explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

467: X Girls Y Cups

2022-07-22T01:26:58Z

172.70.85.115: Nope.

{{comic
| number = 467
| date = August 25, 2008
| title = X Girls Y Cups
| image = x_girls_y_cups.png
| titletext = Also no results: 1girl10000cups, 2girls(5+3i)cups, 65536girls65536cups, or 3frenchhens2turtledoves1cup.
}}

==Explanation==
The comic refers to ''{{w|Hungry Bitches}}'', a 2007 {{w|scat fetishism|scat-fetish}} pornographic film. The one-minute preview, unofficially nicknamed "2 Girls 1 Cup," is a {{w|viral video}} that became a well-known {{w|internet meme}}. It is therefore not surprising that only the input combination of x=2 and y=1 generates a significant number of search results, being 257 times as frequent as the runner-up, "1 Girl 1 Cup."

This table is an example of a rudimentary {{w|heat map}}. The cells in the table with zero hits are white. From 1 to 9 they are yellow, and above that they are orange - except the maximum, which is red. As the second largest count is below 10,000 (7503) and the maximum almost two million, it is impossible to say if the red color is reserved for the maximum or for any number above a given value, say from ten thousand or up to above a million hits.

The title text suggests other combinations like 1 girl to 10,000 cups (very large number of cups to one girl), 2 girls to (5+3i) cups (a {{w|complex number}}), 65536 girls to 65536 cups (216, the first {{w|Integer (computer science)|integer}} that can't be represented as a two-byte unsigned integer), and finally 3 French hens and 2 turtle doves to 1 cup. All are phrases with apparently no search results.

The last phrase is a reference to the song ''{{w|The Twelve Days of Christmas (song)|The Twelve Days of Christmas}}''. After the publication of this comic, the phrase has been cross-posted at various sites in order to generate search results and prove the statement in the title text wrong. The same has happened to other entries, as it often happens shortly after [[Randall]] posts something regarding Google searches.

==Transcript==
:Google results for "<x> girls <y> cups"
:[There is a table with eight columns and eight rows. The cells are colored depending on the value in the cell: cells with the value 0 are clear/white, cells with values 1-9 are yellow, cells with values 10 and above are orange, and the cell with the highest value is red.]
:[Above the tabel is the label for the columns:]
:Cups
:[To the left the label for the rows:]
:Girls
:[0 girls 0 cups has value 3; 0 girls 1 cup has 375; 0 girls 2 cups has 9; 1 girl 0 cups has 7; 1 girl 1 cup has 7503; 1 girl 2 cups has 2007; 1 girl 3 cups has 10; 1 girl 4 cups has 5; 1 girl 5 cups has 3; 1 girl 6 cups has 6; 1 girl 7 cups has 2; 2 girls 0 cups has 9; 2 girls 1 cup has 1,929,000; 2 girls 2 cups has 247; 2 girls 3 cups has 7; 2 girls 4 cups has 14; 2 girls 5 cups has 13; 2 girls 6 cups has 2; 2 girls 7 cups has 1; 3 girls 0 cups has 7; 3 girls 1 cup has 6335; 3 girls 2 cups has 394; 3 girls 3 cups has 34; 3 girls 4 cups has 3; 3 girls 5 cups has 2; 3 girls 6 cups has 6; 4 girls 0 cups has 3; 4 girls 1 cup has 3513; 4 girls 2 cups has 34; 4 girls 4 cups has 63; 5 girls 0 cups has 1; 5 girls 1 cup has 9; 5 girls 2 cups has 5; 5 girls 3 cups has 3; 5 girls 6 cups has 3; 6 girls 0 cups has 3; 6 girls 1 cup has 1461; 6 girls 2 cups has 1; 6 girls 3 cups has 1; 6 girls 4 cups has 1; 7 girls 0 cups has 2; 7 girls 1 cup has 19; 7 girls 2 cups has 4; 7 girls 3 cups has 2; and the rest have 0.]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Google Search]]

1592: Overthinking

2022-07-22T01:25:13Z

172.70.85.115: Undo revision 289886 by 141.101.110.189 (talk) Clearly done by a three-year-old.

{{comic
| number = 1592
| date = October 19, 2015
| title = Overthinking
| image = overthinking.png
| titletext = On the other hand, it took us embarrassingly long to clue in to the lung cancer/cigarette thing, so I guess the real lesson is "figuring out which ideas are true is hard."
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, [[Cueball]] is telling [[White Hat]] about several recent scientific studies he read that appear to contradict the results of either prior studies whose results have stood for a long time or are long-held misconceptions. The studies can be reviewed on-line via their {{w|Digital Object Identifier}} (DOI) in [[Randall|Randall's]] citations.

