explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2288: Collector's Edition

2020-04-03T05:13:52Z

108.162.219.60:

... is this going to be like [[1190: Time]]? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.63|162.158.74.63]] 04:08, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: I hope so, otherwise I don't get the joke [[User:Forresthopkinsa|Forresthopkinsa]] ([[User talk:Forresthopkinsa|talk]]) 04:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: The page just went down for me so maybe what we've seen isn't what it's supposed to be? [[User:Avi m|avis_magpie]] ([[User talk:Avi m|talk]]) 04:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Looks like the whole comic was just taken down. [[User:Parzivail|Parzivail]] ([[User talk:Parzivail|talk]]) 04:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: Can confirm - the most recent comic is Pathogen again [[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.207|162.158.187.207]] 04:26, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
It is still up on the mobile website, but only if you directly go to comic page https://m.xkcd.com/2288 [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.146|172.69.22.146]] 05:10, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: Perhaps this is a collector's edition because it was only up for a limited amount of time?

Talk:2288: Collector's Edition

2020-04-03T05:13:25Z

108.162.219.60:

... is this going to be like [[1190: Time]]? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.63|162.158.74.63]] 04:08, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: I hope so, otherwise I don't get the joke [[User:Forresthopkinsa|Forresthopkinsa]] ([[User talk:Forresthopkinsa|talk]]) 04:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: The page just went down for me so maybe what we've seen isn't what it's supposed to be? [[User:Avi m|avis_magpie]] ([[User talk:Avi m|talk]]) 04:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Looks like the whole comic was just taken down. [[User:Parzivail|Parzivail]] ([[User talk:Parzivail|talk]]) 04:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
: Can confirm - the most recent comic is Pathogen again [[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.207|162.158.187.207]] 04:26, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
It is still up on the mobile website, but only if you directly go to comic page https://m.xkcd.com/2288 [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.146|172.69.22.146]] 05:10, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps this is a collector's edition because it was only up for a limited amount of time?

Talk:2288: Collector's Edition

2020-04-03T05:12:55Z

108.162.219.60:

553: Pirate Bay

2019-11-20T16:21:31Z

108.162.219.60: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 553
| date = March 9, 2009
| title = Pirate Bay
| image = pirate_bay.png
| titletext = We find you guilty of closing your torrents as soon as they finish. Your sentence is unremovable Hungarian subtitles on everything.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|The Pirate Bay}} is a website dedicated to facilitating {{w|Bittorrent|BitTorrent}} downloads of popular media. The site's servers were taken down, briefly, and the operators were {{w|the pirate bay trial|taken to court}} in Sweden, back in 2009. In November 2019, this torrent site was moved to a new official domain - [https://thepiratebay3se.com/ thepiratebay3se.com].

Unlike normal downloads, files downloaded via Bittorrent are not stored on any web server, but instead transferred in small pieces by other people torrenting the same file; these other people are called "peers." Bittorrent allows websites to provide downloads without using up disk space or bandwidth serving up the entire file; instead, they can host smaller torrent files, which simply describe what the finished file should look like and a few "tracker" servers where lists of other peers can be found, and the peers themselves handle all of the bandwidth issues. This approach is used by a number of websites for completely legal downloads (it's popular among smaller game companies providing digital downloads, for instance), but it's mainly associated with piracy.

However, Bittorrent depends on peers actually having the file blocks that you need. People who have already downloaded the entire file, but continue to connect to the network solely to provide that file to others, are called "seeds," and they are an essential part of a healthy torrent. General etiquette demands that people should continue to seed a file until the ratio of data uploaded to data downloaded exceeds 1, although many people feel that one's ratio should be much higher. In any case, closing your torrents as soon as they finish, as mentioned in the title-text, is extremely ''bad'' etiquette, so it is punished with nuisance subtitles. This punishment was likely chosen because finding correct and well timed subtitles, in whatever language, for a pirated show tends to be quite hard sometimes.

This comic is essentially a pun on this second meaning of the word "peer" - in the US court system, a "jury of your peers" means a jury composed of everyday people like you, while the [https://vpnalist.com/proxy-mirror-the-pirate-bay Pirate Bay] operators interpret it to mean a jury composed of people who they've shared files with in the past. The [[Cueball]] that does the talking, and thus is the prodigy of the comic, feels that his approach would give him lenience in the trial, since he has always seeded well, thus ensured those peers had a good downloading experience.

