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

[User] ELI5: Why am I so tired throughout the day and can easily fall asleep, but the second I'm in bed, I'm wide awake and take hours to fall asleep?

[Assistant]
During the day, demands for your time and attention are omnipresent, sleep is a desirable way to escape them.

Once you're in bed, all the distractions have been silenced and now you have time to think about demands, worries, concerns, etc.


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

[User]
ELI5: why do we expect organizations like the NFL to punish players for illegal things they do off the field?

Shouldn't that solely be handled by the legal system? Yet all you hear is bitching when a player does something illegal in their personal lives and only gets a slap on the wrist from the NFL.

[Assistant]
The NFL is a media juggernaut, so one would think they have a certain moral responsibility. But really, like most things, it's about money.

The NFL has sponsors, and those sponsors don't want their product associated with wife-beaters, child-abusers, and murderers. Same reason Donald Sterling was forced to sell his NBA team. On the surface, the other owners said they were "appalled" (for PR reasons). But really, he was hurting their bottom line.


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

[User]
ELI5: How can water vaporise at every temperature if it requires heat from outside?

What about below 0 Celcius, or when you put some water that's colder than the room's temperature( before the temperature of water and room equals)?

[Assistant]
What happens when water (or any other liquid) evaporates, is that a molecule of the liquid at the surface has enough individual energy in order to overcome the attraction of local inter molecular forces. The temperature of the water is essentially the average energy over all the molecules; it does not represent the actual energy of every single molecule. As such, some molecules will have less energy and some will have more. As they move around and bump into each other, energy is exchanged and constantly in flux.

Because of this, at any point some molecule of water at the surface might have enough energy to escape and become vapor. The lower the temperature, the slower this process, of course.


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

[User] Eli5: How did the first weight get weight to know how much it weights?

[Assistant] It more-or-less went, "We need to define a weight, so we take this object and say that it defines the unit and calibrate our scales to match." In the case of the kilogram, it was defined as "the mass of one liter of water," and so no matter how massive one kilogram of water actually was, that mass set the definition.


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

[User]
[DC/Marvel] Who are the biggest Heroes operating outside of the US?

England, France, Germany, Canada, Australlia, Mongolia - there must be heroes from all over the place doing stuff all over the place right? Who are the biggest guys from these countries?

[Assistant]
Batman Inc has members in many nations- Nightrunner in France, Black Bat in Hong Kong, etc. The Great Ten are the most prominent heroes of China. England has Knight and Squire.

In Earth 616, China has the People's Defense Force. In Britain there's Excalibur, MI-13, and Captain Britain. France has Les Heroes de Paris, a team Ben Grimm joined for a short while during the Civil War.


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

[User] ELIF- How does a hot air balloon work? How does the pilot know where they're going to end up and what happens if it all goes wrong?

[Assistant]
Controlling a hot air ballon is a lot of guesswork. Educated guesswork, but guesswork nonetheless.

By controlling the heat inside the actual ballon (this is done using gas burners) it's possible to control if the ballon is rising (because it's hotter than the surrounding air) or declining (because it's colder, respectively.).

The ballon also has a valve at the top where you can let hot air out, to speed up the process of cooling down.

And that is really all there is to it. Hot ballon goes up. Cold ballon goes down.

Actual navigation, though, takes skill. A ballon is always and indefinitely moving in the direction the wind is blowing. Which means that if you want to go west, you'll have to wait until you have wind blowing towards the west.

Complicating things a bit, wind can blow in different directions at different heights. Which means that you can go higher and find a patch of wind going in sort of the right direction instead of staying low and going in the exact opposite direction.

The easiest way to find out exactly how the wind is blowing above you is to release a small helium ballon (because helium ballons always go up) and see in which direction it goes when the wind grabs hold of it.

The rest is all about skill. Knowledge. A tour ballon pilot would typically have several pre-planned routes to choose from depending on wind direction. "If the wind is blowing westward, we'll have to start east of the national park with all the wild animals. And land someplace west of it." The problem is the "someplace" bit, because you don't necessarily end up where you intended to.

Most aircraft can fend for themselves and force a direction they want with a propeller, but an air ballon just...can't. So, to simplify things for everyone, air ballons got their own set of aviation rules where other aircraft has to make way for them. The obvious issue here is of course that ballons are not necessarily welcome in any airspace, because the extra considerations everyone else has to make for them.

Things that typically go wrong is that the wind changes at the exact worst thinkable time, pushing the ballon towards a high voltage power line. Or, you know, towards a forest. Or a cliffside. Any place where you can't immediately land is a risk that the pilot would try to avoid. Passing a risk area means that they have to plan ahead.

When all you can control is height, you'll have to go higher. Because if you can only go up, then you are soon out of options. But if you can also go down, then you got two options to choose from.

What happens when the ballon risks running into a power line is that the pilot has to consider the two options. 1) burn gas and get more heat so that the ballon slowly rises? 2) release hot air so that the ballon quickly goes down?

Going down is always easy. Going down comfortably, thats more difficult. Going down comfortably when you are in a hurry, When you desperately have to come down immediately, that takes skill. And could definitely involve bruises as a calculated better outcome.


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

[User]
ELI5: Where does "The Floor is Lava!" come from, and how did everyone invent it as a kid?

Idk about you guys, but I definitely played the game "The Floor is Lava" as a wee kid. Not only that, but being that young, I'm pretty sure I invented the game myself.

The weird part is, there are a lot of people I know who played the same game, and invented it themselves as well. How the heck does a game like that get independently mass-invented?

[Assistant] You didn't invent it yourself.  :-)  Most kids get it from other kids and it's passed down in grade school.  A younger kid might see their older sibling playing it or an only child will see their friends or neighbors their age playing a similar game.  "Don't step on a crack or you'll break your mother's back!" is very similar.   Since lava is cool (hot molten rocks!) to well...most sane people but especially little kids, pretending your floor is something neat rather than the boring carpet your parents are thinking of replacing is just fun.


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

[User]
[Marvel] How powerful is the country of Wakanda?

Can they be considered a global superpower?

[Assistant]
No. The definition of a superpower is a state that is able to project power on a global scale. Wakanda is extremely advanced, but they have a small landmass, low population, an extremely weak military, and have made a point of staying out of global affairs. They could certainly punch above their weight class if they wanted to given their advanced technology and a near monopoly on vibranium, but tech and resources only get you so far in a world where there are gods walking around.

If Wakanda made an effort to get extremely involved in global affairs, I'd compare them to Japan. Extremely advanced technology, a highly developed economy, and the theoretical ability to be a far larger player than they currently are, but things like a long history of intentional isolation, a relatively small landmass, and a population that seems fairly content with maintaining the status quo keep them from ever reaching that potential, at least for a good while longer. Definitely a large player on the global stage, but far from a superpower.


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

[User]
[Short Circuit] How would Number 5 have developed if he had access to the internet?

We see him devouring information from the moment he gains sapience. Billboards, TV, radio, encyclopedias. How would he have turned out if he had access to the internet, with all of it's wonders and depravity?

[Assistant] He'd have absorbed all the information he could much like Leeloo in Fifth Element. But when he got to the "war" entry in Wikipedia his eyes would start glowing red and he'd turn into a terminator. It's basic computer science.


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

[User]
[X-Men] If Wolverine were to stab an infected person, tuck away his claws, and then proceed to stab me, would I become infected with the same illness?

Okay imagine this, Wolverine stabs someone dealing with an infection like I'm not sure, the common cold or influenza. If he unsheathes his claws for a small period of time, then stabs me (to which I get medical attention and live), would I be dealing with the same infection as the first victim?

What about in a hypothetical scenario where the victim's blood stays on his claws at the time of sheathing and unsheathing and instead it's a blood borne illness?

[Assistant] No, with his healing factor curing him of gunshot wounds in seconds, a mere infection would be dealt with literally immediately. Also, hard metals like stainless steel don't carry disease well anyway so adamantium can be supposed to also be germ resistant.


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

[User]
[The Office] Why does Jim never face any penalties for his pranks against Dwight?

So some of his pranks aren't that crazy like just showing up dressed as Dwight and imitating him, others can be really hard to trace back like putting quarters in his phone to make him bonk himself in the face after they're removed, but some pranks are just unquestionably unprofessional and pretty easy to trace back to Jim like moving Dwight's entire desk to the bathroom and acting smug about it.. Dwight is entirely right it's extremely unprofessional and severely impacting his ability to work for no reason.

[Assistant]
Michael likes Jim. He would never penalize him, especially not for just playing a joke.

Dwight has gone to Toby with numerous complaints about Jim, but Toby never sends them to corporate. He just keeps them in a box under his desk. So Dwight really has no recourse left.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do sodas taste better in glass bottles and cans rather than plastic bottles?

[Assistant]
One word friend: permeation.

So, plastic bottles are permeable as hell. They will lose water and CO2 over time. This will impact the flavor, how bubbly it is, and the crispness of the soda. Glass and aluminum are not as permeable so the formula stays relatively the same and doesnt lose as much from permeation. On that note most plastic bottles are PET and it leaks like a sob.


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

[User]
eli5 Why are historical ruins so much lower than modern ground level?