In the first, Cueball mentions a study that showed that while water is good for you, you only need to drink when you are thirsty. This appears to be a reference to common misconceptions that we should drink a certain set quantity of water per day (oft-cited as eight cups - see [[715: Numbers]]) and may even be referencing the fact that drinking too much water (well more than the standard 8 cups, for most people) can lead to hyponatremia (lack of salt in the body).

Another recent study showed that prolonged sitting is not bad for you which contradicts the long-held belief that sitting at a desk all day is unhealthy and that standing or lying down are healthier. The study showed that the position is not particularly relevant if there is no physical activity in any of the positions.

Finally, Cueball references a study that pre-industrial humans have similar sleep patterns to our own, which would appear to contradict a belief that modern technology has disrupted our sleep patterns (which is likely tied to health concerns around our modern sleep habits).

Cueball's conclusion is that humanity may be over-thinking things in trying to find problems in the way we live our everyday lives. In the last panel, White Hat seems to be attempting to start an inquiry into what everyday modern phenomenon has caused us to over-think things. This is obviously a self-referencing example of the types of claims Cueball is debunking in the first three panels. Cueball responds by suggesting that humanity's over-thinking is likely not a recent phenomenon but probably dates back to the stone age. This could also be viewed as an argument that over-thinking is not all bad, as the wheel would certainly be a good result of over-thinking.

In the title text, Cueball gives a counter-example to his own argument, suggesting that it took far longer for us to realize the negative health connotations of smoking than it should have. Suggesting instead it's not about overthinking or underthinking-it's just that people make mistakes about what is important. (The link between cigarettes and lung cancer has been known for longer than most people realize, possibly coming as early as the 1940s.)

===Links to studies referenced===
*Panel 1: [https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JSM.0000000000000221 DOI:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000221]: [http://journals.lww.com/cjsportsmed/Fulltext/2015/07000/Statement_of_the_Third_International.2.aspx "Statement of the Third International Exercise-Associated Hyponatremia Consensus Development Conference, Carlsbad, California, 2015"], ''Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine'', July 2015, Retrieved 19-Oct-2015
*Panel 2: [https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyv191 DOI:10.1093/ije/dyv191]: [http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/10/09/ije.dyv191 "Associations of sitting behaviours with all-cause mortality over a 16-year follow-up: the Whitehall II study"], ''International Journal of Epidemiology'', 27-Aug-2015, Retrieved 19-Oct-2015
*Panel 3: [https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.09.046 DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2015.09.046]: [http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)01157-4 "Natural Sleep and Its Seasonal Variations in Three Pre-industrial Societies"], ''Current Biology'', 15-Oct-2015, Retrieved 19-Oct-2015

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and White Hat are walking together. The references are at the bottom of the three first panels.]
:Cueball: I found a study* that said water is good for you, but you should just drink it when you feel thirsty and not go overboard.
:White Hat: Uh huh?
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>DOI:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000221

:[More walking with Cueball lifting his hand in front of him.]
:Cueball: Another study* found that prolonged sitting isn't necessarily bad for you, as long as you're also getting exercise.
:White Hat: Okay...
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>DOI:10.1093/ije/dyv191

:[A border-less panel, but still walking.]
:Cueball: Now a study* claims that humans in pre-industrial societies stay up late and sleep 6 or 7 hours a night, just like most people today.
:White Hat: Huh.
:White Hat: So what you're saying is...
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2015.09.046

:[Zoom out showing Cueball and White Hat walking in silhouette.]
:Cueball: Maybe we're overthinking it.
:White Hat: But what ''caused'' our modern epidemic of overthinking?! Plumbing? Or is it email?
:Cueball: Modern? I bet the wheel was invented by someone overthinking "pushing."

==Trivia==
*In the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/archive/0/0d/20151019153329!overthinking.png original version] of the comic, the three DOIs were shifted one panel, so the reference in the first panel belonged to the second panel, the second belonged to the third panel and the reference in the third panel belonged to the first. This was corrected within a few hours.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Science]]

865: Nanobots

2022-07-22T01:23:53Z

172.70.85.115: Undo revision 289885 by 172.70.54.75 (talk) No, you're just trying to find something new to make wrong...

