explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2922: Pub Trivia

2024-04-22T08:07:35Z

172.71.178.177: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2922
| date = April 19, 2024
| title = Pub Trivia
| image = pub_trivia_2x.png
| imagesize = 422x666px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Bonus question: Where is London located? (a) The British Isles (b) Great Britain and Northern Ireland (c) The UK (d) Europe (or 'the EU') (e) Greater London
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A BOT ASKING BAD TRIVIA QUESTIONS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Many pubs have {{w|pub trivia|trivia nights}}, where patrons form teams and compete to answer questions about a range of topics. The typical goal for trivia games is that they be challenging, yet possible, and so questions with answers that are too difficult or too easy generally make for a poor game. In addition, it's usually preferable that questions are clearly worded with a single, objective answer, so as to avoid disputes about which answers are correct.

Cueball has apparently been hired by one bar to infiltrate ''other'' bars' quiz nights and ask particularly bad questions. The implication is that this will make the games unpleasant, in the hopes that people will leave, and possibly go to the bar that hired Cueball.

Cueball uses a variety of strategies to write bad questions, including questions that are trivial (where the answer is painfully obvious), unanswerable (either because there is no answer or because the answer is unknown), ambiguously worded or arguable.

Many of his questions could be altered slightly to make them more reasonable for such a game, but that would defeat Cueball's purpose.

It is possible the intention of this pub quiz is to identify the issues with each question as is done here, accepting these as the answers. As Cueball was hired by a rival pub, they could then take these corrections back to that rival place.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Question !! Problem with the Question !! Explanation !! More Reasonable Alternative(s)
|-
|1. Which member of {{w|BTS}} has a birthday this year?||Multiple correct answers||All people have birthdays every year{{Citation needed}} (other than pedantic exceptions due to calendar issues or timezone alterations, or someone dying before their birthday, or being born on a leap day, none of which apply in this case). Therefore, all seven members of BTS have birthdays this year.||Which member of BTS has a birthday today/this week/this month? Which member of BTS turns [a specific age] this year?
|-
|2. How many sides does a {{w|platonic solid}} have?||Multiple answers, ambiguous language||There are five {{w|Platonic solids}}, with 4, 6, 8, 12 or 20 faces (colloquially called sides) in {{w|Euclid|Euclidean}} {{w|Euclidean geometry|3-space}}. Using the {{w|Euler Characteristic}} Polyhedron Formula the solids have, respectively, 6, 12, 12, 30 and 30 edges (also occasionally called sides colloquially). A more devious quizmaster might actually include this as a trick question with the correct answer being 'zero', since strictly speaking solids do not have 'sides'.||How many Platonic solids are there? What is the highest number of faces on a Platonic solid? How many faces does a [specific platonic solid] have? How many faces (or edges, or vertices) do ''all'' the platonic solids have (i.e., added together)? What is the number of vertices, subtract the number of edges, plus the number of faces equal to for a platonic solid (i.e. The Euler Characteristic)?
|-
|3. What is the smallest lake in the world?||Arguable, Potentially Unknowable||While the largest lakes are relatively straightforward to categorize, smaller bodies of water range in size down to individual puddles. There is no clear, definitional line at which a body goes from being a lake to a pond, for example. In addition, the size of small lakes will fluctuate due to variability in precipitation, and other weather effects, and some lakes only exist for brief periods (intermittent lakes). Hence, which small bodies of water are "lakes" and which is the smallest can't be clearly answered, without specifying a whole list of parameters and standards.

