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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
9tuihl | why is it that when it’s hot we can walk miles without sweating but once we stand a bit after that walk we start sweating a lot? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9tuihl/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_its_hot_we_can_walk/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8z6sxg",
"e8zb3if"
],
"score": [
38,
2
],
"text": [
"You are sweating it is just that the sweat is evaporating and cooling the skin as it is supposed to do, once you stop your body is no longer as hot as it was and isn't evaporating the moisture away, but the sweat is at the same level. In addition your motion through the air assists in the evaporation again standing still reduces this.",
"I can't relate to this as I pretty much sweat all the time when it's hot, especially when walking. Different people sweat different amounts in different situations? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
9fgw0m | at what point do you stop floating in space and start falling? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9fgw0m/eli5_at_what_point_do_you_stop_floating_in_space/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5wbhne",
"e5wbkl0",
"e5wbnpw",
"e5wbw07",
"e5wec9y",
"e5wemal",
"e5wfwrp",
"e5wkhm4"
],
"score": [
2,
15,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"He wouldn't. He would just stay in orbit although a very slightly different one to the ISS dues to pushing off of it",
"They already are falling, but they're also moving sideways so fast that they keep missing the planet. The sideways motion is imparted by the space station.\n\nThis is why you can't just float up into space in a balloon - you have to get up enough speed to achieve that sideways motion that lets you keep 'missing', aka, an orbit.",
"The key here is that 'floating' and 'falling' are the same thing. Astronauts on (and outside) the ISS are constantly falling towards the earth. But they are moving so fast sideways, that their fall keeps missing the earth. This is what causes the ISS and all its inhabitants to orbit the earth.\n\nThe astronaut in the gif attaches himself to the station so that he can't accidentally push himself into a different orbit, away from the station.",
"If anyone has a gif/video they know of that shows exactly what happens when we a dropping and missing the earth that would be much appreciated.\n\nI can educate myself and all you smart people can stop wasting your time! 😅 \n\n & #x200B;",
"Basically they are in orbit so they are falling to Earth, but their orbital velocity means that they keep missing it as their rate of falling is matched by their orbital velocity. If their orbital velocity slows down too much then they start to arc back towards the earth in re-entry. _URL_0_",
"Okay thank you all, I now understand that if you go X speed then you are just going to go into orbit thus stopping the 'falling'. What is keeping them at this speed then, is the ISS powering itself to go a certain speed to that it can keeping 'missing' earth perfectly so stay above it?",
"At that height, it's pretty close to a normal gravity up there. You drop something, it falls. You stand there or put space station there, they come down at very fast speeds.\n\nHowever, the trick to orbiting is, they are moving sideways as well. So while Earth is accelerating space station and everything in it towards it, it's also moving sideways, thus away from the Earth. And as you've moved like 90 degrees around the Earth, that initial velocity is gone. But now Earth has accelerated you to equally fast speed that's yet again taking you away from the Earth.\n\nIf you somehow managed to stop in space, relative to Earth, you'd drop like a hammer. Orbiting stuff is also falling, but because of the speed sideways, it fails to hit the Earth.",
"I think this [from XKCD](_URL_0_) is the best explanation I've seen of this. It also answers your question. It's not a question of a specific point - it's a question of a specific speed. As soon as you slow down to below orbital speed (which you do by propelling yourself in the other direction) then you will start falling.\n\nBut there's actually another answer to your question. If you get close enough to the earth that you enter the earth's atmosphere then the atmosphere will start to act as a drag force on you and will slow you down, and then you will start falling (actually in many it will slow you down so quickly that if you don't have a heat shield you will burn up before you start falling, but forget about that for the moment).\n\nSo the answer to your question is: as soon as you enter the earth's atmosphere.\n\nAlthough actually it's more complicated than that. Although we often say that the earth's atmosphere stops at the \nKármán line (62 miles up) and so the answer to your question is 62 miles, actually that's a fairly arbitrary point. Actually the atmosphere of the earth continues for thousands of kilometres beyond earth - it is just very very thin and decreases exponentially with height. I think only something like 0.2% of the earth's atmosphere is above the Karman line. What that means in real terms is that well below the Karman line the earth's atmosphere very quickly slows you down and you start falling. Well above the Karman line that happens too, but it can take many weeks and months (longer the higher up you are) and so you don't really need to think about it unless you're a space station or a satellites (which do need to do occasional boosts to stay in orbits - satellites more rarely because they're so high up they can usually stay up for their whole lifespan). Near the karman line it's somewhere in between.\n\nSo the real answer to your question is: if you are anywhere near earth you will fall - eventually but it will take a very long time. Or if you start to move towards the 62 mile mark, or if you make yourself slow down by propelling yourself in the other direction, then you will start falling much much more quickly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/Zu-Sp3I0c1Q"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://what-if.xkcd.com/58/"
]
] |
||
3ptoh3 | why is fracking not done with seawater? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ptoh3/eli5_why_is_fracking_not_done_with_seawater/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw9bpcb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because sea water may not have [the right properties](_URL_0_) to break the rock in the way needed, and hold it open as required.\n\nAlso, many fracking sites are inland - the salt water would find its way into inland aquifers, poisoning the ground water for many miles around - even more so than fracking is said to do already."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing#Fracturing_fluids"
]
] |
||
6wg6no | why does computer science have one of the highest unemployment rate of all majors when the field has so many job openings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wg6no/eli5_why_does_computer_science_have_one_of_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm7sjkr",
"dm7soee",
"dm7spv9",
"dm7syc8",
"dm7trp4",
"dm7ybvx",
"dm7yjh1",
"dm7z68k",
"dm7zyjk",
"dm81k36"
],
"score": [
4,
39,
5,
50,
30,
3,
5,
7,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I've heard that a lot of the tech taught in courses is YEARS behind what is actually being used in most businesses these days. Not sure if that's an answer or not but that's what I read looking into switching to CS",
"As someone who does interviews for a tech position. College graduates often times aren't prepared for these jobs. ",
"Notice that the experienced graduates had half of the 8% unemployment. Going into computer science you have to specialize like medicine or have many specialties. Just because you got a degree does not mean squat if you can't prove it in the real world. I know many colleagues that apparently did really well in class but that hasn't seem to translate into the day to day constantly changing field. You have to be willing to continue your education beyond your degree. My degree got me in the door but my certifications allowed me to get other jobs that were higher paying. I'm not knocking degrees but other than my first job no company has really given any weight to it other than to check it off that I have a bachelors degree. all the conversation so started with what certifications do you have that are current and relevant to the task that you're going to be working on.\n",
"CS is a decent credential for programming jobs, but it isn't particularly good training. Most people need a ton of self-directed practice before they're good hires.",
"CS teaches a lot of theory. Employers want practical applications of theory. This brings a very wide range of skill sets from \"can't ever write a line of code, but can tell you some CS trivia\" to extremely talented.\n\nBeing from a good school is nice, but if you're actually good or have proof that you are capable of being good (github projects for example), then you will not have any problems.",
"One thing that's pretty unique to this field is how many different ways (languages, tools, etc) there are to do the work. I can't think if anything else like it. So that makes employment tough. The more different technologies the smaller each one's marketshare and need for your particular set of skills. It's a big pie but there is a lot of slices.",
"I just graduated with a CS degree. One thing I have noticed among some of my peers is that they are pretty damn good at programming but they lack that “social” quality that employers look for. You can’t just be a good programmer. You have to be a team player and willing to face adversity for growth. Some people just can’t face that, so they don’t go that extra mile past just doing their programming homework assignments. \n\nTo me, It’s about the entire package.",
"Since demand and salaries are high many people are trying to enter the field that don't know anything about engineering. That code boot camp won't help if you are an arts major. Sorry.",
"Outsourcing I heard. Or at least you see people talk about it on here a lot about how they create a position with the standards so high that they can't get filled practically and they either outsource the job or bring someone from India. They will defend that decision by stating that they couldn't find anyone to fill the position. They save money and no one is the wiser.\n\nThe tech industry is really nerve wrecking in terms of job security. ",
"Going to a state school...CS advisor was saying this week that they had 27 CS grads in spring 2017, and 27 job offers 60k and up. I think they had all been accepted except for maybe 1-2? They do have an internship built into the degree, it's an engineering degree and more CS heavy than similar programs at other schools. It's possible that the rigour of training is different from school to school and they may focus on finding jobs for their graduates.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2jv3z3 | how can wording in sat questions be biased against minorities? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jv3z3/eli5_how_can_wording_in_sat_questions_be_biased/ | {
"a_id": [
"clfctpb",
"clfe0p5"
],
"score": [
8,
5
],
"text": [
"Consider this:\n\n Roof is to house, as cup is to _______.\n\nThe correct answer, of course, is saucer.\n\nAs benign as that might seem, saucers are things that primarily exist in middle class, predominately white homes. If you didn't grow up in such a home, you would be at a disadvantage answering that question. ",
"Alaska native students didn't know what a curb was. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3eamqu | why don't car makers offer built in dash cams? | With Russia making it a law to have a dashboard camera why wouldn't car makers at least make it an option to have one pre-installed. It would make for a very cool feature to be able to choose what footage you want to save and be able to automatically upload it to a cloud storage. It would make filing an insurance claim a lot less stressful for many people. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3eamqu/eli5why_dont_car_makers_offer_built_in_dash_cams/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctd3pqp",
"ctd90rp"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a good point. If they had an option for a built in dash cam they could be better concealed instead of having it stuck to your windscreen.",
"In a few years, after a few high profile lawsuits involving dash cams clarify the legal standing of the technology, I wouldn't be surprised of car manufacturers started offering an in built option."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
dxgcec | why do our bodies "overreact" to small injuries? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dxgcec/eli5_why_do_our_bodies_overreact_to_small_injuries/ | {
"a_id": [
"f7pz8tl",
"f7q5vwb",
"f7q6y5l"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"I dropped a bacon press on my finger a couple days ago, and I certainly did faint and spent some time on the kitchen floor.",
"It’s likely a bit like a parent yelling more loudly at a child about to pull a hot pot off a stove than after the pot has been pulled down. Extra yelling when the damage is minimal has a chance of stopping things from getting worse. Once the major damage is done, the work is primarily to manage the injury.",
"So your nerves send signals, kinda like the internet, that plugs from your finger (and pretty much every where else in your body) into your brain the same way the internet plugs from the console, and router, into the wall.\n\nOne kind of signal is pain. Pain happens when you injure yourself. The injured place sends an emergency signal to your brain to pay attention as much as possible. That's why it hurts, because it's letting you know something is wrong there. \n\nWell, when you cut or burn that wire, it makes it harder to send the whole signal.\n\nAlso there are so many tiny nerves that if we needed as many wires to run the console we wouldn't fit in the TV room. \n\nSince slamming or bashing (called blunt force trauma) doesn't really damage the nerves ability to send the signal, you get all of it. \n\nThis really confuses your brain sometimes, because there are so many signals coming all at once and there is no damage to see like with a burn or scrape. Now that your brain is so confused and still getting pain signal it is trying to reset which means passing out, because this shuts off the signal for a short time while your brain checks out the rest of you.\n\nLike when minecraft glitches so hard it shuts down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1vu4lb | would training under increased gravity, be it strength or otherwise, be beneficial to humans once they returned to normal gravity? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vu4lb/eli5_would_training_under_increased_gravity_be_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cevt7cd",
"cevt7e1",
"cevtafz",
"cevti6a",
"cevubd9",
"cevumtu",
"cevv7ob",
"cevvf1i",
"cevwarf",
"cevwk77",
"cevxbaf",
"cevz0bp",
"cevzllx"
],
"score": [
198,
7,
2,
13,
7,
3,
15,
91,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I think it would be similar to training at high altitudes. That is, there would be measurable benefits for awhile, but they would quickly disappear after returning to normal conditions. \n\nOur bodies are remarkable at acclimating to new situations, which is a double edged sword. It means we can adjust to harsher conditions like high altitude and (probably) slightly higher gravity, but then we just go right back when things get easier again. \n\nI would also imagine that, depending on how strong the gravity increase was, prolonged exposure would have serious consequences. Imagine extra gravity pulling on all your internal organs and such, and making it harder for blood to get from your lower body back to your heart, or from your heart up to your brain. The extra exertion would eventually take a toll. ",
"I think it'd be similar to the effects gained from doing a compound lifting routine. \n\nHowever, being under gravity for that long would mean that the actual increase in gravity would be very slight. Low intensity + long time, whereas lifting is typically high intensity + short time. Some in the bodybuilding world say that high intensity + short time exercises lead to more functional strength. If you're interested, google \"myofibrillar vs sarcoplasmic\"",
"Kinda, you would definetly get stronger from the increase in gravity but the harmful thing would be the switch back to normal gravity. \nWhen training normally when you do a movement such a punch, instead of fully extending, you break at the last moment to avoid over extending. If you've ever worn wrist weights and then taken them off, the light feeling is great but the stress on your joints isnt - if the earth had a stronger gravity, its likely we would have evolved slighly diffrently to compensate for this (stonger tendons and thicker bones)",
"You'd wear out quicker in the increased gravity. Your heart would always be under increased strain. Your blood pressure would always be high to compensate for gravity pulling your blood towards your feet with more force than that on Earth. It'd be like spending the entire time in a plane pulling some Gs. \n\nI would imagine doing simple things like laying down and then standing up would cause you to faint. ",
"As for actual skills and stuff, I think it might be bad for you. Imagine doing QB drills in higher gravity and then getting out of it and overthrowing every pass you make. Or practicing free kicks in soccer and then sending every shot flying after you get out. I think the main benefits would come from strength related training, but that would pretty much be the same as just using more weight. Even if it was beneficial, I think it would only be temporary. Kind of like using a doughnut for your baseball bat. Right when you take it off, it might feel like you can swing it harder, but it's not a permanent thing. By your next at bat it'll be like you never did it.",
"Interesting theory behind that. You could simulate similar results as a live high train low principle of altitude training whereby an athlete lived at say 3-5G and trained at 1.5-3G and maybe have a better increase as they'd adapt. Physiologically the body adapts after around three weeks to altitude so you could hypothesise the same for gravity. BRB, gonna propose this as an original research topic. Ph.D., here I come!",
"strength training in increased gravity.\n\nthe effect just be like you were in normal gravity but used bigger weights\n",
"There was an experiment , where chickens were put in hyper-G environment. Chickens, after all, had a posture similar to man's - they walked upright on two legs, they had two non-load-bearing limbs\n(the wings), and so on. The experiment involved putting a flock of chickens ,hundreds of them and putting them into the two eighteen-foot-long centrifuges.\n\nThey spun those chickens up to two-and-a-half Gs and let them stay there for a good while. In fact, they left them spinning like that day and night, for three to six months or more at a time. The hens went around and around, they clucked and they cackled and they laid their eggs, and as far as those chickens were concerned that was what ordinary life was like: a steady pull of two-and-a-half Gs. Some of those chickens spent the larger portion of their lifetimes in that goddamn accelerator.\n\nWell, it was easy to predict what would happen. Their bones\nwould get stronger and their muscles would get bigger--because they had all that extra gravity to work against. A total of twenty-three generations of hens was spun around like this and the same thing happened every time. When the accelerator was turned off, out walked the rambo chicken!\n\nThese chronically accelerated fowl were paragons of brute\nstrength and endurance. They'd lost excess body fat, their hearts\nwere pumping out greater-than-normal volumes of blood, and their extensor muscles were bigger than ever. In consequence of all this, the high-G chickens had developed a three-fold increase in their ability to do work, as measured by wingbeating exercises and treadmill tests.\n\nSource - _URL_0_ ",
"This question would probably fare better in an askscience thread. \n\nThat being said, I would have to say that any training done in a specific environment would also constitute acclimating to that environment. Your body will be training in heavier gravity and so you will adapt to heavy gravity, and I'm not sure how well that would translate to Earth-like conditions. \n\nThat is, if your body can even survive strenuous exercise in heavier gravity. At some point it would become a struggle just to sit upright.",
"Well obviously yes, look at son-goku...",
"It has to be like wearing a weighted vest all the time...jus Saiyan. ",
"Check out the book \"Great Mambo Chicken and the Transhuman Condition\", which tells of 'a scientific experiment in which a researcher put several chickens in a centrifuge and raised them in twice-normal gravity for months at a time. When they emerged, the chickens were stronger and had larger bones and muscles, and greater endurance. In other words, they were superchickens.' _URL_0_",
"10 times Earths gravity? *I dont even feel it.*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://yarchive.net/space/science/g_tolerance.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Great-Mambo-Chicken-Transhuman-Condition/dp/0201567512"
],
[]
] |
||
3e90vr | why hasn't apple's magsafe connector been adopted for headphone or usb connectors on phones? | The original MagSafe patent (_URL_0_) only covers DC power connections, but I'd guess that applying this technology to the notorious bend- and dirt-affected USB and headphone connectors would prevent issues from bending the connectors while holding the phone in your hands, while also allowing for a totally waterproof phone.
Why isn't this a thing yet, given that the MagSafe patent only covers power connectors and not data connectors? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e90vr/eli5_why_hasnt_apples_magsafe_connector_been/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctco1o8"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
" > while also allowing for a totally waterproof phone\n\nThat actually wouldn't work. The MagSafe adapter still requires a physical connection of the power pins, the magnet just holds the power connector in place. Using this technology with headphones and the like would still required physical contact between the data pins, which would require them to be exposed. And exposure of these pins to water would cause corrosion.\n\nNow, onto the main question: it's likely manufacturers aren't using this for USB connections because of how easily the magnets allow the connection to break away (that's the point, right?). If the power adapter breaks away, unless your battery is completely dead, nothing will happen. You just plug your laptop back in and nothing has been interrupted. However, if your USB connection accidentally disconnects, you may interrupt data transmission or even corrupt data. It would make for a bad user experience.\n\nThen of course there is the magnet's impact on the signal being transmitted through the wires. It would likely slow data transmitted via USB, as some bits may be distorted by the magnet, requiring those bits to be re-transmitted. Then, with an analog connection like a headphone connector, the magnetism may impact the audio you hear.\n\nFinally, and probably the most important reason, is that headphone connectors and USB are industry-wide standards. There is a spec for them and they are universal connectors because every manufacturer uses the same spec. If you started creating USB and headphone connectors that used the \"magsafe\" technology, you'd create either widespread incompatibility or just force users to use specific peripherals for certain devices. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=7311526.PN.&OS=PN/7311526&RS=PN/7311526"
] | [
[]
] |
|
q0win | how grocery stores benefit from "super saver" cards. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/q0win/eli5_how_grocery_stores_benefit_from_super_saver/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3tsp8o",
"c3tsz8b",
"c3ttld5"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"They encourage people to come back and buy more stuff at the store. \n\nAlso you can also use it to suggest to people to buy certain items.\n\nHey we got two types of bread in. One cost us 50 cents a loaf and the other costs us a dollar per loaf.\n\nSell them both for 2 dollar but give a discount if they have a Saver's card to the 50 cent one. That way people will buy more of it and we'll still make money.",
"* Addresses and contact information for direct marketing \n* Behavior and buying pattern data",
"At least at the store I work at, the prices of the items are slightly higher than any other store, and having the store card brings this price down to a normal level. Most people don't realize this/don't care and believe that it's some sort of savings."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ha3i7 | why are some movies/shows on itunes only offered in sd and not hd or better? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ha3i7/eli5why_are_some_moviesshows_on_itunes_only/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqpbnky"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It has to do with the quality of the original recording. If the original is only a certain quality (sd) there's no process to magically create more pixels and widen the camera angles to make it look better.\n\nThey may be able to clean it up a little and improve it a bit, but not bring an old 80s sitcom to hd quality. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3itei0 | why do we sometimes say a week runs from monday-sunday and sometimes from sunday-saturday? | Monday's always the first day of the week and the week is regularly expressed as running from Monday to Sunday.
But sometimes, particularly on calendars, you'll see the first day of the week (on the left) as being the Sunday.
Can anyone explain this for me? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3itei0/eli5_why_do_we_sometimes_say_a_week_runs_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cujhluw",
"cujhs3h"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"On one end, we always see Monday as the beginning of the week. It's definitely that way for the work week, and Christian religions defined the Final Day as the day God rested (which became their Sabbath, by the way that used to be in line with Judaism on Saturdays).\n\nOn the other end, the way I was taught to say the days of the week as a small child, began with Sunday and ended in Saturday. I was taught the same in French as well. It's probably just a matter of perspective.",
"Some calendars start with Monday so Saturday and Sunday are next to each other making weekend plans easier to note write down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2n2etz | why do results from forensic dna analysis take so long to process? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2n2etz/eli5_why_do_results_from_forensic_dna_analysis/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm9psl8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This is due to a technique known as \"PCR\", or Polymerase Chain Reaction. This is where you take a small amount of the DNA you want to compare, take a small amount of \"Taq polymerase\" (an enzyme, which is what helps the DNA to be 'reproduced'), and then you place them inside a PCR machine. The length comes from the time it takes to produce enough samples to actually ***have*** enough DNA to compare to what you've found at the crime scene. This takes about 20 minutes, more if the initial sample is smaller.\n\nNext, we need to compare the DNA against known samples (against fedral, nationwide databases that agencies like the FBI utilize). This, again takes time (as you know, there will be millions of records in there). Name, and surname, race, etc, must also be inputted to these systems, further slowing things down.\n\nLastly, we need to compare the DNA thoroughly, so that we know we've the right man.\n\nI have a background in biology."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
27daox | how the fifa world rankings work. | I just checked the most recent update and Palestine has gained 71 positions.
