q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
301
| selftext
stringlengths 0
39.2k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 3
values | url
stringlengths 4
132
| answers
dict | title_urls
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1u0grx
|
do bounty hunters actually have any real authority about a regular civilian ?
|
They seem to be overstepping their rights
edit: if anyone was wondering, this [gem](_URL_0_) from r/cringe is what sparked my interest
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u0grx/eli5_do_bounty_hunters_actually_have_any_real/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cedb4jb",
"cedbjcm",
"cedd7ev",
"cedg7l4",
"cedh2qs",
"cf1fsyd"
],
"score": [
7,
149,
11,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It varies by state.\n\n_URL_0_.\n\nIn states that have no special licensing or regulations, they are acting as citizens. The arrest is a citizen's arrest and they have no legal protection against being hurt by the suspect. In some states it's completely banned.\n\nHopefully a lawyer will be able to answer better.",
"State laws vary greatly, some don't allow bounty hunters to make any arrests at all, but quite often yes, they do have even more authority than the police. The reason is that the bail jumper *gave* them that authority when they signed the bail agreement. They are essentially signing away their rights and agreeing to such terms. Bounty hunters don't have to read a fugitive his rights either. If he's on bail, that's already been done and the bounty hunter is just returning him to the custody of the state. Someone on bail technically remains in the custody of the state, but with certain agreed to freedoms provided they behave.\n\nBounty hunters only have authority over someone who skips bail. They have no such authority to track down people wanted by the police for other reasons. Again, the fugitive must have consented to this arrangement beforehand.\n\nBounty hunters can also enter a fugitive's home without either notice or a warrant. But they have no right to enter the home of a friend or relative, or any other private property, even if they believe the fugitive is inside. In that case they'll just stake the place out and call the police to make the arrest.",
"In extension to this question, rather than make a new post, how do bounty hunters make money? Not really familiar with bail or how it works",
"So from the other comments, since the hunters do not have authority over people other than bail jumpers, a family could technically make a protective ring around a bail jumper and escort them. \n\nIf the bounty hunter tries to forcibly remove the bail jumper from the family circle and causes any harm, the bounty hunter is now legally liable and can be arrested for assault at a later time. \n\nCorrect? ",
"What were they shooting the suspect with in this video? Paintball guns?",
"Before reading /u/Pandromeda 's comment, I thought the video was a couple of lonely single moms attacking people and covering them in lipstick. Yes I realize how late I am."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEh3Q9ARMKE"
] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounty_hunter#Laws_in_the_U.S"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
orr1l
|
How does a difference of one atom in a compound completely change its properties? (ie. H2O and H2O2)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/orr1l/how_does_a_difference_of_one_atom_in_a_compound/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3jl3fk"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You're asking why chemistry exists. This would require quite a long reply."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
mwc8t
|
Based on what we know about dreams in humans, what can we know and/or predict about animal dreaming habits?
|
Dreaming for humans seems to be deeply tied to emotional stability. So what does that mean for animals that aren't as emotionally/psychologically complex? I guess another way to phrase the question is How far down the evolutionary ladder does dreaming go, and what function does it serve at those levels?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/mwc8t/based_on_what_we_know_about_dreams_in_humans_what/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c34ditd",
"c34ditd"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Dreams are fascinating things.. two types have been discovered thus far. REM and non-REM. \n\nNon-REM seem to be happier and more realistic and REM seem to be more along the lines of \"nightmares\". They tend to be more abstract..however, studies have shown them to be our brain's way of coping and/or learning from new situations. We find ourselves having difficulty with a new task..that night our brain will do what it can during REM sleep to process and problem solve so that we are better prepared for it when and if it happens again.\n\nSo..this being said, animal dreams are along the same lines. Their dreams pertain to their environment, positive or negative and their REM dreams help them learn and better prepare for challenging and dangerous situatuons. This has played abhuge role in the survival of species.\n\nThe awesome part about REM is that our brain appears to be awake.. (i preform brain wave studies for a living). We are just paralysed. Take that awaty and we'd be running around, doing what our brains are 'reenacting\"\n\nI love science :)",
"Dreams are fascinating things.. two types have been discovered thus far. REM and non-REM. \n\nNon-REM seem to be happier and more realistic and REM seem to be more along the lines of \"nightmares\". They tend to be more abstract..however, studies have shown them to be our brain's way of coping and/or learning from new situations. We find ourselves having difficulty with a new task..that night our brain will do what it can during REM sleep to process and problem solve so that we are better prepared for it when and if it happens again.\n\nSo..this being said, animal dreams are along the same lines. Their dreams pertain to their environment, positive or negative and their REM dreams help them learn and better prepare for challenging and dangerous situatuons. This has played abhuge role in the survival of species.\n\nThe awesome part about REM is that our brain appears to be awake.. (i preform brain wave studies for a living). We are just paralysed. Take that awaty and we'd be running around, doing what our brains are 'reenacting\"\n\nI love science :)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
76o24x
|
How and when did certain works of art become so famous? Was the Mona Lisa for example always valued so much more than the thousands of other Renaissance female portraits?
|
When I try to read about this I seem to always get these kind of canned responses praising the technical marvels of the painting but not an explanation of when it was first widely recognized as such and thus so highly valued.
I know most famously Van Gogh's art wasn't widely appreciated until at least a decade after his death, and people who saw his works before then weren't inherently awe struck as they claim to be now so clearly the famousness of a painting has to do with more than purely its technical merits. Does it just catch on like an Internet meme?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/76o24x/how_and_when_did_certain_works_of_art_become_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dog2dfp",
"dogipuh"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Hi, hopefully one of the art historians will drop by with a broader answer (and/or you might x-post to /r/arthistory), but for the case of the Mona Lisa anyway, you can get started on this interesting answer by /u/butforevernow\n\n* [Why is the Mona Lisa so famous?](_URL_0_) ",
"The 'canonicity' of certain works of art can often be attributed to the ways in which they have been treated by specific art historians. For example, the 'Girl With A Pearl Earring' by Johannes Vermeer, which is arguably as well-known and revered as the Mona Lisa, was a forgotten painting by an obscure Dutch artist until the 19th century French art critic Théophile Thoré-Bürger 'rediscovered' Vermeer, publishing a catalogue of his works (which over-attributed over 60 paintings to the artist, rather than the 34 which are accepted today). It was on the strength of this that the GWAPE was 'saved for the nation' when it was sold at auction in 1881, having been in the same private family collection for almost two centuries, and was ultimately bequeathed to the Mauritshuis museum. Entry into a museum or public collection also seems to be a key factor in determining the fame and importance of an artwork, because a degree of exposure is necessary in order for an image to become a cultural trope and permeate the public consciousness."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1jzs36/why_is_the_mona_lisa_so_famous/"
],
[]
] |
|
f6pmvq
|
why is Eve from the bible named that way?
|
in Hebrew, it sounds completely different from the way English people pronounce it.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/f6pmvq/why_is_eve_from_the_bible_named_that_way/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fi6i2pb"
],
"score": [
40
],
"text": [
"I'll take this as a question not about Eve herself, but about the English language. Most of what I describe here applies to other ancient words as well.\n\nA very brief and very oversimplified history of the English language:\n\n* The earliest civilization in England that we have written records of (i.e. the beginning of history by definition) were Celts. They spoke a Celtic language.\n* The Romans arrived in the 1st century AD and founded the city of Londinium (present day London). Latin became the primary language.\n* Shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire, the Saxons (presumably coming from what today is Denmark) invaded England. The Anglo-Saxon dialect developed gradually.\n* The French invaded England in the late middle age (11th century).\n\nToday, English is essentially a Saxon/Germanic language, but Latin and French influences are very strong.\n\nThe word Eve in English comes from French, which in turn comes from Latin. The initial H from the Hebrew Hawwa presumably was lost in Latin. In fact, some linguists believe the H in Latin sounded like in present-day English, but was gradually softened, so it's mute in modern Romance languages and some of them (e.g. Italian) do not even write it anymore.\n\nThe Italian word is Eva, which reflects the loss of the initial H.\n\nNow let's see what happens in French. It is very common in Romance languages to lose the vowel that comes after the stressed one. Italian has retained most of them though a few were lost. Spanish usually loses one vowel after the stressed one. French usually loses all of them, so much that the stressed vowel in French is always the last one, and the rest of the word is reminescences of consonants from Latin and at most a final e that is mute in French (e.g. the Latin *pauperus* has become *povero* in Italian and *pauvre* in French).\n\nThe French word Ève reflects this loss of the last vowel: the second e has become mute (it has no graphical accent).\n\nThen we have the English redefinition of the Latin alphabet, mostly regarding vowels, to reflect that most sounds in English are dipthongs. The E in English usually sounds like in *see*, rather than the more open sound that it has in words like *get* which resembles a bit more the sound of Romance languages. In fact it's not uncommon in English to maintain the spellig of French/Latin loanwords but vary their pronounciation to accomodate the English alphabet (consider, for instance, the pronunciation of *environment* or *millenium*).\n\nThe only change I cannot explain is how the first A from Hawwa became an E. Most likely this was a very ancient change that happened while Latin was still spoken in the empire."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3g1wgo
|
why is veterans day (usa) on a wednesday?
|
After some research, the Uniform Monday Holiday Act in 1968 moved George Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, and Veterans Day from their traditional days to a Monday, making all of them convenient 3 day weekends. But, in 1978 Veterans Day was switched back to being on November 11, and I can't find any reason why other than people wanted it on Nov 11.
I don't suppose anyone alive in the 70s could explain what people had against 3 day weekends?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g1wgo/eli5_why_is_veterans_day_usa_on_a_wednesday/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctu210y",
"ctu21ax"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Veterans Day is set for November 11th because that's the date that pretty much all countries have for it. It's the anniversary of the end of the First World War -- it's not an arbitrary date.",
"Because Nov 11 is also the day ww1 ended.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.va.gov/opa/vetsday/vetdayhistory.asp"
]
] |
|
rp2zs
|
- why i'm connected to a billion torrent seeders, only 5 will *actually* connect, and i still only get 30kbps sometimes...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rp2zs/eli5_why_im_connected_to_a_billion_torrent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c47hx83",
"c47jkl5"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"\"Connected\" means that you're aware of the existence of those seeders, but not that they are transmitting data to you. The seeders might be \"busy\" uploading to other users at full capacity, and have no spare bandwidth to send to you.\n\nMany bittorrent clients also try to keep track of \"reputation\" of peers, and if you're a new to a torrent, they may only tentatively upload a little bit to you, and then wait and observe whether you then re-share that data to other peers. These clients will upload in preference to people who share well, as opposed to those who don't share much.",
"In addition to what Nebu wrote, if both you and the seeder are using NAT without port forwarding, then there is no way for a direct connection to be made between you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
8ab237
|
why is most of world's deepest mines located in south africa?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ab237/eli5_why_is_most_of_worlds_deepest_mines_located/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dwxaza4"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"This country is blessed with significant deposits of gold and diamonds -- materials so valuable that it's worth digging very deep to extract them.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1kmhxj
|
The Fastest Computer in the Universe
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kmhxj/the_fastest_computer_in_the_universe/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbqfjiw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Every observer in an inertial reference frame sees their own clock ticking faster than any other clock in any other inertial frame.\n\nIf you wanted to shoot a computer out into space at high speed to have it do computations while taking advantage of time dilation, you'd find that that computer comes home having done *fewer* computations than one left Earthside. The computer experienced less time than it would've if you'd just left it here."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
f47u66
|
why does adding butter make food taste so much better?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f47u66/eli5_why_does_adding_butter_make_food_taste_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fhombro",
"fhooj2l",
"fhoq47z"
],
"score": [
20,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It's fat. Our minds are predisposed to seek out fat. Until modern times, fat was a vital part of survival because of its energy density and it was hard to get, so our taste buds and the part of our brain that processes food flavor evolved to reward ourselves with endorphins when we eat fat which make us feel good. In modern times we have easy access to fat, and frankly we get too much of it, but it takes a long time for our bodies to evolve so we still get pleasure from eating fat.",
"The fat in it. Fat is more energy dense and burns longer. It stores vitamins and warms your body. Fat is magical. Then came sugar and spice and everything diabetic... Butter is the premise for High Fat Low Carb diets. (Sugar is a carb.)\n\nThere is a LOT to unload here when it comes to nutritional biochem, but basically it's really good for you if you have less sugar/carbs.\n\nOne comment on salt. Salt is used often to bring taste out. You can use it in combination with spices, on meat, and on fats (butter).",
"Most aromas / flavors are lipophilic, i.e. soluble in fat. The tasty stuff is soluble in butter and more butter means more tasty stuff in your mouth / nasal cavity."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2evz5m
|
game theory, especially the concept of "grim trigger"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2evz5m/eli5_game_theory_especially_the_concept_of_grim/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck3gvb1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Game Theory is a way of describing strategy and decision making in mathy terms. It's generally about finding optimal strategies or equilibrium where no one has any reason to pick a different strategy.\n\nOne of the strategies in some types of \"games\" (or a thing that has multiple people all making strategic decisions) is called the Grim Trigger. It basically says \"play nice with the other person until they betray you. Then, never forgive them ever again.\" It is not generally the best strategy, and it only gets worse if the information is imperfect."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
80a4u1
|
wrinkles in clothes
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/80a4u1/eli5_wrinkles_in_clothes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"duv0evv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When fabric cools off of a line or when you get it out of the drier, it is locked in the shape that the fibers cooled in making it wrinkled. That is why we iron our clothes when they're wrinkled, we warm them to form different bonds so as they are cooled they become unwrinkled."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5vtgon
|
how do good actors end up in flop movies?
|
The first example that comes to mind is Kevin Spacey acting in Nine Lives. He has [a number](_URL_0_) of awards and has acted in hugely successful movies and shows, but he still chose to act in a movie that he had to know would get scathing reviews. How do actors that could get roles in any movie they want end up in movies they know won't go anywhere?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vtgon/eli5_how_do_good_actors_end_up_in_flop_movies/
|
{
"a_id": [
"de4pzxj",
"de4q197",
"de4qgz4",
"de4rbmq",
"de4rzrt"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It's sometimes surprisingly hard to tell that a movie is going to be bad. Every movie involves a new set of people and ideas; very few movies are made by the same whole team that made a previous winner, as people tend to move around. So there's always a lot of risk. And with so many kinds of artists and creators having so many ideas, it can get messy.",
"I've always wondered that too. I guess I just thought maybe they were broke as shit when they got the offer to do that movie ",
"Money. When a big pay check or sometimes a smaller pay check for a smaller role or from a lower budget film (look at their inebriated IMDB and you will find they make a lot a films you have never heard of ) comes their way and they take it so they can own more crap. \nThat reason they like the smaller pay check for the lower budget film is because it's even better for them when the film sucks because then no one will remember it, the public only remember the good films anyway so it hasn't hurt their career and they can continue to make more crap that no one will see or remember or here about a week after it's released.\nNo producer or director intends to make a terrible film and therefore an actor cannot intentionally select a bad film to be in, it just happens to turn into a bad film and it is mostly out of everyone's control and so although the actor was merely paid to do a job that ended up a pile of crap he will cash his pay check and live the Hollywood lifestyle without the downsides of being associated with a terrible unmemorable film.",
"First and foremost, if the movie has the budget to hire the actor, a lot of times the actor will take it. Being in a bad movie doesn't really ruin an actor's career because nobody will see it. That said, actors don't really know which movies are going to be flops. Movie studios have a much greater interest in a movie not flopping because they are investing a lot of money into it, and yet they make mistakes quite a bit. An actor will consider the script, the director, the costars, etc... before committing, but nothing's a sure thing. Even great directors make flops some times. Take Disney, add Johnny Depp, and one of the most successful directors of all time, and you might get Pirates of the Caribbean... or you might get Lone Ranger.",
"In addition to reasons others have mentioned, actors will contract with studios for a certain number of movies. For example, they might say, \"We'll let you star in this artsy Oscar-bait movie, but in return we want you to also star in our stupid action movie.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000228/awards?ref_=m_nm_awd&mode=desktop"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
rk7gy
|
f(x)
|
I really dont get this concept, can someone clear it up for me?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rk7gy/eli5_fx/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c46h85o",
"c46hscn",
"c46htyk"
],
"score": [
22,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"f(x) is a mathy way of saying \"This is a function which gives a certain answer for any value of x you use in the following equation\". In a few years, when you take algebra in school, you'll be able to understand what that sentence means, but in short, there is a lot of math you can do that's more difficult than the typical \"2 + 3 = 5\" type stuff, where rather than numbers, there are letters which represent a value that is not known. \n\nFor example, you might have \"2 + *x* = 5\", and you'd have to figure out which number to use in place of *x* to make the arithmetic correct. \n\nIt's possible to have more than one unknown value, for example, \"*x* + *y* = 5\" I won't get into why right now, but that's the same thing as \"*y* = 5 - *x*\", which can be rewritten as \"f(*x*) = 5 - *x*\".\n\nSo if you used the number '3' in place of *x*, you'd have f(3) = 5 - \n3, which is the same as f(3) = 2. For each different number you use for *x*, you get a different answer.\n\nEdit: Incorporated totally accurate correction in nimaku's reply.",
"It's just a fancy way of saying that one thing is a function of another. But what does that mean? Well, say you went to the candy store and you decided you were going to buy as many jolly ranchers as you could afford. Mmm, Jollyranchers. Okay, now say they cost 10 cents each and you have 2 dollars, or 200 cents (it's good to use the same units). The number of Jollyranchers you can buy is a *function* of how much money you have. So a fancy math person might say \"f(x) = x/10\"\n\nIf you don't know what x is, DON'T PANIC! Just think about what that nice man Jimbabwe said. \"The number of jollyranchers I can buy is a *function* of how many **cents** I have. So the let's be honest here, the answer we're looking for is an amount of jollyranchers. How many of those sweet, sweet morsels are we going home with? Well, we already know how much those cost. So x is the thing that is changing depending on how much money each customer has. Let's plug that in and see if it works. f(200) = 200/10. All I did was substitute a 200 for each x I saw. That part on the right side of the equation is our answer! 200/10 = 20. You can buy 20 jollyranchers. \n\nThat's all there is to it! It's just a fancy way of saying one thing is related to another thing. Want some homework? The distance you might drive in a car is a *function* of how fast you're going. You can express this distance in terms of f(x). How would you do that? If you're driving 80 miles per hour, how long will it take you to drive 80 miles? :)",
"If you were to say it out loud, it would be, \"a function called 'f' of a variable called 'x'\n\nIt could be g(y), in which case it would be, \"a function called 'g' of a variable called 'y'\n\nThe function part means the action part. Often times, elsewhere on the paper it tells you what that action is. The action might be, \"multiply the variable by 2\" or \"turn the variable upside down\" or change the color of the variable to green\"\n\nThe variable part is the thing being changed. In math, it is usually a number, but if you're just trying to understand what a function is, the variable could be anything. \n\nThink of it like a machine. Let's say, an oven that is set at 400 degrees. Whatever goes in the oven is going to be baked at 400 degrees. That's the function (the f) of the oven. The variable (the x) is whatever you put in the oven. Cookie dough, cake mix, a baby, a chicken, etc. Depending on what you put in, you'll get something specific out. \n\nf(x) = bake x at 400 degrees. f(y) = bake y at 400 degrees. \n\nLet's change the function. Now, instead of an oven, it's a dishwasher. We don't call it the same thing as an oven, because it doesn't do what an oven does. Whatever you put in it, it gets washed and rinsed. Dirty dishes, a baby, cookie mix, etc. Depending on what you put in, you get something specific out. \n\ng(x) = wash and rinse x. g(y) = wash and rinse y. \n\nFinally, you can do things to the functions, just as the functions do things to the variables. If f(x) = bake x at 400 degrees, and g(x) = wash and rinse x, then what if I said g(f(x))? it would be interpreted as bake x at 400 degrees, and then wash and rinse whatever came out of the oven. If I said f(g(x)), it would mean wash and rinse x, and then bake it at 400 degrees. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6ob09x
|
You know how if you put liquids of different densities in a container, they separate? What would happen if you did that in 0 gravity?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6ob09x/you_know_how_if_you_put_liquids_of_different/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkg0ups",
"dkg69ct"
],
"score": [
6,
16
],
"text": [
"I watched a video just yesterday (SciShow I think) where they talked about how bacteria and/or viruses actually got stronger in space (while humans usually experience a weakening immune system).\n\nThe reason they gave was that liquids didn't separate because of density differences, like they do on earth....and thus the bacteria had easier access to food sources that would normally separate away from. \n\nSo I'm going to say no, they wouldn't separate if the only driving factor was a difference in densities. ",
"Even in the absence of gravity, the liquids will tend to coalesce, proceeding from, say, droplets of A in B to a single region of A and a single region of B. The driving force is minimization of surface energy, and the phenomenon is variously known as [ripening](_URL_0_), flocculation, coalescence or coagulation.\n\nBecause of the absence of gravity, the positions of the two regions and the orientation of the separating interface may be random, since sedimentation isn't a factor, or may be governed primarily by the shape and material properties of the container."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostwald_ripening"
]
] |
||
3i285r
|
why is there such a significant home advantage in sport?
|
Bonus question: is there as much of an advantage as it seems?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i285r/eli5_why_is_there_such_a_significant_home/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cucnpe6",
"cucnths",
"cucok0v",
"cuctw82",
"cucu2p2",
"cucwkv1"
],
"score": [
3,
66,
9,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"My favorite NFL writer, Gregg Easterbrook, analyzed the NFL and found that in regular season, home teams had a significant advantage, but once they entered into you lose and you're out playoff games, the advantage evaporated. He theorized that they're then playing all out and leaving everything on the field. ",
"It's like shitting at home in your bathroom. You know where the handle is, you know where the extra TP is, you know where the plunger is in case shit gets hairy. That's called home field advantage because you are used to your surroundings: sun, wind, grass, refs, fans, noise are all familiar. As a result you shit much better.",
"The extent of the advantage depends on the sport.\n\nThe home crowd may give you extra motivation at a subconscious level, which causes you to perform better. The British F1 driver said this was worth about half a second per lap, though he was likely exaggerating. \n\n[There is also some evidence referees may be biased in favour of home teams.]( _URL_0_) Not everyone agrees, however. \n\nIn sports where variability in the pitch has an effect home advantage comes from familiarity, and being able to control the pitch to some extent. In the recent Ashes series (cricket) the home team (England) were bowling on pitches that suited their style while blunting Australia's bowling style. English pitches typically have more moisture in them than Australian ones. This moisture helps spin bowlers, but also takes the edge off the speed of a fast bowl.",
"Everyone else in this thread has great answers.\n\nI just wanted to mention that because of the rules of the game, Baseball has a major home team advantage. The visiting team bats first meaning the home team bats last. Because of this, if they're in the final inning of a game and the score is tied, the home team only needs to score one run to win. If the visiting team scores a go-ahead run, the home team still gets the bottom of that inning to try to tie or take the lead.\n\nAlso, in baseball, major league parks don't have identical dimensions. You'll hear baseball stadiums referred to as \"hitters parks\" or as \"pitchers parks\" based on various factors like the size or the weather. For example, Coors Field in Colorado where the Rockies play is a hitters park, despite being large, because the higher altitude air is thinner so batted balls go farther.\n\nSince baseball teams play half of their games at home, the front office of those teams can get players that function better in their home park.",
"In football home field is important because when your on offense the crowd is quiet allowing the players and coaches communicate better. Then when your on defense the crowd gets loud making hard for the opposition to communicate ",
"I've heard it's all about the refs. Refs do not want to be booed (like any human being)\n\nSome guys actually did a study on it: \n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.researchgate.net/publication/254417747_The_importance_of_time_in_referee_home_bias_due_to_social_pressure._Evidence_from_Spanish_football"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/18/football-freakonomics-how-advantageous-is-home-field-advantage-and-why/"
]
] |
|
18d4gr
|
the implications of north koreas nuclear test?
