explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3239: Simple Machines

2026-04-30T18:24:46Z

Cuvtixo:

Woah, I'm first! ---[[User:GSLikesCats307|GSLikesCats307]]([[User talk:GSLikesCats307|talk]]). 17:43, 29th April 2026 (UTC)

Is Randall referring to any specific tools made by those companies when he says "lever and inclined plane" and "wheel-and-axles"? wheel-and-axles describes anything from a toy wagon to an automobile. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:53, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
: Doubtful. More of an additional example of Pro-Skub vs Anti-Skub -- https://pbfcomics.com/comics/skub/ behavior. [[Special:Contributions/130.76.187.47|130.76.187.47]] 17:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
: It's a joke about battery-operated tools. If you buy a battery-operated drill from Milwaukee, it probably does not come with a (removable) battery and charger. So you buy the battery and charger, which are probably comparable to the cost of the tool. Now, when you need a battery operated saw, you already have the battery and charger from Milwaukee (which will work with the saw), so you buy the Milwaukee saw. And the Milwaukee blower. And the Milwaukee weed-whacker. Etc, etc. Buying one brand of battery operated tools locks you into that ecosystem, to a certain extent. Which means you wind up agonizing over which brand has the better overall ecosystem, even though all you need right now is a drill. [[Special:Contributions/163.116.145.55|163.116.145.55]] 18:21, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
::Sorry, no. Many Milwaukee and Black and Decker(etc)tools DO come with batteries and chargers!!! The point is to get the buyers into the "ecosystem", so future purchases that use the same battery system will be more appealing. For this purpose, providing the charger and one battery, at least for the larger, more popular products, makes perfect sense. The more specialized tools, the smaller accessories might not have them, but they are practical purchases once someone already owns a charger and at least one interchangeable battery. For Milwaukee in particular, the M12 FUEL 1/2 Drill Driver, the M18 FUEL Oscillating Multi-Tool, the MX FUEL Backpack Blower and M18 FUEL 15 Gauge Finish Nailer all include battery and charger. Sorry for this tangent, but I don't think it the joke is about batteries! After all, none of the SIMPLE tools needs a battery. It's about committing to a brand, in a broader sense. [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 18:21, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

This is 100% a product he should license and/or sell. It won’t make a million bucks very fast but it will make a million bucks, from science teachers and folks over on IFLS and the like. [[Special:Contributions/138.88.96.2|138.88.96.2]] 17:27, 29 April 2026 (UTC)DanT

I edited the reference to Milwaukee Tool and DeWalt; these are American companies and not common household names where I live. {{unsigned ip|62.112.240.32|08:18, 30 April 2026 (UTC)}}

Talk:3239: Simple Machines

2026-04-30T18:21:50Z

Cuvtixo: Not about rechargeable battery systems

Woah, I'm first! ---[[User:GSLikesCats307|GSLikesCats307]]([[User talk:GSLikesCats307|talk]]). 17:43, 29th April 2026 (UTC)

Is Randall referring to any specific tools made by those companies when he says "lever and inclined plane" and "wheel-and-axles"? wheel-and-axles describes anything from a toy wagon to an automobile. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:53, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
: Doubtful. More of an additional example of Pro-Skub vs Anti-Skub -- https://pbfcomics.com/comics/skub/ behavior. [[Special:Contributions/130.76.187.47|130.76.187.47]] 17:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
: It's a joke about battery-operated tools. If you buy a battery-operated drill from Milwaukee, it probably does not come with a (removable) battery and charger. So you buy the battery and charger, which are probably comparable to the cost of the tool. Now, when you need a battery operated saw, you already have the battery and charger from Milwaukee (which will work with the saw), so you buy the Milwaukee saw. And the Milwaukee blower. And the Milwaukee weed-whacker. Etc, etc. Buying one brand of battery operated tools locks you into that ecosystem, to a certain extent. Which means you wind up agonizing over which brand has the better overall ecosystem, even though all you need right now is a drill. [[Special:Contributions/163.116.145.55|163.116.145.55]] 18:21, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
:Sorry, it sounds like you've never bought one of these tools! The Milwaukee and Black and Decker(etc)tools DO come with batteries and chargers!!! The point is to get the buyers into the "ecosystem", so future purchases that use the same battery system will be more appealing. For this purpose, providing the charger and one battery, at least for the larger, more popular products, makes perfect sense. The more specialized tools, the smaller accessories may not have them, but they are practical purchases once someone already owns a charger and at least one interchangeable battery. For Milwaukee in particular, the M12 FUEL 1/2 Drill Driver, the M18 FUEL Oscillating Multi-Tool, the MX FUEL Backpack Blower and M18 FUEL 15 Gauge Finish Nailer(available in kits with an M18 battery, a multi-voltage charger and a tool bag). Sorry for this tangent, but I don't think it the joke is about batteries. After all none of the SIMPLE tools needs a battery. It's about committing to a brand, in a broader sense. [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 18:21, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

This is 100% a product he should license and/or sell. It won’t make a million bucks very fast but it will make a million bucks, from science teachers and folks over on IFLS and the like. [[Special:Contributions/138.88.96.2|138.88.96.2]] 17:27, 29 April 2026 (UTC)DanT

I edited the reference to Milwaukee Tool and DeWalt; these are American companies and not common household names where I live. {{unsigned ip|62.112.240.32|08:18, 30 April 2026 (UTC)}}

Talk:3236: Border Message

2026-04-23T19:26:24Z

Cuvtixo:

Wow, I got here early. [[Special:Contributions/47.152.141.142|47.152.141.142]] 21:11, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
: *salutations.* [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 21:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
The (sort of) Belgian village of Baarle-Hertog has numerous bizarre exclaves with neighbouring Netherlands, almost as complex as the borders in the cartoon. Some of the borders even pass through houses. https://maps.app.goo.gl/M5duocjEkJRQKedEA [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:22, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
:Baarle is divided into two, with ~-Nassau being Dutch (the Dutch royal family is Oranje-Nassau) and ~-Hertog is Belgian. Note that Baarle is a 2km² area with an extremely chaotic border, but that otherwise the Dutch-Belgian border is pretty normal relative to other European borders. [[User:IIVQ|IIVQ]] ([[User talk:IIVQ|talk]]) 05:15, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
:European states/counties/jurisdictions were often complex and non-contiguous with many enclaves and exclaves. Many of these complex situations have disappeared (e.g. in France through the creation of departements in 1790); but some persisted or still remain. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclaves_of_West_Berlin_in_East_Germany [[Special:Contributions/62.112.240.32|62.112.240.32]] 12:50, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
:there's no need to look all the way to Europe, although I was fascinated by "border corpse(Dutch: grenslijk)" stories. One example is the Four Corners Monument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Corners_Monument which is administered by Navajo Nation(!) and also serves as a border for Ute Mountain Ute Indian Reservation.[[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 19:26, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

SMBC once had a similar idea to stop Gerrymandering: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2013-07-12 [[Special:Contributions/90.146.31.117|90.146.31.117]] 23:02, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Gerrymandering was not my first thought when I saw this comic, maybe that part should be removed from the description? I don't see any real way that it connects to gerrymandering besides the fact that it talks about borders. [[User:Qoiuoiuoiu|Qoiuoiuoiu]] ([[User talk:Qoiuoiuoiu|talk]]) 01:56, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
: Maybe it was added after the vague link to that SMBC comic was found? [[Special:Contributions/110.145.224.178|110.145.224.178]] 03:22, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
:: For what it's worth, the comment about gerrymandering was added in the very first text to be put on that page (21:09, 22 April 2026). It's not merely because of borders; it's because of "borders that have been made extremely convoluted for artificial reasons unrelated to the factors that usually define such boundaries, such as geographical features, roads, latitude/longitude, or regular divisions". [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:38, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
:Even as a non-USian, the recent gerrymandering efforts immediately seemed like an obvious prompt for the idea of the comic to me, even if it doesn't specifically reference it. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:29, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
:I put it in my original explanation, before the comment (indeed, before any comments). It only came to mind because Virginia was in the news that day, so reporters were talking about weirdly-shaped districts. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but Randall may have known that the vote was taking place that day when he came up with the comic. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:25, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

I once spelled out words on openstreetmap. There were some hiking trails nearby from a data set that opened up and I could not put them all up in one session, so I spelled "To Do" (in the shape of the actual hiking trails) on Openstreetmap. [[User:IIVQ|IIVQ]] ([[User talk:IIVQ|talk]]) 05:15, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Is there a category for US State comics? There seems to be a lot of them, and a category might make sence. If there isn't perhaps someone could make one? {{unsigned|GSLikesCats307|09:26, 23 April 2026 (UTC)}}
:There's [[:Category:US maps]], but that is really more specifically of the 'whole' US (give or take contiguousness/fictionalisation), whereas this is more just 'a map', not even necessarily a (theoretical) subset of the US (though the names given to either side of the border do have a more Leftpondian feel, having that 'settler vibe' to them). [[Special:Contributions/82.132.238.56|82.132.238.56]] 10:48, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

== Counting Exclaves ==

The W, O, P, O, ', R, O, A ,P all have clear exclaves. "A" and "R" seems to have two. However, it's unclear whether J and G are entirely exclaves, or possibly letters like "O" are doubly exclaved. If the answer to that is no, then that would mean there are 11 exclaves. Does anyone else agree with this assessment? [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 17:43, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3227: Creation

2026-04-03T16:04:24Z

Cuvtixo:

did anyone else wait for the screensaver to hit the corner? [[Special:Contributions/216.25.182.141|216.25.182.141]] 20:13, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Yes. I watched waaay too long to see if it would, but lost patience and I don’t want to put effort into determining if it will happen. Can anyone confirm whether or not it will eventually happen either for some people or for all people? [[User:Dúthomhas|Dúthomhas]] ([[User talk:Dúthomhas|talk]]) 23:06, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I can't work out what Modem mode is meant to do... on my machine it just freezes the whole page. [[Special:Contributions/78.213.151.110|78.213.151.110]] 20:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:It plays the sound of an old-style phone modem, and scrolls the comic into view slowly. It's supposed to represent the early days when downloading an image would take a long time. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:31, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:can confirm on android firefox it seems to render the page unresponsive to input - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 21:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Same here on Desktop Firefox - under "Modem mode", the whole page freezes up and the browser prompts me to close it ("this page is slowing down Firefox", or words to that effect). I wonder if it's a Firefox thing - odd if so, because I imagine Randall of all people would test on browsers other than Chrom* - or some weird side-effect of my ad/popup/script/cookie-blockers. A shame because all the other modes seem to work - "Greyscale mode" is far too subtle, and I'm ashamed to admit I missed the change from "math" to "maths"! - but this is a great April Fools' comic. [[Special:Contributions/50.45.232.78|50.45.232.78]] 22:56, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Firefoxer here, and ''without'' any particular add-ons that might interact badly with it... It does (seem to) lock up and it does (sometimes... didn't on at least one occasion) prompt Firefox to ask if I want to stop the page. But if I wait long enough it 'wipes off' the last seen comic image, starts to 'scanline' it back (note: not actually accurate to the real days of modems, as you'd probably be loading up images in interlaced mode) and ''then'' starts to give a modem-shriek.
:I wonder, without delving into the code used, if it's the method used to 'sleep' (could it be using busy-busy NOP-like code, rather than true sleep-interupts?), or just a slightly different asynchronous script-handling method that Firefox uses instead of other test-platforms. [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 23:46, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
::Using Firefox (On mac, in Australia, if relevant) and it works fine, but no audio component. [[Special:Contributions/114.198.19.39|114.198.19.39]] 08:07, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
: For me (in Chrome) it scrolled the whole page in from the bottom, but then kept scrolling so that you got the top of the page appearing beneath the bottom of it - like a TV with vertical hold problems (kids - ask your grandparents). Then changing to other modes it was stuck in that position. However, on subsequent attempts it only scrolled open the comic portion of the page. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:35, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I clicked darker mode and my screen is black and I cant undo it help {{unsigned ip|207.233.27.2|20:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)}}
:I assume you mean Darkest Mode, since there's no darker mode. The screen turns black but if you look carefully you can still see the grey of the menu and you can click on it. Also, the menu border continues to appear after you select the choice (at least it does on my Mac). P.S. Don't forget to sign your comment with 4 ~ characters. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:31, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Modem mode doesn’t work for me what does it do [[Special:Contributions/2A06:5906:1412:4100:352D:1A2:184:5F3|2A06:5906:1412:4100:352D:1A2:184:5F3]] 20:29, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Modem mode makes the comic slowly print from above [[Special:Contributions/216.25.182.141|216.25.182.141]] 20:34, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

I see the mobile site m.xkcd.com was left out on this change😔 [[Special:Contributions/104.28.215.219|104.28.215.219]] 20:37, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:I have been viewing via a tablet, though I think I've permwnently set my browsers to ''not'' use mobile version sites (they tend to assume viewing everything in portrait, I have found, whereas I almost always browse in landscape, so it gives me badly relocated on-page menu bars, or other wierdnesses).
:Everything seems to work nicely, as I bounced back and forth between modes (and occasionaly went to other comics to see how something like Stained Glass worked with them). Until I tried out the Star Wars scrolling one. Earlier on, I'd checked it out on a desktop, so I left it until one of the last few because it was hardest on the desktop to move on from (unless you used the cursor key, when you'd let the select-drop-down element drift to far 'away' to easily click.
:However, on the tablet, it ''just'' goes black, no appearance of the scrolly-scrawled page contents. (No way to use cursors to change the in-focus drop-down element to a neighbour.) Back-paging just takes me back through the various Random-comic pages I'd passed through, then the plain xkcd.com latest-comic default, all completely black, no animation. (Plane/Boat/Spring/Screensave mode dynamics, etc animated/transformed properly in their various ways.) Back-paging to before landing on xkcd.com (the tab I'd set off from) then forward again landed me in the all-black page with no space-sprawl in evidence...
:...''until'' I turned the tablet sideways (portrait proportions), and there it was. And rotated back to landscape to find it ''still'' properly visible, still scrolling away. Also, discovered I could drag (without pinch-dragging, which is zooming) the scrawl back 'towards me' (essentially scrolling down the skewed page, not an interaction that I'd attempted on the desktop computer), so that I could intercept the dropdown box and shift myself onto a different mode again.
:This is on Chrome For Android. I have other tablet browsers handy, but would need to check them properly before committing to ''their'' compatabilities or peculiarities. But sort of works, after you get over a funny hurdle (as just described), and ''perhaps'' need to have set Desktop Site as default rather than letting your device attempt to automatically use the "m." site version. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.40|82.132.237.40]] 02:56, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I read “Modern mode” instead of Modem mode and I spent a while making wild theories about what it could be referencing. But I’m also quite sleepy. [[Special:Contributions/146.70.116.107|146.70.116.107]] 20:51, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:i also misread it as modern mode, it made everything lag for me, made it feel like a modern website [[Special:Contributions/85.206.187.35|85.206.187.35]] 00:57, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I deminified the code if anyone wants it. There are no hidden options or anything like right-click has, but it would be extremely easy to add modes to it. [[Special:Contributions/2601:441:4B7E:7660:0:0:0:AC72|2601:441:4B7E:7660:0:0:0:AC72]] 20:59, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

"Modem mode" works for me in Chromium, but not Firefox. [[User:Robobun|Robobun]] ([[User talk:Robobun|talk]]) 21:06, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:For me it's just slow on Firefox. It takes about 5 seconds to clear the comic and start scrolling it back in, and the static doesn't start until it's almost all showing. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:11, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

applies across the whole website? i forsee a preservation effort in the near future to capture What This Was Like, when randall inevitably removes the menu and all its modes--there's no chance this is staying, is there? - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 21:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:It applies to older comics, but not other parts of the site. I'm also wondering if this might be just for April Fool's Day. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:27, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:: I know it's april the 1st, but could we keep the modes? Stainglass is fun when the background doesn't turn maroon (and makes the text hard to read). I also checked other pages of xkcd, the modes are on on the other comics. {{unsigned ip|2a04:cec0:121a:5180:bcf7:54ff:feb2:d55|21:31, 1 April 2026 (UTC)}}
::Of course it's the April Fools'/Fools' comic. Nice to see it being on time, this year, and I too wonder how long it'll stay. Might it permanently stay on this comic page, perhaps even stay if you jump off of it, but comic 3228 (or the 'default' latest-comic page) will probably be back to normal on Friday. [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 22:14, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Luckily, preservation is easy enough. I think you just need to save the main [https://xkcd.com/3227/5710add.js Javascript file] (which contains the CSS, and generates the necessary DOM on the fly) and the [https://xkcd.com/3227/imgs/nyoom_2x.png one image asset]. I think it should be easy enough to turn it into a UserScript if you turn the png into a data URI, or even a web extension if that's more your speed. [[User:Dratini0|Dratini0]] ([[User talk:Dratini0|talk]]) 00:12, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Finally we have the Boat Mode from the footer! [[User:B_for_brain|B for brain]] ([[User_talk:B_for_brain|talk]]) ([https://www.youtube.com/@bforbrain youtube channel] [https://bforbrain.weebly.com/ wobsite (supposed to be a blag)]) 21:33, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

