) rise and fall like the sun, as the earth turns.\nPolaris, the North star, appears to be fixed, as it is above the point on the earth that it rotates around. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5lrb7b
|
why can a honey badger get bit by a poisonous snake, and be okay?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lrb7b/eli5_why_can_a_honey_badger_get_bit_by_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbxunf5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The Honey badger isnt immune to the venom but just has thick skin and fur, and usually the venom doesn't penetrate their skin\n\n\nAKA Honey badger dont give a shit"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
a57le1
|
why can men transitioning to women receive hormone pills to develop breasts but women with small breasts cant?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a57le1/eli5_why_can_men_transitioning_to_women_receive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ebkdpfu",
"ebkg265",
"ebkg4v9",
"ebkn2r4",
"ebkoyg1",
"ebkp0d8"
],
"score": [
120,
30,
35,
9,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Because females already have the levels of hormones desired by trans females. Breast growth does have some limitation by genetics, and additional levels of estrogen beyond a point will not produce significant results and may have undesired side effects.",
"Similarly, transmen on testosterone can develop facial hair and body hair if their genes support that. ",
"It's worth noting that breast growth in trans women is subject to the same genetic determination as breast growth in cis women. A good rule of thumb is you should expect your breasts to be about a cup size smaller than the average in your family. If that doesn't turn out to be satisfactory, the hormones aren't going to change it for either a cis woman or a trans woman.",
"the anti baby pill (which is hormones) actually increases breast size in a lot of women, can attest to that as well, however after stopping to take it, it will reverse in a few cycles and be around the size set by other 'boundaries' like weight/fat to body mass and genetics\n\n & #x200B;\n\nfat also doesn't grow the same everywhere and when trying to get rid of it, places that you don't want to lose fat at often start first, best is to just steadily sculpt and do fitness stuff to never get into such a situation, makes it easier to just grow 'primary fat' reserves and those are usually the ones that look good to guys and others",
"Are you asking why the hormone pills work for trans women and not for cis women looking to enlarge their breasts - or why they are legally/medically allowed to be prescribed it?\n\nI can answer the medical reason - [This post is a great summary](_URL_5_) of it.\n\nBut effectively - Trans women (humans born with male physiology that identify as women) have an altered brain chemistry and biology that actually makes them more similar to women, mentally. They are not men who decided to become women. They are people with the unfortunate circumstance of having a biological clash between their brain and body, where one is male and the other is female. \n \nThis also means their brain is more \"primed\" to take in estrogen than testosterone.\n\nThe result is that not administering estrogen as a form of palliative care is subjecting them to extreme emotional and psychological distress. \n\nTheir body is having a negative reaction to testosterone the same was a \"cis\" (non-trans, meaning physical gender conforms / agrees with their identity.) person would react to being administered hormones for the opposing gender.\n\nA normal man cannot just take estrogen to become a woman - he would become extremely depressed, likely even suicidal. It would utterly destroy him, mentally, because he is not a woman and his gender identity and brain do not accept that as its default. \n\n\n\nFor a trans woman, this has the opposite effect and is in many ways (and very much not placebo) the only way they can achieve a mental peace that most people experience as part of their normal life. It is like the ultimate anti-depressant for them.\n\nThe reason that it grows breasts in trans women and not in cis women is like others have said - the breast growth potential is largely genetic and bringing estrogen above baseline \"normal\" has too many risks without the likelihood of increased breast development.\n\nFor trans women, some report that adding progesterone to their HRT mix can help breast development but I've heard conflicting reports that it's marginal, at best, and may not be worth the side-effects / risks included with progesterone. \n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_6_\n\nMore reading on transgender science\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_3_",
"[Edit: Cis] women with small breasts usually have hormone levels in the normal female range already. Giving them higher doses of those hormones may lead to some additional breast growth (to a point) as evidenced by many women on hormonal birth control gaining a cup size. However, there is a limit to how much this will help, and it can also have undesirable side effects, such as mood swings, loss of libido, overall weight gain, etc. Doctors will typically not prescribe hormones solely to change breast size.\n\nTrans women, on the other hand, have hormones in the male range unless those androgens are suppressed and replaced with estrogen supplementation. When trans women start taking hormones, their breasts tend to grow, but results vary. Some trans women see very little breast growth, while others see quite a lot. In the case of those that see very little, it's possible that more estrogen might help, but doctors are typically hesitant to prescribe higher doses of estrogen that fall outside the normal female range for exactly the same reasons as they don't prescribe them to cis women."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://docs.autismresearchcentre.com/papers/2013_Auyeung_Prenatal%20and%20postnatal%20hormone%20effects_EuJPhysio.pdf",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7477289",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbt/comments/8wh5qs/my_master_list_of_trans_health_citations_in/",
"http://aebrain.blogspot.com/p/transsexual-and-intersex-gender-identity.html",
"https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d9KKqP9IHa5ZxU84a_Jf0vIoAh7e8nj_lCW27KbYBh0/edit?pli=1#gid=0",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/7ogijj/something_ive_never_understood/ds9cefk/",
"https://www.jaacap.org/article/S0890-8567%2816%2931941-4/fulltext"
],
[]
] |
||
34foxu
|
since every copy of windows mediaplayer has a "rip cd" button, why hasn't the mpaa gone after microsoft?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34foxu/eli5_since_every_copy_of_windows_mediaplayer_has/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqu8hge",
"cqu9qtn"
],
"score": [
5,
9
],
"text": [
