explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2654: Chemtrails

2022-08-03T17:22:18Z

172.70.251.112: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2654
| date = August 3, 2022
| title = Chemtrails
| image = chemtrails.png
| titletext = Ants have reverse chemtrails--regular citizens spraying chemicals everywhere they go to control the government.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a REVERSE AIRPLANE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Ants are known to leave trails of {{w|pheromones}}, natural chemicals that they emit, along the trail to food sources. These act as guides to other ants in the colony to return to the food.

Cueball is (possibly intentionally) confusing these with {{w|chemtrails}}, the subject of a conspiracy theory that the government is poisoning the population by spraying toxic chemicals from high-flying aircraft. He knows that Ponytail studies ants, so she objects strongly when he says she studies chemtrails rather than pheromone trails.

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

:[Cueball stands talking to Ponytail.]
:Cueball: So, I hear you're really into chemtrails?
:Ponytail [with her arms in the air]: '''''No!!'''''

:[Caption:]
:How to annoy entomologists who study ant navigation

{{comic discussion}}

2654: Chemtrails

2022-08-03T17:21:51Z

172.70.251.112: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 2654
| date = August 3, 2022
| title = Chemtrails
| image = chemtrails.png
| titletext = Ants have reverse chemtrails--regular citizens spraying chemicals everywhere they go to control the government.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a REVERSE AIRPLANE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Ants are known to leave trails of {{w|pheromones}}, natural chemicals that they emit, along the trail to food sources. These act as guides to other ants in the colony to return to the food.

Cueball is confusing these with {{w|chemtrails}}, the subject of a conspiracy theory that the government is poisoning the population by spraying toxic chemicals from high-flying aircraft. He knows that Ponytail studies ants, so she objects strongly when he says she studies chemtrails rather than pheromone trails.

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

:[Cueball stands talking to Ponytail.]
:Cueball: So, I hear you're really into chemtrails?
:Ponytail [with her arms in the air]: '''''No!!'''''

:[Caption:]
:How to annoy entomologists who study ant navigation

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2640: The Universe by Scientific Field

2022-07-02T13:16:36Z

172.70.251.112:

I have a feeling reproductions of this particular XKCD will be popular on the doors of many offices in astronomy departments around the world. A bit like Gary Larson's Far Side cartoons are found everywhere in biology departments.

I just discovered Safari's "Live Text" feature. It allowed me to copy the numbers with all the digits, so I don't have to count them to create the transcript. But then someone else beat me to creating it. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 22:44, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if we should mention the area of telescope apertures compared to, say, the surface area of all laboratory glassware or something like that. Too much of a stretch? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.81|172.70.214.81]] 23:18, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

“Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.117|162.158.129.117]] 00:40, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreeing with the argument in the current version of the explanation as I write: it is really, really hard to argue that astronomy covers more than physics, which lays claim to including all the physical sciences as subfields. Also, is "field" a pun on the force fields of ... physics? [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:32, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
:I don't think most chemists would say that they're in a sub-field of physics, but chemistry is a huge part of astronomical spectroscopy. Similarly mathematicians relative to trigonometry. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.36|172.70.211.36]] 03:47, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

There's a bit of a problem here. Yes, Astronomy is the study of pretty much anything that isn't Earth. But the other part is pretty much limited to studies of life on earth (biology excluding exo-/astrobiology as well as pretty much all branches of social sciences), studies of earths atmosphere (meteorology and related fields), studies of earths water (e.g. hydrology as well as aspects of biology and others), studies of earths lithosphere (terrestrial geology and subfields) and various tangential branches thereof (like studies of earth's past - as part of pretty much any subject mentioned before). Fields like physics (pretty much everything "real", i.e. 100%), chemistry (any condensed matter) or geology (any rocky bits) have claims to various (already "taken") parts of the universe. Mathematics and philosophy (mentioned in alt text) don't have a claim to much of anything "real" in the universe (except maybe the pieces of data storage (paper, brain, digital) used) but have a claim to all of the (not "real, I guess) sciences mentioned before. Of course, that makes them subject to, at least, physics, chemistry, biology and social (including historical) sciences in turn. - - - TL/DR: I seem to be in a bit of a mood to kill jokes today. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.112|172.70.251.112]] 13:16, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

2637: Roman Numerals

2022-06-24T23:17:27Z

172.70.251.112: explantio of LL

{{comic
| number = 2637
| date = June 24, 2022
| title = Roman Numerals
| image = roman_numerals.png
| titletext = 100he100k out th1s 1nno5at4e str1ng en100o501ng 15e been 500e5e50op1ng! 1t's 6rtua100y perfe100t! ...hang on, what's a "virtuacy"?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a high school teacher for Latin and Maths - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic purposely confuses the symbols used as roman numeral, arabic numerals, and the latin alphabet. Converting the arabic numberal equation 1+1=2 into roman numerals becomes I+I = II but is then represented as 1+1=11. 2+2=4 becomes II+II=IV but roman number V is arabic numeral 5 so this becomes 11+11 = 15.

