explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3025: Phase Change

2024-12-16T20:26:13Z

162.158.90.125: /* Transcript */ I guess physics

{{comic
| number = 3025
| date = December 16, 2024
| title = Phase Change
| image = phase_change_2x.png
| imagesize = 296x354px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Even when you try to make nice, smooth ice cubes in a freezer, sometimes one of them will shoot out a random ice spike, which physicists ascribe to kiki conservation.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOTBA - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is a reference to the {{w|bouba/kiki effect}} (the [[2611: Cutest-Sounding Scientific Effects|cutest-sounding scientific effect]]), where people associate different shapes with different nonsense words.
Because the word bouba is pronounced with long and soft sounds, it is often associated with soft and round objects. Kiki, on the other hand, uses fast, higher pitched, and "cracking" sounds so it is associated with sharp and hard objects. Some real life examples are the antonyms rigid and flowing. This is partly due to humans' needs to {{w|Cognitive categorization|categorize things}}.

The comic intentionally conflates this with the {{w|Phase transition|phase transition}} that water undergoes around 0 degrees Celsius. Water in its liquid state can be described as soft and round, as can the sound of the word "water" itself. In contrast, ice is hard and can form sharp objects like icicles, and the word "ice" also contains a sharp hissing sound.

The title text refers to {{w|ice spike|ice spikes}}, which are caused by the uneven freezing of ice in a freezer. The title text expands on the joke by claiming that ice cubes wish to maintain the pointiness of objects characterized as "kiki."

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A vertical graph is shown, indicating temperature in degrees Celsius, with a horizontal dotted line at zero degrees. The area above the dotted line is filled with several illustrations of liquid water in various forms--dripping, splashing, pouring, etc. This area is labeled "Bouba". The area below the dotted line is filled with illustrations of ice in various forms--icicles, ice cubes, snowflakes, etc. This area is labeled "Kiki".]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:When water temperature falls below 0°C, it undergoes a phase transition from bouba to kiki.
{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Charts]]
[[Category: Language]]
[[Category: Physics]]

3001: Temperature Scales

2024-10-24T04:54:58Z

162.158.90.125: /* Explanation */ there is a maximum positive temperature

{{comic
| number = 3001
| date = October 21, 2024
| title = Temperature Scales
| image = temperature_scales_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x535px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = In my new scale, °X, 0 is Earths' record lowest surface temperature, 50 is the global average, and 100 is the record highest, with a linear scale between each point and adjustment every year as needed.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an EXPONENTIAL TEMPERATURE SYSTEM. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Since the invention of the thermometer, a number of different temperature scales have been proposed. In modern times, most of the world uses {{w|Celsius}} for everyday temperature measurements, as it is part of the {{w|metric system}} that has been widely adopted for official uses. A small number of countries (namely Liberia, the USA and its three associated free states in the Pacific) retain the US customary (or 'imperial') system, which uses the ''slightly'' older {{w|Fahrenheit}} scale (°F was initially proposed in 1724, and refined in later years; °C, more or less as we currently know it, was established in 1743). The other widely used temperature scale is {{w|kelvin}}, which uses the same scale as Celsius, but is rooted at {{w|absolute zero}}, making it both useful in scientific calculations and easy to convert to and from Celsius (which, along with Fahrenheit, is now officially defined directly against the kelvin). Even in countries that use Fahrenheit regularly, scientific measurements are typically done in Celsius and/or kelvin.

The strip proceeds to compare these scales, and a number of others, on a scaled of "cursedness." The joke is highlighting how different the proposed temperature scales are. All of the listed scales are real, but may be considered obsolete to varying degrees. See also [[1923: Felsius]], a combination of Fahrenheit and Celsius.

{| class=wikitable
! scope="col" | Unit
! scope="col" | Water Freezes
! scope="col" | Water Boils
! scope="col" | Notes
! scope="col" | Cursedness
! scope="col" | Explanation
|-
| {{w|Celsius}} || 0 || 100 || Used in most of the world || 2/10 || Celsius (°C) is defined (now indirectly, by comparison to the kelvin scale) so that the freezing and boiling points of pure water at standard atmospheric pressure are set at 0°C and 100°C, respectively. It is regarded as one of the least problematic temperature systems, along with kelvin, among those that are commonly ranked.
|-
| {{w|Kelvin}} || 273.15 || 373.15 || 0K is absolute zero || 2/10 || Kelvin (written with a lowercase 'k' as a unit, or as 'K', always without the degrees symbol '°') is a unit of temperature created by {{w|Lord Kelvin}}. It uses the same scale as Celsius but is shifted by 273.15 to set absolute zero at 0K (based on the {{w|Boltzmann constant}}.) While kelvins are very useful for {{w|thermodynamics}} and material physics, it can be unintuitive. Kelvin and Celsius are the most commonly used units in scientific measurements and calculations.
|-
| {{w|Fahrenheit}} || 32 || 212 || Outdoors in most places is between 0–100 || 3/10 || Fahrenheit (°F) is officially used in a few countries and informally in several others. It originated in a time when factors of 360 were favored in science over powers of ten, which is why the freezing and boiling points of water are set 180° apart. {{w|Daniel Fahrenheit}} chose not to base 0° on the freezing point of water, instead setting it at the coldest temperature he could achieve: the freezing point of an {{w|ammonium chloride}} {{w|brine}} solution. Although these reference points are now considered arbitrary and outdated by modern scholars, the scale gained popularity especially in Anglophone countries, likely because it aligns with everyday weather conditions and is intuitively useful. Its range covers typical temperatures across various latitudes and seasons, and 100°F is close to normal human body temperature. The Fahrenheit scale remains commonly used only in the U.S. (Randall's home country), the Bahamas, Belize, the Cayman Islands, Palau, and Liberia.
|-
| {{w|Réaumur scale|Réaumur}} || 0 || 80 || Like Celsius, but with 80 instead of 100 || 3/8 || Often abbreviated to °Ré, a historical French system used in some places until the early 20th century. In modern times mostly used in cheesemaking. The rating (3/8) is a joke on the boiling point of water in this system being 80 instead of 100 as it is in Celsius; converting this to an out-of-ten scale would give 3.75/10, labelling it as more cursed than Fahrenheit but less so than Rømer.
|-
| {{w|Rømer scale|Rømer}} || 7.5 || 60 || Fahrenheit precursor with similarly random design || 4/10 || Usually abbreviates as °Rø, created by the Danish astronomer Ole Christensen Rømer in around 1702, while the Fahrenheit scale was proposed in 1724. Much like Fahrenheit, it uses the freezing point of ammonium chloride brine as the benchmark for 0°, and the scale is built with factors of 360 in mind with the boiling point of pure water at 60°. Like the Fahrenheit scale, the freezing point of pure water was not originally considered significant by Ole Rømer, but the scale was later updated to fix it to 7.5. The scale is also the last common ancestor of Celsius and Fahrenheit, as Reuamur was inspired by it, and Celsius by Reamur, and Fahrenheit specifically wanted a Rømer scale with more steps to avoid using decimals.
|-
| {{w|Rankine scale|Rankine}} || 491.7 || 671.7 || Fahrenheit, but with 0°F [''sic;'' should be 0°R] set to absolute zero || 6/10 || As the chart mentions, Rankine (°Ra) is to Fahrenheit what kelvin is to Celsius, an absolute scale rather than a relative one. The scale is mostly obsolete, but is still occasionally used in legacy industrial operations where absolute temperature scales are required. By rating, it is inexplicably more "cursed" than the otherwise identical Fahrenheit, ''despite'' being rooted at a more practical zero-point. [[2292: Thermometer]] expresses disdain for this scale.
|-
| {{w|Newton scale|Newton}} || 0 || 33-ish || Poorly defined, with reference points like "the hottest water you can hold your hand in" || 7-ish/10 || Created by Isaac Newton, measuring "degrees of heat", usually given the °N symbol. The cursedness rating (7-ish/10) is a joke about the vagueness of the scale's definition.
|-
| {{w|Wedgwood scale|Wedgwood}} || –8 || –6.7 || Intended for comparing the melting points of metals, all of which it was very wrong about || 9/10 || Created by potter Josiah Wedgwood in the 18th century. The measurement (°W) was based on the shrinking of clay when heated above red heat, but was found to be very inaccurate. The comic has a typo, as the scale is called Wedgwood, without the 'e'.
|-
| Galen || –4? || 4?? || Runs from –4 (cold) to 4 (hot). 0 is "normal"(?) || 4/–4 || In his medical writings, the ancient Green physician {{w|Galen}} suggested a "neutral" temperature, created by mixing equal parts of boiling water and ice. On either side of this neutral point, he described four degrees of heat and four degrees of cold. This range from +4 to –4 is humorously described as implying –100% cursedness, which while technically the least cursed of all, is still as unclear as the idea of negative cursedness and cursedness itself. There is no standard abbreviation for Galen's scale.
|-
| {{w|Celsius#History|''Real'' Celsius}} || 100 || 0 || In Anders Celsius's original specification, bigger numbers are ''colder''; others later flipped it || 10/0 || Most scales' temperatures can be indefinitely large, but have an absolute minimum temperature. By starting at a maximum value and counting down, this scale is indeed cursed, as nearly all possible temperatures (through 1.4x1032K, where thermal radiation creates black holes) will be negative. The rating (10/0) is a joke on the scale "flipping" the fixed points of modern Celsius. Division by zero is problematic, so this rating may either be undefined/undefinable or "infinitely" cursed.
The original logic was that zero could be easily calibrated to the height of a column of mercury at the temperature of boiling water, and further measurements then made of the amount it ''reduced'' in height under cooler conditions. This direction 'survives' in the historic {{w|Delisle scale}}, which predates (and arguably helped greatly inspire, though with a different factor) the classic version of °C. The version originally used by Anders was only 'corrected' posthumously, but nobody seemed bothered enough to do the same with Delisle's scale.
|-
| [https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459851/john-daltons-temperature-scale#459863 Dalton] || 0 || 100 || A nonlinear scale; 0°C and 100°C are 0 and 100 Dalton, but 50°C is 53.9 Dalton || 53.9/50 || {{w|John Dalton}} proposed a logarithmic temperature scale. The scale is defined so that absolute zero is at negative infinity, with the exponent chosen to match Celsius at 0 and 100. While Dalton temperature is defined for all positive and negative numbers, the nonlinear scale is difficult to work with since the amount of heat represented by a change of one degree Dalton is not constant. Degrees Dalton differs from Celsius by as much as 3.9 degrees between 0 and 100, but diverges much more for more extreme temperatures.

