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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
bv9wz2 | what's the cause of the "elmer fudd" speech impediment where r's and l's come out as w's? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bv9wz2/eli5_whats_the_cause_of_the_elmer_fudd_speech/ | {
"a_id": [
"epncf7j"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"When you're speaking, you're not just using your vocal cords. You also use your lips, your teeth, and your tongue to pronounce words. When one of these doesn't work properly, you can't properly pronounce sounds that rely on that part of your body. \n\nThe reason L and R are often mispronounced is because they need you to precisely control your tongue. If you can't do that, maybe because of a disease or maybe because you just didn't practice enough, your tongue will be in the wrong position and you'll say something similar to a W instead.\n\nImagine you're saying the word 'peel'. The P is pretty easy to pronounce - you close your lips for a split second, build up a little air in your mouth, and let it explode out all at once. The 'ee' is also easy - you close your mouth halfway and just let the sound come out. \n\nThe L is harder, though. You need to gently press your tongue against your teeth so it almost, but not totally, covers them. This is a lot harder than popping a P or squeezing out the 'ee'. Try pronouncing 'peels', but keep your tongue perfectly still. It sounds a lot like a certain Nimrod!\n\nThe American R is even harder. Not only do you need to bunch the back of your tongue up, but you also need to clench your teeth and let a tiny bit of air out of your throat. If you don't clench your jaw, your R sounds like a British R, more like an \"ahh\" than an \"arr\". If your tongue isn't bunched up enough or your throat is too open, you make a W sound instead of an R.\n\nThe S sound is also hard for the same reason. Your tongue needs to be positioned just right to let out a little hiss of air. If it's even a little bit out of position, you'll say 'peelth' or 'peelf' instead of 'peels'. \n\nBecause of how difficult these sounds are to make, they're really common speech disorders."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
15sto6 | how p2p file sharing and magnet links work | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15sto6/eli5_how_p2p_file_sharing_and_magnet_links_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7ph7dn",
"c7phah7",
"c7phuq0"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"In before: \"Fucking magnets, how do they work?\" ",
"P2P file sharing works like this:\n\nImagine you're trying to get a page from a book. In a normal download you call up the server and it gives you one piece of the book at a time. You stick it together and hey presto, you can read it.\n\nIn P2P file sharing, you get a tiny piece, say, a word, of the page. You also get information about all the other people who have bits of the page. You ask them for copies of their piece and sometimes give them copies of yours. You gradually build up your full page of text, while helping other people who want to do the same by giving them pieces they need.\n\n",
"In all p2p networks, one thing they have in common is that to uniquely identify a file or multiple files the hash (or, in simpler terms, a \"fingerprint\") of the data is used. Magnet links specify what p2p protocol (BitTorrent, eDonkey2000 etc) and the said fingerprint. It may also include other information that would help the p2p client search the network to find the data in question.\n\nSo, err, let's pull one apart.\n\n > magnet:?xt=urn:btih:91fde0c874becb664f1bacd602731c91259472eb & dn=STEAL+THIS+FILM+%28XviD%29 & tr=udp%3A%2F%_URL_1_\n\n*magnet:?* - Just specifies the \"protocol\". Your operating system assigns certain programs to certain protocols (like your browser is set to use http/https links) - so your operating system knows to open this link with a p2p client.\n\n*urn:btih:* - Specifies it's a BitTorrent type. [It can be other things](_URL_0_).\n\n*91fde0c874becb664f1bacd602731c91259472eb* - This is the hash, or fingerprint of the data that should be unique to it.\n\n*dn=STEAL+THIS+FILM+%28XviD%29* - Is the name of the torrent (\"STEAL THIS FILM (Xvid)\"). The funny characters are just \"encoding\" since spaces and other characters aren't allowed, but can be represented in another fashion.\n\n*tr=udp%3A%2F%_URL_1_* - Tells your BitTorrent client which tracker to announce and find other clients who know something about this torrent."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet_URI_scheme#URN.2C_containing_hash_.28xt.29",
"2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com"
]
] |
||
1t9rdf | why does my soup "pop" violently in the microwave and then still come out lukewarm? | I always come running when I hear what sounds like something exploding, thinking my food is way over done, then I'm always disappointed when it's not even close. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t9rdf/eli5_why_does_my_soup_pop_violently_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce5rrz2",
"ce5tkc8"
],
"score": [
14,
2
],
"text": [
"Microwave ovens tend not to heat very evenly. That is why we stir things after heating them in the microwave. What you're hearing is some small portion of your food getting hot enough to \"pop\" (boil, turn to steam) but most of the food is still luke warm. When you stir it, or it's something that can move around like soup, the hot spot quickly evens out.",
"I'm going to offer an alternate reply here because I believe you may be talking about the microwavable soup containers (the pre canned ones that arent actually cans, you just peel back the metal lid and put them in the microwave). In the case of these there is a design flaw. Air heats up in the bottom underneath the container and the container actually jumps when the air escapes which is the popping noise you hear. \n\nAt least in my experience, I believe this is what you are referring too because I don't remember normal soup making any weird popping sounds. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1as4d3 | what are stretch marks? | Just saw a post on WTF of some really bad stretch marks, so I'm just wondering exactly what they are. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1as4d3/eli5_what_are_stretch_marks/ | {
"a_id": [
"c908oe3",
"c90b5q8"
],
"score": [
7,
8
],
"text": [
"Take a rubberband (the older the better) and stretch a small portion of it a decent amount. As you stretch it it will become lighter as small fibers are being torn apart. Upon un-stretching it that discoloration will still be there as well as the damage.",
"You have two layers of skin: the epidermis, which is the outer most layer, and the dermis that sits below that. Both of these layers can be broken down into even smaller layers. In the lower layer of the dermis lies collagen. Collagen is rubber band like strands of proteins that essentially holds up all the shit above it. Whenever the skin stretches, such as in pregnancy, weight gain, rapid growth in puberty, and the body fails to keep up with this process by not producing enough collagen to hold everything up, the existing collagen tears, and you now have a stretch mark."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
zbabq | the difference between "admin" and "moderator" | Answered. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zbabq/eli5_the_difference_between_admin_and_moderator/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6330fw",
"c6332kk",
"c634323"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
10
],
"text": [
"Admins actually control the site.\n\nModerators create and maintain subreddits. They have no power outside of the subreddits they moderate.\n\nAdmins rarely get involved in issues pertaining to individual subreddits. They do not give two fucks if you think that the moderator of r/widemouthbass is literally worse than hitler because he banned you for vocally supporting salmon. They are concerned with the site as a whole- adding new features, preventing spam and fraudulent voting, etc. \n\nIf you scroll to the right, you can create r/whateveryoufeellike and be a moderator. No credentials required. You'll e able to ban anyone you want from posting there, write whatever you want on the sidebar, etc.",
"Depends on where you are, website-wise.\n\nAdmins maintain all of reddit (or all of the website). Moderators maintain only the subreddit (or smaller portion of the website).",
"Picture it this way, Zordon is an admin while the power rangers are moderators. Zordon manages the cool stuff while the power rangers take a bite out of crime."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5yxbjp | if the center of the earth is hot why are the depths of the ocean cold? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yxbjp/eli5if_the_center_of_the_earth_is_hot_why_are_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"detmkbr",
"detmkjs"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"The ocean is 11,000 meters deep on average. \n\nThe earth is 12,000 km in diameter. \n\nBasically, the oceans aren't much closer to the core than the surface. ",
"Because the depths of the ocean have no sunlight, which is the primary source of heat for things at the surface of the Earth. They are no where near the center of the Earth which generates its own heat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1zuz6e | how do our bodies know to breathe while we're sleeping/ subconsciously? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zuz6e/eli5_how_do_our_bodies_know_to_breathe_while_were/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfx7hll"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The autonomic nervous system. The brain stem is like an autopilot for many bodily functions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2g7lmo | why is there an age requirement (35) to be president of the united states? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g7lmo/eli5_why_is_there_an_age_requirement_35_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckgdjgb",
"ckgdjnm",
"ckged22",
"ckgem8i",
"ckgghcf",
"ckggmo1",
"ckghbui",
"ckghq09",
"ckghy4t",
"ckghya0",
"ckgig5j",
"ckgihjp",
"ckgix7j",
"ckgj1wp",
"ckgjfbd",
"ckgjjvt",
"ckgjx3v",
"ckgnp14",
"ckgoas9",
"ckgrd5v",
"ckgtkso",
"ckgvl3z",
"ckh2vv3"
],
"score": [
12,
15,
4,
676,
4,
7,
26,
6,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2,
47,
3,
6,
6,
20,
7,
3,
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There's an age requirement for all federal elective offices, in an age progression by importance -- 25 for Representative, 30 for Senator, and 35 for President.\n\nIn practice, then as in now, it's unlikely that anyone under those ages would have the kind of connections, experience and resources to run for those offices and win.",
"There's a minimum age. there should also be a maximum age so old fucking game people who only think about themselves stop screwing over future generations ",
"In Germany there is an age minimum of 18 to be chancellor and 40 to be president. Just adding that to the discussion.",
"There are a number of reasons. \n\nFirst, the framers of the constitution believed that wisdom comes from experience and they must have believed that 35 was a sufficient age for a person to gain enough experience.\n\nSecond, they didn't want people to be elected merely because, say, their father was a good politician. They were trying to get away from a monarchy and if a son was elected merely because his father was a good politician, that seemed a little too close to monarchy.\n\nThird, and possibly the most important, in [Federalist #64](_URL_0_) John Jay writes:\n\n > By excluding men under thirty-five from the first office, and those under thirty from the second, it confines the electors to men of whom the people have had time to form a judgment, and with respect to whom they will not be liable to be deceived by those brilliant appearances of genius and patriotism, which, like transient meteors, sometimes mislead as well as dazzle. If the observation be well founded, that wise kings will always be served by able ministers, it is fair to argue, that as an assembly of select electors possess, in a greater degree than kings, the means of extensive and accurate information relative to men and characters, so will their appointments bear at least equal marks of discretion and discernment. The inference which naturally results from these considerations is this, that the President and senators so chosen will always be of the number of those who best understand our national interests, whether considered in relation to the several States or to foreign nations, who are best able to promote those interests, and whose reputation for integrity inspires and merits confidence. With such men the power of making treaties may be safely lodged.\n\nIn other words, by making people wait until they are 35, it gives the voters a chance to make a judgement as to how the candidate performs. It allows the voters to pick a wise candidate based on what the candidate has done in the past. If some flashy 21 year old ran for president and he or she just happened to be more eloquent than other candidates, voters would only have appearances, not substance, to base their vote on. \n\n",
"Because most youths are dumb and impulsive.\n\nSource: I was young once.",
"Bear in mind that the Roman Republic (and later the Empire) had a minimum age requirement for their offices (*e.g.* quaestor, aedile, praetor, consul), and the influence of the classics β or rather, they perceived the influence of the classics β cannot be overstated.",
"The age requirement is so no one has to explain anything to the President like he's a 5 year old ...",
"Would you want some 18 year old in charge of delicate political matters? Imagine how a teenager would have handled the Crimea situation.",
"Because it sounded like a good idea at the time to the people sitting around and brainstorming the U.S. Constitution.\n\nThe U.S. Constitution is a document created by human beings, not a scientific truth or a piece of religious wisdom handed down by a god.",
"I'm a firm believer that just because your older doesn't mean you earned anything. Calling dibs or firsties because you're older doesn't make you more qualified",
"Because of Ice Town.",
"this is one of those things you have to be over 35 to understand.\n\nbut when you are, you will.",
"Because we still repect that one individual clause of the US Constitution. \n\nThat's why.",
"Explain it like you're five? So somebody like an American version of Justin Bieber isn't swept into office because of his fan base. ",
"I think we're all forgetting the time Prez Rickard became the first teenage US president _URL_0_\n",
"So that we don't have children running the country? Plus I would hate to start my term at the age of 20, and have grey hair + wrinkles by the age of 28.",
"Possible 16 year old from /r/atheism within the oval office... No thanks put that requirement way high! ",
"To prevent Icetown",
"I'm starting to think there should be an age requirement of say 30 to become a police officer. If being a police officer is the only thing you've ever done, I think it helps reinforce the \"us vs them\" mindset that too many of them have. They should have to live a normal life for a bit to see what it's like for the rest of us. ",
"because 35 is when your an adult. im 24 and i feel like im the only one who admits to still being a child even though i think im more mature than most/all my friends. at 35 you really start to get a grasp of how shit really works instead just bullshit. i mean you can bullshit you way through life but at 35 you dont have to anymore if you learn from experiences.",
"to stop all the Kardashian fans from electing Justin Beiber.",
"Because having an 18 year old in charge of the most powerful country in the world would be a fucking disaster.",
"Exactly because you don't know the answer to this question. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa64.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prez_(comics)"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
budns5 | how do different pain killers target different areas despite having the same basic ingredients? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/budns5/eli5_how_do_different_pain_killers_target/ | {
"a_id": [
"epare8z"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Here in Australia, Nurofen was fined millions of dollars for misleading consumers into thinking that differently branded (and priced) versions of ibuprofen were able to target specific pain areas.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-16/nurofen-fined-6m-for-misleading-consumer/8126450"
]
] |
||
21wkub | what exactly is taking a mortgage out? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21wkub/eli5_what_exactly_is_taking_a_mortgage_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgh6dta",
"cgh6ik6"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"think of it as taking a bank loan used to buy real estate that uses the real estate itself as collateral. ",
"A bank gives you money to buy real estate. You then agree to pay the bank back over a predetermined amount of time, usually 5, 15, or 30 years at a fixed rate of interest. While you technically own the house, the bank can take ownership of the house (foreclosure) if you stop paying."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
d857ut | how can fish bolt so fast? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d857ut/eli5_how_can_fish_bolt_so_fast/ | {
"a_id": [
"f178q78",
"f178ry9"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Fish are like 90% muscle, that's why they're so fast and strong. Ever noticed why fishermen fight so hard with even a medium sized fish, even when they're not just directly pulling the string? Yeah, fish are ripped as hell bro.",
"While they have to push their bodies through a heavy fluid - water - they also can push off against that fluid. Many fish have large pectorial fins at the front that they can snap backwards to push themselves forward, or they can use their tail to push against the water. Together, it means that they can accelerate themselves quickly, darting away fast. \n\nOf course, it helps that any fish that doesn't dart away really fast soon becomes someone else's meal. Only the fast survive!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5q516d | why is buying a house considered an investment? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5q516d/eli5_why_is_buying_a_house_considered_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcwc60r",
"dcwcq2u",
"dcweq0h"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"When you buy a house, it keeps its value for a very long time (unlike a car, for example which decreases in value the older it gets). In a sense you aren't spending money at all: you're just transforming it from cash to bricks. Houses also tend to increase in value over time so you generally make a profit when you sell a house (like a good investment).",
"i would argue that buying a house is \"mistakenly\" considered an investment by most. \n\nwhy people think it's an investment. \n\n1. you're not \"throwing away money\" by renting. that money is going into equity.\n\n2. the value of the house is projected to increase in the long term.\n\n3. you will always have a place to live.\n\nhowever, this will open you up to several traps. \n\n1. buying a house creates additional liability/expenses such as mortgage, taxes, maintenance, utilities, etc.\n\n2. sure, if your house increases in value by double, you get excited. but wait, that's not real money until you sell/refi the house. and if you sell, you're back to square one. if you refi the house, you're just extending your debt (aka liabilities) \n\n3. you can't live and eat on equity. if you have no monthly cash income, but you're sitting on a \"goldmine\" of a house, how are you going to convert that equity to cash? you will get ripped off, if you have no income. ",
"Looking at a national average, real estate value in the US goes up by 5-10% every year. Obviously, this varies wildly at the local level, (from -50% to +100%) but lets assume you're in the national average. \n\nIf you bought your house in cash, you could buy a $100k house today, and sell it this time next year for $110k and make a $10k profit (not including costs associated with purchase/sale). Keep it for 5 years and you'll be able to sell it for $161k! \n\nIf you don't have $100k sitting around, you can get a mortgage. Lets say you're able to get one for 5% interest. Now your $100k house will still gain 10% each year, but you're going to pay the bank 5% in interest. If you sell the house in 5 years you'll still bring in $161k, but will have had to pay the bank roughly $28k in interest on that loan, reducing your profit from $61k to ~$33k. Only 5% rate of return, but it beats your savings account, and maybe even your 401k. \n\nBut again, this doesn't include the costs of owning the house. If in that 5 years you had to kick out $20k for a new Roof and HVAC system, so that's coming out of your $28k profit. You also have to consider local property taxes and closing costs for both the purchase and sale, which could easily exceed the $8k you have left. \n\nBut maybe it doesn't! Maybe you know the area, and see that business developers are investing heavily, and expect your house to sell for $200k in 5 years! Suddenly it's an excellent investment! What could go wrong! It's 2006 and everything is fantastic! \n\nOr 2008 could happen and your $100k house you were planning to get $200k out of is now worth $75k and dropping. You could double down and buy your neighbor's house, or you could be the neighbor that cuts their losses and runs. Like anything else, it's an investment. Maybe it will pay out, maybe it won't. Historically, you'll usually at least break even if you're patient. \n\nYour only other alternative is renting, but then you're subject to the whims of your landlord which may include lifestyle restrictions and arbitrary rent hikes. See, unlike the homeowner who has their \"rent\" locked in at a steady rate via their mortgage, when property values go up by 20% so does your rent. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2xkfq4 | in standard rem sleep how does the brain stop the body from moving and acting out dreams? | Every search online led me to sleep paralysis. Im wondering about standard sleep. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xkfq4/eli5_in_standard_rem_sleep_how_does_the_brain/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp0v2ir",
"cp1ioad"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The body (guided by neurons called REM sleep-on cells) are told to stop reacting to certain brain chemicals, which means that you are safe during your sleep cycle. For people where this stoppage is interrupted have symptoms like sleep walking and perceived sleep paralysis. \n\nfrom [here] (_URL_0_)\n\n > The release of certain neurotransmitters, the monoamines (norepinephrine, serotonin and histamine), is completely shut down during REM. This causes REM atonia, an almost complete paralysis of the body, due to motor neuron inhibition.",
"The brain stem blocks the signals the brain is trying to send to the nervs, that way you don't do something crazy like stab your family because in your dream they were aliens. That has happened, I'm not sure about that specific scenario but sleep walkers have committed murder, or that's what hey said in court at least."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_eye_movement_sleep#Physiology"
],
[]
] |
|
7g7f80 | why do people waste money on bottles of water even tough they have a tap at home? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7g7f80/eli5_why_do_people_waste_money_on_bottles_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqh1i8u"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"To some degree they are just going for convenience -- you don't have to carry around a bottle if you can pick up a new one anytime. \n\nSome prefer the taste.\n\nSome are just suckers for marketing -- you see something advertised enough, you may start to believe it's superior."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2552rz | how do you pitch a tv show or game show to a network, if you have no experience in the industry? | Always wondered if regular people with ideas can even get a foot in the door, or do you have to be someone on the "in" to get anywhere. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2552rz/eli5how_do_you_pitch_a_tv_show_or_game_show_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"chdsrys",
"chdtsvg",
"chdwlis"
],
"score": [
22,
9,
7
],
"text": [
"Your idea will be rejected, and if it was good enough -- stolen. ",
"If you REALLY wanted to try to pitch a TV show, you would start by doing your research. Watch TV shows in the same genre and the same style (i.e. Bob's Burgers is A) a sitcom and B) stylistically closer to The Simpsons than Arrested Development). Figure out what your TV show is, what channel/s would be the best fit for broadcasting (Network TV? Cable? Comedy Central? STARZ?). \n\nThen write several episodes, or at least outlines of episodes. Decide what the material potential of the show is, alternate storylines, etc, and flush out your characters a bit. If doing reality TV, do some casting research to come up with about 5 essential characters that you would focus on.\n\nOnce you have done all your research and put all the effort into creating what you think is a viable TV show, you can try to get lucky in the industry. \n\nStart networking and trying to meet people from the industry - it's true, you won't get anywhere from the outside, and even on the inside it can take years to get something in the door. Buy an IMDPro account or start a free trial and research every producer / showrunner / writer for all the TV shows that compare to yours. Look up their agents and the agent contact information. Never call into a talent agency without having a name of someone to speak to - agencies deal with the same people every day and someone who doesn't know who they're calling for has no business calling at all. \n\nIf you can get your script / outline into an agent's hands and get a pitch meeting set up for yourself, you're on the right track. Getting representation is probably one of the most difficult steps in the process, right behind getting that agent to work for you. \n\nAfter that it's all about tenacity, salesmanship, and a good knowledge of intellectual property copyrights. I have seen people break into the industry and become successful, and the occasional wunderkind does happen to fall into the right place at the right time with a great story, but generally it's a very difficult and involved process.\n\nIf you ever did get the opportunity do pitch a TV show in front of network execs, the last thing you would ever want to hear is, \"Pass. What else do you have?\" and not have any other ideas for TV shows, TV episodes, anything. Try to create more shows than just the one you have an idea for - at the very least, you are more credible as an artist. ",
"Write your TV show idea on a piece of paper, tie to a brick, and throw the brick through the window of the most relevant network / station. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2xev31 | what makes marijuana smoke safer than cigarette smoke? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xev31/eli5_what_makes_marijuana_smoke_safer_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"coziitl",
"cozijup",
"cozksqx",
"cozlk68",
"cozmdv7",
"cp00ree"
],
"score": [
2,
34,
7,
94,
86,
5
],
"text": [
"Pot has less tar in it, and pot acts as an expectorant where as tobacco will just sit in your lungs and gum stuff up.\n\nedit: I'm just wrong here....",
"While it has carcinogens, marijuana apparently has fewer then tobacco smoke.\n\nTobacco smoke also paralyzes the cilia that move mucus up out of the lungs, while marijuana actually stimulates them (assuming you don't torch them right off) acting as an expectorant.\n\nOn top of this, the resin that accumulates from marijuana smoke is NOT like the tar that accumulates from tobacco smoke. The lungs rather easily clean themselves of marijuana resin and particulates, while tar sticks around for a long time and actually irradiates your lung tissue.\n\nAlso, vaped marijuana does not harm the lungs in any way and is the second safest way to inhale the drug, with the safest being vaped Butane Hash Oil.\n\nEDIT: Forgot to add that additives in cigarettes are really fucking bad, especially when you burn them.\n\nAND That marijuana does not cause narrowing of the bronchi, unlike tobacco. Marijuana actually acts as a bronchodilator.",
"Cigarettes have a shit ton of extra nasty additives. \n\nI have no problem smoking an occasional pipe tobacco, cigar, or shisha, but all of the extra chemicals in cigarettes makes me nervous. ",
"Holy shit, folks, the stupid in this thread is about ready to give me a stroke. People who think pot has any where near the ADDITIVES that cigarettes have are out of their mind. Yes. It's a fact. Tobacco companies ADD chemicals, tons of chemicals, to cigarettes to make them addicting. This is a fact. Sure, burning plant matter is worse than you than not smoking, but it is no where near the chemical cocktail that is proven to kill you that is in cigarettes. If you believe that pot has the same stuff in it. You are wrong, and you are ignorant. ",
"Marijuana is not inherently carcinogenic; tobacco is. Even smokeless tobacco causes cancer. This is partly because it contains [radioactive elements] (_URL_0_) like polonium-210 from the fertilizer/pesticides used to grow it. \n\nThe nicotine in tobacco smoke constricts the airways and blood vessels while marijuana smoke dilates them. Vasoconstriction raises blood pressure and puts strain on the heart and lungs. \n\nThat's not to say marijuana smoke is harmless. It's an airway irritant that can cause bronchitis and other problems. There are also carcinogens produced by burning plant material of any kind. But pot itself is not inherently carcinogenic or cardiotoxic like tobacco smoke. ",
"THC is a bronchodilator and nicotine is a bronchoconstrictor "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.epa.gov/radiation/sources/tobacco.html"
],
[]
] |
||
3x590o | why do people get mad when a celebrity decides to talk about their political opinion? | It seems like to me some people believe that if you're a star you should have no say in politics. I don't understand that, honestly. Being a celebrity should not keep someone from saying what they believe.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3x590o/eli5_why_do_people_get_mad_when_a_celebrity/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy1mq8e",
"cy1mrae"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"But cause they have access to such a huge amount of people who will listen to them celebs can sway a ton of people to do something that may not actually be in anyones best interest (im talking to you jenny mccarthy) ",
"People only get mad when a celebrity says something they disagree with. Since celebrities are typically viewed as better and more important than a \"regular\" person, their opinion can carry a lot of weight. That's part of why it upsets people. The other reason is that a lot of celebrities aren't smart enough to have an informed opinion. *Most* people don't want to hear Kim Kardashian's opinion about gun control or Syrian refugees, for example. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
8vq05f | do animals that live in extreme temperatures (hot/cold) actually want to be there? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8vq05f/eli5_do_animals_that_live_in_extreme_temperatures/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1pe8pf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, because they have the tools to deal with it. A polar bear with its thick coat wouldnβt want to move to California because itβs too warm for the bear. The cold is its home, just like how 70 degrees Fahrenheit feels like a good temperature for humans. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3ea5gr | why do hard drives operate more slowly when close to full even when they aren't overly fragmented? are solid state drives free out this flaw? if so, why? | Just wondering, I just got a new 850 EVO, I was curious. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ea5gr/eli5_why_do_hard_drives_operate_more_slowly_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctd06aj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The response time to reading a file is a function of two things: the time to position the heads over the data you want to read, and the time to wait until their part of the disk platter spins under the heads. The fuller a HDD is, the farther apart the tracks of data might be (max - min). For a non-fragmented file on an HDD with no other accesses (aka not Windows) as long as the file is contiguous, the drive isn't slower. Faster HDDs (higher RPMs) address the second factor only.\n\nSDD has neither delay, it's just the transfer time to move the data from device to memory (go USB3/eSATA/... !)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9ie9nk | who determines which names/jobs show up during the opening credits for movies and how do they determine the order? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ie9nk/eli5_who_determines_which_namesjobs_show_up/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6j4tsc"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"I work in the film industry and have my name in the opening credits of around 10 feature films. \n\nThe order and job positions are fairly standardized through decades of contractual negotiations with the film unions (IATSE for crew and SAG for actors).\n\nActors will come first. Usually the β#1β actor or main actor will be very first and this can be a big point of negotiation in the contract.\n\nNext is below the line crew heads/supervisors in order from least important to highest. So it might go make up, then costumes, then production designer, then cinematographer. The cinematographer is generally considered the highest ranking crew member and will almost always be the last crew member credit in the opening.\n\nNext is above the line which are the βadultsβ as we affectionally call them on set. So usually itβs producers, then executive producers, then writer, then director. The director is always last. \n\nThis only applies to the opening credits. The closing credits have an entirely different system and the general rule is if you were in the opening credits you donβt get to be in the closing credits unless you are an actor.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3chzd4 | why does ingenious mean genius, and why does invaluable mean valuable? | I thought the prefix in- meant opposite, or "not" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3chzd4/eli5_why_does_ingenious_mean_genius_and_why_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"csvqvmy",
"csvs5iy"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Ingenious and genius are, as far as I can tell, unrelated words. They come from different sources altogether, they just sound similar.\n\nInvaluable does actually mean not valuable, but in the way we say priceless not worthless. ",
"Mainly because people think words mean things other than what they do. Value does not mean worth... Value is assigned, worth is inherent. When something is invaluable, that means a value cannot be placed on it. Over time, invaluable has become a synonym for priceless, with the implication that both words mean the worth of what they describe is so high that it cannot be quantified.\n\ningenious and genius merely sound alike and stem from completely different roots. Ingenious from *ingignere* and genius from *genus*."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1u3yt3 | why is produce such as tomatoes, and carrots etc. much cheaper at foreign markets such as hispanic and chinese than the large grocery chain stores? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u3yt3/eli5why_is_produce_such_as_tomatoes_and_carrots/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceeabiu",
"ceecvpw"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A combination of lower profit margins and lower quality produce. \n\nA lot of big grocery produce is selected for appearance. Bright orange carrots and red tomatoes, free of blemishes, that keep a fresh looking appearance longer. People in the cooking community complain produce it grown to look good on shelves rather than to taste good.\n\nDiscount and ethnic grocery stores are often more concerned about price. And if you are just going to cut up the produce and put it in a sauce or stew, freshness is not as imporatant.",
"A big part of it is the difference in overhead costs between the supermarket retailers and the more local ones.\n\nThe local markets don't employ as many people, don't advertise much, don't have the same level of in-store infrastructure, aren't paying as high rents (even if per unit area is higher their over-all square footage is far less and they don't usually occupy premium real estate), do not have to deal with unions or health insurance, don't have their own dedicated shipping services to pay for, often several stores will band together to share shipping space on a single truck, and they don't have the same level of payment hierarchy to cope with either.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3c3psc | why do motorcycles have gears but snowmobiles don't? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c3psc/eli5why_do_motorcycles_have_gears_but_snowmobiles/ | {
"a_id": [
"csryaxc"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Snowmobiles use an automatic transmission (usually CVT).\n\nSnow gets everywhere, having a foot shifter would probably jam with snow.\n\nThere is a lot more drag on snow compared wheel rolling on dirt. Unless you were really good, when you let off the power to shift you'd slow down too much by the time you got the gear change done and need to shift down again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
15qma7 | why does congress wait until something is about to expire to pass a new law. | To me it seems like if you had a deadline you know about why not start working on it, and find a better solution. Better then throwing a plan together before shit hits the fan? This seems to happen with a lot with big issues recently the debt ceiling , farm bill, and the fiscal cliff etc..
