explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2074: Airplanes and Spaceships

2018-11-29T12:19:53Z

Needforsuv:

{{comic
| number = 2074
| date = November 19, 2018
| title = Airplanes and Spaceships
| image = airplanes_and_spaceships.png
| titletext = Despite having now taken three months longer than the airplane people, we're making disappointingly little progress toward the obvious next stage of vehicle: The Unobtanium-hulled tunneling ship from the 2003 film 'The Core.'
}}

==Explanation==

This comic is pointing out that more time has elapsed since the first spaceship flight, than previously elapsed between the first airplane flight and the first spaceship flight. (This was at the time of release of this comic on November 19th of 2018, a month before the 115th anniversary for the first airplane flight).

Airplanes and spaceships are often considered to be related vehicles, under the term aerospace, with degrees in aerospace fields often having aeronautics (airplanes) or astronautics (spaceships) tracks. The jump in technology and performance between the first airplane and the first spaceship was enormous: the ''{{w|Wright Flyer}}'' had a max speed of 30 mph (48 km/h), and the first flights reached only about 30 feet (9 m) above ground, with distances of only 120 to 850 feet (260 m). In comparison the {{w|Vostok 1}} mission of {{w|Yuri Gagarin}} reached orbital velocity of 17,500 mph (28,000 km/h), a minimum altitude of 91 miles (480,480 ft; 146 km), and traveled once around the earth (about 25,000 miles or 40,000 km). This represents an increase in performance of between about 600 and 150,000 times.

By contrast, an equal amount of time has passed between the first spaceflight and the publish date of this comic, but aeronautical performance has not improved much at all. Although the Apollo mission broke speed and altitude records, and later space missions extended the distance traveled in a single flight by sustaining Earth orbit for longer, the overall technology and performance is not much different than that used during the first space mission.

It is one of the typical takes by [[Randall]] to try to [[:Category:Comics to make one feel old|make people feel old]]. Flight seemed old news when the Apollo mission started, so people who lived through the space race, will now feel very old since they were alive back when the space race is new, and that is now old news. This take is also used in the title text.

The title text refers to the 2003 film ''{{w|The Core}}''. In this film, there is an instability in the Earth's magnetic field, so a team of scientists attempt to drill to the center of the Earth and set off nuclear explosions to restart the rotation of the Earth's core. To do this, they travel in a vehicle made of "Unobtainium" that can withstand the heat and pressure within the Earth's crust. Randall is sad to report that there is little progress being made on creating this vehicle. Incidentally, ''The Core'' is a film which represents science and engineering wrong in many, many aspects. There is a long list of flaws.[http://geolor.com/The_Core_Movie-Facts_and_Fiction.htm][https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/goofs][http://intuitor.com/moviephysics/core.html][https://www.moviemistakes.com/film3100] For instance, if a material is resistant to the extreme heat and pressure of the Earth's core, then the significantly cooler and less forceful techniques of human metallurgy would certainly not be able to work that material at all, let alone craft it into a functional hull for a vehicle.

Randall makes sure to mention that the movie is from 2003, so 15 years old. Many people are surprised when realizing that a movie they saw "recently" is now so old that children born that year no longer need their parents guidance when watching it.

The Core was already used as the main plot starter in [[673: The Sun]] back in 2009, and earlier in 2018 it was mentioned in the title text of [[2011: Newton's Trajectories]]. That Randall has a great interest in the Earths cores is shown in several comics, and may explain why he continues to return to the movie, even though he probably (taken from his comics mentioning it) thinks is a bad movie. See a recent comic here, [[2058: Rock Wall]] and of course [[913: Core]].

==Transcript==
:[A timeline is shown with three dots on it. Each dot has a label beneath the dot, and the two intervals between the dots are also labeled, with lines indicating which dots are belonging to that label.]

:;Dot 1:
::December 17, 1903
::First human airplane flight

:;Dot 2:
::April 12, 1961
::First human spaceflight

:;Dot 3:
::Today

:;Interval 1-2: 57 years 4 months
:;Interval 2-3: 57 years 7 months

:[Caption beneath the frame:]
:Spaceships are now older than airplanes were when we flew our first spaceships.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Timelines]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Comics to make one feel old]]
[[Category:Fiction]]

1738: Moon Shapes

2018-03-30T04:15:48Z

Needforsuv: /* Table of the images */

{{comic
| number = 1738
| date = September 26, 2016
| title = Moon Shapes
| image = moon_shapes.png
| titletext = Whenever I see a picture of the moon where the points go more than halfway around, I assume it's being eclipsed by one of those Independence Day ships and interpret the rest of the image in light of that.
}}

==Explanation==
The Earth's {{w|Moon}}, being the most prominent object in the night sky, is a frequent subject of art; particularly art depicting a nighttime scene. Unfortunately, the moon often appears in works of art in ways that are very dramatic and would not be realistically possible. It may be done out of ignorance, or knowingly by taking {{w|artistic license}}. As someone interested in and who has worked in astronomy, this likely bothers [[Randall]].

The Moon is well known to have "{{w|lunar phase|phases}}" describing what portion of the visible surface of the moon is illuminated by sunlight and highly visible, and what portion is dark, and generally only slightly visible when the moon appears while the sun is also up. These phases progress between "New" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely dark) and "Full" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely illuminated, appearing as a full disk as viewed from Earth). Mid-way between those extreme phases is a "Quarter" Moon, when exactly one-half of the surface facing Earth is completely dark, the light half being one-quarter of the total Moon's surface.

Because the Moon is approximately spherical, its illuminated side appears as "crescent" in shape as it progresses from New to First Quarter phase. As it progresses from First Quarter to Full phase, observers on Earth see a Waxing "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gibbous Gibbous] Moon (which just means that the dark portion has formed a crescent). One can imagine this like a globe on which you draw a straight line from the north pole to the south pole down the center of the side facing you (appearing to create two semi-circles); upon rotating the globe, the line would become rounded as it moved away creating a crescent on the side the line was moved towards. Because of the geometry involved, a line connecting the two points (horns) of a Crescent Moon (or of the darkened crescent inverse of a Gibbous Moon) must be a diameter of the moon (i.e. it must pass through the center of the circle).

The deliberate misidentification of a Waxing Gibbous Moon ("waxing" means going from new to full; that is increasing in illuminated area) as a "wax gibbon" (a Southeast Asian ape made of a nonpolar solid) is a source of humor in this comic. This is probably a reference to H.P. Lovecraft, who had several of his stories take place under "a gibbous moon" for dramatic effect, or even more likely a reference to the {{w|Discworld}} by {{w|Terry Pratchett}}, often referenced in xkcd (as in [[1498: Terry Pratchett]]). In the witch series the Gibbous Moon is mentioned several times as the most magic, rather than the more often used Crescent or Full Moon.

Further, because the light portion of the Moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the Moon is in the sky at the same time as the Sun), the light side of the Moon will always be facing towards the Sun. If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the Moon must always be on the half of the Moon that faces the horizon (there are points during the daytime when the orientation can go the other way); however, because of the [http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf moon tilt illusion] it is possible for the light portion of the moon to appear to point up. The [https://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt illusion] is generally not as severe and may only last a few hours after sunset.

It is worth noting that while the Moon's dark portion blends imperceptibly with the dark night sky, it is still a solid body. Therefore it would be impossible to see more distant objects such as stars "through" the dark portion of the Moon's circumference. This is most dramatically exemplified by a {{w|solar eclipse}} during which the Moon passes in front of the Sun and is therefore completely dark (the Sun is lighting only the far side), but the Moon's circumference still blocks a circular portion of the Sun's light. Therefore, if we were to see any lights in the part of the sky the dark side of the Moon blocks, they would need to be from sources between us and the Moon's surface, such as a nuclear war on the moon.

This comic lists some of the some common mistakes. In some cases, a depiction may be unrealistic in multiple ways - for example, the {{w|Flag of Tunisia}} has both unrealistic horns and a star visible between the horns, while {{w|File:Moon tarot charles6.jpg|the Charles VI tarot}} shows a Moon with over-long horns pointing towards the horizon.

In the title text, Randall is referring to the movie "{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}" and how one of the alien's ships (in the movie) 'eclipses' part of the Moon. He says that if the points go halfway or longer around the Moon, then he imagines it's caused by an alien ship and interprets the entire piece of art in that context (i.e. aliens are about to attack those shepherds!).

==Table of the images==
{| class="wikitable"
|+Explanation of individual items in the list
!#
!Image
!Shape
!Rating
!Text
!Explanation
!Examples
|-
|1 || [[File:moon1.jpg]]|| Full moon || Normal || rowspan="3" | "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever || Reality. The full moon cannot really be drawn incorrectly, and will look like this whenever it is up at night. ||
|-
|2 ||[[File:moon2.jpg]]|| Gibbous moon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|3 ||[[File:moon4a.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns away from horizon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|4 ||[[File:moon3.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns towards horizon || Not normal || Not possible at night || This can only happen when the sun is above the horizon. Since a crescent moon means that the Sun and the Moon are relatively close in the sky, the Moon would not be visible with a naked eye, its light completely outshone by the sunlight. Randall comments that this is possible only during the daytime, marking it wrong as the background would not be black. According to this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase#/media/File:Moon_phases_en.jpg image] on Wikipedia's article on {{w|lunar phase}} "Phases of the Moon, as seen looking southward from the {{w|northern hemisphere}}. The {{w|southern hemisphere}} will see each phase rotated through 180°". This might seem to indicate that shape #3, which is visible in for instance USA where Randall lives should be seen like #4 in the southern part of South America, also at night! However, because the light portion of the moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the moon is in the sky at the same time as the sun), the light side of the moon will always be facing towards the sun. If the moon is in the night sky, the sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the moon must always be on the half of the moon that faces the horizon; However, in the case of twilight after sunset and shortly after (like the example painting), due to the [https://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt][http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf illusion] the bright side of the moon may appear to point up relative to an observer on the ground (although not to the extent show in the comic). But as the text from Randall points out there can be times during daytime when the orientation can go the other way. But then the background should not be black. Originally Randall wrote a different (wrong) sentence here and then corrected to the one currently explained, see [[#Trivia|trivia]] below.|| Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Passeio ao Crepúsculo.jpg|Landscape with Couple Walking and Crescent Moon}}
|-
|5 ||[[File:moon5a.jpg]]|| Wide crescent-like moon where the horns don't connect through a diameter || Not normal|| rowspan="2" | Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun) || This is only possible during a partial solar eclipse or the start of an annular eclipse (in which cases the lit portion is not the moon, but the sun), or else if the Earth is casting its partial shadow on the Moon, a penumbral lunar eclipse. Randall labels the lunar eclipse "dubious", since the shadow during penumbral eclipse would be much lighter than shown here, in fact barely visible as a slight darkening of the Moon's surface. The Earth's shadow, being very large, would also likely cast a less-rounded edge than depicted here. ||
|-
|6 ||[[File:moon6.jpg]]|| Narrow crescent-like moon where the points don't connect through a diameter || Not normal || This situation is even harder to create than the previous one - unlike the previous example, here the diameter of the entire shadow is clear, and is too small for the Earth's shadow in a lunar eclipse. A huge ''Independence Day'' spaceship (as per the Title text) might be the right size. It does however resemble a partial {{w|annular eclipse}} if you imagine that the black area is the moon covering up the white sun. || {{w|File:AlcoholicBluesCoverVonTilze.jpg|Alcoholic Blues}}. Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Starry Night - Google Art Project.jpg|Starry Night}}, but turned the other way.
|-
|7 ||[[File:moon7.jpg]]|| Crescent moon blocking stars|| Normal || Looks OK || Reality (as in image 3) with stars shown around the moon, but not any inside the sphere of the sky that would be blocked by the dark (but still present) side of the moon. (See [[#Trivia|trivia]] below though). ||
|-
|8 ||[[File:moon8.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with stars between horns || Not normal || There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface || Many people (including artists) seem to forget that the dark portion of the moon is still a solid object that we can not see through.[http://imgur.com/S30fuOj][https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a7/7d/4a/a77d4ae9e3549e36edd350246d33700c.jpg] If stars are visible, there are either one or more holes in the moon, or the light-source is actually on the moon, such as nuclear explosions. As the {{w|Star and Crescent}}, the image is sometimes considered a symbol of Islam, although it's relatively recent and there's no traditional basis for putting the star ''between'' the horns - as originally used on the Flag of Turkey, the star appears in a realistic position. The flags of Algeria, Tunisia and some other countries show the star in the dark part of the moon. In the first Edwin Blashfield, {{w|File:Edwin Blashfield - Spring Scattering Stars.jpg|Spring Scattering Stars}} a God is standing on the moon throwing stars down, but then these stars are actually in front of the moon and are good. Nothing in the image suggest that stars can be seen through the dark part of the moon. Also the {{w|DreamWorks Animation}} logo shows no stars. Although both show persons sitting on the seal, this is thus also clearly not an effort to make it look real. But in neither case stars can be seen in the moon. This is also the case for the live [https://youtu.be/xPpy8mYHQps?t=11 DreamWorks logo from movies]. Here there are stars in the background but they are not inside the moon as [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/f/f5/1738_Moon_Shapes_DreamWorks_logo_With_Moon_Circle.PNG can be seen here]. || An example can be found in the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/2/26/1738_Moon_Shapes_Mole_Car_Moon_With_Stars_Inside.png image on the last page] of [https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-mole-got-his-car/dp/B0000CKRB4 How mole got his car] with the {{w|Mole (Zdeněk Miler character)|Mole}} from the carton series by {{w|Zdeněk Miler}}. This is not just showing the stars inside from the last shape, but also the type of moon shown in the sixth image.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the panel:]
:'''Interpreting the shape of the moon in art'''
:[The left part of the panel shows a two column chart is shown with labels above the columns. The left side shows the moons shape as white on a black square. These types of moons could be seen in certain art pieces. The right side saying whether this is normal or not as indicated with a green check mark or a red X. Right of the second column there are explanations of why the specific type of moon is marked as it is and what it could be called or how it could be possible even with the red X. The upper three moons have one common explanation as indicated with a bracket that covers all three with the text on the middle part of the bracket. Similarly moon five and six also have a bracket and only one explanation.]
:Shape Normal?

:[Shape #1-3 shows a white circle (full moon), a more than half full moon (Gibbon) and a thin seal at the bottom right of the square.]
:<big>✓</big>
:<big>✓</big> "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever
:<big>✓</big>

:[Shape #4 same as #3 but with the seal in the upper part of the square.]
:<big>X</big> Not possible at night

:[Shape #5-6 shows a full moon with a circular section taken out of the right side and a seal that goes almost all the way around the circumference of the moon with almost a full circle taken out of the top left part of the moon.]
:<big>X</big>
:<big>X</big> Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun)

:[Shape #7 same as #3 but with the seal a little smaller and more to the top and less to the left. Around the moon there are several starts represented with 29 small white dots. In the center of the black square there is a black circle, coinciding with the outer rim of the seal. Within this circle (the dark side of the moon) there are no stars!]
:<big>✓</big> Looks OK

:[Shape #8 same as #7 but apart from the 29 small white dots from before there are now also 6 more dots inside the dark circle with no stars in #7.]
:<big>X</big> There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface.

==Trivia==
* [[Randall]] changed the text for the fourth moon shape the next day from "Only possible during a solar eclipse" to "Not possible at night".
** The original can be found [https://web.archive.org/web/20160926101411/http://xkcd.com/1738/ here].
* [[File:moon7a.jpg]] The image of the crescent moon blocking the stars is slightly wrong, because there are still lights on the surface of the moon.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Fiction]] 
[[Category:Astronomy]]

1738: Moon Shapes

2018-03-30T04:15:16Z

Needforsuv: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1738
| date = September 26, 2016
| title = Moon Shapes
| image = moon_shapes.png
| titletext = Whenever I see a picture of the moon where the points go more than halfway around, I assume it's being eclipsed by one of those Independence Day ships and interpret the rest of the image in light of that.
}}

==Explanation==
The Earth's {{w|Moon}}, being the most prominent object in the night sky, is a frequent subject of art; particularly art depicting a nighttime scene. Unfortunately, the moon often appears in works of art in ways that are very dramatic and would not be realistically possible. It may be done out of ignorance, or knowingly by taking {{w|artistic license}}. As someone interested in and who has worked in astronomy, this likely bothers [[Randall]].

The Moon is well known to have "{{w|lunar phase|phases}}" describing what portion of the visible surface of the moon is illuminated by sunlight and highly visible, and what portion is dark, and generally only slightly visible when the moon appears while the sun is also up. These phases progress between "New" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely dark) and "Full" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely illuminated, appearing as a full disk as viewed from Earth). Mid-way between those extreme phases is a "Quarter" Moon, when exactly one-half of the surface facing Earth is completely dark, the light half being one-quarter of the total Moon's surface.

Because the Moon is approximately spherical, its illuminated side appears as "crescent" in shape as it progresses from New to First Quarter phase. As it progresses from First Quarter to Full phase, observers on Earth see a Waxing "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gibbous Gibbous] Moon (which just means that the dark portion has formed a crescent). One can imagine this like a globe on which you draw a straight line from the north pole to the south pole down the center of the side facing you (appearing to create two semi-circles); upon rotating the globe, the line would become rounded as it moved away creating a crescent on the side the line was moved towards. Because of the geometry involved, a line connecting the two points (horns) of a Crescent Moon (or of the darkened crescent inverse of a Gibbous Moon) must be a diameter of the moon (i.e. it must pass through the center of the circle).

The deliberate misidentification of a Waxing Gibbous Moon ("waxing" means going from new to full; that is increasing in illuminated area) as a "wax gibbon" (a Southeast Asian ape made of a nonpolar solid) is a source of humor in this comic. This is probably a reference to H.P. Lovecraft, who had several of his stories take place under "a gibbous moon" for dramatic effect, or even more likely a reference to the {{w|Discworld}} by {{w|Terry Pratchett}}, often referenced in xkcd (as in [[1498: Terry Pratchett]]). In the witch series the Gibbous Moon is mentioned several times as the most magic, rather than the more often used Crescent or Full Moon.

Further, because the light portion of the Moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the Moon is in the sky at the same time as the Sun), the light side of the Moon will always be facing towards the Sun. If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the Moon must always be on the half of the Moon that faces the horizon (there are points during the daytime when the orientation can go the other way); however, because of the [http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf moon tilt illusion] it is possible for the light portion of the moon to appear to point up. The [https://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt illusion] is generally not as severe and may only last a few hours after sunset.

It is worth noting that while the Moon's dark portion blends imperceptibly with the dark night sky, it is still a solid body. Therefore it would be impossible to see more distant objects such as stars "through" the dark portion of the Moon's circumference. This is most dramatically exemplified by a {{w|solar eclipse}} during which the Moon passes in front of the Sun and is therefore completely dark (the Sun is lighting only the far side), but the Moon's circumference still blocks a circular portion of the Sun's light. Therefore, if we were to see any lights in the part of the sky the dark side of the Moon blocks, they would need to be from sources between us and the Moon's surface, such as a nuclear war on the moon.

This comic lists some of the some common mistakes. In some cases, a depiction may be unrealistic in multiple ways - for example, the {{w|Flag of Tunisia}} has both unrealistic horns and a star visible between the horns, while {{w|File:Moon tarot charles6.jpg|the Charles VI tarot}} shows a Moon with over-long horns pointing towards the horizon.

In the title text, Randall is referring to the movie "{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}" and how one of the alien's ships (in the movie) 'eclipses' part of the Moon. He says that if the points go halfway or longer around the Moon, then he imagines it's caused by an alien ship and interprets the entire piece of art in that context (i.e. aliens are about to attack those shepherds!).