I recently visited the Roman Baths in Bath. The tour made a point of pointing out that you had to go down several meters below the modern ground level to see the remains, that as you travelled down you were travelling further into the past. Walking around old cities you'll sometimes come across a glass panel in the road and below it you'll see the excavated original medieval road 1 or 2 meters down. How is it that this happens? I can't imagine it's a geological process in only a couple of thousand years.

[Assistant] Archaeologist here. Theres a lot of reasons. Some have already been mentioned. When buildings collapse it makes a lot of rubble and dust that can cover other ruins. You also have floods, volcanic eruptions, dust storms, etc. Other factors can be plantsover thousands of years plants grow on ruins, die, and decay and this produces a lot of soil that can bury things. People also often throw trash into abandoned buildings, over time this builds up and can bury a whole structure. Last, dont forget deliberate burial in old cities. Its easier to just fill in the foundations of an old structure with dirt and build on top of it, rather than tear the whole thing down. Same with streets, if you need to replace a street, just cover it with some dirt and pave it fresh on top. Over time this can add many layers on top of one another.


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

[User]
[Ghostbusters] What would have been written in the Help Wanted Ad that the Ghostbusters put out?

Bonus: Who would have written it? What were the qualifications they were looking for? And why would it have been attractive to only Winston?

[Assistant]
Ray would have come up with it (Egon would have been too busy and Peter probably didn't care enough to put any thought into it), but Janine would have typed it out and submitted it to the newspaper. It would have been stiff, formal and contained only the basic information and job description. It would have likely asked for someone with a PhD in particle physics, maybe some higher mathematics or at least SOME kind of high education. And the job description would have been full of wonderful terms like "observing paranormal phenomena" and "collecting postmortem samples for analysis". Most people would have assumed it was a joke or way above their skills, so they avoided the ad and went on to apply at different locations.

Winston just wanted to get paid and he assumed rightly that anyone who came up with such a ridiculous ad and interview would be desperate for help. He also didn't run when he found out everyone in the firehouse were completely serious, so he was hired.


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

[User] [Marvel] Can Magneto take the Infinity Gauntlet off of Thanos?

[Assistant]
I feel really stupid that in all the various infinity gauntlet talk, I've never heard anyone bring up someone like Magneto that can control metal. Frick' SWOOP and now it's mine. Done.

I feel like if someone is actively using it, like Thanos shooting out Power stone rays, that would probably prevent it from just flying off, but yeah, if Thanos is just walking around with it on, they already showed you can literally just pull it off his hand, so there's no reason a magnetic user couldn't just make it fly off to them.


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

[User] [DC/Comics generally]The Hulk can lift a mountain or drag together continental plates. But why doesn't the surface that he is exerting this tremendous strength on just snap, the mountain fall on top of him or the plates break from his grasp? How do other strong characters deal with this?

[Assistant]
The 'Selective Field of Influence Theory' by Doctor Otto Binder

The theory was first postulated in reference to the exploits of the World War II era Captain Marvel, aka, Shazam.  The World's Mightiest Mortal could punch a tank, and the power was applied only to an area the size of his fist. However, he could rescue a disabled plane in midflight by holding a wing, when that should have torn the wing off.

The theory is that these gifted individuals exert their influence as if they were manipulating a variable size and shaped field. Thus Captain Marvel can hold up a falling building, and later return to punch out a single brick. How this happens is not clearly understood, but it appears to be a widespread and innate attribute of these individuals.


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

[User]
Why is there a time-energy uncertainty relation when time is not an operator in Quantum Mechanics?

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is based on the property of the commutators of two Hermitian operators. But time is not an operator in Quantum Mechanics, so what gives? How fundamental is this relation? Where does it come from and what does it mean?

[Assistant]
It's not really the same kind of uncertainty relationship, since you are correct that time is not an operator.

Instead think more as a time evolution on states. If a state is an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, it is stable in time. If a state is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, it can be written as a linear combination of Hamiltonian eigenstates, with a time dependence determined by the difference in energy levels from the spectrum of the Hamiltonian. It is from this time dependence that the time energy uncertainty comes from.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] What is the difference between Bacta and Kolto?

I'm playing through KotOR now and they seem to be pretty much the same thing?

[Assistant] Both are powerful healing agents, but they come from different places. Kolto was commonplace a long time ago, but Production suddenly grinded to a near halt, causing the Galaxy to turn to the more commonly availible bacta, which are in common use today.


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

[User] How is having such dependent offspring selectively advantageous for humans?

[Assistant]
Well, first of all, humans are extremely K-selected in comparison to most mammals. We put a lot of effort  and care into each individual which is born. You can have a supremely dependent offspring when you put a lot of care into it.  Additionally, our babies are born in what we call a secondarily altricial state. We are less developed at birth than what you'd see in most primate species.  Basically, we are born before you would be expected with regards to our brain (and body) development. Much of this is related to brain size. We are born relatively large-brained, but have neonatal brains that are in a less  developed state (relative to final brain size) than seen in our primate relatives.  It has been hypothesized that this is due to the "obstetric dilemma," where you can only manage to squeeze out a head of a certain size through the pelvic outlet (although there are some researchers who indicate that this might not necessarily be the case).

It is also interesting to note that humans are really good at taking care of our kids after they are weaned.  Most primates do not engage in significant direct care of offspring following weaning. Primate juveniles are pretty much on their own in terms of finding food following weaning -- and have correspondingly high rates of mortality. In contrast, humans engage in significant food sharing and direct care for individuals after weaning.  This period called "childhood" (see work by Barry Bogin and friends) not only increases offspring survival, but also reduces interbirth interval by lowering the amount of time spent in lactation.  As females demonstrate reproductive suppression during lactation, reducing this period allows us to resume cycling faster and allows us to have additional kids while still having dependent offspring. In contrast, other ape species have extremely long interbirth intervals as their period of lactation (and thus reproductive suppression) is longer than found among humans.


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

[User] How efficient are our solar panels?

[Assistant]
The commerical panels available on the market are ~15-19% efficient with sunlight. Lab ones are in the 20% region  The theoretical limit for single junction silicon solar cells using sunlight is about 33.7%, based on the solar spectrum and the bandgap of silicon.

Multi-junction solar cells made from multiple layers of material offer better theoretical efficiency as you can tune each junction to a given wavelength. Certain organic semiconductors that can generate mutiple charge carrier pairs from a single photon also offer better theoretical efficiency, as you can better use the higher energy photons rather than just making heat. In the lab, multi-junction cells have hit ~45% efficient, but these aren't commercially viable.


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

[User] Is there a specific reason why many people's arms tend to hurt after receiving a flu shot but not after many other shots?

[Assistant] There is a substance called Adjuvant that is an irritant included with some shots. Adjuvant stimulates your innate/non-specific/general immune response, by stimulating your innate immune response at the same time as the vaccine stimulates your specific/late/anti-body/adaptive immune response the adaptive immunity developed is stronger.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why home blood tests do not exist, while we can measure our sugar levels with personal devices at home?

I feel like going to get basic blood test done is a chore. Why it can't be done at home? I have the glucometer at home and its great. Is the same thing possible for a more general purpose? Education-wise I am far from anything to do with medicine, but technologically speaking, is it really a stretch?

Having a nurse come over is not what I mean by at-home testing, btw.

English is not my mother tongue, sorry if my question is not clear.

Edit: Yes, I missed most of what's going on with Theranos. It's not widely covered where I live, I will definitely watch the documentary or listen to the podcast. sounds interesting!
Also, thank you all for your comments, so much I didn't know!

[Assistant]
Most tests don't use blood per se, they use serum or plasma. Hard to get at those at home.

A blood count requires machines able to see, differentiate and count a variety of different cells in your blood. It is not comparable to a glucose test.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Why do the Separatist bother with life support on Droid controlled ships?

It seems like an unnecessary drain on power, and a lack of life support would make it that more difficult for organic boarding parties.

[Assistant]
Because sometimes they need to take prisoners or shuttle officials/organic officers around. And they never know when a prisoner might come by.

Better to be prepared. In any case, if they didn't use that, boarding parties would soon start using space suits. Clone Trooper armors already give them over fifteen minutes of air in a vacuum.


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

[User]
[The Thing (1982)] What happens to the clothes when The Thing devours you?

Many characters get devoured and imitated in The Thing (1982). I have always wondered about the clothes.

Bennings has his coat, pants and sweatshirt on, they are not bloody, not ripped, they look perfectly normal. The imitation is not ready yet, but clothing is not an issue in that case.

The characters at one point are assuming that it rips off your underpants - but why only the underpants? What is happening with the rest of the clothes? Suffice to say that the characters don't know anything for sure, they are just speculating.

Anyone has a working in-universe explanation?

[Assistant] I've always assumed that the thing absorbs any natural fibers, discarding anything it can't assimilate, and then remakes the clothing out of itself. The same way it made fur when it was the dog or hair when it's human.


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

[User]
[Rocky Horror] Giving myself over to absolute pleasure sounds pretty cool. What's the down side?

I'm cool with living my life for the thrills.

