explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2809: Moon

2023-08-02T15:00:01Z

172.71.178.186:

Happy birthday to me. This comic is a good birthday present, so I'm gonna try to add some stuff to the explanation now. [[User:R3TRI8UTI0N|R3TRI8UTI0N]] ([[User talk:R3TRI8UTI0N|talk]]) 02:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay, added a Trivia section and a lot of stuff to the explanation. Request someone help add more information about lunar cycles and some wikipedia links. [[User:R3TRI8UTI0N|R3TRI8UTI0N]] ([[User talk:R3TRI8UTI0N|talk]]) 02:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:Ah, well, I added more (sufficient? ...haven't wikilinked yet) info about the illumination/tide cycles. i.e. about half the time (at least) half reilluminating areas on the night side of Earth + roughly twice a day dragging/flinging the tides 'upwards' (modifying the Sun's own twice-daily effects).
:Had to heavily qualify the secondary Trivia point, for caveats. I mean selenically-specific names aren't rare, when refering to orb sometimes known as Phoebe/Cynthia, until you become more precise about "common English use". Didn't say anything about (the) Earth, but did mention the Sun(/suns in general) in the edit comment. Interesting point to make, but not so much unusual as stemming from long time (way into prehistory!) custom so really being the heavily weighted precedent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.187|172.70.90.187]] 05:21, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
::...what? I don't understand. [[User:R3TRI8UTI0N|R3TRI8UTI0N]] ([[User talk:R3TRI8UTI0N|talk]]) 05:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
:::''"it can also be described by other titles such as "Luna" (directly taken from from Latin mythology/astronomy)."'' It's not true that "the Moon doesn't have a name". It is ''the'' Moon (unlike other moons), plus all kinds of other names (historical, other culture and/or other language; such as Chandra/Igaluk/Chang'e). But it is interesting to note that, until we were able to imagine (and/or see) moons orbiting other things up in the sky, there was ''just'' its proper name. Whatever it might be. Only after we anticipated the existence of satellites of other planets (and, perhaps, other satellites of our own planet), having first recognised what other planets actually were (distinct from stars, with those being other suns than ''our'' Sun/Sol/Ra/...) was it meaningful that the name(s) we did use for it might be re-used to describe the class of things that were like it. But they then really needed their own fresh names/catalogue numbers. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.15|172.71.242.15]] 10:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
:Reminds me of that conversation from Dragonheart (paraphrized as I only watched the German dub): "So instead of calling me 'dragon" in your language you call me 'dragon' in another language... I think I like it" [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:16, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

If there was no Moon, would an Earth astronomer that discovered moons around one of the other planets be considered a loony? [[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]]) 02:40, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:If there was no moon, it's quite possible there would be no intelligent life on Earth. Also, when Galileo Galilei found Jupiter's moons, he was totally considered loony by some, while others said it's defect of the telescope. Remember that at that point of history, suggesting that if Earth has moon, other planets might have one too was something you could be burned on stake for. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 03:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

:Definitely not. (I see what you did there.) --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.247.155|172.70.247.155]] 12:55, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I doubt the title text is intended as a reference to that saying. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.51|172.69.247.51]] 04:17, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:Yeah, I don't get how that is related either. The title text references that it is pretty, but the nmoves away from that. Not sure how that is related to a quote that doesn't even use the word "pretty". --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 09:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
::I mean, the word "beautiful" and "pretty" have common meanings, so I thought about that connection, but if no one else made the connection, so be it. [[User:R3TRI8UTI0N|R3TRI8UTI0N]] ([[User talk:R3TRI8UTI0N|talk]]) 05:30, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
:::I think if that connection was meant to be invoked it would just say beautiful, or get more into detail of the way it is pretty/beautiful. However it was just used as a kind of connector to make the other mentioned aspects seem more minor. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Like many things,{{Citation needed}} it has probably seemed usual whilst we only know our own example. Once we started to find other examples out there, we can discover the ways in which it's an outlier. (Martian: "Well of ''course'' there's those two small rock 'stars' visibly zipping around overhead, that's what the sky alsays looks like for me, and I imagine that it's much the same for anyone else..." Earthling/Venusian/Jovian/Tritonian/Plutoid: "...hold my beer!") [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.133|141.101.99.133]] 07:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I've been saying this about the Sun… A great fireball looming in the sky. It remotely powers life. (Even with 90% of that power lost at each trophic level!) It is worshipped as a god. It controls Earthlings' sense of time. When it leaves the sky at a regular interval, a wave of fear follows, and everything seeks shelter and goes dormant until its return. Oh, but it also burns and mutates the flesh of those who stand in its rays, to the point that it's ''dangerous to look at''. Sounds fake, right? And yet, there it is. [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]] 08:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I have a personal theory that the constant gravitational massage is responsible for sustaining the Earth's large magnetic field, thus preventing the solar wind making us like Venus or Mars, and probably keeping the tectonic plates on the move. (Oh and dogs domesticated themselves - just saying p.s. same for cats but only after we had barns). [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 09:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I think we’re well past the point of “plans being made” of humans returning to the Moon. [[User:SilverTheTerribleMathematician|Silver]] ([[User talk:SilverTheTerribleMathematician|talk]]) 19:29, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:You mean that we are currently building rockets and stuff to send people to the moon at this very moment? [[User:R3TRI8UTI0N|R3TRI8UTI0N]] ([[User talk:R3TRI8UTI0N|talk]]) 05:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
::We are. Which I hope you're aware of. But if you weren't... this your [[1053: Ten Thousand|lucky day]]! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.15|172.71.242.15]] 10:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

August 1, 2023 the moon is a "Super Moon" [[User:KingPenguin|KingPenguin]] ([[User talk:KingPenguin|talk]]) 22:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

We need to make a category for these things which would sound outlandish if they didn't exist. [[2115]] is the first one I think of, and I'm sure there's more. I propose we call it Category: Things That Seem Like They Shouldn't Work But Do in honor of [[2540]]. [[User:Take The A Train To Watertown|Take The A Train To Watertown]] ([[User talk:Take The A Train To Watertown|talk]]) 12:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@84596Gamma - yes, really. (But not as much as a spoon.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 15:00, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

2798: Room Temperature

2023-07-05T22:50:33Z

172.71.178.186: link

{{comic
| number = 2798
| date = July 5, 2023
| title = Room Temperature
| image = room_temperature_2x.png
| imagesize = 299x352px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They're also refusing to fund my device that demonstrates uncontrolled hot fusion.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a LUKEWARM FUSION REACTOR - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[wikipedia:Semiconductor|Semiconductors]] are a common electronic component of many modern day devices including computers. [[Cueball]] has “discovered” a semiconductor that works in normal temperatures, which already exists, so this “discovery” is not useful to anyone. It appears Cueball has confused room temperature semi-conductors with with [[wikipedia:room temperature superconductors|room temperature ''superconductors'']], which would be a huge boon to the advancement of quantum computers, as most [[wikipedia:Superconductivity|superconductors]] are predominantly only superconducting at 70 Kelvin or below.

In the title text, he is talking about a device that produces “uncontrollable hot fusion”. This is also known as a [[wikipedia:thermonuclear weapon| thermonuclear weapon]], which is not something Cueball should possess.{{cn}} In reality, “cold fusion” is theoretically a way to produce lots of cheap energy, which many people would be interested in and has received significant research funding as a way to provide environmentally-safe energy for humanity. Again, in proposing something that sounds new he has “invented” something that already exists.

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

:Cueball: My layered silicon crystals can amplify or switch current while sitting right here on the table!
:Ponytail: Uh huh.
:Another Cueball: I see.

:Caption: No one is impressed by my discovery of room-temperature semiconductors.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:2769: Overlapping Circles

2023-04-29T10:59:16Z

172.71.178.186:

Incorrect. I’m sure there are set theorists who get excited about that shape who are not astronomers, and astronomers who get excited about that shape who are not set theorists, and people who get excited about it who are neither. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.35|162.158.91.35]] 23:16, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
:Hmmm, I'm not a set theorist, but I don't think that's what the Venn diagram is trying to say. My understanding is that both set theorists and astronomers get excited about that shape, not that only people who are both astronomers and set theorists would be excited. [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 23:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
::I agree with Alcatraz ii. The original poster has a point that there are people who agree neither set theorists nor astronomers and get excited about this shape, but a Venn diagram does not imply that the people in the overlapping section are both set theorists and astronomers. [[User:Python|Python]] ([[User talk:Python|talk]]) 23:31, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Python
:Actually, it does. That's what overlaps in a Venn diagram mean, it's the set of entities that satisfy both conditions. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 02:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
::You're right. People who get excited about the diagram would be the union of the two sets, not intersection. Unless Randall is saying that only astronomers who are also set theorists are so enamored of the two diagrams that they get excited about it. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 04:52, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
:Hmmmm... I initially understood the comic the way Randall intended - that these two groups like this shape - but you have a point, that's not how Venn diagrams work. The left circle is labelled as the set of "set theorists", the right circle is the set of "astronomers", making the joined section the set of "astronomer set theorists". As a Venn diagram this should be ONE circle, "People who enjoy this shape", with "set theorists" and "astronomers" inside it, and as one circle it WOULDN'T have this shape, LOL! I guess a second circle to make this shape, "People who enjoy space", then put "astronauts" in it, and move "astronomers" to the junction? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:21, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

On title text: I'm pretty sure that if two sets are represented by a single circle rater than two, it's no longer a Venn diagram but merely an Euler diagram. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.3|172.71.94.3]] 00:22, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
:A single circle can be either. Two (or more) intersecting circles/loops-of-whatever-shape can be either, but might disqualify themselves from being strict Venns if they do not exhibit exactly 2ⁿ different sub-regions from ''n'' basic standalone partitioning regions. (This includes the whole surrounding one, not within any single partition, which purists might deem needs an "everything else"-sort of label/manifest, if you're putting things inside other parts, but that maybe can be taken as read.)
:You can't but help having 2 regions (inside and outside) from an ''n''=1 circle. (And one region from being constrained by ''n''=0 partitioning boundaries!)
:It's once you have two or more that you start to get the Euler-not-Ven exceptions, like [[1180: Virus Venn Diagram|entirely unintersecting groups]] (notably misnamed, by this comic) or [[2721: Euler Diagrams|only partially supporting all groups]] (misnamed by Cueball, in-Universe), unless you make effort to have some (singly unique) areas covering [[2122: Size Venn Diagram|all combinations of all options]].
:But an annular eclipse probably doesn't count. In 9ne, you cannot see/infer a point upon the Moon's surface that is not also where the Sun 'is' – albeit obscured – though you do see bits of Sun-surface that have no Moon coincident to your view (during the phase of maximum coverage). One assumes that non-annular eclipses (or hypo-annular ones, where the Sun's bodily 'cross-section' is at a minimum compared to the Moon's) are just onzerved as perfect fits. And this must exclude the upper-atmosphere/corona of the Sun (the Bailey's Beads/Diamond Ring effects being the limiting factors), so that you theoretically have a single circle and announce to yourself that all that you see within that is on a sightline which intersects both Sun and Moon, and all sightlines outwith that circle intersect neither. No room in your defining diagram/worldview/skyview for one XOR the other (like having a region for "red cars", but handling red non-cars and non-red cars (and all things that are neither red nor a car) as possibilities. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.9|141.101.98.9]] 03:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
::The way I’ve heard it (though I can’t remember where), it’s a Venn diagram iff it’s a Euler diagram with two congruent circles that overlap without regard for proportion; ''any'' other type of Euler diagram is not a Venn diagram. Which is to say, there is no such thing as a Venn diagram with an almost complete overlap or no overlap. I’m not sure where to find an authoritative definition though.'''Edit:''' And according to Wolfram MathWorld, I’m completely wrong about the shape. They have Venn examples that use several blobs. But what’s important is that every possible intersection has its own region, and size doesn’t matter. —[[Special:Contributions/172.70.254.216|172.70.254.216]] 06:10, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

The shape formed by the intersection of two circles is called a lens. Lenses are also of interest to astronomers for telescope manufacture. A lens shape causes spherical aberation when used as an optical element, leading to the use of aspheric lenses and mirrors on higher quality telescopes. [[User:Quantum7|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7|talk]]) 05:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Uhhh, the first commenter has a point, that's not how Venn diagrams work. The left circle is labelled as the set of "set theorists", the right circle is the set of "astronomers", making the joined section the set of "astronomer set theorists", i.e. people who belong to both sets. As a Venn diagram this should be ONE circle, the set of "People who get excited by this shape", with "set theorists" and "astronomers" inside it, and as one circle it WOULDN'T have this shape, LOL! I guess a second circle to make this shape, "People who enjoy space" for example, then put "astronauts" in it, and move "astronomers" to the junction? Or these are set names of '''''aspects''''' of these professions, like putting "study the night sky" in Astronomers, and "math experts" in Set Theorists (IDK, LOL!), with the Excited thing being an aspect they have in common... I think the explanation needs to be updated to note that the Venn diagram was made somewhat wrong... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

The Sun and Moon are spheroids and so they do not appear as perfectly circular. rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.202|172.71.242.202]] 08:49, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Others who enjoy this shape, travellers relying on Mastercard.

Talk:2764: Cosmological Nostalgia Content

2023-04-22T09:29:37Z

172.71.178.186:

When I added the transcript it broke the "Created by a BOT" tag on explanation, even though I didn't touch explanation [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.98|172.71.151.98]] 05:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, it was broken before your edit. Someone else changed "BOT" to "Z=90s KID". The equal sign causes problems for mediawiki, but it's been fixed now. --[[User:Orion205|Orion205]] ([[User talk:Orion205|talk]]) 06:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
::For anyone who would benefit from a deeper explanation: 
::In the syntax for templates, equals signs come after parameter names (see [[mw:Help:Templates#Parameters|Help:Templates § Parameters]]). So, <code>Created by a Z</code> was parsed as the name of a nonexistent template parameter, and <code>90s KID - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.</code> was passed in as that parameter's value. 
::That still wouldn't necessarily be a problem. It just also left the first parameter empty. This specific template is programmed to show an error message when that happens. [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]] 06:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Two times the red tint around Megan has been mentioned, in explanation and transcript... I cannot see that, no matter how much I zoon in. Is it actually there (can it be measured on the image file?) or is it just someone who wished it was like that? If it can be measrued it should be explained and if not then the mention should be deleted --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:What I meant was that Megan's line art in this comic appeared more brownish/reddish to me than the line art of the other characters. Specifically, the colour hex #472425 using an online colour hex checker. --[[User:Multiuniverse|Multiuniverse]] ([[User talk:Multiuniverse|talk]]) 07:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

:It's definitely there, but I didn't notice it until I saw it mentioned. It's subtle enough that I imagine certain displays or differences in individual color perception could make it harder to see, but trust me, it's certainly there. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.5|162.158.222.5]] 07:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

::Why is everyone so unsure? it's definitely there. [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

:::Not all monitors have the same quality, I can imagine that on some cheapish laptop screens it can be a lot harder to see -- [[Special:Contributions/172.71.131.134|172.71.131.134]] 12:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:::: On this laptop (Dell Latitude 600 - good for its time, a rather archaic thing now) it shows ''just''. Took the explanation mentioning it for me to notice. (And, yes, I'm using pretty archaic kit, at this moment. Though not my oldest, because I tend not to throw away 'perfectly working' things. That said, when it comes to remembering how the universe is, I'm not ''quite'' in the "I remember when all this was fields" category...) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.203|172.71.242.203]] 19:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

:::For me: {{w|Congenital_red–green_color_blindness|red green color blindness}} [[User:Josot|Josot]] ([[User talk:Josot|talk]]) 12:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

For anybody wondering: the current (accurately measured) {{w|Redshift#Highest_redshifts|Highest redshifts}} is z = 11.1 [[User:Josot|Josot]] ([[User talk:Josot|talk]]) 12:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Isn't it a bit ironic that Randall now clearly identifies "Want to feel old" content as clickbait, while I remember that he himself did a number of comics around that topic some years ago? I imagine that he changed his opinion BECAUSE that became such a popular clickbait topic. Could you link to some of these older comics?
("Want to feel old? Randall Munroe did "want to feel old" comics closer to the inception of xkcd than to today.")--[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.38|172.71.160.38]] 07:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
: 😄 --[[User:Catherine|Catherine]] ([[User talk:Catherine|talk]]) 22:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Light's velocity is limited only by the speed of causality. As such, I'd recommend modifying the language about light having a "finite" velocity. Technically speaking, the speed of a photon, from the photon's perspective, is non-existent, and what the photon sees, traveling at the speed of causality, is everything happening all at once across it's path. In other words, from the perspective of the photon, there is no passage of time. However, simultaneity varies based on the perspective of the observer.

;InB4
Before anyone embarrasses themself by asking, "multimanteau" is obviously a portmanteau of "multiple" and "portmanteau". Sheesh, get with the neurolinguistic program. "Phrasemanteau" would also be an acceptable neologism. - [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 11:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:I'm not fond of a explanation needing an explanation :/
The first relevant use of "multimanteau" found by Google is this page
[[User:Victor|Victor]] ([[User talk:Victor|talk]]) 09:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
::Presumably that makes everything else a unimanteau?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.67|172.70.85.67]] 14:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
:::That word and the first sentence needs to be deleted from the explanation! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

;Inconstant "Constant"
I find it weird that so much professional study still refers to an assumed "cosmological constant", when it is observably ''not'' constant. Feels like we should be calling it "the cosmological value", since expansion has not been occurring uniformly & considerable localized variation in "vacuum energy" seems relatively certain. Parts of the observable universe are considerably older than the "big bang" that so much theory is hung upon; what part of "these laws are localized effects, not unchanging constants" has ''not'' been obvious, for >30 years?
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:This may be related to the fact that there are so many actual problems around the cosmological "constant" that noone wants to bother renaming it before getting better idea what it actually is. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:: I'm in agreement with you,[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]], with a slight change. In most of the sciences we call something that's not constant a "variable". Thus we'd have the "cosmologicial variable". Which admittedly does not roll off the tongue as easily. Maybe "cosmic variable" instead? Which seems too alike a "Cepheid variable" star now. Hmm. Maybe I agree with [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] afterall. 😂 [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 13:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

;Missing comic
It's mid-morning (ET) on Thursday and there's still no new Wednesday comic. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
:Very late (definitely Thursday, I think in all time-zones if it isn't even Friday already), but now exists. The interactivity of it might have had to absorb more time to set up in a working manner... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 17:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
::Wednesday's very late (i.e. Thursday) is followed by also very late Friday (''not yet'' seen on Saturday, UTC or almost all(?) US timezones). Maybe shortly, but if this continues to be A Thing with a Monday->Tuesday delay then... Certainly check whether defacto publication dates/days need to be revised from the traditional expectation (or even the official publication one). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.157|141.101.99.157]] 09:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC) (ps. or, meant to say, ''late and/or meta'' April Fool..?)

