explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1086: Eyelash Wish Log

2025-04-01T18:06:21Z

162.158.74.95:

This is one of my favorite xkcd comics ever. I can't stop laughing. -- #TEBOWTIME 17:14, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
: i know right?? feb. 27th is by far the best... --[[User:Douglasadams472|Douglasadams472]] ([[User talk:Douglasadams472|talk]]) 03:12, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

: It seems to me that February 6th's wish implies that, as a result of the previous day's wish, he now has an absurdly large number of eyelashes. Opinions? --[[User:Bobidou23|Bobidou23]] ([[User talk:Bobidou23|talk]]) 02:58, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
:i thought they were absurdly long eyelashes, like his wings in infinite wings (sry cant make links) {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.5}}
::Actually, the guy with unlimited wings is Beret Guy.. (as seen in the "strange powers of beret guy" category on this site).. Black Hat's the "classhole". --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 11:31, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

: I thought of Black Hat having a crazy number of eyelashes, but not attached to him, so he can't pull them for a wish. They're just in a pile on the floor or something. {{unsigned ip|173.245.56.187}}

I feel that each wish should be thoroughly explained, or at least briefly mentioned. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.193}}
: +1, Marking this 'incomplete' [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 20:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

March 15 may reference a painting of M.C. Escher so named "House of Stairs" [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.79|199.27.128.79]] 08:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

:"Revocation of rules" and especially "meta-wishes" must be references to [http://amberbaldet.com/uploads/little-harmonic-labrynth.html "Typeless Wish" scene in Göedel, Escher, Bach]. "banish people into the TV show they're talking about" might(?) also reference the plot there where Achiles and Tortoise enter Escher's Convex and Concave painting after discussing it. Surpsingly to me, that episode's only Escher illustrations are Concave and Convex & Reptiles; House of Stairs does not appear anywhere in the book. [[User:Cben|Cben]] ([[User talk:Cben|talk]]) 00:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

What did "zero wishes" mean? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.86|173.245.48.86]] 18:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
:Often when configuring software (especially regarding limits) 0 is taken to mean infinite, for example in a mail server's config file there may be an entry that looks like "Max number of connections: (enter 0 for unlimited)" [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.170|141.101.98.170]] 19:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

:My take on "zero wishes", is that it is a bit of black hattery. He wants to abuse any system he finds, by asking for zero wishes he wants to cause the eyelash wish system to crash in some way. Its not an attempt to gain more wishes, its an attempt to bring the wish system down.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.165|141.101.98.165]] 21:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

My take on the title text was that Black Hat wanted to alter friction for his own amusement, rather than to affect the outcome of a sporting event as the current explanation seems to lean towards.--[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:32, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. It is very in-characcter for Black Hat to simply want to mess with people, and would be very out of place to care about such trivialities as points. Ima change the mouseover description now.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.97|173.245.48.97]] 16:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I took the April 22 wish to mean that Black Hat would have a Pokeball that works in real life, allowing him to steal the pets of random strangers on the street.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.124|173.245.52.124]] 23:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
:"Hey! No stealing another Trainer's Pokémon!". Also, talk of changing friction coefficients reminds me of the GTA "Carmageddon" videos, where the wheel friction on all the cars was set to -1, leading to most of the game being filled with cars flying through the air and exploding. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 23:30, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
::I may have used my Masterball trying to catch another trainer's Pokemon. I cracked up after it failed, but now I have no Masterball. :( {{unsigned ip|198.41.239.34}}
:::You know, there was a side series of Pokemon games that let you capture another trainer's Pokemon. It was kind of required if you wanted more than one or two Pokemon on your team. And on that day, Black Hat was mailed a copy of Pokemon Colosseum... --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.65|162.158.79.65]] 23:06, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

The first wish is an example of bootstrapping. I love it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.76|108.162.238.76]] 23:31, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I think the title text is a reference to the comics where he talks about Pole vaul's record involving that some records where obtain because they were nearest of equators[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.112|108.162.229.112]] 11:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

It would appear, for March 7th, that this came true... [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.96|173.245.52.96]] 00:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I got rickrolled. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.67|162.158.62.67]] 00:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I personally like these wishes: (1) The power to know all knowable things (to include a full understanding of all available trigger conditions for wishes in the universe),
(2) the ability to always win arguments with wish granting entities, including about numbers of wishes they should grant, (3) for a stone so heavy no wish could lift it, (4) to lift that stone.

(3) and (4) together form the Russell Paradox. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.170|108.162.219.170]] 18:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I interpreted the February 19 entry as being a joke that the US Congressional process of passing legislation is '''so''' dysfunctional that it ends up establishing laws that did not conform to the wishes of ''anyone at all''!

No one could one-up him because he could veto any wishes that could allow that to happen

if black hat wanted veto over the wishes that veto his wishes, couldn't the people who are trying to veto black hat's wishes go one level higher and veto his vetoes, holding up his second level of veto, allowing the people who want to veto black hat to veto black hat? [[User:Plushiefan4111|plushie fan]] ([[User talk:Plushiefan4111|talk]]) 21:18, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Hey, this log was made on a leap year! On Feb. 2''9'' it says the thing about controlling where news anchors are looking. Neat.[[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 22:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
:Wait, I put that in the wrong place. Lol. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 22:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
::Don't worry, it's easy enough to move... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.15|172.69.194.15]] 22:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
:::Thanks.

What if Black Hat had more than one wish left when he made the "zero wishes" wish? Where would the other(s) go? Would they be translated into random thoughts going through his head at the time? [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 13:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Could Feb 12 be a reference to one of the short-answer What Ifs, too? It was in What If 2 though, so it might have been later than this comic was released.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.95|162.158.74.95]] 18:06, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

3063: Planet Definitions

2025-03-24T21:54:35Z

162.158.74.95: Undo revision 370101 by FaviFake (talk) Not missing. Not necessary. Inconsistent.

{{comic
| number = 3063
| date = March 14, 2025
| title = Planet Definitions
| image = planet_definitions_2x.png
| imagesize = 653x1435px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Under the 'has cleared its orbital neighborhood' and 'fuses hydrogen into helium' definitions, thanks to human activities Earth technically no longer qualifies as a planet but DOES count as a star.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic addresses the {{w|IAU definition of planet|controversy of whether of Pluto is a planet}} and explores many definitions, most of them humorous and nonsensical, of what a planet could be.
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="margin:auto"
!colspan="2"|Definition !! # of planets !! Explanation
|-
! Traditionalist
| {{w|Pluto}} is a planet
| align=center | 9
| In modern times, there was {{w|IAU definition of planet#Background|no formal definition of a "planet"}} prior to 2006. However, it was generally accepted as a colloquialism that there were nine planets around the {{w|Sun}}, Pluto included. This view started primarily with Pluto's discovery in 1930, based upon that time's scientific consensus that there ought to be another planet to account for peculiarities in the the orbits of the other outer planets. This ties back to [[988: Tradition]] which discusses how events and beliefs that were popular in the 1940s and 1950s are considered "traditional" in the United States.
As more sophisticated methods of mapping the {{w|Solar System}} were developed, and {{w|Eris (dwarf planet)|Eris}} was discovered and found to be even more massive than Pluto (which may not have been as significant as the theories that led to its discovery suggested), it became clear to astronomers that a more standardized definition was needed.

In 2006 the {{w|International Astronomical Union}} (IAU) published their formal redefinition of a "planet" to require a planet to be gravitationally dominant within its orbit, clearing other objects that aren't moons. This disqualified Pluto and Eris, which are now considered "{{w|dwarf planets}}". This has been subject to pushback from nostalgic laypeople dissatisfied with Pluto being "demoted" or otherwise relegated, when schoolchildren and adults alike have 'known' that there are nine planets for the most part of the last century.

