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

[User]
ELI5: What will happen next after the universe collapses in itself?

Just curious.

[Assistant]
If the Universe collapses, then we could only guess as to what happens next. Presumably a new Big Bang will start the party right back up.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like a Big Crunch is in our future. Currently the Universe is still expanding, and its rate of expansion is accelerating, due to largely unknown factors currently dubbed Dark Energy.

So, if the Universe continues to expand, one of two possibilities currently exist. If the rate of expansion of space continues to accelerate then eventually gravity will not be enough to hold matter together. First galaxies will be flung apart, then stars, planets, and other bodies will be ripped into an expanding cloud of atoms and compounds. All that remains to hold them together are the strong and weak nuclear forces. Soon even that will be overcome and atoms will be torn apart, followed by the remaining subatomic particles, until all that remains of the Universe is the most basic foundation of matter. This is known as the Big Rip.

The other possibility is Heat Death. If the rate of expansion slows but does not reverse, then gravity will still be strong enough to hold galaxies together. But in this case stars will cease to be born, existing stars will die, and planetary bodies will cool, all due to the different forms of energy given off by all matter. Eventually the Universe will dissolve down to an atomic soup and cool to just above absolute zero.

Not to worry, though! All this will happen long after any of us are dead. Likely the human race will be either extinct or have transcended to some higher plane of existence. Or who knows? Maybe we'll still be around and with sufficient technology to stop the degradation of the Universe.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does food's taste fade away the more we chew it?

[Assistant]
This phenomenon varies between different food types. Put simply, as you chew, your saliva dissolves the food in your mouth to help you swallow it. The first thing your saliva touches is the outer layer of your food. In the case of prepared meals like steak and pasta, the main flavor is on the outermost layer of your food, as you chew and swallow the saliva in your mouth it takes the flavors (herbs, spices, salt, seared crust etc.) down with it and you taste more of the remaining meat or wheat in these examples, which don't taste as flavorful without that outer seasoning. This is also why if you don't like the flavor of broccoli or peas, they taste worse the more you chew them, since the seasoning washes down with your saliva and the vegetable taste starts coming out.

You'll notice that this doesn't happen with fruits, ice cream, or chocolate etc. since in those cases all layers of what you're eating have the same flavor.


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

[User]
Why in binding energy calculations do we include emitted neutrons but not electrons?

(not asking for help on a specific question)

In the first part of the decay a neutron is fired into a nucleus the decays and produces 2 daughter nuclei and some other emitted neutrons.
We include these in the binding energy calculations.

After this the two daughter nuclei decay via beta emission.  Producing emitted electrons.
We don't include these in the calculations

When I say calculations mean using binding energies and mass difference.

In both cases the particles are emitted and not part of a nucleus.
Is it because the neutrons have nuclear forces between the quarks inside them?

Is it because the neutrons were initially a part of the nucleus? But then what about neutrons that are fired into the nucleus?

Do they count as being a part of the nucleus too?

[Assistant]
>Producing emitted electrons. We don't include these in the calculations

We **do** include the beta particle masses in calculating beta decay Q-values. The convention in nuclear physics to use *atomic* masses (meaning the mass of the nucleus, plus masses of all electrons, minus the very small electronic binding energy). If you work out beta decay Q-values in terms of atomic masses, you find that actually the beta particle mass cancels in the beta^(-) Q-value, because the atomic mass of the daughter includes an extra electron. In the case of beta^(+), the effect is opposite, and you find that there's actually a threshold for beta^(+) decay of 2m*_e_*c^(2) because not only do you have to produce a positron, but the atomic mass of the daughter is short one electron.

Electronic binding energies are very small on nuclear physics scales, so they're often neglected when they show up explicitly in calculations.


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

[User] ELI5: Why I can memorize complicated formulas, but I struggle with knowing what letter comes next in the alphabet without singing it?

[Assistant]
The alphabet is stored inside your memory in a way similar to how you store complicated formulas.

Have you ever tried to write down a formula backwards from memory without recalling the formula? Or have you tried rewriting the formula solving for one variable without writing out the original formula first?

We've learned how to parse through these formulas a certain way so they stick. If we try and parse them differently, it's much more difficult.

With training, it's much easier to recall the alphabet (imagine if you have to file things alphabetically all day). However, if you don't have to do it too often, your mind is not as trained to compare letters.


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

[User] Why do older models of cars have long antennas, while newer models have short ones or none at all?

[Assistant]
The old long antennas were simple quarter wavelength monopole antennas. The science behind them is very simple, for the most part how they work could be done with pen and paper.

Newer devices use much more complicated antennas that require lots of modeling and simulation to design, something not possible years ago. Most of the things with "no antenna" usually actually have an antenna drawn onto the PCB or otherwise integrated into the device, on the iPhone 4 for example, the trim on the case is the Antenna.

And finally, with modern electronics there is simply less thermal noise and they are more sensitive. With this in mind, they can generally get away with a less effective antenna to arrive at the same total SNR for the device.


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

[User] How do we distinguish that drugs such as SSRIs have side effects of suicide, when the person taking them is potentially already contemplating suicide?

[Assistant] Well the actual Anti-depressant effects take anywhere between 2-6 weeks to really kick in, with 4 weeks usually being the norm. Thing is, the meds also increase energy and motivation to an extent, but that effect starts earlier. So if the depressed person was suicidal, the extra oomph they get from the meds in that first 2-4 week period just might be enough to "motivate" them into actually attempting a suicide.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why are different actors credited in different ways during the credits of TV shows? For example, "Starring Actor A, Actor B, Actor C, featuring Actor D and Actor E, with Actor F and Actor G, guest starring Actor H"

The only one I really get is "guest starring", but what's the difference between "starring", "featuring", and "with"?

[Assistant]
Each actor wants their billing to be as prestigious as possible, and will often negotiate in their contract for a certain type of billing. "Starring" at the front of the credits is obviously the most desirable. Sometimes, an important actor with a lot of leverage playing a non-starring character will get *last* billing that is somehow distinguished; for instance, in the credits of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the established actor Anthony Stewart Head is billed last as "with Anthony Stewart Head as Giles".

The rules and guidelines for this are arcane, and it would be nice if someone with a more thorough understanding of them could explain in greater detail.


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

[User]
ELI5: Are facial expressions genetic or do we learn them?

Do we pick them up from adults while we're young?

Or are the muscles in our face 'programmed' to make certain expressions when we're happy, upset, angry, etc?

[Assistant]
It's a little bit of both.

There are certain things we all instinctual just know of - Things like smiling when we're happy. Like grimacing when in pain.

Even people who are blind and have never seen another face smile, frown, grimace.

But there are definitely things we adapt to those around us as well.


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

[User] What causes manual breathing? (Sorry, everyone)

[Assistant]
Many of our body parts can be controlled by our autonomic (automatic) nervous system, and this can be overridden to some degree by our higher brain. You don't *lose* the automatic control, as you can see if you try to hold your breath forever.

When the conscious brain disengages, the autonomic system gracefully takes over. When the conscious brain screws up, sometimes the autonomic system *forcefully* takes over, as with the breathing example.


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

[User]
If I had a pressure cooker that could raise the boiling point of water above 300 degrees F, could I fry food in water?

Caramelization of sugars and the maillard reaction, responsible for the browning and crisping of food, is associated with temperatures in excess of ~300 degrees F.  Since water at atmospheric pressure boils at ~212 degrees, caramelization and the maillard reaction don't occur and the food gets neither brown nor crispy.

But what if I had a pressure cooker that could raise the boiling point of water above the requisite temperature?  Would it get brown and crispy, effectively frying it?  Or would something else (likely unpleasant) happen, such as the food getting brown but waterlogged/soggy?

[Assistant] The Maillard reactions are affected by moisture content, so using water as a cooking medium, regardless of temperature, will prevent them from occurring. And since the pressure you're positing would prevent the water in the food from escaping as steam, you won't get a crispy texture either.


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

[User] ELI5: where does 'grounded' electricity go to once it's in the earth?

[Assistant]
Well, first off, household power is AC, so charge never really goes *anywhere*. It just jiggles back and forth in the wire. Anyway...

The same amount of charge is drawn out from the Earth as is put back in. Electricity doesn't work by pumping extra charge into something. Rather, there is charge *already present*, and electricity does stuff by making the already existing charge move.

For an analogy, suppose you have a circular loop pipe that is filled with water. If you leave it alone, the water will obviously just sit there. If you attached a pump to it, you could make the water flow around in a circle, and maybe get it to power something like a wheel or whatever. You're never adding water to the pipe, though. You're just pushing water around.

Likewise, a grounded circuit is not pushing charge into the Earth. It's just moving the charge that's already there in circles. It takes out just as much as it puts in.

edit: By the way, no real circuit actually pulls or dumps charge into the Earth if it's operating normally, but we don't really need to get into that. Suffice to say that grounding to the actual Earth is a safety precaution in case something goes horribly wrong.


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

[User]
[The Matrix] What happens when a person uses drugs?

