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

[User]
Does cellular communication use radio waves or microwaves?

May be a stupid question for a subreddit way more scientific than I could ever be, but I'm having trouble finding defined ranges for both radiowaves and microwaves and so I'm also having trouble categorizing cellular communication into either one. I was always pretty sure it was radio but now I'm having doubts from what I'm seeing on the internet.

(I sort of guessed the flair, my bad if it is incorrect)

[Assistant] Both.  Radio waves is a general term that encompasses all wavelengths (frequencies). The term microwave implies a certain frequency range, usually starting around 1GHz and extending to maybe 30 GHz.  Frequencies above that are generally termed mmWave.  So all microwaves are radio waves, but not all radio waves are microwaves.


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

[User]
[Marvel/MCU] In terms of the Infinity Stones, what exactly is the difference between my "Mind" and my "Soul"?

Isn't the soul just a nonphysical embodiment of the mind?

[Assistant]
No, marvel canon states there is a higher power and the idea of the soul is that its what truly gives you life. Your mind is your personality and your thoughts and ect but your soul is... Your essence and energy and life and all those spiritual ideas that go beyond what we know as true.

Your soul is the part of you that can pass on, the part of you that can know your creator and all that spiritual stuff.


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

[User]
Is there a way or has there ever been a case where protons are removed from the nucleus of an atom?

I dont know much about atoms and science-y things, but Ive been wondering if there ever has been an instance where protons were removed from the nucleus of an atom, or if theres a theoretical way to do so.

If there has been, what affect did it have on the atom. If its purely theoretical, then how could it be accomplished

If it cant be done, then why?

[Assistant]
Yes, we can remove protons from a nucleus using various kinds of nuclear reactions.

If you're asking whether there exists any nucleus with only neutrons in it (besides a single neutron), no such nucleus is bound. There are only resonances, like the dineutron and the tetraneutron, which decay with half-lives on the order of 10^(-22) seconds.


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

[User]
[Bright] whats up with all of the humans and the wand?

It was mentioned that only 1 in a million humans were brights and could use the wand. Why do the 4 dirty cops and a whole lot of gangsters have such a huge interest in the wand if they know they're probably just going to die if they try to use it?

[Assistant] But if they can use it, just think of the possibilities. Practically ruling over everything is worth that nine hundred ninety-nice thousand, nine hundred ninety-nine in a million chance of blowing up. Well, it is the case for the power hungry, such as these dirty cops.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Was Palpatine grooming Anakin to turn dark so that Palpatine himself could "possess" his body, or was Anakin simply groomed to wipe out the Jedi?

After the Return of Skywalker where he reveals his plan to need a new body to transfer his essence, it got me wondering if Anakin was initially chosen for that. Did Palpatine want to take over his body, seeing as how his midichlorian levels were pretty high?

Sidious was even expressing sadness when he finds Anakin burned in Mustafar. Why would he express sadness (or pity?) when we know Siths do not care about each other, certainly not Sidious?

[Assistant]
He was more grooming Anakin as a way to pervert the power of the Force with that of the dark side, turning himself into a dark god. (Or at least, that was implied in earlier post-2014 canon material).

Anakin's injuries, however, proved to be the undoing of that plan.


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

[User]
What is happening inside an atom that doesn't make an electron lose its energy the way it would in a cyclotron?

I understand the fundamentals of QM, that the atom acts as a potential well and the energy states get quantised, hence electrons can have only certain wavefunctions. But what about this quantisation 'stabilizes' the electron so that it doesn't radiate energy, the way it would if it was accelerating in a cyclotron?

[Assistant]
Because an electron moving through a cyclotron isnt in a bound state, its in a continuum state. It has a continuum of possible energies, and it can make transitions between those continuous-energy states by emitting photons.

(By the way, you wouldnt want to use a cyclotron for electron beams, because they become relativistic too quickly, and then the cyclotron frequency has to change *synchronously* as the electron accelerates. This is why youd use something like a *synchro*tron instead.)


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

[User]
[MCU] About the dead people after the snap

>!In Avengers Endgame, did the dead know when they were brought back by Iron Man? And secondly, how did the other avengers know that a fight between Cpt. & Thanos taking place? Sorry if these are stupid questions.!<

[Assistant]
First of all, not a stupid question.
Doctor strange seem to have been the driving force, he was the only one who knew what was going on. So he called his sorcerer cliq and told them to gather every warrior who wants revenge against Thanos and i believe thats it.


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

[User]
CMV: Biological traits unique to men are entirely caused by men's reproductive expendability. Patriarchal society is a side effect.

Here's my theory: As a primitive society, your reproductive engine is entirely bottlenecked by the number of women you have.

50 men + 50 young women == 50 babies

1 man + 50 young women == 50 babies (and one very happy guy)

More is better, of course (genetic diversity, men can be helpful, etc), but I would say the driving force causing sexual dimorphism is *the ways men can be helpful by taking the lion's share of collective risk*.

Men are biologically warriors because their deaths are less impactful on the tribe, so it's their primitive role to carry out risk and violence.

* Beards for padding punches
* Extra tall, longer limbs (no need to be lower to the ground for the anatomical changes of pregnancy, better to be faster and have longer reach)
* Testosterone motivated behavioral changes such as
   * Risk taking behavior
   * Aggression
* More lean muscle development
* Faster metabolisms (moving, carrying, fighting, whereas women serve the tribe better by staying still/safe and consuming less calories)

I can't really think of any male-specific traits that can't be connected to expendability

Women are the natural intellectual leaders the way human's have evolved and that's why many early tribal societies were matriarchal. It doesn't make sense, strategically, to have critical leadership roles filled by men when they're more likely to die.

Patriarchy seems, then,  like a byproduct of the agricultural revolution, when territory control allowed for crop yield, power projection, dominion, and wars/consolidation of violence became relevant, and men's roles became more significant in the welfare of a people.

I'm not an anthropologist, or any -ologist, just some dude who read "Selfish Gene," "Guns, Germs, Steel," and some Yuval Harari and now thinks he knows stuff.

[Assistant]
>Beards for padding punches

A defensive measure is the opposite of expendability.

>Extra tall, longer limbs (no need to be lower to the ground for the anatomical changes of pregnancy, better to be faster and have longer reach)

Again, a phsycial advantage has nothing to do with expendability.

>More lean muscle development
>
>Faster metabolisms (moving, carrying, fighting, whereas women serve the tribe better by staying still/safe and consuming less calories)

Neither of these has anything to do with expendability. That's just a physical advantage, that is helpful almost always.

>Women are the natural intellectual leaders the way human's have evolved and that's why many early tribal societies were matriarchal.

There is basically zero indication that early tribal societies where matriarchal.  The opposite actually, tribal societies we have records of vary from egalitarian, to patriarchal. There are no generally agreed upon instances of a matriarchy.


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

[User] ELI5: What are the requirements for a scar to form instead of a full recovery?

[Assistant] Your skin can only regenerate from the bottom up (the deepest layer) so if the wound is deep enough that you lose the bottom layer it cant regenerate. If that happens, the connective tissue that lives underneath the skin has to grow into that space to heal up the area. That tissue, what we call a scar, is made up of entirely different cells than your skin so it doesnt look the same or function the same as the skin its replacing.


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

[User]
[40K] How long will it take for the Tau to surpass the other races in Technology?

Let's be frank. The Tau are not a strong race. They have the smallest empire of all the powers, lowest tier technology, and are constantly being raided by Dark Eldar, Orks, and the occasional Ultramarine.

Despite this, the Tau are the fastest advancing race in the galaxy. They've become star ship capable in a fraction of the time it took humanity. There weapons, while overall weaker still outdo anything Humanity had when they didn't have assistance from the Big E. Tau are advancing extremely quickly, so how long would it be before they are more advanced then even the Imperium or Eldar?

[Assistant]
It's a difficult question as both the Imperium and Eldar are currently in periods of great decline and so what we see of them now is barely a shadow of what they once were.

So how long until they overtake the IoM and Eldar now? Well, at the moment the Tau lag behind them both a little bit, but the difference is that they are advancing at a hell of a pace, while the Eldar are stagnant and the IoM advance only very very slowly. In a few hundred years their basic battle tech may be at the same level of the IoM and maybe a few centuries later the Eldar, but it's hard to say as much of their advancement has been unpredictably fast already. Maybe tomorrow they come up with a new design that takes them up to the IoM level, who knows?

Where they struggle is in Warp tech, which they have little to no understanding of and maybe that will hold them back, but perhaps not. Maybe they can find a new way to travel that avoids the peril of the warp, but if not then it'll be a bit of a problem until they can work it out.

So they will probably be on a rough level with current IoM and Eldar in a relative blink of an eye (in some aspects anyway), but getting up to pre-fall days of Eldar or Dark Age of Technology level IoM, well, that's a huge leap and it's possible they never will.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] A jedi padawan saw me performing some cheap sleight-of-hand and mentalism and now wants to take me before his master and maybe even the jedi council to test me for force-sensitivity. How do I milk this for all it's worth?

I'm not an idiot, I know they have ways to detect the force and that I don't have it, but I'm good at reading and manipulating people, hard to fool, and damn good at setting up illusions and the like.

Any way I can get a couple credits out of this?

