explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

302: Names

2018-06-21T16:21:45Z

108.162.212.59: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number =302
| date =August 13, 2007
| title =Names
| image =names.png
| titletext =I'm always so happy that I successfully navigated the introduction that I completely forget to pay attention to the name the other person told me.
}}

==Explanation==
Everyone has had moments where they forget someone's name, even the name of someone pretty important. This doesn't often happen with one's own significant other, however, hence the joke.

Cueball has been in a relationship with someone, but does not know his girlfriend's name. He knows that the relationship has progressed to the point where asking for her name would be awkward and impolite, and so he waits for some one to call her by name. Cueball is excited when one finally does, only to reveal that they are in the middle of a wedding ceremony. It is hard to be in a relationship with someone if you don't know their name, and for said relationship to progress to the point of a wedding is simply incredulous.

It's sometimes tricky to say the right things during an introduction, and while making sure you don't make an incorrect response (replying to the question "How're you doing?" with "Not much," for example, mishearing the question as "What are you doing?"), one can sometimes forget to pay attention to the actual ''important'' part of the introduction: the person's name. And it's awkward to ask someone for their name when you ''should,'' by all rights, already know it.

Forgetting people's names is a frequent symptom of various social anxiety disorders, but it can happen to anybody at any time.

The use of the name Rachel might be a reference to the character from {{w|Friends}} to whom this happens at her wedding.

==Transcript==
:Cueball (thinking): I hate it when I don't know someone's name, but it's been long enough that it's too awkward to ask.
:[The scene is revealed to be at the altar getting married by a minister to a woman in a bridal dress.]
:Minister: Do you Rachel, take this man...
:Cueball (thinking): Aha! Rachel!

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Wedding]]
[[Category:Social interactions]]

Talk:1195: Flowchart

2017-11-14T22:27:16Z

108.162.212.59: Added a comment, suggesting another interpretation.

Assuming you've already started, it's too late to go get a marker. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 07:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

:You can add the "get a marker" in that looping line too. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

:If it is between the hours of 8:00 and 5:00, then I can escape, but that is only 37.5% of my day. Doomed, for all eternity. The solution proffered has the problem of the chicken and egg, how does one add get a marker if one does not have one. I like Hkmaly's idea... but proposes the additional questions of how: purchase, loot, or created. Each with their own rabbit trails to follow, ending in the pour house, prison, or crushed under the weight of the markers (mater being created?) But I feel there is a market to the other six billion inhabitants of earth that can be exploited. & Would Vulcans be more susceptible to entering into this loop than humans. [[Special:Contributions/24.106.78.38|24.106.78.38]] 10:37, 5 April 2013 (UTC) Drifter

:Straw Vulcans would be, certainly. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 15:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

that's the idea, its a commentary about nuclear weapons. if just one person hides a 'marker' up his sleeve when the rest of us genuinely have none, we're all at his mercy. [[Special:Contributions/193.60.97.30|193.60.97.30]] 08:52, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I think the currently provided explanation is not right. Randall wants us to get a marker BEFORE we get to 'start', hence the phrasing "between you and 'start'" (and not "between 'start' and 'Hey, wait, ...'"). That way when we get to the start, we already have a marker friend to aid us in our infinite quest. Or, perhaps, in other words, to stop being computerized sheep that follow set rules, but rather find an alternative solution ;) I'm new here, so I'll let somebody else edit the explanation if you deem it appropriate... [[User:Blue Charizard|Blue Charizard]] ([[User talk:Blue Charizard|talk]]) 13:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

: I thought that this is clearly correct, so I changed it even though I'm also new here. —[[User:TobyBartels|TobyBartels]] ([[User talk:TobyBartels|talk]]) 19:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Randall just wants us to change the algorithmic loop that we get into when we enter the flowchart and create a paradox to kill the Weeping Angels. [[User:Milar Kayne|Milar Kayne]] ([[User talk:Milar Kayne|talk]]) 14:24, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I was always taught to used lozenges for Start(s)/Stop(s). But YMMV. There are rectangles like above (lacking the curved sides) and small circles (without space for "Start" or "Stop", but contextualised with the uniquetous arrow-heads on each and every line). Also diamonds ''could'' be statements ("Check <foo> exists" -> Yes/No, or "<Foo> is.." -> A/B/C/... for multiple (2+?) exits), although that depends a lot on what style you're using, and I'm betting some would say it's deprecated. But don't mind me. [[Special:Contributions/31.111.77.19|31.111.77.19]] 17:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