The numbers aren't numbers - they're the equivalent roman numeral

* 1 = I
* 5 = V
* 10 = X

The confusion comes about because many people write "1" the same as "I" -- the bars and seriphs only appear in printed output or computer screens.

So, the equations translated back into "normal" numerals are:

* I(1) + I(1) = II(2)
* II(2) + II(2) = IV(4)
* IV(4) + V(5) = IX(9)

For the title text, it's helpful to know 50 = L, 100 = C and 500 = D, which when applied, reads 'CheCk out thIs InnoVatIVe strIng enCoDIng IVe been DeVeLopIng! It's VIrtuaCy perfeCt! ...hang on, what's a "virtuacy"?' with virtuacy instead of virtually being produced because L+L=C (50+50=100).

Until the modern codification in general use today, Roman numerals weren't standardised that much and "LL" could have been a tolerated alternative to "C". For more on that, see {{w|Roman_numerals#Classical_Roman_numerals}}.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Cueball writing on a wall or a whiteboard.]
:1+1=11
:11+11=15
:15+5=110

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Remember, Roman numerals are archaic, so always replace them with modern ones when doing math.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Math]]

Talk:2629: Or Whatever

2022-06-07T10:23:40Z

172.70.251.112:

This is me when I don't want to fact-check things I only barely remember reading about once. -V [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 09:47, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

And once again, no love for ''Ostankino teletower'' built in 1966, which is a building-like structure unlike that bayonet-like CN Tower. *sighs in Muscovite* [[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.112|172.70.251.112]] 10:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2629: Or Whatever

2022-06-07T10:22:59Z

172.70.251.112:

This is me when I don't want to fact-check things I only barely remember reading about once. -V [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 09:47, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
And once again, no love for ''Ostankino teletower'' built in 1966, which is a building-like structure unlike that bayonet-like CN Tower[[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.112|172.70.251.112]] 10:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

925: Cell Phones

2022-05-28T20:16:13Z

172.70.251.112: /* Explanation */ That's clearly not what Randall meant, and there is no "sudden decrease" either

{{comic
| number = 925
| date = July 15, 2011
| title = Cell Phones
| image = cell_phones.png
| titletext = He holds the laptop like that on purpose, to make you cringe.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a good explanation of the correlation/causation fallacy, where one party states two unrelated events and posits that they must have influenced each other.

After hearing about the "Cell Phones Don't Cause Cancer" study, which refutes a claim made by the ''{{w|World Health Organization}}'' (just Google the debate or {{w|Mobile phone radiation and health|check out Wikipedia's article on it}}, the comic doesn't focus much on it), [[Black Hat]] plots "Total Cancer Incidence" per 100,000 and "Cell Phone Users" per 100 on the same graph. The graph in frame 3 shows an exponential rise in cancer in the 70's and 80's, followed by an exponential rise in cell phone usage in the 2000's. Black Hat reverses the correlation/causation fallacy, and comically comes to the conclusion that ''cancer'' causes ''cell phones''.

The comic highlights a well-known fallacy known as ''{{w|post hoc ergo propter hoc}}'', often shortened to simply ''post hoc.'' The Latin translates to "after this, therefore because of this," referring to the common mistake that because two events happen in chronological order, the former event must have caused the latter event. The fallacy is often the root cause of many superstitions (e.g., a person noticing he/she wore a special bracelet before getting a good test score thinks the bracelet was the source of his/her good fortune), but it often crosses into more serious areas of thinking. In this case, the scientific research community, which often prides itself on its intellectual aptitude, is gently mocked for being nonetheless prone to such poor reasoning all too often. The different possibilities are generally known as causation, when one thing is proven to cause another, or correlation, when changes in one thing are aligned with changes in another, but there is no proof that they are directly related.