Ironically, some of the latest study of the outer Solar System includes the possibility of yet ''another'' {{w|Planet Nine}}, but only time will tell if such an object exists and whether it would cross the IAU's current threshold or even require the threshold itself to be reassessed once more.
|-
! Modern
| Pluto is not a planet
| align=center | 8
| When the IAU redefined what a planet is in 2006, Pluto no longer qualified as a planet since it wasn't able to clear its neighborhood around its orbit.
Using the modern, and recently official, definition of a planet, only eight celestial objects qualified: {{w|Mercury (planet)|Mercury}}, {{w|Venus (planet)|Venus}}, {{w|Earth (planet)|Earth}}, {{w|Mars (planet)|Mars}}, {{w|Jupiter (planet)|Jupiter}}, {{w|Saturn (planet)|Saturn}}, {{w|Uranus (planet)|Uranus}} and {{w|Neptune (planet)|Neptune}}.
|-
! Expansive
| Dwarf planets are planets
| align=center | 17+
| This category also includes nine other bodies that aren't dominant within their orbits, including the ones that are considered to have compacted into fully solid bodies {{w|Dwarf planet#Most likely dwarf planets|as defined by Grundy ''et al.''}}: {{w|Ceres (dwarf planet)|Ceres}}, Pluto, Eris, {{w|Makemake}}, {{w|Haumea}}, {{w|Gonggong (dwarf planet)|Gonggong}}, {{w|Quaoar}}, {{w|Orcus (dwarf planet)|Orcus}} and {{w|Sedna (dwarf planet)|Sedna}}.
The basis for this viewpoint is the possible alternative re-evaluation that the IAU could have adopted, in that all newly discovered things ''like'' Pluto (being considered a planet at the time) should therefore be considered a planet. Indeed, Ceres had been observed some time before Pluto and had been called a planet (or a "minor planet") within both scientific and public realms.
|-
! Ultratraditionalist
| Only the classical planets are planets
| align=center | 5
| The {{w|classical planets}} are objects found and considered by the Greek astronomers in classical antiquity to be considered planets. Their definition of "planet" considered visible objects that move across the sky relative to the fixed stars, the original word itself being translated as "wanderer".
There are seven classical planets, but this included the Sun and Moon. If one considers only the ones that also fall under either the IAU's definition of a planet (and so ''less'' traditional) or the convention before that, then there would be only five. Being mostly true to the spirit of the historic naming convention, this would be a conservative but 'valid' version of the criterion.

Notably, Earth itself is not considered a planet by these criteria as, from the perspective of anyone who might even consider such things, it is not wandering the heavens. Or even in the night skies at all, but always underfoot.
|-
! Condescending
| Only giant planets are planets; the rest are big {{w|asteroid}}s
| align=center | 4
| This definition may refer to the {{w|giant planets}}, planets much larger than the {{w|Earth}}. Only the four outer (IAU-defined) planets fall under this definition. Relegation of anything smaller, including our own planet, is an extreme attitude.
Incidentally, most of the initial [[:Category:Exoplanets|exoplanets]] discovered were, by practical necessity in their detection, also only of the "giant planet" kind.
|-
! Simplistic
| Anything gravitationally round is a planet
| align=center | 37+
| The Wikipedia {{w|list of gravitationally rounded objects of the Solar System}} has thirty-seven objects. It includes the Sun, eight planets, nine dwarf planets, nineteen {{w|Natural satellite|moon}}s, but falls short of also highlighting all of the smallest visible objects (per Universalist, below).
This definition is essentially ''part'' of the actual current definition of a planet, leaving out the main factor that disqualifies Pluto, orbital dominance.
|-
! Grounded
| Only objects a spaceship has landed on are planets
| align=center | 10
| This list includes objects in the Solar System that a spacecraft has {{w|List of landings on extraterrestrial bodies|performed a soft landing on}}. The list includes {{w|Venus}}, Earth, {{w|Mars}}, the Moon, {{w|Titan (moon)|Titan}}, the comet {{w|Churyumov-Gerasimenko}} plus the asteroids {{w|433 Eros|Eros}}, {{w|25143 Itokawa|Itokawa}}, {{w|162173 Ryugu|Ryugu}} and {{w|101955 Bennu|Bennu}}.
The justification for this seems to be that we must 'touch' the object before we consider it as worthy of being classified as more than a mere blob (or dot) in space.

It could be argued that Jupiter and Saturn also count, due to the {{w|Galileo (spacecraft)|Galileo}} and {{w|Cassini–Huygens|Cassini}} spacecraft respectively, which plunged into the atmospheres of those planets.
|-
! Regolithic
| Anything covered in dirt and ice and stuff is a planet
| align=center | Infinite
| This list excludes the {{w|gas giant}}s and {{w|ice giant}}s. The list would likely include dwarf planets, asteroids, moons and the comets and {{w|Oort cloud#Structure and composition|trillions of other objects}} in the {{w|Oort cloud}}.
This is effectively the opposite of the "condescending" definition: every object in the Solar System except the Sun is included in one definition or the other.
This is also an extension on the "Grounded" classification. In this case we ''could'' meaningfully touch the object, with predominantly atmospheric bodies being not considered so.
|-
! Lunar
| You can't be a planet if you don't have a moon
| align=center | 12+
| Only some objects in the solar system have known moons orbiting them. The value given may be {{w|List of natural satellites|the number of planets and dwarf planets}} that have moons, excluding {{w|Haumea}} for not {{w|hydrostatic equilibrium|being spherical}} despite having moons.
Adopting this definition would suggest that a planetary body is not worthy of the name if it doesn't demonstrably dominate its orbit by having at least one satellite of its own.

