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

[User]
Why haven't we selected for Avocados with smaller stones?

For many other fruits and vegetables, farmers have selectively bred varieties with increasingly smaller seeds. But commercially available avocados still have huge stones that take up a large proportion of the mass of the fruit. Why?

[Assistant]
Avocado's are not well suited for selective breeding. This is for a number of reasons.

1. Avocados can take a very long to produce fruit and reproduce. Growing from seed, it can take 5 to 10 years for it to create fruit. That means you have to wait a long time to try to breed better avocado

2. It's phenomenally difficult to control pollination. They create thousands and thousands of blooms, only a few which actually become fruit, meaning hand pollination is almost impossible. So you're at the mercy of the winds and of the other trees nearby - it's very tough to control the gene lines

3. Avocados are incredibly heterozygous, meaning even selecting for two parents of a certain type (say, two small trees) can produce wildly different offspring. So even if you can control the pollination, you have to grow hundreds of seedlings to see if one or two are worth keeping.

4. Finally, the avocado craze is fairly new. Humans haven't domesticated that many plants, and probably haven't put much effort into avocado until the last few decades.

That's why when you get a good avocado like Hass (which was a total accident) you propagate it by grafting, not by seed.


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

[User] ELI5- Do animals have ways of keeping their teeth clean? Are they affected by the same dental problems that can occur in humans?

[Assistant]
Animals have a variety of ways of maintaining oral health.

Some animals, like sharks, continuously grow new teeth and shed old ones. So if they chip or lose a tooth they just have to wait a few weeks for new ones to come in, then it's back to business as usual.

A lot of rodents and ungulates have a different solution of having teeth continuing to grow indefinitely. This has some drawbacks, primarily that if they don't wear down their teeth, the teeth can become overgrown and and even grow into the animal and hurt it. So maintenance is key.

Animals who don't have either of those benefits can do a variety of things, some chew on leaves, some form symbiotic relationships with smaller animals that pick bits of food out from between their teeth. But ultimately, without modern dental care, these animals will one day lose their teeth and be unable to feed.


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

[User]
I think an employer should be allowed to discriminate and not hire someone based on their race, sex, or beliefs. CMV

The first reason why I say this is that it's their business, they shouldn't have the government telling them why they have to hire someone. They make all the other decisions in their business, and who they hire is probably one of the more important ones.

The second reason is that if an employer HAS to hire someone of a race or sex they do not like, they might not get along very well. The person that the employer ended up hiring might get treated badly, and the worker might have an unpleasant experience.

My last reason is that the employer might tend to hire someone who shares his/here's viewpoints. So if the employer had to hire someone who he dislikes for whatever reason, the other employees might not like him either, and it would just cause a lot of problems.

[Assistant]
This is how you get minorities subjugated to isolation and poverty, which continues the majority's low opinion of them as criminals and lazy folk, which continues the decision to not hire someone like that.  And the circles repeats ad infinitum, and people who are born in the majority have to work less hard than people in the minority, and that is unfair.

So if you love ghettos, gangs, and crime this is a great idea.


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

[User] ELI5: Why are bears the go-to shape when making jelly things e.g. the gummybears?

[Assistant]
They were originally "dancing bear candies", which the founder of the Haribo company was inspired to make after watching tamed bears at festivals.  The base ingredient that they were made from was gum arabic, hence "gummy bear".

Once they became popular, everyone else just copied the idea.


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

[User] [Aladdin] When first released by Aladdin the Genie exclaims how he had been in the lamp for 10,000 years. Later when throwing Jafars lamp into the Cave of Wonders he says 10,000 years will cool him off - does this imply the Genie himself was once much darker and he was going on his own experience?

[Assistant]
Djinn don't typically start in bottles. Jafar was the exception.

According to legend, King Solomon was granted a ring by none other than God Himself that allowed Solomon to command the djinn. By using the ring to make his mark on a wax seal, Solomon was able to imprison a djinn (or hundreds of them) into bottles, lamps, and various other objects. He only did this to the most troublesome of djinn; there are still free djinn out in the world, but they've learned to rein in their tempers (for the most part) lest God grant a similar ring to one of his faithful worshippers.

Genie was probably a very naughty djinn - imagine someone with his sense of humor, but malicious. A few millennia of forced introspection is probably just what he needed to mellow out.


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

[User] Why is my urine yellow when I'm dehydrated?

[Assistant]
Imagine a mound of white paint, and then imagine right alongside it a little gob of white paint. Now picture two brushes, each with an equal amount of drops of red paint on the ends of their hairs.
Take a brush and mix the red paint into the mound of white paint. You'll no longer see a perfect white color, but rather a very light pink.
Now, take the remaining brush and mix the red paint into the gob of white paint. You'll no longer see a perfect white color, but rather a strong salmon pink, easily distinguishable in color intensity from the mound.
Now replace the white paint with the water in your urine, and then replace the red paint with the urea in your body. The urea is more diluted in the larger body of water, thus that identifiable yellow tinge which is the main perceivable characteristic of urine will be much more diluted in comparison.


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

[User]
In electron capture an electron and proton form a neutron and neutrino, but when a neutron decays it creates a proton, electron, and neutrino. Where does the extra neutrino come from during electron capture if it does not go into the neutron?

Basically why does a neutrino form in electron capture if when a neutron decays it also requires one? Why are 2 neutrinos created in these two processes instead of one? I may not have expressed this question that well but i can clarify.

[Assistant]
When a neutron decays it produces a proton, an electron and an **anti**neutrino.

In nuclear reactions there are some quantities that are conserved, the most notable in our case are charge, baryon number (total number of baryon - total number of antybaryon) and lepton number (the same, but for leptons). Proton and neutrons are baryons, neutrinos and electrons are lepton. You can see that in the neutron decay in your title lepton number isn't conserved as you are 0 leptons before and 2 after the reactions.


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

[User] ELI5: what is it about long car journeys that makes us so tired?

[Assistant] Youre sitting there, just staring straight ahead. It definitely makes your eyes tired. Driving is also fairly mentally active as you need to stay aware and watch out for others which is also tiring. Theres also such a thing as being hypnotized by the white lines that split the lanes.


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

[User] What would happen in the short and long term if the land mass around the Panama Canal vanished, causing one ocean to dump into another?

[Assistant]
IIRC, a few million years ago The Panama isthmus was open as you suggested. The current coming from the South Atlantic to the Caribbean went on through the passage to the Pacific. Once it closed, the current was deflected to the North Atlantic,  creating the Gulf Stream.

So, you could see major disruption in global oceanic circulation, and thus climates.


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

[User] ELI5: Why can you see through frosted glass after putting scotch tape over it?

[Assistant] Frosted glass is intentionally imperfect so that light has a really hard time getting through it without bouncing all around first. The glue on the scotch tape is enough to fill in these minor imperfections, and because the tape is also transparent, you can see through it.


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

[User]
[Warhammer 40K] The God Emperor was born around 8000 BC making him about 10,000 years old in 2021. What would he be doing today?

Weird to think according to 40k lore, the future God Emperor walks among us as a Vandal Savage like figure.

[Assistant]
I'd guess probably  something like head of an obscure but vital government agency, on a board of directors somewhere, a backroom political advisor, that kind of thing. A job that's important and gives him the ability to guide humanity, but not one that thrusts him into the limelight.

It was only at the age of strife that he decided to take over direct control. Before then, he guided humanity from the shadows. In 2021, he'd be doing that.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do most women have higher voices than most men?

[Assistant] Women usually have shorter thinner vocal chords. This causes the pitch to be higher. Think of the difference between a piccolo and a full-size flute. While similar in layout and design. The piccolo being smaller creates a higher pitch when playing the same written music.


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

[User]
CMV: There is nothing wrong with hoping for the best, but expecting the worst.

Often times when I apply this logic to a given situation and am questioned by friends, family, etc. Their usual response is, "You should be more positive" or "You shouldn't expect bad things to happen".

I'll be honest, I view myself as a "realistic pessimist", meaning that I tend to view things for what they are, but also, more often than not, lean towards a more negative approach to certain circumstances. This isn't to say that I can't see the good in anything, but if a situation is a heaping pile of garbage, then that's what it is. I don't see a point in sugar-costing it.

Back to the original point. I don't always use this way of thinking. I apply it when I'm in similar circumstances and previous results have ended with disappointment. Due to my tendency to view things in a realistic way, I assume the same outcome will happen, solely based on my previous experiences. This is pretty much the heart of my misunderstanding. Why should I expect anything different to happen in nearly identical situations? Hopeless optimism will only lead to more disappointment, so if I prepare myself now, I can ease myself into disappointment.

I'm not sure how much sense I'm making, so if something needs clarifying, I'll do so to the best of my ability.

[Assistant]
Look up "Self fulfilling prophecy" It's a psychological phenomenon, wherein someone's expectations subconsciously influence their behavior to confirm those prior expectations.

Basically, if you think you're going to have a bad time, you might unknowingly cause yourself to act in ways that will result in you having a bad time. If you think you're going to have a good time, then the opposite is also true.

