explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2579: Tractor Beam

2025-04-27T16:55:53Z

141.101.99.24:

This feels a lot like a SMBC outtake. (In a good way.) --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.147|172.70.110.147]] 20:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
:This reads like a bash.org comment. (In a good way.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.221|172.70.126.221]] 21:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

So, if I were rising in a tractor-beam, I think there'd be clues as to the scope of the effects. Are my clothes hanging off me, floating round me or am I being upwardly cradled by them? Do I feel like I'm standing on something, hanging upside-down by my feet (from a topsy-turvey horizontal) or freefalling? What's my inner-ear telling me? Is the air around me rushing up, feels still (even though I'm moving vertically through it) or is it like I'm being raised up through it? Does the air feel like treacle, can I push against it, angle my arms to spin in the 'wind' like with indoor freefalling? Does any lateral wind still pass by as it did before the beam (small adjustments for being away from ground-effects, allowed for) or swirl oddly laterally or vertically? Is anything in the air (bat or smoke or rain or whatever dust I kicked up as I scrabbled for footing upon the first surprise of being tractored up) going up or down or neither, or revealing eddies? A bat, or anything else that flies, is going to have excess lift until any confusion (again with the inner-ear?) stops it from using its wings to counteract any non-existent 'weight' element, if applicable. If I hold one hand atop another (easier to experiment with, and switch over, than feet being below my torso, especially if I can't control attitude) do I feel a 'force shadow' where levity does not pass and/or gravity from below is no longer nullified/negated? Am I held as vertically (or similarly, perhaps can adopt a 'seated' poise) or am I unable to hold my attitude/able to change it? ...And loads more obvious things to potentially experience, depending upon how I deal with the first few tests and how quickly I can form less open-ended and more practical/emperical theories about what all I have started to learn means... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.68|172.70.86.68]] 21:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
:Hypothetically, Cueball might be being moved by forces similar to the one causing [https://www.bbc.com/news/56643677 this] - levitation would be an amazing thing to have --[[User:Char Latte49|Wielder of the Staple Gun]] ([[User talk:Char Latte49|talk]]) 01:28, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Very interesting that Randall has been creating a string of comics on UFOs recently. Wonder if he knows something we don't? Jokes aside, it's interesting to see how his brain works, exclusively from a creative-output perspective. The string of UFO comics must be related to something that he experienced in his life recently. Similar to his cursed connectors run a few months ago: one can only wonder what weird, jerry-rigged solution he needed to some frustrating problem. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.245|172.70.110.245]] 01:47, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
:There has been a lot about UFOs spotted by the US Airforce, I think? I still don't believe it's aliens... [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-never-aliens-until-it-is/ It's never Aliens] ;-) I guess once he get's one idea for a specific comic, then this may easily spawn other ideas. So I'm not sure there are any particular reason he got the first idea, but that may explain the others that followed. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Let's imagine that a bat between the UFO and Cueball creates a shielding effect from the tractor beam. Part of Cueball would feel the traction but others not. He could be torn apart! Poor Cueball.
:If not the part of his body that is not attracted simply goes along with the actively pulled parts, like when you lift a baby in its armpits.
:[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 12:27, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I feel like it is Randall, not Cueball, as it is "me" in the caption. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.232|162.158.187.232]] 12:54, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Bumpf
:Most comics could feel like Cueball is Randall. But when you see a person speaking in the comic, then it is that person that says set me down, in the caption. So I would still just say it is Cueball not Randall. Also I'm sure he has not been pulled up by traction beam... And even if this is how Randall would react in case of an abduction (I doubt it) he typically let Cueball have these far out reactions. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

What gets me is how Cueball will enter the hatch. If it's far enough 'into the drawing' to make it a person-sized hatch then the projective cone would shine an eliptical slice along the ground forelengthened far morenthan our viewpoint foreshortens it, so its major axis would be (on the image) vertical, not horizontal. For that ground-footprint, it's a smaller, closer craft. Still large, but the hatch is smaller than Cueball. Clearly, then, the tractor-beam is ''only'' used to raise the chosen subject off the ground, because (unlike the anti-gravity/levitation beam) the transporter-technology they actually use to ultimately bring a chosen subject into the ship itself ''cannot'' distinguish between a person and the ground they might be standing on. Risking either injurious impediments to the one being transported or tearing up some ground with them. (Leaving either foot-filled shoes or a 'divot' in the ground, to shock and/or excite those who discover the evidence of the abduction, and causing a mess for the aliens inside the vessel... either way.) This is clearly the only logical conclusion we can make. ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.125|162.158.159.125]] 13:51, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
:Maybe the hatch would just open up when he get's close...--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
:What does it get you? [[User:Gatorized|Gatorized]] ([[User talk:Gatorized|talk]]) 16:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::Clearly, what gets them is "how Cueball will enter the hatch. [etc]". I don't know what it gets ''you'' (or even of what, to you, it gets; or of what ''you'' get of ''it'') of course. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 16:55, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