How does that work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27daox/eli5_how_the_fifa_world_rankings_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"chzoxoj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The basic logic of these calculations is simple: any team that does well in world football wins points which enable it to climb the world ranking. \n\nA team’s total number of points over a four-year period is determined by adding: \n\n· the average number of points gained from matches during the past 12 months;\nand\n\n· the average number of points gained from matches older than 12 months (depreciates yearly).\n\nCalculation of points for a single match\nThe number of points that can be won in a match depends on the following factors:\n\n• Was the match won or drawn? (M)\n\n• How important was the match (ranging from a friendly match to a FIFA World Cup™ match)? (I)\n\n• How strong was the opposing team in terms of ranking position and the confederation to which they belong? (T and C) \n\nThese factors are brought together in the following formula to ascertain the total number of points (P).\n\nP = M x I x T x C \n\n \n\nThe following criteria apply to the calculation of points:\n\nM: Points for match result\n\nTeams gain 3 points for a victory, 1 point for a draw and 0 points for a defeat. In a penalty shoot-out, the winning team gains 2 points and the losing team gains 1 point.\n\nI: Importance of the match\n\n Friendly match (including small competitions): I = 1.0\n\n FIFA World Cup™ qualifier or confederation-level qualifier: I = 2.5\n\n Confederation-level final competition or FIFA Confederations Cup: I = 3.0\n\n FIFA World Cup™ final competition: I = 4.0\n\nT: Strength of opposing team\n\n The strength of the opponents is based on the formula: 200 – the ranking position of the opponents\nAs an exception to this formula, the team at the top of the ranking is always assigned the value 200 and the teams ranked 150th and below are assigned a minimum value of 50. The ranking position is taken from the opponents’ ranking in the most recently published FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking.\n\nC: Strength of confederation \n\nWhen calculating matches between teams from different confederations, the mean value of the confederations to which the two competing teams belong is used. The strength of a confederation is calculated on the basis of the number of victories by that confederation at the last three FIFA World Cup™ competitions.\nTheir values are as follows:\n\nUEFA/CONMEBOL 1.00 \nCONCACAF 0.88\n\nAFC/CAF 0.86 \nOFC 0.85\n\nTL;DR - FIFA points depend on who you play, in what competition over the course of four years, more points=higher ranking"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a84htq | when looking at the periodic table, are these just the elements just discovered on earth or the entire universe? | Are there likely many undiscovered elements in the universe? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a84htq/eli5_when_looking_at_the_periodic_table_are_these/ | {
"a_id": [
"ec7veuj",
"ec7xmwy",
"ec7zbz5"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Elements are defined by the number of protons they have. So you don't really have to discover them to know they exist. Elements with extremely high numbers are extremely unstable and can only really exist for millisecons or even less. ",
"Elements are defined by their atomic number, which is how many protons they have. We have discovered or synthesized all elements from 1-118. Since you can't have partial protons, there's no elements left to \"slot in\" between current ones. There can't exist an \"element 19.5\" for example. They're always whole numbers. So in that sense, the periodic table is complete. It's possible we may synthesize elements beyond 118, but these would be extremely unstable and decay in the tiniest fraction of a second, so it's extremely unlikely we'd ever find them in the universe, even if they existed at one point. It's very possible massive elements beyond 118 are generated in supernovae, where all heavy elements come from, but we'll never know because they decay too fast.",
"Of course they were all discovered on earth, because we've never been to the rest of the universe^\\*. One of the core principles of science is that the simplest explanation is the best and, following on from this, that the laws of physics are the same everywhere in the universe. If the laws of physics are the same, then the elements will also be the same.\n\n\\* Helium might be considered an exception, since we saw signs of it by studying the colour (spectrum) of the sun before it was detected on Earth. That's where its name comes from, since \"Helios\" is Greek for \"Sun\".\n\nWe can see the spectra of many elements in the light from distant stars and galaxies so we have good reason to believe that the elements are the same everywhere."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
jdjpk | ceo compensation. | Why is it so high? What does a CEO do that requires them to make this much? What is their day to day life like? Especially CEO's that didn't start their company.
I really know nothing about it, so the more the better. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jdjpk/eli5_ceo_compensation/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2b7ngh",
"c2bakmh",
"c2b7ngh",
"c2bakmh"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"To start, most executives have a nice salary and benefits, but some also have stock options (if they are with a young company that does well, the value will shoot up. If they are with an older company, it's an incentive to make the company perform better). Performance-based stock options and pensions also exist.\n\nTo note, the larger the company, the larger the CEO makes. The reason is that he or she is held liable for how the company performs, and if the company comes under legal scrutiny, they will face trial (though recent history suggests otherwise). They are the primary decision makers in a company, and will give a final \"Ok\" to new initiatives or major changes. And, they often will move up after years within a company, putting in a lot of work.\n\nImportant: People scrutinize CEO pay, yet (for example) if you take the CEO of Coke's total compensation of $25 million a year, and divide it among the ~ 140,000 employees, each person will make $175 extra a year.\n\n",
"Do the CEO's decide their own wage?",
"To start, most executives have a nice salary and benefits, but some also have stock options (if they are with a young company that does well, the value will shoot up. If they are with an older company, it's an incentive to make the company perform better). Performance-based stock options and pensions also exist.\n\nTo note, the larger the company, the larger the CEO makes. The reason is that he or she is held liable for how the company performs, and if the company comes under legal scrutiny, they will face trial (though recent history suggests otherwise). They are the primary decision makers in a company, and will give a final \"Ok\" to new initiatives or major changes. And, they often will move up after years within a company, putting in a lot of work.\n\nImportant: People scrutinize CEO pay, yet (for example) if you take the CEO of Coke's total compensation of $25 million a year, and divide it among the ~ 140,000 employees, each person will make $175 extra a year.\n\n",
"Do the CEO's decide their own wage?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6wfygi | why do people in old videos talk like they're singing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wfygi/eli5why_do_people_in_old_videos_talk_like_theyre/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm7r031",
"dm7rdx1"
],
"score": [
30,
8
],
"text": [
"Well, back in the day people actually had to be loud to be heard at rallies since PA systems were not really all that great. You develop a cadence if you practice speaking clearly and loudly, which winds up sounding vaguely melodic.\n\nAlso, recording was barely s thing and the tremor you hear may actually be inherent in the recording method: vinyl cutters and wax cylinders are fickle devices.\n\nLastly, look up a trans-Atlantic accent. It's kind of this odd mix of upper class Brit and American accents that was the norm amongst American elite in the early 20th century. It naturally has a bit of a melodic quality to it. ",
"It's all about trend and fads. People actually have things like these affectations now we just don't notice it. \n\nBack then it was a lilt in the voice. Now it is vocal frey and constant rising scentence tone to mimic the California valley accent. \n\nIn the eighties to nineties, people had very direct flat cadence and a nasily sound similar to the Connecticut accent "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
whwvf | what is a 'blood passport' and how has it reduced doping in cycling? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/whwvf/eli5_what_is_a_blood_passport_and_how_has_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5dgcgq",
"c5difot"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"ELI5 - If you were a consistent student who always got 65% on your exams, and suddenly got 100%, the teacher would be suspicious and look a little harder for cheating by you. It`s an easier method then telling you not to cheat, and then randomly going around to every student while writing their test and seeing if they are cheating (and less disruptive).\n\nExplanation:\nThey test for a bunch of numbers that represent your body. For example, How much oxygen your body can process, how many red blood cells are in your blood, and stuff like that. These values change pretty slowly, and in some cases, never change throughout your life.\n\nThe biological passport is a collection of all these values, unique to only you. They take the readings regularly, on and off season, and if there is a sudden jump or spike in one of these values, questions are raised about if you've been cheating or not.\n\nThis was adopted because drugs are getting harder and harder to track, especially since a lot of the stuff nowadays is just giving your body more of what it already produces, or stuff that breaks down quickly after doing its job. \n\nHas this reduced doping? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe they just got better at cheating. We'll never know. ",
"A common cheating method involves drugs that make the body produce too many red blood cells. More red blood cells means more oxygen transported to the muscles.\n\nSo they want to test to see if an athlete has too many red blood cells. They problem is, this varies from person to person, so they just can't say \"anyone over 50% red blood cell content in their blood is cheating\". Instead, they keep of history of each athlete's tests, the blood passport, and look for deviations. If your normal ratio is 40%, and they find you at 45%, you'll get nail for cheating, even if another athlete has a normal ratio at 47%."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
30vi3l | why are police able to get away with breaking laws related to driving? | There are plenty of cops that speed or talk on the phone while driving. It just pisses me off when I see an undercover cop driving around talking on his phone.
Shouldn't they be held more accountable for not breaking the law than your average citizen?
Edit: From US | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30vi3l/eli5_why_are_police_able_to_get_away_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpw6d35",
"cpw6gys",
"cpwadt9",
"cpwbf74",
"cpwcf0u",
"cpwh5ns"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
2,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"How do you know it's an undercover cop on his phone, and not just some dude?\n\nThat aside, the real reason is because there's probably not another cop around to pull them over, and even if there was, there aren't any cops who would care enough to bother. A lot of regular citizens just get ignored by police for talking on the phone or speeding, and even if you get pulled over, there's a halfway decent chance there won't be any consequences anyway. What cop in their right mind would want to deal with the political fallout of hassling another cop for something completely trivial? ",
"Don't know which country you are from, but in Sweden the only reason a cop has to break the law is to do his/her job. e.g speeding to catch up with a speeder. Other than that, they have to follow the law too!",
"Are you going to pull them over?",
"In the UK, the cops are meant to at least obey the law; one might expect them to be held to an even higher standard but they are not.\n\nAs far as driving offences go, they do it because they can get away with it. Who is going to arrest them - the cops? It is a simple abuse of power.\n\nAll crime reports have to go via the cops, even if intended for the IPCC (the watchdog organisation that checks on the cops). Any reports of driving offences are quietly disposed of so that they do not go anywhere.\n\nAnyone who repeatedly goes on and on about petty law-breaking by cops is likely to find themselves invited to a police station for an afternoon of accidentally falling down the stairs.\n\nExactly the same problem applies to more serious offences by police, but those can also be sent to the newspapers / TV who will enjoy telling everyone the scandal and then the cops will not be able to quietly cover it up; but smaller stuff like motoring offences will not interest the media.\n\nTherefore, the cops have de-facto immunity from arrest and prosecution for driving/motoring/vehicular stuff. This especially applies to parking wherever they please at any time for any purpose.",
"Okay, NC Officer here, I think I can sort some of these questions out. First of all, just because we don't have our lights and sirens on, doesn't mean that we aren't going to a \"hot call\" or a call involving something that dispatch doesn't consider an \"emergency\" but we ourselves deem it so. Perfect example is when we know our partner (I'm referencing a patrol zone with multiple officers within it) is encountering a subject who he or she has fought before or knows will be combative, or has even threatened to kill officers. Just because we deal with these people doesn't mean we can call for backup with their lights and sirens running (making it legal to break speed laws in my state), but out partners know better, and they'd better be coming silent emergency traffic (no lights/siren, but going a little over the speed limit) to help us out; this is a family, a brother/sisterhood, and I'll be damned if I let my partner or any other LEO get hurt when I could've aptly prevented it. \n\nSecondly, you ask about the use of cellular devices. Easy one here. My states laws allow emergency responders (made specifically for police) to utilize electronic devices (cell phones, computers, radar devices, radios) while operating a motor vehicle. Think of how tough our job would be without these items. \n\nHope I've clarified a bit! \n\nRemember, just because we are driving fast doesn't mean there isn't an emergency, 99% of us aren't just trying to catch a light to get to the doughnut shop faster. ",
"Answer to your question \"Why are police able to get away with breaking laws related to driving?\" is, they're not.\n\nTo your comments, it turns into the very simple, ancient matter of, \"Prove it\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3l57i1 | how to people string up these super long zip lines? | The guy in this [video](_URL_0_) is riding a huge zipline and almost loses his hand. now besides the crazy footage, how do they put up ziplines like this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l57i1/eli5how_to_people_string_up_these_super_long_zip/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv39wdb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"One method is to have the high point tied off and then you toss it down and drag it out to the low point. The other would be to tie off the low point and then have a free climber carry the high point up to the higher tie point. \n\nShooting them with some kind of grappling hook gun is common in movies, but not in real life. "
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F723rIlW_No"
] | [
[]
] |
|
21prqc | if host cities like sochi, rio, and qatar have such terrible conditions and atrocities surrounding their respective events, why are the people in charge choosing these cities in the first place? | It seems dumb to pick a terribly poor and third world city to host a world-class event, doesn't it? Or is there other factors involved? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21prqc/eli5_if_host_cities_like_sochi_rio_and_qatar_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgfcfi3",
"cgfciun",
"cgfcxjf",
"cgfkl0w"
],
"score": [
8,
19,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Actually, if you're going to dump a load of money into a place by building hotels, facilities, etc. doesn't it make sense to dump it into a place that needs revitalization?",
"Allow me to answer in one word:\n\nCorruption",
"It's fairly common knowledge that these organisations are very corrupt, taking bribes and such.",
"Most modernized cities don't want the Olympics to be hosted locally. It destabilizes the economy, causes crime and riots, and all the deals end up giving the cities a huge debt. The Olympics usually take whoever they can, because there are some cities that are willing to take those losses (they already have high crime or something), in exchange for a quick chance to get some infrastructure and facilities built."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5u9i86 | how do illegal streamers keep content going constantly, and what incentive do they have to do what they do? | For example, an app like Mobdro that has a 24/7 Dragonball Z channel. Does the person sit there putting on episode after episode? How does it all work?
Also as it has no adverts, no plugs and no donations, what does the streamer get from this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u9i86/eli5_how_do_illegal_streamers_keep_content_going/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddswv43",
"ddt3f9e",
"ddt8q7e"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Well I want nba streams and the scanned and translated versions of some manga, they normally have a donation button. So growing user base of they keep the content up and of quality, this leads to more traffic possible donations and ad revenue. \n\nI.e. I donate like a dollar a chapter from manga streams and about the same for nba streams when I do watch them.",
"The streamer will already have every episode saved somewhere. They just make a playlist of every single episode and then put it on repeat. \n\nI have no idea what they gain from doing this though. ",
"They get not having to pay for it, what do you think?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5h2fli | would river turbines not be more efficient than wind turbines? | A river flows constant where as wind is more intermittent. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5h2fli/eli5_would_river_turbines_not_be_more_efficient/ | {
"a_id": [
"dawv3x7",
"dawv6k8",
"dawvlbj"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You mean like [hydroelectric power plants](_URL_1_)? Such as the [Hoover Dam](_URL_0_)?",
"River turbines are pretty useful, which is why we've been building them into dams for decades. Maintenance does become a pretty serious issue though, and wildlife and debris in the water can cause a lot of damage if not properly accounted for.",
"The problem with river turbines is that you need a strong consistent flow of water which is usually obtained by damning up a river. The problems from flooding upstream and blocking the path of fish and other wildlife have huge environmental impacts far greater than any wind turbine has. \n\nThe other difference is that there aren't rivers everywhere to use where it is much easier to find windy areas. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Dam",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
enq69a | why do basic facts (especially science) have different descriptions for high-school and college education? | I'm trying to learn biology again, and cellular respiration has a different description for high school than college. Do they distort the facts to make it easier for high-school students to learn, or is the college description the one that's over-complicated? I never learned about cellular respiration in college biology--we jumped to the hard ideas, but now I'm trying to re-learn the basics. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/enq69a/eli5_why_do_basic_facts_especially_science_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"fe3iove",
"fe3jesu",
"fe3jjqj",
"fe3tdtd",
"fe3z4sx"
],
"score": [
4,
9,
9,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Most of what you get in high school is highly watered down. The high school audience is less intelligent, less experienced, while the college audience is of people who are interested, and may eventually become experts in it.\n\nIf you are taking BIO 1XX now, and eventually take BIO 4xx, you'll feel the same way--that the 100 level classes are easy and watered down. Imagine how you would feel if you got your doctorate in biology?",
"Its called \"lies to children.\" We over simplify concepts in science, math, history and the such for younger people, with the idea that we will teach them a more accurate version later. We tell kids that atoms are made of spheres that have specific orbits. Its easy to draw that, to visualize it and to explain it. Rather than explaining that electrons move more like a cloud of potential places than clear circles. \n\nSo its not that your university classes are over complicating, but rather that you're getting closer to the actual complicated truth.",
"I mean, the concept of ELI5 is the same deal: most things are endlessly complex but the general idea can be boiled down to the important factors. Once you are comfortable to understanding the most important parts you can spiral out and learn all the caveats and exceptions and additional factors. Like in highschool you learn the basic idea of how cellular respiration works, in a model cell. Then in college you learn \"well actually with the millions of types of cells that exist there is actually many variations in this, few of them ACTUALLY do the boiled down simple version, and some of them do totally different things\"",
"They try and create simpler descriptions for younger minds, because complex descriptions often rely on quite a deep rabbit hole of underlying knowledge. For example, you can't really understand that electron transport chain thingy in the mitochondria until you understand how energy levels in electrons work, which is a whole other module. Unfortunately, anything other than the complete truth must by necessity distort or omit some part of the fact, so the simplified explanations will always be slightly more wrong than the complex ones.",
"It is not distortion, it is simplification. A distortion is inaccurate, a simplification less precise.\n\nIf I told you my house was 3 miles north of downtown, and it in fact is 2.8 miles NNE of downtown, and is not \"my\" house because I live with my parents, that's not \"wrong\", at least not in most contexts. It simply omits details that are not relevant most of the time and gives the person picking you up for the movies the information they need to leave at the right time.\n\nTelling a third grader the electrons orbit the nucleus like a little solar system is the appropriate way to describe it, given their limited context of understanding. And just as a freshman in college might scoff at that degree of simplification, a Ph.D. is going to look down there nose at anything the freshman has to say about. There are no \"right\" answers, just different levels of detail until we reach the limits of what we currently understand."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3d8v7p | why does "nice big red ball" sound more natural than "red big nice ball"? | Something I've noticed is that there seems to be a specific order for adjectives, but I can't see a pattern. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d8v7p/eli5_why_does_nice_big_red_ball_sound_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct2u0qr",
"ct2u5rf",
"ct2u9cw"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I can't tell you why they sound better one way - maybe because we're used to reading them in a particular order?\n\nBut, there is a defined order for adjectives:\nOpinion (nice), Size (big), Age, Shape, Colour (red), Material\n\n",
"English has a very near mandatory order to multiple adjectives. There's no particular reason for it, any more than there's a reason you use particular prepositions with particular verbs (\"afraid *of*\" versus \"attracted *to*\", for example). [Here's a page](_URL_0_) with some info on how to order them.",
"From some googeling it seems that what order we put the adjectives is due to how \"inherent\" the trait is. \n\nThere are several lists such as [this one:](_URL_0_)\n\n- Opinion\n- Size \n- Age\n- Shape\n- Colour\n- Origin \n- Material \n- Purpose\n\n & nbsp;\n\nWe say \"A tall blond boy\" since blondness shapes the perception of the boy more. The group \"blond boys\" can be further divided by height, but we wouldn't first group the boys by height, and then haircolour. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nThe same with the sentence \"An old norwegian steel knife\"\n\nTwo norwegian knives, one of stone and one of steel would be \"further apart\" than two steel knives, one norwegian and one japanese.\n\n & nbsp;\n\nAs with many questions of language, it's hard to get a precise answer, but I hope this makes it a bit clearer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/ar/comment/81974"
],
[
"http://web2.uvcs.uvic.ca/elc/studyzone/410/grammar/adjord.htm"
]
] |
|
3n5ctt | baseball: from pitch to hits | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n5ctt/eli5_baseball_from_pitch_to_hits/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvky48a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"**If a pitcher is throwing 98mph and the batter makes perfect contact (plus his strength index) the ball will be traveling close to 105mph. That lower speed or what some people would think is too low of a speed is due to the wooden bats used. If the MLB players used aluminum bats the ball would be traveling at near 130mph. That is why they will never be allowed in MLB.**"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3uij14 | what is nat type and what causes it to change? | Why can I play with my friend over the internet but not talk to him in a party on ps4 because of this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uij14/eli5_what_is_nat_type_and_what_causes_it_to_change/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxf6ety"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"NAT is network address translation.\nTo do things online we need a public IP address. There are also non-routable private IP addresses.\n\nNAT tends to be a secure way to connect to the internet as the device will not accept unsolicited packets.\n\n\n\nNAT allows multiple private IP addresses to be translated into a single public IP address to allow devices to access the Internet\n\nNAT basically has three levels, Open, Moderate and Strict\n\nthe basic difference between those three is strict can only communicate with strict, moderate can communicate with moderate/strict and open can communicate with all of them.\n\nstrict is basically the router/firewall/admin is restricting most of the ports available to the public IP address, where moderate has more ports open than strict but less than open.\n\n\nTo alleviate these problems it depends on the game, but you can assign your console a static private IP and open the ports that the game uses for that static IP address.\n\n\nFor instance call of duty uses various ports for different things so you would want to open the following ports on the router and firewall:\n\n3074, 53, 3075, 3076 both UDP and TCP, TCP 80, UDP 88, 500, 3544, 4500\n\nFor other games you can probably look them up on their website or contact their customer support.\n\nI tried to keep it ELI5 as I could ;)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1z772m | salt vs. ice | Sure is fun hearing the snap, crackle and pop of ice breaking down when you throw a handful of salt on it!
My question is, why does the chemical reaction stop working after a while?
There's a big patch of ice outside my front door, and yesterday, I sprinkled salt on it. I worked great for a while, but then the salt 'gave up the ghost' and stopped doing it's job. Today, I smooshed the salt around a bit more to other areas, but the big salt crystals that are still not dissolved just happily sat there on top of the ice with no reaction at all. I even tried crushing them up with my foot, but it doesn't seem to make any difference. Did I get ripped off by buying discount salt?!?
