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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4tjczs
|
Are there any animals which have benefited from human dominance of the planet?
|
The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are city-dwelling pests such as rats and pigeons, but then again I know nothing about rat/pigeon population pre-civilization, so I could be wrong there.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4tjczs/are_there_any_animals_which_have_benefited_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5jauom",
"d5jn4t7"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Dogs - or rather their wolf ancestors... In order to gain protection and a constant supply of food from the human communities at the time, the dog ancestors evolved to look less menacing (i.e. Increasingly cute), display loyalty and an offer of companionship. ",
"If you're just looking at straight population counts, it could be said that domestic livestock, like cattle, pigs, sheep, chickens, etc. have benefited from human dominance. If you are considering quality as well as quantity of life in the term \"benefited,\" then it's harder to make that case. \n\nCertainly, as others have said the animals we domesticated to keep as pets, such as cats and dogs, have benefited, as have urban pest species and the invasive species we have introduced to certain areas. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
csbg7a
|
why does it hurt to put a retainer in after not wearing it for a few days? do our teeth really shift that much in such a short period of time?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/csbg7a/eli5_why_does_it_hurt_to_put_a_retainer_in_after/
|
{
"a_id": [
"exdtgzj",
"exdv4or"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"They certainly do. It doesn't take all that much shifting for them to hurt, though, since the retainer gives them very little wiggle room. I have personally broken a retainer after going for a week without wearing it.",
"If I force my retainer in after a few years of not wearing it and it fits (tightly/painfully) would it move my teeth back into place?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1qg0hh
|
When you cook something to 'bring out the flavor' what exactly is going on?
|
You hear cooking show chefs say it all of the time...
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1qg0hh/when_you_cook_something_to_bring_out_the_flavor/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdcftxw"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"[Caramelization](_URL_0_) and [Maillard reaction](_URL_1_), mostly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caramelization",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maillard_reaction"
]
] |
|
2zo150
|
how is it that if i put a gameboy game made for the original gameboy into a gameboy color, that the game is in full color?
|
I put a 1989 Super Mario Land game (and a few other early games)into my Gameboy Color and the game is in full color, and the colors make sense (e.g., Mario is red). How is it that it can be in color like that if it was made nearly 10 years before the Gameboy Color was made?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zo150/eli5_how_is_it_that_if_i_put_a_gameboy_game_made/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpkq21f"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The Game Boy Color was programmed to recognise certain high-profile Game Boy games and apply a specific palette to them. The original Game Boy only had 4 shades of grey, so the GBC cleverly maps each of the 4 shades to a different colour *according to the type of object the graphic is*. So, for example, the 4 shades in the Mario sprite get mapped to 4 colours, while the 4 shades in the background get mapped to a different 4 colours and all non-Mario sprites get another 4 colours, creating up to (IIRC) 12 colours onscreen.\n\nOnly a few of the most popular original Game Boy games had palettes pre-programmed (Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc). Other games just get random colours assigned which can look goofy.\n\nYou can actually swap the palettes by holding different buttons when booting up your Game Boy Color. Try holding Left+B, Right+B, Right+A, Up+A, etc while it says \"GAME BOY\" during the boot up."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
vn1c4
|
How would a continuous audio signal being sent from a ship travelling directly towards Earth at near light speed be perceived upon reception?
|
Assuming the ship is travelling at a sufficient proportion of light speed to cause time dilation effects to be generated, say a relativity factor of 2, would the audio be received at half speed, or double speed? Or, as the signal is travelling at light speed, would it be at normal speed?
If the ship took, for example, 11 years to travel the 10 light years back to earth, and broadcast its signal via a laser targeted for reception on earth, how long would the audio last?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/vn1c4/how_would_a_continuous_audio_signal_being_sent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c55vtm6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You are calling it an \"audio signal\" but then are saying it is flying through space and that it is propagating at light speed. So I am assuming what you mean is it is sending out some electromagnetic signal (like a radio wave) which then a tuner on Earth (Like and FM tuner) could construct into audio. \n\nIn this scenario, the electromagnetic wave will be affected as described by the [relativistic doppler effect](_URL_0_) which accounts for both the regular doppler shifts of a moving object, as well as the relativistic time dilation. What you will notice if you read that article is that the radio waves you are sending out of your ship will be blue-shifted considerably, if you are going fast enough, into the gamma spectrum. So now, the wavelength has changed and any antenna you had would have to be re-tuned in order to work on the new, blue-shifted frequency. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Doppler_effect"
]
] |
|
1opl33
|
How did Turkey keep out of WWII?
|
Why did the Axis not invade Turkey after Bulgaria? Was access to the Middle East and Caucasia not attractive enough?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1opl33/how_did_turkey_keep_out_of_wwii/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccubkvr",
"ccuby0v",
"ccuc2e3",
"ccucddz",
"ccukpzx",
"ccuqlxu"
],
"score": [
5,
10,
411,
20,
46,
2
],
"text": [
"Germany signed a non-aggression pact with Turkey in 1941 to secure Germany's flank during the invasion of the Soviet Union. ",
"While what others have said was going on, turkey was also building fortifications all along trace and moving thousands and thousands of people to mainland anatolia. When you drive into Turkey in some parts you can still see the line of bunkers stretching from valley to valley. More trouble than it was worth essentially.\nsource: retired turkish army Corporal I spoke to.",
"Well technically Turkey didn't. Through much of the war, Turkey was trading with both sides, and actually signed a non-Aggression pact with Germany just prior to Barbarossa, but relations deteriorated with the Axis, and Turkey declared war in February, 1945.\n\nBoth sides were pretty much OK with Turkey's neutrality early on. Germany obviously wanted to secure their flank against Turkey possibly joining the Allies, and the in the early years, the Allies were fine with it since it would prevent Germany from sweeping into the Middle East from that direction, meaning one less front to defend for them. The Western Allies though started pressing Turkey to come and join them though, stepping it up heavily in 1943. At the very least it was hoped that Turkey would render more material aid, and stop trading with the Axis. Best case scenario, Churchill wanted them to join the war to attack the Balkans. \n\nThe Soviets however were seen as a threat to Turkey, and wasn't part of this pressure. Stalin had even expressed a desire for Turkish territory, or violating Turkish neutrality. This actually helped push them into the Allied camp though, since appeasing the US and UK would obviously put Turkey under their protection in the case of Soviet aggression. So by mid-1944, Turkey was pretty much pro-Allies, and cut of diplomatic relations with the Axis. Turkey knew a winner when she was one, and in a mostly symbolic gesture by that point, officially declared war in early 1945. I don't believe that Turkish troops saw combat (I could be wrong though), and the main effect of this was Turkey's early involvement in the UN (founding member) and NATO (joined 3 years after creation).",
" > Was access to the Middle East and Caucasia not attractive enough?\n\nThe mountains of Turkey would've made this a logistical nightmare. Axis supply lines would've been very vulnerable to partisan attack and air/naval/marine attacks from the Mediterranean.\n\nLook to Yugoslavia for a comparable situation.",
"Awesome question, right up my dissertation's alley, so here we go.\n\nTo answer your sub-questions first: Why did the Axis not invade Turkey after Bulgaria (and Greece)? For one, because Hitler never wanted to invade those areas in the first place. Only after Mussolini invaded Greece and found the going a bit tougher than he first imagined did Hitler feel compelled to bring the war machine (and the Holocaust along with it) to southeast Turkey. Hitler had no interest in expanding the SE Europe distraction any more than was already necessary. Additionally, Churchill was utterly unable to convince Ismet Inönü (the Turkish President) to enter the war on the side of the Allies until the very end of the war. \n\nAnd to the second question about access to the ME/Caucasia being attractive, these are technically two separate questions. Nazi influence in the Middle East was independent of any interest they may have had in Turkey, and was met with mixed reception. Reaction against Nazism was fierce in Egypt, more open amongst the Baathi's in Syria, and more of a marriage of convenience amongst the Arab Palestinian leaders (Hajj al-Amin al-Husayni). The Caucasus was firmly in the grasp of the USSR, and since the Nazi's were up for invading Russia and gaining Black Sea control, then that would be easy enough--no need to engaging yet another neutral power (and one with quite a large standing army to boot).\n\nThat last point is perhaps the most critical -- Turkey was probably the most mobilized neutral power of the whole conflict. Turkish neutrality was constantly under threat and there definitely was the thinking that they were ready to enter (on either side) at a moment's notice. The precipitating effect of this is often credited with Turkey's zeal in participating in the Korean War (several hundred thousand soldiers got all jacked up for a war that they ultimately didn't get to fight, hence the first legitimate opportunity to fight following the war, they took).\n\nAs for how they were able to deny the very compelling reasons not to enter (until very early in 1945, when they did effectively join the Allies), one must credit the deft diplomacy of Ismet Inönü. Russia was of course a threat, but Inönü himself was largely the architect of Turkey's alliance with the USSR during the late 20s and early 30s. Arguably, he had a much better feel for Stalin and his aims than any American or British diplomat. Likewise, he was able to deny many advances from Churchill who was operating on the rather stupid assumption that the Turks would bend to the threat of Russian invasion because they viewed them as mortal enemies (this might have worked on a paranoid Ottoman sultan, like, say, Abdülhamid II, but not on Inönü, who was much smarter).\n\nHigh politics aside, there's another reason for Turkey's neutrality in WWII, and this is part of the argument I'm trying to formulate in my own research, and that has to do with the fact that the social and intellectual situation on the ground was incredibly fractured in terms of which side they actually supported. There were fierce fights in the press about whether Turkey should enter into an alliance with the West, Russia or Germany. Political ideologies of communism, fascism, nationalism and Islamism were beginning to harden, and with the convenient polarities of the world war, became popularized in the culture. The point being that although they were not fighting with guns and bombs, the Turkish public was fiercely entrenched in the ideological battles being fought throughout Europe, and this battle had extreme consequences. They were certainly involved in this conversation, and observers from all sides of the European conflict were keenly aware of the conversations that were going on. If Inönü were to enter on one side or the other, it would have taken a serious ideological campaign of support to throw their support behind one side or the other. Remember, if Turkey joined the Allies, these are essentially the same powers that twenty-odd years earlier they were fighting against in their war for independence. If they were joining the Axis, that would have serious repercussions for some of their minorities and would involve a more radical shift in the ideological nature of their regime (though there were many affinities between Inönü and Mussolini, the Turks were not in the empire business). Ultimately, Inönü was successful in bottling up this conversation until after the war was over--after which he was able to manage the popular ideological situation without the threat of having to fend off an invading foreign power.\n\nLastly, here's a few books that might enlighten you on this scenario:\nMetin Heper [Ismet Inönü](_URL_0_)\n\nMark Mazower [Inside Hitler's Greece](_URL_2_)\n\nErik Jan Zürcher [Turkey: A Modern History](_URL_1_)\n\nThere's also much, much more written in Turkish on this subject, and I might guess from your user name that you might read Turkish. If you're interested I can provide those books too.",
"Is there any truth to this? Supposedly Turkey had it's army at ready to enter Caucasus if Stalingrad fell."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Ismet-In%C3%B6n%C3%BC-BRILL-1998-HEPER/dp/B004K850IU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382129150&sr=8-1&keywords=metin+heper+ismet+inonu",
"http://www.amazon.com/Turkey-History-Erik-J-Zurcher/dp/1860649580/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382129256&sr=8-1&keywords=turkey+a+modern+history",
"http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Hitlers-Greece-Experience-Occupation/dp/0300089236/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382129219&sr=8-1&keywords=hitler%27s+greece"
],
[]
] |
|
uisvi
|
Do astronauts get sick in space/stop getting sick over a period of time?
|
Basically, if you sent astronauts in a sterile environment (ideally) into space - would they ever catch a cold? Get the flu? Would their immune systems eventually be able to fight off all contaminates within this environment over time? There are two scenarios here:
Send one person into space, in a sterile environment - does he ever get sick?
Send multiple people into space, in a sterile environment, they may catch bugs from each other because humans aren't entirely sterile, but over time, would they get immune to each others germs and stop getting sick all together?
Thanks!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/uisvi/do_astronauts_get_sick_in_spacestop_getting_sick/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4vro17"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Well you've pretty much answered your own question, eventually they would become immune to all present bacteria and viruses assuming that the people had good immune systems that completely removed the pathogen from their system. You do have to allow for mutations in the pathogens which could cause another infection.\n\nHowever, astronauts don't just stay isolated in space for long periods of time, they get deliveries from earth all the time bringing possible new bacteria. In my non professional opinion, I think they would get just as many colds etc as normal people on earth"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1d9hi7
|
What happened to the indigenous people of Newfoundland?
|
I recently read a reference to the indigenous inhabitants of Newfoundland that implied their fate was similar to that of the Tasmanian Aboriginals. I'm very ignorant about Canadian history, but I do know that the Tasmanian genocide was one of the blackest chapters in the history of my country. Is the fate of the native Newfoundlanders comparable? What happened to them? Are there any survivors, as is the case with the mixed race Tasmanians?
Thanks in advance.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1d9hi7/what_happened_to_the_indigenous_people_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9o7efl",
"c9o9lri"
],
"score": [
5,
8
],
"text": [
"Someone else may have to provide a more comprehensive answer, but it is my understanding that there has been some debate whether the extinction of the Beothuk people (the native inhabitants of Newfoundland) could be called a genocide or not but, either way, they were declared extinct in 1829 (though there is some evidence that there were a few survivors beyond then).\n\nFor the most part, the story is similar to others regarding European contact with indigenous peoples: conflict and disease made short work of the native peoples. From what I understand, revenge was an important part of the Beothuk culture, so conflict with European settlers was self-sustaining once it began.\n\nAn interesting note about survivors: while they are technically extinct, some recent research shows that it is possible a rare mitochondrial DNA sequence found in Iceland could originate in North American indigenous people - possibly the Beothuk.",
"I'm not sure about the Tasmanian Aboriginals so unfortunately I can't really compare the two but I can talk about the Beothuks. \n\nI also want to say I don't have my history book that deals with early NL history so I am going off memory. The main contact with the Beothuks took place in Trinity Bay on the Avalon peninsula in the summer/fall. The Beothuks used to move to the coast in the summer to hunt sea birds and to fish. In the winters they would migrate back inland where they would hunt Caribou other small game. European contact at first was sketchy with scattered reports of sightings and some camps that were found. \n\nUnfortunately like more Native species there were misunderstands and many examples of Europeans shooting first, asking questions later. This pushed the Beothuks away from their traditional grounds which caused a lack of food for the population. Desperation pushed the Beothuks in some cases to attack Europeans and which made some of the Europeans to view them as a threat upon sight. Also disease decimated the already weakened population. \n\nThe last Beothuk was Shanawdithit who died in 1829. There were no more Beothuk, and there were no mixed blood lines. It is a dark streak across Newfoundland history, there were attempts to make sure relations were peaceful but it as too late. The Beothuk were the only native group to the island of Newfoundland but European expansion and European diseases decimated the population. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2ft0vd
|
What are the stains in my glasses when I look at the computer screen through them with sunglasses?
|
When I look at the screen through my regular eyeglasses and sunglasses lens combined, I find out that there are stains in my regular lenses. What are they and are they harmful to my sight?
Photos:
[Eyeglasses](_URL_1_)
[Eyeglasses + sunglasses](_URL_2_)
[Eyeglasses + sunglasses right by the camrea](_URL_0_)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2ft0vd/what_are_the_stains_in_my_glasses_when_i_look_at/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckcl4dp"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"Oh oh this is so exciting!!! This relates directly to my area of specialty!\n\nFirst of all: they are not stains, and they are not harmful to your sight.\n\nSo light has a property known as [polarization.](_URL_0_) The following metaphor isn't perfect, but its good enough for now. The basic premise of it is this: You can think of light traveling through space like a wave rippling through a pond. The height of the wave tells you how strong the electric field of the light is. The electric field is what gives light the ability to slosh electrons around in matter, which is why pigments have color. The higher the wave, the brighter the light. (Incidentally, in this metaphor, the space between ripples tells you what color the light is, but it's not relevant for the rest of the explanation.) EDIT: In this metaphor, the direction of polarization for a ripple propagating through a pond would be vertical.\n\nIn general, any beam of light will have some polarization. Imagine a beam of light striking you directly in the eye. For the purposes of our discussion, the three options are horizontal, vertical and unpolarized (like the sun). You can think of unpolarized light as being a mixture of horizontal and vertical. Because of the way they are designed, modern computer monitors (like LCDs) emit polarized light. In your case, the direction of polarized light is the same as the direction you are holding your sunglasses. If you rotate the sunglasses 90 degrees, I'll bet you won't be able to see your monitor.\n\nA polarizer is a type of light filter which prevents light which does not share its orientation from passing through. This allows you to take an unpolarized source and convert it to polarized light, though there are some losses involved since you're essentially throwing away the other light. This is how sunglasses work. Sunglasses are just polarizers. This is how they prevent glare from surfaces, for example. Light reflected off surfaces (like a lake) will tend to be horizontally oriented, so a vertically polarized pair of sunglasses can filter out the glare.\n\nSo, what's going on with your glasses? Because of the way they are manufactured, the material in your glasses has a certain amount of stress in it. You can also see this in your frame, which also appears \"stained.\" This stress is a normal part of the manufacturing process, and when taken to an extreme is why tempered glass can occasionally [spontaneously shatter.](_URL_1_) The result of this stress is that your glasses treat light which is horizontally and vertically polarized differently, which has the net effect of being able to rotate the polarization of the light coming from your monitor. Because the polarization has rotated, when you pass the light from your monitor which has traveled through your glasses through a your sunglasses (a polarizer), your sunglasses filter out the part of the light which has been rotated to have the opposite orientation.\n\nThe reason you don't see this effect in sunlight, or using room lights, is because those are (generally) unpolarized light sources, so the glasses by themselves are just rotating unpolarized light, which is still unpolarized."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i62.tinypic.com/o7n03r.jpg",
"http://i60.tinypic.com/t6v786.jpg",
"http://i62.tinypic.com/11k9gn5.jpg"
] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_%28waves%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_glass_breakage"
]
] |
|
2mfcms
|
Did the Roman Empire ever use propaganda? If so, how was it displayed/what would typically be featured?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2mfcms/did_the_roman_empire_ever_use_propaganda_if_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm3ql0x",
"cm3v1ap"
],
"score": [
15,
7
],
"text": [
"One interesting way of communicating throughout the empire was via the images on coins. Fronts of coins would often display a dignified bust of the current (or putative) emperor, while the reverse would show a god or scene of Roman pride, with a slogan inscribed along the rim.\n\nOne of the more propagandistic coins was the [\"barbarian hut\"](_URL_0_) FEL TEMP REPARATIO follis during the time of Constans/Constantius II. It shows a Roman soldier, spear (usually) down, leading a germanic waif out of some wretched cottage in a forest. The inscription means roughly \"return of the good times\". It was probably meant to propagandize the introduction and settlement of foreigners into the lands of the empire.\n\n[Here](_URL_3_) is a very detailed explication of the coin and the several elements.\n\nAnother interesting one was the Hadrian [LIBERALITAS](_URL_2_) sestertius reverse, which shows the Emperor acting as the patron of the people overseeing the distribution of largesse. The inscription's root word is, of course, \"liberality\". Note the Emperor is sitting on a [curule chair](_URL_1_), a symbol of power deliberately designed to be uncomfortable. Note the Emperor has no back support and holds himself up with one hand. He is also sitting on it sideways, a concession the artist had to make to capture the scene but still give the chair its distinctive curved-X shape.",
"No, not in the sense that we think of it. Propaganda is fundamentally only possible with the sort of industrial production techniques available to modern states--a pre-industrial society quite simply lacks the social penetration that a modern state is capable of. This is not to say that the Roman Empire did not have *imagery*. Certainty, portraiture of, say, Augustus was carefully crafted and filled with political and social significance. The vast majority of these were not contracted by the state, however. Coins were also a way of communicating particular ideas, such as victory in battle or notable justice. But none of these amounted to the sort of flyers and propaganda posters you might see with a WWII era state, Rome simply lacked the reach and productive capability.\n\nThe classic text on this is Paul Zanker's *The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=94392.0;attach=230444;image",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curule_seat",
"http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1228912",
"http://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/hut_analysis.html"
],
[]
] |
||
6oegzu
|
Why did Rome begin conquering outside of its city-state territory?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6oegzu/why_did_rome_begin_conquering_outside_of_its/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkhi2f8"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Ancient Rome's territorial growth only began after the expulsion of the last Etruscan king, Tarquinius Superbus, in 509 BC. Tarquin campaigned against Rome all the way up to 496 BC, after which he died a year later. These battles, fought against Rome's Etruscan neighbors, also gave rise to the stories of Roman heroes, who exemplified the virtues of the Republic, such as Horatius Cocles, who defended the Pons Sublicius bridge across the Tiber from invading soldiers of the Etruscan Lars Porsenna, and Mucius Scaevola, who defied the king after he was captured.\n\nRome then completed the conquest of the Etruscans over the years; however this was only a small part of Italy as a whole.\n\nAfterwards, Rome was sacked by the Gauls under Brennus in 387 BC, and this allowed the militant Romans to form alliances with other Italian tribes, who, after recovering and warding off the Gauls, Rome would later conquer.\n\nOne especially competent enemy were the Samnites, who took more than 60 years to conquer. Rome eventually defeated a coalition of many Italian groups, which confirmed the Roman Republic's place as the dominant Italian power.\nIf the Kings had not been expelled, Rome might have just been another Latin city-state.\nSo pretty much, Rome's early expansion was due to the Etruscan threat.\n\n\"Roman Empire\" by Nigel Rodgers provides lots of in-depth information, including the Roman state's early years."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
jar3b
|
Does time flow or is it a quantum?
|
With time being a quantum I mean there it being similar to frames of film running over a projector.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/jar3b/does_time_flow_or_is_it_a_quantum/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2ajsl5",
"c2ajsn2",
"c2alxhd",
"c2ajsl5",
"c2ajsn2",
"c2alxhd"
],
"score": [
14,
4,
4,
14,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"I think your question is phrased poorly. What I assume you mean is \"Is time discrete or continuous?\" Whether it actually \"flows\" (progresses) is a separate issue.\n\nAs I understand it, nearly all physicists think of time as continuous. One argument for this is that if time is just another dimension (like up-down, etc) then it's likely to be continuous, as we currently understand spacial dimensions to be continuous. However, the distinction between a universe that has continuous space/time and one that is discrete and incredibly small is untestable, as for any size we measure as continuous, there might be a smaller size that is discrete.\n\nSide note: Some people might try to tell you that \"Planck Time\" is \"the smallest unit of time\". This is a misunderstanding of the concept and isn't relevant to your question.",
"Time is a continuum in all non-speculative theories.",
"Time has quantum properties in that it has an [uncertainty relationship with energy](_URL_0_). \n",
"I think your question is phrased poorly. What I assume you mean is \"Is time discrete or continuous?\" Whether it actually \"flows\" (progresses) is a separate issue.\n\nAs I understand it, nearly all physicists think of time as continuous. One argument for this is that if time is just another dimension (like up-down, etc) then it's likely to be continuous, as we currently understand spacial dimensions to be continuous. However, the distinction between a universe that has continuous space/time and one that is discrete and incredibly small is untestable, as for any size we measure as continuous, there might be a smaller size that is discrete.\n\nSide note: Some people might try to tell you that \"Planck Time\" is \"the smallest unit of time\". This is a misunderstanding of the concept and isn't relevant to your question.",
"Time is a continuum in all non-speculative theories.",
"Time has quantum properties in that it has an [uncertainty relationship with energy](_URL_0_). \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle#Energy-time_uncertainty_principle"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle#Energy-time_uncertainty_principle"
]
] |
|
1bnif3
|
When did Turkey replace Chicken and Swan as the meat eaten on Christmas day?
|
What made the Turkey more popular then the Chicken?
