explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3023: The Maritime Approximation

2024-12-12T10:01:57Z

141.101.98.242:

1.609*3.1416926 looks like 1.852*2.718281828
''seems legit'' {{unsigned ip|172.71.124.233|21:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)}}

I added the basics of an explanation, it definitely needs some work, but it should do as a starting point. Hope I did well! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.92|172.68.22.92]] 23:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

The knot is exactly 1 nautical mile per hour. Meanwhile π/e ≈ 1.155727, which is close to nm/mi = kt/mph ≈ 1.15078
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.135|172.70.134.135]] 23:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

This article says one knot is 1.2 MPH, which is true for the number of digits of precision stated. But in context of the claimed precision of 0.5% it would be more helpful to state that one knot is approximately 1.151 MPH. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_(unit) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.159.7|172.71.159.7]] 00:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Transcendental : relating to a spiritual realm. eg "the transcendental importance of each person's soul". Works for me. {{unsigned ip|162.158.186.248|00:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)}}
:Just as a fun fact, "transcendental" in this case is referring to {{W|Transcendental number}}, which are numbers that cannot be expressed as the root of a polynomial, which basically means they cannot be found using algebra alone. I think the two definitions are related, since these numbers "trancend" the "realm" of numbers which can be found with algebra. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.82|172.68.22.82]] 01:04, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Another maritime approximation: 1 meter/sec nearly equals 2 knots (actual is 1.94384), perhaps there is an actual explanation for this? {{unsigned ip|162.158.155.117|01:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)}}

A better mnemonic, which I actually use: miles→km is Fibonacci. 2miles≈3km, 3miles≈5km, 5miles≈8km, 8miles≈13km, 13miles≈21km, 21miles≈34km, 34miles≈55km, 55miles≈89km, 89miles≈143.23km, Fibonacchi would predict 144km. But at that point, you can just remove some less significant digits anyway. For everything in between, you can estimate how far it is from the nearest Fibonacci numbers, that works pretty well, too. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 01:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
: Yes, similar to this comic the ratio of km to miles (1.6093) is very close to the golden ratio (1.6180) or (1 + sqrt(5))/2. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.64|172.68.54.64]] 04:28, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

My favorite one is that pi squared is approximately the acceleration of gravity (9.8 m/s^2). The best part is that is NOT a coincidence. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.183.174|172.71.183.174]] 06:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

3023: The Maritime Approximation

2024-12-12T10:01:04Z

141.101.98.242: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3023
| date = December 11, 2024
| title = The Maritime Approximation
| image = the_maritime_approximation_2x.png
| imagesize = 265x126px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It works because a nautical mile is based on a degree of latitude, and the Earth (e) is a circle.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SEMICIRCULAR SAILOR - Needs explanation of the origins of the units and constants involved for readers to investigate the confidentiality of the relationship. Also, needs clear explanation of title text. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Mph ({{w|miles per hour}}) and {{w|Knot (unit)|knot}}s (''nautical miles'' per hour) are both units used to calculate the speed of vehicles. Miles per hour are typically used in the {{w|Miles per hour|US, UK and some smaller countries}} for the speed of cars and other similar vehicles, while knots are used by some sailors or pilots to describe the speed of ships or aircraft. Novice sailors or sailors who spend a lot of time on land may find it helpful to quickly convert between mph and knots. Usually, this is the form of 1 knot = 1.2 mph, or 1 mph = 0.87 knots (1.85 km/h and 0.54 knots for metric sailors), however [[Randall]] has humorously noticed that π mph ≈ e knots: π mph = [https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=pi+mph+in+knots 2.72997] knots, {{w|E_(mathematical_constant)|e}} = 2.71828. Despite the claim of the title text, this is a coincidence,{{Citation needed}} since even though knots are based on nautical miles, which are related to degrees of latitude (and thus to π, which is used to describe the circumference of a circle), miles per hour have no relation to either e or π. Furthermore, the title text makes the connection to e by mentioning "Earth (e)" but e is not a commonly used symbol or abbreviation for Earth and even if it were, it has nothing to do with Euler's number e.

The equality shown in this strip consists of several different parts:

# The mile (1609.344 m) per hour (mph) is a unit of speed common for motor vehicles in a few countries, such as the United States and United Kingdom.
# The knot is a unit of speed that is one nautical mile (1 852 m) per hour, used in nautical contexts.
# π is a number equal to the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter, about 3.14159.
# e is Euler's number, the base of the natural logarithm, about 2.71828.

π mph × (1609.344 meters/statute mile ÷ 1852 meters/nautical mile) ≈ 2.729969 knots. The result is only about 0.43% larger than ''e'' knots ≈ 2.71828 knots.

The joke is that it is not exact, but only correct to a certain percentage, unlike {{w|Euler's Identity}}, which is exact, and that's what makes the latter truly remarkable. It isn't helped by the fact that it carries the implication that this neat, easy to remember identity is actual useful for sailors, when really being easy to remember is all it has going for it: it doesn't make calculations any easier and is impossible to do without a calculator or paper, and doing it on paper is much harder than other conversions, given that Pi and e are both irrational, and transcendental.

Knots are related to the circumference of the Earth, which can introduce pi, but this is only "useful" if you want to express your speed as a fraction of the radius of earth: 1 knot = 1 nautical mile per hour = 1/60 of a degree of Earth's circumference per hour = 1/21,600 of Earth's circumference per hour = 2π/21,600 x Earth's radius per hour. However, nowadays this is an approximation, because a nautical mile is defined as exactly 1852 m, which is not exactly 1/60 of a degree of Earth's circumference.

Randall has made similar observations of different dimensions that equal each other in the past with comics such as [[687: Dimensional Analysis]], where he compares {{w|Planck Energy}}, the pressure at the earth's core, the gas mileage in a Prius, and the width of the English Channel to Pi. In addition, in [[What If?]], he has compared the mass of Earth to be Pi "milliJupiters," or Pi times the mass of Jupiter divided by 1000, and noted that the volume of a cube with side lengths of one mile is roughly similar to the volume of a sphere with a radius of 1 kilometer.

==Transcript==
:[In a small panel an equation is shown. There is a footnote below the equation:]
:<big>π mph = ''e'' knots*</big>
:*Correct to <0.5%

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The sailor's version of eiπ=−1

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Math]]

Talk:3022: Making Tea

2024-12-12T09:54:46Z

141.101.98.242:

I wonder where [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party making it in Boston Harbor, at ambient temperature, at scale] would fit on this scale. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.162|172.70.206.162]] 04:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: A little to the left of the microwave thing. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.252|162.158.186.252]] 05:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Oh, no, much further to the right. You stole our colony from us, set up some tinpot, pretended 'country' in its place, and you didn't even have the class to make a decent cup of tea first. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.93|12.68.205.93]] 06:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:: And, even if [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68085304 this guy] is right, ''way'' too much salt... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.130|172.70.91.130]] 07:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
::: Soyuz nyerushimyy respublik svobodnik... [[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]] ([[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al|talk]]) 14:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: Well maybe if you didnt force us to buy discounted tea from you after fighting a war for us, we wouldn't be in this situation. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 15:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
::::: Yeah, a tiny island should not have that much control over a fractionable part of a continent [[User:Danger Kitty|Danger Kitty]] ([[User talk:Danger Kitty|talk]])
:::::: EXACTLY, it's not like you funded the voyages, sent supplies to the colonies, or protected us from the French, or anything. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 14:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
: I would like to as a british person to corroborate this, in the 80's my Dad visited the USA (he did go to florida) and still is complaining that the freshly boiled water wasn't poured directly onto the tea bag but was instead the tea bag and the hot water(now luke warm water) and bag was delivered separately!!! The delivery of freshly boiling water on to the bag is the major issue with microwaves, not the nucleation thing in my experience. Bear in mind I don't even actually like tea, still care enough to right this, but i'll be signing this anonymously to avoid shame being bought on my family and my family's familys. Murderous royals are a lot less popular the tea [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.227|108.162.245.227]]
:: I first visited the US in 1980. A friend who was with hate coffee and was horrified when he ordered tea that he got the water and the tea bag separately. When he suggested they add the water as soon as it was boiled, the wait staff thought he was joking. Many years later in Texas, a waiter asked me why I, a Brit, was drinking coffee, not tea. "You don't know how to make it," I replied. (In my house, the electric kettle and teapot sit next to each other on the kitchen worktop.)--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.135|172.70.160.135]] 09:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

When I make ramen, I put the measuring cup in the microwave. Fight me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.87|162.158.167.87]] 05:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: On behalf of the British Empire: whateva. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 18:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