Drugs; ranging from marijuana and alcohol, to heroin and pcp, affect the human mind itself, not how it perceives the world (excluding hallucinogenic effects).  How does the matrix deal with that?  Does it keep a supply of heroin and pcp around in each pod in order to dose the humans who decide to partake, or can it synthesize the effect somehow?  What would happen if a human who had been freed took something?

[Assistant]
The Matrix is simply a perception field for the mind. Any drug a human within the matrix could find, would be a manifestation of a computer program within the matrix... the program would simply run its course, making the user feel as if he/she had taken a drug.
The greater question is this: when you take drugs, how do you know if the effect they give you within the matrix has any correlation with the effect they would give you in the waking world? There is no way to know, unless you are fortunate enough to be pulled from the matrix, and then stupid enough to take drugs in the waking world (if they even exist IRL). This is fairly unlikely to happen because, remember: the matrix has you.


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

[User]
CMV: Law enforcement need to be stricter on driving slow in the left lane than speeding.

Almost every state has either a law against driving slow in the left lane, staying in the left lane (which should only be enforced against slow drivers) or obstructing traffic like the Maryland law

"Unless reduced speed is necessary for the safe operation of the vehicle or otherwise is in compliance with law, **a person may not willfully drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.**"

It takes no effort to move over if someone is trying to pass you, going the speed limit in the left lane or below it shows that you have no consideration for anyone else. If people are backed up behind you get over.

When I leave early for a job or appointment I just cruise at the speed limit in the right lane and enjoy the music. Not that hard people!

A fine of over $100 would make those idiots stop doing it. They are Entitled point blank who think its their job to regulate the speed of others. Yet get offended when anyone justors at them or follows closely trying to get them to move the fuck over!

[Assistant]
There are a few laws in play here, depending on the state.

Some states prohibit driving in the left lane except to pass.

Some states have laws requiring slower drivers to keep right.

All states have impeding traffic laws.

All states have speeding laws.

The part people fail to realize is the left lane laws do not allow people to exceed the speed limit. A person traveling in the left lane, legally (meaning following left lane laws), at the speed limit is not in violation of the law.

You are complaining that people are following the laws because you want to break the laws.

Going below the speed limit is impeding. Driving at the speed limit is not, which is why LE does not enforce this.

The entitled people are the ones that want to exceed the speed limit and want everyone driving legally following the speed limit to move over.

Every major accident reporting agency lists excessive speed as a leading cause of traffic accidents.

LE cited people for things that cause accidents in order to prevent accidents, hence why they cite heavily for excessive speed.

TLDR: driving below the speed limit in the left lane is bad. Driving over the speed limit in the left lane is also bad. Driving the speed limit is legal and correct.


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

[User]
[Superman] Why doesn't he just throw Doomsday into space?

So Doomsday can survive in deep space, so he wouldn't die and subsequently adapt to the situation. He's also incapable of flight, and doesn't seem smart enough to figure a way out of deep space. Superman, for his part, has been shown as capable of throwing very heavy things into space. He's also shown grappling with Doomsday, so obviously he *can* get a grip on the monster. Wouldn't throwing him into space be the most efficient way to end the conflict?

[Assistant]
He tried. Multiple times.

The thing is, when you have to grab someone that's bigger stronger, faster than you, thrashing around, and covered in spikes, it's kind of hard to get, much less keep, a grip on it to throw it into space.


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

[User]
At the age Olympians must start training, it's akin to child abuse. CMV.

The Olympics is a celebration of the absolute pinnacle of human physical achievement. I love watching them. But as the bar keeps getting raised, so do the demands placed on these athletes.

Early twenties is seen as the prime for many events. Teenagers for others such as gymnastics. This forces training to begin early. Age 4. It is no wonder that a large majority of Olympians have parents who were Olympians themselves.

At age 4 the only thing I was passionate about was Power Rangers. The years of rigorous training these kids must do to perform at the elite level **deprives** them of a normal childhood. We deride the mother of Honey Boo Boo, and the parents of trophy kids. I believe there is a false dichotomy between this and the Olympian mentality. CMV.

**EDIT: My view has been changed. So unless you want to continue the discussion with someone other than me, OP, I don't give a shit.**

[Assistant]
I would say child abuse qualifies as such if there is trauma, psychological damage or some other harm reflected in depression, addictions, phobias, sleeping, eating, relationship or other personality disorders.

Just making them work and focus is pretty much the same as forcing them to go through school.  If there is any damage it basically turns them into...us?

I think you have to present some evidence of negative outcomes of Olympic preparation in order to defend your point.


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

[User]
ELI5 why should/shouldn't you pop your pimples?

Really! I wanna know!

[Assistant] Popping them splits the skin open and makes it possible for bacteria to get in, which can cause an infection. At the very least it causes irritation. If you must pop a pimple (because who can stand the look of a nasty white head on their face?) I'd probably put some neosporin on it after.


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

[User] What happens to the blood inside your body when you die?

[Assistant]
A condition known as lividity occurs, in which all the blood will pool towards the lowest point of the body's resting place because of gravity, and then clot. If someone was to die while laying on their back, bruising would occur on posterior aspects of the body. This can actually show if a body has been moved after death. For example, if a body was found face up with bruising on the face and stomach, it would show that the person has died face down, but was flipped around.

EDIT: Forgot some words :)


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

[User] ELI5: When you have one blocked nostril, how come it switches to the side you sleep on yet it doesn't drain out when you sit vertically/stand up or how come it doesn't come out when you try to blow it out?

[Assistant] There is erectile tissue in your nose that causes it to swell inside the nasal cavities. One nostril is always more open than the other and it switches every few hours. If youre like me theres no mucus just one side shuts down at night but when you get up and walk around it goes away. Basically you have a nose boner.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does a sunburn take a few hours to hurt after we get it?

[Assistant] Sunburn is caused because of cells dying causing an inflamation. Its your body going into protective mode because your skin is damaged. But the way sun does damage to the cell, it makes thymine diamers so really the body does not know its been hurt until your cells self suicide and that takes a bit.


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

[User] ELI5: If we breathe out carbon dioxide why does CPR work?

[Assistant]
Our lungs exchange O2 with CO2, but not all of it.

Going in, the air is: 78% Nitrogen, 21% oxygen and .04% CO2.

Coming out its: still 78% Nitrogen, but now ~15% oxygen and 5% CO2. So there's still oxygen in it.

If you're performing assisted breathing on someone its because they can't breath on their own. So the 15% O2 you're _forcing_ into their lungs is better than whatever little they're getting on their own account.


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

[User] Who are some significant "pantheist" philosophers other than Spinoza who believed essentially that 'matter/energy' and 'spirit' are the same phenomena/completely identical, thus implying that the universe was not created by an eternal being, but is in fact an eternal being?

[Assistant]
Spinoza thinks that matter and mind are two different attributes of substance, which is a neutral monist position and at odds with the idea that they are "the same phenomena/completely identical."  What it suggests is that matter and mind are two different expressions of, or two different ways of conceiving a single underlying substance.  Accordingly, they have a kind of unity to them, insofar as they are both expressions of the same substance, and this has theoretical consequences, notably in the notion of a strict parallelism between mental events and material events.  But mind and matter also have an irreducible diversity in Spinoza's philosophy, since while they are about the same substance, they are nonetheless still fundamentally different in their expression of it.  This too has consequences, namely the mutually irreducibility of mind and matter, and the strict independence of the causal history of each.

But none of this really has anything obvious to do with whether the universe was created by an eternal being or whether the universe is in fact an eternal being.

Spinoza's account of the relation between God and nature is, *for a large part*, fairly traditional: he understands God to be an infinite, eternal, immutable, self-caused, omnipotent and maximally free substance whose creative activity produces nature, and he distinguishes being regarded as this infinite substance, which he calls "naturing nature" (in the sense of nature that is enacting the process of naturing), from being regarded as the product of the creative activity of this substance, which he calls "natured nature" (in the sense of nature that results from the process of naturing).  So far this is pretty typical stuff for the tradition of metaphysics which runs from ancient philosophy to the rationalists.

Where Spinoza departs from the orthodox Christian understanding of this metaphysical picture is with two related points.  First, he thinks that God's omnipotence and freedom only make sense if it's recognized that God's creation of everything he *could* create necessarily follows from them.  That is, he thinks that if God would ever *not* create something, that there must be something which held him back from doing so, but in that case he wouldn't be omnipotent and maximally free, so that God's omnipotence and maximal freedom, somewhat ironically, render the creative act a metaphysical necessity.  Traditional theology had often wanted to identify a point of contingency here, to imagine that God could have chosen to create or not, and accordingly to understand creation as a contingent and freely willed event.  For Spinoza, conversely, creation follows necessarily from God's nature.

The second radical point of Spinoza's philosophy follows from this.  Just as the traditional theological picture tended to conceive the creative act as contingent, it also tended to conceive of *its object* as contingent.  That is, God could freely choose to create or not to create, and he could also freely choose to create one possible universe rather than some other one.  Spinoza, conversely, argues that God's omnipotence and freedom only make sense if his creative activity is expressed without limitation.  That means not only that the creative act necessarily follows from God's nature, it also means that God, as it were, *doesn't hold himself back* so as to make one particular sort of universe (i.e. typically, in the theological picture, one particularly kind to human beings) but rather just limitlessly creates an infinite diversity of everything that can be created.