EDIT: Spelling. Also redacted a specific term and made it more general so as to suit multiple situations OP might be referring to, not just social ones.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why male human testicles are so venerable / sensitive, considering their importance?

I mean you think evolution would have created an armour casing for them or kept them inside the body for protection?

[Assistant]
The male testicles in humans are vulnerable because they are external to the body really and unprotected by body fat bones etc. But why should this be? Sperm happen to be very temperature sensitive and they seem to thrive when the temperature is slightly lower than they would be if they were internal. By having them in the scrotum which contracts and stretches if it's cold or hot respectively temperature can be controlled rather tightly to make sure they are always in prime condition (we think even weekly warm baths actually reduce sperm quaility as do tight underwear/pants when their temperature regulation is hindered!)

But then why not make them insensitive to pain? Well they are vital to our existence without them we can't procreate so they are sensitive as this makes men take care of them.


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

[User]
Most sites say cats become malnutritioned if fed only meat and never any "cat food". Is this a marketing scam, or how would wild cats have been able to survive in nature?

Been reading about how one would provide a full nutritious plate to a cat without using super processed "cat food"s, and this always strikes me as weird (seeing as cats are obligate carnivores).

[Assistant] Wild cats survive by eating animals.  Not just what we call "meat" (muscle tissue), but organs, bones, entrails, and the contents of the digestive systems of those animals (mostly plant matter.)  That gets them a lot more varied nutrition than just muscle tissue (which they do need to be healthy.)


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

[User]
[Bojack Horseman] Why does Vincent Adultman have such a strained relationship with his son, Kevin?

Why does Vincent Adultman have such a strained relationship with his son, Kevin? They barely seem to talk, apparently can't stand to be in the same room as each other and, of course, Vincent lied to Princess Carolyn about even having a son.

[Assistant]
Vincent never really had a childhood of his own.  Times were rough, and he had to go to work at the business factory from a young age to put food on the table for his family.  Since he's become such a successful businessman, he's able to provide a much better life for Kevin, but he's unable to form a real connection because he's treating Kevin like just another adult.

Kevin doesn't really understand what's going on either.  When he looks at his father, he sees a child playing at being an adult.  Someone who doesn't really understand the world at all, and is just faking it in order to get through the day.  Since he *needs* an authority figure to give him guidance and structure, isn't getting that from Vincent, and doesn't have any other guidance, it's all turning into anger and resentment.

Vincent wants Kevin to be a better son.  Kevin wants Vincent to be a better father.  Neither of them are happy, and it's slowly killing their family bond.


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

[User] ELI5: Finally need to settle the score, is it the washing machine or the dryer that shrinks my shirts?

[Assistant]
Dryer, usually. Think about what happens in each machine, versus how you would do it by hand. When you wash clothes by hand, you put them in water with some laundry soap and swish them around a lot and then rinse the soap off. That is exactly what a washing machine does, so if washing stuff by hand doesn't shrink it, a washing machine probably won't.

When you dry clothes by hand, you put them on a rack or clothesline and wait. When you dry them in a dryer, it heats them very hot and tumbles them around quickly for about an hour. The heat is usually what shrinks stuff, so if you put things on the very hot cycle in the washing machine, they still might shrink.

But if you put clothes on the normal or gentle cycle in the washing machine and then hang them up to dry, they will almost definitelynot shrink.


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

[User]
[LOTR] Why doesn't Sauron notice Bilbo when he puts on the ring?

On his 111th birthday, Bilbo decides to leave the Shire. At his birthday party, he slips the One Ring on behind his back, disappearing before all the other Hobbits.

Later, the Ring Wraiths are sent to the Shire to recover the ring, after Gollum gives up the location under torture. Later still, when Frodo puts the ring on at the Prancing Pony, he sees the Eye of Sauron up close, and Sauron is heard saying "I see you."

So why didn't Sauron see Bilbo when he put on the ring? Why did they need to torture Gollum to figure out where the One Ring was?

[Assistant] Sauron usually can't see people who are wearing the One Ring. There are a few special cases (such as when Frodo wears the Ring on the Hill of Seeing and comes close to directly connecting to Sauron's mind, or when Frodo claims the Ring on Mount Doom and Sauron senses the challenge to his authority), but Sauron would not be able to tell Bilbo was wearing the Ring in the Shire, or that Frodo was wearing the Ring in the Prancing Pony.


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

[User]
Buying Stocks: Where Does Money Go?

I had a question about how the stock market works.  So, if you buy a company's stock and invest in that company: does the company actually receive your money, or does it go to an individual who sold you the stock?

If my understanding is correct, the company only gets your money directly either when they initially go public, or if they issue more stock - is that accurate?  As a follow-up: if they do not receive your money: then why do companies focus so much on returning money to shareholders?  If shareholders continually supplied the company with the cash they needed to invest in the business, it would make sense to me, but otherwise it feels like it would be a one-way relationship in which investors collect the profits, but don't provide anything in return.

[Assistant]
1) You are correct, the company only receives the money when the original stock issuance occurs. Any subsequent buying and selling of the stock is on a secondary market and does not provide any funding to the company.

2) The stockholders are the owners of the company. They would have no reason to invest in the first place and provide capital to the company if they were not compensated for it. When a company returns money to shareholders, it is primarily done through dividend payments or by repurchasing shares, which reduces the amount of stock in circulation and increases the value of the ones that remain. This way the stock remains valuable, which is important for a few reasons. Top of mind is that if the company wants to raise capital in the future, they can issue more shares at a higher price and receive more funding from investors.

A helpful way to think about this relationship may be the fact that most business/economics classes have historically taught that the main job of a company is to maximize shareholder value since they are the owners of the company. This view is changing some, but it is still helpful to keep in mind when understanding how a company views its shareholders.


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

[User] Why does sunset look so different from sunrise?

[Assistant] During sunrise even if it is warm the air is not as stratified by temperature as it is after a day of heating. The sun warms from the ground up as the earth absorbs most of the heat. That makes the light of the sunset fall through differentiated cells of rising and falling air and microparticulate dust. Those convection cells and the stratified levels of heat and cool don't exist in the morning. The air is usually stiller in the morning. While the effect might seem small it completely changes the quality of the light.


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

[User]
If I think a professor is doing an outstanding job, and feel they deserve recognition, who should I talk to?

I've had a professor for the past couple of semesters that has had a very positive impact on my studies and after talking to my fellow classmates they seem to be in agreement. I've made sure she knows how appreciative I am of her but is there anything more I could do to help her maybe get some more recognition? Maybe discuss her performance with the head of the department or something? She is a visiting professor so is it even worth letting her superiors know when she'll be gone in a year anyways?

I'm not entirely sure what is considered appropriate to be discussed regarding a professors performance and who it would be appropriate to discuss it with, or if anyone at the university, like her superiors, would care what I have to say. I just think, from the perspective of a student, that not enough positive feedback gets back to the professors.

I'd appreciate any advice/recommendations.

[Assistant] I think the department head would like knowing that. Its kind in person but probably more helpful in a letter that can be used for promotion or an award nomination. You could talk to the head and offer to write a letter for a teaching award for that faculty. And thanks for doing that. Teaching has its rewards but it can be challenging and it is easy to feel undervalued or unappreciated.


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

[User]
[DC] Can someone wield multiple Green Lantern rings at once?

If a user had sufficient willpower, could they wear a ring on each finger and be ten times as powerful as a normal Green Lantern?

[Assistant]
When Hal went a bit cray-cray a few years ago, he wore green power rings on all his fingers. He didn't become more powerful by doing that, beyond maybe a placebo effect of him becoming more confident and therefore boosting his willpower a little while doing it. It was only when he absorbed the power of the central battery that he really jumped in power.

Wearing a power ring from each of the different corps is also possible (Karl Reyner did it), but apparently it's hard to do effectively since you have to isolate out the emotions each ring needs.


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

[User] How many strains of coronavirusare most likely out there?

[Assistant]
Not sure why youre getting such weird answers, but there are 7 main strains of the coronavirus in humans.

The four mundane ones are referred to as HCoV, such as HCoV-HKU1.

These strains are constantly present in humans and are known for causing common colds, and very rarely leading to complications. Our bodies are typically quite used to them.

And then there are 3 novel strains, new strains that have emerged in the past 20 years. They are: SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV 2.

SARS, or severe acute respiratory syndrome, emerged in the early 2000s and, unlike COVID-19, it was easily controlled through international cooperation. Most people only heard about it in the news. We were so effective at controlling it that we gave up on a vaccine because it no longer served a purpose.

MERS-COV, or Middle East respiratory syndrome, is significantly more deadly than any other coronavirus, with a mortality rate as high as 35%. Thankful it also proved easy to contain and while it still exists in the wild, yearly cases are low enough to not be a concern.

SARS-CoV-2, or COVID-19, is something Im sure youre aware of.

Note that these coronaviruses compete with each other.


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

[User]
Is non-Western philosophy more ethnic-focused than Western philosophy?