The conspiracy theorist in me thinks its so they can hide more from the public to make a few rich. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15qma7/eli5_why_does_congress_wait_until_something_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7owh9m",
"c7owmxn",
"c7owz3y",
"c7oye0v",
"c7ozxbb",
"c7p1mhs"
],
"score": [
3,
14,
17,
3,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Because neither side will agree until it is do it now or fuck up everything, and even then they may not.",
"Because currently (and don't think I'm implying this has never happened before), there's a decently sized group in Congress who just refuses to compromise. Without the pressure of an impending deadline, there would be no way to reach an agreement.",
"They often do pass laws in a timely fashion...they just don't earn enough press.\n\nBut largely it is a negotiation tactic, kind of a game of chicken. Something bad is on the horizon, they try to whip up press blaming each other, then hopes the other side blinks first and gives up a little more in compromise.\n\nThe impending cliff is a little different. There are a lot of things in it that either party *wants* to happen. Politically speaking, it is easier to let them happen and blame the cliff, rather than having to stand up and vote for them.",
"It's mostly pandering to extremist constituency.\n\nIf the Ultra-Conservatives/Ultra-Liberals vote for compropmise they won't look like they're principled. There are enough of them who won't budge that we're in this 'down to the wire' game.",
"The reason for the current fiscal cliff problem is a combination of two things.\n\nOne is that you have divided congress that is scared to compromise because of the rise in partisanship. That's not to say in the past both sides didn't want to stick to their principles. The difference today is the 24 hour news cycle and social media. If you do anything bipartisan in today's climate, you will be blasted by media channels (Republicans who compromised would be blasted on Fox, Democrats on MSNBC for example) and by social media. You can't escape your base anymore as they are usually the loudest, most vocal group that can cut you down the most.\n\nThe second problem being there are benefits for politicians to NOT reach a deal right away. This sounds counterproductive but it will be politically beneficial for both Republicans and Democrats to wait. After the first of the year, both sides can say, no matter the deal, they helped CUT taxes because taxes as of midnight will be up. While this takes a lot of stretching and suspension of belief, some nice sound bites in the coming weeks will show this to be true. Another added benefit is both sides can blame one another for the delayed passing of a compromise.",
"At the beginning of the year taxes go up anyway, just by law. A lot of republicans in Congress have signed this new thing that says \"I will never vote to pass a law which raises any taxes ever under any circumstance.\" Congress has a plan: to raise taxes; but by waiting until the first of the year, republicans are able to agree on the plan while staying true to their oath to not vote to raise taxes. I think."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
239va0 | how video games are developed for multiple platforms | Wouldn't there be very different requirements, especially across generations ie Xbox one and Xbox 360 in how the consoles run the games? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/239va0/eli5_how_video_games_are_developed_for_multiple/ | {
"a_id": [
"cguw30h",
"cgv39ha"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Honestly? Sometimes they aren't.\n\nFor example, the Mac and Linux ports of games originally released for the PC are frequently not developed by the same studio that made the PC original version. They're developed by third-party studios who basically agree to pay the original publisher an up-front fee and percentage of sales for the right to do the port. This goes a long way towards explaining why ports aren't necessarily quite as good as original versions: the original developer doesn't provide *any* support for these ports.\n\nIf a game is being released on multiple platforms by the original developer, that's something else again, and it can actually be a pretty significant expense. Depending on the platforms we're talking about, we could be essentially running three simultaneous development projects with very little overlap beyond the plot and some of the art. Even the art may need to be delivered in multiple formats. Unless the publisher expects a massive hit, you don't see many multi-platform releases unless the console manufacturer is paying for it. That does sometimes happen.",
"Source: I've worked on multiple games across multiple platforms (mostly console, but some PC and mobile).\n\nEssentially, we write the game once and push it through different tools that make it work on each platform.\n\nStarting with code:\nMost of the code written for a game can be shared - we just compile the same code with the compiler/SDK for each platform we want to run on. The tricky bit is where the game needs to instruct the device to perform low level tasks, eg submitting commands to the GPU, audio and input systems in the OS.\n\nThis code is written specifically for each platform, and creates a generic interface such as \"DrawPrimitives\" that the game code can use without worrying if that's actually talking to DirectX, OpenGL, OpenGL ES etc.\n\nIn a lot of cases we can also buy middleware that does this for us, for example Wwise is a cross-platform audio engine that we can licence, and when we've written the code for it once, it'll work on all the platforms that Wwise has been created for.\n\nInput works similarly - we pipe all of the device's inputs as generic \"channels\" that the game can observe. Eg we might have a \"Start\" channel that on Xbox 360 is bound to the actual Start button, but on PC it could be Enter, Space and/or Esc.\n\nThere are some cases where we need to write specific code for some platforms, such as in cases where the platform has a unique feature we wish to exploit (like the Wii U's gamepad screen), in those cases we just write something like:\n#if WIIU\n // render wii u second screen\n#else\n // do something else for all other platforms\n#endif\n\n\nAssets (textures, meshes, shaders etc):\nEach platform tends to require its own layout for these that play well with the hardware. For example platforms that support it can use DXT-compressed textures to save memory, but others can just use basic 24/32-bit bitmaps. We support this by \"deploying\" our assets from their raw formats (typically png / fbx for textures and meshes) into formats supported by each platform.\nIn some cases we manually supply replacement source images where they need to differ per-platform, eg input icons (buttons/sticks on consoles and keys/mouse buttons for PC).\n\nShaders work in a similar way - we package them up in a format the platform can deal with after compiling them using the platform's shader compiler, then our rendering runtime can call the generic SetShader functions with a pointer to the platform-optimised asset.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
dn3xpm | why does road construction shut down miles when they only work on like 800 feet at a time? | There's construction in my city that stretches for literal miles away from where the work is being done, even going into cross streets that have nothing but cones and orange signs. Is there some safety regulation or something? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dn3xpm/eli5_why_does_road_construction_shut_down_miles/ | {
"a_id": [
"f57lmbg",
"f57m10p",
"f57psck",
"f58dgnc"
],
"score": [
20,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The biggest issue is traffic management. \n\nIf just reduced the lanes of travel immediately around the repair, what safety buffer do you have for an inattentive driver that fails to yield?\n\nThere is no avoiding that a reduction of a lane is going to slow traffic. The traffic conditions dictate that road needed 3 lanes and now youβve dropped it to 2. To minimize the effect, you reduce the lane as early as possible. Hopefully drivers will merge and unify, although they never do because proper zippering isnβt taught and drivers are dicks or on their phone. You should have merged traffic on the reduced lane by the time you get to the construction site itself. So traffic can proceed without being bothered by the construction, again this never works because people are nosy and slow down to see whatβs happening. \n\nThere is also additional room allotted for additional construction vehicles, materials, the impact of the work zone on run-off, environment, etc. and several other lessor concerns. \n\nYouβll notice that very shortly after passing an actual construction site the road should reopen to its full potential.",
"There is tge safety issue, you need some distance for people to change lanes and not hit the workers. You also need space each side of the workplace for the worker to eat, place for materials, equipements, trash, for incoming delivery trucks to park, etc.",
"I work for an infrastructure engineering firm so I can weigh in a little on this.\n\nAs others have mentioned, safety and traffic management is a major contributing issue, but there's more than that. Whenever you see a zone of construction, there's much, much more going on than what you see at first glance. You might have the obvious construction going on in one section while there's less visible work such as shifting and converting underground utilities like gas, electric and sewer going on in another section. One section may be shut down while the geotechnical engineers do ground analysis. Another might be shut down while they're in the process of buying up right of way from owners. A section might be shut down while design scope changes are made at the last minute. A section might be shut down waiting on a delay on materials procurement or some unforeseen legal issue that popped up. A route might be closed to regular traffic to allow easy access for emergency vehicles to local hospitals etc. There's so many possible factors.\n\nLong story short, when you're driving through construction, as frustrating as it may seem, know that many hours of careful thought and planning by many very smart engineers has gone into it. If something seems dumb about it, it's more likely because of some circumstances that you're not aware of, rather than a fault on the behalf of the designers and contractors.",
"In the USA the guidelines for markings, closures and signage is described in the [MUTCD](_URL_0_) (Section 6).\n\nAt 65 mph, the taper length is nearly 1,000 feet. (the length of the area in which cones are blocking the lane.) The buffer space, (The distance between the closed land and the start of the work area) is 650 feet, or longer if on a curve.\n\nThe reasoning is to give workers adequate protection and drivers adequate time to move clear of the work area. The length of the lane closures are dependent on the speed of the roadway.\n\nMany times, work may be occurring in many places within one closure, or moving along the closed section over the course of a shift. It is then easier to close a longer stretch than to move the closure over the course of the shift.\n\n(Source; I work in transportation and have to qualify on this stuff every couple of years.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/"
]
] |
|
4wwiex | what exactly is happening neurologically when someone, especially a young person, is brainwashed? and why is it so difficult to shake off? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wwiex/eli5_what_exactly_is_happening_neurologically/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ahw0z",
"d6ai1n2",
"d6ai7a4",
"d6aj4nt",
"d6aj5w7",
"d6aj6zy",
"d6ajjlg",
"d6ak9pe"
],
"score": [
2,
167,
10,
47,
8,
3,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"I'm not a neurologist but I suspect that the difference between a brainwashed person and a \"normal\" person is so subtle that the differences cannot be detected yet. What separates a brainwashed person from a religious person, from a person who still believes in Santa, from a person convinced that we never went to the moon? If it's hard to tell for us on the outside, it's even harder to find the corresponding difference in the brain.",
"It depends on what kind of brain washing we are talking about. Generally, most brain washing is as simple as teaching someone a new way or thing in an environment that doesn't offer a lot of cause to question this new knowledge. Neurologically, what's happening is identical to any other learning.\n\nPlease remember as you read things on Reddit and other web sites that what people say isn't automatically true. In the 90s, a lot of people were \"brainwashed\" into thinking vaccines caused autism because it was widely reported on TV and radio. People don't tend to think TV and radio is full of lies, so few people questioned it.\n\nPeople used to know that smoking was an effective way to open up the lungs because doctors would tell them so at the beginning of movies.\n\nSome people still believe Richard Nixon was not a crook because they liked him and he himself said he wasn't.\n\nPeople tend to believe what they're told if they aren't given a good reason to question it. Imagine how much you've learned today and how much of it is actually true. Is anything I'm saying true? I'm just some dipshit on the internet. Why are you trusting any of us?\n\nBut trust me because my particular variety of brainwashing will leave you with a brain that has less gunky false info!",
"Like what u/billslikebobaggins said.\n\nBasically, to ELI5:\n\nMom always said \"Be nice and good things happen\"\n\nBrainwasher \"Has anything good actually happened to you?\"\n\nFrom that point, your brain starts to question what reinforces you. Doing good things used to reinforce you, as in, doing good things made you feel good, but over time, that feeling fades and the brainwasher starts to get these ideas in your brain. Your brain starts to link what that \"good\" feeling is to different things because the brainwasher made you rethink what makes you feel good. When you are full \"brainwashed\" you no longer attach good feelings to the things that kept you away from the idea that took over your brain.\n\nIt takes a long time and a lot of persuasion (or perversion) to get the brain to change course. It works the same as learning math, it is hammered into you to the point where it becomes second nature.\n\n\"2+2 is?\"\n\n\"4!\"\n\n\"good, and supreme ruler is?\"\n\n\"All that is good!\"\n\n\"Very good, class!\"\n\nEdit: And it is difficult to shake off, because, think of it this way, a fully brainwashed brain thinks X, in order to get that person to stop thinking X, we need to brainwash them back to thinking X is bad. It is NOT easy to brainwash someone, just as it is not easy to un-brainwash them. The brain is strong and resilient, so all of this takes time, repetition, persuasion and constant redirection and perversion.",
"I have some experience with this so I'll comment, but I'll say upfront that I know little to nothing about the neurology element.\n\nWhen I was 19, after 4 years of constant drugging, and arrests, I was finally charged with a handful of extremely serious felonies. The judge and prosecutor took pity on me and, rather than send me to jail for the minimum 10 year sentence, they allowed me to attempt rehabilitation for two years. After two years the charges would be dropped and I'd walk away with a few misdemeanors.\n\nI first attended Hazeldon for a month. From there I was sent to a dual-diagnosis program in Boca Raton for 6 months. I spent the remainder of the year in a halfway house/extended program. I attended more than 400 AA meetings and a handful of NA meetings in 365 days. The following year I moved to Virginia and attended a further 300 meetings. My charges were dropped and I was free.\n\nNow, 12 years and a few months later, I can honestly say that I've never ingested a drink or drug since. This coming from a guy who was a veritable garbage can in his teens. I would do any drug, any amount, any time; I was always high.\n\nSo here's the rub - this is where the brainwashing comes in. Brainwashing is self-perpetuating. As a result, the longer I go without a drink or drug the more I'm convinced that I can never safely do it again. Scientology, they say, works so well - especially for the powerful - because the powerful associate their success ith Scientology. They fear breaking away from the \"church\" because it could mean their ruin. *That* is why brainwashing is so insidious. \n\nThe brainwasher aligns itself with success, reaping all the praise when success is found. It lays all blame and failure squarely on the shoulders of the brainwashed person. In this way, the person forever associates the solution with an external force and the problem with themselves. Scary shit. But, when it comes to the choice between spending my life in jail or opening up to something that may or may not be bullshit, there's no choice at all.",
"I grew up in the LDS church and have been working on reversing some of the thinking I grew up with for more than 10 years. If it takes years and years of therapy to reverse what was ingrained into your head during your formative years... you might have been brainwashed. \n\nThe definition is a tough one, but for me, it means being taught things from a young age that shape how you view yourself, other people, and the world around you. For me the LDS church taught me all that stuff, and unfortunately I actually believed it, so when I learned later in life that none of the claims were true, my entire worldview was ripped from my hands. Now I'm working on rebuilding a more healthy worldview. It's not easy. \n\nI can give examples of specific LDS doctrine that I would consider to be in the category of brainwashing, but I'm no expert on the subject of brainwashing, I just know my own experience. \n\nNeurologically, our formative years have a big impact on things like our internal dialog, assumptions and judgements about people and situations etc. I was taught that there's one and only one correct way to live and view the world, and that everyone outside of the LDS religion is living in sin and they are all unhappy. The result is you view everyone you meet with the assumption that they are unhappy and blind to reality. The funny thing is, I was the one who was blind the whole time. \n\nTo answer the question about why it's difficult to shake off? Well, because your internal dialog, how you think of yourself, others, situations, the world etc, those things are learned when you are young and generally remain consistent throughout your life unless you take deliberate action to change. And those are the things that are really difficult to change, thus my 10+ years of therapy, and I'm still going. ",
"You're getting a lot of speculation anyway, so here's mine.\n\nIt hurts a lot less to suffer for a good cause than to suffer arbitrarily, or as a victim of random chance. This means that people will cling bitterly to any beliefs that give meaning and justification to their suffering. Brainwashing involves hurting someone while telling them it's for their own good because of XYZ. If they hear that message long enough, believing it becomes the only way to tolerate the pain and keep a semblance of sanity. Even when you're not actively hurting them anymore, they'll still cling to these beliefs to make meaning out of how much they suffered.\n\nSource: Watching friends in a cult and religious fundamentalist relatives do terrible things to themselves because it would make them \"pure,\" \"enlightened,\" or in some other way \"better.\"\n\nWhat that means neurologically? I don't think our understanding of the brain is sophisticated enough yet to really know that. Neurons that fire together wire together, so it must mean entrenching certain neural pathways, while associating doubt with pain. ",
"We're all \"brainwashed\" from the moment we're born as people, it just depends what gets put into you",
"Brainwashing has largely been proven to not work. It's a relic from the 20th century. The closest thing that works is conditioning, which involves associating a behavior with a stimulus."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
zyph1 | senkaku/diaoyu islands dispute | While I know China and Japan haven't been on good terms for a while now, they seem particularly at each other's throats over this issue. Why is the territory disputed in the first place? What's so special about these islands? Valuable resources? Trade route? Or are they just symbolic and nationalism is so strong for both that they'll fight over anything? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zyph1/eli5_senkakudiaoyu_islands_dispute/ | {
"a_id": [
"c692iy8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As far as I can understand, China claims discovery of them, but Japan actually had control of them in 1895, and even tried building a business on it (which failed) in 1900. After that they were deserted but remained part of Japan. Then WW2 happened and USA took control of it and Japan. While USA was there, they realized there could be some oil just off shore. When USA left 1972, China felt it was fair game. They're only interested in the island for the oil. It has absolutely nothing to do with nationalism, who was there first or whatever excuse each side gives to justify their argument. They only want the island for the oil. They couldnt care less about it, or building an infrastrusture on it before the idea that oil MIGHT be off shore came up. Then suddenly the study came out and this island Oh So Important. \n\nI read this wikipedia. _URL_0_\n\nOther than that and my home-grown cynicism, I have no other back up for my reasoning."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands"
]
] |
|
3u47sx | what happens in a video game that makes it harder or easier when you adjust the difficulty? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3u47sx/eli5_what_happens_in_a_video_game_that_makes_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxbq1w3",
"cxbq499",
"cxbq9ac"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Depends on the game of course. It's usually things like making the enemies do less damage and you do more, having the enemies use their more devastating abilities less often, making the enemies aim worse, and things like that.",
"Depends on the game. The enemies can be given increased health, become more resistant to damage, and can deal more damage. Conversely the player could be given reduced health, suffer more damage, and deal less damage.\n\nSometimes the computer is given access to abilities or strategies the player doesn't, essentially \"cheating\" or otherwise doing things faster or more accurately than a human player ever could.\n\nComputer AIs are usually deliberately dumbed down to be playable, and these limitations are removed as the difficulty increases.\n\nOther things include removing save checkpoints, decreasing time limits, or adding other restrictions to player actions.",
"The easiest AI to make is the hard AI. For a shooter that means that they never miss, they always have ammo, they always know where you are and how to get to you in the fastest way possible. To make an interesting AI in any game you just need to throw some randomness. So like in FIFA the hard ai rarely misses passes and shots, but the easy ai has a large chance to miss a pass, shot or tackle. In a shooter, the easy ai has lower accuracy (a forced randomness on where they shoot because they know your exact position). For rpg games there are lower chances of you getting hit and higher chances of you landing hits on easy mode. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nYou can also scale damage, enemy movement speed, and volume of bullets/grenades they throw at you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4fs7lp | why are people claiming "election fraud" in the states? what is actually happening? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fs7lp/eli5_why_are_people_claiming_election_fraud_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2bi68v",
"d2biwyh"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"What they're talking about isn't an election at all, but the primary selection process, which is treated culturally as an election but is not in the constitution and not a part of the official political process in the country.\n\nConstitutionally speaking, there is no mention of political parties at all. They are not a formal part of government in any sense. What they are actually is advertising franchises; they collect dues from their members, and promote a brand that they all get to use. In this way, the Republicans and the Democrats are more like McDonalds than they are like an order of government.\n\nBecause they are not really part of government, the two parties are free to administrate themselves the same way any fraternity, social club, or church picnic might. They have each chosen to conduct a poll to help them pick which politician will get to wear their brand for the upcoming Presidential election, but this poll is no more a legally binding election or protected by the constitution than the latest CNN opinion survey or a write-in contest to name Burger King's next hamburger.\n\nAs to why people are upset: by tradition, only people wearing the Republican or Democrat brand become president. We are now in the midst of a great cultural struggle between different ideologies and worldviews, and while only two brands really matter, there are more than two different ideas for the country. The primaries have become the battlegrounds for these ideologies, deciding which ideas will have a traditionally legitimate role in the election, and which may be relegated to the doom of self-promotion, as appealing as a 'McBurger Hut' in a strip mall. As much as the Presidential election, these primaries will decide the future of the country.\n\nBy the party's own rules, each state's local franchise headquarters picks the rules for it's very formal but not legally binding poll. Since in previous decades the primaries have seemed less important, few people are familiar with their local primary rules, and have sometimes been shocked by them. In all, 11 states used 'closed' primaries like New York where you have to register months or more ahead, and another 3 states and 2 territories don't even conduct a primary poll. While none of this is the result of new rules or last minute changes, news you hear about for the first time too late to act on it can be pretty demoralizing, leading many to outrage.\n\nThe United States has a very unhealthy democracy right now, and it's clear that some reforms will be needed. This year's primaries offer fresh evidence of that, both in their nearly unconstitutional importance and in the degree to which the money spent in each seems to rise inexorably election after election. There is cause there for outrage, but none of it can be considered fraudulent, and in a technical sense it can't even really be considered voting.",
"The claim of election fraud in the news lately relates to the Democratic primary in New York on Tuesday. This was one of the votes to help decide if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders will represent the party in the general election for president. In order to vote, a citizen must register to do so. Over time, the list of registered voters is adjusted to get rid of people who are no longer living in a given location. In Brooklyn, a part of New York City, it appears that a lot of people had been removed from the voter registration list even though they were still alive and hadn't moved. There were also complaints that some of the machines that record votes had been malfunctioning. As a result of these issues, the number of complaints submitted in this primary was unusually high for the state. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6ijvkc | if soap comes into contact with dirt, does the soap become dirty, or does the dirt become clean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ijvkc/eli5if_soap_comes_into_contact_with_dirt_does_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dj6tw7i"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Generally speaking, soap doesn't \"clean\" anything in the sense of changing dirt into something else. \n\nRather, soap works by making it very hard for dirt to stick to your hands/dishes/clothes/etc... This is why it's usually paired with scrubbing and water, all of which are designed to get stuff we think of as dirty off of the stuff we'd like to be clean. \n\nNow, scented soap might make your dirt smell minty fresh and anti-bacterial soap will kill the germs on your dirt and so on, but the ultimate action of soap is about dislodging and removing, not \"cleaning.\"\n\nAs such, given how you're using the terms, soap gets \"dirty\" when it touches dirt. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
48v7py | doped semiconductors (p and n type semiconductors) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48v7py/eli5_doped_semiconductors_p_and_n_type/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0mwwpw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Others got the gist, but I'll go more in depth. \n\nCurrent is the flow of charge. Not electrons. There's an important distinction here, especially when talking about semiconductors. \n\nConsider copper. Copper is in the 11th column of the periodic table. That means its outer shell has one electron. Shells like to be filled, so when copper bonds it winds up with lots of these free electrons that can be shared between other copper atoms. This means you can push in an electron into a copper crystal and it will pop out the electron on the other side. This is a flow of charge, because the electron \"carries\" the charge. The electrons in this case are called \"charge carriers.\"\n\nConsider a pure crystal of carbon, silicon or germanium. They are in the 14th column of the periodic table, and that means they have 4 outer valence shell electrons... these are \"filled\" shells, meaning they don't really share electrons. That means it's hard to push in an electron and pop one out the other side, making these elements poor conductors. They do not have free electrons, thus no charge carriers. \n\nSomething special happens when you don't have pure silicon or germanium (or carbon, but it's harder so ignore that for the moment). Say we have a crystal of 3 silicon atoms and 1 arsenic atom (fifteenth column). The arsenic will form an ionic bond with the silicon where it shares outer valence electrons... but one electron is left over. This particular crystal is not so hard to push electrons into, but not great at it either. It's a \"semiconductor.\" \n\nNow consider if we used gallium instead of arsenic (13th column). That means instead of a free electron formed in the bond, we have a \"hole\" or place for an electron to chill out. In this case, instead of free electrons being charge carriers, the *lack* of electrons, or holes, are the charge carriers. \n\nAn N type semiconductor is one with a select number of free electrons. A P type semiconductor is one with a select number of holes. \n\n\"Doping\" is the process of taking pure elements like silicon or germanium and introducing controlled amounts of impurities like gallium and arsenic into the crystal structure to control how many holes or free electrons are in the crystal. We can therefore control their conductivity. \n\nNow something *very* special happens when you take an N type material and put it next to a P type material. This is the magic of semiconductors, where they begin to act wild. I will leave an explanation of this to [one of the inventors of the transistor, Dr. Walter Brattain.](_URL_0_). This video is fantastic. His half hour lecture on semiconductor physics is dry and long, but at the same time he explains it far better than my two semesters of semiconductor electronics. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWZsnLvL400"
]
] |
||
3hx3uv | if a person becomes unconscious and is taken to the hospital in an ambulance, is he liable for the bill? why or why not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hx3uv/eli5_if_a_person_becomes_unconscious_and_is_taken/ | {
"a_id": [
"cubcg7n",
"cubimtp",
"cubkex3",
"cubkfff",
"cubmcfl"
],
"score": [
64,
15,
2,
2,
28
],
"text": [
"Yes they are liable for the bill. They are considered to have implicitly consented because it is assumed that people prefer to be alive. ",
"Unfortunately you'll be stuck with the bill. My sister had heart issues in high school and passed out during cross country training. Ambulance was called and mom was stuck with a 3500$ Bill even though the paramedics didn't do anything but arrive and check her vitals since she was awake again before they arrived. ",
"Yes, unless it is included in your insurance. As someone said before, it's because they assume that you will pay for them saving your life. ",
"You are liable for a bill.\n\nBut what I'd like to know what would happen if you did not pay that bill? What could be the worst thing to happen to you? Would you eventually end in jail? \"I did nothing, I'm in jail because I am alive.\" (?)",
"I know some annoying edgy cunt mentioned it already in this thread already but being from the UK, paying for an ambulance seems really strange.\n\nJust last month my friend accidentally cut his hand and it was bleeding quite a bit. Nothing life threatening but it was pretty bad. So I called non emergency line (111, because I figured people having heart attacks might need 999 more than we did) and when we told them we had no car or money to get to the hospital they actually called a taxi for us and paid for it. An ambulance once gave me a lift to a walk in centre at four in the morning so I could pick up a free inhaler. Had a nice chat about mobile apps and places to drink with the paramedic too.\n\nNot trying to touch people nerves or anything, it's just so strange. Here Doctors and paramedics just seem like friendly people who are always there to help at a moments notice and ask for nothing from you other than maybe a chat. \nTwo very different world's."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3s962y | what is going on at us campuses right now | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3s962y/eli5_what_is_going_on_at_us_campuses_right_now/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwv5yk9",
"cwv5zb3"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"What have you sen in those videos?",
"The left has fractured and a significant section of it has decided that it's Enlightenment heritage is not only worth nothing but is in fact oppressive because white European men kick started it. \n\nTLDR: Feels before Reason "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2wlhwx | what does putin "get" out of destabilizing ukraine? | I can't believe that he honestly expects a unification of some or even any of the former soviet bloc countries so what end does it serve by supporting and aiding anti-Western rebels? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wlhwx/eli5_what_does_putin_get_out_of_destabilizing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cory6au",
"cory720",
"cos39hu",
"cos5ftd"
],
"score": [
39,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It prevents an organized and capable ally of EU interests (or worse, one-day NATO member) from sitting at his border; it sows discord among his foes (via disputes over sanctions, providing arms to Ukraine, etc); and it provides a warning to other former Soviet States (Georgia, Kazakhstan, and others) about what their future looks like if they try to distance themselves from Russia diplomatically/economically/militarily.",
"Sea access to the Mediterranean. (No, not **direct** access. Via the Black Sea)\n\nIf you can destabilize a region, you're basically setting it up for a divide and conquer scheme. By the time they figure it all out, you've got what you want and it's too late for anybody to do anything about it.",
"See Russia as soft empire, like a little bit the USA. To be a super power you have to be in control of course of your own state but also the ones surrounding you. It sounds harsh but you better control your neighbors to have influence and power over them than to have a potential enemy ( to be a super power is a hard and unfair game!). Like the USA did with pretty much Latin America ( organizing putsches, financing revolutions or various political parties aligned with USA's views or just exploiting resources), Russia is doing it right now in Ukraine. \n\nWhy? Because Ukraine is leaning more and more to the west side with Europe ( and the USA) and away from Russia. So Putin is trying to intervene and influence this country so that it stays within Russia's influence.\n\nImagine a moment if a latin american country wanted to align itself with Russia ( or USSR at the time) or just having a socialist government. USA will be quick to strike and try to get back this country to order. Well this already happened with Cuba, Central America, Chile, Brazil and[many more!](_URL_0_) . Right now i'm pretty sure America isn't too happy with Venezuela or Bolivia ( they won't openly intervene of course but i bet they secretly tried to pull some strings here and there ). \n\nWell it's the same thing with Russia and it's bordering countries ( mostly ex- USSR members like Ukraine). It already happened before in Georgia and Caucasus like Chechnya and it is happening right now in Ukraine.\n\nRussia cannot tolerate loosing one of it's bordering country and ex USSR member to the west, it would cause a loss of power, influence, security, resources and prestige.\n\nAlso Russia is seeing it as an indirect confrontation ( think of it as a cold war) from the West. Of course the west will use influence and strategy to covertly win Ukraine. So now it's a Russia VS Ukraine +west battle. Loosing this cold war would be a huge deal for Russia, and a win for the West.\n\nRussia already lost a lot with the fall of the USSR, they won't let Ukraine go.",
"Well, hey; he's getting some more land for some ethnic Russkies, access to the black sea, and he knows that the EU was going to slap sanctions on him... so their economy is tanking. Badly. It reminds me of a certain country in Europe back in the 30s that did some of the same things, but in a completely different order. You completely overhaul the entire economy after it tanks, because that's when you should do it, and you build up a power base during the crisis as a bonus.\n\nYou may call me bonkers, but try to recall that history has a very awkward tendency to repeat itself, especially when people don't think it can."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_America%E2%80%93United_States_relations#1970s"
],
[]
] |
|
3002ix | why do i go back to sleep for 20 min in the morning? is it good for me to do this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3002ix/eli5_why_do_i_go_back_to_sleep_for_20_min_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpo4ypf",
"cpo6etu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think the best answer is already here, but here's my two cents. \nI got used to getting up with the first alarm because I realized **for me** this is much better than hitting snooze. \nObviously this is not the case for you, OP. \nIt's just that I have things I look forward to in the morning. That's coffee and shower, news and Reddit. I take quite a while in the morning, though. I need at least an hour, before I am ready to leave home. \n\nSo when the alarm goes off (in my case it's simply the radio starting really quiet and continiously increasing to full volume in about 45 sec) I step out of bed, go to the bathroom and make the first espresso, then drink it while reading news and a bit of Reddit. \nWhen I'm done with the coffee, off to the shower. \nI really enjoy that in the morning. \nPrepare second espresso and start to get dressed for the day. \n \nMaybe you don't drink coffee or turn on your computer or other device in the morning. Maybe you like breakfast, orange juice or tea but I think most people have something they look forward to in the morning and that's what my thoughts revolve around once I hear the radio. \nPlus, if it happens to be a song I like it gets stuck in my head until I'm out of the door and put my earplugs in and listen to something else.",
"Because this is asking about a condition you suffer it qualifies as a personal problem according to the sidebar rules.\n\nI'm not sure what, if any, subreddit would be better for you, but if you find one that works for you, let me know and I'll edit it into this template so anyone in the future will know, too!\n\nAlternatively, *if* this really is a complex conceptual question about the human body and not a question about *you* specifically, you can rephrase and resubmit without reference to yourself and try again. (Body questions are pretty common though, so try a quick search!)\n\nGood luck! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6aybc9 | why did the proteins in body can be misfolded and formed prions ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6aybc9/eli5_why_did_the_proteins_in_body_can_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhict0s"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It has to do with the energy held in the shape of the protein. Consider a rubber band: when you hold the band stretched out it has a lot of energy and it wants to collapse back to the low-energy shape of being flaccid. Proteins are *incredibly* complex molecules that stretch and pull at certain bonds within the molecule, not unlike a rubber band or a spring. Those parts are important, because they are what drive the proteins as tiny molecular machines, but they're also somewhat dangerous because it means the protein doesn't want to hold that shape because there's energy stored in those stretched bonds.\n\nA prion is a lower-energy protein shape. Something (probably contact with another prion) causes it to misfold into that new shape. That takes the right push, though. Imagine your rubber band is being held on a hook: in order for it to relax, you have to give it a little *more* energy and stretch it more so it can get around the hook, then when you let it go it collapses.\n\nScientists aren't entirely sure why prions cause healthy, normal proteins to misfold, but for ELI5 you could imagine it like a [bunch of mousetraps](_URL_0_) cocked and ready to go with a lot of energy stored in them. One of them snaps and goes off, bouncing into another one which goes off and bounces into another one. Whenever prions encounter the healthy form of that protein, they give the healthy protein a tiny push that collapses them into the lower-energy state. Scientists are also not sure why the healthy protein shape is in a higher-energy state in the first place, especially given that it's dangerous (even if it's not very dangerous). It probably has something to do with exactly how the protein interacts with other molecules to do its job which requires the shape it's normally in, but like I said, proteins are incredibly complex molecules."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://media.gizmodo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Screen-Shot-2014-03-27-at-3.46.01-pm.png"
]
] |
||
1ic4m8 | the difference between a hyperbola and a parabola. | I understand a parabola is a cut from a cone at an angle parallel to the adjacent edge of the cone. And a hyperbola is a cut perpendicular to the bottom face of the cone. However I don't see how they differ if viewed face on, as curves on a graph for instance.
