explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1902: State Borders

2017-10-15T21:11:08Z

172.68.133.234:

Let's be honest- it should ''all'' be Canada. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.123|162.158.74.123]] 12:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
:Or... Indigenous people's land? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.232|108.162.216.232]] 04:27, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Could Arizona, New Mexico be a reference to Trump? Like, make the border straighter so it's easier to build a wall? [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 12:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
:More likely the joke is that conceding territory to Mexico is about the last thing Trump would do [[User:AnotherAnonymous|AnotherAnonymous]] ([[User talk:AnotherAnonymous|talk]]) 13:04, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

My first thought is to wonder if it would be possible to arrange the map such that all internal borders are "straight lines" that span the entire country, to satisfy as many criteria as possible:
* The number of states remains unchanged
** …and they all get to keep their capitals (probably quite difficult)
*** …or (and?) each state manages to keep either its current population, land area, or coastline length
* Or all internal borders are parallels or meridians
* Or all states have the same land area
** …or population; or population density
* Or if you're allowing more (or fewer) states than the present layout, what's the greatest number of states possible such that they all contain at least one complete city?

Which of those criteria would be the most interesting challenge? And which could you construct an algorithm to solve?
I really should refrain from trying to build those algorithms, because I'm supposed to be working --[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 13:28, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
:I'd like to see what a map of the US would look like with each house gerrymandered by their legislative preferences... Borders everywhere, and wow what a nightmare of litigation it would generate as people cross from one district to another!
:More to your query: I don't see any modifications you could make that would keep the population unchanged. Some people would inevitably end up in a different state.

:How about a map where every state has an equal number of spiders? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.232|108.162.216.232]] 04:39, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
::Population as in number of people; not necessarily the same people. --[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 10:28, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
:::Oh... Hm, that doesn't sound very useful ''or'' aesthetically satisfying... I think mapping the regions where various spider populations dominate might be more interesting. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.232|108.162.216.232]] 10:46, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

There are some great videos on YouTube about weird State boundaries. There are some REALLY weird oddities out there. Take for instance the "Give to Canada" piece - that's the Northwest Angle in Minnesota. It's really an accident that it ever ended up in the USA at all, and doesn't make any sense! [[User:Martini|Martini]] ([[User talk:Martini|talk]]) 13:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)Martini
:I wouldn't call the NW Angle an accident as much as a slightly illogical solution in order to maintain the terms of the original border agreement in the face of the Mississippi River's inconveniently located headwaters. My recollection is that it said roughly: the border goes west of <this> point until reaching the Mississippi river [which all parties assumed continued that far north]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.40|108.162.216.40]] 14:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I believe Randall's overall point is that though a large part of the individual United States have straight boundaries, especially in the West, or other features that are aesthetically pleasing, as in the S Carolina/Georgia/Florida coastline, there are a good number of internal inconsistencies. Many of these (most of the untagged "fixes") can be attributed to the concept that "Rivers make good logical boundaries", but even then, if you look closer, there are some really puzzling bits:
* The "Give To Canada" bit of Minnesota is almost all Indian Reservation land, so that kind of makes sense...
* The "Fix this thing" in Missouri is even stranger than it initially looks - while the notch in Arkansas is caused by the Mississippi River, there is a large bight of land in the middle of the Missouri-owned bit that is actually Kentucky (yes, there's an island of Kentucky that is separate from the main Kentucky state and entirely surrounded by Missouri)
* Not edited, but equally odd is the dip Florida cuts into Georgia near the east coast - there's no apparent town or natural features there to cause that irregularity

I don't happen to think the Arizona/New Mexico bits are political commentary, just "the entire rest of the state is a box, make this a straight line, too." cleanup. I mean yes, it would make wall-building easier, theoretically, but the Chinese showed the world centuries ago that straight lines are not needed to build a big fricking wall. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.131|108.162.238.131]] 14:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