[Assistant]
Any real Jedi is going to pick it up in a second. Be grateful and thankful. Tell the nice Padawan you've been making credits to try and escape from a Dark Jedi who masquerades as a real one. Ask him to describe his master. Does he ever seem ever so slightly.. evil? Play on his pride in his powers, and the possibility that festers in his mind of his master being evil.

Tell him you've been paying a private detective to find out who it is. Spending money on bribes. That sort of thing. Ask for some of his, since you're nearly broke. Then more. And more. A bit more slight of hand to show him that he's teaching you about the 'force'. Eventually, confirm that it isn't his master and you'd be happy to escape from the possible Dark Jedi with him. Stab them both in their sleep, take their shit and sell it onward, along with the ship they're travelling in (or not, as the case may be). Or just kill the Padawan, the Master will probably check you over himself.


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

[User]
[Marvel][Hulk] What causes Bruce Banner to turn into Joe Fixit rather than the Hulk?

We all know Banner turns into Hulk when he gets angry. What triggers Joe Fixit to show up?

[Assistant]
He doesn't *always* turn into Savage Hulk when he gets angry. He just tends to be the dominant personality.

Bruce has Dissociative Identity Disorder. There's 6 distinct personalties, 5 of which happen to be "Hulks." Joe Fixit seems to show up when Bruce is unsure of himself. He also has a lot more control over Bruce's body when he manifests than Savage Hulk, since he can remain as Joe as long as he wants.


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

[User]
Could an asteroid be big enough to do any kind of damage to the sun?

We always hear about the possibility of an asteroid hitting the earth, which could cause tremendous damage.
I've never heard wether it's even possible for an asteroid to hit the sun and even if so, what exactly would happen?

[Assistant] No. Asteroids are, per definitions pretty much, small. Asteroids (or at least icy ones) can't be larger than Ceres (950km diameter). Otherwise they would be (dwarf) planets. The Sun wouldn't even notice being impacted by such a body. Even a large object, like the Earth, wouldn't be able to damage the Sun. It would be able to affect its rotation and maybe cause a huge explosion (depending on how it impacts), but it wouldn't be able to do much permanent damage.


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

[User]
[40K] So my planet got taken over by the Tau, now what?

I work in the bowels of a power plant on a Civilised World towards the end of the Imperium. A few days ago a Tau Fleet appeared just over head!

I saw a ship land near the government building and a small envoy entered. A few hours later they left and our governor declared we are no longer part of the Imperium and that we've been incorporated into the Tau Empire.

Not that I'm complaining, I got my first day off in years and they threw us a celebration.

So what does this mean for me? Will my life change in any way? How will the Imperium react and will the Tau protect us?

[Assistant] Before you were the Imperium's bitch. Now welcome to the wonderful life of being the Greater Good's bitch. As a second class citizen of the Tau Empire, your life actually mildly improves, as long as everything you do now is for the Greater Good you can expect a much longer life than the average Imperial menial laborer.


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

[User]
Do preservatives have an effect on obesity?

Do preservatives carry enough antimicrobial properties to effect gut flora and cause obesity? This is coming from a place of speculation and curiosity, not FPH. Thank you for your time.

[Assistant] Yes, there have been found links of preservatives having a negative influence on obesity and gut diseases. Chemicals known as emulsifiers (prevent food from breaking down), are apperent in preserved food, more than they are in non-preserved food. These emulsifiers were found to alter the make-up of bacteria in the colon, more frequently than not in a negative manner.


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

[User] ELI5: Does calcium carbonate remineralise teeth anywhere near as well as fluoride is supposed to?

[Assistant]
No, for two main reasons. First the calcium carbonate cannot absorb into teeth to remineralize in any effective way. Teeth just don't soak stuff into them that way. Calcium carbonate is added to toothpaste as a gentle abrasive, not to become part of the teeth.

The second reason is that fluoride doesn't remineralize teeth either. Instead the fluoride reacts with hydroxyapatite crystals already present within the teeth to form fluorapatite which is more resistant to tooth decay. It isn't adding minerals to your teeth, it is changing the minerals already there into a more durable kind.


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

[User]
eli5: What makes certain cancers resistant to radiation/treatment?

For example, I know someone whose daughter has medulloblastoma. She can be in radiation for years, but as soon as they stop the treatment the cancer starts to grow again. How can cancer "survive" after months or even years of constant radiation and chemo?

[Assistant]
The problem with cancer cells is that theyre still *human* cells, and so selecting a treatment that will only kill them without just killing everything is sometimes very difficult.

Since theyre frequently dividing we often go with radiation and chemical poisons that will damage cells currently undergoing cell division a lot more than other cells.  It hits the cancer hard, but also hits your hair, digestive system, reproductive system, and immune system because theyre often dividing too.

This limits the amount and harshness of treatment we can apply.  You cant just go scorched earth and dump 7 times the lethal dose for three months to make sure the cancer cells are all fried - the patient wont survive.

Cancer cells that have spread to many little nooks and crannies where they can evade the worst of the treatment or that still have better than average cell repair capacity can be very difficult to successfully treat with radiation and chemical methods because theyre just as robust as the rest of your cells.


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

[User]
[Frozen] Did the trolls just kidnap Kristoff?

One of the trolls clearly says "I'm going to keep you."
Surely someone would have noticed his absence?

[Assistant] He was an orphan anyway.  The trolls just gave him a home, but he still was free to come and go and carry on his ice trade with humans.  That rock field was within a day's ride of the castle so there must've been other people nearby.


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

[User]
[The Culture] What are Effectors exactly?

In the Culture novels effectors show up a lot, but it's hard to get a read on their limits. They seem to be able to be used for surveillance, or just mucking around with things.'

Are we ever given a scientific explanation for how they work, or what their limits are?

[Assistant]
Effectors are electromagnetic manipulators. They can basically do anything with the electromagnetic spectrum to an extent and from a range dependent on the strength of the effector. This means they can send and receive the entire spectrum of electromagnetic radiation, read minds, able to manipulate electronics, insert thoughts, excite nerves, or just plain dump energy into something if they wish. Basically, if anything involves electrons or electromagnetic waves and would be affected by manipulating it, the effector can probably do it. They work through hyperspace, which circumvents normal lightspeed restrictions.

Effectors are limited in that they have not been shown to work on chemical/mechanical weaponry, though it is more plausible that this is due to the lack of EM waves they produce - if the Culture ship could determine the presence and positioning of said weaponry through other means, there is nothing to stop an effector from wasting them either. So in a sense, the real limitation here is that effectors cannot sense non-electronic weaponry, and it would certainly be more inefficient than frying a wire or two.

Effectors can also be blocked by 4D shielding. Even this can be forced through; however, the ship is extremely wary of this due to the difficulty of hyperspace calculation causing collateral damage:

"Once the ship's back, in about twelve minutes, we have the option of blasting the shielding out of the way and Displacing in, but that's a last resort; wasting 4D without causing horrendous collateral in the associate flat-space is almost impossible. In 4D you think all you've done is kick down a door, and imagine you've done it really neatly, minimum force, but then you look back into 3D and realize you've blown down the whole building. Sometimes the whole block."

The other counter to effectors is simply using your own effectors. It flips one bit, your effector senses it and flips it back. It ramps an electron's energy state up, you slap it back down. That's how equiv-tech fights go until one ship screws up and ends up turning against itself and its allies.

The limits are based on the strength and number of the effectors and the ship's imagination and skill more than anything else.


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

[User]
Can a Starfleet vessel travel at exactly the speed of light so that a supernova appears to be frozen at a given moment in its blast and have more time to study?

If this is possible, could the ship move forward and back to any given moment of the blast and study that particular instant?

[Assistant]
In theory, but that works only with sensors that inspect the electromagnetic spectrum. While that's certainly *helpful*, standard sensors function through manipulation of subspace. This is a faster-than-light process, so you can't take advantage of dancing around the speed of light issue, and also has a rather serious quality issue at very long ranges.

The advantage is that you can drop expendable probes around a star that's about to explode and have plenty of time for them to transfer all the information back to their home ship before the slower-than-light shockwave reaches the probes.


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

[User] ELI5: How do we calculate the force acting on a wall by an object leaning against it?

[Assistant] A modified version of Newton's 2nd Law.  Consider the pivot point located where the object touches the ground.  The sum of the moment (rotational force) around that point must be zero, since the object is leaning against the wall, and not accelerating.  So you know that the reaction force from the wall * the lever arm for that force must equal the gravitational force acting on the object * the lever arm for that force.  And then you know by Newton's 3rd law that the object's force on the wall is the same as the wall's force on the object.


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

[User] [Marvel] Could Deadpool wield the Infinity Gauntlet without dying or being severely injured?

[Assistant]
There is a comic where he steals the gauntlet from Thanos and uses it to hold a roast for himself attended by many Marvel characters. He ends up being kinda depressed and gives the gauntlet back.

Then again, in the comics, just about anyone can wield the gauntlet.


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

[User]
[40k] Which race stands the greatest chance of outlasting (or even defeating) the Tyranids?

I think the Dark Eldar and Eldar stand a good chance, as their craft worlds enable them to actively avoid the Nids.

Orks can theoretically multiply wherever they set foot. Necrons I dont think count as biomass.

