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

[User]
[Marvel] If vibranium is basically indestructible, how is it harvested in Wakanda and transformed into weapons/woven into suits?

Not sure if this has been asked before but how do they harvest/form it into weapons, and would that method be a viable weapon against vibranium?

[Assistant]
Forged vibranium is nearly indestructible, but the ore itself might not be.

As shown in Age of Ultron, sustained high temperatures can slowly melt forged vibranium. Albeit it took a combination of repulsor beams, Thor's lightning, and the Mind Stone to melt it over a few seconds.


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

[User] [Apocalypse: General] What important items would become useless real fast. Such as gasoline settling in vehicles.

[Assistant]
Honestly? Guns. Every apocalyptic scenario appears to have ammo as plentiful, and that's true, but a huge amount will be wasted or unusable by the time you find it, or hoarded by crazy people.

There's a huge amount of ammo in the US. There's probably not enough in any given municipal area to allow a group of survivors to fight off zombies for more than a year.


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

[User]
What is the shortest duration of sound we can hear?

I assume this will vary depending on frequency and amplitude, but let's say if you adjust those so that we can get the absoutelu minimum of duration.

[Assistant]
A quick lit search gives me 1.2ms (Irwin & Purdy, 1982). Also, people were shown to be able to recognize voice when stimuli were only 2ms long (Suied, et al., 2013)!

**References:**

Irwin, R. J., & Purdy, S. C. (1982). The minimum detectable duration of auditory signals for normal and hearingimpaired listeners. *The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America*, 71(4), 967-974.

Suied, C., Agus, T. R., Thorpe, S. J., & Pressnitzer, D. (2013). Processing of short auditory stimuli: the rapid audio sequential presentation paradigm (RASP). In *Basic Aspects of Hearing* (pp. 443-451). Springer New York.


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

[User] ELI5: Uh..how do boomerangs come back?

[Assistant]
Actually the funny thing is that most of them dont. The returning boomerang is fairly modern invention.

Most boomerangs are thrown to either physically strike animals or frighten them into the open and those ones dont come back and must be collected.


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

[User]
[Steven Universe/Transformers] What would Gems think of Cybertronians?

They're both inorganic species with highly advanced technology and similar totalitarian societies. But how would they get along with each other?

[Assistant]
I think it would go similarly to if humans discovered something like silicon based life forms that were pretty humanoid. They both have very different means of existing (hard light vs nanites/living metal/some shit) but they both present themselves in humanoid shapes. They both have a central "battery" that lets them do their thing, and they can both transform their outward appearance.

As for how they'd interact, they'd probably go to war with each other. The Gems are no stranger to war, and the Transformers have had infighting for basically forever. And why wouldn't they? Presumably, they could find resources they want if the Transformers are at the level of galactic conquest (I don't know this part).


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

[User]
Why is it bad to shampoo my hair everyday?

I've heard that its bad for your hair but I'd like to know the science behind it.

[Assistant]
Shampoo, like other soaps, washes away oils that your scalp uses to keep itself healthy. You may have noticed over time hair tends to get oily/greasy. Without these oils, your scalp and hair can dry out. Shampooing every day doesn't really allow your scalp enough time to re-oil/hydrate your hair, especially if it's long.

To be specific, the outside layer of hair is the cuticle, which surrounds keratin proteins. When the cuticle dries out it may flake off or expose the underlying keratin, resulting in splitting, thinning or breaking of the hair itself. This is why it's recommended to condition your hair if you do shampoo it, as conditioners better resemble natural oil, but ultimately your scalp provides the best 'hydration' all on its own.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is it easier to fall asleep to background noise (radio, TV etc.) than just the plain dark?

[Assistant]
This happens because when there's noise around us we feel that someone is near us.
Thus we feel safe and can let go of the tension and fall asleep.
This is an evolutionary thing and has been embedded in our DNA. Humans are primarily social animals and keep each other safe.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do public universities charge application fees?

[Assistant] Two things. First, someone has to be paid look over the applications. Second, it encourages only those with interest in the school to actually apply. If there was no application fee, they would likely see a much larger number of applications, many from people not really serious in their university. This would require a lot more staff to sort through and result in much more uncertainty that those accepted in will actually attend your university.


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

[User]
If the distance between 2 points in spacetime is sqrt(x^2+y^2+z^2-ct^2), does that mean that the further away 2 events are in time, the closer they are in spacetime?

The minus sign in front of ct^2 is really throwing me off.

[Assistant]
What you've written down is called a spacetime interval,

> s^2 = x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - (ct)^2

The s^2 is not a spacial distance, but a spacetime distance, in that it incorporates the distance between two events including time. So for instance, if a grandfather clock rings every hour, then the spacetime interval separating any two rings will be,

> s^2 = - (c\*1 hour)^2 = roughly -10^18 km^2 or -1 lighthour^2 .

So here we are with a spacetime distance that has zero spatial separation from the reference frame of the clock.

So to answer your question, no, that's not how the formula is used. Now to answer *why* the time component has a different sign that the spatial component is because while time is a dimension like the z-direction, it behaves differently than say a fourth spacial dimension. Essentially, when we're asking what Pythagoras's theorem looks like in 4D spacetime, this is the form the equation takes.

Let's go over the different interval types:

* s^2 < 0 (like our clock) is a timelike interval. The two points are causally linked.

* s^2 > 0  spacelike interval. The two points are not causally linked, not enough time has past to connect them.

* s^2 = 0 lightlike interval. The two points are connected causally, but only by information traveling at lightspeed. This represents the farthest two events can be spatially to affect each other in a given timespan.


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

[User]
ELI5: If I shake Honey Bunches of Oats, will it unmix over time?

Objects usually separate by density.
But eventually, entropy is supposed to make everything tend to disorder.

And why does all the sugar and crumbs always collect at the bottom?

[Assistant] because of particle size.  the sugar and crumbs are the smallest particles.  and in an upright bag, they will settle to the bottom during agitation.  separating by density is true for liquids/gasses that do not emulsify at equilibrium, like oil and water.  air/hydrogen.  it is not true for solids.  because if i put lead on top of wood.  the lead isn't going to go to the bottom less the wood breaks or otherwise deteriorates.


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

[User]
What will our landfills look like in millions of years?

I know that over time things like river beds turn into different colored layers of sedimentary rock based on what kind of silt was deposited so I was curious if something similar would happen to the trash we dump. As it gets covered over and is subjected to increasing pressure, what would plastics and other artificial products we throw away do to stone formation? Will we someday be able to dig up the equivalent to fossilized soda bottles?

[Assistant]
If the conditions for cementation were met, you could get rock formation out of landfills, but it is unlikely it would resemble water deposited layersthese layers are formed because the river deposits material based on density and the energy level of the river.

 Landfill formed rock would be more like brecha: poorly sorted, with angular clasts. Metals would likely rust, forming bands in the rock, plastics may break down or may not depending on their composition.

The preservation potential of soda bottles would depend on the substrate they were buried inin many environments they would rust, but under the right conditions, you could see good preservation.  In general, the chance of preserved artifacts resembles the chance of preserved fossils: chemically stable materials in an unreactive substrate will last a long time, so it would depend on the landfill, and what was stored there, how deeply, and how much oxygen worked its way down there.


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

[User]
Can you recommend a book on the history of philosophy?

I'm looking for a book that gives an overview of the history of philosophy, a book that covers the different movements and some of the famous philosophers.

[Assistant] Will Durant's The Story Of Philosophy. His language is very simple yet eloquent and he conveys the ideas of the philosophers as he acquaints us with their life starting from Classical Greece to modern age.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] What are the qualifications for being the Jedi Archivist?

Like, the career path seems straightforward for your mainline. You go to Agricorps if you're a scrub dropout, or you progress up to Jedi Master via Padawan and Jedi Knight. How exactly do you get into the side gigs like being the Jedi Archivist? Is there like some kind of apprenticeship, or is it an appointment type deal?

[Assistant]
The Jedi High Council we see most often isn't the only one it's just the main decision body of the Jedi Order.

There are additional Jedi Councils tasked with overseeing and organising specific aspects of the Jedi Order. One of those councils is the Council of First Knowledge made up of five Jedi Master who oversee the Jedi Academy and Temple Archives.

Jedi in their Youngling years, as well as Padawans, are educated and trained in a variety of fields - this includes history, archaeology and library sciences - should you feel compelled to pursue a carrier as a Jedi in this branches you would simply apply to the Council of First Knowledge to get tasks and assignments to develop yourself further in that direction taking up appropriate positions and jobs as the need arises and your skill allows.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do US courts still employ transcribers? Aren't modern recording devices more reliable?

[Assistant]
Note: They cannot just use a audio recording device as it is violates the ability of those with hearing disabilities to be able to go over the information if it is pertinent, same thing with video cameras. So some kind of written down form of the trial must exist. While cameras or audio recording may be used in conjunction with the transcription you have to have some kind written account which leaves speech to text recognition software.

1. Speech to text recognition software is not currently good enough to get everything. The way you talk to Siri isn't the way you talk to other people and not the way people talk in court. It also can't handle slang very well. Also if someone is testifying in another language with a translator it makes it very difficult to pick up.