"...to the point virtually every home has an electric tea kettle as a standard appliance". If I'm reading it correctly, this and the comic suggests we (though not I, as I'm not a tea-drinker) make tea ''in the electric kettle''. Electric tea-urns, yes, or maybe a setup like a samovar. But, generally, the kettle itself (and, so far as I'm aware, always with an electric kettle) is used to heat the water, which you then pour into the tea''pot'' into which the requisite number of tealeaves/teabags are also put to steep. (Or, for the lazy way, into the mug-with-teabag.) I wouldn't be able to use my electric kettle to (for example) make my instant mashed-potato into the actual mash, if I'd have regularly used it to mash tea. Or top up the boiling saucepan that I'd realised I'd not quite enough water in to cover the pasta/vegetables/whatever. Or to easily add nust a little more heat (with less new water) to the washing-up bowl than would be possible from the hot tap, back to as hot as possible without scalding me. – Whether intentional or not, I suspect Randall has the role of kettle and teapot mixed up, and so (without the intent to parody) has the editor who wrote the above. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.135|172.70.160.135]] 05:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: Agree, we make tea in a mug using water from a kettle. I'd be furious if an American made tea in my kettle, how will I then make up my instant Nescafe? [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 18:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the section on 'Boiling the water in a pot' refers to a teapot - I think it means boiling the water in a pot on the hob, and then making tea with it (in a pot/mug). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.27|172.69.195.27]] 07:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:I agree, but I also think there's a language issue with the use of pot vs. pan that makes things more confusing. I think there are several types of cookware that Americans call pot and British call pan. So British would not say they boil water in a pot but rather in a saucepan (if there's no kettle available of course). [[User:Mtcv|Mtcv]] ([[User talk:Mtcv|talk]]) 09:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I (as Brit) am uncommon in using an electric filter coffee machine to make tea (two bags in what is supposed to be the coffee filter). Set up, press the button and come back to a not jug of fresh tea which is not stewed. If later, the hot plate has shut off and it is cold, you can zap it in a mug in the microwave. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 08:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: As another brit, what? I do not understand the mechanics of this, please elaborate. Additionally, my understanding is that the water would be *briefly acquainted* with the tea, thus would be a poor facsimile of "tea" and would rather be closer to something the americans would attempt. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126|141.101.99.126]] 11:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I did say 'uncommon' but Kenwood made a coffee/tea machine to do this. It sounds like it shouldn't work, but 167 below has the basics right. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 09:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::I'm guessing the water would drip on to the teabags, then soak all the way through them and drip out into the jug, without allowing sufficient to accumulate that it would run straight out without passing fully through the bag. It's an intriguing idea. But most definitely wrong.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.239|172.70.85.239]] 17:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Your guess is right. It works because the (finely cut) leaves are exposed to boiling hot water for a few minutes, you wouldn't drink any before you have half a jug and that is quite 'bright'. Better than a teabag in a mug! Want it stronger, use more bags. Big advantage - you set it up, press button, come back in 5 to 25 minutes and your tea is waiting, including a second mug, not and not stewed. Wrong - but works so right. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 09:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yMMTVVJI4c Technology Connections]! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.109.167|141.101.109.167]] 09:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

You Westerners have literally no idea how to make proper, good tea! SMH [[User:TPS|TPS]] ([[User talk:TPS|talk]]) 13:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

As a Brit who grew up in sight of the Yorkshire Tea factory – and worked there on occasion – and having travelled very widely around the world – including in the US – I feel I'm supposed to have an opinion. However, I have ''never'' encountered the microwaving of water as mentioned here, and I would not object to it as supposedly problematic for tea-quality reasons. I'd object for reasons of common sense. What mystifies me is the idea that kettles are tea-specific. They are for heating water, not making tea. Coffee uses hot water. Pasta, rice and potatoes use hot water. Peas, carrots, cabbage, sweetcorn...

Baking bread often involves a pan of steaming water in the oven.

"But I can boil water in a pan for cooking pasta or vegetables."

Yes, but you'll be waiting a l-o-o-o-ng time. I'll heat my water in the kettle, pour it into the now-hot pan, cook my pasta, and I'll be eating before your water is boiling.

A kettle is not a tea-making item any more than a frying pan is an omelette-making item; tea is simply one of the things you can make with water from a kettle. Hot water is a basic civilised human commodity, predating recorded history. That we should live in a mechanised world, and the Consumer Nation doesn't have water-boiling appliances as standard (saying instead "I don't have a kettle because I don't drink tea") is ludicrous.

Using a microwave rather than buying a kettle is a bit like not buying a hammer for driving in nails because you've got a big pair of pliers that will do. Sure, they're heavy lumps of metal than live in your toolbag, but they're not the right thing.

The Brits, incidentally, are not tea lovers. They are prolific consumers of awful tea that actual tea lovers wouldn't use for cleaning their drains. The most enthusiastic tea enthusiasts I've ever met were from Maryland.

It's all just social ceremony in the UK. Milk first, tea first, must use a saucer, must use a pot...tea is a British religion, not a British drink. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 14:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: How long does it take you to boil water for, let's say enough water for four people's worth of pasta, using an electric kettle? I reckon that's about 4 liters of water? I'm genuinely curious. Now also double the time, because as mentioned in the explanation, American outlets produce half the power of British outlets. And let me not fail to mention that almost all American homes have either special higher power outlets for stoves or gas powered stoves, and frequently have special high-power outlets for microwaves as well. 4 liters of water to boil takes about 5-6 minutes on a low-end American stove, about 3-4 minutes on a gas stove, and about 2 minutes on an induction stove. None of which strikes me as a particularly long time, especially when the most popular varieties of pasta in America all need to be boiled for 8+ minutes. How does this compare to twice the length of time as your electric kettle? Because if your Electric Kettle actually allows you to be eating your pasta before our water has even boiled, that would require your kettle to boil water in around -2min to -6min. And if your electric kettle can time travel, then that is truly an astonishing device. Honestly my takeaway from this is that British Stoves must be apparently heated by a single candle if "boiling water for pasta" is considered to take a "l-o-o-o-ng time". {{unsigned ip|162.158.126.161|21:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}}

I wonder what the Brits would feel about repurposing a single-cup coffee maker. These days, I usually put a tea bag in a mug and place it in a Keurig machine and run it (without a K-cup, of course) to deliver the hot water. Probably the wrong temperature, but fast and easy and the result is good enough. [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 14:52, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Would any British person care to evaluate my tea making practices? Boil water in electric kettle. Pour water over teabag, allow to steep, remove teabag. Add sugar and ice cubes. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 15:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:...well, seems a fairly standard "making one mug of tea for oneself" process. It lacks a milk-adding stage (thus no arguments about whether before or after the water). Removing the teabag at that point probably means it's not going to become a Builders' Brew, which is your choicd. Sugar is ok. And... Waitwhat... ''Ice Cubes?!?'' ...can I get back to you on that? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.163|172.70.162.163]] 17:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I can confirm (by inadvertent experiments conducted on flatmates) that they indeed do not like tea being make in the kettle. What really makes them angry though is making coffee in the teapot. It ruins the taste of the teapot forever apparently. There is also a faction that insists that a teapot should never be washed, and washing it invokes a lesser anger.[[User:Gopher|Gopher]] ([[User talk:Gopher|talk]]) 15:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:This is a source of tension in our house, where we are one washer and one non-washer![[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.243|141.101.98.243]] 09:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

On rare occasions where I don't have a kettle available, I use a microwave oven to boil water for tea. But it doesn't look and taste quite the same, and often leaves an ugly foam at the surface when the tea bag is added. This phenomenon is investigated here: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/a/22264. So the British might be right... Disclaimer: I'm neither from the UK nor from the US. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.126|172.69.68.126]] 16:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

There is a [https://www.tumblr.com/elodieunderglass/669449994039853056/wizardlyghost-silverjirachi-pidoop tumblr thread] about the topic of teamaking in microwaves, kettles, etc. Funnily enough it showed up in my Instagram reels feed just a few hours before this comic was posted. I was thinking perhaps Randall saw it too and was inspired by it? Both of them have to deal with the different ways of making tea and how "absurd" or "unconventional" (etc.) they are. Even if Randall didn't have it in mind, it's certainly a funny little coincidence. [[User:Pie Guy|Pie Guy]] ([[User talk:Pie Guy|talk]]) 16:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm guessing my occasional summertime practice of filling a gallon jar with water and lots of tea bags, setting it on the back porch in the sun for a few hours until the water turns dark brown, then putting the whole thing in the refrigerator and later drinking it over ice would be toward the more angry end of the spectrum.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.204|172.70.126.204]] 16:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Pat
:I think the "in the sun for a few hours" part might just be too incomprehensible to most of us, here in Britain. If we ''have'' a few hours of sun (and we're not abroad and deliberately sunburning ourselves on the beach/beside the pool in our week at the Costa Lotta budget-all-inclusivs holiday) then we're either fuming at our workdesks complaining about the louts stripping down to their shirtsleeves and splashing in the town-centre fountains or we're on our lunch-break and we ''are'' the louts stripping down to our shirtsleeves and splashing in the town-centre fountains. In neither case would sun-stewed tea be a priority. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.163|172.70.162.163]] 17:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps it's worth to mention how dangerous it is to boil water in a microwave. https://tastecooking.com/dangerous-microwave-water/
[[User:Mestafais|Mestafais]] ([[User talk:Mestafais|talk]]) 15:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:I have a >5 inch burn scar on my forearm, to arrest to that. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::I know most Brits would consider it criminal, but I didn't realise you could actually be arrested for it.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.243|141.101.98.243]] 09:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

