https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=108.162.215.150&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T06:34:15ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2295:_Garbage_Math&diff=1908132295: Garbage Math2020-04-17T18:13:43Z<p>108.162.215.150: /* Transcript */ sqrt</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2295<br />
| date = April 17, 2020<br />
| title = Garbage Math<br />
| image = garbage_math.png<br />
| titletext = 'Garbage In, Garbage Out' should not be taken to imply any sort of conservation law limiting the amount of garbage produced.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a ZILOG Z80. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
This comic explains the "garbage in, garbage out" concept using arithmetical expressions. Just like the comic says, if you get garbage in any part of your workflow, you get garbage as a result.<br />
<br />
Some of these rules correspond to the rules of floating point arithmetic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating-point_arithmetic), while others may be inspired by the rules of propagation of uncertainty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagation_of_uncertainty#Example_formulae) where a "garbage" number would correspond to an estimate with a high degree of uncertainty, and the uncertainty of the result of arithmetic operations will tend to be dominated by the term with the highest uncertainty. The rule about N pieces of independent garbage reflects the central limit theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem) and how it predicts that the uncertainty (or standard error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_error) of an estimate will be reduced when independent estimates are averaged. <br />
<br />
This comic is probably not COVID-19 related (though arguably it could be related to doing statistical analyses with the varying quality of data related to the disease), meaning that the streak of comics preceding this on topics relating to COVID-19 is probably broken, after (rather appropriately) 19 comics.<br />
<br />
This comic is about the propagation of errors in numerical analysis and statistics, but described in much more colloquial terms. Numbers with low precision are termed "garbage" and numbers with high precision are labeled "precise".<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
!Formula<br />
!Explanation<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number + Precise number = Slightly less precise number<br />
|If we know absolute error bars, then adding two precise numbers will at worst add the sizes of the two error bars. For example, if our precise numbers are 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>) and 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>), then our sum is 2 (±2·10<sup>-6</sup>). It is possible to lose a lot of relative precision, if the resultant sum is close to zero as a result of adding a number and then close to its inverse. This phenomenon is known as catastrophic cancellation. Therefore, it is likely that all numbers referred here are positive numbers, which does not exhibit this phenomenon.<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number × Precise number = Slightly less precise number<br />
|Here, instead of absolute error, relative error will be added. For example, if our precise numbers are 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>) and 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>), then our product is 1 (±2·10<sup>-6</sup>).<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number + Garbage = Garbage<br />
|If one of the numbers has a high absolute error, and the numbers being added are of comparable size, then this error will be propagated to the sum. <br />
|-<br />
|Precise number × Garbage = Garbage<br />
|Likewise, if one of the numbers has a high relative error, then this error will be propagated to the sum. Here, this is independent of the sizes of the numbers.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\sqrt{\text{Garbage}} = \text{Less bad garbage}</math><br />
| When a number is square rooted, its relative error will be halved.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage<sup>2</sup> = Worse garbage<br />
|Likewise, when a number is squared, its relative error will be doubled. This is a corollary to multiplication adding relative errors.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\frac{1}{N}\sum(\text{N pieces of statistically independent garbage}) = \text{Better garbage}</math><br />
|By aggregating many pieces of statistically independent observations (for instance, surveying many individuals), it is possible to reduce relative error. This is the basis of statistical sampling.<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number<sup>Garbage</sup> = Much worse garbage<br />
|The exponent is very sensitive to changes, which may also magnify the effect based on the magnitude of the precise number.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage - Garbage = Much worse garbage<br />
