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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6lovv4
|
the g20 summit.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6lovv4/eli5_the_g20_summit/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djvheua"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's the biggest 20 industrial and threshold nations coming together and arguing about the most important current and future challenges. How we're going about globalisation, what we're going to do about North Korea, what we're going to do against climate change. It's all discussed there in those few days. It's nothing obligatory, but more a chat what we could or could not do to reach the goals we have or not have. There's also G7, formerly G8 before Putin got kicked out of annexing Crimea, which is essentially similar but smaller."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
91q3yi
|
How did ancient Asian steppe warriors fight each other?
|
In *Empire of the Mind* the author goes over a battle between Rome and Parthia in some detail, explaining that Parthian hit-and-run tactics drained the slow, heavily-armored Romans, while also denying them the quick and decisive victory they had hoped for (and, strategically, depended on). This pattern would repeat itself famously at the Battle of Manzikert.
Since these hit-and-run tactics were such a hard counter to heavy infantry, and I only hear about steppe warriors when they're dunking on Romans, I don't have any idea how battles *among steppe warrior groups* went. Did they dance around each other until someone gave up? Did they use totally different tactics when fighting each other?
Edit: cleaned up the wording since I was half asleep when I wrote this
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/91q3yi/how_did_ancient_asian_steppe_warriors_fight_each/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3101g0"
],
"score": [
32
],
"text": [
"I'm loving the questions this week. I'm gonna have some fun with this and go into everything from warfare to military equipment. I'll mostly be using the Scythians, Alans, and Huns as examples, but much of this applies to other cultures and I'll expound on that some.\n\nInformation on Steppe Warfare is primarily gleaned through second or third hand accounts of battles, and as a result is rather generic. For example, Ammianus Marcellinus, writing on the Huns from a presumably Gothic source, who himself had never actually seen a Hun and was merely reiterating the tales of fighting them, writes:\n\n > They also sometimes fight when provoked, and then they enter the battle drawn up in wedge-shaped masses, while their medley of voices makes a savage noise. And as they are lightly equipped for swift motion, and unexpected in action, they purposely divide suddenly into scattered bands and attack, rushing about in disorder here and there, dealing terrific slaughter; and because of their extraordinary rapidity of movement they are never seen to attack a rampart or pillage an enemy's camp. And on this account you would not hesitate to call them the most terrible of all warriors, because they fight from a distance with missiles having sharp bone, instead of their usual points, joined to the shafts with wonderful skill; then they gallop over the intervening spaces and fight hand to hand with swords, regardless of their own lives; and while the enemy are guarding against wounds from the sabre-thrusts, they throw strips of cloth plaited into nooses over their opponents and so entangle them that they fetter their limbs and take from them the power of riding or walking.\n\nAmmianus, *Res Gestae*, 31.2\n\nThis description is a prime example of what we can expect to hear about the warfare of Steppe nomads or mounted horse archery, which the Romans typically perceived as a \"devious\" style of warfare. It is also a classicizing *topos* that basically copies older descriptions of Steppe nomads, such as Herodotus' description of the Scythians. This has led many authors to make generalizations about Steppe warfare, particularly the Huns, without addressing the literary or archaeological evidence. E.A. Thompson was one of the first to note that the Huns could not possibly have conquered half of Europe with bone arrows and armor. Thankfully, we have both archaeology and accurate descriptions from other sources that allow us to reconstruct steppe warfare. The one I'm most acquainted with is the *Strategikon* of Pseudo-Maurice, which tells of \"Dealing with the Scythians: That is, Avars, Turks, and others whose way of life resembles that of the Hunnish peoples\", written probably in the 590's AD. The other one tells of the ways of war of another people, and that is the 2nd century AD *Ektaxis Kat Alanon* of Flavios Arrianos or Arrian, translated as \"Array against the Alans.\" And I'll talk about Alan warfare and why it's different and notable in a little bit. But first let's start out with some overview.\n\nMounted Cavalry warfare by and large stems from the inventions and innovations of people living on what is now the Eurasian Steppes, and its development correlates with the rise of Pastoral Nomadism. This begins with the domestication of the horse, a process that may have begun as early as 3500 BC in the Botai Culture, in the Akmola region of North Kazakhstan between the Caspian and Aral seas, just south of the Ural mountain range. The evidence for this comes from archaeological remains of horse bones which show evidence of breeding of animals for corralling, and mare's milk residue on fragments of pottery. It's believed that from the wild horse (Tarpan, or *Equus Ferus*) they bred the Mongolian Steppe/Dzungarian Horse, known as Przewalski's Horse, while the Domesticated Horse (*Equus Ferus Caballus*) may have originated slightly further west in the Pontic-Caspian steppes. It's possible horse domestication may even be older, as domesticated sheep and goats are known from the Khvalynsk culture around 4800 BC, but there remain many uncertainties.\n\nWhat is known is that domesticated horses used for transport and warfare first emerged around 2100 BC in the Shintashta culture, formerly a subgroup of the Andronovo culture, who were proto-Indo-Iranians and from whom the Indo-Iranian language originated. In the Transcaucasia region (the area north of the Caucasus, including the Kuban, Ossetia, Dagestan, Astrakhan, and other regions between the Black and Caspian Seas), the wheel had first appeared about the same time as domesticated horses, around 3500 BC, and the wheel and axel was first developed around 3150 BC. By 2100 BC, we find Shintashta culture chariots and drawn carts in burials known as Kurgans, indicating the invention of chariot warfare.\n\nMounted warfare and horseback riding is a bit more difficult to discern. Although bits and bridles appear to have been invented by the Botai culture, there's no evidence of saddles, tack, or spurs for another 2500-3000 years afterwards. Camel blankets and camel tack are, as far as we know, invented first, with camels having been domesticated in South Arabia or Ethiopia around 3000 BC, and in Bactria (Afghanistan) around 2500 BC. Camel Blankets and Saddles both appear around 1200 BC, and the idea may have spread to be applied to the horse. However, the first horse blankets are depicted in Assyrian art around 700 BC, and the first saddles appear in the graves of the Indo-Iranian Pazyryk culture, a Scythian people in Novosibirsk Oblast in the north-west Altai mountains, around 500-400 BC. These were padded treeless saddles, and they lacked a stiff frame to keep the rider in place, but were a major improvement over riding blankets. The necessary tack to control the horse would soon follow, and around 300-200 BC, the high-back steppe saddle was invented, which had a solid wooden frame combined with padded elements. This was followed by the Roman four-horned saddle between 200 BC-100 BC, although it may have had Celtic origins. Finally, around 302 AD, the first evidence of stirrups appear: a further innovation which would affect mounted warfare.\n\nIn the series of comments will discuss how some of these changes dramatically affected mounted warfare in the Eurasian steppes.\n\n(1/?)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
yuwsk
|
why does it seem the larger any particular group get, the more stupid it becomes. are human beings just naturally inclined to be dumb?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/yuwsk/eli5_why_does_it_seem_the_larger_any_particular/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5z0xhc",
"c5z24gg",
"c5zcsh7"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Fuck, i made a typo while asking a question about stupidity. Forgive me internets.",
"Human beings, like many species, are highly social animals. We are strongly driven to ensure we \"fit in\" with the larger group. This has advantages of course, which is why we do it, but it also has huge disadvantages, including the ability to stop thinking clearly and go along with the herd because of the misguided sense of, \"everybody thinks this way, or is doing it, so it must be right.\"\n\nWhen we're acting alone, this drive doesn't apply, so our brains are free to use other methods to ascertain what to do in a given situation.\n",
"A group tends to decent to the level of its lowest common denominator.\n\nThis doesn't necessary mean any particular person is stupid. But if you put an astrophysicist, a philosopher, a neurosurgeon, a poet, and an economist in the same room, there is a good chance the only common topic they will be able to talk about is the weather. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2fs703
|
Is there any evidence that being put under anesthetic permanently alters your behavior, personality, or mental health?
|
I have heard of a few anecdotal stories of people just changing for better or worse after a surgery that included anesthetic. Is there any evidence or studies done to support that anesthetic can cause permanent changes in the brain, either immediately or gradually?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2fs703/is_there_any_evidence_that_being_put_under/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckg8112"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It is well established that some patients (especially older people) show temporary signs of delusion, halllucinations, memory loss and other mental and cognitive changes after surgery involving anesthesia. \n\nThis condition is known as postoperative delirium or postoperative cognital dysfunction and although anesthesia isn't alone responsible for it, for all we know it is a major factor. Usually those affected recover after a few days, but there are studies showing that in some cases this can take much longer (1+ year) and might in some cases even be partly permanent. \n\n*source: _URL_0_\n\nFor very young patients whose brain structures aren't yet properly developed, every major intervention holds a risk of causing lasting effects. But given the fact that at this age brain structure, behavior and personality continually changes anyway, it is very hard to pinpoint cause and effect with certainty. Controlled studies are hard to do or to justify and you just try to keep every medical intervention to a minimum, no matter if it is surgery, anesthetics or any other drug.\n\nAlso it is safe to assume that every potent anesthetic drug will alter your brain chemistry in some way, otherwise it woulnd't be effective. And there is a certain risk involved in any substance that is capable of this. That is the reason general anesthesia should only be given in controlled environments (operation rooms) and by qualified experts (anesthesiologists) and the whole process is closely monitored. Our brain is a finely tuned organ that doesn't like outside interference. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hidden-dangers-of-going-under/*"
]
] |
|
5d9kfm
|
why do so many animals, excluding humans, have retractable 'male genitalia'?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5d9kfm/eli5_why_do_so_many_animals_excluding_humans_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"da2sioa",
"da2somi",
"da2xbuj",
"da301pt"
],
"score": [
15,
7,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Most animals are much closer to the ground than we are, and dragging your frank and beans around would damage them. Other than that, they also have to consider the target that blood-vessel rich genitals present in a fight.\n\nMostly though, I suspect that you'll find distance of abdomen from the ground correlates to smaller/retractable genitalia. ",
"I'm not sure if you refer to retractable male genitalia as in what sense it makes that it is normally is flaccid and then becomes erect, or that is erect/semi-erect/flaccid and then retract.\n\nIn case of \"why we have an erection\" this is most often due to reproductive aspects, full bladder or in case of REM sleep; \"morning wood\".\n\nAs to why we \"retract\" or \"turtle\"; there are 2 major reasons:\n\n1. Protection against physical injury: having a floppy external genitalia being \"all the way out there\" is simply not beneficial for any animal, as that would mean your penis could hit and rub up against course surfaces, sharp plants or grass and get injured. \nThis is similar to the \"Cremaster Reflex\" observed in humans, in which the testis due to physical stimulus of inner thighs retract inwards and upwards.\n\n2. Regulation of temperature: The testis (and accompanying penis) is very sensitive to temperature change, as the testis attempts to stay within an optimum range. Wether the penis retracting itself due to temperature is of a evolutionary benefit itself, or wether it happens due to testis retraction is unknown.\n\nPeople with a larger fat pad tend to see more retraction due to the fact that there's actually a point and different enviroment for the penis to retract into; skinny people with little to no fat pad will not have the \"beneficial nice cozy warm enviroment\" and thus will experience less retraction.\n\nTheres a huge number of other reasons that cause retraction, but why it happens is usually some variation of the two reasons mentioned above. ",
"When you are walking on all fours you don't want your dingalling getting caught in the shrubs or rubbing against the tree. The sheath is to protect your junk. \n\nHumans don't have them because we walk on 2 feet. We can afford to keep them outside, which frees up more room inside the hips. ",
"Humans have a foreskin which fufills a similar purpose. The glans retracts into it when not in use. And while it's not technically a retractable penis and you don't need it, it's the human equivalent to an animal sheath. Protecting the glans when not being used for sex.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1mf26j
|
in computer software, what is the difference between a program, service, thread, process etc.?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mf26j/eli5_in_computer_software_what_is_the_difference/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc8lk66"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A program is a very general term for any piece of software. Your internet browser is a program. Your word processor is a program. iTunes is a program. Each app on your smart phone is a program.\n\nA process can be thought of as a program that is running. On the same computer, you can have the same program running multiple times. Each instance of that running program is known as a process. For example, Minesweeper is one program, but you could have multiple games of Minesweeper (processes) running at the same time. In general, each process on your computer runs in isolation from other processes on your computer. One process should not be able to interfere with the function of another process.\n\nA thread is an independent sequence of operations that your computer performs. Every process on your computer has at least one thread, but it may have more threads. The main difference between a thread and a process is that threads within the same process can interfere with each other. This can add a lot of complexity to a program, but it can also be very useful.\n\nDepending on what a program does, a thread can get stopped for any number of reasons. For example, a thread might try to send a message across the internet, and wait until it gets a message back. If a program only has one thread, the the whole program gets stuck waiting for the message to get back. However, if the program has more than one thread, when one thread gets stuck waiting for something, the other thread can keep chugging along doing its thing.\n\nA service is any program that is used by another program for something."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4agnxk
|
suppose I dropped you in constantinople in 659 and then in 1167, what differences would you expect to see?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4agnxk/suppose_i_dropped_you_in_constantinople_in_659/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d10l221"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Any answer is inevitably going to be patchy. Our knowledge of the seventh century is much poorer than what we have for the twelfth. We are much better informed about religious foundations than the demography of housing, for example. For a general and highly readable account of the city at the end of the twelfth century (although using many elements from earlier for the sake of illumination) by a a scholar in the field see Harris, Jonathan. *Constantinople: Capital of Byzantium.* London: Continuum, 2007.\n\nBetween these two dates, the city will have changed in a number of ways, visually, at least. The degree to what effect these changes had on patterns of life in the city in a whole different topic. A visitor in 659 probably would think that the population of the city was much too small for its size. We do not have demographic figures, but in 618 the government ended the free bread dole, as the loss of Egypt to the Persians had made it unsustainable (*Chronicon Paschale,* anno 618). The Avars had also cut the main aqueduct in 626, which was only restored in the eighth century (Theophanes, *Chronographia*, AM 6258). By the twelfth century the population had rebounded. Although this again by a reflection of our patchy source material, you would probably see a larger variety of foreigners, particularly those from the medieval west, in the twelfth century. The establishment of a Muslim quarter is hard to judge, but there was certainly was one after the 1180s, and there is good evidence for Muslims coming to trade in the city from the tenth century (Reinert, Stephen W. “The Muslim Presence in Constantinople, 9th-15th Centuries: Some Preliminary Observations.” In *Studies on the Internal Diaspora of the Byzantine Empire,* edited by Hélène Ahrweiler and Angeliki E. Laiou. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1998, 137-142.)\n\nA concern about violence would not have been far from the mind of someone living in 659. Constantinople had been besieged by the Arabs in 654 (following Pseudo-Sebeos rather than the Greek tradition, see O’Sullivan, Shaun. “Sebeos’ Account of an Arab Attack on Constantinople in 654.” *Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies* 28, no. 1 (2004): 67–88.) The city had also been besieged by the Avars in 626 and would again be besieged in 669 by the Arabs (for the new dating, see (Jankowiak, Marek. “The First Arab Siege of Constantinople.” *Travaux et Mémoires* 17 (2013): 237–320.) The people in 659 would be seeing their emperor making preparations to depart the city, as Constans II spent 660 in the Caucasus rallying allies. This is in stark contrast to 1167. Although the passage of the Second Crusade had certainly aroused fears and was within living memory, the city was secure and had not faced an existential threat probably since the last big Rus' naval raid of the mid-eleventh century. Perhaps the Sicilians firing arrows into the palace ca. 1153 from ships counts, but I wouldn't tend to say so (Niketas Choniates, trans. Magoulias, p. 57).\n\nIn terms of buildings, a lot changed. The praitorion in 659 did not yet have a mosque for visiting Muslim dignitaries. Justinian's church of Hagia Eirene (near Hagia Sophia, now inside the Topkapi walls) had been destroyed in an earthquake and the present structure was rebuilt in the eighth century. One of the more visible changes would have been the Monastery of Christ Pantokrator, a Komnenian foundation. The topography of imperial power had shifted. In the seventh century it was based in the imperial palace near the Hagia Sophia, whereas in the twelfth century the house of Komnenos spent a lot of time in the Blachernai quarter in the NW of the city. \n\nYou may also want to check out Byzantium 1200, a very good visual reconstruction of the city at the end of the twelfth century.: _URL_0_\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.byzantium1200.com/"
]
] |
||
sdw42
|
Could we replace eating with nutrient injection intravenously?
|
If we could, what would happen to organs like the stomach and liver etc?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/sdw42/could_we_replace_eating_with_nutrient_injection/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4d9bq3"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Yes, [Total Parenteral Nutrition](_URL_0_) is a reasonably common intervention, used when for whatever reason a patient cannot tolerate oral food. Its normally used only in the short term (weeks/months) but it can replace normal digestion indefinitely. There are a number of important side effects, especially an increased tendency to infection, and it needs careful monitoring including frequent blood tests.\nYour small bowel tends to atrophy if its not used - so after just a week or two on TPN there are marked changes which can be seen under the microscope indicating loss of function. People who have been on TPN long term can have problems trying to adapt back to normal food. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenteral_nutrition"
]
] |
|
322ulv
|
Did British military officers during the Napoleonic Wars receive training?
|
I'm currently reading Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels, and they make it seem like significant numbers of the British officers at the time were dilettantes. Cornwell quotes statistics like only 1 in 20 officers being promoted from the field, while the rest bought their commissions using their own money.
Generals clearly would have preferred experienced officers with a good knowledge of strategy and tactics, did they train their officers or have any influence over who advanced besides offering field promotion?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/322ulv/did_british_military_officers_during_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cq7l5zx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Please bear in mind that Cornwell is a novelist and is trying to create an atmosphere in which his \"working class hero\" can be seen to be particularly successful. A dilettante officer wouldn't last long on active service in the field, so although they existed, they weren't as significant as Cornwell would have us believe. Many officers did buy their initial commissions, but there were promotions from the ranks, and many were promoted, once commissioned, on merit. John Shipp, for example, was promoted from the ranks twice. First in 1805, a field commission. He sold his commission in 1808, and subsequently rejoined the army as a trooper in the 24th Light Dragoons, and was again given a commission in 1815.\nArtillery officers were very well trained at the Royal Artillery school at Woolwich."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
26v7aq
|
why does the water in the coffee pot *refuse* to pour neatly from the spout, no matter how slowly i pour, dribbling down the front instead until it's half empty?
|
Is it something to do with surface tension? Cheap glass? Or do coffee pots just hate me?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26v7aq/eli5_why_does_the_water_in_the_coffee_pot_refuse/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chus19j",
"chuwxq4"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"Surface adhesion, which is closely related to surface tension, which is basically water's property to cling to surfaces. A rougher, more coarse surface is easier for water to adhere to (more surface area). But what you actually need to do is pour faster...pouring slowly makes it more likely to cling and dribble down the side. ",
"To stop the coffee dribble, you need to pour faster, my boy. POUR FASTER! THAT'S IT! LIKE THAT!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5m4kfq
|
How does a charged particle not lose all of its energy even though it constantly generates an electromagnetic field?
|
If a charged particle creates an electromagnetic field, doesn't the information in that field have to be carried by photons to "sense" whether or not there exists another charged particle in the field? As far as I know, information can't be shared or transferred without using energy, and charged particles share information using photons.
However if all charged particles are constantly giving off photons to generate this field, how is it that they don't lose all their energy?
