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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4g0o0o
|
could insects be farmed in enough quantity to actually be a viable food source?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4g0o0o/eli5_could_insects_be_farmed_in_enough_quantity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2dma6p",
"d2doelf",
"d2dqxag"
],
"score": [
9,
35,
5
],
"text": [
"Conversion efficiency is good, so it should be at least *more* sustainable. \n\nLong term - there are certain advantages to having tiny beasts with very short lifespans and huge reproductive capabilities. If it all goes wrong you can change from one species to another much more easily than conventional livestock.",
"I actually put some research into this. There are currently two main bugs for farming in the us, and those are mealworms and crickets. \n\n1. Insects have a lot more nutritional content than more traditional meat sources, so it would actually be a pretty good idea to switch to an insect based diet.\n\n2. Farming them in great numbers can be done quite easily, in vertical spaces, with a high rate of return from the feed and low waste. The insects, particularly meal worms, don't like sun, so you can build towers of them in a relatively small square footage, so it is actually more sustainable.\n\n3. Start-up costs are far lower for farming them than traditional beef, pork, or even chickens. Moreover, they can easily be raised in an urban environment, or in a garage, thus allowing small scale farms to compete with larger farms, thus creating a more diverse economy and larger competition.\n\n4. Not only can it be easily done, but it can be maintained easily, even if an entire farming tower of mealworms die do to bad feed or improper care, it can be easily recovered in a much shorter time span. Additionally, in the current meal-worm farms, there has not been any recorded issues with them being picky or having long term breeding problems.\n\nIn short, the current farming solutions are easily scale-able, the diet is fine, and it is economically viable. It just doesn't have much of a demand.\n\nEdit: a word",
"I remember reading ages ago that someone calculated the weight of earthworms capable of living in the area of a cow pasture and it exceeded the weight of the cows but a large margin. I tried to google it, but I'm just getting ads about parasitic worms. The point was, we could get a far larger amount of protein from the worms than the cows, without the greenhouse gases and a fraction of the total work."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b4nch3
|
In the TV show Vikings, an English Queen references the fact the moon shines because it's reflecting light from the sun. Was this known in the 8th century?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/b4nch3/in_the_tv_show_vikings_an_english_queen/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ej9hfh0"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"In *On the Nature of Things and on Times* (before ca. 703), Bede the Venerable (d. 735) states the following passage, roughly based on Isidor of Seville and Pliny: \n\n > 'Chap. 20: The Nature and Place of the Moon: The moon is said neither to diminish nor to increase, but rather, illuminated by the sun on the side which it has toward it, to turn the bright or the dark side gradually to us either by receding from the sun or by approaching it......' [Kendall, Calvin B. & Faith Wallis (trans.), *Bede: On the Nature of Things and On Times*, Manchester: Manchester UP, 2010, p. 85]. \n\nHe also discusses further in the same work that how the solar and lunar eclipse can occur in accordance with their placement to the earth, and also, the tide can be caused by the intervention of the moon. \n\nWhile I cannot find any supportive illustration evidence like [this](_URL_0_) for contemporary Islamic counterpart in the manuscript of Al-Biruni's *The Book of Instruction on the Elements of the Art of Astrology* (10th century), it is highly likely that at least some elites in 8th century Anglo-Saxon England had read Bede's work and become familiar with the ideas mentioned in it since his scientific works had been highly influential until the High Middle Ages. \n\n\n\nReference: \n\n* Brown, George H. *A Companion to Bede*. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2009. \n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Lunar_eclipse_al-Biruni.jpg"
]
] |
|
p96wq
|
What caused the big bang's expansion of the universe to slow down so suddenly before accelerating again?
|
Going off of this [image](_URL_0_) and what I've read about it. I wasn't able find an answer to this question elsewhere so maybe one of you guys know. Sorry if the way I phrased the question is a bit off.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/p96wq/what_caused_the_big_bangs_expansion_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3nicoj",
"c3nikve"
],
"score": [
2,
10
],
"text": [
"I think your main source of confusion comes from the period known as \"inflation\". It does look like the expansion of the universe nearly stops in relation to inflation.\n\nInflation was posited to explain three problems: the flatness problem, the horizon problem, and the magnetic monopole problem.\n\nFlatness: the space-time geometry of the universe is very close to being flat, though there is no reason that it has to be flat. Inflation explains that the universe could have started with any geometry and expanded so much that it now looks flat.\nHorizon: The universe appears isotropic and homogeneous in all directions as far as we can see. How did the different parts of the universe 'communicate' to all reach the same conditions. They must have been in close causal contact at some point.\nMonopole: We have not observed any magnetic monopoles in nature though there is no reason why they shouldn't exist. Inflation explains that they do exist, they are just super rare because space got really big really fast. :/\n\nWhy did inflation start and stop? It was driven by \"negative pressure vacuum energy\" or at least that's what wikipedia says :) It's a lot of difficult physics and it really still is an open question as to the particle physics mechanism. \n\nAfter inflation, photons, then matter, and finally dark energy took turns being the greatest contributors to rate of expansion. We've only \"recently\" (astronomically speaking) entered the dark energy epoch. ",
"Good question. The first thing to keep in mind is that that picture isn't quite to scale!\n\nThe super-quick expansion you see just after the Big Bang is a period called inflation. We don't know exactly how long it lasted or what the expansion rate was during that era, but it's safe to say that it lasted only the tiniest fraction of a second, and was a rapidly accelerating expansion.\n\nYour question comes down to asking what happened after infl It ation ended. Inflation likely occurred because the Universe was filled with a type of exotic matter called the inflaton. was exotic because of its bizarre property that its energy density stayed more or less constant as the Universe expanded, rather than diluting away like normal matter and radiation. This property is what gives rise to the accelerated expansion.\n\nWhen inflation ended, the interactions between the inflaton and the particles of the Standard Model led to all the energy in the inflaton particles going into standard particles - photons, neutrinos, and all the rest of the particles we see in the Universe today, in a process called reheating. These guys don't have the inflaton's bizarre expansion properties. When the Universe expands, they *do* dilute away, as you'd expect normal matter to do, meaning that their total energy either stays constant or even (in the case of radiation) shrinks. Unlike the accelerated expansion of inflation, then, the gravity of all these particles pulls on each other, causing an expansion rate that decelerates. Since the end of inflation is quite a sudden event, and reheating is a very short process on cosmic timescales, what you see in the end is an apparently abrupt transition from acceleration to deceleration as the dominant gravitational force in the Universe changes from the inflaton to the photons and other particles that are created during reheating.\n\nAnd why do we have the sudden transition back to acceleration in the present era? We're still not quite sure. It might be a sign that there's a change to the equations of gravity which only becomes important at late times, be it a cosmological constant or something more subtle. There might be a new type of exotic energy, called quintessence, with very similar properties to the inflaton, but with the exception that its mostly-constant energy is a lot smaller, so it only becomes important much later on. Or it might even be that not all of the inflatons turned into normal particles during reheating, and the current acceleration is due to those leftover inflatons taking back over. However, we don't have any good answer for why, if not all of the inflatons reheated, only such an astronomically tiny number remained."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/CMB_Timeline300_no_WMAP.jpg"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
7ckznz
|
Are the different sections of the brain directed by one individual control center or do they have their own individual control centers acting independently in support of the whole system?
|
Just had a random thought pop up, hoping someone here can help break it down for me. Thank you!
Update: For some reason no one’s comments are visible to me when I look at the post.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/7ckznz/are_the_different_sections_of_the_brain_directed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpqu5h4",
"dpt1gwj"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"I'm hoping an actual neuroscientist will weigh in here, and correct any errors I've made, but here goes....\n\nThere's no central control.\n\nThe brain stem keeps your heart beating, your stomach digesting, your hormones flowing, etc, to keep your biology in balance. \n\nOccasionally, it finds it can't do its job. Then it sends a message higher up to the emotional and cognitive centres saying \"something's wrong, we need some behaviour to fix it!\"\n\nThat's when you might feel hungry, cold, stressed, afraid, etc. \n\nYour emotional centre and cognitive centre start to react, the emotional centre reacts faster. If it detects (what it thinks is) extreme danger, it overrides your thinking about the situation, and reacts. That's when you jump out of the way of a car, or panic and flee from a social situation, or lash out verbally, or just freeze - before you have a chance to think about it.\n\nUsually, though, there's no oveeride, just a strong suggestion from the emotional centre to the congnitive centre. That's when you \"think\" about what to do and can give \"reasons\" for your actions - though often the reasons aren't actually your *real* reasons, of which you have little idea. \n\n",
"Graduate student here, so bear with me.\n\n**The Neocortex**\n\nThe neocortex is the wrinkled walnut-like part of your brain. It's also really new. It's actually a thin sheet (the thickness of six cards stacked on top of each other) folded in various ways. It's different than the rest of the brain and controls \"older\" regions. It's so different that neuroscientists distinguish between brain areas that are *cortical* and *subcortical*.\n\nThe neocortex is organized into what is known as cortical columns. These columns are highly locally connected, but also connected to their neighbours. Cortical areas processing the same type of information are usually referred to as \"modules\". Cortical modules are organized like people in a society. They are both individuals and part of a collective. They work together. We can take a look at how vision is processed to understand how this works.\n\nThe primary visual cortex (V1) is located at the back of your head. This is the first place where visual information gets processed in your cortex. Since your brain is floating inside your head, a blow to the forehead sends the brain swoshing backward, causing damage to V1. This is why people sometimes go temporarily blind or see \"stars\" when hitting their forehead.\n\nV1 can only process low-level visual details, like lines slanted in a particular orientation. The next brain area finds patterns in V1 and may recognize simple objects. The next brain area does the same and finds more complex objects. It gets increasingly more abstract. You might have heard about the \"Jennifer Aniston\" cell that responds only to pictures of her. We don't actually have cells responding to particular individuals, but we definitely have cell assemblies whose patterns of activity correspond to very specific objects.\n\nMy point in explaining all this is that information is passed on in a hierarchical fashion. It goes from concrete sensations to abstract perceptions.\n\nBehavior is processed similarly. Abstract behavioral plans are processed in the prefrontal cortex. Motor sequences are processed in the premotor cortex. Motor programmes are processed in the motor cortex. The motor cortex communicate with cell clusters in the spinal cord. Their neurons innervate muscle fibers.\n\nThe important thing to note is that information travels both ways. It goes up and down the hierarchy. So control is distributed between individual modules as well as centralized in higher areas.\n\n**Subcortical areas**\n\n*Hypothalamus*\n\nWhen we talk about subcortical areas, thing gets a little different. Subcortical areas make up what we call the \"unconcious\" mind. The hypothalamus is a master regulator. Hunger, wakefulness, and all that noise is regulated through a process known as homeostasis. If you're familiar with negative feedback systems, this is what's going on. For instance, leptin increases along with adipose tissue, acting as a proxy variable for energy intake. When leptin levels increase above a certain threshold, the hypothalamus releases hormones that reduce feeding. On the other hand, if you're obese your internal set point for leptin will correspond to a body weight you might not like. You exercise, and the reduced levels of leptin causes you to feel really, really hungry. Because it's an automatic negative feedback system. This is why almost every person who get liposuction regains their weight over time.\n\n*Basal Ganglia and the Amygdala*\n\nFrom the 1920s to the 1960s, psychology (at least in the US) was all about behavior and reinforcement. Pavlov discovered that neutral stimuli paired with a reinforcer could trigger automatic behavior (such as salivation). Skinner discovered that you could shape the behavior of animals by rewarding actions. So behavior can be controlled, subconsciously (subcortically), by their consequences. The basal ganglia is responsible for pairing actions with consequences, while it seems the amygdala is responsible for pairing stimuli with consequences (it's not all about fear!). \n\nBoth the amygdala and the basal ganglia are connected with the neocortex. So the old parts can be controlled by the new. This doesn't always work as well as one would like. Habits are formed consciously at first. Then the basal ganglia takes over. In addiction, the so-called reward pathway gets activated so strongly that the previous behavior gets \"habitual\" quickly. Then, seeing something related to the behavior (such as people smoking in a movie) may trigger the behavior. It can be so strong that you can't consciously override it.\n\nThe amygdala can also wreck havoc. In generalized anxiety disorder, you have trouble with overriding the amygdala through your prefrontal cortex. So anxiety can get in the way of your plans.\n\n**Concluding remarks**\n\nThis was all really long, but it's a really broad topic. Control is distributed between many different areas, and the main conflict is between conscious (cortical) control and automatic (subcortical) control. There is no \"main\" control center, but the prefrontal cortex is crucial because it is the top of the behavioral pyramid. That's where abstract plans are formed and where actions are taken to control lower levels so they don't interfere with said plans. It has been compared with the conductor of an orchestra, which I find appropriate."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2qcnf6
|
how do boxers and mma fighters have careers spanning years, while some people are killed with one punch in a street fight?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qcnf6/eli5_how_do_boxers_and_mma_fighters_have_careers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn4wf6q",
"cn4x99y"
],
"score": [
13,
2
],
"text": [
"People who get killed from one punch in a street fight often die because they hit their head on something hard on the way down. That's not a concern in a boxing or mma ring.\n\nAlso, boxers and martial artists have been trained to defend against attacks. Most people would be destroyed if they joined a hockey or football game with no practice. Experienced players know how to minimize the effects of hits and most importantly avoid them.",
"A lot of reasons. One of the main is that professional fighters know how to minimize damage. I used to do Judo. Practiced for three years. For the first 3 weeks they taught me nothing but how to fall in a way that minimizes the possibility of your bones breaking. You have to practice falling for three weeks, and then you have to be tested by the main coach to be allowed to actually start learning Judo. Learning how to fall includes moves to defend your limbs even in some of the most violent situations, working on the muscles around your neck so it doesn't get snapped in half, working on flexibility of your joints. \nThe same goes for boxing, for example. I did it for a couple of months. There are a lot of ways to minimize damage. For example, when you attack someone with a right hook, you usually hid your jaw \"behind\" you right shoulder and etc. \nTLDR: every martial art teaches you a lot of ways to minimize the damage."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3a762z
|
those body wraps that people post on social media that claims that it makes you lose fat
|
How do those body wraps make you look thinner? It looks like just plain Saran Wrap and surely you don't actually lose fat from wrapping it around your body for a couple hours
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3a762z/eli5_those_body_wraps_that_people_post_on_social/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs9w6lk",
"cs9w9zh",
"cs9xpbj",
"cs9zyu4"
],
"score": [
5,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"No its sort of like shapewear. It makes you look thinner but you are just wearing something that is giving your body a shape. But you aren't losing any fat",
"It doesn't make you lose weight at all, but if you wrap them tightly they can compress the fat making you look slimmer (obviously, only while you've got them on, once you take them off you go back to normal). It's the same thing as just wearing a really tight compression top.",
"Those like mud/seaweed wraps where they measure you, then wrap you, then take it off and then measure you again? Like at spas? They work temporarily, mostly by making you sweat and dehydrating the underlayers of your skin. It shrinks temporarily (like a wet towel wrung out). ",
"Rule of thumb: anything that gets passed around on Facebook is probably a crock of shit. Actually, that's a good rule for the internet in general."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5yqtur
|
what's the difference between 23.976 fps and 24 fps, and why is 23.976 used?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yqtur/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_23976_fps_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"des95ex",
"des99ji",
"des9q1l",
"desa6r2",
"desbxs3"
],
"score": [
240,
3,
80,
32,
4
],
"text": [
"There is a good explanation from a [previous ELI5 thread](_URL_0_).\n\n > Film standard is actually 24.0 frames per second. The 23.976 is the framerate in digital cinema cameras. The reason it isn't pure 24 is pretty stupid. Basically, our video system in America is called NTSC. It set the standard for video signals back in the infancy of video. In black and white everything worked nicely at pure frame rates. However, when color was introduced to videoall of the broadcasters suddenly had to be transmitting color information in addition to greyscale information. Technology already in place couldn't handle this, so the engineers for NTSC devised a trick where video would now be at a slightly lower framerate, and the extra bandwidth in the signal freed up by this would be used for color information. Today, this is no longer necessary as technology has grown beyond the need for such a gimmick. However, thousands of studios across the NTSC world still have some if not all equipment that can only handle the old NTSC standard. It would be too costly to update every piece of equipment, so we're stuck with this standard for at least another decade or two.\n",
"23.976 is what's used on TVs, because TVs aren't actually 30 FPS - they're 29.97 (and we use that because adding color to 30FPS TV changed the time base). When playing 23.976 FPS on a TV, you map 4 film frames to 5 video frames. ",
"It is actually is determined by physics and it dates back to cathode ray TV's. The electron beam is scanned across the screen in two passes. It first scans the odd pixels and then the even pixels. In North America TV was broadcast with 525 horizontal rows. Which means each scan did 262.5 rows. \n\nIn North America each TV channel was given 6 MHz to broadcast it's programs, of which about 4.5 MHz was usable. Picture was sent, and then a small gap and then audio was sent. When color programming came out, they had to somehow fit the color data in between the picture and audio.\n\n The color signal was interfering with the normal picture. Using some complicated physics, you can get rid of the interference if the gap between the picture and color and the gap between color and sound are both odd integer multiples of the horizontal frequency divided by 2. Simplifying the expressions, you can find that you need an integer multiple time the horizontal frequency to equal 4.5MHz. \n\nSo, going back to our 525 rows. Your horizontal frame rate is the number of rows times the frame rate. So, we need a number that when multiplied by 525 becomes divisible into 4,500,000 (4.5 MHz). That number turns out to be 29.97. This is why TV is broadcast at 29.97 FPS.\n\nOkay, now with that out of the way. The 23.976 comes into play when converting from the 24FPS that film cameras use to broadcast rates. 24x29.97/30=23.976. This is called a three-two pull down. Basically they are manipulating the frames in a way that is undetectable to the human eye so that they can match the frame rate of your TV. \n\n\nETA: This might seem like it doesn't add up so I'll add one last step. 23.976 happens to be exactly 4/5 of 29.97. These 4 frames can be stretched into 5 frames because of the way TV images are produced, and that is what allows the movie to be broadcast in 29.97. \n",
"[Matt Parker actually covered this in one of his youtube videos!](_URL_0_)\n\nShort version: its to encode the color in the video.\n\nEDIT: woops, i linked the wrong thing. Should be the right video now!",
"I'll piggyback on this. When a movie is shot at 24.000 fps (and presumably edited at 24.000 too) and then broadcasted at 23.976 fps, does the TV station go through the trouble of re-encoding the video to 23.976 (like they definitely would do with 30 to 24, for example), or do they simply slow it down 1.001 times to avoid frame interpolation issues? "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37z7lq/eli5_why_is_23976_fps_the_standard_on_film/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GJUM6pCpew"
],
[]
] |
||
442skn
|
Care to recommend any youtube documentaries on communist Russia? I'm particularly interested in espionage but any suggestion are welcome.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/442skn/care_to_recommend_any_youtube_documentaries_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czn904q"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Not sure it fits the bill, but I spent an evening watching various Chernobyl videos on YouTube. There were a few decent documentaries."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
87pvdk
|
what is scientifically currently known to influence sexuality?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/87pvdk/eli5_what_is_scientifically_currently_known_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dweseur",
"dwf6zsr"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"TL:DR: Scientifically, there is a LOT of debate. \n\nThe answer will depend on who you ask, what you mean by \"scientifically\", and what you mean by \"sexuality\".\nFirst you have to considered the huge debate of \"nature vs nurture\". Specialists disagree wildly on whether sexual phenomena (such as sexual orientation, gender identification, or even general sexual prefferences or particular \"tastes\") are innate to the individual (born this way) or learned through our early education and interaction with the environment. \n\nYou could also argue that, in a broader sense, human sexuality is influenced by many many things. Social interactions, historical changes (such as the \"sexual revolution\" of the 60s\" or the appearance of HIV), religion, politics, culture, the media, pornography, spirituality, psychology, all can influence a person's sexual behavior and preferences. ",
"The hypothalamus is an area in the brain that basically connects your nervous system and endocrine system. It's divided into anterior (front) and posterior (back) parts.\n\nWhen men view sexually arousing porn, they see activation in their hypothalamus, but when women view sexually arousing porn, they do not see much activation.\n\nThe anterior portion has several \"interstitial nuclei\", or bundles neurons. The \"3rd interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus\", or INAH-3, is a region that people know is twice as big in men as it is in women.\n\nIn the 1990s, a neuroscientist named Simon LeVay figured out that the INAH-3 region is actually bigger in adult heterosexual men than it is in adult homosexual men. To paraphrase his words, an oversimplified view is that homosexual men simply don't have the \"neuronal circuits\" to find women attractive. \n\nInterestingly, homosexual men also see activation in their hypothalamus when watching sexually arousing porn.\n\nAs a disclaimer, this doesn't really mean too much in itself. It's a correlative, not a causative statement. \n\nSecondly, just to put it out there, LeVay is openly homosexual. He's not trying to go out of way to find some biological basis of sexuality, it's just research he's interested in.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
vwbkr
|
Has an adopted child of a monarch ever taken the throne?
