https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=108.162.238.59&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T11:45:39ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1456:_On_the_Moon&diff=2028021456: On the Moon2020-12-07T21:53:39Z<p>108.162.238.59: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1456<br />
| date = December 5, 2014<br />
| title = On the Moon<br />
| image = on_the_moon.png<br />
| titletext = "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on Venus and returning him safely to--" [an aide frantically whispers in the president's ear for a moment] "... of landing a man on Venus."<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The phrase "If we can land a man on the Moon, why can't we <blank>" is commonly used to question a perceived shortcoming of some company, government or humanity in general. The {{w|Apollo program}} landed {{w|List of Apollo astronauts#Apollo astronauts who walked on the Moon|twelve astronauts}} on the {{w|Moon}} in six landing missions from July 1969 to December 1972 and returned all of those twelve astronauts safely to the Earth. However, from 1964 to 1967, there were eight deaths of astronauts or men training to be astronauts: three in the Apollo One fire, four in T-38 crashes, and one in an F-104 crash. The premise is usually that if "we" (whether referring generally to humanity, or specifically to the United States) have been able to achieve this extraordinary feat, our inability to achieve some lesser goal is questionable and/or ironic. Right after the Philae landing, the similar hashtag [https://twitter.com/hashtag/wecanlandonacometbutwecant #WeCanLandOnACometButWeCant] began on Twitter.<br />
<br />
Here, Megan cuts Cueball's argument's short by implicitly reminding him that humanity has not put another human on the Moon since the end of the Apollo program in December 1972 (nearly 42 years at the time this comic was published). New manned programs to return to the Moon, such as the {{w|Constellation Program}}, have been repeatedly cancelled. The {{w|Orion (spacecraft)|Orion spacecraft}}, which will be capable of carrying humans beyond {{w|low Earth orbit}} for the first time in over 40 years, executed its first test flight on the day after this comic was published, Although this is outdated because NASA is planning to go to the moon again with the {{w|Artemis Program}}.<br />
<br />
The title text is a retelling of {{w|John F. Kennedy|President Kennedy's}} famous inspirational [http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/xzw1gaeeTES6khED14P1Iw.aspx address to the U.S. Congress in May 1961] ("I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth"), which set into motion the Apollo program, except that this time, the speaker is talking about putting a man on planet {{w|Venus}}. The aide presumably explains to the president that, unlike Moon, Venus has gravity close to that of the Earth, but what's more, its surface {{w|Atmosphere_of_Venus|atmosphere}} density and pressure, and other factors including high temperature, strong winds and sulfuric acid clouds would make manned launch back to orbit practically impossible at our current technological level. As a result, the president backtracks from the goal of returning the astronauts safely to the Earth and comically limits the aspiration to landing an astronaut on Venus, full stop, without regard to the astronaut's safe return. This differs slightly from Kennedy's goal, which included the safe return of at least one astronaut from the moon. Although the overall 8:12 ratio of deaths to moonwalkers (during the period for Kennedy's speech to the end of the Apollo program) was too high to be considered "safe" by most standards, Kennedy had specified the safety only of the men who landed on the moon, and set a goal of "a" man returning safely. Technically, even if most of the men who landed died, as long as one returned safely by the end of 1969, Kennedy's goal would have been met.<br />
<br />
Kennedy's 1961 speech was also mentioned in the title text of [[753: Southern Half]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball and Megan are walking together heading right.]<br />
:Cueball: If we could land a man on the Moon, why can't we-<br />
:Megan: -land a man on the Moon?<br />
:Cueball: ...ok, fair. But we're working on it, OK?<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Space]]</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=937:_TornadoGuard&diff=166551937: TornadoGuard2018-12-01T03:43:35Z<p>108.162.238.59: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 937<br />
| date = August 12, 2011<br />
| title = TornadoGuard<br />
| image = tornadoguard.png<br />
| titletext = The bug report was marked 'could not reproduce'.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This is a comic with a take on an {{w|App store|application store}} - the most common app stores are for iPhones and Android devices. App stores take all the reviews and average the ratings for the overall star rating. <br />
<br />
In this comic, we see why this is sometimes a bad idea, especially with something as important as an app called ''TornadoGuard'' that should alert the user if there is a {{w|tornado warning}} for an area, an announcement indicating that a tornado is approaching. In this case, there are three 5 star reviews about the stability and user interface features of the app, left by users who actually never experienced its core functionality (simply because they never used it in a place where there was a tornado since they got it); however, the only review related to whether the app really works is given the same weight as the others, and sadly for that user the TornadoGuard app failed in alerting the user to an upcoming tornado. Tornadoes are a [[:Category:Tornadoes|recurring subject]] on xkcd. Also see future comic [[1098: Star Ratings]] and [[1754: Tornado Safety Tips]]. <br />
<br />
The title text is software-developer humor, the same as used in [[583: CNR]] which contains further explanation. It is a note from the developer's {{w|Bug tracking system|bug report}}, which said they could not reproduce the error. Of course, they could only reproduce such a failure if there were a tornado coming towards their area, and if a tornado warning was issued. This is a fairly rare situation, especially in certain areas of the world. This lack of suitable testing conditions explains why the actual alert portion of their code appears to be faulty.<br />
<br />
This is a common problem with code that cannot be easily tested -- that when finally needed, it does not actually work. This is the reason for emergency drills.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[The comic is a single panel which resembles a reviews page for a mobile phone application. Next to the app title is a pictogram of a tornado touching the ground]<br />
<br />
:----App store----<br />
:TornadoGuard<br />
:From DroidCoder2187<br />
:-----------------<br />
:Plays a loud alert sound <br />
:when there is a tornado <br />
:warning for your area.<br />
:-----------------<br />
:Rating: <br />
:★★★★☆<br />
:Based on 4 reviews<br />
:-----------------<br />
:User Reviews:<br />
:[The first three reviews shows five black stars. The last reviews one black and four white stars.]<br />
:Reviewer 1 (Dark silhouette): ★★★★★ Good UI! Many alert choices.<br />
:Reviewer 2 (Helicopter without rotors): ★★★★★ Running great, no crashes<br />
:Reviewer 3 (White square with black triangles at the top left and bottom right corner): ★★★★★ I like how you can set multiple locations<br />