The rating (53.9/50) is a joke about the unit, as 53.9 Dalton would be 50 degrees Celsius — i.e. the cursedness could be understood as 50/50 (or 10/10, entirely cursed), but perhaps instead as 107.8% (even more than entirely cursed).
|-
| °X || 42.9 || 151.4 || '''Title text:''' "In my new scale, °X, 0 is Earths' [sic] record lowest surface temperature, 50 is the global average, and 100 is the record highest, with a linear scale between each point and adjustment every year as needed." || ''not provided'' || The {{w|Lowest temperature recorded on Earth|record lowest surface temperature on Earth}} as of 2024 is –89.2°C (–128.6°F), recorded at the {{w|Vostok Station|Vostok Research Station}} in Antarctica on July 21, 1983.[https://wmo.asu.edu/content/world-lowest-temperature] The average surface temperature as of 2023, the most recent available, is 14.4°C (57.2°F.)[https://climate.copernicus.eu/climate-indicators/temperature] The {{w|Highest temperature recorded on Earth|record highest temperature}} is 56.7°C (134.1°F), recorded on July 10, 1913 at {{w|Furnace Creek, California|Furnace Creek Ranch}} in Death Valley, California.[https://wmo.asu.edu/content/world-highest-temperature] "Surface" temperatures are measured at 1.5 meters above ground inside a shaded shelter, to accurately represent the temperature of the air, because temperatures closer to the ground are often much different.

{{cot|Derivation and graph}}
To break the scale into two linear parts (below and above 14.8°C), we define two separate equations for each range:

1. Below 14.8°C (from –89.2°C to 14.8°C):
* 0 °X corresponds to –89.2°C
* 50 °X corresponds to 14.8°C

We calculate the slope m₁:

<center>m₁ = (50 – 0) / (14.8 – (–89.2)) = 50 / (14.8 + 89.2) = 50 / 104 ≈ 0.48</center>

Now, using the point (14.8°C, 50 °X), we calculate the intercept b₁:

<center>50 = 0.48 × 14.8 + b₁</center>

<center>50 = 7.1 + b₁</center>

<center>b₁ = 50 – 7.1 = 42.9</center>

Thus, the equation for temperatures '''below 14.8°C''' is:

<center>'''X = 0.48 × C + 42.9'''</center>

2. Above 14.8°C (from 14.8°C to 56.7°C):
* 50 °X corresponds to 14.8°C
* 100 °X corresponds to 56.7°C

We calculate the slope m₂:

<center>m₂ = (100 – 50) / (56.7 – 14.8) = 50 / 41.9 ≈ 1.19</center>

Now, using the point (14.8°C, 50 °X), we calculate the intercept b₂:

<center>50 = 1.19 × 14.8 + b₂</center>

<center>50 = 17.6 + b₂</center>

<center>b₂ = 50 – 17.6 = 32.4</center>

Thus, the equation for temperatures '''above 14.8°C''' is:

<center>'''X = 1.19 × C + 32.4'''</center>

;Freezing and Boiling Points

Freezing point of water (0°C): Since 0°C is below 14.8°C, we use the equation X = 0.48 × C + 42.9:

<center>X = 0.48 × 0 + 42.9 = 42.9</center>

So, the freezing point is 42.9 °X.

Boiling point of water (100°C): Since 100°C is above 14.8°C, we use the equation X = 1.19 × C + 32.4:

<center>X = 1.19 × 100 + 32.4 = 119 + 32.4 = 151.4</center>

So, the boiling point is 151.4 °X.

[[File:XvsC.png|400px|center]]

See also [[2701: Change in Slope]] for a general discussion of separate linear scales between three points.
{{cob}}
Due to high and average temperature records now being broken nearly every year as a result of {{w|climate change}}, Randall's new °X scale must be re-calibrated each year. While extreme values like Absolute Zero or the {{w|Tungsten#Physical properties|melting point of tungsten}} will shift more significantly over time, while everyday temperatures will vary less.
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:Temperature Scales

:[A table with five columns, labelled: Unit, water freezing point, water boiling point, notes, cursedness. There are eleven rows below the labels.]