There are several comics with unmarked scales. It would be interesting if the descriptions started using pixels to point where each mark is along the line. As a rough estimate, the four points mentioned here are at X-values: 90px, 115px, 345px, and 645px, indicating that the pot method is 10% as infuriating as the chalice method - or that making tea in a pot ten times would be equally as infuriating as making it once in a chalice (at least, assuming the kettle method causes zero furons. I know of {{w|hedons and dolors}}. I guess 'furons' are a unit of fury, right? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.236|172.70.46.236]] 16:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Interesting to see the interest in editing this. Had a quick check of the last ten comics, looking at the number of edits made in the first 14 hours (the exact time this page has been around, as of me starting the check) and in total, and extrapolated to edits/day (in the case of total edits, both just to the latest edit and right up to 'now'). Thought it'd be interesting to give you my results (assuming I tallied/etc correctly)...
*3022 - 14hr: '''61''' ('''105'''/day); Total: 61 ('''105/day...''')
*3021 - 14hr: 23 (39/day); Total: 39 (11/day -> 10/day)
*3020 - 14hr: 22 (38/day); Total: 36 (10/day -> 6/day)
*3019 - 14hr: 28 (48/day); Total: 54 (17/day -> 7/day)
*3018 - 14hr: 14 (24/day); Total: 48 (4/day -> 4/day)
*3017 - 14hr: 29 (50/day); Total: 33 (32/day -> 3/day)
*3016 - 14hr: 28 (48/day); Total: 46 (4/day -> 3/day)
*3015 - 14hr: 20 (32/day); Total: '''83''' (5/day -> 5/day)
*3014 - 14hr: 40 (69/day); Total: 66 (16/day -> 3/day)
*3013 - 14hr: 36 (61/day); Total: 68 (3/day -> 3/day)
...of course, the first 14 hours probably biases to British readers/editors, and it was too fiddly to add up ''|bytes changed per edit|'' as a more useful metric than mere number of pokes. But quite a bit of interest we already have here. More edits in fourteen hours than any other article less than fourteen (indeed, 17!) days old... ;) Seems to have really hit a mark, this subject! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.201|172.69.195.201]] 19:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:This one is super weird. I may be weirdness incarnate... but... [[User:Maybe Bill Cipher|An anonymous Gravity Falls expert]] ([[User talk:Maybe Bill Cipher|talk]]) 19:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:Well obviously. I mean this one ''really'' matters![[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.23|141.101.98.23]] 08:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I would argue that the more pessimistic interpretation of the two low-end options makes sense, rather than the more generous versions offered in the current explanation. I think the first one does literally mean making tea in the kettle, and the second one does mean boiling water in a teapot. Making tea *using* a kettle isn't anything to get mad about, it's the default practice. That should put it at the zero point of the line, but it isn't, it's to the right. On the other hand, obviously making tea *in* the kettle would incite a modest amount of rage (on the scale of zero to microwaving a mug), and it makes sense that boiling water in a teapot would incite about 50% more, as shown.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.160|172.69.134.160]] 19:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: An American making tea in the correct way by boiling water in the kettle and then pouring that into a teapot with the tea would still probably conspire to make it badly and make the Brit angry. And Brits really do get quite upset about the idea of tea made with water boiled in a stovetop pan.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.23|141.101.98.23]] 08:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

There is a standard for making tea, ISO 3103: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3103, and apparently from the Royal Society of Chemistry.
And, of course, it must be really hot for in infinite improbability drive to work properly.
[[User:Lordpishky|Lordpishky]] ([[User talk:Lordpishky|talk]]) 20:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

All this blather and not one bit about that quintessential Kiwi staple, [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gumboot_tea gumboot tea]. Boil the kettle (about the size of a Dutch oven), throw in handfuls of leaf black tea, and let it sit until consumed. Reheat as needed. One sip, and the source of the Commonwealth aversion to the insane Yankee habit of drinking tea black is immediately apparent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.123.8|172.70.123.8]] 20:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

So, I have a Quooker that boils my water. Add tea (leaves)... done. But *don't* add milk, please.... spoil... {{unsigned|Palmpje|20:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}}

''Ultimately, the real difference comes down to convenience: In the USA, the standard voltage for electric appliances (including an electric kettle) is 120 volts, while it is twice that (240 volts in practice, though nominally 230V) in the UK. Since the amperage for an electric kettle is the the same in both countries (15 amps), this means that an equivalent kettle in the UK has twice the power (3.2kw versus 1.6kw), and can heat the water in a fraction of the time. Meanwhile, a standard microwave has a similar power in both countries (from 700 to 1000 watts), for reasons unrelated to the supply voltage it is equipped to use. Therefore, heating a small cup in a microwave might take a few moments longer than a kettle in the USA, but is many times slower to wait for compared to using an electric kettle in the UK.'' Electric kettles are a bit faster in the UK due to the voltage difference, but it's not that much and I highly doubt speed is the main concern here. The main 'convenience' difference between boiling water in a kettle vs a microwave is quantity: Brits usually don't just make one cup/mug of tea! On the rare occasion Americans drink tea, it's more often just the one person drinking one cup, making a microwave a convenient choice.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.90|162.158.233.90]] 21:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Add in some [https://www.foodandwine.com/why-you-should-add-salt-to-tea-8549735 salt]! '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 21:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

It's not about voltage. They use different gauge heater wire to get the Watts wanted/allowed.

The classic UK plug is nominal 13 Amps. (The circuits may be nominal 16A but there is now better insulation than in 1949.) At 230 Volts that would be 3KW (near enuff). That will be the "legal numbers". At 240V it may be 3,250W true. OTOH a 10V sag might be expected in all but the poshest wall-wiring.

amazon.co.uk sells kettles nearly all rated 3KW. Exceptions are Greepas at 1800W ("However, some customers have reported that it's very slow to boil"); also Philips 2200W, Daewoo 1400W, and OLEGA 1500W 'Fast Boiling'.

OTOH!!

On Amazon US site nearly all kettles are 1500W, a few lower like 1100W. At assumed 120V 1500W is 12.5Amps. 15Amp circuits are still common in older houses (despite changes in 1960s) but we supposed to de-rate for 'long-running' (not clearly specified in old code) so 12 Amps is in a ballpark.

Note that all US kettles are lower power than all but the tamest UK kettles. Essentially half power.

And IIRC, the 13/16A rating which allows super-power kettles in the UK was not for tea but for "electric fire", room heat. In post-War rebuilding, smokey coal was already depreciated in cities, steam plumbing and chimneys are expensive. Copper wire is costly too, but you "have" to have electric, and low-cost plans like ring-main were investigated.
[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 22:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

"accept that tea-appropriate boiling water can be obtained directly from the sink's plumbing" - unless it comes out literally at boiling temperature, it isn't tea appropriate. I live in France now, and order catering bags of tea from Amazon because French tea is dismally awful, not helped at all by this fairly widespread belief that black tea steeps at 60C. When I share tea bags with friends, I have to keep reminding them, boiling! Boiling! So, see, there are worse things than using a microwave to heat the water... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.126.208|172.71.126.208]] 06:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:Not boiling - OFF boiling. Higher than 60C, yes, but if you put actually boiling water straight on to the tea (or worse, boil the water with the tea in it), that's at least as bad. (And how far off the boil exactly depends on the type of tea.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.22|141.101.98.22]] 09:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

