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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
kmfmd
|
I open the windows and let the humid air in my room. Then I close the window, turn on the A/C, and the air becomes dry. Where did the moisture/humidity/water in the air go?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/kmfmd/i_open_the_windows_and_let_the_humid_air_in_my/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2lfv19",
"c2lfzst",
"c2lfv19",
"c2lfzst"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
2,
10
],
"text": [
"look at the outside part of the air conditioner (the condenser) [Check it out](_URL_0_)",
"Your condenser drips water... same thing happens on cars when you see water droplets/mini puddles on the ground. Window units in highly populated cities in Asia (hong Kong) drip like its a small drizzle...",
"look at the outside part of the air conditioner (the condenser) [Check it out](_URL_0_)",
"Your condenser drips water... same thing happens on cars when you see water droplets/mini puddles on the ground. Window units in highly populated cities in Asia (hong Kong) drip like its a small drizzle..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_conditioner"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_conditioner"
],
[]
] |
||
3lid4n
|
why does sweden have the highest number of rapes in europe, by a wide margin?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lid4n/eli5_why_does_sweden_have_the_highest_number_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv6k1is",
"cv6k4m9",
"cv6n1bo"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Sweden measures rape differently. The rest of the world measures victims, Sweden measures rapes. For example: If a woman was trapped in a basement and raped every day for a year, then broke free and went to the police in Sweden that would be 364 rapes, in the rest of the world it'd be 1. Why do they do this? I don't know, it's arguably more accurate but not necessarily more useful.",
"The difference can mostly be accounted for by differing legal definitions of rape. In many countries, 'rape' is defined in the context of forced sexual intercourse / penetration.\n\nUnder the Swedish penal code, the definition of rape is rather broad and it includes activities that don't involve intercourse/penetration as well as activities where the victim was willing to perform the acts at the time but was later deemed unfit to consent because, for example, the victim was intoxicated, scared, or in a vulnerable position of some sort.\n\nThis results in a lot more incidents of rape being reported in Sweden relative to other countries even though the actual occurrence of rape may be no more common (or perhaps even less common) in Sweden than in other countries.",
"* Sweden has a very broad definition of rape, which includes many acts that other countries would deem sexual assault\n* Sweden has a pretty enlightened views on sexuality and women's rights, which makes it easier for victims to come forward\n* Sweden actively pursues the cases that are reported, meaning more arrests and convictions are made\n* according to some, many of the rapes are committed by recent immigrants...this notion is controversial\n\nSo except for the last point, none of these would indicate that more rapes are actually occurring in Sweden."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
c9zcok
|
what the heck does a county do? (u.s. civics)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9zcok/eli5_what_the_heck_does_a_county_do_us_civics/
|
{
"a_id": [
"et4j37v",
"et4jl38",
"et4jo7x",
"et4kzm3",
"et4mhpp",
"et4wtcf"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Canada does have counties, but the term is used to denote the territorial jurisdiction (geographic boundaries) of courthouses. I understand it to refer to a regional municipality in the US (equivalent to Durham, Peel, York, etc.) but I could be mistaken.",
"US counties act like any other municipal (town or city) government. They run the county court system, provide utilities and services, and in most of the country have a Sheriff's Office that runs the jails and does law enforcement for the county.\n\nA whole lot of the US is not part of an incorporated town or city, and in those areas the county is the local government.\n\nAnd then there's Louisiana, which has parishes instead of counties. Because Louisiana is weird.",
"You've actually already got it pretty close, they do the same thing as the city or state, just with an in between jurisdiction. So a county will often be in charge of say public works/licensing for an area because the regulations are mostly the same between multiple cities in a county and people living in the countryside can still talk to the same office. Counties also tend to have more control over more ethereal departments such as mental health services. And lastly, a sheriff's department and highway patrolmen are party of the country as their jurisdiction needs to extend beyond city limits, but a singular state police force would have a lot of logistical problems.",
"So it actually varies pretty widely from state to state, depending on how much power the state government chooses to give them. But fundamentally, they're subordinate to the state and superior to the city; that is, in general, a state contains counties, and a county contains cities. They are basically a smaller organisational level that relieves some of the pressure from the state government, just as having states/provinces allows the federal government to focus on the nation-sized issues while the state governments deal with their individual issues. \n\nCounty functions may include serving as a judicial court district, providing a sheriff's department (sheriffs are county-based whereas police departments are city-based), providing fundamental municipal services (e.g. public hospitals, libraries, jails, parks, road maintenance, etc.), and/or providing non-essential municipal facilities (e.g. airports, museums, convention centers, etc.). \n\nAs noted earlier, actual scope of power depends on the state. In a few states, counties act as court districts and may provide a sheriff's department, but other than that the cities and towns generally carry their own governmental power, leaving the county as a largely geographical distinction responsible for high-level judicial/executive functions. In other states, the county is highly involved and provides things like public schools, county fire/police departments, welfare services, and public housing. \n\nIn general, though - that is, in most states - the county provides at least basic municipal services as mentioned above, like public hospitals, jails, utilities, roads, and law enforcement. So in general, citizens of a county pay the same taxes, get the same public services, and have available to them the same public schools; if you move from one county to another, those things may change (your kids will attend a different school system, your tax rate may change, you will have a new sheriff's department, etc.).",
"I don't know where you are from in Canada, but we have the exact same thing here too and most of the time it have the same name. In Quebec it's called a Regional County Municipality, in Ontario there is Regional Municpalities and Counties, which have different level of responsabilities. In British Columbia they are called Regional Districts.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nNo matter what their names are, they all serve the same goal. They allow regional cooperation between municipalities and rerual areas, since small town and village doesn't have enough population and ressources to provide all the services the population want or expect. A good example of services is Police. In the US counties have their own Sheriff department that take care of police work for the whole country, because having 1 police officer for a village is not the best idea. That said, in Quebec it's the provincial police that provide that service for Regional County Municipalities. Other services could include land use planning, building inspectors, fire protection, waste management, etc anything that need specialist that a small rural area couldn't pay for.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nUsually those kind of administration are only for less populated area. If a municipality is big enough, it will be able to provide those service. What happen to the county level administration depend on the situation. If the county is larger than the city they can coexist, but the county give up most of their responsability to the city within the city limit, that's the situation with L.A. If the county is smaller than the city, it can simply disappear or be incorporated with the city, that's the situation with New York. Or the city can simply become seperated from the country, which is what usually happen in Canada.",
"Growing up in Ontario somewhere between Ottawa and the St Lawrence, we lived in a township inside a county. Living in BC later on there were no counties (could be wrong?), so I figured it was an Eastern, old Canada thing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9ri25z
|
why is the water in some rivers almost turquoise in color while in other ones it's just transparent?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ri25z/eli5_why_is_the_water_in_some_rivers_almost/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8hb08t",
"e8ijiv3"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Dissolved solids.\n\nDepending on what’s floating around in the water will affect its colour.\n\nAlgae and turbid mud will make a hazy brown/green river. Clear water is free from floating debris. Coloured water has something dissolved in it to make it that colour, eg iron, copper, and other elements.",
"Rivers that originate from the melting of alpine glaciers/snow pack are often very clear because the water doesn’t have to drain through a typical particulate-laden watershed. \n \n\n\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
49lf9m
|
what would happen to matter if it were frozen down to 0 k?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49lf9m/eli5what_would_happen_to_matter_if_it_were_frozen/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0sqmbx"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"All molecular movement would cease and the matter would become completely inert. But I'm not sure that this is currently possible to do with our level of technology."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
7l6szc
|
what mastering is, when music gets remastered.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7l6szc/eli5_what_mastering_is_when_music_gets_remastered/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drjztzb",
"drk0a4b",
"drk0pyj"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"So let's say we have an old recording of something. Like The Beatles (Sgt. Peppers was just remastered for example). In older music the recording methods were not near the levels of perfection that we currently have. Audio samples might have some interference that was undesirable and couldn't be entirely removed. This is easier with digitization. We can also take old samples and boost different frequencies, change the volume, change the dynamic range. You can pretty much change any property of the sound you want. Another example is mono and stereo. Old records (The White Album for example) was mixed for mono, all the audio plays out on channel. This conformed to older system standards. Eventually people bought stereos that were able to have multiple channels so now you can play the guitars out one and the singers out the other so it sounds clearer. Changing from mono to stereo is another form of remastering. \n\nTLDR: You scrub undesired noise from the recording and add effects to create the \"perfect\" sound. ",
"Well mastering in essence is just applying noise reduction to remove clicks pops and hissing, leveling volume for more even sound, equalizing the sounds so the don’t sound muddy or too sharp and adjusting stereo width giving the sounds more “space” sounding bigger. You can do this to an already published piece of music like an old rock song or something to make it sound better and be more even. \n\nHopefully this answers your question. \nP.S. take what I say with a grain of salt I’m not great at mastering my music tbh",
"A *master* is the original finished copy of a piece of audio or video. \n\nBefore the 1980s, all masters were analog. Copying it meant playing it, and each time you played, it would wear out a little. Masters were used a little as possible, you'd make 10 copies, then 10 copies of each of those copies, etc., until you had all that you needed. Between occasional copies and just the physical breakdown over time, the quality of the master would degrade.\n\nRemaster means two things. First, you convert the master to digital, which does not wear out. Then you carefully process the digital copy to remove and repair an imperfection, resulting in a better version that will never break down."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
m9ohe
|
how come i have to eject flash drives on my pcs but other devices dont care? (xbox, cameras, phones etc)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m9ohe/eli5_how_come_i_have_to_eject_flash_drives_on_my/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2z73lb",
"c2z7bb5",
"c2z73lb",
"c2z7bb5"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"I can't speak for many specifics, but I can give you the general idea.\n\nThe memory used by flash drives is kinda slow and crappy. It's chosen to be cheap, not fast. When you try to store something on a flash drive, the computer might be sneaky and tell you \"Ok, done!\" before it's really done.\n\nReally, it's still slowly writing that data to the drive in the background while you do something else.\n\nThe problem is that if you yank the flash drive out before the computer has finished doing its sneaky background writing, well, now it suddenly doesn't have anywhere to write that data and *poof* you get corruption.\n\nThis is write caching, and it's a trade-off of safety in exchange for performance. I believe that Windows 7 (possibly Vista, too) disable this behaviour by default in favour of writing data out immediately.",
"You dont *have* to eject flash drives on computers. \n\n\nThere are two settings you can get for your usb drive when using them with computers (win xp/Vista/Win 7 at least). \n\n\nWrite caching - makes access to the drive slightly faster by queuing up the data it has to write to the drive and does this in the background even when the coyp/move dialog has gone. this setting requires you to \"safely remove\" the drive through the settings dialogs, this tells windows that it should finish all its write operations because the user wants to remove the drive. \n\nRemovable mode - ( thats probably not the right name for it) - this trades of some speed of the drive for the ability to remove it at a moments notice without having to safely remove it. This is done by telling windows to immediatly write any data during a copy/move. \n\n",
"I can't speak for many specifics, but I can give you the general idea.\n\nThe memory used by flash drives is kinda slow and crappy. It's chosen to be cheap, not fast. When you try to store something on a flash drive, the computer might be sneaky and tell you \"Ok, done!\" before it's really done.\n\nReally, it's still slowly writing that data to the drive in the background while you do something else.\n\nThe problem is that if you yank the flash drive out before the computer has finished doing its sneaky background writing, well, now it suddenly doesn't have anywhere to write that data and *poof* you get corruption.\n\nThis is write caching, and it's a trade-off of safety in exchange for performance. I believe that Windows 7 (possibly Vista, too) disable this behaviour by default in favour of writing data out immediately.",
"You dont *have* to eject flash drives on computers. \n\n\nThere are two settings you can get for your usb drive when using them with computers (win xp/Vista/Win 7 at least). \n\n\nWrite caching - makes access to the drive slightly faster by queuing up the data it has to write to the drive and does this in the background even when the coyp/move dialog has gone. this setting requires you to \"safely remove\" the drive through the settings dialogs, this tells windows that it should finish all its write operations because the user wants to remove the drive. \n\nRemovable mode - ( thats probably not the right name for it) - this trades of some speed of the drive for the ability to remove it at a moments notice without having to safely remove it. This is done by telling windows to immediatly write any data during a copy/move. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6rdlh0
|
Was fast food a quick take over or did it take decades for it to catch on?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6rdlh0/was_fast_food_a_quick_take_over_or_did_it_take/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dl4vk8e"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Fast food as we know it today was really a product of the atomic age. McDonald's was the first to really brake out from the traditional mom and pop vibe which was a result of Ray Kroc and his success in franchising. By the time he took McDonald's public there was a string of copycats and America was hooked. Now if you consider the drive in to be fast food, they had already sprung up across the country but we're relatively independent and they did not have the same financial success of traditional fast food establishments of the 1950s and 1960s. If your interested I would highly recommend Lisa Napolis book on Ray Kroc and McDonald's. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
82j8oo
|
Have there ever been presidential candidates that were not on the ballots in every single state? What was the outcome?
|
Maryland recently passed a law requiring all presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns. This has sparked some debate on news and politics subreddits about future candidates choosing to not be on Maryland's ballot becayse they don't want to disclose their returns and how much it would harm them. I'm curious about any historical context or precedent there might be.
Edit: I would like to know about candidates from major parties, regardless of whether they won or lost.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/82j8oo/have_there_ever_been_presidential_candidates_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dvaktdv"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Do you mean only successful candidates for president? There have been plenty of third party candidates that fail to get their name on the ballot in every state."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4v0jn0
|
If we fired every single nucleur weapon we have on the planet into the sun simultaneously, would anything happen to the Sun at all?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4v0jn0/if_we_fired_every_single_nucleur_weapon_we_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5ucze3",
"d5umvsz",
"d5unqld"
],
"score": [
41,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Nope. There are about 10,000 nuclear weapons and if we assume each of them have a ten megaton yield, it's roughly equivalent to the energy that the sun puts out in a millionth of a second. And that's if they detonate, instead of just falling in and melting.",
"According to the Web, there's about 6 million tons of minable Uranium on the planet. Google lists the mass of the Sun as 1,989,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg.\n\nYou could throw every ounce of Earth's Uranium into the Sun and nothing even remotely measurable would happen. Google also says the Sun burns away 4 million tons of mass every second, which means all of our Uranium would last 1.5 seconds in the Sun.",
"We might be able to create some sort of surface \"defect\" where we disturb the surface of the sun. It may or may not be visible from the earth. This would assume ok course the following:\n\n* We figure out how to launch them all at once beyond the earth's gravity. as noted by /u/Jos_Metadi we can't use our current launchers. I'm not up on my launch vehicles, but the current (warhead) launchers are in no way capabable of this. as noted by /u/JayaBallard, many launch vehicles are based off early ICBM design, but remember, those were all orbital rockets. Getting to orbit requires 5 mi/s (around 17,500 mph), escaping earth requires 7 mi/s (25,000 mph). That's a big difference. You would need something like an [Atlas V](_URL_0_) which is used to launch interplanetary probes. You can see even in the quote figures, just getting to Geostationary Orbit drops it payload in half.\n* We would have to shield them from the sun's effects--I am not sure if they would melt, but there would be a good chance. The other thing is a premature detonation/fizzle in the extreme environment near the sun.\n\nOnce you solve all that, all you would achieve is pushing around some gas in a localized area (something like a very mini-solar flare). The sun's output would be unaffected.\n\nConsider the sun is \"hit\" by comets all the time with quite a bit of energy and all we ever notice is the comet is missing. \"Something\" would happen, but the chances of us even detecting it are somewhere between slim and none. so \"Something\" is really \"Something very very minor minor and localized\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V"
]
] |
||
1n383b
|
How do rogue planets/nomad planets come into existence?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1n383b/how_do_rogue_planetsnomad_planets_come_into/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccf0ocu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I know of two methods which can create Nomad planets, Orbital Resonance & Stray Blackholes.\n\n**1) Orbital Resonance**\n\nKeplar's third law links planetary orbital period to the size of the Orbit. So objects further out move at slower angular speeds, such as [this](_URL_1_).\n\nNow if you have inner Planet A & Outer Planet B who's orbits and orbital periods match up, such that Planet A has exactly two or three orbits for every one orbit of Planet B, known as Orbital Resonance. (The Galilean moons are in [Orbital Resonance](_URL_0_)). \n\nIf one planet is **significantly larger** then the other, the repeated gravitational interactions between them could de-orbit the smaller planet.\n\n**2) Stray Blackholes**\n\nIt is also believed that a stray blackhole could wonder into the solar system and cause planets to fly out of the solar system"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/Galilean_moon_Laplace_resonance_animation.gif",
"http://www.exeterobservatory.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/solarsystem.gif"
]
] |
||
1k6s61
|
How does an IUC Paragaurd work? How does the copper wire prevent pregnancy?
|
I just got one and I was wondering how it works. I was told the copper creates an ion force field, but how does that prevent sperm from finding the egg? I was told this method of BC is immediately effective, and i am assuming that is due to the force field it creates?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1k6s61/how_does_an_iuc_paragaurd_work_how_does_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbm3q36"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Copper IUDs* (intrauterine device) essentially release small amounts of copper into the uterus, which causes a reaction from the uterus making it an unstable environment for sperm to survive in. It will also then prevent a fertilized egg from adhering to the uterine wall, leaving it to be flushed out."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ds247
|
why do car batteries need water in them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ds247/why_do_car_batteries_need_water_in_them/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9tat7u"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The chemical reaction that releases electrons in a car battery is:\n\n > Pb(s) + HSO4^- (aq) → PbSO4(s) + H^+ (aq) + 2e^-\n\nThis uses sulfuric acid, which is extremely hygroscopic, ie. hard to separate from water. It's also dangerous when undiluted. \n\nThe chemical reaction that accepts electrons in a car battery:\n\n > PbO2(s) + HSO4^- (aq) + 3H^+ (aq) + 2e^- → PbSO4(s) + 2H2O(l)\n\nThis releases water. If you want to recharge a car battery, the reaction goes backwards and consumes water instead. If some has evaporated, you have to add more."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3zd0kh
|
[Minorities]How continuous were the Maroons of North America before Emancipation?
|
Reading about Slavery in British North America and then in the United States, I have read about maroon communities in the Great Dismal Swamp of Virginia, and also elsewhere in the South. Leaving aside Florida, which seems like its own case, just how stable and long-lasting were larger maroon communities in the Great Dismal Swamp and elsewhere?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3zd0kh/minoritieshow_continuous_were_the_maroons_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyl98nk",
"cymjzot",
"cymrxun"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You've really asked a tough one! Maroon colonies in South America and the Caribbean were more common and in many cases long-lasting, and as you've stated, Florida being a special case, the historical evidence for Maroon colonies in most places in North America is severely lacking. Most of what we do have comes from a singular perspective (white men, typically Wanted Ads) and scant archaeological evidence. Richard Price's 1979 seminal work *Maroon Societies* says this:\n > \"It seems likely that about two thousand negroes, fugitives, or the descendants of fugitives, lived in this area. They carried on a regular, if illegal, trade with white people living on the borders of the swamp. Such settlements may have been more numerous than available evidence would indicate.\"\n\nMuch more relevant is Daniel Sayers' recently released *A Desolate Place for a Defiant People: The Archaeology of Maroons, Indigenous Americans, and Enslaved Laborers in the Great Dismal Swamp.* Sayers has been the foremost archaeologist of the Great Dismal Swamp Maroons since 2003 and believes that more than ten generations of Maroons, poor whites, Native Americans worked and lived in the Great Dismal Swamp from the late 1600s till 1865. He's found evidence of cabins, and what he believes to be an armory along with tobacco pipes, fire pits, lead fragments and other archaeological findings. While its impossible to know exactly how many Maroons lived in the Great Dismal Swamp, most scholars believed them to number in the hundreds, if not thousands and bear semi-continuous communities. ",
"It's worth noting that there were places like The Great Dismal Swamp in many local areas. Authors like Stephanie Camp and Anthony Kaye as well as contemporary slave narratives have noted that there were isolated places, often swamps or other wild lands that adjoined plantations that were used as places for regular runaways and that members of neighboring slave plantations would help provision. These weren't meant to be permanent escapes and enslaved people would return generally return after long absences, but these places were known and utilized by multiple enslaved people acting in autonomy.\n\nThe other communities that sort of make it into the maroon spectrum and that existed until the end of slavery are the tri-racial isolates of multiple states. Places like Mahwah, New Jersey home of the \"Jackson Whites,\" or various Appalachian populations that were known as 'melungeons' developed as Native Americans, Europeans (often fugitive indentured servants) and enslaved Africans formed communities together in isolation.",
"I would add to what has already been written by /u/dubstripsquads and /u/anoraklibrarian this that is not a phenomenon exclusive to the continental United States, as has been alluded to. Similar communities appear in the Caribbean and other parts of the New World also; perhaps most famously, to this day, there still exist three autonomous Maroon-descended communities in Jamaica, which have retained some elements of their 'original' culture; they are are for all intents and purposes regarded (at least officially) as an autonomous, indigenous people by the [Jamaican government](_URL_1_), distinct from the wider African Jamaican population. \n\nThough the historical record is of course limited, these communities in Jamaica appear to have been very much autonomous and independent, not only of white society but of each other, with considerable stability and relative prosperity. Two broad , loose factional groupings can be identified based on geographical distribution but each individual community appears to have developed with relative autonomy (and I suspect these broad geographical classifications stem more from British conceptualisation of the 'Maroon problem' in the late 18th Century rather than any kind of meaningful political or social coalition); their long-term survival was made possible by skillful military resistance, command of local geography and quite possibly their disparate nature. In 1739, after decades on intermittent conflict with Maroon settlements and their fighters (Maroon oral tradition puts the span of continuous conflict at some 84 years), the British negotiated peace settlements with the various disparate communities and signed formal compacts of them (see [here](_URL_0_) for a contemporary artistic representation of the signing), guaranteeing them their independence.\n\nThese compacts granted the Maroons autonomy over stretches of territory, hunting grounds and the right to self-defence, whilst accepting British legitimacy to govern and promising to protect British colonial assets in the event of foreign invasion of the island. The treaties also required the Maroon settlements to reject any escaping slaves and return them to the authorities - part of the rationale behind signing these compacts was to pacify what was seen as a substantial threat to the slave system. At least one Maroon group tried without success to revolt against perceived British violations of their compact at a later date but without success - and without support from other Maroon settlements.\n\nMaroon tradition and oral history appears to reflect a culture that set itself apart from other African Jamaicans to some degree; though there was recognition of their common bond, the Maroons participated - reportedly with substantial brutality and even enthusiasm - in the extremely violent political repression that followed the 1865 Morant Bay uprising by African Jamaicans (and possibly some poor white people), acting at the behest of the Jamaican authorities, though there does appear to have been reluctance and conflict on the part of their leadership in participating in that bloody enterprise. Of course, such a distinction and rejection of common identity can also surely be framed consequence of or a reaction to an imperial 'divide and rule' policy adopted by the British authorities, rather than an authentic and organic deviation in social values.\n\nSome reading recommendations:\n\n* Karla Gotlieb, *A History of Queen Nanny: Leader of the Windward Maroons* (2000).\n* Mavis Campbell, *The Maroons of Jamaica 1655 -1796: A History of Resistance, Collaboration and Betrayal* (1988).\n* David Dunkley, *Agency of the Enslaved: Jamaica and the Culture of Freedom in the Atlantic World* (2013).\n* Gad Heuman, *The Killing Time: The Morant Bay Rebellion in Jamaica* (1994)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.dloc.com/AA00010908/00001?search=maroons",
"http://moj.gov.jm/sites/default/files/minister-speeches/6th%20Annual%20International%20Maroon%20Conference.pdf"
]
] |
|
8o64zd
|
When did many anglophones start mispronouncing the old thorn-letter “Y” as a vowel?
|
In Mark Lewisohn’s Beatles history “Tune In”, he references a pub called “Ye Cracke” that he says was pronounced as “The Cracke” when Lennon frequented in the 1950s. But nowadays (in North America at least), the Y-as-thorn is mostly mispronounced as a Y-as-vowel, ~~particularly when quoting articles like “ye” in Shakespeare, the King James Bible, or stock phrases like “Ye Olde...”.~~ (This is only true of the definitive article version of "ye", not the pronoun; see u/Vucufigigudes comment below).
