explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1669: Planespotting

2016-04-20T22:06:05Z

108.162.214.155: Misleading statement about pilots vs autopilot

Hybrid could also refer to hybrid airship dynastats which are a combination between a blimp and a lifting body airplane. HAV in England and Lockheed Martin have both flown prototypes in the last few years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Air_Vehicles_HAV-3 {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.128}}

How would one even pronounce "Mk. IVII"? IV is 4, VII is 7. I could see an argument for treating it as a really bizarre way to say 6. Or, if we treat it as two distinct digits (as opposed to a two-digit number), it could be either "1-7" or "4-2".

: "Usage in ancient Rome varied greatly and remained inconsistent in medieval and modern times." But AFAIK each numeral only stood for a fixed amount, never for a "digit" (in the sense that its value could specify ones or tens depending on its position). So six ((5 - 1) + 1 + 1) is a plausible interpretation, though definitely not standard; but 17 or 42 would be treating Roman numerals as if they were Arabic. [[User:Huttarl|Huttarl]] ([[User talk:Huttarl|talk]]) 16:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

:: You're correct; in Roman numerals, there is not a concept of "this is an I, in the hundreds place, so it's really a 100". If you mean 100, that's always C. Hence the phrasing "two distinct digits (as opposed to a two-digit number). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 14:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I think that's actually MI, or 1001.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.222|162.158.214.222]] 16:12, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

: That was my first thought on reading it, too. Doesn't an underline and overline on a Roman numeral increase it by a factor of 10,000, or am I mis-recalling grade school? ---> 19:38 UTC, 18 April 2016

:: I read it as having too much space between strokes for it to be "MI" rather than "IVII", but poor penmanship is as likely as deliberate nonsense. In proper Roman Empire-era Roman numerals, the overline denotes "multiply by 1,000", but in English an overline/underline combo just means we're being fancy. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 14:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I assume there are other parts of this that are similarly nonsensical to people who know what Cueball thinks he's talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.32|108.162.221.32]] 14:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
:When I first read the comic before the explanation I was assuming Cueball was roughly, and poorly, describing a Bombardier DHC-8. It is also known as a Q400 and is a twin-engine turboprop. The silhouette looks vaguely like it.[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 15:56, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

::Wholeheartedly agreed on it being a DHC-8 version, which could be a Q400. The engine nacelles appear to extend behind the wing (unlike an ATR42/72 or Do328), and the T-tail eliminates a lot of other regional prop possibilities. It also ties in with Cueball calling it a "Q404". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.170|108.162.237.170]] 17:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

::As someone who's worked around "Dash 8's", I echo the Bombardier Q400 identification. The 400-series has the longest fuselage of the DHC-8 family and the aircraft illustrated looks longer than a DHC-8-300. It's definitely too long to be a DHC-8-100 or -200.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.35|173.245.54.35]] 18:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

De Havilland Canada (which developed the Dash-8) did belong to Boeing between 1988 and 1992, during which time the aircraft was commonly referred to as the "Boeing Dash-8". The Q400 variant was developed after DHC was sold to Bombadier, however. So it is possible that a DHC-8 could, in fact, have been made by Boeing, just not the Q400 variant.

There are ''so many'' things wrong about this comic. [[User:.42|.42]] ([[User talk:.42|talk]]) 14:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Maybe I'm totally off base, but this reminds me of something called "Vaynespotting". In League of Legends, there's a character named Shauna Vayne. She has an extremely high skill-ceiling and skill-floor. Vaynespotting is a minigame where other players receive imaginary points for calling out a bad Vayne player when that player makes aggressive maneuvers, but doesn't have the skill to pull it off. [[User:Thefance|Thefance]] ([[User talk:Thefance|talk]]) 15:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Is that black hat or white hat? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.65|108.162.221.65]] 15:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
:Probably White Hat, but it is impossible to say. Have corrected explanation [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:11, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
::Yes, I think that it is White Hat. Just in terms of personality, most encounters with BH end up with some sort of sadistic remark, whereas WH is sometimes used just as a foil character.[[User:RedHatGuy68|RedHatGuy68]] ([[User talk:RedHatGuy68|talk]]) 02:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Fixed the title text explanation regarding the hydroelectric plant. The water going over the dam still falls down (reservoir -> dam -> out of the plane?), but lifting the water in the plane would take more energy than the plant would produce.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.170|108.162.237.170]] 17:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

