explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

718: The Flake Equation

2020-02-27T03:37:23Z

198.41.238.46: > native English

{{comic
| number = 718
| date = March 24, 2010
| title = The Flake Equation
| image = the flake equation.png
| titletext = Statistics suggest that there should be tons of alien encounter stories, and in practice there are tons of alien encounter stories. This is known as Fermi's Lack-of-a-Paradox.
}}

==Explanation==
The Flake equation is a parody of the {{w|Drake equation}} , which is an estimate the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy. The Flake equation, however, provides an estimate about how many false stories ''about'' aliens are likely to exist. It does so in similar manner: by multiplying number of stars by consecutive probabilities of the star having certain characteristics making detectable life possible. Just like the Drake equation, exact numbers are unknown, but can be estimated, and the equation shows the guesses about the values.

The word "Flake" is informally used to describe a crazy person, such as someone who would imagine an alien encounter.

===Explanations of values===
{| class="wikitable"
!Symbol
!Assumed value
!Explanation
|-

|WP
|7,000,000,000
|World population at the time of the creation of the comic, taken as a starting value.
|-
|(CR + Mi)
|1/10,000 + 1/10,000
|Fraction of people who would falsely believe they had been visited by aliens. This is assumed to be people who are crazy, want to feel special, or misinterpret physical phenomena as alien sightings. It is assumed that a total of one in 10,000 people to at least one of the first two of these groups and another one in 10,000 belong to the final group, for a total of one in 5000 belonging to one of these three groups. Multiplied by the world population we get the number of people who falsely believe to have been visited by aliens
|-
|TK
|1/10
|The fraction of people who believe they have experienced an alien sighting that tell others about their experience. Multiplying with the previous values we get the number of people who falsely believe to have experienced an alien sighting, and tell others about it.
|-
|F0
|10
|Average number of people they tell about their "sightings". Multiplying with the previous values we get the amount of people this is the amount of people who hear about a false alien sighting from the "primary source".
|-
|F1
|10
|Average number of people that they decide to tell about the "firsthand" account. Multiplying with the previous values we get the amount of people who hear a second-hand account of a false story.
|-
|DT
|9/10
|The probability that the details will be slightly adjusted during the retelling process, making the account believable. The total is now the amount of believable-yet-false alien sighting stories.
|-
|AU
|1/100
|The proportion of people who have the willingness and ability to share this story with the with a broad audience. The total is now the amount of believable-yet-false alien sightings that are published to a wider audience.
|}

The final results tells us that there should be about 100 000 stories about aliens that have reliable explanation. The data is obviously highly uncertain, and as with the Drake Equation, you can plug in your own numbers, but if you keep your guesses realistic, you will most likely get a very large number. This convinces the reader that the fact that there are many stories about aliens does not necessarily means that many people actually met aliens.

The title text refers to Fermi's Lack-of-a-Paradox as a parody of the {{w|Fermi paradox}}: The contradiction between the high estimated probable existence of extraterrestrial civilizations and the lack of establishing contact to such civilizations by humans.

Another comic parodying this equation is [[384: The Drake Equation]]. The credibility of paranormal reports in general is revisited in [[1235: Settled]], which posits that if such phenomena were real they should have been unambiguously captured on camera by now.

==Transcript==
:The Flake Equation:
:P = WP × (CR + MI) × TK × F0 × F1 × DT × AU ≈ 100,000
:Where:
::WP = World Population (7,000,000,000)
::CR = Fraction of people who imagine an alien encounter because they're crazy or want to feel special (1/10,000)
::MI = Fraction of people who misinterpret a physical or physiological experience as an alien sighting (1/10,000)
::TK = Probability that they'll tell someone (1/10)
::F0 = Average number of people they tell (10)
::F1 = Average number of people each friend tells this "firsthand" account (10)
::DT = Probability that any details not fitting the narrative will be revised or forgotten in retelling (9/10)
::AU = Fraction of people with the means and motivation to share the story with a wider audience (blogs, forums, reporters) (1/100)
:Even with conservative guesses for the values of the variables, this suggests there must be a ''huge'' number of credible-sounding alien sightings out there, available to anyone who wants to believe!