This question may be a reference to the Tom Scott video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEGzvZ85dgs What counts as the world's shortest river?]
||What lake has the largest surface area in the world? What is the world's deepest lake? What lake is recognized by the Guinness World Records as the world's smallest? (Benxi Lake in China).
|-
|4. Which Steven Spielberg movie features more shark attacks, {{w|Jaws (movie)|Jaws (1975)}} or {{w|Lincoln (movie)|Lincoln (2012)}}?||Trivial||''Jaws'' is a famous movie about a killer shark, and features at least five fatal shark attacks. Lincoln is a movie about the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, containing zero shark attacks.{{Citation needed}} Anyone with even a passing familiarity with American popular culture should be able to get this one right, and someone with no knowledge could likely guess the answer from the titles alone. This might be mistaken for a silly trick question, as ''Lincoln'' is a much less famous movie.||How many times is a shark seen on screen in "Jaws"? Which film won more {{w|Academy Awards}}? How many fatal shark attacks occur in "Jaws"? Which movie in the "Jaws" franchise has the most shark attacks?
|-
|5. How many planets were there originally?||Ambiguous||The question doesn't specify a time frame or culture, which is necessary to understand both the word 'Planet' and the word 'originally'. It could be referring to the {{w|classical planets|original meaning of the word planet}}, which in antiquity referred to the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn (total of 7 planets). It could be referring to the planets originally known to the quiz master, which (assuming Cueball is between 18 and 96 years old) would be after the reclassification of Ceres, Pallas, Vesta and Juno to asteroids, and after the discovery of Pluto, but prior to the reclassification of Pluto to dwarf planet (total of 9 planets). It could conceivably be referring to the first official definition of planet by the International Astronomical Union in 2006, which would be Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune (total of 8 planets). It could be referring to the process of planetary formation, in which case another layer of ambiguity is added, as it could be referring to the number of protoplanetary bodies in the {{w|protoplanetary disk}} (which is unknown since some of them were destroyed like {{w|Theia (planet)|Theia}}), or the number of planets that accreted from the disk before some were likely ejected (which is also unknown), or how many planets existed when the sun or the universe was formed (which is 0). It also doesn't specify that it's referring to planets in our solar system alone (in the galaxy there are almost certainly trillions of planets). Additionally, it asks how many "were there", as opposed to how many planets "were known" (the number which we know of being far smaller than the true number of planets in the universe). ||How many planets were known to Ancient Greece? How many planets were known to science prior to the invention of the telescope? How many planets were recognized in our Solar System at the end of the 20th century?
|-
|6. What {{w|NFL}} player has scored the most points outside of a game?||Ambiguous, Unknowable||The term "scored the most points" generally only applies within the context of a game, making it very unclear what kind of "points" the question is referring to. Does it mean points in non-NFL games? Points in games other than football? Points outside the context of any game at all (such as 'making a point' in conversation)? Even if this were clarified, points scored in official games in professional sports leagues are meticulously recorded and published, points scored in any other context are not, so the question is likely impossible to answer. Arguably, Brian Jordan would be an answer, with 121 Minor League and 755 MLB runs scored (points).||Which NFL player scored the most points in a game/season/career?
|-
|7. The {{w|Wright brothers}} built the first airplane. Who built the last one?||Unknowable||Orville and Wilbur Wright are widely credited with designing and building the first airplane (in the sense that they invented wingflaps, and discounting everybody flying before them without wingflaps). In modern times, design and construction of airplanes has become a huge, international industry, with many airplanes of widely varying sizings being built each year. Since airplanes are built continuously, which one was made most recently depends on when the question is asked (and would be very difficult for the average person to know -- and not trivial for even a member of the aerospace industry to know). If it's asking about the last airplane ''ever'', that's impossible to know, since that plane hasn't been built yet (and hopefully won't for a very long time).||Who built the first airplane '''after''' the Wright brothers? When was the final Wright Model B aircraft built?
|-
|8. Is every even number greater than 2 the sum of two primes?||Unknown, Possibly unknowable||This is a famous, centuries-old {{w|open question}} in math known as {{w|Goldbach's conjecture}}. Mathematicians widely believe that it is true, and it has held true for every number checked up to 4 ⋅ 1018, but since it's impossible to check every number, we can't assume it's universally true. No mathematical proof of its veracity exists at this point. Since it is {{w|Gödel's incompleteness theorems|known}} that something can be true but impossible to prove (and, being true, impossible to disprove), this may be the situation forever.||According to which mathematical conjecture is every even number greater than 2 the sum of two primes?
|-
|9. Not counting {{w|Canberra}}, what city is the capital of {{w|Australia}}?||No answer exists||Australia has only one capital (unlike some countries, which divide the legislative and administrative capitals, for example), and that capital is Canberra. Hence, by definition, there is no national capital "not counting Canberra". Though each constituent state also has its state capital (inclusive of Canberra, which is, by population, almost the entirety of its {{w|Australian Capital Territory|own state territory}}), this would still leave us with an ambiguous choice. Before 1927, the answer could be Melbourne, as that was where the Parliament sat at that time. This may be a joke about how other cities, such as Melbourne and Sydney, are often mistaken for the capital of Australia due to Canberra's comparatively small population (roughly 500,000 in the greater metropolitan area, compared to Melbourne and Sydney's roughly 5,000,000 each). It also alludes to the rivalry between Sydney and Melbourne as each claims to be the true capital. ||What city is the capital of Australia? What is currently the largest city in Australia? What is the smallest state capital in Australia? Not counting Canberra, what city was the most recently founded state capital of Australia? What city was the capital city before Canberra?
|-
|10. Who played the drums?||Trivial, yet unknowable without context||As worded, the question could be answered with anyone who's ever played the drums, in any context, whether professional or not, in all of history. This would include a huge number of people, most of whom would not be well-known. Most people would be able to offer a technically correct answer, and almost none of them would be interesting. Or maybe the host is wondering who it was that played drums that night, as part of the bar's live music.||Who played the drums for some specific band/album/track/concert/tour/time/place?
|-
|(Title text) Where is {{w|London}} located? (a) the {{w|British Isles}} (b) {{w|Great Britain and Northern Ireland}} (c) the {{w|United Kingdom|UK}} (d) {{w|Europe}} (or 'the {{w|European Union|EU}}') (e) {{w|Greater London}}||Multiple answers||All choices are technically correct as they are various geographical areas that include the city of London, England. Also note that the City of London is different from the city ''named'' London, as the latter includes a large region around the former, hence (e) as an answer. Answer (d) is both correct and incorrect, as it conflates a geographic region, Europe, and a political body, the European Union. The United Kingdom (and therefore London) {{w|Brexit|left the EU}} in 2020, but is still geographically included in Europe. In addition, 'the UK' is short for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, so answers (b) and (c) refer to the same thing. This also does not get into cities named London outside of the UK, so for example "Ontario" or "Canada" could also be possible answers if the test designer were truly evil, thus making none of the answers correct. ||What is the capital of the United Kingdom? (answer: London) Where is London, England '''not''' located? (a) the British Isles (b) Great Britain and Northern Ireland (c) the UK (d) Europe (e) the EU (answer: (e))
|}