After staring at the title text for a few minutes, I have another interpretation. You're already stuck in the loop. If there had been a box between "Start" and "Hey, wait" which said "Get marker", then you would have a marker already. If you suspend your logic for a moment to write the "Get marker", then afterwards your situation is self-consistent, because you already passed that point in the flowchart and you now have a marker with which you wrote it. (Well, sort of self-consistent.) ...Does that make sense to anyone besides me? [[User:Bplimley|Bplimley]] ([[User talk:Bplimley|talk]]) 05:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

: This is the correct explanation. Please put it into the page, replacing "there is no way to escape this loop". --Zverik

I see three boxes in this XKCD comic (third is quarter hidden by logic). I thought that we were suppose to be learning how to think outside the box in school... - [[Special:Contributions/50.143.22.159|50.143.22.159]] 12:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
:Perhaps the third box can be called life, should we really spend it paying outrageous prices for higher education? - [[Special:Contributions/50.143.22.159|50.143.22.159]] 23:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I added a transcript using some flowchart markup that I find at [http://flomojo.com/ FloMojo]. (Past transcripts in this category have used a variety of methods.) —[[User:TobyBartels|TobyBartels]] ([[User talk:TobyBartels|talk]]) 19:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Guys, I've discovered a serious flaw in the proposed solution. I got a marker and drew the extra boxes, but then I scrolled the web page and reset the zoom level. I can't get the boxes to line up anymore! This is bad; I'd do it in Photoshop but I've already entered the loop! Halp! [[User:Excrubulent|Excrubulent]] ([[User talk:Excrubulent|talk]]) 05:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

careful guys, there is potential for another infinite loop. apparently you need a box to make you get a marker. and you need a marker to make a box ... [[User:Peter|Peter]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 11:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hang on, if you didn't have a marker to begin with, there would be no marker to draw the loop with, and therefore no loop to get stuck in. Right? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 22:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1852: Election Map

2017-06-21T14:46:49Z

108.162.212.59:

Is that Georgia's 6th district? [[User:Homusubi|Homusubi]] ([[User talk:Homusubi|talk]]) 12:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
*Yup. See map [https://decisiondeskhq.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/GA06_HOUSE16.png here]. It looks a little squished, but that's probably to create the angled effect of the screen. [[User:AxleHelios|AxleHelios]] ([[User talk:AxleHelios|talk]]) 13:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:*It looks like it. That looks like the results from the recent (April) Special Election. There are one or two counties that aren't accurate (colored blue here that went red and vice versa), but I estimate a 99.9% chance that this is the 6th. [http://www.myajc.com/news/gen-politics/how-the-district-run-off-election-june-might-look/bHzbRfuZIWN8jOUTOSnQmM/ Here] are the election results. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 13:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::It's also supposed to be live coverage, so it might vary from the final results (ie, some are just projections). They seem fairly close ones too... SS07A was 56/43, AP01C was 53/46; AP14 was 51/48; SS12, AP09a and Blackwell 01 was 50/49 (albeit Blackwell swung red and the others swung blue)... there are probably more places colored wrong, but I've made my point and I'm too lazy to continue looking. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::(EDIT) Sorry, they were all red. And I think that includes ALL of the districts I mentioned Oh, and Sewell Mill 03 and JC08 also turned red. Perhaps the Democrats were a bit too optimistic when calling the projections? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Is it worth a mention that Randall came out as a strong Democrat in the comics last October, and thus, there's a secondary hidden meaning that the red districts are moving "away" from Cueball? [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:That is probably just a coincidence.[[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 15:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:I had that thought also, that the red districts/states/whatevers are figuratively moving away from the Dem's desired look for the country and the blues are moving toward it. But more than likely it's just a coincidence between [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift Red]/[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blueshift Blue] Shifts and the colors associated with the political parties. The title text regarding the Green Party lends itself to the coincidence argument more than a pre-planned correlation. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:In what way does endorsing one candidate over the other make him a "strong" Democrat? He could be a weak Democrat. Or anti-Republican. Or just anti-Trump. Or just pro-Hillary. You're drawing an interesting conclusion from just the October comic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 08:34, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:It's a coincidence, but it may well be a coincidence that Randall's intentionally playing on. (I suspect Randall's more anti-Trump than he is anti-Republican, and more anti-Republican than he is a "strong Democrat"; but that's neither here nor there.) [[User:Pelosujamo|Pelosujamo]] ([[User talk:Pelosujamo|talk]]) 12:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