The title text shows what punishment this kind of peer group would make if they find you guilty - unremovable subtitles in {{w|Hungarian language|Hungarian}}. Many pirated videos originate from countries where no {{w|Dubbing (filmmaking)|dubbed}} version is available in the regional language, so the only way to understand what's being said is by applying subtitles. These videos are then uploaded with subtitles still included, causing consternation among downloaders who can understand the spoken words but not the subtitles. Annoying Hungarian subtitles are just an example for a language most people don't understand. Finnish, Czech, or Polish wouldn't be better.

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the frame:]
:Awaiting the judges' ruling at the Pirate Bay trial.

:[4 Cueball-like guys in a cell: 3 sitting down on a bench and one is standing, presumably looking at the fence.]
:Cueball: I wish this were in America.
:Cueball-like guy: Why?
:Cueball: I hear we'd go before a jury of our peers, and I've always seeded generously.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Puns]]

1738: Moon Shapes

2016-09-30T11:19:57Z

108.162.219.60: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1738
| date = September 26, 2016
| title = Moon Shapes
| image = moon_shapes.png
| titletext = Whenever I see a picture of the moon where the points go more than halfway around, I assume it's being eclipsed by one of those Independence Day ships and interpret the rest of the image in light of that.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Explanation of the text in the image needed in the table.}}
The Earth's {{w|Moon}}, being the most prominent object in the night sky, is a frequent subject of art; particularly art depicting a nighttime scene. Unfortunately, the moon often appears in works of art in ways that are very dramatic and would not be realistically possible. It may be done out of ignorance, or knowingly by taking {{w|artistic license}}. As someone interested in and who has worked in astronomy, this likely bothers [[Randall]].

The Moon is well known to have "{{w|lunar phase|phases}}" describing what portion of the visible surface of the moon is illuminated by sunlight and highly visible, and what portion is dark, and generally only slightly visible when the moon appears while the sun is also up. These phases progress between "New" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely dark) and "Full" (when the surface facing the Earth is completely illuminated, appearing as a full disk as viewed from Earth). Mid-way between those extreme phases is a "Quarter" Moon, when exactly one-half of the surface facing Earth is completely dark, the light half being one-quarter of the total Moon's surface.

Because the Moon is approximately spherical, its illuminated side appears as "crescent" in shape as it progresses from New to First Quarter phase. As it progresses from First Quarter to Full phase, observers on Earth see a Waxing "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gibbous Gibbous] Moon (which just means that the dark portion has formed a crescent). One can imagine this like a globe on which you draw a straight line from the north pole to the south pole down the center of the side facing you (appearing to create two semi-circles); upon rotating the globe, the line would become rounded as it moved away creating a crescent on the side the line was moved towards. Because of the geometry involved, a line connecting the two points (horns) of a Crescent Moon (or of the darkened crescent inverse of a Gibbous Moon) must be a diameter of the moon (i.e. it must pass through the center of the circle).

The deliberate misidentification of a Waxing Gibbous Moon ("waxing" means going from new to full; that is increasing in illuminated area) as a "wax gibbon" (a Southeast Asian ape made of a nonpolar solid) is a source of humor in this comic. This is probably a reference to H.P. Lovecraft, who had several of his stories take place under "a gibbous moon" for dramatic effect, or even more likely a reference to the {{w|Discworld}} by {{w|Terry Pratchett}}, often referenced in xkcd (as in [[1498: Terry Pratchett]]). In the witch series the Gibbous Moon is mentioned several time, as the most magic, rather than the more often used Crescent or Full Moon.

Further, because the light portion of the Moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the Moon is in the sky at the same time as the Sun), the light side of the Moon will always be facing towards the Sun. If the Moon is in the night sky, the Sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the Moon must always be on the half of the Moon that faces the horizon (there are points during the daytime when the orientation can go the other way).

