Recent comments in /f/explainlikeimfive

tdscanuck t1_ja620w3 wrote

Have to be a little careful here...lots of carbon-based organic compounds melt. Like pretty much all plastics, fats, waxes, etc.

It just happens that the main compounds in wood (lignin, cellulose) are heavily cross-linked and undergo thermal decomposition into things that burn before they reach melting temperature under normal conditions.

10

icpooreman t1_ja60943 wrote

The big bang happened everywhere. We can only see as far into the past as the radiation from that event will let us.

Pretend you’re at a fixed point inside a very smoky half filled balloon. Then somebody starts filling the balloon with clear air and now you can start seeing stuff as the smoke disappates. But you can never really see what the inside of the balloon was like before or during the smoky period.

And the balloon just keeps expanding at an accelerating rate.

And also the balloon may be infinite / may have always been infinite / but you don’t know because you can’t see further back than the smoky period. You’ve never seen an edge, the smoke was the edge, was the smoke infinite? And the only thing you have to figure it out is math that you know is wrong.

Basically there may not be an edge. The big bang happened and we can’t see an edge in any direction. Just more places that experienced the big bang just like we did.

1

Lirdon t1_ja5znp3 wrote

Wood is not a basic element, its a lot of organic material made of carbon, and carbon, in general doesn’t melt, it sublimes. While metals have a melting point that is achievable, carbon melting point is like 3,5K degrees and before that it combusts and becomes smoke.

EDIT: I was corrected, there are carbon based organic compounds that melt, like plastics. But it so happens that compounds in wood do not. Just for clarification.

21

TheRealStorey t1_ja5zb7s wrote

It was made to be universally transferable, everyone has water, there is a standard meter stick in France and it was updated to the length traveled by some light so it's universally reproducible. SAme with a second, it's the vibrations of some atom, but the idea is anyone can perform the same experiment anywhere and have the same precise measurement.

1

LogosPlease t1_ja5z9oc wrote

The carbon bonds release a lot of energy when exposed to a little heat and oxygen. Metal will melt after you put intense amounts of energy into it because it doesn't have carbon or carbon bonds with energy. If you take a lighter to (most) metals they will not experience any physical changes. Carbon can melt but it has to be at incredibly high temps to do so.

0

Antman013 t1_ja5ym0u wrote

58 YO male who stopped going to the gym in 1990. At the time I was 6'4" and weighed ~275 lbs. with around 10% body fat.

In October of 2021, I started a new job and stepped on a pallet scale, and weighed 316 lbs. Last Monday I was 299, and the wife and I have started moderate workouts. Swimming yoga, cardio.

​

All this by way of telling you that your muscles WILL atrophy from lack of use, and it is NOT easy to regain either muscle mass OR flexibility once you do. We plan on retiring in a couple years, by which time I hope to be down to around 250, and have more flexibility and cardio, if not necessarily bulk.

4

UnadvertisedAndroid t1_ja5xbwn wrote

This works because you're "pin hole" is filtering out "noise" by limiting the light coming into your eye to the light coming off of what you're aiming at only. Not because it focuses anything, your eye is still doing the focusing, it's just not having to deal with a bunch of extra light that isn't part of what you're looking at.

9

waitforthestopsign t1_ja5vh3d wrote

As I understand it, it's because you are restricting the variance in the angles of light rays that enter your eye and hit the retina.

The way your eyes (and cameras) work is by using three different components to focus light to create an image. First, you have the retina, in the case of a camera a sensor, which is what captures the photons and creates the image. If you have just the sensor, then light hits it from every direction, and you just get a blur with varying intensity. So you have to do two things to get a clear image: you have to focus the light rays and you have to eliminate light rays that are interfering with the image. Focussing the light rays works by using a lens, which both your eye and a camera have. They refract the light rays in a way, so that they converge ideally at exactly the point where the sensor/retina is located, producing a sharp image. But this still leaves you with a problem. If you have a sensor and a lens, you can focus the light rays, but you also receive all of the light that is not being focussed. So the other thing that both a camera and your eye have is a small opening in front of the sensor, that restricts the angle at which light can enter and hit the sensor, in the case of a camera that is the aperture and in case of your eye that is the iris. If you have ever used a camera and are slightly familiar with the settings, you may know that decreasing the aperture (increasing the fstop) increases the depth of the area that is in focus. This happens because by making the hole smaller, you are cutting out some of the light rays, which means cutting out some of the variance in the angles at which light hits the sensor, which makes more of the image in focus (although this isn't the only factor that determines sharpness of course). And that is also what you are doing with your hand in front of your eye, decreasing the aperture, reducing the variance in the angles of light rays that enter your eye, therefore making up for what your lens may not be able to focus properly. This is actually how a camera obscura works. It uses no lens, but only a tiny opening relative to the "sensor", therefore cutting out all light except for the rays that enter at a very specific angle, and thus producing a relatively sharp image, if the sensor is the right distance from the opening.

11

jaa101 t1_ja5tznj wrote

Objects being out of focus is due to them being viewed from multiple locations, i.e., by all the points on the surface of the lens. Pinhole cameras, which have just one tiny hole instead of a lens, see everything as being in focus but, of course, the image is extremely dim. You need a lens to gather more light but then you need to choose the distance to focus on. The bigger the lens, the smaller the range of distances that are in focus at once. Photographers call this range of distances the "depth of field" and they know that adjusting the "aperture" of their lens (the size of the hole in the lens) will control the depth of field.

This is also why focusing is easier for people in bright sunlight, because then their pupils shrink down to a small hole. In dim light with large pupils, focusing needs to be more accurate.

6

garlopf t1_ja5tqgd wrote

You can block sound completely by isolating the source of the sound from the ear with vacuum. As sound is waves traveling through matter, it can only travel where there is matter.

Light on the other hand is electro magnetic waves, which will travel wherever there is an electro magnetic field, including in vacuum. Light will interact with matter and you can block light completely by enclosing it in reflective and/or bsorbent material.

1

VisualImportance5837 t1_ja5sinv wrote

Immunotherapy is a new type of drug technology. The drugs are new with a ton of nasty and unexpected side effects.

Doctors technically can prescribe any drug for any reason. However, they usually prefer to only prescribe drugs where the drug has had a clinical trial to show that the drug works in that situation. Similarly, the FDA won't approve a drug for use in a particular situation, unless there is a clinical trial showing that the drug is safe and effective in that situation.

The problem is getting clinical trials done. If a drug is brand new, with a ton of side effects and quite likely many unknown serious side effects, who is going to volunteer for a trial. Not just that, but is it ethical for a doctor to do a trial on a pore tally dangerous treatment, if there is already something which works.

When it comes to new drugs, the first clinical trials to be done tend to be done in situations where there is nothing else available. In this case, it is ethical to get volunteers for the new treatment, as the only alternative is no treatment.

Most of the clinical trials for immunotherapy fall into this category, although as doctors get more experience, and the drugs are better understood, there are some clinical trials looking at earlier use being prepared or are underway.

0

mandobaxter t1_ja5sebb wrote

Because you’re making all the incoming light rays pass through a tiny opening, which brings them into focus. It’s the same principle behind a pinhole camera. In theory, the smaller hole you make the more the image will be in focus, though in practice a smaller hole also limits the amount of light that passes through, which also makes the image dimmer.

38