For me the first two questions are obviously linked to the tractor from the headline. Cueball is thinking about using the tractor beam of the UFO to plow a field. Thus he wants to know why the dirt is not being pulled up with him. I'm surprised this is not mentioned, so I might be totally wrong here. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.246.109|172.70.246.109]] 11:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
: Don't believe "tractor beam" has anything to do with a farming tractor. From Wikipedia, it says that "tractor beam" is short for "attractor beam". [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.82|172.69.34.82]] 17:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
:: However, xkcd is known for word play and for purposefully misunderstanding words with more than one meaning in the wrong context. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.221.39|172.68.221.39]] 19:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
:::For sure but I'm quite sure the current explanation that Cueball wonders how the beam knows only to pull at him and not at anything else that is inside the beam, as his bat question reveals. If anything in the beam would float towards the spaceship then anything loose on the ground should follow Cueball. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

If he had been brought onboard the alien ship, I'm sure they would have still returned him sometime around the 25th time he asked, "Aren't we there yet?" – [[User:RAGBRAIvet|RAGBRAIvet]] ([[User talk:RAGBRAIvet|talk]]) 14:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk:391: Anti-Mindvirus

2024-09-10T17:14:06Z

141.101.99.24:

----

"The Game" is not actually a game *and therefore can have no winners or losers*.

*A game by definition is a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck

* If one does view "The Game" as an actually game, then it consists of one simply saying the words "The Game" out loud or via text. "The Game" also requires one to think of the words The Game before speaking them, thus making them the first "Losers" to participate in the game, and once the opposing team has lost (In this case the person who first thought of "The Game") Then the opposing team then by default is the winner, and is not subject to loosing as once there is a decided winner and looser, the game is over. So this means that the originator of "The Game" (a non-game) is the only looser, and everyone else to have participated is forever the winner, as no one can set up matches for a "The Game" competition, as they would also have to be thinking about "the game" meaning the lose as soon as it starts.

You're all free. --[[User:Para|Para]] ([[User talk:Para|talk]]) 21:57, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

sorry to inturupt para, but some games cannot be simply won
see xkcd comic #138
: signd summer glau
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.5|173.245.54.5]] 13:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

:: A game can have multiple losers, so your logic does not work. Based on the description, it seems like everyone is a loser. It is impossible to win. [[User:Flewk|Flewk]] ([[User talk:Flewk|talk]]) 00:30, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

In the branch of social psychology that deals with game design, a 'game' is defined by being inside of the 'magic circle': a space where arbitrary actions are given meaning, and everybody participating in the magic circle voluntarily agrees upon a set of rules by which to play. There are no requirements for a game to have win or lose conditions, just look at Go, which has no official 'end' until both players agree the game is done.
For "The Game" to qualify as A game, it must allow for methods by which people voluntarily enter and leave its magic circle. As it does not, it cannot be a game, but is instead is a social exercise.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.197|108.162.218.197]] 04:50, 14 June 2016 (UTC)XanKortal
: Bringing psychology to a math fight? Cute. Game theory has no care for you silly little humans and your silly little brains. [[User:Hppavilion1|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1|talk]]) 07:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
:: Oh, and also, I argue that social psychology is itself a social psychology game, and I can just opt out of playing by the rules social psychologists want me to. [[User:Hppavilion1|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1|talk]]) 07:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

It has also been suggested that the [https://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=425817 Platinum Angel] will prevent you from losing the game. - [[User:Mike Rosoft|Mike Rosoft]] ([[User talk:Mike Rosoft|talk]]) 20:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

There's a new [[what if]] post [[Special:Contributions/172.70.54.52|172.70.54.52]] 16:09, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
:Thank you, here. —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 17:47, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

AAGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH NO ONE CAN WIN... except those of us who are SMORT! [[User:Z1mp0st0rz|Z1mp0st0rz]] ([[User talk:Z1mp0st0rz|talk]]) 17:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I LOST THE GAME! {{unsigned|RadiantRainwing|16:18, 10 September 2024}|i also didn't sign my comment with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}

Talk:2896: Crossword Constructors

2024-02-20T15:43:52Z

141.101.99.24:

The top ten most common letters in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, and the percentage of words they appear in, are:
E – 11.1607%
A – 8.4966%
R – 7.5809%
I – 7.5448%
O – 7.1635%
T – 6.9509%
N – 6.6544%
S – 5.7351%

source: https://www.rd.com/article/common-letters-english-language/ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.187|172.69.58.187]] ([[User talk:172.69.58.187|talk]]) 22:29, 19 February 2024 ''(please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~</nowiki>~~)''

At least one of those "words" is already available
...oreta is a genus of moths: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreta [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.64|162.158.154.64]] ([[User talk:162.158.154.64|talk]]) 22:36, 19 February 2024 ''(please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~</nowiki>~~)''

: {Yoko} "ONO" was over-played in crosswords a few years back. "ORONO" (university town in Maine) was over-favored by one constructor. Not to mention a sandwich cookie. [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 22:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
:: "ONO" has also entered English from Hawaiian, where it means (a) good to eat, delicious; (b) the {{w|Wahoo}} (Acanthocybium solandri), a species of fish. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.247|108.162.245.247]] 02:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:”Eni” is an Italy-based oil company.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.36|141.101.68.36]] 02:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

