[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Can we pinpoint the exact moment a plant dies?

With animals, it's easy to pinpoint the moment of death --- breathing, blood circulation, and brain activity stops.

However, how can we tell when a plant is dead? Is death a sudden cutoff in plant life as seen in animal life, or does it only occur along a gradual scale of healthiness? If you pick a carrot or potato, does it stay alive up until the moment of cooking? (unless it rots.) Do picked vegetables continue life independently after being removed from the mother plant, or is it removed living tissue such as cutting a finger off a human? Do potatoes enter something like cryptobiosis seen in sea monkeys? Are seeds dormant or alive? Potatoes can be stored for months, planted, and grow again... are they fully alive, dead, or dormant/hibernating?

Can we identify the exact point that a plant is too wilted to make a recovery from lack of watering, or is it simply a decreasing % chance of recovery over time?

Is there a point that cut flowers become effectively dead? Obviously plant cuttings can remain alive for some period, as some can be rooted in water or soil to produce a clone.

[Assistant]
Animals can be said to 'die' because they are built with a centralized body plan, and parts that are completely interdependent upon each other: one system for digestion, one for information processing, one for oxygen acquisition, etc etc. So the failure of any part quickly cascades into an overall shutdown, and the animal is dead.

Plants, on the other hand, do not have such limitations. Instead of completely interdependent organs, plants build themselves on a modular design. In any average tree, for instance, almost all of the tissues inside the trunk are 'dead' tissues: rigid, structure-providing cells with tough buildups of lignin and cellulose for structure, and porous, interconnected cells for water transport up from the ground, but in the trunk, you won't find many cells that are actually 'alive' and capable of reproduction or metabolism at all.

Plants don't 'die' the way animals do, any cell of a plant is capable of regenerating an entirely new plant if treated properly, and all the parts are interconnected, but not interdependent in the way that animal parts are.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Everyone's talking about the fact that babies were genetically modified, but since when did we know there was a gene that prevents HIV? How does it work?

[Assistant] One way the HIV virus gets into white blood cells is through a protein on the surface of the cell called CCR5. Think of the protein acting as a door through which the virus enters.  Some people have a mutation which alters the size and location of the CCR5 protein, so HIV can no longer get through the "door".  Around 10 percent of Northern Europeans carry one copy of this gene, and around 1 percent carry both copies, making them HIV resistant. This mutation is all but absent from other world regions. Some speculate this may have something to do with epidemics like the Black Death and smallpox that swept through Europe, arguing that the mutation may have provided some sort of advantage against infection by one of these diseases.  Source: learnt about this in a virology class in college, so perhaps this interpretation is a bit basic.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why do humans have relatively poor night vision?

Only in the last couple hundred years have we really gotten a hold on proper lighting technology.  I realize fire has been around for a long time but a torch is no comparison to good night vision when it comes to hunting or I'm sure a lot of other things.

[Assistant]
You're right that a flaming torch wouldn't be very good for hunting. And our own eyes are basically night-blind.
But why would we hunt at night?

The thing is that we're diurnal. We're usually asleep all night, so there's no real reason to have evolved night vision. but also, large eyes are expensive to make and then they have to be protected throughout your life. So if you're not going to use them, they're more of a liability than anything else.

One more thing to note here is that humans didn't *lose* their night vision, which is what most people assume.
Actually, none of the apes have very good night vision.
Not even the monkeys really have very good night vision.

The higher primates have never really been nocturnal creatures and we're just living the *Simiiformes* way of life.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5 Why do dogs love humans?

I mean, just look at all the youtube videos.

[Assistant]
There are two reasons for this. First is that we have breed this behavior into the dogs. Back when we first started with wolves, we would keep and breed dogs that were docile and chase off those who weren't. Over time, this docile behavior became standard. Of course there are still outlying dogs who are very mean.

The second reason is pack behavior. Dogs consider humans, especially their owners as part of their packs. The human owner is typically the alpha male and deserving of praise. That is another reason while dogs are sometimes very mean toward outsiders. They aren't part of the pack.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why and how do unhealthy simple sugars taste better than healthier vegetables and produce?

[Assistant]
Because they're only unhealthy in that humans can get access to way too much of them in modern diets.

They are profoundly useful sources of energy, which your body needs to not be dead. For much of human history, there were not stores selling Snickers, and as such natural selection has rewarded life forms that avidly seek them out and continue living, necessary for most forms of reproduction.

Now that there are stores selling Snickers, natural selection hasn't had time to reward those of us who avoid cramming them into our mouths.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Marvel] What if... Captain America never chose the super vibranium shield as his armoury of choice?

According to what we see in Cap: the 1st Avenger movie, he merely chooses the circular shield that just happens to be vibranium out of a collection of items as things he wants to use, and lo and behold its pretty much a life saver. In fact, its probably one of the most solid things in the universe.  What if he didn't have the shield? You may interpret that as, he doesn't have a shield, or he has some novice worse shield. Or you may rebutt my question with differing canon, eg. Howard Stark actually had malleable vibranium and was willing to make it into any shaped shield/weapon that this great new soldier was interested in having.  Quite simply, I perceive it as a slice of pure luck that the great shield is now synonymous with the Cap, but what if it were not so...?

[Assistant] Should be noted that he already has an idea that he'd liked using a shield prior to picking out the the round vibranium shield. He brought the one that came with the mascot costume on his first mission.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Indian in the Cupboard] What happens if I put a small globe in the cupboard?

Say I took a small globe that could fit and placed it inside the magic cupboard from 'Indian in the Cupboard', upon opening it would I have a tiny Earth?  How would things like a lack of sunlight, nearby objects, etc affect it?  Would there be a really tiny me on it with an equally tiny magic cupboard?

[Assistant]
This is covered in the books. It only works on:

1) Plastic toys

2) Toys in the shape of people or animals, or that were designed to represent them, and their clothing and other things they are carrying

3) It only pulls people from the past, or close enough to the present that you can't tell. They fall unconscious in their time period while it's active and time moves forward one to one in both reference frames.

4) It has limits and its rules can be bent a little bit

So no, you won't have a tiny Earth and you won't cause an apocalypse. You'd have to individually model 7 billion individuals in plastic to do that, nothing would happen to Earth itself or any living thing you didn't model, and then you would be immune because you would fall unconscious before turning the key because paradoxes. And then you'd just be driving humanity extinct, not destroying the world. And you're also assuming it doesn't break or overload.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why does transparent materials like water act like mirrors?

When you look at a lake, or a water puddle, it reflects everything just like a mirror. How does it do this, if the water is totally see-through?

[Assistant] When light hits a boundary between one transparent medium (e.g., air) and another (e.g., glass or water), some is reflected and some is refracted.  Usually only a small percentage is reflected, except at very shallow angles, but often even that small amount is enough to produce a visible reflected image.  A good example is looking out a window at night, when it's dark outside but brightly lit inside.  The window will appear to act as a good mirror.  If you look out the same window in the day time the reflection is still there but it's much harder to notice because it's competing with the very bright view outside.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Monopoly] How is a motherfucking battleship getting sent to jail?

[Assistant] Is it really an actual jail? It seems to me that it's more like a kind of debtors prison sort of deal, so maybe the battleship isn't as much sent to jail as it is held by the authorities until you can pay off your debt to society?


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Yu-Gi-Oh] What are the geopolitical and social implications of everything being solved with a children's card game?

All problems in the Yu-Gi-Oh universe can be solved by playing duel-monsters. How would their world be different, given thus?

[Assistant] Actually in Yu-Gi-Oh GX episode 1x04 we see a delivery of rare cards being delivered to Duel Academy via Naval Submarine(maybe nuclear sub) and its mentioned that they were attacked en route by other submarines. This establishes that theres still militaries to wage war, its just that the reasons for wars seem to revolve around, or at least be related to, childrens card games.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: What's the difference between Coke Light, Coke Zero and Diet Coke?

[Assistant]
Coca-Cola Light and Diet Coke are different names for the same product in different countries.

Coke Zero is a different drink. Diet Coke isn't just a sugar free variant of Coca Cola - it has an entirely different recipe, and so it has a different taste. Coke Zero, introduces in 2005, uses the same formula as Coca Cola, but with artificial sweeteners. Also, Coke Zero is marketed towards men, since Diet Coke was seen as a "feminine" beverage.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Princess Bride] What happens when two Sicilians bet against each other when death is on the line?

[Assistant]
The actual warning is to never *go in* against a Sicilian when death is on the line.

So what happens is that each Sicilian sits and waits for the other to make a move. The first one to make a move - to "go in" - will have blundered, and will therefore be defeated, but since both are aware of that rule, neither will go in.

Result: Stalemate.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Wasn't the carbon, now being emitted by fossil fuels, at one point in the atmosphere? How did the earth survive back then. What factors have changed this time around?

