explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2294: Coronavirus Charts

2020-04-17T15:13:32Z

DanR:

It must be because there aren't any numbers along the axes [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.104|172.69.34.104]] 23:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I want to know if this is a random sketch with silly labels, or if Randall looked up actual data to plot it. It seems to be a combination of 4 metrics which might be reported somewhere (search popularity, death rate, total reported cases, and number of tests performed). I suspect there aren't many countries/regions for which all 4 are available, but it's conceivable that someone's published enough stats to draw this crazy plot. ¬[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 01:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:What would negative results in a google search be? How do you make them a graph axis? I think its just random labels on graphs. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 05:12, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
::It doesn't say negative test results for a google search. It's the number of people who've tested negative for the disease, divided by the number of people who've searched google for it. I'm moderately surprised that nobody's yet started a list of links to various data soources that could be used to plot this graph. Does Google provide per-country search frequencies? ¬[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 09:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:::[https://trends.google.com/trends/explore/GEO_MAP/1587034200?hl=en-US&tz=420&date=today+3-m&q=covid&sni=3 Google Trends] is always normalized so that the data returned is in [0, 100], and denormalizing out of relative values back to raw numbers is almost impossible. The best you can do is get a unitless proportion by comparing to a second search term chosen as one which doesn't vary much over time. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.203|172.68.142.203]] 10:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
::::From the docs, looks like that data is simply scaled. "A value of 50 means that the term is half as popular [as its most popular day]". Using that 0-100 number as if it were an actual number of people should give the same graph, just with the units on the X-axis offset by some value. Positioning the graphs relative to each other would be harder, as the "Interest by region" chart doesn't follow the same rules; we're lacking good data for the ratio between one country and another. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 13:48, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Is the y-axis ''(death_today + cases_aweekago)/capita'' or ''death_today + (cases_aweekago/capita)''? This would hugely effect the weighting of the two terms. (Parentheses in second interpretation are for clarity only, I know they change nothing mathematically.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.9|172.69.54.9]] 09:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:Perhaps it is intentionally ambiguous to support the main point about bad charts. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.203|172.68.142.203]] 10:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:I assumed the latter; but the page here seems to assume the former. Either way, one of the results will dwarf the other. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 13:48, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

The 19th COVID19 comic... :-) almost in a row. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:40, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I tried my hand at graphing the data for the United States, in this spreadsheet here: [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1W1ttxu9Dths5uOLOzk7VHd78hXG0EgeMkW5TCtdgtqw/edit?usp=sharing]. If anybody is motivated enough to add data from other countries, go ahead. As it is, this data doesn't really look anything like what Randall graphed, making me think that he just made up the lines. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.82|172.68.174.82]] 16:42, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:[https://imgur.com/a/hHc1j7S OH NO!] [[Special:Contributions/172.68.143.96|172.68.143.96]] 18:43, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:: Well, since the x axis doesn't graph time, there's no reason for the trend lines to be functions of x— he just chose to draw them that way. Both x and y are independent functions of t. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.70|172.68.174.70]] 19:11, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I suddenly wondered if the graph means negative test results to date; or the new ones returned today. Same for the Google results, I guess. The Y-axis explicitly says it's talking about the total number of cases and today's death count, but the X-axis doesn't say for either of its values. And then that gave me the idea that "total" on the Y axis might actually mean "worldwide". So now I'm reading the Y-axis label as being (today's deaths in $country)+(worldwide infection count/population of $country). Maybe that makes the graph more useful. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 22:36, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

So did this comic not come out on 4/15 or is that just me? It seemed like all of yesterday was still the Conway Memorial comic. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.167|172.69.63.167]] 22:48, 16 April 2020 (UTC) Acolyte
:i thought so too! is this the first time in ages that randall missed a day? maybe someone wants to add this to a trivia section. [[User:Gir|-- //gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 23:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
::I saw this comic on 4/15 (late in the afternoon/early evening PDT). According to Randall [https://xkcd.com/archive/ here], it was posted on 4/15. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.104|172.69.34.104]] 00:19, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
:::looking at the first capture in the internet archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20200415230401/https://xkcd.com/2294/), it was indeed posted on the 15th -- albeit at 23:04:01. [[User:Gir|-- //gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 13:53, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the remark that logarithmic scale axes "would not have evenly spaced ticks as shown", as it is incorrect. when the marks are 10, 100, 1000, ... the marks are evenly spaced. [[User:Gir|-- //gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 23:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

