Same for my grandpa. He was a radio operator in WW2 as a very young man. One year in the 90s we got Walkie-Talkies for Christmas and he fired off a full paragraph of text.

Humans are most definitely animals. We are very smart apes, but we are still apes. We still have natural instincts we need to fight against or work with.

That's awesome, my entire life I thought it was a dead/dying skill set; had no idea it was still in common use. Thank you!

Brains perfectly work rationally while horny, humans aren't animals. The same argument can be used to justify rape

People don't think clearly when they're horny. If they're in bed with someone, and they just found out they're out of condoms, chances are they're going to risk it and have unprotected sex. Of course as soon as sex is finished they'll realize their huge mistake, but in the moment the brain doesn't work rationally.

International airports are also a status symbol welcoming people from all over into a country or major city. So they make them airy and light and impressive. Eg. The waterfall in the Singapore Airport is just a giant "look how rich we are" sign.

Yeah true, but seems so unnecessary being this tall

I don't think there is any actual architectural reason, just aesthetics and design

Places with very high ceilings feel more roomy than ones with small ceilings, and airports get very crowded, so a more roomy feeling will make passengers feel better about the space.

Also you, as a passenger, only see a small part of the airport. There is a whole other ecosystem of people working and running the place, usually on floors above the bottom floor, which means the cieling is higher to allow extra floors

Links on social media include unique identifiers that are passed through to analytic software. Fb click ids, google click ids, everyone has click ids.

When you make a purchase on a site they will tell facebook that your browser made a purchase so keep finding users like you.

The analytic software will use cookies, ip addresses, and other unique data about you. All of your transactions are tracked and you will be remembered when you return to the site.

Ohhh interesting

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

Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions.

Joke only comments, while allowed elsewhere in the thread, may not exist at the top level.

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.

Lower ceilings tend to create the feeling of being in a cramped space, which is something many modern renovation/construction projects try to avoid

[removed]

[removed]

Basically, they found themselves in a siege on a continental scale.

Essentially, Squirrels use their tails to steer in the air by using the fluff as air resistance. by flattening their bodies and using their tails as a rudder, they can reduce their terminal velocity so much they can fall from any height unharmed.

​

Mark Rober has a 3 part series all about squirrels and how they jump where he builds an obstacle course for them. He has a pretty good explanation of how squirrel's tails factor into their jumping begging at 16:10 in this video: https://youtu.be/hFZFjoX2cGg.

Please read this entire message

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

Questions about a business or a group's motivation are not allowed on ELI5. These are usually either straightforward, or known only to the organisations involved, leading to speculation (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 Diet Coke of Evil

[deleted]

I'll take The rapists for $600

[removed]

That’s a bummer. A democratic club like that might have an opportunity to show off what a healthy democracy looks like. Most of the organizations that succeed in this simply ignore everything they doesn’t stay exactly on message and refuse to reply to a quickly churning news cycle with inevitably reactionary rhetoric.

I'd like to note that you can also see 13.6 billion light years away with your eyes. There's no limit to distance other than whether or not there's anything to see. Telescopes collect light; they don't somehow probe out to a certain point and stop there.

The functional limit is determined by two things: resolution and wavelength. For complicated reasons involving the expansion of space-time, anything really far away is going to show up as longer wavelengths than if you were close by it. The longer the wavelength, the bigger a detector you need to gain good resolution. JWST looks at part of the infra-red range, so it's calibrated generally for further objects than (for instance) Hubble was, and consequently the collection area (the mirrors) had to be a lot bigger. That imposes a limit of how detailed an image we can resolve.

Resolution itself is a bit more straightforward: sure, you can see far away, but how much detail can you see? Not much! Telescopes like this can see with many times the resolution of a human eye, but they're also looking at things that would be unimaginably tiny in the sky. Remember, if something is twice as far away, it will appear half as wide. And now we're talking about things many of orders of magnitude further away than anything you can make out in detail with your eye. That's the limit that's important here, not strictly how far away it is.

If you look at the moon with your eyes, you can see a decent amount of detail. You can see some different kinds of terrain. You probably can't see the small craters that cover its surface. They just don't take up enough angular size in your vision.

The sun, coincidently, is about the same width in our sky. Yet it is 400 times wider than the moon. It's also about 400 times further away.

Alpha Centauri, the sun's nearby star system, is about 100 million times further away from us than the moon is. To see one of the stars there in the same detail we can see from the nearby moon, we'd need a telescope with 100 million times the resolving power of our eyes. And we just don't have one. Not even Webb comes close. Webb has an angular resolution of about 0.1 arc seconds. The human eye can do about 60 arc seconds, so Webb's acuity is about 600 times greater than the human eye. That's great, but a very far shot from 100 million. And we're talking about something the size of a star, and one of the very nearest ones. Looking at a planet much further away...it's simply way out of our capability.

The cool thing though is that there are tricks we can use to add different observations together into higher quality ones, so we aren't as far away from the goal as it looks. But it's still very complicated and takes a lot of combined observing time, and you still need to target to be bright enough to detect well, which distant planets aren't.

🤣 I am sure I remember alan davis and stephen fry doing a bit on QI due to analbumcover

[removed]