[Assistant] The Earth survives plenty of things that have killed almost all life on it. That's the difference. It's not about destroying Earth, but the destruction of life on Earth. One of the big issues with the current warming is the rate at which its occurring, which is not allowing for enough generations of various species to be born with enough genetic variation to develop survivable traits. The amount of climate we've seen over the last 100 years should have taken several hundred to a couple thousand years to occur.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Underworld] so the common consensus is that the older a vampire is, the more powerful it is compared to a younger vampire. Do they mean years of experience of being a vampire or something else?

[Assistant] The further removed a vampire or lycan is from the Corvinus bloodline, the weaker they tend to be, with the exception of hybrids like Michael and Eve that defy this tendency. To give an example, William and Marcus Corvinus were the progenitors of the lycans and vampires, respectively. Marcus turned Viktor, who was slightly less strong than him. Viktor in turn changed Seline, who (while incredibly skilled) was weaker still before Alexander Corvinus, William and Marcus's father and the only pure immortal, gifted her his blood which cranked her abilities up to eleven and made her immune to sunlight.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Is drinking 8 cups of any liquid (i.e. pop, juice, coffee, beer, etc) pretty much the same as drinking 8 cups of water in terms of hydrating your body since the primary ingredient in any drink is water?

[Assistant]
There's some difference. First these beverages are high on water, but it's not all water. Cola has like 88% water in it. Black coffee like 98%. Also, the amount of minerals make it either easier to absorb and keep the water, or harder. If you'd drink something high on salt (like sea water), you'd actually get really sick because partially the salty water in your bowels will attract water from you. This will cause diarrea and causes dehydration.
Some ingredients work as a diuretic, which means you will pee more because of them. Think of beer and coffee. While uptake may be the same as with normal water (but probably isn't the same) you also excrete more of it. So, the additional ingredients do matter.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Captain America: Civil War] What's Baron Zemo's endgame anyway? (Spoilers)

[Assistant]
The entire point of his plan was to make the Avengers tear themselves apart.  He did it for his murdered family during Age of Ultron after thinking that they were safe.

Just imagine, you lost your entire family, your wife and your children.  You'd want revenge too right?

Even though none of the Avengers died, his plan still succeeded because the Avengers are no longer a team.  They're all unsure of what to do now and almost none of them trust each other any more.  Stark and Rogers are barely healing their bonds and it will be a *long* time before any true progress is made in their relationship.

After his plan, he was supposed to commit suicide which is why he finally deleted his wife's last voicemail.  He was only stopped by Black Panther who stopped him and handed him over to the authorities.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
How do you engage with a philosophical argument when you don't have the intuition(s) you're "supposed" to have?

It seems like one could have a one sentence response along the lines of "nope, I don't share that intuition, and so the whole argument collapses". But, that doesn't seem to leave room for any reconciliation or understanding.

There seem to be a lot of claims and thought experiments in analytic philosophy that depend on people having the "right" intuition, for the intuition supports one view, causes problems for another and that position must justify itself, etc.

A few examples:

- Peter Singer uses the case of the drowning child versus the starving third world child to convince people that we should help faraway people. You're "supposed" to have the intuition that there is no real morally relevant difference between the cases. But a reader has the intuition that the cases are *very* different because proximity is very morally relevant, and so Singer's thought experiment doesn't prove what he wants it to to that reader.

- Chalmers uses the philosophical zombie thought experiment. You're "supposed" to have the intuition that consciousness isn't necessarily entailed by our understanding of physics, so there might be more going on, and there is a hard problem to be solved. But, a reader may intuit that Chalmers' thought experiment is nonsensical, that he is postulating something that is inconceivable.

- Somebody reads Judith Jarvis Thompson's violinist example, and thinks it's obvious that they are obligated to keep the violinist attached to them, even though they're "supposed" to believe that they aren't.

It seems to me that if you don't have the intuitions you're "supposed" to, then entire dialectics in philosophy fall apart. Further, it's not clear how somebody with different intuitions would convince others to share their view or be convinced to change their mind. Is there a way for these people to engage? How do professional philosophers handle this when it happens? And, does this call into question the ability of thought experiments and intuitions to lead us to philosophical truth.

[Assistant] Here's how the game is played: if you don't share someone's intuitions in an example, identify which intuitions you don't share and briefly explain why. Then try some related examples to pump the intuition that you want to push, and to argue that this is where the previous thought experiment went wrong. Bonus points for folding this all into a broader account of your own.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why are so many people in the world unable to digest lactose?

[Assistant]
Evolutionary pressure. Once you're weaned off of your mother's milk, there's really not a lot of need for dairy products. These products are very recent in human history, as we didn't really have access to milk, cheese, etc. before the domestication of cows. From a biological perspective, it wouldn't have made sense to keep producing lactase (the enzyme that digests lactose) if you weren't eating anything WITH lactose.

You can see this influence based on lactose intolerance by region. Europe has significantly lower rates of lactose intolerance, most likely due to earlier attempts at widespread dairy farming. Evolution would dictate that having the ability to digest milk into adulthood would have an evolutionary benefit in that situation.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
To what extent can medicine applied to the skin affect joints?

I see TV ads for such products.  Usually it's for back pain, but one currently running in the UK has a graphic with arrows - presumably the path of the active ingredient - penetrating the skin and going to work on a knee joint. Is there such a transport mechanism in the body?  How does it deliver an effective dose without contaminating blood and organs?

[Assistant]
NSAIDs (Non steroidal anti-inflammatory Drugs) can be absorbed through the skin. They are best used on joints on the body that are close to the surface of the skin.

They can be absorbed into the blood stream, however, this isn't common. The toxicities can lead to stomach ulcers and high blood pressure.

Edit: Missed a question - they often also have dosage recommendations or sizes of amounts to use in the instructions.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Trek] Why doesn't any faction have spacefighter craft to accompany the larger battleships?

When in WWII airplanes became widely used in naval warfare it changed the face of how battles on sea were fought completely. Suddenly battleships were vulnerable pieces of machinery constantly having to be on the lookout for torpedoes/bombs/50cals/30mm/etc.

Why doesn't anyone use fighter spacecraft to aid their larger ships?

[Assistant]
Because the role fighters play is irrelevant in space. Fighters provide high-altitude support to their bases, be those bases stationary or mobile. A fighter can "see" farther than a carrier by simple virtue of its altitude, which reduces the horizon line caused by the curvature of the planet itself. On a hypothetical, completely flat "world," fighters would have no specific advantage over vessels locked to ground/sea-level, other than speed and having a closer view of a target prior to attack.

Let's talk about speed a bit. Fighters are substantially faster than naval vessels, to be sure. Why? They're smaller and consequently weigh less. It's not a question of powerplant; a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier produces substantially more power than any fighter, by a large margin. It simply has to apply that power to doing a lot more; pushing a multi-thousand-ton craft through as viscous a medium as water is a lot harder than pushing a several-ton craft through a less-viscous medium like air. For their speed, though, fighters sacrifice the tremendous range that naval vessels have. A nuclear naval craft can go for long tours of duty without needing to refuel. A fighter has a range measured in, at best, several hundred miles.

Now, take all of the advantages of a fighter over a naval ship and transport the two into space. Every single advantage the fighter had *disappears*. In space, you can see *infinitely* (provided you have sufficient imaging equipment), completely obviating the line-of-sight range advantage provided by terrestrial fighters to their naval counterparts. There is no air or water resistance to overcome, meaning the only factor in your speed (or, more relevant in space, acceleration) is your mass vs. your thrust.

Sublight thrust comes from impulse engines, which are glorified plasma rockets wrapped in a mass-reduction field that allows the ship to achieve greater acceleration with **less thrust/greater mass**. There goes the mass advantage space fighters would have in acceleration. But it goes even further than that. Ship size dictates maximum size of ship power plant (usually, the much-lauded Matter/Antimatter Reactor) and fuel reserves (both slush deuterium and magnetically-confined antideuterium, typically). Again, you're going to have big ships with much greater range than small ships -- just as in a terrestrial theater -- but you're *also* going to have more places to devote that power...like *shields* and *energy weapons*.

In *Trek* space combat, shields are a defining factor. Without them, ships quickly succumb to the devastating attacks of their enemies. Because of its smaller power plant, a fighter is going to have substantially less enduring shields than a larger ship. Again, it compensates somewhat by needing to project those shields in a smaller volume, but not sufficiently to make up the orders-of-magnitude differences in protection. Its energy weapons are similarly going to suffer; it can't mount the huge, high-output battleship phaser arrays (or disruptors or whatever else) that a larger vessel can, so its effectiveness against a larger target is already reduced. While a fighter could certainly function as a torpedo platform, it's going to have a much lower torpedo capacity than a larger ship, and because of its weaker shields, will be much less likely to *survive* to fire those torpedoes.

In summary:

* The line-of-sight altitude advantage of terrestrial fighters over naval ships is irrelevant in space.
* The limited range of terrestrial fighters becomes a major liability in space.
* The speed/acceleration advantage of terrestrial fighters over naval ships is negated by the relative size of power plants and thrusters, as well as the mass-lightening properties of impulse engines.
* The smaller powerplant output of terrestrial fighters becomes a severe limiting factor in space, since it puts constraints on shield and energy weapon output that make fighters less durable and less potent than larger ships.
* The ability to deliver guided projectile weaponry is performed more ably by larger ships than fighters due to their endurance and higher magazine capacity.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [DC] If the Joker was female , do you think there would be any type of romantic relationship between her and Batman? Would it be similar to the love/hate relationship Bruce has with Catwoman?

