explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2217: 53 Cards

2019-11-15T18:06:15Z

162.158.134.154:

{{comic
| number = 2217
| date = October 18, 2019
| title = 53 Cards
| image = 53_cards.png
| titletext = Well, there's one right here at the bottom, where it says "53."
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, [[Cueball]] claims that he has found a way to manipulate a {{w|Standard 52-card deck|52-card deck}} into a 53-card deck by only shuffling and rearranging the cards, presenting a complex-looking diagram to support his claim. [[Ponytail]] naturally disputes the claim immediately, which Cueball counters by challenging Ponytail to prove that his math is wrong.

The comic is a satire of the way that conversations tend to go between physicists and perpetual motion enthusiasts (or cranks in general). {{w|Perpetual motion}} is the idea that it could be possible for a mechanical system to work indefinitely without any external input of energy. The {{w|laws of thermodynamics}} absolutely prohibit this, so the only way that this could be possible is if the laws of thermodynamics are wrong. Unfortunately, the laws of thermodynamics are some of the most foundational and well-tested laws in science, so perpetual motion is considered to be a {{w|pseudoscience}}, pursued only by ignorant or quixotic cranks.

One of the things that you could do with a perpetual motion machine is to violate the {{w|law of conservation of energy}} - that is, you could create free energy out of nothing, simply by building a mechanical device. This is likely what Randall is satirizing with the idea of a process that can generate an extra card out of nowhere - it makes no physical sense, but nonetheless Cueball is convinced that he has found a way to do it.

A common defense employed by pseudoscientists, when challenged on their ideas, is to issue a counter-challenge and demand people prove them wrong, as Cueball does in this comic. This is a fallacious line of argument, since the fact that Ponytail cannot prove Cueball wrong does not mean that he is right. Nonetheless, this aggressive defense often works to discourage argument, since it takes far less effort to make a claim than to refute it.

Possibly, Cueball's plan involves usage of the {{w|Banach-Tarski paradox}}, a mathematical theorem which describes a method of "dismantling" a solid sphere, rearranging the component pieces, and reassembling them into two solid spheres identical to the original. This is only possible in a mathematical ideal case, because the "component pieces" are actually collections of infinitely many disjoint points; such a procedure cannot be performed in physical reality. Cueball's operations of shuffling and rearranging are analogous to the operations used in the Banach-Tarski operation, which involves only moving and rotating the component pieces without changing their shape. The Banach-Tarski paradox was also referenced in [[804: Pumpkin Carving]].

In the title text, Ponytail responds to Cueball's challenge with snark, claiming that the most obvious error is the fact that the formula's result is "53". The implication is that his math results in the wrong ''answer'', which is proof that the calculations must contain errors. This, of course, starts with the assumption that Cueball's claimed result is impossible, rather than attempting to find the flaws in his specific method. Because most people would conclude, by basic physical reasoning, that merely shuffling and rearranging a deck of cards cannot increase the number of cards in the deck, that feels like a safe assumption. By analogy, increasing the amount of energy in a system only by moving and transferring energy should be equally impossible, on its face.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Ponytail are standing next to a flowchart, with Cueball gesturing to it.]:
:Cueball: I've found a way to turn a 52-card deck into 53 cards by shuffling and rearranging them.
:Ponytail: No, you haven't.
:Cueball: How do you know?! I challenge you to find an error in my math!

:[The flow chart consist of 15 boxes of different sizes, connected with arrows. In four of them (top, bottom and two in the middle) a deck of card is shown. Next to the top and bottom a number is written, near the other two, which are the only round boxes, numbers are shown in one of the nearby boxes instead. Beneath the top box there are two boxes with readable text. The other 7 boxes, without numbers or card decks have unreadable text. From top to bottom are the readable content:]
:52
:Shuffle
:Cut
:21
:38
:53

:[Caption below the panel]:
:Every conversation between a physicist and a perpetual motion enthusiast.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Flowcharts]]