Thanks
*edit: I meant cone not cylinder! oops | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ic4m8/eli5_the_difference_between_a_hyperbola_and_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb30ung",
"cb30wo7",
"cb30xx6"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"* A parabola is a curve. \n\n* A hyperbola is a curve with a mirrored image curve.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWhen cutting a cone:\n\n\n* A parabola is made from a diagonal cut which crosses the mid-point vertical.\n\n* A hyperbola is made from a diagonal cut which does not cross the mid-point line - therefore there will be a mirror of this on the other side of the cone. \n",
"Hyperbola and parabola are [conic sections](_URL_0_), they are cut from cones, not cylinders. Imagine two cones, stacked on top of each other in an hour glass shape. Now if you took a slice through this shape, you will end up with one of four graphs. If you take a slice parallel to the base, you get a circle. If you rotate this slice so that it runs between the base of one cone but does not pass through the middle point where the two cones meet, you get an ellipse. If you continue to rotate this slice so that it now crosses the base of one cone but not through the other you get a parabola. If the slice runs through the base of both cones, you get a hyperbola. This [image](_URL_1_) might help. ",
"Couple of things wrong in your post:\n\n1. Parabolas and Hyperbolas (as well as circles and ellipses) are cut from a **cone**, not from a cylinder. Cutting a cylinder gives you only circles and ellipses. \n\n\n2. \"cut perpendicular to the bottom face of the cylinder\" is not the only angle of cut that results in a hyperbola. Any cut even at an angle that does not result in a closed loop gives you a hyperbola, except if the cut is parallel to the adjacent edge, in which case the curve is a parabola. [See this diagram](_URL_0_)\n\nHyperbolas are actually two separate curves, mirror images of each other. A parabola is just one curve. Also, as a general rule of thumb, hyperbolas are more \"open\" or divergent than a parabola. [See illustration.](_URL_1_)\n\nIf you are given a piece (a section) of a parabola and a hyperbola, it is visually very difficult to to identify a hyperbola from a parabola, or even from a section of a circle or ellipse.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Conic_Sections.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Conic_sections_2.png"
],
[
"http://www.andrews.edu/~calkins/math/webtexts/conicsl.jpg",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eccentricity.svg"
]
] |
|
upye5 | what scott walker has done good/bad? | What has Scott Walker done to be "recalled" as it were? Even though he won. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/upye5/eli5_what_scott_walker_has_done_goodbad/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4xkioe",
"c4xo3g4"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"(I'm a Democrat)\n\nA good thing he has done is taking the state from a $3.6 billion debt to $150 million surplus in a little over a year.",
"He pissed off the left by reducing the amount of power public sector unions can use to screw the taxpayer.\n\nUnions are at perpetual war with the owners. With public sector unions, the owners are the taxpayers. I really don't get how they expected to pull it off, but it was the job of the left to convince Wisconsin voters that they were greedy and should have less control over their tax dollars."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9gc3ay | how does phantom vibration syndrome work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9gc3ay/eli5_how_does_phantom_vibration_syndrome_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"e62zv13",
"e639kuw"
],
"score": [
11,
3
],
"text": [
"The term is not a syndrome, but is better characterised as a tactile hallucination since the brain perceives a sensation that is not actually present.\n\nThe cause of phantom vibrations is not known. Preliminary research suggests it is related to over-involvement with one's cell phone. Vibrations typically begin occurring after carrying a phone for between one month and one year.\n\nPhantom ringing may be experienced while taking a shower, watching television, or using a noisy device. Humans are particularly sensitive to auditory tones between 1,000 and 6,000 hertz, and basic mobile phone ringtones often fall within this range.",
"We don't really know. It doesn't appear to have existed in the past but as no significant physiological reason for the change it is theorised that the sensation has always existed but was dismissed automatically by the brain. With the advent of pagers and later phones the sensation has become associated with the vibration of those devices and is no longer dismissed. \n\n**TLDR**, its the confusion of a previously dismissed sensation with that of a vibrating phone, not a new sensation in itself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
34e7tr | what do all these settings on my washing machine actually do differently? | [Picture of settings](_URL_0_)
I've read the manufacturer page and all I see is what amounts to ad-speak. When I change the settings the only different things I see are changes in the temperature setting, the soil level, and the extract level. Is the washing machine actually doing anything different? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34e7tr/eli5_what_do_all_these_settings_on_my_washing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqtrwps",
"cqtrx95",
"cqu41q5"
],
"score": [
5,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The things that you have mentioned plus:\n\n* The speed of the spin, \n* the length of each part of the cycle",
"There are also changes in the time of the cycle, which may be influenced by the soil level as well.\n\nRather than making you pick the different levels manually, the manufacturer has chosen a handful of pre-programmed levels. To some extent, they are marketing hype, but they do have value. They help prevent mistakes, since if you select \"delicate\", it won't let you then modify it to be high speed or high temperature. It's also good if you have youngsters or a laundry-challenged SO, since it's easier for them to pick \"colors\" than to remember that colors shouldn't be washed in hot water.",
"Allergen generally has higher temperature water (130F?) to kill allergens, and probably has an extra rinse as well to help make sure dust/etc is rinsed away.\n\nSanitize is even hotter, usually ~160F, to actually kill germs.\n\nBedding usually tells the washer that what it is washing is probably a large item, so that might mean \"spin the agitator more gently so it doesn't become a tangled mess\" or \"use more water than you normally would so that dirt doesn't get trapped in the folds\"\n\nWrinkle Control uses gentler washing/spinning options so it doesn't wedge all of the clothes together and wrinkle them.\n\nDedicates is usually even gentler than wrinkle control\n\nCold Wash uses cold water, which doesn't loosen dirt as well as warm water, so the cycle has more soaking time and might agitate the laundry longer.\n\nsee _URL_0_ and _URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/DAC6ItT.jpg"
] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://laundry.about.com/od/clotheswashers/a/How-To-Select-The-Correct-Washer-Cycle.htm",
"http://www.warnersstellian.com/washer-buying-guide"
]
] |
|
1f1ejz | why are black and white movies and clips always sped up? | It seems like most small clips or videos in black and white are sped up about 150%, why is this?
edit: Heres an example _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1f1ejz/eli5_why_are_black_and_white_movies_and_clips/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca5ud23"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Older cameras did not have motors and had to be hand-cranked by the camera operator.\n\nIf they cranked at 20 frames per second, and the film was then projected at 24 frames per second (the standard rate), then it will appear sped up."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjPoW2Ytt9o"
] | [
[]
] |
|
knzdq | how speed reading works? | Currently I believe you inject cheetah blood into the brain. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/knzdq/eli5_how_speed_reading_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2lrtpp",
"c2lshu4",
"c2lsn12",
"c2lsytg",
"c2lt8fe",
"c2ltctb",
"c2ltk3o",
"c2luayv",
"c2lus7y",
"c2ly45a",
"c2lrtpp",
"c2lshu4",
"c2lsn12",
"c2lsytg",
"c2lt8fe",
"c2ltctb",
"c2ltk3o",
"c2luayv",
"c2lus7y",
"c2ly45a"
],
"score": [
11,
17,
70,
26,
4,
6,
9,
2,
2,
3,
11,
17,
70,
26,
4,
6,
9,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"instead of reading words individually, you read per word group, and hop from each word group to another. Once mastering it, you can also let your eyes move with loops across a text and still make sense of it.",
"Isn't it a scam? ~~Has science proven this??~~\n\nEDIT: I was being serious. I have heard people say that speed reading doesn't really work. I heard the opinion that speed reading is done by people who can just read really fast the normal way, and looking at a whole paragraph or multiple lines of text isn't really effective.\n\nThank you for the responses. I am curious about this and I will check it out.",
"[just something fun to mess with](_URL_0_)",
"I'm a speed reader. When I glance at a paragraph I see all the words at once, as actual words with meanings rather than just letters on a page.\n\nIt's worth mentioning that speed reading isn't ALWAYS the same as \"speed comprehending.\" If I'm reading something with a lot of dense concepts or confusing phrasing, I have to slow down to absorb the meaning. Stephen King, for example, is easier to speed-read than Tolkien, because King writes the way a person talks and doesn't make you think too hard, and Tolkien is trying to pour whole new worlds into your head. But you could hand me a meaningless \"wall of text\" and I could read it silently much faster than I could ever read it aloud. Speed readers don't see words as being made up of letters, really; they just see the words themselves, fully imbued with meaning.",
"People see paragraphs as you would see a word. You read the word, not the individual letters. ",
"To me, it was hardest to not \"say\" the words in my head as I read them. A great way to get past doing this is repeating a meaningless phrase over and over in your head as you read. E.g., \"A, E, I, O, U. A, E, I, O, U.\" or \"1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.\"",
"I dont even want to know any answers after reading the cheetah blood-bit. ",
"Basically, there are 2 major points:\n1) Stop the voice in your head. It makes you read at the level you speak. You can read MUCH MUCH faster than you speak. One key is to block that out\n2) Read words in clumps instead of one at a time. The more words you can focus on at once, the faster you can read. This takes alot of practice and usually starts by focusing on 2 or 3 words at once and moving on. Later move to more words at once. \n\nThere's much more to it, but those 2 things alone will increase how fast you read by ALOT",
"i can read quite fast, like 900-1000 wpm. The problem is I have to be fully focused on what i'm reading to do it, and I just have trouble fully focusing myself in what i'm doing. If I am reading a book that I'm into, I start reading really fast, but i can really only do it without thinking about it.",
"I don't know scientifically how it works, or if I am \"speed reading,\" but I read damned fast. It scares my friends and if I'm waiting for someone to read something, I can read it 3-5 times before they're done. \n\nTo me, it feels like my brain has autocomplete (like you'd use while texting), if that makes sense. Remember eons ago when there were no full-keyboard phones, and you had to use T9 or press buttons 3 or 4 times? As someone who has that phone, it makes a world of difference. \n\nHope that helps explain how it *feels* a bit.\n",
"instead of reading words individually, you read per word group, and hop from each word group to another. Once mastering it, you can also let your eyes move with loops across a text and still make sense of it.",
"Isn't it a scam? ~~Has science proven this??~~\n\nEDIT: I was being serious. I have heard people say that speed reading doesn't really work. I heard the opinion that speed reading is done by people who can just read really fast the normal way, and looking at a whole paragraph or multiple lines of text isn't really effective.\n\nThank you for the responses. I am curious about this and I will check it out.",
"[just something fun to mess with](_URL_0_)",
"I'm a speed reader. When I glance at a paragraph I see all the words at once, as actual words with meanings rather than just letters on a page.\n\nIt's worth mentioning that speed reading isn't ALWAYS the same as \"speed comprehending.\" If I'm reading something with a lot of dense concepts or confusing phrasing, I have to slow down to absorb the meaning. Stephen King, for example, is easier to speed-read than Tolkien, because King writes the way a person talks and doesn't make you think too hard, and Tolkien is trying to pour whole new worlds into your head. But you could hand me a meaningless \"wall of text\" and I could read it silently much faster than I could ever read it aloud. Speed readers don't see words as being made up of letters, really; they just see the words themselves, fully imbued with meaning.",
"People see paragraphs as you would see a word. You read the word, not the individual letters. ",
"To me, it was hardest to not \"say\" the words in my head as I read them. A great way to get past doing this is repeating a meaningless phrase over and over in your head as you read. E.g., \"A, E, I, O, U. A, E, I, O, U.\" or \"1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.\"",
"I dont even want to know any answers after reading the cheetah blood-bit. ",
"Basically, there are 2 major points:\n1) Stop the voice in your head. It makes you read at the level you speak. You can read MUCH MUCH faster than you speak. One key is to block that out\n2) Read words in clumps instead of one at a time. The more words you can focus on at once, the faster you can read. This takes alot of practice and usually starts by focusing on 2 or 3 words at once and moving on. Later move to more words at once. \n\nThere's much more to it, but those 2 things alone will increase how fast you read by ALOT",
"i can read quite fast, like 900-1000 wpm. The problem is I have to be fully focused on what i'm reading to do it, and I just have trouble fully focusing myself in what i'm doing. If I am reading a book that I'm into, I start reading really fast, but i can really only do it without thinking about it.",
"I don't know scientifically how it works, or if I am \"speed reading,\" but I read damned fast. It scares my friends and if I'm waiting for someone to read something, I can read it 3-5 times before they're done. \n\nTo me, it feels like my brain has autocomplete (like you'd use while texting), if that makes sense. Remember eons ago when there were no full-keyboard phones, and you had to use T9 or press buttons 3 or 4 times? As someone who has that phone, it makes a world of difference. \n\nHope that helps explain how it *feels* a bit.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://spreeder.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://spreeder.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
197dxs | what can people of low intelligence do to make themselves smarter? | Miley Cyrus just said something that sounded smart. Like, really smart. I don't know what to believe anymore!
I mean, I know reading makes us smarter. I've been reading since I was two. Can you take pills or something?
**Edit:** This may be OOC. We're getting there. What I was getting at is: how do we arrive at answers to critical questions we currently lack the brainpower to find? Additionally, what are the "best" ways to come up with these critical questions? **Edit2:** I came here to ELI5 in part to work out which questions would be more appropriate to post on r/askscience. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/197dxs/what_can_people_of_low_intelligence_do_to_make/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8lg31u",
"c8lg3z5",
"c8lg928",
"c8lgb1g",
"c8lgbon",
"c8lgctp",
"c8lgjrp",
"c8lh8wo",
"c8lojyj"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
7,
11,
3,
46,
8,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Study. Learn to think critically.",
"There aren't pills. People who are smart tend to read, and be people who have received an education, those two things are helpful.",
"anyone can be smart. It takes time, motivation and willing to learn.",
"Miley Cyrus hasn't gotten smarter because she was stupid before, she's gotten smarter because she was a child when she got famous.",
"Things that help you think in new/complex ways. I believe cross words have been shown to increase IQ slightly and deter dementia; you're trying to figure out words in ways you don't usually associate them. Motorcycle driving also increases your intelligence because unlike driving you have to be hyper aware in order not to die; you're shifting and looking for gaps and making sure someone isn't driving into you, these things *should* be done while in a car but cars are *safe* zones for most people and just don't use the same brain power. Motorcycles can rewire your brain.\n\nBasically what you want to do is increase pathways in your brain. When you're young you have many pathways, but as we get older they \"prune\" to only be the pathways we use the most. A second language can help create new pathways... Doing new things, taking on a new hobby. If you can't draw take a class, try writing with your \"other\" hand, learn a new game... Use your mind, don't become passive.",
"* Read. Books, newspapers, blogs, fiction and non-fiction, etc. Don't just read stuff that's easy or fun - read stuff that makes you think. Read stuff with words you don't know, and look up the words in a dictionary. Read about places you've never been, people you've never met, experiences you've never had, and imagine what it would be like to be there, meet them, **be** them, and do those things.\n* Talk to people. Don't just talk about the weather, talk about life, politics, religion, society, the book you just read, and so on.\n* And more than talk, **listen**. Ask questions. When someone disagrees with you, try to learn why without feeling like you have to convince them you're right. Understand the other person's ideas and perspective before you try too hard to sell your own.\n* Pay attention to everything. Try to notice details. Really see the world around you that you so often take for granted.\n* Ask why. Why is Product A more expensive than Product B? Why do people feel certain ways or hold certain opinions? Why did you choose what you did rather than something else? Question the reasons for everything.\n* If you don't know something, don't just shrug - go find out! There's tons of knowledge in places like wikipedia, forums, dictionaries, and hell, even reddit. Get your questions answered.\n* Finally, adopt the attitude that there is no such thing as useless knowledge - any fact, any piece of understanding, any idea could potentially have value to you some day.\n",
"'Intelligence' is a bit of an abstract concept. You can mostly divide it into two: accumulated knowledge, and what I like to call 'wisdom'. How intelligent you can appear will mostly rely on how much knowledge you've accumulated, and how much knowledge you've accumulated relies on your drive to gain knowledge. In my mind, Wisdom covers your motivation to do something, and a thirst to accumulate knowledge in that area. It also encompasses common sense; next time an unfamiliar situation presents itself, give it some thought before you make action.\n\nReally there's no such thing as being 'smart'. When people say someone's 'smart' they usually mean 'oh that guy's good at Maths/Science/Other classical subject', disregarding more or less everything else, which is a bit of a lopsided judgement of someone. Those people didn't become good at these things due to innate talent (although a genuine pleasure from a subject or a knack for something can certainly help drive you and keep you motivated). Hell, even motivation is a skill in itself.\n\nIf you want to -appear- smart, then you can go off and do reasoning, logic, maths, science courses, but if you don't enjoy them then you're not achieving anything. If you have a natural 'talent' for and enjoy, for example, flower pressing, you'll be motivated to get better in that area because you enjoy doing it and want to get better. The 'getting better' at something part is what separates the people I think of as smart from the people I think of as dumb; you could be a slob and sit and watch sport all day, or you could actively research the history, study tactics, and develop tactics of your own in that sport; they both essentially cover a love of sport, but one of them is an active improvement to yourself, whereas the other is a kinda 'lol whatever' approach to something you enjoy. There's no such thing as someone who got good at something through some hidden innate talent they were born with.\n\nI don't know if this makes any sense i am tired",
"Some great answers here. My two cents on laying some ground work:\n\n1) Learn how to play an instrument. It has a steep learning curve but it adds a big dimension to who you are as a person. My suggestion is piano because it is a very diverse instrument that covers a lot of musical ground, not to mention the notes are logically laid out before you. Start taking some lessons or just go on internet (buy a cheap keyboard if you don't have access to a piano) and you'll be surprised how quickly you can start playing some good tunes. Seriously. Just do 30 minutes a day. See where you are in a few months.\n\n2) Watch TED talks on netflix. The episodes are short but they are usually very interesting. My suggestion is to pick a topic you are already interested in. Sometimes I force myself to watch ones of topics I don't really care about but I don't absorb them in the same way.\n\n3) Learn how to play chess. There's a ton of online resources. The game is purely analytical and really teaches you how to approach problems in a different way. \n\n4) It's been said a lot already, but READ. Start soft with subject matter that already interests you. Heck, read wikipedia. It's good stuff. Here's a start _URL_1_\n\n5) Learn another language. Steep learning curve, but you'd be surprised what 10-20 minutes a day will do for you in a year's time span. Go to _URL_0_. It really is awesome. Type in \"Italian Phrases\" into google. Study them. Please, yes, no, thank you. After a few weeks of TEN minutes a day you'll know them. Build off of that. Who/what/when/why/how. The verbs to want, to be (I am, you are). You'll be surprised how often those 2 verbs come up and how important they are in language.\n\nHope this helps.",
"We're not there yet. We do know that the brain is not some set organ that never changes, far from it. The science behind this though is at its infancy. We only catch glimpses of what is possible here and there through glitches in the system (look up acquired savant syndrome, where people with head injuries gain mental abilities that they did not have before). \n\nAlso, we do have a limited amount of experiments that show that we can stimulate certain parts of the brain and allow more people on average to do something they couldn't before:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIts exciting to know that we're starting to make some headway into such matters, but we're still only at the beginning.\n\nBut given that the brain can make new connections you can make yourself faster through practice with a lot of things. If making calculations in your head is difficult but you don't have any learning difficulties with the concept in general then all that's left is practice. In general, lots of things we attribute to \"intelligence\" are really just refined actions that all of us can do, just slower. You might think someone is a genius at debate but what you haven't seen is years upon years of learning rhetorical tactics, watching other debates, reading, practicing and mental preparation. \n\nAs for Miley Cyrus, I don't know what she said but in general most \"smart\" ideas aren't out of the grasp for people of average intelligence. It just takes being informed, being willing to listen (this is bigger than most people think), and changing your own views/ideas based on new information. There's no reason the average person can't discuss the basic controversy between monism and dualism or continental vs. analytical approaches to epistemology, but most people aren't aware those issues even exist so when someone who did read the wikipedia page on it talks about it, they sound ultra fucking smart. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"www.livemocha.com",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions"
],
[
"http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beautiful-minds/201204/brain-stimulation-makes-the-impossible-problem-solvable"
]
] |
|
6i6lei | what is the inflation rate based on? i keep seeing articles about how x costs so much more now, even when adjusting for inflation. so if it's not based on purchasing power, how is it calculated? is there anything that does cost "the same" over decades? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6i6lei/eli5_what_is_the_inflation_rate_based_on_i_keep/ | {
"a_id": [
"dj3vlda"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Inflation is measured by calculating a \"basket of goods\" that doesn't change much over time, things like food (both groceries and restaurants), electricity and fuel, clothing, transportation, housing, automobile purchases, medical services.\n\nThere are certainly some items that cost the same or fall in price over time, mostly technology. Computers used to cost way more in actual dollars, and thus substantially more when adjusting for inflation. A computer may have cost $3-5000 in 1980, which would have also bought a compact car. Now good computer costs about 1/20 of even the cheapest car. Color TV's similarly may have been a few hundred dollars 30-40 years ago, and still are that price. Never mind the HUGE advancements in quality/power of TVs and computers over time.\n\nOther items may stay much more stable over time, due to changes in production or location of manufacture. Clothing items that were first automated, and then outsourced overseas mean the cost of a t-shirt has probably climbed way below general inflation. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3n2wy7 | why are smartphones so significantly more expensive in europe then in the usa at release date? (looking at you nexus 6p) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n2wy7/eli5_why_are_smartphones_so_significantly_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvkbpzb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Europe has different taxes, import tariffs, and the like. That makes them all likely to be more expensive. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4wfasg | what happens after a thief steals a car? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wfasg/eli5_what_happens_after_a_thief_steals_a_car/ | {
"a_id": [
"d66j8wk",
"d66js3v",
"d66lt91",
"d66m0gd",
"d66m0ko"
],
"score": [
36,
6,
32,
28,
11
],
"text": [
"A chop shop is where they takr cars to be stripped. Of everything. Motor trans electronics ect and they sell all the parts. In a good shop the stolen car leaves as a frame.",
"Some poor sod finds his car is missing, so he is late for work, loses his job, cant claim unemployment, cant feed his family, gets used to steal cars for a chop shop, and the circle comes around.",
"I saw a show on Viceland recently that showed that a lot of high end stolen cars in the US, Mercedes, Land Rovers, BMWs, etc. are shipped in containers to western africa and sold without modifications (no parts removed, no VINs disguised, etc.) in the local markets...it looked a lot like a normal, used car sales lot, accept it was on a dirt road in a west african city. The explanation is that it works because it's too much trouble for the real owners or the US government to track the cars, it's much easier just to file an insurance claim and get at least some of the car's value back in money from the insurance company.",
"When my van was stolen, it was for joyriding. I got it back ten days later when a suspicious abandoned vehicle was reported to police a few counties over.\n\nThe passenger doors looked like a moose tackled the van. Inside.... holy Jesus. It's like Delta House threw the party of the year in there. Trash. Smoke. A pair of panties. Vomit. It took two full details to get the smell out.\n\nThey stole my basket of CDs (mostly metal) and left the crappiest kids bop-style hip hop mix tape CD ever. I offered it to police for fingerprints. I was told that car theft was a misdemeanor and nobody cared.",
"It all depends on what the thief plans on doing with your car. Might use it to conduct further crime, get around town, sell it, dirty Mike and the boys.... \n\nAll depends on that criminals intent. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
380h0k | recently saw a man welding, i know you're not supposed to look at the blowtorch/gun thing, but is it safe if it's just in your peripheral vision? or should you totally avoid it being in your fov without protection? | Edit: Wow thanks guys, had no idea it could burn your skin too. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/380h0k/eli5_recently_saw_a_man_welding_i_know_youre_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"crr9qra",
"crr9que"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"You shouldn't look directly at the arc, you can still get welders flash even if it's not direct line of sight but you would know by the next day. Not a huge deal, I've had it multiple times from welding without a helmet or walking into a weld booth while a coworker was striking an arc",
"Totally avoid looking at it at all. Its very strong UV rays, weld with a short sleeve shirt and it will burn you like you have been out in the sun all day without sunscreen. It doesn't take long to burn you either. And it doesn't take long to burn your eyes either. I recommend a auto darkening wielding mask."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
flj5v2 | why are exhaust tones/notes different in each vehicle? | Iβm asking about motorcycles specifically but it goes for all vehicles. Why/How in a v-twin engine if CCβs are very close and the same manufacturer exhaust is installed on each bike the sound is different? Is this done with timing or are there other internal parts that cause this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/flj5v2/eli5_why_are_exhaust_tonesnotes_different_in_each/ | {
"a_id": [
"fl3dxzc",
"fl3neyc",
"fkyw8fo",
"fkywnwh"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Clap your hands palm to palm. Now clap your hands with just your fingertips. clap your hands with one fist in the palm of another.\n\nSound is just vibrations in the air and when you make sounds, the consistency, and shape of the instruments you use greatly affect the sound.\n\nEven two identically built cars are not perfectly identical. One might have a heavier driver inside. Slightly higher gasoline. A different amount of oil in the engine. An engine that is slightly differently tuned and so on.\n\nThere's a reason making musical instruments is a precision art and musicians need to tune their instruments frequently. Very small differences in makeup and consistency can cause considerable differences in the sound an object produces when it makes the air vibrate.",
"To copy and paste my response from a similar thread:\n\nThe sound is the noise created by the fuel being ignited - the same way a firecracker makes a sound when you light it.\n\nThe reasons engine sound different however is the way that they are constructed and work.\n\nFirstly, each cylinder goes bang separately, but because this is normally happening really quickly, you don't hear lots of separate bangs, but a fairly continuous rumbling sound. That sound is then channeled through an exhaust system which muddles these sounds together, muffles and dampens them, and adds its own sound as it resonates. \n\nThe difference between different engine types mainly comes down to the amount of cylinders that are being fired. If an engine has more cylinders, that means more ignitions per engine revolution, and the sound will change.\n\nAfter that there are lots of smaller details that will have some effect - the size of each engine cylinder, the order they are fired in, the speed the engine is designed to run at, and various other engine parts like turbochargers will all change the sound you hear. \n\nTo add an extra note regarding the v twin mentioned in the post, a v twin engine is a form of two cylinder engine, the fact that there are only two larger volume cylinders (rather than multiple lower volume ones) and the way that these are fired means this engine has a very distinct sound to it. This is also typically enhanced by the fact that motorbikes typically use much shorter and louder exhaust systems, and they lack a lot of the bodywork a cars engine will be shielded by, so the engine is louder and more obvious in sound.",
"V-twins usually have a longer stroke than inline engines which affects exhaust gas velocity and pulse. But valve timings, overlap, etc will also have an influence on the pitch.",
"Depends on the set up, you could have a 1.0 car with a straight through exhaust system, it will sound loud and poor but it will be loud which is the main objective but won't really see any gains as such."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5tj4xs | how is dental health directly linked to life expectancy | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tj4xs/eli5_how_is_dental_health_directly_linked_to_life/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddpeg00"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Only a partial answer but the plaque on your teeth is the same plaque that can build up in heart arteries. It travels through gums and sticks to heart. I guess non-scientific answer would be if you don't give a shit about dental hygiene, something fairly easy to maintain with little effort that everyone notices on 1st impression and judges you on you probably don't give a shit about anything. And not in the cool rebellious way. Or you're a meth addict. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
22da51 | how has youtube managed to stay alive despite having obvious copyright violations up the wazoo? | YouTube is basically a free music-on-demand service right now for pretty much any song you can think of. I could literally listen to 99% of the songs I'd want to listen to for free without ever having to pay the artists, if I wanted. Many people using YouTube are using ad blockers, so they never even see the ads that are *supposed* to go towards making up for that deficit, so watching videos from VEVO becomes no different to watching any other video. Every time a music video is taken down, others will spring up to take its place.
