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

[User]
ELI5: How do trees transfer water and nutrition to its leaves ?

How do hundred-meter trees transfer water and nutrition to its leaves, despite gravity ?

[Assistant]
Do you know how a dry paper towel will absorb more water than a wet paper towel? Roots do something kinda similar to make water get in them all the time. They will control their substances to make what's called osmosis keep water going in.

Then, they have very thin channels that go up the tree. Have you ever noticed how water tends to go up ever so slightly when it touches a cup or glass? That's called capilarity. Trees have channels so thin that water simply goes up, up, up.

But there's a limit how high water can get this way. So there's a third way. When sunlight hits leaves, some of the water evaporates. When one drop of water evaporates on the top of the tree, it creates a bit of pressure that makes one drop of water go up the same channel to the top of the tree. Almost like a very weak vacuum cleaner.

Along with the water, also salts and other nutrients the roots absorbed go up, too.


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

[User] [Transformers] How is Starscream worth keeping around?

[Assistant]
There is the idea that sometimes it's useful to have associates that you *know* are treacherous. (This isn't quite the same as 'keep your friends close and enemies closer', but that too.)

Also, he's just competent enough that if you didn't keep him around, he might start some distractingly-bothersome (if not actually dangerous) situation for you. At least this way you know what's going on.

And, as he would constantly be plotting to overthrow you, he'd be on the lookout for potential rivals *and* allies, which might sniff out someone more threatening before you'd have found them out yourself.


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

[User]
If Plato in the Republic means the ideal city to be an analogy for the human soul, doesn't this imply that the human soul too inevitably degenerates into barbarism as the city does?

I mean, if there is something inherently defective in the rule of the Guardian class which leads to a collapse into tyranny, isn't Plato implying that it is therefore impossible for human reason to control our appetites? And if so, wouldn't that make the pursuit of justice, knowledge, the Good and so on futile?

How might Plato have responded to this objection?

[Assistant] I think Plato would've said that a philosopher's soul, or a soul ruled by love of knowledge, is the only soul that is able to self-care in a way that doesn't make it barbaric, and that a non-philosophical soul can be tyrannical towards itself.


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

[User]
[MCU] Would Bruce Banner and the Hulk make different looking babies?

PLEASE DONT ADD ENDGAME SPOILERS

Let's use Black Widow as our subject, considering the  notable gifs thats been the subject of talk these days.

If Bruce and Hulk fucked Nat, and got her pregnant, would the resulting baby look the same? A friend of mine has a theory that Hulk is merely an astral form that, through the gamma radiation, became a reality within Bruce, having considered his previously known split personality diagnosis. Therefore, the DNA between Bruce and the Hulk is the same and will procreate the same phenotype. I would think otherwise, since Hulk is a mutation in DNA, and the transformtion between Bruce and the Hulk is because of a shift of their DNAs. Therefore, they would procreate differently.

What do you all think?

[Assistant] In several different universes/stories, it doesn't matter if it's Banner or Hulk doing the deed. The genetic material is the same, since they're the same being. And more often than not, his children are large and green with severe anger issues. Some worse than others.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does my breath stink in the morning even though I brushed/flossed/mouth washed before i went to bed?

[Assistant] At night your mouth doesn't produce saliva.  Saliva helps to reduce the amount of bacteria in your mouth.  But when your mouth is dry at night, bacteria multiplies because there isn't much saliva to control it.  When you brush your teeth before going to sleep it doesn't get rid of all the bacteria.  Bacteria is everywhere and you can't get rid of it all.


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

[User]
I don't believe that I, along with the vast majority of others are educated enough to understand what economic (and maybe some social) policies make sense, and therefore a large part of what makes democracy great loses meaning. CMV

Take something like minimum wage, I could want to help the poorer parts of the population, so maybe I vote to raise minimum wage. This could end up making small businesses close, or lay off workers, so maybe I vote to hold or lower the minimum wage. However this does not account for inflation, and it ends up hurting the poor.

I haven't studied minimum wage past what I've learned in high school and college, and I sure haven't studied privatizing social security, the effects of lowering the discount rate, or any other issue that some political experts can spend years researching, and still come to a conclusion that may differ from another experts. Why am I voting to put this guy in office over that guy? I try to stay aware of what's going on, but I can't give up my life to stay completely informed.

I'd rather not feel this way, so if someone could help me see another perspective, I'd really appreciate it.

Edit: this is not about minimum wage, or any of the other examples. It's about whether or not my vote carries any significance due to it coming from an uneducated mind.

[Assistant]
As voters our job is not to set policy.  For one that would be impossible given the complexity of the decisions (as you have stated) and for two then you would not have a need for elected leaders. What we do is hold the government accountable and give signals to our leaders regarding the direction that we want to go. These signals will then be (hopefully) taken into account.

Think about how the democrats lost the house shortly after passing health care reform. That was by no means a coherent, peer edited critique of the health care bill, but it showed that many parts of the country felt we were moving too far left too fast.  This in turn had an effect on how the supreme court and chief justice rogers in particular finally arrived at the decisions they did, to only partially uphold the law.

So we collectively do have an impact regarding overall direction of the country (or in a healthy democracy the electorate does), even if we don't understand the nuances of all the policy that a government has to set.


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

[User]
[The Office] What are the two schools of thoughts about bears?

In season 3, Jim mockingly asks Dwight what kind of bear is best, and Dwight begins saying there are two schools of thought before getting cut off. What was Dwight going to say?

[Assistant] Some bears, like brown and black bears, are generalists. They're omnivorous and can live in various environments, within reason. Other bears, like polar bears and panda bears, are specialists and are extremely good at living in specific environments. It's hard to compare these two groups because they've evolved to do different things. Is it better to be a generalist bear or a specialist bear?


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

[User] ELI5: why do things frozen with liquid nitrogen become so brittle and easily broken?

[Assistant]
Temperature is the measure of the random molecular kinetic energy of a substance. LN2 boils at a very low temperature, at -195 degrees C (-320F or 77K).

When things get colder, the motion of the molecules that make up that substance slows. Just like if you were to take an empty milk jug and fill it with scalding hot water, it becomes a lot more pliable, because the molecules are moving more quickly and can more easily slide past one another. Now, fill it with cold water, and it's nowhere near as pliable. Same deal. LN2 is just so cold, that it slows those molecules down a lot more, making it a lot harder for them to slide past each other so those bonds more or less just break.


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

[User]
CMV: The idea of "The Death of the Author" is entirely legitimate

Here's a quick definition of this from TVTropes: "Death of the Author is a concept from mid-20th Century literary criticism; it holds that an author's intentions and biographical facts (the author's politics, religion, etc) should hold no special weight in determining an interpretation of their writing. This is usually understood as meaning that a writer's views about their own work are no more or less valid than the interpretations of any given reader."

To me, what makes art special is that there is no right answer, that two people can experience a movie or a book and walk away with completely different interpretations of the themes, events and characters. If I can back up my interpretation of a piece of art with direct evidence from the art than why is my interpretation any less valid?

I'll give an example, this is actually what inspired me to make this post, and I think it's a little funny. So I was in Panera Bread and there was this picture up on the wall, it was for and by Panera Bread - it had the logo in it which I'll touch on in a second - but it was not a typical advertisement, it was just a picture really. I've tried to find the picture online but I can't find it, so here's my description:

There were two women, one on the left and one on the right - you're looking at them from the side, at their profiles. They're both looking down on a table between them as they're making cookies. They're wearing aprons and their sleeves are pulled up, and they're both putting icing on the cookies. The woman on the left looks about 60, give or take a few years. The woman on the right looks 35-40. They both have darker features, I thought they looked related like mother and daughter but my girlfriend disagreed so take that as you will. The colors of the painting were not saturated, they were pretty pale. Most of all, the women looked quite solemn, not even that they were focused on making the cookies, they just looked tired more than anything else. Finally, on the collar of the woman on right, is the Panera Bread logo sticking out.

To me, this picture can be interpreted as a critique of capitalism and its effects. How poorer people can be stuck in low-paying dead end jobs which gets moved on to their children, as they did not have the same opportunities as your average person for education, for example. I couldn't help but contrast the looks on their faces and the overall paleness of the picture with how bright and colorful the cookies were, like how behind what capitalism produces, there's something working their ass off and suffering - there's darkness behind the color. And then the Panera Bread logo just seemed the like the final punch to the gut, that this process is being orchestrated by this corporation being lead by people who are being paid more money than either of these workers could ever dream of receiving.

I said it was funny, because obviously that was not the intention. Panera Bread just wanted an artsy looking picture to hang in their stores because it helps with the atmosphere. And my own thoughts and beliefs simply informed an over analysis of this innocuous picture. But I still don't think I'm wrong, photography is an art form and I gave reasons for my interpretation. Whether or not they're good is up to you but they are reasons.

Additionally, I don't even consider "The Death of the Author" to *really* be the death of the author simply because the author or the artist or the director or whatever has all the power in the making of their art. If an artist has an interpretation of their work as their making it, they have all the power to add evidence which makes their interpretation legitimate.