It really seems more like the red is in the northwest and the blue is in the southeast. It's almost symmetric. In fact, if you tilt your head to the right, it almost looks like a blue flare dress with a blood splatter on the left side. ...Yeah, I suppose that was a bit morbid. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

While the pure physics explanation is good and probably right, given Randall's background, I'd point out that there's an alternate explanation: that's a Doppler weather RADAR storm-relative [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_radar#Velocity velocity] product, and the proximity of approaching and receding winds in certain patterns is an indicator of certain types of severe weather. Randall missed out on the opportunity to make a "political [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_echo hook echo]" joke. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.155|108.162.212.155]] 19:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:Nope. First I thought also about a weather report. But it shows the color green! This doesn't fit to the title text.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:10, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Which party is red and which is green? Sorry, I'm not from thé U.S. and don't know.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.10|162.158.238.10]] 20:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:D is blue and R is red. This should be mentioned at the explanation.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

; Greenshift

Dgbrt and I had a back and forth, where we started with the text, ''If the Green Party won, its regions would likely be colored green, which would not work for Cueball's Doppler effect analysis.''.
I noted "Greenshift doesn't implicitly break Dopper analysis, it just implies a great magnitude of shift. And a blueshift isn't necessarily a shift *TO* blue, merely TOWARDS blue (and Green)" and he replied "There is no greenshift in physics. It's either red (longer wavelength) or blue (shorter wavelength). This means when red appears as green it is blueshiftet." I don't quite see Dbrt's point with respect to the text, which now claims ''which would not fit to Cueball's Doppler effect analysis.''
Yes, we only talk about redshift and blueshift in physics, but those shifts don't give us a map with red and blue districts (or stars). They give us light that shifts slightly toward the red or slightly toward the blue (and toward the green). So it's not quite clear how to map red/blue districts to redshift/blueshift. But either way, green is not a problem -- it's not that it would "not work" or "not fit" as Dgbrt keeps editing the article to claim. It just would mean some districts were a lot more blue (or were green). Cueball could simply say "The green regions are approaching us REALLY FAST." Can someone justify Dgbrt's edits here? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 19:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:I am a physicist and in physics there is only redshift/blueshift used as a term for a shift to longer/shorter wavelengths. Most data is obtained beyond visible light and pictures are artificial enhanced. And the colors only represent the speed in respect to us. Red->away from us, white->no motion, and blue->object comes closer. All observations can be done without any color, only the spectral lines are analyzed. Red/blue just indicates the direction of the shift - forward/backward. No further directions are possible.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::I study astronomy and I confirm that red always represents maximum redshift and blue maximum blueshift (by maximum I mean maximum seen in that pecific observation). However, green and yellow are sometimes used to represent no or little motion. So green could match Cueball explanation, but only if it was near the center. However, the term "greenshift" never appears.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.245|162.158.91.245]] 22:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, there is no such term as "greenshift" in physics. But in the xkcd comic universe where red and blue represent redshift and blueshift, we are faced with the possibility of green. This implies it would be "greenshift," despite the term not existing. But whether we call it greenshift or not, that's not really the point: my point, which Dgbrt seems to disagree with, is that presence of green (whether it is called "greenshift" or "stronger blueshift") is not an inherent problem to Cueball's Doppler analysis. Or if it is, please explain why that's so? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:In theory, you could color-code your map differenty, so that green would indicate stronger blueshift than blue, and it would be perfectly correct map if labelled. This map, however, is not labelled for Doppler shifts, so Cueball is interpreting it according to traditional meanings of colors. If he was to consider green as "stronger blueshift", why not consider it as "stronger redshift"? Or, for that matter, why not consider red "blueshift", and blue "redshift"? That would be coorect as well. But having no other clues, he uses traditional meanings of colors.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.245|162.158.91.245]] 12:16, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:Notice the title-text. "Luckily for my interpretation" he says. This implies that he believes green would cause a problem with his interpretation, and thus would use a different interpretation in the presence of green. The possibility of greenshift simply doesn't exist here. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 17:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
::Yes, the joke is about red/blue-shift, nothing else. Scientific images are often much more colored, even maybe even only in green (from light to dark). But the image here is simple as it is. And consider that even the highest redshifted galaxies still appear in white to the human eye. We can not ''see'' that shift.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:09, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