I'm sure there's something I'm missing, and I would really appreciate some clarity.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/5m4kfq/how_does_a_charged_particle_not_lose_all_of_its/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dc0tyby",
"dc0vv0y",
"dc120u7",
"dc16sp2"
],
"score": [
161,
19,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The electrostatic field of a charge *has* or *carries* a certain amount of energy and information. It does not need a *constant input* of energy or information from the charge. It does not \"emanate\" or \"flow\" outwards from the charge.\n\nIt's like a dress, not a waterfall. You don't need to constantly produce fabric to have a dress on.",
"Rantonels explained the most important aspect of the answer, that fields are like a fabric and exist without need for constant input. However since you asked specifically about photons I'll try to explain a little bit about why the picture of a charged particle emitting photons is a bit misleading in this situation. \n\nPhotons are the \"force carrier\" particles of the electromagnetic force. However in that role the photons involved are virtual photons which means they only exist temporarily during the interaction of two charged particles. And in a sense these virtual particles should not be thought of as being a real physical picture of what is happening. They are really representations of terms in a large sum. The important thing is that this representation only makes sense in the context of the interaction of two or more charged particles. So in a situation with a single particle there is no sense in which virtual photons are being emitted.\n\nReading back over that answer I imagine that you will not be satisfied with this explanation. The question of \"Yes but how does the photon KNOW the context its in??\" still seems reasonable. Without diving into the math the best way I can summarize it is that the force carrying photons are only involved in situations where we assume from the start that there are multiple charged particles involved. They shouldnt be considered to be generating the field but as being generated by the field of interacting charges.\n\n(Yes there are contributions to the self energy where a single particle emits and reabsorbs virtual photons by itself but I can think of absolutely no way to describe this that isnt extremely confusing)\n",
"Just to add to the discussion: First I thought, hey, he's right, how is that possible. But I think your reasoning mixes electromagnetic fields with electromagnetic waves? Electromagnetic waves are in some way equivalent to photons flying around and indeed, energy is transported in this case.\n\nBut I think for electromagnetic fields you are only allowed to imagine virtual photons as is mentioned in other answers. And they don't inherently carry energy. \"Virtual\" is a heavy word here and one has to take this seriously. Maybe it's even better to not think of virtual particles and just think of the fabric metaphor.",
"Charged particles *do* emit photons when accelerated though, right? Wouldn't that lead to a constant emission of photons from the interactions of an electron and a proton in a hydrogen atom?\n\nI know something's missing there, but I'm not sure what it is."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4wqtu4
|
why can't we harness the vaporized fossil fuel from engine exhaust and use it again?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wqtu4/eli5_why_cant_we_harness_the_vaporized_fossil/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d69516e",
"d695al3",
"d695c0t",
"d695f9b",
"d695jcq",
"d696mxo",
"d6974bn",
"d69e56n",
"d69ucy9"
],
"score": [
36,
2,
10,
27,
6,
6,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The exhaust from a standard combustion engine isn't \"vaporized fossil fuel\"; the fuel doesn't vaporize, it combusts, which converts the fuel into energy and then chemical byproducts. Those byproducts are what is exhausted. \n\nNone of those byproducts are particularly energy dense like gasoline is, so recapturing them wouldn't be of much use. Carbon Monoxide and Dioxide, for example, are both fairly inert; there are no simple processes we could do to them that would release useful energy. ",
"The engine exhausted does no contain the original fuel, just the chemicals left over after you burn the fuel. You can turn that back into fuel again, but it takes a lot of work and isn't cheap. Also, the exhaust is a gas (not liquid) and takes up a lot of space unless you compress it - so you'd need to add a pump and a gas cylinder to the car (the added weight plus energy to power the pump would make the car less fuel efficient, and the gas cylinder would be an explosion hazard and is filled with poison gas that would need to be emptied often).",
"Same reason you can't set a pile of ashes on fire. Once it's burnt, the only thing left is stuff that won't burn. (because everything flammable burned away.)",
"The ELI5 version would be: \n\nyou wouldn't want to eat food again that you had previously exhausted, either.",
"Gas just doesnt \"vaporize\"into exhaust, it combusts and the byproduct is mainly N2, H2O, and CO2. None of these can easily be separated and converted back into energy, we actually route the exhaust back into the chamber to cool it off to stop NOx from happening (it actually stops some of the combustion)",
"We do. It's called a Turbocharger. It uses the exhaust gases to spin an impeller which turns a compressor which injects compressed cooled air into the cylinders which in turn allows for higher efficiency through increased compression ratio on the fuel-air mixture.\n\nAlthough this isn't probably what you meant because you said \"vaporized fossil fuel\", which, as other commenters have already pointed out, isn't actually a thing. The byproduct of the combustion of gasoline (petrol) and/or diesel fuel does not yield another fossil fuel, but rather other compounds that are of no use as combustible materials.",
"2C8H18 + 25O2 ----- > 18H2O + 16CO2 + heat\n\nIt's not vaporizing the fuel; it's burning the fuel in oxygen.",
"So to answer the intent of your question without getting bogged down in the minutiae: you can, it's called a reduction reaction. You take the byproducts of burning fuel (carbon dioxide and water) and recombine it back into the hydrocarbon chains that make up most liquid fuels. The problem is you have to put all the energy you got out of it, back into it again. Some researchers are trying to use sunlight as the energy source to preform these reactions, essentially using hydrocarbon chains as a storage medium for solar energy. Think of it as a battery for sunlight. _URL_0_",
"A lot of people here are missing that all modern cars have what's called an EGR valve, or exhaust gas recirculation valve, that takes some of the exhaust and puts it into the intake to go through combustion again, reducing overall emissions "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bionic-leaf-makes-fuel-from-sunlight/"
],
[]
] |
||
7s6vmg
|
why has it become virtually impossible for politicians on either side to work across party lines? why has "bipartisan" become such a dirty word?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7s6vmg/eli5_why_has_it_become_virtually_impossible_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dt2ek34"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It gives their voters the illusion that they’re fighting for what they want, but the rival party won’t let them get any new laws passed. In reality, they all work together and pass whatever the lawmakers want."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2zhvrr
|
the different types of logical fallacies
|
And how to identify them
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zhvrr/eli5_the_different_types_of_logical_fallacies/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpj1r20",
"cpj2ort",
"cpje5jt"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"There are a few dozen common fallacies, so it would be tough to explain all of them.\n\n[This should help you learn some of the most commonly found ones though!](_URL_0_).",
"There's tons so off the top of my head, and like you're five: \n\nStrawman: Arguing with a self-constructed and more simplified assertion than the one your debate partner is actually making. Tantamount to building a scarecrow Hulk Hogan then beating it up and claiming you kicked Hulk Hogans ass, hence the title. \n\nAppeal to Force: Getting someone to agree to a conclusion by implicit or explicit threat, i.e. \"All the little Hulkamaniacs should take their vitamins, after all im sure that if they didn't they'd find themselves wishing they did after what happens to em\"\n\nAppeal to Pity: Similar to Force; \"I know you don't think Hulk Hogan deserves the championship belt this year because he lost, but just think, if you don't give it to him, the Hulkamaniac nation will be heartbroken! Children's tears!\"\n\nAd Hominem: Trying to invalidate a persons claim by attacking the person rather than the claim. \"Hulk Hogan cheated on his wife so what would he know about global warming.\" Note that this one is often overused, because it's sometimes not fallacious to question the speaker if the grounds are relevant, i.e. \"Hulk Hogan is a known liar, how can we trust his testimony.\"\n\nSlippery Slope: Arguing against something on dubious grounds that it will necessarily lead to something worse. Not always a fallacy, but often one. \"If we let Hulk Hogan marry Hacksaw Jim Duggan, suddenly we'll have people marrying toasters and animals.\"\n\nRed Herring: Diverting the attention of your audience away from the arguers actual point to a different one. \"My friend Hulk Hogan claims that unregulated pesticides on crops are harmful to all the little Hulkamaniacs, but what he fails to realize is that fruits and vegetables are a great source of vitamins. There is no better source of vitamin c than a grapefruit for example\"\n\nAppeal To Ignorance: Taking a lack of conclusive evidence and drawing definitive conclusion from it. \"No scientist has ever found evidence that disproves that Hulk Hogan's skin turns plaid when no one is looking at him, therefore we can only infer that it is true\" \n\nFalse Cause: A conclusion drawn from a cause/effect connection that is dubious at best. \"Most violent crime happens in the night time hours after 10pm, when Hulk Hogan is asleep. In order to reduce crime we must make Hulk Hogan change his sleeping schedule\" \n\nBegging the Question: Like a false cause but drawing a conclusion based on leaving out certain premises or just marginalizing them as assumed to be true. \"A blonde mustache is the trademark of a murderer, therefore Hulk Hogan is a murderer\". Of course this leads you to wonder \"Wait How do we know blonde mustaches are murder traits\"? \nNOTE: There's also a second form of begging the question which is even more devious, it basically involves your conclusion being a restating of your premise without proving it: \"Hulk Hogan is naturally the best wrestler in the world because there is no wrestler better than Hulk Hogan\" \n\nFalse Dichotomy: \"Either you agree that Hulk Hogan is the best wrestler of all time or you're not a real American. Surely you're a real American, therefore it follows that you'll agree with me that Hulk Hogan is the best wrestler of all time\". This one is actually not a fallacy but the truth. ",
"So many of them, all I can name off the top of my head are confirmation bias and negativity bias.\n\nHere's a video that goes into a few of them, although it only explains the major ones at play with the people who refuse to vaccinate kids. It's a video not about logical fallacies, but it talks about them: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/"
],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/Rzxr9FeZf1g"
]
] |
|
1fpeou
|
If fish can remove oxygen from water, then why can't (or haven't) we created SCUBA gear that can do the same?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1fpeou/if_fish_can_remove_oxygen_from_water_then_why/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cachmix",
"cachmqh"
],
"score": [
12,
2
],
"text": [
"Fish are cold blooded, so they need much lesser oxygen than humans (hot blooded).\n\nIn water, the dissolved oxygen content is approximately 8 cm^3/L compared to that of air which is 210 cm^3/L.\n\nAn average diver with a fully closed-circuit rebreather needs 1 L (roughly 1 qt) of oxygen per minute. As a result, at least 192 litres (51 US gal) of sea water per minute would have to be passed through the system. Imagine the kind of machinery needed to process that much water in 1 minute.\n\nSource:\n_URL_0_",
"Have a read of [interesting link](_URL_0_) It may be possible but we would require more oxygen from the same volume of water per KG of body mass in comparision to fish. (Being warm blooded for one really changes the oxygen requirement)\n\nA sub question, are there any warm blooded animals that breathe through gills?\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_gills_(human)"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/np6pe/why_cant_we_create_underwater_breathing_technology/"
]
] |
||
269aok
|
If the testes are on the outside of the body because they need to be at a temperature lower than the body temperature, how come men living in deserts or other hot climates aren't sterile?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/269aok/if_the_testes_are_on_the_outside_of_the_body/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chowvr3"
],
"score": [
34
],
"text": [
"Sweaty balls. In hot climates your balls can still be lower than body temperature because sweaty balls. Your surface temperature can drop lower than body temperature with the cooling effects of sweat. Hotter balls do result in lower fertility though."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
tiu4x
|
How do brass instruments work?
|
I'm a high school trumpet player and I've always been curious as to exactly HOW they work. Some of my friends are also wondering how, so I just want a way to explain it to them.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/tiu4x/how_do_brass_instruments_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4mzgbc",
"c4n0que"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Not just brass, but from my simple understanding, the vibrations from the mouthpiece/reed are amplified as they pass through the instrument. The shape of the instrument affects the tone and pitch.",
"Your lips produce a range of frequencies. The sound waves from these travel along the pipe until they hit the open end, then they are reflected back in inverted form (high pressure becomes low pressure and vice versa). Some of these frequencies correspond to the set of resonant frequency of the pipe - fundamental, first harmonic, second harmonic and so on. The frequencies which are not at a resonance are suppressed, because the returning wave from the open end interferes destructively with the new input from the lips, so the pipe tends to only allow through sound at these particular frequencies. However although there are many such frequencies, only one will be close to the main pitch that your lips are producing. Of course you can choose which one by lip tension.\n\nOk, so what does the bell do? Two things. Firstly you don't want *all* of the sound to be reflected back into the pipe. The bell reduces the amount of reflection, allowing some of the energy (sound) out into the room. Technically it is an impedance matching device. The other thing results from this. Because the reflection effect is less strong than for a straight tube with a plain cut off end, the resonance effect has a less strong effect in only allowing sound at those resonant frequencies - it now allows a bit more of a spread of frequency. This gives the instrument its characteristic tone, as opposed to making it sound like a pure sound wave."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1y8c9g
|
what does a pilot see when they say turbulence is to be expected for the next x duration of the flight? how do they know how rough it is going to be? why can't they just go higher or lower than whatever the weather is?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y8c9g/eli5_what_does_a_pilot_see_when_they_say/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfi8724"
],
"score": [
27
],
"text": [
"It depends where it is.\n\nSometimes it's possible to see bad weather visually - large cumulus clouds are nearly always turbulent. Other times it shows up on the weather radar - a device which sends out a radar signal that bounces off of water droplets and shows how big the droplets are.\n\nClear Air Turbulence is the one that's most hard to spot. Mostly, pilots rely on reports from other pilots ahead of them on the same route. This is especially true on routes like the North Atlantic, where communication with Air Traffic Control is difficult. In other, more populated areas, Air Traffic Control might collate information from pilots.\n\nAnd finally, there is often turbulence near the ground, either due to the wind being mixed up as it blows across trees, buildings or mountains, or due to the thermal effect of the sun heating the ground, and the ground heating the lowest layer of air, which then starts to rise. But usually you'd have your seatbelts on for take-off or landing anyway, so no special action is required to warn you of that."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
61nlc7
|
In medieval warfare, did all soldiers have shields with their lord's coat of arms or is that just a Game of Thrones thing?
|
In Game of Thrones, the armies have shields with the coat of arms of their lord. For example, a soldier living under Stark territory would have a Stark Shield, a solider living under Tyrell territory a Tyrell shield, a soldier under Frey territory, a Frey shield, etc. Is this true for medieval England / Europe?
So if I was a soldier who lived in Washington, Tyne and Wear, would my shield have the coat of arms of the Washington family (as in the ancestors of George Washington), or would the Washington coat of arms be only for members of the Washington family? If it is the latter, then what would be on my shield?
Sorry if my question is kind of messy, but I don't really understand how Coat of Arms work in a battlefield sense and which soldier would have which arms, so any additional information / further reading that I didn't ask for would be great.
Thanks!
EDIT - Spelling
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/61nlc7/in_medieval_warfare_did_all_soldiers_have_shields/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfga303",
"dfgdfcc"
],
"score": [
139,
8
],
"text": [
"Okay, so you're kind of mixing two concepts up a bit here: heraldry and livery. Soldiers have basically always decorated their equipment, but after heraldry became fully established in the 13th century, to bear a coat of arms, whether on shield or surcoat or whatever, was to claim nobility. The specific arrangement of symbols signified your personal identity. Yours was slightly different than your brother's, or your father's, or your uncle's. A common soldier simply wouldn't have a proper coat of arms on anything.\n\nLivery is another matter. We do know that lords, at least by the 14th-15th century, would often try to equip their *personal retainers* with matching clothing that reflected their attachment. But this is a lot less elaborate than a coat of arms - basically, it's just buying your guys red or blue or green coats. Note the emphasis on personal retainers. Most soldiers weren't directly and permanently attached to a great man's household. Mercenaries, levies (which were falling out of use as heraldry came into being, but that's another story), contracted men: these guys almost certainly would provide their own equipment and look very different from the personal servants of kings or lords. Your shield would be painted however the hell you wanted it.\n\nIt's a common trope in medieval fiction - movies and television shows, I mean - to write the present back into the past. Modern armies wear uniforms; so let's put the English in red and the French in blue, or give everybody on a side matching shields. It helps the audience figure out what's going on. But that kind of uniformity is a distinctly modern thing, a product of the nation state and the permanent standing army. Medieval armies just weren't that organized. They were, as a rule, assembled from disparate parts for a limited duration - a campaign season or a crusade - and then disbanded once they were no longer needed.\n\nBy the by, Game of Thrones is a *really* unreliable source for anything other than George R.R. Martin's imagination. It's about as accurate a portrayal of the Middle Ages as Animal Farm is a portrayal of the day to day working of an English pig farm :D.",
"Hi, here are a few posts on heraldry that you may find interesting\n\n* [Did noble families in the middle ages have a family sigil and/or motto like in Game of Thrones?](_URL_1_) featuring /u/QuickSpore and /u/tim_mcdaniel \n\n* [Heraldry and Livery](_URL_4_) featuring /u/deMohac \n\n* [How did families get their crest's and coats of arms?](_URL_0_) and [How did knights prevent copying each other's heraldry?](_URL_6_) featuring /u/tim_mcdaniel \n\n* [Irish family crests/coats of arms](_URL_5_) featuring /u/The_Chieftain_WG\n\n... and a couple on livery. There are many threads asking how armies identified friend from foe and avoided friendly fire, but these are ones I ran into while searching for the above\n\n* [How did Medieval armies tell which side a soldier was on? How common was it for a soldier to be killed by someone in his own army, being mistaken for an enemy?](_URL_3_) featuring /u/WARitter\n\n* [What would the average medieval soldier wear?](_URL_2_) featuring /u/MI13"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5snudn/how_did_families_get_their_crests_and_coats_of/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4b7yfs/did_noble_families_in_the_middle_ages_have_a/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4jd8ju/what_would_the_average_medieval_soldier_wear/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4wqahw/how_did_medieval_armies_tell_which_side_a_soldier/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4vlx1d/heraldry_and_livery/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/51hqo5/irish_family_crestscoats_of_arms/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5hqiq9/how_did_knights_prevent_copying_each_others/"
]
] |
|
a0vyew
|
definition of a parsec for an amateur astronomer
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0vyew/eli5_definition_of_a_parsec_for_an_amateur/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eaks5a6",
"eakslvz"
],
"score": [
27,
4
],
"text": [
"3.26 light-years or the distance of an object where the orbit of the Earth around the sun creates a visual **P**arallax of one **ar**c**sec**ond\n\nParallax is the difference in apparent position of an object viewed from two different spots like how an object shifts a bit when you look out just your left eye is just your right eye. You can measure the difference in the angle when seen from both spots to determine the parallax angle. The smaller this angle the further away an object is(this is how we tell distance with our eyes at short to medium range)\n\nFor a Parsec, these two measurements are opposite sides of the sun, exactly 2 AU(Earth's orbital diameter) apart. If you can set the angle difference between these two measurements to be 1 arc second then they're focused on an object 1 Parsec away (~3.26 ly)",
"Just as an aside ... if you're asking because of what Han Solo said in the original Star Wars movie, the line was a mistake. Parsec is not a unit of time. It's a unit of distance."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
7dw5iu
|
why do languages from far away cultures have similarities?
|
for example the japanese word for cake sounds almost exactly the same like english word for cake, even though the two cultures were very far away
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7dw5iu/eli5why_do_languages_from_far_away_cultures_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dq0qms2",
"dq0r7ac",
"dq1h6y0",
"dq1ht2m"
],
"score": [
3,
15,
5,
2
],
"text": [
" If I had to venture a guess I’d say that if the Japanese word sounds similar it’s either because of coincidence, or that word was actually influenced by English at some point.",
"They are literally copying the word. Japan did not have cake until the idea was brought there by Westerners. Similarly they call bread *pan,* the Portuguese word, because that's who introduced baked bread to Japan.",
"There are a few cases where it's just an amazing coincidence, but in most cases you'll find it's because one language has borrowed the word from the other.\n\nThis is certainly the case with the Japanese word \"kēki\", which is simply the nearest you can get to \"cake\" in the Japanese language. But this shouldn't surprise you: we have imported several Japanese words into English, like \"sushi\", \"manga\" and \"karate\".\n\nSometimes a word will bounce back and forth. The English word \"animation\" was imported into Japanese as \"animēshon\", then abbreviated to \"animē\", and in that form was re-imported into English as \"anime\" to mean a specific form of animation popular in Japan.\n\nAnother interesting example is the English word \"orchestra\", borrowed by the Japanese language as \"ōkesutora\" (the nearest you can get to the original in Japanese), then abbreviated to \"ōke\". Then a new form of entertainment was invented in Japan, which they called \"empty orchestra\", which in Japanese is \"kara ōke\", and this was the birth of karaoke. (This is the same \"kara\" as in \"karate\", which means \"empty hand\"; i.e. \"unarmed\".)\n\nThere's also the famous franchise featuring fictional \"pocket monsters\". The creators deliberately took the English words \"pocket\" (as \"poketto\") and \"monster\" (as \"monsutā\"), abbreviated them as \"poke\" and \"mon\", and so gave the world \"Pokémon\".\n\nIn case you're wondering why the Japanese versions of English words look so different from the originals, there are certain limits to what the Japanese language can do. There are several English consonants that don't exist in Japanese; but also, in most cases a consonant (except \"n\") must always have a vowel after it. In the other direction, the English spellings are also only an approximation of the Japanese.",
"There's 3 possible reasons. \n\n1. Loan words. As another user pointed out, the Portuguese introduced most baking to Japan not that long ago so there are many Japanese words which are borrowed or adapted from other languages. Every language, even English (especially English), has loan words or borrowed words or words which were introduced from other languages, it's pretty common. \n\n2. Similar root language. Romance languages tend to share similar words because they all stem from Latin. Slavic languages all share similarities due to geographical location etc. etc., This much should be obvious.\n\n3. Pure coincidence. Sometimes words just happen to overlap despite no relation in the language or despite not being borrowed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
c8t03c
|
how can detectives and others match someone's handwriting to a specific person?
|
I always feel like my handwriting varies so much that it would be impossible to match any of it to me.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c8t03c/eli5_how_can_detectives_and_others_match_someones/
|
{
"a_id": [
"esput2j"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The answer is they can't enough for it to hold up in court. They can use it as a detective tool but it is sort of like the lie detector, it doesn't hold up in court."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
a08fn4
|
what happens in your body when you take antidiarrheal medicine?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a08fn4/eli5_what_happens_in_your_body_when_you_take/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eag8j8w"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The most common antidiarrheal medicine is an opioid drug, like morphine, but it doesn't get absorbed from the GI tract very much at all. Opioid drugs really slow down your intestines, so much that addicts often have issues with chronic constipation. When you take this medicine, it basically slows down your gut so that you can absorb more water out of your poop and make it firmer. However, for most diarrheal illnesses, it's not recommended to take these medicines. Ask your doctor before taking any of these drugs."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1ufhzz
|
why are some people so prone to cavities?
|
I'd like to know why is it that some people seem to be over the top prone to dental health issues, where as others aren't as unlucky?
Example, I've taken phenomenal care of my teeth, brushing after every meal, flossing, flouride mouthwash and everything, yet every dentist visit yields another 5 or more cavities. Then I have friends who skip a day in between brushing altogether, chug soda 24/7 and have perfect, strong teeth.
So, did some of us just get the shit end of the genetics stick, or is there a more obvious culprit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ufhzz/eli5_why_are_some_people_so_prone_to_cavities/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cehj5y6",
"cehjg1q",
"cehkpwz",
"cehlatw",
"cehnr00",
"cehnyn5",
"cehpuqv",
"cei8nvo"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
10,
2,
2,
2,
13,
3
],
"text": [
"Some folks just have soft teeth. My family especially is notorious for having \"soft\" teeth, which makes us more susceptible to getting dental issues. \n\nI had to get sealants put on my teeth as a kid once my permanents came in to prevent a lot of nastiness my older family members had to go through. \n\nEven with the sealants, I still got a lot of cavities in my time and I brush every day with mouth wash. ",
"Brushing, flossing, etc are only part of the equation. Your diet is also part of the health of your teeth. Don't consume a lot of junk food especially sugar, be it in food or drinks. Doesn't your dentist ever talk to you about this part of it?",
"Aside from some of the other factors listed, there appears to be a possibility that high levels of *S. mutans* can be transmitted horizontally or vertically, from caregivers, schoolmates, and siblings. This seems to especially be a factor in the first few years of life, when immune resistance in the child is low. \n\nI also have not seen a reply in this thread that adresses the problem of chronically low mouth pH from over consumption of acidic foods and beverages (even sugar free) that may contribute to erosion of the enamel, leaving teeth susceptible to even relatively low levels of *S. mutans* colonization. \n\nLots of genetic factors at play here as well, even something as benign as lower levels of salivary production can have a huge effect. ",
"Oh, I have personal experience here! \n\nThere are a number of reasons that one can be prone. In my case, my jaw is small and compacted. It's really hard to get everything out and my teether are together tightly enough that I can shear most floss through normal usage. \n\nGrinding teeth in your sleep can also be a problem. I had to get a bite guard and thats helped reduce the number of cavities I get. ",
"I've never had a cavity. I'm 24 years old and take decent care of my teeth. I brush twice a day and use mouth wash once a day before bed. And I *never* floss.\n\nI went to the dentist recently since I haven't been in 3 or 4 years and the nurse was shocked at the good state my teeth were in. She said I have good saliva and that was the main reason my teeth are well protected.",
"Low mouth pH is the cause of cavities but there are a lot of factors that affect this. Diet (simple carbohydrates in general, not just sugars), frequency of eating, medication being taken (dry mouth), genetics, and the dominate flora of bacteria in your mouth. Bruxism (clinching and grinding) and acid reflux can also play a role. ",
"There is no such thing as 'soft teeth'. With the exception of some rare disease the composition of human enamel is more or less the same.\n\nThere are 3 things that contribute to cavities:\n\n1) Something to cause decay - usually food. Fermentable carbohydrates and acid foods are the main contributors. This is why people that drink a lot of soda can be prone to decay.\n\n2) Oral bacteria. Different people have different compositions of bacteria in their mouths. Not all the bacteria in the mouth causes decay but this is where the family tie-in comes. The types of bacteria in your mouth is typically established by the time you are one and colonized from familial sources. \n\n3) Buffering ability of saliva. Your saliva is a buffer. Activities that overcome saliva's ability to buffer will cause you to be prone to decay. The worst offender here is snacking. Every time you eat it effectively lowers the pH of your mouth and it can take several hours for it to come back. Teeth begin to decay when oral pH is under 5.5 and so if every 2 hours you have a snack that lowers the pH of your mouth below 5.5 you are going to have a bad time.\n\nIt takes a little bit of all of these to cause cavities. But an imbalance in one area can make you more susceptible.",
"Look at all these made-up, untrue reasons for tooth decay. Just look at them all, it's so cute. OP, one thing that is severely underdiagnosed is acid reflux and its' effects on your teeth. If you find yourself having constant, or regular bouts of upset stomach, reflux, heartburn, etc... consider talking to your doctor about it for an evaluation. -dental hygienist."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
tc3lu
|
Why do we work so hard to keep dandelions out of
our yards in America? Are they harmful somehow?
|
When I was a kid, I always associated dandelions with those really prickly weeds that were a pain in the ass to step on, so it made sense to me... but really, what do dandelions do?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/tc3lu/why_do_we_work_so_hard_to_keep_dandelions_out_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4lbs0s",
"c4lc2if"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Dandelions are actually good for gardens. They draw nutrients into the soil and attract pollinators. Visually, they can be unappealing, however.\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)",
"Dandelions are generally just removed because they are considered unsightly. For most Americans it breaks up the uniformity of the lawn and thus ruins their beautiful lawns.\n\nthat's mainly just everyone's opinion though"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dandelion#As_a_beneficial_weed"
],
[]
] |
|
sb7tn
|
lenz's law
|
Friend in physics was trying to explain this law to me, but I found his explanation to be slightly confusing. So from a physics standpoint, what is Lenz's Law? I would appreciate a simplified response, but if it is difficult, you can give me a more "mature" or scientific version as well. And trust me, I know some basic physics terms.