I have an example of this too, (I promise this is shorter) in the show Bojack Horseman, there's a character named Todd that was revealed to be asexual at the end of the third season and the beginning of the fourth season. The show's creator and showrunner Raphael Bob-Waksberg has said that he interpreted Todd to be asexual before this point, from the first 2 seasons or so, he interpreted something deeper of a character he created that, at that point, had no evidence whatsoever in the show. He followed his interpretation and used his power as the author to make Todd asexual. Todd isn't asexual because Raphael said so, he's asexual because of all of the evidence from the show, from all the stories and lines of dialogue related to Todd's love life throughout the entire series.

That is the true power of the author, that they can create their own evidence for their interpretation of their work. And even still, people can have differing interpretations because there are so many factors to account for regardless of the artform that an author couldn't possibly make every detail definitively prove their interpretation.

[Assistant] It's got elements of truth, but it also certainly has flaws.  One obvious example is sequels.  Information learned in sequels to a book can certainly inform our understanding of the first book.  Sequels written by the same author are and should remain more valid than "fanfic" written by other authors.  If we really take the Death of the Author too seriously, then we'd have to conclude that there's no difference between sequels written by the actual author taking advantage of foreshadowing they deliberately introduced early on, and sequels written by other authors taking advantage of whatever they want to turn into foreshadowing after the fact.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does it cost more to run air conditioning in the summer than it does to run heating in the winter?

Curious, because our electricity bills are always seem to be ridiculously high in the summer, when AC is running. And we don't have any other provider of heat like gas or fire.

[Assistant] Heating is more efficient than cooling; at a minimum, a working machine produces heat. If an air conditioner is producing heat as well as cold air, that's reducing its efficiency. If a heater is producing heat as a byproduct, well... that's sort of what it's supposed to do.


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

[User]
[Lord of the Rings] If I'm a being with multiple arms to accommodate every single rings of power, what would happen to me if I wore them all?

Would I become the be-all-end-all of Middle Earth? Would I become some godlike being?

[Assistant] You'd be a thrall of Sauron that much faster. If Sauron had all the rings of power, nothing would happen, because he controls them all through the One Ring anyway, and the point of them is controlling others.


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

[User] ELI5: Our body fight diseases by increasing the temperature, why betraying it by cooling ourselves down?

[Assistant]
Your body is a house, pathogens are a thousand and thousand of cockroaches ramping on the floor.
Fever is basically the house habitant (immune system) being like "Oh fuck it, let's burn the fucking house down".

It's super effective but it can be very damaging, when a fever isn't really high, doctors usually advice to let it go and wait for it to decrease, when it raises to 103F (40c) and keeps increasing, it's time to stop the fever because it's going to do more harm than good (I think you start getting convulsion around 105 F or 41c and risk brain damage if it increases further).


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

[User]
Does extreme cold affect internet speeds?

This may seem like a ridiculous question, but I live in MN (it was fifteen below this morning, without windchill) and it seems, as it often does when it is very cold, that the internet is more sluggish.  Is that even possible?

[Assistant] Theoretically, the cold could make the internet faster, as colder materials conduct electricity better (with the exception of semiconductors). In the case of an optical connection, light would travel slower in a cold material, because the cold material would be more dense. However, from a purely physical perspective, there's no way you would ever notice the difference. More likely everyone was stuck inside because of the cold so everyone was using the internet.


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

[User] ELI5: The Universe is expanding, but what is it expanding into?

[Assistant]
It doesn't have to be expanding into anything: if the universe is everything that exists, then there might be nothing for it to expand into. Instead, it's just that the space inside the universe is increasing, which isn't actually the same thing at all.

Don't bother trying to get your head around that idea -- modern physics is full of stuff no human can get their heads around without going insane.


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

[User]
CMV: Mike Wazowski WAS scary, he just focused on the wrong style

Al through the amazing movie that is Monsters University it explains the backstory of Mike. He wished to become a scarer despite other monsters observing he doesnt have a scary appearance.

The movie points out that even though he cant look scary, he is so knowledgeable on scare techniques he is able to coach other monsters to be scary. Those from his fraternity learn to use their different skills and appearances to scare in their own style.

My point is, why didnt he realize he could do the same for himself? He insisted on making his weak growls and jumping up with his tiny body, which was very ineffective on scaring. I dont know about everyone else but I myself would have peed my pants if I saw a green orb screeching on my bed, to notice it and have a massive creepy eye open up and get up.

Mike was just not suited to be the same scarer that Sully was. A loud and fierce one. We could have had plenty of success studying a different scare style that was more creepy and uncanny valley-ish.

Change My View.

[Assistant]
Monsters Inc. requires scream energy, however. That means that it places disproportionate value on types of scariness that elicit a scream response, and that in turn requires monsters that rely on a more primal level of fear; that which is a response to predators. Therefore, monsters that appear predatory, in both nature and action, are the most useful for Monsters Inc.

Mike Wazowski does not look predatory. Although he could be scary, it would not be a very useful kind of scary to Monsters Inc. A single looming eyeball is certainly quite a terrifying sight to behold if it wakes you up in the middle of the night, but creepiness does not elicit the same type of fear response. Creepiness runs on curiosity, especially that of the morbid variety. We find creepy things creepy because they are unnatural, and we don't like things we can't wrap our heads around. This does not make us scream, however. You peeing your pants from waking up with a giant eye in your face is jump shock - you weren't expecting that, and you were surprised. But that's something that every monster will get, so it's clearly not enough. If it was, you wouldn't need a university to teach how to be scary.


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

[User] ELI5: If a patient is having open heart surgery and dies on the table, since there is no heartbeat, how does the surgeon know?

[Assistant]
Well, speaking as someone who has participated in *MANY* open-heart surgeries, death would not be called on the heart-lung perfusion machine, as it is performing the gas exchange and fluid propulsion functions of the heart and lungs.

If something happens, it would be after coming off the perfusion machine and after getting the heart to restart with an electrical cardioversion -- electrical shock directly to the heart tissue. It is almost always successful. So death would be called either if the heart could not be restarted (rare), or if the heart failed after having restarted.


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

[User] ELI5: How are freight trains put together, and how long does it typically take?

[Assistant] Trains are usually organized in blocks, the yard crews usually switch out these blocks and place the blocks in order ahead of time.  For example: If you have to make a set off somewhere along the journey, that section of train is usually placed at the head end.  As for doubling the train over once its set in the yard, it can take anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour depending on the conditions.


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

[User]
In order to calculate relative atomic mass the masses of isotopes have to be taken into account. How did the scientists know (initially) what is the abundance of those isotopes?

Is it fixed (in an ore) or did they have to use some other method?

[Assistant]
You use a mass spectrometer. The basic idea is that you use heat or a high voltage to strip one electron away from atoms, then you use an electric field or changing magnetic field to shoot the positively charged atoms (now ions) down a track. The track is curved, and at the end there is a detector that can tell you when an ion hits it. To make the corner and hit the detector, you have to bend the path the ion takes. You do this with an electric or magnetic field that crosses the track. The amount of bending depends on the strength of the field, which you control, the charge of the ion, which is +1, and the mass of the isotope. You do the math and vary the field to give the right bending for a specific isotope mass to hit the detector and count how many hits you get. Then change the field to give the right bending for a different isotope and count the hits. The ratios of hits for all your tests is the ratio of isotopes.
Same concept but different construction can be with one field and multiple detectors set up at different angles off the sriaight track.


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

[User]
[general superheroes] I am a middle tier costumed villain, how do I prevent my nemesis from having a dark and edgy phase and killing me?

Without getting too into it I'm a middle aged guy with cactus powers and the guy I usually fight is a dude in his late teens who recently discovered he has superpowers that put him in the top tier of the DC or Marvel comics universe. I'm having a pretty great time robbing banks and museums and I'm pretty sure Awesome Lad (not his real name) is having a great time stopping me *when* he stops me, I'm in and out of jail every week so my plans are usually pretty goofy and fun. Anyways I heard through the grapevine that Awesome Lad has just lost his mom due to another villain taking things way too personally and there's also an alien invasion coming that he claims is going to threaten everything he holds dear. He recently beat up another nuisance villain pretty bad and I'm not really okay with this, as one of his rogues gallery what could I do to prevent my usual hero from going all Punisher on us? Like when we're all just screwing around I can hold my own with this guy but if he ever has one of those edgy phases I'm toast. Any tips?

[Assistant]
You should help with the alien invasion. It's in your interest for them not to take over the world, and it should make the heroes feel better about you.

In general, don't kill people or do anything else equally horrible. Antiheroes generally only stick to the really bad villains, and when they don't other heroes generally take them down.


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

[User]
If you had a properly sized lens completely free of any imperfection, could you build a magnifying glass that could see atoms?

If not, what about large molecules or cells?

[Assistant]
No, because the wavelength of (visible) light is longer than the distances between atoms, so they cannot be distinguished are the therefore non-resolvable.  1000x magnification is about as far as light can go, which allows you to see bacteria, but not viruses.

Electron microscopes are instead used because the wavelength of electrons...or something...is short enough to distinguish between two objects at that scale.