; Off-topic

Is there any particular use of creating an account here? I can still make comments and edit explanations without one. What does an account actually mean? (Please delete if it's in wrong place) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.245|162.158.91.245]] 20:43, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:Hi 162.158.91.245... is one reason to register. You just will have a name others can remember. And when your IP is dynamic even you will not recognize your former edits. Furthermore members have a talk page and when you have a new message you will be informed. For further discussions you should look here [[explain xkcd:Community portal]] or maybe at someones talk page. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
:You also won't have to [http://imgur.com/a/9NWUd keep solving the CAPTCHA every time you want to comment]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 14:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1852: Election Map

2017-06-20T17:48:49Z

108.162.212.59: (grammar)

Talk:1852: Election Map

2017-06-20T17:44:34Z

108.162.212.59:

Is that Georgia's 6th district? [[User:Homusubi|Homusubi]] ([[User talk:Homusubi|talk]]) 12:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
*Yup. See map [https://decisiondeskhq.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/GA06_HOUSE16.png here]. It looks a little squished, but that's probably to create the angled effect of the screen. [[User:AxleHelios|AxleHelios]] ([[User talk:AxleHelios|talk]]) 13:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:*It looks like it. That looks like the results from the recent (April) Special Election. There are one or two counties that aren't accurate (colored blue here that went red and vice versa), but I estimate a 99.9% chance that this is the 6th. [http://www.myajc.com/news/gen-politics/how-the-district-run-off-election-june-might-look/bHzbRfuZIWN8jOUTOSnQmM/ Here] are the election results. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 13:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::It's also supposed to be live coverage, so it might vary from the final results (ie, some are just projections). They seem fairly close ones too... SS07A was 56/43, AP01C was 53/46; AP14 was 51/48; SS12, AP09a and Blackwell 01 was 50/49 (albeit Blackwell swung red and the others swung blue)... there are probably more places colored wrong, but I've made my point and I'm too lazy to continue looking. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::(EDIT) Sorry, they were all red. And I think that includes ALL of the districts I mentioned Oh, and Sewell Mill 03 and JC08 also turned red. Perhaps the Democrats were a bit too optimistic when calling the projections? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Is it worth a mention that Randall came out as a strong Democrat in the comics last October, and thus, there's a secondary hidden meaning that the red districts are moving "away" from Cueball? [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:That is probably just a coincidence.[[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 15:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:I had that thought also, that the red districts/states/whatevers are figuratively moving away from the Dem's desired look for the country and the blues are moving toward it. But more than likely it's just a coincidence between [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift Red]/[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blueshift Blue] Shifts and the colors associated with the political parties. The title text regarding the Green Party lends itself to the coincidence argument more than a pre-planned correlation. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:In what way does endorsing one candidate over the other make him a "strong" Democrat? He could be a weak Democrat. Or anti-Republican. Or just anti-Trump. Or just pro-Hillary. You're drawing an interesting conclusion from just the October comic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 08:34, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:It's a coincidence, but it may well be a coincidence that Randall's intentionally playing on. (I suspect Randall's more anti-Trump than he is anti-Republican, and more anti-Republican than he is a "strong Democrat"; but that's neither here nor there.) [[User:Pelosujamo|Pelosujamo]] ([[User talk:Pelosujamo|talk]]) 12:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

It really seems more like the red is in the northwest and the blue is in the southeast. It's almost symmetric. In fact, if you tilt your head to the right, it almost looks like a blue flare dress with a blood splatter on the left side. ...Yeah, I suppose that was a bit morbid. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

While the pure physics explanation is good and probably right, given Randall's background, I'd point out that there's an alternate explanation: that's a Doppler weather RADAR storm-relative [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_radar#Velocity velocity] product, and the proximity of approaching and receding winds in certain patterns is an indicator of certain types of severe weather. Randall missed out on the opportunity to make a "political [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_echo hook echo]" joke. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.155|108.162.212.155]] 19:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:Nope. First I thought also about a weather report. But it shows the color green! This doesn't fit to the title text.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:10, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Which party is red and which is green? Sorry, I'm not from thé U.S. and don't know.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.10|162.158.238.10]] 20:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:D is blue and R is red. This should be mentioned at the explanation.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

