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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1zils8
|
why is nigeria so strongly associated with scams?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zils8/eli5_why_is_nigeria_so_strongly_associated_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cftzknl",
"cfu0jny",
"cfu2rpp",
"cfu3234",
"cfu3mze",
"cfu3p8a",
"cfu4a1j",
"cfu4lcf",
"cfu5ip9",
"cfu6gz7"
],
"score": [
37,
2,
6,
2,
3,
7,
10,
3,
2,
35
],
"text": [
"It's called an advance-fee-fraud and was made popular by nigerian groups in the 80s via fax and now via e-mail. They send you a letter in pretty bad english (they are africans and they want you to believe them, so they don't speak flawlessly) and say that a nigerian prince has a lot of money and wants to transfer it out of the country or something in that fashion. Usually, you have to pay a little amount of money, so they can \"set it up\", of course, you will never see any money. \n\nThis is also known as the Nigeria Connection or the 419 scam (The nigerian law code §419 is about scams like this)",
"Its official language is English so I'd say that's important to be fluent in English to carry out these scams. They'd also have to be in a foreign country where it would not be ridiculous to have relatively unknown members of royalty.\n\nAlthough I'd reckon there are just as many scams anywhere else in the world, it's just that the Nigerian prince scam has become a pop culture thing so it's more known. Could be also that it's more prominent because it's actually making them money.",
"_URL_0_ very nice website. It hasn't been updated for years but it has some nice stories in the Archive section.",
"It's not just that old chain email. The website I work for no longer allows signups from Nigeria because they are literally only ever fraudsters. It's like they know just enough to try to make scamming into a living so that's what they do.",
"In asked someone from Nigeria once and he said it was because there are so many educated people there with no jobs or legal ways to make money.",
"The president's son started it.\n\nHe still owes me",
"I saw a new(ish) one on my local craigslist. Back while \nI was apartment hunting I saw an add for a small house that was for rent in my price range (pretty cheap). The add said that he and his wife were in the peace corps, and they would like someone like me, someone who was a handyman and could take good care of a home for a year while they were on a mission. \n\nWe emailed back and forth and it seemed like a good fit. That is, until they asked me to wire the first months rent to Nigeria and then they would send me the lease. I demanded to see the lease first and they never responded. So I drove by the house, and lo, it was not for rent.",
"Nigerian scams are waning. Now I'm seeing more of similar scams from China and Hong Kong. If you own a website, you'll often get emails telling you that they are a domain registrar currently processing somebody else's order of your trademarks/domains of other TLD (_URL_0_, ._URL_1_, etc) and they're giving you a chance to pay $xxx to get the domains first.",
"Check your e-mail. ",
"* Nigeria has a very large population, at 175 million; for example it has a larger population than Russia, Japan or Mexico.\n* Nigeria is a former British colony, so English is the language used in government, trade, education and communication.\n* Nigeria is one of the more prosperous countries in Africa. Did you know that [Nigeria has a space program that has successfully launched satellites](_URL_1_)? More importantly to your question, they have better Internet connectivity than most other African countries.\n* [Nigeria has a huge political corruption problem](_URL_0_), and law enforcement isn't that great.\n\nThese factors put Nigeria into a \"sweet spot\" for this sort of scam. Most other countries either don't have as many people, or not nearly as many English speakers, or are too poor to carry out these scams in comparable number against English speakers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.419eater.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"yourdomain.cn",
"com.hk"
],
[],
[
"http://www.transparency.org/country#NGA",
"http://www.bbc.com/news/world-21954395"
]
] |
||
1sqtlv
|
How to cite a book Chicago style that gives about a hundred page overview then presents documents on the topic?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1sqtlv/how_to_cite_a_book_chicago_style_that_gives_about/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce09xqb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm deleting this question now, as it is not about history or historiography, but about the general academic process. I believe there are other subreddits about this topic, such as /r/askacademia."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2jjudd
|
"mrs." or "ms."?
|
If a heterosexual married couple has different last names, is the wife's title "Mrs." or " Ms."?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jjudd/eli5_mrs_or_ms/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clce3mw",
"clceakz"
],
"score": [
17,
3
],
"text": [
"* Mrs. - married woman\n* Miss - unmarried woman\n* Ms. - none of your goddamned business\n\nTraditionally, Miss vs. Mrs. was to advertise a woman's marital status, with Miss implying she was available. \n\nSince men have no such distinction and are just Mr., Ms. was invented as a similar titled that was agnostic to marital status.",
"Definitely Ms. when they have different last names. Wikipedia says:\n\n > Even several public opponents of \"non-sexist language\", such as William Safire, were finally convinced that Ms. had earned a place in English by the case of US Congresswoman Geraldine A. Ferraro. Ferraro, a United States vice-presidential candidate in 1984, was a married woman who used her birth surname professionally rather than her husband's (\"Zaccaro\"). Safire pointed out that it would be equally incorrect to call her \"Miss Ferraro\" (as she was married), or \"Mrs. Ferraro\" (as her husband was not \"Mr. Ferraro\")—and that calling her \"Mrs. Zaccaro\" would confuse the reader."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1d28sk
|
how to land a plane
|
Specifically, a commercial jet
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1d28sk/eli5_how_to_land_a_plane/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9m74ia"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"First of all, a disclaimer. I'm a flying instructor, I've been teaching people to fly (and land) planes for 9 years. It takes practice - lots of practice. What I'm writing here is background information for people who want to know more - it is **not an instruction manual**. If you want to learn to fly, have flying lessons.\n\nBefore landing, you need to fly a good approach. Line the aircraft up with the runway, with the gear and flaps selected down. Once on final approach, use power to control your speed, and move the nose up/down to control where you're going. Your aircraft manual will tell you what speed to fly at.\n\nIf you're overshooting, you'll see the start of the runway move down in the windscreen, so lower the nose. If you're undershooting the start of the runway will move up.\n\nIf you get too low, the perspective of the runway will look wrong. It will look flat. Too high, and it won't look flat enough. If this happens, get back to the correct perspective, then check where the numbers are moving to make sure it doesn't happen again.\n\nDuring this phase, your \"scan\" should be: horizon, airspeed indicator, runway threshold. Keep checking these three things.\n\nThen, as you cross the start of the runway, shift your focus to the end of the runway. The reason you do that is because it enables you to judge your height. You can practice this in your car on the motorway when there's no traffic - look about 1/2 mile ahead, and you'll be able to judge the height of your car seat above the road.\n\nUsing this method, when you're about 10' above the ground, raise the nose to fly level, and simultaneously close the throttle.\n\nThe aim now is not to let the aircraft land, but to hold it 10' above the runway for as long as possible. (N.b. - this is true for light aircraft. A different technique is used for jets.) As the aircraft slows down, gradually raise the nose more and more to maintain your height, always judging your height by looking at the end of the runway. Eventually, the aircraft will land itself - even after it lands, continue to use the controls to keep the weight off the nose wheel, until you're ready to gently lower the nose wheel to the ground.\n\nFinally, congratulate yourself on a perfect landing.\n\n(Coming up later today, if people are interested - landing in crosswinds.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2s4wul
|
Can the Roman times and Medieval times be considered the same?
|
The reason I ask this is because I am researching on the background of a common phrase used today. My teacher says that the phrase can be tied to events from Medieval England, but when I researched it, I keep getting that it originated in Roman times.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2s4wul/can_the_roman_times_and_medieval_times_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnm8g83",
"cnm9zc0",
"cnmg0y5"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"In just about all situations, they're exclusive. What's the context of this? It's possible your teacher or your sources are wrong.",
"Historical eras are not categories that are set in stone, and for the most part, are fairly arbitrary. Well, that is to say, broad eras such as \"classical antiquity\" and \"the Middle Ages\" are arbitrary (more specific time periods - such as Tudor England or Edo Japan, can obviously be defined). As my high school history teacher said, people didn't just wake up one day and realize that they were now living in the Middle Ages.\n\nThat being aid, these eras exist in historiography because they can be convenient. People shouldn't stick to them religiously, but they can be useful for splitting up and studying the past. \n\nWhen most people talk of \"Roman times\", they are talking about an era known by such terms as *classical antiquity.* This is the ancient world in which the Roman Empire rose and flourished within. Historians date the end of antiquity differently (and as aforementioned, these ending dates really are arbitrary), but antiquity *is not* seen as being the same as the Middle Ages (or Medieval period, the two terms refer the same thing). If antiquity and the Middle Ages were the same, then the two different labels simply wouldn't be useful.\n\nIn terms of \"Roman times\" as in \"the Roman Empire\", well, Roman rule ended in Britain by a little after 410 AD. Romano-British culture continued to exist, of course, but Medieval England was not Roman in the sense that it was not a part of the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire did survive in the East - today we often use the term \"Byzantine Empire\" to describe the Eastern portion of the Roman Empire that survived until 1453, but the the residents of the Empire really did see it as the Roman Empire.",
"No.\n\nSimply because the level of which two completely time periods with completely different everything could be considered \"the same\" would be a level of reduction that would be completely absurd, akin to asking \"can the Civil War and WWII be considered the same?\" \n\nIf you reformulated your question to say \"could be considered similar,\" then the question becomes more viable (although still tremendously reductionist, and still mostly wrong in both structure and detail).\n\nHowever, the late antiquity period is commonly considered a \"pre-cursor\" to the (early) medieval period, sharing some overlaps (the rise of mounted soldiers, fortified strongholds in lieu of open cities, an aristocracy whose wealth was based on land rather than exchange or capital), but even these comparisons tend to break apart upon close examination.\n\nThat a phrase or a concept from Medieval England originated from Roman times, does not mean it is the \"same.\" It just means it originated from Roman times."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3n9s9j
|
why do so many right wingers dislike green energy and are stuck that oil is what we should go for when there are so many political and geological benefits to drop it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n9s9j/eli5_why_do_so_many_right_wingers_dislike_green/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvm477m",
"cvm48u5",
"cvm4u41",
"cvm54ln",
"cvm5opa",
"cvm5uv9",
"cvm619u",
"cvm66fw",
"cvm6b84",
"cvm6d0t",
"cvm6un7",
"cvm8mlc",
"cvmbhv5",
"cvmbieb",
"cvmblig",
"cvmbvwn",
"cvmdimd"
],
"score": [
103,
10,
155,
3,
6,
7,
3,
4,
47,
8,
23,
31,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The core of conservatism is that government regulation restricts the growth of businesses and thus the economy. The government can't just \"drop it\", because they aren't the major users of it. Most oil is used by shipping companies that import and export products, and ship stuff across the country. The government can create regulations that make oil less profitable and offer incentives to make green energy more profitable, that's it.",
"Green Energy = VERY EXPENSIVE Energy\n\nOil is cheap, and low costs allow the economy to perform well without stimulation that would involve raising taxes. The right wingers think that government mostly spends its money unwisely, and green energy deals like Solyndra tend to reinforce that belief. They see giving the money to the people leaves nothing to blame government for, albeit with side effects (like unemployment).",
"Many politicians are personally invested in industries that would be negatively impacted if we migrated away from oil. Further, they get funding from and are lobbied by such industries. Investing in newer, cleaner energy is a financial gamble they're not willing to take.",
"Its not a dislike of green energy, its a dislike of government involvement in the economy (in stated beliefs, many republicans still tend to swing subsidies just towards their own contributors). The best way to develop green energy is to let market forces work, not for government to use its crystal ball and say \"we should go this way\". ",
"Solar is coming along nicely, once Graphen is available it will be a real game changer. But there is an abundance of fossil fuels and they cannot be beat (presently) for energy to weight ratio. For example, aviation will use fossil fuels for the foreseeable future as the batteries for electric flight eliminate any other payload. Plus anymore diesel can be made from algae in one hour so you could call fossil fuels renewable.",
"Petroleum is very good at what it does for what it costs financially.\n\nGreen Energy may or may not hit limitations in returns. (I'd much rather focus on Nuclear.)\n\nChanges to support Green Energy will either accomplish very little or raise the cost on tons of every day items. A massive % of the pollution comes from the ships bring goods between nations.\n\nLot's of the American conservatives don't live in big cities and will frequently drive 150 + miles a week easily so fuel costs are very relevant.\n\nFinally, for a little ad ho·mi·nem: Many of the people pushing for Green Energy on the national stage are making significant profit off of it. Logic has it's place but some data is so complex you will spend lots of time researching or never have an opinion. As nobody else decides not to have an opinion when they don't have a logical defense why should you?\n\n\n",
"Oil is the most efficient way to store energy and the cheapest relatively speaking. Because of these reasons and the right wings' preference of business development over environmental regulations they see no reason to force private companies from fossil fuels. They believe the free market will ultimately correct for any issue and that government shouldn't get involved, this is a well supported position by conservatives and therefore the right wing has no pressuring reason to drop oil, but they do have a few reasons (in their eyes) to stay with it. ",
"Reddit may be lefty, but the reality is that while green-energy can be affordable on the micro scale, it's still quite expensive at the level of consumption the U.S. is at (5 trillion kwh a year) At the retail level, lots of the subsidies are wasted going to rich northerners, who can hardly utilize the technology. If it isn't viable in the market, most conservatives don't want it subsidized. What's viable in Florida isn't in Maine. \n\ntl;dr: solar has tons of advantages, and I've bought and installed it myself, but asking taxpayers to foot the bill for extremely expensive energy while we're deeply in debt doesn't resound with a lot of fiscally-responsible people. The panels alone cost alone would be probably $1 trillion (5 trillion kwh/4.5 sun-hours * $1/kwh), but it's the storage expense that'll be the real stickler. Decentralized, market-based solutions are what the right wants, not utility monopolies forcing expensive technology on the plebs. ",
"Conservatives don't dislike green energy. They fucking love it. They dislike the fact that green energy as it stands today sucks and is expensive / not readily available, and most people aren't going to outlay tens of thousands od dollars to solar panel their fucking roof, especially in this economy. As the markets and large oil and gas companies invest more and develop the energy to where its functional and affordable to the middle class, then it'll take over and be more mainstream. These companies have long term R & D programs designed that are doing this RIGHT NOW. Furthermore, people and businesses are being punished, as well as taxpayers, due to the higher costs associated with higher regulations in efforts to speed the process. Punishing and trying to force the middle class to use these types of energy through higher costs is not the role of government and is shortsighted. \n\nShort answer, conservatives want the markets and companies to continue to develop these technologies to where they make sense to use them. Liberals want to force companies and people to prematurely adopt technologies that are in their infancy and don't make sense in mainstream energy markets. ",
"I'm not a winger, but am right of center.\n\nI Don't think oil is the answer or solution. I just believe that the government shouldn't make rules or incentives. Let the market guide progress, not some law that Congress wants.\n\nPeople in the US reward 'green' companies like Chipolte, Whole Foods and others. I enjoy New Belgium beers (makers of fat tire) and I respect their green energy use.\n\nTL;DR most modern conservatives simply don't want federal laws like the Left insists upon.",
"Many right wingers don't dislike green energy. They dislike green energy REGARDLESS OF COST. Frankly they don't care where they electricity comes from, but they don't want taxpayer dollars artificially propping up the green energy sector, which is what the production tax credit (PTC) for wind and solar have done for two decades now.",
"We have a lot of things that still need energy provided by fossil fuels that green energy sources are not yet capable of providing. Since we have an ongoing need, we need to ensure an ongoing supply.\n\nRight-wingers don't dislike green energy per se; they dislike government intervention in the energy market. When green energy becomes more available, more effective, more practical than fossil fuels - \"right-wingers\" will like it too... except the crazies. ",
"What are the many geological benefits of dropping oil?",
"You're not even asking the right question.\n\nExcept in a few backwater heavily subsidized markets, oil is not even competitive with green energy because green energy (hydro/solar/wind/bio) generates electricity, when very little oil is used for electricity generation - the lion's share is used for transportation, which is the driving force behind the market price of oil - other products such as natural gas, plastics and heating oil are merely profitable byproducts.\n\nTL;DR Oil has almost nothing to do with green energy.",
"Geological benefits to drop it? I don't think you know what that word means.",
"The big irony is that many conservatives are in favor of nuclear energy, the most reliable snd powerful form of green energy, but it is opposed by the green energy movement cuz some bad shit happened 40 years ago.",
"These answers are wrong. The world economy runs on oil. There is no replacement-repeat, absolutely no viable replacement for oil right now. Full stop. 90 million barrels of oil are consumed globally every day. There is absolutely nothing to replace anything more than a small fraction, and that small fraction would be incredibly expensive and resource intensive. \n\n\nBottom line: You are hearing some bullshit from a bunch of people who really, really want to believe you can fix everything with solar panels and wind turbines. Well, you just fucking can't. The technology to replace oil doesn't currently exist. Your two assumptions-that there are political and economic benefits to \"dropping\" oil are flat wrong. It's not a conspiracy. Everything good in your life is there because of oil. \n\nRight wingers realize this, but are in denial about the obvious consequence-drastic climate change. Left wingers ignore this reality and pretend that tiny expensive reductions in carbon emissions are great victories. It's idiocy. \n\n\nI feel the solar powered downvotes headed my way. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1v325y
|
we can send signals to the rover on mars. how come i can't get a hdmi plug that wirelessly sends an hd signal from my cable box to my tv?
|
I'm trying to figure out the best way to word this and hopefully I can. So pretty much we all hate dealing with wires. I have my Cable box, Internet modem, tv and Xbox One all set up in my living room all together on my TV stand. Why can't I wireless HDMI adapters to plug in so I don't have to deal with 25 different wires. It's a mess back there and god help me if I try to move anything, it just gets more tangled. So why can't this idea be put to work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v325y/eli5_we_can_send_signals_to_the_rover_on_mars_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceo86mx",
"ceo89yh",
"ceo8ohw"
],
"score": [
5,
7,
5
],
"text": [
"Chromecast + hdmi hub ",
"The equipment to send and receive signals to mars costs several billion dollars. A HDMI cable costs $15. \n\nThat multi-billion dollar equipment sends and received data at a rate of several kilobytes per second. Your TV could need a gigabyte per second to cover the audio and video signal.\n\nThey are experimenting with very high frequency wireless connections, trying to push the boundaries of what is possible so they can make good, fast, error-free wireless connections to things like televisions. It is not easy. And it is far too easy to make a system that works as long as no one in your street turns on a microwave oven.\n\nTL,DR: Wireless is just hard.",
"The electronics industry could do wireless HDMI tomorrow. The standards body that controls HDMI, which is in turn controlled by content creators, doesn't want to do it.\n\nThey fear that wirelessly broadcasting the signal will make it easier for you to pirate that signal, bypassing the copyright protection scheme that is embedded in HDMI. Because obviously the thing that keeps nobody in the world from making a digital copy of an HDMI stream is hardware based copy protection.\n\nI'm seriously not kidding. (_URL_0_) \n\nA 1080p video stream would be trivial to send wirelessly. If you have an Apple device and an AppleTV you can do it right now using tech they call AirPlay. Video the quality of a BluRay DVD is is max about 8 megabits per second. Wifi on 802.11g is 54 mb/s. 802.11n is 600mb/s."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Content_protection_.28HDCP.29"
]
] |
|
6jpy0e
|
why does cartilage completely degrade from overuse? does something prevent it from regenerating like muscle tissue?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6jpy0e/eli5_why_does_cartilage_completely_degrade_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djg6hzc"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Cartilage isn't connected to any blood supply, such as arteries and veins. Thus, it simply wears down over time instead of regenerating. Additionally, this is why torn ligaments/tendons also take so long to heal, and require direct medical intervention in the form of surgery."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4bfld6
|
If the all of the sun's energy were in the form of heat, how far away would it have to be in order to heat the earth the same amount that it does now?
|
I am asking because I was wondering how much space really insulates things and how much heat can be transferred through the near vacuum. I assume that most of the energy received from the sun on earth is in the form of light.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4bfld6/if_the_all_of_the_suns_energy_were_in_the_form_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d18rf53"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Heat is defined to be the thermal passage of energy between an object and its surroundings, so all of the energy that passes between the sun and its surroundings is called 'heat.' There are three main ways a hot object can transfer heat: conduction (through direct contact with a solid object), convection (through direct contact with a gas or fluid, which then moves around and touches something else), and radiation (through light). Since the sun isn't directly touching the earth, and since outer space is not filled with much of anything, the sun cannot transfer energy to the earth via either conduction or convection. Close to 100% of the heating of the earth from the sun is in the form of light."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4ma2fg
|
how do we know how to spell and pronounce names from ancient sumer and egypt just from reading symbols etched in clay?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ma2fg/eli5_how_do_we_know_how_to_spell_and_pronounce/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3tsf2p",
"d3tvp0w"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You ever heard of the Rosetta Stone?\n\nIt's written in three languages. Two of them nobody knew how to decipher before it was found. The third is Greek. \n\nBy comparing the Greek passages to the same words written in Demotic and Hieroglyphs scholars really busted the languages wide open. That one simple piece of writing was the key to reading everything the Egyptians spent a thousand years writing down.",
"Egypt specifically had the Rosetta Stone. A tablet that had writing in hieroglyphs, phonetic Egyptian and Greek. This allowed us to learn what certain symbols mean.\n\nWe don't know what it sounds like though. Ancient Egyptian is a dead language, like proper Latin. This means that no one knows what it is supposed to sound like, just what we think it is supposed to sound like."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2wbja6
|
What was the religion of the Mycenean's and Minoans like?
|
Was it the same as in classical Greece with the same Gods, or is it completely different.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2wbja6/what_was_the_religion_of_the_myceneans_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"copfyje",
"copmk1q",
"copmnyo"
],
"score": [
19,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Since we haven't managed to decipher the Minoan's script, we don't know all that much about their religious customs. We do know some things based on physical remains, however. There are figurines of goddesses holding snakes, a lot of ceramic and painted bulls, and a lot of double-headed axes. So, it's pretty certain these were important symbols to them. There have also been a few shrines found in caves, so that's something.\n\nThe Greeks also mentioned later Cretain deities, who may have been related to earlier Minoan deities. One of these is named Britomaris, AKA \"the good virgin.\" She seems to have been similar to Artemis in some ways, enough for the Greeks to feel they were equivalent. It has been theorized that the snake-wielding figure I mentioned before is Britomaris. \n\nIn regards to the Mycenaeans, we know a great deal more due to having deciphered their script. Mostly, this gives us names of gods and goddesses. As you might have suspected, they were pretty much the same as the ones the Classical Greeks worshiped! There were some differences, however. They didn't worship Apollo or Aphrodite, which lends to the suspicion that they were adopted from Eastern cultures. They also seem to have given a greater preference to Poseidon than Zeus. Interestingly, they DID worship Dionysus, even though some Classical Greeks believed he had come rather recently from India. \n\nThere isn't much indication of HOW they worshiped their gods, but they likely sacrificed in ways that were similar to their decendents. It's worth noting that the Myceneans made mention of Persephone and Demeter, and seem to have given them great importance. This lends credence to the later idea that the Eleusinian Mysteries, a mystery cult that involved those two goddesses, was VERY ancient. ",
"For Minoan religion, I highly recommend checking out [this](_URL_0_) page maintained by Jeremy Rutter at Dartmouth. It's what we used in my graduate Aegean Archaeology class and I used it myself a lot elsewhere as well. I only caution you to remember that because our understanding of Minoan religion comes almost entirely from archaeology, it suffers from all the usual caveats and vaguaries of archaeological preservation. Thus, when Rutter says things like:\n\n > A survey of the representational art which illustrates Minoan religious activities clearly indicates that those figures which are plausibly to be identified as divinities rather than as mortals are overwhelmingly of the female sex.\n\nIt should really say that \"a survey of the **extant** representational art...\" While we see a lot of goddesses and relatively few gods in what we've found, it's entirely possible that male divinities were worshipped in ways that do not preserve as well in the archaeological record, and so their importance or abundance is underrepresented in our understanding of it.",
"RELIGION IN MINOAN CRETE\n\nCrete’s Religious Context \nThe religious structure of Minoan Crete is one preoccupied with that of the divine. The Minoan world, as it stands through historical understanding of archaeological sources, shows plentiful traces of an organised belief system that was prominently integrated into the society and lives of its people. \nThe extent to which historians can currently examine the nature of the Minoan belief system relies in interpretation of specific religious artefacts, layout of archaeological sites, and the Minoan A and Mycenaean B tablets, though there are few of the former.\nThe conception of a functioning Minoan belief system has revolved around the similarities evident between the Minoans and Myceneans. Like many bronze-age societies, the Minoan religious system revolved around the belief in a number of divinities that shaped the natural and environmental world around them. \nThese integrated themselves into Minoan society and their practitioners seamlessly – so closely, Hood notes, ‘It is often difficult to distinguish representations of gods from those of their priests and worshippers.’\nMinoan Deities\nIt should be noted that, like any historian working in a field of contentious debate, the evidence relating to the identity of the deities and their nature in the Minoan system remains ambiguous at best.\n\n\nPONTIA\n\nCentral to the spiritualistic Minoan religious system was ‘Pontia’, addressed in Linear A as a possible ‘mother goddess’ figure – although this could also be Demeter, referenced in Linear A. She possesses heavy symbolism within many shrines and sanctuaries – referred to as the ‘Lady of the Labyrinth’. Based upon the cultural exports of Crete we find Pontia on Mainland Greece – theories about the transformation of Pontia into Athena continue to this day.\nPontia was only one part of a vague polytheistic system, but it is purported by Castleden that ‘the double-axe was Pontia’s symbol, and possibly the pillar and snake too’. The labrys, or double-axe, was most certainly a symbol of the Labyrinth, having its symbolism strongly integrated into the architecture of palatial and temple areas at Zakros and Knossos. Perhaps it is even illustrative of the Minoan minotaur legend which has permeated the imagination of Evans and other traditional historians for years.\nFundamental to Minoan religious symbolism is that of the snake and pillar – the ‘pillar worship’ of Crete in homes and villas can be seen as representative of the Cult of a mother goddess, or that of a sacred tree and naturalistic symbol of life. The Knossos Gg Tablet addresses ‘Pontia of the Labyrinth’ – it is possible this goddess had labyrinthine sanctuaries in other Minoan temples.\n\n\nKOUROS\n\nKouros is a figure whom seems to have been indicative of a cyclical system of death and resurrection in nature. This figure, dubbed a ‘year-spirit’, is portrayed by a masculine figure called ‘Kouros’ – depicted in two ivory figures of pubescent figures Evans remarks most likely came from the Labyrinth and temple in Knossos. Kourous is evidently believed by Hood to depict ‘the death and resurrection of a god of vegetation, central to the cult of the goddess (Pontia)’. This god is subsequently believed to have been a predecessor of Zeus – even transforming in the late period as ‘Zeus Velachos’.\nAlexiou, however, reminds us that there may have been many other ‘divine boys’ present in Minoan worship. However, it is likely that the depiction of young men in some Minoan frescoes may have been that of Kouros.\n\n\nSEA WORSHIP\n\nAs a civilisation closely connected to coastal life and trade it seems natural that Minoan Crete fixated itself upon the system of deities connected to the ocean. A number of historians have hinted at the presence of a ‘sea goddess’, but little is known about the nature and practice of sea worship – Castleden purports this is as coastal shrines on the shore would have been too vulnerable to be preserved today.\nThe Ring of Minos is one indication of the imagery of the sea in ritual worship. It portrays a priestess carrying ‘portable shrines’ across the ocean to different temples. This is consistent with beliefs concerning Minoan Crete regarding the nature of ‘seashore cults’ in which ‘deities were transported in ships to describe a magic circle of divine protection around the island’. Willetts purports that ‘leaping’ into the sea' may have been an initiatory practice reminiscent of Minoan myth.\n\n\nPOTIEDAN\n\n It is possible that Potiedas or Poteidan may have been present as the Greek Posiedon in Crete as large-scale votive and sacrificial offerings at Pylos during the Mycenaean period were offered in his name. Castleden suggests it is a possibility this practice spread to Crete. However, it is certain that Poteidan was a religious figure whom merged a number of iconographies in his worship – Potiedan is referred to in many tablets as the ‘Bull God’ or the ‘Sun God’ – and it is in this form that Potiedan has been concluded to act as an all-powerful figure whom could take a number of manifestations. \nPotiedan’s most prominent manifestation is that of the bull – a figure that permeates the rituals and arts of Crete to an extent that it is difficult to construe the meaning of ‘bull leaping’ and the practices which typified Potiedan worship. Thus the symbolism of bulls and also horns, most notably that of model bulls and horns of consecration appear in a number of places. This is postulated by Nanno Marinatos as a symbol of ritual bull sacrifice – having been found in monumental scales at Knossos.\n\n\nTHE SNAKE AND DOVE GODDESSES\n\nOur knowledge of the snake goddess is both derivative of the source of information on Pontia, and that of two faience snake-wielding figures from Knossos. The symbolic significance of snakes has many meanings: possibly as a symbol of immortality (the ‘shedding’ indicative of rebirth) or life within the earth.\nThe Snake Goddess herself is seen to be the host of one of the largest Underworld cults on Crete. Like many deities, her physical affinity with the animal (snake) world substantiates that she is a goddess, much like that of the Dove Goddess found in sanctuaries at Knossos – in this case figurines found in sanctuaries at Kannia portray both doves and snakes.\nThe symbolism of doves has been interpreted to relate to the value of fertility. The depiction of goddesses with doves is standard in many shrines and sanctuaries, and these figures often are depicted in a pose in which their arms are raised: most likely a customary manner to denote prayer or divinity. Examples of this are present with the Dove Goddesses in the Knossos Shrine of the Double Axes, and the Goddess with Her Arms Raised at Gazi, Herakleion.\nSites of Worship\nThe Minoans expressed the practice of worship in certain areas, but shrines – the basis for Minoan votive offerings and libations which served as the basis for personal worship – have been found in public and private spaces in Crete.\n\n\nCAVE AND PEAK SANCTURARIES\n\nAcross Minoan Crete there existed a large number of caves and peak enclosures in which religious sanctuaries were established. These were used fundamentally as ‘dwellings from the earliest time of habitation, then as burial-places, shrines and sancturaries’. Not only did these serve as the site of worship for cults, but even for the secret or underground revival of old rituals and gods – though at 2000 BC this was replaced in mainstream Crete by the prominence of temples in the civic structure.\nThe amount of food found within the sites of these peak shrines, as well as vases for libation and figures of model animals and men substantiate a system of pilgrimage – the largest of the sanctuaries on Mount Juktas having areas for storage of offerings around the shrine and ritual fires. Of course, the symbolism of earth, sky and sun would have been a focal point to these.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.dartmouth.edu/~prehistory/aegean/?page_id=720"
],
[]
] |
|
c4dg5p
|
why does the charge of one atom determine how many atoms there are of another element in a molecule?
|
For example. H2O. Oxygen is a -2 charge and hydrogen (in this case) is a +1 charge. When they combine, *BECAUSE* oxygen has a -2 charge, that means there are now two hydrogens in the molecule.