==Transcript==
:[The top half of Cueball is shown beneath the list of questions he is reading aloud. He is holding a wireless microphone in his right hand and a pencil and notebook in his left, reading from the notebook and speaking into the microphone. The list is shown on the notebook as well, but just as unreadable lines.]:
:Cueball: Welcome to pub trivia! Round one is 10 questions:
:# Which member of BTS has a birthday this year?
:# How many sides does a platonic solid have?
:# What is the smallest lake in the world?
:# Which Steven Spielberg movie features more shark attacks - ''Jaws'' (1975) or ''Lincoln'' (2012)?
:# How many planets were there originally?
:# What NFL player has scored the most points outside of a game?
:# The Wright brothers built the first airplane. Who built the last one?
:# Is every even number greater than 2 the sum of two primes?
:# Not counting Canberra, what city is the capital of Australia?
:# Who played the drums?

:[Caption below the panel]:
:A local pub trivia place hired me to run bad quizzes at competing bars.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Geography]]
[[Category:Fiction]]
[[Category:Sharks]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:American football]]

Talk:2904: Physics vs. Magic

2024-03-10T19:25:14Z

172.71.178.177:

Isn't the first law of thermodynamics a conservation law? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.217|172.69.134.217]] 21:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

In Lagrangian Mechanics,the Lagrangian is a function of time, position and speed. The action of the system is defined as the integral of the Lagrangian between the initial and final time. Movement equations are derived as those that minimize action. In that sense it can be loosely interpreted that by only setting initial condition and outcome you can get the full picture of all intermediate events. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.230.215|198.41.230.215]] 22:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