|This line involves catastrophic cancellation. If both pieces of garbage are about the same (e.g. if their error bars overlap), then it is possible that the answer is positive, zero, or negative.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\frac{\text{Precise number}}{\text{Garbage}-\text{Garbage}}</math>=Much worse garbage, possible division by zero<br />
|Indeed, as with above, if error bars overlap then we might end up dividing by zero.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage × 0 = Precise number<br />
|Multiplying anything by 0 results in 0, an extremely precise number in the sense that it has no error whatsoever since we supply the 0 ourselves. This is equivalent to discarding garbage data from a statistical analysis.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The titletext refers to the computer science maxim of Garbage in, garbage out, which states that even if some code accurately does what it is supposed to do, supplying incorrect data will result in incorrect results. As we can see above, however, when plugging data into mathematical formulas, this can possibly magnify the error of our input data, though there are ways to reduce this error (such as aggregating data). Therefore, the quantity of garbage is not necessarily conserved.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
[A series of mathematical equations are written from top to bottom]<br />
<br />
Precise Number + Precise Number = Slightly less Precise Number<br />
<br />
Precise Number x Precise Number = Slightly less Precise Number<br />
<br />
Precise Number + Garbage = Garbage<br />
<br />
Precise Number x Garbage = Garbage<br />
<br />
√Garbage = Less bad Garbage<br />
<br />
1/N &sum; (N pieces of statistically independent Garbage) = Better Garbage<br />
<br />
(Precise Number)<sup>Garbage</sup> = Much worse Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage - Garbage = Much worse Garbage<br />
<br />
Precise Number<br />
________________ = Much worse Garbage, possible division by zero<br />
Garbage - Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage x 0 = Precise Number<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Math]]</div>108.162.215.150https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2295:_Garbage_Math&diff=1908122295: Garbage Math2020-04-17T18:11:45Z<p>108.162.215.150: /* Transcript */ sum symbols</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2295<br />
| date = April 17, 2020<br />
| title = Garbage Math<br />
| image = garbage_math.png<br />
| titletext = 'Garbage In, Garbage Out' should not be taken to imply any sort of conservation law limiting the amount of garbage produced.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a ZILOG Z80. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
This comic explains the "garbage in, garbage out" concept using arithmetical expressions. Just like the comic says, if you get garbage in any part of your workflow, you get garbage as a result.<br />
<br />
Some of these rules correspond to the rules of floating point arithmetic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating-point_arithmetic), while others may be inspired by the rules of propagation of uncertainty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagation_of_uncertainty#Example_formulae) where a "garbage" number would correspond to an estimate with a high degree of uncertainty, and the uncertainty of the result of arithmetic operations will tend to be dominated by the term with the highest uncertainty. The rule about N pieces of independent garbage reflects the central limit theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem) and how it predicts that the uncertainty (or standard error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_error) of an estimate will be reduced when independent estimates are averaged. <br />
<br />
This comic is probably not COVID-19 related (though arguably it could be related to doing statistical analyses with the varying quality of data related to the disease), meaning that the streak of comics preceding this on topics relating to COVID-19 is probably broken, after (rather appropriately) 19 comics.<br />
<br />
This comic is about the propagation of errors in numerical analysis and statistics, but described in much more colloquial terms. Numbers with low precision are termed "garbage" and numbers with high precision are labeled "precise".<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
!Formula<br />
!Explanation<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number + Precise number = Slightly less precise number<br />
|If we know absolute error bars, then adding two precise numbers will at worst add the sizes of the two error bars. For example, if our precise numbers are 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>) and 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>), then our sum is 2 (±2·10<sup>-6</sup>). It is possible to lose a lot of relative precision, if the resultant sum is close to zero as a result of adding a number and then close to its inverse. This phenomenon is known as catastrophic cancellation. Therefore, it is likely that all numbers referred here are positive numbers, which does not exhibit this phenomenon.<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number × Precise number = Slightly less precise number<br />