2. Mumbling/laughing/crying etc - this is all recorded by the stenographer in their transcript but can't be captured correctly by speech to text software. Also if something is mumbled or said too softly the transcriber can ask it to be repeated immediately rather than trying to muddle through the data later.

3. Physical movement - stenographers will also record important physical movement (point at the person who attacked you, etc). which the speech to text software would not be able to see.


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

[User]
ELI5: When driving, is there a speed that is the most fuel efficient? If so, what is it and why?

For the sake of simplicity, assume one is driving at a constant speed on flat ground.

[Assistant]
You've got a bazillion answers here. There's the ELI5:

Yes, there is a speed for every car that is the most fuel efficient.

Then, there's the rest:

It's a sweet spot that is different for every car, but is a combination of:

* Engine design - Every engine has a sweet spot, both in RPMs and in *temperature*, of both the engine and the incoming air. There's a certain engine speed that makes the most power for the least amount of throttle application. At this point, you're getting the most energy possible out of each measured explosion.
* Transmission design & associated gear ratios. These are chosen to either give you good acceleration, good fuel mileage, or an attempt at both. Transmissions like the modern "CVT" can play games to give you both.
* Wheel & tire design. Tread design, tire inflation, rubber compound. Tires will heat & soften at higher sustained speeds, increasing rolling resistance. Different tires have different behaviors with regard to increased speeds and ambient temperatures.
* Aerodynamics.

**Of this entire list, aerodynamics will be the most dominant. When you double your speed, you quadruple the wind resistance. It is the only parameter in this list that increases in this fashion.**


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

[User]
ELI5: kW and kWh difference

Can someone please explain the difference between kW and kWh? Thank you!

Edit: thank you for all the responses, I appreciate you taking time to respond!

[Assistant]
A kW is an amount of power, specifically 1000 Joules every second.

A kWh is a kilowatt, multiplied by an hour. 1000 J/s \* 1h = 3 600 000 J

So a kWh is an amount of energy. Specifically it is the amount of energy used by a 1kW device every hour.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is smoke used in beekeeping? Does it really calm the bees and if so, how?

[Assistant]
It's less "it calms the bees" and more "it prevents the bees from getting really defensive".
When a bee thinks the hive is under attack it releases something called an "alarm pheromone", which is a chemical with a specific smell that lets other bees know something is wrong. The pheromone is very good at getting the bees angry and looking for trouble. The smoke masks the alarm pheromones which prevents the hive from getting angry. It can also cause the bees to think the hive is going to burn, which causes a "We have to save the honey" reaction to distract them from the "attack the guy going after the hive" reaction.


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

[User]
If The Big Bang happened from a single point, how is it The Milky Way and Andromeda on a collision course?

The way I understand The Big Bang is from a single point, and the universe is expanding from a single point out. So how can 2 large objects like galaxies collide with one another if we are all following angles out from origin. Shouldn't any of that stuff happen in the universes infancy?

I think of it as a ripple of water from something falling in. That ripple expands out, never colliding with itself, just other ripples.

[Assistant]
Two misconceptions here. The Big Bang didn't expand from a single point, it expanded everywhere at once. Because of the above, things aren't expanding away from a centre, they are expanding away from each other.

For (relatively) small scales like galactic scales, gravitational forces dominate and there is little to no expansion.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] what would a villain who came from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, or Ravenclaw be like?

Voldemort sought power at any cost and wished to rule over everyone. How would a baddie from the other houses be different?

[Assistant]
A Hufflepuff Dark Wizard would be the most terrifying possibility.

Hufflepuff is all about loyalty, hard work, working together and practicality.

Imagine Voldemort who goes for the kill immediately when he has the chance, backed by an army of personally loyal Death Eaters who aren't in it for the power, fear or racism but because they forged bonds of friendship and loyalty with Voldemort and each other.

All of them ready to fight together no backstabbing, get dirty and do the hard work of conquering the world before them together!

With the power of Friendship!


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

[User]
Why does my tea change color when I add lemon juice to it?

I drink a lot of black tea and sometimes I like to add some lemon juice to my cup of tea. When I do so, the tea changes from a deep-brown almost black color to a clear orange color? How and why does it happen?

[Assistant]
So the simple answer is that the tea is acting as an indicator to the pH of the solution and changes color with respect to the acidity. Tea leaves contain a large amount of polyphenols which account for the majority of its flavor and color profile. The most common compound found in black tea would be thearubigins which are red-brown in pigment and are weakly ionizing acids that produce colorful anions. So with this being said most water that is used to brew tea is slightly alkaline meaning the tea will be of a darker hue. If lemon juice is added the ionization of the thearubigins will be reduced making the color appear lighter.

Tannins are also involved with the color change of your black tea, but this interaction is a little more complicated as the phenolic groups in the tannins become protonated, which results in charge delocalization. This is interesting since the aromatic phenols now have a change in their energy between orbitals resulting in a color change. This is called the bathochromic effect and is very useful to identify many compounds through the use of UV spectrometry.


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

[User] ELI5: ELI5: when people from warm climates have extra low tolerances for cold weather, is there an physical cause for their sensitivity, or is it psychological?

[Assistant]
It's a physiological cause.

There are hormones created in the thyroid gland that activate genes that code enzymes that are involved in glycolysis and ATP production. This effect is called the **calorigenic effect**; the cell consumes more energy and generates more heat. For example, children who are born in colder climates produce more hormones (thyroid stimulating hormones; TSH) to adapt to the cold climates. The same response happens to children who are born in warmer climates. This response cannot occur in adults.


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

[User]
What gives electrons and protons their charge?

I understand what a charge is down to the electron and proton level, but what gives them a charge?

**edit**: a better phrasing of my question as suggested in the comments "Why does the universe exist in a way that particles have these different states?"

[Assistant] Something that helps to understand is that the "charge" is nothing more than a description of a 2 state system in which the particles are one way or another.  The assignment of "+" or "-" is simply to let us do math.  We could reverse them and still be physically accurate.  Perhaps a rephrasing of your question would be "why does the world exist in a way that particles have these different states?"  Good question.


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

[User]
[Doctor Who] Why are the Weeping Angels a credible threat?

I mean there way of feeding is sending people back in time and eating the potential time energy of the left time line. Which might be a problem for normal people but anyone with access to a time machine (like the Doctor and any character we follow) shouldn't see them as a threat.

And to stop two points that will come up certainly
> The Angels Take Manhattan

Doesn't count the Doctor couldn't travel back to Manhattan because of the gigantic paradox the Ponds created to defeat the Angels not because of something the Angels did
>The Time of Angels

Doesn't count as well because we were dealing with scared and starving Angels which just sucked people out of live and didn't use they normal way of feeding.

[Assistant] Did you watch "Blink"? They fucked shit up in that episode. They sent the doctor back in time without the tardis so he would have had to wait about 50 years to get back to the tardis, which for him may be feasible but not for his human companions.


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

[User]
[MCU] How does the economy of Wakanda work?

In *Black Panther*, Wakanda is demonstrated to have a thriving post-industrial economy, with bustling streets filled with vendors and market stalls.

What do Wakandans use for currency? Vibranium is the most obvious candidate but how do they determine value and and ownership? According to Klaue, there is no scarcity of vibranium in the Great Mound below ('they've been mining it for thousands of years and haven't even scratched the surface'), so the only limit on the availability of vibranium is the rate of extraction, which has only increased, especially after Shuri's advances in technology such as sonic nullifiers and automated maglev trains.

Who owns the Great Mound? Is it the personal property of the Royal Family, or is there collective ownership amongst the four participating tribes? What system governs the distribution of vibranium?

Presumably, labor could be exchanged for value-added vibranium-based products (technology, clothes, etc), which not every Wakandan is capable of creating.  But as demonstrated, Wakanda is basically a functional post-scarcity economy. Why are there people down in the streets in the hot sun hawking snacks and textiles if they could all be philosophers or artists instead?

[Assistant]
Because some of those street hawkers ARE artists. Textiles are art. Cooking is an art. In terms of tech, medicine, etc., Wakanda may be closer to post scarcity, but They're not there yet. Even in utopia, you still have to eat. Food has to grow. Someone needs to cook that food. Someone needs to sell the clothes you make as an artist, and maybe they only work that stall part time, or maybe they only do it to see people, to be part of the community. Wakanda works, and wakandans work, because doing so improves the lives of everyone around them.

Vibranium isn't rare in wakanda, but it isn't toilet paper either. Think of Vibranium as the rare earth metals in your phone - expensive, used in small quantities, and not wasted on something as simple as coinage. vibranium is also controlled. They try hard not to let any of it escape Wakanda. Why would they use it for something as disposable as currency?


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

[User]
Are you still briefly conscious after being decapitated?

From what I can tell it is all speculation, is there any solid proof?

[Assistant]
Did the nazi's perform any tests regarding this subject?

EDIT: Why the downvotes? This is a good and legitimate question. The nazi's both killed large numbers of people and were very scientific with all their experiments and kept meticulous records. Like it or not, we have a lot of good scientific data from them regarding some of these more gruesome topics.


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

[User]
ELI5: how the heck do you attach new organs inside the body?

