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

[User]
[In Time] how did the whole world get onto the "Time Economy"?

I understand it for the rich, those who potentially would never run out of money, but for everyone else it seems like a bad deal, even for the Middle-Upper Middle Class,  since you *might* live forever, but you can't retire

Just seems like a really bad choice to elect to die at a much younger age, rather than live for a guaranteed 70-80 years.

[Assistant] It's easy to see why rich people would like such a system - because it would let them be immortal. So maybe some wealthy employers just started refusing to pay their employees with cash, and started only hiring employees that were willing to use the time system. And then, as more and more employees were brought in to the time system, eventually time credits became the primary currency used in economies. Maybe?


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

[User]
ELI5: How do politicians benefit from corporate money? Do they use it as personal income?

I know it goes to fund their campaigns, but I'm not sure if they can use it as personal money as well. If it only goes to their campaigns, why are they so influenced by corporate money if their positions' salaries aren't super high? Are there loopholes they use?

[Assistant]
A politician can never use this money for his or her own personal use. If there is leftover campaign funding, it can be donated to a charity organization or the national party. It can also be held for future campaign use.

Politicians are influenced by corporations because campaigning can be very expensive - often an amount that the politician would never be able to afford personally. The salary of their position is irrelevant. Companies donate money to a candidate with the idea that he or she will act in their best interest.


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

[User] [mars attacks]was it the bird that set them off or did they plan to attack from the start?

[Assistant] Killing the bird was a weapons test to see if they could easily kill Earth-based lifeforms.  It was convenient, it was highly mobile and it was not a person so while it may create initial shock it wouldn't create outrage and an immediate violent response.


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

[User]
Is it necessary to read Kant before reading Schopenhauer?

I've recently started reading World as Will and Representation. The foreword from the author explicitly gives you a "manual" on how to read this book. Apart from instructing the reader to read some of Schopenhauer's earlier essays (e. g. On the Fourfold Root of Principle of Sufficient Reason) Schopenhauer also stressed the fact that the reader should be familiar with Kant's principal works.

Is it really necessary to thoroughly read Kant before diving into Schopenhauer or will just general knowledge of Kant's  thought suffice and allow me to understand Schopenhauer's works?

[Assistant]
A general knowledge of Kant suffices because Schopenhauer explains Kant pretty well through paraphrase. However, his philosophy does explicitly build upon Kantian foundations, and contemporary readers of Schopenhauer would have been familiar with Kant by default.

You will very quickly be able to tell for yourself, as you go through the first book, whether or not you need to read some (more) Kant before going further.


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

[User] Is there a maximum brightness? Is there a limit to the number of photons in a given area?

[Assistant] At a certain point, if enough light is concentrated in a small enough area you get a black hole. This is called kugelblitz. So theres definitely a maximum. However, the limit there is not on the number of photons but rather the energy.


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

[User] ELI5: How does a self-sharpening blade sharpens itself?

[Assistant]
Self-sharpening blades have a metal strip along the entire length of the cutter. When the cutter moves through the thing you're cutting, that metal strip is rubbed against the cutter and sharpens. If you're cutting something like paper, it'll work really well.

There's some debate whether or not this kind of thing actually works or if it's just a marketing gimmick. There's some evidence for both sides of the argument, so really take it with a grain of salt. It's generally going to be better to just sharpen your blades from time to time.


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

[User] Do stars exist that only emit infrared light?

[Assistant]
Bodies radiate electromagnetism at different  wavelengths based on their temperature.

Infrared, radio waves, light, x-rays, etc. are all em radiation at different wavelengths.

In order for a star to be doing any nuclear fusion it has to be hot enough to emit visible light.

There are brown dwarfs which are sort of quasi stars but in short, not really.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do people in India know which caste I am?

I'm an American of Indian ancestry and reading news about intercaste violence. If I visit India, how will I be viewed in the caste system? I don't even know which caste I am.

[Assistant]
In modern times it can get blurred, people from different castes intra-marry, or even different states. Some clues exist, your last name can indicate what caste your family is from. Sometimes different castes use a different pronunciation or word, and that can give a hint. So can the style of traditional clothes worn can also give geographic or caste hints.

Think of it this way, can you tell if someone is from rural Alabama? Probably, just as much as you can tell If someone is from the inner city or England. Different fashion, food preferences, and accent or words.

Could someone pretend to be a different caste, sure but usually by adulthood, those difference are pretty engrained.


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

[User] Eli5 - why is type 1 diabetes typically diagnosed in childhood from ages 4-6 or 10-14? Whats the significance of those age gaps?

[Assistant]
Type 1 diabetes is the pancreas not being capable of producing sufficient insulin or sometimes any insulin. Sometimes this is something done that occurs very young or from birth and is discovered between the ages of 4-6 because that is when kids begin to communicate well enough that the diagnosis can be made.

Other times it is something that triggers the failure. The 10-14 one is puberty triggering the failure. There is also a less common transition point in the mid 20s that also has to do with hormone shifts that can trigger it too.


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

[User] ELI5, why do minty things feel cold?

[Assistant]
It happens that the nerves in our mouth that are sensitive to cold are also sensitive to menthol, which is the chemical that makes mint taste minty. When you eat mint, the nerves that sense coldness are activated and you experience cold.

A similar thing happens when you eat hot chilis. In that case, the chemical is called capsaicin. The nerves in your mouth that sense heat are triggered by capsacin and when you eat it, it feels like your mouth is on fire.


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

[User]
Do sharks growl?

If not, do they vocalize or communicate in other ways? If so, what circumstances elicit growls, and do they vary across different situations?

[Assistant] Sharks cannot vocalize. However, some sharks, grey reef sharks in particular, have a sort of body language they use to tell other animals to back off. Recognizing this behavior can be helpful to divers. Great whites will also slap their tails on the surface of the water to settle disputes regarding food. Larger splash wins.


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

[User]
[The Expanse] If they are mining ice asteroids then shouldn't the stations have enough if not more water and air than they need?

Also even non-ice asteroids should give them a large amount of ice and oxygen. Not to mention oxygen scrubbers and water purification/reuse. Was it just for there to be conflict or is there something really wrong with their tech or economic corruption.

[Assistant] Ceres was pretty used up and severely overpopulated - a lot of people (undocumented workers, criminals, orphans, etc) were "off-book" and drained resources. Most of the biggest asteroids were also probably cracked by that point , likely to help with the terraforming effort on Mars, so ice haulers had to range farther out (the Canterbury was returning from Saturn).


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Did the Jedi order ever play sports?

Like, for training or relaxing? I figure a baseball game between Jedi has gotta be either really boring or really intense.

[Assistant]
It was mentioned in The Jedi Path that they enjoyed playing Smashball. Notably, Count Dooku found his Jedi Master's idle scrawling bragging about how good he was when the man was a trainee, before writing in that his Master sucked at the game.

Smashball never got fleshed out like other games such as Sabacc though, so no clues on how the game was played besides some game formation moves like a blitz.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Force sensitives seem like they're most effective in war serving as either ground troops or piloting fighters. Do their abilities make them effective bridge Admirals on huge capital ships, or other leadership positions?

[Assistant]
They certainly can, but it's tougher.  Force sensitive pilots benefit from increased reflexes, minor acts of very quick prescient warnings (they're about to fire and such) and subtle deflections of objects in flight.  All of these are comparatively trivial force expressions and all of them benefit a front line combatant.

By contrast bridge officers benefit from from long term bad feelings (asteroid belt X is a bad place) and the ability to inspire personnel.  These are much more complex expressions of force sensitivity, and are difficult for even trained Jedi.  They can sub consciously use those abilities but it's much more difficult and uncommon.


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

[User]
[Superman:Red Son] Why did Lex Luthor murder his research team?

After Superman 2 was defeated by Superman, why did Lex murder his S.T.A.R research team?

[Assistant]
The research team died in an accident, the CEO of LexCorp had nothing to do with this. And even if it were, it would have been justified, seeing as the team made a clone of superman on their own without the company's consent.

------------

^^Disclaimer: ^^This ^^comment ^^and ^^the ^^person ^^who ^^wrote ^^it ^^are ^^in ^^no ^^way ^^affiliated ^^with ^^LexCorp ^^or ^^any ^^of ^^its ^^subsidiaries, ^^any ^^possible ^^connections ^^to ^^LexCorp ^^or ^^any ^^of ^^its ^^subsidiaries ^^are ^^pure ^^coincidence.


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

[User]
[Pirate fiction] In some works where pirates have a stronghold or city that serves as their "Capital", why do naval superpowers in said works not send their navy to destroy it?

Like there's places like "Bloodeye cove" or "Buccaneer bay" and yet the naval powers in these settings never pull off an Algiers and bombard the place into oblivion. The pirates can't hide their hideouts and lairs forever.

I know that this is a comedic example but in "Pirates an adventure with scientists" where iit's stated that the british navy controls the seven seas and even show a chart as such yet they haven't been able to wipe out that *single* pirate town that they haven't conquered or destroyed. They victorian navy should have the power to obliterate a pirate town like what hapened to Algiers in 1816.

No matter how adventurous and romantic pirate may be, they're all criminals and it's an inevitability that their swashbuckling and yo ho ho-ing will come to an end when the long arm of the law reaches them. That was the same for real life pirates.