:Reviewer 4 (White car): ★☆☆☆☆ App did not warn me about tornado.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the comic:]<br />
:The problem with averaging star ratings<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Computers]]<br />
[[Category:Programming]]<br />
[[Category:Tornadoes]]<br />
[[Category:Online reviews]]</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=583:_CNR&diff=166550583: CNR2018-12-01T03:40:54Z<p>108.162.238.59: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 583<br />
| date = May 13, 2009<br />
| title = CNR<br />
| image = cnr.png<br />
| titletext = Can't and shouldn't.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
"Could not reproduce" (CNR as per the title) is used here as a {{w|double entendre}}. Because the reported bug is that speech recognition failed on a young child's voice, the programmers attempt to reproduce (biologically) in order to have a child to use as a test subject to understand and fix the bug, starting by reproducing it (the bug). However the attempt fails, as shown by the negative pregnancy test, and therefore the bug report is closed with the reason being "could not reproduce": they could not reproduce the bug because they could not reproduce biologically.<br />
<br />
Nowadays, developers of software usually have a centralized repository of bugs which generally uses one of a handful of standard interfaces for tracking problems and desired featuers in software. There is usually a quick way of removing pending items from this system by changing the status to closed and selecting a reason from perhaps a dropdown list. "Could not reproduce" is a standard reason provided in almost all of these systems, so the novel pun provides extra humor to software developers. This reason also shows up in comic [[937: TornadoGuard]].<br />
<br />
The secondary joke is that Megan has chosen a ridiculous method of obtaining a child for the relatively simple task of testing the software. The obvious solution is to find a pre-existing child to use; giving birth to (and, presumably, raising) a child would burden the programmers with serious expenses, health concerns and responsibilities, and it would take years before the child would be able to speak clearly enough to use the program. <br />
<br />
The title-text "Can't and shouldn't" qualifies the bug report, meaning that the programmers not only could not reproduce, they also should not reproduce, as their reasons for doing so shows they have exceedingly bad judgment. (They also have poor child-rearing skills, as demonstrated in comic [[674: Natural Parenting]].)<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Megan is sitting at a computer.]<br />
:Computer: Speech2Text Commander<br />
:Computer: Bug #167801<br />
:Computer: Speech recognition fails on young child voices.<br />
:Megan: Hmm.<br />
<br />
:[The view enlarges to show a man sitting at another desk.]<br />
:Megan: Hey, can you do me without a condom? We need a young child for something.<br />
:Cueball: Okay.<br />
<br />
:[A pregnancy test is displayed. The label indicates not pregnant.]<br />
:Pregnant<br />
:Not pregnant<br />
<br />
:[Megan is typing on the computer.]<br />
:Megan typing: Bug #167801<br />
:Megan typing: Status: Closed<br />
:Megan typing: Reason: Could not reproduce.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Sex]]<br />
[[Category:Language]]</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2079:_Alpha_Centauri&diff=1665492079: Alpha Centauri2018-12-01T03:32:13Z<p>108.162.238.59: remove power inaccuracy. i don't know the difference very well between a gigawatt and a gigawatt-hour to do the proper calculations. maybe this is missing from calculations here</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2079<br />
| date = November 30, 2018<br />
| title = Alpha Centauri<br />
| image = alpha_centauri.png<br />
| titletext = And let's be honest, it's more like two and a half stars. Proxima is barely a star and barely bound to the system.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a SOLAR SAIL. It would be good to enumerate similar projects. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
{{w|Alpha Centauri}} is the closest star system to our solar system, being 4.37 {{w|light-year}}s away. As such, there are numerous ongoing plans and projects to journey to, and explore the star system, especially since {{w|Proxima Centauri b}} was found in 2016 to likely have liquid water oceans and a very thin atmosphere. Ponytail announces such a project using a {{w|Voyager program|Voyager}}-like probe.<br />
<br />
However, the offscreen person is against her idea, for the strange logic that "Alpha Centauri sucks". He says that he looked "online" and that the system "only has three stars". This is a pun regarding online reviews. Online rating systems, such as {{w|Yelp}}, often use {{w|Star (classification)|star rating system}}s, with more stars indicating higher quality, up to an arbitrary maximum, such as five stars to indicate the best rating. Thus 3 stars out of 5 stars in a 5-star rating system would theoretically be a "middling" rating, equating to a C grade, whereas in a 10-star rating system 3 stars out of 10 stars would be very poor quality. The Alpha Centauri star system has 3 ''physical'' {{w|star}}s: Alpha Centauri A, Alpha Centauri B, and Proxima Centauri. The offscreen person has misconstrued this fact of the system as some kind of review.<br />
<br />
A previous comic, [[1098: Star Ratings]], points out that star ratings below 4 out of 5 tend to be seen as "crap". <br />
<br />
The title text furthers the pun. Some online star rating systems also allow partial stars, such as a half-star, to allow more precision in rating (i.e. rating 2.5 stars instead of forced to chose 3 stars or 2 stars). Alpha Centauri's "half star" refers to Proxima Centauri, a {{w|red dwarf}}, which is a type of low-mass star. According to the offscreen person, this barely qualifies it to be a star. Furthermore, Proxima Centauri is nearly 13,000 AU (0.21 light years) away from the other 2 stars in the system, so it was long unknown whether Proxima Centauri was gravitationally bound to the Alpha Centauri star system.<br />
<br />
===Calculations===<br />
All numbers are rounded after subsequent calculations.<br />
<br />
4.367 light years / 35 years = 0.12477 light years/year<br />
<br />
0.12477 light years/year * 5.879e+12 miles/light year = 733,484,000,000 miles/year<br />
<br />
733,484,000,000 miles/year / 365 days/year / 24 hours/day = 83,000,000 Miles/hour / 1.60934 miles/kilometer = 134,000,000 Kilometers/hour<br />
<br />
According to [https://www.space.com/41447-parker-solar-probe-fastest-spacecraft-ever.html space.com] the fastest spacecraft ever will be the Parker Solar Probe which will reach 430,000 mph (692,000 km/h) as it reaches its closest point orbiting the sun. This is just over half of 1% of the needed speed of the Alpha Centauri vehicle proposed in the comic. The Voyager 1 spacecraft, launched in 1977, is currently traveling at about 38,000 mph (61,000 km/h).<br />
<br />
The above math assumes a constant speed, and requires a speed of ~0.0001c. Assuming a constant acceleration from rest (non-relativistic math follows):<br />
<br />
35*365.25*24*60*60 = 1.10e+9 seconds in 35 years<br />
<br />
4.367 * 5.879e+12 = 2.57e+13miles, 4.13e+13 km, 4.13e+16 m.<br />
<br />
x = 1/2*a*t<sup>2</sup><br />
<br />
a = 2*x*t <sup>-2<sup><br />
<br />
Assuming constant acceleration to the halfway point and constant deceleration to the destination, (otherwise you streak through the system, barely observing anything:<br />
<br />
t<sub>trip</sub> = 2*t<sub>halfway</sub><br />
<br />