[Assistant]
The main reason Catwoman and Batman are able to have a relationship that is more flirtatious than adversarial is a simple one - she doesn't kill people. For Bruce, being a demented serial killer is an absolute dealbreaker.

That said, the Joker's obsession with Batman is often presented as having romantic or sexual overtones; there's no reason why that would go away if he was a woman. So there would probably be plenty of flirtation on the Joker's end, but none coming from Batman.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[LotR] Considering Eru Ilvatar is helping the realm of Men destroy the one ring, why doesn't he simply just go down and destroy Sauron and his armies himself?

Title says all. I know it can't be that he fears Sauron, cause he's so much more powerful than the dark lord, so what could it be?

[Assistant]
I don't think it's accurate to describe it as Eru "Helping the realm of Men destroy the one ring."

Rather the entire saga is the interplay of Eru's themes with those of his children. Sauron's downfall was foretold by that music, long before the creation of the world. In a sense, Sauron was destroyed before he was even "born."


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Lord of the Rings] What if the Ring could not be destroyed at Mount Doom?

If the One Ring, for some reason, could not be destroyed (be it that the path into Mount Doom was destroyed, caved in, etc.) how long do you think the Fellowship and the Men and Elves of the West could have hidden it from Sauron and his massive legions? What would happen when he discovered where it was hidden?

Either Frodo can find out for himself when he reaches Mount Doom, or the Fellowship can know from the beginning, up to you.

[Assistant]
The Ring lands in the lava and just kind of sits there?  Gollum, meanwhile, dies a terrible fiery death three feet to the side.  There's a good chance Frodo is still Ring-crazy and jumps after him, since there isn't the immediate release from Sauron's influence.  The Wraiths were still reacting to Frodo's claim of the One Ring as hobbit lord of Mordor, so they'd probably fish it out of the molten rock.

Though, Nazgul and fire don't mix very well, so Sauron might have to craft the One Pair of Tongs or something.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: What's the difference between Bulls, Bison, Buffalos, and Oxen? Are they all related to "normal" black and white cows?

[Assistant]
A bull is a male cow.

A bison is a species related to cows that is native to North America.

A buffalo is one of many species related to cows native to Africa or Asia.

And unlike *every other post here, get it together people,* an ox is a job description, not a species. They are the same species as the "normal" cow or bull, just trained to do labor instead of be meat or milk suppliers. Not to be confused with a musk ox, which is not that closely related.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: why does repetitive hand movement such as typing cause damage, while repetitive use of other muscles makes them stronger?

[Assistant] Your fingers are controlled by tendons while your arms are controlled mainly by muscles. Tendons can possibly damage over long-term use, while muscles regenerate after microtears and get stronger. Muscles have a type of regeneration that adapts to heavier things over time. Tendons, not so much.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Harry Potter] Realistically, how difficult would it be to take down Voldemort with a gun?

We've all seen that amusing copypasta about how easier it would be to kill Voldy if Harry had a 44 magnum, and the various situations where modern firearms would just make Harry's life easier. But applying what we know of Voldemort and his Death Eaters, how doable would it be to take them down with the assistance of said modern firearms?

Would a quick enough trigger finger be enough to negate the use of a magic? Would a magically assisted SAS Team be able to take out a group of Death Eaters? Could firearms hold their ground against wands in certain scenarios?

[Assistant]
Simply- he has horcruxes.

You could shoot him with a gun if you're quick on the draw (although it's not as curb stomp as often suggested- wizards are stealthy fuckers who don't need ammo and are a lot more versatile then a guy with a gun). But he won't stay dead, and  he's a significant threat in his own right.

By all accounts, you need magic to destroy horcruxes. Muggles could alleviate the symptoms, but not resolve them without magical help.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why do modern day plugs have those little holes in the prongs?

I've never been able to get a direct answer for this, all I ever get is "for stability."  The older electric plugs don't tend to have these holes... I'd speculate it happened sometime in the early 90s.

[Assistant]
NEMA 5 receptacles can optionally be fitted with a prong locking bar, which keeps the jack from pulling free of the receptacle if the wire is tugged.  Take a look at the orange receptacles in a modern hospital: they have a little latch beside them that has to be lifted up in order to release the jack.

It's usually a very, very bad idea to prevent the jack from popping free under stress; you're begging for the wire to split under any decent amount of force.  However, in some applications (e.g. life support), it's safer to design the jack and socket to take the abuse than to allow it to come free unintentionally.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why is the abbreviation of 'Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black' called 'CMYK' and not 'CMYB'?

[Assistant]
So the CMYK is referring to the plates of Cyan, Yellow, Magenta, and Key.

This key plate is usually the last plate, and is what provided the details via lines and contrast in black ink. You can look at a print and see how there's usually not much in actual detail until the black key is used. As such it's also the key for aligning the plates, as the others need to be aligned in relation to it, since if its off at all, the whole image will look wrong when the lines and contrast are laid down.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: If I have a coffee before bed every night, does the stimulus from the coffee or the Pavlovian response of "coffee, then sleep" win? Do they cancel each other out?

Explained in title. Essentially, which of these effects is stronger?

[Assistant]
Caffeine is technically a drug, albeit a fairly harmless one and accepted by society. It causes your metabolism to increase by elevating heart rate and nervous system activity. Obviously, this is why it can be hard to sleep after drinking coffee.

But some people drink a lot of coffee, like a LOT. And since caffeine is a drug, they build up a tolerance to it. The energizing effects of caffeine become the new baseline for these people. Then when they stop drinking coffee, they fall below their baseline. This causes the headaches, cold sweats, irritability and is just generally unpleasant. For these people, drinking coffee before bedtime brings them back up to their baseline and enables them to go to bed comfortably and sleep through the night without withdrawal symptoms.

So to answer your question, it's less about Pavlovian theory and more about whether you are sensitive to caffeine's effects, or reliant upon them.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why do palm trees only have leaves at the top? If so, do they then grow from the middle?

I'm in a place where there are Palm trees right now so I was just curious how they grow such that there are only leaves on top.

[Assistant] Basically as the tree grows taller the lower branches fall off, leaving only the uppermost branches. This is a selective trait along with others such as the relative sponginess of the wood. The species exist in places that are exposed to the ocean meaning they have to survive hurricanes and other strong storms which makes the trait of losing the lower branches beneficial. Less likely to get pushed over or broken by the wind.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
What defines the edge of the observable universe?

Why is some of the universe observable and the rest not?

[Assistant]
Because the Big Bang happened a finite time ago and light has a finite speed. That means that a lot of faraway objects just haven't had time to send light to us.

The Universe is roughly 13.7 billion years old. That doesn't mean, however, that the observable Universe is 13.7 billion light years across. That would only be true if the Universe weren't expanding - but as we know, it is, so the distance to the furthest objects we can (theoretically) see has expanded to be a fair bit larger than 13.7 billion light years.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Why are battery-powered devices such as phones fully operational all the way until 0% charge while flashlights lose functionality the lower the battery gets?

[Assistant]
Phones and other electronic devices usually have a chip built in that tries to maintain the voltage at a set value. While converting amperage to keep it there.

Simple things like flashlights usually have no sort of voltage regulator and as such. As the battery reduces in charge, it's delivered voltage drops over time causing the light to become dimmer.

Things like phones etc will simply shut off if voltage drops below their threshold.

Hope that helps. Maybe an electrician can give some more info on the subject.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Lord of the Rings] What was life like with Aragorn as king? Obviously, his part in destroying the Ring would make him a pretty likable guy, but were there people that weren't super happy with him?

He seems like a swell guy, but I'm sure there were a few people who didn't like him.

[Assistant]
King Elessar Telcontar restored Gondor to it's former glory and splendor. Within a few years of his coronation, he had sent men north to reestablish the ancient kingdom of Arnor, which joined with Gondor in the south to form the Reunited Kingdom. Over the 120 years of his reign, King Elessar improved relations with the dwarves, remaining elves, and allied nations of men. He decreed that the Shire was wholly under his protection, and that no man was ever to set foot within it's borders again. This was to ensure the hobbits could be left to their way of life unmolested. He greatly expanded Gondor's military and naval might, and subsequently their borders. He put a beat down on the Haradrim and the Easterlings, staving off their raids and attacks for decades. On his deathbed, he passed his crown to his eldest son and heir, Eldarion, ensuring a clear and unequivocal succession for the people of Gondor.

He was as great a King as any of his ancestors.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Marvel] What regular, non-powered, plain human has put up the best hand to hand combat fight against Captain America?

[Assistant]
Other than Batman in a couple of crossovers (they fought to a standstill the first time; the second time Batman acknowledged that Cap could probably *eventually* beat him, but it was far from a certainty)?