I have heard the arguments that philosophy as a field is too ethnocentric towards the West, so I've tried seeking out non-Western philosophy. However, no matter where I go (both classics and contemporary), non-Western philosophy seems tribalist. That is, African philosophers talk about African concepts as they pertain to the African people. Chinese philosophers often invoke Confucius and Chinese norms. Western philosophy by contrast, seems to attempt to discover universal truths.

Now, it may be the case that all of Western philosophy's pursuits were actually just ethnocentric ideas veiled with claims of "objectivity," but I find it commendable that Western philosophers at least attempt this grand universal project. non-Western philosophers don't even seem to find this goal for objectivity worthy - they are content making arguments within their culture.

Is this an accurate picture? If not, can someone recommend "universalist" non-Western philosophers (the arabs who engaged with Plato and Grecoroman philosophy do not count).

[Assistant]
> non-Western philosophers don't even seem to find this goal for objectivity worthy - they are content making arguments within their culture

I actually have trouble understanding where you got this from. When Lao Zi talks about the Dao, he nowhere says that this only applies to Chinese people, and neither does Confucius when he talks about ren. Nowhere in these texts will you find the concept of China or Chinese culture. Maybe you could give us some examples of what you mean or name some of your sources? Because simply talking about Confucius doesn't make Chinese philosophy any more tribalist than talking about Aristotle makes Western philosophy.


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

[User]
ELI5: Matter can neither be created nor destroyed?

How is this true according to events such as the big bang? Does this conflict with religious beliefs or are there some loopholes that I am unaware of?

EDIT: Thank you to all who responded, and have helped me understand this more. On the topic of energy has always been there though, I have a similar question: If energy has always been present, what factor does entropy and equilibrium play in this grand scheme?

[Assistant]
*Energy* cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change form.

Some hypotheses suggest the big bang was caused by a lot of energy reaching a critical capacity to burst out and create matter.

There is plenty here to conflict with religious beliefs since many of those were created before we had scientific observations to model the big bang. Some religious groups change to include the big bang, and others continue to deny it. It's really up to them.


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

[User]
[Attack on Titan Anime] Why don't the Scouts do their expeditions at night when the Titans are lethargic/sleepy?

**[I've only seen the anime, so no spoilers from the manga please!! If it gets explained in the manga, but contains other spoilers, please just say so and mark it as such]**

So from Hange's tests, we see that the Titans become lethargic and even immobile under cover of darkness. Why don't the scouts do their expeditions at night?

[Assistant] Simply because it is dark. They can't see more then a few meters around them even in full moon light which would cripple the scouting formation. Also the horses would be unable to see and would be much more likely to injure themselves and that would leave the scout stranded. Remember that it's around 100km between the wall, a ride that far would take several days even in the best of conditions. With hundreds of soldiers, supplies and enemy threat the going is a lot slower. Finally even though it's dark some titans stay somewhat active for hours after losing the light. To fight them in the dark with next to no warning is an absolute worst case scenario.


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

[User] [Star Trek] Q just manipulated me into firing a planet buster onto a planet Kevin Uxbridge the Douwd inhabits. How screwed am I? How screwed is everything?

[Assistant]
Maybe write a letter to Kevin after the launch explaning how Q made you do it. Once it hits he's going to blink you out of existence with a vengeance. Because his wife was human he might not exterminate all humans, but you and your extended family are totally dead.

If Kevin ever reads the letter he might bring you back as an illusion and then a throwdown with Q would occur.


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

[User]
CMV: The U.S. should implement an opt-out system for organ donation.

Just to be clear, I am talking about organ donation after you die, not while you are living.

If the U.S. had an opt-out system for organ donation similar to what the UK has, it would save thousands of lives. By letting people opt-out, those whose religion is against it or simply don't want to don't have to. With the current opt-in system, many people who would donate their organs don't because they never get the time to fill out all the paperwork or are too lazy to do so. With an opt-out system, you wouldn't have to fill out any paperwork to have your organs donated, it would just happen automatically.

[Assistant] Many places in the US sign you up for organ donation when you get an ID, with literally zero hassle. It's technically opt-in, but it's "you have a screen where you press yes or no", so it's the same amount of effort either way you go. Is that also an acceptable solution to you? It doesn't catch *everyone*, but it certainly catches the vast majority.


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

[User]
How soon after an organism 'dies' are all of its cells dead? its bacteria?

Let's say an organism dies instantaneously (no previous oxygen deprivation). How long would the cells continue to be alive despite the macro organism being considered dead? How long would the bacteria within and on the body last? How much of a time difference would it be, if any, between say an ant and a blue whale?

[Assistant]
There is a problem with your question - "die's instantaneously" isn't the right way to word things, since dying is a process and a spectrum.

What is death, and when is the "macro-organism" considered dead? Both very good questions, without simple answers. A simpler definition would define death as the loss body's ability to maintain the biologic functions necessary for life - a poor definition IMO, since it argues that death is the absence of life.

Before modern medicine, death was the lack of breathing and a heartbeat/pulse. However, with CPR, electrical defibrillation, and medications, we are able to continue oxygenation of the organs, and potentially return a stable heart rhythm. This definition is no longer valid in the modern era.

The modern medical definition separates death into brain death and cardiopulmonary death (the heart and lungs). Death of an organ is defined as **"irreversible damage causing the cessation of function of that organ"**. Death of other organs is possible, but can be (at least partly) medically managed, or does not lead to the immediate cessation of functioning of the organism - e.g. one can live without renal function on dialysis, and complete loss of function of the liver would be a slow "death".

So instead, let's frame the question differently - how long after the complete interruption of oxygenation do different organs and cells survive?

The most sensitive organ in the body is the brain. A general estimate is that the brain can survive for up to 10 minutes without oxygen, before there is widespread irreversible damage. This timing can be affected by many different factors - e.g. a low body temperature (hypothermia) extends survival, because it decreases the oxygen demands of the tissues. When dealing with hypothermic patients, "you're not dead 'til you're warm and dead".

Back to the brain, giving a range for hypoxic time until brain death would be safer - I've seen sources give as little as 3 minutes; 10 minutes, as above, seems to be average; and longer is possible in certain scenarios. But the cells of the brain do not die evenly. Neurons (the "most important" brain cell) are the most sensitive to hypoxia, while other cells of the brain can survive longer. Neurons of one specific area (CA1 of the hippocampus, Sommer's area) is most sensitive, and irreversible damage to these cells usually occurs after 3 minutes of hypoxia. During autopsy, looking at these cells can be a helpful clue that significant hypoxia occurred prior to death.

For other organs and tissues, the time from hypoxia to organ death varies; kidney and liver will survive for about 20 minutes, skeletal muscle for an hour and a half, and skin may survive for a few days. The cornea (part of the eye) remains healthy enough for transplantation up to 18 hours after death.

As for bacteria - it probably depends on the type of bacteria. It also depends greatly on the conditions where the body is left. In a warm, moist, oxygenated environment, some species of bacteria will not only survive, but will thrive and multiple - causing putrification of the corpse. These bacteria (or at least their offspring) will survive until the corpse is rotted away to a point were there is no food left for the bacteria. If it is too dry, the bacteria will die, and the body will become mummified. If the body is embalmed, the embalming solution will kill the bacteria.

TL:DR Death is a complicated concept, and is better thought of as a process, rather than a single event. There are different definitions of death, but modern medicolegal definitions define cardiopulmonary death and brain death separately.

Different organs can survive for different amounts of time without oxygen - the brain is the most sensitive organ to hypoxia.


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

[User]
What are the main possible reasons why some people oppose LGBTIQA rights and same-sex marriage?

Apart from the usual scapegoat that fundamental religious beliefs are the main reasons why some people oppose LGBTQAI rights and same-sex marriage, what are the possible reasons why people oppose these things despite scientific research saying that it is not exactly unnatural to develop that kind of "different" sexuality?

I heard that some people are afraid of change because of the fear of the unknown or the fear that the change will be done by force and the heterosexuals became dominated and the new minority *(same way people were afraid when African-Americans demanded equal rights or when Communism was rising in power and influence)*

I also heard that people neglect whatever the demand on equal rights claim because they claim that it is dominated by teenagers and young adults because they are being rebellious and illogical *(which is kinda true in a sense because it has been considered a usual part of development for many teenagers and young adults to go through risk-taking and rebellious behaviours but not all of them do)*

[Assistant]
It's hard to get away from the religious aspect, though, especially because these oppositions were not the norm until quite recently.

For example, the recent book *Gay Indians in Brazil: Untold Stories of the Colonization of Indian Sexualities* shows that, at least in the case of pre-Columbian Brazil, non-cis-straight behaviour was not persecuted by the native population, and homophobia and transphobia were European (Catholic) impositions.

The same appears to be true of Japan before European contact, although the situation there was a bit different, with their hierarchical and patriarchal social structure being more accepting of gay and bisexual men than of women (highly recommend the book *Manga GirlSeeksHerbivore Boy: StudyingJapaneseGender at Cambridge* on this subject).