It is worth noting that while the Moon's dark portion blends imperceptibly with the dark night sky, it is still very much a solid body. It would therefore would be impossible to see more distant objects such as stars "through" the dark portion of the Moon's circumference. This is most dramatically exemplified by a {{w|solar eclipse}} during which the Moon passes in front of the Sun and is therefore completely dark (the Sun is lighting only the far side), but the Moon's circumference still blocks a circular portion of the Sun's light. Therefore, if we were to see any lights in the part of the sky the dark side of the Moon blocks, they would need to be from sources between us and the Moon's surface, such as a nuclear war on the moon.

This comic lists some of the some common mistakes. In some cases, a depiction may be unrealistic in multiple ways - for example, the {{w|Flag of Tunisia}} has both unrealistic horns and a star visible between the horns, while {{w|File:Moon tarot charles6.jpg|the Charles VI tarot}} shows a Moon with over-long horns pointing towards the horizon.

In the title text, Randall is referring to the movie "{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}" and how one of the alien's ships (in the movie) 'eclipses' part of the Moon. He says that if the points go halfway or longer around the Moon, then he imagines it's caused by an alien ship and interprets the entire piece of art in that context (i.e. aliens are about to attack those shepherds!).

==Table of the images==
{| class="wikitable"
|+Explanation of individual items in the list
!#
!Image
!Shape
!Rating
!Text
!Explanation
!Examples
|-
|1 || [[File:moon1.jpg]]|| Full moon || Normal || rowspan="3" | "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever || Reality. The full moon cannot really be drawn incorrectly, and will look like this whenever it is up at night. ||
|-
|2 ||[[File:moon2.jpg]]|| Gibbous moon || Normal || Reality ||
|-
|3 ||[[File:moon4a.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns away from horizon || Normal || Reality ||
|-
|4 ||[[File:moon3.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with horns towards horizon || Not normal || Not possible at night || This can only happen when the sun is above the horizon. Since a crescent moon means that the Sun and the Moon are relatively close in the sky, the Moon would not be visible with a naked eye, its light completely outshone by the sunlight. Randall comments that this is possible only during the daytime, marking it wrong as the background would not be black. According to this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase#/media/File:Moon_phases_en.jpg image] on Wikipedia's article on {{w|lunar phase}} "Phases of the Moon, as seen looking southward from the {{w|northern hemisphere}}. The {{w|southern hemisphere}} will see each phase rotated through 180°". This might seem to indicate that shape #3, which is visible in for instance USA where Randall lives should be seen like #4 in the southern part of South America, also at night! However, because the light portion of the moon is illuminated by sunlight (whether or not the moon is in the sky at the same time as the sun), the light side of the moon will always be facing towards the sun. If the moon is in the night sky, the sun must be somewhere "below" the horizon on the other side of the Earth. Thus, at night, the light portion of the moon must always be on the half of the moon that faces the horizon. But as the text from Randall points out there can be times during daytime when the orientation can go the other way. But then the background should not be black. Originally Randall wrote a different (wrong) sentence here and then corrected to the one currently explained, see [[#Trivia|trivia]] below.|| Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Passeio ao Crepúsculo.jpg|Landscape with Couple Walking and Crescent Moon}}
|-
|5 ||[[File:moon5a.jpg]]|| Wide crescent-like moon where the horns don't connect through a diameter || Not normal|| rowspan="2" | Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun) || This is only possible during a partial solar eclipse or the start of an annular eclipse (in which cases the lit portion is not the moon, but the sun), or else if the Earth is casting its partial shadow on the Moon, a penumbral lunar eclipse. Randall labels the lunar eclipse "dubious", since the shadow during penumbral eclipse would be much lighter than shown here, in fact barely visible as a slight darkening of the Moon's surface. The Earth's shadow, being very large, would also likely cast a less-rounded edge than depicted here. ||