==Table of the images==
{| class="wikitable"
|+Explanation of individual items in the list
!#
!Image
!Shape
!Rating
!Text
!Explanation
!Examples
|-
|1 || [[File:moon1.jpg]]|| Full moon || Normal || rowspan="3" | "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever || Reality. The full moon cannot really be drawn incorrectly, and will look like this whenever it is up at night. ||
|-
|2 ||[[File:moon2.jpg]]|| Gibbous moon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|3 ||[[File:moon4a.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns away from horizon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|4 ||[[File:moon3.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns towards horizon || Not normal || Not possible at night || This can only happen when the sun is above the horizon. Since a crescent moon means that the Sun and the Moon are relatively close in the sky, the Moon would not be visible with a naked eye, its light completely outshone by the sunlight. Randall comments that this is possible only during the daytime, marking it wrong as the background would not be black. According to this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase#/media/File:Moon_phases_en.jpg image] on Wikipedia's article on {{w|lunar phase}} "Phases of the Moon, as seen looking southward from the {{w|northern hemisphere}}. The {{w|southern hemisphere}} will see each phase rotated through 180°". This might seem to indicate that shape #3, which is visible in for instance USA where Randall lives should be seen like #4 in the southern part of South America, also at night! However, because the light portion of the moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the moon is in the sky at the same time as the sun), the light side of the moon will always be facing towards the sun. If the moon is in the night sky, the sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the moon must always be on the half of the moon that faces the horizon; However, in the case of twilight after sunset and shortly after (like the example painting), due to the [https://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt][http://http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf illusion] the bright side of the moon may appear to point up relative to an observer on the ground (although not to the extent show in the comic). But as the text from Randall points out there can be times during daytime when the orientation can go the other way. But then the background should not be black. Originally Randall wrote a different (wrong) sentence here and then corrected to the one currently explained, see [[#Trivia|trivia]] below.|| Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Passeio ao Crepúsculo.jpg|Landscape with Couple Walking and Crescent Moon}}
|-
|5 ||[[File:moon5a.jpg]]|| Wide crescent-like moon where the horns don't connect through a diameter || Not normal|| rowspan="2" | Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun) || This is only possible during a partial solar eclipse or the start of an annular eclipse (in which cases the lit portion is not the moon, but the sun), or else if the Earth is casting its partial shadow on the Moon, a penumbral lunar eclipse. Randall labels the lunar eclipse "dubious", since the shadow during penumbral eclipse would be much lighter than shown here, in fact barely visible as a slight darkening of the Moon's surface. The Earth's shadow, being very large, would also likely cast a less-rounded edge than depicted here. ||
|-
|6 ||[[File:moon6.jpg]]|| Narrow crescent-like moon where the points don't connect through a diameter || Not normal || This situation is even harder to create than the previous one - unlike the previous example, here the diameter of the entire shadow is clear, and is too small for the Earth's shadow in a lunar eclipse. A huge ''Independence Day'' spaceship (as per the Title text) might be the right size. It does however resemble a partial {{w|annular eclipse}} if you imagine that the black area is the moon covering up the white sun. || {{w|File:AlcoholicBluesCoverVonTilze.jpg|Alcoholic Blues}}. Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Starry Night - Google Art Project.jpg|Starry Night}}, but turned the other way.
|-
|7 ||[[File:moon7.jpg]]|| Crescent moon blocking stars|| Normal || Looks OK || Reality (as in image 3) with stars shown around the moon, but not any inside the sphere of the sky that would be blocked by the dark (but still present) side of the moon. (See [[#Trivia|trivia]] below though). ||
|-
|8 ||[[File:moon8.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with stars between horns || Not normal || There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface || Many people (including artists) seem to forget that the dark portion of the moon is still a solid object that we can not see through.[http://imgur.com/S30fuOj][https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a7/7d/4a/a77d4ae9e3549e36edd350246d33700c.jpg] If stars are visible, there are either one or more holes in the moon, or the light-source is actually on the moon, such as nuclear explosions. As the {{w|Star and Crescent}}, the image is sometimes considered a symbol of Islam, although it's relatively recent and there's no traditional basis for putting the star ''between'' the horns - as originally used on the Flag of Turkey, the star appears in a realistic position. The flags of Algeria, Tunisia and some other countries show the star in the dark part of the moon. In the first Edwin Blashfield, {{w|File:Edwin Blashfield - Spring Scattering Stars.jpg|Spring Scattering Stars}} a God is standing on the moon throwing stars down, but then these stars are actually in front of the moon and are good. Nothing in the image suggest that stars can be seen through the dark part of the moon. Also the {{w|DreamWorks Animation}} logo shows no stars. Although both show persons sitting on the seal, this is thus also clearly not an effort to make it look real. But in neither case stars can be seen in the moon. This is also the case for the live [https://youtu.be/xPpy8mYHQps?t=11 DreamWorks logo from movies]. Here there are stars in the background but they are not inside the moon as [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/f/f5/1738_Moon_Shapes_DreamWorks_logo_With_Moon_Circle.PNG can be seen here]. || An example can be found in the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/2/26/1738_Moon_Shapes_Mole_Car_Moon_With_Stars_Inside.png image on the last page] of [https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-mole-got-his-car/dp/B0000CKRB4 How mole got his car] with the {{w|Mole (Zdeněk Miler character)|Mole}} from the carton series by {{w|Zdeněk Miler}}. This is not just showing the stars inside from the last shape, but also the type of moon shown in the sixth image.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the panel:]
:'''Interpreting the shape of the moon in art'''
:[The left part of the panel shows a two column chart is shown with labels above the columns. The left side shows the moons shape as white on a black square. These types of moons could be seen in certain art pieces. The right side saying whether this is normal or not as indicated with a green check mark or a red X. Right of the second column there are explanations of why the specific type of moon is marked as it is and what it could be called or how it could be possible even with the red X. The upper three moons have one common explanation as indicated with a bracket that covers all three with the text on the middle part of the bracket. Similarly moon five and six also have a bracket and only one explanation.]
:Shape Normal?

:[Shape #1-3 shows a white circle (full moon), a more than half full moon (Gibbon) and a thin seal at the bottom right of the square.]
:<big>✓</big>
:<big>✓</big> "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever
:<big>✓</big>

:[Shape #4 same as #3 but with the seal in the upper part of the square.]
:<big>X</big> Not possible at night

:[Shape #5-6 shows a full moon with a circular section taken out of the right side and a seal that goes almost all the way around the circumference of the moon with almost a full circle taken out of the top left part of the moon.]
:<big>X</big>
:<big>X</big> Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun)

:[Shape #7 same as #3 but with the seal a little smaller and more to the top and less to the left. Around the moon there are several starts represented with 29 small white dots. In the center of the black square there is a black circle, coinciding with the outer rim of the seal. Within this circle (the dark side of the moon) there are no stars!]
:<big>✓</big> Looks OK

:[Shape #8 same as #7 but apart from the 29 small white dots from before there are now also 6 more dots inside the dark circle with no stars in #7.]
:<big>X</big> There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface.

==Trivia==
* [[Randall]] changed the text for the fourth moon shape the next day from "Only possible during a solar eclipse" to "Not possible at night".
** The original can be found [https://web.archive.org/web/20160926101411/http://xkcd.com/1738/ here].
* [[File:moon7a.jpg]] The image of the crescent moon blocking the stars is slightly wrong, because there are still lights on the surface of the moon.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Fiction]] 
[[Category:Astronomy]]

1738: Moon Shapes

2018-03-30T04:13:51Z

Needforsuv: /* Table of the images */

{{comic
| number = 1738
| date = September 26, 2016
| title = Moon Shapes
| image = moon_shapes.png
| titletext = Whenever I see a picture of the moon where the points go more than halfway around, I assume it's being eclipsed by one of those Independence Day ships and interpret the rest of the image in light of that.
}}

==Explanation==
The Earth's {{w|Moon}}, being the most prominent object in the night sky, is a frequent subject of art; particularly art depicting a nighttime scene. Unfortunately, the moon often appears in works of art in ways that are very dramatic and would not be realistically possible. It may be done out of ignorance, or knowingly by taking {{w|artistic license}}. As someone interested in and who has worked in astronomy, this likely bothers [[Randall]].

The Moon is well known to have "{{w|lunar phase|phases}}" describing what portion of the visible surface of the moon is illuminated by sunlight and highly visible, and what portion is dark, and generally only slightly visible when the moon appears while the sun is also up. These phases progress between "New" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely dark) and "Full" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely illuminated, appearing as a full disk as viewed from Earth). Mid-way between those extreme phases is a "Quarter" Moon, when exactly one-half of the surface facing Earth is completely dark, the light half being one-quarter of the total Moon's surface.

Because the Moon is approximately spherical, its illuminated side appears as "crescent" in shape as it progresses from New to First Quarter phase. As it progresses from First Quarter to Full phase, observers on Earth see a Waxing "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gibbous Gibbous] Moon (which just means that the dark portion has formed a crescent). One can imagine this like a globe on which you draw a straight line from the north pole to the south pole down the center of the side facing you (appearing to create two semi-circles); upon rotating the globe, the line would become rounded as it moved away creating a crescent on the side the line was moved towards. Because of the geometry involved, a line connecting the two points (horns) of a Crescent Moon (or of the darkened crescent inverse of a Gibbous Moon) must be a diameter of the moon (i.e. it must pass through the center of the circle).

The deliberate misidentification of a Waxing Gibbous Moon ("waxing" means going from new to full; that is increasing in illuminated area) as a "wax gibbon" (a Southeast Asian ape made of a nonpolar solid) is a source of humor in this comic. This is probably a reference to H.P. Lovecraft, who had several of his stories take place under "a gibbous moon" for dramatic effect, or even more likely a reference to the {{w|Discworld}} by {{w|Terry Pratchett}}, often referenced in xkcd (as in [[1498: Terry Pratchett]]). In the witch series the Gibbous Moon is mentioned several times as the most magic, rather than the more often used Crescent or Full Moon.

Further, because the light portion of the Moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the Moon is in the sky at the same time as the Sun), the light side of the Moon will always be facing towards the Sun. If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the Moon must always be on the half of the Moon that faces the horizon (there are points during the daytime when the orientation can go the other way); however, because of the [http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf moon tilt illusion] it is possible for the light portion of the moon to appear to point up. The [http://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt illusion] is generally not as severe and may only last a few hours after sunset.

It is worth noting that while the Moon's dark portion blends imperceptibly with the dark night sky, it is still a solid body. Therefore it would be impossible to see more distant objects such as stars "through" the dark portion of the Moon's circumference. This is most dramatically exemplified by a {{w|solar eclipse}} during which the Moon passes in front of the Sun and is therefore completely dark (the Sun is lighting only the far side), but the Moon's circumference still blocks a circular portion of the Sun's light. Therefore, if we were to see any lights in the part of the sky the dark side of the Moon blocks, they would need to be from sources between us and the Moon's surface, such as a nuclear war on the moon.

This comic lists some of the some common mistakes. In some cases, a depiction may be unrealistic in multiple ways - for example, the {{w|Flag of Tunisia}} has both unrealistic horns and a star visible between the horns, while {{w|File:Moon tarot charles6.jpg|the Charles VI tarot}} shows a Moon with over-long horns pointing towards the horizon.

In the title text, Randall is referring to the movie "{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}" and how one of the alien's ships (in the movie) 'eclipses' part of the Moon. He says that if the points go halfway or longer around the Moon, then he imagines it's caused by an alien ship and interprets the entire piece of art in that context (i.e. aliens are about to attack those shepherds!).

==Table of the images==
{| class="wikitable"
|+Explanation of individual items in the list
!#
!Image
!Shape
!Rating
!Text
!Explanation
!Examples
|-
|1 || [[File:moon1.jpg]]|| Full moon || Normal || rowspan="3" | "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever || Reality. The full moon cannot really be drawn incorrectly, and will look like this whenever it is up at night. ||
|-
|2 ||[[File:moon2.jpg]]|| Gibbous moon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|3 ||[[File:moon4a.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns away from horizon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|4 ||[[File:moon3.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns towards horizon || Not normal || Not possible at night || This can only happen when the sun is above the horizon. Since a crescent moon means that the Sun and the Moon are relatively close in the sky, the Moon would not be visible with a naked eye, its light completely outshone by the sunlight. Randall comments that this is possible only during the daytime, marking it wrong as the background would not be black. According to this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase#/media/File:Moon_phases_en.jpg image] on Wikipedia's article on {{w|lunar phase}} "Phases of the Moon, as seen looking southward from the {{w|northern hemisphere}}. The {{w|southern hemisphere}} will see each phase rotated through 180°". This might seem to indicate that shape #3, which is visible in for instance USA where Randall lives should be seen like #4 in the southern part of South America, also at night! However, because the light portion of the moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the moon is in the sky at the same time as the sun), the light side of the moon will always be facing towards the sun. If the moon is in the night sky, the sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the moon must always be on the half of the moon that faces the horizon; However, in the case of twilight after sunset and shortly after (like the example painting), due to the [https://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt][http://http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf illusion] the bright side of the moon may appear to point up relative to an observer on the ground (although not to the extent show in the comic). But as the text from Randall points out there can be times during daytime when the orientation can go the other way. But then the background should not be black. Originally Randall wrote a different (wrong) sentence here and then corrected to the one currently explained, see [[#Trivia|trivia]] below.|| Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Passeio ao Crepúsculo.jpg|Landscape with Couple Walking and Crescent Moon}}
|-
|5 ||[[File:moon5a.jpg]]|| Wide crescent-like moon where the horns don't connect through a diameter || Not normal|| rowspan="2" | Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun) || This is only possible during a partial solar eclipse or the start of an annular eclipse (in which cases the lit portion is not the moon, but the sun), or else if the Earth is casting its partial shadow on the Moon, a penumbral lunar eclipse. Randall labels the lunar eclipse "dubious", since the shadow during penumbral eclipse would be much lighter than shown here, in fact barely visible as a slight darkening of the Moon's surface. The Earth's shadow, being very large, would also likely cast a less-rounded edge than depicted here. ||
|-
|6 ||[[File:moon6.jpg]]|| Narrow crescent-like moon where the points don't connect through a diameter || Not normal || This situation is even harder to create than the previous one - unlike the previous example, here the diameter of the entire shadow is clear, and is too small for the Earth's shadow in a lunar eclipse. A huge ''Independence Day'' spaceship (as per the Title text) might be the right size. It does however resemble a partial {{w|annular eclipse}} if you imagine that the black area is the moon covering up the white sun. || {{w|File:AlcoholicBluesCoverVonTilze.jpg|Alcoholic Blues}}. Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Starry Night - Google Art Project.jpg|Starry Night}}, but turned the other way.
|-
|7 ||[[File:moon7.jpg]]|| Crescent moon blocking stars|| Normal || Looks OK || Reality (as in image 3) with stars shown around the moon, but not any inside the sphere of the sky that would be blocked by the dark (but still present) side of the moon. (See [[#Trivia|trivia]] below though). ||
|-
|8 ||[[File:moon8.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with stars between horns || Not normal || There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface || Many people (including artists) seem to forget that the dark portion of the moon is still a solid object that we can not see through.[http://imgur.com/S30fuOj][https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a7/7d/4a/a77d4ae9e3549e36edd350246d33700c.jpg] If stars are visible, there are either one or more holes in the moon, or the light-source is actually on the moon, such as nuclear explosions. As the {{w|Star and Crescent}}, the image is sometimes considered a symbol of Islam, although it's relatively recent and there's no traditional basis for putting the star ''between'' the horns - as originally used on the Flag of Turkey, the star appears in a realistic position. The flags of Algeria, Tunisia and some other countries show the star in the dark part of the moon. In the first Edwin Blashfield, {{w|File:Edwin Blashfield - Spring Scattering Stars.jpg|Spring Scattering Stars}} a God is standing on the moon throwing stars down, but then these stars are actually in front of the moon and are good. Nothing in the image suggest that stars can be seen through the dark part of the moon. Also the {{w|DreamWorks Animation}} logo shows no stars. Although both show persons sitting on the seal, this is thus also clearly not an effort to make it look real. But in neither case stars can be seen in the moon. This is also the case for the live [https://youtu.be/xPpy8mYHQps?t=11 DreamWorks logo from movies]. Here there are stars in the background but they are not inside the moon as [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/f/f5/1738_Moon_Shapes_DreamWorks_logo_With_Moon_Circle.PNG can be seen here]. || An example can be found in the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/2/26/1738_Moon_Shapes_Mole_Car_Moon_With_Stars_Inside.png image on the last page] of [https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-mole-got-his-car/dp/B0000CKRB4 How mole got his car] with the {{w|Mole (Zdeněk Miler character)|Mole}} from the carton series by {{w|Zdeněk Miler}}. This is not just showing the stars inside from the last shape, but also the type of moon shown in the sixth image.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the panel:]
:'''Interpreting the shape of the moon in art'''
:[The left part of the panel shows a two column chart is shown with labels above the columns. The left side shows the moons shape as white on a black square. These types of moons could be seen in certain art pieces. The right side saying whether this is normal or not as indicated with a green check mark or a red X. Right of the second column there are explanations of why the specific type of moon is marked as it is and what it could be called or how it could be possible even with the red X. The upper three moons have one common explanation as indicated with a bracket that covers all three with the text on the middle part of the bracket. Similarly moon five and six also have a bracket and only one explanation.]
:Shape Normal?

:[Shape #1-3 shows a white circle (full moon), a more than half full moon (Gibbon) and a thin seal at the bottom right of the square.]
:<big>✓</big>
:<big>✓</big> "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever
:<big>✓</big>

:[Shape #4 same as #3 but with the seal in the upper part of the square.]
:<big>X</big> Not possible at night

:[Shape #5-6 shows a full moon with a circular section taken out of the right side and a seal that goes almost all the way around the circumference of the moon with almost a full circle taken out of the top left part of the moon.]
:<big>X</big>
:<big>X</big> Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun)

:[Shape #7 same as #3 but with the seal a little smaller and more to the top and less to the left. Around the moon there are several starts represented with 29 small white dots. In the center of the black square there is a black circle, coinciding with the outer rim of the seal. Within this circle (the dark side of the moon) there are no stars!]
:<big>✓</big> Looks OK

:[Shape #8 same as #7 but apart from the 29 small white dots from before there are now also 6 more dots inside the dark circle with no stars in #7.]
:<big>X</big> There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface.

==Trivia==
* [[Randall]] changed the text for the fourth moon shape the next day from "Only possible during a solar eclipse" to "Not possible at night".
** The original can be found [https://web.archive.org/web/20160926101411/http://xkcd.com/1738/ here].
* [[File:moon7a.jpg]] The image of the crescent moon blocking the stars is slightly wrong, because there are still lights on the surface of the moon.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Fiction]] 
[[Category:Astronomy]]

1738: Moon Shapes

2018-03-30T04:09:11Z

Needforsuv: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1738
| date = September 26, 2016
| title = Moon Shapes
| image = moon_shapes.png
| titletext = Whenever I see a picture of the moon where the points go more than halfway around, I assume it's being eclipsed by one of those Independence Day ships and interpret the rest of the image in light of that.
}}

==Explanation==
The Earth's {{w|Moon}}, being the most prominent object in the night sky, is a frequent subject of art; particularly art depicting a nighttime scene. Unfortunately, the moon often appears in works of art in ways that are very dramatic and would not be realistically possible. It may be done out of ignorance, or knowingly by taking {{w|artistic license}}. As someone interested in and who has worked in astronomy, this likely bothers [[Randall]].

The Moon is well known to have "{{w|lunar phase|phases}}" describing what portion of the visible surface of the moon is illuminated by sunlight and highly visible, and what portion is dark, and generally only slightly visible when the moon appears while the sun is also up. These phases progress between "New" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely dark) and "Full" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely illuminated, appearing as a full disk as viewed from Earth). Mid-way between those extreme phases is a "Quarter" Moon, when exactly one-half of the surface facing Earth is completely dark, the light half being one-quarter of the total Moon's surface.

Because the Moon is approximately spherical, its illuminated side appears as "crescent" in shape as it progresses from New to First Quarter phase. As it progresses from First Quarter to Full phase, observers on Earth see a Waxing "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gibbous Gibbous] Moon (which just means that the dark portion has formed a crescent). One can imagine this like a globe on which you draw a straight line from the north pole to the south pole down the center of the side facing you (appearing to create two semi-circles); upon rotating the globe, the line would become rounded as it moved away creating a crescent on the side the line was moved towards. Because of the geometry involved, a line connecting the two points (horns) of a Crescent Moon (or of the darkened crescent inverse of a Gibbous Moon) must be a diameter of the moon (i.e. it must pass through the center of the circle).