Help! I'm losing sleep over this!!! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z772m/salt_vs_ice/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfr54kc",
"cfr55wu"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A few likely answers: Salt only works to melt ice if it is able to dissolve some in water already on the ice surface. No little bit of liquid water on the surface = salt will do nothing but sit there. You might have used the salt on the ice when it was warm enough for a little water to be present and it took off just fine yesterday. Then today perhaps it is so cold that even the salt water freezes. The whole thing that makes salt work is that it makes the fresh water in the ice into salt water which freezes at a lower temperature. But to get that kicked off at least some liquid water must come in contact with the salt grains.",
"Primarily, ice is used to _prevent water from freezing_. It works best before the freeze happens. \n\nIf you spread it on the road, the mechanical action of the cars will melt much of the snow, and the salt prevents it from refreezing into ice.\n\nHere is why:\n\nWhen salt (or anything, really) is dissolved in water, the resulting solution has a freezing temperature lower than normal water. The exact freezing point depends on the solution, but it can get down to -6,-7 F before freezing.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1m78rg | the difference between the generally used word "theory" and scientific "theory" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m78rg/eli5the_difference_between_the_generally_used/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc6f7rt"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Theory in common use - Speculation used to explain something. \n\nTheory in scientific use - A group of ideas already tested through scientific analysis that provides a framework for a wide variety of observations.\n\nBoth uses of the words refer to explanations. However, the common usage refers to an idea awaiting testing, while the scientific usage refers to an idea that's already well-supported. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5o04k2 | how can your body (40, 50 or 60 years later) "remember" that you are immune to virus like chickenpox? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5o04k2/eli5_how_can_your_body_40_50_or_60_years_later/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcflgcj",
"dcfoyry"
],
"score": [
8,
6
],
"text": [
"When a virus is introduced to your body (think of each specific virus as a lock, and only one key can open that lock to make it safe) your body recognizes that it is dangerous so it starts to make antibodies (the keys to the locks) naturally... but the very first time the virus is in your system your body has to figure out what antibody or \"key\" to use to \"unlock\" or remove the virus.... this is why vaccinations are important because certain viruses work very quickly and by the time your body figures out which antibody to produce the virus could have already spread to other areas in your body and the antibodies would be too late... \n\nThe antibodies have a certain \"storage station\" of all the different kinds of keys it's already made to crack that certain kind of lock (virus) so once you've already cracked the virus and survived, the next time it shows up in your system it will immediately be taken care of because the key has already been made and your body doesn't need to search for what could work for that virus... \n\nVaccines are weak \"locks\" of the specific virus, that your system can take time to figure out what kind of \"key\" will work on it. So when the dangerous real virus shows up, you will already have the antibody to fight it with. \n\n\nHope i helped ",
"Note: Your immunity can actually decay and even disappear over a very long time span. This is because the population of immune \"memory\" cells for a particular disease (pathogen) can decrease over time as they die off due to naturally aging processes. There are a lot of factors that make different immune responses different--some longer lasting than others. This is why some vaccinations/immunizations require \"booster\" shots.\n\nELI5 immune system: \nBefore you are born your immune system (by shuffling around some genes) tries to make itself a \"library\" of every random shape it can--this library is made up of B cells and T cells. Each cell recognizes one particular shape. Then, the body checks the library of shapes against the all the shapes it can find in your body that are normally there (\"self-shapes\"). Then it removes all those shapes from the library (kills off any early B or T cells that react to self-shapes). Then, it circulates that library of shapes all around the body (B and T cells circulate around the blood and lymph tissues, etc). If one of those cells ever encounters a pathogen (like a bacteria or virus), it begins to multiply rapidly, producing lots of identical cells, then attacks the infection. After it conquers the infection, it keeps a larger population of memory cells around, because it now knows that that particular shape belongs to a real pathogen--and these memory cells can start up again much faster than the original library cells.\n\nSo early on, that library was based on the immune system using randomness to try and generate as many shapes as possible, and it only keeps a few copies of each shape-recognizing cell around, because it isn't sure if it will ever actually recognize that shape, and it is expensive (and takes up too much space) to keep lots of copies of each one. But once it knows that a particular shape is bad, it spends more energy, etc to keep up surveillance for that shape in the future.\n\nThis may be more like ELI8-10, but I tried to keep it simple. \n\nEdit: this is actually only a description of one branch of your immune system, called the adaptive immune system, which is responsible for immunity to specific pathogens--like the kind of immunity in the question. There is another branch, called the innate immune system, which is more generalized and doesn't have the same kind of \"memory.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4lvloi | my biology professor said the dna helix is antiparallel, what does that mean, is the eli5 biology flair antiparallel? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4lvloi/eli5_my_biology_professor_said_the_dna_helix_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3qfqcj",
"d3qg38n"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It means that the strands are parallel, but opposite, like this:\n\n5' ------- > 3'\n\n3' < ------- 5'\n\nThis is important because the strand can only be read/cut/replicated in certain directions, so the molecules dealing with 1 strand have to deal with the other strand differently",
"[Here](_URL_0_) is a representation of a piece of one strand of DNA. The bases, the parts that actually encode information and form the \"rungs\" of the double helix, are the colored parts labeled C, G, A, and T. You can ignore those for the purposes of this question.\n\nThe \"backbone\" part of the DNA is made out of a repeating series of the same molecules. The grey pentagons are a sugar called deoxyribose and that parts in the blue circles are phosphates. The deoxyribose is not symmetrical top to bottom. In any molecule of DNA, one \"backbone\" strand and the other are pointing in opposite directions. Going back to the image I linked, if you were to have the other strand included in this image, it would be flipped vertically compared to the one in the image. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleic_acid_structure#/media/File:DNA-Nucleobases.svg"
]
] |
||
1vity8 | common law and civil law. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vity8/eli5_common_law_and_civil_law/ | {
"a_id": [
"cesobfg",
"cesox6r",
"cesp05o"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Assuming that you're asking about the difference between the two - common law does not have a 'masterlist' of specific rules, but instead refers to how previous similar cases have been judged in order to judge new cases. Civil law, on the other hand, does have a 'masterlist' to refer to outlining the proceedures for each infraction and what the punishment should be, etc.\n\nFor example - imagine a murder case in which a person stumbled across their spouse cheating on them, and killed both people. In a common law system, previous cases of this happening would be looked up to see what kind of sentence was given. In a civil law system, they'd just look up the established rule for murder (not premeditated) and sentence the person accordingly.",
"Answered in detail, by me, [here](_URL_0_).",
"There seems to be a lot of confusion here about these legal systems, so I'll see if I can help.\n\n* Common law system = law developed from precedent and is then passed down and modified as necessary\n\n* Civil law system = law developed from written code. This also known as codified law.\n\nWithin these two systems there are different types of laws. There's:\n\n* Criminal law = laws that handle grievances between people and the government\n\n* Civil law = laws that handle grievances between private citizens/entities\n\n* Other types of law = laws such as administrative laws, regulations, and other enforced rules by government organizations\n\nNow I saw somebody ask about a master list of written laws. Many written laws in common law countries are typically developed from precedent and then they are codified. More laws may be developed via court precedent and more may also be codified."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1l9s12/what_is_the_difference_between_common_law_and/"
],
[]
] |
||
39ryi3 | why are antibodies not passed from one generation to the next? | During our lives, as we get sick, we produce antibodies against many diseases, why doesn't this knowledge pass on from mother to child? So if the mother had e.g. smallpox, the child wouldn't have the disease. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39ryi3/eli5why_are_antibodies_not_passed_from_one/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs5wmev",
"cs5xgub"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
" > Why are antibodies not passed from one generation to the next?\n\nBecause specific antibodies are not part of our DNA. \n\nYour immune system produces a whole slew of random antibodies all the time. When you are infected with a disease, you almost always already have some antibodies for it just because of all that randomness. \n\nAll an antibody does is act like a chemical marker. It attaches to the virus/bacteria, and doing so causes the portion not attached to the invader to change shape in a way that it is detected by various cells in your immune system. Some of those cells bind to the virus/bacteria and destroy it. Others detect the specific type of antibody that was triggered, and start producing more of the same antibody, flooding your body with it. That causes more and more of the virus/bacteria to be latched onto by an antibody, and thus detected and destroyed by white blood cells.\n\nEventually, the infection will die down, and concentrations of that specific antibody will wane. But some cells will have been created during the infection whose sole purpose is to produce more of that same antibody, so it can take years for antibody levels to drop significantly, and every time you're infected, the antibodies for that infection will get a boost (and you may never even notice that you were almost sick).\n\nBut all of this is an adaptive process that happens in your body, and is not hard-coded by your DNA. Which means that specific antibodies can't be passed on to offspring (just the adaptive immune system that can make its own antibodies).",
"Babies can actually absorb antibodies from their mother's breast milk. This is especially important for babies so young they don't have much of an immune system yet. However, once the baby's digestive system is ready for real food, the antibodies are digested instead of absorbed whole. \n\nIn the long run, heritable antibodies may not even be that useful. Germs evolve *far* faster than we do, so if we relied too much on inherited immunities, we would all die off very quickly once the diseases adapted to us. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
343g6h | how does last week tonight with john oliver make enough money to stay on air if all its full episodes are on youtube? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/343g6h/eli5_how_does_last_week_tonight_with_john_oliver/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqqvrl4",
"cqqvt87"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The same way every HBO series ever made does. HBO attracts viewers by having desirable content. Movies, boxing, documentaries, and original series. HBO's revenue comes from subscribers, and until very, very recently, all of that was from cable and satellite subscribers.\n\nThe shows are later released online as a marketing tool. It's a good idea for HBO; as a topical show, Last Week Tonight has no aftermarket value on DVDs. The idea behind releasing the shows online is that maybe it will encourage some to become HBO subscribers.",
"HBO posts large chunks of the show on YouTube in hopes of getting subscribers that will want to see the other half of the show they're missing. They have done this in the past with other shows as well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2516r4 | why are ratings on television more important than internet ratings when it comes to tv shows. do they not include viewers from the internet to be legit? | I just heard that Fox once again cancelled a bunch of tv shows because of 'poor' ratings. Are they JUST going off of the viewers (such as the Nielsen family) who watch television, or are they including viewers off of the internet as well? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2516r4/eli5_why_are_ratings_on_television_more_important/ | {
"a_id": [
"chcmhdi",
"chcmjdo",
"chcn796"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"This isn't easy to answer, not knowing the inner workings of FOX. However, I'll take a guess.\n\nMy guess would be that the income from television shows streamed online is still much less than income that comes from television. Poor ratings = less money from advertisers, and since advertising on television and advertising on the internet are two completely different beasts, they need to prioritize the one that makes the most money which, in this case, is television.\n\nLike I said, this is just a guess.",
"The ratings are used by the networks to sell traditional TV advertising (which is still the major source of their overall revenue). Internet Ratings are available to the networks from Nielsen and other sources however the revenue from online sources is a very small in comparison. So to answer your question - the primary factor that networks use to determine the shows to book each season are the traditional (offline) ratings. \n ",
"Well, they know exactly how many people watch the shows from their websites. But that's a tiny, tiny fraction of the viewing audience.\n\nIf the show cost more for the network then they'll get in advertising revenue due to the low ratings, it'll absolutely get the axe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2nhlun | what is it about the works of famous abstract impressionists like mark rothko and jackson pollock that make their work "good," as opposed to some random shit anyone else could draw? | [Rothko](_URL_0_)
[Pollock](_URL_1_)
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nhlun/eli5_what_is_it_about_the_works_of_famous/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmdnvbk",
"cmdonwv",
"cmdozs9",
"cmdtddu",
"cmdzl2o"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"You can sell a shit in a bag if you're good salesman. However, I like some of these. Pretty pretty colors.",
"You have to re-train your eye a bit. Pollack was the first to popularize a style of painting that actually captured movement. Imagine him dancing above the canvas as it lay on the ground. He was capturing time and rhythm. Before him, almost back through the dawn of art itself, artist smashed the rhythm and dance out of the paint as they touched the bristles of the brush onto a flat surface. Pollack stuff is not in my top five list, but I at least appreciate what he was doing and how it was different.",
"I've heard it is actually hard to reproduce the work of Pollock without carefully studying his technique. In that regard, he developed a new way of doing something that can be incorporated into other work.",
"I actually just finished an essay about abstract expressionism! Something big to keep in mind is the political and social climate of the time, this was post World War Two, a time of communism, patriotism and paranoia, a time of America declaring and celebrating the freedom of its citizens. Pollock and Rothko were both American, and as the Americans enjoyed the post-war economic boom, they were interested in the individual and what the viewer brought to art. Individuality, something that explicitly contradicts communism. So, in short, abstract expressionist art is important because of where it falls in history, it speaks volumes to the time and place it was created conceptually. You can \"just do it yourself\" but it would be like a black woman refusing to switch seats with a white man on a bus. Groundbreaking in history, insignificant now.",
"I like Rothko and Pollock, but when I was first starting out in art school my 2D Design teacher helped me out in understanding what makes these artist really good. Pollock hes weird he flows with emotion in his artwork and you can tell by the different ways the lines are splattered across the canvas. Again this is all just assumptions from what I am inferring. Art is a funny subject because there isn't really a point to it other than showing people what you see. people are different and see things differently, where I see art you see trash and vise versa. Rothko I couldn't tell you why other people like him but I can tell you why I like him. His colors are THICK in contrast in all of his works that you've provide. You may think, \"paint is easy to do that.\" It isn't, and to have that much control over the brush and colors is pretty remarkable. [This](_URL_0_) is a good example. Breaking this down you see the VAST contrast used to separate bright pink from blinding white, and he didn't just put the colors right next to each other he made them mix. These are some really good artist, but the only quarrel I have with Pollock was how fucking pretentious the descriptions of his pieces.\n[Here](_URL_1_) this is my favorite Pollock. I saw it at the Dallas Museum of Art and the reason I love it is because it is different from all of his other works. This one is said to be his \"Self Portrait\" of sorts because of a visible face on the right hand side. Just giving you a rundown buddy hope I helped."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.google.com/search?q=abstract+impressionism&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS594US596&espv=2&biw=1258&bih=1249&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=PP11VJHhBM7hoATs3YCoCA&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=0.75#tbm=isch&q=rothko",
"https://www.google.com/search?q=jackson+pollock&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS594US596&espv=2&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Yf11VLP8PKuHsQTcyoDoAg&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1258&bih=1249&dpr=0.75#tbm=isch&q=jackson+pollock+paintings"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/1-after-rothko-5-gary-grayson.jpg",
"http://www.1paintings.com/images/Portrait%20and%20a%20Dream,%201953.jpg"
]
] |
|
jxy0w | how does reddit sort my homepage? | It does not appear to be by upvotes, as the numbers on the left are not in descending order. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jxy0w/eli5_how_does_reddit_sort_my_homepage/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2g0cab",
"c2g0cab"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Semi-ELI5 version: There are different ways to rank these things. \n\nYou could count how many upvotes there are. But that can be unfair when one post has 500 upvotes and 700 downvotes, versus another post which has only 400 upvotes and no downvotes. The second post seems better because lots of people dislike the first post and no one dislikes the second post.\n\nInstead, you could count the percentage of upvotes. But this can also seem unfair when a post with 3 upvotes and no downvotes (100%) being ranked higher than a post with 1000 upvotes and 1 downvote (99.9%). Way more people like the second post; it should be ranked higher.\n\nThere are other ways to do it too and they all get more complicated than the last, but ultimately the ranking system tries to find a balance and weighs all the following factors:\n\n* percentage of up versus down votes\n* number of votes\n* time: as time goes on, your ranking goes down. This keeps the front page recent.\n\nI think there may be something added in there too to account for the size of the subreddit, which may be why posts from very small subreddits only need a few votes to top the frontpage.\n\n\nThis is not ELI5, but here's an article on how it works, though I believe it has changed slightly since this was written: _URL_1_\nedit: another good article on the subject here: _URL_0_",
"Semi-ELI5 version: There are different ways to rank these things. \n\nYou could count how many upvotes there are. But that can be unfair when one post has 500 upvotes and 700 downvotes, versus another post which has only 400 upvotes and no downvotes. The second post seems better because lots of people dislike the first post and no one dislikes the second post.\n\nInstead, you could count the percentage of upvotes. But this can also seem unfair when a post with 3 upvotes and no downvotes (100%) being ranked higher than a post with 1000 upvotes and 1 downvote (99.9%). Way more people like the second post; it should be ranked higher.\n\nThere are other ways to do it too and they all get more complicated than the last, but ultimately the ranking system tries to find a balance and weighs all the following factors:\n\n* percentage of up versus down votes\n* number of votes\n* time: as time goes on, your ranking goes down. This keeps the front page recent.\n\nI think there may be something added in there too to account for the size of the subreddit, which may be why posts from very small subreddits only need a few votes to top the frontpage.\n\n\nThis is not ELI5, but here's an article on how it works, though I believe it has changed slightly since this was written: _URL_1_\nedit: another good article on the subject here: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html",
"http://amix.dk/blog/post/19588"
],
[
"http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html",
"http://amix.dk/blog/post/19588"
]
] |
|
3ao0lm | in a symphony why does it seem like the conductor is off beat, or better yet ahead of beat, his hits come in sooner than the music hits, is frustrating to watch | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ao0lm/eli5_in_a_symphony_why_does_it_seem_like_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"csedef5",
"csedr5t"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"As a musician, you're always following his lead. He's pulling the orchestra along. The orchestra is big and slow and takes time to react. ",
"If you're in a big concert hall, the light bouncing off of the conductor and orchestra will reach you before the sound."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
b21igj | why do mouths quickly lose moisture when breathing through it? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b21igj/eli5_why_do_mouths_quickly_lose_moisture_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"eipn8iv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"the inside of your mouth is very moist compared to the air, and in nature things generally tend to move from areas of high concentration (the surface of the skin inside your mouth) to areas of low concentration (the air).\n\nI'm not sure why this isn't a problem when breathing through your nose. It might be due to less surface area (compared to your mouth) between entrance to nose and where it connects to the back of your mouth. Or maybe it's the thin coating of mucus in your nose. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
59paph | how exactly does monsanto generate such enormous profits? | In the last twelve months, Monsanto has made a $7.02 billion profit. I understand a minimal amount of their business practices, but how does their profit become this large?
source: _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59paph/eli5_how_exactly_does_monsanto_generate_such/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9a8tjh",
"d9a8vck",
"d9a9uo3"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"They make products that are used worldwide in virtually all farms. There are 7 billion people on Earth that need to eat. There are a lot of farms growing food. They buy from Monsanto.",
"They make a range of products and sell them for more than it costs to make. They sell large enough volume and keep costs low enough that their profits are those numbers. This is the same way that all people/companies make money. ",
"Because they're a $50 comanpny, and because the metric your using ignores a lot of what they spend their money on. \nThe $7 billion number is \"Gross Profit\". This is \"Money you get from selling something - cost to make the thing you sold\". It ignores what is called \"selling, general and administrative expenses\" which is stuff like sales people who actually go and sell your product, the rent for the buildings your business needs to run, management, etc. \nA different measure you can use would be EBITDA (Earnings Before Income Tax, Depreciation, and Amortization). Which for monsanto would be about $3.75 billion. \n$3.75 profit from a $50 billion company isn't really out of line. You can divide the latter by the former to give something called the \"Enterprise Value Multiple\" or \"EV/EBITDA\". Typical values for this vary based in the industry but 13 isn't going to be too far from the considered odd. \n \ntd;dr - Monsanto makes roughly what you should expect a company their size to make."