[Assistant]
In most works of fiction, a powerful navy *does* eventually come in and wipe out the Pirate Town, and there's nothing the pirates can really do to prevent it once sufficient force is brought to bear against them.  In the *Pirates of the Carribbean* franchise for example, the East India Trading company is shown to be more than capable of overwhelming Sao Feng's base in Singapore at the start of the third movie.  The only options the Pirates ever really have are fleeing, or magic.

The main issue is that bringing enough force to bear against a pirate town is not a trivial matter, even for an imperial navy.  A single ship wouldn't be able to intercept multiple fleeing ships, and might even get destroyed if the pirates decide to fight.  A fleet will work, but if you're Imperial power engaged in active warfare against other powers (like the four great powers were during the golden age of piracy), you might go years or even decades before the pirate stronghold becomes enough of a bother to be worth wiping out.

Historically, this is exactly what happened.  Pirate strongholds *did* exist for years and years, and they were eventually destroyed once a real power got around to bothering with it.


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

[User]
Why are the lanthanides and actinides removed from the rest of the periodic table?

Does it allow the table to have more descriptive power based on periods/rows?

[Assistant] We don't have to remove them; they could be written on the same line as the rest of the elements in their row.  That would make the table 14 boxes wider, which would be hard to fit on a normal sheet of paper or a poster without being hard to read.  Instead, the are written as their own block beneath the table.  The same could be done for each other block:  s, p, and d.  There are lots of alternative ways to write out the elements of the periodic table, and a lot of them that you see are useless gimmicks.


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

[User]
[Star Trek] Do we have a definitive cause for the so-called 'Great Barrier' at the edge of the galaxy?

Did the Q Continuum or the Organians put it there?  Is it a radiation front from extra-galactic cataclysm?  Is it a natural phenomena that is around any galactic size body?

Or something else...

[Assistant] It was placed there by the Q to keep an entity called 0 imprisoned in the void between galaxies.  0 was an immortal, nearly-omnipotent (capable of challenging the Continuum on its own terms) entity, which was much more hostile towards "lesser" life forms than the Continuum.


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

[User] If accelerating matter to the speed of light takes infinite energy, why does it not take infinite energy for light to exist, and why can we not convert light into pure energy?

[Assistant] It would, in some sense, take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate anything with mass to the speed of light, although that's not really why it's impossible for massive particles to reach that speed. But light has no mass, and therefore always travels at the speed of light.


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

[User] ELI5:Why is it often cheaper to buy a whole new printer than it is to replace the 3 ink cartridges?

[Assistant] They're selling the printer at a loss and the cartridges at a huge markup. The idea is to make buying the printer appealing because they're going to make all the profit when you invariably need to buy more ink.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do many crazy news stories come from Florida?

I've noticed while reading the news that tons of the crazier stories come from Florida, even in National news such as huff post and msnbc.

Do you think more come from there because how public their criminal info is or do you just think there's more crazies. Could it be the population or the pill problem they have there?

Any ideas?

[Assistant] One reason why a lot of crazy stories seem to come out of Florida is that pretty much all the major U.S. tabloids (such as National Enquirer, National Examiner, Sun, Globe and Star) are published by American Media, which is based in Boca Raton, Florida. Also, Weekly World News was based in Florida before it folded.


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

[User] ELI5: How can I be really hungry at night, go to sleep, wake up, and then not be hungry anymore all with out eating anything?

[Assistant]
When sleeping your body requires less energy than when you are awake.

Your liver stores glucose from the food you eat and can release it when required.

This release of glucose from the liver powers your body while sleeping, and your metabolic rate lowers.

When you wake up in the morning, until you eat breakfast, your liver can continue to release glucose at a higher level to keep you going.

When you eat your first meal of the day your metabolic rate increases and your body starts to store glucose for the next time it is required.

tl;dr glucose and a lower metabolic rate while sleeping.


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

[User]
Supervisor seems like he wants to delay my graduation

OK this is part rant, part asking for advice.

My relationship with my supervisor was always a little tense. He never gave useful input but I actually loved that because then I was able to do my own work and write papers I would be interested in. Due to coronavirus shutdown, I accelerated progress and was able to write 3 papers in 2020 and basically am on my way out.

One of our submissions was just returned with request for major revisions due in 15 days. I asked immediately for a meeting, which he ignored and even told me to not use lab resources to make room for other people. Luckily his input is worthless anyway and I am almost done with the revisions.

The problem is he wants me to work for him as much as possible in the lab as well as for his company. I said I don't want to pursue this field and will do something else and while I think he got the message, he now seems to think if he can't benefit off me (he once told me verbatim "he will milk me as much as he can" LOL), he has no problem extending my stay.

I will quit if I don't graduate by this summer (I wrote a first draft for my thesis and surprise, he hasn't read it). It may sound stupid and dramatic, but I need money (my family needs support + I just bought an expensive computer thinking I would be out in a few months). I don't want to give an ultimatum because at worst he'll have someone else carry on the last mile and publish those papers + even if not, he is a tenured professor who is in his 60s, doesn't give a shit.

What do I do?

\--------------

Some other gems:

\- When my first paper was submitted, he told me it needs more work and probably will be rejected. When it got into a really good journal, he was shocked and visibly upset (cause we need only 3 papers)

\- We discussed me leaving before and even though I had 2 conference + 1 journal + 2 in review, he said what's the rush? He was so happy to pay me $25k/year when an engineer at that level asks for $200k+/year for a starting salary. Mentioned it a bunch of times.

\- His instincts are terrible. Every time I get a note "add this" or "remove that", we get feedback saying this is unrelated or why didn't you describe this in detail. I don't think he is sabotaging me here, it's more like he takes about 15 minutes to review the work and just wants to say things.

\- Since I completed my thesis and every single requirement, I asked him if I could work full time (or even part time). He said no way, people never finish their thesis if they work because they underestimate the work required to complete (exam, revising thesis etc). Now I'm sitting here and before this rejection/rebuttal had nothing to do. But he found me work: I help some of the newcomers, comment my code and prepare documents for future use. I don't object to these, even though in my last 4 years this type of work never amounted to anything.

[Assistant] This is typically quite program specific but there should be a body within your uni/faculty/etc that regulates these things. Even if your advisor doesnt want you to graduate they do! Chat to them and work out the way forward. Graduating without an advisors say so is fairly common so there will be an internal procedure for it.


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

[User]
[Star Trek]Why the hell do we have holodecks onboard deep-space federation vessels? Reading through the reports, it seems like every other day that one goes wrong, becomes sentient, turns the crew into 'photonic lattices' or just plain tries to kill someone.

I realize they're great for relaxation, but sometimes it seems like they're the most dangerous part of the ship, photon torpedoes included.

For that matter, why are the safety locks and manual overrides so easy to disable? it seems like a terrible idea to let such vital safety measures be ovveridden by \*verbal commands\*, of all things.

[Assistant]
The reason it seems like every other day the holodeck fucks up is due to the (i forgot the name of) fallacy.

Basically, everytime holodecks are mentioned is because they have fucked up and that skews your perception a bit.
Imagine someone flips a coin and only tells you about it when he gets heads or when you ask about his latest flip.
You'd think that the coin was weighted abnormally, constantly landing on heads.

Hope i explained it properly.


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

[User]
Where exactly at black holes does hawking radiation occur?

Apparently some say it occurs at the event horizon, others say much further away. I would've thought it's close to the "surface" of the mass.
So let me start here. I assume that a black hole is a spherical piece of mass such as a neutron star, just denser, and massive enough to "capture" light as well as creating a no light zone around it. The more massive a black hole, the bigger this zone is. The more massive a black hole (bh), the less hawking radiation (hr).
Now my problem: If hr occurs at the event horizon, the virtual particle escaping it would need to travel close to the speed of light but would be a lot of energy for a random occurence with very little energy (?).
If it occurs millions of km away and the escaping particle just barely hits just the distance from the bh where it's velocity would allow it to not instantly get dragged back, wouldnt it just go into orbit around the bh and then not be hr? (I realize we don't really know too much about virtual particle's interaction with gravity, or do we?)
Now the only logical way for hr to work for me is this; hr only occurs directly on the surface of the piece of mass. (not the event horizon) Virtual particles are not affected by gravity in any way. The virtual particle annihilating in the bh just happend to travel right into the surface when it was created while the other one just happend not to, because it went the other way and continues to do so beacause it's counter part found another counter part in the bh. In my theory black hole's surfaces are smaller, the more massive they are, because they attrack it's own mass more and don't care about density limitations. Meaning the less massive a bh, the more surface, the more likely one of these hr processes becomes, thus increasing hr effectively. This would explain exactly why more massive black holes have less hr and not more.
Sorry if it's dumb or obvious and I am not a native speaker, so sorry for ineffective or unclear language. Thanks for reading.

[Assistant]
We don't have an exact physical picture of how Hawking radiation works (although we have the math).

Energy from the black hole excelerates one of the members of the virtual pair out into the universe. The black hole loses energy and mass if the member successfully escapes. The smaller the gravity well the more likely these particles are to escape.

Hawking radiation must be produced just outside the event horizon because all paths inside the event horizon lead to the singularity. It also must occur just on the "surface" of the event horizon. Any further out and both particles would simply annihilate as usual. This tells us that the edge of the event horizon must be very sharp, if there is a gradient it has to be very very small.


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

[User]
ELI5: How is it all breeds of dogs are the same species?

