explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T21:02:08Z

108.162.254.104:

The character I'm missing in the title is [http://unicode-table.com/en/0FD0/ Tibetan Mark Bska- Shog Gi Mgo Rgyan U+0FD0] [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.129|108.162.216.129]] 06:13, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

And the second Box is a Mathematical Script small I (U+1D4BE)
And the First Box is a Mathematical Fraktur small S (U+1D530)
I think These are the only ones, that iOS7 can't picture. [[User:ẞ qwertz|ẞ qwertz]] ([[User talk:ẞ qwertz|talk]]) 06:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

More fun with Unicode. Question is, which OS does Randall have that has perfect support? (It has to cover emoji and obscure glyphs like these. Likely that it's multiple devices?) [[User:Azule|Azule]] ([[User talk:Azule|talk]]) 06:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
::Windows 7 here, everything displays properly for me. I don't think supporting most (or all) of the Unicode charset is as uncommon today as it used to be. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.128|108.162.221.128]] 10:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
::Linux Mint 17 here, ditto. [[User:Seipas|Seipas]] ([[User talk:Seipas|talk]]) 11:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
::Most of todays operating systems have unicode support perfect, but may still lack some fonts. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
:::Well, http://i62.tinypic.com/258b02t.png  is as far as I've so far managed to get my personal rendering. "...but it's hard to read and I can't focus ?it?" would have been be my guess. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.48|141.101.99.48]] 14:28, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm looking forward to finding out what the words are in English (as opposed to Unicodish). [[User:Azule|Azule]] ([[User talk:Azule|talk]]) 06:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:"...but it's hard to read and I can't focus"? [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Folks. I offer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI1hGShVdBA as the latest example of the genre. "I rub a Mexican loki" -> "I'm up all night to get lucky". [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:Not typical example. In typical example, you can't hear the lyrics over the music, not because the singer have bad pronunciation. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
:Still, could be added to the explanation that "misheard lyrics" is its own genre on Youtube. Notable example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg5_mlQOsUQ --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.104|108.162.254.104]] 21:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

...Songs still have lyrics these days? {turns on the radio} BWWWUWWUWUWUWUB {turns off the radio} [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.111|108.162.215.111]]

I sometimes observe that while dreaming, I can read the seemingly intelligible text perfectly well, but it changes every time I look back at it. --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.161|173.245.48.161]] 09:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Title possibly inspired by http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1732348/regex-match-open-tags-except-xhtml-self-contained-tags/1732454#1732454 (however, there is a lot of stuff like that) {{unsigned ip|108.162.254.108}}

Why a phone? Why cannot Cueball be holding a tablet? {{unsigned|RChandra}}

Can it be remote control to the radio he's listening to? Or CD case with printed lyrics? I don't know how phone would fit the story. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.51.120|173.245.51.120]] 13:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

For non-native English speakers is even funnier: you look up the lyrics after giving up on deciphering what it says and think: "After so many years studying this language, is *that huge* the comprehension gap between natives and I"? Then you find that natives don't pick up the lyrics either. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.66.53|141.101.66.53]] 13:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Don't look up the lyrics. Whatever you imagine it to be is likely better, and if you can't tell what it is and have no idea: Consider yourself lucky. "If I could be so lucky, lucky, lucky!".[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.149|108.162.254.149]] 13:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm the person that can hear all the lyrics without looking them up. I can't turn it off, and then my brain analyses what they actually mean. Trust me, you're better off not being able to understand them. They suck. [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 14:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I only have that after looking up the lyrics. (non-native english speaker). I think I somewhat agree with you. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67|141.101.104.67]] 15:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

;Attempt at translating
Please feel free to add suggestions below those I have given here. I write first each line in the attempt I have given at typing what is actually written (of course not possible), and then the next line (indented) with the words I think should be there. I have already two possible interpretations of one line. So please just ad an :or and a new line here below. Then note below with a signature that you have added more lines here. Maybe we can include some of the best guesses in the explanation. I do not think this will turn out to be a real song we can find the lyrics to, but I would be very interested in good suggestions. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:I CANTFVEN +ELe THER
::I can't even tell her
:or
::I can't even help her

:ANDT⊕NG fHE WCAN NAp.
::And ???? she can ???.
:or
::And ???? she wanna.
:or
::Finding she can nap
:or
::Finding she wanna.
:or
::Anything she wants ta (to?)