thanks
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/sb7tn/eli5_lenzs_law/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4cmeh5",
"c4cmeyr"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"So it starts with electromagnetic induction. Simply put, a changing or moving magnetic field generates an electric field, and a changing or moving electric field generates a magnetic field. This is simple enough - it's how electromagnets work, and how we generate electricity using spinning turbines. \n \nYou can set up two circuits held close to each other in the same plane (like your hands just before you clap), one attached to the AC mains and one with no power source at all. \n \n* The AC power going into the first circuit creates a constantly changing current in the first circuit\n* This changing current generates a changing magnetic field around the current in the first circuit\n* This, in turn, generates an electric current in the second circuit\n* This induced current generates its own magnetic field around the current in the second circuit \n \nLenz's Law simply states that the magnetic field generated by the induced current in the second circuit will oppose the magnetic field that was produced by the first circuit. This also means that any induced current in the second circuit will move in the opposite direction to the original current, because the magnetic field generated by a current moves in a predictable way around that current (give a thumbs up sign with your right hand - if the current moves in the direction of your thumb, the magnetic field that it generates *always* follows the path of your fingers around the current). \n \nIt's all tied up in conservation of energy - if the two fields moved in the same direction, they would constantly reinforce each other and you'd have free energy.",
"It can be thought of as a form of \"for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction\", but specifically for electric current (or just moving charges).\n\nVoltage is sometimes referred to as EMF: electro-motive force. That is, a force that acts on (usually) electrons that causes them to accelerate (start to move). EMF can be supplied by a battery, or generator, or whatever. According to Newton, if we are putting a force on these electrons, they must be \"pushing back\" somehow. What we observe is that the electricity flowing in our device produces a magnetic field which acts to OPPOSE the flow of electrons. This is a kind of \"no such thing as a free lunch\" scenario: we may be able to push the electrons through the circuit, but not without a price. \n\nLenz law is part of the bigger picture of Maxwell's equations, which bundle up all of our understanding of electricity and magnetism under one roof. Turns out, electricity and magnetism are 2 manifestations of the same field (you've heard of electromagnetism), and which one you observe depends on your reference plane. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1oa9st
|
How can fluid pressure only be dependent of density, height and gravitational pull?
|
I was wondering how fluid pressure worked, and I stumbled upon this webpage: _URL_0_ Unfortunately, this website made the entire thing only more confusing for me. I simply can't figure out how the pressure can be equal at the same height in all three pictures displayed there. It just seems obvious that a small mass of water pushing on a bigger mass due to gravity would create much lower pressure at the same height than the other way round. How is this possible?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1oa9st/how_can_fluid_pressure_only_be_dependent_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccq7zaz",
"ccqb423"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Without getting into too much detail, the simple answer is that the walls of the container are pushing back on the water with the same force the water pushes on them (newtons 3rd law). So in the case with a large bottom and small top, the pressure from the walls keeps the fluid under them at higher pressure.\n\nOne way to convince yourself of this is to realize that pressure must be equal at a given horizontal level, or else you'd have a current traveling horizontally (pressure difference induces flow). So the point under all the water has to be the same pressure as an equal height point under the sloped wall.",
"It sounds like the first figure is the one that bothers you (the narrow column of water on top of the larger tank of water).\n\nLet's instead think of it as a single tall column of water (extended all the way down from the top to the bottom of the tank). This single column of water is surrounded by other stuff (for the top half it is surrounded by walls and on the bottom half it is surrounded by more water).\n\nFollowing just this single column from top to bottom you should be able to see that P = (rho)gh applies to the water inside of it the same way it would if the walls extended all the way to the bottom. In fact, if it helps you to draw walls that extend ALMOST all the way to the bottom of the tank (leaving a small gap at the bottom), feel free to do so: It won't change anything.\n\nNow you're still looking at this and saying \"but when I move away from the column of water, the surrounding water is much more shallow, shouldn't the pressure be lower there?\" That would be true IF that part of the container were open to the atmosphere, but it isn't. The \"ceiling\" itself is applying pressure on the rest of the water in the tank.\n\nHow much pressure? Just enough to keep the system stable (just like how the floor you're standing on applies just enough force to keep you from falling through, but not enough to push you up and off of it). It will apply just enough pressure to maintain the \"equal pressure at equal depths\" condition. If it didn't the container wouldn't be in equilibrium and water would be flowing somewhere or another."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pflu.html"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
55ey3w
|
why do volcanoes contain lava, or do they make it by melting rock or something else? maybe better asked as, where does lava come from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55ey3w/eli5_why_do_volcanoes_contain_lava_or_do_they/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d89xsl0",
"d8a02rg"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Molten rock is what is in the centre of our earth where it's very, very, hot. Pressure within the volcano builds and eventually erupts. No one \"makes\" lava, it's a natural product",
"[Within volcanoes is a crack in the crust of the Earth.](_URL_0_) This causes magma to flow up until the volcano. It comes from the mantle of the Earth, which is under so much pressure and heat that rock stays molten."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://image.slideserve.com/308552/slide1-n.jpg"
]
] |
||
6g24ls
|
How were the Watergate hearings, and Nixon's resignation, covered in Soviet media?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6g24ls/how_were_the_watergate_hearings_and_nixons/
|
{
"a_id": [
"din8yj9",
"dinx4ti"
],
"score": [
44,
13
],
"text": [
"As a followup, how was Nixon covered prior to that? Was he mentioned often at all?",
"You may find this thread and its top answer by u/desoulis helpful\n\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4k92a5/how_did_soviet_leaders_view_the_watergate/"
]
] |
||
21eybd
|
How is it that a 1.3 gig torrent file can support 1080i but because DVD's were inadequate blueray had to be created?
|
I definitely do not torrent files.
Why create blueray when a dvd has the size to easily play such a file [[1]](_URL_0_)?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/21eybd/how_is_it_that_a_13_gig_torrent_file_can_support/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgcknea"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"The codecs you'll find used for popular torrents are more lossy than the codec used for Blu-Ray. For videos with equal resolutions, the smaller one will have a lower bitrate, which can mean more compression artifacts, less color accuracy/depth, and/or a lower frame rate. Some Blu-rays us a lossless audio codec, but any smaller torrent will be lossy. It will also take more processing power to decode the smaller file real time. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
11itmz
|
what's the joke behind r/circlejerk now only allowing gawker links?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11itmz/whats_the_joke_behind_rcirclejerk_now_only/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6mucyw"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"A guy on Gawker published violentacrez's real name, which caused a lot of subreddits to ban all Gawker links."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
66ik4b
|
how do employees of marijuana dispensaries in the us handle their taxes if their income is based off the sale of marijuana?
|
With the federal restrictions affecting how dispensaries due business (such as not being able to have bank accounts), how do its employees handle their taxes when the income is coming from the sale of marijuana?
edit: thanks for the all the replies, I think I was coming from the idea of what would happen if someone had to be audited or have their taxes looked more closely. Would it affect them at a federal level for working at a dispensarie.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66ik4b/eli5_how_do_employees_of_marijuana_dispensaries/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dgiprtv",
"dgiquoy",
"dgivd7u",
"dgixg4n",
"dgiy2f5",
"dgiyvy7",
"dgj2bzt",
"dgj31s7",
"dgjarht",
"dgjbfa1",
"dgjnar6"
],
"score": [
82,
483,
28,
3,
6,
326,
19,
4,
15,
42,
3
],
"text": [
"The same way anyone else does. Just report the source of the income.\n\nFederal law requires you to report all income, even if it's from an illegal source.",
"They report that their employer paid them to operate a retail shop. The IRS wants to know what you got paid, not what the shop sells. OK, there are some banking issues, so your boss had to pay you in cash. From the IRS perspective, also not a problem, they want to know how much you got paid, not how it was paid to you.\n\nOf the many legal snarls surrounding pot, employee income taxes isn't one of them.",
"THe IRS uses business activity codes that you would put on your return. WHile somewhat specific, they don't get so specific as to what items you sell. FOr instance Marijuana sales could be retail trade: food and beverage stores among others. So as long as your business name on the tax return is not something like \"Bob's House of Weed, Edibles and Illegal Activities\" you would be good. The other way they could know is that banks file reporting of interest income to the IRS. So if your business bank name is incriminatory that would come up. FOrtunately, or unfortunately there is not much in the way of banking services for this industry. \n\n[Source: IRS Activity Codes](_URL_0_)",
"I get my paycheck as a dead drop at my local In & Out on the 2nd and 4th Tuesday. Pretty sure thats industry standard.",
"Because the IRS doesn't really care if you made $30k at some place called \"Steve's Alternative Medicine\". They just want to know how much money you got and from where. They've got bigger problems.",
"5 year dispensary manager here. To answer your question, we handle it normally. I filled out a w2, and taxes are taken out of my check every time. I get an income tax check every year like normal. We have an account with ADP and have to just keep money in our account with them. One time the owner forgot to deposit funds, and ADP was nice enough to pay us anyway. Obviously he made the deposit, but super courteous of them regardless. \n\nCountless times I've had to run to the local grocery store for money orders to pay rent, electricity, ect... since everything is cash based. Our taxes are even paid in cash too. We have had 8 banks close accounts that the owners have opened in their names. Chase was one of them. We had an account with them for years. All of the employees knew us and what we were doing. Then one day out of nowhere they closed our account. They even marked my boss as using the account in an illegal way, so his personal account with Charles Schwab got closed because they were notified. He had 7 days to find a place for $1.5mil (personal, not dispensary related).",
"I am probably wrong, but it was explained to me years ago that tax returns are not valid evidence in court. Under the 5th amendment you cannot be compelled to self incriminate but tax code compels you to report income. So if you sell guns illegally, or drugs, you still need to file that as income, possibly just as misc sales but as income. \n\nMr calpone was finally brought down by the IRS, and I'm sure a tax lawyer can help more than internet people. but still it's an interesting topic",
"I've noticed most \"employees\" of dispensaries in OC work as \"volunteers\" but are obviously being paid. Is this some sort of work around to the taxes?",
"So the IRS still want you to report your illegal business income because they still want you to pay taxes. So that's all good, it's effectively like any other business. You report your profits, pay taxes on the profits, the remaining profits after taxes are retained by the business or returned to the owners.\n\nHowever there is a catch, and it's a big one. Businesses pay tax on revenue, not profit. So if you have sales totaling $1,000,000 and costs totaling $900,000 then you're paying tax on the million, not on the $100k difference. However you're allowed to deduct business expenses from the revenue before you pay taxes and in most businesses that'll be the full $900,000 of your expenses. So although you're taxed on revenue, not profits, you're taxed on revenue minus deductions which is effectively the same thing as profits.\n\nIf you're still with me so far I'll get to the shitty bit. Illegal businesses are only allowed to deduct cost of goods sold from their revenue. So if you have $1,000,000 in sales, spent $300,000 on stock, $300,000 on employees and $300,000 on overhead such as rent then where a normal business would be taxed on $1,000,000 minus a $900,000 deduction a marijuana dispensary would be taxed on $1,000,000 minus a $300,000 deduction. So despite only making $100,000 in profit they would be taxed on the $700,000 difference between revenue and cost of goods sold. Therefore their tax bill would be greater than their entire profit.\n\nIt's fucking shit for them. Proper accounting in that situation is really disincentivised while workarounds, such as paying staff off the books become extremely rational.",
"Could you ELI5 what marijuana dispensaries are and why they have problems? It sounds like, even though you can run a shop that sells weed in your state, you have problems because you're doing something illegal federally?",
"The IRS cares not where your money came from, only that they get their cut.\n\nYou could list any number of illegal activities as your source of income, from drug dealer to mob hitman, and the IRS won't do anything about it. Once you stop paying taxes, however, then you have a problem. That's what they got Al Capone on, after all."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://cotaxaide.org/tools/Business%20Activity%20Codes.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3lt47n
|
why in many nations some people want civil unions on top of state-sanctioned marriages? what are the differences supposed to be?
|
At least here in the EU, in many nations domestic-partnership/civil-unions are offered in many states and are asked for by a large share of the population in other ones. However, in all these nations non-religious statal marriages are present, which carry no religious background whatsoever. Just a 10 minutes signing of a legal contract in front of a public servant.
In this case.... Why do people want civil unions? Why aren't legal marriages enough?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lt47n/eli5why_in_many_nations_some_people_want_civil/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv90vse",
"cv916u3"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Because marriage carries certain connotations that people may not want. \n\nYou said that you can get not religious marriages, but marriages are still viewed as being explicitly religious to a vast majority of people, so it still has religious connotations. ",
"I can imagine at least two reasons :\n1. Civil unions in some country (eg France, Switzerland) were created to allow same-sex couple who could not marry at that time to have an equivalent to state-sanctioned wedding\n2. People wanting to have the benefits of marriage (eg inheritance,children custody,...) without having the party it would require to marry (as social pressure dictate). Some of my friends when they were younger did it when they bought a flat so that in case of accident their partner would inherit it and then they did a \"normal\" wedding a few years later when they had more cash for the party part"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3lrklz
|
Can a white dwarf gain material and become a neutron star?
|
Title
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3lrklz/can_a_white_dwarf_gain_material_and_become_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv8tqc4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"That's what leads to one kind of supernova: the star gains enough mass from a companion star to collapse into a neutron star - or rather, it would if it didn't go supernova in that instant.\n\nThe problem is that a white dwarf consists of carbon (mostly), and carbon can undergo fusion if pressure and temperature are high enough. While it's gaining mass, pressure and temperature rise, until just when it's ready to collapse into a neutron star, ***BOOM.*** Think \"star-sized H bomb\" and you get the picture.\n\nNow, if we could feed the star a more inert material than carbon (say, iron), we could avoid the supernova and make the star collapse - at least in theory."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
djbapk
|
vector graphics
|
I understand that the beam is manipulated directly, and that’s what makes it different from raster, but I don’t understand how that would work or why it works and how it knows what order to do things in or why it requires different hardware or anything.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/djbapk/eli5_vector_graphics/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f43cay4",
"f43jym8"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Do you mean the old oscilloscope-style vector graphics or the modern of vector graphics?",
"Classic vector graphics uses a Cathode Ray Tube - an electron beam is controlled by electromagnets onto a phosphorous target. The phosphorous is energized and illuminated, providing the displayed image. Engineers can design such a screen with multiple beams, stronger or weaker beams, different phosphorous coatings, and even multiple phosphorous layers. The effect is the ability to draw multiple lines simultaneously, images that last longer, shorter or longer refresh rates, and even color. Color can also be set with masks and even color changing masks using TFT LCD technology.\n\nThere are electronics that control the beam, and those are controlled by an analog input signal. The details of this signal are dependent upon the device, but in my experience with oscilloscopes, you can generate a control signal with some software and the output of your sound card.\n\nThese devices are pretty limited in their capability but are desirable in some context, I suppose. Sometimes, you just can't beat analog. These devices don't store the image any longer than the phosphorous stays illuminated, so the device driver has to run in a loop to control refresh.\n\nModern vector graphics are a set of points and strokes with brushes. The image renderer has to follow an ordered set of instructions to generate the image from those instructions. The renderer drives a rasterizer, which is software that populates pixel data in a pixel buffer. The data is sent through a video driver, a layer of the OS, to the video hardware, that sends signals to your modern pixel display device."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
67uw3l
|
why newly discovered stars or planets or any celestial bodies were given "code-like" name? for example wise 1828+2650
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67uw3l/eli5_why_newly_discovered_stars_or_planets_or_any/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dgtecf4",
"dgtegqq",
"dgtek76"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"As opposed to?\n\nThere are thousands upon thousands of celestial bodies discovered outside of our solar system each year. Giving them all unique names is hard if you're going to give them memorable names. You'll run out of names from the Greek pantheon before you get outside of the \"A\" stars\n",
"They're systematic names and indeed encode information. For example, WISE indicates that the object was found by the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, a space telescope. The numbers specify coordinates in the sky relative to Earth's equator: the right ascension is 18h 28m and the declination is 26° 50'. It's more informative to name celestial objects like this rather than give it a catchy-sounding name like Rigel or Vega.",
"There are too many stars to give them all sensible names. It is even sometimes too many to have a sensible world wide catalog of them. So the stars are given a sensible way to identify them. First is the catalog name, in your case it is the Wide Infrared Survey Explorer catalog. Next is the index in this catalog, WISE use a coordinate based index hence the + sign. And thirdly there is a series of letters to distinguish different objects in the same solar system. The inner most object is called a, then b, etc. Stars get capital letters and planets get lower case letters. If an object orbits another object then it gets another letter at the end. A solar system might be in multiple catalogs so it can have several different names. It is typical for each experiment to have its own catalog to track the objects they are looking at. This is the case with WISE."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
a8xza3
|
how do live football field graphics appear beneath the players?
|
You know when it shows the scrimmage lines or whatever right on the field? I assume the graphics are already using pan/tilt/zoom data from the cameras, since it looks a lot stabler than simply motion tracking (please correct me if I'm wrong on that), but what really baffles me is how the graphics appear "beneath" the players. Chroma key? Nope. I see teams with green colours that still pass over it. Extracting a matte from thermal imaging? Wouldn't the helmets be cooler than their bodies? What then? How?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a8xza3/eli5_how_do_live_football_field_graphics_appear/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecetmuv",
"eceytfi"
],
"score": [
51,
8
],
"text": [
"You had the right idea already. It is indeed chroma key. The cameras are simply good enough that they can distinguish between the green of the grass and the green in uniforms. They actually need to continually reset the chroma key as the color of the grass changes as the sun moves or when shadows show up on the field.",
"It's a step beyond chromakey and motion tracking... first they can only do this from some of the cameras. Those cameras have motion tracking mounts that are very precise. Then when they set up before the game they not only calibrate those motion tracking, they map the field... it isn't as simple as keying out green. They're keying out the exact shade of grass at that location (within some slight variation for lighting changes). That's the way it was 10 years ago. They may have built into some level of 3d tracking to even improve it further."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3gnnft
|
Historians of Reddit, during the time of slavery in the USA, (or slavery in any country/civilization) was there anything that was frowned upon from one slave owner to another?
|
I recently watched Django, and in the dinner scene, LeoCaps says that "Under Mississippi law she is my property, and I can do anything I want with my property". Im wondering if there were any limits to this, and if there weren't, what was considered a no-no back then.
Thanks
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3gnnft/historians_of_reddit_during_the_time_of_slavery/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu02wxi"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"In early 19th-century North Carolina judicial opinion about this question, of the limits of a master's authority over his slaves, was largely divided in two. While several judges were reluctant to admit that a slave had any rights whatsoever, others found that a master did not have the power to murder a slave for either sport or punishment.\n\nIn State v. Boon (1802, 1 N.C. 191) Judge Hall wrote: \"a slave in a pure state of slavery has no rights...Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries, Vol. I., 423, define pure slavery to be, that whereby an absolute power is given to the master, over the life and fortune of the slave...Slaves in this country possess no such rights; their condition is more abject; they are not parties to our constitution; it was not made for them.\"\n\nThis sentiment was echoed by Justice Ruffin in State v. Mann (1829, 13 N.C. 263), who acknowledged a theoretical bound on the master's power, but declined to have the courts draw any enforceable line. \"That there may be particular instances of cruelty and deliberate barbarity, where, in conscience the law might properly interfere, is most probable. The difficulty is to determine, where a Court may properly begin...We cannot allow the right of the master to be brought into discussion in the Courts of Justice. The slave, to remain a slave, must be made sensible, that there is no appeal from his master\".\n\nA mere five years later, in State v. Will (1834, 18 N.C. 121), Justice Gaston moved the North Carolina Supreme Court in another direction by reiterating the rule that a master may not deliberately kill his slave, even as part of a slave's punishment. \"[U]nlimited power is, in general, the legal right of the master. Unquestionably there are exceptions to this rule...There is no legal limitation to the master's power of punishment, except that it shall not reach the life of his offending slave.\"\n\nRuffin, edging back somewhat from his earlier position five years after that in State v. Hoover (1839, 20 N.C. 500), elaborated then on the restriction on killing in relation to punishment. \"But the master's authority is not altogether unlimited. He must not kill. There is, at the least, this restriction upon his power: he must stop short of taking life...If death unhappily ensue from the master's chastisement of his slave, inflicted apparently with a good intent\", the court would attempt to excuse the master's conduct. But a death resulting from \"[p]unishment...immoderate and unreasonable...accompanied by other hard usage and painful privations of food, clothing and rest\" would suggest that the master intended murder, and be unacceptable to the courts."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4otvmf
|
how exactly did they calculate age during the old testament?
