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

[User]
[Star Wars] What qualifications do Jedi have to be Generals and lead armies?

Prior to the advent of the Clone Wars, Jedi were traditionally used as peacekeepers, arbitrators, negotiators, and ambassadors. While these are noble causes, and their combat skills and preternatural abilities lend themselves well to protection and defense, why would Jedi Knights and Masters (and even Padawans!) be elevated to military leaders?

Surely their skills lend themselves better to a role similar to special forces teams, battalion/brigade/division-level force multipliers, or embedded advisors to people who have graduated from officer training or military academies?

[Assistant]
Looking at how the Jedi are deployed, and what kind of missions and military action we see them engaging in, I'd say they actually are de facto special forces and are used as division level force multipliers.

It's just that they also carry the rank of General.  This allows them the authority and autonomy from the normal Grand Army chain of command to operate in the way Jedi can be most effective.  Sometimes they'll command troops, and many of them do have a mind for overall strategy, but mostly they're leading smaller teams on special missions, and they need to be able to tell anyone below General rank "No".


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

[User]
[Marvel / DC] Which superheros / villains have the most underrated powers ?

By this I mean which characters have huge potential based on their power and have been underused or under-utilised ?

[Assistant]
Electro.

The man has massive control over electromagnetism. In principle, he could do a huge variety of feats- see the spectrum of things Magneto can do.

But alas, the man's a short-sighted thug with no imagination. He has massive power but never things to do much more then "shock someone"


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

[User]
[Marvel What if] Why did Ultron kill the universe manually?

I'm probably not the first one to ask this but why did Ultron take so much time to kill his universe? Thanos said that he could snap to make ALL life end. Ultron had the infinity stones after killing Thanos, why didn't he just do something like clap to do the same? He manually went to so many planets and killed all of them but why?

[Assistant] On some level, he knew that he'd be without purpose once he was finished killing all life in the universe.  When he was giving his little speech to himself right before he percieved the existence of the Watcher, he seemed quite sad about his task being finished.  It makes sense that he drew things out as long as possible.


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

[User]
[Skyrim] Why are the wolves and general wildlife in Skyrim so aggressive?

Wild animals are supposed to be just as afraid of you than you are of them, but every single wolf pack or bear I get near attacks me recklessly. I understand saber cats or trolls being aggressive since they're predators, but it doesn't make sense why a wolf pack wouldn't just run away.

[Assistant] Most wild animals definitely are not afraid of humans in the real world. It's only those that regularly interact with humans that learn to fear us. Skyrim is a vast and mostly untamed wilderness. Animals there either don't interact often with the various men and mer of tamriel or actively prey upon them. Wolves weigh somewhere between 100 and 200 lbs so taking on a lone wandering person is fair game to them. Every farmer and villager they've encountered before you was a tasty meal so why should you be any different just because you have armor on and run towards them instead of away.


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

[User]
ELI5: Mickey Mouse public domain

ELI5: Whats going to happen with Mickey Mouse and Disneys ownership in 2024 when he become a public domain?

[Assistant]
This is going to be a lot more complex than just copyright law, because Mickey is heavily trademarked and is about as tied up in Disneys brand as is possible. Trademarks dont expire as long as they are in use, and Disney has been using its Mickey trademarking to the max.

So although Steamboat Willy and Mickey Mouse fall into the pubic domain soon the trademark on Mickey doesnt. You *could* make new content featuring mickey but will have an extremely narrow path to navigate between using material in the public domain and trademark infringement, with a large team of very litigious and well funded IP lawyers reviewing every aspect of what youre doing with the character for even the slightest potential Trademark infringement.


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

[User]
ELI5: How does a Galaxy S4 cellphone cost $450 when a decent laptop costs $300?

Sure, it's basically a laptop in your pocket, but to make a Galaxy S4 (or the like) would use significantly less resources than making a laptop would. Plus it's 1/16 the size. Why does a little cellphone cost more than an actual computer laptop?

[Assistant] It's for the same reason a decent laptop costs $300 and a desktop with those same specs costs $200. Miniaturization is *expensive*. You not only have to figure out how to cram all of those same components in a smaller space, but you now also have to deal with heat dissipation. And in the case of a phone, you can't really have a cooling fan so you need to find a way to use less energy while also having both cellular and wifi transmitter/receivers. Additionally, phones have touchscreens, which are a fairly expensive component as well.


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

[User]
[Half-Life 2] Who's great idea was this crossbow thing anyway?

Listen, I understand the whole 'necessity is the mother of invention' gig, and I know that supplies can be pretty tight and guys in the field gotta go with what they got. That being said, who the fuck made this thing? And who the fuck let it go into general production? I mean I get the idea of crossbows, they're easier to make than a rifle and they've got the whole silenced shooting thing going for them. Also you know what a crossbow is supposed to shoot? Bolts, arrows. Not chunks of rebar. Imagine my surprise when I fitted in a quarrel in there started to aim when the smell of smoke filled my nose as the damn thing lit on fire. Heated chunks of rebar? Really? That's what this thing is made to fire?

How much force do we need to put behind that thing in order for an entirely blunt rod of metal to move fast enough to puncture flesh? Not to mention the body armour CP's and Overwatch wear. I mean no wonder that damn thing was so hard to notch. And then there's the whole heating aspect. What the actual fuck guys? I nearly burned my fingers off, and I personally know two guys who did.

I understand demonstrating the kickassery of human ingenuity, but there's a point where you've gone too far. If we can jury rig a good number of crossbows capable of firing an excessively heavy projectile that heats up in seconds, wouldn't it be way easier and safer to just make some regular crossbows instead and not have to worry about setting your clothes on fire, or carrying around a stupidly heavy load of rebar rods, or about your shot bouncing off some Overwatch trooper because it's a fuckin' flat-headed missile?

Sincerely, a concerned rebel.

[Assistant]
1.) The rebar is heated by the battery in the damn crossbow. Heated rebar burns you, as you've figured out, so it hurts more when you get shot with it.

2.) It may be slow compared to bullets, but it's fast enough, and it's heavy enough to kill the damn bastards. So maybe stop complaining and try not to burn your damn fingers when using your damn weapon.

3.) Arrows and bolts are more difficult make, and they can't kill instantly. Heated piece of rebar through the chest, that'll do you in nicely.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Why does it seem like humans are the dominant species in the galaxy?

Nearly every position of power has been taken over by a human or a humanoid mamely the Empire or the Rebel alliance ,  why is it that in the trilogies most of the decisive characters in the series are human?

[Assistant]
Humans seeded the galaxy via generational/sleeper ships before the Infinite Empire conquered everything. While the Rakata were technologically suppressing the entire galaxy and preventing various races from developing hyperdrive, humans were spreading from planet to planet just fine.

Once the Rakata were obliterated and (non-Force powered) hyperdrive hit the scene, humans had already established themselves on hundreds of habitable planets. Humans are in more positions of influence/power because they outnumber everybody else by a tremendous margin. There's just *more* of them.


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

[User]
Eli5. How does a snowflake maintain symmetry in all of six sections but share no symmetry with other snowflakes?

Edit : thanks for the great discussion. A fundamental flaw in my question is that since I was pretty high and watching something narrated by David Attenborough I mistakenly applied his facts to our collective knowledge "facts".

Thanks to those that caught this and made me realize that "no two snowflakes are exactly alike" is completely unscientific. No two anythings are EXACTLY alike. That's why there are two of them.

I say we push to amend that statement to "no two snowflakes, that we have examined, have, to the human eye, the same distinguishing features of shape that we would consider them identical in regards to only that particular trait."

I feel like that is a bit too dry for buzzfeed. But we can always hope.

[Assistant]
by "careful" practice.

A symmetric snowflake costs less energy to maintain than an asymmetric one. Or in other words, starting from a warm drop, when the molecules wiggle and try a more symmetric shape, they release more energy into the surrounding. if the surrounding is colder than the water/flake they don't get that energy back.
So bit by bit as the snowflake loses energy, it gets more and more symnetric.


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

[User] [General Fantasy] Most people say they have a fairy godmother, but I apparently have a fairy godfather. Are they fundamentally the same, or does this have something to do with my neighbour waking up to a unicorn's head in his bed?

[Assistant]
Firstly, your neighbor helped out a goblin and therefore deserves what happened to him.

Secondly, fairy godfathers are fine, but they fart a lot and they make crappy dadjokes all the time. Other than that you are good to go.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do cats always seem to want to lie on whatever I'm working on, or to crawl into tight spaces?

[Assistant]
They want to be where your attention is focused. On top of whatever you're looking at is a good bet. The heat from a laptop is an added benefit.

The theory on boxes is that small spaces help them feel protected.


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

[User]
Is culture becoming homogenized globally? Are worldwide values converging?

What about accents, are they diversifying or converging?

[Assistant] This comment is more to hone the conversation rather than provide an answer: couldn't one see the coastal/metropolitan elite vs. rural socio-economic split -- a split manifested politically as well -- as an example of a more global homogenized culture clashing with their country's "traditional" one? While anecdotal, it's often pointed out that those of Paris/New York/London/etc have more in common worldview-wise than with citizens of their respective provinces.


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

[User] [Dune 2021] so the the most valuable resource is in the galaxy is only found on a single planet?

[Assistant]
Yep!

Why is that?