2226: Recombination And Reionization

2019-11-09T15:49:57Z

162.158.134.154: /* Explanation */ wikilinking; wording tweaks

{{comic
| number = 2226
| date = November 8, 2019
| title = Recombination And Reionization
| image = recombination_and_reionization.png
| titletext = These signals seem to be pre-star-formation but post-Malone.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by SELENA GOMEZ. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|hydrogen line}} is a {{w|spectral line}} of neutral (unionized) hydrogen atoms. It falls in the {{w|microwave}} region of the electromagnetic spectrum, with a frequency of ~1.42 gigahertz (GHz). The wavelength corresponding to this frequency is about 21.1 centimeters, giving it the common name of the 21-centimeter line. In this comic, [[Ponytail]] is attempting to detect the signal of this emission line from the ancient universe, although due to {{w|redshift}}, the line's frequency has decreased from 1.4 GHz to only circa 100 megahertz (MHz), putting it in the current {{w|FM broadcast band}}. FM radio makes use of frequencies from 87.5 to 108.0 MHz.

The fact that the signal Ponytail is searching for and FM radio overlap in frequency quickly becomes an apparent problem when tuning to the frequency detects a local radio station rather than the desired signal. She demonstrates this to [[Cueball]] by playing the live signal for him, but says that once the guy stops talking, their research will result in a {{w|Nobel Prize}}. This is unlikely, as most radio stations broadcast 24 hours a day, without ever stopping. Cueball points out that perhaps the signal is indeed what the supposed primordial hydrogen line sounds like. Ponytail jokes back that the primordial universe must enjoy playing popular singer and musician {{w|Selena Gomez}} (which, for the record, has not been conclusively disproven by physicists to date)

The title text refers to the signal Ponytail is detecting, claiming it to originate before the formation of the first stars in the universe (which took place approximately 150 to 200 million years after the {{w|Big Bang}}), but is additionally post-Malone. "{{w|Post Malone}}" is the stage name of a popular hip hop musician and singer, so this is a play on words, as the "Post" in his stage name isn't referring to "after" something, but is simply his (real) last name, and a play on the expression "a star is born" for an artist becoming a famous celebrity.

==Transcript==

:[Panel showing Ponytail sitting working at some type of console, possibly in her laboratory. Cueball is standing on the other side of the console, facing her.]
:Ponytail: Our lab is trying to pick up the spin line of neutral hydrogen. It's the only radiation from the era before the first stars formed.

:[Panel showing Ponytail and Cueball. Ponytail has paused working, with one hand raised off the console.]
:Ponytail: It was 1.4 GHz at first, but by now it's redshifted to the 100-MHz range.
:Cueball: Isn't that also where FM radio broadcasts?

:[Frameless panel showing Ponytail and Cueball. Ponytail is pressing a key on the console to enable and disable a live signal from her lab's equipment.]
:Ponytail: Yeah. That's the problem. Listen:
:Sound of keypress on console: *Click*
:Audio signal from console: ''You're tuned to Hot 92.7: the Vibe! Coming up next...''
:Sound of keypress on console: *Click*

:[Panel showing Ponytail and Cueball. Ponytail has resumed working at the console, and Cueball has raised a hand to his chin.]
:Ponytail: But once this guy stops talking, that Nobel Prize will be '''''ours'''''.
:Cueball: Maybe that's not a station – maybe that's just what reionization sounds like.
:Ponytail: Reionization plays a lot of Selena Gomez.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1112: Think Logically

2019-09-20T11:16:08Z

162.158.134.154: Added comment about identiy of "guy with knit cap"

Cueball is clearly a chess novice as demonstrated by the comic (at the very least he knows what the goal of the game is and how the pieces move), however he lacks higher knowledge of the game (which is gained through education) and is very inexperienced (experience is obviously gained by playing the game regularly). Given his non-expert position he attempts to deliver well-meaning advice as best he can (in this case through "thinking logically"), however the player receiving the advise (a clearly more knowledgeable and experienced player) immediately realises how utterly useless that advise is.
Cueball approached the situation by "thinking logically", but his logic was flawed, possibly due to his lack of knowledge. Just because the goal of chess is to deliver checkmate does not necessarily mean that every move must be pushing a piece closer to the opponent's king. The best thing to do would be to first research and study the abundance of chess knowledge out there, practice it and then one can come up with tactics and strategies for every possible position (even if those aren't perfect). Chess is so complex that even if we wished to arrive at the absolute logical move for every position, this would be beyond us most of the time, it is just too complex. Not even computers know the perfect move for every position, although they do come up with great moves through the use of complex algorithms.
Note: I thought the explanation given in the "Explanation" section above had some merit (it also explains some things I didn't include), and that is why I did not modify it and instead chose to provide mine here. Let me know what you thought, together we can explain everything.--[[User:DelendaEst|DelendaEst]] ([[User talk:DelendaEst|talk]]) 13:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:Feel free to add your explanation to the actual page if you think it's lacking in information. Wikis are meritocracies, and anyone is welcome to voice their opinions. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] ([[User talk:Davidy22|talk]]) 13:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:A good explanation. My takeaway was more about Dunning Kruger, and chess just happened to be a convenient backdrop. The expert proceeds to {{w|pwn}} the {{w|know-it-all}}... and even having been pwned, the braggart can't find the lesson in the defeat. But as with Randall's work, YMMV. (Or to paraphrase {{w|Euell Gibbons}}: "ever analyze an xkcd? Many interpretations are possible.") -- [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 14:52, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