|
I know they didn't actually live for hundreds of years, so how exactly did they count age then?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4otvmf/eli5_how_exactly_did_they_calculate_age_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4fgxz7",
"d4fia6n",
"d4flgn6"
],
"score": [
7,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"They actually did calculate time the same. Religious people will state that the dates are fully accurate and they did live that long, those that believe it is figurative believe that artificially inflated the ages to make them have more authority and \"wisdom\" attributed to them. ",
"The story of the old testament spans thousands of years. But Humans have known what a \"year\" was for long before that. People noticed seasons, and counted time by them for aeons - before Human history started. \n\nNo, they weren't as... accurate as we are now, but -- roughly speaking -- a year was still one rotation of the Earth around the sun (even if they didn't know the Earth moved around the sun!)\n\nNow, as for why biblical figures lived for hundreds of years, well. They also fought angels, turned into pillars of salt, turned sticks into snakes, as well as directly communicating with an omnipotent deity. If you accept all that, then it's not a huge step to someone living for hundreds of years. ",
"The very oldest stories in the Old Testament aren't exactly... accurate. Probably they weren't really supposed to be: they were intended to give some sort of message, but that message wasn't necessarily one about historical fact.\n\nThese old stories are probably very, *very* old, and would have been told for many, many generations before they were ever written down. Whatever factual events may have inspired some of these stories were lost and the details forgotten.\n\nYou can imagine how it happened. \"So, how old was he when he died, dad?\" -- \"Oh, he must have been very old.\" -- \"A hundred years old? Two hundred?\" -- \"I expect so, yes. He was a very good man, so he must have lived a very long time.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2iv48r
|
why is it that a person can't take a large amount of over the counter pain relievers, like tylenol or ibuprofen, to get the same effects as stronger pain killers like vicodin or hydrocodone?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2iv48r/eli5_why_is_it_that_a_person_cant_take_a_large/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl5r1gf",
"cl5r6wj",
"cl5r864",
"cl5uu53",
"cl5ypzu"
],
"score": [
4,
9,
32,
2,
16
],
"text": [
"Opiates like hydrocodone have an entirely different mechanism of action than ibuprofen or Tylenol. No amount of ibuprofen or Tylenol is going to effect the receptors that opiates effect.",
"That is a really bad idea. It doesn't take much tylenol to overdose and destroy your liver.\n\nThey are different drugs that have different effects on the body.",
"Different method of action. Opioids like hydrocodone and Oxy work by binding to neuroreceptors(neuro means brain) which send a depressive signal, which basically means that the signal numbs your central nervous system.\n\nI don't remember the exact MoA of the others so to just put it simply, ibuprofen and aspirin work by reducing inflamation in your body, and Tylenol works by simply cutting off the pain signal on its way to your brain",
"Tylenol works by stopping the pain signal from reaching your brain receptors. Opiate pain killers work by stimulating the 'feel good' receptors. No matter how much tylenol you take you can never get a 'feel-good' sensation. Opiates increases the feel-good which is what allows it to be used recreationally.\n\nIbuprofen is an anti-inflammatory and has no psychological effects, it just reduces swelling which is a large cause of many pains. \n\nAll of these drugs are deadly at their respective lethal-dose.",
"Since apparently everyone else thinks a 5 year old understands medical terms, let me give a more simple explaination.\n\nOver the counter drugs typically reduce pain by reducing the cause of the pain. Swelling for example, causes pain. Reduce the swelling and the pain will be lessened. This method doesn't work when the source of the pain is extreme, like you've just recently been cut open.\n\nPrescription drugs typically reduce pain by turning off your pain receptors in your nerves, either at the source of the pain or in your brain. In some cases the drug will also give you a giant case of \"don't give a shit\". The pain still hurts, but you just don't care."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6o12pa
|
Why, in a history point of view, is Germany called Allemagne/Alemania in latin languages, Germany in English and Deutschland in German
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6o12pa/why_in_a_history_point_of_view_is_germany_called/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkdruem",
"dkdujqx",
"dke7ewf"
],
"score": [
3,
15,
3
],
"text": [
"On that note, why is it \"Niemcy\" or some derivative in most slavic languages?",
"The name *Deutschland* (German) and other similar names (like *Duitsland* in Dutch and *Tyskland* in Danish) is derived from the Old High German word *diutisc*, which meant 'of the people'. This in turn comes from a Germanic word meaning 'folk' (leading to Old High German *diot*, Middle High German *diet*), and was used to make a distinction between the speakers of Germanic languages and the speakers of Celtic or Romance languages. Ultimately, those words come from the Proto-Indo-European word *teuta*, which meant 'people'. Through the PIE root, *Deutsch* is related to the Lithuanian word *tauta*, the Old Irish word *tuath* and the Old English word *þeod*, all of which mean 'people' or 'folk.'\n\n\nThe name Germany and other similarly sounding names (like *Germania* in Italian, *An Ghearmáin* in Irish and *Германия* in Russian) is derived from the Latin term *Germania*, which was first used in the third-century BC. The origin is uncertain, but it's probably that *Germania* is of Gaulish origin, as it was the Gauls who first referred to the people who crossed east of the Rhine as the *Germani*, a name which the Romans adopted.\n\nThe name *Allemagne* (French) and other similarly sounding names (like ألمانيا in Arabic, *Yr Almaen* in Welsh and *Alemanha* in Portuguese) are derived from the name of the *Alemanni*. The *Alemanni* were a loose confederation of Germanic tribes that were also known as the *Suebi* who lived primarily in what is today the region called Alsace in France and the German Bundesland (Federal State) of Baden-Württemberg. The word *Alemanni* has it's origins in the Proto-Germanic word *Alamanniz*, which has two possible meanings, depending on the origin of the prefix *Al-*. The first possibility is that *Al-* means 'all,' which would mean that *Alamanniz* means 'all men.' This suggests that the Alemanni were a diverse confederation of different tribes instead of a unified group. The other possibility is that *Al-* comes from the Latin term *alius*, which refers to 'the other.' In that case, *Alemanni* shares a root with the English word 'alien' and means 'foreign men.'\n\nFinally (and to answer /u/hecklad's question), the name *Niemcy* (Polish) and other similarly sounding names (like *Németország* in Hungarian, *Німеччина* in Ukrainian and نمسا which refers to Austria in Arabic) are derived from the Slavic exonym *nemets*, which is itself derived from Proto-Slavic *nemcy*, which means 'mute' but came to refer to 'those who do not speak like us' or more simply 'a foreigner.' This usage is related to the Proto-Slavic autonymical term *slovo* which means 'speech.' The Proto-Slavic tribes referred to themselves the 'speaking people', as opposed to their Germanic neighbors, who they referred to as 'mutes.' This mirrors the Ancient Greek term βάρβαρος (barbaros) which referred to all non-Greek speakers and roughly means 'those who speak gibberish.'\n\n\n***\n\n\n***Sources***:\n\n John Joseph Gumperz and Dell Hathaway Hymes, *The ethnography of communication*. 1972\n\nMary Fulbrook, *A Concise History of Germany*. 2004\n\nKurt F Reinhardt, *Germany: 2000 Years*. 1961",
"This question was asked just over a week ago and you may be interested in the answers [here](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6lw1p3/why_is_germany_spelled_so_differently_in_many/"
]
] |
||
4vstfq
|
Do individual atoms move in the wind?
|
Is wind like a pressure wave where the energy moves or do the individual molecules move?
Something like convection or conduction
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/4vstfq/do_individual_atoms_move_in_the_wind/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d62shrf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Wind is convection that is caused by weather and the sun. The actual air molecules are moving around due to the interaction between pockets of air having different qualities and the heating/cooling of the surface of the Earth throughout the night/day cycle. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
206snc
|
why humans are born with parts we can live without (appendix, wisdom teeth, male nipples, etc)
|
I'm particularly confused about the ones that usually cause us more harm than good, like the appendix and wisdom teeth. Why are these not removed through evolution over time? Will they ever be?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/206snc/eli5_why_humans_are_born_with_parts_we_can_live/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg0b11w",
"cg0chdk",
"cg0mqyo"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Evolution doesn't craft a perfect organism from scratch, it has to work with the parts it had from the previous iterations.\n\nSometimes useless pieces get left in because there's no real reason to remove them.",
"There is an evolutionary function for the appendix, it is not a useless organ. Your appendix is a repository for healthy gut flora. A few hundred years ago food poisoning and gastrointestinal distress would be very real, everyday concerns for your body. Removing the appendix increases the chance of catastrophic gut flora death leading to a need for re-poop-ulation. Or you die, you can't process food without good gut flora. \n\nThere is also a causal link being formed between diseases like IBS and appendix malfunction and removal. \n\nIn the same vein you tonsils catch bacteria preventing colds etc, your wisdom teeth are for eating unprocessed hard food (although our jaws are shrinking because our food is cooked), your adenoids are another immune defense. \n\nEvolution leaves very little in the body that's not important, why waste the energy of operation on something that's not vital?\n\nEdit: Clarificatio",
"Everyone's skipped male nipples, so to explain that:\n\nAt some point, all creatures are the same. All animals are a couple of cells sharing data, all mammals are a clump of cells creating a bone structure and a warm blood circulation system etc etc. In the same way that horses still have toes and dolphins still have fingers, men have nipples because there is a certain part of development were you aren't fully 'defined' in what you'll be, normally early fetal development. Whether you are male or female is defined a little later, so as the data in the egg just says \"make a baby\" you get given nipples on the 50/50 chance you end up being female. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
64vy9i
|
How does premature birth affect development throughout life (epigenetics?)
|
I was born two months premature, and at face value Im a pretty normal and fit guy, though I have atrocious ADD, I've never been the quickest on my feet in a conversation, and my personality feels a bit "cold". I don't feel I have any defects, but my joints do feel a bit "loose", for lack of a better word.
I never really considered how being born premature may have affected me, but as I started studying for a human biology degree I've started to think more about the possible epigenetic factors that influence development while in the womb, and maybe the added stress at birth from being separated in an incubator. Before I simply thought it would only impact somatic development, which would eventually catch up, but now I'm wondering if it may directly affect HOX genes.
Ive not really been able to find any good literature on the subject.
Does anyone possibly know how premature birth can affect gene signalling?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/64vy9i/how_does_premature_birth_affect_development/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dg63m9s"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"First of all be aware of correlation and causation - your ADD may or may not be related to premature birth. \n\nSecondly, epigenetics usually refers specifically to traits that occur due to chemical modifications of DNA that don't involve a change in the sequence, and that are heritable. I.e. epigenetics specifically refers to changes in germ line cells. It may also refer to the actual process of DNA modification without changing nucleotide sequence. But either way the majority of problems arising from preterm births will be due to pathophysiological effects as opposed to genetic ones. \n\nI'm happy to go into the pathophysiology of preterm birth disorders if you want, but I really don't think there's much to say on the genetic front. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
13l56g
|
how does spilled water left alone dry at room temperature?
|
ELI5 How does spilled water which has been left alone dry at room temperature?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13l56g/eli5_how_does_spilled_water_left_alone_dry_at/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c74wsa5",
"c74wt2s",
"c74x14c"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Water doesn't go into gaseous phase _only_ at boiling temperature. Evaporation can occur because at any given temperature, there will be _some_ water molecules with enough energy to go into gaseous phase.",
"Molecules in a liquid bounce move around inside the liquid. If you make the liquid hotter, the molecules move faster, and if you make the liquid colder, the molecules move slower. Water molecules that are near each other form weak bonds, kiiiind of like magnets pulling on each other (but not exactly). That's what causes two drops of water on a windshield to stick together when they hit each other. But if the water molecules are moving fast enough, they break these bonds.\n\nWhen you boil water, you're speeding up the molecules until all of them have enough energy to break the bonds. But what about your spilled water? It's not hotter than the boiling point! Well, in any pool of liquid, some of the molecules are moving fast, and some are moving slow. The average speed of the room-temperature spilled water is less than the average speed of a pot of boiling water, but some of the spilled water molecules will be fast enough to break their bonds. If one of these fast-moving molecules is near the surface of the water and moving in the right direction, it'll escape the puddle into the air. This is called evaporation. If you spread out the puddle more, you'll see faster evaporation, because you're giving more fast-moving molecules the chance to escape. Given enough time, all the molecules will eventually separate and the puddle will dry up.\n\n",
"Kinetic theory is an important idea in science: temperature is a measurement of the average energy of the atoms and molecules in something. The hotter it is, the more it's atoms/molecules are jiggling in place or zipping around, bouncing off of things. At different temperatures, molecules fall into different formations: solids, liquids, gasses. The main difference between liquids and gasses is that in a liquid, the molecules are moving slowly and stick to each other a bit, but in a gas, the molecules zip around fast enough that they aren't touching each other and can float around the room.\n\nLiquid water's molecules are moving too slow to bounce out into the air... usually. But let's say a water molecule is hangin' near the surface of the water and another molecule slams into it, shooting it out into the air. That water molecule just evaporated. It's a random process that depends on things like how much water is already in the air (humidity), how much water is exposed to the air (puddle vs. vase), etc. When you boil water, you are adding a buttload more heat that quickly \"encourages\" the molecules to book it out of there."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
22rjac
|
How were the christian kingdoms in the iberia able to beat back such a dominant muslim force ?
|
When i see a picture of the kingdom of Asturias in 790 i cant help but wonder how they drove back such a dominant force. Especially when i think about how small the christian kingdoms were in contrast to the muslim ones.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/22rjac/how_were_the_christian_kingdoms_in_the_iberia/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgpufur"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"Note that this isn't an answer to the whole scope of your question, but only for a certain period of the whole Reconquista.\n\nBy 1009, [Spain was divided between Al-Andalus and the christian Kingdoms (León, Pamplona, Aragón and the Coumty of Barcelona).](_URL_0_) The other half of Iberia was governed by the Caliphate of Cordoba, an independent muslim state. By 1009, the Caliph Hishan II was forced to abdicate. Afterwards, the Caliphate broke into a period of high inestability, with many small kingdoms claiming independence from the Caliphate, and creating the kingdom of Taifas. By 1031, the Caliphate of Cordoba disappeared, and the muslim part of Iberia wasn't unified, but divided in many small kingdoms who fought each other.\n\nThe christian kingdoms took advantadge of this situation, and pushed south to gain more land against the weakened mulsim kingdoms.\n\nBy the time that the muslim kingdoms had been reunified again, the christian kingdoms already had the upper hand in the Reconquista.\n\n---\n\n(I'm not an expert, and I may have missed/forgotten some key information)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Leon_1030.png"
]
] |
|
vb532
|
Hypothetically, if we could blow Venus out further from the sun, could it harbor life?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/vb532/hypothetically_if_we_could_blow_venus_out_further/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c52x70c",
"c52xygq"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Isnt the main problem with Venus the fact that its atmosphere is so thick and made up largely of greenhouse gases? So even if we somehow blew Venus out into the habitable zone, we would still need to introduce micro-organisms to change the composition of the atmosphere to be less toxic and to curb the greenhouse effect.\n\nAnd it is my understanding that we could, theoretically, already introduce these micro-organisms without somehow shifting the orbit of an entire planet. \n\nRegarding your second question, I dont think we can speculate if we could at some point in the distant future develop the technology required to move planets.",
"Like Smrti said above/below me, Venus would be nearly habitable in its current orbit if it weren't for the carbon dioxide atmosphere and sulfuric acid rain.\n\nMoving planets is hellishly difficult, though. [Here](_URL_0_)'s a post by one of my favourite sci-fi writers on the topic. Honestly, if you just want living space, it would be far easier to build colonies on Venus and just design them to cope with the high temperatures and acid rain. In fact, disassembling the planet entirely and using it for raw materials could well be easier than moving it (and it would certainly be more useful)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://qntm.org/moving"
]
] |
||
rycff
|
Helicobacter pylori?
|
Why did the name of Campylobacter pyloridis change to Helicobacter pylori?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/rycff/helicobacter_pylori/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c49m2gf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In 1989, RNA sequencing showed that it did not belong in the *Campylobacter* genus, so it was placed in its own genus, *Helicobacter*.\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicobacter_pylori#History"
]
] |
|
3dneft
|
Did Catholic Kings and Emperors go to confession? Do we know what they might have confessed, or if they ever had to do 'Hail Marys' as punishment, and so on?
|
It seems like a King, believed to be the divinely appointed ruler of the earth, would be see themselves as above reproach or real sin. And what rank of priest would have the right to judge their acts and assign punishment? Only a peer could do such a thing I would think.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3dneft/did_catholic_kings_and_emperors_go_to_confession/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct6v3n0",
"ct77c2t"
],
"score": [
104,
7
],
"text": [
"Medieval kings and emperors were very much obliged to go to confession and perform penance as needed. They were baptized and thus members of the Christian community bound to receive all the sacraments the laity received. They would confess to ordinary priests or bishops as they desired, though, just as other laity, if they committed certain sins, these could only be absolved by a bishop or the pope. The idea that kings were divine and exempt from human law—the “divine right of kings”—is a notion only forwarded in the 17th century. Medieval kings were bound both by human and divine law. \n\nThere are some very famous cases of penitent rulers. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, excommunicated the Emperor Theodosius I after he sacked Thessaloniki in 390 and killed several thousand people. He was forced to do penance for a few months. The two most famous examples of royal penance were Gregory VII’s excommunication of Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV in 1076. Henry had to petition the pope for forgiveness. He traveled to Canossa in northern Italy where Gregory was staying; he wore a penitential hair-shirt on the way and some say he walked part of the way barefooted. He stayed outside the castle in Canossa for three days before Gregory admitted him and absolved him. In 1170 over-eager knights in the retinue of Henry II of England murdered the Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket in his cathedral. Henry had to make a penitential pilgrimage to Canterbury in 1174 where he publicly confessed his sins (an action somewhat rare by this time) and received symbolic lashes with a rod from the assembled bishops and the 80 monks connected to the cathedral.\n\nKing Louis IX (d. 1270), later made a saint, regularly confessed his sins and received symbolic lashes from a whip by his Dominican confessor.\n\nSource: This is off the top of my head as a historian of medieval religion. I can give you some sources if you like.",
"If I could add to this question: was there any advantage to being the ruler's confessor? I seem to recall reading this in some fictional accounts of Versailles, where being the King or Queen's confessor would give that priest a great deal of political power...\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9va0f6
|
Where did the traditional image of Cleopatra come from?
|
Everyone recognizes the standard image of Cleopatra. Short black hair, bangs, sleeveless white dress with gold jewelry... my question is where did this image originate, how accurate is it, and has it changed through the years?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/9va0f6/where_did_the_traditional_image_of_cleopatra_come/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e9wyqvd"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Not to discourage any further answers but you'll probably enjoy these older posts by /u/cleopatra_philopater:\n\n[Most people see Cleopatra as an Egyptian, but she was actually Greek. What is her real story and how did we come to the legends about her?](_URL_1_)\n\n[Where did the popular image of Cleopatra with bangs come from?](_URL_2_)\n\nAnd this April Fool's post\n\n[Cleopatra gives rare insider look at her fashion routine?](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/88kk50/cleopatra_gives_rare_insider_look_at_her_fashion/dwlga9q/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=user&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=frontpage",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/66vomz/most_people_see_cleopatra_as_an_egyptian_but_she/?st=j1tfux1d&sh=ff63c2c2",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7gwxeb/did_cleopatra_vii_always_cut_her_hair_short_at/dqmu1zw/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=user&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=frontpage"
]
] |
|
6mvrgl
|
What happens to family surnames when someone horrible becomes associated with it i.e Hitler?
|
[deleted]
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6mvrgl/what_happens_to_family_surnames_when_someone/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dk4va8c"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Regarding the 'Hitler' last name at least, you should check out [this thread](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/39h72v/how_common_was_the_last_name_hitler_prior_to/"
]
] |
|
xf67q
|
how do they name guns and what do the numbers at the end of the names mean?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xf67q/eli5_how_do_they_name_guns_and_what_do_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5ltaip"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends. Some examples:\n\nWinchester 94AE (rifle)\nWinchester is the manufacturer, gun design patented in 1894 ('94). AE stands for \"angle eject\", allowing the shooter to mount an optic on top of the rifle\n\nGlock 17 (pistol)\n\nNamed after Gaston Glock, designer of pistol. 17 refers to the number of patents filed at time of production. \n\nTaurus PT709\nManufacturer: Taurus International Manufacturing\nPT: \"Pistole taurus\"\n709: model number\ncaliber: .380 or 9mm short\n\nOther Taurus Models: PT 111 (9mm) PT 145 (.45 cal) PT 732 (.32 cal)\n\nas you can see, the numbers associated with this brand sometimes are associated with a caliber designation, and sometimes are not. \n\nOverall, they are typically named \"Brand\", \"Model Number\", kind of like cars. (Chevy Aveo, etc, you get the picture)\nHope this helps. go to /r/guns for more information, they are real helpful."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2rhxfp
|
How are we able to know of the existence of exoplanets and even categorize them as "Earth-like" when we barely have images of Pluto in our Solar System?
|
Title is essentially the question, but as far as I know, [this](_URL_0_) is all we have until New Horizons reaches Pluto this year. How is it possible for us to know the chemical makeup of exoplanets and whether or not they are Earth like, or even know of their existence, when we barely have images of Pluto?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2rhxfp/how_are_we_able_to_know_of_the_existence_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cng7jrf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Its all about light wave frequency, when the planet moves in front of a star it is orbiting the light we see reflected off the surface of the plant gives off certain frequencies, which gives us an idea of its chemical make up. Also the relative position of the plant in its given system. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/science/pluto-20100204.html"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
2r1qrl
|
If we can only see 3 dimensions how do we know theres 10?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2r1qrl/if_we_can_only_see_3_dimensions_how_do_we_know/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnc5tvb",
"cncako3",
"cnck7nc"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A problem with this question is that it's not clear what 'dimension' means in a physical sense. If lots of people look at something unfamiliar, do you think they'll agree about whether something is a dimension? For example, do you think that electrical charge is a dimension? What about time?\n\nIn some situations, it turns out that the 'number of dimensions' can have physically measurable consequences. For example, in specific conditions, the way that temperature and pressure change in a gas as it expands are related to how many different ways the gas molecules can 'wiggle'. (_URL_1_)\n\nThere is an analogous relationship between 'degrees of freedom' and physically predicted values in some theories about fundamental particles, and in order for those theories to match the observed behavior of particles, there has to be a specific number of degrees of freedom. (The number of dimensions varies a bit from theory to theory. _URL_0_ )\n",
"Who told you there are 10? There's as yet no evidence for that. I believe some theories like String Theory purposit multiple dimensions (up to 26?) but again, no evidence (yet).\n\nIf you measure dimensions by what you can see, you may wish to consider time to be the 4th. You need FOUR coordinates to arrange a meeting: east/west, north/south, the altitude (the meeting spot may be a building with floors) and also a time for it to occur.",
"We don't know theres 10 at all. Leonard Susskind is one of the fathers of string theory and in one of his lectures on youtube he states that the fact that string theory predicts 10 dimensions is a huge problem, cause we can only identify 4. He talks about how it was 26 and we knocked it down to 10 and maybe we can knock it down to 4 eventually."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory#Extra_dimensions",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_index#Relation_with_degrees_of_freedom"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
e378h7
|
Did Athenian males have to complete mandatory military service time?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/e378h7/did_athenian_males_have_to_complete_mandatory/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f92djrh"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"There are two answers to the question, depending on what you mean by \"mandatory military service time\".\n\nIf you mean to ask whether all Athenian citizens in the Classical period were liable to military service, the answer is yes. When a male Athenian citizen turned 18, they would be enrolled in their deme registry. All the men on this registry could be called up to serve in the army until they turned 60. Since Athens had no professional military, men were called to arms when arms were needed; when war broke out, the taxiarch of each of the ten tribes (administrative regions) would be required to turn out a certain number of men for specific campaigns. If the levy was to march out in full force, every adult male citizen would be drafted.\n\nThere is some controversy over how the system of selection worked, since our sources suggest there were 2 different systems. The first, conscription *ek katalogou* (\"from the list\"), suggests that the taxiarch hand-picked men from the deme registries to meet his quota, probably giving preference to the physically fit or politically reliable, or those he wanted to have a share in the glory or the spoils. The second was conscription by age group. While those aged 18-59 were all liable to serve, Athenian field armies rarely contained men under 20 or over 45 years old; in order to filter out the young and the old, it had to be possible to group them by age. The most likely process (also known at Sparta) was to keep separate lists of men who had come of age in a certain year, and only call up the years you wanted. The size of the army could be determined by how many years you called up without compromising the number of young, physically fit men in the ranks (so, for a small army you might call up only those aged 20-25, but for a large army those aged 20-40, and so on). Traditionally, scholars have argued that conscription by age group replaced conscription \"from the list\" in the 4th century BC, but more recently it's been argued that the age groups must have existed before that time, and conscription \"from the lists\" does not denote some radically different system.\n\nFailing to appear at the mustering point when you were called up to fight was a crime known as *astrateia*, draft evasion. Those found guilty of *astrateia* lost certain citizen rights: they were banned from the public square and from receiving any public honours in future. It is possible that they were stripped of their citizen rights entirely, a punishment known as *atimia* (literally \"dishonour\"). But people were usually only persecuted if they were already public figures, and rarely convicted.\n\nIf, instead, you want to know whether there was a fixed period in a male Athenian citizen's life when he was in permanent military service (like modern conscription), the answer is probably not, except during a brief period of about 335-322 BC.\n\nIn that period, between the defeat of Athens at Chaironeia in 338 BC and their defeat in the Lamian War of 322 BC, we have solid evidence (both literary and in the form of a huge body of inscriptions) that Athens subjected all male citizens who turned 18 to a mandatory two-year programme of military training and service. The first year was spent training with weapons of all kinds, including catapults. The second year was spent in the watch, garrisoning the extensive network of border forts and guarding the walls of the city. At the end of this two-year period, each recruit was issued a shield and spear by the state. They would then be eligible for military service until age 60 as before, but now as a trained reservist rather than an untrained militia levy.\n\nThe tricky question is whether this system existed *before* 335 BC. Scholars have debated this for decades, and a lot depends on how you want to interpret the evidence. On the one hand, we have references to an organisation with the same name as the later mandatory training programme existing in the 370s BC, and a reference to the watch as early as the late 5th century BC. Clearly the later programme didn't come out of nowhere; it probably built on an already existing system of military training for young citizens. But we also have explicit evidence from Xenophon that, as late as 355 BC, recruits in this programme weren't being paid for their service. Now, most Athenian households wouldn't have been able to just miss out on the labour and income provided by a young man for two years; Xenophon points out that these recruits aren't doing their training properly because they aren't getting paid, so they can't afford to spend as much time on it as they should. Most likely, the earlier programme was voluntary, and only the rich could take part. This means that, at best, a small minority of Athenian citizens were actually getting this training. \n\nIt wasn't until the reforms of 335/4 BC that the programme was made mandatory, almost certainly in exchange for a daily wage so that all citizens could participate without suffering a crippling blow to their household income. This would also explain why we have zero inscriptions listing recruits to the programme before 335 BC, and a huge body of them for the ensuing decade (after which they completely disappear again). The programme had changed; participation rates had exploded; and suddenly it was a matter of civic pride, not just an elite fancy, to train yourself for war."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1flhjm
|
What did Japan know about the outside world before European contact?
|
Did their isolationist policies result in a view of foreigners based on rumor and hearsay? How far did their maps go?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1flhjm/what_did_japan_know_about_the_outside_world/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cabkege"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Japan became really isolationist only after European contact, and during the whole sakoku period (1633-1853), there was still contact with the Dutch, Chinese, Ryūkyū Kingdom (present day Okinawa) and Korea, so they got information on the world from several sources. Those interested in the outside world would be able to find some information. \n\nBefore European contact (1543), there was a lot of interaction with China and Korea, so most of the Chinese geographical knowledge would be available to the Chinese. Japanese pirates [ranged far](_URL_0_) in this era."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wokou.jpg"
]
] |
|
168bcp
|
What has changed about the way Western parents would name their children? As we go back in time, are names given based on meaning?
|
I live in the United States, and it seems to me that the majority of people either name their children after someone important to them, or that they simply like the sound of the name. It also seems that knowing the meaning of a name isn't significant. I couldn't recall the meaning of someone's name off the top of my head nor would I expect anyone else to, but perhaps that's just me.