*I’m not asking when the linguistic/orthographic change took place.* I want to know when modern anglophones began misunderstanding the olde usage, and whether this is exclusive to North American speakers. Thank you.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8o64zd/when_did_many_anglophones_start_mispronouncing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e014pcn"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Can I ask a clarification question. Wouldn't examples of ye in the King James Bible or Shakespeare actually be uses of the mostly-obsolete second person pronoun \"ye\", pronounced /jiː/, and spelt with a letter Y, not a thorn? I thought the definite articles in them were spelt with \"th\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5pm6fi
|
Why did the romans use a cross to crucify
|
What was the purpose of using the cross bar. I know that initially a normal post was used to crucify, but eventually they added the crossbar and that seems to be standard(from what I learn from movies and tv.) But I just wonder is there a practical reason for a cross? Am I just wrong about this? What's the deal?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5pm6fi/why_did_the_romans_use_a_cross_to_crucify/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcs94u7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Impairment of respiratory movements, and thereby pulminary fuction, apparently. In short, more effective \"death by torture\". \n\nCilliers L.: Department of English and Classical Culture, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein (South Africa).\n\nSouth Africa Medical Journal. 2003 Dec;93(12):938-41.\n\nThe history and pathology of crucifixion.\n\nAbstract\n\nIn antiquity crucifixion was considered one of the most brutal and shameful modes of death. Probably originating with the Assyrians and Babylonians, it was used systematically by the Persians in the 6th century BC. Alexander the Great brought it from there to the eastern Mediterranean countries in the 4th century BC, and the Phoenicians introduced it to Rome in the 3rd century BC. It was virtually never used in pre-Hellenic Greece. The Romans perfected crucifion for 500 years until it was abolished by Constantine I in the 4th century AD. Crucifixion in Roman times was applied mostly to slaves, disgraced soldiers, Christians and foreigners--only very rarely to Roman citizens. Death, usually after 6 hours--4 days, was due to multifactorial pathology: after-effects of compulsory scourging and maiming, haemorrhage and dehydration causing hypovolaemic shock and pain, but the most important factor was progressive asphyxia caused by impairment of respiratory movement. Resultant anoxaemia exaggerated hypovolaemic shock. Death was probably commonly precipitated by cardiac arrest, caused by vasovagal reflexes, initiated inter alia by severe anoxaemia, severe pain, body blows and breaking of the large bones. The attending Roman guards could only leave the site after the victim had died, and were known to precipitate death by means of deliberate fracturing of the tibia and/or fibula, spear stab wounds into the heart, sharp blows to the front of the chest, or a smoking fire built at the foot of the cross to asphyxiate the victim.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
119rk3
|
I was resistant to poison ivy as a kid. Could literally roll in the stuff and be fine. I haven't tested in a while because a friend said the same but also said they lost resistance around 35. What is the science behind this?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/119rk3/i_was_resistant_to_poison_ivy_as_a_kid_could/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6km3fa"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Reaction to poison ivy is the result of the oil [urushiol](_URL_1_) inducing a [type IV hypersensitivity reaction (delayed type hypersensitivity)](_URL_0_). \n\nSome people are immune for the same reason some people have seasonal allergies and others don't, or why some people have sensitivity to nickel and others don't - variations in their immune systems create varying responses to stimuli. Poison oak also has urushiol, so I don't see why it would be different. And it's not that you 'lose resistance', but that you 'develop sensitivity'. In other words, the 'default' state of the body is not to have sensitivity. But after exposure, the body may develop an immune response towards a stimulus and become sensitive in the future."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-type_hypersensitivity_response",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urushiol-induced_contact_dermatitis"
]
] |
||
277io7
|
what prevents digital banks / payment solutions like paypal to create money by adding few zeros to someone's account.
|
Or, in a total hypothetical situation, me, if I create my own payment solution / wallet and add some zeros to my own account and then send those "money" elsewhere.
Edit: ty, answered. D'oh.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/277io7/eli5_what_prevents_digital_banks_payment/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chy3r60",
"chy3rqx",
"chy7q8k"
],
"score": [
14,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Because when someone transfers that money to a bank account, you'll have to pay them.\n\nSee, by adding zeros, they aren't creating money -- they're creating more debt for themselves.",
"When that person withdraws their new balance, its coming out of your company's account",
"Though the answers you've received are correct, your basic question remains valid:\n\n*If* the underlying medium of exchange is entirely non-tangible, then yes, whoever controls it could effectively invent money that way.\n\nIt's just that in our current system, the underlying medium of exchange is dollars, managed by the Federal Government, who aren't going to do that.\n\nPayPal's accounts, being denominated in dollars, have to be backed up by PayPal's own dollar-based assets at a real bank. That bank may indeed (and probably does) maintain PayPal's account as a purely digital record in their databases. But again, that account has to be backed up by the bank's dollar-based assets at whatever institution manages their money. Ultimately, you follow the chain back to a federal reserve bank, leading back to the government.\n\nSo in theory, there can't be more dollars in all the bank accounts in all the world than the total dollars ever issued by the Fed.\n\nBut let's say you could call up the Federal Reserve and say \"Hi. I'm Norci, and I'd like to open an account with you.\" And let's say you had a friend in the Fed's IT department. That friend could effectively create money by add some zeroes for you, and unless someone ever tried to balance all the books, nobody would ever know."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6ud30l
|
How did the first European explorers find small, remote islands? Did they luckily stumble across them or was there more to it? Specifically, how did Cook discover the Hawaiian Islands?
|
Looking at a map of James Cook's third voyage on Wikipedia, he makes a fairly straigtforward path to the Hawaiian Islands. Did he have some foreknowledge that the islands existed and their rough location? Was he just lucky?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6ud30l/how_did_the_first_european_explorers_find_small/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dls6t2c"
],
"score": [
26
],
"text": [
"I suppose you could say he was just lucky... though he did die indirectly because of it. \n\nIn the case of his third voyage, he was heading up to look for the Northwest passage after stopping off in Tahiti. On his way up to begin his survey, he encounter clues that there must be land nearby-- flotsam, birds, cloud formation-- can all give you a pretty good indication that you are near land well before you see it and the ladder two can often tell you exactly which direction to head. Reading natural signs was one of the ways that Oceanic peoples found the islands in the first place and is still used by many ocean voyaging peoples.\n\nSo Cook realized land was near and then caught sight of the island of Kauai (and eventually the neighboring Niihau and Lehua). He stopped there only briefly for some quick exchanges before heading off to complete his mission. After fruitlessly searching for the Northwest Passage, Cook sailed back down to investigate the islands he had encountered, this time arriving at Hawaii Island (or the Big Island in common parlance). He circled the island His men and him wintered there for about a month, before departing again. Of course, they then ran into troublesome weather and the foremast of the Resolution was snapped, forcing the ships to make for land to effect repairs. And shortly thereafter Cook was dead.\n\nSo did he know about Hawaii? Like I said, there is no substantial proof he was intentionally heading for the islands, they just happen to lay in the direction he was heading after leaving Tahiti. On his first voyage he had sailed with a Tahitian navigator, Tupaia, before his untimely death in Batavia at the end of the voyage. Tupaia drew Cook a map of all of the islands he was aware of-- the map itself is not quite a map in the since we might imagine it, but Tupaia's attempt to render his knowledge in a fashion more like the maps Cook had. Rather than physical distance Tupaia's map likely marks voyaging time between islands. And its possible that if Tupaia knew of Hawaii, he mentioned it to Cook-- yet this seems unlikely since Cook didn't encounter Hawaii till his third voyage and otherwise doesn't seem to have been looking for the islands. Its also possible he heard of the islands during one of his stops in Tahiti from someone else, there are oral traditions that connect the islands and by Cook's third visit to Tahiti he had at least some ability to communicate in the language-- yet he wasn't really hanging out on the right part of the island or with the right people to necessarily have picked up on that information, nor is it clear his command of the language would have been sufficient to actually glean the navigational details from an oral tradition if it had been shared with him. And its not really clear that this would have been the case."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
32r0sk
|
What is happening on a molecular level when a solid becomes saturated with water?
|
Or any liquid. Specifically, I am referring to polymers that are undissolvable. What properties and what structure would a solid possess to hold water over solids that are completely hydrophobic?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/32r0sk/what_is_happening_on_a_molecular_level_when_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqf22zq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Adsorption and desorption rates become equal, so the system enters equilibrium. When water adsorbs to a surface, it is either chemically reacting with it (chemisorption) or just physically interacting with it by Van der Waals forces (physisorption). Adsorption is reversible, so it eventually comes into equilibrium with its reverse effect: desorption. When it happens, the surface is saturated with the adsorbate, so no more sites are available to hold new molecules."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
18j5p1
|
Did Native Americans who lived in climates similar to Europe develop lighter skin?
|
I was watching Pocahontas and this question popped into my head.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/18j5p1/did_native_americans_who_lived_in_climates/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8fbjzo",
"c8fjmpy"
],
"score": [
10,
9
],
"text": [
"Do Eskimos have any place in this discussion?",
"No, because there was no other similar climate to Europe.\n\nEurope is unique in that the Gulf Stream keeps it warm enough to support agriculture, yet is it farm enough north to get little light in the winter. Light skin allows people in a low meat agrarian society to produce sufficient vitamin D in low light conditions.\n\nNative Americans who lived at similar latitudes (remember, London = Calgary) could not support themselves through farming, and subsisted on high meat, high vitamin D diets. And those who lived at lower latitudes got enough light despite having darker skin."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
dr6wt0
|
considering millions of men have been sent to war (and their death) throughout the ages, how is it that the ratio of men to women in the world's population still about half?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dr6wt0/eli5_considering_millions_of_men_have_been_sent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f6fnptj",
"f6fnqn0",
"f6fo2xo",
"f6fssfy",
"f6guhx3"
],
"score": [
2,
23,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"kids have a 50/50 chance of being born male, so even if the worlds population of men gets nuked after impregnating their wives, there’s a chance that the next generation could be entirely male.\nIn short, male mortality rate and male birthrate are not correlated in anyway.",
"The ratio of men to women will always correct to roughly 50% after a couple generations. This is because no matter what happens the sex of any given child is going to be a 50% chance. So in a situation that a women survives and her husband dies young, give it a couple decades and she will die too. Leaving only her children which will of course be a 50/50 split.",
"The ratio actually does dip during really big wars, but in general the number of men dying at war is relatively insignificant compared to other confounding factors. Not to mention, there *are* more women than men on Earth, in part due to violence-related death.",
"A bunch of men dying will have an impact on the population ratio but only for that generation. The amount of women and men leftover does not affect the chance of a child being born Male or female. So regardless of the ratio of the current generation, the next generation will always be 50/50. Over time there is no trend towards one or the other, in fact it's the opposite. As the impacted generation grows older, individuals die and the ratio moves back towards 50/50.\n\nA good example recently is China's one child policy. Chinese culture values Male children to pass on the family name. So instilling a one child policy led to a significant rise in abortions of female babies, causing an imbalance to be created in their Male to female ratio. Currently there are about 35 million more men than would have occurred naturally, and it'll take generations to fix.",
"There is also a phenomenon called the return of the warrior, many hospitals witnessed an increase of male newborns during and after war."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1qq8j7
|
am i left or right handed
|
I write, throw balls, use rackets (tennis), and punch right handed. I eat, bat, use sticks (Hockey and such) left handed. I feel stronger with my right arm but my left arm looks bigger in the mirror. As well, I'm in construction and can do many things either way. I frequently change arms when painting, drywall taping, and many other things.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qq8j7/eli5_am_i_left_or_right_handed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdfc4rz",
"cdfc83b",
"cdffo9g"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"For the purposes of most things, you are right handed.\n\nWriting is the standard. However, you are very close to ambidextrous. You are probably part of the population that is born without an inherent preference and just \"picked\" over time.",
"You are NOT ambidextrous by [definition](_URL_0_) it means that you are EQUAL with both hands. I am similar to you, since I eat and write and do a bit more with my left hand I consider myself to be left handed. Honestly just take your pick.",
"People are incorrectly saying you're ambidextrous. This is due to a common misunderstanding about what ambidextrous actually means. A truly ambidextrous person will be equally proficient in all tasks with both hands, this is really rare. What you're describing is \"mixed handedness\", and it's quite common. Basically, for some tasks you use one hand over the other. That you use both hands/arms in your work does raise the question a bit, but I'd suggest that its because those tasks don't require as much fine motor skill as writing, so you simply swap arms when one begins to get tired.\n\n[This](_URL_0_) wikipedia article on cross-dominance explains the distinction a bit more clearly. If you're interested in what category you fall into, try looking up the \"Edinburgh Handedness Inventory\", it's the most common test for handedness as it assesses multiple tasks."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ambidextrous"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-dominance"
]
] |
|
apmywv
|
what exactly is in blood and how come some animals are able to survive without it?
|
Additional question: Why do some animals have different coloured blood?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/apmywv/eli5_what_exactly_is_in_blood_and_how_come_some/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eg9pmj6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Very, very few complex animals do not have circulation. Flatworms, nematodes, jellyfish, sea anemones, and corals are among the species that do not have a circulatory system and thus do not have blood. Their body cavity has no lining or fluid within it. They obtain nutrients and oxygen directly from the environment that they live in.\n\nThe only non-red blood animal I know of is the octopus. Octopus blood is blue because it contains a protein called Harmocyanin. This compares to Hemoglobin in mammals, which is the \"red\" part of mammal blood. (The color actually depends on the amount of oxygen in the blood, but that's a different question.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4f38fd
|
why does it get harder to breathe when running, even if i try to control my breaths?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4f38fd/eli5_why_does_it_get_harder_to_breathe_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d25i64f",
"d25ibnq",
"d25iczs",
"d25iqzy"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Every cell in your body needs oxygen in order to properly function, and that includes organs like your heart and lungs.\n\nAs you run, you start burning reserve energy in not only your muscles but your heart and lungs too. As that energy is depleted, both your muscles and your heart and lungs will need oxygen to make more energy. This results in things like increased blood pressure, increased heart rate, and increased breathing rate.\n\nIn effect, your organs get \"tired\" and with that comes difficulty to maintain a steady breathing rate.",
" * Lungs extract oxygen from the air and stick it in your blood.\n\n * Your blood circulates the body and sticks the oxygen in the cells that make up your body.\n\n * The cells of your muscles quickly use up that oxygen during aerobic exercise such as sprinting and new oxygen can't get in fast enough-- this is why your heart rate rises, to get the oxygen around your body quicker.\n\n * Now, as there's no oxygen in your muscles, but they still need to contract and put out power, they switch to anaerobic respiration, which can still produce energy in the absence of oxygen.\n\n * Anaerobic respiration breaks down glucose to produce energy, but produces lactic acid as a side effect, which causes muscle fatigue.",
"Can you explain what you mean by \"harder to breathe \"?",
"Sitting still, you might burn 100 calories an hour. Each of those calories needs a little bit of oxygen, and your normal, relaxed breathing rate can supply it.\n\nWhen you exert yourself, like when you run, you might burn 1000 calories an hour. Each of those calories requires they same amount as before, but now here are a whole lot more of them. Your body demands 10x the oxygen, which means breathing a whole lot harder."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
19nv13
|
Why do bacteria not get crushed and die when objects millions if times their mass are placed on them?
|
Bacteria are so tiny that even the lightest of objects would be extremely heavy in comparison. How is it that they are able to survive under the weight of things when they are so extremely small?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/19nv13/why_do_bacteria_not_get_crushed_and_die_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8ppx49",
"c8prjuz"
],
"score": [
20,
6
],
"text": [
"This is a problem of perspective. \n\nIs that super heavy item perfectly smooth on a cellular scale? Is the object the bacteria is on also perfectly smooth? \nThink of it like steeping on a small bug, if the grooves in your shoe happen to land on the bug, it will appear to have survived the stomping. When in fact it wasn't stomped. ",
"Why don't your own cells get crushed by your body?\n\nIt's because the forces are tiny on tiny scales. 100 kg weighing down on, say, 100 cm^2 (part of a foot) can create a lot of pressure (nearly 100 kilopascals), but on the scale of a tiny cell, which may be only 100 microns x 100 microns in cross section for a big cell the total force is only about 1 millinewton."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4ne8ii
|
i have a question about schizophrenia and alien hand syndrome. its a little long so see inside please
|
So the idea behind alien hand syndrome is that one side of the brain is somewhat conscious and learns to just be along for the ride, but a brain injury or something happens and then that side gets some freedom. My thought was that maybe people who are schizophrenic / hear voices / have intrusive thoughts have a similar problem. That hemisphere of their brain got some freedom and is now vocalizing itself to the more dominant side of the brain. I'm sure it has been thought of before but I googled to no avail. I'm honestly curious about this stuff. Could someone explain to me why im wrong? Because it sounds kind of plausible.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ne8ii/eli5_i_have_a_question_about_schizophrenia_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d435rd3"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
" > So the idea behind alien hand syndrome is that one side of the brain is somewhat conscious and learns to just be along for the ride, but a brain injury or something happens and then that side gets some freedom.\n\nNot quite. Alien hand syndrome happens when the two hemispheres of your brain become disconnected from each other so that they can no longer communicate or pass signals directly between them. Your brain always has multiple parts working together, but when one part can't communicate with the other parts, and when the \"other parts\" includes the part of your brain that allows you to be aware, then you become unable to be aware of the separated part of your brain, and so it can take actions that seem \"alien\" to you. But only because you no longer automatically know what that part of your brain is doing.\n\n > That hemisphere of their brain got some freedom and is now vocalizing itself to the more dominant side of the brain.\n\nExcept for alien hand syndrome to happen, the exact *opposite* has to occur, with the \"alien\" part of your brain being unable to communicate with the rest of the brain.\n\nPlus, there are specific parts of the brain that deal with language, so it's not like any random part of the brain can learn to \"vocalize\". That's just not how brains work."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4uzlkb
|
how does the rendering process works in videos?
|
I use Adobe Premiere Pro and I don't have a clue how that rendering process works. (mostly using H.264 here)
I mean the specific process where the whole composition is rendered in one video. When I just put one video, which will be on youtube as 340p and render it as 4k or smth, it's on 1080p (or higher) on youtube. So how does this process work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4uzlkb/eli5how_does_the_rendering_process_works_in_videos/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5u7346"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"\"Rendering\" is just a name for the process of assembling a video in to its final form: all the edits, effects etc. are \"written\" out to a file in the way you specify in APP. \n\nThe rest of your question is about video resolutions, which is a different problem. The rule to remember is to start with the highest possible quality, because losing quality is easy but getting it back is hard. So you would e.g. render to 4k and upload that to YouTube, and let YouTube do the downsizing to smaller resolutions - which is easy for them. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1v1wpy
|
How do photons exist within an electro-magnetic field?
|
I have been learning a lot about electro-magnetism recently, and I have tried asking this question to a few people already but none of them seem to know the answer.
