explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2925: Earth Formation Site

2024-04-29T19:49:16Z

172.71.242.206:

The title text is only true for geocentric latitude and longitude, not geodetic (which is what is commonly used). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.125|172.69.58.125]] 18:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm impressed that whatever distant body that sign is placed upon, has actually developed plant life. Especially since it would need to be parked in place relative to the rest of the observable cosmos, & thus seems unlikely to have a suitably close star making regular appearance overhead...
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 19:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
:👍[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 09:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
::Magrathea? [[User:L-Space Traveler|L-Space Traveler]] ([[User talk:L-Space Traveler|talk]]) 14:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
: Hi Proph! I just wanted to say that I enjoy reading your comments here and in the SMBC comment page, if you are in fact ProphetZarquon in both places. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.28|172.70.175.28]] 21:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
::If there's another Prophet Zarquon out there - wait, nope, looks like that's me, too...
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 03:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

:The spatial location of a famous person's birth is technically not where the Solar System now is, also. If you're going to be picky about that. If you do allow the Earth's worldline to be accounted for, then it's broadly true that Earth formed (looks out of window at home) here. I think the principle concern there is whether Earth formed in the collision of planets named Ear and Theia, or whether Earth was Earth before Theia came along, which either way seems to be why there is such a large Moon beside it - made of material from both of the previous planets. And it probably counts as a change of course from the previous situation, although the apparent likelihood that Theia formed in Earth's orbit in originally a Trojan relationship may bear on that - if one planet just caught up with the other in orbit, like tailgating in traffic. Robert.Carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.184|141.101.98.184]] 17:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

The ridiculously specific date may be a reference to how real historical markers frequently get dates incorrect [[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.135|172.70.127.135]] 23:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

The other side of the sign says, "At this exact point in space, 13.7878693 billion years ago, the Big Bang took place." That's true of every point in space, according to the current model. The Big Bang implies that all of space was a single point, and space itself expanded outward from that point. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

The explanation needs to be rewritten. It is missing the point and far to detailed for just saying: The marker could be standing at any point of earth's surface, as reinforced by the title text. The whole discussion about galaxies and solar systems moving is just a matter of the reference system and does not contribute to the understanding of the comic.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.32|172.70.243.32]] 07:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
: I disagree. The section is saying that it could not have reasonably happened on Earth itself due to the fact the Earth and the Solar System itself move around through space. [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 13:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
::Randall was once a physicist. He's aware of the fact that there is no absolute system of measurements, and that locations on Earth are always relative to Earth coordinates, not some sort of galactic map. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 14:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Can you be 'once a physicist'? Once you've been a physicist, aren't you always a recovering physicist?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.92|172.70.90.92]] 16:31, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
::More immediately, it could not have reasonably happened on Earth, since Earth didn't exist until it happened.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.3|172.69.195.3]] 10:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
: I wholeheartedly agree. The whole joke, as reinforced by the title text, is that the marker could be anywhere on Earth. Simplify, simplify.[[User:DKMell|DKMell]] ([[User talk:DKMell|talk]]) 16:21, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Can the Earth's core even have a latitude and a longitude? Aren't those all referring to the surface? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.198|162.158.90.198]] 11:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
:You're right. That is the joke, in fact. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 14:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
:Well, 162.158... is 'right' except that you ''can indeed'' have a latitute, longitude and also ''altitude/depth'' on top, not just restricting yourself to the surface (or Mean Sea Level or whatever other geometric surface you consider as your default).
:As to whether the (centre of the) core can have latitude and longitude, it's a very similar argument as that of whether the (coordinate) poles can have longitudes as well as ±90° latitude.
:If you are asking what either pole's longitude is, it would depend upon the what the algorthm was specified (or fails to have been) for the situation, as you could be told 'undefined', 'NaN', given a placeholder constant (e.g. zero), an effectively random value, a value determinate upon what led to this (you were at <location>, 10 miles south of the north pole, and modified that by 10 miles direct northwards travel, so maintain the same longitude as <location> had), a value that would normally be out of range (e.g. for silently passing on, to do the error-catching/checking later on) or several other options.
:If you're ''specifiying'' the longitude of a pole (for use in an onward algorithm) then it may well (or may not!) be possible to provide any/all of these, but perhaps ultimately ignored/chucked away as meaningless. (Unless you have it doing something like "go ten miles south from north pole, what's the <location> now?", intentionally or otherwise disambiguating via the 'arbitrary but definite' polar longitude.)
:So, similarly, if you're asking "What lat/long is the location of the core", the chances are that you're going to get to go through a different manner of deriving a result from that of requesting information such as "This is my lat/long. Is this (above) where the core is?".
:...though, yes, this still ''is'' very much the joke. Including all the ambiguity as to the rationale involved in however it apparently became disambiguated. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.122|172.69.195.122]] 21:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