While I'm learning about Greek and Roman history, it's not uncommon to see what someone's name means. This has given me the impression that this was either intentional or significant at the time. Was it more common in the past to name a child based on the meaning of a name? If my perception concerning recent naming of children is correct, and people in the past named their children differently, why did this change?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/168bcp/what_has_changed_about_the_way_western_parents/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7tocmb",
"c7tospc",
"c7tqsoc"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Giving names based on meaning is still very much in practices in the Middle-East and South Asia. Even when people are named after others, the meaning of the name is still known. For example: Muhammad meaning one who is praised, Khalid meaning one who has a long life, Ali meaning one who is elevated, etc.",
"Given the most common names, I the change in the English-speaking world was probably Christianity. At some point, people started to give their children biblical names, whose meanings in their original languages are generally unknown to those naming.\n\nHowever, generally I think it has more to do with maintaining archaic features in language. Many names in English once meant something in much older forms of English, but the language changed enough to make the meaning opaque. So even among names not imported from other languages, names lose their meaning when language changes anyway.\n\nIt's also important to note that a lot of names were imported from the Normans, even if they were ultimately Germanic in origin. I looked up a bunch of name etymologies on lists of common names, and quite a few presumably lost a connection with their meaning before they were English at all. Some, too, are imported from the Normans in general. In that case, disconnect with the name's meaning would have more to do with people no longer using Norman French.\n\nAs /u/sln26 noted, in many parts of the word giving a name based on meaning is still common. For example, Israelis are often named after either biblical figures (whose meanings are fairly clear in Hebrew, even if that's not why they were selected), positive adjectives, or generally nice nouns--things found in nature are common. The practice isn't unheard of in English, too, though it is rather uncommon.",
"Patronyms and the tradition of naming your son after his grandfather was very common in Sweden until the mid-1800s. In my family I have a LOOOOOONG line of Erik Anderson - > Anders Eriksson - > Erik Andersson - > Anders Eriksson and so forth. Since this created a lot of people with similar or even exactly the same name, using the farmstead's name as part of the name to distinguish between people. For example, my great grandfather was known as \"Anteors Erik Andersson\" as the farm was known as \"Anteors\" (or \"Anteols\")."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6z1c0s
|
why are the recommend servings written on food so little?
|
For example, a medium bag of chips has five recommended servings.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6z1c0s/eli5why_are_the_recommend_servings_written_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dmrp5jc",
"dmrp70p",
"dmrpbqb"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
14
],
"text": [
"People see a small bag or box and assume it is one serving, but the manufacturer knows that if you saw the total calories/sodium/cholesterol you wouldn't eat it so they make it multiple servings so they can show you only a fraction of the total calories, etc. \n\nWhen you see this practice it is a good sign that you shouldn't be eating whatever is in the package. ",
"Something that is very high in calories will have a small serving size. Also high in fat, something high in fat will have a small serving size. You are not supposed to eat your entire daily amount of calories (combining carbs & fat) from one bag of calorie-dense low-nutrient chips.\n\nPopcorn makes for a much bulkier snack, one serving of popcorn is a lot more volume than one serving of chips.",
"It's a strategy by the manufacturer to show the calories per serving as small in the consumer's eyes. I've noted a package containing more than 500 calories will be split into two servings. \n\nBut if the contents are cookies or easily divided into a quantity usually consumed in a sitting then they'll base serving size on this serving size. \n\nThere is probably some variance by manufacturer as it's not a precise definition."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
49dq17
|
Where battles in the middle ages just as chaotic as they seem in the movies?
|
Just a mass of people fighting each other? How did they choose who to fight? There must have been a lot of mistakes where soldiers would kill their comrades if that's the case.
Edit: WERE*
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/49dq17/where_battles_in_the_middle_ages_just_as_chaotic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0rcxed"
],
"score": [
22
],
"text": [
"See [here](_URL_0_) for a recent post of mine on this subject. The article linked ITT by /u/Silver_Agocchie is also useful, and cites extensively from Phil Sabin's \"The Face of Roman Battle\" (*Journal of Roman Studies* 90 (2000) 1-17) which is one of the most important publications shaping the modern understanding of how ancient battles worked.\n\nThe short version is no, they were probably nothing like what you see in the movies. The casualty rate in the sort of chaotic melee we see in movies would be far too high; no man in his right mind would be willing to face such slaughter. In reality, battles would have been far more tentative, with prolonged sporadic violence between mostly defensive formations, until one side or the other lost its nerve."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/48pumt/did_the_people_in_the_front_lines_of_ancient/"
]
] |
|
363z9y
|
how are restaurants able to keep soda carbonated and ready to serve?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/363z9y/eli5_how_are_restaurants_able_to_keep_soda/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crai0on",
"crai1a0"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They don't. Inside the soda machine are containers of syrup and a tank of compressed CO2. The two are mixed together at the time the drink is dispensed. On a small/home scale, you can look at a SodaStream system to see how it works. ",
"There are tanks of CO2 that are kept with the syrup for the sodas. When you order the soda, a machine pumps the two ingredients together in proportion and thus soda. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1lh69p
|
If I shut a plastic bottle full of tap water, how long will it take for the water not to be safe to drink?
|
I know algae, fungi and bacterial will enter the water just from contact with the air. I am trying to settle a debate with a friend over whether or not the water will be safe to drink. Will the bottle itself degrade before the organisms have grown noticeably? Will the growth of organisms only take place over a few days or weeks before they are all dormant or dead form lack of resources? If the bottle was full of vitamin water, how much would the outcome change?
For the purposes of the question, assume very little gas transfer, no external motion, and the bottle is next to a window.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1lh69p/if_i_shut_a_plastic_bottle_full_of_tap_water_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbz9ghn"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Assuming the bottle of water has never been opened after factory production, bacteria are not an issue.\n\nWhen it comes to the degradation of the plastic (Polyethylene), two substances may contaminate the water. The first one is acetaldehyde, which only results in a change in taste, the second one is antimony and is slightly toxic. Though normally would never appear in PET bottles in concentrations close to being harmful. \n\n > Acetaldehyde is a colorless, volatile substance with a fruity smell. Although it forms naturally in some fruit, it can cause an off-taste in bottled water. Acetaldehyde forms by degradation of PET through the mishandling of the material. High temperatures, (PET decomposes above 300 °C or 570 °F), high pressures, extruder speeds (excessive shear flow raises temperature), and long barrel residence times all contribute to the production of acetaldehyde. When acetaldehyde is produced, some of it remains dissolved in the walls of a container and then diffuses into the product stored inside, altering the taste and aroma. This is not such a problem for non-consumables (such as shampoo), for fruit juices (which already contain acetaldehyde), or for strong-tasting drinks like soft drinks. For bottled water, however, low acetaldehyde content is quite important, because, if nothing masks the aroma, even extremely low concentrations (10–20 parts per billion in the water) of acetaldehyde can produce an off-taste.\n\n\n > Antimony (Sb) is a metalloid element that is used as a catalyst in the form of the compound such as antimony trioxide (Sb2O3) or antimony triacetate in the production of PET. After manufacturing, a detectable amount of antimony can be found on the surface of the product. This residue can be removed with washing. Antimony also remains in the material itself and can, thus, migrate out into food and drinks. Exposing PET to boiling or microwaving can increase the levels of antimony significantly, possibly above USEPA maximum contamination levels.[10] The drinking water limit assessed by WHO is 20 parts per billion (WHO, 2003), and the drinking water limit in the USA is 6 parts per billion.[11] Although antimony trioxide is of low toxicity when taken orally,[12] its presence is still of concern. The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health investigated the amount of antimony migration, comparing waters bottled in PET and glass: The antimony concentrations of the water in PET bottles were higher, but still well below the allowed maximum concentration. The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health concluded that small amounts of antimony migrate from the PET into bottled water, but that the health risk of the resulting low concentrations is negligible (1% of the \"tolerable daily intake\" determined by the WHO). A later (2006) but more widely publicized study found similar amounts of antimony in water in PET bottles.[13] The WHO has published a risk assessment for antimony in drinking water.[12]\n\nI don't know whether PET degradation due to heat exposure would ever lead to antimony concentrations in the liquid reaching toxic levels. \n\nWhether bacterial growth in the bottle reaches hazardous levels of course depends on how much air has entered the bottle after being opened, the presence of saliva, bacteria in that saliva.. many unknown factors.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1gu2b4
|
why are interest rates set by the fed and not the banks making the loans?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gu2b4/eli5_why_are_interest_rates_set_by_the_fed_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"canterx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The Fed does not set interest rates. That is done by the market itself. The Fed sets the rate for bank to bank loans that fall under Federal regulations. The Fed rate does have some effect on what banks charge in interest (especially long term and mortgage), but it is not a direct correlation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1deyp4
|
my rent keeps going up but my salary does not, what is the societal expectation or gain?
|
Are poorer people supposed to move out every few years so the wealthy can move in? Is this some sort of "step" in gentrification? What happens when all the neighborhoods are gentrified?
EDIT: I worded headline poorly. My bad. TIL: there will always be poor people and we will always live somewhere- not gonna fret about it anymore.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1deyp4/eli5_my_rent_keeps_going_up_but_my_salary_does/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9pmzv9",
"c9pn8vl",
"c9pnnzb",
"c9poqhw",
"c9pqarn",
"c9pqequ",
"c9pqiqy",
"c9ptoej",
"c9pv4il",
"c9pvxnl"
],
"score": [
22,
3,
64,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not like someone's specifically planning for your rent to go up without your salary going up. It just happens to work out that way.",
"This might happen some years.\n\nOther years, your salary might go up and the rent stay the same.\n\nBut I've noticed that, where I live, large houses are being split into several smaller flats or apartments. In my parents generation, they and most of their middle-class friends lived in similar three-bedroom semi-detached houses, whereas in my generation lots of people live in two bedroom houses or flats, despite having similar middle-class jobs to my parents.\n\nWhether this is true in other parts of the world, I don't know. It may not even be true in my area, it's just my observations of people I know.",
"Christ said, \"The poor you will always have with you.\" You need not worry about every neighborhood gentrifying. By the time the last ghetto is turned into chic lofts, the chic lofts of today will be the ghetto.\n\nGenerally speaking the only thing your landlord and your employer have in common is you. Your employer will pay you what he thinks your work is worth to him, and your landlord will charge you what he thinks other people would pay to use his property. \n\nThe way they find out they are wrong is by you mentioning it to them, and if they don't change, you leave. If you don't leave, you are proving that they are right.\n\nThere is no guarantee for rents or wages outside of minimum wage laws and some cities with rent control ordinances.",
"One thing to bear in mind is that rents are currently rising at a faster pace than they would otherwise be: more people are renting rather than buying in the wake of the housing collapse, and because the recession has hurt people's purchasing power, and so the demand for rental property has gone up. This means it's a landlord's market, and they can afford to charge higher rents. On the other hand, there are many areas of the country where buying property is extremely cheap.",
"My house payment is less than $700, but if I were to rent a similar house in my neighborhood, the rent would be over $1000. Anybody who is able to do so should consider buying instead of renting. As an added bonus, your house payment never changes (assuming you don't get one of those stupid ARM or balloon loans). ",
"One thing that affects rents is property taxes. These taxes are typically a percentage of the value of the property. When they raise these taxes, which they seem to do darn near every year, they are increasing the percentage of your property's value the owner has to pay. And like you, I cannot figure out how they can just keep jacking this. Are we going to eventually pay 100% the value of our property in taxes? Seems ridiculous.",
"Your employer is only concerned with the bottom line. And if not giving you a raise gives them more, or they cannot afford a raise, too bad for you. Why would they not be able to afford a raise? Sluggish economy, etc. Or just bad management. Don't worry, those bad managers will always get their pay raise or severance package.\n\nYour landlord needs to pay his own bills. Utilities, loan repayments, etc. And if he's investing, then he will raises the rent whenever he can to match the local rises rent prices. You can't afford it? Too bad. He can find someone who can.\n\nAll your employer cares about is money, not you. \nAll your landlord cares about is money, not you.\n\nMoney makes the world go 'round.",
"The expectation is that a person will get raises, promotions, and better jobs over time.\n\nAlso, that you will eventually buy a house with a fixed rate mortgage, which won't go up even if your salary does.",
"You don't get automatic increments for inflation? That's unfortunate. It's been standard at every job i've had.",
"Not all the neighborhoods are gentrified. Even if the only place left is a mud flat under a sewer drain pipe, there will be places. \n\nOf course, land developers and landlords don't really give a fuck what happens to people, and in many jobs, employers feel the same way about their workers. \n\nIf you want to know what I think, it's because we give away money to the rich and they either hoard it, or spend it snatching up property (increasing demand, and thus housing prices) to milk. And we do this because our government consists of people rich enough to get elected or powerful. And that in turn is because we are by and large a society of ignorant fucks who only pay attention when someone spends a fuck ton of money to ensure they get our attention. Of course, our shitty underfunded education system (see giveaways, above) certainly doesn't help that fact, either.\n\nAhem. < /rant > "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
88tnwr
|
Does the moon/sun's gravitational pull affect how high I can jump height on earth?
|
The moon and sun have effects on gravity on earth, which can be seen with the tides, human physiology, and more. My question is if the pull of the moon and sun have enough of an effect on the gravitational acceleration here on earth that I could be able to jump slightly higher when the moon/sun are overhead than when the moon/sun are underneath us?
Thanks,
rainbows82
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/88tnwr/does_the_moonsuns_gravitational_pull_affect_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dwnkrvn",
"dwnza1i"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"There is a very very weak effect called the Earth Tide (similar to the more familiar water tide) which is mainly due to the moon and the sun reshaping the Earth as they orbit it and modifying its gravitational field slightly. This is a very small effect, on the order of 40 parts per billion.",
"Overhead and underneath are actually the same. In one case you are pulled more towards the Moon/Sun than Earth (making jumping easier), in the other case Earth is pulled more towards it than you (making jumping easier as well, as this time you jump away from them). In terms of Moon/Sun, the hardest time to jump is when they are at the horizon. This is a completely negligible effect, however.\n\nIf you want to jump high, go to the equator. The rotation of Earth both flattens the Earth (your distance to the center increases) and gives you centrifugal acceleration, in total it feels like you have 1% less weight. This might give you a centimeter in height compared to the poles.\n\nJumping while inside a plane flying eastwards is even better."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3swiqg
|
Why were public executions considered entertainment in for the longest time?
|
Whenever I hear of an execution in history on TV or in a podcast, it always seemed like a bit of a spectacle. Something you could even bring your family to. Was it always like this? Was there resistance to this idea? Anyone who thought that it was wrong to have public executions?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3swiqg/why_were_public_executions_considered/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx1k03b",
"cx1n26v"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The initial reason for public executions- as well as any cruel and unusual punishment- was that it was supposed to impress upon all, especially criminals, the awful consequences of crime. Displaying the bodies, or even just heads, of convicted criminals was thought to do the same. There was also a sense of retribution- that the people needed to see a criminal pay for his crime. \n\nFor England, by the later 18th century it was noticed by many that police ( a rather recent invention) reduced crime better than the threat of awful punishments: and slowly punishments became more rational. It was also noticed by reformers that public executions were often celebratory affairs, with people whooping and cheering the criminal, or threatening the guards. And they were sometimes so popular that there were disasters- on a few occasions of very notorious criminals being hanged, there was such a huge crowd and crush that [dozens of spectators were killed, suffocated or crushed](_URL_0_). In short, they weren't presenting citizens with a sobering example, they were entertaining them with violence. Between these two developments ( and with the establishment of Australia's Botany Bay colony making transportation another punishment in the later 18th c.) hangings became less common and less public. Hanging offenses were greatly reduced in 1861, and the [last public one was in1868](_URL_1_).",
"hi! you may be interested in these earlier related posts about public execution, which focus particularly on public attitudes\n\n* [Why did we used to be so fine with such brutal and public executions?](_URL_2_) - featuring /u/Talleyrayand\n\n* [During medieval times public torture and execution was commonplace, how did this effect the general population, did they become desensitized to gruesome death?](_URL_3_) - featuring /u/idjet\n\n* [What is this wheel on a pole with corpse that I see occasionally in medieval/renaissance art?](_URL_0_) - featuring /u/idjet and /u/Whoosier\n\n* [How were executioners viewed by society in late medieval and early modern Europe?](_URL_1_) - featuring /u/Arab-Jesus\n\nif you have followup questions on locked posts, ask them here & include the relevant user's username so they'll be autonotified."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.exclassics.com/newgate/ng481.htm",
"http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/endpublic.html"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/28tv6l/what_is_this_wheel_on_a_pole_with_corpse_that_i/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2quk3r/how_were_executioners_viewed_by_society_in_late/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1xon7j/why_did_we_used_to_be_so_fine_with_such_brutal/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2ea0xf/during_medieval_times_public_torture_and/"
]
] |
|
5o213b
|
what are the differences between a condo, townhouse, and apartment?
|
What classifies a townhouse as a townhouse, condo as a condo, etc? They all seem to have similar qualities/features.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5o213b/eli5_what_are_the_differences_between_a_condo/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcg1mlu",
"dcg1obm",
"dcg60oa",
"dcg9hxr"
],
"score": [
4,
34,
61,
3
],
"text": [
"In most of the U.S. in standard American English, an apartment means something designed for renters, while condos and townhomes are designed for homeowners.\n\nThere are exceptions - for example you can rent a condo from that unit's owner. But a large apartment complex probably has a management office, whereas condos and townhomes don't because the residents are the owners and they don't pay rent, so there's no need for a manager.\n\nAll three are buildings with more than one unit.\n\nApartments and condos are typically 2 or more floors, and quite often units don't have their own \"outside\" entrance, i.e. you have to first enter the building and then enter your own unit.\n\nTownhomes are typically made up of 2-or-3-story units that each have their own outside entrance. A townhome is basically just like a house but with no side yards, because one or both sides of your house share a wall with your neighbors.\n",
"Not sure if this applies everywhere, but where I live: \n\nAn apartment is a unit in a building that you rent. You do not buy an apartment. A landlord owns the building and is responsible for its upkeep and generally makes all the decisions for the building and the units.\n\nA condo is a unit in a building that you buy. Although, you can rent it from the owner, but generally a person owns a condo. Each person owns their own condo and a group of condo owners in a building have a condo committee that makes decisions for the building democratically. Individual owners can make changes as they please to their own units, within certain limits set by the committee.\n\nA townhouse is also a unit in a building that you buy (but again, can be rented from an owner). Townhouses are generally several units joined together in a single row, as opposed to an apartment or condo building which is stacked. \n\nApartment and condo buildings look similar. Townhouses are houses that are connected in rows.",
"Condos (aka condominiums) are a form of ownership. There are apartment condos, townhouse condos, and even detached condos. Anyone who describes a condo as similar to an apartment simply hasn't experienced the variety of condos and doesn't understand the legal meaning. All condo means is that you generally just own outright part of the structure (typically just the interior) while you have shared ownership of the rest (exterior walls, roof, land, yards, driveways, etc.). A condo association is essentially the corporation that manages the shared areas and enforces the covenants on the private areas, with each owner being a member of the association. \n\nAn apartment is a unit in a multistory, multi-family building. Typically each apartment is entirely on one floor but there are fancier duplex apartments, with units extending two stories. Historically apartments had a single owner who rented the units out to different families, but condominium apartments started becoming popular in the last half of the 20th century. \n\nA townhouse is a small urban home, usually two or three stories, but single family, and with walls touching the neighbors' walls. Sometimes it will be a single wall between houses, but in such cases there needs to be some legal mechanism to deal with the shared wall. \n\nI grew up in an apartment building in NYC that was owned by a real estate company and was strictly rental. Later on, after my parents retired and moved, the entire set of apartment buildings was converted to coops (basically a NYC concept, somewhat similar to condos), with the tenants given first crack at occupying them. \n\nIn Boston, you can find traditional apartment buildings. You can find buildings that started out as traditional apartment buildings and were converted to condos. Because housing is expensive in Boston, there are many cases of taking a large 3 story Victorian house and converting it into a condo with three units, one on each floor. \n\nMy brother, out in the Bay Area (Calif.) bought, with friends, a small four unit garden apartment building. (\"Garden apartment\" means a two story apartment building, versus regular apartment buildings which are taller.) They removed the exterior entrances for the upstairs apartments, installed interior staircases, and converted the four rental apartments into two townhouse condominiums. This shows how slippery the definitions can be. But if you remember that condominium is a legal concept, not an architectural one, you'll never go wrong. \n\nEdit: typo",
"I live in Australia and we don't ever use the term, \"condo\".\n\nAn apartment is usually a unit in a high rise building. These are usually in the inner city areas although they've started building them in large, mid - outer suburbs. They can be rented or bought and can be residential only or mixed in with commercial offices/retail spaces. They're usually only 1 floor high but double story penthouses isn't uncommon. Most apartments are occupied by groups of uni students, young people and professional couples. Some of them have a balcony and the penthouse might have a larger outdoor space. There's usually a body corp who is paid a fee to maintain shared areas.\nWe also have really ugly, huge government housing known as \"commission flats\" in the inner suburbs. They're technically apartments but I've never heard them referred to as that. They're not places you'd ever want to reside in. \n\nA unit is a group of small houses, usually built in a vertical line or a U shape, on a long piece of land. Although they can also be arranged other ways such as in a horizontal line on a wide block or scattered over a large piece of land. They can either be joined together or completely seperate. They usually have a small backyard/courtyard but this isn't always the case. Sometimes they're double/triple story but the individual units are only 1 level. They're usually pretty similar if not identical to each other on the inside and out. Old, cheap units are more likely to be occupied by poor people, young adults, uni students and people on VISA's. They exist everywhere and can be rent controlled, owner occupied or government housing. There's usually a body corp who is paid a fee to maintain shared areas. \n\nSubdivided properties are very common here and although they're technically a unit, I see them as being different. Houses were built on large blocks in the suburbs so people now often build a fence in their backyard and build a new dwelling behind the original. They differ from units because they usually have seperate driveways. Families often live in these because they're affordable whilst being bigger than a unit/apartment. They can also be rented or owned and don't usually have a body corp.\n\nTownhouses are usually newer, bigger and multy level units that share a wall with at least 1 other house. They often have small backyards, garages and their own driveway. They can be rented or owned and I don't think they have a body corporate.\n\nTerrace houses exist in inner city areas. They're very skinny houses that are usually joined to other terraces. They can be single or double frontage and some of them are double/triple story. Theyre usually just a long hallway with rooms coming off one side all the way down. Some have small yards and the majority don't have driveways or garages. Lots of them are hugely run down and rented for rediculous prices to young people and uni students. A lot of them are also heritage listed so you're limited in what you can do to them. There's also a lot that have been renovated/updated and they're amazing but unaffordable for the average person.\n\nEstates are all the rage over here at the moment. They're large areas of houses that look the same/similar, they're built by the same company and sold off mostly to new home buyers/young families/retired couples or investors renting them out. They're built quickly and cheaply in outter suburbs, usually when farmland is sold off after being approved for rezoning. The houses are built close together, they often have small yards, the roads are narrow and parking is minimal although most have a garage and driveway. I don't recommend them but I understand their purpose. They usually have a body corp that look after the gardens and make the rules about what you can/can't do to your property.\n\nLast but not least, single dwellings are still the most common residential building here. Unlike some areas in America, almost EVERY property has a boundary fence on at least 3 sides (back and sides), with a gate/fence connecting the front and back yards also common. They usually have a driveway and many have a garage or carport. They also typically have a good sized backyard. They're rented/owner occupied by families, couples, uni students, friends etc. If you own the property, you're only restricted by council regulations which differ depending on the area you live in. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
50s2le
|
the difference between local banks, national banks, credit unions, etc and why should i care?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50s2le/eli5_the_difference_between_local_banks_national/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d76kgy3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Generally, anyone can open an account at local or national banks. If you travel, it will be easier to get more cash from your accounts/find a bank/atm if they are with a larger chain. Think about it like your favorite local restaurant vs McDonalds. Both provide the same general services, but their actual products might be slightly different. You might get better customer service at one or there might be better deals.\n\nA credit union on the other hand is like a food court at your place of work. If you work somewhere where people make good money, there might be better options than if you went to McDonalds because the people there could afford better meals and they don't have to cater to people who can only afford the dollar menu. They would also know what food people who work for your company are most interested in and be able to provide that."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
o8jp4
|
How are extraordinarily high temperatures contained/dissipated ?