a = 2*2.06e+16*(5.50e+8) <sup>-2</sup> = 0.136 m/s<sup>2</sup>, roughly 1/80 gravity.<br />
<br />
v<sub>halfway</sub> = a*t<sub>halfway</sub>.<br />
<br />
Top Speed: 75,000,000 m/s ~ 1/4*c. <br />
<br />
Assuming E = F*d, 0.136*1*4.13e+16 = 5.37e15 Joules will be required for each kilogram carried to Alpha Centauri in 35 years. <br />
<br />
This would require an unimaginable amount of mass for a conventional chemical rocket, is a completely impractical power requirement for any sort of passive solar sail concept.<br />
<br />
Further, the top speed is fast enough to require a recalculation using relativistic physics to model the problem. This means that the energy budget will need to increase, as the relativistic mass of the probe will increase, requiring more force (and thus more energy) to accelerate and decelerate near its top speed than this calculation returns.<br />
<br />
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot Active], laser based propulsion methods require currently non-existent and purely specualtive laser and materials technologies, as well as a powerplant equivalent to 12,500 of the [https://www.power-technology.com/features/feature-largest-nuclear-power-plants-world/ World's Largest Nuclear Plant] to transport sub-gram masses on this timescale. This also assumes that any probes can be steered accurately enough across interstellar distances to come close enough to image with any resolution the bodies they will be passing at a non-trivial fraction of c. <br />
<br />
Short of FTL travel or near-perfect mass-energy conversion technology, transporting more than fraction of a gram of material to Alpha Centauri in a human lifetime will be unachievable. Short of an enormous breakthrough in power generation, transporting even a fraction of a gram is impossible.<br />
<br />
Nonetheless, [http://breakthroughinitiatives.org/challenges/3 Breakthrough Starshot] is attempting to send many gram-sized probes to Alpha Centauri within the century. Following current technological trends, they expect the efficiency of laser-based propulsion to increase by launch time, allowing launches driven by an unreasonably-large-but-achievable amount of power. The top speed needed is halved by refraining from slowing at all at the destination: the probes will aim a distance away from the target, so that it traverses by slowly enough for a camera to rotate and track it, even at near-light speeds. To account for error and space dust, the plan is to launch many tiny probes simultaneously. They may only be able to accomplish their goal if they can get enough funding to actually affect the global economy enough to make the technologies they require more efficient to produce. Launches would additionally burn incredible quantities of natural gas.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a slide with an image of a [https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1 Voyager-like] spacecraft.]<br />
:Ponytail: Our probe can reach Alpha Centauri in under 35 years.<br />
:Offscreen voice: We should go somewhere else. Alpha Centauri sucks.<br />
:Ponytail: Huh? It's the closest, most convenient system!<br />
:Offscreen: Yeah, but I checked online and it only has three stars.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Space probes]]<br />
[[Category:Online reviews]]</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2079:_Alpha_Centauri&diff=1665482079: Alpha Centauri2018-12-01T03:24:28Z<p>108.162.238.59: Added link to breakthrough starshot's plan for handling each seemingly-impossible challenge.</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2079<br />
| date = November 30, 2018<br />
| title = Alpha Centauri<br />
| image = alpha_centauri.png<br />
| titletext = And let's be honest, it's more like two and a half stars. Proxima is barely a star and barely bound to the system.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a SOLAR SAIL. It would be good to enumerate similar projects. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
{{w|Alpha Centauri}} is the closest star system to our solar system, being 4.37 {{w|light-year}}s away. As such, there are numerous ongoing plans and projects to journey to, and explore the star system, especially since {{w|Proxima Centauri b}} was found in 2016 to likely have liquid water oceans and a very thin atmosphere. Ponytail announces such a project using a {{w|Voyager program|Voyager}}-like probe.<br />
<br />
However, the offscreen person is against her idea, for the strange logic that "Alpha Centauri sucks". He says that he looked "online" and that the system "only has three stars". This is a pun regarding online reviews. Online rating systems, such as {{w|Yelp}}, often use {{w|Star (classification)|star rating system}}s, with more stars indicating higher quality, up to an arbitrary maximum, such as five stars to indicate the best rating. Thus 3 stars out of 5 stars in a 5-star rating system would theoretically be a "middling" rating, equating to a C grade, whereas in a 10-star rating system 3 stars out of 10 stars would be very poor quality. The Alpha Centauri star system has 3 ''physical'' {{w|star}}s: Alpha Centauri A, Alpha Centauri B, and Proxima Centauri. The offscreen person has misconstrued this fact of the system as some kind of review.<br />
<br />
A previous comic, [[1098: Star Ratings]], points out that star ratings below 4 out of 5 tend to be seen as "crap". <br />
<br />
The title text furthers the pun. Some online star rating systems also allow partial stars, such as a half-star, to allow more precision in rating (i.e. rating 2.5 stars instead of forced to chose 3 stars or 2 stars). Alpha Centauri's "half star" refers to Proxima Centauri, a {{w|red dwarf}}, which is a type of low-mass star. According to the offscreen person, this barely qualifies it to be a star. Furthermore, Proxima Centauri is nearly 13,000 AU (0.21 light years) away from the other 2 stars in the system, so it was long unknown whether Proxima Centauri was gravitationally bound to the Alpha Centauri star system.<br />
<br />
===Calculations===<br />
All numbers are rounded after subsequent calculations.<br />
<br />
4.367 light years / 35 years = 0.12477 light years/year<br />
<br />
0.12477 light years/year * 5.879e+12 miles/light year = 733,484,000,000 miles/year<br />
<br />
733,484,000,000 miles/year / 365 days/year / 24 hours/day = 83,000,000 Miles/hour / 1.60934 miles/kilometer = 134,000,000 Kilometers/hour<br />
<br />
According to [https://www.space.com/41447-parker-solar-probe-fastest-spacecraft-ever.html space.com] the fastest spacecraft ever will be the Parker Solar Probe which will reach 430,000 mph (692,000 km/h) as it reaches its closest point orbiting the sun. This is just over half of 1% of the needed speed of the Alpha Centauri vehicle proposed in the comic. The Voyager 1 spacecraft, launched in 1977, is currently traveling at about 38,000 mph (61,000 km/h).<br />
<br />
The above math assumes a constant speed, and requires a speed of ~0.0001c. Assuming a constant acceleration from rest (non-relativistic math follows):<br />
<br />
35*365.25*24*60*60 = 1.10e+9 seconds in 35 years<br />
<br />
4.367 * 5.879e+12 = 2.57e+13miles, 4.13e+13 km, 4.13e+16 m.<br />
<br />
x = 1/2*a*t<sup>2</sup><br />
<br />
a = 2*x*t <sup>-2<sup><br />
<br />
Assuming constant acceleration to the halfway point and constant deceleration to the destination, (otherwise you streak through the system, barely observing anything:<br />
<br />
t<sub>trip</sub> = 2*t<sub>halfway</sub><br />
<br />
a = 2*2.06e+16*(5.50e+8) <sup>-2</sup> = 0.136 m/s<sup>2</sup>, roughly 1/80 gravity.<br />
<br />
v<sub>halfway</sub> = a*t<sub>halfway</sub>.<br />
