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
sequence | selftext_urls
sequence | answers_urls
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2zy41u | why do boats all run direct drive? why can't they be fitted with a cvt transmission for efficiency? | Thats all.. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zy41u/eli5_why_do_boats_all_run_direct_drive_why_cant/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpnc9t3",
"cpneafc"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Expense of a CVT drive combined with the weight and cost of maintenance. Modern large vessels already have variable pitch props, which fill the same role in a way.",
"Mostly, transmissions are not particularly helpful for propellers. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7wr8wc | why have my siblings and i all contracted the flu, at vastly different times, since getting the flu shot? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7wr8wc/eli5_why_have_my_siblings_and_i_all_contracted/ | {
"a_id": [
"du2ksuk",
"du2kwzk"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"As I’m sure you know, the flu shot combines 3 strains of the flu virus that are statistically determined to be the most likely for the upcoming season. Unfortunately, the flu vaccine this year has poor effectiveness against the H3N2 strain, which is what’s spreading around right now. ",
"The flu virus can survive on hard surfaces for about 24 hours. It also has an incubation time of 4 days. Someone can still pass the flu on 5-7 days after getting sick. It may be possible to contract the flu from someone nearly two weeks after they got sick."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
19r6uf | why mms messages take forever to send as opposed to sms? | I mean...cmon...it's just a picture...why does it take hours, sometimes days, to send someone a picture via text?? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19r6uf/eli5_why_mms_messages_take_forever_to_send_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8qkus5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Ideally it should only take a few seconds, but sometimes it depends on a \"handshake\" to take place when you try to send it, and if the signal is weak this might not occur the way its supposed to and the whole process stalls. It's not that the transfer is slow, it's that it never started and for some reason the phone is too dumb to know when the next best opportunity to try again is."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1d7r0n | why is dallas so much more commercial than the other major cities in texas like austin, houston or san antonio? | I couldn't help but notice how big Dallas markets products throughout the city I.e. the beer waterfall, billboards on the buildings. Why is marketing so huge here if Houston's probably a better city to market to? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1d7r0n/eli5_why_is_dallas_so_much_more_commercial_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9npw6z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Dallas has more people/demographics it can reach in regards to marketing/advertising. Its like #4 in the country and its huge and expensive to buy for. This is why its a haven for businesses trying to control a piece of the pie.\n\nSource: I work in advertising. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
axczx6 | how do minerals affect people’s health and why do people choose to use them? | I have a friend that is obsessed with using minerals for ailments and I don’t want to be uneducated talking to her, but I find a lot of resources I find on google are heavily biased. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/axczx6/eli5_how_do_minerals_affect_peoples_health_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehspqqq",
"ehsqz6y"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If it's about the presence of minerals vibrating to the natural harmony of the universe in combination with your chakra's and when your aura aligns with your chi to.... You see where I'm going...\n\nThey don't",
"It is kind of a generic topic, minerals and metals have lots of different functions in our body and most of them are finely regulated by physiological mechanisms (calcium needs to be between 8 and 10 mg for every dl otherwise your muscles, including your heart, won't work properly). I don't believe you need to eat mineral integrators as long as your alimentation is varied and complete, but many ads make it look like eating extra minerals will give you a lot more energy, which i don't think is really very accurate. If you are interested in more examples of minerals/metals and their functions i can provide some more, even though i'm not an expert myself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
737lxs | what is the meaning of the different types of hats that the queen's guards wear, and the color of their "robe" | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/737lxs/eli5_what_is_the_meaning_of_the_different_types/ | {
"a_id": [
"dno7auk"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The ones wearing helmets are the Household Cavalry:\n\n_URL_1_\n\nOne of the Household Cavalry regiments, the Blues and Royals, wears, you guessed it, blue uniforms.\n\nThe Foot Guards consist of several regiments from Scotland, Wales and Ireland - and their uniforms have distinctive elements to reflect where they came from.\n\nThe Queen's Guards are also not a static force, but various units will rotate through guard duty, including from time to time units from elsewhere in the Commonwealth (Canada, Jamaica, Australia, etc.), so you will have a variety of uniforms on display.\n\nBritish ceremonial uniforms tend to differ from regiment to regiment because they date back to a time where the army was not so unified and locally-raised units would reflect local traditions (kilts, uniform colours chosen by their commanding officer, etc.).\n\nEDIT:\n\nExample of uniform variations (plumes, buttons, badges, etc.) for UK and Canadian Guards Regiments:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_Guards#Canadian_Army",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_Cavalry"
]
] |
||
34k8k3 | why don't we have cures for common diseases like herpes or diabetes? | For example why couldn't someone just take a sample of their blood and analyze the antigens contained within an HSV cell, and then develop micro-robots that specifically targets the HPV inside their blood?
Also for diabetes why can't someone just use stem cells that attaches to the pancreas and produces insulin? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34k8k3/eli5_why_dont_we_have_cures_for_common_diseases/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqvgr55",
"cqvh4ks",
"cqvhlna",
"cqvhumm",
"cqvj1we",
"cqvoabx",
"cqvp7wc"
],
"score": [
24,
10,
3,
2,
8,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"This is akin to asking why we don't have a cure for mosquitos. After all, couldn't someone just analyze the smell and appearance of mosquitos, and then develop a micro robot that specifically targets them?\n\nThe pathways you describe are active research pathways, so far as I know. But research is hard, and actually making the kinds of things you describe is even harder. Stem cells are simple conceptually, but actually making them do what you want safely and effectively is time consuming, expensive, and difficult. \n\nAnd, as in the mosquito example, you're dealing with living things that have defenses, exist in differing environments, and are really, really complex. Just because mosquitos, or Herpes, is common, doesn't necessarily mean its easy to develop the kinds of things your describing.",
"Short answer: It's not exactly that easy.\n\nI mean, you can't just tell a 3D printer to say \"make tiny robots\" and magically get tiny robots that do exactly what you want. First you have to create and develop the robot (nanotechnology is developing now, so we can ignore that), then you have to find a way to make the robot do what you want, which means you have to develop it in a way that can target the HPV, *then* develop a way the robot can safely get rid of it (this isn't a video game, we have conservation of mass, the bad stuff has to go *somewhere* or otherwise be rendered harmless), and *then*, after it's done targeting and breaking down the bad stuff, you have to make the robot *itself* capable of dissolving or becoming harmless, otherwise you risk it getting stuck in your veins, which would open up a whole new slew of problems (little metal bits in your blood doesn't sound very fun).",
"Also, you can see how much funding research gets for various diseases: [here](_URL_0_) (sort by dollar value by clicking on the top of a column) and note that herpes and diabetes are rather far down the list.\n\nThe amount of funding each disease gets has a lot to do with public perception of the disease, so as long as people want to cure cancer, HIV, neurological disorders and pediatric disease more than herpes, the hep will have to wait.",
"Diabetes is a disorder of the pancreas which regulates sugar. You cannot just alter a liver, its to complex, so we supplemented it by providing artificial insulin at appropriate doses. We are however very close to being able to grow functional livers in labs that can be transplanted into patients if they're comfortable with the notion and are willing to pay for an expensive surgery.\n\nHepes is a virus, and we are not very good at treating viruses yet. Bacteria are relatively large, semi complex cells that antibiotics are capable of penetrating and destroying. However, viruses are too small, most modern medication cannot harm them, but at most sabotage their ability to to infect other cells. In order to cure these diseases and disorders it requires more research into nano technology. Hope this has helped.",
"For HSV, it's kind of like asking how do you get the air out of a balloon without popping the balloon. Except the balloon is a neuron.",
"Something nobody else has mentioned so far is that pharmaceutical companies have pretty much no interest in developing actual cures. With a cure (i.e. antibiotics), it's pretty much a one-time deal (people usually only take antibiotics for a week or two until the infection is gone; there are exceptions, of course, like tuberculosis), so the pharmaceutical companies have to recoup the R & D costs and make profit off of one course of treatment.\n\nEither the cost will be so prohibitive that nobody will be able to afford it (thus leading to even higher prices for those that can afford it), or they will have to hope that they can sell enough doses before their patent expires to make a profit. Shareholders often care primarily about short-term profits, so there is a strong incentive to invest in ongoing revenue streams. As an example, there is a cure for the virus Hepatitis C, and the price is astronomical. [Time magazine reported thus](_URL_0_):\n\n > Gilead Sciences has two drugs for hepatitis C, both costing astronomical amounts: **one drug, Harvoni, costs $95,500 for 12 weeks, and the other, Sovaldi, costs $84,000.** That's $1,000 per pill.\n\nThus, the vast majority of new pharmaceuticals are things you take for a period of time: antidepressants, antipsychotics, insulin (by the way, you cannot buy the cheaper type of animal-produced insulin in the US; you are forced to buy a much more expensive synthetic version... but in Canada, you can buy the cheaper version; [see this reddit post](_URL_2_) for comments in /r/pharmacy and the related article linked by the OP), HIV medications, anti-epileptic medications, ... pretty much everything except vaccines.\n\nSome argue that this is a result of a shift from state-funded research to primarily private research, which naturally introduces a profit motive.\n\nThere is some funding available for R & D of so-called \"orphan drugs,\" but those are for rare diseases that otherwise would receive no funding at all.\n\n[This post](_URL_1_) by /u/moxifloxacin in /r/pharmacy might enlighten you a bit more.",
"Are we talking about Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes? For Type 1, there are transplants of pancreatic islets, where the insulin-producing beta cells reside. This is usually a last resort because the side effects of the immune-repressing drugs are terrible, and the islets generally stop producing insulin within 5 years. \n\nBeta cells aren't transplanted into the pancreas because the exocrine pancreas is extremely finicky and surgery on the pancreas can lead to pancreatitis. Right now islets are generally transplanted into the liver but other sites are being investigated.\n\nThird, there are no known adult stem cells for any type of pancreatic cell, and adult tissues can't instruct stem cells to become like adult tissues. The environment is wrong.\n\nThat means that the stem cells that have to be used \nare embryonic stem (ES) cells or induced pluripotent stem (IPS) cells and that they have to be directed by scientists to become beta cells. The technology for both IPS and ES cells is relatively new. Human ES cell work funded by the US government was banned during the Bush presidency. After Obama reinstated it, a judge banned it briefly and stopped all work, so a lot of work in progress was lost. IPS cells have only been available since 2006 and science takes a while. The factors (transcription factors, signalling molecules) needed to differentiate IPS and ES cells into glucose-responsive, insulin-producing beta cells and the timing to give then to the ES cells needed to be worked out. Luckily, most of these factors had already been worked out by doing basic science research (not translational) to understand how the pancreas and the islets develop. Most of this work was done in the mouse.\n\nPeople working on differentiating IPS or ES cells into insulin-producing cells actually now have FDA approval to transplant these cells within a immune-cell resistant \"pouch\" into Type 1 patients. _URL_0_\n\nThe problem with this approach for Type 2 patients is that a big part of the disease in most people is insulin resistance in tissues other than the pancreas--liver, muscle and fat. This means that even if there is more insulin, the body doesn't listen to it, and those tissues don't take up glucose. This elevated glucose is toxic to the beta cells, and it could lead to their dysfunction or death. But it could perhaps work."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.report.nih.gov/categorical_spending.aspx"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://time.com/3643996/hepatitis-c-drugs/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/pharmacy/comments/2nw8v0/hey_rpharmacy_what_do_you_think_about_the_big/cmhnw6j",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/pharmacy/comments/2zp7ku/why_is_there_no_generic_insulin_historical/"
],
[
"http://jdrf.org/viacyte-files-investigational-new-drug-application-and-device-master-file-with-fda-for-novel-cell-replacement-therapy-product-candidate-designed-to-treat-patients-with-type-1-diabetes/"
]
] |
|
6ttn1g | what happens to your brain when you space out? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ttn1g/eli5_what_happens_to_your_brain_when_you_space_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlnlhqt"
],
"score": [
30
],
"text": [
"There are two kinds of spacing out. There is background processing - thinking about stuff that isn't apparent to you consciously, and basically resting your mind. \n\nFor most of evolutionary history, energy was the limiting factor for most species. Sleeping is not only helpful for repairing your body, but also for reducing your calorie burden. Spacing out is a kind of low energy state that is more alert than sleeping but less energy consuming than active thinking. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
14wvco | if sleep cycles last around 90 minutes, why should naps only be around 20 minutes long? | I've tried taking 90-ish minute naps, but feel terrible when I wake up. What's up with that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/14wvco/if_sleep_cycles_last_around_90_minutes_why_should/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7h66kw",
"c7h9uej",
"c7haup6",
"c7hba98",
"c7hemx2"
],
"score": [
18,
9,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Obviously, everyone is different, (so this may explain why you feel terrible after napping for 90 minutes), but the point about the sleep cycles is that you should only take a short nap of, say 20 minutes, or a longer nap of, say 90 minutes, but not a 60 minute nap.\n\nThis is because, as you sleep, your body moves from REM sleep (the most mentally active and thus easiest to wake from) to the four stages of non-REM sleep, which get progressively harder to wake from. This happens in a cyclic form: you start out in REM sleep, then you move to a certain \"depth\" of non-REM sleep and back out into REM again. (You don't reach the deepest levels until several hours in.)\n\nAt about 60 minutes, you have reached the deepest part of the first cycle, so this is a bad time to wake up. Your brain is in its least active phase, so you will feel very disoriented and \"groggy\" as it has to return to full alertness very quickly. It is better to wake up at 20 minutes, when you haven't yet gotten very deep into non-REM sleep, or at 90 minutes, when you have cycled back around to a higher level.\n\nOne thing that may be affecting you is the amount of sleep you get. If you aren't getting enough, your sleep cycles change to compensate, so your tiredness from 90-minute naps may be a result of disrupted sleep cycles.",
"Something nap related i thought was pretty neat. _URL_0_ kinda off topic but caffeine naps really work wonders.",
"You're a stronger person than me. If I fall asleep ain't no way I'm waking up after 20 minutes. ",
"When you are deprived from sleep, such as after a long day or even in the middle of the day, your brain starts to crave REM sleep. REM sleep is the only important sleep that you need to survive and makes you feel nice and awake. You dont actually start with REM sleep (like /u/Vox_Imperatoris mentioned) unless you are deprived, in which it goes into a state of REM rebound.\n\nREM rebound basically forces you into REM sleep so you can recover faster. Then it follows the normal 90-minute cycles. Because REM sessions last around 15-20 minutes, if you were to go any longer, it would send you back into the sleep state and make you groggy.\n\nThis is the basis of polyphasic sleeping and why the caffeine naps that /u/rbcornhole mentioned actually work.",
"So you don't eneter a full sleep cycle. There are many steps in a sleep cycle and under20 minutes does not allow you to enter into the deeper levels. Once you enter the deeper levels, you need the full 90 to finish, else you will feel groggy as you have disrupted the 90 minute sleep cycle. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.sleepdex.org/caffeine-nap.htm"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
69utns | how do recycling companies weed out things that aren't recyclable that are accidentally put in the recycling bin? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69utns/eli5_how_do_recycling_companies_weed_out_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh9j79w",
"dh9lfvy",
"dh9y456",
"dhctnhf"
],
"score": [
34,
12,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Even at high tech \"single stream\" recycling plants, that first round of sorting is accomplished with lots of people standing on either side of a conveyor belt and grabbing non-recyclables. _URL_0_\n\nNotice the plastic bags getting pulled out. Please don't recycle those unless you're certain they're accepted.\n\nEdit: grammar.",
"I recently went to a recycling facility to collect water bottles for a sustainability project. The whole thing is one big sorting operation. All the employees sorted things into general categories and then those categories are further sorted into more categories with some help from machines but mostly by people. ",
"Apart from manually, there are many automatic steps that doesn't require high tech, depending on what you are recycling:\n\nMagnets can sort out iron and other magnetic metals and alloys.\n\nA water bath can sort out by density, floating/non floating.\n\nFire can just burn away most other things and leave the metal.\n\nAnd so on, there are lots of mechanical ways that just works but are not so obvious, like shaking and spinning, see the video /u/flurbinatior linked for some examples.\n\n",
"I'm an Operations Supervisor at what was once the largest MRF (materials recovery facility) in the world 5 years ago. We receive 4 types of commodities:\n\nRSS - residential single stream, material from your bin off the curb.\n\nCSS - commercial single stream, material from office buildings and other businesses.\n\nCDR - commercial dry residual, material when customers rent a 40 yard and throw whatever they want in it.\n\nCWR - commercial wet residual, stinky crap from restaurants.\n\nThe process we have here is as follows.The material is first loaded by an excavator into a metering bin (a large drum with teeth spins to level and spread out the material). The four different materials, which run on their own lines, are then run past sorters who pull contaminants manually and drop then in the correct chutes. The chutes are fed outside and drop into bunkers to store them.\n\nAnything that is not a container (milk jugs, detergent bottles, plastic bottles) or fiber (paper and OCC old corrugated cardboard) is considered a contaminant and pulled off. Contaminants may include:\n\nWood\nMetal\nRigid plastic\nTrash\nFilm\nDead animals or people (3 bodies found since I've been here)\n\nThe presorted material then flows into the OCC separator, a series of beams that have triangular discs attached to them. The discs spin at around 200 rpm and push the large OCC over and everything else falls underneath onto another conveyor. The OCC falls into a bunker and is later baled.\n\nThe remaining material, which should be only: smaller OCC, paper, and containers. It is fed through 3 more sets of screens, each set smaller than the one before it. As the screens spin, they flick paper over and heavier things like containers fall down to the next screen.\n\nAll of the material that was flicked over and if the system was running correctly would be only fiber. The material is then run by another set of manual sorters to pull contaminants, this area is known as postsort.\n\nAt the end of the 3rd screen, the discs are packed tightly and very small causing all containers to fall onto a single conveyor. On this conveyor there is mostly containers, they are then fed through out NRT (National Recovery Technology) system. Imagine a conveyor moving containers at a high speed towards a bright light. The computer can sense with the light the density of the plastic and will fire or not fire a burst or air to send containers down the right conveyor. Aluminum is pulled with an eddy current.\n\nThe different types of containers we sell are:\n\nPET bottles (water bottles)\n3-7 plastic (clam shells)\nHDPE-NATURAL (milk jugs)\nHDPE-COLOR (detergent jugs)\nTin\nUBC aluminum (used beverage cans)\n\nEach of these materials flow passed a QC sorter before heading to a bunker and being baled.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://youtu.be/J_RWqgXcP_k?t=122"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6kykj9 | why do pharmacists tell us to take 2 or 3 of a pill? can't they give us one big one instead? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6kykj9/eli5_why_do_pharmacists_tell_us_to_take_2_or_3_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"djps3km",
"djpsi6m",
"djq0bo0",
"djq185l",
"djq21av",
"djq481c",
"djq7hsz"
],
"score": [
13,
858,
9,
5,
6,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Because the pills are mass produced in a standard size, and it's much faster for the pharmicist to grab a box from the draw and say \"take 2\" than it is to carefully make up a batch of the drug, then weigh it, then press it into individual pills.\n\nIn theory they can (a compounding pharmacist is the specialization), and they can also change the drugs into other forms (eg a liquid), but it's slow and hence expensive, so they only do it if you actually need it",
"There are several possible reasons:\n\n- Timing. It may be a medicine you have to take throughout the day (like every 8 hours for example) rather than all at once.\n\n- Unusual use. Some medicines can be used to treat problems they weren't originally developed for. This may require an uncommon dosage.\n\n- Insurance. Insurance is *really weird* and may only pay for a certain size of pill. They may agree to pay for 10mg pills but not 20mg pills, so if you need 20mg a day, the fastest and easiest way to get around insurance shenanigans is instructing you to take 2 10mg pills instead of 1 20mg pill. Otherwise, your doctor will have to write your insurance a letter explaining that yes you need this and they should cover it or you'll have to pay out of pocket for it. Usually the pharmacy will contact the doctor and ask for permission to substitute.\n\n- The pharmacy is out of the larger size. This happens from time to time. Again, they'll clear this with the doctor first.\n\n- It just doesn't exist in a bigger size. Drug companies make their medicines in commonly used dosage types. Smaller is generally better. You can usually just take more pills if you need a bigger dosage, with some exceptions, but it's harder when you need a smaller dosage and only bigger pills exist.\n\n- Bigger pill sizes may be available only with a prescription, but the smaller ones can be bought over the counter. Ibuprofen (Advil) is an example of this. You can buy 200mg pills over the counter, but 600mg and up require prescriptions. In this case, the pharmacist can't give you the bigger pill unless you have a prescription from your doctor saying you need it. But giving you smaller ones is a-ok.\n\n- Bigger pills can be a pain to swallow. Going back to the ibuprofen example, if you've seen the larger sizes, they're huge. Swallowing them can be difficult, especially if the patient is a child or elderly, so going with smaller pill sizes or the medicine in a liquid form would be better for them.\n\nThere's probably more that I didn't think of, but these are really the most common.\n\nSource: Former pharmacy technician.",
"If most people need 100mg of something, and you need 200mg, it's easier to give you two of the 100mg and keep ordering the same size pill like they usually do, rather than order a 200mg pill just for you. \n\nPossible reasons why different people might need different doses: weight, size, severity of issue, etc. \n\nAnother reason is that some pills can just become uncomfortable to swallow/digest. Think of NyQuil pills. You're supposed to take 2. Imagine that, in one giant pill - hardly comfortable.",
"Yes, they could put it in one pill. \n\nOne part of it that hasn't been mentioned is the social engineering to prevent accidental overdoses. The amount of actual medicine in most pills is tiny compared to the weight of the pill. But if the pill were 100% medicine with no fillers it would be so tiny that some individuals would not trust that its small size would actually work. Some pills would be so tiny that most individuals would not be able to easily single out their prescribed dose (think size of a grain of salt). So they'd ingest more pills to make it feel like they've taken enough and overdose.\n\nOne pill with your prescribed dose may work very well for you, but for the general population, they need more bulk to make them feel like they're taking a proper dose and not get impatient and take more.",
"I'd just want to add one point to these good answers.\n\nMaking different dose sizes costs more money. There is no cost increase in having some patient take 2 tablets/caps rather than making a whole new line of product aimed at the few that take a bigger dose.",
"I did not see this mentioned: there could be a valid pharmacological/physiological reasoning for the dosing regimen. There is an effective dose, and doses that are either ineffective or dangerous if they are too high. \n\nFor example, some antibiotics need a consistent dosage over a few weeks. Too low and you risk not killing the bacteria and encouraging antibiotic resistance. Too high a dosage and you run into unpleasant side effects like nausea which discourage use and lead to ineffective dosing. \n\nAnother example is in pain management. Typically a rule for pain management is that consistent dosing is better than as needed dosing for chronic pain. With opioids, too much at once can be lethal. \n\nThis question is very dependent on multiple factors like route of administration (oral, intramuscular, subcutaneous, intravenous, rectal, inhaled...), drug type/bioavailability, disease process, health status etc.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Pharmacists don't create the pills. So, no, they can't give you one pill for the exact dosage that you need. Your doctor determines the dosage you need. Pill size is determined long before this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.slideshare.net/bharathpharmacist/pharmacokinetics-of-multiple-dosing"
],
[]
] |
||
4abriv | what makes you tired? | When you stay awake for hours on end, what is it exactly that makes you tired? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4abriv/eli5_what_makes_you_tired/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0z1c2m",
"d0z1eb8"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Many different hormones contribute to this, one significant one is called adenosine. Adenosine makes up the first part of Adenosine Triphosphate, the energy \"currency\" of the body. Over time, normal adenosine builds up and makes a person tired. Caffeine for example works by blocking adenosine receptors, which detect amounts of adenosine in the body.",
"The main contributer to sleepiness at night is the hormone melatonin which releases at night in response to your wake-sleep cycle which is supposed to be in response to sunlight. If you ever have sleep trouble take melatonin supplement. You'll sleep well, but you may have powerful dreams."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1l2ba5 | why do bad smells trigger the gag reflex? | I've always wondered why this is the body's response to smelly things. Can anybody explain why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l2ba5/eli5_why_do_bad_smells_trigger_the_gag_reflex/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbv2q38",
"cbv9fmf"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"To make sure you dont eat the bad food, and if you have, throw it up",
"It's because smell and taste are linked. It's the same reason of why food tastes different when you have a cold."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
dodnoz | why do humans find some repetitive sounds soothing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dodnoz/eli5_why_do_humans_find_some_repetitive_sounds/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5mkmxl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Repetitive sounds are soothing because it similar to a heartbeat of our parents we listen to as babies being consoled in their arms. Repetitive sounds provide a consistent tone and allow us to relax and feel a sense of calm."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xrmuf | if opposite charges attract, why don't the protons and electrons of an atom cause the entire atom to collapse? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xrmuf/if_opposite_charges_attract_why_dont_the_protons/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfe18k3"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"So [here](_URL_1_) is a real scientist ELI5'ing this. And [here is Richard Feynman](_URL_0_) (the real-est scientist?) ELI18ing it. I've copied the relevant part of his below. He explains it way better than me, but that's not how the forum works, so... \n\nMy version: So, atoms are small enough that they exist in the weird of quantum mechanics. And, in quantum mechanics, we learn that something like **the position of an electron is hard to describe as more than just a cloud of places** the electron has some chance of being. Also, because of something called the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, we can't know where it is if we know its speed, and we can't know its speed if we know where it is. Moreover, **the more we know about its location, the \"faster\" it goes to make up for it**. \n\nWhat that means is that, if the electron really did collapse into the proton, we'd know with great specificity about where it is. The problem is that would mean it would have to be going much \"faster\". Going faster means having more kinetic energy, and, **for an electron, having more energy(speed) means being \"farther away\"** (the cloud of positions gets bigger and differently shaped). \n\nAs it gets closer to the protons, and thus its position becomes more certain, the electron starts to gain more and more speed from the uncertainty principle. **At a certain point, it can't get any \"closer\" because it's gaining \"speed\" faster than it gains \"closeness\".** That point is the minimum distance, and with very, very, rare exceptions, outside of something like a neutron star, the electrons can't get any closer to the protons, despite the attraction\n\n**TLDR** The Uncertainty principle creates a minimum distance between electrons and protons, because electrons are weird. And now, Feynmann:\n\n > What keeps the electrons from simply falling in? This principle: If they were in the nucleus, we would know their position precisely, and the uncertainty principle would then require that they have a very large (but uncertain) momentum, i.e., a very large kinetic energy. With this energy they would break away from the nucleus. They make a compromise: they leave themselves a little room for this uncertainty and then jiggle with a certain amount of minimum motion in accordance with this rule. (Remember that when a crystal is cooled to absolute zero, we said that the atoms do not stop moving, they still jiggle. Why? If they stopped moving, we would know where they were and that they had zero motion, and that is against the uncertainty principle. We cannot know where they are and how fast they are moving, so they must be continually wiggling in there!)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.feynmanlectures.info/docroot/I_02.html#Ch2-S4",
"https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1199"
]
] |
||
3t01hb | monetizing videos on youtube. | 1. Can you monetize your own original non copyrighted videos on a Youtube channel that has many other copyright videos?
