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

[User] Is there a term for a ship of theseus situation where the parts replaced aren't identical but the whole still has continuity as with the roman/byzantine empire?

[Assistant]
I don't know of any specific term, but this passage from John Locke's might be helpful:

> From what has been said, it is easy to discover what is so much inquired after, the PRINCIPIUM INDIVIDUATIONIS; and that, it is plain, is existence itself; which determines a being of any sort to a particular time and place, incommunicable to two beings of the same kind. This, though it seems easier to conceive in simple substances or modes; yet, when reflected on, is not more difficult in compound ones, if care be taken to what it is applied: v.g. let us suppose an atom, i.e. a continued body under one immutable superficies, existing in a determined time and place; it is evident, that, considered in any instant of its existence, it is in that instant the same with itself. For, being at that instant what it is, and nothing else, it is the same, and so must continue as long as its existence is continued; for so long it will be the same, and no other. In like manner, if two or more atoms be joined together into the same mass, every one of those atoms will be the same, by the foregoing rule: and whilst they exist united together, the mass, consisting of the same atoms, must be the same mass, or the same body, let the parts be ever so differently jumbled. But if one of these atoms be taken away, or one new one added, it is no longer the same mass or the same body. In the state of living creatures, their identity depends not on a mass of the same particles, but on something else. For in them the variation of great parcels of matter alters not the identity: an oak growing from a plant to a great tree, and then lopped, is still the same oak; and a colt grown up to a horse, sometimes fat, sometimes lean, is all the while the same horse: though, in both these cases, there may be a manifest change of the parts; so that truly they are not either of them the same masses of matter, though they be truly one of them the same oak, and the other the same horse. The reason whereof is, that, in these two casesa MASS OF MATTER and a LIVING BODYidentity is not applied to the same thing.
>
>*Essay Concerning Human Understanding, CHAPTER XXVII.OF IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY.*

I find the image of the oak tree quite memorable.


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

[User]
ELI5: What do the upside down triangles in math and physics mean?

For example, Maxwell's equations contain upside down triangles. What exactly do they represent?

How does it apply to the real world?

[Assistant]
It represents a vector derivative.

It tells you how a vector (a quantity that has both an amount and a direction) will change over time.

For instance, in some of Maxwell's equations, it represents how a charged particle's movement is affected by electromagnetic fields over time.


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

[User] Do we really need to 'catch up' on sleep, or will a simple 8 sleep cover it?

[Assistant]
It's called sleep debt, and no, simply sleeping for eight hours the next day won't immediately "reset" your body. Your body accumulates fatigue when it misses out on rest, and it can take a couple weeks of regular sleeping before the effects of sleep deprivation are mitigated.

As for why this happens: the concept of sleep debt is pretty well agreed upon even if the mechanisms of it are not well understood.


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

[User]
What is happening when you press on your eyes and see patterns and colors?

You know like when you close your eyes really hard and press down on them for a few seconds you start seeing crazy patterns and colors, can somebody explain what exactly is causing this?

[Assistant] Basically, you are manually stimulating the neurons in your eyes that detect light and color, causing them to fire off randomly. Your brain interprets these firings as actual input, and thus produces crazy patterns and colors.


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

[User]
[Godzilla] Godzilla attacks Japan and is wrecking havoc. Can the US military freely engage in combat operations against Godzilla without the permission or consent of the Japanese government?

Lets say that next Saturday, Godzilla makes landfall in Tokyo and moves across the city causing havoc and destruction. Assuming that the JSDF has not been mobilized yet and/or the Japanese government is rushing to see what the fuck is going on, can say, Carrier Strike Group 5 mobilize to engage Godzilla? Assuming that the US government got word of the attack and gives permission for combat operations to be conducted by USFJ, can the US military independently engage against Godzilla without permission or consent by the Japanese government?

[Assistant]
This is a central plot point in *Shin Godzilla*. When Godzilla transforms into its upright form, it starts to spread radioactive contamination everywhere. Whats worse, Godzilla starts its budding process, which would spawn more Godzilla spawn and spread the contamination.

The JSDF try to destroy Godzilla but fail to even contain him. The USA, which was observing the events, decide that if Japan cant contain the monster, itll nuke Godzilla (and Japan) if theres no way to stop it conventionally. Obviously, this creates a nationwide existential crisis of being nuked for the 3rd time in history.

Luckily, Japanese uses its greatest power, efficient government beuracracy, to weaponize Tokyo city and drug Godzilla till it stops moving.


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

[User] (Supermam)If lead blocks kryptonite from hurting Superman why doesn't he just wear a lead suit and be protected from everything all the time?

[Assistant] It also blocks yellow sun radiation. For short periods this isn't a problem, Superman can operate through the night with no noticeable reduction in his strength after all, but if he's *always* wearing it he'll start getting the Superman equivalent of vitamin D deficiency.


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

[User]
I think that a simple solution to cyberbullying is blocking bullies or simply powering down the device. CMV

If you think about it, you can block anyone on anything. iPhone? iOS 7 ships with a blocking feature. If you don't have an iPhone, blocking communication with any number is just a phone call to your carrier. Twitter? Facebook? Any other social media site? They all have blocking features. However, if for some reason you can't block them, EVERY electronic device has a power button. I don't want to get into the "everything is considered bullying argument" today. That is for another thread on another day. I just think this can solve the cyberbullying "epidemic" that the news and other media make it out to be.

Remember, we are talking STRICTLY cyberbullying.

I know I sound like an asshole. So, please, change my view.

[Assistant]
Blocking a cyberbully doesn't stop them from posting photos on you on a revenge porn site.

Blocking a cyberbully doesn't stop them from poisoning the atmosphere at a school through rumor and lies.

Blocking a cyberbully doesn't stop them from seeding the internet with nasty things about a person, which are findable on a google search done, for example, by a potential employer doing a check on someone they want to hire.

Blocking a cyberbully doesn't help a person if they decide to take it to rl and physically stalk their prey.

Blocking a cyberbully is a good step, but not enough to protect someone from the kinds of damage a determined asshole can inflict.


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

[User] ELI5: If an anchor can keep a ship from floating away, how can the anchor be pulled back up?

[Assistant]
Most of the work of the anchor is actually the heavy anchor chain.  It sits on the bottom for many feet as a long weight.  The anchor (at the end of the chain) just adds a little extra grab on the bottom so the anchor chain doesn't drag.

The amount of chain you put out is typically measured in terms of several times the depth so you can get enough chain sitting on the bottom.  In still current and air, 3:1 is ok.  In bad weather, 7:1 is better.  To bring up the anchor, you just pull up the chain and the ship moves to be directly above the actual anchor, which causes it to release from the bottom.


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

[User]
Why does a radio play static or white noise when there is no signal rather than silence?

I was listening to the radio and drove through a tunnel this evening and my radio played the familiar static / white noise through my speakers and I wondered why this happens rather than just going silent.

[Assistant]
(1) Your radio attempts to match volume between radio stations, and (2) your radio is always playing static, but when you're tuned to an actual station the actual signal drowns out the static.

Your radio tries to play each station at the same volume - after all it would be annoying if the stations whose transmitters are nearby were louder than the ones coming from further away. But when your radio boosts those weak signals it also boosts the noise. With a strong signal the weak noise is so small that its inaudible. With a weak signal you get that muddy sound and can hear the impact of the also weak static. With no signal at all all there is is noise, so the static (now boosted to the same volume as an actual radio station) is what you hear, and at a normal volume.


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

[User]
The Bayesian vs Frequentist debate

In which cases do you decide to go for one instead of the other and what are the reasons that lead you to choose a bayesian approach instead of a frequentist one?

[Assistant]
practicaly speaking, there are IMHO three types of situations where Bayesian approach wins over the frequentist one:

1) When the idea of repeated sampling from the same population is not tenable. This happens for example in pre-elections survey. Since voting preferences are changing significantly from day to day, its practically impossible to sample from the same population more than once. In situations like this, the frequentist interpretation of probability is not particularly helpful.

2) When there is a need to add outside information to the model. This happens when the sample size is too small or the model too complex to get a useful result based just on the data at hand.

3) When you someone asks for a probability of a hypothesis being correct, e.g. "what is the probability that implementing this policy will reduce unemployment?". This kind of question is natural for Bayesians, but virtually unanswerable for frequentists.


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

[User]
[Venom] Why does the arrival of the symbiotes on Earth create any conflict really, when we all know for certain that the symbiotes can survive by eating animal flesh instead of humans'?

There's that one scene with Brock, unknowingly carrying the symbiote, really needing to feed it in order to survive. But then for some reason instead of going after the humans (which seems to be the purpose of the symbiotes in the first place), Brock/Venom makes their way to the lobster tank in the restaurant, and feasts on live lobster before being dragged out of there with the other guy pretending that he's his client. Okay.

But... whatever, why did the symbiotes even pose a threat to humankind anyway? Did they come to Earth in order to eat, or are they power-hungry? What is the overall nature of their visit? I'd thought it was just to feed, but maybe they also wanted to control the planet.... I'd just thought to myself when I saw the movie, oh well that'd be cool. And people eat meat here on Earth anyway, so why would it matter if another carnivorous species - especially one that gave its human host superpowers that are out of this world - came to Earth? Since people could just feed them cows, or live fish, or maybe even live insects, and then probably not even have to eat anymore on their own.