|-
|6 ||[[File:moon6.jpg]]|| Narrow crescent-like moon where the points don't connect through a diameter || Not normal || This situation is even harder to create than the previous one - unlike the previous example, here the diameter of the entire shadow is clear, and is too small for the Earth's shadow in a lunar eclipse. A huge ''Independence Day'' spaceship (as per the Title text) might be the right size. It does however resemble a partial {{w|annular eclipse}} if you imagine that the black area is the moon covering up the white sun. || {{w|File:AlcoholicBluesCoverVonTilze.jpg|Alcoholic Blues}}. Van Gogh, {{w|File:Van Gogh - Starry Night - Google Art Project.jpg|Starry Night}}, but turned the other way.
|-
|7 ||[[File:moon7.jpg]]|| Crescent moon blocking stars|| Normal || Looks OK || Reality (as in image 3) with stars shown around the moon, but not any inside the sphere of the sky that would be blocked by the dark (but still present) side of the moon. (See [[#Trivia|trivia]] below though). ||
|-
|8 ||[[File:moon8.jpg]]|| Crescent moon with stars between horns || Not normal || There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface. || Many people (including artists) seem to forget that the dark portion of the moon is still a solid object that we can not see through.[http://imgur.com/S30fuOj][https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a7/7d/4a/a77d4ae9e3549e36edd350246d33700c.jpg] If stars are visible, there are either one or more holes in the moon, or the light-source is actually on the moon, such as nuclear explosions. As the {{w|Star and Crescent}}, the image is sometimes considered a symbol of Islam, although it's relatively recent and there's no traditional basis for putting the star ''between'' the horns - as originally used on the Flag of Turkey, the star appears in a realistic position. A few examples has been posted at first but they did not fit this image. In the first Edwin Blashfield, {{w|File:Edwin Blashfield - Spring Scattering Stars.jpg|Spring Scattering Stars}} a God is standing on the moon throwing stars down, but then these stars are actually in front of the moon as are the good. Nothing in the image suggest that stars can be seen through the dark part of the moon. Also the {{w|DreamWorks Animation}} logo shows not stars. Although both show persons sitting on the seal, this is thus also clearly not an effort to make it look real. But in neither case stars can be seen in the moon. This is also the case for the live [https://youtu.be/xPpy8mYHQps?t=11 DreamWorks logo from movies]. Here there are stars in the background but they are not inside the moon as [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/f/f5/1738_Moon_Shapes_DreamWorks_logo_With_Moon_Circle.PNG can be seen here]. || An example can be found in the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/2/26/1738_Moon_Shapes_Mole_Car_Moon_With_Stars_Inside.png image on the last page] of [https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-mole-got-his-car/dp/B0000CKRB4 How mole got his car] with the {{w|Mole (Zdeněk Miler character)|Mole}} from the carton series by {{w|Zdeněk Miler}}. This is not just showing the stars inside from the last shape, but also the type of moon shown in the sixth image.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the panel:]
:'''Interpreting the shape of the moon in art'''
:[The left part of the panel shows a two column chart is shown with labels above the columns. The left side shows the moons shape as white on a black square. These types of moons could be seen in certain art pieces. The right side saying whether this is normal or not as indicated with a green check mark or a red X. Right of the second column there are explanations of why the specific type of moon is marked as it is and what it could be called or how it could be possible even with the red X. The upper three moons have one common explanation as indicated with a bracket that covers all three with the text on the middle part of the bracket. Similarly moon five and six also have a bracket and only one explanation.]
:Shape Normal?