2. Can you monetize a video with copyright materials but no third party claim like in this image? _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3t01hb/eli5_monetizing_videos_on_youtube/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx1wwem"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"1. Yes. It's just a per video basis that matters. Otherwise you wouldn't have the option to pick which video to monetize, you'd turn it on for the whole channel.\n\n2. No. Just because they haven't detected that it has copyrighted content doesn't change the fact that it does."
]
} | [] | [
"http://imgur.com/rEVZUIW"
] | [
[]
] |
|
50r8wv | curved tvs/computer monitors | I understand creating a concave bowl in front of me removes some variance in my viewing from the one ideal viewing spot. I still don't get it how this is an improvement for anyone sitting next to the presumed cyclops who purchased said curved monitor. Let's also assume no one wants to sit on each others' lap(s). | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50r8wv/eli5_curved_tvscomputer_monitors/ | {
"a_id": [
"d76cdi0",
"d76cr0c",
"d76d5vn",
"d76k9i8"
],
"score": [
17,
7,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"I asked a sales guy at Best Buy that same question about 6 months ago (side note: Best Buy still exists!). His answer: because it looks impressive in a showroom (or in advertisements). \n\nI currently have a big fancy TV and the main effect I get from the curve is that the wall lights across the room are now annoying from every ~~poison~~ position on the couch instead of just one. \n\nEDIT: I probably do need a couch antidote. ",
"The experience can actually be enjoyable if the TV is around 50\" due to the curve being wide enough to enclose several people's viewing angle providing that it's not placed too far away. \n\nComputer monitors however aren't meant to be used by more than one person at a time anyway which is why the additional viewers' pleasure is not considered. ",
"Liquid crystal monitors use the orientation of tiny crystals within a substrate to block light to varying degrees. One significant drawback is that the angle at which you view the screen matters; try looking at an LCD from the side and there will be color distortion to some degree.\n\nThe optimum viewing angle is straight on but as a flat screen gets larger the angle that you view the edges is not straight. If it is really big the viewing angle can get pretty bad. By curving the screen the viewing angle can be improved for a audience directly in front of the screen.",
"I also did not understand the appeal of curved computer monitors untill recently. After buying a non-curved 29 inch ultawide 21:9 monitor I definitely get the appeal. In such a wide monitor your gaze makes a big angle with the edges. Go any bigger and curved will be a must. There is a subreddit _URL_0_ there a curved 34 inch montior is widely accepted as the best one.\n\nI still don't get curved TV's other than looking cool."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/"
]
] |
|
20yyrh | rubber (the film) | I... don't even really know what to put here. If you've seen it, you understand my confusion. Someone help please.
If you haven't seen or heard of it, here's the [IMDb](_URL_1_), the [Wiki](_URL_0_), and the [Official Movie Site](_URL_2_) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20yyrh/eli5_rubber_the_film/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg81rvs",
"cg83amx"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"so there's this tire.... and it blows people up.... how is that hard to understand?",
"Why do you need this explained? Its a tire. It has psycho-kenetic powers that can explode people a la \"Scanners\". Implying its a foreign/alien/supernatural force that happens to be inhabiting an inanimate object.\n\nits less a movie about a murderous supernatural tire than it is a focus on ... oh never mind. I'm sure the director was trying to be \"meta\" on some level..... just shut up and enjoy a murderous supernatural tire and a bunch of yucks."
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_(2010_film)",
"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1612774/",
"http://www.rubberthemovie.com/"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2u8ac4 | why do employers set up their application processes the way they do? | Specifically, things like how they ask you to type in the info from your resume, as well as uploading a copy of said resume.
Demanding you sign up for an account for their website as if it's a social media site.
Why? Why is it so convoluted? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2u8ac4/eli5_why_do_employers_set_up_their_application/ | {
"a_id": [
"co618e2",
"co61koh"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The resume thing is so a bot can scan and look for pertinent information, then, if the application is approved it's forwarded to a real person. ",
"Because they anticipate receiving hundreds, if not thousands, of resumes. Especially if you're talking about a big company that does their hiring through third parties like Monster, Indeed, or a staffing agency. The job posting will be exposed to a shitload of people, many of whom won't even qualify but still apply.\n\nThere's no way a person, or even a team of people, could go through thousands of resumes in a timely manner. So, they feed the information you typed on their little forms through a bot/program to look for keywords. This is why it's so important to tailor your resume to the job description and qualifications! If you just send out a generic resume to a hundred different places without adding in keywords and terms that they're looking for (which are always in the actual job requirements & qualifications), then chances are you won't make it through the first set of filters.\n\nThe bot narrows down the number of resumes to those that actually qualify, and the process continues until they have a manageable number of resumes to sift through. They select the best or most relevant candidates and bring them in for interviews."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2znsti | how geese can fly south for the winter and return home, yet my chickens can't remember where the damn door is to get back in the coop? | Please explain! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2znsti/eli5_how_geese_can_fly_south_for_the_winter_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpkn03s",
"cpko91o"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Instinct. Geese have the instinct in them. They know every winter they must go south. The chickens do not have the instinct for them to go to through the door. The geese have this implanted in their genetic code. Your chickens, however, do not.",
"Domesticated livestock are bred to be stupid and docile. Smart animals tend to either escape confinement, or die trying, and don't pass their smart genes along."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
fxzn9w | why do our arms and legs shake when positioned certain ways? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fxzn9w/eli5_why_do_our_arms_and_legs_shake_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"fmxtbgy"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"If you put your arm in a position that your muscles aren't used to holding it in, they'll get tired real quick. So just like the shaking you'd get at the end of a set of you're in the gym, you start shaking out of fatigue. I've never looked into it in great detail but just intuitively my thoughts for the shaking is that:\n\n1) your muscles are too tired to sustain a consistent contraction so contracting and relaxing really rapidly is better than giving up all together\n\nOr \n\n2) Your muscle fibres don't contract completely in unison anyway. So normally you have enough active muscle fibres that the contraction seems consistent because there's always some fibres contracting. Once you tire them out they you don't have as many active fibres so you can perceive these \"gaps\" in contraction as shaking"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
bjsvbw | how many extinct human species were there? did they all live at the same time? how/why did they face extinction? | The title says it all | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bjsvbw/eli5_how_many_extinct_human_species_were_there/ | {
"a_id": [
"emavw9r",
"embllfu"
],
"score": [
2,
11
],
"text": [
"There were many hominid species exactly how many we are not sure. Many like Neanderthal and Denisovans certainly were alive as Homo Sapiens and interbred with them. Humans likely out competed them - _URL_0_",
"This depends on exactly what you mean by \"human\". If we want to specifically restrict ourselves to members of genus *Homo*, then there are anywhere from 4 or 5 on the low end to something like 15 species on the high end, depending on who you ask. This upper number includes several species that are only known from a single fossil specimen though, and there is definitely some argument on many of these lesser known species. We don't have a perfect understanding of the relationships among extinct species, but there are some key points that everyone agrees on. Referring to [these](_URL_7_) [evolutionary](_URL_0_) [trees](_URL_6_) might help, though you'll notice they don't all agree. I'll give a quick rundown of the more widely accepted members though; my main source for this information (and images) is the [Smithsonian's Human Origins site](_URL_1_). \n\n\n*Homo sapiens*: This is us, obviously. Anatomically modern humans have been around for roughly 200,000 years, but didn't leave Africa until \\~60,000 years ago. And we have not gone extinct (yet).\n\n[*Homo neanderthalis*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/neanderthalensis_JG_Recon_Head_CC_3qtr_lt_sq.jpg?itok=bbMVq7AH): Widely accepted as our closest relatives (as evidenced by the fact that they interbred with *Homo sapiens*). Neanderthals left Africa earlier than we did and lived in Europe and some of Asia. They were pretty similar to us in most ways, but were a bit shorter and chunkier, and actually had larger brains on average. They went extinct roughly 30-40 thousand years ago, very likely due to competition with our species, though the degree to which we were directly responsible is debated.\n\n[*Homo heidelbergensis*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/heidelbergensis_JG_Recon_head_CC_3qtr_lt_sq.jpg?itok=eI1BrkF_): Usually considered the ancestor of both neanderthals and sapiens. This species appeared roughly 700,000 years ago, and probably didn't exactly go extinct so much as it evolved into sapiens in Africa and Neanderthals in Eurasia. Apparently this species is also considered the first to have built shelters to live in. \n\n[*Homo erectus:*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/erectus_JC_Recon_Head_CC_f_sq.jpg?itok=SmKHwIVL) This species is sometimes considered ancestral to *H. sapiens*, but is sometimes thought of as part of an extinct branch instead (depending on whether or not you consider *Homo ergaster* to be a separate species or not). This is pretty widely accepted as the longest-lived human species that we know of, appearing around 2 million years ago and persisting for most of the time since then. *H. erectus* was also extremely widespread, being found basically all over Europe, Africa, and Asia (though this represents an earlier \"out of Africa\" migration than either Neanderthals or sapiens). This species demonstrates a lot of the innovations we associate with early humans, including the first use of fire and of sophisticated stone tools. It's also commonly accepted that [*Homo floresiensis*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/floresiensis_JG_Recon_Head_CC_3qtr_lt_sq_0.jpg?itok=V-blSRE4), the \"hobbit people\" from Indonesia, were a late-branching remnant of *Homo erectus* that evolved to live in an island environment. So again, while some lineages of *H. erectus* did go extinct, many others probably just became other species.\n\n[*Homo habilis*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/habilis_illustration_kc_head_s.jpg?itok=XkgbPfyh)*:* Pretty much always considered the earliest member of the genus *Homo*. They first appeared roughly 2.5 million years ago, and lasted a bit less than a million years in the fossil record. It's often considered as an ancestor to *Homo erectus*, but this is somewhat disputed too. There is also another species that lived in basically the same time and place, [*Homo rudolfensis*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/rudolfensis_illustration_kc_head_sq.jpg?itok=cJaPZbsC), which is sometimes considered distinct. *H. habilis* is probably the first species to make regular use of basic stone tools, though this is also somewhat contentious! As with the previous examples, it's probably the case that *H. habilis* evolved into other human species rather than going completely extinct, but some populations probably did persist and coexist for a while with other species.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThat's pretty much all of the universally agreed upon human species. There are several others that are recognized by some people, including *Homo naledi, Homo antecessor, Homo gautengensis*, etc. but these are mostly known from a small amount of fossil material as I mentioned earlier.\n\nI think it's also worth noting that there were several species outside of genus *Homo* that our ancestors co-existed with though. The genus *Homo* is widely accepted to have arisen from within the genus *Australopithecus* (as a side note, this is some pretty bad taxonomy, but I'll let it slide....), and there are other branches of this group that co-existed with early humans too. [*Australopithecus africanus*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/africanus_JG_Recon_head_CC_f_sq.jpg?itok=ARwchJAQ) lasted until at around 2 million years ago, meaning that it would have co-existed with *Homo habilis*. In general, *Australopithecus* species were physically smaller and less adapted to walking on two legs than our more recent ancestors, though they are still more closely related to us than chimpanzees. Finally, one of the most interesting extinct groups is the genus [*Paranthropus*](_URL_1_sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/boisei_JG_Recon_head_CC_3qtr1_lt_sq.jpg?itok=-IOQM6TP), which is a separate off-shoot of *Australopithecus* that appears to have evolved to become specialized for eating plants (they had huge jaws that almost look more like a gorilla than a human). This group lasted until as recently as 1.2 million years ago or so, and so definitely would have lived alongside members of genus *Homo.*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://youtu.be/x2GcP1hPyLk"
],
[
"https://www.earthmagazine.org/sites/earthmagazine.org/files/2016-08/Cantner_HomininTree.png",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/heidelbergensis_JG_Recon_head_CC_3qtr_lt_sq.jpg?itok=eI1BrkF_",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/habilis_illustration_kc_head_s.jpg?itok=XkgbPfyh",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/rudolfensis_illustration_kc_head_sq.jpg?itok=cJaPZbsC",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/neanderthalensis_JG_Recon_Head_CC_3qtr_lt_sq.jpg?itok=bbMVq7AH",
"https://www.donsmaps.com/images9/floreslineage.jpg",
"https://theness.com/neurologicablog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/hominids.jpg",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/africanus_JG_Recon_head_CC_f_sq.jpg?itok=ARwchJAQ",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/boisei_JG_Recon_head_CC_3qtr1_lt_sq.jpg?itok=-IOQM6TP",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/erectus_JC_Recon_Head_CC_f_sq.jpg?itok=SmKHwIVL",
"http://humanorigins.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/images/square/floresiensis_JG_Recon_Head_CC_3qtr_lt_sq_0.jpg?itok=V-blSRE4"
]
] |
|
27840f | how does time progress when there are an infinite number of points between units of time? | Why does it not just become infinitely closer to the next second? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27840f/eli5_how_does_time_progress_when_there_are_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"chy9v43",
"chya3zu",
"chyakcx",
"chyawdw"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"What you are describing is a version of Zeno's paradox. From Wiki:\n\n\"Zeno states that for motion to occur, an object must change the position which it occupies. He gives an example of an arrow in flight. He states that in any one instant of time, the arrow is neither moving to where it is, nor to where it is not. It cannot move to where it is not, because no time elapses for it to move there; it cannot move to where it is, because it is already there. In other words, at every instant of time there is no motion occurring. If everything is motionless at every instant, and time is entirely composed of instants, then motion is impossible.\"\n\nThese paradoxes don't really have a concrete answer (some claim to have worked out the formula, according to the Wiki, but this seems to be taking the fun out of it). They are meant as philosophical thought experiments.",
"A \"second\" is not actually time. A second is a second. A second passes, but time itself is not constrained by the tyranny of what a second is, the same as the concept of length itself is not constrained by meters or feet. \n\nEach moment is the now. You cannot subdivide the now, the now could be conceived of as the absolute smallest increment of time, kin to electrons or quarks (assuming, of course, nothing lies beneath *those*). A second could be expressed as a near-infinite string of nows, if you would like, which the universe processes at its own speed. \n\nThe mistake you are making is assuming that your processing speed is the same as the universe's, assuming it processes time the way your brain does, lingering on moments as they exist. It does not. The universe processes time, we perceive (some of) the results.",
"this is a zeno's paradox question. the problem is that we have found what seems to be the shortest distance (planck length) and the time it takes for light to travel a planck lenghth is the absolute shortest period of time. a \"frame\" if you will. Trillions of these frames pass in a second.",
"The smallest measurable unit of time is [Plank Time](_URL_0_). Without going into technical detail, many physicists believe that time and matter are not infinitely divisible (string theory). \n\nAlso, time isn't necessarily a thing. We define time by physical events like the vibrations of an atom or the sun rising and falling. If nothing physical happened, did time really pass? How would you measure it? Time is only changes of our universe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time"
]
] |
|
3y9zet | the difference between hyperinflation and a depression. | Both are bad, but how exactly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3y9zet/eli5_the_difference_between_hyperinflation_and_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cybqso8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Hyperinflation is a rapid increase in prices over a short period of time. This usually happens when the government has huge deficits following some sort of upheaval, such as a war, and needs to print a lot of cash fast. This devalues the money very quickly and can lead to such a rapid inflation.\n\nA depression is an extremely severe and protracted downturn in economic activity. Generally this is because of social reasons and consumer confidence. If people, en masse, don't feel confident in spending money, then they buy less things, they don't invest and generally sit on their money. This can lead to a snowball effect, where people don't spend much money, then their businesses suffer, leading to layoffs and eventually mass unemployment, leading to more fear about spending money."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8239n0 | why does it hurt to pee with an erection? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8239n0/eli5_why_does_it_hurt_to_pee_with_an_erection/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv758rd",
"dv77y6j"
],
"score": [
5,
7
],
"text": [
"Because the vascular system around the urethra is constrained and causes the flow out to be restricted, and thus potentially painful or burning. Basically the erection causes the same symptoms of urethral stricture which is caused by multiple issues including tumors and urinary tract infections.",
"Uh, it does? Last time I did it it wasn't uncomfortable. I always sit down in that case though, maybe that's why. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
fbpc1t | does simply rinsing fruit actually do anything in terms of eliminating chemicals? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fbpc1t/eli5_does_simply_rinsing_fruit_actually_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"fj5q70p",
"fj5q8wa",
"fj5xddz",
"fj6c8sd",
"fj6drzv",
"fj6fqxn",
"fj6fymk",
"fj71d16",
"fj89nth"
],
"score": [
5,
93,
47,
11,
23,
3,
10,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes. The chemicals are only sprayed on the outside of the fruit and they aren't strong enough to go through the skin. So a little water should remove all of it but to be safe it wouldn't hurt to use a little soap as well.",
"It can wash off chemicals. \n\nMany fruits are covered in a wax coating to keep them from rotting too quick and that usually needs warm water or something course to rub it off.",
"The main purpose of washing your fruit and veg isn't to remove chemicals that may have been used during the growth of the plant.\n\nInstead you're washing off dirt, and any germs that may have come from the person who harvested it or touched it before it arrived in your kitchen.",
"It’s probably not going to do much to remove pesticides and things, but think about how many other grocery store customers have gotten their grubby hands all over it on the shelf at the store. And then consider that the employee who stocked those shelves may or may not wash their hands — there’s a reason every store that sells food has a sign up in the bathroom to warn employees to wash their hands after they use the toilet, and it’s not because compliance rates are super high.",
"I don’t mean to gross anyone out, but I’ve been fruit picking grapes before and I can tell you that people often cut themselves on the shears and got blood on them. Not only that but a group of of them got drunk the night before and vomited all over a case of grapes. They also sweat and rub sunscreen and god knows what other germs over everything. The people picking it aren’t the most sanitary...I hope that fruit goes through some sort of wash before it gets to the stores but just wash it just in case!",
"Rinse it off with warm water or an actual vegetable wash, using cold water does not do much",
"Some insecticides are systemic. They're sprayed onto the soil so the plant takes up the poison through its root system and is spread throughout the plant . These poisons have a limited life span so there are time limits to harvesting after spraying. If a grower sprays too close to harvest, washing fruit will not remove the insecticide.",
"I used to work in a produce department in a local chain grocery store.\n\nA customer dropped a container of blueberries, so the produce manager had me sweep the blueberries into a dust pan, then bring them to the back of the store and dump them back into the container. He then simply walked out and put them right back on the shelf and said \"people are supposed to wash this stuff anyway\"",
"Can rinsing your hands wash chemicals off of them?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
e4qpmi | how a womans period works, what stages there are and what happens during those stages. | I am a man and thus no one explained it to me during childhood so I though to educate myself now that I have the chance. Tried looking it up but there were only really sciency answer and made me even more confused. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e4qpmi/eli5_how_a_womans_period_works_what_stages_there/ | {
"a_id": [
"f9eoe8e",
"f9epp11"
],
"score": [
13,
3
],
"text": [
"There are two ovaries on each side of a woman’s pelvis, with a Fallopian tube (don’t know why it’s called that - it’s just a tube) connected to each one that leads down to the uterus. Once a month one ovary releases an egg, and it makes its way down the tube. When a man ejaculates into a woman, the semen makes it’s way up and if it encounters an egg and fertilizes it, the resulting zygote continues down to the uterus and implants itself in the uterine lining where it will eventually grow into a baby. Every 27-32 days the ovaries alternate releasing eggs, this is called ovulation. IF an egg travels down the Fallopian tube and doesn’t get fertilized it results in a period. Period is the body shedding the thickened uterine lining (that it has thickened in expectation of a fertilized egg) \n\nThat’s the basics.",
"I’m gonna really try to explain it like you’re 5 and still be accurate. Ovaries drop an egg every month, this is called ovulation. Between periods, the uterus prepares itself so that in the event the egg is fertilized, the uterus is ready to make a baby. When the egg is not fertilized, the uterus sheds this extra lining that would be used to house the fetus, this is when a woman bleeds and is on her period. Hormones go through a cycle that causes this all to happen. Those also cause all the pesky symptoms women may experience. Estrogen is high during ovulation causing a higher libido, the body’s way of saying its ready to make a baby. When period time approaches estrogen levels dip and cause fatigue, headaches, mood swings, etc. any more specific questions I may be able to answer as well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1r6699 | why does the united states have among the highest rates of poverty and income inequality of any developed nation? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1r6699/eli5_why_does_the_united_states_have_among_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdjz9c2",
"cdk35tl",
"cdk3puz",
"cdk4lgt",
"cdk5dei",
"cdk5fq0",
"cdk72jf",
"cdk76ow",
"cdk7odd",
"cdkfk48"
],
"score": [
3,
47,
14,
9,
15,
2,
2,
5,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nThere is a strain in the national character that is naturally hostile to anything approaching Socialism.",
"Left-wing answer: Not enough socialism\n\nRight-wing answer: Too much socialism",
"Timothy Noah has some great posts on this over at Slate. It used to be that wages matched how productive you are. Since the mid-70s this is no longer true as more money gets redistributed upwards to an increasingly narrow elite.\n_URL_0_",
"This almost seems like a loaded question.",
"Everyone seems aware that there is inequity but no one I meet seems to grasp the magnitude of these numbers. So bear with me while I establish what we're dealing with here.\n\nThe Gross Domestic Product, the most basic way to measure the size of an economy, of the United States is estimated to be [$16.724 trillion](_URL_0_). The median wage, the point where half of the population makes more and half makes less, is roughly [$28,000 a year](_URL_1_).\n\nTaking the numbers in the \"Income Distribution\" chart and assuming that everyone in a given income range earns the highest amount in that range, for ease of calculation, the lowest paid 48% of the US population earns $1.585 trillion a year, or around 9.5% GDP. \n\nThe next 45% of Americans earn between $27,500 and $100,000 which, provided that the majority of these people will be one half of a two income family, is a really nice standard of living compared to most of the world. Collectively the earn roughly $4.522 trillion per year or about 27% GDP. \n\nSo this chart is flawed in that the data is over three years old and it doesn't even capture information for the top 7% of earners. But it serves to illustrate that the bottom 93% of the population combined captures less than 37% of GDP in the United States. Remember that all of these numbers are very loose and weighted towards the higher end of the spectrum for someone with access to more detailed information these numbers would inevitably come out lower.\n\nAnd it doesn't get better at the higher end of the spectrum. The gulf between the earnings of those who make more than 99.9% of other people and the top most .01% is actually much larger than a person in the bottom 1% and someone who earns $100,000 (more than 93% of other people). \n\nSo why is this? How did it happen? What on earth is going on in the United States of America, land of the free home of the brave?!? Nothing, the system is working as it was intended to. Capitalism has a long and lustrous history; I would argue modern capitalism developed out of mercantilism in the Netherlands between the 16th and 18th centuries but it can be argued that all of the imperialistic governments of that era contributed to modern economics. \n\nCapitalism works most to the advantage of those who already have money. The system is built to ensure that they can invest that money, capital, into ideas and ventures that they deem worthy and then extract income from those ventures once they have come to fruit. \n\nThere is a lot of talk about trickle down economics, progressive taxation, social welfare programs, raising the minimum wage, universal income disbursements and many other ways to keep the lower earning segments of the population content with taking a much smaller slice of the pie than they deserve but that is all these are; talking points. \nThis is not a Republican vs Democrat; Deeply Religious vs Socially Liberal; Racist vs Minority; Us vs Them issue these are also just talking points that are used to confuse and mislead you about where you stand in society.\n\nA systemic de facto oligarchy exists throughout the world, I'm not talking about some secret society; it has always been a fact of human nature. Before we had corporations and super rich capitalists we had industrialists, before that mercantile empires, kings, despots, tribal elders. Even in communism the antithesis of these systems a few people inevitably end up with (ruthlessly acquire) more power than all of their fellow comrades.\n\nTLDR~ It's Capitalism not Laborism; until the human race develops infinite free energy, highly advanced universal education and radically evolves its social structures there will be inequities.\n\nEdit: Just logged in after 26 days... Thanks for Gold!",
"Its the UGLY side of Capitalism. We've been here before in the the 1920's, late 1800's. It was solved in the past after WWII when America was basically the manufacturing king of the world and returning GI's (and there now working wives) along with GI Bills for education, Vibrant social programs, Unions, Corporate tax rates were high 50ish% so it didnt make sense to hoard cash and off-shoring was a dream. (It actually made more sense to invest in workers since stacking cash wasnt smart so building a bigger business was the goal)\n\nNow we're living the YANG of the YIN. The corporations have all the power and have bought our politics so they get their way. And... Of course whats good for corporations (shareholder profits) is not whats good for the bottom 90%. They want low wages, low taxes and low regulation. At this point they've basically achieved their goals to the point that people working full-time minimum wage qualify for food stamps and live at or near poverty levels.\n\nI hope this is the worst of it and the devastating results that have resulted from the corporations domination are about to rebound back to more worker pay, rights and protections. (See efforts to raise the minimum wage). I'm not too hopeful on the speed of change since you have to undo a LOT of the political damage and until the Supreme Court does something about \"Corporations are People: Citizens United\", Voter Suppression, Etc. I really cant see the way out. Hopefully we're on the rebound and things will get better instead of worse but we're a loooong way from workers having the living standards they had just 20+ years ago. I'm afraid this generation of workers (and maybe the next) will suffer effects from this period of domination of the Corporation. \n\nOther cultures that get to IE rates we have now usually overthrow the government BUT the USA is unique. We have been raised to believe in the \"American Dream\" and the ability to go from poor to rich even as that becomes harder to achieve, we as a people mostly blame ourselves for not getting ahead instead of the 'Government'. In other countries since the ruling class has so much power over the people they DIRECTLY blame the government for their situation, in the USA we mostly take the blame so we've put up with higher levels of IE. We should be at the limits though since IE is getting pretty painful and revolt is starting to simmer. (\"Occupy\" and similar movements)",
"A big reason is capitalism. A capitalist system rewards those who are ambitious and successful, while punishing those who are not. I'm not saying capitalism is bad. I love capitalism, but income inequality is a side-effect. Plain and simple. \n\nAlso, it's important to remember that there simply is not, and never will be, good jobs available for every single American. Someone has to clean bathrooms. Someone has to prepare food. It'd be nice if we could all have six figure jobs, but it's not realistic at all. There are way too many people here. \n\nThe educational system plays a role in this as well. Think of the American South. It is home to the largest percentage of uneducated, or undereducated, people in the country. The schools in the South are, on average, not as good as the schools in other parts of the country, and fewer people pursue higher education in the South due largely to the cost of it. It's a viscous cycle. \n\nTL;DR: Capitalism, demand and population, education. ",
"While I enjoy the well thought out responses, I think it breaks down into even simpler terms. You have a nation full of morons who buy the shit that spews out of the ruling classes mouths because they are blinded by their stupid ideology and or religious bullshit (hatred for those jews, faggots, niggers, spics, etc...) and then, you have another large group who like to think of themselves as the \"silent majority\"...which really translates to a bunch of cow-down pussies who don't have the balls to band together and start dragging these fuckers out of their mansions and towers of glass into the streets and presented with a simple choice. A. you knock your shit off right now...or B. die. Just my opinion. ",
"We have the modern republican party, that convinces millions of idiots that the 1% gives a screaming shit about them. Bill Clinton balanced the federal budget by taxing the 1% at a higher rate- that is all it took. Get the fuck up, wait in line, and vote. ",
"Because we don't get to kill poor people for sport."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism"
],
[],
[
"http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_great_divergence/features/2010/the_united_states_of_inequality/introducing_the_great_divergence.html"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2vrwjh | why will a dog eat any thing you put in front of it but a cat isn't interested in at all | Do cats not have the same instinctual desire to survive by eating anything at all costs?