|
I realize that monarchs who don't have children need to name heirs. I'm wondering more about how adoption would work within lines of succession, or if that's ever even happened.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/vwbkr/has_an_adopted_child_of_a_monarch_ever_taken_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c586toz",
"c587hzv",
"c587kwt",
"c5887v1",
"c588tgv",
"c588v98",
"c58a1mc",
"c58akg1",
"c58c4s4",
"c58cian",
"c58cio7",
"c59n186"
],
"score": [
41,
103,
25,
35,
3,
17,
2,
12,
2,
2,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Would Augustus Caesar count? ",
"Adoption was the norm in the Roman Empire. Famously, everything went to shit when Marcus Aurelius (the last of the so-called five good emperors) was succeeded by his biological son Commodius. In Roman terms, though, adoption generally meant the recognition of a famous general or politician as one's successor, and implied no real family connection.",
"Would this count? \n[Charles XIV John of Sweden](_URL_0_) (Jean Bernadotte), a french general that was adopted by Charles XIII so that he could take over the throne. \n\nEdit: Guess it does not really count, as he was around the age of 50 at the time of adoption.",
"In the business world, the Japanese have a tradition of adopting people that they want to succeed them as executives. I know that that doesn't really count, as you asked about monarchs, but it's interesting nonetheless.\n\nedit: [Here](_URL_0_) is an interesting paper on the topic.",
"4 of the 5 \"good emperors\". Basically they came up with a system where the emperor would adopt a promising young child to become his heir. The problem ended when the emperors real son was an acceptable heir, and everything went back to hereditary again.\n\nIt happened a lot after that too, just don't remember as much in later European history. Also think it happened at least twice in the Byzantine Empire.",
"I think those are two separate questions you're asking because a childless monarch often still has \"heirs\" - usually a nephew, a cousin, a very, very distant cousin, etc. Even when there is a change in dynasty like in Spain in 1700 from Habsburg to Bourbon or in 1603 from Tudor to Stuart in England because of the extinction of the direct line, the next monarch is still related distantly. Someone below mentioned Bernadotte as an important exception but I think this has historically been the exception.\n\nThe other part of your question is how would children adopted by a monarch and not related by blood be treated in succession. My guess is that adopted children would be excluded from succession because they are not of blood descent. The closest analogy is morganatic (sp) children - \"illegitimate\" children born between a royal prince or even monarch and a commoner woman. \"Illegitimate\" is in quotes because the couple may actually be married but not \"official\" because the marriage was not approved by the government/king, or because the woman was not of royal status, or the right religion. In these situations, which was quite common in the 19th century, the children and descendants of these unrecognized unions were usually granted some kind of aristocratic title and honors but never equal to a royal prince or princess and specifically excluded from succession. This happened with the Habsburgs and the Romanov a lot, for example. My assumption is that adopted children would be treated in a similar way.\n\nBTW, among the Japanese nobility (both premodern and modern), adoption was used quite often to ensure the survival of the lineage. But it wasn't like adoption how we think of it - more often a non-heir son of a noble house would be \"adopted\" out as heir to another aristocratic family lacking heirs but still live with his own birth family. This was a useful way to provide a livelihood for younger sons in a primogeniture system and prevent families from going extinct.",
"I studied the British monarchy intensely for a little bit, and no where did I ever see anything about adoption. In fact, to even get a chance on the throne you had to be the child of the legitimate partner - children of affairs didn't count. \n\nSo, speaking solely for the English, then British monarchy, it didn't happen. ",
"Perhaps not what you're asking, but Great Briton *as a whole* essentially adopted [George I](_URL_2_) (note especially: \"Although **over fifty** Roman Catholics bore closer blood relationships to Anne, the Act of Settlement 1701 prohibited Catholics from inheriting the British throne; George was Anne's closest living Protestant relative.\")\n\nMore to the point of your question (and since we're on the topic of British monarchs) [Harold Godwinson](_URL_1_)--the guy who lost the Battle of Hastings in 1066--was the legitimate, *named heir* of Edward the Confessor even though he was not a blood relative. No one in England had a problem with Harold becoming king (even though someone in Normandy did!).\n\nThe take-home here is that monarchies don't always follow ideal bloodlines, and even when they do there's no guarantee that succession will go swimmingly (c.f. [Henry IV](_URL_0_))\n",
"In Japan, it was possible for teens and adult men to be adopted into other families for political reasons. I don't know if any of the emperors did that, but the heads of the various clans would do so occasionally, and they could be considered sovereign entities during the Sengoku period.\n\nAlso quite a few kids in medieval and renaissance Europe were born illegitimately, but would be legitimized by the nobleman. This both includes bastards the father sired, and bastards from the mother that the father would pretend is his own. These bastards were often more loyal than their legitimate kids (since they knew they could be delegitimized by the stroke of a pen), and often rose to very important positions.\n\nAn easy example would be William the Bastard, who later became William the Conqueror and father of all the British royalty.",
"Wasn't Puyi adopted? Although its debatable how much power he had and whether he was really on a throne.",
"[Iltutmish](_URL_1_) was slave of [Qutb-ud-din Aibak](_URL_0_) at one point and took over his Sultanate after him.",
"Sultan Barquq (died 1399)of the Mamluk Sultanate of Egyot, as well as many other Mamluk rulers, were essenitially slaves adopted as sons of the previous sultan. All sultans began as slaves bought or captured in southern Russia or Central Asia or the Caucasus.\n\nThere is a touching moment when Sultan Barquq, having become ruler of one of the richest regions of the earth, invites his **biological father** from Circassia to Egypt to see what he has become. His father, you see, was a poor shepherd from the mountains of the Caucasus, who lost his son to slave raiders. Needless to say, the elderly shepherd was proud at what the shepherd boy had become."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_XIV_John_of_Sweden"
],
[
"http://recanati.tau.ac.il/Eng/_Uploads/dbsAttachedFiles/Morck1.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_IV_of_England",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Godwinson",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_I_of_Great_Britain"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutb-ud-din_Aibak",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iltutmish"
],
[]
] |
|
nb0gm
|
Is gray hair permanent or can it be reversed?
|
I ask this because I'm in my early 20s and I have a ridiculous amount of gray hair already. So I'm wondering if this is caused by some kind of permanent cell damage, and if not, is there any way to reverse it?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/nb0gm/is_gray_hair_permanent_or_can_it_be_reversed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c37ppzn",
"c37ppzn"
],
"score": [
9,
9
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_ \n\nShort answer: We don't know yet if it's reversible, but we know the mechanism.\n\nThe mechanism is your hair follicles aren't making enough of the enzyme that breaks down hydrogen peroxide, so your hair is being bleached by hydrogen peroxide that is occurring from other cell processes.\n\nResearchers think it may be reversible (as well as Vitiligo, the \"Michael Jackson\" skin disease) but are just speculating with respect to that still.",
"_URL_0_ \n\nShort answer: We don't know yet if it's reversible, but we know the mechanism.\n\nThe mechanism is your hair follicles aren't making enough of the enzyme that breaks down hydrogen peroxide, so your hair is being bleached by hydrogen peroxide that is occurring from other cell processes.\n\nResearchers think it may be reversible (as well as Vitiligo, the \"Michael Jackson\" skin disease) but are just speculating with respect to that still."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.fasebj.org/content/23/7/2065"
],
[
"http://www.fasebj.org/content/23/7/2065"
]
] |
|
1hittu
|
quasars and their role in the universe.
|
I'm clueless as to what they are. I just know they're really bright and release a lot of energy.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hittu/eli5quasars_and_their_role_in_the_universe/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cauqt34"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"a \"quasar\" refers to the center of a galaxy that releases a lot of energy. It's generally agreed is' an extremely bright area around a super massive black hole in the center of the galaxy. As stuff gets pulled into the black hole it heats up an immense amount and that's the light that we see before it falls in for good."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2syzyr
|
Is there a way to slow down a spacecraft in a way similar to slingshotting one to speed it up?
|
So I know that we can use a planet's gravity to accelerate a spacecraft/probe to very fast speeds with little fuel use. Is it possible to slow it down in a similar way? If so, how? If not, how could we slow it down in a controlled fashion once it reaches its destination?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2syzyr/is_there_a_way_to_slow_down_a_spacecraft_in_a_way/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnuar8w",
"cnuaywf"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The [\"slingshot\" maneuver](_URL_0_) you're referring to can be used to slow a spacecraft down.",
"[This page](_URL_0_) on Wikipedia gives a good overview of the techniques used besides \"brute forcing\" it with rocket power. \n\nYou mention \"slingshotting\" aka gravity assists. These maneuvers can also be performed in the opposite direction to decelerate a spacecraft. \n\nBesides gravity assist, two other techniques that aren't fuel intensive are aerobraking and just planning the route in an efficient way. \n\nAerobraking involves skimming the atmosphere of a planet to slow a spacecraft down. It's been used on both Venus and Mars missions. \n\nPlanning the orbital path carefully is also an important technique. If time is not an issue, paths like Hohmann transfer orbits and Fuzzy orbits can get a craft between two points in space with little fuel, but sometimes can take a long time (years)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_spaceflight#Economical_travel_techniques"
]
] |
|
1immph
|
what is the standard model? why does it matter?
|
Pretty straightforward questions there. Thanks in advance!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1immph/eli5_what_is_the_standard_model_why_does_it_matter/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb5x9bb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The Standard Model is our current best theory of particle physics. It contains all the particles and all the forces necessary to explain everyday life.\n\nThere are six quarks and six leptons that make up pretty much everything we usually refer to as \"matter.\" Then there are the four fundamental forces that govern every single interaction in the entire universe (that we know of so far), and the gauge bosons (or force carriers) for each of those forces.\n\nIt matters because it pretty much explains all of physics. There are a few exceptions. For example, the Standard Model doesn't really say much about gravity. There exists a theorized gauge boson for gravity, called the graviton, in the Standard Model, but it's never been seen experimentally."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4fn53b
|
According to Steve Jones, polygamy was legal in German states during the Hundred Years' War, is this true?
|
It was in his book, Y:Descent of Man, but I can't really find any sources on it and his book with this statement is one of the top sources for this. Here is the relevant section _URL_0_
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4fn53b/according_to_steve_jones_polygamy_was_legal_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2a9bb6",
"d2at8cq"
],
"score": [
10,
9
],
"text": [
"I'm hardly qualified to comment on late fifteenth/early sixteenth century German marriage practices, but the reasoning presented in that passage is baffling. Skipping right past the frankly odd idea that people treat marriage like they do economics (and the inevitable problem of what the Catholic Church would say), his argument that the Hundred Years War so thoroughly wracked the male population of Germany that it was forced to adopt new marriage practices is patently false. Germany wasn't even a major party in the Hundred Years War! \n\nThe Hundred Years War (actually a series of wars/related conflicts bundled together by historians) was fought primarily between England and France from 1337-1453. While there was some involvement by outside parties, most famously there were several battles in Spain and the King of Bohemia died at the Battle of Crecy in 1346, involvement from across the Alps was always a minor component. There's no way an entire generation would have been wiped out by the war. Most of the conflict was fought in France and even then only certain regions of France suffered from extreme deprivation and destruction. Most of the worst parts of the war for the French populace were actually the early stages (1337-1360) when English tactics emphasized pillage and raiding (called *chevauchee* tactics). In the fifteenth century Henry V mostly tried for more peaceful conquest, I say mostly because he still did some raiding and his attempts to limit pillaging were not entirely successful. \n\nThe reasoning behind this argument is easily one of the most bizarre I've ever encountered. For a good general history of the Hundred Years War, and many of the social issues around it, I recommend David Green's *The Hundred Years War: A People's History*, which I will add has no section dedicated to German population loss or Germany in general. ",
"I think I know where he's getting the idea.\n\nAs necessary background, the later Middle Ages were *zealous* about the strength and permanence of the marriage bond. We can even see ambivalent attitudes towards the acceptability of remarrying after the death of a spouse.\n\nThe word \"polygamy\" today conjures up the stereotypical picture of one husband living with multiple wives in the same house or in nearby homes as one family (unified or segmented). TV cop show fans will also recognize the inevitable plot-of-the-week with the man who leads a double life and is married in each one. *Bigamia* in the Middle Ages would have referred to both of these situations, of course.\n\nBut this context, I believe, is referring to a different type of *bigamia*. Husbands would go off to war, and then...not come home. Were they dead? Were they coming home? What was the wife supposed to do, especially if she couldn't support herself? This was a *major* concern for the Church. (Bigamy was actually an ecclesiastical *and* secular crime). Popes and synods *repeatedly* decreed that wives needed official proof of their husbands' deaths in war in order to remarry, like Raymond of Penafort (ca 1275) wanting an oath from the husband's commander in battle that he really, truly had died. The listed punishments were severe, from multiyear exile to execution. But canon law following Gratian actually recommended leniency for women who married out of the belief that their husbands had died, recognizing the impossible situation they were in.\n\nSara McDougall has shown, however, that women tended to be prosecuted much more rarely for bigamy than men: it was a crime gendered male in much the way that adultery was gendered female. (Probably, again, for practical reasons). Specifically studying the time period in question--the middle of the 15th century, she writes that women were just as often \"up to something that greatly resembled bigamy,\" but it did not result in punishment the way men's behavior did. The cases she identified with men being *prosecuted* were not female soldiers, of course, but husbands and wives separated when they fled the ravages of war. The women who engaged in bigamy-like behavior and were *not* punished, represent wives of MIA soldiers.\n\nI'm guessing that this is what your author has misinterpreted as \"one generation legalization of polygamy.\" German states...well...I guess he can misinterpret France, too. It miiiight be some wildly misremembered reference to the mess involving Philip von Hesse in/after the Reformation, but it's probably just an error among errors.\n\nTag /u/Valkine :)"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://imgur.com/DvN5cdW"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9mwv7s
|
As a soldier in the civil war, politics and home states aside, which side would a soldier rather be fighting for?
|
Was life just generally tough all round for troops fighting in the civil war or from food to medicine did any side have some sort of edge?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/9mwv7s/as_a_soldier_in_the_civil_war_politics_and_home/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e7i9hgp"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It really depends when and where, but for most part the Union. Though the Confederacy was very agricultural it consistantly failed to supply enough food and clothing, aswell as wages, after a certain point. These problems got worse for the Confederacy as the war went on. Near the end of the war most Confederate soldiers were half starved and recieving rations of nothing more than hardtack, and not even in sizable quantities. Since the beginning the Confederacy had problems providing clothing and next to no winter coats were produced and getting a replacement garment was difficult for most soldiers, one of the big reasons behind the common perception of raggled and worn Confederate soldiers. For money, Confederate soldiers were generally paid in relatively worthless CSA dollars and far less then they were promised. \n\nAnd if nothing else, the Confederacy resulted to conscription far before the Union did, and the penalties for not complying were harsh.\n\nTo sum up how the Union compares, they had a surplus in all of the above mentioned, \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6ix9ev
|
Why do astronomers think a collision caused Uranus' extreme tilt yet it's moons are also tilted?
|
Tilted, as in spinning in the same axis relative to our Sun. Yet it's moons have the same axis as Uranus, so collisions did all that? Sounds unlikely.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6ix9ev/why_do_astronomers_think_a_collision_caused/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dj9zkq5"
],
"score": [
33
],
"text": [
"This is generally *not* the consensus explanation any longer in planetary science.\n\nSome 30 years ago, it was the standard answer that Uranus' odd axial tilt was the result of a giant impact. Bear in mind, though, that this was relatively soon after the Apollo missions had confirmed that our Moon had formed via giant impact (although there's evidence now that even this may not be so straightforward).\n\nSo, this may have been a case of \"when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.\" Giant impacts started being used to explain everything a bit odd in the solar system. Uranus is weirdly tilted? Must've been hit by something! Huge cliffs on Miranda? Must've been hit by something! Weird two-tone coloration on Iapetus? Must've been hit by something! Neptune has a mysterious source of internal heat? Must've been hit by something!\n\nThis hypothesis started waning about 15 years ago when impact simulations were getting good enough to show that it's exceptionally difficult to produce an impact that's large enough to tilt Uranus but not completely obliterate the planet. It's a little more likely to do this with multiple impacts, but still not exactly easy.\n\nThe most likely scenario at this point is that Uranus had some kind of gravitational near-miss, enough to induce a tidal torque that could turn its axial tilt. There's also some evidence that this scenario would require ejecting some mass in the process, possibly a big moon. The remaining moons would eventually fall in line with the new inclination angle of Uranus' equator due to tidal forces acting over billions of years. This explanation also has the neatness that it may explain why Uranus doesn't have a big moon, which we'd expect from most formation scenarios; moreover, there are at least some formation scenarios that suggest Uranus and Neptune swapped orbits early on, providing ample opportunity for this gravitational near-miss to occur."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2iv0cf
|
why is the name of the letter "w" so different from all the other letters?
|
Why does it have 3 syllables to every other letters' one?
Why does the name for "W" start with a "D?"
Why isn't it just called "whuh?"
WHAT'S GOING ON?!!!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2iv0cf/eli5_why_is_the_name_of_the_letter_w_so_different/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl5pol9",
"cl5puok",
"cl5px0f",
"cl5q8rl"
],
"score": [
4,
10,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the letter originated from the lack of a letter representing the sound. Originally either a v or uu was used, giving it the name 'double u'.",
"In many languages, W does have a monosylabic name.\n\nW is one of the more recent letters to develop. If you look at old documents - like the Bayeux Tapestry, you'll see it written out as 'UU' . At the time, U and V were also the same letter. The names of letters change over time, and people already abbreviate it as 'dubba' or 'dub' so it will probably change in the future, but that change is probably going to be slow.\n\n_URL_0_\n",
"Well, the name is pretty self explanatory -- it's called \"double-U\" because it used to be written as two of the letter \"u.\" It didn't get its own name (\"whuh\") because it wasn't considered it's own letter; it was considered two of another letter. \n\nIt was written as two of the letter \"u\" because it sounds kind of like a letter \"u\" (that is, it is a really short \"u\" sound), and we already had a letter that was written as one letter \"u\". \n\n",
"The Romantic alphabet (the alphabet of the Romans, which with few variations is the one used today by English, French, Spanish, German, etc) did not have the letters \"u\" or \"w\". In Latin, the letter \"v\" has the formal pronunciation of \"vwuh\", shifting from \"vw\" (no vowel sound) to \"ou\" (somewhere between \"uh\" and \"oo\") - it is both a vowel and a consonant, kinda like today's \"y\".\n\nAs language shifted and Latin split into the Romantic languages, the alphabet also changed. \"v\" was established as having the \"vw\" sound, with \"u\" (literally a v with a curved bottom) took the \"ou\". Later, writers began to use two \"v\"s to signify the softer \"w\" pronunciation, while \"v\" solidified as the hard \"v\" today. A formality turned \"vv\" into its own letter, \"w\". Most Romantic languages call it double-\"v\"; only English calls it double-\"u\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W#Name"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2aj1ax
|
how does your computer store memory when there is no battery left?
|
My computer has been dead for over 3 weeks but when I charged it and turned it back on. Not only did it have all of my latest internet tabs, but it also still has all my files.
How does it store this data without any energy? Could I ever lose some of my files if my computer is dead for a longer time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aj1ax/eli5how_does_your_computer_store_memory_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"civofdj",
"civx98a"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"\n\"Memory\" is usually used to refer to RAM (random access memory). RAM requires power to keep its data.\n\nFiles are usually not kept in RAM for this reason. Instead files are kept on a mass storage device called a *hard drive*. Traditionally a hard drive is a spinning disk. A part called a *head* sits on top of the disk and can magnetize tiny areas, or sense the existing magnetism. The disk doesn't need any power to stay magnetized.\n\nNowadays traditional magnetic hard disks are often replaced by SSD or Solid State Drive which are based on the same Flash technology as memory cards or small portable USB drives [1]. SSD costs more per gigabyte, and aren't available in the same large sizes as hard drives. But many people choose to buy SSD anyway, because they are silent, use less power, and have better random access performance. (When software needs to read data from a traditional hard drive, it has to wait for the disk to spin until the needed area is underneath the head.)\n\nAs for your open applications and Internet tabs: Those are usually kept in RAM. If you *suspend* your PC, it keeps the RAM powered, but shuts down the rest of the system. If you *hibernate* your PC, it writes the contents of the RAM to disk, to be loaded next time. You can explicitly tell your PC to either suspend or hibernate. Your PC's power management settings (somewhere in Control Panel on Windows) determine whether it will suspend or hibernate when you close the lid or leave it sitting unattended for a while.\n\n- Suspending, and restarting from suspend, both happen in a few seconds.\n\n- Hibernating, and restarting from hibernate, both take a minute to access the disk.\n\n- Suspending uses a little bit of power, and will drain your battery in a few days. Usually laptops have a blinking LED to warn you of this.\n\n- Hibernating uses no power, since the machine turns all the way off. (Except for the system clock, which is *always* powered.)\n\n- Suspending will keep all your open tabs and currently running applications, as long as there is AC or battery power available.\n\n- Hibernating will keep all your open tabs and current applications, even if there is no battery or AC power for an extended period of time.\n\n- A full shutdown will close all applications and the operating system; the system must start over from totally blank RAM contents.\n\nSince you reported Internet tabs remaining open even after a loss of AC and battery power, you hibernated your system the last time you used it, before the loss of power.\n\n[1] _URL_0_\n",
"Well ram is lost when the power goes but the hard drive saves data permenanly and some computers mainly laptops when low on battery will save a sort of pause file to the harddrive before shutting down and when it comes back on teh file can be loaded and everything restored to the exact state it was in before it ran out of power."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29wv9c/eli5_how_exactly_is_data_electronically_stored_on/"
],
[]
] |
|
k1ftj
|
Why can't an Atom fall through another one?
|
So why is there a collision instead?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/k1ftj/why_cant_an_atom_fall_through_another_one/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2gsazk",
"c2gsazk"
],
"score": [
8,
8
],
"text": [
"The negatively charged electrons around each atom repel each other.",
"The negatively charged electrons around each atom repel each other."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
q7e58
|
Do objects cast shadows in the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum?
|
Why does visible light get blocked by objects, but for example radio waves travel through walls and the like?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/q7e58/do_objects_cast_shadows_in_the_rest_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3vc5fd",
"c3vcidg",
"c3vd6ks",
"c3vdq5d",
"c3vfbtk",
"c3vfokm",
"c3vfv91",
"c3vgvkl",
"c3vps1p"
],
"score": [
40,
31,
111,
7,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on the composition of the object and the type of EM radiation. For example, ordinary glass in opaque to UV light and would therefore cast a shadow. The metal grating on the window of your microwave is opaque to microwaves and lead is opaque to x-rays.",
"Different objects are opaque to different frequencies. Many metals will actually block radio waves. However, there's another subtlety involved: The longer your wavelengths, the easier it is to curve around structures. So radiowaves (which have much longer wavelengths than visible light) easily curve around buildings and other obstacles. ",
"X Ray film is essentially capturing the x ray shadow of the various body components being photographed. ",
"Radio waves have such a long wave length that the waves simply oscillate around most objects. Radio waves will be blocked by a mountain, for example. Typically, an object will not scatter and disrupt E/M waves if it it's much smaller than the wavelength, though there are exceptions depending on the material (especially the free-electron density of the material, or the number of movable charges in the material).",
"Every material has a map of which frequencies it is transparent and which it is opaque. For example, water is opaque at the microwave frequency (this is why it absorbs energy, heating your food) and Iron is transparent at a narrow range in the x-ray spectrum.",
"Read this:\n_URL_0_",
"Yet another quick example of shadows - try IR radiation (warmth). A shade is cooler than out under the sun because the trees are opaque to IR.\n\nIf you've ever looked at a heat-seeking missile and wondered why you see a shiny opaque dome at the head but no \"camera\" or \"lens\", it's because they use lenses/domes made out of sapphire or other IR transparent material.",
"Radio waves have a huge wavelength, therefore they have not much energy. But a certain amount of energy is needed to interact with the electrons in the atom. If a wave has not enough energy to interact with an electron, or the amount of energy needed for the electron to be stimulated is too high, it will simply not interact with the atom and just pass through as if nothing happend.",
"[Remote Sensing Tools for Exploration: Observing and Interpreting the Electromagnetic Spectrum](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_spectroscopy"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Remote-Sensing-Tools-Exploration-ebook/dp/B0041N3GXU/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1330398567&sr=1-1&tag=bookforyoums-20"
]
] |
|
2ppwmw
|
why is stephen hawking a household name while other people who made great scientific contributions in the same field are generally unknown?
|
Is it both his brilliance and his disability or would he be just as famous if he wasn't wheelchair bound?
What keeps other scientists out of pop culture (for the most part) but Hawking seems like a rock star?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ppwmw/eli5_why_is_stephen_hawking_a_household_name/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmyx8fn",
"cmyxbxd",
"cmyxe5s"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
9
],
"text": [
"He's easily recognizable, for one. Secondly, his book \"A Brief History of Time\" was hugely popular when it came out and went a long way towards making him a household name.",
"He is not only a scientists but also a huge science popularizer. He wrote books for non-physicists, was in a lot of documentaries, etc. \n\nHis disability also plays role, but he is more Neil deGrasse Tyson than Peter Higgs.\n\nMost scientist don't care about being in pop culture, they want to do their job, but there are also guys who promote scientific achievements and try to explain to average person what scientists are doing.",
"His disability made him very unique but most people know him for his immensely popular book, A Brief History of Time. It contains wonderful explanations about very complex subjects like space-time. Other major scientists don't become pop stars because they don't do anything that would make them recognized. Unlike popular scientists such as Michio Kaku, Hawkings book was also well liked by the scientific community since it didn't grossly misrepresent and sensationalize science so he also gets respect from insiders. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
s8did
|
Ok, so my stomach tells me it's time to eat, how does the body know when it's time to get some fluids in your system?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/s8did/ok_so_my_stomach_tells_me_its_time_to_eat_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4bwyaj",
"c4bzpcl"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically how much salt you have in your blood will trigger chemical responses in your hypothalamus that will trigger a thirst response.\n\n_URL_0_",
"When the water potential [concentration of water/the amount of water versus ions you get from salt and other substances] of your blood drops below a certain 'threshold level', osmoreceptors [water detecting cells] in your hypothalmus [in the brain] pick this up. The pituitary gland then sends out a signal/hormone called ADH which make the kidneys retain water (explaining why your urine is more concentrated) and the hypothalmus also signals for the sensation of thirst so that you drink and more water enters the body. This restores the water potential to a safe level."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirst"
],
[]
] |
||
p28u2
|
Why is it so rare to find a fossil of a recent human ancestor when they're only a few million years old?
|
According to [_URL_2_](_URL_0_), it's been estimated that there are about 2,100 complete dinosaur skeletons in museums and such.