So, thoughts?

[Assistant]
Necrons and Daemons have the best chance of defeating Tyranids, because they don't contribute to their biomass.

Necrons probably have the best chance outliving them, because if a tombworld is just floating somewhere, Tyranids would go around it.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why are some people genius at chess, but completely normal in every other thing?

Many world champions of chess immediately become grand master at the very young age, about 12-16. But they all seem totally normal in every other thing. Why aren't their intelligence show up in other things? What makes one's intelligence specific to chess?

Note: English isn't my mother tongue, please keep it simple.

[Assistant]
Chess is an extraordinarily simple game. You can learn everything there is to know about the game in a very short period of time. The issue is that it takes a great deal of intuition to become one of the greats, and intuition can't be taught.

For example, you can very quickly learn how the pieces move, why it's best to keep your knights centralized or trade off bad bishops in closed positions, but seeing that abstract mate-in-four that requires you to sacrifice your queen, a rook, and a pawn is just something that you have to -see-, you can't be taught it.

Chess strategy involves a lot of different aspects; it's not "seeing four moves ahead", it's understanding positions and tactics and making assumptions based on what you might do if you were your opponent. It's not even about studying the great games and trying to mimic them (it'll never happen).

What grandmasters ARE good at is lateral thinking, or solving problems creatively and often indirectly using reasoning that isn't immediately obvious. This sort of approach to problem solving is very useful in a lot of different fields, but isn't the primary focus of very many.


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

[User]
Why can't we use live SARS-CoV-2 as a Covid-19 vaccine?

The SARS-CoV-2 virus infects the upper and lower respiratory tract in humans. As far as I understand, it does not infect other parts of the body, e.g. muscle tissue. So I would expect that if the virus is injected into muscle tissue, it should help the recipient develop immunity, which could then protect them from a conventional Covid-19 infection. This is not being done, so either:

* the virus does infect muscle tissue
* the virus is not infectious enough in muscle tissue to trigger an immune response
* the virus would reach the respiratory tract too quickly from the injection site

Is any of the above the right answer? Or is it something else entirely?

[Assistant]
Because once it gets into the bloodstream, or into the lymphatic system, it can go anywhere in the body, so you would still have a very high risk of getting a full blown infection. You also would have a potential risk of infecting others.

But... there are vaccines that use attenuated (as in less virulent) live viruses (such as the MMR and chickenpox vaccines) and this could be a way to make an effective COVID vaccine.

To attenuate a virus, you infect a host that isnt the viruses normal host, and if you can get the virus to do this successfully, it means its mutated sufficiently to get better at infecting this new host - which also usually means its no longer so good at infecting its original host.

Once youve done testing to verify that this attenuated virus will no longer successfully infect the original host, you can use it as a vaccine in the original host - it will still elicit an immune response, but it wont replicate much/at all and therefore wont cause an infection.

These types of vaccines cant be used in people with compromised immune systems.


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

[User]
[DC] Can someone explain the Speed Force in great detail?

I know the Flash and others speedsters can tap into a "speed force" to use their powers, but does it get more diluted the more speedsters there are? Is the power infinite? I want to know what are the rules and limitations surrounding it are and in the greatest detail you can muster.

[Assistant]
The Speed Force is an extra-dimensional power source that somehow transcends the standard "four-force" model of the observable universe (gravity, electromagnetic, strong force, weak force).  Due to this unusual nature, it allows wielders (known colloquially as Speedsters) to distort the laws of physics in highly unusual ways.  Basic examples are the ability to phase through solid matter or to run beyond the speed of light, extreme examples involve linear time travel (both forward and backwards, allowing for the possibility of paradox) and dimensional bridging.  The Speed Force can be harnessed by certain individuals who have either a genetic predisposition or have experienced certain atypical experimental conditions, and it does appear there is a finite limit to how much Speed Force can be channeled at any given time, but the exact nature of this limit is debatable and seems to change depending on the Speedsters involved in the situation.

Overall, the ability to warp core physical laws means that Speedsters have a dangerous and difficult to define advantage over all other metahumans, who, regardless of powers, are typically constrained by the standard laws of physics as we understand them.  The only other beings we know of that have this ability to distort reality are Celestial level beings about who very little is understood.


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

[User]
How do we know that stellar black hole are not neutron star ?

How do we know that stellar black holes are not neutron star becoming too massive to let photon go away ?

In other word, why a neutron star smaller than 3 solar masses "eating" an other star and reaching 3 solar masses collapse into a black hole ? Why this star doesn't stay a neutron star being invisible by physics ?

[Assistant]
>How do we know that stellar black holes are not neutron star becoming too massive to let photon go away ?

If something is too massive to let light escape, then it's black - so by definition it's a black hole!

But a black hole can't be a neutron star. This is because the speed of light is the universal speed limit - nothing can travel faster than it. So if an object's gravitational pull is so strong that light can't escape, it means that *nothing* can escape. This means no force can *possibly* overcome that gravity. So the gravitational collapse continues unimpeded until you reach a singularity (or some quantum gravity state).

Neutron stars are what happens when the gravitational pull inward of a ball of neutrons is balanced by the outward *degeneracy pressure* of the neutrons. This means that the Pauli exclusion principle forbids the neutrons from being packed any tighter together than they already are. That counteracts gravity. But if the gravity is so strong that light can't escape, this means neutron degeneracy pressure certainly won't do any better, and so the gravitational collapse wins out. What you're left with at the end - a singularity or some other exotic state - can no longer be described as a ball of neutrons.


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

[User] ELI5: Alcohol destroys brain cells but what does that actually mean? Does our IQ drop? Do we lose personal memory? Is our thinking process slowed down?

[Assistant]
The basis for saying alcohol destroys brain cells was from a man applying alcohol directly to brain cells in a Pitre dish. Drinking doesn't actually kill brain cells when people drink, because it's not coming into direct contact in such a high concentration. If it actually acted like that, people would be severely mentally impaired (and permanently so) after just a few visits to the bar, especially the way some do on their 21st birthday.

Also, when people get so drunk that they don't remember what they did, it's not that they can't remember their actions, but rather at that point of drunkenness their brain simply stops recording memories.


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

[User] [Resident Evil] Why does the RPD need S.T.A.R.S if they apparently have a SWAT team as we see in RE2 remake?

[Assistant]
don't know why this was downvoted. it's a fair question given similarities. contrary to popular belief, STARS actually started out first. Not SWAT. it was formed to combat the growing urban crime and terrorist activities in the city \[pre-outbreak\]. it was also considerably smaller in size than SWAT. \[alpha / bravo - if you've played 1\].  but by the events post-mansion incident...they fell out of favor by Brian Irons and (or) the law enforcement community. not to mention most of the operatives already being dead from the mansion fiasco. so by 1998 the SWAT was already being formed by their fragmentation. but SWAT didn't last long either...due to the obvious.

in short, STARS is just the spiritual precursor to SWAT.


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

[User]
Can an object become a black hole by moving fast enough?

this week in school we have been learning about special relativity and we learnt that an objects mass increases as its speed approaches c. Does this mean there would be a point where its mass is large enough that it could become a black hole?

[Assistant] No. The easiest way to see why the answer is no is to remember the laws of physics have to work the same in every inertial frame of reference (per special relativity). If the object won't act as a black whole in its stationary frame of reference, the same must be true for any other frame of reference where its speed can be arbitrarily high.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] If I'm a wizard and I want some object, am I better off conjuring it from nothing, or transfiguring a useless object into what I want?

Is one easier than the other? Is either permanent?

[Assistant]
It depends on what youre more skilled in. Generally speaking no branch of magic is easier for every wizard than another branch. Some wizards are more skilled at conjuration, some are more skilled at transfiguration.

That said, there are certain objects that cant be conjured from nothing and other objects which cant be transfigured or have something transfigured into them, so it also depends on the type of object youre wanting.


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

[User]
CMV: Increasing gun control is unequivocally the right thing to do.

I always try to challenge my own views, but I cannot for the life of me understand why we shouldn't try to limit guns in America.
Safety seems so important to conservatives, who constantly talk about preventing terrorism on U.S. soil, many even going so far as wanting to ban muslims from entering the country. Despite the effort spent on terrorism, and its financial and civil liberty costs, over a decade there has been 24 deaths from jihadist attacks on U.S. soil compared to over 300,000 during the same time frame (I know this is cherry picking years and terror is a larger threat now, but these are just the years for which I could find accurate numbers, and the trend is the same over any period of time). 300,000 deaths in ten years is absolutely horrific to me. 300,000 people have had their lives cut short and have been taken from their friends and family; add up all of that suffering and you should be mortified. And that is just over ten years.

To me, that is a tragedy that cannot be dismissed for the sake of preserving a right that has been exalted to a "sacred" status for no discernible reason. More than 30,000 people are being killed to preserve something that is merely a symbol of personal freedom. In addition, pro gun americans seem not to understand that their rights are not being threatened. Hardly anyone relevant to the national discussion is advocating the government knocking on your door and confiscating all of your guns. Most simply want people measures like banning those on the terrorist watch list from owning guns, expanding our background checks, or closing loopholes for private sellers.

The arguments opposing gun control seem specious, or don't hold any water at all.