I recognize this doesn't apply to all dogs/cats, just generally speaking... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vrwjh/eli5_why_will_a_dog_eat_any_thing_you_put_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cokdd1j",
"cokjjwf"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure why, but I used to have a cat named Simba. He was orange and playful and liked to sleep in the weirdest positions. His name was a little cliche, but he was a great man. \n\nAnyways, one day I gave him a french fry, best day of my life. He looked at it, looked at me, then preceded to beat the fuck out of that french fry for about the next hour. I don't think he even tasted it, just would sink his claws into it and hurl it across the room.",
"\"Eating anything\" isn't necessarily a good idea in terms of survival.\n\nAnimals eat anything that appeals to their senses. What seems appealing to a dog might be kinda \"meh\" to a cat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9koi87 | what exactly is alcohol? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9koi87/eli5_what_exactly_is_alcohol/ | {
"a_id": [
"e70ltbb",
"e70q9sq"
],
"score": [
8,
5
],
"text": [
"The substance commonly known as alcohol is an organic compound structurally similar to ethane except for having one hydrogen replace with an OH group. \n\nIt's also the second-most energy dense substance that the human body can reliably metabolize, an organic solvent, and an intoxicant. \n\nIn chemistry, an alcohol is any such organic molecule where the most significant feature is an OH group. This includes methanol, propanol, etc.",
"In everyday speech alcohol is ethyl alcohol - or ethanol. Two carbon atoms with hydrogens, and a -OH hydroxyl group at the end: CH₃−CH₂−OH (the first carbon has three hydrogen atoms connected to it, second has two and the OH group)\n\nIn chemistry alcohols are the group of organic molecules that have one or more hydroxyl groups in them. These have varying physical, chemical and physiological properties (many of them toxic, some not, and only some get you drunk).\n\nThe most common for us is the ethanol which we drink. Related is methanol which has similar physiological properties, but is also toxic. Methanol or methyl alcohol has only one carbon atom: CH₃−OH\n\nAs you add more carbon atoms in a chain you get other \"primary\" alcohols which are used as industrial solvents or raw materials for chemical reactions: propanol (CH₃−CH₂−CH₂−OH), butanol (CH₃−CH₂−CH₂−CH₂−OH), pentanol, etc.\n\nThey are called primary alcohols because they are built from the basic carbon chain molecules: methane (CH₄), ethane (CH₃−CH₃), propane (CH₃−CH₂−CH₃), butane (CH₃−CH₂−CH₂−CH₃), etc. If you add the -OH to somewhere else than the end, you get the \"iso\" version, eg. isopropanol has the -OH group hanging on the middle carbon: CH₃−CHOH−CH₃\n\nNow, you can also add the -OH hydroxyl group to other organic molecules than just straight carbon chains. This is how you get, for instance, sugar alcohols: xylitol, sorbitol, maltitol. These are sugars with the double bonded oxygen at the end replaced with an extra hydrogen and a hydroxyl group. They will not get you drunk, but the body metabolizes them differently which is why they're used as sugar substitutes for diabetics.\n\nAdd a hydroxyl group to a hexane ring and you get cyclohexanol (which is used as raw material to manufacture plastics, like nylon). Even very complex molecule like cholesterol is chemically an alcohol, because it has the hydroxyl functional group at one end. Generally, if the molecule's name ends in -ol it's chemically an alcohol.\n\n & #x200B;"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2zoiko | how come in an eclipse, it appears you can see stars through the moon? example below | _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zoiko/eli5_how_come_in_an_eclipse_it_appears_you_can/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpku1p9",
"cpl1n59"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"That picture looks pretty heavily edited/processed. Whether it was caused by the filter or intentionally overlaying a star field onto the moon, this looks like the result of editing, not a natural phenomenon.\n\nThen again, I would be interested in hearing how this could happen naturally.",
"Those are image artifacts, most likely due to over-processing of the image (or maybe just bad pixels on the camera). I've photographed many total eclipses, no such thing happens in reality.\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://imgur.com/CeFh5jY"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1izobd | why is it that you can blow bubbles in milk, soapy water, etc. with a straw, but not in regular water? | I've always wondered this. Does it have to do with cohesiveness? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1izobd/why_is_it_that_you_can_blow_bubbles_in_milk_soapy/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb9m6by"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Milk has fats in it that increase the surface tension. Soap is effectively fats that increase the surface tension. \n\nYou can blow bubbles in regular water with a straw, they just don't get to a large size and don't last very long. The purer the water, the easier it is to do. But, again — small and not very long lived."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
48y4ol | why are people from the southern states (us) perceived as less educated than their northern counterparts? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48y4ol/eli5_why_are_people_from_the_southern_states_us/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0ni9mo",
"d0nim2q",
"d0njlrd",
"d0nkguf",
"d0nkmjx",
"d0ns4di",
"d0ns6q9",
"d0nubiz",
"d0nv3r7",
"d0nvrfk",
"d0nvxe6",
"d0nwert",
"d0nwm75",
"d0nwpxp",
"d0ny2ft",
"d0ny5vj",
"d0ny7n6",
"d0nyh64",
"d0nz85z",
"d0nzau7",
"d0nzgfz",
"d0nzrye"
],
"score": [
25,
8,
60,
1000,
33,
24,
162,
19,
5,
11,
6,
6,
5,
3,
2,
3,
4,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A long time ago, when even before America became a country, the early states had to work somewhat together to stay alive. Because of this, everyone has their role. For the south, their great soil quality and weather made them into the farming states.\n\nSo, you have the northern parts with urban centers, trade from all over the world, higher education, and so on, and the southern states are left to be the supplier of cotton, tobacco, and wheat. The downside to this, is most people were isolated from each other/the world, and did not have the same opportunities as the northerners. \n\nAdd this onto the Civil War (which was primarily about the strength of the southern economy) and the spread of fundamentalist Christianity, the reputation stuck with them, even though its mostly untrue and irrelevant now",
"Also, the school systems are much worse in the south in general... in large part due to integration. When the South could no longer have separate but \"equal\" schools for blacks and whites, but instead move to unified schools what happened is that the whites who could afford to pulled their kids out of the public schools and put them into private schools. Those kids who remained in the public school system were the poor white kids and the black kids, and the government officials in power cut funding to these public schools.",
"For a long time, the South had many many rural areas that didn't have as much access to education as the more populated northern areas. \n\nSo while the North had a relatively consistent exposure to the rules of English language, the South did not. So while it was literally true that many from the South were uneducated, it fed into a false stereo type that they were unintelligent because to northerners \"they talk funny\". ",
"Southern states are perceived as less educated because they *are* less educated. \n\n[Eight out of the lowest ten states by percentage of population having a high school degree are in the South.](_URL_1_)*\n\n[Seven out of the lowest ten states by percentage of population having a bachelor's degree are in the South.](_URL_1_) \n\n[Five out of the lowest ten states by percentage of population having an advanced degree are in the South.](_URL_1_) \n\nBesides being less educated, the quality of education in the South is generally poorer than the rest of the country. States in the South are disproportionately low in [this recent ranking](_URL_0_), based upon student-to-teacher ratios, standardized test scores, dropout rates, etc. \n\n*The \"South\" is defined here as Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas.\n\nedit: for the many people I upset by not including Virginia... it was absent-mindedness that caused that mistake. However -as another commenter pointed out in better detail below- Virginia is a bit strange in that NoVa is very much Northern, culturally. I don't think it changes any of my lists above, either way. ",
"While I don't have an answer as to WHY, I did go through this first hand. The first half of my freshman year of high school (1999) was at a well funded city school in New Mexico (as was all my schooling up to this point). Now at the high school I went to we had the same classes all year long, 8 periods, and we alternated days. All 8 classes on Monday (short quick day) then even classes on Tuesday and Thursday and the odds on Wednesday and Friday.\n\nThe Christmas of 1999 I moved to a small town in east Tennessee, and went to a county school. At this count school they only did 4 classes per semester, and over Christmas break you would be changed to 4 new classes. The entire second half of my freshman year (and most of the first half of my Sophomore year) was a refresher for what I had only learned in HALF a year at my previous school.\n\nNeedless to say it was pathetic, and even as a student I felt sorry for the other students who seemed to be put at a disadvantage right from the start and never knew any different.",
"Being born and raised in the South, I've heard this my whole life. It really gets old. Basically, I'm stupid because I don't know as much about what northerners think is important. I don't care much about the economy other than how my 401k is affected because I don't work in that field. I'm not going to talk politics because it's an inherently controversial topic. I don't care about computers even though I know there is money in the IT and programming world. We have our interests, northerners have theirs. To quote the best movie in the world, \"When you tell somebody somethin', it depends on what part of the country you're standin' in... as to just how dumb you are.\" My hometown in Huntsville, Alabama has a ton of Ph.D's in it that work for NASA and DOD. I'm a nuclear engineer. Those things don't make me or my home town smart, just qualified. On the other hand I have a friend from New York move down to the South and guys we work with have him crap for not knowing anything about working on his car. It's because his family never owned one; his family right in the middle of the city. He wasn't stupid at all, just different experiences. \n\nEdit: it goes both ways. Just get along and quit thinking you're better than anyone else.",
"A major factor that no one is mentioning is the South is the Bible Belt. My parents were born and raised in Arkansas. I was raised in Southern California. Comments from both parents when I would answer what I learned in high school that day: \"Your head is getting so big it's going to explode.\" \"My son is so bright we have to put a bucket over his head so the sun will rise.\" And so forth. \n\nVacationing in Arkansas in the summers of the 60s, all of my cousins were enrolled in Bible Camp for the summer. My peers in California were travelling, playing, or enrolled in summer school.\n\nA few months ago, I had a brief phone conversation with a cousin in Arkansas and the call finished with her saying, \"Well, as long as you found the Lord, that's the most important thing.\"\n\nThe people in the South are no more stupid than the people in other parts of the world. But they're programmed away from really valuing rational thought in favor of thinking the 'right' things without questioning them. This is the South's biggest handicap. This IMHO is why they are less educated.",
"I live in south louisiana about 20min from the coast. I'm a high school graduate who did a semester of college then started working in the oilfield. Thing is the blue collar job opportunities are endless down here and as a 18 year old who didn't have money for school I couldn't pass up a job starting out at 15/hour (no experience needed) with overtime ranging from 50-80 hour work weeks. Not to mention the amount of people here compared to a big city. I graduated high school with a class of 43 people, 500 students from 6th grade to 12th grade. The teachers were slim pickings not to mention the lack of electives and other classes that my school straight up didn't have such as any kind of art classes, no calculus or trig. Btw this was recent I only graduated in 2011.\n\nTldr: a lot of blue collar no experience needed jobs and schools that didn't prepare students for college.",
"This was the link right above this one in my Reddit list:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThere's your answer.\n\nThere are a lot of well-educated people in the South. It's just that there are also a lot of religious people who are *mis*-educated, like creationists, and these mis-educated people actually run things and hold elected office, leading a generalizing person to conclude that the voters are also not well-educated.",
"According to the author of this book:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe bulk of white southerners can trace their ancestry to a region of England where the people were: Very religious, sexually promiscuous, prone to violence and under-valued education.\n\nHe mainly discusses how this affected black culture in the US since black and southern cultures are closely aligned but he also mentions that until the big diaspora of black southerners to the rest of the US, black northerners routinely outscored not only black southerners on school tests but also white southerners.",
"Grab this [Census Bureau PDF](_URL_0_)\n\nOn page 2, look at the state maps for high school completion in 1950 and 2000. The southern states had a much higher rate of failure to complete high school than the rest of the country in 1950. Things improved by 2000, but the highest completion rates remain in the northern half of the country.\n\nPage 3 has college completion maps which are murkier, but still show a gap.\n",
"The blue collar comedy tour.\n\nBut honestly it's because the businesses tend to be based in New York or at least New England, and the farm/ag work is based in the south. Business is supposed to require 'business sense' and farming is supposed to require 'common sense' in a manner of speaking.\n\nThe south tends to be more hard-headed, sometimes to a point of absurdity.\n\nBut being a north eastern USA citizen, I can say with some confidence that we generally consider ourselves smarter than everyone else. The midwest, and especially the southwest, any Canada border state west of the Great lakes, and of course Canada itself, as well as Mexico... Maybe it's just because there are so many of us who shit on every other part of the world, we give the idea that we're actually right.\n\n...Goddamn, there's no way to say any of that without sounding like a huge douche. \n\nP.S: New Jersey, we're sorry we keep making fun of you for living in the garbage state < 3",
"I've lived in the south for all of my life and for me it's not that we are less educated it's that southern people seem to take pride in their ignorance. It's embarrassing for sure but it's true. ",
"I'd like to add that I think there's a bit of a brain drain away from the South. Highly educated people often find the north more welcoming economically and culturally. ",
"The south just spends less money on Primary education so it's lower quality. \nAt one point my county had a vote to raise the property tax from the minimum allowed by the state government so that they could expand a school that 1,400 students in a school designed for 900 because the city was growing and it only got 32% of the vote. People don't want to pay higher taxes for better schools so the elementary/high schools are poor.\nAlso there are more opportunities for blue collar jobs in the south than the North. ",
"In addition to the other responses there is also probably some bias in people's perceptions of southerners based on their speech patterns. \n\nThis may be a stereotype related to all the other differences people have pointed out, but at this point as a generalization, a southern accent tends to make the speaker seem more folksy, down-to-earth and yes, less educated. \n\nThere is clearly nothing wrong with a southern accent, and no direct link I just think that there is this perceptual bias\n",
"Historically, because the New England colonies were colonized by fanatically well-read religious dissenters (surprising numbers of whom had graduated from Cambridge University) who insisted that everyone should read the Bible and mandated universal education in every town for that purpose, whereas the Southern colonies were colonized by prisoners, debtors, and vagrants who sold themselves into indentured servitude. (The Mid-Atlantic states were somewhere in between.)\n\nMore recently, because the average IQ is much higher in the North than in the South. Virginia is highest-ranked \"southern\" state, at #16. However, the Southwest does much worse than the South proper, so take it with a grain of salt.\n\n1. Massachusetts: 104.3\n\n2. New Hampshire: 104.2\n\n3. North Dakota: 103.8\n\n4. Vermont: 103.8\n\n5. Minnesota: 103.7\n\n6. Maine: 103.4\n\n7. Montana: 103.4\n\n8. Iowa: 103.2\n\n9. Connecticut: 103.1\n\n10. Wisconsin: 102.9\n\n11. Kansas: 102.8\n\n12. New Jersey: 102.8\n\n13. South Dakota: 102.8\n\n14. Wyoming: 102.4\n\n15. Nebraska: 102.3\n\n16. Virginia: 101.9\n\n17. Washington: 101.9\n\n18. Ohio: 101.8\n\n19. Indiana: 101.7\n\n20. Colorado: 101.6\n\n21. Pennsylvania: 101.5\n\n22. Idaho: 101.4\n\n23. Oregon: 101.2\n\n24. Utah: 101.1\n\n25. Missouri: 101\n\n26. New York: 100.7\n\n27. Michigan: 100.5\n\n28. Delaware: 100.4\n\n29. N. Carolina: 100.2\n\n30. Texas: 100\n\n31. Illinois: 99.9\n\n32. Maryland: 99.7\n\n33. Rhode Island: 99.5\n\n34. Kentucky: 99.4\n\n35. Oklahoma: 99.3\n\n36. Alaska: 99\n\n37. W. Virginia: 98.7\n\n38. Florida: 98.4\n\n39. S. Carolina: 98.4\n\n40. Georgia: 98\n\n41. Tennessee: 97.7\n\n42. Arkansas: 97.5\n\n43. Arizona: 97.4\n\n44. Nevada: 96.5\n\n45. Alabama: 95.7\n\n46. New Mexico: 95.7\n\n47. Hawaii: 95.6\n\n48. California: 95.5\n\n49. Louisiana: 95.3\n\n50. Mississippi: 94.2",
"Many reasons. One is they are actually less educated.\n\n[Here is government spending on education per student by state\n](_URL_0_)\n\nAs you can see, the North Eastern states like New Jersey, New York, and Vermont (Which were originally the Northern states) have considerably higher spending that the South Eastern states like Georgia, Florida, and Alabama (Which were originally the Southern states).\n\nNext, it's the accent. Southern people tend to speak in such a way that does not adhere to standard rules of the language, whereas the General American generally does. For instance, southerners tend say words such as \"aint\", and \"yall\", while northerners would say \"am/is/are not\", and \"all of you\", and less commonly \"you all\", or a plural \"you\". Just tiny things like that won't sound weird to southerners, but has a connotation of stupidity elsewhere in the country.",
"Because they vote for people who are not educated - like the woman who states that Obama was a male prostitute.\n\nThese are the folks who are put up to represent what they believe.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Because, sadly, they are.\n\nThey don't spend as much on education, which hurts. And listen to their politicians- they are more concerned with teaching creationism than factual science. ",
"Because they are less educated. Millions of charts on this fact. Try explaining this to a Texan, tho.",
"[Because of stuff like this](_URL_0_)\n\nIn all seriousness, it's mostly just that - perception. There is a spectrum of smart and dumb people in every place. Southern states are just culturally known for, and have a larger number of, suburban areas where higher education isn't as vital to get through life, hence the reduced municipal budget/emphasis on it.\n\nBy comparison, northern states have higher number of large(r) urban areas, which place more emphasis on and encourage higher (i.e. college/university) education because it is in many cases vital to success due to increased population density, which means increased competition."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-the-best-schools/5335/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_educational_attainment"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2016/03/obama_gay_prostitute_textbook.html"
],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457129505&sr=8-1&keywords=black+rednecks"
],
[
"https://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/censusatlas/pdf/10_Education.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2012/06/pm-studentspending/gr-pm-pupilspending-462.gif"
],
[
"http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2016/03/obama_gay_prostitute_textbook.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2016/03/obama_gay_prostitute_textbook.html"
]
] |
||
3fx0w6 | why are space pictures taken three times in black & white with 3 different filters instead of a single time with a color sensor? | I saw the [picture of the moon transiting Earth](_URL_0_) and the black artifact on the right side that was the result of taking three different B & W pictures one after another with three different filters.
Why aren't picture taken in color in one single shot?
This was an issue with Pluto as well: the pictures we received from New Horizons are without one of the three filters so the colors are not exactly natural since one of the three primary colors has to be guessed. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fx0w6/eli5_why_are_space_pictures_taken_three_times_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctsq405",
"ctsq72n",
"ctsq9im",
"ctsqfke",
"ctsqhde"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If you're going to do color all in one shot, then your sensor needs to have pixels dedicated to each individual color. Say your sensor is 1000 pixels across. If you're going to do full color, then you have to divide those pixels up, and so you only get 333 of each color. So you're really only getting 1/3 of that 1000 pixels resolution.\n\nBut if you use pixels that work with any color and then just put filters over it, then you get that full 1000 pixel resolution for each color, and then you can combine them afterwards and get a better image. ",
"If you take 3 pictures then you can have every single pixel on the CCD (the part of a digital camera that actually records light hitting it) used for each pixel. If you have 3 million pixels on the CCD then you get a color picture with 3 million pixels.\n\nIf you take one picture but you've designed a camera the same size to take pictures in color then you get 1 million red pixels, 1 million blue, and 1 million green. Each red/green/blue triplet goes into making one color pixel, so you only have a 1 million pixel picture out of the same camera.\n\nTo make things worse, a lot of the time you want to look at light that is in a different section of the spectrum. Visible light pictures are great for public relations, but if you want to look at the structure of the surface of a planet then perhaps the near IR range of light is better suited for showing contrast. The approach of using filters and a neutral camera makes it so that you can easily take pictures across a wide range of colors. Curiosity, for example, uses a wheel of 8 different filters that allow it to take pictures in a wide range of the spectrum. ",
"Weight, complexity, and practicality.\n\nWhat they do is use a single sensor and multiple filters for different wavelengths. As you might expect, a single sensor can be made to higher quality, weigh less, need less space, cost less, and have less to go wrong. A single sensor that \"sees\" all wavelengths would be larger, heavier, or lower resolution (or all of the above) as well as being more complex and therefore more expensive and more likely to malfunction.\n\nLooking at your moon example, that was taken by DSCOVR, which has 10 channels allowing it to see everything from Infrared to Ultraviolet.",
"Imagine you are picking apples from an orchard that has three different types of apples growing in the same area. When you pick the apples, you have to make sure you separate them based on their type. Let's also say that the different types of apples should not be in contact with each other due to some allergy/religious food restriction.\n\nOne way of doing this is to carry three small buckets, one for each apple type. However, the apple trees produces varying amounts of apples. There are times when one bucket fills up and you can't put any more apples in one bucket (saturation). Then you have to either return to unload the buckets or only gather the other two types. This is how a color sensor works. It actually uses multiple smaller sensors to detect specific colors for a single pixel.\n\nThe other way of gathering apples is to use one large bucket and only gather one type of apple at a time, rinsing and cleaning the bucket after unloading them. This allows you to collect a large number of apples without filling up your bucket quickly (large sensor area) but requires you to go on multiple trips (different filters). This is how a monochrome sensor works by having a much larger single sensor per pixel. A larger sensor can gather more photons and therefore is more sensitive than a smaller sensor.",
"Well, the thing is, the color camera's we make are actually colorblind, as in they can't see color at all. So every digital camera works with filters.\n\nHowever, in most consumer camera's, this is done by placing an individual filter over every pixel, to prevent these color artefacts. It does however mean that every pixel can only ever see one color.\n\nDSCOVR has 10 different channels, so that method would result in a serious damage in picture quality. An alternate solution is to split the incoming light, but that requires multiple camera assembles which would be too heavy.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/3fvoqj/nasa_camera_captures_moon_crossing_face_of_earth/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1ouv0d | why do churches so often use a number in their name, e.g. "first [denomination] church"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ouv0d/eli5_why_do_churches_so_often_use_a_number_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccvvre7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The numbers are the order that the churches were created in your area.\n\nExcept for Baptists, first and second Baptists are split over disagreements in how they follow the bible."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
99nia5 | ovulation, and it’s relation to conception | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/99nia5/eli5_ovulation_and_its_relation_to_conception/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4ozuyi"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Ovulation is the biological process of releasing an egg from an ovary (or multiple eggs, leading to fraternal twins potentially). This is \"timed\" with the building up of the uterine lining which is where a fertilized egg will lodge and growth of the fetus will begin.\n\nThere is typically a window of time after ovulation and before menses (the women's period) where the egg can be fertilized such that it will be lodge and beging gestation. \n\nWe generally say \"a women is ovulating\" during this period of time, even though it sounds morel like the specific moment the egg is expunged from the ovary. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2h3mhy | why when i hear a puppy / dog whine i instinctively want to check on it, but when i hear a baby cry i get annoyed and want it to shut up? | Btw, I'm a human not a dog. So why am I more willing to tend to a crying dog than a crying babu? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2h3mhy/eli5_why_when_i_hear_a_puppy_dog_whine_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckp328l",
"ckp32il",
"ckp3a39",
"ckp3hti",
"ckp3kys",
"ckpaph9",
"ckpoa2s"
],
"score": [
9,
55,
11,
5,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I can't give you a good answer but I am the same way. Babies crying give me a \"kill it with fire\" reaction.",
"* Dogs crying are usually quieter than babies.\n* Dogs problems are easier to solve than babies.\n* Dogs are cuter than babies.\n* Babies cry over the stupidest shit.",
"Babies cries are intentionally annoying so you'll go see what it needs in order to shut it up.",
"Because dogs > most people. Unfortunate truth of existence.",
"Maybe we think there could be danger nearby? Babies can only shit and drool. Dogs will make noise when strangers are around. Peaks our interest too ",
"For part I, apparently you care about dogs. \nPart II is your primitive brain fucking with you. [Source](_URL_0_)",
"You have symptoms of being a prick. Talk to your doctor."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/oct/17/crying-babies-hard-ignore"
],
[]
] |
|
20xug2 | one big bang, or were there many? | I've wondered many times if the Big Ban is actually a cyclic event that consists of repeating itself. I've thought of this in a metaphysical way. [This scientific article](_URL_0_), a bit old now, also defends the possibility of the existence of previous Big Bans.