::I think your explanation is the best one, you managed to find the essence of the situation. I can very easily see what you explained happening in the comic.--[[User:DelendaEst|DelendaEst]] ([[User talk:DelendaEst|talk]]) 00:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Just a quick point on the explanation. Chess is not a perfectly balanced game due to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_chess first move advantage] enjoyed by white. This advantage is very small, however, and the pieces themselves are well balanced. [[User:Heyart|Heyart]] ([[User talk:Heyart|talk]]) 13:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Please note that experts are not in universal agreement about the supposed first move advantage held by white, and it's unwise to state it in such absolute terms as "Chess is not a perfectly balanced game" [[Special:Contributions/216.99.210.8|216.99.210.8]] 03:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

::I found Cueball's demeanor in this comic to be very remeniscent of {{w|Sheldon Cooper}} of ''The Big Bang Theory'' in that he thinks he knows better than everyone even though chess has been around forever. Also, there was a specific episode of ''TBBT'' in which Cooper invents three-player chess including several new pieces. Cooper does not, however, do so considering the traditional rules of chess to be flawed (other than not allowed a third player). The characters do consider chess to be too easy, however, and often play ''Star Trek'''s three-dimensional chess. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 16:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I see this comic, as so many comics before it, to be a description of nerd-dominance. The author seeks to entice the reader into inquiring about his own ill-thought out rules for chess. Do not inquire.

Is the first character really wearing a "hat"? To me, it looks like a headband, similar to the one worn by {{w|Spock}} in the movie {{w|Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home}}. This would give another meaning to "Think logically"... --[[Special:Contributions/85.159.196.16|85.159.196.16]] 11:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Nope, not a headband -- there's hair below the brim but not above it. What you are seeing is a subtle clue that the chess expert is a Canadian, in that he is wearing what we call a toque, known in America as a stocking cap. https://www.google.ca/search?q=toque&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=JNV&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=MaFhUKmkEObRyAH9xoCACg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=960&bih=544 [[User:Noni Mausa|Noni Mausa]] ([[User talk:Noni Mausa|talk]]) 12:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

:Your point about the hair is interesting; however, a Vulcan is much better at explaining logic than any earthling... Canadians included!
:--[[Special:Contributions/85.159.196.16|85.159.196.16]] 13:52, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

:I don't want to make a huge generalization, but in America they're known as beanies, stocking caps extend out from the head and end with pointed tips (or those silly poof balls). [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
::And thus it is a {{w|Knit cap}} as taken from the wikipedia article: ''This article is about the knit cap also known as a "beanie" or "tuque"'' (or as the Canadian guyy wrote toque). Of course somewhere they do call it {{w|Beanie (seamed cap)|Beanie}}, but even here they refer to knit cap. As a knit cap is for cold weather and the same drawing is used to protect hairless heads when lost the hair to chemotherapy or in cold conditions, and since a similar character was called [[1350:_Lorenz#Knit_Cap_Girl|Knit Cap Girl]] in the extensive comic [[1350: Lorenz]], I have changed (what had become {{w|Skullcap}}?) to ''knit cap'' in the explanation. Here it is a guy though as the [http://xkcd.com/1112/info.0.json official transcript] calls him Knit hat guy, thus also making it clear that this is a knit cap.--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Another point I want to bring up is that it's generally not really a good idea to share your own strategy with your opponents (or potential opponents). I once participated in a Chess tournament, and before it began I encountered this guy who was bragging about his strategy, how he likes to move only his pawns at the beginning and form a sort of wall into which his opponents will invariably run their pieces and, in his words, "kill themselves." Of course, it just so happened that the first game I played in was against this same guy. And so I knew what he was trying to do, and I ended up destroying him. Granted, Cueball's "strategy" in this comic has very little to do with actual established Chess practices, but it's a similar idea. [[User:Erenan|Erenan]] ([[User talk:Erenan|talk]]) 18:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