The deliberate misidentification of a Waxing Gibbous Moon ("waxing" means going from new to full; that is increasing in illuminated area) as a "wax gibbon" (a Southeast Asian ape made of a nonpolar solid) is a source of humor in this comic. This is probably a reference to H.P. Lovecraft, who had several of his stories take place under "a gibbous moon" for dramatic effect, or even more likely a reference to the {{w|Discworld}} by {{w|Terry Pratchett}}, often referenced in xkcd (as in [[1498: Terry Pratchett]]). In the witch series the Gibbous Moon is mentioned several times as the most magic, rather than the more often used Crescent or Full Moon.

Further, because the light portion of the Moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the Moon is in the sky at the same time as the Sun), the light side of the Moon will always be facing towards the Sun. If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the Moon must always be on the half of the Moon that faces the horizon (there are points during the daytime when the orientation can go the other way); however, because of the [http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaper20June.pdf moon tilt illusion] it is possible for the light portion of the moon to appear to point up. The [http://www.academia.edu/7848972/THE_MOON_TILT_ILLUSION moon tilt illusion] is generally not as severe and may only last a few hours after sunset.

It is worth noting that while the Moon's dark portion blends imperceptibly with the dark night sky, it is still a solid body. Therefore it would be impossible to see more distant objects such as stars "through" the dark portion of the Moon's circumference. This is most dramatically exemplified by a {{w|solar eclipse}} during which the Moon passes in front of the Sun and is therefore completely dark (the Sun is lighting only the far side), but the Moon's circumference still blocks a circular portion of the Sun's light. Therefore, if we were to see any lights in the part of the sky the dark side of the Moon blocks, they would need to be from sources between us and the Moon's surface, such as a nuclear war on the moon.

This comic lists some of the some common mistakes. In some cases, a depiction may be unrealistic in multiple ways - for example, the {{w|Flag of Tunisia}} has both unrealistic horns and a star visible between the horns, while {{w|File:Moon tarot charles6.jpg|the Charles VI tarot}} shows a Moon with over-long horns pointing towards the horizon.

In the title text, Randall is referring to the movie "{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}" and how one of the alien's ships (in the movie) 'eclipses' part of the Moon. He says that if the points go halfway or longer around the Moon, then he imagines it's caused by an alien ship and interprets the entire piece of art in that context (i.e. aliens are about to attack those shepherds!).

==Table of the images==
{| class="wikitable"
|+Explanation of individual items in the list
!#
!Image
!Shape
!Rating
!Text
!Explanation
!Examples
|-
|1 || [[File:moon1.jpg]]|| Full moon || Normal || rowspan="3" | "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever || Reality. The full moon cannot really be drawn incorrectly, and will look like this whenever it is up at night. ||
|-
|2 ||[[File:moon2.jpg]]|| Gibbous moon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|3 ||[[File:moon4a.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns away from horizon || Normal || Reality, as in this is how one of the moon's phases looks on a normal basis. ||
|-
|4 ||[[File:moon3.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns towards horizon || Not normal || Not possible at night || This can only happen when the sun is above the horizon. Since a crescent moon means that the Sun and the Moon are relatively close in the sky, the Moon would not be visible with a naked eye, its light completely outshone by the sunlight. Randall comments that this is possible only during the daytime, marking it wrong as the background would not be black. According to this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase#/media/File:Moon_phases_en.jpg image] on Wikipedia's article on {{w|lunar phase}} "Phases of the Moon, as seen looking southward from the {{w|northern hemisphere}}. The {{w|southern hemisphere}} will see each phase rotated through 180°". This might seem to indicate that shape #3, which is visible in for instance USA where Randall lives should be seen like #4 in the southern part of South America, also at night! However, because the light portion of the moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the moon is in the sky at the same time as the sun), the light side of the moon will always be facing towards the sun. If the moon is in the night sky, the sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the moon must always be on the half of the moon that faces the horizon. But as the text from Randall points out there can be times during daytime when the orientation can go the other way. But then the background should not be black. Originally Randall wrote a different (wrong) sentence here and then corrected to the one currently explained, see [[#Trivia|trivia]] below.|| Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Passeio ao Crepúsculo.jpg|Landscape with Couple Walking and Crescent Moon}}
|-
|5 ||[[File:moon5a.jpg]]|| Wide crescent-like moon where the horns don't connect through a diameter || Not normal|| rowspan="2" | Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun) || This is only possible during a partial solar eclipse or the start of an annular eclipse (in which cases the lit portion is not the moon, but the sun), or else if the Earth is casting its partial shadow on the Moon, a penumbral lunar eclipse. Randall labels the lunar eclipse "dubious", since the shadow during penumbral eclipse would be much lighter than shown here, in fact barely visible as a slight darkening of the Moon's surface. The Earth's shadow, being very large, would also likely cast a less-rounded edge than depicted here. ||
|-
|6 ||[[File:moon6.jpg]]|| Narrow crescent-like moon where the points don't connect through a diameter || Not normal || This situation is even harder to create than the previous one - unlike the previous example, here the diameter of the entire shadow is clear, and is too small for the Earth's shadow in a lunar eclipse. A huge ''Independence Day'' spaceship (as per the Title text) might be the right size. It does however resemble a partial {{w|annular eclipse}} if you imagine that the black area is the moon covering up the white sun. || {{w|File:AlcoholicBluesCoverVonTilze.jpg|Alcoholic Blues}}. Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Starry Night - Google Art Project.jpg|Starry Night}}, but turned the other way.
|-
|7 ||[[File:moon7.jpg]]|| Crescent moon blocking stars|| Normal || Looks OK || Reality (as in image 3) with stars shown around the moon, but not any inside the sphere of the sky that would be blocked by the dark (but still present) side of the moon. (See [[#Trivia|trivia]] below though). ||
|-
|8 ||[[File:moon8.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with stars between horns || Not normal || There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface || Many people (including artists) seem to forget that the dark portion of the moon is still a solid object that we can not see through.[http://imgur.com/S30fuOj][https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a7/7d/4a/a77d4ae9e3549e36edd350246d33700c.jpg] If stars are visible, there are either one or more holes in the moon, or the light-source is actually on the moon, such as nuclear explosions. As the {{w|Star and Crescent}}, the image is sometimes considered a symbol of Islam, although it's relatively recent and there's no traditional basis for putting the star ''between'' the horns - as originally used on the Flag of Turkey, the star appears in a realistic position. The flags of Algeria, Tunisia and some other countries show the star in the dark part of the moon. In the first Edwin Blashfield, {{w|File:Edwin Blashfield - Spring Scattering Stars.jpg|Spring Scattering Stars}} a God is standing on the moon throwing stars down, but then these stars are actually in front of the moon and are good. Nothing in the image suggest that stars can be seen through the dark part of the moon. Also the {{w|DreamWorks Animation}} logo shows no stars. Although both show persons sitting on the seal, this is thus also clearly not an effort to make it look real. But in neither case stars can be seen in the moon. This is also the case for the live [https://youtu.be/xPpy8mYHQps?t=11 DreamWorks logo from movies]. Here there are stars in the background but they are not inside the moon as [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/f/f5/1738_Moon_Shapes_DreamWorks_logo_With_Moon_Circle.PNG can be seen here]. || An example can be found in the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/2/26/1738_Moon_Shapes_Mole_Car_Moon_With_Stars_Inside.png image on the last page] of [https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-mole-got-his-car/dp/B0000CKRB4 How mole got his car] with the {{w|Mole (Zdeněk Miler character)|Mole}} from the carton series by {{w|Zdeněk Miler}}. This is not just showing the stars inside from the last shape, but also the type of moon shown in the sixth image.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the panel:]
:'''Interpreting the shape of the moon in art'''
:[The left part of the panel shows a two column chart is shown with labels above the columns. The left side shows the moons shape as white on a black square. These types of moons could be seen in certain art pieces. The right side saying whether this is normal or not as indicated with a green check mark or a red X. Right of the second column there are explanations of why the specific type of moon is marked as it is and what it could be called or how it could be possible even with the red X. The upper three moons have one common explanation as indicated with a bracket that covers all three with the text on the middle part of the bracket. Similarly moon five and six also have a bracket and only one explanation.]
:Shape Normal?

:[Shape #1-3 shows a white circle (full moon), a more than half full moon (Gibbon) and a thin seal at the bottom right of the square.]
:<big>✓</big>
:<big>✓</big> "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever
:<big>✓</big>

:[Shape #4 same as #3 but with the seal in the upper part of the square.]
:<big>X</big> Not possible at night

:[Shape #5-6 shows a full moon with a circular section taken out of the right side and a seal that goes almost all the way around the circumference of the moon with almost a full circle taken out of the top left part of the moon.]
:<big>X</big>
:<big>X</big> Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun)

:[Shape #7 same as #3 but with the seal a little smaller and more to the top and less to the left. Around the moon there are several starts represented with 29 small white dots. In the center of the black square there is a black circle, coinciding with the outer rim of the seal. Within this circle (the dark side of the moon) there are no stars!]
:<big>✓</big> Looks OK

:[Shape #8 same as #7 but apart from the 29 small white dots from before there are now also 6 more dots inside the dark circle with no stars in #7.]
:<big>X</big> There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface.

==Trivia==
* [[Randall]] changed the text for the fourth moon shape the next day from "Only possible during a solar eclipse" to "Not possible at night".
** The original can be found [https://web.archive.org/web/20160926101411/http://xkcd.com/1738/ here].
* [[File:moon7a.jpg]] The image of the crescent moon blocking the stars is slightly wrong, because there are still lights on the surface of the moon.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Fiction]] 
[[Category:Astronomy]]

Talk:1738: Moon Shapes

2018-03-28T09:26:59Z

Needforsuv:

It's a reflection of the nuclear war on [[1626|the sun's surface]]. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 08:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I can't find any photoshopped Moon that looks like the last image. Somebody has to make one. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.207|162.158.92.207]] 13:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

: Randall uncharacteristically missed an opportunity for pointing out additional errors that people make: It's interesting to note that you can get a decent estimate of the artist's latitude by looking at how they draw a crescent moon. In equatorial cultures, the crescent looks like a cup or a boat - and they interpret it like that. But if you look at most english language children's books, the crescent looks like a letter 'C' or a 'D' with a human face - suggesting that they were probably made in the tradition of northern Europe. When I first moved from the UK (more or less a 'C'-shaped crescent moon) to the southern USA (more like Randall's depiction of the correctly-drawn crescent with the points at a roughly 45 degree angle to the horizon) - I subconsciously felt that the moon "looked wrong" - it was only much later that I understood the reason.

: Furthermore, this rotation of the moon relative to the observer also explains why "The man in the moon" is a common trope caused by the pareidolia interpretation of the cratering patterns of the moon in northern cultures. But in southern cultures, people tend to see a rabbit in those full-moon patterns - and that has become the source of many of their stories.

: Now that I'm more acutely aware of this - it's interesting to note how many movies get the orientation of the moon wrong for the location that their story is supposedly set in! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::In Japan, for example, the patterns are interpreted as a rabbit making mochi (a sort of dense dumpling made from rice pounded into a powder) on the moon - the Sea of Tranquillity forming the head, and the Sea of Clouds forming part of the pestle in which the rabbit is pounding the rice. {{unsigned ip|188.114.102.167}}

::Considering how many movies features the famous [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheMountainsOfIllinois Mountains of Illinois], I would be more surprised when they get it right. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

: Not quite sure how to add this but Gibbon is the author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - or a type of Ape. It is not a phase of the moon. Also I think the moon depicted is Waning. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.113|141.101.98.113]] 14:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::I think the correct expression is gibbous - "having the illuminated part greater than a semicircle and less than a circle" {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.68}}
:: Yes, the one he says is correct has me thinking: "OMG, the moon is drunk and has fallen over on its ass." No self-respecting moon lies on its back like that.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.222|162.158.114.222]] 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Indeed - but that's pretty much how it looks down here in sunny Texas. It's one of those things you never think about - but once the fact of it clicks in your head, you get this visceral feeling of how you're standing on a large ball rather than a flat plane! Ha! Take that flat-earthers! :-) [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Living in Florida, our crescent moons are almost horizontal. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.60|108.162.212.60]]
: "Wax gibbon" is probably nothing more than a joke on mispronouncing "waxing gibbous". As drawn, it is the way a waning gibbous would appear in the northern hemisphere, but a waxing gibbous in the southern hemisphere. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Link to the DreamWorks logo image please? There seem to be multiple versions. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.216|108.162.237.216]] 15:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I'm surprised Randall missed the chance to include a joke about guys with fishing rods. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.141|162.158.85.141]] 15:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::http://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/dreamworks-logo.jpg... Here's the link to the Dreamworks logo. You're welcome. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::neither of the examples for the "stars in the moon" apply here. both randall's examples imply a spherical moon. spring and the dreamworks child are supported on a crescent moon for which only the light section actually exists. better examples, please. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.84|141.101.98.84]] 12:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
::While the dreamworks logo features a child sitting on the crescent moon as though the dark portion wasn't there, none of the versions of the logo which contain stars in the sky actually show stars 'inside' the moon's disk, so the logo probably isn't a good example of what Randall is complaining about. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPpy8mYHQps. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 17:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The first "wrong" image is also only possible if the bright portion is presumed to be the sun during a solar eclipse, assuming the sky is actually depicted as black. You can only have a crescent moon during a solar eclipse if the solar system suddenly acquired a second sun. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's a good counter-example: [http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V-N1Fj2RU7Y/Vnvbs3e6JxI/AAAAAAAAouE/X37EuZ2dXmI/s1600/236D5361-D23A-45AD-8D3B-451926D0CA82.jpg EXAMPLE]. The bright dot is actually the ISS transiting the moon - but it certainly looks like an impossibility! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The article doesn't mention the "nuclear war" joke. Does it need explaining? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.49|141.101.98.49]] 19:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:It does now. [[User:WingedCat|WingedCat]] ([[User talk:WingedCat|talk]]) 22:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
:: your welcome ;-) [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I've always wanted to create a story, and have the horns of the moon connect on the other side, so you have a blackbody in front of the moon, in parody of this tendency.
Also, interesting how the moon is at different rotations in different locations. I never did see the rabbit in the moon. Now I know why. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.74|108.162.245.74]] 04:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the examples of "incorrect" moons are kinda questionable - like, how relevant is the position of the moon when there's literally a giant divine skyperson standing on it, grabbing stars and scattering of them? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 23:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I fixed part of the explanation by mentioning the title text. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I think that's enough detail for an explanation, so I removed the "incomplete" bar. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Should the table of explanations include the text in the comic? [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The comic has been updated on xkcd. Randall revised the description of #4. Maybe this should be updated? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.135|108.162.242.135]] 21:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

for trivia doesn't mass bend light so IMHO probably still possible for star light on that position [[Special:Contributions/162.158.163.61|162.158.163.61]] 05:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
:Nope - if a distant star's light were being gravitationally lensed by the moon, then its light would appear ''adjacent'' to the moon's disk, not ''on'' it. A star's light could only appear to originate ''on'' the moon's disk if its light were being lensed by another massive object ''between'' the earth and the moon (such as a second moon). [[User:Whoop whoop pull up|Whoop whoop pull up]] ([[User talk:Whoop whoop pull up|talk]]) 17:10, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

For the Dreamworks logo, it seems that the static versions don't sport the stars-through-the-moon problem, but I suspect the animated versions (the ones showing at the beginning of their movies) might and probably do. As it so happens, I'm watching Kung Fu Panda 2 for the first time right now, - the fishing kid is a turtle in this case, LOL! - and I note that this problem isn't present here, though there are no stars at all during the logo, so that might be the only reason why. (Of course, if a kid can sit there fishing, the rest of the moon is clearly absent, why wouldn't we see stars there, LOL!) - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.239|108.162.218.239]] 18:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC) I finally signed up! This comment is mine. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 11:12, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I swear to god I've seen an Upside down moon before.... both in the day and at night the cusps were pointed down or towards the horizon heres an example of one https://www.flickr.com/photos/dcysurfer/14631243979 i'm 100% sure this is not fake and that there is no reason why one would use a dslr upsidedown or rotate it in post (this is in the southern hemisphere so that may be why... i also swear that many times i've seen the cusps pointed directly to the side (northern hemisphere)
heres a nasa photo http://www.nasa.gov/centers/wallops/news/InOMN.html
[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 06:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:You haven't, at least not at night. The Flickr photo isn't evidence at all -- people often rotate pictures for best effect. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.55.80|172.68.55.80]] 15:55, 3 October 2016 (UTC) i swear it was at night. also the nasa photo looks the same...
i'll take a photo of it one day... it could've been dusk/ last light and maybe it was just a touch rotated down without accounting for the slope the user is standing on but its not impossible {{unsigned|Needforsuv}}

'If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth.' Funny how people still talk as if Earth is the center of the universe. More correct would have been to say something about "Earth's rotation" and stuff. {{unsigned ip|162.158.83.144}}

The moon that does look like the last one is the one in the old Proctor and Gamble logo. https://goo.gl/images/4UE6n6 {{unsigned ip|162.158.10.4}}

== Phil Plait reads xkcd ==

Has anyone else noticed the Phil Plait message in the news section (up top) ? In case it changes: "Thank you to Phil Plait for the correction on #4!" [[User:Blagae|Blagae]] ([[User talk:Blagae|talk]]) 20:16, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

== UPSIDE down moon PROOF:==
[https://imgur.com/gallery/IcJj5]
I took the photos MYSELF [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 09:26, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1894: Real Estate

2017-09-27T11:33:08Z

Needforsuv: spacing

That comic would've been funny ten years ago, but I'm not buying it from an author that is 33, sorry. Is Cueball supposed to be still in college? Is Munroe poking fun at fatuitous sophomores? Boring. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.121|162.158.89.121]] 12:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:I think Randall still feel confused about owning a home, and the prices. When buying for hundred of thousands dollars and then some one cuts 10.000 dollars of the price, that is not that much relative, but it would be a huge deal to save that much in any other situation. Is that then a good offer or nor? As can be seen from my initial start of the explanation by just adding refs to three other comics, this is an issue Randall has returned to several times over the span of xkcd's lifetime. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:Rings completely true to this 41 year old[[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.32|162.158.155.32]] 14:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
::And to this 33 year old [[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.106|162.158.202.106]] 19:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
:It highlights what basically becomes an enormous difference in number size when doing some of these financial transactions. Having owned a house for three years now, I ''still'' cannot fully conceptualise the amount of debt I'm in. Sure, I know the number, and I signed all the papers, but it's an order of magnitude more than buying a car, which is an order of magnitude more than buying a 4k UHD TV, which itself is one of those things you don't even do every year. Within that context, being able to properly appraise whether that 10k discount (and driveway repairs) are worth it is fairly difficult to do. I got a 6k discount for a roof job that needed to be done on the house, along with an estimate that coincidentally expired before closing, that ended up costing me 11k. I had nowhere near any experience to know if any of that was reasonable, and, quite frankly, I still don't think I would have if I did it again. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.64|172.68.141.64]] 18:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
: If you're correct as to his age, I'm a chunk older than him and I still identify with comics like this. I've never bought a house and am sure it would likewise overwhelm me, it would be difficult to grasp that I'm considering encurring such a large debt. I too sometimes don't feel like I'm an adult and am just faking, I spent so many years growing up knowing I wasn't an adult that once I became one it was difficult to grasp that this has "magically" changed. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
::Well, he cracked the joke about Cueball drilling too many holes in his first own walls (xkcd no 905) six years ago. Don't know why, Dilbert certainly hasn't aged in decades, but it bothers me here. ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.121|162.158.89.121]] 08:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

So, what are driveaway repairs? How much value does it normally have? Sorry for being stupid.
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.182.64|172.68.182.64]] 19:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:It could be broken tiles in the driveway for instance. Depending on how many and what type it could be a whole range of values. The idea is that Cueball also has no idea if this compares to the 10,000 $ discount he already has on offer. Probably not though...--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:: As far as I know, the average driveway is paved (at least here in North America, which is also where Randall is). A driveway could have oil stains and such, and/or could be developing damages like roads get potholes, and cracks. "Repairing" any of these would require repaving (though I suspect they never dig it up like roads to start fresh). I think even a simple repaving would run into the thousands of dollars, depending on the size of the driveway. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Seems to me that part of the joke is Cueball, being stunned by the numbers, still uses his normal "let me think about it" response, even when the offer being presented is possibly already a concession to his indecisiveness, and has no drawback (they offer to both reduce price '''and''' cover the repairs). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.21|162.158.62.21]] 20:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
: It has a drawback. He can still decide not to buy the house at all and "save" a whole lot of money. {{unsigned ip|103.22.200.114}}
:: He might also be considering other houses, is this now the better deal? Was it overpriced to begin with and this $10G only a drop in the bucket? Are there other necessary repairs which will cost even more than the money reduction, meaning that it should be reduced further, since the final cost to Cueball will still be higher than the previous price? Are there other issues he hasn't found yet, devaluing the place? (I'm thinking of an episode of How I Met Your Mother, where they bought a place in the "upcoming" neighbourhood of Dowisetrepla - DOwn WInd from the SEwage TREatment PLAnt, a plant that was closed for the weekend, and thus not stinking up the whole neighbourhood when they saw it). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