|
Is there going to be anything to worry about? Are there any really impactful ramifications for them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18d4gr/eli5_the_implications_of_north_koreas_nuclear_test/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8dr4mz",
"c8ds0no"
],
"score": [
3,
14
],
"text": [
"Unless there's been an announcement that's made the wires in the past few minutes, as I write this it's not yet known that it *was* a nuclear test.\n\nThe DPRK has claimed to have conducted three nuclear weapon tests. The first was identified by experts outside the regime as being a fizzle, a particular type of failed detonation. (Basically, you start a nuclear reaction, but fail to contain it long enough for it to complete. Most of the nuclear material remains unreacted, and the bomb produces a much smaller explosion than it was meant to.)\n\nThe second test is a weird one. It created a larger explosion than the first test, but it wasn't large enough to be a *plausible* atomic weapon built by a \"nuclear newbie,\" if you will. Couple that with the fact that *no* nuclear reaction products were detected and you have what looks for all the world like a *hoax.* If you set off a very large conventional explosion underground, the results would look *exactly* like the second test.\n\nThere is a credible argument to be made that the second purported nuclear test was in fact a completely conventional explosion set off as a face-saving measure to make up for the obvious failure of the first test. True? Nobody outside the highest echelons of the DPRK regime knows. But it's certainly plausible. Perhaps more so than to imagine that the DPRK managed to build an extremely small — meaning extremely miniaturized, meaning extremely *complicated and difficult* — atomic bomb and set it off in such a way that the fission products were *completely* contained. That's really, really unlikely.\n\nSo until more information is available about this most recent purported test, no conclusions can be drawn. Preliminary analysis based on seismic data suggests that once again, the yield of the alleged device was *implausibly* small, less than a third of the yield of the first ever (and crudest) atomic test. That means either the DPRK is *much better* at building atomic bombs than they have any right to be — highly unlikely — or this is just more theater, designed to confuse the uninformed rather than to actually effect any international policy change.\n\nBut the bottom line is that as of this writing, nobody knows anything yet, so we have to wait and see.",
"North Korea has a very broken farming system and is running out of food again, and it needs to get food from somewhere. Because it made other countries angry, they haven't been giving it food for awhile. NK leaders would look very bad if their people got hungry, so NK does this nuclear test that the whole world can see. It is a clever plan: it embarrasses world leaders in China and the US, who had told their people that they would stop NK from testing bombs, and makes them pay attention to NK.\n\nHere's how it works: the US and Chinese leaders need to look good to their people, which means they need to look like they are doing something to make NK stop. They need NK to show up to talks and promise to the whole world that they will stop making these bombs, at least for awhile. Now, NK then says they won't come to talks unless they get food (from US) and oil (from China). Since the US and China need them to talk or they will be really embarrassed, they will give them these things.\n\nThe US gives food because it looks to US people like an act of kindness and can't be used to make weapons. However NK leaders need to look good to their people too, so they remove the American flags from the boxes of food and put NK flags on it, and tell their people THEY grew the food.\n\nChina is worried that without oil, NK will fall apart and make a mess. Since they are neighbors, that mess could spill into China too. Maybe if they fall apart, the Americans will even move in, and that would be dangerous, because everyone in China knows how dangerous Americans can be! So China gives NK oil to keep them stable. NK leaders tell their people it is a nice gift from China, given to NK because of how big and strong NK is after making a big bomb.\n\nNobody is REALLY worried about the bombs themselves because they are pretty weak and very heavy, too heavy to put on rockets and planes and stuff, so NK can't really get the bomb anywhere yet and can pretty much only blow up nearby mountains. But it LOOKS and SOUNDS scary to most people, so the other leaders have to react.\n\nSo, NK gets the things it needs by doing something it shouldn't do, and promised not to do. They have done it before and it worked, so they are doing it again.\n\nTLDR: It is like throwing a tantrum because you are hungry, and making a lot of noise for no reason, and then you get fed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
7kzzyz
|
how does electroplating work?
|
How does electroplating work and what are its uses?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kzzyz/eli5_how_does_electroplating_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drihmgi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You stick what you want to electroplate into a pool of metal ions. You then run a current through it (opposite to the ion charge sign you want to attract). The metal ions will stick to the thing you are electroplating.\n\nThere are tons of applications, from aesthetics (gold plating), adding conductivity (copper). You can even coat with anti rust substances, or harder materials to increase durability."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5rckj1
|
is there scripture explaining why the devil punishes sinners?
|
I am not looking for a debate. I just never understood why the devil would punish people in hell if he went against God in the first place. Is there a scripture that explains why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rckj1/eli5_is_there_scripture_explaining_why_the_devil/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dd66657",
"dd6689m",
"dd69wiy"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"One of the rare moments I get to use my theology degree...\n\nThis is a commonly misunderstood concept; the devil is not the 'ruler' or jailer of hell. There is no scripture to support this. He's as much a prisoner and suffers just as much as any other soul in hell.",
"You're getting into later eras of Christianity for that.\n\n'The Devil' in the Bible is basically two separate figures who got conflated later on. I want to say by Dante, but I'm not certain. It's been a while since I studied that.\n\nAnyway, there's Lucifer and ha-Satan. Lucifer is the light bringer, the leader of the choirs who decided he could raise himself above God and was cast down for it. Basically a classical Promethean figure.\n\nThen there's ha-Satan, the main source of ideas of who 'the Devil' is, I think. He worked like God's prosecuting attorney. He's most prominent in Job in which he presses God to prove Job loves him unconditionally, and not just because he's been prosperous. He's a neutral figure in charge of testing people.\n\nIt was much later on in Christianity that these two were melded together a bit and it became kind of non-canon fanfiction that treated them both as 'The Devil' and mixed their stories together.",
"If you were to ask me, this question is flawed. I no longer believe in the bible, but as a strong ex-Christian, I can say that hell, from my point of view, was never something in the realm of reality. I was raised a Jehovah's Witness. We didn't believe in hell, but we were Christian. That is because there is no scripture supporting its evidence, at least not directly. There are references to hades and sheol. These have been translated to hell in most bibles, but it is understood that hades and sheol were terms used to describe the state of the dead, not a spiritual place you go to after death. \n\nAlso, Ecclesiastes 9:5 states the dead are conscious of nothing, therefore the existence of hell or even going to heaven after you die is contradictory. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2h71dx
|
Do polar bears feel "full" after eating?
|
I've been told that Polar Bears don't get a "full" feeling after eating enough food. This was said with he example that, if one was taken to Antarctica, it could eat enough to kill itself without realising.
I've done some googling, but I can't find anything on the topic. Has anyone heard this before? Is there any substance to this?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2h71dx/do_polar_bears_feel_full_after_eating/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckq4zzv",
"ckq519r"
],
"score": [
7,
5
],
"text": [
"1. A \"feeling\" of being full is a type of phenomenon known as a qualia, which by its very definition lies outside of the realm of objective scientific measurement. \n2. If a creature does not possess a physiological mechanism to let it know that its stomach is reaching capacity, limit the desire to eat, or otherwise cause it to stop taking in food, then that organism will lose a great deal of evolutionary fitness. That is, if you eat until you die, then you won't be able to pass your genes on very well. \n3. There is no reason to think that a polar bear would have more to eat in Antarctica than in the arctic. But, assuming you dropped a starving polar bear into a rookery of suddenly paralyzed seals, it would not eat until it died. Polar bears have been recorded feeding on the massive carcasses of whales. None have been observed stuffing their faces until they've died. \n4. Whoever is telling you things is just telling you things...without feeling the need to verify, understand or substantiate his/her claims. ",
"Never ever heard that. It's certainly not true as polar bears leave much of their kill behind if food has not been scares. \n\nSea World's site says that - \"A polar bear's stomach can hold an estimated 15% to 20% of its body weight. A polar bear generally eats this much only when its energy demands are high. A bear can assimilate 84% of the protein and 97% of the fat it eats.\"\n\n_URL_0_\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://seaworld.org/animal-info/animal-infobooks/polar-bears/diet-and-eating-habits/"
]
] |
|
3svivk
|
Knights and weapons
|
Were medieval knights restricted to use some weapons, or they could buy whatever they wanted?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3svivk/knights_and_weapons/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx0szma"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"There weren't any constraints on what weapons a knight or man-at-arms could purchase, no, but practically speaking, certain weapons fared better against armoured opponents than others, and were thus more popular.\n\nOut of curiosity, what led you to ask this?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
9ki3ow
|
how did the northern hemisphere become the top and the southern hemisphere become the bottom?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ki3ow/eli5_how_did_the_northern_hemisphere_become_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e6z7juy"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The first maps we know about wit coordinate system is _URL_0_ by Ptolemy that was alive 100-170 AD (the map in the image is a later copy) a map like that have longitude line that merge on the north pole. In the case of this map it is a point above the map. If you fix a ruler there you can use it to draw line and measure the longitude. So form a map drawing perspective it practical to put the north pole up on the map if you live on the northern hemisphere..\n\nThe same it true for a terrestrial globe where you can see where you live on the northern part easy if it is on the top. \n\nSo when Europe started to maps and colonize the world the usage spread and id not the standard."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy#/media/File:PtolemyWorldMap.jpg"
]
] |
||
aueax4
|
why does a balloon feel like it loses helium while i hold it tightly, then regains that "lost" helium as let the balloon fly freely?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aueax4/eli5_why_does_a_balloon_feel_like_it_loses_helium/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eh7kmle"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The pressure, and therefore volume, of gases varies based on a few factors, especially temperature. Most of the time it is colder in the morning and warmer later in the day, so the balloon shrinks as the gas has less pressure when it is cold and then grows as it get warmer. It has the same amount of gas, but the gas is taking up less space. Think of taking cotton candy and squishing it down. You are reducing the size, but not the actual amount, of the candy. \n\n\nAnd yes, you can squish it with your hands to, but when your hands aren't there to squish it down, it returns to its normal volume."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
ah4vim
|
Was Magellan cannibalized by the Filipinos?
|
Two of my history teachers say that when Magellan landed in the Philippines he was eat by the natives. My parents, whom are both Filipino, tell me that is a lie. However, both of my teachers have history degrees and my parents could be wrong. I personally don't think Magellan wasn't eaten as he was killed by a poisoned arrow and cannibalistic islanders sounds like European propaganda but I am not sure. Please help me and include links please.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ah4vim/was_magellan_cannibalized_by_the_filipinos/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eebs58k"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"No.\n\nMagellan's misadventure in the Philippines began with his arrival in Cebu (or the port of Sugbu), which at the time was ruled by the Rajah Humabon. Humabon was very welcoming at first-- offering the starving scurvy ridden Spanish supplies, food, and feasting. The Spanish for their part were absolutely relieved at the welcome they received. Magellan was also quite keen to have finally arrived in Asia and be able to make use of his crewman Enrique (who possibly came from the Philippines considering his fluency in visayan-- though he did also speak Malay languages, he was definitely from somewhere in the region.) Through Enrique, Magellan exhorted all who were present at the feasted to convert to Christianity-- and according to the Spanish-- he was successful and Humabon along with 800 other attendants all converted, erecting a giant cross to celebrate the miracle.\n\nHumabon did ask for a favor though-- especially if he was tying himself to Magellan and his new religion-- would the Spanish not help him defeat a rival-- Rajah Lapu Lapu of Mactan. The Spanish did not feel as though they could refuse and so Magellan assembled some men and Humabon, impressed by Magellan's bravery, signed off on his plan to storm the beach at Mactan and assault Lapu Lapu.\n\nUnfortunately for Magellan his soldiers were ill prepared for fighting on the shore. Magellan was a bit overconfident in the abilities of his men and himself. He asked that Humabon and his warriors not interfere so that he could see just how effective the Spanish were as warriors. Magellan took 49 men with him to the beach agains 1500 warriors assembled at Mactan. The Spanish had trouble getting in range with their crossbows and firearms as the tide was low they had trouble getting to shore and then trouble getting off their boats as they were weighed down with armor as they splashed into the shallows. Magellan ordered the retreat after it became clear his men were being peppered with arrows and unable to fight back. Most of the men quickly got back in the boats, but Magellan and a dozen or so men stayed behind to cover the retreat where they were speared and/or hacked to death.\n\nWhen Magellan's men attempted to parlay and request his body back, they were denied and told that it was too great a prize to surrender after such a battle. Shortly after the battle, Enrique invited the officers of the fleet to a feast to mourn the loss of Magellan, where most of them were killed. Historians differ whether this was Enrique's doing-- revenge for having been a Spanish slave and suffering abuse under Magellan, or if he did it so that he could stay and not be forced to travel back to Spain, or if he had anything to do with the killings. Either way, the Rajah Humabon had decided that the Spanish were not the powerful allies they had claimed to be and not worth keeping around any longer.\n\nSo did the Rajah Lapu Lapu and his men dine on Magellan? It seems unlikely; though if it did happen, it was likely a symbolic cannibalism rather than an actual meal. As to why your history teachers would say he was eaten by cannibals? That's impossible to say; probably they had teachers who told that story or they could have extrapolated from the accounts of other explorers-- maybe men such as Mendaña or Quiros who both claimed after their failed invasions of Pacific Islands (Solomon Islands & Vanuatu) that the islands were full of cannibals. There is no way for us to say.\n\nAs to Cannibalism and Magellan though, we do know that Magellan and his men practiced cannibalism at least once. Not too long before his arrival in Cebu, Magellan and his men stopped by Umatac on the island of Guahan (Guam). The Chamorro there came out to meet Magellan in their proa (outrigger ships). As is customary on many Pacific islands, if you cross into someone's reef or their waters, you make offerings of peace, food, and goods and in return you can come ashore and receive offerings of food. Magellan and his men understood none of this and when the Chamorro took goods from the Spanish ships the Spanish reacted with violence driving the Chamorro away. The next morning, Magellan took an armed party ashore under the protection of the ship Trinidad's cannon they devastated the village of Umatac-- burning the proa, killing anyone they could find, taking all the food they could, and leaving the village a smoldering ruin. Though most of the Chamorro had retreated from the village at the sight of the Spanish, the few who were killed were disemboweled, their intestines carried back to the Spanish ships in buckets to be eaten by those stricken with scurvy. As the Spanish sailed away the next day, proa from elsewhere on the south end of Guahan raced after them, being much faster and maneuverable than the Spanish ships, pelting them with stones as if to drive away unwanted spirits or malevolent intruders.\n\nIf you want to read a bit more about different aspects of Magellan's demise, each with a slightly different point of view, but generally following my description (the last two really just deals with Guahan). Also note that the Spate is freely available from ANU's online press:\n\n* Matsuda, Matt. Pacific Worlds: A History of Seas, Peoples, and Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.\n\n* Spate, Oskar. The Spanish Lake; The Pacific since Magellan Vol. I. Canberra, AUS: Australia National University Press, 1979 (2004).\n\n* Hezel, Francis X., S. J. \"From Conversion to Conquest: The Early Spanish Mission in the Marianas.” Journal for Pacific History 17(1982): 32-47.\n\n* Hezel, Francis X. First Taint of Civilization: A History of the Caroline and Marshall Islands, 1521-1885. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1983.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
39sii6
|
what happened to old outbreaks like sars and ebola? no one tracks victims anymore. did the virus die out?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39sii6/eli5_what_happened_to_old_outbreaks_like_sars_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs61o0e",
"cs61zh3"
],
"score": [
4,
7
],
"text": [
"They are no longer a threat to the Western World (and really never were) and so they are no longer news to the Western World. Once it was determined that the outbreaks were mostly contained other things took priority in the news cycles. ",
"They are still being tracked *by actual medical organisations*. The media however, who was only reporting on these diseases to hype up the danger and get views (often making the disease appear more dangerous than it was) has moved on.\n\nIf you want actual proper data on an epidemic, you need to consult sources like the CDC (who still are reporting on ebola [here](_URL_0_)), not the media."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/"
]
] |
||
710zj8
|
Had Britain and Poland not answered the call, was there any US Warship that could have destroyed the Bismarck?
|
As the Atlantic was threatened, was the US in any position to destroy the Bismarck?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/710zj8/had_britain_and_poland_not_answered_the_call_was/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn8mw21"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"1. The US was a neutral power during the hunt for the Bismarck. Which is to put in a short answer, no, the US was not in position to destroy the Bismarck unless it entered the war first (with the small caveat that the US WAS becoming increasingly aggressive in \"defensive\" measures, but it's doubtful the Bismarck would have put into position to provoke a fleet engagement with the USN).\n\n2. The US Atlantic fleet was fairly sizable in 1941. What it suffered from was a lack of modernization however, with much of it's battleship component having last been updated in the early 1930's. While in terms of firepower and protection they might have been up to the task, the US battleships of the Atlantic fleet were a lot slower than the Bismarck. The interesting capabilities the US Navy did have on hand in the Atlantic however would have been the USS Yorktown, Wasp, and Ranger (and USS Hornet if the Bismarck had sortied in very late 1941). This was not a small amount of airpower, and the Bismarck had already proven unequal to the task of defending itself against the much smaller, and worse equipped FAA.\n\nThis is all counter-factual to history of course. But for the historical answer, see point 1, for the counter historical, it's likely Bismarck vs USN would have played out similarly to history (airpower cripples Bismarck, surface action finishes it) or USN airpower might have been enough to do the job alone."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6zacl1
|
How exactly did India develop a nuclear weapon? Who helped them and how did they keep it hidden from the world until their first test?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6zacl1/how_exactly_did_india_develop_a_nuclear_weapon/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmucey0"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"The Indian nuclear program was started by Homi Bhabha soon after independence. It was a relatively low priority until the India China war of 1962. From 1963 onwards the Indians worked hard to gain nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union and India were close allies during this period, but there was no direct cooperation between the two countries on nuclear weapons. The first nuclear tests were done in 1974 were ostensibly for peaceful purposes. However, it was also clear that India had the technology was there to have nuclear weapons as well.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/indian_nuclear_history_and_soviet_relations.pdf"
]
] |
||
56xd4q
|
Are there ever any neurons that 'loop back' onto themselves and form synapses such that that they are their own main input?
|
If so, what are they called, what causes them, and do pictures exist?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/56xd4q/are_there_ever_any_neurons_that_loop_back_onto/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8ngfc5",
"d8rvskc"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"these are called [autapses] (_URL_0_). there is a bit of a literature on these but i don't know it (I have looked this up before as a modeling question, also just wondering if such a thing exists).. the Van Der Loos paper cited in the wiki article has some interesting pictures, and if you googleimage autapse you'll find many more.",
"Yes. I have worked in a research field where scientists induced status epilepticus (SE) on rats by intrahippocampal injection of kainic acid. The interesting thing is that between the primary insult (in this case SE) and the first sign of epileptiform activity, there is a latent period where axonal reorganization and sprouting of the pyramidal cells in the CA3, CA1 and suprapyramidal blade of dentate gurys (DG) occurs. This sprouting is seen as a positive feedback system, providing recurrent excitation to other pyramidal cells, but also reciprocally in an autoaptic fashion. \n\nFigure 2B (neuron labeled as 1) here _URL_0_ shows a granule cell (which is excitatory) sprout axons to itself, and another granule cell in epilepsy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autapse"
],
[
"http://pedsinreview.aappublications.org/content/pedsinreview/19/10/342/F5.large.jpg"
]
] |
|
3qhuo2
|
why do companies go through with mergers/acquisitions if they're most likely to be denied by antitrust regulators?
|
Like AT & T/T-Mobile and the recent Walgreens/Rite Aid
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qhuo2/eli5_why_do_companies_go_through_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwfb92r",
"cwfe85r",
"cwfm65n"
],
"score": [
13,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"They aren't most likely to be denied. Most mergers go through without much of a fuss.\n\nLarge companies are more likely to be denied but it still gods through occasionally and the potential profits on the other end are worth the risk that the merger could be denied. The expense of putting together a merger is nothing compared to the amount of marker control they could have if its successful.\n\nIt's an investment and like all investments companies understand they might lose their investment.",
"Sometimes companies that are denied a M & A are able to work around it. As in the divest part of their business or give up some customers",
"Investment Banker here -\n\nTheoretically, it can be that the potential value of the merged entity is great enough to undertake the risk of the merger falling apart due to a variety of issues (regulatory, etc.)\n\nRealistically, usually at this stage of an m & a process (when it gets announced), the management team is pretty emotionally invested in the deal and work with their respective bankers/legal team to come up with a plan to get it approved. More often than not, the plan they put together is sufficient enough for the merger to see completion. Also, before the deal even reaches announcement the management team has probably been counseled time and time again about the risks (including regulatory), and are far along the process of completing and presenting their 'plan'. \n\nIf you believe in the efficient market hypothesis, the acquired Company's stock price should also accurately reflect the expected probability the deal sees completion. If you see the acquired Company's stock price quickly trend towards the offer price and stay there, it usually means the market is confident the deal will close."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2b0r2l
|
why do towels get dirty if i only ever use them after i get out of the shower (when i am presumably totally clean?)