But browsing the [Wikipedia](_URL_1_) article for Australopithecus, it seems that there are only a few fossils of them, and only fragments of bone, no nearly complete skeletons.
Why does there seem to be so many more dinosaur fossils from 65 million years ago then primate fossils from just a few million years ago. Were there conditions on the earth then that preserved them longer? Is it easier to find fossils when they're a result of a mass extinction? Why?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/p28u2/why_is_it_so_rare_to_find_a_fossil_of_a_recent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3lxa7w",
"c3lxb34",
"c3lxx9g",
"c3lyf58",
"c3m2lmp"
],
"score": [
13,
32,
7,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"The many dinosaur fossils are from many species who existed at various times over a period of over a hundred millions.\n\nAustralopithecus is a single species that existed for only about 1 million years.",
" > Why does there seem to be so many more dinosaur fossils from 65 million years ago then primate fossils from just a few million years ago.\n\n\nThree big reasons come immediately to mind:\n\n1) \"Dinosaur\" encompasses a very, very broad spectrum of creatures. If you pick any one such creature, you will probably find that we have very few fossils of that species.\n\n2) The non-avian dinosaurs were around for almost 200 million years. That's a lot of time in which to lay down fossils. Australopithecus, on the other hand, was only around for maybe 2 million years. That's not a lot of time in which to lay down fossils.\n\n3) The environment in which Australopithecus lived wasn't particularly conducive to fossil formation.",
"Dinosaurs represent a huge group of animals, spread over a hundred million years. Human ancestors consist of a relatively tiny group of primates, spread over a relatively tiny geographic area, and over a relatively tiny timescale. It would be more surprising if we had a couple of thousand of them, honestly.",
"1- it seems hominid populations were limited in extent\n\n2- their habitat was lousy for fossil preservation (arid savanna)\n\n3 - so called \"dinosaur beds\" are often the result of massive drowning during migratory river crossings, these kinds of numbers and groupings and behavior were not usual for hominids.",
"The study of how things become fossils is known as taphonomy, literally meaning \"laws of burial\".\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe two most important things that controls an organism's chance of burial are having hard parts and dying someplace where it can be rapidly buried. Being buried removes an organism from the biosphere and into the lithosphere. The biosphere has things that want to eat you, light, heat, wind, and so on - things that will destroy remains. Oceans have a positive rate of net deposition, but on lands you basically only have rivers and lakes - and most dinosaur bones are found in river deposits. Arid savannah is a terrible environment for net deposition in comparison. \n\n\nThere isn't any evidence that mass extinctions produce special bone beds. Consider for example a species that lasts 2 million years with a generational span of 10 years - that means that there are 200,000 generations in however much depth of rock you have. It wouldn't be unusual to see 2 million years represented by 200m of rock, which means that each generation only has 1cm of rock. Since that is thinner than the bones we're discussing, it is pretty obvious that you wouldn't expect a special pattern caused by mass extinction unless it had a different paradigm for preservation potential. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/dinosaur-bones-amp-fossils",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus_afarensis#Notable_fossils",
"scholastic.com"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taphonomy"
]
] |
|
6lfoss
|
how does smacking a device fix/ turn it on?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6lfoss/eli5_how_does_smacking_a_device_fix_turn_it_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djtgcth"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"* it can dislodge a stuck mechanical component, like a fan\n* it can reposition loose connections\n* it can scatter dust and debris that was interfering with proper operation\n* it can make you think you did something, when simply waiting would also work\n\nAs devices have moved more towards solid state and on chip functionality, fixing things by hitting them have become less common."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1ot01w
|
in video games, why are some players affected by specific bugs, while others are not?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ot01w/eli5_in_video_games_why_are_some_players_affected/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccv9kik",
"ccvaby8"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"It depends on the bug. Sometimes the hardware is different. Sometimes the software environment is different. Sometimes the players take different actions.",
"As Phage0070 says, there's a a lot going on.\n\nReproducable bugs - say a hole in a floor or whatever, it's just a matter of getting yourself into that situation and it happens to everyone.\n\nBut some bugs are really difficult to pin down. If your CPU is overheating it can do some calculations wrong - also if it's failing, overclocked or otherwise partially defective. Talk about a nightmare. If I ask a CPU what is 1+1 a billion times and it gives me the answer of 0 twice you have something that can cause all sorts of bugs and there's no easy way to fix it - and yes, that can happen. Harddrives can fail to read a piece of data, memory could have one little thing wrong with it etc.\n\nThen there's software and hardware versions and all the complications that come with that. \n\nNewer games are very very complicated, so even a reproduceable bug may only occur if you do a set of things in a specific order or specific way - so you only notice if you do E- > B- > A- > C- > D- > F, if you do any other order to get to - > F it might work fine. \n\n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
10rtfa
|
why is it so difficult to loose an accent when speaking in a non-native tongue. Even after years of practice.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/10rtfa/why_is_it_so_difficult_to_loose_an_accent_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6g3a7r",
"c6g3fv1",
"c6g6e19"
],
"score": [
5,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"It's called stagnation in Second Language Acquisition studies. It is a highly contested topic. Some claim that anyone can learn to speak accent free, some say it's impossible for many people. Since they can't even agree whether it exists, they also fight over the mechanism.",
"When someone first begins learning a second language, they will generally transfer a lot of rules, pronunciations,etc over from their native language. At the beginning of language learning, a person will need to focus deeply and consciously on each utterance, pronunciation, grammar, etc. After a point, ' Routinization' sets it and more and more of the complexities of speaking become unconscious and effortless, more like speaking a native language. This causes something called [Fossilization](_URL_1_). Basically once the speaker stops consciously forming each utterance and starts running on autopilot, whatever accent or mispronunciations they've already developed will remain except for when they are making a specific effort to speak correctly. Especially in fast, spontaneous, or casual speech, they will use the fossilized procunciations.\n\nImagine I told you that the correct pronunciation of the word 'the', was actually a 'ch' sound instead of 'th'at the beginning, and you decided do use this new pronunciation, in careful speech you could probably make the modifications mentally, but it wouldn't be hard to imagine slipping back to the 'wrong' pronunciation when speaking quickly or casually, as that pronunciation has been routinized.\n\nBasically the reason years of practice don't fix an accent, is that spending years practicing doing something wrong doesn't help you get better at doing it right.\n\nThis Podcast goes into Routinization in some more detail. [Routinization] (_URL_0_)",
"One reason is that languages are made up of many different sounds, and when learning a second language, we are often exposed to sounds that we have never had to make in our native language. Vowels are pronounced differently, or certain consonants just don't exist in our first language. We have trained our facial and oral muscles for our entire lives to utter certain sounds with ease, whereas our mouths are not trained to make other sounds, so we have an accent when trying to pronounce these sounds that we have never had to utter before. In this sense, it is purely muscular. If you suddenly had to force yourself to walk completely differently (while still having the ability to walk as you normally would now!), you would likely never adjust to the new way of walking because it goes against what has felt natural to you for your entire life.\n\nAlso, stress patterns differ from one language to another, and these patterns are so deeply ingrained in our speech patterns that to change them and put the accent on different syllables or to change our tone of voice is extremely difficult. For example, in English it is normal to not speak in a monotone voice - we will raise and lower our pitch throughout a sentence, but this is not done as much in other languages, such as French. I apparently sound funny when I speak in French because of this, but it's not something that I can even force myself to control - my voice just raises and lowers without me even realizing it!\n\nSource: I study Second Language Teaching and have also taken several Linguistics classes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://linguistics.podbean.com/2011/12/29/episode-18-routinization/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlanguage_fossilization"
],
[]
] |
||
3vxyg8
|
how do discount mobile carriers work? like boost mobile or metropcs.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vxyg8/eli5_how_do_discount_mobile_carriers_work_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxrmcej"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They purchase network time in bulk and then resell it. Most discount carriers are consumer-focused, which means that a large portion of the network traffic will happen outside of business hours. And that's why they get such a great deal, since the network operators sell network time at premium rates for business users, who use it largely during business hours."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1uvfvh
|
what is the criteria for killing civilians in war?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uvfvh/eli5_what_is_the_criteria_for_killing_civilians/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cem1qtt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Assuming Legally.\n\nIt depends on a lot. I am going to assume we are talking about a war in which both states or entities follow the Geneva conventions specifically the third one and the fifth article in that one.\n\nNow for a civilian to be killed legal they need to be doing something unlawful to the rules of war, hence being called an Unlawful Combatant. This term however is never said in the conventions at Geneva or the Hague. However assuming that they are correct we move on. Off the top of my head things that would make a civilian an UC would be spying(duh), Sabotage, and taking up arms. Now the first two are self explanatory, you get caught and you are not a uniformed fighting force you are fucked, probably shot, but if your captured there are pretty good odds you will be executed, sometimes after a trail sometimes not. Geneva conventions state that they have a right to a trail, if they are captured. Now on to the taking up arms thing, now this is where I am no longer talking about Geneva conventions, now I am talking about ROEs. ROEs are rules of engagement, which the lawyer boys come up with so we can legally shot someone who looks like a civilian but isn't but is. Usually they are like fire back if fired upon, or carrying something lets say a shovel. If they have that then the nation that has those ROEs rules them no longer to be civilians but Enemy Combatants, thus engage-able.\n\nBasically in this mountain of text, if they do crap that is hostile they are engage-able (I like this word I made it up). So shooting at combatants or facilitating a war effort. Also you should know that unlawful combatants is a controversial topic, and I tend to have a prejudice with this sort of thing, so take what I say with a grain of salt.\n\nedit; Assuming Illegally I think they just have to be evil?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
tk0lo
|
How is it that when you throw a non-flying insect from very high (from their perspective) it walks away (apparently) unscated ?
|
When you throw an ant from a meter or more, it still runs away in no time. However, if I was thrown from near 100x my own height...
Something to do with exoskeleton/endoskeleton?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/tk0lo/how_is_it_that_when_you_throw_a_nonflying_insect/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4n9oki",
"c4nafn4"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Terminal velocity for a tiny object is quite low -- they fall slowly.",
"Not only from their perspective but also from ours or anything else's for that matter. For most small insects it is impossible for them to die from falling, due to their low terminal velocity (explained in other comments.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
20hge2
|
how does antivirus antimalware works? what do you mean by "definition"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20hge2/eli5_how_does_antivirus_antimalware_works_what_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg39ad4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Antivirus software have database of every known virus (up to that time) and they compare file content with their database to see if anything in that file has same or similar content as viruses. As new viruses and malware in general is created non stop, from time to time your antivirus software needs to update their database of known viruses. That virus database is sometimes referred as \"definitions\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
17d9h4
|
- what does direct x do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17d9h4/eli5_what_does_direct_x_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c84fqfi",
"c84fwu3",
"c84hnr2",
"c84i66g",
"c84iaat",
"c84ijhz",
"c84je2u",
"c84o22h"
],
"score": [
5,
49,
4,
36,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"DirectX is a tool for graphics development. Imagine you are creating a video game. You want to make Mario in 3D. You could write code from scratch to draw pixels on the screen (little dots) that will eventually make polygons (triangles) that will eventually look like Mario. Or, you could use the DirectX tools to do that.\n\nThere is still a lot of coding to be done, but DirectX does a lot of work around graphics processing so the developers don't have to",
"DirectX talks to your graphics card. Programmers talk in one language (C++ in the case of DirectX) and the graphics card (GPU) talks in another language. DirectX translates for the programmer, so they can talk (program) in C++.",
"First, you need to look at how PC's work - they're built from an array of different components: a motherboard, a CPU, a Graphics card, some RAM and various other bits and pieces. There are literally thousands of different CPUs out there and just as many graphics cards. Mostly they come from Intel, Nvidia or AMD but there are a couple of other manufacturers as well. In any case, each company's components are built entirely different and can work in very different ways. Now imagine that you're a game developer - how do you write code that'll work across all those different chips? The CPU isn't too bad, they all run what's called \"x86\" so as long as the code compiles to it, it should run on any x86 CPU. However graphics chips are an entirely different beast. The \"code\" that would run on an AMD graphics chip would be completely different to the \"code\" that runs on an Nvidia chip. As a game developer, you don't want to have to write your game code twice just to support AMD and Nivida, nor do you want your code breaking every time a new graphics card comes out.\n\nThis is where DirectX comes in. DirectX acts as what's called an \"Abstraction Layer\", which is a fancy way of saying you can write DirectX code once and the various different graphics chips out there will be able to understand it. There's actually a few \"Layers\" here, but at a simple level your game code compiles to DirectX, which your Graphics card's driver reads and interperets, then communicates that code to the graphics card itself. This way, one piece of DirectX code can work on many different graphics cards. It doesn't always work quite so well, which is why driver updates are released regularly.\n\nDirectX isn't just for graphics, though. The \"X\" in DirectX is there because it's made up of many different libraries - the graphics library being Direct3D (There's also a Direct2D graphics library). Other parts are things like DirectDraw and DirectInput, however these are very old components and have been largely replaced these days, which is partly why everyone just assumes that by \"DirectX\" they mean \"Direct3D\".",
"ELI5 version:\n\nBuilding a video game, or other certain applications, is a bit like building a house.\n\nNow, you could build a house all by yourself, but it's going to take a long time. There's a lot that goes into a house. There's the foundation, the frame, electrical, plumbing, isolation, plaster.. A lot goes into a house.\n\nDirect X is, essentially, a team of experienced house builders that you can contract. It's a large team, and they handle a bunch of different things, so depending on how you want to use them, you could have them do all the plumbing, wiring and foundation work for you while you focus on the frame and plaster.\n\nUsing Direct X allows house builders to focus more on the parts of the house that people will actually see, rather than the stuff that's in the walls but is still very important to the total package.\n\nAs new features are come up with (faucets with motion sensors! dimmer switches!), Direct X gets updates. And since the way games check for the direct X version is very clumsy, they will usually opt to install a version of Direct X that they know has all the features necessary for their game to run.\n\nTL;DR: Direct X is the Home Depot of game design. There's alternatives, or even doing it yourself, but it's a pretty standard short cut to common game engine features.",
"directx is fairly comprehensive a set of libraries to program multimedia applications, like games and video processing programs.\n\nnot only does it handle 3d graphics, but also 2d acceleration, gamepad/joystick inputs, music and networking. i think it is portable to xbox consoles as well.\n\n",
"Its an interface that lets programmers talk to the graphics card and tell it to draw things.",
"Also, why the fuck do I have to download it everytime I install a new game? ",
"In the old days, many applications communicated directly with much of the PC hardware and, as a result, could crash your computer if not written well enough. Microsoft tried to fix this problem by placing all\nhardware under the control of Windows, but programmers balked because Windows added too much work for the video process and slowed down everything. For the most demanding programs, such as\ngames, only direct access of hardware would work.\n\nThis need to “get around Windows” motivated Microsoft to unveil a new set of protocols called DirectX.\nProgrammers use DirectX to take control of certain pieces of hardware and to talk directly to that\nhardware; it provides the speed necessary to play the advanced games so popular today. The primary\nimpetus for DirectX was to build a series of products to enable Windows to run 3-D games. That’s not to\nsay that you couldn’t run 3-D games in Windows before DirectX; rather, it’s just that Microsoft wasn’t\ninvolved in the API rat race at the time and wanted to be. Microsoft’s goal in developing DirectX was to\ncreate a 100-percent stable environment, with direct hardware access, for running 3-D applications and\ngames within Windows.\n\nDirectX is not only for video; it also supports sound, network connections, input devices, and other parts\nof your PC. Each of these subsets of DirectX has a name, such as DirectDraw, Direct3D, or DirectSound.\n\n* DirectDraw Supports direct access to the hardware for 2-D graphics\n* Direct3D Supports direct access to the hardware for 3-D graphics—the most important part of DirectX\n* Directlnput Supports direct access to the hardware for joysticks and other game controllers\n* DirectSound Supports direct access to the hardware for waveforms\n* DirectMusic Supports direct access to the hardware for MIDI devices\n* DirectPlay Supports direct access to network devices for multiplayer games\n* DirectShow Supports direct access to video and presentation devices\n\nMicrosoft constantly adds to and tweaks this list. As almost all games need DirectX and all video cards\nhave drivers to support DirectX, you need to verify that DirectX is installed and working properly on\nyour system. To do this, use the DirectX Diagnostic Tool (type dxdiag in cmd).\n\nSo, what does DirectX do for video cards? Back in the bad old days before DirectX became popular with\nthe game makers, many GPU makers created their own chip-specific APIs. 3dfx had Glide, for example,\nand S3 had ViRGE. This made buying 3-D games a mess. There would often be multiple versions of the\nsame game for each card. Even worse, many games never used 3-D acceleration because it was just too\nmuch work to support all of the different cards.\n\nThat all changed when Microsoft beefed up DirectX and got more GPU makers to support it. That in turn\nenabled the game companies to write games by using DirectX and have them run on any card out there.\nThe bottom line: When Microsoft comes out with a new version of DirectX, all of the GPU companies\nhurry to support it or they will be left behind.\n\n*(Long, but everything you need to know about DirectX. Taken from CompTIA A+ Exam Guide)*"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
c5s0lf
|
how do steering wheels run the electrics for media/infotainment controls through the steering column when a steering wheel can turn multiple revolutions in both directions? don't wires get twisted to the point of giving out?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c5s0lf/eli5_how_do_steering_wheels_run_the_electrics_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"es3odsy",
"es3ottd"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Clock spring. It’s basically a spiral of wire in the wheel rolled up loosely so it can be wound tighter or looser depending on the direction you’re turning.",
"A device called a turn clock holds a small loop of felexible wire in a donut shape. The wire winds up in one direction and unwinds in the other. Most can go 3 1/2 turns before they brake."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5olicp
|
why do many artists when performing live sometimes sing with slight differences than the original recorded song? is it intentional?
|
I am talking about little differences, like the tone in a word or etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5olicp/eli5_why_do_many_artists_when_performing_live/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dck7kaa",
"dck7lty",
"dckb7r1"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"They get sick of singing \"just like the record\". Sometimes they can't the high notes anymore. They may want to give you a \" unique version\" since you paid so much for the ticket. Sometimes they improvise or forget , and sometimes they are drunk, stoned, or tired . Take your pick. ",
"It is more than intentional, it is often the only way they can perform the song.\n\nA studio environment is different than a live environment. A studio recording is going to be highly produced and edited in a highly controlled environment. A live performance is going to have worse acoustics, but the artist can often play off of the audience.\n\nThose very different environments call for different techniques.",
"Sometimes it's intentional. Call it Improvisation. Other times, the live performance is how they really sound. What you hear on the recorded song might have been sung multiple times, edited, mixed, remixed, mastered, remastered etc till it gets out."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1ce23n
|
Is there any evidence to support the claim that the Nazis made soap from holocaust victims?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1ce23n/is_there_any_evidence_to_support_the_claim_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9fnj2p",
"c9fox5l",
"c9fs2a6",
"c9fzh86"
],
"score": [
28,
75,
10,
4
],
"text": [
"[Here](_URL_0_) you can find some information about it, mostly aimed against claims made by Holocaust deniers.\n\n > \n\nLong story short, there are reasons to believe that the Nazis *tried* to experiment with the use of human fat to produce soap, but that it was not something that was done on a significant scale. Something similar happens with the claims that they made lampshades out of human skin: it seems that someone floated the idea, but it was never executed to a significant scale.\n\nOf course, that such horrific ideas could not only be openly proposed but even semi-seriously considered speaks volumes about the environment created by the Nazis.",
"The Nazis didn't make soap out of Holocaust victims. Apart from one attempt, about which more later.\n\nFirst of all, I want to point out that this 'soap myth' is very often used by Holocaust deniers to further their dubious agenda, as in \"the Germans never made soap out of the Jews, *therefore the Holocaust didn't happen*, it's all lies.\" \n\nNow, if it didn't happen, where does the myth come from? \n\n* Wars tend to generate a lot of rumours as well as propaganda. The first mention of Germans making soap out of human fat has been traced back to [WWI Allied propaganda](_URL_0_). \n\n* The same rumour was circulating in Auschwitz as early as 1942. Considering the very real horrors that went on there daily, it is hardly surprising that this would have seemed plausible to the inmates. Some suggest that the SS might have started the rumour to further intimidate the inmates. Further credence was lent to it by the fact that inmates were issued cakes of soap with the initials RIF (*Reichsstelle für Industrielle Fettversorgung*, Federal Agency for Industrial Fat Processing), which were erroneously interpreted as *Reines Jüdisches Fett* (Pure Jewish Fat), the I being mistaken for a J.\n\n* The rumour was repeated in American newspapers, after Rabbi Stephen Wise mentioned the soap rumors to the press in New York City on November 24, 1942. These reports reached SS head Heinrich Himmler who wrote to the Gestapo: \"In view of the large emigration movement of Jews, I do not wonder that such rumors come to circulate in the world. We both know that there is present an increased mortality among the Jews put to work. You have to guarantee to me that the corpses of these deceased Jews are either burned or buried at each location, and that absolutely nothing else can happen with the corpses at any location. Conduct an investigation immediately everywhere whether any kind of misuse [of corpses] has taken place of the sort as listed in point 1, probably strewn about in the world as a lie. Upon the SS-oath I am to be notified of each misuse of this kind.\" (Himmler to Müller, 30 Nov. 1942, US National Archives, Record Group 242, Microfilm Series T-175/Roll 58/Frame 2521486. As quoted in Breitman, Richard, \"Secrecy and the Final Solution,\" pp. 70-71. )\n\n* The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg mentioned the issue in its Judgment thusly: \"After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances *attempts were made* to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.\" ([Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, vol. 1, p. 252](_URL_5_)(pdf)) The Nuremberg documents also contain testimony of British POW Douglas T. Frost on the soap rumour at Auschwitz: \" The German civilians often threatened the inmates that they would be gassed and made into soap. We were told that quite a few times by the inmates and I personally heard the German civilians make those threats many times. Also I heard the Germans joking among themselves about the same thing. I didn't take it seriously at first but later I wondered whether it might not be true after all. Though I have no personal knowledge, I got the impression that the manufacture of soap from inmates was being done at Auschwitz by rendering the fat from the gassed bodies.\" ([Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10 , vol. 8, p. 624](_URL_4_)(pdf))\n\nNow, what about that one attempt I mentioned at the beginning? This took place on the bodies of Polish (not Jewish) victims by Prof. Rudolph Spanner at the Danzig Anatomic Institute in 1944-45. He used fat from bodies collected from Stutthof concentration camp and a nearby mental hospital, because animal fat was becoming scarce as a result of being used for the manufacture of glycerin. [Source 1](_URL_3_), [Source 2](_URL_2_) [Picture of the soap](_URL_1_). ",
"[Here's a picture I took in the Jewish cemetery in Nice, France in 2007](_URL_0_). The caption reads in English, \"This urn contains soap made from human fat, made by the Germans of the Third Reich from the bodies of our deported brothers.\"",
"Ragh. This post is related although irrelevant, so it will probably be deleted. While the nazis didn't make use of fat from their victims to produce soap they did use the victims hair as material in industrial conveyer belts and the ashes of bodies at Majdanek were used as fertilizer. While those facts easily make the idea of soap made from corpses believable, it's very likely untrue.\n\nEdit: If anyone's interested I have some pictures I can share. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/soap-01.html"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kadaververwertungsanstalt",
"http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/stutthof/soap-photos/ussr-393.jpg",
"http://chgs.umn.edu/histories/myths.html",
"http://ejpress.org/article/11052",
"http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/NT_war-criminals_Vol-VIII.pdf",
"http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/NT_Vol-I.pdf"
],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/K88tj45.jpg"
],
[]
] |
||
2gedzq
|
what would happen to the earth in the short medium and long term if all life suddenly dissapeared from the planet?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gedzq/eli5_what_would_happen_to_the_earth_in_the_short/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckib03g",
"ckickt1"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm assuming all life is vegetation as well.\n\nShort term: The atmosphere shouldn't really change all too much, until some volcanoes blow up. The ocean will still dissolve C02 but it won't cause any effects. The earth will not raise in temperature as no more people breathing also means no more cars = no more C02.\n\nMedium: Like short term, buildings will collapse, cars will rust etc. Earth looks a bit messy but that's just a superficial change.\n\nLong, long, long, long term: New life develops and wonders wtf it with all these cars and rubble. No grasp on language means that information is useless. Life starts again, probably benefited by any buildings left standing as shelter.",
"This reminds me of a related question, which is: what would happen to earth if humanity disappeared? \n\nYou can find the answer to the last question - and maybe some answers to your question - if you watch the documentary \"AFTERMATH Population Zero\"\n\n _URL_0_\n\nIt's long, but it's worth it.. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/sUqHECc5rPo"
]
] |
||
2spiad
|
why can't i tame a racoon.
|
Why is it that we say certain animals have been domesticated and can be kept as pets but other animals like squirrels racoons etc Can't be tamed? I could understand not being able to train animals that have grown in the wild but why is it not possible to raise a generation of tame racoons that then have tame racoon babies etc etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2spiad/eli5why_cant_i_tame_a_racoon/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnrp4a6",
"cnrpi0r"
],
"score": [
10,
7
],
"text": [
"Wild animals must have certain characteristics in order to be domesticated.\n\n1. The animal must be willing to live off of the food scraps of humans.\n\n2. They need to mature quickly so that a minimum of resources are given to get the animals to a \"useful\" size.\n\n3. They must be willing to breed in captivity and in close quarters.\n\n4. They need to be pleasant and not ill-tempered or quick to anger or quick to get nervous.\n\n5. The need to be calm and controllable and not constantly trying to escape.\n\n6. Their social network must be flexible enough to recognize humans as the head of their hierarchy.\n\nThe vast majority of wild animals do not meet these criteria -- *even with attempts at selective breeding* -- and therefore cannot be domesticated. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between an animal that can be domesticated and one that cannot. Horses have clearly been a domestication success, but zebras on the other had have resisted domestication countless times in countless generations. They remain hostile and fail almost every criteria above. Raccoons are are much the same... some criteria they can live with, others they fail.",
"There is a difference between tame and domesticated. You *can* tame a raccoon and other certain wildlife. What you can't necessarily do is domesticate them. \n\nTaming an animal is getting it to submit to human control. Domesticating it is altering the species over a long period of time so they become suitable for human needs."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
46nlmy
|
what exactly is 'shock torture' and why is it so prevalent in media?
|
Kind of a morbid question. In almost every kind of media from movies, to video games, to TV shows whenever a character is captured and tortured they are always strapped to a chair or hung from the ceiling and repeatedly electrocuted.
