explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:435: Purity

2024-04-09T17:57:43Z

172.70.127.40:

See Comte's hierarchy of the sciences from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_three_stages his law of three stages]: Mathematics; Astronomy; Physics; Chemistry; Biology; Psychology; Sociology. --[[Special:Contributions/24.85.241.128|24.85.241.128]] 07:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Which is on top? Quantum Physics or Mathematics?

In addition to Comte, Randall's tweaking P.W. Anderson's 1972 article "More Is Different." Anderson gives a similar list and then says "But this hierarchy does not imply that science X is "just applied Y*" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.202|108.162.219.202]] 22:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Shame it leaves out Engineering running parellel to all of them - maybe Engineering is just too busy getting shit done? {{unsigned|2.121.172.39}}

- What can we learn from this? - Actually as an Engineer I have a different view point to 2.121.172.39. We are implementers of original ideas and a few of us are lucky to be original idea generators. As a successful full time Engineer I still find time to be a philosopher and aspiring teacher (who simply didn't want to be poor, which is hard to do when specializing in the other two professions). How ever I do keep asking myself often who wrote the laws that mathematicians and theoretical scientists keep re-discovering for us... - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 17:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

"[http://robotics.cs.tamu.edu/dshell/cs689/papers/anderson72more_is_different.pdf More is Different]", written by Nobel laureate P.W. Anderson, is an insightful critique of constructivism. Quote:
<blockquote>But this hierarchy does not imply that science X is "just applied Y." At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one.</blockquote>
[[User:Allenz|Allenz]] ([[User talk:Allenz|talk]]) 02:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

This one resonated around the Internet quite a bit more than average, and deservedly so. I'd think it'd be almost as far-reaching as the grownups one. I did wonder, after I saw this, how one would take into account things like linguistics, logic, and philosophy. Then I read ''Gödel, Escher, Bach'' and returned to normal. --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 03:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Could one argue that Mathematics is applied Philosophy? [[User:Nsimonetti|NikoNarf]] ([[User talk:Nsimonetti|talk]]) 15:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

;Physics and mathematics

Physics, chemistry, biology, earth science,... are science on how things '''work'''. Mathematics and philosophy are science on how things '''can be predicted to work'''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.32|108.162.222.32]] 10:08, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
A friend of mine compared the math-physics relationship to linguist-regular person. A linguist researches all the little details in a language that a normal person merely uses in his everyday life without giving the language itself much thought.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.215|141.101.99.215]] 08:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Before we get into an edit war here, I'd just like to say that "physics is the real joy in the world" would make absolutely no sense to me if I was not a native English speaker or I simply wasn't getting the comic's point in the first place. Not only does it have shades of grammatical incorrectness, it does absolutely nothing to actually explain how mathematics and physics can be compared to sex and masturbation. Thus I've changed the title text around to a compromise between my edit and what it was before. I hope this is more acceptable. [[User:Jetman123|Jetman123]] ([[User talk:Jetman123|talk]]) 13:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

:I'm still not happy with the title text explain:
:*The explain implies that masturbation "is all just in your head" and not "involves interactions with real objects". Isn't a vagina/penis also a real object?
:My last edit on this wasn't perfect as well, so it still needs an enhancement. The joke is more like this: Math/maturbation gives only satisfaction to the subject acting on this — Physics/sex are related to the real world (applied science/babies). And this is surely exaggerated by Randall because physics couldn't exist without mathematics — those faculties just joking about each other. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Some experts say the universe is a computer. Some other experts say all computers can be hacked. If both groups are right, then it follows that physics is one stack-overflow exploit away from being reduced to applied computer science. [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 23:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Logicians: hi.

From: [http://redd.it/25xhm2 '''The psychology of the pure mathematician''']

* ''"On the other hand, physicists like to say physics is to math as sex is to masturbation."''
* ''Are physicists born with particles- or are they implanted because they are born without balls?''
* ''Would a mathematician have much better analogies than orgasms?''