Am I missing something here, or what?

[Assistant]
They possess humans and slowly consume them while doing so.

It's easy to forget that, with Venom being such an accommodating symbiote, but unless Riot found the one little girl totally down with alien conquest, the symbiotes don't *have* to consider their hosts human desires and goals at all. They can just take over and make them do whatever they like. We even see Venom do it a few times. And we can perhaps assume most symbiotes lean more towards Riot then Venom.

They might not eat us all, but compared to us all being conscious but helpless as alien parasites use our bodies as puppets while slowly rotting our internal organs, that might not be a kindness.


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

[User]
When do people use Planck units?

I never really came across this topic. In high school, I would mostly still use The Law of Universal Gravitation, Colulomb's Law etc., so I never really knew about this at all, and what purpose do they serve (apparently it is to communicate with potential aliens under standardised equations?). My conceptual thinking isn't the brightest, so I also have trouble understanding how the Planck equations and derived units are derived from the Wikipedia page.

[Assistant]
Ever wonder why every fundamental constant is some ratio of another unit?

Turns out it doesn't need to be. That's an artifact of how humans defined their units. We made the units, then worked out the constants to be those constants, with those units. We worked backwards.

But if you start with those constants and assume that they are all 1, you can work out a new set of units from there. Those units are the Planck units. This is convenient because when a constant is 1, the equations are much easier to simplify.


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

[User] Was Nietzsche against stocism?

[Assistant]
Allow me to share with you an excerpt from Nietzche's "Beyond good and evil" where he adresses the stoics and that hopefulys answers your question.

>"You desire to LIVE "according to Nature"? Oh, you noble Stoics, what fraud of words! Imagine to yourselves a being like Nature, boundlessly extravagant, boundlessly indifferent, without purpose or consideration, without pity or justice, at once fruitful and barren and uncertain: imagine to yourselves INDIFFERENCE as a powerhow COULD you live in accordance with such indifference? To liveis not that just endeavouring to be otherwise than this Nature? Is not living valuing, preferring, being unjust, being limited, endeavouring to be different? And granted that your imperative, "living according to Nature," means actually the same as "living according to life"how could you do DIFFERENTLY? Why should you make a principle out of what you yourselves are, and must be? In reality, however, it is quite otherwise with you: while you pretend to read with rapture the canon of your law in Nature, you want something quite the contrary, you extraordinary stage-players and self-deluders! In your pride you wish to dictate your morals and ideals to Nature, to Nature herself, and to incorporate them therein; you insist that it shall be Nature "according to the Stoa," and would like everything to be made after your own image, as a vast, eternal glorification and generalism of Stoicism! With all your love for truth, you have forced yourselves so long, so persistently, and with such hypnotic rigidity to see Nature FALSELY, that is to say, Stoically, that you are no longer able to see it otherwiseand to crown all, some unfathomable superciliousness gives you the Bedlamite hope that BECAUSE you are able to tyrannize over yourselvesStoicism is self-tyrannyNature will also allow herself to be tyrannized over: is not the Stoic a PART of Nature?... But this is an old and everlasting story: what happened in old times with the Stoics still happens today, as soon as ever a philosophy begins to believe in itself. It always creates the world in its own image; it cannot do otherwise; philosophy is this tyrannical impulse itself, the most spiritual Will to Power, the will to "creation of the world," the will to the causa prima."


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

[User] Does laying down toilet paper when in a public bathroom dramatically help keep away pathogens?

[Assistant]
You are incredibly unlikely to ever catch anything, even if you sat in poop, from a toilet seat unless you are immunocompromised (e.g. HIV+, current chemotherapy, on immunosupressants) or you have open wounds in that area. If this was at all even remotely common you'd hear about it. Don't waste paper.

You've got an immune system and it kicks ass at its job. There's nothing to be worried about. You are much, much more likely to get sick if you don't wash your hands and then end up eating, putting your hands in your mouth, or touching your eyes or nose.

Wash your hands when you're done with the bathroom then dry your hands on a paper towel and use that to open the door. If there's no paper towel grab some toilet paper to open the door. It's that important.


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

[User]
[Burn Notice] If Michael is the greatest spy of all time, why do so many of his enemies know who he is and where to find him?

At the end of season two, Management warns Michael that without his protection, Michaels old enemies will hunt him down.

But Michael always used cover IDs, always took precautions in the field, and always had the support of the CIA. How did his enemies find out his true identity? Did Management tip them off?

[Assistant]
A lot of them only know his reputation, he had to introduce himself and then it's all "THE Michael Westen?"

Also, "when you're a spy" ... not everything you do is sneaking about in the shadows. Sometimes your job is to make connections that can help you later, and that requires getting them to know you.


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

[User]
Why does cannibalism cause prions but eating other animals meat does not?

I keep seeing that cannibalism cause prions like during the mad cow disease epidemic and the jack kreuz something disease that killed a lot of tribesmen in the mid 19th century. However, i havent seen any explanation as to why cannibalism spreads prions but eating other species meat does not.

[Assistant]
So this is an interesting one and largely based on theory. Prion disease is an umbrella term for lots of different conditions including Creutzfeldt Jakob, Mad cow, chronic wasting disease.

The issue is with a misfolded protein. This protein then causes nearby proteins to misfold and become non-functional, they then do the same to other nearby proteins. This gives you an accumulation of non-functional proteins (amyloid) which causes the symptoms. This happens (very rare) spontaneously in humans causing Creutzfeldt Jakob.

Its thought that Kuru (cannibalism origin) occurred because one of the tribe members developed this prior to their death and passed it to tribe members due to their feeding habits. It then can take 30-50y to show symptoms so once those infected members died other tribes people became infected and it was a neverending cycle.

For some reason brain is the most likely tissue to pass it on but any tissue can. This is why all cows with mad cow (bovine version of CJD) are slaughtered and their meat not eaten. Its not that eating a brain gives you prion disease its just more likely than other tissues to give you prion disease if the animal had it.


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

[User]
[Marvel] How does the speed of sound affect Daredevil's perception

Daredevil sees via vibrations and his heightened senses (bar his sight). However some of his skills would surely be limited by how fast sound travels. Seeing as most bullets are greater than the speed of sound how is DD able to register that they've been fired before it's too late? Is there something I'm missing? Same thing could be said about his parkour feats due to the difference between the speed light and sound causing a significant delay and making a tough task requiring quick reactions much harder.

[Assistant]
> Seeing as most bullets are greater than the speed of sound how is DD able to register that they've been fired before it's too late?

He hears the noises a gun makes before it actually fires. His directional hearing is so good that it's enough to tell him where the gun is pointing.

EDIT: Daredevil can hear people's muscles rasping under their skin. To him, tendons sound like bowstrings. When you pull a trigger, you make a sound unlike anything else in the world. The trigger isn't quiet either, and neither is the rest of the gun. By the time the firing pin starts to sing, Daredevil is moving.


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

[User]
Why do larger elements (e.g Moscovium) have such short lifespans - Can they not remain stable? Why do they last incredibly short periods of time?

Most of my question is explained in the title, but why do superheavy elements last for so short - do they not have a stable form in which we can observe them?

Edit: Thanks to everyone who comments; your input is much appreciated!

[Assistant]
A contributing factor is that we probably haven't synthesised the most stable isotopes of many superheavy elements. The higher the atomic number, the greater the neutron/proton ratio required for stability, and since superheavy elements are synthesised by fusing two lighter ones together it's hard to get enough neutrons.

For example the first isotope of Copernicium (element 112) synthesised, in 1996, was Cn-277 with a half-life of under a millisecond. A few years later Cn-285 was synthesised and that has a half-life of about 30 seconds. Still very short in human terms, but many thousands of times more stable than the first isotope discovered.

It's likely the same will apply for the newest elements discovered, and indeed unconfirmed results indicate this. Even in the predicted "island of stability" half-lifes are still likely to be minutes at best though.


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

[User] ELI5: how come the Alphabet and Cyrillic share so many letters that are either identical or very similar looking, and are sometimes pronounced the same/similar and sometimes not?

[Assistant]
The *Latin* alphabet and the *Cyrillic* alphabet are both based very heavily on the *Greek* alphabet.

Which is why "a" (alpha) is the same in all three, and why "gamma" is a  or "rho" () are the same in Cyrillic and Greek.

Historically, Slavs adopted a form of Greek Orthodoxy (one major branch of Christianity), but the Greek alphabet wasn't enough to express all of the sounds in the Slavic language so they had to create new ones at times, which is roughly how the Cyrillic alphabet came to be.


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

[User]
[Jurassic World 1 and 2] What would make dinosaurs more superior in military combat than any other animal?

If you could genetically modify a create to obey commands why not an attack dog? Little easier to defend if it turns on you?

[Assistant] Military procurement is about more than just what the military needs to be effective. Dinosaurs are *cool*, and the politicians who make budget decisions can be swayed by such things. It's happened many times before. And the public will think so too, which means there is propaganda value in it. Finally, it provides a funding source for the fundamental tech being developed and intimately connects it with the military. Even if the dinosaurs you see are dumb and impractical as a weapon, they are an impressive proof of concept for the *potential*   of that brand of mad science, and lessons learned can be applied to future endeavors.