Argument 1: people have the right to defend themselves. Reality: the risk of losing your life immediately goes up as soon as you own a gun. We are protecting people's right to feel protected, but actually endanger themselves, which doesn't seem worth it.

Argument 2: "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens." Reality: Quoting Hitler is a classic argument, but if you think that we are going to fall victim to an authoritarian government who plans to exterminate its citizens, you probably are a paranoid conspiracy theorist who doesn't understand how this country works. Hint: it's not the same as 1930's Germany. The real danger is already happening, and its coming in the form of 30,000+ deaths a year.

Argument 3: "Gun control is ineffective."-people who live in the only developed nation with astronomical numbers of gun deaths. Reality: It is fair to oppose somewhat misguided measures such as trying to prevent mass shootings (which don't actually kill that many people) by banning large capacity magazines. However, gun advocates don't just oppose these measures but ALL measures, and refuse to offer any alternative legislation that would save lives and preserve their rights.

Argument 4: Slippery slope, we can't start relinquishing our gun rights or we will lose more. Reality: This is a classic fallacy used against any measure that tries to help people, such as gay marriage. Gay marriage has been legal for a while but its still illegal for a man to marry a donkey. I just don't see how it makes sense to oppose reasonable legislation because it will lead to unreasonable legislation.

Argument 5: None of these arguments matter, regardless of what you think, the 2nd amendment guarantees my right to own guns anyway. Reality: I also am a fan of the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." People have the right not to get murdered in the street, and that seems more sacred than your right to form a well regulated militia to defend yourself when Obama imposes sharia and marshal law before leaving office. Which by the way, you still have the right to do because no one wants to take your guns away.

In summary, I think that gun advocates are letting many people die to preserve their oddly sacred right to own a gun, which really isn't even being threatened. I think I might come across as snarky or arrogant in the argument i just wrote, but I know there are a lot of people a hell of a lot smarter than me who are pro gun, and I don't for a second think with certainty that I know better than they do. I simply want to open my eyes to the other side of an issue that I see as indefensible.

edit: many people think I am saying liberals are entirely correct on guns; I do not think that. Some liberals overemphasize mass shootings, demonize gun owners, have zero respect for 2nd amendment, or focus on passing legislation without considering its effectiveness. Liberals are not always right when it comes to guns.

[Assistant]
> terror watch list

So let me get this straight: you think the government should be able to take away a *constitutional right*, just by placing them on a list without any due process and with no avenue for appeal? Do you seriously not see the problem here?


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

[User]
ELI5: As an Englishman, who knows very little about US politics; is there any chance Romney might actually win?

From an outside perspective, this man is nothing but a walking figure of ridicule, outdated beliefs and backwards ideologies. It seems ludicrous to me that he could be a genuine candidate to run America. Is this a real risk?

[Assistant]
Always remember what you read on the internet always has a liberal tint to it. The thoughts of the every day joe sixpack american is much more difficult to gauge.

Be very afraid of the legions of old people that will come out to vote republican because its what they have always done. This time around Obama wont have the young adult support he had last time. This election is not as glamorous as the last one.

Romney has a real chance of winning, however small it may be.


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

[User] ELI5: Wouldn't all parasites be killed by our stomach acid? How do tapeworms and other parasites survive though the digestion process?

[Assistant]
The egg coating is thick enough to survive the stomach acid.  But that breaks it down enough that they are able to hatch in the small intestine.

Been watching the Monsters inside me on Netflix, be surprised what you can learn about these little critters.


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

[User]
CMV: a republic is too flawed if a system of government for a nation as large and heterogenous as the United States.

Republics work very well in small, homogenous societies. Where basic unifying principles among the people are shared. Whether those principles are solely ideological, or are manifested in other ways (shared ethnicity, culture, religion, etc.)

A republic may have been a desirable form of government in 1793, when we were 13, relatively small, and relatively homogenous colonies.

But in 2020 the United States spans the entirety of North America. Our culture is vastly different depending on where you are, and we have no unifying principle. Something all Americans can look at each other and say we share this

In short, a republic is not an appropriate form of government for a geographically large, and ethnically and culturally heterogenous society like the United States.

[Assistant]
> Republics work very well in small, homogenous societies.

Which is why we are also a federation of states and below that multiple municipal governments. The US has a very bottom up structure of government.

>Our culture is vastly different depending on where you are, and we have no unifying principle.

Yes we do. It's called the US Constitution. The entire nation and its structure are all heavily based on the framework of the constitution and it the principles that inspired it.


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

[User]
ELI5: How can the fire that's going on in Canada cause it's own weather system that produces lightning.

This has also happened in the volcanic ash from eruption.

[Assistant]
Lightning is simply static electricity in a cloud that is discharged into the ground.
In a thunderstorm, rain and ice droplets hit each other and transfer electrons, eventually forming a large enough charge difference for lightning to occur.
The fire, like a volcano, will be putting huge amounts of ash into the air. The ash behaves as the raid droplets would normally, exchanging charge until lightning is formed.


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

[User] ELI5: What exactly are taxi cab medallions and why are they so expensive?

[Assistant]
Taxi Cab Medallions are just the name given to the license to operate purchased from the city.  They were, likely, actual physical medallions to be displayed at one point.

The reason why they're so expensive is because they can be.  The city limits the number of cabs that can be in operation for a variety of reasons (some is pure greed, some is traffic management, some is random bureaucratic nonsense).  As such, there's a very limited number of medallions available, and you literally can't be a cab without one.  The city can really charge whatever the want for them, but if the price is too high, then nobody would buy.  So they're generally priced to be high enough that the city gets a lot of money, but low enough that cabs can actually be profitable, and thus the medallions will be bought.


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

[User] ELI5: How did people freeze items/ have ice back before freezers?

[Assistant]
Simplest way was to go to areas that were cold, find a frozen lake, and cut out some ice. For example, if we lived near a tall mountain we could send people up above the snow cap, find and cut up some ice, and drag it back down.

Another method was to get as much ice as you could while it was frozen and storing it in a cellar or insulated barn. As long as you keep the ice in a cold place, such as deep basement, it will stay frozen for a long time.


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

[User] [The Boys] If Homelander and Starlight were to shoot their respective beams at eachother, could Starlight charge her beams with the light from Homelander's beams given that her powers come from absorbing light?

[Assistant]
Starlight's powers are from absorbing electricity, not light itself. This is often show off with lights because they're common to various locations, but it's in particular electricity as shown when she drains a car battery. So in those scenes she isn't absorbing the light itself but the voltage produced which lights them up.

So no it wouldn't work.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Why did so many people choose to settle on a desert planet?

I assume most if not all of them are not native to a desert planet. Why would you choose to go there to begin with?

[Assistant] All the desert planets we see are pretty sparsely populated. There's a handful of people clustered around the space port and not much else. I'd be willing to bet the population basically exists to support the space port.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do people start talking "baby talk" to babies and cute animals?

I just never saw the point of that. Especially animals. Why on earth would the fact that you're talking to a dog (just as an example) make you sound like Mickey Mouse on helium?

[Assistant]
'Baby talk' [obviously] imitates the talk of babies. This in turn makes the baby feel more comfortable in 'talking' with the person. Social interaction can play a huge part in language acquisition, so baby talk can be seen as a way to improve a babies linguistic ability.

Also because people love hearing babies babble.


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

[User] ELI5: How would you explain what borderline personality disorder is to someone who doesnt have it?

[Assistant]
Best way Ive heard it described is:

People have skin to protect us, so a person with no skin would feel extreme pain at even being touched.

People with BPD have little to no emotional skin, so they can feel extreme emotional pain in response to small triggers.

For example: Boyfriend hasnt texted in several days.  Person without BPD might be miffed.  Person with BPD has a brain that informs them hes abandoned you, now you are completely alone in the world, maybe with a side of he abandoned you just like everyone always does because you are such a piece of shit and you deserve it.

The person might try to hurt or kill themselves because they feel shattered, are desperate to escape from excruciating emotional pain, and/or feel self-loathing.

The person might also take frantic actions to bring bf back and thus relieve emotional pain.  For example, self-harming so bf will come to the hospital.

Its worth noting that there is a LOT of overlap between symptoms of BPD and Complex PTSD.


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

[User]
Why are people calling for a market crash when the fed raises rates this year?

Realistically, arent they going to do this very slowly not to spook markets?

Further, will a gradual increase of 0.20 per quarter or whatever that big of a deal?

Hasnt this happened before, and there wasnt really a crash but a temporary correction?

Thanks.

[Assistant]
Yes, the fed will be careful about raising rates specifically because raising them too quickly would be unwise. The fed is very much aware of that, and generally tries to communicate clearly and ahead of time what they are going to do so markets are prepared.

There are always people predicting all kinds of things, the vast majority of them are not worth paying attention to.


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

[User] Do droughts have a specific cause that prevents rainfall for an extended period of time or are they a statistical anomaly of rainfall not occurring for an extended period of time?

[Assistant] A little bit of both, but most of it probably has to do with the geography of the area. Places far from bodies of water or behind mountains are less likely to get rain in the first place, and the randomness of cloud movement and wind patterns can sometimes prolong the periods between rains. Put those two together and you get major droughts that can last several months, or even years in some places.