I wouldn't know.

* Math is to physics as,
* drugs are to prostitutes,
* green eggs are to ham,
* ''quod erat demonstrandum'' is to ''cogito ergo sum'',
* masterbating is to shakespearing,
* coffee is to sugar,
* Spock is to House,
* category theory is to Kama Sutra,
* Cicero is to Caesar.

Sorry physics, but it seems to me that your particle accelerators are gluttonously huge scientifically unnecessary and totally useless particle-crunchers, functionally comparable to fastest-known super-computer designs for discovering new large prime numbers. I wonder if physicists are actually the ''heaviest'' consumers of funding that would otherwise be available to support mathematicians, who are obviously the ''lightest'' consumers of research funding and also the most productive of new discoveries. Mathematicians can actually tell the difference between an arbitrary mathematical information computational process, and an orgy of man-boy physicists playing with their tiny balls in a spaceship-submarine with a warp-core that could give anyone an involuntary geek-gasm easily shrinking physics to the size of sex. QED.

Thanks for the joke, any offense taken it was not my intention to return. I just felt the need to point out that, although I agree that physics is a respectable second-best, sexy is a long way from first.

''Nafindix'' [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.107|199.27.128.107]] 06:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Random side note: One could argue that mathematics is applied philosophy (if we take philosophy as a way to create an understanding of the world), and that philosophy (as a product of human societies) is applied sociology. It's a weak argument, but the circular-ness is appealing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.69|108.162.238.69]] 15:41, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
: {{W|Equivocation}}!--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 06:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Last night, I passed around my phone in a discussion group, and it showed the philosopher both on the left, and again WAY OVER on the right, with a "Whoa!" This morning, it is back to how it is presented above. Randall, are you messing with me? [[User:Knechod|Knechod]] ([[User talk:Knechod|talk]]) 17:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

First, the terminology: cold science is an observation described with math, that can give stable objective (meaning they could be potentially disproved by an experiment) predictions in a certain range of conditions. Philosophy is an interpretation of science. Math is purely artificial and doesn't require translation, it is pretty much the only abstract symbol system we have now that follows the principle of objectivity, and any solid generalization model requires abstraction by definition. A natural language can't do that because it's subjective, and it's philosophy that is about subjective terms, what do they mean and how do they relate to objectivity and perceived reality. Gather 5 quantum physicists and show them an equation - they will nod agreeably, but ask them to explain it - and they will fight eventually. Despite that, mobile phones work the same way in hands of any person, because that's an applied science, which is roughly equivalent to engineering + inventing. So in that terms the relationship between sciences can be seen as an example of what's called emergence [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence], and this concept quite well exists inside any particular science, i.e. in physics thermodynamics is just a generalization of Newtonian mechanics for certain kind of systems (a temperature is a mean kinetic energy of comprising particles, and so on), and mechanics itself is one of generalizations of electrodynamics (things like friction and collision are electromagnetic by nature). The same applies to all other sciences - they just describe different systems of different scales, and most borders become very smeared nowadays, with things like molecular biology, quantum electrodynamics (which is essentially a whole new branch of math), chemical kinetics, ethology and many other continuously evolving cross-disciplinary branches of science. So there's no contradiction here, sciences are different in many aspects but yet they all are reflections of a global pattern, and thus should operate on the same conceptual field. And in this case the contextual field is maths itself. In the end even our subjective descriptions of reality could (and probably would) be represented as a set of math equations, because our brains are nothing more than big calculators, and our language is nothing more than a system of symbols, represented with geometrical shapes and sound waves, and the same ''mathematical'' patterns are repeated all over the different aspects of those. All is one, just like our universe itself. octaharon @ [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.212|141.101.77.212]] 09:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
:Sincerely, Summer Glau [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 18:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

[[Media:Example.ogg]]When you think about it, math is just applied language, and language is is just applied sociology.--[[User:ExistentialGrasshopper34|ExistentialGrasshopper34]] ([[User talk:ExistentialGrasshopper34|talk]]) 05:08, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Logicians: hi.[[User:Scci0927|Scci0927]] ([[User talk:Scci0927|talk]]) 02:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

==Math vs. Logic==
It should be mentioned that Hofstadter's Gödel, Escher, Bach sets logic as being even more pure than mathematics. All mathematical systems can be derived given basic logical precepts. That is how many mathematical/geometrical proofs are structured.