To me this comic looks like a clear reference to the "user agent" property of a browser notorious for being long, nonsensical and bearing little relationship to the version and the type of browser the client actually uses. E.g. In my Chromium this value is: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu Chromium/49.0.2623.108 Chrome/49.0.2623.108 Safari/537.36. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.72|141.101.80.72]] 17:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

:The user agent string is not SUPPOSED to say what browser you HAVE, but what your browser is capable of doing. For start, Mozilla/ means that it's graphics browser, just like Netscape 4. Gecko means that authors of engine did read the HTML specifications (as authors of Gecko did), as opposed to authors of older versions of Internet Explorer (older than 7). It's because user agent string is only thing server knows about browser and therefore uses it to choose what version of page (and bug workarounds) it's supposed to use. And because some servers never update their definitions, every new browser needs to ADD his own strings to strings of some already existing browser instead of replacing them. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 14:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Dual Wielding could easily refer to the fact the plane has two engines or possibly four if it is dual wielding engine sets. I feel the current explanation of that line item is a little lacking. ([[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.60|173.245.56.60]] 17:52, 18 April 2016 (UTC))
:Then please update the explanation :-) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:58, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I originally read that as "Dual Weld", as in 'using a dual welder', which made no sense since it would be absolutely irrelevant (a dual welder can mean either a welding machine that operates on 120/240V or one that operates in both gas/gasless mode.) [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 16:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I understood the Mig-380 part as a mix, an Airbus-380 but made by Mig. I'm not sure if I explained myself properly...[[User:NeoRaist|NeoRaist]] ([[User talk:NeoRaist|talk]]) 18:15, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Some reference on "planetspotting" by Kepler? [[Special:Contributions/188.114.102.176|188.114.102.176]] 18:43, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

: "''What's that planet?''" "That's Sid Meier's Taupe Netherlands PILF #14!" [[User:.42|.42]] ([[User talk:.42|talk]]) 20:27, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:: It's NEW Netherlands! ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:50, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Well done guys! I have finals, so I didn't check xkcd until now. Loand Behold! An in depth explanation for every part of this joke, which I originally understood none of. With dry humour on the side To Boot! Gold Stars All Around![[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 04:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

"Most flights are on auto-pilot for hours at a time, and the pilots serve primarily for takeoff, landing, and emergencies." As someone who works in aviation, this is a common misconception, particularly the part about the pilot being just there for emergencies. Yes, autopilot is overwhelmingly used, but even routine flights have dozens of decisions that need to be made and minor issues to face. A pilot can be very busy even with advanced horizontal and vertical navigation engaged talking to ATC, responding to ATC commands, adjusting the route through navigation, handling weather, etc. In reality the autopilot, similar to an adaptive cruise control on a car, does not make the pilot useless or oblivious, but instead it simplifies things that should be easy, like following a chosen route at a constant speed.
Since this sentence doesn't blend well with the rest of the paragraph, I suggest it just be deleted.

726: Seat Selection

2016-04-01T05:37:52Z

108.162.214.155: /* Explanation */ changed bag to back

{{comic
| number = 726
| date = April 21, 2010
| title = Seat Selection
| image = seat_selection.png
| titletext = Don't click on the wing.
}}

==Explanation==
Many airlines give passengers the opportunity to select a preferred seat when booking a flight. In this case, [[Megan]] appears to be {{w|Airport check-in|checking in}} at a at [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Self_check-in_at_Dublin_Airport.jpg/1280px-Self_check-in_at_Dublin_Airport.jpg self-check-in] at the airport where she is given the opportunity to select her seat. Rather than selecting a seat on the diagram, Megan clicks on the pilot seat (which is of course not an actual option for online seating reservations). In the last frame, we see that because she chose the pilot seat she is now actually sitting in the captains seat flying the plane while whooping. A worried looking pilot sits behind her at the back of the cockpit holding both hands in front of his mouth.

The title text says to not click on the wing. The implication is that if you did click on the wing you would similarly end up sitting outside on the wing. Even if you were able to hold on, this would put you above the Death Zone which is at 7 km (See the [[what if?]] ''{{what if|64|Rising Steadily}}). Standard cruising altitude is {{w|Stratosphere#Aircraft_flight|10 km.}}. It will be an unpleasant death as the air is so thin that you actually ''lose'' oxygen to the air (as explained in the mentioned what if?)

This kind of event could lead to situations as the one depicted in [[1660: Captain Speaking]].