[Assistant]
Pleasure fades like the high of a drug. What gave you joy will soon fade. You will crave for the same feeling you once had but must now go to greater lengths to achieve it.
Your life will degrade into the never ending pursuit of pleasure. You will become its slave - its darkness will consume you.
The extremes you will go to for the slightest bit of pleasure will make you a monster beyond reckoning. Eventually there will be nothing left but an empty shell, devoid of all things good, a demon of lust whose thirst cannot be quenched.
Your hunger will become your hell.


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

[User]
When an avocado is not ripe, are the fats and nutritional content just as present or does the ripening process make them available? If so, why?

Here I am sitting with a bag full of avocados, and all of them are not quite ripe yet. I wonder if the fat and nutritional content are the same at this stage as when it ripens or if there is a type of transformation that happens as it ripens. If, so, why?

[Assistant] The nutritional content is all still there, but the nutrients in unripe fruits are more difficult to digest for us, and hence they don't taste as good. Starches breaking down into simple sugars, complex enzymes denaturing into amino acid chains, all this helps us digest and absorb the nutrients easier. This is also the same reason we cook meat vs eat it raw (aside from the chance of infection).


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do so many people have peanut allergies?

Just saw on the news that a trial was happening in NZ which could lead on to a cure for peanut allergies, and it made me realise that many people around the world all have this common allergy. I guess my question is, why is it so common? It's interesting enough to know that it is widespread, but knowing why would help me make sense of it all. ELI5.

[Assistant] Nobody's sure. It's more common in developed countries which has led to the ***hygiene hypothesis***, which is basically that our immune systems like to pick fights, and will attack random substances if they can't find real infections - even if they're delicious and harmless like peanuts.


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

[User]
[Spider-Man] Do you think Raimi Spider-Man could've engineered his own web shooters if he really had too?

Compared to the other two on screen spider-men he seems to be the least technologically inclined. His suit is definitely the least advanced and in the trilogy we rarely get an inside look into his scientific expertise.

[Assistant]
Spoilers for No away Home

>!In his own movies Peter is a gifted scientist to the point that he found an error in Doc Ock's calculations for the fusion reactor. Then in No Way Home we see that he was capable of creating a cure for the Green Goblin in a matter of hours. So he probably could build webshooters if he needed to.!<


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

[User]
ELI5: Many billionaires like Bill Gates "give away" billions of dollars, but they give it to their own foundations, who dole it out at a trickle. Could they take this money back if they needed/wanted to?

I'm sure they'd have to pay taxes and penalties on it, but if they wanted to for some reason could they transfer funds from their foundation into their personal account, or just start spending it on themselves instead of on charitable causes?

[Assistant]
No, this would be considered "self-dealing" by the IRS and is prohibited by law. An excise tax of 5% of the amount of money involved will be applied to everyone involved in the act of self-dealing and the act is supposed to be corrected. If it isn't corrected then a penalty of 200% of the amount involved is applied to the self-dealer and another 50% to any foundation manager who refused to correct the self-dealing.

So no, it wouldn't be accessible.


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

[User]
CMV: The "first lady" job should end

Reason #1 - It is an outdated, archaic pratice that has no place in a modern republic.

Back in the days of monarchy, when you were the king, your son was the prince. Should you die, he would rule and be the new king. If the president/prime minister dies, his/her son doesn't get to be the new president/prime minister. So why should, these days, someone be granted a title based on marriage alone?

Reason #2 - It is nepotism pure and simple.

If you argue that some form of charity done by the presidential office is important, shouldn't that job be given to a professional who has actual experience in doing it, instead of a random person that simply happens to be in the family of the president/prime minister?

Reason #3 - It inferiorizes women.

Barack Obama's first lady was Michelle. Trump's is Melania. Now, do you know who Angela Merkel's "first husband/man" is? Do you know who was the "first man" of Brazil's Dilma Roussef? You probably don't and the reason is: when men are in power, it's okay for their women to be their "helpers", coming right behind them. Now, when a woman is in power it would be "weird" for their men to walk behind them taking a subordinate position. Maybe that's another sign that the job is not really necessary. I mean, if it becomes vacant for 4/5 years and nobody even notices...

Reason #4 - It takes our attention away from the important stuff

As the internet would say, government is serious business. A president/prime minister can take millions of people out of poverty, initiate a nuclear war, etc. When he have people discussing whether the current first lady is prettier than the previous one or not, wheter her clothes are adequate to a certain a event or not... That takes attention from the important stuff and transforms the "first family" into some sort of reality show couple. People stop debating tax rates and, instead, start asking if the first lady doesn't care about her husband's flings...

Reason #5 - It reinforces the idea that the "traditional family" is the "proper" right one.

The president/prime minister is elected, pictures start flooding the internet and magazines. Who's in these pictures? The president, the "first lady" and, hopefully, the two first kids and the first dog, as well. Now, put yourself in the shoes of a transgender person, a single lady, a sixty years old man who never had kids or a dog... Won't the fact that the "first family" is always different from yours start giving you feelings of inadequacy and make you question what you're doing "wrong" (even though you're not doing anything wrong at all, it just so happens that this tale tells you that you cannot be successful - or happy, for that matter-  if your family does not look like every single family in power since the dawn of time)?

What am I getting wrong here?

[Assistant]
> Now, do you know who Angela Merkel's "first husband/man" is? Do you know who was the "first man" of Brazil's Dilma Roussef? You probably don't and the reason is: when men are in power, it's okay for their women to be their "helpers", coming right behind them.

I think the reason is that those countries never placed any importance on the "first spouse" in the first place. Do you know who Justin Trudeau's wife is? David Cameron's? Bolsonaro's? Shinzo Abe's?


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

[User]
ELI5: How does the United States run on a deficit, and what does that ACTUALLY mean for the future?

We've only NOT run a deficit for four years of the past forty. As a member of the younger generation I'm trying to learn what it actually means for a country and it's posterity to run a deficit year after year.

[Assistant]
Running a deficit basically means that you end the year owing more than you did at the start of the year.

Is that a bad thing? Well, maybe... but not necessarily.

You see, unlike in personal finance, when you're talking about national finances (or business finances, which are very similar), having some debt is usually a *good* thing, because it means you can spend money in order to make more money.

So if the country borrows money, spends it on things like infrastructure and job creation, and ends up with more of the population in work, earning more money, and paying more tax, then this extra tax ought to be enough to pay the extra interest on the bigger amount of debt. That's a good thing - it means the country's finances are growing. As the country's finances grow, so its ability to repay debt grows, and it would be wrong not to take advantage of that.

On the other hand, if the reason you're running at a deficit is because no one is in work so you're not collecting much tax, but you're having to borrow money to pay the salaries of civil servants, then that's bad.


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

[User]
[STAR WARS] What was life like for Stormtroopers and officers in Vader's personal 501st legion, post-clone era?

What was Vader's relationship like with his men? The clone troopers in the war loved him and he cared for them.

How were his relationships with his officers?

[Assistant]
Officers hate him. Troopers are fanatically loyal to him.

It's interesting to note that so far in the new canon, there's been no mention of him commanding the 501st after the Clone Wars ended, not until Hoth, and that may be incorrect information at the moment.


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

[User]
Where do files, pics, etc. go once they get deleted?

I remember someone telling me about cyberspace once but I don't really know much about it, or whether or not it has anything to do with deleted files.

[Assistant]
your files don't go anywhere.  you just forget where you put them.

whenever you want to draw a picture of a cat with your crayons.  you just take a picture and draw.  when you are done you throw it away, but you can take a new piece of paper and draw again.  You'll always have paper to draw on (your parents will get it for you), and you just throw the old paper in the trash.

but a computer can't get its paper from its parents.  it doesn't have any parents.  instead it has a certain amount of memory to use and draw or write on, like drawing on the bedroom walls.  It can draw all over those walls, and it always remembers where each picture is (the cat is below the light switch, the dog is behind the bed, the house is next to your trash can).  But if it wants to get rid of something and start over new, it can't just tear out the wall.  instead it just forgets where it put that particular picture.  so it thinks the wall is empty.

so it forgets that the cat picture is under the light switch, and the cat picture is deleted.  the computer thinks the spot is empty, and the cat is gone, But technically, the cat picture is still there, where we left it.  some times you can do special stuff to get the computer to remember where that picture is, but it might be difficult depending on how it was deleted.

that deleted picture will stay on the wall until you ask the computer to write something new, like a picture of your goldfish.  The computer thinks the spot under the light switch is empty, so it goes to draw the goldfish there.  first it applies a layer of white paint, and then it draws the fish.  now the cat picture is truly gone, and only goldie remains.


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

[User]
ELI5: If there are no lions in Europe, why are they all over European heraldry?

Owls, bears, boars and all that make sense because Europeans would see them all the time.  I've never heard of lions indigenous to Europe, and yet lions are everywhere when you look at European heraldry.  How come?

[Assistant] modern europeans largely have a greek/roman lineage, to some degree (at least culturally).  romans had lions.  Lions are depicted in the bible.  Lions territory used to be quite large as well, living in southern europe.


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

[User] [Fallout: New Vegas] The Courier does not survive being shot by Benny and dies. How does this affect the Mojave Wasteland?