Talk:2875: 2024

2024-01-02T04:13:41Z

172.70.127.40: FDR dentures

It [[wikipedia:List of presidents of the United States by age|appears]] that only three US presidents so far have lived for over 30 years since their last election: Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and (technically) George H.W. Bush. One other (John Adams) had made it to 29. In addition, Gerald Ford had lived for over 29 years after the end of his presidency (and over 30 years after its start) but had technically never been elected. Of course none of those five were two-term presidents so they in any case would not have been restricted from further election by the 22nd amendment (and John Adams additionally wasn't affected by it due to having died prior to its ratification). --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.200.134|172.70.200.134]] 22:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
:I don't think he's suggesting that 30 years is enough -- that's only when half the tooth cells have been replaced. So we have to resort to dentistry and replace all the teeth. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 00:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I've just made some "content and flow" edits to bring the Explanation up to a reasonable spec of explanatoriaciousness (which I fully expect to be buffed up and/or trimmed by others). I didn't ''directly'' explain that SCOTUS has nine (or more!) voting members, but there's the link(s) I added where this gets fairly well qualified for the person who might need to know this, and I refrained from suggestion reasons why one or both of the more recent Presidents might be best 'forgotten' (depending upon a person's own considerations on each matter), etc... I actually think that if all nine SCOTUSii all decided in one direction on the issues of Obama's teeth then it would be because of ideologically opposing views lining up by pure accident (e.g. some see/do not see pulling teeth as a valid way of becoming President for a third term, the rest see/do not see the pulling of teeth from Obama as laudible but would expect the next step to fail to happen for entirely separate reasons). And if someone definitely knows if FDR wore dentures (or not), particularly in his last five or so years, then that can surely be inserted as a valid (counter-)justifying fact. Anyway, probably done with my own polishing. For the moment, certainly. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.243|172.69.194.243]] 03:34, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
:According to the book [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Party_Politics_in_the_Age_of_Roosevelt/NttsEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22franklin+d+roosevelt%22+dentures&pg=PA148&printsec=frontcover Party Politics in the Age of Roosevelt] by Michael P. Riccards and Cheryl A. Flagg, FDR did have a ''partial'' denture to replace two of his front teeth, but that wouldn't satisfy Ponytail's plan. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.40|172.70.127.40]] 04:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

2875: 2024

2024-01-02T04:12:05Z

172.70.127.40: /* Explanation */

<noinclude>:''This page refers to the comic named "2024". For comic #2024, see [[2024: Light Hacks]].''</noinclude>
{{comic
| number = 2875
| date = January 1, 2024
| title = 2024
| image = 2024_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x553px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It wasn't originally constitutionally required, but presidents who served two terms have traditionally followed George Washington's example and gotten false teeth.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by OBAMA'S TEETH - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In what starts off almost like a "[[:Category:Comics to make one feel old|doesn't time fly?]]" scene, the unstoppable progression of the calendar is observed, as [[Ponytail]] points out that it's now 2024. [[Cueball]], in response, notes that it is an election year, in this context a {{w|President of the United States#Election|US ''Presidential'' election}} year, which occurs every four years and has (in one form or other) since 1788. Ponytail then replies in some form of exasperated tone that they "keep on happening", which is true but (normally) unsurprising, even/especially with other major elections happening every two years, presumably not compared to how [https://www.bristol247.com/news-and-features/news/youre-joking-not-another-one/ some other democracies] might be less predictable/more frequent.