|
Seriously it weirds me out.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2b0r2l/eli5_why_do_towels_get_dirty_if_i_only_ever_use/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cj0ne0d",
"cj0nhbb",
"cj0q9ht",
"cj0t60a",
"cj1afgv"
],
"score": [
6,
15,
10,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"A wet towel is a great environment for bacteria and mold to grow. That generally puts them in the category of \"not clean anymore\", once you've used them to dry off.",
"As others have mentioned, the damp environment can make towels a good home for mold. But people also always shed skin. **always.** So even though you're clean when you're coming out of the shower, you still shedding skin into the towel.",
"you are never clean. no, not even then. ",
"you are clean. not sterile.",
"You presume incorrectly. You are *not* ever totally clean. Oils from your body get onto the towel and, combined with the lovely moist environment you've just created, the bacteria that cover nearly everything in your house enjoy the snack."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
w0i7w
|
Why is it that rooms with little air circulation are often considered "stuffy"?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/w0i7w/why_is_it_that_rooms_with_little_air_circulation/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c59cn3h"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"They become very humid from all of the water vapor exhaled by people in the room, as well as evaporating sweat. This humidity, combined with the smells of everybody's sweat and breath, can get uncomfortable"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1q3jc1
|
if an astronaut in low Earth orbit were to fire a gun at the moon, would the bullet hit the moon at the same speed as it left the barrel of the gun because of lack of air resistance? Or would Earth's gravity slow it down at all?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1q3jc1/if_an_astronaut_in_low_earth_orbit_were_to_fire_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cd8vuay",
"cd8wh99",
"cd9c2ov"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Not only will the earth's gravity slow down the bullet, it will cause it to fall back to the original orbit. The muzzle velocity of even the most powerful gun is nothing remotely like what is required to ballistically get to the moon. To get to the moon, you need one of [these.](_URL_0_)",
"A standard 5.56 NATO bullet travels between 3000 to 4000 km/h. This is only a fraction of the necessary escape velocity to leave Earth. As stated by MayContainNugat, the bullet will eventually return back ",
"Check out this [handy chart](_URL_0_) for the change in velocity required to move from different orbits. You can see that moving from low Earth orbit to the moon requires about 4.1 + 0.7 + 1.6 = 6.4 km/s of delta-v, meaning your bullet must have that speed when fired from low Earth orbit in order to reach its destination."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/gallery/saturn/SaturnV.jpg"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta-v_budget#Delta-vs_between_Earth.2C_Moon_and_Mars"
]
] |
||
22g3zp
|
why are executives always "asked to resign" instead of fired?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22g3zp/eli5_why_are_executives_always_asked_to_resign/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgmghf7",
"cgmghgt",
"cgmghq6",
"cgmgio9",
"cgmh98h"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Its cleaner, and you want to be professional. Getting fired opens up the company to being sued for \"wrongful termination\". Them resigning is much easier and usually is encouraged with \"and we'll give you some separation money\".",
"Professional courtesy. \n\n\nAt that level, positions have as much to do with politics as job performance, and so it's just polite to give someone the opportunity to not have been fired as long as they weren't sucking it up.",
"There's a lot less drama if you announce it as a resignation. And in reality, as an executive, if you're told that you're no longer useful to the company, there's no reason to insist on staying.",
"A couple reasons:\n\n1. Sometimes, the person has been with the company so long and has made so many connections that they want to give the person a chance to save face.\n\n2. It frequently looks bad for a company to hire someone and then fire them. That means the company lacked the wherewithal to screen their employees properly. A resignation looks better to outsiders, especially investors.",
"Courtesy, convenience, and saving face. \n \nSuppose you were responsible for hiring someone to do a difficult task that not many people are qualified to do. You find someone who looks like a superstar, and pay them a huge salary. \n \nThey worked hard, and perhaps did some good things. But you aren't getting all of the desired results. Could be that your person didn't do *all* the right things, maybe there were external factors that hindered success, maybe the company is really screwed up internally, whatever. In any case, you have to try again. Results are important, and for some reason your superstar didn't get them. \n \nIf you fire him/her, you may never work with the superstar again. In some industries, the community of people at the top isn't all that big. In the future, you might even be going to your old superstar looking for a job. And if you fire someone, their story isn't going to be that they were a loser who couldn't do the job, it is going to be that they couldn't succeed due to some factors...one of which might be *you*. \n \nFiring your \"superstar\" will certainly put a blemish on their career. It isn't the kiss of death, but it is serious. It's not like getting laid off from an assembly line because they don't need as many people as they previously did. If they get fired too many times, their career can be over. At the executive level, getting fired is often code for \"this person didn't just fail to get results, they fucked up royally\". Letting them resign demonstrates that things ended amicably. \n \nBecause the stakes are high, there's always the potential for a lawsuit, justified or not. That would eat up a lot of your time, and the time of other people, at a time when you have other pressing issues to concentrate on (you either now have a new executive or are looking for one, and you presumably still have the problem with not getting the desired results). It would probably be a distraction for the organization as whole, too. Better to let them resign, perhaps even with a severance package that ensures they won't bother you. \n \nAdd to all that the fact that people are going to ask the question: Why did you hire this person and give them all that money, just to turn around later and fire them? Are you incompetent at hiring? Better to be in a position where you can say it just didn't work out, no one is to blame. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
z4s5x
|
how do cellular carriers determine that you're tethering?
|
From my understanding, it's based on the user agent they see. But isn't that something easily bypassed? Feel free to explain it like I'm older than 5.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/z4s5x/eli5_how_do_cellular_carriers_determine_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c61fav4"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"They count [hops](_URL_0_).\n\nThe way our current networking technology works, it is possible to tell how many different devices a packet hit between source and destination. When you tether, your laptop to cell phone communication introduces an extra hop.\n\nIt is possible to design a tethering app that deliberately hides the hop."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hop_%28networking%29"
]
] |
|
15y8i5
|
were their any likely any settlements large enough to be called cities in Egypt 5000 years ago?
|
were there any cities in Egypt, in 2987BC?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/15y8i5/were_their_any_likely_any_settlements_large/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7r2lbc"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"[Memphis](_URL_0_) \n\n > According to T. Chandler, Memphis had some 30,000 inhabitants and was by far the largest settlement worldwide from the time of its foundation [about 3100 BCE] until around 2250 BCE \n\nAlso try [Thebes](_URL_1_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis,_Egypt#Population",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thebes,_Egypt"
]
] |
|
6au74n
|
How much power over the affairs of government did Queen Elizabeth I, Victoria and Elizabeth II have compared to each other?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6au74n/how_much_power_over_the_affairs_of_government_did/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhicw3g"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"All of these people reigned at drastically different times which is the main reason for their difference in power, but you also have to take into account the different personalities of the monarch which alters how much power they wield. Both Elizabeths are somewhat easier to explain.\n\nElizabeth I has near absolute power over the affairs of England. Tudor monarchs wielded a greater amount of power than their medieval predecessors and were absolute monarchs. Monarchical power reached its apex in England during this period, which was a trend for European monarchies at the time. So Elizabeth I didn't just have power of the affairs of government, she WAS the government. She was head of the Church of England which gave her complete control of religious affairs, and had supreme authority over her subjects, the power of life and death essentially. Obviously she didn't govern alone, a major power she had was hiring and firing ministers and advisors to do the day to day work of government. The queen effectively formed the executive branch of government, as the office of prime minister didn't exist yet. This isn't to say her power was totally unlimited. Parliament didn't sit permanently yet but it was called to rubber stamp Elizabeths law and most importantly raise taxes. While her grandfather Henry VII had given the crown slightly more monetary independence, taxation was still a requirement and this required a parliamentary vote if it was to be viewed as legitimate. The need to summon parliament for taxation is the major limiting factor on monarchs of this period but this extremely strong monarchy continues until the civil war and it doesn't really go away until the glorious revolution in 1688. Elizabeth was also self confident in her abilities and had no issue with ruling as a absolute monarch and did so.\n\nElizabeth II is the polar opposite of this, as she has practically no power over the government whatsoever. She as a ceremonial head of state and is seperate from politics. Elizabeth II is also a very private and guarded figure who rarely gives an opinion on anything remotely controversial and doesn't appear to show any political bias towards one party or the other. Most of the power she does wield is done on a ceremonial basis. For example she opens and dissolves parliament and gives royal assent to bills, but it would be inconcievable that she ever withhold consent, something that hasn't been done since 1708. \n\nVictoria is a bit more difficult to pin down. She is certainly closer to Elizabeth II than Elizabeth I in terms of power. The Victorian monarchy was constitional and Victoria has no direct power at all, but what so did have was a certain power over appointment. Unlike Elizabeth II, Victoria was a very opinionated person and had no trouble in sharing her opinions on matters, she was against suffrage for women for example. She also had blatant favourites in prime ministers, those being Lord Melbourne and Benjamin Disraeli, and a certain dislike for a couple such as Palmerston. Victoria liked to appoint prime minister she personally preferred if possible, a notable example of this is effectively blocking the Tory Robert Peel from forming a government in 1839 by refusing to sack her Whig ladies in waiting in the bedchamber crisis. We shouldn't overestimate her willingness to do this, most of the time she would invite whoever commanded a majority in the commons to form a government, but often with ill grace and if it was someone who she disliked, after all other possibilities had been exhausted."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3swcbv
|
Will we eventually be able to see other wavelengths on the electromagnetic spectrum?
|
I've recently been fascinated by those [EnChroma videos](_URL_0_) , in which a colorblind person uses special lenses that allow them to see color. This led me to wonder if there would be a way to design glasses that allow us to view ultraviolet or infrared light with some sort of aid on our eyes. Obviously you could just measure the invisible light and translate it into something in the spectrum of visible light, but instead would it be possible to actually **see** the rest of the spectrum? Thanks, sorry if this is a dumb question!
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3swcbv/will_we_eventually_be_able_to_see_other/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx0y2b6",
"cx0zgh4",
"cx0zten",
"cx10gt6",
"cx14ay1",
"cx1ov8w"
],
"score": [
97,
4,
5,
11,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's a bit tricky to answer this question because it's easy to get tripped up by semantics. The best short answer I can give is that yes, we can indirectly make our eyes detect light outside of the visible spectrum, but we can only do so by essentially mapping that light on the part of the spectrum that our naked eyes are physically sensitive to.\n\nFirst of all, yes, we can certainly use tools to make our eyes sensitive to parts of the electromagnetic spectrum that are normally invisible to us For example you could take glasses and chemically add a material that does [photon upconversion](_URL_0_), which means that it takes two low energy photons and spits out a higher energy photon. Those glasses would then allow you to detect near infrared light. You can do something similar with downshifting (turning higher energy light into lower energy light), which would allow your eyes to see UV light. You could even go far further if you use electronic detectors, like a [thermal imaging system](_URL_3_), which can open up other vast sections of the EM spectrum.\n\nHowever, in all these cases what you are ultimately doing is that you are mapping these additional spectral ranges into your existing color vision. What I mean by that is that ultimately we are still relying on converting the incident light into visible light and then using our eye's native way to detect colors. The way our eyes see colors is by using three different using a set of biological receptors called [cones](_URL_1_) in the retina of the eye. There are three types of these cone cells, called S, M, and L cells, which have the [spectra shown here](_URL_2_). These different cells provide three channels through which we can detect spectral information. It is these three channels that ultimately determine how many colors we can see. Therefore, even when we are indirectly observing light outside of the visible range, in the end we are just effectively creating a false color image that maps onto our normal ability to perceive colors.",
"I think if we did something like that we would look at animals that see ultraviolet or infrared. \n\nIf I remember night vision goggles use infrared already. So people already can use lenses to see that. Plus I think I remember that under some conditions people can see infrared with their naked eye. \n\nSince we know insects and some mammals can see ultraviolet (including possibly cats and dogs) we could use the same structure to help us. So studying the structure of animal eyes they found that their lens don't block uv light, humans lens do block light. The reason suggested is because blocking the uv light helps humans see in better detail than other animals. Also, many of the mammals that see uv are nocturnal so they allow more light into their eyes in order to see better in the dark. Anyway, according to the article people who have cataract surgery report seeing UV light. So, perhaps we already know how to allow people to see UV.\n\n_URL_0_",
"It's conceivable that we could do this using gene therapy. Recently colorblindness may have been \"cured\" in monkeys by injecting into their eyes viruses full of the genes necessary for creating the retinal proteins that are sensitive to red, allowing the monkeys to see red better and pass some colorblindness tests. If we could take the genes corresponding to UV or IR -sensitive proteins in other animals and inject them into humans' eyes, I think it's possible we could extend the spectral range of our vision. Can anyone comment on the feasibility of this idea? \n\nEdit: monkey study _URL_0_",
" > I've recently been fascinated by those EnChroma videos , in which a colorblind person uses special lenses that allow them to see color.\n\nI can tell by the way you phrased this question that those lenses don't work the way you think they work. Also, what that person is seeing isn't exactly the same as what you or I would be seeing.\n\nThose lenses block out the wavelengths that have the most overlap between the different kinds of photopigments in the eye to increase contrast. That's it.",
"Those special lenses work because people can already sort of distinguish those colors, but there's way too much overlap, so it blocks the part of the spectrum that overlaps. This is similar to how you can also see a little bit of infrared and ultraviolet, and if you block the rest of the light it will be more clear. In that case, [they already exist](_URL_0_). I don't know if a similar version for ultraviolet exists. Ultraviolet light is much, much more dangerous to your eyes than infrared, so it would be a lot easier to blind yourself with glasses like that.",
"This is the BEST question ever, in my opinion!\n\nThere's so much of the world that is hidden from our casual view and we as a species have gone to such great lengths to be able to detect reality in as many different modes as possible. Think about X-Rays, sonar, lidar, MRI , night-vision goggles... wow! Our brains are amazing in our ability to \"see\" the unseen.\n\nWhat can other animals see?\n\nHunting raptors are able to see into near-UV and can track prey, possibly filtering to detect bio-fluorescent compounds rich in DNA \n\n_URL_1_\n\n > we do not see what the birds see. It turns out that one key prey for common kestrels, the meadow vole, behaves like a tiny dog, using squirts of urine to mark its trails through tall grass. About 15 years ago, Finnish researchers from the University of Turku discovered that vole urine reflects UV light—which kestrels soaring over open fields can plainly see. “Once you realize raptors can follow the trail right to the animal, it makes a lot more sense,” Hill says.\n\nPit vipers, rattlesnakes, and boa constrictors have all developed a pit organ in their faces to detect infrared. This allows them to seek out shelter to regulate their cold-blooded nature as well as strike out quickly at prey in the dark.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nElectroreception and magnetoreception are other senses that animals like electric eels and pigeons have.\n\nHowever, nothing has X-Ray, gamma ray, or radio wave vision. In part because the world world be a much darker place with these as primary senses, since our atmosphere and magnetosphere do a lot to protect us from the EM spectrum outside of the visible light range. It's no coincidence that we evolved to see the brightest part of the EM spectrum either.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTpCTDwjHZQ"
] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_upconversion",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cells",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/Cones_SMJ2_E.svg/1000px-Cones_SMJ2_E.svg.png",
"http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/60317/thermografie_kopie.jpg"
],
[
"http://m.livescience.com/43461-cats-and-dogs-see-in-ultraviolet.html"
],
[
"http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090916-color-blind-gene-monkeys.html"
],
[],
[
"http://amasci.com/amateur/irgoggl.html"
],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_sensing_in_snakes",
"http://www.nwf.org/news-and-magazines/national-wildlife/birds/archives/2012/bird-vision.aspx"
]
] |
|
49rrnl
|
why do car horns (and other components) use relays instead of using normal switches/buttons similar to a house?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49rrnl/eli5_why_do_car_horns_and_other_components_use/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0ubrja",
"d0ubxy1",
"d0ucota"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
10
],
"text": [
"So they can use much smaller switches and wiring than the current draw would usually require. For the horn it's mostly the need for much smaller wiring through the steering column, but for things like the high beam it's just having a nicer feeling switch. Older cars didn't use relays there and the high beam switch was a pretty clunky foot operated thing.",
"? A car horn is activated by a momentary button in your steering wheel that you press to activate. That button may drive a relay, but a relay is just a switch activated by electricity instead of physical motion. Relays allow power systems to be isolated from each other, so a low power circuit can be run into the cabin of the car and that in turn can control a high power circuit that drives the horn.",
"Relays are used when you want a low current to be able to switch a large current. Low current wires can be a lot smaller (and safer), and more easily and cheaply go a lot further. \n\nSo let's say I wanted to be able to turn on and off the electricity coming from the generators at Hoover Dam. I could run wires to support that enormous current all the way to my house, then install a huge switch and all sorts of protection against electrical shorts and fires (oh, and lose money because of power dissipation on my long, gigantic wires). Or, I could put a relay in at Hoover Dam itself, and run a pair of very small wires over to my house, and put in a normal push button switch that not even the most clumsy and unfortunate person could possibly electrocute themselves on.\n\nIt works kind of the same way in your car, just on a smaller scale."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
bf0b63
|
if the tongue is a muscle, and we care for muscles by massaging and stretching, why don’t we have the need to do that for the tongue?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bf0b63/eli5_if_the_tongue_is_a_muscle_and_we_care_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"el9v8ee"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The tongue isn't used nearly as often as muscles that commonly need massaging or stretching. Additionally massaging or stretching, while it often feels good, is only really necessary when you overwork muscles, something not common with your tongue."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3rhvkp
|
motherboards
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rhvkp/eli5_motherboards/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwo5rzq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As long as you are going to one of the big reliable brands there's not many ways you can go wrong. you just need to make sure its compatible with your other parts (any relatively new MOBO with relatively new parts should be) and it has the features you want or will want, like cross-fire/SLI.\n\nand expensive mobo is expensive because of build quality and extra features and stuff. i would stick around the 100-125$ range on your average build. I got a MSI Gaming 5 for my gaming PC."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3kaad2
|
what causes the orange around the pupil of my eye?
|
I have hazel eyes, the outer boarder is a brown and then the middle part is green but right around my pupil it is orange, why is this ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kaad2/eli5_what_causes_the_orange_around_the_pupil_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuw169m"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's called central heterochromia, or sectoral heterchromia. Central would be the ring radiating out from your eye, and sectoral is any spot in the eye with discoloration. There is also complete heterchromia where each eye is completely different. \n\nThe distribution of melanin in your eyes is not the same in each spot. It usually doesn't mean anything bad. It's just genetic. Consider yourself unique! Not many people have this."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
217tsq
|
How did comets form, and why is there water on them?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/217tsq/how_did_comets_form_and_why_is_there_water_on_them/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgags12",
"cgaipp8",
"cgaj07u",
"cgakcgc",
"cgalttv",
"cgamf8s",
"cgaockz",
"cgaoq4v",
"cgat8fc"
],
"score": [
275,
4,
58,
8,
2,
3,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Until somebody can give you a more thorough answer:\n\nComets, like everything else form by a bunch of dust gradually getting clumped together by their gravity.\n\nWhat distinguishes comets is their composition.\nWater, dust, and ice make up comets because they can only form a certain distance from a sun, star or hot celestial body, whereas rocks can clump up together and stay intact in much hotter areas.\n\nSource: memory from intro to astronomy",
"is the question related to why is there water at all in the comet-making part of the solar system? what created all that water? is possible that there was lots of water throughout the disc that surrounded the proto-Star and only the water far away was able to survive the solar-system making process because of the temperature or other processes? did earth's water collect together from this water that was everywhere, or did that water burn off and earth's oceans were delivered to it by comets? i get that comets have ice because its cold in the oort cloud.. but why water? is that the question that is being asked? as opposed to solid etOH or whatever.\n\ndon't comets also have the basic organics and amino acids and they are all the left-handed versions as well that we find so many of here on earth? isn't that a rather cool thing? comets can pepper a planet with all the necessary ingredients for life to start up.",
"/u/IBrokeMyCloset, this is why you should watch Cosmos (Fox, 9PM, Sundays), last night's episode was all about comets. \n \nLike people here are saying, it's basically a combination of nature's forces. Gravity and Electro-Magnetism start pulling dust together. Electrostatic Attraction gets small particles to stick together at first, and when they reach a certain minimum combined mass, gravity takes over from there as the dominating 'growth driver'. From there it's just a function of time, location, and available material. \n \n \nWatch Cosmos.",
"Here's an article that may shed some light on the process of water formation in space:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIn short, it appears it's possible for water to form from hydrogen interacting with solid oxygen at very low temperatures.",
"I'll do my best to remember what I can from Astronomy 150. \nWater-ice can only exist, In our solar system as a solid, outside the snow-line. This snow line lies roughly at 3.8 AU from the sun, any water ice that comes inside that line will quickly evaporate into gas. When we see comets from earth, this is exactly what we are seeing, water evaporating off the comets surface. \nComets form on the very edges of our solar system in a giant sphere called the Oort Cloud. They form by accretion, gravity forcing smaller objects together to form bigger ones. Thus, since the only material in the Oort Cloud is dust and particulate water-ice, comets are mainly composed of just that. \nComets have massive orbits. Hence why we only see some comets once every few decades. However, each time they enter the snow line, they loose a little bit of mass. Eventually, after entering the snow line over, and over, comets perish. They either disintegrate or, in the case as of recent with the comet Io, they travel too close to the sun and are burned up completely. \n\n\nSorry for grammar or spelling errors. Typed this out on my phone. \n\nSource: Memory from Astronomy 150",
"The elements came from a supernova before the sun was born. After the supernova, the material began swirling around and collecting. The supernova before the sun produced a lot of oxygen which mixed with hydrogen to make water. Since they were far from our sun, they froze together to make icy comets. ",
"Think \"Ice' as in frozen liquids, not Ice as in frozen water. It's a bunch of rocky debris that gathered under its own gravity and froze together in space with equally cold (think really close to absolute zero) gas molecules (co2, methane, ammonia, etc.). In space, the lack of air between the particles lets them find enough molecular bonding points to sort of stick together, like you would get if you had two really flat surfaces and slid them together-what they call vacuum welding. So, this collection of junk ends up making a kind of rock, like an asteroid, and, if it's orbiting a star, when it gets close enough, light and solar wind heat it up to where those same gasses start to melt, then boil. It's in space, no gravity, right? So the gas goes out in all directions. If it's BIG enough, it obscures/picks up enough sunlight that it appears as a cloud from far away. Since the suns light and solar wind has pressure, this cloud is \"blown\" away from the Sun, which is why a comets tail always points away from the Sun, not away from the direction of travel. Eventually, after enough passes around a star, the comet loses enough cohesiveness or gets small enough that just falls apart and, without outgassing, becomes nearly invisible.",
"Comets formed along with everything else in our solar system. They are the left over material made up of frozen matter, and can vary in composition. Comets have a dark surface made up mostly of carbon, think of a hard candy shell. What is inside of the comet, depends on how old it is and its distance to the sun. Most of the time, the comet has a frozen solid chunk of matter on the inside, but as it begins falling towards the sun it goes through a process called sublimation. This is when the solid chunk of matter skips the liquid phase and turns directly into gas. Gas is less dense than solid and the comet starts ejecting the gas. That is how comet trails are formed and why there might be water traveling around the comet. \n\nNow if you wondering how water is even present in the comet, that's a much bigger answer that involved the life cycle of stars.",
"Three important things:\n\nWater is thought to be [common](_URL_0_) throughout the universe. So, there's likely a fair bit of it in a pre-star nebula scattered about. The water is made during supernovae where there is plenty of energy, hydrogen, and oxygen around.\n\nWater molecules will attract to each other due to gravity and their polar electromagnetic composition. This explains how comets can form in space.\n\nDuring the formation of a solar system, areas close to the sun where rocky planets form is too hot for liquid water. What happens is the forming star heats up the water near the star to more than the water's gravity or electromagnetic attraction can keep it together. The added heat generally pushes the water away from the sun. If/when the water is in a cooler part of the solar system it will condense, and start attracting to each other. You get asteroids with water, planets with water (like Uranus), and also just icy things like Pluto or comets way out there.\n\nHere's a question that we haven't quite answered yet, though. If the inner area of a solar system is too hot for water to coalesce, where did Earth's water come from? We don't know for sure. Our best guess is that asteroids or comets brought water to the planet after Earth's formation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0805/0805.0055v1.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_liquid_water"
]
] |
||
2ejp7k
|
what is the intuitive explanation for the normal distribution curve.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ejp7k/eli5_what_is_the_intuitive_explanation_for_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck04gug",
"ck04ypd",
"ck07547"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Take a BB gun. Mount it on a vise or other holding device. Try shooting a target at a distance. You will the most concentration of the bullets at the center, spread out thinly. This is one of the examples.\n\nYou can fire the gun yourself, but it causes too much variability due to your body moving and recoil.",
"Many things in life have a significant degree of invariability. For instance, the erect male genital size. The average is 5.2 inches, but how much do people tend to vary from the mean? If it was a purely random dice roll, you'd have a nearly equal amount of people with 1 inch, 2, etc... all the way up to 11 or 12. But of course this isn't the case - instead, most people hover around 4.5 to 6 inches, with outliers being in the 6-7 or 4.5 to 3 range, and even fewer outliers beyond that. The size of the human male member, as a whole, would form a normal distribution.",
"Consider the carnival game Plinko, a version of which you can see regularly on \"The Price Is Right\" gameshow. In its simplest version, you drop a ball (or some other round object) at the top of the game and the ball encounters pegs that temporarily impede its motion downward. At each peg, the ball has a 50-50 chance of falling to the left (L) or to the right (R). A small version of the game might look like this, with dark circles representing pegs and the o row at the bottom representing all of the possible outcomes of any particular ball drop.\n\n •\n • •\n • • •\n • • • •\n o o o o o\n\nIt turns out there are six different ways it can end up in the middle o location:\n\n* LLRR\n* LRLR\n* LRRL\n* RLLR\n* RLRL\n* RRLL\n\nThe ball can get to either of the non-end locations to the left or right of center four ways. Here are the possibilities for end location #2, counting from the left.\n\n* LLLR\n* LLRL\n* LRLL\n* RLLL\n\nAnd the end locations can only be gotten to one way apiece. For the one on the left, that looks like:\n\n* LLLL\n\nThere are therefore 16 different ways the ball can travel downward. The number of outcomes that lead to each end location look like this:\n\n •\n • •\n • • •\n • • • •\n 1 4 6 4 1\n\nSo: 6 out of 16 paths (or 37.5%) end up in the center, 4 out of 16 paths (25%) end up left of center, and just 1 out of 16 paths (6.25%) ends up on the left-hand location. If the game is fair (the ball is round and evenly weighted, the pegs are aligned exactly, etc.), the ball is equally likely to choose any of the 16 paths, and we can expect an accumulation of actual tests to return similar results.\n\nThis is the essence of the normal distribution. The outcome with the most potential paths to it (and thus the most likely) is the middle outcome. The outcomes next to it are (symmetrically) next most likely, and the outcomes with the fewest possible paths (at the extremes) are the least likely to turn up.\n\nNote that any particular ball drop's result can't be predicted (or any few ball drops), but the more balls that are dropped, the more closely the distribution of the outcomes should correspond with the percentage of number of paths leading there. In other words, if you drop 16 million balls from the top, we can expect about a million in each end location, and about six million in the middle.\n\nThis is a simple example, but it should apply to anything that can be discribed with a normal distribution. Most people are in the middle of the intelligence curve, for example, because there are the most paths to the middle for our genes, experience and upbringing. Outliers at the edges of the intelligence curve get there because their genes, experience and upbringing traveled a particularly uncommon path. And so on."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
wr5dr
|
If gravity were to have an exchange particle like the other forces, how would this particle escape the event horizon of a black hole?
|
Presumably it would have to be a massless particle as gravity has infinite range, so it would be like a photon in that respect- photons can't escape the event horizon so how would gravitons? Have we rejected the gravitational exchange particle?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/wr5dr/if_gravity_were_to_have_an_exchange_particle_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5fuz7d"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Exchange particles are virtual. Black holes can also, potentially, have electric charge, which is achieved through the mediation of virtual photons."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ys57u
|
cars] i understand why i have to change the oil in my car after a certain number of miles, but why do i have to do it after 6-12 months regardless if i haven't travelled very much?
|
I've always serviced my cars myself and generally changed the oil based on distance, disregarding time. I typically service early, only ever use fully synthetic and change the filter each time so I figure I'm quite safe.