Assuming that all this is true and that this last Big Ban was neither the first nor will be the last one, **is there a way of knowing the number of Big Bangs that have occurred?** Or for that matter, how long will it take until the next Big Bang? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20xug2/eli5_one_big_bang_or_were_there_many/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg7qqd0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The most important thing to know is that there is no way to know what came \"before\" the Big Bang, if anything. The reason is that all information contained in the matter and energy would have been destroyed in the superdense state that was the start of the Big Bang. It's entirely possible that it's a cycle, and the Big Crunch theory seems to (at least partially) support this. If it has happened many times, it's also possible that the laws of physics were different in every iteration.\n\nTL;DR: It's possible that many cycles have occurred, but there is absolutely no way to know."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/may/05/spaceexploration.universe"
] | [
[]
] |
|
4b99im | what makes my extension cord crackled when something is plugged in it | Sometimes my extension cord would make this static crackly sound and I have to end up unplugging it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4b99im/eli5_what_makes_my_extension_cord_crackled_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"d173f39",
"d178wm3"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"This certainly sounds like a defective cord, with a loose connection or a partly broken wire. These can start a fire. Stop using it immediately -- unplug it, cut it up, and throw it away.",
"The crackling sound is called \"arcing\". When you have a loose connection, the electricity will sometimes try and jump the gap between the two sections of the wire that have become separated. This is just light lightning but on a smaller scale.\n\nThe problem is that causes the wires to heat up which can lead them to melting or burning. If they melt they can cause a short circuit which just makes the problem much worse.\n\nAs the other reply said, this is very dangerous and that cord should be made un-usable and thrown away. \n\nCut the male connector off first, that way no one finds the cord and plugs the male side in with opposed wires on the other side."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3ofu39 | how do military officials decide on what cities/locations to attack or defend? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ofu39/eli5_how_do_military_officials_decide_on_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvwtaj6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"In Military theory tends to be split up into Tactics, Operations and Strategy. \nTactics are how you act on the battlefield, Operations are how you make sure can win battles and Strategy is how you win a war. \nStrategy is big picture, it focuses on not just troops, but the things that allow those troops to keep fighting. You could have the best tanks and tank commander, but they are useless if you can't get them fuel, food and ammo. \nThe choice of target is often dictated by strategic considerations. \nCities are usually of high strategic value. Cities tend to be where things needed to win a war are made or transported. If the city isn't really involved in critical components of the war effort, then it might be abandoned if push really came to shove. \nOther locations are chose because they are easy to defend. Terrain might constrain how the enemy can move or what things he can bring to bear. Now on it's own this means the enemy would not choose it as a target, but if the place is in the way of a target the enemy does want to attack (see above) or the place can be made almost worth attacking (like storing ammo or routing commands), then it makes sense to fortify it, since the enemy might commit more force to assault than you spend defending. \nFinally there is morale considerations. Some cities are more than just place they are symbols. Case in point, Stalingrad was decently important strategically, but it was the symbolism of Stalin's name that really really made it a take/defend or die situation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4d6emf | why is clothing that used to be only for men becoming unisex, while feminine clothing isn't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d6emf/eli5_why_is_clothing_that_used_to_be_only_for_men/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1o3vb7",
"d1o3xuh",
"d1o3ywt",
"d1o41s6",
"d1o48o9",
"d1o49te"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" The idea of unisex clothing is fairly recent. It came along about the same time that women were demanding to be treated equally to men, who historically had more rights in society. So you had millions of women saying: please treat me the way you treat men. It was an obvious thing to try dressing a little bit more like men. \n\n By contrast, under the same circumstances, if a man had dressed in a traditionally female way this would be like saying: please don't take me as seriously as you take other men. In fact, almost the only men who would put on women's style clothing in public were comedians trying to be silly. ",
"Fashion, and what drives it, are a bit random. You never know what's going to be fashionable, or socially acceptable, next. \n\nThat said, some women's clothes not only accentuate the female form, they pretty much *rely* on it. Skirts and dresses, for example, really need you to have a waist and hips, otherwise they just look terrible (trust me, I've tr... uh, I have a friend who's tried). \n\nHowever, if you look a little more closely, you'll see that there *are* women's trends that made it to make fashion. Long hair, for one - it wasn't that long ago that long-haired men would get looks. It is also now acceptable for men to wear what used to be feminine colours, like pink. \n\nBut the bottom line here is that fashion is fairly random. ",
"Women starting wearing trousers during the world wars when working in the factories and this became a symbol of women's liberation and empowerment. After a few decades past it simply became normal. There hasn't been a reason for men to break with gendered clothes and so doing so is considered deviant.\n\nPlus, men's clothes are often more practical than women's clothes.",
"I would say that its, in part, because of the feminist movement at the end of last century.\n\nI think women fought for the right to as they say empower themselves and be accepted doing male things. However men never really had a movement to be accepted as being able to have female traits and men changing is taking a lot longer. \n\nMany modern feminists push for men to express more typically feminine traits such as go into typically female positions for example florists and nurses or to take on female roles such as caring for children etc.\n\nThe lack of men adopting female clothing is just an extension of this. Women generally accept male clothing because they often saw it as a way of showing that they were a feminist however men never really went through that.\n",
"Honestly this is an incredibly complicated question that has to do with cultural gender constructs, gender performativity, and a ton of other factors. \n\nAlso, what clothing is appropriate for who is an a constant state of flux. For example, high heels used to be a masculine item of clothing- it made riding easier (you can hook into your stirrups and not fall off if you let go of the reins to hunt or fight) and they make your calves look excellent (which was considered an important marker of desirability, probably because it signaled you were a good rider. Women started wearing heels later. \n\nThat being said, you can probably simplify down to two main reasons.\n\n1) Women's clothing is generally more impractical than men's. High heels are uncomfortable and difficult to walk in (especially modern spiked heels). Contemporary women's clothing also often doesn't have things like useable pockets.\n\n2) Societally, there's a lot going on here, but to vastly oversimplify, we expect everyone to want to be like a man, \"why wouldn't they want to look like a man? being a man is awesome!\" But we don't expect men to want to be like a woman, having traits that are seen as lesser or undesirable.",
"something that hasn't been mentioned yet: a lot of typical female clothing was designed to restrict movement and physical freedom if you look at some of the extremes of fashion ... not to mention how uncomfortable and dangerous a chain mail bikini would actually be ... but form-fitting skirts, tight corsets, spike heels, bustles, masses of hair, low cut necklines that barely contain the bustline -- how fast could a woman move away from an attacker? Especially when women were property? Why would anyone who wasn't conditioned to accept the restrictions want to mimic that powerlessness?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
fdmaom | how does abductive easoning work? | I’m familiar with inductive and deductive logic, but new to abductive. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fdmaom/eli5_how_does_abductive_easoning_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"fjigvt9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's essentially reasoning to the best explanation based on limited information. Whereas deduction gives conclusions of the form *b* iff *a* and induction gives *a* if *b* for all available information, but not strictly *all* information possible (and so under available information *a* is a necessary condition for *b*), abduction gives a form *a* if *b* like induction, but in which the inferred *a* is not a necessary condition for *b*, just one possible explanation.\n\nTechnically abduction is a formal fallacy (*post hoc ergo propter hoc*), but nonetheless renders practical outputs -- abduction is how you might reason based on expert knowledge and one or two incomplete data, for example; this *can* find true *a* iff *b* deductive forms of logical statements, but the veracity of such is unverifiable under the information from which this is abduced. \n\n\nSo for example, I know some things about politics. I observe Voter i, whom I know to be middle-class, white, and moderately educated, vote Republican. From this information my *best guess* as to i's political ideology on a liberal-conservative spectrum would be that i is at least *not liberal-leaning* because I know of many studies that would suggest this is the case. However, I cannot rule out the possibility that Voter i simply voted Republican by mistake, or because it was raining, or any if various other explanations. I might be right (and my conclusion is quite weak anyway), but without additional information I cannot even express much confidence about whether my reasoning is likely to be correct."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7iyvs7 | why don’t we eat turkey eggs? i mean chicken coops produce quite a few eggs. i imagine that turkey farms would also create thousands of eggs that could be sold. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7iyvs7/eli5_why_dont_we_eat_turkey_eggs_i_mean_chicken/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr2f9bf",
"dr2fbc7",
"dr2frms",
"dr2gd8g",
"dr2nmlq"
],
"score": [
7,
8,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Turkeys are more expensive to raise than chickens, and lay fewer eggs. This would mean their eggs would have to be much more expensive than chicken eggs, and consumers would be unlikely to buy them.",
"Economics. The only turkeys that are kept long enough to lay are producing hatching eggs for meat birds. Turkey hatching eggs are worth a couple bucks a piece so a dozen of them would cost $25.",
"They lay fewer eggs in a clutch and lay them less often. With the demand that we have for turkey meat this means that these lower egg yields have to be prioritized for fertilized eggs. But you can find turkey eggs in some specialty markets, and farmers markets. If you live near a farm that raises them you can often go and get the eggs there too. \n\nA lot of eggs are available in specialty markets: Quail, Duck, Goose, Turkey. Even Emu and Ostrich can be obtained in some regions (though the end of the Ostrich meat fad in the late 90s has reduced availability). ",
"The type of turkey we raise for meat is also very hard to keep alive for more than a year as they get so large that their hearts cannot support them and their joints break down. The heritage type turkeys that can live a long time only lay for a short period of the year.",
"Turkeys are not nearly as easy to keep as chickens and they don't do as well in confined spaces (such as battery cages like we keep hens in for laying). They eat far too much and lay fewer eggs than chickens. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2aoit7 | why doesn't reddit ban overtly racist subreddits dedicated to hate speech or the pedo subreddits? | For example, /r/detoilet /r/greatapes and a bunch of subreddits completely dedicated to racism. Doesn't this just attract a bunch of racists who pollute up the rest of Reddit? Why does Reddit want their traffic? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aoit7/eli5_why_doesnt_reddit_ban_overtly_racist/ | {
"a_id": [
"cix6vg3",
"cix72y3",
"cix8db3",
"cix92ml"
],
"score": [
2,
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because racism, whether you like it or not, is perfectly legal. Reddit doesn't pick and choose which subreddits they allow or disallow, which is the key to Reddit's success and popularity in the first place.\n\nReddit *does*, however, ban any subreddits with pedophilia content, since that is *not* legal and poses a huge legal liability to Reddit itself. ",
"I think one of the basic principles behind reddit is the minimal level of admin involvement. The idea that you can make a sub for damn near anything is the whole point. \n\nBlatant, trollish racist posts tend to get downvoted into oblivion in normal subs. People with a history of posting on them will have even somewhat innocuous comments with the slightest hint of crimethink downvoted and people will reply pointing out the user's association with such socially banned groups.\n\nWhile reddit is not the government and the 1st amendment doesn't apply to them, there is a grand tradition in the US and especially on the internet of allowing people to say pretty much whatever they please as long as they're not engaging in serious incitement to violence or criminal conspiracy. Here we've got the voting system so the community can raise or lower the volume of such voices as a group.\n\nThere's certainly a slippery slope argument to be made (no, I don't care that wikipedia says it's sometimes a fallacy). Once you let the SJWs ban subreddit X, do you really think they'll stop there? Always remember once you set a precedent like that, you won't always be the one deciding who gets silenced.",
"Well it looks to me that you don't want an ELI5 answer, this may be the wrong tread for you :)",
"\"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.\"\n\n-Noam Chomsky"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3uxd0k | are sweet flavoured e-liquids bad for your teeth? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uxd0k/eli5_are_sweet_flavoured_eliquids_bad_for_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxikwif"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You should have no problem with your teeth related to vaping sweet juices. Been vaping 2 years and dentist says my teeth are fine. Just brush like normal you shouldn't have any issue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xzi4a | why is belly fat so hard to lose? | Thank you for front page everybody! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xzi4a/eli5why_is_belly_fat_so_hard_to_lose/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfg0na0",
"cfg1148",
"cfg2n8w",
"cfg2wej",
"cfg3udn",
"cfg5sxw",
"cfg5y8k",
"cfg60ru",
"cfg6i0m",
"cfg7s5s",
"cfg7s9o",
"cfg85cv",
"cfg92mu",
"cfg9uau",
"cfg9usj",
"cfg9zuw",
"cfga6ix",
"cfgapyh",
"cfgast7",
"cfgbmrm",
"cfgcawr",
"cfgcigb",
"cfgcq34",
"cfgeouz",
"cfgf5gb",
"cfgfhi7",
"cfggg6j",
"cfggizq",
"cfgjjcw",
"cfglhas",
"cfgnela"
],
"score": [
2466,
145,
11,
8,
2,
3,
720,
5,
40,
7,
3,
40,
5,
2,
5,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
7,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
14,
3,
9
],
"text": [
"Your body starts storing fat around your hips, thighs & essential organs(belly area). Once these places start to get hefty, your body then moves outwards towards your arms and feet. If you are at the point where you are storing lots of fat in your arms then when you burn calories, your body will ~~take it from~~ heavily favor fat in your arms rather than your belly fat. (This has something to do with protecting and/or warming your vital organs in the event of disaster) This is why if you start an intense running program, the first place you will start to lose fat is in your arms and lower legs. Eventually, if you continue an intense running program, that weight will start to come off of shoulders and thighs. Finally, once all of the remote fat stores are depleted, your body will start using the fat around your vitals(belly).\n\nYour body stores fat using a F-I-L-O algorithm. (First In Last Out). An analogy: If you were to stack 10 papers, in order to get the first paper off of the stack, you would have to remove the top 9 papers. In other words, if you want to get at the belly fat, you have to attack your whole body mass % as a whole. It is impossible to \"Target\" belly fat. If someone told you they did a bunch of crunches and they got a flat stomach, its because of the calories they burnt, not because their stomach got amazingly strong. Having a six pack is about low body fat, not super big stomach muscles.\n\nSource: I was a PT instructor in the military and this is the methodology a PHD sports physiologist explained to me that I should use in order to fight obesity in the military(higher than civilian rate).",
"Your gut is where serotonin is made. \n\nSerotonin is a juice that makes you happy when you eat. \n\n(There are many other kinds of happy juices that are made in the body, and you make them when you are excited about doing something fun.)\n\nSo sometimes people eat a lot, to get more happy juice.\n\nBut the more food they eat, the less happy juice the body makes. \n\nSo some people eat even more food to make up for the lack of happy juice.\n\nEventually these people get fat, and all the other happy juices stop being made, because they feel badly about themselves, and nothing but food can make them happy anymore.\n\nSo these people say, \"I'm going to eat less food, and then I'll feel better!\"\n\nBut their body has other plans.\n\nThe body says, \"You're going to have a time-out until we get some fucking hot wings up in this bitch.\"\n\nAnd so you feed the body, and the body says, \"More.\"\n\nAnd then the body feels awful. It hurts. And you lie down. You sleep. You tell yourself, \"When I feel better, I'll clean the apartment.\"\n\nBut you wake up and the body says, \"More.\"\n\nAnd you say, \"No, body! You've had enough!\"\n\nAnd the body shuts down. You're on the floor. You don't want to be on the floor. You hear a whisper in your ear...\n\n\"... call Dominos, and this all goes away. You can get up and go on your way. Just one call to Dominos and you can have your life back.\"\n\nYou know he's lying. Your body is lying to you. But, you ARE your body. But it lied to me... and I believed it. You used to think you were one person. That you controlled your decisions, your emotions and your destiny. Now you have no idea. And you stress, and your happy juices drop once again, and the uncertainty of existence bears down on you like the sky made solid.\n\nAnd you make the call.",
"As people are saying, you lose fat equally over your whole body.\n\nBut to complete the answer, the reason there is more fat there to lose in the first place is that it is the area of your body needing the most protection from temperature loss. So when you gain fat, say for winter, your gut organs will receive more of the insulation than your toes, which won't kill you if they get too cold.",
"You lose fat in the opposite order that you gained it. If you gained weight in your belly, then your legs, then your arms.. when you lose weight it will be from your arms first, then your legs, then finally your belly. ",
"Basically people get fat in different ways. Theres is something called abdominal obesity (_URL_0_) and this is why some people have a seemingly impossible time losing their belly fat, even if they are able to lose weight and their other body parts are becoming more slim. \n\nEdit: the link i put was to an article about belly fat in general, a better link is this (_URL_1_) one that goes to a BBC article about the \"beer belly gene\". It goes into more detail about that \"everybody gets fat differently\" comment i made. ",
"Warning: bad english ahead\nIt's a misconception really. Many believe that all training helps burning fat. And it does, but only to some degree. If you want to burn fat, long, low-intensity training sessions is the way to go. The body will then use the fat preserves to fuel itself.\n\nSource: I'm a sport-physiological student at my 3rd year\n\nEdit: will answer questions when I get to a computer, shouldn't be to long",
"This comment might get lost in the shuffle, but this is the best way I can explain it as if you were 5. \n\nImagine your body is an ice sculpture. The first parts that melt are the thinnest parts. Arms, legs, face, ect. \n\nThe last parts that melts are the thickest=belly. \n\nApply the right amount of heat (working out), and it will all melt in time. ",
"The *how* has been pretty well covered, but, as I understand it, the ***why*** of belly fat being the last to go is rather interesting (Disclaimer: This is just something I was told or read somewhere. I have no professional expertise or advise to contribute on the topic.) \n\nThe reason that belly fat tends to stick around the longest when losing weight is an evolutionary advantage retained because that area of the body typically **moves the least** in day-to-day activities.\nThis makes sense when you think about things like walking. Your torso is pretty much the only thing that isn't swinging around. Whenever you have to swing around a lump of flesh (a.k.a. an arm or a leg), it costs energy, proportional to the amount of said flesh. \n\nSo, if you can keep the things that need to move around the most lighter, your body can save more energy.",
"We spent thousands of years trying to get it.",
"Belly fat is usually hyperplastic fat- due to increase number fat cells. Fat cells or adipocytes are immortal. They dont die and develop their own blood supply. So no matter how much you try to lose weight they will always be there. The only way to maintain your figure is to make sure to keep these fat cells small by controlling your lifestyle. The only true way to get rid of hyperplastic fat is through liporeduction surgery. Fat cells usually multiply during adolescence therefore obesity during childhood sets you upmfor obesity for a lifetime.\nOn the other hand, fat in the extremeties are usually hypertrophic fat, or just fat cells storing fat and becoming larger. Their numbers stay the same they just get bigger, so they get smaller easier with diet and excercise. \n\nLastly genetics play a large role in how much fat cells you have in your body. Of course everyone is different. You can have hyperplasia in your hips and hypertrophy in your abdominal area and vise versa. \n\nSource: did research on obesity",
"As someone who's tried going the other way - why is it so hard to gain, too?\n\n*Edit to answer my own question:* \nBasically your body has an internal set point of what it thinks is \"normal\". \n\nIf you try to change your weight to match another standard, your body can't know you're doing it on purpose and considers it a crisis. You're losing X% of your weight here! Sound the alarms!\n\nThey've done studies of obese people who've lost weight and they've found that even for long afterward, their bodies are still in a sort of panic mode, dropping their metabolism trying to get back to the \"normal\" size they're calibrated on - even to the point where they can regain weight on a diet of less energy than a person naturally their size would lose weight on. \n\nBasically, unless you can find a way to change your body's set point, you're going to have a hard time changing to a different weight or staying there unless you keep up constant vigilance, because you're literally fighting your own body to do so.",
"Belly fat is no harder to lose than any other fat. But its usually the first place your body starts storing fat. You cant target where you lose fat but generally the first places it accumulated will be the last places your body burns it from. \n\nWeight loss is pretty simple. Diet is about 90% of it and for most of us that just means eat less. You'll be miserable for like a week while your stomach shrinks back to a normal size, after that it will hurt more to eat like you did when you became fat. I didn't change my diet at all just used My Fitness Pal and counted calories, smaller portions meant it was easy to lose weight, about 3 months in I weighed myself and was down over 20lbs. The next 40 came easier. I stalled for a bit. But I'm back on now. Down to about 195. About 25lbs to my original goal. \n\nExercise is also important but I'd say it has more to do with motivation. Seeing yourself run farther faster has an odd way of showing you much more than a mirror or a scale ever could. \n\nI still have a good bit of stomach pudge but my face is much thinner and my calves are sculpted like a god. \n\n",
"Your body wants to store excess fat close to your centre of gravity (belly/thighs) so you can still hunt effectively. Just think about how hard it would be to run if your forearms and calf areas were unproportionally heavy, swinging with a lot of force.\n",
"Because you can't lose fat in one area, you lose fat everywhere or nowhere. It's just not noticeable in the stomach area unless it's a LOT that has been lost.",
"Belly fat isn't the last to go; at least not for everyone. Many women in particular have trouble losing on the thighs and ass more than the belly. Fat distribution even varies by race and ethnicity.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\n",
"No wonder why obesity is so prevalent. Even the top comment in this thread is wrong. Simply put, there is more fat stored around mid-section. Buttocks, stomach, upper legs. As you lose weight, you lost it uniformly throughout your body, but because the fact in the areas are thicker, it's harder to notice. This is why a good rule of thumb is to use the fit of clothes as a barometer of weight loss success. \n\nPersonally, I notice the loss of fat in my face (cheeks, general roundness) before anywhere else.",
"Because your belly fat (much like most of your fat) is your body's last resort of stored food, its only really supposed to be used if you are starving or in an equally dire situation. ",
"Another issue is a lot of people have bad posture and that causes their stomach to stick out and makes it appear you are fatter there than you really are. Look up \"lordosis\".",
"This article explains it as best as i've seen:\n\n_URL_0_\n\n",
"You cannot target a specific area to lose fat.",
"To make it simple, because the stomach is the first place the body deposits fat and as such is the last place it takes it from. Your body deposits and removes fat in layers. There is no way to target a specific area; it just goes one layer after the other. The reason your body puts fat on your belly first is that the area contains vital organs such as the intestines, kidneys and in females the reproductive organs. Without bone there to protect them, the body places fat here as padding for these internal organs as extra protection. This is why women have an even harder time losin the belly fat. Evolution needed to protect that baby maker so you girls had even more need for that padding.",
"Would anything bad happen if a doctor cut me open, removed all the belly fat and sewed me back up?",
"It isnt, its just the last place you lose fat from.",
"People also gain extra weight in the middle from not being happy, which no fitness instructor will ever tell you. They can tell you to cut sugar, fats and workout, but they'll never tell you that it might be from depression, because they know they can't help you there.",
"You are a fat guy who wants to lose weight.\n\nThe answer to your actual question has been answered. Just wanted to give you a cheap, effective workout the Navy adopted:\n\n_URL_0_.\n\nIt's a good start and can be done anywhere. Includes diet information. Make sure you run too.\n\nSource: I'm Navy. I'm not SOF. I'm not a Kleenex. Just Navy.\n\nBe less fat, dude. Cheers!",
"I always thought that all fat stores burn at the same rate. So you must consider the following as a reason to explain why belly fat is hard to lose.\n\nConsider draining different sized pools of water all with the same tiny drain hole.\n\nchin = baby pool\n\nthighs = wading pool \n\narms = plunge pool\n\nbelly = olympic size swimming pool\n\nSo, when you eat at a deficit, each of these bodies of water will all drain at the same rate. however, due to having less amount of \"water\", you'll very quickly see drainage in your chin \"baby pool\" and then your thighs \"wading pool\", all in the while your belly may look about the same. But of course, if you were to drain an olympic size swimming pool and return 30 mins later, it'll likely look the same, but of course there will be less water.\n\n\nSo naturally, having more fat in a particular area, will take much longer to burn/drain, in the same way that having more water in a pool will take longer to drain and to see results.\n\n\nOf course, if you eat at a surplus on some days, you'll be adding more water and if you increase your caloric deficit, you'll be increasing the size of the drain hole ;)",
"Belly fat is different in that it is visceral adipose tissue - visceral meaning that it is in and around your organs. Belly fat has a strong correlation to stress and increased stress will increase cortisol and cortisol increases belly fat. Stress is very difficult to manage - making belly fat harder to lose. There are other factors that create stress - such as environmental factors and inflammation that can influence cortisol production in turn influencing belly fat. Simply, belly fat isn't always about calories in and calories out. \nSource: I am a holistic health coach trained in cardiometabolic lifestyle disease management. ",
"because people don't exercise enough and they're wrongfully educated about diet and nutrition",
"This will get lost. Fat cells have alpha and beta receptors. Beta receptor activation causes the fat cells to spend, alpa receptor activation causes them to save. This is not an on/off screnario its a sliding scale thats effected by receptor ratios and with different levels of epinephrine and norepinioherine that both increase during times of stress and between meals. If a fat cell has more alpha receptors than normal it will be more likely to save. If it has more beta receptors than normal it will be more likely to spend. Studies have already established that the fat cells in women's thighs and butt have 9 times the expected amount of alpha receptors, it's not a stretch to imagine men's bellies and love handles would yield similar results. \n\nSo you go hungry and adrenaline surges, it latches on to those beta receptors begging for energy and most of your body complies, but your ass doesn't because that adrenaline has a slight affinity for the two alpha subunits and that ass fat has enough alpha receptors that despite how small the attraction is its enough to slow the fat loss there. It's your last chance fat. Your final reserve when your really starving and all the quick fat is gone. It makes your fat loss parabolic, like if you were running out of water so you drank half the remaining water each day. The side effect is it accumulates in the slow loss areas.\n\nShort answer, it's just how your body is designed at the cellular level.",
"I wish I had seen [this article](_URL_0_) much earlier. It would have saved my feet and legs a lot of unnecessary pain and anguish. But doing it wrong is better than not doing anything at all. (as long as you don't hurt your self).",
"These answers are awful. The top comment is a simple description of metabolic syndrome, why is that relative? The 2nd highest comment says that thinner parts of the body lose weight easier than the thicker parts, which is also total horse shit. \n\nFat in the lower torso can be divided into three sections. WAT (white), visceral, and subcutaneous.\n\nSubcutaneous means under the skin, think sub(under) cutaneous(skin). This fat is directly under the skin and above our muscle layer. This fat is very difficult to lose. However, even if it is difficult to lose, it is not nearly as bad as visceral fat. The main way to identify subcutaneous fat is because it is pinchable, it's what we normally perceive as fat. Visceral fat, which I'll get to in a moment, is underneath the muscle so you will develop a hard gut around the fat. Think of someone you may know who is heavy set, but they have a rock hard gut. \n\nThe next fat, which is more on topic, is visceral fat. Visceral fat is created underneath our muscle and above/around our organs. To get rid of visceral fat you will need to do more than just exercise vigorously; you should also try a more balanced diet, sleep, and then pick up resistance training. It is responsible for a plethora of health problems, primarily insulin resistance (pre-diabetes), which can also lead to metabolic syndrome. \n\nMetabolic syndrome is the redistribution of body fat from the limbs to the torso caused by having multiple conditions such as diabetes, cushing's, high blood pressure, obesity, etc. One of the primary causes of metabolic syndrome is chronically elevated cortisol, which is a hormone caused by stress, lack of sleep, low blood sugar, etc. It's most noticeable trait is a person with skinny arms/legs and a large gut. I'm not sure why the top comment brings this up, if you suffer from metabolic syndrome you should consult with your physician before exercising anything over 70% APMHR. \n\nNinja edit: I have a bachelor's in exercise physiology for anyone that is curious, feel free to scroll through my other posts. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdominal_obesity#_blank",
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2636509.stm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/500"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://gizmodo.com/the-science-of-fat-1517247620"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.navyfitness.org/fitness/noffs/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/the_final_nail_in_the_cardio_coffin"