Also did people consume any other meats on Christmas day?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1bnif3/when_did_turkey_replace_chicken_and_swan_as_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c98ahb2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Chicken and goose as common Christmas meats for ordinary people do not pre date turkey meat in this context. Turkey was introduced to Europe in the late Tudor period and filtered down through the classes over several centuries as the meat became cheaper thanks to intensive farming techniques. These same farming techniques also made chicken and to a lesser extent goose available for the masses, but not until the the 20th c. In a Christmas Carol getting the 'biggest goose' is a big deal because it's such an expensive meat. It was uncommon for people to eat chicken, let alone goose more than once a week even before the 1960s. \n\nThe traditional Christmas meat in the U.K and much of Europe for ordinary people prior to turkey was pork. Specifically pork brawn, aka 'head cheese' which is a meat-jelly made from an animal's brain and other offal. This was the typical Christmas meal for the majority of people until at least the late Victorian period. \n\nHow to make pork headcheese:\n\n* Boil a pig's head for several hours \n\n* scrape meat and brain and other gunk off the skull \n\n* put the meat and gunk to one side in a tin and continue to boil the skull \n\n* Remove the skull and pour the skull-water, now full of gelatin, over the meat and the gunk. Leave to set. You will eventually have pig brain in pig skull jelly. This is headcheese. \n\nPork was more readily available than chicken or beef because pigs (besides a very few truffle hunters) do not have other uses, we don't drink their milk or eat their eggs, so they were raised solely for slaughter. They are also a lot easier to keep than beef cows requiring less space and are far less fussy eaters. They're the kind of animal it's pretty easy to raise on a small farm. \n\nThe reasons for turkey replacing headcheese as the typical Christmas meal are numerous, over production by US turkey farms meant they had incentive to create a European market, development of a general distaste for offal as people could afford fancier meats etc. \n\nThe key point though is that it did not replace chicken or goose, but that the introduction of poultry as a Christmas meat for ordinary people happened with chicken, goose and turkey in parallel. \n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
30dios
|
why has yemen been target of drone strikes from usa and is it related with the current war right now?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30dios/eli5why_has_yemen_been_target_of_drone_strikes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpre824",
"cpreb6k"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Yemen has one of the most active and aggressive branches of al Qaeda which poses a major security threat to Saudi Arabia. They've also tried in the past to attack the US both through their own operations and by inspiring home grown terrorists. They control a decent amount of territory in Yemen as well.\n\nThe current conflict there is semi-related, but has more to do with Northern Shia (Houthi) opposition to Southern Sunni rule. Yemen was split into two countries in the past, and those old divisions remain.",
"During the final phases of the war in Iraq, most of the resources of Al-Qaeda end up going to the affiliate Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula(AQAP) located in Yemen. AQAP was able to gain a large amount of strength due to the political and economic turmoil in Yemen as well as its close relation to Somalia. To combat AQAP the US launched drone strikes into Yemen rather than dealing with boots on the ground. It isn't really related to the current war in Yemen because the rebels going after the government are Shi'a backed by Iran, and is basically a proxy war between Iran and Saudia Arabia. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
thl4o
|
What effect (if any) would microgravity have on human pregnancy?
|
Would microgravity affect how the placenta forms? How the fetus grows? Bone growth? Could a human being born and raised in microgravity ever hope to land on a planet?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/thl4o/what_effect_if_any_would_microgravity_have_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4mqcej"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"In the order of your questions: Yes, Yes, Yes, and NO.\n\nGravity is apparently an essential stimulus for various types of cell and organ development in vertebrates including the nervous system and brain. \n\n\n\"Human pregnancy is counter indicated by NASA with\nmicrogravity listed as one of the factors. The reasons for this\nare that microgravity “May have impact on in utero embryonic\ndevelopment and reproductive physiology in both males and\nfemales as evidenced by animal studies” (Jennings and Santy,\n1989).\"\n\n\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CGYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ijdb.ehu.es%2Fweb%2F%2Fpaper.php%3Fdoi%3D052077sc%26a%3Df&ei=EK2sT7SdH6udiAf6u7WMCQ&usg=AFQjCNH4na-k57nQCCnH4kqlxdPJ696V-g&sig2=HqVoV5PoRzBEDnxik7g1ww"
]
] |
|
e0yuho
|
My grandmother says that basically nobody in east germany wanted to merge with west germany in 1989, they just wanted a right to travel. Is this true?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/e0yuho/my_grandmother_says_that_basically_nobody_in_east/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f8lp0mi"
],
"score": [
794
],
"text": [
"No, that's not true, but there are understandable reasons why your grandmother might believe it. There are really two mistaken ideas in play here: that the East Germans did not want a reunification (they did), and that they only wanted the right to travel (they wanted much more than that). In fact, many people in East Germany wanted a reunification (*Wiedervereinigung*) in 1989-90. And the denial or hindrance of the right to travel was galling for many citizens of the GDR, to be sure, but it was also not the only reason for political protest, nor was it the only reason to favor reunification. \n\nIn the years after 1990, it has come to seem inevitable that the collapse of the socialist dictatorship in East Germany would lead to reunification. The fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 is often regarded as the beginning of a chain of events culminating in the October 1990 reunification, rather than as the *end* of a story of protest and state decay that began much earlier. Of course, it was both. Reunification was never inevitable; East German protesters had long lists of demands that never mentioned or even implicitly demanded reunification. And even today some former East German dissidents look back on 1990 as a missed opportunity for reform - \"socialism with a human face\" that might have been carried off most effectively in an independent East Germany. It is perhaps as a reaction to this misinterpretation of German history that one might believe East Germans to have been wholly uninterested in reunification. But that belief, too, is a misinterpretation. As is often the case, the truth lies somewhere in the wide middle.\n\nThe Germans named the process by which the East German government fell and the two German states were unified *die Wende* (\"the turning point\"). The beginning of *die Wende* is often placed at the fall of the Berlin Wall. So the story of the end of the Cold War in Germany begins with East German politician [Günter Schabowski's press conference \"gaffe\"](_URL_2_) on November 9, 1989, announcing the immediate implementation of new travel regulations that allowed East Germans to transit the Berlin Wall freely (this led to [a flood of East Germans](_URL_3_) attempting to visit West Berlin). The story then proceeds apace for about a year: the Berlin Wall is rendered superfluous and dismantled; the Socialist Unity Party (SED) gives up its monopoly on political power in December; in the same month, the hated *Stasi* secret police dissolves; on March 18, 1990, the only free elections in GDR history lead to a coalition government of non-communist parties with super-majority support in the *Volkskammer*; in May 1990 the two countries effect an economic merger; on September 20, 1990, the *Volkskammer* votes to ratify the so-called [\"Two Plus Four\" unification treaty](_URL_1_); and on October 3, 1990, the *Wiedervereinigung* is fully effected and the East German government ceased to exist.\n\nThere's nothing factually incorrect about this timeline, but by beginning with the fall of the Berlin Wall, we lose the context of what was happening in East German politics prior to November 9, 1989, which serves to obscure the motives of East German protesters and dissidents. In fact, the spring through the autumn of 1989 was a tumultuous time in the politics of the one-party state, both within and especially outside of the apparatus of the SED, as the Eastern Bloc governments disintegrated. Beginning in April, the Hungarian government began to disassemble the electrified fence on the border with Austria. Thousands of East Germans, already freely able to travel to Hungary, transited into the west. In July, Gorbachev publicly abandoned the Brezhnev Doctrine, the Soviet Union's post-1968 \"Monroe Doctrine\" equivalent, with which the USSR claimed the right to intervene in the politics of other Eastern European states. The West German embassy in Prague was crowded with thousands of East German asylum-seekers. Coalescing around pillars of nascent East German protest like the Evangelical Church and the environmental movement, in the late summer and early autumn a number of new political protest organizations (e.g., New Forum [*Neues Forum*], Democratic Uprising [*Demokratischer Aufbruch*], and the renewed and independent Social Democratic Party) were formed. Such organizations were not novel - the East German Initiative for Peace and Human Rights (*Initiative für Frieden und Menschenrechte*) had existed since early 1986, but this quick proliferation was a sign that matters had come to a boiling point by October.\n\nThe protesters were anything if quiet, so there's no shortage of evidence of what they believed and demanded at the time. The evidence shows that they were by no means a \"reunification movement.\" The [\"Awakening '89\" (*Aufbruch 89*) declaration](_URL_0_), signed in September of 1989 at the founding of the New Forum, is illustrative. The declaration articulated a vision of reform and humanitarian socialism: \"We want leeway for economic initiative but no degeneration into a dog-eat-dog society,\" it announced. \"We want free, self-confident people who nevertheless act community-conscious[ly]. We want to be protected against violence and thereby not put up with a state of bailiffs and police spies.\" Notably, nowhere in the declaration is German reunification listed as a demand. It is not explicitly rejected, either. It simply isn't mentioned. A massive protest took place on the Alexanderplatz in Berlin on November 4. At this protest, one of many that occurred in major East German cities throughout the autumn of 1989, hundreds of thousands of East Germans gathered to listen to dissidents, reformers, and some rather anxious, defensive officials from the SED government (including, most incredibly, secretive *Stasi* spymaster Markus Wolf). There, again, reunification was not a theme. Placards with slogans like \"*Die Macht geht vom Volke aus*\" (\"Power comes from the people\") and \"*Sozialismus ja, Egon nein*\" (\"Yes to Socialism, no to [Egon](_URL_5_)\") were hostile to the SED government, but they were reformist, not reunificationist, and often decidedly anti-capitalist. Ingo Schulze, an East German dissident, [put it this way](_URL_4_) (link in German; this is my own translation): \"'Visa-free all the way to Shanghai!' From the start, it was about the whole world! And it was about authorization of the New Forum and new parties, about access to the media, about free elections and above all about democratizing our own world. The call 'we are the people!' was the decisive watchword. It was actually about taking our country into our own hands. In factories, schools, universities, theaters, and institutes, those who held the trust of the majority had begun to be elected to leadership positions. That was the real revolution. Who could stop us? With every new day, the the realization of a 'socialism with a human face' seemed ever more inevitable.\" \n\nGiven this background, the results of the vote in East Germany's March 1990 elections are surprising. The center-right Christian Democrats - running in explicit association with their West German counterparts, and benefiting from West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl personally stumping in East Germany in advance of the election - took more than 40% of the vote on a platform advocating a quick reunification of East and West Germany. No party other than the SPD (21.9%) polled even half that percentage. Aside from the SED itself (re-branded as the \"Party of Democratic Socialism\" [*Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus*]) (16.4%), no East German party without a western equivalent polled anywhere close to 10% of the vote. It was a stunning demonstration that, for the vast majority of East Germans, reform meant not simply an end to the SED dictatorship, but a drawing together of the two German states *along western lines*. From Wolfgang Grof's [history of the East German Social Democrats](_URL_6_) in 1989-90 (PDF link in German; my translation): \"With the commitment of the majority of the population to German unity, the reform ideas of the GDR oppositions groups, which were never homogeneous, became obsolete. ... Though the West German parties didn't stand in the election, the voters in their majority went for those parties in the GDR whose West German partners governed in the Federal Republic. Expectations of a quick and fundamental change in the living conditions in the GDR were chiefly focused to these parties. The result of the *Volkskammer* election was a clear vote for the entry of the GDR into the Federal Republic under Article 23 of the Federal Republic's Basic Law.\" This meant that the Federal Republic's constitution would not be renegotiated; the GDR would simply slip the Federal Republic's existing structure as a new set of Federal states. Liberal capitalism would be the path forward, not \"socialism with a human face.\" Ingo Schulze again: \"If you pass by the German Historical Museum today, you'll see there a copy of a very late placard shows that outlines of the Federal Republic and the GDR, together with the slogan: 'We are one people.'\" The difference between the slogans at the Alexanderplatz (\"we are the people\") and later (\"we are one people\") tells the whole story.\n\n(Continued below due to the comment character limit.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.east-for-the-record.de/en/extras/aufbruch-89-neues-forum.html",
"https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/politics/germany-europe/two-plus-four-treaty",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3qVjwzgC2A&feature=emb_title",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB8HJe3mQNc",
"https://blog.zeit.de/freitext/2014/10/16/ingo-schulze-mauerfall/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egon_Krenz",
"http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/netzquelle/01284.pdf"
]
] |
||
1gsw8u
|
How did the Romans, or other ancient civilizations, view and handle people with Alzheimer's?
|
What did they think caused it?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1gsw8u/how_did_the_romans_or_other_ancient_civilizations/
|
{
"a_id": [
"canru15"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It was much less common in ancient Rome than it is currently due to a younger demographic and shorter life e expectancy, so it was not a significant problem. \n\nTypical onset age of Alzheimer's is later older than 65 and affects 2% of the population by age 80. The life expectancy of classical Rome was 28 years at birth and by age 15, life expectancy increased to 52.\n\nVery few people in Rome made it past 65 and very few of those had Alzheimers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
f543x6
|
why do dull razors cut you more when you’re shaving?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f543x6/eli5_why_do_dull_razors_cut_you_more_when_youre/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fhwkl5i",
"fhwlcqn",
"fhwllst"
],
"score": [
12,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"When something is sharper it cuts smoother and easier. Imagine trying to cut something and the blade is dull, it won’t cut very well or hardly at all. Same principle applies to a razor blade. It cuts hair easier when the blade is sharp, but won’t hardly cut when it’s dull. A dull razor pulls and tugs on the facial hair which causes it to cut the skin instead of the hair.",
"Dull blades have burs, little bits of metal twisted into itsy bitsy jagged little spikes like barbed wire pointing in the wrong directions. These burs develop after extended use, or from getting rusty if you wet shave and they oxidize. The little burs are what cuts and irritates your skin when the blade is dull.\n\nProperly sharpened blades don't have many burs, they are only sharp in the direction they are supposed to be. They cut the hairs that stick up in front of them, but not the skin which is parallel to them.",
"A dull razor will catch on hairs and pull on them, pulling the skin into a fold which can then get cut."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
pohpq
|
Can anybody help me understand time desynchronization for objects moving near the speed of light?
|
I'm reading "Relativity Visualized" by Lewis Carrol Epstein, and I'm trying to grasp the concept that certain events happen at different times for those moving very quickly and those observing the event from a static position.
I understand the experiment involving 3 space ships, where the one in the middle shoots radio waves to the other two, and they arrive at the rear spaceship before the front one for an observer who is still in space. It also makes sense to me that to the ships' crew, the radio signals arrive at the same time.
However, the book says that if you watch an airplane (traveling near the speed of light) land on a track (to the right across your field of vision), while you are standing still, then it will appear that the back landing gear will deploy before the front landing gear. This is if an observer inside the airplane measures that both landing gear deploy simultaneously. I don't understand this phenomenon. The book's explanation states that this happens for the same reason as the last experiment, but that doesn't seem to help since the airplane is not sending radio signals to its landing gear. The landing gear should be lowered as a result of some electric machinery on the plane.
EDIT: Here are some pictures out of the book for reference: _URL_0_
If anyone could shed some light and offer me a different example or help me think with a new perspective, I would greatly appreciate it!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/pohpq/can_anybody_help_me_understand_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3r0l4j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This gets asked a *lot*.\n\nYou normally travel along your time axis -- if you just sit around, your location doesn't change, but the time displayed on your wristwatch advances. Meanwhile, your spatial axes are aligned with the spatial axes of the world -- i.e. the set of events that are happening *right now* are also happening *right now* from the point of view of anyone else just sitting around.\n\nWhen you move (say, in a car), your time axis rotates slightly relative to the time axis of the world -- if you let some time go by on your wristwatch, you'll notice that the world outside the car has a different spatial position in your own private coordinate system (with origin in your head). In other words, your personal time axis now includes a small component in the world's spatial direction. We call that \"moving\", and it can be expressed as a *rotation* of your time axis in the (x,t) plane.\n\nSo far so good, right? Well, in Galilean relativity that's all there is to motion. But in Einsteinian relativity, when you move there is an equivalent rotation of your spatial axis to balance the rotation of your time axis. \n\nIn other words, what time it is in Topeka *right now* depends (for you) on how fast you are moving -- because if you are moving relative to Topeka, then your spatial axis (which contains all the events in the Universe that are happening *right now* for you) is canted at an angle relative to the spatial axis for Topeka. Which direction it is canted depends on which direction you're moving, and how much depends on how fast you are moving. So two events that happen at the same time (from your point of view) don't necessarily happen at the same time from the point of view of a Topekan.\n\nThe difference in time happens even after you account for any speed-of-light propagation delay. \n\nYou should go over to Amazon and buy \"Mr. Tompkins in Paperback\" by George Gamow. It is a great reference for building intuition about this kind of thing.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://imgur.com/a/ASrgD"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
38lvgd
|
What were the responsibilities of a sheriff in Plantagenet England?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/38lvgd/what_were_the_responsibilities_of_a_sheriff_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crwa1n3"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The Sheriff, who was usually a prominent landowner in the county (15 are mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086, and only two do not own land) where he served, was an agent of the Crown with a wide-reaching set of responsibilities all effectively related to how central government interacts with its outer regions. \n\nThe origins of the role are in the Reeve, an Anglo-Saxon official empowered to hold court and try criminals. After 1066, every Shire in England was appointed a 'Shire Reeve' as part of William the Conqueror's tightening up of central government. This Shire Reeve, or Sheriff, was far more powerful than his predecessor and was partly modelled on the Norman vicomte and was head of government in the region - the King's viceroy, almost.\n\nHe was responsible for the law. He executing legal writs on behalf of the monarch, was able to set up a court called a 'tourn' to investigate cases, presided over the shire court (or moot) which tried offences against the crown or offences where two or more lords were involved, and had the authority to summon a 'posse comitatus' of able-bodied men to help restore public order. These posses were more useful in the Anglo-Saxon era, as the import of knightly tradition from Normandy \n\nThe Sheriff also supervised the Crown lands within his shire to a management level (ensure livestock is replenished, farm workers are well housed etc) and ensured that revenues from land's leased from the crown, port duties and fees for maintenance of local levies were delivered to the Exchequer (a role many relished, and Edward I's treasurer Walter Langton seized the lands of a number of Sheriffs over financial irregularities). \n\nThis role in particular would mark a significant step in direct taxation in England, and set the ground for flashpoints like the Baron's War as Sheriffs gained a reputation for oppressive taxation, which they often increased at will. Non-payment was met with seizure of lands - including church lands. There's even an account held by Rochester Cathedral of the Sheriff, Picot, stealing land from the church by claiming it belongs to the king, and then intimidating a jury into signing off on it in 1076:\n\n > The king ordered all men of the country to be assembled, so that it might be proved by their judgement whose the land ought to be. The men were assembled, and from fear of the sheriff affirmed, that the land was not [the church's] but the king's. Since the Bishop of Bayeux, who was presiding over the pleas, did not put much faith in them, he ordered them, if they knew that what they said was true, to choose twelve of their number to confirm on oath what they had all said. But they, when they had withdrawn for consultation, were terrified by a message from the sheriff, and swore what they had said was true.\n\nThrough the courts the Sheriff also had significant influence in what passed for democracy, and from the mid-13th Century they presided over the election of knights to parliament.\n\nThis was a significant whittling away of the power of the earls - who were vastly important in Anglo-Saxon England, to a Tywin Lannister degree - and the church, who no longer set at the heart of the county court. Personal power, though, varied by individual, influenced both by their proximity to the monarch and their relationship with local earls and bishops.\n\nFrom 1236 onward there was a deliberate move away from landowning lords in the role to knights, and there were sporadic demands for the Sheriff to be an elected official (elected by the nobility, that is) instead of appointed by the Crown. Other roles also came into use which spread the power of the office more evenly, Escheators and Subescheators dealt with management of Crown property, and Coroners were appointed - often for life - to hold inquests and preside over courts. \n\nTax-collecting was passed onto specially appointed assessors and by the reign of Edward I (1272 to 1307) special commissions were formed of knights and nobles for specific one-off tasks such as the recruitment of knights or the hearing of a specific case, new types of courts emerged and the Royal Forests developed a specific system of administration too.\n\nDon't worry though, there's still plenty of documented accounts of Sheriffs levelling arbitrary fines and perverting the course of justice right through the 13th and 14th Centuries.\n\nSource: *The Medieval English Sheriff to 1300* by William Alfred Morris, *From Alfred the Great to Stephen* by R. H. C. Davis, and *Plantagenet England, 1225-1360* by Michael Prestwich\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2cjmox
|
Why when I'm driving do I lose my satellite radio signal for the brief instant that I go under a bridge but my FM radio is completely fine?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2cjmox/why_when_im_driving_do_i_lose_my_satellite_radio/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjg9gvb",
"cjgaa3x"
],
"score": [
9,
4
],
"text": [
"Satellite radio uses a much higher frequency signal (GHz vs FM's MHz) and as such has different properties than FM radio. For your specific question, the high frequency means that it doesn't penetrate buildings or structures very well and is more line-of-sight than FM. ",
"FM radio is considered a terrestrial broadcast system meaning it is broadcast from land based antennas in your general area, similar to cell towers. This creates a good blanket coverage area but limited to a relatively small area. \n\nXM/Sirius is broadcast from a satellite, in space, meaning the receiver must be a clear path to reach the satellite in orbit. If you read your manual that came with the receiver, it should tell you which general direction to point your receiver, to keep a clear connection. Anything from trees, buildings, thick clouds and anything else that obstructs this clear line of sight will disturb the signal. \n\nWe can get into frequency, but it really does not answer the original question of lost signal, but can help answer questions about building penetration and signal quality. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5zuk1e
|
what causes food to stick to my pan, and what is the best way to prevent this (assuming i don't have non-stick, which i don't).