I'd say Batroc the Leaper. People hire him to fight Captain America, not because he stands a chance of winning, but because they know it'll take Cap a significant amount of time to beat him - time everyone else can use to get away.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5:How does my car know it's actual speed in a slippery condition when the wheels are spinnging?

So I realize my base assumptions are incorrect as I originally thought the rotation of the wheels determined the speed the speedometer read out. I was driving in snow up a hill and my wheels began to spin, rpm went into the 7000's yet I was still only doing 35-40km/h. I just wonder what the mechanism is behind keeping the speed read out accurate while the wheels do what they do. What's happening?

[Assistant]
Modern motor vehicles have a speed sensor on each wheel. It uses the data from each wheel to determine which wheels are gripping the road, which wheels are spinning, and which wheels are locked when braking.

If your front tires are spinning, the computer would only use data from the rear wheels to determine your speed.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why did humans seemingly evolve to be unsuited for living in nature?

* We struggle to survive in cold or wet climates without clothing and shelter
* We have limited vision in low light
* We can't see clearly underwater
* Our babies require constant care and oversight for first couple years of life
* We have significantly less strength-to-weight than our ancestors
* We're much slower than most of our prey and require tools to kill

and others

It seems like our necessity for tools and shelter was in response to our state of evolution, so why was it beneficial for humans to evolve from sustainability in the wild and into a more domesticated lifestyle?

[Assistant]
> so why was it beneficial for humans to evolve from sustainability in the wild and into a more domesticated lifestyle?

All tradeoffs for that great big powerful brain we've got.

If you're wondering why it was beneficial, **look around you**.  Look at the world.  What animal is the apex predator in every environment it enters.  Humans live in every corner of the globe and we dominate every species we encounter.  Sure we do it through tools, but those tools are a direct result of our single overwhelming evolutionary advantage:  That brain.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Does wearing Hi-Visibility Gear make any difference in broad daylight conditions in regards to work safety?

[Assistant] Definitely does. The amount the fluorescent yellow stands out is important. If you are operating a construction vehicle, there may be dirt and dust in the air and you may not see a guy wearing a regular grey hoodie. But you would certainly see his yellow jacket or hard hat.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Oregon Trail] Why are we going to Oregon? I'm gonna stay in Missouri.

All this dysentery and shit, fuck that.

[Assistant]
Free 640 acres for a family *(360 for a single man)* if he lived and improved the land for 5 years. Its a really good deal.

You could stay in Missouri but youre probably not from there originally so youre going to have to buy land with most of the premo stuff already picked.

And Gtt help you if you hold a strong opinion one way or the other about slavery. The bleeding of Kansas and Missouri was going on.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire] Did anyone else find spectating the Second and Third tasks of the Triwizard Cup to be incredibly dull? Why were the spectator's stands even there?

I mean the first task was very exciting, the champions took on dragons! Me and my friends thought that was really really great to watch!

But looking at a lake for an *hour*? We needed the mer-chieftainess to tell us what happened down in the lake - I also heard a rumour that one of the ghosts helped that Potter kid. Maybe if we'd had the champions under scrying spells then we could have seen better *and* checked for rulebreaking!

As for the third task, looking at a maze for however long was no better! And with two of the champions out stunned and one of them dead! Without seeing what happened, how are we to believe that Potter didn't snap and go on a rampage in there?

[Assistant] The stands were there so students could receive the results close to the action, actively support their champions, and enjoy the specialness of the occasion. It's natural for us muggles to compare it to, say, basketball or football matches and to desire the jumbotron. But the triwizard tournament is a centuries old tradition with its own customs and ways of doing things. Wizards are fine entertaining themselves while they wait.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[ELI5] Why does gas cost 3 times more in Most asian countries compared to the US?

I know gas prices in general are higher in Asia than in the US and quite alot too. From my past calculations, prices are anywhere from1.5 to 3 times as high as US counterparts.

US is probably farther away and the middle eastern countries dont like the US, so why such a big price difference? Is it due to the sheer difference in quantity?

[Assistant]
So there are a few things to keep in mind:

Gas is a commodity and there is a fixed global price.  There are however several factors which cause that price to vary from country to country.  Shipping costs are one major factor.  However the commodity price is varied by the following:

1. Government subsidies.  Most oil producing countries (the USA and Canada do not do this) provide cheap gas to their citizens through government subsidies.  Some asian countries (notably china) have also worked out exclusive supply deals taking oil from venezuela directly as repayment on hard currency loans.  Whether the chinese government passes this savings on to its citizens is another matter.  The important thing to note however is that US gas prices are not subsidized and in fact are inflated due to taxation.  We do however benefit from being close to where the oil is refined and so have lower shipping costs.

2.  Taxes.  Many countries tax gas highly.  Gas is often seen as a luxury or "sin" item and is taxed accordingly in many places.  Europe and Canada both tax gas signficantly more than the united states.  Every country in asia will have its own taxes.

3.  Real Estate.  Gas storage and distribution takes up a lot of real estate which has to be paid for with the profits of the business.  In Hong Kong for example land is worth so much that typically buildings have to be skyscrapers to the space inside them affordable.  Gas stations however have to be built on the ground level in the open air meaning they take up a huge amount of valuable real estate and so have to have very high profits.  Thus gas prices are dramatically higher than just the cost of the fuel.

4.  Popularity of cars.  Not every country or area is going to be rich enough that the average person can afford a car.  A gas station in north america makes a huge chunk of its profit by selling candy bars and coffee to drivers as they pass through and use the gas as the draw to get junk food sales.  In asia some countries have cars - but not in the same way north americans do.  So station operators need to make their money on the gas sale itself which in turn raises prices.

5. Other economic and political factors.  In a lot of asian countries governance just isn't as good as it is in north america.  This means extra costs.  Your country's currency is inflating: you need a higher profit margin.  Your country has corrupt cops: you need a higher profit margin.  Your country has poor court systems: you need a higher profit margin.  We have done a lot of things "right" in the western world that allow businesses to operate on narrow margins but that isn't going to be true the world over.  A lot of places there is so much instability and uncretainty that unless you are turning 30% a year profits on a business it isn't even worth doing.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Batman 66] Batman seems to always have just the item he needs to thwart his villains or escape from their clutches. Just how much can he carry in that utility belt?

[Assistant]
The utility belt does **not** have extraordinary capacity. Note that we never observe The Batman *searching* his utility belt. We never see him selecting blade from a Swiss Army knife or unfolding a Leatherman multi-tool.

What is extraordinary is The Batman's foresight and preparation discipline. He carries only the equipment he will require on his mission. Anything else would be excess weight.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Can you make a game that picks up simple mic-inputs from the player?

Right so I'm an indie game developer, working primarily in the renpy engine. I am as new as one is when it comes to coding, so excuse me if I sound dumb, but I had an idea for a horror game that would read whether or not the person playing was making any noise or playing completely silently and then react accordingly. Is this even possible or is it just way too complicated? Thanks in advance and sorry if this is a dumb question :)

[Assistant]
Definitely possible. Look into any audio library that will perform a Fourier transform on audio. (It might be called FFT for Fast Fourier transform).

This will get you your audio (i.e. the mic) represented in the frequency domain, or rather, as what the various magnitudes of the various frequencies are that make up the sound wave.

You can run logic over those magnitudes to say stuff like "if the magnitude of any frequencies in the high pitched range spikes for a certain amount of time, then the user may have just screamed"


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Trek] Why does nobody use or fear hypervelocity weapons?

A shuttlecraft going full impulse (1/4th c) is a planet-killing projectile.  Something that massive going that speed is going to hit anything you point it at with so much force that it would make any conventional weapon we see in the show look like throwing firecrackers at a tree.  It's understandable that the Federation wouldn't use what amounts to an extinction-level WMD, and even hostile, less scrupulous powers might be constrained by a MAD-style understanding, but what about races like the Borg?

[Assistant]
I've seen it speculated that Impulse runs on similar mechanics to the Warp Drive, which is why there are no signs of relativistic effects and occasional mistakes where high Impulse is seemingly superluminal. Dunno how much support for that there is.

With that said: phasers travel at light speed, and can transfer energy no less directly than a kinetic strike would. Any equiv-tech civilization *can* easily wipe out life on a planet, it's mentioned several times.

Why don't they? Well, what would be the point? The Borg *do* wipe out advanced life on the planets they attack, but they process it for useful resources first. If you're on an away mission of some kind, you can't use too much power without risking your own life (note that an overclocked Federation handgun can take out several decks of a ship.)

If for some reason you need to extinguish a native population - not enslave them, but actively get rid of them all - and there's nothing on the surface you care about, then yeah, you can wipe them out. Unless they're advanced enough to have planetary shields. But how often are you going to need to do that.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: What, exactly is capitalism?

I have googled it, trust me. I just don't understand it, no idea why. Can anybody help me out here?

Edit: sorry about the comma in the title, lol.