],
[]
] |
|
9o59v8 | electroencephalography activity | I mean what is it? Is it a fancy word for brain activity? Is it a specific type of brain activity? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9o59v8/eli5_electroencephalography_activity/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7rj7ov",
"e7s151j",
"e7st848"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Electroensephalography (EEG) is a method to record brain activity (so EEG is not 'an activity'). \nActivity from individual neurons are sometimes aligned, so that a larger electrical potential exists. This electrical activity can be measured using an array of elektrode on the scalp. ",
"This is a derivative word from Greek. \"Elektron\" is the greek word for Amber, which refers to the fact that amber can easily pick up a static charge.\n\nElectricity was originally referred to by larger word \"Triboelectricity\" which means \"the act of rubbing amber\"\n\nKephalon means the head, and the \"Enkaphalon\" means: pertaining to that which is inside the head. \"Graphé\" means to write, draw, scratch, . Same root word as the English words \"groove\", \"grave\", \"engraving.\" \n\nThe later is a fairly apt description, early EEG's used a large automatic spool of paper and a dozen or so automated pens, which made a classic scratching sound. Computers are of course used now.\n\nSo, an electroencephalograph records the electric charges inside the head, amplifies them, then converts them into a diagram showing the various signals of brain activity. \n\nUsually used to detect seizures or severe head trauma, detect sleep disorders, or monitor activity during general anesthesia.\n\n",
" \n\nElectroencephalography is a domain concerning recording and interpretation of the electroencephalogram. Electroencephalogram (EEG) is a record of the electric signal generated by the cooperative action of brain cells, or more precisely, the time course of extracellular field potentials generated by their synchronous action. Electroencephalogram derives from the Greek words enkephalo (brain) and graphein (to write). An EEG records or detects electrical activity inside the brain by using electrodes. EEG measures the flow of current during synaptic excitation of many pyramidal neurons. Neuron cells create electrical dipoles between soma and dendrites. A large number of neurons generate electrical activity, which is recorded by an EEG. Summed ionic current penetrates through the skin, skull and several other layers of soft tissues between electrodes and neuronal layers. Electrodes read the signal captured by the brain surface, amplifies it so they can be digitized accurately. Amplification is important because the signals detected are weak and are not compatible with devices such as Analog-to-digital Converter.\n\nThe amplified analog signal is then repeatedly sampled for a specific time interval, and each sample is converted into digital form by Analog-to-Digital Converter. The A/D converter interacts with the computer and data is stored in the computer memory. The data captured by electrode is EEG raw data, which means it does not only shows brain activity but other electrical activity of nearby muscles and electrode motion interference which is called noise. These noise sources which results in signal distortion are called artifacts. So once the data is stored, data filtering technique must be applied so that the user can be able to identify different EEG waveforms."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9g66n0 | why do cars have a tighter turn radius when making left turns than they do when making right turns, though they appear symmetrical from above? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9g66n0/eli5_why_do_cars_have_a_tighter_turn_radius_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"e61qsqx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They do not have such differences in turning radius by direction of the turn. Your premise is false. \n\nTrucks may need to make wide right turns because their rear wheels do not follow exactly in the path of their front wheels meaning they might overrun the curb if they don't turn wide. On the left there is an entire other lane where those tires can go instead so it isn't an issue turning that way. It is also simply a less tight turn because of the position of the lanes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1w66g5 | why doesn't the us/eu/un/nato intervene in the ukraine, like they did in syria/libya/afghanistan/etc.... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1w66g5/eli5_why_doesnt_the_useuunnato_intervene_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cez35zj",
"cez3cw2",
"cez4isy",
"cez4k5j"
],
"score": [
2,
16,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that would likely lead to conflict with Russia.\n\nThe upheaval is all about whether Ukraine will be aligned with the EU or with Russia. In general, the population wants closer relations with the EU, but their leader worked out a back room deal with Russia, and that is what all the fuss is about.\n\nWestern intervention would reinforce the idea they are meddling in Russia's sphere of influence, and would undoubtedly be met with Russian intervention. Then the chaos would escalate into a proxy war between the two.",
"This was answered pretty well by /u/Arn_Thor in /r/Ask_Politics \n\n > Because riots in a sovereign state isn't the UN's business unless the security council finds it necessary and appropriate to intervene under the \"responsibility to protect\" initiative. The initiative covers genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing - none of which is going on in Ukraine. If the situation in Ukraine merits UN intervention, then so did the riots in Turkey, Egypt, Yemen - not to mention Syria. The question makes me wonder what you perceive the UN's purpose to be?\n\n[Link to the post](_URL_0_)",
"Syria and Libya were(are) in civil war and pretty bloodly ones at that. Rebels dropping poison gases on people and the dictators in power using air raids to clear protesters. \n\nWhat's going on in Ukraine, while violent, is at the end of the day a protest. There isn't mass killings going on. Even if mass killings are going on though, how does the world just step into a mess like that? You have to consider all the consequences of these actions.\n\nFirst off, it represses the political freedom of that country. While violence isn't exactly the kind of democracy I'd like to live in, when 6 countries that make up Cold War Era super powers get to decide how every other country on Earth lives, things start to look really messed up.\n\nSecond, it's hard to tell who the bad guys are from the good. It's hard to tell if there are good guys at all. Take Saddam Husaine for example. He was a pretty bad dictator and once gases a ton of Kurds in Iran. Yet for what its worth, Iraq was much more liberal of a country than say Afghanistan at the time. And now that Saddam was removed from our(US) intervention, civil war has broken out and Al Qaeda, another threat to global peace, has shown up in Iraq. \n\nYou can't police the globe. Every area of the world has its own culture, politics, and issues to deal with that the US, UN, and Nato cannot just simply walk in with guns and solve.",
"Russia. that is all."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/Ask_Politics/comments/1w05o3/why_hasnt_the_un_intervened_in_ukraine/cexm3rw"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
cmn9xb | how does chinese yuan’s manipulation affect foreign investments in china? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cmn9xb/eli5_how_does_chinese_yuans_manipulation_affect/ | {
"a_id": [
"ew3feyo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"By letting their currency fall in value it makes their exports cheaper (So people overseas can buy things from China cheap) & their imports more expensive so it cost their citizens more money to buy things from overseas\n\nChina is the major manufacturing country in the world so it means they can sell lots while other countries have hard time selling to them\n\nIt much more complicated than this of course & their strategy has drawbacks also but that basically the idea"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5aqyyy | why is crispbread stored in paper and not plastic? | I was eating some crispbread the other day and thought about this. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5aqyyy/eli5_why_is_crispbread_stored_in_paper_and_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9ikua9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Plastic seals in moisture, so as water evaporates out of the bread, it gets trapped and eventually reabsorbed by the crust. This makes it not crisp, so it would just be bread, and not crispbread. \n\nPaper absorbs the moisture as it evaporates, so that the crust stays crisp. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2tss90 | i've been reading up on nukes. did the nevada nuclear tests have nuclear winter? why or why not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tss90/eli5_ive_been_reading_up_on_nukes_did_the_nevada/ | {
"a_id": [
"co1zw60",
"co20111",
"co21efc"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Nuclear Winter is not a local effect resulting from an atomic blast, but rather a hypothetical effect from lots of nukes going off. The theory is that the nukes would kick a lot of soot and dust up in to the air, blocking out the sun. The blocking out of the sun would result in lower temperatures since the sun can't heat up as much of the Earth anymore.\n\nSome of the effects are based on similar effects felt when a large volcano goes off. Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines went off in the early 90's and we only saw a slight drop in temperature (1 degree F).",
"No. The concept of nuclear winter is that if a bunch of nukes all went off in a short period of time (like a nuclear war) the amount of dust put into the air would reduce the global temperature because they would block out sunlight.\n\nThe reality is if nuclear winter were to happen it would be the least of our worries as full scale nuclear war would have already broken out.",
"_URL_0_\n\nTrinity and Beyond...movie about early atomic bomb development. Should be interesting to you.\n\nWhile these tests did not create \"nuclear winter\", the surface tests did create fallout. It was *mostly* localized and largely the reason that testing moved underground in its later stages before it was banned."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8taGbueKBI"
]
] |
||
j7vto | could someone eli5 the positive and negative effects of the major items on nutrition facts? | . | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j7vto/could_someone_eli5_the_positive_and_negative/ | {
"a_id": [
"c29vkjg",
"c29vkjg"
],
"score": [
23,
23
],
"text": [
"[Here](_URL_1_) is a good general explanation of nutrition.\n\nAs far as the stuff on a label, I'll use [this one](_URL_0_) as an example.\n\n* **Serving Size** - This is the amount you should be eating at any one time, as determined by the producer. Many times, they will decide on their serving sizes either based on hitting some kind of calorie cap (only 100 calories per serving!) or based on how much people normally take at once (8oz. glass of orange juice). Number of servings is obviously the total size of the container divided by the size of each serving.\n\nNote that all nutrition facts are given on a \"per serving\" basis. Those numbers will change if you eat more/less than the listed serving size.\n\n* **Calories** - A nutritional Calorie actually refers to 1,000 normal calories. A \ncalorie is a measure of how much heat something gives off when it is broken down. Thus, a Calorie (note the capitalization) is equivalent to the burning of 1,000 calories. This is an important number because your body uses food as fuel, and the amount of Calories in food determines how much use you will get out of it.\nCalories from Fat is an important subset because fat is much harder to get energy out of than carbohydrates or protein. I will get more into this later.\n\n* **Total Fat** - This is how much fat there is in the serving. Fat, as you may know, contributes to obesity. This is because fat is extremely dense in terms of calories. It contains 9 calories per gram, versus ~4.5 for carbohydrates and proteins. As a result, it is also very difficult for the body to break down. Thus, the body naturally wants to store it for later, in case food is scarce or difficult to find. This is based on our old hunter-gatherer lifestyle, which had lots of exercise and competition for food. Back then, fat was a great thing to have as a \"reserve\" energy source. These days, people are sitting in office chairs 6hrs/day and don't use enough energy to warrant their fat intake. Hence, obesity.\nSaturated Fats are a subset of fat, and they are listed separately because many studies have shown a strong link between saturated fat and heart disease, as well as many forms of cancer. Trans-saturated fats (trans fats) are the worst ones of all, and I believe in the US they are banned.\n\n* **Cholesterol** - Cholesterol is similar to fat; it is intrinsically useful, but like anything can be bad in excess. Cholesterol is trickier because it is extremely hard to get rid of. Thus, the effects of high cholesterol intake can last for many years. There are two types of cholesterol - LDL and HDL. In the interest of brevity, I will just say that ~~LDL~~ HDL is \"good\" and ~~HDL~~ LDL is \"bad\". High ~~HDL~~ LDL levels can cause your arteries to clog and that is bad.\n\n* **Sodium** - You can think of sodium as salt. Your body is mostly water, and it has to try very hard to maintain a certain salinity (saltiness). If your sodium intake is too high, your body's water becomes too salty and that will lead to dehydration. In extreme cases, your cells will shrivel (like your fingertips do when you're in the water too long) because they want to balance the salt levels. Certain heart conditions require that you moderate your sodium intake, but for most people it's sufficient to drink plenty of water. Something you should be doing anyway.\n\n* **Total Carbohydrate** - This is the big thing. Carbohydrates (carbs) are the fuel of choice for your body. Your body will turn to carbs first when it needs energy, and will break down protein and fat (in that order) into carbs if it needs to. Conversely, if it has more carbs than it needs, it will convert the carbs into fat. This is where low-carb diet logic comes from. If you keep your carb intake low, your body will be forced to break down fat. The problem is that it would rather break down protein, like your muscles, before touching the fat. It's very easy to eat too many carbs, as they are found in high content in all grains, fruits, and sugary stuff.\n\n* **Dietary Fiber** - Fiber is interesting. It occurs in two types - soluble and insoluble. Both are good, for different reasons. Both types of fiber have no calories but still contribute to food volume, so they help you feel full without actually increasing your calorie intake. Soluble fiber contains nutrients and is digested very readily by the colon. Insoluble fiber is not digestible, so it just picks up water and passes through the system, making your poop cycle more regular. Fiber is also linked to lowering cholesterol and blood sugar levels.\n\nMore coming, my hands are tired.",
"[Here](_URL_1_) is a good general explanation of nutrition.\n\nAs far as the stuff on a label, I'll use [this one](_URL_0_) as an example.\n\n* **Serving Size** - This is the amount you should be eating at any one time, as determined by the producer. Many times, they will decide on their serving sizes either based on hitting some kind of calorie cap (only 100 calories per serving!) or based on how much people normally take at once (8oz. glass of orange juice). Number of servings is obviously the total size of the container divided by the size of each serving.\n\nNote that all nutrition facts are given on a \"per serving\" basis. Those numbers will change if you eat more/less than the listed serving size.\n\n* **Calories** - A nutritional Calorie actually refers to 1,000 normal calories. A \ncalorie is a measure of how much heat something gives off when it is broken down. Thus, a Calorie (note the capitalization) is equivalent to the burning of 1,000 calories. This is an important number because your body uses food as fuel, and the amount of Calories in food determines how much use you will get out of it.\nCalories from Fat is an important subset because fat is much harder to get energy out of than carbohydrates or protein. I will get more into this later.\n\n* **Total Fat** - This is how much fat there is in the serving. Fat, as you may know, contributes to obesity. This is because fat is extremely dense in terms of calories. It contains 9 calories per gram, versus ~4.5 for carbohydrates and proteins. As a result, it is also very difficult for the body to break down. Thus, the body naturally wants to store it for later, in case food is scarce or difficult to find. This is based on our old hunter-gatherer lifestyle, which had lots of exercise and competition for food. Back then, fat was a great thing to have as a \"reserve\" energy source. These days, people are sitting in office chairs 6hrs/day and don't use enough energy to warrant their fat intake. Hence, obesity.\nSaturated Fats are a subset of fat, and they are listed separately because many studies have shown a strong link between saturated fat and heart disease, as well as many forms of cancer. Trans-saturated fats (trans fats) are the worst ones of all, and I believe in the US they are banned.\n\n* **Cholesterol** - Cholesterol is similar to fat; it is intrinsically useful, but like anything can be bad in excess. Cholesterol is trickier because it is extremely hard to get rid of. Thus, the effects of high cholesterol intake can last for many years. There are two types of cholesterol - LDL and HDL. In the interest of brevity, I will just say that ~~LDL~~ HDL is \"good\" and ~~HDL~~ LDL is \"bad\". High ~~HDL~~ LDL levels can cause your arteries to clog and that is bad.\n\n* **Sodium** - You can think of sodium as salt. Your body is mostly water, and it has to try very hard to maintain a certain salinity (saltiness). If your sodium intake is too high, your body's water becomes too salty and that will lead to dehydration. In extreme cases, your cells will shrivel (like your fingertips do when you're in the water too long) because they want to balance the salt levels. Certain heart conditions require that you moderate your sodium intake, but for most people it's sufficient to drink plenty of water. Something you should be doing anyway.\n\n* **Total Carbohydrate** - This is the big thing. Carbohydrates (carbs) are the fuel of choice for your body. Your body will turn to carbs first when it needs energy, and will break down protein and fat (in that order) into carbs if it needs to. Conversely, if it has more carbs than it needs, it will convert the carbs into fat. This is where low-carb diet logic comes from. If you keep your carb intake low, your body will be forced to break down fat. The problem is that it would rather break down protein, like your muscles, before touching the fat. It's very easy to eat too many carbs, as they are found in high content in all grains, fruits, and sugary stuff.\n\n* **Dietary Fiber** - Fiber is interesting. It occurs in two types - soluble and insoluble. Both are good, for different reasons. Both types of fiber have no calories but still contribute to food volume, so they help you feel full without actually increasing your calorie intake. Soluble fiber contains nutrients and is digested very readily by the colon. Insoluble fiber is not digestible, so it just picks up water and passes through the system, making your poop cycle more regular. Fiber is also linked to lowering cholesterol and blood sugar levels.\n\nMore coming, my hands are tired."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.brookerlaboratories.com/images/NutritionFacts.gif",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2xcf/nutrition_as_if_youre_speaking_to_a_wee_child_of/"
],
[
"http://www.brookerlaboratories.com/images/NutritionFacts.gif",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2xcf/nutrition_as_if_youre_speaking_to_a_wee_child_of/"
]
] |
|
2l1dmj | why is history so eurocentric? | Eurocentrism
Merriam-Webster: : centered on Europe or the Europeans; especially : reflecting a tendency to interpret the world in terms of European or Anglo-American values and experiences
Sometimes in history there are sections about someone found somewhere, Sir X found ABC in Africa, or Y found a place in Asia. Why are there less history from other sources, such as authorities in castle or refugees from a place to somewhere else? this makes the entire world seems didn't exist before age of exploration | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2l1dmj/eli5_why_is_history_so_eurocentric/ | {
"a_id": [
"clqjbh2",
"clqjbne",
"clqjpzm",
"clqkxtk"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because, for the last 500 years or so, history has mostly been written by Europeans. Especially since, I'm guessing, you live in a country dominated by Europeans or people of European descent. ",
"Well.... let's start with \"where are you from\".\n\nIf you are from Europe or America... then of course history is taught through that lens because *that's where you are!*\n\nBut otherwise? Because Europe took the lead in a lot of history. Starting with the Renaissance, Europe became the global leader in pretty much everything. So Europeans *wrote* all the history books and *did* a lot of the historical stuff.\n\nA sad truth of history is that people rarely ask others what their perspective on the event was.",
"Because historically (for the last few hundred years at least), Europe has dominated the world and global affairs, so a lot of recent history (and the not too distant past historically) *is* from Europe, hence the focus. Colonialism and Empires, and the side effects of them? European. WW1 and WW2, European, and those had massive effects on the world, technology and balance of power.\n\nYou also have to bear in mind that written accounts of battles or other events weren't that common, so there aren't random accounts of events from people in castles or a refugee, because the often couldn't write, or afford the materials to do so. Combine that with where you are from, if it's Europe or a country with a strong connection to Europe then the focus will be on what's been influential in your area.",
"Same reason the news doesn't talk about the classroom that wasn't shot up. The world mostly didn't change from one generation to the next outside of Europe. They had some huge amazing wars in Asia, but really nothing changed as a result. The border of China is similar to what it was when Europeans were still running around with paint on their faces hitting each other with wooden hammers.\n\n\nIf colonialism had never come to sub saharan africa they'd still be tribes. \n\nThe Natives of the Americas never progressed out of the stone age\n\nThen all of a sudden within 500 years Europe goes from being a backwater third rate power to the dominant region on Earth inventing air power, nuclear weapons, battleships, etc.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a0p0xy | how does waters surface tension work and how does it impact a person jumping into water in relation to the height of the jump? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0p0xy/eli5_how_does_waters_surface_tension_work_and_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"eajcew5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I could be wrong but i think thats a fluid density thing rather than surface tension. For us it takes no effort to break water surface tension a finger is too heavy. But for certain insects with their specialized hairs they spread their weight over a larger area not breaking the water's surface for they can walk on water. \n\nThe basilisk lizard runs really really fast on water by slaping it with its feet proping it up, the water doesnt have time to get out of the way, otherwise it too would sink. \n\nBut the faster you go the less time the water has to get out of the way. Also water cant be compressed like air can so those things put together make for a shity shity belly flop. \n\nIf im wrong, please correct me i love learning random stuff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
p04bq | why are gems valuable? | Can you do anything with them other than make jewelry? Are they valuable just because they're rare? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/p04bq/elif_why_are_gems_valuable/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3lfaqc",
"c3lfmyq",
"c3lhgg8"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They're pretty, rare, and associated with wealth and status. Some gems have unique properties which have industrial uses, such as diamond's hardness, or ruby's staying-the-same-shapeness, but mostly it's just \"ooh, shiny\".",
"The worth of an item is due to supply and demand, for gemstones they are quite rare (low supply) but a lot of people want them (high demand). This is what makes them valuable, if we found gems everywhere, they would be worth significantly less.",
"It's a bit circular, people wants them because they are rare, they are rare because people want them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1zt6px | what happens when i turn on a charger that's not plugged into anything? | I have a portable iPhone charger. When I press on the button and no cord plugged into it, what happens? Do the electric go into air? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zt6px/eli5_what_happens_when_i_turn_on_a_charger_thats/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfwplm0",
"cfwplzh"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Since the circuit is not closed by connecting it to a phone, there is no flow of current. Nothing happens except you might drain some of the charge if there's an \"On\" light.",
"The electric can't just go into air. Well, except a veeeeerry very tiny bit due to humidity. To start a current flow you need to create a closed circuit. You won't be closing the circuit if you don't connect the charger and nothing will happen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
21b9pj | why are some companies so adamant about switching from windows xp? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21b9pj/eli5why_are_some_companies_so_adamant_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgbdctp",
"cgbdeah",
"cgbdz38",
"cgbe4ge"
],
"score": [
6,
11,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Cost. XP is still addressing their needs. Why pay for something that they don't need (yet).",
"Because computers from eight years ago are good enough and the software running on them is good enough.\n\nWhen I started working in my current job six years ago, I got a computer running Windows XP and all it needed to do was run Outlook for email, run a browser to look at cases and graph some data and run putty to login to remote machines and fix things. The job has not changed, the tools have not changed, the tasks have not changed. So why do I need a new computer?\n\nI needed it because the mail server was upgraded, which means I needed to run a newer version of Outlook and the specifications for Outlook said that my current computer was not good enough. As a result, I was given a new computer and it ran Windows 7 and had the new Outlook on it.\n\nDo I do other things with my browser? Nope.\nDo I do other things in my putty sessions? Nope.\nDo I do other things in my email? Nope.\n\nThat was an expensive server software upgrade!\n\nAnd that is why people go \"It works good enough, why would I need to upgrade.\"",
"Some systems have software that won't work on newer systems. The software was made for a particular OS, with all the bugs ironed out. Porting it to a new system will cost time and money, and there are bound to be bugs again.\n\nFrom a business standpoint, it's not broken, why fix it? It's going to cost a business tons of money, especially if they have a lot of hardware to upgrade.",
"The biggest thing is after April 2014, according to microsoft:\n\n > After April 8, 2014, Microsoft will no longer provide security updates or technical support for Windows XP. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nFor companies with hundreds of thousands of machines, having them be esesntially open targets for security holes is a BIG problem and is the primary reason large companies are moving over right now.\n\nI work for a company with tens of thousands of laptops and desktops and finishing upgrades to Windows 7 is literally the most important thing within IT and everything revolves around it because the risk of having Win XP machines around is too high."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/enterprise/end-of-support.aspx"
]
] |
||
2uddbu | is there a difference between inseminating a woman with sperm of a man who is 25, athletic and healthy and the sperm of the same man when he is 35 and a fat slob, or are genes just genes, regardless? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2uddbu/eli5_is_there_a_difference_between_inseminating_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"co7duqf",
"co7erav",
"co7ftlv"
],
"score": [
54,
6,
8
],
"text": [
"Perhaps surprisingly, the answer is yes.\n\nDuring your life changes are made to the way your cells \"read\" your DNA, based on things that happen to you (stress, diet, etc). Whole genes are turned off or on, based on the way the DNA is folded. It turns out that some of these changes can be transferred via sperm.\n\nThis is part of the field called [Epigenetics](_URL_2_), which roughly means \"things that change the way DNA is 'read' by your cells without actually changing DNA base pairs\". I understand epigenetics is considered an exciting new field at the moment.\n\nA classic example of this in action is the [Överkalix study](_URL_1_), which studied the effects of a famine on the grandchildren of people who survived the famine. Many inheritable epigenetic effects were caused by the famine.\n\n[This guide from U. Utah](_URL_3_) looks like a good simple guide to epigenetics, and [here is where they talk about inheritance](_URL_0_).\n\nEDIT II, the Fact Checker Strikes Back: researched a bit more, changed things up a bit.",
"Sperm formation needs proper replication of DNA. DNA replication is controlled by some cues called growth factors (a type of transcription factor), which are in turn triggered by cues a whole network of cues (e.g. cell size, which is determined by resources available). \n\n in a process called meiosis. In meiosis, parent sex cells, in this case spermatogonia, have 23 pair of chromosomes (and each chromosome is made of two chromatids). A single spermatogonia needs to divide these 23 distinct pairs of chromosomes into 46 individual chromosomes between two intermediate sex cells. These sex cells divide again, spliting 46 chromosomes to 92 chromatids between four cells. The older the individual is, the likelier that failures in to cosegregate the sex cells with the proper amount of chromosomes (i.e. nondisjunction) leads to an abnormal amount of chromosomes in sperm. This can be either to much or too little.\n\nFor old age, there's something called the multihit model. Mutations occur in our DNA every day of our lives, but most end changing non-coding \"junk\" DNA. However, as we grow older, these mutations build up, causing errors in the way our DNA eventually create proteins. Some example of proteins include growth factors. If the the genes in our DNA coding for growth factors were affected, DNA replication and segregation in meiosis could be altered.\n\nFor example, a nondisjuction of the sex chromosomes would leave one sperm with both and another with none. If the sperm with no sex chromosomes penetrated the egg, which has one X chromosome itself, you'd conceive a female child with XO or Turner's Syndrome (presuming it survives birth). However, most of the time, if there's an improper amount of chromosomes, a baby won't be valid (be born alive).\n\nI'm not sure if obesity or exercise directly affects the health of one's children. ",
"I'm a physician (and participant in basic sciences research) but my specialty is cancer, so I can't claim to be an expert on this topic. Spermatocytogenesis involves stem cells dividing, with their descendents eventually forming mature sperm. Essentially, any time a cell divides it has to replicate, move, and generally screw around with its DNA. This allows for mutations in the DNA itself, epigenetic changes (methylation, etc.), basically lots of possible changes to the original blueprint.\n\nThere is pretty good evidence that a 35-year-old man's children will be at considerably higher risk for ADHD than a 25-year-old man's children...and changes in sperm genetics are thought to be responsible for that.\n\nAnyways...it goes a lot deeper than this but this is my own doctor-but-not-sperm-doctor understanding of the concept. An easy-to-access discussion might begin here: _URL_0_\n\nEDIT: I probably didn't address the question specifically enough...these changes would probably be due most to just time (the age difference) than the overall health of the male. More time, more divisions, more chance for bad shit to happen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/inheritance/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96verkalix_study",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics",
"http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/"
],
[],
[
"http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-older-mens-sperm-really-any-worse/"
]
] |
||
2pcyur | how do people get decapitated during tragic car accidents? | I've seen plenty of reports of these kinds of car accidents, yet I can't exactly put to mind how a head gets cut off, and how common it seems to happen. How does it happen anyway? I understand that thereight be debris or whatever, but is there a specific car part that does this? Or are these people just really unlucky? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pcyur/eli5_how_do_people_get_decapitated_during_tragic/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmvhvba"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They often talk about internal decapitation in relation to car accidents. I haven't seen nearly as many mentions of actual decapitations.\n\nInternal decapitation is when the spine snaps off in the neck, but the neck is still attached to the body."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4yl3xs | why do recyclers refuse to accept aluminum foil? | I would have thought they could melt it down and burn off all of the contaminants.