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zuk1e/eli5_what_causes_food_to_stick_to_my_pan_and_what/
|
{
"a_id": [
"df17av2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A lack of oil, overly cool pan, overly hot pan could all be reasons food sticks.\n\nTo prevent food from sticking, slightly heating the pan, and making sure there is adequate oil/grease in it. All of this is dependent on what kind of pans you are using. If it is stainless steel, properly oiling before hand will help. Other metals *shrugs* I dunno.\n\nIf you are using cast iron, there are many ways to prevent food from sticking, but without knowing *what kind* of pans you are referring to, that's about all I can do."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
36yftn
|
Is it possible to have conjoined triplets?
|
After reading [this article](_URL_0_), I started wondering if it would technically be possible for conjoined triplets to exist, and if so, how does it happen that only two out of three were conjoined in this case?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/36yftn/is_it_possible_to_have_conjoined_triplets/
|
{
"a_id": [
"criay84",
"crie16c"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It would technically be possible yes though that would be a very complicated birth and even with recent technology would likely have an extremely low rate of survival for both mother and children. As to why only two were conjoined, pretty much luck, it's not like there is a set place where fetuses/embryos are in the womb they move around even within the amniotic sac and there are a lot of factors that determine separation/conjoining, slightly different gradient of this nutrient in one area a slightly later split from the \"starter\" egg etc a lot of potential reasons that aren't fully understood yet.",
"[This](_URL_0_) study presents a case of conjoined triplets. The pregnancy was terminated, so I don't know if there has ever been a viable pregnancy with this condition."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.medicaldaily.com/texas-mom-delivers-conjoined-twins-who-are-also-rare-identical-triplets-334040"
] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378%2804%2901826-5/abstract"
]
] |
|
9qzog4
|
why people are so paranoid about being spied on through their web cam?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9qzog4/eli5_why_people_are_so_paranoid_about_being_spied/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8cw047",
"e8cwb5w",
"e8cx4m4",
"e8cybeb",
"e8cyny6",
"e8czdio",
"e8czmaz",
"e8d112l",
"e8d1bs8",
"e8d1g5h",
"e8d2g20",
"e8d2u6i",
"e8d5268"
],
"score": [
95,
13,
15,
5,
36,
7,
3,
8,
4,
4,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because it actually happens, its not the government though, there are multiple spyware programs out there that, if they get on your pc, can access your webcam ",
"Just go to _URL_0_ and tell me if you still think it is something we don’t need to worry about.\n\n",
"It's all about risk management and there are three basic factors:\n\n1. How often it happens\n2. How severe it is when it happens\n3. The cost to fix or mitigate it\n\nYeah, the degree to which this happens is probably low for the average person. But the impact when and if it does is pretty high and the cost to deal with it is extremely low. As a result, people will be implementing this cheap fix and gain peace of mind, even if they never would have been a target anyway.\n\nAlso, people are generally shit when it comes to assessing risk.",
"Go back several years and read about the Edward Snowden leaks. \n\nYes, there is precedent. If memory serves, the most detailed info was about GCHQ accessing the webcams of literally anyone. ",
"_URL_0_\n\n > Without telling its students, the schools remotely accessed their school-issued laptops to secretly take pictures of students in their own homes, their chat logs, and records of the websites they visited. The school then transmitted the images to servers at the school, where school authorities reviewed them and shared the snapshots with others.[15] In one widely published photo, the school had photographed Robbins in his bed.[16]\n\nHaving any idea what kids do in the privacy of their rooms, what do you suppose the odds are that the school did not (knowingly or unknowingly) traffic in child porn?\n\n",
"my brother insulted my worries of being spied on from my works webcam. he said, \"wtf you gotta be worried about - are you doong something you shouldnt be doing like jerking off or something\"\n\ni pulled out my phone and started recording him. we were lounging on the couch after thanksgiving, and i didnt say a word, just recorded him.\n\nhe got annoyed after 2 minutes and told me to stop. followed with, OOOOOH I GET IT NOW",
"The largest risk to you as a random citizen is from so called friends.\n\nIt's trivial to install a freely available programs that will record and safe on the internet when theres movement in front of the webcam.\n\nYou can see how that could be misused for blackmail and other stuff you wouldn't want.\n\nAnd then there's the cases were schools spied on students with the webcam of the school issued laptops.\n\nSeems equally likely that some company would do the same with their work laptops.\n\n \n\n\nIn the school and company laptops there's virtually no way for a lay person to ever find any evidence on the computer that you are being recorded.\n\n \n\n\nThe last part is random people and the government. Those won't waste resources on you unless you are some kind of person of interest.\n\nBut that can obviously easily go south as well. Maybe you are active in your Union and trying to change some laws to better protect workers... How easily would your reputation be ruined if somehow naked pics of you would appear on the internet?\n\nEspecially if you are a women in some position of authority.\n\n \n\n\n \n\n\nAnd since the fix for all webcam stuff is to tape a piece of paper over the webcam, the cost of mitigating all those extremely costly events is nothing and a second of your time.",
"Well would *you* want to be spied on on your web cam? It may be an unreasonable fear for most people but most people have a fundamental misunderstanding of how technology works. That compiled with factual evidence that the government *does* spy on its' citizens makes people paranoid. ",
"When you give permission to an app to access something like your camera or microphone, they now have the ability to use it at a whim. That being said, you have to fully trust the people who you gave access to your phone since they now have the ability to use your camera whenever they want since their program is installed on your phone. This is why your phone will prompt you if you try to install an app from an untrusted source as the developer of the app could have loaded a benign looking program that actually gives them the ability to snoop on you. That's why Trojans are called Trojans e.g. they look harmless but in reality carry something far more sinister on the inside. On top of this, you have government programs that were uncovered by people like Edward Snowden (think of him what you want) that proved without a doubt that government surviellance is indeed happening on a vast number of people around the world. Personally, I think we should be concerned with what is called \"metadata.\" This is the data that your phone has on you such as the amount of time you spend in one area, where you traveled, etc. Its like having a detective follow you around 24/7. Add this to the cameras and microphone being affected and you have a virtual spy collecting your every move. If you are truly worried about this, cover your camera, use your own mic, use a custom rom (operating system) and be selective of what apps you use. Here is a short documentary elaborating on my points: [State of Surveillance' with Edward Snowden and Shane Smith](_URL_0_).",
"Because it happens, it's easy, and it's common.\n\nEX: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nThey have literally tens of thousands of unsecured webcams you can watch. Anyone who wants access to your webcam can do it by simply sending you a link to a funny picture on Imgur.\n\nOr, even, a link in a reddit post...",
"Can they disable the light turning on when the webcam is active?",
"The question has already been answered, but in my opinion, the microphone is arguably the \"better\" attack vector, because it typically can't be easily obfuscated with a sticker, and any incriminating or damaging information would probably come from audio, not video (except nudes).\n\nFor that reason I'd love a hard power switch on laptops that kill the microphone and camera.",
"paranoid? Its real kid"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"Shodan.io"
],
[],
[],
[
"wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucRWyGKBVzo"
],
[
"https://www.insecam.org"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3pq04k
|
How much iron is in the human body?
|
Similarly, how many people would it take to make a sword?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3pq04k/how_much_iron_is_in_the_human_body/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw8pxly"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Men have more iron than women, and a large number of people are iron deficient- its the most common nutritional deficiency in the world. The average total body iron is about [3.8g in men and 2.3g](_URL_1_) in women. In industrialized nations, its closer to [4-5g](_URL_0_). The body uses iron remarkably well, and only needs one iron atom for each quite large heme cofactor in hemoglobin. \n\nFrom my twitter:\n\nhwillis:\nThe human body contains around three grams of iron, the size of a small marble.\n\nhwillis:\nYou would need 7000 people marbles to make a suit of armor. 1500 for a human shield.\n\nYou'd need about 450 people to make an average sword. Actually doing it would be a lot more difficult, since less than a part in ten thousand is iron. You'd need to do some chemistry to make sure you didn't lose the iron with all the rest of the people stuff."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_iron_metabolism",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_deficiency"
]
] |
|
5m5s09
|
why is it so hard to reverse-engineer something? shouldn't it be simple to just copy the parts exactly?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m5s09/eli5_why_is_it_so_hard_to_reverseengineer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dc0zzio",
"dc100ue",
"dc100wr",
"dc106xq",
"dc10n1y",
"dc11d8z",
"dc11sb6",
"dc144ee",
"dc15dru",
"dc15inr",
"dc166kl",
"dc17o32",
"dc18yxi",
"dc1ca0r",
"dc1e83g",
"dc1f9ro",
"dc1ixg6",
"dc25gfh",
"dc2h2lf"
],
"score": [
139,
9,
725,
36,
6,
144,
3,
243,
2,
26,
4,
9,
5,
9,
2,
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"a real life example is that you can take a look at a house. it has some walls, roof, windows. pretty simple easy to understand concepts. now you are in charge of building your own house, and you know what a house is made up of.\n\nnow, how do you make a rebar? what is rebar made out of? steel? great! how do we create steel?\n\nit's easy to copy simple things with simple materials, but it's extremely difficult to copy advanced things manufactured with complicated manufacturing processes.",
"Just having a part's measurements does not give you the information about the manufacturing techniques involved, which have a huge effect on the part's performance. Furthermore, operating the resultant product requires a decent understanding of how it works.\n\nBlind replication won't just get you nowhere, it's not as simple as you'd like to think.",
"No.\n\nLet's say you try and reverse engineer an iPhone. \n\nYou need to know what each component is made of, this is NOT easy at all and requires some fairly high level analytical skills. \n\nYou also need to know how each component talks to each other. An iPhone isn't just the solid stuff, and then OS installed; there is firmware that controls how say the capacitance from the screen is delivered to other bits of circuitry. There is software that controls the battery.\n\nAnother example would be say a grain mill! You could build something that looks the same easily; a stone with an axel and then another stone on a pivot that can roll along in a circle. But if you don't know how to use it (the software) it's useless. \n\nWith modern stuff the material becomes a big factor!! Touch screens are made of very special materials for one. Military hardware? Can also be very exotic composites, it's not just steel etc. ",
"yes. but you dont know the properties of all the parts involved. Or the reason they have that property. For example when the soviets tried to copy the american b29 bomber from b29's that had to land in russia, because they didn't know the purpose of all the parts, they [went as far as integrating the bullet holes](_URL_0_), the planes had suffered into their copys.\n\nWithout extensive testing, that sometimes includes the destruction of parts, you realy cant get all the material properties right. Add to that, that sometimes you just dont have the technology to replicate the original and reverse engineering can become very dificult.",
"It is actually really really hard and expensive.\n\nPart of what makes companies rich are knowing how to making things cheaply. Anyone can make an iPhone. The trick is making it for $500 instead of $5 million.\n\nSo even if you managed to figure out all the parts, you still don't know Apple's secrets of making an iPhone.",
"Manufacturing engineer, here. \n\nIt depends a lot on the complexity of the object and if there are critical parameters or tolerances.\n\nReverse-engineering a simple table with square legs is easy. Now think of a nice table with a pattern lathe-turned into the legs and a stain. It may be difficult to determine the wood under the stain and the stain color. It will also take much longer to figure out the lathe tooling setup to replicate the legs. If the replica isn't exact, it could still be a nice table. \n\nWhen you consider mechanical and electronic items, the process is more difficult for a number of reasons. Electronic components are exponentially more complicated. If you can identify all the pieces, you still have to arrange them precisely. Imagine trying to copy a complete road map of Texas with a pencil and protractor - no tracing. If you manage to build the thing correctly, you still need to develop firmware and software so that it runs as closely as possible to what you are trying to reverse-engineer.",
"To carry the house analogy further, how do you know what gauge (thickness) wire to use for the electrical outlets, or how the plumbing is laid out. These things are buried inside the walls and invisible to you unless you start knocking down walls. There are many things like this in a house that you cannot see, and thus cannot replicate precisely.\n\nAnd it may not just be items you cannot see, but how they were made. When looking at a product you are only seeing the final result; how it ended up that way may not be obvious. Take christmas tree tinsel for example. Seeing the final result in the box tells you very little about how they are able to package it so cleanly. And it is actually very difficult to do; companies try hard to keep the exact method a secret.\n\nIn both cases what we are really talking about is information. Some of the information needed to copy an object may be hidden or may not exist in the object at all. The big trick with reverse-engineering is being able to infer what you cannot see from what you can see.\n\nA more modern example: Some programmable computer chips come with fuses that can be blown after being programmed. This prevents any changes and prevents anyone from reading the program back out. One way reverse-engineering folks get around this is with a special machine that can shave off epoxy covering of a chip and expose the raw circuits inside the chip. Then they proceed to poke the chip with several very sharp sticks (probes) to learn how it was programmed.\n\n",
"Everyone is using House as an example, but what about a cake?\n\nYou can analyze a cake and determine it's made of starch and sugars, but could you really reverse-engineer that to come up with a list of raw ingredients AND a recipe to recreate the cake?\n\nEven if I gave you the exact list of ingredients, but no directions for mixing them (quantity and order) or baking it, what good would that do you?",
"Drink/Food manufacturers will list their ingredients, but just try and replicate a Coke from that alone. Even something like a chocolate chop cookie going to be pretty different even if you know the exact ingredients. Knowing the parts is only half of the recipe, you also must know the process in which they were combined, e.g. temperatures, mixing, consistency of ingredients etc. ",
"Everyone here is talking about the manufacture of something, and they are explaining why copying things isn't easy...but that isn't reverse engineering. That's just trying to duplicate something. Copying stuff is easy. \n\nIf you look at a piece of electronic equipment, a good chunk of the chips and processors are off the shelf. You can go and buy them and slap them all together and there you go. But that isn't reverse engineering, that's just assembling something.\n\nIf company x builds a cool thing, and company y can't figure out how they did it on their own, company y then needs to buy the thing from company x and do a complete analysis of it. Reverse engineering isn't about copying something. So company y brings in the engineers to look at every single component and wire, and then write up the full specs based on what they see in the hardware. Going back to everyone's house analogy, it's basically looking at a house and then drawing up blueprints. It's not nearly as complicated as figuring out how to manufacture steel, but it isn't easy. It's time consuming and tedious.\n\nThis is what reverse engineering is. Looking at a product, and then figuring out exact specifications for it.\n\nAfter you get your full list of specifications, you hand that off to another completely clean and brand new team to actually design something based on those specifications created from the original product from company x.\n\nNow company y has a product similar to company x, but they have plausible deniability that they copied anything.",
"Lets think about a metal part you need to rebuild because its broken but you have no exact design for it.\nNow you go for an 3D scanner, scan the bad boy and create a mold for your new component. Then you pour in the metal and give it time to cool down. You wrap the component out of his mold, but it will be smaller than the part which broke down. That because metal shrink when it cools down. To merge out this problem, quite much engineering work has to be done and even then the piece wouldnt be like the broken one. \n",
"Say you have 20. Did you make it by adding 5+5+5+5, or multiplying 4 x 5, or subtracting 10 from 30?",
"Say you've got a cup of coffee. We know that was made from coffee beans and hot water, but how would you find that out if you didn't know? You can't get coffee beans back out of coffee. You can analyze the coffee with some expensive equipment and find out what chemicals are in it, but you can't find out where they came from.\n\nNow let's consider an electronic device. It probably has some IC chips in it. You can't just take them apart and figure out how they work. It would be extremely expensive to analyze them on a microscopic level and figure out how to make an identical chip. All you can realistically do is measure the inputs and outputs and try to figure out how they're related.\n\nSo, you're limited by what you can actually observe and measure. It's often impossible or impractical to determine exactly how something was manufactured. Parts are not always simple discrete pieces that can be measured on their own.",
"Ask me to make a lightbulb from scratch? I know enough of how to smelt and refine ores, blow glass, etc. that I could do it in under 3 months if you dropped me in the middle of the woods with the food/shelter to keep me and my project safe. Hell, with half a year I could make a power source to light it up as well, might need all of one community college course or two days in a library beforehand to fill in a few blanks. I'd almost consider doing it for a few grand at the end before remembering I could make more at minimum wage in that timeframe.\n\nNow, hand me a bulb, any bulb, and tell me to make that exact one? Hah. Fuck that. And you wanna know why? Specifics, my dear! I could be on Franklin's heels in a quarter of a year because I spend too much time on Wikipedia and lack a legitimately worthwhile outlet for my curiosity, and I'm reading about something that can be done successfully with fairly modest margins of error before it fails to work. I can almost ballpark a working plan to make everything I need from the stone hatchet and hammer to the turbine wheel powered by a creekbed or steam (or hell, hamster wheel using improvised woodland critters!) on the fly. Such is the power of decades of complacent fact-collecting paired with an overactive imagination that likes to ground itself firmly in \"bullshit that just might fucking work!\"\n\nBut tell me to make that lightbulb. Any one fucking lightbulb. And let me do it in the city, with a project budget of a few grand? I will firmly tell you to go fuck yourself in your round hole with a square peg, and that's only because I don't know a wittier way to tell you to do it with the star-shaped peg. Because I can't be fucked to figure out what filament your bulb uses, if it's filled with x gas, normal air, a vacuum, etc. I don't wanna fuck with making the screw-in base. I don't wanna spend the time being a good enough glass blower to make the bulb the perfect shape, let alone figure out what kinda sand and additional minerals and whateverthefuck goes into it. And I don't want to fucking stamp the goddamn ink on the bulb, or lettering into the base.\n\nTL;DR\nFranken-fucking together a functional science experiment is easy because your target outcome has Texas-sized borders. Counterfeiting has pinhole-sized borders, so it's harder even if you're just making saltwater taffy. ",
"Reverse engineering is more about developing an understanding than replication. I mean, replication can be the end goal. You reverse engineer a piece of technology to understand the principles behind its innerworkings, in order to apply or exploit them.\n\nReplicating an object is a really basic thought process in relation to reverse engineering. You have a lot more to gain by building and understanding of it. Hell, if it's made out of exotic materials you will not be able to copy it until you build an unsterstanding or what that material is, and then build a means of producing it. By that point, you are producing exotic materials that could have potentially thousando of other aplications.",
"It's easy to mix yellow and blue to get green. It's hard to get blue and yellow FROM green.",
"For software, decompiling is commonly described as the attempt to turn hamburger back into a cow.",
"How do you copy the parts, exactly? \n\nTo use a random example, the [ETA 2824-2](_URL_7_) is one of the most popular mechanical watch movements in the world. The patents have long expired, and it has actually been reverse engineered by third parties in Switzerland and China. You can easily and cheaply buy watches with this mechanism, [download service manuals listing all of the parts and how they fit together](_URL_8_), and [watch YouTube videos of the whole service process](_URL_6_).\n\nNow, tell me, how would you copy these parts:\n\n1. [The gears](_URL_2_)?\n2. The [special oils used to lubricate the mechanism](_URL_1_)?\n3. The [pierced synthetic ruby jewels used as bearings for the pivots](_URL_3_)?\n4. The [temperature-compensated balance spring](_URL_4_)?\n5. The [balance staff](_URL_5_)? ([longer video series here](_URL_0_))\n\nIf you look at the links you'll notice three big obstacles:\n\n* There's a lot of specialized materials that you'd need to figure out not just what they're made of, but how to make them. Like the synthetic rubies, secret metal alloys and very high quality synthetic oils.\n* There's also lots very specialized tools used to do very narrow jobs job precisely and repeatably. If all you have is the watch, that doesn't tell you how to make those tools. \n* The videos that illustrate making some of the parts are making either small batches or one-offs. Scaling these processes up to making thousands of parts efficiently is a whole 'nother big problem! And the finished product, again, doesn't give you a lot of information about how that's done.",
"I'll try explain this as simple as possible. (English isn't my native language, it might be a little bit broken) \n\nThis is referring to reverse engineering a software. For other product, the analogy might not make sense at all.\n\n---\n\nSay 1+2+3+4+5 = 15. Let's say 15 is the product, the method to have 15 is 1+2+3+4+5. It's my own unique method to reach 15.\n\nNow you have the product 15, and you know you need five different digit to add it up. You want to find out how to get it through my unique method, so you \"reverse engineer\" it.\n\nIt could be 0+2+3+4+6, or 0+1+2+5+7, or 0+1+3+4+7, etc.\n\nThat's why it is hard, because even though you know the product, you didn't know the source behind it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ATupolev_Tu-4"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmRryEjLW8I",
"http://www.moebius-lubricants.ch/en/products/oils",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nlw1NQQGlXI",
"http://www.rdrop.com/~jsexton/watches/museum/kyp/jewels.html",
"http://www.ablogtowatch.com/inside-nivarox-the-heart-of-the-swiss-watch-industry/",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyGbUEa8agA",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtgAJBPPefM",
"http://www.eta.ch/index.php?id=54&L=2",
"https://watchguy.co.uk/technical/ETA/2824-2.pdf"
],
[]
] |
||
2009e4
|
If the universe was scaled down to the point that the Milky was the size of a baseball, how far away would the Andromeda Galaxy be?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2009e4/if_the_universe_was_scaled_down_to_the_point_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfyll4j"
],
"score": [
73
],
"text": [
"Fun Question. So, The Milky way is about 100,000 light years in diameter. Andromeda is about 2.5 million light years away. So, Andromeda is about 25 time farther away than the milkyway is wide.\n\nA baseball is 7.3cm in diameter. 7.3cm * 25 = 1.825 meters or about 6 feet.\n\nSpace is big.\n\nEdit: misplaced a decimal. And Again"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1htjcn
|
food poisoning, what is going on in my body?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1htjcn/eli5_food_poisoning_what_is_going_on_in_my_body/
|
{
"a_id": [
"caxs9x5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's mainly caused by bacteria that builds up in undercooked, improperly stored, or rotting food. It is your bodies reaction to Gastroenteritis means irritation and inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract which include your throat and intestines. There are different types but it is your body trying to purge itself of the bacteria, virus you have ingested."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2pcpa1
|
Why were German soldiers and officers in WWII so well dressed compared to their Allied counter parts?
|
Ive always wondered this. (More specifically the SS but id like to know about the regulars as well.)
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2pcpa1/why_were_german_soldiers_and_officers_in_wwii_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmvjerb",
"cmvqcdx",
"cmvt0t1"
],
"score": [
15,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Can you expand this question, as in, upon what evidence do you assert that there was a qualitative difference between the dress standards of the Germans vs the Allies? I wasnt aware there was one.\n",
"When you say \"well dressed\", do you mean quality (more effective camo, more comfortable clothing, more practical loadout, etc) or aesthetically (those snazzy SS uniforms and such)? Because while not an expert, I'm sure answers would vary widly (just in the \"quality\" camp you have stuff such as Germany's lack of proper winter clothings in Russia, you'd need to compare if their uniforms were effectively more comfortable/practical that those of the many allied armies, study how effective feldgrau was as camo and the availability of more elaborate camo patterns, etc), while when it comes to aesthetics you have the problem of how subjective the topic is (is it really \"better looking\" than similar, say, british uniforms?) and I'd guess the general answer would lay somewhere between \"German uniforms were developed from the Prussian tradition, compare the overwhelming similarities between WWI and WWII uniforms\" and \"them fascist governments sure thought looks were migthy important\". \n\nSo I'd suggest you elaborate on the question so an expert could give you a better answer. ",
"hi! you may be interested in a couple of previous related threads - the first one mentions the designers\n\n* [Why exactly did the Nazi uniforms have such a striking style?](_URL_1_)\n\n* [Are there any army uniforms though history that were/are viewed as very fashionable? Were uniforms ever designed with fashion in mind?](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1grhvp/are_there_any_army_uniforms_though_history_that/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1ktngd/why_exactly_did_the_nazi_uniforms_have_such_a/"
]
] |
|
1e1bc9
|
When did the concept of basic training come about in the military? Like the whole sergeant screaming in your face thing.
|
I hope everyone understands this question.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1e1bc9/when_did_the_concept_of_basic_training_come_about/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9vw2h3",
"c9w38qf"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"The 'sergeant screaming in your face' type of basic training largely emerged after the Second World War.\n\nS.L.A. Marshall's research during and after the Second World War found that 75 to 80 percent of riflemen *did not* fire their weapons at an exposed enemy. \"When [he] was sent to the Korean War to make the same kind of investigation [...] he found that (as a result of new training techniques initiated in response to his earlier findings) 55 percent of infantrymen were firing their weapons - and in some perimeter-defense crises, almost everyone was. These training techniques were further perfected, and in Vietnam the firing rate appears to have been around 90 to 95 percent.\"\n\nA lot of these new training techniques involved the desensitization and conditioning that come with variations on the 'screaming in your face' style of training.\n\nIf you are interested in this kind of thing, I would highly recommend Lt. Col Dave Grossman's *On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society*.",
"The sergeant screaming in your face is a very American concept. Other military forces having similar, but slightly different ways of desensitizing recruits to stress and to prepare them for violence. Some a little harsher or more devious than mere angry words. \n\nBasic training itself is of course very old, the armies of the ancient world knew similar concepts. But its modern reincarnation, in the Western world at least, seems to find much of its roots in the military reforms of the States Army of the Dutch Republic (*Staatse leger*) under Prince Maurice of Nassau (1567-1625). Who reintroduced the idea of daily training standardized military drills as a way of teaching smaller formations of infantrymen with firearms new tactics, including salvoes and how to manoeuvre under fire. [^1](_URL_1_) (I apologize, the source is in Dutch) Some claim he was the origin of what the British military historian Michael Roberts christened the Military Revolution in his book of the same title. Meaning that it was these reforms that formed the model for not only the basic training of modern armies, but for the whole shape of modern militaries themselves. I hope this answers your question about where basic training comes from.\n\nFor the historians or those wanting more information. The idea of the Military Revolution and Maurice's role in it has been challenged over the last decades. The consensus now being that he was simply the first to innovate the infantry in a general climate of almost continuous war and military innovation stretching back throughout the sixteenth century, beginning with the development of better defences, like the *Trace Itallienne* [^2](_URL_0_)(Once again in Dutch, sorry). Or seek out the response of Geoffrey Parker to Michael Roberts in his book *The Military Revolution - a myth?*\n\nEdit: Sourced and conforming closer to general rules."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://bmgn.knhg.nl/N/Nimwegen__O._van_-_Het_Staatse_leger_en_de_militaire_revolut.pdf",
"http://collectie.legermuseum.nl/sites/strategion/contents/i004529/arma35%20prins%20maurits.pdf"
]
] |
|
8wx96h
|
how are we able to touch fingertips from each hand together with our eyes closed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8wx96h/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_touch_fingertips_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e1z58r9",
"e1z5eor"
],
"score": [
7,
4
],
"text": [
"You do have sensory input though, through your sense of proprioception. Proprioception is the sense of the relative position of your body parts and strength of effort being used in movement. This information is sent to your brain from proprioceptors in skeletal striated muscles, tendons, and joints.",
"This is called proprioception (sense of movement, strength of movement, and our position in space). This sense seems to be formed in our vestibular system, and seems to take information from sensory neurons in the inner ear and in the various stretch receptors in our joint-supporting ligaments. \n\nOver the years of use, we become extremely sensitive to how our bodies move, and this is just an extension of that intimate familiarity with ourselves."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2gtdoa
|
Would holding your pee help delay dehydration?