The title text refers to the way Black Hat holds the laptop in panel 2. Being that Cueball (and Randall, for that matter) are quite into computers, the potential damage to a laptop screen either from the weight of its lower body or the pressure of the user's fingers on the LCD screen is enough to make him squirm in discomfort. The risk of dropping the computer is also present.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball holds a cellphone. Black Hat is sitting at a desk with a laptop.]
:Cueball: Another huge study found no evidence that cell phones cause cancer. What was the W.H.O. thinking?
:Black Hat: I think they just got it backward.

:[Black Hat turns towards Cueball in an unframed panel, holding the laptop with one hand by the upper edge of the screen. Cueball is not visible.]
:Cueball: Huh?
:Black Hat: Well, take a look.

:[There is a plot of total cancer incidence and cell phone users. Cancer rises from 1970 to 1990, then stays relatively steady. Cell phone use rises from roughly 1984, and steeply after 1990, to the present.]

:Cueball: You're not... There are ''so'' many problems with that.
:Black Hat: Just to be safe, until I see more data I'm going to assume cancer causes cell phones.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Cancer]]
[[Category: Research Papers]]
[[Category:Phones]]

1717: Pyramid Honey

2022-05-11T17:46:51Z

172.70.251.112: Undo revision 266709 by 👖🔥 (talk)

{{comic
| number = 1717
| date = August 8, 2016
| title = Pyramid Honey
| image = pyramid_honey.png
| titletext = They CLAIM honey was found in the chambers under the pyramids, but this conspiracy goes all the way to the TOP, where the GIANT EYE is!
}}

==Explanation==
Bee {{w|honey}} is a food item with natural antimicrobial properties. It can remain unspoiled for a person's entire lifetime, making it practically nonperishable for ordinary consumers. It is frequently claimed that archaeologists have found jars of honey that have been well-preserved for thousands of years in ancient tombs, often those found in {{w|Egyptian pyramids}}, hence the title ''Pyramid Honey''. The claims are generally assertions that may point to other similar assertions as supporting evidence but do not provide specific details, such as the identity of the actual tombs where such jars have been found, or the names of the archaeologists who have affirmed finding such jars. Repeated encounters with the assertion lead some people to claim that honey's shelf life is "infinite", which is a much stronger claim which would not necessarily be supported by the assertion even assuming it is true.

In the comic, [[Cueball]] tells [[Megan]] about an article in ''{{w|Smithsonian (magazine)|Smithsonian Magazine}}'' (presumably [http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-science-behind-honeys-eternal-shelf-life-1218690/ this one]) that claims honey has an infinite shelf life. The article links to a book that makes the assertion of such findings but does not provide factual support of the findings. Megan thinks the source for this article, and others that covered the subject, is wrong and wants to refute them all. She tells Cueball ''Believe it or not'' which [[Black Hat]] hears and he immediately states that he believes her, and is convinced without hearing any arguments from Megan. He then decides to begin a Facebook page so he can ''tell the Internet'' without giving Megan a chance to explain any further.

"A hill to die on" is a phrase from {{w|Ernest Hemingway|Ernest Hemingway's}} 1940 novel "{{w|For Whom the Bell Tolls}}", about an American who volunteers in the 1936-1939 {{w|Spanish Civil War}} to fight {{w|fascism}}, who ends up wounded and alone, about to ambush the enemy to give his comrades a chance to escape; "a weird hill to die on" would thus mean a weird cause, if not a just one, to fight for to the bitter end. This expression is also the subject of [[2247: Weird Hill]]. Black Hat asserts that he needs such a cause because the "real" weird hills are too far from his house, humorously implying he would be equally satisfied with a literal weird hill.

Black Hat's actions are clearly premature since he has not heard any evidence to back up the claim and does not understand the nuances of Megan's position. Cueball states that it could have gone better, whereas Megan seems to be resigned to it, perhaps as it notionally supports her (aborted) argument and it's at least a short-term 'win' that she won't fuss over the details of.

Presumably, the best Black Hat can do would be to parrot what he has heard from Megan, without any understanding or critical thinking on his part. Due to his lack of understanding, he may even interject his own ideas (ones Megan never believed nor stated) into his posts. These are all consistent with him calling himself "pyramid honey truther". The word ''truther'' refers to people who reject established facts and instead choose to believe in conspiracies, like people who claim {{w|Moon landing conspiracy theories|the moon landings never happened}}, or {{w|9/11 Truth movement|believe the US government is behind}} the {{w|9/11 attacks}}. While a few conspiracy theories turn out to be true, most are easily proved to be fake, but this does not stop people from believing in them anyway, just like the two mentioned here, which are not easily dismissed by believers. This turns Megan, who likely has a reasonable and well-justified position, unwillingly into the source of conspiracy theories.