For those of you interested in the difficulties experienced by epidemiology under the embarrassment of riches allowed by contemporary big data, please see [https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/severity/global_cfr_estimates.html this working draft on the sufficiency of testing.] [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.146|172.69.22.146]] 23:59, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

There's a [https://www.clevelandfed.org/newsroom-and-events/publications/cfed-district-data-briefs/cfddb-20200408-getting-to-accuracy.aspx graph] from an economist at the Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank that may have been an inspiration for this comic--it has log scales and a difficult to decipher X-axis that is only vaguely time-like. Also [https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/10/a-better-way-to-visualize-the-spread-of-coronavirus-in-different-countries/ discussion here].
--[[User:DanR|DanR]] ([[User talk:DanR|talk]]) 15:13, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

1731: Wrong

2016-09-10T17:49:40Z

DanR: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1731
| date = September 9, 2016
| title = Wrong
| image = wrong.png
| titletext = Hang on, I just remembered another thing I'm right about. See...
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|More on White Hat's new theory from the last panel. The abstraction of the particle idea not explained.}}

All objects on Earth are matter, meaning they are made of {{w|Atom|atoms}}, which are specifically '''not''' made up of {{w|antimatter}}. Atoms, while once (when they were named) believed to be the smallest unit of matter, are now known to be made up of {{w|Proton|protons}}, {{w|Neutron|neutrons}} and {{w|Electron|electrons}}. Protons and neutrons are in turn made up of {{w|Quark|quarks}}. Quarks come in six different "{{w|Flavour (particle physics)|flavors}}" (up, down, top, bottom, charm, and strange), with protons and neutrons being made of the first two types. Each quark also has a corresponding {{w|Antiparticle|antiparticle}}, antiquark, which would make up antiprotons and antineutrons.

[[White Hat]] and [[Megan]] appear to be discussing the topics of {{w|Antimatter|antimatter}} and subatomic particles. White Hat makes the assertion that we (referring to people and objects) are made partially of antimatter, because, as he claims, a proton (one of the particles which makes up all matter) is made of two quarks and an antiquark. In fact, protons are made up of two up quarks and a down quark. He is making the simple mistake of mixing up the difference between flavors of quarks with the difference between particles and antiparticles. He continues to elaborate on his idea by mentioning neutrons, which are made of two down quarks and an up quark, but, by his reasoning, they would be made of two antiquarks and a quark.

(White Hat may have incorrectly remembered that, while the valence quarks in a proton are all matter, quantum field theory says that protons also contain an indefinite number of "virtual" anti-quarks, quarks, and gluons. See this video ''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LraNu_78sCwv What are Quarks?]'' about this. His final comment could be referring to the ontological debate over whether virtual particles are in some sense real or only an artifact of perturbation theory.)

When Megan (accurately) doubts this claim, White Hat takes out his smartphone to look it up, in order to show Megan that he is correct. However, upon seeing results (from Wikipedia or another site), he realizes that he was in fact '''wrong''' (hence the title). Not wanting to be incorrect or give up his position in the discussion, he convinces himself that he wasn't actually wrong, (he mentally deletes the realization that he was wrong as shown in the next panel) and instead completely changes the topic (...) to try and re-frame it so he may in some convoluted way not be completely wrong.

It is rather common to not admit fault, the whole topic of this comic, and instead trying to maintain an air on infallibility and intelligence. Some people are just too prideful to admit that they are inherently fallible; White Hat is one of those people, as depicted in several of his earlier appearances (see [[#Trivia|trivia section]]). [[Randall]] uses this comic to criticize people who are unable to put aside their ego and re-assess what they know in the face of empirical data; such thinking flies directly against scientific rigor (adding an extra layer of irony to the situation, since White Hat and Megan are discussing a ''scientific'' topic). This method had already been called ''wrong'' in [[803: Airfoil]].

White Hat's new topic, where he can be right, includes the {{w|Quantum field theory}}, a very complicated field, which it is likely that Megan do not know so much about (inferred by the fact that she was not quite sure about the anti-quarks). So he could maybe tell her something she could not refute, and then claim to be right. Megan, however, recognizes exactly what he is trying to do, and can only sigh in response to his failed efforts.

In the title text, White Hat just remembers another thing he's right about. This shows that he is not interested in a discussion but only in being right, and he proceeds to prove his point by explaining this other topic (hinted to at the end of the title text). This bears some similarity to [[386: Duty Calls]], in which [[Cueball]] stays up late correcting someone on the Internet.