Why does the charge on oxygen describe how many atoms of hydrogen there are going to be in the molecule?
My chem professor is absolutely horrible and I’m having a hard time getting this shit.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c4dg5p/eli5_why_does_the_charge_of_one_atom_determine/
|
{
"a_id": [
"erw0swt",
"erw1o5h",
"erw1xmb",
"erw4hhu"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It doesn't, it determines what a stable molecule would contain. The 2 atoms of hydrogen and 1 of oxegen have to all already exist and react together to form the new molecule.",
"The general idea is that a atom what a full outer electron shell. That i 2 electrons for the first shell and 8 for all other .\n\nSo look at the [Periodic table](_URL_0_) where the nobel gases on the far right column have full outer shells. If you move a step to the right you add a electron and a step to the left remove one. Covalent bond is sharing electrons and both atoms move a step to the right. There is also Ionic bonding where one atom lose a electron and another gain one.\n\n So oxygen are two steps to the left so you need to add two electrons for a full shell and hydrogen is one step from helium so you need to add one. In covalent bond atoms share electron. So hydrogen what to share 1 electron and water what to share 2 electrons. So if two hydrogen atoms each share 1 electron with a oxygen atom each hydrogen atoms have 2 electrons and oxygen have 8 in the outer shell. The result is that all have a full shell and is happy.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nCarbon is 4 steps from a nobel gas so it like to share 4 electrons. So you can combine it with two oxygen that like to share 2 electron each and ger CO2 or with 4 hydrogen atoms and get CH4 (methane)\n\n & #x200B;\n\nA example of Ionic bonding is table salt NaCl. Na looses a electrons and jump one step to the left and have a full outer shell and Cl gain a atom and move a step to the right.",
"Hold on, when you say charge do you really mean oxidation number? Oxidation number is more of a theoretical charge of an atom in a molecule as opposed to an actual electric charge such as that held by an ion.",
" > When they combine, BECAUSE oxygen has a -2 charge, that means there are now two hydrogens in the molecule.\n\nNo! If you have one oxygen and one hydrogen when they combined they would form HO, and the oxygen would still have a -1 charge that it wants filled. When it gets another hydrogen it forms H2O and it is stable.\n\nThe charge of the oxygen isn't making one hydrogen into two. I suspect your chemistry professor is saying that when oxygen is reacted with hydrogen (lots of oxygen atoms and lots of hydrogen atoms) it results in the pairing of H2O because oxygen's -2 charge is fully satisfied by the +1 charge of two hydrogen atoms (in total +2) which equal out to neutral charge."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Simple_Periodic_Table_Chart-en.svg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
39p016
|
Did the German and Italian-Americans ever face discrimination during WWII similar to the Japanese did?
|
In general, I realize that New York had a large Italian population (though I'm not so sure if that was the case during WWII) and that the West Coast had a larger Asian population than most places.
That being said, was there ever a public view of German and Italian-Americans facing as much racial discrimination as the Japanese did? I'm not talking about the internment camps, as I am aware of the sad nature of those camps, but rather I am more interested in what the average American during WWII thought of American Italians and Germans during WWII
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/39p016/did_the_german_and_italianamericans_ever_face/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs59fso",
"cs5ocz8"
],
"score": [
27,
9
],
"text": [
"There were forms called Alien Registration Forms that any person who originated from an Axis Power nation had to fill out. They contained questions like \"country of origin,\" \"how long have you lived in the United States,\" and others like an immigration form. Citizens had to fill this out, even if they had lived in the US for generations. I had just seen one for an Italian woman who lived in Pittsburgh for 37 years, yet still had to fill one out. Those who had to fill these out felt discriminated, and understandibly so. The idea behind it was to unsure that foreigners wouldn't sabotage the war effort or cause any other problems. ",
"Hello! Recent History graduate with a focus in Italian History. Actually, when it was announced that Mussolini had declared war on Ethiopia in 1936, there are several accounts and instances noted of fights breaking out between African Americans and Italian Americans. Many African Americans take pride in the fact that during the age of colonialism and imperialism in the 19th century, the fierce warriors of Ethiopia managed to resist invasion whereas other African countries fell to the Dutch, German, British, etc. It infuriated African Americans that Ethiopia, famous for its resistance, had been targeted by Mussolini, and I'm sure the Italian-Americans who were sympathetic to the Fascist Party were aggressors in the fights as well.\nLink with further info: _URL_0_ "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://tezetaethiopia.wordpress.com/2005/06/18/black-americans-and-italo-ethiopian-relief-1935-1936/"
]
] |
|
43d8d5
|
how do you order at starbucks? please give me a step by step answer as in how do you order and the different options. i want to become a person with a super complicated order.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43d8d5/eli5how_do_you_order_at_starbucks_please_give_me/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czhdvgd",
"czhdvvg",
"czhe8ox",
"czhen58",
"czhetw6",
"czhexsr"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
4,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"At the risk of sounding rude: isn't all the information you're looking for on the menu and/or available by asking the staff?",
"\"Hi, can I get a small/medium/large (thing from menu) but can you {detailed adjustments like add caramel, no whipped cream, etc)?\"\n\nIf you don't understand the menu: \"Do you have a coffee that, like, tastes like hazelnut but also is more blended like a milkshake. Like the Frappuccinos? And I'd need it to come in decaf. And I'd like caramel in it.\" \n\nJust say whats in your head. That's it. If they need further clarification, they'll ask.\n\nCashier: \"Do you mean caramel drizzle or caramel syrup?\"\n\nThey're a luxury coffee shop, their job is to give you exactly what you want, because god knows you're not there for the prices. Be as complicated as you want and ignore terms you don't know like \"venti\", just go with what's in your head. They'll get it.",
"So my brother works at starbucks and I asked him his tastiest over complicated drink. I asked for it once and it was good, but got a look from the cashier. \n\nMocha coconut frappuccino with 1 pump of toffeenut syrup, extra coconut flakes to be blended, whole banana blended, and a floating shot. ",
"You *want* a super complicated order? This makes no sense.\n\nOrder a coffee you like. Making it hard on the barista for no reason is a dick move.",
"I've managed to put my \"go-to\" drink together through trial and error.\n\nI usually order a \"Venti Soy Vanilla Latte, 6 pumps of vanilla, Kids Temp, No foam\"\n\nI learned how to phrase it in Starbucks terms because in uni, I had friends who worked at the Starbucks in school, and as I was going through my trial and error phase I would ask them \n\nex. \"I hate when I order a latte and it burns my tongue, I want to drink it right away and not have to wait\" \n\n\"you should ask for kids Temp then, it's not just for kids, some people want to drink their coffee right away, or some people who won't be drinking it for another couple hours ask for 'extra hot' \" \n\nrecently, most Starbucks I've been to have some kind of visual chart showing the layers of what goes into a latte, cappuccino, espresso, etc. so that might help a bit. \n\nfor a normal latte, which is basically espresso shot, with steamed/frothed milk and syrup there are a couple customizations.\n\n1) Size: Tall(?oz), Grande(16oz), Venti(20oz)\n\n2) Type of Milk (Soy, NonFat, Lactose etc)\n\n3) Type of Drink (Latte, Frappucino-frozen,slushdrink. etc)\n\n4) no. of syrup pumps - whatever flavour syrup the latte you asked for (mine is Vanilla)\n\n5) Temperature: kids Temp, warm, extra hot\n\n6) Foam/No Foam/Extra Foam: the foamy white stuff on top of the coffee.\n\n LPT, when they make it with no foam, they fill the cup with coffee to the brim. \n\nHope that helps, if you need to clarify anything try to catch a Starbucks when they're not busy and strike up a conversation with the barista, they're usually very nice and will help you with the lingo. GoodLuck \n\nEdit: format and spacing ",
"I like \"normal\" coffee. I call it a drip, I say the size first. I also mention that I want room for cream. I prefer the dark roast, so I mention that too, I say:\n > \"May I have a grande drip of the dark with room?\"\n\nThough I usually have my own mug so while handing my mug with the lid off and in my hand I say, (and I still want room, but they assume the lid takes up a huge amount of volume but it doesn't)\n > \"I'd like the dark roast please, no room\" \n\nAs for normal items on the menu I just say what I want unless I want to augment them, here's an augmented example:\n > I'd like a grande Caramel Macchiato with two extra shots\n\nIf you're about to get in your car and drive I recommend asking for a stopper, don't ask the person you give the order to, ask the person at the other end that gives you your drink.\n\nI hope this was helpful, let me know if you have any questions, I have lived in the Puget Sound for 25 years which is Starbucks ground zero."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4aq9c9
|
How reliable/accurate is the account that Alexander the Great kept a copy of Homer's Illiad in a gold box once owned by Darius?
|
The Guardian is doing a series of articles on cities through history. In their piece on [Alexandria](_URL_0_), they cite that Alexander the Great, after the battle of Gaugamela/Arbela, obtained a small golden box that was previously the property of Darius III. He used that to keep his copy of the Illiad, which was cited as among Alexander's most treasured possessions.
For some reason this fine detail stuck out in my mind. The Guardian article cites E. Cobham Brewer's 1898 edition of *Dictionary of Phrase and Fable* as its source, while in [this thread](_URL_1_), /u/XenophonTheAthenian cites Plutarch when discussing Alexander's love of Homer.
My question is, how reliable is the account of the gold "casket"? Is there enough evidence of the box, that it's taken as fact, or is it something in the realm of "well maybe," like Pheidippides dying after the Battle of Marathon, or Gaius Gracchus's head being filled with lead?
I apologize if my question seems naive or asks too much in terms of "evidence" from that era. I suppose the better question is really, how reliable is the account of the gold casket, relative to the other historical *things*(for lack of a better term) we know of that era?
Thank you in advance.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4aq9c9/how_reliableaccurate_is_the_account_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d12rn7a"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"I mean, it's in our texts, if that's what you're asking. Plutarch says:\n\n > κιβωτίου δέ τινος αὐτῷ προσενεχθέντος, οὗ πολυτελέστερον οὐδὲν ἐφάνη τοῖς τὰ Δαρείου χρήματα καὶ τὰς ἀποσκευὰς παραλαμβάνουσιν, ἠρώτα τοὺς φίλους ὅ τι δοκοίη μάλιστα τῶν ἀξίων σπουδῆς εἰς αὐτὸ καταθέσθαι: πολλὰ δὲ πολλῶν λεγόντων αὐτὸς ἔφη τὴν Ἰλιάδα φρουρήσειν ἐνταῦθα καταθέμενος.\n\n > > But when a little casket was brought to him, which nothing of the goods of Darius and his baggage seemed more valuable than to those watching over it, he asked his friends what they though was most rightly placed there. And after many of them spoke he said he would place the Iliad there to guard it.\n\nThis occurred, according to Plutarch, some time after the battle of the Issus, which is when Darius' baggage train was famously captured (not at Gaugamela), although Plutarch delays mentioning it for some reason until after Gaza was taken. Strabo mentions the same story:\n\n > φέρεται γοῦν τις διόρθωσις τῆς Ὁμήρου ποιήσεως, ἡ ἐκ τοῦ νάρθηκος λεγομένη, τοῦ Ἀλεξάνδρου μετὰ τῶν περὶ Καλλισθένη καὶ Ἀνάξαρχον ἐπελθόντος καὶ σημειωσαμένου τινά, ἔπειτα καταθέντος εἰς νάρθηκα ὃν ηὗρεν ἐν τῇ Περσικῇ γάζῃ πολυτελῶς κατεσκευασμένον\n\n > > Anyway, it is said that there a recension of Homer, called the 'Recension of the Casket,' which Alexander, and Callisthenes and Anaxarchus, read over and annotated and which was then placed in a richly-wrought casket which he found in the Persian spoils\n\nSo there's at least two textual authorities for it"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/mar/14/story-cities-day-1-alexandria-egypt-history-urbanisation-foundations-modern-world",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3wj8ga/literature_they_say_alexander_the_great_slept/"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
22nbpr
|
if a woman uses birth control that also stops her her period, does it actually stop the body from releasing its monthly egg and if not, what happens to the egg without the period?
|
I tried googling around for an answer but clearly could not find a way of wording that that brought up relevant information.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/22nbpr/if_a_woman_uses_birth_control_that_also_stops_her/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgol3n2"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Most pills (I assume you mean the pill) contain an estrogen and a progestogen, which together suppress these things called 'gonadotropins'. There are two big gonadotropins that the pill is meant to deal with: Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and human Lutenizing Hormone (LH). They both get downregulated by the pill, but have different effects that together stop ovulation. Normally in ovulation, FSH stimulates the growth of a 'follicle' on a woman's ovary that contains an egg cell, which then gets released when an LH surge occurs, popping the follicle and releasing the ovule. Without FSH and LH, the follicle doesn't grow and doesn't pop, so the woman never ovulates. The egg cell stays in the ovary. Hope that helps!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2viwci
|
are unreliable cars unreliable because of cost cutting measures or because manufacturers can't do better?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2viwci/eli5are_unreliable_cars_unreliable_because_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"coi1aca"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Depends on what era you're talking about. In the 80s American cars were horribly built, because Ford, GM and Chrystler didn't care. They were confident in their market position, so they didn't focus on quality control, the defects per car rate was very high.\n\nIn the 90s defects per car declined because of automated manufacturing, and better focus on quality control. Now there are very few defects per car, most of the problems with cars are with cost cutting, using cheaper materials or intentionally ignoring design flaws to save money, such as the GM ignition issue, or the Toyota floor mats"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
560zcz
|
Would the bombs dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki been visible from space?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/560zcz/would_the_bombs_dropped_in_hiroshima_and_nagasaki/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8fnwuh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on what you mean by visible and what you mean by space. If you mean low earth orbit, then they would be easily visible. It would appear as a bright flash (even at 200 or so km, it would still be bright enough to be uncomfortable, maybe even dangerous). You would then see a cloud form around the site of the detonation. The size of the mushroom cloud would be a couple Kilometers, so it would be visible, but not easily so.\n\nFrom somewhere like the moon, the flash would still be visible. A few years back, a small meteor hit the moon with the energy of around 5 tons of TNT, less than 1/3000 the energy of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. This was visible from the earth without a telescope. It was about as bright as a 4th magnitude star, putting it as visible from somewhere with decently dark skies. This means that it would be very clearly visible. If my back of the envelope math is correct (and I'm remembering the physics correctly) this would be something around magnitude -4.5, which would be pretty clearly visible, if on the night side, similar brightness to a bright planet. I'm not sure how visible it would be considering that the bomb was dropped during the day so it would be against the brightness of the Earth. Finally, a significant portion of the energy of a nuclear bomb is released as x-ray, ultra violet, and gamma rays, which are invisible. The X-rays and Gamma rays are absorbed by the atmosphere, heating it, so they would still contribute to the visible brightness.\n\nIn short, if you are close enough to the Earth to be in a stable orbit, you would probably be able to see the explosion. If you're in low orbit, the mushroom cloud would probably be visible.\n\nAlso, this question might be better suited to /r/askscience. While it's a historical event, this is hypothetical and uses scientific calculations, rather than historical accounts or evidence."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
mwn2z
|
Can other animals become more social if they are domesticated over time?
|
We know that dogs have evolved from wolves over time due to interaction with humans and domestication. I was wondering, what if we domesticated other mammals over hundreds of years like we have with dogs? Not just interact with them, but have them live with us like man's best friend. Would they become more social and interactive? Would we notice more "feelings" in them (I definitely can tell when my dog is happy/sad/etc, but I can't tell when other animals are)? If so, would this come from our breeding techniques on selecting the more social, less wild-like, animals?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/mwn2z/can_other_animals_become_more_social_if_they_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c34fg8w",
"c34fg8w"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
" > I was wondering, what if we domesticated other mammals over hundreds of years like we have with dogs?\n\nSome russians had the same idea 50 years ago. They were able to domesticate wild silver foxes fairly easily in a very short amount of time. \n\n[Here is a 10 minute segment from BBC Horizons describing the experiment](_URL_0_)\n\nDomestication through artificial selection can occur very quickly in plants and animals if you know what to look for and are rigorous in your selection. ",
" > I was wondering, what if we domesticated other mammals over hundreds of years like we have with dogs?\n\nSome russians had the same idea 50 years ago. They were able to domesticate wild silver foxes fairly easily in a very short amount of time. \n\n[Here is a 10 minute segment from BBC Horizons describing the experiment](_URL_0_)\n\nDomestication through artificial selection can occur very quickly in plants and animals if you know what to look for and are rigorous in your selection. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbcwDXhugjw"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbcwDXhugjw"
]
] |
|
2vlt1p
|
how do the new quantum equations suggest to scientists that the big bang didn't happen the way we thought it did and that the universe is infinitely old?
|
EDIT: If correct, how does this change our understanding of "the early universe" - the cosmic microwave background radiation, the disassociation of the forces of nature, the synthesis of particles, etc.?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vlt1p/eli5_how_do_the_new_quantum_equations_suggest_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cojodof"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because obscure scientists wanted to get famous and click bait \"news\" sites will pick up on contrarian papers and completely misrepresent them or blow their claims out of proportion because science journalism is almost always awful even in reputable newspapers, let alone in the New Media.\n\nThe short answer is: They don't change a damn thing without more evidence and peer review."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2vgki2
|
how does tsa precheck actually make sure people aren't smuggling bad things through security?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vgki2/eli5_how_does_tsa_precheck_actually_make_sure/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cohkg0i",
"cohksc0"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They still check you out, in most airports I see its a quicker check and only uses a metal detector instead of a back-scatter scanner.\n\nThese are also normally people that fly often and are considered low risk. ",
"The pre-check program is only for select individuals who are considered low-risk, extremely frequent fliers and certain government employees and so on. Its not impossible that someone with negative goals could spend the time building up this reputation, but it's unlikely, and not an efficient plan.\n\nMost importantly, they are still subjected to screening, just an expedited version. Even if you are precheck approved you can still, at random, be subjected to a full screening, and their bags and person still go under enough scrutiny that smuggling contraband on-board would be difficult."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3syet3
|
how are people who create and build a company be fired? for example, how does someone like steve jobs get fired from apple if it's his company?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3syet3/eli5_how_are_people_who_create_and_build_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx1h14b",
"cx1henh",
"cx1ilf5"
],
"score": [
13,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It wasn't his company. By the time he left, it had gone public: it was owned by investors, and the Board of Directors (elected by shareholders) were in charge (this is common when a company grows; it gives the company lots of cash in exchange for shareholders getting control over it). Jobs was chairman of the board, but the CEO at the time convinced the other members that his plan was better than Jobs's plan and Jobs was put in a position which was designed to get him to resign from the board.",
"That's the nature of taking a company public. You give up control in return for cash. If you want to maintain complete control, then you should not take the company public.\n\nAlso, it's worth nothing that Steve Jobs never owned Apple in it's entirety. When it went public in 1980 Jobs and Steve Wozniak held the bulk of the shares, with a small percentage held by some early investors and employees.",
"I work for a small, privately held manufacturing company. When they started, John mortgaged his house and used that cash to buy machines and pay employees to make his product. Our product is great, and sales have been increasing dramatically over the past few years, and most of our customers are really happy with our service, so they've stopped buying from our competitors. But it has gotten to the point that, when a customer orders a part, they will have to wait 4-5 weeks before we can get it to them. That's unacceptable in this industry, so we need way more machines, which are really expensive, in order to keep our customers happy, or even think about expanding to new ones.\n\n\nJohn's out of cash, so he looks for investors. For a bank, that's WAY too risky. They're not going to give us $200,000 and just collect a few % interest, because their chance of losing the investment is reasonably high, and the just making the interest payments would likely cripple us. So, we look to venture capitalists. These capitalists say, \"OK, your business is currently worth $100,000. If we get together and give you $200,000, and then we will own 2/3 of your business. We don't necessarily need to pay them a monthly interest or anything, but now if the investment works, and the company triples in value over the next 10 years, their investment is now worth $600,000. That might be worth the risk. \n\n\nSince they own 2/3 of the company, they get to make the big decisions, like who's in charge. They would typically leave John running the show, since he built this from the ground up, but if it looks like he's not maximizing profits, they can call a meeting, and decide that John's no longer in charge. All he can do is watch as the company that he has been running for the past 20 years, probably bears his name, and probably employs a lot of his family, is run by somebody else. Also, due to the non-compete clause in his contract, he's probably not allowed to work for any other company in the industry, or start his own new company, for a set number of years. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6aggz9
|
Since the gravitational force becomes ever smaller as a particle gets farther away from another body of mass, does this gravitational pull become zero at some point or does it become smaller and smaller, never reaching zero?
|
From the equations, it seems gravity never becomes a plain zero, therefore all particles are under gravitational influence of all other particles in the universe (even though it is only infinitesimal), but this observation seems weird to me.
Anyway, I feel the answer might be attached to wether one considers the universe as infinite or finite.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6aggz9/since_the_gravitational_force_becomes_ever/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhefzaz"
],
"score": [
76
],
"text": [
"In pre-relativistic gravity, the gravitational field due to a single point mass is non-zero everywhere the field is defined. So the gravitational force on some test mess is never zero.\n\nHowever, for an extended gravitating mass, there is *always* at least one point where the gravitational field is exactly **0**. Precisely, if ϱ(**r**) is some mass distribution with ϱ continuous and compactly supported (the latter means that ϱ = 0 for |**r**| > *R* for some *R*), then there exists at least one point **r***_0_* where **g**(**r***_0_*) = **0**. For the case where ϱ is spherically symmetric, one such point is **r** = **0** (e.g., the center of a spherically symmetric planet).\n\nIn general relativity, there is no such thing as the gravitational field and thus no such thing as the gravitational potential. There are only some inexact analogues (e.g., Christoffel symbols and metric tensor components, respectively). It's always possible in some frame to set up coordinates in such a way that a particular point the metric tensor components are the same as those of the flat Minkowski metric and the Christoffel symbols vanish at that point. So in that sense, the \"gravitational field\" is zero. This can even be done so that a free-falling observer always observes \"zero gravitational field\" along his worldline. This is just a locally inertial frame.\n\nSo what does that mean for the latter part of your question? Your argument goes something along the following lines. \"The gravitational force between two particles is never zero. So if the universe is infinite, how is it also expanding? If the universe is finite, how can it expand it forever?\" This reasoning erroneously mixes concepts from both pre-relativistic gravity and general relativity, so, of course, there is a contradiction. The two theories are already known not to be compatible anyway. The point is that there really is no good way to explain why the equations of GR give us an expanding universe.\n\nIf the universe is filled with some homogeneous matter field, then in pre-relativistic gravity, there is actually no solution to the Poisson equation. If you want to be very technical, I suppose the gravitational field would actually be **0** everywhere because if we assume the mass distribution is fixed, then any test mass will feel no force. Any force it feels in any particular direction is canceled by an equal force in the opposite direction. The problem with this reasoning is that the mass distribution is *not* fixed. Even in Newtonian gravity, the mass distribution will interact with itself. So the problem of a space filled homogeneously with matter is ill-defined in Newtonian gravity.\n\nIn GR, however, a homogeneous matter field *does* lead to a well-defined problem. The solution is the well-studied FLRW mertic. In fact, the prediction of metric expansion is very surprising since there is no analagous problem in Newtonian gravity, or, at best, the solution is very unstable. But, again, there's no reason to have expected the relativistic problem to have anything whatsoever to do with the ill-defined problem in Newtonian gravity."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2fjv4d
|
poetic meter and rhyme scheme.
|
I want to be the next.. eh.. supreme master romantic/deep poet-superhero. But I dont understand poems. :(
Help me in writing my first poem.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fjv4d/eli5_poetic_meter_and_rhyme_scheme/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck9zt3s",
"cka2m25"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"...blink. \"Rome was not built in a day.\" Rhyme schemes differ and aren't actually required, although you might check out Shakespeare's sonnets. For meter, you could start with old Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, who had a way with meter that is extremely insistent. Robert Frost? Percy Bysshe Shelley? \"Ozymandias\" is a fine old classic, and brief enough.\n\nYou must study, young padawan, and practice your skills.",
"Particularly formatted poems can be difficult at first, but when you understand the basics, you can work toward the more difficult formats. I'll just go ahead and break down each of your inquiries. This is my first explaining post, bear with me.\n\n\n**1. Rhyme Scheme**\n\nRhyme schemes can vary from the simplest (ABAB) to more challenging tasks such as sonnets or sestinas where you get stuff that looks like (ABCDEF FAEBDC CFDABE ECBFAD DEACFB BDFECA). Don't freak out. When you see rhyme schemes represented by such letters, it *typically* means that a letter stands for a certain end-rhyme for the end of each line and all the same-letters following adhere to said rhyme. \n\nIn a simple ABAB, the A's would rhyme with one another, and the B's would rhyme with one another.\n\n* Example: An orange *cat* / Lives in my *house* / He's really *fat* / Since he ate *mouse*\n\nHowever, while I said the lettering of rhyme scheme *typically* indicates a literal rhyme, it can *also* indicate exact words being repeated. This is the case of the sestina mentioned above. The 'rhyme scheme' as it were in a sestina is not about putting 'spoon' and 'moon' together when you need an 'A' end; it means that you actually use the same word, 'spoon,' every time you need an 'A' end.\n\nStill with me? In most cases, if you understand this, you can use this basic knowledge and adjust for the particular kind of poem you are attempting to create. \n\n\n**2. Poetic meter**\n\nThe challenge with formatted poetry comes with balancing rhyme scheme and poetic meter together. But, again, if you understand the basics, you can practice with simple things and work your way up. Meter basically refers to the rhythm the poem makes using its sounds. This can be developed through the syllables of the words used, and how 'long' or 'short' they sound (stressed or unstressed). I like to think of meter in beats. A popular example can be seen in the poem, \"A Visit from St. Nicholas.\"\n\n* Example: 'Twas the night before Christmas when all through the house\n\nReading that, you most likely felt the rise and fall, the emphasis of the beats when you hit them. \n\n* Example 2: 'Twas the **night** before **Christ**mas when **all** through the **house**\n\n* Example 3: You should be able to sense the general \"da da DUM da da DUM da da DUM da da DUM\" rhythm of the phrase, in that the 'DUM' is the beat, and the 'da da' are on the off-beats. \n\nTo connect back to the syllables, the 'DUM' is a stressed syllable, and the 'da' is an unstressed syllable.\n\nThere are many different kinds of meters, again, some more difficult than others, and it can take getting used to. If you understand the pattern requirements for a particular kind of poem, you can use this basic knowledge of meter to accomplish what you want. Understand that meter is like a rhythm, and the syllables help move to the beat. \n\n\n\nUltimately, that's the basis for what you need to know to create structured poems. There's a lot of combinations and variations, but it really just takes practice. Try some simpler poetic forms like limerick or cinquain poems and work your way toward more complicated formats like sestinas or sonnets. Then you can decide for yourself which forms you prefer. If you break it down, it won't be as daunting. Just practice! As with everything, practice!\n\n\n**Endnote**\n\nAlso, I realize I just elaborated on rhyme scheme and meter here, but don't be afraid of free verse poetry either! It has no rules, and anything goes. You can write something in the shape of a [bird](_URL_1_) and have it be a poem. You can write a few simple, un-rhyming stanzas about a [red wheelbarrow](_URL_0_) and have it be a wonderfully whimsical, and much-beloved poem. All that to say: the sky's the limit when it comes to poetry."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://tootyandlolly.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/98860592.png",
"http://parthdoshi.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/the-bird.jpg"
]
] |
|
aul4fk
|
Why does wind whistle when it blows through objects like doors, trees etc?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/aul4fk/why_does_wind_whistle_when_it_blows_through/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eh95408",
"eh9b4i7",
"eh9bw2q",
"eha9fhz"
],
"score": [
767,
6,
79,
2
],
"text": [
"Wind howls when it’s broken up from passing through or around objects, such as trees. The gust of air will split up to move around the tree and then comes back together on the other side. Due to factors such as the surface of the tree and the air speed, one side of the wind is going to be stronger than the other when the currents rejoin. The mixing of the two currents causes vibrations in the air, which produce that ghostly howling noise that gives us the creeps.",
"Von Kármán vortices that form when laminar flow passes a roughly cylindrical object (such as a twig). The characteristic frequency is (roughly, there are far more exact equations)\n\nf = (1/5)(v[m/s]/d[m])\n\nThe vortices range in size and frequency from the small and audible to [global and visible](_URL_0_).\n\n",
"It's due to a concept known as [vortex shedding](_URL_0_). In short, it's a fluid dynamics effect that can happen within a range of Reynolds numbers when a viscous fluid flows around a disturbance. The sound you hear is related to the frequency of the vortices being shed. ~~It's also how all wind instruments work~~ (partially true). You can see slower examples of vortex shedding where water flows around a rock or behind a slow boat.",
"You know how a stick makes a sound when you swing it hard enough through the air?\n\nWhenever Air hits an edge that edge starts to vibrate, this vibration is what you hear, you're ear basically works like a drum, only in reverse.\n\nThats the same principle as with a flute, or as you brought up, wind whistling.\n\nThis also scales quite a bit as you can see with this bridge here: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Heard_Island_Karman_vortex_street.jpg"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_shedding"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mclp9QmCGs"
]
] |
||
p9bwy
|
If water (or any liquid) is not compressible, why does water pressure exist?