<br />
Top Speed: 75,000,000 m/s ~ 1/4*c. <br />
<br />
Assuming E = F*d, 0.136*1*4.13e+16 = 5.37e15 Joules will be required for each kilogram carried to Alpha Centauri in 35 years. <br />
<br />
This would require an unimaginable amount of mass for a conventional chemical rocket, is a completely impractical power requirement for any sort of passive solar sail concept.<br />
<br />
Further, the top speed is fast enough to require a recalculation using relativistic physics to model the problem. This means that the energy budget will need to increase, as the relativistic mass of the probe will increase, requiring more force (and thus more energy) to accelerate and decelerate near its top speed than this calculation returns.<br />
<br />
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot Active], laser based propulsion methods require currently non-existent and purely specualtive laser and materials technologies, as well as a powerplant equivalent to 12,500 of the [https://www.power-technology.com/features/feature-largest-nuclear-power-plants-world/ World's Largest Nuclear Plant] to transport sub-gram masses on this timescale. This also assumes that any probes can be steered accurately enough across interstellar distances to come close enough to image with any resolution the bodies they will be passing at a non-trivial fraction of c. <br />
<br />
Short of FTL travel or near-perfect mass-energy conversion technology, transporting more than fraction of a gram of material to Alpha Centauri in a human lifetime will be unachievable. Short of an enormous breakthrough in power generation, transporting even a fraction of a gram is impossible.<br />
<br />
Nonetheless, [http://breakthroughinitiatives.org/challenges/3 Breakthrough Starshot] is attempting to send many gram-sized probes to Alpha Centauri within the century. Following current technological trends, they expect the efficiency of laser-based propulsion to increase by launch time, allowing launches driven by a single large power plant. The top speed needed is halved by refraining from slowing at all at the destination: the probes will aim a distance away from the target, so that it traverses by slowly enough for a camera to rotate and track it. To account for error and space dust, the plan is to launch many tiny probes simultaneously. They may only be able to accomplish their goal if they can get enough funding to actually affect the global economy enough to make the technologies they require more efficient to produce.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a slide with an image of a [https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1 Voyager-like] spacecraft.]<br />
:Ponytail: Our probe can reach Alpha Centauri in under 35 years.<br />
:Offscreen voice: We should go somewhere else. Alpha Centauri sucks.<br />
:Ponytail: Huh? It's the closest, most convenient system!<br />
:Offscreen: Yeah, but I checked online and it only has three stars.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Space probes]]<br />
[[Category:Online reviews]]</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2073:_Kilogram&diff=166271Talk:2073: Kilogram2018-11-22T08:06:07Z<p>108.162.238.59: a summary is a short synopsis of the content of a larger writing sample</p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
<br />
I didn't know that weights and currencies could be converted 1:1, that's cool! [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 16:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I wish they ''had'' redefined the kilogram a little bit. It would have been neat if 1 kg was exactly the weight of 1 dm^3 (1 litre) of water under one atmosphere of pressure. Right now it's soooo close. It's a good enough estimate for simple maths, but whenever you tell people that a litre of water weighs one kilogram the pedants comes out of the woodworks... [[User:Kapten-N|Kapten-N]] ([[User talk:Kapten-N|talk]]) 16:50, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:You'll get pedants whenever you refer to a kilogram as weight; it's a mass. The difference is that stuff weighs less on the Moon - or on tall mountains - although the mass is the same. I think the article as I just read it gets away with this. And, sure, what is the standard kilogram but a weight, that you take and weigh... rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.59|162.158.91.59]] 23:57, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::It ''used'' to be a mass. Now it's a ratio of the local gravitational strength versus the efficiency of an EM field. Kibble scales require EM shielding & an environment of ''precisely'' 1g, in order to be accurate. Since gravity isn't equal everywhere, our measurements of kilograms will now vary accordingly. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: No, it doesn't require an environment of precisely 1g, it relies on the fact that the effect of local gravity is well understood, can be measured precisely, and compensated for. It's a fundamental aspect of the Kibble balance and you can rest assured that it hasn't been overlooked by the physicists designing it! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.34|162.158.134.34]] 16:38, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
::::Oh really? ''How'' would one precisely measure the local gravity? In kilograms of force? No, sorry. This is a bad method. It leads to an insoluble quandary & clearly either ''hasn't'' been thought through by its supporters, or is an intentional exploit. ''Actually'' fixing it to Planck's constant would be great, but a Kibble scale can't do that. Weighing mass against anything but another mass is foolish.[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 22:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::I'm very happy that measuring a kilogram accurately now may require EM shielding. EM shielding is far too rare nowadays, in this modern world of far-beyond-van-eck-phreaking. Anything that makes shielding more prevalent and widely understood is sorely needed. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.84|172.68.65.84]] 23:19, 20 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Up until 1964 a litre (and therefore actually the metre too) used to be defined as the volume that water with mass 1kg takes. But this is not good for exact measurements not only because you need exactly reproducable temperature, pressure (not so problematic, because you can measure them and then calculate the divergence) and gravity (not so easy to measure, because you need an exact mass and exact masses are impossible to keep the same), but also because you need pure water free of any polutions of other stuff (hard and expensive) and even free of tiny amounts of isotopes which are deuterium and tritium (even way more expensive).<br />
Because the water that was used then was never close to pure the actual weight of water nowadays is 0.99997kg at 4°C and 1.013bar and I don't know which value for g. There is also another definition which I like, but is hard to measure in real life scenarios: E=mc². A kilogramm should be 1/c² of the mass which anything becomes heavier that you accelerate by the energy of one Joule. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.150|162.158.90.150]] 17:11, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:But how do you define/measure a Joule then? [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 18:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:No, until 1964, meter and litre were totally independent, a meter has never been defined directly or indirectly in relation to a mass of water. It is only since 1964 that the liter is defined as a cubic decimeter.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.36|162.158.90.36]] 18:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:Also, in E=mc², E is the energy '''at rest''' (for a stationary object of mass m), so your definition using the acceleration makes no sense.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.254|162.158.88.254]] 18:47, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