:As an avid chess player, I'd have to agree that we should keep our strategy to ourselves (unless we are planning to use deception). Also, I'd like to point out that your opponent's strategy to only move pawns in the opening is a very poor choice (unless the opening in question is a variation by Alekhine, which is considered to be sound). In the opening we are advised to mainly move pieces and only a few pawns and there are very good reasons for this, which I cannot go into here. Moreover, he plans to build a pawn wall for your pieces to destroy themselves? Typical novice threats, doesn't he realise you have an equally matched army and that you wouldn't purposefully endanger your pieces with his pawn wall? (Your pawns can neutralise his). His reasoning is laughable. If you'd like to learn lots about chess in a fun and painless way, I recommend the Chessmaster game. Anyway, good on you for beating that opponent!--[[User:DelendaEst|DelendaEst]] ([[User talk:DelendaEst|talk]]) 12:27, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

::Yes, indeed, he was clearly very inexperienced, and while I'm not exactly a seasoned expert, I did spend the weeks leading up to this tournament studying openings and playing Chessmaster (and other Chess games on my mobile phone while not at my computer), and to my surprise I ended up in second place. Of course, this wasn't an official tournament, but rather one organized by the business and economics club at the community college in the area. So really I prefer to attribute my ultimate loss not to my lack of skill but to being more tired than my final opponent (final game was played at Denny's around midnight). More to the point, I was going to say that Kasparov had moved only pawns for something like the first eight moves for one of the games he won against Deep Blue, but after looking again at those games, that doesn't appear to be true. So what am I thinking of? I could have sworn I saw this from Kasparov somewhere... [[User:Erenan|Erenan]] ([[User talk:Erenan|talk]]) 04:13, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I was reminded of the scene from ''A Beautiful Mind'' when John Nash criticized a game (Go, I think) because he played flawlessly and yet still lost because he didn't go first. So he invented his own game, called Hex. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hex_(board_game)[[Special:Contributions/163.120.70.10|163.120.70.10]] 17:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Does anybody else think the chess player could be Randall's wife? You see her depicted with a beanie and short black hair in the biopsy versary comic {{[[Special:Contributions/24.110.27.83|24.110.27.83]] 18:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)|24.110.27.83}}
:The transcript calls the chess player "hat '''guy'''," so I doubt such.
:Also, sudo sign your discussion comments by entering four tildes in the end. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 11:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
::Yes not his wife as it is a guy according to [http://xkcd.com/1112/info.0.json official transcript] which calls him ''Knit hat guy'', thus also making it clear that this is a {{w|knit cap}}. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

:I've always thought of this comic as being one of those nerdy 13 year olds that are chess geniuses (I call them geniuses because I can't play chess, it's too complicated for me, my cat beats me), and for some reason, these brilliant kids are almost always portrayed as beanie toting. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]<span title="I'm an admin. I can help.">_a</span> ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:47, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Just to add a comment as a chess player, "thinking logically" does not always work in chess. Sometimes, one must go with their 'intuition', or gut feeling. Of course, these gut feelings are usually backed by subconscious logical reasoning, but sometimes, a chess player plays a move because it FEELS right. {{unsigned ip|162.158.2.166}}
:I understand this as meaning "there's only so much logic power I can spend on the next move before I run out of time" - even if there's no chess clock in play, there are social and biological factors like needing to eat and sleep eventually or a desire not to bore the other player. At some point, the amount of time and energy one needs to better evaluate which of two or three or four plausible moves is the best one is just not worth it at the margins. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.87|162.158.62.87]] 16:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

I tend to feel that people who use the phrase "think logically" actually mean "think the same thing I think, because I am *obviously* without bias, am incapable of flawed reasoning, and I am above petty things like history or context, so I'm right and shut up". They are usually wrong, by the way. And an asshole. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 03:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

The first two paragraphs are useless. Nobody doesn’t know what chess is! And if they don’t, they don’t have to learn about it here. {{unsigned ip|162.158.214.22}}

Anyone else think that "guy with knit cap" might actually be Megan? Wearing a cap to cover up hair loss?