How is it that the tiny, white fluffy poodle is the same scientific species as the massive black great dane? Why is there is such a wide range of dog types and how can they all be considered the same species?

[Assistant]
Because they can successfully interbreed.  A species is a group of individuals who can successfully interbreed with each other.

There is a wide range of breeds because people keep breeding new breeds.  A lot of this is accomplished through inbreeding.  This is why a lot of breeds have a lot of genetic problems.


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

[User]
Is there a place on earth where meteors hit fairly regularly?

Is there a place on earth where meteors hit fairly regularly? I know we get approximately 17 meteors hitting the earth a day but I want to know if anyone would know if theres a place that they commonly hit.

[Assistant] There are places where meteor strikes are more and less apparent- Antarctica, with its lack of vegetation and snowy ground cover is near ideal for spotting meteorites. The ocean basins are places where they are least apparent, due to the lack of ability to closely observe much of the bottom and the nature of the water surface (i.e., no persistent crater or evidence of impact).


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

[User] ELI5: What is the difference between a remote controlled helicopter and a drone? and why not call a drone a remote controlled helicopter?

[Assistant]
Most 'drones' aren't actually drones.

A remote controlled vehicle is exactly what is sounds like, it's a vehicle that is directly controlled by a person from a remote location (not actually in the vehicle). A drone has some level of autonomy and can control itself with minimal input from an operator.

Basically, if you have a quadcopter that you have to directly control, it's a remote controlled quadcopter. If you put waypoint into a app or set a destination and the quad flies itself there without your direct control, it's a drone.

For example, predator drones in use by the military can be flown directly, but they can have patrol routes pre-programmed and the pilot simply monitors the flight and takes control if needed.


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

[User]
Why do we need central banks?

Sorry for my ignorance, I am new to monetary economics.

[Assistant]
The theory is that central bankers and an independent bank have a mandate. This usually entails something along the lines of managing inflation.
Central bankers therefore set inflation expectations for the economy and their promises are more credible than if said power were under the control of politicians because they would likely use the power for their own gains.
Theory is that this credible commitment to a given inflation target will trickle down to things like contracts between businesses within the economy and specifically wage bargaining contracts, thus reducing the inflation premium priced into contracts and inflation itself.

There is a lot of rather complex literature on central banks and monetary policy. This is just a very short answer.


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

[User]
[DC Comics] Batman has a utility belt and all sorts of cool sci-fi tech associated with his suit. Does Nightwing (Dick Grayson) have anything?

It seems like he goes out with a mere skin tight suit and escrima sticks while everyone else in the bat family has some sort of armor and high tech gadgets. He dies in the Injustice comics in the same way the main character from Million Dollar Baby dies, leads me to believe he doesn't have much protection.

[Assistant] Its the old agility vs. protection argument. Nightwing opted for less gadgets and less armor in order to be extremely agile. Seeing as he is an ex-acrobat it makes sense that he would lean into his natural talents rather than a score of gadgets that dont provide much more help than your average batarang.


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

[User]
Why don't we use LEDs for all our lighting needs?

LEDs use a higher portion of the energy supplied to them to emit visible light than incandescent bulbs and florescent bulbs, and don't contain mercury like florescent bulbs do. Why don't we use them for everything? Is their initial cost so much higher than the other types of bulbs that it wouldn't be cancelled out by energy savings?

[Assistant]
Professional lighting designer here.  It's incredibly hard to maintain batch uniformity with the current methods of LED manufacturing, which makes it hard to produce a consistent product.

Additionally, the white color created by 'white' LEDs consists of relatively narrow peaks of light on the visible spectrum, providing poor color rendering an irritating color of light.  Incandescent and even CFL lamps produce a more uniform, curved output on the visible spectrum, which more closely resemble the sun, which makes us more comfortable.


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

[User] ELI5: How do headphones work? (As in how does electricity get turned into sound)

[Assistant]
Headphones are just speakers writ small, so let's discuss speakers.

A speaker, fundamentally, is a cone of some sort of material, attached to something called a "voice coil." The voice coil is essentially just a coil of wire wound around a frame. Electromagnetic theory tells us that driving an electric current through a wire makes a magnetic field that varies with the voltage.

There's also a permanent magnet attached to the frame of the speaker; when a magnetic current arises around the voice coil, it vibrates because of magnetic attraction and repulsion. This vibration causes the speaker cone to vibrate, and that causes the air to vibrate, which is what sound is.

A pair of headphones is just a really small speaker right next to your ear.


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

[User] ELI5: will we ever see the national debt start going down or will it keep raising forever?

[Assistant]
We'll likely see the national debt fluctuate up and down as this century goes on.  The American economy is pretty robust and very very good at generating income.  Without multi-trillion dollar wars to fight, and [hopefully] an upcoming rationalization of our economic, tax and social policies the debt will start to drift downwards.

However, it will almost certainly never go away.

This may sound wacky but - America's national debt is the chain that binds the rest of the world to America.

So long as the US continues to be THE place to invest money at a risk free rate (ie US Treasuries) the entire world has a vested interest in the US continuing to operate productively.  In other words, the rest of the world NEEDS the US to be successful or their own economies will suffer.  They need America to keep spending money, because America's economy is the beating heart that is pumping all the blood (re: dollars) through the rest of the world.

As an example, China's growth is impossible without billions of dollars of US money flowing into the country. That money is so critical that they loan that money back to us at pathetically small interest rates so we can keep buying.

The US is living in the best possible situation - we have the close to unlimited funds... and the appetite to match.


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

[User] ELI5: How do fruits ripen even though they are no longer part of the tree/plant?

[Assistant] Ripening is actually a decaying process. The starches in the fruit break down over time into sugars. Thus when unripe, a fruit is generally tough and not very sweet compared to its ripened state. And if left out too long, the fruit eventually gets very soft and mushy as the process continues.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is heart cancer so rare compared to other types of cancer?

[Assistant]
Cancer is a failure in growth regulation that results from mutations.  The way tumors develop is these damaged cells divide and make daughter cells that are likewise damaged.

Cells that divide a lot are more prone to cancer (like skin cells)

Heart muscles dont divide much so they dont copy their dna mistakes and make damaged daughter cells.


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

[User] Carl Schmidt, once a favorite of the far right, haso become increasingly popular with the far left. Can anyone with a grasp on The Concept of the Political in particular explain the transition and what the relationship is?

[Assistant]
Schmitt, you mean?

He has become popular in large part because of Giorgio Agamben. Agamben doesn't take his *prescriptions* too seriously, but thinks that Schmitt offers an accurate *description* of our current politics. So while the right used Schmitt to justify the existing order, while Agamben uses Schmitt for the purposes of critique. His chapter on Benjamin in Schmitt in *State of Exception* is excellent.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do shows like Judge Judy, Judge Mathis, People's Court, etc. work? Are they real judges/cases/rulings?

I've heard someone say Judge Judy is an "arbitrator", what does that mean? Do people choose to be on the show? do they get paid?

[Assistant]
You are correct, these individuals are acting as arbitrators, not judges in a court of law. What you see on the show is a form of alternative dispute resolution where legal conflicts between two parties are resolved outside of the court system.

The rulings are, however, legally binding and enforceable. So although these 'judges' do not represent the state or federal judicial branch of the government, they do hold the power to award judgments in favor of one or both parties. For example, if the arbitrator hears the case and determines that the 'defendant' must give his truck back to the 'plaintiff', the 'defendant' is legally bound by this demand and can be taken to court for not complying.

Typically arbitration is voluntary and mutually agreed upon (i.e. both parties agree that they should resolve their dispute on a show like Judge Judy). These television shows acquire cases by a) searching through cases submitted to small claims courts, b) setting up a phone number / hot-line for people to call in to apply for the show and talk about their case, c) setting up a website for online application submissions [which work like the telephone hot line].

The most interesting/entertaining cases (which are the most television-worthy) get selected by the TV show producers who try and organize arbitration by getting both parties to agree to appear on the show.

Typically individuals who agree to appear on the show are given compensation in the form of an appearance fee ($100-$500 total), a daily fee (e.g. $50 or less per day), and travel/hotel expenses may be covered as well. If either party is awarded money, the amount is typically covered by the television show. In effect, so long as you're willing to potentially face embarrassment on national (or sometimes international) TV, it's a pretty sweet deal even if you are the losing party.


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

[User]
[Marvel] Does the Hulk have a separate soul from Banner?

Soul in the most mystical, religious concept as possible. Are there really two souls inhabiting the body of Bruce Banner or is Hulk just an alternate personality of Banner spawned by gamma radiation?

This also raises some interesting scenarios:

* Assuming Hulk is indeed a separate entity from Banner, would reversing the effects of the experiment 'kill' him? As in: would that force Hulk's soul to pass on to the afterlife?

* Assuming again that Hulk has a separate soul from Banner, what happens if Dr. Strange extracted Hulk's soul from Banner's body? Does Banner get cured of the Hulk or is he now able to control himself when turning into a giant green monster? Or would this create two bodies: a giant frothing green man who calls himself the Hulk and a Caucasian male PhD in nuclear physics called Bruce Banner?

* During times when Banner and Hulk are in cooperation and Banner is able to control his green form, what happens if Ghost Rider gives him (or them) the Penance Stare? Would sins committed by Hulk alone count as Banner's sins and burdened upon him or vice versa or both? Does Hulk even meet the standards of sentience to commit sin?