]
} | [] | [
"https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MON/key-statistics?p=MON"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
adf8pr | how do qr codes work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/adf8pr/eli5_how_do_qr_codes_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"edgerqv",
"edgru54"
],
"score": [
18,
82
],
"text": [
"Short answer: Just loke barcodes, the major difference being that two dimensions are used instead of just one.\n\nFor a longer answer, what exactly do you want to know? How the bits themselves are recognized by the scanner? How the information is encoded? How the error correction works, so that they can be read even when parts are missing? It would be quite a lot of work to explain everything.",
"My dearest five-year-old, It's a barcode that works in two directions instead of one!\n\nWhere a barcode uses a thin strand of light and looks for what was reflected from that one line, a QR code has several lines. Barcodes are often read by a laser. A QR code will tend to use a camera.\n\nNow, the code could be read in a few different directions. It's like when you turn a chess board the white on the right, end up on the left. So, the designers made three marks to show the camera which way is up!\n\nJust like computers think in a bunch of 1s and 0s, a barcode does too. A bunch of whites and blacks that stand out against each other. Pretty simple, eh?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
ux7yn | why telephones and computer/calculator number pads vary in layout when they serve the same function? | From what I've seen, pretty much all phones use the layout:
[1][2][3]
[4][5][6]
[7][8][9]
[*][0][#]
But computers and calculators seem to use:
[7][8][9]
[4][5][6]
[1][2][3]
[ 0 ]
Why the difference? Doesn't this just cause more confusion between devices? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ux7yn/eli5_why_telephones_and_computercalculator_number/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4zdrbq",
"c4zi2az"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Some speculation _URL_0_",
"Computers and calculators were born from mechanical adding machines. For a book keeper, one wants to be able to enter numbers by touch while looking at a ledger. The low numbers at the bottom made sense as they were in the right orientation from the hand. \n\nZeros are used most in accounting, and it is likely the low numbers were more frequently used in retail when the adding machine was invented.\n\nThe touch tone phone was designed to be looked at when used. Phone numbers are \"chunked\" into 3-4 letter segments so they can be remembered. If one is looking at a series of numbers, having them start at the top makes more sense."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.howstuffworks.com/question641.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
3qy2xx | how do they get a tv show that was playing live up on illegal streaming sites in such high quality so fast? | Specifically, is there a decoder or raw data someone can get? Shows like South Park are up in less than an hour after it airs. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qy2xx/eli5how_do_they_get_a_tv_show_that_was_playing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwjbi6q"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"People typically record the episode in transmission quality, so if it aired in HD then someone will record it in HD. They might then do a little editing (if they accidentally started too early, trimming it down; or removing commercials if there were any). After this, there might be other postprocessing to compress the video or something, and then after that it is uploaded. \nAs for how it can be done so quickly - basically a fast computer and a good internet connection!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
crmriv | how do pacemakers actually work? | I know the basics, that it senses when your heart is low and then gives it an electrical shock, but how does it do that? How does it sense your heart rate, how does it give the shock, and how does the battery last so long? I just got one put in, so I'm super curious, if anyone can explain! :) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/crmriv/eli5_how_do_pacemakers_actually_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"ex78pe9",
"ex7c2sb",
"ex7j721",
"ex86xxw",
"ex9hrjb"
],
"score": [
5,
12,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In the most basic of terms your pacemaker is constantly taking an EKG from inside your heart from the leads placed into any combination of the right atrium, right ventricle, and coronary sinus (left ventricle) and it senses from that “EKG” when it needs to intervene. It only takes a tiny amount of electricity to mimic the hearts own electricity so the battery can last anywhere from 6-12 years.",
"I have had a pacemaker for about 3 years. Most of the time, I don't even know it's there!\n\nA pacemaker, under normal conditions, works along with the heart's normal rhythm. Most people with pacemakers don't have complete failure of the heart's natural pacemaker. In these cases, pacemakers are used to correct irregularities in conduction of electrical signals through the heart (such as left bundle branch block,) or for patients with an irregular heartbeat, to bring the heart back to a regular rhythm by sending electrical pulses as needed to the heart muscle.\n\nA modern pacemaker, usually of the ICD (implantable cardioverter/defibrillator) type, has a very powerful (for its size) computer that monitors the heart from two or more leads inserted into the right side of the heart via the subclavian vein in the left upper chest, the area where the device is implanted. There are currently three major manufacturers of pacemakers: Medtronic, Boston Scientific and St. Jude Medical.\n\nMuch of the time (depending on the patient's heart condition and the device's computer programming), it sits and monitors. When an abnormality is detected, it makes decisions whether to send electrical pulses to pace the heart or, in rare cases, send a larger shock to remedy an abnormally fast heartbeat (230 beats per minute or greater, IIRC) or ventricular fibrillation (uncoordinated contraction of the heart muscle that can quickly be fatal as the heart does no useful work.) Fortunately, I have never received a shock from my device. I am told that it feels like having a fastball pitched into one's chest!\n\nMy pacemaker was installed because of a condition called left bundle branch block, brought on by congestive heart failure (essentially an enlarged heart) that was exacerbated by chemotherapy for my Hodgkin's lymphoma. My heart beats fine, but the signal doesn't make it efficiently down the middle (septum) to the left side of the heart. The cardiologist inserted an extra wire through one of the coronary veins to the left side of my heart, so a signal can be sent simultaneously to the right and left sides of the heart, a process known as Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT). It provides an improvement in pumping action of the heart, when used in conjunction with standard heart medications (digoxin, ACE inhibitors and beta blockers.)\n\nPacemaker batteries generally last 5-7 years, after which the device must be surgically replaced. Rechargeable batteries have not been released for general use due to liability issues (e.g., a patient who needs a pacemaker to live forgets to charge the device and later dies.) Replacing the device also ensures that the patient has the latest technology device (and of course makes a bundle for the pacemaker company!) Battery life nowadays is improved by special programming in the computer (Medtronic calls theirs \"AdaptivCRT.\") The technology only sends out pacing signals when they are needed.\n\nMy device has a wireless device built in so they can grab all sorts of data from it and/or change the programming when I go in every 6 months for a check-up. Also, I have a bedside monitor that collects data from the device every few months or if a major event occurs, then it sends the data to the manufacturer over the cell network.",
"For a time, they made and implanted nuclear powered pacemakers, because \"Hey, what could go wrong??\"\n\nThere were a couple different variants, including a plutomium powered one. All the details and a good overview of how pacemakers work too:\n\n [_URL_1_](_URL_0_)",
"Your heart already works on electricity; it is what causes muscles to contract. A Pacemaker uses electricity to mimic your normal body functions but keeps them regular. It keeps them on pace",
"Thank yall so much! This has been a huge help and makes me feel a ton better! < 3"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://danieljohndoyle.com/uploads/3/0/7/7/3077522/the_rise_and_fall_of_the_nuclear_pacemaker_april_2012.pdf",
"http://danieljohndoyle.com/uploads/3/0/7/7/3077522/the\\_rise\\_and\\_fall\\_of\\_the\\_nuclear\\_pacemaker\\_april\\_2012.pdf"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
dcw08g | why is our hearing divided in octaves? why can we hear two wildly different frequencies as equivalent? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dcw08g/eli5_why_is_our_hearing_divided_in_octaves_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"f2by4et",
"f2c0vex"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Octaves aren't as WILDLY DIFFERENT as you might think.\n\nAn octave is simply a frequency that is double the previous frequency.\n\nSo if the A note at 440hz is doubled to 880hz, that's also an A. As is 1760hz, and so on (doubling each time).\n\nTe reason they sound similar is because if you picture a sound wave visually, you have a nice even sine wave. Double its frequency and at each peak, and each 0 point of the lower frequency you'll ALSO have a corresponding peak and 0 point of the higher frequency (with an extra in between), so that's why our brain hears them as similar.",
"It all comes down to what's called 'resonant frequencies' and 'natural frequencies'. \n\nResonant frequencies are when waveforms are perfectly divisible from parent waveforms. When two waves resonate, they have exactly the same wavelength, something we can notice pretty easily. see the link below to picture this:\n\n_URL_0_ \n\nNatural frequencies are a specific wavelengths/oscillations/vibrations that make something vibrate constructively (see link, I'm the video you see 3 springs with different natural frequencies). Most human ears have similar natural frequencies, and people who don't are considered robe deaf.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nSo putting these two together: human ears have a natural frequency that can detect 'notes' because they 'resonate' with our ears. Now, OCTAVES (tl;dr) of a sound or not occur when you divide the wavlegth in half. When you do this, the frequency increases and you have a higher pitch.\n\nThink of sound as a waveform vibration, and the air shaking to the vibrations that are sound."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/ATRzwhk7UvY",
"https://youtu.be/LV_UuzEznHs"
]
] |
||
1kw8sr | for birds who are said to have a "further field of vision" does their vision appear zoomed in? or does their brain just process smaller, further away bits of information better? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kw8sr/for_birds_who_are_said_to_have_a_further_field_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbt8lla"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It means they can pick out more detail from further away. \n\nStand ten feet away from something and look at it. Then go up one foot away from it and look again. Notice that you can see a lot more detail? Now imagine you can see that level of detail from ten feet away. But you're not zoomed in on that patch that you see from one foot away. You just see that same level of detail, everywhere.\n\nSome birds have better eyesight because they have to have better eyesight. They've adapted to become better seers. When your primary means of finding food is hovering 200 feet in the air and looking down at a field, you'd better be able to pick out the mouse running through it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3bj7n3 | what is the point of r/nofap? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bj7n3/eli5what_is_the_point_of_rnofap/ | {
"a_id": [
"csmlz8i",
"csmm20n",
"csmm7ln",
"csmo9iz",
"csmowi0"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
29,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Just taken from the side of the subreddit:\n\nINTRODUCTION\nNoFap® is a web community that hosts challenges in which users (\"Fapstronauts\") abstain from pornography and masturbation for a period of time (\"fapstinence\" or \"rebooting\"). Whether your goal is casual participation in a monthly challenge as a test of self-control, or whether excessive masturbation or pornography has become a problem in your life and you want to quit for a longer period of time, you will find a supportive community and plenty of resources here.\n\nIf this is your first time visiting, read through the reddit-hosted wiki page to gain an understanding on what we're all about. Check out this video, these static pages, and these resources for a semi-scientific look at why some of us are quitting pornography; however, Fapstronauts choose to reboot for a variety of reasons.\nNEW FAPSTRONAUTS\nRead through posts on NoFap to learn about porn addiction, porn-induced sexual dysfunction, excessive masturbation, and what to expect after you cut PMO out of your life. Learn the vocabulary commonly used on NoFap.\n\nObtain a day counter badge next to your username by composing a message to BadgeBot. Click here, fill in the date of the last time you PMOed, and click send. Click here to change the date or reset your badge - same instructions apply.\nRead our full disclaimer and rules before posting or participating in one of our challenges.\n\nShare your story with the Fapstronauts. Post a new thread.\nGet an accountability partner, someone who will hold you accountable during your reboot. Post a thread here.\n\nChoose your own reboot. NoFap's Standard Reboot: No edging, no porn, no masturbating. \"Hard Mode\": No edging, no porn, no masturbating, no orgasming whatsoever. Easy Mode: No porn.\n\nSign up for a reboot challenge by replying to a moderator's sign up thread. These are usually \"stickied\" as the first post or linked on the sidebar.",
"Also this post is from actual people on that sub:\n\n_URL_0_",
"The original ideas were something like this:\n\n1. People with addictions to pornography and/or masturbation do it to overcome those addictions.\n\n2. Normal non-addicted people might do it for a period of time just to prove they can.\n\nOver time it morphed into a weird cult centered around the belief that EVERYONE is addicted, that any amount of masturbation or any exposure to any pornography is inherently harmful, and that not jerking off will give superhuman powers.\n\nIt started out as a nice idea in theory but now you get shit like this:\n\n_URL_1_\n\nAnd this:\n\n_URL_0_",
"I kind of lurked in the subreddit to check it out and I have (not through the subreddit) decided to just not masterbate/watch porn for small periods of time, like a week here and there. I think from my lurking, some of these experiences can apply to nofap as well: As a guy, society pushes the concept of sex on you constantly, and when I'm reminded of it constantly, I want to masterbate. When I decide to not masterbate it kind of forces me to mentally rewire myself and ignore all of the sexual pressure/images the every day media is constantly pushing down my throat. It's nice not to be a sexual being 24/7 sometimes. In addition, if I masterbate too much and watch a bunch of porn I kind of am wary that I will become sexually \"numb\" and be bored of what would be normally be an awesome experience. An example being me getting head from a cute girl, but it doesn't seem as special and awesome because I've seen it on porn, and the girl I'm with doesn't even look like a porn star so I'm not as aroused and it's a lot harder to get off. Another one is that it's much easier to masterbate at home than go out and take a girl on a date, be patient, hook up with her when she's comfortable, and do stuff that isn't even guaranteed to be 100% what you want to get off to, like when you watch porn. So no porn and masterbating forces you to interact with girls and have the patience to have healthier sexual experiences. That seems to be a big one on the subreddit, forcing some more socially awkward people to interact with women and have the courage to ask them out instead of saying \"whatever, I can stay in my comfort zone and wack off at home instead.\" Another big reason on the subreddit is that it seems some people are truly addicted. I honestly think that if (some people claim on no fap) they need to fap 4 times a day, you are addicted. I imagine that's a downward spiral too because if you fap that much it's a downward spiral due to being sexually numb so fast. You can't get off as easy so you spend more time watching weirder and weirder stuff and less time socializing to get off, and it eventually just doesn't even feel good anymore but you keep doing it etc. Just a disclaimer, I don't thinking abstaining to an extreme is healthy at all and I think masterbating is super important for me to be more relaxed and stimulated etc. it's good to take a break and moderate yourself though. I only saw a few posts on there and I didn't see the \"cult\" aspect you're talking about, but not surprised if it's there.\n\nTl;dr to force yourself to be social and meet girls to get off, to avoid addiction of fapping, to not become sexually numb and bored of more \"normal\" sexual acts with others, to have a less constant sexual mindset that media can pressure onto you.",
"Apparently fapping [is good for your prostate](_URL_0_). Those guys are going to die of prostate cancer if they don't cut out cutting it out. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/NoFap/comments/kud1z/alright_rnofap_lets_get_a_list_going_of_why/"
],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/unQ7DhI.png",
"http://i.imgur.com/bjYrDXz.png"
],
[],
[
"http://www.menshealth.com/mhlists/prevent_prostate_cancer/printer.php"
]
] |
||
4hwzj5 | why do we lose our vision momentarily if we press the sides of our eyes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hwzj5/eli5_why_do_we_lose_our_vision_momentarily_if_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2t2oi0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Every redditor who stumbles on this is going to press the side of their eyeballs before opening this thread..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
498t0c | why do notes in different octaves sound similar? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/498t0c/eli5_why_do_notes_in_different_octaves_sound/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0pw6uu",
"d0pwhfe",
"d0pxt8g"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the frequency is supposed to be exactly double. Which means that the waves will be \"constructive\" and line up. \n\nThere's the famous piano tuning problem and it explains why we use specific intervals of frequency to be octaves after 12 half steps ",
"Take a note from a piano or guitar with a fundamental frequency of 220 Hz: that isn't the only frequency in there. It also has quieter harmonics at multiples of that e.g. 2nd harmonic at 440 Hz , 4th harmonic at 880 Hz, and so on. A given note can include an octave version of itself at a lower volume. ",
"Humans understand things logarithmically, our brain is wired for it. Octaves are multiples of frequency."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
21crre | the difference between 4k and 1080p | How can you tell the difference | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21crre/eli5the_difference_between_4k_and_1080p/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgbrxta",
"cgbsp5w"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"4x as many pixles in a 4k display",
"It's all about pixel density and the pixelated look of the picture on the screen.\n\nIn a 1080p tv/monitor, you have 1920x1080 pixels on the screen. This means that there are less pixels than a 4k display, so things look more pixelated and jagged as a result.\n\nIn a 4k tv/monitor, you have 3840x2160 pixels, much more than a 1080p display. More pixels = less pixelation of the picture."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5nt4bb | why do we like things that terrify us? | I find myself riveted to books/tv/movies/etc... lately that terrifies me and gives me nightmares yet I keep going back to it. I'm hardly the only one. Why do we create content that scares us so much and why are we drawn to it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nt4bb/eli5why_do_we_like_things_that_terrify_us/ | {
"a_id": [
"dce3t2b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Adrenaline. Identifying with characters gives you the sensation they are feeling in the story. I play horror games sometimes and figuring out the best way out of a lethal situation is exciting because you feel the intense stress and adrenaline build up and then a release as if you are experiencing the situation. At the end of the day it's not real which makes it enjoyable as compared to actually being hunted down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9unhic | how does dmt work? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9unhic/eli5_how_does_dmt_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"e95mci0",
"e95mkf1"
],
"score": [
11,
9
],
"text": [
"Best we can tell, DMT (DiMethylTryptamine) looks like a lot of other chemicals that swish around in your brain. Primarily serotonin but also maybe a few others like dopamine. \n\nNormally when these chemicals are floating around in your brain it's for a reason. Like to trigger a memory or give you a feeling. When you splash the area with DMT it causes a bit of chaos. Activating a lot of stuff all at once without any plan to it all. \n\nThe conscious part of your brain's whole job is to take all these neural signals and give you something that makes sense. When it starts getting all these random signals, it shows you what it can and tries it's best to make sense of it all. That's what a hallucunation is. ",
"The structure of DMT is similar to that of serotonin, a chemical that helps regulate a lot of key functions in our brain. It's generally seen as a \"feel good\" chemical, but it does a lot more than that as well.\n\nUnlike drugs which release serotonin (eg. MDMA), DMT mimics it and attaches itself to receptors that would normally receive serotonin. \n\nUnfortunately, the reason why this action causes such profound experiences is unclear, as is the reason why we have evolved a mind capable of experiencing them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3hiuz9 | how are hour glasses made? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hiuz9/eli5_how_are_hour_glasses_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu7r65g"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You get a glass tube, heat it up, and pinch it into shape, basically. Here's a video, worth a thousand words: _URL_1_\n\nA second video showing a slightly different technique: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNFBIk8Ycec",
"https://vimeo.com/22396483"
]
] |
||
5xr27d | what was the time frame for the asteroid that caused the dinosaur extinction? if humans had been alive at the time, how much warning would we have had? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xr27d/eli5_what_was_the_time_frame_for_the_asteroid/ | {
"a_id": [
"dek8kfz",
"dekf373",
"deklygk"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"We are actively looking for such asteroids. Today, we might have months to years of warning. Then, well, before telescopes it's going to be hours of warning.",
"Depends on if we're lucky enough to spot it. We are currently tracking quite a few near-Earth objects. None of the ones we know about are likely to hit earth in our lifetimes. There are undoubtedly many more we just haven't noticed yet.\n\nThe problem is, Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space. So we may well not notice until the thing enters the atmosphere. If that happens, the time frame will be just long enough to think \"What the hell is tha..?\"\n\nAnyone catch the quote? ",
"The Chicxulub impactor is thought to have been about 10 km in diameter. An asteroid that large we would probably have spotted already, asteroids orbit fairly close to the Sun which means they're always fairly close to us. If one was found anew we would expect decades of warning, although less is possible. 99942 Apophis is a rock a mere 300 metres across discovered in 2004 as possibly going to hit in 2029 (we've since found out it will miss.\n\nThe bigger threats are comets. They make big long orbits swooping down into the inner solar system at speed and tend to only be discovered a year or two before perihelion. If one was on a collision course with Earth that's the kind of warning we'd have. It would also be a lot harder to deflect than an asteroid, the great speed makes it harder to intercept and much harder to orbit or land on. And unlike asteroids where we can hope to get them all with diligent surveying of the skies, new comets are always arriving from their hiding places in the outer reaches of the solar system."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ltjwx | how saudi arabi managed to be chosen to head un human rights panel. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ltjwx/eli5_how_saudi_arabi_managed_to_be_chosen_to_head/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv95vol",
"cv970fm",
"cv9a087",
"cv9c8k0",
"cv9fwkc",
"cv9gyyj",
"cv9wxv1"
],
"score": [
151,
26,
37,
25,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Long story short. They are rich and own most oil production and extraction in the world. Many believe they have bought that position. UN is a sellout",
"They aren't. Germany is heading the council although their term ends in December. S.A are one of the members and they are standing for election.\n\nI hope the U.N. Have better judgement than the I.O.C. And FIFA.",
"I dunno, it was Libya not all that long ago. The UN has a long and storied history of electing the countries with the worst record in THING_UN_PRETENDS_TO_CARE_ABOUT as the country in charge of overseeing it.\n\nBecause those countries lobby for it.\n\nBecause, for example, now, the UN won't complain about Saudi Arabia's abuses, because the person who would decide what to complain about is... the Saudi representative.",
"They are not the \"head\" of the HRC, they were elected a 'chair' on key section the council. Germany is the current head of the entire HRC.\n\nSaudi Arabia was chosen to head a 5-member group of ambassadors within the HRC, known as the Consultative Group. The full membership of the HRC is made of [47 countries](_URL_0_) based on a 3 year cycle. They help select [experts on specific issues](_URL_2_) from around the world.\n\nIts a theory they they dropped their bid for the head of the Full HRC in exchange for this one. [source](_URL_1_)",
"Because democracy. Much of the UN is based on votes between nations, with one vote per nation, not merit, and not population size or similar. The voting is sometimes based on merit, but more often based on deals behind the scenes.\n\nWhen you look at the world as a whole, the vast majority of governments have shitty records on human rights (amongst other things) from a western European perspective. If you want the UN to represent all countries, and have power (however limited) due to this, then you have to let those shitty countries have their fair say. Plus you have to remember than from the perspective of some of those countries, western Europe has idiotic human rights rules etc - it's the arrogance of the west that we're always the ones in the right.\n",
"Look at who leads at the UNHCR. Russia, Venezuela, China... See a theme?",
"Because the UN is a corrupt cesspit. Most of the countries in the world are extremely corrupt. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/CurrentMembers.aspx",
"http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2015/09/20/saudi-arabia-wins-bid-to-behead-of-un-human-rights-council-panel/",
"http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/SP/VisualDirectoryJune2015_en.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results"
]
] |
||
4etsi4 | how does the heart make its own electricity? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4etsi4/eli5_how_does_the_heart_make_its_own_electricity/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2399bi",
"d23hi2y",
"d23lxnm"
],
"score": [
5,
19,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not really electricity. Our nerves can react to electricity, but what really triggers them is tiny charge imbalances caused by sodium and potassium on either side of the cell membrane (the inside of the nerve cell and outside the nerve cell).\n\nAll neurons can create these imbalances, it's how they work. The heart happens to have a cluster of nerves called the Sinoatrial Node which work together to keep your heart rhythm going. Your brain can tell the SA node to speed up or slow down, but doesn't regulate each beat directly. The SA node sends out pulses which travel down other nerves in the heart, making it all contract and relax as it should.",