==Transcript==
:[A seat selection diagram to book your seat on a plane is displayed on a gray background. It shows the front end of a plane to just behind the wings. The outline of the plane is in a darker gray color, while the seating section is light gray with black seats. The cockpit windows are shown as well as the entrance section in the front of the plane where two arrows point out of the two possible exits one on each side. The first class section with only four seats for each of the 3 rows are clearly separated from the rest of the seats. The six seats for each row is labeled with letters A to F and the rows are labeled for every third seat starting at 9 and ending after two numbers behind the wings at 27. Below, going over the wing pointing down is a frame with light gray background and the following text:]
:<big>Select desired seat</big>
:by clicking on the above chart.
:<small>
:F
:E
:D
:C
:B
:A
:9 12 15 18 21 24 27
</small>
:[Megan in a scarf with two suitcases behind her is standing in an airport, contemplating her choice at the self-check-in looking at the display from the first panel. Behind her is a manned check-in counter with Cueball and Ponytail sitting behind three screens at the counter. Above them is a big sign with an arrow to the right:]
:<big>Gates</big>

:[Back to the seat selection diagram where a hand shaped cursor indicates that Megan has chosen the cockpit of the plane.]
:<nowiki>*Click*</nowiki>
:<big>Select desired seat</big>
:by clicking on the above chart.
:<small>
:F
:E
:D
:C
:B
:A
:9 12 15 18 21 24 27
</small>

:[Close up of Megan seen through the front window in the cockpit of the plane, holding the yoke, her scarf hanging behind her into the next windows frame, like if she was riding a motor cycle, because she makes the plane rise enough for it to fall behind her. A pilot sitting behind her seen in the third window, is wearing a cap and sunglasses. He looks at her with both his hands held in front of his mouth.]
:Megan: <big>Woooooooo</big>

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Computers]]

1659: Tire Swing

2016-03-25T04:56:38Z

108.162.214.155: /* Explanation */ tires need replacing after 6-10 years even if not worn or punctured

{{comic
| number = 1659
| date = March 23, 2016
| title = Tire Swing
| image = tire_swing.png
| titletext = If we find one of those tire dumps, the next time he tries to get his truck back we can just retreat and let him have it.
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, two girls have just completed a [https://damnyoulittlerock.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/img_5457.jpg tire swing]: A common makeshift {{w|swing (seat)|swing}} is created by hanging a car {{w|tire}} from a length of rope, typically tied to the branch of a tree as in the comic. (The left girl has a hair bun with a ponytail and thus has a similar appearance as the adult [[Hairbun]]. The right girl might at first look like [[Megan]] but not quite as she is revealed upon zoom in to have curly hair, so it is neither of these adults. That they are rather small kids can be seen from the size of the wheel compared to them.)

In the second panel of this comic the girl with the hair bun muses that there are huge [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2337351/Worlds-biggest-tyre-graveyard-Incredible-images-Kuwaiti-landfill-site-huge-seen-space.html tire dumps] filled with nothing but old tires that have no use. In the last panel, she continues that maybe they should use a tire from such a dump next time they make a tire swing. The presumption is that perhaps they used a brand new tire, or a tire from some other source. This is confirmed by the other girl's response (and also by the title text, see below) which makes it clear that the tire they used was in fact stolen from a guy's vehicle. The last reply from the girl with the hair bun suggests the victim put up a fight and they had to take the tire by force. So these two small girls actually fought an adult man over his truck and won the fight.

Vehicle tires have a limited lifespan. The natural end of their life is when the pattern of raised treads on the circumference of the tire, which promote traction on wet roads, are worn down to a point where they are no longer effective enough, or after 6-10 years (sunlight causes the rubber to degrade, so the tire becomes prone to cracking and unsafe, even if it appears to be in good condition). Tires can also become damaged in other ways, such as puncture.

{{w|Tire recycling|Used tires}} are a notable ecological problem for a number of reasons (e.g. their size, the quantity produced, their relatively short lifespan, and the fact that they are difficult and slow to break down and contain a number of components that are ecologically problematic). A tire swing represents a functional use for otherwise useless old tires. The amount of tires (it is estimated that 259 million tires are discarded annually) makes them attractive targets for recycling. More than half of used tires are ultimately simply burned for their fuel value (which is at least better than sitting in landfills indefinitely).

The comic is thus clearly [[Randall|Randall's]] attempt to draw attention to this huge ecological problem, as he so often before has done with other climate change/global warming related comics (see for instance [[164: Playing Devil's Advocate to Win]], [[1321: Cold]] and [[1379: 4.5 Degrees]]. So while this is not the joke of the comic, it could be the point of it.