Spinoza, then, might be called a pantheist because in his philosophy (i) God and creation are not separated by a notional point of contingency, but rather are more closely connected, through the *necessity* of the creative act, than in the orthodox theological picture, and (ii) there is similarly no notional space between the various possible universes and the one God chose (providentially) to create, but rather creation expresses God's infinite nature in its own limitlessness--limited not even by a providential design.  In these two ways, Spinoza's God is, as it were, *closer* to creation than in the orthodox picture.

Whether this means that "the universe was not created by an eternal being" is not clear.  The universe is, straight-forwardly, certainly created by an eternal being in Spinoza's philosophy.  But this creation is a necessary rather than contingent act, which might reasonably be regarded as an important difference from the traditional theological accounts of creation.

Similarly, is the universe "in fact an eternal being" for Spinoza?  Certainly, insofar as there is only one being (God), this being is eternal, and the universe is its expression.  But so far as this goes, it's not significantly different from the traditional theological and metaphysical picture.  What is different about Spinoza's universe is its necessary connection to God and its infinite nature rather than providential design.

The difference between Spinoza's "pantheism" and traditional "theism" is thus less straight-forward, and certainly of a different nature, than is popularly supposed.

As to what other philosophers present a metaphysical picture similar to Spinoza's on these points, as suggested above, the framework of his system is fairly traditional.  The ways I've noted above in which he departs from the traditional system are not entirely original to him, but can be found raised in medieval debates and still further back in the context of ancient philosophy.  Spinoza's own emphasis on God's freedom and omnipotence over notions of contingency and providential design are themselves claims that had already been developed in the context of Reformation critiques of Catholic theology, and Spinoza may have inherited them from this tradition of Christian thought through his contact with the Collegiants.  One can thus go back through the history of traditional metaphysics that stretches from the ancient Greeks to the early modern rationalists and find much in various sources that is sympathetic with Spinoza.  Eriugena often received the pantheist characterization, as did the Latin Averroists, and various Renaissance philosophers of nature, e.g. Bruno.  Going back to the Greeks, the pantheism characterization is leveled rather extensively: certainly at the Platonists, Stoics, and at least some of the pre-Socratics.

Of the rationalism which flourished in the early modern period, Spinoza's is particularly noteworthy for the points mentioned above, which are suggestive of the pantheist characterization he often receives, while Descartes, Malebranche, and Leibniz tended to argue the more orthodox line which recognized a greater distinction between God and creation, especially permitting a notion of providential design.  After this rationalist period, the general project of traditional metaphysics in which thinking like this--pantheist or not--occurred largely fell out of favor and was replaced first by empiricism and then by various reactions to it.  In this later period, one may wish to look particularly at Schopenhauer, who also often receives the pantheist label, and belongs to the general context of German idealism and romanticism where an interest in rationalist metaphysics and especially in Spinoza was briefly revived.


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

[User]
Black holes "slow down" time. Is there an astronomical phenomenon that "speeds up" time for a handful of people? Could we use it to "get ahead" in the galactic race for domination/survival?

The question is serious, although it might sound like it's from a c-movie of sorts. You might need to cut me some slack here. From what I understand (and the movies tell me), time "slows down" considerably close to a black hole. It doesn't slow down noticably for the one being close to the black hole, only for the spectator far away. That's relativity, right? A couple of hours too close "make time fly" for the rest of the universe.

Is there an opposite phenomenon, where times starts flying by for a few whereas the rest of the universe "slows down"? Maybe what I'm asking is this: is there such a phenomenen and a way to use it to sort of "cheat" on the speed of advancement and development in relation to the rest of the universe? A chance to "get ahead"?

[Assistant]
Let's take a few steps back. First of all there is no absolute notion of time to talk about. Second of all you have this mixed up a little, a slow clock gives you what you want.

Let's just talk about special relativity, to talk this stuff in general relativity is not much more complicated at this level but requires changing notions of what you mean by accelerating from the intuitive notions you probably hold.

The amount of time a "clock" (meaning anything which keeps track of time, including the aging of an organism) measures between two events is a MAXIMUM if it is not accelerating. So if you have two people starting at the same place and one sits still while the other accelerates off and comes back the second person will have aged less when they meet up. In principle the second person can have aged an arbitrarily small amount for any amount of aging the first person experienced. So to see what the state of technology on the Earth is in some amount of time you "just" need to accelerate hard enough away from the Earth and then return.


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

[User]
Where do yogurt companies get their cultures?

Do yogurt companies have microbiology labs? Do they try to select for/genetically-engineer strains? Wikipedia says yogurt is made by *Streptococcus thermophilus* and *Lactobacillus bulgaricus* (and maybe a few others). I also know that yogurt has been around for centuries (maybe thousands of years?)... So are we using the similar methods they used to use to procure the culture or are we using labs? I understand this is somewhat of a history/anthro question but does anyone know exactly how they got their culture in ancient times? Did it somehow just happen once, and then we started using the yogurt to make more yogurt (then maybe recently we started isolating the cultures from the ancient yogurt line)? I find it interesting to think that the strains we use today could actually be pretty different genetically than the original ones.

Edit: Just saw in the rules that the post must be based on something from a peer-reviewed journal. If this is the wrong place for this question, I'd really appreciate someone telling me where it should go. Thanks.

[Assistant]
The big companies buy their cultures from a lab, just like cheesemakers, winemakers, breadmakers, and everyone else.

Yogurt was made before microbiology by using old yogurt to kickstart new batches. It will basically stay alive forever if you keep feeding it.

It was likely "discovered" just how yeast was discovered. Someone noticed that if you left milk sit out, its texture changes and it tastes different...and if you add that to more milk, that does the same thing! Shaboozle ya noodle, yogurt.


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

[User]
CMV: The Vaccine Rollout ignored human psychology. The government should have tried to foster an atmosphere of scarcity, not abundance.

When TP was even remotely rumored to be scarce, people fucking near rioted in order to get some. When the same was true of masks, you saw people hoarding them.

The simple fact is that humans are not entirely rational, and "the science" changes nearly nobody's minds on whether or not to do something if they fundamentally disagree with it from the get go. Look at green parties being anti nuclear for example.

Deciding to act like "we have plenty of vaccines for everyone and they are FREE FREE FREE!" is great assuming a perfectly rational population, but is a shit way of convincing people to actually get vaccinated.

Imagine if instead, vaccines were marketed as a limited commodity that are hard to get, and that, after a period of time, would no longer be free. Hell, even have a small portion of vaccines reserved only for people willing to pay 1000 dollars if they don't want to wait. People would end up getting FOMO and register immediately in order to not be left out. You'd have influencers going on instagram and tik tok showing off their vaccine as a mark of status.

The appearance of scarcity is what gets people to line up and fight for something, not science. The intelligent people who are moved by the science will still get jabbed, while the ones moved by basic marketing techniques will also get jabbed, win-win.

[Assistant]
vaccines were initially scarce.

In the US at the time, they were reserved for people most at risk.

But, once thawed out, they had limited shelf-life. Many people signed up for wait lists to get called at the end of the day if someone missed an appointment to come in and get the vaccine, even if they didn't fit the current criteria.

Demand for vaccines has risen in areas with rising COVID-19 cases.  Many people who have been hospitalized have urged friends and family to not make the same mistake they did and go get vaccinated.

We need to get vaccines when people feel ready for them.  Unfortunately, that's going to be too late for some people.  But, trying to mislead people with artificial scarcity isn't going to work any better than the real scarcity we had 5 months ago.


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

[User] Is there a limit to how many atoms there can be in a molecule?

[Assistant]
Depending on your definition of molecule, it's pretty clear there's no limit in a practical sense. Crystals are essentially giant molecules, if by that we mean continuous blocks of atoms connected by sharing electrons. (Blocks of metal could also count.)

There's no fundamental difference between that and what we typically think of as a molecule, but the term molecule is pragmatically reserved for items that aren't arbitrary in size. (Although we do talk about DNA molecules, which can be sized arbitrarily.)


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

[User]
Why do some animals have shorter lifespans than others? What keeps humans live for ~80 years versus a cat for only ~15 years?

If beings want to be alive for as long as possible, why would some die faster than others (We're also talking dying by an animal's "old age")? What keeps a human to be considered younger longer than animals with shorter lifespans?

[Assistant]
> If beings want to be alive for as long as possible

Your premise is a problem here. Animals don't need to be alive for as long as possible. Evolution doesn't favor animals that live longer. It favors populations that live longer. It doesn't matter if those individuals breed and reproduce in hours or years apart.

A single fruit fly can lay 500 eggs, and its total lifespan from egg to death is maybe 40 days. A day to hatch. Within a week it turns to the adult stage. Then in 2 days its sexually mature. That keeps the population alive through sheer force of numbers. It doesn't really matter how many are killed by predators, because each pair can produce hundreds more. And they are sexually mature in a week, so a closed system will produce drastic amounts of individuals.

Whales and elephants can have a single young after 18-24 months of gestation. The long life-span allows for this. The intelligence keeps them alive. Their size helps protect from predators. They can also herd to protect the young. All of this allows them to evolve to a large size. It allows them to have long gestation periods to support a large child. These are all interconnected.