The resource is the result of one unique ecological system which also includes Shai Hulud, found only on Arrakis.

Why don't people try to replicate the ecology
On other planets?

They tried.

Tried and failed?

Tried and died.


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

[User] [Star Wars] If timed properly, could Darth Vader have shot down the Millennium Falcon or Red Leader using the Emperor's body which was emitting Force Lightning?

[Assistant]
I do not think force lightning would work as well in space if at all. There is nearly zero conductive media in space to generate plasma from.

Also, why would an emperor missile be a good idea in the first place?


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Theoretically, say if I'm the last Jedi in the universe, is it wrong for me to search for immortality to ensure I live long to see teach/raise more Jedi?

Ok so if I'm the last Jedi in the universe. Like, if I die it's all gone, all the teachings and everything. There are no more temples or libraries or even people who can recall what the Jedi are. But....the Sith still remain.

I'm nearing the end of my life, I can feel it, I'm gonna die in a year or so. So now i wonder,is it allowed as per Jedi teachings, to look for a way to extend one's life?

Long ago I once heard of a Darth Plagueis and how he could cheat death using the force. Since I'm the last Jedi, is it permissible for me, at least until I have raised some semblance of another Jedi order, that search ways to prolong my life? My goals are benevolent, I wish to live longer via the force. Yet somewhere in my heart I feel it goes against everything my masters before me stood for.

What should I do?

[Assistant]
Very much so. Immortality is in no way the natural order of things and the Force is gonna be real unhappy with you.

If your time is up, if the Jedi are fading, it is because the Force wills it. No need to fight it.


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

[User] If Superman, or any hero with super powers, stopped working out, would they lose the muscle mass?

[Assistant]
Superman gets all his bodily needs from the yellow sun's radiation. He doesn't need to sleep for rest or eat for nutrition. However, he still does these things because he grew up as an earthling. It took him a while to get past the psychological barriers that he doesn't need food or even air.

I'd imagine that Superman's muscle mass and physique is from the sun's radiation providing him with necessary nutrients. If the sun also maximizes his muscle growth and minimizes putting on fat, then its possible for him to keep his muscle mass without working out.


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

[User]
[Star Trek] From the perspective of the Borg, what makes a drone excellent?

In *Star Trek: First Contact*, Data opines that Picard "will make an excellent drone." I understand he's acting as a double agent here, but the Borg queen doesn't seem to think it's an unusual thing to say.

So, what qualities does Picard have that would make him an excellent drone? If there are excellent drones, are some drones awful? What kind of person would make a terrible drone?

[Assistant]
Terrible drones would be individuals with bodies that aren't able to handle the extensive modifications the borg do to them. Physically frail, or otherwise prone to untimely death while on the surgery table. Or perhaps natural defenses that attack the nanoprobes and implanted machinery, which impairs their ability to perform tasks. There could also be individuals with minds incapable of interacting with the hive mind properly, either from natural evolution or maybe physical damage to the brain.

Picard was physically healthy, and was already known to take assimilation well. Not to mention the Borg could still use his knowledge and expertise to form other strategies against foes or otherwise "advise" the queen as she reads his every thought like a book.


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

[User]
Is it likely that elements 119 and 120 already exist from some astronomical event?

I learned recently that elements 119 and 120 are being attempted by a few teams around the world. Is it possible these elements have already existed in the universe due to some high energy event and if so is there a way we could observe yet to be created (on earth) elements?

[Assistant] Such heavy elemements are extremely unstable. Therefore they decay in fractions of a second after they are created. Even if they are created somewhere outside of the earth, there is no way that they make it to earth and then stay intact long enough for us to identify them.


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

[User]
[Star Trek] I'm a very lazy and work-shy guy that just moved to Earth, will everything I want and need be provided to me for free since I'm a Federation citizen?

Furthermore, I kinda fancy having a huge mansion, the best holodecks, private cooks and my own shuttle to visit the solar system. I might even decide to get a replicator to build some of those old Rolls Royce Phantoms that I once saw in a simulation.

I won't be working or doing anything productive with my life.

Are there any obstacles in having a life like this? Will my fellow citizens hate me for being a lazy guy?

[Assistant]
The Culture would be a better fit for you than the Federation. The Federation is post-scarcity (for the most part), but not post-motivation. There's a strong "do something productive" ethos in the Federation, not because people *have* to, but because that's how humans are wired. Someone with no ambitions would be seen as ... eccentric.

The Culture, on the other hand, will install drug glands and give you a triple rainbow dong if that's what makes you happy. Aside from a very few instances there's no way a human can meaningfully contribute more than a Mind, and their parties would make the most devout hedonist blush.


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

[User]
(LOTR) How does Smaug stay alive?

I'm not too well versed in Middle Earth lore, but what sustains Smaug? A creature of that size would have to intake a substantial amount of food just to live, much less have the energy to fly and breathe fire.

[Assistant]
Dragons are descended from Glaurung, himself most probably a Maia inhabiting the body of a great wurm. It is quite likely that he has some spiritual source of power inherited through Glaurung, or perhaps is himself inhabited by a Maia corrupted to greed and pride. The nature of creatures like the dragons (and even lesser things, like trolls) is never fully explored in the surviving records of the Elder Days.

For another example of spiritual power inherited via a Maia ancestor, see Luthien Tinuviel. Whereas Finrod Felagund, a great King of the Noldor and Calaquendi, was unable to defeat Sauron in a battle of song, Luthien (a Moriquendi, and thus inherently less than her full potential) was able to do so, in part because she was the daughter of Melian the Maia.


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

[User]
Is there a real world analogy for imaginary numbers?

Just like how you can't have -1 oranges, but we can analogise at as you owing 1 orange, are there any real world analogies for imaginary numbers?

[Assistant]
For me the most intuitive is in terms of 2d space.

In the context of the number line, let's assume "1 metre" is the distance between 1 and 0 and let's arbitrarily assign "East" to be the direction in which positive numbers go away from zero. Think of any real number as being that far away from your origin (zero) due east. (So for example, the number 10 is 10 metres east of zero.)

Negative numbers can be thought of as distances due west. So -1 is 1 metre west of zero.

So now, on this line going west to east, each real number corresponds to a point on the line at some distance from a point we call 0.

Addition (the operator) corresponds to walking on this line due east. So 2+3 (=0+2+3) is equivalent to you starting at 0, walking two metres east and then walking another 3 metres east to end up at 5 (the point 5 metres east of zero).
Now, subtraction which is just addition of a negative number, corresponds to walking along this line due west. so 2-3 (=0+2+(-3)) would be equivalent to walking 2 metres east and then 3 metres west to end up at -1 (1 metre west of 0).

Now the imaginary number i corresponds to the point 1 metre North of zero. This number cannot be reached by any combination of walking east or west, so it is not part of the group of real numbers, which all exist on the line through zero going west to east.

Addition of any number by i corresponds to walking north by 1 metre.

Where this begins to get really interesting and where it ties in with everything else is when we look at multiplication.

Now, multiplication by a positive real number n corresponds to stretching space by a scaling factor of that number (i.e. what was 1 metre before becomes n metres now in all directions). So 2\*3 corresponds to where the old 2 (2 metres due east) ends up after stretching space such that what was 1 metre earlier (in any direction) now becomes 3 metres (in the same direction). So the point which was 2 metres due east from zero earlier now ends up 6 metres due east yielding 6.
Multiplying by 1 does nothing \[space is stretched so what was 1 metre earlier is 1 metre now, so nothing changes\].

Multiplying by i corresponds to rotating space around zero (keeping all distances constant) by 90 degrees so that what was 1 metre due East earlier is now 1 metre due North. This concept fits in very nicely with what we know about i.

1\*i corresponds to finding where the point 1 (1 metre from zero due east) ends up after rotating space by 90 degrees. This is the point i (1 metre North of zero) => 1 times i is i.
i\*i corresponds to where the old i (1 metre due north) ends up after rotating space by 90 degrees. (This point will now end up 1 metre west of zero). => i times i is -1 !

Now within this framework, it is easy to see what complex numbers correspond to and what various arithmetic operators do.
Any complex number is expressed as a real part (a) and an imaginary part (ib), which basically means that to get to it, you need to walk "a" metres East \[if a is negative, this corresponds walking some distance West\] and then "b" metres North.
Adding complex numbers involves adding the real parts (figuring out what the net amount along the East-West line you need to walk) and the complex parts (figuring out what the net amount along the North-South line you need to walk) to get to the new point.
Multiplying by a negative real number involves stretching space by a scaling factor of the absolute value of the number and then rotating space by 180 degrees.
Multiplying by an imaginary number ib involves stretching space by scaling factor b and rotating space by 90 degrees.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do animals not get as regularly sick as humans? Or do they?

I'm not sure if this is an incredible stupid question.. I grew up with dogs and cats but I've always wondered why they don't (or atleast don't seem to) get sick as often as humans i.e. cold, flu etc.

[Assistant]
Most animals do become ill with similar frequency to humans.  The difference is that they can't complain in language, so it's hard for us to tell when they're ill.  In the wild, there is no one to take sick or wounded animals to any sort of health care, so they tend to die, and the healthier ones get to live long enough to reproduce, thus encouraging (through evolution) more effective immune systems in their offspring.

Evolution FTW!