2044: Sandboxing Cycle

2018-09-19T18:08:19Z

162.158.134.154: /* Explanation */ | is the separator for [[ links, only space works for [ links

{{comic
| number = 2044
| date = September 10, 2018
| title = Sandboxing Cycle
| image = sandboxing_cycle.png
| titletext = All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that so much to ask?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|The meaning of the colors need to be explained. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

A {{w|Sandpit|sandbox}} or sandpit is a playground where children can play safe without interfering the world outside. By this meaning the term was adopted by others like the {{w|Sand table|sand table}} in military uses, or as a {{w|Wikipedia:Sandbox|Wikipedia Sandbox}}, a playground for inexperienced editors to test their additions, and in {{w|Sandbox (computer security)|computer security (sandbox)}} which [[Randall]] probably references at this comic.

Software is getting more and more complex, and in an effort to reduce programming work and security vulnerabilities, large applications are composed of multiple programs. Getting these mostly self-contained programs to work with each other can be tricky, since requirements can vary a lot between different applications, requiring a rather general {{w|Interface (computing)|interface}} or {{w|API}} for communication. The more open such interfaces are, the higher the risk of unintended side effects, like vulnerabilities and overly permissive data access which could be exploited by hackers.

At the top left panel it could be a software collection whose parts are not yet fully connected to each other. A simple example is a typical {{w|Productivity_software#Office_suite|office suite}} used for documents, presentations, spreadsheets, charts, databases, and more. In the early days those separate applications weren't much connected together, copy and paste was one of the most important features; which suggests the applications haven't yet been fully developed. But software is never been fully developed as it can be seen further.

The next panel uses some "new technology" to interconnect those parts not only internal but also to the world outside at the internet. In the simple office suite example this means a document can now use a spreadsheet directly by using just a simple connection to another file. If that spreadsheet is changed the document uses this new content without any need of copying it manually.

But this leads to the third panel where many items are marked in red. The connections cause undesired changes in other applications because nobody can oversee everything in a large environment. It even may destroy the original document in this office suite example.

The fourth panel shows one solution to this problem known as sandboxing. This is a security mechanism for separating running programs without risking harm to others. This can tighten up sloppy security. A direct consequence of restricted communication is that the programs now again can't connect easily to each other.

It is discussed that {{w|Orchestration (computing)|orchestrating}} as having an inherent intelligence or even implicitly autonomic control could overcome these issues but there is probably no solution without the interaction by humans not only because these applications are made for humans. And thus Randall's sandboxing just results to a situation very similar like in the first panel.

The dilemma is again stated in the title text: Randall wants both ease of use and high security. In practice, a tradeoff has to be made.

While this comic is applicable to a wide number of digital security issues, it may be about social media in particular.

Originally, there were only a few social media websites (AOL, for example), which were not connected to one another but were so large and all-encompassing that they could be considered highly-connected systems. Once the internet became more popular and more powerful, lots of smaller websites popped up for individual topics -- forums, web apps, etc. Eventually there were so many places users had to log in that Google and Facebook began to offer services to use a single log-in for all websites that opted-in to supporting that service. Recently, with increasing consumer concerns about privacy and security, some users have begun to deliberately sever the connections between websites, to make it harder for any one company to gain a monopoly on their data. This may not last long, though, as users realized just how inconvenient it is to manage so many logins.

This desire to accommodate both privacy and ease use of use can lead to confusing and paradoxical actions or outlooks, like [[2045|Randall's struggle with his social media accounts in the comic immediately following this one]], or Zach Wienersmith's complaints in the [https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-problem SMBC comic] released the same day as this one.

==Transcript==
:[The comic consists of four panels arranged in a circle around the center. Black arrows connecting them clockwise in an infinite loop. All panels show the same 14 tiny circles and three different rings embedding some of the circles while other circles are outside. A few circles and rings are connected by lines but there is no connection between them all.]