|Here, instead of absolute error, relative error will be added. For example, if our precise numbers are 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>) and 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>), then our product is 1 (±2·10<sup>-6</sup>).<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number + Garbage = Garbage<br />
|If one of the numbers has a high absolute error, and the numbers being added are of comparable size, then this error will be propagated to the sum. <br />
|-<br />
|Precise number × Garbage = Garbage<br />
|Likewise, if one of the numbers has a high relative error, then this error will be propagated to the sum. Here, this is independent of the sizes of the numbers.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\sqrt{\text{Garbage}} = \text{Less bad garbage}</math><br />
| When a number is square rooted, its relative error will be halved.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage<sup>2</sup> = Worse garbage<br />
|Likewise, when a number is squared, its relative error will be doubled. This is a corollary to multiplication adding relative errors.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\frac{1}{N}\sum(\text{N pieces of statistically independent garbage}) = \text{Better garbage}</math><br />
|By aggregating many pieces of statistically independent observations (for instance, surveying many individuals), it is possible to reduce relative error. This is the basis of statistical sampling.<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number<sup>Garbage</sup> = Much worse garbage<br />
|The exponent is very sensitive to changes, which may also magnify the effect based on the magnitude of the precise number.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage - Garbage = Much worse garbage<br />
|This line involves catastrophic cancellation. If both pieces of garbage are about the same (e.g. if their error bars overlap), then it is possible that the answer is positive, zero, or negative.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\frac{\text{Precise number}}{\text{Garbage}-\text{Garbage}}</math>=Much worse garbage, possible division by zero<br />
|Indeed, as with above, if error bars overlap then we might end up dividing by zero.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage × 0 = Precise number<br />
|Multiplying anything by 0 results in 0, an extremely precise number in the sense that it has no error whatsoever since we supply the 0 ourselves. This is equivalent to discarding garbage data from a statistical analysis.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The titletext refers to the computer science maxim of Garbage in, garbage out, which states that even if some code accurately does what it is supposed to do, supplying incorrect data will result in incorrect results. As we can see above, however, when plugging data into mathematical formulas, this can possibly magnify the error of our input data, though there are ways to reduce this error (such as aggregating data). Therefore, the quantity of garbage is not necessarily conserved.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
[A series of mathematical equations are written from top to bottom]<br />
<br />
Precise Number + Precise Number = Slightly less Precise Number<br />
<br />
Precise Number x Precise Number = Slightly less Precise Number<br />
<br />
Precise Number + Garbage = Garbage<br />
<br />
Precise Number x Garbage = Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage [inside square root symbol] = Less bad Garbage<br />
<br />
1/N &sum; (N pieces of statistically independent Garbage) = Better Garbage<br />
<br />
(Precise Number)<sup>Garbage</sup> = Much worse Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage - Garbage = Much worse Garbage<br />
<br />
Precise Number<br />
________________ = Much worse Garbage, possible division by zero<br />
Garbage - Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage x 0 = Precise Number<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Math]]</div>108.162.215.150https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2295:_Garbage_Math&diff=1908102295: Garbage Math2020-04-17T18:00:49Z<p>108.162.215.150: /* Transcript */ math, not all caps</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2295<br />
| date = April 17, 2020<br />
| title = Garbage Math<br />
| image = garbage_math.png<br />
| titletext = 'Garbage In, Garbage Out' should not be taken to imply any sort of conservation law limiting the amount of garbage produced.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a ZILOG Z80. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
This comic explains the "garbage in, garbage out" concept using arithmetical expressions. Just like the comic says, if you get garbage in any part of your workflow, you get garbage as a result.<br />
<br />