- While I agree it probably isn't conscious political commentary, its interesting that there are not places the border increases; always concessions, never gains. May take into account its easier to give than take territory? --[[User:Jgt|Jgt]] ([[User talk:Jgt|talk]]) 19:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)--[[User:Jgt|Jgt]] ([[User talk:Jgt|talk]]) 19:33, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm surprised Randall didn't suggest cleaning up Point Roberts as well [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_Roberts,_Washington]. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.174|141.101.107.174]] 14:33, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
: Presumably the graphic designers are okay with that, since it maintains the 49th Parallel as a nice, tidy border. [[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 20:18, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm shocked he didn't support fixing the Idaho/Wisconsin/Montana/Oregon border. That top part should be either given to Montana, or split between Washington and Oregon... I wonder if he left out certain things in order to avoid offending certain groups of people. Like suggesting that Rhode Island and Connecticut should probably be one state, or that Vermont and New Hampshire should be as well. [[User:Kashim|Kashim]] ([[User talk:Kashim|talk]]) 17:03, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Some of the suggestions are ironic, for example Michigan's upper peninsula actually used to be part of the Wisconsin territory, but it was ceded to Michigan in exchange for the port of Toledo being ceded to Ohio. "why does Florida get Alabama's coastline" is actually because Alabama got part of Florida's coastline so it wouldn't be landlocked. The bit of Nevada that he wants to fix it so Nevada has territory along the Colorado River [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.250|162.158.75.250]] 17:18, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Nobody seems to have noticed that Delaware's curved northern border has been flattened (removing Wilmington). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.83|108.162.238.83]] 21:31, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

One significant thing about this map is that, under this map, Hillary Clinton may have won the 2016 election. Citations needed, but I've seen it said that if the Upper Peninsula were moved from Michigan to Wisconsin and the Florida Panhandle were moved to Alabama, Clinton would have won Michigan and Florida, giving her an Electoral College majority. I don't think the Upper Peninsula has enough population to cost Michigan an electoral vote, and I think Florida would lose two electoral votes, putting Clinton exactly at the 270 needed to win. Perhaps the changes around Colorado and Nevada would make a difference, although there were also five faithless Clinton electors who might have voted for her if it would have made a difference. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.4|108.162.219.4]] 01:45, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Good curve! The curve is called the Georgia Bight, or less euphoniously, the South Atlantic Bight. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.76|162.158.63.76]] 03:34, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

"'''Align to Grid'''" refers to the option to have icons snap to a grid on a Windows desktop. The idea is that the states become "aligned" like icons on a desktop. [[User:FakeCrash|FakeCrash]] ([[User talk:FakeCrash|talk]]) 17:59, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

It would be really useful if this could link to somewhere that described why the various panhandles and oddities exist. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.247|162.158.154.247]] 21:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

They should be called geo-graphic designers [[User:Jaalenja|Jaalenja]] ([[User talk:Jaalenja|talk]]) 06:53, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Randall had no references to Trump here. Get over it.
I mean really. Why does everybody think everything about the country has to do with Trump winning? [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 14:24, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

For the sentence: "Many U.S. residents will be made to live in new states, and thus be required to pay different taxes and obey different state laws, and even root for different sports teams." It should be expanded to explain that people are indeed required to root for sports teams in the state they live in⸮ --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.234|172.68.133.234]] 21:11, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

1867: Physics Confession

2017-07-24T18:12:36Z

172.68.133.234: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1867
| date = July 24, 2017
| title = Physics Confession
| image = physics_confession.png
| titletext = "You know lightning, right? When electric charge builds up in a cloud and then discharges in a giant spark? Ask me why that happens." "Why does tha--" "No clue. We think it's related to the hair thing."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This is my first contribution it should be looked over by someone before the tag is removed.}}

A {{w|Theory of Everything}} is a goal of modern physics which would describe the properties of all fundamental particles and all the interactions between them. The current approach to a theory of everything is to describe how at high energies different interactions, such as electromagnetic forces and the strong and weak nuclear interactions merge. It would be possible, in principle to demonstrate how the rest of known physics can be derived from that quantum behavior. This approach, however, leaves many everyday phenomena which are not understood by modern physics, and many {{w|Theory_of_everything#Arguments_against_a_theory_of_everything|arguments against a theory of everything}} suggest that it won't ever be able to actually precisely describe everything. This comic lists several of those phenomena:

The fine detail of how ice skates work is unknown. It is known that they develop a film of water between the skate and the ice that lubricates sliding, but scientists dispute how the film gets there. The commonly held belief is that it is caused by the pressure of the narrow skate; another belief is that the ice is melted by the friction of movement; but both fail to fully explain why skating continues to be possible at temperatures that are significantly below 0 Celsius. A better explanation is simply that, near the melting point of a solid, there will be a thin layer of liquid on the surface due to the dynamic equilibrium between the two phases, hence why ice is slippery. This happens regardless of the presence of skates. A more complete explanation is given in the linked article: [http://lptms.u-psud.fr/membres/trizac/Ens/L3FIP/Ice.pdf Why is ice slippery?].

Physicists lack a clear understanding of the interactions involved in the flow of {{w|granular material}}s, such as sand. It is known that the behavior diverges greatly from that of a liquid, but it is unknown exactly how the flow works.[http://physicscentral.com/explore/action/granular.cfm PhysicsCentral:Granular Materials]

Modern physics also doesn't understand what makes electrons move from one material to another when two materials are rubbed against each other (the {{w|triboelectric effect}}), and why the transfer takes more electrons in one direction than in the other. However this happens, it's the cause of static electricity, which can be seen when one rubs a latex rubber balloon against hair.

The title text mentions another common phenomenon that is poorly understood: the separation of charges in a cumulonimbus cloud. It is thought that interactions between ice and water transfer electrons, and then the different motion of ice (as hail) and water droplets in the cloud separates the charge. [http://www.srh.noaa.gov/jetstream/lightning/lightning.html NOAA How lightning is created].

==Transcript==
:[Megan is facing Ponytail and Cueball.]
:Megan: I'll be honest: We physicists talk a big game about the theory of everything, but the truth is, we don't really understand why ice skates work, how sand flows, or where the static charge comes from when you rub your hair with a balloon.

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

1865: Wifi vs Cellular

2017-07-19T21:27:59Z

172.68.133.234: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1865
| date = July 19, 2017
| title = Wifi vs Cellular
| image = wifi_vs_cellular.png
| titletext = According to the cable company reps who keep calling me, it's because I haven't upgraded to the XTREME GIGABAND PANAMAX FLAVOR-BLASTED PRO PACKAGE WITH HBO, which is only $5 more per month for the first 6 months and five billion dollars per month after that.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|First version... Links to X-finity and blast? Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic [[Randall]] remarks on how recent changes in {{w|Wi-Fi}} and {{w|Cellular network|Cellular data}} reliability have impacted his behavior. Wi-Fi technology has had several advantages over cellular data transmission due to Wi-Fi antennas' more ubiquitous distribution and ability to focus on high data transmission rates instead of broad signal coverage. However, as Wi-Fi has become more popular it is increasingly common to encounter Wi-Fi networks using outdated hardware, poorly organized or overburdened networks, and competition for bandwidth with other Wi-Fi devices. Meanwhile due to continued commercial investment in upgrading and expanding cellular networks and the more frequent consumer replacement of cellular handsets, the reliability of cellular data has continued to increase.

Randall notes that prior to 2015 he found that he could improve his internet connection by connecting to a Wi-Fi network instead of using cellular data. After 2015 however, he finds that in many cases he is able to get a stronger cellular connection by disengaging his Wi-Fi connection and getting his data over a cellular connection.

Anything larger than a few kilobytes would previously require someone to switch off network data and connect to a wireless network. However, for a couple of years, cellular networks' data transmission rates have often become more reliable (albeit usually costlier for larger amount of data usage) while home Wi-Fi has remained fairly constant, meaning the cellular network is often the best choice to download a file.