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

[User]
[Predator] What exactly is the Yautja sense of honor?

The Yautja as we see have some semblance of honor - in the original movie, the Predator only hunts people who are armed. Ahnold is able to get a woman to safety by knocking a gun out of her hands.

Later that Yautja has a one-on-one against Ahnold, and here its sense of honor is kind of hard to grasp - it recognizes that Ahnold is a worthy opponent so it ditches its weapons and fights him hand-to-hand. When Ahnold actually wins, the Yautja starts laughing and nukes itself which does not seem like an honorable opponent.

Then I saw Prey and its sense of honor is very questionable here. Yeah, it seems honorable, but it's also showing up in America in 1719 and has lasers and space weapons and an invisibility device and its just fucking up bears and wolves before starting to kill people with muskets and bows and arrows. So I don't see how these creatures are honorable when they are using such ridiculously advanced tech.

So my question is, what exactly is their sense of honor and how do they abide by it?

[Assistant] While not explicitly said in the movie, it is pretty clear that the Predator in *Prey* was, like Naru, a novice on their first hunt. Hence, they start out with a snake, then a wolf, then a bear, then a human. Working their way up the food chain. You can see with the interactions with the snake, the wolf, and the bear that the Predator is *supposed* to use weaponry that is of parity with the prey, but the Predator here is also not skilled enough to do that and falls back on their crutch: explosives and laser-guided weaponry, resulting in their doom.


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

[User]
[Monsters Inc./Monsters University] How did the monsters ever get access to the first bedroom?

To get to a bedroom and thus screams, you would need a door with power. Power is derived from screams and laughter of children. This seems like a loop. How did the monsters ever get access to their first scream (and electrical power) without electricity to power their doors? Doesn't the chief in Monsters Inc. say that screams are the only source of energy?

[Assistant] Early monsters roamed between worlds through very rare naturally occurring portals, eventually discovering ways to harness the power that children's screams created in artifacts from the monster's world. As monsters developed in parallel with humans they found ways to synthesise portals and bind them to matching geometric spaces in the human world, eventually leading to the bedroom-door standard portal mechanism.


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

[User]
ELI5: Masturbation.

Ok, so animals are humans and such. Animals have mating seasons. Why do I jerk off 3-4 times a day? Shouldn't it be a specific month when I get really horny and such?

[Assistant]
Humans have no specific mating season, at least not in the regular sense of the word. Technically speaking, human's mating season is every month , for about 8 days, when the woman is ovulating. However, as we also evolved sex as a mean of bonding, our mating season becomes every day all day.

Something similar happens in Dolphins, except they have a separated reproductive mating season and then regular, non-reproductive sex for bonding purposes. Coincidentally enough, Dolphins are also known to masturbate and even rape.


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

[User]
Can someone explain the Monty Hall Problem (LI5)?

I don't understand why it is more probable that the final door has a 2/3 chance to win, when after the first door is opened then both doors should, intuitively, have a 1/2 chance of winning.

[Assistant]
Imagine that the prize is in door 1 (this doesn't really matter, all cases are equivalent). Now, make a table with the possibilities.

Pick door 1:

* Don't switch: **Win**

* Switch (to door 2 or 3): ~~Lose~~

Pick door 2:

* Don't switch: ~~Lose~~

* Switch (to door 1): **Win**

Pick door 3:

* Don't switch: ~~Lose~~

* Switch (to door 1): **Win**

So there you have it. Switching guarantees you win 2 out of 3 times.

Idea from *The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time*


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

[User] ELI5: why does a car's steering wheel sometimes need to be twisted/pulled to get the key to turn in the ignition?

[Assistant]
There is a pin in the steering column that prevents the wheel from turning if the ignition lock is engaged.

Sometimes when you park, the car settles into a position where its resting on that pin. You cant turn the ignition because the pin wont disengage.

Turning the steering wheel releases the weight on the pin, and then you can turn the key.


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

[User] [DBZ] So why didn't Ginyu just take Frieza's body?

[Assistant]
Because he respected Frieza. Ginyu wasn't interested in being the absolute strongest. He was happy where he was, leading his men.

Besides, if he violated Frieza's body like that, he'd have to go against Frieza's brother and father, both of whom surpassed him in power. A final thing, he knew that Frieza had multiple forms, and why. Each of Frieza's forms (up until his rebirth) was a power *limiter*. And the reason he needed it was because he had so much power that he couldn't control it without his forms limiting his abilities. It would tear him apart.


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

[User] eli5: Why are flat feet generally worse than arched feet, when you have more surface area making contact with the ground?

[Assistant] The arch shape acts like a spring. In flat feet, there's not much room left to flex. Without that shock absorption, more strain is put on joints through the ankles, knees, hips and into your lower back. Not a lot more, on the scale of things, but with as many steps as people take it adds up.


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

[User]
[Star Trek] Food dispensers produce any quantity of virtually any delicacy you can think of. Why isn't obesity rampant in the Federation?

I know for sure if I had unlimited food at my disposal I know I would snack like crazy. A food dispenser that beams anything I want into existence? Yeah I'd be crazy fat.

There must be people like that among the billions of Federation citizens, and if contemporary obesity figures and probable causes are to be considered, that issue must be more widespread among many billions than it is today. So why isn't it the case? Or is it?

[Assistant] Under the presumption that caloric intake, fat content, and whatnot are taken into consideration and [easily] modified by the replicator as appropriate. Plus, have you ever noticed how busy Feds are? All those electronics to play with, it's amazing they don't forget to eat.


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

[User] ELI5: If the situation arose and it was for survival, would I be able to live off of just water and multi-vitamins?

[Assistant]
Dietetics student here! Your body needs what we call macronutrients, which provide you with energy in the form of calories. Your body burns anywhere between 1500 (low weight, sedentary individuals) to 3500 (high-intensity athletes) Calories a day. These are present in the diet as carbohydrates, proteins, fats, and to a small degree, alcohol.

You *can* survive on one macronutrient for an extended period of time; for example, potatoes are primarily carbohydrates. However, eliminating one macronutrient from the diet does have consequences. Protein deficiency, for example, is one of the largest nutritional concerns in third-world countries, especially in Africa. Each deficiency can lead to a variety of diseases and health concerns.

Multi-vitamins are micronutrients, and we need them  them being vitamins and minerals  to be healthy, but they do not provide any energy. In a survival situation, you'd ideally want a source of water, carbs, proteins, and fats. Most of the micronutrients can be found in the food you'd likely be eating.

**EDIT:** It's important to note that certain nutritional deficiencies can lead to eventual death on their own. However, as long as you have an adequate caloric intake, you will not die from starvation. For example, Vitamin D deficiency can lead to death in extreme cases. Same goes for B12.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Couldnt Padme buy Shmi from Watto?

Padme is presumably wealthy as a queen turned senator, or at least wealthy enough to buy a slave. Couldnt she sneak off to Watto and try and buy Shmi off of him in order to free her? She was clearly shocked by the fact that her and Anakin were slaves, and knew how upsetting it was for Anakin to leave her still a slave. And she could simply pass it off as a standard humanitarian effort if she ever gets confronted about it.

[Assistant]
In Queens Shadow she sends her maidens Sabe and some others to free Shmi from Watto but they couldnt find Watto, they freed some slaves but couldnt find Shmi and watto IIRC.

In AOTC novelisation its implied she met Clieg Lars soon after Anakin left which could be why they couldn't find her.

As for in TPM - time was running out to save her planet and they didn't have any suitable money on them.


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

[User]
ELI5: What does the body do to suppress the appetite when food is not available?

I ate a normal breakfast this morning but was in a work meeting from 11-6 where food was not available. Instead of being hungry for lunch at 12 or 1 like usual, I wasn't hungry at all. I recall other unexpected situations where food wasn't available yet it seems like my body did something to suppress my appetite. What is my body doing, and how does it know to do it?

[Assistant]
This may not fully explain the matter, but one element at play is your bodys sympathetic nervous system, also known as your fight or flight response. Its counterpart is the parasympathetic nervous system, also known as the rest and digest response.

These two are always competing with each other and neither is a simple on/off switch, theyre spectrums. So when your sympathetic system is winning the tug of war your body doesnt care much about eating or signaling hunger.

Sympathetic activation does not only occur in emergencies. It kicks on with any stress- even just a really busy day at work.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Shouldn't the Dark Side be the natural state of the Force?

The Dark Side of the Force is the Force expressed through emotion ans pasaion, but the Light Side is treated as the default state of the Force. The Force is created and shaped by life, and nearly all life naturally feels emotion. Society is built upon emotion. If someone doesn't feel emotion, then they're a sociopath. If the Force is created by emotion, then it would follow that life, chaotic, passionate, and emotional as it is, would cause the default state of the Force to be the Dark Side.

[Assistant]
There's a huge difference between emotion and the dark side. Love is an emotion, the dark side twists it into obsession and jealousy. Hate is an emotion, the dark side twists it into uncontrollable rage.

The Jedi aren't emotionless robots. They are allowed to feel emotions; they're just not allowed to let them cloud their judgments - it's better to approach a situation with a clear head than with a head filled with rage.


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

[User]
[Warhammer 40K] Why hasn't the Imperium changed significantly in the past 10,000 years?