I dont know much about surgery and stuff but I'm pretty sure you cant screw an organ into place, gorilla glue arteries together, or tape them together.

[Assistant] You are describing pretty much the procedure that is done when transplanting inn new organs. Just pack it in wherever it fits and attach the arteries and vains as well as any other connections and let the body do the rest. The human body is very robust and can handle a lot of damage. If tissue is cut it will regrow new tissue to connect it back together. Most organs can work even if nerves are being cut. Blood and nerves will be able to reconfigure itself if there are any damages or things move. And even though humans have not had organ transplant for most of our evolution the cells do not know this and will just work like it was any other type of damage.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do humans like music so much?

[Assistant]
Multiple explainations.

Simplest one is that music is an excellent bridge between the 2 halves of our brain. The emotional and logical portions.

Music has an intrinsic mathematical component to it. We recieved "feel good" sensations from interpreting that mathematics into pattern. On the other hand, the creativity required to process music as something more than just noise required use of our emotional processing system.

To simplify, Music pleases both parts of our left and right brain.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is it bad to 'ride the clutch' on a manual car?

[Assistant]
Depends on what you mean by riding the clutch.

If you mean leaving your foot on the pedal while driving around you can possibly cause slippage under higher loads and during acceleration which will cause wear on the clutch

If you mean having the clutch all the way down while coasting or sitting at a light the clutch is not wearing at all (or shouldn't be). However there is a throw out bearing that the linkage uses to push the clutch away from the pressure plate. The bearing is not really designed for continuous operation. It will wear over time.


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

[User]
[Marvel] What happens if someone is worthy to wield Mjolnir, but not physically strong enough/able to wield it?

Has this ever happened? I know the hammer only weighs about 20 kilos, but that's still not exactly *light*, and I'd wager most people probably couldn't actually swing around a 20 kilo hammer with 1 hand as casually as Thor, or Cap or Beta Ray Bill do.

Do you get additional strength from the hammer? Do you need to be strong enough to lift it in the first place, in order to be considered worthy? I know Jane Foster, an otherwise normal human, has wielded it; was she a particularly strong person beforehand?

Further, what if you're disabled but otherwise worthy? Would a quadriplegic person get full use of their body back?

[Assistant]
This came up when Thor was turned into a frog by one of Loki's spells. The goats that pull Thor's chariot reminded him of the enchantment on Mjolnir. So Thor, as a frog, a slightly stronger frog than usual, but still just a frog, had to lift Mjolnir despite that being an impossible weight for a frog. It appears that being worthy made it possible for him to lift it even as something that wouldn't be able to.

He was then a 6'5 giant frog with the powers of Thor, something that Loki didn't see coming.


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

[User]
Are there any philosophers who deal extensively with themes of whether knowledge is valuable enough to justify suffering?

Now for the context behind me having asked this question, I know some stuff that caused me to suffer immensely. However, as a result of the passage of time, I have come to be grateful for that which I know, even if I did suffer profoundly upon learning this information. So I am interested in whether or not any notable philosophers wrote/spoke about the value of knowledge as opposed to the value of ignorant happiness, either long or short term. I am especially but nowhere near exclusively interested in enlightenment and post-enlightenment philosophers for this post. And yes, I am aware of the allegory of the cave, I'm looking for some other examples.

[Assistant]
John Stuart Mill was a philosopher who has a famous quote: It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.

You can look into his work on utilitarianism and ranking of pleasures for more details.


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

[User] [DC] What does Wonder Woman do in the Future? She's immortal - are there any stories about what she ends up doing after the current generation of human heroes (e.g Batman, the Green Arrow, etc...) die? Does she stay in the Justice League? Retire and leave things to Wonder Girl? Ascend to Olympus?

[Assistant]
In DC One Million (which takes place in the 853rd century), she has long since ascended to godhood, and looks as if she's carved out of pure marble. She is the official protector of the planet Venus, which the Amazons have terraformed and claimed as their home.

Her bracers have been re-forged with a separate AI each (Harmony and Charity), and with them, she can create force-fields, swords, fly, etc.

She works with the Justice League (the interplanetary agency) to ensure peace throughout the known worlds.


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

[User] ELI5: How can frosting/icing made with dairy be left on an unrefrigerated cupcake for days without spoiling?

[Assistant]
If the sugar concentration in a food is very high, the sugar acts a desiccant and preservative. It literally pulls water out of the cells of microorganisms, mummifying them and thereby preventing them from spoiling the food.

Similarly, if the water has been removed from a dairy product, as with butter, it doesnt go bad very quickly. Butter is basically just oil and has had most of the water removed from it. So butter can be left to sit out at room temperature for days without going bad.


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

[User]
[Arrival] Can someone break down the movie arrival for me?

I know its kind of a big ask but every time I feel like Ive got it I.... dont.

[Assistant]
The movie takes the idea about how some languages are built differently than other languages and require a different line of thinking (for example, there are languages on Earth that only have a present-tense, so those speakers don't think about the past and the future in the same way that English speakers do since we have past and future tenses) and combines that with the idea of time travel.

Amy Adams's character gets so invested in teaching herself the aliens' language that it begins to rewire her brain as she better understands it. The aliens see all points within their lifetimes at the same time, and their language is built on this fact. They don't have a past and future tense for their language because their past, present, and future all happen simultaneously from their perspective.

As Amy Adams learns their language, she begins to see her own life the way the aliens see their lives. She begins to see her life out of order, seeing the future during the present.

Arrival uses the type of time theory that posits that time is an immutable thing. The future is set in stone. If someone outside of time was to look at the timeline, they would know all of your choices before you do. So as Amy learns to see her future in her present, she is able to take the knowledge from her future and apply it to her present to get herself to that future. She knows what's going to happen, and she acts in a way that will make that future come to pass.


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

[User]
[Breaking Bad] What would have happened if Saul had given Walt the name's of a hitman for Jack's crew?

Spoilers for season 5

The only reason Walt dies is because Saul couldn't provide him with the name of a hitman for Jack and co. So he took it upon himself to kill them himself ultimately getting killed by a stray bullet.

So what if he did hire a hitman who took out Jack. What would be his next steps? Turn himself in?

[Assistant]
He didn't take it upon himself because of a lack of a hitman.  A few things played into that decision.  He was dying of cancer, which was leading to him getting ready to just turn himself in (even the turning himself in was because of cancer and that his son was refusing to take anything from him).  He also figured out a way to get his money back to his family, which meant he could die in peace.

Had Saul had a hitman for him, and that was taken care of.  Walt still would have went into hiding, he still would have had to figure out a way to get his money back to his kids, and still would be dying of cancer.  We could say that yes, he would have simply turnd himself in after getting Gretchen the money to give his kids, but! we don't know if the event in hiding play out the same now that he knows he successfully killed Jack.


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

[User]
CMV: Solutions to the student debt crisis don't focus on the root problem: degree inflation

I am arguing that many of the soluions to the student debt crisis would not fix the root of the problem. Problem is explained below. These solutions would actually further delay economic independence of young people since these solutions would create a greater demand for grad school or phds in order to access good paying entry level jobs(degree inflation) and deflate entry level wages (more [insert industry] grads than [insert industry] entry level jobs)

Root Problem: The phenomenon that jobs, like secretary or entry level office jobs, used to only require high school diplomas, but now require degrees. There used to be many opportunities to support a family with a highschool degree. One major example would be factory jobs. Now many of those jobs are in other contries where people are forced to take extremely low pay or starve.

The Point: Degree inflation, automation, and globalization have massively decreased the number of good jobs OVERALL. If there aren't enough good jobs then increasing access to good jobs won't help because there aren't enough good jobs. My entire argument relies on this point so feel free to break this point apart.

Breakdown for how this relates to student debt: automation and globalization > # of jobs with livable wages decrease and become harder to access > college attendance rates shoot up to access good jobs > high demand increases prices > college becomes less affordable > most low income people have to save for years to access college(aka access a living wage) or get high interest loans > gov't backed student loans > inflation cycle loops

"Personal responsibility will solve this": If the answer is to get more people into "useful" majors, that won't fix this. For example, lets have 20% more engineering students in the next 5 years, that wont create 20% more entry level engineering jobs. It will make more people go to engineering grad school to stand out. It will deflate entry level wages because employers will have plenty to choose from. Now we have people with more debt getting lower wages. This delays economic independence by years.

[Assistant]
There is no one single root problem for the student loan crisis, but rather many contributing factors. The single biggest issue, however, is that the cost of education has risen far faster than inflation, while the money made by low-income families has risen slower than inflation, resulting in lower wages for the working class as time progresses.

While the CPI (Consumer Price Index, a measure of the change in cost of prices of goods and services) for all items has increased by around 231% since 1980, the CPI for college tuition and fees has increased by about **1199%.** This means that a college education is over five times more expensive today than it was in the 80's, **AFTER** adjusting for inflation. Meanwhile, the Federal Minimum Wage has actually **DECREASED** since 1980 - when adjusting for inflation, in 1980 it was $10.48 an hour.

The issue is known as academic capitalism: when educational facilities exist as businesses meant to make money, rather than as institutions to give students an education. When this happens to coincide with the dominance of one of the most money-hungry and selfish generations being in positions of power, this leads to every possible penny being squeezed out of a system that should have instead cost the public a small amount of taxation.