[Assistant]
Three main factors (simplified for this post) make capitalism:

* private citizens own the businsses, not the government

* goods are sold for profit, not given away at cost

* markets decide the prices of things, not cartels or governments

Now, as with most things in life, in practice not everything is black and white.  Even in a "capitalist" nation like the USA, the government owns some businesses and sets some prices.  Other nations like China may be in even more of a gray area.  But these are the main factors.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: A nationwide 15 dollar minimum wage isn't the best idea

The minimum wage definitely needs to go up, but 15 dollars nationwide seems like an oversimplistic idea. It's already 15 dollars in most major cities, and enacting it gives no guarantees it's going to go up in the future. Also, 15 dollars isn't the same in rural Idaho as it is in San Francisco.

I feel like it should scale with price of living in an area instead of just being a flat rate nationwide, which guarantees that it'll go up as necessary over time. It'll also solve the issue of money being worth different things in different places.

[Assistant] If we kept consistent with inflation and production, the minimum wage would currently be around $21/hour regardless of where you live. $15 is a really moderate amount. The average minimum wage across the country is $9, or about $19,200 per year. The average rent across the country is about $1,450 per month or about $17,600 per year. Average rent is 91.6% of the average minimum wage. Our countrys economic model is based on a time when you could pay college tuition with money from a summer job, then support a family including a house and car on a single income. And its not that the money just isnt there. The gap between what average workers make and the top people at companies make has spread ridiculously far, and most companies could easily pay at least in the $20 range as a minimum and do just fine. The problem is that shareholders expect financial growth year over year, and pay at the top tiers (including options and benefits and bonuses) keeps growing. The rich keep getting richer, and were down here arguing about whether people deserve $15 a god damn hour.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Shadow of War]How the hell is Celebrimbor so powerful?

I mean, he's just a fallen elf who made a ring, right? What gives him the power to basically single handedly stand against the full might of Sauron and all his armies?

[Assistant]
I think you may be underestimating the old Elves.

Elves the likes of Celebrimbor are nearly as powerful as Sauron. We have examples of Elves of his stature killing Balrogs.

Celebrimbor is also the grandchild of Faenor, who was a mighty Elf in his own right, and made the palantiri, something Gandalf said was beyond the skill of even Sauron. So he has powerful blood, which counts for a lot in Middle Earth.

Now, does that mean he can fight whole armies single-handed? Probably not, but then again, Shadow of War (sorry) isnt canon.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Wars] Why did Greedo try to kill Han?

If there was a bounty out on his head, why would Greedo try to kill him? Boba Fett says "He's no use to me dead.", implying Jabba wants him alive.

[Assistant] When Greedo confronted Solo on Tattoine, Jabba was simply looking to either recoup lost expenses or get revenge. Solo was not needed alive for either of them, as with him dead Jabba could essentially just waltz in and take the *Falcon* as payment. The events on Bespin took place three years after that, though. Three years of Solo avoiding paying Jabba and avoiding/killing any bounty hunter that came after him. Jabba was at this point very displeased, and wanted to make a real example of him. The best (and most humiiliating) way to do that would be to have Solo captured alive and tortured in front of his entire court, ensuring that no one would dare think to cross Jabba again. Having Solo turn up as a *literal* trophy to hang on the wall was a bit of an added bonus that Jabba was not expecting.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why did the guitar become such a staple of modern music?

My grandfather was telling me that when he was a boy the guitar was seen as kind of an odd, out of place instrument that wasn't really played that often. Now it would be tough to argue that it isn't a staple of modern day music. A majority of bands follow a basic guitar+drums+vocals formula and while there is vast room for changes and additions, that is a pretty basic foundation. Why has this become so?

[Assistant]
Guitar was popular in the 20's and 30's as a rhythm instrument for the most part.  (And for solo blues and country/folk and gypsy jazz and things like that.)  But most people wanted to see a Big Band with a full orchestra that they could dance to.

Then when big bands started to fade from popularity and electrical amplification started to take off, the electric guitar from Les Paul and then the Stratocaster from Fender were there at just the right time.

The electric guitar became associated with youth music in the early 50's and has remained so ever since.  But like Kwibbian_Kel's article says, it's not as popular as it once was.  But its versatility in widely different genres of music has kept it around for over half a century, and it will still be around for quite a while.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: when a news story says something like "the fire caused $50 million in damage" how are they calculating the dollar amount?

[Assistant]
Depending on the scope of the damage, they could get an estimate from the fire department. They know the extent of the damage, and can guestimate what it would cost to repair/rebuild.

When you talk about larger disasters, like the Fort McMurray fire, they also take into account a number of other factors like disruption to the local and larger economy.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: David Blane's card trick where the card the victim guessed ends up in pocket, wallet, etc.

It's a pretty amazing trick where he hands a real deck to the victim, has them do random nonsense (move deck around, split deck, etc.) and then asks them to pick a random card. The card then appears in the victims wallet, under their watch, or in their pocket. Also would like ice pick through the hand with no blood explained. When the doctors X-rayed the ice pick and it was real my mind was blown.

[Assistant] The mark, if real,  would likely have been reverse pick pocketed before the trick. Slight of hand can explain how he knew the card to put in. He shows a real deck, has them cut the real deck, then fidgets with his hands, shows you there's nothing under his (short) sleeves by touching them, lets his hands fall to his waist, you get the picture. At this point the real deck is swapped out for the gaff deck that only has the card type he put in their pocket earlier. Signatures? Their credit card has them. Behind plate glass? Anybody could have put it there, same with any other of those gimmicks. The trick is making you think the card you choose  has meaning, but all it means is the magician now has 53 decks missing it.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: How do the mechanical elements of a hydraulic press (oil, pumps, valves etc) withstand pressure that can flatten a piece of metal?

[Assistant]
The mechanical advantage of hydraulics is that extremely high pressures are not necessary to generate a large force.

If you had a piston 1 foot in diameter, a measily 50 psi can generate 5000 pounds of force.  Force = pressure times area.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Bobs Burgers] When will Louise outgrow her bunny ears?

Louise has worn those ears for years (both in-Universe and out).

How old do you think shell be when she finally gets rid of them? Will they still have sentimental significance, or would she just chuck them in a Goodwill box somewhere?

[Assistant] Based on her attitude towards them she'll hold onto them until she lets her guard down with someone.  First love or a therapist that breaks through.  It's her security blanket so it'll probably take a monumental effort to get them off her permanently and be in her possession until she has children of her own to pass them onto.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: What causes some food to be so unfilling?

I can eat an entire footlong subway sub no problem, but if I go to a different non-chain sub store and get a 10-12 inch sub, I can usually not finish it. Sometimes I only eat half of the non subway sub.

What is different between subway's sandwiches and other nicer stores sandwiches to cause this?

[Assistant]
Fat content.

Lewis and Clark (the explorers, not Superman) had this problem.   They were all eating a whole lot of Elk meat, but it's so lean that they felt they were starving all the time.

Stomachs feel themselves stretching, sure, but they also have some sense of what the content is.  And that's mostly how much fat is in there.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[The Incredibles] Why are there no supervillains?

Every villain we see in the movies is just plain folks with some technological know-how. (Syndrome, Screenslaver, The Underminer, Bomb Voyage, Ugly Guy with Rocket.)

There are no references to super powered villains, and they would definitely not obey the superhero relocation act.  What is it about having super powers that makes people only be heroic?

[Assistant]
I wouldn't call the Underminer "plain folk"...dude's like half mole.

In any case, the Incredibles-verse is extremely lethal - regular heroes drop like flies even when they're not breaking any laws.  Presumably being a villain is doubly dangerous.  You not only have to worry about heroes, but also other villains, law enforcement, and militaries.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: If Snapchat hypothetically accepted Facebooks offer of $3 billion in cash, how would such a large amount of money be transferred?

[Assistant]
Normal electronic payment would be fine.

In the UK we call them CHAPs, Americans would probably call them wire transfers.

Regardless, you can transfer really big amounts of money this way. Really big. Billions are unusual but by no means unprecedented.

Here in the UK, CHAPs payments are the Bank Of England's own settlement method, and the way large treasury deals are done. Settlement payments between banks for 100m plus happen everyday.

It's also the system used to buy houses, but the method is exactly the same.

Source: Over ten years in banking, specialising in payments.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: where does all the money go after the stock market crashes?

is anyone getting rich because of the economic downturn?

[Assistant]
Money isn't a physical thing, it's an idea.  It doesn't have objective existence.

*Cash* is a physical thing with objective existence, but cash isn't money, cash is *worth* money.  We've got a lot lot lot lot more money in the world than there is cash, though.

When the stock market crashes, the amount of money in the world is reduced.  That money doesn't "go" anywhere, mostly, it just ceases to be.

Say you buy ten shares of FOO for $10/share, so you spent $100.  A month passes, and the FOO company is in the news with some cool new product, and now people are willing to pay $20/share for FOO because they believe it will make a big profit in the future.  Your ten shares are now worth $200 because people are willing to pay more for them.  So we say that that $200 exists in the stock market, even if you don't sell your shares.