[Assistant]
Kimball gets assassinated.
The Great Khans join the Legion.
The Brotherhood doesn't fix its stuff and either leave the bunker or lock themselves in.
Goodsprings gets wiped out by Powder Gangers.
The White Glove Society becomes cannibals.
The Omertas attack the Strip.
Mr. House doesn't get his securitron army.
The Boomers stay in their base.
Caesar doesn't cure his cancer.
The Legion probably wins the Battle of Hoover Dam.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] How many clones were created on Kamino ?

In the movies its suggested 1.2 million units. That simply makes no sense at all in the context of a galactic war. For context, China has an active army of 2 million troops - not including navy and airforce.

In the context of a galactic war, you would need many hundreds of billions of troops. This isnt a regional war on a single planet. A galactic civil war would require almost incomprehensible numbers. Tens of thousands of star destroyers, billions if not trillions of active personnel and so on.

Is there any clarification on what was meant by  units?

[Assistant]
What you're asking is a question which has been debated by fans practically since Attack of the Clones came out. Some authors treated this gospel truth, with total numbers of the Grand Army reaching no more than a few million. Others portrayed it as far more flexible, with each and every planet in the Republic receiving a garrison force of between ~2,000 and 100,000 clones, even as the Republic's lines were allegedly stretched thin by the war.

Complicating things is that Lucasfilm Limited was quite clear that no more fixed number could ever be stated for the clones, ensuring that many writers would write battles where tens or hundreds of thousands of clones die even in quick raids - well exceeding the alleged ~1.2 to 3 million figure.

No clarification of the term "Unit" was ever given.

- If, however, it was referring to the 576-clone Batallion, then Lama Su would be offering Obi-Wan roughly 155 million clones with 576 million more soon - a far more suitable "starting force" for the opening days of the war.

- If it referred to a 2,304-clone Regiment - the largest "unit" in the Grand Army's structural makeup - then the Republic would begin the war with nearly 461 million clones, with another *two billion* arriving soon after - a much more reasonable force for beginning a truly galactic conflict.


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

[User]
What keeps synapses together?

I've read that neurons do not touch at synapses, but are rather really close to each other. So what keeps them from coming undone, especially in a body in movement?

[Assistant]
I think you mean what keeps two neurons together at the synaptic cleft?

Turns out their are glycoproteins (like you would have on the surface of just about every cell), that bridge between the presynaptic neuron and postsynaptic neuron. The presynaptic neuron has a glycoprotein called neurexin and the postsynaptic neuron has a glycoprotein called neuroligin.

By altering the genes responsible for the synaptogenesis of these glycoproteins, it's possible to induce certain neurocognitive conditions.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is walking slowly easier than standing?

[Assistant] It shifts the weight from one leg/ side of the hip to the other. This puts less stress on each leg than the shared weight, because each side gets a break. This is the reason you see a lot of people leanin on one leg when standing still for more than a few minutes.


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

[User]
[Kellogg's] Does Tony the Tiger have a digestive system or taste-buds actually capable of handling/appreciating a sweet, carbohydrate-rich food like Frosted Flakes?

Typical felines are not well-suited to appreciating or digesting a food like Frosted Flakes. Does Tony have some kind of aberrant physiology which makes him capable of appreciating them? Does his anthropomorphized aspect give him a broader palate than typical for a big cat, allowing him to taste things more like a human would?

Alternatively, is he just a completely bought-and-paid-for shill who talks about how grrrrrrreat Frosted Flakes are even though to him they have a taste indistinguishable from wood chips?

[Assistant]
Tony's a chimera based on human stock; his basic body plan is human, and the feline elements (fur, claws, etc.) are largely external and aesthetic.  Specifically, large canines aside, the anatomy of Tony's tongue, mouth, and throat is fundamentally human - he wouldn't be able to talk otherwise.  (You ever see a cat try to roll its 'r's?)  It's only logical that a human-derived tongue structure would retain a human sense of taste.

Whether he *likes* Frosted Flakes or not is another question.  Of course he says he does, but the dude is a professional.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is peanut butter half the price of actual peanuts if it takes more effort to produce it?

[Assistant]
You assume the peanuts that go into a jar of peanut butter are the same ones that go into a bag of peanuts. They're not.

The food that you buy whole (e.g. peanuts, tomatoes, potatoes, strawberries) are the best of the crop. The food that you buy processed into some other form (e.g. peanut butter, tomato sauce, tater tots, strawberry jam) are the small or bruised or misshapen or damaged parts of the crop. The appearance or condition doesn't matter because it's not going to retain that form when processed anyway.

People will pay more for nicely formed, pretty produce. So the stuff you buy whole in the supermarket (or _lightly_ processed, like a jar of roasted nuts) is more expensive than the produce that goes into highly processed foods (where highly processed = it doesn't retain any of it's original shape or form).


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

[User]
CMV: Parents who believe in faith healing and refuse to take their children to doctors when theyre sick should be charged with neglect and/or homicide if that child dies.

Little bit of backstory: I was raised by my grandparents and I love and appreciate them for everything they do for me, but theyre very religious and Im not. Several times growing up, when I had colds or the flu, they would say, just pray and wouldnt take me to a doctor unless I was passing out or in agony. It never got bad enough that I was in danger of dying, but I know what its like to feel like garbage and have your caregivers tell you that youre just not praying hard enough.

Anyway, my stepmother and I are very close and really the only opinions we differ on concern religion (shes loosely catholic, Im agnostic). We were talking about a report that Im doing for an ethics class concerning the death of a 2 year old girl whose parents refused to take her to a doctor because their faith forbid it, and the death of a newborn in Oregon for the same reason. In both of these cases the children were sick for a long period of time and all they did was pray and anoint then with oil. Long story short, the parents in both cases are being charged with neglect and manslaughter/murder, and I support that decision because its ridiculous to me that you could watch your child wither away to nothing and eventually die due to Gods Will. (This is a 3000 level college class and what follows is a civil debate, and Im simply presenting the facts and then leading a discussion with everyones opinions. My own opinions arent in the presentation itself, and I have to review it with my TA to make sure its relatively unbiased).

My stepmother lost it and said I was being cruel and not thinking about the pain the parents were going through, what it was like to lose a child, etc. I tried to explain my opinion, that if these parents actually cared about keeping their kids alive they would actively try to keep them healthy, but she just repeated that Im being cruel because I dont understand what its like to have faith.

Does anyone have an opinion here that Im just overlooking in favor of my own? How can I have more compassion for these people?

Edit: spelling.

[Assistant] Why should we focus on charging them _if the child dies_? This seems like too little too late. Isn't the best time to charge them with neglect _before_ the child dies, when the child can still be saved?


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

[User] X-post from r/[Pokmon] Are all fossil Pokemon part Rock-type because they were fossils or because all Pokemon from their era were just Rock-type by default?

[Assistant] Perhaps only rock-type pokemon are likely to make good fossils? Fossilized creatures on earth are the one-in-a-million that happened to leave their bodies somewhere that would preserve them intact long enough for the mineral-replacement process to happen. The grass types from long ago probably just left very few fossils compared to the rock types.


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

[User]
LinkedIn finds my new stranger flatmates in its suggested connections algorithm. How?

Dear all,

Could someone explain this to me:

Last year I moved in to a rented apartment with totally random people who also found the flat on a housing ads website - we were total strangers. After a few weeks I managed to pop up on their suggested LinkedIn connections window. Neither of us searched for each other - it just happened (seemingly?) randomly.

Today this just happened to me again - about 3 weeks ago I moved in to a new flat occupied by a total stranger and today she cropped up on my suggested LinkedIn connections window - I recognized her from a profile picture. Once again, I told her this and she is 100% certain she did not search me on LinkedIn; she cannot even spell my foreign name. I did not search for her either.

Is this just a very rare coincidence, or am I missing something in my online behaviour that enabled LinkedIn to indicate flatmates as suggested connections?

Please explain! Thanks!

[Assistant]
LinkedIn could be doing a check on which IP address you are coming from and assumr that you know each other if you are the only two people using that address on a regular basis.

*edit: changed "they" to "linkedin"


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

[User] [Marvel] How would Dr Doom take it if the One Above All came to him and personally apologized for making Reed Richards smarter than him in the field of science, and left?

[Assistant]
It would piss him off even more.

Imagine if God himself came and told you that your most hated rival is deterministically smarter than you and there's nothing you can ever do to overcome that difference.


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

[User] [Marvel] Could an individual carry both the inhuman and mutant genes?

[Assistant] Luna Amaquelin-Maximoff does. It was initially believed that they just cancelled each other out, but Quicksilver exposed her to terrigenesis and it worked, giving her the ability to see auras. She's still young though so her X-Gene hasn't activated yet if it even will.


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

[User]
Why is the most common psychological side effect "suicidal tendencies"?

I know there's an aspect of confirmation bias here, but it seems like more often than not a side effect of various drugs is "suicidal thoughts or tendencies."

Why is this such a common side effect? Is there some aspect of brain chemistry that makes us susceptible to it? Why aren't there side effects like "Sudden insatiable curiosity" or "unbearable clinginess" or "sudden hyperfocus on work and other tasks"?