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

[User] ELI5: When you cut something, isnt there a chance that you will cut an atom and there will be an explosion?

[Assistant] Imagine you have a cube made out of little magnetic balls. You've probably seen them. Make a knife out of those magnetic balls. I'll let you use glue to hold it all in place. Now, cut the cube with the knife and try splitting one of the magnetic balls in half doing so.


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

[User] [DCAU] If Parademons can be killed with guns and batarangs, would an invasion by Apokolips really be that bad without Darkseid?

[Assistant]
I would say it would be pretty bad. Parade moms are comparable to us in terms of hardiness, but theyre mass produced, have no regard for their own lives, and will just keep coming. Theyre also supplemented with superior weaponry and the other New Gods of Apokolips, like the Furies or Kalibak

Edit: the parade moms thing was a complete accident but they might be Darkseids most terrifying force.


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

[User]
[SpongeBob] Why does SpongeBobs strength vary so much?

Early on, he struggled to lift two stuffed animals, but later, he can lift and throw a killer whale over his head effortlessly. After that, he struggles to lift an ordinary glass of water. After *that*, he lifts Mr. Krabs over his head and slams him into the ground repeatedly.

Similarly, he can survive being ripped in half and completely disintegrated (neither of which hurt him that badly), but stubbing his toe and cracking his knuckles are both somehow unbearable.

How does this work?

For the record, I know what toonforce is, but I was hoping for a more Watsonian explanation than that.

[Assistant] He's a cartoon, so his strength is based on toon force.  Basically this will mean he is strong when it's funny  for him to be strong, and weak when it's funny for him to be weak.  Same with his durability and pain sensitivity.  That's how toon force works.


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

[User] If you could aggressively fund one area of science (think Manhattan project), what would it be and why?

[Assistant] Energy storage. Battery tech that would make clean renewables like solar and wind more viable, electric cars with huge ranges and electric freight. Hell, even electric air travel. Supercapacitors like graphene are already showing promise. Get in the lab and get it done.


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

[User] Is a transatlantic bridge/tunnel possible? Why or why not?

[Assistant]
They are really two different questions (cue ELI5 mode):

**Bridge:**

The Atlantic is really really big.  Based on where you cross, it could even be bigger than the USA.  On top of that, it's wet and it gets storms which both can cause quite a bit of damage to concrete and steel which would be used to make the bridge.

The ocean is too deep to sink the pilings down to anchor the bridge.  It's too stormy and full of waves so that a pontoon type bridge would just shake itself to pieces.

It's also big and empty and very few people would really want to drive across it because it would be very boring and they wouldn't be able to carry enough fuel for the trip.

(Adult version:  we can't sink piling to stabilise the bridge and current structural materials won't stand up to the stresses of a pontoon bridge.  Maintenance would be an absolute nightmare due to the corrosion of salt water/air.  You could only refuel on the crossing if fuel were shipped out to the middle of the ocean, which basically defeats the purpose)

**Tunnel:**

The Atlantic is very very deep.  All of that water on top of the ocean floor means that there's lots of pressure at the bottom.  Kind of like how your ears hurt when you dive deeply at the pool but multiple it by 10,000.

All of that pressure means that if they tried to dig a tunnel then it would have to absolutely never ever spring a leak or the walls would crumble down and everyone would drown.

On top of that, you'd need really really big fans to make sure that there was enough air for everyone down there.  You would also have the same problem with fuel.

(Adult version:  the real problem would be at the joins of the pre-fabricated tunnel sections which would go into the tunnel hole.  There's no way that they'd be able to be made strong enough to withstand the pressure and even small leaks at that pressure would penetrate materials like a movie laser.  On top of that, ventilation of the tunnel would be an enormous issue.  You would have thousands of kilometers of dead air that would have to be circulated somehow or you'd never make it through.  As above, fuel as well)


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

[User]
[Superman] so how exactly does Sunlight give Superman power? what is his body doing with it get the energy he needs for his abilities?

Photovoltaic seems to inefficient. Is it some unknown nuclear reaction? Quantum shenanigans?

[Assistant]
It's less that the sun gives him power and more that the yellow sun acts as a catalyst for his body to create limitless, god-like energy. He's been shown to do things that require more energy than our sun could produce.

Where does he get this energy from? It's anyone's guess. Many comic heroes pull infinite energy from seemingly nowhere, and that's just what's happening here.


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

[User]
[Alien franchise] What's the most powerful thing that could come from some poor organism being facehugged?

Thought of asking this between the Tarkatan in MK10 and those old Superman v Alien crossover comics. What's the most powerful thing from any universe that could theoretically be facehugged, and have a chestburster develop its abilities and escape its body?

[Assistant] I would say a very powerful psychic, like Dark Pheonix etc. Imagine all the evolutionary prowess of an Alien, but with psionic abilities. You couldn't hide. You couldn't set a trap without it knowing. You couldn't run away. It would be the ultimate being.


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

[User]
ELI5: why do the front wheel studs in a semi or meat truck stick out?

To better explain. I see all the front tires in heavy duty vehicle have the studs stick outward and the tire itself closer to the cars body. But if you look at the rest of the vehicle the studs are in the middle or closer to the cars body.

[Assistant] It's because all of the wheels and rims on that type of truck are made the same. The wheel itself (metal part in the middle) is made to bulge out so you can take one and turn it around so it's touching the other one to make the double wheel that is in the back. Having the front tire be just a single tire is better for turning the vehicle, and having all tires made the same allows for a spare tire that can go anywhere on the truck. So what you are seeing on the back tires facing you is actually the inside of that front tire.


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

[User]
CMV: If a legitimate bomb threat occurs I will run away from the school rather then pile up in one place with the rest of my school.

My school has a policy where if there is a bomb threat the entire school must pile up in our stadium and wait out until police and a bomb squad come. However a smart terrorist (or whomever) could easily find this out (every school does the same and says it on our website) and plant a bomb in said stadium killing the entire student body and staff.

It would make more sense for me to just run to my car (off campus) and escape. Its worth saving my life 100% of the time.

Our school tells us whether or not we have a drill that day or not so I would know if its a legitimate threat.

CMV.

[Assistant] In a lot of terrorist situations, the danger is less in the form of loss of life, and more in the form of panic; in panicked mobs, people get trampled and severely injured. Especially in the case of a threat that is obviously not that serious, it makes sense to keep order and keep everyone in a wide open space where the hiding places for bombs are scarce if present at all.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do they find 12 oblivious jurors for really high-profile court cases?

Like for Michael Jackson or James Holmes or the Boston Bombers or someone like that. How are there 12 people that haven't heard of him or the allegations against him, that are still competent and socially-aware enough to sit on the jury?

**edit:** Also, how do they ensure that the jurors don't learn more once the trial has started? Many trials last months or even years, so how do people not hear about the case in that time? And if they do hear about it, are they disqualified from jury duty?

[Assistant]
Even in high-profile cases, there will be potential jurors who are largely or wholly ignorant of the case.  This is one of the reasons we have *voir dire,* the extensive question-and-answer process where the prosecutor, the defense attorney, and even the judge will ask prospective jurors questions to determine if they have potential bias or too much exposure to the case already.

As for keeping seated jurors unbiased, they're generally instructed to avoid all news coverage of the case and not to discuss it with anyone.  If there is extreme likelihood the jurors will have coverage of the case thrust upon them (protestors holding signs around the courthouse, for example) the jury will be sequestered--they'll be put up in a hotel and supervised to avoid undue influences.  If the judge has reason to believe a juror cannot remain unbiased, that juror will be excused and an alternate juror will be seated.  Jurors and alternates alike are there for the entire case.

For example, the jurors serving on the Manson case were sequestered, for months. It was a hardship for them.  And to avoid exposing them to the media circus surrounding the courthouse, they even had to occasionally cover the windows of the jury bus with soap to keep the jurors from seeing anything they should not.  At one point, Manson tried to force a mistrial by holding up a newspaper headline--"Manson Guilty, Nixon Declares" (an attorney had left the newspaper in the courtroom by mistake).  The jury was immediately polled: everyone of them said that they could remain unbiased, and furthermore, Nixon's opinion didn't matter because he was not sitting there listening to the testimony as the jury was.  Juries tend to feel like privileged insiders, *they* are the experts on that particular case.  Manson didn't get his mistrial.


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

[User]
ELI5:Why do black people have lighter skin on the inside of their hands?

I'm not trying to be racist...I am black.  I am actually just curious.

[Assistant]
Everyone does, not just Black people...

The reason is because the palms of our hands and the soles of our feet contain very little melanin due to receiving far less ultraviolet rays than the outer regions. And when our palms and soles do receive ultraviolet rays, they don't allow the rays to pass through as easily.


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

[User]
[Anne Rice Vampires] Can they be hunted?

I've only seen Interview With A Vampire, and haven't read the books, so if this is dumb, excuse me.

But can these vampires be hunted by a human or is this a suicide mission?  These vampires seem to only be killed by decapitation and sunlight.  Decapitation seems possible, if not for the fact that they can apparently move faster than the human eye can see. And sunlight obviously doesn't follow human command. Stakes through the heart do nothing.

Fire might be usable, but carry a flamethrower around seems implausible. Same for explosives.

So would trying to become a vampire hunter in this setting just be suicide?

On that note, why hide if almost nothing can kill them?

[Assistant]
Anne Rice vampires grow more powerful as they age, so hunting one of the legendary ancients would certainly be suicidal.  Conversely, most vampires dont live much longer than a few decades, and aren't much stronger than a particularly strong human during that time, so an exceptionally talented human could definitely be a vampire hunter so long as they focused on taking out the trash.

Lestat, by the time of the movie, is several centuries old.  He's powerful, but not invincible like a millenia-old vampire would be.  A large, well-trained, and well-equipped team of hunters could probably bring him down.  Later on in the novels he gets some power boosts by drinking the blood of some older vampires, and becomes strong beyond his years.

As for why they hide?  Vampires who survived their early years did so by hiding, so the older ones are inclined to continue hiding.  Beyond that, most vampires are ashamed of what they are and what they must do to survive.  That shame drives many to suicide, and the ones who aren't suicidal inevitably become shut-ins or otherwise withdraw from the world.  Lestat is nearly unique among Vampires in his willingness to engage with the modern world to the extent that he does.


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

[User] ELI5: Why would a giant asteroid hitting earth cause so much damage? Wouldn't it just crush the area where it lands and that would be it?

[Assistant]
An asteroid with a size at which air resistance becomes entirely negligible would impact the Earth at over 10 km/s, releasing all its kinetic energy. Since asteroids are both really damn massive and impact at such a velocity, their kinetic energy is huge, and releasing that amount of energy triggers effects through both the Earth's crust and through the atmosphere of significant magnitude.

But really, an asteroid would absolutely wipe out the impact area (greater than the size of the asteroid), but, kinetically, it would't do much to the rest of the world. It can trigger decent tidal waves, but most of the inland areas would be immune to that as well.

However, it would kick up a huge amount of soil into the atmosphere that would stay there, darkening the sky, absorbing sunlight and creating a "nuclear winter" through most of the world, that would be catastrophic to the biosphere, as plants can no longer properly sustain themselves and most of the food chain collapses.


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

[User]
What causes the thick mist/fog that I frequently see coming off of mountains in my area?

I live in the temperate rainforest biome that's in the Pacific Northwest of North America. I frequently see intensely heavy mist/fog[?] drifting up off the mountains close to me. What causes that? Is it a mist or a fog or low clouds, or what? Does this happen to other mountains or only those in similar rainforest areas?

[Assistant]
The amount of water that a given volume of air can hold depends, among other things, on its temperature. Warm air can hold more water than cold air - this is why speak of relative humidity, with 100% being the max amount of water the air can hold at the current temperature.

When you get wind blowing towards mountains, the mountains will cause the air to rise, just like driving over a ramp. As the air rises, it cools. As it cools, the amount of water it can hold lessens. If the air was fairly humid to begin with - something that often occurs in the pacific north west- it won't take much rising until there's more water in the air than it can hold. The excess water condenses into tiny droplets that make up fog or clouds (same thing, basically).


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

[User] ELI5: Why does the US have such a suing culture?

[Assistant]
It doesn't. Your examples are one outlier case (the damage award will go down) and a South Park episode.

Most jurisdictions cap compensation and almost all require people to carry some sort of no-fault liability insurance when it comes to things like cars and homes.

The truth is, most people who have legitimate claims actually never get to pursue them.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] If "size matters not" to force-wielders, what stops a jedi or sith from manipulating large star ships, or even entire fleets?

I've always been confused on why this never happens in the movies, or what the extent of the power of the force really is. The only place I've ever seen this in Star Wars is in the Force Unleashed games, and I don't think that's exactly canon. Is there more in EU on this?

[Assistant]
It's more a lesson than a fact. What Yoda is saying to Luke is that you shouldn't judge a feat by its size. Therefore, assuming Yoda to be a weak Jedi because he is small, or saying that lifting an X-wing is difficult because it is large is what limits the Jedi's mind and makes them weaker than they could be.

There *are* limits to a Jedi's power - which is why Yoda tells Obi-Wan that he is not strong enough to defeat Sidious. Obi-Wan would not be able to defeat Sidious but if he believed that he could not defeat a Sith Master, he would be even weaker. For a Jedi to attain their full strength in the Force they must be utterly devoted to the concept that they can do anything through the Force.


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

[User]
[Tolkien] By what power did the Oath of Feanor compel his sons to pursue the Silmarils and carry out such crimes, even when they seemingly had the choice not to? Did the Oath itself overrule their free will and agency?

And in the end, what became of Maglor for being the only one to ultimately turn his back on the Oath? Why was he seemingly the only Son of Feanor able to break from its power?

[Assistant]
> By what power did the Oath of Feanor compel his sons to pursue the Silmarils and carry out such crimes, even when they seemingly had the choice not to? Did the Oath itself overrule their free will and agency?

As mentioned already, Oaths are a big deal in Arda. If you break an oath, you'll be punished. Gollum swears loyalty to Frodo but betrays him anyway, and dies in the fires of Mt Doom. Androg swears to never use a bow again, breaks his promise, and is later killed by an arrow. The Men of the Mountain swear to fight Sauron, break their oath, Isildur curses them, and they die out and become the Oathbreakers. So yeah, don't take oaths lightly, and certainly don't break them.

The interesting thing about the Oath of Feanor is that it was an unfulfillable oath due to the Doom of Mandos. Mandos lays a verbal smackdown on the Noldor, outright saying that Feanor and his sons will never succeed, and they'll only find torment and grief in Middle-earth. In a way, the Doom of Mandos is essentially the punishment for making the Oath in the first place. They were doomed to fail against Morgoth, they were doomed to turn on their own allies, and they were ultimately doomed to never get the Silmarils back.

> And in the end, what became of Maglor for being the only one to ultimately turn his back on the Oath?

He was doomed to wander the shores of Middle-earth for, as far as we know, for eternity. This is his punishment for making the Oath and for committing evil deeds whilst following it.

> Why was he seemingly the only Son of Feanor able to break from its power?

Well, five of the brothers were already dead. And it's less so breaking from the Oath and moreso realising that it was all for nothing in the end. Maedhros and Maglor got back two of the Silmarils, only for the Silmarils to burn them due to their evil deeds. The Oath still bound them at that point, so Maedhros killed himself, and Maglor wanders the shores in eternal pain.

The Oath of Feanor was a very, very bad oath to make.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Why Does Palpatine Need An Apprentice?

I understand the rule of two and consolidating power. But Sidious changed the game, he could have rewritten the sith code. Vader was of course instrumental in saving his life and wiping out the Jedi. Then Kylo Ren helped take out Lukes academy. But after Ren cut down Snoke why didnt he just say you know what,.I got this. Fleets almost ready, Ive got all my sith acolytes, done deal. And then just kill everyone.

I get that the new trilogy really dumbed him down as a character but looking back he would have won if he had just done everything himself after Anakin saved his life.

[Assistant]
>Two there should be. No more, no less. One to embody power, the other to crave it.

That's the core tenet of the Rule of Two as said by Darth Bane, who set it all up. And through almost every action Palpatine has taken in all three trilogies. We know he loves the idea of this philosophy

He loves having subordinates around who vie for control and power, he loves having an apprentice he can talk down to and treat as leaser. When he formed the Galactic Empire he structured every branch of the government to follow the ideals of this philosophy

With there always being someone at the top and people who are set up specifically so they'll crave that spot and want to take it. And we know he actively encouraged such thoughts.

He didnt change the Rule of Two, and couldn't, because he's a megalomaniac who craves that kind of power over others, revels in having a second in command who is always a dozen steps behind.

This is especially notable in just how much pleasure he takes in having Count Dooku killed off and showing a resurrected Darth Maul just how insignificant he is in comparison.


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

[User]
I secretly suspect I'm the only real consciousness in this universe, it exists only because I'm here to witness it, and when I die it will stop. CMV

I only experience this universe from my own perspective of being, never anyone else's. I'm not in Sue's mind, or Joe's; I'm only ever in mine. They exist in mine as things, but I can't prove they're actually real consciousnesses. I have vivid dreams, too, and the experiences are not all that different.

In short, I close my eyes to sleep every night, and the world pauses; I open them in the morning, and it's still there. But one day they won't open anymore, and I'll be gone. And, I think, so will you.

Change my view.

[Assistant]
Welcome to solipsism.

It's a position that can't be refuted logically, because anything we could say is instantly converted into the supposed ramblings of your subconscious by your solipsism filter.

The only evidence you might accept is the obvious fact that you live every second of your life acting as if this isn't true, and so does everyone else who exists either objectively or as a product of your imagination.  For what reason do you do that?  Why would you make them do that?  On what existing template does your mind base its creation?


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

[User]
How to stay motivated and productive while advisor is on sabbatical?

My advisor just left for a year-long sabbatical on a different continent (and several different timezones) making regular meetings impractical.

I tend get things done when there are deadlines or something/someone to be accountable to.  For those who've weathered the same conditions, what are some habits, strategies, and/or tricks you've used to keep you motivated, productive, and moving forward in your research?  My biggest fear is that I will slip into complacency or otherwise fall behind.

I do have a lightly-involved co-advisor, but I get the feeling he's not very interested in stepping in to advise me full time.  However, maybe that's my responsibility to advocate for myself and request the guidance I need.