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

[User]
Why did predictability = no free will seem obvious for everyone ?

Every time I read people talking about determinism the implications that theres no free will seems to be the logical implications and comptabilism have to be proven, but why does it seems so logical for everyone ?

To illustrate my thoughts let take a kid, he go to a restaurant who only has salads or steak. Steak is one of his favorite dish and he hate salad. From that we can easily predit that he will chose the steak but does it mean that he had no free will in chosing ? Lets continue, the restaurant now has salad, steak and chicken, the last night the kid ate steak and he doesnt like to eat twice the same dish, from that we can again predict that hell take chicken.

Of course we can argue that the lack of free will come from the fact that he doesnt have much choice but life (obviously on a more complex degree) is also like that I cant decide to take a ride on a helicopter if I dont have one. Like the kid our decisions are also based on previous experiences and our preferences, which mean that given our options and taking into account our experience/preference its possible to predict what we will do but that doesnt necessarily mean that free will dont exist.

[Assistant]
>but why does it seems so logical for everyone ?

For many, a necessary condition to possess free will is the ability to do otherwise or the ability to do something other than what you ended up doing. On this view, a deterministic world is incompatible with free will. This is due to the fact that, in a deterministic world, all future states of the world are the result of past states of the world, which only allows for one possible course of action: the one that ends up happening.

Although many seem to be unable to shake the assumption that incompatabilism is right, this even includes science popularizers such as Sam Harris, professional philosophers generally want to challenge this assumption.

As one person already noted, almost 60 percent of philosophers agree with the compatabilist position. According to one philosopher and neuroethicist, Daniel Levy, the widespread acceptance of incomptabilism is due to conflation between causation and coercion. Essentially, despite the fact that determinism implies that our desires are determined, we still freely choose to act on these desires as long as we are not coerced to act against them. A different conception of free will is advanced on this view, which only requires we are not coerced into acting against our desires -- making it possible for one to possess free will while accepting determinism.


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

[User]
CMV: I believe that a cultural class should be mandatory to all high school students so as to better prepare them when aknowledging people from different cultures.

Society as we know it is becoming more and more culturally diverse these days yet the ignorance and prejudice that people have towards particular ethnics, race, etc. are more prevalent than ever.

Kids need to understand some of the social backgrounds of people coming from different countries. Not too much, just basic enough to appreciate why some people are different and that not everyone likes to have bacon and eggs for breakfast.

Racism essentially stems from prejudice and ignorance.

Please change my view.

[Assistant] I think exposure to diverse populations is the best remedy for that kind of ignorance. Teaching is valuable, but it remains theoretical until kids actually encounter people in different cultures. Better idea: exchange program with other countries, other regions in the US, cities/rural areas.


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

[User] ELI5: Why are fiscal years different than calendar years?

[Assistant]
Because they can be, though they aren't always.

Let's consider a department store like Macy's or Belk.  These stores do an enormous amount of business in November and December... right around the time a calendar year system would have them trying to close out their books.  Fiscal Year closing is a huge deal and having it happen during your busy times is a recipe for disaster.

At the same time, business dries up considerably for them by the end of January.  So in both cases they run a fiscal year that runs Feb 1 to January 31st.  Because that way they are closing out their books during a slow time AND they are capturing their biggest months for each fiscal year.


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

[User] ELI5 How exactly are Rorscach tests assessed?

[Assistant]
The clinician has a very expansive list of historical answers from people and how those answers correlate with various mental illnesses and maladies.  They administer the test, document what the patient says for each image (which are standardized) and compare those answers to the historicals.  From there, they make an assessment of how well the patient aligns with patterns of answers and use that to create a diagnosis.

For this reason, anyone trained in Rorschach can't be administered one - you know how they are graded.

That all said, they are rarely used anymore due to the huge variability in answers and better tests (like the MMPI) existing.


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

[User]
Why Isn't "Free Will" a Pseudo Problem?

On Tuesday, let's say, I ask myself, "I wonder if I have free will?"  I sit down with a cup of coffee and start reading philosophy journal articles and scientific papers in hopes of finding an answer.

But whether I'm *actually* free or not is *independent* of the conclusion I reach.

Suppose the universe is completely determined, each state of the universe following as a necessary consequence of each preceding state.  Then each brain state I have follows as a necessary consequence of each preceding state.  And since my thoughts are nothing but brain states, then it was already determined, long ago, that I will reach one conclusion or another when I sat down on Tuesday to contemplate my free will.  I might conclude "I am free to do whatever I want tomorrow."  But if I think that means I'm going to do anything different than what I was always necessarily going to do tomorrow, that belief is false, in a completely deterministic universe, though I couldn't have avoided that belief.

Maybe I conclude that "I" do orchestrate some *unique* chain of causality that is at least in *some* sense independent of the preceding states of the universe.  Great.  I go about my business.  (And, again, even if I'm wrong (about being free), I couldn't have concluded otherwise.)

Suppose I am *not* *in* *fact* determined, but I *conclude* that I am?  What does the conclusion that I am determined mean for me, practically?  Nothing.  It doesn't lead to any practical change in my behavior.  It means that the sensations, urges and desires that guide my decisions necessarily had to happen.  But what does that mean for what do I do next?  Nothing at all.  My (necessary) urges will determine that.  The conclusion will not cause me to *stop* wanting to do whatever I want to do.  It will always have been the case, I am assuming, that I will want to do what I want to do next.

I know compatibilists re-define "freedom" along the following lines: "People are 'free' if they had a sensation of wanting to do something before they did it, even though it was impossible for them *not* to do what they did," but that also yields no practical consequence.

Again, we are either free or not independently of our conclusion on the question, so any deliberation on the matter is ultimately pointless for practical purposes.

[Assistant] While being neutral on the general account here, many Philosophical problems are 'ultimately pointless for practical purposes' (Depending on how you take the phrase) but Philosophers don't think this is particularly significant.


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

[User] ELI5:How did Google blur every license plate on Google maps?

[Assistant] They do it automatically. Google owns capcha/recapcha. All those times you deciphered numbers and words you were lending human insight to an AI program that identifies numbers/letters in photos. The program scans the photo for those patterns and blurs them out.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is it that a hairdryer can get hot in a matter of seconds, but a cars air conditioner/heat can take several minutes to heat up?

[Assistant]
Hair dryer is pretty much just an electric element that gets hot as soon as its energized (turned on).

Air conditioner is a series of mechanical components that work together to take heat from one space and absorb it into a refrigerant (liquid/gas inside the unit) by manipulating the pressure of the refrigerant by a process of compressing and expanding to expel that heat to another physical location. Therefore its a bit more of a process then just turned on a switch.


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

[User]
CMV: The US, UK, and Canada should all switch to proportional representation.

The Anglophone mother and her 2 north american children (the rebellious one and the loyal one) are the only 3 major countries in the world that still use FPTP.

The Provinces, States, and municipal governments should elect parties not people. Where parties are easy to form, only requiring enough members where you could fill the whole number of seats with your party members, and then get on the ballot.

We could have debates with several parties like parties polling over 5% and we would be able to vote how we want to vote without fear of spoiling it and getting the party we hate the most elected.

Its also much more simple, you get the number of seats in proportion to the percentage of the vote.

No more Gerrymandering (US) no more minority governments UK/Canada and no more strategic voting.

[Assistant]
> The Anglophone mother and her 2 north american children (the rebellious one and the loyal one) are the only 3 major countries in the world that still use FPTP.

Except for...

Antigua and Barbuda
**Azerbaijan**
The Bahamas
**Bangladesh**
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Bhutan
Botswana
Dominica Dominica
Dominican Republic
Eritrea
Eswatini
**Ethiopia**
The Gambia
**Ghana**
Grenada
**India**
Jamaica
**Kenya**
Liberia
**Malaysia**
Malawi
Maldives
Federated States of Micronesia
**Myanmar**
**Nigeria**
Palau
**Poland**
Qatar
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
Sierra Leone
Solomon Islands
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
**Uganda**
Yemen
Zambia

It's true that some of these countries are pretty small, but you've got to admit at least India counts as a "major country", and between them, these countries have a pretty high combined population.


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

[User]
[MCU] How to understand that Dr Strange brought Time to dormammu s dimension ?

I know it s fiction and with our understanding of science this wouldnt be possible. But i cant wrap my head around a dimension without time . Does that mean dormammu couldnt move before ? How do you view it ?

[Assistant] Motion existed in the Dark Dimension, but aging, growth, and decay were non-concepts.  And while Dormammu knew how to kill or destroy something, he has no idea how to cope with that result being repeatedly undone, let alone how to operate an Infinity Stone.


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

[User]
Do movement of electrons in an atom consume energy?

So, although an electron's location can only be expressed in probability, can we still say that it still moves from one place to another? I understand that not by following an orbit or something, but still it "moves" or "changes place" right?

If so, would it be right to say that an electron (this moving particle) does not consume energy to move?

Please clear my confusions :)

Thank you in advance!

[Assistant]
If you think back to your Newtonian mechanics, you'll remember that movement *itself* doesn't require an expenditure of energy - it's just inertia. It's *change* in movement - an acceleration - that requires some energy differential.

Whether electrons can actually be considered in 'movement' relative to an atomic nucleus is, to be honest, a question of how you define 'movement' at that scale, which doesn't translate directly to classical concepts. But, in its ground state, at least, they are in the lowest energy state it can be in, and that translates, in quantum mechanics, to a sort of 'smear' across a simple harmonic oscillation.

If an electron *were* to experience some acceleration, you'd be able to measure it - accelerating charges induce changes in the  electromagnetic field.


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

[User] how does speedtest.net work?

[Assistant] It pings a server in your general geographical location to find latency. It then downloads some number of small packets to estimate download speed. Finally it generates some random data and sends it to a server to estimate upload speeds. It does multiple takes and throws out some of the fastest and slowest to get a more realistic number.


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

[User]
[Futurama] What coin flip gave the Earth its far out sky?

In The Farnsworth Parabox, the alternate universe (Universe 1) only differs from Universe A in that coin flips have different results. Bender is gold, Leela and Fry went on a date, and so on. Yet the sky looks tie dye. What coin flip resulted in that? Also Zoidberg is blue, for that matter.

Dr. Strangelove-style atmospheric warfare? Against the machines perhaps?

[Assistant]
During the days of the Manhattan project, they didn't know for certain wether or not testing a nuclear device would ignite the atmosphere of the earth and light the sky on fire. However, they did it anyway.

Thats what the coinflip about. Not about whether or not to detonate the bomb, lord no - that was always gonna happen. Its about if they sprayed a chemical flame retardant into the atmsophere first.


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

[User]
[General Cyberpunk]If most of the jobs that people have now are automated, what does the regular joe do for a living?

This has bothered me in a lot of films where androids are commonplace. If machines can build everything better and more efficiently than anyone else, what jobs are left for humans to perform? How do regular people who aren't cops, billionaires, or criminals keep a roof over their heads?

[Assistant]
Depends on your universe.  On the utopian side of things, you don't have to work to keep a roof over your head or food on the table.  Because everything is automated, things like food and shelter are freely available with no cost, as are most consumer items.
On the dystopic side, you just live in grinding poverty trying to eek out whatever you can by either being a slave to whatever rat-race the elites have you running.  It'll be unnecessary work that androids could do better, but they have to keep you occupied so you're tied to the system.
A third option is that it's just the "billionaires" left, there are no regular people.


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

[User] ELI5: How can some words not translate to another language? If a word means something in one language, shouldn't it be easy to determine what that is in another language?

[Assistant]
Not all languages have words for all concepts.

A famous example is the German word *schadenfreude*, for which there is no simple English translation. The English concept is "taking pleasure in the misfortune of others" but obviously that's an entire sentence in its own right, for something that can be expressed as a single word in German.

And sometimes things can be even less translatable. English-speakers tend to think of "blue" and "green" as separate concepts, but there are many languages which have the same word for both.


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

[User]
[Mass Effect] Element Zero has an atomic number of zero...

So does that mean it has no Protons and is therefore a mass of electrons and Neutrons? But without Protons, no electrons would be attracted to the nucleus of the atom, so Element Zero would just be a mass of neutrons? In which case, why isn't it called neutronium?

[Assistant]
I'll be completely honest with you: we don't really know.  You see, it rather strongly defies characterization by any conventional means.  We can only identify it by what it does.  Here are a few things that eezo is NOT:

1) It is not composed of Neutrons.  Neutrons have a specified particle mass and momentum that can be measured.  The mass of any "particle" of eezo varies within even minute E/M fields.  A Neutron sized "particle" of eezo would interact with an atom in very different ways than neutrons have been observed to.

2) Eezo cannot strictly be described as a traditional particle-wave.  Its energy is not characterized by mass, speed, or field intensity.

Now, an eezo device is not strictly a "black box" as some like to call it.  We know how to isolate and concentrate eezo using a harmonic spin aligned "gravity trap."  The thing is, the gravity trap is aligned by tuning it with an eezo charged core.  This creates something of a chicken, and egg problem: if the only way to capture eezo is with eezo, where did the first eezo come from?

If you want to tell the difference between a theoretical physicist and an engineer, as them what eezo is.  Theoretical physicists start tearing their hair out, and scribbling equations on any available surface, quoting the speculations of other people who went mad from jacking themselves into prothean archives.  Engineers just extract a bit of it, zap with with a variable electric field, and make things zip around the room.


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

[User]
[General] name a sci fi robot that isn't used for war or combat

Hello there. I am working on a project about science fiction robots and was looking for examples that are more service robots or companions to people from science fiction in western countries (U.S. Germany UK etc). For example R2D2, Bender, Data, and Rosie the Robot over say the terminator or Robocop.
Thanks!

[Assistant]
R. Daneel Ovilaw, Giskard, and just about any of Isaac Asimov's robots. His short stories have loads of robots and none of them have anything to do with combat (thanks to the Three Laws). If you're looking for movie versions, watch "Bicentennial Man" starring Robin Williams. It's not 100% faithful to the original story, but it's not bad.

There's Marvin the Paranoid Android from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

You might also look at Huey, Dewey & Louie from the 70's movie "Silent Running."


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

[User]
ELI5: Why can't light "overfill" closed containers like gas and liquids do?

I feel like the easy answer to this is "Because light has no mass." But where does the spent energy go?

If you create an enclosed container and keep adding water to it, eventually the container will overfill and the container will burst. The same can be said of gas.

What makes light so different?

If you create a similar space and put a lightbulb in it, that lightbulb is providing a constant "flow" of light in the same sense that a stream of water provides a flowing source of water, but the stream of water pools up at the bottom of the container. What is the equivalent of that pool, for light?

By comparison, if you provide the constant source of gas, the gas expands throughout the container and is compressed because there's nowhere else for it to go. Why can light escape this when gas cannot?

EDIT: Wording error.

[Assistant]
This is because you can't have two atoms in the same spot. Atoms occupy physical space, they have volume. Photons, though, don't. They don't have mass nor volume and don't occupy space. Photons are local excitations of a field, but you can think of them as a wave in a pool. Can a pool have too many waves? When two waves are at the same spot, they interact and interfere, but both are still there.

So if you had a box of perfect mirrors and a source of light inside it, you would have it bouncing around eternally, with more and more and more photons inside but never having too much.

However, in our world, there are no perfect mirrors. Whenever light reflects out of something, a portion of it is reflecting but another portion os absorbed and turned into heat. So if you had a real box of mirrors with a source of light inside, you would notice it becoming ever so slightly hotter, as part of that light is absorbed and heats up the box.


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

[User]
Why is ADSL asymmetric?

I thought I was smart today when my nephew asked what ADSL stood for.  That lasted for about 1/2 a second until he asked why it was asymmetrical...

Wiki says
>Currently, most ADSL communication is full-duplex. Full-duplex ADSL communication is usually achieved on a wire pair by either frequency-division duplex (FDD), echo-cancelling duplex (ECD), or time-division duplex (TDD). FDD uses two separate frequency bands, referred to as the upstream and downstream bands. The upstream band is used for communication from the end user to the telephone central office. The downstream band is used for communicating from the central office to the end user.

From That I gather that the downstream simply has more bandwidth compared to up, is that correct?  Can anyone ELI5 how ADSL works?

[Assistant]
Basically its by design.

You can get SDSL, which has symmetrical bandwidths, and theoretically you could get more upload than download.

However the reason is that the majority of end-users spend much more time downloading than uploading. So we deliberately divided the fixed amont of bandwidth unevenly so there's more capcity for downloading.


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

[User]
Do atoms and subatomic particles have a color that we can observe?

My common knowledge on this topic suggest that atoms should have a color and that is why we see different elements (gold, silver, etc.) in different colors. But i'm still not sure if that is correct. And that made me also think about protons, neutrons and elecontrons. They do reflect light, so they should "produce" a color that we can observe. Is it the color of their atom? And what happens if there is a covalent bond or another type of electron exchange between atoms?
I'm sorry if my question isn't clear. This is my first post in this subreddit.

[Assistant]
The phenomenon of colour comes from the way a material reflects (or emits) light. This is almost entirely a result of its electronic properties, which depend on both the atoms present and how they interact with one another.

We see different elements to be different colours because of their particular electronic structures. These are generally actually different to the structures of individual atoms. The presence of covalent bonding, as you suggest, may be one thing that changes the result.

Subatomic particles don't really have colours individually, because colour is a bulk property resulting from their interactions with light in the context of whatever they're surrounded by.


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

[User]
How do potholes form?

Potholes are never gradually descending, which seem counter-intuitive. How do they form then?

[Assistant]
Modern roadways are paved with either two materials: cement concrete or asphalt concrete. Both construction materials contain two portions: a binder and an aggregate. The inclusion of an aggregate makes the material a "concrete" the only difference between the two is the binder (concrete or asphalt). Once these materials are poured and they "set" they are solid materials, but they can still deform by slight amounts. Cars continuously driving over these surfaces result in continuous compression (car tires driving over it) followed by relaxation (no car). Constantly. Load/no load. Load/no load. Day in, day out, year after year after year.

Roads rarely, if ever, fail from sudden collapse unless the subgrade beneath the road suddenly falls away. What actually happens is just the accumulation of minor, tiny imperfections introduced into the surface from traffic driving over it.

So, potholes are really the extreme versions of these minor imperfections. A slight deformation is introduced by a car driving over it and a tractor trailer drives over it and exacerbates the problem even more creating some sort of fatigue cracking in the surface or the asphalt binder may relax a bit and start to form a rut.

Surface cracking, rutting, or other deformations will just get continuously worse over the years. Rain will get in between the cracks, freeze, and make them worse, or maybe just the road hasn't been taken care of for a few decades and the minor cracks meet up together to form a larger continuous crack. Then it's just time and cars that widen the crack further and further until some other type of failure is introduced and viola: pothole.

**TL;DR time and energy and the accumulation of a bunch of minor effects all combine to slowly but surely destroy everything you hold near and dear**


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

[User]
ELI5:Can your sense of hearing be hurt by high-frequency sounds you can't hear?

It's normally believed that humans can hear in the range of 20-20,000 Hertz. So, can they be hurt if extremely high frequencies of sound, which they can't hear, fall on their ears?

[Assistant] Absolutely. Sound is simply longitudinal air waves cause by the vibration of an object at a particular frequency. When we say that humans can only hear a certain range of sounds, it means that the little hairs that are connected to nerves that connect to the brain can only vibrate (and therefore interpret) those sounds. But what matters for hearing loss is the 'magnitude' of those sounds, ie their decibel value, how loud they are. A good example of this is found in case studies of people who live near wind turbines. These generate a lot of low frequency noise which is mostly inaudible, but there have been reports of hearing loss from them.


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

[User]
Is our perception of what a T-Rex's roar would sound like based on anything? What about velociraptor communication?

Or is it merely Hollywood badassery making up sounds and creating our childhood? Am I risking crushing my memories with facts?

[Assistant]
I don't know, but in Hollywood *everything* roars.

In nature animals tend not to make loud noises at their prey, for what should be obvious reasons.  Roars are used for things like fighting over females with members of your own species.


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

[User] Im currently building my first computer. I have about $100-$120 should I go SATA 3 SSD or an M.2? If it helps Im using a msi B450 Tomahawk Max motherboard. Im new to this, sorry if this is a silly question.

[Assistant]
M.2 is just a form factor.  M.2 disks come in two varieties - SATA and NVMe.

A SATA M.2 disk will perform no different than a 2.5" SATA disk (all else being equal).  It's just smaller and doesn't require a drive bay, so it's convenient for very small builds and eliminating cable clutter.

An NVMe disk is substantially different.  It communicated directly over the PCIe bus, and is capable of much faster data transfer.  The only tradeoff is price, so if you can afford a NVMe disk, go for it.

If you can't afford a NVMe disk, then from a performance standpoint, the form factor doesn't matter.  Get whichever you like the looks of.


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

[User] ELI5: How does chalk on a pool cue improve your game?

[Assistant] This prevents the cue from sliding off the ball prematurely, ruining the shot. Over time, the tip of a pool stick becomes worn and smooth from use. Chalk provides the friction necessary to make a shot.


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

[User]
[Half-Life] Why are Vortigaunts so Badass?

So I was there at Black Mesa, where I first saw Vortigaunts. They were scary, but they weren't too *terribly* tough to put down. A few rounds from the 9mm could do it. But now that I'm working with the resistance, I'm seeing Vortigaunts all of the time. And they are immeasurably badass! I saw one take on like, a dozen antlions at the same time! The same antlions that I saw could basically tear a man in half.

Not that I'm complaining. If they were as tough as they were back in Black Mesa, I probably wouldn't have survived. And if they weren't as tough as they are now, I would also probably be dead! So what gives?

[Assistant] Being enslaved undoubtedly didn't do them any good. Those green restraint things the Nihilanth (and later Combine) gave them likely cut or weaken their connection to the Vortessence, which gives them most of their ability. Having no connection to the dimension or spiritual plane where their souls exist reduces them to an almost drone-like state. Those green shackles are the Vortigaunt equivalent of a lobotomy.


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

[User]
[Dracula] Why did Dracula slaughter the crew of the Demeter?

He did need the ship to make it to England, and picking them off one by one put that goal at risk. It was only the captain's bravery and tenacity, to lash himself to the wheel cross in hand, that allowed the ship to make the final stretch.

I know he needs blood to survive, but in Transylvania he lives in a desolate castle in the middle of nowhere. I always assumed he could go long stretches without feeding.

[Assistant]
Dracula can't go a huge amount of time without blood; he often goes out into the surrounding villages (sometimes in the guise of a carriage driver) to find victims for himself and his three brides.  After a few weeks without blood, his appearance becomes much older and his power, presumably, is weakened.

It looks like the *Demeter* shipped out on July 6th of 1893 and crashed on August 8th - a journey of over a month.  From the captain's journal, there were only 8 on board - the captain, two mates, and five sailors. The first death appears to have been on July 16th, when the first mate vanished.  At this point, Dracula had gone at least 10 days without blood - likely more, since he was hidden in his box and probably loaded onto the ship a day or more before they embarked.  So we can safely assume that two weeks or so is a big hunger point - longer than that, he may get too hungry or too weak.

After that point, it was probably a bit of a game to him, and also a bit of a calculation.  He'd be weak during the day, and if the sailors were emboldened enough, they could pry open each box of dirt until they found him, and they could cut his head off and throw his body overboard.  So he needed to thin the herd, but leave enough of a crew to keep the ship going until they got close to England.  By the time it was only down to the captain, Dracula could likely have just held him under thrall and forced him to take them into port.  The captain tying himself to the wheel with a crucifix made this impossible, but at least it ensured that they'd make it to land one way or another.


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

[User]
How does 3D printing work?

I've seen a lot of posts of Reddit about people printing different objects with a 3D printer, like a guitar or a rifle. I'm very curious to find out how that works, and some quick internet seaches haven't been very helpful.

[Assistant] If you take a candle, and melt some wax, you can pour in on the table to make a lump, or a circle, or any shape you want. That is how 3D printing works. Some kind of substrate is deposited in one 2D layer, and then when the layer is done, the printer moves on to the next 2D layer one space above it, and "prints" the next layer.


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

[User] ELI5: why do canned foods have such a long shelf life?

[Assistant]
The thing that makes most food go bad is small organisms - bacteria, fungus, etc - that manage to eat the food before we do.  When they eat the food, they grow, reproduce, and they produce waste, same as us.  So instead of eating tasty food, if you eat something that's gone bad, you're eating bacteria, fungus and waste.  Not good.

When we can food, we put it into a metal can and seal it off so that no air can get in or out, which means that nothing new can get into it.  But the problem we still have is whatever bad lifeforms were inside of the can when we filled it - if we leave them alone, they'll eat everything in the can and the food will go bad anyways.  But if we kill them, then our food can just sit around in the can for years without any little microbes eating it.

Usually, all we have to do is boil the can.  Toss it into hot water, and the heat will kill any unwanted organisms living in our food.  Since nothing new can get in, the food's basically inert unless the seal on the can is messed up.  Safe to eat for years, even without being reheated after opening.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Was it ever revealed to a larger number of people (the public or at least some rebels) that Palpatine orchestrated the clone wars and the invasion of Naboo?

[Assistant]
We as viewers of Star Wars see, literally, everything. But to the casual guy on Coruscant, all he knows is whats on the HoloNet.

War was declared today on Separatist systems!

War has been increasing in the Outer Rim - Republic Victory imminent!

War Ends! Separatist Leaders executed! Empire Founded!

As a person just going about their business, they probably wouldnt even want to know all the ins and outs of what went on behind the scenes.


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

[User]
[LOTR] If the One Ring was so powerful, why couldn't the bearer of the Ring control the ring wraiths? I mean, Sauron was still a shadow without it. And the One Ring is what corrupted the men into wraiths, so the bearer should have power over them, right??

If a simple (in a good way. honest, not seeking power) Hobbit wouldn't have enough power to wield it, couldn't Elron or Gandolf or Beorn?

*Could* the ring, in the right hands, ever be used for good?

[Assistant]
The bearer is not the *owner* of the ring. Bearing the ring is not the same thing as claiming it and possessing it. Ownership and possession have metaphysical power in Middle Earth, and there's a distinct difference between carrying something powerful and being the user of something powerful.

Thus why Sauron was suddenly so distraught and knew precisely where to look when Frodo finally up and claimed the Ring as *his*, rather than just being the one who happened to be carrying it around.

As to your other question, the Ring, being constructed as it was, would *always* be corrupting. Gandalf knew he would succumb to the Ring's influence if he even touched the damn thing(hence why he refused to even pick it up), and Galadriel had an entire prophetic crisis when Frodo offered it to her. She could see that she would be able to use the power of the Ring to overcome anything and everything, becoming the mistress of the entire world and bending it all to her perfect will... and in doing so, would be a horrifying terror, a sort of evil version of her perfect self.

So, no, the Ring can't be used for good.


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

[User]
[MCU] Why is it that people who get powers from the Infinity Stones seem more powerful than people wielding said stones?

Are the stones just a super catalyst or something along those lines?

[Assistant]
Because its extremely difficult to wield the stones, unless youre already a godlike being. People empowered by them only have a fraction of the power, which makes it easier to control, and are usually empowered with an ability that is inherently focussed and manageable.