What's up with the "We want to ensure'''[sic]''' the good people of the U.K"?
I really can't see the US Embassy insuring them for any amount, so what gives? [[User:Ryden|Ryden]] ([[User talk:Ryden|talk]]) 12:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:Came here to make the same note. “Ensure” is not misspelled, why is it marked with “[sic]”? [[User:Dúthomhas|Dúthomhas]] ([[User talk:Dúthomhas|talk]]) 12:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::It's the wrong word entirely for the longer sentence. They perhaps wished to ''assure'' the good people, etc... "Ensure" means to "check and fix" something, in the way this is connected to "the good people" (implying that ''they'' would be changed to deal with any discrepancy of expectations), but this reading also goes wrong by the "that".
::In the sense of making a pledge (probably the actual intent), the structure is all wrong and probably was hastily reworded from a different narrative path, but left half-and-half and not making sense. My most minimal rewording for this would be "We want to ensure to the good people of the U.K. that ...", but it still reads very awkwardly. Perhaps it always made more sense to the average 'Merkin (c.f. "write me" instead of "write to me"), but I still would have written "assure" (as attempt to be comforting) or "pledge to" (for a more fervent sincerity of positive action).
::And to "insure" (for British English) is different yet again. While not working at all in the full sentence, it would start to suggest the actual possibility of such wrongness happening, but with the promise of monetary (or other) compensation if it does. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.149|141.101.98.149]] 15:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Question: Does the obsession with tea apply to all of Britain equally? E.g. are the Scottish just as stereotypicly known for loving tea as the English? This comic immediately brings Arthur Dent to my mind, and he's Very English Indeed. ("A liquid almost but not quite entirely unlike tea" is missing somewhere in the left third of the comic. :) --an intrigued German [[Special:Contributions/172.71.148.103|172.71.148.103]] 14:35, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:The four nations probably have had a similar outlook, but everyone may have had different social reasons. Tea-totalling perhaps was the initial driver in the more methodist corners, to get working people not to drink too much beer/cider/gin. The high social status version of regency ladies. It then sort of met in the middle by the time of the tea-ladies trolleying around refreshments to boardrooms and factory floors alike, in the same building.
:For WW2, the British government's demand for tea supplies was at least as important as ammunition. All British tanks apparently had (and continue to have) a hot-water boiler in the crew comparatment (not just for tea, but, probably the main thing at times). Official worries about tea [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7382750.stm lasted beyond that era].
:Generalising for everyone ''now'' is probably wrong, but visiting elderly relatives all over the UK, I'd ''always'' be passed a cup of tea (and a plate of cakes, or biscuits, placed temptingly close at hand). A pity that I never really liked tea (the cakes/biscuits are a bonus and a mitigating factor, but politeness demands that I throttle back my desires in that direction). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.149|141.101.98.149]] 15:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:If we're talking about the British Isles, it's probably actually the Irish who take the crown for the highest concentration of tea in the bloodstream, even though the stereotype is most commonly associated with the English / the UK.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.242|141.101.98.242]] 09:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Boy, they ''really'' get mad when you microwave the Chalice. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:I think putting metal in the microwave is probably frowned upon worldwide. (Unless you're an ex-Navy Seal and cook who has found your ship taken over by mercenaries with a mad plan. Then go ahead.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.119|162.158.74.119]] 16:07, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I find that Brits really hate it when you bring up the concept of sweet tea, during the summer my family would fill up a jug with water add some tea bags then leave it on the porch over night. [[User:Resign|Resign]] ([[User talk:Resign|talk]]) 07:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

This is the most comprehensively explained comic in a while 😂 I guess there are a lot of passionate tea-makers around here. As a non-tea-drinker living in a Commonwealth country, I have definitely heard the outrageous stereotype that Americans microwave their water. Definitely practical when you don't own a kettle, but slow when brewing for a group. [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 08:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Would the small metal piece that sticks together the label of the teabag at the end of the string be an issue when microwaved (with the water or seperately)? Or is too small for that? (I know not all teabags have that, especially british "black tea" often comes in packages without string, but my usual tea does have it...) --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:3022: Making Tea

2024-12-12T09:42:27Z

141.101.98.242:

I wonder where [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party making it in Boston Harbor, at ambient temperature, at scale] would fit on this scale. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.162|172.70.206.162]] 04:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: A little to the left of the microwave thing. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.252|162.158.186.252]] 05:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Oh, no, much further to the right. You stole our colony from us, set up some tinpot, pretended 'country' in its place, and you didn't even have the class to make a decent cup of tea first. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.93|12.68.205.93]] 06:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:: And, even if [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68085304 this guy] is right, ''way'' too much salt... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.130|172.70.91.130]] 07:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
::: Soyuz nyerushimyy respublik svobodnik... [[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]] ([[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al|talk]]) 14:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: Well maybe if you didnt force us to buy discounted tea from you after fighting a war for us, we wouldn't be in this situation. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 15:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
::::: Yeah, a tiny island should not have that much control over a fractionable part of a continent [[User:Danger Kitty|Danger Kitty]] ([[User talk:Danger Kitty|talk]])
:::::: EXACTLY, it's not like you funded the voyages, sent supplies to the colonies, or protected us from the French, or anything. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 14:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
: I would like to as a british person to corroborate this, in the 80's my Dad visited the USA (he did go to florida) and still is complaining that the freshly boiled water wasn't poured directly onto the tea bag but was instead the tea bag and the hot water(now luke warm water) and bag was delivered separately!!! The delivery of freshly boiling water on to the bag is the major issue with microwaves, not the nucleation thing in my experience. Bear in mind I don't even actually like tea, still care enough to right this, but i'll be signing this anonymously to avoid shame being bought on my family and my family's familys. Murderous royals are a lot less popular the tea [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.227|108.162.245.227]]
:: I first visited the US in 1980. A friend who was with hate coffee and was horrified when he ordered tea that he got the water and the tea bag separately. When he suggested they add the water as soon as it was boiled, the wait staff thought he was joking. Many years later in Texas, a waiter asked me why I, a Brit, was drinking coffee, not tea. "You don't know how to make it," I replied. (In my house, the electric kettle and teapot sit next to each other on the kitchen worktop.)--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.135|172.70.160.135]] 09:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

When I make ramen, I put the measuring cup in the microwave. Fight me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.87|162.158.167.87]] 05:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: On behalf of the British Empire: whateva. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 18:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

"...to the point virtually every home has an electric tea kettle as a standard appliance". If I'm reading it correctly, this and the comic suggests we (though not I, as I'm not a tea-drinker) make tea ''in the electric kettle''. Electric tea-urns, yes, or maybe a setup like a samovar. But, generally, the kettle itself (and, so far as I'm aware, always with an electric kettle) is used to heat the water, which you then pour into the tea''pot'' into which the requisite number of tealeaves/teabags are also put to steep. (Or, for the lazy way, into the mug-with-teabag.) I wouldn't be able to use my electric kettle to (for example) make my instant mashed-potato into the actual mash, if I'd have regularly used it to mash tea. Or top up the boiling saucepan that I'd realised I'd not quite enough water in to cover the pasta/vegetables/whatever. Or to easily add nust a little more heat (with less new water) to the washing-up bowl than would be possible from the hot tap, back to as hot as possible without scalding me. – Whether intentional or not, I suspect Randall has the role of kettle and teapot mixed up, and so (without the intent to parody) has the editor who wrote the above. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.135|172.70.160.135]] 05:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Agree, we make tea in a mug using water from a kettle. I'd be furious if an American made tea in my kettle, how will I then make up my instant Nescafe? [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 18:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the section on 'Boiling the water in a pot' refers to a teapot - I think it means boiling the water in a pot on the hob, and then making tea with it (in a pot/mug). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.27|172.69.195.27]] 07:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:I agree, but I also think there's a language issue with the use of pot vs. pan that makes things more confusing. I think there are several types of cookware that Americans call pot and British call pan. So British would not say they boil water in a pot but rather in a saucepan (if there's no kettle available of course). [[User:Mtcv|Mtcv]] ([[User talk:Mtcv|talk]]) 09:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I (as Brit) am uncommon in using an electric filter coffee machine to make tea (two bags in what is supposed to be the coffee filter). Set up, press the button and come back to a not jug of fresh tea which is not stewed. If later, the hot plate has shut off and it is cold, you can zap it in a mug in the microwave. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 08:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: As another brit, what? I do not understand the mechanics of this, please elaborate. Additionally, my understanding is that the water would be *briefly acquainted* with the tea, thus would be a poor facsimile of "tea" and would rather be closer to something the americans would attempt. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126|141.101.99.126]] 11:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I did say 'uncommon' but Kenwood made a coffee/tea machine to do this. It sounds like it shouldn't work, but 167 below has the basics right. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 09:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::I'm guessing the water would drip on to the teabags, then soak all the way through them and drip out into the jug, without allowing sufficient to accumulate that it would run straight out without passing fully through the bag. It's an intriguing idea. But most definitely wrong.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.239|172.70.85.239]] 17:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Your guess is right. It works because the (finely cut) leaves are exposed to boiling hot water for a few minutes, you wouldn't drink any before you have half a jug and that is quite 'bright'. Better than a teabag in a mug! Want it stronger, use more bags. Big advantage - you set it up, press button, come back in 5 to 25 minutes and your tea is waiting, including a second mug, not and not stewed. Wrong - but works so right. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 09:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yMMTVVJI4c Technology Connections]! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.109.167|141.101.109.167]] 09:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

You Westerners have literally no idea how to make proper, good tea! SMH [[User:TPS|TPS]] ([[User talk:TPS|talk]]) 13:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

As a Brit who grew up in sight of the Yorkshire Tea factory – and worked there on occasion – and having travelled very widely around the world – including in the US – I feel I'm supposed to have an opinion. However, I have ''never'' encountered the microwaving of water as mentioned here, and I would not object to it as supposedly problematic for tea-quality reasons. I'd object for reasons of common sense. What mystifies me is the idea that kettles are tea-specific. They are for heating water, not making tea. Coffee uses hot water. Pasta, rice and potatoes use hot water. Peas, carrots, cabbage, sweetcorn...