I don't understand how this can be economically viable for Google, or how media companies haven't been able to force the whole site down. Please help me understand this! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22da51/eli5_how_has_youtube_managed_to_stay_alive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cglo1b5",
"cglo88l"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"YouTube has 'common carrier' status. What that means is they're not liable for the content that people upload, as long as they respond to DMCA takedown requests (which they do).\n\nThe onus is on the copyright holders to find and report infringing content. But it's a lost cause because of the sheer volume of uploads.",
"Under the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, YouTube is not liable for the copyright infringing activities of its users, under one condition: YouTube must disable access to a video if a copyright infringement notification is filed against it.\n\nSo if you upload a video of, let's say, a song by Prince (Prince is known to be especially protective of his copyright), YouTube won't get into trouble for it. If Prince, or someone acting on his behalf (his record label, for example) files a copyright infringement notification against your video, YouTube must disable access to it (but you do have the legal right to file a counter notification).\n\nIf YouTube *doesn't* disable access to your video, *then* YouTube could be held legally liable for your copyright infringement.\n\nHowever, YouTube does also have this option where copyright owners can choose instead to \"monetize\" the videos. Essentially, YouTube is saying to these entities: \"Look, we don't want to have to keep taking down videos all the time, and neither do you, especially when it's your fans. So why don't you just put ads on those videos and you get to keep the lion's share of the revenue they generate and track the views on those videos to help your marketing department?\"\n\nIt's up to the copyright owners themselves if they want to take YouTube up on their offer. Of course, if the copyright owners decide, \"Wait a minute -- everyone's using AdBlock and we're not getting any money,\" well, then they might withdraw from that scheme and start filing copyright infringement notifications. But as long as YouTube continues to abide by the law and take down videos when YouTube is notified that they are infringing, the copyright owners can't sue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
22g1aq | why do rental properties usually have carpet? wouldn't it be easier, more up to date esthetically, and less expensive to have wood floors, tile, or linoleum? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22g1aq/eli5_why_do_rental_properties_usually_have_carpet/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgmforw",
"cgmfqet",
"cgmg1k4",
"cgmgdrh",
"cgmgmni",
"cgmi3rj",
"cgmj7q4"
],
"score": [
22,
11,
9,
3,
3,
12,
2
],
"text": [
"They usually haven't been updated.. Carpet is cheaper than many hard floor options.",
"Mainly because carpet doesn't show wear and tear as much as does linoleum or wood, and it's a lot cheaper. What carpet *does* show are stains, but those are not normally considered wear and tear and the tenant can be charged for damage.",
"Carpet is cheaper to install. It doesn't wear as well as hard flooring but it is cheaper to replace when it needs replacing. \n\nHard flooring is usually found in higher-end rentals where upfront costs are less prohibitive because they are courting a wealthier clientele and will be charging more for the apartment. Additionally, higher-end renters usually take better care of their apartments so replacement cost is less of an issue. ",
"Replacement. With rental properties, you should assume that almost anything that can be worn or damaged will be. \n \nWhen showing a rental property, the goal is to have it look like it is new and clean. Worn flooring doesn't help, even if it is the level of wear and tear that an owner occupant would consider normal. Carpeting doesn't show wear as badly, and if it does, it is more fixable. \n \nNot only is cheap carpet less expensive to replace, it takes much less time. Your rental property can be off the market for a day or two instead of a week or two. \n \nCarpet also helps a little bit with soundproofing between floors, but I doubt that is a major consideration. ",
"In some states rental properties are required to change the flooring when a new tenant moves in. Carpet is cheaper to install and replace, so for a rental property with a large amount of apartments, it's cost effective to just have carpet. \n\nAlso as a number amount, hardwood flooring, although more aesthetically appealing and easier to clean costs about 3 times as much as carpet to purchase and install. This is considering your doing medium grade carpet and wood. So for a 1000 sq ft apartment might cost about $2500 to replace the carpet, it could cost close to $8,000 to replace with hardwood flooring. \n\nRental properties don't care about being \"up-to-date\" in a sense unless they really need to cater to a population that wants that. For example if you're in a very wealthy neighborhood you'll probably find really nice modern style apartments that will have hardwood flooring, open floor plans and vaulted ceilings. You'd be hard press to find that kind of property in a large apartment community in a part of the city with a lower income. \n\nAt the end of the day owning a rental property (any kind) you want to make money. So if you don't have enough income to spend on completely updating your property to a more modern look, you'll more than likely choose some carpet as opposed to hardwood to get it ready for a new tenant. \n",
"It's also worth noting that for multi-floor units, carpet helps reduce noise flowing up and down between units.",
"Carpet costs less per square foot and is both easier to install and replace in case of damage by any renters/leasers. \n\nThat said, I fucking hate carpet. It's much less durable than other floor materials. You'd think subway-floor-grade tile would be a better option, but hard surfacings are initially more expensive in terms of installation cost and materials cost. You have to be reasonably skilled to lay wood flooring or tile, carpet less so (I say this having done all three). A lot of property managers find it easier to eat a cost stretched over time due to repeated carpet replacements than an up-front higher cost."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
etgdrp | why do you have to check engine oil and transmission fluid? why can't there just be a gauge like there is for your gasoline or for the engine temperature? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/etgdrp/eli5_why_do_you_have_to_check_engine_oil_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ffg5z8w",
"ffg63cj",
"ffgl6zw"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Engine and transmissions fluids move, quite violently in fact, in an engine or transmission. That is why there is a proceeds for checking each. Engine should be off and vehicle level. Transmission should be running, In park, and vehicle level. \n\nNotice when you pull a dipstick it is more or less reading beyond full, but when you clean it off and check it again its much lower? \n\nAlso, its important to check the quality of the oil and fluid, as well as the quantity\n Oil goes bad, gets contaminated, even absorbs water. This also must be checked.",
"It's not always about checking the level of fluid, it's also about checking the contents or quality of the fluid. A level gauge similar to your fuel tank isn't going to tell you that there are metal shavings in your trans fluid of that your oil is black and burnt.",
"Depending on the car these thing's do exist. For example, the BMW M series no longer has an oil dipstick - it's monitored by a sensor now."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6g6jxr | why are psychedelics illegal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6g6jxr/eli5_why_are_psychedelics_illegal/ | {
"a_id": [
"dinx9w4",
"dinxmy3",
"dinzxqj",
"dio15ms",
"dio1sqq",
"dio4k5w"
],
"score": [
47,
249,
9,
79,
8,
19
],
"text": [
"The core principle behind American drug law is that **all drugs are illegal** by default and only those that are approved *for medical use* are legal. Our system of laws has no space in it for legal recreational drugs.\n\nFor various historic reasons, alcohol, tobacco & caffeine are not generally treated as drugs.",
"From Terence McKenna:\n\n\"Cultures are shaped by the drugs that they take and that they suppress. We are a sugar, red meat, and alcohol culture primarily with tobacco to shore all that up. Think for a minute about a drug like coffee, caffeine. Every labor contract in Western civilization contains a clause which secures the workerβs right to halt the assembly line twice a day, to fuel up on a drug known to cause liver damage and all kinds of problems. Well now, why isnβt there a cannabis break?\n\nThe reason is, that caffeine perfectly fits in to a program that would have you busily screwing widgits onto wonkets and moving them along the assembly line. In other words, it promotes capitalist values. Performing repetitious tasks in a state of sort of glazed acceptance. Cannabis, on the other handβ¦ what is always said about it? Makes you inefficient, lazy, uninterested in earning your Mercedes and your houseβ¦\"",
"While most are not harmful and can be beneficial at times there is no guarantee for safety. I believe most should be legal but have had a experience with one my self that affects me negatively to this day.",
"\"Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behaviour and information processing. They open you up to the possibility that everything you know is wrong.\"\n\n~Terence McKenna",
"I know that LSD became illegal after the widespread use in the 70s attracted government attention. Before that, it was just seen as a new alternative medication... I don't remember what its original purpose was. But after college students started abusing it, the media got involved and soon after, it was banned. I'm not sure about mushrooms or DMT or any other psychedelic drug, though. ",
"They implemented the \"Psychedelic Act of 1970\" (ban on all cognitive enhancing drugs, even ones used in scientific studies) to try to arrest people that were in the civil rights movement & the anti-war movement. Drugs like LSD, DMT, & shrooms were huge in that community & by implementing that act, they were able to disband those groups by throwing a lot of them in jail & also discrediting them by giving them a criminal record, in turn - turning people against them.\n\nThat's the whole reason that Psychedelic Act of 1970 was put into place. What's sad is that they were doing studies at a lot of great colleges (like Harvard & other Ivy league schools) seeing how drugs like psilocybin mushrooms could benefit in mental health, but the DEA went busting down doors, confiscating any & all psychedelic drugs, ceasing anymore studies. There's actually a documentary that talks about a lot of this, it's really interesting, but I can't remember what it's called or where I seen it (I want to say YouTube, but I can't find it - if I do, I'll post it in this comment down below.)\n\nIf I remember correctly LSD was accidently discovered by a Scientist named *Albert Hofmann*, when he got some on his skin, while transporting it. It seeped into his skin, causing him to trip. Then I believe they started doing studies on it & more & more people started finding out about it, which led to the \"hippies\" era that we've all heard stories about. It was all legal then, & people were protesting Vietnam, Civil Rights, going to Woodstock, partying, which all led to what I stated above.\n\nEdit: correction of Albert Hofmann's name. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ws86y | how do people get electrocuted in the shower during a storm? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ws86y/eli5_how_do_people_get_electrocuted_in_the_shower/ | {
"a_id": [
"du2svh0"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Lightning + water pipes = electrified water pipes.\n\n\nElectrified water pipes + water = electrified water. \n\n\nElectrified water + shower = electrified shower.\n\n\nElectrified shower + wet person = electrified wet person.\n\n\nElectrified wet person + ground = complete circuit. (Always complete your circuit.)\n\n\nThis is very unlikely though. You need to have metal pipes outside and no one uses metal pipes anymore. They use PVC pipes. Also the water generally discharges into the surroundings quite quickly so it won't reach the person with enough charge to give them more than a little static. Along with that for the thing to complete the circuit the person needs to be in contact with a conducting surface and tiles are pretty bad at conducting. Finally electricity takes the path of least resistance. In this case there is very little chance that this would be the path of least resistance."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4y5l6n | why do we lose our childhood playtime imagination? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4y5l6n/why_do_we_lose_our_childhood_playtime_imagination/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ldoit",
"d6ldv0n",
"d6lh4a0",
"d6lh9h2"
],
"score": [
15,
48,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"In cognitive psychology there are to types of intelligence, fluid and crystallized. Fluid is what we associate with creativity and involves or of the box, abstract thinking. It is what we are born with. As we grow and learn, it begins to morph into fact-based, logical crystallized intelligence. These are things we \"know\" and \"understand.\"\n\nSo basically as we gain more concrete knowledge, we have less \"room\" for imagination.\n\nI'm probably way oversimplifying but that's the general theory behind it.\n\nSource: cog-psy student.",
"Our brains learn things by observing the world, making predictions about what will happen and then seeing how close our predictions were. To reward getting a prediction right, the brain can release different amounts of a \"happy\" chemical (dopamine) which signal that whatever just happened was good and should be replicated. Once you get rewarded for an action, the next time you encounter it you get less of a reward though.\n\nAs a child, we don't have much experience to go off of so even basic activities can be new enough to trigger dopamine release and keep them engaged. \n\nAnother way of thinking about is with money. To a young child, $1 is a lot of money and $20 is a fortune since they have very little experience with money. Once they begin using money regularly and in higher amounts, their perspective on what \"a lot of money\" is shifts to. Once that shift happens, it takes more money to equal the same reward. ",
"Well, in my experience, me and the action figures just grew apart. Luke Skywalker developed social anxiety disorder so he stayed home all day. Han Solo was into the gay scene and clubbing. I don't play for that team. Lando had his business to look after. I mean, the horrors of war affected all of us. After watching the burning death star pieces rain down on the moon of Endor and wiping out all life that couldn't hibernate underground, what we had done finally sank in. We went from bringing freedom to the galaxy, to committing horrible extinction level events of terrorism. I mean, I came back from that and at the airport, people would spit in my face and call me baby Ewok killer? I used to operate million dollar equipment, and now I can't even hold a job parking cars!",
"Further question... As someone who loves learning anything he can get his hands on + works in conceptual design, how can I exercise this \"fluid\" cognitive ability?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2q59kp | why can i drink things faster with a straw rather than just drinking something with my mouth? | I thought my mouth was bigger than a straw!? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q59kp/eli5_why_can_i_drink_things_faster_with_a_straw/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn348vl"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"When you use a straw, you're adding power to the system: you're actively pumping the liquid. When you drink with your mouth, you are limited to gravity. Simple experiment to determine how much power your straw sucking has: get a really long straw, and suck liquid up until the weight of the liquid balances the vacuum you created, you can't lift it any more. That's how high the water in a bottle would have to be above your mouth to have equal pressure when you drink by gravity. If you drank out of a bottle that tall with an opening the size of your straw the liquid would flow exactly as fast."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5xhozs | in mathematics, what do sin, cos and tan do to a number? | I know they are mathematical functions like multiplying and dividing but there most be some way to define them | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xhozs/eli5_in_mathematics_what_do_sin_cos_and_tan_do_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dei4wxm",
"dei69po",
"dei6jit",
"dei9gsx",
"deianv0",
"deidpfm",
"dej153e"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
619,
2,
164,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They are the three basic [trigonometric functions](_URL_0_).\n\nLook at a [right triangle](_URL_1_) (\"right\" means that one angle is 90 degrees). Specifically, look at the angle A. There are three sides to the triangle: the hypotenuse (which is opposite the right angle), the side opposite the angle A, and the side adjacent to the angle A. The three trigonometric functions are defined as such:\n\n* sin(A) = a/h = the ratio between the side of the triangle *opposite* the angle, and the *hypotenuse*.\n* cos(A) = b/h = the ratio between the side of the triangle *adjacent* the angle, and the *hypotenuse*.\n* tan(A) = sin(A) / cos(A) = a/b = the ratio between the side *opposite* the angle and the side *adjacent* to it.\n\nAs you can see, this defines sin/cos/tan for any value between 0 and 90 degrees. There's a more complex definition using a circle which extends this for every number (instead if just 0 - 90), which you can read about in the wiki page I linked to. Also, instead of using degrees, we normally use *radians*, which are a way to express degrees using the constant pi, such that 360 degrees = 2\\*pi (so 90 degrees = pi/2).",
"Sin X means the *ratio* between the side opposite to and the hypotenuse adjoining an angle X in a right-angled triangle. Think of the angle X comprised of two lines meeting at a point, and the opposite side as a vertical line intersecting both of them as they diverge (forming a right-angled triangle). Imagine making the acute angle X bigger - obviously both the opposite side and the hypotenuse get bigger, but the opposite side at a larger rate so the ratio (the Sine) *increases*, maxing out at 90 degrees where it becomes 1 (X has now become the right-angle).",
"The ***sine*** is a measure of vertical-*ness*. Imagine a Ferris wheel, the wheel rotates by an angle and the **sine** of that angle tells you how \"high\" or \"low\" you are on the wheel. (With -1 being at the very bottom, and 1 being at the very top).\nThe ***cosine*** is a measure of horizontal-*ness*. Using the Ferris wheel analogy, this would be how far \"left\" or \"right* you are on the wheel.\nThe ***tangent*** is the slope-*ness* of a ramp. It's the height divided by the base (or Sine divided by Cosine) 0 slope would be a horizontal ramp and infinite (undefined) would be a cliff face. ",
"Imagine a right triangle whose hypotenuse has a length of one.\n\nsine(n) asks, \"if one angle is n, how long is the side opposite of that angle?\"\n\ncosine(n) asks, \"if one angle is n, how long is the non-hypotenuse side adjacent to the angle?\"\n\ntangent(n) asks \"if one angle is n, what is the ratio between the opposite and adjacent sides?\"",
"You can, indeed, define trig functions using ordinary arithmetic operations. The catch, as you can see, is that we have to use imaginary numbers. In particular, we have to use imaginary *exponents*, which behave weirdly compared to real exponents.\n\nThe reason that these functions seem so strange is that when you first encounter them, you don't about imaginary numbers, so you can't put them in terms of something you already understand. In fact, trigonometry as a whole long predates the formal idea of imaginary numbers.\n\nHowever these functions were treated historically, I personally find that the usual definition in terms of triangles is needlessly opaque. I prefer to define them in terms of *circles*.\n\n*[This](_URL_3_)* is what the sine and cosine mean.\n\n[Animated version](_URL_2_).\n\nNow, what is the connection to imaginary numbers? Take the function f(t) = e^(iΒ·t). This looks rather abstruse^([difficult to understand; obscure]) β what does it mean to raise something to an *imaginary* power? Well, it turns out that it means *rotating* it! The function e^(iΒ·t), when t is a real number (so that iΒ·t is imaginary) always produces a point on the unit circle. When t=0, e^(iΒ·t) = 1. But as t increases, e^(iΒ·t) rotates around the unit circle counterclockwise. When t = 2Ο, e^(iΒ·t) has gone all the way around and is back at 1.\n\n[Picture](_URL_5_).\n\nYou can see that this is almost exactly the same picture as the one defining sine and cosine. In fact, there is an even simpler way of defining sine and cosine:\n\n[Image](_URL_4_)\n\nIn these equations, βIm(x)β means the imaginary part of x and βRe(x)β is the real part of x. For instance, Re(2 + 3i) = 2, and Im(2 + 3i) = 3. The real part and imaginary part functions are not ordinary arithmetic functions β they're more like the absolute value function. But using these definitions, we can indeed define sine and cosine using ordinary arithmetic functions:\n\n[Image](_URL_1_).\n\nA little fiddling will result in βEuler's formulaβ:\n\n[Image](_URL_0_)\n\nAnd so we have an explicit definition of the sine and cosine in terms of familiar functions. The trade-off, obviously, is that now we have imaginary numbers to contend with! But imaginary numbers aren't so bad, and they really do make other things simpler. I find that explaining things *without* imaginary numbers is often more difficulty and complicated than just explaining imaginary numbers first. I've always wondered how much easier high school trig would be if you started with imaginary numbers and proceeded from there. Sure, it's not the way the ancients did it, but so what?\n\nEDIT: Thought about removing βabstruseβ, but instead added a definition because I really like that word.",
"Sure, there's a way to define them. Suppose I choose a point on the unit circle (circle of radius one) about the origin, and I look at the angle that point makes with the (positive) horizontal axis.\n\nThen the sine of the angle is the height (or vertical distance) of the point, the cosine is the horizontal distance (and is the same as the sine of the complementary angle, which is why it's called co-sine), and the tangent... well, that's the ratio of the sine and the cosine, never mind that one. :)\n\nThat's enough to define a function, we don't need to define it in terms of multiplying and adding things. But if we need a number, we can use a Taylor series to approximate it. This is what a calculator uses.",
"If t is an angle inside a circle, cos(t) is the x coordinate and sin(x) is the y coordinate. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigonometric_functions",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Trigonometry_triangle.svg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/0b55e28219a34ac40f8f4a92e22302abb83c53bb",
"https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/54c9315ebec2cf4de2424c145441ec2cd3e43ca5",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Circle_cos_sin.gif",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Unit_circle.svg",
"https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/b39d354fe272ab3508576234f99f9884115e1fa9",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_identity#/media/File:Euler%27s_formula.svg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
48ff8r | why do jobs these days require you to fillout a questionare? what ever happened to just filling out a resume and sending it in? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48ff8r/eli5_why_do_jobs_these_days_require_you_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0j6mw2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Questionnaires are designed to figure out things in a standardized way. So while maybe you can fluff your resume and make it pretty, it's a much easier 1 to 1 comparison on questionnaire.\n\nSometimes questionnaires are designed to subtlety figure things out about people, too. Like how willing you are to lie or at least endorse exaggerated claims about your abilities. Stuff like that is usually for entry level store clerk type jobs though. \n\nMore often questionnaires are designed to assess psychometric properties related to job performance or workplace and individual fit. They can assess how outgoing you are, how much you pay attention to detail, how much you like to work in groups versus alone, how independent of a worker you are, etc. Also there is such a thing as being over qualified. If you're high in need for cognition and drive, but it's menial task job, they might not hire you.\n\nIt's not a perfect evaluation tool (it is self reported), but thats why it's paired with resume and interview. Except again for low level jobs. They have so many applicants and a large labor supply that they're mostly weeding people out based on their answers. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6t3o65 | why do our legs feel numb after a car trip, but not after lying in bed for hours more? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6t3o65/eli5_why_do_our_legs_feel_numb_after_a_car_trip/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlhndi0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you sit down in one place for a very long time the blood pools down towards your legs. You aren't getting as much circulation.\n\nWhen you're laying down the blood can more easily flow throughout the body. In addition when you're laying in bed just to rest or sitting at home, you can adjust yourself to get comfortable, increasing circulation. However in a car, you're stuck in one spot for hours."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
khrps | why does smoking a cigarette feel so much better after sex or a big meal than it does normally? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/khrps/eli5_why_does_smoking_a_cigarette_feel_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2kcbc3",
"c2kcwb6",
"c2kea7s",
"c2kfs3n",
"c2kcbc3",
"c2kcwb6",
"c2kea7s",
"c2kfs3n"
],
"score": [
35,
62,
2,
4,
35,
62,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Endorphins. After sex or eating a big meal your body releases them to make you feel good. Morphine is based on Endorphins, to give you some reference, its a very powerful feel good drug, and your body makes it naturally and releases it when you feel extreme pleasure or pain. The head-rush from smoking a cigarette feels even better when you have endorphins in your system. \n\nAlso it might be partially psychological. If you believe that smoking a cigarette feels better after these activities, then you are more likely to enjoy smoking after the activities. ",
"Troll answer: You are 5. You shouldn't be smoking.",
"It's a combination of Endorphins and Serotonin. To your brain, chemically, doing drugs, eating a big comfort meal and having sex are all the same thing because they release the same chemicals in the brain. While your brain is flooded with these chemicals you experience euphoria, a slight \"high\" and feelings and effects of normal sensations are heightened.",
"Because a cigarette is an excellent way to celebrate being awesome.",
"Endorphins. After sex or eating a big meal your body releases them to make you feel good. Morphine is based on Endorphins, to give you some reference, its a very powerful feel good drug, and your body makes it naturally and releases it when you feel extreme pleasure or pain. The head-rush from smoking a cigarette feels even better when you have endorphins in your system. \n\nAlso it might be partially psychological. If you believe that smoking a cigarette feels better after these activities, then you are more likely to enjoy smoking after the activities. ",
"Troll answer: You are 5. You shouldn't be smoking.",
"It's a combination of Endorphins and Serotonin. To your brain, chemically, doing drugs, eating a big comfort meal and having sex are all the same thing because they release the same chemicals in the brain. While your brain is flooded with these chemicals you experience euphoria, a slight \"high\" and feelings and effects of normal sensations are heightened.",
"Because a cigarette is an excellent way to celebrate being awesome."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9w0lw7 | gene drives | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9w0lw7/eli5_gene_drives/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9gpis4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The basic idea behind gene drives is that a genetic modification can self-replicate a factory that creates the same genetic modification.\n\nLetβs say I had a CRISPR sequence that could make your eyes blue. A gene drive would be a CRISPR sequence that would create the CRISPR sequence to make your eyes blue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
211fcs | what is the difference between a canyon and a gorge? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/211fcs/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_a_canyon_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg8t5z2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"1.The word βcanyonβ is widely used in the United States, and the term βgorgeβ is widely used in Europe.\n2.A canyon is a deep valley having steep sides, and a gorge is a deep ravine with a river flowing through it or a ravine without the river.\n3.Canyons have been formed through long periods of time and frequent erosion from a plateau level. The steep cliffs are formed as these hard rocks are resistant to erosion or any type of weathering.\n4.Gorges are mainly formed because of the flow of water or lava. Like canyons, the walls of gorges are also made of sandstone and granite. There are also gorges that have limestone structures which have formed intricate cave systems.\n5.Grand Canyon in Arizona and Yarlung Zangbo Canyon in Tibet are well-known canyons.\n6.Kali Gandaki, Gorges of Finger Lakes, New River Gorge, Columbia River Gorge, and Canyon Lake Gorge are some of the famous gorges in the world.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2hzoyn | what good is there in consuming vitamins in quantities many times more than in the rda and does your body process the sudden excess in a productive way? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hzoyn/eli5_what_good_is_there_in_consuming_vitamins_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckxg8km",
"ckxh5mb",
"ckxjrmi",
"ckxjse4",
"ckxpc4m",
"ckxrok4"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
3,
13,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"I'm no expert, but most vitamins that far exceed the RDA are water soluble in nature so there is no real harm in ingesting more than the RDA. What your body doesn't use is passed through the urine.\n\nYou do need to be concerned with minerals and fat soluble vitamins (A, D, E, K) as exceeding the RDA ~~is probably~~ could be harmful.",
"The US RDA is the bare minimum of vitamins that you need to avoid getting diseases from vitamin/mineral deficiency. Optimal levels may be a lot higher.",
"Is there any good in getting 2000% RDA of a vitamin or mineral? No, not really. If you get more than the RDA over the course of the day, you might get some benefit (I'm not aware of any studies conclusively showing any benefit/harm either way except for some vitamins for some people), but your body can only process so much at one time, and all of the stuff your body cannot process becomes waste. The vast majority of the multivitamin you take ends up as waste. That's why your pee is extremely bright after taking a multivitamin. Vitamins and minerals come in two basic forms: fat or water soluble. With fat soluble (ie, vitamin A, D, E, and K), the excess is stored in your bodyfat. When you go overboard on them you can overdose on them. It's difficult, but possible for you to get extremely sick from overdosing on vitamins. Water soluble means the excess is stored in water, and ends up getting peed out (like the vitamin B that makes your pee weird). Water soluble is much less likely to overdose on, but it's still possible.\n\nNow, as an adult, there is really only one reason to take a multivitamin: you don't have a good diet. You get the majority of the vitamins and minerals your body needs from fruits and vegetables, and if you eat a good diet with some fruits and veges in it every day, you really don't need a multivitamin. Want to take a kid's gummy vitamin 'just to be sure'? Go for it. Look at the contents: that probably only has 50-200% of the RDA, while the 'adult' multivitamins you can buy at GNC are probably drifting between 30 and 3,000% the RDA. \n\nIf you think you aren't getting enough vitamins and minerals, just eat more fruits and vegetables. If you're on a ketogenic diet because your doctor told you to be on one, take a gummy multivitamin. It's probably cheaper anyways. If you're on a ketogenic diet and your doctor did not tell you to be on one, stop. Something about a diet having side effects tells me it's probably not good for you. Also, it's basically the exact opposite of the diet recommended by major heart and cancer groups, and you're more likely to develop heart disease or cancer then suddenly develop epilepsy as an adult.",