You hold on to these shares, and a few months later there's a recession.  Now, not only do people no longer believe FOO will make as big a profit, but fewer of them have money to spend to buy shares anyway.  With so few buyers around, when someone does sell some shares of FOO, they can't find a buyer willing to pay more than $5/share... so they sell.

You still have the same ten shares of stock, but because other people just sold their shares of FOO for $5 each, we know that's what they're worth now.  So your ten shares are now worth $50, because that's what people would be willing to pay if you wanted to sell them.  $150 of your money has vanished from the total amount we claim the stock market is worth.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Harry Potter] So like, what exactly happened to Sirius Black?

I know he fell into the thing and it's implied that he's dead and everything. But is he just chilling in the thing now with a bunch of other spirits, or is he just dead like all other dead people?

[Assistant]
I believe he got hit with the killing curse and fell through the archway which is the veil between the world of the living and the Harry Potter afterlife, It is implied that once you go through it you don't come back out. So yeah he is dead like the rest of Harry's family.

He also appeared when Harry used the resurrection Stone in the Deathly Hallows, so pretty much confirmed dead.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Wars] Do people in universe use the ABY/BBY system to count years?

For those who don't know, the way the fandom tracks years is ABY/BBY (after/before battle of Yavin - basically before/after episode 4). Is this used in universe?

If not, what year is it to the characters in universe?  Actually, to a space faring civilization, what planet do they use to track years?  I guess Coruscant maybe?

If the ABY/BBY system is used in universe, what did people in the prequel era use to track years?

[Assistant]
While it was used by some, there are literally thousands of other calendar metrics used.

The foundation of the Republic is a common one. Years since a certain planet joined the Republic or was colonized is another. The Empire used a dating system based upon its formation.

We don't know what year the prequel era Republic used in canon, but in Legends they set a new calendar system just three years before the Naboo Crisis, before that they used the Ruusan Reformation as their basis.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Marvel Universe] What is exactly Galactus? why does he have a human resemblance?

is he Human?

[Assistant]
Galactus is the last inhabitant of the previous iteration of the universe. He survived the big crunch, and was birthed in our big bang, as a mind blindingly powerful cosmic force.

He isn't actually human, and his appearance changes depending on the creature viewing him. To a human, he looks like a big human in a suit, but he would look totally different to an alien sufficiently different from our mind set.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Are there wavelength limits for electromagnetic waves?

This may be interpreted as a Quantum Mechanics question. I recently learned about selection rules for decay of excited states in Hydrogen, which can govern what wavelength/frequency of light is emitted by an electron decaying to a ground state. Since matter that is moving at some velocity can be described as a wave (via its de Broglie wavelength) by lambda = h/momentum, is it possible to generate a photon for any wavelength for that corresponding "matter wave". For example, is it possible to generate a photon with a wavelength equivalent to me travelling at 1 m/s? l=h/(100kg*1m/s) ~ 6x10^-36 m.   Are these waves related to the type of matter that emits them and if so, is that band structure even possible? I know that black holes can emit pretty short wavelengths, but I have no idea if they can emit ones that are that short. Thanks!

[Assistant]
Not really, what happens is that electromagnetism is not valid up to every energy scale. The shorter the wave-length, the bigger is the energy of your photon. Once your photon has an energy comparable to the electro-weak scale, the effects of the unification of EM and weak forces kick in, and it stops making sense talking about a photon.

Nevertheless, you will still have a particle (it just won't be a photon) with that very short wave-length. Once you go to really high energies (or short wave-lengths), the effective description of what's in there changes. This goes up to the Planck scale, where it stops making sense talking about particles localized within that scale, since you start producing black-holes that grow with the energy.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why does the urge of going to the bathroom drastically increase the closer you get to the bathroom?

[Assistant]
It's a trained psychological response.

We have trained ourselves that the toilet is a safe place to let loose.

It's the same reason people will fall asleep if they lay down on a bed, even if they are not tired.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Pirates of the Caribbean] Given that Davy Jones was immortal, what would have happened to him at the end of the Age of Sail?

Once sails were replaced with combustion engines and wood with metal, would the *Flying Dutchman* have been upgraded as well? Or would there have been an antiquated sailing ship haunting modern ships?

[Assistant]
When was Davy Jones condemed? The Dutchman looks like a fairly modern Ship of the line, so presumably it gets upgraded through the eras unless Davy Jones himself is only recently cursed.

So Davy Jones of the presend day would be equiped with some kind of spectral Battleship or Aircraft carrier to take on modern ships.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Avatar TLA/LOK] When an Avatar's past lives advise them, is it a projection of their memories or are they doing it in person?

I guess what I'm asking is, do Avatars maintain a consciousness when their spirit is reincarnated into a new body?

Do they still have individuality while inhabiting the body of their future life or have they completely merged into an 'Avatar Spirit' with the collective consciousness and memories of every Avatar in existence (excluding the current Avatar)?

[Assistant] A little from column A a little from column B.  Aang wouldn't need to actually talk to the other Avatars if it was the same as just remembering what they would do.  They aren't there as separate people, watching.  The memories are all there, merged into a sort of collective consciousness (not including the current Avatar) but can be "separated out".


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Man of Steel] Say that when Colonel Nathan Hardy was fighting Faora, in spite of having his men wiped out he pulled a blade to face the her. This made him eligible to be a Green Lantern at that moment for his bravery, courage and willpower. How would things have played out?

The colonel pulls out a damn knife to face this alien threat that just tanked bullets from Assault Rifles. Not only that, he also emptied all the bullets of his firearms in her. He could've taken the easy way out and just killed himself, but he was willing to go all out.

Had in that very moment a Green Lantern ring came floating to him and chose him, how would things have played out? Would he be kicking some Kryptonian ass? How would the events in the film, and would he have joined the JL?

[Assistant]
I don't think we've seen DCEU Green Lanterns yet, save for a brief cameo in the flashback in *Justice League.*

If he just got the ring, though, that's a whole lot of space-training that's missing for a decidedly cosmic encounter.  While technically Tama-Re tried to protect Krypton's sector, the Corp's lack of interference in Zod, Jor-El, and Krypton in general implies they're a little cautious around Special K.

So, an Earthling who is assured he's very, very brave and imagines he stabs very, very well against a bullet-proof, jet smashing, tank busting alien still probably gets his spleen punched out.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Is it true you cannot master a language (speak like native) after around a certain age?

I heard this a few times but think it is false. Does this limitation really exist and is it really that hard to overcome?

[Assistant]
You can master a language pretty well after the age of 10 or so, but studies have proven that you will [almost] always make small mistakes in grammar and have a slight accent, and be less likely to pick up subtle grammar misnomers.

It is also harder to pick up a language after this age, but it is still possible with study, concentration and immersion.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Do animals which move very quickly, such as flies, perceive things at that speed and they just have insane reaction times? Or do their brains work in such a way that they perceive things at a speed comparable to what we would call "normal" speed?

[Assistant]
If you think of the physical dimensions, insects and small animals are much smaller than humans so the nerve signals have to travel a shorter distance.

We do not have metal wires or optical fibers in our body to transfer the signals from our senses to our brain and back. The "electrical" signals that we generate in our nerves are due to a change in concentration of charge which is much slower than the speed of signals going through metal wire or optical fibers.

Therefore, in the classic reaction test with someone dropping a ruler over your hand and you catching it, when you see the ruler drop, the signals have to go from your eye to your brain, get processed, then a signal needs to travel to your brain to your hand to close the fingers. The average reaction time for this experiment is around 0.2 - 0.25 seconds.

If you were as small as a fly, all these signals travel much faster due to the small size of a fly. Thus it can react much faster to change it's flight patterns to anything it sees.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Computer Science majors- how much math is involved?

So I'm at the point where I'm selecting my major for college next year, and I'm having a problem choosing between Computer Science or Network and Computer Security. Initially, I had my mind dead set on Computer science, but upon further investigation, I was told a lot of math is involved (which isn't a bad thing, it's just not my strong suit). So now I switched over to Network and Computer Security because that's the closest thing to an IT major at my school of choice.Can anyone describe their experience with the major or field? Anything you have to say helps me, and I thank you for your time.

[Assistant]
It's worth noting that computer science *is* a branch of mathematics. Even when you're not using numbers and conventional math, you're using discrete math, graph theory, logic, and other applied mathematics.

You may find that the kind of math you do in computer science is more suited to the way you think and learn, but if you're opposed to mathematics as a whole, then you may want to look at a different major. It's not just about how many required math courses you'll have to do to graduate because every computer science class is also a math class.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Can wasps/flies detect the difference between real sugar and aspartame?

If so, do they selectively prefer the real stuff? Struck me that insects that go after sweet liquids might be able to tell the real from the fake - if they can, any insight into the mechanism by which this occurs would be greatly appreciated.

[Assistant]
They will be attracted to it but because they can't be metabolized which means they provide no sustenance to the bug.

This is the same reason hummingbird feeders explicitly say not to use artificial sweeteners- the birds will eat it, get 0 calories, and starve to death with a full belly.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why are humans physically weaker than our ancestors?