If this statement were "You can't be a planet if you don't have a Moon", ''only'' the Earth would qualify.
|-
! Solipsistic
| Earth is the only planet
| align=center | 1
| {{w|Solipsism}} is the idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. Randall extrapolated this idea to mean that only one's own planet that they are standing on is sure to exist.
This relies on a more philosophical and/or semiotic assessment than any scientific one.
|-
! Judgemental
| Only the prettiest ones are planets
| align=center | 6
| This list is likely formulated from Randall's own perception of the prettiest planets in the Solar System. Seven objects are highlighted: Earth, Jupiter, one of Jupiter's moons (likely {{w|Europa (moon)|Europa}}, based on [[1547: Solar System Questions]]), Saturn, one of Saturn's moons (possibly Iapetus or Phoebe), {{w|Triton (moon)|Triton}} and Pluto.
The subjectivity of this version of the definition makes it unlikely that a consensus of this form could be established.
|-
! Empiricist
| Only worlds that I, author of this table, have personally seen are planets
| align=center | 12
| This list may refer to the celestial objects in the Solar System that have been visible at night for the author, probably going so far as using an optical telescope (which could be a hobbyist one, perhaps Randall's own, or from time granted on a major institutional installation) but not any more indirect method that uses a camera/screen or historic images of any kind. Apparently Randall has seen Uranus, which technically [https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/skills/how-see-uranus-in-night-sky ''is'' visible to the naked eye] under the very best viewing conditions, but these conditions are rare and it requires knowing exactly where to look. Jupiter's {{w|Galilean moons|four largest moons}} are [https://web.archive.org/web/20201112024151/http://denisdutton.com/jupiter_moons.htm technically visible to the naked eye] but hard to distinguish due to Jupiter's brightness, while Neptune is considered too faint to see even if you know where to look. It appears that Randall has never used a telescope to see Neptune.
As a different form of subjectivity, the value of this grouping's criteria is questionable, but not uncommon in other 'softer' sciences.
|-
! Marine biologist
| Only objects with oceans are planets
| align=center | 6+
| This list includes Earth, {{w|Europa (moon)|Europa}}, {{w|Ganymede (moon)|Ganymede}}, {{w|Callisto (moon)|Callisto}}, Titan and {{w|Enceladus}}. These have had the presence of significant liquid identified from measurements of their magnetic/electric fields, but see the "Maritime" entry.
There is a resemblance, here, to a loose understanding of what a "world" is, i.e., one that possesses various distinct 'terrains' beyond mere dry (and possibly considered featureless) rock. A marine biologist would, of course consider a marine (if not pelagic or bathyspheric) environment to be an essential element of any world.
|-
! Maritime
| Only objects with ''surface'' oceans are planets
| align=center | 2
| In the comic, only Earth and Titan are highlighted. Earth is the only body known in the solar system to have liquid water on the surface significant enough to be called an ocean. Titan's cold and dense atmosphere notably maintains surface 'seas' of methane and nitrogen, while other moons (given as additional in the prior item) seem to have their liquid water beneath either whole-surface ice caps or otherwise deep under the surface.
From the narrower point of view of a sailor, for example, there is no benefit in considering water hidden away far beneath the surface, and it might as well not be there. In contrast, it's possible that a well-prepared mariner could sail the strange seas of Titan, as easily as (or easier than) {{w|Dragonfly (Titan space probe)|an aircraft}} might fly through {{what if|30|its skies}}.
|-
! Universalist
| They're all planets
| align=center | Infinite
| This list claims that all objects are planets, with all drawn items (also presumably all undrawn/undrawable items) being marked as such, including the Sun. Giving up on any thought of exclusivity, this unconventional view willingly inducts all objects into consideration.
|-
! Existentialist
| What if {{w|outer space|space}} ''itself'' is a planet???
| align=center | ''Duude''
| This list is different from the list above as it claims that all of space, rather than only the objects existing in space, are planets. The interjection ''Duude'' expresses one's amazement at this 'revelation' and replaces the number count— and is sometimes used to imply [https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=duuuude the speaker is high] on marijuana or other mind-altering drugs.
The strange stretch of imagination, as prompted by some narcotic or other, abandons all pretense at sensibly sorting everything into "planet" or "not planet", as not only is everything a planet, but so is the nothing ''between'' these titular planets. However, the more serious subject of {{w|black hole cosmology}} holds the view that the observable universe is the interior of a black hole.
|-
! Spiteful
| ''Only'' Pluto is a planet
| align=center | 1
| This list is a malicious play on the demotion of Pluto by demoting all other planets except Pluto instead, leaving Pluto as the only planet in the solar system.
This is the taxonomic equivalent of refusing to play and taking your ball home to spite those who you think don't deserve to enjoy themselves.
|-
! {{w|Star}} (title text)
| Earth is a star
| align=center | 2 stars
| In May 1934, Mark Oliphant, Paul Harteck and Ernest Rutherford at the Cavendish Laboratory published an intentional deuterium fusion experiment and made the discovery of both tritium and helium-3. This is widely considered the first experimental demonstration of fusion. Randall considers that this and subsequent human-induced fusion makes Earth fall into the category of a star, and hence not a planet. Also, the IAU definition of a planet requires that the planet has cleared its "orbital neighborhood" of other objects — objects must either be captured as moons or have their orbits disrupted such that they are flung away.
Under this definition, one could humorously argue that recent human activities, launching into space ''new'' non-orbiting objects like the James Webb Space Telescope, technically disqualify Earth from being a planet, as the orbital neighborhood is no longer completely clear. By changing not only the definition, but the term being defined, this drifts yet further from any consensus view on the original question and into a typical punchline absurdity.
|}
The paper "[https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.15285 Moons are planets: Scientific usefulness versus cultural teleology in the taxonomy of planetary science]" reviews the historical (and astrological) history of what is considered to be a planet within the folk taxonomy, lambasts the IAU definition as "rushed" before sorting out vital issues, recognises the history of science recognising moons as planets and suggests a definition of planets of any orbital state based on their unique complexity between a pile of rubble and an undifferentiated orb of fusing hydrogen and helium.

The 2006 redefinition of Pluto as a dwarf planet is a common theme on xkcd, occurring also in [[473: Still Raw]], [[482: Height]], [[1020: Orion Nebula]], [[1093: Forget]], [[1458: Small Moon]], [[1551: Pluto]] and [[1555: Exoplanet Names 2]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A table with 3 columns, and 17 rows below the the header row, labelled "Definition", "# of planets" and "Solar system".]
:[In each row, the first column has a single word, in bold, then a descriptive sentence. The second column has a digit or other 'value'. The third column is a not-to-scale drawing of the Solar system, featuring the Sun, various 'planetary' bodies and an apparently selective sample of moons and asteroids, as follows: The Sun, Mercury, Venus, Earth with the Moon, Mars with its two moons (Phobos and Deimos), a small selection of some asteroid belt bodies (Ceres in the midst of other, smaller, examples), Jupiter and four of its moons (likely the Galilean moons: Io, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto), a ringed Saturn and usually one of its moons (probably Titan) or two (possibly Enceladus or Iapetus, as required), Uranus and four or five of its moons (likely to be Miranda, Ariel, Umbriel, Titania and Oberon, but one of these (shown upon the face of Uranus) only appears in some iterations of the base image), Neptune and one of its moons (probably Triton), Pluto and one of its moons (Charon), four more plutoid or Kuiper Belt objects (too little context to identify, but possibly Haumea, Makemake, Eris, and maybe Sedna in distance order), the first two of them with distinct moons indicated (entirely dependent upon which main objects they are).]
:[Each row's illustrated solar system has individual combinations of green highlights applied to the otherwise repeated diagram.]
:[Row 1: Definition:] Traditionalist: Pluto is a planet [Number:] 9 [Highlighted: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto]
:[Row 2: Definition:] Modern: Pluto is not a planet [Number:] 8 [Highlighted: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune]
:[Row 3: Definition:] Expansive: Dwarf planets are planets [Number:] 17+ [Highlighted: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres (in Asteroid Belt), Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and the further main bodies]
:[Row 4: Definition:] Ultratraditionalist: Only the classical planets are planets [Number:] 5 [Highlighted: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn]
:[Row 5: Definition:] Condescending: Only giant planets are planets; the rest are big asteroids. [Number:] 4 [Highlighted: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune]
:[Row 6: Definition:] Simplistic: Anything gravitationally round is a planet [Number:] 37+ [Highlighted: The Sun, Mercury, Venus, Earth, The Moon, Mars, Ceres (without other asteroids), Jupiter + moons, Saturn with Titan, Uranus and its moons, Neptune with its moon, Pluto and the four further dwarf planets, your mom]
:[Row 7: Definition:] Grounded: Only objects a spaceship has landed on are planets [Number:] 10 [Highlighted: Venus, Earth, The Moon, Mars, five (non-Cererian) asteroids and Titan]
:[Row 8: Definition:] Regolithic: Anything covered in dirt and ice and stuff is a planet [Number:] [infinity symbol] [Highlighted: Mercury, Venus, Earth, The Moon, Mars, Ceres with all other asteroids depicted in the Asteroid Belt, the moons of Jupiter, the sole moon! of Saturn, the moons of Uranus, the moon of Neptune, Pluto with Charon, and all remaining dwarf planets with their moons]
:[Row 9: Definition:] Lunar: You can't be a planet if you don't have a moon [Number:] 12+ [Highlighted: Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and three of the other dwarf planets in the Kuiper belt, including one with no obviously drawn moon]
:[Row 10: Definition:] Solipsistic: Earth is the only planet [Number:] 1 [Highlighted: The Earth]
:[Row 11: Definition:] Judgemental: Only the prettiest ones are planets [Number:] 6 [Highlighted: The Earth, Jupiter with one of its moons (not identified), Saturn, one of ''two'' Saturnian moons in this image and Pluto]
:[Row 12: Definition:] Empiricist: Only worlds that I, author of this table, have personally seen are planets [Number:] 12 [Highlighted: Mercury, Venus, The Earth, The Moon, Mars, Jupiter with its four moons, Saturn and Uranus]
:[Row 13: Definition:] Marine biologist: Only objects with oceans are planets [Number:] 6+ [Highlighted: The Earth, three Jovian moons, the two illustrated Saturnian moons]
:[Row 14: Definition:] Maritime: Only objects with [next word in italics] surface oceans are planets [Number:] 2 [Highlighted: The Earth and Titan]
:[Row 15: Definition:] Universalist: They're all planets [Number:] [infinity symbol] [Highlighted: All drawn objects, including The Sun and all other objects including all the moons/asteroids]
:[Row 16: Definition:] Existentialist: What if space [next word in italics] itself is a planet??? [Word:] ''Duude'' [Highlighted: The whole third column cell]
:[Row 17: Definition:] Spiteful: [next word in italics] Only Pluto is a planet [Number:] 1 [Highlighted: Pluto]

==Trivia==
*In the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/archive/6/66/20250314195557%21planet_definitions_2x.png original version of the comic], there were two errors that would later be fixed. The "Traditionalist" definition highlighted Neptune's satellite {{w|Triton (moon)|Triton}} instead of Pluto. The images of the Solar System for the "Traditionalist" and "Modern" definitions were swapped, resulting in Pluto being incorrectly highlighted in "Modern" and omitted in "Traditionalist".