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

[User]
How do we know that there aren't entire antimatter galaxies?

Do we know that there aren't?

[Assistant]
you'd see the "boundary" of that galaxy everytime a particle of matter crossed it and annihilated with the anti-matter.

Concidering were don't see rings/spheres of constant explosion, means there isn't such a galaxy in the visible universe.


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

[User] What would be a good way of regulating room temperature without AC?

[Assistant]
Yes, cold water can work. Better, buy some ice and bring it to the room and let it melt there. Both takes a lot of resources though and is not that efficient.

Getting the room air to cool is relatively possible, but the walls are the real issue - cooling them takes a lot of energy, otherwise they will reheat the room. You are much, much more efficient cooling your body to make the room temperature more bearable. Fans, a cold foot bath or a cold shower and not toweling off would do the trick.

I think you were hoping for a nifty science trick, but getting 2 spaces of equal temperature to become one colder and one hotter one is against the second law of thermodynamics. That applies only to closed systems though, so you can do it in open systems by introducing outside energy or entropy increases. But it does mean it's always difficult.


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

[User]
[MCU] What does Vision do all day?

I mean, he's gotta be one of the most powerful beings on earth right now yeah? So what is he doing with that incredible power? Does he just sit around Avengers tower trying on sweaters and watching Youtube? Is he bringing peace to the Middle East? Fighting yet another HYDRA cell that managed to survive the last time HYDRA was completely wiped out? Why doesn't he hang out with Tony more, it's not like he has any other friends around right?  Why doesn't Tony have him try to do that whole, control an army of iron-drones in order to fight crime on a global scale plan? Vision is definitively good and in control of the mind stone, so it should totally work right? Like, couldn't Vision basically replace the entire Avengers team on his own that way?

[Assistant]
>Shortly after that, the Vision first meets Wanda Maximoff, the mutant Scarlet Witch, with whom he later becomes romantically involved. The two eventually marry and, via the Scarlet Witch's hex powers, they have twin boys named Thomas and William.

He spends his time on booty.


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

[User]
ELI5: How is sticky tape only sticky on 1 side despite the whole thing being rolled up?

Just one of those late-night insomnia deep thoughts. You'd expect some of the glue to get stuck on the non-sticky side and make both sides sticky, but somehow that doesnt happen?

[Assistant] After the tape is coated with adhesive, the adhesive is overlaid with  a thin coat of anti-stick material (such as polyvinyl carbamate) to keep it from sticking quite as hard to the next layer of tape in the roll.


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

[User] Can some ELI5 what happens when a computer, or even just an application, freezes?

[Assistant]
So during the course of normal operation, a typical application is constantly doing two things: responding to system messages, and painting (updating) the screen. System messages are things the operating system tells the application about what is happening to and around it. For example, when you click a button in the app, the operating system tells the app that you clicked a button, and that's a system message.

The app takes this message, does whatever it needs to do, and updates the screen in response, to reflect whatever it did, while also acknowledging receipt of the message.

As the app is running, it will recieve (and mostly ignore) hundreds of system messages every second, and it will paint the screen hundreds of times a second.

An application is considered frozen when one or both of those activities stops. Either the app no longer acknowledges system messages, or it stops painting the screen. Modern OSes will detect this and allow you to forcibly kill the application.

Why did the application freeze? Many, many reasons. Maybe the application entered an infinite loop. Maybe it's waiting for some external thing to happen (though if your app freezes for this reason, you're doing it wrong.) Maybe some internal process crashed.


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

[User]
I believe it's perfectly alright to say atheists are going to hell. CMV

As an atheist, I've never really figured out why people get into hissy fits over being declared that we are going to hell. It is the logical destination given that their belief systems are true; the issue being that I do not share that belief system or the existence in an afterlife. The response is highly inconsistent with the belief.

[Assistant] It hurts when someone you love tells you they hope you will, or that you definitely will, burn in hell. That you deserve unending hellfire and torment for not believing. It especially hurts when you hear it from your own parents.


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

[User]
CMV: I think Tim Cook and Apple are being super hypocritical by "boycotting" Indiana while having stores and profiting in countries like Saudi Arabia where they imprison and kill homosexuals.

To me like I stated in the title that I have a hard time understanding how a Company like Apple or Wal-mart that has came out publicly against the Indiana "Freedom of Religion law" when they conduct major operations in countries that imprison or kill homosexuals.  To me it comes off like like making the all mighty buck is more important to them than their ideological beliefs. I think that it shows a level of exploitation of human beings for the sole reason of profit, while fueling a media lynch mob against small businesses like Memories Pizza in Indiana like them preferring to not catering a homosexual wedding squares to the stoning to death of homosexuals in the Middle East.  So I guess in the end if Tim Cook feels that strong enough about the issue of gay rights maybe he should hold some solidarity of the very real life and  death struggle of fellow homosexuals in not only in but on a very large scale inbtje Islamic world. Because if social justice is what we are looking to accomplish then maybe we should start as human beings place our morals and beliefs in basic human rights with those that are very much suffering instead of picking on a pizza parlor in tje middle of the Midwest.

[Assistant] Apple isn't boycotting Indiana because they refuse to do business in Indiana, they're boycotting because they're hoping to actually change the law through applying political pressure.  That's the thing about absolute monarchies, political pressure doesn't work nearly as well as it does in democracies.  A boycott of Saudi Arabia wouldn't accomplish anything, a boycott of Indiana might.


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

[User]
Do you worry that big changes are coming to Universities that will negatively affect job opportunities and/or salaries of Faculty?

We all know that we have a massive issue with the cost of college in this country. In the search for ways to educate our young people in a more cost effective manner, do you anticipate that there will be major changes at American Universities(mainly talking public here) that will negatively affect job prospects and/or salaries for academics? Or, do you feel that academics are already so dependent on grants that the issue of tuition costs (and any actions taken to lower it) would not have a large effect? I often see people in the media complaining about the salaries that professors make, with little understanding of how they are actually funded.

I should state that I know that much of the rising costs are due to administration, but that doesn't mean the the policy makers and the public know it. Therefore, their actions could theoretically target faculty.

I plan on pursuing my PhD in a few years and I believe that my ideal career would be that of a tenured professor. I will likely do this regardless of the financial ramifications (unless they are extreme) but I would like to know what all of you think about the earning potential and job security for the next generation of academics.

My field is Public Health/Medicine if that is important.

Thanks.

[Assistant] You're about 30 years too late with this question.  Track the number and expense for administrative positions in U.S. universities over the past 60 years and you'll see part of the explanation for why universities have become so expensive.


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

[User] ELI5: In movies, during nuclear fallout, people in hazmat suits are usually seen being sprayed down by a liquid (seemingly to control the radiation) but if Radiation can penetrate clothes and metal then how can this liquid be used to control the spread of Radiation?

[Assistant] Well first, not all radiation is equal. A radiation suit can prevent penetration by alpha particles (helium nuclei) or beta particles (electrons), but not neutrons or gamma rays. In addition to blocking heavier particles, suits also keep the person wearing them from getting dust containing radioactive isotopes on them or in their lungs. Washing the exterior of the suits with soapy water just removes this dust so it doesn't spread and irradiate other people/places.


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

[User]
Do I have a moral duty to be well informed about current events which I can't possibly influence?

Edit: please refrain from giving answers that are too specific to any particular event, this is not a question about Ukraine, but rather about all events of this kind. Thanks.

[Assistant] I think this question might be ill-posed, because it assumes that you are able to accurately tell whether or not you are able to influence some set of events without being informed about that set of events. It is very possible that determining whether or not some particular set of events is influence-able by you itself requires that you be informed about those events. Any time this is the case, if you assume that you have a moral duty to be informed about events that you can do something about (take your pick of any ethical theory to justify this assumption), then it follows that you have a moral duty to inform yourself about all events at least insofar as doing so would allow you to ascertain whether or not you are actually able to influence them to some extent.


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

[User]
Due to the inevitable industrialization of the remaining areas of the world in the next 50-100 years, I believe that the fight against global climate change is a pointless battle. CMV.

Take sub-Saharan Africa for example. Currently there is not much industrialization in this region, but there are **vast deposits** of untapped resources (e.g. iron ore, tin, copper, coal), extremely fertile arable land, and a largely untapped labor force (roughly 1 billion people).

Eventually, wages in eastern and south-east Asia (e.g. China, Vietnam) will rise so much that companies will look elsewhere for "cheap labor". When that time comes, companies will start to look seriously at Africa. Africa will industrialize and the standard of living there will increase as the people become more wealthy.

The western world will protest against African nations building **hundreds of new coal-fired power plants**, as they have protested this in China, but ultimately will not be able to stop it.

Sub-Saharan Africa is **just one of many examples** around the world of where this will occur.  This example includes about 1 billion people.  There are many people in other regions of the world that demand a better standard of living than abject poverty too, and will work to make it happen when given the chance.

Global climate change will happen on a scale that the eclipses what we are seeing today.  Due to human nature, this is an **unstoppable inevitability** and fighting against it is a waste of time and resources that could be spent better elsewhere.  CMV.