|
Is your body able to reuse any of the urine for certain purposes in moments of crisis, or is anything in your bladder total waste when it gets there?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2gtdoa/would_holding_your_pee_help_delay_dehydration/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckmdvct"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"No,\n\nThe epithelium of the bladder, (the \"urothelium\"), is relatively impermeable to water and solute. This is necessary to maintain the concentration gradient between the urine and blood and thus prevent the leakage of water, solute, or nitrogenous waste from the urine back into the blood. \n\nThe urothelium is special in this regard (being impermeable to water). There are specific structural differences between the urothelium and epithelium in other tissues. The apical epithelium (on the inner surface) is made of special lipids (\"uroplakins\") that make it very impermeable to water. The gaps between epithelial cells are \"tight junctions\", and they are very tight and allow very little leakage between the cells. \n\nLeakage of urine through the urothelium only occurs in the case of bladder injury or damage to the urothelium, such as in the case of cystitis. Injury to the bladder epithelium occurs frequently but it somehow manages to repair itself.\n\n[People research this, and publish many papers in the renal literature](_URL_0_).\n\nAddit: delaying urination is not helpful. The kidneys continue to function producing urine, solute, and nitrogenous waste. If you absolutely prevent urination the bladder will distend which hurts) as will the ureters and the kidneys. This distention of the urinary system due to a blockage or overfilling of the bladder is called \"hydronephrosis\" and it is a bad thing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://ajprenal.physiology.org/content/283/2/F242"
]
] |
|
2y8p48
|
When explorers or conqestdors just claimed land that they found why didn't they claim the all the land they knew about
|
when let's say when Hudson found the Hudson Bay why didn't he claim all of ruperts land when he got there or all of Canada or North America wouldn't it be more useful if you just claimed all the land in the world there's no contention for land and your nation becomes the largest nation in the world is it rules of colonizism because they didn't really colonize when they found the new world and still owning all the land in the world or keeping some rules
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2y8p48/when_explorers_or_conqestdors_just_claimed_land/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cp7lhr5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This is a question that relates to the development of public international law. When the european exploration started in earnest, Spain and Portugal (the first europeans to do so) divided the world between them. They signed - with papal support - the Treaty of Tordesillas.\n\nThis was later contested by other european powers. They claimed that in order to truly be able to claim land, you have to exercise actual control. This principle was based on roman law and is called \"uti possidetis\".\n\nTherefore, just discovering land would not grant a permanent claim to it. Other powers would not have recognized a claim without actual control, as the Treaty of Tordesillas was not recognized except by the original signatories."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
elksn1
|
How fast do bacteria travel?
|
Say for example, my hands are dirty. How long would it take for bacteria to "crawl" all the way up to my arm? Do they "move faster" by reproduction/multiplication than by translation?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/elksn1/how_fast_do_bacteria_travel/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fdj743q",
"fdjf7ou",
"fdkbxny"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"This question isn’t exactly clear, the speed of bacteria is dependent on several factors to including type, surroundings, energy, etc. but if you’re wondering how bacteria usually get around, most unicellular organisms have a flagella, which is like a whip like tail to help them swim. Of course the primary function of bacteria is to spread, the bacteria will be constantly reproducing, and swimming to take up as much surface area as possible.",
"Good question! The truth is, it depends on about a million factors. But you knew that. I know what you're asking for, examples! I found one quick, and I hope it helps. [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nIt states that bacterial numbers every 4 to 20 minutes. Not sure how much of a change in *volume, speed, or* *virulence* that is, but it gives a general idea of how fast they replicate at least, which is more important in my opinion.\n\nMy advice, buy a microscope! It's fun, worth it, and you can do research that nobody's done specifically. Design experiments relevant to you, such as, how much bacteria and what types grow on my skin after I eat sugar/take a shower/roll in forest soil/manure/swim in a creek/! Use real life examples that you would expose yourself to. Then buy some fine measurement system you can put under the microscope and record the time!",
" > How long would it take for bacteria to \"crawl\" all the way up to my arm?\n\nThe overwhelming majority of microbes on your skin are not motile, so they would never be able to crawl from your hands to your upper arm. And motile bacteria are typically only mobile in liquid environments and your arm is mostly dry (I hope). Bacterial transference from your hands is typically a result of touching stuff.\n\nIn theory a single bacteria could multiply until it was a colony so large it covered your whole arm (which would likely be visible and gross looking). And people typically quote a 20min duplication time as typical for bacteria. So you could imagine a colony that large developing inside of a day. But in practice microbes on your skin can't establish colonies so large they cover your whole skin. They are subject to being washed and brushed off, dying, predation and importantly a lack of sufficient nutrients to maintain a colony as large (plus a host of other issues I'm sure)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.pnnl.gov/science/highlights/highlight.asp?id=879"
],
[]
] |
|
288ino
|
How do particles collide and bounce off on the quantum level?
|
As far as I know, a particle exists as a cloud of probability as long as it's position is uncertain, then when it is "observed" by anything and it's position collapses into a point the momentum becomes uncertain.
I assume anytime people say "is observed" it just means it interacts with something (since that's how we observe them, by firing stuff at them).
So as the two partices get closer, each one can only "learn" the others position or momentum but not both.
So while daydreaming on the job (I'm a lifeguard) I thought it'd go like this:
Once the two particles are reallllyyy close they can sense each other's position almost to a point, but this means they don't know each other's momentum...then I assume some force (strong force? Idk) says ok you're close enough time to bounce off, and so they do. However, since their momentums are uncertain they go off in random directions with random momentum (but still conserving momentum!)
I'm no physicist, just like to think and stuff
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/288ino/how_do_particles_collide_and_bounce_off_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci8uhrb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In my opinion, it would be more correct to say that in quantum physics, position and momentum are not part of the state of a system anymore. Instead, it is entirely defined by its wave function, from which you can calculate a particle's space-time position and 4-momentum for any given point of its worldline. The wave function is related to a probability distribution but contains additional information, the so-called phase.\n\nIf two wave functions overlap, they can interact with each other if there is a fundamental force that allows this interaction. For example, an electron might interact with a photon wave when the photon wave function crosses the electron wave function. If the electron has an excitation level sufficiently close to the photon's energy, and momentum can be transferred somewhere (to a nucleus, for instance), there is an amplitude (probability) for a transition of the electron to an excited level and the photon mode to go down a notch - we say a photon is absorbed. \n\nIf an electron interacts with another electron, they usually exchange photons. If they are sufficiently far from each other, this can be pictured as each electron emitting and absorbing photons. If they are close enough, the photons may be virtual particles, so no free photon actually needs to exist (be measurable in principle)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
c3gzzm
|
Nuclear bombs were described in science fiction prior to WW2. How far back can the concept of atomic fission weapons be dated?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/c3gzzm/nuclear_bombs_were_described_in_science_fiction/
|
{
"a_id": [
"errkmxy"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Nuclear fission was discovered in 1938. The previous concepts of \"atomic bombs\" were not fission-based. Rather, they tended to be based (per H.G. Wells) on the idea of induced radioactivity. That is, the idea that you could release the energy from radioactive materials all at once, rather than waiting for it to decay. \n\nThat's if the mechanism was spelled out. Usually only the effects were spelled out: e.g., in Wells' book, he talks about the atomic bomb as creating fires that could not be put out and continually grew. He only gestured at the idea of how they might work. \n\nH.G. Wells is generally considered the originator of the trope of atomic bombs, in his 1914 novel _The World Set Free_. It was itself largely influenced by Frederick Soddy's work of popular science, _The Interpretation of Radium_ (1909) which discussed the immense amount of power locked up in atoms. Soddy's work was directly influenced by Soddy's own (Nobel Prize-winning) research with Ernest Rutherford on atomic transmutation.\n\nI don't think I've seen the concept of atomic bombs even hinted at prior to 1914 (it is not in Soddy's book; Soddy originates many other \"atomic energy\" tropes though, like the \"one pound of uranium could power a steamship to go around the world X number of times\" one). By the 1920s however it was very commonplace and you could find it in many works of science fiction, popular science, science journalism, etc. \n\nA great resource for the history of thinking about nuclear technology is Spencer Weart's _Nuclear Fear_, which traces a lot of these early threads back."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
26fawj
|
why do streaming players buffer at different speeds even on the same internet connection?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26fawj/eli5_why_do_streaming_players_buffer_at_different/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chqhvr9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of variables can change the speed in which a player buffers—even on the same internet connection. Even though you may be on the same connection, the speed at which a web site is able to serve you content can be different, the file size can be different, and/or the code used to serve up the buffer is different (some may use hardcoded buffer values whereas other may be dynamic).\n\nEven the same web site, like YouTube, can buffer videos at different speeds due to the variety of servers in which host the content. If a particular server is seeing more traffic, it can potentially be giving you less speed. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2wp462
|
how come the adhesive on tape doesn't wear off when it's rolled around the dispensing circle, but it does after you've stuck it to anything else?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wp462/eli5_how_come_the_adhesive_on_tape_doesnt_wear/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cosuaot"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The smooth side of the tape is prepared so that the adhesive doesn't bond well to it. If you've made stuff out of duct tape, you'll know this intuitively; to get your things to hold together, you have to use sticky-sticky joints."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
74im4p
|
why do humans sometimes crave bad food (taco bell, for example) instead of higher quality, better tasting alternatives (real mexican food)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/74im4p/eli5_why_do_humans_sometimes_crave_bad_food_taco/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dnyksf9",
"dnz6c8n"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"For the vast majority of our existence, evolution has pushed us to get whatever calories we can. We didn't get fat because we were more active and did not have huge surpluses of food.\n\nNow we're less active and have huge surpluses of food, but still have that instinct to go for high calorie food.",
"It's about what's in Taco Bell, most importantly, the sugars. Taco Bell usually has stuff in fluffy, floury tortillas, plus the rice and other additives. They are absolutely FILLED with carbohydrates, which your body breaks down into sugars, which your body turns into fuel like the squishy mush engine you are as a hooman.\n\nIn fact, it's why a lot of fast food is addicting. The food itself is FILLED with sugar, the most addictive substance on the planet. Soda, fast food, potato chips... Filled with salt and sugar, two things our bodies, unfortunately, evolved to associate with EAT THIS NOW, YES. They were essential to our survival when we were trying to figure out what fire was, and that essential evolutionary trait doesn't just go away because we have fancy new tools.\n\nWe're still the same weird apes we were 10k+ years ago, we're just better at denying it. The fact is, healthier food may have these things, but not as much, so they don't taste as good because they have lower sodium and sugar levels."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4a1gzk
|
How widespread were the concepts of the seven deadly sins and the seven heavenly virtues during the Middle Ages?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4a1gzk/how_widespread_were_the_concepts_of_the_seven/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0wp5qz"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Lists of the virtues and vices were *the* basis of medieval moral instruction in the later Middle Ages. The idea of virtues countering specific vices, too, was a bedrock principle of teaching. You see the prominence of vices-and-virtues right from the real beginning of widespread ecclesiastical attention to instruction of the laity in the late 12th century. Since moral teaching was also the central aspect of religious instruction, yes, the vices and virtues were everywhere. (Physically as well--lots of church art depicting the personifications of Luxuria, Superbia, and so forth.)\n\nSpecific instances in sermons or instructional literature weren't always seven, though: sometimes you might find a shorter list (\"these are the three deadliest sins\") or a longer one. The virtues tended to shift around more than the deadliest vices.\n\nThe fifteenth century, according to Robert Bast, witnessed a growing movement towards the use of the Ten Commandments instead of the virtues and vices as the principle unit of moral teaching. But the virtues and vices endured. People were reading and pastors were preaching out of sermon books written earlier. 15C authors of more comprehensive catechetical texts will often discuss both the decalogue and the vices by way of moral instruction."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4k5xre
|
Is there any evidence to suggest that children who were married/taken as "lovers" in previous centuries suffered from similar psychological damage as contemporary victims of pedophilia and sexual abuse?
|
I know that the idea of "childhood" is a relatively new concept, but are there examples of people in history who behaved in unexpected ways or came to tragic ends who were married very young or sexually abused at a young age (by 2016 standards)?
Edit: I've barely gotten to read any of these yet but I'm excited to dive in.
I'd also like to clarify (since I'm assuming there was some vitriol about this, although I never saw it thanks to u/commiespaceinvader who I'd like to sincerely thank again) I don't think there's an age cut off when it comes to sexual abuse, and I'm certainly in no position to define for anyone the proper age of consent in any time, place, or location. I'm doing research on France in the late 1600s and I'm finding information about marriages involving teenagers under the age of 16--thus the question and my age cut off choice.
Thanks again! I may post with further questions as I read.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4k5xre/is_there_any_evidence_to_suggest_that_children/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3cm0hr",
"d3cor85",
"d3coyth",
"d3cpw89",
"d3cxpdo",
"d3d78z8",
"d3de46i"
],
"score": [
72,
69,
1341,
260,
41,
13,
11
],
"text": [
"What ages do you specifically mean by \"children\"?",
"Supplementary Q: how does the treatment of girls and women in such societies affect the quantity and quality of historical evidence available to address this question? In terms of their ability to be heard and leave a record of their experience but also the effects of internalising oppressive traditions?\n\nIt strikes me that /r/anthropology might have some additional insights into this question.",
"As I understand it, explicit concern over the *psychological* (as opposed to physical) impact of child abuse/sexual abuse is a 20th century development; we have some great history of psych flairs who would be able to tell you more about that. However, this is an interesting question because OP has specifically asked about sexual practices that were *not* considered abuse in a particular historical context.\n\nSo, with apologies for straying outside my usual focus:\n\nLate antique Jewish moral writing, and then derived from that early Christian authors, comes down *very* harsh on Greco-Roman institutionalized traditions of pederasty/pedophilia (*paiderasteō*). The idea of *corruption* of the boys involved runs deep.\n\nPhilo of Alexandria, [*De specialibus legibus* III.37-42](_URL_0_), explains:\n\n > Moreover, another evil, much greater than that which we have already mentioned, has made its way among and been let loose upon cities, namely, the love of boys, which formerly was accounted a great infamy even to be spoken of, but which sin is a subject of boasting not only to those who practise it, but even to those who suffer it, and who, being accustomed to bearing the affliction of being treated like women, waste away as to both their souls and bodies, not bearing about them a single spark of a manly character to be kindled into a flame\n\nPhilo's specific criticism is that being the victim of Greek pederasty makes boys *accept* and *want* the practice. In another text, *De contemplativa vita*, he more obliquely criticizes how pederasts use and discard the youngest boys.\n\nFollowing this line of corruption, early Greek Christian texts will introduce the word *paidophthoreō* to label the same practice. But rather than the eros/carnal love connotations of *paiderasteō*, John Martens argues, *paidophthoreō* invokes a web of meaning of *destroy* or *corrupt*. The *Didache*, a very early Christian text, places *paidophthoreō* as a crime next to infanticide: the utter destruction of children.\n\nSome sensitivity is mandated here. Philo's criticism, after all, is that the victims of pederasty (he uses the older Greek term, although he condemns the practice; there is only one Jewish source that uses *paidophthoreō*) grow up to be too feminine, and heavens forbid we should accept ancient and medieval ideas of gender boundaries as trans-historical, Platonic ideals. I'm not comfortable with the idea of wholesale dismissing gender performance as 100% the result of sexual abuse, no question, move along.\n\nHowever, I think there is a good argument to be made based on contemporary and later traditions that the idea of dealing with sexual abuse/pedophilia by striving to accommodate it, mentally, was implicitly and obliquely recognized by late antique and medieval authors. I'm no psychologist and it's important to remember that the modern idea of psychology, mental illnesses, and even emotions are culturally constructed, but it seems to be that modern research finds some resonance in this idea.\n\nSo I want to turn to a different type of case, fictional narratives of incest. Medieval sources *really* don't like to discuss sexual abuse of children directly, but as Kathryn Gravdal points out, incest stories present a way around or through the silence by keeping the focus elsewhere. She differentiates between \"canonical incest,\" or degrees of consanguinity for marriage purposes, and incest within the nuclear family. Specifically, we have stories of mother-son and father-daughter incest which are, always, turned towards an ultimately didactic purpose. What I want to highlight here are the very different standard portrayals of those types of incest in hagiographies, narrative poems, and exempla (moral lessons).\n\nThe prototypical mother-son incest story is, I would argue, the heir of the \"corruption\" critique. In these, the mother is a new widow who sees in her *child* the spitting image of her dead husband. She initiates the sexually abusive relationship; *the boy grows up to fall in love with her*. Again, the idea of aligning oneself/accepting the situation as a way to deal, cognitively, finds resonance both in Philo's writing and in modern research.\n\nThe stories of father-daughter incest are very different, certainly also reflecting gender norms. Here, the father is portrayed as a predator. As with stories of saintly women fleeing arranged marriages, the girls disfigure themselves--even to the point of amputating a hand--and flee their homes. The stories recount their suffering and hardships in the world. These are external consequences, of course, not \"internal\" ones--don't expect to find long descriptions of PTSD-type nightmares or flashbacks. However, these texts (unlike the saints who disfigure themselves to flee marriage, who usually wind up martyred) generally have more upbeat endings. The daughters, after massive suffering, will often wind their way to a husband and children of their own. There is room to see, given the medieval refusal to confront certain subjects directly, these stories as a sort of externalization of internal processes. (A literary topos that medieval writers loved.)\n\nIncest is a different case than institutionalized pederasty or early marriage, obviously. However, the parallels between the father-daughter incest narratives and the standard flight from early marriage stories are a *really* striking overlap that, I argue, justifies an extrapolation from specifically incest to forced sexual activity as a child in other circumstances as well.\n\nSo with all the care and sensitivity needed to reconstruct premodern emotions, psychology, and sexual norms, plus some careful reading of and through sources, I would argue that we can see both the emotional effects of childhood sexual abuse and an implicit, oblique awareness of them.",
"_URL_0_\n\nI'm not a historian, but in the interest of representing non-Western cultures, I thought I'd introduce this academic paper I came across on reddit a while ago. \n\nThe paper, which discusses the sex-positive culture of pre-contact Hawaii and Oceania, observes that in the context of a non-Judeo-Christian society with no sociocultural/religious grounds to imbue sex with guilt, sexual relations between adults and nonadults of both sexes were apparently an open and frequent occurrence. There is no mention of trauma or psychological damage on the part of the children, who are instead depicted as being active participants in those sexual acts, as well as growing to be fully functioning members of their community. \n\nI would love if any historians and anthropologists could comment as to the reliability of this paper as a source, as well as any other insights that could shed light on the veracity of the paper's claims. ",
"As a follow up, the first novel written, the Tale of Genji, involves the main character being madly in love with a 10 year old. He essentially grooms her. Her being 10 is not mentioned as a significant point, but rather offhandedly. I cant tell if its because at the time Japanese culture had very strict ways in which to talk about nobility (for example every character is referred to as position, never by name, even when their position changes) that prevented them from saying \"He was a creepy pedophile\". But my question is do we have evidence of this type of thing being common in East Asian culture? Was there a tradition of pederasty, or of child brides? Were children seemingly okay with it or would custom have prevented any writing about it?\n\nEdit: misread the age, it was a 10 year age difference...but he was 18 and she was 8",
"similarly, is there any documented trauma on the part of eunuchs, particularly those that rose to prominence in Muslim societies?",
"I can answer this from the more general perspective of psychology and psychopathology in history, rather than specifically with the incidence and consequence of sexual practices in childhood/adolescence, because my expertise is the history of psychology/psychiatry/psychopathology and because I was a practicing therapist. However, the example I use may well be evidence of the psychological trauma OP is asking about. That being said, mods please feel free to delete this answer if it isn't probative enough.\n\nNot all mental illnesses (let's call them phenomena for our purposes) are seen in all cultures at all times and the ones for which we have evidence of clear biological roots/contribution that DO appear in all cultures at all times are not always viewed as disorders or even seen negatively (symptoms of psychosis may be viewed as spiritual gifts, etc. (Not surprisingly, religion is often the lens through which mental phenomena are viewed and understood.) So cultural relativism becomes hugely important in disorders that are NOT always recognized as negative in all cultures at all times (and there are plenty of disorders that are specifically bound by time and culture). Let's look at one example a psychopathology that has been viewed differently at different times - anorexia and its partner-in-crime OCD. For our purposes, we'll call them phenomena rather than disorders.\n\nJoan Jacobs Brumberg wrote [an amazing book](_URL_0_) on the history of anorexia nervosa and the phenomenon of self-denial in women. We know anorexia nervosa today as one of a set of eating disorders and extreme self-denial currently falls under the category of OCD (the term orthorexia has been used to describe extreme self-denial but it is not yet clinically accepted terminology. I use it here because I find it a handy term). We view them as mental disorders and treat them as such. But as Jacob Brumburg demonstrates so articulately in *Fasting Girls*, these two phenomena are not at all new, and she starts her documentation of them in Europe in the 16th century. At the time, they are viewed through the lens of Christianity and are considered examples of extreme religious devotion and practice. (Jacob Brumburg discusses these phenomena among women, but religious asceticism is not unique to women). She then traces anorexia/extreme denial through the years as it shifted away from religious asceticism and became tied to social standing and wealth, cultural ideals about women, women in the entertainment industry and even to the industrial and scientific revolution. It is only in the 20th century that these phenomena begin to be classed as medical and psychological disorders.\n\nSo even with phenomena that are recorded very clearly in particular cultures over a period of centuries, they are not always considered to be Bad Things like they are today. And this applies to cultural behaviors as well. They need the same relativistic viewpoint.\n\n**That being said,** the example that I specifically have described may in fact be an example of what the OP is looking for. There is clear scientific consensus that anorexia, orthorexia and other forms of extreme self-denial are often, in our current society, the devastating result of childhood sexual trauma. While attitudes about the age boundaries of childhood and adolescence may have changed, the response to what we consider now to be sexual trauma ***may*** have been the same. One could make the argument that the behaviors of extreme self-denial seen in centuries past were rooted in the same causative behavioral phenomenon. I don't have any specific examples at hand (maybe /u/sunagainstgold can help here), but convents were one way of escaping sexual trauma, so it may be that **if** there were psychological repercussions from significant youth at the time of first sexual contact/marriage were in fact experienced as trauma, religious asceticism in convents and the continued existence of anorexia/OCD/orthorexia in women throughout the last few centuries could well be the evidence."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book29.html"
],
[
"http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2000to2004/2004-sexual-behavior-in-pre-contact-hawaii.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/414167.Fasting_Girls"
]
] |
|
442w12
|
why does frying food create bubbles?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/442w12/eli5why_does_frying_food_create_bubbles/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czmzncq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The oil used in frying is hotter than the boiling point of water. So when food touches it, the water contained in the food quickly boils, creating bubbles."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bohn24
|
how do password managers know your password without actually knowing your password?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bohn24/eli5_how_do_password_managers_know_your_password/
|
{
"a_id": [
"engdz7t",
"engmtfq",
"engnsdd"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"You’re just missing a step.\nUser creates account and enters a password. Password is irreversibly encrypted (hashed). Encrypted password is stored on server.\nWhen logging in, the password entered is also encrypted and compared to the stored encrypted password.\nSo there’s only one way to get those to match, which is to hash a password identical to the one hashed and stored in the database.",
"Every single answer here is incorrect. They all explain how websites store passwords, not password managers. **PASSWORD MANAGERS DO NOT HASH PASSWORDS**. \nIf they did, you will never be able to retrieve the passwords that you store in there. Instead, what they do is encrypt passwords to be stored with your master password (**simplification alert**: you actually encrypt it with a special decryption key which is related to your master password, but for simplicity's sake we'll assume passwords are encrypted/decrypted with your master password)\n\nSay you want to give something (your password) to someone for safekeeping (password manager) and you don't want them to see what you're storing. You put the data inside a strong box and lock it (encryption) and then hand it of to the person. So only you can open the box (decrypt the data) with the master key.\n\nWhen you want to retrieve a password from your password manager:\n\nYour password is first used as a verification to ensure that the server sends the encrypted data to the correct person (this part is like how regular websites use passwords to log you in with hashing and stuff). Then the encrypted data (box) is sent by the server which is then then decrypted (unlocked) with your password **on your device**. Remember, the client (software running on your phone/computer) will only send encrypted passwords to the password managers server. The server has no idea what it's receiving from your client. This is why it's important to choose password managers with open source clients which you can verify only sends encrypted data\n\n(Note this encryption is separate from the https encryption your browser/app does while communicating with the servers)\n\nNow that you retrieved your website password securely, it's just like entering it as if you remembered it. Here is where all the hashing mentioned in the other answer comes in\n\nSo the master password serves 2 functions: authenticate you and allow you to decrypt the data. If you ever forgot your password, even if you managed you authenticate yourself to the service by contacting support, the best they can do is hand over a blob of useless encrypted data",
"One way to do it:\n\nYour master password is hashed, and that is sent to the server. When it authenticates you based on that hash, it then sends a big blob of encrypted data to your machine. Your machine then uses your password to decrypt that data locally. The hash of your master password is sufficient to log in to the server, but not to decrypt the blob. So you never send their server anything that can be used to decrypt the blob.\n\nThis is not the only way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4ur1g0
|
How do we get the first distance of a celestial object without having an other one?