Talk:2762: Diffraction Spikes

2023-04-13T14:13:04Z

172.71.178.186: Mention the JWST

I tried to make an initial explanation, but then someone beat me to it and I made a fool of myself on the page trying to add a comment where it didn't go. I fixed it, but I am ashamed ;~; [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.15|172.69.34.15]] 23:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
:It's all good. As long as you learn from it, and we learn what useful things you want to say, nothing at all to worry about... All power to your typing fingers! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.66|172.70.85.66]] 00:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Exoplanets nevertheless exist because, alongside the visible diffraction spikes that chop them up, there are invisible defraction [sic] spikes that reassemble them. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.136|162.158.158.136]] 00:32, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Why does the spike slice the planet instead of the planet breaking the tip off the spike? Are the spikes like enormous light sabers? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 00:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
:The spikes are stellar artifacts of distant observers, with all the mass of the star behind them. The Sun hardly moves much if you dunk the Earth into it, why should the exoplanet move the spike? At best you'd get a similar effect to karate chopping a stream of water from a hose. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.175|172.71.150.175]] 04:49, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Is it inspired by some movie that features this "spike pointing on some person" effect? I remember seeing one, but I don't seem to remember its name. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 02:07, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

:This comic also reminded me of fractal images. [[User:Memo Spike Connector|2503: Memo Spike Connector]] ([[User talk:Memo Spike Connector|talk]]) 09:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

:Is there also some joke here about double vision (if you cross your eyes you will see two planets), you use lens occlusion to see expolanets? ([[garbled]])) 10:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC+1)

From an edit comment "(Refractor telescopes (using only lenses) don't give refraction spikes, reflector telescopes (using mirrors) do.)". Yeahbut, nobuf... It's just the struts, also mentioned, that are the key. You can build pure-refractor telescopes that still have struts (probably not optimal, but a design option) and therefore spikes. And you can make one with mirrors and ''no'' struts (more complicated and less of a practical shape for most mounting/launching purposes) which would therefore be spikeless. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.160|172.70.162.160]] 12:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

:Some telescopes get diffraction spikes from the shape of the mirror. The JWST is a notable example of this. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 14:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

2757: Towed Message

2023-04-04T00:39:10Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2757
| date = March 31, 2023
| title = Towed Message
| image = towed_message_2x.png
| imagesize = 613x236px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = "Hi, what you do is fly over a designated zone and detach the--" "WE'RE SORRY, THE MOBILE CUSTOMER YOU ARE TRYING TO REACH IS OUT OF SERVICE"
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an UNLANDABLE PLANE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, an {{w|Aerial_advertising#Banner_towing|aircraft is towing a banner}}. Notably, these aircraft do not take off or land with the banner in tow, but instead have a hook and release mechanism to [https://www.wgbh.org/news/local-news/2022/09/02/the-surprising-way-those-beach-plane-banners-get-airborne add and drop the banner in flight]. The banner ''could'' be interpreted as a recruitment ad by an aerial advertising company looking for additional pilots. But the humorous interpretation is that the banner is a distress signal – the pilot of the aircraft doesn't know how to land, and is hoping that someone will see the banner and give assistance. This makes the banner self-referential, because the presence of the banner (which makes landing difficult) is the very reason for displaying the banner. It is paradoxical, because printing and deploying the banner requires planning,{{Citation needed}} and if the pilot had anticipated that they would need assistance to land with a banner, they could have simply chosen not to deploy a banner in the first place.

The title text features a caller who dials the phone number from the banner and starts to explain the correct method for landing (detach the banner over a designated empty location then land the plane regularly), but the call is disconnected halfway through. Presumably the number is that of the pilot's cellphone. The call could have disconnected because the aircraft moved out of range of the {{w|cell site}} the phone was connected to and the phone failed to automatically connect to an adjacent cell; or possibly the cell network detected the call on {{w|Cellular_network#Frequency_reuse|multiple sites}} due to the phone's {{w|Mobile_phones_on_aircraft#Technical_discussion|altitude}} and disconnected it from the network; or the plane crashed and the phone was destroyed on impact.

Or possibly because {{w|555 (telephone number)|555 numbers}} are normally {{w|fictitious telephone numbers}}. The 555 exchange in all area codes is reserved for phone company services, and the only one ever in wide use was 555-1212 for information. 555 numbers are often used in movies, TV shows, cartoons, etc. to avoid inadvertently publishing someone's real phone number, which might get such an owner bombarded with unwanted calls.

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

:[An airplane tows a banner. In the background, there are four small clouds and five birds]

:[Text on the banner:] Do '''''you''''' know how to land a plane that's towing a banner? Call '''555-0127''' now!

==Trivia==
* In a similar joke, a pilot used {{w|skywriting}} to write [https://laughingsquid.com/comedian-hires-pilot-to-skywrite-a-joke-over-los-angeles/ "How do I land?"] as a prank in 2013.
* A similar concept was shown in [[1897: Self Driving]].
* Banner towing is generally safe for an experienced pilot, [https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/november/pilot/imperiled-pickup though not entirely without risk].
* The comic may have been inspired by a recent article in the Washington Post [https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2023/03/22/how-hard-is-it-land-plane/] on how a person who is not a pilot is unlikely to be able to land a plane.
* The aircraft in the illustration is similar to a {{w|Piper J-3 Cub}}, which is popular for towing banners due to its low operating cost and good performance at low {{w|airspeed}}.
* Aircraft communication is usually done using {{w|radio}}. The {{w|aircraft emergency frequency}} at 121.5 MHz is reserved for aircraft emergencies including pilots in distress and needing assistance.
* Phone numbers beginning with "{{w|555 (telephone number)|555}}" are commonly used for fictional phone numbers in movies, TV shows, and other related media.
* The emphasis on the word "you" in the banner is reminiscent of ads such as the well-known {{w|Uncle_Sam|US Army recruitment poster}}.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Airplane banner]]
[[Category:Aviation]]

2754: Relative Terms

2023-04-03T11:47:06Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2754
| date = March 24, 2023
| title = Relative Terms
| image = relative_terms_2x.png
| imagesize = 425x442px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Small sewing machines are sewing machines that are smaller than a sewing machine. A sewing machine is larger than a small sewing machine, but quieter than a loud sewing machine.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT THAT IS LARGER THAN A BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The terms "small" and "big" are used to refer to size; the terms "loud" and "quiet" are used to refer to (audial) volume. While these terms are relative, they are often used even when there is nothing obvious being compared against (e.g. "A windmill is a big thing" or "An ant is a small thing").

This comic humorously suggests that the item defined to be in the middle of all four terms ("neither small nor big; neither quiet nor loud") is a sewing machine, as a sewing machine seems (at least in comparison to the other items on the graph) to be neither particularly big nor particularly small; neither particularly quiet nor particularly loud. A standard sewing machine is roughly 60dB in volume and approximately 42” X 21”, although this is for industrial machines, and those in the home would be both smaller and quieter.

As the reference point, the sewing machine is placed in the center of the chart, while a selection of other example objects are located in the four quadrants around it, based on whether they are considered to be small or big, and loud or quiet. Many of the items appear to have been placed in the wrong quadrant for their actual attributes; locations seem to reflect more how people generally think of these things, as opposed to their real-life relationship to a sewing machine.

An alternative argument may be that the in the center would be the average adult human (as this is the perspective from which most people use language), though this observation would lose some of the comic's comedic value.

The title text is humorously tautological because it compares the standard against those things that are themselves defined against the standard.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Small and quiet (upper left)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Ant || Randall has used ants as a small comparator in [[2733:_Size_Comparisons|a previous comic]] on the topic of comparisons.
|-
| Balloon || A party balloon is quite loud when it pops, or if someone 'squeaks' it by rubbing; a hot-air balloon is big enough to carry a few humans, and the burner can be surprisingly loud.
|-
| Book || Books are typically sized to be handheld, and thus smaller than a sewing machine, though some very large books do exist.[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/longest-book-in-the-world-impossible-to-read-180980814/#:~:text=At%2021%2C450%20Pages%2C%20the%20Longest,World%20Is%20Impossible%20to%20Read&text=Artist%20Ilan%20Manouach%20bound%20together,the%20commodification%20of%20comic%20books.] Similarly, books are associated with quiet activity, making no more sound than a quiet turning of a page in typical use, but could make a very loud bang if slammed shut on thrown forcefully on to a hard surface.
|-
| Bun (rabbit or pastry) || "Bun" is an informal term for a rabbit and a loaf of bread; a comparison between the two was made in [[1871: Bun Alert]]. While {{w|Flemish_Giant_rabbit|some rabbits}} may reach the size of a small dog or a child, and specially baked items for promotional activity or record attempts may exceed the size of a sewing machine, both would typically be smaller. However, while bread, even when being eaten, is usually very quiet, rabbits can make a large amount of noise that is at odds with their common image.
|-
| Butterfly || Butterflies are used as an exemplar of something small, unnoticeable and seemingly insignificant in the metaphor of the Butterfly Effect.
|-
| Hat ||
|-
| Mouse || A mouse is a very small, quiet animal. This might also be a reference to the expression "quiet as a mouse", meaning very quietly.
|-
| Newt ||
|-
| Pin drop || The expression "hear a pin drop" is used to indicate that an area is exceptionally quiet; the idea is that the space is so silent that even something as insubstantial and tiny as a pin can be heard hitting the ground.
|-
| Snow globe || A {{w|snow globe}} is much smaller than a sewing machine. Some snow globes have a small music box that can be wound up to play a melody. Snow globes without a music box are silent.
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Small and loud (upper right)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Baby || Babies are usually considered small, and can be quite loud when they cry.
|-
| Blender || Blenders make a lot of noise when in use. Most household blenders are smaller than a sewing machine.
|-
| Cricket || Given that it is in the small/loud quadrant, this would refer to the insect, which is pretty small and can be quite loud; the sport of cricket or a cricket game would be much larger (though potentially much louder).
|-
| Fire alarm || The primary purpose of a fire alarm is to notify people of fire, so fire alarms are usually very loud, but ideally take up little space.
|-
| Firecracker || A {{w|Firecracker}} is a small explosive firework that makes a very loud bang when lit.
|-
| Flute || An example of a small musical instrument that can nevertheless be audibly quite dominant.
|-
| Harmonica || See Flute.
|-
| Popcorn || A snack that is known for being annoyingly loud in a cinema setting. However, this is largely due to the otherwise low volume environment, and arguably a sewing machine might be equally or more annoying. Also, some helpings of popcorn in some cinemas may actually be larger than a sewing machine.
|-
| Songbird ||
|-
| Whistle || This is of course a device known as a whistle, as these are small. The human act of whistling, or a whistle produced by, for example, a kettle, has no size (other than that of the whistler or whistling object). A whistle is used as an alert or signal, or could be another musical instrument (see Flute). The loudest human whistle ever recorded was 8372 Hz and roughly 110 DB, which is a C9 in the standard musical scale and is roughly as loud as a jackhammer[https://www.vnews.com/West-Lebanon-man-sets-a-world-record-for-whistling-24480844#:~:text=Guinness'%20website%20says%20Stanford%20reached,in%20the%20standard%20musical%20notation.]. Since a whistle should be able to beat this it must be seen as loud.
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Big and quiet (lower left)
|-
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Anaconda ||
|-
| Giraffe || Giraffes can be quite loud, but they usually vocalise using frequencies well below the range of human hearing. So, to a human, giraffes are quiet.
|-
| Northern lights || "In 2016, a Finnish study confirmed that the Aurora Borealis does produce a sound that can be heard" [https://www.techexplorist.com/listen-sound-aurora-borealis/47421/]
|-
| Shark || When people think of sharks, they typically envisage something large and dangerous, yet eerily silent as they swim (up until entering a feeding frenzy), like a {{w|Great_white_shark|great white}}. However, sharks come in a large variety of sizes, often {{w|Dwarf_lanternshark|considerably smaller}} than a sewing machine.
|-
| Statue || A stereotypical statue is a large piece of public art, which would be larger than a sewing machine; however, there is no universally agreed lower size limit for a statue, and many smaller examples of figurative art could be considered statues. Most statues are silent, but some have fountains or other devices that make sound.
|-
| The Moon || The Moon is very, very big{{fact}}, but it is also completely silent{{fact}} from the perspective of most humans, since sound cannot travel through the vacuum of space.
|-
| Tree ||
|-
| Windmill || Windmills need to have significant height in order to catch enough air movement to drive them. They are thought of as quiet, relative to other forms of power generation; in reality, though, the passage of the blades through the air can cause considerable noise, as can [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzwqBgWKalI the machinery that they drive].
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Big and loud (lower right)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Airplane ||
|-
| Cannon ||
|-
| Riding mower ||
|-
| [[wikipedia:Calliope_(music)|Steam calliope]] || A large musical device which functions by sending steam (or more recently compressed air) through attached whistles.
|-
| Train ||
|-
| Tuba ||
|-
| Volcano || Lower right corner. Volcanic eruptions can be extremely loud. The {{w|1883 eruption of Krakatoa}} made a pressure wave of 180 dB, the loudest sound ever recorded.
|-
| Waterfall ||
|-
| Whale ||
|}

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

:[A chart, with "Quiet" to "Loud" on the X-axis, and "Small" to "Big" on the Y-axis. It is split into four quarters, with "Sewing machine" in the center.]

:[Upper left quadrant (Small & Quiet items):] Butterfly, Pin drop, Mouse, Ant, Bun (rabbit or pastry), Snow globe, Newt, Balloon, Book, Hat

:[Upper right quadrant (Small & Loud items):] Popcorn, Cricket, Songbird, Whistle, Baby, Harmonica, Flute, Fire alarm, Blender, Firecracker

:[Lower left quadrant (Big & Quiet items):] Shark, Tree, Anaconda, Giraffe, Statue, Windmill, Northern lights, The Moon

:[Lower right quadrant (Big & Loud items):] Tuba, Riding mower, Cannon, Airplane, Train, Waterfall, Steam calliope, Whale, Volcano

:[Caption below the panel:]
:''Big'', ''Small'', ''Loud'', and ''Quiet'' are relative terms. The thing they're relative to is a sewing machine.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Buns]]
[[Category:Sharks]]
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Volcanoes]]
[[Category:Food]]

Talk:2751: March Madness

2023-03-18T12:23:48Z

172.71.178.186:

== Difficult ==

An hour, and still no explanation. Is this harder to get than usual, or is it just me?

Left top two are march [word], next two are [word] of march, bottom left section all reference Seventy-Six Trombones, which is apparently a common song for marching bands. Top right section is March of the [word], and bottom right is [word] March. [[User:NyanSequitur|NyanSequitur]] ([[User talk:NyanSequitur|talk]]) 19:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Well I was going to say something, but now I find myself doubting my ability to find patterns and understand references. This man is on another level. [[User:Toriski3037|Toriski3037]] ([[User talk:Toriski3037|talk]]) 19:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Not confident enough to edit the actual article directly, but I can get the gist of these references:

:- March Madness (NCAA Basketball Tournament)
:- March Hare ("Mad as a march hare" being a common idiom in English, and the March Hare being a 'mad' character in Alice in Wonderland)
:- Middlemarch (novel by George Eliot)
:- Ides of March (March 15th, aka Julius Caesar Assassination Day)
:- aforementioned "Seventy-Six Trombones" references - the first three lines, followed by an impressive option later in the lyrics
::- "Seventy-six trombones led the big parade"
::- "with a hundred and ten cornets right behind"
::- "there were more than a thousand reeds springing up like weeds"
::- "there were fifty mounted cannon in the battery/ thundering, thundering, louder than before"
::- (possibly worth noting: the first version of the song ends with "the kids began to march/ and they're marching still, right today!" - it was a pain to confirm this, since the reprise of the song is much easier to find)
::- (also worth noting for the title text: the song is introduced with the character claiming that the 76 trombone parade was from the day when several historical notables, culminating in "John Philip Sousa", "all came to town on the very same historic day")
:- March of the Dimes (charity)
:- March of the Toy Soldiers (musical piece from Tchaikovsky's The Nutcracker)
:- March of the Ents (from Lord of the Rings)
:- March of the Penguins (documentary about emperor penguins, narrated by Morgan Freeman, also relevant to title text)
:- Wedding March (musical piece - per Wikipedia, the "here comes the bride" piece which I thought of is actually the "Bridal Chorus" from Wagner's Lohengrin; the most famous Wedding March is from Felix Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream, used more commonly at the end of weddings)
:- Funeral March (musical piece - most famous version is Chopin's)
:- Imperial March (musical piece by John Williams for Star Wars)
:- Nissan March (model of car; Nissan is also the official sponsor of March Madness)

Hopefully this will help someone look up properly cited references! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.144|172.70.134.144]] 19:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I hope the previous contributor doesn't mind that I tidied up their layout. I hope the ExplainXKCD Police don't object to the way I did that. :) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.5|172.68.210.5]] 00:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

March is not another word for parade. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.84|172.70.130.84]] 01:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
:It can be. I wouldn't call a Mardi Gras parade a march, but I would do an Orange Order one, for example. And the defining characteristic of a "band parade", above even a mishmash of men just shuffling along the road in a group, is (generally!) walking in lockstep (keeping the music in lockstep), so that (frivolity and syncopation aside) it is as much a march as anything. I mean, I'm not the OA of that phrase linking the sense, but there's clear overlap that cannot be denied as intended. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.12|172.71.242.12]] 09:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

For the second bracket in the top left quadrant, "Ides" refers to "Ides of March", which implies the structure used here is "___ of March", which means that the reference would rather be "Middle of March" (rather than Middlemarch), which is used in crossword puzzle as a clue for the word "arc". [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 12:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

1500: Upside-Down Map

2023-03-10T02:33:22Z

172.71.178.186: Undoing a known article spoiler and accomplice IP with a biased political viewpoint.

{{comic
| number = 1500
| date = March 18, 2015
| title = Upside-Down Map
| image = upside_down_map.png
| titletext = Due to their proximity across the channel, there's long been tension between North Korea and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Southern Ireland.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic plays on the idea that maps with the {{w|South-up map orientation|south pole at the top}} will "change your perspective of the world". Most world maps orient north in the upward direction, placing the north pole as the top. Such an orientation is purely a matter of convention, as 'up' and 'down' don't apply in a planetary context. The north = up tradition probably emerged because most historical cartographers hailed from the northern hemisphere, and placed their own nations at the top. Some people and groups object that this convention subtly, but perniciously, advances the assumption that countries in the northern hemisphere are inherently more important than those in the southern hemisphere. This is especially sensitive because most of the wealthier and more powerful countries in the world are in the northern hemisphere, while relatively fewer southern hemisphere countries have as much wealth or global influence. Early maps had eastern Asia oriented at the top of the map, beyond Israel and the Holy Land in the middle, and western Europe at the bottom.

To remedy this, some advocate the use of maps with the south pole oriented at the top. Some want such maps in common use, while others simply use them to encourage people to rethink their assumptions about how the world should be seen. Such a map can easily be achieved by simply rotating a normal map 180 degrees, though the text labels would also be upside-down and harder to read. A [https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&q=upside-down%2Bmap%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bworld Google Images] search reveals many examples of upside-down maps with the text-oriented correctly for reading.