* In the comic *What If Scarlet Witch Ended House Of M By Saying No More Powers?*, Wanda depowers all mutants and mutates in the 616 world. Is Hulk's personality considered part of Banner's "powers" and also get wiped out, or would only his ability to turn into a giant green man get wiped? Would Hulk then survive inside Banner's mind?

[Assistant] In the original comic, Bruce had more than one type of Hulk in him. Each Hulk represented a different aspect of his personality. The Green Hulk manifested most of the time but not always. So I'd say one soul with multiple personalities.


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

[User]
CMV: There is no good reason to legally require any part of the human body to be covered in public.

It makes no sense that humans are literally not *allowed* to just exist as humans.

All humans have nipples, vaginas, and/or penises. There is nothing inherently "dirty" or "immoral" about them.

It doesn't matter that you don't want to see a dong swinging around while you're out shopping at the grocery store. I don't want to see belly rolls and arm flaps, but no one is about to suggest legally requiring fat people to cover up.

"it'll expose children to ." Yep. And they'll grow up much healthier because of it.

 they'll grow up knowing that their bits and pieces are perfectly normal and nothing to be ashamed about.
 they'll grow up with a better understanding that bodies come in all shapes and sizes, and there's no need to shame other people.
 they'll have a better chance to learn what a healthy and functioning body looks like and does. (erections, discharge, etc)
 they'll have a better understanding of anatomy than half of the existing British population (who aren't even able to figure out which hole is the vagina and which is the urethra).

There is literally no logical reason to force people to cover up.

Bonus related opinion: female nipples are **not** inherently more sexual than men's, and should not be treated as such.

[Assistant]
I know what you mean, but regardless I'll reply to what you're written in your title "There is no good reason to legally require any part of the human body to be covered in public."

I'd say a global pandemic where breathing on people might cause them to die is a great reason to legally require someone to cover their mouth and nose.


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

[User] How did the play by Aristophanes "The Clouds" create negative social stigma towards Socrates?

[Assistant]
Before Socrates there were basically two main "teams" involved in debate in Athens. One was rooted in traditional values, the teachings of the poets and "common sense"; Aristophanes belonged to this team, as did his intended public.

The other one was that of the sophists. Sophist thinkers covered actually a wide range of different positions, but as they questioned the basis of truth, knowledge and ethics - often with a provocative attitude - they ended up clashing with the traditional values team. Sophists came to be seen as people who either wasted their time in convoluted and groundless type of knowledge, or used language tricks to confuse others and make them believe any sort of lie, in order to gain advantage for themselves. The fact that they usually gave lessons to young people eager to learn these "tricks" in order to gain power in the city didn't help.

Socrates brought in the debate something that was completely new and different from both points of view, but for traditionally minded, common-sense people it was very difficult to see the difference. The fact is, that Socrates actually borrowed many things from the sophists, like the provocative attitude and the habit of pushing language to its extreme limits.

In the Clouds a seemingly very superficial knowledge of Socrates' ways of doing philosophy is distorted to reinforce this confusion and group it together with the form of sophism that Aristophane's public would have find at the same time ridiculous and frightening (the play ends with the main character that, having learned how to make a false argument sound true, can allow himself not to pay debts and even to beat his father without consequences - that is, to escape from every kind of value that should be sacred)


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

[User] Is any damage done when my arm falls asleep?

[Assistant]
No. You most probably didn't spend your entire night sleeping on your arm. Your body moves in order to prevent prolonged pressure on a single part of the body which could cause damage.

If your arm did have it's blood supply cut an entire night you would have no arm in the morning. You were probably just lying on it for an hour or so before waking up.

I would  like to add that the numb arm feeling isn't necessarily blood loss, you were probably applying pressure onto a nerve in your arm, not cutting the blood supply.


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

[User]
CMV: Ron DeSantis will be the Republican nominee for President for the 2024 general election

It will either be Trump or DeSantis.  Ultimately I believe Trump will back DeSantis because Ron is is gaining serious momentum and he is receiving positive praise from leaders across both aisles.  My view hinges on why DeSantis is a better candidate than Trump.

1. His Covid response has been remarkable.  While Cuomo was made to be the media darling of how to handle Covid and writing books (and being a creep), DeSantis has followed the science by focusing vaccines based on age and those at risk, and not by profession.  He also opened up the economy and his state has a lower unemployment rate than the nation.  Disneyland is somehow open in Florida but not California.  Because of this, he will easily win Florida and wont need to campaign there.

2. Hes not afraid to fight the mainstream media when they purposely post fake news (see 60 minutes).  Republicans, some who feel there is a left wing bias in the MSM, will like this, particularly as we see the media get exposed for false and or misleading stories.

3. He will do very well in public speaking events.  He is much more composed than Trump and is better at articulating his message without his press secretary having to clarify his statements.  Ive heard on one sports talk radio and he is very intelligent, composed, thoughtful and articulate.  He will win over those turned off by Trumps terrible communication style.

4. Trump can still have his rallies, get his America first message and ensure he stays relevant given he is a DeSantis ally.  Trump base is a small minority of the Republican Party despite his high party approval rating.  DeSantis is not an us vs them type leader like Trump, so he will appeal to many moderates.  If Trump has a platform, hes happy.

There are 2 aspects to my view, that DeSantis will be the nominee, and he will be a better nominee than Trump.

[Assistant]
> His Covid response has been remarkable.

**His** Covid response was disasterous.  **He** basically didn't have a Covid response.  **His** response to Covid was to act like it didn't exist.

Fortunately, local leaders in all the counties with major cities (and most without) ignored the governor and enacted their own local mask mandates and capacity restrictions.  If not for the local leaders taking the virus seriously and bailing out DeSantis's ass, Florida would have easily had more deaths and cases per capita than any other state.


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

[User] Can particles still be entangled when one of the pairs is in a black hole?

[Assistant]
the particle falling in donates the entanglement to the black hole. So the particle out becomes entangled with the black hole.

More precisely, to track what happens to the entanglement you need to take a perspective that can keep an eye on the outside particle, so an external observer that stays outside the black hole. The following is in this observer's interpretation of events. The falling particle is seen to approach the horizon but slowing down and never reaching it, because of the extreme time dilation. The distance between horizon and particle shrinks exponentially in time, and quickly it becomes as small as a Planck length. Here the falling particle has entered the quantum gravitational regime and reaches a Planck-length thick, Planck-temperature hot membrane above the horizon. The particle is destroyed and its information quickly spreads throughout the membrane. That includes the entanglement with the outside particle. Thus the outside particle becomes entangled with the whole surface of the black hole.


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

[User]
[Wall-E] Why was the Axiom still sending out EVE units to look for plant life, if the AI had been explicitly told to give up?

It's pretty obvious throughout the film that all the ship's essential functions are *completely* controlled by AI. The human captain is basically vestigial, he has no real power and no clue what's going on. Otto controls everything.

Throughout the opening scenes, we see no evidence that humans crew members are in any way involved in the scouting missions, sending out rockets with EVE units to go look for plant life on Earth. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure the captain is the only human crew member we see in the entire film. If the process is all controlled by AI, why didn't Otto put a stop to it centuries ago?

[Assistant] His orders were to look for plant life.  On the other hand, his orders were to not return to Earth regardless of the results.  Part of the satire in the movie was the idea of doing things 'just because'.


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

[User] ELI5: how do barcodes work when the same item is sent to different places with different register systems, different prices assigned, etc.?

[Assistant]
The bar code is just another way of writing a number, which is also printed directly below the barcode.

What happens is that the manufacturer says "this bar code number corresponds to this product," and all of the stores list it in their systems under that number.

It doesn't communicate any information about price, however. So the store is free to assign "UPC X = $Y" in their own system totally independently of any other store's systems.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why is photosynthesis so hard to replicate in a machine?

I've always wondered why we don't make solar panels work like artificial plants, and I assume it's because it's too hard. But why?

[Assistant]
For the second part: because we don't need sugar, we need energy. Photosynthesis is very inefficient, the plants are around 0.1 - 2% efficiency (solar power converted to chemical energy) which is abysmal, and unusable for us. If you want to convert this chemical energy to electrical energy you will lose a big chunk of this stored energy again. Not to mention that photosynthesis requires a constant flow of raw materials and water, which is a possible point of failure.

While our solar panels current efficiency is around 20%, and there is still room to grow. Based on the ShockleyQueisser limit our panels can convert up to 33.7% of the solar energy to useable electrical energy. And they don't require any raw materials after they are installed.


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

[User] Why do people say that when light passes through another object, like glass or water, it slows down and continues at a different angle, but scientists say light always moves at a constant speed no matter what?

[Assistant]
We're just speaking loosely.

The speed of light *in a vacuum* is a universal constant. It is also "invariant", which means it doesn't change depending on your reference frame - i.e. it doesn't depend on your speed or location.

The actual speed of light through a medium - not just the abstract theoretical limit of "speed of light in a vacuum" - can change depending on the medium, and isn't a universal constant.

Edit: To clarify further, it might seem a bit odd that so much of physics depends on light, which is after all just one type of specific phenomenon. But really that's backwards. "c" is a special universal constant that tells us about the relationship between space and time, the propagation rate of information and so on. It just so happens that some phenomena - such as electromagnetic waves - will travel at *c*, under idealised circumstances. That is, relativity isn't really about light itself, it's just that light is strongly affected by relativity so it provides a useful way to work out what relativity does.