|
I'm talking about very distant objects like a star
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4ur1g0/how_do_we_get_the_first_distance_of_a_celestial/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5s45i0",
"d5s4tlh"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"You can figure out how far away the moon is if you know A. the diameter of the Earth and B. how long a lunar eclipse lasts. You have to assume the sun is much farther away and that the moon moves at constant speed. Then you know that 2 x pi x distance to moon/ 1 month = diameter of Earth/time of lunar eclipse, and you can solve for the distance to the moon. Eratosthenes figured out how to measure the diameter of the Earth by looking at the angles formed by shadows on the summer solstice at various locations.",
"Once you know the radius of earth's orbit around the sun, you can calculate the distance to the nearest stars by taking measurements 6 months apart and doing some simple trigonometery. It's called stellar parallax if you want to look up more about the method."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1qipl8
|
why does it seem like different parts of certain songs only come out of one headphone instead of both? e.g. "mr. brightside by the killers
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qipl8/eli5_why_does_it_seem_like_different_parts_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdd6qy4",
"cdd6rmm",
"cdd6ruv"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"because different parts of certain songs do only come out of one headphone, by design.\n\nif you switch your audio to mono instead of stereo, they will come out of both.",
"It's either the way it was mixed, or if the headphone is panning in and out for some reason. I'm not 100% positive if i answered your question though. ",
"It's called panning and it's usually a stylistic choice by the producer or band during mixing/mastering. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ck5ofr
|
- why is the process of cooling products down so much slower than heating them up?
|
Why is it that its so much quicker to heat something up rather than cool it (e.g. it takes a few minutes to boil water vs a few hours to freeze it)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ck5ofr/eli5_why_is_the_process_of_cooling_products_down/
|
{
"a_id": [
"evjhem8",
"evjigk0"
],
"score": [
2,
9
],
"text": [
"I mean if you dip something in liquid nitrogen itll cool down FAST. \n\nThe problem becomes whether or not its practical. Right now it's more practical to create fire which is super good at heating things up than removing heat with our technology.",
"The speed of heat transfer is proportional to the difference in temperature between two objects, which means how long it takes to heat or cool something is (non-linearly) proportional to how large a temperature difference you can make between the desired temperature and the heat source/sink you're using. (It's also affected by the particular materials you're using, so trying to boil water by exposing it to hot air is a lot slower than by dropping it on an iron skillet that's the same temperature, but in household use you frequently are just heating or cooling air.)\n\nIf you're trying to boil water, you're trying to bring it to 100ºC using a flame that's probably around 2000ºC (eg, a natural gas stove). That's a difference of 1900º, which is quite large, so it goes very quickly.\n\nIf you're trying to freeze water, you're trying to bring it to 0ºC using a freezer that's probably around -18ºC. That's a difference of only 18º, so it's going to be relatively slow.\n\nIf you tried to boil water using air that was only 120º, it would also take a very long time. Similarly, if you trying to freeze water using air that was -150º, it would go much quicker. But, our household appliances don't provide those things, so we get what we get."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
e5r85h
|
Can someone explain the physics behind powders forming mounds?
|
Why is it that when you drop a handful of sand or salt on a surface, it forms a mound? Can someone describe the physics of what's happening?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/e5r85h/can_someone_explain_the_physics_behind_powders/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f9lpibr"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"It's called the Angle of Repose. When a granular material is poured out, there is a decreasing gradient of likelihood that any given grain falls in the exact center, so you get more grains in the middle, a little less a little further away, and just a few away some distance. Thus, you get a pile with a peak. A cone. The steepness of that cone is governed mainly by the ability of the grains to interlock. Perfectly round grains easily roll downhill, and the sides of the cone slump. Sharp corners inhibit rolling, and the pile gets steeper."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
tt8i3
|
How do kidney stones cause testicular pain?
|
I understand that it's referred pain, but I want to know which nerves are responsible. I'm guessing that it's the Ilioinguinal or Genitofemoral nerve (similar roots), because the ureters have autonomic innervation from T10-L1 and S2-4 (sympathetic and parasempathetic, respectively). Does anyone know which nerves are responsible for sure sure?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/tt8i3/how_do_kidney_stones_cause_testicular_pain/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4pjwym"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You have correctly guessed that referred pain to the scrotum travels along the illioinguinal and genitofemoral nerves. A third somatic nerve that refers pain to the scrotum is the posterior scrotal nerve. There are many other disease that can cause referred pain to the scrotum."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4ppycw
|
how does the nba draft work?
|
I'm Australian and drafts aren't done over here so it's a completely foreign subject. Over here, teams just offer people a place on spot much like you might be offered a job in the real world.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ppycw/eli5_how_does_the_nba_draft_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4n05lf",
"d4n0ck4",
"d4n24uh"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The draft exists in the interest of competitive balance. The NBA wants all 30 of its teams to offer a product to fans worth selling, and that can't happen if incoming players are free to sign contracts with whichever team they want. The good players would be more likely to sign with teams that are already good, or teams that are in bigger markets. The skill gap between the top 5% of NBA players and the bottom 95% is simply too large to allow all the best players to go on a few teams.\n\nSo the basic idea is that all teams go through the draft before free agent signings, and they can use the draft to obtain the exclusive right to sign a player. And the order that teams go in the draft is largely determined by the reverse standings from the previous season (so the worst team in the NBA from the previous season is guaranteed a very high spot in the draft, which means they can select a player they think will be very good). Obviously, there are ways to change draft order; there's a lottery now, so the worst team isn't guaranteed the top spot in the next draft, and teams can also choose to trade away their picks in upcoming drafts. But most spots don't change.\n\nSo if a team selects a player in the draft, they have the exclusive right to sign a contract with that player (I believe that right lasts for one year). And players almost always sign a contract with the team that drafts them - higher draft picks get bigger contracts, after all, as well as being able to play on a team where they probably won't be overshadowed by another player.",
"In the NBA, the draft is how players who were not in the NBA are selected to play in the NBA as rookies of the league. These people may be former pros of other leagues or former college players. Rather than players going to the highest bidder, the teams pick players in a specific order. Part of that order is based on the regular season record of the teams, but the beginning is based on a \"lottery\" for the teams that missed the playoffs. The odds of a team winning is based on their record. They literally draw balls out of a machine that is mixing them with team names on them. The team with the worst records has the most balls in the machine. With that method, everyone has a chance that is part of the lottery to get the first pick. The most unlikely winner was the Orlando Magic in 1993 with a 1.52% chance of winning. The Chicago Bulls in 2008 and Cleveland Cavaliers in 2014 both had a 1.7% chance of winning and won. \n\nWhy do they not just allow teams to simply negotiate with players? There are a couple of problems with that. First, the teams with the most money get the best players that way. It makes it so teams with stingy owners or smaller markets cannot compete and are always worse than the rest. Over time, being bad means less people come to games and you would have a situation where the league would actually bring in less money because many of the teams would have few fans. \n\nThe other problem with that plan is that it is a really big jump from other levels to the NBA. It is pretty difficult to determine if a player will be successful. It would be challenging for owners to make money if they payed players on potential. As such, players and owners have agreed to a rookie pay scale that makes it so rookies get far less money than they otherwise would.",
"You do realise that Australia has the AFL Draft right?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
efvc57
|
How were people of different ethnicity treated in the Soviet Union?
|
Following r/PropagandaPosters I see a lot of Soviet posters trying to appease to the African Americans telling them how the American government and capitalism is oppressing them and how they would be equal under communism. What was the reality of that within the Soviet Union?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/efvc57/how_were_people_of_different_ethnicity_treated_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fc3c0kq"
],
"score": [
28
],
"text": [
"This is a really big question for several reasons but primarily because when talking about something like how peoples of various ethnic backgrounds were perceived and treated in a nation-state like the Soviet Union, one has to take into consideration something called intersectionalism. You'll see this word floating around in places where these kinds of issues are studied and discussed but it's started to become one that is more recognizable in the mainstream of some societies-- what it means in the context of this question though is that making some kind of broad statement that encapsulates how, for example, Chechens would be perceived and treated within the Soviet Union is nigh impossible because it requires that one unpack literal centuries of history concerning Chechen and Russian relations, but likewise an equivalent amount of history for Chechen and Dagestani relations, Chechen and Armenian relations, Chechen and Georgian relations, and on and on and on. History doesn't just disappear overnight because you're ostensibly a communist now. To give a truly holistic and complete answer to your question is the stuff of which PhDs are made.\n\nAs you can imagine, that means a question like this which is seeking a straightforward answer concerning the treatment and perception of all minorities within the USSR (which had 69 officially recognized nationalities and more like 200 self-identified nationalities) scales up to be an absolutely enormous question the moment one sets out to answer it. Literal volumes have been written on this subject. Literal volumes have been written about a single ethnic group's conflicts with the other ethnic groups in its own region. Literal volumes have been written about a single ethnicity as it relates to another single ethnicity within an even smaller region. I would never claim that I've read near enough material or done near enough research to truly, completely answer this question to the extent that it could be done. As such, in this context, intersectionalism helps us immensely by allowing the acknowledgment to be made that racism is a supremely complicated issue and provides the recognition of the collisions that occur between multiple forms of oppression or discrimination that inevitably occur when you're talking about something like race relations in a country of nearly 200 million people and over a millennium of recorded history. We need to be mindful of it and consciously address it before trying to answer (what I'm hypothesizing is) your underlying question which (to nitpick, I'm sorry) can be more explicitly stated thus:\n\nHow did the government of the Soviet Union treat non-Russian ethnicities and/or did the average Russian Soviet citizen harbor intense racial biases or prejudices against his or her Soviet compatriots?\n\nThis question becomes even further fraught with complication given that 'Russian' is also obviously not synonymous with all other quote-unquote white Slavic races in and around Russia-- that is, Belorussian, Ukrainian, etc. So again, while to someone who is looking in from the outside, a Ukrainian will present essentially as a Russian, or Belorussian, or otherwise, the fact is that within these groups, there is huge amounts of dissent about how distinct or indistinct they truly are from one another.\n\nSo, okay, sorry for the entire windup there but it's important to give some space to other writers who might have something to contribute concerning, perhaps, how a specific minority ethnic group experienced specific discrimination (or lack thereof) in the Soviet Union instead of my answer which, as I implied above, is going to talk about the concept of non-Russian ethnicity in a generalized way that is absolutely not correct or even applicable and relevant 100% of the time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
27l0z7
|
how are spaceships able to land on the moon if it is constantly moving?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27l0z7/eli5_how_are_spaceships_able_to_land_on_the_moon/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci1tjs6",
"ci1tkx4",
"ci1tm09",
"ci1ubxv",
"ci1vm82"
],
"score": [
19,
2,
2,
24,
3
],
"text": [
"How do you throw a ball to a man who is running? \n\nIt's the same thing. Throw/propel the object so its path intersects the future path of the 2nd object so they will meet at the same point at the same time.\n\nAnd then, furthermore, how do you jump into a car that is already moving? Just meet up with it as described above, and then move along with it. Then, it's like you are both stationary compared to each other.",
"They match its motion.",
"The same way you walk on the earth even though the earth is moving. You move too.",
"There is a cool game called Kerbal Space Program.\n\n[Here is a guide how to land on a Moon](_URL_0_)\n\nReality is pretty similar.",
"It's like the secret to Space Invaders: you don't aim for where they ARE, you aim for where they're GOING to be. \n\nIn the case of the moon, we can predict where it will be along its orbital path at a given time and adjust the spacecraft to meet it there at that point in space. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFBftGe_dXQ"
],
[]
] |
||
7enogv
|
how do isps expect to retain their costumers without offering a neutral network?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7enogv/eli5_how_do_isps_expect_to_retain_their_costumers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dq69c65",
"dq69dg5",
"dq69h3s",
"dq69i6v"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In the vast majority of areas there is only a single high speed internet supplier, usually the cable tv provider. They can do whatever they want.\n\nIn my are I can get cable tv high speed internet or a barely functional dsl from Frontier. Das it. ",
"Most of the country has 1-3 options for internet (with the largest segment only having one). When there is no option for people to turn to due to the monopolies there is no market incentive for any of ISPs to offer the \"neutral network\" because they will not lose their customers. ",
"ISPs in the US carefully split the map so that a lot of people only have one ISP they can choose. And even then they can adopt a strategy of not waging a price war and instead matching prices.\n\nPeople can't just say \"fuck it I'll stop using this ISP and give up on an internet access\".\n\nThe US market is already an oligopoly, this is just the next natural step in an oligopoly. ",
"60% of Americans live in an area with only 1 ISP and having more than 2 is almost unheard of. On average people dont have have a choice of which ISP they get. Its less a choice of Shitty internet and Neutral internet it will be a choice between shitty internet and no internet. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dl0af3
|
How do the center of planets/stars behave?
|
Is the material in the center of planets and stars just held there by the pressure of everything above it. Is it "weightless" in the center of planets/stars? It seems counter initiative that there is more mass outside the very center point of a planet/star so shouldn't that gravity be pulling it apart all around and away from the center but at the same time all that mass is pulling itself inward because to an outside point there's more mass towards the center were the matter is being pulled and making that pressure that the center feels.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/dl0af3/how_do_the_center_of_planetsstars_behave/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f4p4ec2"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Your intuition would be correct. The [shell theorem](_URL_0_) says that gravity from a hollow sphere of material will behave as follows: To someone inside of it, the gravity will cancel out. To someone outside of it, the gravity behaves in the same was as it would if all of the mass was concentrated at the center of the sphere. The result is that, if you imagine the planet as a bunch of concentric hollow spheres, you realize that as you dig deeper you find yourself inside of these spheres. This means that only the portion of the planet that is beneath you is pulling you down. When you reach the center of the planet, you are inside of every single sphere, and so you experience no gravity. If you were to hollow out the core of the planet, you would float around freely in this cavern."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem"
]
] |
|
4lfxl9
|
how do headphones produce more than one sound at once?
|
If there's only 1 vibrating surface inside your headphones, why can I hear all the different notes in a chord, or guitar and bass at the same time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4lfxl9/eli5_how_do_headphones_produce_more_than_one/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3myv8d"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
" > If there's only 1 vibrating surface inside your headphones, why can I hear all the different notes in a chord, or guitar and bass at the same time?\n\nIf there's only one vibrating surface inside your ear (your eardrum), why can you **hear** all the different notes in a chord, or guitar and bass at the same time?\n\nThe answer is the same in both cases. When you add sound waves together, you get a single, more complicated wave that can still be produced/received by a single vibrating membrane. [Here's an example of what the result of adding several waves looks like](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://static.nautil.us/1620_806beafe154032a5b818e97b4420ad98.jpg"
]
] |
|
2laygc
|
What was Africa's influence if any, on ancient Japanese and Chinese culture?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2laygc/what_was_africas_influence_if_any_on_ancient/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cltcex2"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Well, here's a slice of something I read not too long ago. Not a huge influence but:\n\nYasuke (c. 1556-?) was a black (African) retainer who for a short time was in the service of the Japanese warlord Oda Nobunaga. The name \"Yasuke\" (彌介) was given to him after he took service with Nobunaga; his original name is not recorded.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke"
]
] |
||
1rhum8
|
Why were women treated leniently by the British Justice system during the early modern period? (1500-1800)
|
I'm writing an essay about gendered assumptions and so far, with the exception of witchcraft, women were treated a lot more lightly by the courts and such. Is this due to Christian values or something?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1rhum8/why_were_women_treated_leniently_by_the_british/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdnpxpt"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Crime and Punishment in Eighteenth Century England by Frank McLynn has a chapter on women that addresses this. In short, for capital crimes other than murder, women were reprieved from execution much more than men. Also, women were more likely to have charges lowered and less likely to be sent for transportation than men for non capital larcenies. \n\n\nMcLynn's explanation is that women were generally perceived to be less dangerous to the community/authority/social order, and the deterring effect of the death penalty didn't work so much for women, as \"the hanging of a women was more likely to excite pity for the victim than reinforce confidence in \"law and order\"\"\n\nAlso the concept of coverture might relate to your topic. Since a *feme covert*'s legal standing was eclipsed by her husband's, a married women who committed crimes with their husband were assumed to be acting at their husband's behest. On the flip side of this, wives who killed their husbands were not guilty of murder but petit treason, which was a more serious offense and was punished with burning.\n\nInterestingly, The rates of execution for people indicted for willful murder were the same for men and women, about 1/5. Women charged with homicide were more likely to be accused of murder as opposed to manslaughter than men, which may relate to the higher chance of a women's murder victim being an intimate rather than a stranger."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ujzdw
|
I was told that many nursery rhymes were originally told by peasants to mask a message about politics or events so they wouldn't get in trouble. Any truth to this?
|
If so, what are some nursery rhymes about that most people don't know, and how did they spread?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1ujzdw/i_was_told_that_many_nursery_rhymes_were/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cejjot3"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"I will restrict my answer to my known field which is Germany. I am sure there are countless nursery rhymes over countless cultures and times that could be discussed. \n\nWhat is more likely is that they were not masked, but that the rhymes were often co-opted by people with political leanings. In Germany it was very common, especially with the German Pub Culture, to know many songs. A typical German could easily spout off over a hundred different tunes as late as the 1800's. This fact was made easier due to the re-using of tunes over and over with new words as a new message was needed. For example, what was originally a song about drinking in a pub could easily be converted to the Star Spangled Banner. \n\nSimilarly, children's songs and nursery rhymes could be used to easily remember political tunes to be sung at a rally or to communicate a message. The words to the songs could be distributed through your church, local calendars, books, or at a festival. Various reforms and rules tried to curb all of these distribution methods over time and generally failed. \n\nAs for coded phrases, I have not heard of that outside a few specific circumstances and would not call it common by any means. \n\nSource: James Brophy. *Popular Culture and the Public Sphere in the Rhineland, 1800-1850*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
c4p55k
|
where do protons and electrons come from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c4p55k/eli5_where_do_protons_and_electrons_come_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"erxma3d",
"ery9piy",
"eryba9a"
],
"score": [
21,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Primitive particles created out of the energy released at the Big Bang. By about one second after that event, it's believed most of the protons we have today were already formed.",
"Protons and neutrons come from elementary particles called Quarks. 2 Up quarks and 1 Down quark create a proton, 1 Up quark and 2 Down quarks create a neutron.\n\nElectrons are an elementary particle of the type Lepton.\n\nBosons are the third type of elementary particle which are force carriers: strong (which keep quarks and the nucleus of atoms together), weak (which is responsible for radioactive decay), electromagnetic (light and magnets), and gravity (the theorized graviton, not yet detected).\n\nIt looks like quarks and leptons are theorized to have smaller components called ‘preons,’ but I’m not too familiar with them.",
"while protons are a soup of quarks, photons and gluons, electrons are just electrons. We don't know where all those particles come from, but they at least follow a relatively simple scheme (the standard model).\n\nMuch like the periodic table in chemnistry gives a scheme for elements without explanation (the explanation comes from quantum physics), the standard model gives a scheme of elemental particles, but we haven't found a explanation yet."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1mfera
|
What is the difference in gravity between the lowest and highest points on earth, and would it be noticeable to the average human?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1mfera/what_is_the_difference_in_gravity_between_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc8r4ap"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The radius of the Earth is about 6400 km. The highest point on Earth is at an altitude of nearly 9km (Mt. Everest). The lowest point on Earth on dry land is about .4km below sea level, next to the Dead Sea; the lowest point covered by water is the Marianas Trench, nearly 11km below sea level. [Figures from [here](_URL_0_)]\n\nThe difference in gravitational force between the top of Mt. Everest and the shore of the Dead Sea would be about 0.3%. If you could be at the bottom of the Marianas Trench and neglect the water pressure above you, the difference between the gravitational force there and at the top of Mt. Everest is about 0.6%.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_points_of_Earth"
]
] |
||
796314
|
Can nuclear power still be achievable without uranium?
|
I'm sorry if this is a bad question but I've recently been looking into nuclear power energy and it seems very efficient but the problem is that uranium isn't the safest element of them all. From what I've read, the reason uranium is used is that it's the easiest element to undergo nuclear fission (the splitting of atoms). My question is can we use another element that, like uranium is easy to undergo nuclear fission but unlike uranium is fairly safe (meaning a potential nuclear meltdown that won't spread radiation)? If so, why haven't we tried it?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/796314/can_nuclear_power_still_be_achievable_without/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dozimg1",
"dozk74h"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Your options for a *fissile* fuel in a reactor are basically either uranium (233 or 235) or plutonium (239 or 241).\n\n > (meaning a potential nuclear meltdown that won't spread radiation)?\n\nThe fact that a reactor meltdown can release large amounts of radiation has nothing to do with the fact that the fuel is uranium. Fundamentally, if you are using nuclear fission reactions to produce energy, you are producing radioactive fission products. And if the reactor core is damaged, and the containment is breached, some of those radioactive products can escape into the atmosphere.\n\nNuclear power plants are engineered to prevent core damage and breaches of containment at all costs. But there is no way that changing the fuel of the reactor can totally prevent these things from happening. And as I mentioned above, your choices of fuel for the fission chain reaction are limited. The uranium and plutonium isotopes used as fuel tend to have lower specific activities than their fission products do, so the main source of radioactivity from the operation of the reactor is the *fission products* rather than the fuel itself.",
"You are probably thinking of a [thorium reactor](_URL_0_), but as /u/RobustEtCeleritas says, that will produce radioactive waste too."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power"
]
] |
|
biiv4q
|
would deep sea caves have normal air pressure so that humans could live in them or would they have the same pressure as the water at the depth?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/biiv4q/eli5_would_deep_sea_caves_have_normal_air/
|
{
"a_id": [
"em0yw9k",
"em0z0fh",
"em15zhw"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"They have the same pressure as the water. If it were less, the water would flood in (squeezing the air) until it equalized.\n\nFYI, people can breathe pressurized air. But health problems can occur.",
"The air pressure in the cave must equal the pressure of the surrounding water. If it was less, then the water would move in. If it was greater, the air would move out.",
"They have the same pressure as the surrounding water. \nIf they are filled with water it's the same pressure as the water outside of the cave. \nIf it was opened to the outside air, the water would go in and fill it. \nIf some air was trapped the water would squeeze it until it was the same pressure as the outside water, but this basically never happens. \n \nHumans have built structures filled with air under water and connected them to the surface. \nThey needed to keep the air pressure high. \n[There was one case where all the pressure got suddenly let out.](_URL_0_) \nIt was very bad, and not suitable for 5 year olds. \nThe image often stated is \"imagine trying to suck a human being through a straw, that happened\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byford_Dolphin"
]
] |
||
akjhlo
|
Do dogs really love their owners, or are they just really good at getting us to feed them?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/akjhlo/do_dogs_really_love_their_owners_or_are_they_just/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ef8fn7m",
"efe281g"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Super subjective question and I’m no dog behavioralist, so this is speculative. Dogs are pack animals, the same as us. Love is a very strong emotion, and one of its primary functions is to bond members of a group together. Although we may experience more nuanced and complex versions of emotions, I believe that they are present in most animals, at least mammals, as drivers of basic instinct. Taking this, and the fact that we are part of a dog’s pack, I’m pretty sure they really do love us (and this ignores the more obvious signs like how excited they are to see us come home, etc.).",
"What is love? Why should it only exist for humans?\n\nDoes a child love his/her parents or are children just good at getting us to care for them?\n\nIn the end it all serves an evolutionary purpose. And that is what we call love. It's just a way to survive better and that's why it stayed with us in evolution.\n\nSo in that case both statements can be true at the same time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
i2qhf
|
Is it theoretically possible to create a 4d graphic engine with a 3d display?
|
Ok guys, so maybe it's a stupid question (I have no idea) but we all know it's possible to render a 3d graphic engine in a 2d display, we do it every day.