|
The deeper you go the more pressure. So animals not adapted to the depth are eventually crushed. Is this because it's _slightly_ compressible, or is there some other reason?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/p9bwy/if_water_or_any_liquid_is_not_compressible_why/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3nj2zi",
"c3nj3ua",
"c3nj5f7"
],
"score": [
13,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"All matter is compressible; liquids are just more resistant to compression because they have a high [bulk modulus](_URL_0_). Water's bulk modulus is 10000 times higher than air's, but still significantly less than most solids'.",
"compressible != pressure.\n\npressure = density . gravity constant . height\n\ncompressible = change of density due to pressure.\n\nSo the deeper you go, the more pressure, but the density of water will remain the same. As opposed to air, for example, which is why the air pressure is exponential with respect to height, and not linear as is the case in water.",
"The 'pressure' felt at depths it's a result of the weight of the water above the object in question. \n\nThe reason the animal would be crushed when coming from sea level is that it would have air pockets (more or less) that would compress under the weight, thus killing it (or us), unless you had a way to counteract the force of the water"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulk_modulus"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
317z6s
|
How does the brain react to a limb being cut off? How would the nerves react if you tried moving whatever was left?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/317z6s/how_does_the_brain_react_to_a_limb_being_cut_off/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cq0mt6n"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This is actually fairly well studied. You should check out the wiki page for [phantom limb](_URL_2_). If suddenly your left forearm was severed (at the elbow) from your body the sequelae of events would go something like this:\n\n1. Pain; lots of it.\n2. The nerve projections from the sensory neurons in your ([left forearm](_URL_0_)) to your spinal cord would die -- and the motor neurons projecting from your spinal cord to your left forearm would also likely die (some may survive long enough to make viable connections with cells on your upper-arm). \n3. The sensory neurons in your spine that were once receiving input from your left forearm will no longer be stimulated; in turn, the axons of those neurons that go to your [brain](_URL_3_) will fall silent. \n4. The cortical neurons responsible for processing somatosensory information regarding your forearm will stop being stimulated (somatosensory [homunculus](_URL_1_) < -- definitely do not skip).\n5. Since neurons thrive on stimulation, the dendrites of your forearm somatosensory neurons will seek out new inputs. \n\nWhere do you think those neurons are going to look first, for new input?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://i.imgur.com/fE9Sw4C.gif",
"http://i.imgur.com/fXHEzo6.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_limb",
"http://i.imgur.com/NwgVdU8.jpg"
]
] |
||
5sp8l0
|
What are these ancient artifacts and what were they used for?
|
I came across the following Facebook post claiming that these artifacts are examples of ancient kettlebells
_URL_0_
This seemed like a dubious claim to me so I set about trying to get information about what they actually are and what they were used for, but didn't have a whole lot of luck. Based on my googling, the top two look to be Jiroft Stones which were apparently used for some kind of ceremonial purpose but I couldn't find any specifics. The bottom right is obviously a modern kettlebell so we can discount that, but what are the other three? Where are they from and what were they used for? Are they some kind of ancient exercise equipment like Facebook says or something else?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5sp8l0/what_are_these_ancient_artifacts_and_what_were/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddhef74"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Well, I've seen one of them on [here](_URL_0_), and is actually either a coin or a small weight used as a standard to weight other things against. Given that it appears to weigh around 250g, it's hard to believe that it was used as a kettlebell. \n\nI have no idea about the others... "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/S4xy7Ns.jpg"
] |
[
[
"http://www.wenwu.gov.cn/2013ywb/contents/759/32410.html"
]
] |
|
5n9f07
|
how is the car heating up when the fans are running but the a/c isn't on?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5n9f07/eli5how_is_the_car_heating_up_when_the_fans_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dc9pzy7",
"dc9r44d"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The fans blow air into the car, that air is heated by heat coming off the engine while it runs.",
"The AC in your car is only for cold air, when you turn AC on, it releases a small amount of gas that's used to cool the air, try put your thermostat on low without AC on and compare it to when AC is on, probably best to try in summer or when it's warmer because the air coming in would be cold anyway during winter"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2e9frp
|
what is the white stream seen coming from the back of airplanes?
|
Couple guys started discussing this at work and we could not come up with a conclusion
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e9frp/eli5_what_is_the_white_stream_seen_coming_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjxblz1"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"There are two or three kinds of contrails.\n\nOne kind is from wingtip vortices (I think /u/ThatsPower's father was talking about these). At the tip of any wing, the high pressure air underneath swirls around to the low pressure region above, and as the plain flies along this leaves a (sometimes pretty intense) tubular vortex behind it. The pressure at the center of a vortex is lower than the surrounding air, so if the plane is flying through moist air that's just on the edge of cloud formation, the water vapor in that low-pressure region condenses out into fog and you get a pair of contrails coming off the wingtips. In some cases, [even the normal low-pressure area over the wing is enough to produce condensation](_URL_1_). [Here's a nice photo](_URL_2_) showing wingtip vortices as well as the far-field vortex wake of an airliner. Here's [a kind of crazy shot](_URL_0_) showing a bunch of low-pressure regions made visible around a transsonic jet by condensation.\n\nAnother kind is engine exhaust. Jet exhaust has a bunch of water vapor in it (burning a hydrocarbon fuel produces CO2 and water), and if the temperature/humidity is right, this can condense out into water droplets or ice crystals. This is what /u/barc0de is talking about.\n\nISTR there's a third phenomenon where the airplane can cause nucleation of visible vapor if it flies through saturated air, but I think that's a rare case."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cX5tHgBeKu0/U3UtXrXiIdI/AAAAAAAABio/RGjxmgAuv0I/s1600/F-22_Prandtl-Glauert_condensation.jpg",
"https://www.flickr.com/photos/23032926@N05/6777607687",
"http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-pPSICV3V5dM/T2pJ_UyKizI/AAAAAAABq-U/Bv45DkcP-Ws/j26.jpg"
]
] |
|
1wbuur
|
Why did Robert E. Lee surrender the civil war and not Jefferson Davis?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1wbuur/why_did_robert_e_lee_surrender_the_civil_war_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf0k18r"
],
"score": [
20
],
"text": [
"Well... he didn't. It is a common misconception that Lee's surrender was the end of the war, but it really wasn't. He surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia, and not much else. As the flagship Confederate Army, it was a crippling blow to the Southern cause, but it wasn't exactly the end of the war. Rather it was the catalyst for the rapid collapse of Confederate forces in other theaters. Johnston wouldn't surrender for two more weeks, and the last major Confederate force were the men under Stand Watie, in late June.\n\n[I admit that I didn't know off hand when Davis officially dissolved the Confederacy, but it appears to have happened almost a month after Lee's surrender, following a Cabinet meeting held on May 5th. So while he never officially surrendered the Confederacy, he did oversee its official end.](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusion_of_the_American_Civil_War#Capture_of_President_Davis_.28May_10.29"
]
] |
||
1j0kye
|
When driving at night, when I look in my rearview mirror I can see 2 reflections of my back window above and below my actual window, how are these forming?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1j0kye/when_driving_at_night_when_i_look_in_my_rearview/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb9yuxs"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Light is reflecting off of two surfaces on your rear view mirror. Rear view mirrors are wedge-shaped with a reflective surface behind a piece of glass. Most of the light passes through the glass and gets reflected back by the reflective surface. A small amount of light, however, gets reflected by the surface of the glass. By changing the position of the mirror you can see or one reflection or another. That's useful for when someone is driving behind you and their lights get reflected by the mirror into your eyes. You can reduce the glare by changing to the reflection that is putting out less light so you don't get blinded (at least not blinded as badly)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1rfggp
|
How can some gasses have color?
|
I am aware that things don't "have" color, they simply reflect some light, and depending on which wavelength is reflected the more, you get one color or another.
But what am I asking is, how can (for example) chlorine be yellowish?
Does it follow this principle too, thus it absorbs most light except yellow? If so, why are there no black gasses? (aka they absorb all light)
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1rfggp/how_can_some_gasses_have_color/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdmsy9a"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"In this case, it's better to think of color as a result of light absorption and emission, rather than reflection. When light hits a gas, it can be absorbed by various processes. Visible light just happens to be the right energy to excite the electrons bound to atomic nuclei in some molecules, such as those making up chlorine gas. These excited electrons, which have been given energy by a photon, then relax to their original energies, giving off new photons of a particular wavelength (and therefore color).\n\nElectrons are unusual in that, due to quantum effects, they can have only certain discrete energies. This is determined by the structure and composition of the atom, and its interactions with other nearby atoms. Gasses that are not colored do not have electron excitation mechanisms of the correct energy to be excited by visible light, then give off light of a specific color.\n\nIf a gas were black, it would have to absorb most incoming photons, then give off accumulated energy as something other than visible light, such as photons of a wavelength that cannot be observed by the human eye. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1i76cd
|
Why do some fabrics change shades when rubbed in certain directions?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1i76cd/why_do_some_fabrics_change_shades_when_rubbed_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb1mlgy"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Nap : _URL_1_ And : _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nap_(textile)",
"http://sewing.about.com/od/sewingglossaryko/g/Nap.htm"
]
] |
||
533vgq
|
why does your chest feel 'heavy' for a few seconds after swigging a strong alcohol?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/533vgq/eli5_why_does_your_chest_feel_heavy_for_a_few/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7pxro1"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Alcohol irritates your stomach. Your stomach doesn't have many direct \"pain receptor\" nerve endings, and in any case you can't see or otherwise directly sense your stomach so it's hard for your brain to draw a direct link from discomfort in your stomach to a direct sense of pain in that area of your body (contrast that against, say, burning your hand; your hand is full of nerve endings, you know that your hand was just over a hot stove, you can look and see your hand over the burner, and you can draw a direct causal link from pulling your hand away from the burner and the pain sensation changing, so it's easier to \"peg\" the sensation to the hand specifically and to recognize it as pain). \n\nWhen you irritate your stomach by swigging alcohol your body knows something is kind of amiss, and it wants to bring that to your attention, and nerves fire. But the relative lack of pain receptors and the inability to sense what's going on through other means makes it hard for your brain to present that to you in a way that makes intuitive sense, so it just gives you a report that says something like \"Hey! There's something happening in your torso region that's affecting stuff somehow! It's vaguely unpleasant!\"\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1bmghv
|
[etymology] What is the process a researcher goes through to uncover the origin of a phrase?
|
While reading a [cynical article](_URL_1_) on the origins of a bunch of language in the tech world, I flipped over to my facebook tab and an ad caught my eye:
> Why not have it all?
> [image of a young lady looking off into space and aspiring to great things]
> _URL_0_
> Become a State Farm® agent. With so many unknowns in life, your career shouldn’t be one.
The juxtaposition of that article and that phrase in the ad "Why not have it all?" got me thinking about conspiracy theories on whether the idea of women "having it all" could've been all along just a marketing push to channel the energy of the feminist movement into more uncertainty and inadequacy that could be used to drive people to buy stuff (or in this case apply for a job).
So if I wanted to dig back into the history of the phrase and idea of "women having it all" and come up with a fairly rigorous historical argument about it, what are some ways I should go about it?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1bmghv/etymology_what_is_the_process_a_researcher_goes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c988099"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This is maybe more of a philological question. I'm a classical philologist, so I will bite. \n\nLooking into the usage of a word or phrase starts from the vaguest point and narrows down, usually. So you have your phrase \"have it all\" specifically with related to women, and with an ironic tone to it. First you will want to find out if this is an idiomatic phrase that a dictionary might stock. Big fat huge research dictionaries give a lot of useful etymological information, although I'd bet not so helpful with phrases like this. You might want to consult online databases, and since this is a pop culture phrase you might want to sift through Google results for \"have it all\"+women or \"have it all\"+women+can't (ugh). Philology is often about sifting through pages and pages of dry material.\n\nYou might find that a lot of the material references one particular reference point (I don't know, the article that the Atlantic ran a few months ago). Maybe then there's sort of a blank time for uses of \"women\" \"have it all\". But maybe that reference point article itself references an essay written in 1958, and before this you can't find anything, or what you do find refers to, for instance, men who are trying to be successful in their own right and also follow their fathers' examples. So the context is totally different when that 1958 essay uses the phrase, and when the Atlantic picks it up in 2012 that's where you find an explosion of \"women can't have it all\" or \"women can have it all\".\n\nThis is all hypothetical of course! If you were a classical philologist you would spend a weekend locked in a library searching the indices of inscription volumes to see if anyone in North Africa in the 2nd century BCE ever left the phrase \"she had it all\" on a tombstone."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"statefarm.com",
"http://thebaffler.com/past/the_meme_hustler"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
2yuyyz
|
Hypothetically speaking, if a planet contains 100% liquid water at a room temperature. What its core going to be like?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2yuyyz/hypothetically_speaking_if_a_planet_contains_100/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpddbey",
"cpdkz8i"
],
"score": [
12,
4
],
"text": [
"When you compres water, you get ice. However, there are several different types of ice all of which exist at some unique combination of temperature/pressure. The one we get forming naturally on Earth is Ice Ih. (h should be subscripted but don't know how). Some of the more exotic states can exist at significantly hotter than room temperature but are only formed under extreme pressure. This is my bet for your planet's core.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Hypothetically, this planet must be reasonably small, if it is too big the water will form ice and if it is even bigger fusion will start occurring.\nSo if we have a small enough planet it would simply be a water blob."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice#Phases"
],
[]
] |
||
c5o66m
|
generally, how do car accidents kill people?
|
I'm assuming most of them has to do with neck/spine injuries, right?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c5o66m/eli5_generally_how_do_car_accidents_kill_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"es2x0c6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Depending on where the victim is...\n\nA pedestrian struck by a car is either killed through internal bleeding or head trauma generally.\n\nA driver or passenger usually either does from head trauma, internal bleeding, the severing of the spinal column resulting in brain suffocation, or if metal or glass is involved external blood loss or damage to the brain would do it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
8vg2b9
|
Can we control or predict the direction of an emitted photon?
|
That is to say, can we emit a single photon from a emission source and control its direction of emission? My understanding of the two-slit experiment and the concept of how a diffraction pattern can emerge even while emitting photons one at a time is that the diffraction pattern emerges due to it being the probability of any one photon impacting the senor at that location. More probable impact locations represent the maxima and improbable locations represent the minima.
Is it possible to emit a photon with such a specific direction such at we could predict it's impact point?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/8vg2b9/can_we_control_or_predict_the_direction_of_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e1nlpqa",
"e1ny6hw",
"e1ojd3e"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
9
],
"text": [
"In a laser you have [stimulated emission](_URL_0_) where a \"stimulated\" photon is produced that is basically identical in all ways, including direction of motion, as the original \"stimulating\" photon.\n\n > My understanding of the two-slit experiment and the concept of how a diffraction pattern can emerge even while emitting photons one at a time is that the diffraction pattern emerges due to it being the probability of any one photon impacting the senor at that location. More probable impact locations represent the maxima and improbable locations represent the minima.\n\nYes, this is correct except for one thing: the big \"wtf?!\" aspect of it all isn't that you get a diffraction pattern but rather an *interference* pattern in a two-slit set-up even if only one photon is going through at a time.\n\nAs for double slit experiments you could have something like a collimated light beam with a well chosen focal length, like a laser or light through a lens and you just crank down the intensity to the point where you get, on average, less than one photon per some unit of time. Though, collimation or control of direction isn't really necessary. You could just as easily have spherical emission and just have a slit that picks out one direction of emission. \n\n > Is it possible to emit a photon with such a specific direction such at we could predict it's impact point?\n\nNo. This is essentially the [Mott problem](_URL_2_). The photon wavefunction is a diffuse, distributed objects and doesn't look at all like a particle trajectory. It looks something like a wave. However, at measurement a particle-like trajectory is picked out. But if you repeat the identical experiment over and over again, it will not be the *same* trajectory, but rather will be randomly drawn from a statistical distribution which ends up being that quantum wavefunction (or technically the square of the quantum wavefunction).\n\nOne might then think, \"well, maybe the set-up wasn't *really* identical and there were some hidden variables we just didn't know about that made the experiment give different results each time\", but it turns out that can't be true. Or at least if it is true, that [\"hidden variable theory\"](_URL_1_) is, what is called, \"non-local\" which is in some sense equally as unpalatable.",
" > Is it possible to emit a photon with such a specific direction such at we could predict it's impact point?\n\nThere is always some uncertainty. Apart from that: Sure. That's how individual photons are shot on double slits, for example.",
"Most light sources do not have much of a preferential direction by themselves. However, you can get preferential emission in certain directions by putting them in [optical cavities](_URL_0_). An optical cavity is a specific arrangement of mirrors and other optical elements in which only some light waves can actually exist, other light waves are forbidden from entering the cavity or being generated inside it. By tailoring the cavity to only allow the existence of light moving along the primary axis you can restrict all light emitted to two exceptionally narrow cones along the primary axis of the cavity. If you then use an almost perfectly reflective mirror on one end of the cavity and a partially transparent mirror on the other, all photons are emitted in an extremely narrow cone going in only one direction. This is equally true for single photons as it is for a large number of them. This is of course not 100 & #37; perfect, there are always losses due to scattering and no cavity is 100 & #37; selective, but you can get upwards of 99.9 & #37;\n\nIn fact, you are probably very familiar with a light source that works in this way, because this is how lasers are typically designed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulated_emission",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mott_problem"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_cavity"
]
] |
|
34qp2d
|
coffee on the sand
|
Found this [video](_URL_0_) on /r/streeteats, could someone please explain how it works?
***
[
Original thread.](_URL_1_)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34qp2d/eli5_coffee_on_the_sand/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqx57lq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Looks like a wok full of sand. The sand is heated over a fire, and the coffee pot is placed in the sand to heat the coffee.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXPZW8B93S0",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/streeteats/comments/34pmrv/coffee_on_the_sand_xpist_rvideos/"
] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_coffee#Equipment"
]
] |
|
aflbc0
|
what happens inside a venus flytrap after a bug gets trapped in it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aflbc0/eli5_what_happens_inside_a_venus_flytrap_after_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"edzi2b3"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The plant excretes chemicals that digest the bug and then the plant absorbs it. Very similar to what happens when you eat a bug. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
8xm898
|
why does it sound likes it’s easier to get pregnant when you are young.
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8xm898/eli5_why_does_it_sound_likes_its_easier_to_get/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e242vj6",
"e244meb"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"Your hormones change/decrease\n\nYour ovaries don't produce an egg every time you ovulate\n\nMen's sperm loses motility- meaning they slow down \n\nYour uterus lining doesn't support an egg attaching to it as well as it did when you were younger\n\nYour vagina and cervix atrophy\n\nLess sex overall when you age",
"Statistics.\n\nTeenagers, as a general rule, don't want to get pregnant. They are also hormonal, impulsive, and often lack access to birth control or education on how to use it. When they get pregnant, it's *usually* by accident.\n\nAdults, on the other hand, are less impulsive, have better access to birth control etc, and are generally in a better place to deal with a baby overall, so even if a pregnancy was unplanned, you don't often hear about it.\n\nYou hardly ever hear of teenagers failing to conceive because very, very few teenagers are actively trying to conceive. Adults, on the other hand, often want to have babies, and when that doesn't work, it becomes an issue to talk about."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
ezdd9p
|
what happens when you buy a put option or sell a call option?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ezdd9p/eli5_what_happens_when_you_buy_a_put_option_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fgmj9ym",
"fgmjr98",
"fgmlyr0"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A put option gives you the right to sell a stock by a specific date at a specific price per share. It can be useful if the stock is volatile and may drop in price. The put option gives you a guaranteed buy at a set price, should you choose to exercise it. The call option is the opposite. It give you the right to buy a certain stock, at a set price, by a certain date.",
"Call options - right to buy a stock at a specific price on or before a specific date\n\nPut option - right to sell a stock at a specific price on or before a specific date.\n\n\"Buying\" an option - purchasing a call or put option from another party\n\n\"Selling\" an option - selling a call or put option from another party.\n\nSo, if you buy a put option from me, that means that you have the right to sell me a specific share of stock at a specific price on or before a specific date and I **must** buy it from you if you choose to sell (called exercising the option). If you sell a call option to me, that means that I have the right to buy a specific share of stock from you at a specific price on or before a specific date and you **must** sell it to me if I choose to buy.",
"It gives you the right to buy or sell a stock by a later specified date. Options are bought and sold with an interest in 100 shares, but I'm only going to use one for simplicity.\n\nSo if you buy a call option while their stock is at 100 dollars a share, and by the time the option expires, the stock is at 110 dollars a share, then you're allowed to purchase that at the price agreed when you bought the call option, and now you own a 110 dollar share but only paid 100, plus whatever the cost was to take the option. So if you bought the call option at 1 dollar per share, you would gain 9 dollars here immediately.\n\nIn the event the price went down, and you choose not to buy it, since why would you?, then you lose your dollar that you spent buying the option.\n\n This helps mitigate some risk to you, so if you were POSITIVE a stock will go up, then you would want to buy as much as you can. But you're not dumb and know that there isn't gaurantees like that in trading. So you would invest a comparatively small amount today and that will give you the right to later buy it when it does go up at the price you agreed to, called the strike price, or to pass if it drops.\n\nA put option is the opposite. So if you buy a put option, you'll also have a strike price, and it will give you the right to sell those stocks at the higher strike price, if they fall below that, to whomever the contract is with.\n\nGenerally you would buy put options for stocks you already own, and think will decline, whereas call options are normally stocks you are interested in, but want to see if they go up before investing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
x79yf
|
Why does the Dutch language not have any significant legacy in former Dutch possessions beyond Afrikaans in South Africa?
|
English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese all remain widely spoken in former possessions of European empires, but the Dutch despite ruling parts of India, South America, Africa, and Indonesia for centuries left little of their language behind. Why this huge discrepancy?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/x79yf/why_does_the_dutch_language_not_have_any/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5jt2y0",
"c5jt5v5",
"c5jw9s0",
"c5jy0b3",
"c5jyvr3",
"c5k3vzp"
],
"score": [
23,
11,
9,
29,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Dutch is still spoken as main language in Suriname. It is also spoken in Indonesia, though mostly by old people only.\n\nAlso note that the Dutch mostly only had colonies for trade, not for settling.",
"There are serveral reasons for this and I will point out two of them. The first one is about Capetown/Africa, the second one about Indonesia. The Dutch lost many of their colonies in the great Napoleonic wars that lasted roughly from 1795 to 1813. Capetown was one of them. The Dutch Republic (or the Kingdom of Holland) was a French ally fighting against the British. The British conquered many Dutch colonies like Capetown, Ceylon and also cut of Indonesia. After the Congress of Vienna in 1815 the Dutch regained many of their colonies, but not Capetown/South-Africa. The Dutch people living there moved to the inlands, establishing Transvaal and Oranjevrijstaat. South-Africa was a British colony now, where people would speak different languages then Dutch, which means that Dutch would loose influence. \n\nIndonesia and India resembled eachother. Both are colonies that brought in money for the Dutch and British, colonies with many different types of goods to be exploited, with an indigeous people willing to learn and adapt to their rulers. However, the British focussed on one major language throughout India, English. The Dutch cared less about this and let the different people living on the many islands speak (and educate their children) their own language. They did not impose Dutch on the Indonesian people. \n\nThese are just two examples/explanations. Though the Dutch ruled a major part of the colonised world, the other four major countries ruled more! Another thing is that one of the more discriminating words in Dutch and English (and perhaps other languages) vocabulaire is a Dutch word - apartheid. ",
"Dutch was spoken as a primary language by many people in the former New Netherlands colonies (NYC to Albany corridor along the Hudson River) until well into the 1830s. Case in point: Martin Van Buren was a native Dutch Speaker.\n\nI would imagine that Dutch speaking eventually died out in this area because - you know - the English divested the area from the Dutch through conquest. However, that was in the late 17th or early 18th century. So Dutch stuck around for another 100-150 years.",
"Yay! A relevant question for me! Je aanvraag (vraagje?) geeft me veel plezier!\n\nIbuffel got it largely right, and johnbarnshack made a vital point. In effect, the Cape Colony and its derivatives were the only major colonies of settlement that involved the transplantation of population and its expansion. The creolization of the language into Afrikaans is a sign. It's worth noting that before the 1920s \"Afrikaans\" was anything but uniform across the subcontinent, and which actually today is still not quite uniform, if you listen to Coloured people speaking the very slangy *flaaitaal* sorts of Afrikaans. Part of the reason for the creolization is that Dutch people are only a plurality of the European base of Afrikaner heritage; French and Germans together with others are more numerous. But Dutch was the language of the VOC (Dutch East India Co) that controlled the trade point at Kaapstad (Cape Town) so it was de facto the starting point.\n\nThe Dutch \"gave up\" the Cape officially for a forgiveness of debt and because it was honestly ungovernable; the *trekboers* had gone inland and set up local governments out of disgust for the Company and then Batavian regimes before 1806. (Ibuffel is wrong that the Kingdom of Holland was an enemy of Britain; in fact only the puppet Batavians and the Bonapartists were, while the rightful Stadhouder [monarch] was in exile and had requested the British safeguard their holdings by force.) So the post-1816 Dutch were happy to be rid of its costs, while keeping some of its financial strings. The Boers themselves did, as Ibuffel points out, continue expanding even against the desires of the parsimonious British, building first Natalia (later the British Colony of Natal), the OVS (Free State), and a clutch of weird little republics that later coalesced into the rickety machine that was the ZAR (Transvaal)--all today within South Africa. But the ascendancy of high Dutch was maintained as a language of administration even though the language people spoke was very creole. Those who could read, could read High Dutch and/or English. High Dutch was used jointly with English for government documents, printing of laws, et cetera, all over South Africa until the 1920s. It was joined, then supplanted, by Afrikaans as a way for Boers/Afrikaners (don't get me started about whether or not those two are interchangeable--that's a really long story) to say \"we are not Dutch! We are South Africans!\" which is a major identity struggle that Hermann Giliomee writes about in *The Afrikaners: Biography of a People* (2d ed 2009). The story of the *Taal-unie* and their efforts to solemnize \"white Afrikaans\" is quite interesting.\n\nAs for other regions, the maintenance of Dutch as an administrative and commercial language has turned on much the same reasoning. The difference is that unlike SA, there is no large European-originated population to maintain a Dutch creole that is so close to modern Nederlands. In Suriname, which has a large population descended from ex-slaves, their *flaaitaal* contains a huge amount of Dutch (much as Gullah in North America contains much English). The Dutch under the VOC and GWIC (Geoctroyeerde West Indische Compagnie, or Chartered West India Company) were not very concerned about spreading Dutch culture, religion, or values themselves, so their footprint was only as heavy as local Dutch social activity was. There were some Calvinist missionaries and efforts to promote Dutch enclaves in various places (Taiwan comes to mind) but overall Dutch traders had a reputation for keeping to business however odious that business (e.g., slave trading) may have been.",
"I used to live in Curacao, Dutch is still the official language there. Papiamentu is the most widely spoken however.",
"Don't the Amish in America speak Dutch still?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3o2qh5
|
Have there been US Presidents with no background in politics or law? If so, how did they gain the public's support, and what sort of leaders were they?
|
Donald Trump's presidential campaign brought this question to mind--have we had presidents with no experience in law, politics, or military leadership? What gave them their popularity in spite of their inexperience, and were they effective leaders?
Reagan came to mind due to his background as an actor, but he did at least serve as a governor before becoming president.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3o2qh5/have_there_been_us_presidents_with_no_background/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvtjv72",
"cvtk91g",
"cvtvw3p"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Zachary Taylor was a war general prior to becoming president in 1848 and had no political experience prior to his election, he stated that he had never voted before 1848",
"*No* political experience before being the President? You mean not having held civilian elected office?\n\nEisenhower's first civilian political office was U.S. President, I think. Though you don't get to be a general officer, much less four or five star general, without being a master politician.\n\nThere are plenty of examples of U.S. Presidents having 'limited' political experience--a few terms as governor or in Congress before the Presidency. Shoot, most of our Presidents in my lifetime have had relatively short political careers before becoming President. George H.W. Bush had a longer career as a politician/public employee, but some of that time was serving in appointed (as opposed to elected) positions.",
"Herbert Hoover had been Secretary of Commerce, but had never held elected office before. He had previously been a highly successful business and had led the relief effort after World War I for aid to those left homeless/orphaned/starving after the war (a role he would reprise after the Second World War). Hoover's business acumen and humanitarian credentials went a long way to convincing America to support him."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3u4ps4
|
Was Stalin really a Tsarist informer?
|
I'm listening to the audiobook "Bridge of Spies" while I pretend to work and the author makes this claim. I'm aware that it isn't really an academic book though. I did some googling and couldn't find much.
What do historians think about this?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3u4ps4/was_stalin_really_a_tsarist_informer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxbw7g9"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Although rumors and accusations of police collaboration dogged Stalin for much of his early political career, these charges never really stuck onto Stalin. The tsarist secret police, the Okhrana, often employed a tactic of falsely accusing various revolutionaries of police collaboration to drive a wedge into groups that were already prone to political infighting. The underground nature of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party's agitation meant that the daily activities of its various activists like Stalin are often quite murky and uncertain. Both activists and police often tried to get the better of the other in this context with \"informants\" sometimes leaking false information and the police hinting to their informer that there were traitors in their midst. The chronic disorganization and understaffed bureaucracy of the tsarist state added a further layer of confusion as it became much more difficult to prove or disprove collaboration after the fall of the imperial state in 1917.\n\nIn the case of Stalin, the idea he collaborated with the hated tsarist secret police became a political rumor too delicious not to perpetuate by his political enemies. But there is very little in Stalin's actions in the RSDLP that indicate he was playing both sides; he was quite committed to the cause of revolution in his early career. Although Lenin never particularly liked Stalin, he never doubted Stalin's commitment to the Bolshevik cause. Lenin's last testament, often touted as a Lenin's condemnation of Stalin's growing power, singled out Stalin's rudeness and increasing bureaucratic power. Unlike other targets of the testament (the testament itself was quite catty to everyone, not just Stalin), Lenin never accused Stalin of being on the wrong political faction prior to 1917. \n\nBut the image of Stalin as an apolitical opportunist has a great deal of power for his enemies on both the left and the right. Left-wing Trotskyites favored this narrative because it meant that the greatest excesses of the USSR, which occurred under Stalin's watch, were not the fault of Marxist-Leninist ideology, but rather laid at the feet of a deceitful demagogue who never really cared for the utopian dream of Lenin. For the anti-communist right, Stalin's hypocrisy fed into larger notions of a fundamentally corrupt regime whose ideological pretenses of a Marxist utopia were just window-dressing for a man's will to power.\n\nBoth these critiques of Stalin are somewhat silly not only for their lack of evidence, but also because a Stalin committed to the ideals of Marxist-Leninism is still culpable for the crimes and excesses of his rule. In short, Stalin does not need further charges, especially ones that are spurious and unsubstantiated, leveled against his character.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
dlazni
|
jury
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dlazni/eli5_jury/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f4owl1k"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"They have the power just like a judge in your country has the power. As for the bribing question same thing. Possible but you could also just bribe a judge."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1uuiuo
|
[Europe] Medieval social contract between Lord and serfs
|
I have been arguing with a couple friends regarding a story we been reading. And my question is, in medieval Europe, was there ever a pseudo-social contract between Lords and serfs?