'''Attention admins''' I think there's an "oops" in this line:
<nowiki>To experience the interactivity, visit the {{xkcd|{comicNum}|original comic}}!</nowiki>
[[Special:Contributions/64.201.132.210|64.201.132.210]] 21:43, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Yeah, looks like this is a regression in this corner case. I should have a fix for it soon. —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 23:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Has the full footer always been there? "xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing." --[[User:Chance2travel|Chance2travel]] ([[User talk:Chance2travel|talk]]) 22:30, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:Yes, always has been. Learn more at the page for [[Footnote]]. [[Special:Contributions/104.28.215.219|104.28.215.219]] 23:17, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

I think the Dorian Greyscale Mode takes 5 minutes to complete. I see this in the Javascript: <code>body.mode-dorian-greyscale {\n transition: filter 300s ease-out;</code> [[User:Pgn674|Pgn674]] ([[User talk:Pgn674|talk]]) 22:36, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Dorian Greyscale Mode seems like it ought to use only the white keys on a standard piano, and go DEGFCDBA, with adjacent notes differing in a single bit position. [[Special:Contributions/2A02:8084:2862:4F80:65B7:327D:E614:342F|2A02:8084:2862:4F80:65B7:327D:E614:342F]] 22:56, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

I'd love to know if the modem mode's audio file decodes to anything if you try to decode it as a v.92 stream or something similar. [[Special:Contributions/2603:6011:4504:D100:3BD0:B617:9D7:1C80|2603:6011:4504:D100:3BD0:B617:9D7:1C80]] 23:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Stained Glass Mode doesn't show title text? Might be a bug [[User:X|X]] ([[User talk:X|talk]]) 23:38, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Not gonna lie, I got nerd-sniped hard here. I thought the noise in the modem mode might be real modem noises, and I tried to demodulate it. With Gnuradio, I got to the point of guessing that it's 4FSK at 2400 baud, with a center frequency of about 1700 Hz and a frequency deviation of about 300 Hz. I couldn't find the corresponding modem standard, so I started deminifying the source code that generates it. The good news is that I was correct. It's 4FSK, 2400 baud, center frequency 1710 Hz, frequency deviation 270 Hz. The bad news? The data is Math.random(). That feels bittersweet. I saw a puzzle where there was none. I want to post the relevant snippet of deminified code. Am I allowed to do that? Is the site itself also under CC-BY-NC, or just the comics? [[User:Dratini0|Dratini0]] ([[User talk:Dratini0|talk]]) 23:58, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Honestly, I'd love a real dark mode for xkcd.com. But one where the comic isn't inverted. Sometimes I prefer to read the comic here on explainxkcd.com since I have mediawiki settings for dark mode, but those don't invert the comic. (I don't think I can make mediawiki settings for space opera mode...) [[User:Orion205|Orion205]] ([[User talk:Orion205|talk]]) 00:28, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
:You should be able to force a custom CSS on this site (with or without any browser-helpers, but there are ones out there that streamline/automate/augment this ability). The AFD-code is applying a full visual filter (over the top of the comic; maybe or maybe not above the mode-selection 'widget', depending upon browser implementation), but sounds like you just want to apply foreground/background inversion as priority (above anything xkcd.com normally 'suggests' via CSS/tag-attributes) to all markup, but leave the comic image (and any other images, like the thumbnails) as is. Might he tricky if any element is "black-on-transparency" image, which assumes white but now has your code turning it black behind the non-transparent black, but you could probably live with it (or make it 75% dark-grey or so?), and non-transparent black-on-white (presuming white all around it) could look strange.
:But you can't tell for sure without trying to tweak your end (or actually checking the source HTML, on the way to doing just that).
:Alternatively, maybe you can isolate the on-site code for just the Dark Mode of the entire-page treatment, modified to 'demask' the filter exactly over the limits of the comic img-rendering area. If it's been done the way I think it's been done (not gonna try to check, 'til I'm not on mobile platform myself) should be a fairly trivial job to add to the fraction of the code you 'borrow'. Or at least a learning experience, as you work out what tweaks do what. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.40|82.132.237.40]] 12:22, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I spent way too long watching screensaver mode to see if it would do anything if the comic hit a corner. [[Special:Contributions/170.142.177.145|170.142.177.145]] 00:31, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
:fyi ive found that the comic panels bounce on the edges of the viewport but move with reference to page coordinates--which means if you scroll just right you can place a corner of your screen where it's going to hit, without having to wait for it to get there on its own - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 03:39, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I wonder if the choice of the actual text in the comic is a reference to the Apollo 8 Christmas broadcast of Genesis, due to the Artemis II launch today... or maybe I'm overthinking it and it's simply a joke about light and dark mode. [[Special:Contributions/2601:241:8002:3E0:5CAD:3E02:93FF:FB00|2601:241:8002:3E0:5CAD:3E02:93FF:FB00]] 01:05, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
:TY! I was not aware of that broadcast and it seems incredibly strange, since everything done on the mission "debunks" that passage! Apparently it was done because anything alluding to "world peace" in any way would seem like a commentary on the Vietnam War. Which, depending on one's skepticism of religion, can also seem quite ironic -now I'm overthinking, so I'll stop now. [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 16:00, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Anyone test the other April fools comics? [[User:Commercialegg|Commercialegg]] ([[User talk:Commercialegg|talk]]) 01:14, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
:I tried Machine (2916) in dark mode and it just froze after the tutorial. [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 03:34, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I noticed using some of the modes makes xkcd.com/688 no longer self describing, not sure if its worth noting on either wiki [[User:Daunting Zebra|Daunting Zebra]] ([[User talk:Daunting Zebra|talk]]) 07:31, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

The current explanation of dark mode as 'inverting black and white pixels' isn't quite correct. For example, on [[2623]] a pale yellow colour gets flipped to black. On the other hand, other colours elsewhere are left untouched. So it must be doing 'some very light area of colour palette > black' and presumably 'some very dark area of colour palette > white'. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 11:27, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
: On [[2342]] a light khaki(?) colour gets changed to a dark grey - not even a black. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 11:29, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
: Brown sun, anyone? [[2750]] [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 11:33, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
:Similar to the criteria for the Stained Glass region borders, perhaps? Sufficiently light grey (or unssaturated+light colours) do not 'edge' a given floodfill area, it seems. (See {{xkcd|1811}}, and how it floods/filters that, for example, with pre-coloured ''and'' greyscale text to compare its operational limits upon.) [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.40|82.132.237.40]] 12:22, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
: It is not flipped to black. It is turned into a very dark yellow that appears closer to black than the original yellow appeared to white because it is not gamma-corrected. [[Special:Contributions/80.187.115.75|80.187.115.75]] 00:05, 3 April 2026 (UTC)
... ... I was hoping this comic would be actually fun, like ALL previous April 1 comics are... :( It would be much better if it follows its name and the standards of earlier April 1's, i.e. there is only a "dark" option and when you switch to it the story progresses and you continue to do some other things and eventually complete a full xkcd-style "creation" (a great idea!) [[Special:Contributions/203.198.86.210|203.198.86.210]] 11:43, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

unsigned comment (pretend it's April foooools)

Is nobody noticing the fact that Randall was ACTUALLY ON TIME? That's quite rare! --''''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]][[User Talk:DollarStoreBa'al|Converse]] 13:58, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

I wonder if any intentional "Easter eggs" were hidden inside other comic pages. [[User:Benzaldehyde|Benzaldehyde]] ([[User talk:Benzaldehyde|talk]] 17:10, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
:I tried looking up #[[880]] (the one about 3D) and sadly it has no additional easter eggs with it :( [[Special:Contributions/2407:0:3006:2959:B0A4:2347:EF39:22AE|2407:0:3006:2959:B0A4:2347:EF39:22AE]] 12:03, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Did anyone else notice that the effect (3D, Airplane, etc.) carries over to other comics accessed by the 'Random' button?
:You can change it on any comic. The dropdown is still there. [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 23:09, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Spring Mode is broken on comic [https://xkcd.com/1127/ 1127]. It doesn't do anything for that one, but the other modes work. [[Special:Contributions/2600:4040:2CD4:C200:C134:93AD:21E2:1202|2600:4040:2CD4:C200:C134:93AD:21E2:1202]] 12:35, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3227: Creation

2026-04-03T16:00:36Z

Cuvtixo:

3053: KM3NeT

2025-02-20T21:29:05Z

Cuvtixo: delete {{cn}} (and I did it slower than the speed of light!)

{{comic
| number = 3053
| date = February 19, 2025
| title = KM3NeT
| image = km3net_2x.png
| imagesize = 313x436px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Unfortunately, KM3NeT led to the discovery of the Pauli anglerfish, which emits Cherenkov radiation to prey on neutrino researchers.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a CHERENKOV ANGLERFISH WITH C-SICKNESS - Please continue to expand the explanation, and explain the title text. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
{{w|KM3NeT}} is a telescope under the {{w|Mediterranean Sea}}. As [[Ponytail]] explains, its goal is to detect {{w|neutrino}} interactions with the seawater. Neutrinos mostly originate from the sun and cosmic radiation. Neutrinos interact with solid matter only very rarely, so a telescope looking for them needs a lot of matter, in this case seawater, to spot collisions in. When such a collision happens, it can release a spray of other particles moving at close to the {{w|speed of light}} in a vacuum (''c''). In seawater, however, the speed of light is slower, and particles moving faster than it cause the emission of a type of light called {{w|Cherenkov radiation}}, which the telescope detects as a blue flash.

When [[Cueball]] questions the rationale by pointing out the existence of {{w|Bioluminescence|bioluminescent}} fish, which might also produce blue light, Ponytail responds with a pun: Cherenkov radiation is produced only by particles exceeding the speed of light in the local medium; since fish, a type of undersea life, move much slower than this, they are also "under-c" life, as well as being "undersea" life (though technically they are in the sea, rather than under it).

The title text claims that the KM3NeT telescope discovered a type of fish that emits Cherenkov-like radiation: The 'Pauli anglerfish'. {{w|Anglerfish}} have specialized organs that emit flashes of light to attract or startle their prey. This is described as unfortunate, because the Pauli anglerfish uses its radiation emissions to prey on neutrino researchers. Thus the first to discover the fish was likely attacked, if not eaten, by it. The known types of angler fish are much smaller than humans and they do not prey on researchers.{{cn}} The mythical 'Pauli anglerfish' of the comic is presumably named after the theoretical physicist {{w|Wolfgang Pauli}}, who first {{w|Neutrino#Pauli's proposal|proposed a neutrino-like particle}}, in part to preserve ''angular'' momentum during nuclear decay.

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail is pointing behind her towards a drop down screen as she adresses Cueball and Megan in front of her. On the screen is a panel showing a side view of a deep-water telescope. It shows four series of circles stringed together attached to the rough bedrock, so the circles are floating above the bedrock, but far beneath the surface. Waves are drawn just beneath the top of the panel on the screen, indicating the surface of the ocean.]
:Ponytail: The KM3NeT deep-water telescope detects the flashes of Cherenkov light from neutrino interactions.
:Cueball: How do you know you aren't just seeing bioluminescent fish?
:Ponytail: Cherenkov radiation is only emitted when things exceed the local speed of light, so it can't be produced by under-c life.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Telescopes]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Puns]]

Talk:3053: KM3NeT

2025-02-20T21:27:35Z

Cuvtixo: undersea life slower than light speed

First groan! (Not that I don't appreciate it, but definitely the most groanworthy comic in a long while...) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.229|172.69.195.229]] 17:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
For future context, this array has risen in notoriety thanks to the recent [https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00444-1 detection] of the highest energy neutrino yet, but sadly I need to take this occasion to note how the deadliest thing in the strait of Sicily are not superluminal alien fish, but human traffickers moving people on botched up vessels from the north African coast for the past fifteen years, often resulting in shipwrecks in the waters right above KM3NeT. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.216.67|172.70.216.67]] 22:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I heard about this last week from a BBC Podcast (Inside Science?). The telescope is only part complete*, and consists of photo-multipliers (can detect a single photon) in glass spheres on a string rising from the sea floor to create a 3D grid (as illustrated). As the decay results in further luminescent particles the direction can be determined and the muon was travelling tangentially to the surface. *As with LIGO, the observation was made when the facility wasn't fully commissioned, so they had to carefully check for other light sources (possible joke source) that they weren't being 'swallowed' by bioluminecence? [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 08:13, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

So... excuse my naivité, but how do they, in reality, ensure bioluminescent fish are not confusing the neutrino detectors? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.101|162.158.155.101]] 19:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
:As it depends upon a 'track' of light, you can work out how likely it is that a set of bioluminescent fish happened to spontaneously 'flash' (in a line, in sequence and at a superluminal velocity for the medium) that coincidentally looks like the non-fish detection signature that they're looking for. (That and/or other factors, looking for particular wavelengths, without known bioluminescent sources, etc.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.229|172.69.195.229]] 20:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Please,[citation needed] for "undersea life does not move at the speed of light"? It's mildly humorous, but in contrast to the mission of this site to EXPLAIN xkcd and just sheer ignorance, we do not need a cite for any life, undersea or not, travelling at less than the speed of light! [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 21:27, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3050: Atom

2025-02-13T21:15:43Z

Cuvtixo:

Hey, just wanted to let you all know we've recently discovered 2 comics that have never been published! They don't even have a name, so we used the filenames: [[ibm_hc_2]] and [[ibm_hc_3]]. You can read more about the discovery and what to do [[Category talk:A Smarter Planet|here]]. I had added them to the incomplete comics a while back, but I think not many people noticed them. The explanations are still empty, if you'd like to help! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

----

...admittedly very barebones but at least it isn't blank. Someone smarter than me can expand it. Anyways, the Higgs boson feels like fuzzy dice you can't convince me otherwise [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.143|172.69.71.143]] 13:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
:Well, if they want to test that theory, they're going to have to find it [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1437:_Higgs_Boson again] [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 14:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
:I just added a little about wetness. I don't have time to look into this more, but perhaps the idea is the outer electrons have a low enough energy level they pull heat from the skin, and that sensation of coldness along with the little bumps the electrons would do against your skin would lead your brain to think they're wet. That's all I got for now. [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 15:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

I want fanart of the muons on my talk page by tomorrow. Do I make myself clear?! /j --[[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 14:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
:meowons. ~~(^_^)~~ [[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.7|172.68.150.7]] 03:24, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
:Sir, this is an internets. Someone has likely already made it. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 03:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
:The muon fanart has been delivered to your talkpage. Please do enjoy. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.172|162.158.122.172]] 12:08, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

atom [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.65|172.70.126.65]] 15:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Might be worth mentioning the popculture idea of expanding a subatomic particle found in "Three Body Problem" where they unfold the '11 dimensions' of a proton to make it, apparently, a planet-sized sheet and etch microcircuitry on it. (Programming question: how many bugs can dance on the tip of a proton? but I digress.) The most annoying part of quantum expansion would be how the particle gets entangled with _everything_ [[User:Bilkie|Bilkie]] ([[User talk:Bilkie|talk]]) 15:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
:Such a weird story. I always felt like I was missing some cultural context. I still enjoyed it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.47|172.71.155.47]] 15:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

So, ummm... What happens if they accidentally expanded an unstable atom to that size and it decayed? How earth shattering or otherwise is the kaboom? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
:Ballpark, that atom is probably max of 1 kg, based on how Cueball is holding it. If it's U235, which has a mass of about 0.4e-24 kg, then it's scaled up by a factor of 2.5e24. U235 has a decay energy of 4.7 MeV, which is 0.75e-12 joules, so scaled up that would be about 2e12 joules, about 450 tons of TNT. That's about 1/3 of the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. Not "big" as these things go, but certainly big enough. On the other hand, U235 has a half life of 700 million years, so the odds are low. {{unsigned ip|172.70.115.100|21:29, 12 February 2025}}
::We also don't know how the Quantum Expander affects ''all'' its physical properties. Does its mass increase to have the density of its size as if filled with 'normal' copies of it, or is it the original atom-mass (technically, that'd be like a {{w|vacuum balloon}}), or something between (mostly the mass of the nucleons scaled up to some degree, but still even more 'empty'). The resulting gravitational interaction might or might not match its inertial mass (which would be very interesting!), and parts of it that are normally point-phenomena are now probably(?) macroscopic in size, but may retain the same field-profiles (charge, etc, on top of the already considered gravitation). And how does the scale of time change, now that the speed of light (assuming ''that'' isn't increased across the interior of the Expanded quantum-realm) means that relative timings across the width of the atom must run slower for any propogated effects. (On the one hand, a 700 million year half-life may be ''vastly'' extended; on the other, when any single atom fissions, it fissions in its entirety, and who knows what 'poking and prodding' it will do, and if it works like the arrival of prompt or delayed neutrons from one fission event that might promote a neighbouring one.) We really need to know more about the <abbr title="Quantum Expanded Device">QED</abbr>, including about how it influences <abbr title="Quantum Electrodynamics">QED</abbr>, before we can declare it completely <abbr title="quod erat demonstrandum">Q.E.D.</abbr> [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.37|172.71.26.37]] 22:43, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