Actually, for the new definition of the kilo using the Kibble balance you need to measure the gravity... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.16|162.158.134.16]] 17:34, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Welp, looks like 1 kg, a.k.a. 1 lb, a.k.a 2.2 lb, is now officially defined to have zero mass.<br />
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.50.28|172.69.50.28]] 16:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:…or infinite. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 16:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
::What I understand: the joke is not (only) about 1 (old) kg = 1 (old) lb, but (also) about 1 new kg = 1 old lb... or 1 new lb = 1 old kg :^) Or about a ring of positive characteristic --[[Special:Contributions/188.114.102.94|188.114.102.94]] 17:08, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:I'm so glad other people see the problem with this supposed "official" definition. We've gone from a unit of measure problematically prone to contamination error, to a unit of measure that changes depending on where you measure it! [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
what about the ambiguity of the pound? would they reference an Avoirdupois bound or a Troy lb? --wonderkatn {{unsigned ip|172.69.50.16}}<br />
<br />
I don't believe the Imperial system is "no longer used". Gills have been retired, but yards and even chains are still in use, not to mention the Imperial <s>lb</s> pint. [[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 18:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:The imperial system has some good things about it. Feet are divisible by 12, and Fahrenheit is much nicer for human temperatures. [[User:Linker|Linker]] ([[User talk:Linker|talk]]) 18:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
::Yeah, coz it's so easier to divide by 12 than to divide by 10! {{unsigned ip|162.158.89.61}}<br />
:::No it is easier to divide by 2, 3, 4, and 6, and yes, I can divide the number of feet by 10 easily in my head. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:::The idea is that with twelve parts, you can have 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6, and 1/12 all be integer number of parts. This is why these types of systems developed in the past, and why so many systems also had multiples of 60 (you can do the math here.). They were easy to divide by merchants without access to any sort of calculation method. The base-10 system is great if you're only ever dealing with halves or tenths. But if you want a quarter or a third of something, you have to split the base units. It's no longer necessary in modern life, but it had a real advantage in ancient times. [[User:Cgrimes85|Cgrimes85]] ([[User talk:Cgrimes85|talk]]) 19:18, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:::: No longer necessary in modern life... Which is why we should all switch to base-10 units of time! [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
::::: Or we could change everything else to base 12... (I can dream, can't I?) [[User:Linker|Linker]] ([[User talk:Linker|talk]]) 18:45, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::::: I would love a base-10 time system. Especially since time=money, and money is base-10. Color me surprised a while back when my research led me to find out this had been tried in the past. They had a whole calendar system designed to renumber minutes, hours, days and weeks. I think they went to a 10 day week. Would have worked, too, except for religion. Under the new system, too many people had problems keeping track of every seventh day. SO it was scrapped. --ElectroDFW-- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.59|108.162.238.59]] 08:06, 22 November 2018 (UTC) <br />
<br />
Ok, I'm going to point out something. What's a meter? 1000 milimeters. What's a milimeter? .....skipping the questions all the way to the end, the answer is "the wavelength of the color orange". Or at least that's what I read. So my question is: why orange? What's so special about orange? What as a species or as a solar system or as universe does the color orange have to do with anything? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.90.10|172.68.90.10]] 21:50, 16 November 2018 (UTC) SiliconWolf<br />
<br />
: "The metre was originally defined in 1793 as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole." That's why orange. Think of those lines from equator to pole... and how an orange is divided in segments beneath the peel. This is why the "Terry's Chocolate Orange" is so called, because it resembles the fruit orange. rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.59|162.158.91.59]] 23:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: The wavelength definition of the meter is not in use anymore either. Since 1983, the meter is defined as the distance the light (any light) travel in the vacuum in 1/299792458 seconds. Of course, all units have a part of arbitrary, and the value it is used to calculate the meter (the orange color, the 1/299792458 seconds...) are basically chosen because they are close to and more precise than the previous definition that existed, in order to not have to recalibrate things that don't need high precision. [[Special:Contributions/103.22.200.210|103.22.200.210]] 08:03, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I feel like we're starting to compare angstroms & millitrumps, here. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
::I don't think we need to bring politics in here. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 15:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:::Agreed, but all this talk of "orange" makes it very hard not to relate the entire conversation to politics, for some of us who are particularly affected. Hopefully someday it'll just be another color that's hard to rhyme, again.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Be very careful'''<br />
<br />
An announcement to a new definition of the kilogram is published wildly (I mean what I'm saying) today. Please do not present this issue as a final fact, I'm still missing an official statement -- it's just press hype. And there are two possible definitions taken account, not only the one from the US. The final decision right now looks like some of Randall's compromises. Just sayin... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:01, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:OK then, here's an after-the-vote November 16 web page from NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, within the US Department of Commerce. It says it's a done deal. [https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2018/11/historic-vote-ties-kilogram-and-other-units-natural-constants historic-vote-ties-kilogram-and-other-units-natural-constants]. --JohnB [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.89|162.158.79.89]] 21:58, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