For example, if a rival lord launch an attack on Lord A's lands, would Lord A be obligated (morally or legally) to protect his peasants?
I guess what I am trying to ask is quite a few people claimed that a Lord is more like a Land Lord who collect rent from peasants who live on the land, and peasants pay taxes in the process.
I seem to remember the peasants work to pay for protection from bandits and other lords, So who is right?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1uuiuo/europe_medieval_social_contract_between_lord_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"celslec"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The answer to this is going to vary with time and place, and have a lot to do with how desperately the lords needed someone to cultivate their land and how desperately the peasants wanted land to cultivate.\n\nIf you were formally someone's serf, that is, you swore an oath of fealty to them, they did have the obligation to come to your aid and protect you from physical harm. A lord who could not protect his serfs was no lord. A great many peasants were not serfs, particularly in the towns. The obligation would be a moral one and reflect on the lord's prestige - it would be pretty much unenforceable, legally.\n\nThis all comes with the caveat that this is effectively the storybook picture of feudalism. The reality was not nearly so neat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
26appp
|
what does the military actually protect us from?
|
Ok. Not trying to show disrespect or ignorance here. I've always heard that the military protects our freedom and liberties. It just seems that the military is more of a pawn for the government to push our power down the throats of the world. Other than 9/11 not much happens that involves our freedom. So, can someone explain their position in our freedom?
Again. No disrespect intended. Just looking to get educated.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26appp/eli5_what_does_the_military_actually_protect_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chp85pn",
"chp89iy",
"chp8d3w",
"chp8h8q",
"chp956j",
"chpijih"
],
"score": [
9,
4,
8,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Deterrence is an important factor. A lot of things don't happen because other countries (and various organizations) know that it would be a bad idea to mess with us. We haven't had a lot of big conflicts in quite a while, of course, and I won't say our military couldn't stand to be smaller and do less; but a big military is like a big dog; you don't screw with the owner.",
"Do you think that, without a military, that the US would be left alone?\n\nJust our natural resources alone would be enough to motivate a foreign power to invade or coloniZe us.\n\nForeign relations always have, as a silent subtext, the threat of military force, should one side try to fuck with the other too much.",
"There is an important element that goes along with the ability to project force.\n\nIf two countries don't like eachother they can build up armies, posture and maybe attack. \n\nOr one of them can form a treaty with us where in we say \"We'll come help you if they attack.\"\n\nNow that country can work on economy and social advancement rather than weapons. And their neighbor can do the same since our treaty nation is no real threat.\n\nSo us having the ability to go there prevents us from needing to go there and improves the world economy which keeps your TV's cheap.\n\nIf you are specifically referring to Iraq? That was political BS for the most part. ",
"On a personal level, not much...most of the time. Unless a country is invading our borders, which is not a reasonable possibility currently. But why is it not a reasonable possibility?\n\nLets look at a larger scale than personally, the nation-state scale. Here the military is your ability to defend yourself and your rights, or more nefarious motives depending on your agenda. Much like owning a gun or taking self-defense classes. \n\nThere is a saying in the marines that traces all the way back to Plato: 'If you want peace, prepare for war.' Basically that by projecting force you make others less likely to attack you. \n\nThis was driven home in the US during WWII. The military might of the Germans and Japanese threatened everything we held dear and as wonderful of a job as the US did at gearing up the economy for war it was *just barely* enough. The argument is now that by having a strong military force on standby that it will deter threats such as these from occurring again. CIA, NSA, drone warfare etc all follow a similar argument, that it's better to prevent the war from occurring than to win it. ",
"An army is like a bunch of men on the street. If another bunch of men turn up and want to make trouble, they are going to avoid the street with the largest bunch of other men on it.\n\nExplained it more like you were 3, I guess, but valid enough I hope.",
"Depending upon reddit to answer why we have such a large military is just as silly as depending on Jon Stewart and the daily show to explain politics and the news to you. Responses MIGHT be slightly biased."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9qmfgj
|
How "strong" of a vacuum can you make by pulling a piston out of a cylinder?
|
Asking for my dad - he sent the following explanation of his question, and I couldn't really answer:
"Suppose you have a piston at the bottom of a cylinder, which has no opening at the bottom. When you draw the piston out, a vacuum is created.
It is easy to imagine that very quickly the pressure difference will become about 14.7 psi (atmospheric pressure) outside, and getting close to zero inside.
The question is, what happens next, if you continue to pull the piston? It is relatively easy to overcome 14.7 psi.
Is it impossible to pull it any further? Will there be another force holding the piston back? If so, what force?
Maybe, you can continue to pull the piston out—after a certain point the pressure differential becomes about 14.7 psi and that’s all you have to overcome for the rest of the stroke. What I’m saying is the pressure difference can’t be more than 14.7 psi, and yet you can continue to increase the volume inside the cylinder.
Or maybe the reduction of pressure close to a vacuum inside the cylinder becomes non linear compared to the increase in volume (contrary to Boyle’s Law).
Apparently, a perfect vacuum is impossible. But the references I’ve found so far are not consistent on the meaning of “perfect vacuum.” It could mean zero pressure, or it could mean no molecules of air, which might not be the same thing. I think “impossible” probably means it’s difficult to extract every last molecule of gas from a chamber—the fewer they become, the harder it is to capture them."
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9qmfgj/how_strong_of_a_vacuum_can_you_make_by_pulling_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8a9rku",
"e8aaai2",
"e8adu43"
],
"score": [
16,
6,
8
],
"text": [
"You can see see what happens by looking at the ideal gas law: PV=nRT, where P is pressure, V is volume, n is proportional to the number of gas molecules, R is a constant, and T is temperature. Assuming that the temperature and number of gas molecules stay the same, what you are doing is increasing the volume, which at the same time decreases the pressure. So as you double the volume, the pressure halves. When you quadruple the volume, the pressure reduces to 1/4. So as you can see, when you pull the piston out, you continue to increase the volume, and the pressure will get closer and closer to zero, but will never reach zero.",
"The absolute pressure inside the cylinder drops asymptotically to zero as you pull the piston farther. Approaches zero but does not reach zero. In terms of pressure the differences becomes nil.\n\nOnce you get below a millionth of an atmosphere you're at the verge of the strange world of high vacuum. At that point it's the number of molecules of gas per unit volume that is really important. Think of the vacuum inside the large hadron collider, it zooms particles around a ring that is 16 miles around and they don't hit anything. That's a hard hard vacuum.\n\n",
"The \"theory\" part was already answered, but you also get a lot of technical problems. Once your pressure goes low enough (assuming your sealing holds down to these pressures), the walls of your piston will start outgassing because stuff starts boiling. The water on the walls (there's always a few atomic layers of water on basically any surface on earth) will start to evaporate, cracks and impurities in the metal will start to release gases trapped in them, the lubricant of the piston will start sublimating/evaporating etc.\n\nThis means that you create more sources of molecules and atoms as you decrease the pressure and it will be hard to go below some thresholds.\n\nIf you build a ultra-high vacuum (UHV) setup for research you have to choose your materials very carefully so that all these effects are reduced. We use copper gaskets to seal our assembly (the flanges have knife edges that cut into the copper to guarantee a tight seal) because rubber is not able to seal to such low pressures. Then you have to bake out the system at 150°C (wrap heating tape around the setup and let the system bake at that temperature for several days) to get rid of all the stuff adsorbed on the inner surfaces so they can get pumped away.\n\nThere are also usually several types of pumps involved in the process to be able to pump UHV chambers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
29cpnl
|
Why do cats sleep so much?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/29cpnl/why_do_cats_sleep_so_much/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cik29r5"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Animals will rest as often as they can after spending the time necessary to obtain food, shelter, mates and resources for offspring. Animals that need to spend large amounts of time obtaining these things, like grazzing animals, will only sleep a few hours a day. Animals that can get what they need in a short time, like efficient predators, will sleep most of the time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
a4y9zi
|
how do animals keep track of their babies? can they count? if so they know math? if not what kind of logic they use to know how many are there?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4y9zi/eli5_how_do_animals_keep_track_of_their_babies/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ebiefm8",
"ebifw68",
"ebipt01",
"ebist81",
"ebistiu",
"ebiswk2",
"ebitmn4",
"ebittf5",
"ebitxsh",
"ebiurv1",
"ebivi1x",
"ebivjcj",
"ebiw0ml",
"ebixwwp",
"ebiy4nc",
"ebj00bw",
"ebj1a5z",
"ebj2ds5",
"ebj2w0l",
"ebj413p",
"ebj5s66",
"ebj6k59",
"ebj7hyh",
"ebj9ra6",
"ebjatus",
"ebjggtc"
],
"score": [
2571,
3924,
249,
79,
50,
1870,
26,
12,
2,
9,
14,
170,
2678,
453,
6,
4,
19,
3,
4,
3,
3,
2,
2,
8,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Animals is a pretty broad group. Birds try to keep track, but birds also try to sneak an egg into someone else's nest so that they hatch and feed it. Fish are less selective, more than a few can see their young as potential food.",
"Counting isn't required to detect someone is missing, just the ability to distinguish individuals. Suppose you have no concept of numbers or math but you have children Billy, Bobby, Sally, and Sarah. You see Billy, Bobby, and Sarah. Where is Sally? You don't see her, she is missing.\n\nSee? No numbers, no math, but it gets the job done.",
"I feel like recently there were a bunch of studies done with crows that showed they could solve simple problems and that some of them involved math, but I could be mistaken. Chimps and the like can definitely figure out simple math. \"Animals\" is a pretty broad spectrum, given that it includes humans.",
"Depends on the animal. Some with higher social skills sure realize that someone from their tribe is missing (Apes, animals, dogs, cats, etc.)\n\nOther animals don't count or care, they will just feed and raise whatever they find in their nest. Chickens wont miss a chick or wonder something is akward when it suddendly one too much.",
"By scent and sound. \n\nMother birds will care for anything that makes the ‘cheep’ sound. If a chick doesn’t make the sound she will kill it. If you give her another birds chicks she will care for them as their own. \n\nOther animals use scent in the same way. Some animals will care for the young from another species as long as it doesn’t smell like a threat (known predator or dominant male). \n\nCounting is common to MOST humans but not all. Some remote tribes never grasped the concept. Other animals with the known ability to count are Orangutans and Ravens (who are the two most intelligent species next to humans.)",
"That's going to depend on the animal but many rely on smell. Since each of their young will smell a little different they can tell when one is missing. \n\nIt's like a soup. If an ingredient is missing it is going to smell different. No need to count or even necessarily know exactly what is missing. \n\nThose impressions can change pretty quickly though. It's not uncommon for animals to forget and leave babies behind. ",
"Animals don't need any kind of logic or special thought to notice the absence of something. It's like how dogs don't have object permanence - they don't necessarily understand *where* it's gone and that it still exists, they just know that something was there and now it's not. Like understanding dark and light.",
"If your brain is big enough you don’t have to know anything about numbers because you have audiovisual memory. The animal knows it has 8 babies but it will never grasp the concept math or numbers if that makes sense. The fact that most animals instincts incorporate paying a lot of attention to their young (especially mothers) helps even more with keeping track of them.",
"When it's time to bang, certain hormones increase or decrease depending on role. When pregnant, other hormones alter their levels to maintain the pregnancy. In animals that provide parental care, there is another set usually involved in brooding or lactation. When those baby raising hormones (the name escapes me. To bang = estrogen for \"estrus\" and for gestation \"progesterone\" I do believe oxytocin is the big one for maternal care) are present, they are pretty determined to raise offspring. Most can recognize unique vocal or drastic visual cues in their young but it's not perfect. You can use a chicken who thinks she's laying on eggs to raise all kinds of eggs including quail and duck simply because the hormones are telling her to sit. I have had hens who hatched one or 2 that later died, dumped 7 brand new different colored ones and they've all been ok with it after brief confusion. They know something is different but the hormones say \"we have babies\" so the females are prone to adoption especially when still confused about loss of any young. ",
"Animals can count, they also notice when something is missing. They will generally realise that something is missing and will continue to look for that missing baby.",
"I remember seeing a documentary on cheetah mom's and their kittens. David Attenborough stated that, \"she can't count\" so it was if she saw a few, that was all she would go by. ",
"__ELI5__:\n\nYour brain uses a different part when recognizing the size of small sets (there are three puppies) vs. counting large sets (I can count seventeen puppies). This is called [subitism](_URL_0_), and we have seen evidence of it in many animals.\n\n---\n\n > How do animals keep track of their babies?\n\nSome animals have different reproductive strategies than humans and so don't care for or track their offspring in the same way. Fish have large broods of offspring, for example, and don't nurture their young the same way humans do. Birds will have nests and eggs: some of these care deeply for their offspring (like Emperor Penguins), while others seem indifferent to the loss of an individual egg or child.\n\nAnimals that keep track of their children in a similar manner to humans (gorillas, dogs, horses) keep track of them in a similar manner - knowing them as an individual. Dogs, for example, will look for other animals that they know in places that the animal frequented.\n\n > Can they count?\n\nYes. Some animals can count better than others. Certain species of frog will count with their croaks, some fish can recognize which school of fish has more fish in it, and chickens can recognize which pile of balls is larger. In some cases this is subitism. In some cases animals can clearly count: hunting dogs will keep track of how many animals they have fetched and how many are left in the field, at least to small numbers.\n\n---\nI'm not a biologist or psychologist, but this was an interesting thing to read up on. If there's anything I should add let me know.\n\nInteresting further reads and sources:\n- [Animals that can count, BBC, 2012](_URL_3_)\n- [Free ranging dogs assess relative group size by subitizing, Psychology Today, 2018](_URL_4_)\n- [Many animals can count, some better than you; NYT; 2018](_URL_1_)\n- [Do Dogs Know Mathematics?, Psychology Today, 2011](_URL_5_)\n- [Do Dogs Grieve Over the Loss of an Animal Companion?, Psychology Today, 2016](_URL_2_)",
"Livestock farmer here. For sheep and cattle, it’s mostly scent based. Any time a lamb dies at birth, you skin it to wrap any orphaned lambs in the hide. Tricks momma into adopting other lambs when they smell their own offspring. Alternatively, you can buy scent to smear onto lambs and calves who have lost their mommas. Lambing and calving usually goes smoothly, but when it doesn’t, it’s tough for everyone to make it through alive. Also, they all now each others’ calls\n\nEdit:I should add that I don’t know how the store-bought scent works, and I’ve never used it...",
"My mom’s cat could count — to 5. My mom usually have her 5 cat treats. One day, my mom gave her 3. The cat kept patting my mom with her paw .. so my mom gave another one. More patting. When the 5th cat treat was put out, the cat quit the patting.\n\nMy mom tried different combinations after that. Over 5 didn’t make a difference, but up to 5, that cat could count.",
"You know when you go out with a large group of friends, like 5+, and you get to the restaurant and they ask \"how many?\" and you don't immediately know the answer so you stop and count how many people are there? It's exactly like that.\n\nYou'd know who's there, you'd know if someone was missing, but you're not exactly keeping track of the number of people there, just the people themselves.",
"This goose mom does not seem concerned whatsoever about the missing gooslings: _URL_0_",
"I don't know how they do it.. But I know they do. We had a dog with a litter of 7 puppies and we had to separate them for a moment from her and then when we put them back we gave her all but one just to see if she'd notice. She totally scanned the six as if she was counting and then just looked up at us like \"ummm excuse me?\" Amazing. ",
"Knowing math and knowing how to count are somewhat different. The brain can do what is known as \"summatize\". When there are 5 or fewer items, humans, and likely many mammals, can immediately identify the number WITHOUT counting. Essentially, a group of 5 or fewer becomes a symbol that is identified as a single unit.\n\nIt is likely that animals have a similar ability. They are probably able to recognize \"the correct amount\" rather than count \"1, 2, 3, puppies\". It is also likely that smell, particularly pheromones (sort of a fingerprint for smell, unique to individuals), appearance, and other factors are used to recognize their offspring.\n\nEdited to add possibly pertinent information. ",
"I thought a story from my cat's pregnancy/labor might be an interesting addition. When my cat was having her babies, she was looking for a dark place and meowing, and I saw something protruding from her rear. I quickly wrapped her in a towel and drove her down to the vet. They were much less panicked than me. They said the mom pretty much takes care of everything on instinct. I said I was still a bit worried in case there was any complications, can I have stay, so they put us in a waiting room and said just let her do her thing.\n\nShe ended up having 5 kittens over the course of the next six hours. The first two came out fine and she licked them etc, but the third was still in the sac/small/not moving/presumably stilborn, and the nurse took it away.\n\nI went home with 4 kittens, and that evening/the next day, momma kitten would leave the others and go to the different spots she had gone to in the house and meowed. Broke my heart. She didn't even see the stilborn one for more than a minute and I was wondering if she would even notice, but she did. I got the sense that she didn't have a perception of how many there should be, so much that that she would be missing the one. There might be a difference between ducks and cats because all the kittens looked different. One was black, one was brown, one was white and black, the other white and tan... \n\nBut I can see how if you're having babies, you have a memory of having each one right, so you'd associate each one with the memory of having it, and that means the details of that one, some small differences that stand out, and that gets tied to the 2nd baby and the 3rd baby... not as math, but as a chain of events. I could see them knowing which one is missing based on the order they had the babies, the order they hatched, and how they behaved etc if they're ducks. \n\nI think part of our confusion is that we are doing the species equivalent of \"they all look the same\" when the mother especially, knows.",
"most animals can’t count but recognise up to a certain number, around 3-5 depending on the animal. for some mammals that may be one way of keeping their offspring, assume a bear can recognise three objects immediately (as can humans, without counting) and they have three babies and they see three youngs they might know that all of them are around. but as people pointed out, that wouldn’t be necessary and for the most part, other mechanisms will do the job.\n\nyou might have come across the phrase “if you think dogs can’t count show them three treats but then only give them two” but that’s not counting. show them eleven treats and give them ten, they won’t notice. bees are one of the few species that have been shown to count, up to 20 has been experimentally shown in the study i’ve heard of. they also have a concept of zero which is quite interesting.",
"Smell is a big factor as well. When my ferret had babies if I handled them she would then try to drag my finger or thumb in with her babies. Baby ferrets do look like little sausages though. She did manage to always collect all her little ones and know that there weren’t any missing. ",
"Look at the fingers on your right hand. Are they all there? Did you need to count them to know?\n\n",
"To answer the concept very simply, when animals or people count, the part of the brain used depends on how much is being counted, if you’re counting things in a 1-8 range, you’re not really “counting” he 8 things, you simply know of 8 things. Animals are the same, they don’t think in numbers because they don’t ever have to “count” past a certain number, a very low number. Sry if I explained it poorly but simply put, we don’t “count” things until we cross a threshold of being a number that requires counting",
"We had a feral mom cat have kittens in our backyard. There were 5 and we caught her and 2 kittens and put them in a spare room until we caught the rest to get em fixed, \n\nMom and 2 kittens. Incessant meowing and scratching at the door. \n\nNext day we catch 2 more. Meowing and scratching intensifies. \n\nNext day we get skunked and can’t catch the last one. The meowing and scratching levels are now over 9000. \n\nFinally catch the last one, put her in there and,...\n\nNothing. \n\nNo meowing or scratching or yowling. Just a happy content little family, \n\nWas right then I realized that cats can count!",
"Mice cannot count. At University, we would use this to our advantage when conducting experiments with mice, specifically experiments that involve mice running a maze. \n\nIf you starve a mouse and motivate it to run a maze for a food reward, it will only work until the mouse is satiated. \n\nIf you use a young mother mouse and displace her pups, she will run the maze to find them, and then continue to run the maze to retrieve each pup as she brings them back to her nest. She will also always make one final trip to make sure there are no more pups left out of the nest. \n\nWe used this to motivate the mouse when studying things like the effect of a sun compass or other navigational aid on how a mouse traverses a maze. How animals navigate their habitats gives us clues into their cognition.",
"Having fostered many a mama cat, I know for cats it's sort of a combination of things. When the queen goes into labor, she experiences a surge of hormones that cause her to imprint on any tiny fuzzy thing nearby for about a day (this is why you see those viral videos of cats \"adopting\" ducklings or other baby animals after giving birth to their kittens. From there, it's a smell thing. She and all her babies will share a smell from nesting together that tell her \"okay, this baby is mine.\" So she's able to find her babies based on smell. Conversely, mama won't recognize her adult child if it is raised away from her because it doesn't smell like her baby anymore, its just another cat. Also, it kind of goes both ways. The kittens know who their mama is and they'll seek her out for milk and affection once they start weaning and walking around. As her babies grow, she will start to recognize them as individuals just from being around them all the time and as such, will notice their absence. In our most recent foster, at around 6 weeks, one of the five kittens injured his leg and had to be put into a different foster home because he needed strict cage rest and being around his siblings was not conducive to that. Mama definitely noticed that one of her babies was missing and was searching/meowing for him around the apartment for a few days after, which was quite sad, but she has since moved on and is focussed on the four still with her."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subitizing",
"https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/science/animals-count-numbers.html",
"https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/canine-corner/201611/do-dogs-grieve-over-the-loss-animal-companion",
"http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121128-animals-that-can-count",
"https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/animal-emotions/201802/free-ranging-dogs-assess-relative-group-size-subitizing",
"https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/canine-corner/201103/do-dogs-know-mathematics"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7ua1GGUIlA"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
v8mj6
|
Is there any science behind why different types of beers should be drank out of different mugs/glasses/etc, or is it just a gimmick perpetuated by beer snobs?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/v8mj6/is_there_any_science_behind_why_different_types/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c52af02"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nThis article explains the reasoning behind many of the glasses."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_glassware"
]
] |
||
1bgza2
|
the alien & sedition acts of 1798
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bgza2/eli5_the_alien_sedition_acts_of_1798/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c96skot"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"* *Naturalization Act* (June 18th) - Immigrants had to have lived in the U.S. for 14 years before they could become citizens, and you had to wait 5 years after saying \"I want to be a citizen\" before you could become one.\n* *Alien Act* (June 25th) - Gave the President the authority to deport aliens suspected of treason or otherwise dangerous to \"public safety.\" If those people stayed in the country after being ordered to leave, they could be imprisoned and forever banned from becoming U.S. citizens.\n* *Alien Enemies Act* (July 6th) - During wartime, allowed the President to arrest, imprison, and / or deport citizens of enemy nations who happened to be living in the U.S.\n* *Sedition Act* (July 14th) - Allowed the government to fine and / or imprison people who conspired against it. \"Conspire\" is used loosely here because it included things like \"unlawful assembly\" and \"publishing false, scandalous and malicious writings.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
28xvl0
|
why do ach (electronic bank transfers) take 3+ days
|
I have accounts with two banks and one with a brokerage and I can't seem to figure out why it takes 3 days or sometimes more to transfer money from one account to another, writing a check seems faster
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28xvl0/eli5why_do_ach_electronic_bank_transfers_take_3/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cifitlc",
"cifiu9b",
"cifjnzy",
"cifm5q2",
"cifmm0v",
"cifmz5c",
"cifn1o8",
"cifrxq7"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Banking Rules are Pre Internet. some have computers or computer programs from the 1970's that run on batchs run by a physical person. so after hours or weekends the transaction sits in the queue until the batch is run. so all banks run on the assumption that the bank they are drawing the funds from is in the stone age and have a max allowed transaction time that allows for horse and buggy delay. and banks exploit that to the fullest to delay the parting with money and also to allow for transaction errors ",
"The longer banks sit on your money, even if it is only for a few hours, the more interest they make. ",
"Just to chime in and say it's at least *possible* for banks to perform transfers much quick. I'm with Lloyds bank in the UK, and if I transfer money to someone else (not with Lloyds) through online banking, it generally gets to their account in a couple of hours, at most.",
"In Romania, transfers between 2 accounts at the same bank are instant, and between 2 different banks take from a few seconds to few hours.\nAll transactions between different banks are processed the next business day if you initiate the transfer after 4PM.",
"Having worked for a payroll/direct deposit provider a number of years ago, I can tell you that the intermediaries make a considerable amount of money on the interest from ACH transfers. The company I used to work for counts on that interest, or \"float\" as it's called in the industry, to make up a hefty chunk of their annual earnings. Obviously it's only a couple of pennies from each transaction (2+ days interest on small transfers), but when you're dealing with millions of customers, and billions of transactions each year, you end up with some of that Richard Pryor, Superman 3 money.",
"For a New Zealand perspective:\n\n-Transfers from one account of your own to another account of your own at the same bank are generally instant. \n-Transfers to someone else's account at the same bank are usually instant, depending on the bank, but this is sometimes overnight. \n-Transfers to an account at another bank are nearly always overnight on business days only. There are are some exceptions to this - some of our banks are real time so transfers go out immediately. Then if the other bank is real time too, it gets deposited immediately. This means a transfer can take an hour or two. \n\nOur banks don't do jack on the weekend or public holidays though. ",
"Really, 3 days? At least for me it's like 5 hours. Is that an American thing?",
"Short answer: because it's the way things have always been done.\n\nThe technology is incredibly old and the banks haven't really had any incentives to change how anything works. \n\nNPR's \"Planet Money\" podcast has a great episode that covered all aspects of the ACH system's slowness: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/10/04/229224964/episode-489-the-invisible-plumbing-of-our-economy"
]
] |
|
5tyaef
|
how do gas planets have any kind of objects orbiting them and/or gravity when they are just a big ball of gas, no rocks and stuff?
|
It seems to me if they have gravity stuff would just go right through them.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tyaef/eli5_how_do_gas_planets_have_any_kind_of_objects/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddpyj0l",
"ddpyna0",
"ddpynpv"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
15
],
"text": [
"Even something that is as fluid as gas still contains mass. When you you have something as big as Jupiter, that is a lot of mass. The greater the mass of an object the greater the influence, that we call gravity, it exerts on other objects. Gas planets can exert enough gravity to cause other objects to remain in their orbit.\n\nAdditionally there is ongoing debate on whether gas giants like Jupiter actually contains a solid core or not although it is generally accepted that there is a mass of heavy elements near the center.\n\nEdit: Added some stuff.",
"Stars are made of gas too. You just have toget enough of it in one place. Besides, gas giants do have molten rocky cores.",
"Gas is the same stuff as solid matter, just all spread out. Every particle of matter has its own gravity; the gravity of a planet is the combined gravity of each of its particles.\n\nAlso, gas giants are only mostly made of gas - they're believed to have solid cores and oceans of liquid."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2tgiym
|
Was there ever a long lasting peace between the Muslim states of the South of Spain and their Christian neighbours to the North?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2tgiym/was_there_ever_a_long_lasting_peace_between_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnzj6rs"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"yes and no: convivencia was really defined by balance of power tensionsbut plenty of times without religiously motivated warfare. For instance the Taifa period between the Ummayad and Almoravid dynasties (Taifas were essentially small independent kingdoms, for instance of grenada, seville, etc.) was marked by Christian expansion but it was primarily about monetary raids and getting and keeping Muslim vassals in the rich southern part of Spain. El Cid (who when exiled spent years as a close retainer of the emir of zaragrossa and had muslim vassals) and the Tibyan (primary source written by last independent Taifa ruler of Grenada) do a nice job of showing some of this as both are set at the end of this period. Also even as the states fought each other people of both religions crossed boundaries and fought in the other side's wars (for instance even around las navas de you had christian mercenaries helping out the muslim empire's forces in battles against the berber tribes)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3d96ru
|
[META] AskHistorians Showcase Submissions [North America]
|
Hello everyone! Today I come before you to ask for help on a little project: the AskHistorians Showcase!
What is the Showcase you ask? Well I'm so glad you asked! The showcase will be a page of some of Askhistorians greatest answers presented under 10 general categories. The purpose of this showcase is to show our readers, other historians, and interested people what exactly it is that we do here! Furthermore we will be linking it to a greater community page for interested parties to learn even more!
In order to do this however, we need your help in selecting and nominating some of your saved, favorite, or top quality answers from this subreddit!
How will we proceed? Well, I will make 10 separate nomination threads over the coming weeks for you to nominate your favorite answers in the ten categories below. Today's thread is for **North American**!
So please give us your favorite North American answers past and present, 1492 and onward!
