Since vodka is technically purified distilled spirits cut with purified water, you can make vodka from almost anything that isn't corn or sugarcane.

Distillation is a separation method that requires different boiling points of unbonded components. Such as alcohol and water.

So if there are two liquids that boil ( turn to gas) at differing temperatures then yes; it is can be distilled*.

• There might be other factors that result in complications such as chemical bonds that trigger at temperatures

FYI, it's called fermentation, not distillation. Fermentation is the process of producing alcohol (or some other byproduct) from sugars, while distillation is the process of separating that alcohol from the rest of the drink (resulting in high alcohol content). Low alcohol drinks such as beer and wine are usually undistilled.

And yes, you can basically ferment anything with sugar, including bananas.

Yes. You can make coconut wine and banana brandy if the starter mash has enough sugar content to ferment properly.

I have had banana whiskey.

I truly do not recommend it.

anything containing sugar, yeah.

I only recently found out that you can distill old bread into vodka.

I get the exact same thing with fresh pineapple and kiwi. Not mango though.

And not cooked or canned pineapple. I believe cooking/canning it kills the enzyme.

[removed]

They have been, but oceans are massive (to put it lightly) and so it takes a lot to raise them significantly.

There is absolutely no need for what you are suggesting.

The world has always had different languages since before even the beginning of recorded history, we generally just choose one of them as an intermediary, so that people are free to use their own language 90% of the time, but can reliably count being able to use a second language when the need arises.

In other words, we already have 'one language' that we use to communicate cross cultures, and none of us have had to stop using our own language in the process of learning it. What you are suggesting would actually be an incredible amount of effort towards putting ourselves in a situation with no practical or logical benefit, it would be like suggesting everyone would find it easier to have one arm when they already have two. It is like trying to suggest that bilingualism is a burden, rather than a blessing.

The unique position that English speakers have, is that since English is that language for the time being, we almost suffer from the effect of 'tyranny of choice' when choosing a second language to learn. In the times when French or Latin were used as international languages, not learning them would have been a sign of someone having very poor education, however now, lack of ability in foreign languages is pretty much the norm, and from this position, where most people have no perspective on how empowering it is to speak more than ones own native language, we find that people seriously suggest everyone else should do away with their own, for the sake of making our own lives easier than they already are.

[deleted]

It'll surprise you to learn that not everyone thinks in words. Personally, all of my thoughts are words. The idea that your thoughts couldn't be words is just so alien to me that people who report it must be lying or just incapable of actually understanding it but that's a bit presumptuous.

I think it's only like 50% of people have this inner voice and by some estimations only 25% of people do. A huge chunk of the population just has images and no inner speech.

An interesting article with people describing what it is like. Some people have an internal monologue all the time (like me, I'm pretty sure it is all the time), some people do sometimes and not others, and others never have an internal monologue ever.https://www.iflscience.com/people-with-no-internal-monologue-explain-what-its-like-in-their-head-57739

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/pristine-inner-experience/201110/not-everyone-conducts-inner-speech

>Inner speech occurred in about a quarter of all samples, inner seeing occurred in about a quarter of all samples, and feelings occurred in about a quarter of all samples. The other two phenomena occurred just as frequently but are not so well known.

I don't know how valid this study was, I'm not a scientist.

Alex berenson is exhibit A. He was kicked off for covid misinformation, then later sued Twitter and won. He forced them to reinstate his account because what he said was known scientific fact at the time and not misinformation.

So yes it absolutely did happen.

> here are some strong ramifications to Facebook and Twitter being basically the public square of the Internet

They are not a 'public square' in any way shape or form, that the internets job, alone. Anyone pushing this angle has an agenda.

I wouldn't call that undermining freedom of association. You don't have to follow and can block people on twitter, for example. Just because a nazi is there doesn't mean you also being there means you support nazis by association, that's nonsensical.