My first thoughts upon seeing the words "Atom" and "Electron" was "is thing going to be about text editors"? Anyway, upping my caffeine levels now. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 07:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

This reminded me of a college friend who wanted to be a veterinarian, then quit the program. When asked why, he said the decision came when he and his classmates were supposed to put their hand up a cow's butt. I think he was joking(mostly?) but I was reminded by "I don't want to do physics anymore". The "sensation of coldness along with the little bumps" tracks, often things much colder than their immediate environment can seem wet. Although if giant electrons still acted as electrons, wouldn't racing around at such high speeds make the atom super hot? Sorry, I'm a bit rambly. [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 21:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Talk:2897: Light Leap Years

2024-02-23T01:57:51Z

Cuvtixo:

Not that it effects the joke, but the Gregorian calendar has 97 leap years per 400 year cycle. I was surprised that I was surprised by that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.115|162.158.63.115]] 16:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
:Another interesting number: the difference between the standard Julian year and the (AFAICT, not officially named as such) 'standard Gregorian year' (of 365.2425 days) is 648 seconds, or 10.8 minutes (10m48s) if you prefer. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.115|172.69.194.115]] 00:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

"...never been a papal starship..." - If this upsets you, read Hyperion! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.67|172.71.142.67]] 17:12, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
: Even the most cursory research (i.e. googling) reveals that there have been [https://www.instagram.com/vaticanspaceprogram/?ref=petterimikkonen.fi&hl=af Papal starships].[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.190|172.70.90.190]] 09:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
::I appreciate the {cite needed}!!! and added more adjectives (known earthly). Just because we are not aware of any, doesn't mean they don't exist! For example, how did Michelangelo get to this planet? I have my suspicions!!!;P [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 01:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

"Note: Lightsecond was chosen instead of the more familiar lightyear to make sure that layouts computed during leap years would be unambiguously identical to those computed during non-leap years." (from https://drafts.csswg.org/css-egg-1/#astro-units) --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.253.143|172.68.253.143]] 18:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

The last paragraph says Randall. It should say Cueball. Randall knows better otherwise he would not have made this joke. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.98|172.71.22.98]] 04:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

2897: Light Leap Years

2024-02-23T01:52:22Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ added "no '(known earthly)' starships", because while we inhabitants of the 21st century are unaware of any starships in the 16th, that does not mean they didn't exist! I WANT TO BELIEVE!

{{comic
| number = 2897
| date = February 21, 2024
| title = Light Leap Years
| image = light_leap_years_2x.png
| imagesize = 288x389px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = When Pope Gregory XIII briefly shortened the light-year in 1582, it led to navigational chaos and the loss of several Papal starships.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A FLEET OF PAPAL STARSHIPS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The comic portrays [[Cueball]] and [[Ponytail]] updating astronomical distances in some sort of database, noting how long and unpleasant the process is; the caption reveals that the reason is that {{w|leap year}}s "make light-years 0.27% longer" (366/365 = 1.0027397...). This makes the distance to Alpha Centauri "0.27% shorter". 2024 is a leap year in the Gregorian calendar, and leap day (February 29) was just over one week away when this comic was released.

The joke of this strip is based on the fact that "one year" isn't a precise unit of measurement: there have been different definitions, evolving over time, of what constitutes a year. The {{w|Gregorian calendar}} (the one most commonly used in modern times) includes a system of leap years in which an additional day is added every fourth year (with some exceptions) to make up for incompatibilities between day and year cycles. This temporarily changes the length of a year from 365 to 366 days.

A {{w|light year}} is a unit of distance, commonly used in astronomy, equal to the distance light travels in a vacuum in one year; the year used is the {{w|Julian year (astronomy)|Julian year}}, or 365.25 days. This results in a light year which is standardized at 9,460,730,472,580.8 km, no matter how long the calendar year may be. However, in this comic, a light year has been defined based on the length of the ''current'' year, and consequently becomes longer during leap years, meaning databases with astronomical distances have to be adjusted. Thankfully, most systems of measurement do not change continually, and even those those that do (eg. DST) usually are setup to automatically update when necessary.

The title text jokes that {{w|Pope Gregory XIII}}, the originator of the Gregorian calendar, "briefly shortened the light-year in 1582." What really occurred in 1582 was that the Pope decided to advance the previously Julian calendar by 10 days to make up for an accumulated excess of past leap days and bring the subsequent Gregorian one more into line with astronomical measurements. Not all places went with the change, at that time. Some of the later adopters had to {{w|List of adoption dates of the Gregorian calendar by country|skip yet other days once they did}}, while others continue to use a calendar with an offset factor. In the world of the comic, this change led to "navigational chaos and the loss of several Papal starships". This is of course ludicrous since there were no (known earthly) starships in the 16th century, there has never been a "Papal starship",{{Citation Needed}} and the light-year wasn't developed as a unit of measurement until 1838. Indeed, it wasn't known that the speed of light is finite until {{w|Rømer's determination of the speed of light}} in 1676. Navigational chaos ''has'' been a cause of shipwrecks, notably the {{w|Scilly naval disaster of 1707}} in which 4 ships were lost and over 1400 sailors died.

The joke is that the evolving and somewhat loose and changing definitions of early calendars had significant impacts on the units of measurement we still use today. Such changes did serve to catalyze political and religious conflicts in some instances, and raised temporary issues around matters such as taxes, rents, etc., but as technology has advanced and become increasingly reliant on precise and consistent measurements, they could be significantly more disastrous.

The values given for Proxima Centauri's distance from the Sun, 4.2377 light-leap-years and 4.2493 light-nonleap-years, are consistent with a distance of 4.2464 actual light-years as described by the {{w|International Astronomical Union}}, which is only minutely different from 4.2465 light-years, the value given by {{w|Gaia catalogues|Gaia Data Release 3}} in 2020. Though tiny on an interstellar scale, the difference between 4.2377 and 4.2493 light-years, 0.0116 light years, equals 109.7 billion km (68.2 billion miles), about 730 times the average distance between the Earth and the sun (150 million km or 93 million miles).

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

:[Cueball is sitting at his laptop and leaning to the back of his office chair, while having his other hand on the laptop. He is looking at Ponytail standing behind him. The text from the laptop screen is shown above it, indicated with a zigzag line.]
:Cueball: It took until February, but I finally got all the distances updated!
:Ponytail: I really wish we didn't have to do this.
:[Laptop screen:]
:Proxima Centauri
:Distance: [in red, crossed out] <s>4.2493 ly</s>
:[in green] 4.2377 ly

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Astronomers hate leap years because they make light-years 0.27% longer.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Time]]
[[Category:Calendar]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]

2855: Empiricism

2023-11-16T23:20:10Z

Cuvtixo: He-he-he! The previous witticism must not go unnoticed, although it's not especially funny or clever. It should be translated as ¡Je-je-je!ted for Spanish speakers as Je-je-je

{{comic
| number = 2855
| date = November 15, 2023
| title = Empiricism
| image = empiricism_2x.png
| imagesize = 273x315px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The problems started with my resolution next year to reject temporal causality.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Will be created by a REJECTIONIST TABULA RASA - Please continue to expand and refine the explanation. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] are discussing New Year's resolutions. Cueball says that his resolution for this year was to reject empiricism. Megan asks him how that worked out for him, to which Cueball gives a dismissive response.

{{w|Empiricism}} is the practice of testing a hypothesis based on direct observation and testing. The joke is that, since Cueball succeeded in rejecting empiricism this year, he doesn't care or think about how it went, since doing so would be empirical.

Randall's joke may not be as on-point as he had hoped. Cueball's response can be more accurately characterized as a rejection of empiricism alternatives such as constructivism and pragmatism. Constructivism suggests that knowledge is constructed by the individual through his or her interactions with the world. Pragmatists argue that the worth of a belief is determined by its success in practical application; if a concept works or has practical effects, it can be considered worthy. It would be fair to say that what Cueball is truly rejecting in his response is constructivism or pragmatism, not empiricism, which focuses more on experimentation and testing hypotheses. If Megan had asked, "Did that work out for you as well as you had expected?" then Cueball's response would have been more clearly a rejection of empiricism. This is just a technicality, though; Randall is probably using a more layman's definition of empiricism, which can reasonably be defined as the theory that any and all knowledge comes from sensory experience.

In the title text, Cueball attributes past problems ("my problems started") to his future ("next year") resolution, which is to reject temporal causality. {{w|causality|Temporal causality}} is the principle in physics that the cause of an event always precedes the event. The joke is that his past/current problems are being caused by a future event, since his sense of causality is no longer time-based. This is Randall's second joke about causality in 2 weeks; a similar joke was published [[2848|7 comics prior]] to this one, in which a Breaker Box switch can turn off causality. It's unclear if either joke caused the other one. He-he-he!

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan are standing, talking to each other.]
:Cueball: My New Year's resolution this year was to reject empiricism.
:Megan: And how's that been working out for you?
:Cueball: What does that have to do with anything?

==Trivia==
*This is the first [[:Category:New Year|New Year comic]] to come out in November.
**All previous comics have come in either December or January. And only a few has been outside the window of the one before or the one after New Year.
**But given the subject of two New Year resolutions, it can only be considered a New Year comic.
***With one of them being the rejection of causality the release day is no longer important...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:New Year]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Time]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]

Talk:2798: Room Temperature

2023-07-07T01:56:50Z

Cuvtixo: citation is not needed needed for hot fusion

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]]!!!

2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T19:18:34Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ in fact it would would be much larger that Jupiter, to depict 1:1)

{{comic
| number = 2761
| date = April 10, 2023
| title = 1-to-1 Scale
| image = 1_to_1_scale_2x.png
| imagesize = 444x281px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = There's a version that shows the planets with no cropping, but it's hard to find a display that supports it.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a DISPLAY THAT SUPPORTS THE PLANETS WITH NO CROPPING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic supposedly shows what each planet would look like at 1:1 scale, which would mean at real size. However, because a minuscule portion of each planet is visible on the page at that scale, it becomes comically useless at distinguishing the size or relative size of each planet, and each planet is just a differently textured straight line. To understand the diagram, imagine you are sitting a tremendous distance away from the solar system, and you have a camera with an extremely supremely highly zooming telephoto lens. Then all eight planets happen to line up. You manage to snap this incredible image of a teeny tiny spot of the sky, which simultaneously manages to include the very edges of all the planets as well as some of the space behind them all. Space is the black polygon in the center. The reason why each planet is so smooth is because it's such a small area: you're only seeing a couple of square inches of the surface of each of the planets.

The title text remarks that it is hard to find a display that supports a version of the image without cropping. This is because a true 1:1 scale image showing each of the planets would be ridiculously large[https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/1164/how-big-is-the-solar-system/], larger than any monitor or display currently available on Earth (since it would be much larger than Earth, in fact it would would have to be larger that Jupiter, to depict 1:1).

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|The main panel itself is missing explanation. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[A frame with a central area of black 'space', bounded at various intersecting angles by eight 'straight lines' representing planetary surfaces, originating from various out-of-frame angles of 'down' and the white of some bodies obscuring some part of the others.]
:[There are labels indicating which line represents each planet.]
:[The four gas-giants' lines are simply drawn, near straight and featureless.]
:[The lines for the rocky inner-planets have variations to them, stereotypical of some part of their surface.]
:[The "Earth" line ('down' being out the top of the frame) has a profile indicating various small-scale vegetation and also features the white sillouette of an ant that may be of a realistic size for your display.]
:[Caption below the panel:]
:The solar system's planets at 1:1 scale

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Space]]
[[Category:Comics_with_inverted_brightness]]

Talk:2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T19:16:10Z

Cuvtixo:

Really want an explanation for this one. [[User:JobbieJimmies|Melomaniac]] ([[User talk:JobbieJimmies|talk]]) 03:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

My comment got deleted by a bot!!! [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 03:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:RIP... [[User:JobbieJimmies|Melomaniac]] ([[User talk:JobbieJimmies|talk]]) 03:25, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, UC, it just got overwritten by the 'bot, when it did its job and (re)created the whole initial state of the various pages to depict the new comic coming out. (Noting that you'd not set them all up fully/correctly.)
:That you had spotted it already and had ''just'' gotten in ahead of the 'bot clearly isn't something it was prepared to handle. But as someone spotting it can usually wait a short while for the 'bot to catch up, I don't think it's a problem. In fact, you could have just copied your old contributions into the now receptive page(s), with nary any comment. Too late now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 03:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:: This may have broken the next link on the previous page. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.36|172.71.160.36]] 06:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The lines represent the surfaces of the planets I think, so it's basically all the planets overlaid on top of each other. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.35|172.71.142.35]] 03:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:Yup, I think it's what he meant - but I find it unlikely that the gas giants would have this clear cutoff of a "surface". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.189.241|162.158.189.241]] 03:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
::If there is a gas - liquid phase transition (and I think at least the gas giants have them): Why not? OK, you could see "rain" as blurring a clear cutoff, but wouldn't that also apply to Earth, then?[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 08:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I’d think the same citation as stands for ridiculously large would also cover larger than currently exists on earth, and his that citation is not in fact needed? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.174.186|162.158.174.186]] 06:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:It seems like the gas-covered worlds are explicitly those with clearly cutoff "surfaces," so maybe in those cases the cutoff is some specific gas density -- which occurs at a consistent radius throughout the planet, thus creating a flat surface. While for rocky worlds (except Venus, which is treated like a gas planet here), a density cutoff can lead to bumpiness due to terrain. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 03:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:: just to be very clear (this being a explanation site!) that Venus is "treated like a gas giant" because of it's thick atmosphere. It would be just as correct to say "All the gas giants are treated like Venus" After all, ordinary telescopes couldn't take a picture that sees through any atmospheres, except Earth, where you'd see clouds but often surface where clouds don't appear. Sorry if that's an overexplanation [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 19:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

On Twitter there seems to be concern that all planets are depicted flat. This may make this a contribution/mockery of the ongoing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth Flat Earth] discussions in some corners of the internet. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.132|198.41.242.132]] 06:49, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:You can't see the curvature of the Earth when standing on it; doesn't mean it's flat. Since we're looking at the planets at a 1:1 scale, we're literally only seeing a couple of inches of each of their edges (notwithstanding the whole gas-giants-don't-have-a-sharp-edge issue). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.239.20|162.158.239.20]] 12:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:actually you can see it, standing on the shore of any large lake on a calm day looking at a shore that's ~6.5 miles (10.5km) away. You'll lose ~8ft (2.5m) below the horizon - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.213|162.158.186.213]] 13:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The display for an uncropped version of the image would not only be larger than any display on earth. It would be larger than earth. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.243|162.158.86.243]] 06:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:By necessity, at least as large as Jupiter. Maybe slightly above two Jupiters (max dimension squared compared to display height*width of any common aspect ratio) if you wanted to not overlay any of the others at all. And make the lower limit a packing-problem, then add a buffer so there isn't the actual need for any to touch. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.253|172.70.90.253]] 10:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
::I'm going to add that. Someone was confused enough to put {{cite needed}} there, which may be a joke onto itself?, I can't tell. I've removed the cite needed, but I guess it needs to be more clear why it's totally nonsensical and doesn't need a citation? [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 19:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

1-to-1 scale means 'assume all planets are the same size,' right? I see Earth's grass is shown to be as large as Martian rocks, because Earth is a third again as large. (At the scale where grass is visible, Earth looks flat.) At first I thought the point was that altitude variation in cloud-tops varied so little that a gas giant shrunk down to Earth size would be featureless and have a distinct edge, but that's wrong. Ground isn't cloud-tops. Do gas giants have any solid ground? We've seen Jupiter eat comets, and it makes sense they would've collected at least some minerals and metals. According to [[https://www.teachastronomy.com/textbook/The-Giant-Planets-and-Their-Moons/Internal-Structure-of-the-Gas-Giant-Planets/|Teach Astronomy]], gas giants have Earth-sized solid cores. I'm guessing gas giants' immense gravity compresses their cores into featureless spheres, which, if scaled to Earth-size and viewed at the scale where one could see grass, would look flat. Yes?
[[User:EllenNB|EllenNB]] ([[User talk:EllenNB|talk]]) 10:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:Gravity itself won't compress (and 'flatten') the cores. "Shell theory" shows that gravitational force only counts from the proportion of the body that is within the radius of the bit you're concerned with. But there'll also be the external pressure (from being at the bottom of a thick atmosphere that ultimately ''is'' above far more of the planetary mass) and possibly a degree of compression density to make any Earth-sized core slightly heavier than if it was just a bare core of the same size but shorn of outer layers.
:As to flatness, I can take you to very flat stretches of Earth and very lumpy bits (depends which direction I go, from where I am now), all within 30 minutes' drive. We can'teven know how representative a sample of planetary cross-sections we are seeing (once we get over the issues of gas/space boundaries for gas-giants), but I bet there are bits that resemble the diagram... If you ''really'' want it to be so real. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.87|172.71.242.87]] 11:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, 1-to-1 means that they are actual size, not the same size. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 13:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

There are several pieces of information here that are featured but don't make sense to me. What's the function of the dark polygon in the center? Why are the lines showing each surface going in random directions? Why is the surface of each planet so flat at a full scale rendition? When I look out my window at full sized Earth, it's not flat. It's quite bumpy, actually. But perhaps he doesn't mean these are full size, he might be saying that they're all shrunk, but the same amount, so 1:1:1:1:1... but even then, I'm totally lost.