==Transcript==
:[White Hat is walking beside Megan, index finger extended]
:White Hat: Really, we're all made of antimatter. A proton consists of two quarks and an antiquark.
:Megan: ...I don't think that's right.

:[White Hat stops to take out his smartphone tapping on it. Megan stops and turns towards him.]
:White Hat: Sure it is. Neutrons are, too.
:Megan: Do you mean "up" and "down" quarks? I think antiquarks are a different thing.
:White Hat: No, let me show you...
:Tap
:Tap

:[Zooming in on White Hat's head, while he is holding his phone up looking at it. He is thinking as shown with a bubbly thought bubble.]
:White Hat (thinking): I'm...wrong?

:[White Hat has lowered the phone. He is still thinking the same but the text has been scribbled out.]
:White Hat (thinking): I'm...wrong?

:[White Hat purges the thought from his mind]
:White Hat (thinking): ...

:[Similar setting as in the first panel, but in a full row wide panel, and White Hat is still holding his smartphone]
:White Hat: Really, the whole idea of "particles" is inaccurate. These are abstractions arising quantum field theory, but what most people don't realize is...
:Megan: <small>*Sigh*</small>

==Trivia==
*This comic could be seen as a follow up to [[1605: DNA]]. Going back through the last White Hat appearances it turns out that DNA, 13 White Hat comics back, is actually the last where White Hat has been the fall guy. For instance he has the opposite role in [[1640: Super Bowl Context]], and he is not "the stupid guy" in the comics between that and this one, but often just another guy than Cueball. Further back in [[1255: Columbus]] he was again the fall guy, and again it reminds a bit about this comic. Actually Megan even begins that comic with a *sigh* like she finished this one.
*Quarks are also referenced in [[1418: Horse]], [[1621: Fixion]] and the first time they were mentioned, in [[474: Turn-On]], the up and down flavor was also mentioned.
*Antimatter is also referenced in [[683: Science Montage]], [[826: Guest Week: Zach Weiner (SMBC)]] and [[1621: Fixion]] as well as being the subject of the [[what if?]] ''{{what if|114|Antimatter}}''. It was also mentioned in another ''what if?'': ''{{what if|79|Lake Tea}}''.
*A similar thought process where earlier thoughts are scribbled out was used by Cueball in [[1650: Baby]], but for different reasons.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Smartphones]]

1731: Wrong

2016-09-09T18:55:54Z

DanR:

{{comic
| number = 1731
| date = September 9, 2016
| title = Wrong
| image = wrong.png
| titletext = Hang on, I just remembered another thing I'm right about. See...
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|The new theory White Hat mentions in last panel not explained. Example of early comic with similar White Hat behavior (i.e. older than the examples below).}}

All objects on Earth are matter, meaning they are made of {{w|Atom|atoms}}, which are specifically '''not''' made up of {{w|antimatter}}. Atoms, while once (when they were named) believed to be the smallest unit of matter, are now known to be made up of {{w|Proton|protons}}, {{w|Neutron|neutrons}} and {{w|Electron|electrons}}. Protons and neutrons are in turn made up of {{w|Quark|quarks}}. Quarks come in six different "{{w|Flavour (particle physics)|flavors}}" (up, down, top, bottom, charm, and strange), with protons and neutrons being made of the first two types. Each quark also has a corresponding {{w|Antiparticle|antiparticle}}, antiquark, which would make up antiprotons and antineutrons.

[[White Hat]] and [[Megan]] appear to be discussing the topics of {{w|Antimatter|antimatter}} and subatomic particles. White Hat makes the assertion that we (referring to people and objects) are made partially of antimatter, because, as he claims, a proton (one of the particles which makes up all matter) is made of two quarks and an antiquark. In fact, protons are made up of two up quarks and a down quark. He is making the simple mistake of mixing up the difference between flavors of quarks with the difference between particles and antiparticles. He continues to elaborate on his idea by mentioning neutrons, which are made of two down quarks and an up quark, but, by his reasoning, they would be made of two antiquarks and and a quark.