It's a [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2925:_Earth_Formation_Site&curid=27482&diff=340784&oldid=340779 valid edit], as it goes, but the ''reason'' seems a little over-omniscient. Speaking from another country that does 'signs' quite a bit (for visibility, as well as strategically placed 'table'-style info for closer perusal), I'm not sure we can say it's anywhere near uniquely US-practice. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.120|141.101.99.120]] 10:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

The explanation talks about the impossibly precise date on the sign, but it's ''not'' highly precise. It's 4,450,000,000 BCE, which as far as we can tell is precise to the nearest 10 million years, or even 50 million - hardly an exact year. (The precision could have been made clear with scientific notation like 4.45x109, but that's not something you'd put on a sign for the general public.) Rounding to the nearest 10 million years matches the precision of [https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html what we know about the formation of the Earth], so it's not unreasonably precise. If Randall had wanted to make a precision joke, he would have used "4,450,002,024 years ago" or something along those lines - something that pegs Earth's formation to a specific year. [[User:DKMell|DKMell]] ([[User talk:DKMell|talk]]) 16:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
:Firstly, you top-posted. Moved your contribution down here.
:Secondly, 4.45x109 only makes clear the imprecision (c.f. "4.450000000x109"). Whereas it would be entirely possible for something to be ''precisely'' in the year 4,450,000,000 BCE, as much as it could be 4,450,000,001 BCE or 4,449,999,999 BCE.
:Of course you could 'creatively lie' to imply the correct precision (at the expense of the correct accuracy), as in the last paragraph of {{w|Mount Everest#19th century|this section on surveying a certain height)... Or you could instead say that it was 4,450,002,023 years ago, but then you'd have to update/replace the sign at some point in 2025. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.206|172.71.242.206]] 19:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

2907: Schwa

2024-03-15T22:20:02Z

172.71.242.206: /* Explanation */ In case nobody else is already writing the explanation for this. (If it clashes, and I notice first, I'll merge.)

{{comic
| number = 2907
| date = March 15, 2024
| title = Schwa
| image = schwa_2x.png
| imagesize = 301x389px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Doug's cousin, the one from London, runs a Bumble love cult.
}}

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

All the spoken text (and title text) in this comic can be spoken, at least in some dialects and enunciations, using ''only'' a {{w|schwa}} as all its voiced vowel-sounds. It may not always work in your own accent, but it is certainly [https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/err-nerr-hull-road-sign-2324619 not limited] to the US dialects that Randall himself would be most familiar with.

As an experiment to see you have an accent of your own which supports this effect, you could try to say "Wh'ts 'p? W's D'g g'nn' c'm? D'g l'vs br'nch" and "N' ', D'gs st'ck c's 'f ' t'nn'l 'bstr'ct'n. ' tr'ck d'mpd ' t'n 'f 'n'ns", using the same inflection at each apostrophe.

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

{{comic discussion}}

520: Cuttlefish

2024-03-11T16:20:02Z

172.71.242.206: Undo revision 337021 by Jupitale (talk) Irrelevant and ill-formed edit from dubious user. Not worth fixing/improving.

{{comic
| number = 520
| date = December 22, 2008
| title = Cuttlefish
| image = cuttlefish.png
| titletext = Unless the CS students finish the robot revolution before you finish the cephalopod one.
}}

==Explanation==
It appears that [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] are {{w|physicists}} visiting a biology lab. Their guide, a {{w|biologist}} looking like Cueball, gives them a description of the humble {{w|cuttlefish}} that is both accurate and makes them sound like other-worldly creatures with highly advanced capabilities.

The scene takes an unusual turn when the scientist implies that the cuttlefish have been easily trained to improve their capabilities. He then demonstrates this by giving a simple command, whereupon the cuttlefish rise out of the water, only to attack and kill both Cueball and Megan, demonstrating an ability to fly, talk, and discharge lethal electric shocks in the process. (See also [[35: Sheep]]).

This is all revealed to be a dream, but it has given Cueball a warning not to underestimate the biologists. Apparently, they can be just as crazy and dangerous as any other kind of scientist. Cueball (who represent [[Randall]] as it is xkcd that salutes in the final panel) offers a toast to all biologists everywhere and plans an alliance with them against the {{w|chemists}}, hoping to prevent further attacks on physicists. He is then shown drinking from a laboratory flask, something that any scientist would be wary of.

In the past, Randall has been somewhat dismissive of the non-math/non-physics scientific disciplines, so this comic may be trying to mend some bridges with biologists. But not with chemists.