Alternatively, he only does this to troll Megan (and Cueball), and everyone else that reads his Facebook page, just because he knows they will get annoyed. And also to state that this is an unimportant subject (a weird hill to die on) to make such a fuss over. No one would wish to eat that honey, anyway, having been abandoned to time for that long. He may see this as a completely uninteresting subject and thus makes fun of Megan with his statements. This would also be more in line with his usual behavior.

It is also possible that Black Hat is simply mocking conspiracy theorists' obsessions with factually incorrect ideas, comparably to what may be the case in [[Secretary: Part 3]].

The title text refers to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, a symbol of an eye at the top of a pyramid, found on US currency and often associated with conspiracy theories of the {{w|Illuminati}}. Black Hat again refers to the pyramid honey found under the pyramids and calls it a ''conspiracy that goes all the way to the top''. This usually means that the politicians (or the government agencies) ruling the country know about it, but keep it a secret from the public. But in this case, he mixes up terms and says it goes to the top of the pyramid (from the bottom), to where the giant eye is. As promised he also writes four words in all capital letters, shouting out the TRUTH!

This comic is likely a satire of the stereotypical internet mindset and plays up the frequent confusion between legitimate scientific skepticism, where unsupported claims are rejected, and conspiracy-theory faux-skepticism, where legitimate evidence is rejected because it does not support a specific viewpoint.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan are talking.]
:Cueball: Apparently honey has an infinite shelf life. They just found jars of it in the pyramids, still good.
:Megan: You know, I've heard that, and I don't think it's true.

:[Black hat enters.]
:Cueball: Really? Smithsonian magazine confirmed it.
:Megan: Believe it or not, I think their source is wrong.
:Black Hat: '''''I believe you.'''''

:[Megan has turned to Black Hat raising her hands.]
:Megan: See I read about the archaeologists who-
:Black Hat: I'm convinced. Gonna go to tell the internet.

:[Black Hat moved closer to Megan and Cueball.]
:Megan: Wait, are you sure? Let me explain why I-
:Black Hat: Don't need it. I've heard enough.

:[Zoom-in on Black Hat's head.]
:Black Hat: I've been looking for a weird hill to die on, and all the real ones are too far from my house.
:Black Hat: So this is mine. I'm now a pyramid honey truther.

:[Zoom back out. Black Hat starts walking left, pointing a finger up. Cueball and Megan turn to look after him.]
:Black Hat: Time to start a Facebook group and post a bunch of all-caps comments everywhere.
:Cueball: This could have gone better.
:Megan: Oh well.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Conspiracy theory]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Science]]

Talk:2613: Bad Map Projection: Madagascator

2022-04-29T18:16:45Z

172.70.251.112: comment five

Hopefully the vandal won't bother this one. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.18|172.70.211.18]] 17:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Anyone else want to play this (and the other bad map projections) as maps in a 4X/Grand Strategy game? [[User:Mazz0|Mazz0]] ([[User talk:Mazz0|talk]]) 18:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Clicking on the original comic brings up the actual projection used, it looks like.

this page is kinda sussy tbh [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.81|172.70.214.81]] 18:11, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Why was this page mentioning Among Us? The game has no relation to map projections at all[[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.112|172.70.251.112]] 18:16, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2595: Advanced Techniques

2022-03-23T16:28:40Z

172.70.251.112: correction necessary

The title text refers to [[wikipedia:Noether's theorem|Noether's theorem]]. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 04:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

This is my first explanation [[User:GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e|GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e]] ([[User talk:GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e|talk]]) 05:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

