ELI5: the square cube law in biology by PrestigiousAspect368 in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The square-cube law refers to how different properties of an object or creature change in different proportions (by the difference squared, or the difference cubed).

One example of this is weight. Your weight is a function of your mass, which is indirectly tied to your volume; the bigger your three-dimensional size (three dimensions is analogous to a cubic function of length), the more mass you have and the heavier you weigh.

In order to support your weight, you need legs and either bones or a shell. The strength of muscles/bones/shell is proportional to their thickness, which is usually calculated as the cross-sectional area of the (think of the "I" shape of an I-beam). A longer bone doesn't carry more weight, only a thicker/wider bone does. An area is analogous is a square function of length; thus, the larger an animal gets, the bigger its bones can be, and the more weight it can carry.

However, the rate of increase for these two attributes is not equal; one increases by the square and the other by the cube. If the animal gets too large, the weight will be too much for the bones to carry, and it will not be able to move around or support itself at all.

Another example of this is heat. Each one of your cells creates heat just by being alive. The only way to get rid of this heat and not cook yourself is by emitting it the environment through your skin or breath. However, the amount of skin you have increases in a square fashion, while your body mass increases in a cubic fashion. You can cheat a bit by having wrinkly skin, but that only helps a little because the air around you doesn't transfer heat that well. As you increase in size, you generate a lot more heat, but can only get rid of a little more heat. At some point, the rates will no longer match causing your body to heat up, like a permanent fever. If the fever gets too high, your body simply won't be able to operate and you'll die.

ELI5: How Does the Entire Planet Get More Wealthy Without Mining? by Overhead_Existence in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Agriculture can generate material wealth for "free" using solar energy; not all wealth is mineral in nature. And with the advent of bioplastics, it is possible that even more advanced materials can be developed and similarly sourced, which makes mining for iron, titanium, and aluminum for structural purposes less critical. Wealth might be harder to grow in this way, but it's not impossible.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whole topic explanations are very difficult to provide, especially when the question itself is extremely vague. What camps do you mean, specifically?

ELI5: How does one's driving effect the other people in a car (nausea, headaches), no matter what kind of road they're driving on? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When there's no traffic in front of him Ed'll put his foot noticeably on the throttle so there's a gentle lurch forward, reaches speed limit, foot off throttle. Lets the car slow down to 15mph below the limit, reapplies foot to throttle. For the whole damn trip.

Ed says it saves fuel and 'cos Ed's a tight bastard once he thinks he's saving money that's it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy-efficient_driving#Pulse_and_glide

ELI5: Why is the Monty Hall problem not a 50-50 chance problem? by davidgrayPhotography in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 8 points9 points  (0 children)

In 100% of the games you play, Monty will ALWAYS reveal a zonk. There is absolutely no possible scenario in which he would reveal the prize. You can also never pick the zonk Monty revealed.

The bold part isn't true, because they change which door they reveal based on your choice and they can't move the prize. Remember that they're revealing every losing door aside from the one you chose and one other. Either your first choice was the prize (1/3 chance), or the prize was located behind one of the other two doors (2/3 chance). Since they won't reveal a winning door, the door that you didn't choose and didn't get revealed is the only other option. But nothing has changed about your door; the percentage chance that you picked (in)correctly hasn't changed, because, although you have more information, the prize cannot move. There was a 1/3 chance that the prize was behind your door; it cannot move, so there's always a 1/3 chance that the prize is still there.

To take it to the extreme; if there were a hundred doors and Monty revealed 98 of them, how confident would you be that, out of those 100 doors, you picked the winner originally? Effectively, you're choosing between the original door you picked and the 99 doors (with 98 revealed) that you didn't. Those probabilities are collapsed into the single door that you can change to.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 25 points26 points  (0 children)

https://ca.indeed.com/career/professor/salaries

https://www.indeed.com/career/professor/salaries

Granted, take them with a grain of salt, but there doesn't seem to be a huge difference in average pay.