**EDIT**:  And while I'm thinking about things, I suspect part of my anxiety stems from my mental-model that most of my work comes *from* my advisor or deadlines they set as opposed being self-driven and working on (or discovering) lines of research on my own.  So, yeah.  advice on how to make that transition is also welcome! ;)

I've been used to semi-regular advisor check-in's, so maybe having some mental space to think about things will help.  I guess we'll find out.

[Assistant]
I like this question. This is a good question.

Here are some ideas.
-Join a writing group or research group, if there isn't one that fits your exact needs, why not create an informal reading group for the year. Connect with others writing on overlapping topics and arrange to meet for coffee once a month for the next 8 months. Agree with each other that on the 1st of the month or whatever you will each circulate a draft paper and critique it during coffee later in the month.

-Plan 1-2 meetings with the co-advisor to check in and use those as deadlines for some other component in your work (and newly written chapter, for example).

-Write out an ambitious timeline for everything you hope to achieve that year, remind yourself that you don't have to "hit" all of these goals, but they are your most ambitious aims.


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

[User]
Do we actually know were the center of the universe is located? Do we know where we are in the entire universe?

Update 1: Thanks for all the replies now am understanding it better. Although I came up with this theory.

Since everything is moving away from each other, cant we find the speed at which our solar system is moving across space/the universe (Speed) and then find how long the solar system has been around (Time)
and then use S x T = D  to find where we started in the universe? Then we could use that for everything and eventually find out how the universe was? Prob need super computers but is it possible or no?

[Assistant]
In at least one sense, there is no center of the universe. Everywhere we look, galaxies are moving away from each other. One analogy involves a balloon...take an un-inflated balloon and draw some dots all over it with a sharpie...those are galaxies. Our universe exists *only* on the surface of the balloon. Now slowly inflate the balloon. Choose any random dot to watch as your point of reference. As the balloon inflates, all the dots are moving away from one another. This is the same no matter which dot you choose as your point of reference. In a sense, ALL the dots are at the center of the universe...because from the perspective of each one of them, all the other dots are moving away.

(And yes there are local groups of galaxies that are moving towards one another and will one day merge, but those are just local variations; on the whole all of them are moving away from one another).


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

[User] What's the difference between sugars found in vegetables/fruits and sugars found in refined grains/candy? Why is the latter worse for us?

[Assistant]
Sucrose refined from beets or cane, refined high fructose corn syrup, and the starches or fructose found in vegetables and fruits are fairly similar with some slight differences. Sucrose is a dimer, effectively a 50/50 mixture of glucose, direct energy especially for the brain, and fructose which the body can metabolize to convert it into glucose. High fructose corn syrup typically contains from 45-55% fructose with the remaining being glucose. Additionally, starch is a long glucose chain that gets broken up by saliva.

First, this means that table sugar and HFCS are nearly identical with the only real difference being price and the price of foods that contain them. Foods made with HFCS are cheaper making them easier to obtain an overabundance of. Table sugar while more expensive than HFCS is still fairly cheap, making it easy to obtain too much.

Fruits and vegetables are on the otherhand more expensive per quantity of sugar. Additionally they have additional nutritional value in the form of fiber and other vitamins and minerals. They help you feel full for longer helping to prevent over consumption. Finally, the rate at which glucose is released into the bloodstream (measured by the glycemic index) is decreased due to the form of sugar and the presence of fiber. By prolonging this, the insulin response isn't as severe putting less strain on the pancreas.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do vitamins give 200%, 500%, etc. of the recommended daily value?

[Assistant]
Pills are not a very good delivery method of vitamins. When your body eats it kicks into digestion mode, and absorbs nutrients and vitamins efficiently. If you only take a pill, your body does not go into digestion mode, so it does not as efficiently absorb the vitamins. To compensate for the loss of absorption, pills just contain a greater than required amount.

EDIT: Wow, a lot of responses. You can overdose on certain vitamins, but it would take a lot of that vitamin to have that effect. You could take 15 one-a-day vitamin pills and very likely still be fine, but if you take 15 of them for like two weeks, you're probably going to have a bad time.

It is ok for things like Emergin-c or 5-Hour Energy to have a billion percent of your vitamin c and b because those two vitamins are water soluble, so you can not od on them, you just pass the surplus in your urine. Fat soluble vitamins, the excess is stored in your fat, then if you go through a process where you lose a lot of fat, you can release a large amount of the stored vitamins that were stored in your fat, making you sick.

Taking the vitamin with food probably does aid in absorption, but just follow the directions on the bottle, without an actual medical condition requiring extra vitamins, you aren't going to benefit from absorbing twice the recommended amount.

Gummy vitamins may work better, but more than likely their only measurable benefit over non gummy vitamins are that kids are more likely to take them. There are not enough calories in a gummy vitamin to put your body in digestion mode, unless you take like 100 of them, which would potentially cause the same od problems previously mentioned.


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

[User]
[Inglorious Bastards, Tarantino Universe] Was the A-bomb ever used?

The war apparently ended that night in the cinema, but what was going on in the pacific theater?

[Assistant]
Yes.

The events of Inglorious didn't really make any difference to the war in the Pacific. German scientists were still stolen away to the Manhattan project and Little Boy and Fat Man were still dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


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

[User] ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such?

[Assistant]
>If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such?

Prescriptions are used to limit dangerous chemicals/medications to the use of folk who 1. need them and 2. have been instructed on how to use them by a physician.

Whether or not they are commonly used or required doesn't factor into it.


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

[User] ElI5: How can people be put under anesthesia for emergency surgery but for general surgery they say you will aspirate and die if you eat anything 24 hours prior to being put under?

[Assistant] Aspiration is relatively rare, but given the damage it can cause, and that the only downside is that you miss a meal, people are warned not to eat before surgery. But if you need emergency surgery, well, you need emergency surgery. In that case, the benefits outweigh the increased risk of aspiration.


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

[User]
How can people catch diseases from animals which are not subsequently transmitted from person to person?

Ive just started reading *The Plague Year: America in the Time of Covid* by Lawrence Wright. In the prologue, he writes:

> People also get infections from animals, but they are not considered human diseases unless they are shown to be transmitted from one person to another.

My reading (which may well be wrong) is that animal diseases may occasionally be transmitted from animal to human, but such transmission does not necessarily indicate that the disease will then be transmitted from that human to another human.

But Im struggling to wrap my head around this. Surely the limiting factor in disease transmission is the susceptibility to infection of the *recipient* - and so, once a pathogen has demonstrated that it can cross the species barrier and infect a human, that means humans are susceptible and human-to-human transmission is possible?

If not, what is it that means animal-to-human transmission of that disease is possible but not human-to-human? Why does the species of the infected party matter?

[Assistant]
Theres a lot more to transmission than being able to cause disease. Some examples -

* pathogen may replicate to very high levels in chicken, very low levels in human (where immune response might lead to cytokine storm and death, with almost no viral shed)
* pathogen may replicate in a different area in human and host. E.g. in the gut in chicken (easily shed), deep in the lungs in human (very little shed)
* pathogen may not replicate completely in human, whether because it cant complete its cycle in a human cell (but can still damage the cell) or because immunity controls it (perhaps with a cytokine storm)
* pathogen may modify its structure in different cells. E.g. glycosylation of viral proteins is host cell-dependent, and is different in different species.
* pathogen might have to mutate to adapt to human cells, with the mutation leading to reduced fitness. E.g. avoiding human innate immunity is quite different from avian or bat or swine immunity.

And so on. The most common issue is probably #1, where the pathogen can replicate in the new host but not nearly as well as in the natural host, so that the natural host gives much higher exposure than contact with the new host. This is almost certainly quite common, with many, many instances of animal viruses jumping into a human and not being able to spread, dying out after a single infection - either with an undiagnosed disease, or asymptomatic. Or of course being diagnosed - virology journals are filled with cases of single odd infections of humans that never went anywhere, which is why virologists have been so urgent about warning of upcoming pandemics.

(We are currently seeing COVID adapting to its new host, for example, so that delta gives much higher exposure and better transmission than did the original bat-adapted strain.).


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

[User] Why does the road reflect when it is hot out?

[Assistant] Asphalt is dark, so it absorbs sunlight and re-radiates it as heat. This warms up the air immediately above the road, so that air is warmer than the air above it. The boundary layer between the two layers of air (which are different densities because of their different temperatures) *refracts*, which is another word for *bends*, rays of light that approach the boundary layer at shallow angles (angles that are mostly horizontal, such as rays of light from an object much further down the road). This is the source of many optical illusions, or *mirages*.


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

[User] ELI5: What's the difference between echo and reverb?

[Assistant]
echo is a couple discrete repetitions of a sound over a couple seconds. reverb is 1000s of echos all overlapping each other, separated by miliseconds.

you can theoretically make a reverb plugin out of a bunch of echo plugins.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do animals like squirrels and frogs move like they are lagging?

[Assistant]
We have mostly 2 types of muscles in our bodies. Type 1 and type II

The type one muscles are mostly for endurance. Where as type II allow for explosive bursts. You may have heard of "quick twitch" muscles, which is what animals like frogs and chickens and chipmunks are mostly composed of. These muscles fire rapidly and explosive allowing for bursts of speed and high jumping and rapid directional changes.

When all of your muscles are of the type II variety, you move in a twitchy, jagged manner. Like if everytime you used your arm, it was a karate chop instead of a smooth fluid motion.