"Court cases have ruled that you have the legal right to make copies of your CDs, even to the extent of changing the format (e.g. ripping a CD to and MP3).\n\nHowever there are two reasons why the MPAA hasn't gone after Microsoft for it. First is the MPAA is strictly concerned with movies (Motion Picture Association of America). The organization who would care is the RIAA. The second is that CDs do not have any copy protection mechanisms built into them like DVDs and BlueRay does. Thanks to the DMCA it is illegal to bypass those copy protection mechanisms even if it is to create a perfectly legal copy (e.g. making a backup like you did with the CDs). Thus, the MPAA has a legal basis to go after others while the RIAA doesn't when it comes to ripping CDs.\n\nEdit: Note when I say going after others I'm referring to going after the tool makers. They both go after people who share/pirate copyrighted content.",
"Bob is a fan of the awesome metal band Corroded Axel Battle*. Bob buys their CD, \"Rotten Sewage\", from the local music store. Bob then goes home and fires up Windows Media Player and rips a copy of his new CD to his computer, and then copies it to his Windows Phone, so he can listen to it on his way to work.\n\nThis scenario is perfectly legal, as Bob has made a legitimate purchase of the CD. EMI, the label that owns the copyright to the recordings of the songs on the Rotten Sewage album. Even though they might prefer that Bob purchase the CD again from the Xbox Music Store, the fact is that there's case precedent** for the process of \"format shifting\" and \"media backup\" that is allowed under fair use exemptions in the copyright law. Bob is still in possession of the CD, the computer containing the WMA files, and the phone to which he copied them. Bob has committed no crime.\n\nIf Bob were to \"redistribute\" Rotten Sewage by giving a copy to his friend, or making it available on a torrent tracker, Bob would be infringing on EMI's exclusive right to distribute Rotten Sewage, and thus, Bob would then be in a legal quagmire. If Bob were selling burned copies of the disc, Bob would be in even more legal trouble.\n\nBob buys a copy of Corroded Axel Battle's tour DVD \"The Rust War\". Bob puts it in his computer and tries to copy it. Well, that doesn't go so hot; Bob either gets an error message or sees gobbledegook when he tries to play the files he copied to his computer. That's because the DVD has copy protection on it, so Bob's attempt to copy disk fails anyway. Bob goes on the internet and downloads a copy of CSS Stripper, a program that can remove the copy protection on the disc. Bob is successful, and then transcodes The Rust War to a format that his Windows Phone can understand. Bob is in a legal quagmire, even though he's functionally done the same thing as with the CD.\n\nThe reason for this is because the CD format, first released in 1983, contained no copy protection. DVD, released in 1995, did specify a copy protection mechanism in its spec. The DMCA, signed into law in 1998, upholds that the act of breaking a copy protection scheme is itself a criminal act. If there was a copy of Rotten Sewage that did not contain any copy protection, then Bob would be legally allowed to do what he did. This is the reason why Windows Media Player only rips CDs instead of DVDs.\n\n*Bob, Corroded Axel Battle, Rotten Sewage, and The Rust War are all completely and utterly fictitious.\n\n**There's plenty more to the legal intricacies of copyright, fair use, the DMCA, and all the other legal concepts written in this post. This is Reddit's ELI5 area, not Harvard. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
u04ep
|
why did zuckerberg go public with facebook's stock and why are the shares tanking?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u04ep/eli5_why_did_zuckerberg_go_public_with_facebooks/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4r70ct",
"c4r76lc",
"c4r77dc",
"c4r7aau",
"c4r7lzz",
"c4r7nre",
"c4r7snz",
"c4r7try",
"c4r7wua",
"c4r8j5x",
"c4r8uya",
"c4r9vxc",
"c4ra0np",
"c4rbbfc",
"c4rbmae",
"c4rc0dw"
],
"score": [
235,
60,
10,
25,
258,
2,
6,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
4,
5,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"A website can only innovate so much before their new ideas start to stagnate. Once this happens, the only way they can continue making money is to acquire other businesses (think Google or Facebook's recent purchase of Instagram). An easy way to raise the capital necessary for new investments is to go public, because there is a huge influx of cash after their initial public offering (IPO).\n\nGoing public also allows Zuckerberg and other initial investors from before the IPO to sell their stakes of the company more easily in case they want to cash out. If Facebook was still private, owners would have a much more difficult time selling their shares, even if they were worth a lot.\n\nI can't explain the tanking very well because I haven't read too much about it but one of the reasons is probably because there was too much hype about it and Morgan Stanley (the firm that helped Facebook go public) overpriced it. As more information surfaces, it will be more clear.",
"I don't know if \"tanking\" is the right term. It just isn't performing up to expectations... expectations that were batshit insane.\n\nMost experts consider the share price to be far too high given their current revenue and projected growth of those revenues going forward.\n\nBasically they got greedy, thought they could take advantage of the hype, and it ended up backfiring on them in the end.\n\nSo we're in a situation now where investors didn't take the bait, the stock is overpriced, and no one is buying (more are selling to \"cash out\" than are buying). This is driving the price down.\n\nBasically the market is correcting Facebook's price. How low will it go? Most seem to be pegging it at mid to high 20s. That would put it in line with other companies of similar revenues and growth potential.",
"I've heard from a few people that he had to go public because of SEC regulations. It was also a good way to raise money, some of which has already been used to buy one startup (but I'd bet more are on the way). \n\nThe stock isn't tanking too badly, despite what the media says. But it's going down because the markets idea of what the company is worth (basically, this is the \"market cap\") is much higher than the companies actual revenue. ",
"Remember that movie you got all excited about a while back? You saw the poster and the trailer and you got so worked up you couldn't sleep at night because this movie was going to be totally awesome! Best movie ever! And you were counting down the days until it came out, and we had to wait in a line outside the theater so we could get our tickets the moment they opened and we could get great seats for the very first show?\n\nAnd then we did all that stuff, and you saw the movie... and it wasn't that good. It was such a huge letdown because you were *so* excited and you were expecting *so* much from it. And all the way home you were kicking the back of the car seat and saying it sucked. Do you remember that?\n\nAnd you know, once you get over how disappointed you were when you saw it, I bet when you go back and watch that movie again, you'll decide it's pretty good after all. Maybe not as awesome as you thought, but still pretty good.\n\nFacebook's IPO is sort of like that.\n\nEDIT: Okay. Have we thought about perhaps renaming the subreddit?\n\nThe shares are tanking now because investors got themselves all worked up about how awesome the IPO was going to be and they drove up the value at which Facebook could price its initial shares beyond all reason. As pointed out elsewhere, to match that valuation, Facebook would pretty much need to discover the secret of eternal youth.\n\nThere was so much hype that the initial price went way to high. It's not like plenty of people were warning of this. And now there aren't that many people still willing to pay that price for it. Like the movie example, people got themselves worked up over something that wasn't nearly as awesome as they made themselves think it was going to be. It really is that simple.\n\nAs for why Facebook went public, they're the ones that come out of this smelling like a rose. They sold lots and lots of stock at a very very high IPO price and raised billions upon billions of dollars for themselves. They're happy as pigs in money colored shit right now.",