[Assistant]
This can be a side effect of anti-depression drugs. We are not sure of the exact mechanism, but here's the current thinking.

The most severely depressed patients often have suicidal thoughts already. When treatment begins, the patient may start to have more energy and motivation first, days or weeks before their depressed mood is alleviated. So where they previously only had a vague idea of self-harm, with treatment they have the energy and motivation to form a detailed plan, and act on it.


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

[User]
Are libertarian ideas and arguments intellectually honest or philosophically viable?

I would like to start off by saying that I am new to both philosophy and political ideology, so sorry if this is a stupid question. Also, when I say libertarian, I'm speaking of the of the right-wing political theory that has been growing out of the United States rather than the political theories of left anarchism. Basically, my thinking goes a bit like this. I have found that most of the political theories that I have been studying will have some sort of ideological or (more often) some sort of philosophical justification for their arguments. If this is correct, I should be able to look into the philosophical justifications for many of these political ideologies to find if they hold any validity to modern understandings of known reality. My question is not so much "what do you BELIEVE ?" or "What party should I vote for?", but more of an academic inquiry of whether or not the beliefs, interpretations, and world view of this political ideology are philosophically justifiable. Can a person base their opinions off of logic, reason, skepticism, and academic honesty also be a libertarian, or is their some sort of gap inside their arguments? In other words, I'm asking if libertarians are nothing but a bunch of people who don't understand basic logic on some sort of deeper level, and are they promoting a pseudo philosophy. Is their debate about this? Is this too brad of a question? Is this the wrong place for this question? What would be some good reading material to learn more?

[Assistant] Nozick is considered the best libertarian philosopher. And his work is considered real high quality. So obviously its considered defensible. Whether that makes it correct or the most plausible option is another matter. There's a difference between a plausible defense of something existing and it being the most viable option.


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

[User]
ELI5: How is it that some people are born with natural talents for things and others must learn them?

Some people are born with the ability to draw well or pick up musical instruments, while others must spend double the hours of practice to learn them. Why/how does this happen?

[Assistant]
"Born with it" is usually a misconception.  The general philosophy is that it takes 10,000hrs of practice with the aim to get better to master something.

The key to that is making the most of your time spent "practicing".  For example, professional hockey players almost exclusively are born in January/February. It's not because the hockey gods decreed it so, but has to do with little league rules.

Most pro players got their hockey start in grade school where leagues are usually broken into age groups.  Anyone who was 7 on Jan 1 plays in the 7yr old League.  The difference between 7 and 7.8 years old is huge, so oldest kids on the team are usually the best just due to size.

Now they look objectively better than their peers when going out for select teams and coaches.  This access gives them better training opportunities and tougher competition to grow their skills against.

It's not that they were born with it.  They just were able to make better use of their time practicing.

If you aren't genuinely interested in what you are studying, don't have the best teachers, or simply don't challenge yourself, you aren't making the most of your time, and extend your learning curve.

Some *are* literally born with physical advantages, but like the hockey players this usually gives them an early advantage and early access to elite-tier training and competition.  An example of this would be Michael Phelps and his freakishly long arms & legs attached to his extra-wide hands & feet.  That man's body is just about perfectly evolved for lap swimming.


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

[User]
Does Superman have Kryptonian gut flora?

If he does, then how does his poop not spread a wildfire epidemic of Kryptonian E Coli, immune to antibiotics and fire and anything else? How is the entire Midwest not covered in a ten-foot invulnerable biofilm?

[Assistant] he probably does not have kryptonian gut flora anymore...Studies have shown that when you start living with people(this can actually even include your dog) you end up "syncing" you gut Microbiome. However even if he did maintain his original gut flora, it would be unlikely to affect earth species since these pathogens would be developed for kryptonian biology and would likely be unable to bind cellular receptors or even illicit the immune/inflammation response that is responsible for most symptoms when we are sick.


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

[User]
CMV: Veganism is morally correct compared to meat eating.

I am not a vegan or vegetarian myself. That said I probably should be.

The moral case for veganism is pretty simple and ironclad:

1) Producing meat and animal products causes thinking feeling animals to suffer.

2) We can feed ourselves perfectly well without animal products.

3) Therefore we should not eat animal products as it causes less suffering.

I don't really have a counterargument to this that isn't ultimately just "but they're tasty". Most of the counterarguments I've seen don't even try to make the case that meat is morally correct, just that it's *less* morally wrong.

Is there any case to be made for the morality of eating meat?

[Assistant]
Why is it morally correct to limit animal suffering? Animal's being eaten by other animals is about as natural as it gets. Is a Lion immoral for eating a Zebra?

Would it be moral to kill a lion then if it saves countless zebras? Under the idea that we should minimize animal suffering, you can argue we should actually kill a ton of animals that are predators.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is Humpty Dumpty often times depicted as an egg when the nursery rhyme does not mention him being an egg?

[Assistant]
One likely explanation is that Humpty Dumpty used to be a riddle when it was created. The answer to that riddle was "an egg".
However, over time it would gain popularity and become a well known nursery rhyme, taking the form of a story instead of a riddle. This allowed for Humpty Dumpty to become a character portrayed as an egg.


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

[User]
Eli5: How does a battery company produce say a double A battery that's better or worse than a competitor if it's the same thing?

Do generic products just like add less juice and more popular ones add more or something?

[Assistant]
Firstly there are several different chemistries that are used in AA batteries. Some are more expensive and have higher capacity than others.

The consider that a battery is not just a pot of chemicals. There are various components including a carbon anode, separator, exterior can etc. The quality of these affects the capacity and internal resistance of the battery.

Edit to add: rechargeable batteries have even more variation because the robustness of different geometries to repeated cycling is not trivial to optimise.


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

[User] [Doctor Who] if the silence is playing a guitar but you arent looking at them do you hear them?

[Assistant]
Sure- the mind-wipe only applies if you look at them.

Of course, they're unlikely to be playing guitars around you, but you know when you hear a noise but there's nothing there when you look? Same principle.


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

[User]
CMV: Gender as a social construct should be excluded from identification, and the law should not prohibit misgendering.

I know something like this has been posted before, but the user is often arguing against gender being defined as distinct from sex. I am not here to make that argument. While I think the distinction is largely overcomplicating things, words are defined by collective agreement of meaning, which makes the redefinition valid. I want to make that clear. That being said, I am *fundamentally* opposed to legislation that would legally require a person to acknowledge the distinction. There should be no law prohibiting misgendering. The only repercussions should be social.

Also, gender should not have any place in identification for obvious reasons. Gender is not an identifier, since if we agree it is subjective. This is especially true if we acknowledge gender-fluidity. There is no way to confirm someone's gender, therefore it has no place on identification. There are definitely ways to confirm someone's biological sex, however.

EDIT: I have decided that private entities should have legal requirements to not discriminate, in which case the law would prohibit misgendering. Well, more specifically it should be included in anti-discrimination laws. But fair enough.

I have changed my mind.

Edit 2: A lot of this has led me to question whether sex on ID is helpful anyway. I think ID is usually to confirm your identity at a glance, and the photo is clearly enough for that. The rest is secondary and largely unnecessary.

Which means I'm likely not responding to new comments. My mind has officially been changed. I'm really thankful for all you guys participating
Cheers!

[Assistant] The ways you check for bio-sex is to look at genitals or test Chromosomes. That is not acceptable for identification in public, or quick reference for ID. The Gender that someone displays is the factor that is useful for the vast majority of ID usages as it is some clerk making sure you are the person on the ID when you are buying something controlled (weapons, medication, alcohol, tobacco, etc) or when the police are checking you out (looking for you as a suspect, or running your ID for a violation such as speeding).


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

[User]
[MCU] How did Iron Man defend against the Power stone with his shield in Infinity War?

In Infinity war Thanos shoots the power stone at Tony Stark and somehow his nano tech shield was able to stop it? The same power that obliterated Ronan the Conqueror and took 5 GOG with one of them being a kind of demigod to use? The same power used to hit Captain Marvel into the atmosphere?

[Assistant] Thanos didn't fire it at full power, he was holding back. You can choose how hard you hit with it, for example he uses it on Thor's head and doesn't immediately take it off and same with Nebula in the scene he tortures her to get Gamora to reveal where soul stone is.


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

[User] Eli5: why is it so easy to make heat but so hard to make cold?

[Assistant]
Heat is easy because you just need to do basically anything which will then add energy.  Light a fire.  Rub things together.  Whatever.

But you can't make cold.  That's not possible.  Instead, what you do is that you have to move the "heat" that is already there and move it somewhere else.  A fridge isn't making cold and adding cold, it's taking heat away and moving it somewhere else.  This is why the back of a fridge is so hot.  That's the heat that's been removed.  Compare that to turning on an oven.  Something else isn't getting cold.  You're not removing cold from the oven, you're adding energy.


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

[User]
All I heard the day of the eclipse was NOT to look at the sun directly or you'll get permanent, noticeable eye damage. I believe that's hyperbolic, like saying smoking one cigarette will give you lung cancer. What is the likelihood of permanent noticeable eye damage?

Edit: I don't dispute that it's not a good thing to do, just like smoking isn't a healthy thing to do.