:[Row 1:] Celsius, 0, 100, Used in most of the world, 2/10
:[Row 2:] Kelvin, 273.15, 373.15, 0K is absolute zero, 2/10
:[Row 3:] Fahrenheit, 32, 212, Outdoors in most places is between 0–100, 3/10
:[Row 4:] Réaumur, 0, 80, Like Celsius, but with 80 instead of 100, 3/8
:[Row 5:] Rømer, 7.5, 60, Fahrenheit precursor with similarly random design, 4/10,
:[Row 6:] Rankine, 491.7, 671.7, Fahrenheit, but with 0°F set to absolute zero, 6/10
:[Row 7:] Newton, 0, 33-ish, Poorly defined, with reference points like "the hottest water you can hold your hand in", 7-ish/10
:[Row 8:] Wedgewood, –8, –6.7, Intended for comparing the melting points of metals, all of which it was very wrong about, 9/10
:[Row 9:] Galen, –4?, 4??, Runs from –4 (cold) to 4 (hot). 0 is "normal"(?), 4/–4
:[Row 10:] ''Real'' Celsius, 100, 0, In Anders Celsius's original specification, bigger numbers are ''colder''; others later flipped it, 10/0
:[Row 11:] Dalton, 0, 100, A nonlinear scale; 0°C and 100°C are 0 and 100 Dalton, but 50°C is 53.9 Dalton, 53.9/50

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Science]]

Talk:2995: University Commas

2024-10-10T16:32:24Z

162.158.90.125:

As Wikipedia notes, the {{w|Harvard comma}} is actually a thing, and synonymous with the Oxford comma. It's hard to understand whether Randall was just ignoring that.
It's interesting to also look at how the various commas are meaningful. For instance, the Yale comma here appears to be just plain ungrammatical, you'd never put a comma between a verb and a its direct object; similarly the Cambridge comma and Princeton commas are ungrammatical, you'd never put one after the word "and." The Stanford comma is unambiguously normal and it's not clear how you could have such a list without it (absent replacement with a [Stanford?] semicolon). The Columbia comma is being used to separate "mac and cheese" into "mac, and[,] cheese" which changes the semantic meaning (arguably into something meaningless, but maybe we're listing Apple Computers or even Macintosh apple fruit abbreviated). The MIT comma is a cute programming joke for multiline lists. Maybe there are hidden trick meanings (like MIT) I'm missing. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 23:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
:On their own, few of them are intrinsically bad, in the right context.
:*"Please, buy" - valid comma. Prefixed subclause (general plea).
:*"Please buy, apples" - valid comma (more specific plea).
:*"apples, mac" - valid comma (list-type).
:*"mac, and" - valid comma (potentially a conjunctive sub-clause).
:*"mac and, cheese" - valid comma (potentially a post-conjunctive sub-clause).
:*"and cheese, milk" - valid comma (follow-up sub-clause).
:*"cheese, milk, and" - Oxford comma. (Thus invalid, by default. IMO.)
:*"milk and, bread." - ...would be valid, as above, except for the sentence ending.
:*"and bread,." - Ok. Definitely the worst. (Except for the Oxford Comma, which is still worserer!)
:Obviously, combinations of them (or counterpart lack of them, in some cases) can clash badly. Some can work well together, but using ()s, ;s or feetnete* is often better than diving in and out of sub-clauses in the midst of a comma-bound list and potentially making it ambiguous whether you're diving in/out of a clarifying aside or replacing a non-terminating conjunction or perhaps one of the other usages to which a comma might apply.
:* Or just generally rewriting a multi-clausal sentence completely! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.22|172.70.86.22]] 23:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
::Sorry, no: "and," is bad grammar, except when illustrating a dramatic (but grammatically wrong) verbal pause; ", and" is fine for noting a pause used to divide a list, but it's best to use semicolons in a divided list. IE: "milk; bread; mac and cheese; blood, sweat, and tears". (Again, "blood, sweat and tears", would be atypical cadence if spoken aloud; therefore, the comma.) I don't care what style guides say, only what works well.
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
:::What's grammatically wrong about something like "I drink beer and, on occasion, cider"?
:::Also, the cadence of "blood, sweat and tears" has nothing to do with the commas you give it. This isn't a case of marking verbal ticks, with... uh... transcribed notation. Either for official recording purposes or in the pre-scripting of speech for later performance. One is free to nuance the phrase how you want, with or without OC. The main issue about the OC is whether a list (of ''more'' than two items) should have each (non-final) element followed by a comma? Or are commas placeholders only for the "and"/"or"s that are omited? (And my opinion is that it is the latter, all else being equal. I apply that to semicolon-separated lists, insofar as I won't end with "...; penultimate item; '''and'' last item", but prefer to omit the '''and''' (or '''or'' ), casting whether it's a list of options or an accumulation by the introductory/follow-up contextualisation of that list.)
:::But, whichever standard you prefer, there will be cases where it reads wrongly to others. If you're lucky enough to spot it, then you can look to what you can do to adjust the sentence to remove ambiguity. This does not normally mean adding in any old commas where,,,,, you think a Pinter Pause is needed. (Maybe an ellipsis, in normal writing.) The fact that a grammatical comma may be where a spoken pause may crop up is not because the comma causes the pause. The verbal pause is (if not garbled out) caused by the same understanding of how clauses/etc require intoning under the circumstances.
:::But it is a rhetorical choice as to whether to intone "blood..., sweat... and tears" or "blood, sweat and... tears" or any number of other pausing strategies, as it is how you faithfully transcribe what has already been intoned. When merely listing these in text, your chosen style of grammar is the master. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.134|172.70.160.134]] 19:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
::Commas can go in a number of places in lists, and, occasionally, after the word "and". [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 23:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
::Potentially, anything is possible... I can see how a sentence like "Please buy apples, mac and cheese, milk, and, bread being out of stock, oats" would work, but I really don't see how the commas after "and" could work ''in this sentence''. [[User:Transgalactic|Transgalactic]] ([[User talk:Transgalactic|talk]]) 08:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

If each item in a list shall be followed by a comma then the MIT comma is quite proper. SDT [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.206|172.68.245.206]] 05:11, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

The UCLA comma may refer to the 8 clap, a chant at UCLA which is begins with a string of 8 claps. {{unsigned ip|172.68.205.178|07:33, 8 October 2024}}