In the title text, CS stands for {{w|Computer Science}}. The "robot revolution" references events in film and literature, wherein robots, having become commonplace in the workforce, achieve independent thought and declare war on humanity, like in ''{{w|The Terminator}}'', ''{{w|The Matrix}}'', or the movie ''{{w|I, Robot}}''. Randall implies that the physicists will switch sides if the robot revolution arrives first. {{w|Cephalopod}} is the class of animals that encompasses cuttlefish, as well as {{w|squids}} and {{w|octopodes}}.

==Transcript==
:[A scientist (looking like Cueball) is pointing into an aquarium tank with two small animals floating in the water. He explains that they are cuttlefish to Cueball and Megan, who are on the other side of the tank looking into it, Cueball with a hand to his mouth. Above them there is a frame inside the panel with a caption:]
:We visit a bio lab:
:Scientist: These are cuttlefish.

:[Very detailed drawing of a cuttlefish, with its special W shaped pupils, all eight arms and two longer tentacles, and the striped body with waving parts shown waving down each side. The scientist tells about the animal with text above and below.]
:Scientist (off-panel): They're frighteningly smart, have manipulating arms and tentacles, have ink jets, can dart backwards and see the polarization of light through their w-shaped pupils.
:Scientist (off-panel): And their sides are 200 dpi display screens which they use for camouflage and communication.

:[Back to the original setting where the scientist stands a little farther back from the tank with his arms down. Cueball and Megan have also moved farther back and are even leaning away from the tank.]
:Scientist: When we realized how intelligent they were, we began to teach them.
:Scientist: They've advanced quickly.
:Scientist: '''Cuttlefish: GO.'''

:[The two cuttlefish float straight out of the tank (lines indicating the movement and water splashing at the surface of the tank). The scientist looks down at them, while Cueball and Megan are holding hands and leaning farther back and Cueball taking his hand back to his mouth.]

:[Pan to only the scientist, standing with one arm bend in front of him and the other holding a finger up to his mouth, and the tank from where the cuttlefish now fly toward Cueball and Megan, who are now off-panel. Lines behind the cuttlefish show that they fly right but bob up and down. The cuttlefish talk in a strange way where the letters are alternately up and down.]
:Cuttlefish: K<big>i</big>l<big>l</big> t<big>h</big>e P<big>h</big>y<big>s</big>i<big>c</big>i<big>s</big>t<big>s</big>
:Cuttlefish: K<big>i</big>l<big>l</big> t<big>h</big>e Ph<big>y</big>s<big>i</big>c<big>i</big>st<big>s</big>
:[Pan to Megan and Cueball, with the tank almost inside the left frame. Both cuttlefish are surrounded by their own zigzag lines, which then extend from them in a thin line to encompass either Cueball or Megan. Cueball was running away from them, when this happens, with legs bent at the knees and arms out, one bent. Megan has fallen, lying face down with her arms out.]

:[In this panel with faint gray shading, Cueball is waking up in bed from the dream, rising up to a sitting position suddenly as indicated with two movement lines behind his head. One arm is supporting him on the bed next to the pillow, and the other is pulling his sheet down away from his torso. The first sentence is maybe still part of the dream, as there is no line from Cueball to the sentence, and it is written high up. There is a line to the second sentence.]
:Cueball: Oh god.
:Cueball: I knew it.

:[This panel is divided into five segments. At the top, there is a large caption in two lines. There are three drawings following each other from left to right. First, a bottle is pouring liquid into a an Erlenmeyer flask (a conical laboratory flask) that is half full. Then, Cueball takes the flask and holds it up as a salute. Finally, he drinks from it, leaning his head way back. Below there is more text.]
:<big>xkcd</big>
:Salutes Bio Majors
:If we join you against the chemists, will you train your fleshy minions to leave us alive?

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Dreams]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Animals]]

2893: Sphere Tastiness

2024-02-13T11:59:59Z

172.71.242.206: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2893
| date = February 12, 2024
| title = Sphere Tastiness
| image = sphere_tastiness_2x.png
| imagesize = 388x392px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Baseballs do present a challenge to this theory, but I'm convinced we just haven't found the right seasoning.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a STRANGELY TASTY MOON MADE OF RUSSIAN PELMENI - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic graphs the tastiness vs size of four roughly spherical objects: {{w|melons}}, {{w|grapes}}, {{w|Earth|Earth}}, and {{w|Moon|the Moon}}. Melons and grapes are, in this context, small and very tasty to most people, but the Earth and Moon are large and [https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/formation-earth-and-moon-explained made of rocks and metals], which are not usually considered very tasty. The Earth is a bit higher on the tasty scale than the Moon, probably due to the fact that some things on Earth are tasty. It is unknown what the line would be like if [[Randall]] included [[388: Fuck Grapefruit|grapefruit]].

