explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2950: Situation

2024-06-24T22:03:32Z

172.71.242.223:

For reference, the bridge in question is the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 18:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
:Noting that in all cases ''except'' the Tacoma Narrows, the design flaws were but a part of the issue, with operational decisions at the time playing a big part in the designed-in risks becoming reasons for an actual incident. The bridge could never have been "run safely", once built, unlike trying to ignore bunker fires whilst speeding through iceberg-alley or conducting stress tests in parallel with other non-standard procedures or just not refusing to conduct flights under certain weather conditions. Yes, the other things, by skipping the 'bad end' they actually had, would still be susceptible to future incidents (lessons not now having been properly learnt, or even known to be learnable, so still liable to being mishandled).
:But the only thing that could have saved the Tacoma bridge was to have been so much more alert (and less 'amused') by Galloping Gerti and immediately rushed into developing the better analytical models that could lead to an expensive in-situ retrofit (as with the Millenium Bridge, across the Thames, though that didn't have unavoidable wind issues and ''could'' be managed 'at leisure', whilst being made safer). And, without the rather spectacular demonstration of failure, it was probably not on the cards to 'not do nothing', even if it wasn't already too late to avert history in any reasonable way.
:It's human hubris/failings (at various levels) in each case, of course. But operational and design-time errors do more damage in combination than either by themselves. (Case in point, no deaths from the bridge collapse... actually handled pretty well, considering.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.186|172.70.162.186]] 22:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

And for the record, the Challenger engineers *did* warn about the O-ring risk, but were overridden by management. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.95|172.68.35.95]] 19:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

It would have been so easy to draw a dam about to burst just behind the ocean liner {{unsigned ip|172.70.43.54|20:22, 24 June 2024}}
:Any particular dam-burst? There are many, but I'm not sure that we have an 'iconic' one... There's perhaps Taum Sauk, Vajont Dam, Brumadinho dam, El Cobre, Uttarakhand, Dale Dike Reservoir or Derna, picking a selection of notable ones. You couldn't count the deliberate Operation Chastise breaches or the (probably-)deliberate Kakhovka Dam one, nor all those 'nearly a disaster' ones (like Ulley and Toddbrook, two relatively recent concerns in the UK). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.186|172.70.162.186]] 22:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2948: Electric vs Gas

2024-06-20T13:52:00Z

172.71.242.223:

Now I'm not a fan of gas engines, but that argument is in bad faith. Gas engines have one ''very big'' advantage over electrics: Energy density, and by extension, range. Batteries can't come close to the energy density of hydrocarbons, despite the latters' overall lower efficiency. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 17:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

:I think that's one of the main arguments for hybrid systems. Using a gas engine to charge an electric motor, and then using the electric motor to actually power the appliance, enables significant efficiency gains. If anything, combining the technologies enables even greater ''usable'' energy density from hydrocarbons. Hybrid electric vehicles for example are extremely efficient. [[User:Eunakria|Eunakria]] ([[User talk:Eunakria|talk]]) 17:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:Energy density, and the ability to move large amounts of stored energy from one place to another quickly and easily (aka pump gas, vs charge or swap a battery), from a thermal and maintenance perspective. (Which is not entirely unrelated to energy density.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.39.54|172.70.39.54]] 18:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
::Swapping batteries (and slowly charging the batteries in the swap station) could offer comparable "charge" times to gasoline refuelling times, while also being better for battery lifespan, but would require industry coordination and standardisation re: battery packs and install location that, sadly, simply does not exist. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.212|172.70.42.212]] 19:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
::Plug-in hybrids have been superior since 1904, but the incremental capital cost is still an issue while oil is under $100/bbl. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.129|172.71.150.129]] 19:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
: Except of course that this isn't quite as simple as this. A Honda Civic (one the most popular US petrol cars) will go about 400 miles on a full tank, about the same as a Dodge Ram. Also about the same as a Tesla Model S. There's a pretty good reason this isn't a coincidence - people don't want more much more range, and a bigger tank is more weight. A Chevy Silverado full tank will go about 500miles. If you really want range, you need to look at a hybrid car. As the comic points out, the torque on a standard otto cycle engine is poor, but that cycle is deliberately designed to give more torque. Hybrids use an Atkinson cycle which is far more energy efficient, but could not provide enough torque - so you use the electric to do that. A Prius has a range in excess of 630 miles, more than any popular petrol car. So if you want range, you still want an electric engine, just store the energy in hydrocarbons. For similar reasons, diesel trains use the diesel to run generators which then power the electric motors on the wheels, and have done for decades. {{unsigned ip|172.70.162.186|20:47, 19 June 2024}}
:: Which brings us back to energy density: The Honda Civic has a similar range to the Tesla – at 10% the weight for its fuel (vs. the Tesla's battery), and one-third the volume. The comparison gets even worse for long-haul cargo, but that might be beyond the topic of this conversation. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 13:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

On the other other hand, in a lot of cases an electric motor is just a gas engine with extra steps due to the current state of the power grid. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.232|172.68.174.232]] 17:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Not here in Washington State it isn't. Most of our electricity comes from hydroelectric dams. [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 23:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
: AFAIK, no new dams are being built, and I reckon that the probability is vanishingly small that any new dam that is mooted will survive the inevitable storms of protest and get built. The trend, rather, and the political pressure, salmon fans, is to remove dams (e.g. those on the Elwha River). The existing dams are aging, their impoundment volumes are dwindling due to sedimentation, and the water for those impoundments is increasingly bespoke and is, in at least some cases, declining in volume due to climate perturbations. The population, and its energy use, is increasing. As of 2022, [https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WA#tabs-1 I read], WA was a net exporter of electricity. I would not be taking that status for granted. A few years ago, a study was published, finding that, in states where the electricity grid was dependent on fossil-fuel-fired plants, electric cars had a greater carbon footprint than gasoline/petrol cars - and this was before the major gains in gasoline fuel efficiency contributed by advances in computer tech (2007 Honda Civic hybrid gets the same city mileage, ca. 35 mpg, as a 2021 Honda Civic petrol engine, in my hands). I do not know what current assessments say about this. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.129|172.71.150.129]] 04:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

:I'd say an electric motor powered by a hydrocarbon grid still usually makes better use of gas than a typical gas engine. Gas engines that don't always run at full throttle (as in, a gas engine in an appliance) have dramatically worse efficiency than electric motors that don't always run at full throttle. It depends ''very'' heavily on use case, though; always take measurements and run the numbers before coming to a specific conclusion. Science would be nothing without empirical data. [[User:Eunakria|Eunakria]] ([[User talk:Eunakria|talk]]) 17:50, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Should this have [[:Category:Climate change]]? I can’t decide. [[User:Usb-rave|Usb-rave]] ([[User talk:Usb-rave|talk]]) 17:40, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:Yeah, it's better with it for people looking though the category later on, they will want to see it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.10|162.158.186.10]] 19:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, with this argument the thing gas engines have going for them over EVs is the refueling time and availability. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.59.175|172.69.59.175]] 18:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:That's fair. It would be nice if electric cars had been more focused-on ten years ago than the trend (trend? craze? idea? whatever.) starting now. I refuse to buy a Tesla, though. Elon is never getting my money. I'm waiting for an electric Volvo. [[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 13:27, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

It's really remarkable how uninformed and unintelligent this comic is, to the point where I now doubt the veracity of his entire What If? series. {{unsigned ip|172.70.114.62|19:13, 19 June 2024}}
:To be fair, there’s sort of an agenda here, while I don’t believe there’s one in ''What If?'' I can’t independently verify the accuracy of ''What If?'', of course, but there is that. [[User:Usb-rave|Usb-rave]] ([[User talk:Usb-rave|talk]]) 19:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:I'd like to know more about the "uninformed and unintelligent" assessment. Given that not all of Randall's characters copy his ''exact thinking''. I don't think he'd espouse much of what he has Black Hat say/do. And clearly many of his Cueballs, even being often accepted as Author Avatars, can be clearly being dumber than Randall (who is 'writing them as dumb') is. What we have is parody. And maybe you just don't see the parody in the way intended (or understood by others). Perhaps you have a completely different mindset, or are just inclined to be anti-Randall> (Even in things he's actually right about...) I don't know where the mismatch may be here, but if you're seriously thinking that there remains not one useful take-away from anything Randall has ever said, just from the ''possibility'' that his cartoon characters don't completely mesh with what you perceive as a correct worldview, then this needs looking at from a different perspective than just reassessing the whole ''What If?'' corpus. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.24|162.158.74.24]] 23:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
: The tagline for the xkcd comic does include the word "sarcasm", which should warn against over-serious or over-literal interpretations. Not infrequently, I find, xkcd ventures into the realm of the sarcastic, the opinionated, even the polemic (cf. the Hilary Clinton campaign ads), and this one states a clear opinion in favor of electric cars ... with which one is free to debate (as here, exhaustively), or disagree. All of which brings the cartoonist to the attention of the world, and thereby supports him in his chosen line of work, which, in the current state of cartooning as a profession, is no small accomplishment. As for the opinion, consider the following question: "I have a four-mile commute to work. Which is the most eco-friendly option? The electric car? The hybrid? The gas/petrol car?" Answer: the foot car. Walking the four miles is the only minimum-carbon solution under all circumstances ... except perhaps ones that allow the questioner to keep deir job. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.4|108.162.245.4]] 05:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Ohhh... OK. I had poor signal so this one took a while to load, and I only saw the "Gas vs. Electric" title. I thought it was going to be about kitchen stoves - ones that burn ''actual'' "gas", vs. electrical heating elements. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 19:45, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

I actually experienced the "cons" of a less limited degree of power and not being noisy at all, today. Someone in an electric vehicle (could have been a Tesla) pulled out of a sideroad, accelerating at what seemed like a reckless rate (it was advantageous to do so, but a petrol-powered vehicle that might have taken a bit longer to switch up the gears would still have been up to speed soon enough to not get into contention with any other vehicles). And with barely more than a whine, and perhaps a bit of road-noise that might have included at one point a bit of grit-splattering. I was watching this, and knew they were pulling out of the junction (and knew for certain, moreover, that there was no traffic coming up or down the road, nor anybody crossing the road anywhere in my rather long sight). Had there been someone ''actually'' about to cross the road (within the next 50 yards or so), however, it would have been entirely possible that they would have been caught be surprise by this near-silent and suddenly fast-moving vehicle. If it was a Tesla, then maybe its inbuilt forward 'radar'/whatever would have helped bring the vehicle to a stop, or at least slow it down/stop if from speeding up enough, before any actual accident might have happened... but this is theoretical, as it just happened not to happen anything like this on this occasion... But it could have. And the paradigm for crossing the road that I learnt several decades ago of "Stop, Look, Listen, Think" has probably now started to lose out on the "Listen" bit, and possibly degraded even the "Look" and "Think" until we start to retrain ourselves to anticipate vehicles whipping around random corners that are far more silent-and-deadly then what we've all become used to. Ok, so this is not necessarily the total fault of the electric vehicles (or even the drivers, but they must have ''some'' hand in the matter), but in changing the dynamics and situational awarenesses of road traffic so much it ''might'' be considered a relatable problem. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.24|162.158.74.24]] 23:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
: I drove an electric motorcycle for a while, which put me quite exposed and aware of safety and my driving environment. The concerns about EVs being too quiet don't come across as grounded in reality. Modern ICE vehicles typically have minimal engine noise already. There are really two cases: out on the road, where half the people (exaggerating) have their earbuds in, and any engine noise is swamped by tire noise anyway. No difference between ICE and electric here. Then in a parking lot, where tire noise is not significant, and maybe pedestrians could get extra auditory cues about the vehicles around them from ICE engine noise. In that context, I personally would flip open my visor and make eye contact with pedestrians. It would be nice if drivers of full-sized cars and trucks, no matter their power source, would do more of that. Driving while inattentive is unambiguously bad. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.204|172.69.23.204]] 02:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
: Rolling noise becomes more than enough for safe audibility by about 30 km/h (below which speed collisions are relatively less dangerous anyways, though most urban streets really should have a speed limit of 20 km/h for numerous reasons including safety), and actually dominates engine noise by about 55 km/h. ICEs are loud enough to have like a dozen deleterious health effects even while idling, though the noise of a bicycle, if sufficiently constant, is enough to reach the WHO threshold. In short, electric cars only need to make additional noise below about 30 km/h for safety, and even then only 55dBA, quieter than typical speech, and even then only if there's already a lot of noise polution to drown them out. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.33|162.158.146.33]] 07:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
::Although really what they mostly need is drivers who look where they're going, and don't assume that people will just get out of their way when they hear them coming.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.124|172.69.195.124]] 08:44, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
::: Which is best accomplished using narrower streets, bollards, and other traffic easing mechanisms that make people want to slow down and pay attention rather than putting up a lower speed limit sign and just expecting people to obey it. That goes double in the US where most speed limits are assigned by looking at the speeds people are actually driving in good conditions and setting it where 10% of people woulld be speeding (and then rounded to the nearest 5 mph), meaning the sign is literally irrelevant to almost everyone. Oh, also, we desperately need to stop combining streets, which are destinations, with roads, which are thoroughfares, into "stroads" that fail at being both; that's an actual majority of your traffic easing taken care of basically in one step. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.234|162.158.146.234]] 10:01, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if the current explanation is missing the forest for the trees. My impression was that White Hat was parroting a ChatGPT-style response -- noncommittal and logically incoherent. (In fact, I missed the logical non sequitur the first time I read the strip. The style just screamed to me ChatGPT, though.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.9|172.71.154.9]] 00:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

This comic was posted yesterday and I'm already seeing people typing essays. I'm scared. (also electric rules gas drools nyehh) [[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 13:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
: Not too shabby a result from a stick-figure drawing posted on the Internet. Jealous? As for 'electric', nice to see your unqualified support for [https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/01/1152893248/red-cobalt-congo-drc-mining-siddharth-kara slave labor in the Congo] and elsewhere. Get a horse! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.73|172.68.23.73]] 13:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
:: Isn't a horse also a form of slave labour?[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.223|172.71.242.223]] 13:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

2848: Breaker Box

2023-11-01T18:55:57Z

172.71.242.223: /* Table of the breaker labels */ Clearly had this aboutface.

{{comic
| number = 2848
| date = October 30, 2023
| title = Breaker Box
| image = breaker_box_2x.png
| imagesize = 560x776px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Any electrician will warn you to first locate and flip the house's CAUSALITY circuit breaker before touching the CIRCUIT BREAKERS one.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a HIGH-PITCHED HUM GENERATOR THAT WAS LAST MENTIONED EXACTLY 1258 COMICS AGO - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
A {{w|distribution board}}, referred to as a "breaker box" here and also commonly referred to as a "fuse box", "breaker panel", "DB box", and many other names, is a metal box attached to a wall, usually in some maintenance area, containing multiple {{w|circuit breakers}} that distribute electricity to various parts of the building. A circuit breaker is an electrical switch, usually in the form of a small lever that can be used to manually isolate the electrical connections it controls from the incoming power supply. These breakers are designed to automatically open if too much electrical current flows through them. This is a safety measure to reduce the risk of damage, fire or electrocution in the event of a short circuit or higher load being asked for than the wires are rated to handle.

In breaker boxes, each individual breaker is ideally labeled to let the operator know what that specific breaker controls. Typically, the circuit controlled by each breaker will feed an intuitive set of connections: a certain room, or set of rooms, or possibly a set of related services (like overhead lights, or all the outlets on one floor). Some large appliances will have a dedicated circuit and breaker.

However, in houses that have been rewired multiple times (or are poorly wired), this can quickly become overcomplicated with seemingly random connections. Randall lives in Boston where much of the housing stock is from the late 1800s and early 1900s, and he is likely to live in a house with non-ideal wiring, which may have inspired this comic.

The comic satirizes these complex wiring setups, with multiple breakers "controlling" arbitrary things, including some that – in the classic style of XKCD – are puns on the word "breaker" or may be impossible to hook a breaker up to, getting progressively more absurd to the point of "breaking" certain laws of physics.

===Table of the breaker labels===
{|class = "wikitable"
! Label next to breaker !! Explanation !! Note
|-
! colspan="3"|Left column of switches
|-
| Kitchen lights || The lights in the kitchen. || rowspan="3"| Standard items that could be separate
|-
| Living room lights || The lights in the living room.
|-
| Porch lights || The lights on the porch.
|-
| Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere || The lights in the bathroom, but also a random outlet.
It is not uncommon for the power supplies to bathrooms (and other rooms with water connections) to be on a separate circuit. This is because water can potentially cause a short circuit, resulting in the breaker opening, and separate curcuits minimize the impact and makes the problem easier to locate.

Having initially reserved an output from the box for such a limited use, it is possible that another electrician – while adding wiring – chooses to wire seemingly unrelated things into the same circuit. This may make sense (for example, an outlet near a sink or some other water source could reasonably be grouped with the bathroom), or it may simply be out of convenience. In either case, future residents and installers may not be informed of this, and therefore wouldn't realize that the outlet is grouped with that circuit.
| Standard, but 'kludged'
|-
| North-facing appliances || colspan="2"|Peculiar and a bit complex to execute. Here's how it might have been set up:
# Install a breaker switch that is actually a mechanical switch to control a smart home automation instead of its normal function
# Replace relevant normal outlets with Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets
# Use smart home software to create a custom group of all outlets that control all ''north-facing appliances''
# Set up a software automation to selectively toggle this user-defined group of smart outlets when triggered.
* Adding a matching appliance to the house would require editing the automation.

Alternative explanations:
* The switch may be physically wired only to outlets installed on a southern wall in the property (or ''all'' southern walls, for each room that requires them), and you'd ensure that everything connected to these exclusively north-facing outlets also faces directly away from the wall(s).
* The switch could control appliances on the north-facing walls of the house.

Note: "North-facing" has broad interpretation, as lax as northeast to northwest or as strict as {{w|Points of the compass#32-wind compass rose|north by east to north by west}}. It could also be as exact as perfect north, but this would render this breaker completely functionless unless an appliance happens to be ever-so-perfectly aligned.

|-
| Bathtub drain light || colspan="2"|Bathtub drains typically do not have lights, but this breaker provides power to that and only that. Why it isn't already considered a "bathroom light" is unexplained (unless it's for the bit of the pipe that is ''external'' to that room).

It obviously cannot be the "surprise mystery outlet" already referred to earlier as being covered under the switch for the bathroom lights, much apart from it not being a socket/outlet.
|-
| Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" || colspan="2"|Another odd and amusing specification.

To make it work, one might use the "North-facing appliances" setup described above, but just with a different custom group of Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets chosen to only control appliances with an "F' in their name.

Some common household appliances (kitchen and elsewhere) that this switch might control:
* coffee maker
* refrigerator
* freezer
* fan
* air fryer
* food processor
* waffle iron
* fabric steamer
* fireplace (electric)
|-
| {{w|Hot water heater}} || Usually just a heater that creates (and typically stores) hot water. But given that the next breaker controls the "Regular water heater", this breaker might actually control a water heater that pointlessly heats water that is ''already'' hot.
This is probably a joke about the fact that the common phrase "hot water heater" is [[technically]] redundant or misleading:
* Redundant because the simpler term "water heater" is enough to describe a device that produces hot water.
* Misleading because it's not the purpose of residential water heaters to heat water that is ''already'' hot.

Trivia: In some languages, "hot water" is a separate, single word, so "hot-water heater" is accurate.
|rowspan="2"|Two "heaters"
|-
| Regular water heater || The heater for regular water. In context with the switch above, this label presumes it's for a heater for heating water that is not yet hot (usually called a "hot water heater", hence the joke). Alternatively, if we assume that a ''hot water heater'' is for ''making'' hot water, this heater must be for making “regular water”, whatever temperature that may mean.
|-
| Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in || colspan="2"|This controls every outlet in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in, such as the dining room and kitchen and – depending on the "normal" habits of the inhabitants – other rooms such as the bedroom, bathroom, or living room (if not already covered by the "living room lights" switch above). Closets and single-purpose rooms such as the laundry room are presumably not included.
|-
| High-pitched hum generator || colspan="2"|Controls a high-pitched hum generator. This is a call-back to [[1590: The Source]], which was released just over 8 years before this comic.
|-
| The solution to the cryptogram below: || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on a "code breaker," something or someone that solves a code, such as this cryptogram, a type of puzzle where a sentence has been encoded using a cipher, usually simple, and the goal is to determine the cipher and recover the original sentence from the encoded one.
2 other explanations:
* The identity of the electrical load sourced from this breaker can be found by solving the cryptogram.
* This switch enables or disables the code's solution somehow, perhaps toggling its knowability or solvability or turning on a computer for solving cryptograms.
|-
| Bugs || colspan="2"|Several interpretations are possible:
* Disable all software bugs in the house*
* Disable all insect bugs in the house – as an efficient form of pest control – perhaps using ultrasonic emitters that drive away bugs (may be a reference to [[2753: Air Handler]]) – or perhaps the house contains noise machines that play sounds of insects or other ways of simulating insects.
* Disable power to all covert listening devices, which would be able to be switched off if wired into the house's electrical grid.
* Disable the whole global category of bugs (insects, arachnids, and other small arthropods), in which case we'd have no more pests and we'd reduce disease like malaria and {{w|Lyme disease}}! Of course, food webs would also collapse, and our world would be overrun with waste.
<nowiki>*</nowiki>Though it's unlikely that it's what Randall is referring to, computer bugs switches actually exist. It's a feature in some video game emulators to either run an unofficial patched version or to stay true to the original system, for example to allow bug-exploit speedruns of a video game.
|-
! colspan="3"|Right column of switches
|-
| A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now || colspan="2"|Fans generally produce a steady, low-level 'white' noise that people generally stop noticing. When such a fan is turned off, the absence of that noise is quickly noticed. Shutting down a fan that you didn't realize was running could be worrisome for a couple of reasons: it could be serving an important function (like HVAC or server cooling) and cause a problem when it's off, or it may be a fan that wasn't supposed to be running, but had been for some time with being noticed.
|-
| Dishwasher || colspan="2"|Although dishwashers aren't typically high-load appliances that require a breaker to themselves (unlike, for example, the water heater), if the house wasn't originally built with a dishwasher in mind, it is likely new wiring had to be added during its installation, resulting in a breaker that exclusively controls the dishwasher.

Though what "dishwasher" actually means may depend on what the "dishes" of the next switch might be, and thus what additional device may be required to ensure they remain clean. Even at the more trivial end of the interpretation (though not then explaining the following "dishes"), a busy restaurant might have an employee section equipped exclusively for the dishwashing role and separately supplied with power in a similar manner to that suggested for the bathroom.
|-
| Dishes || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on being a "breaker of dishes." Or the switch powers/controls two or more satellite dishes.

Traditionally, dishes cannot be turned off, as they do not normally require electricity, outside of certain novelty dishes with battery-powered LEDs.
|-
| Hallway lights || The lights in the hallway or hallways. || rowspan="3"|"Hallway" regions
|-
| Hallway outlets || The outlets in the hallway or hallways. A common confusion when turning off breakers is separate wiring for outlets and lights in the same room. Though having the room go dark is a good mnemonic that it is unpowered, it is not a guarantee, and indeed, wiring them separately allows working on the outlets without having to do it in the dark.
|-
| Hallway floors || This breaker has several potential interpretations:
#A master switch for all floors (stories) in the building which include hallways, e.g. the guestroom areas in a hotel, whilst possibly excluding the lobby and service levels
#Outlets in the floor
#Electric underfloor heating (heated bathroom floors are a feature in some houses)
#Electrification of the floors -- not common outside of horror and heist movies
#Disabling all floors entirely, so everything resting on the floors falls through
|-
| Social media || colspan="2"|This breaker also has several potential interpretations of "turning off social media":
#'Digital detoxes', where someone says "I'm going to turn off my social media" and intends to deny themselves access to all their social media apps.
#A switch for a parent to turn off all social media entering the house to protect their kids and themselves, which references a type of specialized content filter available through Wi-Fi router settings, not traditionally a breaker box.
#A callback to [[908: The Cloud]]. Since most social media platforms are centralized services, it would be theoretically possible to hook up a switch to the main power supply of every server building at once, given some extremely long wires, a breaker capable of handling the abhorrently massive electric load, and agreement from every social media provider([[1439|optional]]).
#The theoretical desire by some to "turn off social media" for the world due to its harmful effects on society. As someone who lived before social media and saw its spread over two decades, Randall may be ruing the impacts of social media on civilization and channeling his desire to put the genie back in the bottle.
#A play on the phrase “breaking the internet”, meaning going viral on social media.
|-
| State law || Likely a pun on "State Law Breaker."
Taken literally, it would either disable enforcement of State Law or nullify every single one, creating a state of martial law similar to the premise of the popular movie, "The Purge". It's unclear if this refers to Randall's state of Massachusetts or State Law as a general concept.

If the switch just nullifies State Law within the confines of the house, that would make the home a place where State Law could be broken without consequence, with some exciting implications:
* '''No More Licenses''': Practice medicine, law, or cut hair without the need of a license!
* '''The Ultimate Man Cave or She Shed''': Pet lion, or maybe a nuclear reactor in the basement.
* '''24/7 Parties''': No noise complaints. Late-night parties with blaring music can continue indefinitely.
* '''Tax-Free Zone''': Sell goods from the home without any sales tax.
* '''Unusual Living Arrangements''': OK to live with 50 other people in a 2-bedroom house, with no zoning laws or housing regulations.
* '''DIY Everything''': All those building codes and safety regulations wouldn't apply. OK to install an indoor waterfall or convert the living room into a beach.
* '''Gambling House''': Turn the living room into a full-blown casino, no license needed.
* '''Ultimate Privacy''': No worries about warrantless searches. State law enforcement would have no jurisdiction inside your house.
| rowspan="2"|"Legal" items
|-
| Federal law || Likely a pun on "Federal Law Breaker," though it could also be taken literally, as above.

The ramifications of nullifying every US Federal law are immense. Disabling Federal Law while keeping State Law would theoretically fulfill the goals of the "States Rights" advocates, groups of conservatives across US history aiming to return Federal power to the States.

If the switch just nullifies Federal Law within the confines of the house, there could be some fun results:

* Alternative Currency Operations: Inhabitants could craft their own monetary system, designing and printing their own currency.
* Endangered Species Game Park: The house could become a zone for hunting creatures federally recognized as endangered or protected, like the bald eagle, making it a place to shoot or trap rare wildlife.
* Exotic Collection Hub: With federal import restrictions made moot, the house could transform into a repository for exotic items otherwise forbidden at a national level -- a potential trove of rare fruits, plants, or artifacts.
* Tax-free Commercial Zone: Any enterprise operating entirely within the house's boundaries is free from federal income taxation.
* Experimental Culinary Experiences: Free from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) constraints, the house could offer dishes using ingredients or preparations not federally approved.
|-
| Second law of thermodynamics || The {{w|Second Law of Thermodynamics}} means that things naturally move from order to disorder over time. It also says you can't take heat from a place that's cooler and use it to heat up another place, unless you use some energy to do it. In short, without adding energy, only the hotter place can warm up the cooler one.

Turning off (or breaking) the second law of thermodynamics would have some pros and cons.
;GOOD STUFF
*'''Perpetual Motion Machines''': Machines that can do work indefinitely without an energy source would become possible, defying our current understanding of energy conservation.
*'''Reversibility of Processes''': Many natural processes that are irreversible under current laws could be reversed. For instance, melted ice could spontaneously turn back into a solid without energy removal.
*'''Recycling Energy''': We could theoretically use the same quantum of energy over and over again, leading to ultra-efficient systems and potentially solving many of the world's energy problems.
*'''Reversing Entropy-Driven Processes''': Things like mixing cream and coffee or ink in water could spontaneously unmix.
;BAD STUFF
*'''End Life as We Know It:''' All living organisms rely on the second law for crucial processes, including metabolism and reproduction. If the second law were negated, life, at least as we understand it, might not be possible.
*'''No Heat Engines:''' Engines rely on the flow of heat from hotter to colder bodies. Without the Second Law, our cars, power plants, refrigerators, and many other devices would not function.
*'''Breakdown of Molecular Processes:''' Molecules spontaneously move from areas of higher to lower concentration due to entropy. Without this, diffusion, osmosis, and many biochemical reactions wouldn't occur as they currently do.
*'''Loss of Directionality:''' One interpretation of the Second Law provides a directionality to time (the so-called "arrow of time"). Without it, causality and our understanding of past, present, and future could be fundamentally altered.
*'''Unpredictable Outcomes:''' Turning off the Second Law could result in a universe where outcomes are not probabilistically predictable. You couldn't rely on anything happening as it "should," leading to chaos in every sense.
This law of physics was also explored in the What If? article [https://what-if.xkcd.com/145/ Fire From Moonlight].
| rowspan="3"|"Physics" items
|-
| Friction || {{w|Friction}} is the resistive force that opposes the relative motion or tendency of such motion of two surfaces in contact. Turning it off has some upsides and downsides.
;UPSIDES
*'''Perpetual Motion Machines:''' Without friction, once an object starts moving, it would continue indefinitely unless acted upon by another force.
*'''Super-Efficient Transport:''' Cars, trains, and other vehicles would glide effortlessly once set into motion, leading to immense energy savings.
*'''Unique Sports:''' New sports and activities would emerge, where players glide or slide over surfaces without friction.
;DOWNSIDES
*'''Walking Would Be Impossible:''' We rely on friction between our feet and the ground to move. Without it, we would be unable to walk, run, or even stand.
*'''No Manual Dexterity:''' Holding, grabbing, or manipulating objects would be very difficult, because they would be perfectly slippery.
*'''Catastrophic Mechanical Failures:''' Many machines rely on friction to function. Brakes in cars, for instance, use friction to slow down and stop the vehicle. Without it, uncontrollable accidents would occur.
*'''No Sound:''' Friction between air molecules creates sound waves. Without friction, the world would be silent (some may consider this an upside).
*'''Breathing Difficulties:''' Our respiratory system relies on frictional forces when the alveoli in our lungs exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide with the bloodstream.
*'''Hard to Light Fire:''' Lighting a fire by striking a match would no longer work, because it relies on friction. However, there are other methods for starting a fire that don't require friction, [https://www.wikihow.com/Create-Fire-With-a-Magnifying-Glass the most famous of which just requires a magnifying glass].
*'''Collisions:''' Objects, once set in motion, would continue to move until they hit something, leading to a myriad of unpredictable and uncontrollable collisions.
Being in a frictionless environment (and a vacuum, as physicists love...) was the subject of [[669: Experiment]].
|-
| Gravity || {{w|Gravity}} is a natural force that attracts two bodies toward each other, proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers.
Turning off gravity would have some advantages and disadvantages.
;ADVANTAGES
* '''Flight''': Without gravity, every leap could turn into a flight. We could push off surfaces and float effortlessly through the air.
* '''No Weight Restrictions''': Large structures could be built without concern for weight-bearing loads. This would drastically change engineering and architectural designs.
* '''New Sports''': Zero-gravity sports and activities could become a reality on Earth. Imagine playing basketball or soccer without gravity!
;DISADVANTAGES
* '''Flight''': Without gravity, every leap turns into a flight... right out of the atmosphere of the Earth, and directly into space.
* '''Loss of Atmosphere and Oceans''': Without gravity, Earth's atmosphere would dissipate into space, and water from oceans, rivers, and lakes would float away, making life as we know it impossible.
* '''Unanchored Chaos''': Everything not fixed to the ground, including people, animals, vehicles, and foundationless structures, could become airborne, causing massive destruction and chaos.
* '''Disruption of Celestial Order''': Earth would no longer orbit the Sun, the Moon would drift away rather quickly, and the structural integrity of the universe, including galaxies and solar systems, would be jeopardized.
* '''Everything Exploding''': Most celestial bodies, ranging from the moon to supermassive black holes, would explode from internal pressure and centripetal forces no longer fighting against gravity, throwing everything into space.
* '''Aggregation Absence''': Stars, galaxies, and basically anything in space requires gravity to form. Without gravity, no stars, planets, or meteors would form ever again.

Of course, if this switch is turned off, it may simply mean that objects within the house itself are no longer subject to gravity. This would be '''''far''''' less cataclysmic, and as a bonus, this would make it much, much easier to move around the house, get to higher areas, and move objects, but could prove to cause some problems once the breaker is turned back on, especially for the floor.
|-
| Circuit breakers || colspan="2"|Possibly the "master" breaker, controlling the main circuit that supplies power to all other circuit breakers. However, given the other surreal things this breaker box controls, turning it off may possibly make it impossible to turn it on ever again as the switch will no longer function once switched off (i.e.: If this was turned off, it would presumably turn off the functionality of the circuit breaker itself, if it was wired to include itself).

Moreover, if this circuit breaker disables all circuit breakers everywhere, it would result in global infrastructure collapse, halting essential services, including transportation, healthcare, and communication, and leading to widespread chaos.

Note that it might be a perfectly valid label if it refers to multiple subsidiary 'boxes', cascaded off this particular one, each containing one or more additional breakers for convenience or safety. e.g. units dedicated to a shed, garage or workshop room which save the need to traipse all the way to this box's utility cupboard location in the event of an otherwise easily resolved power issue.
|-
! colspan="3"|Title text
|-
| colspan="3"|The title text is about {{w|causality}} (not to be confused with {{w|casualty}}), and how to use this (unseen, located elsewhere) breaker along with the last shown switch that (de)powers the illustrated box.

Causality, in its simplest form, is the process of cause and effect, meaning that everything that happens only happens because something caused it to happen - in other words, every event is an effect caused by another event. For example, a bag of chips can't just fall onto the floor for ''literally'' no reason - it has to be caused by some other event, such as someone smacking it or a gust of wind blowing it down.

Turning off the circuit breaker using the CIRCUIT BREAKERS switch may lead to a loop, if the disabled breaker can no longer disable itself, leading to it turning back on, etc. Alternatively, turning off the CIRCUIT BREAKER switch might be a one-way street.

Turning the CAUSALITY switch from OFF back to ON might be unlikely to do anything if the circuit breakers upstream of it have been fully deactivated. The separation of cause and effect would ostensibly take precedence over the current switch setting. Turning off CAUSALITY first would prevent either the loop or the permanent disabling of circuit breakers, but would also have many other side effects, including letting switches potentially serve power even if there is no power being served ''to them'', or even spontaneously switching (on or off) without any intervention or reason.

The 'warning', from an electrician, could even be to locate the nominally ''off'' CAUSALITY switch in order to turn it ''on'', or else all other intended effects will possibly not end up being actually actioned. Either way, whether or not turning on/off causality would change the state of causality (at one stage or other being rendered ineffectual) is an exercise left for the reader.
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[An open breaker box is shown. There are 26 labelled breakers, all of which are on, paired back to back in thirteen rows as a label, switch, switch and label.]
:Kitchen lights / A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now
:Living room lights / Dishwasher
:Porch lights / Dishes
:Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere / Hallway lights
:North-facing appliances / Hallway outlets
:Bathtub drain light / Hallway floors
:Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" / Social media
:Hot water heater / State law
:Regular water heater / Federal law
:Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in / Second law of thermodynamics
:High-pitched hum generator / Friction
:The solution to the cryptogram below: [Additional squiggled words that are too small/indistinct to read.] / Gravity
:Bugs / Circuit breakers

{{comic discussion}}

2844: Black Holes vs Regular Holes

2023-10-21T09:45:11Z

172.71.242.223: /* Explanation */ Edits, and refactoring breaks (no need to the long title, it's broken up *anyway* by column compression).

{{comic
| number = 2844
| date = October 20, 2023
| title = Black Holes vs Regular Holes
| image = black_holes_vs_regular_holes_2x.png
| imagesize = 525x743px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Created by the collapse of: [massive stars] [Florida limestone bedrock]
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BLACK HOLE CREATED BY CHILDREN AT THE BEACH - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is a comparison between {{w|black hole}}s and regular, everyday {{w|hole}}s.

{| class="wikitable"
!
! scope="col"| Black hole
! scope="col"| Regular hole
! Scope="col"| Explanation
|-
! scope="row" | Usually formed by...
| Supernovas, colliding stars
| Shovels, small mammals
| Black holes are created by stars going into supernova, and occasionally by two stars colliding. On the contrary, regular holes are often created by humans using shovels, as well as small animals such as ants, moles, and dogs.
|-
! scope="row" | Falling in is...
| Definitely fatal
| Sometimes fatal
| Falling into a black hole is almost always fatal.{{Citation needed}} On the other hand, if a regular hole is deep enough, it is possible for someone to die by falling into it.
|-
! scope="row" | Created by the Big Bang
| Maybe
| No
| Like many other celestial objects, black holes may have been created by the {{w|Big Bang}}, however ordinary holes were almost definitely not created this way.
|-
! scope="row" | Created by children playing at the beach
| I '''''really''''' hope not
| Yes
| Children commonly dig holes in sand at beaches, however if one were to create a black hole at the beach, this could prove cataclysmic.
|-
! scope="row" | Source of many precious metals
| Indirectly
| Yes
| Both the supernovae that create black holes and various events involving black holes, such as black hole/neutron star mergers, produce large quantities of heavy elements, including precious metals found on Earth. Those metals are often underground, and are thus recovered by a mine, i.e. a regular hole.
|-
! scope="row" | Einstein imagined falling into one
| Yes
| Probably at least once
| The thought experiments of {{w|Albert Einstein}}, particularly in relation to {{w|general relativity}}, involve consideration of what happens when one falls through gravitationally-curved space. Aside from this, almost everyone has had a reason to consider the possibility of falling into a normal hole.
|-
! scope="row" | A component of dark matter
| Maybe
| Probably not
| {{w|Dark matter}} is a theoretical part of the universe, a large amount of its total calculated mass which cannot (yet) be directly seen. It is considered possible that at least some of this 'missing mass' is in the form of black holes. It is not generally considered an option that ordinary holes have anything to do with this.
|-
! scope="row" | Created by the Large Hadron Collider
| No
| Yes
| There were concerns when the {{w|Large Hadron Collider}} (LHC), a particle supercollider, was initially put into operation that it would create a black hole that would destroy the Earth. This did not happen.{{Citation needed}} However, the LHC is mostly underground, and its construction required the digging of many holes.
|-
! scope="row" | Massive stars often collapse into them
| Yes
| No
| If a star is large enough, when the star dies, it may still have enough gravity to collapse back into itself, commonly creating black holes. This does not happen with regular holes, and would likely mean the end of the world if one did.
|-
! scope="row" | Explored by humans in famous sci-fi stories
| Yes
| Yes
| Many sci-fi stories and movies explore black holes and regular holes alike. In particular, there's the eponimous classic ''{{w|The Black Hole}}'' and more recent films such as ''{{w|Interstellar (film)|Interstellar}}'', both about space missions that encounter a black hole. {{w|Journey to the Center of the Earth}} is a classic novel by {{w|Jules Verne}} (and made into {{w|Journey to the Center of the Earth (1959 film)|various}} {{w|Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008 theatrical film)|films}}) which involve going into a volcano tube (a kind of hole). 
|-
! scope="row" | Fatal to get a big one in your body
| Yes
| Yes
| If a black hole appeared inside of a person's body, they would almost definitely die instantly.{{citation needed}} The same goes for a regular hole - if you cut out a massive section of a human's body, they would likely bleed out.
|-
! scope="row" | Some of them are the mouths of wormholes
| Maybe
| Yes
| Black holes are commonly portrayed to be the entrances of {{w|wormhole}}s, especially in sci-fi stories. On the other side, many species of worms live in shallow holes, with a "mouth" on the surface - the "mouth" of the "worm hole".
|-
! scope="row" | Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne argued that any information that falls into them is lost forever
| Yes
| No
| The {{w|Black hole information paradox}} is a paradox arising from the storage of information within black holes. Scientist {{w|Stephen Hawking}}, who is famous for his research into black holes, said that black holes release their energy over time, eventually disappearing, through {{w|Hawking Radiation}}. According to this theory, if information was also to enter the black hole, it would be released alongside this radiation. On the other hand, the {{w|No-hair theorem}} states that all black holes are completely identical outside of three key features: mass, spin, and electric charge. If information that fell into a black hole is released with Hawking radiation, then that means that there ''must'' be more than three properties of black holes.
On the other hand, information that falls into a normal hole is not lost forever, and can likely still be reobtained, especially if the information is stored physically. Hawking and {{w|Kip Thorne}} famously made a {{w|Thorne–Hawking–Preskill bet|bet}} with {{w|John Preskill}} over this paradox.
|-
! scope="row" | Commonly inhabited by meerkats
| Undetermined
| Yes
|{{w|Meerkat}}s commonly live in holes underground. It is highly unlikely that Earth mammals live in black holes, but because it is impossible to know what lies beyond the event horizon it is technically possible that there are meerkats.
|-
! scope="row" | (title text) Created by the collapse of
| Massive stars
| Florida limestone bedrock
| As mentioned before, Black holes are often created by the collapse of massive stars. On the other hand, many {{w|sinkhole}}s in Florida are caused due to most {{w|bedrock}} in the state being made of {{w|limestone}}, which is naturally soluble - that is, easily dissolved in water. Sinkholes in the state are [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/science-behind-floridas-sinkhole-epidemic-180969158/ commonly attributed] to the collapse of this limestone.
|}

==Transcript==
{| class="wikitable"
!
! scope="col"| Black Hole
! scope="col"| Regular Hole
|-
! scope="row" | Usually formed by...
| Supernovas, colliding stars
| Shovels, small mammals
|-
! scope="row" | Falling in is...
| Definitely fatal
| Sometimes fatal
|-
! scope="row" | Created by the Big Bang
| Maybe
| No
|-
! scope="row" | Created by children playing at the beach
| I '''''really''''' hope not
| Yes
|-
! scope="row" | Source of many precious metals
| Indirectly
| Yes
|-
! scope="row" | Einstein imagined falling into one
| Yes
| Probably at least once
|-
! scope="row" | A component of dark matter
| Maybe
| Probably not
|-
! scope="row" | Created by the Large Hadron Collider
| No
| Yes
|-
! scope="row" | Massive stars often collapse into them
| Yes
| No
|-
! scope="row" | Explored by humans in famous sci-fi stories
| Yes
| Yes
|-
! scope="row" | Fatal to get a big one in your body
| Yes
| Yes
|-
! scope="row" | Some of them are the mouths of wormholes
| Maybe
| Yes
|-
! scope="row" | Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne argued that any information that falls into them is lost forever
| Yes
| No
|-
! scope="row" | Commonly inhabited by meerkats
| Undetermined
| Yes
|}

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Cosmology]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]

Talk:2798: Room Temperature

2023-07-07T05:05:55Z

172.71.242.223:

Isn't there actually quite a lot of funding available for uncontrolled hot fusion? https://www.icanw.org/squandered_2021_global_nuclear_weapons_spending_report ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.32|162.158.38.32]] 23:29, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Note that '''controlled''' hot fusion (e. g. a functioning Tokamak) would also be really valuable. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 02:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Someone explain why superconductors are a big deal

Arguably the temperature has to change for a semiconductor to work. For it to work at room temperature alone would be pure magic.

:While I agree that a semiconductor that does not heat up in operation (IE stays at room temp) would be revolutionary, the way Cueball describes that they work "while sitting right here on the table" suggests they are "Room Temperature Semiconductors" in the sense that they can operate while immersed in a room temperature environment not necessarily that they themselves stay room temperature. Akin to the contrast between current superconductors that need to be blisteringly cold before they super-conduct and the hypothetical "room temperature superconductors" that could simply be strung through the air like present day power lines.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.223|172.70.174.223]] 14:04, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

A note about the fusion connection. In recent years, there have been breakthroughs in high temperature superconductors, which theoretically would allow to build controlled hot fusion reactors at a much smaller scale (because they can create much higher magnetic fields). There are seveal private companies that attempt to do that, most notably CFS with their [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC_(tokamak) SPARC Tokamak]. I think this is what is being referenced here. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 08:16, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
:Maybe you could add that yourself? I wrote the current explanation but actually have no expertise in that area, and also I'm not sure how to incorporate that into the current flow of the explanation. [[User:Rebekka|Rebekka]] ([[User talk:Rebekka|talk]]) 09:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

:I assumed the title text (which says "demonstrates" and not "produces" uncontrolled fusion) - could be as simple as a device proving the sun is a fusion reaction --[[User:Nico|Nico]] ([[User talk:Nico|talk]]) 11:49, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

::It could also be that he does have a device that produces uncontrolled hot fusion, and they won't fund it because the government does not negotiate with terrorists. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.40|172.69.247.40]] 11:56, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

As I understand it, "cold fusion" doesn't necessarily mean room temperature. That would actually be quite useless. Cold fusion could mean anything from "doesn't need millions of degrees" to "cool enough to directly hook up to boilers to power steam turbines" (and potentially a lower pressure requirement). The "room temperature" thing is mostly due to bad "science" and frauds (though it is still questionable if higher temperature cold fusion can be a thing, too). It's easier to cheaply make an alleged "cold fusion device" if you don't have to heat it up to or contain it at up to several thousand degrees. [[User:627235|627235]] ([[User talk:627235|talk]]) 11:23, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
:I took that phrasing directly from wikipedia, but you appear to be right. I did some further reading and apparently there are working methods of cold fusion (most notably {{w|Muon-catalyzed fusion}}) which are very different from the badly-performed experiments that gave cold fusion a bad name. But the difference is, reputable cold fusion still requires vast amounts of energy, just not as heat, while disreputable cold fusion is claimed to perform nuclear fusion basically for free (commonly by doing an electrolysis of palladium in heavy water). I'll try to incorporate that, but it would be great if someone with actual expertise would chime in and do their own edits.[[User:Rebekka|Rebekka]] ([[User talk:Rebekka|talk]]) 12:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
::I don't claim any great expertise, but I was already (when I wasn't being edit-conflicted) adding little bits such as the "meeting at 'room temperature' speculation" whereby a nigh-on perpetual room-temperature process (albeit with 'hot products') ''could'' be the Holy Grail (or {{w|DeLorean time machine#Mr. Fusion|"Mr Fusion"}}) of future cheap and manageable (and somehow not weaponisable/fail-deadly) table-top-scale fusion devices. Of course, this is is at least twenty-minutes-into-the-future stuff (deLoreans aside!) and may or may not ever become realistic. Perhaps less likely than the "flying cars and jetpacks" (or hover-boards!), of common imagination. But ''perhaps'' we might sometime get something the size (and surface heat, beyond the layers of necessary insulation and shielding for temperatures, fusion products and magnetic flux) of a household gas boiler. Probably not even that, in which case it could be justneighbourhood "{{w|Cogeneration|CHP}}"s to add managed resilience across the power-grids. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.230|172.70.90.230]] 13:43, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Do we really need "citation needed" that uncontrolled hot fusion is dangerous? Really? Because anyone who doesn't understand this is not going to understand "room temperature superconductors", probably not uses of any superconductors. Like ever. Oh wait! I'm sure this discussion statement has a [[citation needed]]!!! {{unsigned|Cuvtixo|01:56, 7 July 2023}} (edit) (undo)
(talk | contribs)
:It's a ''joke''... albeit one that I think is somewhat overused. Currently 817 out of 2798 articles include it, just under 30%. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 04:36, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
::Oh good. I tend to think that it should be maybe, as a ball-park figure, no more than one in four articles that has the {{template|Citation needed}} (in order to keep it special, not shoehorned in ''everywhere''...), and it's almost down that. (It must also be on the absolute blinding obvious and perhaps even tautoligicous to the point of being a tautological tautology, of course. ''And'' funny. If it aint funny, it has no purpose.)
::Though bear in mind that some articles have multiple occurances, so the use-count is probably higher as a proportion. And I'd have to check to see if the count counts the common redirects (thus aliases) of "citation needed", "Citation Needed", "cn" and "fact", at the very least, which might get used accidentally or because they're easier to type.
::But, remember, if anybody wants an ''actual'' {{template|Citation needed}}, there's always {{template|Actual citation needed}}. And, naturally, if you see one of ''those'' then you ''are'' truly invited to confirm/deny or just more accurately word the 'fact' so labeled - if you are in a position to do so.
::Here endeth the lesson. We now return you to your regularly-scheduled program... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.213|172.70.91.213]] 05:02, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

1735: Fashion Police and Grammar Police

2023-07-04T07:53:36Z

172.71.242.223: /* Explanation */ Deleting a fortunately unnecessary portion of phrase, resolving a plural/singular grammatical disagreement. Or at least awkward stand-off. (Crocs are clogs. "Crocs" is a brand of clogs/clog-likes. A croc is like a clog.)

{{comic
| number = 1735
| date = September 19, 2016
| title = Fashion Police and Grammar Police
| image = fashion_police_and_grammar_police.png
| titletext = * Mad about jorts
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, two groups of angry protesters are presented and labeled. They are probably not actually protesting side by side, but simply drawn side by side to compare their similarities.

The left group represents the '''Fashion Police''' with [[Cueball]] holding a sign implying that {{w|Crocs}} are prohibited (by showing Crocs shoe/sandal in a circle with a strike through it). Crocs are {{w|Clog|clogs}} made of foam. Crocs (and their imitators) have become fairly popular due to their low price, comfort, and ease of use, but are broadly considered {{w|Crocs#Fashion| unfashionable to wear in public}}. It is not the first time [[Randall]] mocks a special type of shoes, previously in [[1065: Shoes]] Randall was after shoes that ''has those creepy individual toes'' like {{w|Vibram FiveFingers}}. They will also never be a hit with the Fashion Police.{{Citation needed}}

The right group represents the '''Grammar Police''' with another Cueball holding a sign with three homophones: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/their Their] (belongs to them), [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/they%27re They're] (contraction meaning "they are"), [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/there There] (a location). These words, due to their common usage and identical pronunciation are frequently confused for one another, with one spelling being used in a context meant for a different one, causing the Grammar Police to quickly intervene (see [[386: Duty Calls]]). See the [https://twitter.com/_grammar_ Grammar Police on Twitter] and also {{w|Grammar Police|Linguistic prescription}} which comes up on Wikipedia when searching for Grammar Police.

The two groups look similar, standing in similar poses, with one Cueball holding signs in each group, and [[Megan]] in the front line of both groups. Each group also has one member brandishing a sword, indicating the exaggerated level of intensity they feel about their respective causes.

Both types of people will correct, criticize, denigrate or mock those who fail to conform to their criteria for what is "correct". Fashion police oppose people wearing clothing that's mismatched, out of style/{{w|fashion}} or simply "ugly" to them. Grammar police are "sticklers" for {{w|grammar}} rules and have an immediate negative reaction when someone uses non-standard grammar in a sentence. These two groups are generally seen as socially separate, and their goals appear very distinct, but the comic explains how the two groups are actually very similar. This is demonstrated by listing eight characteristics (plus a ninth in the title text) common to both groups. See explanation in the [[#Table of individual items|table below]].

In the caption below the comic Randall notes that he just realized that these are literally the same people because they both exhibit the listed traits.

It seems like a safe assumption (see [[1339: When You Assume]]) that there are more grammar pedants (see title text of [[1652: Conditionals]]) than fashion police people who read xkcd, and it also would seem likely that many xkcd readers would dislike the Fashion Police. This comic may, therefore, be intended to point out to grammar pedants that their behavior is functionally similar to that of other people who they dislike. Ponytail also represented the grammar police in [[1576: I Could Care Less]], where Megan puts her in place after she polices her sentence; this thus shows what Randall thinks about such police work and supports the above assumption. In 1576: I Could Care Less, "literally" was also used in the title text.

Randall is, with regards to language, definitely one of those that can belong in this group: ''To seem cool and casual, pretend to ignore them while understanding them very well.''

The title is a ninth point to add to the list, with the asterisk in front representing one more bullet. See the last entry in the [[#Table of individual items|table below]] for more:

==Table of individual items==
{| class="wikitable"
|+Explanation of individual items in the list
!list item
!Explanation
|-
|Judgemental and Smug || Both groups tend to feel very comfortable in their own mastery of their particular field, and are frequently condescending to those who either lack their expertise, or are uninterested in meeting their standards.
|-
|Angry about something deeply arbitrary || Both grammar and fashion are, essentially, made-up human constructs.
|-
| Strong opinions backed by style guides || Grammar has ''{{w|The Elements of Style}}'', fashion has fashion magazines.
|-
| Appreciate that the way that you are interpreted is your responsibility || Whether or not you're interested in fashion or 'proper' grammar, how you dress and speak will impact how others perceive you, and often how they treat you. Whether this is fair or not, it is a reality, and each person is responsible for how they present themselves.
|-
| Understand that there's no way to "opt out" of sending messages by how you present yourself, and attempts to do so send strong messages of their own || As above, our dress and speech will be taken by others as sending messages about ourselves. Trying to ignore the rules of either grammar or fashion is, itself, a message, as it presents to the world that we refuse to live by this set of rules. Whether or not we're trying to convey that message, it is what will come across.
|-
|To seem cool and casual, pretend to ignore them while understanding them very well || People who appear to not understand the rules of either grammar or fashion will often be seen as ignorant or low-class. On the other hand, deliberately ignoring rules of either when its clear that you've mastered them comes across as casual, since it's clear that you're choosing to play with the rules, rather than simply not knowing them.
|-
|Vindictive about things that are often uncomfortably transparent proxies for race or social class || This is probably the most impactful observation. Rules around fashion and grammar, being arbitrary, are generally set by the most powerful classes in any society, which often run along racial lines as well. As a result, the "proper" way to dress or speak generally remains associated with those classes. This association can be pragmatic, such as "fashionable" clothing being more expensive and hard for poor people to acquire, or it may simply be cultural, as 'proper' grammar is whatever's spoken in wealthy neighborhoods and schools, while language variants associated with poor people and minority groups is bluntly denounced as 'wrong', even if it has a fully consistent internal grammar. Similarly, fashions that are associated with poor and non-white social groups are broadly considered to be inappropriate, even if the reasons are arbitrary. As a result, such things become signifiers by which one can present oneself as being part of a social class. In America, it would be socially unacceptable to reject a job applicant because they grew up poor, and illegal to do so because of their race. However, rejecting an applicant for using 'improper' grammar, or for not wearing the right clothing or hairstyle, is standard practice. Randall identifies this fact as "uncomfortably transparent".
|-
| Fun to cheer on until one of them disagrees with you|| As with any arbitrary set of rules, those that we're in agreement and comfortable with are easy to promote, and we may enjoy taking part in the condemnation of others. But that suddenly changes when we find ourselves on the outside, condemned for our own use of language or how we dress. At that point, the flaws of such groups become much harder to ignore.
|-
| Mad about jorts (Title text) || "{{w|Shorts#Jorts|Jorts}}" is a {{w|portmanteau}} for a pair of jeans that are made into shorts.

The fashion police would be mad about jorts for being unfashionable.

The grammar police would be mad about the word 'jorts' being an inappropriate portmanteau of jeans and shorts, and also for the fact that the sentence could be misinterpreted as if someone likes jorts, as in being "mad about" something in a positive way.

{{w|Sentence_clause_structure#Incomplete_sentence|Also a fragment}}, with no subject (properly it would be "I am mad about jorts" or "They are mad about jorts"). Randall has [[:Category:Portmanteau|often used]] portmanteaus as part of his jokes.