My best guess is that the salvageable material to contaminant ratio for used tin foil is too low to be economically and/or environmentally viable. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4yl3xs/eli5_why_do_recyclers_refuse_to_accept_aluminum/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6oosyk",
"d6oya93"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Bonus question for recycling experts: when a plastic container has a lid made from a different type of plastic or altogether different material attached, do the recyclers take time to unscrew it or do they just hack off the end and throw it out?",
"You are basically correct as to why foil is not recycled. It takes way too much effort to decontaminate it of food, often times it is not even possible. Not sure about your bonus question."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3i0mqn | how come type o- (o negative. . . ) can be given to most other blood types but it can only receive it's own blood type? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i0mqn/eli5_how_come_type_o_o_negative_can_be_given_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuc8664",
"cuc8klf",
"cuckc6r",
"cucxfys"
],
"score": [
28,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"When we talk about blood type, we're really talking about the different proteins in your blood. The biggest ones are the A protein, the B protein, and the Rh factor. If your body doesn't have the protein and you're given blood with the protein in it, your immune system will attack it. Someone with O- blood has none of these proteins, so if they get blood from someone with any of the three (either A, B, or +), their immune system will go crazy. \n\nGetting blood that doesn't have a protein that you naturally have is fine, which is why someone with O- blood can donate to anyone. ",
"Think of Type O negative blood as being highly non-allergenic, and type O negative blood people as being allergic to everything: if this was environmental allergens, it might be peanut butter, bee stings, and ragweed. Everybody else has a smaller set of allergies to different things, and their blood has something that would make a type O negative person crazy. \n\nYou can give the very bland type O blood to anybody and they won't react to it. But if you give anybody else's blood to a type O person, bad things ensue",
"My mom's a nurse and she explained this simplified one to me.\n\nYou might know that White Blood Cells (the immune system's \"guards\") identify the origin of a cell by protiens that I will call \"Keys\", and that is what A and B refer to. The immune system attacks anything with a strange Key.\n\nThere are 2 basic Key types, we call them A and B. AB means it has both, and O means it has neither. Doctors cannot give B blood to type A patients, because type A white blood cells attack any blood with Key Type B, and vice versa.\n\nAB white blood cells like everything else, since it recognizes both types of Keys. And O blood has no keys, so type O white blood cells will attack any cells with any keys at all. \n\n\nOne other thing to remember tho is that foreign white blood cells will *not* attack if I recall right, as white blood cells take orders from other parts of the immune system. I think they're the Lymph nodes?",
"Think of it like this. Your blood has specific markers in it that your body will recognize. If you have type A blood, you have A markers so if you get blood with A markers, your body won't see a problem and all will be good. If you get blood with B markers, however, your body will see it as a foreign substance and attack it, which is problematic. People with type O blood don't have any markers, so nobody will reject their blood, but any blood they receive can't have markers either because there are non they will recognize."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3rzsre | is the internet made up of more than just websites? if so, then what else is the internet made up of? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rzsre/eli5_is_the_internet_made_up_of_more_than_just/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwsrj6f"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Websites make up the [World Wide Web](_URL_0_). Anything else you can do online - e-mails, instant messaging, online gaming, voice chats, torrenting etc. - is part of the Internet but not necessarily the World Wide Web."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web"
]
] |
||
1qkd4n | why do car fumes/gasses that you can't see have a shadow? | I was sitting in the drive through getting coffee today and noticed on the wall of the building the shadows of gasses rising. I've noticed it before but never really thought about it. Why do they have shadows if they're not visible? Anyone know? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qkd4n/eli5_why_do_car_fumesgasses_that_you_cant_see/ | {
"a_id": [
"cddnmne"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If a gas is rising, it means it has a lower density than the surrounding gas. Therefore it has a lower refractive index, that means light is transmitted a teeny tiny bit different through it. Essentially the rising gas forms a lot of constantly changing lenses that refract light. If you hold a normal lens into sunlight you will see similar shadows formed behind it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5sqo8e | how to video game developers "balance" different aspects of video games (e.g. the different fighters in fighting games, different races in strategy games, etc.) | Are there certain established theories of game balancing, or is it more trial and error? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5sqo8e/eli5_how_to_video_game_developers_balance/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddh582c",
"ddh59a2",
"ddh5hzd",
"ddhs7q6",
"ddiiph7"
],
"score": [
6,
15,
14,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Rarely do designers and programmers get balance even close to right early in development. Months of test plans by QA and good developers who can bury their ego and listen to the testers' bugs and suggestions create a well-balanced game.",
"It's a really complicated topic. Games like Go have been around for a damned long time and are still working on how to properly balance the advantage of being the first person to be able to move. So part of it is trial and error.\n\nIn more complicated games (especially fighting games, strategy games, anything strongly multiplayer) often developers shoot for some amount of *imbalance* but with the tools available to counter any strength.\n\nThink about a game like chess for a moment (which is, for the most part, perfectly balanced). What happens to the strategies, the gameplay? It's rote, it's calculated, it's just a matter of remembering and executing on those strategies rather than coming up with them.\n\nThe same thing happened with Starcraft. The closer it got to perfect balance the more it became a matter of \"who can more perfectly execute the strategies everyone uses\" rather than \"who can think and play strategically.\" And so we started seeing people winning based on their quicker reflexes and clicking, not on the core engagement of strategy.\n\nMany developers now (especially for games like League of Legends, or Hearthstone, or Overwatch) are balanced for imbalance. Some characters *are* more powerful (but only marginally), which creates an incentive for players of the metagame (basically, people who play enough to want to figure out the best way to play/counter other play) to figure out how to beat it.\n\nThere's a lot more to it in specific elements (balancing for skill, and why the \"noob tube\" in Call of Duty games is actually a great thing for everyone; or balancing using RNG) but generally speaking game developers try to come up with a power curve for their game and then not deviate too much from that. If a gun fires faster, it should have lower damage per shot, and vice-versa. If a gun is slightly off that curve (fires faster than normal for a gun doing its damage/does more damage for a gun firing at that rate) it creates interesting play around countering that; if a gun is *way* off the curve, it becomes an optimal strategy and boring.\n\nLook up Extra Credits, they've done a bunch of episodes on the topic.\n\nShort answer to your question: it's a little of both, but a lot of it really is more solidified than just trying stuff out.",
"As /u/Byde said. QA. \n\nThey're assholes. They will fucking ruin your shit. \n\nIf there's a 20 step process to make something marginally unfair, they will find it, and they will rub your face in it. Then laugh as you try to find some way to make it seem ok. \n\nOnce you commit your changes to the new build, they will laugh again as they show you that you missed something, and it only take 28 hours of effort to completely break multiplayer. \n\nOnce you've wiped away the blood, sweat, and tears and QA has to spend more than a week of dedicated effort to make things completely unfun for the new guy dropped into the pit, your game is ready for release. ",
"A bit of math, and lots and lots and lots of testing and feedback.\n\nFor example, they have Character A that does 100 damage per hit and attacks slowly. They decide they want a faster character so they add Character B that does 50 damage per hit and hits twice as often. All seems balanced, but then they realize some characters have abilities that block a set number of hits, which hinders Character A more than Character B, so they boost the damage of the former. Then they realize some characters have abilities that do a tiny bit of damage to the attacker each time they are hit. This of course hurts Character B more than Character A so they give him some small advantage to compensate.\n\nOnce a game is released they'll look for trends. If nobody is playing a character, or a character never seems to be winning, they'll see what's going on and maybe give it a boost. Alternately, if *everyone* is playing a character they'll take a look and see if it needs to be scaled back.\n\nThis goes on forever until nobody is working on the game anymore. It's an endless process, and you'll see games that have been around for years still do it. Everquest launched in 1999 and they still have constant class balance. Perfect balance will never be achieved unless every character/class/fighter/etc is exactly the same, so developers just have to do the best they can and hope it's fun to play everything.",
"As others have said, a lot of it has to do with playtesting, but even then, QA and playtesting can only account for so much. When a game gets released, 100,000 players will find bugs or symptoms of imbalance much quicker than 10 QA evaluators or playtesters. This is why games will often have \"balance passes;\" patches that will tweak settings or numbers in the game to achieve balance.\nAs far as building balance into a game, it really comes down to planning. A developer should have an idea of how they want certain aspects of the game to behave relative to each other, and how to make multiple options appealing, which is the ultimate goal of balance. \n \nIn answer to your question about \"theories,\" there are conventions that generally come out in games, especially in the relationship of offense and defense. Generally, these traits are inversely related; as one goes up, the other goes down. On the defense side, it can be further broken down into speed and ability to sustain damage (sometimes referred to as \"armor\"); again these tend to be inversely related. Likewise, on the offensive side, it's usually broken down into damage output, attack speed, and range. As attack speed goes up, damage per attack goes down. Range will often be inversely related to defense. \nTo illustrate, you'll often see this convention as follows: \nAll-round Class: Mid damage, defense, and speed\nMage Class: High damage, low attack speed, long range, low defense, low speed. Often called the \"glass cannon.\" \nRogue Class: Low damage, high attack speed, short range, low defense, high speed \nWarrior Class: Mid-low damage, mid-low attack speed, short range, high defense, low speed \nAnother example: In the X-Wing minis game, Imperial ships tend to be faster, more agile, with more maneuver options, and less expensive, so you can field more of them, but each one individually has lower capacity to take damage. Rebel ships have beefier defense, are less agile, and more expensive per ship, but are designed to play off each other and each ship has more options. The result is with normal squad size, you can get 6 or so TIE Fighters vs 3 X-Wings, and it can go either way. There's a third option, Scum, which can kinda toe the line between them, going one way or another, but often with some subversive element to reflect their crafty nature; little one-off upgrades that can tilt on a tactical level but have a chance of not working altogether. \n \nAnother theory is the Rock-Paper-Scissors setup, where each choice is strong against one choice, but weak against others. \nBattleships are strong against Cruisers but weak against Destroyers. Cruisers are strong against Destroyers but weak against Battleships. Destroyers are strong against Battleships but weak against Cruisers. \nOr, in Magic the Gathering, each color has two colors it works well against and two colors it's weak against. Competing colors are often weak against each other (thereby balancing out). For instance, Green and Blue, the fastest and slowest colors respectively. Green can crank into action very quickly and overwhelm the relatively defenseless Blue in the early game, but Blue can counter that, literally, by preventing Green from doing anything using control spells. Green has a ton of creatures with interesting different abilities, and has some of the biggest creatures in the game, but Green isn't good at dealing with Flying creatures, which Blue makes great use of. But Blue's flying creatures are expensive and can be overwhelmed by an onslaught of a lot of lower-cost Green creatures."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8d0oui | why is the word "german" so different in other languages? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8d0oui/eli5_why_is_the_word_german_so_different_in_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxjbgbu",
"dxjbq2y",
"dxjbu5h",
"dxjbu8m"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The name of a country is invented in each language (or language group) independent of other languages. Particularly in antiquity when there likely were few if any translators to work between the two groups. ",
"Germany as the modern nation is a relatively new concept, before that it consisted of several territories that kept changing along tribes, then states, before consolidation. However other countries already had contact with them before Germany so they called them according to their relations so the words in their respective languages refer to those rather than the modern nation.",
"There is an entire wikipedia article on this very topic, which I will link to at the end of this comment.\n\nThe answer to your question is that for a very long time, what we now know as \"Germany\" was once a group of different tribes and states. Authors from different cultures would refer to these tribes with a single word, which might be the name of a particular tribe (Saxon), a made-up word (Germany), or the word that the people there called themselves (Deutschland).\n\n_URL_0_",
"That's because different languages decided to name the language, people, and the country from different root words - some referring to the local people, some to the region.\n\nThe German word *Deutsch* comes from an old proto-Germanic (the old languages that modern German, English, etc derive from) word that means \"of the people.\" So the language is \"of the people\" and the country of *Deutschland* is \"the people's land.\"\n\nThe Italian \"tedesco\" comes from a related old-timey word meaning \"of the people.\"\n\nThe Latin word *Germania* basically means \"fertile land\" and was used by the Romans to refer to what's now Germany, Austria, and Eastern Europe. So plenty of languages have kept that word, including English.\n\nDuring Roman times and the period after, one of the tribes of people living in that land was the Alemanni. Their name was used by the French and Spanish as the name for that region and language, which has lasted into today - the Spanish *alemão* and the French *Allemagne.*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Germany"
],
[]
] |
||
141uzk | why do people use hand sanitizer? why do we have hand sanitizing stations all over the place? | I almost never use the stuff. I also seem to get sick no more than the average person. So then why are there people using it? Were the rates of cold spreading way higher back in the 70s when people didn't compulsively sanitize? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/141uzk/why_do_people_use_hand_sanitizer_why_do_we_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"c793zk0",
"c7940cx"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"People use hand sanitizer because it's more convenient, at times, than washing their hands, but nearly as effective at killing germs - thus preventing the spread of illness.\n\nAs far as I'm aware, the hand sanitizing stations started popping up all over the place during the outbreak of H1N1.",
"The concept is that you touch your face many times an hour and your face has the most common holes that allow germs to enter your body. Noses, mouths and eyes are nice warm moist places that allow germs to grow rapidly. \n\nYour hands also touch many objects that have germs on them. Door knobs, shopping cart handles, toilet flush knobs, etc. \n\nSo sanitizing your hands helps keeps you from getting germs into your body. \n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6zvacu | how is the national guard getting activated for the virgin islands? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zvacu/eli5_how_is_the_national_guard_getting_activated/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmy9kdf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Uh, the US Virgin Islands has its own National Guard unit. The National Guard that's being activated to serve in the US Virgin Islands is probably the US Virgin Islands' National Guard. Do you have an article that suggests otherwise?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3ykkcm | why exactly aren't british people allowed to have guns (please feel free to clarify it) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ykkcm/eli5_why_exactly_arent_british_people_allowed_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cye7ijj",
"cye7is0",
"cye7moh",
"cye7o4t",
"cye7y6b",
"cye8319",
"cye90va",
"cye9jkh",
"cyea2va",
"cyeai8b",
"cyect68",
"cyedn5l",
"cyeeyfs",
"cyeg59o",
"cyegdq1",
"cyegjgb",
"cyeglcz",
"cyehsrd",
"cyei4aj",
"cyeiqfh",
"cyeqto2",
"cyerti8",
"cyet32j",
"cyetcfi",
"cyeu3my",
"cyeugx0",
"cyewhx4"
],
"score": [
153,
133,
4,
49,
73,
110,
13,
6,
4,
79,
20,
40,
2,
2,
9,
6,
9,
5,
2,
3,
3,
3,
30,
8,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"We don't really want guns. We don't really want any weapon! We just want to drink tea all day and moan about the weather.",
"Because for the most part we don't want them, and, importantly, we elect people who are willing to ban them.",
"Irish people aren't allowed guns either. I think the reason we have such strict laws is because of the IRA and all of the trouble in Northern Ireland",
"Firearms can be used to kill people and commit crimes. Most people don't have a legitimate need for firearms, so many countries have relatively strict regulations regarding firearm possession. Most have some way to get a gun, but it is much harder than in the U.S.\n\nThe U.S. is the weird one, actually. We have a very strong gun lobby. Most countries require a reason for someone to have a firearm while we need a reason to prevent someone from buying a firearm.",
"There was a school shooting in Dunblane, Scotland back in 1996 where 16 children and one teacher were killed (not so fun fact: tennis star Andy Murray was one of the survivors of the attack).\n\nAfter that, the government passed some laws banning handguns, as well as further restrictions on other types of guns. Since then we have had no mass school shootings like this, and the public is largely in favour of the ban.\n\nGuns are not completely illegal. Certain types of guns are allowed for hunting and other sport. Also farmers are allowed guns for pest control. They are still heavily regulated though.",
"It is possible to get a licence for some firearms, which can be used at ranges, private land e.g. farms.\n\nAside from that, what would be the reason to need to own one? It wouldn't make me feel safer to own one, if I knew everyone else could own one too. Self defeating logic in my opinion.",
"It's the same here in Australia. We don't need them and we had politicians strong enough to make the laws to enforce the rule. I've always believed that we don't have them because we were never brought up on the mentality that we have the right to have one even though we could. Yes you can still purchase firearms but it takes about 3 months and numerous checks before you can have one in your hands.",
"I think farmers can have rifles and there's some other niche examples, but otherwise we just don't really want them. I think most of us find the gun culture in the US (for example) kind of baffling. Also guess what? No guns means there's barely any shootings. ",
"Interestingly lots of people have only said we don't want guns.\n\nWhile this is true it isn't really the only reason. We do have guns by the way you can own a gun license and have a gun accompanying it. That said getting a gun is much harder than in the US and so the is a higher barrier for ownership. \n\nThe reason the are far less than in, say, the US, is a lack of need. In parts of the US you need gun to defend from wild animals, and from what I hear other humans.\n\nIn the UK we have far fewer areas that are home to wild animals that would require a gun to defend yourself with.\n\nGun culture is just different in the UK as well, like many said we don't really want guns.\n\n",
"Why would we want them? \n\nWe don't need them to defend ourselves. Gun crime is non-existent and we have the army and armed police for the serious situations anyway.\n\nYou know the last time we had a gun instructor hand a nine year old girl a gun and then get shot in the face by that girl with said gun?\n\nNever. That's when.",
"In Europe, a while ago, we had some serious wars you might have heared of. Since then, most people somehow dislike guns.\n\nGuns are for killing people, which isn't cool in real life.",
"American Revolution. The British see no need for weapons as the limited availability makes it easier for armed and unarmed law enforcement to deal with most crimes, which in turn, involve far fewer guns and less shooting.\n \nMeanwhile, Americans are more focused on what's happened in the past when a government hoards arms and establishes laws to \"deprive\" the populace of them. It makes it much harder for the people to instigate revolution and re-establish the government as one for the people and not the privileged. We're willing to tolerate high rates of gun crime because we ultimately fear falling under the reign of some totalitarian government (most likely our own if it's not run in the interest of the people) and being helplessly outgunned. I think both views are valid, although the typical American reasoning is certainly more speculate and comes at a greater cost.\n\nAlso, shooty-boomstick is fun.",
"Canadian perspective. In Canada, you are allowed to own one, but you must have a FAC (firearms accquistion certificate) and be sane with no criminal record of violence. Have a licence of ownership and a permit to carry; only to the gun range and back home via the 'most direct route'. Long guns registry is different and more relaxed. And according to the film maker Michael Moore, we Canadians own more guns on a per capita basis than Americans, but most of these are hunting rifles. So, why are gun murders and gun suicides lower in Canada? Because we don't carry them with us! I live in Toronto and we leave our doors unlocked during the day. Gotta love a low crime rate.",
"If this is a serious question I can't tell after reading the comments. I can't say for England, but where I live people still have guns. It's just they need licenses and police interviews in some cases. There's a fair few restrictions.\n\nA couple of the people I've known with guns. One guy got it taken away because he didn't have a cabinet thing for it. Another guy had regular police interviews to make sure he was staying responsible. I think there is a lot of discretion involved in the final decisions. \n\nI'm fairly certain if your committed of some crimes your banned from owning guns. \n\nSo I take it as though the only people who would have access to guns would be the ones who were suitable. Where I thought America just about anyone can buy a gun ? \n",
"As a person who likes guns as a fun way to pass time, these comments make me feel like a crazed madman.",
"They aren't not allowed to have guns.\n\nThey are allowed regulated access to guns similar to Australia and Canada. Where you need a license.\n\nThis process results in people having guns because they need them for hunting rather than having them because they want one.",
"You can own a gun if you obtain a license but there a number of reasons\n\n1. public safety- America is our primary example against gun ownership, combine that with with the Dunblain massacre\n\n2. there simply isnt the need to own a gun with the absence dangerous wildlife in our country. Farmers with a license can have firearms to protect livestock but its very rare. \n\n3. democracy. we voted for leaders that pass legislature for gun controls and as system it opposes tyranical leadership styles (referring to americas reasoning to bear arms) \n\n4. Law and order is maintained with out fire arms for the most part - units that do have firearms are highly trained and highly accountable unlike our american counterparts. \n\n5. keeping the circulation of guns to a minimum is essential to overall security in the uk which is easy to maintain being an island nation.\n\n\n\n\n\n",
"Serious question. One of the problems with gun control in the U.S. is that our constitution prohibits the government taking private property without compensation. This is in top of the second amendment about guns specifically. So to ban all the existing guns would require they be bought up by the government which it won't do. For example, full auto machine guns are banned in the U.S. Before the ban there weren't that many, but there were enough, so for about 7500 you can buy a full auto Uzi still even though it's \"banned\" because it's a \"pre ban\" Uzi that was privately owned before the ban. \n\nSo, how did it work in countries with more recent bans. Did they make people turn their guns in? Did the government pay for them? Are there still guns floatin around in private hands. Sure in 100 years they will all be relics but a gun ban right now in the Us without a mandatory buyback wouldn't do shit. There are so many privately owned guns. ",
"I wouldn't trust most fellow Brits with firearms, knowing how so many Brits don't even take something as common as driving seriously.\n\nBut as others have said, you can still legally own a firearm in the UK for the right reasons. I see no reason to change this, and arguably existing laws mean the police can focus their energies on removing illegal firearms. ",
"You can own a gun, you just need a valid reason. Hunting is a valid reason, so is being a farmer and wanting to protect your livestock from pests. \"Personal defence\" is not a valid reason. Note that even with a valid reason it is an arduous process to get a gun.\n\nOn the 13th of March, 1996, the Dunblane Massacre took place at Dunblane Primary School in which 16 children and one teacher were killed by Thomas Hamilton. The children weren't older than six.\n\nThis changed the view of gun ownership in the UK and two new firearms acts were passed, leading to where we are today.",
"I think the main reason why the U.S. Still has this supposedly 'archaic' law is to ensure that the power stays with the people as much as possible. Though I do advocate for more gun control then there currently is, I feel that it's important to allow 'the people' the right to bear arms so that if, though unlikely it may be, the government becomes corrupt the people may unite against them and have some means to fight against said government.",
"In UK, as in most of Europe, guns are seen as something used for hunting or target shooting, not for defense. This has traditionally led to European countries having an extremely repressive stance when it comes to guns, both for availability and type of guns allowed.\n\nFor UK, we also have issues such as the troubles in Ireland, which caused further restrictions in order to keep guns from ending up with the IRA.",
"It's interesting how a lot of the comments from English and Australian folks explain that a lack of gun ownership works because of trust that a community without guns is safer for everyone and that there is a high level of trust in the system (Police) to protect the community when necessary against those who act against the community. \n\nWhereas many posts from Americans are based on an expectation that if and when someone acts against them and their family, they and they alone are solely responsible for reacting to it with deadly force. There seems to be no consideration for what's best for the community, only yourselves. \n\nAs a Brit, I find this situation a little sad for Americans. I would 100% trust the armed response unit to come to my aid if there were to be a shooting. The chaos that would be caused by a handful of individual citizens all trying to act independently to stop a shooting I fear would be far more dangerous than waiting for the professionals. ",