Do the electric and magnetic fields lines around a magnet mean that that area is filled with photons running along the field lines? Are there photons in EM fields constantly, or only when a ferrous/charged object enters them?
Is there an easy way to calculate the wavelength and frequency of these photons?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1v1wpy/how_do_photons_exist_within_an_electromagnetic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cenwpwj",
"ceo321p",
"ceo6ay9"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A good rule of thumb is that *light travels as a wave but interacts with matter as a particle*. This means that any interaction with matter - absorption and emission - must occur in discrete chunks of energy which we call photons. For all other cases, it's often simpler to think of light in terms of EM waves.\n\n\"Photon\" is just the name we give to the discrete chunks of *energy* that light is *absorbed* or *emitted* in. The EM *field* is not quantized, fields are never quantized, it's the *energy transfer* that is quantized.\n\nRemember, any time we speak of things like wavelength, amplitude, phase, etc are all *wave* properties, so we can't really talk about wave properties of a particle an more than we can ask what the wavelength of a billiard ball is. It's not consistent with the particle model to discuss wave properties of particles.",
"The electromagnetic field supports waves, and the smallest possible waves you can have are photons, quantum particles. Think of them as tiny localized ripples in the field such that a smaller ripple is banned by the laws of physics. \n\nThe field has an existence in its own right, and it isn't made of photons: this is as wrong as thinking of the sea as being made of waves. When you have a permanent magnet, there is a non-zero electromagnetic field around it, but there are *no* photons, because photons are only associated to waves while the field around the magnet is stable and unchanging so there are no waves.",
"A very similar question (with much less understandable title) was submitted about a week ago: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1uda3b/what_truly_is_electromagnetic_radiation_in_the/"
]
] |
|
d9kul1
|
what are the dual "inner rail tracks"?
|
Sometimes, especially on bridges and in tunnels, railroad tracks have a pair of inner tracks. They don't seem to connect to anything in any obvious way. What's their purpose?
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d9kul1/eli5_what_are_the_dual_inner_rail_tracks/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f1ilduk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There are there in case of derailment to catch the wheels and stop or reduce the movement of the train sideways.\n\nIf you look at you images and the wheel closer to you would jump the track the wheel on the other side would hit the track in the middle and hopefully stop the sideways motion towards you."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://photos.app.goo.gl/kKtNFj2EDAmw8WoB8"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
2xec5z
|
how does cold weather cause my tires to lose air?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xec5z/eli5_how_does_cold_weather_cause_my_tires_to_lose/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cozcllk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The air is still there... it is just taking up less space because the cold air has caused that air to 'shrink'. Your tire still has the same number of oxygen, CO2, nitrogen, water, etc molecules in it, they are just clumped closer together, which reduces the pressure in your tire."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
rh8mf
|
montessori method
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rh8mf/eli5_montessori_method/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c45slfx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Teaching complicated concepts in a hands-on method. Examples: using beads and blocks to explain how the number system works, using color association to help children remember continents, having kids use a spoon to move small items from one bowl to another to improve fine motor skills. \n\nI went to a Montessori preschool and years later, I was still able to remember how the 1s beads were red in color and lots of other things. My mom has been a Montessori teacher for 5 years now."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
o0rcm
|
israel and palestine, specifically why israel's "settlements" aren't called "colonies"
|
Basically I've been reading up on this whole situation and it appears that Israel is a colonial power just like England was to the United States a few hundred years ago... Why are the Palestinians treated as a lesser people in the UN? and, Why does the US, which the media portrays as having most of the power to illicit change in the situation, not trying to help the Palestian people?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/o0rcm/eli5_israel_and_palestine_specifically_why/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3dhzmc"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
" > Why are the Palestinians treated as a lesser people in the UN? \n\nThe short answer is because they are essentially a stateless people. It could in some ways be compared to Romani (Gypsies) who, as they have no country to be a part of the United *Nations* are also under represented.\n\nThe real question is why did Israel end up a state and not Palestine. The most concise answer to this question is that the UN granted Israel statehood, and it became a state on borders that were influenced by the Partition Plan. The territories that didn't become Israel, instead of becoming Palestine, became parts of the neighboring Arab states. In this way the Palestinians did not get a state when the region became decolonized, and essentially it is something that is still trying to be rectified.\n\n > Why does the US not try to help the Palestian people?\n\nThis may sound cynical but no country in the world is truly altruistic and the U.S. is no exception. The U.S. sees strategic value in its relationship with Israel and isn't willing to jeopardize that. Right now the government of Israel is rightist so the U.S. can't take a hard line against human rights violations without alienating what they consider to be a key ally in the region. The U.S. has supported all sorts of unsavory states over the years in order to maintain influence, in this sense Israel is really not unique. \n\nThe other reason that the U.S. doesn't take a hard stance against Israel is the presence of a large number of people that live in the U.S., both Jewish and Christian, care a whole lot about Israel and are really offended when people criticize it. This, plus the fact that they are very vocal about their opinions.\n\n > why Israel's \"settlements\" aren't called \"colonies\"\n\nBasically Israel doesn't want to incorporate all of the territory it administers into its actual country for a variety of reasons. The word colony implies that it is a part of the mother country in a more complete and permanent sense. One could make a case for calling the entirety of the occupied territories a colony, but it doesn't really make sense to call just the settler communities colonies. They aren't regions of the occupied territories that are under substantially more Israeli control so much as they are areas where some Israelis have decided to live."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4ps8zw
|
Leif Erikson voyaged to America succesfully and went back,and the Viking race continued .Yet the continent was apparently forgotten till Columbus.What happened?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4ps8zw/leif_erikson_voyaged_to_america_succesfully_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4nipkt"
],
"score": [
69
],
"text": [
"Okay, so first off, *víking* is a job, not an ethnicity. It would be like calling all Americans cowboys.\n\nSecondly, while *Eíriks saga rauði* and *Grœnlendinga saga* were written ca. 1220-1275, the issue is that Iceland and Icelanders were (and still are) an incredibly small populace. There was little enough contact with North America, and no colony like in Greenland, to make it an attractive point for settlement and, frankly, there wasn't the technology to bring sufficient resources back to Europe to make it profitable or reasonable to trade there."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
166eju
|
If a newborn baby was put in an environment with absolutely no encouragement or need to stand/walk on two feet, would it still instinctively learn to do it?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/166eju/if_a_newborn_baby_was_put_in_an_environment_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7t5xs4",
"c7tb8ny"
],
"score": [
34,
24
],
"text": [
"It is hard to say as experimenting with such a thing would be incredibly unethical. Humans do have a capacity to learn without encouragement and deriving new methods of locomotion from either experimenting or mimicking adults is not that hard to imagine. \n\nOne case that partially reflect ethics idea is Genie. She was locked in a single room for the first thirteen years of her life and was sometimes tied down to a potty chair or crib. Now a major point of debate is whether her mental condition was caused by the extreme abuse and neglect she suffered or if she was mentally handicapped from birth. However, you can notice that she has a very peculiar way of walking that is reminiscent of one with a physical or mental disability. If you search for heron YouTube you can see this. \n\nNow I know that doesn't directly answer your question, but you can infer what you would like about her education when it came to learning to work. \n\n_URL_0_",
"It seems that most of the responses here are based on speculation, or drawing from events where a baby was actively prevented from walking or moving whatsoever. Here's some evidence suggesting that a baby will learn to walk without any outside encouragement, as long as there isn't anything to stop it.\n\nEvery infant has something called the \"Stepping reflex\", which means that if you hold an infant above a flat surface they will try to \"walk\" on it. This shows that even though an infant may not be strong or coordinated enough to walk yet, it has a predisposition to do so. Once the infant gains enough strength to support itself, it will start experimenting with stepping on its own. A little coordination will allow it to walk correctly.\n\nSources: _URL_0_\nAnd: _URL_1_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_(feral_child)"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_reflexes",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkGjOwPXsvo"
]
] |
||
7n82bq
|
the protesting in iran, what is it over?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7n82bq/eli5_the_protesting_in_iran_what_is_it_over/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drzsbgb",
"drzsccs"
],
"score": [
24,
5
],
"text": [
"*This is based on a limited amount of information on the subject and while it is based on reputable sources, I may have overlooked or missed some information. If you see something wrong or in need of an update, please reply and I will edit my post after confirming.*\n\nThe starting point seems to have been falling living standards, or at least that is being cited, but the protests quickly spread and became more and more political, calling for an end to the theocratic system. This has, understandably, pissed off a lot of people, mostly the IRGC, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, a militia organization dedicated to retaining the Islamic order in Iran, who have threatened use of force against protesters. There have been some casualties in the last 24 hours, but the cause is unclear, as protesters claim security troops opened fire, and security troops blame protesters and foreign agents.\n\nIn further concerning information, about 7 hours ago large numbers of unidentified aircraft were seen leaving Iran, some of these having seemingly disappeared from radar since while others have continued towards Azerbaijan and Armenia, and yet others have landed in various airports around Iran. It is currently unclear if these are flights seeking refuge, fleeing leaders or IRGC troop movements, potentially all of those. A video allegedly showing Iranian troops moving towards Mashhad, transporting what appears to be S-300 SAM systems, surfaced yesterday, but its authenticity hasn't been confirmed, nor how it would connect to the events.\n\nAs for expected results, it will depend on how much popular support the protests really have. If IRGC starts a proper crack-down, that could be the tipping point that either leads into an open revolt or into the protests being suppressed. The protests are the biggest since 2009, which is saying something about the intensity. POTUS has issued a statement calling for Iran to oust current leadership, so at least they likely believe something will come out of these protests.\n\nBased on a source living in the country: Things have been awry for a while now. This issue started months ago due to jobs getting scarcer and scarcer, and the protests and riots are mostly poor people. Seems like the issue has been brewing for several months at the very least, and has now reached boiling point. Things are getting serious, but there is no indication yet of where this will lead.\n\n**Following several hours of rumours and a denial by the protocol office, Fars has now stated the Iranian president will release a pre-recorded message, assumed to do with the protests. As of now, the president's office hasn't confirmed this. Potentially tonight, although no times have been given yet. ISNA has said president Rouhani will address the nation on Sunday evening. No official confirmation. \n\nIranian authorities are reported to have blocked access to Telegram messaging service after anti-government accounts were not locked down despite Iranian demands. Iran has also blocked Instagram to \"maintain peace\". Both of these reports come from Iranian State TV, so personally I believe them to be credible.**\n\nEdit: Almost forgot the expected results. Added that.\nEdit 2: Got in touch with a friend living in the country. Updated with their views. Bolding the latest update, so if you're checking back, it's easy to find.\nEdit 3 (15:10 UTC): Updated to reflect developments of the past few hours. Will continue to observe and update. ",
"From what I read, the protests are generally about high unemployment, rising prices for food and government corruption. There wasn't a specific spark that started the protests.\n\nThey have been in the making for quite some time. The Iranian economy has been struggling, social inequality is rising, women demand equal rights, the government is quite corrupt, etc. Usual issues to spark protests.\n\nThe Iranians are particularly upset now because they had hoped for a better future after the Iran Nuclear Deal. It was promised that billions of frozen assets would pour into the Iranian economy. So far it seems like only little has actually reached the Iranian people.\n\nWhat will happen?\nThe protests seem to be a civil rights movement, not a revolution. They will probably be calmed by promises and measures to lower prices, grant more civil rights, and take measure against corruption. If the people protesting trust that, time will tell.\n\nThe other possibility would be a brutal suppression which could either succeed or trigger a revolutionary movement. I don't think this is likely, though.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4arjkh
|
why does the same bottle of iced tea sometimes taste bitter and sometimes taste sweet?
|
I usually drink a bottle of sweetened iced tea in the morning over the period of a couple hours. Sometimes it tastes bitter, and then an hour or so later it tastes sweet. Why does this happen despite me not eating or drinking anything between sips? If nothing in my mouth changes, why do I percieve the tea to taste differently?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4arjkh/eli5_why_does_the_same_bottle_of_iced_tea/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d130ny4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Depends on how long the sweetener has been settling. Shake your drink every time before you take a swig and it should be consistent. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ffapm9
|
how does a bot on this website scan all comments continuously for keywords to find relevant comments to reply to?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ffapm9/eli5_how_does_a_bot_on_this_website_scan_all/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fjx9q5s"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Using reddit's API. See this link: _URL_0_\n\nIt contains the latest comments (which you can see when you go to _URL_1_) in a format that is compact and easily parsable by a computer program. Each entry in this page contains the actual content of the comment and various metadata, including when the comment was posted, who posted it, the original link to the comment, the comment and post's unique identifiers, and such. The bot can use the IDs to post a reply to the comment (again using the reddit API)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://api.reddit.com/r/all/comments/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/all/comments/"
]
] |
|
fq91dc
|
how come we can see the sun for the first couple minutes after it rises without it being so bright?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fq91dc/eli5_how_come_we_can_see_the_sun_for_the_first/
|
{
"a_id": [
"flp85ya"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"Because of the Earths curvature (come at me flat-earthers), the sunlight goes through dozens of miles of atmosphere, being dispersed and reflected, when it's lower on the horizon vs when it's high up (only about 2 miles.)\n\n & #x200B;\n\nEdit: Graph giving a general idea of how this is works\n\n[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://i.stack.imgur.com/wl1Z4.png"
]
] |
||
26za9v
|
What were the post world war two plans for Germany? (like the Roosevelt plan)
|
I have heard teachers talk about radical plans for the division of Germany after their surrender but no teacher has been able to give me a list of them! As it turns out, the state is making my school skip past the time period from the 1800s up to the world wars and i may not get this topic covered in highschool, so this is more of an independent question. If anyone could give me a list or a short description I would be very interested!
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/26za9v/what_were_the_post_world_war_two_plans_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chvz2nw"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"In terms of radical plans, the major apparent plan was the 'Morgenthau Plan' of September 1944. This was a memorandum drafted by Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr, and advocated complete demilitarisation of Germany, the partitioning of Germany into two states with the Ruhr to be an internationalised zone, and what was essentially the 'de-industrialisation' of Germany.\n[text of the Plan](_URL_0_) \n\nMorgenthau was able to get both Roosevelt and Churchill to agree to the memorandum at the Second Quebec Conference in September 1944, however it was quickly leaked to the press and both leaders distanced themselves from it once negative public reaction became clear. It was however a propaganda boon for the Germans, and utilised by Goebbels. There was also a concerted effort by more moderate officials within the US government (especially the War Department) against the idea.\n\nAspects of it still found their way into the official occupation directive JCS 1067 of April 1945 - the moderate officials were able to reject the more harsh aspects of the economic ideas, but largely accepted the more harsh political directives as something of an exchange, and it remained official policy until it was replaced by JCS 1779 in 1947.\n\nBeyond this, 'plans' for Germany are unfortunately not so clearly outlined. There were an array of different proposals for how Germany should be treated after its surrender from a variety of sources - various US government departments, the military, German emigre social scientists, academics and so on.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/psf/box31/t297a01.html"
]
] |
|
2358iv
|
How did the Allies view the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact?
|
As a followup question, why did two clashing ideologies create a cease-fire with each other?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2358iv/how_did_the_allies_view_the_molotovribbentrop_pact/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgtk52j"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Realistically it had been clear to both Britain and France that Germany was sizing up Poland, after Hitler reneged on his promise to not dismantle Czechoslovakia it was obvious to everyone who the next target was going to be. Knowing this the allies had issued strong statements of support for Poland before the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was signed. The actual announcement of the pact made very little difference, both Neville Chamberlain (the British PM) and Albert Lebrun (the French President) both said that the pact did not change their pledge to stand by Poland. Chamberlain event sent a letter to Hitler saying so, the poor courier who delivered the letter was subjected to one of Hitler's famous rants. However, the pact could be seen as one of the reasons the British officially signed an alliance with Poland as opposed to simple guarantees. \n\nFunny enough the pact caused more of a storm among the Axis than it did among the allies. Italy and Japan both protested the flagrant violation of the anti-Comintern pact. And both feared a Soviet-German alliance would exclude them from the Axis. \n\nAs for why two warring ideologies suddenly got along? Politics. Both Hitler and Stalin were far more rational than we give them credit for. Stalin especially was a big believer in Realpolitik, the pact gave him time to ready his army for the impending war with Germany, and allowed him to regain territory that was once Russian. Germany essentially ended the possibility of the Soviets interfering in the German invasion of Poland and it allow Germany to take advantage of vast economic resources of the Soviet Union. The pact was so beneficial to both parties it would have been stupid not to sign it. Both sides did have to justify the pact to some of their more hardline supporters though. The Nazi minster Alfred Rosenberg complained about the alliance and said that it was just Ribbentrop's attempt to get back at the British (they had humiliated him when he was the German ambassador to Britain) and communists world wide were angry at the only real Communist state signing an alliance with the fascists who were responsible for oppressing and executing communists.\n\nSources:\n\nA World At Arms by Gerhard Weinberg \n\nBloodlands by Timothy Snyder\n\nThe Third Reich in Power by Richard Evans"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
360isi
|
What do we believe is history's first real fashion trend?
|
Fashion trend as in a feature of clothing that is at least partially ornamental, and widely emulated and adopted quickly for the purposes of appearing appealing.
As a non-historian with a decidedly eurocentric worldview, I'm inclined to believe it's neck ruffs, like during Elizabethan eras.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/360isi/what_do_we_believe_is_historys_first_real_fashion/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cra5jjf"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Your question is hard to answer:\n\n > a feature of clothing that is at least partially ornamental\n\nTechnically, this could go far back in history - Sumerian reliefs and statuettes show fringe and dagging, for instance, and there are dyes and embellishments (beaded, embroidered, etc.) in many ancient cultures as well.\n\n > and widely emulated and adopted quickly \n\n\"Quick\" depends on your frame of reference. If you're judging communication of the past by modern standards, then nothing happened quickly in fashion until the twentieth century, while the number of fashion periodicals of the 19th century would have astounded the 17th and 18th. Also, how widely? - within a country, culture, social group?\n\nIn Western history, *fashion* (styles deliberately changing over time; contrast with *dress*, clothing and related material culture in general, or *costume*, the dress of a specific cultural, geographic, or time-bound group) is generally considered to be begin in the mid-to-late 14th century. To quote Totora's *Survey of Historic Costume* textbook, \n\n > Although one can see instances in the Early Middle Ages when the affluent appear to be following fashion, by the close of the 15th century it is obvious that periodic changes in the predominant style are taking place and that those who can afford to do so are dressing according to the current mode. Details ... were in \"a constant state of change ...\".\n\nIt's difficult to say what the first \"trend\" would be, because the above definition of fashion is wholly composed of trends. We treat our trends today as something apart from actual dress, things almost imposed on us from the fashion magazines and manufacturers. It's not a useful term when it comes to analysis, because it implies a concreteness that fashion barely ever has: Elizabethan ruffs, for example, grew out of ruffled shirt collars in earlier decades, so there's no line to draw between when they were and were not worn.\n\nBut I don't mean to be a total wet blanket! One of the earliest features in Western history post-adoption of fashion that separate fashionable from less fashionable dress would be dagging - cutting the edges of skirts, sleeves, or hoods into tabs or scallops, often lined with another color so that when the edge fluttered the contrast would be seen. it can be seen on the gown in [this manuscript illustration](_URL_0_) from the *Roman de la Rose*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://romandelarose.org/#read;Ferrell.005r"
]
] |
|
jjbkz
|
what is the reason for the statute of limitations ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jjbkz/elif_what_is_the_reason_for_the_statute_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2cl703",
"c2cmlit",
"c2cmwoi",
"c2cl703",
"c2cmlit",
"c2cmwoi"
],
"score": [
77,
5,
27,
77,
5,
27
],
"text": [
"You have a right to a fair trial. If the government comes to you and states that 25 years ago you stole a TV because you still have that TV in your home, it is unlikely that you still have the receipt to prove that you purchased that TV. \n\nAt some point the ability to prove you did something or provide evidence that you did not do something is so hard it is not worth it for a lawsuit. Witnesses move and memories either fade or get mixed up.\nThe statute of limitations allows life to go on without needing you to hoard receipts and worry about maintaining permanent alibis.\n\nHowever some crimes, like murder do not have a statute of limitations because no matter the inconvenience of tracking down evidence, society has decided that a criminal must be punished for certain crimes.",
"To extend the question, for what notable crimes is there a statute of limitations? For what notable crimes is there NO statue of limitations?",
"Like you're five:\n\nTimmy tells your teacher that you hit him on the playground yesterday, and he has a scar above his eye to prove it. Your teacher asks Bobby and Susie if they saw you hit him, they said that you didn't hit him, he got the scar from falling off of the swingset. So the teacher doesn't believe Timmy, and you don't get in trouble.\n\nNow let's say that you're in 3rd grade. Timmy tells your teacher that you hit him on the playground back when you were in Kindergarten, and he still has a scar above his eye to prove it. You know you didn't do it, but Susie moved to another school, and Bobby doesn't remember how Timmy got that scar, but he remembers you yelling at him one time. So the teacher believes Timmy, and gives you a detention.\n\nIf there was a statute of limitations on hitting people, you wouldn't have been punished in third grade. Timmy had plenty of time to accuse you of doing something, and it's not fair that you should have to keep reminding other people that you didn't hit him for the rest of your life.",
"You have a right to a fair trial. If the government comes to you and states that 25 years ago you stole a TV because you still have that TV in your home, it is unlikely that you still have the receipt to prove that you purchased that TV. \n\nAt some point the ability to prove you did something or provide evidence that you did not do something is so hard it is not worth it for a lawsuit. Witnesses move and memories either fade or get mixed up.\nThe statute of limitations allows life to go on without needing you to hoard receipts and worry about maintaining permanent alibis.\n\nHowever some crimes, like murder do not have a statute of limitations because no matter the inconvenience of tracking down evidence, society has decided that a criminal must be punished for certain crimes.",
"To extend the question, for what notable crimes is there a statute of limitations? For what notable crimes is there NO statue of limitations?",
"Like you're five:\n\nTimmy tells your teacher that you hit him on the playground yesterday, and he has a scar above his eye to prove it. Your teacher asks Bobby and Susie if they saw you hit him, they said that you didn't hit him, he got the scar from falling off of the swingset. So the teacher doesn't believe Timmy, and you don't get in trouble.\n\nNow let's say that you're in 3rd grade. Timmy tells your teacher that you hit him on the playground back when you were in Kindergarten, and he still has a scar above his eye to prove it. You know you didn't do it, but Susie moved to another school, and Bobby doesn't remember how Timmy got that scar, but he remembers you yelling at him one time. So the teacher believes Timmy, and gives you a detention.\n\nIf there was a statute of limitations on hitting people, you wouldn't have been punished in third grade. Timmy had plenty of time to accuse you of doing something, and it's not fair that you should have to keep reminding other people that you didn't hit him for the rest of your life."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1mya63
|
beer before liquor, never been sicker.....
|
Why do I feel as if I'm more intoxicated when I mix beer, wine, and liquor in the same day? More so, why does adding liquor to the beer in my belly lead to a worse tomorrow? I have friends at parties who will be fine mixing beer and liquor, but as soon as they smoke a J they are "obliterated." How does adding the third element increase their intoxication?