So yeah, Judaism/Christianity/Islam seem to be intrinsically connected with why the *current* world has anti-LGBTQ+ movements, so even if people are not practicing Jews/Christians/Muslims, they can still enforce these (religion-based) social mores that are embedded in their social millieu.


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

[User]
[The Princess Bride] How did Sicilians get such a fearsome reputation?

We all know that it's a very bad idea (second only to getting involved in a land war in Asia) to go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line. But how did this become such common knowledge? Who was the poor soul who learned this, and how?

[Assistant]
Ol' Alcibiades got some of the first well-documented examples of why it's a bad idea. Then Carthage had a pretty bad time of it. The Servile Wars added a bunch to the legend, and Belisarius made sure the Ostrogoths learned the lesson well. And the Emir of Tunisia spent a *lot* of time and treasure and blood learning the lesson, too. Roger de Hautville brought the idea back into vogue *hard*, and eventually the Aragonese got a front-row seat to the issue, as well.

Basically, Sicily has a long, bloody history of being full of right bastards who have a skill at making themselves seem a lot more dangerous and successful than they really are. Hence the laughing, and then the silence and falling to one side, dead.


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

[User] [LOTR] Worst case scenario has happened Sauron obtains the one ring and has conquered Middle Earth. Do the Valinor step in? Does Arda pull the plug and start over? How long will Sauron maintain power? Forever?

[Assistant]
By that point, the valar had left middle earth in the hands of the free people. What happens happens, they tried to help with the istari.

Whatever happens would be part of gods plan. Since humans are gods chosen, most likely eventually sauron would be overthrown.


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

[User] How do solar panels turn light into energy?

[Assistant]
Solar panels turn light into *electricity.* That's an important distinction.

The short answer is something called the *photovoltaic effect.* Put simply, shining light on a particular type of material liberates electrons from the atoms in that material, causing them to move about. Moving electrons is electricity.

(Sorry, said "photoelectric" originally, should've said "photovoltaic." It's going to be one of those days, apparently.)


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

[User]
Is there a scientific benefit of water towers being bulb-shaped and sitting on a long pole?

Why so high in the air? Does this have any certain effects on the water itself? Or is it just to create pressure leading out to the pipes?

[Assistant] There is no chemical change to the water at the top of a water tower; the goal is to give the water enough potential energy that it will flow through the pipes in the surrounding area with enough pressure to reach the upper floors of nearby buildings without backflow. In some cities (like New York city), you can also see water towers atop individual buildings. They don't sit very far above the roof, but work well for supplying water to that particular building.


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

[User] [JoJo's Bizarre Adventure] What is Barack Obama's stand power?

[Assistant]
Young Americans is the stand name and it looks like James Dean but standed out. Hearts and stuff.

Its a long range stand. His first ability is Changes. It will make you change the direction you are going.

So if you are running at him he shouts "Ch-ch-changes!" and you run the other way.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do plants circulate water and nutrients throughout their system without a heart?

As far as I know, plants don't have any kind of moving parts that help move water and nutrients from their roots to their crowns. So how do they do it? How do plants work against gravity?

It would make more sense to me if plants worked like fungi, spreading throughout the earth until they're ready to reproduce, but no, upright plants are the whole organism. Is that not, like, super weird?

Plants are so weird. Like, "Hi, I'm a plant. I eat sunlight and communicate using mycorrhizal fungi. I have no muscles, but still break through concrete slabs. I have no heart, but still move water from my roots to my leaves."

[Assistant] Osmotic pressure and capillary action. Osmosis is the force that keeps pure solvents (i.e. water) from flowing through a semipermeable membrane (i.e. the cell wall). This keeps structures in the plant from drying out essentially. Capillary action is what causes water and nutrients to flow through a plant to the leaves and back down. Its pretty much physics.


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

[User]
[Super Heroes] How to compose an actually great villain monologue?

 As  a super villain I recognize that part of the fun is getting to rub it  in when you're in a position to beat a hero in a fight or explain to  someone how you got to where you are while talking trash to them too,  but we're living in an age where heroes don't get emotional and worked  up when you gloat about how you're about to destroy the city, they don't  start trying to apologize when you explain how you're really a monster  of their making, they don't even seem to miss a beat when you threaten  innocent civilians. You know what they do do? They get snarky, they  start calling you Francis or they start mocking your costume, or they  hang a lampshade on the absurdity of delivering a monologue.

I want my moment! I want my "I am your number one fan" speech, I want cops to get worked up like I just gave some creepy speech about how I killed their friends with knives, I want civilians to literally bend their knee in fear of what will happen if they don't.

What can I do so that I can't get deadpooled by some jerk off hero who thinks that everything has to be a big joke?

[Assistant]
Call their bluff. Actually shooting someone (albeit in the foot or somewhere else non lethal), or actually killing the civilian is a great way to get yourself taken seriously. Then, taunt them with how the hero is just some selfish jerk whos only in it for the limelight, how they dont really give a damn about their supposed ideals.

Alternatively, why even monologue? Simply tell them this aint a movie and kill then then and there.


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

[User]
Are we producing more atmosphere than we lose at this point in time?

I guess my question is pretty simple. At this point in time is the planet producing more atmosphere than we are losing to solar wind or are we slowly losing atmosphere?

What are some of the factors affecting our atmospheric production or decline?

Is our atmosphere undergoing any kind of changing state? As in, more oxygen rich, less oxygen rich? Etc....

[Assistant] We are always slowly losing atmosphere. As you mention, we do have solar wind stripping us, but there is also the spontaneous generation of free hydrogen and helium by radioactive processes to consider. These are usually trapped within rock or liquid, but once freed, the atoms experience buoyant force, and barring the occasional spontaneous reactions of hydrogen with oxygen, nitrogen and other molecules to form compounds in our atmosphere, each attains escape velocity and pops off into space. The earth does not produce any more of the elements present in our atmosphere, excluding some rare radioactive decays creating short-lived heavy noble gases (radon), so we are losing mass and atmosphere faster than we produce it.


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

[User] [Harry Potter] Spinning a Time Turner sends the user back one hour. If Harry Potter had gotten his own turner, could he have enchanted it to spin ~100,000 times and traveled back in time to the 80s to try to save his parents?

[Assistant]
You can't change time. If time is a river, and you get out of the river and to upstream and jump back in, the river's direction does not change.

Harry couldn't have saved his parents, because if he did, he wouldn't have been in a position in the future to go back in time to save them in the first place.


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

[User] ELI5:When getting a cramp why is your first instinct to become motionless and why does it hurt when you move.

[Assistant]
This might not sound useful, but...

> When getting a cramp why is your first instinct to become motionless

because it

> it hurt[s] when you move.

A cramp is muscles literally cramping (for various reasons) beyond they ability to be healthy, the body tells you about the "danger!" as "pain". As the body tries to limit the possible "damage" in the face of that danger, it just attempts to stop whatever it was doing with that limb to just keep that obviously (at the moment) faulty muscle alone.


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

[User] [Marvel/Avatar:TLA] Could Magneto Bloodbend?

[Assistant] Magneto's powers extend beyond manipulating metallic compounds.  His powers allow him to manipulate the atomic bonds of all matter, in so far as magnetism is responsible for bonds.  He has also demonstrated the ability to manipulate a type of unified field of physics.  Metal is simply easier for him to work with, though with concentration he can use other types of material.  So yes, he can bloodbend.  He can also waterbend, woodbend, airbend, carbonbend or any other type of matter.


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

[User]
CMV: If you died from taking a pressed pill that you thought was a pharmaceutical but it contained fentanyl, you didn't die of a "drug overdose", you were poisoned.

Think about a college student who takes an Adderall a few times per year as a study aid.

Or a single parent who takes Xanax for a few weeks to help them cope with the emotions of divorce.

Or someone with PTSD who takes Ambien to help them rest.

These are legitimate pharmaceuticals that are fairly well-known and **visually recognizable** to anyone who has ever had a prescription for them, or anyone who has been close to someone who had/has a prescription for them.

Sometimes, for any number of reasons, a person who has a physician-approved medical necessity for these pills may be unable to obtain them through the standard legal channels... Maybe the college student has been so busy that he missed his last doctor's appointment for a refill. Maybe the single parent canceled their health insurance so they could start paying rent. And maybe the PTSD sufferer simply can't afford the prescriptions this month.

When someone receives a controlled medication without a valid prescription, it's illegal, period. Whether it's from a fellow college student, a meth-head in the worst part of town, or it's just handed to them at a party, they're all the same in the eyes of the law. And I believe that's necessary to discourage recreational use and abuse.

**But when someone DIES from this pill, labeling it as a drug overdose is not only branding the victim as a user/addict, but *also* putting more lives at risk by failing to acknowledge or recognize the circumstances surrounding the death. Furthermore, it prevents any responsible party from being held accountable for these deaths.**

In other words, when someone shoots themselves, it's a suicide. When someone accidentally shoots themselves with a gun they're handling incorrectly, it's an accidental death. When someone is shot by someone else, it's manslaughter or murder. Why is it different with deaths from fentanyl?

