Recent comments in /f/explainlikeimfive

JesseB342 t1_j2fe49c wrote

A hangover is basically moderate dehydration and all the symptoms associated with it (muscle fatigue, headache, slight nausea). This is caused by the liver trying to process and get rid of the alcohol you consume. One of the most efficient ways to do this is to break the sugars in the alcohol down and pass it out of the body as urine. So the more you drink the more dehydrated you actually become.

27

TJDG t1_j2fdkkd wrote

Assuming you mean financial interest, it works like this:

You start with £100 which you have deposited in a bank.

You get 5% interest per year.

After the first year you have £105, that's 100 * (1 + 0.05)

After the second year you have £110.25, that's 100 * (1 + 0.05)^2

After the third year, you have £115.76, that's 100 * (1 + 0.05)^3

And so on.

The bank pays you interest in order to incentivise you to put your money in the bank. The bank can then lend this money out to other people and make a profit from the difference between the loan interest (that the bank gets from the person with the loan) and the savings account interest (that the bank pays out to you).

Banks help the economy by strongly encouraging everyone to lend their money somewhere useful rather than stuff it under a mattress and have it do nothing.

Obviously there's a lot more to finance. Has that helped? What specific thing were you confused about?

7

Crepuscular_Oreo t1_j2fdd4p wrote

>I had no idea how fast blood moved but that's pretty incredible.

The speeds of various bodily processes are interesting. I have nerve damage. I was lying on the table at the doctor's office while they were testing the speed that signals travel from one part of my body to another. Being bored while the tests were going on, I did the math and calculated that the runners in the 100-meter dash at the Olympics run faster than my nerves send signals through my body. That seemed strange to me; I always thought of nerve signals being instant. It was several years ago so I don't remember the exact numbers.

1

MidnightAdventurer t1_j2fcrat wrote

Think of it as punishing you for not understanding your own budget properly - You set the budget, or at least contributed to setting it. If you asked for money you didn't need then there's a good chance that someone else missed out on funding for something because you said you needed the money. If it turns out that you were wrong, especially if you are regularly wrong then they'll start to think you're padding your budget estimates and cut them back on the assumption that you'll make do with a bit less since you usually don't spend it anyway

4

phdoofus t1_j2fcl9x wrote

I always find this kind of stupid because it means you don't recognize that you're just making your best guess as to how things will go and nothing ever works out that way. It's kind of like going through the whole 'goal setting' process once a year but at least everyone recognizes that you goals will evolve as the the year progresses because of things that arose that you had no ability to predict or predict accurately.

6

postorm t1_j2fcdhn wrote

I don't think that is true, or even possible. It does not generate the sound you are about to hear. That would require prescience. It generates the sound that you have just heard, on the assumption that the next sound will be the same. That's why it works well for fairly continuous background noise.

1

wbsgrepit t1_j2fc7vq wrote

This is kind of true and kind of false, Software speed is limited by the hardware it runs on — there is certainly software that is fast enough to do this work very well (given the right hardware to run on), however, given the constraints of many noise canceling headphones it is currently much more cost effective to bake that logic into chips especially designed for this work vs using a much more expensive general purpose cpu etc.

3

Phage0070 t1_j2fc3i4 wrote

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

ELI5 focuses on objective explanations. Soapboxing isn't appropriate in this venue.

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

1

comeonstupidurdumb t1_j2fb6jf wrote

This is called gating, and it's in another comment too. They use the same technique in other types of heart imaging as well as most are very motion sensitive.

I work in CT not MRI but in CT gating works by having the patient hooked up to an ECG machine that communicates with the CT computer, the computer assesses the patients heart rate while doing some breath hold exercises and gives a range of rates that it think the patients heart will be beating at during the duration of the scan. Then you can do two things, one is retrospective gating or prospective gating.

Retrospective gating scans the patient during their whole heart cycle from heart at rest to heart at rest again, and then takes all of that data to rebuild you a picture of the heart where the computer thinks it will be the most still. With this type of scanning you can go back and reconstruct better phases if the computer didnt end up making you the best possible images but it comes at the cost of radiating the patient when it is potentially unessessary and having a longer exposure time with increases overall dose to the patient.

With prospective gating you are only scanning when the computer thinks the patients heart is at rest, or in between beats, when the heart is the most still. With this type of scanning you have more limited reconstruction options because you have less scan time and less raw data but the patient receives less radiation dose.

Disclaimer that radiation does is not relevant to the MR imaging because magnetic resonance is not ionizing radiation.

Also, I am just learning cardiac scanning so feel free to point out any errors if there is someone in the comments with more experience!

11

coderedmountaindewd t1_j2fb5ps wrote

This was a big problem working (as a civilian) for the military. Budgets literally required acts of Congress to change and the massive amount of departments allocated to each of them were so far outside of my control. It could theoretically be done a thousand times more efficiently but that would require a whole bunch more micro research and management that ends up being considered more trouble than it’s worth.

2