Just got a newish car for my wife and in order to honour the warranty conditions, I need to get it serviced every six months (average car travels about 10,000km in that time, so I get it). Trouble is, the service interval on this car is 15,000km or 18 months. I've had the car almost 6 months and I now have to get it serviced. Trouble is, the car has done less than 2,500km since we bought it - the oil is still pristine! I realise the whole warranty thing (from used-dealership, not factory) is one big ripoff to force you to pay for overpriced servicing; since it has a maximum limit per claim and basically doesn't cover anything that's actually likely to go wrong with it.
BUT HERE'S MY ACTUAL QUESTION:
Why are service intervals like "10,000km or 12 months" and not just "10,000km"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ys57u/eli5cars_i_understand_why_i_have_to_change_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfn9vtv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because your car does both city and highway driving, but let's just use the extremes to demonstrate.\n\nIf you did nothing but highway driving with your car, you'd reach 10,000km very soon and well under 12 months. This is from all the wear and tear that results from driving your car 10,000km.\n\nBut what if you did nothing but city driving? Its much slower driving, so chances are it would take significantly longer than 12 months to reach 10,000km. However, even though your car is not physically moving as much, the engine is still working - the pistons are still churning, parts are still moving, and that oil is getting mucked about. So while you haven't reached 10,000km, after 12 months that engine oil will probably have been worked over into a viscous paste as a result of your months of slow driving.\n\nSo remember, these are ballpark figures. If you just don't drive your car much, then you could likely get away with stretching that oil out. However, idling your oil for long periods of time can be pretty bad too."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
afu20q
|
why we can’t breathe 100% o2 & stay alive for a few minutes without breathing?
|
Edit: Thank you all guys. I was wrong 😁
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/afu20q/eli5_why_we_cant_breathe_100_o2_stay_alive_for_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ee1ergp",
"ee1lce9",
"ee1odgn"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Your breathing reflex isn't triggered by lack of oxygen but by a build up of carbon dioxide which we produce by metabolism and need to get rid of. You feel an overwhelming need to take a breath long before you run out of oxygen. Breathing normal air, exhaled breath is about 16% O2, that's the same oxygen pressure as on a relatively modest 8000 foot mountain, still breathable for a healthy person.",
"Contrary to some other comments, you can breathe 100% oxygen for a long time without any noticeable detrimental effects. The adverse effects of breathing 100% O2 take a long, long, long time to become apparent. \n\nAs stated in another comment, it is the rise in CO2 that first triggers our urge to breathe. This is because under normal circumstances the CO2 will rise long before the oxygen will fall - even more so when you’ve got lungs full of 100% oxygen. However, a low oxygen concentration will also eventually trigger an urge to breathe, but this occurs at a dangerously low oxygen level. In fact, people who have chronically high CO2 levels, such as those with respiratory disease, have grown tolerant to the CO2 and have what’s called a “hypoxic drive” to their respiration i.e. they rely on low oxygen to trigger their breathing. If you give these people 100% oxygen they may stop breathing. \n\nIf you were to hyperventilate on 100% oxygen, then hold your breath, you would have a very low CO2 and a very high O2. Over the breath holding period, your CO2 would rise slowly and your oxygen levels would decrease slowly. Because of the lower CO2 starting point, you would not feel the need to breathe for a long time and would be able to hold for longer. This can be dangerous for divers. Sometimes they hyperventilate to lower their CO2 levels so they can stay underwater longer. But if they do this in normal air, what happens is that the oxygen levels fall before the CO2 levels rise. They can pass out from low oxygen while underwater, with no warning, because they never felt the urge to breathe. They then start breathing underwater while unconscious and inhale water and die. \n\nI am an anaesthetist and we routinely have patients breathe 100% oxygen just before we put them to sleep. This is because once they are asleep, they don’t breathe. We have a limited time to get a breathing tube in or they will die. If there are any problems and delays in doing this, we have bought ourselves a few more minutes before low oxygen levels cause death, because of the higher oxygen starting point and the longer time it takes for the oxygen to fall to a dangerous level. The difference in these patients is that we have taken away their normal breathing response to high CO2 with the drugs we use. So if we didn’t get a tube in, their CO2 levels would be very high (which would normally trigger breathing) their oxygen levels would be very low (which would normally trigger breathing) but they won’t breathe because we’ve obtunded this reflex or paralysed them. ",
"Your blood can only store so much O2. Once it's saturated, which it typically is while you are simply sitting and breathing deeply, it can't fold any more. Breathing air has plenty of O2 to saturate your blood, the air you exhale still has most of the oxygen it had when you inhaled it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1qjp2w
|
what were the first organisms to develop a circulatory system?
|
Or, how did the circulatory system come about through evolution?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1qjp2w/what_were_the_first_organisms_to_develop_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cddvyqp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Phylogenetically, the phylum Mollusca was the first animal group (most primitive) to have a circulatory system but it's an open system with hemolymph with the exception of Class Cephalopoda, which has closed circulatory system. Cephalopoda is made up of squid and octopuses (not octopi) which appeared about 415,000,000 years ago. Annelida is the first phylum in which all its members have a closed circulatory system. Since annelids are soft bodied, fossil records are a little fuzzy. The first annelids appeared as early as ~518,000,000 years ago and as late as 65,000,000 based on what fossil records you go by (i.e. there is a debate as to what fossilized organisms are actually annelids). \n\nThe first plants to have a vascular system I believe were part of the class, Rhyniopsida. They first appeared as early as 419,000,000 years ago. \n\nAll other Kingdoms in the Eukarya domain are basically single celled (although some, such as fungi species form simple multicellular tissues) and therefore have no need for a complex circulatory system. Same goes for the Archaea and Bacteria domains (yay Carl Woese!).\n\nAs with all organ systems, they came about through evolution. As AngryBill stated, circulatory systems really came about due to the increasing size of the organisms.\n\nSource: Microbiology grad with some background in zoology and botany."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2puy5r
|
What do we know about the founding of Korea, if what is recorded is a myth?
|
The South Koreans learn about the history of Korea, very well aware that it's a myth. There's something about a bear becoming a woman, right?
On Wikipedia it says:
"Korean history begins with the founding of Chosun (often known as "Gojoseon" to prevent confusion with another dynasty founded in the 13th century; the prefix Go- means 'older,' 'before,' or 'earlier') in 2333 BC by Dangun, according to Korean foundation mythology."
And then the said mythology goes on.
What's the real story behind it, and how do we know when all records are filled with animals becoming humans?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2puy5r/what_do_we_know_about_the_founding_of_korea_if/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn0eos9",
"cn0g33e"
],
"score": [
9,
5
],
"text": [
"With historical records alone, it is impossible to ascertain the exact date when Gojoseon was founded. We *do* know that Joseon existed by at least the 4th century BC; in the *Records of the Grand Historian*, a figure from the Yan State who lived in the 4th century BC mentions \"Joseon\" as an eastern neighbor of the Yan State. Later, it is noted in both *Records* and another book titled *Weie* (魏略) that Joseon lost its western lands to the Yan State. The *Weie* goes into more detail; it says that Joseon lost 2000 *li* of its western territory to Yan during the early 4th or late 3rd century BC (archaeological evidence indicates that Gojoseon retreated south of the Chongchon River around this time, seemingly abandoning its territories in Liaoning). Obvioudly, 2000 *li* is an exaggeration, because if this was true this would mean that Joseon extended to Yanjing, which is ridiculous, but this does indicate Gojoseon control over Liaoning, which is also supported by archaeological evidence.\n\n\nThe \"Haineibei jing\" chapter of the *Shan Hai Jing* mentions Joseon:\n\n > 朝鮮在列陽東 海北山南 列陽屬燕\n\nWhich translates roughly to\n\n > Joseon is to the east of Lieyang, and to the south of Beihaishan Mountain. Lieyang belongs to the Yan State.\n\nHowever, the *Shan Hai Jing* was written by many people at different times, and the Yan State existed for centuries, so this record does not really ascertain the time of Gojoseon's founding. All we learn is that Gojoseon existed prior to the Qin unification, which we already knew from other texts.\n\nThe *Guanzi* also mentions an entity called Baljoseon (Fachaoxian) trading with the Qi State of the Shandong Peninsula. However, the *Guanzi* is believed to have been written mostly during the Warring States Period, so all we learn is that there was something the Chinese referred to as Chaoxian during the Warring States Period, which we already knew.\n\nSo all we can learn from written evidence is that Gojoseon had power over Liaoning in the 4th century BC. So to ascertain the rough founding dates of Gojoseon we must rely on archaeology.\n\nEarly Gojoseon sites generally include characteristic guitar-shaped bronze swords and by dolmen tombs. Consensus is that these date from the 10th century BC, so the foundation of Gojoseon as a cultural entity probably occurred around that time. ",
"The extinct state of Joseon/Chaoxian doesn't fit the modern day narrative of being a \"Korean\" nation or belonging to \"Korean\" ethnicity as Chinese texts show that the entity or geographic location known as Chaoxian started out in Northeastern China.\n\nTangun has no historic basis and is a result of nation building similar to Shennong being revered by the Vietnamese.\n\nWhile Jizi most likely existed as a historical figure whether or not he has anything to do with the Marquis Ji(㠱侯) mentioned in the bronze vessels excavated modern day Liaoning is still up to debate.\n_URL_0_\n\nEfforts to pinpoint identity are hindered by the lack of primary sources dating towards Joseon/Chaoxian entities.\n\nPre Han texts include the Guanzi,Zhan Guo Ce,Shan Hai Jing etc which do not associate Jizi with Chaoxian.\n\nGuanzi\n陰山之礝碈，一筴也。燕之紫山白金，一筴也。發朝鮮之文皮，一筴也。汝、漢水之右衢黃金，一筴也。江陽之珠，一筴也。秦明山之曾青，一筴也。禺氏邊山之玉，一筴也。\nPrecious gemstones of Mt.Yin,silver of Mt. Zi of Yan,exotic colored animal hides of the Fa Chaoxian,gold from the Ru and Han rivers,pearls of Jiangyang,azurite from Mt. Qinming and jade from Mt. Bian of the Yu clan.\n_URL_3_\n\nHere Master Guan is explaining the 7 treasures of the world to Duke Huan of Qi.\n\nZhan Guo Ce\n燕東有朝鮮、遼東，北有林胡、樓煩，西有云中、九原，南有呼沱、易水。\nTo the east of Yan lies Chaoxian,Liaodong,to the north Linhu,Loufan,to the west Yunzhong,Jiuyuan and to the south Hutuo,Yishui.\n_URL_2_\n\nChaoxian is assumed to be west of Liaodong due to the fact that when Su Qin is taken into account Jiuyan is farther away than Yunzhong while Yishui is farther away than Hutuo.\n\nShan Hai Jing\n朝鮮在列陽東，海北山南。列陽屬燕。\nChaoxian lies to the east of Lie river,north of the sea and south of the mountain,which is ruled by Yan.\n_URL_1_\n\n東海之內，北海之隅，有國名曰朝鮮。\nWithin in the Eastern Sea,and just touching the Northern Sea lies the state of Chaoxian.\n_URL_4_\n\nThe Lieyang used here most likely refers to the Lie river which Han era sources such as Fangyan note about Chaoxian. The Northern sea here is none other than the Bo Sea,the Eastern Sea is the Yellow Sea,while the Taihang mountain range has been identified as the mountain in this quote.\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/URv6Djk.jpg",
"http://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/hai-nei-bei-jing",
"http://ctext.org/zhan-guo-ce/su-qin-jiang-wei-cong-bei",
"http://ctext.org/guanzi/kui-du",
"http://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/hai-nei-jing"
]
] |
|
99g780
|
stars vs gas planets
|
So, stars are largely made up of gasses, I know that and I know the basic definition of planets. But we have gas planets as well. I was wondering what is the distinction between gas planets and stars. It has some to do with the cores, right?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/99g780/eli5_stars_vs_gas_planets/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e4ndkah",
"e4ndmzn",
"e4ndo8y",
"e4ng6zs",
"e4o40cx"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
8,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A star has enough gravity to squeeze it's gases together so much that they start to undergo nuclear fusion, thus causing a star to radiate energy. A gas giant doesn't. \n\nIn between is gas giant and a star is a brown dwarf, which is not massive enough to sustain nuclear fusion of ordinary hydrogen to helium in their cores, but can fuse deuterium and lithium if their mass is large enough. They radiate a small amount of energy.",
"It has to do with the mass, mostly. The reason the Sun can fuse elements easily is because it gets a lot of help from gravity. When we do fusion here on Earth, we have to add a LOT of energy to the reaction to make it work. That's why it's difficult for us, but easy for the sun. It \"cheats.\"\n\n & #x200B;\n\nIf Jupiter had more mass, its hydrogen could be under enough pressure from gravity to make fusion happen.",
"Stars produce energy through a continuous fusion reaction in their cores. Gas giants do not. The smallest an object could be to sustain a hydrogen fusion reaction would be about 8% the mass of our sun.",
"It's all about the mass.\n\nMore mass = more gravity\n\nGas Giants and stars have alot of hydrogen. It's the most abundant and simplest element in the observable universe.\n\nStars turn hydrogen (1 proton) into helium (2 protons) and so forth to get most of the elements we know of. How does the star do that? Because it has so much mass. So much mass means so much gravity.\n\nThe gravity in stars is so great it can physically combine protons together in a process called nuclear fusion.\n\nGas Giants have alot of mass but not as much as stars. They don't quite have enough mass to make gravity strong enough to undergo nuclear fusion.\n\nSo now you can see it's all about the mass =]",
"Theres a critical mass, which is very specific (like an atom less would mean it doesn't start). And that is when a star is big enough to fuse Hydrogen into Helium.\n\nSo if you gave enough mass to Jupiter it would eventually take the mass. It would require something like 750 times its own mass. So it's really far off. \n\nAlso stars form in nebulae, planets form around stars. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
rx7ye
|
Why do Space Shuttles burn up on re-entry, but not when they are leaving the Earth?
|
I know it has something to do with the friction of the shuttle against the air particles, but how come the Shuttle burns up only on re-entry? Shouldn't the phenomenon work in both directions? Why should the Earth prefer things to leave but melt down anything that comes in?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/rx7ye/why_do_space_shuttles_burn_up_on_reentry_but_not/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c49dc8p",
"c49e89g",
"c49fhn5",
"c49fmep"
],
"score": [
22,
53,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"During liftoff the shuttle travels through the thicker part of the atmosphere where friction is greater at a much slower speed than it does on re-entry.",
"The outbound trajectory is designed to minimize air resistance to get maximum efficiency from the fuel. The inbound trajectory is designed to create much more air resistance, in order to bleed off energy to get from orbital velocity to landing velocity.",
"On the way out, the shuttle is moving forwards where it is relatively aerodynamic. During reentry the shuttle is pitched up so that it's flat bottom impacts the atmosphere. This is done in order It's basically the difference between diving into a swimming pool and doing a belly flop.\n\nYou can easily test this for yourself. Get a toy plane, those die-cast metal ones (do they still make those) are perfect. Take your plane and get in a car. Accelerate up to highway speeds, around 65-70 mph if possible. Take plane and extend it out at arm's length pointed into the wind (like it's flying). Notice the extra air resistance is fairly minimal. Now pitch the nose up about 40 degrees and notice how much the air resistance increases. This is what the shuttle does to bleed off speed and it's called aerobraking.\n\nI would also like to point out here that the heating of objects entering the atmosphere comes not so much from friction but from compression of the air ahead of the object.",
"It has almost nothing to do with \"friction of the shuttle against the air particles\". The heat comes from compression of the gas because the reentering object is hitting it at hypersonic velocity.\n\nSince the temperature of a gas is essentially just how fast the particles are moving, running into a gas at high speed (or stopping a stream of high velocity gas) creates a lot of heat.The ambient temperature may be -100, but the stagnation temperature will be thousands of degrees.\n\nThe Earth also doesn't express any preference in the matter.\n\nThe reason there is more heating on the way down than on the way up is because the shuttle was going faster in the atmosphere on the way down. The orbiter is out of the functional atmosphere well before it reaches orbital velocity.\n\nStagnation temperature rises with the square of the velocity, so even being 40% faster in atmo on the way down will mean twice the temperature.\n\nThere is heating on the way up, by the way. Even non-orbital rockets can bake their paint off."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
54b5qu
|
Who exactly would have wound up in an asylum in the 1920s?
|
How eccentric or odd could a person be in the 1920s without getting locked away in an asylum? Today I think the standard is that you have to be a danger to yourself or others but in the old days you just had to be "Insane" I believe. So what qualified as Insane?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/54b5qu/who_exactly_would_have_wound_up_in_an_asylum_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d80iqsq",
"d817q8y"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"In what country/region?",
"/u/SweetHermitress and /u/Subs-man have addressed some of this, but hopefully I can add to the conversation and help in answering your question.\n\nWhen state-funded asylums began to develop in the mid- to late-nineteenth century, the intention was \"therapy\"- the idea was to cure the insane and then remove them from the institution. This ideal became increasingly tempered by the reality of asylums, which in some cases in the U.S. saw a 1,000% increase in the number of long-term patients from the mid-nineteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century. So to bring this around to your specific question, by the 1920s, curing a patient would still have been considered ideal, but by no means a necessary qualification for institutionalization.\n\nSo what was \"insanity\" at this time? \"Disruptive\" behaviour has been mentioned, and it was certainly a factor, but it was not required. Patients could be committed in a number of ways: sent from jail on the certificate of two physicians, admitted by family, or even by themselves. I'm not entirely sure of the details, but these processes remained fairly unchanged from the nineteenth century. Forms of insanity were much the same: intemperance (consistent intoxication, which could cause 'delirium'), schizophrenia, epilepsy, and other very visible disruptions. In most regards, actual mental illnesses have not changed- only their diagnoses. So if you can imagine the mental illnesses that exist today, both temporary and chronic, you will have some idea of the kinds of people who were committed. Women with post-partum depression were almost certainly committed, though not with that diagnosis. Those with visible symptoms of anxiety and depression would also find themselves in the asylum. \"Mania\" and \"melancholy\" would have still been fairly catch-all terms in the early 1920s, though developments in clinical psychiatry would soon expand the terminology used to address mental illness.\n\nNotably, the development of \"idiot asylums\" at the end of the nineteenth century meant that those with autism, Down's syndrome, and other characteristics that would necessitate extra care would no longer be sent to an insane asylum (as they would have in earlier years). Their care would not be much better in the idiot asylum, however, where they might be put to work or even sterilized.\n\nAlso, being the 1920s, there would have been a new class of inmates: those with \"shell shock,\" suffering the effects of war. Asylums received an influx of patients during and just after the First World War.\n\nEDIT: I forgot to mention everyone's favourite cause of insanity c. 1920: masturbation. It was believed that masturbation drained young men of their vital essence and weakened them. In fact, Kellogg's corn flakes were invented by John Harvey Kellogg in order to combat masturbation-induced madness and weakness in young men.\n\nAlso, *neurasthenia* was a common term at the time. Ben Singer (*Melodrama and Modernity*) and Jackson Lears (*No Place of Grace*) have written on the subject extensively. Similar to the effects of masturbation, neurasthenia was a draining of the vital essences by over-stimulation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1gabie
|
'Inhibition of Cancer Cell Invasion by Cannabinoids via Increased Expression of Tissue Inhibitor of Matrix Metalloproteinases-1' - What does this study really say about 'curing cancer'?
|
_URL_0_
Someone mentioned to me that 'hemp oil' is 'a cure for cancer'. When I looked it up, this is the only study I could find on the subject, but I honestly don't have a clue what all the technical jargon means.