:[Shape #1-3 shows a white circle (full moon), a more than half full moon (Gibbon) and a thin seal at the bottom right of the square.]
:<big>✓</big>
:<big>✓</big> "Full" or "Quarter" or "Harvest" or "Wax Gibbon" or whatever
:<big>✓</big>

:[Shape #4 same as #3 but with the seal in the upper part of the square.]
:<big>X</big> Not possible at night

:[Shape #5-6 shows a full moon with a circular section taken out of the right side and a seal that goes almost all the way around the circumference of the moon with almost a full circle taken out of the top left part of the moon.]
:<big>X</big>
:<big>X</big> Only possible during a lunar eclipse (#1 only, dubious) or a solar eclipse (bright part is the Sun)

:[Shape #7 same as #3 but with the seal a little smaller and more to the top and less to the left. Around the moon there are several starts represented with 29 small white dots. In the center of the black square there is a black circle, coinciding with the outer rim of the seal. Within this circle (the dark side of the moon) there are no stars!]
:<big>✓</big> Looks OK

:[Shape #8 same as #7 but apart from the 29 small white dots from before there are now also 6 more dots inside the dark circle with no stars in #7.]
:<big>X</big> There's either a hole in the Moon or a nuclear war on its surface.

==Trivia==
* [[Randall]] changed the text for the fourth moon shape the next day from "Only possible during a solar eclipse" to "Not possible at night".
* [[File:moon7a.jpg]] The image of the crescent moon blocking the stars is slightly wrong, because there are still lights on the surface of the moon.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Fiction]] 
[[Category:Astronomy]]

Talk:1739: Fixing Problems

2016-09-28T04:58:36Z

108.162.219.60:

This one seems relatively straightforward. It points out the rabbit hole that comes from attempting to optimize and attempting to fix earlier mistakes.

I agree. I added my explanation as such, and as I was doing it, I noticed that this comic seems to repeat the themes shown in past ones.

1739: Fixing Problems

2016-09-28T04:57:38Z

108.162.219.60: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1739
| date = September 28, 2016
| title = Fixing Problems
| image = fixing_problems.png
| titletext = 'What was the original problem you were trying to fix?' 'Well, I noticed one of the tools I was using had an inefficiency that was wasting my time.'
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is clearly remarking upon whether or not the benefits of the mentality "If it ain't broke, break it and fix it" are outweighed by the massive waste of time that can result from trying to solve any problem. As Cueball attempts to solve whatever computer issue he feels is causing him to be less productive, he creates more problems along the way. Attempting to solve all of these problems results in more time wasted than he was likely already wasting by using the inefficient tool described in the title text.

This comic is remarkably similar in thesis to [https://xkcd.com/1445/ Efficiency] and [https://xkcd.com/1319/ Automation].

Relevant comics include [https://xkcd.com/1171/ Perl Problems], where using regular expressions causes more problems than it solves, [https://xkcd.com/349/ Success], where Munroe comments on the goals of a project decreasing in optimism as a project goes on due to more and more problems distracting from the original, and [https://xkcd.com/1579/ Tech Loop], which shows that attempting to fix one problem in a piece of software can force a developer to delve into seemingly irrelevant parts of the relevant tech loop that the software in question is trapped in.

==Transcript==
:[Single square panel]
:[Cueball sitting in front of a laptop]
:Off-screen person: What are you working on?
:Cueball: Trying to fix the problems I created when I tried to fix the problems I created when I tried to fix the problems I created when...
{{comic discussion}}

1739: Fixing Problems

2016-09-28T04:56:06Z

108.162.219.60: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1739
| date = September 28, 2016
| title = Fixing Problems
| image = fixing_problems.png
| titletext = 'What was the original problem you were trying to fix?' 'Well, I noticed one of the tools I was using had an inefficiency that was wasting my time.'
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is clearly remarking upon whether or not the benefits of the mentality "If it ain't broke, break it and fix it" are outweighed by the massive waste of time that can result from trying to solve any problem. As Cueball attempts to solve whatever computer issue he feels is causing him to be less productive, he creates more problems along the way. Attempting to solve all of these problems results in more time wasted than he was likely already wasting by using the inefficient tool described in the title text.

Relevant comics include [https://xkcd.com/1171/ Perl Problems], where using regular expressions causes more problems than it solves, [https://xkcd.com/349/ Success], where Munroe comments on the goals of a project decreasing in optimism as a project goes on due to more and more problems distracting from the original, and [https://xkcd.com/1579/ Tech Loop], which shows that attempting to fix one problem in a piece of software can force a developer to delve into seemingly irrelevant parts of the relevant tech loop that the software in question is trapped in.

==Transcript==
:[Single square panel]
:[Cueball sitting in front of a laptop]
:Off-screen person: What are you working on?
:Cueball: Trying to fix the problems I created when I tried to fix the problems I created when I tried to fix the problems I created when...
{{comic discussion}}

1521: Sword in the Stone

2015-05-06T19:39:26Z

108.162.219.60: its not it's

{{comic
| number = 1521
| date = May 6, 2015
| title = Sword in the Stone
| image = sword in the stone.png
| titletext = That seems like an awful lot of hassle when all I wanted was a cool sword.
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, [[Megan]] pulls out a sword from a stone. A flash of light comes down and music plays, and a heavenly voice tells her she has ascended to the {{w|throne of England}}. Megan then pulls out her phone and searches on Wikipedia for {{w|England}} (proving hereby that the setting is in the present). After having read for a while she begins, absentmindedly while reading on, to replace the sword into the rock.