"OK so others have explained the reason as to why they had to go public. My personal knowledge is incomplete in this area. However, on why it's tanking (I'm going to assume basic to no knowledge in economics for you):\n\nImagine you have 10 people buying apples and 1 person selling them. The price of apples is set by the person selling them, but if it's too high, nobody will buy them; if it's too low, the seller might lose money. The 10 people buying are commonly referred to as \"the market\", which essentially means that people who buy the apples decide how much they're worth (to an extent).\n\nNow, imagine Facebook = apple farm. In the beginning, the farm belonged to Zuckerberg and his workers, and they produced apples and kept all profits. But then some guys came along and said \"we will give you extra land in order to make more and more apples, but this farm is now open to everyone to buy and sell\". These guys are called bankers and this is essentially opening his farm to the public, by allowing others to fund / own portions of his farm. Now, when you open up the farm, like an auction, you have to set a starting price for all the land you want to make available. In Facebook's case, the bankers set the asking price really high, and nobody is buying it, because \"the market\" is deciding that the profit they will make from selling apples is not worth what they have to pay for the land. So now, Facebook has to lower the price of its land in order to be able to sell it. This is why Facebook's stock is plunging.\n\nAs to why exactly the profit is not worth the cost, I read this statistic a few days ago which claims that about only 40% of all visitors to Zuckerberg's farm ends up buying apples, which is a bad statistic in terms of investors, because the asking price is based off of how many visitors go to the farm, but the market price is more based off of how many of those visitors actually buy apples.\n\nEDIT: took out buyer's market from explanation, turns out it was backwards. Explanation remains the same though.",
"Social has been anything but proven. Investors are worried FB could be another MySpace, Google+ is on the decline, Google's ad-based revenue took a dip last quarter and there's still no validated method of monetizing their 900 million users. Investors are worried, not scared - yet.",
"It really hasn't \"tanked\". The official ipo price sold to investors before it went public was 32 dollars. It opened at 38 to the public and everyone jumped at it because they thought it was going to shoot 'to the moon!' because of all the hype around it. When it didn't burst out of the gate many sold off in hopes to liquidate their cash so they could go invest elsewhere since there was no immediate bump for them to profit off of. This caused the price to shoot down. If the stock doesn't end up over 32 (which would still be 'up' for zuckerberg and executives) tomorrow i would be surprised. \n\nLook at LinkedIn's stock which opened in the high 80's shot down to 60's after the IPO and now is at around 100's. IPO's are volatile by nature. If you want a good stock to hold for the next 10 years i think facebook is a great investment in the long run. If you want something for the next month, look elsewhere",
"It's tanking because in the days leading up to the IPO, they increased its price and increased the number of shares sold by 25%. People who thought they weren't going to get many shares (and may have put down for more shares than they really wanted) suddenly got filled on their full size at a really high price. Thus in the days following, people have sold the extra shares they didn't really want, and the price of the stock has steadily dropped.",
"Trader here. Going public allows the current owners of Facebook to receive cash in exchange for their shares, attract new investors, and raise capital for the firm. As someone has already said this gives Facebook a ton of cash on hand to buy other firms and expand their business through acquisition rather than growth of their existing business model. \nThe disadvantage to going public is that Mark Zuckerburg is no longer the majority stakeholder in the company. I believe he owns roughly 24% of the company which means that if the remaining 76% wanted to kick him to the curb they could replace him as CEO. (He would still own his shares of the company in this situation.\nIn the process of an IPO (initial public offering, the first time shares of a private company are offered publically) large firms and hedge funds are given the opportunity to buy shares before the stock is listed and available to me and you. Most of the time these large entities will request about 2x as many shares as they want because there are usually a limited amount that are sold this way and requesting more than they want ensures that they will get the number they actually want. In this case all the shares requested were given out as they continued to raise the share price. Giving all the shares out is a bad sign for investors and offering even more shares than initially announced is even worse. It was set for disaster even before the exchange they listed it on had big problems confirming their trades on the first day they were listed. Hope this helps. ",
"Many explanations have been posted but the actual reason Facebook went public is because of the SEC's 500-shareholders rule. Once a company reaches 500 shareholders, it has to register and file financial information with the SEC. The company can choose to stay private and not go for an IPO, but since it has to disclose financial numbers publicly anyway, it may as well go public and let the current shareholders realize their paper net worth.\n\n\nNormally, companies go from private to public (by filing for IPO) because they want to raise money from the stock market. However this is not the case with Facebook. Facebook has over $3B in cash, and virtually no debt on its balance sheet. The primary reason for the IPO is the 500-shareholders rule, as with Google previously, and Twitter in the near future.\n\n\nRelevant info: the 500-shareholders rule hits tech companies more than others because tech companies tend to give their employees stock options. Also the SEC is currently considering raising the limit from 500 to 1000 shareholders.\n\n\ntl;dr; SEC rule virtually forces Facebook to go public.\n\n",