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

[User]
ELI5: My mind can make snap decisions or opinions instinctively, but it's very hard to articulate my reasoning. Why is that?

For example: I was just reading a post about female life expectancy being, in general and on average, longer than men.

One person chimed in 'there is a biological explanation for this, as grandmothers play a vital role in raising families and children'.

My mind instantly goes 'that is so incredibly stupid'. Now, whether or not that's true, somehow my brain leaps to a conclusion/opinion on the matter, and I even get annoyed by the statement.

But if someone challenged me back in conversation and asked me why that is such a bad argument, I find it difficult to respond and articulate why.

So, what is going in my head that 'enables' me to make snap reactions if there is no perfectly-formed conscious line of thought behind it?

[Assistant]
Our brains have processes called heuristics.

You know how when you walk across the same place in the grass a lot, the grass dies and turns into a path?  A heuristic is the same thing, but it's a pathway for thought.  A pathway that gives you a shortcut around logic, because it's easier.

In your case, you've maybe heard a lot of people argue for an evolutionary basis for something they've noticed.  Maybe you associate those arguments with people who have certain beliefs with which you disagree. Maybe you've seen those arguments debunked often.

Whatever the case, you've worn down a shortcut in your brain where when someone makes that argument, you just cut across to the part where you think it's bullshit.


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

[User]
[Logan] Okay so Charles can't stop time, but he can paralyze a lot of people from moving by putting them in a state where they don't respond to stimuli. But why did the goons stay frozen even when they were stabbed in the head?

If hes only stopping them by controlling their minds, then wouldn't they just fall down after getting killed?

[Assistant] I took it as he was controlling their entire nervous system. Even though they died, he was fulfilling the function of their brain. Thus, while their physical body died due to brain death, there was still a brain controlling their bodies, hence why they show awareness or what's happening without any control over their bodies.


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

[User] ELI5: How does so much plastic actually make its way all the way into our oceans?

[Assistant]
Most plastic ends up in landfills or in incinirators. There are orders of magnitude difference. So if you were to throw away an entire bin of compacted plastic waste but accidentally a single plastic bag gets caught in the wind and some how ends up getting washed out into the ocean you will still contribute more to the plastic ocean waste then the average human. The problem is that there are lots of humans and we produce huge amounts of waste. And plastic does not disappear so the trash in the oceans just accumulate.

It is also worth mentioning that a lot of the plastic waste in the oceans are from boats. A lot of fishing equipment is made of plastics and when a fishing net snaggs the fishermen often just cut it and leave it in the ocean. But there are also lots of plastic bags, food containers, plastic bottles, etc.


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

[User]
[Pokemon] After I stopped the plans of the terrorist group known as Team Flare, I managed to capture a Legendary Pokemon that hasn't been seen in over 3000 years. Why do no trainers care, or no scientists want to study my new pokemon?

Seriously, I have been waiting for some sort of contact from a research team, or heck, even just a startled or confused reaction out of the thousands of trainers that challenge me every day... Why does no one care!?

[Assistant] I presume you have a pokedex? As you are the first to see it in 3000 years, all the information you can find in the pokedex is effectively research you have done, no matter how automated it is. You ARE a researcher, and if you check up with your local pokmon professor regularly, as i presume you do, he has access to all the information you've found, and is either publishing it, or writing a paper about it himself.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does water stop boiling when you lower the heat source (but is still more than the boiling temperature)?

I have observed this while cooking, but if you boil something at high flame and then turn the flame low, the liquid stops boiling. E.g. Water boils at 100C. On high gas, it starts boiling. That means the water temp is now 100C. Then if I lower the flame, the water stops boiling even though the flame temperature is greater than 100C at all times. At high flame, the water has reached 100C, so if I lower the flame the water temp should still remain 100C.

[Assistant]
As you apply more heat to 100C water, the temperature of the water actually does not increase beyond 100C. The excess energy is released as steam.

This also explains why removing the heat source causes the water to stop boiling nearly immediately - there is no more energy being added, so no more energy needs to come out.


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

[User]
When was there a 'cosmic visible light' background?

Since the expansion of space causes the wavelength of cosmic microwave background to lengthen, presumably it would have covered other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum in which wavelengths are shorter.  We also seem to have a pretty good idea of the rate (and rate of acceleration) at which space expands.

So at what point in the history of the universe could I look around me and see blue everywhere?  Is there an equation for this? I'm not afraid of math.

[Assistant]
Shortly after the Recombination era - the era from which cosmic background radiation originates - the cmb was bright orange.

To understand what exactly happened, let's backtrack a bit.
Until 380 000 years after the big bang, the universe was too hot to form neutral atoms. Electrons and protons whizzed through space which such high speeds, that electromagnetic attraction wasn't strong enough to bind them together. Thus, space was filled with a hot plasma, that gave off thermal radiation. During this time, the universe was opaque to photons. Photons would bump into electrons frequently. This scattering of photons results in a mostly in-transparent universe with a visibility of a few thousand lightyears at most. (Which sounds a lot but is very small at cosmic scales)

Due to the expansion of the universe, this plasma finally cooled down to around 3000K. Which is cool enough to form neutral atoms around 400 000 years after the big bang. Since neutral atoms don't interact with photons that willingly, the universe became transparent. Thus, the thermal radiation of the plasma in the recombination era was emitted into all directions and from all points in space. And since the plasma was around 3000K at that time, and the black body radiation at that temperature is orangy, the hole universe was filled with orange light for a few million years.

The universe during the first few million years after the big bang saw the first stars being formed, but during this time, the only radiation emitted was the hydrogen line.

Over time, as the universe continued to expand, the cmb got redshifted. Now, ~13 billion years later, the cmb is redshifted down to around 2.7K, which is in the microwave part of the spectrum.


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

[User]
What's the difference between freezing rain and an ice storm?

And which is worse?

[Assistant] Freezing rain is rain that falls as a liquid but freezes into an icy glaze on on contact with surfaces because the surface temperature is below freezing while the temperature in the lower atmosphere is above freezing. An ice storm is just an expected large accumulation of ice from a freezing rain event. The criteria for an Ice Storm Warning varies from state to state, but generally an accumulation of 1/4" or more of ice is enough to be significant and damaging.


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

[User] [Mad Max] Given that Toast is only about ten years younger than Max, how does she not know about television? Televisions remained popular well into Max's twenties at least.

[Assistant] The world didn't uniformly collapse. It wasn't like someone just turned off civilization. Each part of the world devolved slower or faster. So it's very likely that she was born in a part of a world worse off then the part Max was born in.


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

[User]
[MCU] Did Nick Fury always carry the pager around with him in his truck?

meaning in the winter soldier he  either left it or took a second to grab it before escaping.

[Assistant]
You don't notice it much because he's such a badass, but nowadays he's slowed down a bit due to chronic pain from a lifetime of action.  Not the least of which was getting punched full of holes by Bucky.

Back then he still carried the pager on his person.  Since the latest injuries and his "retirement", he often carries the essentials nearby, like in the back seat.


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

[User]
[Physics] Smaller than Planck Length and Radiation?

Is it possible to put enough energy into a particle so that it radiates radiation with a wavelength smaller than the Planck length? I've been taught that there is nothing "shorter" than the Planck length but also that there is no limit on the amount of energy a particle can have and that energy is proportional to a shorter wavelength.

[Assistant]
Where were you taught there is nothing shorter than the Planck length?

Anyway, any given electromagnetic wave can have a wavelength shorter than the Planck length in the right reference frame. Something moving very very close to the speed of light relative to the emitting source could see that.

However, nothing is known to exist that would emit a photon with that much energy, as seen in the reference frame of the emitter. It would have be some sort of quantum gravitational system like a charged micro black holes. A black hole with a mass close to the Planck mass would give off radiation with a wavelength around the Planck length.


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

[User] Why do asteroid impacts leave 'scars' on gas giants?

[Assistant]
You would be correct, if the gasses that Jupiter and other large planets were made of were simple and fairly well mixed. The asteroid would just plummet through them, leaving some smoke behind that would quickly dissipate, and that would be that.

However, the gas giants have striations not just along their latitude (the horizontal bands) but also in altitude (depth). So just like taking a step into a settled pond, a whoosh of stirred up different-colored stuff expands outwards from the impact.

Then, when the asteroid gets sufficiently hot and pressurized from the ramming effect of all that atmosphere (and long before it gets to the potential metallic hydrogen deep within), it explodes in a massive fireball. So now we're dropping grenades into the muddy pond analoge. It mostly expands upwards, away from the denser core of the planet, and all the way out into space. The hole that is left is rather like pulling your foot back up out of the muddy pond suddenly: a huge in and up rush of material that leaves the surface truly altered compared to neighboring regions.

Then you have to wait for natural diffusion and winds to smear the scar out to remove it. These initial marks have nothing hard to contain them, so they can expand to the size of Earthly countries during the initial shock. It takes many days or even weeks for them to be mixed back to uniformity and/or drift back down in the case of heavier elements.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] Are there any other wizards on the level of Dumbledore and Voldemort?

Or anyone near their level?