On top of this, Ponytail seems to have not been aware (or maybe has chosen to forget) the passing of two whole election cycles (and two newer incumbents) as the discussion focuses upon {{w|Barack Obama}}, the ''former'' US President. Ponytail seems to be quite behind the times as she asks if Obama is still president (he left office January 20th, 2017, which was 7 (!) years ago, a fact that Cueball cannot quite believe Ponytail is ignorant of). Ponytail states that she liked him, and wonders if he'll be up for taking on the position again. But Cueball states that he ''can't'' be made President again, having already served two terms, which Ponytail confirms by checking for herself the details of the {{w|Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution}}.

The humor in the comic comes in the second half; Cueball and Ponytail discuss whether Obama is the same person (like the mythical {{w|Ship of Theseus}}, most of his constituent cells are frequently replaced), with Ponytail looking into the possibility of Obama's re-election based upon philosophical/biological technicalities (as applied to the Constitution's words), rather than as legal/political convention might normally suggest. But when even that approach is seen to be wanting, requiring a wait significantly exceeding 30 years, Ponytail suggests negating that issue by having all of Obama's teeth removed and replaced with false teeth.

In order to facilitate the latter goal, Ponytail announces her intention to consult a dentist and (for exact reasons that can only be guessed at) a lawyer. Seeing where her current misplaced, and {{w|Dunning–Kruger effect|less than informed}}, zeal might be leading her, Cueball gives his prediction that the probable {{w|Supreme Court of the United States|ultimate legal arbiters}} of her plan might be unanimous in rejecting its validity (if not dissuading its attempt). SCOTUS being unanimous on an issue is now a [https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/07/as-unanimity-declines-conservative-majoritys-power-runs-deeper-than-the-blockbuster-cases/ comparatively rare event].

The title text references {{w|George Washington's teeth|George Washington's (in)famous 'false teeth'}}, often described as made of wood, but which probably were dentures including ''real'' teeth procured from other sources. Regardless, this would have likely resolved the rather specific problems established in the philosophical conundrum, and the title text claims that other presidents used this plan to get around the Constitutional limitations concerned in case they wanted to serve more than two terms.

As already stated, however, no one has yet even ''needed'' to carry out this plan. Only one President has exceeded the limit; {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt}} died in office during his ''fourth'' term), but he served prior to the 22nd Amendment and was thus unaffected by the rule only brought into being a half dozen years after his death. (FDR did have a partial denture, but given that he retained some of his natural teeth, he did not engage in Ponytail's proposed scheme.) Presidents since then have definitely tried various schemes aimed at securing a second term, with both successes and failures, but nobody has yet planned ''this particular plan'' to achieve a third or beyond. Or at least one can assume that those that perhaps did (including, as noted, all those who were not yet "required" to go to these lengths) failed to attain their goals for entirely different reasons.

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

:[Ponytail and Cueball are walking.]
:Ponytail: So this is 2024.
:Cueball: Yup. Guess it's an election year now.
:Ponytail: Again? Man, those just keep happening, huh?

:[Ponytail and Cueball now standing.]
:Ponytail: Who's the president these days, anyway? Is it still Obama?
:Cueball: What? No? He hasn't been... How do you not...

:[Ponytail and Cueball still standing.]
:Ponytail: Darn, I liked him. Is he running this time?
:Cueball: No, he's not allowed to.
:Ponytail: He's not? Why?
:Cueball: Constitution.

:[Ponytail checks her smartphone.]
:Phone: ''Amendment 22''
:Phone: No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice
:Ponytail: What?? C'mon...

:[Ponytail talking to Cueball.]
:Ponytail: Don't all your cells get replaced every seven years, Ship of Theseus-style? Is he even the same person?
:Ponytail: Maybe "no person shall be elected more than twice" isn't a prohibition, it's more of an observation, like "you can't step in the same river twice."