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

[User]
[Subreddit Business: RULE ENFORCEMENT CHANGE, PLEASE READ] A Reminder about the Distinction Between Watsonian and Doylist Comments

TL; DR: Doylist answers will soon merit an automatic temp ban, with escalating penalties for further offenses.

Long Version: One of the core tenets that underpins this subreddit is that we're here to talk about the internal logic of works and franchises, the nuts and bolts of what's happening within the setting, not what's going on outside. The internet is full of places where you can talk about how many times George Lucas watched The Dam Busters before making Episode IV, mention that Harrison Ford had a wicked case of the trots when they were trying to film the fight against the swordsman in Raiders of the Lost Ark, or say ", lol", but we're not here to do that. We're here to talk about why the Rebels chose to fly down that trench and why Indy chose to draw and fire his revolver on the sword guy, not what inspired Lucas or what Ford ate on set.

The distinction between "watsonian" and "doylist" comments is hard coded into the rules of the subreddit by design, not by mistake. Placing that distinction allows us to maintain a level of focus, and provide constructive answers. Sometimes this means leaving out interesting notes or educational facts, but 9 times out of 10 when we delete a doylist comment, it's nothing useful or enlightening; "" or "George Lucas sucks" doesn't help anyone.

We've noticed an uptick in the quantity of doylist comments. Not the quality, by any means, just the volume. Either we have a lot of new people wandering in without reading the rules, or older users who have forgotten. This goes against both the rules and the spirit of the subreddit, and does not represent sincere attempts to address the questions at hand. Steps must be taken to bring this under control.

**EFFECTIVE 8 AM EASTERN STANDARD TIME ON MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2022, DOYLIST RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS WILL MERIT A 3 DAY TEMP BAN. ADDITIONAL OFFENSES WILL MERIT ESCALATING PENALTIES, UP TO AND INCLUDING PERMANENT BAN FROM THE SUBREDDIT**

A reminder in case anyone needs it:

Watsonian pertains to the internal logic, history and mechanics of the setting.

Doylist pertains entirely to the external concerns, habits, limitations and demands of and on the creators.

Edge Cases:

Comments or statements made by creators are permitted if they concern the internal logic or lore of the setting. "Word of god" is not the be all and end all of sources (when in doubt the published material wins), but it is a valid source. If the creator starts hemming and hawing about budget limitations or recycling props, that's doylist and should be left out.

Settings with strong "meta" elements can blur the lines between watsonian and doylist. When a Mel Brooks character punches out the on-camera film director or kills a key grip with their Schwartz, a Scream victim notes the tropes behind traditional slasher films, or Mister Fantastic calls out that the fundamental elements of the Marvel universe are stories, it's not doylist to point this out.

**EDIT 5 MARCH 2022**

Thanks to everyone who has responded to this post with questions and feedback. Based on those questions, here's some more information and clarification.

GENERAL QUESTIONS: Per our last rule adjustment, overly broad "general" questions are being actively discouraged, especially ones where the answer is critically dependent on the setting. Responding to a general question with a response that points out that the answer is going to vary from setting to setting is **not** doylist, but it should be more than just saying "it depends". General questions will continue to be screened out, and overly general questions should be reported for review.

INTRINSICALLY DOYLIST QUESTIONS: We do get questions on here that cannot be addressed in a watsonian fashion. These questions themselves are against the rules, and will be removed as they are found. If you see such a question **don't give the doylist response**.

If you can't think of a watsonian answer, don't respond. No answer is better than a doylist answer.

If you honestly believe there isn't a watsonian answer possible, downvote the question and move on.

If the question is egregiously doylist in nature (things like obvious production errors, the fetishes/religions/drug habits of the writer, corporate shenanigans, etc), downvote, report, and move on.

REALITY: Per the rules, we're not here to discuss the real world, and questions that ask things like how a fictional concept/technology would work in reality, if a fictional thing is plausible, or about things that happened in real life. When answering a question it's ok to use real life examples for comparison and illustration, so long as it doesn't discuss author influences/motives, technology available to production crews, etc., nor does it get too close to modern events (20 years is given as a yardstick). For instance, if someone asks a question about the aluminum Christmas tree Lucy mentions in A Charlie Brown Christmas, it's fair to bring up the historical practice of using an aluminum tree as a Christmas decoration in the United States, but it's not fair game to mention anything about Charles Schultz's opinions on said trees, whether or not he himself had one, and so on.

Edit 7 March 2022, 8:00 AM EST: *VERY LOUD PURGE SIREN SOUNDS OUT OVER THE LAND*

[Assistant] Occasionally a question comes up about a setting or franchise with conflicting sources or multiple canons. Is it acceptable to acknowledge these facts while giving a Watsonian answer? ie. "In some sources the answer is X, but in other sources the answer is Y"?


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

[User]
CMV: There should be no legal difference between American Citizens convicted of a felony who have completed their sentences and American Citizens who have not been convicted of a felony.

Our allies abroad may not be aware of this, but Americans surely are: American citizenry exists in Four legally codified castes - felons, immigrants, Territorial Americans and Full Americans.

The only two legal differences between a documented immigrant and a Fully Incorporated American are that 1). If an immigrant commits a felony in America, they can be stripped of their citizenship and deported. 2). Is eligibility to run for the Presidency, which is also not what I'm here to discuss. The first applies to this conversation, the second does not.

Territorial Citizens are fully American citizens on Incorporated soil, but their own communities are not places in which they are fully eligible for federal representation.

The biggest difference in rights however, is between Americans convicted of felonies and Americans who have not been. The definition of a felony is vague in America and many misdemeanors are felonies...based upon the whims of the judge and former records (Jim Crow policies) - but effectively, these crimes, however they are defined in ones state, locality, or federally will leave an American struggling to get a job, unable to vote, often for the rest of their lives, unable to own a firearm (not here to discuss whether our 2nd Amendment Liberties fit in our modern society so would prefer if we kept that discussion to a minimal) and depending on the judge/state, various other requirements, like regular monitoring during "probation," which is effectively a game of catch and release.

My stance is that limiting the rights and opportunities of people with felonies after their sentence (including probation) has been completed is immoral, arguably, tyrannical, and a relic of our enslavement culture, so we should reenfranchise, return gun rights to, and cease deportations of former citizens and limiting jobs available to convicted felons unless credible basis for a persistent threat to our election systems, the safety of others, or other institutions can be established (affiliation with a terrorist or international criminal organization, election meddling, etc...)

If anyone disagrees with this, please, let me know why and let's have a discussion.

[Assistant]
Election meddling is where you draw the line? Murder, rape, those guys get their guns back and shouldnt be kept out of jobs. But election meddlers, lets continue the enslavement culture for them?

Seems like youre letting your personal politics drive the exceptions to your opinion here, rather than being completely objective. How is that any different from the whims of a judge using their personal views to do the same?


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

[User] ELI5: How come mosquitos come back after winters over, why aren't they all wiped out?

[Assistant]
Those aren't the same mosquitoes from the year before you're seeing, those are the larvae that have spent some time in ponds and whatever pools of standing water are around, that have pupated into adults.

The warmer weather triggers them into the next stage, and then the adult mosquito females consume blood to help in the development of her eggs.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do children and teens grow in spurts or bursts, rather than continuously?

[Assistant]
Hormones.

Growth Hormone is released in cycles, you get bursts of it during sleep, so kids growing up overnight is actually kind of true.

Growth hormone secretion is also increased by a number of other factors, most notably from testosterone and estrogen, which are increased during puberty. Other causes of increased growth hormone would be eating (insulin and glucagon both increase growth hormone), and exercise.

But like someone else already said: these things are occurring pretty consistently (that growth hormone increase is occurring every night), so the 'bursts' we see are probably just our own perception when we see that someone's grown an inch and we hadn't realized it.


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

[User] ELI5:Why do Newtonian physics break down at a quantum level?

[Assistant] It's not so much that they break down, rather it's that Newtonian physics is an approximation of how the world works that is not totally correct, but in many cases is accurate enough to be incredibly useful.  In such circumstances (like the ordinary motion of a baseball), the inaccuracy is so low as to be practically imperceptible, though it is still there.  When things become very small, very large, or very fast, however, the Newtonian model is very inaccurate.


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

[User] What is the significance of isotropy in the cosmological principle? What would a cosmology that was homogeneous but *not* isotropic look like?

[Assistant]
One example could be that expansion is faster in some directions than others. This is possible even if the universe is homogeneous, and a universe with this property is called a "Bianchi type 1 universe".

There are other possibilities too; look up "Bianchi universes".


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

[User]
[MCU] How much web can Spider-Man's web-shooters hold?

How long would it take for him to run out?
edit: also, do we know what the web is made of?

[Assistant]
His webs are made out of a special chemical that he devised, but we do not know what that mixture is. They are as strong as steel after drying, are able to be fired in quick drying and floppy modes while dissolving away to nothing in 3-8 hours. The shooters likely have settings that inject different amounts of some activating chemcial that tells the webs to harden or soften as needed so he doesn't damage the city's windows as he swings but can also hold down thugs.