*The "Judgemental" definition has seven colored objects instead of the stated six. This mistake has not yet been fixed.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[Category:Comics edited after their publication]]

2: Petit Trees (sketch)

2025-03-10T00:06:10Z

162.158.74.95: Undo revision 368471 by 172.71.218.214 (talk) Wut?

<noinclude>{{distinguish|2614: 2}}</noinclude>
{{comic
| number = 2
| date = September 30, 2005
| title = Petit Trees (sketch)
| before = <big><big>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927001941/http://xkcd-drawings.livejournal.com/?skip=40#:~:text=8%3A36%20pm-,Le%20Petit,-Another%20fairly%20old Original title]: '''Le Petit'''</big></big>
| image = tree_cropped_(1).jpg
| titletext = "Petit" being a reference to Le Petit Prince, which I only thought about halfway through the sketch [https://web.archive.org/web/20070927001941/http://xkcd-drawings.livejournal.com/?skip=40#:~:text=8%3A36%20pm-,Le%20Petit,-Another%20fairly%20old Original caption]: Another fairly old drawing that I scanned.
}}

==Explanation==
This was the fourth comic originally posted to [[LiveJournal]]. The previous one was [[3: Island (sketch)]], and the next one was [[1: Barrel - Part 1]]. It was among the [[:Category:First day on LiveJournal|first thirteen comics]] posted to LiveJournal within 12 minutes on September 30, 2005, on the first day of the xkcd LiveJournal account.

This comic does not present a particular point, it's just a picture drawn by [[Randall Munroe|Randall]]. ''{{w|The Little Prince}}'' (in French ''Le Petit Prince'') is a novella written by {{w|Antoine de Saint-Exupéry}} in 1943, about the titular Little Prince, who lives on an asteroid and visits other inhabited asteroids and eventually the Earth. The book is filled with drawings of the asteroid, the prince, and the travels they make. It is noted how, on occasion, {{w|Adansonia|baobab trees}} can begin to grow on these asteroids, and should they not be immediately uprooted, the growth of their roots would tear the asteroid apart. ''The Little Prince'' would later be [[:Category:The Little Prince|referenced]] in the ''[[what if? (blog)|what if?]]'' article {{what if|26|Leap Seconds}}, in [[618: Asteroid]], and in [[1350: Lorenz]] at [https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/a1-2014/VgSdMz8OAHQ8w5Ee432f5Q.png the end] of the space trip branch.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Describe the little squares next to the drawing, and describe the planet in more detail.}}
:[Two trees are growing on opposite sides of a very small world. Their roots cover most of the planet's surface.]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Posted on LiveJournal| 04]]
[[Category:First day on LiveJournal| 04]]
[[Category:First day on xkcd.com]]
[[Category:Checkered paper]]
[[Category:Sketches]]
[[Category:The Little Prince]]

1845: State Word Map

2025-03-02T21:22:00Z

162.158.74.95: /* Explanation */ The phrasing looked a little off (and porn can often be of solo acts, so broadening it out).

{{comic
| number = 1845
| date = June 2, 2017
| title = State Word Map
| image = state_word_map.png
| titletext = The top search for every state is PORN, except Florida, where it's SEX PORN.
}}

==Explanation==

This is another of the many comics where [[Randall]] used a map of the United States for his joke (see below for examples). Similar in spirit to [[1138: Heatmap]], this comic pokes fun at many maps that attempt to use data to discern unique characteristics about various sub-regions, in this case {{w|U.S. state|American states}}. This map may have been inspired by [https://twitter.com/GoogleTrends/status/869624196921303040 this map] posted on Twitter by Google Trends the day before the comic was posted. Many web companies use maps like this in viral marketing, but the methodology behind them is pretty weak. The random noise in the data will mean that there will be variations between states even if there is no underlying pattern - and this can be further boosted by statistical tricks. A common one is to show the "most characteristic" or "most distinctive" term for each state. For instance, [http://www.businessinsider.com/most-common-causes-of-death-in-each-state-2014-6?IR=T the most common cause of death is heart disease or cancer] in every US state, but this makes for a boring map. Looking at the [https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2015/14_0395.htm most distinctive cause of death] produces a more interesting map, but it highlights very minor trends - Louisiana is marked as having syphilis as its most distinctive cause of death, even though [https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/stateprofiles/pdf/louisiana_profile.pdf only 15 Louisianans in every 100,000 have the disease] and there were only 22 syphilis deaths in the state over a whole decade. These maps can give a misleading impression of huge variation between states that doesn't really exist.

This map does not include real data, but says (when read left to right):
:You can make these maps say whatever you want by adjusting the methodology. Half of the time you're just amplifying random noise because the underlying data doesn't vary that much from one state to another. But whatever. Nobody checks this stuff. Just pick whatever normalization lets you make fun of Florida.

The primary joke is that the likelihood of these being the words used most often by the inhabitants of each state is low, rather than accurately representing the most used words Randall has just done exactly what he says he can do (make fun of Florida by putting whatever he wants). He also has not obtained the data from anywhere, just 'Something Something'. The joke about {{w|Florida}} is that the most used word in Florida is "Florida", which would make people in Florida very self-centered.

The comic continues to make fun of Florida in the title text by saying that Florida searches for "sex porn" instead of "porn", which is not needed since porn already means the depiction of sexual content. This is also probably a reference to PornHub's [https://www.pornhub.com/insights/united-states-top-searches data-farming] exercises, where they have periodically released the most frequently searched term by state. Florida is often the butt of many jokes, including the {{w|Florida Man}} meme and many mocking jibes regarding its {{w|2000 United States presidential election recount in Florida|messy electoral history}}. For more information on why Florida itself seems eager to play into this stereotype, check out the {{tvtropes|OnlyInFlorida|"Only in Florida" phenomenon}}.

Randall previously used a map of the United States as the basis for his comics in [[1767: US State Names]], [[1653: United States Map]], [[1509: Scenery Cheat Sheet]] and in [[1079: United Shapes]].

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the map, with sub caption:]
:<big>Most-Used Word in Each State</big>
:Based on Something Something Search Data

:[Beneath the captions are a colorful map of the United States of America. Each state has one color, but the colors do not change from state to state, but rather between rows of states. The top "row" is purple, the second row is gray-blue, but only goes half across. Where it stops a pink row of states begins. Beneath this runs a yellow row, except it does not take California with it, since it belongs to the next purple line beneath this yellow line. Finally the two states not in the contiguous states as well as the southern states from Texas to Florida are again pink. Inside each state is written one, and only one word (or for small states the word is outside and if needed a line indicates which state it belongs to). The words size depends on the size of the state and the word. If it can fit inside the state it will be written in a font large enough to fill the entire state if possible (in one case a hyphen is used). So a short word, like "lets" in huge Texas becomes huge, but a word like "noise" which has been fitted inside small Massachusetts becomes small.]

:[Here are the 50 words written in lines resembling the colors on the map (from left to right). Purple, gray-blue, pink, yellow, purple and pink:]
:You can make these maps say whatever you want
:by adjusting the methodology.
:Half the time you're just amplifying random noise.
:Because the underlying data doesn't vary that much from one state to another.
:But whatever. Nobody checks this stuff. Just pick
:whatever normal-ization lets you make fun of Florida.