Is 'shock torture' actually done in real life and how exactly would it be painful? Also why is 'shock torture' so prevalent in media when it comes to depictions of torture where stuff like waterboarding and other classical forms of torture are more popular and known to the public?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46nlmy/eli5_what_exactly_is_shock_torture_and_why_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d06ige4",
"d06in7e"
],
"score": [
7,
9
],
"text": [
"I'm guessing you've never been electrocuted before, I have (briefly). I was a dumbass kid who touched an electric wire and realised very quickly why the cows were so against coming over here. It's a horrible experience, for me it felt like every cell in my body was about to catch on fire. The worst part was I couldn't let go immediately, I was too busy being zapped to worry about opening my hand. \n\nMy point is if someone clamped a set of jumper leads to your balls, wouldn't you start talking? The CIA worked out a way to turn a towel and a jug of water into a torture device; doing shit with electricity is basic these days.",
"Passing an electrical current through the human body is almost invariably painful. Take a (voluntary) ride on a police-grade Taser if you ever get the chance (with the prongs). It just hurts, alot. Waterboarding is also awful to experience but most people don't understand how excruciating and terrifying it really is, hence why many people continue to justify its classification as \"enhanced interrogation\" rather than torture. \n\nIt's probably so widely seen in media because it's believably painful yet not gory. \n\nIn real life, dictatorships and other bad guys use it because it doesn't leave much in the way of visible marks. This is preferred for plausible deniability (\"we clearly didn't torture him, he has no scars.\") Its also psychologically easier for the torturer, no need to worry about your torture man feeling remorse at the sight of blood. It usually involves little more than activating a battery."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1d72pm
|
Would high caliber actors be able to pass a lie detector test?
|
I hear stories about character actors like Daniel Day Lewis staying in character for entire film shoots. So I wonder, would an actors commitment to their craft aid them in passing a polygraph?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1d72pm/would_high_caliber_actors_be_able_to_pass_a_lie/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9nixwi",
"c9njjo8",
"c9nme2e",
"c9o1t9r"
],
"score": [
12,
21,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Lie detectors don't actually detect lying. It's a confidence trick, played using the machine as a prop. ",
"**Anyone** can pass a polygraph using very simple techniques.\n\nThe whole thing is a sham based on intimidation and trickery. ",
"Lie detectors do not detect lies. They detect physiological responses such as breathing, pulse, and perspiration. All of these *can be* responses to deception, but they can also be responses to anxiety, memories, stress, or any other number of emotions. Polygraph tests are not scientific; they are a tool used to assist in evoking confessions. Anyone can employ [countermeasures](_URL_0_) to reduce responsiveness. \n\nKnowing that the \"test\" works by trying to get a physical response to uncomfortable questions, what kind of person do you think is most likely to pass? ",
"Would a sociopath be more likely to pass the test since they believe they haven't done anything really wrong and therefore wouldn't show anxiety to questions?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph#Countermeasures"
],
[]
] |
|
4yqr6o
|
how does our internal alarm clock work?
|
Not always.. but sometimes I will wake up right before my alarm goes off. And other times ill sleep through it and wake up knowing immediately that ive over slept even when its still dark outside. How is our body able to be this accurate when we sleep for hours on end?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4yqr6o/eli5how_does_our_internal_alarm_clock_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6ptcja",
"d6pxar8",
"d6qi9z8"
],
"score": [
8,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Your body operates on \"circadian rhythms\" which are in effect cycles of hormones in your body, over time with a consistent schedule your body will produce the same hormones at the same times of day, causing the effects mentioned above - waking up, because your body halts production of sleep hormones as it's \"rhythm\" knows it's time to wake up ",
"My aunt can wake up at any desired time. Like if she intends to wake up at 7am, she doesn't set an alarm, she just naturally wakes up at that time, it's always baffled me",
"One of the basic mechanisms we have for telling time \"internally\" is what's called a molecular clock. \n\nCertain cells in your body produce a certain protein at a certain rate (for the sake of argument, let's say 1 million copies per hour of this protein). Then, later, they clear away all of that protein. So if the cell has 20,000,000 copies of the protein (it doesn't actually count them, this is determined by the concentration of the protein, more copies = higher concentration), then it has been about 20 hours. \n\nSecondly, your brain learns to unconsciously identify other cues that indicate approximately what time it is. Changes in lighting, ambient temperature, background noise, and so on can also help your brain guesstimate the time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3fay3u
|
Electrons emit photons, which are absorbed by other electrons. How is it decided which electron will absorb that photon? Do photons have direction?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3fay3u/electrons_emit_photons_which_are_absorbed_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctnna66",
"ctn19wx",
"ctn3jy1"
],
"score": [
2,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"so to answer the gist of your question and not baffle you with more physics you never knew existed.\n\nyes. photons have direction. they will travel through space on a vector and interact with whatever they get close enough to react with.",
"It's more accurate to say that the change in energy of electrons produces light. You can only pinpoint \"which electron\" even exists in a molecule if there is only one. Otherwise, in a multi-electron molecule or atom, there is really no such thing as \"that electron\". We approximate the true system as a collection of electrons that have a discrete existence. The way we typically talk about these transitions is that light is involved whenever a molecule shifts between two overall electronic states.\n\nIt is true that many electronic transitions pretty much involve the transition of one electron from one orbital energy level to another. From a less pendantic standpoint, you can say that \"that electron\" was responsible for the transition. However, there are many electronic transitions that involve several electrons jumping orbitals at once, and it can't be said that any one of them is solely responsible for the light being emitted. ",
"Electrons are not the only things that absorb photons. Other portions of atoms and molecules are able to absorb the energy of photons. Bonds, nuclei and electrons all can absorb photons and differences are determined by the difference in energy between their excited and non-excited states. More specifically:\n\n1. **X-rays:** excite/ionize inner shell electrons (~10^+5 kcal/mol energy transition)\n2. **UV light:** excites/ionizes outer shell electrons (~10^+3 kcal/mol energy transition)\n3. **infrared light:** increases the energy of molecular vibrations (~10^-2 - 10^+1 kcal/mol energy transition)\n4. **microwaves:** increase the energy of molecular rotations (e.g. water!) and sometimes nuclear spin-states (~10^-3 kcal/mol energy transition)\n\nYou can find an infographic and some references on this topic here:\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.practicallyscience.com/the-spectrum-of-microscopic-and-spectroscopic-techniques/"
]
] |
||
lv53r
|
Is there any evidence that keeping a journal (writing down day-to-day activities) will increase your long term memory?
|
Second question - What are the effects of keeping a dream journal?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/lv53r/is_there_any_evidence_that_keeping_a_journal/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2vvvsx",
"c2vvvsx"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There has not been any evidence for the consistent improvement of long-term memory. There have,however, been many methods and effects that may positively influence long-term memory (learning strategies, sleeping consolidates memory, stimulus cues [emotional vs. non-emotional words], etc.) but no tried and true method that will lead to an increase. Many websites and programs offer products and suggestions based on scientific \"evidence\", though to date, no such evidence exists in the main stream literature. That is not to say that modes of improvement are impossible - merely that there are no established, proven methods which will lead to meaningful improvement at the moment.\n\nThat said, research in the field of cognitive reserve suggests that there is an influence of lifetime activities on cognitive well-being into old age. That is, those who have engaged in more enriching daily activities throughout their lifespan will be more likely to maintain a high level of cognitive functioning into late life. Engagement in social and leisure activities, fitness, education, and dietary patterns throughout the lifespan seem to have a positive impact your memory and other cognitive abilities. It is important to note that though these are some of the things that are proven to assist with improving your long-term memory throughout your lifespan, this is quite a ways from being translated into a meaningful, practical strategy.\n\nLast thing worth noting is that there are fairly well-established ways to improve short-term memory through the constant practice of fluid intelligence. Working memory training also has some benefits in this regard.\n\nI can share scientific papers with you about any of these if you would like. Let me know.\n\nIn any event, I have found on non-scientific note that - in my personal life - keeping a journal handy has been useful for many other reasons, such as reducing mental clutter (which has, through subjective measurement, improved my processing speed) and giving myself a window into my own mind, so to speak.\n\nAs far as keeping a dream journal goes, the famous neuroscientist and psychneuroimmunologist Candace Pert swore by it. It is unlikely that there will be practical benefits to this, but it is a good way to gain insight into your mental processes, and perhaps - if you have recurring dreams - a look into what's on your mind.\n\nHope that helps. ",
"There has not been any evidence for the consistent improvement of long-term memory. There have,however, been many methods and effects that may positively influence long-term memory (learning strategies, sleeping consolidates memory, stimulus cues [emotional vs. non-emotional words], etc.) but no tried and true method that will lead to an increase. Many websites and programs offer products and suggestions based on scientific \"evidence\", though to date, no such evidence exists in the main stream literature. That is not to say that modes of improvement are impossible - merely that there are no established, proven methods which will lead to meaningful improvement at the moment.\n\nThat said, research in the field of cognitive reserve suggests that there is an influence of lifetime activities on cognitive well-being into old age. That is, those who have engaged in more enriching daily activities throughout their lifespan will be more likely to maintain a high level of cognitive functioning into late life. Engagement in social and leisure activities, fitness, education, and dietary patterns throughout the lifespan seem to have a positive impact your memory and other cognitive abilities. It is important to note that though these are some of the things that are proven to assist with improving your long-term memory throughout your lifespan, this is quite a ways from being translated into a meaningful, practical strategy.\n\nLast thing worth noting is that there are fairly well-established ways to improve short-term memory through the constant practice of fluid intelligence. Working memory training also has some benefits in this regard.\n\nI can share scientific papers with you about any of these if you would like. Let me know.\n\nIn any event, I have found on non-scientific note that - in my personal life - keeping a journal handy has been useful for many other reasons, such as reducing mental clutter (which has, through subjective measurement, improved my processing speed) and giving myself a window into my own mind, so to speak.\n\nAs far as keeping a dream journal goes, the famous neuroscientist and psychneuroimmunologist Candace Pert swore by it. It is unlikely that there will be practical benefits to this, but it is a good way to gain insight into your mental processes, and perhaps - if you have recurring dreams - a look into what's on your mind.\n\nHope that helps. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
20nmym
|
Is it better for a vehicle to move slowly over a weak bridge?
|
On Sunday's Top Gear (UK car programme) Burma special, the trio had to drive across a bridge they built themselves on trucks. Having built it themselves, the bridge wasn't very stable or strong. Jeremy Clarkson opted for speed, whilst the other two drove across it slowly.
This lead me to question whether speed of a vehicle crossing a bridge affects the likeliness of the bridge collapsing?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/20nmym/is_it_better_for_a_vehicle_to_move_slowly_over_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg55uik",
"cg59x1w",
"cg5mexs"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It is not so much the speed that matters, but the impact loads associated with going over a bridge that is not stable. If there are too many imperfections, this will cause the wheel and tire to go higher up when moving faster and upon impact, will cause higher stresses in the bridge, thus leading to a higher chance of collapse.",
"So many factors. Slower would be better. Rapid changes in forces (impacts) are generally bad. However, by that logic, a speed of zero would be best, yet if the bridge is borderline stable, you probably can't park a lorry on it overnight and expect it to remain standing.\n\nStill, if you drive fast enough to make the bridge fail, you can't outrun gravity by driving even faster, except in Keanu Reeves movies.\n\nAnd since this is TV, one might suspect a few local \"volunteers\" drove across first to test it.",
" There two forces imparted on the bridge by the tires. One the normal force from the weight of the car and the other is a tangential force from friction. The normal force isn't effected much by speed (other than if we go into detail of the surface finish and if the tire maintain contact with the road). Faster the constant speed, the higher the friction force will be to overcome the drag to maintain the speed. Drag increases by the square so driving at 40mph compared to 20 mph will be a 4x load increase. If they started on the bridge and needed to accelerate up to speed, then the force from the tires would be much greater."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ie3n1
|
how does activated charcoal remove poison
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ie3n1/eli5_how_does_activated_charcoal_remove_poison/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuflyrn"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Paramedic here - Activated Charcoal doesn't remove poisons from the body, the thought is that poisons will bind to the Activated Charcoal which in turn prevents it from being absorbed into the blood stream via the GI tract. In reality, there isn't much evidence that Activated Charcoal is very effective, and it is rarely used in modern medicine. It used to be carried on every ambulance in the USA, however most have stopped carrying it years ago due to there being better techniques in the ER to treat poison ingestions, and like I stated above, the benefits of Activated Charcoal are negligible at best. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3ib2zr
|
what needs to happen for there to be a king of england?
|
I don't know much about the Royal family/Monarchy ~~in England~~ but I'm intrigued by it. I don't want the queen to die, so don't think I'm dissatisfied with the Queen or I have any ill-wishes against her. I was basically wondering if it's possible to have a King ~~of England~~ in the first place and then what would have to have for said King to come to "power". I know that the royal family doesn't really hold any power anyway as well.
I probably won't be able to respond till later, but thought that this was an appropriate time to post for the English to comment.
Edit: I realize now that the Queen is more than a queen of just England. Thanks for the responses everyone.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ib2zr/eli5what_needs_to_happen_for_there_to_be_a_king/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuev11b",
"cuev1h5",
"cuev6fi"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"If the Queen dies, or steps down (which isn't really the done thing in the UK), then her son will become King. It's as simple as that.\n\nThe rules for who takes the throne used to favour males. When the reigning monarch dies, it would go to their eldest son, or their eldest daughter if they had no sons. But the rules were changed a couple of years ago, so now it goes to the eldest child regardless of gender.\n\nAlthough that rule was not applied retroactively, and it wouldn't have changed anything anyway because the Queen's eldest child is male. And he only has sons, and then his eldest son happened to have a boy first anyway. So when the Queen dies there probably only be Kings for quite a long time.\n\nedit - Pedantic side note: It makes more sense to talk about the UK rather than specifically England in this case. The United Kingdom is a single kingdom, so there is one 'crown' for the entire thing. Not much about the monarchy relates to England specifically.",
"It's pretty simple under the newest set of laws, being based predominantly on primogeniture. Basically, if the first-born child of the monarch is male, then he will become king. As it stands now, we are looking at a line of kings (absit omen). When the Queen dies, the throne will be inherited by Prince Charles. William will become the Prince of Wales. When Charles in turn dies, William will become king and his son, George, will become Prince of Wales. When William dies, George will become king. I should note, although it is a bit pedantic, that the royal title is a lot more than \"king of England\". Elizabeth II is also queen of Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc. and of course the other states making up the United Kingdom.",
"First, there is no Queen of England, because there is no Kingdom of England. Back at the start of the 17th century the English royal line failed to produce a direct successor so the throne went to the closest relative, King James of Scotland. This brought the two countries together until in 1707 they entered into a formal union creating the Kingdom of Great Britain. The Queens full title is:\n\n > Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith\n\nNow you asked what it would take for there to be a king - all it would take is for the queen to die, at which point the heir presumptive would take the throne - currently that would be the Queens eldest son, Prince Charles. \n\nIt used to be unusual to have a Queen Regnant (as opposed to a Queen Consort, who is the wife of a king) because of the principle of male primogeniture, which meant the oldest son would always inherit before any older sisters, but that rule was changed recently. Still the next two in line after Prince Charles are his son William, and his son George"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
38s8o6
|
Good books on emperors after Augustus?
|
Prefferably not ancient authours. Emperors like Caligula ans/or Nero. Been reading Goldsworthy's biography of Augustus and was looking for a book similar to that about other emperors or known romans.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/38s8o6/good_books_on_emperors_after_augustus/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crxjhml"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I can recommend Aloys Winterling's Caligula: A Biography.\nI read it along with Suetonius' The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, but if you don't want to read ancient authors then just stick with Winterling "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ngwgu
|
Why is it that my ears hurt when descending from a flight?
|
I mean, it hurts so badly, why is this?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/ngwgu/why_is_it_that_my_ears_hurt_when_descending_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c38zofb",
"c38zofb"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You are descending into a region of higher air pressure; the increased pressure presses your eardrums inwards. The reverse happens when you climb; the lowered ambient pressure allows the air behind them to push them out. Either way it hurts and makes your eardrums temporarily less sensitive to vibrations, causing a weird kind of temporary deafness.\n\nEventually air will make its way through your Eustachian tube to equalize pressure on either side of the tympanic membrane and the pain and deafness usually go away instantly.",
"You are descending into a region of higher air pressure; the increased pressure presses your eardrums inwards. The reverse happens when you climb; the lowered ambient pressure allows the air behind them to push them out. Either way it hurts and makes your eardrums temporarily less sensitive to vibrations, causing a weird kind of temporary deafness.\n\nEventually air will make its way through your Eustachian tube to equalize pressure on either side of the tympanic membrane and the pain and deafness usually go away instantly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3mqr4j
|
I've often heard that gravity warps or bends space around it. Is there any change to the geometry of objects in this space?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3mqr4j/ive_often_heard_that_gravity_warps_or_bends_space/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvhp4db"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Not really, beyond the normal effects of gravity, at least in the case of objects that are physically bound together. (Contrast: an abstract object consisting of, say, three very distant galaxies; I'll come back to this.)\n\nThe extent to which gravity can affect the geometry of an object depends on the *tidal force*, or the difference in gravitational force across the size of the object. (The tidal force from the Moon is, surprise, responsible for tides.) But the effect to which this changes the geometry of the Earth depends on the material properties of Earth: the oceans are affected substantially, while the rest of the Earth doesn't respond nearly as much. General relativity tells us that gravity is curved spacetime, but the actual bending of space is not *directly* related to the bending of objects. (As we've seen, it is *indirectly* related through tidal forces and material stresses.)\n\nNow, think about an abstract triangle whose vertices are three very distant galaxies in different directions. (This is probably not what you meant by object, but hey. I'm gonna talk about it anyway.) If space is really curved, the angles of that triangle will *not* add up to 180 degrees, but to more (positive curvature, like a sphere) or less (negative curvature, like a saddle). This is basically how cosmologists can measure the curvature of space with the cosmic microwave background: they look to see if angles make sense in the very distant light of the CMB. And, lo and behold, the universe is very flat. (Maybe not *perfectly* flat, but so far consistent with zero.)\n\n(How does that mesh with gravity curving spacetime? Emphasis on the *time*: we know that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate due to the gravitational effect of dark energy, but this is manifested as curvature in time only; experimentally, space itself is very flat on the largest scales.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1tcgvr
|
Is it possible that the planetary collision that created the Moon was between Earth and Venus?
|
The Moon was likely formed by a collision between the Earth and another planet-sized body. Venus has a retrograde rotation. Is it possible that these two facts are products of the same ancient event?
Edit: And if it wasn't Venus, then what happened to the remaining part of the other planet-sized body that collided with the Earth to produce the Moon? Is it correct to assume that it wouldn't end up losing literally 100% of its mass, and that part of it would still be off in the solar system somewhere?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1tcgvr/is_it_possible_that_the_planetary_collision_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce6lxq4"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"No, the Earth's moon and Venus's rotation aren't related except in the vaguest sense. (They may be the same process, but not the same event.)\n\nVenus's rotation has two possible origins. The first might be tidal locking to the Sun. This same reason one side of the moon always faces the Earth. However, this process might not have had enough time to slow Venus's rotation to what we see today.\n\nSome astronomers invoke a late-formation planetesimal impact to explain the slow rotation. Had this body been large enough and hit at the right angle, it might have been enough to rob Venus of its rotational velocity.\n\nThe impact process also happened on Earth to form the moon. This one hit just right to throw some debris into orbit around Earth, but most of the mass of the impactor ended up inside of Earth. Very little ended up escaping from the gravitational pull of Earth.\n\nThe current idea to explain the needed parameters to form the moon (low-angle, low velocity) is that another large body at a Lagrangian point, gravitational islands of stability where objects can share the same orbit. This is only for small bodies, and as a co-orbiting body gets larger these points get less stable. \n\nEventually, this would-be impactor grew large enough that it was no longer in a stable orbit. Still, it's orbit around the Sun was much like that of the Earth, so when the two eventually ran into one another, it wasn't very fast, and more likely to be at a grazing angle."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7luuma
|
satire and irony
|
No matter how many times I read an example, I can’t grasp it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7luuma/eli5_satire_and_irony/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drp4r1q",
"drp8vk6",
"drpaaqk",
"drpe6h1"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
11,
4
],
"text": [
"Satire - Exaggeration or using a material in a usually comical way to mock it\n\nIrony - Best example is when a man who advocates for more people to take buses gets hit by a bus",
"Irony: When Alanis Morissette writes a song called \"Ironic\" that she thinks contains examples of irony, instead they are all just examples of 'bad luck,' thus she unintentionally writes a song that's ironic.",
"Irony is a part of satire, so we'll start with irony.\n\nThere are a couple forms of irony:\n\nDramatic irony is a situation in which the audience knows something that a character does not. (Juliet isn't really dead. Romeo doesn't know that.) This is typically used to add to the tension of a situation.\n\nClassical irony is the triumph of wit over hubris. We don't typically associate this with irony anymore, but any sort of parlor scene from a detective story is a good example. \n\nVerbal irony is sarcasm and is mostly performative in nature. An intended meaning is dramatically different from an expressed meaning. This is typically indicated by tone, gesture, and circumstance. Paralipsis (talking about something by saying you're not talking about it) is the easiest method of verbal irony to translate from performance to written word.\n\nSituational or cosmic irony is when the outcome of a series of events is different from the expected outcome. For instance, in *The Wizard of Oz* all three of Dorothy's companions are questing for a character trait they felt they lacked and hoped to receive from the allegedly god-like Oz, who in fact lacks the traits the companions sought and would be unable to grant those traits even if he had them himself because is revealed to be a mere mortal. Had Oz been a god, he would still have been unable to grant these gifts, but the situational would have been elevated to the cosmic.\n\nNow satire uses these forms of irony, a context of entertainment and lightheartedness, and a tendency towards absurdity, to make the serious (Bill O'Reilly, colonial attitudes of British landlords to suffering during the Potato Famine) seem silly. (Stephen Colbert, a solution that involved raising Irish children as a food resource for the wealthy points out that the population of a colony is, in fact, a valuable resource regardless of their caloric value.)",
"Satire is a form of social criticism that uses humor to exaggerate some aspect of society you wish to criticize. In *A Modest Proposal*, Jonathan Swift famously criticizes British indifference to the poverty and famine in Ireland by proposing the Irish raise money by selling their children to the rich to eat. By structuring it as the sort of policy suggestion a British politician favoring wealthy British landlords might make, he highlighted the callousness, cruelty, and ineffectiveness of British policy in Ireland.\n\nThere are a number of forms of irony. Verbal irony is when what you say is different from what you mean. Sarcasm is either the lowest form of verbal irony or falls just short of it, depending who you ask. \n\nDramatic irony is when the audience knows something the characters do not, creating suspense. Horror films often employ it, like when the young couple sneaks out into the woods where we know the serial killer is lurking.\n\nSituational irony is a coincidence accompanied by a sudden reversal. In O. Henry's *The Gift of the Magi*, a poor man sells his heirloom pocket watch to buy his wife a fine set of combs for her beautiful long hair. At the same time, she cuts off her hair and sells it to buy a platinum chain for her husband's watch. The coincidence is they both made great sacrifices to buy gifts at the same time, the reversal is both gifts are now useless. Irony is often negative, but in this case is it positive, as it underlines the couple's love for one another."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
hhdy0
|
Has there been any research into whether books or audiobooks are better for learning? And whether there are any gender differences here?
|
Personal anecdote. I'm a guy and reading books mostly just puts me to sleep. They require too much attention. However, if I listen to audiobooks at 2x the speed while doing something physical (e.g. walking, cooking), then the books are awesome and I remember them way better.