The Imperium of Man seems basically stagnant. Why hasn't it had any major changes of government in that time? 10,000 years is a really long time.

You could blame religion, except that on Earth historically, religions aren't that static either. New religions pop up and old ones reform, splinter into sects, and so on.

Is there some particular force holding the Empire static for such a long time?

[Assistant]
It's hard to notice the changes on a large scale. Sometimes a world will develop some new and fascinating philosophical outlook on life or some revolutionary technology or what have you. And maybe they share it with the larger imperium only to realize they're caught in a warp disturbance and isolated for millennia or maybe they get executed for heresy or just maybe they can't get anyone to understand their dialect of low gothic. And other places it's just that the fundamental ideas of how things work are completely lost to humanity. They're cavemen that know banging the shiny rock on a the black rock makes fire not that flint and granite are two different types of stone and why they interact they way they do.

These are the guys that can deploy a nuke but wouldn't know how to program a clock in most cases.


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

[User]
[WH40k] Are there any known ork Waaagh's against Chaos?

I'd imagine the orks would have a lot of fun fighting chaos, no?

[Assistant]
Tuska, the "Daemon-Killa" - he and his Waagh entered the Eye of Terror and started slaughtering everything until he was killed (and did kill) a daemon prince known as the Blood Prince.

Khorne was so impressed, he resurrects the entire Waagh every day to continue fighting, and sends in Bloodletter generals in against him to test them.

* not going to try writing this in an Ork accent.


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

[User] (eli5) After WW2, Germany was divided as East Germany and West Germany. Why was city of Berlin divided? Why wasn't it entirely a part of East Germany, since it laid on the East side?

[Assistant]
Berlin was the capital, which is a symbolically important place. When the Allies agreed to split Germany into four occupation zones, they realized that giving any country full control over Berlin would make it look like that country gets to decide the future of Germany single-handedly. So therefore they decided to treat Berlin separately, and also do a four-way split, even though the city was fully surrounded by the Soviet zone.

Note that at the time, the partition of Germany into East and West was not yet a done deal. The Allies still thought that the end result of the occupation would be a unified Germany, reborn as a democracy. But if that rebirth happened while the capital was firmly in the hands of the Soviets, the new "democratic" government would probably be a puppet of Stalin.

When the ideological difference between the Soviets and the Western Allies became too great, the French, British and American zones merged into West Germany and the Soviet zone became East Germany, West Berlin then ended up an enclave within East Germany.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is it that right handed people greatly outnumber left handed people?

[Assistant]
We don't know, is the only real answer. In fact, scientists don't even have a scientific definition of what it means to be left-handed. (Is it the hand which can perform a task better? Or the hand you prefer to use for a task?)

There are several theories, and it's probably a combination of all of them. They include:

- correlation with the way the brain is organised (in right-handed people, the left side of the brain deals with speech as well as with controlling the right hand, and the theory is that speech and fine motor skills are related, whereas the brains of left-handed people are often organised differently)

- the position of the foetus in the womb, especially in the last trimester of pregnancy

- a complex tie-in with genetics (two left-handed parents have a 24% chance of having a left-handed baby, compared to the general population which is 10% left-handed)


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

[User] ELI5 Why can you jumpstart a car battery with the black cable on the negative pin on the battery or the car frame? Doesnt the electricity flow negative to positive?

[Assistant]
The car frame is joined to the negative of the battery.  It acts as an "earth" if anything goes wrong and shorts out to the frame in the car.  You wouldn't want to have the metal door handles, etc. be accidentally made live, or floating (then you would get a lot of static on them from the road movement building up a charge).  So you connect them to negative.

But when you jumpstart a car, it's recommended to make sure that you keep the final connection AWAY from the battery.

Lead acid batteries release hydrogen when being charged.  Hydrogen is flammable.  If you complete the circuit to the battery, which charges the battery, and that connection sparks when it makes contact, and the battery is kicking out hydrogen, you could in theory start a fire.  It's unlikely but possible.

So you instead complete the final connection (the negative to the second car) to the actual chassis of the car, away from the battery.  Because the chassis and the negative are joined together, it's electrically exactly the same, but now the spark is away from the battery.


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

[User]
ELI5:What exactly is an abscess, and when/why does it need to be drained?

Here's what I think I know about abscesses and their formation:

1. Some pathogen gets into the body

2. Immune cells recognize it and start secreting substances like Histamine to bring more blood flow to the area and increase vascular permeability so that neutrophils and other things can get to the area

3. The neutrophils eat up the bacteria

4. The neutrophils then apoptose (and the collection of these dead neutrophils is called "pus")

5. An abscess is just a red, tender, warm area where pus has built up?

6. And it has to be drained I'm not sure when/why...?

[Assistant]
Yes. Basically pus are dead cells. The body makes a capsule to isolate it from healthy cells. You must drain it as fast as possible cause if your immunity can't deal with it anymore, the bacteria can enter the bloodstream and cause a Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome then if it's untreated goes into sepsis with septic shock and death.

There is a famous latin quote in medicine that all surgeon know "Ubi pus, ibi evacua" that means  "where is pus, you must evacuate"


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

[User] [Harry Potter][DCEU] Could Superman break through Dumbledores protective spells ?

[Assistant]
No. Superman has no real power where Magic is concerned. The reason for this is that Superman's powers are grounded very firmly in the physics and laws of his reality. He absorbs and metabolizes yellow sunlight, which empowers him by altering the physiology of his body. It seems like magic to those who are not Kryptonian, but his powers are based on his biology and still very much bound by all the same laws of Energy and Physics as anything else in the universe.

Magic, on the other hand, specifically *breaks* and *bends* the laws of reality to get what the caster wants. If a magic user were to create a spark that ignited hydrogen and oxygen in the air to create a fireball, that fireball would not harm Superman because it is the product of a chemical reaction. The spark itself may have been magical, but the flames it ignited were wholly mundane. In contrast, a fireball conjured purely from magical energies would still hurt him, though to what degree depends entirely on how powerful the spell is.

Given this, Superman would be more or less completely stymied by magic on the scale a wizard like Dumbledore could produce. He could certainly still defeat Dumbledore, given his insane speed and strength, but he can't do dick against magic.


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

[User]
[DC] How the heck do Green Lanterns patrol entire sectors of the Universe?!

So, Hal Jordan gets a magic ring of green goodness, and suddenly he's a space-cop who can hit people with magic, green chairs right - but how on earth is it plausible for him to patrol such a large area of space, especially when the distance between habitated planets is huge. And what constitutes a problem that requires a Green Lantern? Is a common mugging something that will pull Hal back to Earth from ages away, or is he content to let Earth police/superheroes deal with it - and if so, what's the point of the Lanterns - or how do they function at all?

[Assistant] No, of course, he won't come back to Earth for a common mugging. Don't be silly. The Green Lantern Corps focuses primarily on interstellar conflict, especially in cases where civilizations that have not achieved significant space travel capabilities are threatened by those that do. Given that, the responsibilities of the Green Lantern are narrowed down considerably to patrolling those worlds that can move through space, which are relatively few in number. This facilitates ease of planning patrol routes, using the superior technology of the Lantern ring. Of course, Lanterns are also given individual liberty in the performances of their duties and are not necessarily beholden to only preventing one sort of offense or another; their overarching mission is simply to preserve the integrity of peace and life in the universe.


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

[User]
Any accounts of how there are moral facts? As in why they exist rather than not? (not if they exist)

I understand the arguments for moral facts and against, however what has always seemed unintuitive to me was how those facts got there.  This I guess is sort of an addendum to Mackie's queerness argument - not only do strange things seem hard to imagine existing, but it is hard to imagine a reason for them to have come into being.  At least divine command theory has the part where god says 'Thou shalt not...' and then poof!  A moral fact!  The same thing works just great for subjectivists, you experienced a moral imperative!  There you go, a moral fact for you came into being.  But how else are there some moral facts rather than none?  I can imagine astrophysical explanations of the universe, but giving a physical account of moral facts would be for most people, a category error.

I realize that many probably wouldn't want to consider moral facts as becoming but rather as being (although the 'why do moral facts exist rather than none' I think gets that across without reference to becoming), but if anyone has thought about it, please help.

[Assistant] If you accept them, its kind of like asking why mathematical facts exist rather than none. It would be bizarre if there was no mathematical facts. Reality in general simply requires it. The implication is that morality is the same. Even if nothing concrete exists, the potential for things to exist and exist in relations that are moral is still there. If you consider it like the math of morality then the facts exist for the same reason as other universals.


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

[User]
[LOTR] Why didn't the Elves just make more rings?

Their rings were uncorrupted by Sauron, and rings seemed pretty capable of granting all sorts of sweet powers.

[Assistant] While Sauron had the One Ring, the elves could not safely use their rings because the One Ring would gain control over them. By the time Sauron lost the One Ring, the elves who knew how to make Rings of Power were mostly dead (including Celebrimbor, who made the Three Rings). During the 3rd Age, the only one to figure out even how to make lesser rings of power was Saruman, and he seems to have made his after betraying the White Council and starting his attempts to take over Middle-earth.


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

[User] ELI5: How can someone take a loan to buy a company and transfer the debt to the company? E.g., the Glazer's takeover of Man United.