==Trivia==
In [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/archive/0/04/20170602113432%21state_word_map.png the original version of the comic], the border line dividing {{w|New Hampshire}} and {{w|Maine}} was missing, although both states had distinct words attributed to them ("you" for NH and "want" for ME). Randall later corrected the error.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:US maps]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics edited after their publication]]

User talk:Firestar233

2025-02-24T21:22:47Z

162.158.74.95: /* Fixing the {{tl|notice}} and {{tl|notice2}} templates */ Oh, the irony, I of course made the attempt to use the 'template' template give the template of the '=', which ''really'' messed things up... until I delimitred the '='! Well, I think it's funny!

{{crickets}}

but nobody came

== User and User Talk pages for IPs ==

There really is no point to creating these for IP users (such as myself, yes), as they are not a practical/viable a means to contact a specific anonymous contributor, nor a useful 'home-page' for them to use.

Now, '42' is maybe a bit keen to tidy up, and found that you seem to be active (or at least responded to a notification about the change to your Watched page, yes?), so rightfuly that should be reversed (the merits of tagging to delete other named users will depend upon the users themselves, there are occasional spam-only (or failed spam-only!) contributors that were given User-space pages by well-meaning others, who neither know nor care). But setting IP-specific pages to delete is entirely justified. If there are any significant contributions to these, they could probably be copied somewhere else first (pages of the most significant ''named'' contributor?), yet I generally doubt that'll be a realistic consideration, overall. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.111|172.70.163.111]] 12:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
: If the pages were blank, then I might agree. I'm mostly undecided on deleting the IP addresses' user and talk pages, but ''registered'' users probably shouldn't have their pages be deleted even if they are blank. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 21:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:: Some people, upon getting "page creation privileges" have tended to go around and "un-redtext" people's user-space pages (or even just make them for random users they've seen sign up that day - not realising that a vast majority of the [[Special:Log/newusers|new users]] are typically just attempts at auto-spamming that get stalled).
:: It's all a lot easier if the user concerned (the who gains the pages) hasn't made any actual editing, or whose only edits are discredited. Even if you delete them and it ''wasn't'' a totally abandoned (and never-used) account, just hadn't got around to doing anything for several years, it can be recreated as soon as the puzzled owner finds out. (Some users, recently coming into "page creation capability" have tended to try to de-RedText random contributors to article Talk pagesl; or even give [[Special:Log/newusers|recent new users]] their userspace-pages, despite most of those clearly being abortively created only for spamming purposes.)
:: I think there's a degree of consideration to take when there is some content. But what use does the content of [[User talk:108.162.212.48|a page such as this]] have? That'd be a decision I'd happily leave to the administrator who eventually decideds to ''look at'' the "please delete this page" tag. They can look at the contributors, what they contribute, decided whether to: a) actually delete it (and, if there's reason to, they can always 'undelete' it, but meanwhile it cleans up the openly visible site), or b) remove the tag themselves.
:: I don't think it's your job to remove "please delete" tagging from pages that you randomly find like that. If you know the user concerned, maybe. If you ''are'' the user yourself, especially. But all you're doing is leaving it in a state where someone can be equally certain that they should be tagged-to-delete (with exactly the same reasoning) and re-apply it. Mass-hot(un)catting doesn't make me think that you've even looked at the users (contributors, if any, whoever created the page in the first place, but also the 'owner', if they've ever been involved).
:: No, maybe it wasn't right '42' to mark your particular page, but... look at the actual history of pages like [[User:Danken]]. Created (probably) in error, marked for deletion when that was realised... Then you reverse that for what reason? (Not for the sake of the content.) Good intentions, yes, vs. an equal well-intent. And, personally, I'd side with (some of!) the things you untagged being more tag-worthy than not. Leaving it up to the admin(s) to work out as and when they get around to it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118|162.158.74.118]] 22:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

==Whaaaaaaaaa==
:Omg you know warriors and undertale!? {{unsigned|Definitely Bill Cipher|15:04, 7 January 2025}}

== Sandbox ==

Hey, what are you cooking up in your sandbox? The wikitext/code on your user page looks pretty interesting. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 21:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:I'm also wondering about this! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
: I was trying to fight with wikitext to allow me to calculate the precise contribution score. Plainly using the contribution score extension's functions in an expression returned an error saying there was a delete character in the input, which i think was because the cscore functions evaluated after the expression and had the delete character as the default string. I tried offloading it to a template, which was my sandbox, but that didn't work so I just gave up and just updated it manually on my user page [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 20:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

== Interested to know ==

What was the rationale behind {{diff|365435|switching wiki-italics with HTML-italics}}. I presume some context in which it was embedded, but it's not obvious where, and I'm genuinely curious. (Noting that i(talic)-tags are officially a style-only tag, with the equivalent em(phasis)-tags are now prefered where it's a semantic purpose, though identical under most circumstances and probably not worth changing.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.216|172.70.160.216]] 13:40, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
:For some reason the wikitext italics didn't italicize the second page(if it was given), but the html italics italicized the second page link. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 06:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

...additionally, I have for a while been pondering adding (optional) <nowiki>[[Category:Comics sharing name|<category sorting key>]]</nowiki> to the {{template|distinguish}} template. Invoke by <nowiki>{{distinguish|9654: Similar Names|Similar Name 8765}}</nowiki>, on top the (hypothetical) "8765:Similar Name" page and <nowiki>{{distinguish|8765: Similar Name|Similar Name 9654}}</nowiki> on its counterpart, auto-populating [[:Category:Comics sharing name]] without having to seperately remember to add. (When it's a number-vs-title coincidence, "|[[2: Petit Trees (sketch)|2 Petit Trees]]" vs "|[[2614: 2|2 #2614]]", perhaps.

I've yet to work out what might happen to the category if this was done for (e.g.) [[2411: 1/10,000th Scale World]], [[2412: 1/100,000th Scale World]] and [[2417: 1/1,000th Scale World]], if adding a {{template|distinguish}} for both 'others' on all three (one could retain the current 'manual' category of <nowiki>[[Category:Comics sharing name|1/10]]</nowiki> and stick to the current only-the-target parameters at the top).

Thoughts? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.78|172.71.178.78]] 14:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
:Not the intended recipient but love the idea! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:36, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
:i made it add the category when the common parameter is given (even if empty, where it doesn't add the sorting key). [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 23:33, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

== can you elaborate on "if you have something to add, add it to the main explanation"? ==

That was my first edit. You didnt delete it, but commented it out. I thought I had seen alternate explanations in other articles. Are you just asking me to remove the "===Alternative Explanation===" header?

[[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.94|172.69.23.94]] 14:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
(Note:I have no idea why its asking for 4 tildes)
: There generally aren't "alternative explanation" sections in the other pages (If there are, i don't remember seeing any under a new section). From what I've seen, different takes are typically worked into the main section instead of a separate section at the bad i.e. just before where the table is now. I just commented it out because i was tired and didn't feel like incorporating it myself (i'm pretty bad at it), and deleting it would just require future editors to look at the history to see what was removed. It was essentially just me putting the workload on other people.
:Though, looking back at it now, it seems like what you wrote kind of missed the point of the comic, as it is pretty clearly referring to the website wirecutter instead of the wirecutter tool.
:the <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> is what inserts your signature in the talk pages, so that the comments will be attributed to you. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 06:31, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