My hypothesis is that boys would learn better if given audiobooks instead of books and being allowed to do something physical while listening. This kinda seems logical to me.
So I wonder -- has there been any research into this?
**Edit:** I guess I'm being downvoted for bringing up non-physical gender differences. Didn't expect this from /r/askscience.
**Edit:** I guess I'm not being downvoted after all :)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hhdy0/has_there_been_any_research_into_whether_books_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1vesgz",
"c1vezo4",
"c1vf0mz",
"c1vf9n9",
"c1vfwan",
"c1vgiri",
"c1vgnl7",
"c1vgq5b"
],
"score": [
16,
2,
7,
8,
7,
2,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"I would like to kindly encourage you to not complain so short temperately about being voted down. Also, while it seems logical to you, I entirely fail to see why your hypothesis would apply to boys and not girls.\n\nOther than that I can only conclude that association with physical activity helps memorizing. I'm layman, here is a [link](_URL_0_) possibly related.",
"I haven't seen anything on this. But it seems like a testable hypothesis. ",
"Downvote numbers do not reflect the real number of downvotes, it's an anti spam mechanism. \n\n[Ohh and complaining about downvotes](_URL_0_)",
"I don't have articles off hand, but I'm 99% sure there have been conclusive studies that people learn in different ways. Some people learn better by reading than by doing something by hand, or hearing it. Others can't take in information very well by reading, but can learn very well by listening. \n\nThis is not gender-specific. Believe it or not, the two genders are pretty similar in many ways. \n\nYou appear to be an auditory learner, so listening to the audiobooks is how you learn best. ",
"Yay! A question I can actually answer. :) I used to do learning styles testing for students going into tutoring. I would compare learning strength in Visual/Auditory/Bodily Kinesthetic and see which was strongest (as well four other categories). It's probably anecdotal as the sample size is not large or reflective of the overall population but I did notice that boys frequently scored higher on the auditory section and than girls but -as I said - this could be biased because the majority of kids I tested were diagnosed with some other learning disability (as evidenced by the fact that most of the kids I tested scored highest it BK). You are fortunate and probably score high in auditory and BK since the combination helps you learn. My auditory score was really low and my V & BK were almost tied. :) Different strokes for different folks. :)",
"Perhaps you have ADHD? I used to feel the same way until I started treatment.\n\nAnyway, I'm a male and I've always preferred books (physical copies over electronic). I like to hear the material in my internal voice and appreciate the subtleties that are implied in the text.\nHowever, because of my visual predisposition, I've gotten very good at transcribing lectures. Being able to just listen to the professor and focus on what I'm writing down on the paper, only having to look at the board every once in a while is an invaluable skill for me. \n\nAs for gender difference research, I'd imagine you'd really need to specify what material is being learned. I'm no expert but I think your hypothesis is way too broad to be testable. ",
"How do you play the audio books at 2x?",
"Based on your answers to other posts you seem to be more curious about the difference in the way genders learn rather than the difference in audio vs reading. Have you tried seeing what Google Scholar has to say about the issue? A quick search of [\"differences in learning by gender\"](_URL_1_) yields quite a few articles which seem to be highly relevant.\n\nI'd also recommend looking into the Multiple Intelligences theory for an explanation of why some people tend to do better with learning aurally rather than visually. Again - not an expert, but Google Scholar is your friend with regards to [multiple intelligences and gender](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110119095458.htm"
],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/rPsIg.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=multiple+intelligences+%2B+%2Bgender&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C31&as_ylo=&as_vis=1",
"http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=differences+in+learning+by+gender&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart"
]
] |
|
5ju6lf
|
why is pro wrestling being fake such a criticism of it?
|
Avengers, Gotham, Walking Dead, Frozen, Hunger Games are all fake. in fact, they're even faker than wrestling. but when someone is a wrestling fan, people say "how can you watch that, it's fake". but why that doesn't apply for any other fake show or movie?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ju6lf/eli5_why_is_pro_wrestling_being_fake_such_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbizmuz",
"dbj0gdw",
"dbj1yeq"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
10
],
"text": [
"Well, what people argued was that they never said it was scripted, they pretended it was real from the start. All those shows were obviously made from fiction, but for a while, it was up in the air for pro wrestling.",
"While the outcomes of pro wrestling matches are predetermined, and the storylines are just that - storylines - it must be borne in mind that the matches themselves are mostly freeform. It's up to the competitors to put on an engaging performance, with the help of the referee, who subtly reads the mood of the crowd to help guide the match to a well-timed resolution or shift in momentum to keep things interesting.",
"For most of wrestling's history, it presented itself as a legitimate competition, like boxing or modern MMA. And while there have been accounts of match fixing in both boxing and wrestling as long as both existed, wrestling promoters realized very early on that there was much more money in presenting worked matches that they could control. These controversies manipulated audiences into buying tickets much better than simply presenting a fight. As wrestling lost prestige and began to focus more on the show than the sport, it opened the door for sports fans to look down on wrestling fans for not being able to tell they were being manipulated. Because of that devious history, many people are still compelled to point out that it's not legitimate, despite not being presented as a real sport for decades. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
zttyb
|
Physicists: I'm looking for a primer on Quantum Mechanics. Any suggestions?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/zttyb/physicists_im_looking_for_a_primer_on_quantum/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c67nghj",
"c67nibb"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"The third book in the Feynman lectures series is mostly Quantum Mechanics.\n\nThere is a lot to be said for the whole three volume set. However, while the target audience was undergrads; the actual lectures ended up being attended by post grads and faculty.\n\nI found the books to be a better route to understanding actual physics compared to many textbooks which teach the math but not a deep understanding.",
"Griffith's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. It's a textbook but I'm sure you can find it somewhere online. You'll need to know differential equations and linear algebra."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
dvjqmu
|
why do grown ass adults talk to their kids in baby voices and jibberish when they're supposed to be teaching them how to talk normally?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dvjqmu/eli5why_do_grown_ass_adults_talk_to_their_kids_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f7d3gdh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In the first few months, while the baby is just learning to make sounds, baby talk is okay, even useful. After they start doing that, though, speaking in a normal voice is far more beneficial to development. \n\nIn my experience, adults who persist in this habit are either under educated or too attached to \"their baby\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2ms924
|
how can a service (i.e.: whatsapp) offer end to end encryption, when the patriot act forces them to hand over personal communication of at least some of their users?
|
Do they simply hand over the encrypted messages and say: figure it out yourself? Do they need to have a backdoor installed? Or did I get it completely wrong?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ms924/eli5_how_can_a_service_ie_whatsapp_offer_end_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm73t89"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"IIRC, the patriot act doesn't force companies to keep records on communications. What it does is allow the government to see the records that companies do keep, without a warrant. If there is no record, then the government can't see it. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5dcrse
|
how are homming missiles working and how aircraft systems can detect that a missile locked-in for example a chopper so pilots know that rocket is going to hit them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dcrse/eli5_how_are_homming_missiles_working_and_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"da3jq37",
"da3jy6k"
],
"score": [
3,
12
],
"text": [
"There are different types of homing missiles. \n\nMost use radar. A scanning platform may detect a potential target, then a second radar will attempt to track the target, adjusting the missile's trajectory depending on the range and distance the radar signals return. However, an aircraft may have a radar warning receiver that can detect radar signals. The RWRs are programmed to recognize the signature of a threat such as a missile or a missile platform and alert the pilot when it sees this signature so the pilot may take appropriate action or in some cases, launch appropriate countermeasures such as chaff or flares.\n\nSome missiles have IR cameras built into them, looking for the brightest IR signature ahead and adjusting course to intersect with it. These are difficult to detect as they don't need to actively radiate a signal. But they are typically positioned on platforms with scanning radar which can be detected.\n\nLaser-guided missiles have the platform paint the target with a laser. They can't be easily detected, but the body of the aircraft can be designed to make it difficult to reflect the laser correctly. Like IR missiles, they are typically stationed on platforms that use detectable radar to scan.",
"There's a couple different types of guidance systems for missiles. Most missiles will use some sort of electromagnetic radiation to home in on the target. These can include:\n\n- Passive homing, which relies on emissions generated by the target in question. Examples include infrared (read: \"heat seeking\") guided missiles which home in on the infrared energy generated by a target's engine or other devices, as well as electro-optical systems (\"TV-guided missiles\") which relies on a visual contrast between the target and its background to guide it to target. Other missiles can home in on an enemy RADAR (or jamming device) when it's turned on by following the output of radio signals from the target. The AIM-9 Sidewinder series of missiles, for instance, uses an infrared detectors that can lock on to heat sources (like an engine exhaust or the leading edge of an aircraft) generated by a target.\n\n- Active homing, in which a missile \"illuminates\" a target with energy (usually with a RADAR set which shoots out radio waves and then uses the reflections to determine the target's position) and homes in on the target that way. The AIM-120 AMRAAM missile has a small RADAR dish in its nose that allows it to independently guide itself to the target without the need for the launching aircraft to do anything after launch.\n\n- Semi active homing, in which a missile relies on the launching aircraft or vehicle to \"illuminate\" the target for them, usually with a RADAR set or laser beam. Take the AIM-7 Sparrow missile, which is guided to the target by the launching aircraft, which must keep its RADAR trained on the target in order to give the missile (which only has the ability to home in on radio energy and not generate any of its own) something to track. If the aircraft breaks RADAR lock with the target then the missile will stop tracking it. Laser-guided weapons similarly require the target to be illuminated by a laser beam (either from the launching aircraft or another platform) that the missile's guidance system can see and home in on.\n\n- Manual guidance, in which the operator has to visually steer the missile on to the target. There's a variety of different ways to do this but all are ultimately dependent on the operator using a joystick or sighting device to manually guide the missile to its target. A lot of anti-tank missiles, like the American TOW missile, require the operator to keep a target sighted during the missile's flight.\n\nActive and passive homing weapons are considered to be \"fire and forget\" in that the launching platform doesn't necessarily have to provide any additional guidance and can move on once the missile has been fired. These categories aren't mutually exclusive, and a lot of missiles combine elements of two or more guidance concepts. For instance, the AIM-120 has the ability to independently guide itself to target but can also receive updates from the launching aircraft (or other aircraft in the area) in order to increase the probability of a successful hit, especially at long range. It also has the ability to passively \"home on jam\", meaning it can detect radio emissions from a jamming device and guide itself to the jammer (and the enemy aircraft it's attached to).\n\nPilots and vehicle crew have a variety of means of detecting and evading missile launches. The first (and most obvious) is their own eyes, which can spot the plume of fire and smoke that a missile leaves when launching. Evasive action taken as soon as possible may allow the pilot to dodge a missile shot, especially if it's at extreme range. Aircraft and combat vehicles can also be equipped with early warning systems that can inform the operator when somebody's illuminating them with a RADAR set or a laser beam. This lets them know that someone is looking at them with murderous intent and allows them to perform evasive or defensive action. Aircraft also carry a wide variety of countermeasures, including flare/chaff dispensers (which act as false signals for a missile to chase after) and dazzlers (like the American CIRCM system), which attempt to use laser pulses to blind enemy missile sensors in the same way you could blind someone by shining a laser in their eye. There are also systems developed for tanks and ships that attempt to physically intercept approaching missiles using some sort of projectile.\n\nAs an interesting anecdote, Israeli tank crews in the Yom Kippur War figured out how to counter manually guided anti-tank missiles used by their Arab foes by wildly dodging while spraying the launching site with fire in the hopes of distracting or killing the missile's operator so that the missile would go off-course and miss."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4u2zz9
|
how does my phone know i'm driving to work or driving to daycare?
|
I understand that my phone will see "oh you normally go to daycare at this time" and it will alert me. But this morning I pulled the car out of the garage to move the baby's carseat and the phone was like "oh it'll take you 10 minutes to get to daycare"
Not only this, but it seems to learn new places I go if they become normal destinations. I worked a second job once a week and the phone has picked up on that only on Tuesdays.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u2zz9/eli5_how_does_my_phone_know_im_driving_to_work_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5md4jl"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Like you said, your phone \"sees\" where you go. It also knows the *kind* of places you go, and at what times. There's an algorithm that goes \"Hey, jfk_47 likes widgets and they just went to a new widget shop, so let's ask them if this is a place they want information about.\" \n\nAnd if you go somewhere on a regular basis, it'll definitely pick up on that. \n\nBy the way (in case you want to) you can usually disable your phone creepily stalking you. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
asx0mk
|
What was Revolutionary War-era whiskey like? Was it aged?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/asx0mk/what_was_revolutionary_warera_whiskey_like_was_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egxobqx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It wasn't aged in barrels at that time. Most of it was homemade and not stored for long before consumption. The source below claims the practice of aging came about sometime post-revolution when whisky was packed in barrels for transit from Appalachia down the Ohio/Mississippi river, and people noticed a difference after it had spent time in transit. Specifically, charred barrels were used to clean out whatever crap was previously stored in there, and that inadvertently created flavor magic. However, you also have aging in barrels in Scotland during the early 19th century, so one development may have influenced the other.\n\nIt would have been like moonshine, of variable quality. Unaged whiskey today is called \"white whiskey\" and you can buy it from various distillers. \n\nSource: The social history of bourbon, Gerald Carson"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
d2lh6d
|
what changes in the structure of an object that allows something to permanently bend (i.e folding paper)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d2lh6d/eli5_what_changes_in_the_structure_of_an_object/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ezvm3jc",
"ezvm7is",
"ezvnn48",
"ezvnsuv",
"ezvoaq4",
"ezvodia",
"ezvrk1n",
"ezvt8lq",
"ezvxx7y",
"ezw70df",
"ezwegck",
"ezwnzrs",
"ezwrvlc",
"ezww8yk"
],
"score": [
84,
2399,
24,
2,
186,
12,
17,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Solid materials are made up of tightly packed molecules, which is the most energy efficient way to be in. If you bend something, this structure is changed to a less energy efficient form.\n\n\nThe molecules are moving within the material, so when you hold it long enough, they will eventually reach the energy efficient state again, but now in the new shape.\n\n\nThe time and force it takes to achieve this differs for each material.",
"Let's use paper from your example to explain this.\n\nPaper is not one solid, contiguous thing on a microscopic level. Paper is really made from layers and layers of interlocking plant fibers. Those fibers are made of layers and layers of interlocking cellulose molecules, which [look like this, more or less](_URL_0_).\n\nThose cellulose molecules form fibers because sometimes hydrogen (the white balls) on the outer side of one strand of cellulose will bond to an oxygen (the red balls) on a neighboring strand. The fibers form the paper due to the process in which the paper's made leaving them physically interlocked, and some of the hydrogen bonding between fibers. It's a very weak bond, which is why paper's so easy to tear and bend.\n\n~~As to why it stays bent, though. As you bend paper, it requires you put energy into the act, and that energy breaks some of the hydrogen bonds, changing the orientation of some of the fibers within the paper, which then form new hydrogen bonds.~~EDIT: It was pointed out that what I said wasn't quite correct. Creasing *does* break some of the fibers, and that does add up over time.\n\nSo when you're bending the paper, you're changing its structure at a microscopic level.",
"Civil engineer here. Besides what’s happening on the molecular and cellulose level, there is also something called Young’s Modulus, which is a ratio of the stress exerted on a material (in terms of force, such as Newtons or lb/ft^2 or kips) vs the strain (change in L or A per original dimensions). All solid materials have this characteristic. For paper, it is very, very, very low, so that humans can rip it easily or whatever. When you bend paper slightly, it will go back into place. This is the plasticity index, and it indicates the threshold before which the material will return to its original form. Again, paper’s super weak, so it’s practically nonexistent, but steel works the exact same way just with much stronger molecular and physical bonds. Upon surpassing the plasticity index, the material can no longer return to its original form. It is therefore “deformed” in whichever position it was put into, and that’s considered a fold. This is a very tangential connection but is nonetheless a phenomena that occurs as a result of the various qualities of paper that make it the way it is, and explains from the physical perspective why creases happen\n\nEdit: forgot about strain\n\nAnd thanks for the silver!!",
"Interesting stuff. I love hearing the chemical explanations for things. On the physics end, we quantify the tensile limits to which a material may bend without permanent deformation with a quantity referred to as [Youngs Modulus](_URL_1_). Similarly, an object's ability to withstand \"shearing\" strain without snapping or breaking is quantified via its [Shear Modulus, aka its Modulus of Rigidity](_URL_0_)",
"The answer differs depending on the material but u/Zemedelphos and u/hickeycurran mostly cover it from two different views. u/Zemedelphos is incorrect in the last 2 paragraphs. u/hickeycurran is simplifying things to a single isometric material. \n\nFor elastic materials there is a difference between elastic deformation (temporary) and plastic deformation (permanent). This model is often applied to all materials in structural design as a simplifying assumption. \n\nFolding paper is plastic deformation. Bending paper without creasing would be elastic deformation.\n\nEdit: \"wrong\" is the wrong word. u/Zemedelphos is technically correct, but the last 2 paragraphs are more misleading than helpful for a basic understanding.",
"I want you to imagine playing with a set of [small magnetic spheres](_URL_0_). \n\nIf you have a nicely arranged sheet of them and try to bend them, they sometimes can snap to a different ordered position. That is bending or folding them. \n\nNow, this kind of bonding is more similar to how metals bond, rather than solids in general. So this only really gives you a decent idea of how bending metal works at the microscopic level. \n\nNon-metals (such as paper) work a bit differently, but still in a *kinda* similar way.\n\nNow, note that molecular bonding works with electric forces, rather than magnetic forces, so the way the individual molecules behave is different to how the individual magnets behave. However in terms of the big picture, some of the same kind of order can be seen when you look at the whole collection of molecules/atoms, vs the whole collection of magnets.",
"Any material can change its shape. That's called *deformation*, which literally means \"getting out of shape\".\n\nSome materials can change their shape a lot and still return to the original shape. Like rubber, or steel that's specifically made for use on springs. The fancy word for this kind of deformation is *elastic deformation*.\n\nOther materials, like play dough, glass, coal, or diamond can only change its shape a little bit without permanent shape change or breaking apart. When you push the material beyond a certain point, it won't return to its original shape any more. This is called *plastic deformation* because it's changing the shape of the object - kind of like plastic surgery. The limit is correspondingly called *plastic deformation limit*.\n\nWith very strong chemical bonds between the atoms or molecules, you usually get very rigid structures that don't deform easily. With weaker bonds, you get materials that are more flexible, but as long as the bounds are strong enough it still takes a considerable force to make them give completely.\n\nThen there are materials like play dough or clay, which has so weak forces keeping it together that not only is it easy to change its shape, the change is usually also permanent. This is because the play dough molecules easily forms new bonds, weak as they are. That's why you can join together two pieces of play dough seamlessly, while trying to join two bits of rubber for example requires some chemical help (usually called glue).\n\nWhen an elastic deformation happens, typically the atoms or molecules making up the material move a little relative to each other, but the bounds that keep them together are not broken. That means the material keeps its molecular structure.\n\nWhen the bending, stretching, compressing or shearing load is removed, an elastic material will spring back to its original shape. But any material can only change its shape a certain amount. Beyond that, it either breaks, or deforms permanently.\n\nWhen a material reaches its plastic deformation limit, the chemical bounds keeping atoms or molecules together start breaking, and the atoms and molecules start shifting relative to each other. In some materials, like the aforementioned play dough or clay, new bonds are formed immediately and the material just assumes its new shape. In other materials, like paper, wood, or most metals for example, new bonds don't form so easily so the material can become permanently weakened. Forming new bonds usually requires some amount of energy, which can be done by heating the material, but since wood and paper are flammable, you know what tends to happen instead.\n\nFor metal, things are a bit more complicated. Each plastic deformation breaks some bonds, but some new bonds may develop so the bent piece can still have significant strength. However, in most metals a permanent shape change also always weakens the structure. So in critical applications - like the crumple zones of an automobile - you can't just bend the structure back into its original shape, because it won't have its original strength.\n\nIf enough deformations happen at a certain point on a metal object, the remaining bonds become too weak to hold the object together and it comes apart, like if you're bending a piece of welding wire back and forth.\n\nBut when metalworking is done at high temperatures, the metal becomes more like very tough play-dough, since the heat allows the metal bonds to break and re-form more easily. This means that much like play-dough, heated metal can be forced into a new shape, and the metal atoms can form new bonds that become stronger when they cool down and the metal solidifies. But going into more depth would be *way* beyond ELI5 stuff, this post is borderline too detailed as it is.",
"in a really simplified nutshell, using paper:\n\none side of the paper is stretching and the other is compressing. if the object doesn't have elastic properties, it should stay that way",
"Paper is not one solid, it's many little fibers, you can see these if you zoom in really close. These fibers are pretty stretchy, so when you fold a piece of paper, they seemingly move out of the way.\n\nHowever, they can't permanantly bend. Paper always has crease marks afterwards, these are because the fibers aren't stretchy enough, and tear.",
"Plastic vs elastic deformation. Pushing something past it’s yield point (a mechanical property of the material).",
"Probably late to the game, but gonna try a proper maybe... ELI7?\n\nIf you zoom in smaller and smaller things are made of billions of tiny atoms that are basically little balls that are stuck together. When 2 atoms are stuck together we say they're bonded. The sticking is a bit like how magnets stick together - they're attracted to each other, but you can still pull them apart, breaking the bond. Atoms stick themselves together into large structures, and sometimes these structures make even bigger structures - like how a chocolate bar is made of collections of chocolate that's bonded to rice crispies etc.. For solid objects in order to stay the same shape, the atoms can't move around - the bonds stay the same... Unless...\n\nIf you push hard enough, just like pulling magnets hard enough, you can break the bonds and start to move the atoms around. If after you stop pushing the atoms, they can't move back to where they were before, then the material will permanently change shape.\n\nIn the specific case of paper, atoms make molecules called proteins, that form weak bonds to other proteins and these form fibres that in turn bond together with weak bonds and that makes paper! Folding paper in half, some fibres will slide over eachother in order to change the shape, but they can't slide back, so the shape change is permanent.\n\nElastic deformation i.e. when it springs back is a little more complicated as things like rubber achieve it in a different way to metal for example.\n\nFeel free to ask any questions / query stuff.\n\nE: just to add some credibility to my answer, I have a Masters in Materials Science.",
"Sorry, I just want to make sure you're clear on the use of \"i.e.\"\n\ni.e. = \"id est\" (Latin), meaning \"that is\" or \"in other words\". So your question reads \"what... allows something to permanently bend, specifically paper\"\n\ne.g. = \"exempli gratia\", meaning \"for example\". So your question using \"e.g.\" instead would read \"what... allows something to permanently bend, such as (but not limited to) paper\"\n\nIt's a subtle difference, but it changes how specific your question is, which might change how specific the answers you get are.",
"Every material has what's called an elastic limit. When you stretch/strain a material past this limit the deformation stops being reversible, a *plastic deformation*. If you look up a stress vs strain graph the linear part at the beginning is the elastic part.\n\nWhen you stretch something into the plastic zone and let go of it, before a certain point of stress it will shrink back and recover the same amount it would if you held it at the elastic limit, it just wont go all the way back to normal\n\nFor paper this limit is probably really low and the cellular thing that happens with folding is explained better in here, you don't have to actually fold paper to get it to have a permanent deformation though",
"Paper is just many many tiny wood slivers. Now what happens when you bend a big sliver? It breaks but usually stays intact. That's what's happening when you bend paper. Just lots and lots of broken slivers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Cellulose-Ibeta-from-xtal-2002-3D-balls.png"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shear_modulus",
"https://depts.washington.edu/matseed/mse_resources/Webpage/Biomaterials/young's_modulus.htm"
],
[],
[
"https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/g5oAAOSw9ZtcpKO4/s-l640.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
668stu
|
why do some films have a well known song feature as part of the trailer/adverts but that isn't in the film at all?
|
I watched 'You're Next' last night and remembered 'Perfect Day' being on the trailer but it isn't in the film and I then thought of loads of other films that do it too...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/668stu/eli5_why_do_some_films_have_a_well_known_song/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dggk26o",
"dgglfgh"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"That has to do with licensing and syncing. If they think that a song will help sell a movie, they'll use it in the trailer and put it on the soundtrack. The band gets paid, the movie ads are more effective, and the studio can recoup more production costs via soundtrack sales. ",
"I think part of it also has to do with the fact that one of the last things to get finished on a movie is its musical score. So, you're far less likely to hear music from the actual movie in early trailers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1o7yen
|
why do we never seem to measure wind chill on hot days or humidex on cold days?
|
So during the summer weather reports will usually say it's 30 degree but feels like 35 with the humidity, and during the winter it's the opposite with wind chill.