So, is it possible to use some sort of 3d display to render a 4d graphic engine?
Edit: I mean the 4th spatial dimention, of course, not time.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/i2qhf/is_it_theoretically_possible_to_create_a_4d/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c20eoac",
"c20fkqz"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"We don't render 3d graphics on a 2d display. We abuse various optical illusions that human eyes suffer from in order to make specific patterns of 2d graphics *look* 3d. Since our minds don't try to make things look 4d, there are no optical illusions that make things look 4d, so there's no way to do this.",
"Depending on what type of 3d display you are talking about. If it's just a simple 3D tv (which is just two 2D images delivered to each eye independently) then not really. If it's a true volumetric 3d display, like some sort of hologram, then sort of. You could display a 3d projection of a 4d object, exactly analogous to the 2d projections of 3d objects you see on a normal screen.\n\nThe problem is that any image you see is always essentially in 2d, even when observing 3d objects you can only perceive the two-dimensional surface of them (each point on that surface can register as a specific distance from you, but this \"dimension\" isn't really the same as the other two). Think an MRI scan, this is a \"real\" 3d image that doctors have to view in 2d slices. True 3d vision would allow you to perceive every point on or *in* the object simultaneously (three spatial coordinates).\n\nThis is why even if you could overcome some of the problems Amarkov talked about and actually conceive of the 4th spatial dimension in your head, you physically wouldn't be able to see it in the display. A projection of the 3d surface of the 4d object contains information throughout it's entire structure, which is impossible to look at all at once. This is why even a 3d display really won't let you see into the 4th dimension."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3ff7ai
|
why are centimetres used regularly but centilitres aren't?
|
When measuring small distances, you might say that it was for example 25cm long. However, when measuring a small amount of liquid, you would say something like 250ml.
Why do we not say with 250mm or 25cl (depending on which you change)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ff7ai/eli5_why_are_centimetres_used_regularly_but/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cto2lda",
"cto3xft",
"cto5s2r"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"I would say it's because of convention. ml are used most commonly and people are used to using that rather than cl. The academic and scientific community decide this. It's just to make things easier for people to understand what you are doing. Also, some formulas require use of specific units and ml is probably one of those specific units. If you use minutes in a formula that requires input units of seconds, you'll get the wrong answer. If a bunch of formulas require seconds, it's easier to do your work in units of seconds. Outside of academia and science, people would know what you are talking about and it wouldn't matter much, but those that have done work in those fields probably hold onto old habits of using standard SI units that are most commonly used.",
"As /u/Redbeater said, much of this is convention. I'd imagine at some point in the past one became preferred due to ease of everyday use. That is, most people (especially scientists and those outside the US) can eyeball 1 mL of liquid relatively easily, but most do not intuitively know what 1 cL is (at least without approximating 10 mL). Since it's easier to visualize 10 mL vs. 1 cL, why bother with centiliters?\n\nIt could also be so that if you tell someone to measure out a volume, they won't get cL and mL confused, because you always use milliliters. Another thought is just plain usefulness; centimeters are much more useful in everyday life than millimeters, which ties in to the first point.\n\nKept that at ELI5 as possible, but if you want more info we can go to ELIAHighSchooler. Sometimes \"odd\" measurements are used in sciences. Blood glucose level is measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL), and many other \"blood concentration of whatever\" is measured in units like nanograms/micrograms/number of cells per deciliter of blood. When measuring how much a substance bends/twists light (not gonna get into chirality), the length used in the formula in in decimeter (dm). It all comes down to ease and practicality of use, familiarity, and a desire for precision, but there is nothing inherently \"wrong\" with the oddball units.",
"Centilitres are used, in France at least. Checking on my can of famous cola based fizz drink, it's a 33cL can. A smaller one is 15cL. A bottle is usually 50cL instead of 0.5L, or 500mL."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
256r9f
|
if the universe if infinitely big, then are there infinite versions of everyone doing the same thing at the same time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/256r9f/eli5_if_the_universe_if_infinitely_big_then_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"che8z8e"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Well, also, at this point, the scientific consensus is that the universe is not infinitely big. Actually, at the point of becoming infinite, the word \"big\" loses all meaning.\n\nIt is still accepted that the universe might theoretically be infinite. At that point, yes, it's possible that what you describe is accurate.\n\nBut, infinite has a lot of different connotations. For example, if the universe is infinite, does it have an infinite amount of mass and energy? If not, then all mass and energy that does exist is insignificant to the universe, and therefore all theoretical ideas are not possible. And wouldn't an infinite amount of mass and energy preclude a \"big bang\" theory?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
374p04
|
in nascar or other car races, why doesn't everyone go the same max speed and finish in the same position that they started in?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/374p04/eli5_in_nascar_or_other_car_races_why_doesnt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crjnpya",
"crjoqbi"
],
"score": [
6,
6
],
"text": [
"Drag. When you are directly behind another car, the wind isn't hitting the front of your car as hard as the car in front of you. Your engine doesn't have to work as hard, and because of this you can race up behind a car and perhaps overtake them, But then you have to deal with the drag yourself.",
"This little tidbit really transformed the way I think of Nascar races: to the lay viewer, it really does just look like they've got the pedal to the metal and they're flooring it all the way around the track. \n\n\nBut this is the reality of it- if at any point, particularly in the corners, they truly floor it, they will go into the wall. Those cars are the basic bare bones, a mere shell, transporting a guy (or girl) attached to an enormous, very powerful engine. Those cars are capable of going way faster than they go on the track, they have to slow down so they can make it around the corner. \n\n\nBut who can make it around the fastest? Do you keep the speed and take the outside line, or slow down a bit and take the corner closer to the infield? How do you use the drag from other cars to your advantage? There's a lot of nuance in Nascar which is unapparent from the outside.\n\n\nMore on the point of how bare bones the cars are and how much depends on the driver's ability to sense the car and judge it's ability: there's no fuel gauge, there's no speedometer, and there are no electronic sensors in the various suspension components. As far as I know, those drivers have a tach, the pedals, steering wheel, and gear level, and their butts to know what's going on with the car. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
50bb1i
|
Why were so many UN and US prisoners killed by China and North Korea during the Korean War?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/50bb1i/why_were_so_many_un_and_us_prisoners_killed_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d72qn3v",
"d73k28l"
],
"score": [
60,
2
],
"text": [
"Look at the Korean War in two parts - pre-China and post-China.\n\nPre-China, the North Koreans were quite vicious. They did execute prisoners that had been captured and bound. They were fighting a war that was both fast and political. The speed meant that they weren't ready to house prisoners, so they had no other choice than to kill them. The politics of the situation was also a precursor to what would come later in North Korea - loads of propaganda.\n\nPost-China is a different story. The Chinese were much more humane towards prisoners. They didn't execute people who surrendered, at least not as an official policy. During battles, there are records of isolated incidents of this happening, but it was low level officers, not general officers, making those decisions.\n\nThe biggest problem was simply that the Chinese were overwhelmed. They had just finished fighting a civil war, they were poor and poorly equipped, and it was winter. UN troops were also poorly equipped, many of them fighting in North Korea in October and November in summer uniforms. The majority of soldiers who died in Chinese captivity died from hunger and weather, factors that the Chinese had little to no control over given that they were trying to feed and clothe their soldiers at the same time.\n\nFor more information, any decent book on the Korean War will mention this. The two that jump out at me are *Scorched Earth, Black Snow* by Andrew Salmon, a book about UK/Commonwealth soldiers in the war, and *The Coldest Winter* by David Halberstam, about the US in the war. They don't discuss POW camps in detail, but they do mention the factors I've brought up.\n\n**Edit**\n\n/u/henry_fords_ghost said\n\n > this seems to suggest suggesting that military expediency justifies killing Prisoners of War.\n\nI'm not saying that military expediency justifies killing prisoners of war. I am saying that North Korean soldiers did kill POWs, in part, for that reason however. As I'll mention below, the available evidence suggests that these were not systematic killings ordered by the General Staff, but the actions of front line soldiers with little training and little choice other than to let the POWs go. The South had NOT collapsed as predicted and the northern soldiers could not afford to leave people behind to guard the prisoners.\n\n/u/GTFErinyes said:\n\n > I certainly hope you aren't suggesting that North Korea killed prisoners out of strategic need. While some cases were out of circumstances, like the notion that North Korea's most recent military experience was with/against the Japanese - who were notorious for how they treated POWs - and thus weren't as privy to Western/international regulations on the treatment of POWs, we cannot ignore that North Korea also systemically implemented a lot of policies towards POWs that were barbaric and designed to advance their own agenda.\n\nT.R. Fehrenbach, in his book *This Kind of War* pointed out that there is no evidence that the North Korean leadership knew of or sanctioned the shooting of prisoners in the early part of the war. In Roy Appleman's book, *South to the Naktong, North to the Yalu*, he cites an order from the North Korean General Staff to all officers that said killing of POW's was strictly prohibited. The order came down on July 28th, after reports of massacres began to appear. After this order, a few more incidents occurred during the Battle of the Pusan Perimeter, but for the most part, these incidents stopped.",
"One Underrated fact that isnt often talked about is that the Korean POW camps would feed the prisoners about what the average citizen would eat but as Americans/most westerners were typically larger and had a higher caloric intake in their diet they would often be going hungry while eating the same amount of food a Korean or Chinese citizen would."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
90it3j
|
why wouldn't papa john always have 51% of stock issued to him.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/90it3j/eli5_why_wouldnt_papa_john_always_have_51_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e2qpiuf",
"e2qqo3x",
"e2qr9h5",
"e2qyhqh"
],
"score": [
16,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because there is no special privilege given to the founder of a company that is publicly traded. He’s a shareholder like everyone else.\n\nOr are you asking why he allowed other people to buy shares in his company? Money. Shares are sold to raise money to invest in the business.",
"Would you rather have a smaller part of something huge or a majority position in something much more modest? Maybe he keeps 100% and it's a chain of 3 or 4 shops. Maybe he sells off a bit to a partner and it's 20 stores. Or he takes on big investors, goes public and eventually owns less than half the company... in return for building a net worth of hundreds of millions of dollars.\n\nOften, giving up ownership stake, even when dropping well below 50%, is the only way to succeed big time.\n\nOn the other hand, I once worked for a company whose founder had sold the first company he previously founded and had taken on partners, because they tried to reign him in (he was the stereotypical bully narcissist who blamed everybody but himself), so he stared up a new company in which he vowed to never take on any partners or investors so he could run it as he pleased.",
"In a privately held company, or in a small publicly traded company, the CEO or another 'owner' may hold 51%.\n\nBut in order to expand to the size of a company the size of Papa John's or any other major corporation you have to raise a *lot* of money, and in exchange the people backing you all expect a piece of the pie, as it were.\n\nIn large corporations, the CEO compensation *is* based in large part on stock performance; but that CEO does *not* hold a majority of the shares. This is because the investors usually demand to retain the right to fire the CEO if the executive is not performing to their tastes. And in order to fire a CEO you have to have a majority of the ownership [the investors] back the measure to give them the bounce. If the CEO holds the majority, it is much harder to fire them.",
"Because if you don't sell shares of stock, you don't get actual cash for buying mansions like _URL_0_\n\nOwnership is good, but without a lot of money into the company, it is tough to expand the company quickly.\n\nWould you rather own 30% of a massive company, or 51% of a regional chain?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.estately.com/blog/assets/470x317xpapa-john-schnatter-house-470x317.jpeg.pagespeed.ic.5I9BBgkSw0.webp"
]
] |
||
3bqsv7
|
why do christians focus so much on the homosexuality part of leviticus but nothing else; i.e. shell fish, tattoos, not shaving...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bqsv7/eli5_why_do_christians_focus_so_much_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csollah",
"csolljo",
"csolp1t",
"csolxp6",
"cson8m5",
"csonlb8"
],
"score": [
7,
6,
2,
9,
30,
4
],
"text": [
"Well, the official answer is that the parts they don't focus on aren't intended to be taken literally, while others are. Figuring out which is which comes from both personal interpretation based on their own relationship with God, and from that of their pastor who uses his relationship with God to guide them.\n\nThe less official answer is that they ignore the stuff that's inconvenient, but they think gays are icky so they make a big deal out of it. But that's just my opinion, and anyone is welcome to disagree with it.",
"Some sects are against tattoos....\n\nThe traditional logic goes that Leviticus was just a moral and/or health code that was abolished by the things done in the New Testament. In the NT there is one verse against homosexuality. One. Jesus talks about how divorce is wrong. Etc. Etc. Etc.\n\nReally, religious people don't want to admit that they are a CULTURAL group who has cultural mandates that are now counter-cultural. This has little to do with what some book or religion demands and more to do with their own insular culture.\n\nProof? Women wearing short hair. Mismatching fabrics. Divorce. ",
"Because Christians seem to think that the Bible is a la carte. They totally disregard the things that are inconvenient. It's quite ridiculous if you ask me, but that's the world we live in. ",
"Christians don't actually focus on any part of Leviticus. In Christian tradition Leviticus details the original covenant with God that was replaced by Jesus in the New Testament. Christians might mention elements of the Old Testament in a historical sense or to amplify where certain rules came from, but it's not really part of the overarching theology.\n\nChristians who condemn homosexuality do so because it's condemned in the New Testament as well.\n",
"Christian here. The simple answer is because its an easy one to pick on and christians don't really understand the references to homosexuality that are made in the bible. (TLDR;) \n \nFirst of all, this is not an all encompassing truth. As with extremists of other topics, it is always the outspoken and somewhat crazy ones that are heard. \n \nSecond, the reference to Leviticus does not apply to Christians today. It was part of the Law of Moses and that law was fulfilled by Jesus when he died on the cross. Anyone who claims this is condemning homosexuality is absolutely correct, but it would be like saying that beheading is a form of capital punishment used in the United States. It used to be true, but no longer is. \n \nNow the meat of it. There are 3 references in the New Testament that could be interpreted as condemning homosexuality. Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9–10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11. \n \nRomans 1:26–27 - \"26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.\" \n \nI don't think these verses need any explaining if they are taken as is. But reading them as is, is taking them out of context. In Romans 1, Paul is introducing himself to the church in Rome and giving a summary of how things used to be. If you continue reading into Romans 2 (pretend that there is no chapter divider there) and it is plain to see that these things are no longer the case. \"You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.\" - Romans 2:1 \n \n1 Corinthians 6:9–10 - \"9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.\"\n\nAgain, without the context of the rest of the chapter (at least) this looks really bad. But the very next verse reads, \"11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.\" The sanctification that this is referencing is explained in more detail in Hebrews 10:12, \"12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God\". The context with this verse to in talking to Christians. It makes no distinction as to if they are homosexual or not. \n \n1 Timothy 1:8–11 - \"8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.\" \n \nThis one actually doesn't need much more context to understand the intent. It is saying that the Old Testament law applies to those types of people. What did we learn earlier? The Old Testament law does not apply to Christians today and that Christians were made righteous by Jesus' sacrifice. So if you are not a Christian then, yes, you will be judged according to that law. But chances are, if you are not a Christian, you don't care. Therefore, a Christian pointing out a non-christian's \"sins\" is absolutely useless. \n \nI'm sure I made this as clear as mud but the gist of it is that the bible does not teach that a Christian has any right or responsibility to point out the \"flaws\" in other people. There is nothing in the bible that states that a homosexual cannot be a Christian and maintain their sexual preference. Just like there is nothing in the bible that states that a fat guy can't be a Christian (remember fellow Christians, gluttony is also a sin according to the Old Testament law). \n \nI want to make it clear that I am a Christian and I am happy to see that my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ can now get married to a partner of their choice. I'd be happy to answer any questions in the comments. ",
"The proper answer is that there is no standard agreement on how to interpret the bible among all Christians.\n\nSome people who identify as Christians only really follow the things that Jesus said. \nOthers would say this is theologically erroneous because if you don't follow the teachings of the prophets that came before him, then you don't have any reason to believe he is the Messiah.\n\nSome Christians only act like the whole of the old testament is now invalid and only the new testament matters. Homosexuality as a sin is in fact mentioned by the epistles of the apostles in the new testament, but some people forget that...\n\nThere are contradictions and changes in the teachings between the old and new testament regarding certain matters some of which are explained by Jesus himself (see divorce), some are explained in visions to the appostles after Jesus died, rose and was assumed to heaven, and some aren't clearly explained.\n\nMost doctrine by official church bodies such as the catholic church and the church of england centers around a principle that when contradictions occur, the new testament takes precedence, as it is newer and the death and resurrection of Jesus is seen to have fundamentally changed our relationship with god. Where there are no contradictions, the old testament teachings are still seen as valid, albeit as interpreted with the understanding given by the new testament.\n\nSome people pick and choose the bits of the bible that fit in with their own personal prejudice, like concentrating on the fact that homosexuality is a sin, but ignoring the teachings of the new testament on how Christians should interact with sinners with love, grace and compassion.\n\nHomosexuality, while not mentioned by Jesus at any point in his life (many established jewish laws aren't mentioned by jesus, that isn't a theological proof for them not being valid), is mentioned in multiple places in the old and new testament FYI. It is clearly as much a sin as any other according to the bible.\n\nEating shell-fish, as well as pork and all the other foods that are banned by Jewish law was basically allowed in the new testament when Saint Paul had a vision of being offered all sorts of forbidden foods from heaven, and was told to eat them. He refused because the law said they were unclean., and was then chastised, as God said that he had told paul to eat them. God said \"Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.\"\n\nAccording to the teachings of paul, there is a saying \"Anything is permissable, Not all is beneficial.\"\nThis can be used by some christians (I believe incorrectly) to try to theologically justify ignoring any law, namely those that they can't see a benefit in.\nPersonally the interpretation I was taught and which I believe is theologically correct is that it means that no sin we commit permenantly bars a christian from heaven. Nothing condemns us permenantly, therefor we can do anything, but we should not do everything because some things are not good for us.\n\nGod may very well know what is good for us better than we do, and the law may reflect that. A christian who loves God ought to follow follow god's law out of love, not fear.\n\nI could bang on for days about all the theological arguments of why christians shouldn't be hating on non-christian gay people or trying to stop them from being gay, or how even when talking with a christian who is gay, everything you say should be out of love, for the benefit of the person, not to demonstrate how \"right\" you are in your interpretation of religious law, but alas, I don't think this is the place.\n\nBut so so so so so so so many Christians have thoughtlessly self-righteously attacked people people they see as \"sinners\" in a manner that only damages their oppinion towards christianity, which could in no way help then on the path to heaven, quite the opposite infact.\n\nOf-course you may believe it's all a bunch of hogwash anyway..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
hsg8y
|
Some questions on the nature of the stellar and interstellar environment.
|
1. Is there a galactic magnetic field? What is its strength?
2.Does the solar bow shock point in the direction the sun is traveling, or towards the galactic center?