I've read that homo erectus were bigger and more powerful than Homo sapiens.  My understanding is that we all carry around a bit of Neanderthal DNA who were also much stronger and physically sturdy than modern man.  Why have we lost that physical advantage?  Surely strength along with more efficient brains would have helped natural selection?

[Assistant]
There are a few different possible reasons. One is that there is often a general tradeoff between power and finesse. You can move a heavy weight, but you can't move a heavy weight very precisely. It could be that dropping overall muscle mass helped with the fine motor control we needed to make better tools. Perhaps with better control, the tools improved and we made up for the loss of power.

_*Edit: Comparison with chimpanzees and other apes give a clue here. One of the reasons other apes are so much stronger is that the tendons that attach their muscles to their bones tends to be further away from the joint, which gives more leverage and thus more overall power. But this also makes very fine movements more difficult._

Another reason is that muscle is energetically expensive. You have to eat a lot of food to build and then maintain muscle. When modern human ancestors and our very close cousins the Neanderthals lived at the same time, it was the height of the Ice Age. It is likely that food was very scarce. In that situation, it's advantageous to have less muscle mass, because you waste less energy maintaining muscle that isn't useful because there isn't anything around to kill. Instead, with less muscle, more energy can be spent on keeping the rest of your body in better repair. Or maybe there's game, but you have to chase it a long way. Modern human anatomy is _extremely_ efficient at moving long distances compared to the vast majority of other animals, and a heavier, stockier build like that of Neanderthals would be at a disadvantage. Over very long distances, like when you're chasing a migrating herd, humans may have been able to move further distances on less food, increasing the chances they survive to carry out the hunt when they catch up.

Less inherent muscle mass means it's easier to survive when you're on the brink of starvation. Neanderthals had both heavier musculature and slightly larger brains, both of which are very energy intensive to build and maintain. If it's a race to avoid starving to death, modern humans may have had an advantage. Evolution doesn't select for intelligence or strength, evolution selects for survival and reproduction. And there are situations where maximum intelligence and strength are not necessarily the most optimal strategies for reproducing.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Star Wars] Why is the Death Star laser green?

[Assistant]
It was a marketing decision, basically. Like most large organisations, the Empire has very strict rules in place for its staff with respect to how their logo is used, what font and font size is used for internal documents etc.

The Death Star was supposed to scare the shit out of anybody who thought to stand against them, so it was important to make sure that everyone could tell it was an Empire weapon.

So - green laser, same as they already use for TIE fighters, star destroyers etc.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why does alcohol "burn" while drinking it?

What makes it "burn" while you drink it and also causes your stomach to become warm? Why?

[Assistant] It pulls water from the cells lining the skin, causing them to dry out somewhat, and they signal that stress as a burning sensation. It makes you feel warm because, when inside the body, acting as a drug, it dilates (makes expand) blood vessels, allowing more blood to flow to your skin, hands and feet, making them feel warm. In so doing, though, you lose more heat, so you do not want to give alcohol to someone who is at risk of hypothermia. But if someone is merely cold, but is now dry and in a warm place, a shot of spirits to make them feel warm and comfortable will do no harm.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: How have we not run out of space for graves in cemeteries by now?

[Assistant]
Because they haven't. Cemeteries have become more and more of a nuisance, ask any urban planer or city developer their opinions on cemeteries? Burial plots are crazy expensive (that's not even considering the cost for a funeral as whole,) are allotted only for a specific time, charges maintenance fee's. If those cost fail to get cover, they'll dig that person up just incinerate them. If they can get a fresh one in the ground they'll gig up any ol' schmo they can legally get away and put some paying customers body there.

So just get cremated. Its cheaper and much better when the zombies come.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: It is completely justified to hate the "new normal" trend we are seeing due to the pandemic and being shamed for it doesn't make sense.

I sometimes I hate how American most of Reddit is. I'm Indian and I have taken the vaccine which is available here and I'm also wearing masks all the time because India.

But, even though I understand how Work From Home is awesome (and I'm for it completely) I just can't feel the same way about parks, restaurants and stadiums.

I cannot for the life of me imagine empty stadiums due to covid. Only if you are a person with very very very limited intelligence would you think that I am advocating for unsafe environments. What I am trying to say is that this "new normal" has continued for too long and there are just as many people who are uncomfortable with the continuation of this lifestyle and want to return to how things were in the beginning.

Problem is because of how America centric Reddit is I and people like me who say we hate "new normal" get linked with Trump, American Right, anti-vax and anti-mask crowd. People fail to understand that there are people against "new normal" just because they miss the old normal and it's nothing to do with America, its politics and its conspiracy theorists.

Lastly, I know the internet makes you feel that almost 6 billion out of 7 billion population is introverted but that is not the case and even I as an introvert would not like to stop other people from enjoying things just because the current situation suits me. I want the parks to open, the crowd to cheer when the players hit a six or score a goal and not in the stupid screens on a stadium way but the actual people in a stadium way. And there is nothing wrong in that. You assuming wrong things about me is the problem here. Not me. Also fuck LinkedIn.

[Assistant]
You're right, it does suck to see, for example, a wrestling event without a crowd. That did make the last year or so of wrestling awkward.

Do you know what sucks more than that? People dying.

Almost everyone wants to return to the way things were before COVID. Very few people like the current state of affairs. But outwardly expressing that dislike makes it seem like you're either downplaying the pandemic (like Trump) or that you're expressing a first-world problem like not being able to go to a wrestling match when there are people who are dying from a pandemic, making you look callous.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Do COVID PCR-tests always involve reverse transcription? Are there any that don't?

I visited Thailand in November when travel restrictions loosened and back then, one of the requirements for entry was a negative RT-PCR test result. They were very specific that it had to be "RT-PCR" not just PCR. There were some people online saying that their lab reports didn't specify RT-PCR so they got delayed or turned away at the airport.

My understanding is that coronavirus is an RNA virus. Hence, all PCR tests must involve a reverse transcription step, so any PCR test for COVID must automatically involve this step to reverse transcribe viral RNA into DNA to then run PCR on.

Is this accurate? I can't find the answer anywhere online. All descriptions of the PCR test for COVID seem to use "RT-PCR" and "PCR" interchangeably, but always involve an RT step.

I briefly spoke to a staff member at a local testing site who disagreed and said there are PCR tests for COVID that don't involve the RT step. I have experience from doing PCR in an academic biochemistry lab during university but it's been a while.

[Assistant] You are correct. If RNA is the initial target (as with any PCR-based test for active COVID), a reverse transcription step needs to be involved. Both reactions, the RT and the PCR, can be done within the same reaction with the proper input and cycling parameters, though, which eliminates the need for multiple separate reaction/purification steps.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[X-Men] Are Mystiques disguises truly perfect? Is there anyway to tell her apart from whoever she is impersonating, other than telepathy?

For instance, if a target has a scar that Mystique doesnt know about, would it still show up on her disguised body? What about internal differences like say, a removed appendix or situs inversis?

[Assistant] Iirc she gets weight wrong a lot and cannot strip clothing off. She can only mimic things close to her own mass so a fat person she mimics will weigh less than the actual person. And since she mimics clothes simply having people remove clothing down to a certain level she's incapable of as the clothes she mimics are her own body. But if she knows your checking she'll eat a big breakfast or wear clothes rather than go nude.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
What's the difference between an argument and an explanation? Homework Help

I know that this question was already asked (2 years ago), but I couldn't understand the explanation. I tried to google it as well, which led to me only becoming more perplexed.

I read that an argument can answer the question "How do you know?" while an explanation answers the question "Why is that so?" But I'm struggling to notice the difference.

For example (from my homework, which we are being asked to determine if what is written is an argument or not, and if it is to standardize it):
"I don't care what you say. I really think that Mary is in love with Allan. Why? Because she always wants to talk about him. And she gets very excited when he is due for a visit. She even blushes when you ask her about him."

I initially assumed it was an argument, but it doesn't seem to have a logical flow, it just seems to be answering why the speaker believes in what they believe.

Sorry if this was long. Thank you.

[Assistant] An argument gives an account as to *how you know* a conclusion to be true, while an explanation gives account as to *why* a conclusion is true. From your example, it is clear that the narrator is giving an account as to how he knows that Mary is in love with Allan. He argues that since Mary always wants to talk about Allan, gets excited about him and even blushes around him, she must truly be in love with Allan. But ask yourself are those truly reasons *why* Mary is in love with him? Surely these facts about Mary are a result of her being in love, not whats causing her to be in love. Therefore, these arent explanations as to why Mary loves him. Its an argument as to how the narrator is justified in believing that she does.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: how are hot-air balloons navigated?

[Assistant] Aviators weather reports will provide anticipated wind speed and direction at different altitudes, so to some extent you can control which prevailing wind you are in by changing altitude. In general though, you are entirely at the mercy of the wind, so ballon journeys are hops in a single direction planned in advance in accordance with the wind direction.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Sup everyone! I was wondering about terminal velocity. How exactly do you calculate it, and how do you determine how long it would take for an object to reach it?