I believe the reason that most middle-class white-collar families don't realize or understand the fentanyl problem is because when they hear someone died of a drug overdose, they assume the person was an addict and picture them snorting, smoking, or shooting up to get high. That's what most people think when they hear the term "drug overdose" unfortunately.

Look, if I shoot up heroin or smoke meth, then I know the risks. I know this stuff was made by a crackhead in their backyard. There's no telling what it could be laced with or what it could do to me - and that's been true for decades, long before the fentanyl epidemic. I'm not saying these people deserve to die AT ALL, but they are choosing to put a substance in their body that they KNOW is home made, unregulated, and dangerous. They know it's a calculated risk (whether or not an addiction overshadows their ability to make that decision is irrelevant to the greater argument here).

But in the case of pressed pills that are **pharmaceutical replicas** containing fentanyl, the "drug overdose" label seems like quite a stretch - they died from taking a SINGLE PILL that looks IDENTICAL to the pressed pills that come from their pharmacy. Regardless of how the victim obtained the pill(s), they were **deceived.** They thought they got Adderall because it looks just like the Adderall they got from their pharmacy a couple months ago. There was no perceived risk.

If I buy some Kool-Aid packets from the flea market, I'm sure I've broken a law or two by buying an individual retail product not labeled for resale and without its original retail packaging, but that doesn't change the fact that I believe that it's Kool-Aid because it's in a paper packet that looks identical to the Kool-Aid packet I buy at the grocery store. So if that Kool-Aid contains fentanyl and it kills me, did I die of a drug overdose? The fact that it contained something deadly isn't diminished just because the Kool-Aid was obtained illegally.

**TL;DR**

**When someone dies from a substance they consumed too much of for the purpose of getting high or staving off withdrawals, I'd agree that it's a drug overdose.**

**When someone dies from doing something they knew was dangerous/risky, I'd call that an accidental death.**

**When someone dies from a substance they didn't even know they were consuming because it was intentionally disguised as something FDA-approved, legally manufactured, and well-regulated, that's not a drug overdose nor is it an accidental death - it's manslaughter via poisoning.**

[Assistant]
Why do you think the word overdose requires intent? It is simply a combination of two words that describe what happened.

Over = in excess, above

Dose = amount of a medicine or drug

To use your shooting comparison, in both cases the person is shot. The word shot doesn't require intention. The accidental shooting doesn't need to be renamed to manslaughter by unexpected bullet entry.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does the military insist on saluting?

[Assistant]
Saluting has a long history that is actually not written in stone. However one explanation is that it was originally used as a greeting between two knights to show their face and thus not be seen as an enemy. Additionally it would take away from their master hand to hold their weapon.

This has progressed through to when officers would remove their headgear in the presence of a superior, and then became just a grabbing of the hat. This turned into the modern salute which now has enlisted men salute officers and junior officers saluting superior officers.

The salute itself is in recognition of the Commander-in-Chief, for the Commonwealth the salute goes to the Queen, as recognised by the crown on the cap badge.

Really though it's just a longheld tradition and the military loves tradition.


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

[User]
[Star Trek] How do sensors function at warp?

Sorry if this is an obvious question, but if Warp drives function by distorting space around them and thus moving that 'bubble' of space at FTL speeds, how do sensors function? It's never clearly stated how sensors on a starship work, aside from being 'multi-spectral', yet they are necessary for starship navigation. Whether passive or active, wouldn't energy being distorted by or reflected off of objects (how we conventionally 'sense' things in the 21st century) still be subject to the laws of physics and thus it can be assumed they would be distorted right along with the rest of conventional space, thus moving around the starship instead of colliding with it?

[Assistant] The warp core generates a controlled local/subspace distortion (as enabled by the field coils in the nacelles) around the ship whilst traveling at Warp speed, generally referred to as the warp field.  The amount of distortion is predictable and quantitative (it's not completely random) so when jumping to warp, sensors are automatically recalibrated by the ships computer - no muss, no fuss.  Anyone looking out a window would have a distorted view of distances and objects but anyone using the various sensor arrays (active/passive/etc) would be able to gather useful and accurate information.


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

[User]
What does Adorno mean when he says "to think the unconditional and to endure the conditional"?

I'm reading a collection of essays on the Culture Industry by Adorno. It's pretty confusing. Here's the full quote from the book:

>Astrology, Adorno contends, presents the bill for the neglect of
interpretive thinking for the sake of fact-gathering. Astrology, we
might say, is the social bad conscience of critical theory; its blind
synthesis of different domains responds to the same division of intellectual labour and opaqueness of the totality that animates critical
reflection.
The tendency to occultism is a symptom of regression in consciousness. **This has lost the power to think the unconditional and to endure
the conditional.** Instead of defining both, in their unity and difference,
by conceptual labour, it mixes them indiscriminately. The unconditional becomes fact, the conditional an immediate essence.
What holds for astrology exemplifies the culture industry generally
from advertising to film and television.

[Assistant]
To understand the quote, as you acknowledge, some context is required. The ideas on astrology and occultism have been explored in his essay The Stars Down to Earth: The Los Angeles Times Astrology Column (1974) and his book _The Stars Down to Earth, and Other Essays on the Irrational in Culture_ (2001). Astrology, for Adorno, bears the mark of the culture industry (which is always authoritarian in nature) in that it seeks to propagate certain ways of categorising and reifying - especially in a Marxian sense - experience.

By providing a message that appears specifically tailored to you (read: the Barnum effect), astrology rides on the coattails of critical reflection.  Astrology hence has a bad habit, in Adornos opinion, of presenting itself as fact without the need for interpretive thinking. It also tends towards the prescriptive, all the more to produce types of lives that are easily harnessed by late-capitalist societies.

Because Astrology operates along the logic of an arbitrary system (but still a system, nevertheless) in which star constellations are brought to bear on our lived experience, it appears to be both factual, essential, and totalising on a cosmic scale. The unconditional, then, lies beyond astrology and its reification of lives under capitalism: it cannot be reduced to a fact (which merely describes, and upon description, enters the economy of information-exchange; also, facts can change over time, which is the entire basis of daily, monthly, and yearly astrology readings). The unconditional, in this context, seems to be a way of thinking beyond the ways in which the culture industry dictates.

On the flip side, the conditional - that which is subjected to conditions or pre-requisites - becomes intolerable to people who have been imbibing on palliative predictions and advice. We want to know our futures and we want the solutions _now_: these have to be in terms of the absolute (absolutely no terms and conditions allowed here!). The uncertainty that accompanies conditions and circumstances (which are all too vulnerable to chance and accidents) is unendurable, and indeed need not be endured because there is astrology and other occultisms like advertising, film, and television to pre-empt any existential discomfort.

TLDR: we can no longer think beyond the reified ways of life under late-capitalism (this is a power that we possessed prior to this economic system) and thinking of uncertainty and chance has become unendurable because of how the culture industry distracts us from having to deal with that.


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

[User]
eli5: How does a nose just spontaneously start bleeding? Where does the blood come from?

My friend gets super severe nosebleeds all the time, but Im so confused as to where the the blood comes from so suddenly? What are these floodgates that open and why?

[Assistant]
there are blood vessels in every soft tissue of human body

inside the nose, the "skin" is very thin, and blood vessels are close to it. if their skin is extra thin, nosebleeds can happen easily.

things that cause nosebleeds are dry air (which cracks the skin), or sudden increase in blood pressure (e.g. from getting excited over something). If these factors are present, then simply sniffling can be enough to start a nosebleed.


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

[User]
ELI5: How do tropical, desert or savanna animals survive in zoos in cities where winter are below freezing?

Could it be that those animals are sheltered inside during winter? But what about nature preserves like Columbus zoo? Animals are roaming free there.

[Assistant] Almost all zoo animals have a den in their enclosure.  These are heated/cooled to a comfortable temperature, usually with water running in tubes through their floors.  When you "can't find the animal", it hasn't escaped (except for Rusty the Red Panda, he's probably escaped again), it's simply decided to lie down on the warm floor and watch the snow fall outside, like humans would do.


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

[User] If you were traveling at a supersonic speed towards a sound source, would the sound appear to be going in fast-forward?

[Assistant]
Yes, this is a product of the Doppler shift. You know, the "ambulance siren has a higher pitch when it's approaching you, and a lower pitch after it passes?" Same thing, only now the ambulance is stationary, and you're moving.

The equation is pretty simple in theory,

    f_obs = f_source (v_sound  v_obs)/(v_sound  v_source)

So assume the source is stationary, and you, the observer, are approaching (so use addition). Thus, we get an equation like:

    f_obs = f_source (v_sound + v_obs)/(v_sound)

If you are going at Mach 1, then that fraction in parentheses on the end is 2, so the frequency is doubled, so the pitch is shifted up considerably. Also, since periods are inverse frequencies, this means that it will take you half as long to hear the sound. For example, if the source is Lynyrd Skynyrd emitting a 10 minute live version of Free Bird, you'll hear the entire song in 5 minutes as a live version by Alvin and the Chipmunks.