; Greenshift

Dgbrt and I had a back and forth, where we started with the text, ''If the Green Party won, its regions would likely be colored green, which would not work for Cueball's Doppler effect analysis.''.
I noted "Greenshift doesn't implicitly break Dopper analysis, it just implies a great magnitude of shift. And a blueshift isn't necessarily a shift *TO* blue, merely TOWARDS blue (and Green)" and he replied "There is no greenshift in physics. It's either red (longer wavelength) or blue (shorter wavelength). This means when red appears as green it is blueshiftet." I don't quite see Dbrt's point with respect to the text, which now claims ''which would not fit to Cueball's Doppler effect analysis.''
Yes, we only talk about redshift and blueshift in physics, but those shifts don't give us a map with red and blue districts (or stars). They give us light that shifts slightly toward the red or slightly toward the blue (and toward the green). So it's not quite clear how to map red/blue districts to redshift/blueshift. But either way, green is not a problem -- it's not that it would "not work" or "not fit" as Dgbrt keeps editing the article to claim. It just would mean some districts were a lot more blue (or were green). Cueball could simply say "The green regions are approaching us REALLY FAST." Can someone justify Dgbrt's edits here? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 19:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:I am a physicist and in physics there is only redshift/blueshift used as a term for a shift to longer/shorter wavelengths. Most data is obtained beyond visible light and pictures are artificial enhanced. And the colors only represent the speed in respect to us. Red->away from us, white->no motion, and blue->object comes closer. All observations can be done without any color, only the spectral lines are analyzed. Red/blue just indicates the direction of the shift - forward/backward. No further directions are possible.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::I study astronomy and I confirm that red always represents maximum redshift and blue maximum blueshift (by maximum I mean maximum seen in that pecific observation). However, green and yellow are sometimes used to represent no or little motion. So green could match Cueball explanation, but only if it was near the center. However, the term "greenshift" never appears.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.245|162.158.91.245]] 22:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, there is no such term as "greenshift" in physics. But in the xkcd comic universe where red and blue represent redshift and blueshift, we are faced with the possibility of green. This implies it would be "greenshift," despite the term not existing. But whether we call it greenshift or not, that's not really the point: my point, which Dgbrt seems to disagree with, is that presence of green (whether it is called "greenshift" or "stronger blueshift") is not an inherent problem to Cueball's Doppler analysis. Or if it is, please explain why that's so? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:In theory, you could color-code your map differenty, so that green would indicate stronger blueshift than blue, and it would be perfectly correct map if labelled. This map, however, is not labelled for Doppler shifts, so Cueball is interpreting it according to traditional meanings of colors. If he was to consider green as "stronger blueshift", why not consider it as "stronger redshift"? Or, for that matter, why not consider red "blueshift", and blue "redshift"? That would be coorect as well. But having no other clues, he uses traditional meanings of colors.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.245|162.158.91.245]] 12:16, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
:Notice the title-text. "Luckily for my interpretation" he says. This implies that he believes green would cause a problem with his interpretation, and thus would use a different interpretation in the present of green. The possibility of greenshift simply doesn't exist here. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 17:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1852: Election Map

2017-06-20T08:34:05Z

108.162.212.59:

Is that Georgia's 6th district? [[User:Homusubi|Homusubi]] ([[User talk:Homusubi|talk]]) 12:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
*Yup. See map [https://decisiondeskhq.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/GA06_HOUSE16.png here]. It looks a little squished, but that's probably to create the angled effect of the screen. [[User:AxleHelios|AxleHelios]] ([[User talk:AxleHelios|talk]]) 13:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:*It looks like it. That looks like the results from the recent (April) Special Election. There are one or two counties that aren't accurate (colored blue here that went red and vice versa), but I estimate a 99.9% chance that this is the 6th. [http://www.myajc.com/news/gen-politics/how-the-district-run-off-election-june-might-look/bHzbRfuZIWN8jOUTOSnQmM/ Here] are the election results. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 13:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::It's also supposed to be live coverage, so it might vary from the final results (ie, some are just projections). They seem fairly close ones too... SS07A was 56/43, AP01C was 53/46; AP14 was 51/48; SS12, AP09a and Blackwell 01 was 50/49 (albeit Blackwell swung red and the others swung blue)... there are probably more places colored wrong, but I've made my point and I'm too lazy to continue looking. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::(EDIT) Sorry, they were all red. And I think that includes ALL of the districts I mentioned Oh, and Sewell Mill 03 and JC08 also turned red. Perhaps the Democrats were a bit too optimistic when calling the projections? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Is it worth a mention that Randall came out as a strong Democrat in the comics last October, and thus, there's a secondary hidden meaning that the red districts are moving "away" from Cueball? [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:That is probably just a coincidence.[[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 15:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:I had that thought also, that the red districts/states/whatevers are figuratively moving away from the Dem's desired look for the country and the blues are moving toward it. But more than likely it's just a coincidence between [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift Red]/[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blueshift Blue] Shifts and the colors associated with the political parties. The title text regarding the Green Party lends itself to the coincidence argument more than a pre-planned correlation. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:In what way does endorsing one candidate over the other make him a "strong" Democrat? He could be a weak Democrat. Or anti-Republican. Or just anti-Trump. Or just pro-Hillary. You're drawing an interesting conclusion from just the October comic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 08:34, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
It really seems more like the red is in the northwest and the blue is in the southeast. It's almost symmetric. In fact, if you tilt your head to the right, it almost looks like a blue flare dress with a blood splatter on the left side. ...Yeah, I suppose that was a bit morbid. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.71|108.162.238.71]] 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