I mean we've all heard: "beer before liquor, never been sicker." Are you really in the clear with whiskey before beer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mya63/eli5_beer_before_liquor_never_been_sicker/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccdq7s6",
"ccdqrko"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"it's really a myth that mixing alcohol makes you more drunk.\n\nThe thing is, if people are mixing drinks, it's very likely they are drinking more than they would usually. it's likely that is why the intoxication level is higher.",
"\"Drunkness\" is based on ethanol concentration in the blood. That's it. So mixing different drinks won't increase intoxication.\n\nThe saying comes from the bloating feeling associated with beer, people tend to feel more sick from drinking harder spirits while bloated."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
46b4tr
|
Why was there no Scandinavian unification during the 1800 century similar to the Italian or German unifications?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/46b4tr/why_was_there_no_scandinavian_unification_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0452tb",
"d048xmy"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"In fact, there were two Scandinavian unions in that period, in succession to each other. The first was Denmark-Norway, which lasted until 1814, and the second was Norway-Sweden from 1814 to 1905. These were not quite the same as the other two unifications, as these were personal unions of the Kingdoms and not a \"nationalist\" unification per say, so as far as I am aware the peoples were not integrated nor was one language promoted to become \"Scandinavian.\" However someone with more expertise may shed some more light on this than I can.\n\nIn addition, there was also the Kalmar Union, which unified all the Scandinavian nations from 1397-1523, although I don't really know much about it.",
"There were strong scandinavist leanings after the danish lost Norway to Sweden and after Sweden lost Finland to Russia in the early 19th century. While certainly popular, the movement had little solid support from the upper echelons of Scancinavian society, and there was no obvious leader in the same way Prussia were for a german union. Still, there were some cautious cooperation between Sweden (with Norway in tow) and Denmark, especially among liberals.\n\nThis ended quite abruptly after the second Schleswig War of 1864, where the danish called on Sweden for assistance on Scandinavist grounds and the swedes refused, partly recognizing a lost cause, partly being on the german side. Though the movement has some support even today and contributed to the decision to use the same currency, though the nordic kronor has since diverged in value.\n\nIf we ask why in general we enter the realm of speculation which, as I've understood it, is frowned upon on this forum. Certainly though, the matter of relative power was a problem, both between Sweden-Norway and Denmark as well as the relative weakness of scandinavian states in international context. That there were no common language, no clear political center and no strong support from the political establishment were all contributing factors as well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3disw6
|
what is this whole res thing
|
I keep seeing people talking about RES and I'm not sure what it is
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3disw6/eli5_what_is_this_whole_res_thing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct5iqbs",
"ct5ir7s"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's the Reddit Enhancement Suite, a browser extension that lets you customize how you view/interact with Reddit. It's great for filtering out specific kinds of posts. ",
"[Reddit Enhancement Suite](_URL_0_) \n\nIt's a browser plugin which greatly improves the Reddit browsing experience on desktops."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://redditenhancementsuite.com/"
]
] |
|
v9o2p
|
How did food preservation techniques in the pre-Industrial era evolve?
|
I was thinking about how even with modern refrigeration, fresh produce will spoil in a relatively short amount of time after purchase. Which made me think about how people would preserve food in the pre-refrigeration era.
From reading books like A Song of Ice and Fire series (which depicts a medieval society) I understand that salt was very important (they mention salted meat all the time), as was pickling/curing, but what about other cultures/time periods? How *did* people survive winters? I guess it's more of an issue for more northern latitudes, but what did people in the tropics do to preserve food? Was starvation during winter/non-growing season a big issue for peasants and such?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/v9o2p/how_did_food_preservation_techniques_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c52rjup"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The link by neobot is a great overview. With regard to Ancient Rome, the Romans used a variety of methods to preserve foods, particularly to ship from place to place. Common liquid ingredients that needed to be kept at a cool temperature (e.g. wine) were kept in [amphorae](_URL_0_) which could be partially buried to keep them cool. (Amphorae were also used for dry ingredients, but as I recall for Romans they were used pretty exclusively for olive oil, wine, or garum, all of which will go rancid if left open.) \n\nAs for fruits and vegetables, the Romans used honey to make preserves or dried the fruit out, and for both veggies and fruits they used pickling techniques similar to what is currently in use today for veggies as well as cheeses and meats. For pickling techniques in use in the early 1st Century CE, see Columella's *De Re Rustica* (\"About Farm Stuff\" as I like to think of it, but if you're boring I guess you could translate it \"Agriculture\") and for uses of pickled and dried foods in Roman Cuisine, see the cookbook of Apicius. Cato the Elder also wrote a book on farming that has notes on preservation, but I try not to recommend any Cato the Elder to anyone unless I can help it. (I kid, I kid. *Carthago delenda est, amice.*) In all seriousness, the man loved his pickles, especially pickled cabbage. He devotes a whole chapter to it in his own *De Agricultura*, which is [available for you to peruse on LacusCurtius](_URL_1_).\n\nUhhh, what else. Salt, where available in great quantity, was also used to preserve meats (fish, pork, snails) for transportation, as it has been used since well before the Romans came along. \n\nAnd of course if stuff was spoiled enough to taste unpleasant but not enough to kill you, there was always *garum* to smother all over it until it no longer tasted like anything! Mmmm, *garum*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphora",
"http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cato/De_Agricultura/K*.html"
]
] |
|
7aw4xr
|
Was there severe tension between Greek settlers and Egyptians during the Ptolemaic Period?
|
I am currently playing the new Assassin's Creed and without giving away spoilers, of the numerous insights into the period this got me most curious. In the game, upon reaching the city of Faiyum and the Oasis, the side quests in the area focus on tension between Greeks and Egyptians. An example of an Egyptian character telling you that Greeks were taxed less and Egyptians were taxed more by the ruling Greeks resulting in the Egyptian's inability to buy land or maintain land that was already owned. There are also examples in the game of Egyptians desecrating Greek temples. Lastly, there were instances in the game of acknowledgement and reference to skin color and there being derogatory impressions regarding it. So is this just artistic license taking more modern social and class issues and putting them in the game or was there severe tension between the ruling Greeks and the Egyptians, enough so that they hated each other?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7aw4xr/was_there_severe_tension_between_greek_settlers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpefx5n"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You might like these older answers of mine on\n\n[Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt: A veritable ancient apartheid?](_URL_1_)\n\n[How much did Ptolemaic Egypt resemble modern colonialism? Is it in any way helpful to make this comparison?](_URL_3_)\n\n[How accurate is the representation of Egypt in Assassins' Creed: Origins?](_URL_0_)\n\n[How would an Egyptian in Alexandria at the turn of the Millenium BCE have perceived race and skin tone?](_URL_2_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7acez8/how_accurate_is_the_representation_of_egypt_in/?st=j9l30obp&sh=abd7132a",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7awgeo/ptolemaic_and_roman_egypt_a_veritable_ancient/dpeezyt/?st=j9neul7m&sh=a1931965",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/69nsex/how_would_an_egyptian_in_alexandria_at_the_turn/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/79l6u4/how_much_did_ptolemaic_egypt_resemble_modern/dp2zlqn/?st=j9elcru8&sh=f4165335"
]
] |
|
f22fjd
|
what happens at subatomic level when we touch things? shouldn't electrons repel from each other due to their negative charge?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f22fjd/eli5_what_happens_at_subatomic_level_when_we/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fh9y3p7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Atoms never touch each other when things touch.\n\nThe atoms get pushed back (due to the nuclei having similar charge) and we sense this force as touch."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
uscdh
|
why are there so many different citation manuals (e.g. mla, apa, chicago, etc.)?
|
I tried Googling and Wikipedia-ing, but they were only able to explain the major differences between the manuals, not the rationale behind having so many different ones. By the way, here's the [Wikipedia article](_URL_0_).
My rationale for asking? I'm just curious. But thanks for your help!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/uscdh/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_different_citation/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4y3zsv"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"I think this explains it well for a 5 year old: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_guide"
] |
[
[
"http://xkcd.com/927/"
]
] |
|
hza33
|
Could careful administration of a heart rate increasing drugs have the same effect as cardio?
|
Disregarding the positive effects that cardio exercise has on other muscles, would artificially increasing the heart rate on a regular basis have the same positive effect on the heart as regular exercise?
EDIT: I am referring to positive effects such as reducing your resting heart rate, increasing your max heart rate or speeding up your heart rate recovery.
I also mean using such drugs for say an hour every day instead of exercising. For example for bedridden people. Not using it around the clock
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hza33/could_careful_administration_of_a_heart_rate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1zmoj6",
"c1zms38",
"c1zol2h"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"[Relevant](_URL_0_). Robert H. Lustig, critic of HFCS, speaking on the independent benefits of exercise beyond burning calories.",
"Are you referring to taking stimulants in attempt to strengthen your heart muscle?\n\nIt's an interesting concept, but I think the drawbacks would outweigh the benefits.\n\nI've read that when your body produces adrenaline and similar chemicals they do harm if they are not used.",
"[This AskScience answer may be relavent](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM&t=71m15s"
],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/f7ygk/why_does_increasing_your_heart_rate_via/"
]
] |
|
25k93y
|
why do we use hours, minutes, seconds to measure time versus increments of a decimal system?
|
Seems like the world uses an "English" system to measure time when it should be using a "metric" system.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25k93y/eli5_why_do_we_use_hours_minutes_seconds_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chhzrpr",
"chhzxts",
"chi0b86",
"chi0bkf",
"chi0h6n",
"chi2s8z"
],
"score": [
5,
10,
3,
2,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"A metric time system was proposed back when the metric system started being a thing, but people didn't really like it. \n\nThe way humans perceive time is so variable depending on circumstances, the sort of precision that decimal systems can provide aren't really that important I guess. \n\nThe 24 hr/60 minute/60 second system is a bit unwieldy at times, but all of those numbers are easily divisible into various chunks, and I think that quality fits much better into how people generally use time. \n\nAnd when higher precision is required, say for science or whatever, it's easy enough to just use seconds and decimals (nanoseconds,etc.).",
"100 has only two prime factors: 2 and 5. So it's divisible by 2, 4, 5, 10, 20, 25, or 50.\n\n60 has three prime factors: 2, 3, and 5. So it's divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, or 30. So it's much easier to slice a 60-minute hour into convenient fractions than a 100-minute hour.",
"I seem to recall reading that it has to do with the sexagesimal(base-60) number system of the babylonians.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Because tradition. Minutes and seconds have been used for thousands of years.",
"Thank the Mesopotamians",
"We use the duodecimal or dozenal system of measuring time most likely because there are 12 lunar cycles in a year. From there is makes sense to continue breaking things down by a base-12 system.\n\nMany systems of measurement used to be dozenal (and some still are) but were replaced by decimal systems. \n\nThere is no real reason we use a duodecimal system for time as opposed to a decimal system. As others have mentioned, a decimal time system was introduced by the French but never adopted on a large scale.\n\nMany will agree that the duodecimal system has great advantages when it comes basic arithmetic as demonstrated by AirborneRodent. You should try thinking in terms of a dozenal system some time. After a little while you might wonder why we use a decimal system at all.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_numerals"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6xJfP7-HCc"
]
] |
|
3rz1er
|
what dimension does science say we exist in presently? how do scientist know?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rz1er/eli5_what_dimension_does_science_say_we_exist_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwskya5",
"cwsn6wz"
],
"score": [
24,
6
],
"text": [
"We exist in 3 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension.\n\nWe know this because we invented the language of math and physics that describes these dimensions. \n\nThe spatial dimensions are the x,y,z coordinates we use in any description of 3 dimensional location in space. For example, we can describe the position of a place on the surface of the earth by saying it is a certain number in latitude, a certain number in longitude, and a certain number of feet above sea level. These three numbers can accurately describe that exact location in space. \n\nBy adding the 4th dimension of time, we can now even more accurately locate the point. You could say to someone \"meet me on the 4th floor of the building at 93rd street and Lincoln Avenue at 4:00 p.m.\" and someone would be able to accurately locate you because you gave them all the four dimensions they need.\n\nWhen scientists talk about other dimensions, they aren't talking about mysterious other universes alongside our own, they're talking about mathematical concepts where you add more information to more accurately describe something. The cool thing about math is you can add as many extra dimensions into your calculations as you want, you aren't just limited to three. ",
"According to [M-theory](_URL_1_), the Universe consists of 11 dimensions. We can only perceive 3 of them (4 if you count time) because of [compactification](_URL_0_). (Translation: Our perception smushes multiple dimensions together so the appear as if they are a single one) \n\nIt's important to note that M-theory and its parent, string theory, are both highly theoretical. They make mathematical sense but nobody's been able to figure out an experiment to prove or disprove them. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compactification_%28physics%29",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory"
]
] |
||
7fh92g
|
virtual particles please.
|
I understand the basic concept behind them but would like to know more.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7fh92g/eli5_virtual_particles_please/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dqbwmcn",
"dqc054j"
],
"score": [
39,
2
],
"text": [
"Virtual particles are particles that *cannot* be measured but *must* exist. Take, for example, two electrons interacting with each other. Because they have the same charge, they will repel each other. How do they \"know\" they have the same charge? How do they \"know\" that there's another electron nearby repelling them? They share a photon.\n\nThe photon carries the electromagnetic force between the two electrons, transferring momentum between them and sharing the information to each of them that they exist. That photon has to be there. That photon is how the electrons communicate - it's how any charged particles communicate. That photon is also undetectable.\n\nYou detect photons by having them interact with charged particles. But the photon is already interacting with two charged particles. It can't make a pitstop through your detector. If it gets detected, it's absorbed, and the information it was carrying between the two electrons is gone. It's not like you \"aren't allowed\" to detect that photon, you just *can't*. As far as anything other than the two electrons is concerned, the photon doesn't exist. And in a shaky kind of way, it really doesn't exist. Does something exist if you can't measure it?\n\nThe math that describes the interactions of particles says that the virtual particle exists. It has to. But it only exists long enough for the math to work.\n\nThey can be visualized by [Feynman Diagrams](_URL_0_), which show the interaction of particles. This one shows two electrons coming near each other, exchanging a virtual photon, and then leaving the interaction. The squiggly line is the virtual photon. Notice that the photon doesn't leave the diagram. It goes from one electron to the other, but it doesn't go in or out. It can't. If it did, it could be absorbed and detected somewhere else. Anything in the middle of a Feynman Diagram like that is a virtual particle.\n\nAlso worth noting slash just kind of neat: virtual particles don't just go from one place to another or \"exist\" in a continuous, rational kind of way. That virtual photon might spontaneously become an electron-positron pair, and then those will annihilate each other again to become the photon. The virtual photon can take literally any possible path through space to get from one electron to another. And an electron can spontaneously emit a virtual photon and then reabsorb it again. Any of those things can happen any number of times, and it doesn't change the outcome of the interaction between the original two electrons which are the real particles. Anything in-between is virtual.",
"A key point I see missing in many of these responses: these particles can exist on account of Heisenburg's uncertainty principle (a derivative of the approximation of all particles as wave functions). \n\nThe lesser known relationship ΔΕΔt < = hbar/2 (the uncertainty in the energy of the particle times the uncertainty of the duration of this particle is less than or equal to planck's constant divided by 4π, which can be derived from the more familiar ΔpΔx < =hbar/2) provides a means for these to exist:\n\nif we consider the rest mass (and \"kinetic\" energy, but assuming they are not moving only the rest mass needs to be taken into account) of the virtual particle to be the uncertainty in the energy (ΔE), then these particles can exist for a certain uncertainty of time Δt such that the product of these two is less than or equal to hbar/2.\n\nsources: krane \"modern physics\" (you can probably find a pdf of it online), intro modern physics class"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://sciencevspseudoscience.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/moller_feynman_tree.png"
],
[]
] |
|
pkhde
|
Can someone explain to me what this guy means by "That whole light theory by Einstein is being proven wrong by science right now."?