If fruit flies bred like elephants, they would have died out long ago to predators. If elephants bred like fruit flies, the world would be buried in a mountain of fully grown adult elephants in months, and they would all die out after exhausting their food supply. Evolution wouldn't have allowed either to happen, when very early on they wouldn't have been able to sustain a population.

If you want to know why specific animals get old and die, it really varies. Organs give out after some time. It depends how that animal evolved. Reptiles can live a long time, but so can mammals and trees. Some things live days and others over a century. Its a balance based on their population, predators, food source, etc. It even benefits a population to not live too long, because you are more damaged from disease and injury when you produce less often and live longer.


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

[User] I get that crack is the free base of cocaine chemically, but why does that make it smokable and more powerful?

[Assistant]
"More powerful" probably isn't the right word here. Free base (neutral) drugs have different physical properties to their salted forms (e.g. cocaine vs cocaine hydrochloride). The two most striking and relevant differences for drugs are solubility and volatility, which both play a part in a parameter called bioavailability. The solubility is how well the drug dissolves in water. Salts will have higher solubilities than non salts. Volatility is how well a drug goes into the vapor phase. Essentially, all salts will be non-volatile (i.e. cannot be vaporized). Bioavailability is the measure of how well a drug gets absorbed by the body and varies by administrative route. Bioavailability can be measured in %'s which represent how much gets absorbed vs released/excreted.

With all that laid out, the main difference between free base cocaine and cocaine HCl is that free base can be volatalized. When it's heated, it goes into the vapor phase and can be breathed in. The bioavailability through inhalation is pretty high. If you heat up cocaine HCl, it will get hotter and hotter but never become a gas. It will eventually get hot enough to break down chemically, at which point the cocaine will be destroyed.

Different routes have different bioavailabilities, onset times, and risks.


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

[User]
Given E=mc^2, if the mass of photons is zero, why does light have non-zero energy?

Does it have to do with the Lorentz factor?

Or does it have to do with the wave-particle duality of light?

I believe the latter is the key, but I'd like a clearer explanation. Perhaps my question boils down to, "When does light act as a particle, and when does it act as a wave?" (the answer to which I believe is, "When it is observed/not observed," but I still don't see how that resolves the initial question).

[Assistant]
E=mc^2 is a special case for things that aren't moving. The full equation is

E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2 )^2

p is momentum. Light has energy due to its momentum but none due to its mass. An object at rest has energy due to its mass but not due to its momentum. An object in motion (relative to some observer) will have both.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does it take multiple listens to certain songs to fully enjoy them?

Happens to me quite a bit.

[Assistant] It's all about anticipation. Popular songs usually have a pretty predictable sound and so your anticipation of it will quickly be rewarded. When a song has a more complicated sound it takes a few listens before you know what to expect. It is the anticipation of the sound that makes you enjoy a song.


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

[User]
ELI5: If I buy stocks in a company and if that company is acquired by a larger one, what happens to my original stocks.

this didnt happen to me, just a shower thought of mine that I was genuinely curious of what the answer would be.

[Assistant]
the shareholders vote to be aquired (though the majority wins)

you would either get paid out in cash, or recieve shares in the company that buys you (the cash value or share ratio would be published for you to decide whether to vote yes or no)


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Why wasn't the Rebel Alliance larger?

Why is it that the rebels are so hopelessly outmanned by the Empire?

The rebels always seem to base themselves off the grid on far away planets like Dantooine, Yavin 4 and Hoth despite the fact there are larger more populated systems they can base themselves such as Bespin or Alderaan which would prove a lot harder to launch an attack on, hell they could even have set up base in Hutt Space and get them involved.

The rebels seem to be based only at one place at all times, why are there not more rebel factions throughout the galaxy?

The empire is extremely humanocentric. Why would any alien creatures let humans rule over them and treat them like scum? Why are the Ithorians, Zabraks, Wookies, Bith, Hutts, Rodians, Trandoshans, Twleks etc not creating their own freedom forces or joining the alliance? Surely the planets with an alien majority wouldn't want empire rule? Surely most planets in the galaxy are an alien majority??

Surely there must be planets out there with sizeable armies and technology that can protect themselves from a few Star destroyers? Why haven't they joined the rebels?

I don't agree that the Galaxy is frozen in fear of a Death Star destroyed by a small fleet of X-Wings or a cyborg old man who worships ancient religions and magic powers?

If a few pilots, a wookie, a smuggler, a princess and farmer from Tatooine can take down the empire I think a huge combined army of aliens threatened with genocide would have finished the war a tiny bit sooner.

Why was the alliance so small!!??

[Assistant]
The Death Star wasn't the only thing that Rebels were afraid of. The Empire had a variety of tactics, such as Base Delta Zero, where they used Star Destroyer turbo-lasers to glass a planet from orbit. They also used biological weapons to devastate dissident planets.

Many planetary leaders and high level politicians were active supporters of The Empire, as it boosted their own power or lined their wallets.

The Rebel Alliance was a loose conglomeration of smaller, localized rebel groups. Until near the end of the war, they lacked funding, resources and an organized power structure.

Let's say for example that Alderaan decided to openly defy The Empire. Most likely the Imperials would use their intelligence service to remove the ruling house from power via threats and bribery, then install puppet rulers in their place. That's if the local Moff didn't just decided to glass the major inhabited areas and let them be an example about why you shouldn't turn against The Empire.

The Hutts would have had no reason to get involved. The Empire brought back slavery, and slavery is good business. Smuggling also became a larger trade, due to restrictions put in place be the imperials. The Empire unintentionally generated a lot of revenue for the Hutt Cartels.


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

[User] ELI5: Why might the government be shutting down (in the US)?

[Assistant]
There are two major parties in the US: Democratic and Republican.

The Republican Party has decided that the entire purpose of their existence at the Federal level is to undo a Healthcare Law called the "Affordable Care Act"  AKA OBAMACARE which was passed early in Barack Obama's presidency.

There are two relevant branches of Federal Government in the US: The Senate and The House. The House has a Republican majority, but the Senate has a Democratic Majority. This means that the government is incapable of getting anything done. The House has voted 40 times to repeal Obamacare, and the Senate has of course prevented this from passing, 40 times.

The implementation of the budget for this year will bring into effect the funding for the final stages of Obamacare. The Republicans see this as their last chance to repeal the law before it takes effect across the country and becomes much more difficult to do away with. They realize that their chances of getting the law repealed are exactly the same as the last 40 times they've tried, so with their house majority they have passed a law which basically states that they will not allow the budget to take effect unless the Senate agrees to Repeal Obamacare. This would have the effect of halting funding for most federal government services; hence the "government shutdown" that is being talked about.

tl;dr: the republicans are holding the budget hostage in an attempt to get Democrats to agree to defund Obamacare. If Democrats call their bluff (which they are doing), the government will stop paying its bills.


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

[User]
[MCU] Can anyone pick up what's left of Mjolnir?

In Ragnarok, Thor's hammer gets shattered into dozens of pieces. Is each piece as immovable as the hammer was?

[Assistant] Probably no, pieces are not immovable. First of all, enchantment is most likely got broken along with the hammer, and secondly if you go by the letter of enchantment, it says "whoever picks this hammer", and Mjolnir is clearly no longer a hammer.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do hooves make animals better at climbing mountains?

Wondering how mountain goats are so good a climbing. How to hooves help them?

[Assistant] Mountain goats have special hooves that are like a pirate's hook with soft padding to help adjust.  They suck at running long distance running but are great at scaling verticle surfaces because of this.


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

[User]
ELI5: What happens to a charger that's plugged into a power outlet but doesn't have a device attached?

For example, if I plug in the power brick for my computer into a power socket, but I don't attached the charger to my computer. What happens to the brick while it's on "idle?" Is it somehow being damaged by me leaving it in the power outlet while I'm not using it?

Edit: Welp, I finally understand what everyone means by 'RIP Inbox.' Though, quite a few of you have done a great job explaining things, so I appreciate that.

[Assistant]
Wall adapters and chargers are almost always AC to DC adapters. What they do is take the electricity in the wall and change it from whatever periodically-changing voltage is standard in your country (AC) into a constant voltage (DC) of a certain amount. A simple way to do this is to change the voltage with a transformer and then force it to always move in the same direction. A more complicated (but more efficient) way to do this is to store it as a magnetic field for a very small fraction of a second and then bring it back as the correct voltage. In either case, the final voltage is regulated by capacitors which store energy and try to keep the voltage steady.

Well, that's the ELI5 version of it.

Anyway, theoretically an AC to DV converter circuit shouldn't draw any energy out of the capacitors which keep the voltage steady when there's nothing plugged into it, but in reality it's not so simple. The components that make up the circuit are imperfect which means it will always use a little bit of energy when plugged in. In addition, many power bricks have a LED on them which shows that it's plugged in, meaning that you always have some tangible amount of power being used.

TL;DR: It will always use a small amount of power when plugged in, but you won't harm the adapter by doing so.


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

[User]
[Avatar] What will happen to Jake Sully's body?