"The explanation by frommerman is incorrect, it is electricity and the sinoatrial node is not a cluster of nerves. The cells of the heart have the ability to pump ions across the membrane such that the inside is usually negatively charged compared to the outside. When the cell gets hit by the action potential, there are voltage gated ion channels in the membrane that open, and then the cell becomes depolarized. This opens other channels and makes the heart contract. The cells then reset themselves to restore the normal negative resting membrane potential.\n\nThe sinoatrial node is composed of specialized heart cells that have special channels such that they are leakier than the normal channels, so it sets itself off every once in a while (aka every heartbeat). If the sinoatrial node is broken for some reason, the atrioventricular node also goes off but more slowly than the SA node, and if the av node breaks there's the his-purkinje branches.\n\nPeople who have had heart transplants do not have nerves that connect to the heart, but the heart will still fire on its own. The vagus nerve tells the heart to slow down usually, but a transplanted heart doesn't receive nerve signals from the brain/spinal cord. So it usually beats at about 100 bpm, which is what the SA node would do without external regulation.\n\nWe measure electrical activity in the heart via an ecg, an electrocardiogram.\n\nEdited to include the part about heart transplants not needing nerve innervation to beat.",
"Electricity is the movement of electrical charge.\n\nIn electronic devices, the movement of electrical charge is done by electrons flowing through a metal wire.\n\nIn biology, the movement of electrical charge is done by electrically charged chemicals being pumped around inside your body."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4p87vl | why dont drinks go stale like food does? | Title**** | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4p87vl/eli5_why_dont_drinks_go_stale_like_food_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4iu0tg"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Staleness, in a food item, involves the food in question equalizing its moisture content with the air around it -- dry foods feel damp and spongy, while wetter foods dry out and become crusty. So if you were to apply the same principle with a drink, it would simply evaporate.\n\nBut if you define staleness as loosing freshness and palatability, then it absolutely does happen. Try leaving a jug or open jar of fruit juice/drink sitting in the fridge for a few days, and tell me that it doesn't acquire a distinct \"fridgey\" flavour after a while."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
opqm5 | why can we breathe out both warm and cold air? | How can we change the tempreture at which we exhale? Like how you can breathe warm air into your hands when you're cold, or cool air on a hot day? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/opqm5/eli5_why_can_we_breathe_out_both_warm_and_cold_air/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3j23im"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The air is always warm. The moisture content and speed effect how it feels. \nWhen you open your mouth wide and breathe out, the air is moving slowly and carrying lots of water. Warm water. \nWhen you purse your lips and blow a light fast stream of air, the air is moving more quickly and carrying less water. Whatever you are blowing on will therefore evaporate more of its water into the drier faster moving air. Evaporation produces the cooling effect even though the air leaving your body is still 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5ztuz2 | why can kids have imaginary friends, but if you're an adult you're crazy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ztuz2/eli5why_can_kids_have_imaginary_friends_but_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"df100y0"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Small kids are not yet entirely used to their emotion and experiences and it is healthy for them to project them apart from themselves. They are also helpful to playfully train social behaviour, especially if the child has few real friends.\nFurthermore, the age of 2-3 is when kids really learn imagination. Imagining a friendly figure that helps them discover the world is one of the most straightforward things to imagine, since it is a very pleasant and exciting imagination. Imagining a chair is far more boring. Imagining a hostile monster is too scary.\n\nAn adult is supposed to not need all of this. They are supposed to be capable of social behaviour, adequately dealing with their emotions, and can use their imagination more routinely. \n\nThis is the most basic short answer. There are many more advantages for children who have imaginary friends."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
k0x5u | can someone explain li5 significant figures? | I'm really confused with these. Especially problems asking for the answer to a simplish equation and then it asks the answer with the correct number of significant digits. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k0x5u/can_someone_explain_li5_significant_figures/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2gozba",
"c2gpmtn",
"c2gozba",
"c2gpmtn"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Let's say you spend the day hiking, and you cover 15 km in 3.5 hours.\n\nYou want to know you average speed, so you plug those numbers into your trusty calculator, and get something like this:\n\n 4.2857142857142857142857142857143\n\nThat's a lot of digits. And since you probably didn't cover *exactly* 15 km in *exactly* 3.5 hours, it is misleading to give this many digits, which imply you knew your speed to within the width of an atom.\n\nSignificant digits are rules we use to determine how many digits make sense. If you just used your watch and the mileage markers on the trail, it would make sense not to be overly precise, and only use 2 significant figures. So in our answer, we round to 2 digits, and get 15 km / 3.5 h = 4.3 km/h.\n\nOr maybe you were using a GPS to measure, and you know the results are accurate to 4 significant figures. Then we would get 15.00 km / 3.500 h = 4.286 km/h.\n\nSignificant figures let us show both how large a value is, and how precise it is, all with one number. ",
"kouhoutek has a really good explanation. The only thing I'd like to add is that while the \"exact\" nature he was talking about is true, perhaps an easier way to look at it is this: you cannot make your calculation more accurate than it is. \n\nIn other words, in a calculation, you take the number with the least amount of significant digits (sig figs) and use that many digits because you can't make your least accurate measurement *more* accurate. \n\nHere's an example: \n\nLets take a car's trip computer. Common ones go to one decimal place -- e.g. 30.5 miles. Now lets say you want to do a small experiment and see how good your gas mileage is. So you top your tank off, drive 27.3 miles and fill up your gas to full again. Lets say you end up with 1.135 gallons as measured by the gas pump.\n\nSo you take 27.3 divided by 1.135 and get 24.0528634(continues). In this case, your least accurate measurement was the car's trip computer. You have 3 sig figs there. Even though you divide by a more precise gas measurement (4 sig figs) you have to round it to 3 sig figs because you can't magically make the car's trip computer more accurate than it is. \n\nSo if this was a problem given to you, the answer would be 24.1 (rounded to 3 sig figs) miles per gallon. \n\n",
"Let's say you spend the day hiking, and you cover 15 km in 3.5 hours.\n\nYou want to know you average speed, so you plug those numbers into your trusty calculator, and get something like this:\n\n 4.2857142857142857142857142857143\n\nThat's a lot of digits. And since you probably didn't cover *exactly* 15 km in *exactly* 3.5 hours, it is misleading to give this many digits, which imply you knew your speed to within the width of an atom.\n\nSignificant digits are rules we use to determine how many digits make sense. If you just used your watch and the mileage markers on the trail, it would make sense not to be overly precise, and only use 2 significant figures. So in our answer, we round to 2 digits, and get 15 km / 3.5 h = 4.3 km/h.\n\nOr maybe you were using a GPS to measure, and you know the results are accurate to 4 significant figures. Then we would get 15.00 km / 3.500 h = 4.286 km/h.\n\nSignificant figures let us show both how large a value is, and how precise it is, all with one number. ",
"kouhoutek has a really good explanation. The only thing I'd like to add is that while the \"exact\" nature he was talking about is true, perhaps an easier way to look at it is this: you cannot make your calculation more accurate than it is. \n\nIn other words, in a calculation, you take the number with the least amount of significant digits (sig figs) and use that many digits because you can't make your least accurate measurement *more* accurate. \n\nHere's an example: \n\nLets take a car's trip computer. Common ones go to one decimal place -- e.g. 30.5 miles. Now lets say you want to do a small experiment and see how good your gas mileage is. So you top your tank off, drive 27.3 miles and fill up your gas to full again. Lets say you end up with 1.135 gallons as measured by the gas pump.\n\nSo you take 27.3 divided by 1.135 and get 24.0528634(continues). In this case, your least accurate measurement was the car's trip computer. You have 3 sig figs there. Even though you divide by a more precise gas measurement (4 sig figs) you have to round it to 3 sig figs because you can't magically make the car's trip computer more accurate than it is. \n\nSo if this was a problem given to you, the answer would be 24.1 (rounded to 3 sig figs) miles per gallon. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
76f2o2 | why do stock photos look so fake? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/76f2o2/eli5_why_do_stock_photos_look_so_fake/ | {
"a_id": [
"dodgq0d"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In order to sell the most copies of a stock photo, it needs to be very generic, so that many clients can put their own message on top and use it as is. Therefore, if the photo itself looked natural and sent a message of its own, it would limit the amount of clients you could sell it to. \n\nFor this reason, it is usually difficult for the people in the photo to look natural, since they don't know if they're posing, like in your example, for a boardroom meeting, a casting call, an ad for a university, an ad for some miracle drug, etc.\n\nFurthermore, a part of the fake look is due to lighting. Again, in order to maximize client base, you want a very neutral photo, with a background that blends well into stuff, etc.\n\nMaybe if you point out what you think looks fake we can find more reasons."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3lotla | how come my cat doesn't smell bad and all he does is lick himself, yet if i go a day or two without bathing i smell terrible? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lotla/eli5_how_come_my_cat_doesnt_smell_bad_and_all_he/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv7zoo8",
"cv7zwmt",
"cv84dei",
"cv84kiu"
],
"score": [
7,
21,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Cats don't sweat. You do. The sweat provides a good place for bacteria to grow.\n\nIf your cat has bad teeth then it's spit will smell, and so will the cat.",
"Human body odour is caused by chemicals from certain types of sweat gland; it is then broken down into various acids, and it's these acids that smell. In our modern culture, this smell is considered unpleasant (yes, this is a cultural thing), but our habit of wearing clothes does make the smell quite pungent. Kept to acceptably low levels, BO apparently helps us to locate a compatible mate (it turns out, there's some truth in the idea that \"chemistry\" needs to happen).\n\nCats sweat only through their paws; and, being predators, have evolved not to have a powerful body odour (as this would warn their prey). They don't give off those smelly chemicals.\n\nAs for \"all he does is lick himself\", cats spend hours grooming themselves, and they lick themselves pretty much all over (something you can't physically do). There's not much BO for them to deal with, but their tongues are covered in tiny, hard bumps -- if your cat has ever licked you, you'll know how rough a cat's tongue is -- which turn them into very effective combs.",
"The saliva of cats has deodorant properties. That's why if you stick your nose in their fur, cats smell \"clean\" but there's always \"dog smell\" on a dog. (there's definitely a \"cat smell\" you can smell in some homes, but its the smell of dirty cat litter, not the smell of the cat's body.). \n\nAs mentioned earlier, this is an adaptation that helps them be stealth hunters.",
"Have you tried licking yourself?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
21w1rr | assuming the observable universe came from one point, (the big bang theory) how is other matter so far away without traveling faster than the speed of light? | Similar questions have been asked here, but there didn't seem to be an explanation present, certainly not one fit for a five year old. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21w1rr/eli5_assuming_the_observable_universe_came_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgh1k2q",
"cgh1q75"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Matter within space cannot move faster than the speed of light, but space itself can do what it wants. Best explanation I've seen is that ants on a balloon can only walk so fast, but the balloon itself can expand rapidly and make it appear as though the ants have moved away from each other faster than the speed of ants.",
"It is speculated that 10^36 seconds after the big bang, a time before the current laws of physics had essentially 'solidified', the young universe underwent a period of much faster-than-light expansion that we call the *Inflation epoch*. \n\nThis theory actually just got a huge boost in probability after the discovery of B mode polarization in the cosmic microwave background which was predicted by inflation epoch hypothesis. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1pja0v | why do some foods/drinks stain our skin? ex. pomegranate | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pja0v/eli5_why_do_some_foodsdrinks_stain_our_skin_ex/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd2wdyz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because they do"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9rdiqi | what is the reason why cars are made fwd/rwd? | How do car manufacturers choose between FWD and RWD in their design? Is there a reason behind that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9rdiqi/eli5_what_is_the_reason_why_cars_are_made_fwdrwd/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8g11tn",
"e8g2v0w",
"e8g3jeo"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
6
],
"text": [
"I’m curious about this too... my understanding (which may be wrong) is that they do it in relation to the type of vehicle you’re dealing with. Fast cars typically absolutely need rear wheel drive while larger cars prefer front wheel. All wheel is preferred in both, however ",
"RWD cars are good for performance, because when a car is accelerating, its' inertia pushes weight backwards, which gets caught by the shocks into essentially transferring that mass down onto the back tires (regardless of what wheels are driving the car), leading to greater traction for straight-line acceleration.\n\nFWD cars are typically lighter, and thus more fuel efficient.\n\nAWD cars give you the best handling, but you add a lot of weight because you have 3 differential systems instead of the typical 1. They're also typically more expensive due to the added parts, and wear tires faster in everyday driving conditions.\n\nFWD cars also tend to not oversteer (your typical fishtail-type skid), and will understeer instead (you keep going somewhat the way you were going before turning), and are less prone to losing grip overall, which makes them favored by inexperienced drivers (more experienced drivers who routinely push their cars to skids tend to prefer oversteer, though.)\n\nTypically, FWD cars are going to be your economy models that are focused on saving fuel, and your newer standard sedans. RWD cars are going to be more sporty cars, and AWD cars are going to be either higher-end performance cars, or certain wagons/sedans made to do better in rain/snow/etc.",
"Like most decisions for a car design (or any consumer product really), cost of production and intended audience play the biggest role. The goal, in simple terms, is to minimize cost of production, while maximizing interest from the intended audience. As a car company, you want to add features that add value to your audience, and nothing else. No one will pay more for features they don't care about if a more affordable option that forgoes them exists.\n\nIn order to understand which drivetrain to include in a car, let's compare the advantages and disadvantages of each.\n\nFWD:\nLeast expensive to produce, maximizes interior space (no transmission tunnel necessary), cheaper to maintain (fewer and smaller parts), tires last longer (rear tires almost don't wear, can rotate more frequently), higher fuel economy (less weight, possibly lower drag), provide more control in wet pavement. However, it's has poor weight distribution (front heavy), poor traction in turns, worst traction while accelerating forward, worst breaking performance.\n\nRWD:\nExcellent weight distribution, higher power capacity (as drive shafts and transmissions can be made larger and more robust), simple (transmission is usually separate from differential and drive shafts), great acceleration in straight lines, good breaking, best cornering. But it's more expensive to produce and maintain, robs the cabin and trunk of some room, generally less efficient (as the rotating assembly is heavier) and offers poor traction in wet/snow.\n\nAWD:\nBest traction in any condition, redundancy in case of driveline failure, predictable handling. However, it's the heaviest configuration, most expensive, most complex, requires most room, has worst efficiency.\n\nSo, if your audience is comprised of working class families, you will add different features than if you're appealing to young enthusiasts. These are things like interior space, low cost of ownership, good fuel economy, reliability. In this case, FWD is unquestionably the right choice. If you want to sell a go anywhere fast car, than AWD is probably the right decision. If you want to sell a small high performance car, RWD is the best choice. The same process can be applied to transmissions, interior features, size, pretty much any voluntary design aspect of the car.\n\n\nTL;DR: Companies want to spend the least amount of money possible to make an attractive car. A family will be attractive as a FWD. A performance car will be more attractive as RWD. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9vnq41 | how does medicine become effective in your body instead of just being digested in your stomach? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9vnq41/eli5_how_does_medicine_become_effective_in_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9dn94c",
"e9dnkza",
"e9dnqtk",
"e9dnrgi"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"That's what digesting does. It breaks things down so that they can be absorbed into your blood stream. Once in your blood, medicine goes everywhere and your body reacts to it the way it does (like slowing inflammation, etc)",
"It becomes effective in your body *by* getting digested in your stomach (or other parts of your digestive tract). The same way that you get nutrients from food by digesting those in your stomach.\n\nYour stomach and digestive tract have mechanisms to pull out usable nutrients, and these chemicals in medicine have properties that let them get pulled through various channels and get them to the relevant part(s) of your body to do what they need to do.",
"This is actually a big part and challenge of drug design. How to get the medicine in the right place and how to prevent digestion by the human body. This can be achieved by designing the perfect chemical structure, which is quite hard and requires a lot of research. ",
"The digestive process doesn't destroy everything, it has some specific chemical mechanisms to break down certain large substances in their constituent parts like proteins into amino acids or starches into sugars using a combination of enzymes, acid, emulsifiers, and mechanical processing. \n\nMost drugs taken by mouth are small chemicals that aren't affected by the enzymes in your digestive system. Protein-digesting enzymes only cut proteins, not aspirin or tylenol. \n\nSome medicines are actually activated by the acid in your stomach. In the tablet or pill, the drug is in a stable, inert form called a pro-drug, and the stomach acid unlocks the active part of the drug, usually by breaking off some part of the pro-drug.\n\nAnyway, after you swallow a pill or whatever, it dissolves into the fluid in your stomach and then gets absorbed into your blood stream through the walls of your stomach and small intestine. Most of the drug will then go first to the liver. Sometimes drugs are designed to be processed from their inactive pro-drug form into their active drug form by enzymes that are in the liver. After its detour in the liver, the drug is carried throughout the body in the blood by the circulatory system.\n\nDrugs that are essentially special proteins (Like monoclonal anti-bodies used for fighting cancers) cannot be taken orally because your protein-digesting enzymes would indeed digest them. So you have to inject these drugs into your blood stream intravenously. \n\nSome drugs also very damaging to the liver, so instead of swollowing them, you stick them up your rectum. These are suppositories. Drugs absorbed through the rectum go directly into your blood stream and do not first get processed in the liver, so they don't hit the liver too hard. \n\nDrugs can also be snorted through the nose, inhaled into the lungs, dropped into the eye or ear, passed through the skin by way of a patch or cream, or injected into a vein, a muscle or the fat under your skin."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
425qc4 | rights of asylum seekers | If a Syrian were to go through a country that is willing to grant them refugee status (for example, Turkey), are they legally entitled (as dictated by either the UN or EU) to refuse and make their way through other countries and into Germany?
Legalities aside, why is it considered unethical or at least 'abusing the system' for asylum seekers to seek the best possible outcome rather than 'settling'? Shouldn't we hope they all don't just settle, so that countries like Turkey and others aren't taking the entirety of the burden? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/425qc4/eli5_rights_of_asylum_seekers/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz7s12s"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"According to the UN Convention on Refugees, a refugee has the following rights.\n\n > • The right not to be expelled,\nexcept under certain, strictly\ndefined conditions (Article 32);\n\n > • The right not to be punished for\nillegal entry into the territory of a\ncontracting State (Article31);\n\n > • The right to work (Articles 17 to 19);\n\n > • The right to housing (Article 21);\n\n > • The right to education (Article 22);\n\n > • The right to public relief and\nassistance (Article 23);\n\n > • The right to freedom of religion\n(Article 4);\n\n > • The right to access the courts\n(Article 16);\n\n > • The right to freedom of\nmovement within the territory (Article\n26);\n\n > **• The right to be issued identity\nand travel documents (Articles 27 and 28).**\n\n(emphasis added)\n\nIn 1967, these rights were extended regardless of geographic or time limits, up to the extent that the refugees' home becomes safe. That means that for all intents and purposes, a refugee arriving in Greece has a Greek passport until such time as ISIS and Assad are overthrown, or there are substantial reforms to either 'government' that guarantee the rights of returning refugees. \n\nUnder the Schengen agreement, anyone with a Greek passport can travel Europe freely, and Europe has been interpreted as 'one territory' by the UN for refugee purposes. Furthermore, under the 1967 protocol, anyone from anywhere can claim refugee status wherever they are, so once a refugee has crossed the border into Germany or Norway or wherever, they are the responsibility of that country.\n\nThe origins of the agreement date back to the end of the War and the ongoing Korean war. During the War, the Nazis forced thousands of Jews to flee across Europe, and many governments were reluctant to take them on. It was decided that it should be a legal responsibility not to turn people away, both for ethical reasons and practical ones - groups of unwelcome refugees become mobs and looters that facilitate enemy conquests and destabilize nations, where refugees with rights can be more easily controlled.\n\nThe 1967 protocol was a response to some key failures in the 1951 protocol. Most prominently would have been the coming legal obligation for neighboring countries to return Palestinian refugees to Israel, which was seen by the UN as a non-starter, but other ongoing conflicts and unresolved issues mandated permanent extension, such as the ongoing North Korean dictatorship.\n\nIn short, if Europe wants to send the refugees home, it either has to be prepared for armed mobs, looters, and accusations of hypocrisy from the Arab world, or else it needs to invade Syria and occupy it with military force. The latter is likely to have a lower cost in European lives and money."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
adcfwt | why does downs syndrome occur more than other trisomy diseases? | I get that for many chromosomes it’s probably just cause the pregnancy is unviable with a trisomy of that chromosome. However, there are a few other ones, like trisomy 18 and 13, where it is survivable to the point of being detected yet the number of pregnancies with these syndromes are significantly less than Downs Syndrome. Is there some reason why the 21st chromosome appears to be more suspectible to having an extra copy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/adcfwt/eli5_why_does_downs_syndrome_occur_more_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"edfukx9",
"edfutb4",
"edfvje3",
"edfvmig",
"edhka6u"
],
"score": [
18,
2,
2,
12,
2
],
"text": [
"I do not believe that 21 is more susceptible to trisomy, but it is more compatible with life than others. Most pregnancies with any trisomy will not make it to term. People born with trisomy 13 or 18 will rarely survive the first year of life due to the laundry list of complications. \n\nHope this helps!",
"It is not that the fertilization of with an extra chromosome 21 is more common than others from what I understand (in fact 16 seems to be most prevalent), it is just the most likely (other than sex chromosomes) to go to full term, followed by 18 and 13. \n\nIt is important to point out that miscarriages occur in 25-50% of pregnancies, often before the woman knows she is pregnant. Thus, any changes to a normal pregnancy leads to decreased chance of an already less than certain chance of a live birth. ",
"21 is the smallest chromosome. Size of chromosome approximates the number of genes it carries.\n\nWhen you get conception with trisomy of one of the bigger chromosome such as 1,2,3, it will likely cause death because more genes in affected chromosome means it is more likely the screw-up is deadly very early on, maybe even before pregnancy is noticed, maybe even when the baby is just a few cells (not even an embryo).\n\nBasically, the reason Downs is the most common is it's most likely to actually be born.\n\nTrisomy 16 is acutally probably most common, but results in miscarriage.",
"It is exactly because most trisomies are incompatible with fetal development so the pregnancies just don't progress. Chromosome 21 is the smallest, so duplication of it causes less chaos in the cells than if more genetic material was copied. Trisomy 13 and 18 also involve small chromosomes and the nature of the information on those chromosomes may be less harmful when duplicated so those pregnancies can progress to detectible levels. Even so, most Trisomy 13 and 18 pregnancies spontaneously terminate or the child is stillborn or survives only a short time.\nThe only chromosome smaller that 21 is the Y chromosome and cases of XYY genotypes can have so few symptoms that there is no reason to test so no one knows for sure how frequently it happens. The X chromosome is larger, but because one copy of the X chromosome is inactivated in each cell in a normal XX genotype (typical female), having an XXX or XXY also causes very few symptoms and may go completely unnoticed.\n",
"Most other trisomies will result in a miscarriage, sometimes pretty early in pregnancy. Doctors probably aren’t going to try to figure out what caused an early miscarriage unless a woman has several of them, so those trisomies go undetected."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
52buwv | wells fargo scam | Please explain this Wells Fargo scam like I am five.