This may also have a poke at some recent radio commercials (I forget for which bank) where, in the commercials, real estate agents and home buyers refer to home prices in terms of "years of really hard work" or similar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.108|172.68.65.108]] 03:02, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

15 dollars is ALOT for pizza... given that frozen ones are only $5 and about double that for a store pizza and I am talking AUD here [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 11:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1894: Real Estate

2017-09-27T11:32:15Z

Needforsuv:

That comic would've been funny ten years ago, but I'm not buying it from an author that is 33, sorry. Is Cueball supposed to be still in college? Is Munroe poking fun at fatuitous sophomores? Boring. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.121|162.158.89.121]] 12:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:I think Randall still feel confused about owning a home, and the prices. When buying for hundred of thousands dollars and then some one cuts 10.000 dollars of the price, that is not that much relative, but it would be a huge deal to save that much in any other situation. Is that then a good offer or nor? As can be seen from my initial start of the explanation by just adding refs to three other comics, this is an issue Randall has returned to several times over the span of xkcd's lifetime. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:Rings completely true to this 41 year old[[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.32|162.158.155.32]] 14:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
::And to this 33 year old [[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.106|162.158.202.106]] 19:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
:It highlights what basically becomes an enormous difference in number size when doing some of these financial transactions. Having owned a house for three years now, I ''still'' cannot fully conceptualise the amount of debt I'm in. Sure, I know the number, and I signed all the papers, but it's an order of magnitude more than buying a car, which is an order of magnitude more than buying a 4k UHD TV, which itself is one of those things you don't even do every year. Within that context, being able to properly appraise whether that 10k discount (and driveway repairs) are worth it is fairly difficult to do. I got a 6k discount for a roof job that needed to be done on the house, along with an estimate that coincidentally expired before closing, that ended up costing me 11k. I had nowhere near any experience to know if any of that was reasonable, and, quite frankly, I still don't think I would have if I did it again. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.64|172.68.141.64]] 18:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
: If you're correct as to his age, I'm a chunk older than him and I still identify with comics like this. I've never bought a house and am sure it would likewise overwhelm me, it would be difficult to grasp that I'm considering encurring such a large debt. I too sometimes don't feel like I'm an adult and am just faking, I spent so many years growing up knowing I wasn't an adult that once I became one it was difficult to grasp that this has "magically" changed. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
::Well, he cracked the joke about Cueball drilling too many holes in his first own walls (xkcd no 905) six years ago. Don't know why, Dilbert certainly hasn't aged in decades, but it bothers me here. ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.121|162.158.89.121]] 08:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

So, what are driveaway repairs? How much value does it normally have? Sorry for being stupid.
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.182.64|172.68.182.64]] 19:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:It could be broken tiles in the driveway for instance. Depending on how many and what type it could be a whole range of values. The idea is that Cueball also has no idea if this compares to the 10,000 $ discount he already has on offer. Probably not though...--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
:: As far as I know, the average driveway is paved (at least here in North America, which is also where Randall is). A driveway could have oil stains and such, and/or could be developing damages like roads get potholes, and cracks. "Repairing" any of these would require repaving (though I suspect they never dig it up like roads to start fresh). I think even a simple repaving would run into the thousands of dollars, depending on the size of the driveway. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Seems to me that part of the joke is Cueball, being stunned by the numbers, still uses his normal "let me think about it" response, even when the offer being presented is possibly already a concession to his indecisiveness, and has no drawback (they offer to both reduce price '''and''' cover the repairs). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.21|162.158.62.21]] 20:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
: It has a drawback. He can still decide not to buy the house at all and "save" a whole lot of money. {{unsigned ip|103.22.200.114}}
:: He might also be considering other houses, is this now the better deal? Was it overpriced to begin with and this $10G only a drop in the bucket? Are there other necessary repairs which will cost even more than the money reduction, meaning that it should be reduced further, since the final cost to Cueball will still be higher than the previous price? Are there other issues he hasn't found yet, devaluing the place? (I'm thinking of an episode of How I Met Your Mother, where they bought a place in the "upcoming" neighbourhood of Dowisetrepla - DOwn WInd from the SEwage TREatment PLAnt, a plant that was closed for the weekend, and thus not stinking up the whole neighbourhood when they saw it). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

This may also have a poke at some recent radio commercials (I forget for which bank) where, in the commercials, real estate agents and home buyers refer to home prices in terms of "years of really hard work" or similar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.108|172.68.65.108]] 03:02, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
15 dollars is ALOT for pizza... given that frozen ones are only $5 and about double that for a store pizza and I am talking AUD here [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 11:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

1862: Particle Properties

2017-07-14T10:08:56Z

Needforsuv: Undo revision 142618 by Needforsuv (talk)

{{comic
| number = 1862
| date = July 12, 2017
| title = Particle Properties
| image = particle_properties.png
| titletext = Each particle also has a password which allows its properties to be changed, but the cosmic censorship hypothesis suggests we can never observe the password itself—only its secure hash.
}}

==Explanation==
A table is presented comparing the range (maximum and minimum value) and scale (how big number increments are) of several measures. The table begins by listing properties pertinent to {{w|particle physics}} as the title suggests, but quickly devolves to other domains such as role-playing games (such as D&D) and sports after failing to provide a good definition of {{w|Flavour (particle physics)|flavor}}.

{| class=wikitable
! Property
! Scale
! Explanation
|-
| Electric charge
| [-1,1]
| The {{w|electric charge}} is shown in increments of a third from -1 to +1 which are the only known charges of fundamental particles (leptons, quarks and gauge bosons); however there are some exotic composite particles with twice integer charge, e.g. the recently discovered double charmed Xi baryon with a charge of +2.

Quarks are the only particles with charges of ± ⅓ or ± ⅔, but cannot exist on their own. To date, all hadrons (particles composed of quarks) have integer charge, and current models indicate that this must be the case.
|-
| Mass
| [0,∞) in kg
| Mass (specifically {{w|rest mass}}) is the measure of an object or particle's resistance to force, as well as its ability to distort {{w|spacetime}} (its gravitational attraction).
Theoretically, any object's mass could approach infinity, but mass cannot be below 0. The mass units shown (kilograms) are, however, far too large for particles. Some particles, such as photons, have zero rest mass and are therefore massless.

All particles with rest mass obtain it through confinement, either by the {{w|Higgs field}} (the quarks, leptons and W, Z, and Higgs bosons) or the strong nuclear force (hadrons).
Particles with no rest mass (photons and gluons) can only move at lightspeed.
|-
| Spin number
| (-∞,∞) (Intervals of ½)
| {{w|Spin (physics)|Spin}} is an intrinsic property of particles, a relativistic form of angular momentum. The spin of a particle determines what statistics the particle follows, half odd integer spin particles are classified as fermions and integer spin particles are bosons.

Two fermions cannot have exactly the same state, an observation known as the Pauli exclusion principle. Thus, for fermions to exist in the same position, they must have opposite spins, of + ½ and - ½. It follows that a maximum of two fermions of the same flavor (e.g. two electrons) may exist in the same position.
|-
| Flavor
| Misc. quantum numbers
| Flavor is a series of {{w|quantum numbers}} that do not fit neatly onto a set of dimensional axes.

The most general theory breaks flavor down into four distinct conserved values, the electric charge, the weak isospin, the baryon number and the lepton number, but more specific models increase the number of distinct values. Quarks, for example, add five more flavor numbers: isospin (upness vs. downness), strangeness, charm, topness and bottomness (the last four are literally just the number of strange, charmed, top and bottom quarks, minus the corresponding anti-quarks).
|-
| Color charge
| Coordinate system with R, G and B axes
| The primary {{w|strong nuclear force}} has six mutually attractive charges, arranged in three perpendicular axes each analogous to electric charge. These charges are commonly referred to as "{{w|Color charge|color}}" and the three axes are given the names of the three primary colors of light: Red, Green and Blue. The black dots in the diagram represent the actual colors while the white dots are the anti-color charges: anti-Red (colored cyan in diagrams), anti-Green (magenta) and anti-Blue (yellow). To complete the analogy, a color charge of zero is referred to as "White". The names of these charges are purely allegorical, but they do make it convenient to refer to them, especially in diagrams.

The color of a particle not confined by the strong force must be White, either as the sum of a color and its anti-color (as in a meson), as the sum of RGB or anti-RGB (as in a baryon), or as a sum of those sums (As in tetra-, penta- or hexaquarks). The attraction of the strong nuclear force is so strong that attempting to separate two quarks from each other creates enough energy to create two new quarks, which then bind to the original quarks. This property is known as "confinement" and means that color charge can never be observed directly.

Randall is incorrect in stating "Quarks only", since {{w|gluon}}s (the particle that carries the color force) are themselves colored. However, the colors of gluons are much more complicated, with a total of eight distinct superpositions of every possible color-anticolor pair. The fact that gluons are subject to the force they mediate also means that the strong force has a defined radius of effect, unlike the electromagnetic force, whose gauge bosons (the photon) are uncharged.

This is the last entry currently used to describe particles by particle physicists.
|-
| Mood
| 5 emojis on a number line ranging from angry to joyful
| Particles are not considered to have mood, even in the allegorical way they have color or flavor, but Randall implies that there is a quantized 5 point scale (from "angry" to "ecstatic") which would have some effect on the properties of the particle. This would be more appropriate for measuring customer satisfaction. Charts such as this are also sometimes used in medicine to indicate levels of pain, and in some psychiatric treatments as a quick way to track changes in the patient's condition.

In grammar, {{w|Grammatical particles|particles}} are a nebulous class of words, usually defined by a lack of declension or conjugation (such as prepositions in English). Some languages use particles instead of or in addition to "standard" declension/conjugation, much like auxiliary verbs are used in English. These particles may well carry "{{w|Grammatical mood|mood}}" as an attribute, as well as tense and aspect.
|-
| Alignment
| 3x3 grid with varying shades (columns Good-Evil, rows Lawful-Chaotic)
| A reference to the tabletop RPG ''{{w|Dungeons & Dragons}}'', where characters have an {{w|Alignment (Dungeons & Dragons)|alignment}} that is either Good, Neutral, or Evil (describing whether they have a propensity to help or harm others) and either Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic (describing how much they care about organizations, social norms, and the status quo). Common examples of these alignments include Darth Vader (Lawful Evil), Superman (Lawful Good), Robin Hood (Chaotic Good), and the Joker (Chaotic Evil). This may be a reference to the now defunct names of the two heaviest known quarks ("truth" and "beauty").
|-
| Hit points
| [0,∞)
| Games (videogames, board games, CCGs, RPGs, etc.) often have values for players and other entities that represent {{w|Health (video game)|health}} (also called hit points or HP). Generally there is not necessarily a limit on this value, but it does not often go below 0 as the zero value is considered "dead" (or some equivalent).
|-
| Rating
| 5-star scale
| The five-star rating system is often used to rate films, TV shows, restaurants, and hotels. Randall has previously criticized this system in [[937: TornadoGuard]] and [[1098: Star Ratings]].
|-
| String type
| Bytestring-Charstring
| In computer science this denotes what type of data is stored subsequent set of elements or a {{w|String_(computing)|string}}. This is likely a pun on {{w|String_(physics)|string}} types that appear in {{w|string theory}} and particle physics, and may also be a reference to {{w|Python (programming language)|Python}}, in which the difference between a byte string and a (Unicode) character string is a cause of difficulties for some programmers.
|-
| Batting average
| [0,100] in %
| In {{w|baseball}}, a player's {{w|batting average}} is calculated by dividing their hits by their at-bats. Instead of using the percent sign (%), it is usually presented as a number between 0 and 1 (inclusive) expressed as three decimal places with no leading zero: [.000, 1.000]. It is pronounced as though it is multiplied by 1,000: A batter with a batting average of .342 (which is very good) is said to be "batting three forty-two." A perfect batting average (unattainable except in very small samples) gives rise to the expression "batting a thousand." The 0-100 scale would be a better match for the batting average statistic in {{w|cricket}}, although percents would still not be used.
|-
| Proof
| [0,200]
| This refers to {{w|alcohol proof}}, which is the measure of the amount of ethanol in a beverage by volume. In the United States, 100% proof correspond to 50% alcohol, so the proof of a beverage is two times the percentage of ethanol, so the maximum value is 200.
|-
| Heat
| No jalapeño icons - 3 jalapeño icons, increasing
| Spicy dishes are sometimes measured by the intensity of the spicy flavor, usually ranging from values like "mild" to "hot". The gray jalapeño likely represents negligible or no spicy taste in the food. However, as an objective scale it is largely meaningless, since there is no reliable consistency in how these ratings are applied - what may be considered a 3-chilli dish in one establishment may only be a 1-chilli dish in another. The scale being unlimited may be a reference to the practice of some restaurants where a fourth or fifth chilli may be added to exaggerate the heat of their dishes.
|-
| Street value
| [0,∞) in $
| The value of an illegal good or a legal/controlled good when bought or sold by illegal means usually by or to the end user.
|-
| Entropy
| ''This already has like 20 different confusing meanings, so it probably means something here, too.''
| The term "entropy", which {{w|History of entropy|began}} as a {{w|Entropy (classical thermodynamics)|thermodynamic measure}}, has since been adopted {{w|Entropy in thermodynamics and information theory|by analogy}} into {{w|Entropy (disambiguation)|multiple seemingly unrelated domains}}. The table doesn't seem to know what domain it is in, but (possibly in a desperate attempt to hide this) deems it safe to assume the unknown domain uses the term "entropy" for ''something''! Entropy is often described as a measure of disorder or chaos so this may be another reference to the D&d alignment axis above.
|}

The title text says that in addition each particle has a password, but only hash of the password can be observed. This is a computer science reference. In computer science properties (e.g. of an object or program) often can be changed with a single command. In physics as we observe it, properties can locally change with the environment. There are several {{w|Time-variation_of_fundamental_constants|experiments}}, whether physical constants are really time-const. Password hashing is the practice of hiding the password itself by storing only an irreversible representation of the password. Since the password itself is not stored, the password cannot ever be viewed by the user or a hacker (outside of the login page). This method is considered to be safest way of storing passwords. Password hashing using some {{w|key derivation function}} makes it impossible to steal passwords even if the server that stores hashes is cracked, unless the hash function is also broken, which should be a task which cannot be completed in any feasible time for sufficiently strong passwords. The title-text claims this is predicted by the {{w|cosmic censorship hypothesis}}, which in reality claims that a {{w|gravitational singularity}} must always be obscured by an event horizon (i.e.: there can't be a {{w|naked singularity}}). There is also a hint of quantum mechanics in the statement, as observation is one of the central concepts of the field, and {{w|Heisenberg's uncertainty principle}} actually states that it is impossible to observe (measure) some property of a particle with arbitrary precision when another one is known (e.g.: you can't determine the momentum and position of a particle). This makes the title text a mix of several domains, as was the above table.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon. Is table alone the best solution?}}
:<big>Particle Properties in Physics</big>
{| class=wikitable
! Property
! Type/scale
|-
| Electric charge
| [Scale with -1, 0 and +1 labeled and markings dividing the units in thirds. The endpoints are both dots.]
|-
| Mass
| [Scale with 0, 1kg and 2kg labeled and markings dividing the units into thirds. The endpoints are a dot on the zero end and an arrow on the other end.]
|-
| Spin number
| [Scale with -1, -½, 0, ½ and 1 labeled and no additional markings. The endpoints are both arrows, pointing out.]
|-
| Flavor
| (Misc. quantum numbers)
|-
| Color charge
| [Coordinate system of three axes labeled R, G and B clockwise from the 10 o'clock position. Endpoints are arrow-dots on all ends, with black dots for the labeled ends and white dots for the unlabeled ends.] (Quarks only)
|-
| Mood
| [Scale labeled with 5 emoticons, from angry to happy, and markings dividing the units in thirds. Endpoints are both arrows, pointing out.]
|-
| Alignment
| [3x3 grid with varying shades] Good-Evil, Lawful-Chaotic
|-
| Hit points
| [Scale starting from 0, markings but no labels other than zero. Endpoints are a dot at zero end and an arrow at the other end.]
|-
| Rating
| [Star rating of 3.5/5 stars]
|-
| String type
| Bytestring-Charstring
|-
| Batting average
| [Scale from 0% to 100%. Endpoints are dot at 0% end and arrow-dot at 100% end.]
|-
| Proof
| [Scale from 0 to 200. Endpoints are dot at 0 end and arrow-dot at 200 end.]
|-
| Heat
| [Scale labeled with pepper icons, from 0 (a grayed-out pepper) to 3. Endpoints are a dot at zero end and an arrow at the other end.]
|-
| Street value
| [Scale with $0, $100 and $200 labeled. Endpoints are a dot at zero end and an arrow at the other end.]
|-
| Entropy
| (This already has like 20 different confusing meanings, so it probably means something here, too.)
|}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Baseball]]

1862: Particle Properties

2017-07-14T10:03:21Z

Needforsuv:

{{comic
| number = 1862
| date = July 12, 2017
| title = Particle Properties
| image = particle_properties.png
| titletext = Each particle also has a password which allows its properties to be changed, but the cosmic censorship hypothesis suggests we can never observe the password itself—only its secure hash.
}}

==Explanation==
A table is presented comparing the range (maximum and minimum value) and scale (how big number increments are) of several measures. The table begins by listing properties pertinent to {{w|particle physics}} as the title suggests, but quickly devolves to other domains such as role-playing games (such as D&D) and sports after failing to provide a good definition of {{w|Flavour (particle physics)|flavor}}.

{| class=wikitable
! Property
! Scale
! Explanation
|-
| Electric charge
| [-1,1]
| The {{w|electric charge}} is shown in increments of a third from -1 to +1 which are the only known charges of fundamental particles (leptons, quarks and gauge bosons); however there are some exotic composite particles with twice integer charge, e.g. the recently discovered double charmed Xi baryon with a charge of +2.

Quarks are the only particles with charges of ± ⅓ or ± ⅔, but cannot exist on their own. To date, all hadrons (particles composed of quarks) have integer charge, and current models indicate that this must be the case.
|-
| Mass
| [0,∞] in kg
| Mass (specifically {{w|rest mass}}) is the measure of an object or particle's resistance to force, as well as its ability to distort {{w|spacetime}} (its gravitational attraction).
Theoretically, any object's mass could approach infinity, but mass cannot be below 0. The mass units shown (kilograms) are, however, far too large for particles. Some particles, such as photons, have zero rest mass and are therefore massless.

All particles with rest mass obtain it through confinement, either by the {{w|Higgs field}} (the quarks, leptons and W, Z, and Higgs bosons) or the strong nuclear force (hadrons).
Particles with no rest mass (photons and gluons) can only move at lightspeed.
|-
| Spin number
| (-∞,∞) (Intervals of ½)
| {{w|Spin (physics)|Spin}} is an intrinsic property of particles, a relativistic form of angular momentum. The spin of a particle determines what statistics the particle follows, half odd integer spin particles are classified as fermions and integer spin particles are bosons.

Two fermions cannot have exactly the same state, an observation known as the Pauli exclusion principle. Thus, for fermions to exist in the same position, they must have opposite spins, of + ½ and - ½. It follows that a maximum of two fermions of the same flavor (e.g. two electrons) may exist in the same position.
|-
| Flavor
| Misc. quantum numbers
| Flavor is a series of {{w|quantum numbers}} that do not fit neatly onto a set of dimensional axes.