[Assistant]
Two words: solar power.

Solar is already cheaper than coal in some places, and in the next 5-10 years is likely to continue to drop in price until it beats coal *everywhere*. Once it hits the point that a solar plant is cheaper watt-for-watt with coal, people won't make more coal plants. There will be economic incentives against it. And the existing coal plants in other places will become economical to EOL and replace with solar.


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

[User]
Dean of a department I want to work at emailed me - what does it mean?

I am all but dissertation, with 1-2 years until I have enough data to call it completely finished. The timeline to completion is a bit of an ongoing discussion, as it is mostly held back by IRB.

The dean of a department that is fabulous in my field, who I am on a first name basis with at conferences because we do such similar work, emailed me letting me know that there is a faculty position posted for her department, and that she would like to call me this week and tell me about it.

1. It seems she might want me to apply, and that she would welcome my application, correct?

2. The position has no clear start date, but welcomes applicants who are ABD - what does this mean exactly?

3. How long would a department hold a faculty position for if my dissertation / data isn't done by next fall? Is there precedent for being "hired" but not starting work for another year and half?

4. What are some things that would be good to ask in this sort of phone call?

Thank you!

[Assistant] I think you need to talk but be honest about your completion timeline. It sounds like the dean or maybe members of the department are under a different assumption about your current expected timeline. Hiring a year in advance is pretty typical (hiring in Fall for a position starting the following Fall) but not two years, unless you are a more senior faculty planning to move departments.


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

[User]
[Return of the Jedi] Why did the Emperor want Luke to strike him down?

Sure it would turn Luke to the Dark Side, but then Palpatine is dead!  Seems he'd prefer Luke to kill Vader.

[Assistant]
He didn't want Luke to kill him, he wanted him to *try*. He knew that Vader would protect him, and failing that, Palpatine was confident that his own skills and power would protect him.

What he really wanted was for Luke to give in to his evil urges, battle Vader, and either succumb to the Dark Side, joining Palpatine (and Vader, if he survived) in taking absolute control of the galaxy, or die, ending the single greatest threat to his rule.

As Palpatine saw it, there was no way he could lose. This is, of course, Sith overconfidence, and Sith blindness to the power of the Light Side of the Force. It never occurred to him that Luke might refuse to fight, or that such an act of selflessness would cause Vader to turn from the Dark Side.


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

[User]
ELI5:If explosions in space can't happen(Movies), why doesn't the vacuum of space put out the sun or at least solar flares instantly?

More in depth: I've heard chemical reactions before but isn't there oxygen on the space ship and in tanks that would provide a nice bang as shown in the movies?
Still, solar flares shouldn't happen, but do???

Has Nasa experimented and video recorded an explosion?

[Assistant]
You're confusing explosion with combustion. Combustion is what we know typically as fire, and it can't occur in space without oxygen or another oxidizer.

Explosions, however, are just a rapid release of energy, and they happen in space all the time. While they might look plenty fiery, combustion isn't (typically) occurring. Stars like the sun, for instance, are not burning but constantly undergoing thermonuclear fusion which pumps out tons of energy in the form of light and heat. A solar flare is an abnormally large and fast release of energy.

What you're probably referring to when people say explosions can't happen in space, is the fact that you can't *hear* an explosion in space because sound requires a medium of transmission, and since space is a vacuum, there isn't a medium for the sound to travel through.


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

[User]
ELI5: If we cannot see certain "colors", can camera lenses see these or can we just not see them on the camera screen/printed out?

My understanding is that the human eye has limitations in what we can see. My question is, if we cannot see these so-called "colors", can camera lenses capture these? Why/why not? And if they can, why can we not see it? Is it the same limitation? Is there any technology that will enable us to see things that the human eye cannot see?

[Assistant]
Yes cameras can pick up light waves that we can't see then interpret them into a media that we can.

In fact that how skeletal x rays work, or if you hold you phone camera up to the ir light in the television remote.


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

[User]
If I were on a space station 2 light years away?

Ok, so basically say I, right now, was instantaneously teleported via some kind of magic to a space station 2 light years away. I have a telescope on this space station that is so powerful I can see people walking around on city streets in minute detail, would the planet I see be Earth in the year 2017?

And if so could I theoretically see myself walking around on the surface of planet back in 2017?

[Assistant]
Yes, because the light takes two years to reach you, so you're seeing a two year old image.

You would of course need an enormous telescope to see that level of resolution - *much* bigger than a planet. You also can't actually use this to see into your own past, because you can't travel faster than light - this only works in a hypothetical thought experiment where you can magically teleport, or at least travel faster than light. So even though an alien civilization in the Virgo Cluster might see the Milky Way as it was when dinosaurs were (just) still on Earth, you can't fly to the Virgo Cluster and build a giant telescope and use it to directly observe dinosaurs.


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

[User] [DC] Why does General Zod and every other Kryptonian villain not sundip before every fight?

[Assistant]
Not for nothin', but the Sun is about 150,000,000 kilometers from Earth.  To put that in perspective, the circumference of the Earth is only about 40,000 kilometers.  So flying to the Sun is like flying around the Earth 3,750 times...and then the trip back is another 3,750 laps.  At the speed of light, it's a 15 minute trip, longer if we account for acceleration, not setting the atmosphere on fire, etc.

So, even for a Kryptonian, it's kind of a pain in the ass.


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

[User] Do cravings for specific kinds of food mean anything about the nutrients my body needs?

[Assistant]
I think what you're getting at is akin to, does someone with an iron deficiency crave iron-rich foods (for example).

As some of the others stated, deficiencies sometimes correlate with cravings, but the foods craved don't necessarily have anything to do with the deficiency.  Your satiety hormones don't know that spinach is high in calcium, so they can't be that specific in cravings.


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

[User]
ELI5: How similar (or dissimilar) are Cantonese and Mandarin?

I get that they are totally separate languages but how interrelated are they? Is it like Spanish and Portuguese where there are many similarities? Or is it more like Spanish and Italian where they aren't similar but have a base in a common language (Latin)?

[Assistant] The speaker of one cannot understand the speaker of another language. There are differences in pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar (This often leads to problems when *writing Cantonese*, as written Chinese is based on Mandarin. and Standard Mandarin often don't recognize some of the grammatical forms and characters native to Cantonese). Both languages are part of the Sinitic Language family, Mandarin is part of the Northern subbranch and Cantonese is part of the Yue subbranch, so yes, it's kind of like the difference between Italian and French. Both langauges are descended from Old Chinese.


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

[User]
ELI5: How does smoking and curing meat work?

As the title says. How does it work? If I were to process say a pig on my own how would the meat taste without smoking or curing?

[Assistant]
These processes are sort of opposites, if you think about it.   Curing meat is about preserving meat without cooking it.  Smoking meat IS cooking it, albeit slowly.

When you smoke meat you're basically cooking it low and slow.  Really low and really slow.  And that process relaxes all the connective tissue and makes taste moist (despite the fact that it's really cooked to hell and back).  Because it's swimming in collagen.  If no collagen is present, then you just get dry smoky meat, which is okay, too.

Curing is different.  Curing is basically salt and time.  First, salt curing kills microbes and bacteria in your meat by removing the water in them.  It also removed the water in the meat itself, making it harder and condensing the flavor.  This dry meat is also less susceptible to new bacteria and microbes, because they want a moist environment.


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

[User] ELI5 : Why does pouring salt on a wound hurt?

[Assistant]
The tissue in your body relies on a very careful balance electrolytes. Salt is made up of sodium and chloride, two very important components of the electrolyte balance in your body. Sodium is particularly important in the conduction of signals along the neurons in your body. A disruption in the concentration of sodium outside of the cells making up your tissue will cause problems.

In this case, it is thought that there are neurons that sense changes in electrolyte concentrations. Pouring salt in a wound would generate a dramatic change in the concentration of sodium and chloride, resulting in the sensation that you feel. You feel this when you have a cut as opposed to when you don't because there is a loss of the very important barrier function provided by your skin.


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

[User]
CMV: It makes sense for organized crime members to register like sex offenders.

In the US, sex offenders are required to make their presence known in their neighborhood. They are not allowed to live certain places and their information is readily available to the public.

This is all after they have served their time in prison. They continue to pay for their crime.

It makes sense. They tend to target those who have a less chance of protecting themselves from them.

Sex offenders also have a recidivism rate between 12%-39% depending on the time and treatment.

I think the same measures should be taken for those who are known members of criminal organizations.

The numbers are not precise, but a cursory search shows that possible 80% of crime in the US is the result of gang activity.

Some prison systems vary, but the recidivism rate of gang members is **~80%!**

Many times, the unsuspecting & innocent are the victims of gang violence.

So, to better be aware, I think it makes sense for the public to be aware of those who are more likely to commit crimes.

[Assistant]
Registering *sex offenders* doesn't even make sense.

The goal of the criminal justice system should be (at least in large part) rehabilitation. The goal should be to prevent recidivism. So let's think on this.