3. In what direction (expressed by a star or constellation) is the sun traveling?
Thank you for your time!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hsg8y/some_questions_on_the_nature_of_the_stellar_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1y0z54",
"c1y1pm9",
"c1y28hz"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"1. There are galactic magnetic fields. Not sure on the strength. Also there is the cosmic microwave background\n\n2. Well, bow shocks are created when interstellar materials \"collide\" with stellar winds. When the winds-- > < --interstellar matter. Solar winds come out every which way and if the path of a cloud of interstellar matter intersects with the sun's path then there would be a bow shock. So if there is a solar bow shock it would be in the \"front\" of the direction the sun is traveling, so not really to the galactic center, more off to the side along the path but probably more out than directly on the path of the sun's travel.\n\n2. (Two twos?) Well I'm not sure how to answer this because the sun is traveling around and around so it technically moves towards every object in the galaxy and moves away from every object as well. As for constellations they aren't very... connected in space, they are just formed into certain arrangements relative to our view of them here on earth. As for knowing which star we are moving towards, I would guess any of the stars that are seen near that milky way haze in the sky. So stars in orion, cassiopeia, etc. If anyone else has some insight on this I would like to know too. I mean, we know direction and distance to the stars and their placement relative to the sun and the milky way in relation to the sun but my brain can't quite stick them together.",
"The front of the bow shock is whichever direction the interstellar wind is coming from, not whichever direction the Sun is traveling. If the Sun is traveling one direction around the galaxy, and the background interstellar material is traveling in the same direction but faster, then the bow shock's leading edge will be opposite the Sun's direction of motion.\n\nAlso, which direction the Sun is moving is pretty simple: spinward! When looked at from the \"top\" of the galaxy (so that the arms go counter clockwise as they get further out), the Sun is orbiting clockwise (as is everything else). See: _URL_0_ According to Wikipedia:\n\n > The general direction of the Sun's galactic motion is towards the star Vega near the constellation of Hercules, at an angle of roughly 60 sky degrees to the direction of the Galactic Center.",
"Aha, two of these I know!\n1. There is most certainly a Galactic magnetic field (GMF), it is the primary topic of my research (currently a MSc student, but also did work on the GMF during my undergrad). The strength of the field depends on whether you are looking at the 'local' strength, or the large-scale pattern strength. The GMF has a large-scale component (by large scale I mean patterns on the scale of the size of the galactic disk), and a turbulent, smaller scale component (think of it like ripples on top of some sort of larger structure). The large scale component has a strength of a couple (2-5ish) microgauss, while the random component is more like 5-15 microgauss. So... something like 1000x weaker than the Earth's magnetic field, or 10^7 times weaker than a fridge magnet (approximately).\n\nThe strength, structure, dynamics, generation mechanism, history, etc. of the GMF are still open research fields. At risk of being rather self-aggrandizing, here's a paper I wrote last year, which I think sort of demonstrates where the state of the field is: _URL_0_ (Skip to Figures 6/11 for most easily interpreted results) If you're really interested, I could probably find a better review article.... (I'm probably being a little over-enthusiastic, since this is my field....)\n\n2a. I don't really know a lot about this, and the wikipedia article doesn't give enough leads for me to quickly/easily dig it out of the literature. It probably depends on the motion of the interstellar medium gas relative to the Sun.\n\n2b. I actually a related question for someone else a while ago, who was asking about the direction of the sun's velocity vector on the sky. Let me copy and paste that here:\nIf I assume a circular orbit about the Galactic center, the direction of that motion is in the constellation Vela, in the southern hemisphere. (Assuming I worked that out right.) Also, according to Wikipedia, the motion of the Sun relative to the nearby stars/local-standard-of-rest is the direction of Vega, in the constellation Hercules.\n\nI hope that helps!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Milky_Way_Spiral_Arm.svg"
],
[
"http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.2938"
]
] |
|
4dj4zj
|
How were empires such as Byzantium and the Ottomans able to field armies in the tens of thousands (or even 100,000) while western armies a fraction that size had issues with starvation? What were the respective logistical networks like?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4dj4zj/how_were_empires_such_as_byzantium_and_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1riw49"
],
"score": [
110
],
"text": [
"I can't really speak to Byzantine armies, but I can tell you a fair bit about Ottoman armies. \n\nFirst of all, it's important to remember that the vast majority of Ottoman armies weren't professional soldiers. They weren't even part-time soldiers. Most of them were mounted irregulars of some sort (usually classified as akinci). They served myriad purposes, but basically none of them were related to direct involvement in pitched battles. They were hit-and-run troops. You might see them involved in sporadic clashes with other cavalry, but for the most part that was the responsibility of the sipahis (both timariot and Kapikulu). The akinci were, in a sense, just like their steppe-bound predecessors. They harassed the enemy, provided scouting services, and they were paid pretty much exclusively out of loot -- it cost the Ottomans almost nothing to field them, so field them they did. If you see an Ottoman army of significant size prior to 1600, odds are half that force is made up of akinci and the related irregulars -- Crimean Tatars who were effectively \"on loan\" from the Crimean Khan, religious warriors (ghazis), sekban (mercenary) infantry that were hired on an ad hoc basis, azaps (the dismounted cousins of the akinci), and so forth. The Ottomans had a *lot* of irregulars. \n\nThen there's the Timar system. Timariots, at least on a socioeconomic level, were essentially Ottoman knights. They were given land, almost always tax-free, in return for military service. The timariot himself was, depending on the wealth of his territory, responsible for bringing a number of armed retainers (cebeci) to battle. Wealthier tracts of land (ziamets and sanjaks) came with correspondingly higher expectations from the Ottoman state. Sanjaks are a little weird in that they weren't strictly in the timariot system but, for the purposes of the general levy, they were frequently counted as timars. This system, as of 1609, gave the Ottoman Empire a theoretical muster of about 200,000 men, including some ethnic levies (Turkoman and Kurdish, neither of whom were properly integrated into the timar system; they were often aghaluks, ruled by aghas [lords], rather than divided into fiefs -- these aghas weren't to be confused with the honorific given to officials, such as the Kizlar Agha, the man in charge of the eunuchs). \n\nThen there were the professional formations -- Janissaries, Sipahis, and the artillery corps (Topcu). These were the Kapikulu (\"slaves of the gate\" -- a reference to the Sublime Porte, indicating direct service to the sultan). Contrary to popular belief, they rarely marched to war *en masse*, especially if the sultan didn't go. Only a handful of Janissary ortas, for instance, would've been present at battles like the Siege of Malta. \n\nThese staggering numbers that the Ottomans could muster were, as you can probably imagine, difficult to feed. The Ottomans solved this issue in four ways. First, the Ottomans had imperial granaries located along the major roadways they'd use in wars every three leagues. This meant that armies could resupply while on the move. Local officials would be responsible for ensuring the granaries were sufficient. Second, the Ottomans foraged. A *lot*. The Ottoman campaign season was dictated as much by the availability of forage (specially for their apparently endless supply of horses) as weather. Third, the Ottomans used ships and wagons to resupply on a regular basis. Finally, the Ottomans campaigned with field-portable ovens, so the troops could cook their own bread in the field. Decentralizing bread production like that meant individual ortas were surprisingly self-sufficient. And if units are self-sufficient, that means they can take different routes and arrive at the same location. This allowed the army to spread out while in friendly territory, like Rumelia and Anatolia, and similarly spread out the burden of feeding all these troops, making it easier for armies to march by and not starve towns to death. \n\nIncidentally, the Ottomans had the hardest time by far when they couldn't forage. The Persians in particular proved troublesome opponents because of their ability to effectively hem the Ottomans in -- they were one of the few rivals that could reliably contest Ottoman raiders in the field. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3si7us
|
What was life on the Soviet Homefront like during the course of World War 2?
|
I've heard a lot about rationing and the entry of women into the workforce in America, enduring the blitz (and rationing) in Britain, rationing and preparing for invasion in Japan, and the progress of ever-more-pervasive propaganda and the advent of Total war in Germany as the facade of the invincible third reich cracked.
But I know little of the home front in Soviet Russia. How were displaced civilians treated; what were the cities created or grown from displaced civilians and transported industrial equipment like? How severe was rationing during the different periods of the war? And what was the post-war period like with vast casualties, the return of enormous numbers of victorious, experienced soldiers?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3si7us/what_was_life_on_the_soviet_homefront_like_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwxvefl"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Hey, can't answer all your questions but since I am working around the Siege of Leningrad I can answer a few that I have encounterd in my research:\n\nAbout the evacuation of civilians from the frontlines it seems people where reluctant to do that, because of bad treatment in the destination regions or because they had no social contacts in that region. Also the evacuation was based on how much you where worth for the war effort, so skilled laborers where preferably evacuated first.\n\nAbout the rationing, it was based on how much you provided to the war effort, Soldiers had the most, and after that ofcourse the workers at industrial plants directly influancing the War Effort (Tanks, Airplanes, ...). Ofcourse the more higher up you where, or contacts you had in the higher echelons of power, the bigger rations you could get.\n\nSources: \n\nGOURE, L., The Siege of Leningrad, Stanford en London, 1962.\nKIRCHENBAUM, L.A., The Legacy of the Siege of Leningrad, 1941-1995, Cambridge e.a., 2006."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6uskli
|
Any books on the Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian Gentry?
|
I've been struggling to find any good books on Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian Gentry and nobility specifically between 1500-1900, so I was wondering if anyone had some good suggestions?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6uskli/any_books_on_the_bosnian_croatian_and_serbian/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dlvblzk",
"dlyzygm"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Hey OP! \n\nI just wanted to drop a line here - I've noticed that you've asked this question quite a number of times and unfortunately you've had no luck here so far. Is there anything the mod team might be able to do to assist? It's rough that AskHistorians hasn't been able to help so far and if there's anything we could do, that'd be great - I've pinged a couple of flaired users familiar with the pre-20th century Balkans with this question in the past, but it unfortunately appears that we don't have any specialists on your topic.",
"Hey, \n\ni will help as much as i can, but this isn't really my area\n\n-------------------------------\n\nFirst i have few questions: can I recommend books written in croatian/serbian/bosnian? Also what kind of books do you really want? Maybe you are thinking more of a book on genealogy and heraldic (so maybe something like [this?](_URL_6_) ), or maybe something more descriptive of nobility in general without going to details of individual families? \n\nI am now browsing the inventory of local library, as far as i see, there are no books encompassing all of nobility even just in croatia, let alone one that includes bosnia and serbia. Not surprising, 1500-1900 is a long time ,and the area is huge and diverse, and the Ottoman empire caused a lot of turmoil. Most of the books that pop up either follow a family, or an arbitrary local region. Maybe you would like some of those? \n\n------------------------\n\nI am also browsing the syllabuses of local History course at University of Zagreb. I am checking the referenced books. \n\nThere is a course called (my translation) Nobility in Croatian Early Modern area in regional and European context (Plemstvo na hrvatskom ranonovovjekovnom prostoru u regionalnom i europskom kontekstu) [warning Word .doc link](_URL_4_)\nThis file has a lot of (poorly formated ) references. \n\nThis one referenced book looks promising if you want some general basics about feudal relations and system in place in Croatia (language is croatian) \n\nJosip Adamček - [*Agrarni odnosi u Hrvatskoj od sredine XV do kraja XVII stoljeća*](_URL_1_) (Agrarian relationships in Croatia from middle of 15th to end of 18th century) \n\nSome of the more relevant ones in egnlish or german seem to be\n\nScott, H.M. *The European Nobilities in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Western Europe. Vol. 1. & The European Nobilities in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Northern, Central and Eastern Europe. Vol. 2.* London-New York, 1995; \n\nand\n\nBojničić, Ivan. *Der Adel von Kroatien und Slavonien* Zagreb, 1995 (Nürnberg, 1899.); - which i am not sure is same as [this](_URL_5_)?\n\n------------------\n\nThere are other courses in the university which might be relevant like [Nobility of \"Ban\" Croatia of 19th century](_URL_2_)\n\nAlso another course called [Medieval Nobility]( _URL_0_) (so little before what you wants) and one called Nobility of medieval Dalmatian towns (caution another [word link](_URL_3_))\n\nIt's not much, but hope it helps a bit\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.ffzg.unizg.hr/pov/pov2/file.php?folder=silabusi0809&file=dipl_plemstvo",
"https://books.google.hr/books/about/Agrarni_odnosi_u_Hrvatskoj_od_sredine_XV.html?id=mt_SAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y",
"http://www.ffzg.unizg.hr/pov/pov2/file.php?folder=silabusi0910&file=izb_Iveljic_Plemstvo.html",
"http://www.ffzg.unizg.hr/pov/pov2/files/silabusi1415/silabusPLEMSTVO%20U%20DALMATINSKIM%20GRADOVIMA%20U%20SREDNJEM%20VIJEKU.doc",
"http://www.ffzg.unizg.hr/pov/pov2/files/silabusi1415/Stefanec%20-%20silabus%20izbornog%20kolegija%20-%20plemstvo%202014-2015.doc",
"https://books.google.hr/books/about/Der_Adel_von_Kroatien_und_Slavonien.html?id=0FVmAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y",
"https://books.google.hr/books/about/Zbornik_plemstva_u_Hrvatskoj_Slavoniji_D.html?id=49MlMQAACAAJ&redir_esc=y"
]
] |
|
8ibq3s
|
how do astronauts deal with swallowing, going to the bathroom and other functions when there is no gravity?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ibq3s/eli5_how_do_astronauts_deal_with_swallowing_going/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyqijze",
"dyql795",
"dyqpeqp"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Humans can swallow against gravity through muscle contractions called *peristalsis*, and waste elimination in EVA suits is accomplished with diapers. As simple as that sounds that's all it is.",
"Gravity is not required for those functions, though the lack of it can make things complicated. \n\nHumans swallow via muscle contractions and that works with or without gravity. In fact you can swallow hanging upside down and therefore do so against gravity. \n\nAs for bathroom functions. On the space station they have special toilet units which have suction that keep the waste from floating about. If they are out on a spacewalk they have diapers in their suits. ",
"None of things require gravity, which you can test at home by standing on your head for a while. It'll be uncomfortable (and messy), but you can still swallow food, digest it, and go to the bathroom. That's because these actions are controlled by muscles.\n\nAs far as going to the bathroom is concerned, the only difference is practical, not biological. Since there's no gravity to hold waste down, special space toilets have suction to keep waste from floating around."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2gwp2o
|
Why do you think women are basically nonexistent in history textbooks?
|
I have taken 2 history courses in college and am currently in my last history class. While reading the text books, it's like women were none existent throughout history, except for the occasional mentioning of successful women. When I'm doing my readings, it's just a long narrative of all the accomplishments of men and their strive for freedom (with the exception of women). I was wondering what your thoughts are on this and if this is a problem that should be addressed and taken seriously
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2gwp2o/why_do_you_think_women_are_basically_nonexistent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckn845v",
"cknb2en"
],
"score": [
3,
13
],
"text": [
"I'm curious - what particular history courses did you take?",
"There are a number of reasons for the general underrepresentation of women in these textbooks. Women’s and gender history are often specialized fields within the historical discipline. Some textbook authors have real trouble incorporating this knowledge into their surveys of world or national history. Many textbook authors tend to not be from these specialized fields. There are a few counter-examples to this trend, for example Lynn Hunt’s *The Making of the West* (written along with Thomas R. Martin, Barbara H. Rosenwein and Bonnie G. Smith) incorporate women’s voices and experiences more thoroughly than other textbooks.\n\nBut a major cause for underrepresentation is a combination of the paucity of sources coupled with the design of a history textbook as a pedagogical tool. Textbooks tend cover numerous topics in a brief and concise manner because they have to be of a general nature. Textbooks have to be able to employed by multiple instructors across many different institutions. The push towards concision and brevity makes it hard to incorporate the stories of outsider groups into this narrative. Women have often tended to leave far less historical traces than men do. This is not to say that women have no history or were not participants in history, but that their history has not been preserved. Gender and women’s historians have developed a series of theoretical tools over the past sixty years to deal with this scarcity and render women’s history more visible. For example, some gender historians use microhistory (using a minute example to extrapolate larger ideas about a time period, culture, or society) or case studies to resolve this problem, or others use non-traditional sources like court records to explore a dimension of history that older generations of historians have ignored. This historiographic methodology often has little place in a textbook where space is at a premium and a detour into theory can alienate and confuse students who have little experience with these models. \n\nIt needs to be also emphasized that the neglect of women in textbooks is far from unique. Although textbook writers are getting better at it, they still have trouble incorporating marginalized and non-elite groups (be they racial, class, sexual orientation, etc.) into their narratives for much the same reasons. There is also the problem that older generations of historians tended to be less interested in the experiences of those who existed outside of the rich and powerful. Some historians have also intentionally left women out of their accounts of historical events (for example, a large number of historians of the Irish War of Independence and Civil War, both of which had prominent female involvement, treat women as non-entities). This creates an illusion that outside of these elite individuals, the bulk of humanity was a shapeless mass that silently went along with history. However even a cursory examination of social and gender historiography proves such a contention to be a distortion of the historical record. \n \nIf we historians haven’t burned you out on history through our repetition of a sanitized great man textbooks, I suggest Joan Wallach Scott’s *Gender and the Politics of History* for background and methodology and the two volume *A History of their Own* by Bonnie Anderson and Judith Zinsser as well as *Connecting Spheres* by Marilyn Boxer and Jean Quataert as two examples of textbooks that privilege women’s history in a systematic way. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
i62c2
|
What are the holes in leaves (in trees/shrubs) usually caused by?
|
From childhood, i was led to believe that they were mostly caused by caterpillars. But I look around and see no caterpillars. I'm sure the caterpillar would stick around, since the caterpillar is slow-moving anyways. What else could cause these holes?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/i62c2/what_are_the_holes_in_leaves_in_treesshrubs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c216wsp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most of them pre-butterfly lifeforms (wurms), thems that munch leaves, have a tendency to eat at night and hide during the day, cos dem flappy bird thingies find them scrumptious.\n\nSometimes, dem flappy bird things, they get up real early and catch dem wurms, and da humans, sometimes dey says: Da early bird catches da worm.\n\n( Soz, was talking to a Jamacian client and tried to make that lingo happen in my answer mon, failed (obviously) )"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6u7q91
|
besides strong mental game, what's the science behind people breaking bricks and other tough materials during martial art shows?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6u7q91/eli5_besides_strong_mental_game_whats_the_science/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dlqlh5z",
"dlqn7w9"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends. Sometimes it is a performance trick, and there's really nothing much behind it other than circus trickery.\n\nAt other times, it comes about as a slow process of 'conditioning' the hand whereby the bones and connective tissues become stronger, as opposed to just roughening up the skin. This combined with tendonal strength (so you don't break your wrist for example) leads to the ability to be able to break things that normal untrained people can't, at least not without breaking their own bones.\n\nAs one example, Kyo-Kushinkai, those who practice Kyo-Kushin karate, have a particular favourite of breaking baseball bats with their shins by kicking them. If a normal person tried that, they'd most likely seriously hurt themselves, but a trained proponent can break the 'tough material' without breaking their own bones.",
"Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: How can martial arts specialists punch through rock or wood? ](_URL_3_)\n1. [ELI5:How do karate experts break bricks with their hands? ](_URL_4_)\n1. [ELI5: How do martial artists break concrete with their bare hands? ](_URL_1_)\n1. [ELI5: How do people break bricks with their hands without hurting themselves? ](_URL_6_)\n1. [ELI5: How can hands be able to break stone (martial arts)? ](_URL_2_)\n1. [ELI5: How are professional martial artist able to smash wooden boards and cinder blocks in half with a kick or karate chop and not be in pain? ](_URL_5_)\n1. [ELI5: Why don't bones break when martial artist destroy them? ](_URL_7_)\n1. [ELI5: How is it that practiced martial artists are able to break seemingly hard things with seemingly no injury? ](_URL_0_)\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2b4f9g/eli5_how_is_it_that_practiced_martial_artists_are/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1axsab/eli5_how_do_martial_artists_break_concrete_with/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/pngja/eli5_how_can_hands_be_able_to_break_stone_martial/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2stn72/eli5_how_can_martial_arts_specialists_punch/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zkrc0/eli5how_do_karate_experts_break_bricks_with_their/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d2kgd/eli5_how_are_professional_martial_artist_able_to/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dev4i/eli5_how_do_people_break_bricks_with_their_hands/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2eddwd/eli5_why_dont_bones_break_when_martial_artist/"
]
] |
||
36ds8x
|
Does the earth's atmosphere rotate in sync with the rotation of the earth? If so, are the two somehow connected? What keeps them from turning independently?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/36ds8x/does_the_earths_atmosphere_rotate_in_sync_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crd5781"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"The atmosphere rotates with the earth due to frictional effects in the [planetary boundary layer.](_URL_0_) At the top of the atmosphere where it thins out into space, there are no surfaces to rub against and thus no frictional force. Therefore the only net force acting on the atmosphere is at the earth's surface and over millions of years this has acted to accelerate the atmosphere so that it rotates in sync with the earth. \n\nThe really cool thing is that the atmosphere is not perfectly in sync with the earth and on monthly time scales there is a small amount of momentum exchange between the atmosphere, the oceans and solid earth. When the momentum is transferred, the atmosphere slows down slightly as the earth spins up. A month or two later the opposite happens and the earth slightly slows down as the net rotation of the atmosphere increases. Again, very tiny changes but detectable in the data.\n\nsee: Atmospheric torques on land and ocean and implications for Earth's angular momentum budget. _URL_1_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_boundary_layer",
"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2001JD900028/abstract"
]
] |
||
g0dwrb
|
how much is the pope's power controlled by others (as in checks and balances), is he like the president of the church?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g0dwrb/eli5_how_much_is_the_popes_power_controlled_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fn97gyw"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Papal authority has been debated many times in the past, and the answer still isn't quite clear. In the most recent Church council, the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965, the supremacy and infallibility of the pope was confirmed, but also added that the college of bishops have the power to control the church, as long as the pope agreed. Basically, Vatican II kept with tradition and made the role of the pope unclear like it has been for the last two thousand years."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
x887m
|
Was the sky different colors through its history?
|
I know the sky is the color it is because the current gases and their density absorb some colors and reflect mostly blue. However, the gases and composition of the atmosphere have changed over billions of years some number of times, so has the color changes as well? Was it ever more green or red?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/x887m/was_the_sky_different_colors_through_its_history/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5k595d",
"c5k69l8"
],
"score": [
7,
6
],
"text": [
"The wavelengths of light involved in [Rayleigh scattering](_URL_0_) (the process that makes the sky appear blue) are independent of the composition of the atmosphere. The Rayleigh scattering factor is inversely proportional to the wavelength; in other words, shorter wavelengths (blue and violet) are preferentially scattered no matter what the composition of the atmosphere. In fact, if Mars did not have so much dust in its atmosphere, it would have a blue sky as well (though much darker since it's atmospheric pressure is much lower).\n\nThe only way the sky could have been a different color is if something was suspended in it, like smoke or dust (as in the Martian atmosphere) or clouds of some sort (as in the Venusian atmosphere). Since I assume your question is referring to a \"clear sky\", then the answer is no, the earth's sky has always been blue.",
"From what I've gathered, while the color of the sky probably hasn't changed much in recent times ([at least not for prolonged periods](_URL_0_)). Human [perception of its color has changed](_URL_1_), though. Ancient Greeks seem to have thought of it as bronze, at least under some circumstances."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter",
"http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/61"
]
] |
|
171brv
|
R/AskHistorians, were there any songs that soldiers sung during times of war that truly frightened or significantly impacted the other side?
|
I've been interested ever since reading somewhere that when Union soldiers sung "The Battle Cry of Freedom" during the civil war, it made Confederate soldiers uneasy.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/171brv/raskhistorians_were_there_any_songs_that_soldiers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c81ch9m",
"c81cw2w",
"c81cygu",
"c81dl58",
"c81dwr0",
"c81fsx1",
"c81fwgk",
"c81g6he",
"c81hez4"
],
"score": [
14,
4,
26,
11,
6,
3,
5,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"This might be a bit outside what you were looking for, but during the Chu-Han war in China (~207-203 BCE), the Han general Han Xing adopted the \"Chu Song from Four Sides\" tactic, from Wikipedia\n\n > To further break the Chu army's spirit, Han Xin employed the \"Chu Song from Four Sides\" (四面楚歌) tactic. He ordered the Han soldiers and captured Chu troops to sing Chu songs. The Chu songs made the Chu troops remember their families back home, greatly reducing their will to fight. Even Xiang Yu himself thought that the whole Chu had been conquered, while he had been trapped there.\n\nNo specifics, but definitely effective.",
"While battle cries and pass phrases were common in warfare, especially before the implementation of standardised uniforms, singing, as I understand it was not.\n\nSinging happened in camps and on marches, at morale-raising events and at the home front to raise spirits. Many of the marches and songs you hear now and attach to the soldiers are far too advanced for (musically) untrained and often out of breath (due to marching, running etc.) soldiers to sing. \"The Battle Cry of Freedom\" does not sound as impressive without a well-coordinated chorus or an excellent, trained solo vocalist.\n\nWhen soldiers did sing in battle, the songs were usually very simple, like the [\"Onion song\"](_URL_0_) sung by the French Imperial Guard as they marched up to attack (but not during the actual attack).\n\nSinging was common in camp, while waiting in trenches and so forth, but the patriotic marches written at home were rarely sung. The Germans made dozens of songs for their soldiers during ww2, including a bunch of SS ones, which were almost never sung by the soldiers. Instead, they sung tunes like [Lili Marlene](_URL_1_) or [Waltzing Matilda](_URL_2_). Note how both are rather slow and easy to sing songs.\n\nIn actual battle though, soldiers usually had more important things to tend to than singing.",
"I know that someone else mentioned the Haka, but they didn't add any context to it. \n\nSo, imagine that you are some English troops - the pride of England in your hands. You have been tasked to re-enforce troops engaged in a heavily fortified Maori position. \n\nIt's a misty day, as is common in the Northern Island of New Zealand. It's much like home, but it's also heavily forested. Also, the locals hate you, and they have surprisingly good tactics for a native tribe that had lead to heavy losses for your side. \n\nFrom the left, without any notice: \n\n_URL_1_\n\nThen they fade back into the misty mountains ... If a little bit of pee didn't trickle down your leg it was probably because were crazy. \n\nOn a further note: Imagine hearing this just days after the destruction of a major force.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nEDIT: Zulu war chant may not be historical. I only added it because it would have scared the pants off of me. \n",
"Music played a huge role for soldiers during the American Civil War. They sang songs to boost morale, induce courage in battle, and cope with death and homesickness, but not so much as to scare the opposition in combat. \n\nA little bit about the song though. Interestingly, songwriters were quick to use current events in their music. In the case of \"Battle Cry of Freedom\", President Lincoln publicly called for 300,000 volunteers on July 2, 1862 and an inspired songwriter and music teacher George F. Root wrote the song which premiered publicly a mere 22 days later. The song was immensely popular with soldiers and civilians that by the end of the war, nearly everyone knew the tune; there was even a Confederate version of lyrics. It sold between 500,000 and 700,000 copies in sheet music in the North and was only second to \"John Brown's Body\" (later re-written by Julia Ward Howe as \"Battle Hymn of the Republic\") in its popularity. To those not familiar with it, they sing it in the Lincoln movie when they pass the 13th Amendment.\n\nIf you want to read more about music in the American Civil War, \"Battle Hymns: The Power and Popularity of Music in the Civil War\" by Christian McWhirter is a very interesting read and \"Music of the Civil War Era\" by Steven Cornelius is one of the go-to's on the subject. \n\nedit:spelling\n",
"Not a song but Takbir (Allahu Akbar) is also used in battle. It frightened many opponents to the Muslim Armies, whilst encouraging the army itself. \n\nIt is used in the beginning a certain amount of times prescribed by the commander and also whilst fighting. \n\nYou have surly heard this in contemporary wars such as the one in Syria. \n\n",
"Ottomans used [Mehter](_URL_0_) military bands to intimidate enemies and rise the morale of the own troops.",
"The medieval Irish *ceitherne* (light infantry that made up the bulk of Gaelic military forces) would scream war cries/curses/songs and blow lots of horns and pipes to confuse and frighten their enemy before closing in with a charge. It was intended to break the enemy's will to fight by scaring the crap out of them and was often effective against Norman and English troops, especially during the Tudor conquest.\n\nInterestingly, the same tactics (war cries & blowing tons of horns before charging) were also employed by the Gauls during antiquity. It's interesting to speculate if the Irish were employing millennia-old military practices until the 16th century, or if they were a sort of convergent evolution that arose out of the rural and decentralized conditions of both societies.",
"This might be a little outside what you're looking for, but at the battle of Zama Hannibal sent out his war elephants in the hope of scattering the Roman infantry. The Roman cavalry responded by blowing loud horns to frighten the elephants, some of which turned around and thundered straight through parts of the Carthaginian army.",
"I posted this previously to the recent question about [war chants](_URL_3_). [Athenaeus](_URL_1_) (paragraph 29), a later historian, says that Spartans sang the poems of their national poet Tyrtaeus when going into battle, in order to keep step. Tyrtaeus was famous for his martial poetry. Here's a brief translation given on his [Wiki page](_URL_2_):\n\n\n\n Let a man learn how to fight by first daring to perform mighty deeds,\n\n Not where the missiles won't reach, if he is armed with a shield,\n\n But getting in close where fighting is hand to hand, inflicting a wound\n\n With his long spear or his sword, taking the enemy's life,\n\n With his foot planted alongside a foot and his shield pressed against shield,\n\n And his crest up against crest and his helm up against helm\n\n And breast against breast, embroiled in the action—let him fight man to man,\n\n Holding secure in his grasp haft of his sword or his spear!\n\nI'd imagine if you were a Greek soldier, probably already aware of the Spartans' reputation for military prowess, hearing something like that would be pretty terrifying.\n\n* [Here](_URL_0_) (as far as I can tell) is his entire corpus in translation and in the original Greek. The translations are from 1931 and read sort of silly these days, unfortunately, but a lot of it is still pretty bad-ass."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKRogpFUaY0",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUsePoATbrU",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwvazMc5EfE"
],
[
"http://youtu.be/ODM1RJe4FvQ",
"http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-27/nz-soldiers-perform-giant-haka-in-honour-of-dead-comrades/4225346"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_military_band"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A2008.01.0479%3Avolume%3D1%3Atext%3D2%3Asection%3D2",
"http://www.attalus.org/old/athenaeus14.html",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrtaeus#His_work",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/16wk6g/war_chants_were_they_common_in_premodern_battles/"
]
] |
|
4w0sk3
|
Do monkey teeth rot as badly as a humans teeth do?