Future Categories:
Europe, Cultural History
Past Categories: [Military History,](_URL_2_) [Asia](_URL_6_), [Africa](_URL_5_), [Middle and South America](_URL_0_), [Middle East](_URL_1_), [Medieval World](_URL_3_), [Ancient World](_URL_4_),
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3d96ru/meta_askhistorians_showcase_submissions_north/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct2x1zc",
"ct318yu",
"ct31zej",
"ct59dfd"
],
"score": [
8,
8,
7,
5
],
"text": [
"Two of my favorite answers (I wrote) both involving the role of religion in some American secular affairs, music and foreign relations. \n\n[How and why did Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists become such strong supporters of Israel and the Jewish people?](_URL_1_)\n\n[What were the views of Church on Blues Music?](_URL_0_)",
"I think we can just nominate /u/Reedstilt, and helpfully he has assembled a [list of his greatest hits here](_URL_0_). ",
"Wait, are you only looking for things from 1492 onwards?\n\n/u/Reedstilt consistently has awesome contributions for Native North American history in this sub. I know so little about it that region pre-17th century; I always learn something from his comments.\n\nThese are my favorites:\n\n[Was there a revolutionary ideological shift that brought down the Mississippian cultures?](_URL_0_)\n\n[What was happening in N. America during the time of Jesus?](_URL_1_)",
"These are all my answers I've submitted on American history. I don't know if any are of high enough quality to be considered, but I thought I'd share just in case.\n\n**American History**\n\n*Political History*\n\n* [Why was Washington D.C. created out of land owned by Virginia and Maryland?](_URL_16_)\n\n* [What was the deal with the Fenian Raids into Canada?](_URL_19_)\n\n* [Did Henry Clay's political platform while running for President change, or was it consistent?](_URL_5_)\n\n*Racial History*\n\n* [Was there ever a serious effort to get Native American Nations to join the United States, and be recognised as states?](_URL_20_)\n\n* [During the Jim Crow/Civil Rights era, were there any boycotts launched against entire states?](_URL_12_)\n\n* [Why were sit-ins during the Civil Rights movement potentially dangerous affairs?](_URL_11_)\n\n* [How did the N-word come to be a derogatory slur]\n(_URL_7_)\n* [In the US, did slaves have any legal protections from their owners?](_URL_18_)\n\n* [To what extent was the emergence of strong black leaders reason for the increased demand for Civil Rights?](_URL_13_)\n\n* [What was Martin Luther King Jr. really like?](_URL_2_)\n\n* [Is it true that the original African slaves brought to Virginia were treated as indentured servants, and that they were eventually granted freedom?](_URL_1_)\n\n* [How accurate is the proclamation that Irish slavery was as prolific in America as African slavery?](_URL_9_)\n\n* [Did white indentured servants mix with black slaves?](_URL_6_)\n\n* [Is there truth in the statement, \"The Civil Rights Movement made MLK, rather than MLK making the Civil Rights Movement\"?](_URL_14_)\n\n* [Were there religious arguments against miscegenation? What were they?](_URL_4_)\n\n*Social History*\n\n* [Were the Vietnam era protests effective?](_URL_0_)\n\n* [Why do we measure cultural shifts in decades?](_URL_10_)\n\n* [When did literacy become expected in America?](_URL_15_)\n\n* [How did marijuana come to be so stigmatised in the United States?](_URL_8_)\n\n* [What makes old Universities/Colleges more prestigious?](_URL_3_)\n\n* [Popular Music and the Vietnam War](_URL_17_)\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3b4qyb/meta_askhistorians_showcase_submissions/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3be954/meta_askhistorians_showcase_submissions_middle/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/39ax2o/meta_ah_showcase_dear_lovely_readers_of/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3bw3fz/meta_askhistorians_showcase_submissions_medieval/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3cjm1c/meta_askhistorians_showcase_submissions_ancient/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3alovu/meta_ah_showcase_dear_readers_of_raskhistorians/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/39svf0/meta_ah_showcase_dear_lovely_readers_of/"
] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3bw7fz/what_were_the_views_of_church_on_blues_music/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2rogzy/how_and_why_did_christian_evangelicals_and/cni0em2"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3c1zc9/what_was_north_america_like_before_the_english/csrq9xz"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2yowgi/in_a_talk_i_saw_recently_david_graeber_implies/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2azh2j/what_was_happening_in_north_america_during_the/cj0otsd"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/32iqko/were_the_vietnam_era_protests_effective/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2p8onh/is_it_true_that_the_original_african_slaves/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2p2ehm/what_was_martin_luther_king_jr_really_like/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2s0dsz/why_do_some_of_the_oldest_collegesuniversities/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2rknpm/were_there_religious_arguments_against/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2qoc14/henry_clay_ran_for_president_three_times_over_a/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2qp4mb/did_white_indentured_slaves_worklive_with_african/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2v2d9u/how_did_the_term_ngger_become_derogatory_towards/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2q81jf/how_did_marijuana_become_too_be_so_stigmatized_in/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2pi4qm/how_accurate_is_the_proclamation_that_irish/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/31paaq/why_do_we_measure_culture_shifts_in_decades/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/31gjph/why_were_sitins_potentially_dangerous_during_the/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/32dmg9/during_the_jim_crowcivil_rights_era_were_any/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2s6yv8/to_what_extent_was_the_emergence_of_effective/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2r60o5/the_civil_rights_movement_made_martin_luther_king/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2tsmnq/when_did_literacy_become_expected_in_america/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2qhmhp/why_was_the_land_for_washington_dc_taken_from/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2r6cuv/were_songs_that_we_currently_associate_with_the/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2spny6/in_the_us_when_black_slavery_still_existed_were/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2qhff8/what_was_the_deal_with_the_fenian_raids_into/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/32h7qb/was_there_ever_any_effort_to_get_native_american/"
]
] |
|
57l4p8
|
What underlying social factors caused the 90s Norwegian black metal scene to be so violent?
|
The subculture around Norwegian black metal in the early 1990s was strongly associated with a string of arsons and murders. In that regard, it can be vaguely compared to hip-hop in the era of the East Coast/West Coast beef, but while there was a clear underpinning of ethnic and economic disenfranchisement there, it seems like the black metal inner circle emerged out of a socioeconomically comfortable background. What specific factors about early 90s Norway (if any) could have led to this wave of violence?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/57l4p8/what_underlying_social_factors_caused_the_90s/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8tdimz",
"d8tk19m"
],
"score": [
31,
5
],
"text": [
"It is often hypothesized that when Mayhem vocalist Per Yngve Ohlin committed suicide, the scene became a lot darker and real. Mayhem's semi official album \"Dawn of the Black Hearts\" was released with a cover featuring a picture of none other than Ohlin's dead body, with shotgun and all, taken by Mayhem guitarist Øystein Aarseth. They used his suicide note as song lyrics and the band members made necklaces with pieces of his skull, given to \"worthy musicians.\" Oystein used the image to further Mayhem's dark image.\n\nAfter the Mayhem incident, Øystein had allegedly became so enthralled with this dark image that he kept it going. He opened a record shop, Helvete ('Hell' in Norweigan), and it became a stronghold for the Black Metal scene. Many young musicians and bands had become obsessed with the same ideas Øystein had and transformed their Death Metal bands into Black Metal bands, with the same anti-religion and totalitarian ideas that Øystein had. The satanic image was there, but they concentrated more on being evil than any real philosophy and thus church burnings and murders came with that.\n\nSources: Sam Dunn, Director. Metal: A Headbanger's Journey (2005)\n\nMichael Moynihan, Author. Lords of Chaos (1998)\n\nEdit: Fixed mix up about Ohlin being guitarist, when he was in fact a vocalist.",
"As unreliable as Varg Vikerness may be, you might get satisfactory answers by looking up his videos where he speaks of the Norwegian Black Metal scene during '91 - '93. \n\nThe documentary \"Until the Light Takes Us\" and Fenriz of Darkthrone are also good sources to answer this question. Members and fans of the scene have pointed out that the book Lords of Chaos is not entirely reliable. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6o9huc
|
According to multiverse theories, what separates our universe from other universes?
|
That's the one thing that's always confused me about the idea of a multiverse. Is it just empty space? If it's just empty space, can universes collide and merge like galaxies? Or do they exist in sort of a bubble? Are there parallel universes that exist within different dimensions?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6o9huc/according_to_multiverse_theories_what_separates/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkhuxjz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You're trying to think about a super dimensional model in three dimensional terms. It doesn't work to think about the problem that way because we can't conceive of dimensions beyond this that we live in. \n\nThere is a classic comparison that helps illustrate the futility of trying to think of super dimensions spatially. It is called the flatland analogy. \n\nConsider a two dimensional stick figure that lives on a piece of notebook paper. The bounds of his universe are the boundaries of the page and any other pages in the notebook would be other universes to him. But since he lives in only two dimensions, he can't conceive of nor observe the third spatial dimension. He can't travel to the other universes because he can't enter the third dimension. The only way to travel to another dimension is if a hole were ripped in his sheet of paper exposing the sheet underneath. \n\nIf you were to grab this flatlander by the leg and throw him up in the air in front of you, he wouldn't see you as a three dimensional human. He would only see two dimensional slices of you as he traveled up in the air and back down again. \n\nSo, i don't think this directly answers your question. But it's the best I can do because the question is asking the unanswerable. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
29lhs1
|
Are all the stars we can see with naked eyes part of the Milky way galaxy?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/29lhs1/are_all_the_stars_we_can_see_with_naked_eyes_part/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cim2l63",
"cimehte",
"cimjklv",
"cimoj19",
"cimsqqy"
],
"score": [
259,
16,
10,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes.\n\nYou can see things like the Andromeda galaxy and the Magellanic Clouds with the naked eye, but not individual stars in those objects.\n\nSupernova SN 1987a in the Large Magellanic Cloud was naked-eye visible, but a supernova is, of course, a special case. There was a supernova in Andromeda in 1885 (SN 1885a) that was just bright enough that it might have been visible to the naked eye, but there is no record that anyone actually saw it that way.\n\nEdit: Typo fixed (thinkgs -- > things)",
"Generally speaking, yes. And they are almost all within about 1000 light years of us. The vast majority of stars even in the Milky Way are too distant to be visible by themselves.\n\nOnce in a while, there is a supernova in a close neighboring galaxy that can be seen with the naked eye. But main sequence stars that far away are not individually visible.",
"To be clear, everything you see with the naked eye is not a star. You can see galaxies too, and if you know what you're looking at, nebulae. Take a pair of high powered binoculars out some night and it's like you've never seen the sky. Better yet, get a pair of [these](_URL_0_). You won't be disappointed. ",
"A little mindblowing thought.\n\nIf you look up in the night sky, many of the stars appear to be very small...maybe the diameter of the head of a pin at arms length.\n\nIf you do the geometry, they are MUUUUUCH smaller than that. In fact, many of the stars in the night sky are about as wide as a single molecule at arm's length. A single red blood cell, for example, is thousands of times wider.",
"Another cool thing about the stars we see at night is that they are all moving. \nThe constellations that hung over the dinosaurs ~~are~~ **aren't** the same that hang over us.\n\nThat also means we need a new north star every couple million years.\n\nI'm sorry why was this down voted this? That is a fact the constellations are constantly moving just as we are constantly moving around the galaxy. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-SkyMaster-Binoculars-Tripod-Adapter/dp/B00008Y0VN"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
8kikg6
|
what is the neurological explanation for the zapping sensation people experience in their heads when they are late taking anti-depressants?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8kikg6/eli5_what_is_the_neurological_explanation_for_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dz84237",
"dz855lk",
"dz85w3p",
"dz87gem",
"dz8ar83",
"dz8dynq",
"dz8klxr",
"dz8miyn",
"dz8n8cs",
"dz8s9rt",
"dz8xoo4"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
192,
57,
11,
6,
2,
6,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"This happens sometimes for people who do a lot of MDMA and then stop taking it too, weird stuff.",
"The term I’ve seen often used are “brain zaps”. \n\nI do not know what is happening at a neurological level though, good question! ",
"There are some pretty bad answers in this thread 😂. Guys I’m pretty sure OP knows what they are & what causes them, he’s asking *why* they happen.\n\nIn short, we dont *really* know why they occur. We barely know why SSRIs work in the first place, and a lot of the withdrawal symptoms are an even bigger mystery. One theory is that discontinuation of these drugs leads to temporarily low GABA levels. Since low GABA has been liked to increased seizure risk, [it is postulated](_URL_0_) that these brain zaps might be small, localised seizures.\n\nWe do know that despite ther discomfort, they’re usually harmless and in almost all cases disappear.\n\n\n",
"I’ve commented this elsewhere in the thread, but just for visibility- a single fluoxetine will stop the “brain zaps” occurring when you are coming off other SSRIs, and it is crazy that drs don’t routinely give patients this option (especially for antidepressants with horrible withdrawals like venlafaxine) ",
"The best eli5 theory I've heard it's that a lack of serotonin in certain parts of the brain can lower the firing threshold for certain synapses, which causes a chain of neurons to fire rapidly, resulting in the unpleasant zap-zap-zap sensation; for that theory to hold water, serotonin would therefore have to act almost like a down-regulator for certain types of synapse, perhaps?\n\nI've had it a lot when withdrawing from certain medication, and also get it together with sleep paralysis some nights.",
"Wow I had no idea there was a name for this. I’ve actually tried googling my symptoms and never found anything. I described it as a popping or grinding sensation in my brain. Strangely it only occurs when I’m napping. \n\nThe weird thing is that I’m not coming off SSRIs. I’m just taking a single dose daily of Prozac. Does this mean something might be wrong with the dosage?",
"Head zaps are weird, i got them a lot when i was anti-deppressants. It was really hard explaining them to my GF. I tried finding good information online, but it was hard to find a solid source and reasoning. ",
"I could shoot my doctor for not warning me about the month of misery I was in for when I couldn't afford the refill. ",
"Yeah, I was on Paxil for a while (five months give or take) and I stopped taking it....for probably five or six weeks every time a took a step I'd feel that sensation all throughout my body, cold sweats while I slept, etc. Weirdest shit coming off of.",
"I get these when im tired and ive never been on antidepressants. Is there an official term so I can tell a doctor?",
"Nothing to add, but I wanted to say that this was a good question, OP! I’ve been on almost every type of med for the last ten years and have certainly experienced it. When I mentioned it to my docs (at the VA), they acted like they didn’t know what I was talking about. Thanks for asking this!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-superhuman-mind/201710/what-causes-brain-zaps"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2mb1b2
|
how do doctors get paid?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mb1b2/eli5how_do_doctors_get_paid/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm2jgvj",
"cm2jwt4",
"cm2m1h5",
"cm2mhzi",
"cm2s5oe"
],
"score": [
55,
2,
22,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Doctor sends the bill to insurance company. Insurance checks their books and pays $x amount to the doctor. Doctor send the patient a bill for the remaining balance.",
"Sometimes, it depends. A relative of mine was an ER doctor; he and the other ER doctors formed their own \"ER corporation\" so they could pay and manage themselves, whilst billing the hospital they worked in // \"worked for\".",
"My father is a radiologist, and the way he is paid is typical of many doctors (though certainly not all).\n\nThere are about 25-30 doctors who are all radiologists and equal partners of the company that they collectively run. When someone new wants to join (if accepted), he has to pay in a certain sum of money to buy his share of the company. When someone wants to retire, he sells his share to the other doctors.\n\nThe doctors employ nurses, technicians, and office workers who are not partners, just salaried employees.\n\nAs radiologists, the doctors read X-rays, CT scans, etc. either done at their own clinic or at various hospitals within the general area (a city of about 100,000 people and surrounding towns). The partnership is paid either directly by patients or their insurance companies—in the case of work done at their own clinic—or by the hospitals they work at. (They actually go to work at different hospitals—or their clinic—on different days.)\n\nThe doctors decide as a group (with the advice of accountants) how much to spend on rent, new machines, workers' salaries, and other business operations. The rest they take as profit for themselves. If the company does better, they can pay themselves more. If it does worse, they get less.\n\nSometimes, before a doctor actually retires, he chooses to work less than the other doctors. In return, he has to sell part of his share so that he makes less.\n\nAgain, not all doctors everywhere in the U.S. work under such a system. Many are just salaried employees of a bigger firm or hospital. But small to mid-size practices usually work this way. (Lawyers work in a very similar way.)",
"It depends on the doctor and how they are employed, but typically (for US doctors):\n\nDoctors can work in a number of different types of practices. They can either work for themselves (as an individual or in a group practice), for a hospital or clinic, or for an insurance company or health system. The type of practice they work in (called individual, physician group, hospital owned, etc) changes how exactly they get paid but the process is generally similar.\n\nWhen a doctor sees a patient in a clinic, that office visit is assigned a specific designation based upon (1)if the patient is a new or established patient, as well as (2)how sick or complex of a patient they are. In essence, they assign a level of service (that is based upon very strict and standardized guidelines). This level of service for a visit costs a certain price based upon whatever the insurance company has negotiated with the doctor/doctor group/hospital/clinic etc that employs the doctor. If a procedure is performed, or the visit is especially long, there are other modifying factors or things that add to the bill. \n\nWhoever is running the clinic (and thereby determining the type of practice for the doctor, be it the doctor themselves, the group of doctors, the hospital/clinic, etc) receives the payment from the insurance company and patient. How much the doctor actually gets in his/her paycheck at the end of the day then depends on the type of practice they are in. If they work by themselves and run the clinic, they pay their overhead, staff, malpractice insurance, etc, then whatever is left over is their paycheck. If they work in a group, it is often all pooled together from every doctor to pay the overhead/staff then divided up based upon how many patients each doctor saw (and how challenging they were). If they work for a clinic or hospital itself, they usually have a contract to get paid either a certain salary or a certain amount of money for each type of office visit (based upon the level of service I mentioned). \n\nReally, it is extremely complex, I don't know if I quite hit a 5yo level but would be happy to answer any questions. \n\nSource: I am a Doctor. ",
"Medical Revenue Cycle analyst here!\n\n\nThe major process of docs getting paid is called \"Coding and Billing\"; insurance companies have a strict set of procedures and how much they are willing/supposed to pay for them. So, physicians need to translate \"what they did today\" into these procedure codes (called CPT codes) and let the insurance folks know how much they are owed based on how many \"units\" of each procedure was administered (ie, 2 X-rays, 1 General Checkup). The physician can then bill the insurance company, and if applicable, the patient. However, the journey from procedure-to-payment is a lengthy, and there are several routes that the bill can take.\n\n\nThere are a few ways doctors take care of coding and billing, but normally it falls into 1 of 3 categories: in-house, corporate (or \"group\" or a couple of other terms), or outsourced. In-house, the physician is running their own practice and hires people to take care of coding and billing. In a group (or physician network, or whatever-overarching-group-is-called), the doctor passes off their \"charts\" and notes to staff employed by the group, which takes care of all the back-office stuff (hiring, scheduling, and of course, coding-and-billing). These physicians receive a regular paycheck like any other commission-based employee would. Finally, some groups (and some private practice physicians) outsource altogether - they just send info on to another group that takes care of the billing and lets that group take a percentage of what they collect, then deposits the rest back to the physician/group. The remaining amount is handled just as if they had collected it themselves.\n\nNow, that's how the process goes from paper-to-bill-to-cash, but who pays what is a more complex matter as well. Payments typically come from 1 of 2 sources: Patients and Insurance (both of which can be divided into smaller categories).\n\n\nThe healthcare provider \"enrolls\" in a number of insurance plans (this is what is meant by \"in-network\") that will send him more patients if he gives them a bit of a discount. If you aren't in-network, the insurance company may penalize you (higher copay, not count towards deductible, or not even cover you) because that physician isn't contracted with them (and the insurance company can't make money if they're paying full-price for every procedure). Thus, there are a few different scenarios that can result in patients not owing ANYTHING, or patients paying EVERYTHING.\n\n\n\nSo, these are the major scenarios, and let's just say it's a $1,000 procedure:\n\nScenario 1. I am insured, and I am seeing a physician in-network: \n\n* The doctor takes your insurance information and treats you. You go home.\n* Coding takes place to translate the procedures to a standardized \"menu\" of procedures. Now, we can send a bill.\n* The bill is sent to your insurance. They notice you have a $100 co-pay for the procedure. They have a contract with the physician saying they only have to pay $600 for the procedure. The insurance company will sent a check for $600 and an EOB explaining that they are required to write-off $300, and they may bill you for the remaining $100.\n* The physician practice or network or whatever receives the check and posts the payment/write-off, then sends you a bill for $100.\n* Assuming you sent in the check or paid online, the payment gets deposited to the practice's account. Depending on your insurance plan, they might count this towards your deductible.\n\nScenario 2. I am insured, and I am seeing a physician out-of-network, but the procedure is covered (often emergency services):\n\n* The doctor takes your insurance information and treats you. You go home.\n* Coding takes place to translate the procedures to a standardized \"menu\" of procedures. Now, we can send a bill.\n* The bill is sent to your insurance. They notice you have a $150 co-pay for the procedure when performed out-of-network. They do not have a contract with the physician, so they are responsible for $850 of the procedure. The insurance company will sent a check for $850 and an EOB explaining that they may bill you for the remaining $150.\n* The physician practice or network or whatever receives the check and posts the payment, then sends you a bill for $150.\n* Assuming you sent in the check or paid online, the payment gets deposited to the practice's account. Depending on your insurance plan, they might count this towards your deductible (but not likely).\n\n\nScenario 3. I am insured, and I am seeing a physician out-of-network, and the procedure is not covered (DON'T do this! Often only used for cosmetic procedures that you can afford!):\n\n* If this is a cosmetic procedure, you will likely have to pay something or everything up-front.\n* The doctor takes your insurance information and treats you. You go home.\n* Coding takes place to translate the procedures to a standardized \"menu\" of procedures. Now, we can send a bill.\n* The bill is sent to your insurance. They notice you are not covered. They will deny the claim and return the information to the provider saying, \"Nope - not our responsibility. Here's why: NOT COVERED.\" Some providers will double-check and put plenty of effort into making sure that you're not actually covered (sometimes, a procedure is mis-coded, or there can be some negotiation, or some particularly heinous insurance carriers will just deny a claim for no apparent reason). The denial comes back to the provider and is confirmed.\n* The provider sends you a bill (and sometimes a notification of the denial) for $1,000\n* You can probably call in and ask for a payment plan or a discount (\"Prompt-Pay Discount\", \"Charity Adjustment\", or \"Settlement\" are the buzzwords), but ultimately, you owe that now. Some groups will send you to collections if you aren't timely in paying :/\n\n\nScenario 4. I am uninsured:\n\n* The doctor takes your personal information and treats you. You go home.\n* The provider sends you a bill for $1,000\n* You can probably call in and ask for a payment plan or a discount (\"Prompt-Pay Discount\", \"Charity Adjustment\", or \"Settlement\" are the buzzwords), but ultimately, you owe that now. Some groups will send you to collections if you aren't timely in paying :/\n\n\nThere are all kinds of additional rules (like, in most states, if you're covered by Medicaid, they can't send you a bill for emergency services despite copays or whatever), but these are the most likely scenarios. You will not be denied healthcare at most facilities for urgent or life-threatening matters, but they can destroy your credit. Ultimately, commercial insurance carriers (Blue Cross, Aetna, etc) are the best bets both for you and the physician.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3asw0o
|
during a divorce why isn't custody entirely up to the child? if they're old enough to properly understand and make decisions?
|
Sorry if this is a stupid question, I don't know terribly much about divorce but I mean it is their life so shouldn't it be their choice?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3asw0o/eli5_during_a_divorce_why_isnt_custody_entirely/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csfniyw",
"csfpbtj"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Until a child is 18, they aren't considered developed enough to be making legal decisions. They can testify and favor a parent, but it doesn't make a definitive choice. Once that child hits 18, they're allowed to live with whoever they want. ",
"As a society we like to pretend we care about \"the children\" but we give children zero rights at all. No matter how much children tell us they don't like something, we ignore them, all the hell we put them through is \"for their own good.\" "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
b6geva
|
What is in the synaptic cleft exactly?
|
As in, what is in the gap between the axon of a neuron and another cell? Is it air? Vacuum? Fluid?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/b6geva/what_is_in_the_synaptic_cleft_exactly/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejm59b8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Fluid, basically extracellular fluid speaking generally. \n\n_URL_1_\n\nFor a synapse the gap between the two cells is only about 20-40 nanometers across, so the total volume of fluid is not that much, and the specific amounts of neurotransmitters and different ions present will change from moment to moment and depending on what type of synapse it is.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://book.bionumbers.org/how-big-is-a-synapse/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extracellular_fluid"
]
] |
|
9zgrem
|
Can anyone help me settle a chemistry debate with my wife?
|
My daughter sometimes wets the bed in the middle of the night, but our neighbors kept complaining about doing laundry at night, so now we have to wait until morning.
My wife is insistent that we not use bleach because urine has ammonia and everyone knows mixing bleach and ammonia is bad.
I think we should use bleach because overnight pee? Sanitize that!
The thing is, I don't actually know much about the ammonia/bleach reaction aside from don't do it, and I can't imagine that the amount of ammonia is enough to make some kind of reaction in a washing machine.