The most general theory breaks flavor down into four distinct conserved values, the electric charge, the weak isospin, the baryon number and the lepton number, but more specific models increase the number of distinct values. Quarks, for example, add five more flavor numbers: isospin (upness vs. downness), strangeness, charm, topness and bottomness (the last four are literally just the number of strange, charmed, top and bottom quarks, minus the corresponding anti-quarks).
|-
| Color charge
| Coordinate system with R, G and B axes
| The primary {{w|strong nuclear force}} has six mutually attractive charges, arranged in three perpendicular axes each analogous to electric charge. These charges are commonly referred to as "{{w|Color charge|color}}" and the three axes are given the names of the three primary colors of light: Red, Green and Blue. The black dots in the diagram represent the actual colors while the white dots are the anti-color charges: anti-Red (colored cyan in diagrams), anti-Green (magenta) and anti-Blue (yellow). To complete the analogy, a color charge of zero is referred to as "White". The names of these charges are purely allegorical, but they do make it convenient to refer to them, especially in diagrams.

The color of a particle not confined by the strong force must be White, either as the sum of a color and its anti-color (as in a meson), as the sum of RGB or anti-RGB (as in a baryon), or as a sum of those sums (As in tetra-, penta- or hexaquarks). The attraction of the strong nuclear force is so strong that attempting to separate two quarks from each other creates enough energy to create two new quarks, which then bind to the original quarks. This property is known as "confinement" and means that color charge can never be observed directly.

Randall is incorrect in stating "Quarks only", since {{w|gluon}}s (the particle that carries the color force) are themselves colored. However, the colors of gluons are much more complicated, with a total of eight distinct superpositions of every possible color-anticolor pair. The fact that gluons are subject to the force they mediate also means that the strong force has a defined radius of effect, unlike the electromagnetic force, whose gauge bosons (the photon) are uncharged.

This is the last entry currently used to describe particles by particle physicists.
|-
| Mood
| 5 emojis on a number line ranging from angry to joyful
| Particles are not considered to have mood, even in the allegorical way they have color or flavor, but Randall implies that there is a quantized 5 point scale (from "angry" to "ecstatic") which would have some effect on the properties of the particle. This would be more appropriate for measuring customer satisfaction. Charts such as this are also sometimes used in medicine to indicate levels of pain, and in some psychiatric treatments as a quick way to track changes in the patient's condition.

In grammar, {{w|Grammatical particles|particles}} are a nebulous class of words, usually defined by a lack of declension or conjugation (such as prepositions in English). Some languages use particles instead of or in addition to "standard" declension/conjugation, much like auxiliary verbs are used in English. These particles may well carry "{{w|Grammatical mood|mood}}" as an attribute, as well as tense and aspect.
|-
| Alignment
| 3x3 grid with varying shades (columns Good-Evil, rows Lawful-Chaotic)
| A reference to the tabletop RPG ''{{w|Dungeons & Dragons}}'', where characters have an {{w|Alignment (Dungeons & Dragons)|alignment}} that is either Good, Neutral, or Evil (describing whether they have a propensity to help or harm others) and either Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic (describing how much they care about organizations, social norms, and the status quo). Common examples of these alignments include Darth Vader (Lawful Evil), Superman (Lawful Good), Robin Hood (Chaotic Good), and the Joker (Chaotic Evil). This may be a reference to the now defunct names of the two heaviest known quarks ("truth" and "beauty").
|-
| Hit points
| [0,∞)
| Games (videogames, board games, CCGs, RPGs, etc.) often have values for players and other entities that represent {{w|Health (video game)|health}} (also called hit points or HP). Generally there is not necessarily a limit on this value, but it does not often go below 0 as the zero value is considered "dead" (or some equivalent).
|-
| Rating
| 5-star scale
| The five-star rating system is often used to rate films, TV shows, restaurants, and hotels. Randall has previously criticized this system in [[937: TornadoGuard]] and [[1098: Star Ratings]].
|-
| String type
| Bytestring-Charstring
| In computer science this denotes what type of data is stored subsequent set of elements or a {{w|String_(computing)|string}}. This is likely a pun on {{w|String_(physics)|string}} types that appear in {{w|string theory}} and particle physics, and may also be a reference to {{w|Python (programming language)|Python}}, in which the difference between a byte string and a (Unicode) character string is a cause of difficulties for some programmers.
|-
| Batting average
| [0,100] in %
| In {{w|baseball}}, a player's {{w|batting average}} is calculated by dividing their hits by their at-bats. Instead of using the percent sign (%), it is usually presented as a number between 0 and 1 (inclusive) expressed as three decimal places with no leading zero: [.000, 1.000]. It is pronounced as though it is multiplied by 1,000: A batter with a batting average of .342 (which is very good) is said to be "batting three forty-two." A perfect batting average (unattainable except in very small samples) gives rise to the expression "batting a thousand." The 0-100 scale would be a better match for the batting average statistic in {{w|cricket}}, although percents would still not be used.
|-
| Proof
| [0,200]
| This refers to {{w|alcohol proof}}, which is the measure of the amount of ethanol in a beverage by volume. In the United States, 100% proof correspond to 50% alcohol, so the proof of a beverage is two times the percentage of ethanol, so the maximum value is 200.
|-
| Heat
| No jalapeño icons - 3 jalapeño icons, increasing
| Spicy dishes are sometimes measured by the intensity of the spicy flavor, usually ranging from values like "mild" to "hot". The gray jalapeño likely represents negligible or no spicy taste in the food. However, as an objective scale it is largely meaningless, since there is no reliable consistency in how these ratings are applied - what may be considered a 3-chilli dish in one establishment may only be a 1-chilli dish in another. The scale being unlimited may be a reference to the practice of some restaurants where a fourth or fifth chilli may be added to exaggerate the heat of their dishes.
|-
| Street value
| [0,∞) in $
| The value of an illegal good or a legal/controlled good when bought or sold by illegal means usually by or to the end user.
|-
| Entropy
| ''This already has like 20 different confusing meanings, so it probably means something here, too.''
| The term "entropy", which {{w|History of entropy|began}} as a {{w|Entropy (classical thermodynamics)|thermodynamic measure}}, has since been adopted {{w|Entropy in thermodynamics and information theory|by analogy}} into {{w|Entropy (disambiguation)|multiple seemingly unrelated domains}}. The table doesn't seem to know what domain it is in, but (possibly in a desperate attempt to hide this) deems it safe to assume the unknown domain uses the term "entropy" for ''something''! Entropy is often described as a measure of disorder or chaos so this may be another reference to the D&d alignment axis above.
|}

The title text says that in addition each particle has a password, but only hash of the password can be observed. This is a computer science reference. In computer science properties (e.g. of an object or program) often can be changed with a single command. In physics as we observe it, properties can locally change with the environment. There are several {{w|Time-variation_of_fundamental_constants|experiments}}, whether physical constants are really time-const. Password hashing is the practice of hiding the password itself by storing only an irreversible representation of the password. Since the password itself is not stored, the password cannot ever be viewed by the user or a hacker (outside of the login page). This method is considered to be safest way of storing passwords. Password hashing using some {{w|key derivation function}} makes it impossible to steal passwords even if the server that stores hashes is cracked, unless the hash function is also broken, which should be a task which cannot be completed in any feasible time for sufficiently strong passwords. The title-text claims this is predicted by the {{w|cosmic censorship hypothesis}}, which in reality claims that a {{w|gravitational singularity}} must always be obscured by an event horizon (i.e.: there can't be a {{w|naked singularity}}). There is also a hint of quantum mechanics in the statement, as observation is one of the central concepts of the field, and {{w|Heisenberg's uncertainty principle}} actually states that it is impossible to observe (measure) some property of a particle with arbitrary precision when another one is known (e.g.: you can't determine the momentum and position of a particle). This makes the title text a mix of several domains, as was the above table.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon. Is table alone the best solution?}}
:<big>Particle Properties in Physics</big>
{| class=wikitable
! Property
! Type/scale
|-
| Electric charge
| [Scale with -1, 0 and +1 labeled and markings dividing the units in thirds. The endpoints are both dots.]
|-
| Mass
| [Scale with 0, 1kg and 2kg labeled and markings dividing the units into thirds. The endpoints are a dot on the zero end and an arrow on the other end.]
|-
| Spin number
| [Scale with -1, -½, 0, ½ and 1 labeled and no additional markings. The endpoints are both arrows, pointing out.]
|-
| Flavor
| (Misc. quantum numbers)
|-
| Color charge
| [Coordinate system of three axes labeled R, G and B clockwise from the 10 o'clock position. Endpoints are arrow-dots on all ends, with black dots for the labeled ends and white dots for the unlabeled ends.] (Quarks only)
|-
| Mood
| [Scale labeled with 5 emoticons, from angry to happy, and markings dividing the units in thirds. Endpoints are both arrows, pointing out.]
|-
| Alignment
| [3x3 grid with varying shades] Good-Evil, Lawful-Chaotic
|-
| Hit points
| [Scale starting from 0, markings but no labels other than zero. Endpoints are a dot at zero end and an arrow at the other end.]
|-
| Rating
| [Star rating of 3.5/5 stars]
|-
| String type
| Bytestring-Charstring
|-
| Batting average
| [Scale from 0% to 100%. Endpoints are dot at 0% end and arrow-dot at 100% end.]
|-
| Proof
| [Scale from 0 to 200. Endpoints are dot at 0 end and arrow-dot at 200 end.]
|-
| Heat
| [Scale labeled with pepper icons, from 0 (a grayed-out pepper) to 3. Endpoints are a dot at zero end and an arrow at the other end.]
|-
| Street value
| [Scale with $0, $100 and $200 labeled. Endpoints are a dot at zero end and an arrow at the other end.]
|-
| Entropy
| (This already has like 20 different confusing meanings, so it probably means something here, too.)
|}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Baseball]]

Talk:1855: Telephoto

2017-06-27T13:27:05Z

Needforsuv:

Notice the "webcam" placed on the front element, and the cable running through the extenders and converters back to the camera body? The extenders and converters are only being used for mechanical support, to place the webcam near the bird, and not optically. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.125|162.158.79.125]] 15:16, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 
I understood it to be that the webcam was mounted on the side of the extender, allowing for a live stream in addition to the up close picture being taken. [[User:Rajakiit|Raj-a-Kiit]] ([[User talk:Rajakiit|talk]]) 16:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
:That's how I took it, but the webcam and wires are drawn in a lighter line, possibly insinuating that the webcam and wires are inside the extenders and converters. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

It depends on how tall Randall actually is, but using an average of 1.7 m for humans, that camera is about 32 feet, 4 inches long (it's about 5.8 times the length of Cueball). [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 17:04, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
:Your comment makes me cringe. Apparently you measure people in metric but camera lengths (not focal length!) in imperial. So here you have it: 9,85m camera length! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.226|141.101.76.226]] 20:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
::Fair point, I'll simplify the equation. Cueball is 0.00845063 furlongs tall, the camera is 0.048984751 furlongs long. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 11:33, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
While I am at it I think using commas for decimal places is wrong. [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 13:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

;Incorrect definition of telephoto

A telephoto lens is actually a lens of which the physical length is shorter than the nominal focal length. For instance, I have a 90mm Leica lens that is about 67mm long; this is accomplished through the optical design. A ''long-focus'' or '' long '' lens is a lens with a comparatively long focal length: on 35mm cameras, this is generally any lens 85mm and up. They are sometimes called portrait lenses. A ''zoom'' lens is one with a variable focal length, e.g., 70mm – 140mm. It is not necessarily a long lens.

The distinction is especially important to large format photographers, and the conflation of the terms is common among lay speakers.

Randall has conflated a telephoto lens with a long lens, as does the current explanation.

See http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Telephoto#Long-focus_.28Telephoto.29 for on the topic.
[[User:Seezee|Seezee]] ([[User talk:Seezee|talk]]) 18:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
:It would be nice if you could enhance the explanation by this matter. I'm not an expert on photography but I believe Randall is just talking about a ''telephoto'' which is often also called ''telephoto lens''. And his ''telephoto'' even doesn't need a single lens. Randall hasn't conflated anything, it's the explanation. I.e. instead of "100 foot lens" it should be "100 foot telephoto without lenses", and similar to other sentences.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:01, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I am sure something like the contraption here will be a Long and Telephoto lens... like a telescope, yes you can get a lot of zoom under 200 mm lens length but then if you could do that they wouldn't have long telescopes.[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 13:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Could this also be a reference to all those phone camera attachment advertised online. I don't know if there's any truth to their claims (somehow I doubt it), but if anyone knows better, please chime in.

Were it not for the added weight of the tripod on the left, the right end would be on the ground. --[[User:Pascal|Pascal]] ([[User talk:Pascal|talk]]) 11:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1738: Moon Shapes

2016-10-30T06:20:57Z

Needforsuv:

It's a reflection of the nuclear war on [[1626|the sun's surface]]. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 08:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I can't find any photoshopped Moon that looks like the last image. Somebody has to make one. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.207|162.158.92.207]] 13:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

: Randall uncharacteristically missed an opportunity for pointing out additional errors that people make: It's interesting to note that you can get a decent estimate of the artist's latitude by looking at how they draw a crescent moon. In equatorial cultures, the crescent looks like a cup or a boat - and they interpret it like that. But if you look at most english language children's books, the crescent looks like a letter 'C' or a 'D' with a human face - suggesting that they were probably made in the tradition of northern Europe. When I first moved from the UK (more or less a 'C'-shaped crescent moon) to the southern USA (more like Randall's depiction of the correctly-drawn crescent with the points at a roughly 45 degree angle to the horizon) - I subconsciously felt that the moon "looked wrong" - it was only much later that I understood the reason.

: Furthermore, this rotation of the moon relative to the observer also explains why "The man in the moon" is a common trope caused by the pareidolia interpretation of the cratering patterns of the moon in northern cultures. But in southern cultures, people tend to see a rabbit in those full-moon patterns - and that has become the source of many of their stories.

: Now that I'm more acutely aware of this - it's interesting to note how many movies get the orientation of the moon wrong for the location that their story is supposedly set in! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::In Japan, for example, the patterns are interpreted as a rabbit making mochi (a sort of dense dumpling made from rice pounded into a powder) on the moon - the Sea of Tranquillity forming the head, and the Sea of Clouds forming part of the pestle in which the rabbit is pounding the rice. {{unsigned ip|188.114.102.167}}

::Considering how many movies features the famous [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheMountainsOfIllinois Mountains of Illinois], I would be more surprised when they get it right. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

: Not quite sure how to add this but Gibbon is the author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - or a type of Ape. It is not a phase of the moon. Also I think the moon depicted is Waning. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.113|141.101.98.113]] 14:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::I think the correct expression is gibbous - "having the illuminated part greater than a semicircle and less than a circle" {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.68}}
:: Yes, the one he says is correct has me thinking: "OMG, the moon is drunk and has fallen over on its ass." No self-respecting moon lies on its back like that.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.222|162.158.114.222]] 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Indeed - but that's pretty much how it looks down here in sunny Texas. It's one of those things you never think about - but once the fact of it clicks in your head, you get this visceral feeling of how you're standing on a large ball rather than a flat plane! Ha! Take that flat-earthers! :-) [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Living in Florida, our crescent moons are almost horizontal. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.60|108.162.212.60]]
: "Wax gibbon" is probably nothing more than a joke on mispronouncing "waxing gibbous". As drawn, it is the way a waning gibbous would appear in the northern hemisphere, but a waxing gibbous in the southern hemisphere. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Link to the DreamWorks logo image please? There seem to be multiple versions. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.216|108.162.237.216]] 15:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I'm surprised Randall missed the chance to include a joke about guys with fishing rods. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.141|162.158.85.141]] 15:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::http://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/dreamworks-logo.jpg... Here's the link to the Dreamworks logo. You're welcome. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::neither of the examples for the "stars in the moon" apply here. both randall's examples imply a spherical moon. spring and the dreamworks child are supported on a crescent moon for which only the light section actually exists. better examples, please. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.84|141.101.98.84]] 12:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
::While the dreamworks logo features a child sitting on the crescent moon as though the dark portion wasn't there, none of the versions of the logo which contain stars in the sky actually show stars 'inside' the moon's disk, so the logo probably isn't a good example of what Randall is complaining about. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPpy8mYHQps. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 17:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The first "wrong" image is also only possible if the bright portion is presumed to be the sun during a solar eclipse, assuming the sky is actually depicted as black. You can only have a crescent moon during a solar eclipse if the solar system suddenly acquired a second sun. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's a good counter-example: [http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V-N1Fj2RU7Y/Vnvbs3e6JxI/AAAAAAAAouE/X37EuZ2dXmI/s1600/236D5361-D23A-45AD-8D3B-451926D0CA82.jpg EXAMPLE]. The bright dot is actually the ISS transiting the moon - but it certainly looks like an impossibility! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The article doesn't mention the "nuclear war" joke. Does it need explaining? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.49|141.101.98.49]] 19:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:It does now. [[User:WingedCat|WingedCat]] ([[User talk:WingedCat|talk]]) 22:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
:: your welcome ;-) [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I've always wanted to create a story, and have the horns of the moon connect on the other side, so you have a blackbody in front of the moon, in parody of this tendency.
Also, interesting how the moon is at different rotations in different locations. I never did see the rabbit in the moon. Now I know why. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.74|108.162.245.74]] 04:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the examples of "incorrect" moons are kinda questionable - like, how relevant is the position of the moon when there's literally a giant divine skyperson standing on it, grabbing stars and scattering of them? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 23:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I fixed part of the explanation by mentioning the title text. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I think that's enough detail for an explanation, so I removed the "incomplete" bar. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Should the table of explanations include the text in the comic? [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The comic has been updated on xkcd. Randall revised the description of #4. Maybe this should be updated? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.135|108.162.242.135]] 21:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

for trivia doesn't mass bend light so IMHO probably still possible for star light on that position [[Special:Contributions/162.158.163.61|162.158.163.61]] 05:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
:Nope - if a distant star's light were being gravitationally lensed by the moon, then its light would appear ''adjacent'' to the moon's disk, not ''on'' it. A star's light could only appear to originate ''on'' the moon's disk if its light were being lensed by another massive object ''between'' the earth and the moon (such as a second moon). [[User:Whoop whoop pull up|Whoop whoop pull up]] ([[User talk:Whoop whoop pull up|talk]]) 17:10, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

For the Dreamworks logo, it seems that the static versions don't sport the stars-through-the-moon problem, but I suspect the animated versions (the ones showing at the beginning of their movies) might and probably do. As it so happens, I'm watching Kung Fu Panda 2 for the first time right now, - the fishing kid is a turtle in this case, LOL! - and I note that this problem isn't present here, though there are no stars at all during the logo, so that might be the only reason why. (Of course, if a kid can sit there fishing, the rest of the moon is clearly absent, why wouldn't we see stars there, LOL!) - Niceguy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.239|108.162.218.239]] 18:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I swear to god I've seen an Upside down moon before.... both in the day and at night the cusps were pointed down or towards the horizon heres an example of one https://www.flickr.com/photos/dcysurfer/14631243979 i'm 100% sure this is not fake and that there is no reason why one would use a dslr upsidedown or rotate it in post (this is in the southern hemisphere so that may be why... i also swear that many times i've seen the cusps pointed directly to the side (northern hemisphere)
heres a nasa photo http://www.nasa.gov/centers/wallops/news/InOMN.html
[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 06:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:You haven't, at least not at night. The Flickr photo isn't evidence at all -- people often rotate pictures for best effect. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.55.80|172.68.55.80]] 15:55, 3 October 2016 (UTC) i swear it was at night. also the nasa photo looks the same...
i'll take a photo of it one day... it could've been dusk/ last light and maybe it was just a touch rotated down without accounting for the slope the user is standing on but its not impossible

'If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth.' Funny how people still talk as if Earth is the center of the universe. More correct would have been to say something about "Earth's rotation" and stuff. {{unsigned ip|162.158.83.144}}

Talk:1738: Moon Shapes

2016-10-03T07:52:29Z

Needforsuv:

It's a reflection of the nuclear war on [[1626|the sun's surface]]. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 08:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I can't find any photoshopped Moon that looks like the last image. Somebody has to make one. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.207|162.158.92.207]] 13:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

: Randall uncharacteristically missed an opportunity for pointing out additional errors that people make: It's interesting to note that you can get a decent estimate of the artist's latitude by looking at how they draw a crescent moon. In equatorial cultures, the crescent looks like a cup or a boat - and they interpret it like that. But if you look at most english language children's books, the crescent looks like a letter 'C' or a 'D' with a human face - suggesting that they were probably made in the tradition of northern Europe. When I first moved from the UK (more or less a 'C'-shaped crescent moon) to the southern USA (more like Randall's depiction of the correctly-drawn crescent with the points at a roughly 45 degree angle to the horizon) - I subconsciously felt that the moon "looked wrong" - it was only much later that I understood the reason.