Why do you think most people join gangs? Because they are black hearted thugs? Not likely. The primary reasons tend to be things like protection and (sadly) economic oppertunity. If the ladder of success doesn't reach down into Harlem, you will find your own way to scramble up the buildings.

So you take people who have bad economic options, and you subject them to a whole host of brutal and pointless restrictions that make it harder for them to find a real job, a safe place to live or otherwise live a normal life.

What the fuck do you think is going to happen?


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

[User]
[DC] Can Aquaman communicate with all creatures in the animal kingdom, or just the aquatic one?

I know this might seem like a stupid question, considering his name, so bear with me.

I know Aquaman can talk to all manner of sea life.  From fish, to crabs, to plankton and everything in between. But he can also talk to mammals like dolphin and whales.

Is he limited to creatures that claim water as their habitat?  What about hippos?  Or crocodiles?   Turtles?

What about beavers or otters who are technically land creatures, but make their home on the water?

Can he talk to sea birds?  Penguins and Ospreys?

I feel like theres a bunch of grey area between some of these animals.

[Assistant] The closer an animal is to being an ocean creature the better he can communicate with it.  He at one point gave a White Martian a seizure by focusing his powers and they are pretty far removed from being from the ocean.


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

[User]
[Monsters Inc.] How do they ensure the child isn't awake?

They just go through the door, but just because it is night time doesn't mean the child will be asleep.

Moreover, how is the scream then harvested when they have crossed into another world?

[Assistant]
I don't know why it'd matter greatly if the child is de facto asleep or sleepily awake. I'd imagine a child that tends to not always fall asleep properly would get assigned to a monster that specialises on creeping up the tension slowly - for example Randall, as opposed to e.g. Sulley.

Also, the doors (and their frameworks etc.) seem to incorporate the scream-harvesting mechanics as part of their interdimensional transportation properties. If you can transport matter, it'd be logical that you can transfer energy - and the canisters are plugged into the door-frameworks too.


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

[User] ELI5: if fresh/drinkable water is so scarce, why do we use it to clean and wash our stuff? Couldn't we use something else?

[Assistant]
There are diminishing returns at some point. Depending on the area and situation, there are  some areas that ban things like watering lawns, washing cars etc in order to reduce consumption. But there is a point where the savings incur costs too - unsanitary practices, lack of hygiene lead to disease and other health issues. The little savings by not washing leads to even more waste and loss in other areas.

In general, day to day stuff like cleaning clothes, short showers, use for waste disposal and drinking do not consume a lot of water per person. Alternatives would be expensive, inconvenient and possibly dangerous (eg cleaning chemicals).


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

[User] Does the vibration function of Gillette Fusion or similar razors actually do anything (on a physical basis) to enhance  shaving?

[Assistant]
It should help the shave. Instead of pushing the wedge of the blade straight against and perpendicular to the hair, the vibration creates a sawing effect.

On a microscopic level, there are tiny imperfections in the blade edge. These act as serrations, as on a steak knife. If the blade were then to vibrate (let's say it moves in a random direction a short, fixed distance along a plane), the serrations would tend to make the blade saw through the hair with less bending. The bending of the hair tends to create a cut surface that isn't flush with the skin.

Therefore, the sawing will increase the flatness of the shorn hairsa closer shave.


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

[User] If the moon was indeed created by the collision of the earth and another protoplanet, how is it that we don't see any traces of it down here ?

[Assistant] We do, it's just that down here we just call it ground. One of the biggest pieces of evidence pointing to the impact formation theory is the similar composition between the moon and the earths crust. Since we live on Earth, we have a bias towards it, so we say that we find traces of Earth up there, not vice versa.


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

[User]
[WH40k] How did the Emperor not see he was setting himself up to be deified and undo all his work?

For a guy who thought organized religion was holding humanity back, he had to have known what would happen if he traveled across the galaxy decked out in gold everything and effectively performed miracles.

[Assistant]
The Emperor didn't really understand humans on an individual level. Although nominally human, he was also tens of thousands of years old by the time he went public, may have the combined consciousness of several thousand individuals, and was so far intellectually beyond your average person that even his closest confidants like Malcador - already selected from humanity's best and brightest - were like children next to him. Even the Primarchs he was closest to were still men despite their power, but he  was unable to recognize their desire to be treated as beloved sons.

This was a being who stole from the powers of Chaos, wrestled the Void Dragon of Mars into submission, and could psychically force entire armies of Space Marines to kneel before him. The Emperor had never before been in the presence of a being as far above himself as he is above the common man. While he did try and keep the grossest displays of power from the public eye, he had no context to understand that his blinding aura, golden armor, inhuman stature, unfathomable age, force of will, etc. were enough *by themselves* enough to instill supernatural fear and awe in a mortal man.


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

[User]
Democracy is overrated and not a useful type of government. CMV.

I am an American citizen, but I have never been a fan of Democracy. Even though many textbooks, writers, and politicians will claim that Democracy is the perfect government system as it "gives voices to the people", comparative studies of democratic regimes across the world beg to differ.

If you look at instances in Mexico, Nigeria, or even India, you'll see that even though the people are voting and are choosing their representatives in government (the hallmark of Democracy), these countries are faring much worse than countries such as Chinawhich, despite a totalitarian regime and single party system that squashes all opposition, has had unprecedented growth and economic prosperity under state capitalism and unrestricted government powers and spending.

Mexico and Nigeria both have huge corruption issues, and because of the extremely slow Democratic process, India has not been able to do much to improve the welfare of its citizens because of Democracy's never-ending debate. Comparing between China and India, it seems obvious that one would rather live under an "oppressive" government such as the Communist Party and experience tremendous economic growth, than be a part of an inefficient and corrupt Democracy such as those of India, Mexico, and Nigeria.

Furthermore, historically, totalitarian regimes under kings and emperors have shown to be the most prosperous. We remember the emperors of Rome and of China, and we learn about incredible English kings. Figures such as King Charlemagne and Emperor Qin Shihuang, among others, show how an autocratic ruler can actually lead a country better than an elected group of politicians can. And to cite the most recent example, Stalin's autocratic rule in the USSR allowed it to match America's power in a matter of a few decades, as opposed to the hundreds of years America took to reach global superpower status.

I understand that in the developed world, countries such as the United States and those in Europe thrive under a well-nourished Democracy. But I do truly think it is overrated and that Democracy isn't for everyoneespecially in the developing world.

To summarize,
1. Democracies such as Mexico, Nigeria, and India pale in comparison to the growth, prosperity, and overall living standards of autocratic regimes like China's.
2. Historically, single-party rule and totalitarianism under kings and emperors (even Stalin)not elected officialshas led to some of the greatest regime successes in human history.
3. Developed countries can have Democracy, but developing countries... it'd be best not to.

[Assistant] Your basic premise is that democracy isn't a useful type of government but then you pick the most extreme examples to illustrate your point. Compare Finland to North Korea and you'll get a different result. You also seem to be under the assumption that the seemingly huge economic growth in China means that the people are directly reaping the rewards but you hear countless stories about workers being mistreated and living in absolute poverty. Your argument also seems to ignore personal liberty and freedom of speech, two concepts that can't flourish under an oppressive dictatorship. Are you arguing that democracy isn't always the best answer or that it is a useless form of government?


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

[User]
ELI5: why do we lose our sense of time when anaesthatized but not when sleeping?

Like when you are anesthetized you fall asleep then wake up and it feels like its instant and have no sense of how much time has passed. But when you wake up from sleep you often know roughly how long you have been out.

[Assistant] Because you're somewhat conscious when asleep,  sounds and touch and pain can stir you to full awareness.   Unconscious is completely out,  nothing -  not even pain,  which is entirely the point of anesthetics - will make you fully conscious from that unconscious state.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] About the Deathly Hallows.

Particularly the cloak of invisibility (Death's cloak). In the legend it states that the younger brother wanted a item in which he couldn't be followed by Death. Doesn't this make the wearer immortal? The end of the legend states that at the end of his life, the brother chose to shed the cloak to die. Does that mean he wore the cloak for the entirety of his life? What were to happen if you were wearing the cloak, tripped and banged your head fatally. Would you die or carry on living?

Kind of a second question here. Isn't the goal of the Deathly Hallows to attain mastery over Death, i.e. immortality? If so you just need to cloak then. The stone seems pointless in this regard. As the way I see it, the wand gives the mastery of killing and the cloak shields you from death. So what could the stone possibly give? The only aspect I can think of is wisdom. Knowledge and wisdom from the deceased as they're only shades, they're not actually resurrected.

I've only watched the films so maybe it's better explain in the books.

[Assistant] The Hallows, even if you possessed all three, have no ability to make you immortal. The story of the Three Brothers is just that, a story. In reality the Hallows were just three powerful magical items, not artifacts handed over from the personification of Death.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do you feel more awake after not sleeping for an extended period of time?

Like if you stay up overnight you start to feel really drowsy at around 24 hours of no sleep, but then after that initial drowsiness you start feeling awake again.

[Assistant]
So there are two independent systems that influences your sleep/wake cycle.

One is the circadian rhythm which controls not only sleep but also your hunger, how much urine you produce, body temperature etc.