"What's the function of the dark polygon in the center?"
I think it is a view of the dark sky, "above" the surface of the Earth, Mars, etc. [[User:Rps|Rps]] ([[User talk:Rps|talk]]) 11:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:I think the "polygon" is a grassy Earth itself, with the white above it sky. Earth is the rearmost planet pictured. Then in front of Earth, on all sides except the top, are the overlays of the various planets, what little of each one as can fit. But then maybe the polygon is night starry sky, and Earth is the white area above it. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 14:35, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Is this an ant on earth, over the letters "EA" ? On my monitor, set for my less-than-perfect vision, it is 15mm long, which (at a 1:1 scale) makes it a cow ant, or a large african ant. I guess people with normal vision get fire and carpenter ants instead? And those on smartphones get pavement ants?[[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.73|172.68.50.73]] 11:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:I do believe it is! It's 6 mm on my desktop monitor and 3 mm on my phone. We also don't know what side of the Earth we're looking at, so I suppose it could really be any ant, including the one in your local area. I like to think it's a black garden ant (''Lasius niger''), since I'm most familiar with those :) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.239.25|162.158.239.25]] 12:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

It took me a good while to figure out this one; I don't normally need to come here, but this one stumped me at first. (The comments as of right now weren't too illuminating either.) I think the lack of color was an issue; I first thought the black polygon in the center was the earth, and then interpreted the various lines as a really weird diagram type I'd never seen before, like a phase diagram or something; I also considered one-dimensional planets. [https://imgur.com/a/yJOYvk1 I colored in the planets to aid me.] The way I now interpret this one is thus: imagine an observer sitting a tremendous distance away from the solar system, and they have a camera with an extremely supremely highly zooming telephoto lens. Then a lining-up of all eight planets happens – I believe this is impossible IRL (because of resonances or something), but just go with it. The observer manages to snap this incredible image of a teeny tiny spot of the sky, which simultaneously manages to include the very very edges of all the planets as well as some of the sky behind them all. The sky is the black polygon: it has nebulae and stars. Neptune is in front of Uranus, and that as well as Mercury are in front of Saturn, which is in front of both Jupiter and Mars; Venus is between Mercury, Mars and the Earth, and the Earth is also behind Jupiter. The reason why these are all so smooth is because it's such a small area: we're literally only seeing a couple of square inches of the surface of each of the rocky planets. (See, you can see an individual ant on the Earth. Go to the most rugged mountain range you can find and observe a couple of square inches; it'll be locally flat.) The lack of atmospheres on the rocky planets as well as the hard edges of the gas giants are artistic license. This one is a member of the genre of "true yet unhelpful diagrams"; I'm surprised that isn't a category on this wiki. – [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.4|162.158.238.4]] 12:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

((Written whilst 162.158.238.4 was editing, above, and I got an edit conflict on that. The editor concerned touches on this ordering business, but I'm pasting my original in unaltered, not rejigged as a more focused reply.)) I was wondering abut the "overlap order" for a while, until I twigged it. May not be worth officially documenting, but my analysis, showing that (perhaps depending upon specific orbital positions, during a given range of times, which can of course be checked) it's ''probably'' based upon distance away from Earth.
*Earth is bottom-most. Could be 1st/2nd, shared with Mars, as their overlap isn't shown.
*Mars is our nearest neighbour. (As above, could be 1st ''or'' 2nd on stack.)
*Venus next. Although it could be 7th (only obscured by Mercury) or anywhere else down to 3rd.
*Jupiter as 4th from bottom. (''Could'' be 3rd..5th, though.)
*Saturn takes 5th-up position. (4th..6th)
*Mercury as 6th. (Or all the way to topmost, but I made an assumption about its relationship to the last two.)
*Uranus as 7th. (6th/7th a possibility, depends on Mercury)
*Neptune as 8th. (7th/8th possible, Mercury again.)
...or at least that's what my mental notes tell me. Not helped by starting off counting from near to far and possibly messing up my numbers when I realised it made sense to flip them. It could also be "delta-V needed to reach the planet concerned" (either without or ''including'' flyby slingshot momentum borrowing/burning), but that's something I'd also need to check. I doubt it really needs tying down/Explaining, and when I edited the Transcript I decided not to record every nuance of the "variously orientated surfaces", as I think it adds nothing so long as the description gives the general idea. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.121|141.101.98.121]] 13:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

So no one is going to mention that for the clarity depicted you'd need to literally place the planets inside of each other, or have some sort of focal length from zero to infinity? I'm not sure if that bothers me more or less than the missed trick of making the length of ground shown relate to some comparative parameter (albedo might have been a fun one) - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.213|162.158.186.213]] 13:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:To be fair, you're also going to have to choose a "flat" few inches of surface that stands proud of the local geography (such that anything higher is below the curvature of the Earth for its proximity), and deal with an impossible resolution of an impossibly zoomed telephoto shot from a viewpoint unimaginably distant (''whilst'' a near-enough non-Solar conjunction/asterism is happening, or at least was, when the light passed each body), without significant atmospheric distortion (which is a relatively minor issue, compared with the scarcity of photons that reach the camera ''anyway'').
:Can we perhaps instead assume that these are just individual 1:1-scale cross-sectional diagrams (or even carefully curated local photos) drawn together into a hybrid image to accurately retain the scaling verisimilitude, and individual contexts, but happily faking the relative positions? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.56|172.70.85.56]] 15:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

It would take some work to check, but I'm wondering if the angle of the horizons of the various planets are perpendicular to the line made between the earth and the planet in question [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.141|162.158.154.141]] 15:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T19:10:50Z

Cuvtixo: are all the gas giants really treated like Venus?

Really want an explanation for this one. [[User:JobbieJimmies|Melomaniac]] ([[User talk:JobbieJimmies|talk]]) 03:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

My comment got deleted by a bot!!! [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 03:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:RIP... [[User:JobbieJimmies|Melomaniac]] ([[User talk:JobbieJimmies|talk]]) 03:25, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, UC, it just got overwritten by the 'bot, when it did its job and (re)created the whole initial state of the various pages to depict the new comic coming out. (Noting that you'd not set them all up fully/correctly.)
:That you had spotted it already and had ''just'' gotten in ahead of the 'bot clearly isn't something it was prepared to handle. But as someone spotting it can usually wait a short while for the 'bot to catch up, I don't think it's a problem. In fact, you could have just copied your old contributions into the now receptive page(s), with nary any comment. Too late now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 03:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:: This may have broken the next link on the previous page. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.36|172.71.160.36]] 06:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The lines represent the surfaces of the planets I think, so it's basically all the planets overlaid on top of each other. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.35|172.71.142.35]] 03:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:Yup, I think it's what he meant - but I find it unlikely that the gas giants would have this clear cutoff of a "surface". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.189.241|162.158.189.241]] 03:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
::If there is a gas - liquid phase transition (and I think at least the gas giants have them): Why not? OK, you could see "rain" as blurring a clear cutoff, but wouldn't that also apply to Earth, then?[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 08:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I’d think the same citation as stands for ridiculously large would also cover larger than currently exists on earth, and his that citation is not in fact needed? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.174.186|162.158.174.186]] 06:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:It seems like the gas-covered worlds are explicitly those with clearly cutoff "surfaces," so maybe in those cases the cutoff is some specific gas density -- which occurs at a consistent radius throughout the planet, thus creating a flat surface. While for rocky worlds (except Venus, which is treated like a gas planet here), a density cutoff can lead to bumpiness due to terrain. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 03:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:: just to be very clear (this being a explanation site!) that Venus is "treated like a gas giant" because of it's thick atmosphere. It would be just as correct to say "All the gas giants are treated like Venus" After all, ordinary telescopes couldn't take a picture that sees through any atmospheres, except Earth, where you'd see clouds but often surface where clouds don't appear. Sorry if that's an overexplanation [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 19:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

On Twitter there seems to be concern that all planets are depicted flat. This may make this a contribution/mockery of the ongoing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth Flat Earth] discussions in some corners of the internet. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.132|198.41.242.132]] 06:49, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:You can't see the curvature of the Earth when standing on it; doesn't mean it's flat. Since we're looking at the planets at a 1:1 scale, we're literally only seeing a couple of inches of each of their edges (notwithstanding the whole gas-giants-don't-have-a-sharp-edge issue). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.239.20|162.158.239.20]] 12:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:actually you can see it, standing on the shore of any large lake on a calm day looking at a shore that's ~6.5 miles (10.5km) away. You'll lose ~8ft (2.5m) below the horizon - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.213|162.158.186.213]] 13:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The display for an uncropped version of the image would not only be larger than any display on earth. It would be larger than earth. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.243|162.158.86.243]] 06:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:By necessity, at least as large as Jupiter. Maybe slightly above two Jupiters (max dimension squared compared to display height*width of any common aspect ratio) if you wanted to not overlay any of the others at all. And make the lower limit a packing-problem, then add a buffer so there isn't the actual need for any to touch. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.253|172.70.90.253]] 10:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

1-to-1 scale means 'assume all planets are the same size,' right? I see Earth's grass is shown to be as large as Martian rocks, because Earth is a third again as large. (At the scale where grass is visible, Earth looks flat.) At first I thought the point was that altitude variation in cloud-tops varied so little that a gas giant shrunk down to Earth size would be featureless and have a distinct edge, but that's wrong. Ground isn't cloud-tops. Do gas giants have any solid ground? We've seen Jupiter eat comets, and it makes sense they would've collected at least some minerals and metals. According to [[https://www.teachastronomy.com/textbook/The-Giant-Planets-and-Their-Moons/Internal-Structure-of-the-Gas-Giant-Planets/|Teach Astronomy]], gas giants have Earth-sized solid cores. I'm guessing gas giants' immense gravity compresses their cores into featureless spheres, which, if scaled to Earth-size and viewed at the scale where one could see grass, would look flat. Yes?
[[User:EllenNB|EllenNB]] ([[User talk:EllenNB|talk]]) 10:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:Gravity itself won't compress (and 'flatten') the cores. "Shell theory" shows that gravitational force only counts from the proportion of the body that is within the radius of the bit you're concerned with. But there'll also be the external pressure (from being at the bottom of a thick atmosphere that ultimately ''is'' above far more of the planetary mass) and possibly a degree of compression density to make any Earth-sized core slightly heavier than if it was just a bare core of the same size but shorn of outer layers.
:As to flatness, I can take you to very flat stretches of Earth and very lumpy bits (depends which direction I go, from where I am now), all within 30 minutes' drive. We can'teven know how representative a sample of planetary cross-sections we are seeing (once we get over the issues of gas/space boundaries for gas-giants), but I bet there are bits that resemble the diagram... If you ''really'' want it to be so real. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.87|172.71.242.87]] 11:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, 1-to-1 means that they are actual size, not the same size. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 13:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

There are several pieces of information here that are featured but don't make sense to me. What's the function of the dark polygon in the center? Why are the lines showing each surface going in random directions? Why is the surface of each planet so flat at a full scale rendition? When I look out my window at full sized Earth, it's not flat. It's quite bumpy, actually. But perhaps he doesn't mean these are full size, he might be saying that they're all shrunk, but the same amount, so 1:1:1:1:1... but even then, I'm totally lost.

"What's the function of the dark polygon in the center?"
I think it is a view of the dark sky, "above" the surface of the Earth, Mars, etc. [[User:Rps|Rps]] ([[User talk:Rps|talk]]) 11:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:I think the "polygon" is a grassy Earth itself, with the white above it sky. Earth is the rearmost planet pictured. Then in front of Earth, on all sides except the top, are the overlays of the various planets, what little of each one as can fit. But then maybe the polygon is night starry sky, and Earth is the white area above it. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 14:35, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Is this an ant on earth, over the letters "EA" ? On my monitor, set for my less-than-perfect vision, it is 15mm long, which (at a 1:1 scale) makes it a cow ant, or a large african ant. I guess people with normal vision get fire and carpenter ants instead? And those on smartphones get pavement ants?[[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.73|172.68.50.73]] 11:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:I do believe it is! It's 6 mm on my desktop monitor and 3 mm on my phone. We also don't know what side of the Earth we're looking at, so I suppose it could really be any ant, including the one in your local area. I like to think it's a black garden ant (''Lasius niger''), since I'm most familiar with those :) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.239.25|162.158.239.25]] 12:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

It took me a good while to figure out this one; I don't normally need to come here, but this one stumped me at first. (The comments as of right now weren't too illuminating either.) I think the lack of color was an issue; I first thought the black polygon in the center was the earth, and then interpreted the various lines as a really weird diagram type I'd never seen before, like a phase diagram or something; I also considered one-dimensional planets. [https://imgur.com/a/yJOYvk1 I colored in the planets to aid me.] The way I now interpret this one is thus: imagine an observer sitting a tremendous distance away from the solar system, and they have a camera with an extremely supremely highly zooming telephoto lens. Then a lining-up of all eight planets happens – I believe this is impossible IRL (because of resonances or something), but just go with it. The observer manages to snap this incredible image of a teeny tiny spot of the sky, which simultaneously manages to include the very very edges of all the planets as well as some of the sky behind them all. The sky is the black polygon: it has nebulae and stars. Neptune is in front of Uranus, and that as well as Mercury are in front of Saturn, which is in front of both Jupiter and Mars; Venus is between Mercury, Mars and the Earth, and the Earth is also behind Jupiter. The reason why these are all so smooth is because it's such a small area: we're literally only seeing a couple of square inches of the surface of each of the rocky planets. (See, you can see an individual ant on the Earth. Go to the most rugged mountain range you can find and observe a couple of square inches; it'll be locally flat.) The lack of atmospheres on the rocky planets as well as the hard edges of the gas giants are artistic license. This one is a member of the genre of "true yet unhelpful diagrams"; I'm surprised that isn't a category on this wiki. – [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.4|162.158.238.4]] 12:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

((Written whilst 162.158.238.4 was editing, above, and I got an edit conflict on that. The editor concerned touches on this ordering business, but I'm pasting my original in unaltered, not rejigged as a more focused reply.)) I was wondering abut the "overlap order" for a while, until I twigged it. May not be worth officially documenting, but my analysis, showing that (perhaps depending upon specific orbital positions, during a given range of times, which can of course be checked) it's ''probably'' based upon distance away from Earth.
*Earth is bottom-most. Could be 1st/2nd, shared with Mars, as their overlap isn't shown.
*Mars is our nearest neighbour. (As above, could be 1st ''or'' 2nd on stack.)
*Venus next. Although it could be 7th (only obscured by Mercury) or anywhere else down to 3rd.
*Jupiter as 4th from bottom. (''Could'' be 3rd..5th, though.)
*Saturn takes 5th-up position. (4th..6th)
*Mercury as 6th. (Or all the way to topmost, but I made an assumption about its relationship to the last two.)
*Uranus as 7th. (6th/7th a possibility, depends on Mercury)
*Neptune as 8th. (7th/8th possible, Mercury again.)
...or at least that's what my mental notes tell me. Not helped by starting off counting from near to far and possibly messing up my numbers when I realised it made sense to flip them. It could also be "delta-V needed to reach the planet concerned" (either without or ''including'' flyby slingshot momentum borrowing/burning), but that's something I'd also need to check. I doubt it really needs tying down/Explaining, and when I edited the Transcript I decided not to record every nuance of the "variously orientated surfaces", as I think it adds nothing so long as the description gives the general idea. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.121|141.101.98.121]] 13:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

So no one is going to mention that for the clarity depicted you'd need to literally place the planets inside of each other, or have some sort of focal length from zero to infinity? I'm not sure if that bothers me more or less than the missed trick of making the length of ground shown relate to some comparative parameter (albedo might have been a fun one) - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.213|162.158.186.213]] 13:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:To be fair, you're also going to have to choose a "flat" few inches of surface that stands proud of the local geography (such that anything higher is below the curvature of the Earth for its proximity), and deal with an impossible resolution of an impossibly zoomed telephoto shot from a viewpoint unimaginably distant (''whilst'' a near-enough non-Solar conjunction/asterism is happening, or at least was, when the light passed each body), without significant atmospheric distortion (which is a relatively minor issue, compared with the scarcity of photons that reach the camera ''anyway'').
:Can we perhaps instead assume that these are just individual 1:1-scale cross-sectional diagrams (or even carefully curated local photos) drawn together into a hybrid image to accurately retain the scaling verisimilitude, and individual contexts, but happily faking the relative positions? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.56|172.70.85.56]] 15:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

It would take some work to check, but I'm wondering if the angle of the horizons of the various planets are perpendicular to the line made between the earth and the planet in question [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.141|162.158.154.141]] 15:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T19:02:21Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ got rid of {{citation needed}} it's kinda funny to leave it, because it seems so stupid before the following explanation afterwards, but I don't want to further embarrass the contributor ;) >:D

{{comic
| number = 2761
| date = April 10, 2023
| title = 1-to-1 Scale
| image = 1_to_1_scale_2x.png
| imagesize = 444x281px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = There's a version that shows the planets with no cropping, but it's hard to find a display that supports it.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a DISPLAY THAT SUPPORTS THE PLANETS WITH NO CROPPING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic supposedly shows what each planet would look like at 1:1 scale, which would mean at real size. However, because a minuscule portion of each planet is visible on the page at that scale, it becomes comically useless at distinguishing the size or relative size of each planet, and each planet is just a differently textured straight line. To understand the diagram, imagine you are sitting a tremendous distance away from the solar system, and you have a camera with an extremely supremely highly zooming telephoto lens. Then all eight planets happen to line up. You manage to snap this incredible image of a teeny tiny spot of the sky, which simultaneously manages to include the very edges of all the planets as well as some of the space behind them all. Space is the black polygon in the center. The reason why each planet is so smooth is because it's such a small area: you're only seeing a couple of square inches of the surface of each of the planets.