|
I have trouble believing that people evolved in such a way that we die of rotting teeth by sometime in our mid-thirties without modern medicine... What gives?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4w0sk3/do_monkey_teeth_rot_as_badly_as_a_humans_teeth_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d647alj",
"d68qer5"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is no difference in the composition of human and monkey teeth. Unlike humans however, monkeys generally do not eat much raw sugar or starch.\nHere is a study where they examined the teeth of 10 dead chimpanzees and only case of caries was observed: \n_URL_0_\n\nObviously if monkeys would eat the same sugar- and grain-centered diet as humans, they would have the same tooth problems.",
"Side note: evolution is all about reproductive success. Humans (and our ancestors) reproduce before mid-late 30s, and historically much before that, and therefore dying of rotting teeth AFTER you reproduce would not impact the evolution of humans as a species. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2801914"
],
[]
] |
|
1vda93
|
if someone makes a will, how can people challenge it and be given what was willed to someone else?
|
No examples. I don't understand any of the situations that this has been allowed in. Isn't that the point of a will in the first place?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vda93/eli5_if_someone_makes_a_will_how_can_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cer58rt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Ok in ELI5 terms:\n\n+ Sometimes it isn't legal to distribute assets/money the way it is willed\n\nFor example, in most countries if a person dies and has underage children, the law says that a certain % goes to the children, no matter what the will says. \n\nThere may be a marital agreement, saying that the wife of the dead husband will get X stuff, so that is stronger that X person's will. \n\n+ Sometimes you can argue about the mental incapacity of the person drafting the will. \n\nIf he/she was diagnosed with a mental disorder, or the will has some clauses that you can find evidence that don't make much sense, considering that person's \"normal\" behavior/character. \n\n+ Sometimes the document itself can be challenged. \n\nMaybe one can prove it is fake, or an older will."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3h5exi
|
Has there been any attempt of genetically modifying trees to yield wood with better material properties?
|
Would it be possible? or is there something intrinsic to the nature of trees or wood that makes this impossible? Could a superwood be created to replace metals in some applications?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3h5exi/has_there_been_any_attempt_of_genetically/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu4xmy9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"To create a \"superwood\" would take an incredible amount of modification. obviously some woods (i.e hardwoods) are stronger than others (i.e. softwoods), but think of wood almost like human tissue. The consistency is dependent on the biology of the plant, its necessities, and how it grows. It's very possibly to engineer a tree that \"needs\" a very strong wood, but to obtain a product the strength of modern day alloys would be pretty unreasonable. Especially since growing a tree, and harvesting it (one as strong as steel I might add) would take considerable more time than mining ore and processing it into a usable metal."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1pngue
|
what makes things spicy, why does it hurt, and how do people build up an immunity?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pngue/eli5_what_makes_things_spicy_why_does_it_hurt_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cd42c5r"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"capsaicin, the oil in a hot pepper, affects receptors in your system in a way that makes them think the are being burnt. It hurts because your body really believes it is being burned & in extreme cases even swells and inflames as it it had been burnt.\n\nPeople build up an immunity by increasing the the levels of capsaicin over time - although it is believed nursing babies can pick it up from their moms."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
27ctjj
|
the origination of the porn suffix to subreddits.
|
I've always been curious - yet never found any answer (not even here!) for why it's called earthporn, foodporn, pornporn etc,. I don't know where it came from or why it sticks.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27ctjj/eli5_the_origination_of_the_porn_suffix_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chzkbyy"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
" > why it sticks\n\nheh.\n\nAlso, it comes from the idea that porn is images or videos of things that make you aroused or turns you on basically. So if you go to /r/foodporn , you will see images of food that is pleasurable to look at, it makes you salivate, etc."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7gn4uu
|
Is there a way to determine the amount of photons that the sun radiates every second?
|
By extension, what is the amount of those photons that we receive here on earth?
Also, how come that the light from other stars is so dim? What happens to all the photons that are sent towards us?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/7gn4uu/is_there_a_way_to_determine_the_amount_of_photons/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dqkkzpz"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > what is the amount of those photons that we receive here on earth?\n\nA star radiates its photons in every direction almost equally. A simple way of calculating this is just to take how much of the sky as seen from the Sun is covered by Earth. It happens to be about 0.00000005%\n\n > Also, how come that the light from other stars is so dim?\n\nSpace is actually much bigger than one would assume. All of the other stars are simply so far away, so only a VERY SMALL precentage of their ligth hits Earth. From the star nearest to us after the Sun, only 0.00000000000000000006% of all its ligth hits Earth. And from other stars the precentage is even smaller."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
860lno
|
does anybody knows the difference between bachelor of art and bachelor of science?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/860lno/eli5_does_anybody_knows_the_difference_between/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dw1gpja",
"dw1k8lx",
"dw1l1dr",
"dw1o3pk",
"dw1x5o6"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3,
14,
3
],
"text": [
"It has to do with the core requirements you take. For a BA you usually have to take a specific amount of credits of a language as well as more college of liberal arts classes, while a BS has more math and science. Often schools have multiple paths for each so you can choose what really is the right one for you. ",
"\"Arts\" in this sense isn't stuff like drawing and painting - the *liberal arts* consist of things like literature, history and the like. \"Science\" OTOH consists of things based strongly in math.\n\nIn most American universities, most programs only have a BA or a BS option, depending on the subject matter. When you do have an option, the BS will have more math/science requirements while the BA gives you more freedom to pick electives or an unrelated minor.",
"Bachelor of Science degrees are more specialized in the field, while Bachelor of Arts degrees have more generalized requirements.\n\nThe BS class requirements are more specifically geared towards the major, the BA class requirements are generally more well-rounded.\n\nI have a BS in Health Administration. It's similar to a BA in Business, but hyper-focused on the business of healthcare.",
"There's no generally-agreed-upon difference. Some universities that offer both have slightly different requirements, but many schools offer only one or the other for historical reasons, and as a practical matter, graduate schools and most employers treat them identically.\n\nI have a Bachelor of Arts in physics; an acquaintaince of mine has a Bachelor of Science in creative writing.",
"My degree is studio art with an art history minor, but it is a Bachelor of Science degree as I did not take 2yrs of foreign language. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2qlxi2
|
what is computing power? what do people mean when they say "your phone has twice the computing power nasa had to send man to the moon"?
|
And how do we gain more computing power? Is it a physical thing that happens in the computer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qlxi2/eli5_what_is_computing_power_what_do_people_mean/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn7aixq",
"cn7ajxs"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Basically computers just do a lot of calculations, so more computing power = faster and faster calculations.",
"\"Computing power\" generally means the number of operations a computer is able to perform per second. Of course, this depends on what kind of operations we're talking about, so a commonly used measure is called FLOPS - Floating Point Operations Per Second, i.e. the number of calculations (such as multiplication of division) the computer can do on floating-point numbers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
646xvk
|
why do cars tick when they're hot after stopping?
|
I have noticed that cars, particularly more modern sports cars, tend to make a ticking noise when cooling down after being driven hard. Is this due to the cooling system itself or just a byproduct of the engine being hot?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/646xvk/eli5_why_do_cars_tick_when_theyre_hot_after/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dg01slx",
"dg11ype"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"My understanding is that it is the hot parts on the car expand and contract based on how hot they are. \n So as the parts cool and shrink a bit they move ever so slightly and make a small noise.\nAlot of the time it tends to come from the exhaust system as it changes temperature the quickly and is made of fairly thin metal, so it works like a bell when any small thing changes. Think of a house creaking at night when the temperature drops.\n\n\nAdditionally, depending on the engine it can be cause by the block and heads being different metals that expand and contract at different rates. Most new cars have aluminum engine blocks and heads so this wouldn't effect those but other cars like my 03 mustang GT has a Iron block but aluminum heads.\n\nNot 100% accurate but best I can do in simple terms",
"Generally what you hear ticking is the exhaust, this is becase it is made of thin metal and will heat and cool the quickest. The thicker something is the slower it will dissipate heat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
24eadf
|
Can someone explain what made the "Tyrants of Syracuse" tyrants? Were these tyrants originally Greek/Roman/Punic or was this a completely independent culture?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24eadf/can_someone_explain_what_made_the_tyrants_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch6bjlp"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"\"Tyrant\", or rather *tyrannos*, was a Greek word for any absolute ruler whose power was obtained by gift, usurpation, or popular revolution. That is to say, the difference between a king (*basileus*) and a tyrant is that a king's power is inherited; a tyrant's power is obtained. Otherwise, both words refer to an autocrat. Greek tyrants did also bequeath their rule to their descendants, but the descendants were generally called \"tyrant\" too because the title had become a tradition by that point. Most Greek tyrannies didn't last more than a couple of generations anyway; Syracuse was an exception in that respect.\n\nSyracuse and its tyrants were certainly Greek, because like most other major settlements in Sicily and coastal southern Italy it was a Greek colony."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2z6gj6
|
how does fps change from 30-60+ create weird bugs in games?
|
After looking at the recent Dragon Ball Xenoverse update, I noticed that a lot of the issues were bugs relating to the FPS, like:
> • The Z-Soul 'You can be the first victim' now works properly and gives full bars of Ki when activated. This issue tends to happen with 60 FPS framerate.
> •The Z-Soul 'Tien, Please don’t die' now works properly and charge all allies' Ki to max when the player's character gets knocked out. This issue tends to happen with 60 FPS framerate.
> •The Z-Soul 'I'll take you down!' now works properly and gives full bars of Ki when activated. This issue tends to happen with 60 FPS framerate.
I understand animation being affected by frame rates, but events like "x person dies, this happens" doesn't sound like something that should be affected by FPS at all.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z6gj6/eli5how_does_fps_change_from_3060_create_weird/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpg3bcf"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"I can't speak to this game specifically, but a common reason for things to get weird with changes in framerate comes from the way games generally handle time tracking.\n\nYou've probably heard of 'ticks' - a 'tick' with respect to a game is 1 unit of time as far as the game is concerned. Exactly how long that unit of time is can change depending on how the game is coded, but there's two main ways this happens:\n\n* The game counts each frame, or redraw of the screen, as 1 tick.\n* The game considers a unit of actual time - for instance, 1/30 of a second - to be 1 tick.\n\nBoth have advantages and disadvantages. In the first instance, the length of a tick changes based on how fast the computer is rendering the game. Games that use this method will start looking like they're playing in slow motion when you're running at a low framerate, or in fast motion when you're running at a high framerate.\n\nIn the second, when you have a low framerate, things will look jerky, since the game is updating the position of things on the screen multiple times for each time the screen is actually drawn.\n\nIf the game is using the first method, there can be other, unexpected results of having weird or fluctuating framerates, either high or low, since things are now being calculated at a rate faster or slower than the game's maker intended."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
383oqi
|
How was food sweetened before the discovery of sugar and the Americas?
|
How was food sweetened or was it sweetened at all?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/383oqi/how_was_food_sweetened_before_the_discovery_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crs1bzv"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"Sugarcane is not native to the Americas, and sugar (crystallized sugar) was not discovered in the Americas.\n\nSugarcane is native to South and Southeast Asia. About the 8th century AD, it was discovered in India how to turn sugarcane juice into crystallized sugar. \n\nSugar spread from India east to China and West to the Middle East. It was noticed by Europeans during the Crusades. Venice began cultivating sugar, first in Outremer, later in Cyprus, by about 1200.\n\nSugarcane cultivation to supply Europe spread to areas with a suitable climate, of which there were not many in the European ambit, the Canary Islands became the largest growers before the spread of cultivation to the Caribbean.\n\nSugar remained expensive in Europe until growing production in Brazil and the Caribbean brought down prices in the 18th century.\n\nDuring the Napoleonic Wars, when continental Europe was mostly cut off from Caribbean sugar by the British, production of sugar from the sugar beet was developed. By 1880, sugar beets, rather than sugarcane had become the main crop source for European sugar.\n\nBefore sugar was known in Europe, honey was the main sweetener used in foods. It was expensive, so most people did not get many sweet things to eat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2pe42s
|
how does immune response work? does my body have a database of which antibodies it can send out how does it know what infection to fight?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pe42s/eli5_how_does_immune_response_work_does_my_body/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmvtthq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Yes. Your immune system keeps a \"database\" of [Memory B cells](_URL_0_) in your lymph nodes, where each B cell remembers how to make one specific type of antibody. If you get an infection, your immune system cells exchange chemical messages [in a complicated network](_URL_1_) and, if there are any memory cells that have the right antibodies for that infection, they'll reactivate and make lots of clones and manufacture that antibody a lot."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_B_cell",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_immune_system"
]
] |
||
1cjqcs
|
How are biosynthetic pathways with a known end product determined?
|
As an example [caffeine](_URL_0_) is produced in plants by methylating the nucleotide portion of a neucleoside and removing the ribose sugar.
For this example how is it determined what enzymes are involved in the pathway. How the plant goes from a normal eukaryotic metabolite (hormones, lipids, amino acids, etc) to a specific end product.
As a bonus: How to determine the coding sequence for cloning into another organism (*E. coli* or other host)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1cjqcs/how_are_biosynthetic_pathways_with_a_known_end/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9h8hkt",
"c9hc22t"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"It can be a really long, painstaking process that takes many years. The two biggest tools at our disposal are biochemistry and genetics. Biochemical assays would start by first isolating the compound and seeing what it looks like to allow us to take some educated guesses (huh, that looks like a nucleotide or could be two amino acids stuck together). You can try to find enzymes (based on sequence, structure, function etc. ) that could get you there, isolate them, and test them in a test tube with your starting material to get you to the end.\n\nGenetics can be useful with many organisms where you can knock out a gene and see what happens to starter compounds (you can identify them with mass spectrometry or introduce labelled compounds yourself). It also allows you to look at gene clusters that may be on pathway to a larger product, but these are more prevalent in \"simpler\" organisms.",
"It's an extremely long painstaking process.\n\nOnce you know what you want you first make an educated guess as to where it started from. To test your guess you feed the organism a labelled version of that starting compound. A radioactively labelled nucleoside is fed and then you test if the caffein produced is radioactive. If it is, congrats, you got a start point.\n\nNow for the fun part, determining the pathway it went through. If the processes are slow enough you can simply kill the organism at some point and then examine all of the chemicals that are labelled. It'll be a mess but eventually you'll find intermediate compounds and maybe their metabolites and other pathways. \n\nYou construct your theoretical pathway and then feed the organism some of those labelled intermediates (if they are isolable) and see if they come out the other end as the product. If so you can be sure the intermediate you selected was part of the pathway.\n\nIf you already suspect certain enzymes to be part of the pathway then you can then start experiments where you feed the intermediate to just that enzyme in a test tube and see if the next intermediate or product comes out. If so, great, if not, revise your pathway.\n\nIf it's a new enzyme you suspect is doing it then you start crushing up copious amounts of your organism and with enough isolation (centrifugation, chromotography etc.etc.etc.) you find what fractions have the enzyme you're looking for. If you can crystallize and x-ray it (to determine structure) you're laughing. if not you can still characterize your new enzymes for further study.\n\nOnce you've got your pathway you can then use genetics and start knocking out genes you suspect are making the enzymes for that target compound. Through a fun process of molecular musical chairs you eventually ascertain which genes are necessary to keep the pathway functional and you may even find if other enzymes are necessary.\n\nCongrats you have found the pathway and the group of genes needed for it. \n\nYou don't necessarily need to do everything yourself, alot of times researchers just focus on one intermediate or enzyme and figure out its role. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.bioscience.org/2004/v9/af/1364/figures.htm"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
55dujh
|
why does jupiter have 67 moons when we only have one?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55dujh/eli5_why_does_jupiter_have_67_moons_when_we_only/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d89oioj",
"d89ox2e",
"d89p1mk"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Well, jupiter is also 12 times the size of earth and has a lot more gravitational strength.",
"Earth's moon is pretty big by moon standards, which would prevent the formation of other moons in orbit. Debris and stuff that could aggregate into a moon gets pulled to earth or the existing moon instead. Really, Earth is kind of weird planet wise. Most planets have more than one moon. ",
"It has a large mass which means that it will capture more objects like from the asteroid belt which will become small temporary moons. The position beyond the frost line meant that it formed as a gas giant and ejected some of the earlier accumulated rocky mass due to the conservation of angular momentum. The full explanation is very complicated some of it is addressed here - _URL_0_ "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k6tZZpz7Cg"
]
] |
||
a9yyo4
|
why is the frost on my car on a cold morning usually worse on 1 side of the car? and specifically on only 1 side view mirror?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a9yyo4/eli5_why_is_the_frost_on_my_car_on_a_cold_morning/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecnjxfw"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"One side of your car is either warmer or subject to more humidity than the other. \n\nThis can happen for any number of reasons. The most common is the icy side being turned to the west or north, away from the Sun. The second-most common is there being something on the non-icy side that gives off heat, such as a wall. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
25a6lq
|
What is the longest an electrical outage can be without causing everything to turn off and need to start up again?
|
So just a few minutes ago there was a power outage, one that lasted a fraction of a second. It was a very small amount of time, yet all of the electronics in my house need to be reset. I'm sure there is some tolerance for near instantaneous electrical outages, ones so short that there is no noticeable effect to them, my question is in how large that tolerance is. Could a computer stay on if power is lost for a hundredth of a second? a thousandth? What kind of factors go into the delay between power loss and power return for a common power outage?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/25a6lq/what_is_the_longest_an_electrical_outage_can_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chf80jj"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"So it depends on two things: the kind of current the device is using, and how the power supply is made. Any device working on Alternating Current has a low tolerance for interruption, in the exception of heating coils. This is because an attribute of this kind of power is frequency, or voltage reversal over time. If the current isn't reversing direction 60 (or 50, in some countries) times a second, the device won't function.\n\nDirect Current devices, such as those with transformers or what's powered by batteries, can be a little more robust, depending on how their transformers are made. Many times, the Rectifier responsible for switching alternating current to single-polarity direct current has capacitors and other components involved in it to soak the 98 times a second that the input voltage is at 0. These capacitors may continue to feed current out of the transformer even if the input current is suddenly cut. Depending on what it's powering, the device on the other side could suck all the power up and shut down, or a status light might stay on for a few seconds before finally fading dark. We see this a lot in amplifiers and sound processors, and many inexpensive computer speakers will do it. Curiously, if you turn the speakers off, and the diode is still faintly glowing, and you then try to run sound through it, the sudden demand for work by the speaker's small amplifier will instantly deplete what is left in the capacitor and the light will go out immediately. You might even hear a small gasp of sound on its way out.\n\nEdit: I forgot how sine waves work"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
t3hrs
|
startups and the stages of raising money
|
I've heard things like Angel investors, and Type A's. WTH are they? What do they tell us about the "health" or "state" of a startup?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/t3hrs/eli5_startups_and_the_stages_of_raising_money/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4j8ics"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A startup is simply a recently formed company. To get a company off the ground, it usually needs capital to operate and grow.\n\nAs a startup grows, it requires varying amounts of capital to expand. As it grows larger, it may need more capital than it currently generates.\n\nFor example, you have a startup which you just started. But you need a little money to feed yourself, maybe hire one employee and some equipment. At that very beginning, all you need is seed money... which can come from your friends, family, or an individual investor (Angel Investor). You need $30k to get started, and you're willing to give up 30% of your company in exchange for that funding.\n\nAs you grow and generate more business, you realize that you can grow the business even faster if you just had more money. So now, you want to borrow $1 Million. That is now considered a new stage of funding. Most individuals don't have $1 Million sitting around to invest in a startup, so you approach a Venture Capital Fund and pitch them your idea. They agree and fund you in exchange for some % of your company.\n\nNow 2 years pass, and your company is exploding. It's getting crazy amounts of business, and you think your company can dominate the market really quickly... but it needs $50 million to do so. You go back and find investors and raise another round of funding to fuel your growth.\n\nSo that's sorta how it works. It doesn't necessarily tell you the \"health\" of a startup. Some companies can get tons of funding based on a good idea and strong team, but the company itself could be losing money and not profitting. \n\nThere are also many companies that forego funding altogether and yet are incredibly successful. So the amount of funding doesn't tell you how profitable or strong a company is. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1m4c54
|
for any offroaders out there, how exactly do locking differentials work, or lockers for short.
|
Like ARB's air lockers, OX lockers, etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m4c54/eli5_for_any_offroaders_out_there_how_exactly_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc5naww"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"there are basically 3 types of traction aid: Limited slip (aka Positraction) Locker (ie Detroit) and spool (aka Lincoln locker)\n\nThe limited slip usually uses clutches and transfers power from a spinning tire to a non-spinning tire. There is at least one clutchless limited slip that I'm aware of. These are good for front diffs and rears if street manners are highly important.\n\nThe locker locks both wheels together whenever one starts spinning faster than the other. It gets a little wiggly in long sweeping corners on the road but most offroaders don't mind. They rock. If you put them in the front you will sometimes 'plow' when turning in soft stuff but for straight stuff they can't be beat.\n\nSpools are sometimes called Lincoln lockers after the welder used to make them one solid piece. The axles are permanently welded together. They are good for off road only mud trucks that are trailered.\n\nThere are variations of these like the 'e-locker' and air actuated (arb) and such and whatnot. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.