This map is a comedic play on such maps, where each landmass is in the same position it would be in a traditional north-top map but rotated 180 degrees (presumably around some central point of the landmass) to the orientation it would have in a south-top map. Such a map is, of course, almost completely useless in real life, because it completely distorts the relative positioning of the landmasses. Moreover, it keeps the northern countries at the top of the map, which means one of the chief complaints about traditional maps is unaddressed.

Note that individual islands are rotated about their own centers, rather than following the rotation of the neighboring continent; however, some are displaced as necessary to keep them from being overlapped by the rotated continents. For instance, {{w|Madagascar}} would be overlapped by the {{w|Sahara}} if it remained in position, but is instead displaced eastward to keep it in the Indian Ocean. On the other hand, all the islands of the {{w|Mediterranean Sea}} have disappeared under {{w|Asia}}.

Asia is so broad that almost the entire {{w|Indochinese Peninsula}} (with for instance {{w|Vietnam}} and {{w|Thailand}}) has been rotated out of the top of the map. Similarly, the map omits {{w|Antarctica}} in the south.

To keep their familiar shapes on a rectangular map, the continents would also have to be heavily distorted compared to their actual shapes, becoming much narrower (along the lines of latitude) near the poles and wider towards the equator. See also [[977: Map Projections]].

The basic climates for several areas would be distinctly different. For example, the former Central America area would be in the arctic zone, while Siberia would be subtropical.

This arrangement of the world's landmasses would have great advantages for trade because there are (presumably navigable) straits between the {{w|Americas}} and between Africa and Asia, removing the need for the {{w|Panama Canal}} and the {{w|Suez Canal}}.

The title text references the fact that, in this new map, the {{w|United Kingdom|UK}} is now next to Asia – specifically the {{w|Korean Peninsula}}. {{w|North Korea}} is mentioned in the text as having a history of hostile relations with nearby countries. However, on this map North Korea would be the part of {{w|Korea}} we today know as {{w|South Korea}}. Furthermore, {{w|Northern Ireland}} is now at the south of the {{w|island of Ireland}}, so the UK's full name would need to change to The United Kingdom of Great Britain and '''Southern''' Ireland. There have been several wars concerning the {{w|English Channel}}, mainly, but not only, between {{w|England}} and {{w|France}}. Likewise, there has been a history of animosity between Korea and {{w|Japan}}, separated by a similar body of water. Since, on this world map, a channel now exists between the UK and North Korea (the real world's South Korea) there could obviously have been many wars for the dominance over the said channel.

Along the same line of thinking, interesting speculations could be made about the following "new" facts:
*{{w|Cuba}} is now off the east coast (formerly west coast) of {{w|Canada}} (and the {{w|USA}}).
*{{w|Japan}} is next to the coast of {{w|Portugal}} and {{w|Spain}}.
*Madagascar lies next to {{w|Morocco}} and {{w|Mauritania}} on the east coast (formerly west coast) of the Sahara.
*{{w|Taiwan}} (officially called the Republic of China) is now next to {{w|France}}. This might be a game-changer for the {{w|Cross-Strait relations}}, an ongoing rivalry with {{w|China|China}} (officially called the People's Republic of China).
*{{w|Greenland}} lies next to {{w|Mexico}}.
*{{w|Sri Lanka}} is located next to the {{w|Yamalsky District}} of {{w|Russia}}.
*{{w|Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego|Tierra del Fuego}}, an island just south of the southern tip of South America, which is divided between {{w|Argentina}} and {{w|Chile}}, is now located in a similar manner next to {{w|Colombia}} and {{w|Venezuela}}, so it would probably have been divided between these two countries.
*The {{w|Falkland Islands}} (not named in the map – they are probably represented by the single island above the T in Tierra) where Argentina and the UK have an ongoing {{w|Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute|sovereignty dispute}}, could now be claimed by {{w|Ecuador}} or {{w|Peru}}.
*The Mediterranean islands seem to have vanished entirely, as they are now in approximately the same place as {{w|Mongolia}}.
*{{w|India}} is nowhere near the {{w|Indian Ocean}}.
*{{w|Norway}} almost touches the {{w|Philippines}}.

==Transcript==
:[Map of the world with all the landmasses rotated upside-down.]
:[Four oceans and all the visible continents have been named in large letters in a bold font. The Pacific has been named both to the left and right. Several islands (large and small) have been designated with name but in grey and in a much smaller normal font. For all continents the names are written on them. For the island the name is written in the ocean except for Greenland.]

:[Below the names on the map are given in the order they appear reading from left to right, first for the northern and then the southern hemisphere:]

:[Northern hemisphere:]
:'''North America'''
:Cuba
:Greenland
:'''Atlantic Ocean
:Iceland
:UK
:'''Asia'''
:Sri Lanka
:'''Europe'''
:'''Arctic Ocean'''
:Taiwan
:Japan
:'''Pacific Ocean'''

:[Southern hemisphere:]
:'''Pacific Ocean'''
:'''South America'''
:Tierra del Fuego
:'''Africa'''
:'''Indian Ocean'''
:Madagascar
:Indonesia
:'''Australia'''
:New Zealand

:[Below the main frame:]
:'''This upside-down map will change your perspective on the world!'''

==Trivia==
Map projections are also the subject of [[977: Map Projections]]. In fact, if this comic was released later, it would certainly have "Bad Map Projection #''n''" on the top, and would be part of [[:Category:Bad Map Projections|the category]].

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Geography]]
[[Category:Maps]]

2742: Island Storage

2023-02-25T13:30:10Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */ Added distortion explanation, Title Text information and the fact of the (typically Randallesque?) typo therein. With more snslysis to do later.

{{comic
| number = 2742
| date = February 24, 2023
| title = Island Storage
| image = island_storage_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x435px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I always hate dragging around the larger archipelagos, but I appreciate how the Scandanavian peninsula flexes outward to create a snug pocket for the British Isles.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A BAD MAP PROJECTOR FIRED - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This is another world map vandalized{{Citation Needed}} by Randall, similarly to the [[:Category:Bad Map Projections|bad map projection series]]. This time, every major island, that is not considered a continent in its own right, is relocated into similarly-sized swathes of sea partly enclosed by the outlines of adjacent continents. The caption implies it's Earth's intended "storage mode", where everything 'loose' is neatly packed away. A similar comic is found at [[1784: Bad Map Projection: Liquid Resize]].

New locations of various islands:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Island(s)
! Original Location
! New Location
|-
| Vancouver Island
| West of mainland Canada
| {{w|Salish Sea}}
|-
| Northern Canadian Islands
| North of mainland Canada
| {{w|Hudson Bay}}
|-
| {{w|Newfoundland (Island)}}, {{w|Prince Edward Island}}, and {{w|Anticosti Island}}
| {{w|Labrador Sea|Off the eastern coast of Canada}}
| {{w|Gulf of St Lawrence}}
|-
| {{w|Greenland}}
| {{w|Greenland Sea|Northeast of Canada}}
| {{w|Gulf of Mexico}}
|-
| {{w|Hispaniola}} and {{w|Cuba}}
| {{w|Caribbean Sea}}
| Gulf of Mexico
|-
| Other Caribbean Islands
| Caribbean Sea
| {{w|Gulf of Venezuela}}
|-
| {{w|Iceland}}
| {{w|Sargasso Sea|Northern Atlantic Ocean}}
| {{w|Gulf of Lion|Coast of southern France}}
|-
| {{w|Great Britain}} and {{w|Ireland}}, ??
| Northwest Europe
| {{w|Baltic Sea}}
|-
| {{w|Sardinia}} and {{w|Sicily}}
| {{w|Tyrrhenian Sea|Off western coast of Italy}}
| Coast of Italy
|-
| {{w|Aegean Islands}}
| {{w|Aegean Sea}}
| Coast of Greece
|-
| {{w|New Guinea}}, {{w|Sumatra}}, {{w|Java}}, {{w|Sulawesi}}
| {{w|Solomon Sea}}, {{w|Natuna Sea}}, {{w|Java Sea}}, {{w|Sulawesi Sea}}
| {{w|Mediterranean Sea}}
|-
| {{w|Philippines}}
| {{w|Philippine Sea}}
| Black Sea
|-
| {{w|Novaya Zemlya}}
| {{w|Pechora Sea}}
| {{w|White Sea}}
|-
| {{w|Japan}}, {{w|Sakhalin}}
| {{w|Sea of Japan}}, {{w|Sea of Okhotsk}}
| Sea of Okhotsk
|-
| {{w|Taiwan}}, {{w|Hainan}}
| {{w|South China Sea}}
| {{w|Yellow Sea}}
|-
| {{w|Madagascar}}
| {{w|Mozambique Channel}}
| {{w|Red Sea}}
|-
| {{w|Sri Lanka}}
| {{w|Laccadive Sea}}
| {{w|Persian Gulf}}
|-
| {{w|Borneo}}
| South China Sea
| {{w|Gulf of Thailand}}
|-
| {{w|New Zealand}}, {{w|Tasmania}}
| {{w|Tasman Sea|Off the coast of Australia}}
| {{w|Gulf of Carpentaria}}
|-
|}

Though much of the apparent strange distortions of relocated islands are probably due to the relative changes in length/area/angle across differing parts of the planar-stretched map of the globe (depending upon the {{w|map projection}} being used), Randall is clearly also not averse to distorting the landmasses slightly, to fit, even the the 'immobile' continental masses. He mentions in the Title Text that he likes to make use of the jutting outcrop of {{w|Scandinavia}} (though mis-spelled, as it was in [[850: World According to Americans]]) by flexing it somewhat like one might do with a spring-clip, thus gripping tightly whatever islands he forces within the gap (in this instance, the British Isles and another currently unconfirmed island).

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A map of Earth with the largest continents (except Antarctica) in their usual locations, but all of the major islands have been moved into various bays and seas.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Reminder: If you're the last one using the Earth, please put the islands away when you're done.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Maps]]

2738: Omniknot

2023-02-16T16:46:53Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2738
| date = February 15, 2023
| title = Omniknot
| image = omniknot_2x.png
| imagesize = 358x288px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The Gordian knot is an omniknot tied using every bend in the Ashley Book of Knots, and then for extra security the upper rope at every crossing is connected to the lower with a randomly-chosen hitch.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by THE KNOTTED OMNIBOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do KNOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The comic jokes that if you have several potential {{w|knot}}s which could be tied in a given situation, rather than being forced to choose one, you can simply use all of them and create the comic's "Omniknot." The prefix omni- means "all", and so the "all-knot" is the knot containing all the other knots (...that one knows).

Knots in the middle, from top to bottom:
* {{w|Granny knot}}: A knot that easily comes undone, usually the result of an improperly tied reef knot.
* {{w|Reef knot}}: Also known as the square knot, one of the most commonly tied by competent amateurs. But a poor and possibly dangerous choice as a load-bearing bend, as it has a tendency to {{w|Knot#Capsizing|'capsize'}} and untie itself.
* {{w|Sheet bend}}: Similar to the bowline, a popular, all-round good choice, especially if one rope is thinner than the other (the loop should be on the thinner rope).
* {{w|Double sheet bend}}: A more secure version of the previous knot, especially if one rope is much thinner than the other.
* {{w|Carrick bend}}: A very good bend, especially if both ropes are similar in kind and thickness. This version, however, with the ends emerging from the same side, is weaker than if the ends were diagonal from each other.

On the sides are {{w|bowline}}s and each rope is terminated by a {{w|figure-eight knot}}.

The {{w|Gordian Knot}} mentioned in the title text is a knot which purportedly was extraordinarily complex and nearly impossible to untie. According to legend, when Alexander the Great was faced with the knot, he simply drew his sword and cut it in half, thereby "untying" it and solving the unsolvable. The Gordian Knot is now used as a linguistic metaphor to describe a problem whose solution, rather than being to directly solve it head-on, involves working around or otherwise bypassing its apparent constraints, or simply one that is so complex as to be practically intractable.

{{w|The Ashley Book of Knots}} is an encyclopedia describing thousands of different knots. Though it is now dated, because it was written before the widespread adoption of synthetic fiber rope, it is still considered the reference in knot tying. Using all bends from the book and as many hitches would make the final result very complex indeed (a "bend" is a knot that connects two ropes or lines; a "hitch" is a knot that connects a rope (a.k.a. line) to something like a post, loop, or shackle). Randall proposes here that this was the true origin of the mythical Gordian Knot.

In practice, it is knot recommended to use overly complex knots, as they provide little in terms of additional security compared to a simpler, well-chosen knot. The ease of tying and untying, especially in less than ideal conditions, is also an important factor to consider. If strength is more important than the ease of tying and untying, {{w|Rope splicing|splices}} should be considered instead of knots, as they don't weaken the rope as much.

==Transcript==
:[Two ropes tied together with several different kinds of knots. The ropes enter from left and right. The left rope proceeds to go up where the right rope goes down. But then they interact to form five nots in the middle of the drawing. Following each rope will show the left to interweave the right rope from top to bottom, and via versa. At the bottom the left rope swings back to where it began going op, ties a knot with it self at the start and the end of the left rope then goes to the right of this knot and ends in another small knot. Similar the right rope goes back to the right at the top and forms a similar know with it self, before the end of the rope goes left an end in the same type of small knot and the left rope. There are thus 5 knots using both ropes, and two knots on each rope with it self, and the entire thing is yet another combined Omniknot, for ten knots in total. There is a caption below the panel:]
:If you know several knots and can't figure out which one to use, just tie one of each.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Fiction]]

Talk:2727: Runtime

2023-02-08T17:31:04Z

172.71.178.186:

It has to be said that a first season of a series generally will be written ''as'' a whole season (give or take any pilot/feature-length-special that may be the heralding first episode). Whereas film sequences don't tend to be purposefully made/anticipated together (notable exceptions: Back To The Futures 2 & 3, the LOTR and (later) Hobbit trilogies, various sub-sets of Star Wars (the prequel and sequel trilogies, certainly, the OT's second and third conclusions to the story started with Ep4)). Sometimes it runs well enough to get up into high numbers of at least sufficiently similar-yet-innovating releases that satisfy the theme (the Fast And Furiouses... the whole Bond œuvre..?), though sometimes it might stutter (Highlander 2!) and may or may not actually recover. Either way, it risks becoming a made-for-TV-movie sinkhole (as Disney knows well enough), unless it was always intended to reproduce some previously successful serialisation (Tolkein's stuff, as already alluded to; J.K. Rowling's surprisingly popular product). I think, therefore that Cueball is right to more dread the effort of dealing with some multi-sequel monstrocity of a film-canon, compared to whatever degree of {{tvtropes|EarlyInstallmentWeirdness|First Season Disservice}} he has suffered or heard that he must suffer before the kinks are properly ironed out in seasons 2-6. (Then it goes funny for 7, 8 and most of 9, until the story arc evolves into something that gets it to series 20 before a bit of cancel/uncancel shenanigans plague the production, spin-offs (including a prequel series and/or an animated version) take over the franchise and relegate the old stars to cameo-actors, the franchise then gets a Series: The Movie! which either does surprisingly well or surprisingly manages to upset the whole diverse fanbase in loads of differing ways... or some variation on all that.)
 ...but, anyway, it's not surprising. Yet it ''does'' probably qualify as an interesting point that fully deserves to be highlit or else we might never have thought of it for ousrselves, in as many words. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.64|172.71.178.64]] 03:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think 8 moves are of about equal length to 1 season. I picked 8 random movies from the list of movies I'm planning to watch and it totaled 18¼ hours. Then looked at some series first seasons. The Mandalorian is 5½ hours, Wednesday is 6 hours, Friends is 6¼ hours, even an outlier like Dragon Ball Z is only 10½ hours. The premise of the comic probably still stands though, but can be explained by the fact that with a series it also gives the promise of more hours of good material. With movies if the first 8 are bad there might not be many good ones after that. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 04:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:You picked some BAD examples, though... AFAIK, Mandalorian and Wednesday are straight-to-streaming shows. STS, specialty channel, and non-North American shows (British, Australian) have particularly short seasons of 6, 8, or 10 episodes. A standard season is between 22 and 26 episodes at the very outside, usually around 24. Also, such discussions don't generally happen about half hour sitcoms & cartoons like Friends or Dragon Ball Z, most shows are hour shows (44 minutes without ads instead of 22). Quick and dirty math - rounding to 20 and 40 minute episodes, or 3 per hour and 3 per 2 hours - means you picked a weirdly short season of Friends of 18.75 episodes, their 26 episode seasons (as I recall they tended to hit 26) would be nearly 9 hours usually. Hour-long shows, using the average 24 episodes, is 16 hours. A usual average movie length these days is 2h per (used to be 1.5 until I'd say the late 90s, movies could be as short as 1:15 and rarely hit 2, but SO MANY long movies in recent decades) means 8 movies ALSO averages about 16. The math works out if you use standard, middle of the road examples - no long movies like Titanic or short seasons like streaming shows. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:26, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:It's not just about the length, although yes, it's rare for movie series to have more than 8 movies. It's about continuity. Movies tend to be relatively stand-alone (although there are counterexamples, like LOTR) so watching 8 of them just to "get" the 9th is rarely needed. Meanwhile, with series, you usually NEED to watch the first season - or at least big part of it - to get the basic premise of the show. It's more likely you get away with skipping second one, if it actually gets better in third or fourth season (like ST:DS9, although you probably can just watch first four episodes then skip rest of first season and whole second and not miss much). -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
::The thing is, movies aren't designed as serial (the first movie doesn't assume there will be a second), but there DOES tend to be some continuity, where the events of the previous movie(s) are still "canon", and most sequels will count on it. Aliens starts with Ripley being in the escape pod from the end of Alien, the events of the movie spring from her being in stasis in that pod for so long, and seeing the first movie lets the viewer know how and why that happened. For such reasons, there are many people like myself who prefer only to see movies in order (I was curious about Glass, so I went through some effort to see Split first, only to be irritated that it's secretly a sequel to a much earlier movie Unbreakable, so since then I've been TRYING to find a way to watch them in order. Still never seen Glass). The main series of movies I can think of that long is Fast & Furious (there's James Bond, but that doesn't count, those started based on books, where they knew full well there were more books), and yeah, people SHOULD see the first one first, to learn the relationships between everybody, how Paul Walker (I forget his character's name right now) got involved, etc. Watching all the movies gives the viewer the significance of things. I think it was Fast Five which had Han give some nods to the earlier Tokyo Drift, which viewers wouldn't catch or understand if they hadn't seen it (which is WHY I watch movies in order, and find it annoying when idiots suggest you can skip, no problem. I ended up seeing Blade Runner 2049 before the original because some dimwits insisted they weren't related, when it's an unmistakable sequel!). This applies just as much to seasons of TV series, each season (usually) counts on previous events from previous seasons. Ignoring the past is considered continuity errors. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 22:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