== Fixing the {{tl|notice}} and {{tl|notice2}} templates ==

Hey Firestar233! Since you seem to like templates, I wanted to let you know that the {{tl|notice}} and {{tl|notice2}} templates (and thus also the {{tl|incomplete}} and {{tl|incomplete transcript}} templates, which use {{tl|notice}}) sometimes break when a link is used. I'm not sure what causes them to break (for example, [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=15:_Just_Alerting_You&oldid=366502 here it breaks], but [[ibm_hc_2|here it works]], even though the latter has more links), but I thought you might be interested in this. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 09:22, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:It's not an error with those templates, or at least not one that can be solved ''by'' those templates.
:The presence of the "=" character n the link URLs gets interpreted by the template-parser as making a variable that is called <everything in that paramater to the left of the (first) equals sign> contain paramater data that is <everything to the right of it>. And, in doing so, it no longer recognises that 'N'th parameter as <parameter N> and containing <the whole lot>, but leaves it blank and thus (as is errorchecked by the template) cause for the complaint.
:In short, if you try to use an equals-character, it'll disrupt things from your expectations.
:The answer, though, is probably quite simple. Replace any (and all!) instances of "=" with {{template|{{=}}}}, that means that it doesn't trip up the backend wikimedia handling/whatever it is.
: So, instead of...
:*"...|something like foo=bar|..." looking like a <nowiki>{{{something like foo}}}</nowiki> uselessly containing "bar"...
: We have...
:*"...|something like foo<nowiki>{{=}}</nowiki>bar|..." properly giving an appropriate '<N>'th parameter <nowiki>{{{<N>}}}</nowiki> containing "something like foo=bar"...
:I also ''really'' personally dislike the kind of URLs that have 'highlight text' additions. If you could have used the link without any of the ":~:text=" part, and onward, you'd have been Ok. And I wouldn't have been wondering if you were yet another one of those cases where the person posting the URL doesn't even bother to check that they're using the least complicated and perhaps non-browser-specific version of a URL. ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.33.215|162.158.33.215]] 20:16, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:: That does seem to be the issue, with unescaped equal signs. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 04:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:: Thanks! This makes sense.
And I wouldn't have been wondering if you were yet another one of those cases where the person posting the URL doesn't even bother to check that they're using the least complicated and perhaps non-browser-specific version of a URL. ;)
::Well, the reason I went out of my way to select the text, right click, and click "Copy link to highlight" is because without it, the user would be directed to the full page of 10-20 comics instead of the specific comic in question. If you notice, I've done this for every "original caption" and "original title" link for the early comics, like [[1]], [[3]], [[10]], etc.
::I'm not sure if it's compatible with all browsers, but even if it's not and doesn't worsen the UX of a non–compatible browser–user, then i believe we should keep using these "longer links". --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

== Identity Theft ==

Wasn't me who added that tag, but I've a feeling that it was a reference to the potential (corporate?) identity theft that the theft of TinyURL would allow. (Yeah, a marginal reference, at best, but just to give you my casual thoughts on the matter. Certainly I'm not going to unrevert it back.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.92|172.68.205.92]] 20:55, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

(Added to that, that Phones category in Rapid Test Results probably references the "Good Cell Signal". Again, I would say too tenuous to matter.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.92|172.68.205.92]] 21:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

1195: Flowchart

2021-07-25T06:16:30Z

162.158.74.95: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1195
| date = April 5, 2013
| title = Flowchart
| image = flowchart.png
| titletext = The way out is to use the marker you have to add a box that says 'get a marker' to the line between you and 'start', then add a 'no' line from the trap box to 'end'.
}}

== Explanation ==
{{w|Flowcharts}} are diagrams used to show the logical flow of an {{w|algorithm}}, process, or program. Flowcharts are a [[:Category:Flowcharts|recurring theme]] in [[xkcd]]. In this comic, [[Randall]] uses the fact that flowcharts can indeed be used to show a loop in the procedure: in this case, the reader will theoretically become trapped in a loop of reading the text in the diamond, following the line marked "YES," and ending back up in the diamond. Those familiar with flowcharts will notice though that, while diamonds usually contain decision questions (which can be answered multiple ways), the diamond here actually includes a statement instead.

The title text contains a suggested solution to the loop: the way to escape the loop is to use a marker and add an additional "NO" arrow proceeding from the diamond to a rounded box labelled "END" before you start the algorithm at "START." This suggests that the decision question in the diamond could more properly be phrased as "Is this flowchart a trap?" However, to follow this suggestion, you would need to actually have the marker that you are about to write instructions to go get. Thus, you must also add the instruction "get a marker" somewhere before the flowchart actually begins (before "START"), so that you actually have the marker by the time you get to the flowchart in the comic. And since you did not have a marker and could thus not write this way out, you are still trapped!

Of course, the reader could disregard the algorithm, but this would break the conventions of following the flowchart. This is perhaps part the comic's purpose - to suggest that a problem cannot be solved from within the confines of its own conventions.

Randall has made use of [[:Category:Flowcharts|flowcharts]] before, and previously released another comic named [[518: Flow Charts]].

== Transcript ==
:[A flow chart is shown with two boxes and two arrows. The first box rectangular:]
:Start

:[From the first box there is a short arrow straight down to a diamond shaped box:]
:Hey, wait, this flowchart is a trap!

:[An arrow continues down below from the bottom corner of the diamond box, where there is labeled, and quickly it turns left (in the direction of the arrow), going out under the diamond and then turns left two more times to end up on the right corner of the same box where the arrow points back again.]
:Yes

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics sharing name|Flowcharts02]]
[[Category:Flowcharts]]

Talk:2469: Astronomy Status Board

2021-06-02T17:11:54Z

162.158.74.95:

I don't think the two characters shown in the comic are necessarily junior astronomers. The title text seems more like a comment on how people new to a field would want to do big and exciting things, and groan when told they need to do boring but essential tasks. [[User:DrPumpkinz|DrPumpkinz]] ([[User talk:DrPumpkinz|talk]]) 04:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Anyone else going to make the Destiny reference? Just me? Cool. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.111|172.69.35.111]] 06:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

What exactly is the destiny reference for us uneducated? Also as a sidenote I think this is funnier if I imagine that they check if the sun is still there by aiming the telescope directly at it and looking into it.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.95|162.158.74.95]] 17:11, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

The two phrases, "still there" and "gone" are from the movie "before midnight 2013" when they were watching the sunset. --[[User:Eta|Eta]] ([[User talk:Eta|talk]]) 06:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking that (as well as the obvious Big Rip of hard(-probably) science) there might be an oblique reference to the old (19thC?) Verne/Wells-ish tale I cannot remember the true title and author of, in which an amateur astronomer becomes aware (through being one of the few knowledgable people observing on a given night - somehow almost globally cloudy?) that the Moon is in the wrong position. Derived from this (and its later return to where it should have been, plus other observed effects from the stars to the tides) is developed a new theological science of a divine flaw (a bit like a misplaced stone in the desert of [[505]]) that can then be divinely corrected. (i.e. science effectively ''is'' 'the planets being pushed around by angels', with mystical and natural causes being the same). - Though the fact I have to explain all the differences from mere presence/absence (and Google-Fu failing me when I try to ID the story) makes this much less likely to even be involved in the conception. Still, mentioning it in case it interests, or someone can do the YASID for me. ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.38|141.101.98.38]] 11:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

When seeing the comic the first thing that came into my head was http://www.hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com which gives a similar more or less obvious status report. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Luckily they don't have indicators for individual pulsars. Those would be way more effort to maintain. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 12:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

... they may want to add a couple moons to the list. ;-) https://www.project-apollo.net/mos/mos361.html [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.57|162.158.89.57]] 13:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I would be a lot less concerned about this if I weren't currently reading Seveneves... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.57.91|172.68.57.91]] 15:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

This would have been very cool if he'd released the comic earlier in the week, and briefly changed the moon's status to "gone" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.14|162.158.75.14]] 20:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

If the universe will continue expanding, other galaxies, while not technically "gone", will either move so far away we wouldn't be able to see them OR merge with our own galaxy. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