The title text remarks that it is hard to find a display that supports a version of the image without cropping. This is because a true 1:1 scale image showing each of the planets would be ridiculously large[https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/1164/how-big-is-the-solar-system/], larger than any monitor or display currently available on Earth (since it would be much larger than Earth).

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|The main panel itself is missing explanation. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[A frame with a central area of black 'space', bounded at various intersecting angles by eight 'straight lines' representing planetary surfaces, originating from various out-of-frame angles of 'down' and the white of some bodies obscuring some part of the others.]
:[There are labels indicating which line represents each planet.]
:[The four gas-giants' lines are simply drawn, near straight and featureless.]
:[The lines for the rocky inner-planets have variations to them, stereotypical of some part of their surface.]
:[The "Earth" line ('down' being out the top of the frame) has a profile indicating various small-scale vegetation and also features the white sillouette of an ant that may be of a realistic size for your display.]
:[Caption below the panel:]
:The solar system's planets at 1:1 scale

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Space]]
[[Category:Comics_with_inverted_brightness]]

Talk:2750: Flatten the Planets

2023-03-16T22:42:44Z

Cuvtixo: replaced == Death's End == Sorry!

I have to wonder, would you slide down to the sun, or be flung outwards? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
: The discs are centered on the orbit of the parent planet, and presumably rotating at the same frequency as the parent planet's orbit. That means the inner edge of each disc is going slower than you'd need to orbit the Sun at that distance, and the outer edge faster. If you moved inward from the original planet's orbit, the Sun's gravity would pull you in, but when you crossed the boundary to the next disc, you'd get flung back outward.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.61|162.158.62.61]] 19:58, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::No Each planet fills out the space within their orbit into the next planet. Easy to see as the outer edge of Neptune's orbit is the same as with the planet flattened. There is a distance from Mercury to the Sun indicated. Maybe because it would melt if it got any closer? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Take another look at the top and bottom images, you'll notice that the Neptune disc is significantly larger than Neptune's orbit (especially on the left hand side of the image). I suspect that, as the other response suggested Mercury and Neptune takes the inner edge of the disc as the average between Neptune and Uranus's orbital radii, and then the outer radius the same distance on the other side of Neptune's orbit. Similar for Mercury.
:::First, they're rings not discs, but I'm skeptical of the math. And it looks to me like the ring's edges are halfway between the orbits, with Neptune extended outwards the same distance as halfway to Uranus's orbit. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.4|172.69.22.4]] 20:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

{{cot|My mistake, Randall's math is correct, sorry.}}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: right;"
|-
! Planet !! Volume (109 km3) !! Orbital radius (106 km) || halfway to prior || halfway to next || Annulus area (10<s>9</s> ''12'' OOPS! km2) || Thickness (<s>cm</s> ''10s of microns'')
|-
| Mercury || 61 || 58 || 29 (to 0) || 83 || 19,000 || 321
|-
| Venus || 928 || 108 || 83 || 129 || 30,637 || 3,029
|-
| Earth || 1,083 || 150 || 129 || 189 || 59,942 || 1,802
|-
| Mars || 163 || 228 || 189 || 504 || 685,794 || 24
|-
| Jupiter || 1,4310,00 || 779 || 504 || 1,107 || 3,051,847 || 46,890
|-
| Saturn || 827,130 || 1,434 || 1,107 || 2,154 || 10,726,236 || 7,711
|-
| Uranus || 68,340 || 2,873 || 2,154 || 3,684 || 28,061,145 || 244
|-
| Neptune || 62,540 || 4,495 || 3,684 || 5,304 (symmetry) || 45,743,348 || 137
|}

:::: The volumes in this table are at 2 different scales. Only the Mercury to Mars volumes are at 1010 km3. Jupiter to Neptune are at 1012 km3 [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 21:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: Thanks, fixed; I had the scale wrong for the radii too. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.231|172.71.158.231]] 21:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Someone please double-check this, I think Randall is off by a factor of 1000. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.229|172.71.154.229]] 21:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::: I did my own spreadsheet, and my figures agree with Randall's (roughly). I think your thinkness figures are mostly out by 1000, and a few of your volume figures also have the wrong scale (Mercury is smaller than Mars, and the giants are too big by a factor of 10). [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 22:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: 61 * 10^9 km^3 is [https://www.google.com/search?q=61+*+10%5E9+km%5E3+in+cm%5E3 6.1 × 10^25 cm^3], 19000 * 10^9 km^2 is [https://www.google.com/search?q=19000+*+10%5E9+km%5E2+in+cm%5E2 1.9 × 10^23 cm^2], and (6.1 × 10^25 cm^3) / (1.9 × 10^23 cm^2) is [https://www.google.com/search?q=%286.1+%C3%97+10%5E25+cm%5E3%29+%2F+%281.9+%C3%97+10%5E23+cm%5E2%29 3.2 meters]. I'm afraid I'm correct. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.145|172.69.22.145]] 22:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: According to {{w|List_of_Solar_System_objects_by_size#Objects_with_radius_over_400_km}} yes I had Mars wrong (corrected) but the others are roughly correct. I stand by my claim that Randall is in error. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.86|172.71.154.86]] 22:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::: Mercury's orbital radius is about 58 * 106 km, not 58 * 109 km, which makes the annulus' area 19000 1012 km2. [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 23:20, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::: I fixed that label, hold on... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.86|172.71.154.86]] 23:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::: You're right. Thanks. Sorry. Reverted on main. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.215|172.71.154.215]] 23:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

|} 

This makes about as much sense as other Flat Earth theories. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.200.137|172.70.200.137]] 20:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:But this would actually be a flat Earth. Albeit with a rather larger surface area ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:And..the Earth-ring is not a disc and it's also in the same plane as the sun. Meaning If you were to stand on the surface of this ring earth , there would be a perpetual sunrise / sunset... And similar for everything else in the plane of the ecliptic. [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

But what does the plot of surface gravity vs distance from the Sun look like? Gravity of an infinite plane and all that?--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 00:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

The explanation currently says that it would require "several solar system's worth" of matter, but isn't there enough matter in the actual solar system? --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 00:49, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:That was said in reference to the Alderson Disk, which requires 1000km or so of thickness. Clearly more than the proposal here that gives a minute thickness (relatively) from the ''actual'' planetary mass in the solar system. Even if you reduced its extent (smaller outer, bigger hole for the Sun) it wouldn't thicken up enough. The prior (non-xkcd) version would require a mass of material rivaling, if not exceeding, that of the Sun itself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.222|172.70.162.222]] 02:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

One of the reasons NASA rejected this could've been the use of inches. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.13|172.71.102.13]] 02:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
: Except for Mars. I can only imagine that use of the metric system for the Mars ring is a reference to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_failure Mars Climate Orbiter] fiasco, which certainly would not endear Randall, or his proposal, to a NASA granting agency program officer. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.150|172.70.214.150]] 02:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: I assume the use of microns there is simply because 5/512 is a really awkward fraction. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.25|172.71.223.25]] 05:48, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::: Awkward? Its vulgar! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56|172.70.162.56]] 08:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: Oh right, the Mars Climate Orbiter reference makes sense! I was wondering why Randall would mix imperial and metric units like that. No sane physicist would do that, especially not Randall. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.250.88|172.71.250.88]] 12:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::: And Randall rubs more salt into the wound by using "micron", when the formal/correct SI unit name is "micrometer".[[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.187|172.70.206.187]] 17:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

If the planets of the solar system were to become disks centered on the respective planet's current orbit, how do we deal with the different orbital eccentricities? For example, per That Other Wiki, Venus has an orbital eccentricity of 0.006772, Earth has 0.0167086, and Mars has 0.0934. Not to mention Neptune's 0.008678 and Pluto's 0.2488; Pluto's orbit actually crosses Neptune's. Surely that would cause issues with the disks? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.98.5|172.71.98.5]] 08:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:Pluto isn't involved, so at least that difficulty doesn't have to be dealt with. Maybe Pluto and other dwarf planets could be used to supplement the asteroid ball bearings.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.63|172.71.242.63]] 10:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

It appears that there is enough material in the asteroid belt to do this, since a ring of asteroid ball bearings with a 1 trillion kilometer diameter where each ball bearing was a cube 1 meter by 1 meter (clearly more than enough!) would be less than 10 trillion cubic meters. Since the total mass of the asteroid belt is 10^21 kg, and the average density is around 2 g/cm^3, = 2000 kg/m^3, then the amount of matter required is 2,000*10 trillion = 2 quadrillion which is much less than 10^21. (Not sure if this is actually correct) --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 12:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:Ahh yes, the classic cubic-bearing. Just what we need in this planetary ring system we've created. Since Randall elects to eschew spheres for the planets, let's go all in and refuse them for the bearings as well. Bravo. ;-) [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:40-12:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC) 
::''I just want to say that this line of logic ''really'' tickled my funnybone. Well done! ...I've got no other valid contribution at this time, just that.'' [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 13:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::That was to further overestimate the material needed, since a cube is more mass than a sphere. --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 15:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Did anyone notice that this came out just after pi-day? [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
: That's really crusty of Randall. It does explain the rolling pin. He probably also knows, and chooses (for cause) not to disclose, that pronunciation of the Greek letter as "pie" [https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2023/03/14/amoebas-lorica-14-march-icymi/ doesn't conform to modern language usage]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.232|162.158.90.232]] 17:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: for the same reasons outlined in the link, beta and phi are also pronounced differently, and I'm pretty sure zeta, eta, theta, xi and chi are too [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.105|172.71.26.105]] 22:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Bumpf
:::Although all these terms were deliberately taken from ancient Greek, because that's when they were first proposed! I believe Pi was devised around 250 BC by the Greek mathematician Archimedes, and is sometimes called Archimedes' Constant. There is no reason to use more modern pronunciation, except to make jokes about "Pee Day", I suppose. Why are we talking of hypotheticals of Randall's knowledge and secret humor, anyways? Do we need such an elaborate justification to quote and link to this dude, "Amoebe"? Please wait til next time, next year![[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 22:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
== Death's End ==

I don't know if there's a non spoilery-way to mention that there are similar ideas explored in the novel ''Death's End'' by Liu Cixin. [[User:Nedlum|Nedlum]] ([[User talk:Nedlum|talk]]) 13:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

What would even happen here? Would the rings collapse into planets again? Where will the atmospheres go? Are the rings a uniform material like rock or many small pebbles? What happens at the borders? Would i be squished or will all life still be intact? If i a squished, do i have to put up with my worst enemy next to me? Will it be like the flat skins from //All Tomorrows//? Will i die? I expect to see this in «What If 2» coming out 13th october. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.134.38|172.68.134.38]] 14:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Presumably for the gas giants to hold a disc shape, the gas would have to be encased in hollow discs made out of the solid cores. How thick would the walls be? What if we used thinner cavities to store the inner planets' atmospheres as well? And how much would the core material decompress as a result of not being a core? [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 18:18, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

:isn't it hypothesized that they're "solid cores" are only solid because of the immense pressures? Like isn't much of Jupiter's inner core (or outer-inner core) metallic helium or something? My reading about this is outdated, but it's mentioned in the explanation that it requires "tensile strength beyond what is likely physically possible for any known form of matter." Actually I'm a little annoyed that this statement doesn't get "citation needed", rather than "planets of our solar system would not be suitable for this endeavor", because obviously if the first statement is true, the second needs no citation if the first is true, because no planet is made of unknown forms of matter. Correct?" [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 22:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2750: Flatten the Planets

2023-03-16T22:40:51Z

Cuvtixo: Archimedes' constant

I have to wonder, would you slide down to the sun, or be flung outwards? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
: The discs are centered on the orbit of the parent planet, and presumably rotating at the same frequency as the parent planet's orbit. That means the inner edge of each disc is going slower than you'd need to orbit the Sun at that distance, and the outer edge faster. If you moved inward from the original planet's orbit, the Sun's gravity would pull you in, but when you crossed the boundary to the next disc, you'd get flung back outward.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.61|162.158.62.61]] 19:58, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::No Each planet fills out the space within their orbit into the next planet. Easy to see as the outer edge of Neptune's orbit is the same as with the planet flattened. There is a distance from Mercury to the Sun indicated. Maybe because it would melt if it got any closer? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Take another look at the top and bottom images, you'll notice that the Neptune disc is significantly larger than Neptune's orbit (especially on the left hand side of the image). I suspect that, as the other response suggested Mercury and Neptune takes the inner edge of the disc as the average between Neptune and Uranus's orbital radii, and then the outer radius the same distance on the other side of Neptune's orbit. Similar for Mercury.
:::First, they're rings not discs, but I'm skeptical of the math. And it looks to me like the ring's edges are halfway between the orbits, with Neptune extended outwards the same distance as halfway to Uranus's orbit. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.4|172.69.22.4]] 20:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

{{cot|My mistake, Randall's math is correct, sorry.}}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: right;"
|-
! Planet !! Volume (109 km3) !! Orbital radius (106 km) || halfway to prior || halfway to next || Annulus area (10<s>9</s> ''12'' OOPS! km2) || Thickness (<s>cm</s> ''10s of microns'')
|-
| Mercury || 61 || 58 || 29 (to 0) || 83 || 19,000 || 321
|-
| Venus || 928 || 108 || 83 || 129 || 30,637 || 3,029
|-
| Earth || 1,083 || 150 || 129 || 189 || 59,942 || 1,802
|-
| Mars || 163 || 228 || 189 || 504 || 685,794 || 24
|-
| Jupiter || 1,4310,00 || 779 || 504 || 1,107 || 3,051,847 || 46,890
|-
| Saturn || 827,130 || 1,434 || 1,107 || 2,154 || 10,726,236 || 7,711
|-
| Uranus || 68,340 || 2,873 || 2,154 || 3,684 || 28,061,145 || 244
|-
| Neptune || 62,540 || 4,495 || 3,684 || 5,304 (symmetry) || 45,743,348 || 137
|}