In contrast to crosswords in german newspapers, those in american newspapers are typically not dense, right?
“Our” crosswords rarely have a single unused square.
And this is obviously easier to compose if you can choose from more words. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.123.39|172.71.123.39]] 22:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
:I was looking around the internet for an example, and I found this example: https://www.50plus.de/spiele/raetsel/kreuzwortraetsel-1.html
:If this is what you are talking about, Games World of Puzzles calls this a "Pencil Pointer" puzzle. I think technically the name is "Swedish Style" according to Wikipedia. They aren't typically the kind you'd find in an :American newspaper, but I do see them on occasion.
:Generally, the American style ones are less dense than Swedish but more dense than British cryptics.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.195|172.70.175.195]] 00:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
::Also, American puzzles almost always have rotational symmetry (at least 180 degrees, sometimes all four 90-degree turns)[[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 01:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, 172.70.175.195, that is exactly what I meant. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.236|172.71.94.236]] 14:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm confused, on reading the Explanation, as to whether these words are wanted for crossword ''clues'' or crossword ''answers''. I thought I knew, but it looks like other people might have the other idea. Either:
#In order to fit something perpendicular to several other words, in a dense and/or symmetrically-gridded puzzle, it ends up asking for a (currently) fictional string of letters that cannot be given a valid 'Easy' clue. They're seeking to make "2024 Nicki Minaj hit song (5)", or similar, to become that, soon enough that they can publish the whole puzzle that they're otherwise happy with. Or,
#For a cryptic clue with an anagram/subselection element, they want a way to include, letters that they've found them unable to mix in otherwise. e.g. "Taylor Swift's 'Oreta' with Tenacious D's initial spin (7)" -> "rotated" (ok, awkward example, but best I could back-contrive at a moment's notice... As opposed to something like "Turned a bit of carrot at Edinburgh (7)", which would ''already'' work Ok for the exact same answer), using various typical tricksy and misleading mannerisms of a Cryptic...
#...or both? Being only a(n unskilled) ''doer'' of crosswords, not usually a compiler of them, I might well be missing the details that someone deeper into crossword-lore takes for granted. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.143|172.69.195.143]] 02:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:Most likely Cueball and friends are constructing American-style crosswords and want to use ORETA, ENTA, and similar words as answers in their puzzles, so that they could clue them with "2024 Nicki Minaj album", for example. (I imagine that when John Lennon entered into his second marriage, crossword constructors of America rejoiced since they now had a well-known person that they could use as a clue for ONO.) Since the letters in their proposed album titles are common, I doubt that a cryptic crossword constructor would be hoping for such "words" to exist so that they could use them in clues. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.150|108.162.216.150]] 04:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:My initial reading was that these were awkward series of letters that appear within words that they're otherwise struggling to find clues for, but I guess why not all three.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 09:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

did any of yoy check out the new fnf rodentrap mod? i think it ws peak :) --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.188|172.69.79.188]] 08:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Should main page include possibilty that there is no intended meaning in these words? {{w|172.71.94.236|14:20, 20 February 2024}}
:If you can explain what you mean (I'm not entirely certain, you leave it somewhat ambiguous), you can possibly include itself.
:(Unless you mean to edit the [[Main Page]] itself, which wouldn't be either right or technically possible, as you stand.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 15:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2896: Crossword Constructors

2024-02-20T09:38:12Z

141.101.99.24:

The top ten most common letters in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, and the percentage of words they appear in, are:
E – 11.1607%
A – 8.4966%
R – 7.5809%
I – 7.5448%
O – 7.1635%
T – 6.9509%
N – 6.6544%
S – 5.7351%

source: https://www.rd.com/article/common-letters-english-language/ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.187|172.69.58.187]] ([[User talk:172.69.58.187|talk]]) 22:29, 19 February 2024 ''(please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~</nowiki>~~)''

At least one of those "words" is already available
...oreta is a genus of moths: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreta [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.64|162.158.154.64]] ([[User talk:162.158.154.64|talk]]) 22:36, 19 February 2024 ''(please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~</nowiki>~~)''

: {Yoko} "ONO" was over-played in crosswords a few years back. "ORONO" (university town in Maine) was over-favored by one constructor. Not to mention a sandwich cookie. [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 22:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
:: "ONO" has also entered English from Hawaiian, where it means (a) good to eat, delicious; (b) the {{w|Wahoo}} (Acanthocybium solandri), a species of fish. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.247|108.162.245.247]] 02:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:”Eni” is an Italy-based oil company.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.36|141.101.68.36]] 02:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

In contrast to crosswords in german newspapers, those in american newspapers are typically not dense, right?
“Our” crosswords rarely have a single unused square.
And this is obviously easier to compose if you can choose from more words. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.123.39|172.71.123.39]] 22:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
:I was looking around the internet for an example, and I found this example: https://www.50plus.de/spiele/raetsel/kreuzwortraetsel-1.html
:If this is what you are talking about, Games World of Puzzles calls this a "Pencil Pointer" puzzle. I think technically the name is "Swedish Style" according to Wikipedia. They aren't typically the kind you'd find in an :American newspaper, but I do see them on occasion.
:Generally, the American style ones are less dense than Swedish but more dense than British cryptics.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.195|172.70.175.195]] 00:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
::Also, American puzzles almost always have rotational symmetry (at least 180 degrees, sometimes all four 90-degree turns)[[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 01:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm confused, on reading the Explanation, as to whether these words are wanted for crossword ''clues'' or crossword ''answers''. I thought I knew, but it looks like other people might have the other idea. Either:
#In order to fit something perpendicular to several other words, in a dense and/or symmetrically-gridded puzzle, it ends up asking for a (currently) fictional string of letters that cannot be given a valid 'Easy' clue. They're seeking to make "2024 Nicki Minaj hit song (5)", or similar, to become that, soon enough that they can publish the whole puzzle that they're otherwise happy with. Or,
#For a cryptic clue with an anagram/subselection element, they want a way to include, letters that they've found them unable to mix in otherwise. e.g. "Taylor Swift's 'Oreta' with Tenacious D's initial spin (7)" -> "rotated" (ok, awkward example, but best I could back-contrive at a moment's notice... As opposed to something like "Turned a bit of carrot at Edinburgh (7)", which would ''already'' work Ok for the exact same answer), using various typical tricksy and misleading mannerisms of a Cryptic...
#...or both? Being only a(n unskilled) ''doer'' of crosswords, not usually a compiler of them, I might well be missing the details that someone deeper into crossword-lore takes for granted. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.143|172.69.195.143]] 02:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:Most likely Cueball and friends are constructing American-style crosswords and want to use ORETA, ENTA, and similar words as answers in their puzzles, so that they could clue them with "2024 Nicki Minaj album", for example. (I imagine that when John Lennon entered into his second marriage, crossword constructors of America rejoiced since they now had a well-known person that they could use as a clue for ONO.) Since the letters in their proposed album titles are common, I doubt that a cryptic crossword constructor would be hoping for such "words" to exist so that they could use them in clues. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.150|108.162.216.150]] 04:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:My initial reading was that these were awkward series of letters that appear within words that they're otherwise struggling to find clues for, but I guess why not all three.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 09:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

did any of yoy check out the new fnf rodentrap mod? i think it ws peak :) --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.188|172.69.79.188]] 08:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

2658: Coffee Cup Holes

2022-08-15T11:55:11Z

141.101.99.24: /* Explanation */ Typo

{{comic
| number = 2658
| date = August 12, 2022
| title = Coffee Cup Holes
| image = coffee_cup_holes.png
| titletext = Theoretical physicist: At the Planck length, uncountably many.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a CAFFEINE MOLECULE WITH A HOLE DRILLED IN ITS SIDE. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic depicts people in different fields of study answering the question, "How many holes are there in a coffee cup?" and also compares this to what a normal person would say.

This question has different interpretations, entirely dependant upon the definition of a hole. The type of {{w|coffee cup}} shown in the comic is with a handle (like a {{w|Mug}}), but [[Randall]] calls it a cup and there are also cups with handles on the Wikipedia page for coffee cups. Most people would recognize that there is a hole through the handle.

[[File:Mug and Torus morph.gif|thumb|200px|The coffee mug and donut shown in this animation both have topological genus one.]]

[[Ponytail]], a {{w|topology|topologist}}, states the coffee cup belongs in the {{w|Genus (mathematics)#Topology|genus}} of one hole. A common joke is that topologists can't tell the difference between a coffee cup (with handle) and a {{w|doughnut}} since they're {{w|Homeomorphism|homeomorphic}} to each other — meaning they have the same genus, i.e one hole. From the topologist's point of view, the coffee cup definitely has one hole, which corresponds to the opening created by the cup handle. A cup without a handle would have zero holes, as it is equivalent to a dinner plate, just an indentation in the surface. See [[2625: Field Topology]] for more information about topology.

[[Hairy]], a normal person, is not sure (the acronym "IDK" stands for "I don't know") and asks for clarification about whether the opening at the top counts as a hole. This shows flaws in the question, which suffers from the mathematically imprecise, ambiguous common usage of the word hole. Topologists would refer to the opening as a concavity, not a hole, and while they consider such geometrical properties generally outside their field, most practical applications of topology do involve geometric components. Hairy would say one for the handle, and two if the opening counts as a hole, which he is not certain the one asking the question thinks.

[[File:Double torus illustration.png|thumb|left|200px|A genus two surface]]

[[Hairbun]], a philosopher, answers the question with an elucidating counter-question, considering a hypothetical scenario. Drilling a new hole should increase the number of holes by one. After the hole has been drilled, the coffee cup with handle has two holes according to topologists. Therefore, the philosopher's question requires the original questioner to reveal the answer to their own question. The drawing clearly shows the two holes that would be in the cup after drilling, and thus makes it clear that the opening is not considered a hole if there is no way through for the coffee. (So from that drawing the original answer is again one hole).

[[Image:Point cloud torus.gif|thumb|200px|A point cloud of a genus one surface]]

[[Cueball]], a chemist, looks at the coffee in the cup on a molecular level, which means it has very many holes: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (1021 or 1 sextillion) “in the [https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?model=CN1C%3DNC2%3DC1C%28%3DO%29N%28C%28%3DO%29N2C%29C caffeine] alone.” One molecule of caffeine has two rings of bonds with holes in them, so Cueball is talking about 500 quintillion molecules, or 0.00083 {{w|mole (unit)|moles}}. As the molecular mass of {{w|caffeine}} is about 194 grams per mole, [[Randall]] must think that the mass of caffeine in a typical cup of coffee is 161 milligrams. The coffee could have other holes, depending on the type of coffee; for example, espresso contains significant amounts of niacin and riboflavin, which have one and three rings in their chemical structure, respectively. However, bonds are not sticks as portrayed in many molecular models. The "holes" in the middle of a molecule's rings are not completely empty but instead merely have lower electron probability density through the middle than other parts of the bonds. So the point-cloud duality of {{w|Bonding molecular orbital|electron orbitals and bonds}} might not satisfy a topologist's, normal person's, or philosopher's criteria for a connected substrate in which holes may be formed.