This sounds a lot like Laplace or Fourier transforms, converting a function into a different where it is easier to manipulate then reversing the transformation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.173|108.162.245.173]] 06:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:When I was learning to use fourier transforms in EE, they were very straightforwardly (and accurately) described as "transferring the function to the Spectral Domain". [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.241|172.70.110.241]] 22:45, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's proper to refer to someone as a "giant" while explaining a comic that references mythological creatures. Unless it was literal of course, but as far as I'm aware giants never existed. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.12|162.158.111.12]] 11:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:I think she may actually have been a wizard-giant.[[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 13:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Not my area, but I am passingly familiar with the [[:wikipedia:Gauss–Kuzmin–Wirsing_operator|Gauss–Kuzmin–Wirsing Operator]], [[wikipedia:Dragon curve|Dragon Curves]], and [[wikipedia:Hilbert spaces|Hilbert ''Spaces'']] (guessing that the "arrow" refers to scalar vector?). Some type of iterative/recursive conversion that yields to analysis of the period? Probably not pertinent to the joke which is more about the fanciful names attached to mathematical concepts, constructs, and processes [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.173|108.162.245.173]] 11:53, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I find it interesting that despite now being the day after release (or well into the next day, my time, which is usually sufficient — and I'm not in a DST zone yet) the site explanation hasn't explained (or thought it has explained) every single element of the in-comic 'explanation' — even if not established the (probably) nonsensical whole. As an example, I don't yet see the obvious {{w|Dragon_curve|dragon}} element that is both alluded to ''and'' seemingly illustrated upon the board-notes. Leaving this here to help near-future editors who might have time to bullet-point/tabulate/sub-heading these things and just need that extra bit of info. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.125|162.158.159.125]] 15:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

There is the misquote of Arthur Clarke "All sufficiently advanced [strike]technologies[/strike] mathematical techniques are indistinguishable from magic." [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]])
:Fix it!
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 23:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
::I'm not sure what Arachrah means, because technologies is included in the original version: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. I have corrected the explanation to that and also added link to wiki. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The explanation should decide whether the teacher is Miss Lenhart, or Blondie. I think it's Miss Lenhart. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 17:02, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:A teaching [[Blondie]] is always Miss Lenhart. It has been corrected before I came here. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

That dragon looks suspiciously like Trogdor...[[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.73|162.158.146.73]]
:It just looks like a normal wyvern to me, though the perspective doesn't give us much detail to help tell those two cases apart. I think if it ''were'' Trogdor though, fewer liberties would have been taken with the shape of the dragon's body. (To be confident we would have to figure out the original problem and use Gauss' operator ourselves to get a more detailed look, which seems difficult.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.11|141.101.104.11]] 16:25, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

"Critical Role: Call of the Netherdeep" released this week, for D&D 5e.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 23:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Come to think of it, we do use fantasy-sounding expressions in math: e.g. titanic prime, imaginary part, infinite field, ideals, friendly numbers, brute force attack. I'm pretty sure there are many more fun examples.
[[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 04:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

PS: "Sexy primes" and "latus rectum" are real technical terms.
[[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 04:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
:Its weird how this fantastic math have failed to solve the 3n+1 problem. Because I do believe I have solved it within this week. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.246.55|172.70.246.55]] 18:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad the wiki format saves old versions of explanations, because it would be a shame if that incomplete notice would be gone forever once the explanation is complete enough. Made me chuckle! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.11|141.101.104.11]] 08:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I suspect there's also an aspect of how, if you don't know the mathematical concepts involved, some of these solution methods can seem more like the author is just casting spells. The context that most immediately comes to me is solving integrals with weird techniques that involve mapping to other planes and such. I would say that solving integrals was the first place I really saw creativity being heavily focused on in my math curriculum. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 08:43, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
: I couldn't agree more. {{unsigned ip|172.70.250.231}}
: I agree as well. "An alternative view" seems like the wrong way to state this: I believe the ''entire'' joke is that Randall is comparing the processes described in the preceding paragraph (transforming a function to another domain & such), to the "sufficiently advanced technology" of Clarke's "third law". It's not an either/or proposition: The references to advanced maths are there, to illustrate how fine the line is between complex operations, & "magic"; & the D&D metaphors are there, to bring the "magic" into a context that sounds more structured & math-like, than some arbitrary 'hocus pocus'.
: [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 22:33, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
::Agree as well. Reminds me of the Langlands Programme. Guess Randall has been reading that article, too.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.112|172.70.251.112]] 16:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Re. '[metaphor] is not usually used in math classes.' - it's used a lot more than you might initially assume - there's at least one example in this explanation, where it talks about transforming between 'domains'.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.119|162.158.34.119]] 09:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2595: Advanced Techniques

2022-03-23T16:27:31Z

172.70.251.112: some comment; Langlands

The title text refers to [[wikipedia:Noether's theorem|Noether's theorem]]. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 04:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

This is my first explanation [[User:GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e|GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e]] ([[User talk:GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e|talk]]) 05:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