Baking bread often involves a pan of steaming water in the oven.

"But I can boil water in a pan for cooking pasta or vegetables."

Yes, but you'll be waiting a l-o-o-o-ng time. I'll heat my water in the kettle, pour it into the now-hot pan, cook my pasta, and I'll be eating before your water is boiling.

A kettle is not a tea-making item any more than a frying pan is an omelette-making item; tea is simply one of the things you can make with water from a kettle. Hot water is a basic civilised human commodity, predating recorded history. That we should live in a mechanised world, and the Consumer Nation doesn't have water-boiling appliances as standard (saying instead "I don't have a kettle because I don't drink tea") is ludicrous.

Using a microwave rather than buying a kettle is a bit like not buying a hammer for driving in nails because you've got a big pair of pliers that will do. Sure, they're heavy lumps of metal than live in your toolbag, but they're not the right thing.

The Brits, incidentally, are not tea lovers. They are prolific consumers of awful tea that actual tea lovers wouldn't use for cleaning their drains. The most enthusiastic tea enthusiasts I've ever met were from Maryland.

It's all just social ceremony in the UK. Milk first, tea first, must use a saucer, must use a pot...tea is a British religion, not a British drink. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 14:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: How long does it take you to boil water for, let's say enough water for four people's worth of pasta, using an electric kettle? I reckon that's about 4 liters of water? I'm genuinely curious. Now also double the time, because as mentioned in the explanation, American outlets produce half the power of British outlets. And let me not fail to mention that almost all American homes have either special higher power outlets for stoves or gas powered stoves, and frequently have special high-power outlets for microwaves as well. 4 liters of water to boil takes about 5-6 minutes on a low-end American stove, about 3-4 minutes on a gas stove, and about 2 minutes on an induction stove. None of which strikes me as a particularly long time, especially when the most popular varieties of pasta in America all need to be boiled for 8+ minutes. How does this compare to twice the length of time as your electric kettle? Because if your Electric Kettle actually allows you to be eating your pasta before our water has even boiled, that would require your kettle to boil water in around -2min to -6min. And if your electric kettle can time travel, then that is truly an astonishing device. Honestly my takeaway from this is that British Stoves must be apparently heated by a single candle if "boiling water for pasta" is considered to take a "l-o-o-o-ng time". {{unsigned ip|162.158.126.161|21:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}}

I wonder what the Brits would feel about repurposing a single-cup coffee maker. These days, I usually put a tea bag in a mug and place it in a Keurig machine and run it (without a K-cup, of course) to deliver the hot water. Probably the wrong temperature, but fast and easy and the result is good enough. [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 14:52, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Would any British person care to evaluate my tea making practices? Boil water in electric kettle. Pour water over teabag, allow to steep, remove teabag. Add sugar and ice cubes. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 15:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:...well, seems a fairly standard "making one mug of tea for oneself" process. It lacks a milk-adding stage (thus no arguments about whether before or after the water). Removing the teabag at that point probably means it's not going to become a Builders' Brew, which is your choicd. Sugar is ok. And... Waitwhat... ''Ice Cubes?!?'' ...can I get back to you on that? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.163|172.70.162.163]] 17:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I can confirm (by inadvertent experiments conducted on flatmates) that they indeed do not like tea being make in the kettle. What really makes them angry though is making coffee in the teapot. It ruins the taste of the teapot forever apparently. There is also a faction that insists that a teapot should never be washed, and washing it invokes a lesser anger.[[User:Gopher|Gopher]] ([[User talk:Gopher|talk]]) 15:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

On rare occasions where I don't have a kettle available, I use a microwave oven to boil water for tea. But it doesn't look and taste quite the same, and often leaves an ugly foam at the surface when the tea bag is added. This phenomenon is investigated here: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/a/22264. So the British might be right... Disclaimer: I'm neither from the UK nor from the US. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.126|172.69.68.126]] 16:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

There is a [https://www.tumblr.com/elodieunderglass/669449994039853056/wizardlyghost-silverjirachi-pidoop tumblr thread] about the topic of teamaking in microwaves, kettles, etc. Funnily enough it showed up in my Instagram reels feed just a few hours before this comic was posted. I was thinking perhaps Randall saw it too and was inspired by it? Both of them have to deal with the different ways of making tea and how "absurd" or "unconventional" (etc.) they are. Even if Randall didn't have it in mind, it's certainly a funny little coincidence. [[User:Pie Guy|Pie Guy]] ([[User talk:Pie Guy|talk]]) 16:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm guessing my occasional summertime practice of filling a gallon jar with water and lots of tea bags, setting it on the back porch in the sun for a few hours until the water turns dark brown, then putting the whole thing in the refrigerator and later drinking it over ice would be toward the more angry end of the spectrum.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.204|172.70.126.204]] 16:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Pat
:I think the "in the sun for a few hours" part might just be too incomprehensible to most of us, here in Britain. If we ''have'' a few hours of sun (and we're not abroad and deliberately sunburning ourselves on the beach/beside the pool in our week at the Costa Lotta budget-all-inclusivs holiday) then we're either fuming at our workdesks complaining about the louts stripping down to their shirtsleeves and splashing in the town-centre fountains or we're on our lunch-break and we ''are'' the louts stripping down to our shirtsleeves and splashing in the town-centre fountains. In neither case would sun-stewed tea be a priority. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.163|172.70.162.163]] 17:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps it's worth to mention how dangerous it is to boil water in a microwave. https://tastecooking.com/dangerous-microwave-water/
[[User:Mestafais|Mestafais]] ([[User talk:Mestafais|talk]]) 15:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:I have a >5 inch burn scar on my forearm, to arrest to that. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

There are several comics with unmarked scales. It would be interesting if the descriptions started using pixels to point where each mark is along the line. As a rough estimate, the four points mentioned here are at X-values: 90px, 115px, 345px, and 645px, indicating that the pot method is 10% as infuriating as the chalice method - or that making tea in a pot ten times would be equally as infuriating as making it once in a chalice (at least, assuming the kettle method causes zero furons. I know of {{w|hedons and dolors}}. I guess 'furons' are a unit of fury, right? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.236|172.70.46.236]] 16:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Interesting to see the interest in editing this. Had a quick check of the last ten comics, looking at the number of edits made in the first 14 hours (the exact time this page has been around, as of me starting the check) and in total, and extrapolated to edits/day (in the case of total edits, both just to the latest edit and right up to 'now'). Thought it'd be interesting to give you my results (assuming I tallied/etc correctly)...
*3022 - 14hr: '''61''' ('''105'''/day); Total: 61 ('''105/day...''')
*3021 - 14hr: 23 (39/day); Total: 39 (11/day -> 10/day)
*3020 - 14hr: 22 (38/day); Total: 36 (10/day -> 6/day)
*3019 - 14hr: 28 (48/day); Total: 54 (17/day -> 7/day)
*3018 - 14hr: 14 (24/day); Total: 48 (4/day -> 4/day)
*3017 - 14hr: 29 (50/day); Total: 33 (32/day -> 3/day)
*3016 - 14hr: 28 (48/day); Total: 46 (4/day -> 3/day)
*3015 - 14hr: 20 (32/day); Total: '''83''' (5/day -> 5/day)
*3014 - 14hr: 40 (69/day); Total: 66 (16/day -> 3/day)
*3013 - 14hr: 36 (61/day); Total: 68 (3/day -> 3/day)
...of course, the first 14 hours probably biases to British readers/editors, and it was too fiddly to add up ''|bytes changed per edit|'' as a more useful metric than mere number of pokes. But quite a bit of interest we already have here. More edits in fourteen hours than any other article less than fourteen (indeed, 17!) days old... ;) Seems to have really hit a mark, this subject! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.201|172.69.195.201]] 19:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:This one is super weird. I may be weirdness incarnate... but... [[User:Maybe Bill Cipher|An anonymous Gravity Falls expert]] ([[User talk:Maybe Bill Cipher|talk]]) 19:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
:Well obviously. I mean this one ''really'' matters![[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.23|141.101.98.23]] 08:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I would argue that the more pessimistic interpretation of the two low-end options makes sense, rather than the more generous versions offered in the current explanation. I think the first one does literally mean making tea in the kettle, and the second one does mean boiling water in a teapot. Making tea *using* a kettle isn't anything to get mad about, it's the default practice. That should put it at the zero point of the line, but it isn't, it's to the right. On the other hand, obviously making tea *in* the kettle would incite a modest amount of rage (on the scale of zero to microwaving a mug), and it makes sense that boiling water in a teapot would incite about 50% more, as shown.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.160|172.69.134.160]] 19:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
: An American making tea in the correct way by boiling water in the kettle and then pouring that into a teapot with the tea would still probably conspire to make it badly and make the Brit angry. And Brits really do get quite upset about the idea of tea made with water boiled in a stovetop pan.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.23|141.101.98.23]] 08:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