{{comic
| number = 865
| date = February 25, 2011
| title = Nanobots
| image = nanobots.png
| titletext = I think the IETF hit the right balance with the 128 bits thing. We can fit MAC addresses in a /64 subnet, and the nanobots will only be able to devour half the planet.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Megan]] and [[Ponytail]] are in orbit while nanobots are devouring the earth in a swarm. The nanobots stop after devouring 40% of the planet. This is a take on the "{{w|Grey goo}}" scenario in which self-replicating nanobots destroy the earth while creating more and more of themselves non-stop.

However, the nanobots are only able to destroy 40% of the planet because (40% of the earth's mass) = (# of {{w|IPv6}} addresses) x (A few cubic microns) x (density of nanobots). Without more IP addresses, the nanobots cannot continue to replicate (assuming that each nanobot must be individually addressable).

IPv6 supports approximately 3.4×1038 addresses, while the {{w|Earth|Earth's mass}} is around 5.972×1024 kg. Assuming "a few cubic microns" is the minimum of 2 µm3 (according to [[1070: Words for Small Sets]]), the nanobots would have a density of 4 g/cm3, a bit less dense than the earth.

This is a joke on the shortage of IPv4 addresses. The only difference is that we are on {{w|IPv4}} and the nanobots are on {{w|IPv6}}.

1998 is when the [http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2460 IPv6 Specification (RFC 2460)] was published and IETF is the Internet Engineering Task Force.

Note that an April fool joke for [http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1606 IPV9] exists and would have guaranteed Earth's doom in this comic's scenario.

==Transcript==
:[Megan and commander are on a space station.]
:Megan: Commander! Come quick! It's the nanobots—they've ''STOPPED!''

:Megan: They devoured 40% of the Earth, and then just... quit! They're just sitting there! Why?!

:Ponytail: It's a mystery. ...unless... What's the volume of each nanobot?
:Megan: A few cubic microns. Why?
:Ponytail: I think the year 1998 just bought us some time.
:[Earth's surface, covered in mountains of nanobots.]

:In the swarm:
:Nanobot: What do you mean, "Run out of addresses?"
:Other Nanobot: Look, we should've migrated away from IPv6 ''AGES'' ago...

==Trivia==
*On the website, the space above the comic says "xkcd.com now has IPv6 connectivity. If you can't reach it, you or your ISP have misconfigured equipment. Sadly, I now have no way to tell you."

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with inverted brightness]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:Singularity]]

473: Still Raw

2022-07-22T01:22:27Z

172.70.85.115: Undo revision 289884 by 172.70.54.75 (talk) Sad

{{comic
| number = 473
| date = September 8, 2008
| title = Still Raw
| image = still raw.png
| titletext = We actually divorced once over the airplane/treadmill argument. (Preemptive response to the inevitable threads arguing about it: you're all wrong on the internet.)
}}

==Explanation==
This comic shows [[Cueball]] and his significant other undergoing a domestic dispute. The debate is heated, enough to tear apart a romantic relationship, and although the end result is Cueball being thrown out of his other's house, he resolves that he will stand by his point of view no matter what.

Of course, in the last panel, we learn that the argument is over something that should be, in the context of romance, utterly trivial: Cueball has been thrown out simply because he believes that {{w|Pluto}} should never have been a {{w|planet}}.

Pluto was the ninth planet in our {{w|solar system}} between 1930 and 2006, during a time when "planet" had no formal definition. (Jupiter was thought to be the ninth planet [http://spaceweather.com/swpod2006/13sep06/Pollock1.jpg from 1807 to 1845.)] In 2006, the {{w|IAU}} created a formal definition for "planet"; Pluto didn't make the cut, and it was reclassified as a {{w|dwarf planet}}. The reasons are {{w|IAU_definition_of_planet|complicated}}, but the basic issue is that like {{w|1 Ceres|Ceres}}, {{w|2 Pallas|Pallas}}, {{w|3 Juno|Juno}}, and {{w|4 Vesta|Vesta}}, Pluto is too small to {{w|clearing the neighbourhood|function as a planet}} in the solar system. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_2gbGXzFbs A better explanation can be found here.]