My initial inclination is to suspect that the study actually concludes something a lot less amazing than 'THC cures cancer'. I know that there are a ton of different cancers that behave in many different ways, and these things are often blown way out of proportion, as we all know from spending time on reddit. I don't believe the claim, but I don't have the knowledge to understand what this paper is really saying, so I would greatly appreciate if someone could give me a more accessible explanation. Thanks!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1gabie/inhibition_of_cancer_cell_invasion_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"caiebrs",
"caien32",
"caieth2"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
5
],
"text": [
"I think I can help walk you through it.\n\nLets start with the basics. They are using an invasion assay. This is essentially watching a cells ability to move through a chamber, in this case a Boyden chamber. Google Boyden chamber and you will see a lot of examples. This type of assay is used a lot in cancer studies because it can examine a tumors ability to break off and spread, which is obviously very relevant in humans as this allows the cancer to have a greater pathology.\n\nThe protein they are looking at is TIMP-1. TIMP-1 inhibits several proteins called Matrix Metalloproteinases (MMPs). MMPs main role in the body is to cut extra cellular matrix, this matrix is essentially what ties cells together. Many MMPs have been implicated in diseases e.g. cancer, emphysema etc. In the case of cancer they appear to be involved in \"cutting\" cellular bonds of the tumor to the organ allowing the cancer to metastasize.\n\nSo the question they are asking is, can treatment of HeLa cells (a cancer cell line) with either THC or a THC analog (MA) prevent the cells ability to move through a chamber. Essentially can THC prevent cancer cell spread.\n\nThey find that in this assay it definitely can. What they found is that when treated with THC the cells seem to have higher concentrations of TIMP-1. This inhibits the action of several MMPs, preventing the spread of the HeLa cells through the chamber.\n\nTo confirm this thought they knockdown the expression of TIMP-1 back to normal levels using small interfering RNA (prevents the protein from being made), and this allows the HeLa cells to invade once again suggesting TIMP-1 is infact responsible for the decrease in invasion that was seen.\n\nHope that helps.",
"There are actually plenty of studies looking into the use of cannabinoids for cancer therapy. To sum up the field briefly, there is evidence that these substances have a number of interesting properties: they are anti-proliferative, pro-apoptotic, and anti-invasion. In English, that means the effects they have on tumor cells help slow cell growth, promote cell death and help prevent movement of the cells. [Technical review here](_URL_0_).\n\nUnfortunately, these results are mostly for tumor cells in a test tube, so they are preliminary and pre-clinical. You might characterize the cannabinoids for cancer treatment field as \"ehhhh, maybe there is some promise there\" but right now any claims of curing cancer are extremely premature.\n\nTo summarize the study you linked very simply:\n\nWe can set up a system in a test tube that measures two properties of tumor cells -- their **migration** (which is their ability to move) and their **invasion** (which is their ability to move through something by breaking it down).\n\nImagine a line. Put cancer cells on one side. If the cells can migrate, you will see them move across the line. In this experiment, the line is actually a thin membrane with small holes in it that cells can squeeze through. This is an artificial way to measure how cancer cells might be able to move in an actual living being.\n\nNow imagine a wall. Put cancer cells on one side. If the cells can invade, they can actually break down the wall and squeeze through it, so you will again see them on the other side of the wall. In this experiment, the wall represents something called *matrix*, which is a bunch of fibrous proteins (think spiderweb) that cells are usually surrounded by. If cells are considered *invasive* that usually means they might have the potential to metastasize out of the tumor and spread to the rest of the body (because they can break out of the location they started growing in).\n\nThis paper shows that if you treat the cancer cells with cannabinoids, you partially prevent their invasion through the wall. They also provide evidence for how the cannabinoids might doing this (by helping to stop the stuff that chews up the wall). Again, this is in a test tube. \n\nIt's a far, far cry from having something that is ready to be used in humans for preventing metastasis let alone to treat a tumor (much less cure it!). \n\nHappy to answer any other questions. ",
"The study was done on [HeLa cells](_URL_4_), in a cell culture plate containing a chamber of of [Matrigel](_URL_0_), a substance designed to emulate the extracellular environment of bodily tissues. The experiment was testing whether or not two substances, one a synthetic cannabinoid ([Methanandamide](_URL_7_)), and one a naturally occurring cannabinoid ([THC](_URL_3_)), have any inhibitory effect on the invasion of cells by cancerous cells, and the associated spreading of cancer through a tissue/organ\n\nWhat they found was that at the right concentrations, and after a 72 hour incubation at the correct temperature, that both compounds were able to slow the 'progression' of invasive cancer by slowing the rate at which they permeate through a tissue. In theory, this has applications to invasive cancers, as slowing their progression is generally seen as a good thing. However, the researchers note:\n\n*First, it is not known to what extent the principal finding of this study can be generalized to cell types other than those examined in this study. Moreover, further studies will be required to examine the relevance of our findings to in vivo tumors*\n\nMeaning they are unsure whether the findings are directly applicable to humans, as the cell culture setting they used is a fairly limited setting.\n\nSince this paper was published, these guys have written a lot more papers on similar topics [1](_URL_5_), [2](_URL_6_), [3](_URL_1_).\n\nSo it seems that overall, the property of these cannabinoids that stops cancer migration is that they induce tissues to express TIMP-1 (tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases-1). The mechanism by which this works is quite complex, but it appears that it is possible to induce high levels of expression of the chemical [by other means too](_URL_2_), meaning cannabis isn't yet some anti-cancer wonder drug.\n\nOverall, some interesting research on cells in culture, although nothing in vivo (In the body) yet. I'm also not saying cannabis is useless for cancer treatment, it's a fantastic painkiller, but it's definitely not some anti-cancer miracle that's going to save your life if you take a few drops of THC oil."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/100/1/59.short"
] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22019199"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrigel",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22198381",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17369856",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19914218",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20488167",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanandamide"
]
] |
|
5upl1t
|
what is this controversy pertaining to pewdiepie, the media, youtube and such?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5upl1t/eli5_what_is_this_controversy_pertaining_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddvusbz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A bunch of media outlets, particularly The Wall Street Journal, took him out of context and portrayed him as a white supremacist anti-Semite, and Nazi.\n\nWhich he's not.\n\nThis has pissed off anyone with a semblance of a brain, and caused a huge uproar amongst YouTubers who are tired of being slandered and libeled.\n\nTL;DR WSJ committed a crime."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
88xfod
|
why is it in languages where there is no alphabet but rather characters, such as mandarin, cantonese and japanese kanji, why can people understand the meaning of a word but not know how to say it?
|
In this video: _URL_0_
It states, "Everybody knows what it means but they can't read it." Why exactly is this, surely if you know what it means then you know the word.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/88xfod/eli5_why_is_it_in_languages_where_there_is_no/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dwnxqp3",
"dwnxswm",
"dwnyovy",
"dwnyto1",
"dwnyw19",
"dwo1teo",
"dwofz9f"
],
"score": [
16,
2,
20,
4,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Spoken and written language are learned separately. \nYou learned to say cow when you saw a cow. It just so happens that in English with letters tied to sounds you learnt to write it as c o w to represent the sound the word makes. \nItalians learn that a cow is called mucca. And they learnt to write that with a subset of the same alphabet used in English that represents the sounds needed for mucca. So they have a different word for the same thing to English speakers, but common characters for the sounds. \n\nWith Cantonese, mandarin and japanese speakers they also learnt the word for cow (Ngau, niu, and ushi respectively) in their own language, but they happen to have a common symbol for cow, not a phonetic spelling and an alphabet. \nSo naturally when they see the cow **or the symbol for cow**, they say the word in their own language...\n\nBut they don’t know how to say that word in the other languages. ",
"Often, complicated words are an amalgamation of simpler words into one. For example, in Mandarin, 人 (ren) and 众 (zhong) means person/people and public respectively. As you can see, many people make the public, yet the pronunciation is completely different.",
"How do you pronounce [this symbol](_URL_0_)? \nYou know what it means, but can't pronounce it. \nAlso Chinese has characters pronounced similarly look similar. \nFor example all these characters are pronounced with some tone of \"Ma\":马妈骂码. Though they all have wildly different meanings. \nThere used to be more overlap, but the language evolved while the writing stayed the same.",
"This video is a bit of a unique case for Japanese as well. In Japan there are three alphabets: hiragana, katakana, kanji and technically romanji as well. The real problem lies with kanji. Kanji means Chinese character and is the alphabet Japan adopted from China. They also brought with them the Chinese reading of the character, but applied it to Japanese words that already existed. This made it so each kanji has multiple ways to read it. For example, 大 is the kanji for \"big\" but it can be read as \"oo\" as in Osaka (大阪) or dai as in daigaku (大学). Sometimes there are more than two readings and there are sometimes unusual readings as well. So the problem becomes when you see compound kanji that you can be unsure which reading to go with. That's problem one. Problem two is that there are thousands of kanji. So you can be presented with a word but either a) never learned that character, b) forgot that character and/or c) not sure of the different reading of the character. So a combination of all of those can lead someone being unable to read a kanji compound. The same word if written in either of the other two alphabets would be instantly readable however. \n\nOr even simpler, think of an English word written verses hearing a word spoken. You can read a word but sometimes when you say it you pronounce it wrong because it has a different or unique pronunciation. It doesn't mean you don't know the word it just means you don't know how to say the word.",
"As other people in the thread said, the more complicated Hanzi/Kanji are often comprised of radicals, some of which may carry meaning and some may carry hints at pronunciation. \n\nIt is also really quite easy to get familiar with some specialized characters used, for example, in a certain scientific field without ever hearing the words they represent spoken aloud. You get the meaning from context or a dictionary, but you forget the dictionary pronunciation right away or never even bother to learn it.\n\nAlso, as a Mandarin as Third-Language speaker I should say that it's so much easier to read Chinese text or subtitles without trying to mentally say the words you see. Pronunciation completely slips past your mind and you get straight to the meaning.",
"I speak Japanese and this happens to me,especially with compound words. In compound words you might know the meaning and pronunciation of the individual characters, but when they are placed together you can only figure out the meaning based upon what you know the two of them mean separately. Each Japanese kanji can have many different pronunciations depending upon the circumstances so it's not always easy to look at a compound that you're unfamiliar with and know the pronunciation of it.",
"The people in the video may recognize the characters and understand the meaning. They just don't know how to *say* the word out loud. This is because they are ideograms - the characters represent ideas directly, without an intervening sound representation as with alphabets. Of course there is a way to pronounce each word represented by an individual ideogram or combination, but it's completely separate from the form of the ideogram. So it is possible to maintain an understanding of the meaning of written words without knowing how to pronounce them. If the word is frequently seen in written text but rarely heard spoken, one can forget how to say it. And because in Japanese each ideogram can have multiple pronunciations depending on context, it is possible to use those same words in speech without knowing that they are the same."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://youtu.be/IARguDQIGVs?t=6m16s"
] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol#/media/File:Radiation_warning_symbol.svg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
243tkv
|
Why do some hot peppers have a "slower burn" than others?
|
The habanero is the hottest pepper I've eaten, but it also has the slowest effect -- it can take up to 3 seconds for me to even start feeling the burn. On the other hand, banana peppers are fairly mild but the burn is pretty fast. Piquin peppers are pretty hot and have a fast burn (and don't linger like habaneros.)
What causes these different burn patterns?
Now, I understand that there's more than capsaicin involved in heat; there are [various related compounds](_URL_0_) with similar and lesser Scoville ratings. There might be differences in how they are released from pepper cells, bind to other food ingredients (such as lipids), move through the mouth lining, and bind to receptors, but I don't have any information on that (or on what peppers contain how much of each) and a web search didn't turn up anything promising. So that's my own guess, but I'm looking for something with more of a basis in theory or evidence.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/243tkv/why_do_some_hot_peppers_have_a_slower_burn_than/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch3gpmp",
"ch3llf7",
"ch3w82q",
"ch3wukj",
"ch48e3w"
],
"score": [
57,
4,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You've probably got it figured out already.\n\nAlmost certainly the different Capsaicinoids will have different binding affinities to the TRPV1 receptor/ion channel as a result of their differing structures. This means that they will have different rates of TRPV1 binding, they will activate the protein to differing degrees and they'll have differing dissociations rates with the receptor. In turn, these means that the speed at which you sense the heat, the strength of the heat and its longevity will likely all be different.\n\nHaving said all that I've previously looked for research in to characterising the association and dessociation constants for these Capsaicinoids and TRPV1 because I'd previously made a similar hypothesis about different chilli burns. So far I've found nothing in the literature about it so I guess it is still an open question.\n\nOf course the question is further complicated because, as you rightly say, when it comes to actual foods the many different chemicals like lipids will have additional marked effects on how capsaicin and the other Capsaicinoids can diffuse from the food you are eating and on to the TRPV1 receptor. I'm not sure if much work has been done to characterise these effects either. I vaguely recall that there is a brief section in McGee's Science of cooking text on this but I don't think there was really much more information.\n\nSo yes; you're hypothesis is a good one and accords well with what we know about enzymes/proteins with multiple substrates but sadly I'm not aware of any more formal work on this specific biochemical system\n\nSource: was a biochemist for 15 years and have read all of McGee's encyclopaedia of the science of food.\n\nEdit: corrected capsaicin for Capsaicinoids\n\nEdit2: To update my answer. Here's a nice paper on the kinetics of the TRPV1 receptor;\n\n_URL_0_[1]\n\nTo summarise; Heat and pain typically activate the TRPV1 receptor. But in the presence of capsaicinoids or low pH (4.5 or 5.5). The receptor's response time is greatly reduced. That is low pH and capsaicinoids make the receptor much more sensitive to heat or pain. So it seems that a reasonable hypothesis is that acidic foods might burn hotter and faster.\n\nStill not found a paper directly comparing the kinetics of the different capsaicinoids though.\n",
"I'm throwing out another observation to see if anyone else has it. Chipotle peppers and sauces...the burn seems different. It seems to not really hurt but it is a heat sensation. Also it doesn't drown out the tip of your tongue...Instead the burn seems more in your throat and the back of your mouth... \n\n\nAnybody else find chipotle pepper special like this???",
"Hazarding a guess, I'd look at the difference between the masses of the molecules involved. The larger molecules will have a slower time of diffusing across membranes, which would be relevant especially for those G protein-coupled receptors which have their binding sites on the inside of the cell.",
"This or a similar question has been answered in Askreddit before, even by those who do research in the field. Below are the most relevant links.\n\nAs to your specific question, the most likely answer appears to be the different ratio of capsaicinoids you mentioned. Lipids are present but not normally high in pepper tissues to change the burning sensation as much. High lipid levels are normally in seeds themselves (think sesame oil, peanut oil) and thus would not be as likely to effect capsaicin interaction unless in a food containing such oils. Here is the type of data you were asking for. [Capsaicinoid profile of different chilli peppers.](_URL_0_)\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_5_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_3_\n\n_URL_1_",
"Hey! to update my answer. Here's a nice paper on the kinetics of the TRPV1 receptor;\n_URL_0_\n\nHeat and pain typically activate the TRPV1 receptor. But in the presence of capsaicinoids or low pH (4.5 or 5.5). The receptor's response time is greatly reduced. That is low pH and capsaicinoids make the receptor much more sensitive to heat or pain. So it seems that a reasonable hypothesis is that acidic foods might burn hotter and faster.\n\nStill not found a paper directly comparing the kinetics of the different capsaicinoids though."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsaicin#Capsaicinoids"
] |
[
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20858418"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsfa.2087/abstract",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1az6pn/heat_receptors_on_our_tongue_are_activated_by/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/v74ej/what_is_happening_in_our_tongue_when_we_eat_spicy/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/16x3di/why_do_we_gain_a_tolerance_to_spicy_foods_with/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1o71vb/how_do_chemicals_like_capsaicin_and_menthol_trick/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1pv5hj/what_makes_the_difference_in_the_way_we_perceive/"
],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20858418"
]
] |
|
hyku4
|
Askscience, what is one the most mind-bending things associated with your field?
|
Something that really makes your head hurt thinking about it.
Edit: of* sorry about the typo :/
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hyku4/askscience_what_is_one_the_most_mindbending/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1zftd0",
"c1zfvwa",
"c1zfzcu",
"c1zg2c6",
"c1zgdh0",
"c1zggc1",
"c1zgln3",
"c1zgojg",
"c1zgtxl",
"c1zhd9c",
"c1zhjqd",
"c1zi19f",
"c1ziahw",
"c1zilnf",
"c1zippc",
"c1zisci",
"c1zixfe",
"c1zjpar",
"c1zjrub",
"c1zjsvm",
"c1zk4p6",
"c1zk8qn",
"c1zkcz6",
"c1zkkzy",
"c1zppis"
],
"score": [
12,
7,
12,
12,
6,
13,
6,
3,
8,
4,
6,
9,
2,
7,
5,
8,
3,
2,
3,
6,
4,
7,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"You're going to get chewed out by RobotRollCall for thinking that any scientific knowledge should make your head hurt.\n\nPerhaps it could be rephrased to what the coolest thing about their field is?",
"Two things come to mind:\n\nThe fact that nature is so complex that it is possible to have human beings. Or any life at all.\n\nThe fact that we no in stupendous detail how the Standard Model works, only to find out that it only accounts for 4% of the energy and matter of the universe.\n\n_edit_: removed abbreviation.",
"Face processing, specifically, three things: \n\n1) the disorder where you lack face processing, [prosopagnosia](_URL_2_)\n\n2) how [upside down faces](_URL_3_), or [Thatcher effect](_URL_0_) or [eye-brow removal](_URL_1_) disrupt face processing \n\n3) People with ASD (and some other socio-cognitive disorders) might process faces differently (too many references to list...). ",
"Well, this isn't exactly 'mind-bending,' but it always shocks me how massive and fast male elephant seals can be. An elephant seal bull can weigh upwards of 3 tons and can move well in excess of 10 mph. Every time I see two bulls fighting, I'm still in awe of it.",
"The specific case: we do single-molecule-like studies, and for a long time we were bothered by the presence of some completely erratic results that doesn't seem to be noise, but no amount of reduction gives any sense of what it is: [traces](_URL_1_)\n\nIt was only after several years we wise up to the fact that it had a relationship hidden under the chaos. When you count the number of events that are of selected durations, and put it in a logarithmic histogram (OK, a CDF), it pops out as a straight-line... [CDF](_URL_0_)\n\nIn the general sense the traces are objects that would be called \"fractal\". In the general sense as well, I never fail to be astounded by how beautifully statistical distributions are able to describe physical phenomena. It's like a Law of Unreason.\n\n*Bonus fact*: human hearing is also logarithmic. After we transformed the chaotic traces above to sound, most people are able to distinguish \"fractal\" from just plain \"erratic\" traces by just listening to them. I wish I could tell you what is being listened to, but despite being a classical musician, I belong to the minority for which it's all *noise*.",
"The speed that metal deforms in metal cutting (milling, turning, etc) is well over 1000 times more rapid than the metal casings of even the most violent explosives. In fact, it is practically impossible to re-create these conditions with current or foreseeable technology.\n\nFriction-stir welding; take a tool, plunge it into the seam of two metals and spin it to plastically deform them into each other; this is done at sub-melting temperatures and is ideally entirely mechanical with no melting of the metals.\n\nExplosive welding and amour piercing ammunition: the forces involved are so high that the mechanical strength of the steels involved becomes negligible in modeling and calculations.",
"Head hurts from the constant Star Trek references when someone talks about 'quantum teleportation'. \n\nIts closer to sending encoded messages using super sneaky carrier pigeons than it is to beaming people around.",
"Well, not specifically my field but related to my studies in math: Gödel's incompleteness theorem and banach tarsky. \n\nIn my field, the non-convex optimization and machine learning/pattern recognition algorithms always make my head spin. Specifically, the statistical methods like \"particle filters\". It's easy to understand on the small scale but take that concept and start applying it to larger pattern recognition and machine learning systems and we humans begin to get seriously outclassed. Basically, we can evolve sufficiently complex systems that we can no longer follow what is going and things become very hard to improve or debug.",
"I think the most mind-bending result in computer science is the universal nature of a Turing machine:\n_URL_0_\n\nBasically, you can imagine a progression of theoretical computers such as finite state machines, pushdown autonoma, and Turing machines, each more capable than the previous. It turns out that each has a wider scope of computational abilities than the previous.\n\nA Turing machine is still a very simple hypothetical construct compared to an actual computing device:\n_URL_2_\nIts main featured compared to simpler computational models is a non-random access memory tape.\n\nSo, naturally, one can ask the question \"What computational capabilities does this simple, hypothetical machine have?\" and the amazing result is \"all of them\". If a Turing machine can't compute something, then _nothing in the universe_ can compute it. You can't augment a Turing machine with new capabilities and then suddenly there's a new class of problems it can handle.\n\nThis is outside my immediate area of expertise, so I'm eager for any theorists to correct my naive interpretation.\n\nedit: Another interesting statement from Wikipedia \"All known laws of physics have consequences which are computable by a series of approximations on a digital computer. A hypothesis called digital physics states that this is no accident, that it is because the universe itself is computable on a universal Turing machine. This would imply that no computer more powerful than a universal Turing machine can be physically built\" from _URL_1_",
"I wouldn't say it make my head hurt but whether 1 = 0.999... is one of my favourites to give laymen.",
"Manned space flight. Let me elaborate:\n\nStarting off with human life, it doesn't take much to die. You can die by falling over and hitting your head, among many other small mistakes. The amazing thing is humans are biologically capable of surviving on the surface of the Earth, where the pressure is 14.7 psi of 21% oxygen at relatively mild temperatures. We humans do not move very fast, ~14 mph max (not sure at all about this number, but on that order of magnitude). \n\nThe amazing thing is that we can speed a person up to 17,500 mph (for an [ISS](_URL_0_) orbit, faster for the moon missions in Apollo) using a rocket, which is basically a bomb with a hole at the bottom. Once in space, there is no pressure, no oxygen, extremely hot and cold temperatures, radiation, and no help if anything goes wrong. We can have people live in this environment for months at a time on the ISS. Afterwards, we can bring them back down to Earth by removing all the kinetic energy from the orbiter that was given to it by the rockets, and safely land. There is so much detail that needs to be accounted for in order for these missions to work. Each subsystem has extremely smart people that think of anything that could go wrong and prevent it from happening. The amazing thing is we can do this regularly. Excluding the Apollo I, Challenger, and Columbia accidents (in the US), I think manned space flight has been a success. Unfortunately, NASA has stopped these manned space flight missions in the foreseeable future.",
"We routinely make stars.",
"To make the math simpler, AC power is commonly represented using an imaginary dimension. It's called phasor notation, and you can do it with any sinusoid. We take it a step further though: we have resistive (real) and reactive ('imaginary' [relative to the reference phasor]) power.\n\nPeople with a mathematical background beyond calculus II usually have no problem understanding this. Explaining the concept to a layperson usually results in a bit of brain-melting before it clicks.\n\nEdit: Laypeople also look at engineers funny when we start discussing phasors with a straight face. Many people only know the Star Trek phaser, and are curiously confused.",
"I think it's amazing that literally 2 *billion* people around the world are infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis, which causes the most deaths of any bacterial pathogen, and yet most will never know and will never get sick. I think it's just amazing how prolific it can be and shows how difficult it could be to eradicate.",
"In the merging of two black holes (of about 10 solar masses each) the power output in gravitational waves, as they merge, will be greater than the power output in stars of the rest of the observable universe.",
"I'm no scientist, but it fucks with my mind exactly how massive the universe is. Imagine the universe being as big as you can possibly conceive, then realize that what you're imagining is nowhere near as big as it actually is.",
"This is what I find fun to think about every now and then after my psych rotation:\n\nWhat defines consciousness and the processes which lead to personality disorders and other mental diseases.\n\nThe brain is a f***** beautiful thing.",
"I reckon that'd be economics and zoonotic diseases. Hard to really pinpoint any one thing.",
"Chemist here.\n\nPhase changes (liquid to gas, liquid to solid, etc...) are pretty mind-blowingly cool. The fact that you have 10^23 objects that share a collective behavior is about the coolest thing I can imagine. And there are both abrupt and gradual changes in that behavior!",
"The fact that you can sever the corpus callosum in the human brain and create what appears to be two loci of consciousness, one in the left hemisphere and one in the right.\n\nIt makes you wonder: were they really created, or were they there all along?",
"That significant traits can evolve in so few generations.",
"The fact that we can take a sample of any part of your body-skin, muscle, anything-and turn it into stem cells which could be differentiated into a completely different type of tissue and put it back in your body. Such as skin= > neurons for treating skin injuries (currently still in mice)",
"The most \"mind bending thing\" associated with my field is that you can take a 3 dimensional volume and encode all of the information about that volume into its 2 dimensional surface area, and that this works with black holes. It doesn't hurt my head to think about it, but its one of those things I find truly amazing.",
"the fact that so many people actually believe that conservation of our ecosystems is just a 'nice concept', as opposed to a life or death priority, or that we can compensate infinitely for our mindless drive to overpopulate. (biologist, US Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.",
"In Microbiology, perhaps the first thing that really blew my mind and got me hooked onto the subject, is the fact that bacterial cells outnumber human cells in our bodies."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010028583710078",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15693666",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia",
"http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1969-12269-001"
],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/cvVGG",
"http://imgur.com/TjmQ5"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine#Universal_Turing_machines",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine#Informal_description"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bzoor8
|
why do nations sell resources -e.g. oil- to each other, only to buy it from other countries? why not use what oil you need for your country, and sell the excess produced?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bzoor8/eli5_why_do_nations_sell_resources_eg_oil_to_each/
|
{
"a_id": [
"equfg3d",
"eqvcp16"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Sell for more, buy for less -- > Profit\n\nAlso, afaik the US doesn't sell Oil anymore. They're hoarding it for themselves",
"In addition to differing prices (buy low sell high etc), it can also be a component of trade deals (i.e. a non-optimum oil exchange might be traded for trade agreements in something else, or even political support)\n\nthe other thing to consider is that oil isn't oil - by which I mean the composition and grade varies widely. Heavy crude would require additional refining facilities to turn it into the most usable products, and the yield tends to be a bit lower than light, sweet crude, which is more easily turned into petrol and diesel (just for example)\n\nfor this reason countries may specialise in refining, so they import heavier liquids, refine them (where they get efficiency due to specialising) and then export the refined liquids at a higher price - singapore is a good example of this, as they have only modest reserves of oil natively, however are about the 3rd or 4th largest refined oil exporters in the world"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
vmfdc
|
What does modern physics suggest about the precursors to the singularity of the Universe?
|
I'm curious about the precursors of the "Big Bang" theory. This theory generally refers to the phase of cooling and expansion, but as I understand it current scientific knowledge cannot explain events prior to this phase.