:[Zoom in on Cueball.]
:Cueball: Isn't the cell thing a myth?
:Cueball: I think tooth enamel has a turnover half-life of 30+ years. His teeth molecules are probably the same.

:[Ponytail heads off with a finger raised.]
:Ponytail: So if Obama just gets false teeth, he can run again! I need to talk to a dentist and a lawyer!
:Cueball: The Supreme Court is about to vote 9-0 to block your number.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Elections]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Biology]]

2875: 2024

2024-01-02T04:05:50Z

172.70.127.40: /* Explanation */

<noinclude>:''This page refers to the comic named "2024". For comic #2024, see [[2024: Light Hacks]].''</noinclude>
{{comic
| number = 2875
| date = January 1, 2024
| title = 2024
| image = 2024_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x553px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It wasn't originally constitutionally required, but presidents who served two terms have traditionally followed George Washington's example and gotten false teeth.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by OBAMA'S TEETH - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In what starts off almost like a "[[:Category:Comics to make one feel old|doesn't time fly?]]" scene, the unstoppable progression of the calendar is observed, as [[Ponytail]] points out that it's now 2024. [[Cueball]], in response, notes that it is an election year, in this context a {{w|President of the United States#Election|US ''Presidential'' election}} year, which occurs every four years and has (in one form or other) since 1788. Ponytail then replies in some form of exasperated tone that they "keep on happening", which is true but (normally) unsurprising, even/especially with other major elections happening every two years, presumably not compared to how [https://www.bristol247.com/news-and-features/news/youre-joking-not-another-one/ some other democracies] might be less predictable/more frequent.

On top of this, Ponytail seems to have not been aware (or maybe has chosen to forget) the passing of two whole election cycles (and two newer incumbents) as the discussion focuses upon {{w|Barack Obama}}, the ''former'' US President. Ponytail seems to be quite behind the times as she asks if Obama is still president (he left office January 20th, 2017, which was 7 (!) years ago, a fact that Cueball cannot quite believe Ponytail is ignorant of). Ponytail states that she liked him, and wonders if he'll be up for taking on the position again. But Cueball states that he ''can't'' be made President again, having already served two terms, which Ponytail confirms by checking for herself the details of the {{w|Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution}}.

The humor in the comic comes in the second half; Cueball and Ponytail discuss whether Obama is the same person (like the mythical {{w|Ship of Theseus}}, most of his constituent cells are frequently replaced), with Ponytail looking into the possibility of Obama's re-election based upon philosophical/biological technicalities (as applied to the Constitution's words), rather than as legal/political convention might normally suggest. But when even that approach is seen to be wanting, requiring a wait significantly exceeding 30 years, Ponytail suggests negating that issue by having all of Obama's teeth removed and replaced with false teeth.

In order to facilitate the latter goal, Ponytail announces her intention to consult a dentist and (for exact reasons that can only be guessed at) a lawyer. Seeing where her current misplaced, and {{w|Dunning–Kruger effect|less than informed}}, zeal might be leading her, Cueball gives his prediction that the probable {{w|Supreme Court of the United States|ultimate legal arbiters}} of her plan might be unanimous in rejecting its validity (if not dissuading its attempt). SCOTUS being unanimous on an issue is now a [https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/07/as-unanimity-declines-conservative-majoritys-power-runs-deeper-than-the-blockbuster-cases/ comparatively rare event].

The title text references {{w|George Washington's teeth|George Washington's (in)famous 'false teeth'}}, often described as made of wood, but which probably were dentures including ''real'' teeth procured from other sources. Regardless, this would have likely resolved the rather specific problems established in the philosophical conundrum, and the title text claims that other presidents used this plan to get around the Constitutional limitations concerned in case they wanted to serve more than two terms.