"The RDA or Recommended Daily Allowance for Vitamins and Minerals. It is the average daily dietary intake level sufficient to meet the nutrient requirements of nearly all (97-98%) of healthy individuals in a group.\n\nUnless you have a severe deficiency of any type of vitamin or mineral such as Vitamin D, You should not exceed 100% of the RDA. Most Supplements are surprisingly bad about only being 100%. They can be any numerous amounts past that. \n\nI know someone with a really strong vitamin D deficiency that takes 10x the RDA of Vitamin D dosage to try and get their body back up to regulation. \n\nThe UL, or Adequate Upper Intake Level is the maximum amount of minerals, nutrients, or vitamins that your body should take in. \n\nTo answer the question directly, there is no benefit unless you have a deficiency. And they can be harmful to your body in plenty of ways. Even taking Aspirin frequently can be extremely harmful on your liver. Vitamin Toxicity, which is taking more than you should, Can have a lot of negative side effects. For Example, Vitamin A Toxicity can have side effects of: Red Blood Cell breakage, Bone pains, Growth retardation, chronic headaches, and the list goes on.\n\nTL;DR Taking more than the RDA is not harmful in some situations, Taking more than the UL(Upper Intake Level) is harmful.\n\nSource: Culinary Nutrition Major",
"Wow. There is a lot of bad info here. The RDA is the recommended daily allowance to prevent disease. Vitamin C is the easy one here. If you consume less than the RDA you are likely to get scurvy and have your teeth fall out. Your body may need more than that to be in an optimum state. Linus Pauling (he basically discovered chemical bonds) studied quite a bit on Vitamin C. On any given day you may need more than 10x the RDA level. He took 18000mg per day and was a proponent that IV Vit C would be beneficial for cancer.\n\nEfficiency and absorption is another thing to look at. Vitamin D can be tested easily in the blood. It is fortified into many different food groups and produced naturally by the body in sunlight. However, an alarming number of people are deficient. The rub is that if they start supplementing vitamin D they often need multiple times the RDA to get their blood levels into the normal range. Their body is either using the Vit D up or not absorbing it efficiently. In any case, larger doses than the RDA achieve normal blood values.\n\nOne theory behind higher doses, especially B12, is making a higher concentration of Vitamins that are involved in rate limiting step for a process. B12 supports mitochondrial function which is the powerhouse of your cells.\n\nAnother thing to consider is the composition of the supplement you're taking. Calcium carbonate, basically chalk, is not very soluble and is not absorbed efficiently at all. Calcium citrate is highly soluble and a much better source.\n\nIndividual people have individual needs. Some folks need more of one thing than another often outside the **minimum**RDA. Vitamin toxicity is pretty rare if ingested orally. Vitamins absorbed into the blood stream are filtered out in the kidneys. \n\nIf you look at some of the better studied nutrients, epa/dha, green tea extract, vitamin c, they are strong antioxidants and their effect is based on that AO function. Having a surplus of antioxidants in your body is a good thing.\n\nSource: I studied quite a bit of Clinical nutrition, Biochemistry, and nutritional biochemistry in Chiropractic school. I refer patients to a MD next door who chooses to practice medicine as naturally as possible. ",
"The RDA is the MINIMUM AMOUNT the average person needs to avoid a disease caused by deficiency. There are currently zero definitive studies which reliably determine the OPTIMAL amount of those vitamins. Add to this, there are an unknown but very large number of micro-nutrients that only exist in raw fruits and vegetables that eating over-the-counter vitamins will not substitute for."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
66h7b7 | how do dictators maintain power when it seems that most of the country is against them. | With what is going on in The Middle East and South America where is seems like significant portions of the county are against a particular regime, how do these dictators maintain control? I understand they have the armed forces but surely people in the respective armies must be against the dictator as well or at least have family that is demonstrating. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66h7b7/eli5_how_do_dictators_maintain_power_when_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgiih2q",
"dgiiwfb",
"dgin7s7",
"dgina65",
"dgiozxi",
"dgiq6li",
"dgiqmcr",
"dgirpnn",
"dgirwj9",
"dgj176t",
"dgj6vd7"
],
"score": [
239,
28,
4,
2,
8,
37,
9,
104,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"- Surrounding yourself with corrupt people who financially gain from your policies, and who in return provide you with \"donations\"\n\n- Ensuring the wealthiest citizens benefit from your policies and are exempt from prosecution for the laws they break\n\n- Changing laws to marginalize opposition\n\n- Silencing journalists\n\n- Employing state media to control the narrative\n\n- Creating nationalist fervor through a perceived outside threat from foreigners\n\n- Indoctrination of ideology in schoolchildren\n\nMany countries that are not currently dictatorships have already checked off a few of these boxes, including the United States.",
"Governors and Rulers are kept in power by their key supporters, not necessarily by the populace which they rule. Many countries in which the citizens suffer and the elites flourish are actually quite stable, when compared to democratic societies. \n\nFor example, in Saudi Arabia, only the royal family can vote in the next king and the king only really has to maintain the support of his family members (albeit larger than your typical family). The saudi citizens has no real say in who rules next.\n\nWhereas in the U.S., the president requires key support from major political figures, who are they themselves supported by their constituents and contributors, who are also themselves supported by local level constituency / stockholders etc.\n\nTLDR: Dictators tend to need to keep less people happy than elected leaders.\n\nYou mentioned the role of the military, which behaves similarly to any political pyramid. At the top you have the generalissimo, who is presumably a key supporter of the dictator, and is being kept happy by the dictator. \n\nHe is then appointing and keeping happy the top officers he needs to keep the army under control (typically with help from the regime's coffers). These top officers will dispense and acquire whatever influence they need to keep their subordinates under control, and so on.\n\nThe army, with the general in the lead, is not likely to abandon the current regime unless a new regime is likely to improve their welfare. At which point they might throw their weight behind a revolution. Its important to note that populist uprisings are typically seen as the people rising up against the establishment, this is a fallacy. What actually happens in a populist uprising is a new regime moving to push the old regime out, probably having swayed some key supporters their way. It's just a better public image to let the people (aka angry mob) do the work for you. \n\nThis is why so many new governments born of populist uprisings ends up being just as bad or if not worse than the previous government. When a new ruler comes in power, new key supporters are installed, much of the old support base is purged, and the day to day lives of the people tends to stay the same. Since the money used to maintain the previous government's support base is now being spent to keep the current government's support base happy.\n\n\n\n",
"\"It seems like\" is the key word there. Most people don't give a fuck, or simply don't care enough to be involved. It's really two minorities one of which has much more resources than another one. ",
"I don't claim to understand these things well, but the way I see it happening here in the U.S. is that the people may hate the dictator's regime, but they are not unified about what should replace it. One side wants apples, the other side wants oranges, and they both feel that anything is better than what the other side wants.",
"This question is so on point given the current situation in Venezuela.. There you have a guy (in fact he used to be a bus driver) who is now a defacto dictator, slowly eliminating political opposition. \n\nIn a country where there's so much oil that a tank of gas costs less than a coffee, the vast majority of Venezuelans have nothing.. No food, and no basic supplies. ",
"CGP Grey actually has a really good video describing the general structure that most dictatorships (or any power structure) follow.\n\nHere's the link: _URL_0_",
"CGP Grey(youtube channel) has made some awesome videos explaining the dynamics of dictatorship. I hope links will help you to understand :\n_URL_0_\n_URL_1_",
"In addition to everything else already mentioned, dictators keep themselves in power by spending enormous resources on propaganda (and censorship) to keep individuals who hate the government from realizing they're not alone.\n\nIf you hate the government enough to want to act, but fear that you are alone and therefore essentially powerless, you're probably going to keep your head down and grudgingly obey. If you realize that *everyone* feels that way, well, if *everyone* revolts, the dictator is in deep trouble. Therefore, it is in his interests to fill the media with lies 24/7 about how great he his, how popular he is, how good everyone under his rule has it, and so forth. It doesn't even matter if the lies are transparently false--as long as you can't be sure the population as a whole shares your hatred for the regime, the risks of revolting are huge.\n\nBut when it becomes evident that hatred and unrest are widespread, you can see a dictatorship fall seemingly overnight. Suddenly everyone realizes the regime is a house of cards and reacts accordingly.",
"A good lesson to take away from this is that the military and police are there to protect those in charge. If given the order the \"few the proud\" would gladly fire upon you and your families. They do not protect you and they do not serve you. ",
"See the CGP grey video (The Rules for Rulers) on youtube for an ELI10, and/or read the Dictator's handbook for an ELI15.",
"[Here](_URL_0_) is a great video by CGP Grey explaining the topic in great detail."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig_qpNfXHIU"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs"
]
] |
|
6mcag0 | how do video games (i.e chess) change the ai depending on the level set (easy, medium, hard)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6mcag0/eli5how_do_video_games_ie_chess_change_the_ai/ | {
"a_id": [
"dk0ivzo",
"dk0jkjo",
"dk0pdg4"
],
"score": [
15,
14,
2
],
"text": [
"The harder you set it, the more time the computer gives itself to examine every possible future situation -- what you might do next, then what it might do in response, then what you might do after that, etc.\n\nOn low difficulty it won't look too far ahead.",
"Really depends upon the game. Some games take away certain features of the AI on lower dificulties. Others have the AI randomly make mistakes depending on difficulty.\n\nIf you are playing a complex stategy game like Civ almost guaraneed the AI will start cheating on the higher difficulties and look at some of your stats even thogh it should not be able to see them.",
"It depends on the game.\n\nIn many games, the programmer will not bother to program separate AIs for different difficulty levels. Instead, they will program a \"perfect\" AI first for the hardest difficulty, and then adjusts for lower difficulties by making the AI make more *mistakes*. Sometimes this is as simple as throwing in occasional random decisions, or making the AI occasionally just *do nothing*. This is common in shooters or fighting games.\n\nIn fixed strategy games like Chess, usually the computer will plan a certain number of moves ahead. Changing the difficulty settings adjust the number of moves ahead the computer will look.\n\nSometimes, there are also \"rules of thumb\" the computer uses to plan a strategy, and adjusting these rules can affect the difficulty - a simple AI might just capture any piece left out, a more complex one will avoid defended pieces, a still more complex one will assign values to pieces and decide when to \"make a trade\". The details will vary greatly from one AI to the next, but generally harder AIs will use more complex strategic rules.\n\nThe *best* chess \"AIs\" often use a \"lookup table\" for the best moves in any given situation. These AIs are rarely adjustable though; they are intended for professional players and tournaments.\n\nIn more variable strategy games where the players don't always start equally, like in the card dueling or monster training genre, there might not even be difficulty settings on the AI - harder opponents just have better options to choose from.\n\nIn some games, harder \"AIs\" will flat out cheat - getting full view of the map, or even free resources. This is typical in strategy or tactics games, like Warcraft, Starcraft, and Civilization.\n\nRacing games often implement a \"rubberband AI\" that makes cars simply get *faster* as they fall behind, rather than actually get smarter. Some games (i.e. Mario Kart) make this more obvious than others.\n\nInterestingly, in some games an \"easier\" AI may turn out to be harder than a \"hard\" AI, especially in the case where the \"hard\" AI is intended to be perfect and the \"easy\" AI makes random mistakes - the \"perfect\" AI is predictable and may be exploited with specific tricks, while the more random AI is harder to manipulate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ic9e9 | how are we able to accurately depict where galaxies ,light years away, are from us? | If we haven't been able to send a spacecraft, and/or, space station that far, how are we able to accurately know what's out there? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ic9e9/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_accurately_depict_where/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqxsh2q",
"dqxsj4i"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"For close stars, we can figure how far away they are by looking at them at different times of the year as we go around the sun. The angle between them and other stars varies a tiny bit as we move, and so we can work out the distance to them.\n\nSo then we can compare known stars to more distant stars, especially certain ones that we know should be a certain brightness, such as Cepheid stars. We know how bright they really are, so the dimmer they appear, the farther away they must be.\n\nWe do the same for galaxies, but need to use supernova for that.\n_URL_0_\n\n\n",
"We use telescopes to see roughly what's out there and, if not *too* far, what shape it is.\n\nWe figure out how far it is by observing in fine detail the color of light that comes from it. Because the universe is expanding, the farther away something is, the faster it's moving away from us, and that shifts the light color through the [Doppler effect.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://stardate.org/astro-guide/faqs/how-do-astronomers-measure-distances-stars-and-galaxies"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect"
]
] |
|
tmj4g | why would a bank want to foreclose on a house? | Why would a bank want to foreclose on a house, rather than allow me to refinance to where I can afford the payment? At least they'd be getting SOME money for the property, rather than no money, which would happen if they can't sell the house. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tmj4g/eli5_why_would_a_bank_want_to_foreclose_on_a_house/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4nvo41",
"c4nw28n",
"c4nyfek"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"they will eventually sell the house, there's only so much real-estate in the world. ",
"Well, the owner of the home isn't paying their mortgage loan, that's why it's in foreclosure in the first place. It's in the bank's best interest to try and salvage what they can from a home that nobody's paying on. So, they \"buy it back\" and then they sell it, to try and replenish what they lost out on. ",
"The answer is that banks make their money on the interest of the loan.\n\nLet's pretend that you buy a $200,000 house with 10% down. $200,000-$20,000 = You'll need a $180,000 loan. \n\nThat $180,000 loan with a 4% interest for 30 years will end up costing you are around $130,000 **just in interest** and you'll pay over $300,000 in total over the life of the loan.\n\n\nSo why don't they work with you? Becuase it cuts into their profits. It's more lucrative to foreclose on you then sell the house to the next people. \n\n\nGoogle amortization calculator if you want more info \n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
akjbaq | why does the slo-mo option on phones capture blinking lights when indoors when the human eye sees it as still light. | Also I heard the human eye can see over 1000fps | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/akjbaq/eli5_why_does_the_slomo_option_on_phones_capture/ | {
"a_id": [
"ef5aupa",
"ef5bzy2"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Your brain decides the flickering is not something you need to notice so it doesn't waste resources focusing on it. Some people do see the flickering with fluorescent lights and it's annoying as all hell. Gives me migraines.",
"Have you ever stood in a room with a strobe light? If you have, have you ever tried to match your blinking with the timing of the strobe light being off? If you can blink at the same times the light is off, you will be seeing the room as always lit up. This is just like seeing a light as always on even when its blinking (just at a MUCH slower speed than office lights)\n\nBut if you keep your eyes open and you see the strobe light blinking while you wave your hand through the air, you'll see your arm moving in slow motion (don't worry, you won't feel slow motion in your arm!). This is kinda how that slow motion mode on the camera sees the world. It sees the spacing between the lights blinking on and off where it's darkness.\n\nFun fact: TV uses 24 frames per second. So every second it shows 24 different pictures, making it look like things are moving. If they put slow motion in a TV show, they'll record it at double speed (48 frames per second), then when they edit it into the show they slow it down to 24 frames per second, but they still have twice the photos to use meaning they need to double the time it takes, making it look nice & smooth and in slow motion (like that scene from The Matrix where Neo dodges bullets).\n\nAs for seeing framerate, so far gaming (and HFR films) has taught me we can see the difference between 30FPS, 60FPS, and 144FPS."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
p2eaq | why do we get tax returns from the government? why don't they just tax us less? | This may be a very obvious answer, but I'm just curious. Is it just to get us to actually do our taxes? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/p2eaq/eli5_why_do_we_get_tax_returns_from_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3lxvcd",
"c3lxxnt",
"c3lxy9y"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
57
],
"text": [
"Not everyone gets a return. Some pay taxes.",
"Your not getting taxes back. You're getting withholding in excess of your tax burden back. So if you had $4000 withheld from your paycheck, and your tax burden came to $3500, then you get a $500 return. Ideally you don't want a return. You want it to come out as close to even as possible, but things are hard to predict.\n\nI know you can choose to have MORE money withheld, but I'm not sure about having less. I know they start getting suspicious if your withholding gets very small.",
"When you initially start working for a company, you fill out a form called a W-4. This form asks you various questions like if you are married, how many children you have, and how many jobs you have. The information on this form is then used to decide how much of your paycheck should go directly to the government. \n\nThe government generally overestimates the amount of taxes you owe for two reasons. First off, people are much happier receiving a refund in April rather than having to pay the government extra money. Secondly, the money taken out of your paycheck acts as a free loan. The government gets to hold on to your money for months without paying you interest.\n\nIf you normally get a refund every year, I would recommend talking to your employer's HR or finance person. Ask them to help you adjust your W-4 exceptions so that you aren't over paying your taxes. They should be able to help you adjust your withholdings so you pay less taxes upfront. This would result in a generally smaller refund or possibly even owing the government extra money come tax time.\n\nEDIT: This is specific to the US. It probably works similarly around the world, but I can't say that for a fact."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bf671g | how do the scientist estimate the age of an old object by its carbon isotope? (english is my 2nd language, and i donβt know how to phrase this correctly) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bf671g/eli5_how_do_the_scientist_estimate_the_age_of_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"elb5kfd",
"elbfepe"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"There is an isotope of carbon which is radioactive. It decays at a steady, known rate and we also know the amount in the atmosphere across a long period of time. Plants and animals take in carbon from the atmosphere (all isotopes) and so they can be expected to contain a proportion of carbon isotopes matching that of the atmosphere while alive.\n\nBut when they die they stop taking in carbon and the radioactive carbon gradually decays. So when we dig them up we can test to see how much of the radioactive carbon is in them and from that calculate how long they must have been dead.",
"above reply is solid, just whatβs for to add that radiocarbon dating - is done using \nC-14 which is radioactive (rather than a stable isotope!), allowing for when excavated the older the sample, the less c-14 there is.\n\nalso (as you may know there is a known limited on βhow oldβ can be dated."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
fukc57 | how do people 'revive' in certain medical scenarios? for example, their heart stops beating due to cardiac arrest, but 30 minutes later they come back alive. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fukc57/eli5_how_do_people_revive_in_certain_medical/ | {
"a_id": [
"fmdgqhy",
"fmdlx70"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Not a doctor, but...\n\nThe heart contains it's own nervous system, in order to keep the rhythm of the beating. When this nervous system fails, a person goes into cardiac arhythmia (heart loses rhythm, making it so very little blood is pumping, if any) or fibrillation (the heart starts basically convulsing, moving completely irregularly). Or cardiac arrest (heart kinda gives up, stops moving completely)\n\nAs long as the heart hasn't stopped for long, All it takes to get the heart back on track is a \"reset\" of its nervous system. Today, we do this with a defibrillator, that sends an electric pulse through the heart, essentially stopping all irregular nervous activity, giving it the time and opportunity to get on the right track again.\n\nNote that in an adult, the heart suddenly starting again out of nowhere is extremely rare. Defibrillators are pretty effective, but they can only work with arrhythmia or fibrillation. Once an adult has suffered cardiac arrest, theres like a less than 5% chance of their heart starting again, even with CPR. However, children's hearts are able to \"reset\" by themselves a lot better than adults. The younger they are, the better their hearts are at resetting after cardiac arrest. This is why, sometimes, dying babies can suffer cardiac arrest several times in a row, dying each time, and coming back to life each time, until they dont. :/",
"Well, 30 minutes is an unusually long period of time. Brain damage becomes irreversible after about 4 minutes without oxygen. It's possible to be revived after being in cardiac arrest for that long, but only if the person is also severely hypothermic. \n\nIf it's a shorter amount of time, like 2-3 minutes, if you can correct whatever caused the cardiac arrest and restart to heart, the person will still be alive, because your brain doesn't suddenly shut off the second your heart stops."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
33ox5h | why do i have a nose? why not just have a couple nostrils without the pyramid? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33ox5h/eli5_why_do_i_have_a_nose_why_not_just_have_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqmzi8t",
"cqn3o9b"
],
"score": [
10,
4
],
"text": [
"It keeps the rain out. Like a nasal umbrella..",
"The purpose of the nose lays mostly in the nose hair and the mucous membrane. The thin hairs inside the nose works as a filter, preventing bacteria and dust from entering the body. This is also the reason why the nostrils face downward: it is the direction from which it is least likely to draw in unwanted dust or bacteria."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
633tiz | consequences of making a centralised currency worth zero of itself. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/633tiz/eli5_consequences_of_making_a_centralised/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfr7qg7",
"dfrbzlp",
"dfrk5ui"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Because who would pay an employee to do that job if there is no money?",
" > Why can't it just be clicked back?\n\nIt could. Sounds like a job for an accountant or someone in IT. \n\nBut who would do it if they're not really being paid anything worth any value. Bureaucracies function by the actions of bureaucrats. Who do what they do because they get paid. \n\nAlso, it's a cartoon dude. ",
"Obviously, unlike in Rick and Morty, you can't just make a currency \"go to zero\". But there is a kernel of truth here. Any currency is worth what people believe it is worth. \n\nFor example, I can buy a can of soda with $1 because both me and the seller agree that $1 is worth a can of soda. I am willing to be paid in dollars because I am confident that if I go shopping with those dollars, merchants will accept them and I will get the goods I need. It's all based on faith.\n\nOf course the problem then becomes, if everyone loses faith in a currency, it is now worthless. In real life, there are plenty of other currencies, so you could relatively easily adapt if one currency fails; I could demand my pay in Euros, for example. There would be some chaos at first, but people would figure it out after a while. \n\nHowever, if some galactic government took over and forced everyone to use only one currency, and then everyone suddenly lost faith in it... well, the chaos would be proportionately larger. People would still adapt, though: \"he who controls the pants, controls the galaxy!\" is an attempt to establish a new currency."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2hpbp1 | is there a physical difference between someone that can sing and someone that cannot? | I wanted to say the "throat" but I know there is more to singing like vocal chords, diaphragm, etc. Do people that are able to sing have a physical difference in these parts? Or can it be learned? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hpbp1/eli5_is_there_a_physical_difference_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckurb73",
"ckurceh",
"ckurfjs",
"ckurvgi",
"ckusjbt",
"ckuu4gq",
"ckuuxag",
"ckuveqh",
"ckuvhlm",
"ckuvmc1",
"ckuvryh",
"ckuvyoh",
"ckuwt3r",
"ckuylit",
"ckuyzam",
"ckuz7lk",
"ckuzqo4",
"ckv10j4",
"ckv1tnn",
"ckv1y44",
"ckv222f",
"ckv2fic",
"ckv33xp",
"ckv35tn",
"ckv37e7",
"ckv4hyp",
"ckv4n70",
"ckv5nlr",
"ckv5rd2",
"ckv5s75",
"ckv60eb",
"ckv6os9",
"ckv6s9l",
"ckv74rp",
"ckv7zfw",
"ckv8duf",
"ckv8w73",
"ckv90ym",
"ckv95ua",
"ckvamo7",
"ckvaz0l",
"ckvcpn6",
"ckvdpb3",
"ckvehru",
"ckvemjv",
"ckvf8t5"
],
"score": [
688,
9,
66,
5,
61,
3,
7,
6,
1607,
6,
2,
15,
2,
52,
2,
3,
2,
3,
9,
2,
7,
7,
14,
2,
4,
2,
2,
35,
2,
4,
2,
2,
11,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Some people tend to have a better \"ear\" than others. The more you practice, the more developed your ear is. I've seen someone go from seeming to be completely tone deaf, to 6 months later singing on pitch, and in time. As for the vocal cords, they are muscles, so the more you use them, the better and stronger they become. I am a strong believer that anyone can sing!",
"_URL_0_ \nIt's all in your head. Really. ",
"Between a singer and an otherwise healthy individual and excluding neurological differences, there might be increased diaphragm/intercostal/intracostal strength and possibly higher lung capacity. Those features, however, would the result of training and use.",
"You know how you get to Carnegie Hall, don't ya?",
"No source here, but from observation learning music is similar to learning a new language. If you start at a young age it's intuitive and amazingly easy, after that you have to put a lot of work and practice into it. Most of the people I've known who can sing took time to learn an instrument at some point in their life, while the ones who never played have trouble grasping a basic tune.",
"Singing like most things can be learned by most people. Most people dont train to sing though and end up trying to on a whim sound bad and plame it on genetics. The average person has to ability to sound amazing it just takes practice like any good skill.",
"Singing activates a lot of muscles that you don't use (or only a little) otherwise, so these a certainly stronger in trained singers.\n\nApart from that it is mostly muscle memory like with every instrument. Physically everybody is able to play the piano decently, but your brain can't handle it without training. The same goes with singing.",
"Anyone can sing. With practice, just about anyone can be good. Like most instruments, it'll probably take at least 10,000 hrs to do it at a semi-professional level.\n\nHowever, if you wish to go into operatic singing, etc., it becomes exponentially easier with strong lungs and good vocal folds. These are responsible for specific tone of the voice, at a base level. E.g. Pavarotti's sound v. Domingo's. People prefer different tones, and those are determined largely by those innate features of the body.",
"When you're talking about classical singing, there is absolutely a difference.\n\nYes, anybody can find a way to coordinate the neuromuscular actions necessary to produce sound. With enough practice, anyone can make the lungs and the diaphragm work with the muscles of larynx to make sound, but it doesn't mean they'll have a pleasing tone. That tone - the warmth, the color, all those subjective things we think when we hear an excellent singer - are innate, and many of them can't be taught. They're the product of a very distinct set of traits, including laryngeal shape, muscle elasticity, muscle thickness, size and shape of the body's resonators, and a number of other small details inherent to a person's physical build.\n\nWhen it comes to popular music, we as listeners aren't as concerned with tone, except that it's pleasing - or, failing that, unique. The voice can be a vehicle for a great many things, and it doesn't need to be pretty or perfect to be outstanding to listen to. I believe that anyone can manage to sing popular music well and be very entertaining while doing it, given a commitment to the art.\n\nI often differentiate, when talking about singers of all stripes, whether or not I think they're good singers or good artists. There are some singers I'll listen to all day who I wouldn't call \"good\" or \"pleasing\", but who nevertheless make awesome music. It's not a slight on them that I don't think they have a beautiful voice. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.\n\nSource: Classically-trained operatic singer (until I decided to get a stable job and pay my bills instead)",