The comic references the fables of {{w|King Arthur}} and the {{w|Knights of the Round Table}}. In Arthurian legend, whoever can remove {{w|Excalibur#Excalibur_and_the_Sword_in_the_Stone|The Sword in the Stone}} is the lawful king of England. Arthur is an orphan being raised in secret; he notices the sword, removes it, and is proclaimed king. The sword is sometimes identified as {{w|Excalibur}}, although in other versions Excalibur was acquired by King Arthur from the {{w|Lady of the Lake}}. The most familiar version of this story is {{w|The Sword in the Stone}} by {{w|T. H. White}} which is based on {{w|Le Morte d'Arthur}} by {{w|Sir Thomas Malory}}. The animated {{w|The_Sword_in_the_Stone_(film)|musical}} by Walt Disney is a well known version of this fairytale.

A key element of the joke is that as Megan begins to read about England, especially information concerning being an English ruler, she quickly thinks better of this and begins to put the sword back in its place.

English history is rife with monarchic strife, and a brief inquiry into the {{w|List of monarchs of the British Isles by cause of death|cause of death}} will show that almost one in three {{w|British rulers}} have died either in battle or from murder etc. This would quickly lead most sane people to conclude that the risks associated with ruling England far outweigh the benefits.

The title text furthers this plot, having Megan comment on the hassle when the only thing she was interested in was the cool sword. Apparently Megan is not enthusiastic about power, and her choice is made when she sees how problematic it could be to reign over the country of England.

From the time of the {{w|Roman Empire}} all the way up to {{w|Charles II of England|Charles II's}} reclamation of the throne, England was one of the most contested and most difficult to hold chunks of real estate on Earth. Besides the constant threat of usurpation, as evidenced by the numerous wars for the crown, such as the {{w|Norman_conquest_of_England|Norman conquest}} and the {{w|War of the Roses}}, there were also constant difficulties in managing the frontier regions. This can be seen from {{w|Hadrian's Wall}}, a creation of the titular Roman Emperor designed to keep the ever difficult Scots out of the areas of Roman control (the Scots would be a constant problem for England up until the reign of King James; think of the movie {{w|Braveheart}} for a good example of the regular headaches they caused, seen from the English point of view), as well as the {{w|List_of_Anglo-Welsh_Wars|Welsh uprisings}} that occurred with such consistency that you could set your watch to them.

It should be noted that in Arthurian Legend, it is stated that Arthur would return when England most needed him. It is possible that Megan in this comic is a 21st century version (reincarnation) of the old Arthur.

The timing of this comic might relate to the birth of princess {{w|Princess_Charlotte_of_Cambridge|Charlotte Elizabeth Diana}} on May 2nd, 2015 just four days before this comic, and the burden of a royal of having a whole life in public shaking hands of strangers. Since {{w|Succession to the Throne Act, 2013|2013}} the {{w|Line of succession to the British throne|line of succession}} was changed to {{w|Primogeniture#Absolute_primogeniture|absolute primogeniture}}, meaning that she will keep her current position in the line (4th after her {{w|Prince George of Cambridge|older brother}}) even if she later gets baby brothers. Before this year, that would not have been the case, as the male gender took rank over birth order.

It is also probably not a coincidence that this comic was published the day before the {{w|United Kingdom general election, 2015|UK General Election}}, on May 7, 2015. This election decides the modern day leader of England and the rest of the UK. And the problems they face today, may even be more likely to cause Megan to give away the throne, than the risk of untimely death she would have faced in Arthur's days.

==Transcript==

:[Megan walks up to a sword in a stone.]

:[Megan tries to pull the sword out of the stone.]

:[A flash of light and music plays as she removes the sword.]

:[While standing with the swords a voice from heaven speaks in gray shaky letters:]
:Heavenly voice: ''The Throne of England is yours''

:[Megan takes out her smart phone and writes:]
:Wikipedia
:England

:[Megan reads on her phone.]

:[Megan starts to replace the sword back into the stone.]