He thus gives another way to use old tires. It should be noted that used tires are not necessarily safe to use as a kids' toy as they could become sharp/frayed along the edges and stones and other hard/sharp objects may have become stuck in the tires (even going all the way through), during its life span, or worn thin enough to tear apart mid-swing (when the stresses on the swing material would be at their peak). So tires bought for use as a swing would usually be new, but not necessarily made as solid as those used for cars. Used tires reused for a swing should be inspected for these problems.

The title text goes further, suggesting that they actually stole the victim's entire truck - possibly just to harvest the tire needed for the swing - and that he unsuccessfully attempted to recover the truck, so they probably did fight him. He put up enough of a fight that they do not wish to fight him again (so he at least survived). Further, since the girls expect him to try again (maybe recovering the truck with only three tires), they apparently still have the truck. One of the girls suggests that if they could find one of these tire dumps, then they could take a tire from there, make a new swing, and then just walk or run away from the truck when the guy comes back, letting him have it if he really wants it so bad.

==Transcript==
:[Two girls, one with a hair bun with a curly ponytail the other with long curly hair, are standing under a large leafless tree as the girl with hair bun adjusts a tire swing hanging from the largest of the branches of the tree. The tire hangs so high that the small girls only reach up to just above the center of the tire which has a diameter of more than half the height of the girls.]
:Girl with hair bun: Ok, looks good.

:[Zoom in on the girls so only the tire swing can be seen, and nothing of the tree. They both look at the tire.]
:Girl with hair bun: I read that there are these huge dumps everywhere full of millions of old tires that no one knows what to do with.

:[Same setting but the girl with hair bun looks up at the tree (outside the frame).]
:Girl with hair bun: We should use one of those next time.
:Curly haired girl: Yeah. That guy was real mad.
:Girl with hair bun: I would ''not'' want to fight him again.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1602: Linguistics Club

2015-11-11T23:48:50Z

108.162.214.155:

If biannual is ambiguous, meaning either biennial (every two years) or semiannual (twice each year), then isn't sesquiannual similarly ambiguous, meaning either every 1.5 years (every 18 months), or 1.5 times a year (every 8 months)?
[[User:Pete|Pete]] ([[User talk:Pete|talk]]) 06:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
:If I'm confused I think of plants: Annuals, biennials and perennials - this last one being the important one as I *know* there is no such thing "perannual", so the ending I want must be "-ennial". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 08:58, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Could it not mean it meets one and a half tines each year, so once during each year then every other new years it meets with half the meeting before the ball drop and the other half after? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.236.181|108.162.236.181]] 06:41, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

You know, I always thought the roots of "sesqui-" equated to "six quarters" (i.e. 1½). Today I learn that it's apparently "a half ''and (the original unit, about to be mentioned)''". I'm glad I read this place. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.125|162.158.152.125]] 06:49, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
: ...and then I nearly made a total mess of the editing, while trying to add info and 'correct' it, but I think it's back to how it should be, with the correct amount of appropriate justifications. (Note, "sesquicentennial" could be read as "one half (0.5) plus one hundred (100) years", i.e. 100.5 years, but the intended grammatical formation is "one-half-plus-one (1.5) hundred years", i.e. 150 years. Whilst "sesquicentannual" would doubtless be... give or take, according to rigor... something that occured every two days, ten hours and twenty-four minutes, I suppose.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.125|162.158.152.125]] 07:32, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
:I thought that the root of the Russian word "poltora" (same meaning) was "half of three", but it's actually "half to two". Now if I could only understand why the English phrase "half again as much" also means 1.5 times...
:On-topic, I understand "biannual" as "every 6 months", so by extension "sesquiannual" would mean "every 8 months". Not to be confused with "sesqui''ennial''", which does mean "every 18 months" (as in [http://absurdopedia.net/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B1%D1%81%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F:%D0%92%D1%8B%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8B_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C%D0%B8_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F-5 Fifth Sesquiennial Best Article Elections] of Russian Uncyclopedia; sadly the Sixth Elections had not proceeded on the account of only having one eligible candidate, and there are still no eligible candidates for the Seventh, due in July). --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.79.37|141.101.79.37]] 07:52, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