Since water vapour traps heat do we just not notice the effect when there is little heat in the atmosphere? I can understand that one a little more, but there are certainly days during the summer where it wouldn't be nearly as bearable to be outside if there was no breeze.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1o7yen/eli5_why_do_we_never_seem_to_measure_wind_chill/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccpktzp",
"ccpmrad"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The meterologists are trying to prepare you for the worst probable case. It's important to know that it's technically 100 degrees but feels much hotter, because that is more likely to affect your plans. If they say it's 100 but feels like 95 then that will not be very valuable to the audience.\n\nPlus, when it's cold outside the humidity is very low so the humidity index will not be very useful.",
"They measure it. They just don't bother to report it as it doesn't have any significant impact under those conditions. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
pddcz
|
Can anyone explain the monetary issues in the US during the late 19th century?
|
Specifically, if anyone could clarify the the Sherman Act, why Clevland's veto was so shocking to the Populists, the silver standard in general. Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/pddcz/can_anyone_explain_the_monetary_issues_in_the_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3ojys7",
"c3oka2v"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"To which Sherman Act are you referring? The Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 or the Sherman Silver Purchase Act of 1893? Both acts affected the economy in different ways.",
"I took a few classes dealing with the American economy around that period so here's what I know.\n\nFirst, silver was promoted among the populists because there was more of it. At the time that US dollar was based on the gold standard. Now as time went on, gold became more valuable and so did the dollar.\n\nIn connection, farming was often a cyclical form of business. Farmers often needed to take out loans in the Winter/Spring to help them get to the harvest in the Fall. Therefore when farmers took out a $100 loan in the Spring, it would actually be worth MORE in the Fall to pay back in principle. In addition, I also recall reading that at this point in time, farming was becoming more capital intensive due to new developments in technology. Farmers have never been a rich profession and that new technology cost money, ergo loans! \n\nI am not an economist but I believe that the gold standard had a deflationary effect on the US economy. So for farmers, their crops were worth less but their loans remained the same if they didn't increase.\n\nThe Sherman Act, again from what I can recall, was an attempt to get the US government to buy silver and use it as backing for the US dollar. In so doing, the populists hoped to weaken the dollar and thus the loans they had taken out. The story of its repeal is one that I will unfortunately have to leave to other commentators."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
8ihr0x
|
what happens when a former us president dies? how does the country react? are the protocols similar to uk royalty?
|
I've not been around long enough to know...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ihr0x/eli5_what_happens_when_a_former_us_president_dies/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyrtkem",
"dyrtkv0",
"dyrtlw9",
"dyrudbs",
"dys7jry",
"dyso5bp"
],
"score": [
9,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Flags go to half staff, big funeral, news coverage, etc. Not sure what the UK does considering QE2 is an immortal.\n\nSeriously though what are the UK protocols and I can tell you of they're at all similar.",
"If a former President dies, they have a big funeral, maybe a moment of silence before sporting events, and the news channels run a bunch of coverage about what a swell guy he was.\n\nRonald Reagan died in 2004 and I don't recall it being a terribly big deal at the time. This question is going to become a lot less hypothetical soon, as George Bush Sr. is quite old and his health is failing. ",
"Everybody is sad. There is a state funeral. Many dignitaries come and say good things about them. It's not like the UK, where somebody new gets to be King/Queen; though there is a similar set or procedures in the event a serving president dies in office.",
"Former presidents are offered a state funeral, along with some other public officials. There's a lot of tradition but relatively little legally defined protocol; a lot depends on the wishes of the family.\n\nGenerally there is a funeral procession in Washington, the body lies in state at the Capitol for people to pay their respects, and there is a funeral service usually at the Washington National Cathedral attended by government officials and foreign dignitaries, and maybe more services elsewhere.\n\nThen they are interred whey they or their family wish. In the olden days there would be a funeral train but nowadays it can be done in a single day. Most presidents choose to be buried at their Presidential Library or at Arlington National Cemetery if they're eligible.\n\nLike I said, a lot of this is up to the individual and their family. Richard Nixon declined a state funeral when he died in 1994.",
"Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford are the two who have died in the modern internet-news era. For both of them, the families released the news to the media and there were \"breaking news\" alerts almost immediately. \n\nMost news sites and media sites have files ready to go for the deaths of famous people, including former Presidents. They will start publishing stories of the history of that person, their political achievements, their life achievements, etc. There will be retrospectives, biographies, books will be published, cable news will broadcast as much of all the events as they can get away with. \n\nThe family will usually plan a private funeral and a more public memorial service that the general public can come to. The current President will instruct that flags be flown at half-staff, usually for a period of 30 days. \n\nThere are no federal rules about cancelling programming or not showing comedy shows or anything like that. It's pretty much life goes on for the rest of the nation. \n\nI suspect if you watch what happens when John McCain dies, you'll get a pretty good feel for what will happen with a former President. ",
"The family, their lawyer or representative, or the doctor will issue a press release. It is usually determined ahead of time who this will be so the media are able to speak with one person rather than any and everyone.\n\nMost, if not all, media outlets have a biography on file for anyone of public stature, including former presidents and senators. They can add the press release and a detail or two and have the story ready to go.\n\nThere will be lots of media coverage and the body usually lies in state and/or visits prominent locations around the country for a few days.\n\nThe family often plans a private or semi-private memorial, and there will be a public one as well.\n\nPresident's can choose where they want to be buried, or if they want to be cremated or whatever.\n\nThe only real difference from a normal people funeral is the size and the amount of media coverage.\n\nUnless they die while in office, they are a normal person when they pass. The office and power and everything that goes with it cease to be theirs when the new president is sworn in and takes over. A president continues to be very well known, obviously, and often has a charity that runs to support something they are interested in promoting, but they have no more political power than any other famous person. [Edit: their experience and familiarity with classified info means they may consult, discuss history, or offer advice sometimes, but they don't make the decisions or anything.]"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
p3s7t
|
At what altitude (below sea-level) would a human be crushed by atmospheric pressure?
|
The air is 8% thicker in the Dead Sea area at 400m below sea-level. Thought it would be interesting if (hypothetically) there existed a place on land that was too low for human travel.
_URL_0_
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/p3s7t/at_what_altitude_below_sealevel_would_a_human_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3madm8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Here is a graph outlining the survival range.\n[link](_URL_1_)\n\nThe source has a lot more info on other factors and survivability in harsh conditions.\n[link](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea"
] |
[
[
"http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/conghand/mannedev.htm",
"http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/conghand/fig15d3.gif"
]
] |
|
6rb9nu
|
why does mcdonald's food i.e. a cheesburger and fries, not grow mold?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6rb9nu/eli5_why_does_mcdonalds_food_ie_a_cheesburger_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dl3poo4",
"dl3r8sz",
"dl3sj7n"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
14
],
"text": [
"Put a McDonalds burger in a plastic bag and it will be covered in mold in no time. The reason they don't mold if left out in the open is likely because moisture escapes the food. No moisture = no mold.",
"They will, just like any other food, unless you are trying to create a misleading article/video showing how \"all fast food is bad no matter what\"",
"The no-mold experiments also take away all of the toppings. The toppings add too much moisture which would encourage microbial growth.\n\nThe thin toasted bun and thin cooked meat are dry, high surface area, and salty. Together this makes it dry out before anything obvious can grow, and once dry no mold can survive on it since mold needs moisture to live. \n\nThere are probably some preservatives at work too, especially in the bun, which are probably no different than the ones added to your sliced bread you have at home. \n\nThe same experiment with a **fully dressed** Big Mac is going to get very moldy, because of the sauce and veggies adding a lot of moisture and sugar. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1v1fls
|
How do we know what specific chemicals are active in the brain (e.g. how can we say that there is a dopamine surge when a person does X)?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1v1fls/how_do_we_know_what_specific_chemicals_are_active/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cenzv01"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"There are a number of tools used to measure changes in neuromodulatory neurotransmitters like dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine and acetylcholine (in the central nervous system). As /u/Pallidium mentioned, microdialysis is one such technique. A newer, and some argue better, technique is called [fast-scan cyclic voltammetry](_URL_0_). This technique is similar to microdialysis, except that the detection probe is much smaller and can detect signals much more rapidly, and can be used in a live animal. However, microdialysis is more versatile in that it can detect changes in many different neurochemicals, though using this tool in a live animal is hard becuase the probe is rather large. \n\nAnother tool that is used commonly is electrode-based neuronal recordings. This technique is more inferential because you cannot directly measure levels of neurochemicals, but you can infer their activity based on measuring how neurons, like dopamine neurons of the VTA or the Substantia Nigra are firing and responding to dopamine activity. This tool was initially used in monkeys to determine that dopamine neurons played a [role in learning and reward](_URL_1_). \n\nWe can then say that \"when a person does X, dopamine surges in the brain\" because of the findings from animal model systems like monkeys and rodents. Lots of peer-review based literature backs up the claim that when you do *rewarding activity* dopamine is released into the *brain area*. \n\nSources: I study dopamine neurons and my lab uses fast scan cyclic votammetry as well as electrical recording techniques."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2579/",
"http://www.jneurosci.org/content/13/3/900.full.pdf"
]
] |
||
xpobt
|
Heading into dangerous territory, but why does it seem certain races are better at certain sports?
|
I'm watching the Olympics and am really curious to know why say, Kenyans, are such excellent runners.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/xpobt/heading_into_dangerous_territory_but_why_does_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5ohlqz",
"c5ohpyp",
"c5ohrll",
"c5oi7ag",
"c5oj6fh"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
18,
14,
3
],
"text": [
"Apparently kenyans do actually have a more efficient body for long distance running. However the reasons are still unclear. See attached study.\n\n\n_URL_0_",
"from what i understand it's a combination of a culture that supports running, high altitude which has thinner air, and physiological differences. ",
"From a thread with the same title posted yesterday. \n\n > _URL_0_\n\n > They specifically ask that it not be quoted, so I'll avoid it.\n\n > Basically: The distribution isn't of *just* black people. The record holders are divided by geographical distribution. \n\n > Sprinters and jumpers from West Africa, Long distance and middle distance from North Africa, and long distance from East Africa. \n\n > There's no reason to assume there aren't difference between races. Equality is **not** the same as \"no differences\". \n\nEdit: downvotes for a cited source that indicates that \"blacks aren't all the same\" and that it's an ethnic difference, not specific to skin tone? I'm not sure what to make of that? \n\nEdit2: never mind, not so much. ",
"Combination of genetic and cultural reasons. Biomechanically, there are various optimal human proportions/sizes for different sports. For example, it is advantageous for gymnasts to be smaller and lighter, for olympic lifters to be shorter, for swimmers to have longer limbs, etc. Such things can become very subtle. For example, explosive jumping power and sprinting are very much correlated to your shin to foot length ratio (kind of obvious when you think about the leverages happening) [1].\n\nOn top of that, there are other biological factors at work such as lung capacity, muscle composition, etc. These are vary, and carry a genetic component.\n\nNow, it happens that Africa's genetic diversity means that there happen to be nice geographically defined groups with genetic predisposition to various athletic events. \n\nIn today's world, this genetic predesposition feeds a big cultural thing as well. Even if you were born with the perfect genes, to get truly EXCELLENT at it, you need practice. Focused practice is even better, but you need practice. This is where the cultural element turns up. \n\nI've linked to a pair of blog posts discussing Kenyan dominance at long distance running. It covers the physiological and cultural reasons. It's not full of citations, but the writer is solid, and the citations he does give are solid as well. (The entire series is a great look at why some countries dominate/suck at different sports - notice, country, not race).\n\n_URL_1_\n_URL_2_\n\n\n[1] _URL_0_",
"Just as a side note: Correlation between race and being good at certain disciplines does *not* mean that there's a causal link. Genetics may very well have nothing to do with it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19952848"
],
[],
[
"http://www.smith.edu/philosophy/Taboo55.html"
],
[
"http://en.bioinformatyk.eu/contest-articles/anthropometric-and-kinematic-determinants-of-vertical-jump-parameters.html",
"http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/why-the-us-sucks-at-olympic-lifting-part-2.html",
"http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/why-the-us-sucks-at-olympic-lifting-part-3.html"
],
[]
] |
|
2pc6tk
|
why does it take so long after changing the quality on youtube for it to actually take effect?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pc6tk/eli5_why_does_it_take_so_long_after_changing_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmvbs6c",
"cmvd66k"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You're probably changing from lower-res to higher. Because it's streaming, some of the vid has to pre-load so it can keep playing while it's loading the rest.\n\nHow much of the vid gets pre-loaded depends on how long it's taking to download. Lower-res has less data, of course, so it loads more of the video in a given amount of time than it does at high-res.\n\nSo if the vid has already started at low res and you set it higher, it takes longer to pre-load enough for it to keep streaming at higher quality. Meanwhile, in order to keep playing, it continues playing the lower-res pre-load.",
"The YouTube player has already loaded a good chunk of the video that you haven't seen yet - something like 30 seconds to a minute. Rather than downloading the same chunk again in higher quality, it just waits until the next time it downloads a chunk, and downloads *that* chunk in high quality."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
eo2t1o
|
Is there a link between the recent volcanic/tectonic activity?
|
Is there a connection between the volcanoes/tectonic activity in the Philippines, New Zeland, Puerto Rico, Iran, Russia, Indonesia, and Japan? I assume the media just blows some things up and that's why I'm making this connection.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/eo2t1o/is_there_a_link_between_the_recent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fe8mz27"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The only substantive connection is that these are all driven by active plate tectonics. To put this into context, it's worth considering the statistics for both earthquakes and volcanoes. \n\nAt any given scale, the frequency of earthquakes of a given magnitude obey the [Gutenberg-Richter law](_URL_1_). If we look at records of [global seismicity](_URL_0_), and consider the magnitudes of the earthquakes you're referencing (which have mostly been in the 5-6.5 range), we can see that on average in a year, you expect around ~1500 earthquakes between 5-5.9 and ~150 earthquakes between 6-6.9. This means that on average there are pretty much always multiple earthquakes of 5.0-5.9 magnitude every day globally and that for 6-6.9 magnitude earthquakes, we would generally expect at least one every couple of days. Generally though, we (and the media) only take note if these earthquakes (1) occur in a populated area and (2) cause any damage or are weird in some way.\n\nWe can find similar statistics for volcanoes. On average, [somewhere around 50-70 volcanoes erupt per year](_URL_2_), so similar to moderate magnitude earthquakes, we'd expect there to be a volcano erupting somewhere every couple of days (the difference with volcanoes is that for some of these, an eruption may last for days, weeks, even months).\n\nTypically, the appearance of some sort of increase in earthquake/volcanic activity is a product of either (1) several earthquakes/volcanoes occurring in populated areas as opposed to the majority that are ignored or (2) when there is a cluster of time with more earthquakes or eruptions. Both of these are a reflection of both of these processes having an aspect of randomness to their occurrence."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/lists-maps-and-statistics",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutenberg%E2%80%93Richter_law",
"https://www.volcanodiscovery.com/volcanology/faq/how-many-eruptions-per-year.html"
]
] |
|
m98zk
|
Some of our field of view is blocked by our nose (different region for both eyes). Why doesn't everyone sees 2 translucent noses all the time like me?
|
I can't even find an image on the internet that would represent what a field of view looks like to humans.
I can probably draw and explain better, but here is what my field of view looks like: If you close one eye at a time, whatever nose you can see, that area becomes translucent when I open both my eyes. Therefore, I see 2 translucent noses all the time.
I have asked several people in my life, but no one can even realize that they see 2 translucent noses.
Another thing which is sort of related: When you are looking at a distant object across the field, and you place your finger 1 feet from your eyes. In that case I see 2 translucent fingers (when I am focusing at a distant object). But no one I know can realize that you are supposed to be seeing 2 translucent fingers.
If you can't understand my question, please let me know and I will try to draw and post some visualization later.
thanks.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/m98zk/some_of_our_field_of_view_is_blocked_by_our_nose/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3qijcj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I see and understand exactly what you are talking about."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
20ewrv
|
does drinking gatorade hold any advantages over drinking water when i'm dehydrated?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20ewrv/eli5_does_drinking_gatorade_hold_any_advantages/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg2kfyg",
"cg2kmm2",
"cg2m66l",
"cg2mt8h",
"cg2p92g"
],
"score": [
25,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"For the average fitness person, not really. Water and your regular diet should provide all the electrolytes you need.\n\nFor athletes (my experience = rugby): it is different. Sweating profusely for 80 minutes of a contact sport (substitute any long term physical activity) and you will need to replenish both your energy source (sugars) and the electrolytes you lose (salts). Even then, I don't drink full-strength gatorade. I water it down to about 1 part water, 1 part gatorade.",
"Gatorade seems much sweeter now than when i was growing up in the 80s and 90s. Is it sweeter now? Or do I just notice its sweetness now since I am older and more averse to sweet tastes?",
"Gatorade also has glucose which gives you those carbohydrates which give you quick energy when you're running low on them when running or exercising and stuff. \n\nWhen you're not doing anything, then drinking water should be enough as you're not losing lots of electrolytes through sweat and you don't need carbs to give you energy to do whatever strenuous activity you're not doing. Although gatorade is an isotonic drink (same concentration as your body fluids), drinking a high sugar drink (like coke) is infact bad for you when you're dehydrated because the higher sugar drink is hypertonic (which means it has higher concentration) than the fluid in your body (in the cells and in blood) which causes water to move out of your body and into your gut where the drink is because water would move from an area of low concentration to an area of higher concentration, this will in turn make you even more dehydrated. So when you're dehydrated water is the best fluid to drink as it quickly gets absorbed into your body fluids (which have a higher concentration than water, remember liquids move from regions of low concentration to regions higher concentrations) and if your kidneys are functioning properly, you'll have enough electrolytes in your body to not require any additional ones. ",
"Athletes don't actually drink Gatorade haha it's a nice promotion scheme but it's garbage for you. Anyone who has ever drank that when doing serious cardio / any exercises won't drink it while doing it, I've thrown up several times from that shit when I was younger playing football, naive about health. It's decent for afterwards but that's because it replaces the electrolytes and sugars that you just sweat out and used, it can be replaced by fucking apple juice to get the same effect. Gatorade is essentially soda with good marketing.",
"During the hardest part of Navy SEAL training we were given 1-2 waters for every gatorade to drink. We were also given water with added electrolytes but no sugar."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2m1x6z
|
when playing a game online, why does my ping change? how can my signal suddenly drop or rise?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2m1x6z/eli5_when_playing_a_game_online_why_does_my_ping/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm07kvd",
"cm07lfs"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your internet traffic is broken up into packets with an address attached and put on the wire. The packet is then sent to the router which looks up its internal directory for where to send the packet next. The packet will make many stops along the way where the address is checked and continued, but these packets don't always travel the same path. The directories each device has is continuously updated based on what information it has available so two packets may be sent to different locations by the same device. Along the way, it's also possible that devices get congested like during a DDOS attack and they discard the packet so it never reaches its destination and may have to be resent. These packets are sent continuously and the ping is the communication time it takes for packets to go back and forth. If a device updates its directory or a wire gets congested or too many packets arrive out of order or anything else changes how packets travel, then that ping time will fluctuate.",
"Traffic, condition of your machine and the server, etc. Similar to why when driving down the highway your speed might change."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
na10n
|
how does computer speed and memory increase at such a rapid rate?