"Right here we go. I'll try and keep this simple. \n\n\nI am English, I live in England, I own guns for sporting purposes under a section 1 (Firearms) and a section 2 (Shotgun) licence. \n\n\nGetting a section 2 licence is quite easy, just about anyone can get one provided they have not had a custodial sentence of more than three months (suspended or not). The police have to find a valid reason as to why not to grant you this licence. These licences are the most common and there are currently a few hundred thousand valid shotgun licences in the UK.\n\n\nSection 1 licences however are another matter. You have to prove to the police why you should be granted this licence. It's a lot more hoops to jump through but is simple enough. \n\n\nThere are two valid reasons for wanting a section 1 licence. \n\n1) Pest control / hunting\n\n2) Target shooting\n\n\nFor pest control you need written permission to shoot quarry from a landowner on a piece of land that must be deemed safe to shoot (your desired calibre) on by a firearms/firearms licensing officer. You are then only allowed to shoot on that land until they eventually trust you enough to give you an open stalking certificate which permits you to shoot your rifle anywhere that you deem safe however you still need written permission from the land owner.\n\n\nFor target shooting, before you can apply for a section 1 licence you must first join a home office approved club and receive training and guidance using club owned firearms for a probationary period of 3 to 6 months. You must then be invited in to the club by a committee vote before you can apply for your own licence. You then may only use your firearms where specified in your licence. Mine says that i am based at 'x club' but may also shoot at other home office approved ranges such as Bisley.\n\n\nThere are other licences such as:\n\nSection 5 (prohibited weapons) e.g regular handguns, centerfire semi/full auto rifles.\n\nSection 7(1) / Section 7 (3) licences which permit ownership of firearms of historical significance. These however must be kept at a section 7 club and may only leave in the hands of a section 5 dealer as well as they may only be handled by the section 7 owner or section 5 dealer. Section 7 firearms range from browning 1911's and other hand guns to fully automatic rifles and machine guns.\n\n\nAlso, section 5 is usually granted on a case by case basis by the home office for humane dispatch, usually in the form of a hand gun/revolver limited to two rounds.\n\n\nFun fact: The UK has an Olympic pistol shooting team which cannot train in the UK due to pistols being section 5 firearms. Each member of the team was granted a section 5 licence for the duration of the London 2012 Olympics but had it revoked afterwards. \n\n\nSo much for keeping this short.\n\n\nGuilt free plug for /r/ukguns ",
"Mostly because we can actually fight with fists, and don't require fire arms to sort out petty squabbles. \n\nSeriously though, the US likely has some of the most retarded people in the world, yet you let them own guns? Makes zero sense.",
"We can have guns, but the licensing provisions are strict. You have to demonstrate that you have a requirement for a gun (belong to a club with a range, belong to a skeet-shooting club with facilities, be a farmer etc), and you have to have a clean past vis-a-vis criminal activity. Gun crime is very rare in this country, and a lot of \"normal\" criminals wouldn't want to carry a gun, the escalation from the police (who aren't armed but have special teams for armed response) is pretty fierce if a weapon is involved.... we don't want guns in this country, they won't keep you safe, and a militia without serious formal military training would last a fast five minutes against the British Army..... seriously ask the average American soldier who has served with our forces somewhere where the shooting started, which side he wants to be on if the British Army are doing the shooting....",
"I think a much better question is why exactly *would* British People be allowed guns? The idea that everyone should be granted the ability to easily kill people at a safe distance seems a little bizarre to most non-Americans. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3pfzca | why did star wars start on episode iv back in the 70s and not episode i ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pfzca/eli5_why_did_star_wars_start_on_episode_iv_back/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw6088d",
"cw60ju0",
"cw61w7f",
"cw63fem",
"cw658tl"
],
"score": [
18,
3,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The original film was titled \"Star Wars\", the subtitle (Episode IV: A New Hope) was added in later releases to make it constant with the sequels. Episode numbers started with V in \"Empire Strikes Back\", when Lucas decided to write backstory for many of the characters which could be (and were) made into prequel films.",
"I always heard Lucas had the broad strokes of the overall arc in mind (without being written) and made \"A New Hope\" first because it made the best stand-alone film.",
"\"A New Hope\" (ANH) was originally part of a larger treatment written by Lucas called \"The Adventures of the Starkiller\".\n\nANH was near the middle of the series of movies modeled after older \"Serial\"-style movies that would play before longer movies; such as \"Flash Gordon\" and \"Buck Rodgers\".\n\nLucas wasn't given enough money for \"Adventures of the Starkiller\", so he broke out a part of it and reworked it as a stand-alone store that was framed as part of an ongoing, larger story.\n\nAfter the success of ANH, he began excising Return of the Jedi (ROTJ) from The Adventures of the Starkiller; it was further fleshed out by other (better) writers. You can see this in both the tonal, story, plot, and character shifts/developments that have little connection to ANH; really, beyond character names and backgrounds, the moves aren't really connected in any way.\n\n\"Episode I\" wasn't added until much later after there was a call for the pre-ANH movies to be made.",
"Lucas had an overall story in mind when he started out, but looking at the early drafts of the first Star Wars movies that story doesn't seem to have much in common with the one we eventually got.\n\nThe whole idea was to make a movie based on the stuff he enjoyed in his youth (which is something that is true for almost all his projects) and ended up making something that was a lot like the Sci-Fi serials of old. There are numerous nods and references to that legacy even in the newer movies. He mixed it with standard mythology motives like following the Campbell's \"Hero with a thousand faces\" to give the whole thing more epicness and adding touches from WWII war movies and Kurosawa movies.\n\nWhen the first Star Wars movie started taking form he created something that had both a history of stuff that had happened before and a future of stuff that might happen later, but it was mostly a stand alone story without and Episode number.\n\nWhen the whole thing was more successful than anyone expected, Lucas decided he could add somethings from the stuff he had earlier cut out and dropped.\n\nTo give it more of serial feel he renamed and numbered the first movie as Episode IV: A New Hope. That gave the whole thing a certain in-medias-res quality like watching a serial episode halfway into the series without having seen the first few episode.\n\nIt made everything look grander and more epic and opened up the possibility of creating prequels to show the first three episodes and the adventures of a young Anakin Skywalker. Which is what he eventually did. ",
"A New Hope was originally made as Star Wars, a single stand alone movie, since Lucas wasn't sure it would be successful enough to spawn other films. It's noted that he had something of a larger idea, but the only part that was fleshed out enough were the parts that turned into A New Hope. And having only one chance to make it, he opted for the more detailed part rather than a cliffhanger set in that story's past.\n\nWith the success of the film, Lucas continued the story, noting that there was an undeveloped story that took place earlier."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
13lwp4 | - hedging | I searched reddit and only found the question of what a hedge fund is, I checked investopedia for hedging and I still don't really get how risk is mitigated. Can someone please ELI5? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13lwp4/eli5_hedging/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7554bd"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The concept itself is not as complicated as the instruments themselves so I'll just start off with that. Hedging is basically when you want to minimize how much you can gain or lose by entering in another transaction.\n\nFor example, assume you bought $1Mil worth of stuff denominated in Mexican Pesos and they will send you a bill later in the year. You might be worried that the mexican peso will fluctuate in value a lot when you actually pay it(and in this case you'd be worried that the mexican peso increases in value relative to your currency which means it will cost MORE from your point of view). \nTo to hedge this, you might ask your aunt in Mexico to lend you $1Mil today in mexican pesos and you will pay her a fee.\nOn the day the invoice is due, you will take that money and use it to pay the invoice. So because you already have pesos, you didn't have to suffer potential risk (or gain) from the peso becoming more valuable and requiring you to pay more in USD/CAD.\n\nThere are a ton of hedging instruments that kind of follow this concept, but they're pretty complicated.\n\n\n**Or to further ELI5 it** (this would just explain how hedging could mitigate risk and grossly simplifies it): Imagine you're taking a multiple choice and there are two questions:\n\n\n\n1) Is a soccer ball round? TRUE/FALSE\n\n2) Is a basketball a square? TRUE/FALSE\n\nYou remember that soccer balls and basketballs are the same shape but are not sure if it was round or square. If you were to to guess one shape, you could end up with 2 right, or both wrong. So to \"hedge\" your choice and minimize risk you can answer that it is a square to one and that it is round to the other and guarantee that you'll get one right."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2s2f8b | what exactly does anonymous do and is it ever useful? in light of "operation charlie" all they've done was take a site down for an hour. what's the point? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s2f8b/eli5_what_exactly_does_anonymous_do_and_is_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnlj6uv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Well at one point they were useful, many of their early operations were focused on internet freedoms and fighting 'rogue' hacker groups (LizardSquad, although they came back so that didn't really work).\nRecently they have become a bandwagon-jumping publicity group causing more contraversy than change.\n\nDue to the disorganised nature of Anonymous its entirely possible that all of the members who spearheaded/participated in the 'useful days' have long since left.\n\nEDIT: Probably worth mentioning the many conspiricy theories saying that theres a big difference between Old Anonymous and 'New' Anoymous because they have been taken over by various goverment agencies."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8lpwac | why does excess food stretch the stomach but not excess water? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8lpwac/eli5_why_does_excess_food_stretch_the_stomach_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzhiy8u"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"Excess water can actually stretch the stomach. Competitive eaters will often practise by drinking tons and tons of water, so they \"train\" their stomach to stretch more without having to eat unhealthy amounts of food all the time. \n\nAs for why eating food makes you more full than drinking water, there are two reasons. Solids stay in your stomach longer than liquids, so you stomach will become empty faster if it is full of water. When food begins to be digested, nutrients such as glucose are released into the blood that prevent you from feeling hungry, while more water does not have the same effect. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
29v67h | could the blood nicotine of a smoker kill a mosquito? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29v67h/eli5_could_the_blood_nicotine_of_a_smoker_kill_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciot0z5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My wife is a heavy smoker and I can attest that if given a choice the mosquitoes around our house will munch on her more readily than me. My two cents, they're addicted now too! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
77qgzw | what causes the actual sound associated with tinnitus? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/77qgzw/eli5_what_causes_the_actual_sound_associated_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"donyd44",
"donye2r",
"dooaeao",
"dooefqz",
"doofx3v",
"dop2e9f"
],
"score": [
4479,
81,
6,
3,
57,
4
],
"text": [
"We don't know for sure.\n\nA common theory is that the brain is trying to make sense of the lack of signal (probably due to damaged hair cells) by cranking up the sensitivity, resulting in basically static noise. Imagine turning up the volume on the radio because you can't hear anything. But since there's no signal you just get louder white noise. \n\nRegardless what it is though, there is no actual sound. Tinnitus ultimately happens in the brain, not the ears. Misinterpreting signals, or neural circuits thrown out of balance",
"Nerve hairs inside the ear send signals to your brain that tell it what they hear. When there is hearing damage, some or more of these sensitive nerve hairs are broken off, and their signals go crazy instead of sensing an actual sound. The sum of all these broken hairs is the sound we experience as tinnitus.",
"I read a study last year that referred to it as\"hidden hearing loss\", they found that in cases where people were around noises above 90db for extended periods tinnitus was often a precursor to permanent hearing damage. At least for people who work in loud environments.",
"I'm not an expert but saw an explanation once, and since there seems to be a lack of that explanation here I will try remember it. \n\nSo the neurons in the brain get a signal from the ear and they activate and so you hear a sound. When they activate, they cause other neurons to activate, its like a domino reaction. Now they are all connected. Sometimes, especially when they're getting very strong signals, or no signals due to damaged ear, they can get in a loop of sorts, activating each other continuously, never deactivating. If there's a lot of these, activating themselves continuously that's when you hear the constant ringing. \n\nMore or less. ",
"I'm probably late to the party here, but tinnitus is most analogous to phantom limb pain. When there is a (near) total lack of stimulation from a nerve, your brain makes up for the loss in one way or another. Just like the usual \"prescription\" for phantom limb pain is to stay active to keep your mind from dwelling on that lack of stimulation, white or pink or grey noise generators (I know they exist, just don't know the difference) can help calm tinnitus by stimulating the hair cells in your inner ear that detect sound at specific frequencies. This is usually the best option if you do not have appreciable hearing loss that warrants the investment in a hearing aid. Most people who suffer from tinnitus, though, *do* have hearing loss as well, so hearing aids that are programmed to help stimulate your hearing nerve(s) can work wonders in reducing (although not totally eliminating) tinnitus in affected patients.\n\nSource; I am the husband of an Au.D and an engineer with interest in acoustics and hearing. We joke that I have an honorary doctorate, too.",
"In permanent tinitus there is no sound, your brain makes it up. Some say the frequency of the sound is a frequency your ear cannot hear anymore but your brain expects it to be there. So by the lack of that frequency, your brain is confused and tries to compensate by creating this false processing sound. So if the hearing part is queried or checked by other parts it can tell them \"i'm ok, look at the stats, i got every frequency covered i suppose to have\". \n\nI got it proven by undergoing an EEG in a soundproof room staring at a white wall. The EEG registered brain activity in the hearing part of the brain. Meaning the brain was processing something that wasn't there.\nThere is a (experimental) treatment where they electrify the part of the brain responsible for the phantom sound so it overloads and \"breaks\". The tinnitus will be gone for about 3 months until the brain recovers. Then it is time for a new treatment. I never tried that because i don't want to know what life is without tinnitus and get it back every 3 months.\n\nOther treatments suggested are anit-depressant or anti-epileptic medication. How does that help? In order for a part of your brain to give an alert to your consciousness, the signals of that brain part have to rise above a certain threshold level so it is worth mentioning (if we didn't had those thresholds, we'd be overwhelmed by signals and go crazy). Those medications make that threshold higher so weak processing signals do not get to the threshold and never revealed to your consciousness. If they can get the threshold higher than the signals of the tinnitus, they wont go through to your consciousness so you wont experience them.\nExtra info: that is what your body does during sleep, set the threshold higher. That is why you dont feel mosquitoes or spiders, the signals from your skin do not pass the threshold so it doesn't get passed on to your consciousness (which would wake you up)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1esm7t | why isn't "quantitative easing" money just given directly to taxpayers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1esm7t/eli5_why_isnt_quantitative_easing_money_just/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca3osa9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The Fed isn't there for the sake of taxpayers. It's there for the sake of banks and that kind of guy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
43k8yb | why do cable stations play the same movie twice in a row on weekends? | Who is watching the same movie twice? Isn't it better for audience retention that they play two movies with overlapping audiences? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43k8yb/eli5_why_do_cable_stations_play_the_same_movie/ | {
"a_id": [
"czismz5",
"czisqun",
"cziuphy"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Weekends are very low-rated time for most TV. Especially daytime TV.\n\nChannels will play movies back to back in an attempt to draw in different audiences at the different times without paying for additional programming.",
"I would stumble on a movie halfway through then watch the second playing to see the first part of the movie then usually just catch the end again with context. Back before DVRs mind you.\n\nI assume this is at least some of the strategy behind it.",
"Because economics:\n_URL_0_\n\nBasically the more channels that are out there, the larger the share of people who didn't watch the first broadcast and might watch the second. Add to that the people who would watch the broadcast a second time, and you have a potential business model."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://books.google.ca/books?id=FfgmpGBospkC&pg=PA139&lpg=PA139"
]
] |
|
2zqe72 | if the nfl is a non-profit then why is roger goodell's salary $44 million? how can non-profits legally pay executives exorbitant amounts of money? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zqe72/eli5_if_the_nfl_is_a_nonprofit_then_why_is_roger/ | {
"a_id": [
"cplbump",
"cplbyc1",
"cplbykk",
"cplc7jf",
"cpldfeo",
"cple24i",
"cplnpqh",
"cpltuk3",
"cpltwxx"
],
"score": [
43,
202,
16,
28,
7,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the profit they make is spent towards furthering the purpose of the NFL and not as bonuses/dividends. His salary can be 300 million but if the profit they make isn't directly given to him or other higher-ups, there's nothing illegal happening. Salary is just another line in the budget.",
"Non-profit doesn't mean charity. You can pay anyone any amount you want. All non-profit means is that there's no one who gets the profits from the organization.",
"Non-profits can pay whatever they desire to hire the talent they want. This means executives can still make for-profit salaries since salaries are a pre-profit expense. All that is required for non-profit status is reinvestment of any net profits or, as some nonprofits do, charity donations and etc.\n\nEdit : spelling",
"The important distinction is that the NFL is a non-profit organization that coordinates a bunch of for-profit teams. A non-profit can have whatever mandate they choose. In this case the purpose of the NFL is to progress the league in such a way that the team owners make lots of money. Ultimately, the goal of the NFL is to make money for the teams in the league, not to give back to the fans or do charity work.",
"If something is for-profit, it means that the goal is to make profit for whoever owns the business/company/organization. If it is non-profit, it mean that something else is the goal.\n\nNon-profits still have employees, and it sounds like Mr. Goodell is an employee of the NFL. And non-profits (including charities) can still pay their employees, usually whatever they want. And that's good.\n\nIf you have a non-profit that oversees 20 homeless shelters, for example, that host 1000 people on any given night, and see ten of thousands over the course of the year, that's a big job. If you're only paying the Executive Director $20,000 a year, you're probably not going to get someone who has the skills and experience necessary to manage an organization like that. You've got to offer a salary that is reasonably attractive to the kind of employee you need.\n\nSimilarly, if the NFL needs a great commissioner, to deal with the various team owners, broadcasters, advertisers, etc., they may need to offer a big fat paycheck. $44 million seems like nonsense to me, but apparently that's what it costs. If you could do just as good a job, and are willing to do it for $22 million, I'm sure they'd hire you.",
"People who work for non-profits still get paid. If you run one that generates billions of dollars, whether a charity, religious organization, or professional sporting League, they are probably going to pay you a lot of money. Several charities in the US pay their top executives more than one million per year. ",
" Salaries are an expense even if they are very high.",
"A better question why is it the green bay packers are the only teamed owned by the city they play in?",
"The NFL is an unincorporated 501 (c) 6 Non-profit organization. This designation applies specifically to the NFL but a few other businesses/organizations can fall under this category, such as the chamber of commerce in your town or city.\n\nWhy is this a non-profit? Because this specific business has a very specific goal, to promote professional football. The chamber of commerce in your city has a specific goal, to promote businesses in your area. This business is in this space to promote those another type of business or improve the environment for that business!\n\nIn this case, the NFL is promoting football by creating franchises, enabling a board to create rules within the sport, create a level playing field and ensure people have access to professional football. Each individual NFL team is a franchise of the league, approved by the league, which consists of 2 board members from each franchise. In order for a new team to come into existence, all the other teams have to agree (might be a certain %,i forget). This does not refer to a change of venue for a franchise.\n\nSo the NFL needs to do whatever it takes to ensure professional football grows. They do that by investing their income in the organizations and having staff to handle all the things it takes to make professional football happen. Roger Goodell is a business expense. He pays taxes on his income, from the NFL, but the NFL is not taxed on it's income. Instead, all of it's money must be accounted for at the end of the year within the business or distributed to the franchises.\n\nThis is actually a really good business model for a lot of things, the NFL is just a shining example.\n\nELI5: Rogers money is taxed, and the money the NFL distributes to its employees and franchises gets taxed and this is OK because at the end of the year, the NFL shouldn't be using this money for anything other then promoting football and it's franchises. In order to be an NFL team, your franchise must be for profit (it's in the bylaws, last i checked). The NFL being a non-profit actually prevents a scenario of double taxation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1dxh2q | how to find happiness | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dxh2q/eli5_how_to_find_happiness/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9uspd1"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I agree that this definitely the wrong sub, but I want to respond because it sounds like you could use some friendly advice. \n\nFrom my experience, happiness isn't \"discovered\". It's created. And only you can create it for yourself. Happiness can snowball. For your life is as enjoyable, as you make it. When I'm feeling blue, I personally focus on little things that cheer me up. A comedy film, an uplifting song, the voice of my family, good weather, exercise, a candy bar, ..just simple accessible things that have a tendency to cheer me up. \n\nHowever, I also understand that there is a such thing as diagnosed depression, and it is a mental disease that requires therapy and/or medicine. From what you described, it sounds like speaking to a professional couldn't hurt your cause. \n\nI truly hope that you can development an enjoyment for your life. Take care.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8n6d8k | why do you sweat and feel really hot when you vomit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8n6d8k/eli5_why_do_you_sweat_and_feel_really_hot_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dztf143"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Isn't that just basic signs of sickness? Vomiting mostly occurs when you have a sickness, like a cold, which also makes you sweat and gives you a fever."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6br2g6 | despite being the most prolific media corporation in america, how is fox news not considered msm? isn't it the most mainstream of mainsteam media? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6br2g6/eli5_despite_being_the_most_prolific_media/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhout81"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"It depends on your definition of \"mainstream media.\" You could define it as one of the major media players that gets access to information based on its size and reach. Or you could define it as reporting the same thing as the other major media players.\n\nIt's definitely mainstream media under the first definition. It has a front seat in the White House Press Room, it has tons of viewers, and disseminates news across the world in a variety of formats. \n\nIt's probably mainstream media under the other definition, but maybe not. If CBS, CNN, NBC, and ABC all have one take on an issue and Fox is all on its own with another take, then maybe Fox isn't mainstream. However, I don't think the actual news segments from Fox are far away enough from what other networks report on to be considered out of the mainstream (the opinion shows might be another topic, but those aren't news).\n\nConservatives and Fox like to play up the not being mainstream thing, though, because it helps their narrative that they're taking a stand against other stations reporting fake news and propaganda."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dnrhrm | : how do planets keep stable orbits in binary systems? |
Looking at a map of the Alpha Centauri system, assuming A as the centre (incorrect, but it's easier to imagine) Alpha Centauri B has a very variable orbit ranging from out at a Uranus distance to a Jupiter distance around A.
Yet we know planets exist there.
How do they keep steady orbits when they have something so massive as another star occasionally drawing so close? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dnrhrm/eli5_how_do_planets_keep_stable_orbits_in_binary/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5euxak",
"f5fgobl"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"All the planets that didn't have a stable orbit got destroyed already. Imagine throwing a box of rubber ducks into a river just before a waterfall. The vast majority are going to go over the waterfall, but a couple will get stuck somewhere in the river either in some weird vortex current, or a shoal, or on a stick. If someone came along a month later and said \"how did those two rubber ducks get to safe places?\" you would forgive them for not seeing just how much other stuff got destroyed along the way.",
"The only planet confirmed with a high level of certainty in the alpha centauri system orbits proxima centauri (alpha centauri C) which itself is only very loosely bound to the system orbiting between 0.06 and 0.2 light years from alpha centauri A and B.\n\nThe not quite confirmed planet around alpha centauri B is thought orbit extremely close to the star, so close that it would have a partially molten surface which is close enough to B/far enough from A to be stable. Planets that possibly had formed further out between the stars would have been in unstable orbits and ejected - but there is the possibility that more planets exist much further outside of both stars orbit, far enough to orbit their common center of mass without being disturbed by their motion too much."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
64s1lr | what counts as being "white" ? | I've always been curios about this. I've never really been sure up to what point is someone considered white; Where is the line drawn and who draws the line?
Do Greeks count as white? Do Turqs count as white? Spanish? Lebanese? Kabyle people (Berber people native to Algeria (Africans)? Kazakhstanis? Slavs?