Bonus question is why exactly there is a terminal velocity! Thank you all for your help!

[Assistant]
A body falling to the earth is being pulled by gravity with a force equal to its mass times the gravitational acceleration of the earth (9.8m/s^2) -- F=mg. If there's nothing (like air resistance) to oppose that force, a body will continue accelerating indefinitely. So say, on the moon, there is no terminal velocity.

The force opposing a body in the air is drag, which depends on the shape of the body and the properties of the air you're falling through. Drag can be determined by
    D=1/2 * rho * V^2 * C_D * S
where rho is the density of the fluid, V is the velocity of the object, S is a reference area (say, the frontal cross-sectional area of a falling object), and C_D is the "drag coefficient." C_D is something you can determine experimentally or numerically which depends primarily on the shape of the body, and secondarily on particular properties of the flow (mach number, reynolds number, etc). An arrow will have a much lower C_D than a brick, for example.

When the drag force pulling you back equals the force of gravity pulling you down, you've reached the equilibrium "terminal velocity." Determining how long it takes to reach is then a straightforward calculus problem.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: What exactly happens to people in the US, if they have no health insurance, no money, and get badly injured?

I'm in England, and over here, if you got hit by a car, and were badly hurt (let's say a broken pelvis, back and legs), you'd get picked up by a free ambulance, taken to a free hospital, fixed up for free by whatever surgeons were necessary. You'd stay in hospital for however long without it costing a penny. At the end of it all you'd go 'yeah, cheers', and walk away, with a total cost of 0.00. And this would be the same whether you earned 1 / year, or 10m / year.

Imagine the same situation in the US, where you have no private health insurance whatsoever, and no money. Presumably you wouldn't be left at the side of the road to die, but if you needed massive surgery right away, and had no way at all of paying, what happens then?

I'm asking in good faith; I don't want this to be all 'Goddam Commie Europeans / Bastard heartless Yanks blah blah'. I'm just baffled at how it all actually works in practice in the US. Thank you.

[Assistant]
You go to the hospital and get treated in the emergency room until such point as you are stable.

You will be charged and you can either pay the fees or you don't and it goes to collections tanking your credit score.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Trek] Are there robots in the 24th/25th Century and what do they do?

Aside from Data, are there other automatons/robots/androids and what do they do in the Star Trek universe. Particularly interested in seeing if robots played a key role in Roddenberry's vision of the future.

[Assistant] AI never ends up working right in the trek universe. They always end up turning evil. Even Data's had his moments. Most civilizations stay away from it. There is the Pralor, who built a bunch of robot to fight a war for them. It didn't end well.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Wars] What did the Imperial after action reports look like after the Battle of Hoth?

On the one hand, the Empire scattered a Rebel encampment.

On the other, they had several Star Destroyers disabled by ion cannon fire, lost several AT-AT walkers in the ground assault, didn't manage to capture or kill Skywalker or Princess Organa, two of the Rebellion's most famous heroes, and then to cap it all off had several more Star Destroyers damaged due to friendly collision and lost an entire Star Destroyer bridge to asteroid impact plus additional damage to the fleet suffered during the unsuccessful pursuit of the Millennium Falcon after the battle.

All in all, Hoth looks like a pretty major cock up from a strategic standpoint. How do the officers report on all of that to the top brass? How does Vader explain all of that to the Emperor?

[Assistant] Pretty easy. Admiral ozzel cocked it all up by exiting hyperspace too close to the planet. The rebels were alerted and able to scramble some of their forces off world. It's still a major victory for the empire but not a complete one. Ozzel is already dead so any and all blame for the tactical situation would be put on him rather than those participated in the battle. And losing a few AT-ATs and troopers is an easy trade for crippling the rebellion and capturing it's leaders.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Star Wars] What's a day in the life of an average Imperial Star Destroyer crew member?

[Assistant]
IMHO three shifts with over lapping start times [ie 0600 to 1400, 0700 to 1500, and 0800 to 1600] Mess halls run all day.  Two twenty minute breaks and one 40 minute break.

Six crew to a room with one toilet/shower.  Four NCOs and two officers per 'refresher.'

Average crew has one or more 'droids assisting them.  Droids cook meals [which are pretty good].

Empire encourages crew to study/train in off hours.  Many enjoy working the areoponic farms aboard.

Frequent shore leave opportunities, world class libraries and numerous sporting activities.

As long as you don't get into a beef with the Stormtroopers, it's pretty sweet.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] To a photon, dose it takes a year to travel one "light-year"?

[Assistant]
We cannot talk about how things look like from the perspective of a photon. Relativity tells us that there is no such thing as the inertial frame of a photon.

A light year is the distance that light travels in one year through vacuum as seen by a subluminal observer. You cannot define it from the perspective of a photon, because the perspective of a photon does not exist according to relativity.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Marvel] Does the Punisher care about anti-mutant hate crimes?

I don't remember Frank Castle ever getting involved in "punishing" the numerous people who attack and kill innocent mutants.

Does he not care, or is he just preoccupied with "normal" crimes?

[Assistant] He would see it as assault/murder, deserving of punishment. He's usually preoccupied with other, non-super power related crime, but if he walked in on someone attacking a mutant for no reason, he would certainly punish them.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Superman] If Superman looks through a basic toy store telescope how far into the universe can he see?

[Assistant] Only that much farther than it extends a regular person's vision. He does have an extended range of sight, but a "basic toy store telescope" doesn't make things that much easier to see at a distance, and in fact generally aren't focused enough or made of pure enough material to provide a really good boost to sight.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Lost Episode Creepypastas] Who lets the production crew and animators make episodes featuring horrific imagery, wouldnt they be fired on the spot?

[Assistant]
The implication is  generally meant to be that the episode is somehow haunted or cursed- that is, when it was made, it was normal, and then it was made creepy when released.

If it's more mundane, it's  generally one producer who's gone off the rails and everyone under them simply goes along. They usually are fired once its clear what's going on.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Men In Black] K shows J a small disc that they're going to be replacing CDs with. Obviously that didn't pan out, with digital music and streaming becoming dominant instead. Why?

Were those human innovations that just work better for our needs? More advanced alien tech the MIB got ahold of later? Or maybe alien tech they already gave humanity, repurposed in an unexpected way?

[Assistant] It wasn't a question of technical superiority but rather market fit. The disc could fit all music ever produced on it, but K didn't appreciate that humans wouldn't know what to do with that. We don't want to shuffle play all music in the world, 99.9% of which is awful. We want algorithms to decide what we should listen to from knowledge of our preferences. The best way to enable that kind of intelligence is with centralized servers. Once you're connected you might as well stream the music and not require localized storage at all.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why is the Star of David called the Star of David/why is it associated with David?

[Assistant]
The Hebrew term actually translates as "Shield of David", and is sometimes used metaphorically to refer to G_d.  The phrase has appeared in Jewish literature over many centuries.  The six pointed star has also appeared in Jewish writings over the centuries, but didn't really become popular as a symbol of Judaism until the 19th century.  But it evolved separately from the name.

It's not at all clear how the star became associated with that name.  But the reason why the phrase "Shield of David" refers to David is because David is considered the most important military leader in the Jewish Bible.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Interstellar] Why isn't Cooper filthy rich from owning fields of corn?

Like most people on Reddit, I have no idea what I'm talking about. That aside wouldn't owning fields of corn get you some good money in a time when most crops have died and corn demand is increasing while corn supply is decreasing? Cooper mostly just runs the farm with his fancy robot tractors and his relatives, shouldn't he be filthy rich?

[Assistant]
Maybe?  There's some reason that he might not be:

* previous crop failures
* high maintenance and seed costs
* socialization of farming (has the government taken over agriculture in some ways for the sake of national security?)
* artificial price caps (imposed by the government so that people can afford to eat)
* distraction (Cooper doesn't seem like the most attentive farmer)


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [MCU] If Tony is responsible for the death of Zemos family, why does Zemo seem to have it out for Steve Rogers specifically out of the Avengers?

[Assistant]
He doesn't have it out for Steve particularly, he has it out for the Avengers and super soldiers in general.

He has it out for the Avengers especially Stark because of Sokovia and he has it out for super soldiers because he believes that it leads to supremacist ideologies.

When Bucky asked him if he might be wrong about his beliefs because Steve wasn't corrupted, he acknowledged that Steve was the exception.

In Civil War, he was trying to tear apart the Avengers from within, he wasn't targeting Steve specifically.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why aren't there an excessive amount of fossils right at the KT Boundary?

I would assume (based on the fact that the layer represents the environmental devastation) that a large number of animals died right at that point but fossils seem to appear much earlier, why?

[Assistant] If a mass extinction occurs over, say, 100 years, there are probably actually fewer deaths during that century than in the previous century. Over the course of any given century, pretty well every animal living at the start will have died. In a stable population, these will be replaced by new births and there will be many generations of roughly consistent deaths and births. But if species are dying out, then halfway through the century, there will have been fewer births to contribute to additional deaths later in the century so by the end of the century there will have been fewer deaths than average, despite every member of the species dying.