::Well, 'round these parts it's generally said in a different order, as "half as much again", which is more obviously 50% on top, or 150%.
::If only I could stop people saying "four times less". One can only presume they mean 25%, a quarter (the reverse of the quarter being made "more by four times" to make the whole). But three times less would be a third, two times less a half and one times less... well, that breaks things. Rather than the unaltered 100%, parsing that suggests either 0%, or possibly half, if the reverse is "one time more (on top of the starting point)". In which case "four times less" is 20%, so that "four times more" adds four more 20%s to get you up to the 100%...
::Which is a totally different mathematical conundrum from removing 10% then adding 10% to get to 99%. (original - (10%*original) = 90%*original = midstep. midstep + (10%*midstep) = 90%*original + (9%*original) = 99% original.) Or adding 10% (110% original) then removing 10% (-11% original), which is commutatively the same pair of operations (*1.1, *0.9) in reverse.
::But that's probably not relevent. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.125|162.158.152.125]] 08:33, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

'biweekly' means both once every two weeks and twice a week. The explanation implies it only means once every two weeks. --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.63|173.245.56.63]] 13:46, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
:The only thing in common there is the prefix. "bi-" means 2 and "sesqui-" means 1.5, no matter what. In the case of "biweekly", that can mean "two per week" or "every two weeks," and that's because "weekly" can take either meaning. The same applies to "monthly" for "bimonthly."
:''Annual,'' however, is different. "Biannual" only means "two per year." That's it. It doesn't mean "every two years," because that's a different word: 'biennial'. In other words, the "annual" root means "once a year", and the "-ennial" suffix means "once every X years".
:The reason for this is that "annual" and "-ennial" were derived from Latin words that already had the distinction, while "weekly" and "monthly" were created from English words, with no way to distinguish the two meanings.
:Confusing? Blame the Romans. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.84|108.162.246.84]] 23:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

''"Regarding the title text, a {{w|tautology (rhetoric)|tautology}} is a statement that is true because of its logical form, such as "all birds are birds" or "A = A."'' Maybe {{w|tautology (grammar)|tautology in grammatical context}} is more appropriate here, since the comic is linguistics-themed: ''"In grammar, a tautology (from Greek tauto, "the same" and logos, "word/idea") is an unnecessary repetition of meaning, using more than one word effectively to say the same thing (...)"'' or ''"saying the same thing twice"'', as in the title text: ''(...) Tautology Club, which meets on the date of the Tautology Club meeting.''
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.71|141.101.104.71]] 14:06, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to add a real-world example for additional confusion on the issue: The [http://www.salsa-tipiti.org/conferences/ Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America] has a sesquiannual conference which is held every 18 months. The last conference was on June 26, 2014 and the next one is January 7, 2016.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.252.155|162.158.252.155]] 15:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

The current second paragraph says:
On the other hand [and the crux of the comic in general], 'sesqui' can be interpreted as a prefix meaning '1.5'. For example, the US sesquicentennial was celebrated on July 4, 1926 (after 150 years), so the confusion comes from people who think the meetings would be every 8 months (as above) or every 18 months (here). The confusion is related to the distinction between 'biweekly' (once every two weeks) and 'semiweekly' (once every half-week, i.e., twice a week), and bimonthly (twice a month or every two months). 'Biannual' and 'biennial' only furthers this confusion (as in this case, 'biannual' and 'semiannual' are synonymous when the prefixes usually are not).
...which misses the point. Sesqui ''is'' 1.5, bi is 2 (c.f. bicycle, 2 wheels), semi is 0.5 (c.f. semicircle, half a circle). The issue is with the -ennial (X years per event) and -annual (X events per year). Semiannual (half an event per year, thus one event every two years) is cognate with biennial (two years between events). Biannual ''only'' means 'two per year', unless misused. Semiennual would match that (half a year per event), but I'm not sure that's ever used, like perannual (1 event a year), in the face of the identically descriptive perennial (a year between all successive events). ...I think. Tablet on-screen keyboard obscures most of what I'm typing, so there'll be no proofreading of this point to make sure I've not boobed. It'll have to stand. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.35|162.158.153.35]] 16:33, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm just going to leave this [https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=sesquiannual&date=now%207-d&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B7 Google Trends link] here... [[User:Celloman|Celloman]] ([[User talk:Celloman|talk]]) 16:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

As another note, a group that meets every 8 months and a group that meets every 18 months will only overlap every 6 years. But my sesquibiennual group has the room booked, so they'll both have to reschedule [[Special:Contributions/108.162.214.155|108.162.214.155]] 23:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

1569: Magic Tree

2015-09-03T21:04:06Z

108.162.214.155: /* Explanation */ : I argue that Randall meant "Batesian mimicry" rather than "convergent evolution".