While the pure physics explanation is good and probably right, given Randall's background, I'd point out that there's an alternate explanation: that's a Doppler weather RADAR storm-relative [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_radar#Velocity velocity] product, and the proximity of approaching and receding winds in certain patterns is an indicator of certain types of severe weather. Randall missed out on the opportunity to make a "political [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_echo hook echo]" joke. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.155|108.162.212.155]] 19:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:Nope. First I thought also about a weather report. But it shows the color green! This doesn't fit to the title text.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:10, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Which party is red and which is green? Sorry, I'm not from thé U.S. and don't know.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.10|162.158.238.10]] 20:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:D is blue and R is red. This should be mentioned at the explanation.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

; Greenshift

Dgbrt and I had a back and forth, where we started with the text, ''If the Green Party won, its regions would likely be colored green, which would not work for Cueball's Doppler effect analysis.''.
I noted "Greenshift doesn't implicitly break Dopper analysis, it just implies a great magnitude of shift. And a blueshift isn't necessarily a shift *TO* blue, merely TOWARDS blue (and Green)" and he replied "There is no greenshift in physics. It's either red (longer wavelength) or blue (shorter wavelength). This means when red appears as green it is blueshiftet." I don't quite see Dbrt's point with respect to the text, which now claims ''which would not fit to Cueball's Doppler effect analysis.''
Yes, we only talk about redshift and blueshift in physics, but those shifts don't give us a map with red and blue districts (or stars). They give us light that shifts slightly toward the red or slightly toward the blue (and toward the green). So it's not quite clear how to map red/blue districts to redshift/blueshift. But either way, green is not a problem -- it's not that it would "not work" or "not fit" as Dgbrt keeps editing the article to claim. It just would mean some districts were a lot more blue (or were green). Cueball could simply say "The green regions are approaching us REALLY FAST." Can someone justify Dgbrt's edits here? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 19:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
:I am a physicist and in physics there is only redshift/blueshift used as a term for a shift to longer/shorter wavelengths. Most data is obtained beyond visible light and pictures are artificial enhanced. And the colors only represent the speed in respect to us. Red->away from us, white->no motion, and blue->object comes closer. All observations can be done without any color, only the spectral lines are analyzed. Red/blue just indicates the direction of the shift - forward/backward. No further directions are possible.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
::I study astronomy and I confirm that red always represents maximum redshift and blue maximum blueshift (by maximum I mean maximum seen in that pecific observation). However, green and yellow are sometimes used to represent no or little motion. So green could match Cueball explanation, but only if it was near the center. However, the term "greenshift" never appears.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.245|162.158.91.245]] 22:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, there is no such term as "greenshift" in physics. But in the xkcd comic universe where red and blue represent redshift and blueshift, we are faced with the possibility of green. This implies it would be "greenshift," despite the term not existing. But whether we call it greenshift or not, that's not really the point: my point, which Dgbrt seems to disagree with, is that presence of green (whether it is called "greenshift" or "stronger blueshift") is not an inherent problem to Cueball's Doppler analysis. Or if it is, please explain why that's so? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1052: Every Major's Terrible

2017-06-19T10:33:10Z

108.162.212.59:

I think Iambic Octameter has a ''stressed-unstressed'' pattern, not the other way around as this explanation says. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.4|172.68.34.4]] 02:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
:No, the explanation is correct, I misread the Wikipedia article. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.4|172.68.34.4]] 13:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Panel 1's cueball is in the same pose as Rodin's "The Thinker"

Panel 4 background is the periodic table of elements.

