Compiler converts the code into Machine level language from the first line to the last and then when the program is actually executed, it uses the machine level code. An interpreter converts it to machine level when it runs. Another difference is, compiler will show all errors in the code at once. In case of interpreter, it shows one at a time. I.e. when the interpreter encounters an error, it won’t go to the next line without fixing the error in the current line.

As the other comment says, there is experimentation, however there's a really fine line when it comes to pointe shoe safety and comfort, and it's hard to replicate in any way that makes them sustainable.

A dancer needs to have complete confidence and control over their feet (think of all the spinning and leaping), if they aren't molded perfectly to the dancer's liking it can cause hesitation, discomfort or bad fitting, which can cause injuries.

Source: Did ballet up to a professional standard and tried many different pointe shoe styles to find the one that worked for me

With a compiled language, the human friendly code that gets written is compiled in advance before the code can be run, which may take some significant amount of time depending on complexity, into generally faster and more efficient "machine code" which is what computers actually understand.

Interpreted languages don't get compiled, their code gets translated on the fly between the human friendly code and and what the machine can understand. The advantage of interpreted languages is that they're generally easier and you can test and work out bugs more quickly without spending time compiling.

As a trade off, the interpreted languages can take significantly longer to run the same functions. Which isn't a problem on the small scale, but and add up a lot with more complexity.

Damn where were you when i needed to write an essay. So nicely worded.

There are programming languages and machine code. Your computer can only understand machine code, so in order to run a program, you need to translate the code you wrote in a programming language into machine code.

There are two ways two do this. Compiling your code means that all the code you wrote is analyzed and translated into machine code ahead of time, so everything is ready when it’s time to run your program. Interpreting means that your code is being translated line by line as it’s being run.

Compiled languages are written in human readable form and then a program compiles the instructions into something that the computer later run and directly.

An interpreted language is read by another program and interpreted into something the computers understands when it runs.

https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/compiled-versus-interpreted-languages/

Because those are the doctors laymen interact with. Many times in my life I have needed a doctor, and it has never been a doctor of music.

A compiled language gets converted to machine language (that's what compiling means). This makes it more efficient in many ways, but TL;DR: it'll run faster. Also nobody can look at your code.

Interpreted language is never compiled, as such. You run the interpreter, which reads the file, and translates it to machine language on the fly. This is a lot slower, but means development can be a lot faster and simpler.

Alzheimer's is just a specific type of dementia, but there are others. It's like a square is a rectangle, but not all rectangles are squares.

[deleted]

[removed]

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

• ELI5 requires that you search the ELI5 subreddit for your topic before posting. Users will often either find a thread that meets their needs or find that their question might qualify for an exception to rule 7. Please see this wiki entry for more details (Rule 7).

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

They are sort of, but assembled into packs that are larger and bolted together to maximize space and reduce wiring. If you remove the seats and some covers they are relatively easy to get out most times, but they are still high voltage and can easily harm you if you aren't careful.

There is not much difference between the battery cells and the ones in drill batteries, but if you needed 100 drill batteries to use your car the packaging would take up lot of space, and then you would need more wiring because you have wiring inside the drill batteries and wiring to get the batteries from the receptacle to the rest of the vehicle.

The battery packs last long enough that making them difficult to get out isn't an issue. You can service individual cells or groups of cells, but getting an entire refurbished unit is recommended because if ones going bad you may end up fixing more not long after.

The threshold is that there's less than X% chance this occurred due to random events unless we mucked something up

Replication is critical for showing that something weird actually is happening and there isn't a quirk in the setup.

If you're testing say a sweet electrically powered EmDrive that could be used on spaceships and your test measures something well above the noise floor of the system then the drive works! Right? Mmmm but what if those big ol' power cables happen to be interacting with the Earth's magnetic field? Whoops! Drive is garbage, and the setup had a parameter that wasn't accounted for!

Or maybe you measure some neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light! But you forgot to account for the time to sync the clock on the surface with the one underground resulting in all of your time measurements on just one end being offset

Just because you can do something once doesn't mean you did what you intended to do. There are plenty of experiments that have produced the desired result because that's what people wanted to happen but were unintentionally setup incorrectly or had quirks which made it look like the desired result was real even though it was something unrelated

Because those are the kinds of doctors that most people personally know and interact with. Not everyone has met someone who is a doctor of literature or engineering or physics, etc., but from infancy everyone sees a medical doctor a few times a year. There might be more PhD's than MD's, but they don't tend to work with the general population quite as much as MD's.

What i'm saying is even if you take 10 cards, shuffle them and put them back with the rest, that 52 card order is still one of the many possible orders that could happen if you shuffled all the cards( it would be a bad one but still ine of the possibilities.

Same as what are the chance the a 5 ball lottery winning ticket is X-Y- 48-49-50. Is it a bad sequence but it is still a ticket that has as the same chance of winning as a really random ticket like 9-23-29-36-42..

Yeah, you could subdivide the PhD group in any way you want, and that would surely reduce their numbers. Then again, if you do that, then you could include lawyers (Juris Doctor) and that number would go up again.

In the USA, there are maybe a couple hundred thousand more JDs than MDs.

Yeah, currently we address people by their job title, so the PhD's tend to be addressed as "professor" rather than "doctor".

But we do use "doctor" for the honorific that goes with the person's name, for example you called Thomas Aquinas "St." (saint), he could also be addressed as "Dr. Aquinas".

I wonder how it stacks up if you group them. Like, I don't know what would be an equivalent tier group as "medical" but maybe literary, theoretical sciences, something like that. If you could come up with an equivalent group, does medical have the most doctors per group? If it's 3:1 and there are more than 4 such groups, then it would stand to reason...

To be fair, I thought you were right, but I was curious so looked it up.

I stand corrected then. Thank you

There are about three time as many PhDs than MDs in the USA. About 3 million to 1 million.

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Rule #2 - Questions must seek objective explanations

• Straightforward or factual queries are not allowed on ELI5. ELI5 is meant for simplifying complex concepts (Rule 2).

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

The way the language evolved, the meaning of the word doctor changed from "teacher" to "physician." If I am not mistaken, back in the middle ages, a doctor was more often to be considered a doctor of theology (which is why you often hear people call St. Aquinas "The Doctor").

You may want to ask this to /r/AskHistorians because I doubt that there is a simple answer to how this word changed meaning.

Most people are familiar with medical doctors than academic doctors. I'm not sure on the numbers, but I'd wager that there are more medical doctors than academic doctors as well.