As already stated, however, no one has yet even ''needed'' to carry out this plan. Only one President has exceeded the limit, {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt}} died in office during his ''fourth'' term), but he served his time prior to the 22nd Amendment and was thus unaffected by the rule only brought into being a half dozen years after his death. Presidents since then have definitely tried various schemes aimed at securing a second term, with both successes and failures, but nobody has yet planned ''this particular plan'' to achieve a third or beyond. Or at least one can assume that those that perhaps did (including, as noted, all those who were not yet "required" to go to these lengths) failed to attain their goals for entirely different reasons.

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

:[Ponytail and Cueball are walking.]
:Ponytail: So this is 2024.
:Cueball: Yup. Guess it's an election year now.
:Ponytail: Again? Man, those just keep happening, huh?

:[Ponytail and Cueball now standing.]
:Ponytail: Who's the president these days, anyway? Is it still Obama?
:Cueball: What? No? He hasn't been... How do you not...

:[Ponytail and Cueball still standing.]
:Ponytail: Darn, I liked him. Is he running this time?
:Cueball: No, he's not allowed to.
:Ponytail: He's not? Why?
:Cueball: Constitution.

:[Ponytail checks her smartphone.]
:Phone: ''Amendment 22''
:Phone: No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice
:Ponytail: What?? C'mon...

:[Ponytail talking to Cueball.]
:Ponytail: Don't all your cells get replaced every seven years, Ship of Theseus-style? Is he even the same person?
:Ponytail: Maybe "no person shall be elected more than twice" isn't a prohibition, it's more of an observation, like "you can't step in the same river twice."

:[Zoom in on Cueball.]
:Cueball: Isn't the cell thing a myth?
:Cueball: I think tooth enamel has a turnover half-life of 30+ years. His teeth molecules are probably the same.

:[Ponytail heads off with a finger raised.]
:Ponytail: So if Obama just gets false teeth, he can run again! I need to talk to a dentist and a lawyer!
:Cueball: The Supreme Court is about to vote 9-0 to block your number.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Elections]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Biology]]

2875: 2024

2024-01-02T04:03:46Z

172.70.127.40: /* Explanation */

<noinclude>:''This page refers to the comic named "2024". For comic #2024, see [[2024: Light Hacks]].''</noinclude>
{{comic
| number = 2875
| date = January 1, 2024
| title = 2024
| image = 2024_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x553px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It wasn't originally constitutionally required, but presidents who served two terms have traditionally followed George Washington's example and gotten false teeth.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by OBAMA'S TEETH - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In what starts off almost like a "[[:Category:Comics to make one feel old|doesn't time fly?]]" scene, the unstoppable progression of the calendar is observed, as [[Ponytail]] points out that it's now 2024. [[Cueball]], in response, notes that it is an election year, in this context a {{w|President of the United States#Election|US ''Presidential'' election}} year, which occurs every four years and has (in one form or other) since 1788. Ponytail then replies in some form of exasperated tone that they "keep on happening", which is true but (normally) unsurprising, even/especially with other major elections happening every two years, presumably not compared to how [https://www.bristol247.com/news-and-features/news/youre-joking-not-another-one/ some other democracies] might be less predictable/more frequent.

On top of this, Ponytail seems to have not been aware (or maybe has chosen to forget) the passing of two whole election cycles (and two newer incumbents) as the discussion focuses upon {{w|Barack Obama}}, the ''former'' US President. Ponytail seems to be quite behind the times as she asks if Obama is still president (he left office January 20th, 2017, which was 7 (!) years ago, a fact that Cueball cannot quite believe Ponytail is ignorant of). Ponytail states that she liked him, and wonders if he'll be up for taking on the position again. But Cueball states that he ''can't'' be made President again, having already served two terms, which Ponytail confirms by checking for herself the details of the {{w|Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution}}.

The humor in the comic comes in the second half; Cueball and Ponytail discuss whether Obama is the same person (like the mythical {{w|Ship of Theseus}}, most of his constituent cells are frequently replaced), with Ponytail looking into the possibility of Obama's re-election based upon philosophical/biological technicalities (as applied to the Constitution's words), rather than as legal/political convention might normally suggest. But when even that approach is seen to be wanting, requiring a wait significantly exceeding 30 years, Ponytail suggests negating that issue by having all of Obama's teeth removed and replaced with false teeth.