|
[Here's](_URL_0_) the context of why he said that statement. Was he just trying to be snarky and say that science is always proving itself wrong? Or did he hear something wrong?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/pkhde/can_someone_explain_to_me_what_this_guy_means_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3q46nn"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Who knows? But my guess is that he read something about last year's much-reported story about the apparently-faster-than-light neutrinos measured at CERN. \n\nIf true, it'd mean something would be wrong with Einstein's theory of Special Relativity - at least as we understand it today. \"Einstein was wrong!\" makes for a good headline, but it's not really true - since the vast majority of physicists don't believe at all that's the case. \n\nIf someone thinks Science is \"always proving itself wrong\", they've fundamentally misunderstood Science. It's not about being absolutely 'right' or 'wrong', it's about getting more and more 'right'. If a scientific theory works, there's something right about it. If you come up with a new theory that works even better, it doesn't mean the old one is 'wrong', just that it's a more approximate theory, or limited to a certain set of circumstances. Since the new theory encompasses the old one, it'll also give insight into why the old one worked where it did.\n\nFor instance, quantum mechanics is fundamentally different from classical Newtonian mechanics. Some of the basic assumptions of classical mechanics are false in the quantum realm. But that doesn't mean Newton was \"proven wrong\" - he'd no ability to ever test his theory on subatomic particles. Classical mechanics still works just fine for the kinds of things it was created to describe. It can be said to be an approximation of quantum mechanics for objects that are heavy and large. \n\nSo quantum mechanics didn't prove classical mechanics wrong. What it _did_ prove wrong was the _assumption_ physicists had made, that the mechanics of human-sized objects work the same way as the mechanics of subatomic particles. It's that _assumption_ that was proven false, not classical mechanics itself. There was nothing wrong with making this assumption though. It's rational to assume your existing knowledge applies in new situations until proven otherwise. That's what science is about - coming up with theories that explain what you do know so you can predict the things you don't know.\n\nIf you deny that this is possible, you're not just denying the scientific method but knowledge itself.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/3aKoh.jpg"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
1245bb
|
imaginary numbers and i (square root of -1)
|
I took a look over the simple wiki page.. And though it made me get it a bit more, I'm still almost as confused as I was when I didn't know yet.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1245bb/eli5_imaginary_numbers_and_i_square_root_of_1/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6rztje",
"c6s283j",
"c6s7iqg"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Let's start with the number line, and say we have some number. What happens when you multiply that number by another one? You \"stretch\" away from 0 if the second number is bigger than 1 or less than -1, and you \"squish\" towards 0 if the second number is smaller than 1 and bigger than -1, right? You can also flip which side of 0 you're on if the second number is negative. So we'll think of multiplication by a real number as a stretch or squish and maybe a flip.\n\nNow imagine a big sheet. It goes on forever in all directions. Let's pick a point on this sheet and call it a \"complex number.\" Now I can label the point by two real numbers - how far to the right/left of 0 I am and how far above/below 0 I am. These are the \"real\" and \"imaginary\" parts.\n\nThe thing that makes these complex numbers different from just a pair of real numbers is that you can multiply them in a really cool way. When you multiply our complex number by another complex number, it both squishes/stretches the number towards/away from 0 and *rotates* where the number is.\n\nSo remember how -1 \"flipped\" a real number? We can think of that instead as taking our number and rotating it half a circle around 0.\nReal numbers are stuck on a line, so the only rotations you can get from multiplying by real numbers are 0 and half a circle. But with complex numbers you can get any rotation you like! And they're really easy to manipulate, too. If you multiply a ton of different complex numbers together and want to know the result you just add up all the rotation angles and multiply all the (real) stretches and squishes.\n\nNow, you say, what's this got to do with square roots? That's where you hear about imaginary numbers! Well, the imaginary number i is a rotation by 90 degrees (a quarter circle) with a stretch/shrink of 1 (no stretching). What happens if you take i x i? I said you multiply the stretches and add the rotations, so you get a stretch of 1 x 1 = 1 and a rotation of 90+90 =180 degrees. But remember, we just realized that we can think of -1 as a rotation by 180 degrees with no stretch... So i x i = -1. This means that i is a square root of -1.",
"[This](_URL_0_) is the best explanation I've seen.",
"IAmMe1's explanation is awesome.\n\nA few other notes that I always found helpful:\n\n1. There is one and only one imaginary number: i == sqrt(-1)\n2. As others have said, the term \"imaginary\" is awful. You could just as easily call it the igloo number or iguana number and it would mean just as much\n3. One thing that helps make the idea of the \"imaginary number\" authentic is a \"proof\" that the imaginary number MUST exist. As you may know, the number of roots to any equation is equal to the highest power in the equation:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThus, for x^2 - 64=0, there must be 2 solutions: x=8 and x=-8 are the two solutions\n\nFor x^3 - 64, there are three solutions: x=4 is one solution, and there are two other numbers. \n\nBut if you try to draw the function on the cartesian plane, you can't visually find the other two y=0 intercepts. The reason why you can't find it is because the roots do not exist in the real number domain. So mathematicians, when they plugged the function into their \"root generating algorithm\" decided that if you ignore the ridiculousness of sqrt(-1) and just continue anyway, you can get the other two values with some good precision (albeit, they contain sqrt(-1) in them: -2+3.4641 * sqrt(-1) and -2-3.4641 * sqrt(-1)).\n\n**Edit: Not all quadratic equations have real solutions. Eg. x^2 + 1 never crosses y=0 if you draw it on a graph, but since you know there are two roots, you just set x^2 + 1 = 0 and you discover that the two roots must be sqrt(-1) and -sqrt(-1). Or, i and -i if you prefer.**\n\n**Edit2: Cool! _URL_1_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10h7nl/eli5_complex_and_imaginary_numbers/c6djd3z"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nth_root",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_irreducibilis**"
]
] |
|
zrqmy
|
If I have a really long pole, say 1 light year long, and I pull on one end of it, will the other end move immediately or will it take more than one year for it to move?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/zrqmy/if_i_have_a_really_long_pole_say_1_light_year/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c674zmx",
"c6751s8"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
" > This question has been on my mind for a while, sorry if it's been asked before.\n\n[Have you looked at r/sciencefaqs](_URL_0_)? Or done a [search](_URL_1_)?",
"From a physics forum: \n\n\"I think this will depend on some other things that are not yet specified, namely the density of the pole in question. I believe the answer will be directly related to the speed of sound in the material. \n\nAs you tug on one side of the pole, you create a gap between the molecules at that end, and their immediate neighbors. The EM potential around these neighbor molecules will change, and so there is some slight lag before the molecules 1 meter away will respond and the lattice in this vicinity resets itself. This will propagate as a lattice wave down the pole until it reaches Jupiter. So if you pull the pole 1m toward you, I think it will take:\n\ntime = length / (sound speed)\n\nbefore the opposite end at Jupiter actually moves toward you. So, lets say we have a diamond tube (which is quite dense and therefore has a very high sound speed). And let's also estimate the distance to Jupiter as ~ 5 AU (Irkun already pointed out that this actually varies).\n\ntime = (7.5e9 km) / (12 km/s) ~= 6.3e8 seconds or ~20 years\n\nThere are a lot of simplifying assumptions here, but I think this should be correct to within at least an order of magnitude.\n\nEDIT:\n\nI was just thinking about my response and I realized you said \"infinitely light\". In this case we have zero density, and I don't really know how to answer the question. In fact, I don't really think it is meaningful to talk about waves propagating in a material of zero density. Regardless, hopefully my explanation about a pole with some known density was at least somewhat helpful.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/sciencefaqs/comments/fj1qd/if_i_had_an_infinitely_stiff_rod_could_i_push_and/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/search?q=light+year+rod&restrict_sr=on"
],
[]
] |
||
qaiby
|
How did we find out all the steps of star creation?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/qaiby/how_did_we_find_out_all_the_steps_of_star_creation/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3w3dhk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Once you know the general composition of the stars themselves (can be deduced by looking at the light given off) and you have a general handle on the energies involved it all kind of falls together afterwards. You can calculate reaction rates and estimate the time a star will spend in each stage of it's life, and you can estimate what the star will consist of (hence how it will look) from the amounts of each element present from the reactions.\n\nAstronomers are also able to look out into the sky and identify a vast number of stars in all stages of development and can check the theoretical models against real-life examples. I doubt *anyone* would seriously claim we know everything about the life of any given star but from observation alone we are able to achieve a solid grasp of the basics.\n\ne: I should note I glossed over the processes involved. If you go back a hundred years or so people didn't have the slightest clue how it worked even with a large amount of observation, the development of our understanding of nuclear fission and fusion drove the theoretical side and brought the observational evidence into focus."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bvjjbh
|
why cannot there ever be a successful breeding between a human being and another animal?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bvjjbh/why_cannot_there_ever_be_a_successful_breeding/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eppo26l",
"epppkl7",
"epppzai",
"eppwbqp"
],
"score": [
20,
12,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Huge over simplification; when you make a baby, its DNA comes equally from the mom and the dad. The DNA is a big set of building instructions, and a playbook of how to react to situations. For humans, we get every odd page from Mom, and even pages from Dad. Most of the time, the instructions still make sense. Chimeras, like mules, ligers, and tilons have building instructions close enough that it doesn't die instantly. \n\nImagine trying to assemble an F35, if the guide book has the instructions for an F16 in English in the evens, and an s300 in Swahili on the odd pages. \n\nYou might get somewhere, but will it fly?",
"Did you try ALL of the animals?",
"Because, the mechanics of genetics have some clear and simple nuances to prevent this from happening, so divergence of inherited traits doesn't result in cronenburg babies. These are long evolved over time.\n In short, this is complex life forms were talking about, Not a piers Anthony novel",
"All questions must begin with “ELI5”. That's in the sidebar."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2wqmio
|
Exactly how much more advantageous is it to "switch" in the Monty Hall Problem?
|
In the Monty Hall Problem, you're on a game show, and there are 3 doors to choose from. Behind 1 door is a new car, and behind the other 2 doors are goats. You pick a door, and the host opens another door, revealing a goat. The host then offers you to either stay with your door, or switch to the other unopened door. Most people would stay with their pick, thinking that the odds between the two doors is 50/50, but it is actually mathematically advantageous to switch. I've heard that it is 50%, 2/3, 1/3, etc MORE advantageous to switch, but which one is it, and why?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2wqmio/exactly_how_much_more_advantageous_is_it_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cot9it2",
"cotac5e",
"cotbkfa",
"cotl6wn"
],
"score": [
18,
9,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"The probability of winning when switching is ⅔, while the probability of winning when not switching is ⅓. You could say you are twice as likely to win (100% increase) when switching. Since probabilities are bounded from above I tend to avoid that kind of language, even though it's correct in this case.\n\nEdit: To others who want to reply, note that OP is not actually asking for an explanation for *why* switching is better.",
"Yeah, I like to actually think about this problem from the POV of the host actually, because it shows why the host's opening of a door affects the problem.\n\nPretend you're the host; the contestant chooses a door at random. There's a 1-in-3 chance they pick the car, and a 2-in-3 chance they pick a goat. Now, if they picked the car correctly, you can open either other door to show a goat - this happens one third of the time. If they picked a goat, you only have one door to open to reveal the other goat, and this happens two-thirds of the time. So two thirds of the time, the contestant will be better off switching, because the car will be behind the other door those times.\n\nTo really understand it, you can draw out the decision tree, and that will make it all crystal clear.",
"Well, this paper explains this problem far better than any redditor ever will...\n\n_URL_1_\n\nIt entirely matters which Monty is at play. Classic Monty, you have a 2/3 chance of winning by switching. High Monty, you have a 50/50 chance if he selects door three and a 100% chance of winning if he chooses door two, and Random Monty, where you have a 50/50 chance of winning by switching unless Monty reveals the car, in which case you have a goat.\n\nThis page backs up the first.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nYou will only be able to infer which Monty by past performance. If Monty NEVER gets the car, you can conclude he is either Random Monty or High Monty.",
"You pick one door out of three, so it has a 1/3 chance in having the car. The other two doors, collectively, have a 2/3 chance of having the car. So it is twice as likely that the car is in one of the two other doors. Now, the host, *who knows what is behind all the doors* (this is important) and who *always opens a door that will reveal a goat* (also important), opens one of the doors you didnt choose, to reveal a goat. Those two doors collectively still have 2/3 chance of having the car, and the host has been kind enough to show you which one it definitely not, effectively putting the entire 2/3 chance over to the remaining door and reducing the one he showed you to 0 (obviously). Your initial door is still at 1/3; the other doors being revealed or not doesnt affect that, because you made your choice before. So, if you switch, you are twice as likely (2/3) to win as if you dont switch (1/3).\n\nThis is counter intuitive because the number of doors is so few. The whole thing becomes more apparent if you imagine more doors. Imagine there being 100 doors. 1 door contains the car, the 99 others goats. You make your choice, and of course your door has a 1/100 chance of containing the car. The host now, still knowing what is behind every door, opens all other doors except one, revealing goats behind all of them. He then asks you if you want to switch. I think most people will now easily recognise that their initial door didnt just magically improve its odds to 1/2 from the 1/100, and that the door they didnt choose will be massively more likely to contain the car (again, this only works if the host *knows* whats behind every door, and he *has* to open all remaining doors except one and reveal goats in all doors he opens, which is the premise of the original 3 door problem and the premise of this 100 door variation)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://math.ucsd.edu/~crypto/Monty/montybg.html",
"http://educ.jmu.edu/~lucassk/Papers/MHOverview2.pdf"
],
[]
] |
|
2j4dhj
|
how do they measure how much water travels through a a waterfall every minute/second?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2j4dhj/eli5_how_do_they_measure_how_much_water_travels/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl89du5"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Geometry. The wall of water is a rough rectangle the width of the opening, and the thickness of the water depth at the edge. Drop a knotmeter in and you get the third dimension - speed of the rectangle (distance per time). So, assume a waterfall 100x1 feet at the dropoff, doing 8 kts (almost 16 feet per second). So, 100x1x16 feet go over the falls every second, or 1600 cuft."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
bqk8v8
|
what's the difference between a technologist and a technician?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bqk8v8/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_a_technologist/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eo54krk"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Technician actually performs work/maintenance on machinery. A technologist studies said machines looking for ways to improve on it"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
8ji8rm
|
To plant scientists: What are the most efficient plants to put inside a home for producing the most oxygen and cleaning up the air?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/8ji8rm/to_plant_scientists_what_are_the_most_efficient/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dz20gsa"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Back in the ‘80’s NASA studied exactly what you’re asking. \n\nYou can find the quick chart here, or read the original study if you’d like. \n\n_URL_0_\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Clean_Air_Study"
]
] |
||
3k0vkc
|
How hard was it for an Irish immigrant to become an American citizen? (I'm also interested in the experience of Italians and other immigrant groups)
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3k0vkc/how_hard_was_it_for_an_irish_immigrant_to_become/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuu54ub"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"At what point in time?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
ukic2
|
When did the Royal Navy get its first steel boat?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ukic2/when_did_the_royal_navy_get_its_first_steel_boat/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4w5up7",
"c4woqb8"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The first ironclad would be the [HMS Warrior](_URL_1_) in 1860.\n\nAs for all-steel, it would be the [Iris Class Ships](_URL_0_) in 1877.\n",
"It might be of interest to you that the first steel warship was not actually fielded by the Royal Navy or the French. \n\nThe East India Company vessel [*Nemesis*](_URL_0_) was built in 1839 and saw action in the Opium Wars. Although unarmored, her steel hull was able to withstand lightweight shot. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_class_cruiser",
"http://www.bit.ly/akinIj"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_%281839%29"
]
] |
||
1q3uy6
|
why using the word "rape" is considered normalizing the issue while using the word "murder" is not.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1q3uy6/eli5_why_using_the_word_rape_is_considered/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cd8vzfl",
"cd8w18c"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think part of the problem is that the crime of rape is very different from murder. The act of sex can be something consensual or considered rape, depending on who is involved. The act of murder is always murder and always a terrible thing. In this respect, it is hard to \"normalize\" murder in the same way that you can \"normalize\" rape as people will generally all still believe murdering is a crime no matter how much we may say \"Oh shit, I straight up murdered that test.\" \n\nTV is sort of deceptive and portrays most rape cases as some guy jumping a girl in the street. In reality, it usually happens between two people who already know each other. Maybe they get a little drunk, the guy gets a little too aggressive and the girl gets too scared to say no. It is much harder to determine whether or not rape has occurred, and so \"normalizing\" the idea of rape is much more likely to make this kind of behavior seem more acceptable. ",
"I suppose if the word \"murder\" was used in the same way as \"rape\" is, you probably could consider murder being trivialized. Trying to keep any sort of bias out of it, the way I understand arguments about rape being trivialized are that using the word \"rape\" in such a casual, joking manner will eventually (if it goes on long enough) create the idea that being raped is not a big deal, therefore trivializing rape.\n\nIf we used murder in the same context (and I know some people do, but I don't think to the same degree), we could probably create the idea that someone murdering someone else isn't a big deal, as well.\n\nI think the difference in something like \"rape\" vs. \"murder\" is that rape is something that is in many cases survived, so someone that is a survivor of rape is going to be more sensitive to jokes about it than someone who was murdered (because obviously, being dead, they aren't going to care if you make fun of them).\n\nAs an example, let's pretend that you were mugged at gunpoint. It would probably be a traumatic event for you. If you were to later watch a movie or TV show where someone was mugged at gunpoint for comedic effect (I can think of an episode of Futurama where mugging was played for comedic effect), you probably wouldn't laugh at the joke, because you know what being mugged at gunpoint is like and you know that it's no laughing matter.\n\nThis is kind of the idea. Rape survivors are not going to think rape jokes are funny (for the most part; everyone has a different sense of humor, and there may be some rape survivors that make or laugh at rape jokes), and are not going to like the idea of someone saying, \"I raped you\" when all you did was beat them at a video game. It takes their personal experiences and invalidates them to some degree."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
26l9a9
|
How does a small gust of wind measure eye pressure?
|
I went to get my eyes checked about a week ago, and part of the (many) procedures was checking my eye pressure. A machine was put close to my eye and a small puff of wind was blown against my eye. Predictably, this caused me to reflexively close my eyes.
How could a gust of wind determine my eye (intraocular?) pressure?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/26l9a9/how_does_a_small_gust_of_wind_measure_eye_pressure/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chs8sxc",
"chs9gs7"
],
"score": [
11,
9
],
"text": [
"This is known as [ocular tonometry](_URL_0_). The basis of the measurement is something called the [Imbert-Fick \"law\"](_URL_1_) which basically says that when you have a spherical thin membrane filled with liquid, then the amount of pressure required to flatten a given area on the surface of the sphere can be related to the pressure of the liquid in the sphere. The pulse of air flattens the cornea and the area flattened is measured by an optical sensor and correlated with the force of the puff of air to calculate the pressure. \n\nIt is not especially accurate though. Even Goldman Contact Tonometry (which is supposed to be better than puff tonometry) will measure different pressures on different people with the same intraocular pressure. There are various reasons - the primary one being a large difference in the thickness of the cornea from person to person. ",
"The puff of air is basically just a poke in the eye to see how squishy it is. The puff pokes a small area on your eye with a fairly well known force, which means they know how much pressure is exerted by the puff. How far the puff is able to dent your eye tells them how much pressure is pushing back on the puff. That is the pressure in your eye. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocular_tonometry",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbert-Fick_law"
],
[]
] |
|
as3glk
|
how does diabetes work on a cellular level?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/as3glk/eli5_how_does_diabetes_work_on_a_cellular_level/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egri0gp"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"Really rough and basic: imagine your cell has a lock on it. Insulin is the key to open that lock. Depending on whether you have Type 1 (little to no insulin production) or type 2 (insulin cannot recognize the key hole and thus can’t let the sugar (glucose) into the cell), the sugar builds up in your blood and causes damage to your blood vessels and organs.The body does what it can to remove the excess sugar through your urine etc. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
es4g5q
|
can you get your pets sick, or vice versa?
|
We were supposed to take home a new kitten tonight, but my son was sick (Possibly strep. Negative on the quick strep test but the doctor wanted to do a culture because the symptoms say strep.) So we had to reschedule. Between orange juice and ibuprofen, my son asked if he could get the kitten sick. I honestly don't know the answer. Can pets catch the common cold? What other illnesses can pets and humans share? Do I have to worry about his kitten getting strep throat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/es4g5q/eli5_can_you_get_your_pets_sick_or_vice_versa/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ff7qnbu",
"ff7th7z",
"ff7ufwh",
"ff7wzok"
],
"score": [
6,
16,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Sometimes. \n\nDifferent animals and humans have different bacteria and viruses that can get them sick. Some can affect both, while others only one. \n\nMost only affect one. I believe strep throat can be passed to cats though. \n\nMost diseases that can spread between animals and humans are larger parasites though. This is because they live in the environment of our flesh, with less specialization needed. Bacteria and viruses use our cells to help them grow, where as parasites are more like a bug or animal eating the meat to grow.",
"You can definitely get your pets sick under at least one circumstance:\n\n- If you have rabies, and you bite your pet.",
"There are some diseases that can spread from animals to humans, but many can't. Diseases that do jump between us and animals are known as \"zoonotic diseases\". Which disease can jump between species is often quite specific. Flu, for example, can infect pigs and birds as well as humans easily but is unlikely to be transmitted to cats. Ebola jumps from monkeys to humans. AIDS evolved from a simian (monkey) virus and then made humans their host. The list of known zoonotic diseases is pretty long.",
"Sometimes, but only with specific illnesses. Diseases that can pass between humans and animals are called zoonitic diseases, but most common diseases that humans get can't be passed to animals. It's usually the animals that get *us* sick. Infectious diseases tend to be very specialized in terms of what organisms they can infect, so the majority of diseases can't cross species. That means cats and dogs can't get the flu or a human cold (cats and dogs can get colds, but it's a different virus that humans can't get). Pets can pass some diseases to humans like rabies and certain parasites, but they can't give us common pet diseases like parvo in dogs or calcivirus in cats. Rest easy knowing that you can bring your kitten home and your son can't get it sick."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
t3paf
|
How much lower were sea levels during the ice-age?