To what to we attribute the presence of the preceding heat and density? Where is modern physics heading? Will we ever find an answer to this question?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/vmfdc/what_does_modern_physics_suggest_about_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c55rpie",
"c55teov"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Current understanding doesn't precede 10^-43 seconds after the \"big bang,\" anything before is speculation.",
"speaking of wild speculation and theoretical physics, I like [this article](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.insidescience.org/?q=content/every-black-hole-contains-new-universe/566"
]
] |
|
8o2r9k
|
What exactly is a ninja and what was it like being one in medieval Japan?
|
It's clear that the pop cultural image of a ninja is at best, an exaggeration and at worse, completely false. But I've read about them using different sources and I still don't have a clear picture of what they really were and different sources give me different answers. Were they simply samurai using guerrilla tactics? Were they an order with secret mountain villages for training? Were they just people hired to spy and assassinate? Were they peasants secretly resisting the hierarchal society of Japan? Or were they something else entirely?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8o2r9k/what_exactly_is_a_ninja_and_what_was_it_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e00oo84",
"e017pjr"
],
"score": [
10,
25
],
"text": [
"In the FAQ there is this excellent answer by /u/AsiaExpert on ninjas in general\n\n_URL_0_",
"I'm a ninja skeptic. Depending on what people mean by ninja, they may not have existed. \"Shinobi warfare\" ie. all the sneaky, underhanded parts of warfare is a real thing, but as I've commented before:\n\n > There is no doubt that \"shinobi\" warfare existed, it's documented from one end of Japan to another over centuries. And there is also no doubt that certain individuals were good at it and worked for their masters' benefit. Some of those individuals were indeed Iga and Koga people.\n\n > The key issue with the ninja tradition, though, is a) was there a particular Iga and/or Koga tradition of shinobi warfare, famed outside Iga and Koga? and b) did Iga and Koga warriors skilled in shinobi warfare ply their trade outside of their own territories and local wars?\n\nI don't think there's actual existence for either of those things. \n\nThere's more elaboration on the problem of \"ninja\" in my posts to these threads:\n[How many koku would a ninja in medieval Japan get paid for a typical assassination?](_URL_0_) and its follow-up [Were there actually female ninjas](_URL_1_). As explained in those posts, plenty of the individuals identified in legend/history as practicing shinobi warfare *were* samurai. \n\nAs mentioned in those links, the key paper in adding to the English language information about ninja was Stephen Turnbull's *[The Ninja, an Invented Tradition?](_URL_2_)* which I haven't seen any rebuttals to, and a lot of historians relieved that Turnbull's made up for some of his earlier over-eager readings."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/12lwoi/the_respective_roles_of_ninja_and_shinobi/c6w7qva/"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6rja8q/how_many_koku_would_a_ninja_in_medieval_japan_get/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/85s2ml/were_there_actually_female_ninjas_in_koga_andor/",
"https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/530c/a6033ff2379c4837081199ba088111840ebf.pdf"
]
] |
|
e74rat
|
Why does there appear to be gender disparities in professional instrumentalists particularly over the course of the 20th century?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/e74rat/why_does_there_appear_to_be_gender_disparities_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f9w6mrr"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"So, the short answer to your question is basically sexism. It's the same reason that women weren't in most professions in the 1940s. It was hard for a woman to get into university, to get hired, to get paid the same as a man. Some orchestras outright outlawed the pratice, with orchestras like the Vienna Philharmonic not allowing women until 1997.\n\nAt the turn of the century, some all-female orchestras were started up to give women a chance to actually play, but pretty much no one allowed women to play in other orchestras.\n\nInteresting you mention Fantasia though, because the conductor of Fantasia was Leopold Stokowsky. Stokowsky was the director of the Philadelphia Orchestra in 1930, and hired the first female orchestral musician in the US, a harpist by the name of Edna Philips. If you were watching Fantasia, you would have seen Edna, as she was on the original recording. Like with every first, there was a huge amount of controversy surrounding her hire.\n\nHowever, orchestras remained predominantly male for decades. Into the late 20th century, most orchestras would claim they have no bias in their hires, but just that women weren't as as skilled, and continued to hire \\~90% men. Eventually, they started to institute blind auditions, with musicians playing behind a screen. With that process, hiring of female musicians jumped to \\~50% women.\n\nThat being said, orchestral positions are HIGHLY prized. Most musicians who get a position will stay in that spot for the rest of their life, so a position for, say, flute, might not open up in an orchestra for 40 years, so the turnover takes a long time. But not, you'll start to see gender parity (or approaching gender parity) in a huge number of orchestras around the world.\n\n[_URL_1_](_URL_1_)\n\n[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\n[_URL_2_](_URL_2_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://gap.hks.harvard.edu/orchestrating-impartiality-impact-%E2%80%9Cblind%E2%80%9D-auditions-female-musicians",
"https://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/blind-auditions-orchestras-gender-bias",
"https://www.wrti.org/post/reluctant-trailblazer-philadelphia-orchestra-harpist-edna-phillips"
]
] |
|
4jktye
|
why are many predatory insects so voracious?
|
I just watched a documentary in which a giant forest mantid devoured a spiny leaf insect at least twice its size, then immediately went back on the hunt.
Most of the other predators are described as being very similar.
Many other animals would be fine for a while after such a big meal. What is it about insects which requires them to eat so much?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jktye/eli5_why_are_many_predatory_insects_so_voracious/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d37ixce"
],
"score": [
237
],
"text": [
"Well I'm no expert on predators but I know my way around Insecta. Your mantid there is very short lived compared to other animals, and she will need to carb load fast AF to get swole enough to produce eggs. In the r-selected species (lots oF babies) it's all about getting big fast before you get eaten. \n\nAlso, that stick/leaf she ate may look big, but they are mostly exoskeleton which is made of chitin and not super nutritious. It's the goo in the middle your mantid needs to get swole. Think Alaska crab legs, can't really eat the shell, need the middle part. Mammals, which is what most people think of when they think animals (racist) are mostly goo, and a much better meal. A lion can eat a wildebeest and be passed the fuck out bc of all the calories. That same lion would have to eat a metric ass load of leaf insects, which is totally gross to the lion, and would piss it right off. Well I think lions are gross so fuck you lion. \n\nThat's my guess. Stay in school kids. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
13o8ss
|
Is our knowledge of physics limited by our knowledge of math?
|
Basically is there some limit to our mathematical knowledge that is holding us back from advancing physics. Do we need to discover some field of mathematics perhaps (I'm thinking along the lines of the discovery of calculus) that could unlock a deeper understanding of physics?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/13o8ss/is_our_knowledge_of_physics_limited_by_our/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c75pjky",
"c75rhp0"
],
"score": [
33,
7
],
"text": [
"It's *really* hard to predict the future of science, but generally, math runs **fifty to** a hundred years ahead of physics (although that gap is tightening). It's fairly likely that the mathematical tools to do The Next Big Physics already exist in some form, but we're missing either (1) the suite of experimental observations that will convince us that we need to do some new explaining or (2) a sufficiently clear conceptual picture of what sort of mathematical objects we need to be using.\n\nThat being said, I'm a mathematician, not a physicist, so my perspective on this is probably a bit different than theirs would be.\n\nAs an aside, this question is probably more suited to the new /r/AskScienceDiscussion than to this sub.\n\n**edit: A hundred years may have been too strong a claim.**",
"I would say that our knowledge of physics is generally not limited by our knowledge of math. One example where I would argue that math is actually behind physics is fluid dynamics. Fluid dynamics is very difficult to describe mathematically (the Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness problem is one of the Clay Institute Millennium Problems, and it doesn't seem like it's about to be solved). \n\nDespite the difficulty in solving the partial differential equations involved with fluid dynamics (the Navier-Stokes problem is just a question of when a solution exists, much less finding those solutions when they do exist), there are lots of equations that approximately describe fluid flow. They aren't mathematically justified, but instead they are experimentally shown to be valid approximations.\n\nThe other thing to note is that math has mostly moved out of the realm of the real world. For example, topology has some applications in biology, but for the most part it deals with things that have no real-world analogue. (I'd love to hear some more real world applications of topology though, especially the more advanced theorems. It's definitely my favorite branch of math)\n\nMaybe someday there will be a use for things like that though. For centuries, number theory was considered the most pure and least applicable field of mathematics. Suddenly, computers were invented and number theory become a field with countless applications. Heck, group theory was used to find the maximum number of moves needed to solve a Rubik's Cube. I'm sure they can find ways to apply even the most abstract theorems (though I don't know if they'll ever be able to apply some of the ones that depend on the axiom of choice, e.g. the Banach-Tarsky paradox)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
wor99
|
why do my glasses fog up when it's humid out?
|
i just got to thinking last night getting out of my car to go to work, i know it's a function of the heat and humidity (i live in georgia), but i honestly have no idea the mechanics of it.
and i'd like to know in case there's something i can do to reduce it, because it's honestly pretty annoying to get out of my car and have my glasses *instantly* go, "foof! we're foggy now!"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/wor99/eli5_why_do_my_glasses_fog_up_when_its_humid_out/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5f4e5g",
"c5f6nuo"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"If your glasses are cooler than the air outside, water vapor from that air will condense on them, especially at high levels of humidity. Maybe glycerine (rain-x) would help.",
"There may be other processes at work here if this is occurring over the summer time, but this is what I feel is happening: Warm air can contain more moisture than cool air. When you enter a relatively warm environment, your glasses will cool the immediately surrounding air. Since the air is getting colder, but the moisture contained is not changing, the water vapor in the air condenses onto your glasses. A similar event happens when you have a cold drink on a hot day.\n\nKeep on mind that this only explains \"fogging\" for when you go from a cold to a warm environment. If your situation differs, this explanation may not be relevant to you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1rpqui
|
Were there differences in the practice of Arian versus Orthodox Christianity in the Middle Ages?
|
In reading on the late Roman and early Middle Ages, Arianism is treated as almost a separate religion rather than a dissenting sect within Christianity. Besides the Creed, were there significant differences in religious practice unique to the Arians in terms of liturgy or sacraments? Were there uniquely Arian monasteries and other structures besides those bishops adhering to Arianism?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1rpqui/were_there_differences_in_the_practice_of_arian/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdpsv1b",
"cdpulxh"
],
"score": [
10,
4
],
"text": [
"This won't be as detailed as I want it to be, but I have time to give the quick and dirty. \n\nIn the timeframe you're looking at there wasn't anything resembling a unifying practice. Liturgies were local, and though there are some who argue for a unifying \"shape\" of Catholic liturgy being apparent, the wording of the liturgies wasn't uniform, and it wouldn't be for quite some time. It's likely that the Arian liturgy kept a similar \"shape\" but we don't have any extant liturgies to say for sure. \n\nAs far as monasticism goes, the idea of ordered monks didn't really exist yet, and \"cloisters\" were mostly just associations of hermits who lived in community. Nothing like the Benedictines or Augustinians. The Franciscans sort of follow this model... But I'm digressing. \n\nArian monasticism was very decentralized and existed primarily in the Arabian peninsula and in Syriac speaking eastern kingdoms where it would survive (marginally) until the rise of Islam. It was a very hermetic kind of asceticism, and didn't lend itself to putting down roots and putting up buildings.\n(This is from my early-monasticism professor who focused on Syriac monasticism. I can't really speak to how it worked for the Germanic tribes.) \n\nSo they very well may have had an entirely\ndifferent liturgy, but seeing as how liturgies were especially suppressed (see how long Donatist parishes lasted after Constantine came down on them...) we don't have any details of what they included. \n\nAlso: Rowan William's book on Arius and Arianism is a great read, and I highly recommend it. It focuses more closely on Arius the person, but he covers some of this. \n\n",
" > In reading on the late Roman and early Middle Ages, Arianism is treated as almost a separate religion rather than a dissenting sect within Christianity\n\nThis is because from 381 onwards, thanks not just to the Council of Constantinople but also to Theodosius I's edicts, 'Arianism' could no longer be treated as a dissenting sect within the Imperial version of Christianity. Only prior to this could you really claim 'Arianism' was a theological faction within Roman-Empire Christendom.\n\nMy doctoral research is in the 4th century 'Arian' crises, but I don't really do much into the Middle Ages."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
fphl79
|
How do girls or women suffering from Hemophilia (Bleeder's disease) deal with their periods ?
|
I always had this question but was too awkward to ask to my teacher about it.
Do they take some medication everytime they bleed?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fphl79/how_do_girls_or_women_suffering_from_hemophilia/
|
{
"a_id": [
"flosdy3"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"A period is not an open wound. Your \"bleeding\" is actually just the sheeding of the lining of your uterus that has built up the last few weeks, which happens to contain blood among other things. \n\nHemophilia has nothing to do with your period.."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
86k3zs
|
how is radiotion, a carcinogenic, is used in cancer treatment?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86k3zs/eli5_how_is_radiotion_a_carcinogenic_is_used_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dw5mpjj",
"dw5mput",
"dw5n1lr",
"dw613hu"
],
"score": [
12,
5,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Radiation may cause tumours occasionally, but it also directly kills cells. Like most anti-cancer treatments, radiation kills both cancerous and healthy cells. The trick is to make it hit more of the ones you want to affect. That may be achieved by directing the beam in from many separate directions over time, with the tumour at the aiming point. On it's way, the radiation passes through different parts of the body each time but every time it passes through the tumour. So all the other parts receive a smaller dose than the target.\n\nAnother is to use a radioactive substance that preferentially goes to the right place. Using radioactive iodine is one example as it concentrates in the thyroid gland so is a treatment for hyperthyroidism.",
"The radiation is aimed very precisely in a beam at the tumour, from multiple angles. (Imagine a bike wheel, \nWhere the hub is the tumour And the spokes are the angles the beam comes from) - only the tumour is in every beam, the surrounding tissue gets a much lower dose so theoretically only the tumour dies. \n\n\nObviously in a person the beam is shaped and angled to account for bones and more sensitive organs to maximise the tumour dose and minimise the rest. ",
"Cancer is only a possibility when radiation slightly damages the DNA. At high enough doses, radiation completely destroys DNA, causing cell death. Which for cancer is good, because cancer in a nutshell is uncontrolled growth of cells. Killing the cells stops the growth.\n\nSo doctors use very specialized tools to aim the radiation EXACTLY where the cancer is to minimize cell death in the non-cancer cells.",
"Same way a knife, a stab-ogenic, is used in surgery.\n\nJust because something is bad sometimes doesn't mean it is bad always. Being exposed to random radiation or stabbings is a bad thing, but using them very precisely can be a good thing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
eeanfe
|
Could other animals develop Tinnitus or is it something "special" to us?
|
And if they cannot develop it why would that be?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/eeanfe/could_other_animals_develop_tinnitus_or_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fbx36k4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Tinnitus is a perception of ringing in the ears. As a perception, it is something that humans must report for us to know about it. Given that we don't have a good way to investigate personal auditory perception in animals, there is not a way to investigate this question as written.\n\nFurthermore, while there are some common causes of tinnitus in people, for many cases a cause is never found. Thus, our lack of knowledge of what causes many human cases adds to the difficulty of answering whether animals can get tinnitus.\n\nThe most common cause of tinnitus is inner hair cell damage. All vertebrates rely on hair cells for hearing, and we know that they can become damaged in animals, so animals can experience the most common cause of tinnitus. But, then again, we return to the \"perception\" problem: we do not have a way to have animals communicate to us their personal \"perception\" of potential tinnitus."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1dbyt1
|
why is there a need for so many types of video formats?
|
For example, AVCHD DVCAM XDCAM DVCHD? Why can't everyone just use the same thing? The same goes for aspect ratios, like 1.85:1, 1.78:1, 2.35:1.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dbyt1/eli5_why_is_there_a_need_for_so_many_types_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9ouqrg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Different video formats have different uses. For example, compression, quality, sound vs. video, compatability, all take a part."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
kyloi
|
How was gravity ORIGINALLY calculated and how accurate was this?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/kyloi/how_was_gravity_originally_calculated_and_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2obdwf",
"c2obl0w",
"c2obdwf",
"c2obl0w"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
3,
8
],
"text": [
"I'm not an expert, but in the past [pendulums](_URL_0_) served as gravimeters.",
"Depends on what object's gravity you're talking about, but the most significant piece of the general equation for the gravitational force between two objects, the gravitational constant (G) was measured in an [experiment](_URL_0_) by Henry Cavendish",
"I'm not an expert, but in the past [pendulums](_URL_0_) served as gravimeters.",
"Depends on what object's gravity you're talking about, but the most significant piece of the general equation for the gravitational force between two objects, the gravitational constant (G) was measured in an [experiment](_URL_0_) by Henry Cavendish"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum#Gravity_measurement"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_experiment"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum#Gravity_measurement"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_experiment"
]
] |
||
2t142m
|
what exactly is spacex and what are they trying to do?
|
^
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t142m/eli5_what_exactly_is_spacex_and_what_are_they/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnur2il",
"cnurkx5"
],
"score": [
15,
2
],
"text": [
"\"SpaceX designs, manufactures and launches advanced rockets and spacecraft. The company was founded in 2002 to revolutionize space technology, with the ultimate goal of enabling people to live on other planets.\"\n\n_URL_0_",
"SpaceX is basically a government contractor, but there are two differences between SpaceX and contractors like Lockheed Martin or Boeing. \n\n1. SpaceX doesn't just manufacture parts, it runs the launches and manufactures and designs everything on their own. Essentially NASA pays SpaceX to go do something it wants, and SpaceX manages the whole thing mostly themselves. There are some other places which do this but SpaceX is the biggest.\n\n2. SpaceX is very tightly controlled, it is privately traded not publicly, and Elon Musk actually has a very large degree of control over it. One of the odd things about this is that it really does seem like they have the goal of just expanding without much concern for profit, they are trying to grow instead of find a successful niche. \n\nWhat these two things combined together basically mean is that SpaceX isn't really innovative, just very efficient. SpaceX is in many ways the ideal government contractor, it requires little oversight, it won't try to rip you off or have cost overruns, and it is tightly managed making communication easy. Here is where things get weird though, there's another side to SpaceX, the media. Elon Musk has a big media presence and so does SpaceX, by contracting with SpaceX, NASA is basically proving to budget hawks and conservatives that they are working with private industry, that improves their political standing and help secure more allies and funding. \n\nThat is what SpaceX is, what it is trying to do is somewhat different.\n\nElon Musk is basically trying to have his own truly exploratory space program. This idea has seeped into all of SpaceX and is part of what makes them so driven and effective, there is a definite cult of personality there surrounding Musk, and the level of reverence from people who work there can kind of get creepy sometimes, but just a little. In any case it means that the company follows him in his vision, they see themselves as on the frontier of exploring all of space. In fact because of this the people I have met there are often very touchy about the fact that they would be nothing without NASA, they see themselves as independent and a driving force in space exploration.\n\nIs SpaceX going to get to Mars? No. Just no, they don't have the money and no one will pay them to do that. Barring something crazy the first people on Mars will be wearing NASA patches, but this isn't to say that SpaceX isn't doing something cool. While the goal of SpaceX is exploration, in reality it has been really effective at simply improving the way we do things in orbit, its reusable technology has some promise, and the efficient way the operation is run has been a great way to reduce costs, they are starting to open up earth orbit for real private expansion, and that is a big development. \n\nThe fact remains that exploring the universe and seeing beyond humanities next horizon is going to be done on the government's dime, and frankly I can't see that changing ever, certainly not soon. But opening up the more common parts of space to private development is a rare opportunity that is good for business and humanity, and SpaceX is leading that."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.spacex.com/about"
],
[]
] |
|
836h1v
|
why are bonuses taxed differently than ordinary income?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/836h1v/eli5_why_are_bonuses_taxed_differently_than/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dvfftpx",
"dvfthzb",
"dvgjzy0"
],
"score": [
49,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"They're not\n\nThey're *withheld* differently from your normal paycheck since the computer doing the withholding wasn't accounting for the bonus. Since it ends up boosting your income it gets taxed at your marginal tax rate but any income boost of the same amount would require the same taxes",
"Understand the money that is taken out of your paycheck is **not** your income tax. It is money **withheld** from your paycheck to pay income tax. \n\nThat withholding is computed against your base salary, and likely includes your standard and other deductions. You might make $50K, but only be taxed on $40K of it, and that is what the withholding is computed against. If you get a $10K bonus, your deductions were already applied to your base salary, so your bonus gets withheld assume the regular tax rate.\n\nAlso, your bonus can put you into a higher tax bracket, which is withheld at a higher rate. However, this is rarer, and the difference will not be that large for most people. ",
"Payroll guy here. \n\nMost software that calculates taxes does so based on your normal income. Get paid bi-weekly? That's 26 pay periods a year. So any given check cut will be assumed to be 1/26 of your gross income for the purposes of your annual income. \n\nSo if you get a gross of $2,000 bi weekly, the system will calculate your witholding taxes based on a $52,000 per year income, modified by your marital status and exemptions. \n\nNow let's say your boss is feeling REALLY generous and gives you a $4,000 bonus. Left to its own devices, most payroll software will assume that you now make $104,000 a year for tax purposes and calculate your taxes MUCH higher. Of course, manually overriding them or blocking them to compensate can make the employee underwithheld and owing money come tax season. The 25% is a recommended amount to both avoid getting nuked by taxes on the check while making sure you're not underwithheld. Of course, that is the IRS guidelines and they'd love you to overwithheld, so it errs on the side of too much. \n\nMy suggestion? Using the above example, have the bonus check \"Taxed Monthly\". Changing the frequency in the system would make it assume you get that $4000 only once a month or $48,000 a year making the taxes much more in line with the levels you'd see on a 'normal' paycheck. Not eating half your bonus, but not leaving you with a giant tax bill at the end of the year either. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
n8b3v
|
Will a star's light travel through space forever, even after it has burnt out.