== Bloated explanation? ==
Is it just me, or does someone else think that the current explanation is bloated? I mean to actually explain/understand the comic everything below the current third paragraph isn't needed, imo. All other paragraphs do say something about why the objetcs listed may or may not suddenly disappear but I guess for the understanding of the comic the thirds' paragraph notion "are expected to last for bilions more" is absolutely sufficient. I propose to move everything below that paragraph into trivia section. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
:I moved it [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:46, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
::Is there a way to integrate it better into the usual page style? Having a second, longer explanation where the trivia page normally is looks strange, and it lacks the casual, understandable-by-people-who-are-new-to-the-subject tone one might expect from an explanation. I request permission to edit it for brevity and merge it with the main explanation, leaving the details in Trivia as to not intimidate people looking for simple explanations. I am asking permission because this edit goes against your earlier proposal. [[User talk:Quillathe Siannodel|{)|(}]][[User:Quillathe_Siannodel|Quill]][[Special:Contributions/Quillathe_Siannodel|{)|(}]] 19:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
:::I see where you are coming from. In my opinion the point of an explanation - any explanation - is to, well, explain the topic at hand. While all the additional information might be helpful if you want to dig deeper into any given topic (this is the reason why I have not outright deleted but only moved it) it's not needed to get the point of the given comic. However, if you can think of some phrasing that contains the things currently in the "second explanation" but without(!) bloating the actual explanation you're welcome :) Mind, this is an issue I'm having with many explanations on the site and everytime I feel it got out of hand too much, I try to intervene. I see that many people contributing here are very passionate and most if not all are nerds in one form or another and are VERY happy if they can write something about their field of expertise. However, if you want to know how to make apple cider you don't need to know the evolutionary history of apple trees ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible that the "sun" and "moon" still being there is a reference to the lunar eclipse that happened last Wednesday?

Ironically, I got a 503 error when I first visited this page, so maybe ExplainXKCD needs its own status board. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.88|172.69.71.88]] 17:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

https://astronomystat.us/ is now a thing. You're welcome. [[User:Jessews|jessews]] ([[User talk:Jessews|talk]]) 19:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
:Who is updating this? Is it reliable? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.44|172.70.114.44]] 20:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Cueball is actively tapping away. I wonder if the status will failsafe to "gone" if it isn't confirmed still there. Sort of like the proposed status board that normally would say "The FBI hasn't demanded keys to your secure, encrypted email in the past hour" unless the operator didn't actively click a confirmation button. (To get around the gag order). [OK, everything after the second sentence is a tangent, but I hadn't thought of this since 2015 or so]
[[User:Joejellybean|Joejellybean]] ([[User talk:Joejellybean|talk]]) 07:49, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2469: Astronomy Status Board

2021-06-02T17:11:13Z

162.158.74.95:

I don't think the two characters shown in the comic are necessarily junior astronomers. The title text seems more like a comment on how people new to a field would want to do big and exciting things, and groan when told they need to do boring but essential tasks. [[User:DrPumpkinz|DrPumpkinz]] ([[User talk:DrPumpkinz|talk]]) 04:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Anyone else going to make the Destiny reference? Just me? Cool. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.111|172.69.35.111]] 06:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

What exactly is the destiny reference for us uneducated? Also as a sidenote I think this is funnier if I imagine that they check if the sun is still there by aiming the telescope directly at it and looking into it.````

The two phrases, "still there" and "gone" are from the movie "before midnight 2013" when they were watching the sunset. --[[User:Eta|Eta]] ([[User talk:Eta|talk]]) 06:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking that (as well as the obvious Big Rip of hard(-probably) science) there might be an oblique reference to the old (19thC?) Verne/Wells-ish tale I cannot remember the true title and author of, in which an amateur astronomer becomes aware (through being one of the few knowledgable people observing on a given night - somehow almost globally cloudy?) that the Moon is in the wrong position. Derived from this (and its later return to where it should have been, plus other observed effects from the stars to the tides) is developed a new theological science of a divine flaw (a bit like a misplaced stone in the desert of [[505]]) that can then be divinely corrected. (i.e. science effectively ''is'' 'the planets being pushed around by angels', with mystical and natural causes being the same). - Though the fact I have to explain all the differences from mere presence/absence (and Google-Fu failing me when I try to ID the story) makes this much less likely to even be involved in the conception. Still, mentioning it in case it interests, or someone can do the YASID for me. ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.38|141.101.98.38]] 11:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

When seeing the comic the first thing that came into my head was http://www.hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com which gives a similar more or less obvious status report. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Luckily they don't have indicators for individual pulsars. Those would be way more effort to maintain. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 12:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

... they may want to add a couple moons to the list. ;-) https://www.project-apollo.net/mos/mos361.html [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.57|162.158.89.57]] 13:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I would be a lot less concerned about this if I weren't currently reading Seveneves... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.57.91|172.68.57.91]] 15:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

This would have been very cool if he'd released the comic earlier in the week, and briefly changed the moon's status to "gone" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.14|162.158.75.14]] 20:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

If the universe will continue expanding, other galaxies, while not technically "gone", will either move so far away we wouldn't be able to see them OR merge with our own galaxy. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

== Bloated explanation? ==
Is it just me, or does someone else think that the current explanation is bloated? I mean to actually explain/understand the comic everything below the current third paragraph isn't needed, imo. All other paragraphs do say something about why the objetcs listed may or may not suddenly disappear but I guess for the understanding of the comic the thirds' paragraph notion "are expected to last for bilions more" is absolutely sufficient. I propose to move everything below that paragraph into trivia section. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
:I moved it [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:46, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
::Is there a way to integrate it better into the usual page style? Having a second, longer explanation where the trivia page normally is looks strange, and it lacks the casual, understandable-by-people-who-are-new-to-the-subject tone one might expect from an explanation. I request permission to edit it for brevity and merge it with the main explanation, leaving the details in Trivia as to not intimidate people looking for simple explanations. I am asking permission because this edit goes against your earlier proposal. [[User talk:Quillathe Siannodel|{)|(}]][[User:Quillathe_Siannodel|Quill]][[Special:Contributions/Quillathe_Siannodel|{)|(}]] 19:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
:::I see where you are coming from. In my opinion the point of an explanation - any explanation - is to, well, explain the topic at hand. While all the additional information might be helpful if you want to dig deeper into any given topic (this is the reason why I have not outright deleted but only moved it) it's not needed to get the point of the given comic. However, if you can think of some phrasing that contains the things currently in the "second explanation" but without(!) bloating the actual explanation you're welcome :) Mind, this is an issue I'm having with many explanations on the site and everytime I feel it got out of hand too much, I try to intervene. I see that many people contributing here are very passionate and most if not all are nerds in one form or another and are VERY happy if they can write something about their field of expertise. However, if you want to know how to make apple cider you don't need to know the evolutionary history of apple trees ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible that the "sun" and "moon" still being there is a reference to the lunar eclipse that happened last Wednesday?

Ironically, I got a 503 error when I first visited this page, so maybe ExplainXKCD needs its own status board. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.88|172.69.71.88]] 17:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

https://astronomystat.us/ is now a thing. You're welcome. [[User:Jessews|jessews]] ([[User talk:Jessews|talk]]) 19:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
:Who is updating this? Is it reliable? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.44|172.70.114.44]] 20:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Cueball is actively tapping away. I wonder if the status will failsafe to "gone" if it isn't confirmed still there. Sort of like the proposed status board that normally would say "The FBI hasn't demanded keys to your secure, encrypted email in the past hour" unless the operator didn't actively click a confirmation button. (To get around the gag order). [OK, everything after the second sentence is a tangent, but I hadn't thought of this since 2015 or so]
[[User:Joejellybean|Joejellybean]] ([[User talk:Joejellybean|talk]]) 07:49, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2343: Mathematical Symbol Fight

2020-08-08T02:50:46Z

162.158.74.95:

Can I get aleph-null aleph-shaped throwing stars? [[User:LunarNapolean|LunarNapolean]] ([[User talk:LunarNapolean|talk]]) 20:18, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Apologies to whoever added the "citation needed" that I stepped on. -- brad

That zeta looks conspicuously bad. I wonder if this comic will get a cleaned-up version uploaded. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.16|108.162.237.16]] 20:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

[[Megan]] usually has shoulder-length hair, so the person being attacked by Ponytail is probably not Megan... except in so far as all brunettes in this comic are called 'Megan'. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 20:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
:Is one of them [[Danish]]? And one of them Megan? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.121|172.69.33.121]] 22:49, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I think Randall is underestimating the weapon utility of psi. There's a real-world martial arts [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sai_(weapon) weapon] that looks somewhat like it.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.197|172.69.68.197]] 22:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
:I think he’s also seriously underestimating the value of keeping your fingers attached to your hand. Swords have guards for a reason. I’d pick the contour integral over anything else there.