Does religion define it?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/64s1lr/eli5_what_counts_as_being_white/ | {
"a_id": [
"dg4jj3e",
"dg4l645",
"dg4lzpb",
"dg4r3pw"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"\"Races\" are social constructs. As such anybody is white who is regarded as white by others. \n\nThe division of humans in different \"races\" is a silly relict from the past, when people thought superficial characteristics like skin color had some deeper significance. \n\nNow that we have decoded the human genome, we know that those superficial features do not influence who we are on any \"deeper\" level. ",
"To answer the question, when people are described as being \"white\", what you're really describing is someone being Caucasian.\n\nAccording to Merriam-Webster, Caucasian is defined: \"of, constituting, or characteristic of race of humankind Native to Europe, North Africa, and SW Asia, and classified according to physical features...usually light skin pigmentation\"\n\nSource:_URL_0_",
"'White' typically refers to the caucasoid people of Europe, and their descendants living elsewhere, like in the US, NZ or Australia. Whiteness refers to their ethnicity and not the colour of their skin, 'paleness' is a better word to describe the latter. From your list of examples, the Spanish and Slavs would generally be considered to be white, even if Spaniards are often very tan and sometimes swarthy, while e.g Turks are not white even if they are pale.\n\nThere are handfuls of blonde, blue-eyed people in Afghanistan and of Berber origin (because they share the same caucasoid roots as white people) but they're typically categorized with Arabs and Turks due to their geographical location.",
"I would say a person is a white if they have (or these combined ethno groups form the majority of their heritage); \n \nGermanic - (Germans, Dutch, English, Danes, etc.) \nHispanic (Spanish, Portuguese, etc.) \nLatins (Italians, French, etc.) \nCeltic (Irish, Welsh, Cornish, Scottish, Breton etc) \nSlavic (Russians, Poles, Serbs, Bossnacks, etc.) \nBaltic (Finns, Latvians, Lithuanians, etc.) \nHellenic (Greeks) \nBasque (Basques) \n\n \nIn terms of peoples the nations would be all of Europe bar Turkey (Turks are Atlic Asians I think, near Turkmenistan), Hungary (Magyars come from the same general region as Turks)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Caucasian"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1weoxk | how is hate speech considered constitutional?(american here) | Wouldn't the first Amendment (freedom of speech) protect people and allow them to say what they want? what is hate speech defined as? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1weoxk/eli5how_is_hate_speech_considered/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf19tah",
"cf19tue",
"cf1a5yu",
"cf1a7x9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
11,
6
],
"text": [
"It's unclear whether you mean *constitutional* or *unconstitutional*.",
"Hate speech is constitutional.",
"Hate speech is constitutional, barring certain very limited restrictions. The basic principle coming out of R.A.V. v. St. Paul (1992) is that the government cannot prohibit speech based on the *content* of the message. For example, trying to ban Neo-Nazis from holding demonstrations would boil down to the government banning them because they disapprove of what they are saying. Now, it's perfect correct for citizens to disapprove of Neo-Nazism, but it's not for the government to bring the force of law down upon them because, if we do, we have now entered the slippery slope of deciding what people can say based on the majority. We ban Neo-Nazi speech because we don't like it. What happens if the majority doesn't like Pro-gay rights speech? Or pro-evolutionary theory speech? We allow hate speech because it's not the job of the government to tell us what we are and aren't allowed to say. It's up to the citizens to individually decide what's appropriate. \n\n > Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move\nthem to tears of both joy and sorrow, and—as it did here—\ninflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react \nto that pain by punishing the speaker. As a Nation we \nhave chosen a different course—to protect even hurtful \nspeech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle\npublic debate.\n\n > Snyder v. Phelps (2011)",
"Hate speech is constitutional. Nearly everything you say is constitutionally protected (from state action). This protection extends to hate speech.\n\nBut one situation where hate speech (or any speech for that matter) is *not* constitutionally protected is where it creates some sort of *immediate* danger to individuals. The common example is, \"You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater.\" So consider the following examples:\n\n* You say \"I hate Japs.\" That's constitutional. The government *generally* can't stop you from saying that.\n\n* You say \"I hate Japs. So let's draw our guns and grease all the slopes in this city\" to an excited crowd in a public place. That's not constitutionally protected. You're inciting a race riot. The government can intervene and shut you down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4c1m72 | why is it that when we are learning the basics of a certain task, we as humans label it "(task) 101"? | Driving 101, Swimming 101, Hockey 101 | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c1m72/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_we_are_learning_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1e8l9q",
"d1e8lya",
"d1e8mot",
"d1eal39"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It's common in colleges and universities to have numbers for courses, with 101 being the first class you'd take in a particular subject. Often, the first number will indicate the year level that the class is designed for (a 1 meaning freshman, or new student), and the next two being a course number within that level, with higher numbers being more difficult (class 102 or 110 might be more advanced).\n\nSo, \"101\" has entered the lexicon as the basic starting point for any new course of learning.",
"Most universities use a 3-digit system for numbering classes (ex. Physics 203). The first number indicates what level of a class it is. 100 is the first level.",
"Because intro classes in college are generally 101 and go up from there. 102 would be a incremental step whereas 201 would signify a year higher. This isn't always the case but traditionally that's how it was done. ",
"Universities number their courses. 101 would mean it is the first course of the subject. So \"Physics 101\" is the first college physics class you take that covers the basics of physics. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8jiglc | why do people who get shot stiffen their limbs? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8jiglc/eli5_why_do_people_who_get_shot_stiffen_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyzxbkp"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Your muscles are one line of defense against harm to your organs. Since it's dense, thick tissue that is difficult to get through compared to skin and fat, and relatively easily healed, especially compared to organs. When you sense a sudden force or hit against your body, you tense up so that your muscles become even denser, hopefully stopping whatever is hitting you from getting past those muscles and into say, your lungs or guts."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1up99d | why do some online purchases require my credit card's security code, while others don't? | I just bought something from Amazon with a new credit card and I wasn't asked to enter my card's [security code](_URL_0_). On other websites, however, I'm unable to purchase anything without entering this code.
What is this code actually used for, and why don't all online merchants ask for it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1up99d/eli5_why_do_some_online_purchases_require_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"cekdf58",
"cekdhzd",
"cekhbs0",
"cekmn4t",
"ceknse7",
"cekoobi",
"cekotoa"
],
"score": [
3,
41,
6,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Also, why do I need to sign the receipt at some stores and others don't care?",
"The code is only printed on the card, not stored on the magnetic strip or chip which (in theory) means that you must be able to see the card to know the code. \n\nAll that is technically required to process a credit card transaction is the 16 digit card number and the expiry date. Anything else is additional security. Some merchants ask for the cvv, the issue number or valid from date as well (not all cards have all of these). American Express has 4 digits in the cvv. They will also ask for the card holder's name, which doesn't have to match. However, the software they use may not allow them to process a transaction without the information, so there's no point arguing if they say they require it.\n\nTl;dr: it is extra security but not technically required.",
"I can't speak for all merchants and all credit card processors, but when I worked on the credit card system for a Fortune 100 retailer we were charged different rates by our card processor based on whether the card was registered as \"present\" (meaning we had the security code), and whether it was swiped or keyed in. We could complete a transaction without the security code, but we received a discount if it was entered so we prompted our users to enter it in our point-of-sale system.\n\nThe logic for the different rates was to compensate for the risk the card processor was taking of a chargeback (a customer reporting they didn't authorize a charge and getting it reversed). If we have the signature of the person, and the card was swiped, and we have the security code it's pretty unlikely the person will be doing a chargeback compared to if a person gives the sales person a credit card number but doesn't actually have the card.",
"All the answers here so far are correct, but it's also worth pointing out that every card actually has two security codes. The CVV2 code that most people who buy things online are familiar with is printed on (typically) the back of the card, but not included in the magnetic strip's data. There is an additional, similar code, called CVV1, which is only present in the mag strip and not physically printed on the card anywhere.\n\nThe presence of either of these codes lets the processor know something about the way the card data was input. For example, if the CVV1 code is present, the card was swiped through a reader. Likewise, the CVV2 code is intended to prove that the physical card was available when the main number and expiration date were entered manually.\n\nAt least in theory, neither code is supposed to be stored by merchants after the transaction completes. They're used immediately to validate the transaction, then should be discarded. That way, the ultimate \"goal\" of using the CVV codes is to authenticate that the physical card is present during the transaction, which is meant to at least help safeguard against data breaches (meaning if someone were to illicitly obtain a list of card numbers from a merchant's logs, those numbers would be useless at any merchant requiring CVV authentication, since the CVV codes wouldn't be present in the stolen data).\n\nTL;DR: The idea behind CVV codes is to authenticate that you actually have the physical card in your possession, but as others have pointed out, it's an optional, additional layer of security that merchants will either use or not based on their specific needs.",
"I am a web developer by trade and I have worked on a few different shopping cart systems over the years. I do not have the best understanding of all avenues involved in online commerce, but I will take a crack at this.. Please correct me where I am wrong.\n\nDifferent payment gateways are used as an intermediary between you as the customer and the bank which holds the money for the business. When a website owner signs up for a gateway account they have to go through some rigorous assessments to determine the legitimacy of their business (Except for paypal, which usually lets you cruise until they detect \"fraud\").\n\nGateways require the website owners to adhere to a specific set of guidelines to protect their customers (PCI Compliance, or Payment Card Industry Compliance). \n\nSystems like Amazon most likely have their very own gateway service (Which I would assume to be true as they offer a gateway for customers as well). Having their own gateway service would require them to have some specific agreements with their banks, but due to the volume of money they move through every day, I would assume that an agreement like that would not be hard to broker, especially given Amazons reputation).\n\n[Here is a diagram of how _URL_0_, one of the industry leading payment gateways works](_URL_1_)\n\n**TL;DR**: Small webshops use smaller services for online transactions which require stringent PCI compliance. Amazon, and other large online retailers most likely act as their own intermediaries between the customers who shop on their sites and the banks who store the money after a sale.",
"I see a lot of half answers here, but a lot of misinformation, so here's the actual ELI5 answer: Some retailers require the security code and others don't because of how many credit card transactions they process every year.\n\n[source](_URL_0_)\n\nMore in-depth (slightly non-ELI5) answer: Every merchant, in order to accept credit cards, has to be PCI (Payment Card Industry) compliant. Every merchant will fit into one category or another based on a few key criteria: number of transactions annually across the board, as well as specific criteria per each card brand (Visa, Mastercard, etc). If you end up a lower level (from 1-5), you must adhere to more rigorous PCI standards than a higher level merchant (more security controls on card data such as requiring the security code).\n\nadditional source: I work for a level 1 PCI compliant hosting provider.",
"the code isn't actually needed for the payment, there's a security standard called PCI-DSS (Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard) and how it works is the more secure that card data is the less the banks will charge for a transaction, \n\nlet's say you just take the basic card details and you write it all down in a book, while you *could* take payment from that it is very risky so the banks charge you a 25% fee to process the payment. \n\nThe higher the security the lower the charge so you scale that up to a full scale properly protected domain (or website i guess, outside my field) where data is all encrypted, proper access control is in place etc and that charge can potentially be reduced to zero.\n\nthat's why some shops charge a fee to pay by card if it's less than X amount\n\n\n*edit* i missed the bit where i say the number is essentially an extra bit of security that you actually *have* the card and haven't just seen say a picture of it"
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Card_security_code"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"Authorize.net",
"http://www.authorize.net/resources/howitworksdiagram/"
],
[
"http://www.pcicomplianceguide.org/merchants-pci-basics-quick-guide.php"
],
[]
] |
|
8d61wy | why do people drink alcohol when it tastes horrible, causes headaches, vomiting, and makes them act like fools? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8d61wy/eli5_why_do_people_drink_alcohol_when_it_tastes/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxkia6p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Some people find the flavor of alcoholic beverages fine, even pleasant. They may also enjoy the sensations it provokes in the brain.\n\nIt doesn't necessarily cause one to have headaches, vomit, or behave like a fool, if consumed in moderation.\n\nIf not consumed in moderation, then its action on the body might itself cloud realizing those potential future repercussions. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
c9txl0 | if eyesight is not treated it gets worse and worse over time. can it heal itself? if there are people with bad foresight and myopia why cannot it turn back? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9txl0/eli5_if_eyesight_is_not_treated_it_gets_worse_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"et2z80t"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"If you have poor eyesight, it gets worse over time whether you treat it or not. Usually, it stabilizes once you reach adulthood*. Again, regardless of whether or not you treat it . And no, it can't heal itself. \n\nIt's caused by your eyeball not being quite the right shape as it grows, which causes images to be projected slightly in front of or behind your retina instead of directly on the retina like they're supposed to be.\n\n***\n\n\\* Until you reach your 40s, and then you start suffering from presbyopia, where the flexible lens in your eye begins to harden, and you begin to lose the ability to focus on close-up objects."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dwujao | why does corn « pop », and not other vegetables? why don’t we have pop-zucchini for instance? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dwujao/eli5_why_does_corn_pop_and_not_other_vegetables/ | {
"a_id": [
"f7lj6ow",
"f7ljn3z",
"f7lk024",
"f7llc1j"
],
"score": [
5,
14,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Corn pops when the starches inside heat up and liquefy, building pressure that the shell can't contain. Once the pressure inside is enough, it pops and the liquid inside is cooled as it splashes out.",
"Corn pops because it's basically pure starch in a hard shell. \n\nOther starchy grains puff (Rice Krispies are basically rice's popcorn) but they don't pop because rice is puffed after the shell is removed and even brown rice doesn't really pop because the rice outer coating isn't as stiff as corn's shell. \n\nPuffed wheat exists, too, Honey Smacks are sweetened puffed wheat.",
"You can pop most things that have a moist interior and hard outer shell. That is what allows pressure to build up. So you can pop corn, wheat, rice, and most other grains.",
"Dried corn kernels pop because they have a hard, watertight outer shell (pericarp) and a starchy inside (endosperm) with a small center (germ) that retains a tiny bit of moisture. When you heat the dried kernel, that moisture in the center turns to steam and expands, but has nowhere to go since it can’t escape through the outer shell. The steam pressure builds until the shell can’t hold it anymore, at which point it fails and the kernel explodes (aka pops).\n\n\nZucchini is made up of a ton of individual cells that each contain water. When a zucchini is heated, the cell walls break down well before the water inside them is able to turn to steam, allowing the water to escape and turn its insides to mush and cause the skin to soften."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
wpxxw | the health care mandate vs. being forced to buy liability insurance if you own a car. | Why is the former fought on constitutional grounds, but the latter is not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/wpxxw/eli5_the_health_care_mandate_vs_being_forced_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5fezhl",
"c5ff0qb"
],
"score": [
7,
6
],
"text": [
"This has a lot to do with politics. In the 1990s the Heritage Foundation (a powerful conservative lobbying organization in the U.S.) supported the idea of an \"individual mandate\" (people must pay into the system). \n\nToday, due to a Democratic president championing this old idea, most conservatives do not support it.",
"There's a couple reasons.\n\n1.) The former was really only fought on constitutional grounds at the federal level. The argument was basically \"this power wasn't given to congress/the federal government so the 10th amendment prevents them from doing it\". I'm not aware of any real challenges to the mandate at a state level when it occurred in Massachusetts\n\n2.) The insurance mandate is placed upon everyone. There is no way to get out of it. It is not based on optional behavior. Liability insurance is based on a completely voluntary/optional act (driving a car) thus the government is not forcing you to purchase something they're simply laying out the conditions required to participate in a given activity."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7r4olj | what is the speed of a photon as it gets reflected by a mirror? | I know that if a photon exists, then it must be traveling at *c*. My question is, when a photon gets reflected or gets reflected how can it stop and move the other way. I picture it as a ball getting thrown up, stopping, and coming back down. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7r4olj/eli5_what_is_the_speed_of_a_photon_as_it_gets/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsu6sk7",
"dsu74tq",
"dsuiqo2",
"dsuk73i",
"dsv4784"
],
"score": [
16,
98,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You've partially answered your own question - photons move at c. \n\nWhat you're missing is that they're not (necessarily) the same photon. When light hits the mirror, the photons are absorbed. \n\nThe reflection is other photons being emitted, travelling at c. ",
"So! Your analogy of a ball isn't a bad one to start with. But instead of thinking about a ball being thrown up, and having its momentum acted on by gravity and reaching a moment of equilibrium, let's instead think about a ball being thrown *down*.\n\nWhen you bounce a ball it hits the earth and comes back more or less instantly, due to the laws of motion.\n\n(I realize I'm way beyond what a 5 year old would understand, stop me if I'm going too fast.)\n\nWhen it comes back up, of course, it is slower and doesn't go so high. That's because of gravity and friction, and inertia. Inertia is the thing that really matters here.\n\nA ball has mass and therefore has inertia that it has to overcome. Overcoming inertia slows things down, and inertia is relative to mass. \n\nA photon has no mass. And therefore no inertia. When it changes direction, it does it *instantly*. It bounces without slowing down or losing speed. It's also too small to have friction and while it is affected by gravity, well... We don't really understand gravity so we can't really understand how light is affected by it.",
"When the photon hits the reflective material it is gobbled up and then spat back out in the opposite direction. It never bounces so it doesn't have to slow down or speed up. ",
"You can't think of it as a simple photon when you're talking about reflection and refraction of light. You must think of it as a wave.\n\nQuantum mechanics tells us what's called Wave-Particle Duality, meaning that any particle (a photon, proton, neutron, electron, etc.) is both a wave and a particle at the same time. When I say wave, think of ripples on a pond of water. When I say particle, think of what you normally think of when you think of these things.\n\nIn some interactions, particle-based mathematics describes them perfectly. This can be something like the attraction/repulsion of a proton and an electron next to each other (they're like magnets, one is positive and one is negative). \n\nHowever, some interactions make the particle seem more like a wave. This means that they can reflect off of surfaces and interfere with each other (when two waves meet, they will either strengthen each other or cancel each other out. Think trying to shake two ends of a jump rope... if you do it at the same time, then you get one big wave. If you shake both ends at different times, it is much weaker).\n\nWhen it comes to light reflecting off of a surface, the wave model is used. Therefore, there isn't necessarily an object like a ball that's being slowed down.\n\nThat's the end of how light reflects, and I'd like to just add another thing about the speed of light. A photon can never move at any speed but c (the speed of light). If we were to look at the mostly inaccurate particle model here, that would mean that the photon instantly changes direction without changing its speed.",
"This is a really complicated question. If you have an hour and a half [here's Richard Feynman answering it](_URL_0_)\n\nBasically the photon is travelling at c until it hits the mirror where it is absorbed by an electron on the mirror's surface. Then various quantum phenomena occur within the atoms on the mirror's surface. However what makes a mirror a mirror is that the end result of these phenomena is that a second photon is spat out almost immediately and with the same wavelength and angular momentum as the first.\n\nYes photons are normally generated travelling in a random direction, why is it not random in this case? It's something to do with the quantum reactions between the atoms on the mirror's surface. I forget exactly what but if someone could watch the lecture and summarise it that would be great.\n\nSo at the moment of reflection there is no photon and so no speed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMSgE62S6oo"
]
] |
|
1g82fw | how does gas and paper chromatography detect drugs in athletes and how did lance armstrong get away with doping? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1g82fw/eli5_how_does_gas_and_paper_chromatography_detect/ | {
"a_id": [
"cahs6kl",
"cai142r"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The paper has a chemical in it that will react when hit with another paper like if you mix red and yellow you get orange. He got away with doping because doping isn't drugs it's injecting yourself with oxygenised blood during a race.",
"Armstrong injected himself with his own highly oxygenated blood. He also used steroids and other PEDs. Armstrong (and other riders) had retained a very talented sports physician by the name of Michele Ferrari who always kept him informed which of the PEDs could not be detected by then state of the art analytical methods. When progress was made in doping analysis Ferrari informed his \"patients\" and they changed up their doping methods. Thus Armstrong was nver officially caught. He was caught however in the sense that old blood samples of his were analyzed years later in a French lab with new analytical methods and showed clear and unmistakable signs of doping. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5jdb0s | why do car heaters need time to "warm up," but then they start working immediately instead of a gradual ramping? | Also, do car heaters get ready any faster if one blasts cold air until it works, or is it just as good to trickle the cold air until it's ready? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jdb0s/eli5_why_do_car_heaters_need_time_to_warm_up_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbf7drk",
"dbf8gqy"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It doesn't matter really the heater in your car is 100% based on how fast your car warms up. The higher the temperature gauge the warmer/hotter the air will be. There is a mini radiator in your dash that a fan blows air through. The same water/coolant that keeps your car from overheating is used to keep you warm.",
"As previous commenters have mentioned, the cars cabin heating system is a part of the engines cooling system. There are channels and \"jackets\" all around the block of your engine where coolant liquid flows all around while the engine is running. There is a thermostat (essentially a valve) that opens at a predetermined temperature and allows the coolant to flow into the radiator/heater core part of the system. \n\nWhat you do in the car has no bearing on how fast the heat will be available. Some people think that revving the engine will make the car heat up faster, but I believe that under no load, that the difference in time to warm up the engine is negligible (and it wastes fuel)\n\nIf you've ever seen cars with an electrical plug sticking out of the front of a car, this is typically a \"block heater\" which is essentially a small electric blanket that is wrapped around the engine block. The use of these ranges from giving instant heat when you start up the car on a cold morning, to being essential for the car to even start (in very cold climates) "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4tni9f | how do some wheelchair users use their breath to control their wheelchair? | I've seen some totally paralyzed people have a mouth piece that they blow in to control it. How does that work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4tni9f/eli5_how_do_some_wheelchair_users_use_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5ivj5x"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's a \"Sip N Puff\" as /u/sarafinapink mentioned. Basically, it's a sensor that can sense different patterns or pressures from your breath, and actually offers a lot of control over. So two quick puffs will do one action, a soft blow might do another, a quick sip will do something else and two quick sips do something else still. It's programmable, and a user can have more than one set of controls.\n\nIt's a surprisingly efficient means of mobility for someone who needs it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
dkxy4x | why is coconut oil is considered a good moisturizer for skin when it doesn't have any water content? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dkxy4x/eli5_why_is_coconut_oil_is_considered_a_good/ | {
"a_id": [
"f4kgfno"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Like most moisturizer, it's not the water content that matters. It's the ability to retain water within whatever it is you're moisturising.\n\nE.g. water will have a hard time passing through your skin if it's got conconut oil on it, hence the water remains in your skin!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1p4kj4 | why email hasn't replaced the fax | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p4kj4/eli5_why_email_hasnt_replaced_the_fax/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccyo3x8",
"ccyo7cb",
"ccyo85m",
"ccyod5y",
"ccyoep2",
"ccypwac"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It has.\n\nJust the other day the network admin at my work shared a few IT stats. The entire company (60+ people) have sent 4 faxes in the last 3 years. In comparison, we send around 90.000 emails a year.",
"Fax has its uses. I use it in my law practice all the time. There's nothing like a fax confirmation sheet to sink someone else's \"I never got that document\" argument.",
"Seriously, as someone who works in IT, when I hear the words fax machine i cringe. Just buy a scanner and send it in an email, let them print it off if they want it. Just do away completely with that dated technology please.",
"Email accounts get hacked all the time.\nYou can't, nearly as easily, hack a phone number.",
"There are some businesses, believe it or not, that do not have reliable Internet service. That is why my workplace has a fax but no email. ",
"Because there are laws and legal precedents that recognize faxes as legal documents, and they haven't quite caught up to email yet.\n\nBut beyond that, email has replaced faxes is most other ways."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
c6xmsx | what is a connection between commodity price on an exchange and price of the actual commodity? | There is price of, say, grain futures on a commodity market, but, to my understanding, if I bought some of them, nobody is going to deliver 10 tons of grain to me when the futures expire and there is a delivery day. I would be just paid a current "market" price of the grain. It seems that price of a security is completely detached from the actual commodity price.
What is a mechanism that prevents commodity market prices from running away from prices of actual grain on an actual elevator when you can neither ask for delivering of actual commodity from exchange nor can you deliver it yourself to the exchange?
[This ELI5 question](_URL_0_) touches the topic, but does not explain actual connection. Answers imply that actual delivery to the exchange happens, while in fact trades happen through brokers, and they seem to prohibit keeping securities up to delivery day. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c6xmsx/eli5_what_is_a_connection_between_commodity_price/ | {
"a_id": [
"esbqhdz"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The current or \"spot\" price is the commodity price at the time. So, settling the exchange contract involves getting paid or paying in real dollars what the commodity price is on the exchange contract. \n\nSay you purchased a future contract for 1 cow to be delivered in 1 month and you paid $10 for it. One month later, cows are being sold (actual cows) for $15 a cow (this is the market price). To settle your contract, you will be given $15 which is what you can buy 1 cow for at that time. \n\nIf you actually want to buy a cow and wanted protection against cow inflation, then what you have done is spent $10 a month ahead of time to guarantee that you'll have the money to buy a cow at the end of the month. The other side of the deal is someone who wanted to sell a cow a month from now but believed that there would be cow deflation, so they wanted to guarantee that they'd sell their cow for $10. Who gains and loses depends on whether cows inflate or deflate in that period :-)"
]
} | [] | [
"https://redd.it/aunv8y"
] | [
[]
] |
|
2b347w | what is a vpn and how come it can bypass netflix throttling? | And how come we can't all do it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2b347w/eli5_what_is_a_vpn_and_how_come_it_can_bypass/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj1blrl",
"cj1fb1f"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"It's a way of tunnelling all your internet traffic to another point in the internet, usually encrypted. I can send all of my internet traffic through an encrypted channel to a server that I rent from _URL_0_. My ISP cannot tell what is going over that channel, so cannot throttle it unless they throttle all secure connections. To Netflix, it will look like my traffic is coming out of a completely different node on the internet, and one which isn't served by a domestic ISP. \n\nWhy can't we all do it? You can. But you may have to pay for the endpoint you connect to, and it may take a bit of technical knowledge.",
"Imagine you are sitting in class and want to pass a note to Joe, however between you and Joe is Fred. \n\nFred hates Joe and you so he might see the note and decide not to deliver it. \n\nSo instead you write a note to John. After if goes through Fred John opens it up and sees it is actually a note to Joe, so John hands it to Joe. \n\nIn this case your ISP is Fred, Netflix is Joe and you VPN is John. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"linode.com"
],
[]
] |
|
3mbfrj | why would you use a hardware firewall over software? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mbfrj/eli5_why_would_you_use_a_hardware_firewall_over/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvdleef",
"cvdnacv"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"First of all, note that a hardware firewall is usually a software firewall running on specialized hardware. This can be hardware that is designed to only run the firewall, or hardware that is also performing other networking tasks, such as a router or modem.\n\nThere are two main reason I know of.\n\n1. Safety:\n\nThe idea is that a hardware firewall is harder to hack because the computer it is running on is locked down.\n\nExample: the installer of a game may open firewall ports of windows so you can host a multiplayer game.\nBut if the installer of a game can do so, any installer can do so...\nUnless the firewall is not managed by windows.\n\nA hardware firewall takes it a step further and doesn't even run the firewall on the same machine.\n\n2. Network protection\n\nIf a company connects 1000 computers to the internet via a single intermet connection, the company can use a hardware firewall to protect all 1000 computers from dangers coming from the internet at once. The admins now have to setup a single firewall instead of 1000.\n\nSo you can use it to protect entire networks from external dangers, rather than a single machine.\n\nOne disadvantage here is that the computers may not be firewall protected from eachother by the single firewall.",
"A hardware firewall is a separate piece of equipment between your computer and the internet. A hacker/virus/whatever would have to completely fool the hardware firewall to get access to your computer. I've also heard it described as wearing a bulletproof vest as being better than eating Kevlar."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.