[Assistant]
You agree to buy part of the company, with a contractual condition with management that it will take a loan and buy back all its shares from other shareholders. The loan is collateralized on the assets of the company, so the banks are okay with it.

So now you own the company which has taken a massive loan on itself, but are protected by the limited liability company from the loan if it defaults.

It's not always bad, there are plenty of reasons for a company to privatize itself or even buy back all its shares. Sometimes the market heavily discounts a company (e.g. Microsoft throughout the 2000's) or the company is beholden to quarterly results and can't implement long term strategy (e.g. Dell). There have been successful leveraged buyouts which have produced win wins for all parties involved.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] What determines whether I get thrown in the Sarlacc Pit verses fed to the Rancor?

Jabba has two options to execute people. What determines which he chooses?

[Assistant]
How much Jabba hates you.

The rancor arena doesn't have a lot of pomp to it, he just drops you in and then you're dead within ten minutes. He gets a show, you get to die, and nobody except the Rancor has to get off their ass to get it done.

The sarlaac, on the other hand, is saved for when Jabba hates you so much that he doesn't mind gassing up his finest and skiffs, loading them up with his prettiest sex workers and bounty hunters, and flying out to a remote part of the desert just to watch you fall into a pit and get no satisfaction from your watching your limbs be ripped from your body. It's so much less bloodsport, and so much more work, but it sends a message (plus he gets to watch you squirm the whole ride out there which is a little bit of compensation from not getting to see what you're made of).


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

[User] [Star Trek] If I ask a replicator for "Earl Grey" without specifying type of beverage or temperature, what will it give me?

[Assistant] You would get hot earl grey tea as that is the default.  When Picard started out on star ships, replicators were a bit more limited and the orders had to be placed that way.  Nowadays it's usually not the case, but it's a habit for him.  It doesn't help that in cases where there isn't a default (soup that can be served either hot or chilled) the computer does require the temperature adjective, so he's never broken the habit.  It is possible that at some point, he programmed "hot" to be a different temperature than the default so the tea you got wouldn't be the same.  He may well at some point have changed other things too, so with your order you'd still get hot Earl Gray tea, it just wouldn't be as good.


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

[User] ELI5: Why some people believe they look attractive in the mirror but unattractive in photos.

[Assistant]
a) Mirrors aren't still images - it's easy to preen and pose and turn until you look just right. It's far easier for the camera to capture unattractive snapshots.

b) People aren't perfectly symmetrical. When you only ever look at a mirror version of yourself, seeing yourself flipped the correct way might always look a little bit "off".


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

[User] Chiasmodon, Gulper Eels, and other species of fish that ingest prey larger than themselves are probably more sluggish with the extra weight. How do they escape predators in this engorged state?

[Assistant] I dont think they have to. Many of them are ambush predators who live in the deep sea. The reason they can eat such large prey is because encounters with living things of any sort are rare in their environment, so they need to be sure they can eat most anything that comes along. So once theyve eaten something, odds they can just sit and wait digesting their food waiting for the next meal to swim by. And the extra size from their distended mouths may even serve to make them harder to attack by making themselves harder for other fish to swallow.


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

[User] ELI5: What would earth be like without the moon?

[Assistant] Without the moon, many of the species of animal which currently exist would die off, for one.  Animals which depend on the existence of the tides, for instance.  Or animals which use the light of the moon in navigation (like it is believed moths do).  In fact, humans are highly dependent on the tides as well, and have been for as long as we've been taking advantage of the oceans' bounty.  Would the Earth fall apart or something without the Moon?  No.  But if the Moon suddenly stopped existing or was somehow flung out of Earth's orbit unexpectedly, it would have serious impacts on the biosphere as a whole.


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

[User] [Playerunknown's Battlegrounds] What the hell is going on? Why have I just been airdropped on an abandoned Soviet island littered with military gear? What is this circle closing in on me? What happens if I'm the last one here?

[Assistant] A cruel millionaire known only as Playerunknown has done this to you. Navy SEALs, special ops, bodyguards to kings; he loves to pit the best of the best against each other. And when you're the last one standing, you are forced to do it again.


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

[User]
What problems does homelessness cause for society as a whole?

There's a lot out there about homelessness and the problems it causes for the affected individual, but what problems does homelessness cause for society as a whole?

[Assistant]
Economic stress due to homelessness occurs for several reasons.  For context, we'll us the U.S. as an example.

* Nations that do not have universal healthcare coverage (U.S.) pay for healthcare for homeless individuals only through the Emergency Room.  This is extremely expensive, due to lack of preventative care.  The government generally pays all bills, because people can not be denied in the ER.

* The presence of homeless in neighborhoods, business communities, shopping malls create economic stagnation.  People with visit shopping ares less often and spend less money.  And those that do spend money will spend less time and visit less often.  This is the inspiration for the many loitering laws on the books.

* Real estate values of "traditional" neighborhoods plummet with the presence of homeless.

* The allocation of community services is stunted.  Police have less time to spend on real issues, dealing with minor homeless misdemeanors.  Welfare workers have less time help needy families.  Hospitals have less time to spend with other patients.

* The government in general loses out huge in terms of investment.  Working people pay taxes and bring in revenue.  Homeless pay no taxes (other than sales), yet they are the recipients of services.  This is a perfect example of the "Free Rider Problem."
_______________________________________
This is not by any means the fault of most homeless people in the (US).  A large population of the homeless is in fact mentally disabled, developmentally disabled, or physically disabled.  This disability severally limits their appeal in a (presently vicious) job market.  In addition, many homeless suffering from mental illness are former patients of federally funded mental health clinics that have had to cut back on funding or close entirely.  The end result is an untreated patient thrown back into a world with no understanding or sympathy for their illness/disease/disability.  This is akin to having someone come in with two broken legs, putting one in a cast, and saying "here you go mate, ran out of plaster, best of luck with this crutch."


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

[User] ELI5: How does a police sketch work? I feel like if I saw a suspect for a brief time no way would I be able to describe the shape of his eyes or what kind of eyebrows the guy has.

[Assistant]
>How does a police sketch work?

Not very well, as it turns out. In reality, police sketches are almost comically unreliable. Sketches are one of several cop tactics that continue to be used, despite the fact that there is no evidence that they work effectively, and actually quite a bit that they don't.

Things like lineups, and bite mark/blood splatter analysis are similarly bogus, but they just keep being used because it's "common knowledge" that they work. Except they don't. Even fingerprinting has a lot of problems that nobody is really addressing.


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

[User]
How strong/quick could a robot with human dimensions be compared to a human? Is it limited by hydraulics?

I'm picturing things humans do well, and how a human sized robot could do it. How strong can a robot with human dimensions be in theory?

[Assistant] The largest groups of muscles that control as single joint are your quads and hamstrings, which do nothing but bend your knee. We can make machines the size of a person's thigh that can generate more force than a knee, and the same goes for other joints. The biggest problems with building humanoid robots are power storage and balance.


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

[User]
ELI5 - Does everything have a melting point and a boiling point? If so, what's the melting point of wood?

(Don't worry, I understood particle theory at 5)
(I watched a lot of Bill Nye & Magic School Bus)

[Assistant]
Wood is not a single thing, it's a bunch of stuff arranged together to make what we call wood. There's water, carbon, and a whole bunch of other stuff in it. Each of these has its own temperature that it becomes liquid and gas, as well as the temperature it burns at. For some things, the "burn" temperature is lower than the temperature it melts at, or lower than the temperature of the other stuff in the wood.

When wood is heated the stuff in it starts to break down from the heat. The water changes from liquid to gas and other stuff starts to change because of both the heat and the water boiling away. Then some of the stuff in the wood begins to burn because it is higher than its "combustion point" (a fancy way of saying how hot it can get before it burns). The heat released by the stuff beginning to burn raises the temperature even further and other stuff begins to burn.

The biggest reason that wood doesn't melt is really that the stuff that's in it will mostly burn before it melts.


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

[User]
Eli5 - why do you take antibiotics as a course and not all at once?

I've just started an antibiotics course which is 4 times a day for 10 days and that got me wondering if they would be just as effective if  I took them all and why not.

[Assistant] Drugs only stay in your body for a limited time, and it takes time for them to find their targets. The drugs and the bacteria pretty much have to randomly run into each other in your bloodstream or wherever. So if you took it all at once some of the bacteria would survive no matter how much you took. Taking the meds over a period of time keeps a supply in your body long enough to kill all the bacteria, or to kill enough that your immune system can handle the rest. Good question tho. It makes sense to wonder how this works.


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

[User]
I believe that voice control for computers is a useless gimmick. CMV.

I don't understand all the appeal of voice control (Siri, Google Now) in computers today. Voice is not information dense; any form of input or output you can do via voice you can do faster via other means. If there's anybody else in earshot, you also look like an idiot. So... why is it around?

I think it's because it looks "cool" the handful of times you actually use it - either in the store, or at home after opening the box. The reviewer who doesn't actually use the device for very long is also similarly impressed.

Beyond that, though, it's a gimmick. CMV.

[Assistant]
>I don't understand all the appeal of voice control

...said the man with arms.

Honestly, it's cool (for reasonably loose definitions of 'cool'), until it becomes mainstream.  Then it just 'is', and everyone accepts it.  Eventually it may become standard, but that depends.