At the end of Avatar, Jake Sully's human body is left on Pandora, presumably to die without a conscious mind inside. The atmosphere is different and clearly can't support Earth-animal life, and it is never shown that Earth-animals can eat food from Pandora or vice-versa. So will Sully's body be eaten by scavengers if they can stomach it, eaten by bacteria already present on his skin and within him if they can survive in the atmosphere, or will something else entirely occur?

[Assistant]
The Earth bacteria already in his body will cause him to decompose. However, there are no scavengers on Pandora which will find the corpse palatable, and to date there are no known species of bacteria or fungi on Pandora which can decompose Earth biomatter.

You may recall that the humans had to grow Earth crops on Pandora. The fruits that the natives on Pandora eat are unappetizing at best and toxic at worst. A human can get some carbohydrates from well-prepared Pandora fruits, but plant matter and animal meat can't even be broken down by human digestive enzymes. This is mostly because of basic chemistry. Although Pandora life is carbon-based, it uses a different set of amino acid pairs and codes for radically different proteins.


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

[User]
I believe everyone should have to be routinely mentally evaluated. CMV.

I believe everyone should have to be mentally evaluated by a professional psychologist/psychiatrist at multiple points in their lives. Critical points include before entering elementary school, high school, and college. (However, I believe it should extend beyond college as well.) Mental evaluations should be viewed similarly to physical check-ups at a general practitioner's office. I believe mental evaluations are necessary because many people with mental illnesses refuse to speak up, even when treatment is necessary.

Change my view.

[Assistant]
Here is the issue with that.

If we flood the system with a bunch of people who don't need the help then we are going to make it harder for people who do need the help to get treated.

There are a finite amount of doctors who can treat people. If they have to screen every average joe on the street then the waiting times to see these people would be ungodly. Mental health is an emergency condition that can't be put on hold for a week or a month.


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

[User] [Warhammer 40k]Roboute Guilliman somehow manages to institute an Imperium wide mandatory Yoga program, eliminates suffering and gets everyone including most aliens to be much more chill. Is this change in the average emotional state of the galaxy enough to unfuck the Warp?

[Assistant]
At one point the answer would have been a simple yes. It would've taken millenia probably for the Sea of Souls to quiet, but it would eventually. But nothing the imperium could do would have ever made that possible. It isn't mankinds fault the warp is the way it is, it's the Old Ones and the Necrons, and more recently the Eldar. You see, before them, the warp naturally responded to soul bearing beings, since their souls came from it and returned to it. But after the war, something happened that never happened before. Instead of responding to changes from the material world, part of the warp "woke up". A chaos god was born. Daemons. The warp isn't just responding to the anger and fear of the races of 40k, it's actively *causing it*. It's almost self sustaining, if it weren't dependant on material beings to exist.

At this point the only confirmed thing that would take it out is the Necrons building their pylon systems to max capacity, or the sudden extinction of humanity. Why mankind and not the Eldar or Tau? A couple of reasons. The Tau have souls, but they're so weak that they simply don't provide sufficient nourishment for greater daemons. Even if they were killed in an attempt to starve chaos, mankind alone provides all the food they could ever need. The Eldar meanwhile are all claimed by Slaanesh already, to say nothing of the fact that there are only a few Eldar left. Their sudden disappearance wouldn't matter for the same reason as the Tau. Mankind is the only race with souls nearly as strong as Eldar, while having numbers to rival every faction but the Tyranids. Mankinds extinction would be sufficient to starve chaos, but who has time for that? Emps apparently had a plan to stop them, but whatever it was may have been lost when he died.

Thats the way it goes in the grim darkness of the future. There is only war. War against extinction itself.


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

[User]
Job offer while pregnant

TLDR: I'm 6 weeks pregnant which puts me at an October 15 due date. Right in the middle of my first semester. Do I tell the committee before I have a signed contract? This is for an assistant prof TT position.

Longer story: my husband and I have been trying for a year and its been a really tough journey that's involved surgery and a miscarriage. I was actually making the call to schedule our first infertility appointment and was waiting on my period.  Needless to say, I was NOT expecting this to happen. I thought we'd be doing fertility treatments for several months or longer. Anyway, did the pee test to confirm I wasn't pregnant and voila. I'm 6.5 weeks along and everything appears to be going well. The incredible morning sickness is a constant reminder lol.

I am waiting on an official offer from one place and just finished interviewing at another and that went very well. So I'll have at least the one offer (heard from the director but upper admin is being slow). The second institution will take a few weeks to decide. I feel hopeful but not certain of course. They're both higher teaching loads but with a formal research appointment. I'm in applied STEM. Both places have faculty with young children and seem to be accommodating of young families.

I don't want to hide my pregnancy and then have to duck out of my first semester of teaching and seem like I'm being sneaky. On the other hand, in the grand scheme of things I know this won't detract from my overall career. I don't want to scare them away but I also don't want to seem like I'm screwing them over. I don't want it to be like "oh she got an offer and immediately got pregnant to take advantage of the healthcare and leniency of academia" bc really we've been trying for a while.

Any thoughts are appreciated! I've never been on the hiring end of things so I don't know how this situation would come across.

Edit: thanks everyone for the info and support. I will be sure to read the maternity leave policy carefully. My current job has a situation where you're not protected until you've been there a year. My teaching load is 1/1 and the fall course has not been taught consistently for several years so I know they're really wanting someone to pick it back up. I wasn't planning on waiting long, but like many people have said, most people don't announce until the end of the first trimester. Thanks again for all the help! I really appreciate your input!!!

Edit 2: to clarify, I know 6.5 weeks is too early. But uni B has another interview after me and is meeting late next week to decide. Given the slowness of admin and negotiations it's entirely possible that a signed contract isn't done until tut second trimester. Uni a does not have anyone else to interview and has made an unofficial offer but admin is still slow so I expect that process to take a while, too. I didn't mean tell people immediately.

Edit 3: looks like both universities have policies that require 12 months of full time employment to use FMLA so it looks like I'll be screwed regarding maternity leave. That fucking sucks. I've been paying into short term disability to not even be able to use it for its exact purpose. Wonderful!!

[Assistant]
1.  It's none of their damn business if you are pregnant or not

2.  You should be able to look up the school's maternity leave policy online

3.  Life happens in academia.  Kids are born, professors die during the semester.  Things work out.


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

[User]
[spoilers] X-Men: DoFP - Wolverine.

So, his mind is sent in time to 197X. There, he begins to drown, and his next memory is in 20XX.

But he wakes up in the school, where he is apparently the history teacher. So he had a whole life between being fished out of the Potomac and 'waking up' in Xavier's school. What happened to the Wolverine who was the history teacher? I mean, he's *dead*! All his memories are gone, overwritten by a stranger's from another timeline.

Professor seems awful happy to see a friend he only met in 197X, and seems to not shed a single tear for the man he's known for the past thirty years.

[Assistant]
Xavier didn't lose anyone.
Logan had pretty strong amnesia as a result of the Weapon X program, it's likely he forgot 197x and 20xx as a part of this process. So an amnesiac is discovered in Canada matching the description of Xavier's friend that had recently been kidnapped. The X-Men mobilize and bring him in and after who knows how many weeks or years of telepathic therapy with the Professor Logan's pre-197x memories return.

Logan's brain is all sorts of weird because of his time travel shenanigans and ridiculously long life. This is probably just the first of hopefully many more breakthroughs in his therapy.


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

[User]
If Time is influenced by gravity does that mean that in the "void space" between two galaxies time will flow really fast, thus making humans and materials age much faster than if they were inside the galaxy?

Sorry if the question is obvious, Im not a physicist thus I have limited knowledge on the matter. This question spurred from the "if you live on a mountain you will age slower than someone who live at the sea level, since the gravity pull will be greater for the latter".

Also, could you suggest me some books on the time and relativity theories? Im shitty at math but I suppose I might understand a book like that anyway... or so I hope.

[Assistant]
Nah the effect isn't very big in galaxies. The gravity field of a galaxy isn't astonishingly strong, it's just spread out over a huge volume. The Sun's acceleration around the Milky Way is a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percent of the gravity you feel on Earth.

You get a small effect close to objects like planets and stars, but even then you only notice it if you're making really accurate measurements - you need atomic clocks etc.

The effects only really get noticeable on a human scale if you're in the vicinity of a black hole (or to a lesser extent, a neutron star). But even then, if you want the extreme time dilation depicted in Interstellar, you need to be pretty much right on top of the event horizon.

When we're doing galaxy simulations in astrophysics, we can actually just ignore time dilation, and most relativistic effects, except for the expansion of the universe. On that scale, the universe does seem to mostly run very close to classical physics, and relativity mostly comes into play in a few extreme circumstances.


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

[User]
[Back to the Future] How does the DeLorean appear in the same spot relative to earth when it time travels?

The earth is moving through space at high speed, so how does the DeLorean manage to appear in the same position relative to earth after a 30 year jump?

EDIT: thanks, some great explanations here!

[Assistant] The flux capacitor most likely mathematically calculates the movement of the Earth and corrects for it when the machine jumps.  Alternatively, the gravitational or magnetic sphere of the Earth creates a sort of stabilizing quantum effect so that the DeLorean stays affixed to Earth even though Earth is hurtling through space.