"Why did Facebook sell stock? Because it raised them a lot of money.\n\nThe shares are tanking because there are more people selling them than buying them. \n\nNow here are the details that explain those answers better:\nStock is how people own companies. A company, like a lemonade stand, might have 100 shares of stock. You started the lemonade stand, so you own all 100 shares, and so you own the entire company. But you want some more money to help the company get better lemons and a bigger sign. So you can sell me 10 shares of your company for a dollar each, and you have $10 - and I now own part of your company. \n\nHowever, some companies like Facebook are tricky, and they issue two different types of stock. Stock A they keep for themselves, and that stock has all the voting power that controls the company. Stock B is what they sell to the people, because it has no power. The people still want to buy this stock, because maybe it will start to pay them money on a regular basis, in the form of a dividend, if the company does well. So that hope is why some people were excited to buy Facebook stock on day one, but the price they paid was too high, and so the companies value has gone down as more people sell than are willing to buy the shares that are out there.",
"It's like selling a really good candy bar.\n\nPeople love the candy bar! It's so good! Everyone wants some of that candy bar!\n\nSo, you start selling it for $5. Way too much money for a candy bar.\n\nPeople become uninterested and the worth of that candy bar has decreased.\n\nSimilar situation with facebook. ",
"I thought Zoidberg traded all his stock for a sandwich...",
"Why did Facebook go public? They couldn't figure out the privacy settings either (stolen from Twitter)",
"I can almost guarantee this will be buried, however I trade stocks myself and I would be more than happy to explain this. First off, Zuckerberg is a billionaire, he can retire now and will never run out of money if he wants too. Second, the release of Facebook was known throughout many investor communities to be a pump and dump. Meaning, the minute the stocks are released, you have people jumping in and buying. We (although I didn't get in on this, when I should have) knew that Facebook's stock would soar, and we knew that the release of Facebook's stock would be dirt cheap compared to what it could be. Pretty much people bought a ton at $20 per share knowing it would go up to say $40 per share (I don't remember what the IPO originally was). We wait around until the stocks do reach $40 and then we sell all of our stocks back to other traders or what have you. Voila, I just doubled my money in under a day. Pump and Dumps usually mean that the stock will sharply fall by the end of it. That is why the shares are tanking... \n\nAs for why Zuckerberg went public. I believe he is trying to sell the company. You see, when a company goes public and people buy shares, they are actually buying pieces of the company. The investor/trader actually owns a part of that company. When one person owns more shares than any other one person, they become what's called majority shareholder. For example: Say you own %20 of a companies shares and everyone else individually owns 2%, you are now the majority shareholder. It means that you now own the company. I believe that Zuckerberg will be attempting to sell his company. I believe he will sell all his stock, retire, and live happily ever after, or whatever. \n\nEdit: I accidentally a word.",
"He went public because he wanted lots and lots and lots of monies in his pocket. And the shares are tanking because the company is not worth anywhere close to its hyped up stock value, at all."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1sqbj2
|
how does a disease effect a country's economy?
|
According to a guest scientist on NPR, Alzheimer will cost the US billions of dollar in the next few years. I can sort of understand how factors such as labor and drugs are part of it, but BILLIONS?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sqbj2/eli5_how_does_a_disease_effect_a_countrys_economy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce04h53"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A heard a good example using AIDS in Africa. If 5 million people in a country are suffering from AIDS, they're going to need another 5 million people to care for them. That's 10 million people who are out of the workforce, which is going to hurt the economy. \n\nThat's a super-simplified point of view, of course, but should give you an idea of how disease affects the economy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3gxyfn
|
why do one of my plugs sometimes have a bigger side?
|
I live in America, and sometimes the plugs have a larger side so that they will only fit in one way. What is the reason for this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gxyfn/eli5_why_do_one_of_my_plugs_sometimes_have_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu2hnzk",
"cu2i0bu",
"cu2i28x"
],
"score": [
25,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"So you don't have to stretch up two sizes, just maybe one. The flare is to hold it in place and you should be able to maneuver it even if at a smaller size. Also, aesthetics. Generally, they are usually the same flare size on reach end so I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly.",
"So that you don't connect it the wrong way around. Some appliances, like my laptop charger, don't care and so don't have a larger prong on one side. Others do care so they are made in a way that forces you to plug them in the right way around.",
"It's called a *polarized plug*. It's an extra safety feature that helps device designers know which wire is \"hot\" and which is \"neutral\".\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power_plugs_and_sockets#Polarization",
"http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/15228/why-are-some-ac-outlets-and-plugs-polarized"
]
] |
|
2ubzsp
|
why in animated series or movies objects that are interacted with by the characters are drawn differently?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ubzsp/eli5_why_in_animated_series_or_movies_objects/
|
{
"a_id": [
"co7010o",
"co70933",
"co70e50"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"A static background can be drawn once and the characters overlayed on top. Moving objects need to be drawn over and over again, so they are on different layers.",
"This is something you mostly see in older animations. The backgrounds and setting are often drawn by different artists at different times than the actual animations. The static backgrounds and live animations are joined later. ",
"Anything that characters dont interact with only has to be drawn once. This means investing the time to draw the background nicer/more detailed isnt much of a time sink. But anything that moves/changes at all must be drawn dozens of times to animate smoothly, so often they are simplified so that less detail has to be drawn in each frame."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1itty0
|
the counter argument to: "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide."
|
I have a general sense that this is wrong or at least over simplified.