The comic takes these four data points and makes a regression with them. Randall interpolates from this line that there must be a medium-sized sphere that "tastes okay".

The title text points out that {{w|baseball (ball)|baseballs}} seem to refute this theory since they're not usually thought of as tasty, but they're between the sizes of grapes and melons. Baseballs are balls used in the sport {{w|baseball}}, usually made out of a combination of a rubber or cork centre wrapped in yarn, and covered either by either horsehide, cowhide or synthetic leather. Although most baseballs may not be immediately lethal to consume, they are not likely to be very delicious to eat by the sheer nature of the taste of the materials that make them, something that any seasoning is unlikely to be able to mask (at least in reasonable quantities). However, it suggests that if the right seasonings were found, they would be as tasty.

This is the second comic in a row to feature fruit, graphs and predictions, after [[2892: Banana Prices]], and continues the theme of a logarithmic axial scale to facilitate plotting a linear regression. Here the line is interpolated between known data, rather than extrapolated beyond it. This would ordinarily be far more accurate than extrapolating outside the range of known data. However, Randall's analysis is flawed in multiple ways. Firstly, there are only four data points, which is insufficient to extrapolate from. Secondly, they are tightly clustered, effectively reducing it still further to two data points. Thirdly, these clusters represent entirely different sub-classes of spherical object - fruit and astronomical bodies - while other subclasses are not represented at all (as the title text makes reference to). Also, it should be noted that edible things are not manufactured in 800-meter (½-mile) spheres, as that may be hard to prepare and consume.{{citation needed}} The 800-meter wide sphere could also be a small asteroid or other celestial object, but would not be very tasty, as they are made of rocks and metals, just like the Earth and the Moon. If this is true, Randall’s interpolation on the graph would probably be incorrect. Or perhaps the problem is just seasoning, just like a baseball. However, it is hard to believe that sauce is the solution to making rocks tasty.

The comic refers to this plot as research. This is an exaggeration, since four data points are rarely considered sufficient for research purposes.{{Actual citation needed}} Plotting data on a logarithmic plot and then drawing a line through it, is a common way to visualize data. It makes the exponential relationship of the data more comprehensible. An example of that is the {{w|Gutenberg–Richter_law}} where the magnitude of earthquakes (a logarithmic scale) in a particular region is plotted together with the frequency resulting in a fairly straight line.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Graph with Y axis using an arrow indicating tastiness from "Not Tasty" to "Tasty" and X axis labelled "Sphere Diameter (meters)" with a logarithmic scale running from 10-5 to around 108 (with 10-3, 100, 103 and 106 labelled).]

:[The graph contains two points for "Grapes" and "Melons" at the "Tasty" end of the Y axis, between 10-2 and 10-1 meters, and two points for "The Earth" and "The Moon" at the "Not Tasty" end, both around 107 meters. A straight dashed line shows a linear interpolation between the points. There's a circle with a question mark about halfway between them.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
: My research suggests the existence of an 800-meter sphere that tastes okay.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Baseball]]

2893: Sphere Tastiness

2024-02-13T11:59:41Z

172.71.242.206: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2893
| date = February 12, 2024
| title = Sphere Tastiness
| image = sphere_tastiness_2x.png
| imagesize = 388x392px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Baseballs do present a challenge to this theory, but I'm convinced we just haven't found the right seasoning.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a STRANGELY TASTY MOON MADE OF RUSSIAN PELMENI - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic graphs the tastiness vs size of four roughly spherical objects: {{w|melons}}, {{w|grapes}}, {{w|Earth|Earth}}, and {{w|Moon|the Moon}}. Melons and grapes are, in this context, small and very tasty to most people, but the Earth and Moon are large and [https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/formation-earth-and-moon-explained made of rocks and metals], which are not usually considered very tasty. The Earth is a bit higher on the tasty scale than the Moon, probably due to the fact that some things on Earth are tasty. It is unknown what the line would be like if [[Randall]] included [[388: Fuck Grapefruit|grapefruit]].

The comic takes these four data points and makes a regression with them. Randall interpolates from this line that there must be a medium-sized sphere that "tastes okay".

The title text points out that {{w|baseball (ball)|baseballs}} seem to refute this theory since they're not usually thought of as tasty, but they're between the sizes of grapes and melons. Baseballs are balls used in the sport {{w|baseball}}, usually made out of a combination of a rubber or cork centre wrapped in yarn, and covered either by either horsehide, cowhide or synthetic leather. Although most baseballs may not be immediately lethal to consume, they are not likely to be very delicious to eat by the sheer nature of the taste of the materials that make them, something that any seasoning is unlikely to be able to mask (at least in reasonable quantities). However, it suggests that if the right seasonings were found, they would be as tasty.