|
I'm assuming much lower due to all that water being tied up in ice-form... Am I wrong?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/t3paf/how_much_lower_were_sea_levels_during_the_iceage/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4j9s5v",
"c4jaocz",
"c4jd6zf"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"During the last glacial maximum ~19,000-23,000 years ago the ocean was between 120 and 140 meters (390-460 feet) below its current level. \n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n",
"You're right. I assume by \"ice age\" you mean the most recent one, which ended a little over 11,000 years ago (where the last of the sheet glaciers retreated to high latitudes). During the peak of this particular ice age, sea levels were about 130-140 meters lower than today. Both of these articles are great for explaining the sea level change that occurred during the Pleistocene Glaciation (the most current ice age).\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_",
"Makes you think about where \"cities\" might be underwater huh."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://web.me.com/uriarte/Earths_Climate/9._The_Last_Glacial_Maximum.html",
"http://shadow.eas.gatech.edu/~jean/paleo/Lectures/Lecture_9.pdf"
],
[
"geo.oregonstate.edu/files/geo/Clarketal.-Science-2004.pdf",
"geochemistry.usask.ca/bill/courses/.../Sea%20level.pdf"
],
[]
] |
|
fcvbgs
|
how does saliva become "sticky" sometimes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fcvbgs/eli5_how_does_saliva_become_sticky_sometimes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fjd65ks",
"fjd68nj"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Vape liquids are literally vaporized sugar water with flavors/nicotine.\n\nIt's just sugar alcohols and water. Also any kind of respiratory irritant will cause a bodily response and increases mucus secretion.",
"People aren't meant to inhale irritants. When we do our airways will increase mucosal output as part of our body's immune response. Mucous can be watery and thin or thicker. Thicker mucous is generally meant to trap any offending bacteria or foreign body to help us cough it up."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2zuupb
|
Do we know what the Vikings called the island of Britain?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2zuupb/do_we_know_what_the_vikings_called_the_island_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpmojr4",
"cpmwo48",
"cpmxfxp",
"cpn5qfq"
],
"score": [
10,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Are you looking for the name used before the invasions or after, or just the \"viking\" word. In ancient Icelandic it was called Bretland but disclaimer: I'm not certain if that is the proper word the Vikings themselves used so wait for an expert to post on that. \n\nAfter the Vikings established colonies the part of England they controlled was known as the Danelaw. Is this what you are looking for?",
"Swedish linguistics major here. There are a number of rune stones here than mention warriors that left for or perished in England (written \"IKLAT\" due to spelling conventions), but I'm not sure what they'd have called the whole island. Remember that Britain in those days was not considered one realm as it is today, like Sweden. Sweden wasn't united until later - under Birger Jarl, as I've been taught. If Roman expression \"Britannia\" was used in Viking times, at least it doesn't seem to have been picked up by the Danes. I have never seen it in Scandinavian sources. ",
"Well in Icelandic (the closest language to Old Norse) the word for \"Britain\" (United Kingdom) is [\"Bretland\"](_URL_2_) other forms of the word Bretland include; Bretlandi & Bretlands, depending on whether you're using the article or not.\n\nThe Nefnifall (Nominative) form of Bretland is just simply \"*Bretland*\". The Þolfall (Accusative) form of Bretland is also just \"*Bretland*\". The Þágufall (Dative) form of Bretland is \"*Bretlandi*\". The Eignarfall (Genitive) form of Bretland is \"*Bretlands*\". Information taken from the [Icelandic language Wiktionary](_URL_1_), in their singular forms.\n\nThe Icelandic word for \"British\" is \"*Bretlandseyjar*\" The Nominative plural form of \"Bretlandseyjar\" is simply \"*Bretlandseyjar*\". The Accusative plural form of \"Bretlandseyjar\" is also \"*Bretlandseyjar*\". The Dative plural form of \"Bretlandseyjar\" is \"*Bretlandseyjum*\" & the genitive plural form \"Bretlandseyjar\" is \"*Bretlandseyja\t\n*\". Taken from [Bretlandseyjar](_URL_0_) on Wiktionary.\n\nThe \"British Isles\" in Icelandic would be \"Bretlands-og-eyjar\". (Britain and Islands)\n\nI'm not entirely sure if the vikings gave Britain & *the* British another name on arrival though. I do know that \"Danelaw\" (Danelög in Icelandic) is the area of Britain controlled by the Danish Vikings. ",
"And in a follow up question what did they call or write about Scotland, Ireland and the Isle of Man?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://is.wiktionary.org/wiki/Bretlandseyjar",
"http://is.wiktionary.org/wiki/Bretland",
"http://bin.arnastofnun.is/leit/?q=Bretland&ordmyndir=on"
],
[]
] |
||
3hsyw3
|
why is tire pressure printed so tiny?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hsyw3/eli5_why_is_tire_pressure_printed_so_tiny/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuaam3w"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because that's not the pressure you should be going by anyway. That's the absolute maximum that tire should ever see. Your car's door jamb should have a sticker that shows the proper pressure that's been calculated for the load your car will put on the tires. If you use the pressure molded into the tire you're virtually guaranteed to be over inflating, often by close to 20 psi."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
18sdvb
|
I heard some people talking at the store and they said that gravity isn't really real. They said that instead, space is just curved. Please answer me this
|
If that wasnt true then shouldn't a coin you drop from your hand get a little closer as it falls?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/18sdvb/i_heard_some_people_talking_at_the_store_and_they/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8hjjdm",
"c8hjnqc",
"c8hmfdi"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Our modern understanding of gravity, derived from the theory of general relativity (GR), is that gravity is caused by the curvature of *space-time* (not space). This in no way means \"gravity isn't really real\": gravity exists just as well, but may be understood geometrically instead of just as a force. GR gives us a very powerful picture of gravity, and explains several phenomena we observe in space, such as [gravitational lensing](_URL_0_) and black holes.",
" > If that wasnt true then shouldn't a coin you drop from your hand get a little closer as it falls?\n\nIt does, actually. It's just that you're so small relative to the mass of the earth that the effect is basically completely unnoticeable. If you weigh 70 kg, and a ball that weighs 1 kg is a meter away from you, your mass is causing it to accelerate at around .000000004 m/s/s towards you, but the Earth is causing it to fall at 9.8 m/s/s, so... we don't really notice it.\n\nI'll let someone else try to explain general relativity, that's so not my field.",
"Particle physics is my field, but I'm a n00b. But I'll try and answer with my limited knowledge. Things like weight and temperature aren't real, they are just our experience of physical effects. However, if you boil down the universe to the basest components, as in particle physics, you have 4 forces, which we know as strong, weak, electromagentic, and gravitational. Each force has a particle that interacts with reality as we know it (called a force carrier) that gives the effects we observe. We don't really see much of the strong and weak force, those are pretty much involved in nuclear bonding and such, as well as their force carriers. We do however experience the electromagnetic force. Our whole society is run on that force and we are intimately familiar with its force carrier: the photon. The gravitational force interacts with our reality in the form of the Higgs boson, although it is NOT the force carrier for the gravitational force. That honor goes to the graviton, which is still a theoretical construct not yet proven to exist. As you may or may not know the quantum field theory of gravity is still up for grabs. Popular candidates include string theory and loop quantum gravity. Until those are resolved (far, far in the future) your question can't be answered definitively any further."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lensing"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2a9lkl
|
Why was Romania ordered to pull out of Hungary and denied any war reparations from the Entente after conquering Budapest in the Romanian-Hungarian war of 1919?
|
They were also promised additional territories populated by Romanians in Hungary in 1916 , when Romania entered the war , but the Entente didn't keep its promise
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2a9lkl/why_was_romania_ordered_to_pull_out_of_hungary/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cit2k37"
],
"score": [
19
],
"text": [
"The seeming *volte-face* of the Entente had several origins. Firstly, the Bolshevik Revolution greatly scared the Allies and they feared that the Romania's incursions destabilized the region greatly. The advent of Bela Kun and the expansion of the Russian Civil War seemed to confirm these suspicions. Although by this point most Allied leaders had realistically given up on direct intervention against the Bolsheviks, they desired to erect in Eastern Europe a cordon against Communist expansion. Marshal Foch would say he \"preferred a barbed-wire entanglement around Russia.\" Especially for the British foreign office, Allied leaders felt that Romania territorial gains were at the expense of the long-term interests of the European continent. The Romanian occupation of Budapest was for them an annexation too far; Romania had already gained considerable Hungarian territories. The man arguably most responsible for swaying Allied opinion against its Romanian ally was Sir George Russel Clerk. Primarily a specialist of Czechs, Clerk forged a series of personal connections with the post-Hapsburg elites in the successor states. Among his connections was Miklos Horthy. Horthy gave the Clerk two promises: to end the Red menace and restore stability to Hungary. This dovetailed nicely with the French desire for a \"little\"-Entente in Eastern Europe the British Foreign Office's desire to restore the European economy by bringing peace to the Danube basin. The Romanian occupation ran counter to these goals.\n\n*sources*\n\nProtheroe, Gerald. \"Sir George Clerk and the Struggle for British Influence in Central Europe, 1919-26\". *Diplomacy & Statecraft*. 12, no. 3: 39-64. \n\nSugar, Peter F., Péter Hanák, and Tibor Frank. *A History of Hungary*. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
224041
|
Did the Red Army have a "full-invasion" kind of reputation during WWII? If so, how did it earn it?
|
I read that the Germans and the Japanese would rather surrender to the western powers than to the USSR. Is this because the Red Army had a reputation of "total annihilation" or treating the defeated really bad? Or "just" because they (the Axis powers) inflicted so much damage to them they were sure the russians would seek some kind of revenge?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/224041/did_the_red_army_have_a_fullinvasion_kind_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgjsv76"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The Germans treated Soviet prisoners a bit like they treated jews and a huge pourcentage of Soviet prisoners ended up the same way : in death camps being worked and starved to death when they were not just shot down.\n\nThe Germans always pretended that the fact USSR never signed the Geneva convention meant they were not protected by it and that they could therefore do anything they wanted with Soviet prisoners.\n\nIt was in fact just an excuse to treat badly people they considered subhumans (jews were evil and manipulative, slavs were docile beasts of burden). The British / French and US prisoners though were relatively well treated as long as they behave, with adequate food and facilities and okeyish camps. \n\nSo it easy to see why they preferred to surrender to armies which had signed the Geneva Convention and whose prisoners they had treated fairly than to an army whose prisoners they had treated like vermin and that refused to sign the Geneva Convention.\n\nAnother fact that deeply enraged the soviet rank and file and made the matter worse was when they advanced in German territory and saw how well-off they were. They saw rich German farms with well-fed families that had a very comfortable life compared to the average Soviet citizen. They would have undestood if Germany invaded because they were starving and poor and invaded to try and get some ressources to fed their people, but when they saw the very good standards of living of German people first hand it really appeared like the Germans invaded, killed and brought all this suffering simply because they wanted even more even though already had a lot. \n\nThis fact infuriated the Soviets soldiers and they made their personal objective to take their revenge on Germany's population for their greed and cupidity. They gang raped the girls (some as young as 13), killed the husbands, burned entire villages etc... German prisoners were even more guilty as they actively fought for all this so retaliation on them was very important as well.\n\nAs a result a lot of German units conducted a fierce fighting retreat against the Soviets, then surrendered to the first British uniform they met, sometimes with slightly amusing results like the recount of the end by Guy Säjer in \"The forgotten soldier\" : the remnants of elite Panzergrenadier division GrossDeutschland leaving their defensive position with hands raised to surrender to a couple of astonished British soldiers in bicycles that were just scouting the area and stumbled upon the village the Grossdeutschland was dug in by chance."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ggaqt
|
Is there a delay if two people are listening to a radio station at different distances?
|
I'm assuming there must be because of the time the waves take to travel. Does this also mean that if u drive toward the station the music plays just a bit faster, and visa versa?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ggaqt/is_there_a_delay_if_two_people_are_listening_to_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cajz5y4",
"cajz6m9",
"cak0yae"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"There is a Doppler effect for light, but you would have to going close to the speed of light to notice an appreciable difference, and at that point you'd zip through the radio circumference in way less than a second.\n\nTL;DR: Not that you'd ever notice. ",
"Yes, there is a small delay based on how far you are from the broadcast tower.",
"Most broadcasts are delayed for reasons other than speed of light. For different towns it would be recut for local commercials. That would mean that one town over a broadcast would be delayed by the time it takes to compress, and uncompress the master stream. A satellite broadcast wold be delayed even more because it takes time to compress it into an mp4 stream and encrypt. \nAll the buffers used in broadcasting equipment introduce all sorts of delays. \nSo actual delays would depend on anything but how close you are to the station.\nIf you find a station with a precise time signal, check it with a GPS-enabled device that has clocks in it. The station will be slightly off."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2z4evx
|
How do keep seeing improvements in USB cables?
|
I don't understand where the massive improvements in cables are coming from.
I'm thinking of the improvement between USB - USB2-USB3 - USB3 - USB C.
Hdmi cables aren't that old but now we are being told that we can deliver HD video while charging and transferring data all from a tiny little charger.
How are we still seeing improvements and are there any physical limits on the horizon?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2z4evx/how_do_keep_seeing_improvements_in_usb_cables/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpggwiw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most of the engineering in interconnect technologies isn't actually in the cables, but rather at the end point devices, the cable is simply engineered to operate to those specifications that the endpoints are specified to operate. Thumb drives are an example of a situation where in most cases no cable is used.\n\nWith that in mind, all interconnect technologies have standards that defines many elements of how the technology works and how manufacturers are to implement the technology. This spec outlines things like frequency and bandwidth which establishes the base physical data rate on the wire. Also part of the spec is how many wires carry how many \"channels\" of data in one direction or the other. This isn't everything though, with digital communications, there must also be included in the specification error correction and the actual protocol used for devices to negotiate connectivity (for devices to announce what kind of device they are and what speeds they can operate at), they also include how data is to be represented on the wire whether it is to be packetted or data streams. Anything from PCI-E to SATA to USB to Ethernet (which is more than just a cable type) and so on follow these basic concepts. Adjusting the bandwidth used and/or frequencies used on the wire between a transmitter and receiver can increase speeds, as can providing more pins like USB 3.0.\n\nThe biggest challenge however is backwards compatibility, this is why many technologies maintain the same connector design generally and have allowances to fall back to previous versions of the specification and is why you can use a USB 2.0 device on a USB 3.0 port, just with USB 2.0 speeds. Same with Ethernet with 10/100/1000 Mbit connectivity.\n\nGetting back to the cables now, the cables have to be of sufficient quality of conductors in order to carry the specified frequency and bandwidth as well as have easy to use connectors that shouldn't be able to be plugged in the wrong way. Copper tends to be preferred for wired communication since it can be purified again and again, be stranded and flexible and can carry a wide range of frequencies reliably, anything from analog voice to multi-gigabit digital (See: Gigabit Ethernet and USB3 and many of the wires pressed into circuit boards).\n\nWith all of that mentioned, devices today are simply able indeed process larger bandwidths of data and operate at higher frequencies, allowing for higher data rates to be established on interconnect technologies, so specifications are updated to take advantage of this availability. The physical limits are only as much as the physical medium can permit. This is why there are fiber optic cables for carrying high-capacity internet traffic because light is at an even higher frequency than traditional copper is capable of carrying, thus able to have a wider bandwidth. The downside to fiber is that it is very finicky and gets damaged easily which is one of the things holding it back from being adopted — also power is another thing that it can't carry on its own, but I do see a future where fiber becomes more mainstream, we already are seeing it with FiOS and like internet services being provided to the home.\n\nFor reference, you can review the USB 3 specification here: _URL_1_\nAnd reference for electromagnetic spectrum: _URL_2_ and bit rates: _URL_0_\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_device_bit_rates",
"http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum"
]
] |
|
6ni01i
|
Could the army of the Potomac(1865) have won a war against any of the major European power during the same time period
|
For a very brief time after the civil war, the us had the largest navy in the world, but I was wondering how their army would compare
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6ni01i/could_the_army_of_the_potomac1865_have_won_a_war/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dk9wp3x",
"dka4ttx"
],
"score": [
4,
14
],
"text": [
"You may find these previous threads useful. User /u/vonadler has touched on basically this subject several times, with a fair amount of back and forth in both threads.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_\n\nEDIT: Tried to fix user tagging.",
" > For a very brief time after the civil war, the us had the largest navy in the world\n\nIf I could also address this point too as the other posts have linked to a few of the repeated treatments of the topic of the land forces.\n\nBack to the point, even at its peak the USN was woefully under prepared to fight one of the top tier European fleets, say Britain or France. The massive expansion of US hull numbers was by and large accounted for by blockade ships, often poorly armed and constructed to below true warship standards. Meant only to add numbers to the blockade line and stop smugglers everything from coastal haulers to pleasure yachts were also bought for the Navy and sent South with a crew. Many of the others were coastal and river craft with limited usefulness in any sort of open water.\n\nWhile the USN did have a gaggle of Monitors and a few larger ironclads they were all dwarfed by European peers. The 2 largest ironclads the US put into service during the war were the Monitor Dictator and ironclad USS New Ironsides. Both clocking in around 4,000 tons. HMS Warrior and her sister Black Prince were both topping 9000 tons by comparison! And while later classes were of a more economic size they were still all larger than those in American service. \n\nWhile there is rather convincing evidence run down IIRC correctly by /u/Jschooltiger as to just how much more effective contemporary British naval cannons like the 68pdr vs the Dahlgren guns so common in US service. \n\nSuffice to say that if Britain had sought to life the Union Blockade there was little that could have been done to stop it. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/15sx12/how_did_the_unionconfederate_army_compare_to_the/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/17tovc/how_would_us_troops_in_the_civil_war_era_have/"
],
[]
] |
|
1qpi32
|
can someone explain what the vote for the "upton bill" is about?
|
I'm having trouble understanding what the upton bill is and what it has to do with obamacare? I keep hearing about it but I don't get what its about. Please eli5! Thankyou!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qpi32/can_someone_explain_what_the_vote_for_the_upton/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdf5bvt"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"One thing the Affordable Care Act did was prohibit insurance companies from selling new policies that were not up to certain standards. This affected some people who had bought these policies after the original cut-off date.\n\nOne proposal, sponsored by Democrats, would let people who had those policies canceled keep them through next year. The Upton proposal, sponsored by a Republican, would allow insurance companies to keep selling those sub-standard plans to anybody until 2015.\n\nThe difference between the two is that the first bill would keep people from losing their health insurance now, while the second would pretty much let insurance companies continue selling health insurance that doesn't really cover anything -- a problem that the ACA was intended to solve in the first place.\n\nEven though it passed the house, the Upton bill isn't expected to pass the senate, or survive a presidential veto if it does."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3hox05
|
Are there any valid historical documentaries still being made?
|
I love learning about history for fun and like watching documentaries but it seems like every documentary produced in the last 10 years is always full of action, intense narrating, inaccuracies, and over-the-top reenactments.
I recently tried watching **Mankind: The story of us all** from the History Channel and it was completely terrible.
At one point they talked about the Vandals raiding Rome to kidnap the Empress and pillage just because. They didn't mention that the Empress herself requested they come to Rome and depose the new Emperor that murdered her husband and in exchange there would be a political marriage.
The point at which I had to shut it off was when they said that the Vikings lifted Europe out of the dark ages. All they mentioned was that they were great explorers and colonized. Not once did they mention Charlemagne and his contributions to western civilization.
Anyways, I'm finding it hard to find good quality documentaries about history, doesn't matter the time period. I just want to learn.
Can you guys recommend any quality ones?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3hox05/are_there_any_valid_historical_documentaries/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu9l34s"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I'd look at the credentials of people making documentaries before investing time in watching them.\n\nDo contributors or presenters have advanced degrees in a relevant topic, do they have research outputs on those topics, are these publications reputable?\n\nFor example, there was a recent BBC series on the Plantagenets by Professor Robert Bartlett, author of *The Making of Europe* and *England under the Angevins*, which I assumed would be well informed and, based upon watching it I can confirm this. More iffy, on the face of things, was the documentary by Thomas Asbridge (a notable crusade historian, author of *The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land*) whose research had not, to my knowledge been overwhelmingly focused on his subject William Marshal. However, the wealth of literature on the topic meant it was easy for him to put together a special on the topic and for myself to fact-check it.\n\nUltimately, documentaries do not have the time to linger in such depth over the minutiae of historical record and the line between eliding points of contention - I'd have preferred a more extended examination of the Welsh Wars in Bartlett for example, and would have liked a less travelogue-like feel to Asbridge - and actively misleading viewers to cram in a narrative (I shudder at the thought of trying to squeeze the history of mankind into a documentary format) is slim, but no historian worth their chops would do so with regard to a topic they are renowned in. Think of the barbs that'd be thrown their way during the conference/seminar season."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
138yqe
|
At what point did China's population start booming into unprecedented levels and what caused it?
|
Always wondered why, out of all the countries on the planet, theirs ended up with almost 3 billion people, with atleast 2 billion ahead of the second most populated country on the planet. What caused this?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/138yqe/at_what_point_did_chinas_population_start_booming/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c71u2ju",
"c71uc01",
"c71yr37"
],
"score": [
9,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Sorry that I can't actually answer your question - my knowledge of Chinese history is insufficient for anything I say to be better than a guess at best - but China has nowhere near Three Billion People. It has approximately 1.35 billion people. For comparison, India, the second most populated country in the world has 1.24 billion people. This is also nowhere near the stated 2 billion person gap.",
"I would argue that it wasn't a boom as much as a gradual progression. Recall that China is one of the largest countries in the world as well as one of the oldest civilizations. Geographically, its land is much more livable than Russia and Canada. Politically, there were times during history that China's rulers were very keen on conquering new territories such as Tibet and Xinjiang, which are both huge provinces. And don't forget the Yuan Dynasty rulers brought a good chunk of Mongolia with them. Culturally, the general mindset was that it was necessary to have as many sons as possible; makes sense, given how easily kids died from famines and diseases back then.",
"You might be interested in these previous discussions on this topic:\n\n* [Why do China and India have such massive populations?](_URL_1_)\n\n* [What are the societal characteristics that lead to overpopulation in countries like China and India?](_URL_4_)\n\n* [Why did China have such a large population?](_URL_3_)\n\n* [What made China and India the most populated countries in the world?](_URL_0_)\n\n\n(It looks like we need to add this question to the FAQ!) \n\n*EDIT: I've added this [to the FAQ](_URL_2_).*\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/12ydq2/what_made_china_and_india_the_most_populated/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/wk6ea/why_do_china_and_india_have_such_massive/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/zirmo/meta_lets_do_this_faq_together/c71ysq7",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/12y7yl/why_did_china_have_such_a_large_population/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/yzs34/what_are_the_societal_characteristics_that_lead/"
]
] |
|
13ipro
|
How much computing power would it take to simulate all the molecules and interactions in a human body?
|
when might we get there according to Moore's law? does quantum computing help in any way? Would it be possible to obtain an "image" of a human while still alive?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/13ipro/how_much_computing_power_would_it_take_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c74cazn",
"c74e26r"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"There are about 10^14 atoms in a typical human cell, which is coincidentally about the same number as there are cells in a human body. So with around 10^28 atoms to simulate, you now would need to define at what level you were going to simulate each molecule and how rapidly you need to update that to get an accurate simulation. \n \nBut even assuming that you only need to do one floating point calculation of each atom per second, that would be 1E13 petaflops. \n \nI believe that the most powerful supercomputers in the world today can do about 1E2 petaflops. So you either need an awful lot of them(100,000,000,000 of them), or you need to wait around 54 years for Moore's law to take care of you. \n \nSimilarly, storing a digital \"image\" of the state of a human would take those kinds of large numbers of bits. Obviously, analog storage systems (like a real human) are much more efficient. \n \nI assume quantum computing could help a great deal, since you can store many states simultaneously, and make many computations simultaneously. ",
"You cannot simulate _all_ the interactions. Period. Thus far we can only achieve analytical solutions for a number of specific situations (e.g., hydrogenic atoms). Modern calculation methods (for example, density functional theory) use basis sets that are approximations to provide \"close enough\" answers. Even then, simulating larger molecules is very time consuming and can have significant error."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2rttnm
|
why is it, and why was it originally, seen as insulting for other people to have sex with your mother? why are 'your mom' jokes so insulting, yet little is said about 'your dad' jokes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rttnm/eli5why_is_it_and_why_was_it_originally_seen_as/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnj7lp9",
"cnj86br",
"cnj8lgv",
"cnjahxf"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
3,
15
],
"text": [
"Because of the persisting belief in our society that when a man and a woman have sex the man 'wins' and the woman 'loses'.",
"Because my dad could totally beat up your dad. So you best show the man some respect",
"I dated my friends mom for a bit. There's something about that person with the woman who gave birth to you. It's almost like they feel violated. It's easy to make jokes, but it's even better when it's true!",
"Traditionally, legacy was a very important thing. Your father gives you your name, your property, your occupation, and even your reputation (at least if you are a son, he does).\n\nKnowing who your real father is (and conversely, a father knowomg who his real sons are) was a pretty serious affair, and is part of the reason society is so uptight about female sexuality. Implying your mother is promiscuous , and that you may be some other man's bastard, that calls into question whether you are entitled to your father's legacy, and is a grave insult."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3h5886
|
why would people want to buy bonds with short maturity dates when the return is lower than the average inflation rate?
|
I was looking at CDs and bonds on scottrade and I realized that some of the short term bonds have returns below 1%. This is way below the average inflation rate.