This sounds a lot like Laplace or Fourier transforms, converting a function into a different where it is easier to manipulate then reversing the transformation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.173|108.162.245.173]] 06:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:When I was learning to use fourier transforms in EE, they were very straightforwardly (and accurately) described as "transferring the function to the Spectral Domain". [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.241|172.70.110.241]] 22:45, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's proper to refer to someone as a "giant" while explaining a comic that references mythological creatures. Unless it was literal of course, but as far as I'm aware giants never existed. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.12|162.158.111.12]] 11:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:I think she may actually have been a wizard-giant.[[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 13:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Not my area, but I am passingly familiar with the [[:wikipedia:Gauss–Kuzmin–Wirsing_operator|Gauss–Kuzmin–Wirsing Operator]], [[wikipedia:Dragon curve|Dragon Curves]], and [[wikipedia:Hilbert spaces|Hilbert ''Spaces'']] (guessing that the "arrow" refers to scalar vector?). Some type of iterative/recursive conversion that yields to analysis of the period? Probably not pertinent to the joke which is more about the fanciful names attached to mathematical concepts, constructs, and processes [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.173|108.162.245.173]] 11:53, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I find it interesting that despite now being the day after release (or well into the next day, my time, which is usually sufficient — and I'm not in a DST zone yet) the site explanation hasn't explained (or thought it has explained) every single element of the in-comic 'explanation' — even if not established the (probably) nonsensical whole. As an example, I don't yet see the obvious {{w|Dragon_curve|dragon}} element that is both alluded to ''and'' seemingly illustrated upon the board-notes. Leaving this here to help near-future editors who might have time to bullet-point/tabulate/sub-heading these things and just need that extra bit of info. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.125|162.158.159.125]] 15:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

There is the misquote of Arthur Clarke "All sufficiently advanced [strike]technologies[/strike] mathematical techniques are indistinguishable from magic." [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]])
:Fix it!
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 23:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
::I'm not sure what Arachrah means, because technologies is included in the original version: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. I have corrected the explanation to that and also added link to wiki. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The explanation should decide whether the teacher is Miss Lenhart, or Blondie. I think it's Miss Lenhart. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 17:02, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:A teaching [[Blondie]] is always Miss Lenhart. It has been corrected before I came here. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

That dragon looks suspiciously like Trogdor...[[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.73|162.158.146.73]]
:It just looks like a normal wyvern to me, though the perspective doesn't give us much detail to help tell those two cases apart. I think if it ''were'' Trogdor though, fewer liberties would have been taken with the shape of the dragon's body. (To be confident we would have to figure out the original problem and use Gauss' operator ourselves to get a more detailed look, which seems difficult.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.11|141.101.104.11]] 16:25, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

"Critical Role: Call of the Netherdeep" released this week, for D&D 5e.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 23:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Come to think of it, we do use fantasy-sounding expressions in math: e.g. titanic prime, imaginary part, infinite field, ideals, friendly numbers, brute force attack. I'm pretty sure there are many more fun examples.
[[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 04:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

PS: "Sexy primes" and "latus rectum" are real technical terms.
[[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 04:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
:Its weird how this fantastic math have failed to solve the 3n+1 problem. Because I do believe I have solved it within this week. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.246.55|172.70.246.55]] 18:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad the wiki format saves old versions of explanations, because it would be a shame if that incomplete notice would be gone forever once the explanation is complete enough. Made me chuckle! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.11|141.101.104.11]] 08:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I suspect there's also an aspect of how, if you don't know the mathematical concepts involved, some of these solution methods can seem more like the author is just casting spells. The context that most immediately comes to me is solving integrals with weird techniques that involve mapping to other planes and such. I would say that solving integrals was the first place I really saw creativity being heavily focused on in my math curriculum. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 08:43, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
: I couldn't agree more. {{unsigned ip|172.70.250.231}}
: I agree as well. "An alternative view" seems like the wrong way to state this: I believe the ''entire'' joke is that Randall is comparing the processes described in the preceding paragraph (transforming a function to another domain & such), to the "sufficiently advanced technology" of Clarke's "third law". It's not an either/or proposition: The references to advanced maths are there, to illustrate how fine the line is between complex operations, & "magic"; & the D&D metaphors are there, to bring the "magic" into a context that sounds more structured & math-like, than some arbitrary 'hocus pocus'.
: [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 22:33, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
::Agree as well. Reminds me ofthe Langlands Programmme. Guess Randall has been reading that article, too.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.112|172.70.251.112]] 16:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Re. '[metaphor] is not usually used in math classes.' - it's used a lot more than you might initially assume - there's at least one example in this explanation, where it talks about transforming between 'domains'.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.119|162.158.34.119]] 09:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)