Much appreciated. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/52buwv/eli5wells_fargo_scam/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7j5778",
"d7j5mkt",
"d7j6zke",
"d7j71un",
"d7j739u",
"d7j75at",
"d7j7fzu",
"d7j7xb4",
"d7j8kcd",
"d7j8y0g",
"d7j9j6j",
"d7j9kkv",
"d7j9lc4",
"d7j9qbl",
"d7j9suu",
"d7j9vi9",
"d7jaal0",
"d7jalb6",
"d7jav5q",
"d7jaxwk",
"d7jb9gz",
"d7jbja2",
"d7jbjxs"
],
"score": [
105,
5164,
47,
31,
237,
676,
574,
11,
196,
15,
83,
105,
3,
60,
3,
5,
33,
2,
34,
11,
2,
14,
8
],
"text": [
"Some employees opened a bunch of accounts for their customers without telling their customers. They did this to meet personal business goals (boss said \"open this many accounts before this time period, or you don't get a bonus check (etc.)). This is illegal and can cost their customers a fortune (opening accounts costs money to the customers).",
"Bankers get a commission (extra money,) for certain actions. These usually invoice opening accounts. The more accounts you open, the more money you get. Commission is a bonus. It's not a requirement for your base salary. Many banks create a quota of sales that they expect their bankers to hit. When accounts are opened with certain products(direct deposit, online banking, etc) is profitable for the bank.\n\nWells Fargo had an environment, where if your bankers were not making enough commission, they were reprimanded. Every location has a limited amount of customers. The quotas at Wells Fargo were much higher than achievable. This is a tactic for any sales force to raise the bar higher to get your team to perform harder. Unfortunately the quotas were so high, and the pressure on the employees was equally high, many resorts to illegal actions to achieve those goals.\n\nBankers opened accounts without the owners permission. Credit cards, checking, savings, online banking, bill pay. They would transfer money around to these accounts, simulate the activity that would get them paid, and transfer it back. The banker hits their numbers, three bank looks profitable, no one thinks about it. This goes on for years, and customers are asking about credit cards/accounts they never applied for.\n\nKeep in mind, when we say bankers, we mean regular employees who make 25k-35k a year before commission.\n\nThis type of stuff isn't uncommon, but such a drastic beach across the board showes that when you create a highly pressured incentive based system, and punish those who perform poorly, you'll create a corrupt system. There was no one looking to see if these dates were legitimate, they only cared that numbers were met.",
"The retail banking division of Wells Fargo incentivized employees to open different types of accounts for their customers that their customers never consented to. These employees would get a commission, bonus, or just be able to keep their jobs if they would meet the corporate target of accounts opened. You would go into a Wells Fargo to open a checking account, but they would open up a credit line or a credit card without your knowledge and the employee/bank would be awarded a bonus for these new accounts. They would also go through their system and look for accounts with little or automated activity and open up new accounts on the sly. I'm not sure how they kept this knowledge from people, but I assume they were pretty good at targeting people that had a low probability of examining their credit situation on a regular basis. Retail banking (tellers, loan officers, bank managers) is, basically, a sales job. The people that got canned(though certainly responsible), aren't the ones that were in charge of this deceit. The higher ups that really knew and pushed for this behavior have plausible deniability and celebrate the fact that the fine is such a small portion of the profits that they generated with this scam that they accept the soon forgotten scandal as the cost of doing business, and laugh all the way to the bank. ",
"Just realized that I recently noticed a savings account with a balance of $5 when I logged online to pay my Security Finance car loan. That's some bullshit. I'll be calling them soon...",
"I had a job interview at Wells a month ago after leaving my other financial institution.\n\nThe group interview went great, but during the 1-on-1, the manager was such a dick - I was very successful at my previous job, and a top performer in my region, and so I shared my numbers, which he then scoffed at and said my quarterly production is what they'd expect on a monthly basis. He then mocked me for the amount of money I was being paid at my previous job and said I was being untruthful, even though I explained the low pay was the reason for me leaving.\n\nI told him the strategies that brought me success, all of which he rolled his eyes at and called a waste of time. I couldn't believe how unprofessional and dickish he was.\n\nI didn't get a call back, obviously. That environment has to be brutal.\n\nAlso this is either the 2nd or 3rd time Wells has received national scrutiny for doing this. I remember an article from 2011 calling the bank a 'pressure cooker sales' environment where employees were caught doing this exact same thing and were officially sued by the city of LA. I would absolutely never bank with Wells, and would stash my money in a mattress if Wells was my only choice.\n\nGiven all the trouble they've been in, I'd question the judgment of anyone who continues to bank there.",
"I am a banker (salesperson). You are an existing customer. My job is to sell you more products than you currently have. The accounts you already have open don't do anything for me, I get no credit for maintaining your account as it is. \nSo I position our new accounts as alternate accounts: don't shop online with your main checking account, it might get hacked. Open this extra checking account and simply transfer money into it when you want to shop online and make purchases from that.\nWow! Your employer has a corporate perk you're entitled to if you open a business account. No, I can't convert your account (I can), you'll have to create a brand new account. You'll need a debit card, a savings account and online access, it's a package. Eventually you may want to close your old account as the new one will start to be the one you use more often. I'll even help you set up a $25 transfer from the new savings account to the new checking account (and then back to the savings) to simulate 'activity' to keep you from being charged service fees. \nOh, you've got a business/commercial account? How many authorized signers do you have on the account? They'll each be getting a commercial debit card. They'll all be sent to you, you don't have to give them to the individuals, you can destroy them if you'd like. \nEach of the \"new\" accounts, or debit cards, or services were all notches towards a daily goal to \"sell\" new products. \nMore often than not, the customer was told what was happening, but they were deceived into believing it had to be that way. It wasn't until fees popped up or spouses/parents questioned duplicate accounts and services that it was addressed. \n \nSource: I was a Personal Banker 1 (salesperson) from 2011-2012, watched it happen, reported it to HR, didn't do any of it and stuck to my morals. Walked out when I got a new job. It was truly the worst job I've ever had. Shame of it all was it was good people doing bad things just so they could keep a job.",
"I used to work for Wells Fargo as a teller. The pressure to sell is insane. I remember having managers tell me \"everyone needs a credit card. Everyone\" I got written up for arguing saying I was not going to sell credit cards to people who come in on a weekly basis overdrawn and have no idea why because they don't keep track of their spending. A credit card would be the worst possible thing you could give that type of person. They don't care though. They just want you to sell wether it's wrong or right. They hire people that their job is to literally stand behind you and breathe on your neck all day long and pressure you to pressure your customers into bull shit they don't need. And if you don't well your ass is grass. Moved to a smaller community bank since then and it's so much better. They actually will question you personally if you open up a product for someone that doesn't appear to be a good fit. After only being at this new bank I quickly moved up and now work in the mortgage department. It's good to know there are honest Finicial institutions out there. ",
"The simple version is that a bunch of people at Wells Fargo signed up a bunch of people for accounts that cost them money to use, even though they didn't ask for them. Now there's over 2 million unauthorized accounts just so certain people at Wells Fargo could make more money. They got caught and all of these people who have accounts they didn't want are angry.",
"My ex wife worked for WF. One day I received multiple notices that I had over draft fees on accounts I had no idea existed. My parents started to receive the same notices. When I asked her about it she told me she'd look into it. I kept receiving notices and finally when I'd had enough of the lack of action that came with her \"looking into it\" I told her I was going into her branch to speak with the manager. She flipped out asking if I didn't trust her why were we together. I explained that I keep getting notices and the fees/penalties were getting insanely high. She told me that her boss was \"handling\" it. \n\nNeedless to say we split up a couple weeks after this. I went to a different branch to speak with someone about the problem. None of the paperwork had my signature except for my original account which was opened as a favor to my wife at the time. Same thing with accounts my parents had opened. WF put unrealistic goals on their employees and then management encouraged this kind of behavior. They ended up closing the unauthorized accounts but the one thing that they didn't fix was the money that had been withdrawn from both mine and my parents accounts without our consent. WF allowed my ex wife to remove money from these accounts without our permission.\n\nMy mortgage at the time was with WF. When I would go in to pay the mortgage I would get the full court press about opening up new accounts. I would politely explain at a rather loud volume my situation and dissatisfaction with WF. After a this happening a few times I was never asked to open accounts again. I have sinced moved my mortgage to my current credit union and refuse to do business with WF ever again. ",
"I ended up having one of these accounts opened on me about 2-3 years ago. I had been debating a new account, but never took the time to come in and set it up. Left my details to make an appointment with a banker, and lo and behold the account just appeared in my online accounts listing one day.\n\nOverdrafted that fucker by about 4-500 before they closed it. What do you know? Wells Fargo has never made any attempt to recover those funds, despite still being a customer with them as of today. I can only imagine they looked into it at some point, realized the opening was bullshit, and ate the loss.",
"Actual ELI5:\n\n\nYou open a bank account and give me all your info. I make $1. I have all your info already, I open another account with the same exact info without your permission. I make another $1.\n\n\nSimple as that.",
"I am a Wells Fargo customer. This happened to me.\n\nAbout 8 years ago, I went to the branch for a routine reason (don't remember exactly, maybe to deposit a check).\n\nI come home and see that someone opened a checking account and a savings account for me. It's just...there.\n\nI go back to the location and am like...WTF?\n\nThey point me towards the banker who did it and I'm like dude...what the fuck? You can't do this without my permission.\n\nHe proceeds to (amazingly) not back down, but instead give me the sales pitch about how it's beneficial to have the accounts open for this and that reason.\n\nI cut him off after like 15 seconds and went dude. You opened two accounts without my permission. That's not acceptable at all. Close the accounts now. I don't want to hear it.\n\nHis manager came in, I repeated what happened to the manager. He dismissed the banker and closed my accounts for me and apologized.\n\nI hope the fucker got fired because what he did seems borderline illegal?",
"I was convinced to switch my account which was completely free to one that is now charging me a fee every month. I was misled about this new account and was told there would be no changes to fees or anything like that (which was true at the time, but now I don't meet the requirements to avoid a fee and the old account didn't have those requirements). If I call them and complain about it, will they reverse all the fees? It's been charging me every month for a couple years now and I've been to do something about it but have just been too lazy to get it done (exactly what the company was planning on happening, I'm sure)",
"Direct from a former Wells Fargo banker:\n-Salary was about 30k. Bonus topped out at like 2k/year, but maybe 2/30 bankers in my district would hit bonus and 1.5k of that bonus was dependent on the branches overall 5 star ratings from 8 random reviews from customers each quarter. \n\nWe were required to open 2 checking/day. The branch I worked at was based the the demographically oldest county in the USA. We maybe had 60-100 customers/day walk in, 4 bankers, and 2-4 customers wanting to open checking accounts. The rest had to be self generated aka calling 80 year olds and convincing them to open a checking account. Obviously that wasn't going to happen, so the guilty bankers would open accounts for these people, without their knowledge, using, let's say $50 from their savings account. \n\nThe best legal way we got additional accounts was when people lost their checkbook, we would tell them their account number has been compromised, close out their old account and open them a new one (it counted!). Oh, don't forget Identity Theft Insurance! You are a huge rusk for that now. \n\nI also knew of bankers open credit cards under people's name \"accidentally\" in order to hit that quota. \n\nAnyway, commissions aside, our quotas were so unattainable that your only chance was pulling BS or Illegal moves in order to hit them. ",
"So with all of this, ELI5 how I, a wells Fargo customer, know if they opened anything extra in my name I don't know about and how it can affect me ",
"Bank staff have to hit certain sales goals or they get fired. Opening accounts or creating credit cards is an example. Some of these goals were completely silly and couldn't be met, so staff would create these accounts or cards without permission and move money around to make it look like they were real, or tricking people to open accounts they dont need.",
"I worked at WF for 7 years. This happened way before 2011 like most article says. I was there from 2004 and if you didn't' game. You didn't eat. Most of the gaming was not credit cards but debit cards and online banking. Each account was called \"core\" which stands for core accounts. Then you're incentivized on \"packs\" which was 3 other cores. So a basic pack was a checking account, savings, debit and online banking. If you didn't make that goal, no bonus. \n\nHonestly, I feel that we were all forced to game. I left banking completely because of this. Such a horrible place to work.",
"We went in to inquire about a business line of credit, they told us we had to open a checking account to apply. Short time later we also received a credit card in the mail. All a load of crap.",
"Until someone goes to jail from Director or C level, nothing will change. And the next scandal is around the corner.\n\nThe fine was 158 million........WF last quarterly earnings was 9.9 billion. The attorney's, regulatory officials, and Corporation made out like a bandit and the media got it's story.\n\nRemove regulation, and put it straight into criminal courts. \n\nBanking is a necessity, it should not be commingled with other things, especially since the Public John Q. Taxpayer insures all these funds and then gets charged to use their own money or store it.",
"Not an explanation, but a question since we've got Well Fargo employee's posting here. Since all this fraudulent activity has come out what has Wells Fargo done to address it? Has the pressure been reduced, or are you guys still expected to do the undoable?",
"Just read the thread on this.\n\nIsn't this type of scam, mega illegal in the US?\n\nIn Denmark it would one of the hugest scandals with swift justice in newer times, if it happened here.",
"Bosses pressurize employees into opening phantom accounts to make the numbers.\n\nBosses collect big fat bonuses.\n\n(Employees then fired.)",
"a lot about \"commissions\" here. having a nephew that worked for them I suspect it was closer to \"keeping their job\". the working environment could be brutal and ruthless. everyone gets told to push products to all the customers and they get evaluated based on adds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
143vex | why are some former presidents referred to as former president and some referred to as president? | I've just noticed recently that when talking about former presidents they'll refer to some as Former President (Like I just hear George HW Bush referred to as Former President George HW Bush) and some as just president (I often here Bill Clinton referred to as President Clinton)
Is there a reason for this or is it just at the discretion of the person saying it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/143vex/eli5_why_are_some_former_presidents_referred_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c79moe0",
"c79mxco"
],
"score": [
3,
8
],
"text": [
"Just discretion. But I must say I also seem to hear \"President Clinton\" much more often than \"Former President...\"",
"\"President\" is an official title, but it is also a job. If you were ever the President of the United States, you are entitled to use the title President for the rest of your life. Thus, everyone who was ever President is titled \"President\", but every one except Barack Obama is also a \"former President\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
26z3pr | are first world countries only wealthy because third world countries are poor? | Going shopping for groceries I often think that most of the things we can buy take a tremendous amount of time and manpower to be produced and to be shipped to us. Yet we can buy exotic fruits, coffee, electronic devices, etc for very little money.
When I work I earn money that represents (somewhat) my amount/time of work in some way. I can then trade my salary for goods that were produced by someone else who spent time working. But if I buy, let's say, a banana I only have to pay a very small fraction of my salary. Yet to grow, harvest and get that banana to my local supermarket you need countless workers. Given the low price it is obvious that someone at the end gets paid a laughable amount of money for his work.
We all know that labour is super cheap in developing countries and that this is the reason for companies to outsource it to those countries. Does that mean that if ,given the hypothetical case, all third world countries disappeared or that first world countries could only trade between each other, the luxury we live in in first world countries would also disappear and shelves in the supermarket wouldn't be half as full?
I think, I might come off as extremely naive here but I feel I lack knowlede about economics, world markets etc. to wrap my head around this. If someone could elaborate a bit I would be really glad.
So basically the question is, do I only live a comfortable life because some poor guy on the other side of the world does not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26z3pr/eli5_are_first_world_countries_only_wealthy/ | {
"a_id": [
"chvu8y0",
"chvuamz",
"chvv5ls",
"chvxfbe",
"chvxln2",
"chvxwyb",
"chvyh1y",
"chvymwb",
"chvz31r",
"chvzyau",
"chw05mx",
"chw0q96",
"chw4ys0",
"chw558f",
"chw829v"
],
"score": [
11,
9,
2,
2,
7,
47,
2,
6,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I hope somebody can answer your question as it is a very good one. But it is very, very likely you are right, and that we only live comfortably because someone else works their ass off all for an unfair amount of hours and for a joke of a salary.",
"It's complicated. I'd say you are right for things you get from third world countries, especially produce and even clothing. I don't think prices would go up too crazy if they had the same quality of life as you (maybe double? but that's still a pretty small part of your salary) because many of these things are mass-produced anyways.\n\nIt's an interesting part of globalization though. China used to be nothing but a third-world country. Now they have much more of a \"middle class\" growing, especially in urban areas. So they are creating a demand for goods, such as Apple products. Apple puts together a lot of their products in China, and now with rising overall wealth comes increased knowledge of human rights as the west calls them. Now they don't want to work in crappy factories where they will die due to exposure or exhaustion. They also want to make more money. So yes, companies will always find ways to do things as cheap as possible, but it doesn't necessarily mean you buying those products is keeping anybody down as a third-world country.\n\nBut yes some companies do manipulate politics in some countries in such a way that it's not overall beneficial to the country or its people. Usually these practices are facilitated by corruption in the local governments. So how do you keep yourself from buying in to hurting other human beings with your purchases? It's very complicated, but I'd say learn as much as you can and try to figure it out.",
"No. \n\nOur economics today don't rely on the fact that goods from third world countries are cheap. It is handy that they are for certain products on supermarket shelves, but ultimately the western economy doesn't hinge on this. \n\nHowever, it could easily be said that the fact that we're richer than they are was down to the fact that Europe colonised Africa, the Americas and East Asia and not the other way around. Back then, the economies were based on the fact that they ruled those nations which later became 3rd world, and the wealth our forefathers earnt then built the money dependant capitalist economy of today. Their ancestors didn't, so they stayed relatively poor. ",
"No. Basically if we didn't trade with them the only things they'd have would de bananas, coffee or whatever thier raw material is. By trade with rich countries they get access to high tech goods, medicines etc. \n\nYou need to remember that a lot of these places would be subsistance farmers only without industry to make goods to trade with us.",
"Value of money is not absolute but relative. If you live in Manhattan, 30K a year is nothing. But if you make the same amount somewhere in the Mid-West it's probably easily enough to have a normal life. (I actually don't know. I'm just assuming MW is inexpensive place to live). It's the same with the 3rd world countries. A few thousand dollars might buy a house or a farm there. In Manhattan it's a months rent. Countries like China have raised our standards of living a lot. But we have done same to them. Without us, this banana farmer wouldn't even have a job anymore. \n\nYou might want to watch Johan Norberg's Free or Equal? It has more about how free trade creates prosperity everywhere.\n\n_URL_0_ ",
"Theoretically, no. Wealth is not a zero sum game, because wealth is not strictly measured in the amount of actual, physical dollars which exist. Right now, third world countries aren't generating enough value with their resources, and a huge part of that is exploitative rather than endemic.\n\nSo I don't need to take a dollar from someone to have a dollar's worth of wealth, I just need to have something that I can theoretically obtain a dollar for. That includes my time and labor. The question, of course, is whether I could afford to purchase products if they were made by people who earn a living wage, and based on what I can tell, I think the answer is probably yes. If every adult on Earth earned enough money to live on, prices for products probably would go up to compensate, but it doesn't have to be a one-to-one correlation with the increase in wages unless–and this matters–companies insist on making the profits they're making now.\n\nMost companies could make up in volume what they lose in labor costs, because paying people more money opens up new markets. As it stands, the reason this isn't being done is because there isn't any incentive. People are buying Nikes and iPads without regard to whether the labor which produced them is reasonable. Most companies operating in a capitalist market aren't going to bother jumping through hoops to make their product human rights friendly.",
"The general answer is no. Economics is demand driven, not supply driven. It doesn't matter how many widgets you make if no one wants them. It's about how many people want widgets compared to how many there are. Simulateneously, even if there are very few of a certain kind of widget for sale, the price doesn't go up unless everyone wants them and is competing over them. They'd be worthless either way.\n\nIf every third world country dropped off the face of the earth, the demand for all these things still exists. Obviously if they just poofed, the sudden lack of supply would really hurt the prices, but suppose that these countries slowly shift away from agriculture/production over time. Well the demand for these products/services doesn't go away, so as they start to shrink, new technologies, innovations or laborers fill that gap, keeping things relatively stable. The price of a thing is set by its apparent value to others, because markets fill demand, not by the number of people doing the production.\n\nNow obviously there are corporate cronies out to manipulate these prices and make life difficult for both the laborer and the consumer so they can benefit. This part of the drawbacks of having corporations tied up so closely with law, especially the American legal system. To that end, it takes an informed consumer to avoid these bad situations, and to prop up companies whose actions are in line with your preferences.\n\nOne last note about scarcity. Human demands are limitless, especially in terms of our desires (as opposed to basic needs). What we define as \"luxury\" and \"third world\" is relative, even if the terms are new. At one point, owning any books at all was a luxury, now common place. At another point, transportation was luxurious, now between mass transit and the advent of the automobile, most people in this country can afford them, but in others, they can't. As we demand new innovations as consumers, older things become less luxurious, until the technologies of decades ago become considered outdated and lowly, and different peoples economies grow in line with their scarcities and their consumers' demands.",
"It has very little to do with third world countries being poor and the people here claiming that it is a major factor are economically illiterate. Harsh, I know, but true. Consider, if that truly were a major factor in the relative prosperity of the Western World, how can the average standard of living in the world seen a nearly continuous increase since the 1900s? Or for a period closer to us in time, consider 1970-2012 or so. This period of time saw absolutely massive economic growth for more than 3 billion people living in Asia giving rise to hundreds of millions of near middle class families while we saw *simultaneous* increases, albeit not as big, in the developed world. How could that be if we were rich just because they are poor?\n\nThe real answer here is the developed world is rich because it has a much longer history of capitalism and investment. This means that the accumulated capital of the Western World over the last three centuries obviously *vastly* outstrips the available capital in the third world. If you aren't familiar with what capital is, it's essentially an umbrella term for means of production. So more capital = more factories, better educated workers, stronger infrastructures, more efficient methods of production etc etc. This leverages the labor of western workers, making them massively more productive than their counterparts in the third world and that's the real reason you can buy a lot of bananas for little work.",
"The wealthy do survive by exploitation.",
"Imagine if for some reason wealthy countries only traded with each other, simple economics says that the cost of products will rise, because demand in wealthy countries hasn't changed while supply from poorer countries has dried up i.e. you still want an iphone, but no one is there to provide it as cheaply as you want it. The same will go for your food and everything else, if only because the cost of making stuff (wages, machinery etc) is higher in developed countries than in poorer countries. So, yes your living standard will decrease quite a bit. \n\nNow imagine what happens to the poorer countries. They have suddenly stopped trading with developed countries, so their exports to them become zero. The important thing here then is how much of their stuff they export to developed countries. I would imagine China would be massively impacted by this situation and also the oil producing nations too, since most of their exports go to developed countries for now. So when the trade suddenly disappears, there is a lot stuff they made that is no one is buying. This will lead to a lot of factories closing down. Only the ones who can make enough of a profit by switching to selling to poorer nations, or who didn't sell their stuff to the rich nations will survive. Suddenly a lot people who were making not that much mo will make even less money, or not at all. \n\nSo the simple economic answer is that if rich and poor nations stopped trading with each other, your living standards will decrease and their living standards will also decrease. This is because trade is (theoretically) what they call a positive sum game. Trading helps both the richer and poorer nation. BUT, this doesn't mean that richer nations can't do more to help poorer nations \"develop\" more quickly. \n\nAlso, sometimes trade isn't actually good for a poor country for a variety of reasons. I will give one example. There are some countries somewhere in Africa that mostly mine and sell their natural resources. It has gotten to such a situation that these countries manufacturing industries have actually become smaller because it is more profitable to export the natural resources. Their service industry is also focused around helping the natural resource sector. Because natural resources are cheaper, they eventually make less money from them than if they had built stuff like cars or made clothes. If this wasn't bad enough, prices for natural resources have been in a slow but terminal decline for the last 30 (not sure of the number, but a long time) years. This means that these countries are getting less and less money for the resources they export. They have got caught up in a situation from which there is no easy escape. \n\nREADING LIST: If you have the time, I would suggest looking in to these books. They are written with little to no economic knowledge required\n\nHa-Joon Chang, Bad Samaritans: The Guilty Secrets of Rich Nations and the Threat to Global Prosperity\n\nJagdish Bhagwati, In Defense of Globalization: With a New Afterword\n\nOne is sort-of anti-globalisation, the other is mostly pro. \n\nI haven't read the following, so I don't know how technical they are, but both are written by really good economists:\n\nJoseph Stiglitz, Globalization and Its Discontents\n\nDani Rodrik, The Globalization Paradox: Why Global Markets, States, and Democracy Can't Coexist",