I thought the UCLA & Michigan commas referred to quotes within citations. This isn't uncommon in literary studies, where you quote articles quoting books. Depending on your quotation style, this can result in a long string of 3-4 "commas" (as in: short lines in punctuation marks). If you place the quote between actual commas, make that 4-5. [[User:Transgalactic|Transgalactic]] ([[User talk:Transgalactic|talk]]) 08:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the tirade against the Oxford comma in the article is not relevant for understanding the comic. "'To my mother, Ayn Rand and God' does not" is not saying that Ayn Rand is the mother. To express that one should write "To my mother, Ayn Rand, and to God". Thus the ambiguity can be resolved. I believe one of the editors is mixing in their personal taste here. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.71|172.71.160.71]] 09:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
:Tirade? Hardly. It explains when it doesn't help (and when it might).
:And I think you misread. "'To my mother, Ayn Rand and God' does not" indeed does not say that Ayn Rand is the mother. In fact it ''explicitly'' says that "'To my mother, Ayn Rand and God'"... erm... does ''not'' say the thing that 'To my mother, Ayn Rand, and God' ''potentially'' does. (See table below.)
:The choice of how to disambiguate "my mother, who is Ayn Rand", as a concept, is another thing and has multiple options. Disambiguating in the direction of a simple list is the contention surrounding the Oxford(/Serial) Comma itself (it is, by definition, being used in the list format), given that some circumstances are most helped by it and others are most helped by its absence. If you're strongly for the OC, you'll hopefully rewrite problematic OCed formulations so that you can use it. If you're strongly against it you should change problamatic non-OCed versions so that you can better go without one. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.128|172.70.85.128]] 10:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Inspired (a bit) by the Three Laws permutation table, a set of possible ambiguations from the straight list...
{| class="wikitable"
!A !!B !!C !!"A, B and C" !!"A, B, and C"
|-
|my parents||Ayn Rand||God||"my parents (who are Ayn Rand and God)"||''list only''*
|-
|my parents||God||Ayn Rand||"my parents (who are God and Ayn Rand)"||''list only''*
|-
|Ayn Rand||my parents||God||''list only''* ||''list only''*
|-
|Ayn Rand||God||my parents||''list only''* ||"Ayn Rand (who is God), and my parents"
|-
|God||my parents||Ayn Rand||''list only''* ||''list only''*
|-
|God||Ayn Rand||my parents||''list only''* ||"God (who is Ayn Rand), and my parents"
|}
:-* - Assuming no other "All You Zombies" and/or divine incarnation scenarios.
:...maybe it's too early in the morning, but I'm sure I'm missing other ambiguities I've commented on before. (Without necesarily going into the asterisked territories.) Anyone want to amend this? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.105|172.68.186.105]] 09:56, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
::Love it! [[User:Transgalactic|Transgalactic]] ([[User talk:Transgalactic|talk]]) 10:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
::There's additional potential ambiguity if you go with the singular "my mother" as opposed to the plural "my parents". "My mother, Ayn Rand, and God" (with the Oxford comma) could be listing 2 separate entities while indicating that my mother is Ayn Rand, or could be listing 3 separate entities. "My mother, Ayn Rand and God" (without the Oxford comma) could be referring to a single entity while indicating that my mother is both Ayn Rand and God, or listing 3 separate entities. (In a phrase like, "My mother, Ayn Rand and God, gave it to me," the comma after God indicates that it's one entity, but you lose that clarity with "It was given to me by my mother, Ayn Rand and God." [[Special:Contributions/172.68.70.66|172.68.70.66]] 14:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
:::What if my mother, Ayn Rand, and God are actually the trinity?[[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.87|172.69.195.87]] 08:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
::::I myself, was fully expecting one of the examples given, to be: "To my God and mother, Ayn Rand". [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I realize that this comic focuses on University commas, however I feel that some mention should be made about the Walken Comma and the Shatner Comma! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.103|172.70.114.103]] 10:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
:What, do you,    mean by,   that? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.106|172.69.195.106]] 13:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
::Here's the explanation: [https://www.joeydevilla.com/2015/06/26/a-visual-guide-to-the-different-comma-styles/ Walken and Shatner Commas] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.228|162.158.62.228]] 11:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

{{w|Mac and cheese}} is probably not well-known outside the US (especially not under that name). --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.115|172.71.160.115]] 13:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
:As usual, the Brits don't know how to name food. "Macaroni cheese" sounds like the macaroni is made of cheese. But I added an explanation and link to the Wikipedia page. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
::Don't be silly, that would clearly be named "cheese macaroni". Macaroni cheese is clearly cheese for macaroni, and it's simply polite to serve macaroni to have it with as well. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.114|172.71.151.114]] 14:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
::: By the logic of your second interpretation, "cheese macaroni" is clearly macaroni for cheese. The lexical existence of this separate form of macaroni begs the question: what kind of macaroni goes best with macaroni cheese? The plain kind or cheese macaroni? The answer is neither! The best kind of macaroni to serve with macaroni cheese is clearly macaroni-cheese macaroni. But then what kind of cheese goes best with that? None other than (macaroni cheese)-macaroni cheese, which in turn is best served with ((macaroni cheese) macaroni)-cheese macaroni. This interleaving of macaroni and cheese never ends, meaning that no matter where you choose to stop, you will always end up with a sub-optimal pairing. So it's best to just not eat any form of cheese with any form of macaroni, to avoid disappointment. As an aside, the logic of your first interpretation implies that "macaroni cheese" is actually cheese that's made of macaroni. [[User:MelodiousThunk|MelodiousThunk]] ([[User talk:MelodiousThunk|talk]]) 12:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
::As opposed to 'mac and cheese', which sounds like a particularly unappetising dish made using a waterproof coat.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.92|172.68.186.92]] 15:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Oddly, US English goes the other way with "grilled cheese", neglecting to mention that the cheese should be placed between slices of bread before grilling; in British English, it would generally be called a "cheese toastie". (Until looking it up, I was under the mistaken belief that it was a name for what we would call "cheese on toast", which also involves grilling the cheese, on the toast.) - [[User:IMSoP|IMSoP]] ([[User talk:IMSoP|talk]]) 21:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
:'Mac & cheese' is, sadly, probably more common in the UK now than the proper 'macaroni cheese'.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.47|141.101.99.47]] 08:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to the added red text in the Notation column, but it needs to be explained in the Explanation column. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.8|162.158.90.8]] 00:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Could this, at least in part, be about typography, not grammar and style? The depicted commas are not all the same. [[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 10:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Specifically, MIT is the home of the Rust language, which prominently uses trailing commas after the last item in a list as a matter of programming style.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.211|172.70.214.211]]

2973: Ferris Wheels

2024-08-16T23:47:04Z

162.158.90.125: /* Explanation */ better anchor

{{comic
| number = 2973
| date = August 16, 2024
| title = Ferris Wheels
| image = ferris_wheels_2x.png
| imagesize = 624x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They left the belt drive in place but switched which wheel was powered, so people could choose between a regular ride, a long ride, and a REALLY long ride.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BELT POWERED BY A DIFFERENT WIKI PAGE IN ORDER TO KEEP THIS ONE GOING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic depicts an attempted connection of three {{w|Ferris wheel}}s using a {{w|Belt (mechanical)|mechanical belt drive drive}}, a system typically used to transfer motion between rotating shafts. By connecting the wheels at different circumferences, the relative motion is geared up or down. If the belt passes around the circumference of one wheel and is connected around the hub of another, the latter will rotate significantly faster. In this case, the second wheel's circumference is in turn connected to a third wheel's hub, resulting in even greater rotational velocity. However, this setup is mechanically unsound and possibly dangerous, as Ferris wheels are not intended to be connected in this way.{{cn}} As shown, the first wheel on the left is running at a normal speed, while the other two are rotating increasingly fast, leading to a potentially hazardous situation where passengers are flung around at various (possibly {{w|G-force#Human tolerance|quite hazardous}}) extents.

The ratio (give or take a pixel) seems to be approximately 12.5:1.

Effectively, this system converts the linked wheels into a belt-and-pulley system. For a two-pulley system with one driving pulley and one driven pulley, the system can be described by d1*r1 = d2*r2, where d1 and d2 are the radii of the driving and driven pulleys, respectively; and r1 and r2 are the rates of revolution of the two pulleys. A typical Ferris wheel has a diameter (d1) of approximately 200 ft. The speed that Ferris wheels rotate varies somewhat; many are set to complete a single rotation (r1) in about 10 minutes. It is unclear how large the central hub pulley is on the second Ferris wheel in this illustration, but a plausible estimate is that it is about 10 ft across. Plugging these numbers into the pulley formula, we conclude that the driven pulley -- the hub of the second Ferris wheel, and thus the second Ferris wheel itself -- would spin about about 2 rpm. Cars on this wheel would be traveling at about 1250 feet per minute, or about 14 miles per hour. This is almost certainly faster than the safety limits on most Ferris wheels, but would likely not be otherwise dangerous to the passengers (who would experience only about 0.15 G of force).