|
What are the new technologies being used that weren't used 5-10 years ago that make our computers so much faster and have so much more memory?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/na10n/eli5_how_does_computer_speed_and_memory_increase/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c37gks2",
"c37gsnw",
"c37gks2",
"c37gsnw"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Intel operates on a tick-tock paradigm. The \"tick\" side is architecture improvement, the \"tock\" side is process improvement. You can see their products evolve along this path, look at their [roadmaps](_URL_1_). \n\nArchitecture are things like better branch predictions, additional instruction sets, better bus protocols, and multiple cores. Process improvement includes things like high-K insulators, smaller feature sizes, more die layers, larger silicon wafers, lower power usage, and copper interconnects. They improve one, then the other.\n\nThe pipeline to create a new processor takes many months. Newer processes are proved out in simpler chip designs. Memory is simpler in design than a processor, and moves to smaller processes before big ticket items like processors. 32 nanometers is state of the art today, [22 nanometers is coming](_URL_0_) in the first part of next year. ",
"Strictly speaking, the fundamental technology itself hasn't changed. CMOS technology has been providing us with highest performance-per-watt since 1970s. The changes are mostly attributed to two things: manufacturing techniques and architectural improvements in CPUs.\n\nInnovations in manufacturing technology continues to provide computer architects with more and more devices (transistors, SRAM/DRAM cells) to construct CPUS and RAMs. I have covered this topic [here](_URL_0_) before. The increase in memory capacity can be more or less explained with the manufacturing innovations alone. The units of data storage (DRAM cell in this case) are getting smaller and smaller, so we can pack more of them in the same amount of space, effectively increasing the storage capacity.\n\nOn the CPU side, which (arguably) largely determines the \"speed,\" architectural innovations come to play as well. End-users/consumers are mostly familiar with this in terms of manufacturer's brand names, such as Pentium, Pentium II, ..., Core, Nehalem, Sandybridge, etc. It's a very dense topic to discuss in depth, but basically they are like different types of car engines. Car manufacturers have different engine designs, the usual inline 4 cylinder, V6, V8 engines found in American muscle cars, Subaru's box engine, Porsche's famous inline 6 cylinder, all the way up to Lamborghini's V10, Bugatti's V16, each offering different performance and cost characteristics. The major difference here, however, is that the kind of innovations we see in manufacturing technology is unseen elsewhere (1000x increase in the past ~20 years). The manufacturing techniques we used when Pentium was around isn't suitable for more recent versions of designs, such as Sandybridge, since we are talking about entirely different level of device budgets here - Pentiums were made up of around 3 million transistors while recent Sandybridge based chips are made up of over 1 billion transistors, which represents 3 orders of magnitude difference.",
"Intel operates on a tick-tock paradigm. The \"tick\" side is architecture improvement, the \"tock\" side is process improvement. You can see their products evolve along this path, look at their [roadmaps](_URL_1_). \n\nArchitecture are things like better branch predictions, additional instruction sets, better bus protocols, and multiple cores. Process improvement includes things like high-K insulators, smaller feature sizes, more die layers, larger silicon wafers, lower power usage, and copper interconnects. They improve one, then the other.\n\nThe pipeline to create a new processor takes many months. Newer processes are proved out in simpler chip designs. Memory is simpler in design than a processor, and moves to smaller processes before big ticket items like processors. 32 nanometers is state of the art today, [22 nanometers is coming](_URL_0_) in the first part of next year. ",
"Strictly speaking, the fundamental technology itself hasn't changed. CMOS technology has been providing us with highest performance-per-watt since 1970s. The changes are mostly attributed to two things: manufacturing techniques and architectural improvements in CPUs.\n\nInnovations in manufacturing technology continues to provide computer architects with more and more devices (transistors, SRAM/DRAM cells) to construct CPUS and RAMs. I have covered this topic [here](_URL_0_) before. The increase in memory capacity can be more or less explained with the manufacturing innovations alone. The units of data storage (DRAM cell in this case) are getting smaller and smaller, so we can pack more of them in the same amount of space, effectively increasing the storage capacity.\n\nOn the CPU side, which (arguably) largely determines the \"speed,\" architectural innovations come to play as well. End-users/consumers are mostly familiar with this in terms of manufacturer's brand names, such as Pentium, Pentium II, ..., Core, Nehalem, Sandybridge, etc. It's a very dense topic to discuss in depth, but basically they are like different types of car engines. Car manufacturers have different engine designs, the usual inline 4 cylinder, V6, V8 engines found in American muscle cars, Subaru's box engine, Porsche's famous inline 6 cylinder, all the way up to Lamborghini's V10, Bugatti's V16, each offering different performance and cost characteristics. The major difference here, however, is that the kind of innovations we see in manufacturing technology is unseen elsewhere (1000x increase in the past ~20 years). The manufacturing techniques we used when Pentium was around isn't suitable for more recent versions of designs, such as Sandybridge, since we are talking about entirely different level of device budgets here - Pentiums were made up of around 3 million transistors while recent Sandybridge based chips are made up of over 1 billion transistors, which represents 3 orders of magnitude difference."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.engadget.com/tag/22nm",
"http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/05/leaked-intel-roadmap-hints-at-ivy-bridges-future/"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m6zli/eli5_how_are_they_making_technology_so_damn_small/c2ynkht"
],
[
"http://www.engadget.com/tag/22nm",
"http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/05/leaked-intel-roadmap-hints-at-ivy-bridges-future/"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m6zli/eli5_how_are_they_making_technology_so_damn_small/c2ynkht"
]
] |
|
2semn4
|
When seceding from the Union, were Southern legislatures representing popular opinion or the interests of slave-owning elites?
|
In [this r/history thread](_URL_0_) several commenters observe that voting laws in 1860 were a bit of a mess. As a result, common white folks in Southern states were under-represented in their state legislatures compared to rich slave-owning aristocrats ~~just like in modern times~~. This led to Southern states seceding without necessarily taking into account popular opinion.
Additionally, the commenters mention that the national Congress was imbalanced in the favor of the North, which led to Southern states fearing a slavery ban was imminent, leading to them seceding pre-emptively.
Are these claims accurate? Was secession popularly supported?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2semn4/when_seceding_from_the_union_were_southern/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnowvex",
"cnowvj4",
"cnoy3ey",
"cnoygne",
"cnpqua5"
],
"score": [
10,
559,
63,
50,
3
],
"text": [
"The short answer, yes. The longer answer...\n\nOn secession, legislatures did not make the decision to leave the Union, there was a slightly different logic involved. The US Constitution, the big one that created the federal government was debated, written, and signed by a group of men who represented individual people. It was meant to be something entirely distinct from any national legislature under the Articles of Confederation. Thus the line in the federal constitution \"We the People.\" They aren't kidding. They really mean, all of the people who will be governed by the document (there are some logical turns in republican/democratic/constitutional theory that help them to account for people who did not support ratification.) It was done as something completely distinct from the sitting national legislature.\n\nFast forward to 1860. Slave-holding southerners are fed up with the federal government and worried that it will threaten slavery. They want to leave the Union, so how do they do it? The same way that the union was formed in the first place. The individual states called constitutional conventions and the men who represented the people writ large are the ones who voted to leave the Union. If you look at the ordinances of secession, each and every one of them says something like \"the people in convention assembled.\" It's not fancy language or just a nice turn of phrase. They mean, representatives of the people who are governed are the ones who consented to the creation of the federal government, they are the ones who are officially withdrawing that consent and seceding from the Union.\n\nWas secession popularly supported? The evidence that I can find suggests yes. Texas was the only southern state to submit their ordinance of secession to a popular vote before adopting it. 3/4 of the voting public voted in favor of leaving the Union, suggesting that yes. There was fairly widespread popular support for secession (though not universal support, there were some unionists running around in the south).\n\nSources: [Ordinances of secession](_URL_0_)\nFor the Texas fact see: Richard White, Law in American History vol 1, pg 386. White probably also has the bits about the people in convention assembled, but I'm sure there is a better secondary source for it. If anyone really wants it, let me know and I'll dig it up. For primary sources, you can read the Federalist Papers for the national constitution and then compare the logic there with writing from John C. Calhoun.\n\nedited to clarify a sentence and formatting because some days there just isn't enough coffee.",
"This is fairly accurate. The southern slave-owning states had absolutely been worried about slavery being abolished. They had long been pushing for more protections of slavery, and trying to persuade the new territories to hold slaves as well. They were keenly interested in making sure that there were at least as many slave-holding states as non-slave states. There was even talk of invading the Caribbean, and setting up a series of new, slave owning states.\n\nThe 1860 election really hammered home this imbalance. Lincoln won without the electoral votes of a single southern state. This meant that the south, even as a united block, could not win majority elections in the federal government. \n\nNow Lincoln had publicly stated that he was not going to outlaw slavery. He disliked the institution of slavery, but he felt very strongly that the federal government did not have the power to ban the practice. The southern states though, knew of his anti-slavery feelings, and with the practice becoming fairly unpopular internationally, feared that he would go back on his word and attempt to legislate against them.\n\nAs far as the Southern governments not representing their people, South Carolina is the most obvious example. The state legislature and governor positions didn't actually involve popular election until 1868. Ever since 1790, the state government of South Carolina declared that the legislators would appoint not only the state governor, but also all other legislative positions. Obviously, as a result, the state government was completely dominated by the plantation class who essentially appointed each other and took turns at various positions.\n\nSouth Carolina also had the most to fear from Lincoln. With a population which composed more slaves than free men, the federal government and John Brown style abolitionists drove the legislature into a rather paranoid frenzy. \n\nWas secession popularly supported? Yes and no. You had voices on all sides of the spectrum. McPherson certainly notes that letters written during the lead up to war written by plantation-owners contained roughly twice as much \"Nationalist\" language than poorer whites. Newspapers supported both sides of the argument. There may have been plenty of white southerners who weren't as invested economically in slavery, but damned if they were going to let the yankees criticize them. Propaganda followed the usual drum-beating approach. The North is going to impede on our freedom, and you're less of a man if you don't fight against that! \n\nUltimately though, I do feel that the Confederate governments led their populations into war hastily. Once shots had been fired though, the Southern population were certainly willing to fight as a matter of pride.\n\nSources:\n\nEdward Ayers *In the Presence of Mine Enemies*, James McPherson's *For Cause and Comrades*, and McPherson and William Cooper's *Writing the Civil War*.",
"Stephanie McCurry's [Confederate Reckoning](_URL_0_) covers this question perfectly. Her book is concerned with the role of people who didn't hold power in the Confederacy--ie, non-slaveholding whites, women, and blacks. More than anything, we should remember that women and blacks were people who were not allowed to vote in an election that would determine their future as much as anyone else's. \n\nOne of the first reminders that McCurry makes is that the Confederacy was conceived illiberally:\n\n > What secessionists set out to build was something entirely new in the history of nations: a modern, proslavery and antidemocratic state, dedicated to the proposition that all men are not created equal. Confederates were fully caught up in the turbulent currents of history that roiled the hemisphere in the age of emancipation; their proslavery experiment was part of a far larger struggle then being waged over slavery, democracy, and the powers of nation-states. Theirs was a nation founded in defiance of the spirit of the age. \n\nLet's start with South Carolina. It's is always a weird example when it comes to secession because it is the state with the largest fears of a race war like that in Haiti. It was also a single party state; South Carolina's voters didn't get to vote on their governor, US senators, state senators, many local officials, and electoral college (ie, the electorate didn't get to vote for president in 1860; the legislature did that for them). There, voters were allowed to go \"to the polls in a climate of political terror, surrounded by armed companies of men\" in order to vote in a show election for the state legislature in tickets that gave \"voters\" the right to support single party rule in the state. Consequently, nearly everyone elected to the state legislature had publicly advocated for immediate secession from the Union, and this was the closest South Carolina's voters got to voting for secession. \n\nThis chapter goes on to show how other states (or rather, slaveholders governing them) avoided letting the general public vote for secession because they didn't want to risk losing those elections. \n\nGeorgia and Texas, as in the /r/history thread you mention, were on the other side of the spectrum. Sam Huston was completely against secession and did everything he could to avoid it. Even then, the convention in Texas voted 166 for and 8 against secession, but this had to be confirmed by a popular vote. States that required a popular vote were much less likely to secede than South Carolina, for example. Georgia's vote was incredibly close, but the governor fudged the election results in order to secede with the rest of the lower South. \n\nSo yes, I would say that the democratic process then was a lot different from how we would expect it to work now. ",
"The state legislatures were indeed representing the will of the majority of the white population in secession. Southern politicians played a major role in creating this support but by the time they acted support for secession was widespread among all classes of white population in the south. \n\nSouthern whites genuinely believed that abolition of all slavery would be passed within a short amount of time. They believed that abolition was contrary to god's will as he had expressly allowed it in the bible. They believed that abolition would destroy the southern economy and plunge everybody into poverty. Perhaps most importantly they feared that without the social order of slavery blacks would become idle, then criminal and finally would engage in rebellion and murder against whites.\n\nTo start take a look at the relevant results of the [1860 census](_URL_0_). Slave owning elites may be a bit of a stretch. One third of all southern families owned a slave. In South Carolina arguably where secession has its roots 46% of all households owned slaves. 46% is hardly just a slave owning elite.\n\nYou also have to consider that not all slaves worked in the fields. If you went to the grocery a slave would likely carry your purchases home for you. If you went to a party there would be slaves to take your coat, stable your horses and unseen preparing much of the food. Slaves cleaned the streets, cared for children, worked in bakeries, and in general did all the undesirable tasks. I'm not saying Southern Whites were lazy rather that the presence of a controlled group of persons allowed them to avoid some tasks. Abolition didn't just affect the elites it changed the entire southern way of life.\n\nReturning to abolition and god's will. The major churches in the United States fractured over the issue of slavery well before the Civil War. Presbyterian in 1837, Methodist in 1844 and Baptist in 1845. In the years leading up to the war many southern congregations discussed how the North was trying to disrupt God's natural order by freeing blacks. The language interpreting god's will into politics increased in the years just before the civil war in both the North and the South. As each group insisted more on God's favor Religious language became increasingly common from politicians such as Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis neither of which showed a particularly religious nature earlier in their life.\n\nAs for my other claims they can be read in pamphlets that circulated throughout the South prior to and during the Civil War. While true that these pamphlets were mostly published by wealthy slave owners this was in large part due to this group having the money to publish such things. The spirit in Southern media both in newspapers and pamphlets was very much a we are all in this together attitude. Freeing the slaves meant the end of the Southern way of life for all whites slave owner or not. To better understand the rational of the South read [John Townsend The Doom of Slavery in the Union: Its safety out of it](_URL_1_)\n\nBy the time the first shots were fired there was popular support from far more than just a few \"slave-owning elites.\" The impetus to drum up this support did come from the wealthy slave owners they couldn't have manufactured the support from thin air. The ideas were already present in the southern population the politicians turned the ideas into a cause. ",
"From Eric Foner, I understood that yeoman and poor white farmers (white free labor) did not necessarily share a natural sympathy with the slave holding elite. I am hoping someone more knowledgeable than me would comment on this perspective vis-a-vis OP's question."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/2s2xi7/the_us_civil_war_a_proclamation_issued_by_the_sc/cnlvwwi"
] |
[
[
"http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/secessionacts.html"
],
[],
[
"http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674064218"
],
[
"http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html",
"http://civilwarcauses.org/townsend.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
29p3ru
|
why doesn't smoking, drinking or doing other drugs while pregnant qualify as child abuse or neglect?
|
I'm in Canada BTW, but if anyone can answer it'd be cool. I just don't get why a mother would get to keep her child or not be forced to get treatment if she's knowingly endangering her unborn child's life or wellbeing.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29p3ru/eli5_why_doesnt_smoking_drinking_or_doing_other/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cin3nda",
"cin44lr",
"cin453p",
"cin8zpd",
"cin9dwa",
"cin9ngz",
"cin9s06",
"cinauj1",
"cinb4ah",
"cincrpq",
"cinef3t",
"cineytq",
"cink1dr",
"cink4ru",
"cink7v9",
"cinl7tb",
"cinm9on",
"cino209",
"cintatf"
],
"score": [
147,
8,
67,
27,
4,
4,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because a fetus is not considered a being until birth.\n\nAfter birth though, the child can be taken in if it can be proven that the mother knowingly endangered the life of the unborn child.\n\nYou can lose custody if your habits cause extreme damage to the child. But at the same time, medical professionals recognize that the withdrawals from not smoking, drinking, etc for months can have an equally dangerous impact on the child, and most have alternatives to reduce the risk to the child to a manageable level.",
"There are States in the US where that is indeed a crime.",
"I believe the state of Louisiana has been putting women in jail for drug use while pregnant.",
"This is my favorite topic. I just reread this and it's a little bit of a rant. \n\nThe reason it's not abuse is the same reason that someone doesn't get accused of abuse for not taking prenatal vitamins. Smoking or drinking does not affect unborn children as much as many people would like it to. Every single woman on the face of the planet before (maybe) your mother smoked and drank all through their pregnancies. My grandfathers mother actually advised drinking before bed every night to help with night sweats. \n\nThat being said. Being an alcoholic can cause alcohol fetal syndrome or whatever it's called. Chain smoking is not the best thing in the world. Drugs of any kind can cause miscarriage or stillbirths. But drinking and smoking (here and there) will **most likely** not harm the baby. Notice all the cans in there. \n\n Just like forgetting to take your prenatal vitamins will not cause your baby to resemble Rosemary's baby. \n\nAlso, about smoking. One of the most damaging chemicals in cigarette smoke that is absorbed into the blood stream is carbon monoxide. Which is the product of anything burning. Including barbecue. The charred bits on us Americans burgers this weekend have as much cancer causing, baby mutating carbon as a cigarette. Cars put out carbon monoxide. Basically everything does. \n. \n\nKeep in mind that women in other parts of the world work in the field until their water breaks, birth the child, rest a little next to their carbon monoxidey stoves, and go right back out there. The 1st world has, in my opinion, gone a little bit overboard. Women have been having babies for an awful long time. In all kinds of environments. \n\nMore or less, it's not advisable, but it's not like letting your kid starve or beating them till they bleed. \n\n\nBut other drugs are illegal all the time.. Usually for a good reason. Shouldn't anyone who does them get arrested?\n",
"In the US, if baby tests positive for some illegal drugs at birth, it is reported and your child will likely go to foster care or kincare, not home with you. (I don't believe drug testing newborns is standard practice, so usually I think there has to be some kind of probable cause to test the baby (such as prior removals). ",
"Lawyer in Virginia and I've worked on a few of these cases. In VA it is if both the mother and child test positive at birth it may be grounds as abuse/neglect. The child can be taken or far more likely issued a protective order and if mother doesn't comply then there will be an emergency removal order. ",
"In South Carolina a pregnant woman with a positive drug screen can be arrested. ",
"It's an extraordinarily bad row to hoe telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies, even while pregnant. \n\nPeoples' bodies should be sacrosanct. ",
"Because abortion. If harming an unborn fetus is illegal than an abortion would be murder. Since the law doesn't recognize an unborn child as technically alive, you can't technically hurt it.",
"In Texas at least, if there's such evidence CPS will come and take the baby at birth if the mother is doing such activities. ",
"Well, I suppose, conflict of perspective. With abortions being legal and all, many don't even consider a fetus to be a human.\n\n",
"In the UK I believe legal action was being considered against a woman who gave birth to a child with foetal alcohol syndrome. ",
"Because why would it be considered abuse when people are allowed to just terminate the life?",
"I don't know about Canada, but in Alabama it does.",
"**Just because a woman is pregnant does not mean her only purpose in life is suddenly to be a baby-incubator.** The wishes, preferences, well-being, and right to say \"fuck it,\" of a living breathing ALIVE person will ALWAYS be more important than an unborn lump of cells that can't survive outside its host.",
"In the United States, if you test positive for illegal substances at birth, they will open a Department of Human Services investigation on you and any other children in your care. You do end up court involved, but it's in dependency court, not criminal court. Though one of the potential consequences of dependency court involvement is having your custodial rights suspended and the children being removed from your care.\n\nSource: worked in dependency court for three years and have seen many cases become court involved as a result of mothers on drugs at birth. ",
"I know a woman who was sent to prison for ten years for doing meth while pregnant.",
"Shouldn't the mother get arrested anyway if the fetus is tested positive not only because she hurt the child but because that proves she is on drugs which is illegal...",
"Yes it is okay to tell people what to do when they clearly are affecting the basic rights of another human being..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a147iy
|
what happens if a person (of average height and weight) hits the ground after reaching terminal velocity
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a147iy/eli5_what_happens_if_a_person_of_average_height/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eamm35f"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"R/watchpeopledie might see it there yourself. Basically you become a puddle with some bones jutting everywhere."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3mwaot
|
why does white clothing yellow after placed in storage for a long time
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mwaot/eli5_why_does_white_clothing_yellow_after_placed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvip18n"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It can be too much bleach, which causes fabrics to deteriorate over time, it can be inadequate washing or rinsing, decomposition of whitening agents or dye while in storage, or it can be acids present in storage containers, seeping into clothes and staining them.\n\n\nSource: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.ehow.com/about_6642880_do-clothes-turn-yellow-storage_.html"
]
] |
|
3hns30
|
why helicopters keep their engines on and the rotors at a high speed when they're on the ground even when they haven't just landed, or aren't about to take off?
|
I've definitely seen more helicopters in movies, so it could just be something for the camera, but I've definitely seen it in real life before also.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hns30/eli5_why_helicopters_keep_their_engines_on_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu8yy5g",
"cu8z8p6",
"cu8zk9v"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It takes a while for the rotors to start up or stop safely. There's a whole checklist the pilot has to go through.",
"A helicopter doesn't actually control its lift with rotor speed, it has to do with the angle of attack of the blades. So they stay spinning because there's no reason to stop them: it doesn't affect the craft moving, and as lokil130 pointed out, it takes a minute to turn them on and off.\n\n[The only reason I know how helicopters work](_URL_0_)",
"The blades are heavy as shit and don't have brakes. Starting them up takes time and energy, lots of both. If you're gonna sit for 15 minutes or less (just a number...might be closer to an hour depending on the actual craft) best to just keep them going because to stop them and then get them back up to speed it'll take longer and use more fuel."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdEWzqsfeHM"
],
[]
] |
|
124hv2
|
why people hate windows 8
|
It seems as though the entire Internet has a lot of resentment towards Windows 8...
I understand the (optional) interface change but what makes it so unbearable?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/124hv2/eli5_why_people_hate_windows_8/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6s34ca",
"c6s34hu",
"c6s5f8g",
"c6s5ggr",
"c6s7nxe",
"c6s83ju",
"c6s8xxd",
"c6sazab"
],
"score": [
10,
12,
3,
5,
6,
7,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"As a computer geek & student, we tend to hate Windows 8 because it seems like a sellout. Windows 7 was great because it had a clean feel to it and it worked great. Same with XP. Windows 8 looks like something I would give a toddler to play with. The windows phones aren't as popular and they seem to want to try to turn that into a useable computer console. Yeah if everyone had touch screens it'd be great but the majority of users are not going to go out and buy a new computer just so they can use 8. There was very little integration between 7 and 8. They threw users into a new interface that nobody really knows anything about and is bulky. It will take off but like CNN reported today, it's likely that 8 will not hit mainstream use until 2015. ",
"It is confusing to people who have used previous versions of Windows for years. The Metro interface is much more like an interface for a tablet or smartphone than what people are used to for a desktop computer. Many of the functions that have been used under Windows for years are now missing or have changed. For example, the \"Start\" menu no longer does some of the things it used to. \n \nI haven't had to use it yet, but the thing that sounds the worst to me from what I've been reading is the inability to have multiple apps windows visible at the same time. I believe that you can have the main app and part of another visible at the same time, which isn't the same thing. \n \nNote that Win8 has both the new Metro interface and a more traditional interface available, although it sounds like switching between the two causes some users problems, and the traditional interface still has changes with respect to earlier versions of Windows. \n \nFrom what I've read of Win8, it is a great incentive to try to switch to linux. ",
"it was made with touch screen/tablets in mind. you can use normal interface that is inferior to win 7 according to most people. to put it in perspective it is like you try to play games like RTS or MMO with gamepad. it is made for keyboard and work on keyboard best. same with win8 great for tablets but you limiting your self if you using it on desktop computer",
"The Metro interface is not optional, thou I wish it were. \n\nI'll repost something I said not too long ago in another thread talking about Metro: \n\nI think people see pretty tiles and fancy animations and become impressed. They don't actually look at it and go, 'How is this an improvement over win7? In what ways specifically is this better?'\n\nFor example, looking at Metro's search feature:\n\n* How is categorizing results into 3 groups better than displaying them all at once?\n\n* When a 'result' can be opened both in metro and in the control panel, how does having the metro version selected by default help me when I want to open it in the control panel?\n\n* Why is returning 'No results' better than skipping to the first category that actually has results?\n\n* How does using up my entire 24\" monitor to display a single result benefit me?\n\nI've brought these points up before and got downvoted because 'omg he hates it cause it's different!' but that's not true at all. I think Metro is a step backwards in terms of work efficiency. I've been using win8 for months on my laptop and so far I haven't seen a single feature in Metro that made doing my job easier.\n\nJust to be clear, I like windows 8, but I dislike metro.",
"Windows 95 (1995) - Crashed more often than Stevie Wonder's car.\n\nWindows 98 (1998) - Just like Windows 95, but not shitty!\n\nWindows ME (2000) - What fresh hell is this?\n\nWindows XP (2001) - Ah, solid.\n\nWindows Vista (2006) - Worse than Hitler.\n\nWindows 7 (2009) - No complaints!\n\nWindows 8 (2012) - You tell me...",
"- people don't like change\n- two wildly different user interfaces is confusing to average users\n- people are pretty satisfied with Windows 7 (and rightly so)",
"It's a solution looking for a problem. Win7 works fine, but now MicroSoft wants you to shell out another $150 for Win8, which by most accounts has an inferior GUI that moves everything around.\n\nThere's also the Vista factor at play in most people's minds. MicroSoft told people to upgrade from XP to Vista and claimed that Vista was so great. Turns out, Vista basically sucked. So people are wary of embracing what MicroSoft says is the next thing, because they've lied in the past. (There was also a similar, but far worse, debacle between Win95 and WinME. WinME was one of the worst operating systems MicroSoft has ever made. Possibly one of the worst ever sold by anyone, anywhere.)",
"Let me give an answer from a developer's perspective about something that doesn't get much press concerning Windows 8: secure boot.\n\nSecure boot is a way of locking down a computer when you first turn it on so that only authorized operating systems can boot. This is being marketed as a security measure to keep viruses from compromising the machine at it's very root. In reality, it's a mechanism for DRM.\n\nWindows 8 for ARM tablets requires this secure boot mechanism. For other machines, this is optional. The overall effect is that you cannot install an alternate operating system, or 'hack' the one already there.\n\nThere is alot of fear that Microsoft wants to close the windows ecosystem and turn it all into a walled garden like apple, making it so that the only way for people to sell software is through Microsoft. Microsoft takes a large cut of the profits, and has to approve you app before it can be released. Secure boot and the new app store are strong pushes in this direction.\n\nThat's the fear anyway; that the tablet method of \"install apps only from the manufacturer's store\" will became the norm for desktop and other machines. I think the enterprise market would embrace linux on the desktop before letting it go that far.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3rz3we
|
What did non-Roman Italian armies look like? Was there significantly different equipment used by the Etruscans, Samnites and Romans etc.?
|
I have a reasonable idea of what a Roman soldier might have looked like (*Hastati, Principes & Triarii* pre-Marius and legionary with *gladius, scutum* and *lorica* after), but how did the Etruscans, Samnites, Umbrians etc. equip themselves?