This is why statistics is magical [[User:Phlaxyr|Phlaxyr]] ([[User talk:Phlaxyr|talk]]) 23:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Both thermodynamics and conservation laws make predictions without telling us anything about what exactly is happening in the intermediate steps. In that sense they're no different from the curse in the comic. An example for thermodynamics could be: your coffee cup will get cold if left on your desk (zeroth law). And an example from conservation laws could be: it doesn't matter what method you're going to use to stop a moving car, in all cases the car has lost the same amount of energy (1/2mv^2). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.110|141.101.99.110]] 00:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I've always been a little bit annoyed by thermodynamics. I mean it has a temperature, it has energy, why can't I have the energy without something colder lying around? "Remove heat energy from this object and charge a battery with it"... It sucks because the inverse is true, I can certainly discharge a battery and make heat energy from chemical... Anyway back on topic, can someone magic me such a device? I promise to share 50% of the big oil hush money. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.23|172.68.210.23]] 04:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
:What exactly would be your contribution? Anyone with such device would be already swimming in money from U.S. department of defense. Or, more likely, killed by them. Because it certainly can be used as a bomb. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 20:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
:: Anonymity. With magic up their sleeve they probably want to solve a few more world problems too, this allows them to get one out of the way without drawing attention to themselves. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.73|172.68.210.73]] 01:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The talk had a better explanation of why Thermodynamics, Conservation laws and Lagrangians are 'magic' than the actual explanation. I added a few paragraphs briefly explaining to the explanation, I hope that's helpful, but I left the paragraph about scientific laws being empirical themselves in place despite the fact that I'm pretty dubious about whether that's actually part of the joke. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.111|141.101.99.111]] 16:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
:: To be frank I just think part of the joke is how naive definitions of science can lead to baffling counterexamples [[Special:Contributions/198.41.230.214|198.41.230.214]] 08:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

 
 

'''About the stationary action concept'''

At first sight it looks as if Hamilton's stationary action implies some form of teleology. On closer inspection that turns out not to be the case.

I will use the following case as example of application of calculus or variations in physics: the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catenary catenary] problem. The properties of the catenary problem that make it lend itself to variational treatment generalize to other areas of physics in which calculus of variations is applied

Take a catenary and divide it into subsections. Here's the thing: each of those subsections is an instance of the catenary problem. The ''ratio'' of horizontal and vertical displacement is different for each subsection, of course, but that is not an obstacle.

Solving the catenary problem with calculus of variations consists of the following: you subdivide the total length in infinitesimally small subsections. You then set up an equation that addresses all subsections concurrently.

That equation-for-every-infinitesimal-subsection-concurrently is the Euler-Lagrange equation. You solve the problem by restating the equation as a ''differential equation''.

A differential equation is non-local in the sense that to solve the problem you require that the equation is to be satisfied over the whole domain ''concurrently''.

The derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation is a generic derivation. That is, the result of that derivation is applicable for ''any'' problem that is stated in variational form.

Stating a problem in variational form means that it is stated as an integral. (In the case of the catenary problem that integral is the integral of the potential energy from one point of suspension to the next point of suspension.) The problem statement is then: which curve has the property that for that curve the ''derivative'' of the integral of the potential energy is zero.

In the case of the catenary problem: 
The integral is integration with respect to the horizontal coordinate. The variation that is applied is perpendicular to that; the variation is applied in the ''vertical'' direction. The derivative-is-zero criterion is for the derivative of the integral with respect to that ''vertical'' direction.

 

Key to the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation is that it works towards the goal of transforming the integral expression to a differential expression. That is essential: in order to make progress the integration must be replaced with differentiation.

The result of the transformation, the Euler-Lagrange equation, imposes a constraint that is just as demanding as the initial formulation with an integral. The differential equation is to be satisfied concurrently over the whole domain.

There is a derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation that just skips stating the integral; it goes straight to the differential expression. [https://preetum.nakkiran.org/lagrange.html Geometric derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation] Author: Preetum Nakkiran.

(Preetum Nakkiran uses the catenary problem as motivating example, the result has general validity.)