However, the second Ferris wheel is then used to drive a third. Using the same diameter assumptions, this would drive the final wheel at 40 rotations per minute, or a full circle every 1.5 seconds. At this speed, the cars would be traveling at over 400 feet per ''second'', or at about 285 miles per hour. Even assuming the structure did not fail, passengers would experience instantly fatal conditions, something on the order of 54 Gs of centrifugal force.

The caption suggests that the person responsible was fired for this ill-advised modification, highlighting the impracticality and dangers of the idea.

The title text imagines the consequences of leaving the belt drive system in place but switching which wheel is powered. If the most extreme wheel (the third one on the right) is powered, the gearing would be reversed, making for a possibly pleasant and normal ride on the right-hand wheel, but rendering the experiences of the riders on the other two wheels far too slow and seemingly interminable. One revolution of the center wheel might take three hours and twenty minutes, while the left wheel would take multiple days per revolution.  This exaggerates the impracticality and unintended effects of using a belt drive system on Ferris wheels, humorously illustrating how such an idea would lead to absurdly varied ride experiences.

A cruise line fired a person due to an unsound engineering solution earlier in [[2935: Ocean Loop]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Three Ferris wheels are shown side by side, with some people stood on the ground for scale.]
:[Each of the first two wheels have a belt connecting their circumference to the axel of the respective one to the right.]
:["Agitrons" indicate that the middle wheel is turning notably faster than the left wheel, with the gondalas seen to be rocking significantly at all points round the wheel.]
:[The spokes of the right wheel are completely replaced by "motion lines", indicating that the the right wheel is turning the fastest of all. All its gondalas are hanging outwards against centripetal force, interspersed with their own motion lines.]

:[Caption below the picture:] The county fair fired me for adding a belt drive to the Ferris wheels.{{comic discussion}}

2973: Ferris Wheels

2024-08-16T23:46:18Z

162.158.90.125: /* Explanation */ fix link

{{comic
| number = 2973
| date = August 16, 2024
| title = Ferris Wheels
| image = ferris_wheels_2x.png
| imagesize = 624x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They left the belt drive in place but switched which wheel was powered, so people could choose between a regular ride, a long ride, and a REALLY long ride.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BELT POWERED BY A DIFFERENT WIKI PAGE IN ORDER TO KEEP THIS ONE GOING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic depicts an attempted connection of three {{w|Ferris wheel}}s using a {{w|Belt (mechanical)}} drive, a system typically used to transfer motion between rotating shafts. By connecting the wheels at different circumferences, the relative motion is geared up or down. If the belt passes around the circumference of one wheel and is connected around the hub of another, the latter will rotate significantly faster. In this case, the second wheel's circumference is in turn connected to a third wheel's hub, resulting in even greater rotational velocity. However, this setup is mechanically unsound and possibly dangerous, as Ferris wheels are not intended to be connected in this way.{{cn}} As shown, the first wheel on the left is running at a normal speed, while the other two are rotating increasingly fast, leading to a potentially hazardous situation where passengers are flung around at various (possibly {{w|G-force#Human tolerance|quite hazardous}}) extents.

The ratio (give or take a pixel) seems to be approximately 12.5:1.

Effectively, this system converts the linked wheels into a belt-and-pulley system. For a two-pulley system with one driving pulley and one driven pulley, the system can be described by d1*r1 = d2*r2, where d1 and d2 are the radii of the driving and driven pulleys, respectively; and r1 and r2 are the rates of revolution of the two pulleys. A typical Ferris wheel has a diameter (d1) of approximately 200 ft. The speed that Ferris wheels rotate varies somewhat; many are set to complete a single rotation (r1) in about 10 minutes. It is unclear how large the central hub pulley is on the second Ferris wheel in this illustration, but a plausible estimate is that it is about 10 ft across. Plugging these numbers into the pulley formula, we conclude that the driven pulley -- the hub of the second Ferris wheel, and thus the second Ferris wheel itself -- would spin about about 2 rpm. Cars on this wheel would be traveling at about 1250 feet per minute, or about 14 miles per hour. This is almost certainly faster than the safety limits on most Ferris wheels, but would likely not be otherwise dangerous to the passengers (who would experience only about 0.15 G of force).

However, the second Ferris wheel is then used to drive a third. Using the same diameter assumptions, this would drive the final wheel at 40 rotations per minute, or a full circle every 1.5 seconds. At this speed, the cars would be traveling at over 400 feet per ''second'', or at about 285 miles per hour. Even assuming the structure did not fail, passengers would experience instantly fatal conditions, something on the order of 54 Gs of centrifugal force.

The caption suggests that the person responsible was fired for this ill-advised modification, highlighting the impracticality and dangers of the idea.

The title text imagines the consequences of leaving the belt drive system in place but switching which wheel is powered. If the most extreme wheel (the third one on the right) is powered, the gearing would be reversed, making for a possibly pleasant and normal ride on the right-hand wheel, but rendering the experiences of the riders on the other two wheels far too slow and seemingly interminable. One revolution of the center wheel might take three hours and twenty minutes, while the left wheel would take multiple days per revolution.  This exaggerates the impracticality and unintended effects of using a belt drive system on Ferris wheels, humorously illustrating how such an idea would lead to absurdly varied ride experiences.

A cruise line fired a person due to an unsound engineering solution earlier in [[2935: Ocean Loop]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Three Ferris wheels are shown side by side, with some people stood on the ground for scale.]
:[Each of the first two wheels have a belt connecting their circumference to the axel of the respective one to the right.]
:["Agitrons" indicate that the middle wheel is turning notably faster than the left wheel, with the gondalas seen to be rocking significantly at all points round the wheel.]
:[The spokes of the right wheel are completely replaced by "motion lines", indicating that the the right wheel is turning the fastest of all. All its gondalas are hanging outwards against centripetal force, interspersed with their own motion lines.]

:[Caption below the picture:] The county fair fired me for adding a belt drive to the Ferris wheels.{{comic discussion}}

Talk:524: Party

2024-03-12T01:44:35Z

162.158.90.125: I added a comment.

''Yo, dawg, I heard you like to be rickrolled, so I rolled Rick into a rickroll so you could be Rick rickrolled rolled!'' [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 09:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Is it me, or is having Astley put on a pair of sunglasses to deliver a dry punchline reminiscent of CSI: Miami, where Horatio Caine gets in a clever one-liner at the end of the opening tag, almost always while donning sunglasses? [[User:GeniusBooks|GeniusBooks]] ([[User talk:GeniusBooks|talk]])
:I can't imagine it would be anything else at this point. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 04:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
::That makes the most sense. [[User:Flewk|flewk]] ([[User talk:Flewk|talk]]) 01:37, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Wait. Wait. That's Danish? I always thought it was Megan. {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.189}}
:It can't be Danish. Danish has rightfully told Black Hat, "I'm better at it [psychological manipulation and devastation] than you." She would have twisted into a means of doing something similar to Black Hat.{{unsigned ip|172.68.143.150}}
:True, her reaction would have been very different. Megan, being generic, seems to fit. [[User:Dontknow|Dontknow]] ([[User talk:Dontknow|talk]]) 00:01, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
:I really don't think that's Danish...{{unsigned|Comment Police}}
::Wrong reaction, for Danish, but the hair reminds me of her. And besides, Danish doesn't always get the upper hand. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 03:50, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
:::Of course it is Danish, not just because of the hair, and not just because of her being Black Hat's girlfriend (although those two are give aways). But of course she spots Black Hat's trick, she thinks, and just wait to be really rick rolled. And then when it do not happen, it freaks her out, and as she is so unused to this, she even runs off slamming the door. Megan would never have reacted this way, since she probably do not mind getting rick rolled, it's just for fun for normal people. It is really just because she hates when Black Hat messes with her mind. And he did it. That she claims to be better than him at it, is just a claim. Also I think we see when they meet, that he [[405: Journal 3|outplays her]], after [[377: Journal 2|she took his hat]]. He just realizes that she is the closest he can ever find to one having as evil mind as his, without wishing to become world leader... And he thus falls in love in a way only Black Hat can. [[433: Journal 5|Moving land mines]] etc. thus again proving my point that he best her... As at her New Year party, by not rick rolling her. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
:I do seriously doubt that's Danish, and have adjusted the article accordingly. It seems amiss to declare so confidently a fact that is debated amongst those in XKCD.