I know a few people that hold to this argument, but I don't know practically, simply and point-by-point how to refute it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1itty0/eli5_the_counter_argument_to_if_youve_done/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb7yryz",
"cb7yrz0",
"cb7ys5f",
"cb7yum1",
"cb7yv7d",
"cb7ywgq",
"cb7zdev",
"cb7zlcm",
"cb7zn41",
"cb808by",
"cb80chk",
"cb80cye",
"cb80moz",
"cb80qmn",
"cb813ut",
"cb814ju",
"cb827cw",
"cb82ip9",
"cb836ja",
"cb84d4u",
"cb85mq6"
],
"score": [
15,
19,
6,
3,
9,
2,
2,
2,
10,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
4,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sometimes governments and the people disagree on what \"nothing wrong\" means, and traditionally it's very dangerous for people in this case. The reason that the bill of rights, and similar documents in other countries, exist is specifically to protect people from their governments in such cases.",
"I think \"okay then we'll set up this live video feed from your shower for the government to watch\" is pretty convincing.",
"TECHNICALLY, if you've done nothing wrong, you DON'T have anything to hide.... the problem lies with people who take advantage of being allowed access to your life.",
"Wrong things are not the only things that one might wish to hide. For instance, most people wouldn't want strangers to watch them masturbate, pick their nose, sing in the shower, etc. They'd prefer to \"hide\" the activities, even though they aren't wrong.",
"\"What's your bank acount #, SSN, and PIN?\"\n\n\"What's your FB password?\"\n\n\"How much money do you make?\"\n\n\"Can I videotape you having sex?\"\n\nMost people will not divulge this information to you. That's a good opening for you to ask why they prefer to keep those things secret if they have nothing to hide. Try not to be too confrontational or aggressive. The goal is to get them to consider their own reasons.",
"There is a large difference between immoral acts that can hurt a reputation and illegal acts that are deserving of punishment. For example, suppose an officer wants to search your bedroom. However, there's evidence in your bedroom of cheating on your wife. Would you want that stuff being found and your wife possibly finding out over the course of the trial due to the evidence being discovered?",
"This is only my personal opinion, but to me it isn't a matter of if I want to hide something, but why. Everyone wants to hide something, but the reasons can vary. People who make this argument tend to assume that the only reason a person would want to hide something is if they are doing something illegal, but that isn't always the case. For me it is a matter of whether or not, or how much, I trust the person who gathers the information. In the case of the government, I don't trust them much more than I would trust any other person. Just like I wouldn't share certain personal information with you because I can't trust what you will do with it, I also don't trust the government, which is at its basic level made up of individuals who just like anyone else can abuse their power to satisfy their own interests.",
"There are many good arguments to explain the basic wrongness of that approach. \n\nThe least obvious one is that it is very damaging psychologically to know that others know all about you, know all your (perfectly legal) secrets and can deduce your future actions based on that knowledge. This is the approach that is taken with prisoners to break their will.\n\nAnother not so obvious reason is that you **literally don't know** when you are breaking the law. The sheer size of penal code and the local laws make it impossible to know. We have laws based on what *other countries* deem legal. We have *secret* laws that you are not allowed to know, because Transparency™.\n\nOne more reason that should be obvious is that laws change and often retroactively. That picture you took of your girlfriend when you were both 16? It was legal then, now that you are over 18, it's \"child pornography\". That donation to a charity you made two years ago? It just made you a \"terrorist supporter\".\n\nThe right to privacy can be rather easily arrived at from the Bill of Rights, and some Supreme Court Justices have done so.",
"It's presumption of guilt vs presumption of innocence. The way it's *supposed* to work is that unless the government has some specific reason to believe that you're breaking the law, then your personal life is none of their damn business. People who spout the line in your title have it flipped around - they believe it should be up to everyone to *prove* that they're not doing anything illegal by giving up all their privacy.",
"Let's not overlook that \"wrong\" is simply a notion defined by current political and cultural values. Maybe today you can claim you've done nothing wrong. Will you still be able to claim that next year? Decade? Tomorrow?",
"it's usually over simplified.\n\nfor example. people may say \"I'm not a terrorist, i have nothing to hide. Only if you're guilty you have something to hide\".\n\nThis is usually made in the context of being a terrorist but not overall the blanket of the law. User may be have other things or be engaged in activities that are illegal and they don't know. \n\n\n\nKeep in mind there are so many federal crime laws, there is no \"counting them\".. [Last educated guess was about 3000, and that was in the 80s after a 2 year project](_URL_0_)\n\n > \"There is no one in the United States over the age of 18 who cannot be indicted for some federal crime,\" said John Baker, a retired Louisiana State University law professor who has also tried counting the number of new federal crimes created in recent years. \"That is not an exaggeration.\"\n",
"[Three felonies a day](_URL_0_) gives some insight into the counter argument. \n\nPeople who say they have nothing to hide really don't know if they do or not. Apart from that, even if a person is a 100% law abiding citizen, I'm pretty sure there are some potentially embarrassing things they would prefer to keep private. In my experience the \"I have nothing to hide\" argument is used by people who haven't thought about it critically.",
"\"If I've done nothing wrong you don't need to have constant surveillance on me.\"\n\nThat's my counter argument. It's the constitution's counter argument. Think of it like spying on a significant other. If I had no cause to think my wife is cheating on me, most people would think that me screening/copying all her messages, calls, whereabouts, etc. would be insane. Doing that, it would almost be impossible for me not to find possible evidence of her cheating on me if I want to see it that way.\n\nMe being a douchebag and the government being a douchebag are magnitudes apart in terms of how dangerous our constant surveillance policy is.\n\n\n",
"This approach essentially gives government entities (police, the military, etc.) carte blanche to look into people's private lives. If you give that kind of power to people, they will eventually use it against people they just don't like, not just people who are potentially dangerous.",
"a.) Reasonable expectation of privacy (in the bathroom, having sex, ebay purchases of John Stamos figurines, etc.)\n\nb.) Even *if* the current leaders are trustworthy, there's no way to tell who will get these \"privileges\" in the future.\n\nc.) There are literally 1000s of felonies you could commit without knowing it, however ignorance will not hold up in court.\n\nd.) If the people are going to be forced to be transparent, the government should be transparent as well. If we should not be scared, why are they?",