Edit: And importantly, you don't need to be supersonic for this effect to occur at all! Any movement will, by the the Doppler effect, shift the apparent frequency and thus timing of the song!


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

[User] [Kill la Kill]Why did Ragyou finger her daughter again?

[Assistant] I believe the point of the sexual relationship between Ragyo and her daughters was for her to show them that she was always in control. She voluntarily meant to make them feel the same way that many sexual abuse victims feel: vulnerable. She probably also just enjoyed it.


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

[User]
CMV: After a person has earned a certain amount of money in a year (say, north of 5,000,000), they should be charged at a tax rate of at least 80%

About half of the world's wealth is currently held by the top 1% in society, a significantly higher tax rate for the very top earning members of society will both prevent more money being hoarded by them, reducing the wealth gap between the ultra-wealthy and the poorest people in society, and it will mean that billions more will go towards tax which can also be used to build up the economy and help the less fortunate people.

When someone has passed a certain threshold (not necessarily 5million, but that seems like a reasonable number in my opinion) they will not really need that much more than that, they wouldn't really be able to spend that on anything other than things that people would never really need. Plus, why should people be able to have millions that they can spend on extravagant items when some people cannot even afford a roof over their head, or food to feed themselves/their family.

[Assistant]
What you're missing is the presumed link between productivity and compensation.

Elon Musk is responsible for PayPal, Tesla, and SpaceX, right?

What if after PayPal the government told him "Alright there Elon, you've made enough money, we're taking the rest from here on out"? Even if he's not the kind of guy motivated by money, that means he'd have no resources to fund those other projects. Those other companies wouldn't exist because we decided to stifle innovation.

Some people make a thousand times more than others because they're doing a thousand times more for society.


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

[User]
How to obtain energy gain or loss of chemical reactions?

Chemical reactions either take or release energy.

So this "energy" must be on either the reactant or at the product side.

What specific chemistry concept is this?

I assume that I need specific computations for getting the energy of all reactants and products as well, how do I obtain this "energy" value as well?

what formulas and table values do I need to use?

[Assistant]
I believe you are looking for reaction enthalpy, often also called "heat of reaction"

Roughly, there's an energy associated with sticking a molecule together. This is related to the bond strength, and atoms involved, etc. This is the enthalpy of formation, or heat of formation. This can be measured, or in some instances modeled and calculated, although the specifics get nit pickey iirc.

Once you know the heats of formation, you can use the chemical reaction to calculate how much heat will be released or absorbed.
2A + B -> 3C

A: 5 j/mol

B: 7 j/mol

C: 10 j/mol

2A + B = 17 j/mol

3C = 30 j/mol

 = 13 j/mol (correction. See below for explanation.)

So this reaction absorbs 13 j per mole of reactions.


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

[User]
ELI5:Why do some webpages get stuck and reload when you repeatedly hit the back button?

Like when you have something and you want to go back to say google or a search engine, you click the back button, but it just reloads the page you are on instead of going back to the search engine results.
Also, sometimes, clicking the back button really fast and a lot sometimes works and you are able to get out of the webpage and back to the search engine. Why does spamming the back button a lot sometimes work?

[Assistant] Because the previous page has an automatic redirect to the current page.  When you click Back, it takes you to the previous page... which redirects you back to the current page.  Clicking fast works because your browser takes you back two or more pages before it gets a chance to process the redirect.


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

[User] ELI5: Why did humans decide to make cow milk their milk of choice?

[Assistant] This is a relatively new development. Humans have been milking lots of different animals. Even today goats are kept for their milk in areas where cows have a hard time grazing. But you can get anything from yak milk to camel milk. Cows first became the milk of choice when industrial dairy farms started mass production of milk. Cows are bigger then most animals and produce a lot of milk from a single cow. So instead of having to milk twenty goats it is much easier to just milk one cow and get the same amount of milk.


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

[User] What makes a person's voice distinct?

[Assistant]
Too many things to count, but I'll generally try to divide it into two broad categories:

1. The way our muscles and cavities are made and aligned. This refers to the composition of the muscles which make up our vocal folds, pharynx, soft palate, etc. Also, the ways the tunnels and tubes in our throat are connected help shape the sound we produce.

2. The way our brain instructs us to produce sound. This means, how we articulate certain consonants and vowels, our various speech patterns when we communicate, and the inflections we use when we breathe and communicate ideas.


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

[User] ELI5: What is stickiness and do we have a measure for stickiness?

[Assistant]
There are several different measurements for adhesion. Peel is when you pull it off at an angle and measure the force it takes , shear is when you try to slide the two adhered surfaces in opposite directions and again, measure the force it takes,  and tack is measured by rolling a small steel ball across the surface of a pressure-sensitive adhesive from a pre-determined height/incline and measuring the distance the ball rolls across the adhesive surface.

Usually, an adhesive with high shear will have low peel and vise versa.

*Edited for clarity.


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

[User]
CMV: The Bible does not support a "burning forever in hell."

This is not an argument of whether the Bible is true or if God and/or hell truly exists. This is about how the Bible does not support a place where people go to when they die and be punished forever. For example, when Lazarus died, Jesus told his disciples that he was asleep. His disciples did not understand so Jesus had to plainly say that Lazarus was dead. (John 11:14). There are other verses that talk about death as a type of sleep and verses that say that the dead know nothing. Finally, the book of Revelations talks about the dead in Christ will rise first and meet Jesus in the air when he comes back. Why would they need to be resurrected if they were chillin in heaven already? The Bible supports a death that is like a deep sleep and that we don't go anywhere (to heaven or to hell) until the second coming of Jesus. So why does so many people believe in this burning forever in hell or even that their loved ones are looking down on them?

[Assistant]
A quick search on the internet will give you plenty of quotes about eternal suffering in afterlife in hell from scriptures.

Revelation 21:8

>But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liarsthey will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.

Matthew 25:46

>Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.

Psalm 9:17

>The wicked go down to the realm of the dead, all the nations that forget God.

Thessalonians 1:9

>They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might

Matthew 13:50

>and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Acts 2:27

>Because you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, you will not let your holy one see decay.

Mark 9:43

>If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.

Jude 1:7

>In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Matthew 13:42

>They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 25:41

>Then he will say to those on his left, Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Revelation 19:20

>But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.

2 Peter 2:4

>For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment;

Revelation 20:13-14

>The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.

Matthew 10:28

>Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] Why are most incantations Latin or pseudo-Latin?

Does this mean those spells were created by Latin speakers? Either in ancient Rome, more likely IMHO in the era when it was the language of the educated across the Western world?

Or conversely, did wizards create Latin?

My assumption is that the incantations are somewhat arbitrary, like a wizard taught in a Chinese tradition would probably not use those words. Don't know if that's ever been said explicitly, but it seems to fit the things we know, such as the fact that spells can be cast silently with sufficient skill.

[Assistant]
Yes, these spells were likely invented by Europeans, that's why they sound Latin.

Considering there are cultures that can do sophisticated magic without wands, which are considered almost impossible by the Europeans, it may be possible that the magic can be accessed by different ways, and different cultures may have invented different spells based on different languages that ended up doing the same thing.

Some of the spells do not sound Latin.  Maybe those are supposed to be spells invented elsewhere that are adopted by the Europeans?  For example, Avada Kedavra.


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

[User]
ELI5: Microsoft's stack employee ranking system

With the recent news of Ballmer being out of Microsoft, there is a lot of talk about how the the stack ranking system he implanted was a wrong move, and was one of the reasons he was forced out.
I couldn't find anything that explains simply what this system is and why was it bad, so I hope you guys can help.

[Assistant]
Let's say you and nine friends get together to go pick berries for the local baker to make pies with. When you bring the berries to the baker, the baker doesn't want to give everyone the same payment, since it's not fair to pay someone who picked less berries the same as someone who picked more berries. The baker says that one of you has to be the worst, two of you are below average, four of you are average, two of you are above average, and one of you is the best. The person who is the worst gets nothing and is never allowed to pick berries again. The two below average people get $5 and if they don't do better during the next berry picking trip, they won't be allowed to pick berries again after that. The four average people get $10 and are allowed to pick berries again. The two above average people get $20 and are allowed to pick berries again. They are also entered in a random drawing that would allow them to pick a different kind of berries, which would pay twice as much. The best person gets $40 and automatically gets to pick the better berries the next time.

This seems fair, however every group that picks berries from the original berry patch gets the same reward structure, whether they bring back 100 berries or 10,000 berries. The reward structure also applies even if the work done isn't evenly distributed. For example, if 7 people pick 30 berries each and three people pick 300 berries, only one of the 300-berry pickers gets the $40 and the automatic berry patch upgrade even though all three picked the same amount. The same applies if all ten pick 1000 berries, one gets the big reward, one gets nothing and is asked to leave, everyone else gets something in the middle.

There is no incentive for the best berry pickers to work in the same group and do outstanding work. There *is* an incentive to make sure that everyone you work in a group with is worse than you, even if that means crushing the berries they pick, accidentally misplacing their berry baskets, or lying about how many berries they picked.