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

[User]
[Warcraft] What the hell are Void Lords?

Once again out of the loop with events on Azeroth.

[Assistant]
You know the light? The thing that powers everything good and holy in the universe?

Well void lords are the polar opposites to that.

Immensely powerful beings completely composed of shadow that dwell within the void. Their aim is the complete and utter corruption and destruction of the Titans and their world souls and to eventually rule the whole universe in darkness.. Or something.

They pass the time by throwing old gods out into the  universe to do their bidding.


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

[User]
But...what IS the anti-life equation?

Darkseid is always after it. I believe others want it too.

Yet it is just some sort of mathematical proof...? Which, spoken aloud, while somehow avoiding its effects on himself, what could he DO with it and how does it work?

[Assistant]
To understand the anti-life equation there are some baseline things that need to be established.  One is it requires an immense intellect to "get" it without being destroyed or rendered catatonic.  The other assumption that you need to make is that magic and science are two routes to the same place, knowledge.  A lesser bit of trivia is demonology; that is to say knowing the true name of an entity gives you dominion over it.

With these two (technically three) established the Anti-Life Equation is like learning the ultimate spell.  In learning the true name of life, you have the power to strip it of all of it power.  Darkseid wants it because he hates sentient life.  He hates the idea of people being able to resist him.


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

[User]
[Dark Knight trilogy] What exactly is the Dent act and how does it work?

I've watched these movies so many times and I just don't get it. What is it? Why does it lock up the entire mob? Why would Harvey being a criminal make the law invalid? The people are still criminals aren't they?

[Assistant]
The Dent Act effectively allows for criminals deemed to be part of a mob family to be arrested and denied parole and then given higher sentences than they would have been otherwise given.

In other words, it creates a new category of justice where if you are deemed to be part of organised crime then you are punished more severely and denied several basic parts of due process. So there are normal criminals subject to one set of rules and "mob" criminals subject to another - who decides who is in each category? The same people prosecuting them.

So it worked by throwing the entire mob in jail, denying parole and sentencing them harshly for any crime they could find they had committed, keeping them off the streets for as long as possible.

The act was only passed in the wake of Harvey Dent's tragic death, when public opinion was sufficiently anti-mob that they accepted this kind of two-tier justice system. If Harvey had been found to be a criminal then public opinion would likely have swayed quickly back the other way, this would have been seen for the violation of human rights that it was and it would likely have been repealed.


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

[User] Male orgasms are much  more intense if you masturbate and stop right before ejaculating for a few times before actually doing it.  Why does this method work?

[Assistant] Most nerves use something called cascades (proteins use it too but proteins use hormones instead of cations). The cascade is basically when something small causes large changes and an increasing avalanche effect/chain reaction (this is why you can't stop an orgasm once you hit the vinegar strokes). If the levels hit a certain point, the cascade will be triggered and the final effect can be much stronger than what caused it, but if the event is even one atom off from causing the cascade, nothing will happen. When your penis is stimulated, the molecules responsible for causing the ejaculation/orgasm begin production or transportation to the nerves associated with the action. The closer towards orgasm the nerves get, the higher the concentration of these molecules becomes. If the cascade is not triggered, the molecules won't do anything and continue to build up (arguably the chemical basis for "blue balls" though psychological evolution plays its part too). When the orgasm actually happens after being pushed to the edge multiple times, not only are the nerves primed for a strong response, but the molecules that make it happen are in such high concentration that the effect of the orgasm seems multiplied many times over. Also this probably has something to do with desensitization but that's to do more with the relative feeling rather than what causes the differences.


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

[User] ELI5: How long will it take the world to run out of oil?

[Assistant]
Realistically, we will never truly run out of oil.  As the "easy" sources of oil begin to run out, the price of oil goes up and new technology allows us to access more oil that was too expensive to get at before.  At a certain price point it is actually feasible for us to *create* oil here on surface from raw materials (you may have heard of something called "biodiesel" which is a form of this).

What is ultimately going to happen is that as oil becomes more expensive, we will use less of it and switch to other energy sources that are either becoming cheaper, or will be economically viable at the higher price of oil.


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

[User]
[MCU] Doctor Strange used a sling ring to get to the battle in Endgame. Why didnt he do the same on the Maws ship after hes released?

Before Tony makes his case that they should face Thanos on Titan, Strange is asking if Tony can get them home, as if he cant. But he easily got himself, Peter, and the Guardians back to Earth. He hadnt yet looked into the future to see how they could win, why could he just teleport himself, Peter, and Tony back?

[Assistant]
One other theory: Doc Strange did not know exactly where he was in space, and was moving at extremely high speed, two things that are prohibitive to portals.

He could have ascertained his location and ported back to Earth once he arrived on Titan, but decided to look into the future beforehand.


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

[User]
Why don't incandescent light bulbs need any cooling, but LED lamps require it?

Old bulbs didn't require any cooling even in the 100-200W range. But LEDs need passive cooling after few W and active cooling over ~20 W. Why is that?

[Assistant]
Old bulbs are simply wires that get so hot they glow, we actually want them to be hot. They get so hot that we put the wires in a vacuum (or at least oxygen-free atmosphere) to prevent them from burning.

LEDs don't produce the light thermally. They are crystals with a more complicated structure, and we don't want them to get too hot mostly so that the structure stays intact. For example, one stage needed to make an LED out of a homogeneous crystal wafer involves diffusing "doping" atoms of another element into one side of the crystal, to alter its electronic properties. If we get the LED too hot, these will starts moving around the crystal (diffusing), and the structure we have carefully constructed is lost.

Another reason is that the materials the LEDs are made of simply can't handle the temperature, and if they get too hot they start burning or evaporating away, and they're often not-too-pleasant chemicals.


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

[User]
[Warhammer 40k]Do the Custodes and tech-priests ever get in the spirit of the season and dress up the Emperor in festive costumes for the holidays? Maybe a Santa hat or a pumpkin head for Halloween?

You know, liven up the throne room a bit, maybe deemphasis the Spooky Skeleton aspect?

[Assistant] Actually yes. There is a rather rigid and involved ritual regarding the decorations displayed in the throne room (which is a suitably titanic edifice). There is a rotation of holy relics, sacred banners washed in the blood of imperial saints, portraits of heroes etc that must be placed according to a rotating order that has been established over ten thousand years of Imperial history. An entire tower of the Palace, itself the size of a dozen hab blocks, is dedicated to storing the documentation concerning this order, though the attending Custodes have it memorized and never really consult it.


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

[User] Does the act of boiling actually help cook foods (e.g. potatoes), or do you get the same results with really hot (99C) water?

[Assistant]
Boiling is simply the hottest water temperature you can achieve under given atmospheric conditions.  Typically, when cooking food by submerging it in a non-oil liquid, there is no danger of burning the food, so the highest available temperature is preferred because it will yield the shortest cooking time.

This is why most boiled food products, such as pastas, have *high altitude* instructions, which are usually as simple as "boil an extra few minutes."  The lower atmospheric pressure experienced at higher altitudes means water boils at lower temperatures, so you need to cook it longer.

Another way to look at your question involves pressure cookers.  The whole point of a pressure cooker is to increase the pressure of a system in order to increase the boiling point of water.  That is, to make liquid water hotter without necessarily boiling.  The benefit of this is mostly a decrease in cooking time.

TLDR: it is the temperature that matters, not the actual phase change from liquid to gas.


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

[User] ELI5:Why is TOR funded by the US government?

[Assistant] Because the US has many worldwide interests that are advanced by open communications in areas where TOR is the only means to bypass local government.  The technology, like the Internet (which they also fundeded the development of) has good and bad uses.  That's the way technology pans out.


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

[User]
Is time a dimension in the same sense that height, width, and depth are dimensions?

I recall string theory requires more dimensions than we traditionally understand there to be, does time count towards this requirement?

[Assistant]
Yes, time is one of the dimensions, not just in string theory, but in physics as we already know it.  Relativity already tells us that we have to treat the three dimensions of space and the one dimension of time as a single four-dimensional construct.  The reason we have to group them into a four-dimensional *spacetime* is that different observers will separate spacetime into space and time in different ways.

Time is different from space in that we seem only to be able to move forward in time, but can move in both directions in the spatial dimension directions (but even with this, you cannot uniquely specify what direction in spacetime corresponds to time).

In string theory, the additional dimensions are all spacelike (can go forward and backward) rather than timelike.


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

[User]
[Marvel] Why does Punisher hate others trying to be like him?

His fellow street level heroes Daredevil and Spider-Man are the two who are most disapproving of the Punisher's style, and are the two Marvel heroes who are easily the most against deadly force. I always figured that Punisher considers them weak and unable to do what must be done to keep the peace in New York, however, Frank gets uncomfortable if anyone tries to do things his way, and had notable problems with Spider-Man's Superior phase.

What's up with that?