Why would people want to invest in these types of short bonds.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3h5886/eli5_why_would_people_want_to_buy_bonds_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu4es8f",
"cu4htyf"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Some accounts even have negative interest rates. \n\nIf you have a $1,000,000, what are you going to do with it? Ordinary bank accounts are only insured up to $250,000. If you buy real estate it's no longer easy to get if you need it fast, and can go down in value, and your paying property taxes. Put it in your mattress? What if your house burns. Sometimes you essentially pay to keep money stored and safe. ",
"If you leave it in cash, inflation would eat that even more. And it wouldn't be FDIC insured above a certain limit. So bond look good in comparison to that."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3t625g
|
if there ia only one harvest season, how are most vegetables able to be sold year round?
|
I live in TN where the corn is grown. It grows in the spring and ia harvested in the fall. All the cornfields are nubs now. But corn is sold around the year. How can they sell it around the year if there is only one harvest season?
And why don't they do the same for pumpkins and watermelons? Those are only sold during specific times.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3t625g/eli5_if_there_ia_only_one_harvest_season_how_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx3d28p"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's grown in other areas that have different harvest seasons, and then shipped around the world to supermarkets.\n\nYou can buy pumpkins and watermelons year round, as well, but when it's not the local harvest season the price goes up beyond what you might want to pay."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
9vifo6
|
how do radical muslims interpret the quran in such a way that they feel compelled to conduct extremist acts such as suicide bombings? is there a certain passage that is misinterpreted?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9vifo6/eli5_how_do_radical_muslims_interpret_the_quran/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e9cgynw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Sadly it's not a misinterpretation at all...it's laid out pretty clearly and people are simply following what it says. Downside is that it was written ~1400 years ago when it was completely accepted that murder was the proper punishment for all kinds of innocuous things, and practically everyone believed in some form of magic; and now some people in the 21st century (large groups of them in fact) still take this collection of ramblings to be the perfect word of an all powerful being that created the universe and everything in it. Quite literally on the same level as throwing people in the ocean as an offering to Neptune or rocking a rain dance...which would be completely fine if their customs were making crafts, or simple introspection, or spreading goodwill, but in this case, the customs are converting or killing anyone who doesn't agree with them, or at the very least, siding with people who propagate these beliefs. All written by a bunch of people who's entire world view was a couple of hundred square miles at best. Great bunch of ideas to base your entire life around."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
64swn9
|
if you owned land would the land underneath be still considered yours?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/64swn9/eli5_if_you_owned_land_would_the_land_underneath/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dg4qhnt",
"dg4qlqc",
"dg4qpmp"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
5
],
"text": [
"Depends on the country. In some places the \"mineral rights\" (rights to dig up what's underneath) are sold separately from the land.",
"Generally, only up to a certain depth. Everything below that is what's known as \"mineral rights\". \n\nIt varies widely based on municipality and the history of the land but the majority of people do not own the mineral rights unless it was explicitly included in the sale of the property.",
"Mineral rights is a common thing through out Texas. When buying and selling land there you but the topsoil which is often considered 20 feet below ground. anything deeper are mineral rights and can be sold separately."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1fa6f1
|
How much pressure does water put on each inch of the item holding it?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1fa6f1/how_much_pressure_does_water_put_on_each_inch_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ca89irl",
"ca8bv8c"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"it would depend entirely on the depth/amount of the water, pressure increases in water with one atmosphere (1 atm) every 10 meters. If this is a flood situation we're talking about though, the flow of water would also increase pressure and weight would be more important, 1 L of seawater has a mass of 1 Kg, so it depends on how much those doors would be able to take.",
"You can use unit analysis to get that. 1 liter of water has a density of 1kg, so water's density is 1kg/liter -- or 1000 kg/m^3 . Since gravity is about 10 m/sec^2 at Earth, that 1kg will exert a total force of 10N on its base. If the base is 1 m^2, then a liter of water stacked on that base will be 10^-3 m tall, or 1mm tall (remember, there are 1,000 liters in a cubic meter). The 10N of force will be spread over the full meter, for a pressure of 10N/m^2 , or 10 Pa. Making the water deeper increases the pressure. A meter-deep cube of water is 10^3 mm thick, so it will be 1,000 liters of water and exert 10,000 N of force on the same square meter of bottom -- hence 10kPa of pressure. The pressure is independent of the actual amount of water, since we divided by the area of the base -- it only depends on the *height*, since we didn't divide by that.\n\nAtmospheric pressure is about 100kPa, so a column of water 10 meters tall exerts the same pressure at its base (100kPa) as the entire 100-km tall column of air right next to it (provided that it is near sea level).\n\nBut you probably want that in ~~evil stupid~~American units. 3-1/2 feet of water is about the depth of the shallow end of the pool, and it's just over 1 meter. It will exert a pressure of about 1.5 pounds per square inch at the bottom. 3-1/2 feet (42 inches) of water pressing against a plate glass window exerts 1.5psi at the bottom and 0psi at the top, for an average of 0.75psi. If the plate glass window is 42 inches across, then the total force is (42\"x42\"x0.75) lbf, or about 1300 lbf. (remember, we use \"lbf\" to mean \"force-pounds\", which are different from \"mass-pounds\", since American units are stupid).\n\nMaking the water deeper increases the force quadratically, since both the amount of pressure and the area over which it is exerted grow linearly with depth. 52\" of water (4-1/3 feet, or 13 hands if you really want provincial units) will exert more than a ton of force on the same sliding door.\n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3gnht9
|
what is the difference between china's "devaluing currency" and america's "quantitative easing?"
|
Don't they both just involve using monetary policy as an economic stimulus (i.e. printing money)? It feels like politician doublespeak to me.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gnht9/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_chinas/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctzptwf",
"ctzpy17",
"ctzr7nr",
"ctzxbus"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
25,
6
],
"text": [
"From my limited but hopefully growing background in economics, from what I know so far, it seems China is selling more yuan back into the Forex markets whereas the US is lending/giving money to the major banks instead. I'm going to look more into this to double check this. Please anyone correct if I'm wrong. \nOP check out /r/finance",
"Both involve printing money but they have different objectives and, thus, the printed money is targeted at different assets. Whereas in quantitative easing what is being usually bought by the central bank are toxic or long-term financial assets, devaluation is usually done by targeting more foreign currency or foreign short-term financial assets. The effects end up being similar in direction but different in magnitude.",
"Actually, neither one involves the literal printing of money. The Chinese have a fixed exchange rate and peg the Yuan to the US Dollar. With the devaluing, they moved the peg and now accept fewer dollars per yuan. This was done to make their goods cheaper in the U.S. with the hope that Americans will buy more stuff. \n \nThe Fed cannot print money, only the Treasury can do that. The purpose of QE was to increase the ability of banks to lend money by taking bonds the banks held and issuing an offsetting credit to the banks in exchange. This had the effect of increasing the bank's cash on hand. While the Fed did not print any paper dollars, they created digital credit out of thin air, which has the same effect as printing dollars. Keep in mind most \"money\" in circulation are digital entries, not paper dollars.",
"*Background*\n\nThe Renminbi is not a freely-traded currency. Instead, the currency operates off of a 2% trading band from a midpoint pegged to the US dollar – that is to say, every morning, the PBOC tells the world how many rambos can buy one dollar, and the currency is then allowed to fluctuate over the course of the day so long as it does not go more than 2% above or below the PBOC-set rate in the morning. This process is repeated every day, and while the PBOC says that it takes market movements under consideration when setting the morning peg, it is under no obligation to do so – ie even if on Monday the RMB dropped by 0.5%, on Tuesday the PBOC can set the midpoint higher than the Monday rate if they feel so inclined (for various possible reasons: to meet political goals, to encourage various policies, Xi lost a bet, whatever).\n\nNow there are two markets for the Renminbi: Onshore (CNY) and Offshore (CNH). The CNY is what the PBOC has direct control over. The offshore CNH market is traded in Hong Kong and does not have the same trading restrictions, although it is of course heavily indirectly influenced by PBOC policy. Essentially the CNH offers a window for what the Rambo would look like if it was more heavily influenced by market factors rather than PBOC say-so.\nNow, China politically is currently faced with two geopolitical problems tied to its currency and international trade: (1) the country has been suffering from weaker exports as demand for Chinese stuff drops and a more expensive RMB makes it harder for Chinese industrials to compete with cheaper exports, and (2) the Chinese government is lobbying to include the RMB in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Special Drawing Rights (SDR), a basket of currencies held by the IMF that are meant to be an international baseline for currency value (in theory; in practice everyone mostly still uses the US Dollar). They want (2) for international respect and greater global use of the RMB as a trade currency. One of the conditions for SDR inclusion is that China needs to show that it has attempted to liberalise its currency (ie allow market forces a greater say over RMB pricing rather than “it is what the PBOC says it is”). SDR inclusion is a very political process and while every IMF member has a say the US has the largest single voice in the matter.\n\nThe forced currency depreciation is an attempt to (at least partially) address both those problems. The fact is, the CNY rate has been overvalued by the PBOC. [Take a look at these graphs](_URL_0_), which show CNY vs CNH rates since last April. Top graph shows CNY (white) and CNH (orange) to USD rates; bottom shows CNY – CNH spread. As you can see, the market has almost constantly considered the CNY as overvalued. There have been downward pressures on the RMB for over a year now, which have been resisted by the PBOC because of a variety of reasons – in essence, the PBOC has been keeping their currency artificially high. The world, particularly the US, likes this, because it mitigated some of the Chinese export juggernaut and policymakers have been calling the RMB artificially low for years.\n\nBy lowering the RMB, the Chinese government is seeking to further encourage their faltering exports by making it cheaper for Chinese manufacturers to sell overseas, and by making their currency more in-line with market value. Along these lines, the RMB will most likely continue to depreciate: remember there’s still a 2% cap on CNY, while CNH dropped by 3%, meaning the market expects at least another 1% drop in the currency, probably up to around 3% more. The PBOC has also stated that future currency pegs will be based on previous market activity rather than the whims of the central bank. Whether that’s lip-service or actually true, only time will tell.\n\n*Repercussions*\n\nIronically, while the move itself is market-friendly (brings currency closer in line to market value, take markets into greater consideration when forming prices), the way in which the PBOC made it (ok guys we’re dropping it by 2% now) is very market-unfriendly and part of China’s usual tactics of taking a sledgehammer to a problem best solved with tweezers. And while the US in theory has always wanted China to ensure its currency is more in line with market value, the devaluation does actively harm US interests, particularly in the manufacturing sector (loss of jobs overseas etc), which is why the US Treasury still considers the RMB as undervalued when, you know, it isn’t. Also, you know, election year, and China is always a good bogeyman. As such, expect US politicians to go apeshit over this and accuse China of currency manipulation etc. They’ll also probably do whatever they can to delay Chinese SDR inclusion.\n\nDomestically, while this will boost Chinese exports, it won’t have that much of a long-term effect. The Chinese economy is suffering from systemic problems which cannot be addressed by a simple currency adjustment. That said, it’s a move in the right direction.\nThe flipside to this coin is China’s capital outflow problem. China has always had a problem with people trying to get their money out of the country, right? Well imagine that sentiment compounded by the idea that this money I hold will probably be worth less tomorrow than it’s worth today. Rich folk in particular, or those with international holdings, will try to move as much out as possible in order to retain value. The outflows could even amount to another liquidity squeeze which could further threaten overall economic performance.\n\n*What does this mean for me?*\n\nIn short: if you’re paid in foreign money, or using a foreign bank account to live in China, then stuff will be cheaper for you. If you’re paid in Rambos, travelling abroad will be more expensive. This is the same on a corporate level: it will be cheaper for foreign companies to set up in China, which might lead to an influx in demand for foreign staff. Likewise, non-SOE firms who have to pay staff abroad will retract as it costs more to do the same shit they’ve always done. SOEs don’t care as much because they essentially have infinite money, but private firms will have a much harder time of it. Commodity companies are also going to fare poorly as commodities tend to be priced in US dollars, making it more expensive for the firms to do their thing.\n\nGeopolitically, this will probably kick off another US/China pissing contest where politicians from other side say bad things about one another and presidential candidates say borderline-racist stuff to appease voters.\n\nIf you’ve got a large stash of RMB lying around not doing much, now’s the time to get it into foreign currency. Even if you convert it back in a couple months you’ll probably get around 5% extra moneys.\n\nCourtesy of /u/zhongwu"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/er71ama.png"
]
] |
|
2rka6y
|
what is the big deal with stradivarius violins, can't the just make an exact clone of it by analyzing it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rka6y/eli5_what_is_the_big_deal_with_stradivarius/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cngn9kt",
"cngndrh",
"cngnmwe",
"cngqdi3",
"cngqewz",
"cngsdpl",
"cngurc5",
"cngvheh",
"cngxrib",
"cngy0vx",
"cngykux",
"cnhekwh"
],
"score": [
211,
13,
9,
22,
70,
4,
5,
2,
3,
9,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"They're made of denser wood due to the \"little ice age\" which took place during their construction, and this supposedly gives them an unique sound.\n\nIn reality, the effect comes from their name. In double-blind tests they perform just as well (or worse) as your average violin.",
"It's can be cloned and improved upon, but the intangibles are hard to mimic. Here's a good Planet Money show about it: _URL_0_\n",
"they can make exact copies of a Picasso too, doesn't mean it is the equivalent to the original. Copies are always worth less than the original no-matter what you are talking about.",
"It is perception and hype. The same reason a painting goes from being a painting to a masterpiece. Some one could copy and improve a fine piece of art but we believe that the original is better because it was made by a master of his craft. ",
"My sister is a violinist, and I went shopping with her for a new violin. They can have two violins that are the exact same model, but they will bring you two of them because they will still play differently because of tiny differences in the wood, etc. They are incredibly delicate instruments- any minuscule detail in construction will change how they sound to a trained ear. \n\nIt doesn't exactly answer the whole question, but just wanted to give some context on why little details can mean a world of difference to the kind of people who physically cringe when they hear a note that's only slightly out of tune. ",
"Absolutely. You wouldn't believe the amount of folklore you find in the musical world.",
"[There's a Hungarian chemist who did a pretty good job duplicating it apparently.](_URL_0_)",
"Almost every violin made in the past 350 years is a clone of a Stradivarius.",
"Little known fact: Stradivarius is still alive and makes brass instruments _URL_0_",
"1. They're very complex instruments. Wood, design (especially arching), construction, wood treatment, finishing (treatment, primer, sealer, ground, probably color coats less important). \n2. The SOUND isn't what they are purchased for, it's for the player. Not that the sound isn't rather delightful. The purchased is for the nuances. Listen - really listen - to some of the LOC series on Paganini, to Bell playing on and talking about the Gibson. The response, range, power etc of great violins is astounding. I can only taste a tiny bit of this when I get to try one out, but it's highly clear that great violins are special. \n3. It isn't the ice-age wood - one can still get that wood.\n4. Blind tests are just that - most of the listeners are quite blind relative to folks who build and adjust and really listen to lots of violins of high quality. On the other hand, I've been chatting with people like that and had someone mention that a recording sounded like this or that - and was correct. Not just a Stradivari or del Gesu, but that something sounded like this maker or that. They really are quite distinctive.\n5. Most players, even very good ones, really can't use such things. They're fickle. Most like nice sounding, tractable, easy to play, uniform violins without nearly the top end power or variability of tone and so on. That's actually the market I'm working towards satisfying at the moment.\n\n_URL_0_ has lots of discussions, and do listen to the top players talk about their instruments. Many videos out there.",
"My cello teacher told me a funny story about a violin player who was known for playing a Stradivarius. It was all in the papers that this guy was coming to town to play his Stradivarius and people came to see him. He played his first piece and it was beautiful. It got a standing ovation. He then held up his Stradivarius and asked the crowed \"Do you like the way my Stradivarius sounds?\". The audience cheered. Then the violin player smashed the violin into a million pieces. The audience was shocked. Turns out it was just a piece of shit violin and the guy wanted to prove it was *him* that made the violin sound good, not the fact that it was a Stradivarius. He of course finished his concert with the Strad. ",
"There's no simple answer to this, but a *simplistic* one would be, \"Sort of, but not really.\"\n\nThere are many different things that make a Stradivarius what it is. One of those is age, and we cannot duplicate that artificially. All instruments change sound with age, and the only thing you can do is wait.\n\nBut *some* of the factors that contribute to the sound *can* be duplicated in newly made instruments, and in the last few decades we've come much closer to it, thanks to a chance discovery by a scientist who also happened to be an amateur luthier. We can identify and duplicate the woods and most of the other materials (glues and such) with pretty good accuracy. We have a very good idea of how they were made, so we can also duplicate that pretty accurately.\n\nBut it turns out that probably the most important factor in duplicating the Stradivarius sound is one too small to see -- without a microscope.\n\nA scientist curious about this very question obtained some shards of a Stradivarius that had been destroyed somehow, and examined them under a powerful microscope. What he discovered both shocked and delighted him, and led directly to the modern development of new violins that sound a lot like aged Stradis.\n\nPart of the making of any instrument like a violin involves bending thin pieces of wood. This is done by first soaking them in water. It turns out that by pure chance, the particular water that Stradivari was using to do this had a high content of metallic salts. As the wood dried, the wood was impregnated by these minerals, leaving millions of microscopic bits of metal in the pores of the wood that would resonate with it when the instrument was played.\n\nAll that is necessary to duplicate this is to identify the minerals involved, then soak violin parts in water with those minerals dissolved in it. Within a few years of the discovery, they were producing violins like that, with marvellous results.\n\nThe catch is that another important component of the sound is the aging of the wood, which gradually opens up the pores throughout, changing the sound. And that is all but impossible to accurately duplicate artificially. Something like it can be achieved with various chemical and other treatments, but if you really want an aged sound, you really need an aged instrument.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/05/09/310447054/episode-538-is-a-stradivarius-just-a-violin"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nagyvaryviolins.com"
],
[],
[
"http://www.bachbrass.com/instruments/product.php?model=18037&category=Trumpets"
],
[
"maestronet.com"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
a5vjpc
|
When groups of animals that use echolocation do so, how are they able to differentiate which sound was theirs? Can a dolphin that’s in the middle of a group pick up on the sound of another dolphin that’s on the outer edge of said group and know exactly what the other dolphin is seeing?
|
I was watching Blue Planet and being underwater hearing all of the clicks and whistles the dolphins were using made me wonder if all of the dolphins heard each other. Does one big pod(?) of dolphins make a huge beacon of sonar that allows each dolphin in the group to see what the others are seeing? If not and it’s comparable to “how can you tell when your mother or sister calls you?”, is it the frequency that each individual dolphin uses to determine which sound was theirs? Can they only hear one frequency at a time? If not, underwater must be so loud...