The question is: What is the likelihood of **permanent** **noticeable** eye damage?

I'm not asking if it's dangerous. I'm asking **how** dangerous.

Edit: Also, anybody know of any studies that show frequency of **noticeable** eye damage?  (meaning noticeable by the owner of the eyes' vision, not an optometrist looking at the eye and seeing damage).

Yet another edit: My analogy to smoking one cigarette is really bad. Maybe not putting on sunscreen if you're very fair skinned is a better analogy. It's dangerous to get a sunburn. Getting a sunburn will damage your skin. You shouldn't go outside without sunblock. It's a warning. But if you *do* get a sunburn once, your skin will most likely recover. If you look at a partial eclipse once, unprotected, your eyes will get damaged, that isn't disputed. Will I notice it by impaired vision? Will my eyes recover? (Skin is resilient, but aren't eyes also? - that's what my eye surgeon said when they performed LASIK on me).

[Assistant]
You can get permanent eye damage from a single exposure to intense UV light, no doubt about it. (I got permanent damage to one retina by a short accidental look at a hollow-cathode lamp in a AAS spectrometer)

Your analogy to cigarettes is plain wrong. Cancer is usually caused by probabilities and _cumulative_ DNA damage, which is nothing at all like the _acute_ damage caused by short but intense UV radiation.


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

[User]
If you mixed a bunch of people's blood in a blender, and spilled it all over a crime scene, could they figure out whose DNA was whose?

I'm not implying that a blender could blend DNA or anything, but what problems would this create? Would eat swab give a different result?

[Assistant]
I am a forensic DNA analyst. The result of each swab would give roughly the same result (unless the blending was incredibly short, as there is enough DNA in blood to ensure complete mixing of DNA profiles). Each swab would have all the different DNA.

While it's technically true that the instruments used would detect each unique DNA sample present in the mixture (the instrument would detect each different allele present in the mixture from whatever genetic markers you used for the DNA profiling). It is not able to separate specific profiles from each other. That would take further analysis of the results. For each extra person you mix with another, the less confident you can be to separate each DNA profile upon analysis.

Also, it would be very difficult (maybe impossible?) to actually physically separate each person's DNA from the mixture (at least with any technology a common forensic lab possesses).

EDIT: As astazangasta said, good luck trying to prove it in court. Defense attorneys have field days over mixtures.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why India is the only place commonly called a subcontinent?

You hear the term the Indian Subcontinent all the time. Why dont you hear the phrase used to describe other similarly sized and geographically distinct places that one might consider a subcontinent such as Arabia, Alaska, Central America, Scandinavia/Karelia/Murmansk, Eastern Canada, the Horn of Africa, Eastern Siberia, etc.

[Assistant]
India is it's own land mass and sits on it's own tectonic plate. That plate smashed into another continental plate. So while it is part of the continent of Asia, it would also be it's own continent if it had not smashed into another one. So they call it a sub continent.

Edit: Its.

Also, why do all other versions of possessives require an apostrophe?  If you get your message across it doesn't matter anyway IMHO.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do little insects that live in groups like ants and bees live when they get separated from their nest?

Imagine you're a bee and get trapped inside a car that drops you off two towns away from your hive. Do you just live trying to find your way back or just become part of another hive or just live like a lone wolf? Do foreign bees care if you are not their relative? Are you gonna survive?

[Assistant]
Generally, its a death sentence for that individual.

Sometimes bees will get taken in by other hives, though there isnt much documentation for this. The bee could probably make it back to his hive from just a mile or two away, as bees can cover quite a bit of area looking for flowers.

Ants are extremely territorial, though, and unless the lone ant in question runs across a different colony of *exactly* the same species, hes definitely dead.

Even if the lone ant didnt run into an enemy colony, he would likely not make it long. Ants are basically a bit of biological programming with legs, outside of the controlled chaos of his anthill the simple rule set that ants use to survive in a group would not get him what he needs to survive alone.


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

[User] [Toy Story] Do toys that require batteries i.e. Buzz need them to function when humans aren't around?

[Assistant] Not to move but for his laser sounds to work. His karate chopping action and wings would still work as they are mechanical, much like Woody's pull cord. He does need someone to activate the karate chop though.


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

[User]
[Star Trek] Why isn't the capital of the Federation on a neutral world?

It never made sense to me to make the Earth the capital. Maybe temporarily until construction could be completed.  But it seems a to me that capital should placed on a previously uninhabited planet. To ensure no bias and concerns about humanity running the show.

[Assistant]
At the time the Federation was founded, Earth *was* neutral. Humans were new comers to the galactic scene, and had okay relationship between the Vulcan, Andorans, and Tellerites, who all had issues with each other.

And there is absolutely no concerns with humans running the show. Most of the Federation members probably prefer it that way.


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

[User] ELI5: How can bamboo grow up to 3ft per day whereas other plants can get no where near as close to this speed?

[Assistant]
Bamboo grow in a different manner to normal plants. Rather than growth through mitosis (splitting and division of cells) they already have present a number of cells and these cells stretch and elongate these cells. They become turgid (full of water) and stretch.

Tldr;

They don't grow faster. They fill with water and stretch into their adult shape fast.


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

[User]
[Marvel] So how does Spider-Man go about jumping around New York like a gymnasium without causing serious damage?

IIRC Spider-Man is pretty strong, able to lift up to 10-25 tons under extreme pressure. His webs and the force they generate also compliment this strength. By pulling and jumping as hard as he does how does he not cause any amount of property damage unless he chooses to?

[Assistant]
He's not constantly using his maximum strength. He doesn't need to use multiton strength to swing around on his webbing or leaping around on or inside buildings. He rarely uses his strength to his highest levels, he's almost always holding back.

And when he has to use his webbing to stop something big, he's always anchoring it to as much surface area as possible to reduce the structural stress.


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

[User]
Does Justice Exist?

My friend and I are engaged in an argument on whether justice actually exists or not, and I naturally gravitated to the more skeptical view that justice doesn't exist.

So far, I've discussed deconstructionism and variance (across history and time), but does anyone have any other interesting rationales?

Perhaps equally as important, does anyone have any arguments on why justice exists?

[Assistant] In the first book of The Republic, Thrasymachus in dialogue with Plato, claims justice is "the advantage of the stronger". Plato spends the rest of the book trying to pin down what exactly justice is by formulating a polis in which he believes it resides, allowing him to trace it back to the individual. That book is a decently long read by one of the most important philosophers to ever live and yet didn't produce a definite answer to this question.


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

[User] Why can I see very dim (distant) stars if I look away slightly, but when I look at them directly, I can't see them anymore?

[Assistant]
The cells in your eye responsible for detecting faint light (rods) are not in the center of your retina. That pride of place goes to your cones, which are less sensitive in the dark, but which you use a lot more since they give you color information. As a result, your night vision is best when the light is focused off of the center of your retina where your rods are located. That's why when you see something faint, you can lose it when you look directly at it. They also aren't sensitive to red light, which is why people use red flashlights to avoid ruining their nightvision.

As a side note, dim stars are not necessarily distant, they may just be small and cool. All 3 things affect how bright a star appears. Proxima centauri is the closest star to the Sun but is too faint to be seen by the unaided human eye.


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

[User] eli5: Why most people can turn both eyes inwards but not in the opposite direction?

[Assistant]
Turning eyes inward is a very natural motion, for focusing both eyes on something that is very close to your face. You naturally do it all the time.

Pointing your eyes outward is not a "natural" motion, because there is no occasion where you would focus your eyes on two different objects. Your brain is inherently trained to use binocular (two eyes on one object) vision, not monocular (one eye on one object).


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

[User]
ELI5:Why, despite violent crime being the lowest it has been in 20+ years, do most Americans feel the country is more violent than ever?

I got in a big debate last night about this and can't explain it. My theory is that the severity or the atrocity of violent crimes are more severe (ie. most crimes seem to be taken out on random people that don't know the violent criminal, such as Sandy Hook were innocent children are dying) and the news reports about violence more frequently than any other type of news.

[Assistant] I feel like with the sensationalization of the news and how violent crime is generally the top story it has led to people being more afraid. Think about thirty years ago, while people knew there were violent crimes, we didn't have access to them five minutes after. Parents today say there are more "crazies" out there. Which may be true, but there were just as many people to avoid 30 years ago. It's really because we are so much more informed that we are more afraid.


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

[User] [Time Travel/Legal] If I take a work and publish it before the original artist creates it, can they later sue me for copyright infringement?

[Assistant]
This very much depends on the universe you are set in, and can have some interesting outcomes:

1) There was no "original artist", and it was actually *you* all along, working under a pen name.

2a) *Your* version of the work is imperfect in some way, or just not as popular.  When the original artist produces their work, they (and the world) are generally unaware and unaffected by your shenanigans.

2b) *Your* version of the work is imperfect in some way, or just not as popular.  It eventually reaches the original artist, who draws/steals from it and creates the "true" original work.

3a) Your "work" makes as big an impact as the original, and eventually reaches the original creator.  The artist is so taken in by the style that they go on to pursue and perfect it, creating even more bold works.  Your piece has a part in history, but is largely overshadowed.