:::: The volumes in this table are at 2 different scales. Only the Mercury to Mars volumes are at 1010 km3. Jupiter to Neptune are at 1012 km3 [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 21:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: Thanks, fixed; I had the scale wrong for the radii too. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.231|172.71.158.231]] 21:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Someone please double-check this, I think Randall is off by a factor of 1000. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.229|172.71.154.229]] 21:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::: I did my own spreadsheet, and my figures agree with Randall's (roughly). I think your thinkness figures are mostly out by 1000, and a few of your volume figures also have the wrong scale (Mercury is smaller than Mars, and the giants are too big by a factor of 10). [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 22:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: 61 * 10^9 km^3 is [https://www.google.com/search?q=61+*+10%5E9+km%5E3+in+cm%5E3 6.1 × 10^25 cm^3], 19000 * 10^9 km^2 is [https://www.google.com/search?q=19000+*+10%5E9+km%5E2+in+cm%5E2 1.9 × 10^23 cm^2], and (6.1 × 10^25 cm^3) / (1.9 × 10^23 cm^2) is [https://www.google.com/search?q=%286.1+%C3%97+10%5E25+cm%5E3%29+%2F+%281.9+%C3%97+10%5E23+cm%5E2%29 3.2 meters]. I'm afraid I'm correct. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.145|172.69.22.145]] 22:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: According to {{w|List_of_Solar_System_objects_by_size#Objects_with_radius_over_400_km}} yes I had Mars wrong (corrected) but the others are roughly correct. I stand by my claim that Randall is in error. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.86|172.71.154.86]] 22:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::: Mercury's orbital radius is about 58 * 106 km, not 58 * 109 km, which makes the annulus' area 19000 1012 km2. [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 23:20, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::: I fixed that label, hold on... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.86|172.71.154.86]] 23:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::: You're right. Thanks. Sorry. Reverted on main. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.215|172.71.154.215]] 23:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

|} 

This makes about as much sense as other Flat Earth theories. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.200.137|172.70.200.137]] 20:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:But this would actually be a flat Earth. Albeit with a rather larger surface area ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:And..the Earth-ring is not a disc and it's also in the same plane as the sun. Meaning If you were to stand on the surface of this ring earth , there would be a perpetual sunrise / sunset... And similar for everything else in the plane of the ecliptic. [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

But what does the plot of surface gravity vs distance from the Sun look like? Gravity of an infinite plane and all that?--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 00:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

The explanation currently says that it would require "several solar system's worth" of matter, but isn't there enough matter in the actual solar system? --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 00:49, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:That was said in reference to the Alderson Disk, which requires 1000km or so of thickness. Clearly more than the proposal here that gives a minute thickness (relatively) from the ''actual'' planetary mass in the solar system. Even if you reduced its extent (smaller outer, bigger hole for the Sun) it wouldn't thicken up enough. The prior (non-xkcd) version would require a mass of material rivaling, if not exceeding, that of the Sun itself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.222|172.70.162.222]] 02:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

One of the reasons NASA rejected this could've been the use of inches. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.13|172.71.102.13]] 02:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
: Except for Mars. I can only imagine that use of the metric system for the Mars ring is a reference to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_failure Mars Climate Orbiter] fiasco, which certainly would not endear Randall, or his proposal, to a NASA granting agency program officer. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.150|172.70.214.150]] 02:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: I assume the use of microns there is simply because 5/512 is a really awkward fraction. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.25|172.71.223.25]] 05:48, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::: Awkward? Its vulgar! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56|172.70.162.56]] 08:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: Oh right, the Mars Climate Orbiter reference makes sense! I was wondering why Randall would mix imperial and metric units like that. No sane physicist would do that, especially not Randall. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.250.88|172.71.250.88]] 12:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::: And Randall rubs more salt into the wound by using "micron", when the formal/correct SI unit name is "micrometer".[[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.187|172.70.206.187]] 17:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

If the planets of the solar system were to become disks centered on the respective planet's current orbit, how do we deal with the different orbital eccentricities? For example, per That Other Wiki, Venus has an orbital eccentricity of 0.006772, Earth has 0.0167086, and Mars has 0.0934. Not to mention Neptune's 0.008678 and Pluto's 0.2488; Pluto's orbit actually crosses Neptune's. Surely that would cause issues with the disks? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.98.5|172.71.98.5]] 08:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:Pluto isn't involved, so at least that difficulty doesn't have to be dealt with. Maybe Pluto and other dwarf planets could be used to supplement the asteroid ball bearings.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.63|172.71.242.63]] 10:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

It appears that there is enough material in the asteroid belt to do this, since a ring of asteroid ball bearings with a 1 trillion kilometer diameter where each ball bearing was a cube 1 meter by 1 meter (clearly more than enough!) would be less than 10 trillion cubic meters. Since the total mass of the asteroid belt is 10^21 kg, and the average density is around 2 g/cm^3, = 2000 kg/m^3, then the amount of matter required is 2,000*10 trillion = 2 quadrillion which is much less than 10^21. (Not sure if this is actually correct) --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 12:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:Ahh yes, the classic cubic-bearing. Just what we need in this planetary ring system we've created. Since Randall elects to eschew spheres for the planets, let's go all in and refuse them for the bearings as well. Bravo. ;-) [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:40-12:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC) 
::''I just want to say that this line of logic ''really'' tickled my funnybone. Well done! ...I've got no other valid contribution at this time, just that.'' [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 13:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::That was to further overestimate the material needed, since a cube is more mass than a sphere. --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 15:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Did anyone notice that this came out just after pi-day? [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
: That's really crusty of Randall. It does explain the rolling pin. He probably also knows, and chooses (for cause) not to disclose, that pronunciation of the Greek letter as "pie" [https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2023/03/14/amoebas-lorica-14-march-icymi/ doesn't conform to modern language usage]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.232|162.158.90.232]] 17:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: for the same reasons outlined in the link, beta and phi are also pronounced differently, and I'm pretty sure zeta, eta, theta, xi and chi are too [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.105|172.71.26.105]] 22:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Bumpf
:::Although all these terms were deliberately taken from ancient Greek, because that's when they were first proposed! I believe Pi was devised around 250 BC by the Greek mathematician Archimedes, and is sometimes called Archimedes' Constant. There is no reason to use more modern pronunciation, except to make jokes about "Pee Day", I suppose. Why are we talking of hypotheticals of Randall's knowledge and secret humor, anyways? Do we need such an elaborate justification to quote and link to this dude, "Amoebe"? Please wait til next time, next year![[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 22:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a non spoilery-way to mention that there are similar ideas explored in the novel ''Death's End'' by Liu Cixin. [[User:Nedlum|Nedlum]] ([[User talk:Nedlum|talk]]) 13:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

What would even happen here? Would the rings collapse into planets again? Where will the atmospheres go? Are the rings a uniform material like rock or many small pebbles? What happens at the borders? Would i be squished or will all life still be intact? If i a squished, do i have to put up with my worst enemy next to me? Will it be like the flat skins from //All Tomorrows//? Will i die? I expect to see this in «What If 2» coming out 13th october. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.134.38|172.68.134.38]] 14:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Presumably for the gas giants to hold a disc shape, the gas would have to be encased in hollow discs made out of the solid cores. How thick would the walls be? What if we used thinner cavities to store the inner planets' atmospheres as well? And how much would the core material decompress as a result of not being a core? [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 18:18, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

:isn't it hypothesized that they're "solid cores" are only solid because of the immense pressures? Like isn't much of Jupiter's inner core (or outer-inner core) metallic helium or something? My reading about this is outdated, but it's mentioned in the explanation that it requires "tensile strength beyond what is likely physically possible for any known form of matter." Actually I'm a little annoyed that this statement doesn't get "citation needed", rather than "planets of our solar system would not be suitable for this endeavor", because obviously if the first statement is true, the second needs no citation if the first is true, because no planet is made of unknown forms of matter. Correct?" [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 22:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

2750: Flatten the Planets

2023-03-16T22:24:37Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ moved cite needed after "...with a tensile strength beyond what is likely physically possible for any known form of matter." Because if this statement is true, if logically follows that the planets, of known matter, would not be suitable

{{comic
| number = 2750
| date = March 15, 2023
| title = Flatten the Planets
| image = flatten_the_planets_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x647px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = We'll turn the asteroid belt into ball bearings to go between different rings orbiting at different speeds.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a ROUNDEL. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic depicts a situation where the solar system is flattened to create a ring system around the Sun. This may be inspired by the {{w|Alderson disk}}, a hypothetical megastructure intended to gain truly massive amounts of living space by constructing a literal disk of matter around a star. This would require several solar systems' worth of matter to do, and materials with a tensile strength beyond what is likely physically possible for any known form of matter.{{Citation needed}} The planets of our solar system would not be suitable for this endeavor; alas, Randall apparently cannot comprehend why {{w|NASA}} is rejecting this proposal to "improve" the planets.

{| class="wikitable"
! rowspan="2" | Planet
! colspan="2" | Thickness
|-
!Inches
!Millimeters
|-
| Mercury || 1/8" || 3.2 mm
|-
| Venus || 1" || 25 mm
|-
| Earth || 3/4" || 19 mm
|-
| Mars || 0.01" || 0.25 mm
|-
| Jupiter || 18" || 460 mm
|-
| Saturn || 3" || 76 mm
|-
| Uranus || 1/8" || 3.2 mm
|-
| Neptune || 1/16" || 1.6 mm
|}

The title text explains what would happen to the asteroid belt if this was done. He is proposing that the asteroids should be turned into ball bearings to go in between the planetary discs. There is enough matter in the asteroid belt to do this,{{Actual citation needed|Surely depends upon the size and radial density of the inserted race of bearings}} and furthermore it implies that the discs would actually have small gaps between them. Unless the discs were made of material with impossibly high tensile strength, the whole structure would soon be torn apart by the relative forces between the inner and outer fringes of each disc trying to both 'orbit' at the rate more suited to a radial distance somewhere between the two, and crushing the bearings placed between adjacent ones. Although less so than with a single structural disc rotating at any single given compromise rotation (or not at all).

==Transcript==
:[This comic depicts a situation where the planets of the Solar System are flattened using a roller pin to create a contiguous ring system around the Sun, with each planet taking up the part within their orbit to the next planet (or the Sun).]

:[The top part shows a normal image of the Solar System with the eight planets orbiting the Sun, and their orbits shown as circles. The Sun is yellow and the planets have approximately the color they typically are shown in. Earth has more features than the other three rocky planets. Jupiter has clear features including the red spot, while Saturn has its rings. Beneath this is a broad arrow pointing down.]
:↓
:[The arrow points to a roller pin. A similar arrow points down to the next image.]
:↓
:[The second large image shows the Solar System with the planets flattened to fill out the gap between the Sun and each of the planets, so they each cover the area of the circle within their orbits, into the next planet (or the Sun). Each segment has kept a similar color as used for the planets in the first image. The Sun is not flattened and is now the center of a huge ring with eight different colors, some with patterns, mainly Earth, but also Jupiter and Saturn's discs show features.]

:[Beneath this to the right is a side view of the flattened Earth, with its thickness indicated with two arrows pointing in at the top and up at the bottom of two dotted lines continuing where the "Earth" stops. A label has been written between these two lines, and the thickness is compared to US quarter and penny coins.]
:Earth
:3/4"

:[Below this and going all the way across the panel is a side view with a segment of the Sun to the left followed by all the flattened planets, labeled with their name and their thicknesses. Arrows point to the relevant segment from the three rocky planets other than Earth. Above Jupiter and Saturn is a label between two arrows. Text alternates between being above and below the planets. Their thicknesses differ quite a lot, with Mars being the thinnest and Jupiter by far the thickest. Cueball stands on the flattened Earth.]
:← Not to scale →
:Mercury 1/8"
:Venus: 1"
:Earth 3/4"
:Mars 250 microns
:Jupiter 18"
:Saturn 3"
:Uranus 1/8"
:Neptune 1/16"

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I don't know why NASA keeps rejecting my proposals to improve the Solar System

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]

Talk:2750: Flatten the Planets

2023-03-16T22:19:46Z

Cuvtixo: /* Death's End */

I have to wonder, would you slide down to the sun, or be flung outwards? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
: The discs are centered on the orbit of the parent planet, and presumably rotating at the same frequency as the parent planet's orbit. That means the inner edge of each disc is going slower than you'd need to orbit the Sun at that distance, and the outer edge faster. If you moved inward from the original planet's orbit, the Sun's gravity would pull you in, but when you crossed the boundary to the next disc, you'd get flung back outward.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.61|162.158.62.61]] 19:58, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::No Each planet fills out the space within their orbit into the next planet. Easy to see as the outer edge of Neptune's orbit is the same as with the planet flattened. There is a distance from Mercury to the Sun indicated. Maybe because it would melt if it got any closer? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Take another look at the top and bottom images, you'll notice that the Neptune disc is significantly larger than Neptune's orbit (especially on the left hand side of the image). I suspect that, as the other response suggested Mercury and Neptune takes the inner edge of the disc as the average between Neptune and Uranus's orbital radii, and then the outer radius the same distance on the other side of Neptune's orbit. Similar for Mercury.
:::First, they're rings not discs, but I'm skeptical of the math. And it looks to me like the ring's edges are halfway between the orbits, with Neptune extended outwards the same distance as halfway to Uranus's orbit. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.4|172.69.22.4]] 20:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

{{cot|My mistake, Randall's math is correct, sorry.}}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: right;"
|-
! Planet !! Volume (109 km3) !! Orbital radius (106 km) || halfway to prior || halfway to next || Annulus area (10<s>9</s> ''12'' OOPS! km2) || Thickness (<s>cm</s> ''10s of microns'')
|-
| Mercury || 61 || 58 || 29 (to 0) || 83 || 19,000 || 321
|-
| Venus || 928 || 108 || 83 || 129 || 30,637 || 3,029
|-
| Earth || 1,083 || 150 || 129 || 189 || 59,942 || 1,802
|-
| Mars || 163 || 228 || 189 || 504 || 685,794 || 24
|-
| Jupiter || 1,4310,00 || 779 || 504 || 1,107 || 3,051,847 || 46,890
|-
| Saturn || 827,130 || 1,434 || 1,107 || 2,154 || 10,726,236 || 7,711
|-
| Uranus || 68,340 || 2,873 || 2,154 || 3,684 || 28,061,145 || 244
|-
| Neptune || 62,540 || 4,495 || 3,684 || 5,304 (symmetry) || 45,743,348 || 137
|}

:::: The volumes in this table are at 2 different scales. Only the Mercury to Mars volumes are at 1010 km3. Jupiter to Neptune are at 1012 km3 [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 21:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: Thanks, fixed; I had the scale wrong for the radii too. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.231|172.71.158.231]] 21:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Someone please double-check this, I think Randall is off by a factor of 1000. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.229|172.71.154.229]] 21:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::: I did my own spreadsheet, and my figures agree with Randall's (roughly). I think your thinkness figures are mostly out by 1000, and a few of your volume figures also have the wrong scale (Mercury is smaller than Mars, and the giants are too big by a factor of 10). [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 22:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: 61 * 10^9 km^3 is [https://www.google.com/search?q=61+*+10%5E9+km%5E3+in+cm%5E3 6.1 × 10^25 cm^3], 19000 * 10^9 km^2 is [https://www.google.com/search?q=19000+*+10%5E9+km%5E2+in+cm%5E2 1.9 × 10^23 cm^2], and (6.1 × 10^25 cm^3) / (1.9 × 10^23 cm^2) is [https://www.google.com/search?q=%286.1+%C3%97+10%5E25+cm%5E3%29+%2F+%281.9+%C3%97+10%5E23+cm%5E2%29 3.2 meters]. I'm afraid I'm correct. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.145|172.69.22.145]] 22:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::: According to {{w|List_of_Solar_System_objects_by_size#Objects_with_radius_over_400_km}} yes I had Mars wrong (corrected) but the others are roughly correct. I stand by my claim that Randall is in error. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.86|172.71.154.86]] 22:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::: Mercury's orbital radius is about 58 * 106 km, not 58 * 109 km, which makes the annulus' area 19000 1012 km2. [[User:Sandor|Sandor]] ([[User talk:Sandor|talk]]) 23:20, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::: I fixed that label, hold on... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.86|172.71.154.86]] 23:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::: You're right. Thanks. Sorry. Reverted on main. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.215|172.71.154.215]] 23:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

|} 

This makes about as much sense as other Flat Earth theories. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.200.137|172.70.200.137]] 20:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:But this would actually be a flat Earth. Albeit with a rather larger surface area ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:And..the Earth-ring is not a disc and it's also in the same plane as the sun. Meaning If you were to stand on the surface of this ring earth , there would be a perpetual sunrise / sunset... And similar for everything else in the plane of the ecliptic. [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

But what does the plot of surface gravity vs distance from the Sun look like? Gravity of an infinite plane and all that?--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 00:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

The explanation currently says that it would require "several solar system's worth" of matter, but isn't there enough matter in the actual solar system? --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 00:49, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:That was said in reference to the Alderson Disk, which requires 1000km or so of thickness. Clearly more than the proposal here that gives a minute thickness (relatively) from the ''actual'' planetary mass in the solar system. Even if you reduced its extent (smaller outer, bigger hole for the Sun) it wouldn't thicken up enough. The prior (non-xkcd) version would require a mass of material rivaling, if not exceeding, that of the Sun itself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.222|172.70.162.222]] 02:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