[Assistant] Because he considers himself an absolute monster. Something that must be destroyed but can destroy other monsters too. He's the embodiment of the failed justice system and only goes after those who escape justice or pervert it. When he sees others trying to copy him he considers them as willfully being what he is. He didn't choose to become a monster and hates himself for it but wants to die stopping real evil that the police ignore. He expects other heroes and cops to be better and do better than him. Even going so far as expecting them to stop him in his personal war against crime because he is a criminal. Choosing to do what he does completely ignores the heinous pains and tortures that took everything away from him and left him on his slow march to suicide. He wants to stop those who slip through the cracks in the justice system not widen the same cracks or ignore the rule of law just to settle personal scores.


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

[User]
[MCU] Assuming Peter properly told Tony the story of how he came to aquire his spider abilities, what does he make of the whole thing?

To me I think the story would prompt some further questions for Tony and could possibly ignite an interest in researching this form of obtaining powers through research on animals. I think he'd be much more likely to have his own speculations and thoughts on the story than just taking the story at face value with a reaction that's chalks up as conveying no interest.

Edit: I suppose it makes sense at this point in Tony's story arc that he probably wouldn't look into it...some good points made about his disinterest in banners origin and the super soldier serum.

Thoughts?

[Assistant]
Tony would probably think it was neat, but if it was like the comics, he probably wouldn't be that inspired by it cause his 'realm' of interest is supposed to be computers and mechanics.

Tony would more likely be interested and inspired by Peter's webbing.

Peter's Spider powers and it's causes would overlap more with scientists obsessed about the super-soldier serum and it's flawed derivatives, such as, maybe, Bruce Banner, The Leader, and the deceased Maya Hansen.


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

[User] ELI5: if my blood's temperature is 98.6, why does 80 degrees feel hot and 60 degrees feel cold?

[Assistant]
Our bodies produce heat to maintain that temperature (realistically, it's normally anywhere from 97-99 degrees), but the body also loses heat to the outside air, so it produces more heat than "just barely enough to maintain 98 degrees." When the temperature outside goes up, you're not losing as much heat as normal, so your skin expands for more surface area, sweats to induce evaporation and your blood vessels expand in your extremities, all of which allow your body to lose heat more quickly to maintain a normal internal temperature. When it gets cold, sweating stops, your skin contracts and your blood vessels contract in your extremities to slow down the loss of heat.

[Edit]: Humidity plays a big part in this, too, because sweating is the most efficient method of getting rid of heat. 80 degrees with low humidity can be pretty comfortable for most people, because rapid evaporation of your sweat keeps your body temperature well-regulated. When the humidity is high, though, evaporation of sweat occurs more slowly, so you feel hotter and sluggish, so as to not increase the amount of heat you're producing internally.


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

[User] What would the atmospheric composition have to be to scatter red light instead of blue? Green Light? Purple?

[Assistant]
We actually have two examples - Mars and Earth - with different colored skies. The difference comes down to Rayleigh scattering vs. Mie scattering.

There are two variables to keep in mind with scattering that can be wavelength dependent - the cross section and the scattered angles of the light. Rayleigh scattering is a good approximation for particles or molecules much smaller than the wavelength of light. Rayleigh scattering spreads the light at all angles, but the cross section is higher for blue light than red. This gives us blue skies and red sunsets.

Mie scattering describes what happens when particles are about the same size as the wavelength of light. Mie scattering has a flatter wavelength dependence for the cross section, so it doesn't produce very vibrant colors. However, red light scatters broadly while the blue light scatters in a more limited cone. Mars has dust in its atmosphere that is the right size for Mie scattering. That makes the sky on Mars red and the sunsets blue. You can get the same effect on Earth if a volcano puts up ash that is the right size. This can give a visibly blue moon.


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

[User] Could a subatomic particle tunnel out of a black hole?

[Assistant] The event horizon is not a potential barrier. At least in general relativity the inside is in the future of the outside. "Tunneling out" would be like tunneling to yesterday, which particles can't do either. At the moment we can't rule out that a quantum theory of gravity will lead to some modifications, however.


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

[User] If the only thing keeping an electron in the lowest orbital from crashing into the nucleus is the quantization of energy, how can electron capture occur? Does the electron just go through a series of quantum jumps to the nucleus?

[Assistant]
Even though atomic electrons live in orbitals of well-defined energy, they do not have well-defined positions. Instead they have probability density functions which extend throughout space.

And in fact, *certain* electron orbitals have probability densities which are nonzero **inside** the nucleus. Any orbital with zero orbital angular momentum has a wavefunction which is nonzero at r = 0 (where the nucleus is).

So if you were to measure the position of an atomic electron with zero orbital angular momentum many times, some fraction of the time, you would find the electron inside the nucleus.

The probability of electron capture is proportional to |(**r** = **0**)|^(2).


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

[User]
[WH40k] Chaos marines and death and other things.

Does chaos marines truly die in battle, or are they reborn in the warp like demons? Or is that exclusive to people who have achived demonhood?

If they premently die, how do they substain their numbers? I know that every leagion started at about 100 000 strong, but 10 000 years of war must have taken its toll. I've also heard that they sometimes steal geneseed, is this enough to substain their numbers or do their own geneseed still work? Even if its corrupted, aint that what they are aiming for, corrupted marines?

Also, have any traitor leagion been totally erradicated, had their numbers reduced to zero, or to few to come back?

[Assistant]
So, here are some answers.

As far as replenishment of numbers is concerned, there are a few different methods. There's the daemonculaba, there are Dark Mechanicus/Hereteks to assist with creation (remember, they're unbound by typical Mechanicus rules), there are plain old traitors and mercenaries, and there's... well... the nature of Chaos itself. Time is all wonky for them... from their perspective it could have only been a few years since they turned traitor, or it could be a million years. Chaos doesn't play by the rules of physical reality.

As far as death goes, their souls would return to the warp. Unless they're remarkably willful and powerful, their soul would just sort of "unravel" and become part of the warp rather than its own entity.


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

[User] [Star Wars] What was the official report regarding Pong Krell's death? Did the clones note his fall to the dark side?

[Assistant] The Clones didn't specifically note his fall to "the Dark Side". Their report described his suicide missions for the Clones, traitorous actions attempting to get Clone battalions to kill each other, his attempts to sabotage the Umbaran campaign, his attacks against Clone Troopers and his own confession of his allegiance to the Separatist cause. The Jedi themselves recognised that like Pong Krell, they were at risk of falling to the Dark Side should the war continue much longer as it was going, but the Clones themselves (and likely the GAR report) wouldn't have mentioned the Dark Side, certainly not over typical treason and betrayal which would take priority over "differing religious views to the religious warrior monks we fight alongside".


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

[User] [DC] How would Two-Face react if one morning he woke up and his face looked completely normal again ?

[Assistant]
Largely would depend on his current state of mind.

His face was repaired on several occasions in comics. In some cases he was relieved and it helped him to keep his shit together for a while, in other cases he snapped instantly and ruined it again, or something like that.


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

[User]
How far can an ant be removed from the anthill and still find its way home?

Driving away from a parking spot in a park, I see an ant walking across my windshield. I stop and let it off, but I've already driven 30 feet. Is that ant doomed to death? (I thought most ants leave trails behind them to find their way back home. Since the trail is now broken, how will it find its way?)

[Assistant]
This has been asked a lot before so if you want deeper answers you can look them up. Basically if an ant doesn't know where it's trail home is it will start wandering around in random(ish) directions trying to find it. IIRC, they also have a good ability to remember landmarks, so that can help too.

If they are really far away and can't find their home then yes, then they may wander until they die. They may find another colony that they can assimilate into, but more than likely they ants their won't accept the foreigner and will attack and kill it (even if it's the same species possibly.)

So to answer your question of how far away, it depends. If they are a really long ways away, but get lucky in their random search they can find their way back. In general, I've seen estimates hover closer to 100 or less meters. It's actually a neat direct application of some of the algorithms in computer science if you want a more rigorous way to think of it.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do developers make "better" compression algorithms?

What do we know or do now that we didn't when we first started file compression? What makes new image and video codecs better than their predecessors?

[Assistant]
The algorithms are usually around for years before they get widespread acceptance.  The catch is that better compression algorithms require more CPU time and memory to run.

When you see a new algorithm start getting used, that usually just means that modern computers have improved to the point where they have the resources to practically compress & extract data with a better algorithm.


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

[User] ELI5: Why are constructors still using crushed stones alongside new railroad tracks instead of concrete?"

[Assistant]
Higher surface energy can absorb way more than things with lower surface energy without suffering catastrophic failure. Try hitting the sand in the beach with a hammer. It's very tough. It is very malleable. You can't cause it to "fail".

Now take the sand, and turn it into glass. Hit it with a hammer, and you'll see that it can shatter. It is harder, sure, but it isn't tougher. It is brittle. It fails immediately.

The purpose is to maintain integrity of the surface. Bunch of smaller rocks can maintain a surface exposed to constant vibrations much more cheaply and effectively than one large solid piece.


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

[User] ELI5: Why can targeted advertising be smart enough to show me ads at home for something I searched on my PC at work, but not smart enough to not show me the same ad 10x in a row or for services for which I've already subscribed?

[Assistant] same ad 10 times in a row, just means they paid more for the type of people group they chose. they don't want to oversaturate you with the same information, that just what happens ad algorithms have a strict impressions(views per time) to chase after and a limited pool of ads to choose from.