== What form? ==

This explanation uses "Rickrolling", "rick rolling", "rickrolling", and "Rick rolling". Which form should I use? [[User:HostnameNotCaroline|HostnameNotCaroline]] ([[User talk:HostnameNotCaroline|talk]]) 03:15, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
:you should use "RiCkRoLlInG"

783: I Don't Want Directions

2024-03-02T22:59:29Z

162.158.90.125: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 783
| date = August 23, 2010
| title = I Don't Want Directions
| image = i_dont_want_directions.png
| titletext = Yes, I understand that the turn is half a mile past the big field, but my GPS knows that, too. This would be easier if you weren't about to ask me to repeat it all back to you.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] wants to use his {{w|GPS navigation device|GPS device}} to find an individual's house, and therefore needs the house's address. The person on the phone is giving him directions, something that is useless because by giving Cueball the address, the GPS can give directions to the address, possibly better than the ones he is getting over the phone. Cueball then decides to tell the person that he would like to mail something to their house, hoping they will give him the address, because you must have the address to mail something.{{Citation needed}}

The title text is a continuation of the comic's joke. By the end of the comic, Cueball has got the information he needs, and has just ignored the directions he did not want. However, if the person on the phone insists on checking Cueball has remembered the directions correctly, Cueball has to be able to learn the useless information he did not want in the first place, and has been mostly ignoring, at least well enough to repeat it once.

Judging by the roads mentioned in the comic (Highland Rd and presumably {{w|Interstate 495 (Massachusetts)|I-495}} and {{w|Massachusetts Route 18|MA-18}}), the person on the phone lives somewhere around [http://goo.gl/maps/tXFbF southern Lakeville, Massachusetts], and Cueball is starting from the Boston area.

The superfluousness of giving directions as opposed to using a GPS is also the topic of [[1155: Kolmogorov Directions]]

==Transcript==
:[Cueball on phone.]
:Cueball: Looking forward to seeing your new place! What's the address?
:Cueball: Mm hmm. Yes, I'm taking 495, but I have a GPS, so I really just need the street address.

:[Close up.]
:Cueball: ...then south on 18, okay, but I have a GPS, so if you just want to skip to the street address, I can...

:[Full body shot, facing other direction.]
:Cueball: Thanks, I'm glad to know Highland Road comes a mile after the big intersection, but I keep saying I ''have a GPS'', can you tell me the street address?
:Cueball: ...
:Cueball: Technically that's just more information on how to get to your place, not the address itself. If you could-

:[Close up again, Cueball writing on pad.]
:Cueball: ...I appreciate that you want to help, but I'm ''ignoring'' you and just waiting for the...
:Cueball: Listen, I just remembered I need to mail you a letter. What's your address?
:Cueball: Mhm... okay...
:Cueball: Great, thanks! I'll see you in an hour!

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:2880: Sheet Bend

2024-02-18T17:20:46Z

162.158.90.125: unsigned

Why is this called a "sheet" bend? [[User:SystemParadox|SystemParadox]] ([[User talk:SystemParadox|talk]]) 21:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:I don't know the full answer but it's a sailing thing: the 'sheet' is the rope you pull in or let out to control the position of the sail. I guess bend describes the category of knot. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.48|172.70.90.48]] 21:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::NO NO NO. The sheet is the sail. [[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 21:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:::: '''never''' has a sail been called a sheet by a sailor. It is a rope, attached to a sail. It has a ''very'' precise and specific meaning. {{unsigned ip|172.69.58.200|16:18, 18 February 2024}}
:::It is the rope - {{w|Sheet (sailing)}}. "In sailing, a sheet is a line (rope, cable or chain) used to control the movable corner(s) (clews) of a sail." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.5|172.71.242.5]] 21:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::::Huh. Dueling Wikipedia articles. The Sheet_bend article has a definition section that says the term "sheet bend" derives from its use bending ropes to sails (sheets). But the Sheet_(sailing) article says a sheet is a line used to control the movable corner(s) of a sail. [[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 23:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::A sail is never, and was never, properly called a "sheet", since at least the 13th century. The Wikipedia explanation of the name is misleading. According to https://www.etymonline.com/word/sheet, it's "shortened from Old English sceatline "sheet-line," from sceata "lower part of sail," originally "piece of cloth," from same Proto-Germanic source as sheet (n.1)." [[User:Jlearman|Jlearman]] ([[User talk:Jlearman|talk]]) 17:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::: When I took a sailing class as a kid they used the word “sheet”, I think it was the lines connected to the sails used for adjusting them? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]] 19:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
* Sheet is used to adjust/trim a sail and a halyard is used to raise/lower sails. Sheet '''only''' refers to a rope, ''not'' the sail. Standing rigging are the ropes which supports masts including shrouds and stays. Running rigging adjusts the position of sails and spars including halyards, braces, sheets and vangs. Sheets are used to control clews (movable corners of sails).
** A sheet bend joins two ropes. '''Not''' fabric to rope. The following comment, for example, is incorrect.
::The sheet bend is named for its ability to to secure a sail, or sheet. You fold over the corner of the sail and that's one of your "ropes". The sheet bend is generally used as a knot for tying a large, inflexible rope (or rope-like object) to a smaller, more flexible rope.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.22|172.69.70.22]] 22:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::I would take the Ashley Book of Knots as authoritative. Sheet Bend is the first knot in the book, and is always (in modern terms) rope-to-rope, not to sail. It is one of the basic knots. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashley_Book_of_Knots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheet_bend
::{{unsigned|PRR|04:04, 13 January 2024}} 
:::But what dispute are you taking TABoK's authority on? Two things can have the same name in different contexts (or namespaces). And does Ashley use anything other than ropes exclusively in the whole book? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.170|108.162.241.170]] 14:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:I added a link to the wikipedia entry, it explains the name. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:Because it's a sheet way to connect cables?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.137|172.70.90.137]] 09:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Presumably the "different loads" title text is a pun between electrical load and mechanical stress on the knot? [[User:Jim-at-home|Jim-at-home]] ([[User talk:Jim-at-home|talk]]) 21:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

“silver being joined to silver and gold being joined to gold within the insulating white cable” is not the conventional way to join cables.
Unless you are joining one cable to itself (like a Möbius strip), you have ''two'' cables with insulation.
And usually you use non-cursed connectors, where you first remove the insulation at the end of the cable and then crimp or solder the conductors to metal parts of the connector; or solder the conductors and then add a different type of insulation for protection; or use screw terminals;...
Only with insulation displacement connectors you keep using all the insulation of the two cables.
And finally, conductors are usually copper ''or'' aluminum, and very rarely silver ''and'' gold. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.141|162.158.94.141]] 08:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:I think the gold and silver is just color coded for the reader. Not that they are meant to indicate that the conductors are made from this material. Apart from that you comment sounds like you know what you are talking about. So please improve the explanation if you can. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

