explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2124: Space Mission Hearing

2019-03-18T11:49:35Z

172.69.46.10:

Spaceship noises? What exactly does a spaceship sound like if you can't hear anything in space? Perhaps this is part of the joke! [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 13:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:Actauly you can - your own spaceship might be producing some sounds. Like sort of humming device. {{unsigned|172.68.244.102}}
::Spaceships sound like the computer-generated chirps, whistles, and whooshes used in sci-fi media to make travel through space familiar to those of us who travel through air. I hear little 'pew pew pew' noises come from my computer whenever I burn a cd! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.198|172.68.65.198]] 13:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:::they add them artificcially like on electric cars, so that you do not get run over by a spaceship when crossing the milkyway. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 14:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

And I see that main idea behind this comics - that while we are trying to find some serious reasoning of space programms, the real motive that realy matters - IT IS SPAAAAAAACE!!! Everything else is not enough to justify such expenses.{{unsigned|172.68.244.102}}
: It could be meaningful to list some reasons for exploring or not exploring space in the article ... There's a TV show about colonizing Mars that makes the point that once we inhabit two planets, we guarantee a future for our race if the planet doesn't survive. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.198|172.68.65.198]] 13:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:: Indeed, the main reasons for exploring space are (so very human) curiosity and need of achievement. Like exploring the lands and seas of Earth in the previous centuries (even if greed was a big factor as well). The former is more rational and largely more fruitful than the latter, in the sense that pursuing curiosity we (the humanity) learn new things while exploring space and advance general science and technology, which eventually (in some cases) leads to improvements of daily life. The need of achievement (hurray! we're first to do it!) is what mostly drives manned exploration, which also provides some scientific results but comes at a vastly greater cost. Given current and near-future advances in robotics, mechatronics, etc. the scientific value/cost quotient of manned exploration is very low compared to robotic missions in my opinion. I'd vote for building a thousand of Mars probes that will take some measurements in a thousand of points on the planet's surface over doing a manned mission that'll visit one spot - for a comparable price. But humans are not entirely rational beings and sometimes do crazy things just for the sake of them. Colonization on the other hand is a completely outworldlish idea. The colony would not survive without constant resupply from Earth - not in any forseeable future state of technology. Maybe in thousands of years, maybe never (i.e. we'd go extinct before we could achieve it). -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 14:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
::: See {{w|Mars (2016 TV series)}} which basically plays as a mix of advertisement for SpaceX and conventional sci-fi. They've got a surprising amount of how to do this figured out. And I can only imagine the funding comes from people saying "Spaaaaaace" with stars in their eyes. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.149|162.158.79.149]] 17:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
::Both rational though and our genetic programming says that we need to spread more to avoid the risk of extinction. Note that Mars guarantees nothing: Sun will go nova in just five billion years and destroys all inner planets. That's the deadline to moving to different solar system or at least moons of Jupiter. We would need to move to Mars sooner, as Earth will get too hot (yes, even if we stop current episode of climate changes). Also, that's assuming nothing will crash into our solar system when {{w|Andromeda–Milky Way collision|our galaxy will be crashing into Andromeda}} in 3.75 billion years. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:46, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
:::The travel-into-space efforts seem to either be "right now!" or "that's stupid" when it seems a more rational approach would be, "let's just make sure we're always working on this a little bit." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.100|162.158.78.100]] 17:30, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
::::I second that. Let's stop worrying what will happen in "just five billion years". Anything can happen between now and 5 Ga from now, including Earth being ejected into interstellar space (goodbye, Sun! goodbye, life!). We've already done a lot to avoid extinction in the last few thousand years, and we'll continue that effort; however, being unable to learn from an example, we can make a fatal mistake anytime without realizing it until it's too late. Or a random big event (internal or external) could wipe us all. Or a natural long-term trend (in human timescale, not billions of years) that we can't possibly adopt to. So research what we reasonably and affordably can and hope for the best :-) -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 10:56, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
:If species preservation gets integrated into the reasons we should include a mention to the title text from https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/893:_65_Years [[Special:Contributions/172.69.46.10|172.69.46.10]] 11:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I’m glad there’s now a comic featuring literally me. Complicated explanation prior to yelling space and making laser noises. [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:23, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

The "Spaaaaaace" reminds me of the "Spaaace" substitution in 1288. Probably just a coincidence. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.77|172.68.142.77]] 17:11, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:Spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace! [[User:Zmatt|Zmatt]] ([[User talk:Zmatt|talk]]) 07:42, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

The obsession with Space makes me think of Space Core from Portal 2
~Diceguy [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.7|173.245.54.7]] 00:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Are there any recent real-life hearings to justify a space-related project that this comic could be referencing? The comic feels like a parody of a real-life event, but a quick search of recent news found only a tiny statement by NASA, nothing like a big hearing.—[[User:Roryokane|Roryokane]] ([[User talk:Roryokane|talk]]) 13:19, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

187: The Familiar

2019-02-14T19:19:24Z

172.69.46.10: Replaced "A guy" with names

{{comic
| number = 187
| date = November 22, 2006
| title = The Familiar
| image = the familiar.png
| titletext = When I say we should do something sometime, I'm secretly hoping you'll say 'Why not now?'
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball|Cueball's]] friend asks him to go with him to view the sunrise over the ocean. Cueball refuses by giving a list of excuses, including the statement that "rationalizing the familiar is easy." This statement is amusing, because Cueball acknowledges the fact that he is making excuses and seems to refuse going out on the basis that rationalizing going to see the sunrise would require much more effort. This criticizes some people's tendency of not trying new things or going out with friends, even though one would likely get more fulfillment by doing these things.
The computer with the egg-shaped profile looks like an iMac G3, sold from 1998 until 2003. It seems that rationalizing the familiar has made Cueball resistant to upgrading his computer long beyond its obsolescence date.

The title text indicates [[Randall|Randall's]] frustration with this mentality and his hope that when he wants to make plans with someone, they are just as eager.

==Transcript==
:[A guy is standing behind his friend who sits at a computer. Both look like Cueball.]
:Guy: Let's go see sunrise over the ocean.
:[The friend turns and replies:]
:Friend: That's a long drive, it's cold, I'm tired, and rationalizing the familiar is easy.
:[The guy leaves, and in the next two frames, the friend remains at his computer alone.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]

2061: Tectonics Game

2019-02-14T19:16:34Z

172.69.46.10: more detailed last frame

{{comic
| number = 2061
| date = October 19, 2018
| title = Tectonics Game
| image = tectonics_game.png
| titletext = They're limiting the playtesters to type A3 V stars, so the games will all end before the Sun consumes the Earth.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Do NOT delete this tag too soon. What do L_T etc mean?}}

This comic is to show similarity to many {{w|simulation video game|simulation games}}, which have various niche popularity. Similar to Maxis' ''{{w|Spore (2008 video game)|Spore}}'', the game in question allows you to {{w|terraforming|terraform}} entire worlds. However, in a typical [[Randall]] twist, unlike most simulation games, you could not speed up the progress of time to make world-changing endeavours occur in a matter of seconds. The game operates in real time, which means most of the user time-frame will be spent idly watching nearly non-moving continents, drifting at the real speed of continental drift, a couple of inches a year, which makes for very slow gameplay. Thus several hundred millennia of play time is needed to reach a game {{w|Achievement (video gaming)|achievement}} of forming a kilometre high mountain.

Many {{w|computer games}} {{w|computer simulation|simulate}} to one degree or another real items and tasks, but often simplify them to fit into a game format -- to make them more exciting, to make them quicker, to advance a particular plot line or quest, etc. For example, a game about farming might allow you to grow corn, but whereas in real life corn takes about 90 days to germinate from seed and grow to maturity, in a game the growth might be instantaneous or measured by minutes, rather than by days/weeks/months. The comic may thus be a jab at how our lives already are real time {{w|MMRPG}}.

In this game, especially, one would expect such shortcuts, given the extreme time frames required for {{w|geological}} events to be manifested. The joke is that this game is so realistic that it's played in "real-time", which means for every second or hour or eon something would take in real life, in the game it would take the same second or hour or eon to happen. Playing such a game where the events take longer than the person would be alive would likely be unsatisfying.{{Citation_needed}} A mildly less extreme example of a simulation game being played in real-time would be the {{w|Penn_%26_Teller%27s_Smoke_and_Mirrors#Desert_Bus|Desert Bus}} video game where you have to drive a bus from {{w|Tucson, Arizona}}, to {{w|Las Vegas, Nevada}}, in real time at a maximum speed of 45 MPH. The trip requires eight hours of continuous play to complete, at which point you score one point with the option to continue playing for additional points at the rate of one point per successful eight hour trip. The action consists almost entirely of just keeping the bus from veering off the road. It cannot be paused or sped up, and failure requires a tow back to the starting point at the same 45 MPH speed.