How much they hold is unknown but we do know that they can last anywhere from a couple of hours to all night long depending on how much he uses them. So their capacity is typically determined by plot.


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

[User] ELI5: How did we survive so long as hunter-gatherers, sharing the elements with other predators, when human babies are so loud?

[Assistant]
Hunter gatherers wouldn't generally take their babies around with them while they were hunting and gathering.

Humans are *tribal*, so we stick together. Babies would be left with whoever was back at whatever base/town/village was set up. Generally, earlier people would go somewhere, settle for a while, use up resources and often move on.

It is also a good idea to note that *how* we interact with babies is very different. Now, we actually put children down and let them entertain themselves. Long ago, a baby would be held almost all the time. They would naturally be a little more quiet.


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

[User]
CMV: any religion that touts its leaders as speaking directly to god, yet its followers can pray and get a message from god and theyre not special, is a scam.

So many people since Covid for example, are talking about how they prayed to god, who told them they shouldnt get the vaccine

Correct me if Im wrong, but arent bishops, elders, cardinals and priests special because they talk to god? Why are they so special if everyone does it? Why do we need churches if you can just pray from anywhere and talk to/get answers from god?

I could be wrong, as Ive never been religious personally, but years ago it seemed that prayer was sending a letter to god and hoping he gets it and provides what you ask. Now everyone and their mother was told by god to do something like they have his cell number and can call him any time with a question and hell answer them immediately.

People use talking to god as an excuse for everything now and its kind of repulsive. If they think this being created the entire universe and is all powerful and all knowing, why do they think you can just throw gods name around as an excuse for every little thing that upsets or disagrees with you.  Its lazy and blatantly bullshit but historically, religion is sacred so we cant question its plot holes and inaccuracies without being the devil, the antichrist, or some other made up boogeyman to scare people into giving more of their money to some crack pot.

I may have been a bit too broad in that my view is that most religion is just ancient people not understanding the world and making things up to fill the gaps (which isnt far off from current people who often cling to religion when they dont understand something or dont want to understand something as its contrary to other beliefs theyve already made public and dont wanna look dumb.)

But the view Id like to hear attempts to change is regarding religions where everyone can speak to god but some claim their dialogue is more important than other somehow. What makes them so special? And why do you need the religion at all if everyone can talk directly to god?

EDIT: Still no deltas awarded, as everyone seems to be cherry-picking why their religion isnt a scam and still not even covering everything.

[Assistant]
>Correct me if Im wrong, but arent bishops...cardinals and priests special because they talk to god?

You are wrong. Bishops, Cardinals, and Priests aren't special because they can talk to God. In Catholicism, Priests are special mostly because they can effect the sacrament of the Eucharist (i.e. the changing of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ) as well as two of the other sacraments. Bishops are special because they occupy a position of authority in the Church, as well as being capable of ministering the sacrament of Holy Orders (i.e. the process of making someone a Priest, Bishop, or Deacon). Cardinals are special because of their position of authority within the Church, which entitles them to choose a new Pope. None of this is specially about "talking to God" per se, and most other traditional Christian religions are similar (I mention Catholicism here only because the term "cardinal" that you used is primarily associated with Catholicism).


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

[User]
Why does water seem to vaporize fairly quick at room temperature, even though the boiling point is not reached and water has a high surface tension?

I can still remember that this question popped up in my head on a cold day (about 5 degrees Celsius) and I could see water evaporate on my arm after I washed my hands in a small creek. Being the smart 12-year-old that I was, I was pretty certain my skin wasn't 100 degrees. I had a hard time grasping why the water was going from a liquid state to a 'gas' state.

My last lessons in chemistry where about 12 years ago, so excuse my gawky terminology, but I'm still looking for the answer to the question.

[Assistant]
Top-down view: While the air in contact with the water is not saturated with water vapour, water molecules will escape the liquid phase and enter the gas phase. This is relative humidity.

Bottom-up view: The overall temperature of the water is below the boiling point, but this is number is an average over many molecules. Temperature is proportional to kinetic energy, so we can say the kinetic energy of the molecules typically forms a Boltzmann distribution. The average temperature may be below the BP, but some molecules will have sufficient energy to break out of the liquid and enter the gas phase.


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

[User] Why are sonogram images that weird wedge shape?

[Assistant] Depends on the probe (transducer) that is used. A curvilinear probe, used for abdominal and obstetric scanning, gives the wedge shape. This gives a wider field of view at the expense of reduced resolution. A linear probe gives a narrower parallel field of view but increases the image resolution. An ultrasound image is made up of a series of pulse-echo lines which are built up to create the image. The machine sends out a pulse and waits for echoes, then moves along and repeats until it has enough lines for an image. To increase the frame rate, gaps are left between the pulses meaning that fewer lines are required to create the image. The scanner has to fill these in, a process called interpolation. In a curvilinear probe the lines diverge, which creates bigger gaps at the deeper part of the image, leading to more interpolation and reduced image quality.


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

[User]
[Ender's Game] What would happen if you shot the little doctor into a black hole?

I know that the bigger the object, the bigger the blast it produces. But in the book, he shot the little doctor at the formic home planet, and after the initial blast, remnants of the planet came together to form a smaller mass. (I hope that makes sense) I'm wondering what would happen if it was something with the mass of a black hole?

[Assistant] Nothing visible.  The Little Doctor's field doesn't expand faster than light, and thus what effect, if any, it had on the mass inside the black hole would be contained within that hole's event horizon and we'd never know about it.


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

[User] ELI5: Why did some older semi trucks have two gearboxes? And what's the point of some of then having so many gears?

[Assistant]
Semi trucks only have 10-15 horsepower per ton of weight that they're moving, whereas cars have several times as much. And the truck's engine only makes that much power in a narrow RPM window, say from 1,600 to 1,900 rpm

You need a lot of gears to keep the RPM jumps between the gears as small as possible so the engine can always operate inside its RPM sweet spot. That wouldn't work if they only had say 5 or 6 gears. So that's why they have so many.

Now, you can either design a fairly complex gearbox with like 12 or 14 forward gears, or you can combine two of them. Basically you have a 6-speed gearbox and another one that allows you to 'sub-divide' those 6 gears.

Instead of just having 4th and 5th gear, the secondary gearbox lets you select intermediate steps.


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

[User]
ELI5:Why do we spontaneously dance(move) to music?

It seems to be more like an instinct since even small children have the urge to move when they hear music.

[Assistant]
We dont really know, besides that music stimulated the auditory part of our brain, which then stimulated the reward center of our brain. Why does it do that? We dont really know. But what we do know is that humans find music rewarding.

Theres plenty of different theories as to why we developed that way, such as it simply being humans like patterns (patterns are easy to remember and identify, which can help you survive), and music at its base is rhythmic patterns.


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

[User]
[Marvel] What is the "Scientist Supreme"

So I've heard of Sorcerer Supreme, but what is the Scientist Supreme?

What extra abilities does Scientist Supreme give?

Why is Hank Pym the Scientist Supreme and not someone better like Dr. Doom or Reed Richards?

Does the Scientist Supreme contrast the Sorcerer Supreme?

[Assistant]
> So I've heard of Sorcerer Supreme, but what is the Scientist Supreme?

- The title of Yandroth, a interdimensional Master of the Mental Arts. The title gives him no special abilities, as it is a descriptor of his duties and skills. He is a direct contrast to the Sorcerer Supreme, as he uses rationality and science to create technology that rivals Stephen Strange's magical artifacts. He is the oppositional force to the concept of Sorcerer Supreme.

- A honorific given to Hank Pym by Eternity. The title bears no special abilities, it's just a reflection of Pym's advancement of science in the universe.

Hank Pym firstly, may not have even gotten the title. Loki claims it was a deception- him/her in disguise. That remains arguable. In any case, if it was truly given it has nothing to do with intelligence. Hank Pym's dedication is really to excelling in the field of research. Doctor Doom is a polymath, who has his irons in a great many fires, even more so lately. Reed Richards is an explorer who uses science as a tool to understand what he finds. There are others, like amadeus Cho, and Bruce Banner that can rival him in intelligence and even scientific aptitude, but they all basically use science to accomplish their goals. Pym does science for the sake of science, to understand the nature of the multiverse around him.

Others have several titles which they can be called superlative or even the best at, but only he is the scientist supreme in Eternity's eyes, supposedly.

None of this concerning Pym has anything to do with Doctor Strange's title as Sorcerer Supreme, they are completely different ideas and job descriptions.


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

[User] ELI5: What causes sleepwalking?

[Assistant]
When you go to sleep, there is a part of your brain that turns off your muscles while you dream so you don't act out your dreams. Sometimes something can go wrong and your brain forgets to turn off your muscles. So your body just goes along with your dreams and you sleepwalk.

This is also the same part of your brain that causes sleep paralysis, where you wake up but can't move. The dreams stopped, you woke up, but your brain hasn't flicked the switch to turn your muscles back on yet.


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

[User] [Bioshock Infinite]What exactly is the Songbird?