In order to facilitate the latter goal, Ponytail announces her intention to consult a dentist and (for exact reasons that can only be guessed at) a lawyer. Seeing where her current misplaced, and {{w|Dunning–Kruger effect|less than informed}}, zeal might be leading her, Cueball gives his prediction that the probable {{w|Supreme Court of the United States|ultimate legal arbiters}} of her plan might be unanimous in rejecting its validity (if not dissuading its attempt). SCOTUS being unanimous on an issue is now a [https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/07/as-unanimity-declines-conservative-majoritys-power-runs-deeper-than-the-blockbuster-cases/ comparitively rare event].

The title text references {{w|George Washington's teeth|George Washington's (in)famous 'false teeth'}}, often described as made of wood, but which probably were dentures including ''real'' teeth procured from other sources. Regardless, this would have likely resolved the rather specific problems established in the philosophical conundrum, and the title text claims that other presidents used this plan to get around the Constitutional limitations concerned in case they wanted to serve more than two terms.

As already stated, however, no one has yet even ''needed'' to carry out this plan. Only one President has exceeded the limit, {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt}} died in office during his ''fourth'' term), but he served his time prior to the 22nd Amendment and was thus unaffected by the rule only brought into being a half dozen years after his death. Presidents since then have definitely tried various schemes aimed at securing a second term, with both successes and failures, but nobody has yet planned ''this particular plan'' to achieve a third or beyond. Or at least one can assume that those that perhaps did (including, as noted, all those who were not yet "required" to go to these lengths) failed to attain their goals for entirely different reasons.

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

:[Ponytail and Cueball are walking.]
:Ponytail: So this is 2024.
:Cueball: Yup. Guess it's an election year now.
:Ponytail: Again? Man, those just keep happening, huh?

:[Ponytail and Cueball now standing.]
:Ponytail: Who's the president these days, anyway? Is it still Obama?
:Cueball: What? No? He hasn't been... How do you not...

:[Ponytail and Cueball still standing.]
:Ponytail: Darn, I liked him. Is he running this time?
:Cueball: No, he's not allowed to.
:Ponytail: He's not? Why?
:Cueball: Constitution.

:[Ponytail checks her smartphone.]
:Phone: ''Amendment 22''
:Phone: No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice
:Ponytail: What?? C'mon...

:[Ponytail talking to Cueball.]
:Ponytail: Don't all your cells get replaced every seven years, Ship of Theseus-style? Is he even the same person?
:Ponytail: Maybe "no person shall be elected more than twice" isn't a prohibition, it's more of an observation, like "you can't step in the same river twice."

:[Zoom in on Cueball.]
:Cueball: Isn't the cell thing a myth?
:Cueball: I think tooth enamel has a turnover half-life of 30+ years. His teeth molecules are probably the same.

:[Ponytail heads off with a finger raised.]
:Ponytail: So if Obama just gets false teeth, he can run again! I need to talk to a dentist and a lawyer!
:Cueball: The Supreme Court is about to vote 9-0 to block your number.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Elections]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Biology]]

2863: Space Typography

2023-12-06T21:36:10Z

172.70.127.40: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2863
| date = December 4, 2023
| title = Space Typography
| image = space_typography_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x239px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = And over heeee[...]eeeere (i)s Saturn.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an OPTIMISTIC ALIEN OVER THEEEE[...]EEEERE (i)N... NEPTUNE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Randall has created a sentence with the property wherein, when printed in {{w|Times New Roman}} font, the distances of the "i" letters from the first letter are proportional to the radii of the orbits of the innermost five planets in the {{w|Solar System}}. These are the only letters in the sentence that have a dot over the letter (there are no "j"s in the sentence) or elsewhere (there are no periods, colons, semicolons, or other dot-containing symbols). He suggests that if you get lost traveling among these planets, you can use the dots as a map.