Some of these rules correspond to the rules of floating point arithmetic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating-point_arithmetic), while others may be inspired by the rules of propagation of uncertainty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagation_of_uncertainty#Example_formulae) where a "garbage" number would correspond to an estimate with a high degree of uncertainty, and the uncertainty of the result of arithmetic operations will tend to be dominated by the term with the highest uncertainty. The rule about N pieces of independent garbage reflects the central limit theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem) and how it predicts that the uncertainty (or standard error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_error) of an estimate will be reduced when independent estimates are averaged. <br />
<br />
This comic is probably not COVID-19 related (though arguably it could be related to doing statistical analyses with the varying quality of data related to the disease), meaning that the 19 comic streak preceding this on topics relating to COVID-19 is probably broken.<br />
<br />
This comic is about the propagation of errors in numerical analysis and statistics, but described in much more colloquial terms. Numbers with low precision are termed as "garbage" and numbers with high precision are termed as "precise numbers".<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
!Formula<br />
!Explanation<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number + Precise number = Slightly less precise number<br />
|If we know absolute error bars, then adding two precise numbers will at worst add the sizes of the two error bars. For example, if our precise numbers are 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>) and 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>), then our sum is 2 (±2·10<sup>-6</sup>). It is possible to lose a lot of relative precision, if the resultant sum is close to zero as a result of adding a number and then close to its inverse. This phenomenon is known as catastrophic cancellation. Therefore, it is likely that all numbers referred here are positive numbers, which does not exhibit this phenomenon.<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number × Precise number = Slightly less precise number<br />
|Here, instead of absolute error, relative error will be added. For example, if our precise numbers are 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>) and 1 (±10<sup>-6</sup>), then our product is 1 (±2·10<sup>-6</sup>).<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number + Garbage = Garbage<br />
|If one of the numbers has a high absolute error, and the numbers being added are of comparable size, then this error will be propagated to the sum. <br />
|-<br />
|Precise number × Garbage = Garbage<br />
|Likewise, if one of the numbers has a high relative error, then this error will be propagated to the sum. Here, this is independent of the sizes of the numbers.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\sqrt{\text{Garbage}} = \text{Less bad garbage}</math><br />
| When a number is square rooted, its relative error will be halved.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage<sup>2</sup> = Worse garbage<br />
|Likewise, when a number is squared, its relative error will be doubled. This is a corollary to multiplication adding relative errors.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\frac{1}{N}\sum(\text{N pieces of statistically independent garbage}) = \text{Better garbage}</math><br />
|By aggregating many pieces of statistically independent observations (for instance, surveying many individuals), it is possible to reduce relative error. This is the basis of statistical sampling.<br />
|-<br />
|Precise number<sup>Garbage</sup> = Much worse garbage<br />
|The exponent is very sensitive to changes, which may also magnify the effect based on the magnitude of the precise number.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage - Garbage = Much worse garbage<br />
|This line involves catastrophic cancellation. If both pieces of garbage are about the same (e.g. if their error bars overlap), then it is possible that the answer is positive, zero, or negative.<br />
|-<br />
|<math>\frac{\text{Precise number}}{\text{Garbage}-\text{Garbage}}</math>=Much worse garbage, possible division by zero<br />
|Indeed, as with above, if error bars overlap then we might end up dividing by zero.<br />
|-<br />
|Garbage × 0 = Precise number<br />
|Multiplying anything by 0 results in 0, an extremely precise number in the sense that it has no error whatsoever since we supply the 0 ourselves. This is equivalent to discarding garbage data from a statistical analysis.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The titletext refers to the computer science maxim of Garbage in, garbage out, which states that even if some code accurately does what it is supposed to do, supplying incorrect data will result in incorrect results. As we can see above, however, when plugging data into mathematical formulas, this can possibly magnify the error of our input data, though there are ways to reduce this error (such as aggregating data). Therefore, the quantity of garbage is not necessarily conserved.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
[A series of mathematical equations are written from top to bottom]<br />
<br />
Precise Number + Precise Number = Slightly less Precise Number<br />