"A great counter-argument I've seen recently stems from the fact that **many things that are illegal are not wrong, and many things that are legal are not right**. \n\nGood example, smoking pot. I do it, my friends do it, my boss does it, and if we lived in a state of constant surveillance we would all be doing time for the amount of marijuana we've each had on person in public at one time or another. Should we be locked up? Ninety nine percent of people would probably say no. We're nice people, pay our taxes, vote in elections, love our families and girlfriends and in general (and I can only speak for myself), I think we make our society a little better by being an active part of it. \n\nThe reason that constant surveillance is so dangerous is because **laws often lag behind the cultural mores of our society**. Society develops and changes to suit the people that live in it, even if that means pushing the limits of legality every once in awhile. If we lived under constant surveillance that change would come to a grinding halt. The lawmakers would dictate how society functions instead of the people that live in and support it and to me, that is one of the scariest things I've heard in a long time. ",
"Quant/Stats nerd here - it's not about hiding single instances of good or bad behaviour, whether they occurred in the past or present. It's about the collection of hundreds or thousands or millions of data points, and their *application* as forecasts of future behaviour or profiles of future criminals. For example, there's a 22 year old girl studying history at a local university. She shops at american apparel and urban outfitters, uses a backpack instead of a purse, and doesn't shave her legs every day. Believe it or not, this kind of information was used to profile people at [G20 protests](_URL_0_) in Toronto in 2012. Women who matched this profile were arrested and held in jail overnight. \n\nPicture that scenario, but on a bigger scale. An enormous scale. An internet-sized scale. \n\nLong story short - with all of that data, we are allowing governments to make profiles by which our guilt will be measured. This morphs the system from innocent-until-proven-guilty based on a case by case examination of evidence, to innocent-until-you-statistically-resemble-someone-who's-guilty.\n\n",
"The government (legislative and/or executive branches, in the US) basically gets to arbitrarily decide, at any time, what they consider to be \"wrong\".\n\nYou spoke with a friend of a friend of a friend of a suspected terrorist? You must be doing something \"wrong\"!",
"\"Scope creep\" is a big part of the problem. Once the government has the ability to track your movements/activities/etc., the definition of \"something wrong\" could potentially expand very quickly, and there wouldn't be much anyone could do about it. If a tool can be easily abused, it probably will be someday.",
"The argument \"If you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide\" is a guilty until proven innocent presumption, which directly violates the Constitution where presumption of innocence (innocent UNTIL proven guilty) is mentioned in the 5th 6th and 14th amendment. It's an over extension of power passed behind our backs under the facade of protecting us.",
"Read this:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304319804576389601079728920.html"
],
[
"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/krystalline-kraus/2012/08/activist-communique-toronto-police-face-lawsuit-over-activi"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1fv4r6/i_believe_the_government_should_be_allowed_to/caeb3pl?context=3"
]
] |
|
4vklqq
|
do antibiotics and antibacterial chemicals (like in soap) kill our own cells, if not, why not?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vklqq/eli5_do_antibiotics_and_antibacterial_chemicals/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5z5kin"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I don't know about cells, but yes, they do kill beneficial bacteria on our skin that protect us from invasion by other more malicious bacterias. It's why the natural community has nothing wrong with soap, but they hate hand sanitizer"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
7f5v5e
|
why do people wake up very early in the morning on every weekday to go to work, school etc. but sleep through to very late times on weekends and holidays, regardless of what time they begin sleeping?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7f5v5e/eli5_why_do_people_wake_up_very_early_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dq9owzq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They are required to get up for work and school and so do not actually sleep as much as they want/need to sleep. But they do sleep to the natural point of waking when they have nothing forcing them to get up. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6rqga1
|
what differentiates life from everything else if both are just atoms?
|
What makes us different than just normal matter? How is it that the way the atoms in our bodies are arranged allow us to move and do stuff even though we are made of lifeless atoms?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6rqga1/eli5_what_differentiates_life_from_everything/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dl70e8m",
"dl70q2x",
"dl79ij5",
"dl7l88s"
],
"score": [
22,
12,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The most truthful answer, and probably the most frustrating, is that life is simply active energy in the universe given self-awareness. The only reason we're different from a rock, cloud, or stream of water is that we're aware of what we are, and thereby are able to question why. Here's the long answer. The thing that makes life what it is, technically speaking, is the fact that energy is a currency that organisms formed out of convenience in order to spend, as energy is never truly destroyed, it's just translated to a different form of energy. Life is a biproduct of that fact because, as you said, everything right now is just atoms and energy. All of the energy in our universe is beginning to slow down, leading to a total stop, which is known as the heat death of the universe. Generally speaking, we're only different because our particles decided to group together to take advantage of, and better process, energy.\nI hope I got all of that right. Hope this helps!",
" > What makes us different than just normal matter?\n\nNothing. We are composed of normal matter in a novel arrangement, but other than the uniqueness of our structure there is no distinction.\n\n > How is it that the way the atoms in our bodies are arranged allow us to move and do stuff even though we are made of lifeless atoms?\n\nThat is *extremely* complex. It is a combination of complex chemistry and the interaction of physical law; a simple way of putting it is that this is how matter behaves under certain circumstances.\n\n\"Life\" isn't a property of a substance but rather a description of its behavior. Something alive can be scrambled up and suddenly not be alive despite everything still being present.\n\nWe don't even really have a universally agreed upon definition of what life *is* so that just deepens the issue.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
"Because brain dead reductionism like \"just atoms\" is never a useful way of looking at things.\n\nAll matter is \"just atoms\". Does that mean everything in the universe is exactly he same?",