"No. Your high quality of life is not extracted out of someone else's, because economics is not a zero sum problem.\n\nI think you might also be visualizing things incorrectly. Take the banana as an example. You're right in the fact that thousands of people work hard on the plantation that produced that banana and that hundreds of others are involved in shopping that banana to your store.\n\nBut the output of the plantation isn't one banana, it's tens of millions of them. The time invested on your one banana is measured in seconds. You spend a small fraction of your salary to buy a small fraction of the plantation and shipping network's output.\n\nThe importance is economies of scale. The larger an operation is, the less overhead it has and the thinner the profit margin can be while still being profitable. One guy raising bananas could never make it profitable to send his crop to one store half way across the world. The bananas would be ridiculously expensive. It is only possible because of the large scale of both production and distribution. Otherwise no one would have access to bananas.\n\nThe western world went through a very long period of increasing education and industrialization that lasted centuries. From an economics perspective, the banana plantation laborer isn't worth very much. He has a limited skill set and is extremely replaceable. You at your job are not as replaceable and not very many people will work cheaper than you, ergo your salary is more. You are not paid a lot because someone somewhere else is paid less.",
"Think of the world's wealth as a pie. The actual size of the pie is the *nominal wealth* and the cut each nation get is the *relative wealth*. It's important to understand this distinction when you talk economics.\n\nWhen people say it's \"not a zero sum game\" they are referring to the nominal wealth. If US owns 25% of the pie and China owns 10% of the pie and the pie grew in size then they both became \"pie wealthy\" as does everyone else. \n\nNow let's talk relative wealth. In this case it is absolutely true you benefit because someone else has a hard shitty life. Resources on this earth is finite and therefore has a finite price. If that banana farmer get the same salary as you, then the price of banana will absolutely rise. And even worst since that banana farmer now can finally afford his own bananas, driving up the price even further until demand meets supply.\n\nThis distinction is even more evident when we discuss inelastic strategically useful resources like oil. Wars have been fought over who gets oil and who don't. Seen any poor oil exporting countries? \n\n \n\n",
"I'm a bit late, but ELI5 gets these sort of questions every now and then but I have never read a decent (IMO) answer, so I thought of writing one myself. \n\nInstead of answering your question I think it's better to try to explain what makes a country rich or poor according to mainstream economics. There are many theories/ideas so I'll name a few:\n\n**Neoclassical/Solow Model:** Imagine the whole economy is a mine, what factors affect the mine's production? The more workers in the mine the more rock will be mined, but too many workers will make the mine run out of easily accessible rock quite quickly, mining will increase even more if the workers are equipped with excavators instead of shovels, and production will only increase if the workers have the necessary education/skills to use the mine. If you think of the entire economy as a mine then rich countries are rich because they have low population growth (so the mine doesn't run out), lots of capital goods (so they can dig quickly with machines) and the education/skills to use them, while poor countries are stuck using their hands to dig for minerals. \n\nObviously this theory is extremely simple, but it can actually explain a lot (especially if you are from the first world). Most third world countries produce things in a relatively primitive manner, the agricultural sector in most third world countries lacks things like heavy machinery, bio engineered seeds, original research, and even things like crop cycles (it's just slash and burn), ie poor countries are poor because they lack the necessary resources to produce the goods and services that are valued by their own citizens and the world at large.\n\nHaving this in mind I would also like to say that many people severely overestimate the amount of time that is needed to produce many things in first world countries compared to third world countries. For instance you say that it's obvious that if a banana costs so little someone at the end gets paid a laughable amount of money for his work, but it's completely the opposite. Rich countries produce much more agricultural products than third world countries ([link](_URL_0_), and most of their workers earn much more than the average world wage (if only because the average human earns so little). Agricultural products (ie bananas) are cheap because agriculture is a sector with many machines and technology which allows few workers to produce a lot of (cheap) goods.\n\n**Ramsey Model:** Sometimes you don't need bigger or different machines, sometimes you just need to use the ones you have in a better way. For instance, seasons/weather vary a lot between regions in the world, a poor tropical country can't simply copy the agricultural practices of a rich, first world country, it must first adapt those practices to it's weather and environmental conditions, which is easier said than done. There are many examples of this, but I personally don't like this explanation very much for different reasons.\n\n**Political/Other Institutions:** Rich countries, in general, have relatively clean and transparent governments with common-sense rules, while poor countries are more corrupt and have sillier regulations. There are many, many examples of this but if you have ever lived in a third world country you would be amazed by petty corruption, the amount of red tape and silly rules. Although old, I think the best example comes from Maoist China. During the 1950s the Chinese government decided to kill rats, flies, mosquitoes and sparrows as they spread disease and ate grain seeds. The thing is, sparrows also eat locusts and other crop-eating insects, so when their natural predators were killed they reproduced like rabbits, ending in the world's greatest famine with a death toll of about 20-30 million people. Now obviously no country has a perfect agricultural policy and there were many factors at play in the chinese famine, but most historians agree that chinese government policy HELPED make the famine worse, whatever stupid things the US or other first world country does none of them has helped cause a famine killing millions.\n\n**Terms of Trade:** Most countries export a limited amount of goods and import the rest. Rich countries export expensive products, allowing them to import a lot in turn, while poor countries export cheap products, which only allows them to import very little. If this were true the first thing you should ask yourself is why don't poor countries switch to produce expensive goods instead? What a few economists answered is quite interesting. The price of goods varies a lot, most poor countries started producing goods and services many decades ago, their choices probably made sense at the time but might make little sense now. The best example is Argentina, they were one of the richest countries about 100 years ago, but they mainly produced and sold agricultural products. You could be a first world countries 100 years ago exporting cattle, but cattle is much more cheaper now so Argentina is only a middle income country now.\n\nThere are many many other theories and smaller ideas of why countries are rich or poor, and I barely discussed international trade, but I think those four give a nice overview. \n\nSo to discuss your question: Are first world countries only wealthy because third world countries are poor?\n\nA few, not most, economists would answer yes due to the terms of trade theory. For instance, Venezuela (oil exporter) is poorer than the US. If the price of oil increased by enough you could see both countries become equally wealth (Venezuela would be richer, the US poorer), but this implies that Venezuela is poor because oil is cheap which I don't think makes much sense (oil isn't cheap!, Norway manages just fine with the current oil price!).\n\nMost economists would tell you the answer is more or less no. Poor countries are poor because they lack capital goods, education, technology and the political institutions necessary to produce goods and services, but none of those things are zero-sum! \n\nHaving said that, in my opinion the answer will depend a bit on the country. I don't really think you can claim Japan is only rich because North Korea is poor, if only because I don't think they trade with each other. Spain wasn't poor 50 years ago because the EU was rich, it was poor because of Franco's regime, and it's richer now due to better government policies under democracy, EU help, tourism, etc. The US isn't rich because Nicaragua is poor, if only because Nicaragua is really little, but I don't think anyone can claim US policy has helped any central american country (because of the coups, the CIA influence, the repression, etc). I don't think the UK is rich because India is poor, but I really don't think UK's influence in India caused anything other than human rights abuses and economic backwardness.\n\nI don't know if anyone will even read the answer, but I hope it helps!",
"This idea is ridiculous. Why?\n1. China created more wealth, in less time, and for more people than any country in the history of the world and they just finished doing it, it's not a 200 year old example where everything has changed and the example doesn't hold. They did this, beginning as a poor country, per capita -- and have progressed a lot since then. Soon, they will be the largest economy in the world.\n2. After WWII, Japan, will no natural resources to speak of, no oil at all, on a small island, went from a poor backward, primitive nation -- really to one of the wealthiest, most advanced and also largest economies in the world.\n3. Germany had more natural resources, but was bombed flat, just a wreck, after the war -- and today, look at Germany.\n4. Americans at one time had 50% of the world's GDP and only 5% of it's population. They weren't stealing the stuff, they were making it. During Mao's reign he killed 80 million and never got the economy going. After his death and the adoption of capitalist principles in the economy (not politically!) they had their miracle. It's simple, take a poor country, educate them (Japan, Germany, China), provide energy at low cost, supply a transportation network and then let people keep what they make or earn. Before long, you'll have the same effect.\n5, This is what the Ukraine struggle is over, basically. The Ukrainians (who only make $8,000 a year, per capita), got a close look at their neighbor Poland, which went with the West at the fall of the USSR. At that time Polish per capita income and the Ukrainian number were very close. Polish per capita has tripled in the 20 years since then, while Ukrainian per capita income actually declined a little since then. Naturally the Ukrainians wanted to sign their own deal with the West and get on with the aforementioned changes which were expected to make things better. Putin, realizing that one after another of the few \"buffer\" countries left around him -- would eventually follow suit, had to react.\n6. The Chinese are in the same boat. Authoritarian regimes can't supply the material for growth without risking the throne. That's why so many small, poorly run countries can't turn it around. The rules for success don't allow for complete control and they'd rather starve their own people than give up power. This conflict will probably rip China in two, in a big civil war, eventually, because in the end, people want prosperity.\n7. Chavez consolidated power, took private property from the corporations (and the people) and the economy tanked and won't recover until they denounce all that nonsense and go back to a market economy. There are hundreds of examples like this and NOT one of the opposite.\n8. Market economies make for well fed, educated and competitive populations, and so far, nothing else we've ever invented, even comes close.",
"No. Poor countries are poor basically because they lack the technology richer countries possess. In general, rich countries possess abundant capital (technology/machinery/ways to make products easier or better). Poor countries on the other hand possess abundant labor which is why you see very low wages. With so many people competing for jobs, employers can pay less and still obtain workers. Poor countries can improve their standard of living by importing more capital. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLTkZ-ttYIc"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-agricultural-exporters-map.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ngsoj | what use has the international prototype kilogram? | What's the use of the international prototype kilogram?
Why do we need it and why is it so protected against mutation?
Propably another stupid question: Why and how did they specify exactly this as the norm Kilo? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ngsoj/eli5_what_use_has_the_international_prototype/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmdgp4t",
"cmdh8gv"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"The kilogram is the only unit that currently isn't defined by some constant of the universe. The second comes from atomic transitions, the meter by the distance light travels in some amount of time in a vacuum, the mole by the number of atoms in 12g of carbon-12. But the kilogram doesn't have a definition other than \"however much the prototype kilogram weighs.\" It's the only one of the seven base units that is this way, and we need a definition to derive a lot of other units and ultimately do science.\n\nAnd it's the only one that is based on a physical object because so far no method based on a universal constant has produced a definition that is precise and consistent enough.",
"This video explains it very well in simple to understand terminology. they also have a lot of other good videos.\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l9gqTzAbXI"
]
] |
|
68jwh6 | why is international shipping a lot cheaper when we buy something online and have it delivered to our house, but when we go to fedex/ups/etc. to ship something overseas it costs $100+? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68jwh6/eli5_why_is_international_shipping_a_lot_cheaper/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgz288h"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"International shipping is based off of weight, and by shipper's contract with various Couriers involved.\n\nMost of what you buy overseas already has a shipping contract and is shipped to a local warehouse and stored for final distrobution to the buyer from a storage location closer to where you live. If it isn't then it's shipped directly with a shippers already pre-arrainged shipping manifest.\n\nSay I order 200 glass beads from a retailer in Vietnam. Those beads are already being sold to dozens of customers stateside, and could be in batches of thousands or millions of beads already being shipped.\n\nSomeone Stateside who already has those beads is the one who boxes up a shipment and sends it out to me, even though they were made and shipped to the US from out of country.\n\nBut back to the point... When you use FEDEX or UPS locally to ship say, a package, you are using a retail service.\n\nWhat happens is different. Instead of a shipper of goods from out of country who makes a product and figures out how to ship it to you while figuring in the costs of that shipping, FEDEX and UPS among other couriers are offering a different kind of service going back out.\n\nYou aren't a person with a lucrative contract sending things out on a containership, or mailing them stateside in pre-arrainged shipping lanes. You are sending something out and literally paying for a 1 time usage space on one of their trucks/planes/ships that is going to take your package and send it somewhere else.\n\nThe crux of this problem is that where retailers and wholesalers from out of country, they already have vast contracts that they can ship things in the country with. They buy container vessels and ship using large cargo crates, packed full of products and things to be sold here to us, and ship it for @bulk rates.\n\nAs a retail customer of UPS, you are sending a package that does not have that level of treatment. Outgoing packages, like everything else sent retail shipping, are going to dozens of different locations, and each inch of that precious shipping space is vital. If a plane is 1lb overburdened, it costs the company money. If one package is just slightly out of shape or size, it costs them money.\n\nSo your package, has to be billed to compensate for the space and weight it takes up, and the time that it will take to deliver it to your given destination.\n\nCause you know.... who else do you know who can carry that package to Yemen for you? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2su42x | how do snipers account for wind and gravity on long-range shots? | When I was watching American sniper, and he fired that shot more than a mile away, I was wondering how he was able to be so accurate. I always thought that you fire in a straight line at your target as a sniper but what it wind and gravity affects a shot from that distance? I'm just trying to figure out how snipers can accurately hit a long distant shot despite all these variables. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2su42x/eli5_how_do_snipers_account_for_wind_and_gravity/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnsu53f",
"cnsuiox"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Lots and lots of practise in differing conditions. Long shots require elevation to compensate for the drop due to gravity, also you need fire at where they will be and not where they are now.",
"Computers. \nSpecifically Ballistic Trajectory Computers.\n\n[Chris Kyle talks about the shot on an interview with Conan](_URL_0_), and how much of that shot was a matter of targeting computers to handle things like gravity and wind effect. Still a great shot, but not a shot that would be possible without modern technology. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiVDtNjORbY"
]
] |
|
5zpeyy | what are film/analog cameras and why are they considered cool? | I see a lot of Instagram posts with the hashtag #filmisnotdead too, and yeah these photos have a cool retro feel to them, but are they considered better in the photography world? Like, what's so amazing about film/analog and how are they different/better than photographs taken from DSLR cameras? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zpeyy/eli5what_are_filmanalog_cameras_and_why_are_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"dezy8nj",
"dezyveh",
"df0nuws"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Firstly... Holy fuck does this post make me feel old.\n\n2ndly it's not nessecarly that film is better than digital, its that you're more connected to the work as you have to take it and process it.. You're more in the moment with taking the photo and not distracted by a billion different settings and checking the image after each shot because you don't get to see what you've taken until your process it.\n\nFilm is processed into negatives from the camera roll, using chemical baths to draw out the photo and different timings and chemical applications can create different effects on the the film.\nThe negatives are then processed and blown up into prints.\n\nWhere film does tend to outshine digital media at least in still photography is in large format photography where you can capute images that capable of being blown up to enormous proportions ",
"Some people like the discipline required to shoot on analogue film: you only have limited film and no instant review, so you more care is required. ",
"Film has unique grain to it that you don't see in digital, and much better dark and highlight tones, as well as being capable of higher resolution when used right. The downside of film is that it's much less sensitive to light than digital so you can end up with blurrier or grainier photos. \n\nFilm is considered cool because the grain texture it has looks interesting and it's a much harder way to take a picture so it shows skill.\n\nOverall having used both I prefer digital as if you get a high end enough camera like a 5D Mark III the quality difference all but disappears and you can edit the photo to have the same feel with regard to the grain look."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ndd0f | why is college drinking so under regulated? | I'm currently a sophomore at a large public institution in the Northwest, with a definitely active party life but not like California or the South by any means.
With all of the health and legal problems posed by binge drinking, and specifically, underage binge drinking, why is alcohol consumption on campuses and specifically in the Greek system (which I am apart of) barely monitored at all?
I mean, I get that it's not like high school where drinking is like "cool and hip" or like "edgy," and it's naive to think college students won't drink- but it just seems like at least for my school, every administrator or public official turns the biggest blind eye I've ever seen to egregious violations of the law. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ndd0f/eli5_why_is_college_drinking_so_under_regulated/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvmzmwl",
"cvmzp34"
],
"score": [
17,
4
],
"text": [
"Ever heard the phrase \"pick your battles\"? College kids are going to drink, and trying to stop them is a waste of effort and resources. Furthermore, a drinking age of 21 is relatively new. ",
"Federal law mandates you must be 21 to drink. That stops absolutely no one. Even if the university tried to crack down by spending thousands of dollars, students can and will find a way."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
bn2021 | how a speed camera works on a multiple lane road? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bn2021/eli5_how_a_speed_camera_works_on_a_multiple_lane/ | {
"a_id": [
"en2ly3w"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Police cameras use radar guns to measure the speed of cars. Radar works be shooting radio waves at the target, and measuring the amount of shift caused by the Doppler effect on the radio waves to determine the speed of cars. The reason they work on multiple lane roads is that radar can be focused, just like a flash light, using mirrors, lenses, lasers, or blinders. The officer can then measure the speed of a car by pointing the gun at at."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5zdirm | why does a single violin often sound harsh to the ear, while a group of them playing together can sound much more soothing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zdirm/eli5_why_does_a_single_violin_often_sound_harsh/ | {
"a_id": [
"dexadi0",
"dexcief"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Well I don't personally think that a single violin sounds harsh I know that some people upon hearing A violin played badly I will think it harsh. When multiple instruments played together there is an affect called chorusing in which the individual instruments are just slightly out of tune with respect to each other . This creates a sort of sweeping gliding effect which is that so called smooth sound you hear.",
"It's because a single violin lacks harmonies. If someone plays just one G chord on a guitar, they're playing the root note (G) the major third (B) and the fifth (D), and often those same notes one octave higher, all at the same time. This is possible because guitars have a flat fretboard and violins have a rounded neck. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5zvyag | if blood thinners are used to reduce risk of strokes and heart attacks, why do they cause them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zvyag/eli5_if_blood_thinners_are_used_to_reduce_risk_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"df1ihk9",
"df1inn9"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Blood thinning drugs don't actually \"thin\" the blood, they work by de-activating the proteins in your blood that cause clots (there's lots of them that work together, which is why there's many different types of \"blood thinners\"). The most common adverse effects are what you'd expect, problems related to not being able to form a clot like bleeding or bruising too much. Taking them for a while causes your body to create more of these clotting factors - so if you stop taking it, miss a dose, or take another medication that can increase how fast you metabolize these drugs and you're left with too many clotting factors and make tons of clots and... blood clots blocking arteries cause heart attacks and strokes! \n\nSeeing heart attacks and strokes as a potential risk for taking a medication you need to prevent these things can be a bit concerning. You definitely need to listen to your doctor about what to do and not to do when taking these drugs. There's a lot of things that can affect how they're working, like eating too much vitamin K while taking warfarin.",
"Strokes come in two different flavors: ischemic (not enough blood getting to the brain) and hemorrhagic (bleeding from a blood vessel into the surrounding brain tissue.) \n\nBeing on a blood thinner decreases your risk of an ischemic stroke since it prevents blood clots from forming as readily. Blood clots are the main cause of an ischemic stroke - if one gets stuck in the blood vessels of your brain, it will obstruct blood flow to that area and cause brain cells to start dying off. \n\nHowever, blood thinners increase your risk of a hemorrhagic stroke because you won't be able to form a clot as readily to stop bleeding - namely, when a blood vessel in your brain breaks open and start bleeding. This can happen for many reasons, such as an aneurysm (a weakened, bulging vessel) or traumatic head injury such as a fall or a blow to the head. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3bs00m | if infomercials and "too good to be true" deals are widely known to be bs, why are so many of them still made? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bs00m/eli5_if_infomercials_and_too_good_to_be_true/ | {
"a_id": [
"csoxesi",
"csoxetn",
"csoxg81",
"csoyq6d"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the sales generated from the ads is enough to pay for product, advertising, and profit.\n\nJust because most people won't buy it doesn't mean *nobody* will buy it.",
"Well, first off, not all of them are BS. Many of those products do work well - Oxyclean started as an infomercial product and it does help your laundry.\n\nAs for the actual BS ones, well, not everyone knows they are BS and those people do buy the products.",
"Because they still work. There are people who buy the products peddled on infomercials. They don't get sales from the vast majority of their audience, but that's why they use the infomercial format: it's super crazy cheap, so they don't need many sales to cover their marketing costs. ",
"Plenty of folks still by them. Also not all of them are total BS. Some of them are very useful products but the commercials are still funny seeing people hilariously fail at simple tasks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6l4zbl | if there are billions of transistors in a cpu, why aren't there billions of pins/contacts on the cpu? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6l4zbl/eli5_if_there_are_billions_of_transistors_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"djr5skn",
"djr6ekk"
],
"score": [
4,
11
],
"text": [
"Pins are only necessary to connect with off-chip components. The vast majority of transistors on a chip are connected only to other on-chip transistors. There are indeed billions of tiny intrachip connections (they're called traces) that connect different transistors to each other, but you can't see them since they're inside the chip (and microscopic on modern chips).",
"The same reason that thousands of rooms in a hotel or large office building but there aren't thousands of doors to the outside.\n\nThe pins allow data to be transmitted into and out of the CPU. Inside the CPU, the billions of transistors allow it to do complex calculations. For example, to multiply two 32-bit numbers together requires approximately 20,000 transistors.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1aafhu | why is the center of the catholic church in rome instead of, say, israel or jerusalem or another place more closely related to the bible? | I'm not a biblical scholar by any means, but I don't remember Italy being talked discussed. I know (from The DaVinci code haha) that St. Peter is buried in Vatican City. But if that's true, how did he get there? And why was the Catholic Church founded in Italy instead of somewhere important according to the Bible? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1aafhu/eli5_why_is_the_center_of_the_catholic_church_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8vis7n",
"c8viswr",
"c8vok6b"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Rome was the center of the world at that point, so it was important for Christianity's survival to spread throughout the empire from the capital. Upon his death, Jesus appointed Peter the head of the nascent church, and he traveled to Rome to convert people. He was the first Bishop of Rome (another title that every Pope holds) and was executed in Rome. ",