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

[User] ELI5:Why are the primary colors for light (green, red, or blue) different from the primary colors for paint (yellow, magenta, or cyan)?

[Assistant]
The quick answer: mixing light is "additive" and mixing pigment is "subtractive". But that's essentially just restating your thread title in different terms.

With pigment, assume that the object is being illuminated with all frequencies of visible light. The pigment will absorb some frequencies and reflect others. The reflected frequencies reach our eyes and that is the color we perceive. So pigment subtracts frequencies from the visible light spectrum. If we add enough different pigments, we subtract all the frequencies and are left with "black".

With light, we start with the assumption that there is no visible light emittance (black). Adding frequencies causes the eyes to perceive a color. The more frequencies we add, the closer we get to the full spectrum of visible light - "white".

Essentially, when mixing pigments fewer frequencies reach the eyes, but when mixing light, more frequencies reach the eyes.

So why is green a primary color in light? Consider secondary colors and color compliments. A primary color mixes with it's compliment to produce white light. Red and blue mix additively to create magenta. Magenta and green mix additively to produce white.

Edit: What's important to remember here is that primary and secondary colors aren't a physical property of light. Color theory is based on the physiology of the eye. Humans have three types of cone cells in the eyes which respond to three different ranges of colors.


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

[User] ELI5: Why there is no cell phone signal in some houses/apartments even though the signal is full when you are on the street?

[Assistant] The biggest reason you are experiencing loss of signal is due to the structural material of your building. There is a certain amount of signal loss (measured in dB or decibels) that occurs whenever a wireless signal must pass throught any object. Some building materials such as single pane glass windows, drywall and wood have a very low loss of Signal Penetration as opposed to more dense materials such as concrete, steel and brick. If you are located in the center of the building, say by the elevator, you will be struggling to get a decent signal as opposed to if you were close to an exterior wall on the same floor. There are many other factors that can cause loss of signal such as line of sight, distance and weather but aren't necessarily contributing to your specific case as you can travel a short distance outside of your building and grab a signal.


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

[User]
[The Shawshank Redemption] Where does Red get all the stuff other inmates buy from him?

It seems like he can get just about anything. Cigarettes, a bag of reefer if that's your thing, a bottle of bourbon to celebrate my son's graduation... yes sir, the man's a regular Sears and Roebuck. I hear he even got DuFresne a poster of Rita Hayworth. I tell ya, I could use one of those for my cell...

[Assistant] Well, Red's been in the joint for a long time, and...well, he knows how to play ball. It's a safe bet that he's got a few relatives, or friends, or ex-cellmates on the outside who will do favors for him and also knows that certain guards will turn a blind eye to this sort of thing because it keeps the prisoners happy. That makes their jobs easier. And, really, how much trouble can a poster of Rita Hayworth possibly cause?


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

[User]
[40K] So is eating Xenos okay?

Respect for human life doesn't really seem to be a thing in the setting so much as respect for the empire. You also already have cannibalism to begin with in some of the imperial guard with corpse starch.

So are there any moral quandries regarding roasting an Ork leg for dinner, or Eldar ribs in the slow cooker?

No point leaving the bodies, to waste, right?

[Assistant]
Strictly speaking, it's morally fine. Xeno lives have no value, but their deaths can still be of service to the Emperor.

That said, there are reasons why it wouldn't be a good idea to eat certain xenos races. Orks are liable to give you the mother of all fungal infections, Tyranids are loaded down with horrifying toxins and require an exceptionally skilled chef wearing full biohazard gear, and Eldar meat is pretty much tasteless so unless you've got plenty of barbecue sauce you're better off not bothering.

Tau, on the other hand, taste quite like chicken.


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

[User] ELI5: why isn't quaternion multiplication commutative?

[Assistant] Quaternions are used to describe rotation in 3D space. Multiplying by i, j or k is just a 90 turn about an axis. Hold an object in front of you, then turn it 90 to the right, then flip it up 90. Take note of what its orientation is. Now put the object back to where it started and then flip it up 90 before turning it to the right 90. If you did it right, the object should not be in the same orientation as the first set of instructions. This is why quaternion multiplication isn't communitative. Numberphile recently did a video explaining this more clearly.


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

[User]
ELI5: What is inflation/interest rates and how do they affect an economy in the long run?

Reading about economic history. I have a vague idea about what "inflation" and "interest rates" mean, but I don't know how exactly are they supposed to affect the economy positively/negatively.

From what I've heardboth inflation/deflation and higher/lower interest rates can be good or bad for the economy, depending on the situation. How and why does this happen?

[Assistant]
These are related to how a monetary based system works. One way to look at it is that interest rates are a "tool" and the inflation is one of the "outcomes" the tool is supposed to manage.

It gets a little bit difficult to picture but a core idea is the idea of purchasing power. For example, say you have $100 and the current (nominal) interest rate (controlled by the Central Bank more or less) is 10%. This means saving this $100 results in $110 after 1 year. Meanwhile inflation is 5%. This means something that costs $100 today costs $105 in 1 year. In this particular scenario, saving for 1 year increases your purchasing power since $110 is greater than $105. It can be said that the real interest rate (ie accounting for inflation) is positive - this generally benefits saving over consumption.

However too high real interest rates, causes too many people to save and this has the detrimental effect that overall consumption decreases (meaning the economy shrinks) - this is called the 'paradox of savings'. The bad thing is that it is possible to get into a vicious cycle where initially sellers reduce their prices (to increase sales) and this causes deflation. If this cycle continues, sellers shut down factories and more people are unemployed and this causes further shrinking of demand - a vicious downward cycle. This is why deflation is almost universally considered a very bad thing. Central banks/governments will do everything to avoid this.

On the other hand if real interest rates are low or negative, it induces more current consumption (holding cash is bad) which stimulates the economy but at the cost of people who are earning fixed incomes. (eg people with not much savings or who are retired living off their savings).

Most of the time, governments will target a low inflation rate (say around 2%) which gives them some room to react if something happens. They do so by controlling the nominal interest rate to boost the economy (lower rates) or slow down the economy (increase rates) In extraordinary situations (like COVID-19) the interest rate tools are not very effective and the government will go to more extraordinary measures (directly pumping money into economy) to keep things from getting too bad (it will be bad - but hopefully not as bad).

Bottom line though, it is important to know that these are monetary actions and are indirectly used to control the "real" economy - ie actual goods and services, trade, employment. The real economy usually grows - more people join the workforce (due to population increases), technological and productivity improvements, new inventions etc etc. This is why a healthy economy usually needs a bit of inflation and monetary base growth to keep up.


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

[User]
If every language is eventually compiled into the most basic machine instructions then why do languages like C and C++ run faster than Java and Python?

I dont understand why lower level languages run faster than higher level ones if they are all eventually compiled into machine code.

[Assistant]
First of all, you should distinguish between a language and its implementation(s). How and whether code in a language is translated to machine code can and does vary widely between different implementations of a language. For example the Python implementation PyPy has a JIT compiler, but CPython does not.

> If every language is eventually compiled into the most basic machine instructions

This isn't true. Not every programming language implementation emits machine code (as mentioned above, CPython doesn't), nor does every language have at least one implementation that does.

Beyond that, it doesn't only matter whether machine code is generated - it also matters *which* machine code is generated (also *when* in the case of JITs). For example, a naive compiler for a dynamically typed language might generate type checks for every operations (while a more complex, optimizing compiler still wouldn't be able to avoid doing so in all cases) while a compiler for a completely statically typed language would have no reason to do so. Similarly virtual function calls will necessarily involve extra lookups that can't always be optimized away.

In addition, a language might use big integers as their default integer types, heavily feature reflection, or contain plenty of other features that tend to be costly to implement.

Even among implementations for the same language, performance can differ significantly, so it's not surprising that implementations for different languages with different features and requirements would have even more differences in performance.

And then there's of course the fact that some languages simply have more mature (and thus better optimized) implementations than others based on how long they've been around, how widely they're used, and how much performance is even a priority.


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

[User]
ELI5: How instincts biologically work?

So, I've always wondered how birds make their nests or how bees make their hives. It is what's called "Instinct". But in fact, I've never understood how it really works deep inside the genes and the brain of each animal. Were they "born with it" or is it transmitted culturally through the generations?

[Assistant] We don't really know. We know some about genetics and we know some about behaviour, but getting from genetics to behaviour is still largely unknown, although we are working on it all the time. We know that genes can control the number of receptors for certain neurotransmitters (the chemicals that send messages in your brain) so certain responses can be easier/harder depending on the number of receptors for the message. We also know that some reflexes are stored in the spine, so the signal to perform a behaviour doesn't even need to get to the brain to be processed. We also know that we can affect behaviour by deleting certain genes.  So we have pieces of the puzzle but the exact process from genes to complex behaviours like nest building is not really well understood.


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

[User]
[Marvel] Eternals Question

The movie talks about their memories being reset after every celestial is born. If theyve done this same process for thousands of different worlds, why did they take their final stand to protect the earth ? They could have done the same thing for other planets. What made earth special?

