Well... I could
...but I won't wouldn't have -- before OP's augmentation below.
If you know, and the person you'll be directing here is your peer or subordinate, there's no reason to inconvenience multitudes of electrons to -- educate the other person / win your bet / whatever. That's what peers and supervisors are for.
And if your target audience is someone who is your workplace and classroom superior, think of the rewards providing your own explanation -- with well-researched and thoughtfully-presented documentation.
Note that I have not assumed inappropriate laziness nor any misrepresentation of your knowledge (but neither have I rejected either as a working hypothesis). However, I do believe this <update>was</update> is a hopelessly inappropriate SOPW.
Update: Most objections satisfied. See OP's reply (below) which provided sufficient information to justify (IMO) approving the original node, above.
In reply to Re: Could someone please explain...
by ww
in thread Could someone please explain...
by raisputin
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |