explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2343: Mathematical Symbol Fight

2020-08-07T23:11:12Z

162.158.7.9: insert 'citation needed'

{{comic
| number = 2343
| date = August 7, 2020
| title = Mathematical Symbol Fight
| image = mathematical_symbol_fight.png
| titletext = Oh no, a musician just burst in through the door confidently twirling a treble clef.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SQUARE ROOT SCYTHE. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This panel imagines which {{w|List of mathematical symbols|mathematical symbols}} would be good in a fight if they were made corporeal in two (or three) dimensions. Generally, objects with longer reach and pointier ends wind up on the "more dangerous" side of the scale, and symbols with less reach and more curves tend towards the left side.

The comic invokes [[wikipedia:surreal humour|surreal humour]] by suggesting that mathematical symbols could be handled as physical objects in the real world. Another component of the humor is the implication that it is useful to prepare to use mathematical symbols in a fight, even though mathematicians, who use mathematical symbols, usually do not conduct their debates violently (though some stories suggest that {{w|Hippasus}} was killed by his fellow Pythagoreans for his proof that irrational numbers exist), and even if they did, they wouldn't use large reproductions of their symbols as weapons.{{Citation needed}}

A straight line is farthest to the "more dangerous" side, which could possibly be a reference to the dangers posed by lines in "Flatland", because their infinitely-sharp endpoints could be difficult to see (particularly their rear end, which does not contain a gleaming eye as their front end does) and would fatally pierce whoever they chose to stab. However, taking a more literal view of the drawings, the straight line does not appear to be any thicker or thinner, or pointer, than any of the other lines.

The title text refers to a {{w|clef}}, which is not a mathematical symbol but rather a {{w|List of musical symbols|musical symbol}}. The note of concern in the text suggests musical symbols may be viewed in such fights as exotic or especially dangerous.

{| class="wikitable"
! Symbol
! Meaning
! Notes on using in a fight
|-
|ℝ
|The set of [[wikipedia:real number|real number]]s
|Megan seems to be struggling with a giant version of this symbol.
|-
|∅
|[[wikipedia:Empty set|Empty set]]
|This symbol is not very sharp, and [[White Hat]] is unable to use it in combat. It would not work as a good shield due to the hole in the symbol, but it possibly could be thrown.
|-
|>
|Greater than
|-
|α
|Alpha
|-
|π
|Pi
|-
| +
|Plus
|Maybe thrown like a shuriken?
|-
|Ψ
|Psi
|It could be used as a slightly-less-functional trident or pitchfork, with a shorter handle.
|-
|~
|tilde, meaning "approximately"
|A potentially dangerous throwing weapon.
|-
|⇒
|rightwards double arrow, meaning "implies"
|-
|⋅
|multiplication sign
|-
|Γ
|uppercase Greek letter gamma
|-
|√
|{{w|square root}} sign
|Black Hat has chosen this symbol and is using it like a polearm, something like a {{w|shepherd's crook}}.
|-
|∮
|contour integral
|-
|∫
|integral
|-
|⇀
|…
|A single-barbed spear.
|-
|
|…
|-
|θ
|[[wikipedia:Theta_function_(disambiguation)|Theta]]
|-
|∞
|infinity
|-
|∪
|union (set theory)
|-
|∈
|member of (set theory)
|Cueball is holding this. It could be used as a significantly-less-functional trident or pitchfork, if only it wasn't missing a handle like Psi. Maybe better for throwing.
|-
|∀
|"for all"
|-
|∂
|partial derivative or boundary operator
|-
|≠
|not equal sign
|-
|#
|[[wikipedia:Cardinality|Cardinality]], [[wikipedia:Connected_sum|connected sum]] (knot theory), or [[wikipedia:Primorial|primorial]].
|-
|-
|Δ
|[[wikipedia:Delta_(letter)|Delta]]
|-
|ζ
|Zeta
|-
|ℵ
|[[wikipedia:Aleph_number|Aleph number]]
|-
|𝜌
|italic rho
|Perhaps could be wielded as an axe
|-
|→
|Implies; X→Y means that if X is true, then Y is also true
|Looks like a spear
|-
|⊥
|up tack or falsum, indicating a false proposition in logic or the bottom element in a partial order
|Held like an axe, the top of the T could be arced towards an opponent.
Held like a wishbone, two hands could be used to try to drive the point into an opponent.
|-
|⎯⎯
|Fraction bar (division) or overline (complex conjugate or mean).
|Held on one end, this could be used to stab the point, or hit with the edge
|-
|-
|𝄞
|Treble clef
|Could potentially be 'twirled' like a {{w|quarterstaff}}, {{w|bō}}, or other {{w|stick-fighting}} weapon. Loosely resembles a Klingon {{w|bat'leth}}.
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[Heading]

Mathematical Symbols

[Subheading]

by how useful they would be in a fight

more useful

⟶

ℝ ∅ > α π + Ψ ~ ⇒ ⋅ Γ √ ∮ ∫ ⇀
θ ∞ ∪ ∈ ∀ ∂ ≠ # Δ ζ ℵ 𝜌 → ⊥ ⎯

[Below the (number?) line, eight characters fight each other, using some of the symbols mentioned above as weapons.]

[Megan is awkwardly handling a giant "ℝ".]

[White Hat is holding an "∅" with both hands, as a shield.]

[Cueball is holding an "∈" in both hands, with its "tines" pointed towards Blondie, who is swatting at him with a "#".]

[Ponytail is leaping at another (?) Megan, swinging a "ρ" like an axe, while Megan is leaning back and thrusting a "→" back at her.]

[Black Hat is swinging a long "√" like a polearm at Hairy, who is holding a long "⎯" defensively.]

−
List of symbols, in order of farthest extent to the right:

−
ℝ θ ∅ ∞ > ∪ α (E) ∀ π ∂ + ≠ Ψ # ~ △ (???) ⇒ (.) ℵ (hangman) (P) √ → ∮ ∫ ⊥ ⇀ ⎯

Note: Where two symbols had similar right-most edges, the overlay grid on an ASUS pro-art display was used to decide which one went further right.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Blondie]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]

Talk:1095: Crazy Straws

2020-07-12T07:46:10Z

162.158.7.9:

Compare [[915:_Connoisseur|xkcd.com/915]]. [[User:Arlo James Barnes|Arlo James Barnes]] ([[User talk:Arlo James Barnes|talk]]) 10:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

"Subcultures" is misspelled in the comic. Perhaps Randall will fix it and reupload? [[User:Erenan|Erenan]] ([[User talk:Erenan|talk]]) 15:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
:Randall has corrected the mistake, but the image on this page is still the old one. Would we want to keep both versions of the image in the interest of completeness? [[User:Erenan|Erenan]] ([[User talk:Erenan|talk]]) 00:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Have to admit, this one went a bit over my head. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 20:38, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Fractals not only have an unlimited level of detail; they are (most times) self-similar in the sense that you'll find the same pattern on every level of detail. Just like finding the equivalent of finding the "Paris hilton of the plastic straw subcultures' hobbyists' splinter group." [[User:BKA|BKA]] ([[User talk:BKA|talk]]) 09:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I think we should get the corrected comic, but note that it was originally misspelled in the explanation. Tebow Time, Twice a Day. 17:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC) ([[User talk:jjhuddle|talk]])

It's a mistake to think the every-pickier level of detail is a flaw in these interest subcultures. Smaller and smaller levels of study are what flesh out our knowledge of the world. And myriad small subgroups of shared interests allow many people to achieve excellence and status, not just in their minds but in an (admittedly small) range of reality. Examples: the people who maintain and improve the Kennedy line of Boston Terriers; people whose specialty is tooth wear in prehuman hominids; people who parse xkcd comics.
:This comment was mine, attribution corrected.[[User:Noni Mausa|Noni Mausa]] ([[User talk:Noni Mausa|talk]]) 12:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that the comic means it as a flaw, I think it's a just a (humourous) observation, not a negative critisism.

Agreed, and it even goes on here (just drop in on the community portal, to see tempests in a tea pot such as whether he's [[Cueball]] or [[Rob]]...) I couldn't help but think that RM poked his head in on this site and came up with this comic as a response. (Of course, that would be greatly overestimating our importance in the grand scheme of things, but we are all entitled to our little fantasies of grandeur, no?) Ah, well... it seemed perfect timing nonetheless. '''By the way, folks: please sign your posts.''' Four tildes, a la <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>, is all it takes... -- [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 14:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the fractal analogy holds because human subcultures cannot be nested infinitely deep. At some point, subcultures will come down to individual humans, who aren't also (infinitely deep) subcultures. [[Special:Contributions/70.31.155.184|70.31.155.184]] 15:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
:Randall is using the term hyperbolically — his point is that subcultures have ludicrous amounts of detail, not necessarily infinite. [[Special:Contributions/108.233.253.211|108.233.253.211]] 18:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
::Half of me disagrees with you, with the other half in an argument with itself over from which crazy straw will Paris Hilton look best drinking. [[Special:Contributions/146.186.149.47|146.186.149.47]] 18:49, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
:::Still, even people so crazy they are kept in straitjacket all the time can have only several dozens of personalities ... there's not enough space in brain for infinite. -- [[Special:Contributions/89.177.52.2|89.177.52.2]] 09:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
:I still believe Randall's point was not the infinite detail, but self-similarity. Regardless on whether you look at something very popular or a niche - you'll always find exactly the same social structures. [[User:BKA|BKA]] ([[User talk:BKA|talk]]) 06:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
:Funny, I was just reading the article http://www.economist.com/node/21560559 -- And while they're not infinite, there's a damn lot of (microbial) subcultures within a human too!

Isn't there any reference to the [http://www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp/gateswhine.html Open Letter to Hobbyists] and the famous hacker Eric Raymond?
:I keep coming back to this page to see who "Eric" is. I don't think it's Eric Raymond (no apparent connection, from what I can see). Any insights? [[User:Zelmo|Zelmo]] ([[User talk:Zelmo|talk]]) 03:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
::"Eric" isn't an uncommon name, and in fact, there's a well documented "[http://www.catb.org/esr/ecsl/ Eric Conspiracy]" out there. While ESR is a prominent Eric, I see nothing to tie the Eric in this comic to ESR specifically. For that matter, I'd be hard pressed to see a reference to Bill Gate's "Open Letter to Hobbyists", either. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] ([[User talk:Blaisepascal|talk]]) 17:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
::I wonder if the comic is making an oblique reference to String theory and Loop Quantum Gravity. There was (and still is, in some places) a lot of hostility between the two camps, most easily visible in the articles and comments of various physics blogs. This would kind of tie in with the 'fractal' comment, since you see this same division into strings (or wiggly crazy straws) and loops - it's a pattern that repeats when you look at physics groups or crazy straw groups. In that case, the Eric would be "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Verlinde Erik Verlinde]". I know it's a bit of a stretch, but what do you think? [[User:Slouchingtb|Slouchingtb]] ([[User talk:Slouchingtb|talk]]) 01:56, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
:::Okay, at this point the depth of the discussion has just corroborated the point of the comic. Good job, everyone, pack it up. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.236|141.101.99.236]] 17:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

IMO [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Kardashian/ Kim Kardashian] is a much better example of someone who is famous (just) for being famous. Hilton hotel scion etc. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.34|173.245.54.34]] 09:51, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
:Not really. Kim K became famous from being a porn star and then becoming an actor after that. Paris Hilton sorta just became famous for no obvious reason. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.7.9|162.158.7.9]] 07:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Is it just me, or are the crazy straws themselves examples of something that would work just fine as a straight line, but are much more interesting with fractal-like complexity (subject to the practical limits of a physical object)? [[User:Danshoham|Mountain Hikes]] ([[User talk:Danshoham|talk]]) 04:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)