Panel 5, Fowler's Toad emits a noxious secretion that irritates skin and mucous membranes (it was previously thought to cause warts)

Panel 6, Psychology = a serial killer with a chainsaw, Sociology = hobo; Social Psych = hobo serial killer with chainsaw.

Panel 15, LISP, Scheme, and other computer languages with an excess of parentheses.

Panel 16, biohazard symbol

Panel 19, bongos were played by Richard Feynman

Panel 27, fear of snakes, study of reptiles

Panel 28, a picture of a stomach, pun on "stomach" being slang for "tolerate"

Panel 30, words in all lowercase like e.e.cummings

-- [[Special:Contributions/75.103.23.206| 75.103.23.206 ]] 22:04, 7 December 2012‎
:Hobo serial killer with chainsaw? Social psych sounds awesome!
:[[Special:Contributions/24.2.217.188|24.2.217.188]] 22:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
----
In panel 22 (History), what's the theme connecting the years 1935, 1969, and 1991?
[[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 15:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
:1935 is certainly related to some event that lead to the WWII (a quick look at the Wikipedia page for 1935 show that was the year Hitler rearmed Germany), which paved the way to the Cold War. 1969 was Apollo 11, a high moment of the Cold War, as the USA essentially won the race to the Moon. And 1991 was the year that the USSR dissolved, officially ending the Cold War. [[User:Sir labreck|Sir labreck]] ([[User talk:Sir labreck|talk]]) 18:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
:1935, Harlem race riot; 1969, race riot in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 1991, Rodney King race riots... 2014-2016??? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.62|173.245.54.62]] 03:33, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
----
This explanation is very small for that big comic. I am starting to add the transcript and after that I will do more investigations to that opera. This should be the key to explain all the panels.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

:The answer won't lie in the song, trust me. Pirates of Penzance is probably my favorite comic opera out there. Plus Randall gives that the lie in saying you can use the tune from the elements song (a well-known parody) or even Marry Poppins (similar tune, but not exactly the same). I think each panel is just a reference to the words, I don't think that Randall is actually involving The Pirates of Penzance in any way other than the tune. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.211|173.245.52.211]] 20:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
----
Feynman was also known for being a ladies' man, so the two girls in panel 19 are significant IMHO.
--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.117|141.101.80.117]] 13:51, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
----
Needs explanation what does it mean to '''choose a major''', and what '''major''' is in this context. Note every reader is from U.S.A.; different countries have different higher education systems. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
:True that. 'Graduation' in Brazil means 'Undergraduation' in the US. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105|108.162.254.105]] 03:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
----
"Math's just physics unconstrained by precepts of reality" - that isn't a binary tree, its a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifurcation_diagram bifurcation diagram] from chaos theory. And, sorry, it has nothing to do with the Banach–Tarski paradox - that's just mindless name-dropping.
[[User:Davidbak|Davidbak]] ([[User talk:Davidbak|talk]]) 20:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
:Are you sure it is not just an illustration of Banach-Tarski, arguably the most famous example where mathematical reality and (physical) intuition diverge? Why would the verse be illustrated by a bifurcation diagram (which I think, and I might be a bit ignorant here, is a concept pretty much only found in the "applied side" of mathematics, which ''is'' constrained by precepts of reality)? And even if it were a bifurcation diagram, why would the mass of the balls change? (again, I am perhaps showcasing my ignorance; if so, please be gentle) Finally, i would deem the bifurcation explanation a bit too obscure to be the real deal - a panel which is only understood by somewhat specialized mathematicians seems strange to me, especially given that all other frames contain understandable references. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.183|108.162.229.183]] 13:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRexBMPeRTo[[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 18:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Panel 30: possibly iambic septameter[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.154|141.101.104.154]]

---
I think that the reason for not getting hugs in panel 16 is more to do with the fact that as a virus researcher you would be aware of how easy it is to get a virus/disease and so you would keep away from people and be worried about hugs because of that. (Sorry if I've done something wrong this is my first comment!) [[User:Yxquillio|Yxquillio]] ([[User talk:Yxquillio|talk]]) 08:24, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Another song I guess could provide a good match is "Can You Stop the Calvary?" by Jona Lewie (or "Where's the Modding API" if you're a YOGSCAST fan like me. :)) --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 11:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