Look at how touchscreens took off.  The first ones that were really commercially made were in ~1983.  Today they're ubiquitous, though they're still trying to catch on for desktop computers.  After 30 years they're finally almost standard.

Voice control (which has also been around for a long time) is at the start of catching on.  Partially because the computing power necessary for it is finally arriving.  Partially because we're so used to people walking around talking to their phones through hands-free headsets that seeing people talking to themselves for no discernible reason isn't that big of a deal any more.

Kids these days can barely write, everyone learns to type at an early age, so it's not needed.  Maybe down the road, people will barely be able to type, since all you have to do is talk at your computer.  Don't be too surprised...if in the 80's or 90's you'd have tried to convince someone that *writing* would be becoming a lost art in a couple decades, you'd have been laughed at.


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

[User]
ELI5: How come if atoms are around 90% empty space in volume, yet solid matters are not transparent?

Matter is made of atoms and atoms are largely empty space. If we are made of atoms, we should not be seen as continious, non-spaced solid things with our bare eyes. Shouldnt we appear as 90% empty space?

[Assistant]
I mean if you grab a magnifying glass and look at the screen you are reading this off of, you have thousands of tiny pixels separated in space which when displayed in the density that they are, and at the distance from you that they are, appear to be 100% completely filled in solid color.

The gaps between "stuff" are only relevant if the observer is on a size scale that can meaningfully see those gaps.

Transparent would suggest that the light would just travel through an object, never obstructed. While light could get a decent distance unobstructed, the number of atoms light would have to conveniently "not hit" is far too many for transparency to be possible.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do the countries that used to be a part of the British Empire (Canada, New Zealand, Australia, etc) have a dollar ($) for a currency, instead of a pound () like Britain?

Just a thought I had, and it made me wonder. You'd think that when Britain gave Australia, Canada, and whatnot, their independence that they would have the pound as the currency. It's like they decided to join America on the dollar bandwagon.

[Assistant]
New Zealand and Australia used their own independent pounds, shillings and pence for some time after they had independence. When they decimalised, they found people worked in shillings. So they came up with a system where the cent was similar in value to the old penny, and 10 cents was a worth one old shilling. To keep it decimal, they needed a new currency worth 100 cents, and so they picked the name "dollar" because it's understood as a currency name, and other proposals were unpopular.

Other countries weren't straight for their own currency, and adopted a decimal currency with a similar value to their neighbours. Dollars were recognizably different from pounds, so made sense.


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

[User]
Are everyones intestines folded up the same way?

Is the small intestine bunched together the exact same in everyones body?

[Assistant]
Nope! In fact, your small intestine probably isn't even bunched up in the same way it was a month ago!

The small intestine is a very mobile structure because of the mesentery to which it is attached. This means it is able to move over itself and adjust its position (important to isolate infections etc if they occur). Contrast this with the large intestine which is partly retroperitoneal and is fixed as ascending and descending segments. The rest of the large intestine is a bit variable. caecum and sigmoid colon are more mobile, and the transverse colon is a bit mobile but is more specific in its location because its ends are determined by the fixed ascending and descending segments.


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

[User]
[Back to the future] Why did Doc build the time machine if he thought it would likely lead to his death

1955 doc sent Marty back to 1885, and then for all he knew Marty may not have succeeded in his mission to prevent him being shot in the back by Buford Tannen.

He so possessed a letter from Marty detailing how he would be shot by terrorists.

At this point the time machine is clearly bad news. Doc knows it might lead to his death.

He builds it anyway. was he motivated by pure curiosity? Did he want to avoid a paradox? Was he dreading his death the whole time? Did the ripple effect change his memories?

[Assistant] Considering how scared he was of even opening the letter to cause a paradox, it's possible he did it to avoid one. He also may have felt that a bullet proof vest would make him safe. Which is stupid, but so is remote controlling an untested time machine to drive directly towards him when none of his previous inventions have ever worked. He has high intelligence, but wisdom is his dump stat.


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

[User]
Why do researchers publish to paywalled journals if they're not getting paid?

Is it just the prestige of the journals, or do they have some legit advantages? What's so special about these paywalled journals and publishers?

What are some popular pro-open-access alternatives?

[Assistant]
You may call it prestige, but it is really about careers. Why would an athlete join the best team possible? Why would an author publish with a high end publisher rather than self-publish?

These things are changing rapidly, but no one submits to "paywall" journals just to feel special.


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

[User]
It seems like it's possible for consent in sex to be violated without anyone being morally to blame. Does anyone have any reading on this?

Fair warning: This post discusses the potential for sexual assault, though in as dry and non-graphic a tone as I can manage.

So I've kinda had this idea bouncing around my head for a long while, so I came here to see if anybody's ever thought this over before. I've been looking but I can't find anything from any philosophers. I'd love to hear from folks who have an interest in sex ethics or who might have related reading.

I'll write from my own perspective, then zoom out and ask questions about the general principle of the thing.

So ethical sex requires informed consent (at least by the moral framework I subscribe to). Practically speaking, that means I need to be as sure as reasonably possible that my partner actually understands what I want from them and is willing without coercion to participate. In college, I was taught to seek an "enthusiastic yes". Not just a sigh and an annoyed nod or a drunken "yeah okay", but active, engaged consent both verbally and in body language.

That seems like a good starting point to avoid a lot of potential for communication errors, but it got me thinking: What if I do all that, but she (as I'm a heterosexual man) was signaling her lack of interest in a way that I'm not familiar with? Am I to blame, even if it was communication that I couldn't reasonably be expected to understand? At that point I've just committed rape--as the definition we use for rape revolves around the consent of the one raped. If a person does not consent to sex, then they have been raped. And rape by definition requires a rapist, doesn't it?

Further, what if somebody does absolutely everything they reasonably can to ensure that their sex partner gives informed consent. They speak the same language, are both familiar with the same type of body language, they get to know one another very well before sex, all of that. It could still be rape if one of them feels coerced and doesn't show it for whatever reason.

What if somebody had autism and couldn't read body language and relied on the actual words somebody said and the fact that they were cooperating? What if somebody is vacationing in another country and doesn't understand the slightly different body language? What if peer pressure made somebody pretend they wanted it just to "get it over with" and lose their virginity or something to avoid social repercussions from their social circle? Or what if the victim was never taught how to communicate a lack of consent, and didn't know how to signal it in the ways that a partner would reasonably pick up on it? There are a great many different situations where this applies.

While I'm thinking on it, it's even possible for two people to be raped by one another, with both feeling coerced and neither picking up on it from the other party. What then?

Anyway, I guess I want to talk this over with folks. It seems like this is a major problem with the way we frame conversations about consent.

[Assistant]
I think what you are interested in is the conditions for valid consent and there is a lot of discussion of these in the medical literature along terms that are similar to the concerns you raise here.

So the requirements for consent to be valid are rationality, understanding and freedom. Proponents of consent as a central concept in the doctor patient relationship acknowledge the potential difficulties but highlight solutions and the responsibility of the person asking for consent to be aware of these pitfalls and take steps to avoid them. So, for example, a doctor faced with a patient who is a recent immigrant and appears to be shy and introverted should also consider the possibility that language barriers are causing a problem with understanding which affects the validity of consent. Consent and autonomy are the dominant narrative in medical ethics so there are loads of discussions around these issues. Other philosophers, Onora ONeill comes to mind here, think these problems with consent are reasons to do away with an over reliance on the concept and recent research the discussion on rights.

Specifically on the literature on rape a few authors liken rape to an act of violence expressed through sexual means, so this kind of approach makes ones motives crucial. Genuine misunderstandings would not have the same moral status than deliberate acts of violence through consent. But this is just one approach.


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

[User] ELI5: Why we feel sleepy when in a warm room.

[Assistant] Warmth relaxes your muscles. Relaxation puts our bodies at ease, prompting rest. When spending enough time in a comfortably warm place, the body, unless stimulated by some activity, will attempt to rest.


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

[User] ELI5: how do illegal drug prices remain more or less constant while everything else increases in price?

[Assistant] They don't.  Cocaine was 3 times more expensive, when everything is adjusted for, in the 80s than now.  Tells you something about the economy in the 80s.  The price of an ounce of high grade marijuana has also dropped significantly in the past ten years.  Used to be an ounce of the best stuff would be between 350-400, now it can be had for 250-300.  Acid was 2 bucks a hit when that dude was making it in the abandoned missile silo in the 90s, now the going rate is 10.  Heroin has dropped significantly in price and increased in purity since the invasion of Afghanistan.  You probably just haven't been using illegal drugs long enough to notice the price fluctuations.  Give it time, you will.


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

[User] Can every philosophy be defined by a set of axioms from which the rest of the system is derived? If so, shouldn't the axioms be the primary field of debate and discussion?

[Assistant]
There have been attempts to axiomatize and formalize moral systems (Deontic Logic, for example).

But really, axiomatization is of limited use in moral philosophy (and philosophy in general).  Logic is a useful tool for argumentation, but formal logic isn't going to tell us what values we should uphold.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does glue not get hard and stick to its original container?

[Assistant]
Often it is the case that water is acting as a solvent, so as to prevent the glue from solidfying into a self-stuck mass. The amount of air inside the container is insufficient in the short term to evaporate that water.

Once you've applied the glue to some surface, it can more readily interact with the air and lose its water content.