3b) Your "work" makes as big an impact as the original, and eventually reaches the original creator.  The artist sees your piece, and ultimately decides that "the style has been done before" and goes in a different direction.  How intense this new direction is depends on the artist and the medium, but are held in similar regard as the original timeline's pieces.

3c) Your "work" makes as big an impact as the original, and eventually reaches the original creator.  The artist sees your piece, and ultimately decides that "the style has been done before" and goes in a different direction.  This is an utter failure on their part, and they live the rest of their lives in squalor, unnoticed and unappreciated for their genius.  As the artist is no longer notable in your time, paradox is imminent.

4a) You manage to secure your "work" with as much popularity and regard as the original.  The original artist has the copyright, while you have none.  The courts side with the original artist.

4b) You manage to secure your "work" with as much popularity and regard as the original, and you remember to copyright it this time.  The original artist has rough drafts and other proof that the material was their creation, while you have none.  The courts side with the original artist.

4c) You manage to secure your "work" with as much popularity and regard as the original, you remember to copyright the material, and mock up some rough drafts.  The original artist has character witnesses and proof of own personal artistic ability which surpasses your own, while you have none.  The courts side with the original artist.

4d) You manage to secure your "work" with as much popularity and regard as the original, you remember to copyright the material, and mock up some rough drafts after taking the time to master the craft and bribe/alter the memories of a few witnesses.  The original artist has nothing to use against you, but the universe hates you.  The courts side with the original artist.

5) Everything works out, and you manage to get away with it.  Your work, while previously contested, has been proven to be your own, and the original artist (while annoyed and having lost face in the lawsuit) continues on their original timeline.  You are world renowned as a remarkable artist with only one piece, and become known as a "one-hit wonder".  You have a choice laid out in front of you: do you steal more art, and risk being exposed for what you are?  Do you go into hiding, ultimately driving the value of your work down?  Do you attempt to create new original works (which to be honest, if you were that good, you'd have just done that in your own timeline)?  Was all this really worth it?


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

[User]
If abortion is legal, suicide must also be legal. CMV.

I believe if unconditional abortion of a viable fetus/embryo is legalized, suicide must also be legalized.  I believe it is illogical and hypocritical to allow abortion but not suicide.

*if the life of a *viable* embryo/fetus can be terminated on a parent's decision, why can't a self-aware (already born) human make his own choice to terminate his life?

*It seems inconsistent that abortion is considered a body-rights issue when laws prevent people from destroying their own bodies through suicide.  If abortion is legalized, I feel people have the right to destroy their own bodies just as abortion gives women rights over their own bodies.

To be honest, I am fairly ignorant regarding the laws that surround these issues.  If you think it will be helpful, you can mention some laws.  However, I don't feel you can CMV purely on legal technicalities.

EDIT:  Consider this to be a hypothetical question, where unconditional abortion is legalized.  Also, keep in mind assisted suicide (which to my knowledge is illegal).

Another point to consider: Suicide is prevented under the gamble that life has the potential to be better, and someone committing suicide is throwing away his potentially fulfilling life.  However, with *unconditional* abortion, a *viable* fetus may be terminated despite the potential for a fulfilling life.  This seems inconsistent.  If the potential for a fulfilling life can be taken away with abortion, the legal system should have no qualms with allowing a person ending his own life.

[Assistant]
>I believe if unconditional abortion of a viable fetus/embryo is legalized

This isn't the same thing as abortion being legalized. The vast, *vast* majority of abortions take place before the fetus is viable, and the vast majority of abortions that happen later are done to protect the life of the mother.


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

[User]
[Superman] Are supermans muscles, bones and skin the same as ours but extremely dense (like, 1 billion times denser or something) or do they work entirely different?

I always wondered how they explain super strenght, and the most logic explanation I've heard would be extremely dense muscles, like almost zero space between atoms so that the muscle fibers are basically almost endless. Would this in theory work?

[Assistant] No, that doesn't really work. First of all, if his strength and resiliency were due to innate physical qualities like bone and muscle density, it wouldn't matter what color star he was under, and his strength couldn't be lost due to exposure to kryptonite. Plus if he were that dense he'd also weigh a few billion pounds and leave craters in the ground just by walking.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is it not advised to keep the phone plugged in after it has been completely charged?

[Assistant]
Modern chargers stop charging the battery once it reaches 100%.
After this the phone will bypass the battery and use the electricity from the wall socket directly. The charger can become hot if you use a lot of power (similarly as the phone will get hot if you draw a lot of power from the battery).

Some (very much) older chargers, as well as chargers that are defective can heat up beyond a safe point and cause damage. This is likely the reason that this "unplug when fully charged" advise still floats around.

For modern cell phones (using lithium ion based batteries) it's in fact best to discharge the battery as little as possible, as using the battery will over time degrade the battery's life (even if very slowly). Hence it's in fact better to keep your phone plugged in.


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

[User] Why did all the lithium end up in Chile?

[Assistant] It didn't. However, the combination of natural concentrations and the mechanics of salt flats has created the world's most cheaply-accessible lithium source. There are other deposits around the world, and there are other salt flat sources (Argentina and Bolivia both have some, as do Tibet and Nevada USA), but Chile's the biggest.


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

[User]
[Marvel] Why doesn't the Sandman just suffocate anyone he fights?

He could so easily just surround someone in sand, harden the sand, and suffocate them. Why doesn't he?

[Assistant]
This is actually one of the very first things he tried against Spider-Man.  It didn't work.  Not that it isn't a valid tactic, but the people he's normally fighting are typically more than strong enough to break out of such a hold, and while Sandman *can* affect his density, he's not Concreteman or Steelman or anything like that; he's Sandman.  The move would work great against your average bank guard, street cop, or mook, but Flint Marko's main opponent is a guy that bench-presses Hummers as a warm-up.

He can only get so hard.


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

[User]
[X-Men] Do the X-Men ever fight standard threats the way, say, the Avengers do?

Like, do the X-Men actively battle foes like HYDRA, AIM, and so on? It could net them just a little good press.

[Assistant]
Yes. Though oddly it was a lot more common in their early adventures.

Sauron isnt a mutant (though hes arguably a bigger threat to mutants), Mojo isnt a mutant-rights issue, the Shiar arent, the Phoenix kind of sort of isnt, Juggernaut isnt although he works alongside them, the Living Pharaoh, Lucifer a few Hellfire Club members


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

[User]
CMV: There is no benefit to having the electoral college. Either allow a percentage based sharing of electors, or have the presidential election decided by popular vote

For those who don't know/don't understand how it works, the U.S. uses a system of electors to elect the president. Each state has a certain number of electoral votes which aren't proportionate to their population (less populated states are overrepresented, more populous states are under represented) and its a winner take all system. If you were running for president and won 50.000001% of New York's popular vote, then you would receive 100% of their electoral votes. This is messed up for several reasons, mainly that the minority parties people's votes don't count in reliably blue/red states. I see two ways of fixing this.

1. Get rid of the winner take all system and replace it with a percentage system. If a democrat won California by 64%, then the republican candidate should get the other 36% of the vote. This would make reliably blue/red states competitive again, and stop nominees from spending 99% of their time and money in just a few battle ground states. It would also help to make the most popular candidate the winning candidate. OR
2. Have a simple popular vote system. In the first solution mentioned, one of the issues would be the over/under representation of states based on the population of the state. I am personally of the opinion that the person who the majority of Americans want to be president, should be president.

[Assistant]
Benefit is a matter of perspective. The system was designed to benefit low pop states, and it does.

Your proposal would harm large pop states. It would harm the political calculus of Democrats especially. With 3 EC states like Wyoming their vote splitting is largely inconsequential, but if the 55 California EC votes were to split that harms the advantage Democrats have. The same to Texas and the GOP.


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

[User]
[StarWars] What does Obi-Wan Kenobi mean specifically when he says "not as clumsy or random as a blaster.?"

I was wondering why he calls blasters clumsy and random when he introduces the lightsaber to Luke.
edit: I love all these answers. Thank you guys for clearing this up. I'll keep reading everyone's view.

[Assistant] Blasters get used for suppressing fire rather a lot. Standard doctrine for both Republic and Empire forces, and Obi-Wan has seen plenty of that. A Jedi knight walking into that will generally deflect everything, aided by only focusing on the few, random shots that matter (whereas a non-Force-sensitive still has to worry about stray shots, which is why suppressing fire works).


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

[User] Metabolically, what advantages are there to "Carbo-Loading" by loading up on rice/pastas the day before a big marathon or hike?

[Assistant]
The most important thing about carb loading is the fact that it replenishes and maximizes your glycogen stores. When you carb load, your body digests those carbs into glucose, fructose, and galactose (mostly glucose). Fructose and galactose can be converted to glucose through a series of chemical reactions in the body. The thing is, you don't need all the energy at that moment. So, when you have such an excessive amount of glucose in the body, insulin is secreted which stimulates glyconeogenesis: glucose gets polymerized in a chain to form glycogen. Glycogen is almost entirely stored in muscles and the liver.

