3047: Rotary Tool

Welcome to the explain xkcd wiki!
We have an explanation for all 3208 xkcd comics, and only 59 (2%) are incomplete. Help us finish them!

Latest comic

Go to this comic explanation

Early Arthropods

|< < Prev #3199 (January 26, 2026)

Title text: 'Ugh, I'm never going to be like spiders. My descendants will all just be normal arthropods who mind their own busines and don't do anything weird.' --The ancestor of a bunch of eusocial insects

|< < Prev Random Explanation

Explanation

This is one of 59 incomplete explanations: This page was created by an arthropod who will get 10 pointy things to zap a metal box and tell it stuff.. Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page!

This comic points out that something we generally take for granted — spiders spinning webs — can seem weird and disgusting when we consider the details of what it involves. Whereas the kind of adaptation referred to by the first arthropod (seen in isopods) and by the second (scorpions or crabs) may seem like obvious things for evolution to arrive at, it may be less clear how something would arrive at the outcome of web construction.

Note that evolution in real life does not work the way the comic implies, as creatures cannot choose a direction in which to evolve.^{[citation needed]} An individual organism can choose to pursue certain activities, but these only affect its number of offspring. An intelligent species could accelerate this gradual process of natural selection through artificial selection that favored certain individuals, but this would still require many generations to make observable progress, and would generally require a more advanced understanding of what can be achieved. While many species select for fitness during reproduction, this is normally for traits that are already present, or of novel features that arise randomly and stand out as an advantage against their peers. Only humans are known to pursue major change, and mostly in other domesticated species, and even then it is an imperfect process that can be very hit-and-miss.

Spiders are a recurring theme on xkcd.

Crabs are a recurring theme in biology (and conversations with Randall).

The eusocial insects mentioned in the title text are another group of arthropods with high levels of social organisation, mainly bees and ants. As such, they are notable for not "minding their own busines [sic]", as their ancestor arthropod apparently expects. Eusociality has evolved multiple times in the Hymenoptera alone, as well as in termites. There is no arthropod species that is the ancestor to all the eusocial arthropods and no others. While there are a number of species of social spider, there aren't any that meet the strict definition of eusociality. Eusocial insects have been known to do weird things, such as giving birth to a separate species.

Transcript

This is one of 39 incomplete transcripts: Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page!

[Wide panel with three small arthropods standing on the ocean floor. Two of the creatures are facing the leftmost one. Small bubbles and particles float around them.]

Arthropod 1: Now that we're multicellular, what are your plans?

Arthropod 1: I'm gonna evolve little legs and swim around with them!

Arthropod 2: I'm gonna evolve sharp pincers and use them to crunch stuff!

Arthropod 3: I'm gonna evolve glands to make string from my butt and use it to construct elaborate geometric nets hundreds of times my size to catch other animals.

[Beat panel narrowed in on the arthropods.]

[Same scene:]

Arthropod 1: Dude.

Arthropod 2: Can you please just be normal about this?

Arthropod 3: What??!

Trivia

"Business" is misspelled in the title text as "busines".

  Add comment        Create topic (use sparingly)       Refresh 

Discussion

How come it's at 0.017 RPM for a minute?? and yet 1 RPM for a second? pls fix this randall Midnightvortigaunt (talk) 18:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Its 0.017 RPM for the minute hand. The minute hand revolves once per hour or at 1/60 RPM ≈ 0,017 RPM --172.71.148.59 18:14, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Ohhh that makes sense I didn't think about it like that Midnightvortigaunt (talk) 19:27, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Mr.Dude (talk) 17:20, 7 February 2025 (UTC) I wonder what torque is needed to launch the average backyard telescope worthy of a tracking mount at Mach 8 given standard state pressures and temperatures of perhaps average conditions found in Randall’s back yard.

How come the comment above is invisible to me? 172.68.245.229 18:03, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Possibly because people indented with spaces rather than with colons? 162.158.79.77 19:40, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

72 RPM for a record player...? 162.158.74.25 18:08, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

I could only find 78 RPM disks in the german wikipedia. 172.70.114.56 18:41, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

I came here to make the same comment: 72 is most probably a typo. The old records (at this date, very old, since the transition to vinyl records was 1948 to 1958 (in the US)) were 78 rpm, not 72 rpm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonograph_record Rps (talk) 19:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

72 is (for example) relevent to font sizes (size 1 = 1/72 of an inch, size 72 = 1 inch), which might therefore have envaigled Randall's head for numbers by a different route, and got him confused. Conceivably he has had to deal with playing old 78s, but probably not for a long time... even the retro-revival of vinyl, recently, has probably not had quite so many old old records released to fill such nostalgic needs. So an easy brain-fudge/thinko to trip over on. 162.158.74.48 00:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

There used to be a record label call 72RPM records. 172.69.229.146 (talk) 19:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

We need one of those tables in here. DollarStoreBa'al (talk) 18:37, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