{{comic discussion}}


[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Wikipedia]]

1310: Goldbach Conjectures

2014-04-15T12:51:58Z

108.162.219.60: /* Explanation */ From a false statement everything can be implied (false → true), hence the extremely strong conjecture does indeed imply the extremely weak one.

{{comic
| number = 1310
| date = December 30, 2013
| title = Goldbach Conjectures
| image = goldbach_conjectures.png
| titletext = The weak twin primes conjecture states that there are infinitely many pairs of primes. The strong twin primes conjecture states that every prime p has a twin prime (p+2), although (p+2) may not look prime at first. The tautological prime conjecture states that the tautological prime conjecture is true.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Goldbach's conjecture}} and the {{w|Twin prime|twin prime conjecture}} are unsolved problems in mathematics relating to {{w|prime numbers}} (numbers greater than 1 whose only {{w|divisors}} are 1 and itself). A claimed proof of {{w|Goldbach's weak conjecture}} is currently under review.

Randall is riffing on the relationship between "strong" and "weak" logical statements, which are an interplay between the boldness or usefulness of a statement and the ease with which it might be proven to be true. For example, if Goldbach's conjecture (given in the comic under the label "strong") could be proven to be true, it would automatically imply that Goldbach's weak conjecture (given in the comic under the label "weak") is also true, because any odd number greater than 5 can be expressed as 3 (a prime number) plus an even number greater than 2 (which, per the strong conjecture, would itself be the sum of two prime numbers), resulting in a way to express the original odd number as the sum of three prime numbers. The weak conjecture does not, however, imply the strong conjecture.

Mathematicians have been solving related problems that are "weaker" than the weak conjecture, and working towards "stronger" ones. For example, in 1937 the weak conjecture was proven for odd numbers greater than 314348907. In 1995 a version was proven based on the sum of no more than seven prime numbers, and in 2012 the ceiling was lowered to five primes. In 2013 the weak conjecture was claimed proven for numbers greater than 1030, while all numbers below 1030 have been verified by supercomputer to satisfy the conjecture; these together imply that the weak conjecture is true (although there is no ''general'' proof of it for all numbers). Goldbach's strong conjecture remains unsolved.

This comic plays on the "strong" and "weak" naming of Goldbach's conjectures by extending it to further degrees of strength or weakness. The "very weak" and "extremely weak" conjectures are indeed implied by Goldbach's weak conjecture, just as the weak conjecture is implied by the strong one. The "very strong" and "extremely strong" conjectures are extensions of Goldbach's strong conjecture, even as it is an extension of the weak conjecture. However, the "very weak" and "extremely weak" conjectures are so obviously true that they are hardly worth stating, while the "very strong" and "extremely strong" conjectures make such bold claims that they are obviously false.

Moreover, the "extremely weak" and "extremely strong" conjectures contradict each other, even though they're both derived (albeit in opposite directions) from the same initial conjectures.

The title text refers to the twin prime conjecture, which states that there are an infinite number of pairs of primes that differ by 2, and then applies the same spectrum of "weak" and "strong" statements to it.

[[Randall]]'s weak twin prime conjecture states that there are an infinite number of pairs of primes. This is clearly true. Per {{w|Euclid's theorem}}, there are an infinite number of primes. Unlike the actual twin prime conjecture (which specifies a distance of two), this conjecture does not specify a required distance. Thus, any pair from the infinite set of primes suffices. An example is 5 and 13.

His strong twin prime conjecture states that every prime is 2 less than another prime. This statement is obviously false, as there are many possible counter-examples to this statement (thus Randall's humorous {{w|hedge (linguistics)|hedge}} that some prime numbers "may not look prime at first").

The tautological prime conjecture states that it itself is true, while making no statement about primes. It is not technically a {{w|tautology}} but more of a plain assertion. Randall has mentioned tautologies before in [[703: Honor Societies]].

==Transcript==
:'''Goldbach Conjectures'''
:'''Weak'''
:Every odd number greater than 5 is the sum of three primes
:'''Strong'''
:Every even number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes
:'''Very weak'''
:Every number greater than 7 is the sum of two other numbers
:'''Very strong'''
:Every odd number is prime
:'''Extremely weak'''
:Numbers just ''keep going''
:'''Extremely strong'''
:There are no numbers above 7

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Math]]