{{comic
| number = 1569
| date = August 26, 2015
| title = Magic Tree
| image = magic_tree.png
| titletext = Since people rarely try to cut down cell phone towers, after millions of years, as cell phone towers have gotten more treelike, trees have started growing fake cell phone tower attachments and shiny gray bark to protect themselves. This is a standard textbook example of convergent evolution.
}}

==Explanation==

{|style="float: right; border:1px solid dimgray; color:white" border="0" align="right" valign="top" cellpadding=10px cellspacing=0px
|+style="background:white; color:black"|'''Examples of camouflaged cell towers'''
|-align="center"
|[[Image:PalmCellTower.jpg|194x259px]]
|[[Image:AnotherCellTower.jpg]]
|}

This comic features a running theme in the xkcd comics, [[Beret Guy]]'s naive and/or odd ways of thinking. In the beginning of the comic, Beret Guy shows [[Megan]] what he believes to be a tree, and explains that it grew there because he placed magic beans in that spot yesterday. This is a reference to the fable "{{w|Jack and the Beanstalk}}", where the protagonist plants several magical beans he acquired, resulting in a beanstalk growing which ascends into the atmosphere. Megan, however, tells Beret Guy that the "tree" is actually a {{w|cell site|cell phone tower}}. Beret Guy disagrees, pointing out that it has branches, to which Megan tries to explain that this was in an attempt to make the towers look like trees. She gives up, however, as Beret Guy has already begun climbing the tower.

Later, Megan complains that her {{w|mobile phone signal|cell reception}} has disappeared. Beret Guy responds by saying that he had to cut down his "tree" because there were "scary giants with yellow helmets" in it. This mirrors, again, the "Jack and the Beanstalk" fable, where the protagonist has to cut down his beanstalk to prevent the giant, whose lands the beanstalk connects to, from climbing down and chasing him. In reality, the "giants" were probably utility workers.

The title text suggests that, over time, trees will evolve to start looking more like cell phone towers in a form of {{w|mimicry}} in order to avoid people cutting them down. Mimicry is where a creature copies the appearance or behavior of another in order to confuse predators. In this scenario, the more defenseless trees attempt to mimic cell phone towers, which have the defense of people not wanting to cut them down or they would lose cell service (and likely a significant amount of money through fines) and because of society's general respect for the property of others. This is similar to the {{w|Flora and fauna of the Discworld#Counting pines|counting pine}}, a tree in {{w|Terry Pratchett|Terry Pratchett's}} {{w|Discworld}} series that evolved to display its age with numbers on the outside (in the bark) in the hope that humans would not cut it down and count its rings. Of course now humans hunted it down trying to find a tree with numbers that would fit their house number instead, thus quickly rendering the trees almost completely extinct. (See the tribute to Terry in [[1498: Terry Pratchett]]).

{{w|Convergent evolution}} deals with multiple species acquiring similar characteristics to fulfill their role (such as dolphins and sharks both having a streamlined shape to swim fast) due to the species' common need to adapt to similar environments or tasks. [[Randall]] uses the term to describe the convergence in the appearances of cell towers whose design has "evolved" to include tree-like branches and trees which he predicts will evolve to resemble cell phone towers. Each of these "evolutions" would be for the purposes of camouflage, although the cell towers "evolve" by human design for purely aesthetic reasons and the trees would evolve naturally for self-preservation. This would therefore not be a true example of convergent evolution. It more closely resembles Batesian mimicry, or the evolutionary process by which a species remains noticeable, but treated as something it is not.

==Transcript==
:[Beret Guy and Megan stand next to a large pole with a note on it. Beret Guy points at the pole.]
:Beret Guy: Check it out! I threw my magic beans on the ground here yesterday, and this big tree appeared!

:[Zoom out, the pole is revealed to have branches. Around the pole are trees about 1/9th of the height of the pole.]
:Megan: That's a cell tower.
:Beret Guy: No way - it has branches!
:Beret Guy: See?
:Beret Guy: I'm gonna climb it!

:[Same as frame as the first. Beret Guy starts climbing the pole.]
:Megan: No, they just put those there to make it look-
:Megan: ...Never mind.

:[There is a caption in a small frame inlaid at the top of the last frame:]
:Later...
:[Megan looks at her phone while Beret Guy walks towards her holding an axe.]
:Megan: Why do I have no signal?
:Beret Guy: There were scary giants with yellow helmets in that tree! Luckily I cut it down before they ate me.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Biology]]