"End of the first verse where Cueball tells his academic advisor that he is undecided as every major's terrible. He even throws away his study guide." Are you sure it's not a course catalog? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 10:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:878: Model Rail

2017-06-10T06:04:17Z

108.162.212.59:

It IS possible to go smaller than one atom, but it tends to make a really bright flash and loud noise. The original atomic bomb was the second guy's reading of a train modeler's notes, miraculously preserved in a refrigerator. --[[Special:Contributions/68.200.188.141|68.200.188.141]] 03:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Corrected HO to H0 --[[Special:Contributions/70.169.90.254|70.169.90.254]] 22:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I hate it when my model train layout gets crushed by a cold virus. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.150|199.27.128.150]] 23:38, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
:You mean your model model model model model train layout.. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.195|141.101.99.195]] 20:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

3.5mm per foot? What kind of half-assed system is that?? It's an embarrassment. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58|108.162.219.58]] 21:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

3.5 millimeters is due to the origins of HO scale. It literally means "Half O", and "O" scale, now 1/4 inch per foot in the US, was 7 mm/foot in Britain, where the scales originated. The debate over "HO" and "H0" comes from the same source, as "O" scale was originally labeled "0", following the larger scales of 1, 2, 3, etc, used for toy trains in the early 20th century. As for the name today, it's pronounced "Aitch-Oh" in most, if not all, of the world. {{unsigned ip|173.245.50.92}}

:In Germany this scale is called "H-Null" (H for halb=half; Null=zero). So H0 is definitly correct there while HO is completly illogical. The HO can be used in english only because it is common to use O instead of saying zero, while this is uncommon in most other languages. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.101|141.101.104.101]] 09:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
::How is half of zero logical but half of O isn't? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 06:04, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

The "this discussion" link doesn't lead to the discussion in question. Please fix? Anonymous 17:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
:I can't see this. But a former add here is fixed, maybe this helps.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 23:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
::The {{Tl|w}} does interpret the link target as the page name. So when linking to "Page?bar=foo" will not interpret the bar parameter. Additionally because there was a = in one parameter it treated everything before as the parameter name and everything after it as the parameter value. If the first problem wouldn't be a problem at least the first parameter would need to be defined as 1=…. I reverted that part to the old working version. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.109|108.162.254.109]] 13:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the Category:Multiple Cueballs. Since the one who knows the rule to me seems like the best candidate for a Cueball here, I have changed the transcript to make him Cueball. He has the interesting comments of this comic, so maybe it is OK to let him be listed as Cueball? On the other hand someone has previously done the opposite, proving that it is not possible to say that Cueball is any particular guy. But it is just easier to explain the transcript (and the comic) when calling one of them Cueball rather than guy 1 and 2 (left of right etc.)--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)--

The original width of the section of real world being modeled (18m * 87) works out to 1 mile. [[User:Johanna-Hypatia|Johanna-Hypatia]] ([[User talk:Johanna-Hypatia|talk]]) 21:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Is this really a sensible interpretation of the "philistines" comment? It seems to hinge on more obscure, original use of the word, and slightly far-fetched. In particular, considering Munroe's other [[922|comments]] on that movie, I had assumed they were considered philistines simply for cluttering the rulebook with needless pop-culture references, as per the more common definition given on the {{w|Philistinism|wikipedia page}} of "[A person with a] lack of and an indifference to cultural and æsthetic values".[[User:Thomson's Gazelle|Thomson's Gazelle]] ([[User talk:Thomson's Gazelle|talk]]) 11:50, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1845: State Word Map

2017-06-02T05:40:31Z

108.162.212.59:

New Hampshire and Maine are merged together? Significance? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 04:19, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
: That's weird, because there're definitely 50 words. Am I overlooking something... [[User:PvOberstein|PvOberstein]] ([[User talk:PvOberstein|talk]]) 04:22, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
:: Well, there are two words assigned to the merged state. It's just that the political boundary line is missing. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 04:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
::: Oh, duh. [[User:PvOberstein|PvOberstein]] ([[User talk:PvOberstein|talk]]) 04:54, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

"The comic continues to make fun of Florida in the title text by saying that Florida searches for sex porn instead of porn, when porn is already about sex." [https://www.reddit.com/r/EarthPorn/ But is it really, though?] [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 05:40, 2 June 2017 (UTC)