The runtime of most movies is O(n), but the runtime of some TV shows is O(n log n) because you have to go back for context. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.114|162.158.2.114]] 04:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I was surprised nobody noticed or made mention that with Doctor Who you CAN'T watch from the true beginning (not really) because of all the lost episodes from the 60s and 70s! So I added that to the explanation. I've collected every episode, but for those lost ones all I have is that they have the audio and some pictures so someone made a slideshow as a replacement, or they have the audio and someone animated a replacement (many of these replacements are shorter than an episode, though). And sometimes it isn't even full stories missing - as nearly every story spanned multiple episodes - so LOTS of stories aren't complete. So nobody can TRULY watch every episode from the beginning any more (I've done my best and got to season 3 before I couldn't find time any more). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Is "The original Doctor Who, running from 1963-1989 was extremely low budget, and is generally considered to be not as good as the revived series (2005-present), which has a much higher production budget and is typically much more popular with modern viewers (who mainly ignore the older episodes)" actually true? Most of the discussion I've seen is not particularly kind to the revival relative to the heyday of the third through seventh doctors. It seems like someone just made this up to fit the comic's underlying narrative. An actual citation is actually needed. I would suggest in this case that being its own thing means that the quality varies from writer to writer more than from year to year. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.145|172.70.210.145]] 08:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:Without having read your comment, I made changes there that might help. But, really, the joke is ''not about'' Doctor Who (outside of the title text)v, and while there is much useful info to impart, the point is that it just isn't covered by the comparison and might even need to begiven a Trivia-like add-on for the detail, and leave the main bit as a "it's complicated!" to not distract..? ;)

I think the title text is less about the number of seasons of Doctor Who and more about the fact that people tend to suggest you start with the 9th Doctor. In other words, they're suggesting you skip the first 8 Doctors. [[User:Mrgvsv|Mrgvsv]] ([[User talk:Mrgvsv|talk]]) 15:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:I don't know anyone who thinks the revival has been better than the Pertwee and Baker years. Since 2018 there's been no respect for continuity or canon, just one long retcon festival. It's not a story, it's a set of shorts with a theme. Not that the original was too great with continuity to begin with, of course. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.91|172.70.211.91]] 19:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
::Horses for courses. I don't rate much of Nine's tenure (except as a useful re-emergence of the franchise), and the structure of the stories had changed (gone with the serials, apart from a few multi-episode stories, and of course the integration of series-arcs; then the awkward reliance on ''only'' a Christmas/New Year episode-or-two without even proper free reign in a mini-season or longer), but Classic was Executively Meddled With in its own ways more suited for the time and there was enough fan-grief at the time for all of that, and confusion by the more casual viewers.
::Yes, perhaps a bit too much introverted navel-gazing and unsubtle nod-nod-wink-wink to the perceived obessesives. Some of the writers may be a bit too much fans themselves. And yet others just plan reckless and ''not'' as solidly faithful as we might wish them to be to our own personal headcanon.
::But that's not unique to Who. And I can't judge the series's merit only on ''my'' enjoyment. There's far more than that to the successful commercial continuation. And this is a discussion that could ''really'' alienate those we might hope to appreciate the 'real' series, whatever that is. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.159|172.69.79.159]] 20:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I interpreted the title text as saying that, although Doctor Who would by any reasonable metric (consistency of writing, consistency of worldbuilding, how compelling and/or realistic and/or complex villains are, plausibility, philosophical resonance, CGI, etc.) be rated as 'bad' or 'unlikely to be good' in almost any season, it is nonetheless good for the vast majority of it. But I don't want to put that in unless somebody else reads it that way too.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.32|172.68.35.32]] 15:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:To some extent I agree. I've heard enough times "You've never watched DW? I think you'd enjoy Blink..." (or "The Girl In The Fireplace", or "A Good Man Goes To War" or "The Dalek Invasion of Earth" or "The Five Doctors" or... ...whatever the speaker thinks will appeal to the curiosity and/or particular interests of their Who-curious but surprisingly still 'cherry' partner in conversation).
:There are some episodes/serials/entire seasons that I'd not suggest as an intro, but An Unearthly Child is valid, as is Rose (consigning the whole available run of of Classic and especially the TV-Movie to "maybe later, just to get an idea"). But there are clunkers (or "hilarious in hindsight", like the rather ''less'' impressive 'preview' of the London Olympics in Fear Her) that I'd say to watch along the way through a series but not try to make too much judgement of as you advance onwards to other intresting points (Army Of Ghost, etc) or episodes which actually need quite a bit of prior knowledge to appreciate (Turn Left).
:But this is going to be a subjective deal between the existing fan and the 'potential new recruit' that I can only really generalise about. And likely mystify some others as to my choice of examples and attitudes towards them! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.231|162.158.34.231]] 19:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Why does it say there are seven Doctor actors (plus one announced) and the 8th already announced in new Who? 8 is accounted for in the movie mention, so it’s 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and “war”, making 6, with Ncuti Gatwa as the announced 7th. Tennant reprising his role doesn’t count as another actor, so it doesn’t add to the count of actors. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.148|172.68.174.148]] 20:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:Could they have been counting the {{w|Fugitive Doctor}}? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.158|172.69.79.158]] 22:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:That's consistent (assuming you accept War Doctor as valid, squeezed into the number-sequence as a retrofit incarnation). In fact moreso, as War didn't like to be identified as Doctor, but Fugitive did (when applicable). But also, at a push, David Morrissey, Toby Jones and even Catherine Tate could (for differing reasons) be included. Tentatively, also Tom Baker. Never mind David Bradley or Richard E. Grant as, amongst others, '(p)replacements' to the standard set of One to Thirteen, seen in the post-Eight era although if you include Bradley then, at the very least, Richard Hurndall needs adding to the pre-Eight set as well.
:Then there are the Doctor actors from {{w|Doctor Who: The Curse of Fatal Death|The Curse Of Fatal Death}}, should you legitimately find a place to include those of them not already mentioned. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.139|172.71.242.139]] 16:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
::Made the issue moot by making it less numerically exact. Also proofed the article against needing editing in the next year or three when Fifteen is current, or even succeeded by a Sixteen. (Could be more than the ~four year average, or less, but it'll be maybe only half a dozen ''episodes'' a year, if we're lucky. Possibly less. Even with seasonal specials.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.56|172.70.86.56]] 13:08, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
:::Ahh Dr Who Numbering ... with 7 Timeless children, 8 Mobius Dr's, Fugative, 15 numbered, War, Two incarnations of 10, 14 being the same as 10, The Curator, The Meta-Crisis Dr, Forced Regeneration 13, Master-Doctor, The Valeyard, The Curator, ....etc .. anything with 50+ years of Lore most of it made up as they went along gets very complex .. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.47|172.70.85.47]] 16:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Dr Who classic series is praised for it's stories, and Acting, but it is old enough that CGI didn't exist originally, and Special effects when they arrived were too expensive for it's small budget - It is often recommended to stsrt with New Who and go back to the Classic series if you want to - the remaining Classic series is a whopping 21 days 22 hours and 30 minutes runtime, so it good you don't need to [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.133|172.70.85.133]] 12:36, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

::I'd mention another example. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Most fans will agree that the first two seasons are weak, and I concur (even though it's one of my favourite shows). So you need to watch 20+26 episodes x 45 minutes to get to the good stuff. But "the good stuff" is 5 more seasons so the prize you get for watching the first two seasons is suibstantial...

Good lord. Everybody in the UK knows - even if they won't admit it - that Doctor Who was upturned dustbins studded with grapefruit, a police box shaped thing that (ahem) couldn't turn back into the right form because of a (ahem) malfunction. The TARDIS was a phone booth. Because that was easy, and "Oops, it can't stop looking like this easily recognisable blue rectangle, that's a shame!" is easy. Easy and cheap. Cheap cheap cheap. Cheap and ridiculous.
 Hiding behind the sofa as kids because cybermen are terrifying if you're a kid (even if they're just grey coveralls and bits of tubing) makes it culturally iconic, and so does Tom Baker's eccentricity/scarf. But so does anything that strikes a chord! If you're in a country where there are 3 (OK, eventually 4) TV channels, and two of them are publicly funded (and that's where Doctor Who is made!), the bar is very, very low. It wasn't great. It was iconic, but it was cheap crap nonsense.
 Eccleston is not everyone's cup of tea when it comes to Who, but at least he (and everybody else involved) ushered in a new era with modern production values. What a time to be a kid.
 Yeah...kid.
 What...you do know it's KIDS' show, right? That's why the scripts are so seemingly weak.
 Did that memo not leave the UK?
 Oh my... {{unsigned|Yorkshire Pudding|00:55, 28 January 2023}}

:Nice diatribe. Yes, the 'phone booth' was originally supposed to be an "invisible sphere", within which the crew would have vanished from shot (think Al and his time-chamber door in Quantum Leap? At least from Sam's sole perspective..) before it (timewise-)vanished as well, but it would have been hard to film convincingly. Given that Police Phone Boxes were pretty much on their way out even back in Hartnell's day (it was 'not out of place' in a scrapyard, as one of the last acts of the Chameleon Circuit apart from some sporadic fixes years later, and nu-Who seems to have relied upon the Perception Filter and occasional "entirely made invisible" trick and given up on any reason to fix it) I think that was an inspired/lucky choice, beyond what they knew they were actually doing at the time. You can make a glorious new 'thing' such as the H.G.Wells-style time-machine (a kind of steamless-Steampunk brass chair-with-controls-and-weird-perpendicular-wheel), fashion something whose mystery is held within a handy portable future-styled casing that might as well be ''objet trouvé'' (the Matter Paddle from Red Dwarf looks like a repainted version of something that would be a Bop-It, these days, and just 'happened' to have exactly as many handholds to it as Dwarf crew) or consciously use an existing past idea of the future of transport and zhoosh it up (the DeLorean!). Writing the TARDIS as a Policebox was a hit in so many different ways, and outlasted most people knowing what a ''real'' one was with no real problems... The ''Metropolitan Police'' couldn't even get the copyright on the imagery of the thing, when they tried!
:(I expect you meant the Daleks were dustbins with melons on, though the similarity between a cylindrical bin and the truncated polygonal pyramid 'skirt' of a Dalek-casing upon which are those bumps is very, very approximate. Some say that pepperpots played a part in the design, but that's officially denied. I've personally had icecream-packaging that seems ''quite'' like a Dalek - without actually being a copy - but this was in the '70s so it might have been a "copy''ish'' but not actually a copy, you can't touch us for it!' by the icecream company.)
:Scarves (or lapel-vegetation, or the Whomobile, or the...) didn't start with #4. ITV shows were just as 'cheap' (if anything, whoever your ITV provider was at the time, Grenada/Central/Anglian/etc) probably had to be more creative with their divided budgets (c.f. Morecambe And Wise's stints on and off the BBC).
:Kids' shows... Meh. Not like there wasn't a My Little Pony fanaticism for a good long decade or so, that seemed to go well beyond 'conciously ironic', right? Defining purely by the expected/intended audience is something best left to be gotten wrong by the Marketing Department.
:And the show ''has'' stopped being its original "educational and informing" concept (alternating a historic-era visit, then a future setting to expound something scientific, to please the kind of teachers that the first adult Companions were for ''precisely'' the need of Mr./Ms. Exposition (later often the Watson/Explain-It-To-Me-Holmes character) to act as proxy/relay to the viewers) pretty much let go after the first series (US:season), at which point it became a child-friendly (but not child-''coddling'') "sci-fi orientated dramatic entertainment show".
:But anybody who has any interest at all in the details probably knows much of this (except that I happened to eat Two-Ball Screwballs in the '70s, as most fans would be rightfully ignorant of my own personal particular icecream preferences from five decades back, and I'd be worried if it was actually widely known!), and the kind of viewer who might otherwise be told to "watch from <this point>, at least up to <that point>, before you give up on my recommendation" wouldn't get any benefit out of being either informed or ''mis''informed about any of these fundemental qualities of production lore... So this is just my response to you, and nobody else needs to have read this far... <checks left and right> ...ah good, it looks like it's just us. As long as nobody else comes along later and has to read the unstructured rush of opinion that gushed out of both our variously twisted egos. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.80|172.70.85.80]] 04:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Dr Who is about someone travelling in time, so it doesn't matter where you start, or what order you watch them in. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.172|172.71.242.172]] 09:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
:Why not watch only the River Song episodes? In River Song order! (I think that'd start with The Rebel Flesh, technically, and it'd end with the Library/Forests double.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 17:31, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

2735: Coordinate Plane Closure

2023-02-08T15:42:19Z

172.71.178.186:

{{comic
| number = 2735
| date = February 8, 2023
| title = Coordinate Plane Closure
| image = coordinate_plane_closure_2x.png
| imagesize = 271x376px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = 3D graphs that don't contact the plane in the closure area may proceed as scheduled, but be alert for possible collisions with 2D graph lines that reach the hole and unexpectedly enter 3D space.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a 2D graph that has accidently become 3D (and sentient) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic is a "Math Notice," which is presumably a warning or reminder for mathematicians or others who interact with the field of mathematics. Specifically, this one advises those who are using the coordinate plane to avoid drawing any graphs in the area with a hole until the damage is patched or fixed.

{{w|Coordinate planes}} are used in math for drawing graphs. The joke here is that a small section has been "closed for maintenance," likening the concept of a coordinate plane to an actual physical platform used by math, which is therefore vulnerable to damage such as is shown in the comic. In reality, the coordinate plane cannot be damaged as it is not a tangible thing.{{citation needed}}

Closure in mathematics is a term relating to sets, specifically operations on sets, and a coordinate plane is a particular set of numbers. A set is closed under an operation if all the "answers" to the operation are also in the set. The coordinate plane is said to be closed under vector addition for example - adding together any two coordinates produces another coordinate in the plane. Many functions and operators may be said to have closure on the real plane, and this comic may be a pun on that term. Of course, if there actually is a hole in the plane, then suddenly the plane will no longer exhibit closure...

The title text clarifies some of the unwanted effects of drawing a graph into the hole, stating that two-dimensional graph lines might accidentally become three-dimensional and interfere with the graphs made there.
==Transcript==

<big>⚠️ Math Notice ⚠️</big>

The coordinate plane will be closed Thursday between (1.5, 1) and (2, 1.5) to repair a hole.

(A coordinate graph is shown, with a gray hole between (1.5, 1) and (2, 1.5). The hole is highlighted with two dots in the corners of a hollow rectangle with split border lines.)

If your graph uses this area, please postpone drawing until Friday or transform it to different coordinates.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2472: Fuzzy Blob

2023-01-31T00:30:34Z

172.71.178.186:

That bot description is comedy gold, I think the page is already perfect. "It's a finger." [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.60|141.101.98.60]] 02:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
:Really, what more explanation do we need? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.13|172.69.63.13]] 02:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
:The only thing I could see being added is if there is a sub joke regarding the historic 4th ave church being unusual. It might just be an unimportant detail, but most of Randell's jokes have something extra behind them.[[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 03:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
:That didn't come from the bot, it comes from anonymous user 162.158.62.37. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 09:46, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

The NAVY UFOs are the same type of feature; a little bug is inside the camera, sitting on the lens inside the aircraft window. You can see the insects feet, blurry, of course, and you can watch it turn around.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.186|172.69.35.186]] 02:48, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
:Nice of the insects to show up on radar too, for consistency.[[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 03:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

The people in the comics are stick figures. Their limbs and appendages are simple lines. Why would they know that the blob in the image is a finger? That’s a construct for the 3D world of people.

----

Someone showed me a photo of a "spirit guide" - a strange glowing fuzzy orb, floating near a group of spiritually-minded people in a dim room. I thought a few minutes, threw a pinch of flour into the air in a dim room, took a flash photo, and there were dozens of little fuzzy orbs in the photo! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.72|172.69.35.72]] 06:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
:That's why ghosts are white, obviously. They keep throwing flour around, and end up covering themselves. ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.36|141.101.98.36]] 08:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
:I have photos full of fuzzy orbs from tunnel. I'm not sure what EXACTLY those are, but I think bad lighting has more to do with them than ghosts. Unless there were much more causalities building that tunnel than reported. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 03:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Will there be an explanation of “zoning permits” joke? Sounds like something local to US. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.122|162.158.222.122]] 07:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
: I just did add something, but without seeing your request here so maybe I need to dig up a Wikilink for that definition in particular. But I always understood Zoning Permits as being roughly equivalent to Planning Permissions in the UK, or close enough. That's from my exposure to US films/TV, where it can be a (usually) minor plot-point. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.36|141.101.98.36]] 08:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
: Addendum: Yeah, it's like Planning Permission (skewed towards Land Use designations, but the two systems are overlapping in concept). What I found funny was that "Euclidean zoning" was ''not'' actually named for the coordinate system. ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.46|141.101.98.46]] 09:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

----

What's the joke about 4th avenue church? Google fins a 4th avenue church, but it doesn't seem to be related to any mistery.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 10:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

: It might just be that churches tend to employ unusual architecture, and historic churches tend to employ a combination of antique and unusual architecture, making them distinct from the surrounding buildings, especially in urban areas. Maybe people seeing the churches would think that there's some hidden conspiratorial meaning behind their structure. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.117.38|172.70.117.38]] 14:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

: Could be this church: https://www.google.com/maps/uv?pb=!1s0x88690d53a414c0ff%3A0x38c51a845c08ff8a!3m1!7e115!4s%2Fmaps%2Fplace%2F%2522historic%2Bfourth%2Bavenue%2Bchurch%2522%2F%4038.2373688%2C-85.7595726%2C3a%2C75y%2C190.58h%2C90t%2Fdata%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211s8YHVWQJ-DS513U1EBHZ7Tg*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x88690d53a414c0ff%3A0x38c51a845c08ff8a%3Fsa%3DX!5s%22historic%20fourth%20avenue%20church%22%20-%20Google%20Search!15sCgIgAQ&imagekey=!1e2!2s8YHVWQJ-DS513U1EBHZ7Tg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiUmdTU94XxAhXaMlkFHfpaAZMQpx8wBXoECDQQCA. There's a blur in the middle of the lens.