The importance of this is that when the body needs energy, it can then break down the glycogen through a process known as glycogenolysis. This process is stimulated most directly by the epinephrine that is pulsating through your body during physical exercise (it can also be stimulated by glucagon, but during exercise it is primarily epinephrine doing the stimulation).

By maximizing your glycogen stores, you maximize the energy your body has stored, therefore, maximizing your energy output and your success in any physical activity. That is why for practically any sport, you are supposed to carb load, not protein or fat load, the day before. This is also why everyone says you should eat the majority of your carbs a couple hours before you workout; you need your glycogen stores filled to push yourself.


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

[User]
ELI5: WHY DO SOME books and news articles start the first few words in all caps?

I've always seen this in "classier" books and news publications, but I never understood why they did it, or what the origin was. Sometimes it's even in larger print. It seems random when it happens, or how many words they capitalize.

Thanks in advance!

[Assistant]
When you have many articles clustered together, it makes it easier to find where they start.

In books, where chapters start in mid page, it can help find the where they start.

But mostly it is just a style.


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

[User] ELI5 Why do YouTube videos load faster while playing than they do when paused?

[Assistant] Google doesn't want to waste bandwith on someone who isn't watching a video. So they throttle the speed of data transfer of videos that have been paused for a long time, assuming that you have left the page and are never going to actually watch the video.


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

[User] Eli5: why do car engines vibrate more when in park?

[Assistant] When your engine runs, it doesn't deliver nice constant power.  It's a series of captured explosions delivering sudden bursts of power, followed by a lag until the next burst.  This is more noticeable when the engine is running really slowly, since the explosions are further apart.  Also, the weight and resistance of the drivetrain helps to smooth out the explosions and make power delivery feel more smooth, but when the transmission is in neutral this extra weight and drag isn't present to help smooth things out.  Finally, engines are tuned to run best at a certain RPM, when they are running significantly faster or slower than this RPM, they can run more roughly.


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

[User]
Does the sun make a sound?

When I imagine being close to the sun I imagine it making a very loud roaring noise, like that of a large fire. Also, if it does make a sound, would you be able to hear it in the near-perfect vacuum of space?

[Assistant]
Depends on how you define "sound." In the strictest definition, sound is a pressure wave through some kind of medium, and there's nothing between the sun and anything else that can act as an effective medium.

But *within* the sun there are pressure waves that you could imagine are something like a sound. You could never hear them, obviously, because your ears wouldn't survive that environment for even the tiniest fraction of a second. But if you like, you can imagine the sun ringing like a bell that's continuously being struck.

That's mostly just poetry, though. In practical terms, no, the sun does not make a sound, and no you could not hear it under any circumstances.


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

[User]
[The Expanse] If water on Ceres is so valuable why are steamed and boiled foods so common?

Detective Miller frequents a bar where they're constantly steaming something like your typical sci-fi ramen stand. If water is "more valuable than gold," heavily rationed, and constantly fought over why is this restaurant owner so cavalier with its use? Shouldn't they, at the very least, have something set up to capture and reclaim the water vapor?

I don't imagine the answer to this needs spoilers, but just in case please limit them to S1.

[Assistant]
A chunk of ice the size of a skyscraper is more *useful* than a chunk of gold of the same size.

Humans need a lot of water, wherever they go, but it's not like the water is "used up" in the cooking. Everyone in space lives inside of a pressurized capsule surrounded by vacuum... so the water will eventually be reclaimed. They need all that water for, presumably, cooking noodles and boiling eggs.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Is there a canon explanation for why so many aliens are humanoid?

[Assistant]
For most, such as Sullustans and Abednedo, convergent evolution. Species in the galaxy that evolve into intelligent toolmakers tend to have the same basic body shape.

The species that have human shaped heads with colorful skin or other small differentiators (like Twi'leks and Mirialans) are "near-humans" who have human ancestry but adapted to life on other planets or interbred with aliens.


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

[User]
ELI5: In quantum mechanics, what do they mean when they say a particle takes "every possible path"?

I'm referring to Feynman's sum of all paths, which is often mentioned in layman physics books but rarely fully explained. What counts as a "possible path"? Often it is described as a particle travelling from point A to B could include a path in which it heads off to Alpha Centauri and back again. I know quantum physics is very counter intuitive, but in what way are we supposed to picture the particle heading off to Alpha Centauri? What sent it in that direction? What would have caused it to return? And are we assuming it travels below light speed (in which case that path would take years) or does this it not matter if it moves faster than light since this path is not the actual one measured, but only incorporated mathematically (whatever that means)? In that case can we take it to the extreme and say the particle also took a path to the other side of the observable universe and back again?

[Assistant]
A basic difference between classical physics and quantum theory is the fact that within the quantum world, certain predictions can only be made in terms of probabilities.

As an example,  take the question whether or not a particle that starts at the time A at the location A, will reach location B at the later time B.

In classical physics, an answer can be given depending on the particles velocity and the forces acting upon it, giving a simple yes or no answer. BUT,  In quantum theory, it is only possible to give the probability that the particle in question can be detected at location B at time B. Quantum mechanics  therefore considers all possibilities for the particle travelling from A to B. Not only the boring straight-line approach, but also the possibility of the particle turning loopings and making detours etc.


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

[User] Why does the Planck length exist, and why is it that specific size?

[Assistant]
The Planck length is a length you get when you multiply certain constants together in physics, why it is exactly that number is not known, just as it is not known why the speed of light is the number it is or why the charge of the electron has that certain value.

You may have heard that the Planck length is the smallest length possible, but this is not so. It is simply at this scale that we would need to have a functioning theory of quantum gravity to understand phenomena.


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

[User] [Heroes] Sylars power is intuitive aptitude which means he can comprehend anything they perceive. Does this mean he has a fundamental understanding of how the mind works? What consciousness is? Does he know the secrets of the universe and how it works?

[Assistant]
The universe is probably too big for his mind to grasp, which means he can't use his power on it properly. He usually has to take brains out of people to learn their powers, for instance, which wouldn't be remotely necessary if it were just pure observation.

The same may be true of the mind - he may need to really *examine* a living brain before he can understand everything about a mind.

But he could learn what consciousness *is* pretty easily, since it is a purely chemical process. Fully understanding every part within it is much more difficult than knowing what it *is*.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do browsers such as Chrome and Edge use such a seemingly large amount of memory?

[Assistant]
Unused RAM is wasted RAM

If Chrome uses 500 MB of RAM and pages take a half second to load it's alright

But if you've got 8 GB of RAM and it gobbles up 2GB precaching pages so they now only take a quarter second to load then you're happier.

The increased RAM usage doesn't really matter. If a real program comes along and asks for memory to run in then it'll get dibs and chrome will back down, but a gig of RAM sitting there empty is doing nothing but consuming power, might as well use it!


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

[User]
Eli5: Why turboprops if you can just have a turbofan?

If the airframe and/or fuselage can support the weight of one of or more turbine based engines (including the necessary volume of fuel), why attach propellers? Wouldn't a typical jet engine provide far more thrust than a turboprop counterpart?

I understand turboprop retrofits in older aircraft, but when designing a new plane, what's the benefit of propellers?

[Assistant]
Props can move a lot of air for their weight. An equivalent turbofan would weigh more.

Turboprops are more fuel-efficient and less maintenance-intensive. Fuel and maintenance costs are a big factor for single planes, and huge for those who have fleets.

Turboprops can usually take off on shorter runways.


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

[User]
Why does sweat have so much salt?

From a biological standpoint, why is salt excreted in sweat along with water?

From an evolutionary standpoint, why did sweat evolve to be an excretion of salt and water when potentially it could have evolved to be just an excretion of water?

[Assistant] From a chemical viewpoint, salt is excreted along with water because excreting water alone would increase the osmotic pressure inside the body (less water but the same concentration of salts, sugar etc. means the solutes become more concentrated), which would actually draw water back into the skin because of the concentration gradient. Evolving to excrete salt/water together means more water can be removed to allow for evaporation and thus cooling.


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

[User] Eli5: What is the difference between various programming languages? Dont they all do the same thing?

[Assistant]
Its a bit like toys to build stuff. Think about Lego blocks, Lincoln Logs and an Erector set. You can build a house with any of them but the house you end up with is going to be different. The erector set house is probably the strongest but might take longer to build. The Lincoln log house might be the weakest but was really fast to build.

So yeah, the all do the same thing   tell a computer what to do. But some languages are easy to use but more limited. Some are more powerful but are challenging to master.


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

[User] [Marvel, DC] What makes characters' eyes glow white when wearing their masks, and be expressive? (Woverine, Batman, etc)?

[Assistant] Batman has tech in his lenses that allows him to scan the environment, see in the dark, etc. The glowing is just a side effect. Also it makes him look more badass, and Batman is all about scaring the criminals.


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

[User] ELI5: Why can't the space shuttle just go slow enough to not be heated up by friction with earths atmosphere on re-entry?

[Assistant]
Because friction is a completely free way to slow a spacecraft down. In space, the only way to slow down is to burn fuel in the opposite direction you're moving. Using the air to slow down instead means you don't need to bring as much fuel, which means you can bring a heavier payload.

Increasing the payload size by making the rocket more efficient is a goal for any rocket scientist.