One of the reasons NASA rejected this could've been the use of inches. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.13|172.71.102.13]] 02:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
: Except for Mars. I can only imagine that use of the metric system for the Mars ring is a reference to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_failure Mars Climate Orbiter] fiasco, which certainly would not endear Randall, or his proposal, to a NASA granting agency program officer. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.150|172.70.214.150]] 02:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: I assume the use of microns there is simply because 5/512 is a really awkward fraction. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.25|172.71.223.25]] 05:48, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::: Awkward? Its vulgar! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56|172.70.162.56]] 08:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: Oh right, the Mars Climate Orbiter reference makes sense! I was wondering why Randall would mix imperial and metric units like that. No sane physicist would do that, especially not Randall. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.250.88|172.71.250.88]] 12:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::: And Randall rubs more salt into the wound by using "micron", when the formal/correct SI unit name is "micrometer".[[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.187|172.70.206.187]] 17:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

If the planets of the solar system were to become disks centered on the respective planet's current orbit, how do we deal with the different orbital eccentricities? For example, per That Other Wiki, Venus has an orbital eccentricity of 0.006772, Earth has 0.0167086, and Mars has 0.0934. Not to mention Neptune's 0.008678 and Pluto's 0.2488; Pluto's orbit actually crosses Neptune's. Surely that would cause issues with the disks? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.98.5|172.71.98.5]] 08:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:Pluto isn't involved, so at least that difficulty doesn't have to be dealt with. Maybe Pluto and other dwarf planets could be used to supplement the asteroid ball bearings.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.63|172.71.242.63]] 10:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

It appears that there is enough material in the asteroid belt to do this, since a ring of asteroid ball bearings with a 1 trillion kilometer diameter where each ball bearing was a cube 1 meter by 1 meter (clearly more than enough!) would be less than 10 trillion cubic meters. Since the total mass of the asteroid belt is 10^21 kg, and the average density is around 2 g/cm^3, = 2000 kg/m^3, then the amount of matter required is 2,000*10 trillion = 2 quadrillion which is much less than 10^21. (Not sure if this is actually correct) --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 12:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:Ahh yes, the classic cubic-bearing. Just what we need in this planetary ring system we've created. Since Randall elects to eschew spheres for the planets, let's go all in and refuse them for the bearings as well. Bravo. ;-) [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:40-12:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC) 
::''I just want to say that this line of logic ''really'' tickled my funnybone. Well done! ...I've got no other valid contribution at this time, just that.'' [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 13:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
::That was to further overestimate the material needed, since a cube is more mass than a sphere. --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 15:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Did anyone notice that this came out just after pi-day? [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 12:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
: That's really crusty of Randall. It does explain the rolling pin. He probably also knows, and chooses (for cause) not to disclose, that pronunciation of the Greek letter as "pie" [https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2023/03/14/amoebas-lorica-14-march-icymi/ doesn't conform to modern language usage]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.232|162.158.90.232]] 17:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:: for the same reasons outlined in the link, beta and phi are also pronounced differently, and I'm pretty sure zeta, eta, theta, xi and chi are too [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.105|172.71.26.105]] 22:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Bumpf
== Death's End ==

I don't know if there's a non spoilery-way to mention that there are similar ideas explored in the novel ''Death's End'' by Liu Cixin. [[User:Nedlum|Nedlum]] ([[User talk:Nedlum|talk]]) 13:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

What would even happen here? Would the rings collapse into planets again? Where will the atmospheres go? Are the rings a uniform material like rock or many small pebbles? What happens at the borders? Would i be squished or will all life still be intact? If i a squished, do i have to put up with my worst enemy next to me? Will it be like the flat skins from //All Tomorrows//? Will i die? I expect to see this in «What If 2» coming out 13th october. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.134.38|172.68.134.38]] 14:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Presumably for the gas giants to hold a disc shape, the gas would have to be encased in hollow discs made out of the solid cores. How thick would the walls be? What if we used thinner cavities to store the inner planets' atmospheres as well? And how much would the core material decompress as a result of not being a core? [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 18:18, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

:isn't it hypothesized that they're "solid cores" are only solid because of the immense pressures? Like isn't much of Jupiter's inner core (or outer-inner core) metallic helium or something? My reading about this is outdated, but it's mentioned in the explanation that it requires "tensile strength beyond what is likely physically possible for any known form of matter." Actually I'm a little annoyed that this statement doesn't get "citation needed", rather than "planets of our solar system would not be suitable for this endeavor", because obviously if the first statement is true, the second needs no citation if the first is true, because no planet is made of unknown forms of matter. Correct?" [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 22:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2676: Historical Dates

2022-09-25T04:35:45Z

Cuvtixo: White Lotus and Birth of Unix and Unix Timestamp

Source for the Excel/Lotus 123 relation with Dec 30th, 1899: https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/office/en-US/f1eef5fe-ef5e-4ab6-9d92-0998d3fa6e14/what-is-story-behind-december-30-1899-as-base-date?forum=accessdev
[[User:Victor|Victor]] ([[User talk:Victor|talk]]) 08:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I feel this one. My birthday happens to be within 24 hours of [[1179: ISO 8601|1970-01-01]], so I keep getting caught off guard for a moment whenever I see my birthday showing up in one of these contexts. -- [[User:KarMann|KarMann]] ([[User talk:KarMann|talk]]) 08:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

We're going to need the date stamp format for 1890 ticker tape for this one. Anyone? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.183|172.70.214.183]] 11:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:MM/DD/YY, with leading zeros omitted, and no I don't know why, but I suggest Google Books Ngrams might have a clue as to when that abomination started. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.61|172.69.22.61]] 12:03, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
::Not necessarily with pairs of the slash '/' _ . . _ . but also hyphens '-' _ . . . . _ and periods '.' . _ . _ . _ were used as delimiters in MM?DD?YY, which if I remember right dates to the 1500s when accounting ledgers were invented. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.207.8|172.70.207.8]] 12:10, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
::::Are you with the NSA and have a data warehouse of all the ticker tapes ever sent or something? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.185|162.158.166.185]] 12:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:::::No, but my great grandparents thought ticker tape parades were littering, because Great Grandma worked in an office and Great Grandpa worked for sanitation, so we have a bunch of boxes in the attic filled with what she was supposed to throw out her window. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.75|172.71.158.75]] 12:54, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:::That would be [https://www.jstor.org/stable/40697544 1299]. But I'm not sure how this is going to help us explain the comic, unless you perhaps are suggesting we enumerate date representation clusters somehow? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.61|172.69.22.61]] 12:32, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:::: Someone should ask GPT-3 for a list of the top ten dates. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.71|172.69.22.71]] 12:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Just putting January 2, 2006 here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20530327/origin-of-mon-jan-2-150405-mst-2006-in-golang [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.161|172.69.22.161]] 12:28, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Do we need a comment about how Pope Gregory XIII obliterated October 5th through 14th, 1582? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.25|172.71.158.25]] 13:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

In Unix, January 1st, 1970 0h0 is 0. In Excel, December 31st, 1899 is 1. Either Randal forgot December has 31 days (hence December 30th) or he though Excel starts to count at 0 like Unix. For more information in the (probably) intentional bug in Excel https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-review/ .

In Excel, January 1, 1900 is 1. However, December 30, 1899 is the "epoch" date that you should use if you want to convert a current date (anything on or after March 1, 1900) to a number by "subtracting" the current date minus the epoch date (counting the number of days since the epoch date). The reason it isn't December 31 is because of the above mentioned bug where Excel counts February 29, 1900 as a day even though it actually isn't.
::I just checked it in different versions of Excel, you are right. Meanwhile LO Calc it is Dec 31th 1899... I'll try to edit the explaination to make it more universal. [[User:Asterisk|Asterisk]] ([[User talk:Asterisk|talk]]) 21:11, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:::In Excel 2002 (XP) it actually interprets it as "1900-01-00" or "January 0, 1900", that's weird [[User:Asterisk|Asterisk]] ([[User talk:Asterisk|talk]]) 21:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Speaking of dates, shouldn’t this one be in the category “Saturday comics”? Or was it still Friday in Hawaii when it came out? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.246|162.158.107.246]] 17:57, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:While uploaded by the bot on 2022-09-24, the xkcd archive (and json data) states that this comic was published on 2022-09-23 —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 18:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
::The same thing happened on Monday. The comic didn't show up until Tuesday, but it was still dated Monday. Someone suggested that the book tour has been interfering with Randall's schedule. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand what the White Lotus Religion has to do with the comment in the title text. Nothing in the Wikipedia article linked mentions 1899 or December 30 in connection with that religion. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.100.158|172.70.100.158]] 01:03, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I believe The White Lotus reference is a stretch, but it is possible, just based on the name "Lotus". This would have to be confirmed by Randall Munroe. On another matter; I'm sorry I don't have citations for Unix only becoming complete in mid-March. Dennis Ritchie himself wrote of it's birthing in 1969 in the 1978 paper,"The Evolution of the Unix Time-sharing System*" I'm quite sure of the Unix timestamp being a kind of "hack" used until a calendar app could be created. PS This Jan 1, 1970 problem was even in the first iPhones, which could be bricked by setting the date to Dec 31, 1969 or any date previous. Many an Apple Store had to put up with this nuisance.

2676: Historical Dates

2022-09-25T04:22:03Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2676
| date = September 23, 2022
| title = Historical Dates
| image = historical_dates_2x.png
| imagesize = 305x438px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Evidence suggests the 1899 transactions occurred as part of a global event centered around a deity associated with the lotus flower.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a CONFUSED HISTORIAN BORN ON DECEMBER 30TH - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Many files and database entries contain a date. When it is not set, it often defaults to the first day in the system. The default "creation date" of many operating systems and software is Jan 1st, 1970, which leads to a lot of files wrongly reporting that they were created on this date. This comes from dates being stored as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_time Unix timestamps], which are defined as the number of seconds since Jan 1st, 1970, 0:00, so a timestamp value of 0 (the default value of otherwise undefined numbers in most systems, such as where no value at all has actually been entered into a given spreadsheet cell) equates to this date. Note that Unix was started in 1969, and not substantially working as an OS until Mid-March of 1970. January first was picked out of convenience until a proper calendar app could be implemented(which may have been "cal").

Dec 30th, 1899 comes from a [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-review/ spreadsheet date compatibility issue] between Excel and Lotus 123 (referenced in the title text.) Spreadsheets store dates as sequential serial numbers so that they can be used in calculations. In Excel, by default, January 1, 1900 is serial number 1 [https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/datevalue-function-df8b07d4-7761-4a93-bc33-b7471bbff252]. Based on that, Excel's integer date representation is the number of days that have passed since December 31, 1899. However, because of a bug intentionally carried over from Lotus 1-2-3 where it counts February 29, 1900 as a day even though it actually was not [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/office/troubleshoot/excel/wrongly-assumes-1900-is-leap-year], for any day since then, Excel's integer date representation is actually the number of days that have passed since December 30, 1899. Most other spreadsheet applications copied the behaviour of Excel to maintain compatibility with it. This leads to the value of 0 in some applications (notably Open- and LibreOffice Calc and Google Spreadsheets) being interpreted as Dec 30th, 1899. Similarly, Microsoft Visual Basic and Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) interpret 0.0 as Dec 30th, 1899.

The historian in the comic presents some research wrongly based only on the number of entries created on those dates. This confusion on the part of the future historian only grows in the title text, where they make the claim that Lotus 123 is, in fact, religious imagery related to some sort of deity, potentially a lotus god, around whom the '1899 event' took place. This may be poking fun of the trope that anthropologists attribute any behavior they can't explain to religious ritual. This historian's confusion may have been at least partially due to China's {{w|White Lotus|White Lotus Religion}}.

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

:[Blondie is talking, while pointing to a hologram showing a timeline with two dates, 1899 and 1970. At the top of the hologram are two lines of text, above "1899" are three lines of text, above "1970" is one line of text, below "1899" are two lines of text, and below "1970" is one line of text; all of these lines of text are illegible.]
:Blondie: Historical records show millions of business transactions occurred on Dec 30th, 1899.
:Blondie: This economic activity sparked the digital age, culminating in a "data festival" on Jan 1st, 1970, when many early digital files were created.

:[Caption under the panel:]
:It's going to be weird when historians forget why some dates show up a lot.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Calendar]]
[[Category:Time]]
[[Category:Programming]]

2661: Age Milestone Privileges

2022-08-20T02:26:15Z

Cuvtixo: explained controversy on Jean Calment's Wikipedia article. (I was inspired myself to make a minor correction!)

{{comic
| number = 2661
| date = August 19, 2022
| title = Age Milestone Privileges
| image = age_milestone_privileges.png
| titletext = If you reach 122, you get complete unrevertible editorial control over Jeanne Calment's Wikipedia article.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BABY GOD-EMPRESS MAKING THE PRESIDENT'S LETTER R-RATED - Please change this comment when editing this page. (Edited by Cuvtixo) Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This is a list of "age milestones" in the United States. As usual for Randall, he has added many fictional entries to supplement some real life ones.

{| class="wikitable"
! Age || Privilage || Desription
|-
| 16 || Drive || Legal driving age varies by state in the US, but 16 is the highest age to qualify for a learner's permit.
|-
| 17 || Attend R-Rated movies Alone ||
|-
| 18 || Vote ||
|-
| 21 || Buy Alcohol || In the US, the legal drinking age is 21 years, although other countries have a lower drinking age (Example: In Japan the legal age to drink is 20.).
|-
| 25 || Rent a car ||
|-`e
| 30 || Run for Senate || This entry is incorrect: one must be at least 30 years old in order to ''become'' Senator, not ''run'' for Senate. Joe Biden was 29 years old when he was elected to Senate but turned 30 before being sworn in.
|-
| 32 || Rent a Senator's Car || The first joke entry in the table.
|-
| 35 || Run for president ||
|-
| 40 || Rent a flying car ||
|-
| 45 || Learn about the God-empress ||
|-
| 50 || Join AARP || Full AARP (formerly called the American Association of Retired Persons) membership is available to anyone age 50 and over. {{w|AARP}}
|-
| 52 || Click to skip captchas ||
|-
| 55 || Vote for God-empress ||
|-
| 62 || $80 national parks lifetime pass ||
|-
| 65 || Eligible for Medicare ||
|-
| 68 || See "Skip ads" button on live tv || 68 refers to a "Skip ads" button on live TV. Some DVRs and streaming applications have a feature to skip over commercial breaks in recorded programs, but this could not be available in live TV, since it would require jumping forward in time. Time travel is currently impossible.{{citation needed
|-
| 70 || Run for God-empress ||
|-
| 75 || Ride any animal in a national park ||
|-
| 80 || Eligible for Megacare ||
|-
| 85 || Click to toggle whether an ad is positive or negative about the product ||
|-
| 90 || Click to make any movie R-rated ||
|-
| 100 || Get a letter from the president ||
|-
| 102 || (35+67) Collect a presidential pension ||
|-
| 105 || Get a birthday card from the God-empress ||
|-
| 111 || Leave your own birthday party early by putting on a magic ring ||
|-
| 118 || Vote 100 times ||
|-
| 120 || Collect the pensions of all elected officials ||
|-
| 125 || Drink alcohol in an R-rated movie while getting a shingles vaccine from the president ||
|-
| 128 || Age rolls over, become a baby again ||

}}
|}

In the UK you get a telegram from the Queen on your 100th birthday. In the US you also get congratulated by the weatherman on the {{w|Today Show}}.

Bilbo Baggins Farewell Birthday Party took place on his eleventy-first (111th) birthday.

Obviously, the god-empress does not actually exist because this comic is visible to people under 45 years old.{{citation needed}}

128 is a reference to computers, though 128 would become either -128 or -0 (depending upon implementation) in signed 8-bit, which means you would have a weird experience of your next phase of life. For unsigned integers, the correct rollback number would be 256.

The title text mentions {{w|Jeanne Calment}}, who holds the record for the oldest person ever (there are biblical references to older people, such as {{w|Methuselah}}, who supposedly lived to 969, but their ages haven't been verified); she reportedly was age 122 when the died in 1997. Randall claims that if you match her age you get editorial control over her Wikipedia page. Not there's some controversy whether Calment actually claimed her mother's records (including birth certificate) as her own, and "editing wars" have been fought over her article.

Although if anyone managed to exceed her age, presumably they would get their own page (albeit that they should not be encouraged to {{w|Wikipedia:Editing Your Own Page|edit it}} themselves) and hers would cease to be as interesting, although that might depend on what use is made of the unparalleled editorial control now granted.