The other one is Adenosine, which is a chemical in your brain which creates that sleep pressure you feel when you are sleepy. The amount of Adenosine increase as the number of hours awake increase. This is only recycled from the brain when you sleep.

The key thing here is that this two system do not influence each other, so whether you sleep or stayed up all night your circadian rhythm will still continue as if nothing happens. In a normal circadian rhythm you peak in wakefulness at around noon, so even though your brain is full of Adenosine (which makes you sleepy) you feel awake when your circadian rhythm reaches it's peak.

You feel more tired early in the morning because your circadian rhythm is at low wakefulness and there is a high Adenosine level.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Can Sith lords come back in spirit form like the Jedi masters can?

[Assistant]
As of Canon, no they cannot. The ability to become a Force Ghost is not something that can be achieved by one tainted by the Dark Side. Yoda even remarks that the phantom Darth Bane he meets was no more than an illusion.

In Legends, oh totally. Pretty much anyone powerful who was Force Sensitive could linger beyond death as some form of spirit.


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

[User]
Can you enlarge the radar cross section of a aircraft?

So if stealth works my making your radar cross section smaller thus having you register as a much smaller object than you really are, can you do the opposite and say make a smallish drone appear as the size of a fighter/bomber to feint an oncoming attack?

[Assistant]
Sure.

For a common example, look at radar reflectors for sailboats.

Fibreglass sailboats dont give much radar return at all, but they usually have right-of-way and cant/wont yield to motor vessels.  A recipe for disaster.  So, sailboats use radar reflectors to make them appear on commercial radar scopes.

These reflectors add lots of flat hard panels and orthogonal surfaces to give a strong radar return.  You could do something similar to an airframe.


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

[User]
[Arrow] Why doesn't Diggle need a secret identity?

I get that The Arrow needs one because Oliver Queen is famous. But Arsenal gets a mask and he's a nobody, so why isn't anyone worried about Diggle's family?

[Assistant]
Diggle is mostly support, and when he is out in the field he usually uses a ski mask to conceal his ID.

As for why no one is worried... they are. His family just happens to be Argus agents who have a level of protection associated with that that others do not. If you are a criminal in the know, you have to have a big reason to risk running afoul of Waller and Argus. If you are not aware of his family being Argus agents, you are probably not a big risk.


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

[User]
[Rings] Well over a decade after the first reports of the Samara Phenomenon, and with likely hundreds of accumulated cases of the syndrome, is "Ringology" already a respected science?

Or is Dr. ~~Leonard Hofstadter~~ **Gabriel Brown** considered just the embarrassing crackpot of his Department?

[Assistant]
Now that we've had enough time to study the phenomenon fully, we're starting to harness the power of rings to benefit humanity.

COMING IN 2018: New TV transit! Mail the VHS tape to your destination, then crawl through the TV and you're there!

(of course, you have to spend 6 weeks undergoing traumatic electroshock therapy and another 2 weeks at the bottom of a well before you can travel this way, but it's still better than dealing with TSA and the major airlines these days.)


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

[User]
ELI5: Why are some people so prone to cavities?

I'd like to know why is it that some people seem to be over the top prone to dental health issues, where as others aren't as unlucky?

Example, I've taken phenomenal care of my teeth, brushing after every meal, flossing, flouride mouthwash and everything, yet every dentist visit yields another 5 or more cavities.  Then I have friends who skip a day in between brushing altogether, chug soda 24/7 and have perfect, strong teeth.

So, did some of us just get the shit end of the genetics stick, or is there a more obvious culprit?

[Assistant]
There is no such thing as 'soft teeth'. With the exception of some rare disease the composition of human enamel is more or less the same.

There are 3 things that contribute to cavities:

1) Something to cause decay - usually food. Fermentable carbohydrates and acid foods are the main contributors. This is why people that drink a lot of soda can be prone to decay.

2) Oral bacteria. Different people have different compositions of bacteria in their mouths. Not all the bacteria in the mouth causes decay but this is where the family tie-in comes. The types of bacteria in your mouth is typically established by the time you are one and colonized from familial sources.

3) Buffering ability of saliva. Your saliva is a buffer. Activities that overcome saliva's ability to buffer will cause you to be prone to decay. The worst offender here is snacking. Every time you eat it effectively lowers the pH of your mouth and it can take several hours for it to come back. Teeth begin to decay when oral pH is under 5.5 and so if every 2 hours you have a snack that lowers the pH of your mouth below 5.5 you are going to have a bad time.

It takes a little bit of all of these to cause cavities. But an imbalance in one area can make you more susceptible.


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

[User] ELI5 Why is internet sold like a limited resource?

[Assistant]
The internet itself is not really the resource people are selling you. (Mostly because it is not theirs to sell.)

What is being sold is the access to the internet. The infrastructure for that is expensive and limited in how much traffic it can handle at once.


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

[User]
[Metroid] I'm a scientist at a facility on SR388. How the hell do I open the door to the bathroom? I saw someone in a metal suit open it with a gun on their arm but I don't have a weapon! Why would the doors be designed to open via gunshot? Please hurry, I really have to pee.

Seriously, I was never issued a weapon and I'm going to pee my pants.

[Assistant] You should've been given a security device during orientation. Depending on your authorization your device will disperse the correct energy required to open a given door. The person in the metal suit probably has weapons that give an energy signature similar to the one required to open the door. We should probably update security to get those energy signatures changed because that seems like a massive security hole.


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

[User]
CMV: The upcoming presidential debates should have questions that measure cognitive capability and knowledge of the US government as well as the world economy/geography.

During the debates they should ask both candidates things like "What is the current federal debt" as well as a geography section where they are given a list of countries to point to (specifically countries with US military installations/deployments)

Even some SAT level math questions or reading comprehension/LSAT logic based questions could give a side by side comparison of the cognitive capabilities would be a completely unbiased way to compare them.

To be clear, I'm not advocating people vote solely based off intelligence/cognitive capability, but I would imagine it would be a factor in the decision making process, and in the day of fake news and claims like "I took a cognitive test and it was the highest score ever" it would be interesting to have a true side by side comparison of the candidates.

[Assistant]
A few counterpoints for you to consider:

1) The candidates' ability to articulate their stances on the issues, reasons for those stances, and intelligently address counterpoints already gives you evidence on their cognitive abilities,

2) Biden and Trump have very different approaches to governance, which impacts how important their cognitive ability is. Spending time on this during a debate implies that it's equally important for both candidates, which would be misleading.

3) It incentivizes "gotcha" questions that aren't relevant to actual policy or performance, and whichever candidate has better connections to the network hosting the debate will likely have a leg up on answering them.


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

[User]
Albert Camus and Soren Kierkegaard's the Absurd

I am writing an undergrad thesis for my comparative philosophy subject and I thought it would be good to pick Camus and Kierkegaard's philosophy of the absurd as a possible topic to do. I thought this would be a good topic to tackle since I'm also taking Existentialism as a subject this semester and I have developed a keen interest in Kierkegaard's philosophy of the absurd. The problem is, I dont know how to formulate a claim for this topic, can anyone show me the light?

Thank you to those who responded, sadly, my proposal was declined by my professor on the grounds of Camus not being a proper philosopher and is, as he stated, "a Fool."

[Assistant] If you want to compare the two, there's definitely something to be said about how the two *react* to the idea of the absurd. Camus takes some time in The Myth of Sisyphus to show how Kierkegaard wrestles with the familiar absurd spirit, but importantly denies the way in which Kierkegaard comes to his conclusions about the idea. A thesis going into what exactly "the absurd" means to the two sounds fun, since they seem to have some different view on what exactly it is.


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

[User]
ELI5: When people/companies sell books on Amazon for $.01, plus a reasonable amount of S+H, what's their motivation?

Media mail starts at 2.69, but IDK what it actually costs for them - these places seem to charge 3.99 generally. I'm thinking its silly for them to sell books for a penny given that the cost of housing the books, packing, sending them out etc., but I don't know.

[Assistant] they make money from the shipping.  the .01 listing price is just so that it shows up first as the cheapest option in amazon's listings.  and also if you return the item, you'd only get a refund of .01, you don't get refunded shipping.  so it's also to discourage returns.


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

[User] [MCU] How do Thor (and others) age? Does their childhood last hundreds of years? Or do they age to adulthood and then slow completely?

[Assistant]
It's hard to say. Thor is currently 1,500 years old, and Asgardians have a lifespan of around 5,000 years. If Thor's lifespan is proportional to a human's, he would be in his early 20's, close to Chris Hemsworth's age when he was cast in the original movie.

If that's the case, Thor would have reached adulthood at around 1,000 years old.

*But* if we assume Thor was an adult by the beginning of the Viking age, he would have 200-300 years to reach adulthood.

Interestingly, Thor in the MCU is actually several hundred years younger than our first historical records referencing him.


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

[User]
ELI5: The sales technique of "Always Be Closing".

If you know of any examples that put this into practice, please provide them.

Thanks in advance!