[Assistant] Songbird is an extremely advanced hybrid between man and machine, brutally brainwashed and conditioned to rabidly protect Elizabeth. It's known to respond to several cues, most prominently the song on the pipe instrument Fink designed, and has extremely acute senses. It's to the Handyman and the Big Daddy as nuclear weapons are to fire, and its devastating potential should not be underestimated.


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

[User] [Star Wars: Rogue One] Why did Saw Gerrara put Bhodi into a jail cell if he knew he was telling the truth?

[Assistant] Saw is deeply paranoid and rightly so. He's made an enemy of both the empire and the alliance with his actions and is fearing an assassination attempt constantly. Bhodi might be telling the truth or he's been given false information he believes is true and is being sacrificed to get Saw out in the open. Saw doesn't trust anyone but his closest allies in the partisans and even then he'll readily kill them if he feels like they're going to kill him first.


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

[User] Why can almost any function be easily differentiated while so many functions cannot be integrated or are much more difficult to do so?

[Assistant]
This is actually backwards.  Any function that has a derivative has an integral, but most functions that have integrals don't have derivatives.  For instance, every continuous function is integrable, but almost none of them are differentiable.

What you're talking about isn't actually integration or differentiation, but rather *writing down formulas* for integrals and derivatives, which is something altogether different.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does higher literacy rates correspond to lower birth rates?

I understand that the more educated people are more aware of the responsibilities and risks of having children and they use protection more etc. but why is it ALWAYS that more literate and rich populations have lower birth rates? At one point, shouldnt the literate and able people have children to contribute to the future of their countries?

[Assistant]
It's not that *literate* people are less likely to have kids.

It's that populations with a higher rate of literacy... also tend to have a higher level of development - better medical care, better education, more industries and jobs concentrated on advanced technologies.

If you look at how a country developed in time you can see why this is a trend.

A country starting out a few hundred years ago that was based on agriculture (farming and harvesting) had a lower quality of health care, which meant people were more likely to die. Also, having more children was an asset, a positive thing, because they could help contribute to the work on the farm. But you were also more likely to have even *more* kids than that because you kind of anticipated that at least a few or more would die from disease.

Then medicine started getting better, and technology started getting better. People started moving to the city and the mortality rate for children started to drop. But this was a transitional period so people were still poppin' kids out.

Then finally a *lot* of people settled in the city, and having kids became a *liability*, a burden, because... well, your 14 year old kid isn't going to be helping you compile and file financial reports for your job at Goldman-Sachs. And you could feel comfortable having just one or two kids because with modern medicine you have a really strong guarantee that they are gonna be healthy and survive through adulthood.

Now, there are still a lot of countries that are developing around the world and unfortunately do not have access to the same level of medicine that other countries have, and they still rely on very manual farming and fishing jobs for survival. So they're in that early stage still.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does a room go dark after the light goes out? Where does the light go, and does it take a brief moment for this process to happen, or is it nearly instantaneous the room goes dark after the light goes out?

[Assistant]
Think of it like a hose... and a room made of sponge.

The light bulb is a hose, spraying water (light) everywhere. The room is a sponge, absorbing the water (light) all the time.

The moment you turn the light off, it's like closing the faucet to which the hose is attached. It stops spraying water (light) everywhere, the sponge absorbs any water still traveling through the room.

The water (light) does not vanish instantaneously. It travels until it hits some sponge which absorbs it. It travels extremely, extremely fast, mind you, but it does take a finite amount of time to vanish.


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

[User]
CMV: I think everyone on earth should speak the same language.

I think this would create a greater unity among all humankind by making communication with different people much easier.

I understand that, to an extent, culture is tied to language, but many people of other cultures still practice those cultures while speaking english. It doesn't seem like other cultures would disappear if all people spoke one language.

In fact, the fact that language is a part of culture seems to provide even greater evidence that speaking one language would bring the world closer together, by making all cultures that much more able to understand/empathize with each other.

Edit: I am not arguing for one particular language over any other. Also, this is regardless of how everyone comes to speak the same language (maybe starting with everyone speaking it as a second language would work best?), I'm just arguing that if they did, it would have a positive effect overall.

[Assistant]
One of the most underrated parts of any language are the words that are untranslatable to other languages. For example, the English word serendipity is notoriously hard to translate into other languages. In Spanish, the word duende is famously hard to translate. And there are countless examples from other languages of words that do not translate well or at all to other languages.

Why is this important? Well, these untranslatable words give their languages a special feeling that no other language has. Their existence and usage can tell you about what the people of the other culture might value that you might not.

Not only that, but the grammar between languages is so different, that sometimes whole works of literature are difficult to translate. Take The Metamorphosis for example. It's first sentence is famously hard to translate into English because English grammar and German grammar are so very different. They place value on different sentence constructs, orderings, and word types that make the sentence (and whole piece) just different between the two languages (of course translators do their best, but an English version of the Metamorphosis does not compare to a German version). A similar comparison is between Don Quixote in Spanish and in English. You might be able to translate it to English, but there will be many differences (subtle, yet the feeling is what is important) that can change the way the book is read.

And while literature may not be the utmost important thing in the world (and perhaps world unity is more important), what the literature represents is important: the culture. That different languages place different importance on different words, grammar, syntax, etc. makes the languages not just hard to translate, but almost impossible to do so without losing part of the meaning that is only comprehensible in the original language.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why, often in film credits, are the actor's and character's name often written as, for example, "Ian McKellen - Gandalf (as Ian McKellen)", but only for certain cast members?

I've seen this a lot on IMDB, and this was just an example using more well-known names. For a direct example, I was looking up the cast for the 1999 film, DragonHeart: A New Beginning, and the lead actor, Chris Masterson, is listed as "Christopher Masterson - Geoff (as Christopher Masterson)", and another character is "	Vladimir 'Furdo' Furdik - Sentry (as Vladimir Furdik)", but only those 2 actors were listed that way. What does it mean that their character is "as the actor", but it's only true for them and not anyone else in the cast?

[Assistant] The two names which are listed are the one the actor is commonly known as and the other is how the credit in the film is given. The movie may list him with one name, IMDb or other sources May refer to them by another name. This is especially common for actors who have changed their screen names during their career.


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

[User] [Harry Potter] If Voldemort made speaking his name a taboo so that Death Eaters could easily trace the speaker, why didn't he make the phrase "He-who-must-not-be-named" a taboo as well? Wasn't there like a 90% chance if someone said that phrase they were probably referencing Voldemort?

[Assistant]
Because if someone says He-who-must-not-be-named, it means they're afraid of him, and no threat to him. References to him ARE going to come up, since the ministry has blatantly begun acting on his agenda. But if someone is saying He-who-must-not-be-named, they're going to be saying it in whispers to dismiss the notion, and if someone bursts into their house a minute later, you've confirmed what they just dismissed.

He couldn't just kill every single wizard who wasn't a Death Eater, so he needs to instill fear to make the population compliant. And nothing shows fear more than being too scared to say Voldemort.


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

[User] If the Higgs Boson is what lends mass to protons, neutrons and so on, where does the Boson itself get it's mass? What are the sub-atomic particles made up of? What is the Boson made up of?

[Assistant] The Higgs boson is not actually what gives elementary particles mass, but the Higgs field. Massive elementary particles couple to this field and as a result gain mass. The Higgs boson is an excitation of this field, and it couples to this field to receive mass. Also, most of the mass of protons, neutrons, and composite particles of quarks comes from the binding energy between the quarks, not from the mass of the quarks.


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

[User] CMV: If we get rid of tipping waiters in restaurants they will, on average, earn less money, not more. With more money being transferred to restaurant owners instead of staff.

[Assistant]
You miss the main argument for ending the practice of tipping. The reason is that the establishment is responsible for paying the servers, not the customers. The tipping debate was never about whether servers would make more or less money than before. If they make less money than before, than the servers have the option to leave that job or negotiate for higher pay. But what the wage of the servers changes to, should tipping end, is not really an important part of the debate.

In addition, this entire CMV is just a guess. You can't say with any degree of certainty what would happen if tipping was ended.


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

[User]
[DBZ]How do people survive energy blasts?

When someone is sending a huge energy blast at someone else and it completely envelops them, there won't even be a scratch on them if they're powerful enough.  How does this work?

[Assistant] A fighter's body lets off an aura of energy that serves a defensive purpose of simply dampening blows. When a giant energy blast envelops them and they are unhurt, the implication is their aura is stronger than their enemy's energy blast.


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

[User]
[X-men][Deadpool] is Deadpool technically not a true mutant?

This comes from the Deadpool game where Deadpool calls Mr Sinister a Mutate like him. considering that Deadpool isnt a natural mutant and had to be mutated by Dr Killbrew and weapon X, does this mean Deadpool and the other Weapon X experiments arent really technically mutants in the case that they were forcibly mutated?

[Assistant]
The comics do make a distinction between a mutant (someone born genetically different than baseline human) and a mutate (someone born as a baseline human, and then genetically altered accidentally or willfully). Wade Wilson was not born a mutant, but was made into something technically distinct from (but functionally very similar to) a mutant. Logan, also part of Weapon X, was born a mutant.

The films blur the line. In Wolverine Origins, Wade is depicted as a mutant, who was then further mutated. Deadpool the movie instead  describes the process as being a way of awakening the potential for mutation; Wade was essentially a born mutant, who likely never would have been noted as anything other than baseline human had he not volunteered for the program.