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

[User]
How does the body "decide" where to lose weight from?

I recently lost a lot of weight, mostly due to eating right and a bit of cardio. Unfortunately it has been mostly around my neck, face, chest and breasts, leaving me still with larger legs and "love handles".

So how exactly does the body "decide" where it should lose weight from?

Thanks!

[Assistant]
One major factor is hormones. Men and women tend to store fat very differently. Men tend to store fat on their stomachs, while women tend to store fat on their breasts, hips, and rear.

Interestingly enough, this is based mostly on hormones. Transgender people who undergo cross-sex hormone therapy eventually undergo a shift of body fat distribution. Over a few years, a male-to-female individual on estrogen therapy will have her stomach thing out and her hips, butt, and chest grow fatter. A female-to-male person on testosterone will see his hips, posterior, and bust shrink and start storing fat on his stomach.


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

[User]
ELI5:please explain how cruise ships are able to stay upright and not tip over in high winds, when many other smaller boats experience great sway.

keeping center of gravity low is important to shipbuilding so how do these super cruise ships stay upright in high winds when they are 5+ stories tall above the water?

[Assistant] Tons of weight concentrated in the lower portion. The upper decks consist of far more empty space than the lower ones. To tip the ship, wind would need to lift that weight upward, which would take an enormous amount of force.


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

[User]
[Dr Strange] Why didn't the monster torture Dr Strange?

At the end, the monster repeatedly kills him relatively quickly and painlessly, so it seems like Strange is a hero because he's more willing to deal with the tedium. But would his plan have worked (that is, would he have gone through with it as readily) if the monster had basically put him in hell for days each time he came back?

[Assistant] We didn't see every iteration of their battle during the montage. Dormammu probably killed him in every way conceivable and a few more before giving up. It's just like in Groundhog day where we only see a fraction of of the days he spent stuck in the town while people have calculated that the whole movie takes place over several thousand years.


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

[User] [Doctor Strange/Infinity War] Why didnt the Ancient One ever use any of the more powerful spells we see Doctor Strange use? Why did she stick to matter folding and the orange spark constructs?

[Assistant]
When did she really need to?  Kaecilius and his band weren't particularly dangerous or skillful.  She had no trouble handling them using more mundane spells.

She only lost because she underestimated Kaecilius' ruthlessness in killing his own man to get to her.


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

[User]
Since both a WiFi signal and light are electromagnetic radiation, can I simulate the range of my WiFi Access Point by replacing it with a bright light in a pitch-dark night?

I would probably need to leave all doors open since the WiFi signal has no trouble to shine through them, but it seems that concrete and brick walls are opaque for both WiFi and light.

[Assistant] No. All materials have different absorption and scattering properties of electromagnetic radiation, and these properties are different for different wavelengths of light. Visible light and radio waves will not have the same behavior, especially since houses are such irregular objects made of so many different materials. Furthermore, you wouldn't simulate the correct power or signal-carrying properties of the light either.


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

[User]
[Avatar: The Last Airbender] Couldn't Toph find the space sword trivially?

It fell from a blimp into a forest. Toph has the ability to find things through tremors in the ground. Wouldn't this make finding Sokka's magical space-sword a trivial exercise?

[Assistant]
No.

>Toph has the ability to find things through tremors in the ground.

and
>It fell from a blimp into a forest.

She has to be in contact with the same ground in close vicinity to sense stuff, so she wouldn't have sensed where it landed.

On top of that Aang flooded the battlefield which would most likely have buried the sword or swept it out to sea, or at least swept it into a different location. And even if they wanted to look for it later, the battlefield looked like it was hundreds of square miles - that's a lot of area to search, a real needle in a haystack situation.

Like the other guy said, shit's gone.


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

[User]
[Mass Effect] Why was Shepard never promoted past Commander?

Considering how many different things (s)he pulled off that no other organic (let alone human) managed to do, in terms of diplomacy, combat, *and* leadership, why was Shepard never so much as offered a promotion?

[Assistant]
You don't want to climb too high... because then you have far less freedom of movement.

At Commander, Shepard has the authority to command his ship (the Normandy) and between that and his Spectre status sufficient power/authority to get what he needs to do what he needs to do.

If he climbs much higher he would start to get bogged down in the paperwork and political red-tape that comes with commanding larger and larger forces.

Same reason James Bond is a Commander, and Wedge Antilles refused multiple promotions (Star Wars Legends) until he was more or less given a promotion that still let him do what he wanted.


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

[User]
How does a car determine its speed?

I was thinking it can't be a simple revolution counter of the wheel, because if you change the size of the wheel the distance covered will be different. So how does the car "calculate" its speed accurately?

[Assistant] It is done by counting revolutions, of the wheel, axel, transmisson, ect. And yes, changing the tire size does change the calculations, which is why you are supposed to have it recalibrated if you do change tire sizes.


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

[User]
[Fallout] Which Vault experiments were the most inherently cruel, the most disastrous and the most harmless?

Note that "most inherently cruel" and "most disastrous" are very much two different categories here, as in many cases the horrific end results of certain experimental Vaults were not necessarily intended to happen by the designers; for instance, Vault 112 was not *meant* to end up as an IHNMAIMS-esque scenario, and simply devolved into one due to Braun going insane and power-mad over a timespan of centuries.

And for "most harmless", I do *not* mean to include the handful of Vaults that actually functioned exactly as advertised; I'm looking for one(s) where there *was* an experimental gimmick, but it was actually relatively benign compared to some of the others.

[Assistant]
The most inherently cruel may have been Vault 12, which was designed to let in radiation from the outside, causing all of the inhabitants to either die or become ghouls. Another candidate for this title would be Vault 87.

Vault 87 probably had the most disastrous results, since it was intended to be used for testing F.E.V., which directly led to the creation of East Coast Super Mutants.

The most harmless vaults, in terms of outcome, were Vault 21 and Vault 101. Vault 21 was filled with compulsive gamblers and designed to have a society built around gambling. Vault 101 was meant to be controlled by an Overseer with absolute power and never opened to the outside world. While we don't know their exact histories, we know that 200 years after the War, both Vaults had opened and contained thriving populations.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do Asians have such a unique eye shape?

I can pretty much grasp how and why skin color and hair color managed to change in the way it did over tens of thousands of years of evolution but I don't understand the evolutionary need for the eye shape of Asians and why it is specific to them.

[Assistant]
The shape is caused by the epicanthic fold, which is a fold over the inside corner of the eye. Asians aren't the only ones to have it, though, it's not unheard of among Europeans, especially the Irish and Scottish. Some Amerind tribes have them, too.

The theory is that it helped prevent snow blindness or radiation, but there's still scientific disagreement on the matter.


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

[User]
[Marvel/MCU] How powerful are the Guardians of the Galaxy compared to Earth's superheroes?

Reflecting on Civil War II got me thinking, how big of a threat are the Guardians to the Avengers (or the X-men in the comics)? I figure Drax and Gamora are similar to enhanced humans like Captain America and Winter Soldier, and Groot is at least as strong and impervious as Colossus. But are any of them analogous to a Hulk, a Thor, or even a fully-equipped Iron Man? I'm not really asking who would win in a fight (I know that is a different sub), but just a general idea of how powerful the characters are.

I'm talking specifically about the Guardians line-up from the first movie of Starlord, Groot, Drax, Gamora, and Rocket.  Examples/comparisons from both the movies and comics appreciated, especially if they are more powerful in one medium than the other.

EDIT: So far lots of great responses, but not seeing a lot on adult Groot, who I would assume has the most raw strength/durability (though it sounds like 616 Drax might have more from some of the comments.) Also, I believe in the comics he can replicate himself much faster than in the films.

[Assistant]
Rocket's tech is far beyond Tony's. Remember he has a handheld (for a raccoon, even) device that was regenerating the Milano after it crashed.

One of the deleted scenes from GotG2 has Gamora lift and carry a gun as big as she is, so saying she's as strong as Cap is kind of an understatement. Drax is even stronger than her.


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

[User]
How can an almond help with digestion but also be indigestible?

Apparently it's called "roughage". It is "fibrous indigestible material in vegetable foods which aids the passage of food and waste products through the gut" which for example can be an almond. How come there are so many whole grains, nuts, seeds, legumes, fruits, and vegetables, that your body can't digest, but also helps digestion? To the uneducated mind, it sounds like an oxymoron.

[Assistant]
Fiber helps with digestion by absorbing water, which softens/loosens feces.

There are three basic components to digestion in the body:  Propulsion, chemical/physical digestion, and absorption. Fiber helps with propulsion, but cannot be broken down properly by the body and thus can't be absorbed. Which means that it aids in the digestion of other nutrients, but can't be digested itself.


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

[User]
ELI5: What is the point of Kirchhoff's First Law?

My exam starts in 3 hours so this is late but what the hell.

If Kirchhoff's first law says the current going into a junction is equal to the current coming out of a junction isn't that basically saying that I=I? I don't see how that's useful. That's just common sense isn't it?

How could this be applied and when is it actually useful because I really don't see this being important...

[Assistant] If your circuit splits up into different (parallel) paths, it tells you that the sum of the current in the paths will be the same as the current before they split up (and equally, the sum of the currents in paths that join together will give you the current in the section after they've joined together).