::: I changed it to gold- and silver-colored. It was obvious to me that it was the colours used in the comic that were being referenced, but fixed for the avoidance of doubt. The join being made within the one cable was clearly an error though. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.161|172.70.85.161]] 22:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

:: cables often have the signal parts copper-colored (described gold atm) and they are obviously copper, and the outer ground more the color of steel or something, not sure what metal it is, but it’s easy to solder like copper or silver is, not aluminum which is very hard to solder. usually gold and silver are used at the contacts of a connector, not inside a wire, i don’t know who would ever make that mistake. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.83|108.162.245.83]] 19:49, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:::"''more the color of steel or something, not sure what metal it is, but it’s easy to solder like copper or silver''" Traditionally tinned copper. Tinned not just for identification, or easier soldering, but because early rubber insulation actively rotted copper and tinning slowed the damage. Many sorts of damage, why much copper today is silvery. [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 04:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
::: Not wishing to spoil it, but the series finale of {{w|Cabin Pressure (radio series)|a certain radio comedy}} reveals... ah well, that's the spoiler (in the article, if you read that far down... rather than just listen to it if you haven't heard about it already but now think you like the premise). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.188|172.69.79.188]] 21:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay I looked at the wikipedia article and the knot depicted in the comic looks like a right handed one. I still don't know why it's called right handed, or why the left handed one is insecure.[[Special:Contributions/198.41.236.207|198.41.236.207]] 11:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:It's not. Ropes and heavier ropes (called cables) are commonly made by twisting smaller ropes together, the twist direction (terminologically the 'lay' of the rope, (s-laid or z-laid)) is the main thing (that I know about) that can make chirality (handedness) of knots important to their strength. Electrical cables and wires aren't usually expected to have any tensile strength, and their tensile components aren't usually twisted in a way that would affect their strength. (Sorry for all the parentheticals.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.130|108.162.241.130]] 14:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
::As I understand it (at least in knots that I'm familiar with), it's not chirality (like stereo isomers) but cis-/trans-ness (e.g. isomers which have active groups pointing in different directions across a double-bond).
::If the left cable came into the right's loops on on the bottom, dove under the two loops of the RH cable, over the conductor then under then over to have the loose end emerge where the offscreen-length currently comes in, then it'd be electrically the same but any tension would pull more off-axis and the knot could 'capsize' into an unwanted form (topologically similar, but with different relative loops.
::If you did that but ''also'' rethreaded the RH length to come up through the LH's loop (as now), but then passed over the top, down behind the two LH bits (free and loose end) to go back over the (lower) LH, under itself then over the (upper) LH, to dangle free, it would be a chiral inversion and (as you say) probably not greatly affected by the cable's own rotational symmetry.
::Re-rethread the LH loop as it was, and you'd get a chiral alternative to the first 'capsizable' change.
::Proper mathematically-inclined knot-theorists probably have better terms to use for both chiral and cis-trans transforms (as well as functional sub-mirroring such as the difference between reef and granny). There will already be terms known amongst practical knot-practioners such as sailors and other riggers, but (at least until "knot bibles" were written) they'll have been given homegrown/traditional terms that might not be particularly consistent with other knot-cultures. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.163|172.69.43.163]] 17:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
::^^^^ Addendum... Maybe [https://forum.igkt.net/index.php?topic=1551.0 this link I just found] is relevent, from a quick scan of it... Or maybe not. ~same IP/time as above .sig~

A note I nearly added in the bit about short-circuits (or, as I added, 'un'circuiting) is that the electrical behaviour of the knot is different according to which 'end' slips. If the left-side cable 'slips through' enough, then its gold and silver bits of sheath could contact (would short-circuit any current driven at that side). If the right-side cable slips out, it is in no danger of doing so for a right-driven current (it would just disconnect). That ignores the cross-talking that could occur (on one conducting line at a time, so may not matter if there's no external ground-return element, except as far as not being a proper connection any more), or ''both'' ends slipping (where one of the LHS sheaths ''might'' shuffle into a position to bridge the two RHS sheaths). But, as tied, the LHS silver (being bent in and out of the page around its crossing counterpart wire) seems unlikely to be pressed against both gold and silver, should it trivially untwine/slip through. Actual studies with actual knots might be useful. I thought I had a spare length of unterminated Cat5, nearby, but apparently (k)not... that, with some coloured permanent marker-pen marks made upon it, would probably have made a decent analogue for visual analysis of failure conditions. Maybe I'll de-plug an old cable (I've got a number of damaged USB cables I could chop, but their being thinner would change the scale and dynamics of the knot, meaning I might as well just use a scrap of twisted-pair internally-sheathed strands). – But I thought you'd like my mind's-eye analysis of the knot behaviour, before I get around to trying anything practical to this end. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.7|141.101.99.7]] 17:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC) (<- ex Cub-/Boy-/Venture-Scout, but never got any Knot ''Un''tying badge... that brief stint with escapology aside... ;) )

This comic contained material familiar to a hobby engineer that was cast critically and derogatorily (e.g. “sheety” bend) throughout the explanation. I edited a lot of it. I’ve seen this happen repeatedly in other explanations. I don’t edit most of them. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.155|172.71.150.155]] 18:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC) 