When Megan (accurately) doubts this claim, White Hat takes out his smartphone to look it up, in order to show Megan that he is correct. However, upon seeing results (from Wikipedia or another site), he realizes that he was in fact '''wrong''' (hence the title). Not wanting to be incorrect or give up his position in the discussion, he convinces himself that he wasn't actually wrong, (he mentally deletes the realization that he was wrong as shown in the next panel) and instead completely changes the topic (...) to try and re-frame it so he may in some convoluted way not be completely wrong. White Hat may have been incorrectly remembering that, while the valence quarks in a proton are all matter, quantum field theory says that protons also contain an indefinite number of "virtual" anti-quarks, quarks, and gluons.

It is rather common to not admit fault, the whole topic of this comic, and instead trying to maintain an air on infallibility and intelligence. Some people are just too prideful to admit that they are inherently fallible; White Hat is one of those people, as depicted in several of his earlier appearances.

Megan, however, recognizes exactly what he is trying to do, and can only sigh in response to his failed efforts.

In the title text, White Hat just remembers another thing he's right about. This shows that he is not interested in a discussion but only in being right, and he proceeds to prove his point by explaining this other topic (hinted to at the end of the title text). He most likely will simply be wrong again, as per the title of this comic.

This comic could be seen as a follow up to [[1605: DNA]]. Going back through the last White Hat appearances it turns out that DNA, 13 comics back, is actually the last where White Hat has been the fall guy. For instance he has the opposite role in [[1640: Super Bowl Context]], and he is not "the stupid guy" in the 9 comics between that and this one, but often just another guy than [[Cueball]].

Quarks are also referenced in [[1418: Horse]], [[1621: Fixion]] and the first time they were mentioned, in [[474: Turn-On]], the up and down flavor was also mentioned. Antimatter is also referenced in [[683: Science Montage]], [[826: Guest Week: Zach Weiner (SMBC)]] and [[1621: Fixion]] as well as being the subject of the [[what if?]] ''{{what if|114|Antimatter}}''. It was also mentioned in another ''what if?'': ''{{what if|79|Lake Tea}}''.

A similar thought process where earlier thoughts are scribbled out was used by Cueball in [[1650: Baby]], but for different reasons. It also bears some similarity to [[386: Duty Calls]], in which Cueball stays up late correcting someone on the Internet.

==Transcript==
:[White Hat is walking beside Megan, index finger extended]
:White Hat: Really, we're all made of antimatter. A proton consists of two quarks and an antiquark.
:Megan: ...I don't think that's right.

:[White Hat stops to take out his smartphone tapping on it. Megan stops and turns towards him.]
:White Hat: Sure it is. Neutrons are, too.
:Megan: Do you mean "up" and "down" quarks? I think antiquarks are a different thing.
:White Hat: No, let me show you...
:Tap
:Tap

:[Zooming in on White Hat's head, while he is holding his phone up looking at it. He is thinking as shown with a bubbly thought bubble.]
:White Hat (thinking): I'm...wrong?

:[White Hat has lowered the phone. He is still thinking the same but the text has been scribbled out.]
:White Hat (thinking): I'm...wrong?

:[White Hat purges the thought from his mind]
:White Hat (thinking): ...

:[Similar setting as in the first panel, but in a full row wide panel, and White Hat is still holding his smartphone]
:White Hat: Really, the whole idea of "particles" is inaccurate. These are abstractions arising quantum field theory, but what most people don't realize is...
:Megan: <small>*Sigh*</small>

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Smartphones]]

Talk:1469: UV

2015-01-06T15:55:55Z

DanR:

Weird turn of event. Going from a comic about how disgusting your bathroom is, to how stupid the two characters are concerning insurance. Maybe this is just to show what happens to your brain once you realize how much dirt etc. are on your bathroom surfaces. And also to warn you not to look into it with a UV light/black light. I think Randall did this and regretted it - although it did give him "easy" inspiration for this comic :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Is it just me, or this strip is kinda similiar to #860? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.89|108.162.254.89]] 19:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
-It is, at least the first bit.

IMHO, this would have been better without the second half. It's reminding me a bit of 78. Here's hoping Randall throws off his Dadaist mood... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.156|108.162.238.156]] 01:50, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I was expecting this would be a reference to some movie. Isn't there any movie quote on the lines of "we <action> and <action> and never stop!"? [[Special:Contributions/188.114.98.220|188.114.98.220]] 13:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I think the two halves are tied together by a failure to think through the consequences, first not thinking through the UV light, and second not thinking through the claiming the insurance far enough to even have insurance. So the second half is a kind of commentary on how bad an idea the UV light was, and the title text is a commentary on how bad an idea the second half is.
--[[User:DanR|DanR]] ([[User talk:DanR|talk]]) 15:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)