Imagine it like this: The person whos been empowered has been given a loaded super-soaker, while the person with the stone has a gigantic bucket of water, filled to the brim and so heavy they can barely lift it.

The person with the super-soaker has a fraction of the water in the bucket, but in a water fight they can splash anyone they want safely, from 20 feet out, while the person with the bucket is probably just going to spill it all over himself and anyone unfortunate enough to be standing nearby.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do TV companies record viewing figures?

Surely it must be impossible to gauge an accurate figure with the amount of online viewing services available today.

[Assistant]
TV Viewership is measured under the Nielson system, which returns "ratings" for specific demographics.  They gather the information by either having select households self-report their live viewing habits or by sending out "Nielson boxes" to certain homes to be connected to TVs to specifically send viewing reports to Nielson.  This system gives a general percentage of which households are watching what channels when.

The system has faced a ton of backlash from the public in recent years over the out dated aspects of the system and how they lack a proper way to account for DVR or streaming methods in the overall rating. It is also under criticism for how it selects it's "subjects." Plus people report having a bias of what they watch because they know they are being reported on to Nielson.  The company has recently been trying to find ways to redo the system to account for the problems.

Most networks are aware that while Nielsen ratings give a general idea of the audience, it is not exact.  That's often the point of the social network aspects of tv shows showing twitter hashtags for every episode and sites like GetGlue where anybody can "check in" to say what shows they are watching.  It gives a better idea of who is watching or plans to watch the series.

TL;DR: TV views are measured by a outdated but somewhat-effective system of select people reporting on what they watch.


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

[User] ELI5: What is Pirate Party and why is it so popular?

[Assistant] I think it started in Sweden and then the name got adopted in other countries. Basically it's a political party that is pro-freedom, free sharing of information, knowledge, more civil rights, pro people actively participating in the governing of a country, etc. Democracy as it is supposed to be by definition.


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

[User] Why don't we "bleed" lymphatic fluid when we get cut?

[Assistant]
This is a three parter.

1. simply because there is nothing pumping it out as is the case with the heart and blood.

2. there is far less of it in your body in comparison to blood.

3. the places that you find lymphatic fluid are rarely cut, places such as the arm pits, groin and neck also have large blood vessels, and any lymphatic fluid would be diluted in large amounts of blood.


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

[User]
[Firefly] What was the War for Unification really about? (xpost/fantheories/firefly)

So being a history buff and a major fan of the series, it just didn't sit well with me that the Browncoats and the Alliance were *just* fighting for unification. If there's one thing history has taught us, it's that most wars are not fought entirely for noble causes. They fight over fertile land, mineral rich country or in the case of the American Civil War- let's be honest here- slavery. Most of these are extension of the phrase "the rich get richer".

One thing that struck me as I rewatched the episode "The Message" was the shell shocked lieutenant in the flashback scenes. I couldn't help but think that he came from one of the more well off families on one of the outer planets- the few 'haves' that existed out there.

Now I scoured the episodes and whatever canonical ancillary media I could and I couldn't come up with a a more in-depth answer to the question of "What was the Unification War really about?" The most likely scenarios I could fathom was possession of the "Mudder" colony planets/moons or perhaps mining rights. So if anyone can tell me or if there's any good headcannon out there, what was the War really about?

[Assistant]
Unification is about all those things you mention. Firefly is set in a single cluster of stars, ie. bigger than a solar system, smaller than a galaxy or even a star system.

When humanity left Earth, they ended up colonising this star cluster. This was a migration by necessity, not a well prepared expedition with home support. As a result, not every colonised planet ended up equally well off. In fact many were isolated from the rest of the system for generations.

The planets around the central solar system were best off in terms of resources, technology, supplies etc. Eventually this is where the alliance started. Consider it a modern sovereign nation with a complicated government that imposes plenty of laws and rules to keep society's motor running.

The further away you get the less developed and well off the colonised planets started. Most of these are fiercely independent and quite a few aren't even unified on a planetary level. These are frontier planets where the focus still lies on survival rather than progress. These people really aren't waiting for some suits to show up and tell them it's time to join the wonders of the modern age and start paying taxes.

If you want to compare the conflict between the alliance and the browncoats to anything historical, it's similar to how America was won from the North American natives. You got a star cluster full of independent peoples minding their own business when a modern government shows up to levy taxes, redistribute land and resources and so on.


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

[User]
Why do stars appear to constantly change colour?

I know this is more of a less complicated kids question, but Im honestly not bothered enough to search for it on Google.

Anyway, when ever I look up at the night sky, any star I stare at seems to be constantly changing colours in a rapid flash.

Does this happen because of the way the light refracts in the atmosphere, or are my eyes just fucked and cant process bright colours properly?

[Assistant]
It's because of the way light refracts in the atmosphere. Different wavelengths (i.e. colours) of light refract at slightly different angles, just like going through a bunch of little prisms. This is called *chromatic aberration*, and it's particularly strong when the star is low in the sky and you're looking through a large amount of air.

With a telescope looking at something bright like Venus you can actually see kind of a rainbow effect going on.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] If I'm an Imperial soldier who really looks up to the Emperor and wants to reach higher and higher ranks, would Vader think highly of me or despise me?

So, think I'm like some Empire fanboy. My mind's been fully twisted to the point where I want to be the Emperor's right hand man or something. Extremely high aspirations. All my friends in the academy know I admire everything about the Empire, and my top commanding officers always speak highly of me. From the looks of it, if everything goes well, I might be next in line to be "the guy" (no, not the Spy Kids 3 kind...). Basically, I'm gaining a lot of steam and fast. I'm like the Anakin Skywalker of Empire....minus the force powers. And maimed body. I'm like a solid 9-10/10 at everything I put my hands on.

What would Vader think of me?

Would he even give a damn? Would he be keeping an eye on me? Would he.....kill me? What if he thinks I'm trying to steal his spot or something, or maybe I remind him of a young, brash man that he once was?

Plus, wasn't Vader eventually trying to overthrow the Emperor anyways (Idk if this was a real thing or just a lie he told Luke to side with him). So would Vader really WANT someone like me to be around? Or would I be too much of a future liability?

Mind you, I worship the Emperor, but Vader I simply respect. I think he's just a stoic man past his prime who lingers around, but since he demands respect (and out of fear of getting choked), I show it. Nothing more.

[Assistant]
Do your job well and execute Palpatines Will, Vader will commend you and hold you up as a model Soldier.

Over-Promise, disrespect Vader or Fail in your duty, and Vader will choke you with a thought and the same officers who cheer on your every success will step forwards to take  your place before your body is cold

Remember Hoth? The greatest victory the Empire had in a decade but one admiral jumped his ship into the system early and alerted the rebels. Because of this admiral's desire for glory, the key Rebel Leaders got away. Vader choked him dead over a holoscreen.


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

[User]
[Other] Blood starts pouring from the walls, horror-movie style. What happens if I do a DNA test?

What happens if I give someone a blood transfusion with it?

[Assistant]
It is usually an animal's blood. However if its human, its most likely no ones, and is cursed.

So a DNA test would turn up with the species, maybe the type, and no DNA matches. It'd be like a randomized DNA sequence, with a pattern not intentionally the same as anyone alive.


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

[User] There is alot of energy in liqour, but does it make you fat?

[Assistant]
Yes, it can. Just like any other foodstuff you consume.

You may have noticed, from reading the nutritional labels on packaged items, that calories come from carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. They provide 4, 4 and 9 calories per gram, respectively. (These are nutrition calories, which are actually 1000 chemistry calories.)

Alcohol, at least as sold in the US, doesn't have to put nutritional information on their packaging, so it's understandable that not as many people know that one gram of (pure) alcohol has 7 calories.

Knowing this, and alcohol concentration in various drinks, you can easily work out how many calories you are getting. Or you can just look them up. For instance, a 5 oz. glass of wine contains in the region of 120 calories, plus/minus depending on the residual sugars. An ounce of 80-proof vodka is about 65 calories.


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

[User]
[Disney] In Beauty and the Beast (1991), how have all the villagers forgotten about the castle within walking distance in just ten years?

At the beginning of Beauty and the Beast the narrator mentions that the Beast and his castle was cursed ten years ago (until the Beast's 21st birthday). How has everyone forgotten about the castle that's within walking distance from the village that is presumably home to their ruler? Even if the enchantress' spell made the villagers forget about the prince, they'd still be able to see the castle. Haven't they been wondering who's been collecting their taxes?

[Assistant]
He wasn't a crown price, he was a spare prince who lived in Provence, nowhere near Paris. Completely irrelevant to the actual running of the state and much easier to forget about.

And the castle isn't visible from any inhabited towns, it's in the middle of a forest, probably a Royal one that people are therefore not allowed to just wander through, aside from the main road through it.


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

[User]
I don't believe that having "In God We Trust" on American currency is a big deal. CMV

I understand the part about the first amendment, I just really don't think that secularists are being oppressed and I don't think it's doing anybody any harm. I'll buy the justification that it's traditional, not religious. But I'm open to anything.

[Assistant] It's a simple as this: America is not a Christian nation. Having a reference to the God of a specific religion on a federally issued document is an affront to the idea of religious freedom and secularism. It implies that the God of the bible has more sway in American government than others, and that is unjust.