There is a standard for making tea, ISO 3103: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3103, and apparently from the Royal Society of Chemistry.
And, of course, it must be really hot for in infinite improbability drive to work properly.
[[User:Lordpishky|Lordpishky]] ([[User talk:Lordpishky|talk]]) 20:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

All this blather and not one bit about that quintessential Kiwi staple, [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gumboot_tea gumboot tea]. Boil the kettle (about the size of a Dutch oven), throw in handfuls of leaf black tea, and let it sit until consumed. Reheat as needed. One sip, and the source of the Commonwealth aversion to the insane Yankee habit of drinking tea black is immediately apparent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.123.8|172.70.123.8]] 20:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

So, I have a Quooker that boils my water. Add tea (leaves)... done. But *don't* add milk, please.... spoil... {{unsigned|Palmpje|20:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}}

''Ultimately, the real difference comes down to convenience: In the USA, the standard voltage for electric appliances (including an electric kettle) is 120 volts, while it is twice that (240 volts in practice, though nominally 230V) in the UK. Since the amperage for an electric kettle is the the same in both countries (15 amps), this means that an equivalent kettle in the UK has twice the power (3.2kw versus 1.6kw), and can heat the water in a fraction of the time. Meanwhile, a standard microwave has a similar power in both countries (from 700 to 1000 watts), for reasons unrelated to the supply voltage it is equipped to use. Therefore, heating a small cup in a microwave might take a few moments longer than a kettle in the USA, but is many times slower to wait for compared to using an electric kettle in the UK.'' Electric kettles are a bit faster in the UK due to the voltage difference, but it's not that much and I highly doubt speed is the main concern here. The main 'convenience' difference between boiling water in a kettle vs a microwave is quantity: Brits usually don't just make one cup/mug of tea! On the rare occasion Americans drink tea, it's more often just the one person drinking one cup, making a microwave a convenient choice.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.90|162.158.233.90]] 21:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Add in some [https://www.foodandwine.com/why-you-should-add-salt-to-tea-8549735 salt]! '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 21:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

It's not about voltage. They use different gauge heater wire to get the Watts wanted/allowed.

The classic UK plug is nominal 13 Amps. (The circuits may be nominal 16A but there is now better insulation than in 1949.) At 230 Volts that would be 3KW (near enuff). That will be the "legal numbers". At 240V it may be 3,250W true. OTOH a 10V sag might be expected in all but the poshest wall-wiring.

amazon.co.uk sells kettles nearly all rated 3KW. Exceptions are Greepas at 1800W ("However, some customers have reported that it's very slow to boil"); also Philips 2200W, Daewoo 1400W, and OLEGA 1500W 'Fast Boiling'.

OTOH!!

On Amazon US site nearly all kettles are 1500W, a few lower like 1100W. At assumed 120V 1500W is 12.5Amps. 15Amp circuits are still common in older houses (despite changes in 1960s) but we supposed to de-rate for 'long-running' (not clearly specified in old code) so 12 Amps is in a ballpark.

Note that all US kettles are lower power than all but the tamest UK kettles. Essentially half power.

And IIRC, the 13/16A rating which allows super-power kettles in the UK was not for tea but for "electric fire", room heat. In post-War rebuilding, smokey coal was already depreciated in cities, steam plumbing and chimneys are expensive. Copper wire is costly too, but you "have" to have electric, and low-cost plans like ring-main were investigated.
[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 22:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

"accept that tea-appropriate boiling water can be obtained directly from the sink's plumbing" - unless it comes out literally at boiling temperature, it isn't tea appropriate. I live in France now, and order catering bags of tea from Amazon because French tea is dismally awful, not helped at all by this fairly widespread belief that black tea steeps at 60C. When I share tea bags with friends, I have to keep reminding them, boiling! Boiling! So, see, there are worse things than using a microwave to heat the water... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.126.208|172.71.126.208]] 06:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:Not boiling - OFF boiling. Higher than 60C, yes, but if you put actually boiling water straight on to the tea (or worse, boil the water with the tea in it), that's at least as bad. (And how far off the boil exactly depends on the type of tea.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.22|141.101.98.22]] 09:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

What's up with the "We want to ensure'''[sic]''' the good people of the U.K"?
I really can't see the US Embassy insuring them for any amount, so what gives? [[User:Ryden|Ryden]] ([[User talk:Ryden|talk]]) 12:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:Came here to make the same note. “Ensure” is not misspelled, why is it marked with “[sic]”? [[User:Dúthomhas|Dúthomhas]] ([[User talk:Dúthomhas|talk]]) 12:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::It's the wrong word entirely for the longer sentence. They perhaps wished to ''assure'' the good people, etc... "Ensure" means to "check and fix" something, in the way this is connected to "the good people" (implying that ''they'' would be changed to deal with any discrepancy of expectations), but this reading also goes wrong by the "that".
::In the sense of making a pledge (probably the actual intent), the structure is all wrong and probably was hastily reworded from a different narrative path, but left half-and-half and not making sense. My most minimal rewording for this would be "We want to ensure to the good people of the U.K. that ...", but it still reads very awkwardly. Perhaps it always made more sense to the average 'Merkin (c.f. "write me" instead of "write to me"), but I still would have written "assure" (as attempt to be comforting) or "pledge to" (for a more fervent sincerity of positive action).
::And to "insure" (for British English) is different yet again. While not working at all in the full sentence, it would start to suggest the actual possibility of such wrongness happening, but with the promise of monetary (or other) compensation if it does. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.149|141.101.98.149]] 15:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Question: Does the obsession with tea apply to all of Britain equally? E.g. are the Scottish just as stereotypicly known for loving tea as the English? This comic immediately brings Arthur Dent to my mind, and he's Very English Indeed. ("A liquid almost but not quite entirely unlike tea" is missing somewhere in the left third of the comic. :) --an intrigued German [[Special:Contributions/172.71.148.103|172.71.148.103]] 14:35, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:The four nations probably have had a similar outlook, but everyone may have had different social reasons. Tea-totalling perhaps was the initial driver in the more methodist corners, to get working people not to drink too much beer/cider/gin. The high social status version of regency ladies. It then sort of met in the middle by the time of the tea-ladies trolleying around refreshments to boardrooms and factory floors alike, in the same building.
:For WW2, the British government's demand for tea supplies was at least as important as ammunition. All British tanks apparently had (and continue to have) a hot-water boiler in the crew comparatment (not just for tea, but, probably the main thing at times). Official worries about tea [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7382750.stm lasted beyond that era].
:Generalising for everyone ''now'' is probably wrong, but visiting elderly relatives all over the UK, I'd ''always'' be passed a cup of tea (and a plate of cakes, or biscuits, placed temptingly close at hand). A pity that I never really liked tea (the cakes/biscuits are a bonus and a mitigating factor, but politeness demands that I throttle back my desires in that direction). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.149|141.101.98.149]] 15:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Boy, they ''really'' get mad when you microwave the Chalice. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:I think putting metal in the microwave is probably frowned upon worldwide. (Unless you're an ex-Navy Seal and cook who has found your ship taken over by mercenaries with a mad plan. Then go ahead.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.119|162.158.74.119]] 16:07, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I find that Brits really hate it when you bring up the concept of sweet tea, during the summer my family would fill up a jug with water add some tea bags then leave it on the porch over night. [[User:Resign|Resign]] ([[User talk:Resign|talk]]) 07:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

This is the most comprehensively explained comic in a while 😂 I guess there are a lot of passionate tea-makers around here. As a non-tea-drinker living in a Commonwealth country, I have definitely heard the outrageous stereotype that Americans microwave their water. Definitely practical when you don't own a kettle, but slow when brewing for a group. [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 08:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Would the small metal piece that sticks together the label of the teabag at the end of the string be an issue when microwaved (with the water or seperately)? Or is too small for that? (I know not all teabags have that, especially british "black tea" often comes in packages without string, but my usual tea does have it...) --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

2456: Types of Scientific Paper

2021-04-28T23:34:16Z

141.101.98.242: /* Explanation */ Functional table improvement

{{comic
| number = 2456
| date = April 28, 2021
| title = Types of Scientific Paper
| image = types_of_scientific_paper.png
| titletext = Others include "We've incrementally improved the estimate of this coefficient," "Maybe all these categories are wrong," and "We found a way to make student volunteers worse at tasks."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a RESEARCH DEPARTMENT ON A LUNCHBREAK. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, Randall describes categories of scientific papers with somewhat humorous generalized titles.