:HADBE AūτlfA!NNNG∩RKILL...
::Had be ????????????? kill…
::: Had be ous tanning or I'll ? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.68.29|162.158.68.29]] 15:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
:or
::Had be >autsaining< (outstanding?) or kill
:or
::Had ße aut?????? I'll (Had me out, saying "I will¨)
:or
:: Had to be outstanding girl

:FOR♡ITiNnaAGL♡OOO!VEEE ?-
::For ????????? Loooveee?-
:or
:: Foorgetting Looooveee
:or
:: For tiny gloooooooove
:or
:: For Tina's Looooooveee
:or
::Forgotten Love --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.68.29|162.158.68.29]] 15:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:::Please just fill in more suggestions above--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:::Added some. Apearently someone can't tell some sleeping girl something because she is asleep and therefore not listening. He/she did not know the girl could nap before he found out she was asleep. The rest as of yet makes even less sense. What would the genre of this song be? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67|141.101.104.67]] 15:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:::: The drawn out "loooooove" makes me think pop. -[[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 16:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

::: Added some of my own. I think it makes slightly more sense now, if you pick the right ones. Others are just silly. 15:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

The structure of the lyrics (four lines of equal length) suggests the standard A/B/A/B rhyme scheme, which could in theory help decipher them. In practice, the final syllables of each line appear to be her/nap/-ill/love, which make no musical sense. - [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 16:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1511: Spice Girl

2015-05-13T12:08:18Z

108.162.254.104:

Not being shouted (from without, at either cueball or his female companion) by a post-apocalyptic crowd, surely, but by Cueball (from within, at the post-apocalyptic person of whom he is currently trying to deny entry whilst possibly necessary weaponry is being loaded)... Or so I read it. If that makes sense. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.4|141.101.99.4]] 05:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
:It does look like that, but the caption states "through a door". -- microslayer
::The little lines around the origin point of the speech "bubble" is usually used in XKCD to indicate that the sound is coming through the surface or offscreen (see Writers Strike (360) and Time Vulture (926)). -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.155|108.162.250.155]] 06:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
:::Except that I read the ''caption'' as meaning "through a door" by our Cueball, i.e. what someone like him would be shouting ''out'', plosively. (It's "through the wall", anyway, if that's a 'through something' speech-bubble-originator-indicator (like the "THUMP"s are) rather than 'rather loudly' emphasis that I'd expect to be associated with Cueball. They are shown differently, with the non-THUMP indicator not really having the same appearance as all the other ones otherwise mentioned. Even in the very same panel.) Anyway, just my POV. Needs an Official Transcript to be sure, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.4|141.101.99.4]] 07:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
::::The speak line clearly shows it is Cueball who shouts this quiz title through a door. No question is it like this, so I have corrected the transcript accordingly.--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
:::::I disagree. It's not that clear. The marks around the end of the speech line indicate the question is being shouted from the other side of the wall, and I think - but can't be certain - that the line terminates near Cue Ball's head looks like to me like ambiguous drawing by the cartoonist. That, and the "through the door" make me think that Cue Ball is just silently holding the door shut against the rampaging hoards, who are doing all the shouting. {{unsigned ip|108.162.229.123}}
::::::I agree that it is unclear. See comic [[1493]]. Randall has used those little "blast" lines USUALLY to denote off-screen speech, but in that comic (the first example I found going backwards), he uses it directly on Cueball. That said, most uses are for sound effects or off-screen/through wall speech. I expected to find it used for "shouting", but Cueball isn't even shouting in that comic. Not sure why Randall used it. Another example is [[1393]]. I initially read this comic as Cueball speaking, otherwise Randally would have drawn the line over Cueball's head to the door, but I don't think the other interpretation is necessarily wrong. I do think the third one had to go though. Cueball shouting to Megan doesn't line up with the caption of "through the door". [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 14:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
:::::::I also find it to be confusing. I first thought it was Cueball that was doing the shouting but after reading this page I now see that the little marks around the speech line are usually used when the speaker is off panel or inside of something (car or coming from PC, etc). I went looking through back comics to see if any yelling was indicated differently and found one where the character was not yelling but the speech line has the same little marks (First panel of Fundamental Forces http://xkcd.com/1489/). In that case it looks like a small mistake, but in this comic it just leaves me unsure who is speaking. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.171|108.162.221.171]] 14:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)Agent0013
::::::: I am satisfied with the two different explanations currently being shown, given the controversy. However, to continue to support 'my' interpretation, do note the difference between the *THUMP* origins (unidirectionally starred lines, definitely on the door) and the question's origins (splayed lines, and an origin on the surface of a wall... ''coincidentally'' in the right place to be confused with originating from Cueball's mouth?). I'd accept that there's argument (before anyone else gives it) that because of Cueball's head being where it is one might not see the leftward-sloping asterism lines, but I don't think it's close enough to have obscured this (and could have been easily drawn to ''avoid'' such an illustration problem, as might a way to have drawn it to be unconfusingly not associated with Cueball's head at all). Tell you what, let's see if we can get it via the 3d.xkcd.com interface... ''Then'' we might know... ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.4|141.101.99.4]] 15:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
::::: I agree that it is clear it is Cueball shouting. The caption says through a door, not through a wall. The lines (different from the "through-door" lines) indicate he is shouting it with stress in his voice, through the door at a Spice Girl on the other side. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.187|108.162.250.187]] 23:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
:: [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.155|108.162.250.155]] and [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.123|108.162.229.123]] are correct, the shouting is coming from outside the room. Randall/Cueball imagines he is hearing quiz titles "being shouted," he is not imagining shouting them himself. [[User:Pesthouse|Pesthouse]] ([[User talk:Pesthouse|talk]]) 11:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
::: Furthermore, ''"in order to make sure the one you '''let in''' is not some scary person but a merciful one"'' makes no sense because the Spice Girl in question is clearly meant to be the girl loading the gun behind the box. She's already in the room. {{unsigned ip|108.162.229.123}}
:::: Hmm, or maybe not. I thought the hair was too different from Megan's usual style, but it could be her. So now I'm about 50/50 on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.123|108.162.229.123]] 12:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
::::There is no such character as Megan. Please see [[Megan]]. I quote ""Megan" does not necessarily always represent the same character from comic to comic. She is essentially the female equivalent of Cueball, representing the every-woman to his everyman.". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 13:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
::::::::I agree that it is difficult to determine from the small lines where the speak comes from. I have added several changes to the explain, but kept most of it in. I still believe that it is Cueball that shouts, but I'm not 100% sure anymore. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't know much about the Spice Girls, but the comic seems to be referring to two; Is there a "merciful" Spice Girl? Is there one likely to "start a war"? And is there a "war" that is specifically to do with the Spice Girls? -[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.95|141.101.106.95]] 08:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
What about Camp Spice?? {{unsigned ip|173.245.50.103}}

The comic is clearly inventing new Spice Girls: the original Spice Girls didn't have a merciful one, or an evil one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 13:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
:Disagree. In real life, there has not been a war started by ANY spice girl. This is clearly fantasy. It is just as likely that Randall is imagining the Spice Girls rise to power and in their newfound power, become associated with new traits (e.g. one is a merciful and one starts a war - in Cueball's fantasy scenario, there are only two spice girls left, or two who could possibly be at the door). There is no basis to assume this is a reference to invented new spice girls.
:: I also think that if Randall intended to have the quiz's answers make sense, it would have to be the latter, since the quiz won't have an "evil" or "merciful" spice. That said, given Randall's comment about needing to make the link titles less irritating, it's unlikely he would actually do the quiz. He just wants to be less annoyed while skimming his, Facebook feed (for example) [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 14:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
::You are wrong when you say 'the quiz won't have an "evil" or "merciful" spice'. [http://www.kidspot.com.au/the-spice-girls-and-10-other-mummy-types-you-might-know/ Here] you can see Baby Mummy, Sporty Mummy, Scary Mummy, Posh Mummy, Ginger Mummy, and also Old Mummy, Oracle Mummy, Supercalifragalistic Mummy, Drop and Run Mummy, Hover Mummy, Boring Mummy, Disaster Zone Mummy, and Baby Factory Mummy. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 17:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Why are we all ignoring the fact that this is not just this quiz title? It extends to things like "Which Harry Potter Character are you?" and other stuff like that. [[User:YourLifeisaLie|The Goyim speaks]] ([[User talk:YourLifeisaLie|talk]]) 00:15, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
:Because the comics name is Spice Girl!--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