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

<big>Age Milestones</big> 
and associated privileges

16  Drive 
17  Attend R-rated movies alone 
18  Vote 
21  Buy alcohol 
25  Rent a car 
32  Run for senate 
35  Run for president 
40  Rent a flying car 
45  Learn about the God-Empress 
50  Join AARP 
52  Click to skip captchas 
55  Vote for God-Empress 
62  $80 National parks lifetime pass 
65  Eligible for Medicare 
67  Collect Social Security 
68  See "Skip Ads" button on live TV 
70  Run for God-Empress 
75  Ride any animal in a national park 
80  Eligible for MegaCare 
85  Click to toggle whether any ad is positive or negative about the product 
90  Click to make any movie R-rated 
100  Get a letter from the president 
102  (35+67) Collect a presidential pension 
105  Get a birthday card from the God-Empress 
111  Leave your own birthday party early by putting on a magic ring 
118  Vote 100 times 
120  Collect the pensions of all elected officials 
125  Drink alcohol in an R-rated movie while getting a shingles vaccine from the president 
128  Age rolls over, become a baby again

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] 
[[Category:Wikipedia]]

2637: Roman Numerals

2022-06-24T23:19:53Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ Also "5050" for double "L" might be mistaken for V̅L = five thousand and fifty -clearly the encoding system is far from perfect

{{comic
| number = 2637
| date = June 24, 2022
| title = Roman Numerals
| image = roman_numerals.png
| titletext = 100he100k out th1s 1nno5at4e str1ng en100o501ng 15e been 500e5e50op1ng! 1t's 6rtua100y perfe100t! ...hang on, what's a "virtuacy"?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a high school teacher for Latin and Maths - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic purposely confuses the symbols used as roman numeral, arabic numerals, and the latin alphabet. Converting the arabic numberal equation 1+1=2 into roman numerals becomes I+I = II but is then represented as 1+1=11. 2+2=4 becomes II+II=IV but roman number V is arabic numeral 5 so this becomes 11+11 = 15.

The numbers aren't numbers - they're the equivalent roman numeral

* 1 = I
* 5 = V
* 10 = X

The confusion comes about because many people write "1" the same as "I" -- the bars and seriphs only appear in printed output or computer screens.

So, the equations translated back into "normal" numerals are:

* I(1) + I(1) = II(2)
* II(2) + II(2) = IV(4)
* IV(4) + V(5) = IX(9)

For the title text, it's helpful to know 50 = L, 100 = C and 500 = D, which when applied, reads 'CheCk out thIs InnoVatIVe strIng enCoDIng IVe been DeVeLopIng! It's VIrtuaCy perfeCt! ...hang on, what's a "virtuacy"?' with virtuacy instead of virtually being produced because L+L=C (50+50=100).

Until the modern codification in general use today, Roman numerals weren't standardised that much and "LL" could have been a tolerated alternative to "C". For more on that, see {{w|Roman_numerals#Classical_Roman_numerals}}. Also, "5050" for double "L" might be mistaken for V̅L = five thousand and fifty -clearly the encoding system is far from perfect

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Cueball writing on a wall or a whiteboard.]
:1+1=11
:11+11=15
:15+5=110

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Remember, Roman numerals are archaic, so always replace them with modern ones when doing math.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Math]]

2637: Roman Numerals

2022-06-24T22:58:42Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ added 50=L because of the "l" in "developing"

2637: Roman Numerals

2022-06-24T22:54:46Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ For the title text it's helpful to know 100 = C

Talk:2607: Geiger Counter

2022-04-16T21:06:30Z

Cuvtixo: birds not getting electrocuted while sitting on power cables

Vanilla joke, but funny. [[User:Nafedalbi|Nafedalbi]] ([[User talk:Nafedalbi|talk]]) 18:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Nafedalbi
:It's Randall's "dad joke". [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:23, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
:Honestly, yeah. I impulsively went "wow... Randall's really jumped the stick figure shark." --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.121|172.70.110.121]] 06:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
::Not me. After plumbing the depths of Unicode and trying to describe a Taylor series expansion from square one, this is a welcome relief. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.81|172.70.214.81]] 07:34, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
: When does an ordinary joke become a dad joke? When it becomes apparent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.121|172.70.130.121]] 10:31, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
::When does it become apparent? After the delivery. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.223|172.69.33.223]] 17:30, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I added telegraph wires (UK-only term, possibly, and anachronistic as they are telephone cables, so feel free to change to be US-centric) and birds seem happy to sit on pole-suspended POTS cables as much as power-lines, so the linked heat-effect thing is definitely a minority necessity. I think it's just a perch. Though we probably have more signal-wires. Most(?) streets more than a few decades old have telegraph poles feeding wires to established properties (even if cable/FTTP has been dug into trenches) but mains electricity tends to have been subsurface for much longer, with only HV national/rural-area transmission grids up on pylons/poles. Obviously there ''are'' a lot more perching birds out in the countryside, where they may dominate (but still the 'telegraph' may follow road or rail routes to service the villages and isolated inhabitations along them) but you don't tend to see birds atop the larger lines at all... Too high up? ''Too'' hot? I've seen rooks/etc happily doing a Hitchcock upon a pylon itself, apparently enjoying the communal view. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.63|172.70.90.63]] 18:54, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

The title text joke may be understood more easily by reading "stood under" in place of "understood". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.124|162.158.107.124]] 19:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Living in Manhattan, you learn to notice when an area is full of bird droppings and avoid standing there. You also need to pay attention when parking your car. Certain lamp posts (where the lamp is cantilevered over the street) near Central Park often tend to have a large accumulation under them. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.178|108.162.246.178]] 19:47, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

I do not understand the joke in the title text, so if somebody could please write an explanation, that would be great.
Also, this is my first ever full comic description! Yay!
I don't know what categories this fits in, if somebody could also put those in that would be great. [[User:MrYellow04|MrYellow04]] ([[User talk:MrYellow04|talk]]) 19:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
:I suggest you stand under a wire with lots of birds on it for a while. It will hit you. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:32, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
:Dirty birdy in the sky, why you do that in my eye? Boy I'm glad that cows can't fly! [[User:TCMits|TCMits]] ([[User talk:TCMits|talk]]) 14:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Randall, come here. Yes, right there. Stand still. THWACK! THWACK THWACK THWACK THWACK THWACK! That is all, you may go now. 20:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

The explanation makes clear the side of the pun regarding the Geiger counting clicking, but for non-native English speakers, the phrase "it clicked" meaning "I understood" may need clarification. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.213|162.158.166.213]] 21:17, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

I thought it meant the birds were dangerously mutated because of the radioactivity, but now I understand. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.84|172.69.34.84]] 22:00, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
:Just make sure you don't open your mouth and tilt your head back. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.63|172.70.90.63]] 22:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Also possibly related to this news story https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/unprotected-russian-soldiers-disturbed-radioactive-dust-chernobyls-red-forest-2022-03-28/

Calling the pun a parody of another joke is weird. Jokes aren’t parodied. Parodies aren’t made of general things people say. It can be a ''play on'' that other joke, but not a ''parody'' of it. It’s not ''making fun'' of the other joke. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.69|108.162.245.69]] 11:24, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
:I somewhat agree with you. It's a 'type of' pun related to the Tom Swifty, which I edited in just now. I didn't actually remove the claim of parody. Perhaps someone else should also do that without hesitation... (...says I, unerringly!) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.43|162.158.159.43]] 15:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Dates for the Trinity Site Open House are April 2 and October 15 for 2022. Bring your own geiger counter. [[User:TCMits|TCMits]] ([[User talk:TCMits|talk]]) 14:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
:...and possibly a time-machine? ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.43|162.158.159.43]] 15:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

== Leonard Cohen reference? ==

It seems to me that the title text has to be somehow referencing one of Leonard Cohen’s better known songs, “Bird on the Wire”, from the very specific phrasing there. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.69|108.162.245.69]] 11:21, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
: It's a fairly common phrase. Including the 1990 Goldie Hawn / Mel Gibson
[https://g.co/kgs/QZ6LpN film]. [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 16:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

:I think it more likely there's some reference meant to birds not getting electrocuted while sitting on power cables-perhaps this is even in a "What If" book? I don't think very likely, but more likely than any Leonard Cohen reference. It's because "both the bird's feet are on the same potential, so electricity does not flow through the bird. The bird also offers greater resistance than the power cable, so the electricity continues to flow through the power cable." I figured this "explanation" fits here as well as anywhere. [[User:Cuvtixo|Cuvtixo]] ([[User talk:Cuvtixo|talk]]) 21:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2592: False Dichotomy

2022-03-11T21:18:03Z

Cuvtixo:

This is my second explanation ever, it probably isnt great but its good for others to have something to start from. if anybody who knows how to do the links and everything, for all of the characters and the fancy words, please do that. [[User:ElijahRock|ElijahRock]] ([[User talk:ElijahRock|talk]]) 17:57, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

And here I thought it was a pun on tracheotomy...

I’m pretty sure the cannibalism joke is based on the idea that we have to create a “false dichotomy” between humans and non-human living things, or else we can’t say that it’s okay to eat some things (maybe the line is drawn at plants, maybe at animals) but not others (a category that usually includes humans). [[User:Pablo360|Pablo360]] ([[User talk:Pablo360|talk]]) 19:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
:I don't think it's that specific. Often false dichotomies use something horrible or unthinkable as the alternative, and cannibalism is about as taboo as it gets. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]])

: no, that's delving too far into a fairly simple joke. "Embracing dichotomies and Cannibalism" is a false dichotomy itself! He could have said anything "skydiving", "poison swallowing", anything... It's the fact it's a false dichotomy used to justify false dichotomies. GET IT?!?!?

I think the title text joke is more based on "There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors." [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

2592: False Dichotomy

2022-03-11T21:14:42Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ replaced "with absolutely no visible reasoning behind it." why "visibly???" Also there is reasoning, he presents a false dichotomy as the reason why to "embrace dichotomies" The original writer doesn't get the joke here at all!

{{comic
| number = 2592
| date = March 11, 2022
| title = False Dichotomy
| image = false_dichotomy.png
| titletext = There are two types of dichotomy: False dichotomies, true dichotomies, and surprise trichotomies.
}}

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

A {{w|false dichotomy}} is a {{w|logical fallacy}} based on an incorrect perception of limited options. [[Cueball]] has apparently made one such error and is being called out by [[White Hat]] for it. Upon having this pointed out to him, Cueball says that we must '''embrace''' false dichotomies, because the '''only other option''' is {{w|cannibalism}}. This statement is another false dichotomy, as cannibalism is not actually recognized as an alternative to presenting false dichotomies{{Citation needed}}.

Cueball has thus created another false dichotomy to excuse his first.

The title text states that there are two kinds of dichotomies, making a dichotomy in itself. Due to three types of dichotomy being mentioned, and only two being foreshadowed, this statement is itself a surprise trichotomy (trichotomy being a {{w|portmanteau}} of "tri" meaning three and "dichotomy"). The title text is a variation of the [https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/There_Are_Two_Kinds_of_People_in_the_World "Two kinds of People"] joke. The classic math nerd variant is "There are three kinds of people in the world, those who can count, and those who can't." Alternatively, it may refer to a variation about {{w|base 2|binary}}. The original joke usually goes something like this: "There are 10 types of people: those who know binary, and those who don't." The variation is usually something like the following: "There are 10 types of people: those who know binary, and those who don't, and those who weren't expecting a {{w|base 3|ternary}} joke."

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

:[White Hat and Cueball are talking to each other.]
:White Hat: That's a false dichotomy!
:Cueball: Yes, but we have to embrace false dichotomies, because the only alternative is cannibalism.

{{comic discussion}}

2592: False Dichotomy

2022-03-11T21:11:59Z

Cuvtixo: /* Explanation */ replaced "makes another error, saying" Firstly its purposeful, not an error. He proposed another false dichotomy as an answer for why we "must embrace dichotomies" This is the whole point of the humor here!!!!

{{comic
| number = 2592
| date = March 11, 2022
| title = False Dichotomy
| image = false_dichotomy.png
| titletext = There are two types of dichotomy: False dichotomies, true dichotomies, and surprise trichotomies.
}}

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

A {{w|false dichotomy}} is a {{w|logical fallacy}} based on an incorrect perception of limited options. [[Cueball]] has apparently made one such error and is being called out by [[White Hat]] for it. Upon having this pointed out to him, Cueball says that we must '''embrace''' false dichotomies, because the '''only other option''' is {{w|cannibalism}}. This statement is another false dichotomy, as cannibalism is not actually recognized as an alternative to presenting false dichotomies{{Citation needed}}.

Cueball has thus created another false dichotomy, with absolutely no visible reasoning behind it.

The title text states that there are two kinds of dichotomies, making a dichotomy in itself. Due to three types of dichotomy being mentioned, and only two being foreshadowed, this statement is itself a surprise trichotomy (trichotomy being a {{w|portmanteau}} of "tri" meaning three and "dichotomy"). The title text is a variation of the [https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/There_Are_Two_Kinds_of_People_in_the_World "Two kinds of People"] joke. The classic math nerd variant is "There are three kinds of people in the world, those who can count, and those who can't." Alternatively, it may refer to a variation about {{w|base 2|binary}}. The original joke usually goes something like this: "There are 10 types of people: those who know binary, and those who don't." The variation is usually something like the following: "There are 10 types of people: those who know binary, and those who don't, and those who weren't expecting a {{w|base 3|ternary}} joke."

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

:[White Hat and Cueball are talking to each other.]
:White Hat: That's a false dichotomy!
:Cueball: Yes, but we have to embrace false dichotomies, because the only alternative is cannibalism.

{{comic discussion}}

2592: False Dichotomy

2022-03-11T21:09:48Z

Cuvtixo: replaced "false" with "another false dichotomy". The point is not that its false, but it's a false dichotomy presented as an answer to "embracing dichotomies"

{{comic
| number = 2592
| date = March 11, 2022
| title = False Dichotomy
| image = false_dichotomy.png
| titletext = There are two types of dichotomy: False dichotomies, true dichotomies, and surprise trichotomies.
}}

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

A {{w|false dichotomy}} is a {{w|logical fallacy}} based on an incorrect perception of limited options. [[Cueball]] has apparently made one such error and is being called out by [[White Hat]] for it. Upon having this pointed out to him, Cueball makes another error, saying that we must '''embrace''' false dichotomies, because the '''only other option''' is {{w|cannibalism}}. This statement is another false dichotomy, as cannibalism is not actually recognized as an alternative to presenting false dichotomies{{Citation needed}}.

Cueball has thus created another false dichotomy, with absolutely no visible reasoning behind it.

The title text states that there are two kinds of dichotomies, making a dichotomy in itself. Due to three types of dichotomy being mentioned, and only two being foreshadowed, this statement is itself a surprise trichotomy (trichotomy being a {{w|portmanteau}} of "tri" meaning three and "dichotomy"). The title text is a variation of the [https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/There_Are_Two_Kinds_of_People_in_the_World "Two kinds of People"] joke. The classic math nerd variant is "There are three kinds of people in the world, those who can count, and those who can't." Alternatively, it may refer to a variation about {{w|base 2|binary}}. The original joke usually goes something like this: "There are 10 types of people: those who know binary, and those who don't." The variation is usually something like the following: "There are 10 types of people: those who know binary, and those who don't, and those who weren't expecting a {{w|base 3|ternary}} joke."

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

:[White Hat and Cueball are talking to each other.]
:White Hat: That's a false dichotomy!
:Cueball: Yes, but we have to embrace false dichotomies, because the only alternative is cannibalism.

{{comic discussion}}

2189: Old Game Worlds

2019-08-14T05:28:43Z

Cuvtixo: expressing some disappointment of no Atari 2600 games or older...

{{comic
| number = 2189
| date = August 14, 2019
| title = Old Game Worlds
| image = old_game_worlds.png
| titletext = Ok, how many coins for a cinnamon roll?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a VERY OLD GAME CHARACTER. What the hell is a Panera? Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic explores the difference between the real world, where artificial structures require constant upkeep and communities change with time, and the digital worlds of video games, where everything is static until the plot demands otherwise. Although ''online'' games do require server maintenance by the owners, offline games are - and always have been - perpetual existences, unchanging so long as the data is intact.

As the narration explores this incongruity, and theorizes about the idea of it not being so, the comic displays the alternative with the ubiquitous video game - ''Super Mario Bros.'' - as an example. Mario arrives in World 1-1 to find a Goomba expressing surprise that the plumber has deigned to return to the place where his '''first''' journey began. As he advances, he finds both signs of progress - a telephone pole, an e-scooter - and signs of disrepair - damaged Warp Pipes, dismounted ? Blocks. At World 1-Castle, he finds Toad - usually warning him that the princess is being held elsewhere - informing him that the castle has been remodeled into a Parena.

The title-text abruptly switches to Mario's acceptance of the changes to World 1-1, and deciding to make the most of it by purchasing a meal. "Coins" are the ubiquitous currency of the Mushroom Kingdom and most other locations Mario visits in the ''Mario'' series, taking the form of large nondescript golden circles, usually with a rectangular indent on the sides.

Some readers might wonder why there's no mention of even older games like Space Invaders and Pacman, but these games were so abstracted, so pixelated; that there's never an expectation that anything in them would age or deteriorate. Likewise with older text games like the Zork series or their predecessor, Colossal Caves. So they are sadly ignored on the timeline of games.
==Transcript==