This is the second comic in a row to feature fruit, graphs and predictions, after [[2892: Banana Prices]], and continues the theme of a logarithmic axial scale to facilitate plotting a linear regression. Here the line is interpolated between known data, rather than extrapolated beyond it. This would ordinarily be far more accurate than extrapolating outside the range of known data. However, Randall's analysis is flawed in multiple ways. Firstly, there are only four data points, which is insufficient to extrapolate from. Secondly, they are tightly clustered, effectively reducing it still further to two data points. Thirdly, these clusters represent entirely different sub-classes of spherical object - fruit and astronomical bodies - while other subclasses are not represented at all (as the title text makes reference to). Also, it should be noted that edible things are not manufactured in 800-meter (½-mile) spheres, as that may be hard to prepare and consume.{{citation needed}} The 800-meter wide sphere could also be a small asteroid or other celestial object, but would not be very tasty, as they are made of rocks and metals, just like the Earth and the Moon. If this is true, Randall’s interpolation on the graph would probably be incorrect. Or perhaps the problem is just seasoning, just like a baseball. However, it is hard to believe that sauce is the solution to making rocks tasty.

Other fruit opinions have previously been mentioned in [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]].

The comic refers to this plot as research. This is an exaggeration, since four data points are rarely considered sufficient for research purposes.{{Actual citation needed}} Plotting data on a logarithmic plot and then drawing a line through it, is a common way to visualize data. It makes the exponential relationship of the data more comprehensible. An example of that is the {{w|Gutenberg–Richter_law}} where the magnitude of earthquakes (a logarithmic scale) in a particular region is plotted together with the frequency resulting in a fairly straight line.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Graph with Y axis using an arrow indicating tastiness from "Not Tasty" to "Tasty" and X axis labelled "Sphere Diameter (meters)" with a logarithmic scale running from 10-5 to around 108 (with 10-3, 100, 103 and 106 labelled).]

:[The graph contains two points for "Grapes" and "Melons" at the "Tasty" end of the Y axis, between 10-2 and 10-1 meters, and two points for "The Earth" and "The Moon" at the "Not Tasty" end, both around 107 meters. A straight dashed line shows a linear interpolation between the points. There's a circle with a question mark about halfway between them.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
: My research suggests the existence of an 800-meter sphere that tastes okay.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Baseball]]

2893: Sphere Tastiness

2024-02-13T10:57:11Z

172.71.242.206: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2893
| date = February 12, 2024
| title = Sphere Tastiness
| image = sphere_tastiness_2x.png
| imagesize = 388x392px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Baseballs do present a challenge to this theory, but I'm convinced we just haven't found the right seasoning.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a STRANGELY TASTY MOON MADE OF RUSSIAN PELMENI - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic graphs the tastiness vs size of four roughly spherical objects: {{w|melons}}, {{w|grapes}}, {{w|Earth|Earth}}, and {{w|Moon|the Moon}}. Melons and grapes are, in this context, small and very tasty to most people, but the Earth and Moon are large and [https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/formation-earth-and-moon-explained made of rocks and metals], which are not usually considered very tasty. It is unknown what the line would be like if [[Randall]] included grapefruit.

The comic takes these four data points and makes a regression with them. Randall interpolates from this line that there must be a medium-sized sphere that "tastes okay".

The title text points out that {{w|baseball (ball)|baseballs}} seem to refute this theory since they're not usually thought of as tasty, but they're between the sizes of grapes and melons. Baseballs are balls used in the sport {{w|baseball}}, usually made out of a combination of a rubber or cork centre wrapped in yarn, and covered either by either horsehide, cowhide or synthetic leather. Although most baseballs may not be immediately lethal to consume, baseballs are not likely to be very delicious to eat by the sheer nature of the taste of the materials that make up it, something that any seasoning is unlikely to be able to mask (at least in reasonable quantities). However, it suggests that if the right seasonings were found, they would be as tasty.

This is the second comic in a row to feature fruit, graphs and predictions, after [[2892: Banana Prices]], and continues the theme of a logarithmic axial scale to facilitate plotting a linear regression. Here the line is interpolated between known data, rather than extrapolated beyond it. This would ordinarily be far more accurate than extrapolating outside the range of known data. However, this regression line is unlikely to be accurate, given that there are only four points and they come in very close pairs, making it two. Also, it should be noted that edible things are not manufactured in 800-meter (½-mile) spheres, as that may be hard to prepare and consume. The 800-meter wide sphere could also be a small asteroid or other celestial object, but would not be very tasty, as they are made of of rocks and metals, just like the Earth and the Moon. If this is true, Randall’s interpolation on the graph would probably be incorrect. Or perhaps the problem is just seasoning, just like a baseball. However, it is hard to believe that sauce is the solution to making rocks tasty.