[Assistant]
None currently active at the time of the books, no. People like Fred and George or Hermione seem much closer to, say, Snape's or James Potters' level - extremely competent for their age, but not quite...worldchanging. To use an Ancient World example, the difference is that of someone who might one day achieve the consulship in their year and spend the rest of their life as a well-respected senator, and Gaius Julius Caesar. The difference between a person who exceeds through highschool to the point where they could be a competent professional immediately after and a person whose actions will inherently shape the world unless they make an active effort to hold themselves back and avoid making waves.

It's the difference between being a year or two ahead of where you should be, academically, and being one of the greatest minds in human history. Hermione was working 7th year coursework at 16. Voldemort was rediscovering obscure fields only a few people had ever delved into at that age, and taking them further than anyone ever had within the year.


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

[User] [Star Wars] High level Empire officers are often seen with a stormtrooper escort when moving around their ships or bases, blasters drawn and held against their chests. Is this escort just ceremonial, or is there a real need to protect military leaders inside their own military vessels and bases?

[Assistant] Its probably routine procedure, in case the unexpected happens. Theres always the chance of a rebel spy on board, or a random soldier decides to defect and take out an unguarded high ranking officer or something.


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

[User]
If you are a moral realist, are you also by the same reasons committed to aesthetic realism? Can we divide normative facts?

How does one separate aesthetic norms from, say, moral norms and epistemic norms? If you buy into realism about one of them (e.g., moral realism), are you committed to realism about *all* normative facts?

I was thinking about the kind of argument presented by Cuneo concerning the "normative web": the idea that a rejection of moral realism would also mean the rejection of epistemic norms. Normative facts are intertwined. But I am wondering where aesthetic norms fall into this.

In short, I would want to say the following:

1. Epistemic norms are real.
2. Moral norms are real.
3. Aesthetic norms are *not* real; they are entirely subjective.

I have the easiest time believing that there are epistemic facts. I have a fairly good time believing that moral facts are real. However, I have a very hard time believing (though not for any especially informed reasons) that there are such things as aesthetic facts. It seems like "Vanilla is the best flavor of ice cream" or "The Mona Lisa is beautiful" are entirely subjective judgements. I find it very striking in everyday life when my philosophy peers who I tend to agree with on virtually everything simply have *completely* divergent tastes in music, art, etc.

I would hope to think that we come to agreement in other domains because there is a general convergence toward truth; however, the sheer divergence we have when it comes specifically to aesthetic judgments makes me think that there mustn't be aesthetic facts.

Can this be defended in a consistent way?

Thank you.

[Assistant]
According to his philpapers survey, derek parfit is an intersubjectivist about aesthetic judgments. he is a realist about both moral and epistemic judgments.

it seems like a reasonable set of positions to hold to me. You might think the truth-maker of 'the mona lisa is beautiful' is a fact about social reality, but that for epistemic and moral judgments the truthmaker is a mind-independent fact.


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

[User] ELI5: why does Israel collect Palestine's taxes?

[Assistant] Because Palestine doesn't really exist yet.  It's a complicated situation.  The lands that are 'Palestine' are technically still owned by Israel.  It's what is called a de jure state.  The territory is nominally controlled by the Palestinians but they do not have true sovereignty yet.


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

[User] What is the difference between plasma and ionized gas?

[Assistant]
Nothing really. Although the actual definition can be a bit fuzzy and can depend on the field. Astronomers tend to refer to all plasma as "gas", regardless of how ionised it is. The main difference between plasma and neutral gas is that plasmas are much more affected by magnetic fields, because the particles are charged. But many astronomical effects are dominated by gravity and pressure, and magnetic fields tend to be a secondary consideration, so we tend to think of plasma as just a sub-category of "gas". Other fields will maintain a strong distinction between plasma and gas, to emphasise the importance of magnetism etc.

There's also in-between states, where gas can be partially ionised. How ionised something needs to be to count as a "plasma" is also a bit arbitrary. This is particularly the case for photo-ionisation, where light can ionise specific elements while the gas is still quite cool. But even for thermal ionisation, there is a temperature range where hydrogen gas is ionised but helium isn't. Most of the gas in stars and in interstellar space is 3/4 hydrogen and 1/4 helium, so if it's 75% ionised, is that a plasma, or a partial plasma, or what? It depends on the convention in your field, and generally you can call it what you like as long as you're clear about what you mean.


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

[User]
Can we overtake either of the Voyager probes with current tech?

If NASA got a wild hair and decided to re make the voyager probes could they make them faster and catch up, over take them? Would they have a camera system that still works? Would the power connections last as long or longer? Can we go further faster?

edit: NASA has the budget of the DOD. Hypothetically.

[Assistant] The voyager probes managed to get their high speed from a rare planetary alignment that will not be happening in a very long time. The probes both used a slingshot maneuver around Jupiter and Saturn to attain their high velocitys.


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

[User]
[General Fantasy and SciFi] Why are Elves almost always such dicks?

In many universes there are elder species of pointy eared folk who seem to specialize in being presumably superior, long lived and super-freaking arrogant.

Sure, being old as dirt means you've got more experience to draw from, but if your civilization is in it's death-throws you should be able to see and accept it.

Elves always seem to have some kind of misplace superiority complex that doesn't mesh with the reality of their circumstances.

Is it that even with their "superior intellects" they're too proud/blind/fearful to see the truth that their time is almost up?

Do they hate humanity for replacing them?

Do they think they're angels or something?

[Assistant]
Generally annoyed with the obnoxiously loud, violent, fast breeding idiots who seems to sweep over the land that they usually love, draining it of resoucres then moving on, forcing the elves to move further and further away from the places they used to like to avoid the humans (generally we're not too tolerant of different people, and elves typically dont have the numbers to wage a war against humanity, and we tend to hold a grudge for hundreds of years).

Elves typically live in harmony with the land, humans tear the resources away from it, they often dedicate themselves to knowledge and bettering themselves (as they see it alteast) whilst look at the humans getting drunk, starting fights, raping and murdering each other for petty reasons, trying to subjugate others out of desire to be powerful etc.

They can usually see that their end is coming, and they blame the humans (who have little regard for the things they cared for for thousands of years) and are angry with them, angry at the world/themselves for not being able to stop the destruction of what they loved and the gradual errosion of what they were/the lands they held, and then the very same animals that are the cause of so much suffering and angst start trying to interfere with what the elves are doing, trying to steal their knowledge to twist it for their own ends, basically like an annoying 4 year old who wonot stop bothering you, then goes and draws on the walls with crayons after you teach them how to read and write.


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

[User] ELi5: how far is: 'as far as the eye can see'?

[Assistant]
You can see the Andromeda galaxy with the unaided human eye, which is 2.5 million light years away.

Standing on the planet Earth, the horizon is about 4.7 kilometers away, depending on elevation or obstruction, but you can also see clouds or mountains that are past the horizon.


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

[User]
Given enough time, will photons ever fall back towards their source?

I've been wondering about the end of the universe lately. Where do all the photons go over very long time scales? Does the answer change if the universe is finite? Infinite?

[Assistant]
> Given enough time, will photons ever fall back towards their source?

Only in a few very specific cases with black holes.

Photons do this thing where the follow a geodesic, which is basically a straight line in curved spacetime (specifically, they follow a certain type of geodesic called a "null geodesic" but that might be too technical for our purposes here). In the handful of solutions we have for general relativity, these lines can generally just be thought of as out and away, but with things getting interesting near massive objects. The basic principle of general relativity is this: mass tells spacetime how to curve, and curved spacetime tells mass (and light) how to move. For example, when you get close to black holes, there is a certain distance from the black hole that light will actually *orbit* the black hole, so that if you are close enough to a black hole and you look forward, you'll see the back of your own head. This would be one example.

Black holes have this interesting property inside in that *all geodesics converge at the singularity* - no matter how you move inside of a black hole, you are getting closer to the singularity at the middle. Weird, right? Well this means that if you drop a blinking LED into a black hole, if it is still emitting after it passes through the event horizon, both the LED and all the light it emits will come back together at the singularity in the center.

> I've been wondering about the end of the universe lately. Where do all the photons go over very long time scales?

They just keep going until they hit something. But since you asked about the end of the universe, I'll mention that the universe is expanding. This is causing the clusters of galaxies in the universe to spread out, and as they move apart, the light we see from them get's *redshifted*. This is like the doppler effect that makes sound wave changes frequency when the car goes by- it makes light look *less energetic* if it's source is moving away from us. As things in the universe begin to recede faster and faster, eventually the light we receive from them will be redshifted away to almost nothing.


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

[User]
Why did China and India become so heavily populated?

.

[Assistant]
A: They're very large countries to begin with in terms of geographical area.
B: They both have multiple large river systems which can support large scale agriculture
C: They both have had centralized governments for millennia. Central governments, despite their bad reputation, do serve to allocate resources efficiently, which leads to greater food distribution and overall population health. This leads to more people, and thus, more children.
D: This increased population millennia ago provided the base for today's population growth. Population growth is an exponential growth model, so a little population difference ages ago will multiply into huge differences in today's population.

In summary, they had a head start.


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

[User] [Wh40k] Why does anyone still follow Abaddon the Despoiler despite his continuing track record of failure? Why do the Chaos Gods continue to grant him unanimous favour?

[Assistant]
Who said they were failures? Not all the Black Crusades were about OVERTHROW THE IMPERIUM.