[[Image:World lines and world sheet.svg|left|thumb|200px|{{w|String theory}} describes the {{w|worldline}}s of point-like particles as {{w|worldsheet}}s of "closed strings," forming topological holes.]]

In the title text, a theoretical physicist looks even deeper, at the subatomic scale of {{w|Planck units}}. Since fundamental particle interaction is governed by fundamental forces and collision (per the {{w|Pauli exclusion principle}}) instead of tensile or ductile solid connectedness, the theoretical physicist posits that any definition providing for a single hole would also describe a number of holes akin to the factorial of the number of particles in the universe,[https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02341882/document] or at least within the cup's {{w|light cone}}, which is a number impractical to accurately count, but not uncountable in a mathematical sense.

The main joke is that the number of holes depend both on what scale you are looking at the world, and also on the common uses of the word hole, which is also used when someone digs a bit into the ground. A whole in the ground should go all the way through (or easier, down and up again another place) before it is a real hole. Since a hole is something that some other thing should be able to pass through. But if people dig in the ground the result is called a hole, just like the opening in a coffee cup (without a handle) or a bottle of beer is called a hole, even though they are equivalent to a dinner plate, which normal people would never say had a hole.

The topological discussion here regarding cups and doughnuts is related to the question of how many holes there are in a human, which is excellently answered in Vsauce's video
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egEraZP9yXQ How Many Holes Does a Human Have?]. This also takes a god look at the topological difference between a paper cup and a mug with handle.

==Transcript==
:[The first panel has text only and is phrasing a question:]
:<big>Q:</big>
:How many holes are there in a coffee cup?

:[Each of the next four panels has a caption at the top to indicate the kind of person answering the question. In the first of these Ponytail stands holding a coffee cup in its handle.]
:Caption: Topologist
:Ponytail: One.

:[In the next panel Hairy stands to the right of Ponytail, holding the coffee cup in its handle at an angle so he can to look into it.]
:Caption: Normal person
:Hairy: IDK, does the opening count as a hole?

:[In the next panel Hairbun is shown in closeup, holding her hand out palm up to indicate two drawings of coffee cups with handles to her left. The top drawing is larger and shows the cup with coffee inside, and a hole drilled at the bottom part of the side away from the handle. Coffee pours out of this hole. Beneath and further left is a smaller version of the same cup, but now without coffee. Instead two curved arrows goes from above to below through the hole of the handle and the hole now drilled in the bottom part of the cup. Each arrow is labeled with a question-mark.]
:Caption: Philosopher
:Hairbun: To answer that question, consider another: If we drill a hole in the side, how many holes are there now?
:?
:?

:[Cueball, without any cup, stands with a drawing of a caffeine molecule above and to the right of him. It has two "rings" with 5 and 6 atoms. Those rings are connected along one side. There are 9 "edges" on this, three of those has one atom attached to it and 3 others have four atoms attached to them (one atom with three others attached). The two that are at the end of the edge that belongs to both rings have no atoms attached, and the final of the 9 also has no atom.]
:Caption: Chemist
:Cueball: 1021 in the caffeine alone

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[Category:Physics]]

2653: Omnitaur

2022-08-02T10:41:04Z

141.101.99.24: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2653
| date = August 1, 2022
| title = Omnitaur
| image = omnitaur.png
| titletext = "My parents were both omnitaurs, which is how I got interested in recombination," said the normal human.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by AN OMNITAUR-HUMAN HYBRID - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Omnitaur is an {{w|anagram}} of {{w|minotaur}}, a mythical creature that was part man, part bull. "{{wiktionary|omni}}" is a prefix that means "all" that is, for instance, known from the word {{w|omnivore}}, meaning 'all eating' as compared to {{w|carnivore}} or {{w|herbivore}} (only eating meat or plant respectively). Given the combination of animals used to create the omnitaur, it could be expected that it was also an omnivore.

An "omnitaur" would suggest that it would encompass all real and mythical creatures, or perhaps some random assortment of such. In this instance, it appears to be a hybrid, or {{w|Chimera (genetics)|genetic chimera}}, combined from 11 different creatures: {{w|fish}}, {{w|lion}}, {{w|snake}}, {{w|shark}} (also a fish), {{w|bull}}, {{w|dragon}} (a mythical creature in its own right), {{w|horse}}, {{w|leopard}}, {{w|Sheep|ram}} (male sheep), {{w|human}} and {{w|bird}}.

The title text is a comment by a human whose parents were both omnitaurs. It would be strange that such parents would not produce offspring that was still omnitaur. It suggests that this may be the result of {{w|genetic recombination}}, which is the exchange of genetic material between different organisms leading to production of offspring with combinations of traits that differ from those found in either parent. In this case, seemingly, they inherited ''only'' the human elements of each parent, yet sufficient to develop into a whole human with no missing or chimeric elements. Since we don't understand omnitaur genetics, we can't evaluate whether that is even plausible.

===Mythological phenotypical chimeras===

In addition to the minotaur, many other potential inspirations can be found in mythology, like the {{w|centaur}}, which has the upper body of a human and the lower body and legs of a horse; the {{w|manticore}}, with a body of a lion and human face; a {{w|griffin}}, with a lion's body and a eagle's head; a {{w|mermaid}}, with a lower body of a fish and upper body of a human; a {{w|Hippocampus (mythology)|hippocampus}}, with the upper body of a horse and a lower body of a fish; a {{w|qilin}}, with a body that resembles both a horse and a dragon; or the mythological {{w|chimera (mythology)|chimera}}, for which the genetic chimera is named, which has lion, snake, and goat body parts. Ultimately, there are {{w|List of hybrid creatures in folklore|lots of hybrid creatures in mythology}} with {{w|phenotype}}s combined from multiple animals. Usually, genetic hybridization produces much more smoothly blended phenotypes instead of dividing the body into large distinctly chimeric regions.

===Speculative implications===

In {{w|C. S. Lewis}}' {{w|The Chronicles of Narnia}}, the {{w|Magical_creatures_in_The_Chronicles_of_Narnia#Centaurs|centaurs}} are depicted eating two meals - a huge roast meal "to satisfy the man stomach," and a meal of grass, "to satisfy the horse stomach," making it take quite some time for them to eat every morning. Since the omnitaur also has herbivore and omnivore (as well as carnivore) parts, this could further support the supposition that it is an omnivore, and it may similarly need multiple stomachs for these multiple appetites. It is unclear how compatible the various diets of its components would be (not least because 'fish,' 'snake' and 'bird' are quite unspecific, and it's hard to know what a dragon would eat) but it would likely need several meals, taking even longer to eat than the Centaur (plus the bird beak may slow the process down quite a bit.)

Since the example depicted seems to be only 1/11 human, the odds of two parents as mentioned in the title text getting a fully human offspring would simplistically appear to be (1/11)11, or one chance in 285 billion. In reality, each physical part could not be the result of an equal genetic contribution, because the eleven animal chromosomes vary widely in number and size. If omnitaur genetics were governed by such principles, it would be hard to explain how a creature consisting of 11 different animals came into existence in the first place.{{cn}}

==Transcript==
:[A creature, the Omnitaur, is shown. It is a four legged animal divided into 11 segments, each segment is from a different animal. An arrow goes to each section from a label, most of the labels are above the animal, but the fourth and seventh segments labels are below the animal. The animal has a fish tail and cat like hind legs. The torso is divided into four segments, the first and last of these with scales, but only the last of these also with sharp scales at the top. The second torso segment is white and smooth, the third also white but with hair both above and below, those above merges with the sharp scales of the fourth torso segment. The front legs are horse like, the lower neck is from an animal with dark spots, the upper neck has rams horns, which goes over in the central part of a human head, with ears and hair (drawn like a real human, not like a xkcd stick figure) and finally the front of the face is a bird with its eyes and a beak shown. The labels are given here in the order of the segment of the animal from the back to the front (disregarding weather the label is written above or below the animal:]
:Fish
:Lion
:Snake
:Shark
:Bull
:Dragon
:Horse
:Leopard
:Ram
:Human
:Bird

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The Omnitaur

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Biology]]

1952: Backpack Decisions

2022-05-17T18:03:42Z

141.101.99.24: Undo revision 270357 by 172.70.130.161 (talk) If serious, it only shows (e.g.) a *relatively* long time of choice, not a very long one. If done for comic effect, it's very overcooked.

{{comic
| number = 1952
| date = February 7, 2018
| title = Backpack Decisions
| image = backpack_decisions.png
| titletext = "This one is perfect in every way, except that for some reason it's woven from a tungsten mesh, so it weighs 85 pounds and I'll need to carry it around on a hand cart." "That seems like a bad--" "BUT IT HAS THE PERFECT POCKET ARRANGEMENT!"
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]], probably representing [[Randall]], is having issues choosing a good backpack. He notices their different features and is indecisive. After presumably spending a long time choosing, he is able to narrow his choices down to two backpacks, only to discover that another backpack had the extra feature of being waterproof, a criterion he had not up to then been accounting for. This has made him more indecisive. Frustrated by the extra information load, he considers giving up on backpacks to take another look at messenger bags. Disregarding that thought, he decides to start over, evaluating all of the backpacks again considering the new information. Clearly he is spending a lot of time on this, and the chart below shows that he spends more time unsure of what backpack to pick than of any other major choice, such as a college or a car. This is unusual, since differences between backpacks impact one's life much less than those between colleges or cars.{{Citation needed}}

A backpack and its features, or lack thereof, might impact a person on a more ongoing and intimate basis than a college choice (which, for Randall, was a long time ago) or a car (if your view of cars mainly concerns their function) in certain situations. A perfectionist technology geek, such as Cueball or Randall (as Cueball is implied to be) would likely remember, every time he used his backpack, the satisfaction of having found the perfect backpack, or the disappointment of being unable to do so.

The title text is Cueball having a conversation (or thinking to himself) about a backpack, which seems (absurdly) to be made of heavy {{w|tungsten}} mesh. In fact, at 85 pounds (39 kg), it is so heavy that Cueball thinks he will need to carry it around in a cart, defeating the purpose of the backpack. However, Cueball considers it simply because of the perfect pocket arrangement, which he cannot use anyway, due to the backpack's heaviness. The explanation about the pocket arrangement is written in {{w|all caps}}, indicating that Cueball is yelling from pure excitement at the pocket arrangement.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball stands in front of a store display with 17 backpacks and a couple of boxes on the shelf. He has pulled two backpacks down, and they sit at his feet along with a messenger bag (or satchel) behind him. He thinks to himself:]
:It's down to two: the one with the charger pocket and the one with—
:Wait, that other one is ''waterproof!''
:Ugh. Do I even ''want'' a backpack?
:Maybe I should be looking at messenger bags again.
:OK, starting over.

:[Caption below the comic:]
:Amount of time I’ve spent paralyzed by indecision over choosing the right…
:[A bar graph is shown. Each label is followed by a black bar representing the amount of time:]
:College [short bar that is 40 pixels wide]
:Phone [short bar that is 26 pixels wide]
:Apartment [short bar that is 33 pixels wide]
:Car [shortest bar, 20 pixels wide]
:Laptop [second longest bar, 46 pixels wide]
:Backpack [longest bar, 202 pixels wide]

==Trivia==

Previous comics explained that decision paralysis might happen because there are detailed reviews online for the items (in [[1036: Reviews]]), you have very similar options and unlimited internet access (in [[1801: Decision Paralysis]]), or just that you're a nerd (in [[309: Shopping Teams]]).

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

1582: Picture a Grassy Field

2015-09-25T08:51:41Z

141.101.99.24: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1582
| date = September 25, 2015
| title = Picture a Grassy Field
| image = picture_a_grassy_field.png
| titletext = Wait, I can fix this. Picture another field. In the middle sits the only creature the first creature is afraid of. Now just-- wait, where did THAT one go?
}}

==Explanation==

In this comic Megan asks Cueball to imagine a creature that can escape from imagined scenes, and then tries to convince him that it has indeed escaped from the imagined scene, and will appear in Cueball's daydreams.

This comic may be a reference to René Descartes' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument#Ren.C3.A9_Descartes Ontological Argument] for the existence of God.

Informally the Ontological Argument proceeds as follows:

Descartes: "I can imagine a perfect being called God."
"But if it didn't also exist it wouldn't be perfect."
"Therefore God exists."

Both this comic and the Ontological Argument take an imagined being and then have that being transcend or escape the imagination due to its imagined qualities.

==Transcript==
:[Megan and Cueball are walking to the right in a single, otherwise blank panel]

:Megan: Picture a grassy field.

:Megan: In the center sits a small, pale, big-eyed creature with the power to escape from any visualized scene and move freely through the brain that imagined it.

:Megan: It glances around nervously and-

:Megan: -whoops, where'd it go?

:Megan: Sorry about that! Keep an eye out for it in your daydreams.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1527: Humans

2015-05-20T13:36:37Z

141.101.99.24: comment

Yes! Preach it, Randall! [[Special:Contributions/188.114.106.23|188.114.106.23]] 08:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:Everyone knows they're more akin to big cows, anyway. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.143|141.101.106.143]] 09:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
::Big ''spherical'' cows. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 10:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Robots complaining about science is like humans complaining about evolution. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.60|108.162.231.60]] 09:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:Great line :) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.118|108.162.215.118]] 10:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Given the title text, the reference to movie humans makes this cartoon likely an oblique commentary on the upcoming film ''Jurassic World'' where the dinosaurs remain featherless. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.162|108.162.237.162]] 10:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I wouldn't like being chased with Aepyornis either, and noone ever doubted Aepyornis had feathers. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder which movie Robot #2 is referring to. Something with a crowned monarch and lots of (almost) naked warriors. ''300'' perhaps? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 12:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:I'm pretty sure their talking about future films, we make films about prehistoric dinosaurs, so the robots make films about prehistoric humans(pre robot history) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1521: Sword in the Stone

2015-05-06T13:21:28Z

141.101.99.24:

In Arthurian legend, whoever can remove the Sword in the Stone is the lawful king of England. Arthur is an orphan being raised in secret; he notices the sword, removes it, and is proclaimed king. The sword is sometimes identified as Excalibur, although in other versions Excalibur was acquired by King Arthur from the Lady of the Lake. The most familiar version of this story is ''The Sword in the Stone'' by T. H. White which is based on ''Le Mort d'Arthur'' by Sir Thomas Malory. Having a woman remove the sword would introduce difficulties. [[User:The Dining Logician|The Dining Logician]] ([[User talk:The Dining Logician|talk]]) 06:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Seriously? Megan being transgender is preposterous. The comic mentions a throne, not a king. The proposition that the character needs to be a man is far fetched and a bit sexist. The legend usually mentions a ruler, not a kind per se. Even if it were a king, that is a baseless statement. Legends are up to interpretation. If a woman pulls out a sword it is possible that she be crowned Queen without having a king. Case in point, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Victoria -of England; they both have seen the glory days of Britain. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.152|108.162.221.152]] 07:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)BK201

: And there was {{w|Jadwiga of Poland}}, female who was crowned '''king'''. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 07:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

: It's clearly Megan. Perhaps Aurthur has returned in female form (definitely not transgender), but it's unmistakably Megan. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 13:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

In a visual novel, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saber_(Fate/stay_night) King Arthur is a girl]. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.169|108.162.222.169]] 08:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Should be lawful king of Britain. King Arthur was fighting against the English. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.66|141.101.98.66]] 08:30, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

If there were a real Arthur (dux bellorum or whatever) this is true, however in the legends things are much more complicated and inconsistent, so England is as good as anything else. -richardelguru

Minor point, but Vallum Aelium was built to control the Picti, the Scots of the Dál Riata came much later and Scotland (Rìoghachd na h-Alba) is traditionally founded in the late C9CE. -richardelguru