By the time of the Social Wars in 91 BC were they essentially fighting in Roman style *maniples* (my lecturer noted that maniples were partly designed to deal with the hilly terrain of the Italian highlands) or something entirely different?
I'm also curious to what extent/in what way their equipment/tactics may have changed since the earlier Italian revolts in the 4th century BC.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3rz3we/what_did_nonroman_italian_armies_look_like_was/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwspkq3"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I don't mean to discourage anyone else from posting, so please if you can provide a more complete answer then do so! Right now I'm just about to go to bed, so I'll provide a more detailed response tomorrow, if one is still called for.\n\nEarly on, the Etruscans would've been armed in a very Greek fashion, much like the early Roman Army. Likewise, there were many Greek cities throughout the South of Italy who would have fought in traditional Greek styles before being absorbed and Italianized. \n\nIt may surprise you too learn that the Maniple is actually a *Samnite* invention, which the Romans quickly adopted by the Romans after their early conflicts with the Samnites. The Romans soon found that their original, Phalanx style of warfare (inherited from the Etruscans) was too inflexible for fighting the wily Samnites in the Italian uplands. The Samnites themselves were actually a remarkable people, and provided a much greater challenge to Rome than any of her other Italian contemporaries, and in terms of their influence on Roman warfare had a much greater impact than their meager lands and little known name would suggest.\n\nHere is an excellent illustration of what Samnite warriors would have looked like _URL_0_ Notice their colorful outfits, their distinctive body armor, their smaller shields that don't look *quite* like the Roman *Scutum*...and the swastika symbol that always brings a comment or two when people first see depictions of the Samnites. Feathers in the helmets were also very common as well.\n\nGenerally the *Italic* peoples had similar armaments - thrusting and throwing spears (again, I believe the Samnites are credited with the original Roman throwing spear - the *Verutum* ), and some sort of cuirass which could range from the distinctive three-disk Samnite armor ( _URL_1_ ) to adopted Greek *Linthorax* armor, which I imagine would have been more common among the Bruttians and Lucanians due to their proximity to the Greek City States of Magna Graecia. Also shields of various types were used as well.\n\nOver time the trend would be towards standardization, where thrusting spears were phased out in favor of the gladius, chainmail was adopted, and the shields made uniform. The Roman style of war evolved alongside its Italian contemporaries, to the point that by the Social Wars the distinction was almost meaningless, and the Socii infantry was for the most part trained, armed, and organized in the Roman fashion.\n\nThat ended up being a much longer answer than I intended! But hopefully it touched all of the salient points for you. The Italic armies aren't my specialty, but I'll try to answer any follow-up questions you may have."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://i1301.photobucket.com/albums/ag107/Monchegorsk/samnites_zpsb42d5b32.jpg",
"http://www.thefakebusters.com/greek%20bronze%20helmets/pics%20Greek%20bronze%20helmets/chalcidian/72701.jpg"
]
] |
|
2f6zqw
|
Who wrote the declaration of independence(literally)?
|
Like who actually put the pen on paper and wrote it down? Did the founding fathers think of who had the best handwriting or something?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2f6zqw/who_wrote_the_declaration_of_independenceliterally/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck6irz4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" > Timothy Matlack was probably the engrosser of the Declaration\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_history.html"
]
] |
|
5ft6hl
|
Were there trebuchets actually capable of launching a 90kg projectile over 300m?
|
This seems like a joke but it's not
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5ft6hl/were_there_trebuchets_actually_capable_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dana3nz",
"danacd1"
],
"score": [
29,
14
],
"text": [
"Where are you getting that from? Some context would be helpful.",
"What time period? There are certainly some today that can launch such a projectile so far."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3g91ag
|
how come if you pee or cum in your dream, you pee or cum in real life, but with anything else you're just dreaming? (nsfw)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g91ag/eli5how_come_if_you_pee_or_cum_in_your_dream_you/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctvysdg"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In REM (rapid eye movement) sleep there are a bunch of chemicals that paralyze you're body so you don't move about while you sleep. Though sometimes it's not perfect and under certain conditions in the brain, it will fail and you will move about. For example sleep walking\n\nWith peeing or ejaculation in particular. Peeing is a lot easier to do, because if you're busting you have to hold it in with muscles and in REM relaxing muscles is a lot easier than working them.\n\nWith Ejaculation I assume it's because hormones from the brain help with you becoming erect. You can't just flex your penis instantly, it's do with the hormones and during a dream your brain can get aroused and send the hormones down. I could be totally wrong with this, but it's an educated guess."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
acu7il
|
how does one retire to another country?
|
My uncle is planning to spend his retirement in Germany and since his wife is German I know this is very much possible but I often hear people say “When I’m old, I want to retire to another country” despite them not having any sort of connection to said country. How does this work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/acu7il/eli5_how_does_one_retire_to_another_country/
|
{
"a_id": [
"edasexz",
"edbdsoo",
"edbe6jw"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are no answers that fit every situation, but some countries, such as Thailand, have retirement visas to attract retirees if they fit the requirements. Some countries also have investment visas that can be pseudo retirement visas.",
"I'm in this process now, to a country where I have many connections. Previously I have been an expat a couple of times where my employer handled the logistics, so I'm a bit shell-shocked at how many decisions there are to be made along with the normal challenges of retiring.\n\nThe first step is to figure out how to get legal residence in the foreign country. It isn't just a matter of convincing someone that you will be a positive influence; you have to find a category and meet specific requirements according to the laws of that country. Some countries want retirees and make it easy; other countries don't. \n\nAssuming his wife still has German citizenship, it will probably be pretty easy for your uncle to get residence. In most countries a citizen can sponsor a non-citizen spouse. Once he has that he should be able to rent an apartment, open a bank account, buy health insurance, whatever he needs to do. \n\nAssuming they are US citizens or permanent residents: if they qualify for the Social Security old age benefit, they can receive that anywhere. Probably they won't have to pay German income taxes on their SS and retirement savings since they weren't earned in Germany, but they need to check. What will NOT follow them abroad are any kind of Medicare benefits, or Medicaid or SSI if they is getting either of those in the US. Only the normal SS old age benefit. \n\nThey should continue paying their Medicare B premiums while abroad in case they return at some point to live in the US, otherwise they will face premium penalties if they return. (If they aren't yet 65, when each one reaches 65 s/he should sign up for Medicare A, which is free, and B, which requires a premium that will be deducted from SS if s/he is receiving SS.) If they ever return to live in the US they will benefit from a special enrollment period to get back into the optional parts of Medicare (Medigap, Medicare Advantage, prescription coverage), so they shouldn't try to maintain those while they are living abroad. \n\nThey will need to continue to file US tax returns and pay US income taxes on their SS and withdrawals from 401(k)s and taxable IRAs. As part of their tax returns they will need to report their foreign bank accounts and other foreign assets to the IRS, and depending on how many $$$ they have in their foreign accounts they may have to do separate annual FBAR filings with the Dept. of Treasury.\n\nYou don't say which state they live in, but if it is one with high income taxes they may wish to consider cutting ties with that state and establishing at least a virtual presence (virtual mailbox, cheap mobile plan, etc.) in a state with no income tax to reduce the tax burden on their SS and taxable retirement savings. \n\nIf they want to ship their furniture and other possessions, that's another whole (expensive!) nightmare.\n\nHope this makes it a bit more real .",
"Lots of countries with low incomes are delighted to have rich retirees come and spend money. Lots of Canadians spend six months a year in Florida."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1kz292
|
Which postcolonial countries of South America had the greatest economic power during the 19th Century?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1kz292/which_postcolonial_countries_of_south_america_had/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbuhjua"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Argentina became a pretty wealthy country in terms of GDP per capita during the 1800's largely due to agricultural development and exportation. Wikipedia says they had the 10th highest GDP per capita in 1913. The country had huge income inequality though, which continues in a lesser state today. _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Argentina"
]
] |
||
7fvcbl
|
how do they find out the money conversion rate? (example: 1 canadian dollar is 0.79 usd)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7fvcbl/eli5_how_do_they_find_out_the_money_conversion/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dqel9mo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Transactions on the Forex market are updated in real time. Sellers of the Canadian dollar can ask for more in return if the demand goes up, or vise versa. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5t0yfd
|
why are "bad" things (such as binge drinking, driving fast, eating unhealthy, not working
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5t0yfd/eli5_why_are_bad_things_such_as_binge_drinking/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddja2e8"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Can you elaborate a little more?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
a2plew
|
If an egg has one X chromosome and a sperm cell has either an X or a Y, the how do some people have 3 X chromosomes?
|
[deleted]
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/a2plew/if_an_egg_has_one_x_chromosome_and_a_sperm_cell/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eb1nw9r"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Sometimes errors occur during meiosis which results in a gamete (egg or sperm) having both copies of the chromosome from that parent. It is the same process that results in Down Syndrome just with a different set of chromosomes. In general, this category of genetic disorders is referred to as trisomy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5mylp8
|
How does the public perception of historical events compare to the actual history?
|
How has the perception of history overshadowed actual historical events? For example, Benjamin Franklin flying a kite with a key to “discover electricity” might be a small scale example. Or people “knowing” history from Shakespeare or movies.
What scholarship exists on the perception of history?
Finally, what do you think the impact of collective memory or public opinion is on the historical record/how history is presented? (For example the cancellation of the Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum.)
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5mylp8/how_does_the_public_perception_of_historical/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dc7mrvh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Take a look at this: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/historically_accurate"
]
] |
|
2vuwcu
|
How can we tell how accurate a timekeeping device is?
|
As in, how do we know it's off by 1 second every X years, particularly if it's the most accurate clock we currently have?
When we compare an atomic clock with, for instance, a pulsar how do we know which of the two is the more accurate time keeper?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2vuwcu/how_can_we_tell_how_accurate_a_timekeeping_device/
|
{
"a_id": [
"colgygi"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"All of the timekeeping devices I can think of off the top of my head basically work by measuring how long something takes to happen (either by using a single interval or by counting occurrences of the event).\n\nAn example of using interval directly: a sundial. When the shadow moves from one mark to the next mark one hour has passed.\n\nAn example of counting occurrences: a quartz digital watch. The watch uses a quartz crystal that oscillates 32,768 times per second. Every time the watch counts 32,768 oscillations, one second has passed.\n\nSo, what does this mean for the accuracy of a timekeeping device? Two things.\n\n1. Your precision, how small an amount of time you can measure, depends on the interval between events. A 32,768Hz quartz clock can't resolve differences smaller than 1/32,768 of a second.\n\n2. Your accuracy, how much error builds up over time, depends on how stable the interval between events is. If your interval is PERFECTLY stable (which is physically impossible), meaning the length of time between events is EXACTLY the same every time, no error will accumulate. To measure time by counting events, you have to assume a certain interval between events. When you add up the difference between your assumed interval and the actual interval over time for every event, you get the accumulated error.\n\nSo, what's good about caesium atomic clocks? Well, they do very well on both of these standards. The 'event' happens 9,192,631,770 times per second, so the precision is very high, and this value is extremely stable - the fancy ones are stable to better than 1 part in 1,000,000,000,000,000, so very little error builds up over time.\n\nThere is a clock in Poland which works by observing a number of different pulsars but the pulsars oscillate on the order of 1-10 ms. Error is similar to atomic clocks, a little behind the best caesium atomic clocks. One drawback to pulsar clocks is that the frequency of the pulsars is pretty low - on the order of 100-1000Hz - so while the accuracy over time (stability) is good, the precision (how small a time interval you can measure) is not as good as an atomic clock.\n\nThere are also more exotic clocks based on even higher frequency oscillations - the highest I can find reference to is a clock based on UV radiation from a single aluminum ion which manages stability about 37 times better than the best caesium atomic clock currently in use.\n\nThe way that you actually measure the stability of these different timekeeping methods is pretty simple. You just take several clocks, and you run them for a long time and see how much they drift apart. From the amount of drift you can calculate the worst case stability for the clocks."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5q5fkm
|
how do card "hackers" not get caught?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5q5fkm/eli5_how_do_card_hackers_not_get_caught/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcwgepm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because often the guy that stole your card info isn't the one that used it. If you're smart, you steal/skim a bunch of credit cards and then sell them to a foreign group that will use them. This makes it extra hard for credit card companies to figure out how bad guys are getting your information, as it's exchanged hands so many times before being used. \n\nOf course that foreign group could be using hacking/phising to get the card information themselves. Vertical integration is one of the best ways to grow a business after all. \n\nOnce you start using a stolen card, you're against a timer before the number is shut down by the owner or credit card company. Like you did, someone will report the card stolen, and the credit card company will try to track the purchases to find *someone* to arrest. \n\nUnfortunately, it's really easy to create a false identity online. Odds are the names and addresses used are either the original cardholders or wholly false. \n\nThe cleverer ones will buy gift cards that send codes via email, which can be readily converted into cash or simply used for everyday purchases. If someone offered you a $100 Walmart gift card for $50, would you ask questions?\n\nEven IF they find someone, odds are that person isn't a US citizen. To have them punished, you have to go through the US and Foreign state department to see which local laws apply, and THEN the foreign local government would START their investigation and probably not even find the guy. \n\nEVEN IF they find the guy, they'd have to bust him for violating a LOCAL law, or extradite him to the US so we can have a trial that will ultimately determine that US law doesn't apply to a foreign nationals unless his home country is OK with giving up one of their citizens so the US can imprison them, but WOW is that not going to go over well. \n\nNow more than a year has passed, and your credit card company has spent tens of thousands in investigation, lobbying, and legal fees just to apprehend the guy that used your card to steal $500 of iTunes gift cards to make $250 to feed his family. \n\nOr Wells Fargo/Visa can just write it off, give you back the $500 and only pick the lowest hanging fruit. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3cmygk
|
why do humans have two of some things, but one of others?
|
So this is a really stupid sounding question, but what im asking is why do humans have two lungs, and two breasts, two kidneys, but only one heart and brains and other things? and yes i realize how stupid this posts sounds, but i cant figure out any not stupid way of saying it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3cmygk/eli5_why_do_humans_have_two_of_some_things_but/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csx20i1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's a popular question actually. Check out these previous answers.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vugg7/eli5why_do_humans_have_two_testicles/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2afi2u/eli5_why_do_people_have_two_of_some_organs/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30j1cn/eli5why_do_humans_have_two_kidneys_if_we_only/"
]
] |
|
19uc2h
|
What was Hitler's reaction to the Nanking massacre, if any?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/19uc2h/what_was_hitlers_reaction_to_the_nanking_massacre/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8rgnry"
],
"score": [
45
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nYou should read about John Rabe. He was a Nazi in Nanking at the time. Very similar story to Shindler's (Shindler's list). Since the Nazi's and the Japanese we allies, he was able to use that to help out many people in the city. \n\nTo sort of answer your question, he tried to contact the authorities back in Germany to get Japan to stop, but they were not very happy about it. When he went back to Germany, he was arrested. \n\nNot sure if Hitler himself knew about any of it, though."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rabe"
]
] |
||
b8qenc
|
what makes cavities hurt and why does filling the hole make it better?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b8qenc/eli5_what_makes_cavities_hurt_and_why_does/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejzhf40",
"ejzhl1e"
],
"score": [
7,
4
],
"text": [
"Cavities hurt because the nerves in the tooth are exposed. Filling the hole once it's cleaned out blocks things like air, food, and germs from getting stuck and making it worse.",
"So, your tooth is made up of protective layers (enamel, being the hardest and furthest out, then softer dentin underneath), and inside there's nerves (along with blood vessels and some other stuff). When you have a cavity, air, bacteria, and foreign material can get in and irritate the nerves, registering to you as pain. Even a cavity that doesn't go deep enough can still hurt because the deeper layers transfer changes in temperature and pressure to the nerve more directly than the harder outer layers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
9anc6v
|
why some otherwise appealing photos or illustrations look awful when simply flipped horizontally?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9anc6v/eli5_why_some_otherwise_appealing_photos_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e4wod7v",
"e4wok2e"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"It's hard to picture this happening. Can you link to some examples?",
"I know the phenomenon you're talking about, but I can honestly only objectively speak to illustrations for this, not photos. \n\nWhen an artist is drawing an illustration, sometimes they make mistakes that \"look\" correct when they are close to the work (or are easy to ignore because they are commonly made mistakes for the artist), but flipping the canvas exposes the mistakes to a different perspective and then makes them more glaringly obvious. This is why many illustrators suggest flipping the canvas very frequently (or using a mirror when working traditionally) when drawing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
17axaw
|
why do charge cards need to have a signature on the back, and why doesn't anyone check it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17axaw/eli5_why_do_charge_cards_need_to_have_a_signature/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c83tjo5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Back when there were credit cards during the 80's and 90's, they would verify the receipt signature with the card's signature. Since the design format for an ATM card/ Debit card is the same as a Credit Card, and because they can be used like a Credit Card, the signature block remained. \n\nNo one checks them either out of laziness, or the fact that punching in your PIN acts as a digital signature. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bqjfkv
|
If Bees were not widely populated in the Americas until 1622, how did the flora survive?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/bqjfkv/if_bees_were_not_widely_populated_in_the_americas/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eo8bkvk",
"eo96x65"
],
"score": [
19,
4
],
"text": [
"[There are plenty of native bees, and many insects like small parasitic wasps that also snack on nectar and pollinate flowers](_URL_0_) Most of the native bees are solitary, a few live in very small hives.\n\nThose are plenty to pollinate a garden, but not a farm or orchard. Native pollinators need habitat that farms don't provide, while bees live in a concentrated hive. When too much of one crop is planted in one place, they become dependent on travelling beekeepers. For example, and apple orchard provides a feast of nectar for ten days, and not much food the rest of the year. So they pay beekeepers who move hives around in trucks. Native bees don't return to a portable hive, and they need food year round.\n\nThe idea that humans need bees isn't quite right. Concentrated, single crop agriculture needs them. If not for honeybees, an orchard would have to plant multiple crops to sustain native pollinators through the year, and reserve some space as a meadow for them to live. That would raise the price of food, not end civilization.",
"The Western Honey Bee *apis mellifera* are only one of some 16,000 species of bees and the only one brought from Europe to the Americas for the explicit purpose of being managed. Prior to the arrival of Europeans the native bee species pollinated the native American plants but didn't have to worry about crops like apples which also came from Europe.\n\nYou should also note that many of our crops are not pollinated by bees of any type: wheat, corn, other grains or are not native to the Americas: apples, citrus, almonds."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://bugguide.net/node/view/475348"
],
[]
] |
||
177q84
|
Does the color of sunlight have an impact on the ability of a solar cell to generate electricity?
|
For example - I have a portable solar powered recharger for my phone, how would being on a planet orbiting a different colored star (like a red dwarf or a blue giant) effect its ability to generate electricity? Would the different wavelengths be more or less efficient? Would it work at all?
ELI5, please.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/177q84/does_the_color_of_sunlight_have_an_impact_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c82zyi8"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"YES! The color of light has a huge impact on the ability of a solar cell to generate electricity. This was one of the ways they discovered the principles behind solar cells in the first place. When low energy light (like red light) strikes certain semiconducting surfaces, it does nothing, but when higher energy blue light strikes the same surfaces, it causes current to flow! \n\nIn fact, the most recent generation of high-efficiency solar cells (called [multijunction cells](_URL_1_)) are the most efficient because they contain multiple materials that each absorb a certain range of light frequencies well, so together they can efficiently absorb much more of the usable light than ordinary cells.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nEDIT: Multijunction not multi-heterojunction... mah bad."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multijunction_solar_cell"
]
] |
|
23awqe
|
why do pork rinds say "not a significant source of protein" when a single serving is 7 grams, or about 12% of your daily recommended intake, more than an egg?
|
They seem like a very good source of protein, but it says "not a significant source of protein"
What gives? They're like 50% pure protein.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23awqe/eli5_why_do_pork_rinds_say_not_a_significant/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgv8uhe"
],
"score": [
69
],
"text": [
"I was pretty curious about this myself so I did some Googling. As far as I can tell the reason is because pork rinds lack certain amino acids required for processing protein, so your body does not actually make use of the protein unless you eat the pork rinds along with something else that has the necessary amino acids. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1rz1tm
|
Why did the May 4th/New Culture movement in early 20th century China blame Confucianism for China's problems?
|
My very limited understanding of Confucianism (read: wikipedia) is that it values altruism, loyalty, respect, moral behaviour and was the motivating factor in the meritocratic [imperial examination](_URL_0_) system. On the surface these seem like pretty good qualities. Why did the May 4th/New Culture movement see these as weaknesses?
I've been reading [Lu Xun's](_URL_1_) short stories and i'm having trouble understanding his critiques.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1rz1tm/why_did_the_may_4thnew_culture_movement_in_early/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdtyys4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A couple reasons: \n\n1) Because Confucianism also demands fealty to the government as it is currently constituted. You can't really build a movement for change around a system that holds that the ruler deserves almost parental loyalty. At least not unless you're trying to put a new Emperor in place.\n\n2) Because Confucians were the ones who were obstructing change. The biggest proponents of Confucianism were reactionary factions who were attempting to maintain the status quo in the face of decades of attempts to bring about change. By the time of the New Culture Movement, the people behind it had more or less given up on the idea of gradual change, and believed that a Japanese-style break with the past was the best option for a strong China. \n\nThere's a good discussion of it in Spence's \"The Chinese and Their Revolution,\" though some background knowledge is helpful."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lu_Xun"
] |
[
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.