|
Ok so I understand that many of the stars we see are actually already gone and all we see is the light still traveling through space. My question is: if we travel away from that star at a speed faster than the speed of light, will we always be able to see it. Basically, forbidding any black holes, does light continue forever.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/n8b3v/will_a_stars_light_travel_through_space_forever/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c371ivb",
"c371j16",
"c371ivb",
"c371j16"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
3,
8
],
"text": [
"Theoretically, yes. unless the photons get absorbed by matter, but it would get to the point were the photons will spread out to the point that we won't be able to see the light. (An extremely long distance)",
"Space is expanding, which causes the light from a star to shift further and further into red end of the electromagnetic spectrum. Eventually, the wavelength will be nearly infinite, at which point the light will be undetectable. It won't have disappeared, exactly, but if no one is ever able to detect it, does it really exist?",
"Theoretically, yes. unless the photons get absorbed by matter, but it would get to the point were the photons will spread out to the point that we won't be able to see the light. (An extremely long distance)",
"Space is expanding, which causes the light from a star to shift further and further into red end of the electromagnetic spectrum. Eventually, the wavelength will be nearly infinite, at which point the light will be undetectable. It won't have disappeared, exactly, but if no one is ever able to detect it, does it really exist?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cbsgo0
|
Are there examples of invasive species not caused by human actions?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/cbsgo0/are_there_examples_of_invasive_species_not_caused/
|
{
"a_id": [
"etqoz25"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Plants and animals can populated new areas (like islands) through [long distance dispersal](_URL_2_). For example, a seed from a plant may travel long distances through the ocean, arrive on an island, and germinate and grow there. There's an argument that the whole of [New Zealand's plants](_URL_3_) arrived as a result of this process.\nTherefore, arguably, organisms can \"invade\" new locations without humans.\n\nYou may think that this seems \"natural\" and therefore they're \"not invasive\", and you're not alone.\nThere's a greater debate amongst conservation biologist, policy makers, etc about how useful it is to classify something as \"invasive\" vs \"natural\". This [Nature paper](_URL_0_) highlights reasons why it's reductive to categorise organisms in this way and that we should instead be looking at their impact (whether good or bad) on the ecosystem.\nAn example in the paper is tamarisks shrubs from Eurasia introduced into the USA. They were considered \"invasive\" throughout the 20th century and the government tried to eradicate them. Now they are the preferred nesting site for an endangered bird species and they are more drought tolerant than their native counterparts.\n\nAnother good book by Ken Thompson called [Where Do Camels Belong?](_URL_1_) discusses this whole concept of an invasive vs a natural species. The book uses the example of the camel because (a) its closest relatives (llamas, alpacas) are South American, (b) it evolved and spent the longest time in North America, and (c) the only true wild population is in Australia.\nTherefore, where are camels natural and where are they invasive?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51202855_Don't_judge_species_on_their_origins",
"https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Where_Do_Camels_Belong.html?id=DxslAwAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y",
"https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2745.12690",
"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247933410_The_New_Zealand_Flora-Entirely_Long-Distance_Dispersal"
]
] |
||
1efadi
|
Was there any representation or presence of the Southern states in the US government during the Civil War? How was it handled?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1efadi/was_there_any_representation_or_presence_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9zp7h5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Certainly. The \"Border States\", Delaware, Kentucy, Maryland, and Missouri, were all slave states that did not seceed from the Union. So they were Southern states that retained their seats in Congress throughout the war. Additionally, West Virgina seceeded from Confederate Virginia, and was represented in Congress after its admission to the Union.\n\nIncidentally, the Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to slaves in the Border States- only to slaves in those states \"in open rebellion\". An understanding of this is critical for understanding why the passage of the 13th Amendment was so important, as depicted in the movie *Lincoln*.\n\nCredentials: Studied Civil War history under Dr. Dwight Pitcaithley, former Chief Historian of the National Park Service."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
63wubx
|
Is the French "surrender monkey" meme historically accurate ?
|
As I understand, perhaps as a consequence their refusal to participate in 2003 Iraq, there has been a general rebranding of history and running joke that the French army tends to surrender fast and fight weakly. The basis for this are the quick defeats in WW2 and 1870 and the defeats in Indochina and Algeria. Of course, not everybody believes it and some will go as far to the other side as to say France had the most military victories in Europe since the medieval era. So would anybody be so kind to provide an anchoring source to link when this debate comes up, it would be great. How did France compare it to the military contenders of the times ? Has France seen a decline in military in the past centuries or is it just a misconception ?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/63wubx/is_the_french_surrender_monkey_meme_historically/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfxvqfx"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"While you're waiting for other answers, check out /u/alexistheman's answer in this post: [Why do people say that the French always surrender? Have they really capitulated more than most nations?](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4qs8w3/why_do_people_say_that_the_french_always/"
]
] |
|
3kwcx1
|
what does it mean when some websites end in .xyz instead of .com?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kwcx1/eli5_what_does_it_mean_when_some_websites_end_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv11dic",
"cv11v9x"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It probably means that the domain they wanted with the .com was already taken. So instead of being able to buy _URL_1_, they were stuck with example.xyz. There are TONS of new top level domains (TLDs) now. Most of them are two letter country codes, plus the old standard .com, .net, .gov, etc... but there are a bunch of brand new ones too. A full list is at _URL_0_",
"That what you mean is the TLD *(top-level-domain)*. It can be *.de* for Germany, *.fr* for France, *.au* for Australia, *.mil* for military *(country doesn't matter)*, *.gov* for governments *(country doesn't matter)*. Those are all referring to something. A country, organisation, etc.\n\n*.xyz* is for everyone. It doesn't apply to a country, organisation, institution, goverment, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains",
"example.com"
],
[]
] |
||
7n7a7b
|
what's the point of adding alcohol when cooking some food dishes when the alcohol is going to be burned off anyway?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7n7a7b/eli5_whats_the_point_of_adding_alcohol_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drzlxay"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Not all of it is burned off depending on how you cook it, but adding alcohol generally has always been about flavour, not the tiny amount of alcohol left in it\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
22nptl
|
How did it happen that the Moon's orbital period and rotational period are exactly the same?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/22nptl/how_did_it_happen_that_the_moons_orbital_period/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgopr1f",
"cgp1hdx"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Tides. The Earth exerts a tidal force on the Moon (much larger than the Moon's on the Earth). This causes the moon do bulge along the line between the Earth and the Moon. If the Moon were spinning, the bulge would produce friction that would slow the Moon's spin. The Moon's spin slowed long ago to the point that the same spot (more or less) is always pointed toward the Earth, and there is no longer any friction. This is called tidal locking.\n\nThe same is happening to the Earth, but much more slowly. The day is gradually becoming longer as the Earth's spin decreases.",
"The phenomenon is known as tidal locking. The is very common when a body is in close proximity to a much more massive object. Io and Europa (two Galilean moons) are also tidally locked with Jupiter. Mercury would be tidally locked with the sun, but it is likely that a large impact threw off its orbit (and is a likely culprit for Mercury's large iron core)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2fax77
|
If I fell through a thick enough cloud, would I get wet?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2fax77/if_i_fell_through_a_thick_enough_cloud_would_i/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck7i3ck",
"ck7i6gg"
],
"score": [
4,
15
],
"text": [
"have you ever flown through a storm cloud? water collects all over the windows. it's basically a giant region of air where millions of gallons of water is constantly blowing around until it is so heavy it cant stay up. yes you would get wet.",
"Yup. Imagine how damp you would get running a few miles in dense fog. Effectively it would be the same as vertically through a cloud (fog = a cloud touching the ground). And if the cloud has rain droplets suspended (larger than cloud water droplets but not large enough to fall), or even if it is raining, there would be more moisture. As far as how wet you would get is dependent upon the precipitable water value within the cloud depth that you fell through."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1m1wjo
|
how would i look like if i were in a car traveling near the speed of light, and why would i look like that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m1wjo/eli5_how_would_i_look_like_if_i_were_in_a_car/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc4ywbo",
"cc4zn31",
"cc52f81"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"How would you look to who? To yourself you would look exactly the same. To others you would look squished (or the car would) along the direction it's travelling\n\n----\n\nSlowly:\n\n < < < [YOU] > > > \n\n-- Observer ---\n\n----\n\n\nVERY Fast:\n\n < [U] > \n\n\n-- Observer ---\n",
"It's a phenomenon called \"length contraction.\" The easiest way to explain it relies on you already knowing \"time dilation,\" which gets asked about [extremely often](_URL_0_), so I'm not going to bother explaining it here.\n\nSo, imagine that you have some rod of length L, and it's at rest according to you. You also have a stopwatch, which you'll use in a second.\n\nI have a really powerful cannon that shoots stopwatches for some absurd reason, and what I do is shoot a stopwatch along the length of the rod at 99% of the speed of light.\n\nYou measure the time, t, that it takes the stopwatch to pass from one end of the rod to the other. Naturally, since speed is distance divided by time, you have\n\nL/t = v\n\nwhere v is the moving stopwatch's speed, and thus\n\nt = L/v.\n\nThe stopwatch that I shot out of the cannon is also measuring time. However, it's moving really fast, so it's going to measure a shorter amount of time because of time dilation. We'll call the time that the moving stopwatch measures t', remembering that t' is less than t.\n\nThe speed according to the stopwatch is still the same (it would say that the rod is coming towards it), so\n\nt' = L/v?\n\nWell, no, because t' < t, so L can't be the same:\n\nt' < t = L/v\n\nAnd v has to be the same, so the only appropriate thing to do is to say that L gets \"contracted\" from the perspective of the moving stopwatch, just like how time gets dilated:\n\nt' = L'/v\n\nso\n\nL' < L\n\nThus, length contraction. Relativistic effects force objects that are moving extremely quickly to appear to get \"flattened\" from the perspective of someone watching them whiz by.\n\nI know that this explanation was a bit mathy, but that's the unfortunate nature of physics at this level. I think that it's not unreasonable to get an intuitive grasp of time dilation, and once you understand why that happens, it's reasonable to show that length contraction just sort of \"falls out\" pretty naturally, like I did here.",
"I did my research project last summer on this at MIT.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nWe built a 3D simulation of what it's like to travel near the speed of light by slowing light down to a nearly walking pace.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=time+dilation&sort=new&restrict_sr=on"
],
[
"http://gamelab.mit.edu/games/a-slower-speed-of-light/"
]
] |
||
6y2v2c
|
how does "lift" actually work?
|
\ > inb4 "differing air pressure above and below the wings"
How does that make it so the plane wants to go up?
What is "air pressure" anyway? And how does the wing make it so there's more air pressure on one side of the wing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6y2v2c/eli5_how_does_lift_actually_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmkhxoa"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: How do aircraft [eg. fighter jets] generate lift upside down? ](_URL_1_)\n1. [ELI5: How are plane wings designed to achieve lift? How do they decrease lift when landing? ](_URL_6_)\n1. [ELI5: The physics of how an airplane flies ](_URL_5_)\n1. [ELI5: How do airplane wings actually work? ](_URL_0_)\n1. [ELI5: How is lift created with an airfoil? ](_URL_4_)\n1. [ELI5: How does a helicopter actually attain lift? ](_URL_3_)\n1. [ELI5: Lift, Drag, And Thrust ](_URL_2_)\n1. [ELI5: how in the hell do planes fly, if you really think about the explanation it makes no sense ](_URL_8_)\n1. [ELI5: Flight & Lift without \"Equal transit theory\" ](_URL_7_)\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jkj3b/eli5_how_do_airplane_wings_actually_work/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lmqoj/eli5_how_do_aircraft_eg_fighter_jets_generate/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3w1d47/eli5_lift_drag_and_thrust/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47p984/eli5_how_does_a_helicopter_actually_attain_lift/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ussb9/eli5_how_is_lift_created_with_an_airfoil/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uiano/eli5_the_physics_of_how_an_airplane_flies/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xy53m/eli5_how_are_plane_wings_designed_to_achieve_lift/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11z6a0/eli5_flight_lift_without_equal_transit_theory/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pzwfn/eli5_how_in_the_hell_do_planes_fly_if_you_really/"
]
] |
|
3gxejr
|
why doesn't your brain tell your toenails to stop growing after they penetrate skin?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gxejr/eli5why_doesnt_your_brain_tell_your_toenails_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu2cfrv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The growth of toenails is not under the control of the brain. Indeed, the growth of tissues is not under the control of the brain.."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
dmy3lq
|
how come sticky things (like spilled coke) can stay sticky for days or weeks? shouldn't they dry up relatively quickly and lose their "stickiness"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dmy3lq/eli5_how_come_sticky_things_like_spilled_coke_can/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f55tg6j",
"f55xg2m",
"f57lycb"
],
"score": [
34,
3,
11
],
"text": [
"No. They will stay sticky from their sugar content. When things dry up it’s because the water in them has evaporated, but when something sweet spills the water evaporates and leaves the sticky, sugary mess behind. Hope that helps!",
"Talking about soda/pop specifically, it tends to stay sticky after being spilled due to the high amount of sugar inside of it. The water will evaporate, but sugar does not. This is why sparkling water (Which is just like Coke, except without all the sugar) does not leave behind a sticky mess if it's spilled. [Watch videos of people boiling soda/pop and you'll see what I mean. It's quite disgusting.](_URL_0_)",
"Sugar is a humectant. It draws water from the atmosphere to itself, so it is constantly replenishing the moisture it needs to remain sticky. In a humid place like the area in which I live, it’ll be stickier for longer than a pop spill in Las Vegas or Calgary."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/LZp29Qeu8_U?t=78"
],
[]
] |
||
f9gc5h
|
Wikipedia claims that a number of Bible translations into German were printed prior to Martin Luther's birth, some nearly 60 years before the Protestant reformation. If this is true, then why was Luther's bible so influential?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f9gc5h/wikipedia_claims_that_a_number_of_bible/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fiu29hy"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"It is absolutely true that there were a substantial number of German Bible editions--and thus, printed (and manuscript) individual German Bibles--circulating in 15th and early 16th century Germany. Eighteen High German editions would mean between 5400 and 18000 printed Bibles alone.\n\nAnd that's just full Bibles! To say nothing of testaments, individual books, plenaries (Bible passages printed in the order of weekly readings at church), Gospel harmonies (storybook Bibles, kind of)...\n\nFortunately, *that* part I've [discussed in this earlier answer](_URL_0_), so we can focus on the Luther Bible and why we *think* it was so important.\n\nYes, \"think.\" Because a whole lot of the reason is the mythology that has built up over the last 500 years.\n\nEnglish scholarship that has realized the existence of 15th century German Bibles in abundance has generally posited two factors for why the Lutherbibel was so important: it was cheaper and it was better written. In point of fact, neither of these are true. \n\nScholars have judged the literary quality of earlier German Bibles by using the Lutherbibel as the standard (of which they will always fall short, inevitably). And yes, it *is* true that 16th century print was cheapter than 15th century print. But in terms of the people who could afford to buy Bibles in the first place, the difference really wouldn't have mattered that much.\n\nWhat makes the difference? Luther. Luther the salesman, Luther the celebrity, Luther the salesman, and Luther the celebrity, roughly in that order.\n\n**(1) Luther the Salesman**\n\nI covered a lot of this topic in my earlier post. Scripture became an increasingly important part of pastoral Christianity over the course of the 15th century (such as the Ten Commandments approaching and replacing the seven deadly sins as a basis for morality, or preachers making passages the central basis of their sermons). But it was always kind of implicit. Luther, and the general atmosphere of the early Reformation in which Luther played a large media part, made it explicit.\n\n**(2) Luther the Celebrity**\n\nThis one follows on the end of the previous--the central role of Luther as a media/public figure of the early Reformation. From the September Testament onwards, Luther's translations were a hot ticket off the press. Furthermore, once they became easier to find in the first place, it was MUCH easier for new printers to publish that translation.\n\n**(3) Luther the Salesman**\n\nAlternately, here, Luther the Fox News anchor. Luther was really, really, *really* good at semi-rewriting the past to give himself a lot more credit for the triumph of the German Bible than he deserved. His claims in particular about the linguistic superiority of his translation had less grounding than they probably merited. He wasn't really wrong in that he played a major role in making people *realize* the importance of access to the Bible, or in terms of his version becoming so popular. But as in many things, he overstated his case. ;)\n\n**(4) Luther the Celebrity**\n\n500 years of theologians and eventually Protestant university academic-type scholar basically listened to Luther on the importance and originality of the Lutherbibel. Anthony Gow walked through this in a 2009 article, including the scholars who actually observed the primacy of the 15C Bibles but were more or less ignored. \n\nOnce again, their view wasn't entirely wrong. But it was mostly less wrong due to the *later reputation* of Luther's translation, rather than how much it mattered at the time.\n\nThis pattern isn't unique, either. The same evolution has been traced with--of all people and things--Chaucer and the *Canterbury Tales*.\n\nSo the next time any of you reading this has to read Chaucer in English class..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ep1ced/do_we_overestimate_the_importance_of_the/fehrt6b/"
]
] |
||
2blsvc
|
Did some New World civilizations actually use mushrooms containing psilocybin in any religious ways?
|
I've heard people talk about Aztecs, Incas, Mayans, and other New World civilizations using "magic mushrooms" in religious rituals. But I don't know how true that is. So first, do we know for sure that any of them used mushrooms containing psilocybin for any religious use? And if they did, do we know anything about their use, and religious significance to them?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2blsvc/did_some_new_world_civilizations_actually_use/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cj6mo4h",
"cj6z03x",
"cj702go"
],
"score": [
29,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Oh yes. And not just mushrooms; there were a whole suite of hallucinogenic drugs that the civilizations of the New World used as sacraments. Magic mushrooms (*Psilocybin mexicana*) were common among the Aztecs and other Central Mexican groups. Peyote was used in both Central/Northern Mexico, the American Southwest, and among the Maya. Salvia comes from Oaxaca and was used by cultures in that region. The hallucinogenic San Pedro cactus was used by the Andean cultures of South America like the Inca. There were also seeds from a plant the Aztecs called *ololiuhqui* that could induce hallucinations. There was a species of water lily used by the Maya as a hallucinogen. There is even a species of toad in Central America called *Rhinella marina* that emits a hallucinogenic toxin when stressed. If you lick it while it's secreting this toxin, you will hallucinate - and it appears that the Maya and other neighboring groups did this. There are likely even more such drugs that we're not familiar with - \"snuffing pipes\" for nasal delivery of drugs have been found in the Mexican state of Guerrero.\n\nThe use of hallucinogens is tied with a suite of spiritual practices that anthropologists often call \"Shamanism.\" In a nutshell, a lord or priest (or \"shaman\" in this context) derived spiritual power from the perceived ability to move between the physical, mortal world and a supernatural world. A shaman functioned as an intermediary between humans and the supernatural. My favorite description of this comes from the Q'uiche' Maya of highland Guatemala. Their creation story, known as the Popol Vuh, describes how during the early days of creation humans had the ability to perceive gods in the same way that gods could perceive people. However, the gods did not want humans to be able to see them, so they obscured the divine world \"like fog on a mirror.\" To borrow their metaphor, hallucinogenic drugs let a person pierce the fog and perceive the divine.\n\nAs to the specific rituals they were used for, we have records of their use in divination rituals as well as major religious events like the coronation of a new ruler. Duran describes this incident following the coronation of the Aztec emperor Motecuhzoma II:\n\n > They all went to eat raw mushrooms; on which food they all went out of their minds, worse then if they had drunk much wine. With the force of those mushrooms, they would see visions and have revelations of the future.\n\nAnd here he is describing the coronation of Tizoc:\n\n > They all ate some woodland mushrooms, which they say makes you lose all your senses, and thus they sallied forth for the dance.\n\nThe Maya also appear to have taken hallucinogenic drugs such as peyote in the form of enimas, as shown in this [hilarious yet mildly NSFW ceramic sculpture.](_URL_1_) Similar motifs can be found painted on pottery like [this example](_URL_0_).\n\nConsumption primarily took place within the confines of religious ritual. There also appears to have been some recreational use of hallucinogenic drugs, although this was frowned upon. From Sahagun, p. 37 (referencing the cultural taboos of the Aztecs):\n\n > The Lewd Youth is a drunkard, foolish, dejected; a drunk, a sot. He goes about eating mushrooms.",
"If you are interested in more information on the plants and some of their practices you should read [Plants of Gods](_URL_0_). It also has information about other cultures and plants uses around the world.",
"Peter Furst has repeatedly claimed that certain elements on the shaft tomb figures of West Mexico are related to shamanism. His work with the Huichol and their use with peyote had convinced that people in the same region were doing similar practices or at the very least consuming peyote. The most common element that Furst claims to be a shaman feature is a horn strapped to the forehead of some of the figures, which I will admit is a little odd. His claims however seem stretched for other types of figures like those of the warriors who carry a spear and wear barrel shaped armor and some sort of helmet protecting their head that does not include the horn element.\n\n\nFurst, Peter\n\n1965 Shaft Tombs, Shell Trumpets, and Shamanism: A Culture-Historical Approach to Problems in West Mexican Archaeology. Unpublished\nPh.D. Dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.\n\n1998 Shamanic Symbolism, Transformation, and Deities in West Mexican Funerary Art. In Ancient West Mexico. Art of the\nUnknown Past, edited by Richard F. Townsend, pp. 169-190. Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.mushroomstone.com/Mayan%20bowl.jpg",
"http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-X_XvTrMrCuM/ThHstZf8OFI/AAAAAAAAA0M/N-Cq6wuQdEc/s1600/Painkillers.jpg"
],
[
"http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0892819790/ref=oh_details_o02_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1"
],
[]
] |
|
enjikl
|
What happened with all the rubble after WWI and WWII?