:: This comment is underappreciated... Although for this specific image, moving forward and backward show the same blob, so it's likely a camera/software problem. *ahem* A ghost sticking to car on one side! *gasp!* --[[User:Eelitee|Eelitee]] ([[User talk:Eelitee|talk]]) 22:33, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

----

Should it mentioned that these are stick figures, and usually don't have "fingers"? Also, why is it (white) flesh-toned instead of (ink) black? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.178|172.69.71.178]] 23:59, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
: Rand's white, so he probably didn't think of that and would possibly be embarrassed or change it if brought to his attention. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.226|172.70.110.226]] 00:59, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
::A finger in front of a lens blocks light from reaching the film, or the sensor array. Why, then, is the finger a light shade of supposed skin tone? Isn't that another reason why it should appear black instead? [[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]]) 04:40, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
:::The convex nature of a fingertip means often plenty of side-lighting is available (unless you've stoppered the whole finger right straight over the whole aperture and have no exposure at all, never mind an off-focus finger). I can confirm a finger-blob looks lit and skin-coloured (assuming daytime/lit-room photography) from a non-zero number of photos returned from the lab (remember those days?) with a sticker on them to suggest that their sharp-eyed QCing (and possibly statutory "illegal/immoral content guardianship" filtering) had determined that there was an obvious technical fault with the image, but it wasn't their fault/nothing they can do about it, and next time don't stick your finger there (or shake the camera, or fail to use a flash, or get the basic focal length right, or whatever). But an easily removable sticker, because maybe you ''were'' a budding experimental photographer not yet with your own darkroom to see your results quicker than an hour (drop-in photography shops) or a few days/couple of weeks (postal processing).
::: ((There's also precedence for the 'stick figures' having close up details, but I'm not going to reference them, because having it ''not'' be a flesh-pink blob, but something more stick-figurey would remove a layer of viewer certainty in interpreting the desired joke. And, possibly, there's a little bit of an echo of Spiderman Noir (from the "Spiderverse" film) and the Rubik's Cube, making it ''actually'' and legitimately surprising to stickworld civilisation...)) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.38|141.101.98.38]] 07:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
::: Clearly this really is a conspiracy and it runs deeper than us. Is Randall part of the NWO?!?!!!?! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.10|108.162.216.10]] 18:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I removed the incomplete text because I think this is done. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.18|108.162.246.18]] 00:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
: Ok --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.161|172.68.133.161]] 11:00, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Who's going to turn this into a joke SCP? [[User:Wilh3lm|Wilh3lm]] ([[User talk:Wilh3lm|talk]]) 15:16, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

There are actually a few hypothetical methods of 'cloaking' an object, including optical metsmaterials, metascreens and active camoflage. See this Wikipedia article for more: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloaking_device [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.151|172.71.94.151]] 17:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

(Firstly, if the above editor cares to, they could use the <code><nowiki>{{w|Cloaking device|this Wikipedia article}}</nowiki></code> style of wikimarkup, or at least edit out the ".m" to not initially force the mobile site on others. Anyway...) The current Explanation sentence "In this strip Randall appears cases where phenomena have been caught on film, but are generally unclear and ambiguous." seems to be missing words. "...appears '''to be portraying''' cases..."? Not sure exactly what the exact intent is and not sure if I'm missing some alternate grammatical correctness. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 00:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

2724: Washing Machine Settings

2023-01-16T12:29:50Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */ Rewording. Initially to shorten, but may have expanded other bits more...

{{comic
| number = 2724
| date = January 13, 2023
| title = Washing Machine Settings
| image = washing_machine_settings_2x.png
| imagesize = 308x524px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I guess the engineers who built my dishwasher MIGHT have some insight into how to load it, but instead of reading the booklet they gave me, it seems easier to experiment for years and then get in arguments so heated that I get banned from Quora.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a GUY ON QUORA TYPING RTF(WM)M - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The comic strip depicts Cueball (possibly [[Randall]]) standing in front of a washing machine, wondering which settings starts to use for his particular wash. He starts guessing which settings would do what from the perspective of an engineer, planning to look up detailed information on what the settings do and when to use them. However, he doesn't realize that all the information he is looking for should be found by looking at his product manual. Most of the time, people don't spend time on viewing product manuals and instead just use whatever settings seem best to them, obviously not going into the depth of thought Cueball has fallen into.

This comic may allude to the fact that product manuals are easy to lose, at which point the person having questions about the product is obliged to find other ways to find out how to use the product.

Settings on appliances with dials or radio-button selectors are often contradictory and arbitrary. In this case Cueball likely is trying to wash something that is both "delicate" and has "colors", but is forced to choose between them, even though there would ideally be a washer setting that anticipates the need for both considerations at once. Due to the laconic vagueness in the choice of wording for the dial (or button/menu), the "(Light)" ''may'' truly mean that the treatment is gentle, in this colors-specific setting; but it just as easily could refer to the best wash cycle for either brighter ''or'' more pastel hues. It could even describe a quicker and less resource-intensive cycle aimed at cleaning a less full than usual batch of items, though a separate "half load"/”economy" button (or similar) often exists that abbreviates the appropriate phases of each main washing cycle accordingly.

The title text proposes deliberately ignoring the manual for a dishwasher and continuing to use the internet and other people for information on household devices. It references [http://quora.com Quora], a website which allows users to publicly ask questions and answer the questions of others. This website is not typically known for its debates, although the situation in this comic could probably lead to one - when someone who doesn't really understand the subject provides an answer, it could lead to a lengthy and unnecessary argument as multiple parties, at least one of them being incorrect, continue to stand their ground rather than be persuaded. Although Quora moderation is notably inconsistent, being inflammatory (as people tend to be in debates that progress too long) could lead to one's account being reported and banned, like on a typical social network or forum.

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

:[Cueball is standing in front of a large combination washing machine/dryer, holding a coat, wondering.]
:Cueball: Okay, do I want "Colors (light)" or "Delicate"? Does delicate mean less agitation? Or a slower spin?
:Cueball: I should Google, I bet clothing experts have experimented with various settings/clothing combos.
:Cueball: Ooh, someone should make a tool that indexes people's results by washer model, so you can look up what settings to use for a given...

:[Caption below the panel]:
: Every now and then I forget that product manuals exist and spend a while reinventing them.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:1576: I Could Care Less

2023-01-11T00:45:56Z

172.71.178.186:

I interpreted the title text as saying that it's impossible to care so little about something that you can't care less about it. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.146.170|172.68.146.170]] 02:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Another excellent comic by Randall. In case of interest to anyone a different perspective, David Mitchell did a wonder rant on this... "Dear America... | David Mitchell's SoapBox"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw {{unsigned ip|‎141.101.98.100}}

The only people who complain about this phrase are pedantic morons who have never heard such things as "head over heels".

Here, I've composed a list of common vernacular/slang idioms which are valid, clear, and diametrically opposed to their original meaning:
* "Head over heels"
* "Break a leg"
* "It's the shit"
* "That's bad"
* "She's phat"
* "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"
* "Irregardless"{{unsigned|Cwallenpoole}}
: "Diametrically opposed" is redundant. The words mean the same thing. Sorry, when the topic of conversation is pedanticism I couldn't resist :P [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.170|108.162.221.170]] 22:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
: I think "diametrically opposed" is not redundant. I visualize "opposed" = could be points of a circle greater than 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees apart. "diametrically opposed" = exactly 180 degrees apart, to the maximum extent possible. Whereas "opposed" implies only one dimension of opposite-ness, "diametrically opposed" implies multiple (or colloquially, even all) dimensions of opposite-ness, emphasizing that there is no common ground between the sides in question. 21:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
:The reason I dislike "I could care less" is because it just grates me. It disrupts the flow of parsing language in my brain, throwing up a "wait, what?" exception that I have to expend far more mental energy than usual to correctly interpret the meaning of something in my head. I'm not being pedantic for the sake of uptight rule adherence and feeling superior (I play around with language and use it in non-standard forms all the time), I'm pedantic because it causes my brain real difficulties in processing the meaning of what a person's said. I mean I'm a woman with Asperger's (and a British one at that) so maybe things are a little different for me, but that's just why I personally strongly dislike this usage. The things on your list though are all different in some way to "I could care less", at least for me, for example:
:* "Head over heels" - How is this an opposite meaning, exactly? Doesn't it give a rather nice metaphor for being giddy about something? Being hyperbolic and metaphorical doesn't make it an opposite meaning.
::*Because your head is ''normally'' over your heels. Nothing special about it. Heels over head would be much more interesting...[[User:Silverpie|Silverpie]] ([[User talk:Silverpie|talk]]) 17:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:::*Personally I always think of it as your head being bowled over your heels - not the sort of "over" as in "higher gravitational potential energy", but in the same "around" sense of being "turned over" or "starting over". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.47|108.162.218.47]] 03:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
::::*Yes, this never sounded "opposite" to me. Imagine a contortionist with knees and toes on the ground, bent over backwards so that his head is literally over his heels. This is absolutely not normal. I took it as meaning something is so exciting/surprising that one contorting himself in unnatural ways. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.124|162.158.255.124]] 21:14, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
:::::It's a reversal, of the original British expression "heels over head". [https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/head-over-heels.html] [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 21:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
:* "Break a leg" - This is closer to being an opposite, but the exact opposite to wishing an actor good luck would be to wish them bad luck. The mutation to a slightly absurdist statement marks it out as having a different meaning, especially as "break a leg" isn't really used in any other context than to wish a person good luck. While it may be the case that "I could care less" is rarely (if at all) used in its literal form, there's still nothing to mutate it and obviously mark it out as a linguistic special usage case. It's also still how I'd expect someone to phrase it if they were actually telling me they could care less about something.
::: The "Vaudeville theory" on this page is where I got my understanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Break_a_leg --EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "It's the shit" - Again, this is mutated. People aren't saying "it's shit", the word "the" handily tags it for my brain parser to handle differently.
:* "That's bad" - Well, you've got me here actually. I mean, context (and tone) makes the meaning obvious but I can't objectively understand why this phrase doesn't cause me the same sort of difficulties at all. Perhaps because I grew up in the 80s, and a big part of my musical upbringing was Michael Jackson. ''♬ A-hee-hee! Hoo! ♬''
:* "She's phat" - This is completely literal, "phat" is a slang term meaning excellent or attractive. It may be a mutation of the word "fat" or not, its etymology is uncertain, but it is indisputably a very different word now (much like how "orchids" means a species of flower rather than testicles, and "sinister" hasn't meant left in centuries).
::: I understand it's an acronym: Pretty Hot And Tempting. --EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" - This is also completely literal, Freud meant that while he believed many things ''could'' have hidden, psychosexual meanings... that while sometimes a person might be puffing on a cigar due to some suppressed phallic desires... they could also just be puffing on a cigar because they're enjoying a nice cigar. That is to say, not everything has a hidden subconscious meaning, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, not a substitute object to fellate.
:* "Irregardless" - Well yes, the suffix added to "regardless" here would usually invert its meaning, but "irregardless" isn't actually a word that existed before it came into use with its current meaning so it's not like saying a previously established and defined word (or phrase).
: Anyway, while I do believe language is flexible and mutable, this particular phrase fails the easily interpretable test for my brain. I try not to be too uptight about it, but it really does irritate me in a way I can't help. Obviously my opinion is not the only one, so that's just my 1.29587 British pence on the matter :D [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
::(In response to Cwallenpoole, not 141.101.98.195, who makes good points that I didn't actually read first!) "Head over heels" is of course "head over (and down), heels (upwards) (...and continue this rotation to its logical conclusion)"; "Break a leg" has {{w|Break_a_leg|a number of possible origins}} (I always assumed wishing luck was unlucky, thus the inverse, but several "the leg not being yours" versions also ring true); "It's the shit" is using a somewhat unfortunate object (certainly if you miss out the "the") that is a short-cut off-colour superlative like "the dog's bollocks"; "bad==good" I always assumed was "what's bad to the establishment is good for our own clique"; "phat" is far too modern for me, but probably arises a similar positive superlative with some counter-culture anti-standard spelling; Cigars being cigars don't sound diametrically opposed, to me, although who knows ''what'' went on in Freud's head!; "Irregardless" is an obvious portmanteau/malapropism blend that is so easy to create. - Or so I would personally explain these.
:: Here's an additional one, though, if you care for it: "Cheap at half the price". It sounds wrong if you dig deep and work out that it must mean "It is not more than or equal to twice the actually fair price you should have been asking" (i.e. it's less than double the price). But I've always internally rationalised it as really saying "If this figure you mention actually were only half of the full price you are ''truly'' asking for, the real price would still be considered cheap" (i.e. it's less than half price). Or it could just be obfuscated salesman patter, i.e. telling the truth (still making a profit, but less than a 100% mark-up) but using weasel-words and terminology that create misleading imagery in the listener's mind. i.e. No crime, no foul, should Trading Standards happen to come-a-visiting, one day... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:21, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:::''Actually'', to follow-up on myself: "It's cheap(, it being in this instance) at half the price (I would normally charge)" works best. Why has that only just occured to me? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:::Attempting to interpret "head over heels" to somehow mean "head down, heels up" isn't etymologically accurate; it's simply a reversal of the original expression, which was "heels over head." There's a similar expression in German ("Hals über Kopf") and Scandinavian (Norwegian "hals over hode", Swedish "hals över huvud") literally "neck over head," which means "in great hurry or disarray, without thinking" and is also sometimes (particularly in Norwegian) reversed for no particular reason: perhaps it's just the "mouth feel" that makes it tempting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 10:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

'I couldn't care less' is the standard formulation in the UK, for one. I always assumed that the US version was originally a variant on this which was later contracted, eg 'I could care less, but not much'.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.106|141.101.99.106]] 07:10, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Given that xkcd is so pro-science, I don't think the analysis here should endorse the peeve that there's anything wrong with "I could care less" (or use of "literally" as an intensifier), since most actual linguists, experts on how language works, think it's fine. See for example the list of posts dealing with the question here: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=21170#more-21170 And of course, the comic itself points out how petty an besides the point this kind of "correction" is. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 07:43, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

: As a linguist, regarding the claim that most actual linguists think it's fine, I'd have to respectfully say HELL NO! There is a difference between acknowledging the pragmatic implementation of the phrase, that is, its use in common parlance and the general acceptance and understanding of it, and the question wether or not it is "fine". The comic exemplifies a rather extreme version of the idea "Whatever people use is proper language" - in other words, as long as everybody involved in a conversation gets what is meant, there is no point in arguing semantics, grammer, etc. This is, however, neither the only, nor the dominant approach to language and linguistics. For exapmle, it doesn't answer the question how such an ostensibly paradox use of this phrase came to happen, where (geographically, socially, etc.) the phrase might have originated, and other puzzless regarding the origin of the phrase; this attitude also dismisses any inquiry into how humans process (or ignore) such discrepancies between literal meaning and actual use, and in general, how humans organise, structure, and conecptualise language. Additionally, this comic adds a radical deconstructional (and maybe existential) twist to this perspective by basically saying, "We're all alone, and can never really know or understand anybody else".
: Such an attitude of total relativism ("Every experience ist entirely subjective and unique") makes my skin crawl. It is by far more presumptious than being a little pedantic about grammar and the use of expressions.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.176|162.158.114.176]] 11:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Agreed. Words have meanings and reducing the amount of trust you can place in those meanings decreases the value of the language. "You could never understand me, so I might as well not even try to make myself understood" is a cop-out. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.23|108.162.219.23]] 15:22, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:: I stand by my comment that most linguists would argue that the phrase does not warrant censure, on the grounds that it is (1) in very common use, probably about 5 times as common as "couldn't care less" in American speech, including educated speech, and about half as common in writing, (2) long established, with the OED's first reference back in 1966, only twenty years after it first notes "I couldn't care less" (and with Google Book Search, we can push this back to the 1940s: it occurs repeatedly in the official transcript of a House Congressional Hearing in 1947, for example), (3) idiomatic, so that logical analysis of its strict literal content is not helpful, and (4) analogous to other constructions (in English and other languages) that don't raise any eyebrows or hackles. That does not mean that they don't consider it interesting and worthy of explanation, of course. Indeed, almost all the work of actually trying to explain how "could care less" arose has been done by people who are at pain to point out that they find the phrase unobjectionable (while those who disapprove of it don't seem to get much further than calling it "an ignorant substitution" or a result of "sloppy speech and sloppy writing"). It's of course hard to prove that this is the majority view in academic circles, but I refer to Lawler, Liberman, Pullum, Okrent [http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2014/03/18/why_i_could_care_less_is_not_as_irrational_or_ungrammatical_as_you_might.html], Pinker, the various dictionaries that list it without deprecation (e.g. RH Webster's: "usage: could care less, the apparent opposite of couldn't care less, is actually used interchangeably with it to express indifference. Both versions occur mainly in informal speech."), and linguistic popularizers such as Grammarist [http://grammarist.com/usage/could-care-less/]. This clearly reflects the descriptivist paradigm that seeks to understand language as it actually occurs, and looks skeptically on attempts to impose "rules" that are often demonstrably wrong. In other words, treating linguistics as an empirical science. The version of this position that Megan argues in the comic is obviously heightened for comic effect (she's also using a sort of mock-Gricean analysis to impute a possible helpful intent to Ponytail). You can find most of these points endorsed in a very reasonable [http://blog.dictionary.com/could-care-less/ blog post by dictionary.com]. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.152|141.101.105.152]] 09:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 23:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

As it's currently written, the explanation seems to suggest that "I could care less" is the American form and "I couldn't care less" British. In fact, both forms are in use in the US, and it wouldn't surprise me if "I could care less" occurs occasionally in British English as well. There are also other English-speaking countries in the world. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 07:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:As a Brit, I can't think of any time I've heard a fellow Briton say "I could care less", it's always seemed very much an American phenomenon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:Another American chiming in here to say that I never, ever, ever say "I could care less" when I mean "I couldn't care less". Characterizing it as "*the* American form" is incorrect. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.167|173.245.56.167]] 15:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

As for the title text, I'd disagree with "The sentence is also ambiguous, as it may mean that literally or figuratively, the speaker could or couldn't care less." I think that Randall is pretty clear here: he ''should'' ('could' as in polite request) care less about irrational idioms instead of wasting time drawing comics about it. But he just can't resist. And without him doing so, we wouldn't be here. So in fact, it is nonsense for Randall to care less, and this contradiction is the point of the title text joke. But then again, I'm not native English speaker, and even less of a thought reader to understand what was on his mind. -- kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.224|141.101.96.224]] 08:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:I had an alternate take on the title text. Since I could care less literally means I care some but could stand not to care as much, I took it to mean that for all the comic says about the true spirit and nature of communication and the evils of forcing linguistic absolutism onto other people, at the end of the day Randall still does care about people using correct phraseology. Yes, language is so much more than words and sounds but without clear grammatical usage rules communication could descend into chaos. This is actually one of the pivotal points in Jet Li's movie Hero which is a great commentary on this comic's profundity. The deep resonating pools of meaning that communication stores is only useful for peace and coexistence if we can all understand each other and come together as one. --[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 15:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
::I'm solidly with the IP. Randall is saying that, evidently, this is something which is important to him, and something he's put a lot of thought into. [[User:FourViolas|FourViolas]] ([[User talk:FourViolas|talk]]) 17:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I think "I could care less" is completely unheard of in Britain - I had to come here to find out what this was all about! In the UK the correction wouldn't be seen as pedantic, but rather that you had said something really rather odd, possibly for effect. I'm guessing in the US this doesn't stand out, and the phrase is "familiar" so the brain will run with it, but it just sounds really weird and jarring to me. That's not being pedantic, we toss double negatives around all over the place. Randall's point is that it how you interpret the words, rather than exact rules. So if ponytail is British then she is genuinely just trying to check that it wasn't a slip of the tongue and not meant for effect. To experience how odd it sounds its like a similar phrase "I don't give a s**t", but someone saying "I do give a s**t" (unless you guy's say that as well?!). {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.205}}