Other fruit opinions have previously been mentioned in [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]].

The comic refers to this plot as research. This is an exaggeration, since four data points are rarely considered sufficient for research purposes.{{Citation needed}} Plotting data on a logarithmic plot and then drawing a line through it, is a common way to visualize data. It makes the exponential relationship of the data more comprehensible. An example of that is the {{w|Gutenberg–Richter_law}} where the magnitude of earthquakes (a logarithmic scale) in a particular region is plotted together with the frequency resulting in a fairly straight line.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Graph with Y axis using an arrow indicating tastiness from "Not Tasty" to "Tasty" and X axis labelled "Sphere Diameter (meters)" with a logarithmic scale running from 10-5 to around 108 (with 10-3, 100, 103 and 106 labelled).]

:[The graph contains two points for "Grapes" and "Melons" at the "Tasty" end of the Y axis, between 10-2 and 10-1 meters, and two points for "The Earth" and "The Moon" at the "Not Tasty" end, both around 107 meters. A straight dashed line shows a linear interpolation between the points. There's a circle with a question mark about halfway between them.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
: My research suggests the existence of an 800-meter sphere that tastes okay.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Baseball]]

Talk:2889: Greenhouse Effect

2024-02-05T09:27:55Z

172.71.242.206:

First description! FIRST 🤑 [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 18:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there a category or a name for the set of comics which make the observation of "x thing happened closer to Y thing than today"? --[[User:Raviolio|Raviolio]] ([[User talk:Raviolio|talk]]) 18:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
:Maybe Category:Timelines could work? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 19:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
:It is also similar in structure to many of the comics in [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Category:Comics_to_make_one_feel_old| Category:Comics to make one feel old] but has a quite different theme [[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.156|172.69.6.156]] 23:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Do we have a source for the "their answers closely match modern estimates"? that would be a good thing to add [[User:Happier7713|Happier7713]] ([[User talk:Happier7713|talk]]) 19:35, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

A nit -- the Newcomen atmospheric engine was invented in 1712 and is usually thought of as the first steam engine (at least of the modern, western, world). {{unsigned ip|108.162.245.36 |20:25, 2 February 2024}}
:The Newcomen was certainly started it, and tends to be somewhat overshadowed (I actually walked past ''the'' oldest still-in-place Newcomen beam engine, earlier today... never seen it working (by hydrau;ics, these days), but it's there). But its practical efficiency was limited by its operation, and it took (Boulton and) Watt to make it into the potentially mobile powerhouse that drove much of the really developed stuff (beyond mine-drainage/etc).
:Of course, it was also more fuel efficient, so if we'd have somehow done exactly the same amount of IR via Newcomen-style machines then we'd probably have accelerated the burning of resources across the same period, so... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.49|162.158.74.49]] 00:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I would say we did plenty of work. In 1896, noone had any idea what renewable energy is. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

:There have been windmills and watermills and fire from wood for thousands of years. The real problem is fossils, which release co2 from millions of years. In my opinion, it's about the attitude of "the right to consume" instead of "the right to use". --[[User:LaVe|LaVe]] ([[User talk:LaVe|talk]]) 06:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

“yet after 128 years there’s been close to no progress to changing our infrastructure to be renewable-energy based.” That might or might not be true, depending on how you define “close to no progress” but regardless of that, the comic does not make any such claim, and that part should be deleted frm the explanation of the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.35|162.158.186.35]] 05:06, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