|
I know entire towns were wiped off the map, and even if much of the buildings burned to ash there was still so much brick/stone/wood rubble all over Europe. Was this bulldozed into landfills? Somehow salvaged for rebuilding? If anyone has any book recommendations about the actual logistics of “cleaning up” after wars I’d be interested to hear them.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/enjikl/what_happened_with_all_the_rubble_after_wwi_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fe1l2w7"
],
"score": [
58
],
"text": [
"In Britain the problem of rubble blocking London streets became acute in September 1940, resulting in the appointment of Warren Fisher as a Special Commissioner to \"organise the clearance and salvage of debris and to facilitate the work of the authorities responsible for the restoration of roads and public utility services\". Fisher employed a variety of personnel including unemployed civilians, the Pioneer Corps and Royal Engineers, initially with basic tools and even wicker baskets until more vehicles were obtained. Military personnel (some 13,500 in 1940) were steadily replaced by civilian workers (25,000 at their height in June 1941). Private property, even as rubble, remained the property of the owner until a March 1941 modification to the War Damage Act authorised clearance workers to \"enter and clear any building damaged by enemy action to clear the site and salvage materials\".\n\nWhere possible intact bricks, tiles etc. were recycled; at one stage 700,000 bricks were being recovered each week for use in reconstruction or building new blast walls and shelters. Unusable timber etc. was burned, other worthless debris were dumped. The northern end of Regent's Park was (and remains) raised by several feet with Blitz rubble, much was also taken to the Leystone Marshes to form parkland. Crushed debris could be used as hardcore for construction work, especially the massive airfield building programme from 1942 as the USAAF joined the Combined Bomber Offensive; thousands of Allied bombers took off from airfields partly built from Blitz rubble as they visited even greater destruction on German cities. Away from London, debris from the bombing of Liverpool and Bootle was taken up the coast to Sefton and used as sea defences; there was little processing of the rubble, some recognisable parts of buildings remain as documented by photographer Tom Fairclough in [Collateral] (_URL_4_) in 2010, and an archaeology student at Durham University is [currently running a project](_URL_3_) to explore the rubble on Crosby beach ( _URL_0_ ). In Bristol rubble was used as ballast for ships returning to America after bringing supplies in; in New York that ballast then became [landfill for FDR Drive between 23rd and 34th Street] (_URL_2_).\n\nBook-wise, specifically focused on London there's Robin Woolven's chapter \"Between Deconstruction and Reconstruction: London's Debris Clearance and Repair Organisation 1939-1945\" from *The Blitz and its Legacy: Wartime Destruction to Post-War Reconstruction*, ed. Clapson & Larkham. More generally, Clapson has recently published *The Blitz Companion: Aerial Warfare, Civilians and the City since 1911* ([available free in electronic formats](_URL_1_)) with a broader chapter on worldwide reconstruction that's a useful starting point for other countries."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://twitter.com/ArchaeoBeach",
"https://www.uwestminsterpress.co.uk/site/books/10.16997/book26/",
"http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/nyregion/28fyi.html",
"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-49926429",
"http://coast.foliohd.com/collateral#untitled-1jpg-1"
]
] |
|
23e6g0
|
if time were to pause, would the force of gravity disappear?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23e6g0/eli5if_time_were_to_pause_would_the_force_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgw3qdr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Acceleration would be 9.81*t so if t = 0 acceleration is 0, not undefined. You could speculate but nothing would be able to move as time has stopped. \n\nAll physics equations would still apply."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1l5roi
|
How did historians name the cities and settlements of prehistorical and preliterate civilizations?
|
I'm reading my World History textbook, and I noticed that Olmec settlements (like La Venta) have very Spanish names. With preliterate civilizations having cities like Çatal Hüyük or Mohenjo Daro, how did these names came about as the official names of these cities when writing hasn't been invented yet?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1l5roi/how_did_historians_name_the_cities_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbw2hda",
"cbwah8r"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Er those are modern local names used for convenience, in the cases of Chatal Hoyuk and Mohenjo-Daro local toponyms in the modern local language. We don't even know what kinds of languages these people spoke(although there are many speculations, some better-founded than others) let alone what they called the places they lived.",
"There are many cases where these names come from modern toponyms or titles for the site, or even other past cultures. An example of the latter is Teotihuacan, which is a Nahuatl name given to the city by the Aztecs meaning \"place where the gods dwell\". The city was old when they were active. In my area of study a lot of pyramids and complexes get assigned the \"Huaca\" designation, meaning \"sacred\" or even just a locus of power and energy. Though it would be great to have these places' original names we are rarely so lucky in the New World. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2tlaeg
|
Is it possible to create an image that is blurry to people with perfect vision but clear to people who otherwise need eyeglasses?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2tlaeg/is_it_possible_to_create_an_image_that_is_blurry/
|
{
"a_id": [
"co0htt2"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"I don't know if you could paint an image like the one you describe, but it is possible to make an image using [holography](_URL_0_) that looks blurry to people with normal vision, but clear to people who otherwise need glasses. \n\nHolograms are not like normal photographs. After passing though (or reflecting off, depending on the type of hologram) a hologram, the light is bent in such a way that it follows the same path as it would after reflecting off of whatever objects are shown in the hologram. This means that any lenses in the picture will work like real lenses, focusing light at the same place that a physical lens would. Edit: The physics department at my old university had a hologram of a microscope that was taken so that you could look though the microscope's eyepiece and see a magnified fly. It looked kind of like [this](_URL_1_).\n\nYou could make an image like the one you are describing by making a hologram of some scene and putting a person's glasses in front of the photographic plate. The person who wears those glasses would put the hologram up to their eye, and see the scene as they normally would while wearing glasses. A person with normal vision would also see the scene as if they were looking though the glasses of the person with poor sight."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography",
"http://www.jrholocollection.com/collection/images/spierings/Microscope1.jpg"
]
] |
||
b4kwpe
|
how do plants remove toxins from the air?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b4kwpe/eli5_how_do_plants_remove_toxins_from_the_air/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ej7cljf",
"ej7g17c"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Plants specifically remove carbon dioxide from the air through a process called photosynthesis. Although it's a complicated word, photosynthesis is just the plant version of how we humans breath (admittedly, it's more the plant version of how our individual cells breathe, but it's fine)\n\nWhen a human breathes, their lungs take some oxygen from the air to fuel their body, and puts some carbon dioxide into the air.\n\nWhen a plant 'breathes', it takes some carbon dioxide from the air to fuel itself, and puts some oxygen into the air. This oxygen is good for us humans because we need oxygen to live, and the removal of the carbon dioxide is also good because in high amounts, it can be dangerous to us.\n\nI'm not familiar with plants removing any other toxins, so I'm sorry if I accidentally answered the wrong question.\n\nEdit: plants, not pants",
"Plants dont actually remove toxins. The word toxin actually has a specific meaning, it's not just \"something that's bad for you\". Here's a definition from a quick Google search:\n\n\"an antigenic poison or venom of plant or animal origin, especially one produced by or derived from microorganisms and causing disease when present at low concentration in the body.\"\n\nLike someone else said, plants remove CO2, something that every animal engaging in respiration produces.When people talk about trees and plants cleaning the air, that's what they're talking about, CO2. It's also something that accumulates in our atmosphere from other chemical reactions, most notably combustion. Plants and other photo synthesizers use that compound to build sugars that they store as plant tissues and use for energy. \n\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6k7nna
|
What happened to the post 17th Century Ottoman Navy?
|
I feel that The Ottoman Navy performance becoming worse during the 17th Century onwards despite multiple successful reforms like introducing modern sailing ships and the reform of Selim III, the navy still performed overall badly and rather get defeated easily by its rival's navy like in Çeşme, Sinop, and Navarino Bay. While there's a clear reason on why the army performed poorly at the later 18th century to the reforms of Mahmud II like the civilianization of the Janissaries and the decentralization of the military, i haven't got a clear answer on the navy yet. So why is this?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6k7nna/what_happened_to_the_post_17th_century_ottoman/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djsyn3c"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I am not a historian but I consider myself as a ottoman naval history enthusiast. I hope my answer is helpful. \n\nProf. Idris Bostan published a great book about this subject (_URL_0_) \n\nName of the book can be translated as \"Ottoman paddle and sailing vessels\" and has a lot of picures, letters, infographs , etc. in it. To answer your question these notes can be listed : \n\n1-) Ottoman Navy under Barbarossa and Sultan Suleiman was doing well but Spanish and English began using galleons at the time. Galleons were big and heavy ships and were not performing well in Mediterranean and low winds. That's why ottoman naval engineers decided to stuck with galleys instead of galleons because Mediterranean was their main hinterland and Venetians were their main enemy. Venetians decided to do the same which led the decline of both states because they could not compete with new world exploring. Discovery of the Americas gave advantage to Spain and England where they lacked financial and raw material resources in the following years. According to me this may be one of the most prominent cases of a technology selection shaped the fate of an empire. \n\n2-) During stagnation period , Ottoman elite and high bureaucracy were shaped by bribery and not the skills. Prof. Bostan gives a letter from Sultan as an example where how angry the Sultan Selim III was during a commencing of a ship, it directly sank in the water. That's why he favored french shipbuilder Jean-Baptiste Benoit over Turkish shipbuilders. This led crisis in Turkish shipyards and eventually Benoit had to escape from the Empire. Ottoman sultans were directly managing navy and shipbuilding process. In one directive of the Sultan himself criticizes the geometry of a ship and ordered engineers to build it with a better mathematics[sic.]\n\n3-) Bribery and corruption were wide in military personnel as well. Huge ships were under order of unexperienced admirals who lacked active combat experience. Because of low skill navy staff a special law needed to be prepared which shaped rankings and minimum requirements to lead a ship. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://books.google.com.tr/books/about/K%C3%BCrekli_ve_yelkenli_Osmanl%C4%B1_gemileri.html?id=1S81AAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y"
]
] |
|
1jfxbv
|
How common was identity theft in the 1800's?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1jfxbv/how_common_was_identity_theft_in_the_1800s/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbev6l0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"James Johnson has a superb article entitled [\"The Face of Imposture in Postrevolutionary France\"](_URL_2_) in _French Historical Studies_ that addresses this very subject.\n\nIn brief, Johnson argues that imposture and identity theft became easier after the French Revolution because of the loosening of the social order associated with abolishing feudal privileges. This was compounded by the cultural representations produced by authors, playwrights, and artists who played up the trope of the fallen man who takes on a second identity and finds success (think Jean Valjean in _Les Misérables_). \n\nSome of these writers were former con artists themselves; the most famous was [François Vidocq](_URL_0_), the director of the _brigade de sûreté_, which was an investigative unit within the Paris police. Vidocq was an ex-convict hired by police commissioner Henry to combat property crime, forgery, and usurpations of titles and civil status. By 1818 Vidocq had a bridge of twenty-eight men and women, all ex-convicts like himself, working with the police. He wrote a series of [best-selling memoirs](_URL_1_) about his life of crime turned investigator that contains several run-ins with identity thieves: people posing as aristocrats, policemen, and wealthy financiers. During his criminal and police days, Vidocq was known as a master of disguise. According to Johnson, drawing from Vidocq's memoirs:\n\n > He [Vidocq] developed a way of walking that made him shorter by half a foot. He could add several inches by stacking playing cards in his shoes. He learned from professional begirds how to induce skin ulcers and simulate scars. He could produce a fever by swallowing mouthfuls of tobacco juice over several days. He darkened his face by rubbing it with walnut husks, filled his nose with a gummy mucus that he darkened with coffee, and once deliberately infected himself with head lice. With the aid of a tattoo on his left arm, he impersonated a drowned sailor named August Duval, whose traits and biography he had learned about from a former friend…At the height of his celebrity, Vidocq, disguised as an ancient duchess form the Faubourg Saint-Germain, was received by a credulous Louis-Philippe (300).\n\nVidocq used these skills to keep one foot in the criminal underworld and seek out high-profile criminal cases.\n\nOne such man, and the figure that Johnson focuses on the most, was Pierre Coignard. Vidocq arrested him in early summer 1818 for usurpation of titles; Coignard had been living since December the previous year as André-Pierre de Pontis, comte de Sainte-Hélène, complete with a royal commission as _chef de battalion_ for the 74th Legion of the Seine, two orders of knighthood, and the Croix de Saint-Louis. Coignard/\"Pontis\" was fingered by an ex-con fresh out of prison named Darius who happened to pass by when Coignard was reviewing his troops in the Place Vendôme and recognized him. According to Darius, Coignard was really the first of fourteen children born to Pierre and Anne Velouse Coignard in Langeais, in the Loire Valley. He was a hat maker's apprentice until he left to fight in the revolutionary army. In 1801, he was arrested and sentenced to fourteen years in Toulon prison for theft. \n\nSome time before the end of his sentence, he escaped and assumed the identity of Pontis. Coignard wrote a mayor in the Vendée pretending to be Pontis and asked for a copy of his baptismal certificate, which he claimed had been destroyed during the Revolution. Coignard memorized the details of Pontis' life down to the finest details, for when he was arrested and interrogated in 1818, he could rattle off the entire de Pontis family history and the comte's military record in Spain. The interrogator, Despinois, remarked how much like a noble Coignard acted. He carried himself like an aristocrat, Despinois claimed, both in action and in attitude. The evidence against Coignard, though, was too strong, and he was sentenced to life in prison for a long string of crimes that included impersonating a noble.\n\nThe best part of the article is the way in which Johnson juxtaposes the lives of Vidocq and Coignard:\n\n > The things that distinguished Vidocq's from Coignard's technique were mostly temperamental. Strictly speaking, there is little difference between disguise and imposture. To disguise is to alter one's dress or appearance, usually with the intent to deceive. To practice imposture is to impose oneself on others, that is, to palm off or put across a false or misleading representation. Vidocq mastered many personas, while Coignard hewed to a single role. Vidocq manipulated his face and body, while Coignard relied more on intellectual artifice. Vidocq favored brute force, while Coignard employed a quick mind and a smooth tongue (300).\n\nJohnson argues that Vidocq and Coignard \"were among the first to take advantage of conditions favoring a particular kind of deceit, which was bred in the chaos of administrative and social upheaval\" (292). The entire article is much more nuanced than my brief overview, so if you have access it's worth a read."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eug%C3%A8ne_Fran%C3%A7ois_Vidocq",
"http://books.google.fr/books?id=uGQoAAAAYAAJ&printsec=titlepage&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false",
"http://fhs.dukejournals.org/content/35/2/291.abstract"
]
] |
||
1y84n3
|
why is it said that some people lived even 900 years?
|
Please give me some biology examples of why this is not possible*. The conditions, alimentation etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y84n3/eli5_why_is_it_said_that_some_people_lived_even/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfi6lif",
"cfi6m95",
"cfi6zul",
"cfi71pb"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Since the people saying it are invoking religious texts, it's not a scientific statement. People don't, to the best of our understanding, live 900 years.",
"It's from the Bible - _URL_0_\n\nEvery scientist will tell you it's simply impossible to live that long.",
"This is literally only stated in religious stories. There has never been a record of a mammal living for that long, let alone a person. ",
"We have modern medicine. We're lucky to make it to 100 years. There's no way someone 6000 years ago was living to 900. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchal_age"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1incte
|
how did berlin (the western part) exist during the cold war? the wikipedia map shows the wall only on one side. where did the sewage go? where did fresh water come from? how did iggy pop and david bowie score drugs and record albums there in the 70's?
|
The [picture](_URL_0_) I'm thinking of. If the answer is a simple search away, remember that I'm five-years-old, spent 30 seconds looking, quit and started crying out of frustration.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1incte/eli5_how_did_berlin_the_western_part_exist_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb66wp8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Road: the Helmstedt-Berlin autobahn (A2) (Checkpoints Alpha and Bravo respectively). Soviet military personnel manned these checkpoints and processed Allied personnel for travel between the two points. Military personnel were required to be in uniform when traveling in this manner.\n\nRail: Western Allied military personnel and civilian officials of the Allied forces were forbidden to use commercial train service between West Germany and West Berlin, because of GDR passport and customs controls when using them. Instead, the Allied forces operated a series of official (duty) trains that traveled between their respective duty stations in West Germany and West Berlin. When transiting the GDR, the trains would follow the route between Helmstedt and Griebnitzsee, just outside of West Berlin. In addition to persons traveling on official business, authorized personnel could also use the duty trains for personal travel on a space-available basis. The trains traveled only at night, and as with transit by car, Soviet military personnel handled the processing of duty train travelers.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Berlin_satellite_image_with_Berlin_wall.jpg"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1w96ms
|
How does an all-meat diet affect humans?
|
Eskimos come to mind.
Seeing as we are not naturally carnivorous, I am curious how people manage to live on all-meat diets. Additionally,what are the consequences? Are there adaptations at work which allow some to manage better than others (ie Eskimos)?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1w96ms/how_does_an_allmeat_diet_affect_humans/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf05su6"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Essentially an all-meat diet in humans causes protein poisoning. This is because during the metabolism process protein-rich meat releases high concentrations of toxic nitrogenous waste. As an archaeologist this is how we know Neanderthals ate a high animal protein diet because of the high Nitrogen stable isotope values that we find in their bone deposition.\n\nThe Inuit of the high north are known for having a diet that's very high in animal protein but also low in vegetation and carbohydrates. Essentially, the reason their able to sustain themselves is because they offset the tremendous amount of meat they're eating with animal fat. The animal fat and protein act as the primary source of energy and they gain vital vitamins like A and C through fish and uncooked meat respectively. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
r71li
|
giant swords in fantasy games/art
|
Most of the fantasy games and artwork I've seen lately are at least reasonably realistic until they get to the weaponry. I often see swords that are impossibly huge wielded one-handed by heroes and villains alike. I don't mean, "Wow that's a pretty big sword" but rather "Wow, that sword has to weigh more than he does."
Why do artists do that, when the rest of the image is more or less realistic? When did this artistic trend start?
I think this artistic practice detracts from the suspension of disbelief to have the characters hitting each other multiple times with 200 lb weapons and I'm hoping game designers and the attendant artists reverse this trend a little and restore the proportion to the artwork.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/r71li/eli5_giant_swords_in_fantasy_gamesart/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c43f3j6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Nearly all sword play in almost any depiction may it be television, film or video games is extremely stylized. A sword hitting another sword dulls the person's blade extremely quickly (You can imitate this by buying two axes blades and smashing them into each other.) and as such most blocking was done with a shield and not the person's primary weapon. Spears, Polearm and other Long pointy things were far more common on the battlefield as they were easier to use in formation (Spears don't require a swinging arc so people can stand closer together and have a longer range.), and less expensive. Dueling sports such as Fencing, Sabra and Epee are sports not battle techniques and are mimicking dueling swords.\n\n\nAs such having a over sized sword is only slightly less realistic then how a sword is generally shown. The audience is ignorant of all these facts and enjoys it none the less."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
33wn1a
|
what happened to michael jackson?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33wn1a/eli5_what_happened_to_michael_jackson/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqp1xlo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Just because someone is a talented artist doesn't mean that they don't have their own issues. Jackson obviously did have his own demons he was wrestling with. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5fu3m8
|
how do people quit their jobs and travel the world for years?
|
As the title suggests, how do people just travel the world with no job?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5fu3m8/eli5_how_do_people_quit_their_jobs_and_travel_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"danagkl"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"They save like demons while they're working, then travel cheaply and sleep in questionable places. Some get odd jobs or barter for food or lodging. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1mhx7z
|
australian government
|
Can someone please explain how the Australian parliament works? What us the senate? Diagrams would be good!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mhx7z/eli5_australian_government/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc9e7f7",
"cc9edxu"
],
"score": [
12,
6
],
"text": [
"I don't have any diagrams, but I can give it my best shot from my understanding.\n\nThe Australian Government is divided into two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate. \n\n\n\nThe House of Representatives is technically the 'lower' house, and is made up of representatives from each 'electorate' in the country. (An electorate is basically just a division of the country, like a tiny state, which is represented in the federal government by one individual.) There are 150 electorates, and therefore 150 different members of parliament in the house. These MP's not only represent your electorate, and fight for particular issues concerning your specific electorate - they also help vote and pass bills in the house of representatives.\n\nThe party with the majority of 'seats' (MP's) in the house of Representatives becomes the party in power, and their leader becomes the Prime Minister. So when we vote for the representative of our electorate, we are also voting for that particular party to be in power. The house of Representatives serves a 3 year period.\n\n\n\nThe Senate is the 'higher' house - and consists of 76 senators. 12 for each state, and 2 for NT, ACT and Tasmania. The senators serve a 6 year period, with half of the senate elected each 3 years. \n\nFor a 'bill' to become law, it must first be passed through both houses. To my understanding a bill can be introduced in either house, however, it is usually introduced in the lower house (representatives). The bill will be introduced, debated/discussed etc. Once this is over, they will take a vote. If this vote passes, it is passed on to the next house. This house must then also pass the bill for it to become law.\n\n(Here is a diagram! _URL_0_)\n\n\n\nThis system comes with pro's and con's. It means that a law takes thought and time (mostly) before it can be passed - preventing the party in power from just 'dictating' laws. (The two houses can often have a majority of two different parties.) This in itself can cause issues though.\n\nFor example: If the Liberals are in power (House of Reps), but the senate is majority Labor (they can have major differing views on policies and issues) then it can render a government ineffective. The house of Reps passes a bill, but the senate disagrees and denies it - thus the law is not changed/formed etc.\n\n\n\nHope this wasn't too confusing to understand - if you have any questions feel free to ask and I'll try explain.\n\n\nEDIT: TL;DR:\n\n2 houses. House of Representatives and the Senate. Representatives form the party 'in power' (i.e. Prime Minister). Senate votes on new/changed laws. A new/changed law has to pass both houses to become law.",
" [Here is a visualization](_URL_0_) of how senate preference flows worked in the state of NSW"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/briefs/~/media/82250A99B09944548BFD7DF26C509B0D.ashx"
],
[
"http://www.grwpub.info/senate/nsw.svg"
]
] |
|
dd588h
|
Can stress and anxiety increase body temperature?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/dd588h/can_stress_and_anxiety_increase_body_temperature/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f2etosh",
"f2g4rih",
"f2hae0f"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"the stress of getting ready to puke certainly does. That's why you often get massive cold sweats after throwing up - your body is trying to cool down FAST. Something about the higher temperature helps trigger the clenching and pulsing motions your stomach and esophagus need to make to get solids out.",
"Yes they can. It is of course more complicated. Acute stress vs chronic stress, peripheral temperature vs core temperature, you have to be specific. But in general, an acute sense of anxiety increases core body temperature due to the PSH (psychological Stress-induced hyperthermia) via adrenaline as sympathetic activation increases heart rate and signals for metabolic energy release to facilitate the fight or flight response and these two produce heat as a byproduct due to biophysical and biochemical reasons. There's also direct thermogenesis or heat production from brown fat that is activated with stress, evolutionary this is presumably to warm up the muscles and nerves in preparation for activity (faster response and higher contractility). However, peripheral temperature is transiently decreased with acute stress, as the blood is shunted towards your vital organs and core muscles. So your finger tips and toes might feel cold. However, chronic stress can on fact induce longer term hyperthermia, in what is called psychogenic fever and this can last longer and happens with some people but not all. There's even been reports of stress inducing hypothermia or actually a lowering of core body temperature, presumably through the activation of different neural pathways (I believe involving serotonin) but that's not the general pattern.",
"Absolutely. Stress hormones are released which then puts the body in fight or flight. This in turn affects the hypothalamus which is responsible for keeping the body in homeostasis including appetite, sex drive, body temperature. Therefore the body temperature usually goes up because more energy is being burned trying to keep the organism alive."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.