The frames show some elements of gameplay. The first frame shows a destructive plate margin in which an oceanic plate (grey) is being subducted under a continental plate (brown with a person standing on it) while sediments between the plates are compressed to form mountains. Clockwise from top left, the second frame shows a cross section through the planet and various statistics about the planet (CO2 levels of 840 ppm, solar irradiation of 1184 W/m2 and heat-flow through the crust of 91 mW/m2). Solar irradiation and heat-flow are similar to the Earth, but CO2 levels are raised. Bottom right displays several stats titled LT, LM, LA and LL, and bottom left is a view of the planet showing the proportion covered by ice (3%), land (31%) and water (66%). It seems that the raised CO2 levels have reduced the amount of ice compared to the Earth. The final panel shows some of the achievements that can be unlocked, the first is 1 km mountain and the last achievement of the first row is 10 km mountain. Below that seem to be achievements in the formation of an atoll.

{{w|Large igneous province}}s are suspected to be related to extinction level events and rapid climate changes in real life. Thus, they 'are the worst' in this game.

In the title text type {{w|A-type main-sequence star|A3 V}} stars are mentioned which are white main sequence stars at mass from 1.4 to 2.1 times the mass of the Sun. Thus they have a shorter lifespan than the Sun, hundreds of millions of years, compared to the 10 billion years lifespan of the Sun. By starting the game now with an A3 V star, there would be plenty of time to complete the game before the real Sun would go to a Red Giant destroying the Earth.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
:[Cueball is standing behind Ponytail, who is sitting on the floor playing a video game on a TV which displays a diagram of tectonic plates.]
:Cueball: What game is that?
:Ponytail: ''Tectonics!''
:Ponytail: You steer chunks of crust around, rifting, subducting, and building and eroding mountains.

:[A view of the game screen is shown. It includes a large cross-section of the Earth with smaller charts around it.]
:Ponytail (narrating): You try to keep your climate stable and your biosphere rich.
:Ponytail (narrating): Avoid making large igneous provinces! They're the ''worst''.

:[Cueball holds his hand out in a frameless panel.]
:Cueball: Cool!
:Cueball: Can I try?
:Ponytail (off-panel): Sure!

:[Cueball plays the game while Ponytail watches.]
:Cueball: ...How do I unpause?
:Ponytail: It's not paused.
:Cueball: ...
:Ponytail: Continents can only move a few inches per year.

:[Cueball has stopped playing and holds the controller in one hand. Ponytail points at the screen that shows an achievement page with no completed achievements, but a progress bar halfway done for an achievement with the number 1 and a mountain.]
:Cueball: It's ''real-time?''
:Ponytail: Just 400 millennia to go until your first mountain achievement!

==Trivia==
*This comic's number and content regarding simulations in real time may also be a reference to {{w|Arthur C. Clarke}}'s ''{{w|2061: Odyssey Three}}'', the third book in the ''{{w|Space Odyssey}}'' series, in which {{w|Monolith_(Space_Odyssey)|monoliths}} are left throughout the solar system, manipulating environments to encourage the evolution of intelligent life.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Video games]]

2107: Launch Risk

2019-02-12T23:01:41Z

172.69.46.10: Re-wrote some stuff, and removed some cruft.

{{comic
| number = 2107
| date = February 4, 2019
| title = Launch Risk
| image = launch_risk.png
| titletext = Don't worry--you're less likely to die from a space launch than from a shark attack. The survival rate is pretty high for both!
}}

==Explanation==
This comic deals with the faulty application of general statistics based on a large population, such as all Americans, to specific situations with vastly different statistics, such as astronauts.

A manned rocket ship is about to be launched into space. Mission control counts down from "T-minus 20," where "T" stands for the time at which the rocket is scheduled to launch. In the capsule, one astronaut asks another how they are feeling. The second admits that they are nervous. The first one offers a supposedly reassuring observation that they are more likely to be struck by lightning than to be selected to become an astronaut. Such comparisons are commonly used to illustrate that a particular probability is very small, and therefore not worth worrying about.