::Thanks, but my German sources still preset something like counting atoms [https://www.ptb.de/cms/forschung-entwicklung/forschung-zum-neuen-si/ptb-experimente/kilogramm-und-mol-atome-zaehlen.html Kilogram and MOL, counting atoms], just meaning I'm not sure what will be true in May 2019, do we know the truth??? And in fact it looks like Europeans are fighting against US scientists, or vice versa. This is far of a standard I would prefer. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:::I'm ''extremely'' skeptical of the Kibble scale definition. It won't maintain constant mass at different locations. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It will be very funny when we find out one of those constants is not really constant ... sure, planck length is less likely to change than physical object, but it MIGHT. Like, maybe it gets longer the older the universe is ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:The definition of units is always dependent on our knowledge of physics. Perhaps the best example of this is the confusion about whether the pound is a unit of mass or weight. The lb predates the distinction and the definition bifurcated when the distinction became clear.<br />
:If Planck's constant isn't constant then we get two functionally different concepts of mass and we have to decide if we stick with the new definition or go back to (some equivalent of) the older one.<br />
:By the way the confusion over the definition of a lb was settled long ago. The lb is defined in terms of the kg and is a unit of mass. The claim that the lb is a unit of force is a deliberate obfuscation perpetuated by bad physics teachers who understand neither physics nor the history of physics. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58|108.162.219.58]] 19:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
:Since they're proposing to measure the gravitational force exerted on a unit of mass against the force exerted by an electromagnetic field (instead of comparing the downward force exerted on two masses), the new definition ''isn't'' a constant. For instance, on the moon such a scale would define 1kg as about 13.3lbs! The "new official definition" is a bad one. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You could not define the kilogram in terms of electric force when you defined the Amp in terms of the current that creates a given force. But by defining the amp in terms of numbers of elementary charges per second and setting Avogadro and other constants by fiat, you break the circle. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.190|162.158.38.190]] 23:54, 16 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
In the Netherlands, we use the metric system. We also use the term "pond" to mean pound. However, we use metric pounds. Those are 0.500 kilogram, so it is actually easy to use. {{unsigned ip|162.158.89.61}}<br />
<br />
US weight and length units definition is strictly based on metric system:<br />
"Standards for the exact length of an inch have varied in the past, but since the adoption of the international yard during the 1950s and 1960s it has been based on the metric system and defined as exactly 2.54 cm."{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inch}<br />
"the most common today is the international avoirdupois pound, which is legally defined as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms" {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(mass)}<br />
Therefore the conversion proposed sounds recursive.<br />
Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmSJXC6_qQ8<br />
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.178|172.68.51.178]] 13:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
While it would be nice if the meter were equal to a yard, it would certainly be better if the meter were defined as 5.28 feet, so that kilometers and miles are the same.[[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 13:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Not to mention, why are highway sign distances measured in quarter-miles, but our car odometers are tenths? Grrr... --ElectroDFW-- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.59|108.162.238.59]] 08:06, 22 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm guessing that they'll get around the varying g problem by defining the kg in terms of some standard acceleration equal to 9.81 m/s^2. Then when measuring an object's mass you would account for the difference between the local value of g and the standard one. This isnt a problem because we can measure gravitational acceleration quite precisely and it depends only on the units of length and time.<br />
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.190|108.162.216.190]]Carl[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.190|108.162.216.190]]<br />
: The varying g problem is already compensated for in the way you describe (otherwise the Kibble balance wouldn't be useful), ProphetZarquon is just spreading misinformation. [[User:Arcorann|Arcorann]] ([[User talk:Arcorann|talk]]) 07:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
In the What If "A Mole of Moles," Randall states in his estimates, "Anything I can throw weighs one pound. One pound is one kilogram." [https://what-if.xkcd.com/4/] {{unsigned ip|162.158.75.178}}<br />
<br />
Let's see... All the things this proposed change would mess up. (even assuming that Black Hat meant 1 Kilogram = 1 mass-pound)<br />
....<br />
The newton just changed, but only in relation to the KG, so I guess the force required to lift 1 KG in 1 G is still technically about 10 newtons, only it's a DIFFERENT newton now...<br />
atmospheric pressure is no longer ~= to 100 kilopascals, because the pascal just changed.<br />
1 liter of water is no longer ~= to 1 KG.<br />
Metric and imperial Tons are no longer anywhere close to each other.<br />
1 mole of carbon-12 no longer masses 12 grams. <br />
There must be other ways the common rules-of-thumb of the metric system just got broken, any suggestions? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.82|108.162.216.82]] 19:44, 18 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is already one link to a Veritasium video on this subject a few coments above, and there was a new video out just before this vote, about the new units: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_e1wITe_ig The kg is dead, long live the kg]. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:57, 19 November 2018 (UTC)</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1037:_Umwelt&diff=154344Talk:1037: Umwelt2018-03-14T18:11:35Z<p>108.162.238.59: </p>
<hr />
<div>I looked at it in Firefox, and the alt text changed from saying "web browser" to "browser window size" Should we add that?[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.59|108.162.238.59]] 18:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Normally I understand xkcd. But this one hurts my head. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 20:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)<br />
: I sorted all of them out. Phew!!! That was some work. The ones at the end have no appropriate picture in the image part. Atleast the hurricane one should be added. Please do so. [[User:TheOriginalSoni|TheOriginalSoni]] ([[User talk:TheOriginalSoni|talk]]) 11:09, 8 September 2012 (UTC)<br />
:: I live in one of Umwelt's "hurricane areas", and that's the one I see. How do we add it? [[User:Ekedolphin|Ekedolphin]] ([[User talk:Ekedolphin|talk]]) 06:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is a fixed image used if your browser does not support javascript, which is missing. Additionally, the alt text varies at times. [[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 20:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