[Assistant]
The basic concept is that you don't want to give the customer/client an option to "come back later" or "think it over." You want to close the deal or sale that day or at that moment, rather than risk losing a sale by letting them browse the competition or search for better deals elsewhere.

This is implemented many different ways depending on the industry. Two popular examples in retail:

1) Limited-time deals or incentives to make the sale final that day if necessary. "I can only guarantee this price for today or while supplies last." It gives the customer the notion that if they wait too long, they'll lose out on a deal.

2) Price matching. Plenty of businesses do this in order to make the sale. It's better for a company to match the price of a competitor so that they at least get a sale rather than letting you walk away.


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

[User]
I believe that the principles of free market economics represent the best economic system and should be strictly adhered to. CMV!

The theories of free market economists such as Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, and Murray Rothbard (though differing in some details) have come the closest to an accurate description of the fundamentals of economics, the implications thereof, and proper policies to which political bodies should adhere.  The system which they have described represents the best possible economic system for satisfying the needs and desires of individuals in the face of scarcity.  I believe this to be true due to, primarily, the seamless logical flows and consistency of their arguments, historic empiricism, and, secondarily, my personal disposition towards desiring maximal freedom.

As examples, I am of the opinion that government's roles in the economy are to provide for protecting the right of contract, individual rights, police fraud, etc..  Taxes and regulations should be minimized to the greatest possible extent.  Wealth transfer programs, public insurance, regulations, and market interventions by the hand of government in general are detriments to the economic well-being of the citizenry.

Reddit, you have your work cut out for you.  Change my view!

[Assistant]
>Wealth transfer programs, public insurance, regulations, and market interventions by the hand of government in general are detriments to the economic well-being of the citizenry.

Then you don't agree with Milton Friedman, who supported literally all of those things. (His criticism of welfare systems was that they're *conditional*; he thought we ought to just give poor people money, with no strings attached.)


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

[User]
What are the requirements for becoming a philosophy professor?

I have seen similar questions to this one asked on this subreddit before, but it seems to me that most of those questions are from people seeking to teach at prestigious schools or to also become considered "philosophers" (which I guess means having their theoretical contributions to the branch of philosophy of their interest become widely read and acknowledged?). I do not necessarily want either of those things. I would be satisfied with being a philosophy professor in literally any college no matter the prestige, and I am not concerned with gaining notoriety of any sort. I live in the United States, and I essentially wonder whether I must attend really prestigious schools in order to ultimately attain my doctorate even if I am satisfied with teaching at less prestigious schools? Don't most colleges have philosophy professors in the United States, whether they are top schools or not? If so, do those colleges seek professors that graduated from top schools? Any other information about the path to becoming a philosophy professor in the United States would also be appreciated.

[Assistant] It sounds like you're imagining a position at a small, out of the way school where not a lot of people apply to work (because it's low-prestige and so forth). There is no such position. The job market is incredibly competitive. Any permanent position has hundreds of applicants, even if that position is at a school no one has heard of in the middle of nowhere. Many graduates, even those who went to prestigious doctoral programs, spend years moving between 1-2-year gigs until they finally land a tenure-track or otherwise permanent job -- and that's what happens when everything goes well. Some spend a few years hopping between adjunct and visiting positions before eventually dropping out and doing something else. Keep in mind that these temporary positions quite often are poorly compensated and come with huge teaching loads, leaving you little time to do the research, writing, conference-going, paper revision, and other networking necessary to get a position (*any* position -- again, the market is sufficiently competitive that there are no easy positions that don't require your resume to outshine hundreds of other applicants').


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

[User]
CMV: The government should stop recognizing ALL marriages.

I really see no benefits in governmen recognition of marriages.

First, the benefits: no more fights about what marriage is. If you want to get married by your church - you still can. If you want to marry your homosexual partner in a civil ceremony - you can. Government does not care. Instant equality.

Second, this would cut down on bureaucracy. No marriage - no messy divorces. Instant efficiency.

Now to address some anticipated counter points:

The inheritance/hospital visitation issues can be handled though contracts (government can even make it much easier to get/sign those forms.) If you could take time to sign up for the marriage licence, you can just as easily sign some contract papers.

As for the tax benefits: why should married people get tax deductions?  Sounds pretty unfair to me. If we, as a society want to encourage child rearing - we can do so directly by giving tax breaks to people who have and rare children, not indirectly through marriage.

CMV.

[Assistant]
> The inheritance/hospital visitation issues can be handled though contracts (government can even make it much easier to get/sign those forms.) If you could take time to sign up for the marriage licence, you can just as easily sign some contract papers.

That's what marriage *is*. It's a kind of contract that include a bunch of specific rights. Giving people those rights is still marriage, whether you call it that by name or not. It's like saying "We're not going to give out sandwiches anymore. Instead, we will be serving meat, vegetables and condiments between two slices of bread". It's the same thing.

You're just saying we should change the name, but there's really no benefit. Marriage has been a legal institution as long if not longer than it's been a religious ones. Why should the state arbitrarily decide to start calling marriage something else?

> Second, this would cut down on bureaucracy. No marriage - no messy divorces. Instant efficiency.

If you're going on to keep civil unions, you're going to also have to deal with the dissolution of those unions. No efficiency gain here.


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

[User] If monkeys are our closest relative, what is our most distant relative? Is there even any way to figure that out?

[Assistant]
Monkeys are not our closest relatives, the chimpanzees are. Like humans, chimps are apes, not monkeys.
The most distantly-related animals that are currently living are the sponges. The most distantly-related living things are a little bit more difficult to sort out. If you look at mitochondrial DNA, the archaea are most distant. If you look at nuclear DNA, the bacteria are most distant. This is because our nuclear genome is descended directly from the archaea, whereas our mitochondria are literally bacteria. The eukaryotes, of which we are members, were formed through an endosymbiosis event between archaea and bacteria. We could not exist without either of these components, so it is a bit of a philosophical question as to which one we are more closely related to.


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

[User] [Superman] What if a regular person would wear supermans skin as a full body suit?

[Assistant]
Assuming the skin was kept alive and viable, then the skinsuit would become powered up by yellow sun solar radiation.  The person inside would remain completely normal.  It'd just be a regular guy wearing a super-durable catsuit.  He would not be able to fly.  He would not have super strength.  The skinsuit would be very durable, but the person inside would not.  So, for example, if someone fired a bullet at this individual, the suit would remain intact, but the kinetic force would likely knock the person down and cause some serious bruising or fractures.

By the way, how are you planning on skinning Superman?


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

[User]
Learning Philosophy vs reading Philosophers

Is reading philosophers important at all? And if so, how much?

In context I ask because if we want to learn philosophy and use it as a way of figuring things out and thinking about the world better then how important is reading philosophers work as opposed to just learning philosophical skills. For example I am interested in the idea of personal identity so I find it interesting to read David Hume and Buddhist works but are these for me to use philosophical techniques and neuroscience etc to try and figure out the concept of personal identity and whether it even exists at all? We study logic so that we can spot whether an argument is valid or invalid, and if valid is it sound. But we dont need to read any philosopher to learn this skill, except for the one who wrote the curriculum. The skills of philosophy allow you approach any subject better, whether philosophical or not. So if someone is interested in learning philosophical skills as a way to approach things then how important is reading the works of philosophers?

[Assistant]
So you want to learn to philosophize, or more exhaustively, you want to learn how to use the tools and methods for reasoning to arrive at generalized statements of some truth value, about topics that empirical study won't yield meaningful results. How do you do this? By practicing these skills in some manner. People have been doing this for ~2300 years already, though. Do you set out on your own, and build up your skills from the ground up, or do you take advantage of the fact that there is ~2300 years of work on this subject to use as a guide?

If you try to build your own system from the ground up, you'll probably make some mistakes and errors, and the chance is that someone in those intervening thousands of years made those same mistakes. So learning to philosophize by learning about the theories of past philosophers is beneficial for at least three reasons: you get to see examples of philosophizing done by experts, you can correct certain errors and pitfalls you would have made on your own by seeing how past thinkers have run into those problems and corrected them, and you can see how *not* to do things, based on errors or holes in their reasoning they did not correct.

Many subjects are taught like this. In art you study and copy works by the masters before you can break the rules and forge your own path, in music you learn the compositions of great composers before you can compose your own pieces, etc.


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

[User]
[Suicide Squad] Exactly how much time do members get off their sentence for each completed mission?

* I am referring to the comics version, not the movie version
* It seems like even though some members like Deadshot, Harley Quinn, and Captain Boomerang have gone a million missions, they are no closer to their freedom than before they started.
* Also, how does it work for someone that has a life sentence?

[Assistant] In DCAU it wasn't years off per mission, Flagg made it clear they were signed on to whatever the Agency/Cadmus/Waller required of them for five years, at which point they would be let go. Any refusal would mean they get remanded to execution.


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

[User]
ELI5: If someone donates a kidney and the recipient dies a few years later, can the original donor get their kidney back?

Would a donor's body recognize their own organ if it was re-transplanted into their body? Is it even a good idea, or would the risk of major surgery outweigh the benefit of having your kidney back?