The second astronaut is about to agree that they have a good point, but then realizes the problem with their argument: the likelihood of being ''selected as an astronaut'' is a moot point, because they both ''already are'' astronauts. The comparison ignores the relevant concern, which is the danger involved in ''being'' an astronaut and launching into space. The second astronaut's nervousness is understandable as space missions are historically quite dangerous, and have numerous avenues for potentially fatal failure, certainly far beyond the minuscule risk of being struck by lightning, approximately 1 in 14,600 throughout your entire life ([https://www.weather.gov/safety/lightning-odds]).

The title text creates additional confusion by referencing another common statistical reference point, the probability of dying in a shark attack. In addition to shark attacks being uncommon, they are also less likely to kill their victim than is commonly assumed. Still, while shark attacks are more frequently fatal than rocket launches, this comparison is once again useless, as the astronaut is not in any danger of sharks, but is literal seconds from launching into space. The astronaut is presumably not especially reassured by the "pretty high" survival rate.

Of the 557 people who who have been in Earth orbit, 18 (3%) have died in related accidents, not specifically at launch([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents List of spaceflight-related accidents and incidents], [https://www.worldspaceflight.com/bios/stats.php Astronaut/Cosmonaut Statistics]). Of the 93 incidents logged for 2018 in the [http://www.sharkattackfile.net/index.htm Global Shark Attack File], 4 (4.3%) were fatal, but the statistic has been higher in the past when there was likely less education against provoking sharks.

A large metal rocket, such as depicted would be more likely to be struck by lightning than nearby structures. However launch controllers generally monitor weather carefully to reduce the chances of attempting to launch when lightning is likely.

A spacecraft launch can also trigger lightning, by creating a conductive path through electrically charged clouds. Apollo 12 was struck by lightning twice during the launch phase. Thankfully backup systems allowed the flight to proceed. For more information, see [https://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/9-12/features/F_Lightning_and_Launches_9_12.html NASA: Lightning and Launches]

The perceived value of risk is a recurring topic and is also featured in [[795: Conditional Risk]] and [[1252: Increased Risk]].

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

:[A rocket is about to launch.]
:Astronaut 1: How you feeling?
:Astronaut 2: Honestly, pretty nervous.
:Astronaut 1: I know it seems dangerous, but just remember: you're more likely to be struck by ''lightning'' than to be selected to become an astronaut.
:Astronaut 2: Oh that's a good-
:Astronaut 2: ...Wait.
:Countdown: T-Minus 20...19...

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Space]]

Talk:207: What xkcd Means

2018-07-10T20:07:32Z

172.69.46.10: Suggest alternative interpritation of first panel.

I'm pretty sure that the first panel isn't talking about the legality of U-turns; I think it's actually talking about the legality of bypassing traffic signals:
https://www.drivinglaws.org/resources/is-it-illegal-to-cut-through-a-parking-lot-to-avoid-a-red-light.html

I do the last panel ALL THE FRIGGIN' TIME. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 20:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Graham's Number has not had that title for several years now.... See here: http://googology.wikia.com/wiki/Graham's_number
XKCD also means getting addicted to webcomics because they are too funny
-[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.175|108.162.237.175]] 21:57, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
A question, what is meant with "(In fact, A(g64, g64) is less than g65)"? Is g65 more than g64? Is it much more? Is A(g64, g64 "insanely large" compared to what you would expect or not? [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 13:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

:It means that mathematicians who read XKCD are not horrified by the idea, but calmly compute the result. (g65 is obviously more than g64 ; both Graham's number and Ackermann functions are methods to make ludicrously high numbers, and the "only slightly more" means that they growing in roughly same ludicrous speed) -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

You know, if everyone did the traffic thing at intersections, it would basically be the same as a roundabout. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.150|162.158.102.150]] 16:19, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

[https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/dvs/forms-documents/Documents/Minnesota_Drivers_Manual.pdf Apparently (page 28)] some intersections where I live are designed ''for'' the maneuver in panel 1.--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 17:30, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Yo mama ≡ 1 modulo A(g64, g64) [[User:Int|unsigned int]] ([[User talk:Int|talk]]) 22:13, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

I ran into a situation yesterday where the first panel saved me five minutes in traffic. The road I was driving on had two lanes on each side. The left lane was backed up a quarter mile and the right lane was empty, as across the next road, construction trucks blocked the right lane. I drove all the way down the right lane, took a right turn, and then proceeded to execute the maneuver depicted in the comic. Half a dozen other cars caught on and followed. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.169|173.245.52.169]] 21:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)