So, dear Reddit scientists, who is right? Is it actually dangerous to wash pee sheets with bleach? Would there be enough bacterial growth overnight to warrant sanitizing? Who worries too much?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9zgrem/can_anyone_help_me_settle_a_chemistry_debate_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ea9b9wj",
"ea9ci04",
"ea9djor",
"ea9dzl8",
"ea9eqa2"
],
"score": [
3,
12,
61,
47,
3
],
"text": [
"The issue with using bleach is unless the sheets are white you run the risk of ruining them. Color safe bleach doesn't disinfect so using it would not eliminate your concern.\n\nSo try this idea instead.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nTreat Stains\n\nAmmonia makes certain types of stains disappear with minimal effort on your part.\n\nMake an all-purpose stain remover by combining equal parts water, ammonia and liquid dish detergent or your regular laundry detergent in a spray bottle. Spritz this on food spills, ink stains, barely-there grass stains and other marks at least 30 minutes before rinsing the solution out and laundering.\n\nFor a gentler version that doesn't need to be rinsed out, combine 1/2 ounce of ammonia with 1 ounce of detergent and 2 cups of water. This contains less soap, so it is less effective, but perfect for minor discolorations.\n\nTackle blood, grass and urine stains by combining equal parts ammonia and water. Apply the solution to the mark with a soft cloth or sponge and wait about 30 minutes before laundering per usual.\n\n",
"While I'm not qualified to weigh in on the chemistry side of things, I do have a vast experience of doing laundry of varying degrees of grossness. \nYou don't need to bleach your daughter's sheets in order for them to be really clean. The main grossness factor in urine is the smell, which is easily rinsed out. Just wash on a hot cycle with regular detergent. You can add white vinegar to the load as well (in your washer's bleach slot, conveniently), and that will help, as well as keeping your washer in good condition. Alternatively, if you have a utility sink, I'd suggest putting the sheets in to soak rather than leaving them in the washer til morning. \n",
"When you mix bleach and ammonia they react to form chloramines which are highly toxic\n\nBleach is used in laundry primarily because it whitens stains. Bleaching damages the fabric and shortens its life. \n\nYour daughter's urine is sterile, and contains almost no ammonia (assuming she doesn't have a serious kidney problem.)\n\nYou can safely bleach the sheets, but there is absolutely no need to do so. ",
"Urine only contains about 1% ammonia. It's also pretty soluble in water so a water pre-wash would take it out. It's so low that nobody worries about bleaching fabric nappies. Did she use reusable or disposable ones and, if the former, did she bleach them?\n\nIn the other hand, urine isn't faeces so bleaching isn't really necessary anyway.\n\nIn short, I think you're **both** over-reacting!",
"Humans get rid of Nitrogen in their body mainly through producing ureum, not ammonia. Ureum is less soluble in water than ammonia (which most fish make to get rid of their nitrogen), but easier to make than uric acid (which most birds make to get the nitrogen out of their system). I don't know the exact chemistry of the reaction between bleach and ureum, but the ureum molecule first needs to be cleaved in order to make ammonia."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.hunker.com/13422713/how-to-use-ammonia-in-the-laundry"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bowqtg
|
what is the geometric mean and why is it good as a type of average for comparing things that are indexes of lots of other things?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bowqtg/eli5_what_is_the_geometric_mean_and_why_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"enly23a"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The geometric mean of n values is the nth root of the product of the n values.\n\nBy contrast the usual mean, the arithmetic mean, is the sum of the n values divided by n.\n\nThe geometric mean is interesting when you are interested in tracking proportional changes between different values.\n\nSay, you have two values: 1 and 100.\n\nThe arithmetic mean is 50.5 and the geometric mean is 10.\n\nNow, say you double one of the values. \n\n* If you double the first value -- (1, 100) - > (2, 100) -- the arithmetic mean becomes 51 and the geometric mean is 14.1. \n* If you double the second value -- (1, 100) - > (1, 200) -- the arithmetic mean jumps to 100.5 while the geometric mean is the same 14.1.\n\nWith the geometric mean, the same proportional change to any of the values has the same effect on the mean. With the arithmetic mean, the larger values dominate. \n\nFor this reason, some like to use it for component indexes. For example, a 25% gain in a 10 dollar stock has the same effect as a 25% gain in a 100 dollar stock in the same index. There are other ways of handling this problem (such as pre-scaling the data) but the geometric mean is one tool in a statisticians toolbox."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
d53zra
|
when you’re playing chess with the computer and you select the lowest difficulty, how does the computer know what movie is not a clever move?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d53zra/eli5_when_youre_playing_chess_with_the_computer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f0jg1qn",
"f0jg2h6",
"f0jg4lf",
"f0jgnsz",
"f0jhjqy",
"f0jhtaa",
"f0ji721",
"f0jis48",
"f0jj23k",
"f0jkaup",
"f0jlhc2",
"f0jymfr",
"f0jywro",
"f0k4ihp",
"f0kcczy",
"f0l3yzf",
"f0l7eyi",
"f0ltw17"
],
"score": [
38,
12759,
2,
16,
915,
293,
8,
11,
156,
13,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The computer typically rates moves by looking ahead -- if I make this move, will I lose a piece or a good position in the future, or will my opponent.\n\nSetting lower difficulty tells the computer to look less far ahead, or to consider fewer possibilities before stopping.",
"The computer typically rates moves by looking ahead -- if I make this move, will I lose a piece or a good position in the future, or will my opponent.\n\nSetting lower difficulty tells the computer to look less far ahead, or to consider fewer possibilities before stopping.",
"The computer typically rates moves by looking ahead -- if I make this move, will I lose a piece or a good position in the future, or will my opponent.\n\nSetting lower difficulty tells the computer to look less far ahead, or to consider fewer possibilities before stopping.",
"Well... if it knew what *was* clever, surely it would just pic one of the lower-ranking possible moves in its algorithm?",
"Computers are ranking and scoring moves as it goes. When you lower the difficulty it will not look as far ahead, and purposly not choose the move it deems the best.",
"In short a computer is capable (with enough processing power) of looking at every possible move that could happen based on the current state of the board, and calculating the response to each move, and repeating this calculation until it hits the end of each possible list of moves. This builds what is called a decision tree. Once that tree is built, the computer can score it's potential moves based on how likely they are to lead to a win in the computers favor. \n\nOnce all the moves are scored, it simply picks the highest scoring move and goes with that one. A difficulty setting may affect how moves are scored or it may require the computer to pick lower scoring moves so the game swings more in favor of the player. \n\ntl;dr - Computers can calculate the best moves possible, lower difficulty can force the computer to make weaker moves.",
"A bit simplified description is that a computer play chess by evaluating a position with some numerical score that is based on how the pieces is placed on the board. It it stat with the current position and test all possible move and evaluated by calculating the score. It reject the one that is bad for it and test all possible opponents move and take the one that is good for the opponent. Recent the alternative where the opponents have move that is very good for them and continue to test all alternative. So that for some time of for some number of moves and you can find what move that give you the best advantage even if the opponent do there best move.\n\nTo change difficulty you primary limit the time or the numer of position the computer use to evaluate moves , you could also change the selection criteria so it select a move with a lower score. You could write in so that there is a 5% chance that is take a move that is very good for you.",
"A typical chess program analyzes a position by \"looking forward\" - it predicts the best moves to achieve a better result in subsequent moves. Setting it to low difficulty limits the number of moves it looks ahead. This allows the human player to more easily beat the program by employing better positional strategy (ie using human heuristics/experience to make \"better\" moves for the long term)",
"Generally, when you set a computer to play at a lower difficulty, three things are happening:\n\n* You're limiting the amount of time that the computer is allowed to \"think\"\n* You're limiting the number of moves ahead that the computer looks\n* You're denying the computer access to its opening book and its pre-selected \"good moves\"\n\nSo if you take a lot of that stuff away, you really limit a computer's ability to select strong moves. It might not get so bad that it just throws its queen away and leaves its king open to an easy checkmate, but it might miss things like \"Oh, in two turns your knight can do some damage unless I move this pawn\" or \"if I don't move this rook now, I can be checkmated in 5 turns\" the way that a supercomputer would be able to calculate.",
"Making AI convincingly stupid is often a lot harder than making it cruelly difficult.\n\nThe program has some method of determining the \"best\" moves by combining brute force (just calcuate all possible moves for the next few turns) and priorities.\n\nAfter running these programs over and over we start to know which priorities produce the best win rates and which produce the worst.\n\nTo make the AI look dumb, you have it stick with the bad priorities more often and pick the \"best\" move less often. You don't want it to *never* pick the best move though, it should still respond believably to easy-to-see hazards and not just lose pieces any child would have repositioned.",
"A computer doesn't inherently know what a good or bad move is. Instead it looks at lots and lots and lots of possibilities and chooses the one most likely to lead to a win state.\n\nSince chess has an extreme amount of possible states, it's impossible for computers to look at all possibilities. Instead they will look ahead a certain number of moves and rank the state of the board (for example, piece advantage, position advantage, possible mates, etc.) and will choose a move that is most likely to lead to a favorable future state.\n\nTo \"dumb down\" a computer, they restrict how far ahead it looks at possible moves. The less moves it can look ahead, the less likely it is to choose a series of moves that are favorable for it in the long term, allowing it to be out smarted by a human opponent capable of looking ahead further.",
"In chess .com the computer levels are stupid. They basically make good moves and then make one terrible move. Then they make more good moves, then one stupid move.. like sacrificing their queen. They can still win though because they will play really really smart after that. It's very unrealistic.",
"I'm totally guessing here but I think it all comes down to how many plays in advance the computer gives itself to think before actually making a move. For instance, if the computer just moves pieces randomly it will be the same as no difficulty. If the computer checks the possible consequences of moving a piece (for instance trying to avoid that piece being eliminated...) That would be difficulty 1. The more analysis the computer makes the harder it will be as an opponent, the computer is not intentionally trying to play dumb, it's just not trying hard enough.\n\nAgain, I'm just guessing",
"Anyone remember the computer cheating in windows 95?",
"Depends on the program but in general yes.A good chess program has every possible layout as an integer score (or generates scores on the fly). From any state that you are in, it selects (often randomly) the next valid state that has a score +/- the level of difficulty (or a range determined by the level of difficulty). \n\nedit: typed a section twice, i've removed it. \n\nedit: realized I may not have been as direct as I could be. The computer does know a move that has the greatest success value, it may or may not pick it based on the range of difficulty it is allowed.",
"Since this question has already been answered in many very good ways I would just like to add a little bit of general AI knowledge on top. Most AIs are designed to the hardest difficulty first and then scaled downward. The designer creates a \"perfect\" AI that usually is too difficult to be fun and then scales that AI down by intentionally causing mistakes. This is particularly true for games with potentially perfect play or where the computer has a distinct advantage (such as reaction time). For first person shooters enemies usually deal less damage than players and have intentionally bad aim. For fighting games random pauses are often injected into the AI where it is not allowed to take an action or sometimes intentionally wrong actions are taken at intervals providing space for the player. The primary similarity is that AI is always designed from best to worst and it takes more skill, time and effort to make an AI bad at a game than good at a game.\n\nEDIT: Grammar",
"An answer I didn't read here: \n\n\nIn the same way that a person who has driven to work many times is able to know which patterns are likely to develop. In the early game you generally have something like 10-40 different moves to make, to some people this isn't a lot, but realistically, an amateur player probably looks at 60-70% of them, one move out, where a grandmaster can see literally 100% of the upcoming moves for potentially 3, 4, or even 5 future moves - and perhaps falling off to 85-90% after that.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nChess is an amazing game because there are 10^(120) different games out there - more than the number of atoms in the universe. For this reason, computers are an eternity away from solving chess. That being said, League of legends probably has an infinitely higher number of potential games, given the complexity of potential moves a player makes in a given game frame (hint: there's a lot). \n\n & #x200B;\n\nBut yes, the answer everyone has already given - it rates the moves, finds the worst ones, eliminates them, and move forward. This is another way people learn about the concept of recursion, whereby the optimal move is a function of subsequent optimal moves, thus the computer cannot rate a move until it understands the position of the board after that move, etc. etc., so thus sometimes we can think of this recursively, where the score method is something like scorn(move\\_n) = score (move\\_n + 1) while the number of moves ultimatlely converges into the endgame (stalemate, checkmate etc.), where the win is the highest score and the loss is the lowest.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nWhen you think about how quickly a computer can solve complex math problems, it's pretty cool to think how quantitatively a computer could evaluate the best move in a complex game like Chess.",
"chess engines like stockfish create a tree diagram of future potential lines and runs an algorithm that gives a score to these lines according to piece value, position etc. The further the engine predicts, the more accurately it can score these lines and the more difficult it is to win against it. If the engine is only allowed to see a few moves ahead, most of these lines are going to have very similar scores and thus sub-optimal lines will be selected."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3g6vah
|
Did America use 'Shock and Awe' (Rapid Dominance), to gain control of/ access to oil in Iraq?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3g6vah/did_america_use_shock_and_awe_rapid_dominance_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctvf8n2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This submission has been removed because it violates our ['20-Year Rule'](_URL_0_). To discourage off-topic discussions of current events, questions, answers and all other comments must be confined to events that happened 20 years ago or more."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_no_current_events"
]
] |
||
4ytk2h
|
how does the akinator site/app so accurately guess characters/people in so few questions?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ytk2h/eli5_how_does_the_akinator_siteapp_so_accurately/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6qcuok",
"d6qd33q",
"d6qddib",
"d6qdhov",
"d6qgiyr",
"d6qh8ln",
"d6qjdv7",
"d6qls2b",
"d6qrjf8"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
12,
33,
13,
91,
27,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It seems to start by asking questions that will lead to answers that are common choices (popular celebrities/characters from movies/tv) and if you don't choose the clues that lead to those answers it will start asking general questions again (more vague) like if you're looking for an anime character youtube personality etc. then narrow it down to whatever you say yes too by hair color, facial hair, other distinctive features till it has a reliable answer. ",
"[This search](_URL_0_) has answers for you.",
"Just answered approx 70 questions thinking about a (once very popular) video game character and the site was unable to guess it. ( _URL_0_ )",
"It's pretty much a long process of elimination, isn't it?",
"If we simplify somewhat and pretend that you can only give two answers, yes or no, then after 20 questions there are about a million possible answers. There are probably not a million famous people, fictional or otherwise. (And if there are: after 30 questions, there are about a billion possible answers, which is certainly enough.)\n\nOf course, akinator has to deal with the fact that you're probably not going to give exactly accurate answers, but the basic idea is that a few more questions results in being able to choose from a much larger collection.",
"It works because many people already answered the questions thinking of the same person as you. Akinator remembers all the answers of its users and uses them to learn what questions and answers lead to what person.\n\nIf you try describing a very obscure/unknown person akinator will not be able to guess them because not enough people tried describing the person, so Akinator doesn't have enough data to guess correctly.",
"Every question is designed to divide the set of people that it knows about approximately in half (male/female, real/fictional etc.), so with every question you can discard about half of potential answers. \n\n10 or 20 questions may seem few, but actually that is quite a lot of information to work with. If you are able to discard half of possibilities 10 times in a row, then you can uniquely identify about a thousand characters. If you do it 10 times more, then this becomes a million, for 30 yes/no questions this becomes a billion.\n\nIf you think about how many popular characters or people are there, there are most definitely *not* a billion or even a million of them.",
"Courtesy of /u/martelfirst \n \n > When someone answers a series of questions and Akinator gets the answer wrong, it offers you the choice to write in the correct answer.\nThroughout the years, with millions of users playing the game, Akinator built its database of answers to different series of questions. The database knows the patterns, which is why sometimes it seems to guess an obscure character based on very few questions.\nNaturally, some people may answer questions wrong from time to time, which would falsify the database if it weren't for more people answering correctly at a specific question. The database tends to take the most common answer as the correct one. So if you're thinking Stallone, and the question is \"does he have black hair\". Most people will answer \"yes\". Some people might get it wrong and answer \"no\", but the system takes into account that there can be mistakes.",
"28 questions including \"does your character have a number in their name?\" and \"is your character associated with wolves?\" to get direwolf20."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=akinator&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all"
],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Mole"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
e7fe13
|
What was the lifestyle of Germanic tribes during the Roman Era like?
|
What was their lifestyle like? What types of houses did they live in, and did they live alone or in groups? Were they hunter gatherers or farmers?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/e7fe13/what_was_the_lifestyle_of_germanic_tribes_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f9z1w41"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Information on the \"Germanic\" tribes on the fringes of the Roman world is relatively scant for much of the Roman Empire's existence in the west. These various groups left little in the way of native writing, even less was written down contemporaneously to the events they ostensibly depict, and the works of Roman writers were hardly unbiased sources on the ways of their neighbors. So historians are left with a few written sources that need to be carefully examined, ie the work of Tacitus and Caesar, or the works of Jordanes, and consequently much of our knowledge on these groups comes from archaeology. \n\nThe Germanic tribes of the early Empire were quasi-sedentary. They did not lead hunter gatherer/nomadic existences nor were they exclusively farmers, much less were they urbanized, instead they only temporarily occupied good sites for agriculture and livestock. They would stay put for as long as the soil held out, likely decade or two, and then move along to a new site that offered greener pastures. These group likely differed significantly in size, but early in the Roman empire they were unlikely to include more than a few hundred people at the absolute highest level. Roman authors and their tales of hordes and throngs of Barbarians thronging over the border in massive armies tens of thousands strong, are just that, tales. Urban development, and subsequently larger populations, around the Germanic world went alongside the development of Roman infrastructure. The first areas to start an exclusively sedentary lifestyle would have been trade hubs with the Roman world, trading on the North Sea with Britain, along the Rhine, and only gradually penetrating deeper into Germania. \n\nThe societies that arose in Germania were dominated by a warrior elite who were able to exert, more or less, exclusive military power in the area and dominate the smaller groups that lived around them. While many men may have had access to weapons, and indeed bore them, it is unlikely any but the highest rungs of society, those with access to Roman goods, were involved in politics. Our historical sources are not clear on how these societies were structured exactly. Tacitus, a Roman historian, claims that in these societies kings were hereditary and generals were chosen by merit of their skill at arms, but this seems unlikely. Even more farfetched are 19th century romantic notions of Germanic freemen operating a quasi-democratic society. It seems likely to me that political power was extremely transitory. A single chieftain or warlord might wield a great deal of power within his own lifetime and provide his children with a more substantial advantage in the future, but there's little to actually indicate hereditary transfer of power.\n\nWe should also take care to not attempt to categorize these different polities as ethnic groups. Many of the labels that were applied to Germanic peoples by Roman observers are routinely resurrected to describe groups living in a similar locations centuries later, but there is little reason to think that ethnic markers were as long lived as this. Instead we should imagine these societies as much more fluid with tribal allegiances changing as different contexts arose. The Germanic people of the early Empire were likely no more loyal to their \"tribe\" than they were to another that offered them a better life. Loyalty and politics in this time and place were much more personal, with gift giving, serving in a warband, and so on being the means by which political alliances were maintained, not through ethnic similarity. \n\nThe material culture of these people, the kind of houses they lived in, the goods they owned, and so on, were as a rule quite plain. Indeed houses in the Low Countries and Northern Germany often consisted of little more than a dug in floor, a roof, and a small hearth. Goods that they owned would likewise be rather simple and locally sourced. Pottery, beer, subsistence foods, simple weapons such as spears or bows and arrows could likely be made locally, but more luxurious goods such as wine, armor, jewelry, and so on were likely Roman imports and limited to an extremely small part of the population, those with contacts in the Roman world whether they were traders, raiders, or mercenaries (and the difference between the three was likely pretty small). As the Germanic world coalesced into larger polities this would change, but this was a development much later in time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4ws059
|
Were there any Native tribes in what would become the U.S. and Canada that were notably more advanced technologically than their contemporaries?
|
Something I've wondered about on occasion. I know there are variances in culture and "minor" things like basket weaving as a random example, but what about in agriculture or war (weapons or even tactics) and the like?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4ws059/were_there_any_native_tribes_in_what_would_become/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d69xb1j"
],
"score": [
25
],
"text": [
"To start with, I do have an answer for you, but only reluctantly. I'd much rather say I reject the entire premise of the question. So I'll start with why I don't think the premise is sound, and then I'll give you part of the answer anyways. \n\nSo the trite complaint is to say that \"advanced\" is a highly relative and vague term and most anthropologists aren't going to use it for exactly that reason. However, I can already hear you saying: \"Yes, but surely there are some things we can say are objectively more advanced, like gunpowder weaponry compared with bows!\". To that I say: absolutely, but we need to make sure we understand what criteria we are using to define \"advanced\". \n\nGenerally, people think of Native American societies as less advanced than European societies because they are defining advanced on the basis of metalworking technology and highly-complex state society, neither of which were well developed in the Americas north of Mexico. However, that is only one dimension we could evaluate how \"advanced\" a society is. \n\nLet me elaborate by quoting from Eric Wolf (1997:5), emphasis mine:\n > Many of us even grew up believing that this West has a genealogy, according to which ancient Greece begat Rome, Rome begat Christian Europe, Christian Europe begat the Renaissance, the Renaissance the Enlightenment, the Enlightenment political democracy and the industrial revolution. Industry, crossed with democracy, in turn yielded the United States, embodying the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. \n\n > Such a developmental scheme is misleading...History is thus converted into a tale about the furtherance of virtue, about how the virtuous win out over the bad guys. Frequently, this turns into a story of how **the winners prove that they are virtuous and good by winning**. \n\nWhat Wolf is describing as a developmental genealogy here (Greece to Rome and so on) is very frequently the basis for qualifying the idea of what \"advanced\" means. The idea being that the qualities of European societies in the late 18th and into the 19th centuries are the benchmark for \"advancement\". For example, the ability to project power across the planet in colonial and imperialist projects. A frequent question about the relative lack of advancement in Native societies north of Mexico is \"where are the empires?\". However, we have to question whether or not \"empire\" is really an advancement, or necessarily a marker of moral success. \n\nNow you might say that I'm conflating moral success with technological or social advancements, but that idea of moral success is really very much bound up in the ideas we have about what an \"advanced\", or \"modern\", society consists of. As Wolf says, the genealogy of the West is often told as a moral success story, with each \"advancement\" moving closer towards the virtuous society of the present. It's really important to decouple this idea of virtue from advancement. Why do we define virtue (and advancement, consequently) on the basis of conquest? What is so inherently virtuous about empire that we consider it \"advanced\", for instance? \n\nIndeed, in the present it is fairly uncontroversial to say that empire, colonialism, and monarchy run counter to our democratic ideals. Yet, in the past, we don't often consider Native societies in North American - considerably more egalitarian on the whole than their monarchist counterparts in Europe - as embodying \"advanced\" or \"modern\" society. Since they are not part of this genealogy of the West, the virtues we value in a \"modern\" society are glossed over as \"primitive\", rather than being \"advanced\". \n\nSo, my objection to the very premise aside, we still have to have some sort of definition of \"advanced\" to work with to actually answer your question. In this case I'll just use \"complexity\" as a byword for \"advanced\". In anthropology, \"complexity\" is an analogy borrowed from biology that describes an organism (or society, technology, etc.) as more or less complex on the basis of how many components it involves. For instance, a dog is considerably more complex than a bacterium. In a social sense, a state society is generally more complex than a foraging society because there are a larger number of social roles inside that society (\"organs\", perhaps). \n\nHowever, just like with the biological example, complexity is just descriptive, and doesn't necessarily indicate how successful and organism might be. Bacteria are extraordinarily successful organism despite not being very complex, while you can list any number of extinct mammals, for instance, that are considerably more complex but not nearly as successful. As this applies to technology, let's say that the complexity of a technology is a product of the social complexity necessary to produce it. Firearms, then, require a number of specialists to produce, while a bow and arrows can be produced by a single individual. It could be argued that early firearms were hardly superior to bows despite their greater complexity, so again, complexity doesn't necessarily equate with efficacy, but that is a bit of a tangent. \n\nIn terms of complex technologies north of Mexico, agricultural technology in the U.S. Southwest was significantly more complex in many ways than in other regions. Particularly irrigation technology. The Hohokam farmers of southern Arizona (primarily in the Phoenix and Tucson basins) were able to construct extensive irrigation canals that ran for many miles and seem to have functioned for many hundreds of years, with the apogee being between about A.D.800 and 1300. These canals cover an absolutely huge area. For instance, [a map of the canals](_URL_2_) under what is most of modern Phoenix. [A map that includes the lower Gila River as well](_URL_0_), showing some of the extent to which the entire Phoenix basin was covered in irrigation canals (and therefore put under cultivation). \n\nThese were not simple irrigation channels either. As you can see from the maps, many ran for a number of miles. The engineering that has to go into a canal to ensure it flows continuously on a gradient over that long a distance is a feat unto itself. [These weren't small canals either in many cases](_URL_1_), especially the large central \"trunks\" of each canal system. The complicated, branching structure of the canal system is also a feat of engineering in that it requires a good understanding of how large each ditch needs to be to provide sufficient water for all the side channels. We know also that many of the main canals are positioned so their openings take advantage of areas with high flow along the Salt River, due to areas where bedrock encroaches on the surface. \n\nWhile there are traditions of irrigation in other parts of the U.S. and Canada, none come even close to the scale of these Hohokam systems. Even in the Eastern Woodlands, home to the largest extent of agricultural societies north of Mexico, no irrigation systems reach this level of complexity. Though, to be fair, there is significantly more ground water and rainfall in the East that makes such systems much less valuable than in the extremely arid deserts of southern Arizona. \n\nThere are any number of other examples of technological variation across the Native societies of the U.S.A and Canada, but hopefully this gives you at least an idea of one dimension along which that variation exists. \n\n**Edit:** Need a citation for the material from Wolf!\n\nWolf, Eric R. 1997. *Europe and the People Without History*. University of California Press."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://phoenixspatialhistory.asu.edu/sites/default/files/canalII/Picture2.png",
"http://www.waterhistory.org/histories/hohokam2/pix1.jpg",
"http://arizonaexperience.org/sites/arizonaexperience.org/files/base_images/hohokam-canals_turney-map.jpg"
]
] |
|
ab18no
|
Does alcoholism in parents affect the tolerance of their kids? If so, how does that work biologically/genetically?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/ab18no/does_alcoholism_in_parents_affect_the_tolerance/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecz7dhm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Epigenetics. DNA is not immutable. The body will put \"markers\" on the DNA so different subsection are ignored or used. These can transferred to children. Basically, the environment affects which genes we express. A classic example is historical trauma which is that there are heightened anxiety in the children and grandchildren of Holocaust survivors. This could be explained by epigenetics.\n\nOne thing that is believed to be epigenetic is tolerance. If you abused a drug (including alcohol), you can use it for a while before the body develops significant tolerance. Once you stop it will quickly in a couple days go back to original \"normal\" tolerance. However, now if you are reexposed to the drug, it will take far less time to develop tolerance. Now it will only take a couple days to redevelop your previous level of tolerance. Your body remembers that it should modify it's response to these drugs. \n\n\nThe body also remembers some stress responses. The body has two responses to stress, trying to stop it or do some other pleasure activity (like stress eating). This is why alcoholics are likely to relapse when they are stressed. The bodies reward system goes right to alcohol to relive it. Some of this conditioning is thought to be epigenetic.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2958p8
|
Why is it that Newspaper Articles are accepted as credible sources when they are often opinionated or biased?
|
I understand that an essay would not only accept newspaper articles as sources.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2958p8/why_is_it_that_newspaper_articles_are_accepted_as/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cihk5hp",
"cihktw6",
"cihkw81",
"cihwu5e",
"cii0hze"
],
"score": [
14,
31,
66,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Newspaper articles are accepted as sources in much the same way that anything else is accepted as a source. Historians generally strive towards objectivity, but we also understand that there is no source that is totally objective. I teach university undergraduates, and whenever they have a primary source analysis or something along those lines, I always tell them that I do not want to see the statement, \"This source is biased.\" The reason for that is that *every* source is biased. In everything -- newspaper articles, government edicts, telegrams, diary entries, interviews, memoirs, histories written after the fact -- there are inbuilt \"prejudices\", so to speak: cultural assumptions, socioeconomic circumstances, political leanings, and so on. These must all be taken into account when evaluating a source. A newspaper article is no different in this regard. No conscientious historian will take an article at face value, but will evaluate it within the wider context of other bodies of work.\n\nLet me give you an example. You pick up a 1935 copy of the *Völkischer Beobachter*, which was the official Nazi Party newspaper, and you find an article in it about the nature of Jewish involvement in German society. Naturally, we can say that this is a \"biased\" source; it is the mouthpiece of a virulently and violently antisemitic political movement. If you want to know about the nature of Jewish involvement in German society (which, after all, is what the article is about), this is not really going to tell you all that much about it. However, it *will* tell you an awful lot about what the NS regime wanted citizens to *think* about Jews in Germany. You can also, perhaps, infer a fair bit about the harsh realities of being a Jew living in NS Germany in 1935, since the article would undoubtedly be a harsh attack on Jews, and it appears in a nationally-circulated newspaper with a high readership. \n\nSo, in answer to your question, newspaper articles are accepted as much (or as little) as any other source. You can't just accept what one says out of hand, and you must interrogate the source closely. But even the most opinionated or \"biased\" source has value. It depends what questions you are asking of your source.",
"Just a modnote as this question got a report - questions about the historical method (including analyzing and working with primary sources) are very much encouraged in here. ",
"I wrote my final undergraduate thesis on the role of journalism in shaping our understanding of history — focusing specifically during the Spanish Civil War — using contemporary newspaper reports as my primary reference material, so I'm well aware of the pitfalls of using them as historiographical sources. But I also think newspapers (and journalistic writing generally) are completely valid and incredibly precious parts of the historical narrative — as long as you use them in the right way.\n\nThere's an old adage about journalism being \"the first rough draft of history\" — though exactly who coined that phrase seems to be [the subject of some debate](_URL_0_) — which I think is a nice epigrammatic summary of why journalism is important to history. \n\nIn the last two centuries or so, journalists have generally been the first people to chronicle and analyse events and, most importantly, *to write that analysis down*. They are history's first responders; they create a paper trail that provides a foundational basis for understanding events as they were understood at the time — because the importance of the news media in framing popular understanding in the modern era cannot be overstated.\n\nAs contemporary eyewitness accounts, newspapers are often the most prolific, articulate and readily available sources. They're certainly not the only contemporary sources, or even in most cases the best, but they are a starting point for further enquiry.\n\nWhat I mean by 'use them in the right way' is really 'understand and interrogate biases'. The first lesson in my very first historical method class was that pure, philosophical objectivity in the writing of history is a myth. It doesn't exist. Historians are shaped by their own social, cultural and political context, and all come with their own biases and subjective interpretations. The study of history is an exercise in interpreting evidence to validate or counter a thesis — and the use of evidence is invariably selective. So then it's about damage limitation, and what *kind* of selectivity it is: are you excluding evidence because it's irrelevant to the thesis, or because it explicitly goes against your argument?\n\nWhen we talk about 'objective' history *qua* 'good' history, we're not arguing that something can be proven or disproven absolutely — in fact, that idea should go out the window on day 1, along with the idea of true objectivity. What we're really talking about is understanding and accounting for the context, interpretive frameworks (and yes, biases) that affect both primary source material and historiography.\n\nAll that being said: interpreting and analysing journalistic reportage is exactly the same process as assessing formal historiography. You look at social context and political orientation and geography and culture, and compare to other sources, and develop an assessment of that source. Rinse and repeat. \n\nSo — and I'm going to use my own personal examples here — when I'm writing about how the bombing of Guernica was reported in the Anglo-American press, I know that in the late 1930s the *Times of London*'s editorial page was ardently pro-German; how could that affect their editors' willingness to directly accuse the Germans of carrying out the bombing? When I'm talking about attacks on the Spanish clergy, I know that the *New York Times*' editorial bullpen at that time was dominated by Catholics — how does that affect their framing of anticlerical violence?\n\nEssentially, credibility is a subjective judgement like any other, and no source is 'credible' in a vacuum; rather, its credibility is derived from others' perspectives on its use of evidence and the sophistication of its argument. We can cross-reference a contemporary newspaper account against the accepted historical version of events (where one exists) and find factual errors or outright untruths. But that doesn't change the view that newspaper provides into how events were framed at the time, and from there extrapolate valuable insights into the contemporary zeitgeist.\n\nIf you can, find a copy of Phillip Knightley's *[The First Casualty](_URL_2_)* for a fascinating read about how journalists and propagandists (and some people who were both at once) have shaped public perceptions in times of war; alternatively, going back to the Guernica example, H.R. Southworth's *[Guernica! Guernica!](_URL_1_)* They should give you some more practical examples of what I've tried to explain here.\n\n*Edit: thank you for the gold, stranger.*",
"Newspaper articles are fantastic sources mainly because they provide such blatant bias. Especially when dealing with historic newspapers the political slant is often obvious and not even hidden. \n\nWhen encountering any source as a historian we always assume bias. Infact one of the key facets by which historians engage their craft is by analyzing and discussing the facts surrounding a particular source. By aggregating sources that provide a broad swath of historical experience and opinion it is much easier to convey the subtle details of a particular issue or event.\n\nGenerally as a historian you don't want to use primary sources that deal in dry facts that proclaim objectivity. If we want to learn more about the facts and minutiae of an even we would either look for other historical works, or even better cross reference historical documents that discuss the event in question.\n\nFor the average history student you want to bulk up the context of your piece with Secondary sources that discuss your topic in context. A textbook or Journal Article would provide the backbone of your paper. But the meat of any historical article always comes from the ugly, dirty, messy opinions you find in primary source documents.\n\nWhats most important is that you look at history with a skeptical eye, and always presume the most cynical of motives when you read any source. From there you can start to approach the truth, and perhaps write yourself a decent paper.",
"I minored in journalism in college and will always remember what my journalism ethics professor told us - There is a misconception that journalism is supposed to be unbiased. That is not true, it is supposed to be objective. As long as facts are reported accurately and both sides are given a chance to speak, the journalist has met the ethical obligation to be objective.\n\nApply this to academic research. When you write a paper, you are presenting an argument and evidence to support your argument. You will naturally present the information in a way that favors your argument (this is human nature). You should address any evidence that contradicts your argument and acknowledge dissenting opinions but you then usually try to either discredit that dissenting evidence/opinion or explain how ti does not apply to the argument you are advancing. In this way you have been objective.\n\nJournalistic writing, when done properly, is not much different than academic writing in terms of being objecting and fair even while being biased. \n\nNow there are some journalistic sources that are not objective. There is also academic and peer-reviewed writing that is not objective. This is why you are supposed to evaluate the evidence being considered, why you conduct a literature review, etc. Also sources should be evaluated."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/press_box/2010/08/who_said_it_first.html",
"http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Guernica_Guernica.html?id=1R304lcSa4kC&redir_esc=y",
"http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_First_Casualty.html?id=DXu6XL4g4agC&redir_esc=y"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
6327o8
|
How does the absorption spectrum of compounds and molecules differ from that of their constituent elements?
|
I know that there is a very specific absorption spectrum for for example Nitrogen and Oxygen, and that these allow us to estimate the atmospheres of other celestial bodies. Is there a sufficient difference in absorption spectra between these and NOX gases to determine weather another body had an atmosphere of one or the other? How does this difference exist (if indeed it does at all)?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6327o8/how_does_the_absorption_spectrum_of_compounds_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfqy5d8"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Within an atom, the only \"modes\" for absorbing or emitting energy are electrons transitioning between different energy levels. Molecules offer additional modes. Each bond in the molecule can act like a spring, storing energy through the different ways the bond can vibrate. The greenhouse effect, for instance, is due to vibrational modes in the bonds between carbon and oxygen at the same energy as infrared photons, trapping energy radiated from the Earth.\n\n~~As far as I know, molecules will still radiate energy at the same wavelengths as their constitute atoms. But the bonds between atoms add additional emission lines (typically at lower energies, i.e. longer wavelengths).~~ Thank you RapidCatLauncher for correcting what was severe oversight. The electron energies around a single nucleus are quite different from those allowed within a bond orbital (if they weren't, bonding might not occur in the first place, as it wouldn't be a favorable, lower-energy state). I will leave discussion of this point to anyone with more knowledge of molecular orbital theory. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6g1oe6
|
is it really possible for a person or entity to get precise information, such as your street location, from your ip address?
|
Hi everyone.
I've heard this a couple of times now and I'm not sure what to believe.
My understanding was that the most a person could do with an IP address was find the city you live in. Precise information like street location could only be obtained from an ISP. Now I'm not so sure. Could anyone explain this?