Edit. Every single one of you just karate chopped!


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

[User] Many poisonous and venomous vertebrates get their toxins from toxic arthropods that form part of their diets. Why can't they just form the toxins themselves the same ways their prey do?

[Assistant]
Plenty of vertebrates do make their own, for example multiple snake species.

Most animals that have some level of toxicity due to diet likely have this due to the survival benefits conferred to their ancestors from that food source. For example, monarch butterfly caterpillars eat milkweed, which makes them toxic. This could be the result of a population of a species which prefers a food source which also happens to give them toxicity, giving them a survival advantage as predators will learn not to eat the tiny toxic bugs.

Eventually, if the selective pressures are strong enough (in this case the pressure would be predation) the individuals who prefer the food source which gives them toxicity will pass on their genes so their offspring will also gain toxicity from their preferred food source. So on until the whole species is toxic.

You can think of it more as their food source giving them toxicity rather than them eating a food source in order to gain toxicity.

Most (I would say all but Im not sure) animals which derive their toxins in this manner use them as a defence mechanism. Whereas animals that produce their own toxins tend to use them for either catching prey or defence.


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

[User]
If there's a solid object, where its color is completely outside the visible light spectrum, do we see it transparent like glass, or black? What do we see?

Follow up question:

Let's say there's a hypothetical creature X who is completely unable to see our visible light spectrum (eg. their eyes are only sensitive to ultra-violet, and has no overlapping regions with our visible light spectrum range. Or a severely colorblind bird who's RGB sensitivity is zero, but UV is working. Or a creature who could only see the x-ray).

If an object like in the title above is in their visible range, will they see that object as opaque, while we see the object as transparent?

Sorry if my question seems silly. I was just wondering about that, as different ranges of the electromagnetic spectrum could pass through different types of matter.

[Assistant]
You could see it either way, depending on whether it was opaque or transparent to the visible light spectrum.

It's "color" refers to the light it reflects back into your eye.  The visible spectrum isn't being reflected in your scenario.  That means it is either being transmitted or absorbed.  If it is being transmitted, the object is transparent.   If it is being absorbed it is opaque.

As far as your creature:  That will depend on the spectrum he sees.  For instance, if he sees in the x-ray spectrum, than objects through which x-rays pass will be transparent for him.  A lead wall thick enough to block x-rays would be opaque.


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

[User] Why do viruses like herpes or hpv stay forever, while flu viruses don't?

[Assistant]
Ignore the other comment, Herpes does NOT integrate into the host genome (note: HSV6 is an exception to this, as was pointed out in a comment). Herpes viruses lie dormant in "immunologically privileged" sites in the body - neurons for example. If the immune system were to attack these sites, the harm caused from inflammation (death, paralysis, etc.) would outweigh the good caused by clearing the infection, so the body keeps immune cells out. Herpes stays here until proteins necessary for replication are expressed (during periods of stress is a common time). Upon replication,  the new virions leave the immunologically privileged sites, where they are then cleared by the immune system, resulting in the blisters you see so commonly with herpes.

Influenza recognizes receptors (Sialic Acids) really only found in the respiratory tract (upper or lower dependent on which hemmagglutinin and neuraminidase the influenza genome is expressing) which does not have that immunologically privileged status. As a result, immune cells are actively able to clear the viral infection here.

(Also a note on the instability of RNA in the cell vs DNA as a big barrier to dormancy, as pointed out in the replies).


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

[User]
ELI5 Why that, even if I just peed, getting in the shower makes me pee more, no matter how much or what I try to do to empty my bladder before I got in?

Also with getting in the pool or the bath, does the warm or cold water actually affect you physically? Or is it completely psychological?

[Assistant]
Running water makes you pee due to hard coded evolution.
If you hear running water it means you have a source of water to drink so the body is willing to dump the extra with wastes.
Basically, it tries to ensure that you have adequate water available before getting rid of some.


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

[User] How do we design new surgeries and decide who attempts it first?

[Assistant]
Many surgeries are one of a kind processes, not every tumor grows in the same place, affects the same organs/vessels, not all organs have the same pathologies, etc. A good surgeon will design each surgery to the patient, and will have to possibly react on the fly to changes that occur during surgery.

There are everyday simple ones like appendix removal, setting broken limbs, removing a limb, things like that. Then there is trying to save a mans face while removing the cancer spreading from his neck, and having to get in there and do what needs done. Or a full reconstructive surgery to a severe burn victim. Or separating conjoined twins. These are all unique, one of a kind situations, every time.

Something radical, like replacing a heart with a machine, or other major transplants (even one day inter-species ones, like pig hearts) is usually tested on animals first. Then a human will allow it to be done, as it is the only possible way to save their life. As for which surgeon performs it, that is decided by the patient, hospital, and the surgeon. If he/she is qualified, understands the process, and feels confident based on past experience, they may suggest it to the patient as a last ditch effort. The surgeon may even be the one who did the research. The first ones aren't always long lived, but they help pave the road for others.

For instance, the first heart transplant was on a dog, before the first human transplant was done (patient died 18 days later, but the heart was healthy.)

So really, part of the training and expertise of a surgeon is "crafting" a surgery. The procedures are mechanical in nature, but the process is as much art as engineering.


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

[User]
Eli5: How do wild animals survive infection from getting serious injuries?

Before modern medicine getting a small cut from or a scraped knee could lead to death. How does a lion, for example, survive infection after a brutal encounter with another lion?

[Assistant] They dont. They either fight off the infection, or die. With most falling into the second category. On top of that, even if their body is able to naturally fight off the infection they are often weakened by it to the point that they become prey to another animal as they lose their mobility.


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

[User]
Does chlorine that settles in to ground when irrigating lawns or draining swimming pools degrade into something else, or remain unchanged?

I work in water utilities. 99% of residents in my city irrigate their lawns with city water, and we like chlorine to be 1.8-2.1 in this city. All run off from irrigation and when people drain pools and the like seeps into their lawn, and all water eventually makes it to the lake system. It's common knowledge here that chlorinated water once "filtered" through ones lawn removes nearly all the of the chlorine from the water by the time it makes its way back into our lake system.

So my questions is, does all that chlorine sit in the ground unchanged? Or does it eventually degrade into something else?

[Assistant] Chlorine gas is very reactive and can oxidize most organic matter it comes in contact with. It does not stay chlorine for very long in an high-organic load environment such as soil. The chlorine in treated water will gain two electrons from something in the environment and become two chloride ions (Cl-).


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

[User]
ELI5: How the speed of light was calculated.

How would a scientist calculate or theorize the unmaginable speed of light?

[Assistant]
The first *direct* measurement involved a rapidly spinning cog and a mirror very far away.  The idea is to pass a beam of light between the gap between two teeth, have it travel back.  If the cog is spinning fast enough, the light hits the next tooth instead of the gap.  And if it spins even faster, it hits the next gap.  If you know the precise distance and speed of rotation, you can compute the speed of light.

This was first done in 1849, and computed the speed to be 315,000 km/s, which is about a 5% error.


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

[User]
[WH40K] How would the Imperium react to the discovery of a Solar Auxilia Cohort that was fully intact and functional?

Question is pretty obviously really, what would occur if a fully manned and equipped Solar Auxilia Cohort was to appear that dated back to near the start of the Great Crusade as the result of the warp going bonkers.

I think that their lasrifles might become popular if they can be replicated, but I am not much of an expert on 40k.

Thanks for reading!

[Assistant]
Tech-wise, it'll probably make some tech adepts drool, but not not much. They have better toys.

The biggest issue is the knowledge they'll know about the Imperium in its early days. Each one of them will be debriefed by the Inquisition about the knowledge of everything that has to do with the GC. Foremost in their interrogation would be about the Emperor when he was a living, walking, breathing "man".

Of course once they find out that the SA upholds the ideals of the Imperial Truth and denies the divinity of the God-Emperor, all bets are off. A lucky few might be followers of the Lecto Divinitas and could be potentially spared.


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

[User] Are the "Light Side" and "Dark Side" of the Force inherently good or evil, respectively?

[Assistant]
There are a number of theories, the most prominent are **The Living Force**, **The Unifying Force**, **The Potentium** (and it's inverse **The Way of The Dark**) and **The Insidious Force**.

According to **The Living Force**, the traditional understanding of The Force and the canonical view accepted by the Jedi Order, The Force surrounds and binds all living and most non-living things. It guides their actions but strong beings can use The Force as a tool for their own ends. This theory also dictates the need of a Light Side, which is harmonious and draws power from those who seek to follow the guidance of The Force over their own ends, and a Dark Side, which is chaotic and is strengthen by those who would use their power for selfish or destructive pursuits. As opposites these two sides are always in conflict. The Jedi Order holds that selflessness and harmony were good, and that selfishness and chaos were evil, so in terms of the Jedi, the Light Side is the inherently good natural state of the Force and the Dark Side is an inherently evil corruption of it.

However, the concept of good and evil sides of The Force are not only dependent on the Jedi's definitions, but also on they way the order interpretes The Force. For advocates of **The Unifying Force**, the Force has no sides; it is simply a willful and omniscient manifestation of destiny that could manipulate (and in turn be manipulated). According to this theory The Force neither had sides, nor took them, it, simply, was, and it acted to fulfill a destiny using both evil and good to achieve it's hidden goals, but revealed these goals through visions and premonitions to select individuals. Various incarnations of the Sith Order followed this theory, but not all, in addition some "Greyer" Jedi believe in this theory.