:Given what has appeared in other xkcd comics with a global-warming theme, I think the "close to no progress" reaction is permissible. Whether it is accurate is remarkably hard for me to pin down. A study I found in 2014 said that annual per-capita energy consumption in the USA rose from 100MM to 350MM BTUs between 1900 and 1973, and has since remained almost constant. 1973, of course, was the Arab oil embargo, which stimulated massive investment in energy efficiency that continue to the present day. Each of us now uses many more things for the same energy - but the population is increasing, therefore so is the bulk carbon-dioxide loading. A 2023 US Government attempt to forecast energy use in the USA between now and 2050, I found to be both unreadable and unhelpful in terms of assessing whether we are gaining on energy efficiencies and transition to renewables. There simply were too many variables in the inputs. And as 2020 demonstrated, our response to energy challenges will be forced by economics, not climate politics or comics IMO. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.168|172.71.150.168]] 07:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I was unable to find an article by "Crawford 1997" in which either of the quotes cited in the title text appear in full. They might appear in other articles included in the [https://www.jstor.org/stable/i399217 special issue of the journal Ambio] devoted to the work that Arrhenius and colleagues did in the last decade of the 19th century. The two articles by Elisabeth Crawford in that journal, one sole-authored and one co-authored, provide considerable context for the discovery, including the various competing theories about global warming that were being debated among scientists at the time, and the remarkable observation by Arrhenius that such warming was not a bad thing. According to the Crawford sole-authored paper, Arrhenius wrote (translation from Swedish), "It [global warming] "will allow our descendants, even if they only be those of a distant future, to live under a warmer sky and in a less harsh environment than we were granted." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.130|172.71.151.130]] 07:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
:I feel this assessment should be included in the explanation. Not just because it hints at one reason for climate inaction in cold-to-temperate regions. It also points to a central issue of climate justice: A ''White'' Swedish scientist in 1895 thought of milder winters, but people closer to the equator, who were summarily ignored by the ''White'' scientific community on racist grounds in 1895, are now about to face physically unbearable hothouse conditions. The quote also shows how little this scientist knew about the land that sustained him - every peasant whom he would have bothered to ask could have told him that a +8°C change in temperatures would have devastating effects on agriculture because most plants can't adapt to it and agricultural knowledge of the local soil and climate, that has been painstakingly developed over centuries of famine, would be rendered mostly useless, everywhere. [[User:Transgalactic|Transgalactic]] ([[User talk:Transgalactic|talk]]) 13:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
::I contemplated doing so, but refrained, because I feared it would transform an explanation into a polemic. The main point of the comic, I argue, is that humans have known about global warming, and anthropogenic carbon dioxide's role in it, for far longer than most of today's narratives state, and, in an explanation, it is sufficient to point this out. Those with Bibles may find the ethical underpinnings for this comic and its message in the [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%209&version=NRSVUE ninth chapter of John], particularly v. 41: “If you were blind, you would not have sin. But now that you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains." For my part, I find the principal explanation for climate inaction (not just in the temperate zones, air-conditioning fans) in the concept of "personal advantage". I once estimated that, to bring per-capita energy use in the USA, anno 2014, down to the level current in 1957, that use (thanks to population increase) would have to correspond with energy usage in 1900. No aircraft, few cars, almost no electricity infrastructure and therefore nothing that depends on that infrastructure. I have not attempted to estimate what the energy usage would have to be to bring today's per-capita allotment to the level current in 1896; I suspect it would require the dismantling of the Industrial Revolution in its entirety. In token of this, I used to walk two miles each way to work. A co-worker saw this, patted me on the head, said "That's nice", and drove off, alone, in deir SUV. Oh ... the co-worker led a climate-change research lab. No one will willingly accept a reduction in standard of living, and, I argue, any attempt to force this will put authoritarian climate deniers at the head of government everywhere. Nor do I accept that [https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2020/08/23/kris-an-murphy-wunderwaffe/ Wunderwaffe] will save us ... and those concerned with "climate justice" may well ask who among us can afford such toys.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.33|108.162.245.33]] 16:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Arguably, it was Abraham Darby's invention of the coke fired blast furnace in 1709, that vastly increased iron production, was the real start of the industrial revolution and use of coal as a fuel. (It was actually banned in some places as being a dirty fuel for cooking and heating) Of course that would mess up the nearer to / further from dates that this series of comics use. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 09:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I would not use the expression "renewable-energy based.", but i would use "Co2 free" or similar. The main problem with climate change is CO2, not lack of renewables. Plus renewables are not the only CO2 free energy source. E.g. the nuclear energy is too a CO2 free energy source. And the only renewable source able to cover the baseload is hydropower, that is not available in the right amount everywhere. For instance take a look on Germany CO2 emissions. {{unsigned ip|172.71.114.107|10:00, 3 February 2024}}
:That's why it's called "renewable-energy ''based''", not "using renewable energies, too". "Renewable" doesn't refer to just a CO2 neutral process, but to a process that can be sustained infinitely (within the sun's life span as a main sequence star), which is clearly not the case for uranium-based energy sources. Maybe "sustainable" is the word we're looking for? [[User:Transgalactic|Transgalactic]] ([[User talk:Transgalactic|talk]]) 13:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
::Although nuclear energy is a CO2 free energy source, it creates nuclear waste that is hard to get rid of. I believe that we need to invest in developing infrastructure to properly store energy via batteries so that we can create sustainable energy without creating so much waste. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
:::Mass batteries? For which you probably need lithium. Which we're not yet geared up to get in a 'sustainable' manner. In large quantities if you're going big on buffering power. (If not lithium, then there's same/different issues, or both.)
:::The solution is going to be a complex balancing act of old and new thinking, which needs rebalancing all the time. At least we (technically) know how to deal with nuclear, or at least how to not be totally reckless with it, as we (hopefully) move towards developing who-knows-what to make it less necessary to continue with less sophisticated/more problematic solutions.
:::Ever onward, ever onward. Expect hiccoughs along the way, of course. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.210|141.101.99.210]] 02:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
::::Only if you take a very narrow definition of 'battery' (and I'll assume here that you're using 'lithium' as synecdoche for 'the kind of resources that need to be extracted to make chemical action based batteries'). You can store energy using other approaches, such as using it to heat up materials which can release it when needed, or pumping water up to the top of a mountain, and probably lots of other ways that haven't even been thought of yet. Those are all effectively 'batteries', both in function and in the original sense of the word.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.206|172.71.242.206]] 09:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Here's another quote from the Crawford paper:
<q>He proposed to calculate the changes in CO2 necessary to bring about periods of both milder (+8°C) and harsher climate (-5°C), i.e., the conditions which reigned before, during and etween the Ice Ages. His preliminary calculations showed that the required changes in CO2 were in the order of 50%. Hogbom, who was present, confirmed that those changes could have occurred in geological times. It remained, however, to demonstrate this quantitatively. The construction of the model which enabled him to do so occupied him for most of 1895. Writing to a friend at the end of the year, he found it "unbelievable that so trifling a matter has cost me a full year" (5). But his complaints in letters to other friends about how difficult it was to bring the "carbonic acid matter" to an end showed how arduous a process this had been.</q>
- This suggests to me that Arrhenius thought the development of a quantitative model to be a "trifling matter" a.k.a. "trivial" in 1894, but it turned out to be a really difficult mathematical problem. So the "trifling matter" possibly doesn't refer to "hypothetical CO2 concentration in far-off eras", as the title text suggests, but to Arrhenius' initial estimation of the mathematical problem. [[User:Transgalactic|Transgalactic]] ([[User talk:Transgalactic|talk]]) 13:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
:Good get! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.153|172.71.151.153]] 17:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Talk:79: Iambic Pentameter