I made a change to the explanation that all of these numbers are realistic because, I checked out the speed of dental drills and they really do rotate that fast. I haven't checked out all of the other tools, but I suspect that they are also accurate. If you find that any of them are misstated, please correct my correction. Rtanenbaum (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

TABLE REQUEST When someone uploads a table, I'd like to recommend a second column for the frequency / reciprocal of the speed. "0.000000000073 minutes" is one every 13.7 billion minutes, or ~26,000 years. Thanks! 172.70.46.107 20:20, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Me again. Should the column header "revolution time" be "rotation time"? In every instance, the axis of motion is within the object itself; even the second/minute/hour hands go around the axis. 141.101.76.73 16:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

TRIVIA 16 2/3 RPM phonographs were used for some voice-recorings back in the day. 172.68.26.24 21:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

My parent's old record player (60's, probably) had 4 possible speeds: 16, 33, 45, 78. By the early 80's the current ones only had 33 and 45. Rps (talk) 16:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Album goes back to stacks of 78s. A symphony or opera would be 2, 3, 4 or more disks. They were bound like a photo-album with a leaf for each disk. "78" wasn't "standardized" until the format was fading. 3600-rpm motor and 46-tooth gear is incomplete (one tooth gear??) Early discs were from 60 to 130 rpm. Users would adjust speed by ear (also to ease pitch-matching for karaoke). Only as LPs arrived did someone invent the number "78.26 rpm" (no recordplayer and few lathes of the period were near that accurate). --PRR (talk) 02:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Indeed, my parents had a large collection of old records and at least one had a speed marking of 80rpm.--172.68.186.43 09:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

With wind-up players, a lot of them started off playing at one speed and ended playing at a completely different one anyway...172.68.186.50 09:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

I suspect there's not many consumers needing a Uranium Enrichment Centrifuge... at least outside of a few countries in the Middle East. --172.70.58.6 08:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Might face some regulatory / export license issues too.172.70.86.129 11:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

I feel like there was a lost opportunity to have Dr. Who's Sonic Screwdriver on the list. Maybe the rpms are unknown.162.158.159.107 13:05, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

The table says that 0.00070 "seems off; a sidereal day is 23.93 hours". That's just because (like all of the other settings) 0.00070 is quoted with only 2 significant digits. Every period between 23.64 and 23.98 hours would round to 0.00070 RPM. 162.158.134.199 13:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

The question I have is: why are dental drill speeds so high? 172.70.247.92 17:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

"why are dental drill speeds so high?" It hurts less. (Are you old enough to remember routine use of belt-driven dental drills?) You can cut a given amount of material (wood, steel, tooth) quickly with heavy force or high speed. Neither is really fun, but hi-speed is generally preferred. --PRR (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Although some materials behave badly to heat (either work-hardening, for some alloys, or melting/burning, like plastics) and that's why variable-speed hand-drills/etc usefully have low speeds (for essentially the same force, when that's done via reostat rather than an actual gearbox). On the few occasions I've had my teeth drilled, I'm pretty sure I've detected the pungent smell of fried tooth-fragments, but it was nothing like as strong as smelling my own nose-flesh being burnt one of the times I had it cauterised to try (and fail) to prevent excessive nosebleeds. 172.69.79.139 21:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

The latest NMR CPMAS probes send their rotors to go at 9.6 Mrpm, M=mega. [1] --172.69.109.172 21:56, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Should we list the rotor diameters to achieve the mach 8 speed mentioned in the title text in the table? I don't think that we should. guess who (if you desire conversing | what i have done) 06:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I (obviously since I worked it all out) think it is in the spirit of the ridiculous idea of the comic and XKCD generally to do these calculations. That said, I'm getting different numbers than your update to make it Mach 8. Denver87 (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I get the following: 4,799au, 74,866km, 37,733km, 3,144km, 52.4km, 1,588m, 1,165m, 728m, 175m, 34.9m, 21.0m, 149.7cm, 87.3cm, 174.7mm. Denver87 (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Happy to share calculation notes, but here's the example for the dental drill: 300,000rpm = 5,000 rps; diameter of: 174.7mm --> circumference of: pi * 174.7mm = 548.8mm; 548.8mm * 5000rps = 2,744,000mm/sec = 2744m/sec; Mach 8 = 8 * 343m/sec = 2744m/sec. Denver87 (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

If you agree with the calculations, one of us can at least update it. Denver87 (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
        Add comment

Is this out of date? .

New here?

Last 7 days (Top 10)

Rank Score Pages Changes Username 1 22 18 22 TheusafBOT 2 16 13 16 Natg19 3 16 9 21 Elizium23 4 11 5 15 BunsenH 5 8 6 7 FaviFake 6 8 5 7 DKMell 7 7 5 6 Elektrizikekswerk 8 6 2 7 Megan 9 6 4 5 Qwertyuiopfromdefly 10 5 5 5 Victoria

Lots of people contribute to make this wiki a success. Many of the recent contributors, listed above, have just joined. You can do it too! Create your account here.