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

[User] How long ago did the platypus split off from other mammals? Why does the platypus have several distinct features not found elsewhere in combination? What genetic or fossil evidence supports the theories?

[Assistant] The monotremes split from the therians in the late Triassic/early Jurassic. Early monotremes did not resemble platypuses. The unique modern platypus form is a combination of derived (duck-like bill, webbed feet) and ancestral traits (lack of teats, oviparity, fur). The general platypus morphology has existed since at least late Oligocene as evident in the fossil record exemplified by the extinct genus *Obdurodon*.


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

[User]
How can objective morality overcome language?

Say that we are realists. We agree that 'child abuse' is objectively wrong.

But what exactly is child abuse? For extreme cases, child abuse is well defined and understood. But for more nuanced cases, we have endless complexities and components that defines the conduct.

Let's say we are trying to find the threshold where an act is considered not an abuse, but if only added a tiny component, it becomes an abuse. The point where we raise the flag and enter the realm of child abuse and its moral implications.

Given the enormous amount of components to consider, we cannot really reduce it to a linear progression of severity and articulate a threshold point. However as objectivists, we believe it exist, right? We have acts which are not child abuse, we have acts which are child abuse -- there is a line, somewhere.

In our mission to find out this threshold, we build an AI program that analyses trillions over trillions of borderline cases (let's put aside the mechanism which determines if an act is moral and consider that it does know how to do that), and rule out if they are an abuse or not.

Can this AI ever provide a clear definition of what considers a child abuse? of this threshold area? Can it give us clear examples of cases which lack this tiny component in order to become an abuse?

[Assistant] The situation is even worse than you think! For by the very same virtue, we must ask, how can objective knowledge claims in general overcome language? Say we are realists. We agree that the Earth is round. But what exactly is the Earth? And what exactly is roundness?


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

[User]
Why can't the Fed just do a 250 basis point hike in one go for the year and we can just move on with our lives

From @_SidVerma on Twitter. And could you please also help me understand why a few people replied that its because the fed has painted itself into a corner where if we keep giving the patient medicine to mask the pain, it will die, and if we dont, it will die?

And why do people think such a rate hike automatically crash the market?

Thank you.

[Assistant] When you increase interest rates, you also increase the cost of borrowing. People & businesses that take out loans, will have to pay more. This also leads to a slowdown of the economy. Any such measures need to be taken gradually.


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

[User] ELI5: Why are babies sometimes so unwilling to eat, when it is fundamental for survival?

[Assistant]
Failure to thrive is sometimes caused by things that aren't obvious: some babies have acid reflux, some aren't signaling they're hungry in ways the parents pick up on, some have other health issues.

Essentially, if a baby appears healthy and isn't eating, something is going on - and it needs to be investigated.


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

[User]
META plea to ELI5 about the upcoming elections.

As election season is upon us, I sense the number of posts about it will increase. And since most will be 'ELI5 The Electoral College" or "ELI5 American Politics" or "ELI5 The Difference Between Obama and Romney" repeated over and over, can we please get a one stop shop **ELI5: Guide to the 2012 election** in the side bar so that we can direct all these redundant questions there.

[Assistant] Also, can we have active moderation? ELI5 will have more and more questions of the "push-poll" variety as the election nears. It will become unusable if half of the posts are "ELI5 why Mitt Romney hates gay babies" and "ELI5 how President Obama can hold office if he's a secret Kenyan Nazi?"


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

[User]
[Guardians of the Galaxy] What if Ronan gave Thanos the Power Stone instead of keeping it?

Title. What if he just handed it to him. Granted, at this time, I don't believe Thanos had the Infinity Guantlet. So what happens next in the grand scheme of things?

[Assistant]
The same events would probably play out. He would still wait for ego, sourcerer supreme, and odin to die before he continued on with his plans like what he did in the normal sequence of events.

If he were to start collecting the stones sooner in your scenario, one of the 3 aforementioned characters might have caught on. Knowing this, he would still wait for odin to pass and therefore asguard to be destroyed and he would attack the asguardian ship as usual.


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

[User]
How do investment bankers and other financial careers produce wealth/value?

A popular opinion seems to be that people in finance produce little value and/or are just parasites. This seems to rely on the assumption that wealth is a zero sum game.

Are there good examples of how these people increase production?

[Assistant]
Starting from the obvious:

Businesses require capital - startup money to buy property, plant, equipment, or whatever else. Good businesses are a better allocation of capital than bad businesses. Therefore, we want smart venture capitalists and angel investors to go over new business plans, and to try to distinguish the good entrepreneurs from the bad ones.

The benefits these guys provide are obvious. Entrepreneurs come up with ideas and venture capitalists help vet them. So what about the rest of the financial markets?

Well, the venture capitalists need to be able to exit the market, so they can invest their money in new startups. So you need some people to turn a new company's ownership into publicly traded stock. Then the venture capitalists can exit (sell).

Here's where the rest of the finance people come in. Stock prices, from beginning to end, *must* reflect the fundamentals of the underlying company.

Suppose that the stock traders weren't doing their job right, and they were overvaluing, say, all of the tech stocks. Well, then you'd see the venture capitalists giving too much money to dubious tech startups. Who cares if the thing is profitable in ten years? If we can sell the stock immediately at a high price, that's all we care about!

This isn't a hypothetical; this is *exactly* what happened in the late 1990s. Capital was poured into dubious tech companies when it should have been going into other, more useful projects. If we had smarter finance professionals who didn't overvalue the tech stocks, then we'd all have been better off.


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

[User]
What should I read of Heidegger & Husserl to help me understand Being and Nothingness?

I know nothing about philosophy. I've read *The Stranger* & *The Plague* and really liked them. When I Googled Camus to learn more about him, it said "People also search for Jean-Paul Sartre" and *Being and Nothingness* came up when I clicked on it so I ordered it.

Now I've started trying to reading it and it's difficult to understand.

From searching around on this sub I've figured out that some things I could read first to help would be:

* *Existentialism Is a Humanism* - Sartre
* *The Transcendence of the Ego* - Sartre
* *Meditations on First Philosophy* - Descartes

And then I saw several suggestions to read Heidegger & Husserl, but there weren't many specific suggestions. I wrote down *Being and Time* and *The Paris Lectures*, but I'm not sure if those are the right ones to read. Any suggestions?

[Assistant]
Trying to read Hiedegger to understand Satre as an amauter is like learning to be a helicopter pilot in order to get to the grocery store faster. Incredibly difficult and unlikely to help you very much. *Being and Time* is probably one of the most difficult Philosophy books out there, and Husserl isn't know for being an easy read.

Just read Satre.


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

[User]
[General]Can you think of any works of fiction that actually discuss the ethicality of wiping peoples memories?

When you think about it wiping peoples memories, even if you are able to wipe out specific memories with no real side effects, is kind of messed up.

I mean, if I entered someones computer without the owners permission and erased a file, any file I am probably guilty of some sort of crime(computer trespass etc) or if I took someones book and ripped a few pages out of it Im guilty of destroying someones property.

Yet in fiction when they are methods wiping peoples memories the ethicality of is never really discussed at all:

In Harry Potter we found out that they are memory erasing spells and that Lockhart as been using to erase peoples memories so he can take credit for tenor achievements and that is depicted as a bad thing but we are also told that good wizards use it on muggles to cover for the wizarding world

In MIB Will Smith is very hesitant about K using the neuralyzer on people but in the sequels he used it frequently with no hesitations.

In Gravity Falls there is actually a group of villains that goes around wiping peoples memories and it is depicted as a negative thing but when the protagonists gets the hands on their memory erasing device they use it on them and it is portrayed as a good thing and also for comedy even though the leader of the group had been the leader for decades and by wiping out his memories of  group they basically brain damaged him yet any discussions of whatever it was the right thing to do is never brought up.

Thats just seems to the standard in fiction: if antagonists erase peoples memories its a bad horrible thing but when protagonists do it is a good thing, no discussions at all is necessary.

Can you think of any works of fiction that actually discuss this?

[Assistant]
Yeah, Identity Crisis in DC Comics

The heroes started wiping memories and rewriting personalities of supervillains who were crossing moral lines. Then as other heroes start finding out, there's a pretty big fallout out over it.

It was sort of like DC's Civil War but not really.


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

[User]
Why does the sun feel hotter on a hot day?

Today in L.A. it's hot, in the high 90s. I went out at midday and the heat from the sun felt unpleasantly hot, making me want to stay inside as much was possible.

A few days ago, it was maybe 10 degrees cooler. I went out at midday, and the sun felt pleasantly warm.

I'm asking here about the direct sensation of the heat from the sun on the skin. It was the same season, same time of day, same location, full sunlight each time, no wind on either occasion. Why does it feel different?

[Assistant] Because you do not perceive temperature; rather you perceive loss or gain of heat energy. On the cooler day you were able to dissipate heat at a faster rate than on the hotter day, giving the sensation of being cooler. If it is humid this effect is compounded because you are not able to lose heat as effectively through sweat evaporation.