It is also possible that the Grammar police are indeed "mad about Jorts" in the positive sense, i.e Grammar Police love Jorts.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Beneath two headings to the left and right are shown two aggressive-looking groups of people with only the four people in the front clearly shown for each group. Behind them five other people can be seen, but they are not drawn with the same solid line and are only partly shown behind the first four, but legs from all five in each group can be seen along with some heads (all Cueball like) and arms etc. The front of the left group consist of Hairy holding a fist up towards left, Megan with her arms crossed in front of her chest, Cueball holding a sign, using both hands, straight up above his head and another Cueball-like guy to the right is holding up a broken branch in one hand toward right. The person behind this last person is shown to hold up his fist towards right like Hairy does to the left. The sign shows a Crocs shoe in a circle with a strike through it going above the Crocs from top left to bottom right. The front of the right group consist of Megan holding both her arms over her head hands folded into fist while looking towards left, Cueball holding a sign, using both hands, towards the right and up above Ponytails head, she is raising one hand in a fist to the left and finally a bald guy with glasses is brandishing a short sword in one hand toward right while holding his other hand palm up. The sign has three similar words written beneath each other.]
:Left: Fashion Police
:Right: Grammar Police
:Sign:
::Their
::They're
::There

:[Below the two groups are eight points with bullets:]
:*Judgemental and smug
:*Angry about something deeply arbitrary
:*Strong opinions backed by style guides
:*Appreciate that the way that you are interpreted ''is'' your responsibility
:*Understand that there's no way to "opt out" of sending messages by how you present yourself, and attempts to do so send strong messages of their own
:*To seem cool and casual, pretend to ignore them while understanding them very well
:*Vindictive about things that are often uncomfortably transparent proxies for race or social class
:*Fun to cheer on until one of them disagrees with you

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I just realized these are literally the same people

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Portmanteau]]
[[Category:Pedantic]]

Talk:2793: Garden Path Sentence

2023-06-24T13:39:54Z

172.71.242.223:

The bot didn't upload the most recent comic so I tried to do it myself, but I think I screwed it up :([[User:Szeth Pancakes|Szeth Pancakes]] ([[User talk:Szeth Pancakes|talk]]) 18:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I think the term "bird strikes" should be interpreted as a plural noun, given the two Xs on the map. Something like "After bird strikes, judge ... overturned but rights and lands safely" [[Special:Contributions/172.69.59.8|172.69.59.8]] 20:30, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
: Or it could be the bird strikes judge... You know, the one who was the judge in an important and well-known "bird strikes" case, possibly environmental, possibly an insurance scam case or something.[[User:Thisfox|Thisfox]] ([[User talk:Thisfox|talk]]) 21:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think the current interpretation is wrong, but "olive garden" could be the lower-case-when-not-a-comics-headline descriptor for, you know, an actual garden of olive trees. That makes more sense when referring to green walkways. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 20:33, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Can someone also parse the alt-text? I still can't figure it out. -[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.176|162.158.154.176]] 20:39, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
:I think it's saying the arboretum owner (who is appealing the case) is himself appealing. I'm still having trouble with the grounds grounds portion though. :([[User:*anonymouse*|*anonymouse*]] ([[User talk:*anonymouse*|talk]]) 20:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
::He was ''appealing'' the lawsuit on the ''grounds'' that the ''grounds'' were ''appealing'' [[User:Ahecht|Ahecht]] ([[User talk:Ahecht|talk]]) 22:06, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Going by the picture I think the "bird" that struck the judge may be the plane.
:Disagree, "{{w|bird strike}}" is a term used for an incident where a bird strikes a vehicle, usually a plane. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.155|172.70.211.155]] 20:50, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
:But all these conflicting interpretations proves Randall's point that this is a garden path sentence :) [[User:Natg19|Natg19]] ([[User talk:Natg19|talk]]) 20:52, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

[[User:*anonymouse*|*anonymouse*]] please reconsider your edits; before them, I think I understood the meaning, but your supposed clarification messed it up :( the paragraph you removed seemed more plausible to me, and it also contained some useful wiki links to {{w|bird strike}} and {{w|vacated judgement}}. [[User:Torzsmokus|Torzsmokus]] ([[User talk:Torzsmokus|talk]]) 20:47, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

As I understood it, birds hit the plane piloted by the judge that gave the Olive Garden path sentence, overturning it (!!!), but he righted it and managed to land. [[User:J Petry|J Petry]] ([[User talk:J Petry|talk]]) 20:49, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

A [[wikipedia:bird strike]] is an aviation thing. Given the airplane in the photo and the path to what appears to be runways, I think that these are the bird strikes it's referring to. "Rights and lands safely" also would refer to the judge piloting an airplane. "Overturned" thus should also refer to the flight, but I would expect it to be something like "overturns", not "overturned", given "rights and lands". Thus: "After bird strikes, the judge who ordered the sentence overturned in the olive garden path case, his plane overturned, but rights the aircraft and lands it safely." [[User:SheeEttin|SheeEttin]] ([[User talk:SheeEttin|talk]]) 20:53, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, and I think you're right. After (multiple) bird strikes the (plane being flown by the judge) overturned but was able to right itself. :([[User:*anonymouse*|*anonymouse*]] ([[User talk:*anonymouse*|talk]]) 20:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I feel certain that "olive" refers to the shade of green, because otherwise why specify "green" walkways? This makes "Olive Garden" a red herring, which seems likely. -- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.244|108.162.245.244]] 21:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

:I disagree. I read "olive garden" as a literal garden of olive trees. Randall is exploiting our familiarity with the Olive Garden restaurant to construct the sentence. The path would be a footpath or something through this garden. What makes the walkways green? No idea, maybe they're the kind that are actually solar panels. [[User:SheeEttin|SheeEttin]] ([[User talk:SheeEttin|talk]]) 22:10, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

:: I would interpret "green walkway" as meaning a picturesque walkway going through a forest, public gardens, or similar, which fits in with the olive trees. Searching for the term on Wikipedia suggests this expression is more commonly used in England than in the US. [[User:Hmj|Hmj]] ([[User talk:Hmj|talk]]) 05:29, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I still don't like "overturned but rights and lands" - why would the first verb be in the past tense and the others present tense, if they are describing events that happened within a very short time of each other? Wouldn't a headline be entirely in the present tense? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.102|162.158.159.102]] 05:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
: Because it had to overturn first (in the past) before it could right and land. It's a valid use of tense, using the past tense helps establish the sequence of events. Simpler sentences only use 3 tenses: past, present, and future, so in such a sentence, since none of the three events are in the future, two must share a tense. It could also have been "overturned, righted, and lands safely.", with two being past tense and the last being present. Getting less simple would be "had overturned, then righted so it lands safely", to give each term its own tense. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:13, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

This also suggests the plane was overturned by some external factor, rather than just overturning by itself.

I had understood that an actual flying animal - a bird - bounced off the judge's head - in present tense, the bird strikes the judge - which made it flip over, but it managed to right itself and properly land, as if that's important. I honestly feel like this interpretation of "bird" makes more sense than an airplane being involved. Also that it adds humour, since how is the bird important enough to care that it recovered, and care ENOUGH that it should be mentioned in the headline. :) (I hadn't gotten around to trying to figure out the rest, felt too difficult until I read the concept of a garden path sentence) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I can't help but feel a better (worse?) sentence would be "After bird strikes judge who ordered olive garden path sentence in case of emergency exits vacated overturned but rights and lands safely", playing off familiarity with the phrase "in case of emergency" and the fact that "exit" is both a verb and a noun. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.223|172.71.242.223]] 13:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

2717: L6 Lagrange Point

2023-01-01T16:11:33Z

172.71.242.223: /* Explanation */ Rewriting to remove uncomfortably closely repeated "factor" string.

{{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 can float motionless relative to the defining bodies. The L1, L2, and L3 points are unstable, as any drifting off the point (e.g. due to the gravity of other bodies) might quickly increase the tendency to depart the area. However, there are quasi-stable {{w|Halo orbit}}s around these points, like the one used by the {{w|James Webb Space Telescope}}. The L4 and L5 points can actually retain objects stably over long periods, resulting in the Sun-Jupiter L4 and L5 points capturing the {{w|Trojan (celestial_body)|Trojan Asteroids}}.

There are five traditional Lagrange points. Two form equilateral triangles with the two massive objects (in this case the Earth and the Sun), and three more are collinear with the massive objects. Randall claims that a sixth Lagrange point has been discovered outside of {{w|Cleveland}}, {{w|Ohio}}. This is pretty obviously farcical,{{Citation needed}} as this would be part of the Earth and thus not gravitationally balanced between Earth and the Sun, though it is balanced by the countering forces that hold anything stable on the surface of any body: {{w|gravity}} and {{w|electromagnetism}}. The joke here is that there actually is a small village named {{w|LaGrange, Ohio|LaGrange, OH}} (population 2,595 in 2020) just outside Cleveland ([https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lagrange,+OH+44050/ map]). However, the village name is spelled with a capital G, unlike {{w|Joseph-Louis Lagrange}} after which the Lagrange points were named.

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 the LaGrange L6 are unstable. The Lagrange points are solutions for a simplified three-body system, and orbits around them may be disrupted if additional bodies such as moons or planets are close enough or massive enough to cumulatively exert significant gravitational forces over time (the Moon does factor into the Earth-Sun L1 and L2 Lagrange points, especially, but that can be accounted for in the station-keeping measures already required). Trying to orbit around a point on the ground would, of course, run into much more serious problems, {{w|lithobraking|such as the ground.}}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:Grey on white diagram of the Earth orbiting the Sun, not to scale. Earth is depicted as a circle with pale grey continents on darker grey seas, and shows a view from above the North Pole without any Arctic ice. The sun is drawn surrounded by radially symmetrical exaggerated wave pattern.
:Also in grey, approximate locations of Lagrange points 1 to 5 are marked with dots and labels: "L1" "L2" "L3" "L4" "L5".
:In black, a point on the Earth's surface within the boundary of a continent that could be North America. Also in black, an arrow pointing towards the point, and the label "L6".
:[Caption below the panel:]
:Huge space news: Astronomers have discovered a new Lagrange point just outside Cleveland.

{{comic discussion}}

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

Talk:2717: L6 Lagrange Point

2022-12-29T10:38:58Z

172.71.242.223:

Daily comics. —[[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] | a late contribution | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 19:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

This came out about a year after JWST was launched, and it's stationed at a Lagrange point of the Sun and Earth. It might be related to the anniversary, although it would make more sense if it came out in a month, on the anniversary of the telescope reaching L2. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Missed opportunity to reference [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Grange,_Texas La Grange, Texas], the basis of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Grange_(song) song] by [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZZ_Top ZZ Top]. [[User:RandalSchwartz|RandalSchwartz]] ([[User talk:RandalSchwartz|talk]]) 21:13, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
: Well I hear it's fine, if you got the time [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.5|108.162.249.5]] 13:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Not ''probable'' but maybe a reference to the recent "Ohio" meme?[[Special:Contributions/172.71.82.41|172.71.82.41]] 22:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Bumpf

Probably not on purpose but it definitely fits in with the rest of the “Ohio” memes
22:38 27 December 2022 (ETC) Comi123

;Can I use a subscript notation in the transcript?