{| class="wikitable"
|+Breakdown of Papers
|-
|Paper Title
|Explanation
|Article Description
|-
|We put a camera somewhere new
|This may involve miniaturisation or other improvements of imaging sensors, power supply, transmission or retention of data, environmental hardening and (possibly) recovery afterwards. Photographs and videos can be especially helpful in understanding what is or was going on, especially for the layman, than more limited signal traces.

Cameras have been inserted into ''every'' obvious bodily orifice (including swallowed, to be later excreted), placed in interesting habitats to monitor wildlife, sent into volcanic craters/ocean trenches/high altitudes/nuclear reactors, launched into space and sent past/round/onto several of the solar-system's more interesting bodies.

There's no clue ''which'' new place a camera has now been put, but it will probably at the very least excite people in the appropriately narrow field of research. The title (paraphrasing) does not guarantee that it will interest the public as a whole, but neither does it completely rule out that this will grab the headlines - at least until the next 'newer place' is imaged.
|
|-
|Hey, I found a trove of old records! They don't turn out to be particularly useful, but still, cool!
|Rather than starting with the aim of investigating some question, and finding some way of answering it by uncovering evidence, sometimes a writer may have stumbled upon a cache of historic documents that they then feel compelled to justify the resulting 'WikiWalk' they may have found themselves sucked into.
|
|-
|My colleague is wrong and I can finally prove it
| This title refers to the occasional rivalries between scientists within a field, which can push them to seek proof that they, and not their colleague, are correct.
|Note the lack of headers, suggesting an argument more than an explanation of data
|-
|The immune system is at it again
|The human immune system is notoriously complex, and there are countless papers in medical fields just describing its strangeness
|
|-
|We figured out how to make this exotic material, so email us if you need some
|Researchers often attempt to create materials despite there not being any demand, predicting that in the future their material will be game-changing without any actual applications. These researchers have created such a material, and are offering to produce it for anyone who needs it
|
|-
|What are fish even doing down there
|Deep sea marine biology regularly discovers [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7QXdlSBGGY strange lifeforms] in unexpected places, and theories explaining deep sea ecosystems are regularly confounded by new data.
|This paper does not appear to have any headers
|-
|This task I had to do anyway turned out to be hard enough for its own paper
|There is a huge variety in the complexity and importance of subjects studied in scientific papers, and often some supposedly easy task will be sufficiently complicated as to merit its own paper.
|
|-
|Hey, at least we showed that this method can produce results! That's not nothing, right?
|One of the struggles of the scientific method is that many experiments will not produce the results scientists desired or expected. These results are still (sometimes) important, but are often ignored compared to research with important findings
|
|-
|Check out this weird thing one of us saw while out for a walk
|This paper may be imagined as an opportunistic publication. A department or team has seen itself low down on the local 'league table' for academic output. A brainstorming session for a way of rectifying this led to desperately seizing upon the first idle comment made (in lieu of any better sounding ideas) that can somehow be shoehorned into their respective subject area.
This also works in the context of entomology. Insects have the most species of any class of animals [https://www.si.edu/spotlight/buginfo/bugnos by a wide margin], but due to their small size, they're not easily seen. As a result, new species are constantly being discovered in places as innocuous as [https://wildlife.org/video-entomologists-discover-30-new-species-in-la-backyards/ someone's backyard.]
|
|-
|We are 500 scientists and here's what we've been up to for the last 10 years
| Some papers summarize the work of big research teams, like those working on the [https://repositorio.uc.cl/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11534/13948/Observation%20of%20a%20new%20particle%20in%20the%20search%20for%20the%20Standard%20Model%20Higgs%20boson%20with%20the%20ATLAS%20detector%20at%20the%20LHC.pdf Higgs Boson] (list of authors starts at page 17) or LIGO. Since the discoveries which are made are a team effort, probably outlasting many of the individual tenures involved, the papers have many authors listed.
A credit for participation may not mean any particularly great contribution by each individual, but being left out (even for one summer's secondment, seven years before any results could be recorded) would be taken as a slight, and an opportunity missed to be 'citable' in the future.
|A huge portion of the page is taken up by the presumably 500 authors' names, above the main horizontal bar.
|-
|Some thoughts on how everyone else is bad at research
|Similar to the "my colleague is wrong" paper, but in this case applied to far greater swathes of the community by the author(s) of this (possibly unfocussed) tract.
|
|-
|We scanned some undergraduates
|Some initial research, especially that on a low budget, may recruit students at the same institution as easily available test-subjects. Quite often these are psychological or sociological studies, but can involve more medical (but non-invasive) 'scans', from simple eyeball-tracking to full-body MRI.
|
|-
|We've incrementally improved the estimate of this coefficient
|Often scientific research, e.g. in cosmology or physics, will work with an assumed constant value that is known to be only an 'educated guess' of the actual definite value, or an inclusive range. However accurate/certain this is, further experimentation or observation may further narrow down the uncertainty involved to a statistically significant degree.
|rowspan="3"|(Only referenced in Title Text)
|-
|Maybe all these categories are wrong
|In some field that relies heavily upon classification (e.g. phylogenetic biology, or the Standard Model in physics) sometimes observations arise that cast doubt on the previously established ideas. It seems that this may have happened here, hopefully with a suggestion of how to reimagine the situation.
|-
|We found a way to make student volunters worse at tasks
|Possibly a pyschology experiment, and maybe not even the result expected. In general, the repetition of an activity will induce greater skill/capacity in a tested individual. By accident or design, the study group in this instance has induced the opposite correlation.
|}

===Trivia===
Originally, this comic's title text misspelt "volunteers" as "volunters". This could have been intentional (''we'' might be the volunteers), but probably not as it was quickly corrected.

==Transcript==
Types of Scientific Paper

''An array of scientific papers is shown, with only their titles legible. Titles are as follows:''

We put a camera somewhere new

Hey, I found a trove of old records! They don't turn out to be particularly useful, but still, cool!

My colleague is wrong and I can finally prove it

The immune system is at it again

We figured out how to make this exotic material, so email us if you need some

What are fish even doing down there

This task I had to do anyway turned out to be hard enough for its own paper

Hey, at least we showed that this method can produce results! That's not nothing, right?

Check out this weird thing one of us saw while out for a walk

We are 500 scientists and here's what we've been up to for the last 10 years

Some thoughts on how everyone else is bad at research

We scanned some undergraduates

{{comic discussion}}

2455: Virus Consulting

2021-04-28T11:47:42Z

141.101.98.242: Substituted "exponentially" for "considerably". Vaccination is not an exponential process, even though the curve might look like it.

{{comic
| number = 2455
| date = April 26, 2021
| title = Virus Consulting
| image = virus_consulting.png
| titletext = All our teams make an effort to stay optimistic, but I will say that once our virus division saw the vaccine efficacy data, they started asking for payment up front.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COVID virus. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is another in a [[:Category:COVID-19|series of comics]] related to the {{w|2019–20 coronavirus outbreak|2020 pandemic}} of the {{w|coronavirus}} {{w|SARS-CoV-2}}, which causes {{w|COVID-19}}, specifically regarding the [[:Category:COVID-19 vaccine|COVID-19 vaccine]].

This comic imagines a scenario where [[Ponytail]] works for a {{w|consulting firm}}, which offers advice about viruses, specifically COVID-19. Ponytail tells a panel of people (the government?), consisting of [[Hairbun]], [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]], that though they are worried about COVID-19 variants, the fact that the number of people vaccinated is increasing considerably is a good sign. Hairbun then accuses Ponytail's firm of simply "telling them what they want to hear", accusing her firm of giving them false hope to make them keep retaining her firm.

The punchline comes in the final panel where it turns out that Ponytail's colleague, [[Black Hat]], is consulting a different set of clients, which are the viruses themselves. He presents the exact same graph to the viruses and gives them the opposite message: though COVID-19 variants seem to be exciting to them, vaccination numbers are terrible news to their propagation and survival. This repeats the idea of [[2287: Pathogen Resistance]] where the pandemic is seen from the virus' perspective. As in that previous comic, it is the virus that are in a lot of trouble, which is another way of saying that humanity stands a good chance of surviving this situation. (That humanity will survive is also good for the virus, which needs living humans so that it can spread.)

The fact that another member of Ponytail's firm is telling clients that they should be worried is what Ponytail refers to when claiming that her firm does not simply tell clients what they want to hear.

This would not be the first time that Black Hat has given advice to natural disasters that can kill humans, see [[1754: Tornado Safety Tips]].

{{w|Variants of SARS-CoV-2|SARS-CoV-2 variants}}, commonly called "COVID variants", have been in the news. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has mutated into many different strains, some of which spread more easily among humans. It is unknown whether the different variants have a greater individual fatality rate. The current SARS-CoV-2 vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna as well as the Regeneron therapeutic monoclonal
antibodies all effectively protect against at least the New York ({{w|Lineage B.1.526}}), South African ({{w|Lineage B.1.351}}), and U.K. ({{w|Lineage B.1.1.7}}) variants according to [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/health/covid-ny-variant-vaccine.html two recent study preprints] released April 22, 2021. Further research and peer review is ongoing.