"The phrase that has always stuck in my mind in grappling with this kind of question is \"emergent behavior\" - the idea that a collection of things with simple properties can exhibit more complicated behaviors when grouped together.\n\nOne example of this is the highly complicated \"social\" structures of insects. No insect is very smart - their brains appear to follow extremely simple rules of communication and decisionmaking. Yet the effect of all those independent agents interacting with each other is a highly complex behavior, \"wars\" between ant colonies, etc. \n\nAs other posters pointed out, Conway's Game of Life is a great synthetic example of complicated behaviors which emerge from the most minimal ruleset. What's interesting is that a reductionist approach to analyzing the game is misleading. When you \"drill down\" to an individual cell and how it applies its internal rules, you would not intuit how the whole game works, or the interesting self-replicating, moving patterns that appear on the display.\n\nWhy doesn't the drill-down, reductionist approach work? Well, one reason is that it eliminates some of the information - namely, that the cells exist in relation to one another. The rule-set becomes massively complex if you actually consider all cells simultaneously as well as their spatial relationships.\n\nNow considering the ants again - they, while simple, are certainly much more complex than the cells in Conway's Game. They obey some rules of pheremone signaling, sensitivity to various stimuli, and who knows what else - maybe just how they're feeling that day. And the emergent behavior that comes out at a systems level is far, far more complex than one would imagine.\n\nSo when we talk about being \"alive\" - as other posters have stated, we're describing a complex, ongoing process. In Conway's Game of Life, an initially blank screen will stay that way forever- just like some arrangements of atoms will stay in their initial configuration forever. Looking at a single cell, or single atom at a time, will not help you understand whether it is \"alive\" or not - the arrangement and relationships are critical to whether the 'emergent behaviors' will be seen.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2e8kyy
|
the concept of women "syncing up" their periods.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e8kyy/eli5_the_concept_of_women_syncing_up_their_periods/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjx37x7",
"cjx3lbi",
"cjx4d12",
"cjx77e1"
],
"score": [
75,
6,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"They don't, it's a myth.\n\nConsidering cycles range from 25-30 days and can last from 3-9 days (sometimes more) in duration, they don't actually sync up, they just gradually overlap for a time and then they go back to being at different times.\n\nThink of it like being in the left hand turn lane. You watch all the blinkers and for a few seconds they seem to be in sync, but before long they go back to blinking at different times due to duration.",
"It hasn't been fully proven or disproven; Most studies find no statistically significant evidence. \n\nBut if it does exist, its because of pheromones. Its known that these hormones excreted by other individuals does affect hormone regulation of the people who pick them up. \n\nIn this instance, the same group of females would take up the same amount/type of pheromones which would, in theory, cause the timing and release of their hormones to be more similar.\n\n A females menstrual cycle is regulated by hormones*.",
"I don't have the citation but it is based on body odors. There was a study where girls at one school had to smell pads soaked in sweat from girls at another school and within some time their cycles lined up. it's similar to the phenomenon of women appearing more attractive when they are ovulating. It's all based on hormones, however, hormones can easily respond to outside stimuli and change the timing, duration, or intensity of their actions.",
"Easy explanation: They don't. \n\nI'm a woman who lived post-puberty with a pre-menopause mother and a post-puberty sister for eight years. Occasionally we had our cycles at the same time, but that's just because the period cycle isn't a rigid \"three days of bleeding, 27 of normal life\" kind of dealie, it's more like \"between two and six days of bleeding, between 24 and 31 days of normal life\". \n\nEven besides my parents, I spent hours and hours five days out of the week at school with hundreds of other girls, and our periods were all over the goddamn place. You know how creepy it would have been for all of us to spend the exact same four days menstruating? You know how completely impossible to ignore that would've been? \n\nTrust me, doesn't happen."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8hopvv
|
what kind of service or "package" does a tier 3/last mile isp get from a tier 1/infrastructure isp
|
Does the Tier 3 have a data cap?
Or do they get a & #37; of the Tier 1's bandwidth or utilization?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8hopvv/eli5_what_kind_of_service_or_package_does_a_tier/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dylr5xn"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Tier 3 providers buy per gigabyte from Tier 1 ISPs and use the Tier 1 ISPs infrastructure. Tier 1's are forced by law to allow a minimum amount of Tier 3's so there aren't as many monopolies (we saw how that turned out). They generally turn it around and sell it at an upcharge and pocket the difference to keep themselves running.\n\nIt's cheaper because the Tier 3 is guaranteeing they'll buy so many lines from the Tier 1, even if they aren't being used. Bulk discount and all that.\n\nThey usually were put on the \"back burner\" of traffic priorities and got slower speeds because of it. I don't know if they have caps or not, since the ISP I work for doesn't implement caps."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2h32bl
|
what are the positive aspects of the american national debt, if any, and what would be the benefits of paying off the debt?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2h32bl/eli5_what_are_the_positive_aspects_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckoxjqk",
"ckp3bdd",
"ckp4vku",
"ckp8my7",
"ckpbgdh",
"ckpksra"
],
"score": [
69,
7,
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Not an American, but the big advantage of a national debt in very basic terms is that you have a lot of money. You can use that money to stimulate the economy. \n \nFor example, imagine you want to start a business selling widgets. You can go and get a small business loan, then spend that on a small widget making machine. Then you can sell those to make enough money to pay back the loan. But instead of that, you want your business to grow. You don't want it to just sit there making a half dozen widgets here or there, as some bigger widget company will overtake you and you'll be out of business. You've got to grow. So you take out a bigger loan. You buy an industrial widget maker, and hire some widget machine operators and train them, and rent factory space. Now you're making more money, and you could start paying that loan back, but the other widget companies are encroaching. You've got to keep up. You've got to get a larger factory with a bigger loan. Then you need more factories. Then overseas manufacturing centers, and HR departments, and security guards and offices with desk tidies and little signs that say \"You don't have to be mad to work here but it helps!\" and it all adds up, and you're looking at how much you owe, and you realise the only way to pay it back would be to stop expanding, but if you stop expanding and advertising and growing you'll be overtaken in the market, and no-one will think your widgets are the best anymore and if they think that, then people might start asking for the loans back sooner, or not offering you loans, or charging more interest, and you soon realise the perception of your widgets is as important as the widgets themselves and you've locked yourself into a vicious cycle where you can never stop borrowing or the whole house of cards will collapse. \n \nBut you're making lots of widgets. And you're employing lots of people. ",
"One benefit of *not* paying off the debt is that inflation turns it into less debt. As long as the debt isn't growing faster than inflation, you actually owe your creditors less over time (in terms of purchasing power). \n\nAlso, a substantial portion of the U.S. debt is people buying Treasury bills as a very safe but still interest-generating investment. If you paid those guys off, they would just buy them back again. This includes Social Security- the funds it receives are required to be invested in something safe but interest-generating, IIRC. \n\nThe primary benefit of taking on debt is that you can use the money to do stuff. Real interest rates are pretty low since we're in a slump right now, so it can make sense to take on debt to get necessary things done, and then pay it back later when the economy is running better and government income is higher. When the economy is bad, tax revenue decreases and payouts for things like unemployment increase, which obviously makes it more difficult to get things done without running a deficit. ",