Considering the title text, a bass clef looks pretty formidable, close to a bat'leth. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 00:31, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
:Yes, but the treble clef is the one in the title text, and that’s nothing like a Klingon {{w|bat'leth}}. I removed the comment from the table. [[User:Adam1729|Adam1729]] ([[User talk:Adam1729|talk]]) 02:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

These “weapons” seem strangely appropriate for xkcd’s stick figures... -cpl

Are we sure White Hat is holding empty set? There don't appear to be points extending outside the circle in which case I think he's actually holding Theta -jc

Talk:2340: Cosmologist Genres

2020-08-03T18:03:58Z

162.158.74.95: metal subgenres

An ultra-early comic, after the prior quite-early one. Is Randall (suddenly now) getting enough sleep? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.71|162.158.154.71]] 08:31, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
:Perhaps his sleep schedule has become completely hopeless instead. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.37|108.162.238.37]] 11:08, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
:what do you mean ultra early?
::(Remember to sign...) As a metric, look at the page-creation times of the last few comic pages (i.e. View History). The times, at least for me as an anon-IP with no settings changed, are that of the server's home, not Randall's, but consistent tor all that.
::Quite often, the comic page is created shortly after midnight and the auto-filled date has to be corrected to the assumption it was published on the Mon/Wed/Fri by Randall, not the Tue/Thu/Sat of the server (which seems to check/listen for a new comic periodically, ready to create and pre-populate the page ASAP after it is commentable-about).
::Wednesday (prior comic) was very much still within Wednesday, and this one was about ''twenty hours'' ahead of normal (4am, server's Friday, rather than midnight+ on server's Saturday). No sign yet of Monday, when I checked just now, so perhaps ⅔rds of last week was just a transient anomaly. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.71|162.158.154.71]] 13:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Is the 'pop' not considered a metal possibly referring to the 'pop test' for Hydrogen gas that I had to do hundreds of times in high school? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.230|162.158.2.230]] 10:13, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Is "Lite" a play on "Light" - i.e. photons during the big bang?[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.106|108.162.245.106]] 17:39, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
:Nope. (Probably not, anyway.)[[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.169|172.69.63.169]] 18:31, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Why 'pop' is 'lite'?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.6|162.158.238.6]] 19:29, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd say it's because pop is the most commonly played music genre, just as hydrogen and helium are the most common elements. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.109|162.158.93.109]] 20:35, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Surely Pop is 'Lite' because it refers to the Big Bang - or 'Big Pop' in this case. And it was all Hydrogen or helium at that moment therefore 'lite' not 'metal'.
:I get why ''pop'' is lite, but why "Lite". Is that a collective term in cosmology for Hydrogen and Helium? [[User:Kapten-N|Kapten-N]] ([[User talk:Kapten-N|talk]]) 07:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that astronomers don't always refer to non-H/He stuff as "metal". When you start talking about exoplanets, asteroids and meteoroids, there's a different classification (albeit nearly as reductive):

*Gas: H2 and He
*Ice: anything made out of CHON
*Rock: basically the ordinary meaning - mostly metal silicates and sulfides
*Metal: native metals

Each of these has much less variation in density and volatility than the variation between categories (I listed them in ascending order of density and descending order of volatility), so these tend to stick together both in terms of what stays on a planet and in terms of forming layers on a planet (e.g. Earth has no Gas, a light dusting of Ice in the form of the biosphere and oceans, Rock crust and mantle, and a Metal core; Neptune's outer layers are Gas, most of the planet is Ice, and the core is Rock and Metal). [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 05:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
:That calls for a sequel involving both drugs and music. I don't see how to make sex fit. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.110|172.69.69.110]] 08:47, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
I assumed pop->bang->big bang->(let there be) lite
[[User:Ysth|Ysth]] ([[User talk:Ysth|talk]]) 08:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

This is most likely in reference of https://xkcd.com/2205 where approximation in cosmology is usually in orders of magnitude instead of precise value. In this case only "pop" music is lite and everything else is "metal" with nothing in between. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.45|162.158.62.45]] 15:57, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Fun fact (feel free to delete if not allowed): you can take any of the genres on the left and combine it with "metal" to get a subgenre of metal that actually exists!

2338: Faraday Tour

2020-07-28T00:19:29Z

162.158.74.95:

{{comic
| number = 2338
| date = July 28, 2020
| title = Faraday Tour
| image = faraday_tour.png
| titletext = I asked them if it was safe to be running tours during the pandemic. They said, "During the what?"
}}

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

A Faraday Cage blocks electromagnetic transmission into and out of the cage area. Attempting to livestream a walk through such a cage would (theoretically, at least) cause the streamer's cell signal to drop out completely, resulting in the loading wheel show in panels three and four.

The title text refers to COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. The joke is that as they don’t get cell service in the cage, the owners would be unaware of global events. This assumes that the owners and workers solely live inside the Faraday Cage.

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

{{comic discussion}}

2335: Photo Deposit

2020-07-20T21:20:06Z

162.158.74.95: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 2335
| date = July 20, 2020
| title = Photo Deposit
| image = photo_deposit.png
| titletext = It's okay, they scan the serial numbers and make sure you can't deposit the same bill more than once.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BANKNOTE PHOTOCOPIER. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Some mobile banking apps allow users to deposit {{w|Cheque|check}}s through the app. The comic parodies this by "depositing" cash via a mobile app. This leads to duplication of the money. Checks cannot be duplicated by this method, as a check is, in some ways, an instruction for one bank to send money to another.

The title text states that the app recognizes the {{w|serial number}}s on the bills and prevents users from depositing them multiple times. It is unknown if multiple users can deposit the same bills. Even with a user being unable to deposit the same bills twice, they will still double the value of their cash, as they have a spendable copy of it in their account and they still have the original which could be spent outside the bank system.

In addition, the system would be highly vulnerable to {{w|Counterfeit money|counterfeiting}}. When depositing or paying with cash, the texture of cash is different from normal paper and therefore is a method to detect counterfeits. (In the U.S., bill are made from a sort of cloth. Other nations such as Canada and the U.K. have started introducing plastic banknotes.) In contrast, the low-resolution camera of a smartphone could be fooled by a printed image, or possibly even an image on a screen, effectively enabling an attacker to clone an arbitrary banknote without actually possessing it; enabling a determined person to arbitrarily lower the purchasing power of existing money significantly, without issuing any new money.

This comic is also related to {{w|fractional reserve banking}}, where banks create money through lending the same money multiple times.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Megan is holding a (cash) bill in one hand, and is taking a picture of it with her smartphone with her other hand. Cueball is holding a (cash) bill in one hand, and is looking at his smartphone in his other hand.]

:Cueball's phone: Deposit accepted!
:Megan's phone: click
:[Caption below panel:]
:After a lucrative six hours for us, our bank removed the new feature in their app that let you deposit cash by taking a picture of it.

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

Talk:2330: Acceptable Risk

2020-07-10T11:12:37Z

162.158.74.95:

Back to COVID-19. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.172|162.158.63.172]] 23:59, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Transcript claims that there is Ponytail while explanation says it's Megan[[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 09:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
:Fixed! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.4|162.158.238.4]] 09:48, 9 July 2020 (UTCA

"I don't know! AAAAA! AAAAAA!" Must be referring to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPOyOM7wxlE
At least, it seems that way to me . . . . [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.95|162.158.74.95]] 11:12, 10 July 2020 (UTC)