Any clues where to find the code? Comic seems to have the numeral portions of "L1" to "L6" as subscripts. Is that a standard notation for Lagrange points, if so should we also use it in the main article? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.66.102|172.68.66.102]] 06:14, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

:Sure. Use HTML tags. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.39|172.71.154.39]] 07:41, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Why Cleveland? Well, Yakov Smirnoff said, "In every country, they make fun of city. In U.S. you make fun of Cleveland. In Russia, we make fun of Cleveland." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.168|172.71.26.168]] 12:14, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

The center of the Earth is also a Lagrange point (I think I'll call it L0). So Lagrange, OH is only 4,000 miles off, which should be close enough for many astronomers. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.100|172.70.135.100]] 16:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
:Well, LaGrange, OH is in a stable orbit around L0, so would this also be a Halo orbit? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.5|141.101.77.5]] 09:26, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

And I thought La Grange was in Texas I should not listen to three wise men with beards, even at this time of year. Wikipedia tells m there are over 25 across the US. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.223|172.71.242.223]] 10:38, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

1474: Screws

2022-12-20T00:52:14Z

172.71.242.223: /* Explanation */ Correct grammar, expand and wikilink a bit.

{{comic
| number = 1474
| date = January 16, 2015
| title = Screws
| image = screws.png
| titletext = If you encounter a hex bolt, but you only brought screwdrivers, you can try sandwiching the head of the bolt between two parallel screwdriver shafts, squeezing the screwdrivers together with a hand at either end, then twisting. It doesn't work and it's a great way to hurt yourself, but you can try it!
}}

==Explanation==
This comic uses a similar structure and is based off of the same idea as [[1714: Volcano Types]] and [[1874: Geologic Faults]]. Appliance makers sometimes use {{w|List of screw drives|strange screw heads}} to hinder attempts from users to remove appliance covers. Users usually have handy {{w|screwdrivers}} for the first two screw types drawn, Phillips and Flat. More advanced users usually have some less standard drivers, such as {{w|Torx}} or {{w|Allen key|Allen}}, however appliance makers keep designing increasingly strange {{w|List of screw drives|screw heads}} and users keep acquiring increasingly strange screwdrivers.

The comic is about the frustration a user may feel when faced with a screw for which they have no screwdriver. Usually the user will try to fit one of the drivers they have handy into the strange screw, leading to damaging the screw and/or the driver and/or the person wielding the tool.

The types of screws listed are the following:

{| class="wikitable"
! style="width: 25%"|Screw type
! Description
|-
| Phillips head
| {{w|List of screw drives#Phillips|Phillips screw drive}} and its corresponding screw head is one of the most recognizable types of screw heads that is commonly used in construction. This type of screw head was named after its inventor, a US businessman {{w|Henry F. Phillips}}. Neither the inventor nor his invention have any relationship to the Dutch electronics manufacturing company with similar, but not exactly the same name {{w|Philips}}. Technically speaking, this is not a Phillips, as a Phillips screw head is rounded at the center.
|-
| Flat head
| {{w|List_of_screw_drives#Slot|Slot head screws}} are frequently erroneously referred to as flat heads (a flat head screw refers, in fact, to the shape of the screw head, regardless of the shape of the drive socket). The slot head is also commonly used in construction. Although the diagram shows the slot truncated, the slot almost always runs across the entire head of the screw (as in the case of the "uranium screw" below).
|-
| Uh oh. Maybe it's on Amazon? (pentagram-shaped screw)
| Manufacturers sometimes use screws that require special screwdrivers in order to prevent the customer from opening the product. The reference to Amazon is presumably a suggestion to search {{w|Amazon.com}} for the screwdriver. A number of star-shaped screw heads exist, notably the six-pointed {{w|Torx}}, and {{w|Apple Inc.|Apple}}'s rounded {{w|Pentalobe screw|pentalobe screw}}, although there is no popular design that uses the 5-pointed star shape depicted in the comic. Torx screws are common in automotive applications — Phillips heads are designed to "{{w|cam out}}" at high {{w|torque}} to protect the screw, whereas Torx do not — and on bicycles where a higher tightening torque is needed than hex screws can support. They are also commonly used on {{w|disk brake}} mounts and in {{w|smartphones}}.

|-
| Cursed −1 Phillips head
| The head of a screw can be stripped by overuse, tightening the screw too much, using the wrong size screwdriver, or other misuse. As the driving surfaces wear away, removing the screw becomes more difficult, and the added pressure needed to drive the screw usually damages it further.

The addition of "cursed" and "−1" in the titles is a reference to various role playing games (e.g. ''{{w|Dungeons and Dragons}}''), where magical "cursed" items appear frequently. This often makes the cursed equipment (in the case of armor or weapons) incredibly difficult to remove, as it will cling to the wielder. Similarly, the cursed Phillips Head screw becomes difficult to remove due to the stripped head. Alternatively, this may imply that the damage to the screw head was caused ''because'' the screw is "cursed" and therefore difficult to remove.

The "−1" refers to the damage of the screw head. In role playing games, items such as weapons and armor may have an "enchantment", with a positive enchantment making the item more effective, and a negative enchantment making the item less effective. Negatively enchanted items are often also cursed, as is the case with this screw head. The "−1" does not appear to be a reference to a {{w|List_of_screw_drives#Phillips|Phillips bit-size number}}, as those are always positive.

Notably, the stripped screw bears a resemblance to a {{w|List_of_screw_drives#Pozidriv|Pozidriv head}}, a modified version of the Phillips head designed to resist slipping and subsequent stripping. Using a Phillips head screwdriver in a Pozidriv screw is very likely to damage the screw head and cause a real Pozidriv screwdriver to no longer mate correctly.{{Actual citation needed}}
|-
| Crap, it's a ''rivet''.
| A {{w|rivet}} is not a screw — it is a permanent fastener which is secured by deforming the body of the fastener. Rivets cannot be removed with a screwdriver, they must be drilled out. Some bolts also have rounded rivet-style heads, though, which need a {{w|collet}}-style tool to grip and remove.
|-
| Phillips head ruiner ''(actually a hex screw)''
| A reference to the fact that {{w|List_of_screw_drives#Hex_socket|hex socket}} screws can, in a pinch, be removed with a Phillips screwdriver (rather than the intended {{w|Allen wrench}}) but this will likely ruin the screwdriver (and damage the screw) in the process.
|-
| Uranium screw
| Uranium screws were [http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2014/11/10/fat-mans-uranium/ used] in the [http://www.scintillators.ru/booc/criticality/reports/ref_050.pdf construction] of [http://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/769001 nuclear weapons] during the twentieth century. Multiple radially extending short wave-like lines around the screw head symbolize radiant energy output, although real uranium screws were most likely made of {{w|depleted uranium}}, which is [http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabc.htm 40 percent less radioactive] than naturally-occurring raw {{w|uranium}}.
|-
| Phillip's head
| This is a morbidly literal interpretation of the misuse of an apostrophe in "Phillip's head". This "screw" is actually a bloody bag containing the severed head of someone named "Phillip" (an all too common modern respelling of the more classic "Philip", perhaps in part influenced by the more typical "Phillips" surname). Intentionally or otherwise, this last punchline could be described as a "{{tvtropes|MindScrew|mind screw}}".
|-
|Hex bolt (title text)
|A {{w|List_of_screw_drives#Hex|hex bolt}} has six external sides, so it could in theory be held by squeezing two screwdriver shafts together with the bolt in-between, as an ersatz pair of {{w|pliers}}. The amount of force on the two screwdriver shafts needed to turn the hex bolt and maintain the 'grip' will probably exceed the strength of human hands — the attempt would most likely only result in causing your hands to cramp or causing the screwdrivers to slip and cause further injury. The title text is making a play on the phrase "you can try", which normally implies something with a reasonable chance of success, but here is only pointing out "just because you ''can'' doesn't mean you should".
It marks a variation on the idea that "{{w|Law of the instrument|when all you have is a hammer}}, everything looks like a nail", as also exemplified by the common tendency for cutting-pliers to be used to grip things or gripping pliers to be used to try to flex-shear objects, just because one tool is more immediately at hand than a more correct one. But, in this case, it seems that multiple screwdrivers are available. Whether or not any of these are strictly suitable for all actually encountered screw-heads (as above), here something that is definitely ''not'' actually a screw-head but "looks like one" and forces an improvisation in leiu of any of the more suitable tools that should really be used — including an ''external'' hex socket of a suitable size.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Eight drawings of different types of heads each with a caption:]
:[Plus sign-shaped screw.]
:Phillips head
:[Minus sign-shaped screw.]
:Flat head
:[Star-shaped screw.]
:Uh oh. Maybe it's on Amazon?
:[Plus sign-shaped screw with worn edges.]
:Cursed -1 Phillips head
:[No screw, just a circle.]
:Crap, it's a ''rivet''.
:[Hexagon-shaped screw.]
:Phillips-head ruiner
:[Minus sign-shaped screw going through the whole circle. Also giving off radiation.]
:Uranium screw (a real thing)
:[A sack with blood oozing out of it.]
:Phillip's head

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with blood]]
[[Category:Comics featuring cursed items]]