: You're right, the British National Corpus has essentially no hits for "could care less" [http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/]. However, Ponytail's "correction" doesn't sound like she's unfamiliar with the expression, but more like the common pedantic objection to it, so I doubt that she's intended to be British, or that it's anything other than "showing off how well she knows some mental checklist." The Lawler link above ([http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/giveadamn.html]) discusses the example "They could give a damn about Whitewater" (as in they '''don't''' actually give a damn about it). I think you could get away with "I give a shit?" or "[Like] I give a shit!" (with the "like" elided) as implicitly negative, but no, you can't put in an affirmative "do." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 10:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm fighting a long lost battle, I know, but can I mention my fight against the (long-standing) misuse of Decimation when the speaker/writer probably means Devastation? These days it's often assumed to be its own mathematical complement (around ~10% survival, rather than the intended ~10% depletion). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I am right with you on this one. Although I don't think the users are mistaking the Dev- for the Dec-, they have just forgotten or never learned that "decimate" had anything to with percentages. Heck, many English speakers don't grasp that percent has anything to do with percentages. [[User:NoniMausa|NoniMausa]] ([[User talk:NoniMausa|talk]]) 15:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Either one works, depending on how the sentence is finished:
* I could care less...about this than other things.
* I couldn't care less...about this than I already do.
--EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:Indeed, but "I could..." also begs the question "...but will I?" and so does not actually affirms that "I ''will'' care less (than with other things)", whilst "I couldn't..." is more imperative as in "...and therefore I wouldn't". (Unless you want to read the latter as "I couldn't care less because I actually care quite a lot already and I know that this will never change", I suppose! Oh dear, we uregently need to start using one of those totally-umambiguous ConLangs based upon predicate logic!) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 15:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

On a different note: The way the panels are set up is pretty interesting. Anyone a idea, why he set it up like that? Does he want to tell us something? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.196|162.158.92.196]] 17:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:The panels seem to form a logical story progression: introduction / development / conclusion, each on 3 lines. The panel on solitude and darkness is inverted -- it's literally dark -- which is a common comics idiom to emphasize a specific panel and break monotony {{Citation needed}}. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 20:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

This is starting to feel like the [http://english.stackexchange.com/ English Language & Usage Stack Exchange] :-)

It's quite amusing as most of the discussion here is about the pedantic usage solely focused on how the listener perceives the expression irregardless (;-p) of what the speaker tried to express, which is is exactly what the comic is ranting about.
If we want to be all pedantic, I'd offer the alternative that "I could care less" is a literally (;-p) perfectly sound form in itself. It's all about expressing the emotional value that someone attaches to a concept or thing -- think of it as an emotional energy or charge. Since everything is inter-dependent, there is no such thing as an absolute zero, it's the relation to other things that matters. The expression "I don't care" would imply the speaker devotes a neutral emotional energy value to the subject. Since it's a relative value, there are no boundaries in either direction and consequently "I could care less" and "I couldn't care less" are perfectly valid. It's all relative, as used to say Frank. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 20:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

'I know what you're thinking about,' said Tweedledum; 'but it isn't so, nohow.'
'Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, 'if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 23:26, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

"I could care less, but I would have to try" is the phrase as I have always known it (shortened to "I could care less...). I always took this to mean that someone was indifferent to a thing. It is a bit of an oxymoron since to try would mean you care more when your goal is to care less. My assumption has always been that the way someone feels about something generally exists on a scale from love to hate with the dead center being indifference. To care more from an indifferent standpoint is too move towards one of the poles (love or hate) and thus the oxymoron.--[[User:The elusive pickle|The elusive pickle]] ([[User talk:The elusive pickle|talk]]) 22:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Is it proper to use citations or should we just link to the source? {{User:17jiangz1/signature|10:44, 12 September 2015}}

;Negation by association in French

The [http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/giveadamn.html assertion] that ''could care less'', or ''give a damn'', is "negative in its own right" in the same way as ''pas'' in French sounds dubious to me to say the least, if not downright bovine excrement. In French, the original word for negation is ''ne'', it came to be associated with ''pas'', so that there was a perceived redundancy. Dropping ''ne'' when ''pas'' is used clearly conserves the negative meaning (it is only usual in oral French though, and frowned upon in written French). The same applies with adverbs that have a negative meaning, like ''jamais'' (never). But this is a very generic process, and thus completely different from very specific cases like ''could care less''. [[User:Zoyd|Zoyd]] ([[User talk:Zoyd|talk]]) 17:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
:Absolutely off-topic: there's a fairly good overview of the evolution leading to ''ne... pas'' in French [https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%A9gation_en_fran%C3%A7ais#.C3.89volution_de_l.27expression_de_la_n.C3.A9gation over there in The Other Wiki]. The link (or lack thereof) with ''could care less'' would definitely qualify as ''capilotracté''. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 00:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I've heard people say they ''couldn't'' give a damn. Never heard someone say they ''could''. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 13:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

It's a shame we don't know Ponytail's name. If we did, this would pass the Bechdel test. Out of interest, are there any xkcds which pass the Bechdel test? {{unsigned ip|108.162.249.183}}

I could care more. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.33|198.41.238.33]] 00:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

This was done on [http://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2015/08/03 Pearls Before Swine] a couple of weeks ago. --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.118|173.245.54.118]] 13:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps she's saying she could care a lot about the correction if it's intended to help her, but she could care less than that if the correction stems from the desire to complete a mental checklist.
In other words, there are two interpretations of the significance of Ponytail's correction. If the first interpretation is correct, she will care a lot. If the second interpretation is correct, she will care less. But she's not sure which is the case right now, so she could either care a lot or care less.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.78.10|172.68.78.10]] 13:53, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

I literally could care less about this. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.160|108.162.219.160]] 19:25, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

The entire explanation seems off, to me... this comic isn't merely about a quirk of English parlance but is an exploration of the state of the human condition and relationships, and the role of communication. Sure, the comic starts off with Ponytail's attempted correction of a common English idiom, and it ends with a call-back to this idiom, but that doesn't mean the comic is all about the idiom. Rather, I think discussing the idiom is the means by which Randall can express his understanding of the role of ALL language and communication in human relationships - to remarkable depth, I would say. He has expressed the sentiment before that "literally the only thing that matters" is how others feel and our relationships with them (in [[1216: Sticks and Stones]], for example, and even as far back as [[24: Godel, Escher, Kurt Halsey]].) This, for him, is the reason effective communication is so important and worth studying - because communication is required for human connection, and human connection has such a profound effect on our psychological well-being. Language pedants, therefore, are missing the point: why get so caught up correcting peoples' grammar, when the whole reason they're talking to you is because they feel alone in a void and they want to feel seen and understood? If you can understand them just fine, why make it harder for them? Language is more or less arbitrary anyway. The only reason we should correct others' grammar, as Megan implies in the seventh panel, is because you ''do'' understand why language exists (that is, to improve our relationships) ''and'' because you desire to improve the lives of others by helping them to express themselves more effectively. That is a noble goal; one-upping others is not. MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.219|162.158.74.219]] 17:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I just undid someone's removal of the "Head over heels" example, that came with the comment of ''(Even with a literal interpretation I can't see how "Head over heels" means the opposite of what it reads (which would be to stand upright?).)'' - I disagree with the removal, but I'm not sure what I'm disagreeing with due to a key ambiguity. Is "(which would be to stand upright)" refering to whole "the opposite of what it reads" or just the "what it reads" part?
 My own interpretation is that "what it reads" ''is'' the literal interpretation of the phrase (the head is up above the heels, a truth when standing. "The literal thing means not the literal thing" is the logical problem at the core, which makes it the perfect example of the paradixical non-literal intent behind the phrase. So it's valid.
 But if the intent here is to say that the standing upright is the opposite of the literal read, then the literal read is being declared by our editor as the tumbling behaviour. Clearly wrong (IMO, but that is indeed the whole point), and thus I can only strongly disagree with the whole worldview. Even suspecting a certain cheeky contrarianism.
 ...now, obviously, the arguments above are said and done. And if I could be sure it was an honest edit, ''and'' a valid replacement candidate was being provided, then I'd grumble and gripe internally over a needless replacement. But I'm just not sure it deserves to be edited out with such uncertain justification. And, clearly, I feel strongly enough about that to not only revert it but write (...counts...) ''four'' whole paragraphs trying to explain my multifaceted thoughts on the subject. But over to all you other editors, if anyone understands (or thinks they understand) both the question and the possible answer. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 00:45, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2722: Etymonline

2023-01-10T11:03:18Z

172.71.178.186: erased my own comment because I just realized it's pointless, it just repeats something that's clearly in the comic.

Random fact: I recently finished reading etymonline.com from beginning to end. It taught me things about the English language that I didn't know that I didn't know. [[User:Darthpoppins|Darthpoppins]] ([[User talk:Darthpoppins|talk]]) 00:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Nice. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.235|172.71.167.235]] 04:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear whomever wrote the current explanation, please take an English composition course. It's clear you mean well, but it's really hard to read your work. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.216|172.71.158.216]] 04:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In the comic, french word "étymologie" is incorrectly spelled "ethimologie" which is referred to as "Old French". I wonder whether that mistake was done on purpose ?
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.222|141.101.68.222]] 08:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: "Old French etimologie, ethimologie (14c., Modern French étymologie), from Latin etymologia, from Greek etymologia" from the Etymonline entry for "etymology"[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 10:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

: Given that it's over 350 years from now, it really ought to say 'from Old English etymology', with what we currently call Old English now being known as Really Old English.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 09:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

1160: Drop Those Pounds

2023-01-09T21:47:12Z

172.71.178.186: /* Transcript */ Dissassociating the out-of-poster caption/comment from the poster text.

{{comic
| number = 1160
| date = January 14, 2013
| title = Drop Those Pounds
| image = drop those pounds.png
| titletext = If the flyers don't work, we'll switch to the LEAST subtle method of informing a town of the existence of a trebuchet club.
}}

==Explanation==
The comic presents a flyer with text typical of a ubiquitous advertisement for a "Weight Loss Program". However, the image at the bottom of the flyer and the text below the flyer make it clear that the flyer is actually an advertisement for a trebuchet club. This unexpected meaning is meant to highlight the ambiguity of the flyer's content. A {{w|counterweight trebuchet}} is typically a gravity powered siege engine, which was originally used to attack fortifications. It works by dropping a raised counter weight to rotate a throwing arm, launching a projectile on a ballistic path. The phrase "We'll help you hit your target by dropping 30 pounds FAST" is where the ambiguity is produced. In the context of a weight loss ad, the "target" would be a rhetorical device referring to the weight which one wishes to achieve. In the context of a trebuchet club, the target is a literal location which one is trying to hit with a projectile. Likewise, a weight loss ad may indicate that a client could quickly lose 30 pounds (~13.6 kg). However, in this context, the 30 pounds being dropped is either the counter-weight - which is dropped to provide a trebuchet with its power, implying a rather small trebuchet - or the projectile itself being dropped at the target - it will be slower than the counter-weight but definitely still much faster than any weight loss program.

The only hint that the flyer advertises a trebuchet club is in the drawing at the bottom of the flyer, which appears to show two individuals pondering a ballistic path towards a castle tower, though no trebuchet is shown.

The text below indicates that this flyer "may have been too subtle". The title text suggests that, if the flyer is indeed too subtle a form of advertisement, they will use the LEAST subtle options of announcing their club's existence — likely by using their trebuchet to attack the town. That would certainly get the club some attention!

See also [[382: Trebuchet]].

==Transcript==
:[We see a poster taped to a wall. It has Megan and Cueball in the bottom left, a silhouetted crenelated tower in the bottom right, and a thin arc between them. It reads:]
:Struggling with those 2013 resolutions?
:We'll help you hit your target
:By dropping thirty pounds '''fast'''
:[Small print.]
:WEB: http://[illegible].com
:CALL: [illegible]

:[Caption, below:] The flyer for our trebuchet–building club may have been too subtle.

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

Talk:2720: Biology vs Robotics

2023-01-05T11:51:01Z

172.71.178.186:

The Explanation says "'Cueball complains to the robot that biology (And presumably being biological) is annoying/bad, stating "Biology sucks" and "Bodies have all these problems'" but the comic currently says "Biology is *the worst*. Bodies have all these *random* problems." Was the comic updated or is the explanation inaccurate? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.100|172.71.102.100]] 23:29, 4 January 2023‎ (UTC)

As part of building the robot, Cueball (or xer builder, if he didn't build xim) have been drilling holes in xim. Xe doesn't care because xe doesn't have nerve endings. As a result of this conversation, xe discovers that the not-caring would not be reciprocated if xe began drilling holes in humans.{{unsigned ip|172.68.34.215|05:41, 5 January 2023}}
:I think it's not quite that, perhaps just more a passive-aggressive attitude by the robot, who just happens to know that any damage ''they'' suffer is going to need at the very least some form of metalworking handyman to patch the damage up (possibly an engineer). But there's not enough context to reliably narrow it down. For example, does a hole 'hurt' the robot (independently of whether it impairs functionality), or is it just an annoyance (or necessitates a system shut-down) until repairs are completed. Yet obviously they like the idea of having a self-repairing system, without understanding that there are different limitations and consequences...
:''But'', the joke appears to be (to me) that the biological being is bemoaning all the flaws in his body's design, whilst not appreciating how truly remarkable are its many useful features, such as (limited, but not insignificant) recovery from trauma. Something the robot has its own perspective on. Simple as that? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.224|172.70.85.224]] 10:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Very tempted to add in that, if there was a designer/engineer, the problems of biology might be so easily identified and designed out (or never designed in, in the first place). Except that there's often a few 'awkward' (or even unidentified) flaws in an ostensibly finalised project (at least with man-made things) and I also would attract the ire of the YECs/etc who believe there ''was'' a biological 'designer' (despite seemingly having made such errors along the way). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 11:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2420: Appliances

2023-01-03T17:23:40Z

172.71.178.186: /* Coloring of table */

This seems related to [[1890: What to Bring]]. [[User:Bubblegum|bubblegum]]-[[User_talk:Bubblegum|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bubblegum|contribs]] 02:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I actually disagree with the stove and washing dishes. In a large pot with water and with some stirring one can remove stains from cloths and kill germs. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.28|141.101.96.28]] 07:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
:I suppose a mesh with spacing of roughly 1 cm or 1/2 inch placed near the bottom could help filter out any dirt/crumbs/similar that come out. [[User:Solomon|Solomon]] ([[User talk:Solomon|talk]]) 18:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

It's interesting that all green squares are mirrored along the diagonal, with one exception, but no yellow ones at all. Usually you would assume that somewhat similar things result in a yellow square on both sides. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 07:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

== A washing mashine can (and does) spin-dry clothes ==

A spin-drying program can usually be selected separately without getting the clothes wet. While this is not effective as a dryer, still much better than nothing.
----

I microwave can boil eggs, you just nweed to wrap them in foil and ensure they are covered by the boiling water. The foil acts as a faraday cage and ensures they only cook by conduction from the outside and the water stops arcing.
You cvan also make scrabled eggs and omlettes. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 09:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
:You seriously suggest putting foil into the microwave? I guess you don't mean tinfoil/aluminum? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 09:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
::yes, read what they said. The aluminium foil happens to be unnecessary because they are immersing the eggs in water which will eventually boil. A fun thing to do is say to put a half a cup of water in the microwave, and listen to the screams from people who don't know that a couple of halved grapes are just fine with that half cup of water. One year old microwaves may not need the water; the half cup of water thing is from the directions for use on a twenty year old microwave. Edit by me[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.140|162.158.75.140]] 05:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
:: You can put a foil there IF you know what you are doing. Try dissecting a microwave popcorn bag - its bottom has an aluminium foil inside and acts as a pan. I was surprised by inclusion of egg as okay by Randall though - I thought egg yolks were famous for infrequent but nasty [https://abcnews.go.com/Health/dangers-microwaving-eggs/story?id=51630977 superheating surprises] when microwaved. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.165.116|162.158.165.116]] 10:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
::: You don't even need to know what you are a doing. I often don't bother to heat a skillet and fry two eggs in an oiled ceramic bowl. They don't cook evenly, so you gotta rearrange them.
500watt oven. For a 1500 one use a quarter power. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.52|108.162.216.52]] 05:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm a bit weirded out by the idea that the eggs in the grid are specified as being poached. I'd have thought that "eggs in a microwave" meant scrambled, unless otherwise specified. And yes, OK, saying "poached" is specifying otherwise, you're right, thanks for mentioning it, but the implication is that poaching is the way that microwaves cook eggs. I've cooked a lot of eggs, microwave and otherwise, and today is the first day the idea of using a microwave to poach them has come up. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 00:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
----
I didn't get this at all until I read the explanation, as I am red-green colorblind and the shades of red and green that Randall chose appear completely identical to me.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.35|141.101.104.35]] 09:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
:Oh man, I wonder whether Randall is aware of the difficulty his choice in colors creates for colorblind readers. He's done comics referring to colorblindness before, hasn't he? I wonder if a subtle edit should be in order, on his part. (Alternatively, a confusion map of which vision types perceive differences between which colors, labeled in the same problematic colors, might have a certain apropos irony...?)
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 18:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
----

What a microwave does to bread is very weird. It seems to make the bread tougher (i.e., harder to bite through; in one case of a microwaved sandwich I was totally unable to bite off pieces), but doesn't make it stiffer (it ends up kind of like rubber). It doesn't wind up unevenly toasted like in the picture, but rather cooked in a completely different way. [[User:Magic9mushroom|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom|talk]]) 11:22, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

----
Using a microwave to dry clothes is generally a bad idea, there is quite a high chance of burns. The most household appliance to quickly dry clothes beside a dryer is actually the freezer. [[User:Perigril|Perigril]] ([[User talk:Perigril|talk]]) 13:20, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

----
Updated transcript from [[1890: What to Bring]]. Considering the increased size of this table maybe something else is wiser? Does anyone know why the three first items are separate, or why the washing machine appears only to wet parts of the shirt? Should the cited text from the comic be written in all caps to match the comic? Should the "with a" between the pairs be replaced with something better to indicate that unlike What to Bring, Appliances does not have an equivalent to the "Should you bring _____ to ______"-text? --[[User:IonIceXIII|IonIceXIII]] ([[User talk:IonIceXIII|talk]]) 13:22, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

----
Attempting to do as well as possible in each square could make an interesting short video series. Stove/oven could probably achieve 6 greens, at least for quality of results if not for the time required [[User:Jgt|Jgt]] ([[User talk:Jgt|talk]]) 13:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
:I love this. Where do I click "Like" & "Subscribe"? [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 19:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
:I agree that the stove/oven deserves more green. I'm using the oven to dry (not just) clothes pretty often ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.82|141.101.96.82]] 21:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
----
A classic example of a diagonally dominant matrix. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.41|162.158.62.41]] 18:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

----
I'm surprised how many people persist in using "bad" toasters (slot loading). They're terrible at handling pretty much everything except sliced bread, & are completely impractical for more than half the things one might want "toasted". Even a sliced bagel turns out better in a half-decent "toaster oven" than in any slot-loader I've seen; & with a toaster oven you can toast the toppings too. (For instance: peanut butter is better toasted! Warm gooey cream cheese! Reheat muffins with loads of butter on top!) Try making a toasted sandwich in a slot loader; they're a nightmare. Even cleaning them is more effort than a toaster oven. Slot loaders are terrible, obsolete fire hazards, as far as I'm concerned. Yet when you say "toaster", people still visualize a slot loader. It's like if you said "pencil" & everyone visualized a stick of bare graphite. The graphite can conditionally be used for some purposes related to "pencil" but the wood cased design with rubber eraser is far more practical. Same situation with toasters; why use a slot-loader when you can get a good toaster instead?
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 19:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
: It is an American thing. It is just how they believe toasters are supposed to look like. Also try telling them slices of real bread aren't square :D [[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.104|172.69.55.104]] 09:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

----
I seem to recall a Cutthroat Kitchen episode where one of the chefs was forced to cook eggs with a toaster. I think they turned the toaster on its side, then put the egg in a shallow dish that was placed inside the slot. I don't remember if that chef was cut, though. - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.218|162.158.212.218]] 22:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Wait, you can cook fish in a dishwasher? Guess I'm one of today's lucky 10,000. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 01:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
: Don't. It is like canning greenbeans with aspirin. The aspirin fucks up the flavor of the greenbeans and with or without the aspirin you must process the greenbeans properly. SDT[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.239|162.158.74.239]] 05:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
::Yeah I'm obviously not going to actually do that, but it's fun that I learned it's technically possible to cook fish like this. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 06:08, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

== Washing machine cooking options ==

Some modern dishwashing machines will hit fairly high temperature for part of the cycle.

https://www.reviewed.com/dishwashers/features/dishwashers-with-effective-sanitize-cycles

Our Miele dishwasher tits 65C during part of the washing cycle (not the drying part).