|
Take the [Z-Machine](_URL_0_) for example. How do you contain 6.6 billion degree temperatures? I feel like it would melt nearly anything in an instant. What materials would be needed to create a heatsink that could deal with those incredible temperatures?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/o8jp4/how_are_extraordinarily_high_temperatures/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3f8jpx",
"c3f8rnx"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
" > How do you contain 6.6 billion degree temperatures?\n\nNot to hijack your question, but this got me thinking: is there an \"upper limit\" for temperature? ",
"These things are generally confined by magnetic fields in vacuum. Heat doesn't transfer through a vacuum, so the interior of the chamber doesn't get melted by the heat of the plasma.\n\nIn collisions at CERN and Brookhaven National Lab, temperatures have reached the trillions of degrees, but it's only in the volume of an atom that things get that hot."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_machine"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
55cwlr
|
how do certain types of music sound good to some and unbearable to others?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55cwlr/eli5_how_do_certain_types_of_music_sound_good_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d89mm5f",
"d89nfo2",
"d89u0nl",
"d89uf2i"
],
"score": [
14,
7,
8,
9
],
"text": [
"What you're really asking is, why is aesthetic subjective?",
"Well, there's a psychological thing where the more you're exposed to something the more you like it (in general). So if you grew up listening to country, you're probably more likely to like it as an adult, but perhaps find something totally different, like screamo, weird.",
"i'm a musician and artist myself. i personally believe it may have something to do with validation; you expect specific sequences of notes and when you hear them it gives you some sort of personal confirmation on some core level we have a hard time analyzing. just a theory.\n\ntldr: you heard the notes you'd expect, and that makes you feel good about yourself.",
"It's harder for someone to enjoy a piece of music if they do not recognize the pattern.\n\nFor some genres with very complex patterns, it usually takes someone who recognizes the pattern to enjoy it, not everybody does.\n\nSimpler patterns, such as in pop music are deliberately simple, so that most people like them to some degree.\n\nAlthough simpler patterns expire faster."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ahcixb
|
why must my car be a "sauna" in winter, or else my windows are all fogged over with zero visibility?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ahcixb/eli5_why_must_my_car_be_a_sauna_in_winter_or_else/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eed9hso",
"eed9xls",
"eedhhjx",
"eeduy1t",
"eegyjbe"
],
"score": [
4,
9,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Humidity in your car will precipitate out onto your window (like dew) because the window is almost as cold as the outside. By heating up the air you increase the window temperature as well as increasing the moisture capacity of the air (hot air can contain more moisture than cold air) because the air can hold more moisture and the window is not as cold it's less likely to fog up.",
"In the winter, the outside air is almost certainly colder than the inside of your car. When the warm air inside hits the (cold) window, it cools down quickly and any water in that air condenses into a liquid form, forming fog (tiny water droplets coating the inside of the window).\n\nHeating the windows with the defroster can make it warmer and less likely to \"shock\" the water out of the air. More important for defogging the windows is turning on the air conditioner (yes, even with the heat on). One of the main things an air conditioner does is dehumidify the air. Thus, you're spraying the window with dry air, which gets rid of the fog and keeps it from forming again. You can defog a window with cold air with the AC on...try it! \n\n",
"Your car doesn't *have* to be a sauna, you might just be using the system inefficiently.\n\nIf your car has auto defog, use it (and set the temperature to something you're comfortable with).\n\nIf your car has manual controls, set them as follows:\n\n* Output vent: Defog/windshield (or the combination of defog & floor vents if you want).\n* Input: Fresh/outside air. Any light labeled \"recirculation\" or with the icon of a curved arrow inside the car, should be **off**.\n* A/C compressor: **On**. This is the part many people don't understand, they think that the AC is for cooling the car in the summer. But it also has the effect of reducing humidity, which defogs the windows.\n* Fan: On so that the air reaches the windshield. To quickly defog you can turn the fan to its highest setting, then turn it back down to medium or medium-low when the fog has disappeared.\n* Temperature: *You can set this to whatever temperature you're comfortable with*, as long as it's not lower than the outside temperature. It doesn't have to be all the way up. I normally start with 50/50 cooling/heating and then adjust from there.",
"This isn't true of your car. Turn your heater down and fan up. The windows will defog.\n\nYour car should also have a button that allows air to come in from outside or recirculate the air from inside. Make sure you are drawing fresh air from the outside.\n\nBecause you are breathing you are humidifying the air. This water condenses on the cold windows. If you make the whole care very hot, then the windows will also get hot and the water won't condense.\n\nBut there is a better way. The air from outside has very low humidity. you just need to get that air into the car. You could blow it in cold if you wanted, the only reason to warm it a little is for your comfort.",
"Don't forget you breath when in your car. When breathing the exhaled air has a higher humidity than the air you inhaled. So you humidify the air in your car with every breath you take.\n\nWhen you heat up the windshield in your car water will not or only sparcely condensate on it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
116jqd
|
how do aircraft manufacturers deliver smaller planes (that cannot fly across the ocean ) to other continents ?
|
I hear Boeing sells a lot of 737s. How do they get them to customers in places like Europe and Asia, which would require flying over oceans that may be beyond their range ? I'm guessing they could ship them by sea ( inefficient due to wingspan ), assemble them on site, use add-on fuel tanks to extend their range, or maybe there's some special route to Europe that a 737 can fly, with stopovers ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/116jqd/eli5_how_do_aircraft_manufacturers_deliver/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6k0hf9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"1. Ranges for passenger aircraft have large safety margins\n2. Not having cargo, passengers, or even an interior increases range\n3. Flying from Newfoundland to Iceland is about the same as flying from Denver to New York"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1l7n48
|
If Jupiter has so much mass, why is it still a gas planet and not a solid??
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1l7n48/if_jupiter_has_so_much_mass_why_is_it_still_a_gas/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbwlbek",
"cbwq8s4"
],
"score": [
9,
5
],
"text": [
" > If Jupiter has so much mass, why is it still a gas planet and not a solid??\n\nBecause most of the material of which it is made is has low atomic mass and high vapor pressure. The rocky planets farther in (including Earth) are composed mainly of refractory elements that have higher atomic mass low vapor pressures and high melting/vaporization temperatures. \n\nIt's entirely likely that Jupiter has just as much (probably more, actually) refractory material as Earth, etc. -- but the body of the planet is much, much larger and the lighter elements dominate the overall structure.\n",
"It's largely made of liquid metallic hydrogen, due to the high pressures once you leave the upper layers. It's called a gas giant because it's mostly made of hydrogen and helium, known to us as gasses, and because its visible parts are all gas--not because the majority of the planet is actually in the gas phase. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
170phl
|
do chefs have to like the food they cook?
|
For instance: if a chef hates eating asparagus but has to cook something with it for a menu item.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/170phl/eli5_do_chefs_have_to_like_the_food_they_cook/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8154ux"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They don't have to like it, but they should be able to appreciate what others like in it, so they can make cooking decisions that reflect those tastes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
bywwrx
|
how is it possible that extinct species are "brought back to life"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bywwrx/eli5_how_is_it_possible_that_extinct_species_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eqmu4pi",
"eqn6b89"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Outside of science fiction movies, it isn't currently possible. Theoretically, you could use cloning methods to insert DNA from an extinct species into the egg of a existing close relative.",
"Essentially, it works the same way as cloning a living animal would. It requires you to have good quality DNA available, so is only really feasible when working with very recently extinct species. This is (one of) the reasons why there has been little tangible progress towards cloning woolly mammoths, despite much media hype. The only example I know of where an extinct species was cloned is the [Pyrenean ibex](_URL_2_), which is really more of a subspecies with several living close relatives anyway. These animals went extinct in 2000, and in 2003 an attempt was made to clone some using tissue samples taken from the last living individual before she died. You can read an article about this [here](_URL_1_), or the original scientific publication [here](_URL_0_). Out of a total of over 400 embryos the researchers created, 57 were implanted in surrogate females, of which 7 actually resulted in pregnancies. And of these 7, only a single one made it to term; it was born by Caesarean section, but died a few minutes later due to some birth defects.\n\nI'm sure that with further efforts, we could successfully get living individuals of this species and others that recently went extinct, but I think it's important to consider the ethics of this kind of work. It seems pretty clear that even in this best case scenario (a species that had been extinct for only three years, and for which frozen tissue samples from a living individual were available for use), getting an actual breeding population of these individuals established would take a tremendous amount of work, and might just be impossible. Though this kind of research is definitely interesting, I think at a certain point it's important to question what can really be gained from it. If it's too inefficient to actually reestablish any extinct species (at least with current methods), then it seems cruel to bring back a few individuals who will likely experience short and lonely lives in a world which may not even match the one they evolved in."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093691X08007784?via%3Dihub",
"https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2009/02/news-bucardo-pyrenean-ibex-deextinction-cloning/",
"https://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2015/10/938806_1_ibex_standard.jpg?alias=standard_900x600nc"
]
] |
||
1n10ab
|
When a car (in movement) hits a stationed car (same type) face to face, will the damages on each car be different?
|
My first intuition would be NO. But I know nothing on momentum in physics.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1n10ab/when_a_car_in_movement_hits_a_stationed_car_same/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccezd1v"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I have read the replies, and I feel I should mention the car in motion will have an engine, transmission, and tires/wheels that more in motion. It might not be much different, but certainly the wheels/tires will have angular momentum much different from the stationary vehicle. The axles, camshaft, and a few other parts will also differ. Might not be much difference, but there is more potential energy. I would think the stationary vehicle will receive slightly more damage. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
24q3ln
|
Did past (before 1800s) heads of state visit other nations, for whatever reason, like heads of state do today?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24q3ln/did_past_before_1800s_heads_of_state_visit_other/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch9olpt",
"cha3w0o",
"cha432o"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Sigurd I, King of Norway has his journeys chronicled in the [Heimskringla](_URL_0_). While he campaigned in Palestine, he spent many years journeying to and from the Holy Land as a guest of various kings and emperors, travelling through England, Spain, Sicily, Constantinople, Bulgaria, Hungary, Pannonia, Suabia, Bavaria, and finally Denmark before returning home.\n\nIf the saga is to be believed, he was an honored guest of these courts and was often given sumptuous feasts and gifts. The Byzantine Emperor (Alexios I, I think) threw games in his honor. Lothair III, the Holy Roman Emperor, \"received him in the most friendly way, gave him guides through his dominions, and had markets established for him at which he could purchase all he required.\"\n\nHistorians do debate the historicity of the Heimskringla, although the Saga of Sigurd and his brothers is towards the end of the book, it was still written some 100 or more years after the events described. As far as I can tell we can't discount the Norweigan Crusades actually occurring, though, and the journeys and monarchs describe make sense in that context.",
"In 1520 Henry VIII of England travelled to France to meet the French King Francis I ; an event that became known as the \"Field of the Cloth of Gold\" due to the splendour of the tent cities erected as each king tried to outshine the other. The two kings even wrestled (Francis won).\n\nThey were supposed to be discussing a treaty of peace (and maybe an alliance against the Emperor) but nothing came of it- they were back at war with each other as usual before long.",
"Other than as part of a military expedition of conquest it was uncommon, but not unheard of. The example red-team gives below of a crusader king is a good one. The difficulty of travel and the instability of a monarch's grasp on power would have been major deterrents to leaving the home territory prior to the nation-state period. \n\nA notable example of a meeting between heads of state in the pre-modern era was Henry VIII's meeting with Francis I at the \"Field of the Cloth of Gold\" in 1520. This meeting was to solidify the new terms of peace between the countries after years of war. The site of the meeting was English-held, located in modern French territory, and so was probably an effort at finding neutral ground. Henry and Francis met again in 1532. This is in contrast to some later monarchs, like George III, who never left the British Isles. \n\nAnother example of a pre-modern head of state visiting another country was John VIII Palaiologos, the next-to-last Byzantine emperor, visiting Italy in 1439 in an effort to rally western support for defending Byzantine independence from the Ottomans by trying to repair the rift between the eastern and western church. A notable result of this visit occurred because he was accompanied by Gemistos Plethon, a Byzantine scholar who did a great deal to introduce Classical Greek learning to the west. \n\nI'm sure other examples exist, but these two are the ones I remember in particular. By the mid-19th century travel had become easier, allowing for more frequent contact between monarchs. Prior to this period most business was conducted via ambassadors, or correspondence."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimskringla"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1j8j7n
|
Why did WW2 ruin the economy of the British Empire but revitalize that of the United States?
|
Or is that too simplistic a description?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1j8j7n/why_did_ww2_ruin_the_economy_of_the_british/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbc7yzu",
"cbc8gzq",
"cbcbrcu",
"cbcd2nc"
],
"score": [
5,
27,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"This is an incredibly complicated question because there are so many factors involved. Even prior to American \"involvement,\" American agriculture and industry underwent rapid expansion to meet the demand of supplies to the Europeans. The Battle of the Atlantic meant that Britain could no longer reliably receive goods from its imperial holdings, which greatly undercut its effectiveness. In order to maintain American \"neutrality\" (which prevented the Axis from destroying the merchant marine fleet for a while, the Americans introduced \"lend-lease.\" The American government would pay for war equipment and then \"lend\" it to her Allies. This stimulated the industrial sector of America while making the other Allies indebted to her. Britain did not make the final payment until 2006. \n\nAnother factors include \"the Blitz\" which destroyed civilian infrastructure. Americans have not had to deal with large scale infrastructure destruction since the Civil War. An additional factor was that six years of the most intense fighting in history, the British people were no longer willing to fight colonial wars. ",
"-The UK had already been damaged horribly by the losses of The Great War. While the UK had lost over 2% of its population during WWI, as well as endured the most expensive war in history for 4 years, the US had only lost a little over .1% of its population from 1917-1918 and only was on a \"total war\" economy for a little over a year. This of course would have different impacts on the two countries in the following generation(s). \n\n-The drain of its losses against Germany in 1940, and then the subsequently bloody Battles Of Britain, Of The Atlantic, The Blitz, all took their economic toll. The US never quite had to deal with its cities being bombed, the resulting starvation, and all the treasure it requires to make each city well defended.\n\n-While eventually American assistance proved generous (ridiculously generous, actually) this was only after Britain had spent itself nearly bankrupt buying weapons. \n\n-The world wars as well as a changing world culture made maintaining a large far flung Empire more difficult. In exchange for assistance from its increasingly independent-minded colonies, Britain made promises of greater autonomy. This would prove to be among the reasons of the death of British India, which was its prized possession. Also, in exchange for greater help from the United States, the British had made promises of decolonization and greater openness to US companies within the British Empire and Commonwealth. Some have argued that lend-lease was something of a deal of large amounts of aid during the war in exchange for the US taking a chunk out of the economic benefits of the British Empire after the war. The US on the other hand didn't have these headaches of governing a large empire with all that goes with that (the exception being The Philippines.)\n\n-The British defeats during the early years of the war dealt a huge blow to the prestige and myth of British power. This became apparent to Churchill in the later conferences with Roosevelt and Stalin. He found himself the junior of the Big 3. Since the US and USSR had obviously done most of the work winning the war, and had emerged from the war two vast military powers, it made the British look all that much weaker and forced them into a position of trying to keep up to the shrinking table of world powers. It was also harder to justify maintaining a large amount of people under British subjugation/influence when they had just spent the last few years stopping Hitler and Japan from building their own great empires and enslaving millions of people. \n\n-The biggest reason, however, is probably that the US had just been a much richer country than the UK was for decades by the 1940s. Even during the darkest days of the Depression in the US had had the largest economy in the world. WWII was also the perfect kind of war for the underachieving, sleeping, industrial giant United States to fight. WWII was a war of tanks, ships, planes, guns, bullets, atomic bombs. The US with its large factories, auto plants, bright scientific minds, was perfect for this type of conflict as they could easily transfer this industrial base and great pool of minds from making cars and inventions for civilian life to making war materials and inventing military technology. That isn't to say Britain couldn't build anything or didn't have bright scientists of their own, they obviously could and did, but I would say the US was in a much better position to meet these war needs. ",
"I will answer your question as 'the UK economy'.\n\nIn addition to the obvious damage to national infrastructure and manpower, the [Anglo-American loan](_URL_1_) had an interest rates the UK couldn't cope with. The UK government only finished repaying them in 2006.\n\nThough to be honest the UK economy wasn't great when the war started and in my opinion the [1945-1951 Clement Atlee ministry](_URL_0_) was the UK's most successful ever, so it could be argued that WW2 didn't fundamentally 'ruin' the UK economy in that it functioned as a launchpad for the revolutionary reforms in the postwar years.",
"WW2 wasn't the only factor. One of the biggest industrial changes in the first half of the 20th century was the transition from steam power to electric power. Electric powered industry represents a very significant inflection point in the industrial age, and unleashed massive increases in productivity and total industrial output.\n\nThe transition occurred just before WW2, during the 1920s and '30s. And industrial facilities, e.g. factories, made the transition in one of two ways. Either by retrofitting previous facilities that had been steam-driven to use electric machinery or through all-new construction of purpose-built electric driven machinery. Importantly, even the retrofit facilities could not achieve the levels of productivity and production that the new facilities could, and as a consequence in the US, and many other industrial nations, essentially all of the retrofit facilities were shut-down within a fairly short period (in addition to the steam-powered facilities, of course). However, due to many factors the British were unable to achieve the same turnover in their industrial base and did not build as many new, electrically powered facilities during the '20s and '30s. They simply could not close down all of the old, outdated plants without significantly impacting their total production capacity. And as a result they had an outdated industrial base at the end of WWII and were at an economic disadvantage.\n\nCompare that to the situation in Japan, which had most of its industrial base destroyed during WWII, and thus had the combination of misfortune and opportunity to be forced to rebuild. In the process they ended up with an industry based on some of the newest equipment in the world by the 1960s, and leveraged that advantage (in productivity, capacity, and capability) to become an economic super power despite having lost the largest war in history."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attlee_ministry",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-American_loan"
],
[]
] |
|
37x5q8
|
Was Alaska considered a colony by the Russians? And if so, then what did they produce/extract from there?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/37x5q8/was_alaska_considered_a_colony_by_the_russians/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crqjxzl"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"**Yes. Furs.**\n\nThrough the end of the Russian era, the principal product of Russian America (Alaska) was the fur trade. Of paramount value were sea otters, and the Russian-American Company traveled across the Pacific Ocean in pursuit of these otters, ranging as far as southern California to find them.\n\nThe sea otter trade was a largely triangular trade. Furs from Russia were sold in China, where proceeds purchased Chinese products including porcelain and fine luxuries. These were then shipped back to Russia (or Europe at large), where they were sold for large profits. Some of these profits were then put back into the Russian-American company, paying expenses incurred in Alaska.\n\nThe triangular trade wasn't an exclusively Russian thing. British, French and particularly American traders made quite a bit of money from it. This had a lot to do with politics. Russian ships were all but barred from trading in Chinese ports, which meant furs had to travel to Okhotsk (Vladivostok was not established until the very end of the Russian period) before being transported overland to Kiahkta, the isolated trading post that was one of the few places where European-Chinese trade was allowed.\n\nFrom there, Chinese goods had to travel overland the length of Russia to reach Europe. Similarly, supplies had to travel the length of Russia the opposite direction to reach Alaska, where the Russians were almost perpetually near starvation until Americans began arriving on the west coast of North America in significant numbers.\n\nOnce the Pacific Coast of North America began to be settled, supplies could come from California. Furs could also be sold in California, but transporting them to markets like New York and Philadelphia wasn't much easier than shipping them to St. Petersburg. Instead, **ice** was a hot seller (pun intended) in San Francisco. In the 1850s, ice harvested from the Kodiak archipelago was the largest product shipped from north to south.\n\n***\nAnd if you want to argue it, there's a case to be made that Alaska remained a colony for most of the American period as well ...\n\nIf you're interested in this topic, I recommend *Russians in Alaska: 1732-1867* by Lydia Black and Ilya Vinkovetsky's *Russian America: An Overseas Colony of a Continental Empire*. I feel the latter is inferior to Black's work, though. For fur-specific books, try *Furs and Frontiers in the Far North* by John Bockstoce or *Fur Traders from New England: The Boston Men in the North Pacific*."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
b16kci
|
the idea of silver/gold/platinum
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b16kci/eli5_the_idea_of_silvergoldplatinum/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eijmjdx"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Reddit gets money, poster gets a false sense of achievement, and the giver gets to feel good about themselves for spending money "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4ucwqf
|
why do flies gather around the eyes of cows and horses but not around human eyes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ucwqf/eli5_why_do_flies_gather_around_the_eyes_of_cows/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5oo0ed",
"d5oq6vw"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"We have hands to rub excess mucus away and prevent buildup of globs of it in which bacteria could turn that lovely eye snot into a super cheesecake for flies. Cows and horses cannot do this so they have essentially fly dinner plates under their eyes.",
"It's incorrect to say that they don't. What's more correct is to say that they tend not to, unless we're too sick, weak (young) or exposed to defend against them properly. \n\n[Photo proof here. Fair warning, though...person pictured is a child](_URL_0_)\n\nWhen we're not incapable, as others have suggested, we have hands to mitigate the problem. I'd add that we also have the advantage of social / cultural systems that teach us how to make tools to shoo them away (see: Australian cork hats) and buildings or nets when everything else is inadequate as a long-term solution."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jaya_Chidambaram/publication/8558359/figure/fig1/AS:280029364801545@1443775611763/Figure-1-Moisture-seeking-Musca-sorbens-flies-congregate-around-the-eyes-of-an-Ethiopian.png"
]
] |
||
3lbc2w
|
do euro countries still keep track of there old currencies? why or why not?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lbc2w/eli5_do_euro_countries_still_keep_track_of_there/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv4sdsm",
"cv4suo8"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"what do you mean? do european countrys that are in EU and use euros as official currency keep the tract of the previous currency they used? the answer is no becouse you cant keep track of somthing that no longer exists.",
"I don't know exactly what \"keep track of\" entails, but I can say with confidence that they don't do it.\n\nThe old currencies are no longer in circulation and, in some cases, the presses used to print them are no longer even around."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
68ntu2
|
What is the prevailing opinion on "Why the West Rules... For Now" here on AskHistorians?
|
(An RE-POST of my previous question to see if Monday gives me better luck!) I just finished reading "Why the West Rules... For Now" and found it both interesting and troubling. I decided to pick the book thanks to the recommendation I found here on it. It was a worthwhile read, but I couldn´t shake the feeling that something was severely missing. The strongest segments of the book are (unsurprisingly) those dedicated to his fields of expertise. The chapter about the Roman and Han Empires is particularly good in bridging both "sides" into a single credible narrative. Where the book starts to falter, though, is in the latter sections. The more we approach the pivotal Industrial Revolution "moment", the less culture, social constructions, and science seem to matter, for it was only a matter of time and geography.