[Assistant]
The transplanted kidney would have taken damage from being transplanted in another person's body. The person who gave the kidney would have had their other kidney get bigger to compensate for the loss of one of their kidneys. There would be little to no benefit/ probably a lot more harm in trying to give back the kidney even if it was okay because the person who gave it has already had enough changes to make up for it. You would not want to give it back due to things like fibrosis(scar tissue), etc. Also when you transplant a kidney you put it in a different place than where you take it(in the pelvis area). So it's not like you can just "put it back."

On a side note, kidneys are VERY easy to damage, so depending on what they die from it would probably not be able to be used anyway even if it were possible.


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

[User] Why do people die instantly of heart failure? Shouldn't there be some time you're still alive while your brain is suffocating from lack of fresh oxygenated blood?

[Assistant]
They do not, many many people have been resuscitated after the heart stops beating. You will lose consciousness within a short time of the moment it stops beating (similar to losing consciousness from being choked - lack of oxygen to the brain), but you are not dead immediately thereafter.

That is just what happens in movies.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do people only sneeze when awake?

[Assistant] During REM sleep (the phase where dreams take place), your muscles are paralysed so that you dont thrash around and hurt yourself. This paralysis extends to reflex muscle contractions, so you cant sneeze while you are dreaming. In non-REM sleep your muscles are free to move again but the trigeminal motor neurones responsible for triggering a sneeze are still suppressed. It is just about possible to sneeze during this non-REM sleep, but the exertion will normally wake you up.


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

[User] ELI5:I'm in Vancouver, BC, it is 4pm and I can obviously see the sun, but also the moon. Can people of the direct opposite side of the earth see the moon aswell? Or are they experiencing night with no moon?

[Assistant] They are in the middle of the southern Indian Ocean waaay the fuck off of Madagascar.  They are experiencing 4am and right now cannot see the moon.  Almost just like you, earlier in the day at 4pm they saw the sun and moon in almost exactly the same positions as you see them now. For them the sun went down around 8:50pm with the moon still in the sky, and then the moon went down a few hours later, around midnight, and left them with a moonless sky just as you will experience in a few more hours. You are at 49 N in latitude, so they are at 49 S which means it is winter there, and probably cloudy so actually they can't see shit.


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

[User]
[Marvel] Why does Tony Stark need an Arc reactor that could power a small city, inside his chest, just to keep out a few shrapnel from entering his heart?

I mean, I understand that it also powers the suit, but the primary goal for it is to keep him alive, couldn't he just use a much less powerful one inside his chest and use an external powerful one for the suit?

[Assistant] Arc Reactors produce safe and clean energy with little upkeep. The fact that it also produces a fuck-ton is a nice little side effect. Besides, he wouldn't want his reactor to suddenly run out of energy, would he?


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

[User]
I do NOT want to have a wedding, despite my family's (and his family's) wishes. CMV.

20 something female from the US here, close to graduating with a 4 year degree. I am not against marriage, but my partner and I see no reason to spend money we don't need to spend on something neither of us want. We would much rather keep every penny we've earned and put a down payment on a house, pay off school loans, or save it. (Things that are truly important).

Both of our families have expressed that they would like to see us have a wedding and that it would be somewhat rude/selfish if we did not. They see it as a day where our love for each other can be celebrated and the joining of two families. And I don't disagree, but I see no need to spend **any** amount of money making that day "special".

If/when we do get married, it will most likely be private and quiet. Every day with my partner is special and I wish my family would understand that we don't need or want a "big day" to tell people that. I wish they could just look at us and be happy for what we are when we are together, regardless of marital status.

I just don't want a wedding. CMV.

Edit: Thank you everyone for the insightful answers, opinions and suggestions so far. It is what I came here for and I truly appreciate it.

Edit #2: Just to be clear **I am not against MARRIAGE. I am against having a WEDDING** Please acknowledge that these are two different things and CMV.

What I've learned so far:

*The topic has me believe that there are two types of people in the world.

1) "I think your wedding is about you/S.O. and no one else."

2) "I think your wedding is not for you, it is for your family."

Literally opposites. I am having a hard time deciding which one I am.

*Weddings can be done inexpensively if money is really the problem, yes I know.

*Wedding are about the joining of families, got it.

Edit #3: How does upvoting/downvoting my post work? Do I get upvotes for a popular opinion or a good CMV topic? Do I get downvoted because people disagree with me, or I am being unoriginal? Uhh could someone inbox me and explain?

[Assistant]
It sounds like money is the big issue. The answer to that issue is: don't spend money on all the ridiculous crap people think is necessary (expensive dress/clothes, flowers, exotic banquet hall, food, music, etc. etc.). The wedding industry (in America) is out of control overpriced and is way out of affordability range for a lot of young people.

So... skip it. Remember that cheaper doesn't have to mean crappy. Take bbop21's advice and find a free location, ask for friends & family to chip in for supplies and just have a party. Make your own traditions, whatever is meaningful to the two of you and your families. DON'T have a cookie cutter wedding because it doesn't sound like it appeals to you.

Beyond the money issue, you sound reluctant to even have, much less celebrate, a wedding. Honestly it doesn't sound like you guys are ready for "marriage" in all that it entails. What you have is a loving private relationship, but a marriage is really more of a public thing, designed to bring your families together, bring them in to your family circle and most importantly, help raise kids and so forth. A marriage is kind of like a company having an IPO and going public. There's no reason to even do the ceremony if you want to keep your relationship private for now. When you're ready (especially if you're thinking about kids), you can do the public ceremony thing down the road.


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

[User] [Terminator 2] If 1/2 of the liquid metal that T-1000 was made of had been destroyed, would it have prevented it from reforming, or would the good guys have faced a terminator the size of Tyrion Lannister?

[Assistant] The T1000 is shown to function fine with small bits missing and those small bits retain some ability to function, at least knowing to return to the main mass.  No reason half a T1000 wouldn't still function.  The T1000 has distributed processing, so each bit of good helps the rest with computing power.  A half sized T1000 would also be a lot dumber.


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

[User]
[ELI5] Why shouldn't you put out a grease fire with water?

Why doesn't it work / why does it make it worse?
What does work and why does it work?

[Assistant] Well, part of it is just that water displaces grease instead of mixing with it, so the result is that it splashes grease everywhere instead of putting out the fire. In addition to that, the water turns into vapor from the heat of the fire, and expands rapidly, slinging more grease outwards in smaller particles. Being divided into smaller particles increases the surface area of the grease, allowing it to burn a lot faster. This results in a far larger flame.


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

[User]
ELI5: Would the human body adjust to higher gravity, extreme temperatures through slow but increased training

Disclaimer: I've seen similar questions. but they've been archived already(and not completely the same. If I started at 1.5x gravity and went to 2x then 3x etc. As in Goku training for Namek but on a much slower scale. Would our bones grow denser? Would our bodies just  crush at some point? In the same rate if we trained for extreme temperatures. For instance, start at 100 go to 105, 110, 115, 120 etc. Would we adapt or reach a threshold limit?

[Assistant]
Temperature is a lot harder! We have biological processes such as enzymes which will not change no matter how hard you train. Above certain temperatures many biochemical processes will slow and eventually cease.

Muscles and bones however do respond to stress by building and strengthening tissue and bone. Lung capacity, red blood cell count wouls probably also increase under such conditions. What the upper limit of gravity a human could survive in is unknown.


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

[User] ELI5:Why are animals that have a size similar to man kind usually much stronger than a human?

[Assistant] Assuming you're talking about other primates such as chimpanzees and Gorillas its a matter of motor control. Essentially in primates their muscles are generally all or nothing responses allowing all muscle fibres to be activated at once. In humans we instead lost the ability to use all muscle fibres at once and instead replaced it with fine control. This means we're much better at delicate things such as making tools and performing intricate tasks.


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

[User]
[Speaker for the Dead] How does the "Third Life" of a Pequenino work?

Particularly, I am interested in the xenobiology of how the individual Pequeninos can retain memories in its father-tree state, and how it can interpret or sense its surroundings. Do the father-trees have a central nervous system? How do they know how to turn themselves in to tools, and by what mechanisms do they do it?

[Assistant]
Father trees do not give themselves up for making tools, those are brother trees (trees that grew from pequeninos who were not planted but rather fell on the field of battle, they are alive but retain no consciousness).

It is not known how father trees retain the memories from their Second Life. It is hypothesized that the Descolada is responsible. Before it was eradicated (or eviscerated, as some would contend) and replaced with the Recolada, Lusitania's xenobiologists discovered that the Descolada actually communicates among itself by distributing packets of genetic information which are picked up by other Descolada bodies.

Although these packets were not decoded, it was noted that occasionally the reception of these packets would cause the receiving Descolada body to rewrite itself to incorporate the information contained in the packet. It was theorized that by this method of communication, the Descolada was able to facilitate the pairing of species on Lusitania and actually enable the Pequeninos to experience the Third Life.

It was also found that without the Descolada, a Pequenino carried into the Third Life would have no consciousness, memory, or sentience. Planter, the Pequenino upon which the experiment was carried out, is the only brother tree given the honor of retaining his name.