The title text notes that the firm's "virus division" (the group advising the viruses themselves) has started to get worried that their jobs are becoming obsolete, due to vaccine efficacy. Thus, they are demanding to be paid "up front", before consulting/advising services have been rendered to their clients. Dependent upon the expectations of each party, payment can be asked for "up front", deferred for invoicing once services have been rendered, or a combination of the two. The weaker party to a contract may need to submit their transaction, or a guarantor, before the other spends too much effort in fulfilling their side of the contract.

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail stands in front a chart, with a labeled graph with an upward-curving line at the top, and several box-and-whisker plots below, with unreadable text and labels. She is holding a pointer towards the plot while addressing a panel in front of her to the left. The panel is seated behind a desk and is composed of Hairbun, Cueball and Megan. Cueball has one arm on the desk.]
:Ponytail: Now, I know you're worried about the variants, but this graph should be encouraging.
:Ponytail: Your rollout is going well. The vaccines are good. They work.
:Label on graph: Vaccinations

:[Same setting in a narrower panel without the chart. Ponytail has the pointer to her side. Cueball has his arms under the desk as the other two.]
:Hairbun: You're just telling us what we want to hear.
:Ponytail: If you think that, you should see the reports from my colleagues who work for COVID.

:[Close-up of Ponytail in a very narrow panel.]
:Off-screen voice: They work for '''''who??'''''
:Ponytail: Our firm has lots of clients.

:[Black Hat stands in front of an identical chart as in panel one, and points to it with a pointer in the same way as Ponytail did. Only he is looking to the right at his clients. He is speaking to a panel of three large coronaviruses, two of which floats above the desk, the middle one is partly below the desk. Across the top frame of the panel there is a box with a caption:]
:Meanwhile...
:Black Hat: Now, I know you're excited about the variants, but this graph should be terrifying.
:Black Hat: We're in real trouble here.
:Label on graph: Vaccinations

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:COVID-19 vaccine]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]

Conservation

2015-06-17T16:23:18Z

141.101.98.242: Undo revision 93700 by NuikaSanders (talk)

{{comic
| date = June 17, 2009
| title = Conservation
| image = conservation.png
| before = Original blog post on ''Building a Smarter Planet'': http://asmarterplanet.com/blog/2009/06/building-a-smarter-planet-for-squirrels.html
| lappend = asmarterplanet/
}}

==Explanation==
Two special [[:Category:A Smarter Planet|A Smarter Planet]] comics were created by Randall after a special request from {{w|IBM}}'s blog [http://asmarterplanet.com/ A Smarter Planet]. They are not part of the regular numbered series of comics for xkcd's home site. But they are featured (both of them at the same page) on xkcd under [http://www.xkcd.com/asmarterplanet// asmarterplanet]. Each comic links to their respective posts on the A Smarter Planet blog.

It was once said that America's forests were so dense and continuous that "a squirrel could go from the Atlantic to the Mississippi without touching the ground." As this is no longer true, anyone mentioning this today would use the phrase to highlight the fact that deforestation is such a problem that this once common aphorism is anachronistic. Cueball, however, interprets this literally to mean that squirrel's not being able to travel without touching the ground is a problem - rather than the more general problem the aphorism was meant to illustrate. As a result of his misinterpretation, he invents the Aerial Squirrel Transit Pod, which technically solves the problem of squirrel transportation, but does nothing to solve the problem of deforestation. This is yet another instance of people announcing odd things at conferences, a recurring theme in xkcd.

The other Smarter Planet comic is [[Prescriptions]].

==Transcript==
:[Trees, with a squirrel flying in-between.]
:They say that 400 years ago a squirrel could go from the Atlantic to the Mississippi without touching the ground.

:[Cueball speaking to an audience, under a banner labeled "Conservation Society".]
:Cueball: I dream of bringing back those days.

:Cueball [pointing to a diagram of a helicopter-like device carrying a squirrel]: Which is why I've developed the aerial squirrel transit pod.
:Audience member [Offscreen]: Okay, back up.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Squirrels]]
[[Category:A Smarter Planet]]
[[Category:Extra Comics]]
[[Category:No title text]]

882: Significant

2014-07-26T10:58:57Z

141.101.98.242: /* Explanation */ removed duplicated word

{{comic
| number = 882
| date = April 6, 2011
| title = Significant
| image = significant.png
| titletext = So, uh, we did the green study again and got no link. It was probably a-- "RESEARCH CONFLICTED ON GREEN JELLY BEAN/ACNE LINK; MORE STUDY RECOMMENDED!"
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is about the often difficult relationship between science, statistics and the media. [[Megan]] and [[Cueball]] commission some research on the link between jelly beans and acne. At first the scientists do not want to stop playing the addictive game {{w|Minecraft}} (which has been referenced in a [[861|previous xkcd]]), but they do eventually start.

First some basic statistical theory. Let's imagine you are trying to find out if jelly beans cause acne. To do this you could find a group of people and randomly split them into two groups - one group who you get to eat lots of jelly beans and a second group who are banned from eating jelly beans. After some time you compare whether the group that eat jelly beans have more acne than those who do not. If more people in the group that eat jelly beans have acne then you might think that jelly beans cause acne. However, there is a problem.

Some people will suffer from acne whether they eat jelly beans or not and some will never have acne even if they do eat jelly beans. There is an element of chance in how many people prone to acne are in each group. What if, purely by chance, all the group we selected to eat jelly beans would have had acne anyway while those who didn't eat jelly beans were the lucky sort of people who never get spots? Then, even if jelly beans did not cause acne, we would conclude that jelly beans did cause acne. Of course it is very unlikely that all the acne prone people end up in one group by chance, especially if we have enough people in each group. However, to give more confidence in the result of this type of experiment, scientists use statistics to see how likely it is that the result they find is purely by chance. This is known as {{w|statistical hypothesis testing}}. Before we start the experiment, we choose a threshold known as the significance level. In the comic the scientists choose a threshold of 5%. If they find that more of the people who ate jelly beans had acne and the chance it was a purely random result is less than 1 in 20, they will say that jelly beans do cause acne. If however, the chance that their result was purely by random chance is greater than 5% they will say they have found no evidence of a link. The important point is this - '''there could still be a 1 in 20 chance that this result was purely a statistical fluke'''.

The scientists find no link between jelly beans and acne (the probability that the result is by chance is more than 5% i.e. p > 0.05) but then Megan and Cueball ask them to see if only one colour of jelly beans is responsible. They test 20 different colors each at a significance level of 5%. If the probability that each trial gives a false positive result is 1 in 20, then by testing 20 different colors it is now highly likely that at least one jelly bean test will give a false positive. To be precise, the probability of having ''no'' false positive in 20 tests is (0.95)^20 = 35.85%. Probability of having ''no'' false positive in 21 tests (counting the test without color discrimination) is (0.95)^21 = 34.06%. In this case they find that green jelly beans do cause acne.

This leads to a big newspaper headline saying '''GREEN JELLY BEANS CAUSE ACNE''' but when the scientists {{w|Reproducibility|repeat the experiment}} (another key part of the scientific method) they find no evidence for a link. They try to tell the reporter that it was probably a coincidence but that is not news. Instead it leads to another major headline saying '''RESEARCH CONFLICTED'''.

This can be an issue with more serious matters than jelly beans and acne - at any one time there are many studies about possible links between substances (e.g. red wine) and illness (e.g. cancer). Because only the positive results get reported, this limits the value any single study has - especially if the mechanism linking the two things is not known.

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail runs up to another person, who subsequently points off-panel where there are presumably scientists.]
:Ponytail: Jelly beans cause acne!
:Another: Scientists! Investigate!
:Scientists: But we're playing Minecraft! ...Fine.

:[Two scientists. Cueball has safety goggles, Megan has a sheet of notes.]
:Cueball: We found no link between jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:[Back to the original two.]
:Another: That settles that.
:Ponytail: I hear it's only a certain color that causes it.
:Another: Scientists!
:Scientists: But Miiiinecraft!

:[20 near identical small panels follow, 4 rows 5 columns.]
:Cueball: We found no link between purple jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between brown jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between pink jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between blue jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between teal jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between salmon jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between red jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between turquoise jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between magenta jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between yellow jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between grey jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between tan jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between cyan jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found a link between green jelly beans and acne (p < 0.05).
:Off-panel: ''WHOA!''

:Cueball: We found no link between yellow jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between beige jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between lilac jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between black jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between peach jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:Cueball: We found no link between orange jelly beans and acne (p > 0.05).

:[Newspaper front page.]
:NEWS Green Jelly Beans Linked To Acne! 95% Confidence
:[There is a picture of 3 green jelly beans.]
:Only 5% chance of coincidence!
:Scientists...

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics with color‏‎]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Video games]]