Classic sous vide egg poaching temperature is 64C so it should be able to poach an egg if you like your yolks runny. It's also plenty hot enough to sous vide fish (as long as it is a relatively thin fillet). Here I would be worried about overcooking white fish but firm fish like tuna or monkfish might work well. I'll give it a go tonight and report back!

== Toaster Cooking, etc... ==

Standard Slot toaster with Toaster Bags can cook many things in a toaster, including eggs and fish

My Washing Machine (AEG) has a top temperature of 95 C (washing cycle) so I'm pretty sure I could cook many things in it, if pushed.

Microwave - surely - with the correct setting (low) you could adapt the stove top washing method mentioned above to clean clothes? OH, and you can certainly cook eggs in a MW - Fried, Scrambled, OR Poached (not tried boiled, but can't see why it would be much different from poached, you *may* want to put a hole in the shell though to avoid explosions...)

Shame Freezer isn't on the matrix - supposedly the best way to keep Jeans fresh is to freeze them... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.85|141.101.68.85]] 11:12, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

== Main page error? ==

The main page currently has some sort of welcome template accidentally added to it.

Screenshot: https://ibb.co/F08GNnN

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&type=revision&diff=205838&oldid=158337

https://web.archive.org/web/20210205200636/https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.244|162.158.238.244]] 20:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

== Coloring of table ==

The table should be adjusted to be colored like the comic: see [[2360: Common Star Types]] as an example. [[User:SilverTheTerribleMathematician|SilverTheTerribleMathematician]] ([[User talk:SilverTheTerribleMathematician|talk]]) 00:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
:Try it, then. It's easy enough to do. Check it via Show Preview until you're happy (''if'' it turns out that you're ever happy, but I say this rather than part-submitting your experiments and changes while you're tweaking such a big overall change) and then commit the change and let others judge your edit and adjust/revert accordingly.
:If you need to know ''how'' to do it, and don't already know (perhaps by checking the source of other Tables you admire) click on the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Contents Help] link to the left (or just there, where I linked anyway), find the Tables page under the Advanced Editing section (IIRC) and find on that page all the cell-formatting details you need. (And loads that you won't need.)
:HTH, HAND [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 17:23, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

2717: L6 Lagrange Point

2022-12-28T04:02:41Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */ Obvious typo

{{comic
| number = 2717
| date = December 27, 2022
| title = L6 Lagrange Point
| image = l6_lagrange_point_2x.png
| imagesize = 399x400px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It's difficult to orbit L6 stably due to gravitational perturbation from Akron and Toledo.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a LANDED LAGRANGE POINT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In celestial mechanics, the {{w|Lagrange point}}s are points of equilibrium for small-mass objects under the influence of two massive orbiting bodies. Or in simpler terms, positions in space where objects sent there tend to stay put, relative to the defining bodies. Though additional gravitationally significant bodies add complications, as any drifting off a stable point might (depending upon the point concerned) quickly increase the tendency to depart the area of 'stability' for the L1, L2, and L3 points. The L4 and L5 points can actually retain objects stably over long periods, resulting in Jupiter capturing the {{w|Trojan (celestial_body)|Trojan Asteroids}}.

There are five traditional Lagrange points, two spaced on the same orbital path as the original object (in this case Earth), and three more colinear with the Earth and the body it orbits (the Sun). Randall claims that a sixth Lagrange point has been discovered outside of {{w|Cleveland}}, {{w|Ohio}}. {{w|LaGrange,_Ohio|Lagrange, OH}} is a small (population 2,103) village outside Cleveland [[https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lagrange,+OH+44050/ map]]. This is pretty obviously farcical, as this would still be part of the Earth and thus not a separate Lagrange point, and [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlaceWorseThanDeath plays into Cleveland's reputation as a strange place].

The title text mentions {{w|Akron}} and {{w|Toledo,_Ohio|Toledo}}, two other large cities in Ohio. It says that their gravitational influence is the reason why orbits around Cleveland are unstable.

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

Huge space news: Astronomers have discovered a new Lagrange point just outside Cleveland.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Science]]

414: Mistranslations

2022-12-21T00:54:38Z

172.71.178.186: Undo revision 302004 by 172.68.174.192 (talk) No reason to switch from the long-used generic versions (arose between the 15th and 18thC...) to the specifically cultural ones.

{{comic
| number =414
| date =April 23, 2008
| title =Mistranslations
| image =mistranslations.png
| titletext =Oh, I think this word might mean 'Crisco'!
}}

==Explanation==
The ''{{w|Kama Sutra}}'' is a well-known work on human sexual behavior originally written in the language Sanskrit, in India sometime between 400 BCE and 200 CE. It's not exclusively a "sex manual," as it also contains a guide to virtuous and gracious living, but in the Western world, it's primarily thought of as a manual of exotic sex positions.

Given that the ''Kama Sutra'' was written almost 2,000 years ago, it's doubtful that it has ''any'' references whatsoever to a skateboard ramp, but Cueball and Megan enjoy their badly-translated version of the ''Kama Sutra'' so much that they refuse to change it.

The title text refers to {{w|Crisco}}, a brand of {{w|shortening}} that is used in baking, as well as a sexual lubricant. It has been mentioned before in [[330: Indecision]] and later in [[557: Students]].

==Transcript==
:[A bed sits on the ground in the middle of the frame. At the left of the frame, Cueball stands atop a skateboard jump ramp twice his height, one foot on the back of a skateboard poised over the coping. At the bottom of the ramp is a small kicker ramp, which will launch him over the bed. Megan, to the right of the frame, stands on the roof of a house grasping a rope, which is affixed directly over the bed. They are both poised to begin their motion.]
:Our copy of the Kama Sutra has a couple mistranslations.
:Which we refuse to fix.

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

2712: Gravity

2022-12-18T11:52:19Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */ From experience.

{{comic
| number = 2712
| date = December 16, 2022
| title = Gravity
| image = gravity_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x700px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It's a long way down.
}}

*To experience the interactivity, visit the [http://xkcd.com/2712/ original comic].
==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by THE UNIVERSE FROM A PIECE OF FAIRY CAKE- Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this interactive comic, the viewer pilots a small spaceship throughout a vast area in space. The viewer is capable of exploring various bodies and planets within the play area, many containing easter eggs alluding to the book What If? 2 and previous xkcd comics. The flight mechanics are largely, if not entirely, Newtonian, so the vessel is capable of using the gravity of planets to alter its trajectory or even enter orbit. The spaceship has several indicator circles around it which appear when a gravitational body comes into range, showing the direction towards their center of gravity and the size of the body.

The arrow keys rotate the spaceship and accelerate it forward and backward. On mobile the comic will full screen, pressing either side of the center rotates the spaceship, and pressing in the center accelerates it forward. There is no way to accelerate backward on mobile – unless you're glitched inside a planet, in which case it is the ''only'' way to move.

It is fairly easy to fly between planets as long as you pay attention to orbital mechanics don't just floor the accelerator. The background stars show your velocity and orientation relative to the nearest gravity well. If you are having difficulties navigating space, point towards a gravity orb and accelerate for only a few seconds. Wait until the background stars spin wildly, and then reduce your velocity to 0 before gently accelerating towards to object.

There is no "universal" point of view — the bottom of the window, "down", is oriented towards the object exerting the most gravity upon the player. Multiple things found in this comic draw attention to this, such as how on Earth Ponytail says to White Hat, "I checked downforeveryoneorjustme.com and it says just me", and he replies "Yeah, I guess down isn't down for everyone."

Throughout the play area are coins that change the spaceship into different rockets and non-space based vehicles, including humans.

The comic promotes Randall's new book [https://xkcd.com/what-if-2/ What If? 2], which was released in September and is available for purchase. Many of the planets contain references to various What If? articles.

The comic is similar to [[1608: Hoverboard]], which celebrated Thing Explainer instead.

===Celestial Bodies===

The following is an incomplete table of features:

{|class="wikitable sortable"
!
!
!
!
! colspan="4"|References
!
|-
! ID
! Description
! Transcript
! Tiles (X, Y)
! What If
! XKCD
! Movies
! Other
! Explanation
|-
|<code>origin</code>
|'''Starting planet'''
|
|(0, 0)
|
|
|
|
|The starting planet. The player begins on the launch pad in a landed position. Collecting the orbiting cannonball will transform you into a more advanced rocket.
|-
|<code>earth</code>
|'''Earth'''
|
|(27867,-35648)
|
|
|
|
|A planet with among other things; a crane dropping a comet onto a dinosaur, unusually high speed squirrels, Megan inviting Cueball into a pool, a region where the frame rate is intentionally limited, a flagpole, a literal rabbithole referencing the figuratively speaking rabbit hole, someone aiming at a satellite with an arrow, a lake with an eel, the earth-moon firepole, a volcano, two figures being attacked by a third with a sword, two kids playing soccer (Catching the ball will turn the ship into a soccer ball), a farmer on a tractor being stuck in what seems elastic earth, a banana pile, Megan and Cueball digging a hole (in the center of this planet is the "earth's core" referenced below, the Niagara Falls water being redirected into the LHC, Japan(?) leaving earth, a tube to the bottom of the ocean and a reference to everyoneorjustme.com
|-
|
|Earth's core
|
|
|
|
|
|
|[[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] floating in a small space in the center of the planet in inverted rotations. Can be legally accessed using a high velocity collision onto the surface of the planet, although requires tapping the up arrow afterwards many, many times.
|-
|<code>europa</code>
|'''Europa'''
|
|(13180, -2540)
|
|
|
|
|Europa, one of Jupiter's many moons (in real life). A broken, icy crust has a single path into its core.
|-
|
|Europa's crust
|"It's so unfair we don't get to compete in EuroVision."
"The region of the solar system where liquid water can exist on the surface is the habitable zone, and the region where it can exist beneath the surface of moons is the Eurozone."

"WHIRRRR"
|
|Y
|
|
|
|Europa's crust, with a single entrance into the core demarcated by an octopus leaving a hole.
Cueball states that Europa is in the Eurozone, a pun on the ''other'' Eurozone, with liquid underneath its surface.

A roomba whirs across the icy crust.

Cueball has a hairdryer and is melting the surface of the crust. A direct reference to [https://what-if.xkcd.com/35/ What If's Hairdryer].
|-
|
|Europa's core
|"We've always used neutrinos for astronomy, but if we place my 'optical telescope' in orbit above the kryosphere, we could potentially observe the universe using electromagnetic waves. Who knows what else there is out there besides stars! There could be other worlds!"
"Hi, I'm Annie. Welcome to the depths of Europa. There's some weird stuff down here."
"We were caught in a powerful November gale on the Great Lakes outside Whitefish Bay. Our ship foundered and sank here." "This is Jupiter's moon Europa." "It was a REALLY powerful gale."
"Does our book club really need this much secrecy?" "That sounds like a question a SPY would ask."
|
|
|
|
|
|A watery ocean with octopi looking out into the great unknown using telescopes. This is a reference to octopus's intelligence here on earth! There's also a secret path leading to a book club, through the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald.
|-
|<code>b612</code>
|'''B-612'''
|"Asteroid deflection mission to earth. The package is delivered. Commencing planetary threat neutralization."
|(2610,3700)
|
|Y
|
|
|A reference to [https://xkcd.com/618/ Asteroid]. The little prince is having his asteroid blown up as it was heading towards Earth, apparently.
|-
|<code>dogplanet</code>
|'''Dog park planet'''
|
|(1240, 11230)
|
|
|
|
|A planet with a dog park. Covered in dogs, along with dog walkers and some fences. There's a hole being dug by two dogs and a dog bone empty space in the center.
|-
| <code>goodhart</code>
|'''What If? 2 scenario planet'''
|
|(-13300,-3260)
|
|
|
| Y
| Contains a reference to Kerbal Space Program, whimsically referring to the launchpad as the Vehicle Disassembly Building.

Contains a figure in a cave saying "MMM SPIDERS HOMF NOMF", which may be a reference to the [https://reallyreallyreallytrying.tumblr.com/post/40033025233/average-person-eats-3-spiders-a-year-factoid Spiders Georg] meme.
|-
|<code>sun</code>
|'''The Sun'''
| "The sun is governed by magnetohydrodynamics, or 'Magic' for short"
"My countertop!"
"This will make a good soup base"
"Can I touch it yet?" "No, be patient. It's still too hot. Give it another 20 or 30 billion years."
"It's okay. I'm wearing five layers of sunscreen."
TV Anchor: "The forecast for today is lots of sun"
"This should be enough sunscreen"
|(-14950, 12080)
|
|
|
|
|Difficult to escape from if you hit the core.
|-
|
|Sun's core
| Cueball: "The core of the sun may seem hot, but it only produces about as much energy per volume as a lizard" Megan: "Wow. So how many lizards are there?" Cueball: "No-one knows."
|
|Y
|
|
|
|Difficult to escape from. Can be escaped by rotating around the sun until an escape-like velocity could be reached.
|-
|<code>soupiter</code>
|'''Soupiter'''
|"I think it's chicken noodle? Hard to tell."
|(-800, -9040)
|Y
|
|
|
|A planet made of soup, with a core. As commented by Cueball, noodle soup. Has several small versions of other planets floating around it.
|-
|<code>nojapan</code>
|'''Earth without Japan'''
|"Something is missing."
|(-7680, -5850)
|Y
|
|
|
|Earth, except it's missing japan.
|-
|<code>japanmoon</code>
|'''Just Japan'''
|
|(-5930, -5800)
|Y
|
|
|
|A moon with water surrounding... just Japan.
|-
|<code>pigeons</code>
|'''A blob labeled "Pigeons"'''
|
|(-9020, -2490)
|Y
|
|
|
|A reference to Chapter 6 of What If? 2, where it would take 1.6 x 10^25 pigeons to lift you and a chair up to the halfway point of Australia's Q1 skyscraper.
|-
|<code>enterprise</code>
|'''Starship Enterprise'''
|
|
|
|
|Y
|
|Star Trek reference: The Enterprise-C, yes 2344,commanded by Captain Garrett's. While defending a Klingon outpost, the weapons discharges resulted in the creation of a temporal rift, through which the badly damaged Enterprise drifted. In the comic, there is a large, invisible gravity distortion near the Enterprise-C
|-
|<code>qwantz</code>
|'''Dinosaur planet'''
|"Welcome... to Jurassic Park."
| (20403,-49559)
|
|
|Y
|
|An homage to [https://www.qwantz.com/ Dinosaur Comics], a webcomic Randall has mentioned several times before. All the dinosaurs on the planet are black-and-white versions of the clip art dinosaurs in that comic. Also references the Jurassic Park movies, with CEO John Hammond welcoming paleontologists Dr. Sattler and Dr. Grant to the planet. The long grass depicted is a plot point in later films.
|-
|
|'''What If? 1 scenario planet'''
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
|<code>roads</code>
|'''Cat blocking traffic flowing through portals'''
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
|<code>outside</code>
|'''Edge of the Universe'''
|
| ( 6081, 26138 )
|
|
|
|
|It looks like a planet labeled "edge of the universe". Outside the universe, so inside the "edge of the universe planet", is another universe, the bubble universe. Hidden entrance is between 10 and 11 'o clock.
|-
|<code>roads</code>
|'''A tree larger than the planet it's growing on'''
|
|
|
|Y
|
|
|May be a reference to [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2:_Petit_Trees_(sketch) Petit Trees]. More probably, a reference to ''The Little Prince'', a french children's novel about a traveler from a distant asteroid. In the novel, baobab trees are a serious threat to the Prince's home asteroid, as they are so large that their roots would engulf the asteroid entirely. Randall has alluded to The Little Prince numerous times before, especially in what-if articles.
|-
|<code>outside</code>
|'''Milliways'''
|
| in code: <code>[0,-14500]</code> in game: <code>[0,29000]</code>
|
|
|Y
|Y
|A reference to Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe from ''The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy''. On one side of the planet, Ponytail, Cueball, Megan, and other characters gather on the patio of the Milliways restaurant; on the other side, the Sojourner rover examines a rock.
|-
|<code>greatattractor</code>
|'''The Great Attractor'''
|
|
|
|Y
|
|
|Beret Guy stands on the surface of a large ball labeled "The Great Attractor". Gravity is so strong that escaping is impossible.
|-
|<code>present</code>
|'''Present'''
|"I didn't do any of my Christmas shopping yet because I was too busy drawing tiny planets."
"I'm done with my shopping! I got everyone What if? 2"

"...You got me my own book?"

"Yeah! I figured that since you wrote it, it must be right up your alley."

"It does make a good gift, though. You can get it at xkcd.com/whatif2"

"I got you this present!"

"Is it an angry bobcat?"

"It might not be."
|in code: <code>[22820,-18920]</code> in game: <code>[45640,37840]</code>
|
|Y
|
|
|The XKCD cast react to giving each other What if 2? as a present. Gravity at the bottom of the missing quarter of the planet is inescapable. Black Hat gives Cueball a "gift" which he claims "might not be a bobcat", a reference to [[A-Minus-Minus]]
|-
|<code>maw1</code>, <code>maw2</code>, ... <code>maw14</code>
|'''Black hole cluster'''
|
|
|
|
|
|
|A cluster of black holes with extremely high gravitational strength, set to the maximum of 2048. Not particularly easy to land on with multiple conflicting gravitational fields, but once landed on, rather difficult to escape.
|-
|<code>remnant</code>
|'''Remnant'''
|"All right, that's close enough"
"Oh no"

{{w|Walkin' on the Sun|"So don't delay, act now, supplies are running out"}}

"In 5 billion years, the Sun will run out of fuel and suffer gigennial burnout."