This won't actually be a very useful map. When traveling between planets, it's not enough to know where the planet's orbit is, you also need to know where it is along the orbit. Additionally, if you are truly lost then you likely do not know where ''you'' actually are, and which 'way' you are heading, though you can probably at least locate the sun if you are indeed within our inner solar system.

The sentence is self-referential, since it talks about using typography to measure distances in space, and this makes it a useful mnemonic. The "optimistic" in the sentence could indicate that the aliens in question are highly optimistic that this kind of "map" would be useful for navigating a star system where planets orbit in ellipses, rather than being in static positions along a line (as is so often depicted in line-ups of the Solar System's planets).

The title text appends the sentence with a section for identifying Saturn. It contains an ellipsis in brackets, which normally signifies that an indeterminate number of 'e's has been omitted from the sentence, seemingly to represent Saturn's large orbital radius as the next "i" in "is". The trick is that actually appending the sentence literally, brackets and all, after the original sentence (so that we get "Optimistic aliens measure space typographically. And over heeee[...]eeeere (i)s Saturn.") actually puts the dot on the last "i" at Saturn's orbit. The extra dots and periods beside the six 'i's only serve as punctuation and spacing; the parentheses, besides spacing, call attention to the 'i' in the title text, where the black emphasis of the comic is not available. They're also reminiscent of {{w|Saturn's rings}}, although they are much too large and off-center.

Similar sentences with varying numbers of "e"s could be used to continue out to any planet or other body which does not contain the letter "i" – which is all of the remaining planets and minor planets, with the exception of Eris. However, the strings of "e"s would get longer and longer, to the point that it might be necessary to write down how many of them are to be used – about 59 "e"s for Saturn, starting from the Sun – which might as well just be replaced with a table of orbital ephemerides.

==Accuracy==
[[File:2863OrbitComparison.png|thumb|Comparison between orbits of Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, and Jupiter to the dots in the comic]]
Measuring the distances based on the provided image results in these approximate distances:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|-
! Planet !! Pixel offset !! Relative Distance in Comic !! Actual Distance in AU<ref>https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/pdfs/scaless_reference.pdf</ref>
|-
| Mercury || 93 || 0.3907 || 0.39
|-
| Venus || 169 || 0.7101 || 0.72
|-
| Earth || 238 || 1 || 1
|-
| Mars || 362 || 1.5210 || 1.52
|-
| Jupiter || 1229 || 5.1639 || 5.2
|}

Saturn is 9.54 astronomical units from the sun, for which 13 middle 'e's would be required in "here" to make the title text work.

The picture also contains a standard-representation of Times New Roman, with no changes to kerning or tracking.

Continuing the idea would look like this:

"Optimistic aliens measure space typographically. And over heeeeeeeeeeeeere (i)s Saturn. And over heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere is Uranus. And over heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere is Neptune."

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|-
! Planet !! Number of 'e's needed in "here"
|-
| Saturn || 13
|-
| Uranus || 49
|-
| Neptune || 58
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A grayed-out sentence in the Times New Roman font reads "Optimistic aliens measure space typographically". The "O" in "Optimistic" is dark black and indicated as representing the Sun (not to scale). The dots of the letters "i" in the sentence are similarly dark black. The dot in the first "i" in "Optimistic" is indicated as representing Mercury; the dot in the second "i" represents Venus; the dot in the third "i" represents Earth. The dot in the "i" in "aliens" is indicated as representing Mars. The dot in the "i" in "typographically" is indicated as representing Jupiter. A measurement bar indicates that the distance between the "O" and the third "i" in "Optimistic" (representing Earth) is equivalent to 1 AU (astronomical unit).]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Space tip: if you're ever lost in the inner Solar System, you can just type out the phrase "Optimistic aliens measure space typographically" in Times New Roman and use the dots as a map.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Tips]]