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

[User]
ELI5: What am I looking at when viewing Conways Game of Life? What is the significance of this?

I just found out about this last night and am having difficulty understanding what exactly this is.

[Assistant]
It's a game, a toy, a mathematical toy.

It merely demonstrates that a few very simple rules can generate extremely complex behaviour.  The "rules" for whether an individual cell lives or dies into the next generation are so simple you can do them by hand yourself.

But apply it to a large field of random cells, or a carefully chosen pattern of cells, and you can generate things that appear to wander off into infinity, to last forever, and even generate more things themselves that then wander off into infinity.

If you choose carefully enough, you can make a entire computer inside the game, powered entirely by little things running around based only on those same simple rules of what lives and what dies in the next generation.  An entire computer that could, in theory, perform any calculation that your computer could.

It's an interesting mathematical diversion depicting Turing-completeness, the chaos that arises from simple rules, and it just looks pretty.


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

[User]
[007] What is James Bond's relationship with the other 00 agents?

I don't remember any of them showing up in Casino Royale or Skyfall, so what do the books and the other movies say? Is he bros with them? Are there any that he goes on adventures with?

[Assistant]
He does sometimes go on joint missions with other 00's, like in *GoldenEye*.

The viciousness with which he's avenged ones who have fallen, like in *Octopussy*, suggests he has a personal bond with them.


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

[User]
[LotR] Why does Sauron lose his physical form after Isildur cuts off the ring from his hand?

Did he not have a physical form prior to making the one ring?

[Assistant]
In the books he does, you just never see him because he isn't at full strength so he holds out in Barad Dur. In the Jackson movies they wanted something more literal when referring to the "Eye of Sauron" so they made his avatar a giant flaming eye. He totally had a physical form, he actually died and came back several times before the War of the Last Alliance. When he made the rings he took a fair form as Annatar the Gift Giver. Hell at one point he was even a werewolf during the events of Beren and Luthien.

It just took thousands of years for him to scrap together enough power without the ring to take a physical form.


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

[User]
ELI5 - In very brief, simple terms, what is the postmodern?

I suppose I mean from a sociological perspective. This is one concept that seems to pop up everywhere, but it always seems to mean something slightly different. Relationships with media, inter-textuality, that kind of stuff I believe, but I've never been too sure. Can any of you underpin exactly what postmodern means in simple terms for me?

[Assistant]
"Modernism" is the idea that things are getting better, or can get better. Try to improve technology, expand the methods of art, etc. Try to be the best you can be, destroy tradition, move society and the individual forwards. Write the great American novel, make the best movie ever. Art should be universal and stand alone.

Post-modernism is the rejection of that idea. Maybe there /isn't/ such a thing as perfection. Maybe instead of trying to make the universal movie or novel, we should try to see things from different perspectives. In the social sciences, post-modern practice questions the idea of objective reality and the scientific method. Not necessarily discarding it, but taking an approach which allows for multiple perspectives to be reported.


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

[User]
ELI5: Capital gains tax

What are the arguments for why it should or shouldn't be implemented, and what exactly is it? I checked the Wikipedia page, but my understanding is still pretty fuzzy.

[Assistant] If as a private individual you buy something, then later sell it at a profit, you have made a *gain* on that item. Your capital has increased. Many countries have laws that say if you make money in this way then there is tax payable on that profit.


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

[User]
(DC) The Kryptonians

Ok so my question is if superman gets his powers from the sun why didnt
All the other kryptonians just spread out to other stars and take over the galaxy with the powers they would gain with stars like our own being so common out in the cosmos?

[Assistant]
Depends on the version of the story why they never left Krypton.

In some, Kryptonioans were biologically linked to Krypton and couldn't leave.  Jor El removed this genetic fault from Kal when he was in utero.

In others, they simply didn't believe Jor El's warnings about how dire the situation was and by the time they realized it, it was just too late.

In some they didn't know what would happen if they went to another world.  Jor El knew Kal would get stronger than humans on Earth but how strong?  That's an unknown.

Also, they had no real reason to conquer the galaxy.  In most versions of the story Krypton was a relatively peaceful scientifically advanced world.  They weren't conquerors.

But there's also stories in which they did colonize Earth and the results were pretty bad for humankind.


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

[User] How do game shows make money when they are always giving away prizes?

[Assistant]
They sell advertising, lots and lots of advertising. Plus, don't forget merchandising on the larger ones. (You get a copy of our home game!).

The profits from these two things are greater than the amount of money they give away. Most gameshows have a pretty low overhead. They don't really require a lot of effects and they don't have a large cast. Whereas, a high-budget sci-fi show could easily blow as much money as it costs for many of the prizes, simply on special effects for a single episode. That's not even counting paying actors, extras, crew, etc.

**TL;DR: Sell advertising and merchandise, spend as little as possible elsewhere.**


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

[User]
Tears of joy and cute aggression are considered examples of dimorphous expressions. Would laughing when you become frustrated or angry also be considered a dimorphous expression?

From what I have been learning, a dimorphous expression is a bodys way of bringing back equilibrium to your emotions. Id like to believe that when you are very frustrated or angry, your bodys instinct is to laugh in order to equalize your emotions. Would this be true?

[Assistant]
It's true, since the frustration and anger comes from an inner expression of the self, laughing it off is you (unconsciously) trying to equalize your emotions as a safekeeping for your mental and physical health.

It could also be considered as a psychoanalysis defense mechanism.


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

[User]
(Star Trek 2009) What happened to that giant black hole at the end of the movie?

Wasn't the black hole created near Titan or something?

[Assistant]
IIRC, Scotty says ejecting and detonating the warp core would give them the push they need to escape and collapse the singularity as well.

It should also be pointed out that the singularity was only created from the mass of the Narada. It wasn't that big.


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

[User] Why were offspring of cross-bred hominids (e.g., Homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis) viable to breed, but other cross-bred species like mules or ligers are infertile?

[Assistant]
Answer:  i don't know the current terminology, but the last common ancestor of horses and donkeys lived 4 to 5 million years ago, so they have evolved to be farther apart than homo sapiens and homo neanderthalis, which had a much more recent common ancestor.
 As a result, horses and donkeys do not yield fertile offspring, because the parents are too far apart genetically. But many hominids could interbreed.
I consider mules and hinnies to be a real time 'experiment' proving evolution.


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

[User]
CMV: Saying Olympic gold medal winners are the best in the world is misleading for the winter Beijing Olympics.

As I'm watching the Olympics this year I have heard on several occasions that the current world leader is unable to compete because they are out because of Covid or they are in quarantine. I think that this has tainted the Olympics naming the "best in the world" because competitor's are gaining an unseen advantage due to influence outside of competitors control. China has claimed that the Olympics will take place safely and I understand that catching covid is not the host countries fault but since in some events are having world champions not competing due to the host the Olympics rules with covid it makes it seem that they are "the best in the world who were able to compete" not the actual best in the world. I don't want to minimize the accomplishments of gold medal winners but this Olympics feels more like regular world championship competition and less like competition between the best athletes int he world. I am uninformed about athletes that did not compete due to not being vaccinated  or stuff like that but to athletes that followed all protocols and were unfortunate enough to still have a breakthrough case or similar circumstance.

[Assistant]
>"the best in the world who were able to compete"

That's every single olympics, not just this one.

It's almost certain that there exists people, in many different events, every single year, who don't make it to the olympics for a variety of reasons.

Hell it wasn't even somewhat recently by olympic standards, that it was *amatuer only*, if you were a professional athlete of basically *any* kind, you were not allowed into the olympics.  At least a few people were stripped of their medals, because they were professional athletes *in a capacity utterly unrelated to the events that they won the medals in*.

There are still events *to this day* that refuse to allow professionals, and are *amatuer only*.

There's really nothing "best of the best" about the olympics.

It has always been "Best of those who are allowed, and capable and able to compete"


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

[User] [Marvel] Does Hulk still bill himself as "the strongest there is" even after doing battle with Thanos and meeting a bunch of other Hulks?

[Assistant]
1. Hulk is vastly beyond 90% of the other Hulks, and the few that can match him either lose to him in a war of attrition or are physically weaker and compensate with other powers. Hulk is the strongest Hulk.
2. Hulk gets stronger the angrier and longer he fights. In his mind, Thanos' advantage over him is temporary at best.
3. The number of people that match or surpass Hulk cap out at a few hundred maybe, in a galaxy of literal trillions, and most of these are cosmic entities. For 99.9% of Hulk's encounters, he is effectively the strongest there is.


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

[User] [DC,batman] What would happen if Mr.Freeze could save his wife, would he go back to being a regular guy? Or has he already gone to far?

[Assistant]
In an ideal world, he would use the cure he developed to rid the word of cancer, and then turn his genius to to heart disease or diabetes or whatever he thought was most likely to take his wife again, a few years down the road.

But Freeze has already shown that he isn't exactly playing with a full cart of apples, so the most likely result is that he becomes obsessive about protecting her. This would probably be a combination of "typical" abusive relationship behavior - controlling her schedule, limiting contact with friends and family - and more super-villain behavior like building automated ice weapons to flash-freeze anyone that tries to break in during the night and murder her.