"It is a popular misconception that people can even be 'tone deaf.' Every human being, with the exception of the deaf, can hear tones, otherwise you wouldn't even be able to tell peoples varied tonal inflections during speech. As a guitar teacher this is one of the first self-defeating myths I break down. No one is tone-deaf, every one can learn to sing, practice, practice practice is what makes you better and develops your diaphragm and vocal chords.",
"One big thing that is being glossed over is that just like each person has their own unique conversational voice, they also have their own singing voice. It comes down to opinion, but some peoples' voices just sound strange. On that note, Shakira was told she sounded \"[like a goat](_URL_0_)\" when she was younger, but now is super successful. So forget whatever anyone else thinks about your voice. To answer the original question, no there is not. Just practice. ",
"Singer in the middle of classical training here. Anyone can learn to sing, like anything some people have more talent than others and it's easier for them to learn technique than others. That being said as a singer your instrument is your body and these come in many variations. The size and shape of your nasal cavaties, mouth, vocal chords and abdominal cavaties all have large influences on the size, timbre, and range of your specific instrument. Some attributes are considered more desirable than others, and you may have an instrument that some people don't personally like. But anybody can learn the techniques needed to control their instrument.",
"Singing, at the most basic level, isn't something you learn (although you get better at it by learning)- it's something you become too self concious to do in public, and thus stop doing. Every child can, and does, sing (ask any music teacher who works with elementary age kids), but at some point somebody tells them they can't, and so they stop. And thus, never get any better at.",
"This subreddit is perfect for me to find questions I didn't know I wanted the answers to.",
"Everyone can sing, now whether or not anyone likes your singing voice is something different. ",
"Not necessarily, anybody can sing, and quite well. However; there is something to be said for body-type, someone with less cartilage on their throat can sing higher etc. That does not mean that someone that isn't a good singer can't get good. Chances are you can sing very well, so long as you can talk.",
"Since this thread is attracting singing questions, I'm going to ask mine: I love singing and I sing pretty well, but my voice gives out after just a little while. If I sing in the car for 30 minutes straight, I'll be hoarse the rest of the day. (And if I do karaoke, I can barely talk the next day.) Is that something that can be fixed with proper training? ",
"I love how no one answered the question XD",
"Follow up question. I think most people ITT agree that anyone can sing. But is it possible for anyone to sing as good asβlets sayβ Freddie Mercury or Whitney Houston?",
"i dont know if its physical or not, but the reason i dont sing is i;m nearly tone deaf.",
"Went to a singing workshop in Findhorn led by this amazing Australian who had been a Tibetan monk for years. One of the goals of the class was to teach people to sing who never believed they could sing before.\n\nFirst week we spent concentrating on breathing and singing single notes, then adding overtones to them. It helps enormously to sing from a place of calm center with proper breath support.\n\nWe were taught that everyone's anatomy is like a unique bell that we ring with our breath. Every voice is unique and beautiful if people just relax enough to let it happen.\n\nI now want to hear every one's unique voice and feel sad when people hold back because they are withholding a beautiful gift from the universe.\n",
"Music teacher here, I know it's been said already but I want to say it again. Anyone, anyone, can learn to sing. You might not end up with the vocal style you want (I for instance am not going to sound like Aretha Franklin) but anyone can learn to sing in tune, unless they genuinely have no ability to hear the pitch of their own voice. And thats rare- most people who think they're 'tone deaf' are not. They just haven't learned to coordinate their muscular systems efficiently yet. I help kids find their singing voices all day and it's amazing how much improvment people can have- adults are mainly held back by self perception... Just like with other skills I suppose.",
"Yes, there's a ton of differences physically. \n\nEveryone has different resonance. This is decided by the shape of the chambers that sound is produced in and travels through, and it determines the quality, timbre or 'way' the sound is. The shape of your chest, throat, mouth, nasal cavity all contribute, depending on where you let the sound travel. These are different for everyone, but there's no 'poor' shape; it's not a physical difference that can stop you from singing.\n\nVocal cords are also important. They also characterize the sound, but sometimes vocal cords can be overworked, underworked, damaged or disfigured, and can in fact separate people who can and can't sing. But when you describe someone as not being able to sing, this generally isn't the problem.\n\nControl is huge. In a lot of pop, control is often what defines a singer as being \"good.\" It gives speed and accuracy to your notes. Control, physically, manifests itself as the nerves that tighten and loosen the cords. Nerves grow and configure themselves with practice; it's what practice *is*, most of the time. Control can be learned, and although someone people have predispositions to learning coordination fast, it's a learned thing. If people can't sing and never try to learn, this is usually why they can't sing.\n\nHaving an ear for notes is often what people need to sing. Someone people have trouble distinguishing some notes from other notes, in the same way someone might have trouble judging distances or how hideous their shirt is. Physically, this is also nerves, although it's hard to produce a general statement on what that looks like. For the record, being able to hear notes totally isn't required for singing. I sing at pow wows and that fact that a ton of people sing in their own key gives the music its identity.\n\n\nTL;DR: Physical things like the throat, chest and cords give stylistic quality, but don't decide whether someone can or can't sing. Someone who can't hear notes can't sing, and people who don't practice can't sing well.\n\nTL;DR + Reality check: People who can make noises come out of their mouth can sing. You can like or dislike their singing; that doesn't make them a good or bad singer.",
"so, i have a interesting question...\n\nif we took really good singers, and look at the parts in the throat that make them able to sing really well.\n\nCouldn't we just use there body as a template and devise a surgery to shape other peoples vocal cords to do the same?",
"ELI5: Singing involves muscles. Some are born good at sports, some need to train to be good. Some people can hear pitch well, some need to learn.\n\nSo yes, there is but it is muscles that can change and grow and learn how to sing. Michael Phelps is physically a perfect swimmer, whereas Ryan Lochte isn't as perfect physically, but as good and sometimes better than Phelps on the right day.",
"its like asking can someone curl a 18kg dumbbell. some people can naturally, alot of people can start training and do it, some people can't and never will \n\nits a multi-factored thing\n\nsource: someone who sings and does weight training lol",
"I currently work for and am great buds with a vocal coach in Nashville by the name of Brett Manning. The amount of students I've watched him transform is evidence that yes, technical vocal competency and proficiency in singing can absolutely be taught. Having a unique character to your voice, and being able to sing honestly/with conviction, is another matter. \"Superstar\" voices are not only technically sound, they connect emotionally with listeners, which is more the part you're born with IMO. If you're struggling with technique, check out his Singing Success Program. Don't get me wrong, like any skill you want to master it takes a shit ton of work and discipline (especially if you aren't born amazing). But the program really is the best regimen out there to train with. \n\nSource: Am a singer. ",
"I know this will probably be buried, but oh well, I'm pretty passionate about this. I am about to graduate with my degree in vocal performance. \n\nSome things can be learned. If you weren't born with a great ear, you can train to a certain degree. You can gain technique, breath control, an even vibrato, a bit of agility, a bit of range, a bit better tone (also comes with a better ear and some technical training of where to 'place' the voice based on the style and tessitura). All this can be done--to an extent.\n \nBut, truly, once you reach a certain point in proficiency, it's all about who had the goods to begin with. A truly great tone, an amazingly even vibrato, perfect pitch, extreme agility, vocal power, resonance, range, etc...that stuff is there from the get-go. Just like someone can be built better suited physically than others to being a certain kind of athlete, people can be built better suited physically than others to being a singer--ESPECIALLY classically. \n\nI have a large, slow-moving, powerful, rich voice. I will never sing very quickly. My voice is not 'pretty' unless I manipulate it to make it so (it is not naturally sweet). I have a great ear. I have an extensive range. My vibrato can slow if I'm not on my a-game. I, as with most people, have my strengths and weaknesses. \n\nI've definitely found that many of the best, most resonant, beautiful tones I've ever heard come from people with larger heads...more resonating space. I on the other hand, have a mini head :p\n\nI will never be a professional opera singer, although I am good and well-trained. However, musical theatre and pop? I agree with the top poster, anyone can learn how to do that in a way that will work. Don't be down on your voice! I've learned to love mine despite its limitations. We all have strengths and weaknesses. You've gotta work with what you've got. :)\n\nBut yeah, if you wanna be a runner and train as hard as a this other guy, but he happens to have been born with a huge lung capacity, long legs, etc...you just can't compete.",
"Where does tone deafness come into this? I love music but I've been called tone deaf and other rude things?",
"Some people can't actually differentiate between harmonious sounding notes and discordant ones. There are a few online tests you can take where two short melodies are played, one after the other, and you're asked to say if they were the same or not. To most people, it's glaringly obvious. But to some people, there is literally no difference. These people cannot sing, if you include \"production of harmonious tones\" in your definition. ",
"Bonnie Prince Billy \n_URL_1_ \nSame song roughly 10 years later \n_URL_0_",
"Or you can just give less fucks than [Tom Waits](_URL_0_) and sing regardless of how good you sound!",
"I am a very good singer, and while I've participated in many choirs and studied vocal performance for years, I was a good singer before all that. Most of the comments on this thread seem to suggest that anyone can learn to sing, and while I'll readily agree that almost anyone (excluding the hopelessly tone-deaf) can improve his/her singing, everyone has a threshold, and it is simply impossible for most people to produce the kinds of sounds that a really phenomenal singer can make with little to no effort. Things like breath support, body position, vowel placement and (I mean this) practice can only take most people so far. Sure, I listened to a lot of music growing up and maybe that has influenced my ability, but I've seen countless voice students struggle to improve (despite great mentors and professors) while other, more naturally talented students consistently performed at a higher level. Also, to address the idea of improving aural skills to become a better singer, I knew a man who had perfect pitch, but still failed to produce sounds with a pleasing timbre. He simply lacked the machinery necessary to do so. This whole issue, to me, calls into question the validity of praising good singers (myself included. I have received endless praise and commendation for my voice) for their talent when in reality they are simply lucky. Thus, in my listening, I tend to lean toward artists like Elliott Smith or Joanna Newsom, who don't necessarily have conventionally pleasing voices but who create beautiful, intricate music regardless. Additionally, my theory on this matter explains the occurrence of good singers who are bad musicians and vice versa. Okay that is all.",
"Since this thread has a lot of questions, here's mine:\nI'm a singer who sings almost exclusively rock. I'm just starting with a band and I've taken a few singing lessons but nothing serious, I don't know anything about technique. In one lesson recently I was told not to sing with a 'rasp' or hoarse sound because I will damage my voice. My feeling is though, since I'm never planning to be a classical singer and don't need to have a clear/healthy/perfect voice when I'm much older, is there really any reason I shouldn't sing with a raspy voice now? She also said that I shouldn't try to sing that way if it isn't 'natural' (i.e. how I sing when I'm not trying to sound like anything specific). However, I'm pretty sure even someone like Kurt Cobain didn't sound raspy or hoarse when he wasn't trying to--no one's speaking voice is like that, so it's obviously a conscious choice, right?",
"I like this thread a lot (saved), but I have to sleep, I'm very tired, but I have a question.\n\nI *think* I'm a tenor, but as far as tone and sound it's kinda CLOSE to a singer I really would like to be like, but not quite. And I'm just wondering if I could ever get to that point, or if I'll always have this sound, but just a little better if I practice?\n\nEveryone says that everyone has their own unique voice that they can't mold into someone else's. Well then what do impersonators do? What are voice actors doing? ",
"Well if you have a Nice Sob story\n\nand you cant sing your a loser\n\nif you can your an Inspiration\n\n*Thanks for clearing that up for everyone xfactor.*",
"This is going to go against many people's ways of thinking, especially people who think they know what they're talking about. Normally I wouldn't bother with these types of things, but the misconceptions I have read in the comments are too much to ignore.\n\nFirst it is important to address the misconception that there is any significant difference between the physiology of people who do or don't sing well. This will also answer OP's question but will require more explanation. If you pose this question to many highly regarded teachers in both the classical and pop worlds you'll be met with varied responses, but a common belief is that some people are simply born with the gift of a beautiful voice whether it be that their instrument is physically more perfect or that they have the innate ability to sing better than others (more on this later). I have found, and this is strictly my own observation, that classical musicians tend to have the belief that some aspects of voice can be taught while in pop genres people believe that you are born with a certain voice and that voice is what you have.\n\nHere's the truth.\n\nIf you pick up a copy of Grey's Anatomy and turn to the section on phonation and respiration you will be presented with lovely diagrams of the muscles involved in producing sound. Barring defects through genetics or birth every single person on the planet is born with the same instrument (voice). Through physical development as we age the characteristics of one persons vocal tract begin to vary and that is what produces the types of voices (soprano, mezzo, contralto, tenor, baritone, bass) and their subsets. However it is again important to stress that barring physical defects every single person has the same instrument and therefore the same capacity to sing as anyone else. There is no genetic trait that leads to a superior vocal tract such as an unnaturally large pharyngeal space which would present an individual with a naturally beautiful voice.\n\nWhat actually makes a voice beautiful is a combination of factors. The clarity of the vowel being sung, the darkness or brightness of that vowel, the coordination of the two main groups of muscles which control the vocal folds, the position of the larynx, the position of the tongue, the stability of the hyoid bone, the breathing, and a whole lot of other things. The way you get these things to work in an optimal manner is through instruction from a good voice teacher who both knows how to identify the sound of something not working correctly and how to guide a student to the correct sound.\n\nI'm not going to go into the argument about \"natural talent\" being a factor in how well people perform. It would take a book to do that and incidentally there is a book on just that subject. If you're interested read Geoffry Colvin's \"Talent is Overrated.\"\n\nTL'DR: When you're talking about any type of singing, there is absolutely no difference in the physiology of good voices and bad voices. What controls the quality of a voice is the teaching you've received.",
"As a poor soul who was forced into eleven years of a city boys choir, I can tell you that anyone can train themselves to sing. Anyone can learn to coordinate their lungs and accurately hit notes within their range. Anyone can produce a pleasing tone. \n\nNow it may not be in the range you want - most people who \"cannot\" sing, or who haven't had any training, will usually try to hit every note, regardless of their range. \n\nOf course, it takes a special type of personality to do solo work or opera work. It probably takes a special passion. I could never get on stage and do a solo. But when I hear people straining their voices and singing off key, I usually suggest, in a kind manner, that they could benefit from voices lessons / joining a local choir. Just to get familiar with their voice. But anyone can train themselves to sing within their vocal range. ",
"Could an expert do a physical exam (of someone dead or alive) \nand by that alone determine if a person had the gifting to be a great singer?\n\n",
"Med student here, I once asked my anatomy professor this same question; His answer was that there is no difference in the anatomy of the larynx, vocal chords or other surrounding structures. His opinion was that its perhaps more related to neurological control of the larynx and diaphragm and that some people have more of an inclination to be able to control these organs. I guess you could say that would imply differences in neuronal connections in the brain but this is a perhaps a bit more of a deeper level than what the question is referring to i.e. gross anatomy.",
"I can sing reasonably well, and I can tell you that singing ability comes down to pitch-matching and breathing techniques. Both of which are learned/developed. \n\nWith legitimate practice, most people can sing. You'll learn how to modulate the tone of your voice over time. All other vocal gymnastics are a function of time and practice, but if you can sing in the right pitch, that's half the battle.",
"Listen to Julie Andrews sing when she was 12. The girl had what it takes! \n\nI thought I could learn to sing like her. I can sing, and I've taken voice lessons that helped me have more control. But I just don't have that voice. I can't sound like Julie Andrews. Me at 12 sounded like a little girl singing. Although I am more refined now, it's still the same voice. \n\nYes. There is a physical difference. You can train your ear and train your muscles. But it's like rolling your tongue. Some people are physically able and some people are physically not.",
"it's kind of like an athletics. anyone can achieve a certain level of ability. barring some ailment everyone could learn to run a marathon or carry a tune. enough practice and you can even become exceptional. but being the best, reaching the highest echelons of performance is at least partially biology. \n\nso it's probably most accurate to say \"it's training\"",
"One of my hobbies is teaching at an amateur choir. We specifically have no prerequisites and take anyone. The number of people who are genuinely tone deaf (unable to differentiate any pitch at all) is tiny. People like to add a lot of mystique to singing, like you're born with it, but that's BS. Singing is a skill, and like any other skill you get better with practice and feedback. ",
"I'd have to disagree with anyone saying we all have the same instrument. Everyone's similar, but the differences in size of the various constituent parts of your vocals will ask contribute in their own way to the sound of your voice which will limit your ability to sing well in some way.\n\nIf you were to build a trumpet but vary the length and diameter of the tubes randomly, the valves would produce such different pitches and tones that a trumpeter would not be able to play it to the same quality. They may not even be able to play recognisable notes on the scale due to longer or shorter tubes, and every larger diameter tube would add resonance chambers that change the sound. Every unique person on this planet has their own random configuration which similarly will affect the quality of their singing voice.",
"Look up the 'bel canto' method. Singing is all about control of air and control of your vocal chord closure. The use of vowel pronunciation techniques will also help you sing\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://discovermagazine.com/2014/julyaug/11-singing-in-the-brain"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakira#Early_life"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPPifHyqnas",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOyb-jlVp7c"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AayN7lwNyRM"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
21q5n9 | why does getting something as meaningless as karma make us feel so good? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21q5n9/eli5_why_does_getting_something_as_meaningless_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgfgak7",
"cgfgjeu",
"cgfgm8z",
"cgfgwbn",
"cgfhb05",
"cgfjb5m",
"cgfjkkx",
"cgfl9xx",
"cgfm6tb",
"cgfpflo"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
22,
3,
3,
2,
3,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"A reward is getting something good for doing a given task. It needs someone who has the power to give the good thing. It is the opposite of punishment.\nIdeas like risk and reward, reward and punishment are based on the idea that people do things, or avoid doing things, to get rewards. In psychology there is another idea that this is not true. This other idea says that training (conditioning) and emotions (affective factors) are much more important than the rewards or punishments given by others.\nIn trying to catch criminals and other bad people, the government often offers money to people. This money is given to people who may capture the criminal, or give information that helps the police catch them. For example after the Eureka Stockade rebellion in Ballarat, Victoria in 1854, the government offered a big reward of 400 pounds for the capture of the people who had started it.\n\n\nIn 2001, the US government offered a big reward of 2.5 million dollars for help in capturing the person who had sent anthrax in letters to a newspaper journalist and 2 senators. Anthrax is a disease which can kill people.",
"Positive reinforcement. I works. I employed this technique when I was a grammar school teacher. My students always responded to rewards. Even something small like a sticker.",
"I think it probably has to do with the fact that because humans are such social creatures we constantly seek the approval of others subconsciously. When you get upvoted it makes you feel like you are right about something, and add value to a conversation and maybe even that you're smart. I see it as being similar to making somebody laugh, even tho making somebody laugh doesn't have any tangible value, the fact that you said something that added to a conversation, and that somebody else enjoyed and approved of makes you feel good.",
"I don't know. I'm pretty new to Reddit and was way too excited when I jumped from 77 to over 100 last week. \n\nIt's like the Sally Field Oscar moment",
" > Gamification is the use of game thinking and game mechanics in non-game contexts to engage users in solving problems.\n\n > Gamification techniques strive to leverage people's natural desires for competition, achievement, status, self-expression, altruism, and closure. A core gamification strategy is rewards for players who accomplish desired tasks. Types of rewards include points, achievement badges or levels, the filling of a progress bar, and providing the user with virtual currency.\n\n_URL_0_",
"People love to be validated. Having an opinion, putting it into words, and posting it for everyone to see and read is fun. But to then have complete strangers agree with you gives a huge sense of \"fuck yeah!\"",
"Serotonin gets released when we gain social status/receive public praise. Serotonin is one of those feel good neurotransmitters like Dopamine, Endorphins, and Oxytocin that trains us to do things by providing us with positive stimulus. It's supposed to exist so exceptional people will continue to be exceptional regardless of consequences (like being eaten by tigers while defending the group). ",
"Here is a quote from Dale Carnegie's \"How To Win Friends And Influence People\" that have explained it to me:\n\n > Sigmund Freud said that everything you and I do springs from two motives: the sex urge and the desire to be great.\n\n > John Dewey, one of America's most profound philosophers, phrased it a bit differently. Dr. Dewey said that the deepest urge in human nature is \"the desire to be important.\" Remember that phrase: \"the desire to be important.\" It is significant. You are going to hear a lot about it in this book. \n\n > What do you want? Not many things, but the few that you do wish, you crave with an insistence that will not be denied. Some of the things most people want include:\n\n > 1. Health and the preservation of life. \n\n > 2. Food. \n\n > 3. Sleep. \n\n > 4. Money and the things money will buy. \n\n > 5. Life in the hereafter. \n\n > 6. Sexual gratification. \n\n > 7. The well-being of our children. \n\n > 8. A feeling of importance.\n\n > Almost all these wants are usually gratified-all except one. But there is one longing - almost as deep, almost as imperious, as the desire for food or sleep - which is seldom gratified. It is what Freud calls \"the desire to be great.\" It is what Dewey calls the \"desire to be important.\"\n\n > Lincoln once began a letter saying: \"Everybody likes a compliment.\"\n\n > William James said: \"The deepest principle in human nature is the craving to be appreciated.\" He didn't speak, mind you, of the \"wish\"\nor the \"desire\" or the \"longing\" to be appreciated. He said the \"craving\" to be appreciated. \n\nThere is much more written about this subject in the book, but I think you get it by now.",
"Because I got no friends. Upvotes from random people make me feel warm :D",
"One of my friends was telling me that (according to some studies) we just *really* like points. We fucking love to get points for things, and we'll put a lot of effort into optimizing our behavior for a system that gives us points, regardless of whether the points imply social acceptance or anything.\n\nI think the addictiveness of something as stupid as [Cookie Clicker](_URL_0_) is pretty good evidence for that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamification"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://orteil.dashnet.org/cookieclicker/"
]
] |
||
5jlsof | why does it "hurt" your eyes when you look at neon colors? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jlsof/eli5_why_does_it_hurt_your_eyes_when_you_look_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbh4oof"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Natural color light sensitivity. our eyes were naturally made for yellow/green due to the sun/green around us. \n\nSome people experience it worse than others. Our eyes are in general very sensitive to blue light, such as those very annoying jerks with blue headlights. Very irritating. If you want to get more scientific about it well it's due to how the light bends around the eye. Blue will be in front of the retina instead of on the retina. See chromatic aberration, it applies to both camera and natural eye lens."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4fkrc4 | β how are unicode fonts made? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fkrc4/eli5_how_are_unicode_fonts_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"d29ov40"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The [Unicode Consortium](_URL_1_) is a non-profit standards committee in charge of, among other things, computer typography. They're a non-profit, too! [Here's](_URL_0_) a good NPR story about Unicode and emojis.\n\nUnicode makes the standards for characters, fonts are created by other groups; some are free, some are for sale, and some are licensed to be distributed with certain software (like all those Adobe fonts with Photoshop.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2015/10/25/451642332/who-decides-which-emojis-get-the-thumbs-up",
"http://unicode.org/consortium/consort.html"
]
] |
||
34624v | why do the words "first" and "second" sound nothing like "one" and "two" when all other numbers do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34624v/eli5_why_do_the_words_first_and_second_sound/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqrkury",
"cqrkvuc",
"cqrkwb1"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"First comes from Old English. \nSecond comes from Latin through Old French. \n\nOne and two come from Old English too. But these numbers sound pretty similar even in other indoeuropean languages, the common roots show. \n\nNote that the word \"prime\" can be used in a similar way as first, e.g. \"my prime concern is xyz\" has a similar meaning to \"my first concern is xyz\" if you think of a list of concerns, and it has a latin origin. \nIn Italian first and second are \"primo\" and \"secondo\". \n\nIn English you often find two words to say the same thing, one with Latin origins (usually through French) and one with Old English/Germanic origins. \nIn other cases, the two words evolve to have completely unrelated meanings and this is often a trap for English learners who speak Latin languages natively and may think \"if second is second, why is what comes before not prime?\" because they're used to consistency. There's a change of etymology just like that, due to how the language evolved. ",
"The words for first and second are less related to the numbers than 3rd, 4th, etc. First comes from the Old English fyrst which more means forefront or principle, more a symbol of importance than positioning, although the two are related. Second comes from the latin (via french) secundus, which means following or next (e.g. of secondary importance). ",
"Rather than deriving from the numbers like other ordinals do, they come from words meaning roughly \"foremost\" and \"following\". \"Second\" is from the same root as \"sequel\", a book which follows another, and \"sequence\", a group of things which follow each other in order."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7482ri | what happens where predators eat body parts of animals that contain large dose of venom, like the head of a snake or the tail of a scorpion? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7482ri/eli5what_happens_where_predators_eat_body_parts/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnw5zje",
"dnw694h",
"dnwa1bn",
"dnwa2yv",
"dnwa4ia",
"dnwao1x",
"dnwbnrt",
"dnwbnsz",
"dnwcrnq",
"dnwdixd",
"dnwf5ou",
"dnwfbfa",
"dnwg87s",
"dnwgd22",
"dnwi5he",
"dnwimpb",
"dnwivv7",
"dnwlbua",
"dnwmjcq",
"dnwmjmu",
"dnwmoi8",
"dnwmvkf",
"dnwo3sg",
"dnwotbe",
"dnwrw4y",
"dnwt7sl",
"dnwxu94",
"dnx1gdx",
"dnx1noe",
"dnx8456",
"dnxbsud",
"dnxl5o2",
"dnxlzcq",
"dnxnu1q",
"dnxqueu",
"dnxui6f"
],
"score": [
1804,
5,
2857,
2,
254,
33,
587,
19,
20,
7347,
8,
5,
2,
7,
6,
2,
2,
3,
31,
2,
4803,
2,
2,
2,
16,
2,
2,