Still, another set of theories paint a different picture of The Force, the adherents in **The Potentium of The Force** believe that, like followers of The Unifying Force, that the Force has no sides, but, unlike followers of The Unifying Force, that the Force is inherently good. In essence, The Potentium doesn't believe that there is a Dark Side, and that evil acts only occur to create the greater good. They believe that any any action, good or evil is acceptable as long as the intent was for the greater good (or even if the reaction helps the greater good). One of the major flaws in this theory is that it is untestable; constant evil can be waived-off by arguing that it will eventually bring about the greater good.

Conversely, disciples of **The Way of The Dark** believe that The Force is entirely and inherently evil. And that The Force only acts to cause more destruction, harm, pain and strife to the galaxy. Every action that occurs, occurs to make the galaxy a worse place. One of the best examples of this is the interpretation of this theory is Palpatine. Palpatine was able to achieve success against the Jedi and the Republic because his primary motive was the destruction of both parties. However, once he had achieved these goals and set about consolidating his rule and building the Empire, his focus shifted from destruction to creation, in total opposition to universal processes. Thus when before he could not fail, now he could never succeed.

Finally, there was the theory of **The Insidious Force**, possibly the most pessimistic theory. The believers of The Insidious Force believed that The Force was deceptively sinister and passively indifferent, and that it fed on the strife and conflict of Force-users and other individuals. They point to the countless and terrible wars that those who could harness The Force were part of. The Insidious Force bound all beings to its will and only called for conflict, regardless of morality. To followers of this theory, The Force was not only inherently evil, it was literally the force of evil and tyranny, enslaving everything to it's amoral ends. All actions, all beings, the entire galaxy and universe, everything existed solely for the Insidious Force's entertainment.

There are other minor theories on The Force, but most of them are superstitious beliefs that are used by undeveloped societies to explain Force phenomena.


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

[User] ELI5: How do birds that dive from the air into the water to catch fish manage to get back up into the air? Wouldn't the water soaking their feathers weigh them down?

[Assistant]
Birds have an organ called the Uropygial gland, which is an excretory gland that produces oil for their feathers. Birds will use their beaks to spread this oil over their feathers.

One benefit of this oil is that it makes the feathers waterproof.


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

[User] Why is it so difficult to tell a dream from real life even though in a dream you're sometimes confronted with the most absurd scenarios?

[Assistant] A lot of these answers seem very vague and anecdotal.  The real reason why dreams seem very logical while dreaming and absurd when you wake is that during REM sleep portions of the prefrontal cortex, in particular the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, are deactivated in REM sleep.  This part of the brain is responsible for many executive functions such as judgement, logic, planning, and working memory.  Its deactivation explains our acceptance of the absurd things that happen in our dreams.  It may also contribute to the hallucinatory properties of dreams because the deactivation of this region is a signature of halucinating schizophrenics.


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

[User] [MCU] Would Captain Marvel have survived snapping with the infinity gauntlet, like Hulk,, or died, like Iron Man?

[Assistant] We don't have a super clear picture of her durability or recovery, but given that she can kill an intergalactic warship with a headbutt, and is suffused with Infinity Stone energy already, I'd say she's closer to the Hulk side of surviving that the Tony side.


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

[User]
[Logan]? Spoilers

Could Logan have put magneto's helmet over the professor to keep his powers from hurting anybody?

[Assistant]
In theory, yes. The helmet is able to keep out all forms of telepathy so it should be able to keep it in as well.

The problem is that it was Xavier's first attack, which happened suddenly and unexpectedly, that caused the majority of the deaths and injuries. After that the damage was done and Logan took Charles into hiding. Given the state of how things were for Logan and co after that, it's unlikely he would have had any time to go hunting down the helmet afterwards, assuming it was even still around and that Magneto hadn't been buried with it or something.


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

[User] ELI5: Do caterpillars know that they are going to become a butterfly? If so, how?

[Assistant]
It's a common mistake that people sometimes make to try to apply human levels of intelligence to insects.

Insects are not self-aware. A caterpillar does not even know that it is a caterpillar. It is aware of the general shape of the surface it's on, and it feels hungry around things it can eat.

That's really the extent of it's cognitive powers - it doesn't know things like how much it's eaten recently, or if there are usually predators in an area. And it certainly doesn't know what's going to happen to it after it's done with it's metamorphosis.


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

[User]
Is it possible to trap light in a hollow ball whose inside is made out of mirror?

Say you have a ball which can be opened. Inside the ball is purely mirror. You put a flashlight that is turned on inside and you close the lid for a million years. The flashlight will have run out of battery long before then.

Within the ball, will the light just keep bouncing forever?

Now after a million years, someone or something opens that ball with an internal mirror. Will a flash of light occur when the ball is opened?

[Assistant]
Mirrors don't reflect light perfectly. With every "bounce", part of the light is absorbed instead of reflected and the reflection loses some of its intensity.

Regular everyday mirrors will top out at about 90% reflectivity. That means that 10% of the light intensity is lost with each bounce. If the distance between each bounce is 1 meter, that means it takes about 3 ns (nanoseconds) for 1 bounce. After 50 bounces (150 ns), only 0.5% of the original intensity remains.

It's possible to fabricate a high reflective coating that does much better however, going up to 99.99% or even higher, but it comes with some limitations. One of them is that these coatings typically only work on a relatively narrow range of wavelengths. They can also be sensitive to the angle of incidence of the incoming light.

But lets forget about that and see what happens with a 99.99% reflective coating. Only 0.01% is lost per bounce. However, we find that after only 50,000 bounces (= 150 microseconds), only 0.7% of the original light remains when the distance traveled between each bounce is 1 meter.

Lets make our mirror even better and shoot for 99.9999% reflectivity (I have no idea if this is possible) and increase the size of our mirror-box so that there's 1 km between bounces. What now?

After 5,000,000 bounces, only 0.7% of the light remains. How long does that take? At 1 km distance, each bounce takes about 3 microseconds. So the 5,000,000 bounces take a total of 15 seconds.

So even in the very unrealistic example of a 99.9999% perfect mirror with a 1 km path length, you'd still have lost almost all of the light in well under a minute. This is ignoring the problem of losing light intensity to air and dust in the interior (you'd have to make the interior of the mirror box a vacuum) and the fact that the flashlight itself is in the way of some of the light and will cause additional loss of intensity as light strikes it.


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

[User] ELI5: Exercise is supposed to be good for the heart - how does forcing a finite organ to work harder not just wear it out faster?

[Assistant]
It's a muscle, working it out in a controlled fashion makes it stronger and more efficient for all the time you aren't intentionally working it harder.

You are effectively making it's work 90% of the time easier by working it harder 10% of the time, instead of making it harder 100% of the time.

Take professional athletes for example, they often have a resting heart rate anywhere from 40-60 beats per minute at rest. The average resting heart rate for a moderately or less-active person is usually around 60-100 depending on multiple factors. Take sleep for example, assuming 8 hours that means a normal persons heart will beat maybe 28,800 times during sleep (assuming 60bpm though it's probably lower because you're sleeping), an athlete's heart will beat only about 19,200 times during sleep (assuming 40bmp, though again probably less during sleep).

Factor that in to the amount of time you are at rest vs exercise over your lifetime, even with hours of exercise regularly the athletes heart is going to come out with fewer beats over time.


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

[User] [Star wars] Between episode 3 and episode 5, how was Yoda using up his time on Dagobah?

[Assistant]
Meditating on his failures, communicating with Qui-Gon Jinn with respect to the Living Force (and becoming a Force Ghost), and focusing on his personal (800-year old) connection with the Force to help him make sense of everything that happened in the decades that led to the Jedi's near destruction.

Also, going a bit crazy.


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

[User] ELI5: How does natural selection explain homosexuality?

[Assistant]
Natural selection doesn't require individual organisms to have descendants.

Worker bees and ants are all asexual except in rare instances. Although they don't pass on their genetic materials, their existence allows their relatives (queen) to continue to survive and pass on genetic information to future queens and drones to make new hives.

Likewise, homosexual individuals may not produce descendants at a similar rate to heterosexuals but as a highly social species, humans can support one another within an extended family. Grandparents can only do so much and parents may be too occupied with raising their own children. Homosexual individuals can help support their relatives to help pass down their related genetic material.


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

[User] ELI5: How do we make extremely, extremely high frame-per-second cameras?

[Assistant]
The sensors in most cameras are perfectly capable of capturing at a higher frame rate than what they are normally being used for, but the challenge is getting the data and putting it somewhere fast enough. If your storage subsystem is too slow, you won't be able to ingest the flood of incoming data fast enough. Some of the fastest high-speed cameras have ridiculous amounts of RAM to initially capture the video, and then they take a minute or two to dump that to a slower hard drive or SSD afterwards.

Another issue with super extreme high speed cameras is light sensitivity of the pixels, as well as cooling of the sensor. When you get into the *really* high speed territory, the individual pixels in the sensor have less time to gather light before the next frame, so you have to use extremely bright external lighting, or even sunlight to get a usable video. The sensors that are capable of such fast frame rates require additional cooling which makes the cameras bulky and loud.