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

[User] What happens in your vocal cords when you sing falsetto?

[Assistant] In regular singing/speech production, the entire vocal cord vibrates together to create the sound.  In falsetto range, only the ligaments on the edge of your vocal folds vibrate together.  They can vibrate faster, hence higher in pitch, but often do not close fully, hence the "airy" and light note quality.


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

[User]
When a black hole is rotating what exactly is physically rotating?

Black holes are supposedly a singularity (to the best of our knowledge) if the black hole is a singularity how can it be rotating? Is space itself rotating? Do we know that black holes actually rotate, i.e. have we detected rotating black holes in some way?

[Assistant] The singularity is a theoretical construct, not a real thing. As it stands we can only make inferences about what is going on inside an event horizon based on observed effects. We can observe interactions with the ergosphere in the form of x-rays coming from relativistic jets at the poles, and reflected x-rays from the accretion disk. But as far as what is happening on the other side of an event horizon we really don't know what is going on.


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

[User]
[General Military Science Fiction] How dangerous or intelligent is a General who has spent a century non-stop wars?

I'm writing a story with a group for a modernish setting. The world itself is very peaceful so to speak but only internally.

At its external borders, the world (humanity), has been at constant war with an group of monstorous races that want to kill them. Fortunately the military in this case is very competent and powerful enough to face them head on.

Nevertheless these borders or "fish-net" has been a constant battle ground where hundreds of thousands to millions of soldiers die on an annual basis. The General/Command step have held the line, taken the some ground and lost some for three centuries now.

Nevertheless how intelligence or dangerous would such a general be?

[Assistant]
Assuming it's a do-or-die meritocracy type system you would expect them to be incredible tacticians and well versed on the capabilities of their technology but without in-depth knowledge of the latter.

But if it is like the real world where you only have to look good on paper and be an excellent networker, with someone in your corner. Then you would expect them to be of average intelligence but with immense skill at covering their own behinds when they screw up.

In addition in real life, most tactical decisions are made by majors, Lt colonels, and colonels. Generals usually set overarching goals and deal with the civilian leadership to get resources.


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

[User]
Is there a comprehensive, CS-oriented book of common mathematical functions and operations and ways they can be implemented?

Let me first preface this question by saying I am not exactly sure what it is I am after.

I am looking for a book (or, generally, an overview) collating some mathematical operations and functions (and the algorithms that give them) and different ways they can be evaluated, computed, approximated and implemented. For example, in discussing trigonometric funcions, it would give series expansions that one could use to calculate the sine and cosine.

I am *not* looking for something like Eagle & Durand's *Handbook of Mathematical Functions*, and maybe not even the *NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions*; is there an equivalent to NIST's handbook that approaches the algorithms and functions from a more CS or programming-oriented standpoint?

[Assistant] There is a book called *Matters Computational - Ideas, Algorithms, Code* which more or less seems to fit the description of what you're after. It covers some clever ways to implement various common mathematical operations from simple arithmetic operations like exponentiation to things like Fourier transforms. The book features example code written in a small, C-like subset of C++.


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

[User] [DC] Is the lightning that transform Billy Batson into Shazam more powerful than normal lightning?

[Assistant] It is specifically magic lightning, which means 1) it is vulnerable to things that work against magic, and 2) things that are vulnerable to magic are vulnerable against it. Notably, during *Kingdom Come* Captain Marvel was able to use the lightning as a weapon against Superman (who is vulnerable to magic) by saying the word and then rapidly moving away so that Superman would be hit by it. This worked pretty well...for a couple of hits.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is chickenpox worse as an adult?

[Assistant]
It's mostly due to the difference in immune system between a child and an adult. A primary varicella zoster infection (chickenpox) in adulthood is indeed associated with increased risk of complications. Most of these complications are due to the intense response by the adult immune system that comes into contact with the virus for the first time. Children have less active immune systems, but usually active enough to clear the virus - making them immune to it thereafter, and are therefore less likely to develop complications with this particular infection. The same goes to hepatitis A: adults develop jaundice, while children are asymptomatic.

Note: a secondary varicella zoster infection during adulthood is called "shingles" and is generally less dangerous than a primary varicella during adulthood, due to the immunity that is already present at the time of the second infection.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does water burn skin at far lower temperatures than air does?

For example, a human can easily endure a 90 C (198F) sauna for 15 minutes. Whereas human skin will burn in just two seconds in just 65C (150F) water.

ELI5 please.

[Assistant]
Because water is far more effective at transferring heat to you than air is.

It's the same reason why if you put your hand in a 200C hot oven, it'll feel hot but won't burn you unless you hold it in there for quite a few seconds, but if you so much as brush one of the metal shelves you'll get an instant burn. Everything in there, the air, and the shelves are all at 200C but air is terrible at transferring heat and metal is very good at it.

Another example is why at room temperature, a wooden spoon will feel warmer to you than a metal spoon in the same environment, because the metal pulls the heat *away* from you way more effectively. Your body interprets that as feeling colder, despite them logically being the same temperature to begin with.

Air being so bad at transferring heat is why you have to put thermal compound on the bottom of a computer processor cooler, to fill those microscopic air gaps with something that can transfer heat a lot more effectively.


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

[User]
ELI5: Pyrex with boiling water in microwave blew out the door and landed on the floor. Why?

A couple days ago my son is complacently making himself some ramen. He grabs some tupperware, throws in the ramen, leaves out the water, and throws it in the microwave. 3 minutes later, there's smoke everywhere and my wife pulls it out. Took us a couple days to get the smell out of the house. The smell is still in the microwave, and every time we use it it stinks up the house again. So, I've been taking steps to get rid of the smell.

So, last night I'm doing some internet reading, and decide to start with 1/2 cup water and 1tbsp vinegar, and let it steam up the microwave. This is in a 1+ cup Pyrex measuring glass. I run it for 5 minutes, watch it steam up the microwave, it finishes up. I let it sit. I decide to do it again. I look and there's just under a half cup of liquid in the pyrex, so I just start it on another 5 minute cycle. I walk back to the couch and chill. 90 seconds later we are all sitting there, and hear a huge BOOM, and I peripherally see the microwave door BLOW OPEN, the pyrex come FLYING out, and land directly on the wood floor.

We are all sitting there astounded. First words out of my wife's mouth are, "What did you do!?" I examine everything, and there's ZERO damage. There's water and vinegar everywhere in the microwave, splattered all over the place. No damage to the pyrex, no damage to the microwave, no damage to the glass tray. Nothing... I have no idea what I did, and I have never seen that happen before. It was just water and vinegar in a pyrex glass.

I'm confused. What the hell happened?

[Assistant]
You should never boil water in the microwave in a perfectly-smooth container, as you just discovered.

What happens is that the water becomes super-heated.  That is, it rises above its boiling point, but the glass is so smooth that there are no nucleation sites to allow the water to begin transitioning to steam.  So you end up with liquid water that is above its boiling point, and the slightest disturbance will cause it to explosively flash-boil into steam.

Most of the time, you see this with people heating water for coffee/tea in the microwave.  It looks like normal water when they take the mug out, but as soon as they stir the liquid, it "explodes", flinging boiling water everywhere.

In this case, it sounds like the water was eventually disturbed enough, or reached high enough temperatures, to finally start turning into steam.


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

[User] Why does a puff of smoke appear when a candle goes out?

[Assistant]
Incomplete combustion. A lit candle flame is in a constant mix of gas that is combusting and giving off light.

When you blow it out, you remove one of the the three things you need for fire - heat. By blowing cooler air in the flame, the gases rapidly lose heat, combustion stops, and the reaction stops emitting light. The cooling gas also condenses, forming the small cloud or puff.

The smoke that comes from the wick is the same thing, wax from the wick is evaporating under the retained heat of the wick but rapidly cools in air, condensing and forming a little cloud you can see.


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

[User] ELI5: Bitcoins: How can a math problem be worth money, no matter how hard it is to solve?

[Assistant]
Anything can be worth money. Why is a dollar bill money? It's just paper with an image printed on top. The reason it's valuable is because we all agree that it has value. It sounds silly but there's not much more to it. We give things value when we use them as a medium of exchange, currency has value because of the utility of allowing trade, allowing pricing, allowing us to store value and exchange value easily. If currency has that utility then there is a demand for it that creates a price, and if it has a price then currency can be sold for goods, which creates a supply.

In that sense, money is just a bunch of tokens for which there is a supply and demand, just like any other good (e.g. pancakes) can be money, only currencies are generally much easier to exchange, divide, store etc.

Now what bitcoin did was essentially take those dollar bills and make them digital through a public ledger. It's still a bunch of tokens for which there is a supply and demand giving rise to a price, only these tokens are digital and thus much easier, faster and cheaper to store or send across the planet for use in payments, and divisible to 8 decimals and thus allowing more precision in pricing, and has its money supply fixed by software and thus not causing the value of the tokens to devalue over time.

The math and cryptography in bitcoin makes sure that unlike normal digital data, you can't copy it infinitely. (that would defeat the point of scarce money. Why accept someone's money for your goods if you can just copy/paste your own money however much you'd like). Bitcoin introduced decentralized digital scarcity, it's quite amazing really. The math doesn't make it have value, we do. But the math makes sure it's secure and that you can't forge bitcoins, that's all.