<br />
Precise Number x Precise Number = Slightly less Precise Number<br />
<br />
Precise Number + Garbage = Garbage<br />
<br />
Precise Number x Garbage = Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage [inside square root symbol] = Less bad Garbage<br />
<br />
(Garbage)<sup>2</sup> = Worse Garbage<br />
<br />
1/N [Greek letter Sigma] (N pieces of statistically independent Garbage) = BETTER Garbage<br />
<br />
(Precise Number)<sup>Garbage</sup> = Much worse Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage - Garbage = Much worse Garbage<br />
<br />
Precise Number<br />
________________ = Much worse Garbage, possible division by zero<br />
Garbage - Garbage<br />
<br />
Garbage x 0 = Precise Number<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Math]]</div>108.162.215.150https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2293:_RIP_John_Conway&diff=1906232293: RIP John Conway2020-04-14T19:21:32Z<p>108.162.215.150: /* Explanation */ wlink template</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2293<br />
| date = April 13, 2020<br />
| title = RIP John Conway<br />
| image = rip_john_conway.gif<br />
| titletext = 1937-2020<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a GLIDER. Needs more in-depth explanation of how the Game Evolves. Include remaining stills from the GIF in the table below. Should also expand more on why Conway is a person of note. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
{{w|John Horton Conway|John Conway}}, an English mathematician, passed away of {{w|COVID-19}} on April 11th 2020. Two days later, [[Randall]] created this [[:Category:Tribute|memorial comic]]. It is the 6th memorial comic, but it is the first released in almost 5 years, since [[1560: Bubblegum]].<br />
<br />
One of Conway's most famous creations was the {{w|cellular automaton}} known as {{w|Conway's Game of Life}}. A cellular automaton is a machine composed of cells, each of which can be in a different state. Every generation, each cell in the automaton may transition to a new state depending on a set of rules. (Conway's work in mathematics was vast and various, but he is perhaps best known in the field for discovering the {{w|surreal numbers}}, which inspired Donald Knuth to write a novel which may have been referenced back in [[505: A Bunch of Rocks]].)<br />
<br />
Conway's Game of Life is a 2-state automaton (i.e., every cell can be "alive" or "dead") that is implemented on a two-dimensional grid of cells using the {{w|Moore neighborhood}} - this means that each cell can only be influenced by the eight cells directly surrounding it, both orthogonally and diagonally. The transition rules that Conway discovered are as follows:<br />
<br />
* If an "alive" cell has no live neighbors, or only one live neighbor, it becomes "dead". (This simulates death by isolation).<br />
* If an "alive" cell has four or more live neighbors, it becomes "dead". (This simulates death by overcrowding).<br />
* If a "dead" cell has exactly three live neighbors, it becomes "alive". (This simulates birth).<br />
<br />
Despite the simplicity of these three rules, Conway showed that patterns of amazing complexity can nonetheless develop out of simple cell arrangements. Some patterns do not evolve at all ("still lifes"), some enter a cyclic, repeating state ("oscillators"), and some reproduce their own pattern displaced by an offset, resulting in patterns that can move across the grid under their own power ("gliders" and "spaceships"). This last category is of particular interest, as it allows the Game of Life to transmit information from one location to another, allowing for rich, dynamic behavior and even for the creation of computational machines within the automaton itself.<br />
<br />
This comic begins with the shape of a stick figure as the starting cell configuration of the Game of Life. The black cells are "alive" and the white cells are "dead". This configuration then evolves via Conway's rules, disintegrating into nothingness and forming the five-cell pattern known as the "glider", which ascends up and to the right. This visually suggests a "soul" breaking away from the disintegrating corporeal body. The glider is perhaps the most iconic pattern of the Game of Life, and is often used symbolically to represent the phenomenon of emergence.<br />
<br />
The initial state presented in the comic is real and does actually evolve in that manner, as can be verified by entering the pattern into a cellular automaton simulator such as [http://golly.sourceforge.net/ Golly] or web services such as [https://bitstorm.org/gameoflife/ this one].<br />
<br />
The title text simply states Conway's birth and death year: 1937-2020.<br />
<br />
==Table of generations==<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
!Generation<br />