"Positive aspect of the debt: Investing in the American national debt (by buying TBills) is a safe place to store cash. This is useful for those who have cash, but are risk averse.\n\nBenefit of paying it off: In 2012 we paid $223 billion in interest on the national debt. Pay it off, and we save all that money every year.",
"An analogy:\n\nSuppose a tree makes 100 pieces of A4 paper. If I want more paper, I would have to cut more trees down, but I don't want to damage the environment. An alternative solution would be to recycle that paper. lets say a piece of A4 paper can be recycled 10 times. If a person uses A4 paper only once and then doesn't need it anymore, then I might as well recycle that piece of paper and re-distribute it as a fresh piece of paper. If this process is done completely, then a tree doesn't provide just 100 papers, but up to 1000 pieces of A4 papers.\n\nThe same idea holds in lending money. Essentially they take money that is not being used and re-distribute it. Instead of 100 dollars circulating the economy, you suddenly have 1000 dollars circulating. With very little you have alot more available and alot more flexibility to expand the economy.\n\nPaying off a debt is a different story. It means that you reduce the risk of having an economic crisis, but it also means that you are reducing the flexibility of further expansion of the economy. \n\ntl;dr: National Debts provide the illusion that you have alot money and that you can expand based on how much debt you buy/sell",
"Debt is handed completely differently if you're a nation than if you're a person. Imagine you're living with your parents and your dad tells you that he'll give you $10 for you to mow the lawn. While he won't pay the $10 till you're done with the job, he has to count it as a debt to you until then. If it turns out he can't pay at the last second, he doesn't HAVE to, but that just means you won't do more jobs for him since he isn't reliable. Hopefully that analogy makes sense! \n\nAdditionally, most of the national debt isn't to be paid off for a long time because there's no reason to. Other countries buy US bonds, which promises a small but extremely reliable profit (that already accounts for inflation) that will be paid off in 20 years. Other countries buy these bonds because of their reliability!\n\nIt should also be noted that the US also owns lots of debt from other countries that isn't taken into account for the national debt clock. ",
"The advantage of the national debt, for the government, is that it gets to offer more services. TARP, the stimulus package--these things (along with other infrastructure products like building roads and bridges) were financed by issuing debt. The government doesn't have $1 trillion just sitting around in a bank account somewhere. Issuing debt increases the purchasing power of the government, which is generally a good thing for citizens since that money tends to get spent on things like infrastructure projects, hiring more government workers, projects that will boost economic activity, government services, etc.\n\nFor the past several years, the U.S. government has been able to borrow money essentially interest-free, since it is borrowing below the expected rate of inflation, which is obviously good for the borrower. \n\nHowever, as the national debt continues to grow, then the government will have to devote more and more of its resources to debt service. Paying interest doesn't help U.S. citizens (unless they own treasury bonds, I suppose), because that means dozens of billions of tax dollars get spent on interest instead of on services.\n\nIronically, one of the biggest advantages to paying the debt off would be that the government could borrow more money. The other benefit would be that tax dollars wouldn't have to go toward paying off interest and could be used on actual projects."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9b1az4
|
why does our body want to jump when it feels a lot of pain at once?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9b1az4/eli5_why_does_our_body_want_to_jump_when_it_feels/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e4zkygj"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Adds extra stimulation to dull the senses, like rubbing your arm after getting punched and such. Why did you have an extremely hot bowl of milk? "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2f5p80
|
why does it feel even more euphoric to stretch when you have a cold or the flu?
|
Just something I'm pondering. I currently have a really bad head cold and stretching seems to be 10 times more enjoyable.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2f5p80/eli5why_does_it_feel_even_more_euphoric_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck6acv5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Well I tell you what-not because of the blessing of some phony god! \nBut actually, you are likely down a lot when you are sick, moving less, and your muscles aren't used, they need to be stretched and used, and so your body rewards this. Think about it, when you're sick, youre probably not gonna make the decision to go walk fido, and you wont get that excercise"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3v6bq5
|
why do we raise our pitch at the end of questions but not normal sentences?
|
At the end of questions why do we raise the pitch of our voice? From what I know we don't do it at the end of any other sentences, so why just questions?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v6bq5/eli5_why_do_we_raise_our_pitch_at_the_end_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxko72l"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The purpose is specifically to indicate that the sentence is a question. And not just any question, but a yes/no question.\n\nFor example:\n\n\"This is fun\"\n\nWhen said with a *falling intonation*, i.e. lower pitch at the end, this is a declarative sentence: \"This is fun.\" When said with a *rising intonation*, a higher pitch at the end, this becomes a question: \"This is fun?\"\n\nA rising intonation also indicates that the sentence is a yes/no question, and not a multiple choice question:\n\n\"Would you like pepperoni or sausage pizza?\" with a falling intonation is asking you to choose which pizza you want: pepperoni, or sausage. \n\"Would you like pepperoni or sausage pizza?\" with a rising intonation is asking if you would like any pizza at all, whether it be pepperoni or sausage."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
353rwh
|
why is it that when a crime is committed against animals it gets more attention on social media compared to when a crime is committed by a human?
|
For example, at the moment there is a post that has went viral locally about someone kicking their dog. Everyone is going nuts saying that the person responsible is scum.
The thing is, you very rarely see posts on Facebook about similar crimes against humans. Its not common to see 'this poor man was assaulted in the street while he walked home and here is the scumbag that did it, let's help catch the him' type posts going viral.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/353rwh/eli5why_is_it_that_when_a_crime_is_committed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr0phz4",
"cr0rkxc",
"cr0s78t"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"We treat crimes against those who could not defend themselves as harsher than those against people who could. We get angrier at someone who beats up a child or a dog than an adult. ",
"Because the kind of people who get upset about animal mistreatment are the kind of folk who post a lot on social media.",
"[This Video](_URL_0_) might help answer your question "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKKXQP6vehM"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.