:[The panel at top left shows this configuration but with a few circles in red.]
:"I wish these parts could communicate more easily."

:[Clockwise the next panel on the right shows new lines in green connecting nearly all remaining also now green circles and the lower most circle has a dashed green line to the outside.]
:"Ohh, this new technology makes it easy to create arbitrary connections, integrating everything!"

:[At the third panel to the bottom right all green parts are now in black and even more connections are established. Parts of these and some others are now highlighted in red.]
:"Uh-oh, there are so many connections it's creating bugs and security holes!"

:[At the fourth panel to the bottom left all red parts are now in black, showing a complex structure. Four green rings separate the structure with only green connections between them and to the outside.]
:"Ohh, this new technology makes it easy to enclose arbitrary things in secure sandboxes!"

:[The arrow above the fourth panel connects it to the first and the circle continues from the beginning.]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Computer security]]

Talk:2013: Rock

2018-06-30T06:06:16Z

162.158.134.154: philosophical perspective

Wow, 3 paragraphs and still created by a “BOT”. Good self control today, explainers! 😂. If someone does change it, may I humbly suggest it be created by a “rock”? [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 19:40, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Note: this explanation was written by someone who's not very good at skipping stones, if they think 1-2 skips is typical. A single skip is about the same as just throwing a rock in the water! (Just kidding around because it's Friday) [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 20:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone know if there could even be a rock that came from a volcano near the south pole when the world was frozen over before multicellular life began, and if so, when would that have occurred? [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 20:40, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

:Looking at {{w|Geologic temperature record}}, I suspect even the "world was frozen over before multicellular life began" is pretty bold statement not supported by actual evidence. Existence of specific volcano is likely even less supported. On the other hand, we can't disprove it either. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:21, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

"philosophical perspective". Does mean that this is the philosophers' stone?

Talk:2003: Presidential Succession

2018-06-10T08:30:59Z

162.158.134.154: legalities

Aw, but what about Morgan Freeman? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 04:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:And Kiefer -designated survivor- Sutherland?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.83|141.101.104.83]] 08:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Morgan Freeman> "I do solemnly swear / that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States..." [[User:Linker|Linker]] ([[User talk:Linker|talk]]) 12:39, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Academy awards have been won by actors playing kings / queens - of England, the United Kingdom and Siam - Princes - of Denmark - and Prime Ministers of Great Britain and even the President of the Uniter States / Member of the house of Representatives, but I do not believe it has been won by an actor playing a state govenor. Mind you it is not clear if an actor playing a prison govenor, would count. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 11:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
: Broderick Crawford, actually. I've added him. To the best of my ability to determine, the opposite group (Governors Award recipients who have played characters named Oscar) appears to be an empty set. I'll note that I don't have a really comprehensive filmography for {{w|Jean-Claude Carrière}}, but I consider it fairly unlikely that he ever played a character by that name. [[User:Squeamish Ossifrage|Squeamish Ossifrage]] ([[User talk:Squeamish Ossifrage|talk]]) 16:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Bill Pullman's eldest daughter Maesa is a film composer with an IMDB page in her own right. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 11:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Top 5 US astronauts? I only count three. Who are the other two? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.76|172.68.150.76]] 12:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

As of September 3, 2017, the 5 US astronauts with the most total time in space are Peggy Whitson (665 days), Jeff Williams (534), Scott Kelly (520), Mike Fincke (382), and Mike Foale (374), according to https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders. Michael Lopez-Alegria has the second-most time in space for a single spaceflight (215 days, compared to Scott Kelly, 340). [[User:The Dining Logician|The Dining Logician]] ([[User talk:The Dining Logician|talk]]) 12:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Mike Foale was born in Louth - so ineligible. Michael Lopez-Alegria was born in Spain ditto [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 15:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Foale was born to an American mother and should hence be a natural-born American. --[[User:Ycthiognass|Ycthiognass]] ([[User talk:Ycthiognass|talk]]) 09:40, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
::There is actually legal question about whether someone born on foreign soil to US citizens count as "natural-born" (or whether courts would just say it's a political question and pass the buck to Congress), though I will add Foale back to the list. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 14:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

The non-US-citizen-being-in-line-for-the-Presidency thing has already been cleared up IRL - several Presidential cabinets have had non-natural-born-US citizens on them (current Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao was born in Taiwan; in the past Madeline Albright was born in the then-Czechoslovakia). All the serious succession lists I've ever seen just list them and skip over them. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 13:19, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