In the title text, the airplane/treadmill argument starts when someone asks whether an airplane can take off while it is on a treadmill that is opposing its progress (pulling it backward). The question usually leads to arguments because it is posed ambiguously. Properly defining the question shows that the airplane can indeed take off (because its forward motion is provided by its propeller/jet engine, not its wheels, which are free to spin at any speed) and experiments (such as Mythbusters') bear this out. Randall also takes a crack at the issue [http://blog.xkcd.com/2008/09/09/the-@#$%&!-airplane-on-the-@#$%&!-treadmill/ here], and more info can be found [http://www.airplaneonatreadmill.com/ here].

The statement about being wrong is likely a reference to [[386: Duty Calls]].

==Transcript==
:[Cueball laying on sidewalk outside a house, surrounded by his belongings.]
:She threw me out yelling, "You don't say those words. Not in ''this'' house."
:It's been two years. I thought the wounds had healed.
:But I stand by what I said.
:Pluto never should have been a planet.

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

2648: Chemicals

2022-07-20T21:16:35Z

172.70.85.115: Undo revision 289454 by 108.162.246.196 (talk) No, yousociety and/or yourself.ociety

{{comic
| number = 2648
| date = July 20, 2022
| title = Chemicals
| image = chemicals.png
| titletext = It's hard to believe, but lots of kids these days ONLY know how to buy prepackaged molecules.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by BIG MOLECULE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, Megan mentions that you can find the chemical formulas for chemicals online, and that they spend a lot on fancy chemicals. Bizarrely, she suggests that "they can assemble" their chemicals themselves. When Megan says this she is holding a sheet that contains the chemical formula for nitrobenzene. This would be difficult without some fancy chemistry equipment.{{citation needed}} This formula also adds to the humor because the synthesis of nitrobenzene is highly exothermic{{citation needed}} and thus extremely dangerous, and gives a reasonable response to Cueball's comment as to why more people don't "manufacture" their own chemicals.

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

:[Megan and Cueball standing next to each other. Megan has her palms raised.]
:Megan: You know how our company spends a lot on expensive chemicals?
:Cueball: Yeah?

:[Megan holding up a piece of paper with a chemical formula on it, as well as some computation for the number of atoms needed]
:Megan: Well, I just learned you can look up all of the formulas online!
:Megan: We can just buy the atoms in bulk and assemble them here!

:[Cueball still standing. Megan walking off-panel to the right]
:Cueball: I wonder why more places don't do that.
:Megan: People have no idea they're getting ripped off by Big Molecule!

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

Talk:2602: Linguistics Degree

2022-07-19T22:04:41Z

172.70.85.115:

I think i messed up with the file upload- i was trying to help, sorry guys! [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 07:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
:I think I fixed it. We use the small version of the file, not the x2. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Not to be too nit-picky, but the legendary animal is a combination of jackrabbit and antelope, no jackal in it, therefore it’s jackelope. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.65|172.70.126.65]] 07:18, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
: Uh, no. It's "jackalope": Google is your friend. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 09:51, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
::Yes, I saw the wiki article. Either the person who coined the word was an idiot who thought it was spelled “antalope” or didn’t know how to make a portmanteau. Either way, it is NOT a portmanteau of jackrabbit and antelope, because that would be jackralope or jackelope. At best, you can call it a portmanteau of jackrabbit and a _misspelling_ of antelope.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.87|172.70.126.87]] 17:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
::: Excuse me? Are you in charge of "Jackalope" or Ponytail? ;) [[User:Lexi|Lexi]] ([[User talk:Lexi|talk]]) 20:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC) JACKrabbit + AnteLOPE = JACKALOPE . . . . (Was that so hard?) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 10:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:::: Definitely jackalope in Texas, their native territory. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.170|172.69.69.170]] 01:41, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
:::: "Jacklope" Oh DEAR. You are so very and hilariously wrong on the Internet.

My immediate reaction to this was to see where ///bassoon.jackalope.slurp (What3words) took me. Nowhere - but suggested ///passion.jackpot.slurps is near Chausserais, 100 km ESE of Nantes in central France.[[User:Jmbryant|Jmbryant]] ([[User talk:Jmbryant|talk]]) 10:22, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
:That's nearer {{w|Dahu}}-country, though! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 10:38, 5 April 2022 (UTC) (P.S. Not that this is even a valid example why, but I rather think What3words is a bad development that will do more harm than good in serious navigation/geolocating purposes. Just sayin' in passing.)