That said, section 230 should not be overturned, and doing so opens a whole host of problems. Companies not associated with the government should have the ability to do what they want with their platform, within the boundaries of law. The effects of social media and its dominance in information, discourse and it's algorithmic attempt to keep you in a bubble is likely not good for society, and will have consequences we still can't foresee.

[removed]

Please site your source.

Alex Berenson was removed from Twitter for covid misinformation. He later sued Twitter and won. He forced them to reinstate his account because it was proven that what he was saying was not misinformation.

If electric current flows in a straight cable, it creates a magnetic field circling around it. If you bend the cable into a ring or a coil, then those little magnetic circles arrange to form electromagnet. What we take from this is that if electric charges are circling, there will be a magnet.

Now matte has lots of electron in it. Those things are electrically charged. But they also "spin". They are however infinitely small, so this spinning is a bit weird, but the same ideas apply. Hence they have a magnetic field by our previous observation; they are microscopic magnets. To get a macroscopic magnet, they need to be aligned so that their little magnets don't just cancel each other out.

In most matter, there are a lot of those little buggers, chaotically swirling around (metals, very hot "gas" [plasma]) or orbiting in atoms. The chaotic ones usually contribute nothing unless we create a current again or apply a magnet from the outside. They just point wherever they want.

Those in atoms follow some quantum rules, which tends to pair them in opposing directions; hence they cancel. They pair up, but sometimes one or more cannot find such a partner. This turns the entire atom into a slightly larger (but equally strong) magnet. Now most metals have those lonely electrons on the outside and they tend to join the swirling chaos, leaving their atom behind. But some atoms like iron or nickel have them a bit further on the inside where they stay. Thus those metals are effectively a lot of little magnets.

They are however still probably just pointing wherever they want. But if one gets them arranged properly in the same direction ("magnetizing"), then we finally got a magnet! This can be done in several ways, e.g. by an external magnet (might be electrical) forcing them to arrange; one usually then heats the piece of metal and cools it again, this will lock them in place so that they stay a magnet even if our external magnet is removed.

It's estimated that only between 30% and 50% of people have an inner monologue or the ability to hear their own voice in their head.

Those without an inner monologue have to consciously think about associating words with objects or thoughts in their heads.

Exactly what impact this has on peoples ability to think, problem solve, memory, processing speed is unclear but is being studied.

Arizona here can confirm.

It should only occur in the direction of travel of the object.

EDIT: Actually, length contraction occurs in a direction parallel to the direction of motion, not just the direction of motion. In other words, even if the object was going the exact opposite way as its original direction of motion, a stationary observer would still see the spaceship as being contracted. The only difference between moving toward a stationary observer and moving away from a stationary observer is that when moving toward the observer, the spaceship would be blue shifted and when moving away, the spaceship would be red shifted (relativistic doppler effect).

[deleted]

What's the point of language?

Generally speaking, we use language to communicate ideas and instructions to other humans. That's why language exists - because we can't read each other's thoughts, we use words to communicate the ideas contained within our brains.

So if we are thinking of something, at some point we need to communicate that information to someone else. In order to do that, we need to use words. And what is faster:

To have an abstract brain state and then try to convert that into words on the fly while talking to someone?

Or to format your thoughts in language to begin with so that when you need to communicate them to someone else, you already know how to?

I think that hypothesis more accurately explains why reptiles did not rise back up to the dominant roles that mammals filled. The fungi were fed in part by the massive die-off of plants and animals following the meteor.

There are also some evidence to suggest that a mass extinction due to natural climate change at the time was already beginning and the meteor cranked what was already a huge ecological upheaval to 11.

Please read this entire message

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

Loaded questions, or ones based on a false premise, are not allowed on ELI5. A loaded question is one that posits a specific view of reality and asks for explanations that confirm it. These usually include the poster's own opinion and bias, but do not always - there is overlap between this and parts of Rule 2. Note that this specifically includes false premises.

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.