!Notes<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 0.jpg|thumb]]||Starting state (or "zeroth generation").<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 1.jpg|thumb]]||First generation. Note that this image is not aligned with the previous one: the position of all cells has shifted downward by one cell. All further generations are aligned the same as this one.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 2.jpg|thumb]]||Second generation.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 3.jpg|thumb]]||Third generation.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 4.jpg|thumb]]||Fourth generation.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 5.jpg|thumb]]||Fifth generation.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 6.jpg|thumb]]||Sixth generation. The first appearance of the glider, a well-known formation in Conway's Game of Life.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 7.jpg|thumb]]||Seventh generation. The glider takes on its other shape.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 8.jpg|thumb]]||Eighth generation. The glider returns to its first shape, pointing right instead of up.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 9.jpg|thumb]]||Ninth generation. The glider's second shape again, pointing right instead of up.<br />
|-<br />
|[[File:Generation 10.jpg|thumb]]||Tenth generation. The glider is now in its original form, but one cell higher and one cell to the right. It will continue to progress, cycling through these four states every four generations. The remains of the chaos down below will take two more generations to disappear completely.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[A pixelated image of a stick figure using 21 pixels, could be a pixel Cueball, which waves with one hand up while holding the other hand down. The head consist of 7 pixels, the top row of three having two pixels beneath the two outer pixels, thus having two empty pixels beneath the central pixel. The neck and torso is a typical cross made from six pixels. The two legs are to pixels each shifted left and right of the cross. The arm to the left that waves is two pixels one down and the next back up to the level of the cross central beam. The arm to the right has the first pixel similarly but the second pixel continues one further step down. After less than one second it turns out that the image is animated, with the pixels changing according to the rules of Conway's Game of Life. The figure splits into three groups, two of which dissipates in a similar way at the bottom of the panel. The other becomes a 'glider' and moves off to the top-right corner of the image and out of the frame. The animation then repeats.]<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Tribute]]<br />
[[Category:Comics with animation]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]</div>108.162.215.150https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:673:_The_Sun&diff=89508Talk:673: The Sun2015-04-12T23:11:34Z<p>108.162.215.150: </p>
<hr />
<div>Interesting (or deliberate?) that there's no reference at all in the explanation to [[wikipedia:Sunshine_(2007_film)|Sunshine]], released two years previously. [[Special:Contributions/178.99.247.73|178.99.247.73]] 21:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Can't "to spring" be thought of as a physical movement? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.196|108.162.212.196]] 00:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)<br />
: Yes; that's why the mnemonic works. [[User:Zowayix|Zowayix]] ([[User talk:Zowayix|talk]]) 16:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)<br />
:: Also, the mnemonic works because physically it is relatively easier to spring (i.e., jump) forward and to fall (through the simple action of gravity, without being able to catch yourself with your arms) back(ward) than it is to do the reverse. --[[User:Bedunkel|BD]] ([[User talk:Bedunkel|talk]]) 01:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)<br />
the fusion reactions are well understood<br />
By whom?<br />
<br />
[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 22:12, 27 January 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Okay, I'm too lazy to figure out a rewrite, but honestly...it seems pretty durned obvious that it's making fun of "The Core" which is actually mentioned in the comic, not making fun of some random British film not mentioned. Also look at the movie poster for "The Core" on Wikipedia; the similarities to the last panel with the group of people and the silhouettes is pretty obvious. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.150|108.162.215.150]] 23:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)MW</div>108.162.215.150https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1497:_New_Products&diff=86028Talk:1497: New Products2015-03-11T07:02:18Z<p>108.162.215.150: Created page with "Seems to me that the humor on the first two is based on engineers and programmers not understanding the general public's needs and wants. Also based on how engineers may find..."</p>
<hr />
<div>Seems to me that the humor on the first two is based on engineers and programmers not understanding the general public's needs and wants. Also based on how engineers may find products "exciting" based on how novel the product's functionality is, not based on how useful that functionality is. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.150|108.162.215.150]] 07:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)MW</div>108.162.215.150