I can't see any of them neither in Firefox nor in IE :( --[[User:Kronf|Kronf]] ([[User talk:Kronf|talk]]) 11:32, 13 October 2012 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This has got to be one of my favourite xkcd's! That amount of ingenuity in one edition! [[User:D3KN0W|Dean]] ([[User talk:D3KN0W|talk]]) 22:33, 01 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is now also a category page for Jurassic Park, but I'm not sure how to work that into the explanation. [[User:Kaa-ching|Kaa-ching]] ([[User talk:Kaa-ching|talk]]) 09:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I can't resist noting that Chrome is sadly mistaken in thinking that its puzzle piece links up to a corner piece - it would have to be an edge piece to do that. Firefox would never have that kind of issue... [[User:Natf|Natf]] ([[User talk:Natf|talk]])<br />
: Supposedly, if there were a puzzle with inner corners, such as one with a plus cut out of it, this could link up as shown. ... I wanna make a puzzle like that now. [[Special:Contributions/99.44.200.140|99.44.200.140]] 08:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It would be difficult to compile, but I think this page would benefit from having the conditions along with the image (for instance, "Displays when running Netscape:") [[Special:Contributions/24.41.66.114|24.41.66.114]] 03:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Hey, um, I think there is an AniMega Mega Mega Mega Maniacs reference. Namely, the question about hot dogs resembles Yakko's question to the Wally Llama except it dealt with packages of eight and packages of ten. (I forget which is which) {{unsigned ip|71.166.47.84}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I came here to seek informartion about how each strip was seen. Disappointed... Especially after seeing there is a hebrew one!?!?!?!? (number 29) Is it real? Because I assume it should be visible from Israel and I can't see it [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.228|141.101.99.228]] 22:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Added two location references to the 2Fast2Furious and Snake comics, with browser references. Anyone know why I got those results? {{unsigned ip|173.245.50.77}}<br />
: I don't, especially since I live in the UK (not Texas) and yet I see the Snake comic? [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 14:14, 7 April 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I found a new one, it seems to display when using TOR. Should I add it? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.49.60|173.245.49.60]] 02:22, 7 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
:Yes definitely. [[User:Chriswampler|Chriswampler]] ([[User talk:Chriswampler|talk]]) 16:07, 7 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
::The Reviews comic just as appearing under TOR is actually comic #1036. Can you confirm that it is actually showing up under Umwelt? [[User:Chriswampler|Chriswampler]] ([[User talk:Chriswampler|talk]]) 20:34, 7 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
:::Yes. I checked like ten times. I just did it again.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.153|173.245.53.153]] 20:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
:Honestly I can't do much explaining. Does anyone get it? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.61|108.162.219.61]] 20:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
:For me, using TOR, it displayed the full Aurora comic. [[User:Zorlax the Mighty|Zorlax the Mighty&#39;); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:Zorlax the Mighty|talk]]) 17:50, 5 June 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Has anyone tested the Steam browser, whatever it is, with this comic? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.66|108.162.219.66]] 18:50, 26 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I tested the Steam browser and got the "This plugin requires Sergey Brin's permission to run" comic, same as when I use Chrome.[[User:RobotSnake|RobotSnake]] ([[User talk:RobotSnake|talk]]) 18:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)<br />
:That is because the Steam browser is WebKit/Chromium-based. (Now you know something!)[[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.88|173.245.50.88]] 03:34, 2 September 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
For the Yahoo Chrome one with Sergey Brin, it reminds me a bit like how GerMega Mega Mega Mega Man tanks were unable to be moved on D-Day because Hitler, whose order was needed to move them, slept through the first five hours of the batter. It's the same theme of failure due to having only one person able to give permission, and that person being asleep.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.188|173.245.54.188]] 14:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I get Pond on both my laptop (Firefox) and iPhone 3. I live in North Holland. Hope it helps, ask some other Dutch people about it for affirmation. On Opera, I get the turtle one. I should also note that if I make my browser window smaller, the right part of it is cut off. This page is clearly incomplete... -Maplestrip<br />
<br />
...Uhm, have you guys ever tried looking at this page in Lynx? Because, seriously, this is amazing. It's basically this entire page. The start in particular is hilarious: "<nowiki>[[two people...]]</nowiki> <<..wait.. <scrolls through a listing of everything> oh goddammit Randall. Thanks a bunch, dude. I better get a raise for typing out all of this>> [[Two people standing next to eachother..." Reading some of this, is this where you got all the transcripts for these comics from? -Maplestrip<br />
<br />
In Ireland I get no comic strip loading at all! Just nothing in between the direction buttons, on Chrome or Safari! :/ {{unsigned ip|173.245.53.215}}<br />
<br />
Just something I feel should be added to the "Blizzard" comic: it seems to also change the distance measurement (magnitude and system), in the last panel, depending on your location; for instance, the final panel refers to them only having [https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22279334/Screen%20Shot%202015-03-25%20at%2010.03.06%20PM.png six more kilometres to travel] for me: fitting given that I'm located in central Ontario. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.17|108.162.216.17]] 02:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm in Georgia but I still got the Hurricane image. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.187|108.162.238.187]] 14:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I have the "Reviews" one. With Firefox/Linux without referer and without javascript, from France. With javascript I don't have any comic. Edit : I checked, it's because I have the "Reviews" one but inside a <noscript> tag, so it doesn't display when javascript is activated. [[User:Seipas|Seipas]] ([[User talk:Seipas|talk]]) 14:20, 9 December 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
And now we need Randall to make an Umwelt page for Microsoft Edge.<br />
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.61|108.162.221.61]] 02:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Note of interest: Windows 10, Georgia Tech campus in Atlanta, GA. Currently receiving "The Void" on both Chrome and Microsoft Edge unless Javascript is disabled. When disabled, "Reviews" is shown instead. Also: Chrome on HTC One M8 shows "Corporate Networks" with yellow triangle and Google - a combination which incidentally does not seem to be on this page. [[User:Castriff|Jimmy C]] ([[User talk:Castriff|talk]]) 05:11, 9 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm on Windows 10 in NJ and I'm getting "Snake" instead of "Hurricane" on Opera, Chrome, Edge and Maxthon. Has this happened to other NJ users, or is "Hurricane" in only some parts on New Jersey? Maybe it's because it's on Windows 10. {{unsigned ip|69.123.50.168}}<br />