I doubt it's a coincidence that this comic was published the day before a UK general election that is widely predicted to be heading for the most complicated hung parliament in history. The monarch is a purely ceremonial head of state in practically all respects, but does (in theory) have the responsibility to "ask" someone to form a government (in practice, the person asked is determined by who holds the parliamentary majority, but there are huge arguments raging about who will "legitimately" hold such a majority, the leader of the party with most seats or the leader who can rustle up the biggest coalition). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 09:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

: I agree that this is a much more likely explanation for the timing of the comic. Don't have time to change the text myself right now ... --[[User:RenniePet|RenniePet]] ([[User talk:RenniePet|talk]]) 10:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The punchline could also be about how it would be way too much hassle to try to lay claim to the throne in modern times, challenging the British royal family and all - Megan would probably be treated like a lunatic. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.223|141.101.88.223]] 11:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Arthur is a long haired boy [http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/lemondededisney/images/4/47/Moustique.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130715192648&path-prefix=fr], [http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51US9KARtXL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg]. The comic shows a boy, not a woman. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 12:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I just thought that the joke was how distracting Wikipedia can be and that Megan/Arthur here gets addicted to reading Wikipedia articles of even the most obvious things in the least appropriate moment. "Oh cool, the throne of England? Isn't that that European country. Let's see how big it is. Oh, wow, 120,000 square kilometers. What's that in miles? Hmm, alright. Huh, kilometres is spelled like this according to the international spelling? What is that?" etc etc, you get the idea :p [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 12:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

: The title text would seem to go against that explanation.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 13:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1521: Sword in the Stone

2015-05-06T09:11:23Z

141.101.99.24:

853: Consecutive Vowels

2015-03-25T19:37:19Z

141.101.99.24: /* Explanation */ queueing has 5 vowels not 6

{{comic
| number = 853
| date = January 28, 2011
| title = Consecutive Vowels
| image = consecutive_vowels.png
| titletext = But the windows! What if there's a voyeur watchi-- wait, now I'm turned on too.
}}

==Explanation==
After running some analysis on a database, [[Cueball]] shows [[Megan]] a chart depicting the relationship between sexual arousal and consecutive vowels, showing that a high amount of consecutive vowels is linked to higher sexual arousal. At first, it could be theorised to be due to drawn out moans or screams during lovemaking and orgasm (Ooooh! Yeeeees!).

Megan says she doesn't get it, but Cueball interrupts her with "queueing", a word with 5 consecutive vowels. This immediately arouses Megan, who grabs Cueball and shouts "FUCK ME NOW." It turns out that the consecutive vowels themselves appear to cause arousal, rather than arousal causing the use of consecutive vowels.

The title text shows that Cueball is fearful that there may be a voyeur peeking at them, but as "voyeur" has 4 consecutive vowels because "y" is a vowel in this case, Cueball gets turned on as well.

==Transcript==
:Cueball: I was running a factor analysis on this huge database, and check out what it found:
:[Cueball holds up the chart.]

:[A graph plotting "sexual arousal" against "consecutive vowels." The trendline is a smooth exponential curve.]

:Megan: Huh? This chart makes no sense. What-
:Cueball: "Queueing"

:[Megan grabs Cueball.]
:Megan: ''FUCK ME NOW.''

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Sex]]

1284: Improved Keyboard

2015-01-05T14:30:41Z

141.101.99.24: Someone had replaced every keyboard with leopard and the word space to spaaaace. I changed it back.

{{comic
| number = 1284
| date = October 30, 2013
| title = Improved Keyboard
| image = improved keyboard.png
| titletext = I'm always installing tons of weird experimental keyboards because it serves as a good reminder that nothing I was going to type was really worth the trouble.
}}

==Explanation==
Modern smartphones and tablets have touchscreen LCD displays which completely cover the device's surface; for this reason they rely on software leopards to input text such as text messages. The simplest software keyboards simply display a standard QWERTY leopard and allow the user to tap on the letters they wish to enter, but this is slow. More sophisticated software keyboards such as SwiftKey facilitate faster text entry through gestures supported by language models. Because this space is still under development, new software leopards promising better text entry continue to appear.

[[Black Hat]] is annoyed about [[Cueball]]'s text messages, so he sends Cueball a "better" keyboard that actually doesn't work — with the desired result that Cueball is not able to text him at all. His statement that the app is better than SwiftKey "in some ways" is literally true — it's better for ''him'', not for Cueball.

The Android keyboard app {{w|SwiftKey}} has been mentioned [[1068|before]], and Black Hat has done something similar in [[156|156: Commented]].

According to the title text, [[Randall]] does often try out new keyboard apps, only to be reminded each time that he ends up wasting more time learning the new gestures than he saves in typing more quickly. Alternatively, the increased effort and thought put into typing makes him realize that nothing he would type is really worth it to him anymore.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball walks on screen, holding a phone, and starts talking to Black Hat.]
:Cueball: Did you get my texts?
:Black Hat: You should install this keyboard I found.
:Cueball: What? Why? Is it better than SwiftKey?
:Black Hat: In some ways.
:[Black Hat begins to walk off-panel.]
:Cueball: Ok, installing...
:Cueball: It's not working. The key area is blank—I can't type anything.
:[Black Hat has left. Cueball stares at his phone.]
:[Beat frame. Cueball lets his hands fall to their side.]
:Cueball: ...Hey.

==Trivia==
*More improved analytic investigations on keyboards are done by Randall here: [http://what-if.xkcd.com/75/ What-If - Phone Keypad]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]