Difference between revisions of "3254: Detector"
(Moved transcript to correct section) |
m |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}} | {{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}} | ||
[Hairy is standing next to a large machine. The front of the machine has two lights, labeled "detected" and "not detected". Ponytail and Cueball walk towards the machine] | [Hairy is standing next to a large machine. The front of the machine has two lights, labeled "detected" and "not detected". Ponytail and Cueball walk towards the machine] | ||
| + | |||
Ponytail: Over there are our electron microscope, XRF scanner, and mass spectrometer. And this is our most sensitive detector. | Ponytail: Over there are our electron microscope, XRF scanner, and mass spectrometer. And this is our most sensitive detector. | ||
| + | |||
Cueball: What does it detect? | Cueball: What does it detect? | ||
| + | |||
Ponytail: Lots of stuff. Gas, dust, particles, light, radio waves, gamma rays, protons, neutrons, electrons, fields, forces, events, potentials, or states. | Ponytail: Lots of stuff. Gas, dust, particles, light, radio waves, gamma rays, protons, neutrons, electrons, fields, forces, events, potentials, or states. | ||
| + | |||
Cueball: I don't understand. Aren't most of those always present? | Cueball: I don't understand. Aren't most of those always present? | ||
| + | |||
Hairy: Yeah, it's been saying "detected" continuously since we turned it on. | Hairy: Yeah, it's been saying "detected" continuously since we turned it on. | ||
| + | |||
Cueball: What happens if it says "not detected"? | Cueball: What happens if it says "not detected"? | ||
| + | |||
Ponytail: Oh gosh. | Ponytail: Oh gosh. | ||
| + | |||
Hairy: That would be pretty bad, I think. | Hairy: That would be pretty bad, I think. | ||
| + | |||
Title text: No other experiment has a lower false negative rate. | Title text: No other experiment has a lower false negative rate. | ||
{{comic discussion}}<noinclude> | {{comic discussion}}<noinclude> | ||
Revision as of 21:54, 3 June 2026
| Detector |
 Title text: No other experiment has a lower false negative rate. |
Explanation
|
This is one of 44 incomplete explanations: This page was detected recently. Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page! |
Transcript
|
This is one of 25 incomplete transcripts: Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page! |
[Hairy is standing next to a large machine. The front of the machine has two lights, labeled "detected" and "not detected". Ponytail and Cueball walk towards the machine]
Ponytail: Over there are our electron microscope, XRF scanner, and mass spectrometer. And this is our most sensitive detector.
Cueball: What does it detect?
Ponytail: Lots of stuff. Gas, dust, particles, light, radio waves, gamma rays, protons, neutrons, electrons, fields, forces, events, potentials, or states.
Cueball: I don't understand. Aren't most of those always present?
Hairy: Yeah, it's been saying "detected" continuously since we turned it on.
Cueball: What happens if it says "not detected"?
Ponytail: Oh gosh.
Hairy: That would be pretty bad, I think.
Title text: No other experiment has a lower false negative rate.
Add comment 
Create topic (use sparingly) 
Refresh Discussion
The deluxe edition of the machine probably has "Detected/Not detected" lights for each of those items. I would guess its cost would be significantly higher. 47.248.235.170 21:39, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Pat
To whoever wrote the initial transcript: the title text should not be included. Barmar (talk) 21:57, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
It doesn't even detect a vacuum? Useless thing, showing not even a vacuous truth. 2A02:590:1402:2E01:102F:245D:DD57:1937 22:15, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
It also has zero false positive Rtanenbaum (talk) 23:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
- Not necessarily. We are told that it never says "No" when it should be saying "Yes", which suggests that there will be no false negatives. If were trust that assertion.
- But we aren't given any assurance at all (even a simple nodding statement with no provability behind it) that the machine will not continue to say "Detected" even if it somehow really shouldn't. Should it do so, it would be be a false positive. Even though various other existential problems might be more important to anyone around who might care about it, at that point. 81.179.199.253 23:45, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
Add comment