: Furthermore, this rotation of the moon relative to the observer also explains why "The man in the moon" is a common trope caused by the pareidolia interpretation of the cratering patterns of the moon in northern cultures. But in southern cultures, people tend to see a rabbit in those full-moon patterns - and that has become the source of many of their stories.

: Now that I'm more acutely aware of this - it's interesting to note how many movies get the orientation of the moon wrong for the location that their story is supposedly set in! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::In Japan, for example, the patterns are interpreted as a rabbit making mochi (a sort of dense dumpling made from rice pounded into a powder) on the moon - the Sea of Tranquillity forming the head, and the Sea of Clouds forming part of the pestle in which the rabbit is pounding the rice. {{unsigned ip|188.114.102.167}}

::Considering how many movies features the famous [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheMountainsOfIllinois Mountains of Illinois], I would be more surprised when they get it right. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

: Not quite sure how to add this but Gibbon is the author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - or a type of Ape. It is not a phase of the moon. Also I think the moon depicted is Waning. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.113|141.101.98.113]] 14:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::I think the correct expression is gibbous - "having the illuminated part greater than a semicircle and less than a circle" {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.68}}
:: Yes, the one he says is correct has me thinking: "OMG, the moon is drunk and has fallen over on its ass." No self-respecting moon lies on its back like that.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.222|162.158.114.222]] 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Indeed - but that's pretty much how it looks down here in sunny Texas. It's one of those things you never think about - but once the fact of it clicks in your head, you get this visceral feeling of how you're standing on a large ball rather than a flat plane! Ha! Take that flat-earthers! :-) [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Living in Florida, our crescent moons are almost horizontal. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.60|108.162.212.60]]
: "Wax gibbon" is probably nothing more than a joke on mispronouncing "waxing gibbous". As drawn, it is the way a waning gibbous would appear in the northern hemisphere, but a waxing gibbous in the southern hemisphere. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Link to the DreamWorks logo image please? There seem to be multiple versions. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.216|108.162.237.216]] 15:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I'm surprised Randall missed the chance to include a joke about guys with fishing rods. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.141|162.158.85.141]] 15:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::http://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/dreamworks-logo.jpg... Here's the link to the Dreamworks logo. You're welcome. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::neither of the examples for the "stars in the moon" apply here. both randall's examples imply a spherical moon. spring and the dreamworks child are supported on a crescent moon for which only the light section actually exists. better examples, please. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.84|141.101.98.84]] 12:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
::While the dreamworks logo features a child sitting on the crescent moon as though the dark portion wasn't there, none of the versions of the logo which contain stars in the sky actually show stars 'inside' the moon's disk, so the logo probably isn't a good example of what Randall is complaining about. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPpy8mYHQps. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 17:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The first "wrong" image is also only possible if the bright portion is presumed to be the sun during a solar eclipse, assuming the sky is actually depicted as black. You can only have a crescent moon during a solar eclipse if the solar system suddenly acquired a second sun. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's a good counter-example: [http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V-N1Fj2RU7Y/Vnvbs3e6JxI/AAAAAAAAouE/X37EuZ2dXmI/s1600/236D5361-D23A-45AD-8D3B-451926D0CA82.jpg EXAMPLE]. The bright dot is actually the ISS transiting the moon - but it certainly looks like an impossibility! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The article doesn't mention the "nuclear war" joke. Does it need explaining? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.49|141.101.98.49]] 19:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:It does now. [[User:WingedCat|WingedCat]] ([[User talk:WingedCat|talk]]) 22:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
:: your welcome ;-) [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I've always wanted to create a story, and have the horns of the moon connect on the other side, so you have a blackbody in front of the moon, in parody of this tendency.
Also, interesting how the moon is at different rotations in different locations. I never did see the rabbit in the moon. Now I know why. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.74|108.162.245.74]] 04:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the examples of "incorrect" moons are kinda questionable - like, how relevant is the position of the moon when there's literally a giant divine skyperson standing on it, grabbing stars and scattering of them? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 23:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I fixed part of the explanation by mentioning the title text. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I think that's enough detail for an explanation, so I removed the "incomplete" bar. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Should the table of explanations include the text in the comic? [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The comic has been updated on xkcd. Randall revised the description of #4. Maybe this should be updated? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.135|108.162.242.135]] 21:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

for trivia doesn't mass bend light so IMHO probably still possible for star light on that position [[Special:Contributions/162.158.163.61|162.158.163.61]] 05:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

For the Dreamworks logo, it seems that the static versions don't sport the stars-through-the-moon problem, but I suspect the animated versions (the ones showing at the beginning of their movies) might and probably do. As it so happens, I'm watching Kung Fu Panda 2 for the first time right now, - the fishing kid is a turtle in this case, LOL! - and I note that this problem isn't present here, though there are no stars at all during the logo, so that might be the only reason why. (Of course, if a kid can sit there fishing, the rest of the moon is clearly absent, why wouldn't we see stars there, LOL!) - Niceguy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.239|108.162.218.239]] 18:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I swear to god I've seen an Upside down moon before.... both in the day and at night the cusps were pointed down or towards the horizon heres an example of one https://www.flickr.com/photos/dcysurfer/14631243979 i'm 100% sure this is not fake and that there is no reason why one would use a dslr upsidedown or rotate it in post (this is in the southern hemisphere so that may be why... i also swear that many times i've seen the cusps pointed directly to the side (northern hemisphere)
heres a nasa photo http://www.nasa.gov/centers/wallops/news/InOMN.html
[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 06:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1738: Moon Shapes

2016-10-03T07:49:38Z

Needforsuv:

It's a reflection of the nuclear war on [[1626|the sun's surface]]. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 08:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I can't find any photoshopped Moon that looks like the last image. Somebody has to make one. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.207|162.158.92.207]] 13:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

: Randall uncharacteristically missed an opportunity for pointing out additional errors that people make: It's interesting to note that you can get a decent estimate of the artist's latitude by looking at how they draw a crescent moon. In equatorial cultures, the crescent looks like a cup or a boat - and they interpret it like that. But if you look at most english language children's books, the crescent looks like a letter 'C' or a 'D' with a human face - suggesting that they were probably made in the tradition of northern Europe. When I first moved from the UK (more or less a 'C'-shaped crescent moon) to the southern USA (more like Randall's depiction of the correctly-drawn crescent with the points at a roughly 45 degree angle to the horizon) - I subconsciously felt that the moon "looked wrong" - it was only much later that I understood the reason.

: Furthermore, this rotation of the moon relative to the observer also explains why "The man in the moon" is a common trope caused by the pareidolia interpretation of the cratering patterns of the moon in northern cultures. But in southern cultures, people tend to see a rabbit in those full-moon patterns - and that has become the source of many of their stories.

: Now that I'm more acutely aware of this - it's interesting to note how many movies get the orientation of the moon wrong for the location that their story is supposedly set in! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::In Japan, for example, the patterns are interpreted as a rabbit making mochi (a sort of dense dumpling made from rice pounded into a powder) on the moon - the Sea of Tranquillity forming the head, and the Sea of Clouds forming part of the pestle in which the rabbit is pounding the rice. {{unsigned ip|188.114.102.167}}

::Considering how many movies features the famous [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheMountainsOfIllinois Mountains of Illinois], I would be more surprised when they get it right. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

: Not quite sure how to add this but Gibbon is the author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - or a type of Ape. It is not a phase of the moon. Also I think the moon depicted is Waning. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.113|141.101.98.113]] 14:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::I think the correct expression is gibbous - "having the illuminated part greater than a semicircle and less than a circle" {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.68}}
:: Yes, the one he says is correct has me thinking: "OMG, the moon is drunk and has fallen over on its ass." No self-respecting moon lies on its back like that.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.222|162.158.114.222]] 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Indeed - but that's pretty much how it looks down here in sunny Texas. It's one of those things you never think about - but once the fact of it clicks in your head, you get this visceral feeling of how you're standing on a large ball rather than a flat plane! Ha! Take that flat-earthers! :-) [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Living in Florida, our crescent moons are almost horizontal. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.60|108.162.212.60]]
: "Wax gibbon" is probably nothing more than a joke on mispronouncing "waxing gibbous". As drawn, it is the way a waning gibbous would appear in the northern hemisphere, but a waxing gibbous in the southern hemisphere. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Link to the DreamWorks logo image please? There seem to be multiple versions. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.216|108.162.237.216]] 15:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I'm surprised Randall missed the chance to include a joke about guys with fishing rods. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.141|162.158.85.141]] 15:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::http://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/dreamworks-logo.jpg... Here's the link to the Dreamworks logo. You're welcome. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::neither of the examples for the "stars in the moon" apply here. both randall's examples imply a spherical moon. spring and the dreamworks child are supported on a crescent moon for which only the light section actually exists. better examples, please. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.84|141.101.98.84]] 12:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
::While the dreamworks logo features a child sitting on the crescent moon as though the dark portion wasn't there, none of the versions of the logo which contain stars in the sky actually show stars 'inside' the moon's disk, so the logo probably isn't a good example of what Randall is complaining about. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPpy8mYHQps. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 17:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The first "wrong" image is also only possible if the bright portion is presumed to be the sun during a solar eclipse, assuming the sky is actually depicted as black. You can only have a crescent moon during a solar eclipse if the solar system suddenly acquired a second sun. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's a good counter-example: [http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V-N1Fj2RU7Y/Vnvbs3e6JxI/AAAAAAAAouE/X37EuZ2dXmI/s1600/236D5361-D23A-45AD-8D3B-451926D0CA82.jpg EXAMPLE]. The bright dot is actually the ISS transiting the moon - but it certainly looks like an impossibility! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The article doesn't mention the "nuclear war" joke. Does it need explaining? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.49|141.101.98.49]] 19:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:It does now. [[User:WingedCat|WingedCat]] ([[User talk:WingedCat|talk]]) 22:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
:: your welcome ;-) [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I've always wanted to create a story, and have the horns of the moon connect on the other side, so you have a blackbody in front of the moon, in parody of this tendency.
Also, interesting how the moon is at different rotations in different locations. I never did see the rabbit in the moon. Now I know why. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.74|108.162.245.74]] 04:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the examples of "incorrect" moons are kinda questionable - like, how relevant is the position of the moon when there's literally a giant divine skyperson standing on it, grabbing stars and scattering of them? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 23:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I fixed part of the explanation by mentioning the title text. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I think that's enough detail for an explanation, so I removed the "incomplete" bar. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Should the table of explanations include the text in the comic? [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The comic has been updated on xkcd. Randall revised the description of #4. Maybe this should be updated? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.135|108.162.242.135]] 21:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

for trivia doesn't mass bend light so IMHO probably still possible for star light on that position [[Special:Contributions/162.158.163.61|162.158.163.61]] 05:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

For the Dreamworks logo, it seems that the static versions don't sport the stars-through-the-moon problem, but I suspect the animated versions (the ones showing at the beginning of their movies) might and probably do. As it so happens, I'm watching Kung Fu Panda 2 for the first time right now, - the fishing kid is a turtle in this case, LOL! - and I note that this problem isn't present here, though there are no stars at all during the logo, so that might be the only reason why. (Of course, if a kid can sit there fishing, the rest of the moon is clearly absent, why wouldn't we see stars there, LOL!) - Niceguy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.239|108.162.218.239]] 18:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I swear to god I've seen an Upside down moon before.... both in the day and at night the cusps were pointed down or towards the horizon heres an example of one https://www.flickr.com/photos/dcysurfer/14631243979 i'm 100% sure this is not fake and that there is no reason why one would use a dslr upsidedown or rotate it in post (this is in the southern hemisphere so that may be why... i also swear that many times i've seen the cusps pointed directly to the side (northern hemisphere)[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 06:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1738: Moon Shapes

2016-10-03T06:57:41Z

Needforsuv:

It's a reflection of the nuclear war on [[1626|the sun's surface]]. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 08:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I can't find any photoshopped Moon that looks like the last image. Somebody has to make one. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.207|162.158.92.207]] 13:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

: Randall uncharacteristically missed an opportunity for pointing out additional errors that people make: It's interesting to note that you can get a decent estimate of the artist's latitude by looking at how they draw a crescent moon. In equatorial cultures, the crescent looks like a cup or a boat - and they interpret it like that. But if you look at most english language children's books, the crescent looks like a letter 'C' or a 'D' with a human face - suggesting that they were probably made in the tradition of northern Europe. When I first moved from the UK (more or less a 'C'-shaped crescent moon) to the southern USA (more like Randall's depiction of the correctly-drawn crescent with the points at a roughly 45 degree angle to the horizon) - I subconsciously felt that the moon "looked wrong" - it was only much later that I understood the reason.

: Furthermore, this rotation of the moon relative to the observer also explains why "The man in the moon" is a common trope caused by the pareidolia interpretation of the cratering patterns of the moon in northern cultures. But in southern cultures, people tend to see a rabbit in those full-moon patterns - and that has become the source of many of their stories.

: Now that I'm more acutely aware of this - it's interesting to note how many movies get the orientation of the moon wrong for the location that their story is supposedly set in! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::In Japan, for example, the patterns are interpreted as a rabbit making mochi (a sort of dense dumpling made from rice pounded into a powder) on the moon - the Sea of Tranquillity forming the head, and the Sea of Clouds forming part of the pestle in which the rabbit is pounding the rice. {{unsigned ip|188.114.102.167}}

::Considering how many movies features the famous [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheMountainsOfIllinois Mountains of Illinois], I would be more surprised when they get it right. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

: Not quite sure how to add this but Gibbon is the author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - or a type of Ape. It is not a phase of the moon. Also I think the moon depicted is Waning. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.113|141.101.98.113]] 14:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::I think the correct expression is gibbous - "having the illuminated part greater than a semicircle and less than a circle" {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.68}}
:: Yes, the one he says is correct has me thinking: "OMG, the moon is drunk and has fallen over on its ass." No self-respecting moon lies on its back like that.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.222|162.158.114.222]] 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Indeed - but that's pretty much how it looks down here in sunny Texas. It's one of those things you never think about - but once the fact of it clicks in your head, you get this visceral feeling of how you're standing on a large ball rather than a flat plane! Ha! Take that flat-earthers! :-) [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:46, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Living in Florida, our crescent moons are almost horizontal. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.60|108.162.212.60]]
: "Wax gibbon" is probably nothing more than a joke on mispronouncing "waxing gibbous". As drawn, it is the way a waning gibbous would appear in the northern hemisphere, but a waxing gibbous in the southern hemisphere. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Link to the DreamWorks logo image please? There seem to be multiple versions. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.216|108.162.237.216]] 15:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I'm surprised Randall missed the chance to include a joke about guys with fishing rods. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.141|162.158.85.141]] 15:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::http://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/dreamworks-logo.jpg... Here's the link to the Dreamworks logo. You're welcome. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::neither of the examples for the "stars in the moon" apply here. both randall's examples imply a spherical moon. spring and the dreamworks child are supported on a crescent moon for which only the light section actually exists. better examples, please. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.84|141.101.98.84]] 12:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
::While the dreamworks logo features a child sitting on the crescent moon as though the dark portion wasn't there, none of the versions of the logo which contain stars in the sky actually show stars 'inside' the moon's disk, so the logo probably isn't a good example of what Randall is complaining about. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPpy8mYHQps. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 17:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The first "wrong" image is also only possible if the bright portion is presumed to be the sun during a solar eclipse, assuming the sky is actually depicted as black. You can only have a crescent moon during a solar eclipse if the solar system suddenly acquired a second sun. [[User:Harperska|Harperska]] ([[User talk:Harperska|talk]]) 16:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's a good counter-example: [http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-V-N1Fj2RU7Y/Vnvbs3e6JxI/AAAAAAAAouE/X37EuZ2dXmI/s1600/236D5361-D23A-45AD-8D3B-451926D0CA82.jpg EXAMPLE]. The bright dot is actually the ISS transiting the moon - but it certainly looks like an impossibility! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 18:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The article doesn't mention the "nuclear war" joke. Does it need explaining? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.49|141.101.98.49]] 19:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:It does now. [[User:WingedCat|WingedCat]] ([[User talk:WingedCat|talk]]) 22:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
:: your welcome ;-) [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I've always wanted to create a story, and have the horns of the moon connect on the other side, so you have a blackbody in front of the moon, in parody of this tendency.
Also, interesting how the moon is at different rotations in different locations. I never did see the rabbit in the moon. Now I know why. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.74|108.162.245.74]] 04:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the examples of "incorrect" moons are kinda questionable - like, how relevant is the position of the moon when there's literally a giant divine skyperson standing on it, grabbing stars and scattering of them? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 23:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I fixed part of the explanation by mentioning the title text. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:I think that's enough detail for an explanation, so I removed the "incomplete" bar. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Should the table of explanations include the text in the comic? [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 22:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The comic has been updated on xkcd. Randall revised the description of #4. Maybe this should be updated? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.135|108.162.242.135]] 21:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

for trivia doesn't mass bend light so IMHO probably still possible for star light on that position [[Special:Contributions/162.158.163.61|162.158.163.61]] 05:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

For the Dreamworks logo, it seems that the static versions don't sport the stars-through-the-moon problem, but I suspect the animated versions (the ones showing at the beginning of their movies) might and probably do. As it so happens, I'm watching Kung Fu Panda 2 for the first time right now, - the fishing kid is a turtle in this case, LOL! - and I note that this problem isn't present here, though there are no stars at all during the logo, so that might be the only reason why. (Of course, if a kid can sit there fishing, the rest of the moon is clearly absent, why wouldn't we see stars there, LOL!) - Niceguy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.239|108.162.218.239]] 18:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I swear to god I've seen an Upside down moon before.... both in the day and at night the cusps were pointed down or towards the horizon (this is in the southern hemisphere so that may be why... i also swear that many times i've seen the cusps pointed directly to the side (northern hemisphere)[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 06:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1651: Robotic Garage

2016-03-04T12:17:12Z

Needforsuv:

[[493: Actuarial|First Post]] (just read that comic (and [[269: TCMP|this]]) the other day and couldn't help my self :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

black hat axe hmmm fire rescue axe? maybe? possibly damaging the car defeating the purpose of an automatic "aprking" system that handles cars like top gear handles valet keys? [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 12:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1651: Robotic Garage

2016-03-04T12:16:05Z

Needforsuv:

[[493: Actuarial|First Post]] (just read that comic (and [[269: TCMP|this]]) the other day and couldn't help my self :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

black hat axe hmmm fire rescue axe? maybe[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 12:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1616: Lunch

2015-12-15T15:59:15Z

Needforsuv:

... I don't think pizza is that bad. Those are sort of things people could really eat ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

That's not that gross, IMO. Tomato sauce is pretty much thought of as thick tomato juice. White bread. Salt. Normal things. And this seems to be assuming I wouldn't want to eat a brick of cheese. I do this regularly-ish with brie. [[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 13:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
:Cut the cheese to thick slices and put it on pieces of bread to make a few sandwiches, spread the tomato sauce on other pieces of bread for a few more sandwiches. Put the salt on the tomato sauce, or on a few other pieces of bread. Completely nice lunch (though with the ingredient amounts pictured, it would be a lunch for 2-3 people). Incidentally, when I listed the ingredients to my mother, she immediately said "pizza Margarita". --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.191|162.158.180.191]] 19:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm not American, so what does he mean by cheese and grease soaked vegetables? {{unsigned ip|162.158.153.101}}
:The cheese is a common ingredient in the pizza seen in the comic, which might be a plain cheese pizza. As for the veggies, this might be a reference to french fries, which is essentially potatoes cooked in a deep fryer which is filled with oil (though I can't be sure with the English definition correlation between grease and oil). {{unsigned ip|108.162.218.148}}
:On this side of the lake pizza's made with dough (white bread), tomato sauce, cheese, and apparently salt the way Randall makes it. Some people put veggies on their pizza, which later get greasy and oily thanks to the cheese; nothing to do with french fries, though I'm told fries on pizza is actually pretty good Though I suppose you'd call them chips over there. {{unsigned|Legofan613}}
::Salt is usually an ingredient in dough, although why it's listed separately is anyone's guess. [[User:Rawmustard|Rawmustard]] ([[User talk:Rawmustard|talk]]) 16:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
:::Many pizza places (at least in the central/midwest of the US) will put salt down under the dough to help prevent it sticking to the pan, and also to add a little flavor. Examples would be places like Donatos, Little Cesars, Marions, LaRosas, as well as many Chicago-style pizza joints. The big chains tend not to do this though, not sure why because in my opinion it's details like that that really make the smaller places more delicious. [[User:Domino|Domino]] ([[User talk:Domino|talk]]) 17:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)Domino