Further reading: discussion of Hamilton's stationary action in an answer I submitted to physics.stackexchange: [https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/670705/ Hamilton's stationary action]

 

'''The relation between Newtonian mechanics and conservation of energy'''

We have that in order to formulate a theory of mechanics we must at minimum use these three quantities: position, velocity, acceleration. These three are in a cascading relation: velocity is the time derivative of position, acceleration is the time derivative of velocity.

v = ds/dt, a = dv/dt      (1)

In the case of uniform acceleration from a starting velocity of zero we have: 
v = at      (2) 
s = ½at²      (3)

Take (3), multiply both sides with acceleration ''a'', and substitute according to (2):

as = a½at² = ½a²t² = ½(at)² = ½v²

as = ½v²    (5)

The relation (5) is known as Torricelli's formula. 
In case the initial position coordinate and the initial velocity are non-zero:

a(s-s₀) = ½v² - ½(v₀)²    (6)

Interestingly, in the case of a non-uniform acceleration the result of the integration is identical to (6)

∫ a ds = ½v² - ½(v₀)²    (7)

(To understand (7): we have that integration is summation of infinitesimal strips. The integration consists of concatenating instances of (6), in the limit of infinitesimal increments. All of the in-between terms drop away against each other, resulting in (7))

 

The work-energy theorem is obtained as follows: start with ''F''=''ma'', and integrate both sides with respect to the position coordinate.

∫ F ds = ∫ ma ds    (8)

Use (7) to process the right hand side:

∫ F ds = ½mv² - ½m(v₀)²    (9)

(9) is the work-energy theorem

The work-energy theorem is the reason that it is useful to formulate the concepts of potential energy and kinetic energy. If we formulate potential energy and kinetic energy in accordance with the work-energy theorem then we have that the sum of potential energy and kinetic energy is a conserved quantity.

The work-energy theorem consists of two elements: ''F''=''ma'', and (7).

Here (7) was stated in terms of the familiar quantities of mechanics: position, velocity, acceleration. (7) generalizes to any set of three quantites that features that cascading relation: state, first time derivative, second time derivative.

Example: electric current and electromotive force in an LC circuit 
Amount of current is a first derivative (displacement of charge per unit of time) 
''Change'' of current strength is a second derivative 
For current through an inductor: the rate of change of current strength (second time derivative) is proportional to the electromotive force. 
So we see that in the case of an LC circuit the elements necessary to result in a conservation property are present. 
[[User:Cleonis|Cleonis]] ([[User talk:Cleonis|talk]]) 11:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thinking further on this, I believe part of the apparent strangeness of the Lagrangian formalism is the fact that the system state is specified at both ends forces you into thinking 'backwards in time' in a way that you don't have to in the Newtonian formalism, but the Newtonian formalism is quite happy to infer the past state from the future and give sensible answers if you integrate backwards in time. So in that sense it's true to say that the Lagrangian formalism implies no more teleology than the Newtonian formalism, but only because the unsettling backwards propagation of cause and effect is actually hidden in the Newtonian approach too. Maybe the interesting thing here is a connection between entropy, whence we get a distinction between past and future, and the philosophical notion of 'purpose' or 'ends' or whatever the term in teleology is. I'm not a philosopher (nor a physicist) so forgive me if I'm mischaracterizing teleology. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.177|172.71.178.177]] 19:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

2873: Supersymmetry

2023-12-28T19:19:20Z

172.71.178.177: Link...

{{comic
| number = 2873
| date = December 27, 2023
| title = Supersymmetry
| image = supersymmetry 2x.png
| imagesize = 313x375px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = High-speed collisions at the Baby Park track may support the hypothesis that Daisy is her own evil twin, a theory first suggested by Nintendo in the game Majorana's Mask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A RELATIVISTIC WALUIGI ANNIHILATING AN UNSUSPECTING LUIGI - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic imagines a "theory of supersymmetric Mario Bros." that merges the theoretical physics concept of supersymmetry (explained in detail [[#Background on subatomic particles|below]]) with another "super" thing, {{w|Super Mario Bros.}}, originally developed for the {{w|Nintendo Entertainment System}} and later the ''Super'' Nintendo Entertainment System (SNES), two home game consoles popular during Randall's childhood. The comic humorously combines the two domains by equating certain subatomic particles and Mario game characters. Mario is the titular protagonist of his franchise and Luigi is his brother, and their centrality to the games are similar to the nucleus (proton and neutron) being the center of an atom.