How do we decide who gets a bye in the jousting tournament? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.147|162.158.74.147]] 13:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Random draw, probably. There's no jousting rankings AFAIK to enable any kind of seeding like in tennis. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 15:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone with a jousting ranking would not need a bye. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 15:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone else think it's interesting that Kate gets a "if available" but Tom Hanks doesn't? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.62.184|172.69.62.184]] 16:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
: Also, why doesn't Tom Hanks kids get to be in line, like Bill Pulman's? Colin Hanks is old enough. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.210|162.158.122.210]] 03:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I assume, but am too lazy to do all the maths, that the person born closest to Europa would be the one closest in time to the point Sun Earth and Jupiter are in line.
I found a table of opposition distances here: http://www.ianridpath.com/jupiter.htm
[[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 18:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

All of this talk about ''where'' people were born is very misleading. The general opinion is that you have to have been a citizen from birth, not born in the U.S. (or a U.S. territory or whatever). Ted Cruz was born in Canada, but he would have been eligible had he won the nomination and the election. See http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/26/ted-cruz-born-canada-eligible-run-president-update/ for discussion. —[[User:TobyBartels|TobyBartels]] ([[User talk:TobyBartels|talk]]) 20:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
*Yes, Kate Brown (governor of Oregon) should be restored to Randall's line of succession, because she was born in Spain while her father was serving in the U.S. Air Force. Presumably she's a U.S. citizen by birth and thus eligible for the presidency. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.52|172.68.150.52]] 22:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
** Added her. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign-born_United_States_politicians#Governors This page says she's a natural-born citizen]. --[[User:Ycthiognass|Ycthiognass]] ([[User talk:Ycthiognass|talk]]) 08:49, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I read #7 being that we would have 5 people as co-president. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.210|162.158.122.210]] 03:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
:Would that also hold for other entries where multiple people are listed (e.g., multiple league MVPs meet the criteria)? Also, there is the "ties broken by born closest to Europa" title text. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 13:31, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

For the 'List of Specific Individuals', should it be maintained by who currently holds those positions, or left as who held them when the comic was posted? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.71|172.69.70.71]] 12:14, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
:If you want to come back and update the line as things change in the weeks, months, and years ahead, you're welcome to do so. If you do, I would recommend that both lists (the one accurate as of comic publishing and the one "updated") be maintained, perhaps as one table for fun comparison (adding blank spots as necessary if a current spot falls out of eligibility or a new one becomes eligible for whatever reason. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 13:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Tom Hanks is probably a reference to the June 4 Last Week Tonight episode, see http://time.com/5298479/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-guardianship/ {{unsigned ip|162.158.123.85}}

Oh! Question regarding Serena Williams - does it count if her latest match was in a ''doubles'' tournament? She pretty much always teams up with sister Venus in doubles. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 14:52, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone else curious about the apostrophe in "Governor's award"? The current notes imply that it is simply a mistake in "Governors Awards" (the Academy Awards similar to the Oscars), but Governor's awards (i.e., an award by a state Governor) for other areas are quite common (e.g. Clemson University Governor's Award for Excellence in Science and Pennsylvania's Governor's Award for the Arts). Rearranging Oscar and governor from the preceding criterion certainly makes sense, but wild speculation is always more fun...

1933: Santa Facts mentioned Santa being 9th in the presidential line of succession. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.7|162.158.111.7]] 08:56, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

To me, #17 (Pullman '''and''' his descendants) seems to imply that we'd abolish the 4-year term and be presided by the Pullman clan for as long as there are eligible successors. #18 might imply that too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21|162.158.74.21]] 20:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

I note that if Donald Trump wasn't already holding the office of President, he could only qualify from positions 7 and 20 on Randall's list. And not at all from the actual list. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 01:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

There are two problems with this explanation:
The line of succession applies only when the office of president becomes vacant. If the president is incapacitated, the vice president acts as president. If that office is vacant, or the vice precident is also incapacitated, the US will have to do without a president.