"The immense gravity of the sun's remnant means that this is the tallest possible skyscraper."
|(19620, 3800)
|
|
|
|
|A stellar remnant, with high gravity (making it difficult to escape, although it's possible to achieve escape velocity by flying sideways). Has various small landmarks, including a "skyscraper" and suspension bridge. There are bombs being dropped from above the planet, with one that seems to be sledding on the planet.
|-
|<code>steerswoman</code>
|'''Steerswoman Planet'''
|"As a Steerswoman, I have to answer any question anyone asks me, or I'm expelled from the order."
"What's one question that you would be unwilling to answer?"
"Oh no."

"Handle this artifact with great care. It contains a magical wizard's potion which the ancients called 'trinitrotoluene'"
|(-35070,-2500)
|
|
|
|
|A reference to the Steerswoman series of books by Rosemary Kirstein. Includes a number of references to the series, including a group of people observing a small object orbiting the planet.

Trinitrotoluene is better known as {{w|TNT}}, a powerful explosive.
|-
|<code>peeler</code>
|'''Peeler'''
|
|(-9270, 620)
|
|
|
|
|A reference to the question posed by "What If 2: Lose Weight the Slow and Incredibly Difficult Way". A large potato peeler is seen removing the earth's crust.
|}

===Ships===
{|class="wikitable sortable"
|-
! Name
! Description
! Location
! Filename
! Image
|-
|Default
|The starting ship.
|It is possible to change back to this ship by collecting a dot located within the Black Hole cluster
|ship2
|
|-
| Tintin
|
| On the starting planet; can be obtained by collecting the cannonball in orbit
| ship-tintin
|
|-
| Figure
|Stick figure
|On Goodhart, atop the mountain up which Sisyphus is pushing his boulder.
|ship-figure
|
|-
| Soccer ball
| Soccer ball shaped ship
| On Earth, between two figures playing ball
|ship-soccer
|
|-
|Alternative Ship
|Slightly thicker version of default ship
|Only available by using console to change Comic.ship
|ship1
|}

==Data Dump==

extracted from a JSON blob near the bottom of <code>https://xkcd.com/2712/comic.js</code>.
I believe this to be all the data but i'm not sure. this should probably be on a different page but i'll leave that up to the smart people
<pre style="height:10em;overflow-y:scroll;">
{
"items": {
"coin-cannonball": {
"consumable": "yes",
"effect": "transformship|ship-tintin",
"image": "coin",
"loc": [
359,
-815
],
"size": [
40,
40
]
},
"coin-figure": {
"consumable": "yes",
"effect": "transformship|ship-figure",
"image": "figure",
"loc": [
-15050,
-2984
],
"size": [
40,
40
]
},
"coin-regular": {
"consumable": "yes",
"effect": "transformship|ship2",
"image": "regular",
"loc": [
-29976,
-8077
],
"size": [
40,
40
]
},
"coin-soccerball": {
"consumable": "yes",
"effect": "transformship|ship-soccer",
"image": "soccerball",
"loc": [
15293,
11140
],
"size": [
40,
40
]
}
},
"locations": {
"b612": {
"gravity": 60,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
2610,
3700
],
"radius": 82,
"width": 2048
},
"dogplanet": {
"gravity": 300,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
1240,
11230
],
"radius": 337,
"width": 2048
},
"earth": {
"gravity": 21000,
"height": 16384,
"loc": [
14360,
14360
],
"radius": 3275,
"width": 16384
},
"enterprise": {
"gravity": 200,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
1010,
30440
],
"radius": 160,
"width": 2048
},
"europa": {
"gravity": 5000,
"height": 8192,
"loc": [
13180,
-2540
],
"radius": 1625,
"width": 8192
},
"goodhart": {
"gravity": 5000,
"height": 8192,
"loc": [
-13300,
-3260
],
"radius": 1625,
"width": 8192
},
"greatattractor": {
"gravity": 450000,
"height": 4096,
"loc": [
-297000,
-125000
],
"radius": 800,
"width": 4096
},
"japanmoon": {
"gravity": 50,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-5930,
-5800
],
"radius": 67,
"width": 2048
},
"maw1": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-31576,
-9077
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw10": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29516,
-6321
],
"radius": 15,
"width": 2048
},
"maw11": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29381,
-6248
],
"radius": 12,
"width": 2048
},
"maw12": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-26832,
-5928
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw13": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-31743,
-4724
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw14": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-26071,
-10824
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw2": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-30211,
-8831
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw3": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-27975,
-8266
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw4": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29546,
-7971
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw5": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29791,
-7631
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw6": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29328,
-7575
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw7": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29700,
-7426
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw8": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-29165,
-7160
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"maw9": {
"gravity": 2000,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-30772,
-6910
],
"radius": 18,
"width": 2048
},
"nojapan": {
"gravity": 80,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-7680,
-5850
],
"radius": 200,
"width": 2048
},
"origin": {
"gravity": 1500,
"height": 4096,
"loc": [
0,
0
],
"radius": 630,
"width": 4096
},
"outside": {
"gravity": 200,
"height": 16384,
"loc": [
0,
-14500
],
"radius": 125,
"width": 16384
},
"peeler": {
"gravity": 50,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-9270,
620
],
"radius": 40,
"width": 2048
},
"pigeons": {
"gravity": 100,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
-9020,
-2490
],
"radius": 160,
"width": 2048
},
"present": {
"gravity": 300,
"height": 2048,
"loc": [
22820,
-18920
],
"radius": 195,
"width": 2048
},
"qwantz": {
"gravity": 1400,
"height": 4096,
"loc": [
11060,
24870
],
"radius": 850,
"width": 4096
},
"remnant": {
"gravity": 9000,
"height": 4096,
"loc": [
19620,
3800
],
"radius": 537,
"width": 4096
},
"roads": {
"gravity": 40,
"height": 16384,
"loc": [
13240,
-11510
],
"radius": 30,
"width": 16384
},
"soupiter": {
"gravity": 1300,
"height": 4096,
"loc": [
-8000,
-9040
],
"radius": 812,
"width": 4096
},
"steerswoman": {
"gravity": 600,
"height": 4096,
"loc": [
-35070,
-2500
],
"radius": 520,
"width": 4096
},
"sun": {
"gravity": 9000,
"height": 16384,
"loc": [
-14950,
12080
],
"radius": 540,
"width": 16384
}
},
"player": {
"animation": "player.png",
"animcount": 4,
"startloc": [
0,
750
],
"targetheight": 59
},
"tile_height": 1024,
"tile_source": "tile",
"tile_width": 1024
}

</pre>

==Hacks==
Various modes and hacks have been found or developed by the community, and can be activated by opening the Javascript Console (F12 [Or Command-Alt-I in most browsers under Mac OS X] to open Developer Tools, then Console tab) and writing corresponding commands. 
'''Click to expand:''' 

<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed leftAlign" style="width:100%">
 
*'''Speedhack:''' <code>ship.engines = "warp"</code> - Speed hacking, sets speed to 1.4x. set to "standard" to reset to normal speed
*'''Teleport to planet:''' <code>[Comic.voyager.pos.x, Comic.voyager.pos.y] = Comic.planetRects.'''''origin'''''.slice(0,2)</code> - teleport near a planet, in this example near earth. You'll still have to fly a bit towards the nearest planet to reach it. Replace '''''origin''''' with the ID of the planet you want to go to, from the table above.
*'''Teleport to coordinate:''' <code>[Comic.voyager.pos.x, Comic.voyager.pos.y] = '''''[0, -2000]'''''</code> - teleport to an exact coordinate. <code>[0, -2000]</code> happens to take you to the starting area.
*'''Chaos Mode:''' <code>ship.engines="infinite improbability drive"</code> - Seems to randomly teleports the ship. A reference to it's namesake in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
*'''Insta Death:''' <code>ship.shields = false</code> - Kill the player if they land on a planet, the code never sets it to false, so it seems to be always true.
*'''No Clip:''' <code>noclip = true</code> - Enables noclip.
*'''Select ship:''' <code>Comic.ship = "ship-tintin"</code> - Select ship (use filename from list of ships)
*'''Autorotate:''' <code>Comic.cameraRotation = false</code> - View does not rotate with ship
*'''Goggles:''' <code>ze.goggles()</code> - returns a warning: "they do nothing!". This is a reference to Hoverboard, where ''ze.goggles()'' would give you the ability to see false walls. Which itself is most likely a reference to the Simpsons where Radioactive man complains that his safety goggles do nothing against a deluge of acid.
</div>
 

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

Welcome!

To celebrate the world of what if? 2, here is your very own planet to explore!

Give someone the science question-and-answer book what if? 2 for Christmas:
xkcd.com/whatif2

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Book promotion]]
[[Category:Interactive comics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Bobcats]]

User talk:Jkshapiro

2022-12-07T07:00:23Z

172.71.178.186: /* Omitting words */ new section

Hi Jkshapiro! What kind of development do you do? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 11:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
: Actually the more I learn about front end development the more I realise I don't actually do it. I do have a programming background and I can slap together enough Javascript to create pretty decent prototypes, but when you start getting into intermediate stuff like MVC frameworks or the shadow DOM I lose interest. Really what I am professionally is a very good interaction designer with some decent skills in related areas such as prototype development, business analysis, and project management. I'll update my user page; thanks for the prompt. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 13:22, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

==Hairbun, girl or not==
Hi Jkshapiro. I have made a comment in your [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Rename_Hair_Bun_Girl|proposal]] and also reinserted a note in the [[Hairbun]] section. I think that it is prudent given that you did not get any replies that agreed with your proposed change from any one else but me. As I already said I do not mind, but many people now know of her as [[Hair Bun Girl]] and might be confused. So at least for the time being there should still be a note. Also I will make a change to her page to explain that she was originally named Hair Bun Girl. Good luck with the massive job of changing her name all along the way. I have used it quite a lot in my huge effort to explain [[1608: Hoverboard]]. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
: Thanks Kynde! [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 16:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

== Glacier Movement ==

Hi, you have edited that a glacier moves at 1 metre/day, instead of 25cm/day as the explanation mentioned earlier. Your information is directly from the Wikipedia article, but that article links a source that says 25cm, which I think is quite confusing. Did you just check the wikipedia article, or do you have other sources that say 1m? I do not want to edit back and forth on this... --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 07:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
: It's a fair cop. Yes, that's exactly what I did and your point is a good one. Will fix here, and I've updated Wikipedia too. Thank you for the personal contact, much appreciated, and would be happy to continue dialogue as necessary. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 15:22, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
::Thanks for the edit, especially for the Wikipedia one. I am not registered to Wikipedia, so I didn't do the change there, when I first checked their source (as the 1m seemed pretty fast to me). --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 09:40, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

== Omitting words ==

That's [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2552:_The_Last_Molecule&diff=prev&oldid=300696 a lot of words to 'omit']... You've every right to rewrite, but seems like a bit dismissive of things that (insofar as I'm concerned) looked relevent/related. If it had been an anonymous editor (like me, yes), I'd have probably undone the change thinking it was excessive for a not particularly current and active article seemingly just randomly edited down. As it is, I thought I'd make this note instead to express my initial reaction (and then leave it). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 07:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

529: Sledding Discussion

2022-11-30T09:27:32Z

172.71.178.186:

{{comic
| number = 529
| date = January 12, 2009
| title = Sledding Discussion
| image = sledding_discussion.png
| titletext = If you get your hands on that one, it's the worst place to have a breaking-up conversation.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] have a perfectly normal sled ride down a perfectly normal hill (engaging in what's traditionally a children's pastime{{Citation needed}}) while Cueball is complaining that he has grown too old for certain things – like learning another language fluently (but not for taking a sleigh ride – although he does not really seem to enjoy it). There is a hypothesis, called the {{w|critical period hypothesis}}, which states that you can only learn a language fluently before a certain age.

Cueball hates that ''options are closed'' to him and feels like he has ''given up a life that was once possible''. The joke is that this reminds Megan about their anniversary coming up. This means that she feels that she has given up a life that was once possible by staying so long with Cueball. Actually this may be the time when they are going to break up.

The reader would thus have expected something ironic to happen at the end of the trip but instead, the only humor in the last frame arises from their commentary on the {{w|meta humor|''lack'' of humor}}.

''{{w|Calvin and Hobbes}}'' is an acclaimed newspaper comic strip that ran from 1985 to 1995. Calvin is a six-year-old child with an active imagination, and Hobbes is his stuffed tiger whom Calvin perceives to be alive through his imagination. The two frequently had philosophical conversations, [http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/2012/12/30 often while sledding]. Calvin sledded on densely wooded hills near where he lived, and the ride would often serve as a perfect parallel to the conversation they were having; for example, in one strip, Calvin talks about how seemingly mundane decisions can nonetheless have lasting consequences, by pointing out how all the things they see as they continue down the hill (and eventually crash into a ravine) are a direct result of him having taken a particular fork early on.

The title text notes that if you did have a Calvin and Hobbes {{w|toboggan}}, it would be the worst place to have a breaking-up conversation, perhaps because the sled itself would literally ''break up'' during the journey – with potentially dangerous consequences. This is also the clue to the fact that the comic is in fact about a break-up situation.

Calvin and Hobbes is also referenced in [[409|409: Electric Skateboard (Double Comic)]].

==Transcript==
:[Megan looks out window through blinds.]
:Megan: It's snowing!
:Cueball: [from off-screen] Sled time!

:[Megan and Cueball outside with sled, at the top of a hill.]
:Cueball: It depresses me that I'm too old to learn another language fluently. My brain's solidified.

:[Megan and Cueball sledding down the hill.]
:Megan: Is there one you wish you knew?
:Cueball: No, I just hate having options closed to me. Like I've given up a life that was once possible.

:[At the bottom of the hill, sled has stopped.]
:Megan: Yeah. Which reminds me - our anniversary is coming up.

:Megan: Man, that ride failed to be a metaphor for our conversation.
:Cueball: Guess this isn't the Calvin & Hobbes-model toboggan.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Romance]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[Category:Calvin and Hobbes]]

2703: Paper Title

2022-11-25T21:34:53Z

172.71.178.186: /* Explanation */ In a more mature exaplanation, this link would have more more mature version of the link. Leaving it up to the next few editors to sort out.

{{comic
| number = 2703
| date = November 25, 2022
| title = Paper Title
| image = paper_title_2x.png
| imagesize = 557x261px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT: The authors hope these results are correct because we all want to be cool people who are good at science.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COOL MICROBE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

A scientific paper usually present a hypothesis and the result of testing the hypothesis. Scientific papers also have titles which describe the content of the papers. Or [[2456: Types of Scientific Paper|should do]].

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

Paper title

Check out this cool microbe we found

Isn’t science supposed to be about formulating a hypothesis and then testing it?

Oh. Yeah, I guess.

Paper title

Is our lab really good at finding cool microbes? Some preliminary data
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Scientific research]]
[[Category:Science]]

Talk:2702: What If 2 Gift Guide

2022-11-24T09:45:11Z

172.71.178.186: Added comment on previous xkcd comic

The puzzle is almost certainly a reference to the Monty Hall problem, since that's usually framed in terms of 3 doors: behind 2 are goats (bad prizes), behind the third is a new (the desirable prize). While the other puzzles share some attributes, I doubt they're intended. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
:Who says goats are a bad prize? If you want to make goat's milk cheese, they are quite necessary. Whereas a car may be a burden, most states still require the recipient to pay sales tax, which can be thousands of dollars. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 01:58, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

The goat can be left on its own, but not with the fox or the cabbage. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.135|172.70.162.135]] 00:12, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Another problem with the James Webb photo is that, from its orbit, the Earth appears too close to the Sun to be safe to photograph. So, the recipient of the gift would have to travel into deep space, well past the orbit of the Moon, for the shoot. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.29|172.70.111.29]] 22:22, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Wasn't Bobcat in a Box inspired by xkcd #576 and its title text, which wasn't even the first boxed bobcat in xkcd? Feels weird to say that the boxed bobcat is a reference to an external brand and not xkcd's rich internal history of mailing people bobcats. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 06:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

== "Katherine and Brandon" ==

Could someone explain those Names in the "Chemistry" entry to me? It would be very atypical for Randall to make a mistake in that place, but both seem to be impossible to spell with the periodic table of elements.
Potassium, Astatine and Helium would give K-At-He- (and some radiation posioning) and Iodine and Neon -Id-Ne. But neither Rubidium (Ru), nor Radium (Ra), nor Ruthentium (Ru), nor Rhodium (Rh) nor Radon (RN) give you a pure "R" and likewise there is no Element Ri or Er, so it is impossible to put the "R" into "Katherine".
Likewise "Brandon" could be started with Boron (B), Radon (Ra), Nitrogen (N) and finished with Oxygen (O) and again Nitrogen (N), but there are only two "D"s in the whole peridoic table and both are fixed to other letters, that would not fit: Paladium (Pd) and Gadolinium (Gd).
P.S.: 3 full Minutes of Captcha-solving for a Wiki? WTF??? {{unsigned ip|172.70.247.13|23:40, 23 November 2022}}
:Potassium-Astatine-Hydrogen-'''Erbium'''-Iodine-Neon [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.184|172.69.79.184]] 23:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
:As for Brandon, you seem to have missed '''Neodymium''' (Nd). So, Boron-Radon-Neodymium-Oxygen-Nitrogen [[User:TurZ|TurZ]] ([[User talk:TurZ|talk]]) 07:00, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Could he be limiting himself to rendering only the capital letters of each element? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.43|172.71.160.43]] 00:17, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
But Astatine is so radioactive that no one has ever seen it. A lump big enough to physically see would instantly sublimate with its own heat of radioactivity. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.7|172.68.210.7]] 00:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Due to the prior comic, I actually bought a Cybiko (I'm into older computer collecting). Now that he's mentioned it again, I'm thankful I got it quick, before the inevitable price rise. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.106|108.162.221.106]] 01:00, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
:Is it good? —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 05:28, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

== Psychology ==

Hi, this is my first edit, I hope I'm doing it right. The psychology example is most likely about the norm of reciprocity (see Wikipedia). It's a very strong norm. Violations of this norm can indeed cause distress to a point where people express anger if they can't reciprocate (which seems somewhat irrational at times).
I'm a psychology student from Germany, I might do some errors when writing in english :) [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.85|198.41.242.85]] 06:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

== Baby Shoes ==

Has nobody mentioned the xkcd comic that references this yet? https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1540:_Hemingway

Artinum [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 09:45, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

File talk:BlackHat head.png

2022-11-18T11:16:34Z

172.71.178.186: Undo revision 298977 by While False (talk) No, it was removed as contributing absolutely nothing of usefulness, after nearly ten years of happy dust-gathering.

Sorry if he looks stretched -- MediaWiki bug with the cache. It should fix itself in a while. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 00:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)