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:SETI]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Paranormal]]

2261: Worst Thing That Could Happen

2020-02-26T20:12:24Z

198.41.238.46: /* List of worst thing */

{{comic
| number = 2261
| date = January 29, 2020
| title = Worst Thing That Could Happen
| image = worst_thing_that_could_happen.png
| titletext = Before I install any patch, I always open the patch notes and Ctrl-F for 'supervolcano', 'seagull', and 'garbage disposal', just to be safe.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A SLOW NUCLEAR WAR WAGED BY SEAGULLS WITH HANDGUNS. Link to related comics could be included. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Ponytail]] and company are considering upgrading some part or program of their computers. They may feel the need to upgrade because the software they are currently using has some vulnerability that is only patched in newer revisions (this comic was released just two weeks after the end of extended support for Windows 7), or because they want to have access to some new feature. As part of the decision-making process, Ponytail asks her friends, "What's the worst that could happen?" If the computers they are discussing are privately owned, she may be concerned about losing personal data or having to learn new software interfaces. On the other hand, if they are discussing a corporate computer system, there may also be business-related risks. If their company relies on functionality offered by their current system that has been deprecated or modified in the updated version (such as in [[1172: Workflow]], or as with many specialized tools or machines in the real world), they may suffer downtime while they modify the rest of their workflow. Even if the upgraded system should continue to fit their needs, they may need to take some downtime to perform the update and deal with the risks of something going badly along the way, and there may be major costs associated with license subscriptions and support contracts. "What's the worst that could happen" is also a common {{w|rhetorical question}}; Ponytail may be expressing a belief that nothing bad could happen as a result of the upgrade, and not expecting an answer.

Unfortunately, Ponytail's friends answer with their ideas for the worst things that could happen ''ever'', not "...as a result of the upgrade", as Ponytail meant, or they are taking the question to the logical extreme and invoking chaos theory. The result is a list of 'worst things' ridiculously unconnected to a computer upgrade. At the end, however, [[Megan]] interprets these as possible results of the upgrade, and advises against upgrading. A [[#List of worst thing|list with explanations]] can be found below. Ponytail facepalms at her friends' overly-literal senses of humor

Alternatively, Ponytail could be facepalming at the fact that the worst thing which could happen, according to her team, is that they are put on a ridiculous game show in which, if they answer a question incorrectly, they are chucked in garbage disposal. This may be bad, but it is nowhere near as bad as an erupting supervolcano or nuclear war. However, [[Cueball]] has shown anxiety and difficulties in social situations, such as the less-than-helpful advice in "[[1917: How to Make Friends]]", so he (and likewise [[Hairy]] and Megan) may consider that embarrassment on the game show (which might then be immortalized online) is worse than instantaneous death in a nuclear war.

The title text talks about searching upgrade release notes for some of the things listed to be sure none are potential side effects of an upgrade. "Ctrl-F" is a common keyboard shortcut for "find text string" in many programs. Since Randall is just reading but not changing the patch notes, a web browser, PDF viewer, or word processing program such as Adobe Reader or Microsoft Word might have been used.

===List of worst things===
*The list of "worst things that could happen" discussed by the team are:

{| border =1 width=100% cellpadding=5 class="wikitable"
|'''Thing''' || '''Notes'''
|-
|{{w|Supervolcano}} || A supervolcano is a volcano which would (or does) eject over 1,000 cubic kilometers of material when it erupts. The United States in particular is home to a supervolcano in {{w|Yellowstone National Park}}. When it erupts, the results will be catastrophic to the entire world, possibly triggering a volcanic winter, massive crop die-offs (and subsequent cascading extinctions up the food chain), and the destruction of human civilization.
|-
|{{w|Robot uprising}} || An artificial intelligence overthrows humanity and takes over the world. Hairy is probably concerned with a violent uprising in which the robots are determined to exterminate humanity, as in, for example, the {{w|Terminator (franchise)|''Terminator''}} films, rather than [[1450: AI-Box Experiment|an AI who just wants to stay in a box]]. Randall has written about robot uprisings (both violent and humorous) in [[:Category:Artificial Intelligence|several comic strips]]. If Ponytail's company is involved in artificial intelligence, a robot uprising could be a remotely plausible worst-case scenario from a botched upgrade.
|-
|Everyone falls down a {{w|well}} at once || ''{{w|Lassie}}'' was a series of books, films, and television shows about Lassie, a heroic Rough Collie dog who either rescues people from dangerous situations or at least goes to find other humans and lead them to the victim. The archetypal rescue in popular culture is that {{tvtropes|TimmyInAWell|little Timmy, her owner, falls down a well}} (although this never happened in any episode -- it was her first owner, Jeff Miller, who needed rescuing from the well, while Timmy got into [https://sickbastard.wordpress.com/2007/07/10/timmy-fell-down-what-well/ pretty much every ''other'' kind of trouble imaginable]). There have also been several well-publicized incidents in which a real person fell down a well, such as [https://www.biography.com/personality/baby-jessica Baby Jessica] and [https://www.michigan.gov/egle/0,9429,7-135-3313_3675_3689-7996--,00.html this list]. If ''everyone'' fell down a well at once, there would be nobody for Lassie to summon to get them out, which would be a pretty bad thing. It's unclear how this upgrade could cause this outcome, making this suggestion preposterous.
|-
|Instead of hitting the tallest thing around, lightning starts hitting the nicest || {{w|Lightning}} generally strikes the tallest object under a thunderstorm, a topic addressed in {{what if|16|''What-if #16: Lightning''}}. {{w|Lightning rods}} are built to take advantage of this effect to protect nearby important objects from the lightning. If lightning started hitting the ''nicest'' thing around, then it would presumably strike whatever it was that the lightning rods are meant to protect (nice buildings, nice people, [https://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-7-3.html nice rockets]). If the computer that's being upgraded is connected to the [[1620: Christmas Settings|Universe Control Panel]], this change could be a plausible negative consequence of the update.
|-
|{{w|Seagulls}} all get {{w|handguns}} || Guns in the hands of humans account for the large majority of homicides and suicides in the USA. Letting handguns be wielded by seagulls, which lack the impulse control and cognitive thinking required to make the ownership of a handgun somewhat safe, would make this much worse. Seagulls are not particularly known for their intelligence, self control, or kindness toward others. At popular beaches, seagulls are known to aggressively harass humans for their food; if they wielded handguns, a great deal of violence would ensue. Even if mayhem and death were not due to intentional use (i.e., if the seagulls were capable of learning that use of a handgun would get them food or something else they might like), they would happen from accidental use.
|-
|A really '''slow''' nuclear war || No {{w|nuclear war}} involving two sides launching nuclear weapons at each other has ever been fought, but experts generally agree that an all-out nuclear war between superpowers would end very quickly and very badly for all parties involved (as well as all parties not involved). A "slow" nuclear war might play out as a series of tit-for-tat individual launches rather than a single apocalyptic exchange, but the destruction of cities and release of fallout would be the same. Perhaps the anticipation of when exactly it's "your turn" to be a target would make the slow war a worse experience.

Much of the computer networking technology used today has its roots in research into hardening nuclear command and control systems against an incoming first strike, and many works of fiction have depicted nuclear war (or the risk of nuclear war) resulting from computer and software errors in systems that are supposed to "upgrade" the decision-making process, such as ''{{w|WarGames}}'' and "{{w|Fail-Safe (novel)|Fail-Safe}}". If Ponytail's company is involved in the defense industry, a nuclear war could be a plausible worst-case scenario from a botched upgrade.
|-
|We have to go on a game show where they show you photos of people you've met once and ask you their names, and if you get one wrong a trapdoor opens and you fall into a garbage disposal || The premise of this game show seems to play on Munroe's frequent references to anxiety about social situations. For people who have troubling remembering names, encountering someone you've met once before can be harrowing, as you may know that you ''should'' know their name, but be unable to recall it, creating embarrassment and awkwardness (particularly if the person remembers your name with ease). The concept is that fear could be exploited in the form of a game show. Many popular game shows feature contests where contestants who fail are subjected to pain and/or humiliation, such as the ''{{w|Ninja Warrior}}'' franchise. This case is particularly exaggerated, as the inability to remember even a single name would result in being dropped into a garbage disposal, which would virtually guarantee serious maiming and/or death. The reaction of the strip characters suggests that they all share a lack of confidence in their ability to remember the names of casual acquaintances, making such a game show one of the "worst things" they could encounter.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail is standing in front of a desk with a computer. One of her hands is on the keyboard. Behind her, Cueball, Hairy, and Megan are looking at the computer screen.]
:Ponytail: We should upgrade. What's the worst that could happen?
:Cueball: Supervolcano.
:Hairy: Robot uprising.
:Megan: Everyone falls down a well at once.

:[Zoom in on Cueball, Hairy, and Megan. Cueball has turned toward the other two.]
:Cueball: Instead of hitting the tallest thing around, lightning starts hitting the nicest.
:Megan: Seagulls all get handguns.
:Hairy: A really '''''slow''''' nuclear war.

:[Large panel with the original setting. Ponytail has turned towards the other three but is now facepalming, as Cueball gesturing with his hands at chest-height are still looking at the other two facing him.]
:Cueball: We all have to go on a game show where they show you photos of people you've met once and ask you their names, and if you get one wrong a trapdoor opens and you fall into a garbage disposal.
:Hairy: '''Ooh,''' that's a good one.
:Megan: Yeah, let's put off the upgrade.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Volcanoes]]
[[Category:Robots]]
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

Talk:1862: Particle Properties

2017-07-13T05:02:32Z

198.41.238.46: jalapeño ratings in email

oh dear, they copied the alt text wrong
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.108|173.245.50.108]] 14:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

More significantly, color charge is carried by gluons as well as quarks. [[User:Mjackson|Mjackson]] ([[User talk:Mjackson|talk]]) 15:19, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

As suggested by Zach Weinersmith ([https://twitter.com/zachweiner/status/885154434514395138 "For a joke: If you put pure alcohol under extreme pressure, could you claim to exceed 200 proof?"]), it's kind of confusing that the comic suggests alcohol proof can exceed 200 proof, and also that baseball batting averages can exceed 100%. Although on further review, they use the arrow-dot →∙ notation rather than the dot-arrow ∙→, so maybe it's not intended to indicate a lack of an upper bound. But then I'm not sure what it does indicate, esp. compared to the Electric Charge property. Continuous vs. discrete? It doesn't seem clear… [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 15:41, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Proof is presumably US proof - UK usage based on gunpowder 175 degrees proof would be 100% alcohol

Batting average is presumably from baseball
Cricket batting averages are measured in runs per dismissal and are in theory unbounded. It is possible to have an infinite average for a season or series - though in terms of lifetime averages the best for players with more than ten matches is 99.96.
:If it is for baseball, it's labeled incorrectly. A perfect batting average is 1.000, not 100%. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batting_average Batting average] is actually a ratio - number of hits to number of at-bats - expressed as a decimal, not a percentage. For example, if a batter goes 3 for 5 in a game, his batting average would be .600, not 60%. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

We should probably arrange descriptions into a table.

How is it that there's no pain scale?
: Because Randall didn't think -- or possibly want -- to use it. Besides, do you really want every scale in existence in a single comic? If not, Randall has to select based on his own criteria, whatever they may be. As it is, there are 9 or 10 (depending on how you count "entropy") fields that don't apply to particle properties, as opposed to 5 or 6 that do. Gotta stop somewhere. [[User:Nyperold|Nyperold]] ([[User talk:Nyperold|talk]]) 22:44, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Actually, D&D calls you "dead" if you go to your NEGATIVE hit point maximum. Otherwise, you make a completely random (50%) death saving throw. After 3 cumulative fails, you die. After 3 cumulative successes, you are stable. More info can be found in the {{w|Player's Handbook}}. [[User:SilverMagpie|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie|talk]]) 21:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

"Heat" measured in jalapeño has also been used by some email systems such as Eudora to measure how strong an email message is (e.g., whether it will lead to a flame war) [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.46|198.41.238.46]] 05:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

1810: Chat Systems

2017-03-14T04:22:44Z

198.41.238.46: Spelling error

{{comic
| number = 1810
| date = March 13, 2017
| title = Chat Systems
| image = chat_systems.png
| titletext = I'm one of the few Instagram users who connects solely through the Unix 'talk' gateway.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Fill in the table and explain the title text. The main purpose of an euler diagram needs to be explained. (E.g. BBM in eMail; WhatsApp in eMail and SMS)}}
In the world of social media, connecting to and communicating with friends, relatives, and other acquaintances can be extremely easy, but due to the large amount of networks and systems through which to communicate, and the selective nature of the people using them, it can be difficult to keep track of who uses which system(s), and thus, communication can be more complicated by social media as well.

;Chat systems mentioned
{| class="wikitable"
!System
!Number of people in group
!Explanation
|-
|Skype
|2
|Microsoft's chat client. It offers VoIP video and audio calling, instant messaging and phoning through the app.
|-
| {{w|Email}}
|35
|A popular form of electronic communication that saw first widespread use in the 1960s. It allows you to send electronic "letters" to people using pre-exchanged email addresses. Many people use this platform, hence the large size of the corresponding circle.
|-
| {{w|SMS}}
|39
|Short Message System; a text-based messaging system connecting most worldwide phone systems that had its beginnings in the 1980s and has since represented the most common form of data transmission for most people. It is principally used to send short text messages between mobile phones, but most phone carriers provide facilities to send-to-email or send-to-voice (for use with landline phones). Most major phone carriers also provide support for email-to-SMS.
|-
| {{w|Hangouts}}
|9
|Google Hangouts is Google's instant messaging system. It can be used to share data and for video chat.
|-
| {{w|Signal_(software)|Signal}}
|8
| An app used for encrypted communications.
|-
| {{w|iMessage}}
|6
|Apple's SMS service
|-
| {{w|IRC}}
|5
|Internet Relay Chat is an old chat system which many people refuse to switch off of.
|-
| {{w|Slack_(software)|Slack}}
|5
|A team instant messaging service
|-
| {{w|Twitter|Twitter DM}}
|4
| "Direct messages" between users on Twitter.
|-
| {{w|AIM}}
|2
|AOL Instant Messaging service; a popular messaging system from the 1990s that suffered a severe decline in 2005 upon the release of Gmail and Google Chat. It is based on the closed source OSCAR protocol, but AOL created the TOC/TOC2 protocol specifications, and made specifications openly available, for third parties to connect to their service. There have been short-lived dalliances with other protocols since 2008; it has never had direct support for the other widely used protocols here.
|-
|The "chat" tab in an old {{w|Google Doc}}
|2
|Google Docs is an online word processor reminiscent of Microsoft Word. One of the notable features is online collaborative editing, with a rudimentary chat feature for communication. Randall apparently communicates with someone using the chat in an old Google Doc.
|-
| {{w|Facebook_Messenger|FB Messenger}}
|2
|Facebook's chat system.
|-
| {{w|Instagram|Instagram DM}}
|2
|Direct Messaging, a feature of Instagram that allows users to post personal messages to each other.
|-
|{{w|Peach_(social_network)|Peach}}
|2
|Peach is a mobile-based social network introduced in January 2016.
|-
| Telegram
|2
|Could refer to a cloud based instant messaging system by this name ({{w|Telegram (software)|Telegram}}), or to actually sending messages using {{w|telegrams}}. Telegrams were messages sent by electric telegraphy, which were often typed out and hand-delivered to the recipient. This was the first system for rapid communication across long distances that was widely available, originally developed in the 19th century. Naturally, telegraphy is now wildly obsolete (though some local services apparently do still exist) which would explain why Munroe communicates with so few people that way.
|-
| {{w|Skype}}
|2
|Microsoft's chat client. It offers VoIP video and audio calls, instant messaging and phoning from within the app.
|-
| {{w|WhatsApp}}
|2
|Billed as encrypted end-to-end chat, allows VoIP chats, text chats, video and image sharing. Caters for group chat as well.
|-
| {{w|WeChat}}
|2
| Started off as a Chinese WhatsApp imitation. WeChat has become a full scale social media with its own news, games and payment system.
|-
|{{w|Apache_HTTP_Server|Apache}} Request {{w|Server_log|Log}}
|1
|A file used by Apache HTML server to log page access requests by users, usually stored as access_log. Its use as a communications tool would require the user to embed their messages in URLs and the admin to look for the messages in the logs. It would be inconvenient and time consuming for both parties.
|-
| {{w|BlackBerry Messenger|BBM}}
|1
|Blackberry message. A chat system available on {{w|BlackBerry}} phones, now largely obsolete.
|-
| {{w|Snapchat}}
|1
|Snapchat is an image messaging app.
|-
|Wall (bathroom)
|1
|Apparently a chat system based around writing on the wall in the bathroom. Not an electronic system. Leaving messages on public bathroom walls is a common form of {{w|graffiti}}. It may be used as a support for anonymous conversations. Alternatively, this could mean the person is an extreme introvert, and hides in his bathroom instead of interacting with others, by talking through the wall. It could also be a pun on "communicating through _____" as a bathroom wall is a physical object rather than an interface. It could also refer to someone who has a habit of talking through the wall to people in adjacent stalls of a public bathroom.
|-
|{{w|Wall (Unix)}}
|1
|Short for "write all", the "wall" command copies its argument to every user logged into the same Unix system, and so can be used as a primitive chat system.
|-
| {{w|Zephyr (protocol)}}
|1
| Zephyr was designed as an instant messaging protocol and application-suite with a heavy Unix background.
|-
| {{w|ICQ}}
|1
|An older open-source instant messaging application.
|-
|{{w|Talk_(software)|Unix 'talk'}}
|*
|This is in the title text, and the only user is Munroe. Old peer-to-peer chat system whereby users logged into the same UNIX system could privately communicate with each other in a full-screen interface.
|}

;Related comics
*The ubiquity of standards - here, of messaging systems - was already covered in [[927: Standards]]
*For IRC see also [[1782: Team Chat]]

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
:[An Euler diagram with many circle like drawings for various chat systems is shown. Some circles overlapping others in complicated ways, others are single circles with no connections, but most are embedded into others.]


:[Caption below the frame:]
:I have a hard time keeping track of which contacts use which chat systems.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1531: The BDLPSWDKS Effect

2015-06-01T19:59:39Z

198.41.238.46:

Doesn't the reference to the "Doppler" effect refer to the fact that the Doppler effect may distort the meaning of words in a tonal language, thus making it harder to perceive the word being shouted out of the firetruck? [[User:A-jay|A-jay]] ([[User talk:A-jay|talk]]) 07:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

: I thought this too - tonal languages will inevitably suffer more from Doppler distortion than non-tonal ones, so it's going to take the listener longer to react to it. Obviously, that's not the sole cause for the delay with the BDLPSWDKS effect, but it's surely a contributing factor. [[User:Bish|Bish]] ([[User talk:Bish|talk]]) 11:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I think it is a bit more complex than effect mentioned having an individual referent. It becomes complex because the language level, for example, interacts with the physics level. (I think this is the joke, that such random effects from different fields can actually interrelate in some bizarre scenario) A tonal language would be much more susceptible loss of meaning due to blue shift from the doppler effect than a nontonal language. Shouting red is also probably a reference to the 'red-shift' in the doppler effect, which, depending on the speed of the truck may distort the sound the shout or make it unintelligible. At sufficient speed, this would also distort the actual color of the firetruck, which is a topic Randall discussed in one of the What-If's about traffic lights and should probably be linked here. --[[User:MareCrisium|MareCrisium]] ([[User talk:MareCrisium|talk]]) 08:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