[Assistant] Ajak decided that Earth was special.  Humans were the ones who reversed the Snap, and thus Ajak decided that humanity was too special to sacrifice to a newborn Celestial.  It was Ajak's decision to preserve humanity that kicked off, well, everything else.


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

[User]
[Mechs, Bipedal weapons systems, ect] What are the advantages to putting a tank or a gun on legs?

Like, I know the downsides. Just assuming that you can get the tech working, any armor light enough to be carried on relatively thin legs wouldn't hold up well to anti-tank fire, it's higher frame makes it more of a target for lower-to-the-ground vehicles, it can't traverse terrain as fast as wheeled or tracked vehicles, ect.

...And that's what has me confused! There are all these downsides, and I can't think of any benefits other than the capacity to more efficiently travel on rocky terrain. Why the hell would any military want these things? What are the upsides that I'm not seeing?

[Assistant] That depends on where it stands on super robot vs real robot. Super robots generally can be piloted with the same dexterity as fighting on your own. Real robots are basically all-terrain tanks. Tank treads are better than wheels, but there's some terrain where you really need feet.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do torquey engines make their power at low rpms, but higher horsepower motors seem to hit peak power at higher revs?

[Assistant]
If you're talking internal combustion engines, a lot has to do with their bore (cylinder diameter) and stroke (how far up and down the pistons move).
   Engines with long strokes typically make higher torque at lower rpms, since to get a long stroke, the throw of the crankshaft is longer. Basically, a longer stroke gives the power stroke more leverage at the crankshaft.
   Engines with short strokes can be made to rev faster since the crankshaft throws are shorter. Since the torque at each power stroke is lower since the leverage is lower, these engines need to spin fast to make much power.
   Consider the formula for horsepower: HP= torque x RPM/ 5252. It shows how the same HP can be achieved by high torque at low rpm or by lower torque at high rpm.


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

[User]
Why is our current understanding of gravity unable to explain the rotational speed of galaxies without adding unseen mass (via dark matter) to the equation?

I have read that the the stars moving on the outside of galaxies would fly out of orbit at their speeds. Why is gravity not considered strong enough to keep them in orbit?

[Assistant] An orbit is a balance between an object's inertia carrying it outward and gravity pulling it in. If an object is moving fast enough, its inertia will carry it outwards fast enough that the cumulative effect of its parent body's gravity will never be enough to pull it back in. This speed is the escape velocity, and it can be calculated based on the total mass of the system and the initial altitude of the orbiting object. Based on the apparent mass of other galaxies, the outer stars should be moving at escape velocity, but somehow they're remaining in orbit.


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

[User] [Childs Play] How is Chucky able to overpower adults so easily?

[Assistant]
A lot of it is surprise. People don't expect a doll to have such murderous energy. And his small size makes it perfect to set up ambushes. By the time someone realizes Chucky is attacking them, they're often heavily injured already and unable to fight back with their full power.

But also the magic that put his soul in the doll, plus a lot of the other magic that he's messed with over the decades, has dramatically increased the strength he'd otherwise have as a child-size plastic toy. It's comparable to the strength Charles had as a human, if not more so. Since he has no fear of dying or of pain like a sane person would, he can push his fake body to self-destructive limits, which makes him quite physically powerful indeed.


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

[User]
ELI5: Odd unanswered question about Metal rubbing metal.

Whenever two metal utensils rub together (forks, knives, spoons) or on a metal pan/dish, and I taste it, I taste this really strong metallic/weird thing. It's extremely unpleasant for me to taste and nobody else I know has the same problem.

I asked this question 5 months ago and nobody answered it.

[Assistant]
The surface of almost all metals is attacked by the oxygen in the air to form a surface layer of metal oxide. Some types of oxides are much more visible than others such as rust in iron or tarnish in silver. Only a few metals such as gold and platinum do not normally react with oxygen.

The metal oxide layer on the surface prevents direct contact with the actual metal underneath. When you rub two metal things together, you temporary break apart the oxide layer. When you taste it before the oxide forms again, you are directly tasting the metal rather than the oxide which results in a strong metallic taste!


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

[User]
Do the elements of supernovae stay within the range of the previous solar system? Is a solar system with a star of sufficient mass just recycling elements within that range?

I get that nebulae can be many AUs in diameter, but isnt the distance between solar systems much larger to the point where there would be very little cross pollination between solar systems? Also what happens to planets that arent destroyed by supernovae? Are there gas giant sized planets drifting around within galaxies unattached to a star?

[Assistant]
Nah supernova remnants spread out really quickly, and mix into the general mess of low density gas called the "interstellar medium". The interstellar medium is the thin gas that fills most of the volume of the galaxy, and it's very turbulent - it gets stirred up by supernova and winds, and by the rotation of the galaxy. So the high-mass elements produced by the star and the supernova get spread around pretty quickly, and when some part of the interstellar medium condense to form a molecular cloud than will then collapse into stars, it carries bits of high-mass elements from all sorts of supernovae throughout the galaxy.

It's unlikely a planet would survive its star going supernova - they are extremely energetic events - but stars don't usually get completely destroyed when going supernova. There's a remnant - a neutron star or black hole - that's left behind, although it only has a portion of the mass of the original star. There might be enough left to keep some hypothetical planet bound, but it's unlikely, especially as the outflowing gas will push the planet too, and because supernovae are not symmetric - the star gets a big "kick" from the supernova, and could leave any hypothetical planets behind.

There should be rogue planets though anyway, but these would likely be slingshotted out by gravitational interactions rather than leftover after stars go supernova.


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

[User] ELI5: why is it that the bigger your FOV is in a game, the faster it feels like you're moving?

[Assistant]
If you're in a moving car and look straight ahead (in the direction the car is traveling), it doesn't look like the car is moving very fast compared to if you look out a side window (perpendicular to the direction of travel).

In the car analogy, increasing your FOV exposes more of the area to the sides of the car to your eyes. So a higher fraction of the things in your line of sight look like they're moving faster. This same idea holds in games.


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

[User]
ELI5: Where does stuff go when it gets in your eyeball? Is the fluid in your eyes somewhat acidic and dissolve it?

Something gets in your eye and it's there for a few seconds or few minutes. Then it's gone.

[Assistant] No dissolving, just washes away. When you blink your eye actually closes from your temple to your nose too, not all at once, so this helps push stuff out of your eye as well. Thats why you always get those crustys by your nose, not your temple.


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

[User] ELI5: How do we know exactly that the bee population around the world is decreasing? How do we calculate the number of bees to begin with?

[Assistant] Bee keepers know how many bees they used to have, and how many bees they have now. Commercial bee keeping is a huge industry (many bee keepers rent their bees out to farmers, for example), and when commercial bee keepers, amateur bee keepers and people who plain notice bees notice colonies are collapsing, it's worth paying attention to.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do muscles start to twitch for no apparent reason?

[Assistant]
Probably a misfire within a nerve bundle that triggers a motor unit in a muscle.

Muscles aren't controlled the way you probably think they are. Your muscles are roughly divided into sections called motor units, each fed by a nerve (nerves are all or nothing, either completely on or completely off, so they can't be used in isolation for gradients, making parallelism the only viable strategy for precise motor control).

Whenever your brain wants to send a command to your muscles, it goes through a process called recruitment, where it gathers up the required number of motor units to carry out whatever activity it's doing (more units in a line means larger motion, more in parallel means more force), and then sends the signal to all of the motor units in whatever pattern is needed (maybe series contraction first, then more in parallel, sort of a soft start).

Recruitment is carried out mainly by the cerebellum in activities you have practiced, because it is more efficient, but less adaptable on the fly. When you are learning a new task, your cortex takes on recruitment, which is why it's clumsier, less precise, and slower, because it can do basically anything, but not very well. This is also why it is harder to do anything other than the new task at first, because your cortex is already in use. Device not ready bro. If your brain misfires slightly, then recruits and fires a single unit, that one little muscle spot twitches.

It has been postulated that we aren't as strong as similarly sized mammals because our muscles are divided up more finely, requiring more brainpower and time to recruit. This allows us to carry out extremely precise actions (flint knapping, for instance), but makes it more difficult to use our entire muscle at once (there just aren't enough connections and they can't be recruited fast enough).

Working out and doing complex physical tasks helps strengthen the recruitment mechanism, which is thought to be the main driving force behind "beginner gains" in bodybuilding. Your brain just learns how to use your muscles better.

Edit: Gold?!? Noice. Thanks kind internet stranger!

Edit: Initial statement for clarity.


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

[User]
Why can't non-ionizing radiation be used for radiography?

Everything is in the title I guess. I get that ionizing radiation is more energetic, but can't lower energy light be used anyway? Or is it because it would interfere with normal radiation from the body/ambient radiation?

[Assistant] Non ionising radiation does not have enough energy to penetrate through the body. It all gets absorbed in the skin. As you raise the energy of the Radiation beam (photons) to the point where it can pass through the body and be detected on the other side then it is sufficiently energetic to be ionising.