Randall says it is ''weird from a networking point of view'', but in fact modern {{w|LTE (telecommunication)|LTE}} connections via the cellular network are faster ({{w|List_of_LTE_networks#USA, US Territories, Canada & Bolivia (FCC band plan)|up to 300 Mbit/s}}) than the common used Wi-Fi standards like 802.11b/g and 802.11n ({{w|IEEE_802.11#Protocol|54-150 Mbit/s}}). Faster Wi-Fi standards do exist but they are very rarely supported.

In the title text Randall takes a moment to rail against the often misleading promotional rates offered by cable internet providers. Such providers often attempt to up-sell consumer on internet packages with additional features. Here Randall juxtaposes several descriptors that might feature in a cable ad with several that refer to other things entirely. Xtreme Gigaband is a plausible internet package name, but might also be a reference to {{w|Comcast|Comcast's}} often derided "{{w|Xfinity}}" promotions. And while {{w|Panamax}} sounds like it may be a film term, it is actually a ship classification that denotes the maximum size ship that can safely pass through the {{w|Panama canal}}. Flavor-Blasted is a food term often used in hyperbolic television food ad, but also could be a reference to Comcast Cable's "Blast!" internet packages. Pricing mentioned in title text is exaggerated with only $5 more during first six months, but costing 5 billion after, which is a reference to how service providers would often advertise a lower temporary price, while if you read the fine print the plan is much more costly once the limited time offer runs out, and {{w|discounting}} is simply used for marketing purposes. What's worse, these discounted periods (typically six months) often come with a much longer contract (typically two years) which imposes cancelation fees.

==Transcript==
:[A graph with two curves that cross each other. The two areas beneath the curve at the top, and down to either the X-axis or the other curve are shaded with horizontal gray lines. The Y-axis has no label, but represents reliability, the X-axis is a timeline, with labels indicating years beneath the axis, without any ticks. The two curves are labeled with text interrupting the curves, in the second case using two lines for the text. In the left shaded area there is a label inside and the right shaded area the label is beneath the curves with an arrow pointing to the area. All this text and the arrow is gray. Above the curves there is a caption also in gray font:]
:To get something to load on my phone, sometimes I have to...

:Label left area: ...Connect to WiFi
:Label right area: ...Turn off WiFi

:Label curve one: Home WiFi reliability
:Label curve two: Cellular data reliability

:Year labels: 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

:[Caption below the panel:]
:It seems weird from a networking point of view, but sometime in the last few years this flipped for me.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Timelines]]

889: Turtles

2017-04-25T23:42:03Z

172.68.133.234: Fixed an out of place word

{{comic
| number = 889
| date = April 22, 2011
| title = Turtles
| image = turtles.png
| titletext = You're a turtle!
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is about the frivolousness of many modern problems. While an offscreen character is panicking over deleting a file, the turtle is content with just being a turtle. The text saying "turtles have it figured out, man" indicates that Randall appreciates this simpler mode of thought. The idea that computer problems are pointless when compared with the whole of life is similar to the sentiment expressed in the title text of [[1173: Steroids]].

==Alternative Explanation and Correction ==
The "turtle" shown in the comic clearly has small legs instead of the flipper-ish limbs of turtles. this actually makes it a tortoise! Also, the lifespan of a tortoise is approximately twice (100-150 years) as long as that of a turtle(~80 years) . So,the organism which would look somewhat similar after 50 years must be a tortoise.
An alternative explanation could be that the satisfaction of knowledge that the creature has poses an obstruction to his venturing out and finding its true identity. It was told that it's a turtle, thus, it continues to believe, even though it's wrong. The minor panicking of humans actually is a driving force of our sentience.

The title text is possibly a reference to [[231: Cat Proximity]].

The text at the bottom 'Turtles have it figured out, man' could be a reference to the turtle in Finding Nemo, who speaks in a similar manner.

==Transcript==
:[There is a turtle.]
:Off-panel: Oh, crap, I deleted the file!

:[There is a turtle.]
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:[There is a turtle.]
:Off-panel: No, wait, there it is.

:[There is a turtle.]
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:[There is a turtle.]
:50 Years Later:
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:Turtles have it figured out, man.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Philosophy]]