2,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably nothing. \nThere's a difference between venomous and poisonous.\nA venom ingested doesn't have to be poisonous as it's often designed to interact with specific parts of a body. Usually the nervous system or blood. \nwhen the venom is ingested it most likely won't encounter those systems before it comes in contact with all the digestive enzymes that can break down the protein structure that makes up the venom.",
"Without looking it up I'd say that the venom is neutralized, when swallowed, by acid and the proteases present in your stomach. Venom injected into the body on the other hand gets into your blood system and then you're fucked without access to some anti venom. ",
"ELI5-\n\nVenom is a small square box. \n\nYour bloodstream is a small square hole and your stomach is a small round hole.\n\nVenom is able to go through the square but not the circle because it's not designed to go through a circle. ",
"Probably not much. Venom is bad if it gets into the bloodstream. Typically by a bite. The stomach is full of hydrochloric acid and digestive enzymes which might change it. And the GI tract is designed to only grab nutrients and things the body needs. Ie, there likely does not exist an organ that is designed to pull venom into the bloodstream. ",
"Nothing because venom is really just a protein that you can digest. But you had better not have a cut in your mouth or an ulcer in your stomach.",
"Venom does its thing from being in the bloodstream. If eaten, it won't enter the bloodstream until after it's been broken down and isn't harmful anymore. ",
"I will add that many predators know to simply avoid the part of the body that delivers the venom. For example, meerkats adroitly nip the stingers off of scorpions and discard them before they eat their delicious land-lobster. ",
" > Poisons are substances that are toxic (cause harm) if swallowed or inhaled. Venoms are generally not toxic if swallowed, and must be injected under the skin (by snakes, spiders, etc.) into the tissues that are normally protected by skin in order to be toxic.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Venom is safe to eat, nutritionally it is essentially egg white. It only does it's work if injected directly into your bloodstream. If it was unsafe to eat it would be a poison. \n\nVenom works because it attacks the delicate and defenseless tissues where it's injected, either blood or nerves etc. When it dings itself in a well protected stomach it just gets digested since its only a protein like any other. ",
"If the venom doesn't get stabbed into the bloodstream, then it will seem like nothing happened, and the predator will be OK. But what really happens is pretty neat.\n\nPutting something in your mouth and then swallowing it is ALWAYS safer than poking it into your bloodstream. \n\nJust like humans, many predators have a whole line of \"digesters\" that can make things safer to eat. First, there is spit - chewing and mixing with spit is important for digestion because it helps make big chunks smaller, it helps smaller chunks slide down into the stomach, and the spit helps some things start to dissolve. If you are chewing a venomous animal, there is a good chance that the chewing will burst the tissues where the venom is stored - that makes it less likely that the fangs or stingers can actually inject the venom.\n\nOnce the venomous parts get into the stomach, the acids within the stomach are often strong enough to \"de-nature\" many venom proteins. \"De-nature\" basically means it changes shape to that it doesn't react the same way that it would have. Then other enzymes begin to break everything down into even smaller chemical bits. Those small chemical bits are mostly turned into new proteins that you need to rebuild your own cells, or energy that helps you move.\n\nSo eating venomous animals is not a super idea, because there are some risks of the venom getting through your skin (or digestive tract lining) but the venom itself is usually not dangerous to digest.\n\nOn the other hand, if you inject beef stew into your bloodstream, you could get very sick.\n\nEDIT: I'm forced to amend my dangerous comments, as follows -\n1) Putting something in your mouth and then swallowing it is ALMOST ALWAYS safer than poking it into your bloodstream. If a doctor tells you otherwise, listen to your doctor. \n2) Don't eat sacks of venom and don't inject things into yourself. EVER. If a doctor tells you otherwise, listen to your doctor.\n3) Putting things in your butt is not quite the same as eating. But it is ALMOST ALWAYS safer to put something in your butt than it is to inject it. If a doctor tells you otherwise, listen to your doctor.\n4) If you aren't sure whether to eat something, put it in your butt, or inject it, move on to something you are more familiar with.\n5) I'm really surprised there weren't many responses talking about scorpions. They are good examples of animal magnetism in this crazy world. ",
"Poison will hurt you if itβs ingested. Venom will hurt you if it gets in your blood stream. ",
"generally predators that hunt venemous animals are immune to that particular poison, at least a little. they can eat it or even get bit or stung and survive...might get a bit stoned but...other than that. take for instance the mongoose, or the honey badger, they can take a direct bite from their prey and survive.",
"Venoms do very specific things, chemically, to very specific types of cells (for eg red blood cells, or nerve cells which it reaches through your blood). Your stomach [1] is designed to break down all sorts of chemical structures, and [2] doesn't contain any of the kinds of cells venom targets.",
"Poison in venom are different.\n\nVenom is aimed at attacking the blood stream, that is why everything with venom has sharp implements to deliver said venom into the victims blood stream. \n\nPoison on the other hand is just toxic so is bad for you whether it is in your blood or your stomach. \n\nI believe in Texas there is a rattle snake soup served with the venom in the dish, though they do warn you to make sure you have no cuts in your mouth before you dine. \n\nvenom is perfectly safe to eat baring no compromised stomach lining/cuts. ",
"Venomous =/= Poisonous\n\nVenomous - If A bites B and B dies, then A is venomous.\n\nPoisonous - If A bites B and A dies, then B is poisonous.",
"Absolutely nothing, venom is not poison. In order for venom to harm you it needs to enter the blood, so unless there is an open wound coming in contact with the venom it wont bother the animal in the least. I'm guessing you are thinking venom and poison function similarly they do not. Poison has to be ingested, venom has to be injected. the basic rule here is \"If it bites you and you die its venomous, If you bite it and you die its poisonous.\" Also stop biting things its getting weird.",
"That's why venom and poison differ. Venom must enter the bloodstream, for example, through a bite. Poison, on the other hand, is absorbed or ingested. You have to consume the animal or touch it, for example, to be affected by the poison.",
"If it is venomous then nothing since that venom only really works if it his your blood stream undigested. Poisonous on the other hand will kill the predator (think poisonous frogs found in amazon forests)",
"Why capitalize the words you did? I thought this was about the movie Predators with Marvel's Venom. I wouldn't do that for clarity.",
"There is a difference between venom and poison.\n\nVenom is just a protein so what happens to it is not too dissimilar to what happens when you eat some chicken. It gets digested and absorbed into the body in a form it can use.\n\nSo long as you don't have any cuts between your mouth and stomach you're not going to have any problems drinking a mug of snake venom (do it at your own risk I do not recommend it).\n\nIt is also worth noting some creatures are not affected by various venoms. We, humans, are lucky enough to have a strong reaction to most potent snake venoms. Horses are not which is why we use them for making anti-venoms. Other creatures might simply avoid eating the venomous bits for safety or avoiding venomous animals in general.",
"In order for venom to be dangerous, it must enter the bloodstream. Many venomous toxins specifically target red blood cells themselves and break down those cells which results in organs being unable to receive oxygen. This leads to inflammation and necrosis of the cell tissues. Organ failure then leads to death. (Not all venom works this way. Sometimes venom attacks the nervous system instead.)\n\nWhen consuming anything, animals have several defense mechanisms in the digestive system. The first defense is the mouth itself. If the lips start burning, the animal might not swallow. Then, the taste buds help the predator know whether this should be swallowed if it tastes bad. Next, the saliva in the mouth and chewing action helps break down molecules and foods into smaller pieces. Saliva is also full of white blood cells (leukocytes) that attack harmful items (such as bacteria) that might enter your mouth.\n\nAfter the mouth, the item enters the stomach. The acids, heat, and enzymes in the stomach are capable of denaturing proteins. For proper protein function, the proteins must consist of specific shapes. By denaturing potentially harmful proteins, they are rendered harmless in many cases. They are also broken apart. [Gastric acid](_URL_0_) in the stomach is normally between 1.5 and 3.5 PH. (Stomach acid can be incredibly acidic!) So, if it reaches this point, the venom is most likely going to be broken down in the stomach.\n\nHowever, if the venom happens to make it to the digestive tract intact, then it could potentially leech into your system. But, if it is possible for such a substance to reach this point, it is not actually a venom. It is a poison!\n\nTo explain further, for an animal to be venomous, it must inject its venom by way of a sting or bite. For an animal to be poisonous, however, it does not inject the toxins in the same manner. Instead, you are harmed by swallowing the poison. So, if a snake was commonly eaten and it resulted in people dying, the snake would be considered poisonous not venomous for this reason. If this same snake could also harm people by biting them and injecting venom, the snake would then be poisonous and venomous! Most snakes are simply venomous. That is, consuming their venom is usually harmless. It is not recommended that you do so, though, since it could potentially be toxic if it passes all of the digestive defenses, and no matter what you consume, if you consume enough of it, it will kill you. The dose makes the poison.\n\n\"All things are poison, and nothing is without poison, the dosage alone makes it so a thing is not a poison.\" -- Paracelsus\n\nEdit: Clarification that saliva itself does not break down the proteins. That starts in the stomach.\n\nNote: Bloodstream is a simplified term and circulatory system would probably be a better term to use. Venom initially enters a different system designed to transport white blood cells and remove toxins from the body (lymphatic system). For some venom, the molecules are too large to enter the bloodstream itself. Comments from /u/KingKongBrandy and /u/Maj3sticCr0w led me to make this note.\n\n",
"Afaik, venom is 100% safe to ingest as long as there's no way of it directly entering the bloodstream. \n\nVenom =\\= poison, venom makes your blood clot up and deprived you of oxygen (mostly)",
"Venom is proteins. Proteins are denatured by many things - including pH changes.\n\nAlso, the gastric system is technically considered 'outside' the body. I.e., everything is basically an elaborate living donut. ",
"Venom is typically not injected into the blood directly. A bite is not as accurate as setting an IV. Typically the venom gets into the interstitial space of tissues and drains into the lymphatic system, which them feeds into the circulatory system.\n\nThat said, consuming venom does not have the same effect because venoms are composed typically of polypeptides (proteins) which are broken down by enzymes in the GI system. Whole proteins do not get absorbed into the bloodstream of the intestines since they cannot cross. They need to be broken down into small peptides and amino acids. Keep that in mind when you buy any enzymes supplement that claims it has systemic effects. ",
"Well Predators are space alien warriors. I assume they have trained their bodies to withstand upset tummies. Also venom doesn't do anything If eaten.",
"Venom only takes effect when in the blood stream.\nPoison takes effect when you eat it.\n\"Venom hurts if it bites you. Poison hurts if you bite it.\"",
"It took me one minute to realize you mean Predators as in animals, not the space alien movie franchise ",
"Nothing, generally. A grasshopper mouse will usually get stung several times before biting off a scorpion's tail. The mouse has evolved to be able to handle it's prey.\n\nIf a predator does devour something it can't handle, it will die like it's supposed to.",
"So generally venom doesn't affect animals unless it enters the bloodstream (though there are a handful of animals that have venom that is also poisonous), so in theory ingesting it through eating it is harmless. In reality though it is possible to die (really only possible from really powerful venom like from a taipan or cone shell snail) or get sick from ingesting venom because it can get into the bloodstream through sores in the mouth and throat, or mucus membranes (though this generally is a small dose that gets in and is usually negligible). Due to this and the risk of being bitten/stung by their prey most animals that specialize in hunting venomous and/or poisonous animals have antibodies that break the toxin down making it essentially harmless.",
"All venom are types of proteins which are safe and digestible poisons are things that our body tries to use the way it would something normal, like lead poisoning is your body using it the way it would use iron in the blood, the lead goes to the brain and leaves deposits and thus rendering you mentally handicapped",
"This isn't really a problem for Predators because they are trophy hunters and don't eat their kills. They prefer to use the limbs of their prey as decorations so venom isn't really a concern.",
"If you bite it and die, it's poisonous. If it bites you and you die, it's venomous. Ingesting venom is not lethal to the same capacity (if at all) as having it directly injected into your blood stream from a stinger or fang. ",
"I saw a video of a honey badger eating some kind on venomous python, it eats it head first, passes out drunk on venomy goodness then wakes up some hours later to continue with its day",
"Venom/=poison\n\nDifferent things. Venom is, in most cases, relatively harmless to eat. Your liver has to work extremely hard to process it, but it's not going to have the same effect as passing unfiltered and unprocessed into your bloodstream.",
"Venom has to be injected. Poison is consumed. Venom proteins are broken down by stomach acid. ",
"Venom is different than poison, poison can be ingested and still do damage, but venom has to be injected into the bloodstream"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://ufwildlife.ifas.ufl.edu/venomous_snake_faqs.shtml"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastric_acid"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2k1xad | why, when i say my cats name does her tail wag ferociously but she very rarely acknowledges or looks when her name is called? | My other cat used to do the same and I'm sure my sisters dog does it, why do they do it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2k1xad/eli5why_when_i_say_my_cats_name_does_her_tail_wag/ | {
"a_id": [
"clh5bp5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Cats are kinda jerks like that. They'll know their name, but just choose not to answer to it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2zdtvz | how did clockwise opening lids, screws, caps etc. become universally accepted? | I have never seen one that opens the other way. (Although i have tried to do that.)
EDIT: I meant counter-clockwise, I'm a retard | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zdtvz/eli5_how_did_clockwise_opening_lids_screws_caps/ | {
"a_id": [
"cphzalc",
"cphzrrx",
"cphzv1q"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Clockwise opening? I can't remember ever using something that opens when you turn it clockwise. \n\nLefty loosey righty tighty",
"As other's have pointed out, you've got it the wrong way around.\n\nBut aside from that - this is one of those points where the definitive answer is lost in thousands of years of history. Joseph Whitworth was the first to write it down when he suggested a standard format for screws in 1841, but the system had probably been around for a very long time before that.\n\nNo one knows for sure exactly where it came from, but it seems likely that it's because right-handed people (ie. most people) are stronger when turning things to the right, and so would be able to tighten a screw more if it is arranged this way around.",
"Human beings are more likely to be right handed, and the human arm is stronger turning in that direction than the other. As for why it got standardized, there was an concerted effort in the mid 1800's to standardize this kind of thing so that parts could be more universal, at least in terms of actual screws. My guess is that by the time screw on lids became viable, the standard for metal screws had already set the precedence. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2cfa2j | if i drink 10oz of an 8%abv beer and 16oz of a 5%abv beer, which one will affect my bac more quickly? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cfa2j/eli5_if_i_drink_10oz_of_an_8abv_beer_and_16oz_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjevtbb",
"cjew03j",
"cjew3df",
"cjew3pe",
"cjew65r",
"cjewdkl",
"cjex7qw",
"cjexd5t",
"cjexk2f",
"cjexo0z",
"cjeyyxy",
"cjez4mm",
"cjeze0d",
"cjf1ztz",
"cjf3zg5",
"cjf587z"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
3,
62,
28,
2,
3,
1312,
2,
2,
7,
14,
134,
16,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"for science, of course.",
"sounds like half and half so your trying to make it the same amount of alcohol in each. I would have to go with the 8%. My thinking would be the alcohol wouldn't be as diluted so it would enter faster... My only way to back this up is if I chug a beer vs taking a shot the shot almost always hits me quicker. A shot of whiskey and a 12 oz beer have similar total alcohol as far as I'm aware.",
"Assuming all the other relevant factors are the same, (rate of absorption, metabolism, etc.), and you drink them both in the same amount of time, I don't know why they wouldn't be the same. \n\nThat said, I only work professionally with this stuff. I'm not a chemist, and I'm not an expert in the underlying science. ",
"Bartender/bar science engineer here. There are a couple factors to consider but the basic concept is it doesn't matter. The 8% will get you drunk slightly quicker but your blood is only capable of carrying so much alcohol at a time (think of it like a pipe, no matter how much you poor in the pipe. It won't move more than a rate of k volume per time) so by the end of an hour it won't matter. But in the course of 5 minutes the 8% will act a little faster",
"So if on both occasions you will be drinking the same amount of alcohol (.8 oz) under the same conditions (empty stomach, etc) your BAC will be more effected by the 10 oz drink assuming the rate at which you drink both is constant (oz/min). But let's say you were to drink both drinks in the same amount of time, your BAC should be roughly the same for each",
"Not really an answer to your question, but you might find this drink calculator pretty cool\n_URL_0_\n",
"The one you drink first will.",
"Pharmacologist here, one of my lecturers in vascular pharmacology stated there is a optimal % of alcohol to get drunk in the smallest amount possible. \n\nToo high a % i.e vodka, absinthe etc and the body will treat it like a poison and limit absorption. Too low a % and it's not a very effective way of getting drunk. \n\nIt seems the optimal % (varies between people) is 19-20%, some examples of drinks with this % is port and sherry. ",
"They will affect you the same given all other variables are same. The absorption of active drug (EtOH in this case) is based on the concentration that is considered free v. bound. Free being that is able to produce the subjective effect of intoxication, while bound means it is tied up in the stomach, fat deposit, etc. \n\nThe volume of the beverage consumed will not have an affect on this concentration as the water, wheat, malt, and other things in the beer do not affect the concentration of active v. bound.\n\n[Here is a graph showing how a drug travels through the body](_URL_0_)\n\nI will add the caveat though, that if you continue to drink the higher proof/less voluminous drink, you will probably be inclined to drink more as you feel less full compared to the larger drink over time.\n\n*Studied substance use and abuse in undergrad and graduate school.",
"[Perhaps Mitchell and Webb can answer that question.](_URL_0_)",
"Thank God they don't ask you this question in a DUI checkpoint",
"you can determine the blood concentration of orally applied drugs/chemicals with the [bateman-function](_URL_0_) (not batman).\n\nThe parameters bodyvolume (V) , invasion/absorption and elimination konstants (ka/kel), bioavailability (f) are the same, you only need the dosages to determine the time.\n\nI could get more specific and do the actual math but I assume that wouldn't help you very much and wouldn't be ELI5.\n\nSo the dosages of pure ethanol are approximately the same (10oz x 0.08 = 0.8 oz and 16x0.05=0.8oz) both will affect your BAC exactly the same if you down the entire beer in one go. If you take lets say one gulp (same volume) every minute the beer with the higher alcohole concentration will raise your BAC quicker since the amount of alcohol per gulp is higher.\n\n\n**TL,DR:\nBlood levels of any substance are determined by the dosage, the bioavailibility, the absorption and elimination rates and the body/compartment volume. If you down beers the BAC will be the same, if you drink them one sip at a time the bear with the higher concentration will raise you BAC quicker.**\n\nPS: I say the dosages are approximately the same because volume percentages of alcohol are not equivalent to the mass fractions. There is a marginal error.\n\nPPS: As kendo545 pointed out there are certain discrepancies in bioavailibity/rate of absorption depending on how high the alcohol concentration is. Considering the percentages are quite similar (5% and 8%) I don't think the difference is significant in this case.\n\nsource: Pharmacologist/Pharmacist",
"Peak alcohol absorption occurs around ~20% ABV. Factors that speed absoprtion are carbonation, sugar, and temperature of the liquid. There is a point at which more sugar will not speed up absorption, but I don't recall finding out what that value is when we learned about that in class. So, something carbonated, hot, 20% ABV, and sugary will absorb faster than something that is cold, dry, flat, and > or < 20% ABV.\n\nOn a side note, the subjective and objective drunkenness of an individual is reflective of the *rate of change* of BAC, *not the total* BAC. In other words, you will feel and behave more drunk if your BAC is increasing at a rapid rate, regardless of how much alcohol is in your system currently. The same goes for feeling like you are sobering up. This means that even if you simply maintain your BAC, you will feel like you are sobering up.",
"The 10oz of 8% ABV will affect your BAC quicker.\n\nAlcohol enters your bloodstream by [Diffusion](_URL_0_). The speed of diffusion is controlled by the concentration of the substance in question on each side of a membrane. \n\nThis is called the concentration gradient. Think of it like an actual gradient of a hill and roll a ball down it. The greater the difference in height between start and finish, the steeper the hill, the faster the ball rolls.\n\nIn this case alcohol is the substance, your gut/stomach lining is the membrane.\n\nThe higher the concentration of alcohol in your drink and the lower your BAC the faster the alcohol will diffuse across.\n\nSo while there is the *same amount* of alcohol in both cases, the higher ABV will affect your BAC more rapidly because there will be a steeper \"concentration gradient\" between your blood and your stomach contents. This is also one reason why you don't get as drunk after a big meal, you are effectively diluting the booze with your stomach contents.\n\nThis is also one of the reasons drinking a lot of water can sober you up but also the reason why drinking a lot of water can be dangerous, as it causes essential salts/electrolytes in your blood to diffuse *back* into the 'pure' water in your stomach.\n\n",
"Is this an alcohol question or a math question?",
"Explain like your five hmm... BEER IS NOT FOR FIVE YEAR OLDS! Now go play outside."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/ccalcoh3.htm"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/aaSYs1N"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwXjm64a3QE"
],
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/0/2/a02f3a585d4e247aca63871707b5d6f9.png"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1p2iof | why are judges allowed to be biased toward topics/rulings? | Over my years of existence I have heard, "that judge doesn't like when you do this" or "this judge leans this way on a specific topic." When did this become acceptable if it not already is? Why do we allow judges to be biased towards certain topics? I was under the assumption that they were to listen to the facts and make judgement based on facts and provided information. Not how they "typically rule." | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p2iof/eli5_why_are_judges_allowed_to_be_biased_toward/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccy26w5",
"ccy2897",
"ccy2e1l",
"ccy4ag5"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The law is never black and white.",
"Because they can be biased and still work within the law. \n\nLet's say we're looking at a specific state. In this state, a person convicted of possessing a small amount of marijuana can be given a sentence ranging from probation to ten years in prison. \n\nIf a judge thinks that marijuana is a terrible thing, they can take a hardline stance and sentence nearly everyone to the harshest sentence of 10 years in prison. If a judge thinks that marijuana isn't a big deal, they can sentence everyone to the minimal sentence of probation. \n\nBoth are working within the law, but one is clearly more lenient on marijuana possession convictions.",
" > I was under the assumption that they were to listen to the facts and make judgement based on facts and provided information\n\nRight, but they're not robots. Judges, like everyone, approach problems through their own lens of experiences and ways of looking at the world. For instance, a judge like Scalia sees the Constitution as rigid and inflexible, rooted in the precise definitions of the words used at the time. A judge like, for instance, Sotomayor sees the Constitution as an evolving document. This will impact how they rule on the same set of facts, just because they view them differently.",
"First, we don't really know what unbiased looks like. The law has enough ambiguities that honest judges can have different opinions. \n\nAlso, when listening to testimony, a judge has to make a subjective judgement call as to whether that testimony is credible, and weigh the facts provided by that testimony accordingly.\n\nFinally, different judges have different priorities. One might feel getting through 10 cases well is better than 5 cases perfectly, and make rulings accordingly. Another might want to make their cases appeal proof and rule more conservatively. There are different ways to run a courtroom, and not of them necessarily wrong."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
623vgi | why is day trading of stocks a thing if its essentially a zero sum game? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/623vgi/eli5_why_is_day_trading_of_stocks_a_thing_if_its/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfjj28f",
"dfjj2r3",
"dfjksgk",
"dfjkw89"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Its not a zero sum game for the people trading it, its zero sum because their trades are not generating any (or much) value for the market. Among the people trading, there are still winners and losers, its just that it roughly evens out, the winners win the amount the losers lose\n\n",
"Some people imagine that they will be the winners, since a zero-sum game can have about the same number of winners as losers. ",
"The same reason gambling is a thing, even though it's basically a negative-sum game. People love it.",
"Trading creates value for society by moving money around from places that destroy value (such as a bad company, or a bad gambler) to places that create value (such as a good company, or a good investor). \n\nThis extra value created actually strengthens the value behind money - it increases it's purchasing power!\n\nDay trading still does this, at smaller intervals/increments of time.\n\nConsider a million dollars in the hands of a Good Guy like Elon Musk or Bill Gates, versus that million in the hands of a Playboy who occasionally destroys a hundred dollar bill as a cocaine straw and whose company is just for show.\n\nNot all million dollars are equal - it's value and power depends on the owner/user! If both the good guys and the bad guys have publically traded companies, investors in both the long and short terms eventually bleed the bad guy dry, saving all that money and value from destruction!\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
e19lrs | how do world class competitive athletes get popped for drug/steroid abuse years after their championship? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e19lrs/eli5_how_do_world_class_competitive_athletes_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"f8nrot5"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"As time progresses we get better and better at detecting very minute amount of drugs (or by products from taking drugs) in samples.\n\nWhen world class competitive athletes participate they give samples that are saved. Years later these samples can be analyzed by more modern techniques which are far more sensitive than they were however many years ago."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xed6n | why do we have to break glass to access fire extinguishers? | Just seems like an unnecessary hazard during emergencies. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xed6n/eli5why_do_we_have_to_break_glass_to_access_fire/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfakpuo",
"cfakwtu",
"cfaljmz"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"It ensures no-one has already tampered with it.",
"I think that's an old convention. I've never seen an extinguisher without a door.",
"* it is a safety glass or weak plastic, and not terribly dangerous\n* it discourages frivolous use\n* it makes it clear when it has been used, so it can be inspected and recharged as necessary"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4z62kg | how does what i see become something i feel? | OK so let me explain, does anyone remember childhood games where one would hold their hands together whilst the other tied imaginary knots over their fingers? I know that's quite specific but it always felt as though when trying to pull my hands apart I would feel a tug? Can someone explain how that'd occur | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4z62kg/eli5_how_does_what_i_see_become_something_i_feel/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6tqdn2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's caused by suggestibility. \n\nYour brain is constantly building a model of your environment for you to navigate. This model isn't perfect. You can't take in everything around you so you brain fills in the information gaps with what you know the world is like.\n\nLike if you throw an imaginary ball for a dog and he chases after nothing. You have suggested a ball was thrown so the dog's brain says there's a ball. \n\nYour brain is told there's a string. You relax into that string imagining. Your brains builds that fact into your world model. When you open your hands your brain finds an information gap were a string feeling should be, so it builds a string feeling for you to experience.\n\nYour brain is filling these information gaps all day long for you but you only notice when it gets it wrong. This kind of trick makes you notice."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
24csuu | the difference between student loans and student aid/grants? | Hi, reddit, I just got my information back from my FAFSA. I received a Stafford (Direct) loan, a Parent PLUS loan, and a Perkins loan. Along with these loans, I got a bunch of grants and aid, which I assume I don't have to pay back.