: I thought of the red being a redshift as well, but what the heck is "GREEN" then (rather than "BLUE")? [[User:Odysseus654|Odysseus654]] ([[User talk:Odysseus654|talk]]) 09:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if the reference to whether the language has a word for "firetruck" is a Sapir Whorf reference? If there's no word for firetruck, the listener (victim?) is likely to be more confused by the situation than a listener who can at least recognize what kind of vehicle is about to kill him/her (Curses! There's no sexless personal pronoun in this language!) So the reaction time of the first person is likely to be longer than that of the second person.
:"They/them/etc." has been the accepted sexless personal pronoun for a long time (in the order of centuries), even in the singular. The only people who say you shouldn't use it for such a purpose are the same ones who say you shouldn't split an infinitive despite it having been acceptable for centuries, simply because it's impossible to split infinitives in Latin. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.109|141.101.99.109]] 19:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a whole class of psychology experiments (with both human and animal subjects) that uses reaction-time as a measure of degree of understanding in various situations. Is this effect named after a famous experimental psychologist? If so, Randall may have to issue an update to this cartoon... {{unsigned|Ribbit}}

If you think English has no sexless personal pronoun you *clearly* haven't read comic 145. Ahem... --[[User:MareCrisium|MareCrisium]] ([[User talk:MareCrisium|talk]]) 08:49, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

: Off topic, but I agree 'them' is a sufficient pronoun in this case, since you've already specified the singular 'listener'. [[User:Bish|Bish]] ([[User talk:Bish|talk]]) 11:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, the Bernoulli effect is, in fact, responsible to the aerodynamic lift. While it is correct that most people trying to explain aerodynamic lift use an incorrect explanation, the incorrect part has nothing to do with Bernoulli, as implied by the explanation. [[User:Shachar|Shachar]] ([[User talk:Shachar|talk]]) 09:53, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bernoulli effect describes how pressure distribution changes with speed, and needs to be understood if you want to fully grasp all the science behind it. That being said, there isn't an intuitive way to grasp how airspeed varies across a wing's surface which ultimately means that any accurate explanation dependent on the Bernoulli effect goes well beyond the scope of a layperson's understanding. It's better to note that wings are tilted to push the airflow downward and for every action their's an equal and opposite reaction.([[User talk:Some Guytalk]]) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.182|108.162.238.182]] 11:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
:Um, I'll give you half points – it depends on what type of wing you're talking about. You can have a "high lift" type wing fly straight and level and still provide plenty of lift. But a low chord wing (eg "fighter jet style") more greatly depends on forward speed and angle of attack to stay up than the lift provided by the wings. Needless to say, airplanes make people think - and too often the more people think about them, the more confused they get. [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 13:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a difference between saying this is how wings generate lift and this is the only factor in the equation. On top of which angle of attack is not defined by the zero lift angle. that being said, every scrap of airfoil data I've ever seen shows a proportional relationship between (angle of attack - zero lift angle of attack) and CL (and by extension lift). Is that everything a professional needs to know about aerodynamics? Far from it. Is it an adequate explanation for laypeople? As far as I'm concerned, yes.--Someguy[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.156|173.245.54.156]] 20:57, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

"The Peltzman effect refers to how regulations intended to increase safety are ineffective or counterproductive. This is likely referenced by the observer responding to a dangerous situation more slowly if the language he is warned in has a word describing the object he's in danger from ("firefighter") than if the language didn't." The comic states that the person reacts more *quickly* if the language has a word for firefighter... {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.150}}

: I think it's actually about how the firefighter has gotten himself into a dangerous situation due to the feeling of safety he has from being in a modern firetruck, since a major case of the Peltzman effect is that increased car safety leads us to drive at higher speeds. The innocent pedestrian is less safe because the firefighter is driving more recklessly. [[User:Not-my-username|Not-my-username]] ([[User talk:Not-my-username|talk]]) 16:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

He totally could've added the McGurk effect in there. Just saying. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.181|108.162.237.181]] 15:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Isn't part of the Doppler joke the fact that it is a fire truck, as emergency vehicle sirens are very often used as an example of the Doppler effect?
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159|141.101.98.159]] 13:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Is there a name for the law that states "red ones go faster"? I believe that too was referenced, but possibly not by name. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.46|198.41.238.46]] 19:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)