The constitution places no restrictions on who can act as president. The current law of succession stipulates that only those elegible to become president can act as president, the constitution does not.
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.154|162.158.134.154]] 08:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1992: SafetySat

2018-05-25T11:38:55Z

162.158.134.154: Added comment on a link to another comic

I was excited that I might be the first to give an explanation (because the comic was so late in being posted), but when it finally arrived, I had no way to interpret it. It was just a gigantic Γ shape (though with a rounded corner). Now that the real comic{{Citation needed}} has been posted, I find that I'm ''still'' not very qualified to explain it. (I can guess at some of the references, but not the important ones.) I guess my only constructive comment here is encouragement to have a section (trivia?) talking about the initial failed comic image. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.104|172.69.22.104]] 19:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
:There was a broken image a xkcd and uploaded by the BOT. It's now fixed at xkcd and here too. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:48, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Someone should point out how much damage the "extends spikes in all directions" safety measure could do. And I note SpaceX scrubbed a satellite launch with 1 minute to go yesterday because of some anomaly. Maybe the impetus for this cartoon? [[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 20:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I figured today's comic was in reference to this picosat launch from India, which was denied launch in the US for being below minimum size ("too hard to track if they go offline") & thus in violation of the requisite cubesat specs:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/satellites/fcc-accuses-stealthy-startup-of-launching-rogue-satellites
Personally I'm in favor of these sub-cubesat launches; My concern is with liability, not safety, per-se.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:47, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

:I would be concerned with safety as well, if not for the radar reflector ... seriously, this looks more like FCC wanting to destroy the company for being innovative than trying to ensure the visibility. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

::Agreed, I feel like it's less about the satellites themselves & more about vilifying anyone who doesn't adhere to an industry specification that is being given the weight of law. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:06, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Considering that it says the solar panel was "found", I think that implies that perhaps it was stolen? Or just literally found on the side of the road. Either way, it seems kinda shady. [[User:Carrera|Carrera]] ([[User talk:Carrera|talk]]) 22:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
:"shady"! I see what you did there... [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 08:05, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Are there any rules regarding solar panels on spacecraft? Seeing that Randall "found" it, I'm wondering if this would be a violation of any rules. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 23:41, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

What would happen to wet sand if put in a cubesat and then released? Water released into space boils and then desublimates into a cloud of ice crystals. But what would the temperature and pressure be as the cubesat was launched? Starting from wet sand at one atmosphere and whatever ambient temperature, would it cool down fast enough for the water to freeze before it was dispensed? (Release a gritty snowball.) If the dispenser is not kept at atmospheric pressure, would the water boil as the satellite was ascending to orbit? I wish Randall was still doing what-if. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.22|162.158.255.22]] 01:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:I have no idea, but would imagine that water in sand would freeze the sand together into small clumps that could penetrate other satellites, rather than just evaporate. We must try this soon... (Kessler...) ;) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:40, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
::In our solar system the {{w|Frost line (astrophysics)|ice line}} is inside the asteroid belt beyond Mars. This means water in Earths orbit exposed to the vacuum and the sun will evaporate. And the heat from the Sun is even high enough to trigger this very fast. More far away - e.g. at Jupiter - that wet sand would freeze to a dirty snowball. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:32, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

> quality of the solar panel and the power it produces<br>
Quality of the power ? Isn't all solar power clean and green quality ? [[User:Spongebog|Spongebob]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 04:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
:Well a solar panel's efficiency depends on how well it's made, and what materials have been used to make it. Considering that it was just "found", it may not be efficient enough to actually run the satellite, or even work in a vacuum. Then again, it's not like the satellite does much other than point lasers and explode. [[User:Carrera|Carrera]] ([[User talk:Carrera|talk]]) 05:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

I am totally surprised that nobody either commented on or included a mention in the explanation of the obvious misnomer of the title of the comic! Doesn't anyone else think this cubesat is the opposite of a SafetySat in every way possible, which I think is the main joke of the comic? I would update the explanation accordingly, but I'm not sure where exactly this point should be made. Anyone else want to take a crack at it? [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 21:59, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

:Well, it could be very useful in satellite design classes. "Here is how *NOT* to do it." Gene Wirchenko genew@telus.net [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.220|108.162.216.220]] 04:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Shouldn't a link be made to comic http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1337:_Hack, about hacking satellites? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.154|162.158.134.154]] 11:38, 25 May 2018 (UTC)