"Because at the time the Church was being founded (it was a gradual process that took hundreds of years, not a single event), Rome was basically the capital of the world. An early Christian church — called a *basilica* — was built outside Rome in the 300s, and that church became first the de facto center of Christianity, and later the official one. The site is now part of the Vatican.",
"The Catholic Church is essentially what's left of the roman empire so naturally it's centered in rome"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1woghi | why does evolution favour the eyes above the nose, and the nose above the mouth? | It seems that an almost universal trait of animals (whether mammalian, reptilian, amphibian or insect) is the position of the eyes being above that of the nose, and the position of the nose being above that ofthe mouth. Although it makes sense to have the eyes as high as possible is their any particular reason for the arrangement of the other senses? Or did it occur merely by chance and it was simply a case of "if it isn't broken, don't fix it"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1woghi/eli5_why_does_evolution_favour_the_eyes_above_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf45512",
"cf45dk6",
"cf3x8oq",
"cf3y75t",
"cf3zc3x"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
4,
6,
7
],
"text": [
"It makes the most sense for the mouth to be at the bottom so that food and drink don't drip down into your eyes or nose.",
"its a predator thing, actually. prey species, most obviously small lizards, have their eyes on the sides of their head, potentially in-line with the rest of their heads gear. \n\npredators need binocular depth perception, so they need overlapping fields of vision. that means front mounting. \n\nthe eyes over the mouth and nose leaves a clear field of vision without a significant blind spot. \nadditionally, being able to see up is more important than being able to see down. very little attacks from underneath the ground, plenty of things pounce from above.",
"Most likely it's just how it first developed a long, long time ago and it hasn't changed because it'd require a great deal of alteration to the ear/nose/throat structure and it'd probably not be much better anyway.",
"This order is the most perfect when looking for food on the floor. Eyes to see above the food, nose to smell it closer, mouth to eat it easily. Natural selection, etc... ",
"As a counterexample, whales and dolphins have their nostril (blowhole) above the eyes on top of the head, and the eyes and mouth are roughly on the same level. [pic.](_URL_1_)\n\nThis is for the obvious reason of allowing them to breathe while remaining mostly underwater. For the same reason hippo's nostrils are just as high as its eyes, but the eyes are further back. [pic.](_URL_0_)\n\nInsects don't have nostrils (they smell using their antennae, which are level with or above the eyes), and all the other groups you mentioned all come from one common ancestor with the organs in that order."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://daitengu.zoints.com/image/53628-AhippothatIturnedintoanavatarforsomeoneonetime",
"http://www.hdwallpaperspin.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/top_dolphin_facts_2.jpg"
]
] |
|
e3koa8 | how can one tell if they have absolute pitch vs. relative pitch? | I googled this but I’m still not sure if I’m confusing the two terms. What are you required to have in order to be considered someone with perfect vs relative pitch? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e3koa8/eli5_how_can_one_tell_if_they_have_absolute_pitch/ | {
"a_id": [
"f93jpmz"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Absolute pitch is knowing the exact chromatic note being played just like a tuner regardless of key. Relative pitch is hearing and knowing whether a note is in tune based on the key one is in.\n\nEdit: People say you’re born with absolute pitch and it can’t be learned. Relative pitch can be learned."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
59hrmo | - why in cooking anyone would use a steel skillet/pan as opposed to something with nonstick coating? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59hrmo/eli5_why_in_cooking_anyone_would_use_a_steel/ | {
"a_id": [
"d98ixtm",
"d98jhfo",
"d98lokq",
"d98n264",
"d98pqes"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Nonstick coatings cannot be used at high temperatures. The coatings begin to break down and they start to poison the food, or they vaporize and poison the cook. So if you are doing any cooking that needs to be done at high temps like searing meat, stir frying, etc then you should never use non-stick. \n\nInstead you should use steel, aluminum, copper, or iron that has been made non-stick with oil, butter, or fat. ",
"Because sometimes you *want* things to stick a bit.\n\nNormally, the food will release from the pan in its own time--typically when it's nicely browned. It'll leave behind a bunch of intensely flavored brown bits (called fond) that forms the basis for a lot of pan sauces. \n\nPlus, you can't scratch off the non-stick coating with a metal spatula if there's no non-stick coating to begin with.",
"Nonstick pans have very poor heat retention and can become damaged at high temperatures. I often use pans to sear meat so the high temp is needed which is why I use cast iron. \n\nAlso, you can use metal tools directly on the pan. Nonstick pans can be damaged by metal tools. \n\n",
"There are uses for nonstick pans. I use mine for crepes, and eggs. If you need high heat, you need steel or cast iron. At those temperatures, nonstick disintegrates. I didn't know this and lost a few nonstick pans before I figured that out. A hot steel pan with a little oil is as nonstick as Teflon.",
"Because using anything other than cast iron makes you a filthy heathen not fit to cook in my kitchen. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6wjut7 | how does floodwater stay so high for so long above sea level? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wjut7/eli5_how_does_floodwater_stay_so_high_for_so_long/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm8jdb8",
"dm8neg9",
"dm94555",
"dm9koum"
],
"score": [
26,
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"In a flood, the extra water has nowhere to go -- it can't go into the ground like on a day of average rain because the ground is already saturated (filled) with water, so it just stays on the surface.",
"Because water is a little sticky, and doesn't instantly spread out.\n\nImagine a bucket with a small hole in the bottom. It doesn't flow out instantly, it dribbles out slowly over time. \n\nEven when an area is relatively flat, the water still needs to find a path to the ocean, and those paths will be blocked by plants and buildings and small hills the water has to flow around. There is just so much water it can't drain away quickly.",
"Water is based on individual molecules. Each molecule takes up space. And to get from where it falls from the sky to the ocean takes time. The water will only go so fast, based on the change in elevation between where it is and the ocean. Rivers don't empty out instantly. \n\nSo the water starts to flow - but then hits other water molecules. It has to \"get in line.\" \n\nWater flowing at 200 feet per minute still takes about 5 hours to flow 10 miles. All the while, more rain is falling, and more water is flowing in from upstream. And the flatter the land, the slower that water will flow. ",
"1. Water flows very slowly over a slight grade. Eventually it will drain, but it could take weeks.\n2. Large amounts of water saturates the ground below it, so absorption into the soil eventually stops as the soil cannot take any more.\n3. Urban development, paving, parking lots, highways, lawns, golf courses, etc. remove absorptive capacity from soil and dirt, causing more water to spread out over an area and just stay there.\n4. During flash floods, lots of other \"stuff\" gets lifted up and carried by the floodwater: debris, trees, branches, leaves, shopping carts, refrigerators, cars, garbage cans, can very quickly pile up and accumulate in choke points, creating impromptu dams that impede drainage. Although these are created randomly, with enough debris they can be surprisingly effective at halting water flow almost completely."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3dex35 | could space rockets be launched via 'railgun' or 'skylift' type methods? before using the engines. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3dex35/eli5_could_space_rockets_be_launched_via_railgun/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct4h1u0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In theory? Sure. Is it practical? No. Getting anywhere useful by railgun would mean you'd have to now build the amazingly expensive and difficult to maintain railgun as well as building rockets to a much more difficult spec; one that can withstand the massive forces of a rail-gun launch and still be entirely functional.\n\nAlso you have the issues that as it stands today rockets tend to be launched perfectly upright from a known position, and the second and later stages at least have the benefit of the previous stages having some steering. A toss into the air is much harder to control and more likely to result in a tilt that would put the rocket off course and potentially crash it.\n\nEven if you got it working: You still need a rocket almost the same size to get enough velocity for orbit. A rail gun can't take you all or even most of the way in most cases."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
axberx | when describing the event of having a stroke, what constitutes it being a major or minor stroke and what does that mean for the person experiencing it? | Just curious, most recently saw this in relation to the death of Luke Perry, they described him as having a MAJOR stroke on all media outlets. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/axberx/eli5_when_describing_the_event_of_having_a_stroke/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehsex2o",
"ehsf4yk"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I don't think there's an exact criteria per se. As far as I am aware major vs minor is fairly subjective. A minor stroke for example would be what my grandma experienced. It was a very small vessel occlusion that resulted in poor balance. Some rehab and monitoring resulted in a full recovery. A major stroke on the other hand would most likely be a major vessel occlusion or a multivessel occlusion, or a big hemorrhagic (bleeding in the brain rather than a blockage) stroke. This would cause full hemipalegia (one sided paralysis), and other major neurological deficits. It starts messing with the bodies ability to control homeostasis, breath, ect. If not recognized and treated quickly it will probably result in death. ",
"You can think of the blood supply of the brain as a tree. The trunk gives rise to large branches, which give rise to smaller branches, which give rise to even smaller branches. They eventually give rise to leaves, which can represent the many things a brain can do\n\nA stroke is the equivalent of one of the branches being cut. A minor stroke is like cutting a small twig - only a couple leaves will be affected. A major stroke is like cutting a large branch - many leaves will be affected. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
b279ha | why does decaffeinated coffee taste different than normal coffee? | Or am I just crazy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b279ha/eli5_why_does_decaffeinated_coffee_taste/ | {
"a_id": [
"eiqpvhz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Most of your decaffeinated coffee is often from lower quality coffee beans than regular coffee. The process to decaffeinate beans is time consuming and expensive, so the way to offset this while maintaining price similar to regular coffee, is to use cheaper ingredients. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5130ud | the incentives for governments to agree to ttip and tpp. | There's a lot of videos, articles, and information out there available on why TTIP and TPP is 'very bad' but I can't seem to find any that explain what incentivizes officials to agree to these terms if it's so bad for both the government itself and the consumers. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5130ud/eli5_the_incentives_for_governments_to_agree_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d794tw5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"From what I gather as a Kiwi here in New Zealand the main benefit for an export heavy country like us is that our big dairy, meat and seafood companies won't need to pay tariffs on our goods we export to other countries that have signed it, so we have 'free trade' which means that the companies make more money, hire more people, produce more goods and the government gets more tax money.\n\nMy knowledge is pretty limited, this video talks about many of the positives for NZ, but they would go for the other countries also but in different ways: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfcHXjA3Wuw"
]
] |
|
3tfkwc | why are piranhas so aggressive against other creatures, but not against their own? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tfkwc/eli5why_are_piranhas_so_aggressive_against_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx5piti",
"cx5pxy4",
"cx5rdtk"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Piranha are in general much less aggressive than you would expect. They aggressively attack in some rare circumstances, usually something thrashing around in distress as they know it's weak and they can finish it off. If you watch River Monsters, the host of the show jumps in to piranha infested waters and swims around and nothing happens. \n\nSo they are aggressive of their own, but again normally only when it's struggling. Piranha in captivity act a little differently than their wild versions, so there are lots of tips online about how to keep piranha without them attacking and killing one another.",
"Ok, let's pretend we're playing in the yard with some other kids. We're playing a game of tag where if you tag someone else, they're out of the game and you get a point. The trick is, you and I are the only ones that get to use our hands. Who are you going to go after to try and get the most points, me or the other kids? That's right, the other kids! You'll be able to tag them before they can tag you. You'll stay away from me, because you don't want to risk getting tagged. If we get all the other kids and we're the only ones left, maybe then we'll go after each other.\n\nIt's the same way with predators in nature. They really try to avoid getting hurt, since any injury can get infected and kill you or will heal wrong and make it much harder to hunt effectively. As long as there's prey that can't fight back, they'll pick that. ",
"They are generally not all that aggressive, except for when they are very hungry. In fact, during the wet season, they are found to be mostly herbivorous. It's during the dry season, when water level drops and thus cuts off food supplies, that they are mean. \n\nMost of their reputation is based on myths and a thing Teddy Roosevelt did where he blocked part of the river where pihrana were for like a week, and then pushed in a cow. They school for the same reason other fish do--for protection from their own predators. \n\nThe mother of one of my exes used to keep a giant tank of redbelly pirhana. When she had parties, she'd take people's car keys (this was before car remotes were common) and toss them in the tank so people wouldn't drive drunk. Little did they know she just reached into the tank with her hand to fish them back out. They were well-fed fish, so therefore had no reason to attack her hand, or each other."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
avh9l0 | why does the point system in football count by 6 and not by just one? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/avh9l0/eli5_why_does_the_point_system_in_football_count/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehf2ecj",
"ehf3fdw",
"ehf3q54",
"ehfrvbi"
],
"score": [
9,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In American football, there are ways to score by two (safety), three (field goal), six (touchdown), seven (TD and extra point), and eight (TD with two-point conversion). So it would be pretty difficult to simplify the scoring while keeping the value of each action the same.",
"They experimented a lot in the early days of football as they wanted to weight the difficulty of a TD versus a kicked score (field goal). The touchdown is much more difficult, so they weighted it as twice as many points. So it's a decision making process whether the team wants to go for six, or settle for an easier three points.",
"Only a touchdown (carrying the ball into or catching it inside the endzone) is worth six points. It happens to be the highest-scoring play, but there are other ways to score that award fewer than six points.\n\nA field goal (kicking the ball through the upright goalposts) is worth three points.\n\nA point-after-touchdown conversion (kicking the ball through the uprights immediately after a touchdown) is worth one point.\n\nA two-point conversion (running or passing into the endzone immediately after a touchdown) is worth two points.\n\nA safety (tackling the ball carrier in their own end zone) is also worth two points.\n\nIf football games only incremented in units of six points, then it would be impossible for this past super bowl to have ended with a score of 13 to 3.",
"Many sports have multiple ways of scoring points because it keeps the sport more unpredictable and thus exciting for spectators, and adds some depth to the strategy and decision making of the players/coaches making it entertaining for them too. These different methods are weighted based on their difficulty, this means players are forced to choose between making an easier play and getting few points, or making a difficult play and getting more points. These fundamental concepts of risk/reward trade offs are present even in games such as gambling, it's what makes games exciting.\n\nPresuming you mean American Football aka Gridiron, there are multiple ways to score points, with a Touchdown being worth 6 because it's roughly twice as hard to achieve as a Field Goal (3 points) and three times as hard as a Safety (2 points). In Australian Football, a Goal (6 points) is roughly six times as hard as a Behind (1 point)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1jaenv | professional athletes' salaries? | Why do some get paid enormous amounts of money? I realized their hard work and dedication to a sport, but to have 5 year, 100 million dollar contracts seem absurd to me. Also, why do players complain that their salaries are not enough compared to others..they're already making millions..so why ask for more? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jaenv/eli5_professional_athletes_salaries/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbcov1a",
"cbcov2z",
"cbcoxbl",
"cbcwmaw"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Their very high salaries aren't exactly due to their hard work and dedication; many people work harder or are more dedicated to their line of work. But with pro sports, having a \"name\" player can mean a huge difference to the profits of the teams' owners. This gives top players the ability to negotiate very large salaries, since they are still a good investment for the owners. \n \nWhy do such highly paid people ask for more? Because they can. And because they want to be seen as on par or better than the other top players; its an ego thing. ",
"The sports industries they play for are **ridiculously profitable**. Owners of pro sports teams make huge amounts of money from those teams. Players argue that since so much money is made from sports, and they are the ones actually playing the sports, and bringing in the crowds that spend the money that they should be getting more of that profit.\n\nImagine if you worked for a store and you did all the work running the store and everyone came to the store to see you. If the store made a a million dollars, wouldn't you think it's unfair that you only get 100k? You just see the owner sit around while you do all the work, why does he get 9 times as much as you?\n\nThat's the story here basically.",
"To put player's salaries in perspective you need to look into the amount of money their franchises make in a given year. Some of the most lucrative franchises (the Yankees, FC Barcelona, Manchester United) can bring in over a billion dollars in a year from ticket sales, merchandising, advertising, etc. Giving your top player $100 million for 5 years ($20 million a year) makes sense because that player will add more than $100 million in value if he/she performs. Sports franchises are businesses run by professionals and know how much a player is worth in franchise profits.\n\nPlayers complain about salaries because, no matter how much you make, you want to be paid competitively. If a player who is about as good as you are is making $20 million more than you, then you're a little put off.",
"Supply & demand.\n\nThese athletes are in extremely tight supply as you don't have ten Ronaldos or fifteen Lebron James. At the same time there's huge public demand to see them preform and it creates huge salaries. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2t4dmp | why does water have to list its ingredients? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t4dmp/eli5why_does_water_have_to_list_its_ingredients/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnvl52r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"All food and drinks regulated by the FDA are required to list their ingredients, and its easier just to say no exceptions than it is to write up different rules for a bunch of different products.\n\nBefore you ask, alcoholic beverages are not regulated by the FDA, so they aren't included in the legislation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8wb1lf | how can a human stomach realistically hold 74 hot dogs and buns? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8wb1lf/eli5_how_can_a_human_stomach_realistically_hold/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1u2aoh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The stomach is not a stiff organ. Its due to it's elasticity, the material / tissue of the stomach is pretty elastic, allowing it to hold a lot of solids/liquids without \"exploding\" or breaking up. It pretty much acts as a bag.\n\nWithout counting the digestion that \"liquidifies\" aliments and reduces their volume...\n\nBut i didnt know it could hold 74 hotdogs and buns, that's impressive"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2c2frl | why is the post-ww2 50s decade considered the quintessential time period for defined gender roles when throughout the 40s women were in "men's" roles for the first time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2c2frl/eli5_why_is_the_postww2_50s_decade_considered_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjb8pjx",
"cjbb9kn",
"cjbe9yc",
"cjbie94",
"cjbjv2x",
"cjbkk3m",
"cjbs7bx"
],
"score": [
19,
17,
4,
6,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because after the war there was a push for women to go back to traditional roles, this didn't fly. So women have been fighting to gain equal footing as men in career roles ever since.",
"During ww2 there was a requirement for women to take over mens' jobs as the men were away fighting, but once they all returned the women fought to be allowed to keep their jobs.",
"During World War II, the majority of men who would have worked in factories were off at war. This resulted in the women having to take over in the factories. Women were building planes and tanks while the men were fighting. Once the war was over and the men returned home, jobs were needed for the veterans. Most women left the workplace and stayed at home, doing house chores and cooking. Also, the Baby Boom began right after the war, which resulted in stay at home mothers (called 'home makers') taking care of children.",
"Women were actually in men's roles for the first time during WWI. After the end of that war, there was a surge for women's rights, the most obvious example being the right to vote in 1920. \n\nPart of the issue following WWII, had to do with the Cold War and American ideals about how the rest of the world saw them. The concept of the American dream being a reality became not propaganda , but real life, complete with suburbs and malt shops. If anything, you can see how poorly this all worked out based on the rebellion against the notion of the 50s house wife by the time we get to the 60s. ",
"Because women were only allowed to shoulder men's roles while the men were away fighting. As soon as the war ended they canned most of them.\n\nAlso they didn't get paid as much as men did and weren't given benefits as often.",
"Just to add to all the previous posts, gender roles were redefined in the western countries. USSR enforced gender equality right from the revolution, however it took a decade or so to overcome the cultural resistance. Activist from communist parties in Europe were very vocal and active advocates for gender equality. Clara Zetkin was one of the most prominent ones before the WW2 _URL_0_",
"In the 1950s a middle class dad could have a job and mom didn't need to work. This lasted around 30 years and was immortalized by the new art of television situation comedy. Rosie the riveter was only around for 3 or 4 years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clara_Zetkin"
],
[]
] |
||
bkqeao | i've seen clips of players im games like minecraft and others make fully functioning calculators. how is this done/possible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bkqeao/eli5_ive_seen_clips_of_players_im_games_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"emiqi28",
"emit4r8"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Minecraft has a way to simulate any sort of electronic circuit using Redstone. \n\nIf you just read the section on Redstone in the Minecraft wiki you can learn how to make all the different electronic components such as diodes, etc.\n\nSo then it's just a matter of working out the electronic schematic for a calculator and translate it into redstone devices. Very time consuming and tedious.",
"This is a very good intro to some very approachable CS concepts. If my explanation is confusing, skip to the end for some YouTube links\n\nMost computers are made up of assembled \"logic gates\". They take a set of inputs and produce a set of outputs, the inputs and outputs are either \"on\" or \"off\", aka 1 or 0. \n\nThere's a handful of \"basic\" logic gates. It's easiest to give examples:\n\nThe NOT logic gate takes an input and outputs the opposite value; if you feed it a 1 you get a 0 and if you give it a 0 you get a 1. \n\nThe AND logic gate takes two inputs and produces one output. If both of the inputs are 1, the output is 1. Anything else produces a 0.\n\nThe OR logic gate takes two inputs and produces one output. If either input is 1 it produces a 1, if both inputs are 0 it products gives you 0.\n\nYou can plug these logic gates together to do things. With some basic knowledge of binary numbers you can very easily create a simple adder that adds two numbers together.\n\nFun fact: you can create every single kind of logic gate out of one kind, the NAND gate (Not-AND).\n\nIn these videogames there are mechanics you can use to imitate these logic gates. All I know about Minecraft is that it uses redstone to do this. I've seen similar things in little big planet though.\n\nLook up \"logic gates\" on YouTube for some intro materials. It's one of those concepts that's easy visualise in video form. Once you have that down, look up how to produce a logic gate in your game of choice.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/gI-qXk7XojA",
"https://youtu.be/UvI-AMAtrvE"
]
] |
||
5y6shn | why does the body stay asleep when choking on vomit? | I had a friend die in his sleep from choking on his vomit after using Xanax for the high. I'm curious as to why he and all the other people that die this way don't wake up so they can change positions or consciously remove the vomit from their throat. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5y6shn/eli5_why_does_the_body_stay_asleep_when_choking/ | {
"a_id": [
"denm8ha",
"denmeeo"
],
"score": [
8,
10
],
"text": [
"The body is supposed to wake up from such a situation. However, drugs may disrupt the normal function of the body and brain. Especially drugs that affect the nervous system.\n\nThe body is supposed to breathe automatically too, but even excessive doses of a common and legal drug such as alcohol can disrupt this process.",
"Xanax is a pretty powerful sedative. The body didn't respond because he was so drugged up his normal instinctive reactions to stimuli no longer worked. The effect is doubled if he had been drinking.\n\nWhen you do too many drugs for your body to function properly, it's called an **overdose** (for fairly obvious reasons)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6bqpsk | what is the red pill? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6bqpsk/eli5_what_is_the_red_pill/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhor1nz"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It gets a bad reputation because at its core it relies on the idea that women are essentially children and a resource as opposed to actual people, and puts men into a position where they feel victimized, in part as a reaction to their perception of feminism (which ironically, they think is setting up a system of false victimization). It's also extremely hostile to opposing viewpoints.\n\nThere are differences between men and women, but people are people. They're complicated. While I can certainly see how red pill could have been an overall healthy step out of an abusive (presumably controlling) relationship, there's such a thing as going too far as well. I know I'm not going to convince you, I just hope you look at things critically. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2m7i0k | re: net neutrality; how exactly is the fcc a standalone entity and why cannot the president tell them to do what he wants? it's part of the executive branch, and the president is the head of the executive branch. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2m7i0k/eli5_re_net_neutrality_how_exactly_is_the_fcc_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm1mscy"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"It's classified as an Independent Agency within the Executive Branch. It's to ensure that the President doesn't have too much power over something that is technically supposed to be non-partisan. The President appoints the head of the FCC, as well as the members of the Commission, but that's where his authority ends. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.