Thanks.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6g1oe6/eli5_is_it_really_possible_for_a_person_or_entity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dimpv7a",
"dimpzbl",
"dimq3mr",
"dimqd47",
"dimtzz1",
"dinaf22"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
8,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The I.P. address only drills down to a general location. Someone would have to analyze your data packets to get anything more, such as names sent in-the-clear, meta-data that identifies, etc. Using a VPN to mask location is not a perfect solution, either. ",
"It depends on the environment, and requires prior knowledge of the environment. In general; no. You can't diagnose an explicit physical location from an IP address.\n\n*However*, groups of computers will have similar IP addresses, particularly in the first two groups of an IPv4 address, and particularly in an office environment where you have tons of computers on the same network. Thus, you can make an educated guess as to *approximately* where the computer is. How close that guess is in terms of a physical location therefore basically depends on how densely grouped the devices are.",
"It's not really possible with just the IP. You can use it to get a rough approximation of your location - my IP address points to my town but to my ISP's location and not to my house. \n\nYou can get a little more detailed with the hostname depending on what your ISP sets it to. A hostname is basically a text label that whoever manages your IP applies to it. When I lived on campus, the campus IT department marked each IP with a hostname that explicitly identified what building in the graduate student apartment complex you lived in - each building had only four apartments. That was fun to learn. ",
"A single IP cannot locate you. However cross reference the IP with other information may be more than enough.\n\nSuppose you had hacked Facebook. Or Hotmail or Gmail. You can now look up that IP in Facebook's logs and find any matches for that IP. Chances are thats the same person.\n\nIf you're a bit less ambitious than hacking Facebook, then you could look up the already hacked systems that data has been published for. Like the Sony hacks. Or the bank of America hacks. \n\n",
"It depends on the entity. IP addresses typically can only be traced to your ISP (Internet Service Provider). That will usually be somewhere near where you live, but not necessarily very close. \n \nAs you said, there is at least one entity who must be able to provide more precise location...your ISP. If they, **or someone who has compromised their systems**, wants to locate the exact location of an IP address they most certainly can. \n \nThis is well beyond the capabilities of the vast majority of hackers. So it isn't likely. Could some rogue hacker who works for the ISP do it? Maybe. Could the NSA do it? Probably. ",
"Simply put, your understanding is mostly correct. Accurate IP address to physical location is only known by your ISP. Publicly available information can only come from what they provide to other entities. Some services sell geolocation information (Information that ties physical location and IP address). Accuracy of such services depends on your ISP giving them your address and IP address.\n\nIP addresses are allocated in something called a block. A block can be something like 192.168.0.1 through 192.168.0.255. Blocks of IP address are owned by various entities, your ISP being one of them. Ownership is publicly known and maintained by [IANA](_URL_0_).\n\nIP address allocation is allocated by country. If your address comes from a certain IP block they can effectively figure out your country (Barring connecting through services like VPNs or other things that obfuscate your IP). Beyond that there is no other definitive information they can get about you without hacking your ISP, or your ISP telling everyone. Most ISPs don't give precise physical locations simply because it's a PITA to keep updating that since most ISPs do not give you a fixed IP address. A fixed IP address is usually a service you have to buy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Assigned_Numbers_Authority"
]
] |
|
acgvc5
|
Could a fusion reactor use any element with an atomic number lower than Iron as a source of fuel?
|
So I was reading about fusion reactions in stars. They can fuse elements up to iron and release energy. Iron and above can be fused but they absorb energy.
This got me wondering. We are experimenting with the development of fusion reactors and using different hydrogen isotopes to do this (hope I got this correct).
However, once these reactors are up, running and well understood could we use any element with an atomic number below iron as a source of fuel for these reactors?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/acgvc5/could_a_fusion_reactor_use_any_element_with_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ed80a8a",
"ed80hbh",
"ed85q1b"
],
"score": [
15,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"In principle you can use any exothermic fusion reactions. But the Coulomb barrier increases with atomic number, so it’s harder to fulfill the Lawson criterion with heavier elements. Hydrogen has the lowest possible Z, and it’s very abundant.",
"In theory yes, but it wouldn't be a great idea.\n\nFusing elements heavier than hydrogen requires a far higher temperature, pressure or combination of the two. We already run into plenty of technological difficulties building a commercially viable fusion reactor for light elements such as hydrogen isotopes. It would be unproductive to consider fusing heavier elements, especially since we have more than enough \"fuel\" available for current designs.",
" > We are experimenting with the development of fusion reactors and using different hydrogen isotopes\n\nPeople use Deuterium-Tritium reactions (two hydrogen isotopes). It lacks of alternatives atm since those isotopes have the highest cross section at our reachable temperatures (means they are quite likely to perform fusion).\n\n > However, once these reactors are up, running and well understood could we use any element with an atomic number below iron as a source of fuel for these reactors?\n\nHm. Our reactors are different from the sun. We need to confine our plasma magnetically and heat it up to temperatures much higher than the sun to achieve reasonable fusion! Remember the sun uses tunnel effects by sheer amount of particles. We dont have so many particles in our reactors and thus need to increase the temperature. Iter will be 10 times hotter than the core of the sun.\n\nNow lets say we want to use those reactors for He-He fusion like the sun does. Helium will just lure around in our magnetic confinement devices and impurify the plasma. In the sun Helium falls down to the core by gravity and eventually starts fusion there. In a magnetic device Helium cores will barely hit each other in the device and fusion between He-He is even less likely! Have a look at the cross sections for He-He fusion: [cross sections](_URL_0_) (in that picture you also see why we use D-T, or maybe D-D)\n\ntldr: Yes, you could eventually use other elements for fusion, but thats not in our reach with the devices and temperatures we have here on earth atm. Deuterium-Tritium fusion is the way to go atm and that would more than enough! (D-D would be the optimal reaction later tho.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/318390/why-do-fusion-cross-sections-drop-after-a-certain-temperature"
]
] |
|
7wz4fq
|
if our brain is the control system for everything, how come we aren't naturally experts at our own anatomy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7wz4fq/eli5_if_our_brain_is_the_control_system_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"du49o3t",
"du49r93",
"du4ax2f"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because most of it is automated. There's no real benefit to our ancestors evolving some innate master level knowledge of every system.",
"Because we never needed to be. Evolution needed us to be able to control our bodies so we have motor centers, same with all other properties of our brains like how big they are.\nAlso you could reason it would be impossible to develop this trait since it would require dna to store huge amounts of exact memories/knowledge, while it usually can only help develop most basic instincts like eating and drinking.",
"Because it would be a computational nightmare and possibly break physics.\n\nOur brains are already the most complicated and powerful computers in existence. We don't even understand how it does a lot of the things it does yet. In order to do what you suggest, our brains would have to be able to simulate every single fragment of our body with a great degree of accuracy. After all, imagination is just your brain simulating possible (or impossible) things. In order to simulate everything in our bodies it would also have to simulate itself, as nothing in the body works without the brain. If the brain had to simulate itself inside its simulation of the body, you're looking at fractal simulations. The brain would be simulating itself simulating itself simulating itself...etc. If it didn't do that, it would be unable to do much useful with the simulations that it couldn't already do with its current hack job at it.\n\nThis fractal imagination problem would break physics because there is a finite amount of information that can be stored in any given volume. As your simulation increases in accuracy the information density of your brain would have to keep increasing because it's storing more and more copies of itself in copies of itself. Incidentally, this also means that it is impossible to make a computer which can perfectly simulate a region of our universe larger than itself. You could just program it to simulate a region which contains itself plus a little more and use that little more in each layer to make a computer of infinite processing capacity. Processing information requires energy, so doing this would also require infinite energy.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2ss3ac
|
Does a radio attract radio waves?
|
Assuming magnetically to some degree? (logical guess) or does it 'listen' for the signal.
However I really have no idea and can't find an answer online to explain this area.
Any insight would make my day, been thinking about this since my drive to work this morning.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2ss3ac/does_a_radio_attract_radio_waves/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnsohos"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"No, it doesn't attract them any more than a light sensor attracts light. It's just that the radio waves are traveling through the air, and the ones that hit the radio cause an oscillating current in the radio which it turns into sound."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
47pf4o
|
why is english considered one of the hardest languages to learn?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47pf4o/eli5_why_is_english_considered_one_of_the_hardest/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0emkv8",
"d0emxis",
"d0en6wm",
"d0en83y",
"d0envz5",
"d0enx1y",
"d0epek9",
"d0evcul",
"d0ewzdx",
"d0ext6r",
"d0f47wz",
"d0f7av0",
"d0f7t9v",
"d0f9mfm",
"d0fcirg",
"d0few1j"
],
"score": [
173,
72,
8,
71,
2,
8,
26,
2,
7,
5,
4,
2,
2,
2,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"THIS ISN'T MY WORK. Sorry for any confusion.\n\nDearest creature in creation,\nStudy English pronunciation.\nI will teach you in my verse\nSounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse.\nI will keep you, Suzy, busy,\nMake your head with heat grow dizzy.\nTear in eye, your dress will tear.\nSo shall I! Oh hear my prayer.\n\nJust compare heart, beard, and heard,\nDies and diet, lord and word,\nSword and sward, retain and Britain.\n(Mind the latter, how it’s written.)\nNow I surely will not plague you\nWith such words as plaque and ague.\nBut be careful how you speak:\nSay break and steak, but bleak and streak;\nCloven, oven, how and low,\nScript, receipt, show, poem, and toe.\n\nHear me say, devoid of trickery,\nDaughter, laughter, and Terpsichore,\nTyphoid, measles, topsails, aisles,\nExiles, similes, and reviles;\nScholar, vicar, and cigar,\nSolar, mica, war and far;\nOne, anemone, Balmoral,\nKitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel;\nGertrude, German, wind and mind,\nScene, Melpomene, mankind.\n\nBillet does not rhyme with ballet,\nBouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet.\nBlood and flood are not like food,\nNor is mould like should and would.\nViscous, viscount, load and broad,\nToward, to forward, to reward.\nAnd your pronunciation’s OK\nWhen you correctly say croquet,\nRounded, wounded, grieve and sieve,\nFriend and fiend, alive and live.\n\nIvy, privy, famous; clamour\nAnd enamour rhyme with hammer.\nRiver, rival, tomb, bomb, comb,\nDoll and roll and some and home.\nStranger does not rhyme with anger,\nNeither does devour with clangour.\nSouls but foul, haunt but aunt,\nFont, front, wont, want, grand, and grant,\nShoes, goes, does. Now first say finger,\nAnd then singer, ginger, linger,\nReal, zeal, mauve, gauze, gouge and gauge,\nMarriage, foliage, mirage, and age.\n\nQuery does not rhyme with very,\nNor does fury sound like bury.\nDost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth.\nJob, nob, bosom, transom, oath.\nThough the differences seem little,\nWe say actual but victual.\nRefer does not rhyme with deafer.\nFoeffer does, and zephyr, heifer.\nMint, pint, senate and sedate;\nDull, bull, and George ate late.\nScenic, Arabic, Pacific,\nScience, conscience, scientific.\n\nLiberty, library, heave and heaven,\nRachel, ache, moustache, eleven.\nWe say hallowed, but allowed,\nPeople, leopard, towed, but vowed.\nMark the differences, moreover,\nBetween mover, cover, clover;\nLeeches, breeches, wise, precise,\nChalice, but police and lice;\nCamel, constable, unstable,\nPrinciple, disciple, label.\n\nPetal, panel, and canal,\nWait, surprise, plait, promise, pal.\nWorm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair,\nSenator, spectator, mayor.\nTour, but our and succour, four.\nGas, alas, and Arkansas.\nSea, idea, Korea, area,\nPsalm, Maria, but malaria.\nYouth, south, southern, cleanse and clean.\nDoctrine, turpentine, marine.\n\nCompare alien with Italian,\nDandelion and battalion.\nSally with ally, yea, ye,\nEye, I, ay, aye, whey, and key.\nSay aver, but ever, fever,\nNeither, leisure, skein, deceiver.\nHeron, granary, canary.\nCrevice and device and aerie.\n\nFace, but preface, not efface.\nPhlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.\nLarge, but target, gin, give, verging,\nOught, out, joust and scour, scourging.\nEar, but earn and wear and tear\nDo not rhyme with here but ere.\nSeven is right, but so is even,\nHyphen, roughen, nephew Stephen,\nMonkey, donkey, Turk and jerk,\nAsk, grasp, wasp, and cork and work.\n\nPronunciation — think of Psyche!\nIs a paling stout and spikey?\nWon’t it make you lose your wits,\nWriting groats and saying grits?\nIt’s a dark abyss or tunnel:\nStrewn with stones, stowed, solace, gunwale,\nIslington and Isle of Wight,\nHousewife, verdict and indict.\n\nFinally, which rhymes with enough —\nThough, through, plough, or dough, or cough?\nHiccough has the sound of cup.\nMy advice is to give up!!!*",
"Could you provide a source that considers English as one of the hardest languages to learn? As a French, I think learning English is waayyyy easier than learning Chinese, Arabic, Russian, Greek, or even German...\n\nSo yeah, I don't think the premise of the question is right, or at least not universal.",
"English is not that hard, it' just that there are a ton of exceptions to the few rules while other languages have a lot of rules to cover exception. \n \n English doesn't do a lot of things that makes it easier, such as not assigning gender to inanimate objects like a table or juice, which they do do in languages like French.",
"I used to work with people from all over the world. Many of them knew two or three languages on top of English. \n\nThey didn't think English was all that difficult. Especially the ones from Eastern Europe. A Czech man actually laughed when I suggested English was difficult to learn.",
"English is both hard to learn and easy to learn because it is a hodge podge created by combining words of different languages over time.\n\nIt is hard to learn because there are exceptions to every rule it has and multiple meanings to many words and multiple words mean the same thing (which means people who learn English sometimes use words that exist but are not actually used in normal English like saying \"greetings\" instead of \"hello).\n\nIt is easy to learn because you do not have to know all of the different words, just some of them. And the grammar, pronunciation and such is very forgiving because it is such a hodge podge.\n\nHaving 10 ways to say \"hello, how are you?\" makes it hard to say it the \"correct\" way, but easy to say it in a way that is understandable and acceptable.",
"I've lived and worked around Asia. Most people say English is easy to learn, but hard to master.\n\nMy experience learning Chinese was the opposite: difficult to get started, but easy when you know the basics.",
"Can you provide any source for this claim? As far as I'm aware, English is a rather easy language to learn. The fact that it doesn't have grammatical gender (like French, German, Russian etc.) and doesn't have grammatical cases (like German, Finnish, Russian) makes it rather easy from a grammatical standpoint. Of course, English orthography and phonology is rather complicated, but it isn't necessarily more complicated than most other languages. As someone who speaks both German (which English is closely related to) and Portuguese (which is a Romance language and thus shares many words with English due to its French influence), learning English was really easy for me, but I still consider English phonology to be rather difficult compared to most Romance languages. \n\nHere is an example of how I was able to use my knowledge of both German and Portuguese to my advantage. English words such as *example*, *part*, *honest*, *public*, *important*, *impossible*, *necessary*, *different* have Portuguese equivalents that look very similar to English: *exemplo*, *parte*, *honesto*, *público*, *importante*, *impossível*, *necessário*, *diferente*. However, English is actually considered a Germanic language from a linguistic standpoint with simply a large amount of Romance vocabulary. As such, English words *hand*, *winter*, *sink*, *find*, *sand*, *sea*, *house*, *mouse* and many others have very similar German equivalents: *Hand*, *Winter*, *sinken*, *finden*, *Sand*, *See*, *Haus*, *Maus* (the two last ones are pronounced exactly the same as in English). However, it is important to note that the first row of words (*example*, *part*, *honest*, *public*, *important*, *impossible*, *necessary*, *different*) is completely different in German: *Beispiel*, *Teil*, *ehrlich*, *öffentlich*, *wichtig*, *unmöglich*, *nötig*, *anders*. This is because German uses Germanic words while English uses words derived from Latin for these concepts. Furthermore, the second row of words (*hand*, *winter*, *sink*, *find*, *sand*, *sea*, *house*, *mouse*) is completely different in Portuguese: *mão*, *inverno*, *afundar*, *achar*, *areia*, *mar*, *casa*, *rato*. Here, English uses Germanic words for these concepts, whereas Portuguese uses words derived from Latin.\n\nHowever, I can imagine that for someone who speaks Chinese, which has a much simpler grammatical system than English and a completely different phonological and writing system, English can indeed be a hard language to learn, but I bet that even in their case they'd have a harder time learning German than English.\n\nAlso, if anyone is curious about me, I was born in Brazil and came to Switzerland when I was 7. My native language is Brazilian Portuguese, but I learned German very quickly once I migrated to Switzerland. Some time later, I decided to learn English. Now I am perfectly fluent in German, English and Portuguese. I also study English linguistics, so I do know enough about English etymology (the origin of words) and morphology (how words are constructed, such as plurals or conjugation) to compare it to other languages. I also speak French and Italian and I have studied Latin, so I suppose I should have a fairly good idea of how difficult English is compared to other languages out there. However, all the languages I know fluently belong to only two Indo-European (the larger language family that English, German, French, Russian, Greek and even Hindi belong to) language families: Germanic (which is derived from Proto-Germanic and includes German, Dutch, Swedish, Danish, Icelandic and also English) and Romance (which is derived from Latin and includes French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese). Therefore, my experience may be a tad limited, so I'm sure that someone who speaks Chinese or any other language that is wildly different from English might have some better input into how hard a language English really is. However, I know enough about the grammatical structures of non-Indo-European languages to know that some of them can seem quite alien to an English speaker and hence English itself can seem rather alien to them. Don't hesitate to ask me if there was any term I didn't adequately explain to you. I really hope I managed to make myself clear even for people who know very little about linguistics.",
"English has a bad habit of taking other languages, taking them to a dark alley where it mugs and pickpockets bits of their language.",
"white guilt as well as a way to trick kids into thinking spanish class isn't that hard because they already speak a super-difficult language",
"Did you meant to write \"easy\" instead of hard?",
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary. ",
"English is not so hard. \n\n1) Most of us (non native english speakers, travelling internationaly speak the *globish* subset of english. which is always enough for small talk and business conversation. It's not enough to write a book or understand a legal text. I guess that some conservative british loving their language might hate it, but knowing that the acceptable subset of english to be known is pretty small helps trying to talk\n\n2) At the moment the English-speaking culture dominates, if you want to practice english it's easy everybody (at least in the \"west\") can name a lot of English-speaking movies (While in the best-case I can name one or two movie from a given foreign country). If you add the video games (not always translated), music and a big part of the internet you have plenty of opportunities to practice English which helps getting an acceptable level (Specially with the globish tolerance) It's really harder to find a descent selection of Spanish-speaking song and movies (at least if you're not leaving there) \n\n3) Even if English has some weird structures (Why do you say *Do you*) verbs have almot the same form ( I love, you love, s-he loves, we love, you love, they love /Compare to : quiero quieres quiere queremos queréis quieren) most of the are regular. Name's gender are irrelevant (OK you should say *she* to describe a ship but I can still say a ship and not worry about *le/la* Moreover English ha no declension (OK the possessive *'s* is a kind of genitive but it's nothing compared to Check/Polish ) \n\nThere's really worse language to learn. But it's still a foreign language and it need some work to be learned but there are really worse choice. ",
"Googled - Why Is English So Hard to Learn? \n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe Oxford Royale Academy sounds like a legit source....",
"Yeah English has some exceptions, but you can still communicate 99% and be perfectly understood from context. And only 26 letters including vowels. \n\nCompare to Thai, which has has 44 letters, ~29 separate vowels, and five levels (intonations?), which my ear can't even distinguish, for every single one. And you screw up one thing and nobody understands you. \n\nE.g. \"Khao\" (pronounced \"cow\" basically) means five different things depending on how you intonate it, and every single intonation sounds the exact damn same. Each level just goes up in pitch maybe a half-step in musical terms. ",
"English is easy to learn, however English pronunciation is hard to pick up on, especially later in life, because its all out of whack - there is no logic to it. If you can figure out the root of the word (Greek, Latin, French, Germanic, Britonnic, etc.) it helps. But otherwise the pronunciation is bullshit, while other languages - like Spanish or Hindi, have very obvious and logical pronunciation.",
"No one considers it the hardest language to learn, because it isn't. It's one of the easiest language to learn both in terms of difficulty and exposure. Your question makes no sense."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.oxford-royale.co.uk/articles/learning-english-hard.html"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4hka29
|
how can scientist really know what cats or dogs see?
|
Searched to try and find this answer in this sub but couldn't find it so I'm putting it out there. So supposedly some animals are colour blind, like dogs for example supposedly are. But, like, how do we really know that? Same goes for taste buds. How do we know cats can't taste sweet?
Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hka29/eli5how_can_scientist_really_know_what_cats_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2qa7kk",
"d2qfjgn"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"If you cut open a human eye, you see certain structures that respond to light. Rods and Cones as we call them. Humans have 3 cones that are sensitive to different wavelengths of light (Red, Blue, and Green), and the various wavelengths of light will be registered by one or more of the cones.\n\nIf you cut open a dog's eye, they only have 2 of the cones in there. They don't have one that's sensitive to red. The others look like our blue and green cones, so they can know what a dog sees.\n\nIt's when you get to animals that have more than 3 structures that we can't describe what they see, like a Mantis Shrimp (they have 16).",
"You test them.\n\nYou train the animal that if it picks out the right colored object, it will get a treat. First you train it with black and white, then you try it with various color pairs.\n\nIf the animal can learn to pick the right color, then it can tell the difference between the two colors. If it never does better than random, then it cannot."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4punlf
|
how is it possible to own/ operate a graveyard considering that all payments are made up front (are low, relatively) and need to last indefinitely?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4punlf/eli5_how_is_it_possible_to_own_operate_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4nz4od",
"d4nzqpw",
"d4o097d"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Aren't they paid for by governments and/or churches and other religious organizations? Neither of those operate like other businesses and get money from taxes or donations",
"In some countries, the rights to the plot only last a certain time - 100 years or so. \n\nThen the remains are dug up and the plot resold. ",
"In the modern world, the idea that your grave is your body's final resting spot for all of eternity is pretty much gone. Of course there are exceptions to that rule. \n\nPlots are generally leased for 50-100 years, with an extension to renew if any of your heirs are so inclined. How many people know where their great great grandma is buried, and are willing to spend several thousands of dollars to keep exclusive for long gone granny for another 100 years?\n\nFor the poor or unidentified bodies, they're generally put in city owned plots in a cardboard and plywood coffin which quickly decays, and the plot can be reused in a few decades. \n\nAlso this past post will help.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Organization_for_Standardization"
]
] |
||
124e1x
|
Why did Austria, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Ireland remain neutral during the cold war?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/124e1x/why_did_austria_sweden_norway_finland_and_ireland/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6s1m2l",
"c6s21ad",
"c6s2t09",
"c6s2wa8",
"c6s396f",
"c6s89rw",
"c6sltam"
],
"score": [
13,
19,
11,
9,
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"In the case of Sweden it is a result of The Policy of 1812 which came into effect as a result of Swedens large territorial losses (Sweden lost half of its total territory). Since then, Sweden has in effect remained neutral through every major conflict in Europe.\n\nEDIT: In reality, Sweden was far from neutral during the cold war (or WW2 for that matter). There was a military security guarantee from the US in case of Russian aggression but this information was not made public until 1994.",
"You're asking a whole lot of questions in one package. At least Norway should be removed since it was a founding member of NATO which pretty much puts it in the western camp I think.\n\nSweden was covered by Superplaner, longstanding policy of staying neutral.\n\nFinland had to be neutral in order to keep the peace with the Soviet union, it had to walk a fine line with regards to Russian interests (this is where the term \"Finlandized\" comes from).\n\n Russia had decided that it was not worth it trying to make Finland into a real satellite state after the winter & continuation wars but they retained a lot of influence with the Finns.\n\nI'll leave Austria and Ireland to others.",
"Norway was part of the founding nations of NATO and have contributed soldiers and materiel for every NATO operation, latest during Libyan revolution, where Norwegian F-16s operated out of Crete.\n\nSweden's neutrality worked during both World Wars so they saw it to their benefit of remaining neutral, as what Superplaner said.\n\nAs sp668 said, Finland was under Soviet influence to stay neutral. Search for Urho Kekkonen, the Finnish president for more info.\n\nIreland I don't know, but I'd make an educated guess that too many Irish would not have been pleased about going into an alliance with the British, as it was just over a decade since Ireland had gained true independence and the scars from Easter Uprising, Irish civil war and independence war and the hated Black & Tans were still fresh in most Irishmen's minds.\n\nAustria I have no idea, so hopefully someone else will give an answer. Might though have something to do with the four zones of interest the Americans, British, French and Soviets established.",
"Sweden's Cold War neutrality was a convenient fiction. \n\n* US nuclear subs patrolled Sweden's west coast, [including Sweden in the NATO nuclear umbrella](_URL_3_).\n* [Swedish jets were full of US avionics and electronic warfare equipment. Swedish officers participated in NATO exercises.](_URL_0_) \n* [Swedish agents were part of the CIA's Operation Gladio](_URL_2_) to run militias throughout Europe in the event of Soviet occupation.\n* A secret Swedish Air Force unit [smuggled spies into and out of Sweden and dropped infiltrators at the Soviet border](_URL_1_).\n",
"Austria was offered reunification by Stalin if it stayed neutral (same offer was given to Germany, but west German chancellor Adenauer refused), and it took the offer. \n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_",
"Ireland has been remained neutral in every war since it became a republic in 1937. As for why well during WW2 it was just a good idea not to get involved if you could avoid it. Also much of our government and population had lived through the war of independence and civil war so wished nothing to do with Britain. Our history of being colonised and ruled by a foreign power probably has also left us leary of war and invasion. During the cold war while we didn't become involved in NATO we were clearly part of the western liberal democratic bloc of countries so not sure how neutral that makes us.",
"Austria, like Germany, was divided into spheres of occupation by the allies. However, the occupation of Austria continued until 1955, when Austria pledged neutrality in exchange for the removal of occupying troops."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2012/09/26/secrets-baltic-swedish-cold-war-neutrality-revisited",
"http://www.thelocal.se/32788/20110324/",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=ox_gXq2jpdYC&pg=PA511&dq=sveaborg+gladio&hl=en&sa=X&ei=g6SKUKqxOcuy0AHaxYGwDw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=sveaborg%20gladio&f=false",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_neutrality#The_Cold_War"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Austria#Independence_and_political_development_during_the_Second_Republic",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_State_Treaty"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
3b3p60
|
How to publish an academic article?
|
I don't know if this is the place to post this, but I am trying to get published but I have no idea where to start. I have written an article about the public school curricula under the Nazis, and I have a few journals picked out, but each have extremely specific formatting rules (which is fine), but I just don't know how this whole process works. For instance, they want the authors address and phone number, but it won't be published...does this mean I put that info on the title page? Or just in the submission? It is also a blind peer review, so I need my name on one copy, but not the other? Any help with this?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3b3p60/how_to_publish_an_academic_article/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csik5n5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I can't give you the best information, but usually this is something your academic adviser would help you with. Can you not solicit their help? They want your name and address because you will be asked to revise elements of the article."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
fzxfqo
|
what's the relationship between power, wavelength and penetration?
|
So I work as ISP tech support (yes, I do tell people to turn off and on their router). I always assumed that the shorter the wavelength (+Hz) the harder to penetrate objects, but I'm not really sure what role the emitter power does play.
So I went to Wikipedia, and I figured out that there's a relationship between wavelength and power (the shorter the wavelength, the greater the power), but I'm not sure, then, how it's possible to have two emitters with different power output and the same wavelength.
Or how it's safe to touch a 5Ghz home router antenna, but some people died being in front of a radar with longer wavelength.
It's clearly out of my very basic physics knowledge. I'm missing something, and I really want to know what's going on about this. First, because some clients ask questions about this and I'm unable to provide answers about this very matter. Second, because when my brother asked me about this whole 5G paranoia, despite I vaguely know what's ionizing vs non-ionizing, I realized I really didn't know about the fundamentals.