2023-09-02T09:09:37Z

172.71.242.206:

It's really not so hard to write such prose, 
To stick to Shakespeare's scheme for fellow bards, 
Of course the preparation always slows, 
So spontaneity aint on the cards. 
The better art of live concoction sits, 
Beyond the skill of I your editor, 
And this is why the comic title bits, 
Are true and accurate without a flaw. 
Or so I humour Randall by these lines, 
Restricted by the form I've set upon, 
Fearing that soon I'll commit rhyming crimes, 
That you the readers see arrive, 'ere long. 
And thus a sonnet author finds to be, 
Whether for fun or for a Dark Lady. 
[[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 14:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
:I am stunned. Flabbergasted, of a lack of words. You, good sir, are a hero. A true poet, a master of words. I applaud you, and thank you for your time here. [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 15:04, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
:Please create an account, [[Main_Page|explainxkcd]] <s>needs</s> wants you here. [[User:Knit cap|Knit cap]] ([[User talk:Knit cap|talk]]) 09:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Wait, normal people don't communicate exclusively in iambic pentameter? Shakespeare lied to me! [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.62|199.27.128.62]] 04:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. Since Randall is the one with the hobby and also the one that Cueball represents I have kept Cueball in this explanation and transcript. But made a note of it. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

If you unstress both "of" and "course," the title text also kind of works with iambic meter. [[User:Aronurr|Aronurr]] ([[User talk:Aronurr|talk]]) 23:25, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Ex'''plain''' x'''k'''c'''d''': It's ''''cause''' you're '''dumb.''' {{w|172.69.59.21|19:16, 3 June 2023}}


I rarely speak non-iambic, that's for sure. 
I surely won't attempt to find a cure. 
It hardly is a problem, do you mind? 
I just can't help that I'm the rhyming kind!


If people all around the world agreed, 
and rhymed instead of waging wars unjust, 
the world would be a better place indeed, 
thus, if you ask me, poetry 's a must!


That said, if one of you explainers know, 
enlighten me on whether there's a rule, 
which parts of quads of penta-iambic lines, 
should rhyme together, like I just did show?

[[User:Flexximilian|Flexximilian]] ([[User talk:Flexximilian|talk]]) 23:44, 01 September 2023 (UTC)
:Refer to places such as {{w|Rhyme scheme}}'s link?
:In there you will perhaps come find a clue.
:To start: I, for your first of verses, think,
:Perhaps a Balliol or Clerihew.
:Though as your stanzas go from here to there,
:The scheme does change in ways I need not say.
:The second verse is of a type not rare,
:In fact I do prefer myself that way.
:It's at the last where head and foot alone,
:Both rhyme; the lines betwixt are free from that.
:In isolation I don't see it shown,
:Of which the listed group or style it's at!
:[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.206|172.71.242.206]] 09:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)