By this last point, I don´t mean to criticize the fair approach Morris takes regarding China (and the East) and its merits against the old conception of Western superiority. The problem lies, at least in my opinion, with the reduced, almost non-existent, role everything social seems to play the more we approach the present.
The final chapters, too, seem to play against the book´s favor. While the final analysis seems consistent with the model Morris built along the book, the conclusions seem to be a tad black and white, with two possible scenarios that seem equally troubling. According to Morris, the paths are embracing Singularity or expect catastrophe at the hands of natural, political and social disaster. Worse still, both scenarios are, by the timeline proposed in the book, no more than 30-40 years away. It is certain that the dynamics of world politics are constantly changing, but to argue that by 2050-2070 countries like Germany or France are going to start speaking Chinese en-masse or forgetting about Plato in favor or Confucius seems to avoid the reality that the same didn´t happen in China, India or Southeast Asia during the "Western" rule. Some level of influence can definitely exist like it has happened across history, but Morris proposed timeline appears both rushed and disproportionate based on the amount of energy a society captures or the size of its cities. This last point is only meant as an example, one among other issues and successes along the book.
Regarding the question, I would like to hear the opinions of others in the forum, mostly as a way to exchange points of view. The question doesn't go along the path of the "Morris = Diamond" matter I have seen asked before.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/68ntu2/what_is_the_prevailing_opinion_on_why_the_west/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dh06t53"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"[I liked it](_URL_0_). And I think you are misunderstanding his point at the last chapter, I don't remember him ever saying that in 2070 Germans will in unison cast Goethe into the fire in favor of Chinese novels. He does say that the lopsided cultural balance between West and East will start altering, which I think is objectively true, but his claim about the East \"overtaking\" the West is mostly based on GDP projections--it is a pretty narrow claim related purely to his chart, really (I understand in his follow up book he went a bit wild with it, but I haven't read it).\n\nThat being said, both of those are a bit outside of the twenty year rule (unless the twenty year rule is an absolute vale, so we can talk about 2037 and on? Need mod weigh in!). I found his account of the Industrial Revolution to be actually pretty conventional, basically a shortened version of Pommeranz."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryResources/comments/y66i8/book_why_the_west_rulesfor_now_by_ian_morris/"
]
] |
|
7hp0oq
|
How do particle accelerators sync with the particles?
|
When a particle accelerator like CERN is accelerating a particle how do they time the RF Cavities with the particle?
Should I change this to the engineering category?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/7hp0oq/how_do_particle_accelerators_sync_with_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dqspi93",
"dqufcp5"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"The particles are often bunched before injection into a series of accelerating cavities. So you can tune the frequency of the cavity to the desired value, and have the buncher pinch off bunches of particles in synch with the RF in the cavity.\n\nThen you also have the advantage of [phase stability](_URL_0_), where whether a particle arrives a little bit early or a little bit late, there is a restoring force which pushes it towards being in phase with the rest of the bunch.",
"The nominal orbit length and the particle speed is known very precisely and the cavity frequency can be tuned a bit (e.g. to keep up with the acceleration). Individual particles always deviate a bit from the nominal orbit, but there you have the phase stability mentioned in the other comment already: Particles that are behind are accelerated a bit less, which means they are bent more by the magnets and make their turn more along the inner part of the beam pipe, that allows them to catch up with the other particles. There is also the other operation mode where particles that are behind have to be accelerated more to be faster - an accelerator has to use exactly one of these options, you can't mix them and you can't work without them.\n\nThe LHC has an interesting operation mode when protons and lead ions are collided. The lead ions have a lower energy per nucleon (as they have neutrons that contribute to inertia but not to the force in magnets), which means they are slower and their revolution frequency is different. How do you synchronize the RF cavities? Well, luckily the LHC has separate cavities for both rings. How do you synchronize the bunches to make them collide always at the same point? At the initial (injection) energy this doesn't work. Only at higher energies the speeds are similar enough to keep the collision point at the detectors."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://cds.cern.ch/record/1982417/files/phase-stability.png"
],
[]
] |
|
5pwpeq
|
why are some nfl teams generally better than others over extended periods of time? aren't new teams drafted every season?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pwpeq/eli5_why_are_some_nfl_teams_generally_better_than/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcudvhq",
"dcugxuj"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"New players are drafted not teams. The teams with the best draft strategy over several years normally end up being better. Many players that are drafted are not as good as hoped and others are better than expected. Basically it's a crap shoot. The best teams have good front office management (drafting, hiring staff, etc), good coaches and good players.",
"you vastly over estimate the turnover. The best players stay with their team on the order of 10 - 15 years. Great coaches also stay for a long time (decades).\n\nWhile there is turnover on a roster from season to season, those are often fringe positions that simply do not matter much. The key talent is usually repeatedly there season after season. Brady, Rodgers, other top qbs, etc are not being replaced season to season.\n\nThus, if you look at teams over these longer time periods, you do definitely see the ebb and flow of how good they are. Who knows, after brady and belichick are gone, the patriots dynasty probably does end."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4ik2fq
|
What's the origin of Irish gypsies/ travellers and do they have any relation to Romani gypsies?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4ik2fq/whats_the_origin_of_irish_gypsies_travellers_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2z125a"
],
"score": [
79
],
"text": [
"A very good question that—would that I had a better answer for it.\n\nI have had little cause to study any theoretical ethnogenesis, unfortunately. I *can* tell you Traveller origins are not well understood, with many competing hypotheses; ranging from the pre-Celtic, to Cromwellian or Famine displacements. However, those that point towards origins in prehistorical or non-indigenous groups do not appear to be supported by genetic analysis:\n\n > Comparison with other European, Roma, and Indian populations shows that the Travellers are genetically distinct from the Roma and Indian populations and most genetically similar to Ireland, in agreement with earlier genetic analyses of the Travellers. However, the Travellers are still genetically distinct from other Irish populations, which could reflect some external gene flow and/or the action of genetic drift in a small group that was descended from a small number of founders.^1\n\nWhatever its origins, Traveller culture is quite venerable. A ready anecdote to illustrate is that when the brilliant and prolific music collector Tom Munnelly chanced to meet a Traveller singer named John Reilly in 1965, Reilly would sing a song for Munnelly he called [*The Well Below the Valley*](_URL_0_). Munnelly, awe-struck, recognized the ballad as version of one that had been lost to the settled oral tradition for *one hundred fifty years*.\n\nTraveller singing traditions were particularly vibrant, making them [ideal sources for musically inclined collectors](_URL_1_) like Munnelly—though unfortunately those traditions have faded considerably today.\n\n***\n\n^(1 • Relethford, J. H. and Crawford, M. H. *Genetic drift and the population history of the Irish travellers*. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 150: 184–189.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrdrQpJIm-M",
"http://www.itma.ie/itmashop/product/songs-of-the-irish-travellers"
]
] |
||
1e1hy8
|
How many mechanisms are there in the brain that induce sleepiness?
|
I'm curious about how receptors the brain has that induce sleepiness. For example, taking narcotics make some people sleepy, but that can release histamine, but at then again, taking an anti-histamine (like Benadryl) also makes some people sleepy. Further, taking Ambien for an extended amount of time doesn't seem have a noticeable effect on one's tolerance to Nyquil for drowsiness. If y'all know anything on this subject, I'm nowhere close to a doctor, but I'd be thrilled to understand a little bit more!
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1e1hy8/how_many_mechanisms_are_there_in_the_brain_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9wwx2b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Free adenosine's the major endogenous signalling molecule. As an organism stays awake, levels increase and this makes you sleepy. Caffiene is an antagonist at this receptor, hence why it makes you less sleepy.\n\nAmbien's an agonist at GABA, similar to benzodiazapenes and alcohol. It increases inhibitory nuerotransmission globally, so it effects the same regions that adenosine inhibits, but also other regions. Hence why such drugs result in motor function issues, cognitive deficits, and even breathing problems.\n\nAntihistamines are not sedatives, however, some of the first generation ones like diphenhydramine(benadryl) are also anticholinergics. Rather then increasing activity of a major inhibitory transmitter, it decreases activity of an excitatory one. These drugs really aren't that good of sedatives at all.\n\nAll sleep aids or sedatives rapidly lose effectiveness over time. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2kupzo
|
How do irregularities (such as sunspots) develop in the Sun?
|
The Sun is so massive, shouldn't it be roughly uniform rotationally?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2kupzo/how_do_irregularities_such_as_sunspots_develop_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clp7zi1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The cause of sun spots is due to the charged surface of the sun swirling around and allowing a magnetic field to be created similar to [eddy currents](_URL_0_). Each sun spot is produced in pairs and when these pairs come into contact with one another a process called [magnetic reconnection](_URL_2_) occurs and a [coronal mass ejection](_URL_1_) is the result. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronal_mass_ejection",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_reconnection"
]
] |
|
17j43c
|
How was Trudeau compared to Mulroney, more beneficial to Canada?
|
Canadian History
In other words, how was Trudeau being very beneficial to Canada?
Also, how was Mulroney not being beneifical to Canada?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/17j43c/how_was_trudeau_compared_to_mulroney_more/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c860w3j",
"c8620vx",
"c863o0x",
"c865fem"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
7,
6
],
"text": [
"This seems like a very difficult question to answer, since \"beneficial\" is such a difficult to measure term. I can't really answer this question, but can you specify what you mean by \"beneficial\"?",
"I believe that 100 years from now, Trudeau will be remembered principally for the Constitution Act, 1982, and especially for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. \n\nPrior to the Constitution Act, 1982, Canada did not have ultimate control over its own constitutional order. (For example, the British Parliament had to pass the Canada Act, 1982 in order to cement the Constitution Act, 1982 as part of Canada's constitution). \n\nI'd probably say that the three most important parts of the Constitution Act are the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the \"Rights of the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada\", and the effect that both these sections has had on the legal environment of Canada.\n\nThe Charter is beneficial in that its predecessor, the Bill of Rights, 1960, wasn't really a Bill of Rights in the American, constitutional sense. Rather, it was an Act of Parliament, able to be revised by any future parliaments and also not enjoying supremacy or primacy over any other statues. So if a provision in the Bill of Rights and a provision in a different law conflicted, the courts wouldn't be bound to accept the Bill of Rights as more fundamental. *Bliss v Canada* [1979] is probably the most famous case where this happened. Stella Bliss said that the *Unemployment Insurance Act*'s denial of her claim for benefits associated with pregnancy and childbirth constituted sex-based discrimination, illegal under the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court of Canada essentially had two competing statutes, and prevented Bliss from collecting benefits. *\n\nThe Aboriginal Rights aspect of the Constitution Act, 1982 is not part of the Charter. However, it affirms that \"The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.\" Two important points: This means that the treaties signed between Aboriginal groups and the Crown are part of Canada's constitutional framework. Second, there are specific \"aboriginal rights\" which exists independently of either historical treaties or the Charter. There's a good primer on what \"aboriginal rights\" mean [here](_URL_0_). Some of the highlights: the Constitution Act, 1982, did not *create* these rights, but rather is the recognition of existing rights, the government has a duty to meaningfully consult with Aboriginal groups before it takes any action that might negatively affect an Aboriginal right, and Aboriginal title exists as a meaningful and *sui generis* type of land ownership.\n\nFinally, the Constitution Act, 1982 has vastly increased the importance of the Supreme Court of Canada in the country's legal environment. Prior to the Act, the Court was much more deferential to parliament, and had more limited ability to affect the implementation of laws. The post-1982 SCC is much more willing to \"read into\" the laws certain protections or language that is implied by the Constitution Act, 1982. \n\n* This is actually slightly more involved, the SCC held that the *Unemployment Insurance Act* wasn't discriminatory against women, but merely limited the benefits that could be claimed by people who were pregnant. Two later cases, *Brooks v Canada Safeway Ltd* and *Andrews v Law Society of British Columbia* used the Manitoba Human Rights Act and the Charter's s. 15 equality provisions respectively to establish how equality under the law was to be interpreted in the post-Charter legal environment.",
"I disagree with the premise of the Question. I don't think you can really say that Trudeau was very beneficial to the country while at the same time Mulroney was not beneficial to the country. Yes, Trudeau enacted the Constitution Act of 1982 and the charter of rights and freedoms, but at the same time his economic mismanagement placed the country in a very difficult situation and his National Energy Policy greatly alienated Western Canada and made the \"winning coalition\" for the Liberal Party that much more challenging to achieve, as well as creating a divisive wedge issue in Canadian politics that still exists to this day.\n\nAt the same time Brian Mulroney, though misjudged with his mega-constitutional political gambles and reinvigorated Quebec separatism, almost leading to Quebec leaving in 1992; the genesis of this anti-federalist sentiment pre-dated Mulroney and can even be somewhat blamed on Trudeau not getting Quebec's signature on the constitution. \n\nAs for positives Mulroney did some great things for Canada. His environmentalist legacy has been quite beneficial for the country (see the Canada-US Acid Rain treaty, which helped abate the Maple Die-back that Ontario and Quebec were facing); The GST in future decades will be seen as a necessary economic measure that helped he next Liberal Governments (Chretien and Martin) help fix the economy; and last of all the FTA and NAFTA were important measures for the Canadian economy and the manufacturing sector of Ontario.\n\nEach Prime Minister had his strengths, weaknesses, and failings, but neither one was objectively better -- or greatly more beneficial to the country -- than the other.",
"This is probably homework. [He did it in /r/math too.](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.law.ubc.ca/files/pdf/enlaw/primer_complete_05_10_09.pdf"
],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askmath/comments/16sars/need_help_with_parabolas_please/"
]
] |
|
42hprk
|
what is the format of the afl/nfl from the start of season to the superbowl?
|
I'm European and I know of the terms AFL/NFL/SuperBowl but that's about it.
When I say format I referring to teams in each/no. of games/is progression to SuperBowl based on wins or points?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42hprk/eli5_what_is_the_format_of_the_aflnfl_from_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czaengm"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"AFL isn't a thing anymore; it merged with the NFL many years ago.\n\nThere's a preseason, but results there don't affect a team's progression. The season proper starts with the \"regular season.\" Each of the 32 teams plays 16 games over a 17-week season. The teams are organized into two conferences (AFC and NFC) of 16 teams each, and each conference has 4 divisions of 4 teams each. A team's regular season games are as follows:\n\n* 2 games each against the other three teams in their division\n* 1 game each against all four teams in another division in the conference (the divisions are paired up, so all four teams in one division play all four in another)\n* 1 game each against the teams in the two remaining divisions in the conference who had the same division rank last year. That is, if the NFC North division is paired with the NFC East division this year, then the team that won the NFC North last year plays the winners of the NFC West and NFC South divisions from last year.\n* 1 game each against all four teams in a division in the *other* conference. Again, divisions are paired up, so every team in one division plays every team in another division.\n* Lastly, one bye week where they don't play a game.\n\n------\n\nAfter the regular season, it goes to the playoffs. The playoffs are done by conference; a team won't play anyone from the other conference until the Super Bowl. The team with the best record in each division goes to the playoffs; also, each conference has two *wild cards*, which are the teams in the conference with the best records who did *not* win their division. The teams are seeded in each conference; the division winners are seeded as 1-4, and the wild cards as 5 and 6, according to records (it is actually quite common for the wild cards to be better than the worse division winners; if you're second place in a good division, you're probably better than the winner of a bad division). Then, the 3 seed in each conference plays the 6 seed, and the 4 seed plays the 5 seed in the first playoff round (1 and 2 seeds have a bye). The losers are eliminated. The 1 seed then plays the lowest-seeded team remaining, and the 2 seed plays the other remaining team. Again, the losers are eliminated, and the winners of this round play for the conference championship.\n\nAfter the conference championship is decided, the champions meet in the Super Bowl, which is the NFL championship game."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
dpriy4
|
what are raw photos?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dpriy4/eli5_what_are_raw_photos/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f5xtnj2",
"f5xu4uy",
"f5xw047",
"f5yg6o3"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Some cameras can give you both RAW and JPG photos. JPG photos are processed in the camera and give you a jpg file afterwards. RAW files are much larger because they contain much more data in the file which allows the user to process it themselves using a program like Photoshop to adjust things like exposure, brightness, contrast, sharpness, noise reduction, etc.. These RAW files MUST be processed using software after to produce the final jpg image, jpg being the most used file format for images. \n\nRAW files have none of the camera's processing settings applied to them. They are exactly what the camera \"sees\".\n\nMost professionals will shoot in RAW format so that they can then process the photos after and get them exactly how they want them to look. A jpg is much more limited in being able to be post processed.",
"A RAW file contains the raw data that the camera sensor captured.\n\nDigital cameras contain an image sensor - an electronic device which detects light and converts it into electrical signals. These electrical signals need to be processed in order to convert them into an actual image file such as JPEG, during which some of the data is lost. The RAW file however contains these values with minimal processing, allowing the photographer to work with them using a proper program (such as Adobe Lightroom) which does the same processing to convert the raw data into a useful image, but allows configuring different parameters in order to achieve the best result.",
"A RAW image refers to the proprietary file type from some camera's manufacturer. It is a non-compressed digital image that contains all image data captured by that camera. In other words, the data for *each and every pixel* is preserved during storage, with no compression or editing. That means that an image taken with a 20 megapixel camera (20 million pixels) will be quite large (perhaps around ~50 MB in size)\n\nMost cameras also save to JPEG, which is a compression method often used in digital imagery. It is a lossy-type compression, which means data is lost every time you compress an image into a JPEG (and why JPEGs get that pixelated look after having been compressed multiple times). Essentially large groups of similar-color pixels are grouped together during compression, making our final file-size much smaller. A 20 megapixel image might only be ~4-8MB when saved to a JPEG, for example, especially if a decent amount of the image is similar in color (i.e. a blue sky taking up much of the background).",
"So to add to the other answers, the main question would be: why would you want to take pictures in RAW?\n\nThe answer is because they're way, WAY more correctable. We're not talking about getting the last 10% of quality for professional publication, but that RAW allows to make amazing corrections that are impossible otherwise.\n\nRAW have a far better ability to correct exposure mistakes. A RAW image that's too dark to see is often correctable into something that actually looks quite good, while the JPG isn't.\n\nRAW is also much better in that it captures the original, unfiltered color data from the image. So if your camera got the balance wrong, and your photo is all tinted blue or yellow, a RAW allows you to fix things as if nothing had gone wrong in the first place. You can color balance a JPG but the result will be much worse.\n\nSo, if you're doing something important and not very repeatable (eg, like making a trip somewhere special), RAW is very worth the trouble because it can allow recovering from a lot of problems that otherwise are unfixable.\n\nThe downside is that it's bigger, and requires post-processing. But it's certainly possible to just go with the post-processing defaults and not bother changing anything unless there's something that really needs fixing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
hs86p
|
What can politicians do to help scientists?