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

[User]
Why can humans not digest hair, which is made of many amino acids and so (one might assume) contain valuable calories and nutrients?

I would guess it's because we don't have the enzymes to do itbut that just leads to a bigger question: Why not? Food scarcity played an important role in pushing our evolution. **Wouldn't the ability to digest hair have been a caloric/nutritional advantage for any omnivore?** I'm thinking about being able to digest more parts of a trapped or hunted animal, and also about being able to eat your own when faced with a starvation scenario.

[Assistant]
It has something to do with the many disulphide bonds found in hair keratin. You either need a strong base to break them, or a specialised hydrolyse. While the small intestine is slightly basic (8 to 9 pH) it's nowhere near as strong as it needs to be in order to hydrolyse those bonds. Not to mention, the keratin found in your hair is very tightly packed, therefore, it's hard for hydrolyses to break the disulphide bonds down.

There are some animals which can, mainly bugs, but they feed on carcasses and play a crucial part in decomposition.


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

[User] [Legend of Korra] In S3E3, it is said that the extreme cold of P'Li's prison keeps her from fire bending, though in the following episode one of the guards fire bends at Ming-Hua right before the escape. How is this possible?

[Assistant] She's a heat bender and she stuck in the freezing cold without any source of warmth, so all her bending is required to keep her alive and she can't use it to do anything else.  The guards are supplied with warm clothing and doubtless a warm breakroom and can leave for warmer places when they are off duty.  They can spare using fire for something other than keeping alive.


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

[User] [Marvel] What exactly are the responsibilities of the Scientist Supreme and does Hank Pym do them?

[Assistant] So, first off, it's unclear if Scientist Supreme is actually a thing, or if it was Loki pranking Hank Pym. If it was, mainly the idea is that the Scientist Supreme would defend the universe from threats using SCIENCE!


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

[User] ELI5: Why do human feet have so many bones, yet very little mobility compared to our other joints and appendages?

[Assistant]
Look at your hands. Do you see why your hands need a lot of bones in order to move in all the different ways that they do?

Your hands and your feet are just variations on the same blueprint - that way your DNA can just store one blueprint, and then a set of simple "adjustments" to make a hand vs a foot, which is way simpler (from your DNA's perspective) than having two completely separate sets of instructions.

So basically, your feet have a lot of bones because your hands have a lot of bones, and it's easier to build feet as kinda-crappy hands (more like "hands built for standing on rather than picking stuff up"; if your feet were as good at picking stuff up as your hands you wouldn't walk nearly as well).

EDIT: another reason that your hands and feet both have so many fiddly bones in weird places (like all the different bits that make up your wrist, for example) is that the blueprint for how to build a hand/foot had to start with an older blueprint which had a lot of fiddly bits to make fins for fish to swim with (and crawl around in mud with).


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

[User]
[star trek ds9] Why do people buy drinks at quarks bar

In the Star Trek universe they have replicators which can essentially make food and drink items out of thin air, and for free. So why do people even bother buying drinks at quarks, if you can literally create the same product out of thin air for free?

[Assistant]
It is a frequently repeated opinion that replicated foodstuffs do not taste as good as the real thing. That's one of the whole reasons sisko's father runs a restaurant is because he thinks replicated food is overrated. Also official Starfleet replication units do not replicate alcohol,  they replicate drinks that have the same flavor but without the alcohol.

Edit: a specific example. There's a scene  in emissaries part 1 where O'Brien and Bashir are ordering food at quarks and the moment he says one of the things we'll have to be replicated they say ~~nevermind~~ they'll wait for the non replicated drinks.


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

[User] How are mating phenomenon, particularly sexual cannibalism, evolutionary beneficial to a species?

[Assistant]
If it increases reproductive fitness, it's evolutionarily beneficial.  Sexual cannibalism = nutrition for the mother = able to bear lots of young.

Evolution isn't about an individual's survival, it's all about who reproduces (and that those progeny themselves reproduce.)

Males of species like preying mantises who let themselves get eaten had more kids than those who didn't.


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

[User]
CMV: There is nothing wrong with an athlete betting on themselves.

There is an obvious conflict of interest should an athete place a bet against themselves.  It is also illegal to engage in illegal gambling (duh!). But so long as an athlete places a legal bet on themselves I don't see any ethical dilemma or conflicts of interest that aren't already present.  That is, for instance, an athlete tempted to cheat because of a bet already typically has ample incentive to cheat.

Now I can see a scenario where it could be argued that public betting could make a culture that pressures others to also make bets against their better judgement.  Perhaps to avoid criticism such as, "the QB clearly isn't confident as they did not bet on themselves in the Superbow."  (How fun that gamesmanship could be.) So let me add another stipulation - the bet must be anonymous.

In summary please CMV: there is nothing wrong with an athlete placing a legal and anonymous bet on themselves.

[Assistant]
For a QB to bet on themselves, they generally would have to bet against some spread.  Therefore, the QB would not just be trying to win the game, but beat the spread.

For example, they might try a more risky play on a 3rd down at the end of the game, knowing they need a touchdown to beat the spread, vs just a field goal to win the game.

Thats a clear conflict of interest.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] How do Wands work?

Why do you have to say the name of the spell for the spell to be cast? How and why do Wands choose their masters?

And how come Hagrid was able to cast the fire to light the fire place without saying the spell?

[Assistant]
Wands and spells are like training wheels or a barrel of a gun respectively. They make sure the spell is the one you wanted and direct it in the most efficient way possible. That being said, if you're a good enough wizard you don't have to worry about them. Hagrid is just skilled enough to  not need a say a spell to cast what he wants.

Wands are almost living entities themselves, being made of magic items like unicorn hair or phoenix feathers. They are like a wizards closest ally, knowing what he wants to do and helping them achieve the task at hand. If you use a wand that doesn't think you deserve it it won't be very useful, even detrimental to the user.


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

[User]
ELI5: With a rotating star light projector, the stars on the wall move faster than the stars on the ceiling. Why is that?

My kids have one of those star projector night lights that has a motor so the stars rotate. We have it placed near a wall pointing up. The stars move slowly except for the stars projected onto the wall. Theyre stretched, which makes sense. But they also move faster.

I tried to explain to my kids (7 yo) that they moved faster because they had more distance to cover to keep up with the rotation of the motor but that didnt make any sense to them.

Is there a good ELI5 explanation?

[Assistant] This might be an illustration best done in person.  Head outside with your kids.  You stand in place, slowly turning in circles while pointing.  Tell the kid(s) that their goal is to move so that you're always pointing at them.  Have them start close to you, where they'll just need to walk slowly to keep up.  Then, have them move further away, keep turning at the same pace, and watch as they have to run to keep up.


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

[User]
When we wake up for a minute in the middle of the night, do we end our sleep cycle and start a new one?

So let's say you wake up in the 3rd stage even if only for a minute and you sleep in again, do you continue with the 3rd/4th stage or do you start all over again?

[Assistant]
Sleep Scientist who has seen literally thousands of people's sleep: You generally continue your sleep cycle after an awakening.

People (all people) rouse regularly throughout sleep cycles, particularly during sleep cycles in hours ~3-4+ in a sleep period because these sleep cycles typically contain less slow wave (aka deep) sleep. Technically according to sleep analysis rules you go back to Stage 1 NREM sleep whenever you wake up from NREM sleep, but the brain typically shows features of Stage 2 or 3 NREM sleep within the next minute or so which means that shift "up" the sleep stages is cancelled out pretty quickly. Similarly, according to sleep analysis rules, there need to be features of not REM sleep visible after an awakening from REM for someone to be classified as being in NREM (meaning the default rule is that REM always continues after an awakening).


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

[User] ELI5: Why or how does someone develop an accent after living somewhere for a while?

[Assistant] Linguist here. It's because we are social creatures and we want to assimilate to our nearest society. While formally known as an accent or dialect, switching accents e.g. when moving to a new town could be considered an sociolect or maybe an idiolect -- something far more individual than an accent.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Why did Padme appoint Jar Jar to Senate?

Why would someone put him in that position? He's an absolute fucking dumbass. Makes no sense.

[Assistant]
Aside from the Darth Jar Jar hypothesis...

Jar Jar was the only Gungan that Padme knew. And while he's an idiot, the Senate doesn't usually require much brainpower because they don't usually do much of anything. It's the same as any other politician giving a no-work job to their buddies.

Plus, Jar Jar kept coming back even after the other Gungans tried to exile him. Getting him off planet is their best bet to make sure he doesn't come back again, so she might have done it as a favor for them.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Mon Calamari vision

Do Mon Calamari have binocular vision and if so, what is the binocular field of view? Do they have difficulty looking forward?

[Assistant]
There are plenty of images where both of their eyes can clearly be seen from a point somewhere in front of them, so it seems perfectly reasonable that they would be able to see any of those points with binocular vision - indeed it seems highly likely that the evolutionary advantage of their externally positioned eyes was precisely that they did allow for binocular vision. From an evolutionary perspective, they would seem quite vulnerable, and so a disadvantage, without *some* over-riding advantage.

It is likely that their range of binocular vision is significantly less that for Humans, but probably greater than such successful predators as the Tyrannosaurus Rex from Earth for example.

It is more than likely that they have a much wider peripheral vision, of course.