<br />
I'm in Idaho using Firefox, and I get Reviews whenever I go to this comic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.74|108.162.246.74]] 18:41, 17 April 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Should I add to the article that I'm seeing "Snake" on Chrome version 49.0.2623.112 on Windows 8 in Massachusetts? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.72|108.162.219.72]] 00:13, 29 April 2016 (UTC)<br />
:I posted that comment before I had an account. Now that I'm looking back at this article a year later, I've gone ahead and done it. —[[User:CsBlastoise|CsBlastoise]] ([[User talk:CsBlastoise|talk]]) 22:28, 12 April 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I got a variant of the snake one in Ohio using Windows 7 and Google Chrome Version 49.0.2623.112 m. As of now, it should only be visible in "Texas (on Chrome Version 33.0.1750.154 m), New Jersey, California (on Chrome Version 39.0.2171.95), Maryland, Massachusetts (Safari for iOS), Connecticut (Safari for iOS)."[[User:Bbrk24|Bbrk24]] ([[User talk:Bbrk24|talk]]) 16:35, 3 May 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm getting Plugin Disabled in Safari, Firefox, Safari mobile, Chrome mobile, and the Google app. The only anomaly is Chrome desktop, where I'm getting Tornado (located in "the Midwest"), and I'm all out of browsers. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.72.113|162.158.72.113]] 21:37, 18 June 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I get the review strip when sharing http://xkcd.com/1037/ on FB, and the full aurora strip using chrome on my android t-mobile phone [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.89|173.245.48.89]] 17:55, 26 August 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm in Virginia, but when i look at umwelt in firefox, it gives me the tornado, whith ohio in the third panel, and on chrome, it does aurora, still saying ohio. {{unsigned ip|172.68.78.127}}<br />
<br />
== Comic Might Now be Broken? ==<br />
<br />
For some reason, this comic does not seem to be working now. It doesn't work on Chrome version 57.0.2987.133 on Windows 8 in Massachusetts, even though it worked a year ago on the very same computer with version 49.0.2623.112 of Chrome in the same location (showing "Snake" then); I tried it on Internet Explorer on the same computer (only because it's the only other browser I have on it), and it didn't work there either; my brother grudgingly agreed to try it on Firefox on his Ubuntu 14.04 machine (in the same room), and we got the same result.<br />
<br />
No, I'm not talking about the void; here, there is absolutely no image at all. It seems to be the same as the experience that an anonymous user posted above about two and a half years ago:<br />
<blockquote>In Ireland I get no comic strip loading at all! Just nothing in between the direction buttons, on Chrome or Safari! :/ [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.215|173.245.53.215]] 18:41, 13 November 2014 (UTC)<br><code>''(Comment was actually unsigned; contributor and timestamp are implied by <nowiki>{{unsigned ip}}</nowiki> template and edit history, respectively)''</code></blockquote><br />
Now, every time I tried on my computer, the browser said that the page was trying to load unsafe scripts. Maybe this is somehow linked to the fact that within the past few months, Randall (or more likely Davean) made all xkcd links secure (<nowiki>https://</nowiki>), and the now secure nature of the page could be blocking the location- and browser-sensing scripts in the comic itself. However, the comic still didn't work when I opted to "Load Unsafe Scripts", so maybe it isn't that simple.<br />
<br />
Also, it might be helpful to note that [[User:Seipas|Seipas]] posted on here that he was having an issue that is probably quite similar to this one:<br />
<blockquote>I have the "Reviews" one. With Firefox/Linux without referer and without javascript, from France. With javascript I don't have any comic. Edit : I checked, it's because I have the "Reviews" one but inside a <noscript> tag, so it doesn't display when javascript is activated. [[User:Seipas|Seipas]] ([[User talk:Seipas|talk]]) 14:20, 9 December 2015 (UTC)</blockquote><br />
Anyway, with all that said, is there anyone else who is having this issue and/or knows what might be causing it?<br />
<br />
—[[User:CsBlastoise|CsBlastoise]] ([[User talk:CsBlastoise|talk]]) 23:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:It has to do with the browser getting scared off by "mixed active content." Mozilla's developers discuss it in more detail here: [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Mixed_content]. In Firefox at least, there's a config change you can make (security.mixed_content.block_active_content) to override this and get the comic to display. (Well, kind of. I'm still getting "The Void," but I'm working on it.) Other browsers can probably be reconfigured likewise, though you should remember to change back when you're done to avoid security problems.. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.94|108.162.216.94]] 03:28, 27 November 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
when using chromium on ubuntu 16.04 32 bit (yeah yeah yeah) I get no comic loaded, there is no element present. --> http://i.imgur.com/KZwpN8y.png have fun all. -[anon]<br />
<br />
I live in Florida and I had the "Lake Diver Killer" comic show up for me in Umwelt. Then it changed to the "Void" comic despite the fact that JavaScript was supported (it was Google Chrome) and now nothing shows up at all. I don't get it.... --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD''' ]]<sup>[[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]]</sup> 12:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
I notified davean, since nobody said doing so. [[User:Musaran|Musaran]] ([[User talk:Musaran|talk]]) 14:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Developer console on Opera 46 shows this error:<br />
GET http://umwelt.xkcd.com/story/ghenkEggov8?callback=waldoCallback&w=796&h=658…%3Dopera%26hs%3DuXE%26gbv%3D1%26sei%3Df5dkWd_9MMiGaJKyibAG&_=1499764695887 503 (Service Unavailable)<br />
So it appears there are problems with the server.<br />
Also, I confirm that disabling Javascript in the browser results in the reviews comic displaying. [[User:Jaalenja|Jaalenja]] ([[User talk:Jaalenja|talk]]) 09:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Israel is incorrect. I ive there and I got Saturday _OHF {{unsigned ip|162.158.90.36}}<br />
<br />
== New location for long Too Quiet? ==<br />
<br />
I got the long version of Too Quiet on a Chromebook in Minnesota. The long version only seems to be mentioned for Chrome in Indiana. Can anyone else verify? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.46|162.158.214.46]] 17:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)</div>108.162.238.59https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1945:_Scientific_Paper_Graph_Quality&diff=151403Talk:1945: Scientific Paper Graph Quality2018-01-22T16:22:55Z<p>108.162.238.59: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
What happened circa 2015 that marks the *end* of the PowerPoint/MSPaint era? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.59|108.162.238.59]] 16:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)</div>108.162.238.59