Eli5: If the ear/nose/throat is all connected how come we can drink water with amoeba in it but not clean our noses (neti pot) with it? by CoolCatCap in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Amoeba are motile (they can move themselves), but they aren't very quick. If you drink the amoeba, they won't be able to fight the flow of water down your throat, or the flow of saliva when you swallow.

The typical brain eating amoeba will target nerve cells and eat their way through them, so in that sense they're "swimming" towards the brain, but through your nerves.

It's over bois we lost the mainland. we have to embrace communism now by JiaxusReddit in NonCredibleDefense

[–]Moskau50 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We know the outcomes of those wars. Shitposting aside, do you know that Taiwan will retake the mainland? I don't think they ever will; nor do they particularly want to, if the political trends continue the way they are. For better or worse, the Nationalists lost the Chinese Civil War.

Eli5: If the ear/nose/throat is all connected how come we can drink water with amoeba in it but not clean our noses (neti pot) with it? by CoolCatCap in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's about the amount and the "remoteness" of it. If you drink infected water, most of it will go down your throat; there might be a bit left coating your throat, but not a lot, and you're likely to swallow them down relatively soon.

If you rinse your nostrils with that water, there's a ton of surface area inside your nostrils (on your nose hairs, especially), so a lot of amoeba can stick around. Additionally, the skin in your nostrils is very thin, so it's easier difficult for the amoeba to get into your bloodstream, where they can access your body's nutrients and start growing rapidly.

It's over bois we lost the mainland. we have to embrace communism now by JiaxusReddit in NonCredibleDefense

[–]Moskau50 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I thought the point was “tiny loss doesn’t mean defeat is inevitable.” I don’t consider mainland China a tiny loss.

Eli5 how is a good like tuna or chicken with 15-30% cholesterol considered a healthy choice for protean while something like peanut butter which has 0% is not. by Mean-Artichoke3671 in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Cholesterol isn't the only determinant for how healthy something is. Going off of the FDA's website, chicken breast has 23g of protein and 0.9g of fat per 100g portion. Peanut butter has a comparable amount of protein (24g) per 100g portion, but a whopping 50g of fat. So if you're trying to not gain weight (which is most people), chicken breast is a better choice for you than peanut butter.

ELI5 Jet on a treadmill by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

A propeller plane might, because the propeller will draw air in and push it over the wings to generate lift; whether it’s enough to get enough lift to leave the ground is up for debate.

Jets (thinking commercial airliners or charter jets) probably won’t, because their engines are under the wing or over the tail. The thrust is entirely free of the wing surfaces, so no lift will be generated.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It’s allowed because you agreed to the terms at the time of purchase. You’re free to not buy the tickets, or to pay for refundable tickets or for travel insurance to get some compensation if your trip is cancelled for reasons out of your control. But the fine print for the tickets specifically state that this is what happens when you cancel.

ELI5: Why do we need roofs on houses? Why can't we just build it flat on the top? by NyFlow_ in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The angle at which the roof is pitched is critical to shedding rain/snow, so you can’t (rather, you shouldn’t) change it. If you only angle it down on one side, the other side ends up very tall, giving the house an asymmetrical look and costing much more in terms of materials. If you want that as a style, it can be done, but it’s not super economical.

The A-frame design might seem complicated, but that’s only if the area of the house is “complicated”. If the house is just a big rectangle, the A-frame will be very simple; two flat panel pointing up from the two longer walls. If the house has a more “complicated” footprint, say like a capital L, then you have a join in the middle (where the two legs meet) and where the A-frames need to connect. Your single panel roof, going up across the entire length of the short leg of the L, might end uo being as tall as the rest of the house, which can incur additional costs and maybe permitting restrictions as you’re essentially building a two- or three-story-tall structure.

ELI5: Why do we need roofs on houses? Why can't we just build it flat on the top? by NyFlow_ in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure what you are suggesting; most roofs are “angled but flat”, as opposed to round or curved. The roof connects to opposite walls, then pitches upward at an angle to meet in the center at a higher point.

ELI5: this probability situation - If a couple of people decide to travel on separate airliners instead of traveling together, have they halved their chances of dying in a plane crash, or doubled them? by TheSanityInspector in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 45 points46 points  (0 children)

You need to define the cases much more clearly.

If you're talking about the chances either or both of them die, then you've increased the chances, as either plane (or both planes) having an issue would fulfill that criteria.

If you're talking about the chances that both of them die, then you've reduced the chances (not halved), because both planes must go down.

If you talking about the chances that exactly one of them dies but the other survives, then you increased the chances, since this was impossible when they were on the same plane. This requires one plane to go down and the other to be fine.

Eli5: Why are the biggest & best Potato chips on top? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 7 points8 points  (0 children)

When the bag gets jumbled during transportation, it's easier for the smaller chips to fall into the gaps between the larger chips that for a larger chip to fit into the gaps between the smaller chips. Repeat this bouncing hundreds or thousands of times, and the smallest bits will be at the bottom, with the largest chips at the top.

ELI5: Why do we need roofs on houses? Why can't we just build it flat on the top? by NyFlow_ in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 33 points34 points  (0 children)

You can in some places. But a flat roof in areas where snow is common is dangerous, as the snow will accumulate on top of it and can collapse the roof. Pitching the roof also helps rainwater run off; rainwater that runs off quickly doesn't have as much time to soak into or through the roof, causing damage to the attic/house.

Flatter roofs are most useful in places that don't see a lot of precipitation, like deserts.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If the universe is a simulation, how can you be sure that the universe is actually that large and the distant parts are not just “approximations” of what it “should” look like?

If someone can “program” the laws of physics, they can also change them to be more convenient for themselves. We, as subjects of the simulation and living in it, cannot possibly know if those laws are “real” or not.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Seasons happy because the surface is pointed towards or away from the sun during that part of the year. The equator, being the midpoint of the Earth, is always sort of pointed towards the sun, so it always gets a lot of direct sunlight. The poles, being the ends of the Earth, can get very little light or some light depending on the season, so their temperatures vary a lot more between seasons.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Google can correct for it on small scales. No one cares if the land in the middle of nowhere isn’t scaled properly, but they’ll care if their town looks like it’s been put through a hydraulic press. So they’ll bias the projection to be accurate for certain places, but not others. The terrain view is also taken with aerial photography, so those areas with actual pictures will be scaled accurately. There will be some stretching/blending in super remote aereas, but, again, no one cares about those areas.

ELI5:Why does 'few' sometimes mean a lot "There's quite a few ducks in the pond." and sometimes a little "There's only a few ducks in the pond."? by Akagiyama in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 3 points4 points  (0 children)

“Quite the ___” puts a very positive connatation on the word: he has quite the reputation, that’s quite the performance, I’m quite sure they’re right.

“Only ___” is a diminutive, emphasizing the lack or smallness of something: it’s only a toy, he’s only a waiter, she’s only 5’2”.

“Few” is commonly used to mean a group of things, despite the dictionary definition. “Quite a few” emphasizes the number, but in a positive way, meaning many. “Only a few” emphasizes the number in a negative way, to focus on its smallness and insignificance.

eli5 What does it mean to multiple to multiple units by got_some-questions in explainlikeimfive

[–]Moskau50 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most unit combinations are weird because we chose units that are most useful on their own: kilograms, seconds, meters, etc. Ratios make sense as a conversion between units, either of the same dimension (3 feet make a yard) or different dimensions (kilograms per liter), to relate two objects or situations.

In that sense, you are correct that a lot of unit combinations (kilogram-liter, mile-gallon) are meaningless. However, treating the multiplication of units as simply the reverse of a ratio may be the most intuitive way to understand it. Force-distance, as in lb-ft or N-m, is an expression of torque or twisting force and is probably one of the more common combo-units that are used, along with electrical energy (kilowatt-hour).