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

[User]
ELI5: How can the government force you to purchase a healthcare plan or get fined?

I'm still confused as to why or how this is constitutional.

[Assistant] Because the 16th amendment to the Constitution of the US says that the Federal government has the authority to impose taxes. These taxes can be for just about anything. The Supreme Court decided that imposing taxes for not purchasing health insurance is constitutional.


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

[User] Over time do nuclear warheads become less powerful?

[Assistant]
Over a very, very long time, the radioactivity of the fissionable material drops. Long before that, the mechanical, triggering and control mechanisms likely degrade to the point of making the weapon potentially dangerous to even store.  Hence, the retirement/rebuild programs for old nukes.

Edit: 'Fail' in this case  means more likely to not work at all not blow up without warning.


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

[User] [All Vampire/Dracula Lore] Who was or even WHAT was the first being to have vampire blood/powers? Did it start wit ha spirit? A genie? A jinn? Random RNA mutation? What? I really want to know.

[Assistant]
You'll get as many answers as there are vampires in the world. Especially if you account for all the universes they exist in.

In worlds where vampirism is explicitly a curse from God onto the most wicked of people, Cain (of Cain and Abel from the Bible) was the first vampire. His act of evil was so unprecedented that he was forever cursed to bear his burden, and spread it among the unholy. Sometimes, it was Judas and not Cain who was the first, for a similar reason.

In other worlds, vampirism is just a natural thing, like a disease or illness that kills its victims, yet doesn't. The microorganisms that cause the transformation have simply always been there, or were made by God/the Gods to torment mortals. In such cases, it's impossible to know the first vampire, since it would have happened so long ago.

Similarly, when vampirism is a curse from the underworld or evil extra-dimensional planes (if not some sort of demonic possession), then it would be impossible to know the first. Like in a disease-vamp universe, the first vampire would have been turned eons ago, long before writing or other surviving memory.

That being said, we do know of one world where vampirism is a form of demonic possession, and the first vampire was an ancient queen named Akasha. Circa 4000 b.c.e., a malevolent spirit named Amel possessed her body and soul at the moment of her death. All future vampires would be imbued with a small fragment of his power.


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

[User]
[MCU] [Endgame] Why did the Avengers not travel back to go for the head?

Why did the Avengers not time travel to the moment Thanos was vulnerable with Stormbreaker in his chest, and have Thor decapitate him there? If they had, they would have acquired all of the Infinity Stones without the death of Black Widow, and Iron Man. They would also have opportunities for numerous attempts as they are only traveling to one time period. And even better, the alternate timeline they create is safe from the snap, which although doesnt help them, it does mean this timelines people dont have to live for five years without half the universe.

Edit: The answer that makes the most sense to me so far is that a direct confrontation with Thanos was immediately dismissed as too risky.

[Assistant]
Showing a Thanos with complete Gauntlet that they were travelling from another world? GIGANTIC risk. Screw that up, and you have a fully empowered Mad Titan who now wants to snap *all* the timelines.

Remember, the original plan would have never went directly against Thanos again at all: grab the Gems, snap everyone back, put back the Gems. We'd still lose Black Widow or Hawkeye due to the unexpected snag of the Soul Gem's protection, but the "time travel heist" had the least risk on paper.

It only really went wrong because Nebula accidentally tipped off Past Thanos, which wasn't anticipated at all.


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

[User] [Pirates of The Caribbeans] What requirements does a person need to fulfill to be the captain of the Flying Dutchman?

[Assistant]
I've heard the position is hereditary, in that weird way that being the Dread Pirate Roberts is hereditary. If you kill the captain of the Flying Dutchman, you become the captain of the Flying Dutchman. Calypso basically gave over the portion of her portfolio that involves ferrying the souls of the dead to the Captain of the Dutchman, so it's essentially demigodhood. And the Dutchman must have a captain.

You're probably not going to get it from Will, though. He's really into duty and honor and noble sacrifice, so even if Calypso *could* transfer control of the Dutchman over to you, Will's probably going to be suspicious of anyone who wants the job, and not let you have it.


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

[User] eli5 how do they take the caffeine out of coffee to make decaffeinated coffee?

[Assistant] Other posters are correct that decaf is made using a solvent that removes the caffeine. However there is another way called The Swiss Water Process. It has multiple steps. First green (unroasted) coffee beans are soaked in hot water to dissolve any water soluble compounds, which includes caffeine but also a lot of the other organic compounds that make coffee taste and smell like coffee. The water is then passed through a special molecular filter that selectively removes the large caffeine molecules but lets other organics pass through. Steeping another batch of beans in this decaffeinated green coffee extract dissolves away caffeine but leaves behind the other organics because the extract is already full of them.


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

[User]
ELI5:How can I suddenly become lonely?

I am generally absolutely fine with being alone, in fact at times I revel in it. However, for some reason at random intervals for approximately 5-6 hours at a time I feel near cripplingly lonely and for no apparent reason crave another person.

Is it a chemical situation or is it possible that I repress the feelings and they are always present without me noticing?

[Assistant]
Loneliness does not come from having no people about one, but from being unable to communicate the things that seem important to oneself, or from holding certain views which others find inadmissible.
 C.G. Jung

I don't believe there is chemical imbalance that leads to the specific emotion of loneliness. And, even introverts need interaction.


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

[User]
How do scientists know that a specific part of our DNA is viral?

Just reading about virus evolution, and it got me wondering about all the times scientists say some 5-10% of our DNA is viral in origin. If those genes are potentially still active in us--not sure if they're non-coding or not--how do they know it's viral (and/or not the other way around)? (Not that I don't believe the much-smarter-than-me scientists, I'm just curious)

Thanks (and sorry if I misused vocabulary)!

[Assistant]
Very cool question!

The sequences youre referring too are called endogenous retroviruses. We know theyre viral in origin due to how similar they are in nucleic Acid sequence and sequence element types to known and current retroviruses.

To answer some of your question about activity, different sites are transcribed at varying levels. Some even have direct impact on biological function of other human genes.

But to date none have been identified that are still capable of producing an infectious virus, as far as Im currently aware.

Did that answer your questions?


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

[User] [Star Trek Enterprise]In Civilization the NX-01's long range sensors discover some black dwarf stars, but the senior officers opt not to visit them. Why aren't they at all interested in studying stars that shouldn't exist in a universe as young as ours?

[Assistant]
By the 22nd century, cosmologists had determined some mechanisms that black dwarfs could in fact form naturally. In some rare cases, a cooling white dwarf will interact with a localized subspace inversion pocket to create an area of accelerated temporal flow. These white dwarfs can thus age and cool much more rapidly than the clocks of distant observers would think possible. The universe may only be 13 billion years old, but by the black dwarfs' clocks, they have experienced trillions of years worth of time.

This was first postulated by researchers in the 2090s, and then confirmed by telescopic observations in the 2210s. By the NX-01's launch, several hundred black dwarfs had already been cataloged.


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

[User]
ELI5: The concept of Dimensions. How do we know there are 12? How do we know which one is which specifically?

I know the first 3, (width, height, depth) and if I heard correctly the 4th is time. But yesterday this topic came up in conversations and to my suprise there is 12. But my friend couldn't tell me what they do either.

[Assistant]
>How do we know there are 12?

We don't know whether there are 12, or any more than 4. Current conventional physics only uses 4 dimension (3 space + 1 time). The 12 dimensions you hear from are a prediction (or rather: a requirement) of certain speculative theories in physics like string theory. String theory has not been proven to be correct yet.

>How do we know which one is which specifically?

In the world of string theory, the other extra dimensions are very very small. They are nothing like the regular dimensions that we are familiar with. You'd have to zoom in to around the Planck length (10^(-35)m) to see them.


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

[User]
CMV: Sam Harris's program to give ethics an axiomatic foundation is, according to his particular formulation, logically incoherent.

This one is quite simple, and I'm sure that the details can be worked out through discussion. Harris asks us to assume that wellbeing is to be axiomatically regarded as the foundation for our ethical system, that is, the domain of inquiry that includes working out what the aim of an ethical system ought to be.

But this is logically incoherent: every field that concerns itself with a particular domain of inquiry cannot adopt what would be *conclusions* within that domain of inquiry as axioms. For example, in the field of engineering, you can assume that it's good for an engineer to have low cholestorol but not that he ought to build a particular bridge of a particular thickness with a particular material.

On the other hand, within the domain of medicine, it is fine to assume that building such a bridge is the aim but *not* that the engineer should have low cholestorol, because whether or not having low cholestorol is a good thing is a conclusion within the science of medicine.

In the same way, to identify that *wellbeing* is the ethical goal we should strive for is not appropriate as an *axiom* for ethics, as determining what ethical goal we should strive for can only be a *conclusion* for ethics, as that is one of the points on which ethics is designed to seek a conclusion.

Thoughts?

[Assistant] I can't comment on the microscopic details of Harris's meta-ethics, but it seems to me like you've got it wrong slightly. The importance of well-being in Harris's account is not axiomatic, but rather definitional. Harris is not saying, "Surely everyone can see that well-being is the road to the Good," but rather that the Good can only possibly be understood as well-being, i.e. that what we mean when we say "good" is actually "promotes well-being".