I believe that the "grease soaked vegetables" refers to a "caesar salad" or similar salad arrangement containing oil-based dressing and other ingredients with high fat content. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 17:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
:Cueball is eating the pizza in turns: ''I'm trying to be healthier, so after I eat this brick of cheese, I'll have a spoonful of grease-soaked vegetables.'' This means he's eating a pizza that has just a spoonful of vegetables. A Caesar salad would be much bigger. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 20:03, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if the joke was derived from the "healthy eating" craze here in the US at least. That is, people who spend copious amounts of time pouring over nutrition and ingredient labels to understand what it is they are actually eating. For most foods bought already prepared from the grocery store, the individual ingredients can range from bizarre (if you are not a chemist) to unappetizing. Perhaps Randall thought about it one step further and realized that any meal when broken into its macro components sounds unappetizing.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 17:33, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Not to mention, Cheese on pizza is'nt real cheese (At least, not on the deep freeze supermarket kind of pizza): at least half of it is some fat and a binder. Yuk. However if cueball skips the salt (blood pressure!) and ads some veggies it might make a healthy lunch if he also adjusts the amounts to something more sensible. -- IshouldRealyGetAUserNameHere
:And this is why I don't use frozen supermarket "cheese". [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 21:59, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
:It used to be widely believed that excess salt raises blood pressure, but recently the medical profession are beginning to realise that this isn't the case. If you already have high blood pressure for other reasons then reducing your salt intake can help, but healthy people don't need to worry about how much salt they have. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 21:59, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

White bread: flour, water, salt, yeast. Pizza dough: flour, water, olive oil, salt, yeast. Why did Randall list the salt separately when it would have made more sense to mention olive oil? [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 21:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
:Many things have extra salt added besides the salt of the ingredients. I expect most pizza has salt other than that in the dough and sauce. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.83|162.158.56.83]] 04:12, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Half a pound of cheese - what kind of pizza is this? -- [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.131|198.41.235.131]] 00:11, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
:One with not enough cheese on it..? ;) (Although, seriously, I bought a 746g (~1½ lbs, but actually slightly more) block of cheese, today... I'm sure that while I ''could'' eat a third of that, in one go, it would more likely be by way of two deliciously-thick cheese sandwich toasties, rather than covering and/or crust-stuffing an extra-cheesy pizza. For a pizza to have that much cheese, I'd expect it to be multiple ''types'' of cheese, for interesting flavour contrasts...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.227|162.158.152.227]] 00:35, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

This list is supposed to be unappetizing? Randall, you underestimate the laziness of a cooking college student. {{unsigned ip|162.158.56.119}}

Deconstructed food is also a thing. I can’t find much information on it—I first saw it in a fiction story, Wikipedia doesn’t have anything, and I’m too lazy to look further—but people definitely do sometimes take foods meant to be eaten all at once and instead eat the individual pieces. I’m not sure this is the best way to deconstruct pizza (for example, the bread should be cooked differently), but somebody has probably done this before now. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.83|162.158.56.83]] 04:12, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
:John Green "deconstructed" and ate a hamburger a few years back. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.214.83|108.162.214.83]] 04:23, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
::I don’t think that really counts, unless it’s a different one than I’m thinking of. Generally, deconstructed food is actually “not-yet-constructed”, not “taken apart after construction”, and it’s generally not mixed back together in the process. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.83|162.158.56.83]] 06:26, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Never left a comment on a wiki before, so no idea if I'm doing this right, but aren't the grease soaked vegetables just chips (or fries to my good American colleagues), and the brick of cheese a reference to the cheese in the comic? The joke would still be the same, and it makes more sense than a vegetable pizza, at least to me. That's how I read it, anyway. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.197|141.101.106.197]] 09:55, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
:that's how i saw it, too. at least it makes sense. and, for the record, eating a hunk of cheese is one of life's great pleasures. when i weigh three hundred pounds i will do it all the time. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.233|141.101.106.233]] 13:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Funny how comics about food always cause more comments than any other regular comics ;-) I'm definitely on the idea that this is about toppings for a pizza and not fries. No one claims chips/French fries are healthy, but having veggies on a pizza is considered healthier than one just with four kinds of meat. Many people won't even eat pizza with vegetables. But of course they do not make it healthy. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:37, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Is it just me or would it sound better if it was a quarter pound of cheese and had meat in it along with pineapple (Hawaiian)[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 15:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1611: Baking Soda and Vinegar

2015-12-03T11:39:38Z

Needforsuv:

The only experience I have with such a volcano exhibit is from US TV programmes representing the nerds (or the desperate non-nerds with no imagination) at a science-fair in Stateside schools, but I laid down my impressions of the tradition anyway. No embedded links to anything, as yet, as I expect other people will know what needs explaining (or re-writing) better than me. - I was going to go onto Supervolcano territory, but I'm not sure it's supposed to be more than 'regular' increased volcanic activity, outside, albeit through the power of acid/base interaction (thus salt being the equivalent of volcanic dust plumes, no doubt). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.227|162.158.152.227]] 10:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Another trans-Atleantean here, I've expanded on your explanation with some links and the title-text, but your overall draft concurs with my experience of science-fair volcanoes being a stereotypical "easy/lame" project for science fairs [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.193|162.158.90.193]] 11:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Humanity should hope that the supervolcano is built in scale, resulting in ONLY Decade Volcanoes level of damage. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
:According to the title text it is so no worries if you do not live close by or has to fly close to the ash clouds ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Isn't the girl the same one as in Feathers[[https://xkcd.com/1104/]]? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.129.95|199.27.129.95]] 23:08, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

I thought Megan was about to say that the mini volcano had nothing to do with the scientific method, which would fill in the holes mentioned by the incomplete box and thus complete the explanation. If anyone else agrees with me, I think we should edit it to say that (I'm too busy right now to do so.)[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.49|173.245.54.49]] 23:39, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Can we all agree that this is a young Danish? {{unsigned ip|Zakka}}

i personally think shes kinda a black hat type guy who caused unusual things to happen maybe her volcano is like a voodoo doll of sorts for the real earth which now suddenly has such volcanoes because of her. [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 11:39, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1611: Baking Soda and Vinegar

2015-12-03T11:39:21Z

Needforsuv:

The only experience I have with such a volcano exhibit is from US TV programmes representing the nerds (or the desperate non-nerds with no imagination) at a science-fair in Stateside schools, but I laid down my impressions of the tradition anyway. No embedded links to anything, as yet, as I expect other people will know what needs explaining (or re-writing) better than me. - I was going to go onto Supervolcano territory, but I'm not sure it's supposed to be more than 'regular' increased volcanic activity, outside, albeit through the power of acid/base interaction (thus salt being the equivalent of volcanic dust plumes, no doubt). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.227|162.158.152.227]] 10:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Another trans-Atleantean here, I've expanded on your explanation with some links and the title-text, but your overall draft concurs with my experience of science-fair volcanoes being a stereotypical "easy/lame" project for science fairs [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.193|162.158.90.193]] 11:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Humanity should hope that the supervolcano is built in scale, resulting in ONLY Decade Volcanoes level of damage. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
:According to the title text it is so no worries if you do not live close by or has to fly close to the ash clouds ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Isn't the girl the same one as in Feathers[[https://xkcd.com/1104/]]? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.129.95|199.27.129.95]] 23:08, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

I thought Megan was about to say that the mini volcano had nothing to do with the scientific method, which would fill in the holes mentioned by the incomplete box and thus complete the explanation. If anyone else agrees with me, I think we should edit it to say that (I'm too busy right now to do so.)[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.49|173.245.54.49]] 23:39, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Can we all agree that this is a young Danish? {{unsigned ip|Zakka}}

i personally think shes kinda a black hat type guy who caused usual things to happen maybe her volcano is like a voodoo doll of sorts for the real earth which now suddenly has such volcanoes because of her. [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 11:39, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1609: Food Combinations

2015-11-30T11:20:20Z

Needforsuv:

I tried this on a friend and after three tries she said, you just mentioned all my favorite food items. So... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:27, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

You know what's really good? Ice cream on pizza. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:23, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
:That's a popular summer snack in Tasmania. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 08:02, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

So nobody puts sour cream on pancakes??? {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.14}}

Joey agrees with that - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSFgDZJVYbo [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.139|162.158.34.139]] 15:40, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks I was just thinking of that episode when seeing this comic. Think it deserves a place in the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:06, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, I made a first-hack attempt, with terrible grammar and no appropriate citations. Please don't be too harsh! [[Special:Contributions/199.27.129.83|199.27.129.83]] 16:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Most of the combinations involving the dairy items are disgusting. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.9|108.162.216.9]] 19:29, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

If you think sour cream and pancakes is not a traditional combination, you've never been to Russia. We put sour cream in a lot of things, really, but pancakes especially. That applies almost as well to sour cream and ketchup (though that is just a pair of commonly combined condiments, not a food item in itself). I do, however, agree with the commentor above (even regarding sour cream). Incidentally, I had to google "relish" - apparently it's a general term for a big variety of chopped-vegetable items. The Russian name for one particularly common type literally translates as "eggplant caviar". Goes nicely with ham, is applied to pancakes occasionally. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.191|162.158.180.191]] 20:51, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
:FYI, pickle (that is to say, pickled cucumber) relish is generally what people from the US mean when referring to relish. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.59|108.162.216.59]] 05:05, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

It will be interesting to see if all items will be checked of eventually when people from many different countries comes by? I checked of pancakes and ice cream. I put ice in almost every time I make sweet pancakes. Yummy. But we also have "food" pancakes (not sweat) with meat in them. And I'm note talking about tortillas or burrito pancakes. Made exactly like normal sweet pancakes without sugar and with salt. In The Netherlands they have pancake houses where the toppings is more like that of a pizza, and then after wards they drop on some kind of syrup... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:06, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Avocado and ice cream is traditional? Really? I mean, the novelty ice cream places (bacon ice cream, beer ice cream, Tabasco ice cream, you know the drill), sure, but where is that a traditional pairing? ... However, I'm putting in another vote for sour cream with pancakes. Especially if you consider crêpes and associated acts as in the pancake category, so there's the whole world of savory pancakes out there. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.7|108.162.221.7]] 04:16, 28 November 2015 (UTC)MR
:I have removed avocado and ice cream. That cannot be thought of as traditional even if someone actually likes it. I do not know if you could think of pancakes and sour cream as traditional. But again if you think of them both as sweat and food pancakes (as already is the case, then maybe...) I will not list it though as I do not feel it is traditional. But I would also not delete it if anyone else feels it is. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:41, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
:Sorry, that was me. Wasn't aware that this had to be exclusively limited to food items from the US, but anyway was thinking about the avocado icecream here (taluwang.com.my). It's quite popular where I come from and quite delicious, actually. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.137|162.158.153.137]] 14:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
:Avocado ice cream is also eaten occasionally in Brazil. Admittedly, Brazil isn't the United States. However, a simple Google Search of "Avocado Ice Cream" brings up dozens of very different recipes (including an avocado coconut ice cream that I really have to try). In addition, the table of traditional pairings says "it should mainly be combinations that are common in the US". If it said "combinations exclusively in the US" then I could see justifiably removing Avocado Ice Cream. However, since there are multiple countries that it is both popular and commonly eaten ''and'' literally millions of hits show up in English if you search it in Google, I would say that it counts. (That's not even including the smoothies and shakes that include avocado and ice cream). [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 07:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

At least five of those alleged "individually good" so-called "foods" - relish, ketchup, cheese, sour cream, and avocado - are absolutely disgusting and would destroy any food value of things they came in contact with. YMMV.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.33|108.162.221.33]] 09:46, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
:Well I also do not like avocado or sour cream and neither most forms of eggs plus only a few kind of cheese. But I know that many people really love these items, and that would not make it a bad combination to put sour cream and avocado together. I just would not wish to eat it for my personal taste. That I do not like it, does not make it disgusting. But I would be sorry if someone tried to make me eat it. But not get disgusted because other people eat it in front of me. Disgusting things are something like rat or excrements... ;-) And this has to be taken into account before anyone changes the table above. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:37, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

There's some "almost something I've seen" combinations, in the above. For example, while I've never had Ham And Avocado, Ham And Pineapple is not uncommon. (Of course, now we're also into neighbouring territory of "does pineapple belong on a pizza?" ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.227|162.158.152.227]] 16:39, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Err, what? Ketchup flavored chips hard to come by in the US? I've yet to see a single supermarket that didn't have a large quantity of Herr's Ketchup Chips. And I live in the american Northeast.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.59|108.162.216.59]] 05:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

"Pairings" is itself a bit ambiguous, but I'd vote that none of cupcakes/sour cream, pancakes/cheese nor eggs/ relish are traditional pairings. Pancakes with sour cream may well edge in as blinis, but only by counting blinis (and crepes?) within pancakes. Some others are perhaps a little more likely, but still would not make my personal cut as a traditional pairing -- ice cream/ hot chocolate & ham/relish would fail, and if we count hot chocolate/pancakes as OK because they may both be part of a breakfast, then why not hot chocolate/eggs? [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 20:40, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

In my experience, all combinations of individually-good foods are only bad if you go into it expecting them to be. Speaking of which, I highly recommend putting creamy peanut butter and slices of banana on a burger.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.60|108.162.216.60]] 05:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

the one problem i see is the non-solid combinations... such as ketch and hot coco or eggs (depending on state) [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 11:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1603: Flashlights

2015-11-18T20:15:10Z

Needforsuv:

Is that it? I swear there must be more to the joke than this explanation implies. It just describes what's going on in the comic. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 10:29, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

-- Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. [[User:Pete|Pete]] ([[User talk:Pete|talk]]) 11:19, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

---- but sometimes there is no spoon [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.62|108.162.221.62]] 06:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

::Ceci n'est pas une pipe. [[User:Sobsz|Sobsz]] ([[User talk:Sobsz|talk]]) 08:27, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Is the 'joke' based on the ambiguity of the phrase "light up the trees" meaning either illuminate the trees or set fire to them too obvious? [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:59, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that the joke is about subcultures and enthusiasts in general. Much like there are communities dedicated to getting the best performance out of PCs and coffee makers (to name two examples), this comic imagines a hardcore community of torch users dedicated to “overclocking” torches to operate at extreme levels far beyond their manufactured intent. Regardless of whether or not such a subculture exists in reality, the humour is in the possibility that a common household object could attract such a fervent modding community that the limitations and functionality of the devices could be taken to their comical extreme. Compare [[1095: Crazy Straws]]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 09:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

"A typo", uh? Sure, sure, of course it was only a typo, Randall ;) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.57|108.162.221.57]] 10:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:I also think the type was that he searched on flashlight instead and found the flashlight enthusiast page from that ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I think it's unfair to assume lack of detail in the explanation, the fact that research was obviously done on the meaning of fleshlight an it's association to the comic, is more than I would have original got from the comic by itself. However if you perceive additional meaning please share, the thing I love about 'This' website is for the ability for others to add their interpretations. --[[User:Igwarrender|Igwarrender]] ([[User talk:Igwarrender|talk]]) 10:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if you could use a high-powered fleshlight to cook a sausage...[[User:RedHatGuy68|RedHatGuy68]] ([[User talk:RedHatGuy68|talk]]) 05:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Quote:
<blockquote>When Cueball refers to classic Flashlights(torches) as dim and finnicky, this gives reason to assume that the flashlight he is holding is going to be ridiculously overengineered.</blockquote>
I disagree. In the generation of Randall (and me), the flashlights most of us had as kids really did suck and were dim and finnicky. That's not an exaggeration which, as is implied in the explanation, is used to prepare the joke. It's more of an explanation on why he is interested in modern flashlights in the first place. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.225|162.158.91.225]] 10:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: AND they almost always had at least half flat batteries. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.239.32|198.41.239.32]] 11:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

:Exactly. I never tried xenon, but the difference between old lightbulb based flashlights and modern LED-based ones, even with the same battery, is obvious. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 15:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Nope...nothing to do with fleshlights. There are in fact multiple flashlight enthusiast forums that have nothing to to with sex toys. Use your favorites search engine to search "flashlight enthusiasts: [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.48|173.245.54.48]] 10:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

It's funny how "the explanation" has a need to point out that there were no prior knowledge about fleshlights. (according to Wikipedia) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.197|162.158.180.197]] 12:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I never leave for work without my trusty '''Lumapower EDC-LM31''' with its '''Cree XML(U2) LED''' and its '''3.7 volt size 14500 Lithium Ion cell.''' But I'm not a flashlight geek! Besides, 420 lumens is no where near enough power to set trees on fire. (Personally, I think this comic is an example of Rule 34. Randall was originally thinking about Fleshlights, typo'd into flashlights, and discovered a sort of geeky torch porn sort of thing out there. Also, the flashlight I describe is real, but has nothing on the stuff you'll see in Candlepower Forums.) [[User:Co149|Co149]] ([[User talk:Co149|talk]]) 12:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:The 100,000 lumen lamps (X-LED MRK72 or is that MKR72?) have to be water-cooled! That's plenty hot enough for me.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 14:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
::There are videos of flashlights that set things on fire, without lensens etc. One of them is [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhdKnMlJ4H4 this] video of an ''Magic Scorpion'' flashlight, a halogen variant. But I've also seen video's of (custom-built) LED flashlight that set things to smolder. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.111|141.101.104.111]] 14:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: It's not lumen that sets things on fire, it's lux. All you need is a good focus. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 17:11, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: Also note [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkkU0UO3sek this] flashlight, which is just a bunch of ultra-bright LEDs crammed into a case that resembles an oversized flashlight and on full power drains its battery in about 15 minutes...and lights up a city street like it's day. --NXTangl [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.42|108.162.216.42]] 21:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It feels to me that "their highest-end models are ALSO capable of setting trees on fire." is some advertisement where the tree is a metaphore for one's organ. as such it is clear that "They're impossible to use without severe burns". which makes it really twisted that "some [people] swear it's worth it" {{unsigned ip|108.162.228.167}}

I think the burning trees joke comes from this [[http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch "...even fry and egg"]] thing. --[[User:Arturojain|Arturo Jain]] ([[User talk:Arturojain|talk]]) 14:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Should the explanation contain something about the prevalence of internet forums dedicated to enthusiasts of various activities or hobbies? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 17:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Currently no (albeit indirect) link to https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/ or others like 119? Ok, so only going to be an incidental link, but... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 17:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

it is missimg reference to another comic where randall makes a joke about flashlight and fleshlight. The comic had a star wars setting with death vader and luke skywalker. https://xkcd.com/1397/ --anonymous [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 15:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

"Let's" appears to be missing an apostrophe. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.21|173.245.54.21]] 20:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Now, see, this is why we Brits call them 'torches'. Less risky with finger trouble. (Hint - don't google 'finger trouble') [[User:Jdluk|Jdluk]] ([[User talk:Jdluk|talk]]) 21:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

could it be referencing http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch ?

[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.38|173.245.54.38]] 17:54, 13 November 2015 (UTC)an internet flashlight enthusiast

Why are there personal opinions like "maybe they're trying to trick you!" in the main body? Weird. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.140|162.158.142.140]] 02:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
:It is not personal. If someone tries to tell you that something is worth trying in spite of promissing you will get a severe burn, it could be to see if they could fool you into doing so. Some people are like that... Either that or they are pretty crazy with their fetishes. But some people are also like that. hence both explanations are OK. {{unsigned|Kynde}}

"Of course, a flashlight that cannot safely be pointed at things is fairly useless for the traditional purpose of a flashlight". Really now? A flashlight that set targets on fire is pretty useful - you only need to flash something once, and it'll stay illuminated without having to keep the flashlight on![[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 05:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC){{unsigned ip|192.0.189.206|12:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)}}

Just gonna leave this here https://youtu.be/MGANrd7u4o0
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.41|108.162.228.41]] 11:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

;Recoil?