1st Black Crusade: Abaddon recovered the Daemonsword Drach'nyen. Abaddon's power swelled to inhuman proportions and he was recognised as Horus Lupercal's true successor amongst the Traitor Legions, the new Warmaster of Chaos Undivided.  Mission Accomplished.

2nd Black Crusade: Abaddon places a terrible curse upon the worlds of the Belis Corona Sector, infusing them with the touch of the Warp. Meanwhile, his fleet attacks the sector's Imperial shipyards, destroying dozens of Imperial Cruisers being constructed or repaired. Before the Imperium can muster its strength to fight back, the Despoiler retreats into the Eye of Terror, his works complete. Mission Accomplished.

3rd Black Crusade (909.M32) - The Despoiler sends the Daemon Prince Tallomin against the Cadian Gate in a reckless and bloody frontal assault. Under the cover of the attack, Abaddon leads a dedicated strike force to desecrate the Shrine World of Gerstahl, breaking the ancient seal on the Imperial saint's tomb and utterly destroying his remains whilst the Imperium's attention is elsewhere. Mission Accomplished.

4th Black Crusade: Also known as the El'Phanor War, during this Black Crusade the Black Legion besieges the great Citadel of Kromarch. Abaddon leads the charge against the adamantium gates of the famously unbreachable citadel upon the world of El'Phanor. In an orgy of violence, the Traitor Legions and their daemonic allies fall upon Kromarch and his kin, extinguishing their ancient line forever. Mission Accomplished.

5th Black Crusade: Abaddon scours the Elysia Sector, raiding hundreds of worlds and causing untold death and destruction. On Tarinth, the Despoiler lures the Warhawks and Venerators Chapters into the ruins of Kasyr Lutein where he traps them between the daemonic hordes of Khorne and the forces of the Black Legion. In a bitter last stand, both Loyalist Chapters are utterly destroyed, their skulls taken by the ancient Daemon Prince Doombreed, whose existence precedes that of the Imperium itself, to be mounted upon the mighty throne of Khorne. Mission Accomplished.

6th Black Crusade: The Sons of the Eye were a splinter warband of the Black Legion. Always jealous of the Primarch Horus' favour for the Despoiler, the Sons of the Eye considered Abaddon a usurper. During the 6th Black Crusade launched in 901.M36, Abaddon visited his wrath upon Drecarth the Sightless and his treacherous warband. Abaddon aided the Sons of the Eye in an assault on the Forge World of Arkreach, fighting side-by-side with them until the Adeptus Mechanicus defenders were finally crushed. The triumphant Abaddon then slowly killed Drecarth, impaling him with the Talon of Horus, even as the Despoiler made him watch every member of the Sons of the Eye bow before their new master. Mission Accomplished.

7th Black Crusade: This one is technically a failure, while the forces of chaos were unable to break the Imperium's defenses in a series of guerilla wars, Abaddon was able to almost annihilate the Blood Angels chapter. Draw/failure.

8th Black Crusade: Abaddon the Despoiler completes a complex ritual of death in the name of Tzeentch, the Changer of Ways. On worlds throughout the Segmentum Obscurus, Imperial citizens are slaughtered in precise numbers and esoteric rituals. Only when the Inquisition finally breaks the code of damnation is the Imperium able to bring an end to the Black Legion's rampage across the Segmentum, but not before countless worlds have been saturated in death. Mission Accomplished.

9th Black Crusade: The 9th Black Crusade was a campaign led by the infamous Chaos Lord Abaddon the Despoiler and his Black Legion, launched out of the Eye of Terror in 537.M38. Intending to bring about the demise of the naval fortress of Cancephalus, Abaddon lead his forces against the heaving populations of the nearby world of Antecanis. Monarchhive, the hive city that served as the seat of Antecanis' Imperial Commander, was besieged by Abaddon's vanguard. The Black Legionaries burned and butchered their way through the lower levels, whilst Abaddon himself stormed its inner sanctums. The hive populations were slowly destroyed by the slaughter. By the time the forces of the Imperial Guard arrived from Cancephalus to reinforce the desperate survivors, Abaddon and his favoured Legionaries had already left orbit, dropping a dozen Cyclonic Warheads onto the ruins of Monarchhive in a last gesture of contempt. The seventeen-year-long war that ensued robbed both Antecanis and Cancephalus of their most precious resource -- manpower. Without the fleets of Cancephalus to stop him, Abaddon is able to ravage the rest of the sector at will. Mission Accomplished.

10th Black Crusade: A joint campaign carried out by Abaddon and the Daemon Primarch Perturabo. Both the Black Legion and the Iron Warriors struck against the worlds of the Scarus Sector's Helican Sub-sector. While the Black Legion attacked the capital world of the sub-sector, the Hive World of Thracian Primaris, the Iron Warriors focused their own assault against the Iron Hands Chapter to fulfil an old blood debt. In a series of bitter sieges, the Iron Warriors burned the Medusa System's outlying worlds and pushed the Iron Hands to the brink of destruction. Only when the Loyalist Chapter receives heavy Imperial reinforcements did Abaddon and the Iron Warriors retreat back to the Eye of Terror, taking with them valuable information about Medusa's defences for use at a later date. Draw.

11th Black Crusade: Abaddon the Despoiler launched his 11th Black Crusade out of the Eye of Terror. In an attempt to break through the cordon of Warp Storms surrounding the Eye into Imperial space, he employed a captured daemon to navigate. The effort proved fruitless, and instead the daemon warped the Black Fleet directly into the path of the Orks of WAAAGH! Murgor. In the ruins of the Cardinal World of Relorria, the Black Legion brought the Orks to battle, Bolter rounds and Chainswords tearing into the green-skinned xenos. After months of bloody warfare, Abaddon decided to leave Relorria to its fate and the Black Legion returned to the nightmare realm of the Eye of Terror -- but not before the Warmaster of Chaos filled the holds of his Black Fleet with a multitude of captured Orkoid specimens for later experimentation.

12th Black Crusade (139.M41) - Better known as the Gothic War, this Black Crusade was fought for control of the Gothic Sector in the Segmentum Obscurus between the Chaotic forces of Abaddon the Despoiler and the defenders of the Imperium. Abaddon lead his great fleet into the Gothic Sector, capturing two of the prehistoric xenos-built star forts known as the Blackstone Fortresses. Under Abaddon's control, the might of the Blackstone Fortresses is used to destroy entire worlds in the Gothic Sector during this campaign. The Despoiler's fleet is driven back at great cost, though Abaddon escapes with the Blackstone Fortresses into the Eye of Terror. The vast engines of destruction emerge once more into the material universe during Abaddon's 13th Black Crusade over eight hundred standard years later. Mission Accomplished.

13th Black Crusade: Well, he blew up Cadia, so he's not doing bad so far.

As you can see, only a couple Black Crusades could really be considered "Failures". They each had a specific objective that Abaddon was trying to achieve and for the most part he was successful. Most of the earlier crusades were carried out for Abaddon to consolidate his power within the Eye, while in the later crusades he was gathering the tools he needed to bring the Imperium down. It is only the latest crusade that has the ultimate objective of bringing down the Imperium forever.


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

[User] [Warhammer 40k] Do Traitor Marines need Gellar fields for travelling through the immaterium?

[Assistant]
Yep, everything that wants to exist in real space or has lived its life in real space needs a gellar field.

You cant be an effective fighting force if your engines are firing bubbles backwards in time, your helm turns into a daemon and the guys reloading your torpedos explode into a ball of maggots covered in razor wire.


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

[User] [Harry potter] what if Voldemort sent one if his horcruxes to space flying away from earth. Would he essentially become immortal for ever or is there some sort of distance parameters required?

[Assistant]
Well assuming it just drifted forever, if he needed to be reincarnated it would be at the location of the horcrux in a pretty limited, slightly more than ghostly form with very little ability to do anything for himself. So he'd be stuck drifting forever in space, immortal yes, but not how he wanted it to be.

As for apparition, it's doubtful he could do that and even if he could apparently  there's a range limit for magical teleportation, who would've thought? And the distances in space make that range limit look like peanuts.

Unless the spacecraft has a fireplace attached to the flue network and he has a loyal Deatheater ready to go fetch him after he died. A portkey is 50/50, after all the spacecraft with the horcrux is a moving target.


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

[User] ELIA5: Why do I get sleepy when in a warm cosy car, but I need my bedroom to be like a fridge?

[Assistant]
<- MD PhD Cand, Clinical Neuroscience, Neurosurgery Psychiatry spec.

We have a Circadian Biorhythm basically telling us when to sleep and when to be awake. This is directly connected to the hypothalamus, our "thermostat control center" for how hot our body temperature is and should be.

Body temperature is altered by hormones like cortisol,adrenaline and thyroxin, and in turn muscle movements.

While in the evening our body temperature is usually higher (Ever had a fever? These tend to go up at night due to this same process!), it has been shown that we experience a cooler room which lowers our temperature.*

This will slow muscle coordination and movement and thereby lower sensory input into our arousal system (e.g. the reticular formation) making falling asleep easier - it "relaxes" us.

In the afternoon a warm car on the other hand might stimulate this same effect by triggering associations of comfort. Psychoanalysis has an approach to understanding that this sensation of "comfort" will remind us of being protected by our mother. Biologically this effect of warmth + being "hugged" or "enclosed in tight blankets" stimulates the parasympathetic nervous system. This also calms our arousal system.