:In some languages, a bassoon is called ''fagotto'' i.e. faggot, which in English is an offensive word addressing a male homosexual person (Note: I'm describing the word, not discriminating against any people). The word ''jack'' also means a male person, and an antelope is '''horny'''. With ''slurp'', these three words happen to be kind of '''inappropriate''' or '''graphic''', if seen this way. Maybe? Thoughts? [[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 05:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
::Long leap. Or easy leap, as pretty much every word of significance has been (mis)appropriated, and has variable connotations anyway (someone mentions Slurp's variable offensiveness, below). "Faggot" is as likely to be a kind of sausage (an actual sausage, though of course "sausage" has its own innuendo!) or an actual bundle of sticks, round these parts, though we probably do recognise it as (US movie?) slang, if spoken in the more obviously offensive context.
::Linking the woodwind ("erection-fart?") directly to ludeness is so easy. Perhaps also through onomatopeia? Or else "bassoons" is reminiscent of "bossoms". "Jack" might be "-the-lad", but no more sign of sexual-male than many other names (There's ''a'' John, naturally. Or the naming-of-parts via John-Thomas/Dick/Peter/”Hugh Jampton", etc?). And you missed in the jack''rabbit'' that rabbits themselves have a certain reputation, beyond munching on carrots. Or, the question is, did your 'uncle and antelope'? And, like many ungulents, I believe they like pronking!
::Low-hanging fruit (testicles?), I'd say. Not wishing to blow my own trumpet. (Well, I m not really supple enough to try!) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.125|162.158.159.125]] 09:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

::This use of '''faggot''' is American (and possibly other dialects). In the UK a faggot is a type of liver dumpling, or a wooden branch or a bundle of wooden branches - often intended as firewood.[[User:Jmbryant|Jmbryant]] ([[User talk:Jmbryant|talk]]) 08:50, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Could the random student in Ohio be a cousin of the random programmer in Nebraska? --[[User:Quazgar|Quazgar]] ([[User talk:Quazgar|talk]]) 11:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

There's a Linguistics Society of America, maybe they could coordinate the assignment of words to graduates. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
:In the US, yes. In most of the rest of the world follows ISO 1806. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 16:43, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
::ISO 1806 Determination of mesh breaking force of netting? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:55, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
::I'm sure it was a typo for ISO 24612 [[User:Philhower|Philhower]] ([[User talk:Philhower|talk]]) 12:44, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Cueball's objection to "slurp" is not explained; what's wrong with "slurp"? I think it's great word! (I wonder if trades are allowed...) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.146.81|172.68.146.81]] 21:31, 5 April 2022 (UTC) Corin
:You're right. The word ''slurp'' is just a word, value-neutral. What this word means can be seen variously, though. In some countries, slurping (e.g. noodle) is not only culturally acceptable but possibly seen positively, implying what they're eating is delicious. In some other countries, slurping may be a no-no, seen negatively. Some webmasters may not like the Yahoo Slurp bot, as it might misbehave. [[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 05:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if those who graduated with honors are entrusted with more difficult words, like irregular verbs or ones with tricky homophones. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.38.41|172.70.38.41]] 01:21, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:[https://imgflip.com/i/16xi7j Or both..]? ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.177|172.70.85.177]] 02:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

My sister was wondering if the assignment is specific to English, or whether you own the word in every language where it's a, well, word. Like if you got "eleven", are you merely in charge of "the integer between ten and twelve [English]", or are you also the administrator of "lively, alive [Hungarian]"? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.38.41|172.70.38.41]] 18:25, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:Oh, no... I believe that the only way to get responsibility for the English word "eleven" is to do a ''mathematics'' degree, via the responsible governing body for assigning integers, fractions (vulgar or decimal*, including irrational) and various trans-finite notations. Although, only an infinitesimal number of numbers have been so assigned, so practically no-one else has noticed. Practically zero. Including the person who was actually assigned 'Zero' but was still suffering from a celebratory hangover at their graduation ceremony and apparently never realised.
:(* - For historical reasons, however, all your ''other'' base belong to Sega.)
:Due to an oversight, though, yes the person given "Eleven" has precedence over the Hungarian Linguist (who also has not realised... again due to a hangover). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.43|162.158.159.43]] 21:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:My graduation was bi-lingual (English/Welsh) so, although I got "moron", I've never been quite sure if it was in the sense of "idiot" or "carrots". And actually, come to think of it, the Pro Vice Chancellor did inexplicably say "dirigible" at one point, so maybe it was neither and he just thought I was a moron. Or he fancied some carrots.
:Better start researching airships... [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 14:26, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
:: Or pannas/parsnips (see Welsh Duolingo and FB Owen a'i pannas) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.170|172.69.69.170]] 01:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

