1922: Interferometry

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 16:23, 29 November 2017 by (talk) (Added explanation and transcript for comic. Newbie here, so will need editing.)
Jump to: navigation, search
It's important to note that while the effective size of the dog can be arbitrarily large, it's not any more of a good dog than the two original dogs.
Title text: It's important to note that while the effective size of the dog can be arbitrarily large, it's not any more of a good dog than the two original dogs.


Ambox notice.png This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.
If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.

Beret Guy and Cueball are walking Beret Guy's dogs when BG makes a comment on how interferometry is really cool. Interferometry is the practice of overlapping two different waves to get a different signal, which can be used to determine the distance between two reflecting surfaces. Beret Guy states that two dogs placed at a consistent interval will function as a larger dog. While this idea works on waves, it probably won't work on dogs, which is why Cueball is confused and starts to correct him. Before he can respond, however, Beret Guy jumps on this "large" dog and appears to be floating in midair. The large dog is proved when it gives out a large bark. Cueball looks on confused while Beret Guy appears to break more laws of physics, again.


Ambox notice.png This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks.

[Beret Guy and Cueball are walking with their dogs.] Beret Guy: Interferometry. Is so cool!

[The two dogs are placed a small distance apart.} Beret Guy: If you put two small dogs a large distance apart, they can function as a larger dog.

Cueball: I'm not sure that's- [He is cut off by Beret Guy jumping onto an invisible steed, most likely the "bigger dog".] Beret Guy: HYAH!

Beret Guy: Away! [He rides away on the invisible dog with the two smaller dogs under him, while the invisible dog gives out a large bark.]

comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!


Newbie here just added the explanition and transcript, so will need editing. 16:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

I think we both added it at the same time; when I submitted mine it showed normally in the edit box with the captcha, but when I pressed save it spliced your explanation and mine together. Think yours is probably better researched (I was typing off the top of my head), so I reverted it again. -- 16:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Seriously! A comic explanation about interferometry was created by two people at the same time, some large distance apart, resulting in interference! 04:57, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Why is there a period after Interferometry in the first panel? 19:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

It has to be a mistake. Otherwise, Beret Guy sounds like he has a weird speech cadence. Dogman15 (talk) 10:17, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Could it have something to do with the fact that it's a "period"?-- 02:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I really like the [citation needed] on whether dogs can interfere with each other. I want it to stay! -- 20:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Dogs certainly can interfere with each other - in fact, they often have to be restrained from doing so... 09:37, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree, but feel like it would be better if the statement had more certainty. "it PROBABLY won't work on dogs". Probably? Someone is uncertain on this point??!?!? LOL! NiceGuy1 (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
If you poll a large number of theoretical physicists I'm pretty sure you'll find some who are certain it WOULD work on dogs -- It's just an engineering problem. Afterall interference has been demonstrated with molecules of over 800 atoms, which is just a few Daltons short of a yorkie. 08:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Beret guy is back ! I like it... 00:05, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I feel it should be noted that these are good dogs, Brent. -- 04:49, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I think the good dog part in the title text is related to the new t-shirt from Questionable Content. I think there has been guest comics one way or the other before. 06:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

It's different and probably unrelated, but the comic made me think of the science fiction classic _A Fire Upon The Deep_ in which there are intelligent hive mind dog packs. One dog isn't intelligent, but put 4-6 together and the pack forms a single person with human-level intelligence. 07:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

The latest research shows you'd need about 30 dogs to equate to one human in terms of neuron quantity (https://newatlas.com/dogs-smarter-cats-neuron-density-study/52416/), but I wouldn't expect human-level intelligence with just 30 dogs because that ignores the amount of overhead needed to control the 30 dog bodies. 11:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Note that while Tines are similar to dogs, they are not actual earth dogs and are likely more intelligent or at least having more mental capacity even separately. -- Hkmaly (talk) 23:42, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

A large bark does not prove a large dog - dog size and bark size are not proportionately related. The fact that the bark is apparently emanating from mid-air would be more of an indication (though this could be an auditory illusion caused by the combination of barks from the two dogs). 09:37, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Well, barks can make interference much easier than dogs themselves ... -- Hkmaly (talk) 23:42, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

While I get the gist of the comic, my borderline completionism won't let me completely enjoy it unless I can understand the logical connection between astronomy and dogs. How are dogs and telescopes isomorphic in the realm of interferometry? Just another random brilliant leap that only makes sense to Beret Guy (i.e., not logical to any other being on Earth)? -- 14:53, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I get the sense that this is it, there's no connection between dogs and astronomy except the one Beret Guy just created. NiceGuy1 (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Have you never heard of the Dog Star? 10:16, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
True... Except the Dog Star is something to observe, while the concept being linked is about what's doing the observing. :) Connection seems shaky at best. Now, if there was some recent article about someone using Interferometry to observe the Dog Star, we'd have our connection. NiceGuy1 (talk) 04:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Here's the connection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canis_Major 10:52, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Srs answer - interferometers have other uses besides astronomy, including quantum physics, radio antennas, direction-finding, and precision measurement. They function by measuring a signal (radio wave, laser beam, w/ever) at two distant points simultaneously, or else by splitting a signal so it travels two different paths to reach a detector. If the difference between the points/paths is such that the wavefronts reach the detector(s) at exactly the same moment, you get "constructive" interference - the waves' peaks and troughs add together and produce a signal of twice the strength. In the context of the comic, the dogs are the signal*, and Beret Guy the detector. Note that if the wavefronts do not arrive in sync you will get partial addition, and/or partial cancellation, or may even produce a perfect cancellation, and get no signal at all. So, presumably if Beret Guy were to move one of the small dogs a little to the left or right, all the dogs would disappear completely.
(*We may assume that both dogs are at the same frequency and therefore constitute one signal for our purposes. It is unclear to me if the dogs are more properly thought of as signal emitters or are simply the measured output of a single wavefront at two different points, but if I think too much harder about this metaphor I may lose my mind.) 22:29, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone else notice how in the third panel, HYAH seems to be coming from BG's beret button? What if the beret is controlling him?MrBookBoy (talk) 15:03, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I love the observational skills of the XKCD fandom, makes me feel right at home. LOL! You're right, I don't see how there can be any question that it seems like the button is doing the talking. NiceGuy1 (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Senstivity WILL be greater than for a single telescope, because you ARE gathering more light. You're not doing it at one detector, but processing both the measurements will allow you to add the images together and then lead to some sort of coherent integration! 03:29, 26 December 2017 (UTC)