explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1981: Rickrolling Anniversary

2018-04-17T13:25:34Z

162.158.238.22:

I wonder if Randall realizes that, if he had made this comic #1987 instead, it would coincide with the release year of Never Gonna Give You Up.
Speaking of which, who's excited for xkcd #2018 and the fact that such a thing will never happen again?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.100|162.158.75.100]] 19:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
:Is that a ref to [[1340: Unique Date]]? ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:57, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
::More like it'll be the one and only time a comic number appears in its namesake year. :) I REALLY hope Randall does something with that. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 02:58, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
:::Well he has three months to think of ideas... So hopefully something interesting. And I can't believe it's been 10 years since that April fools joke! [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 08:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

"Want to feel old?" feels old to me. I wish xkcd would stop overplaying it. Alas, it seems Randall's never gonna give it up, which is always gonna let me down. [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 22:16, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

This reminds me of [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ XKCD 843], in that they both make a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ parallel reference]. It would be interesting to see what Randal was thinking when he created [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ the formula]. That being said, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ this explanation] probably needs to be completely re-written per [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ rule 5]. Please work on this immediately. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ 172.68.34.16] ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ talk]) 3:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
: I see what you did there :)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.165.238|162.158.165.238]] 03:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
"We've known each other for so long." So did Cueball and Megan meet by either of them rickrolling other? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.22|162.158.238.22]] 13:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1670: Laws of Physics

2017-01-19T11:33:12Z

162.158.238.22:

This was demonstrated nicely by Neil deGrasse Tyson in episode six of the new Cosmos. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVSYA1RnSMQ] [[User:.42|.42]] ([[User talk:.42|talk]]) 15:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
: Another demonstration: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UkUHC8hlL8] ;) --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.240|198.41.242.240]] 16:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
: This youtube video with Neil deGrasse Tyson has been modified heavily from 6 secs to the end and no longer represents true psychics. Is this video here as a joke or should it be removed? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.214.197|108.162.214.197]] 22:19, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

:Richard Dawkins demonstrated this as part of his Royal Institution Christmas Lectures in 1991. This is shown at the start of his video interview describing the experience of presenting the lectures. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGFtjU5juEk] He also discusses it in the second volume of his autobiography Brief Candle in the Dark [[User:Ericmberg|Ericmberg]] ([[User talk:Ericmberg|talk]]) 01:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I believe that the line about having faith is also supposed to be a dig at magical thinking in science. Cueball may "know" that the experiment works because he's seen it done, but he hasn't thought it through enough to realize that it doesn't work from the other direction. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.252|173.245.54.252]] 16:32, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
:I concur. "if you really believe in the laws of physics, you won't flinch" seems like Black Hat teaching a very important lesson to Cueball about trusting appeals to science. Not kindly. {{unsigned ip|162.158.255.103}}

Could it also be interpreted that Black Hat is talking to himself, instead of Cueball?
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.221|108.162.237.221]] 17:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC) Brian
: Black Hat being Black Hat, I very much doubt that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.219|162.158.150.219]] 19:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
: He could be reassuring the ball. [[User:Elvenivle|Elvenivle]] ([[User talk:Elvenivle|talk]]) 03:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

The comic is in 2d. Are we sure that Black Hat will release the ball in a plane that actually runs through the volunteer? If the plane is actually just in front of the volunteer's nose, then he will not be hit (okay, there may be {{w|Foucault_pendulum|precession}}, but that will only come into play after a while).
In that interpretation, the volunteer still needs trust, but not only in physics, but also in Black Hat's ability to release the ball in a suitable plane. --[[User:Markus|Markus]] ([[User talk:Markus|talk]]) 17:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
: There's slack in the line. Assuming the ball swings, a rough measurement seems to position it below Cueball's chin. [[User:Elvenivle|Elvenivle]] ([[User talk:Elvenivle|talk]]) 03:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
: Around [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/64:_Solar_Plexus this location] actually; I bet that smarts. [[User:Elvenivle|Elvenivle]] ([[User talk:Elvenivle|talk]]) 05:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Inocalash: Assuming that the line is not a bungee cord. otherwise knowing black hat he might of set this off in a very well calculated bouncing action that will actually not hit Cueball. as if the balls weight was just right it would bounce over Cueball's head. as the start height is indeed above Cueball. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.85}}

Possible reference to #755? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.143|108.162.222.143]] 03:27, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
: It does seem his head is tilted towards the ball. [[User:Elvenivle|Elvenivle]] ([[User talk:Elvenivle|talk]]) 03:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

This experiment is in the novel "Contact" by Carl Sagan. [[User:Chvsanchez|Chvsanchez]] ([[User talk:Chvsanchez|talk]]) 06:09, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
: In that demonstration the tested subject flinches and her companion notes "You have a lot of trust in science, but not total trust" (or something along those lines), upon which she answers "No, that’s not it: that was a million years of brain fighting a few billion years of evolution." – which is imho the same topic as Randall's title text. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.137|162.158.150.137]] 12:06, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
: Definitely reference to "Contact". It should be mentioned. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.22|162.158.238.22]] 11:33, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Could the joke also be that flinching won't help Cueball much at all when he gets creamed by a bowling ball? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.31|173.245.54.31]] 21:18, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1784: Bad Map Projection: Liquid Resize

2017-01-11T16:39:27Z

162.158.238.22:

I'm not too experienced with PhotoShop, but I think that the tool is a selective delete that he used on water bodies, so removing most of the water while maintaining relative shapes and sizes?
:Mostly just from the fact that India looks desiccated.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.197|162.158.166.197]] 05:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Girish
::Australia is pretty mutilated, so I think the tool was used on land too [[Special:Contributions/162.158.178.111|162.158.178.111]] 05:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Where are Laos and Cambodia missing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.11|108.162.246.11]] 06:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
:It seems that Laos and Burma have been merged into one big county, as well as Cambodia and Thailand. Maybe they are just unnecessary details according to this map projection. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.22|162.158.238.22]] 16:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

The tool removes spaces of uniform color automagically. If you have big countries like India or Australia, they get caught by the algorithm as well. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.69.9|162.158.69.9]] 06:16, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Can anybody figure out the projection before the application of the tool? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.232|108.162.219.232]] 06:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
:I think it is a Mercator projection that got mutilated. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.239|141.101.104.239]] 07:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
::I agree, it looks like a Mercator that Freddy Kruger got at.
Girish, [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.197|162.158.166.197]] 09:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
:::I think if it was a Mercator, the bottom of Antarctica would be flat. To me, it looks like Winkel Tripel, with the odd angles in Alaska and the Russian Far East. [[User:Schroduck|Schroduck]] ([[User talk:Schroduck|talk]]) 15:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I feel like there is some part of sarcasm in "unused blank spaces", as if it was Randall saying "You're right, why would anyone care about the oceans? There, I have removed them, problem solved.". Can anyone tie this to a recent event? Or maybe the joke is about improperly handling data, where you use a tool just because it's known to work well and for the sake of processing data, even if using in a given context doesn't make much sense. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.213|141.101.69.213]] 10:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

This map proves, once again, that it's good to be an archipelago. Philippines, FTW! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.58|172.68.54.58]] 13:59, 11 January 2017 (UTC)