== Explanation Tag ==
"Created by a JACKALOPE SLURPING UP A BASSOON, GRADUATED BACHELOR OF SCIENCE WITH A GUARDIANSHIP OF 'EXPLAIN'" This seems wrong, as the stewardships of words are gifted to recipients of Linguistics degrees, not Science degrees. --[[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 00:30, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2647: Capri Suns

2022-07-18T18:15:24Z

172.70.85.115:

The title text could also be referring to a catheter. I'm not sure which is funnier, but one is certainly grosser. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.115|172.70.85.115]] 18:15, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

1377: Fish

2022-07-15T22:15:05Z

172.70.85.115: /* Explanation */ Minor grammar/spelling/contextual tweaks

{{comic
| number = 1377
| date = June 4, 2014
| title = Fish
| image = fish.png
| titletext = [Astronomer peers into telescope] [Jaws theme begins playing]
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|Fermi paradox}} is the contradiction that arises between high estimates of the likelihood of {{w|extraterrestial life}} and the fact that no evidence for it has thus far been found.

[[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] are having a conversation regarding this — since new planets are found all the time around distant stars, Cueball comments that this makes it an even greater paradox. Megan suggests that perhaps our search for extraterrestrial life is like looking at a patch of ocean floor looking for a fish. The diver knows that there must be a fish somewhere, but is unable to actually find it. She then goes on to ask why the fish would be hidden — i.e. camouflaged, and what it means about the remaining fish. The suggestion is that the fish would be hidden to avoid being eaten by predators, and perhaps the reason no extraterrestrial life is sending any sign of existence back is that {{w|Fermi paradox#Communication is dangerous|they fear they might be destroyed}} soon after they revealed their location. Maybe they have even actively tried to hide the presence of their entire planet if they obtain the technological means. This potentially refers to the [http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/gif/1983QJRAS..24..283B/0000296.000.html Deadly Probes scenario] where a space faring species has developed deadly probes that self replicate and spread through the void between the stars - homing in on radio signals and destroying young civilizations in the cradle...

The camouflaged fish could be identified by using more sophisticated technologies like infrared cameras. Looking at the Earth from space beyond {{w|Low Earth orbit}} only with the naked eye wouldn't show any hint to our {{w|ecosystem}}. This is like the actual possibility in astronomy when observing {{w|Exoplanet|exoplanets}} — the nature of those more than 1,500 known planets is unknown due to the lack of better technologies to the scientists. And there are perhaps a couple of hundred billion planets in our galaxy still camouflaged to human scientists.

The final panels take the metaphor further, suggesting that there is literally a planet sized shark swimming through space eating planets, and since the view is panning away from earth and over to the shark, the shark seems to be heading our way. It looks like Earth is the next fish, presumably because we did not reach a high enough technology level in time to recognize the danger and hide.

This also explains the title text that has the theme from the movie ''{{w|Jaws (film)|Jaws}}'' playing while astronomers look into their telescopes. This may also be a reference to the film ''{{w|Alien (film)|Alien}}'', which was pitched with the three word proposal "''Jaws'' in Space."

{{w|Stephen Hawking}} famously warns, "If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus landed in America, which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans." Chinese sci-fi author {{w|Liu Cixin}} wrote an award-winning sci-fi trilogy called the ''{{w|Remembrance of Earth’s Past}}'' trilogy, which draws on a similar idea; the title of the second book, ''{{w|The Dark Forest}}'', is a reference to the same Fermi paradox solution described in the comic. Even {{w|Carl Sagan}} called the practice of broadcasting and signalling the presence of life on Earth "deeply unwise and immature," and recommended that "the newest children in a strange and uncertain cosmos should listen quietly for a long time, patiently learning about the universe and comparing notes, before shouting into an unknown jungle that we do not understand."

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan are walking down a hill.]
:Cueball: The Fermi paradox keeps getting worse. If planets are common, where ''is'' everybody?

:Megan: Imagine you're a scuba diver looking at the ocean floor. You know there's a fish there, but you can't see it. Why?

:Cueball: Maybe the fish looks like sand.
:Megan: Yeah...

:[Zoom out to the Earth from space.]
:Megan: ...and what would that tell you about the ecosystem?

:[Earth moves slightly out of the panel.]

:[Earth moves halfway out of the panel.]

:[Blank panel.]

:[A shark swims through space.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Aliens]]
[[Category:Sharks]]