The subatomic particles and their character equivalents:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|-
! Particle !! Symbol !! Type !! Charge !! Mass !! Mario Character !! Notes
|-
| {{w|Proton}}
| p / p+
| Baryon ('uud' quarks)
| +1
| ≲1 {{w|Dalton (unit)|mu}}
| Mario
|-
| {{w|Neutron}}
| n / n⁰
| Baryon ('udd' quarks)
| 0
| ≳1 mu
| Luigi
|-
| {{w|Antiproton}} (not involved in the diagram)
| p / p-
| Antibaryon ('uud' quarks)
| -1
| as proton*
| Wario
| Wario is the "evil" version of Mario
|-
| {{w|Antineutron}} (not involved in the diagram)
| n / n-0
| Antibaryon ('udd' quarks)
| 0
| as neutron*
| Waluigi
| Waluigi is the "evil" version of Luigi
|-
| {{w|Electron}}
| e-
| Lepton (charged)
| -1
| 5.5x10-4 mu
| (Princess) Peach
|-
| {{w|Positron}} / Antielectron (not depicted/involved)
| e+
| Antilepton (charged)
| +1
| as electron*

|-
| {{w|Electron Neutrino}}
| νe
| Lepton (uncharged)
| 0
| Assumed >0 (very small*)
| (Princess) Daisy
|-
| Electron {{w|Neutrino#Antineutrinos|Antineutrino}} (not depicted, hypothetical)
| νe
| Antilepton (uncharged)
| 0
| as electron neutrino*

|}
<nowiki/>* - to within experimental error

The "Free Luigi Decay" diagram is a {{w|Feynman diagram}} reinterpreting the process of {{w|free neutron decay}}.

The right-handed Daisy (Electron Neutrino) means that Daisy’s direction of spin (in subatomic terms, a measurement which does not now match that of the angular momentum in classical physics which inspired its naming) is the same as the direction of motion. A left-handed Daisy (Electron Neutrino) would have the opposite value.

Certain current understandings of the process require that the electron neutrino be an ''anti''neutrino, but antineutrinos have not so far been sufficiently confirmed to exist, with some theorising that a neutrino can be its own anti-particle (unlike the neutral neutron, composed of charged quarks, which has the similarly neutral antineutron, composed of oppositely charged antiquarks).

The '''title text''' is a pun on the title of the Nintendo 64 game ''{{w|The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask}}'' and the concept of {{w|Majorana fermion}}, which attempts to reconcile how, while many particles have separate antiparticle counterparts, certain ones do not. Until this is resolved, scientists may depict a theoretical antiparticle in place of a neutrino in order to preserve various total values across the diagram. But scientists do wonder if a neutrino is its own antiparticle, much as they have also previously wondered if {{w|Neutrino oscillation|they also flip their 'flavor'}} as a way to explain certain experimental results.

Baby Park is an oval-shaped race track in the ''{{w|Mario Kart}}'' series and used as a particle collider in the title text, first featured in ''{{w|Mario Kart: Double Dash|Mario Kart: Double Dash!!}}'' on the Nintendo GameCube.

==Background on subatomic particles==
In {{w|particle physics}}, a depiction such as a {{w|Feynman diagram}} can be used to try to explain elementary (and composite) particles, and how various interactions occur between them. At the atomic level, this may involve the bulky nucleons (protons and neutrons, these being each a particular triumvirate of quark 'flavors'), electrons (smaller, charged fermions) and various others (such as neutrinos, also fermions, chargeless and often ''nearly'' massless). Sometimes other more exotic/fundamental particles (force-mediating or otherwise transient) are included.

Added within the {{w|standard model}} are the "{{w|antiparticle}}s" that are oppositely charged (or built up of more fundamental antiparticles), and further issues have required extending this further through theories of {{w|supersymmetry}} which further adds counterparts that have alternate '{{w|Spin (physics)|spin}}'s.

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

:Mario : Proton
:Luigi : Neutron

:Wario : Antiproton
:Waluigi : Antineutron

:Peach : Electron
:Daisy : Electron neutrino

:Free Luigi decay:
:[Illustration of Luigi → Mario + Peach + Daisy]
:[Label below Daisy:] (Right-handed)

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The theory of Supersymmetric Mario Bros suggests that each fundamental particle has a Super Nintendo partner.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Video games]]
[[Category:Mario Kart]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:2870: Love Songs

2023-12-21T01:02:38Z

172.71.178.177:

I need to know which axis means “does the ‘me’ like them” because I fail to understand it.--[[Special:Contributions/172.71.134.164|172.71.134.164]] 23:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
:Pick a song you know that isn't near the (X=Y) line, and it should explain it.
:e.g. "That don't impress me much", at centre-top. Clearly the other party is trying to impress (likes the 'me') but Shania is ambivalent in response (she doesn't actually love their being a rocket-scientist, nor hate it).
:"Killing me softly..." is from 'me' having love, whilst "You're so vain..." is actively insulting the other party (but indifference by the target ''could'' be the attitude).
:Though for X=Y items (e.g. "I will survive" - it's declared to be an unamicable but ultimately mutually-acceptable split) the way round of course doesn't matter. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.224|172.69.194.224]] 00:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm hoping "I Will Survive" isn't a reference to the Zootopia abortion comic. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.82|172.68.174.82]] 23:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
:Well, some of the (apparently obvious) references I didn't know. First thought about "Girlfriend" was the {{w|Girlfriend in a Coma (song)|The Smiths song}} ''almost'' of that name. (And it looks like there are almost thirty possible songs... not sure how many are covers of others... {{w|Girlfriend (disambiguation)#Songs|under that exact name}}.) Can I suggest that any possible songs that could be confused (but maybe not match the plotted position, being of a different story/tone) be recorded in a "Not to be confused with..." section? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.177|172.71.178.177]] 01:02, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

not pictured: Jim Steinman songs, which spend most of their time out of the XY plane. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.214.109|172.69.214.109]] 00:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

1082: Geology

2023-12-13T16:49:28Z

172.71.178.177: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 1082
| date = July 16, 2012
| title = Geology
| image = geology.png
| titletext = That's a gneiss butte.
}}

==Explanation==
Here we have [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] discussing {{w|geology}} and the words they use are ripe with puns and {{w|double entendre}}s which also have sexual meanings. In the end, they just decide to get it on.

Specifically, the suggestive terms are "{{w|Bed (geology)|bedding}}," "{{w|Extensional tectonics|spreading}}," "{{w|friction}}," "{{w|Cleavage (geology)|cleavage}}," "deeper in the {{w|rift}}," "{{w|orogeny}}," (perhaps a {{w|portmanteau}} of {{w|orgy}} and {{w|erogenous}}), "huge," and "{{w|Thrust fault|thrust}}."

The technical terms are:
;Bedding : The division of usually {{w|sedimentary rock|sedimentary rocks}} into distinct layers.
;Spreading : A process in which two geological regions are moving apart, and potentially allowing for {{w|magma}} to rise between them. Spreading occurs in {{w|mid-ocean ridge|mid-ocean ridges}} and in {{w|rift valley|rift valleys}}.
;Friction breccia : {{w|Breccia}} is a rock made of broken fragments of other rocks. When these fragments can be formed from the rubbing between rocks in a fault, it is a friction breccia.
;Flow cleavage : The {{w|crystal|crystals}} in a rock can be aligned by the {{w|plastic flow}} of a rock when it is hot. This causes the rock to split (cleave) along particular planes.
;Rift : A result of spreading is that rocks break, forming vertical faults, and allowing regions to sink and form valleys.
;Orogeny : The process of mountain forming, or a period in which mountains are formed.
;Thrust fault : A sloping crack in the rocks at which one region of rocks is pushing another up.

So it seems that Megan tells Cueball to ignore the layers in the rock, as there is evidence that the valley they are in is a recent rift valley. It was formed in cracking following the lifting up of the surrounding rocks.

The title text is a wordplay, as it could sound like "nice butt". {{w|Gneiss}} is a type of rock made up of different bands, and a {{w|butte}} is an isolated hill with steep sides and a flat top, but smaller than a {{w|plateau}}. However, "butte" is not pronounced like "butt", but as "beaut".

==Transcript==
:[Two people are doing a geological survey.]
:Megan: Forget the bedding - we were wrong about the whole valley.
:Cueball: The spreading is recent.

:Megan: See the friction breccia?
:Cueball: Oh - flow cleavage!
:Cueball: Deeper in the rift.
:Megan: Deeper.
:[An idea pops into Megan's head.]

:[The same idea pops into Cueball's head.]
:Megan: This orogeny
:Cueball: is driven by a
:Megan: ''huge''
:Cueball: ''thrust'' fault

:[They both drop to the ground in a fit of passion.]
:The couple: MMM
:[Down from comic]: Geology: Surprisingly erotic.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Romance]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Puns]]