I'm missing too much information and don't really know how to do this myself anyway; Perhaps someone would be willing to do some calculations on how much force Cueball would experience pushing him back due to the momentum of the light being emitted from his flashlight. Relevant factors off the top of my head:
 1 - The diameter of the beam at the point of contact with the trees has to be wide enough to encompass multiple trees. The trees do not completely fill the area due to overall shape and gaps between leaves.
 2 - The trees are on fire within a few seconds of turning on the flashlight.
 3 - The leaves would obviously ignite first. How much energy do they have to absorb to combust?
 4 - The trees are still alive and, therefore, wet. In addition to the ignition energy, the beam also has to dry out the leaves first. (right?)
 5 - The flashlight is a bright white color and is emitting light across the entire visible spectrum and, maybe, a significant amount to either side of the visible spectrum as well (assuming the light is produced by a heated filament. Less so with an excited gas or white LEDs) What does the absorption spectrum of a leaf look like? The lower the percentage of light absorbed by the leaf, the stronger the flashlight has to be to dump enough energy into it. {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.185}}

I think this comic's idea, flashlights lighting up the trees, is based in part on the work by this Danish person who posts detailed and technical reviews of hundreds of flashlights, including "beam shots", photos of how well they light up the trees behind his house: http://lygte-info.dk/review/Beamshot%20AA-CR%202012-07%20UK.html [stolkin] {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.119}}

this in a torch www.youtube.com/watch?v=budMkPhUE4c or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVntaa0DDhY [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 19:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1603: Flashlights

2015-11-18T19:49:29Z

Needforsuv:

Is that it? I swear there must be more to the joke than this explanation implies. It just describes what's going on in the comic. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 10:29, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

-- Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. [[User:Pete|Pete]] ([[User talk:Pete|talk]]) 11:19, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

---- but sometimes there is no spoon [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.62|108.162.221.62]] 06:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

::Ceci n'est pas une pipe. [[User:Sobsz|Sobsz]] ([[User talk:Sobsz|talk]]) 08:27, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Is the 'joke' based on the ambiguity of the phrase "light up the trees" meaning either illuminate the trees or set fire to them too obvious? [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:59, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that the joke is about subcultures and enthusiasts in general. Much like there are communities dedicated to getting the best performance out of PCs and coffee makers (to name two examples), this comic imagines a hardcore community of torch users dedicated to “overclocking” torches to operate at extreme levels far beyond their manufactured intent. Regardless of whether or not such a subculture exists in reality, the humour is in the possibility that a common household object could attract such a fervent modding community that the limitations and functionality of the devices could be taken to their comical extreme. Compare [[1095: Crazy Straws]]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 09:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

"A typo", uh? Sure, sure, of course it was only a typo, Randall ;) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.57|108.162.221.57]] 10:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:I also think the type was that he searched on flashlight instead and found the flashlight enthusiast page from that ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I think it's unfair to assume lack of detail in the explanation, the fact that research was obviously done on the meaning of fleshlight an it's association to the comic, is more than I would have original got from the comic by itself. However if you perceive additional meaning please share, the thing I love about 'This' website is for the ability for others to add their interpretations. --[[User:Igwarrender|Igwarrender]] ([[User talk:Igwarrender|talk]]) 10:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if you could use a high-powered fleshlight to cook a sausage...[[User:RedHatGuy68|RedHatGuy68]] ([[User talk:RedHatGuy68|talk]]) 05:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Quote:
<blockquote>When Cueball refers to classic Flashlights(torches) as dim and finnicky, this gives reason to assume that the flashlight he is holding is going to be ridiculously overengineered.</blockquote>
I disagree. In the generation of Randall (and me), the flashlights most of us had as kids really did suck and were dim and finnicky. That's not an exaggeration which, as is implied in the explanation, is used to prepare the joke. It's more of an explanation on why he is interested in modern flashlights in the first place. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.225|162.158.91.225]] 10:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: AND they almost always had at least half flat batteries. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.239.32|198.41.239.32]] 11:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

:Exactly. I never tried xenon, but the difference between old lightbulb based flashlights and modern LED-based ones, even with the same battery, is obvious. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 15:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Nope...nothing to do with fleshlights. There are in fact multiple flashlight enthusiast forums that have nothing to to with sex toys. Use your favorites search engine to search "flashlight enthusiasts: [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.48|173.245.54.48]] 10:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

It's funny how "the explanation" has a need to point out that there were no prior knowledge about fleshlights. (according to Wikipedia) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.197|162.158.180.197]] 12:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I never leave for work without my trusty '''Lumapower EDC-LM31''' with its '''Cree XML(U2) LED''' and its '''3.7 volt size 14500 Lithium Ion cell.''' But I'm not a flashlight geek! Besides, 420 lumens is no where near enough power to set trees on fire. (Personally, I think this comic is an example of Rule 34. Randall was originally thinking about Fleshlights, typo'd into flashlights, and discovered a sort of geeky torch porn sort of thing out there. Also, the flashlight I describe is real, but has nothing on the stuff you'll see in Candlepower Forums.) [[User:Co149|Co149]] ([[User talk:Co149|talk]]) 12:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:The 100,000 lumen lamps (X-LED MRK72 or is that MKR72?) have to be water-cooled! That's plenty hot enough for me.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 14:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
::There are videos of flashlights that set things on fire, without lensens etc. One of them is [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhdKnMlJ4H4 this] video of an ''Magic Scorpion'' flashlight, a halogen variant. But I've also seen video's of (custom-built) LED flashlight that set things to smolder. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.111|141.101.104.111]] 14:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: It's not lumen that sets things on fire, it's lux. All you need is a good focus. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 17:11, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: Also note [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkkU0UO3sek this] flashlight, which is just a bunch of ultra-bright LEDs crammed into a case that resembles an oversized flashlight and on full power drains its battery in about 15 minutes...and lights up a city street like it's day. --NXTangl [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.42|108.162.216.42]] 21:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It feels to me that "their highest-end models are ALSO capable of setting trees on fire." is some advertisement where the tree is a metaphore for one's organ. as such it is clear that "They're impossible to use without severe burns". which makes it really twisted that "some [people] swear it's worth it" {{unsigned ip|108.162.228.167}}

I think the burning trees joke comes from this [[http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch "...even fry and egg"]] thing. --[[User:Arturojain|Arturo Jain]] ([[User talk:Arturojain|talk]]) 14:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Should the explanation contain something about the prevalence of internet forums dedicated to enthusiasts of various activities or hobbies? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 17:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Currently no (albeit indirect) link to https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/ or others like 119? Ok, so only going to be an incidental link, but... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 17:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

it is missimg reference to another comic where randall makes a joke about flashlight and fleshlight. The comic had a star wars setting with death vader and luke skywalker. https://xkcd.com/1397/ --anonymous [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 15:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

"Let's" appears to be missing an apostrophe. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.21|173.245.54.21]] 20:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Now, see, this is why we Brits call them 'torches'. Less risky with finger trouble. (Hint - don't google 'finger trouble') [[User:Jdluk|Jdluk]] ([[User talk:Jdluk|talk]]) 21:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

could it be referencing http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch ?

[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.38|173.245.54.38]] 17:54, 13 November 2015 (UTC)an internet flashlight enthusiast

Why are there personal opinions like "maybe they're trying to trick you!" in the main body? Weird. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.140|162.158.142.140]] 02:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
:It is not personal. If someone tries to tell you that something is worth trying in spite of promissing you will get a severe burn, it could be to see if they could fool you into doing so. Some people are like that... Either that or they are pretty crazy with their fetishes. But some people are also like that. hence both explanations are OK. {{unsigned|Kynde}}

"Of course, a flashlight that cannot safely be pointed at things is fairly useless for the traditional purpose of a flashlight". Really now? A flashlight that set targets on fire is pretty useful - you only need to flash something once, and it'll stay illuminated without having to keep the flashlight on![[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 05:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC){{unsigned ip|192.0.189.206|12:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)}}

Just gonna leave this here https://youtu.be/MGANrd7u4o0
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.41|108.162.228.41]] 11:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

;Recoil?

I'm missing too much information and don't really know how to do this myself anyway; Perhaps someone would be willing to do some calculations on how much force Cueball would experience pushing him back due to the momentum of the light being emitted from his flashlight. Relevant factors off the top of my head:
 1 - The diameter of the beam at the point of contact with the trees has to be wide enough to encompass multiple trees. The trees do not completely fill the area due to overall shape and gaps between leaves.
 2 - The trees are on fire within a few seconds of turning on the flashlight.
 3 - The leaves would obviously ignite first. How much energy do they have to absorb to combust?
 4 - The trees are still alive and, therefore, wet. In addition to the ignition energy, the beam also has to dry out the leaves first. (right?)
 5 - The flashlight is a bright white color and is emitting light across the entire visible spectrum and, maybe, a significant amount to either side of the visible spectrum as well (assuming the light is produced by a heated filament. Less so with an excited gas or white LEDs) What does the absorption spectrum of a leaf look like? The lower the percentage of light absorbed by the leaf, the stronger the flashlight has to be to dump enough energy into it. {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.185}}

I think this comic's idea, flashlights lighting up the trees, is based in part on the work by this Danish person who posts detailed and technical reviews of hundreds of flashlights, including "beam shots", photos of how well they light up the trees behind his house: http://lygte-info.dk/review/Beamshot%20AA-CR%202012-07%20UK.html [stolkin] {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.119}}

this in a torch www.youtube.com/watch?v=budMkPhUE4c [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 19:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1603: Flashlights

2015-11-18T19:49:02Z

Needforsuv:

Is that it? I swear there must be more to the joke than this explanation implies. It just describes what's going on in the comic. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 10:29, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

-- Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. [[User:Pete|Pete]] ([[User talk:Pete|talk]]) 11:19, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

---- but sometimes there is no spoon [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.62|108.162.221.62]] 06:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

::Ceci n'est pas une pipe. [[User:Sobsz|Sobsz]] ([[User talk:Sobsz|talk]]) 08:27, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Is the 'joke' based on the ambiguity of the phrase "light up the trees" meaning either illuminate the trees or set fire to them too obvious? [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:59, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that the joke is about subcultures and enthusiasts in general. Much like there are communities dedicated to getting the best performance out of PCs and coffee makers (to name two examples), this comic imagines a hardcore community of torch users dedicated to “overclocking” torches to operate at extreme levels far beyond their manufactured intent. Regardless of whether or not such a subculture exists in reality, the humour is in the possibility that a common household object could attract such a fervent modding community that the limitations and functionality of the devices could be taken to their comical extreme. Compare [[1095: Crazy Straws]]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 09:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

"A typo", uh? Sure, sure, of course it was only a typo, Randall ;) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.57|108.162.221.57]] 10:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:I also think the type was that he searched on flashlight instead and found the flashlight enthusiast page from that ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I think it's unfair to assume lack of detail in the explanation, the fact that research was obviously done on the meaning of fleshlight an it's association to the comic, is more than I would have original got from the comic by itself. However if you perceive additional meaning please share, the thing I love about 'This' website is for the ability for others to add their interpretations. --[[User:Igwarrender|Igwarrender]] ([[User talk:Igwarrender|talk]]) 10:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if you could use a high-powered fleshlight to cook a sausage...[[User:RedHatGuy68|RedHatGuy68]] ([[User talk:RedHatGuy68|talk]]) 05:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Quote:
<blockquote>When Cueball refers to classic Flashlights(torches) as dim and finnicky, this gives reason to assume that the flashlight he is holding is going to be ridiculously overengineered.</blockquote>
I disagree. In the generation of Randall (and me), the flashlights most of us had as kids really did suck and were dim and finnicky. That's not an exaggeration which, as is implied in the explanation, is used to prepare the joke. It's more of an explanation on why he is interested in modern flashlights in the first place. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.225|162.158.91.225]] 10:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: AND they almost always had at least half flat batteries. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.239.32|198.41.239.32]] 11:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

:Exactly. I never tried xenon, but the difference between old lightbulb based flashlights and modern LED-based ones, even with the same battery, is obvious. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 15:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Nope...nothing to do with fleshlights. There are in fact multiple flashlight enthusiast forums that have nothing to to with sex toys. Use your favorites search engine to search "flashlight enthusiasts: [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.48|173.245.54.48]] 10:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

It's funny how "the explanation" has a need to point out that there were no prior knowledge about fleshlights. (according to Wikipedia) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.197|162.158.180.197]] 12:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I never leave for work without my trusty '''Lumapower EDC-LM31''' with its '''Cree XML(U2) LED''' and its '''3.7 volt size 14500 Lithium Ion cell.''' But I'm not a flashlight geek! Besides, 420 lumens is no where near enough power to set trees on fire. (Personally, I think this comic is an example of Rule 34. Randall was originally thinking about Fleshlights, typo'd into flashlights, and discovered a sort of geeky torch porn sort of thing out there. Also, the flashlight I describe is real, but has nothing on the stuff you'll see in Candlepower Forums.) [[User:Co149|Co149]] ([[User talk:Co149|talk]]) 12:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:The 100,000 lumen lamps (X-LED MRK72 or is that MKR72?) have to be water-cooled! That's plenty hot enough for me.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 14:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
::There are videos of flashlights that set things on fire, without lensens etc. One of them is [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhdKnMlJ4H4 this] video of an ''Magic Scorpion'' flashlight, a halogen variant. But I've also seen video's of (custom-built) LED flashlight that set things to smolder. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.111|141.101.104.111]] 14:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: It's not lumen that sets things on fire, it's lux. All you need is a good focus. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 17:11, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: Also note [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkkU0UO3sek this] flashlight, which is just a bunch of ultra-bright LEDs crammed into a case that resembles an oversized flashlight and on full power drains its battery in about 15 minutes...and lights up a city street like it's day. --NXTangl [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.42|108.162.216.42]] 21:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It feels to me that "their highest-end models are ALSO capable of setting trees on fire." is some advertisement where the tree is a metaphore for one's organ. as such it is clear that "They're impossible to use without severe burns". which makes it really twisted that "some [people] swear it's worth it" {{unsigned ip|108.162.228.167}}

I think the burning trees joke comes from this [[http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch "...even fry and egg"]] thing. --[[User:Arturojain|Arturo Jain]] ([[User talk:Arturojain|talk]]) 14:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Should the explanation contain something about the prevalence of internet forums dedicated to enthusiasts of various activities or hobbies? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 17:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Currently no (albeit indirect) link to https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/ or others like 119? Ok, so only going to be an incidental link, but... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 17:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

it is missimg reference to another comic where randall makes a joke about flashlight and fleshlight. The comic had a star wars setting with death vader and luke skywalker. https://xkcd.com/1397/ --anonymous [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 15:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

"Let's" appears to be missing an apostrophe. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.21|173.245.54.21]] 20:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Now, see, this is why we Brits call them 'torches'. Less risky with finger trouble. (Hint - don't google 'finger trouble') [[User:Jdluk|Jdluk]] ([[User talk:Jdluk|talk]]) 21:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

could it be referencing http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch ?

[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.38|173.245.54.38]] 17:54, 13 November 2015 (UTC)an internet flashlight enthusiast

Why are there personal opinions like "maybe they're trying to trick you!" in the main body? Weird. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.140|162.158.142.140]] 02:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
:It is not personal. If someone tries to tell you that something is worth trying in spite of promissing you will get a severe burn, it could be to see if they could fool you into doing so. Some people are like that... Either that or they are pretty crazy with their fetishes. But some people are also like that. hence both explanations are OK. {{unsigned|Kynde}}

"Of course, a flashlight that cannot safely be pointed at things is fairly useless for the traditional purpose of a flashlight". Really now? A flashlight that set targets on fire is pretty useful - you only need to flash something once, and it'll stay illuminated without having to keep the flashlight on![[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 05:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC){{unsigned ip|192.0.189.206|12:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)}}

Just gonna leave this here https://youtu.be/MGANrd7u4o0
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.41|108.162.228.41]] 11:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

;Recoil?

I'm missing too much information and don't really know how to do this myself anyway; Perhaps someone would be willing to do some calculations on how much force Cueball would experience pushing him back due to the momentum of the light being emitted from his flashlight. Relevant factors off the top of my head:
 1 - The diameter of the beam at the point of contact with the trees has to be wide enough to encompass multiple trees. The trees do not completely fill the area due to overall shape and gaps between leaves.
 2 - The trees are on fire within a few seconds of turning on the flashlight.
 3 - The leaves would obviously ignite first. How much energy do they have to absorb to combust?
 4 - The trees are still alive and, therefore, wet. In addition to the ignition energy, the beam also has to dry out the leaves first. (right?)
 5 - The flashlight is a bright white color and is emitting light across the entire visible spectrum and, maybe, a significant amount to either side of the visible spectrum as well (assuming the light is produced by a heated filament. Less so with an excited gas or white LEDs) What does the absorption spectrum of a leaf look like? The lower the percentage of light absorbed by the leaf, the stronger the flashlight has to be to dump enough energy into it. {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.185}}

I think this comic's idea, flashlights lighting up the trees, is based in part on the work by this Danish person who posts detailed and technical reviews of hundreds of flashlights, including "beam shots", photos of how well they light up the trees behind his house: http://lygte-info.dk/review/Beamshot%20AA-CR%202012-07%20UK.html [stolkin] {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.119}}

this in a torch [www.youtube.com/watch?v=budMkPhUE4c GREAT SCOTT] [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 19:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1467: Email

2014-12-31T19:03:25Z

Needforsuv:

The strftime format used is probably %Y-%M-%D %h:%m:%s, which visibly looks as if it will yield a date and time, yet doesn't. A more correct format would have been %Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S. {{unsigned ip|‎197.234.242.236}}

There's a strange thing with the date string : why 30 ? The timestamp shows 31 as a day in month and 5:54 which doesn't match 30... 54 looks like the week in year but matches with the minutes. [[User:Goufalite|Goufalite]] ([[User talk:Goufalite|talk]]) 09:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

What on earth does 'Created for a live studio audience mean'?! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.143|141.101.106.143]] 10:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

"Unix" is misleading. Sure, unix "date" command is using this kind of formating, but it's also in C standard (specifically, C89 and C99) and available in most other programming languages standard libraries (including perl, php, python, ruby), often as ONLY way to format date without fetching every component separately. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:15, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm fairly confident that I used the term "email" before 1993, because of what I was doing before that date. But I also couldn't give any definitive sources. And I mean the name, not just the general Port 25 thing or its predecessors. But meh, no real proof unless I get lucky digging around in 5.25" floppies for old backups that I doubt I could read anyway... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.191|141.101.98.191]] 13:23, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Might be worth explaining %D vs %x for other locales. [[User:Glen442|Glen442]] ([[User talk:Glen442|talk]]) 15:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

How does "1420001642" translate into "2014-12-31 at 04:54:02"? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 16:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

the title text gives a date of 30 not 31 which means randell made a mistake!!!
refer to http://www.unixtimestamp.com/index.php [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 19:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk:1467: Email

2014-12-31T19:01:10Z

Needforsuv:

The strftime format used is probably %Y-%M-%D %h:%m:%s, which visibly looks as if it will yield a date and time, yet doesn't. A more correct format would have been %Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S. {{unsigned ip|‎197.234.242.236}}

There's a strange thing with the date string : why 30 ? The timestamp shows 31 as a day in month and 5:54 which doesn't match 30... 54 looks like the week in year but matches with the minutes. [[User:Goufalite|Goufalite]] ([[User talk:Goufalite|talk]]) 09:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

What on earth does 'Created for a live studio audience mean'?! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.143|141.101.106.143]] 10:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

"Unix" is misleading. Sure, unix "date" command is using this kind of formating, but it's also in C standard (specifically, C89 and C99) and available in most other programming languages standard libraries (including perl, php, python, ruby), often as ONLY way to format date without fetching every component separately. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:15, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm fairly confident that I used the term "email" before 1993, because of what I was doing before that date. But I also couldn't give any definitive sources. And I mean the name, not just the general Port 25 thing or its predecessors. But meh, no real proof unless I get lucky digging around in 5.25" floppies for old backups that I doubt I could read anyway... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.191|141.101.98.191]] 13:23, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Might be worth explaining %D vs %x for other locales. [[User:Glen442|Glen442]] ([[User talk:Glen442|talk]]) 15:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

How does "1420001642" translate into "2014-12-31 at 04:54:02"? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 16:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

the title text gives a date of 30 not 31[[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 19:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)