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/a5vjpc/when_groups_of_animals_that_use_echolocation_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ebpqyvg",
"ebpr1vt",
"ebpspyz",
"ebptpbb"
],
"score": [
288,
9,
14,
3
],
"text": [
"I actually can answer this specifically for moustached bats. I’m not sure if a similar mechanism exists for other animals that echolocate, so I can’t speak to dolphins or anything. \n\nSo as you probably know, bats hunt in huge swarms, so it’s important for a bat to be able to distinguish his own echolocation call from that of other bats. When the bat makes a call, he listens for the harmonics of that pulse in the returning echo, specifically the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th harmonics. The difference between the echo and the initial call tells the bat all sorts of information about whatever the call bounced off of, including size, shape, speed and direction of movement, etc. It’s so finely tuned that bats can tell when an insect’s wings are moving forward vs backward and use this to predict their motion. \n\nThe bat has a clever mechanism for ensuring that he only hears his own echo. The first harmonic of the call comes out very quietly, too quietly to be picked up by other bats. However, the bat itself hears the call through its own skull, rather than through its ears. The bat’s brain will only respond to a *combination* of the first harmonic with any other harmonic of the call. If it only hears the 2nd or 3rd or 4th, it won’t react. It has to hear the first and one of the others. And since it can’t hear the first harmonic of any other bat, he can only be following his own call. So the first harmonic acts as a sort of password to ensure that the bat is not even hearing any of the other hunting calls",
"I forget the video but, it explained the complexity of dolphin communication is so difficult to “translate” mostly due to their range of hearing. Scientists were able to conclude the dolphins they studied had specific calls for individual divers. Yet in an attempt to reply back by playing a type of soundboard, they felt like nothing was conveyed to the pod. Their speculation was that there were overlapping frequencies being sent from the dolphins that were not recorded because they may be out of range of their equipment.",
"TLDR: Yes. [Link](_URL_0_). Echolocation requires two sounds - a) the original sound, b) the echoed sound. The difference between the sounds is how they 'see.' If a dolphin can hear both the 'original voice' and the echoes, it can interpret the sonar signal/visual, but in a less detailed way.\n\nThis means a dolphin can see by using the clicks and echoes that originate from another dolphin.\n\n\\-----\n\nAnytime a creature makes noise, the sound is traveling into their head as well as out to their surroundings. You can observe this by humming, and then plugging/unplugging your ears. The sound changes because you are hearing either a) the sound as it traveled through your skull, or b) the sound from the environment *plus the sound through your skull*.\n\nWhen animals echolocate, they hear a reference sound (through their skull) and an echo (from the environment). The difference between these sounds is what allows the creature to 'see' and it gives them their normal resolution. This is one way a dolphin knows which echo is theirs, so they can tune out other clicks.\n\nEcholocation has a limited range and resolution. Some studies put a dolphins limit to [seeing a 75mm object from 11m away](_URL_1_) (seeing 3-inch object from 35 feet away). This varies by material such that soft targets, like meat, are more difficult to detect.\n\nHowever, the study linked in the TLDR explains how scientists know this. They silenced a dolphin's echolocator using an insulated plastic membrane, then put a speaker in the tank. The speaker made echolocation clicks. The dolphin, which couldn't produce its own sounds, could use the speaker's sounds to find objects (but took longer, and was less accurate).\n\nThis all means that there is a limit to what a dolphin can see through echolocation, both their own and the echolocation of other dolphins.\n\nAdditionally, different species of dolphins use different frequencies and click patterns when echolocating. This means that the only way for dolphins to 'see' what other dolphins detect is if they are of a similar species (conspeficics).\n\n\\----\n\nTo clarify:\n\nDolphin A can hear Dolphin B clicking and understand \"Dolphin B is using a pattern that is used to look for fish, therefore Dolphin B is tracking a fish.\"\n\nAlso, Dolphin A can hear Dolphin B clicking and understand \"Dolphin B is 2m long, facing east, moving away, tracking a fish that is 1m long, and they are both 10m below me.\"\n\nThen Dolphin A makes its own clicks and understands \"Dolphin B is 1.75m long, facing east, moving away at 0.5m/s, tracking a fish that is 0.6m long, and they are 9.8m below me.\"",
"You might find these papers interesting. [One](_URL_0_) says that it is possible, [another](_URL_1_) suggests that one dolphin may be able to use another dolphins clicks to identify an object that the first individual cannot see. So it seems like there is some supporting evidence that they can eavesdrop on each other's calls."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.dolphincommunicationproject.org/pdf/GreggEavesdroppingReview.pdf",
"https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4684-7254-7_3"
],
[
"https://www.dolphincommunicationproject.org/pdf/GreggEavesdroppingReview.pdf",
"https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03199007"
]
] |
|
2pzyz8
|
I'm interested in the history of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Can anyone give an overview and/or some good online sources to help me understand a little more?
|
Question says it all.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2pzyz8/im_interested_in_the_history_of_the_democratic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn1mysg"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The [AskHistorians Book List](_URL_0_) is often a good place to look to find sources. *King Leopold's Ghost* is listed there and should be up your alley. I haven't read it, but I've always heard that it's an excellent book."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/books/africa#wiki_colonial"
]
] |
|
4r16n1
|
How did the convoy system protect shipping in the world wars?
|
Thanks.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4r16n1/how_did_the_convoy_system_protect_shipping_in_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4xiaf7"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"This answer will focus on convoys in the Atlantic in both wars - the Japanese experience in the Pacific in WW2 diverged significantly. While convoys in both WW1 and WW2 appear similar, with destroyers and smaller ships escorting a large amount of merchant ships, they protected their charges in very different ways. In the First World War, the ability to reliably detect and sink submerged submarines was lacking. This meant that convoys could not effectively kill submarines threatening them. Instead, convoys protected shipping in three main ways. Firstly, they reduced the chance that ships would encounter a submarine. Convoys and independently sailing ships were as easy to spot for a submarine, but an individual sub was much less likely to encounter a convoy, simply because there were much fewer convoys. Convoy escorts could also interfere with a submarine's ability to approach a convoy, especially once the RN began to escort convoys with blimps or kite balloons. By spotting a submarine on approach, they could force it to submerge, greatly decreasing its speed, and allowing the convoy to escape. Finally, outlying escorts attacked submarines, with the aim of forcing them to break off their attack on the convoy. The primary aim was not to kill the submarines, but to damage and deter it. \n\nIn the Second World War, things changed significantly. The advent of sonar meant that submarines could reliably be detected. The threat environment also changed. Instead of having to protect against single submarines, wolf-packs of multiple submarines were the main threat to the convoy. This meant that submarines could no longer be driven off - if the escort devoted its attention to driving off a single submarine, as it did in WW1, then the rest of the wolf-pack would savage the convoy. Instead, submarines had to be destroyed. Convoys moved from being primarily about passively protecting shipping to actively being a killing ground for U-boats. Convoy escorts were greatly strengthened, and given better tools and training for killing U-boats. In the First World War, the majority of U-boats were sunk by mines or by hunting destroyers., with only a small proportion being sunk by convoy escorts. In the Second, convoy escorts and aircraft were the two biggest killers of U-boats. \n\nConvoy alone could not reliably protect shipping against surface attacks. In 1917, a British convoy to Norway was completely destroyed by two German cruisers. Several convoys were destroyed or attacked by German surface raiders in WW2, including HX 84 and SLS 64. To protect against this, the escort could be strengthened with battleships - HMS Ramillies deterred an attack on HX 106 by *Scharnhorst* and *Gneisenau* in February 1941. The convoy could also have a strong protective covering force, which could speed to the rescue of the convoy, but remain separate and comparatively safe from submarine attack. This was commonly done in the Arctic theatre, and for important convoys like Operation Pedestal in the Mediterranean."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4blxbm
|
why cant we just stop media outlets from covering terrorism? wouldn't that effectively make it pointless?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4blxbm/eli5_why_cant_we_just_stop_media_outlets_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1aay9z",
"d1ab703",
"d1acu3h",
"d1acuzq",
"d1acx0h",
"d1ad11b",
"d1aftut",
"d1ag2de",
"d1ahrlq",
"d1aife2",
"d1ajajb",
"d1akacf",
"d1amdjt",
"d1amlwq",
"d1ammpl",
"d1aobpr",
"d1aoflw",
"d1aolk3",
"d1apmgk",
"d1apnun",
"d1aq77x",
"d1ar0zp",
"d1ar1y2",
"d1aryke",
"d1atnb8"
],
"score": [
1338,
8,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
5,
4,
2,
96,
36,
32,
3,
2,
2,
9,
4,
2,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Freedom of the press. \nIf you prevent the media from reporting something, that opens room for abuse. \nPolice beating that man to death? Fits most definitions of terrorism. \nThat government crackdown on dissidents? Terrorism. \nInvading another country? Terrorism.",
"I think ignoring the problems would be one of our worst strategies. I actually liked your post and idea and all, but if we ignore terrorism, were never going to stop it. These people have some strange ideas and fantasy about death, I don't understand why they have to bring others into it, but they do and will continue. As a pacifist I find this Islamic radicalism to be very disheartening as I can only see abolishing the religion all together as the only option. Even if you're moderate, your book speaks of death, gender inequality, and world domination. Violence should never be a form of communication. But the media will pass it along for its on greedy attention attempts for ratings. ",
"How would that be enforced? If you prevent the media from publishing news about terrorist attacks, why not other negative things? Like how badly you're doing in a war? Or how the quality of life in your country is less than in others? It's censorship which just turns the news into propaganda. ",
"This would not solve anything, and if anything it would make it work better than it does now. \n\nTerrorism works against the people doing it, as it solidifies the views and creates harsher decisions, the response to terrorism is not \"i should stop bombing them\", its \"we will bomb those fuckers even more\", and leads to more extreme governments who will then have more extreme actions against those groups.\n\nThere is a reason ETA, IRA etc accomplished nothing, terrorist does not work, especially if it starts creating outrage in the population who is then motivated to be politically active, which isnt the case in normal times. ",
"Taking a different angle... Real people died. Those people's families would tell their stories. These stories would spread by word of mouth (and the internet). Think about how inaccurate modern news stories can be in spite of all the technology available. Now imagine those stories spread by the telephone game.\n\nThe stories would still get out but would potentially be even more damaging.",
"The media fulfills a need of people to relate to news and stories, and they are free to do this.",
"Even if the mainstream media stopped covering terrorism, individuals would still share and reblog and make the news and videos and images go viral on social media. ",
"Silence would cause panic in another way. \n\nBut I do think that media have a moral obligation to stick to the important facts, not create emotions, not report rumors and stop with the topic once there is nothing really important left to report. Unfortunately almost all news outlets do the opposite, even changing their layout to create the feeling of an exceptional situation.\n\notoh I see no way this could be written into law without making that law dangerously exploitable",
"If you don't see why this would be far, far worse than terrorism, it's not something that can be explained to you.",
"If you know someone happened, ask yourself, would you rather have vetted sources of information or countless rumours where you don't know which is true. Some of these rumours will be worse and some better. Media coverage enables most of the rumours to be eliminated and in-turn eliminate most of the rumours that would make a situation seem worse or scarier than it actual is.",
"It'd also make news outlets useless since they are no longer reporting important events.\n\nCoveting up important world events to deprive the public of knowledge is a dangerous route as it impedes their ability to make an informed decision come election time hurting democracy.",
"You can't stop the spread of knowledge and information. Even in totalitarian societies \"word\" gets around.",
"Why is it that nowadays it is always someone else's fault for everything? I am curious of why this is. Why can't we just take responsibility for our own actions and ask the question, Why can't we just stop being the audience?",
"There's a difference between reporting that something terrible happened, and reporting that it happened + a full week of coverage + specials + interviews + really inappropriate intro graphics that say stuff like 'BLOODSHED IN BELGIUM' \n\n\nTell us that it happened, don't turn the criminals into celebrities.",
"It's the freedom of the press coupled with a drive for ratings in the 24 hour news cycle vs our morbid curiosity for the macabre.\n\nNo one looks away at a train crash. We all just stand their with our mouths agape asking \"how could this happen?\". Now imagine a channel on your TV that is constantly on the lookout for train crashes to show 24/7, hoping to \"outdo\" the one from before.\n\nNOW... imagine you're a psychopath who wants to live in infamy because you've always led a life of nothing. What could you do to get your name/cause/ideology in front of millions of people today?",
"Can we censor the news? No, that's a terrible idea.",
"Because journalists and large media groups don't understand the phrase \"Don't feed the trolls.\" ",
"As a former editor-in-chief: With all due respect to the victims of these latest attacks... Looking at only the statistics of casualty, terrorism is many times less \"dangerous\" than sugar, traffic and many other everyday occurrences. But it has a huge \"wow\" factor and thus as a newspaper you would face a lot of internal criticism for not writing about it.\n\nIt's a vicious circle: Extensive reports of political/religious violence feeds public fear. Fearful people click more fear-inducing headlines, and newspapers feel obliged to keep the headlines coming since they bring in HUGE amounts of clicks.\n\nIf newspapers actually reflected and informed about the big threats against society, we'd all be writing about climate change, mass extinction in the oceans and the global erosion of fertile soil. But way too few read boring stuff like that...",
"You can't prevent reporting on what happens in the world, but something that almost all news stations are guilty of now is giving constant breaking and unconfirmed reports, sensationalising and giving opinion on breaking events. Yesterday I was watching Sky news which is owned by Rupert Murdock and is strong supporter of Britain exiting the EU. Less than an hour after the attacks on the train, Sky news were using the events to push this political agenda saying that this was proof that the EU was incapable of keeping Britain safe from terrorism. \n\nIf news channels were restricted to simply presenting the known facts and nothing else without an emotional spin I think you could count this as a massive blow for terrorism.\n\nI tend to try and avoid rolling news (both on TV and here on Reddit) as you are going to hear half stories and misunderstandings that will confuse the facts, a good example being the panic that was ensuing after Nuclear power plants in Belgium were evacuated, but it later transpired was just the standard operating procedure for a level 4 state of emergency.",
"I've always watched the news before work and at 6pm, this year I decided to stop watching it, I unfollowed news media outlets on social media and to be totally honest, I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything. \n",
"The government shall pass no laws abridging the freedom of the press. \n\nHowever the consumer is always right. If you want to stop the media from covering terrorism, then stop being the customer of news outlets that profit from sensationalist reporting. You can vote with your dollars. If the news outlet can't sell advertising because their viewership is dropping, they will either have to cave in to the demands of their viewers, or go out of business. It's a simple concept, don't give money or views to businesses you hate, but it requires more discipline than many people can display. ",
"The press is also owned by a few large corporations who are in lock-step with various government agencies. They've been pushing this agenda for years, at the cost of the tax payer. I'm sure these same large media corporations are profiting in some way. The truth is probably much stranger than any conspiracy theory out there. ",
"News is a business, and like all businesses, they care about making money above all else. I completely agree that it would be better for them not to report terrorism, but these kinds of stories draw viewers/readers in droves. The only way to stop them would involve erasing a bit of the First Amendment, and I don't think that's a road people want to go down. All rights are a double edged sword, they give you the freedom to do things you like, and other people the freedom to do things you don't like.",
"As a lot of people have pointed out freedom of the press is a significant factor.\n\nThere are also other reasons. The point of terrorism is to spread fear yes bout the fear that they try to spread is not of than but of rather your own governments inability to protect you. Terrorism is not about winning a war as the terrorist know that they can't, it's about destabilizing a country enough to begin a war.\n\nIf you found out that a large amount of people had died and that the government was responsible for hiding the fact you would begin to fear what else the government were hiding.\n\nThink about this, if you can't trust the government to tell you the truth who can you trust. Not reporting terrorist activity makes it easier for terrorists to gain more control over the dialog as people seek answers. This makes it easier to portray themselves as freedom fighters.\n\nThink about the great firewall of China. The world largest and most effective censorship scheme. It is highly ineffective with millions of Chinese citizens still accessing sites they shouldn't. The problem is once people lose faith in the press and start seeking alternatives you can't ensure that the attentive media is accurate not bias. If people start trusting a source which is sympathetic to the terrorists that you just create more terrorists.",
"\"My daughter went to Belgium last week and I haven't heard from her. Oh well, she's probably just having fun!\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
60cka7
|
why isn't renting an apartment/house go under monopoly laws?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/60cka7/eli5why_isnt_renting_an_apartmenthouse_go_under/
|
{
"a_id": [
"df58wxy",
"df597h0",
"df597sh",
"df59e9l"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Because lots of different people rent or sell houses. No one company or person controls the market, which means its not a monopoly.",
"For starters.... Housing is not a RIGHT to be granted or taken away, because you have zero right to the product of the labor of another person. All this is despite what your teachers teach you. \n\nSecondly: in economics, you cannot view something as a monopoly based on another product... The products have to remain identical. If there were only one apartment complex in the county, with one owner, and you couldn't live Anywhere but there.... That's a monopoly. \n\nIt is dependent upon each individual person to make the decision to live within their means, and source housing according to their limited means and products of their labor. \n\nSomething is worth only what someone is paying for it. If the market in an area dictates that the rent will rise.... It's not monopolizing anything to raise the price of the rent. That's the basic supply and demand curves. ",
"First of all, you seem to not understand quite what a \"monopoly\" is.\n\nAnd secondly, you also seem to not understand the laws about monopolies.\n\nSo, let's start with the first point. A monopoly is when there is only one supplier of specific goods. A monopoly in the property market would be when there is only one landlord, and anyone who wants to rent a property has to rent from the same landlord. That clearly doesn't happen in the property market, because you have lots of choice of whom to rent from.\n\nAnd now to the second point: monopolies are not illegal. What *is* illegal is to make use of your monopoly in one field to gain an advantage in another field. So if there really was only one landlord, then it would be illegal for that landlord to insist that you only got cable from the cable supplier which is owned by the landlord - doing that would mean that the landlord was gaining an advantage in the cable market due to his existing monopoly in the housing market. *That* would be illegal, but having a monopoly in the housing market is not.",
"Because that is not even close to what the word monopoly means. Do you consider making you pay more than you want to be theft as well?\n\nYou may have a human right to housing, but you do not have the right to live in any particular place. If you feel your rent is too high, there are plenty of other renters in competition for your businesses. That is pretty much the exact opposite of a monopoly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1qkwg8
|
the difference between feminism and women's rights.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qkwg8/eli5the_difference_between_feminism_and_womens/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cddtwey",
"cdduyrq",
"cddvdsp"
],
"score": [
9,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Good luck finding two feminists that can agree on what feminism even means.\n\n...and that's before you bring in the trolls & misogynists shitting all over the thread.",
"Women's rights is a about equality, particularly legal equality and justice.\n\nFeminism is about advocacy of women's issues, which while a large part, is not limited to legal equality.",
"Go ask SRS, they are full of useful info. It's been proven to be useful. That's why they ban anyone who asks a question or disagrees. \n\nIn full, both groups are full of radical people who only care about first world issues and need something to cry about. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1r25zl
|
By the start of the American Civil War, how much money was invested into slavery?
|
EDIT: I've done some research on the topic, and to whomever it may interest check out this work:
_URL_0_
The average value of slaves at this time is stated by persons well informed to be as high as five hundred dollars each. To be certainly within the mark, let us suppose that it is only four hundred dollars. The total value, then, by that estimate, of the slave property in the United States, is twelve hundred millions of dollars.
—Speech of Henry Clay on abolitionist petitions in the Senate, February 7, 1839, in Swain, The Life and Speeches of Henry Clay
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1r25zl/by_the_start_of_the_american_civil_war_how_much/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdiuf74",
"cdivapn"
],
"score": [
16,
13
],
"text": [
"I am sure someone has estimated the total value of slave property in the South in 1860 but I don't have that information at hand. The running estimate for Southern slaves just before the war numbers them at about 4 million. Also, a good rule of thumb for the price of the slave was usually about $1000. Of course there could be a lot of price fluctuation based on a slave's gender, age, skills, location of the sale, etc. Generally speaking, a \"good\" male field hand could easily get up to $1200 while a female might run $800, give or take.\n\nSo, running the numbers, looks like the total value of slave property can be roughly guesstimated as between $3.2 billion and $4.8 billion (1860 dollars of course). These numbers are by no means official or exact, I can't stress that enough. All this is meant to show is that it was a lot.\n\nAnyone looking to examine this idea should also make sure they appreciate both the intricacies of the slave economy, specifically the buying/selling process and how value was determined, as well as the general construct of slaveowning households (who owned slaves, how many, the nature of their work and lives, etc. For that I recommend both James Oakes' *The Ruling Race* and Walter Johnson's *Soul by Soul: Life in the Antebellum Slave Market*.",
"The total value of all slaves in the United States was around $3 billion. It's $75 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars, although that's a poor guide the further back you go. Another way to look at it is to realize that was 50 percent of the GDP in 1860. Imagine the struggle you would face today if you tried to legislate the destruction of $8 trillion in property. \n\nBy the way, an investment in slaves returned about 10 percent annually. This explains why the South was under-industrialized - it was simply better business to invest in slaves than in factories. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://uncpress.unc.edu/browse/page/423"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5tw9hl
|
what caused the deepwater horizon catastrophe?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tw9hl/eli5_what_caused_the_deepwater_horizon_catastrophe/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddpio6j"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"1) BP Co man tried to be cheap & reduced the number of pipe centralizers by a significant number. \n2) Halliburton was hired to pump cement to solidify the pipe. Head cementer noticed the discrepancy & noted it to the Co man. Insufficient centralizers can cause a poor cement job since the pipe bends & moves as it goes downhole. \n3) Co man told him to \"shut up & do his job\". Signed cementer's joblog & notation. \n4) Cement in a well job goes down the inside of the pipe then back up the outside of the pipe. Water is pumped behind the cement to clear the cement w or without a rubber plug. \n5) As the cement came up the outside, the pipe had bent & was touching the freshly drilled hole so the cement went around the pipe THICK on the other side but NOTHING on that side. Just as the cementer had predicted. \n6) After the pipe was perforated to allow product to flow into the pipe, no cement at that point in the pipe allowed it to shake & erode the hole. \n7) Very quickly the metal pipe burst allowing pressurized petroleum to escape OUTSIDE the pipe & blast up the outside of the hole outside the cement & all pressure control mechanisms on the rig. Pressure ratings on pipe require proper counterpressure such as hardened cement.\n\n- I got this during my 10 years in the oilfield including 6 in cement w several ex-Halliburton engineers & Senior Cementers who were given the full briefing when this happened."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2ifd31
|
Looking for a couple books!
|
Hey! I'm new to this subreddit, and I was brought here because of my current interests in European history! I am a history buff, particularly for World War 1, and have a deep interest in the history of several European Countries, particularly Spain, France, Germany, and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, all up until the beginning of the 20th century.
Now I looked over the books list, and I found a book or two I was interested in, but I didn't find anything in particular for the other subjects I hope to read up on.
If it isn't a hassle, and as long as I am allowed to ask this, is anyone familiar with a book for any of the following subjects?
- Imperial Germany (1871-1914/1918)
- Imperial Spain ( I think I already found a book about this that is about the rise and fall of Imperial Spain between 1469-1716, but any other suggestions in this timeframe would be awesome!)
- France during the 19th and early 20th Century(s) (Or just a book about the French Third Republic, since I can always just find a book about the Napoleonic Era to satisfy most of the 19th century bit.)
- History of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Mainly looking for a book that is a detailed history of its subject, and covers all of the general aspects of the country, such as Politics, Military, Diplomacy, Culture, etc.
Thank you to anyone that can help, the nature of European countries between 18th and 20 century really fascinate me, and at the same time these are the types of books that are hard to find. Any help would be appreciated :)
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2ifd31/looking_for_a_couple_books/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl1uqxo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"For the Spain part you could be interested in Stanley Payne's *A History of Spain and Portugal*, which is handily available freely online as part of UCA's Library of Iberian Resources Online [here](_URL_1_) and [here](_URL_0_). It's a pretty good overall history of both of the countries."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://libro.uca.edu/payne2/index.htm",
"http://libro.uca.edu/payne1/index.htm"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.