How are the loans different from the aid/grants? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24csuu/eli5_the_difference_between_student_loans_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch5uq0r",
"ch6dwtz"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You hit it right on the head. Loans are money that you have to pay back. Grants are money that you don't.",
"Financial aid is all the different ways they help you pay for school put together.\n\nGrants are money that's just given to you because you need it that you don't need to pay back. Scholarships are like grants but you 'earned' them somehow (good grades, sports, being the right race/religion, etc).\n\nLoans are money that you have to pay back. There's a bunch of different programs - some are loans in your name, some are loans in your parents' names, some accrue interest while you're in school, some do not.\n\nThe best thing to do is to talk to a financial aid counselor at your school. There is an entire office full of people whose job it is to explain your options & help you pick the best ones."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2oxrob | why do so many bollywood movies/indian songs have a majority of the dialogue in hindi and have random lines of english interspersed in the conversation? | Many times, they will be talking and all of a sudden they say a phrase or two in English and go right back to Hindi. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oxrob/eli5_why_do_so_many_bollywood_moviesindian_songs/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmrhlzy",
"cmrk213"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that's what appeals to their target audience: Indians who grew up with Hindi, and use a little bit of English because everybody knows it a little. You'll find the same tendencies in a lot of foreign films. Off the top of my head, Arn has some English, but is mostly Swedish, and Martha, Im Juli, and I think Der Untergang also have a few English lines amid the German. ",
"India, being a former British colony, has relatively high rates of English speaking. It's much more complex than the coolness factor found in other SE Asian countries. It also incorporates the fact that if something is easier to say in English or Hindi lacks then they will use English. If you know anyone who speaks every day Hindi, it's very common in Hindi as well. It's not just a movie thing. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
lo67f | why, if a meteor (or similar phenomenon) killed off the dinosaurs, we still have other animals that were already around then? | Maybe I just don't properly understand the theory of how dinosaurs died out, but why didn't that cause eradicate everything at the time? If the early mammals and reptiles (like turtles!) that survived survived, why didn't *any* dinosaurs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lo67f/eli5_why_if_a_meteor_or_similar_phenomenon_killed/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2u9iog",
"c2u9xon",
"c2u9iog",
"c2u9xon"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are two broad categories of evolutionary strategy that you frequently see. An animal can produce as many offspring as possible, but invest little in the care of each individual, or they can produce few offspring, but heavily invest in each, which increases their likelihood of survival. Large, long lived animals will tend to use the second strategy, while smaller, short lived animals prefer the first strategy. During times of relative stability, the large animals do well, but during times of rapid environmental change the smaller species, because they have lots of different children (and therefore lots of different genetic difference in every generation) coupled with fast reproductive cycles, allows them to adapt to the change better. This helps explain why you will see a long cycle dominated by a certain class of animal, followed by an extension event, and then the rise of a new type of animal.",
"**When did Dinosaurs live?**\n\nDinosaurs were basically reptiles who could stand on four legs or two legs (unlike today's reptiles that crawl). They were both big and small.\n\nDinosaurs lived in a time (230 MYA to 65 MYA; MYA=million years ago) when climate was warm (there was no polar ice), food was plenty and so dinosaurs grew big and fat. \n\n**What killed them?**\n\nDon't assume a single event caused the dinosaurs to die out instantly. The mass extinction event (65.5 MYA) most probably a meteor, caused climate changes which killed plants which herbivore dinosaurs depended on and subsequently carnivore dinosaurs also died. \n\nInitial impact was not the cause of the mass extinction. But it created dust clouds with stopped the sunlight, killing many plants. It created a long winter. \n\nThen, by the time dust settled, the continuously burning forest fire (oxygen levels were very high back then) had increased carbon dioxide levels. This caused a greenhouse effect trapping the heat inside the earth atmosphere. \n\nDinosaurs were cold-blooded ('bask in sun if you feel cold and jump in water if you feel hot' types, they cannot control body temperature like warm-blooded mammals and birds by burning fat or sweating), so they couldn't tolerate the temperature change.\n\nThen it would have caused acid rains killing more plants and animals.\n\nAlso, herbivore dinosaurs ate non-flowering plants (gymnosperms like pine trees), even though flowering plants (angiosperms) appeared at about the time they lived (200 MYA). They didn't adapt themselves to eat them. So, when most non-flowering plants died and flowering plants took their place, dinosaurs couldn't eat them.\n\nThere are also theories that volcanic activity killed dinosaurs. One theory is that many volcanic eruptions or one super volcano caused all those dust clouds, forest fires, emission of carbon dioxide and sulfur into the atmosphere. Other theory is that volcanic eruptions kept the temperature warm during that time. But when eruptions stopped, the long hot summer ended and dinosaur died of the cold.\n\nAlso another theory, dinosaurs needed a particular temperature range to reproduce and temperature change killed them. A rather highly rejected theory. \n\n**Why mammals and birds (aves) survived?** \n\nDo not assume that all mammals survived, for example pouched mammals (Marsupials) of Asia and North American disappeared. Most of egg-laying mammals (Prototheria) died. But mostly all mammals survived.\n\nFirst a little about evolution of mammals. About 340 MYA, reptiles (Amniotes) evolved from other amphibians who must return to water to lay eggs, by learning to lay eggs on land. Reptiles then divided into Synapsids who became mammals and Sauropsids who became today's reptiles, dinosaurs and birds. \n\nMammals first appeared at 200 MYA. They had one hole for all purposes, peeing, pooping and laying eggs (monotremes). Still they are considered first true mammals. Mammals of that time were small like rats, so they could have hidden in holes and caves to survive. For example, Hadrocodium of 195 MYA ago was a 3.2 cm (1.25 inch) night animal (nocturnal) and ate insects (insectivore) and we are not sure if was a warm-blooded (probably was since it came out at night when sun was down and it was cold). First birthing mammals (placental mammals; Eutherians) appeared in 160 MYA. Eomaia a birthing mammal (Eutherians) from 125 MYA was 10cm (3.9 inch). Sinodelphys was a furred mammal about 15 cm (5.9 inch) long, it lived at 125 MYA, it was tree dwelling and gave birth to under-developed babies (like marsupials; Metatherians). Mammal with early milk-producing and birthing features probably developed during the Paleocene age (65.5 to 56 MYA)\n\nOnly when dinosaurs died out, mammal rose to power and diversified. They evolved to fill in the gaps in the ecology left out by dinosaurs.\n\nNow about birds. Most scientist believe birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs the same group of dinosaur as the biped carnivore Tyrannosaurus Rex. But some believe that they evolved from earlier archosaurs. According to later, archosaurs split into two groups, one group became birds (and others) and other become dinosaurs (and others). \n\nEarliest fossils of the famous Archaeopteryx points that it lived at 150 MYA ago, had teeth, feathers, claws in forearms and could glide, it used flapping to aid flight not generate lift. It was sized like a raven, 50cm (20 in). Another bird-like dinosaur Microraptor lived at 120 MYA, it had four wings and used all of them to glide. It was 77β90 cm long (2.53β3.0 feet) long. \n\nMost of the birds died in the event like Hesperornithes (5 feet predator, swimming, diving waterbirds) and Enantiornithes (4 feet wingspan, flying, with teeth and claws on wings), those who survived are modern birds (Neornitheans). These birds survived because they were smaller, dug holes in ground or trees, had better flight, could swim and dive. Also they may have survived due to diets like eating insects, unlike other birds of the time who were mostly predators. \n\n**So why reptiles survived too?** \n\nReptiles should have died out too, right?\n\nTurtles (testudines) survived mostly because they were aquatic animals. Although 20% of their species did die (among them the larger ones). Actually, Turtles are tough bastards because they survived another mass extinction at 250 MYA which had killed 96% of all marine species and 70% of terrestrial vertebrate species. It also killed all their cousins (Anapsids).\n\nOther reptiles like lizards, snakes and leg-less lizards (lepidosaurs) survived because of they were smaller, capable of burrowing and adaptable to newer climates. Even though lots of them died, most of them survived. For example, Tuatara of New Zealand (Sphenodon) has lineage back to Mesozic era (250-65 MYA).\n\nThe above reptiles are non-Archosaurs, meaning birds and crocodiles are one and a different lineage from them. Turtles had diverged from them much earlier.\n\nSo that leaves us only the crocs including crocodiles, alligators and gharials (Crocodilians). They basically survived because they could burrow and live in fresh water. Still 50% of their species died in the event. For example, Sarcosuchus which was lived in 112 MYA and Deinosuchus of 80 MYA were giant species with sizes ranging above 12m (40 feets), they probably died in the event.\n\n**Did every single Dinosaur die?** \n\nAccording to some, no. Some evidence of Paleocene dinosaurs says that some lived into Paleocene epoch, which means 40,000 to 1 Million year after the event. ",
"There are two broad categories of evolutionary strategy that you frequently see. An animal can produce as many offspring as possible, but invest little in the care of each individual, or they can produce few offspring, but heavily invest in each, which increases their likelihood of survival. Large, long lived animals will tend to use the second strategy, while smaller, short lived animals prefer the first strategy. During times of relative stability, the large animals do well, but during times of rapid environmental change the smaller species, because they have lots of different children (and therefore lots of different genetic difference in every generation) coupled with fast reproductive cycles, allows them to adapt to the change better. This helps explain why you will see a long cycle dominated by a certain class of animal, followed by an extension event, and then the rise of a new type of animal.",
"**When did Dinosaurs live?**\n\nDinosaurs were basically reptiles who could stand on four legs or two legs (unlike today's reptiles that crawl). They were both big and small.\n\nDinosaurs lived in a time (230 MYA to 65 MYA; MYA=million years ago) when climate was warm (there was no polar ice), food was plenty and so dinosaurs grew big and fat. \n\n**What killed them?**\n\nDon't assume a single event caused the dinosaurs to die out instantly. The mass extinction event (65.5 MYA) most probably a meteor, caused climate changes which killed plants which herbivore dinosaurs depended on and subsequently carnivore dinosaurs also died. \n\nInitial impact was not the cause of the mass extinction. But it created dust clouds with stopped the sunlight, killing many plants. It created a long winter. \n\nThen, by the time dust settled, the continuously burning forest fire (oxygen levels were very high back then) had increased carbon dioxide levels. This caused a greenhouse effect trapping the heat inside the earth atmosphere. \n\nDinosaurs were cold-blooded ('bask in sun if you feel cold and jump in water if you feel hot' types, they cannot control body temperature like warm-blooded mammals and birds by burning fat or sweating), so they couldn't tolerate the temperature change.\n\nThen it would have caused acid rains killing more plants and animals.\n\nAlso, herbivore dinosaurs ate non-flowering plants (gymnosperms like pine trees), even though flowering plants (angiosperms) appeared at about the time they lived (200 MYA). They didn't adapt themselves to eat them. So, when most non-flowering plants died and flowering plants took their place, dinosaurs couldn't eat them.\n\nThere are also theories that volcanic activity killed dinosaurs. One theory is that many volcanic eruptions or one super volcano caused all those dust clouds, forest fires, emission of carbon dioxide and sulfur into the atmosphere. Other theory is that volcanic eruptions kept the temperature warm during that time. But when eruptions stopped, the long hot summer ended and dinosaur died of the cold.\n\nAlso another theory, dinosaurs needed a particular temperature range to reproduce and temperature change killed them. A rather highly rejected theory. \n\n**Why mammals and birds (aves) survived?** \n\nDo not assume that all mammals survived, for example pouched mammals (Marsupials) of Asia and North American disappeared. Most of egg-laying mammals (Prototheria) died. But mostly all mammals survived.\n\nFirst a little about evolution of mammals. About 340 MYA, reptiles (Amniotes) evolved from other amphibians who must return to water to lay eggs, by learning to lay eggs on land. Reptiles then divided into Synapsids who became mammals and Sauropsids who became today's reptiles, dinosaurs and birds. \n\nMammals first appeared at 200 MYA. They had one hole for all purposes, peeing, pooping and laying eggs (monotremes). Still they are considered first true mammals. Mammals of that time were small like rats, so they could have hidden in holes and caves to survive. For example, Hadrocodium of 195 MYA ago was a 3.2 cm (1.25 inch) night animal (nocturnal) and ate insects (insectivore) and we are not sure if was a warm-blooded (probably was since it came out at night when sun was down and it was cold). First birthing mammals (placental mammals; Eutherians) appeared in 160 MYA. Eomaia a birthing mammal (Eutherians) from 125 MYA was 10cm (3.9 inch). Sinodelphys was a furred mammal about 15 cm (5.9 inch) long, it lived at 125 MYA, it was tree dwelling and gave birth to under-developed babies (like marsupials; Metatherians). Mammal with early milk-producing and birthing features probably developed during the Paleocene age (65.5 to 56 MYA)\n\nOnly when dinosaurs died out, mammal rose to power and diversified. They evolved to fill in the gaps in the ecology left out by dinosaurs.\n\nNow about birds. Most scientist believe birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs the same group of dinosaur as the biped carnivore Tyrannosaurus Rex. But some believe that they evolved from earlier archosaurs. According to later, archosaurs split into two groups, one group became birds (and others) and other become dinosaurs (and others). \n\nEarliest fossils of the famous Archaeopteryx points that it lived at 150 MYA ago, had teeth, feathers, claws in forearms and could glide, it used flapping to aid flight not generate lift. It was sized like a raven, 50cm (20 in). Another bird-like dinosaur Microraptor lived at 120 MYA, it had four wings and used all of them to glide. It was 77β90 cm long (2.53β3.0 feet) long. \n\nMost of the birds died in the event like Hesperornithes (5 feet predator, swimming, diving waterbirds) and Enantiornithes (4 feet wingspan, flying, with teeth and claws on wings), those who survived are modern birds (Neornitheans). These birds survived because they were smaller, dug holes in ground or trees, had better flight, could swim and dive. Also they may have survived due to diets like eating insects, unlike other birds of the time who were mostly predators. \n\n**So why reptiles survived too?** \n\nReptiles should have died out too, right?\n\nTurtles (testudines) survived mostly because they were aquatic animals. Although 20% of their species did die (among them the larger ones). Actually, Turtles are tough bastards because they survived another mass extinction at 250 MYA which had killed 96% of all marine species and 70% of terrestrial vertebrate species. It also killed all their cousins (Anapsids).\n\nOther reptiles like lizards, snakes and leg-less lizards (lepidosaurs) survived because of they were smaller, capable of burrowing and adaptable to newer climates. Even though lots of them died, most of them survived. For example, Tuatara of New Zealand (Sphenodon) has lineage back to Mesozic era (250-65 MYA).\n\nThe above reptiles are non-Archosaurs, meaning birds and crocodiles are one and a different lineage from them. Turtles had diverged from them much earlier.\n\nSo that leaves us only the crocs including crocodiles, alligators and gharials (Crocodilians). They basically survived because they could burrow and live in fresh water. Still 50% of their species died in the event. For example, Sarcosuchus which was lived in 112 MYA and Deinosuchus of 80 MYA were giant species with sizes ranging above 12m (40 feets), they probably died in the event.\n\n**Did every single Dinosaur die?** \n\nAccording to some, no. Some evidence of Paleocene dinosaurs says that some lived into Paleocene epoch, which means 40,000 to 1 Million year after the event. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4c5dk9 | why does a banana peel rot much faster after the banana has been eaten? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c5dk9/eli5_why_does_a_banana_peel_rot_much_faster_after/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1fe7ni"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"with many fruit, the outer layer (peel, rind, etc) is designed specifically to stop bacteria (sometimes animals too!) This only needs to apply to the outer layer to be work though, not the whole thing. the inside of the peel is clearly quite different than the outside (it lacls the smooth, polished look of the exterior), and is more favorable to the bacteria which cause decay"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1csrb6 | people against gay marriage. | As far as I can make out, people are against gay marriage mostly for religious reasons, mostly due to marriage being for a man and a woman to have babies.
Are these men and women permitted to adopt children?
Are they allowed to marry if they are found to be infertile?
Are their other reasons aside from child-raising that people are against gay marriage? I'd be interested to understand any non-religious reasons too.
I'd really like to hear the main points of the debate without the usual bashing you get when people are discussing it. I don't want to argue, I want to understand why people feel so strongly.
EDIT: I've marked this as answered because I've got some good responses here. But I will keep checking back for new comments so please do add your view if you have one. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1csrb6/eli5_people_against_gay_marriage/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9jmivh",
"c9jwd12"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Marriage is a **legal** agreement between two people. It is quite separate from the religious ceremony. Arguments about gay marriage which try and state that marriage is a purely religious thing are either trying to confuse the basic facts to prove a point, or are simply unaware of the differences.\n\n(Case in point, my brother, who legally married his wife about three months before they had a religious ceremony in a church - although in that case he and his wife both treated the relationship as though they weren't married until the religious ceremony - both are very strong Christians).\n\nThe arguments against gay marriage are, ultimately, all based on the idea that \"being homosexual is not normal\". The reason most of those people who vehemently oppose gay marriage feel the way they do is that it normalises something which to them is inherently \"not normal\".\n\nOn top of that you have piled all the other arguments that state 'marriage is about raising children' or whatever.\n\nNB: Sweeping generalisations abound, because it's ELI5. Also hard to have a nuanced discussion in text comment form without each post being massive.",
"For myself, I am against gay marriage as a concept for religious reasons, my religion says that it is wrong and that marriage should be between a man and a woman. In my opinion though the religious argument is a moot point when it comes to talking about anyone but yourself. That being said, I am pro gay marriage on a legal basis. I believe the government shouldnt be able to tell people what they can and cant do when it comes to trivial stuff like this. If two men want to get married, who cares, it effects me none what so ever. Who am I to say they can not. It is how I feel about abortion, and gun rights, etc. Do I support abortion? no. Do I support being able to easily obtain assault weapons? no. But the government should just stay out of all that. Its a choice. I can not force anyone to hold my opinion."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
35ryyu | how voting systems, such as proportional representation work? | In light of elections in my country, I'm trying to understand how voting systems such as proportional representation. I understand with recent elections in UK, there have been calls to switch to proportional representation. What I don't understand is how these systems work, and how exactly they affect the outcome. It might sound like a homework question, but I'm ashamed to say that I'm just a 27 year old with no clue about politics.
Edit: Thanks for replying everyone. For reference I'm not actually from the UK, but it was a relevant point. My country actually uses proportional representation, but no one's questioned the system. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35ryyu/eli5_how_voting_systems_such_as_proportional/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr78qcu",
"cr79rha"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Proportional representation works like this: In an election, you vote for whatever party you like. When all the votes are tallied, each party gets a number of seats proportional to the number of votes they got. \n\nIf Labor got 50% of votes, UKIP got 25%, and Greens got 25%, then Labor would get half of the seats, UKIP and the Greens would each get a quarter. \n\nThis is contrast to a \"first past the post system\" (i believe the UK has something similar to this). In this case, votes are tallied by districts, and whoever gets the highest number of votes wins all of the seats of that district. \n\nWith FPTP, you can get situations (like the recent election) where a party might get a massive number of seats in Parliament despite only marginally winning in a lot of districts, while parties that had really high showings but a bunch of narrow losses don't get any seats despite representing a pretty large number of voters. \n\nProportional representation means that government will more closely resemble the makeup of the voting population. On the flip side though, it also means it's really easy for radical groups to manage to get a bit of official power. It probably won't actually *matter* seeing as they'll constantly get overruled, but it might still be a bit awkward for there to be an official Fascist/Communist/Jedi party in government. ",
"Others have answered this well, but it's worth pointing out that it's very unlikely to happen. You will remember there was a referendum in 2011 - that was the Lib Dems trying to take a step towards proportional representation and it was soundly defeated.\n\nThe Conservatives are against PR (because it would be bad for them), so they are never going to propose it. They are however going to move forward with boundary reform, which means they want to rejig the constituencies so they have roughly the same number of voters.. At the moment they range from 20,000 to 110,000. This will obviously be an improvement democratically speaking, but it is also almost certainly advantageous to the Conservatives.\n\nThis means they are more likely to be in power in future, and when they aren't they are more likely to have enough stopping power to prevent PR ever happening (far from everyone in the other parties is for it either). \n\nAll that coupled with the fact that the referendum can justifiably be said to have answered the question for a generation means you shouldn't expect PR any time soon!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
zk3df | how does texting work? how does the information go from one phone to the other instantly. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zk3df/eli5_how_does_texting_work_how_does_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c65cde2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Your phone is always sending signals, even when you are not using it. This helps the cell phone towers know where your phone is. When a phone sends a text message to you, it goes to the nearest cell phone tower, which sends it to the \"SMS center\" or text center. This center then sends it to the tower that most recently was sending signals to/from your phone. The communication is very quick, so it happens \"instantly.\"\n\n-------\n\nThank you to /u/blazaiev for the [comment](_URL_0_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zk3df/eli5_how_does_texting_work_how_does_the/c659zij"
]
] |
||
2v30m0 | is jordan a dictatorship and if so why are they receiving positive press? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2v30m0/eli5_is_jordan_a_dictatorship_and_if_so_why_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"coe01wt",
"coe039l",
"coe9028",
"coe9tsv",
"coefp1b"
],
"score": [
44,
14,
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"No it's not, it is a constitutional monarch similar to that of England except King Abdullah has a few more powers. But don't let that dissuade you for it is a highly developed country with one of the freest economy in the Middle East.\n\nIt's getting positive press for the actions it's doing to ISIS in retaliation for the death of their pilot.",
"Jordan has a tradition of having intelligent and modern monarchs. So they have a positive image in the eyes of most of the World.",
"I mean if your dictator is a great person it could work. Imagine a perfectly smart, altruistic, uncorrupt, charismatic dictator who only cared about serving the people. Might work better than a democracy. ",
"Not every dictatorship is the work of the devil. Take Singapore, for example. Also, some democracies receive constant negative press, btw (not going to name any here).",
"A dictatorship isn't inherently evil. There have been many good dictatorships."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6t4mtg | how would the environment change if you added a body of water to a dry desert area? | Suppose I was able to dig an enormous hole in the centre of Australia (100km diameter, the bottom below sea level). Then I dug a canal directly south, joining the hole to the ocean.
The sea water would fill the hole and essentially make a lake in the centre of the country.
Ignoring any effects that would cause the canal to collapse or erode etc, what impact would this have on the environment of the desert? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6t4mtg/eli5_how_would_the_environment_change_if_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlhvn0c",
"dlidpnc"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"A good real-world example of this is the Salton Sea in California, which was created by a catastrophic failure of a canal that caused the entire Colorado River (before it was dammed up) to flow into the middle of the desert for two years. It's now California's largest lake.\n\nSo what changed? Well, it's a great place for migratory birds to stop, and because we also ruined a lot of their former stops (by damming rivers, draining lakes for cities, etc.), they pretty much rely on it now. It didn't cause a jungle or forest to pop up in the middle of the desert, though. The water isn't that good, and the dirt (sand) is still very poor soil.",
"By bringing in water you're providing potential moisture for clouds to form. But any rainfall would happen farther downwind from this inland sea you've created. I know nothing about Australian geography or weather to know how topography and prevailing winds would affect those clouds.\n \nAfter a quick maps search I see Lake Eyre in Australia. What is the humidity around that area? It seems to be roughly the size you're talking about. The water vapor would make the air more humid. However, since you're adding salt water not fresh, you're going to have coastal flora and fauna living there."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
33xclz | how did hitler get away with breaking the treaty of versailles? | How did Hitler manage to build an entire army with weapons and planes after signing the Treaty? Are there any organizations that look to enforce treaties today? What are the consequences of breaking a treaty now? Links too please, this is for a history assignment and I can't find any information on this! Much appreciated | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33xclz/eli5how_did_hitler_get_away_with_breaking_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqp88jh",
"cqp8cq9",
"cqp8k5z",
"cqp8x7p",
"cqpdst8"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"other countries knew he was breaking the treaty, but they just thought maybe if we don't aggravate him he won't do anything. they kept telling him if you do one more thing we will declare war, but they kept not following through with those threats.\n\ntoday we do pretty much the same thing. we see other countries with enriched uranium and launching missiles when they agreed not to, we tell them to stop, they don't, we make more threats we don't follow through on.",
"Nobody did anything to stop him; who would? Trying to stop him would likely involve a war in itself, and nobody really wanted one. [The Appeasement](_URL_0_) is often used to describe the period of hoping Hitler was just pushing his luck a bit in trying to develop Germany.\n\n > Are there any organizations that look to enforce treaties today?\n\nNot really, who would pay for that sort of thing? The only real power is violence. Countries will always violate treaties if they deem the consequences lesser than the profit they stand to gain. \n\nTo a certain extent the best thing to enforce a treaty is reputation: nobody will believe you tomorrow if you're flagrantly disregarding your word today. Ultimately, though, the only thing that stops, say, Uzbekistan from respecting the UN charter of human rights would be someone coming in and making them. As long as nobody is willing to do that what's stopping them? Nothing.",
"Just off the top of my head, might link stuff later. Firstly, Hitler was able to get away with the things he did for a quite a while due other nations being reluctant to stand up to Germany. After going through the WW1, the governments did not want to see 2 world wars in a single lifetime. \nTreaties are [soft laws](_URL_0_) whereby there is no policing organisation to enforce the the treaty. However, the [International Court of Justice](_URL_2_) is there to solve disputes brought before it by the countries involved in altercations. Even if the court manages to reach a decision, the outcome cannot be enforced and many times countries just disagree and disobey the [verdict](_URL_1_).\nEconomic sanctions are the most common repercussion of breaking a treaty nowadays such as when [North Korea violated the NPT](_URL_3_).",
"A few points about Versailles - by the time Hitler came to power, it was widely recognised that the treaty had gone far too far. Europe had seen the hardship Germans had been burdened with throughout and past the Great Depression and hyperinflation. Hitler seemed to be getting things back on track for the country and dredging it out of chaos.\n\nThere was a lot of sympathy for what Hitler was doing in the capitals of Europe. When he moved to retake the Sudetenland, many people thought this was pretty justified. A phrase you see a lot was that Germany was merely walking into it's \"own back yard\". Things had changed, they thought, and Germany was simply rolling back some of the more unfair provisions of the Versailles treaty.",
"Hitler wasn't perceived as the greatest threat to Europe. He was a fascist yes, but fascism was not nearly as bad (to the allies) as communism. When Roosevelt and Stalin met each other they agreed that Hitler could be a massive threat to Poland. But Roosevelt also secretly felt that Stalin could be a threat to the world, as did Chamberlain and as did Lebrun.\n\nHad the Ruskies and the Anglos been able to get along Hitler would have never been able to successfully invade Poland. However distrust among each other lead to non-intervention as anyone who pushed against Hitler would be weakened against the greater enemy.\n\nThe policy of appeasement was as much a policy regarding Russia as it was about Hitler. When Russia and Germany made a pact together The Anglos made no attempt to prevent Finland's invasion nor Poland's."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_law",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States",
"http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1",
"https://www.globalpolicy.org/security-council/index-of-countries-on-the-security-council-agenda/north-korea.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
3r4re2 | if sodium consumption is such a big health concern, why aren't there a ton of sodium substitutes on the market like there is for sugar? | Are sodium substitutes not as common because they just don't exist? Are they expensive to produce unlike sugar substitutes? Or are consumers unwilling to use them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r4re2/eli5_if_sodium_consumption_is_such_a_big_health/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwkv7a1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Sugar is really complicated and you can make variations on it, salt is two elements mashed together. potassium chloride exists as another type of salt that people can eat but it tastes slightly worse and has a lot of the same effects sodium chloride does so it's not as worth using. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6s16gx | how biologically similar would half siblings from twins be? | Watching Arrested Development, and thinking about Buster vs. Michael and the rest of the family.
If two half siblings had the same mom, but the respective fathers were twins, how related would they be genetically vs. say, my half brother and I? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6s16gx/eli5_how_biologically_similar_would_half_siblings/ | {
"a_id": [
"dl98pc0"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If they had the same mother, but their fathers were identical twins, then they would generically be full siblings, just as if they had both had the same mother and father."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.