|
I ask because my future career will involve politics(one way or another), being my father and his father before him both were state representatives I will most likely follow in their footsteps but going further than they had. I've had the luck being born in this time period and seeing(reading as well) such inspirational scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson, Richard Feynman, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Carl Sagan, and etc. If the chance comes to enter political arena, science would be top priority especially helping those scientist who don't have the opportunity to have a platform like Dawkins. My fear is America currently values science too little and this is unfortunate as science played an integral role in making this country into what it is today.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hs86p/what_can_politicians_do_to_help_scientists/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1xx5g6",
"c1xx7ah",
"c1xxm6u",
"c1xxn49",
"c1xyb5c",
"c1xymff",
"c1xypz4",
"c1xz6r9",
"c1xzw85",
"c1xzwkp",
"c1y03mg",
"c1y196k",
"c1y2jsm",
"c1y4xwe"
],
"score": [
41,
22,
18,
8,
5,
3,
4,
16,
3,
4,
6,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"* stop others from trying to legislate truth\n* pay school teachers more\n* fund science, basic research with minimum strings attached EXCEPT force the results to be free and accessible to everyone",
"When it comes to funding science, understand that while politicians live on four year plans, scientific projects usually takes a lot longer. Many good (and bad) projects have been canceled due to change in the political climate, not based on scientific merit.",
"For the love of God listen to us. If there is mass consensus on something read: evolution. Then it's probably right. Not to mention that just because something is suggested or concluded which doesn't cohere with your world view is not to say that it isn't valid. Individual experience is nothing relative to the rigour of good experimentation.",
"I'm a field researcher, and we end up doing alot of public outreach. By proxy, really, you can't pull up to a boat launch with the electrofishing boat without getting some interest and questions.\n\nThe thing that constantly blows me away is the lack of understanding about the scientific method in the general population. Making science easily accessible to the public is crucial. The concept of the scientists locked up in the ivory tower of academia needs to be crushed. \n\nDuring field work, my crew makes an effort to explain our research in easy to understand terms, and most importantly, explain our work in terms of how the work might impact the folks we're talking with. \n\nFrom a politician's prospective, things like arranging public forums with scientists, question and answer sessions, and channeling funding for public outreach and education would be helpful. Anything that helps make science accessible and cool again would be fantastic.",
"I think scientists would do well to offer more thorough explanations for their research. I cringe whenever I'm watching a scientific documentary and some researcher says \"Why do we want to research this? Because science is fun LOL!\" I'm not suggesting they should offer an economic reason for doing research, but something a little more in depth than \"because I want to\" would go a long way toward justifying really expensive projects. As much as I abhor defense spending, it's a lot easier for some politician with a lot on his/her plate to justify a $10 billion aircraft carrier just because he/she thinks it will protect the country than it is for him/her to shell out the same amount for a particle accelerator because some physicist wants to have fun with it. \n\nI'm sure the dialogue between politicians and scientists is a little more serious than that, but I can't imagine that the average scientists' difficulty in putting things in laymen terms without coming off as insulting doesn't help matters much.",
"Pay attention in your science classes.",
"Funding for undergraduate through graduate level training in STEM disciplines. I've known some rather outstanding scientific thinkers, who choose business because they needed to make money (e.g., first generation college students). ",
"* Evidence based policy making\n* Free up intellectual property laws\n* Improved high school education\n* more funding basic science\n* more funding applied science\n* dont base funding on publication count of PI\n* support open science publication models\n* ban creationism or intelligent design [edit: in school curriculum], there are no two sides to the debate. there is no debate!",
"You are awesome! The best way is to build relationships with scientists (in your area). Scientists are problem solvers, and politicians run into a lot of problems! \n\nLearn science, use the scientific method to solve problems, meet scientists and make them part of your constituency that you communicate with often. Ask them for advice! ",
"Stop being controlled by religion. Done.",
"Use science to determine your views, not support them.",
"As a health scientist (in training - doing my PhD):\n\n* preventing disease is often better (cheaper and more effective) than curing it, but it is much less dramatic and thus often not valued enough.\n* Similar: try not to react to sensational stories. In the news, you will more often see the young breast cancer patient, the leukemia patient whose mum is convinced it has something to do with heating the food in the microwave, or the patient who was able to get out of the wheelchair after a visit to faith healers. While your instinctive reaction perhaps would be to screen every woman from the age 18 for breast cancer, to ban microwaves and to start training faith healers, science will tell you that breast cancer is much more common at an older age and screening at a young age is unfortunately not effective, that leukemia and microwaving food have nothing to do with each other and that faith healing does in fact not work. \n* scientists do (have to?) hype their results. Try to value a \"new finding\" for yourself. For example: there will never be THE cure for cancer (because cancer is too complicated for one cure). But the added efforts of cancer research have, so far, resulted in a longer survival after cancer diagnosis and certainly an increase of life quality of people with cancer. So it is worthwhile to fund it, even though you shouldn't expect to solve the cancer problem completely.\n* learn how to interpret statistics. And especially risk estimates, such as relative risk and odds ratio. [A starting point](_URL_0_) . This will also help you distinguish hype from true progress...\n\nGee, thanks for listening :-)",
"[Highly relevant article on scienceblogs](_URL_0_). One key remark:\n\n > To boil it all down, requiring that any funded research be \"transformative\" is utter nonsense, because scientific peer review can't easily recognize research that is truly transformative before it's done. Most projects fail; that's how science works. Some succeed, and from those will come a very small number of truly transformative research projects. In other words, if we could reliably predict which lines of research would be truly transformative, we almost wouldn't need to to the research itself. What we can do is to fund the best and most creative science that we can, knowing that our ability to recognize what will and won't be transformative ahead of time is highly unreliable, and then let the chips fall where they may.",
"If a politician could actually change policy, after a scientist has spent years researching an issue, and other scientists similarly labor, and reach a great concensus, it might be encouraging. No more pi = 3. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.childrensmercy.org/stats/journal/oddsratio.asp"
],
[
"http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/06/more_abuse_of_science_for_political_pand.php"
],
[]
] |
|
1bdn5l
|
what is the benefit of having the large hadron collidor?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bdn5l/eli5_what_is_the_benefit_of_having_the_large/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c95x10y",
"c95x150"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Scientific understanding is it own benefit. Other benefits will follow once the science is better understood. \n\nNo scientist working on all the underlying physics thought about medical imaging technology at the time, but yet, x-ray, CAT Scan, PET scan, MRI, fMRI... are all the result of studying cutting edge physics. QM understanding makes all the micro electronics of the world possible, at the time that was not the goal. \n\nCutting edge science serves its own purpose, others will exploit the technology at a later time.",
"The LHC is basically a huge circular tube that is used to accelerate particles to very high speeds using magnetic fields; like a microscopic MagLev. They can use this for a variety of purposes, the main purpose being to accelerate two particles in opposite directions so that, at the other end of the circle, the two particles collide.\n\nParticles behave the same way normal sized objects do when they collide at high speeds: they break into pieces. This is useful because scientists are still not clear on what the really REALLY tiny particles are made of. They use the LHC to break apart these tiny particles and look at the pieces.\n\nI'm sure it has plenty of other uses, but this is the only one I'm clear on."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4dlsfx
|
why are the lights inside buildings, skyscrapers, etc... always on at night? are they actually used by people or is the a requirement to make the night skyline look good?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4dlsfx/eli5_why_are_the_lights_inside_buildings/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1s39dy",
"d1s3rbg",
"d1s41h6",
"d1s7nlv",
"d1s8cis"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They aren't always on. However yes many of the buildings are still used by people at night. Cleaning crews. Security. Renovations. People just working late. Etc. ",
"Take a closer look at any skyline picture and you'll note that actually, nowhere near are all lights turned on. Even more so in modern builders, where most floors will have motion activated lights.",
"You have to look after midnight, many offices will still have people working late after 8pm but the central computer controlled lights will turn off (unless manually activated, which they often are by cleaning crews) after midnight.\n\nThough some offices still have manually controlled lights that the building manager must turn off once the place is unoccupied, and they don't always remember to do that. Or even when the lights are computer controlled they might adjust them to run later for some evening office meeting and then forget to adjust them back to normal hours for a few weeks.\n\nPeople are actually much better at remembering to turn off the lights than they are at turning off their computers or the thermostat/air-conditioning.",
"Noticed that Public Schools Always keep the lights on in all public (non-locked) areas 24/7 though... Guessing this is a security or legal thing.",
"From a security perspective, light is a deterrent. People are much less likely to break in if they thought they'd be seen doing it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2jnqzb
|
My Great Grandfather was killed in WW1.
|
My great grandfather was an American who went to Canada to enlist in the Canadian Army. He died just a few days before Armistice. My grandmother (his daughter) was 10 when he died. She never got over it. She couldn't watch war movies all her life. I want to know where in France he died, what battle was being fought, and any other information someone might have about what was going on for his regiment on the day he died. Thanks.
Thomas Fennelly
Death Date: 7 Nov 1918
Rank: Private
Unit: 2nd Canadian Mounted Rifles
Service number: 225266
Cemetery: Quievrain Communal Cemetery
Cemetery Location: 7 1/4 Miles North East of Valenciennes, Belgium
Burial Place: Belgium
For those who do an internet search, you will find my family tree on _URL_0_. The Ross Fennelly Leach Gallagher tree is mine. I have already found much information about this man who was so mourned by my grandmother. It is just the information about the day he died that I lack. He enlisted with the Canadian armed forces though he was a native of Massachusetts. Apparently he wanted to join the fight but the US had not entered the war, so he went to Canada.
FOUND IT !!! Thank you guys! With the names of the possible battles, I was able to narrow it down to two battles, Battle of Selle or Pursuit to Mons. He was shot and "died later" on November 7. So far it is not known exactly when he was shot, but I am assuming it was during one of these two battles.
From Wikipedia: "After a brief pause another set-piece attack was launched on 17 October (battle of the Selle). The British were now back on familiar ground from 1914, fighting around Le Cateau (17-18 October). The Germans retreated to yet another river line, this time on the Sambre. Once again a set-piece attack was launched. A preliminary attack on 1-2 November saw the Canadians capture Valenciennes, and then on 4 November Haig’s armies launched an attack on a thirty mile front along the Sambre. This was the final British set-piece of the war. The fighting from 4-11 November was officially designated the Pursuit to Mons. One of the last actions of the war saw Canadian troops liberate Mons on the morning of 11 November."
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2jnqzb/my_great_grandfather_was_killed_in_ww1/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cldeyly",
"cldf0lt",
"cldff6p",
"cldg314",
"cldikkg",
"cldn25d",
"cldnlso"
],
"score": [
27,
6,
18,
2,
2,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"I was able to find a letter he wrote, dated August 31st, 1918. I'm not an expert on battles but if it helps anyone who might be able to help there aren't that many battles after that. I don't know how long he would've lingered after being wounded but the battles leading up to November 7th with about a months worth of wiggle room are: Battle of Ypres (1918), Pursuit to the Selle, Battle of Coutrai, Battle of the Selle, Battle of Valenciennes, Battle of the Sambre, Passage of the Grande Honnelle. They're all in France and Flanders and involve Canadian troops. Hope that helps. ",
"You might want to try in r/genealogy.",
"You might want to ask such questions on /r/genealogy. They'll point you in the right direction.\n\nHere's what I could find from a quick search. From the [Canada War Graves Register, via _URL_2_](_URL_0_):\n\n > Died of Wounds. \n > In the field, France.\n > During an advance on enemy positions he was wounded in the head by a bullet from the rifle of an enemy sniper, and died later.\n\n[Here's a letter he wrote to his daughter in 1918](_URL_1_), also posted on _URL_2_. Apparently you have some relatives active on that website.\n\nThe certificate is alarmingly specific but lacks crucial details - where and when. \"Died later\" suggests he may not have been fatally wounded on 7 Nov, it's not clear which engagement he might have been in. The 3rd Canadian Division (that the 2nd Canadian Mounted Rifles was a part of) was active up until right before the armistice. [This page](_URL_3_) describes generally some of the minor actions late in the war, and the 3rd Canadian is mentioned - including the Battle of Valenciennes, 1-2 Nov 1918, which was a bigger dust-up. The 3rd Canadian was part of a general advance, which makes sense because your granddad got shot out in no-man's land approaching German positions, and not hiding in a trench.\n\nPM me if you want to try and get in touch with other people who are also interested in the life of your great grandpa.",
"May I ask why he enlisted in the Canadian army and not with American forces?",
"I have found a little more information and copied PDFs for you. I'll PM you to provide an email address.",
"It looks like my Great Grandfather was in the same regiment as yours. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nthis is his pay book and some other documents that my Grandmother has, thought you might like to see them as your Great Grandfathers would have been very similar. ",
"Archives Canada actually has some great resources for finding information on individual CEF members.\n\n[Attestation Papers](_URL_2_) are the forms first filled out when someone volunteered. They will have basic information like height, weight, place of birth, etc… \n\nOnce you’ve confirmed from the digital Attestation papers that you have the right regimental number you can [order](_URL_1_) the full package of documents from Archives Canada for a small fee. They will include a casualty form that looks like [this](_URL_0_) that includes all unit information and will tell you what unit the person was with during what range of dates. \n\nFrom there, it is possible to read the battalion diaries which keep daily records of activity and will tell you exactly where your great-grandfather was an on what dates.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"ancestry.com"
] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/msr0qqS",
"http://imgur.com/a/FuATE",
"ancestry.com",
"http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/first-world-war/last-hundred-days?filter=month&month=11"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/wwi/comments/1n2n5h/my_great_grandfather_served_with_the_cef_in_ww1/"
],
[
"http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/022/f1/e002343043.jpg",
"http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/military-heritage/first-world-war/first-world-war-1914-1918-cef/Pages/canadian-expeditionary-force.aspx#e",
"http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/military-heritage/first-world-war/first-world-war-1914-1918-cef/Pages/item.aspx?IdNumber=388199"
]
] |
|
97w3ws
|
Why does light bend when it refracts?
|
I've looked everywhere and this is driving me crazy, so hopefully someone here can help me.
I'm curious as to why light bends during refraction. I understand that when it travels from one medium to another, its speed changes, which is responsible for the refraction. What I don't understand is why this change in speed causes the light to change directions. Why wouldn't the light just pass through the medium, heading in the same direction, but at a slower (or faster) speed?
Wikipedia gives the following analogy: "Imagine a marching band as it marches at an oblique angle from a pavement (a fast medium) into mud (a slower medium). The marchers on the side that runs into the mud first will slow down first. This causes the whole band to pivot slightly toward the normal (make a smaller angle from the normal)."
In this case, why must light (the marching band) change it's course of motion because of the new angle cause by the slowing down of one side? Why doesn't the light just keep heading straight, but have a weird slant in the front instead of a straight line?
I hope this makes sense, please ask if I need to clarify anything. Thanks for the help in advance.
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/97w3ws/why_does_light_bend_when_it_refracts/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e4bkjqd",
"e4blbev"
],
"score": [
15,
2
],
"text": [
"Because of two things: 1) as you say, the speed of light is different in different media and thus the wavelength must be different in different media, and 2) because energy and momentum must be conserved at an interface. As a result of this conservation you cannot have any \"kinks\" in a wave, and a peak in the first media must still be a peak in the second and a trough a trough (i.e. you can't magically have peaks turning to troughs or something at the interface as this would imply pulling energy out of thin air).\n\nThe only way to simultaneously meet these criteria is to [bend](_URL_0_).\n\nEDIT: I'd add, for the sake of interest, that energy and momentum conservation at such an interface can play out in interesting ways and, for example, that since light has momentum and since that momentum is being bent by entering the material, the material itself will also feel a reaction force in the opposite direction. In other words, refracting light PUSHES the material doing the refraction in the opposite direction that the light is being bent. This is how we can make things like [optical tweezers](_URL_1_) that can hold a transparent dielectric material in place within a laser beam like a miniature \"tractor beam\".",
"In the marching band analogy, they are leaving out a point: The marching band wants to maintain the fact that they are all shoulder to shoulder in their rows. That means the column has to turn a bit at the interface from fast to slow medium so that the alignment is maintained.\n\nEDIT: So basically, in the marching band analogy, we want to AVOID that weird slant. And why can't the light have that weird slant? That would hark back to the wave properties of light. If you had that slant, it'd mean the individual waves making up the wave front of your light beam are out of sync (out of phase, to be precise) and would interfere destructively. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://blog.soton.ac.uk/soundwaves/files/2013/12/refracter.gif",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_tweezers"
],
[]
] |
|
1dfp58
|
When we say a chemical is odorless, do we mean that it is odorless to humans, or that it is truly odorless?
|
Is there even a way to know?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1dfp58/when_we_say_a_chemical_is_odorless_do_we_mean/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9q3r74",
"c9q6och",
"c9q72n7",
"c9puwkr",
"c9pv2as"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
4,
126,
10
],
"text": [
"Another question. Is it true that dogs can taste pure water?",
"Odor isn't an inherent property of a chemical. Talking about odor only makes sense in reference to a particular olfactory system. When we say something is odorless, what we actually mean is that a typical, healthy human is unable to smell it. This is a rather different statement than making the claim that their exists no olfactory system that can detect it, or the claim that there can exist no olfactory system that can detect it.",
"This is like asking: Is it true infrared is invisible or can we just not see it? We evolved only to see a certain spectrum of light in the same way we perceive only a certain spectrum of smell. The thing is, color is not a property of light and neither is smell a property of matter. These are solely properties of the brain's perception. ",
"When we talk about odorless we are saying that the human nose is unable to detect it. \n\nTypically compounds that have an odor have a small amount of vapors which come off the compound. When these compounds enter your nasal cavity it interacts with the sensors there giving you the sense of smell; however, your nose is only calibrated to sense certain molecular configurations. Anything which does not bind to your sensors is odorless and thus your body can't detect it. \n\nBut different animals have the ability to smell things we do not (Dogs in particular have a great sense of smell) and also we can create machines which detect molecules our noses can't. ",
"Smell receptors in humans and other animals are called G-protein coupled receptors. They are the most abundant type of receptor in our body, with over 1000 separate genes encoding separate receptors. Their discovery by Buck and Axel received the Nobel Prize awhile back. These receptors can sense particular chemical configurations or classes of configurations, yielding our ability to smell a variety of chemical signals. While the diversity of our receptors allows us to pick up on various chemicals, we can't account for all of them. I can't think of any examples of compounds that we can't detect that other animals can, but even simple organisms such as C. elegans can detect many of the smells that we can. Also, I believe that animals with a comparatively strong sense of smell (rodents, dogs, etc) have a much more pronounced olfactory bulb in the brain, rather than a much larger amount of receptor types."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
f4e9u2
|
why is it bad to plug extension cords into one another? like i know it’s bad, but why?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f4e9u2/eli5_why_is_it_bad_to_plug_extension_cords_into/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fhpwarz",
"fhpwsys",
"fhpx4j2"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Extension cords are designed to carry a certain amount of current over a fixed distance (length of the cord). Daisy chaining cords (plugging cords together) increases this distance and thus increases the extension cord’s resistance.\n\nWithout getting into the mathematics and physics of it, essentially this results in greater heating of the cord and possible damage to the insulation – this may be associated with a risk of fire and electrical shock. (commonly known as I2R or Joule heating)\n\nSecondly, you have the chances of the interconnection of plugs coming loose or pulling apart, resulting in a loss of power.\n\nThirdly, there is less current available to operate the load (although this is marginal and negligible). A fault furthest away from the source, in a daisy-chained arrangement, may result in the breaker failing to trip.\n\nFinally, if the interconnection comes loose gradually, it could likely create a spark and that is once again a risk of fire (just through a different failure mechanism).\n\n- OSHA\n\nto add, the longer you make the cord the less power will reach the end. the loss is added to by each connection(plug) adding even more resistance. as resistance goes up so do heat and chance of failure or fire.",
"Consumer extension cords have insulation on them. That insulation has a rating for a specific voltage/resistance. \n\nYou could technically make the cord soo long that there is soo much resistance that the angry pixies just jump through the insulation and end up burning your house down/shocking you. \n\nAlso. As you add more cord length you are increasing the total resistance which increases how hot the cords can get = burning your house down.",
"As the length of the cords increases by chaining them together, there is a drop in the voltage across the cord. According to Ohm’s law, voltage is directly proportional to current, so if the cord voltage drops, then the current capacity of the cord drops. That means that you could overheat your cord, plug, or socket (which is a real fire hazard) if you use a device that has too high of a wattage rating. \nNot only is it not a good idea to daisy chain power cords and strips, it’s also a good idea to make sure your cord has the correct rating for the device you want to power. Here’s a good resource that explains it pretty well: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.m.electrical101.com/m.extension-cords.html"
]
] |
|
8s2hi0
|
Why did the Nazis devote resources to accelerating the Holocaust as they were losing the war?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8s2hi0/why_did_the_nazis_devote_resources_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e0w2mth",
"e0w30as"
],
"score": [
5,
42
],
"text": [
"I asked a similar question awhile back: _URL_0_\n \nThe short of it is that the Holocaust is inseparable from the Nazi's larger war goals - the Holocaust was as much of a part of the Nazi war strategy as everything else was. The top comment on the linked post goes into much more detail.\n \nEDIT: Original responder to my post was /u/commiespaceinvader",
"The proposition that the Third Reich doubled down on its genocide as it started to lose the war is a very popular one, but it is not one that exactly fits the chronology of genocide. For one thing, the first steps to envisioning a Jew-free Europe were broached amidst German victory. The German Foreign Ministry came up with the abortive Madagascar Plan, for example, which would have been a genocide via neglect, in the wake of the victory over France. There were other schemes in German-occupied Poland to work its Jewish population to death via corvee labor. The first major Rubicon in which thoughts of mass murder translated into concrete deeds was during the invasion of the USSR where *Einsatzgruppen* expanded shooting operations to destroy whole Jewish communities. One of Ian Kershaw's notable phrases on this period is \"genocide was in the air,\" by the last quarter of 1941. Older ideas of working the Jews to death still percolated around the Nazi leadership, but the *Einsatzgruppen* did demonstrate the appeal of cutting the Gordian knot of what to do with Europe's Jews. \n\n/u/commiespaceinvader has a good [post of theirs](_URL_0_) on when was the deadliest phase of the Holocaust. Although \"deadly\" is somewhat subjective, he concludes:\n\n > So basically, when narrowing down, the most deadly phase, it is probably this time frame between June 1942 and October 1943 when the Einsatzgruppen, the Reinhard Camps and for parts of it, Auschwitz Birkenau were in operation.\n\nWhile it is possible to see with hindsight that Germany was losing the war in 1942, things were not so clear-cut at the time. Germany after all still had control over Western Europe and a sizable chunk of the western USSR even after Stalingrad. While some more level-headed individuals understood that it might be possible that Germany would lose, the reality was Germany was still in control of a good chunk of the continent. \n\nThis is why it is something of a trap to think that those who implemented genocide were somehow behaving irrationally in light of an obvious truth that Germany was losing. As absurd and morally offensive as it might sound, the German leadership that planned and carried out the Holocaust saw the removal of Jews as a logical step to win the war. Jews were not only ideological enemies of National Socialism, it was unthinkable that they would have a place in a postwar Europe where Germany had won. The fact that Barbarossa did not end in a triumphal collapse of the USSR likely encouraged more genocidal thinking as murdering Jews within the German sphere of influence would free up the resources used to feed them, allow for their property to be cycled back to the Reich, and remove a potential Jewish fifth-column from Germany (remember, many within the Third Reich's leadership believed the stab in the back legend). The Reinhard camps themselves were fairly efficient at their job, they arguably made a profit and did not demand too much manpower and resources, unlike ghettos and the police that guarded them. The SS's WVHA office also proved quite adept at organizing the labor of camp inmate, Jews and non-Jews, towards productive labor that had incredibly high wastage rates. Many of WVHA's activities ticked off two boxes: they strengthened the German war effort and they eliminated the racial enemies of the state. Even the mass operations clearing out Hungary of its Jewish population in 1944 was justified in the sense that this was a region of strategic importance to Germany and the shrinking Eastern Front meant it was soon to be a battlefield. \n\nWhile there certainly was wastage and WHVA's various plans did not always result in the most productive use of KZ labor, those who planned and facilitated the Holocaust often did see their work as a necessary component of the war effort. Not only was genocide conceptualized in middle of German victories, but continuing genocide was often framed as a means to stave off defeat. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/620e3a/how_much_of_a_distraction_was_the_implementation/"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/579kbc/what_was_the_most_deadliest_phase_of_the_holocaust/d8svlr5/"
]
] |
||
1g15l0
|
Do we have any journals from Europeans were marooned at sea during the age of exploration?
|
Maybe got rescued and wrote about it after the fact, or they died but we found their written record.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1g15l0/do_we_have_any_journals_from_europeans_were/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cafss8m"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Indeed we do, albeit the ones we do have come along towards the end of the Golden Age of Piracy. In fact, the fictional story of Robinson Crusoe is thought to be based off of the real story if Scottish buccaneer and self-inflicted castaway [Alexander Selkirk](_URL_0_). He was rescued, much like his fictional counterpart, after voluntarily marooning himself on an island with only his personal items. I don't know if he kept a journal per se, but his story was a popular one in Europe when he came back so there's a lot of post-hoc documentation of his feat. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Selkirk"
]
] |
|
8768f6
|
I am a high school student and I have a few questions for anyone that works in a field related to history.
|
Ever since I was young I loved history. Whether it's reading about the Cold War or looking at Ancient Greek artifacts, I have always been captivated. As college starts to approach, I must begin looking towards what I will do in the future. So, I have a few questions for anyone that has a job in the field of history/social sciences with some spare time. What is your occupation? Why did you choose it? What do you love about it? How can I learn more about history-related careers?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8768f6/i_am_a_high_school_student_and_i_have_a_few/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dwajx3w",
"dwaujd7"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"These links should not discourage further replies, but here are some recent threads, which may be of interest: \n\n_URL_0_ with answers from u/restricteddata, u/Dire88, u/alriclofgar and others \n\n_URL_4_ by u/uncovered-history and others \n\n_URL_5_ by u/itsallfolklore, u/restricteddata, u/hesh582, u/alriclofgar and others \n\n_URL_3_ by u/sunagainstgold and others \n\n_URL_2_ u/abettine \n\nThere are also some older answers in the FAQ here: _URL_1_\n\n",
"I see that there is a link to a discussion with my participation from a few days ago. I was a state historic preservation officer, and I was closely involved with the National Park System and the historians working there. In addition, my agency awarded grants to local agencies and local non-profit organizations, many of which employed historians. And ... I taught at the university level for three decades. After reviewing the [link below and provided here](_URL_0_), if you have questions you think I can answer, please contact me. Best of luck!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6267u7/will_i_be_able_to_find_a_job_as_a_historian/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/theory#wiki_history_careers_and_education",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6knw12/questions_from_an_aspiring_historian/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6nzyf9/historians_if_you_were_graduating_high_school/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7ly9ta/what_exactly_do_historians_do_as_a_job/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/85a471/what_is_it_like_to_be_a_historian/"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/85a471/what_is_it_like_to_be_a_historian/"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.