TL DR:
Cool in evening = relaxing muscles ->sends brain to sleep

Warm in afternoon = stimulates autonomous system -> sends brain to sleep.


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

[User] ELI5: How can a ruling in a Washington state court overrule executive action?

[Assistant]
It was not a Washington State court. It was a Federal Judge who lives in Washington State. There is a very big difference.

As to how the Federal Judge can overrule an executive order? That is one of the purposes of Federal Judges and the Judicial Branch's check and balance against the Executive.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] Why did Voldemort not make a horcrux out of Gryffindor's sword?

He *thought* he had the real sword, protected inside the Lestrange's vault. There was no way for him to know it was fake. He always wanted to have a horcrux made out of objects belonging to each founder and he had his chance. I am very surprised when Bellatrix panicked thinking they got the real one Harry immediately thought that there must be another horcrux there instead of the sword actually being one.

We know he also thought 7 was the most powerfully magical number but he ended up having 8 anyways:

1. diary
2. ring
3. locket
4. diadem
5. cup
6. Nagini
7. him (as Dumbledore explained)
8. Harry (Which he didn't know of course but is still important)

So we know there doesn't seem to be a physical limit, and not like he hadn't gone past it anyways even by making the second one.

So why did he not complete the set once he had the chance? I am sure he cared more about such an amazing magical item than a superstitious number.

[Assistant] The Sword of Gryffindor has this nasty habit of being able to be pulled out of the Sorting Hat at times. Not exactly a trait you want in an item holding your soul. Voldemort had all the other horcurxes well hidden or well protected.


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

[User]
CMV: Animals are not deserving of fundamental rights

I believe that animals as a whole do not deserve rights.

I believe that fundamental rights (such as the right to life, freedom, choice, etc) are derived from the social contract.  It's the best system I've found to build a working society without requiring rational actors.  You can be entirely self-interested, and still decide something like "I don't want to be killed, so my best chance of not getting killed is to live in a society where people agree to not kill eachother, so in order to not be killed, I should respect other's right to life".

So a fundamental part of rights is reciprocation.  Others are deserving of rights because they're capable of respecting the same rights towards me.  This falls apart for animals, since animals aren't capable of reciprocation.

If I'm out in the wilderness, a fellow human is capable of respecting my right to life, and thus not killing me.  A bear is simply incapable of that level of thought, if it's hungry, and it thinks it can get away with it, it will eat me.

If it could be demonstrated that an animal was capable of understanding and respecting rights, then and only then would they be deserving of all the same fundamental rights humans enjoy.

Someone might bring up human babies as an example of something that should have rights but can't reciprocate, I'd argue that while they can't as babies, we know they're going to grow up into a human that can, so we respect their rights the same.

Someone might also bring up "feral humans" or uncontacted tribes.  This can get a bit muddy, but if it could be demonstrated that they are incapable of respecting our rights, then they wouldn't be deserving of any either.

So because of this foundation for the existence of fundamental rights, I believe animals are not deserving of rights, and thus treatment of animals should be viewed in the same way as treatment of plants, or rocks, or any other thing that doesn't have rights.

I also think that if you believe animals have fundamental rights, you're morally obligated to be fully vegan, not own pets, not kill/trap rodents or other small living creatures, etc.  If animals have rights, pet ownership is slavery, the egg/milk industry is forced captivity, thus should all be wrong.  We also might be obligated to go out into nature and protect prey animals from predators, but that starts to get confusing and I haven't fully worked that out yet.

To address two common alternative ways of defending "ethical" treatment of animals:

 - The suffering argument

People often say we're obligated to prevent suffering wherever we can, and thus causing suffering to animals (or anything) is wrong.  This doesn't ring true to me for two reasons.  The first is I've never heard a good argument of why suffering is inherently wrong or to always be avoided.  The second is where you draw the line of "suffering", and our collective un-willingness to apply that universally.  If preventing suffering is always important, then I would go back to above where I say we'd be morally obligated to be "extreme vegans" and possibly go out into nature and prevent all the suffering that occurs out there.

 - The consciousness argument

The other argument is since animals are fellow conscious beings, they deserve rights.  The same first argument applies here, I haven't seen a good argument as to what "consciousness" even is, or why it's an important factor in determining the distribution of rights.  Then the second is mostly the same too.  If everything that's conscious deserves full rights, then that leads to extreme veganism and an obligation to protect nature from itself.

There's also the argument to be made that animal rights should be respected because most people believe they should be, and thus going against that causes harm to the people who think it's wrong, but while that might be a reason to respect animal rights in the real world today, that seems like argumentum ad populum, and doesn't address whether the argument is *right*, just popular.

Change My View!

[Assistant] What does it mean to _deserve_ fundamental rights? You either have the rights, or you don't. To suggest that one can _deserve_ fundamental rights seems to be equivalent to saying that one can have the right to have fundamental rights  but in that case, wouldn't it be the right to have the rights that is fundamental, and not the original fundamental rights themselves?


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

[User] [LOTR] Why did the ring have such a quick effect on Smeagol and Deagol and yet bilbo and frodo were able to spend so much time without it corrupting them to that level?

[Assistant]
Part of it was their character - Bilbo and Frodo were basically good people before they came into possession of the Ring, while Smeagol was always a little mean and prone to thievery prior to his big birthday.  The Ring would enhance the negative aspects of its owner, and so it had an easy time with Smeagol, but took longer (and in Frodo's case, more dire circumstances) before it would wear on the hobbits.

Part of it was the means of possession.  Gandalf notes that Bilbo likely escaped a lot of the Ring's hurt because he found it by chance, and because he escaped from Gollum with an act of pity - refusing to kill this wretched creature - even though he had the opportunity.  That act of pity made it harder for the Ring to start to affect him, and it was likely the same with Frodo, who earned the Ring as an inheritance and didn't use it for anything malicious.  Smeagol took the Ring by force, through murder, and that had serious consequences.

Part of it was environmental - while Bilbo kept the Ring with him at all times, he wasn't usually paying much attention to it, because he had an otherwise fulfilling life going on around him.  He adopted a ward to give him a family at home, he threw parties with his fellow hobbits, and he was a generally social guy.  And the same with Frodo, who didn't especially change his life upon gaining the Ring.  But Gollum was fairly quickly kicked out of his community, forced to wander his way under the Misty Mountains and spend all of his time either looking for food, or else worshipping his Precious.  It had his whole mind ensnared from early on and he had no other distractions to keep it from taking him over entirely.

And lastly, part of it was usage.  Bilbo would only ever actually *use* the Ring on occasion, usually to avoid an annoying relative.  Frodo basically never used it prior to his Quest.  But Gollum would wear it to go hunting goblins, not only semi-frequent use, but also usage for evil purposes, which we already know gives the Ring more power to corrupt its owner.  Everything that Gollum did was an advantage to the Ring, while most of what Frodo and Bilbo did was antithesis to it - good deeds and time spent with friends were the best protections they had against its influence.

Thorin's last words were a little prophetic, in that sense:

>If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why the writer/showrunner has the creativity control of a TV series but in a movie/film its the director's job....

And the writer/showrunner gets more credit in a TV series than the director, while in a movie/film the director does and the writer barely gets any.
Im not a movie expert/student and its been bugging me for as long I can remember, the concept just seems weird to me.

[Assistant] TV shows have multiple directors who each handle different episodes. That means they need an extra job role that is higher that controls continuity between episodes and handles the arcs that cross multiple episodes or the whole series. Movies are more self contained.


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

[User]
If you doubled your caloric intake for two months, and wore a corset for the whole time, would it affect where the fat forms?

Assuming it's a *tightlacing* corset, which actually works to shape one's form.

[Assistant] Tight corsets were infamous for shaping one's body in the way of shifting internal organs little by little. If you added fat to the equation, you could eventually die by organs shifting enough to restrict blood flow and the resulting necrosis. Corset wouldn't affect the location of fat which is dictated by genetics.


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

[User]
How long does Covid 19 survive on money?

I checked the FAQ section and saw that it survives on copper for a few hours and plastic for a few days, but what about money? Right now I work a job that makes tips and I've been putting my tips in a ziplock bag with Lisol sprayed inside. How long until it is definitely safe for me to use?

[Assistant]
The problem with some of the studies is that they find COVID RNA on the surface, and not the actual virus that would make you sick.  So use caution.

Just one idea - do you have access to an ATM that accepts cash deposits?  If so, go deposit the money (either immediately or after Lysoling) and then wash your hands / sanitize.  Its a lot less handling of the bills.


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

[User] If you mix Helium and Sulfur Hexafluoride of even amounts and inhale it, will your voice stay normal or fluctuate?

[Assistant] The distortion when you inhale those gasses is caused by the density of them being lesser or greater than that of air. If you could generate a homogenous mixture of the two with the same overall density as air then you would sound normal.


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

[User]
[Silent Hill] What would happen if a morally good person went to silent hill?

Like someone whos never felt heart break, never done any bad deeds, never been in any trauma. Just someone who has had a good life and done good things? What would the town do to them?

[Assistant] They wouldn't be able to get there in the first place. Silent Hill as a psychic space is only available to people on the right mental wavelength. If a totally innocent, mentally healthy person went to the physical place of Silent Hill, all they'd see is the remnants of a burned out old rust belt town.