So If a client calls and tells me that he's going to burn down his 5G Antenna, I'd like to have more that a vague layman explanation on what's going on.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fzxfqo/eli5_whats_the_relationship_between_power/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fn6qgca"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Power is power, that doesn't change with wavelength. A 1 watt transmitter is a 1 watt transmitter whether its putting out microwaves or UV rays. Each photon has more energy which changes its behavior, but that's distinctly different from the power of the transmitter.\n\nWavelength, penetration, and target material are all related. Longer wavelengths work their way around objects and bounce off walls well, shorter wavelengths tend to get absorbed more, but this is only true for radio waves in the spectrum that we look at (100 kHz-100 GHz). Xrays don't care about drywall, they'll go right through them, visible light doesn't care about glass it'll pass straight through as well while longer wavelength IR waves are blocked by glass extremely well.\n\nWiFi routers are restricted to 1 Watt max so there really isn't anything exciting they can do. Big TV broadcast antennas can be over 1 MW but since they're such low frequency that they don't interact with your body much its not a problem, a little warming at most. Meanwhile a big military S-Band radar that runs in the 2-4 GHz range could be used to microwave whatever you want with some frequency tuning.\n\nIts a complex interaction between power, wavelength, and material to determine what'll end up happening, but in general if its used around the general public someone has done the math and it came up harmless. 5G is not a danger to anything."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2fj713
|
what (if any) does the color of a laser have to do with its power?
|
So why would a green laser be stronger or brighter than a red laser? Or does color not have anything do with it just how much electricity you can pump through it? So would a blue laser be more powerful because it is closer to UV wavelengths? Or can you just not get certain power levels out of certain colors?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fj713/eli5_what_if_any_does_the_color_of_a_laser_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck9qmqc",
"ck9qqo1",
"ck9twfv"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Power and color are separate. The color determines the energy in the individual photons, but the power is the total amount of energy being emitted (how many photons times the energy in each).",
"Rather than do my own sloppy explanation, I'll link to an expert answering laymen: _URL_0_\n\n > Q: I was curious as to the difference in power between the colors, and if there is a limit to that power depending on each color. I have watched lasers melt through things, depending on wattage and nanometers, and was wondering about the relation of colors to wattage and nanometers, if there was any at all. Mostly I just want to know if a blue laser would be more effective at melting stuff than a green or red would be, or if it's completely unrelated.\n > - Dave (age 22)\n > Ames IA US\n\n > A:\n > It's the Watts that count, not the color. There is, however, a relationship between the energy of a single photon of a certain color, E = hf where h is Plank's constant and f is the frequency of the photon. So in that sense it takes fewer photons per second to make up one Watt for higher frequency (shorter wavelength) light. However, the power specification takes that fact into account making the color irrelevant. ",
"The power of a laser on a given target relies on two factors.\n\nThe first factor is how much energy is put into the stream of photons being ejected. That's the wattage.\n\nThe second factor is that all materials have spectral patterns in which they either absorb or reflect light energy. So a laser used against a material that reflects the frequency of light being produced will have less impact than one of a frequency that is absorbed by the target. \n\nThis allows for some excellent physics experiments from pulse detection of specific elements in a material either by reflection or absorption OR in the most extreme case Lasers have been used to COOL materials to within billionths of a degree of absolute zero.\n\nSo the total wattage AND the frequency of the laser are listed so that one can be selected for the intended use. It is much more effective to use the right frequency than to use a much higher energy state and in certain circumstances such as surgery, you want a laser that is completely absorbed by the exposed tissue so that it vaporizes the tissue but doesn't flash-heat the flesh beneath.\n\nSuch qualities are used in automated laser cutting systems as well.\n\nUsing a laser on a material with high rejection incidence will literally spray the stream of photons back at the laser and the operating environment and is an excellent way to accidentally blind people, start fires and cause injuries. When using industrial lasers in the 300 watt range you can end up with sudden flares so bright that they WILL burn a spot on the human retina just by looking at them. If you don't grasp this concept, think about the tiny LED in the center of a three watt Cree flashlight - very painful to look at."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1930"
],
[]
] |
|
aand8t
|
Did George Orwell ever reject communism/ socialism?
|
I’ve seen YouTube comments from right leaning people saying he did at the end of his life, but I’m not finding that anywhere. The closest I’ve seen is him be highly critical of it to be sure it does not go authoritarian/ totalitarian like capitalism can (and has been) and so the USSR isn’t repeated.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/aand8t/did_george_orwell_ever_reject_communism_socialism/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecuhtap"
],
"score": [
58
],
"text": [
"George Orwell rejected USSR Stalinist policies and their interpretation and implementation of Marxist-Leninist philosophy. But Orwell certainly didn’t reject socialism. In fact, Orwell himself was a devoted socialist, and volunteered and fought in war for socialism. He said himself in his essay *Why I Write*, \n\n > “Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it.” \n\nOrwell wrote an entire book, *Homage to Catalonia*, about his experience fighting in socialist, anarchist, and syndicalist militias during the Spanish Civil War. In the book he says, \n\n > “Socialism means a classless society, or it means nothing at all. And it was here that those few months in the militia were valuable to me. For the Spanish militias, while they lasted, were a sort of microcosm of a classless society. In that community where no one was on the make, where there was a shortage of everything but no privilege and no bootlicking, one got, perhaps, a crude forecast of what the opening stages of socialism might be like. And, after all, instead of disillusioning me it deeply attracted me. The effect was to make my desire to see socialism established much more actual than it had been before.”\n\nIn this sense, Orwell mentions his admiration of a classless society free of state coercion, which in many ways is a form of communism in its higher stage, as Marx defined communism as a stateless, classless, moneyless society. In this way, you could argue that Orwell considered himself a democratic socialist, but that he was also sympathetic to anarchists who aimed to also achieve communism but through means that are not authoritarian. But he wasn’t totally anarchist. In *The Road to Wigan Pier* Orwell says on anarchism,\n\n > “I worked out an anarchistic theory that all government is evil, that the punishment always does more harm than the crime and the people can be trusted to behave decently if you will only let them alone.”\n\nBut he later elaborated, \n\n > ”it is always necessary to protect peaceful people from violence. In any state of society where crime can be profitable you have got to have a harsh criminal law and administer it ruthlessly.”\n\nIn this way you can clearly see that while anti-authority, he is still in favor of some form of justice system, which is absolutely counter to anarchist theory.\n\nOrwell seems instead to be opposed to totalitarian techniques to achieve communism, but was actually in favor of a communist society himself, as long as it was achieved through means that were not oppressive.\n\nWhat many don’t understand is that the USSR was communist, meaning their goal was to achieve communism, but the USSR never claimed to live a communist society, because according to Marxist-Leninist philosophy, they were still in the dictatorship of the proletariat phase of socialism, and it wasn’t until the 1936 Soviet Constitution that the regime claimed to have effectively began their transition into socialism, the lower phase of communism, but they never made it to actual higher stage communism. This utilization of the state apparatus, and even strengthening the state to violently erode capitalism with the goal of it leading to socialism is what Orwell was opposed to. He was not opposed to the end goal of socialism or communism itself.\n\nOrwell was a socialist until his death, and never rejected it later in life. The British MI5 even kept close tabs on him and for a long time considered him not just a socialist, but a secret Soviet-sympathetic communist. They would later retract this and claim he was not a communist, but still hold that he is a socialist. Much of the belief that Orwell rejected socialism later in life comes from\nhis two essays *Fascism and Democracy* and *Patriots and Revolutionaries* which he wrote in contribution to the book *Betrayal of the Left*. \n\nThe essays outline Orwell’s break from the British Communist Party following the party’s backing of the Molotov-Ribbontrop Pact. Specifically, they were against the British Communist Party’s stance of appeasement and nonviolence with Nazi Germany, while Orwell and his partners believed that fascism must be fought and denied in every way possible, whenever possible. The British Communist Party took this stance of nonviolence toward the Nazis from the Marxist-Leninist belief, originating from Lenin, that the Soviets could not win or benefit from any capitalist war. Instead, like the Soviets at the time, the British Communist Party believed they must instead focus on internal struggle, or supporting internal communist revolutions in other nations. But they believed fundamentally that any direct war with a capitalist nation would only harm the cause. Again, this emphasizes Orwell’s fierce stance against Soviet totalitarianism and Marxist-Leninist philosophy as a whole, but maintains that he is still, and always was, a socialist."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1g0hdm
|
What is the difference between slugs and snails?
|
I've had a great deal of trouble finding an answer to this in any detail beyond the obvious "snails have shells, slugs don't."
Beyond the shell and their respective taxonomic classifications, what is the "real-world" difference between (for example) [Helix aspersa](_URL_1_) and [Deroceras laeve](_URL_0_)?
My current understanding is that apart from the shell they are extremely similar in morphology, with very minimal differences. From what I've understood, slugs often retain some sort of calcium carbonate deposit and will even sometimes be found with partial shells. In addition, snails will not develop shells when exposed to certain external factors in their environment (such as platinum metal) and will live without shells. It seems as though many snails have the developed ability to adapt quickly to different environments by suppressing shell growth. There is also a category of "semi-snails" that appears to be a reversion back into a shelled state, although these shells have limited functionality.
Snails have evolved multiple times from completely separate lineages and have entered into shell-less forms several times throughout their respective histories. How is individual lineage determined in modern organisms with polyphyletic origins?
If two hypothetical modern organisms happened to evolve to be completely identical to each other despite separate origins, would it be important to nonetheless make a distinction between the two? Could that distinction be proven beyond theory?
Hopefully that makes sense, I'm pretty confused.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1g0hdm/what_is_the_difference_between_slugs_and_snails/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cafs928"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"OK...\n\"How is individual lineage determined in modern organisms with polyphyletic origins?\"\n- Basic answer... Don't try. They're polyphyletic. Which means they share a common ancestor but they're all bunched into an arbitrary group. A bit like Protists (which include archaea, fungi, bacteria and a few other things). They're a mish mash clade that only really relate to how they are observed by humans, not how they are actually classified. This is why we have the linnean classification system: (Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species. This will actually give us the lineage and its relation to other organisms based on the most up to date genetic and taxonomic information.\n\nThe best way to determine the individual lineages of both is to test their DNA. The most common in animals is 18s Ribosomal. A strand that is slow to change, but when speciation occurs the change is distinct. Comparing many species will give you an accurate phylogenetic tree but in the case of polyphyletic clades, you would need to test things that you would not consider slugs as well.\n\n\"If two hypothetical modern organisms happened to evolve to be completely identical to each other despite separate origins, would it be important to nonetheless make a distinction between the two? Could that distinction be proven beyond theory?\"\n- Short answer, YES.\nLong answer. Basically what i said before about genetic testing. No animal, despite the evolutionary convergence will ever truly be completely identical genetically. This has been observed in a couple of cases where scientists have sampled animals and found that a population of similar looking organisms are actually two separate species. Or the exact opposite, where one species that has extreme sexual dimorphism has been mistaken for two species.\nWhen scientists realise, there is normally a change in the classification of one of the organisms to ensure that they are put in the right group.\n\nHope i haven't further confused you. Ask any more questions if you need to.\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deroceras_laeve",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix_aspersa"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
aoo91q
|
do petitions actually change anything?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aoo91q/eli5_do_petitions_actually_change_anything/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eg2d2up",
"eg2d5ea",
"eg2diiv",
"eg2drva"
],
"score": [
12,
7,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"By and large, they don't make much of a difference. A petition is no real indicator of anything beyond a person's willingness to sign something. It doesn't confer any promise of action, nor any lasting consequence, and not even a guarantee of authenticity.\n\nThey can hold sway in situations where a decision may go one way or another, but it's rare for a petition alone to overturn a made decision. That typically takes more active engagement.",
"It's a way to draw attention to something. If a huge number of people agree with you about something then maybe that's enough leverage to start changing the thing you want to change. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nAnd some petitions do come with specific actions if a threshold is met. Like collecting signatures to appear on an election ballot or to force a recall vote. Those conditions are usually written in the law so the standards are also a bit stricter than the guy who wanted the Sponge Bob song in the Superbowl. ",
"It is human nature for people to want to feel like they are doing something, but often just like other task this feeling is satisfied in the easiest way possible. So you give the homeless guy a buck, but never do anything to address the plight of people living in the street.",
"Some do. Actual pen and paper petitions can legally force issues in states. In my state, the legislature would never address the issue of medical marijuana -- so a petition drive forced it to be on the ballot for the people to vote on, and they did.\n\nOnline petitions aren't worth the paper they aren't printed on, however."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3rfnwp
|
Why do both sides of a magnet stick to my refrigerator?
|
Shouldn't the refrigerator also have 2 poles and push back on one side of the refrigerator magnet?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3rfnwp/why_do_both_sides_of_a_magnet_stick_to_my/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwo183l"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Your refrigerator is not (as a whole) magnetized. That means the the magnetic moments of the Fe atoms are aligned inside the microscopic iron grains of the material but the orientation of these grains are random so there is no macroscopic order in your fridge. It has no macroscopic north or south pole!\n\nWhen you now bring your magnet (where all the grains are aligned) close to the surface the moment in all the grains near it rotate in the same direction, matching the direction of your magnet. This leads to an attractive interaction and the magnet sticks, but it works for both orientations of the magnet. If you turn it around you just flip the grains on the surface of the fridge.\n\nIf you want to magnetize your whole fridge you will need a strong magnet and move it over the whole fridge. Then all the grains (at least at the surface) will be aligned and your fridge will become a large magnet with north and south pole."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ad9wya
|
. what is the difference between hdr and 4k?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ad9wya/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_hdr_and_4k/
|
{
"a_id": [
"edezunt",
"edf037d"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"HDR gives you better and brighter/darker colors (High Dynamic Range).\n\n4K just gives you a massive amount of screen space",
"4K refers to the resolution or how many pixels there are. For home TVs this is 3840x2160 pixels. For comparison, Full HD 1080p is 1920x1080. So, 4K has four times as many pixels as 1080p.\n\nHDR refers to a different concept which is often seen in 4K content but isn't technically part of the 4K resolution. HDR stands for High Dynamic Range. Basically, it allows your TV to show more colors than a standard dynamic range TV would. These extra colors can make things on screen look more vibrant, more true-to-life, smoother or simply brighter depending on how they use those extra available colors."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
11qmlv
|
if fat is stored energy, then why do fat people get tired faster than skinny people?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11qmlv/eli5_if_fat_is_stored_energy_then_why_do_fat/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6oqt5y",
"c6oqug0",
"c6oqvau",
"c6or4dt",
"c6orlcv",
"c6orm8q",
"c6oryj7",
"c6os4l5",
"c6os4w7",
"c6osagy",
"c6osayl",
"c6ot6tm",
"c6otge6",
"c6otus2",
"c6ou33k",
"c6oue64",
"c6ouhpf",
"c6oy6wk"
],
"score": [
29,
6,
309,
5,
20,
2,
6,
19,
3,
3,
2,
2,
14,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they aren't using that energy. Your body gets used to storing it and not using it. Skinny people use their energy. Their body is used to burning it. ",
"Heavier people carry more workload through their weight. Their body still functions on the same metabolic level that everyone else does by using carbohydrates first, then fat, then protein. However, if they're eating enough carbs to not get to the 'burning fat' portion, then the extra fat really makes no difference.\n\nOn that note, even if they starved themselves and ate minimal calories, they still need enough calories to 'feed' their Basal Metabolic Rate (same as base metabolic rate, or basically your metabolism OR to sum it down further the stuff that goes on in your body to keep you alive in functioning) ... Without that, their body goes into 'starvation' mode and any calories eaten are converted to fat because the body feels like it is starving. \n\nWhen they exercise, if they have eaten enough to feed their basal metabolic rate, they'll burn through their carbs and then start burning fat. They'll get tired more quickly because they have extra weight and still have the same base frame that everyone else has to carry all this weight on... Think like if you are an average weight person and have all these weights strapped on you - you'd get more tired too doing anything.\n\nHope this answers it well enough.\nedit: forgot a word",
"There are two reasons that I can think of, off the top of my head: \n \nFirst, you don't get access to all the energy at the same time. Generally speaking (and way oversimplifying it), your body prefers to fuel itself using the food you eat instead of using your stored fat. Because of this, almost all of the fat remains in storage most of the time, but you still have to carry it around with you, and carrying all that extra mass makes you tire faster. It's like walking around with a heavy lead apron on all day - it doesn't really provide much in the way of energy benefits, but adds a lot to your energy costs. \n \nSecond, overweight people also *tend* to be less fit anyway - eating too much and doing too little tend to go together. So a tendency towards lack of exercise among overweight people leads to a tendency towards tiring more easily as well.",
"It's more an issue of fitness than excess fat.",
"Fat is the body's emergency supply of energy. It is only to be used when food is not available and then only to keep the person alive long enough to find a new food source. \n\nFat is not intended as a fuel for excercise and strenous activities but of course in modern times we force it to do that in some cases where we want to slim down fast. It is a survival mechinasm which provides a small steady stream of energy to tide us over during famines. This is why it is not good for fueling sprinting etc.\n \nWhen our body gets the chance to store un-needed calories as fat it does it. If we have a good supply of food and keep over eating our body will gratefully store any excess as fat. We are designed with this special redundancy and it works very well. \n \nIf you eat more than you need you will gain weight. If you eat a \"maintenance\" level you will remain at your present weight assuming similar levels of exertion. If you eat less than you need to fuel your body's needs then you lose weight. \n \nIt is as simple as that. Everything else you hear about weight loss is smoke and mirrors. \n \n\"Calories in\" minus \"Calories used\" = X \n \nIf X is a negative number you will lose weight (even in so called starvation mode).",
"For the same reason that a semi that carrying fuel still has to refuel at regular intervals at a gas station just like everyone else. Just because you have all that fuel doesn't mean you have access to or can burn it.\n\nAlso, its obvious that its much harder for someone that is 400lbs to run a mile than it is for someone that is 100lbs.",
"this question assumes that fat people actually do get tired faster than skinny people, which isn't necessarily true.\n\nthe most important factor that determines how quickly a \"healthy person\" (meaning the person doesn't have any diseases that affect their energy balance) tires is their cardiovascular health. meaning, how fit/strong is their heart and how healthy are their blood vessels. this in turn is dependent on if the person exercises regularly (if you make your heart work hard, the muscles of your heart get bigger, stronger, and more durable) and if the person is relatively free of gunk in their blood vessels (smoking can damage your blood vessels, a diet high in cholesterol can clog up your vessels, etc.).\n\ni've seen plenty of \"fat\" people who are actually quite fit from regular exercise and can run long distances or play sports for an extended time. i've also seen plenty of skinny people who can barely run a mile because their cardiovascular health has been ravaged by smoking.\n\ni think the assumption in OP's question exists because people who tend to exercise and eat healthy (and therefore maintain good cardiovascular health) *tend* to be skinny, and people who don't exercise and eat fatty food *tend* to be fat. but whether they tire quickly or not is not actually dependent on whether they are fat.",
"You ever seen fuel trucks go up a hill on the highway? They lumber in the slow lane because fuel is heavy. If there were suddenly no gas stations, the fuel truck would be able to use its stored fuel to keep going. But that would be hard. \n\nHeavy people are the same way. They can use their stored fuel, but it is far more convenient and comfortable to fuel up at regular intervals just like everyone else. ",
"Obesity often comes with insulin resistance (works also the other way around, insulin resistance triggers obesity, it's a chicken & egg thing).\n\nWhen you eat, you produce insulin, which signals cells to store energy as fat. After eating, the insulin levels drop slowly and gets replaced by glucagon which signals cells to free the energy.\n\nInsulin resistant people always have insulin in their blood and cannot release this energy like a normal body would.\n\nRead somehow this analogy : Insulin resistance is like having a lot of money in bank and being able to save more, but never being able to go to the ATM and get some back.\n\nGary Taubes says from these kind of people that they're not fat because they eat a lot, but they eat a lot because they're fat. Makes sense, not being able to used stored energy, they have to provide more and more via diet.",
"You are confusing two very different things: fat level and fit level. If your fitness level is high you tend to get tired harder. If your fat level is high you have excess fuel to survive the famine.",
"Here's a video which will explain part of it but is not for 5 year olds. _URL_0_",
"In a nutshell, because living things are spectacularly complex machines, and simplistic, intuitive reasoning about how these machines works is often (if not virtually always) inadequate for understanding how these machines work.",
"Any motion that a person makes is because their muscles contract. Muscles need a fuel-like substance called \"ATP\" to contract. Bodies make ATP from two possible sources: **carbohydrates**, and\n **fat**. The body wants to burn carbohydrates into ATP first, because carbohydrates turn into ATP much more efficiently than fat.\n\nWhile a fat person may have more stored energy from fat than a skinny person, the body doesn't like to burn fat right away. The body burns up the carbohydrates first, and everyone can store about the same amount of carbohydrates, no matter what their size. That's why a fat person doesn't have more usable energy stores than a skinny person.\n\nMoving a bigger mass requires more energy, so that's why a fat person burns their available energy faster than a skinny person.\n*****\n**NON-FIVE YEAR-OLD ELABORATION**: The fat/carb dichotomy is why marathoners hit \"the wall.\" Every human body can only store about 2,000 calories worth of carbohydrates at any given time, mostly as glycogen stored in the muscles. 2,000 calories will take you about 20-22 miles, and then, if you haven't replenished along the way, you're just out. The system for converting fat to ATP requires much more oxygen than the system for converting glycogen to ATP, and speaking from personal experience, IT HURTS. Like \"holy crap my legs are full of lead shot\" hurts, like \"I was running eight minutes for a mile for 21 miles, now I can't go any faster than 9:30/mile\" hurts.\n\nThis is also the basic idea behind the \"ketogenic\" or atkins diet. With a keto diet, the theory is that you withhold carbohydrates, and force your body to get more efficient at converting fat to ATP. I'm sure someone from /r/keto can come by and elaborate/correct my very limited understanding of ketogenic diets.\n*****\nSources:\n\n\"[Understanding Muscle Fueling](_URL_0_)\" - it's obviously pro-powerbar biased, but their basic idea of the science is right.\n\nWikipedia links:\n\n[Glycolysis](_URL_1_) - the process by which the body converts glycogen to ATP\n\n[Beta Oxidation](_URL_2_) - the process by which the body converts fatty acids to ATP\n\nAlso, 15 years of personal experience as an endurance athlete of various pursuits and skill levels (usually poor, however).\n\n",
"In your body, energy comes in many shapes and forms, and just because it's there, doesn't mean you can use it at any time. Stored fat is definitely energy, but it's a sort of long-term storage. Fat is there to take you through the winter (if you are a stone age human, that is) -- you can't use it right now.",
"Your username is extremely relevant. ",
"I have been watching this series all morning. I **highly** encourage everyone to watch this.\n\n_URL_0_",
"The same reason that sports cars are faster than 18-wheelers hauling 50,000 gallons of gasoline.",
"It's like a small car having to pull a semi-trailer full of fuel."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM&ob=av3e"
],
[],
[
"http://www.powerbar.com/articles/356/understanding-muscle-fueling.aspx",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycolysis",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta-oxidation"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.uctv.tv/skinny-on-obesity/"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1gyokm
|
How has it come to be that Americans speak English and not French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch etc.?
|
I'm not particularly well-informed on the early history of North America but I gather there were many colonies founded by people from many different parts of Europe. From this variety how did homogeneity come about, in language and government?
Thanks.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1gyokm/how_has_it_come_to_be_that_americans_speak/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cap3y0s"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"In 1775, [48.7% of colonists were English](_URL_0_), the next largest group were black slaves. none of the other ethnic groups were above 10% of the population. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_American#1775_estimates"
]
] |
|
3aa2gf
|
why is it always a hate crime when a white person kills blacks, but not a hate crime when it is a black person killing whites?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3aa2gf/eli5_why_is_it_always_a_hate_crime_when_a_white/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csamkh8",
"csamoqp",
"csamwav",
"csanaaa",
"csankx6",
"csanmde",
"csb398a"
],
"score": [
6,
6,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If a black guy walked into an all white church and opened fire, it WOULD be considered a hate crime if no other motive was discovered. Also, white people have a history of committing hate crimes against minorities and lets face it, discrimination is still alive and well in the U.S.",
"It's about the motive, not the color of the person's skin.\n\nIf someone kills someone else because he were robbing them, or found them in bed with his wife, then that wouldn't be a hate crime, no matter what the various skin tones involved were.\n\nBut if someone kills someone else *because* of the color of their skin, or their religion, or their sexual preference, and so on, then that *is* a hate crime.\n\nIt's not always a hate crime when a white person kills a black person. But a hate crime committed by anyone is **far** more likely to make the news than any other kind of murder, so you're more likely to hear about it.",
"[Of the reported 3,407 single-bias hate crime offenses that were racially motivated, 66.4 were motivated by anti-black or African-American bias, and 21.4 percent stemmed from anti-white bias.](_URL_0_)",
"It's often not clear, but it's also true the media doesn't report black hate crimes. Yes it's true, black people can be racist too.",
"It's all about what the intention is. To put it this way, think of yourself on a farm with lots of animals and there was a long lasting feud over years with pigs and chickens where the chickens mistreated the pigs, and then this kind of dies down a bit over the years. There might still be some chickens that hate pigs for just being pigs and some of them might feel the need to express their hate in violence. If a chicken killed a pig for no apparent reason, except for the fact that they were a pig, in this context it would probably be deemed a hate crime; the same for the other way around though. On the other hand, if a pig was just poor and wanted to rob a chicken and ended up killing them on the side/in the heat of the moment, the fact that they were chickens and pigs has no real relationship in the fact that this murder happened.",
"Well, there's the media saying that something is a hate crime, and then there's prosecuting a hate crime. The media tends to throw it around when something might not actually be a hate crime.\n\nIn prosecuting a hate crime, you have to prove that the person committed the crime, but also that they committed the crime because of a bias based on race, religion.\n\nSo: person with a history of racism kills other person in hated group, because they got into a bar fight. Not a hate crime.\n\nPerson seeks out someone of a race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. they hate, and injure that person because of any of those things: hate crime.\n\nIt's exceptionally hard to prove that something is a hate crime. But a person of any race or religion CAN commit a hate crime. The thing here is that whites have a history of organizing large groups around the hatred of other groups.",
"It's not. But the talking heads on the media like to paint it that way to get ratings. Dirty laundry sells, and things get hyped, misconstrued, and misunderstood. Human are fickle creatures."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/december/latest-hate-crime-statistics-report-released"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
emf75x
|
Why does ice in my freezer occasionally grow these protuberances?
|
(_URL_0_)
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/emf75x/why_does_ice_in_my_freezer_occasionally_grow/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fdp0ib5",
"fdoq00j"
],
"score": [
2,
10
],
"text": [
"The expansion of water as it freezes causes internal pressure to rise considerably if the container isn't flexible. Imagine the ice cube being solid on the outside but still liquid on the inside. As the liquid on the inside gets closer to freezing it starts to expand. If there's a weak spot in the ice \"shell\", or even a small hole that hasn't quite frozen yet, it becomes the outlet for the expanding water. As the water gets squeezed out through the hole it reaches the cold air of the freezer and starts solidifying. As more liquid water comes out and freezes, it builds upon itself, creating the little spires that you're seeing. \n\nI suspect it's more common with pure water and colder freezers because impurities in the water create \"seeds\" for ice crystals allowing the ice in the middle to freeze at closer to the same time as the outside of the cube. A warmer freezer would do the same thing, allow the water to cool more uniformly and increase the chances that the middle will freeze around the same time as the outside.",
"Water freezes from the outside in (the outside is in contact with the colder air). As it freezes it becomes less dense, taking up more space than when it was water. This pushes the unfrozen water out of the way, and the only direction it can go is up.\nIt then freezes as it emerges, forming these spikes."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://i.imgur.com/uCP7lhF.jpg"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
fpx7to
|
Why is the troubles characterized by conflict between Protestants and Catholics?
|
It seems rather odd to me that there is such an important distinction that is classified through religious means. When writing, I always refer to groups of different opinions in the troubles as either Loyalists or Nationalists.
It seems there is a lot of Protestants that are Loyalists, and most Nationalists being Catholics. Why is there such a trend among the two religions?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fpx7to/why_is_the_troubles_characterized_by_conflict/
|
{
"a_id": [
"floy2d5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Someone may come along and discuss the religious breakdown of sides in the Troubles in more detail for you, but in the meantime, you might be interested in a previous answer I gave about the history of ethnic and religious tensions in Ireland: [_URL_1_](_URL_0_)\n\nThe key takeaway is that Catholics were the majority but were legally discriminated against for a significant period under Anglican rule. Again, I go into more detail in the above linked answer."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/edg4hi/how_british_were_the_irish_considered/?st=k5d1iphz&sh=532dc67f",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/edg4hi/how\\_british\\_were\\_the\\_irish\\_considered/?st=k5d1iphz&sh=532dc67f"
]
] |
|
d27v1b
|
why is it that the government has made it illegal to own both firearms and a medical mariguana license?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d27v1b/eli5_why_is_it_that_the_government_has_made_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ezt8bjx",
"ezt9nz1"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Under federal law there is no such thing as medical marijuana. So to the feds it's illegal to possess a firearm while being a user or possessor of restricted controlled substances, which marijuana still is. Federal law does not recognize state legalization of marijuana, so while your state does not criminalize it, if a federal law enforcement agency happened upon you using state legal weed on federal property or crossing state borders, they could arrest you and charge you.",
"Marijuana is illegal under federal law. Period. Full Stop. Some states have gone against that law and have legalized/decriminalized marijuana (medical and/or recreational), and the enforcement agencies of the federal government have declined to push it. That doesn't make it legal per federal law. It is illegal to own firearms if you are a user of illegal drugs. Again, since marijuana is illegal under federal law, it is part of that same prohibition. Therefore it's illegal to own a firearm if you use medical marijuana.\n\nAs far as the license goes, if you had a medical marijuana license and never used marijuana at all, it would not be illegal to own the firearm. It might be tough or impossible to prove that, though. The government has said that having the medical marijuana license is enough to assume that you are a user of medical marijuana and therefore you are prohibited from possessing a firearm."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
18fkh0
|
Do maps/GPS have an equivilant to UTC/GMT ?
|
I can see how map/gps measurements can relate to local points/features, but when it comes to a large scale, how do they relate when it comes to say NZ vs Australia as they both move about due plate tectonics, earthquakes, daily rise and falls due to the moon and tides. Is there a single point or system that everything relates to ?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/18fkh0/do_mapsgps_have_an_equivilant_to_utcgmt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8eeaby"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There is. The GPS system, and plenty of maps nowadays (including Google Maps), use a [geodetic datum](_URL_1_) - basically, a frame of reference for Earth coordinates - called [WGS84](_URL_0_), whose main meridian (the IERS Reference Meridian) is about 5.31 arc-seconds east of the Greenwich meridian. Not only does it take into account plate tectonics but also a number of other parameters such as local variations in the Earth's gravity field, the ellipsoidal shape of the Earth, etc.\n\nIf you're curious, the coordinate origin of this system is the (supposed) centre of mass of the Earth, which is displaced from its geometrical centre. Nobody knows for sure, but it's estimated that we know its location to within 2 cm, which is outstanding given the mean radius of the Earth is approximately 6,370 km. GPS receivers usually output Cartesian coordinates in this system, and it's the software's task to convert them to more meaningful latitude and longitude."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Geodetic_System",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodetic_datum"
]
] |
|
zcbid
|
[Biology] Why is is that turtles can live so many years while for dogs we even say they have x amount of human years and y amount of dog years?
|
Also, is there actually a reason behind that "x human years but y dog years" thing?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/zcbid/biology_why_is_is_that_turtles_can_live_so_many/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c63d5fw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Taking a stab at the added question.. the dog years thing is just worked out by taking humans average life span vs dogs average life span.\n\nHumans out live dogs by a factor of about 7 so we say a dog has 7 years in a regular year but its just a cute saying not really an actual thing.\n\nEdit: wild speculation here but I would put money on the dog year thing being something that was made up to comfort children.. the family dog died buy the children might feel better to know sparky lived to a ripe old age of whatever in doggy years"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6f6vy6
|
why do doors get squeaky over time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6f6vy6/eli5_why_do_doors_get_squeaky_over_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"difvg4m"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"there's oil in the hinges that hold the door, over time that oil dries/evaporates/leaks and the metal parts of the hinges start rubbing \n and scratching against each other, resonating when you open and close a door"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.