That's some [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waste_Land Waste Land] level shit of complexity right there. [[User:Boerder|Boerder]] ([[User talk:Boerder|talk]])

The discussion has convinced me my initial interpretation is wrong, but I still like it best: Cueball is shouting, in a panic, at Megan Spice, who he thought was innocent until those at the door came for her. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.108|173.245.50.108]] 16:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

The whole idea that the shout is coming from Cueball is nonsense, utter nonsense. Megan is loading her shotgun, and saying "Haha, you'll see!" So Megan is the merciful spice girl or the one who started the war. The shouted question "Which spice girl are you?" is directed at Megan. And Randall is saying that he likes to imagine questions like this as being shouted through a door. Cueball and Megan are on the same side of the door. Ergo the shout is coming from outside. --[[User:RenniePet|RenniePet]] ([[User talk:RenniePet|talk]]) 18:58, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

;Known Comics Iconography for Outside
Everyone who thinks it's Cueball should read "Understanding Comics" by Scott McCloud. The radiating lines at the start of the stem (for both the THUMPs and the shouting) indicate that the sound is coming from off-panel. Randall has used this technique before, in [[1154]] for example. See also "Emanating Dialogue" at http://www.blambot.com/grammar.shtml - [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 21:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
;Known Comics Iconography for Shouting
:It is common for Randall to indicate shouting (and all agree that this line is shouted) with the same type of radiating lines. See when Megan shouts in [[1374: Urn]] and in [[1360: Old Files]]. There is actually a clear difference between the Thumps line and the speech line. So this is no argument. Also the "wall" is not off-screen and thus comic [[1154]] or the other referened in the explanation has nothing to do with this comics speech line. And as the comment below notes, when something is coming out of a box/wall then the "thumps" version is used as can be seen in [[915: Connoisseur]]. So once again we are back to square one. Randall has not made a clear comic here!--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:21, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
::As an evidence-based person, I thank you for the disappointing counter-examples. Yes, Randall has used this symbol ambiguously. However, in standard comicsography, small radiating lines at the base of a speech stem (henceforth called SRL@BOSS) is a known and accepted convention for an occluded speaker. When radiating lines are used to indicate emphasis (which is already rare, since volume is usually demonstrated via thicker lines and other symbols) the lines are typically larger and encompass a substantial fraction of the speaker's head.
:: TL;DR version: Randall might be ''doing it wrong''. - [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 21:33, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
:: p.s. It's certainly his right as an artist to do so. The confusion might even be intentional. {{unsigned|Frankie}}
::The comment below is not about "thumps," it is about how we are a bunch of people locked in a box arguing about something stupid. [[User:Pesthouse|Pesthouse]] ([[User talk:Pesthouse|talk]]) 00:07, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

I think I just realized what [[915: Connoisseur]] is really about. [[User:Pesthouse|Pesthouse]] ([[User talk:Pesthouse|talk]]) 01:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

;Is "Duck Soup" the answer to "Anyone who can pinpoint a specific work with this scene in it?"

Regarding the incomplete tag that asks "Anyone who can pinpoint a specific work with this scene in it?":

It vaguely remains me of a scene in the Marx Brothers movie "Duck Soup" but I haven't seen it in many years. Anyone who has copy of the movie (or remembers it well) and can verify this?

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.189|108.162.215.189]] 06:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I've been leaning more towards "The shout comes from Cueball". But the officcial transscript now clearly states, that the shout is coming from "A cruel interloper, external to the scene". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.104|108.162.254.104]]

1310: Goldbach Conjectures

2014-02-14T16:21:48Z

108.162.254.104: /* Explanation */ 1 is not a prime

{{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. Therefore, the "extremely strong" conjecture could not possibly imply (however indirectly) the validity of the "extremely weak" conjecture, as it would if proved true.

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]]