"this is a scenario commonly encountered by hobby engineers from the last millenium"
"commonly"? Can any hobbyist engineers from the last millennium attest? Also, this sounds ageist - is it ageist? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.166|172.70.86.166]] 21:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:Well, I definitely did electrics/electronics pre-millenium. I'm not at all unhappy with the idea with the possibility of an occasional 'bodge job' connection having happened (e.g. tying a cable in a simple knot, in suitable cases, to add mechanical resistance to any further tendency for a cable to be tugged out of a grommit-hole and the core conducting wires being tugged out of whatever terminal/patch-block they need to be connected to - or, more likely, pulling the core copper strands beyond their tensile limits).
:Although (while I respected the ''idea'' of this being based upon a repair-bodge), I don't see this as a "this wire was damaged, this is how the two ends are reconnected", but rather as a deliberate cable termination method (like adding moulded plugs/etc) which could then be mated end-to-end with another similarly terminated cable. (Like using a gender-changer 'double-socket' between two phono-ended lengths of cable, or using a {{w|File:BNC Tee connector, with Ethernet cable connected-92166.jpg|BNC T-connector just to join two lengths of networking cable}} but without the need for the extra connector ''and'' adding intrinsic tensile resistance - though actually not as much as the BNC 'bayonet' version already does...)
:If I was writing this from scratch, I'd actually remove all the 'repair' aspect of it, TBH. It looks more like a deliberate patch-type cable (1x2core) manufactured to be directly and hermaphroditically compatible with any other such cable, tied together without the need for tools (screwdrivers, crimpers, punch-downs, etc) ''and'' untied as and when required (at least as easily as any similar rope-knot can be undone, which isn't always a given if mishandled and overtightened).
:I'd also be looking at various knots and working out which (if any) could support ''more'' than two contact-patches/sleavings per cable, for three-core or more-core connections between any two such cables. The geometry of the knots would define roughly where (and how long) the external contact-sleaves would need to be (presumably identical for both cables) such that they made appropriate connections between the two halves (cross-overs could be allowed, but that'd have to be down to the IEEE specifications of how to detect/interpret RX/TX assymetry at the end devices, etc). But then I'd also be writing a vastly more complicated alternate explanation. Perhaps just remove the bodge-job implications, someone? Clearly it's not an end-user bodge. Though it could be a manufacturer/industry bodge (such as using an 8P8C connector for essentially 6P4C purposes). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.138|172.69.79.138]] 00:53, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I use the reader app in inverted color mode, so I could not for the life of me figure out what all the discussion about silver and gold was about. Also, can I just comment on how the conductive sleeves are magically flexible? I wonder if they are braided. Even then, this would severely limit how tight the knot could be pulled. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.238|162.158.154.238]] 13:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:I initially imagined either a particularly ductile 'foil' or, as you say, braided (like an STP cable's 'S' layer), though the failure modes of both (tearing or fraying) are potentially problematic. Perhaps a conductive polymer of similar mechanical flexibility to the non-conductive regular sheath. The attachment of respetive core to the outer seems to me the most intensive process.
:I once jury-rigged two cameras on a length of CAT5, using two pairs each for power/signal. One camera was around half way along the cable from where it was commonly terminated, but rather than than cutting the cable entirely and reconnecting the 'onwards' TPs (or threading a half-used full cable and a half-used part-length through the false ceilings/etc) I made a careful slit in the outer insulation (and shielding foil/braid, whatever it had), pulled the two chosen pairs out enough to get the necessary length of mid-cable free ends for my purposes and then snipped just those.
:It wouldn't need as much work to connect outer-conducting sheathing to an inner core. Possibly an into-insulation 'displacement' blade, but not sure how you'd guarantee the (single, and only) inner core contact, so slitting outer insulation, fishing for the chosen inner-core, piercing, twining and/or wrapping that conductive strand then reinsulating as necessary or shrink-wrapping with the 'conductive rubber' outer (preventing the slit from tearing too far open on bending). Twice, though you don't need to preserve the 'gold inner' up to or beyond the 'silver inner' tapping point.
:I would imagine (if this were a serious cable-end spec) there'd be careful balancing of robustness and flexibility of the [[2856: Materials Scientists|materials]] and construction methods in use. But handwaved away, in our 'reality'.... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.163|172.69.43.163]] 17:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:...see {{w|Conductive elastomer}} (and some of that article's onward links) for a possible type of material to use. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.156|141.101.98.156]] 18:32, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Y'know, I've read every XKCD comic. For some reason, this one makes me the most uncomfortable. I ''hate'' it. No idea why. [[User:Magicalus|Magicalus]] ([[User talk:Magicalus|talk]]) 04:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
;Knot category?
We've seen some recurring knot-themes, I was thinking. A quick check shows that it's not as overwhelming as I thought it was, but here's what I easily found anyway (possibly missed some, as I skimmed things).
*[[595: Android Girlfriend]] - averted, but knots are mentioned/could have been expected in the parodied scenario (probably not really so cattable).
*[[730: Circuit Diagram]] - drawn knot
*[[1572: xkcd Survey]] - mentioned as an option
*[[1762: Moving Boxes]] - written down (ambiguously)
*[[2738: Omniknot]] - full-fledged 'knotty comic'
*...this one, as above.
So it might just be the two 'proper knot-focused' comics, but (like 'birds' or 'real people' as categories) two or three others that should be considered relevant. Maybe wait until there's a third (it might take a year?), but placing the groundwork for it. Or maybe even being sufficient to prompt someone to act sooner, now that we can be sure that Knots is one of the many subjects Randall may dive into. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.131|141.101.99.131]] 18:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:The android comic doesn't mention knots. It is only the explanation here that does. The circuit diagram may have a knot, but it is not labeled, and could be something else. Not like saying this is a comic about knots. Of course it has a relation to this comic, but the relation is more in the connector than in knots. The survey doesn't have knot mentioned in the actual comic. Knots are for sure mentioned in a word in Moving boxes, but the comic is not about knots. Which leaves only Omniknot and this one, and I think even three about knots would be too little for a category. So unless there are at least a couple more, it is way too soon to make a knot comic category. But would be fine to include a link between the two knot comics. I will do that! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:43, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
::(You'll note that I expicitly pre-stated each of your 'objections', already. Not sure, then, why you thought I didn't realise any of it...) As I said, I had an impression that it was a well-used trope, here, but found it less so when I checked. But definitely not an unused one. So marked it here to avoid having to necessarily recheck everything once the next one arrived (or the one after that, etc, if still not conclusive). Although it's also possible I missed other good exameples, already... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.229|172.69.195.229]] 17:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2368: Bigger Problem

2024-02-18T17:18:53Z

162.158.90.125: unsigned

I have a saying that's kinda related: Someone else's broken arm does not make my broken wrist less painful. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.56|162.158.255.56]] 17:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I feel like this could have been blackhat instead of whitehat [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.194|108.162.229.194]] 18:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
:Nah, Whitehat's been used before as the guy who keeps introducing stupid or strawman arguments - like 1314:Photos
:No, it being White Hat is important. White Hat at least deludes himself that he's doing what's right. Black Hat knows full well he's a troll and doesn't pretend otherwise. The point of this comic is that this diminishment of problems is a means to make yourself feel more comfortable with your own inaction. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.206.14|172.68.206.14]] 19:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
:would it have mattered? [[User:Donthaveusername|Donthaveusername]] ([[User talk:Donthaveusername|talk]]) 21:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
::("would it ''have'' mattered?", or "it've" if you wish. Please consider this a problem I feel is worth trying to solve, though I know I never will succeed.) White Hat has prior form in what could easily be the exact same discussion. See [[1232]]. Assuming that NASA started to employ {{wiktionary|chugger}}s to get their funding, that is. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.247|162.158.158.247]] 22:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
:::I corrected my grammar, thanks [[User:Donthaveusername|Donthaveusername]] ([[User talk:Donthaveusername|talk]]) 17:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC) 
This doesn't just apply to big problems in the world. As a software developer, we often have to fix a small problem, and then someone will inevitably try to expand this into solving big problem, of which this is just one symptom. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 22:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I think a paragraph should be added warning against this fallacy in real life - a call to action of sorts to encourage people not to worry about whether there's a bigger problem, but to tackle some sort of problem in their lives they feel is manageable. Would this be out of place? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.25|172.69.23.25]] 22:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
:I agree, and have added such a note. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 22:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)s

This reminds me of the [https://pics.onsizzle.com/apple-airpods-cost-159-but-they-cant-pay-taxes-or-3795036.png famous Matt Bors comic] after which his new book is named. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.36|172.68.133.36]] 05:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Is this kind of like as a social conservative, I care about euthanasia, war, abortion, and the death penalty and want them all reduced, but I also care about doing what I can about climate change even if I am skeptical that human beings can do anything to reverse climate change at this point, and so I drive a 2006 prius with all sorts of pro-life bumper stickers and am planning on, when I change out the battery at 300,000 miles, to add a 3rd party plug in charger reducing my once-every-three-months gas tank fill up to once a year?[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 15:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
:Perhaps see if you can get your old batteries (maybe paired up with someone else's, to deal with the capacity bleed that forced you to replace them) and put them in a Home Storage Unit that you can feed with excess renewable energy (your own, or off the grid at anti-peak times) and this balance of energy then becomes as much as possible of the home-charging power given to your PIH car. This solves some of the problems caused by the attempt to use certain Green Revolution solutions (the need to recycle/(re)manufacture batteries, the energy load now not taken by tanks of hydrocarbons now needing to come off the domestic electricity supplies, etc). There's plenty of knock-on effects to consider. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.82|141.101.107.82]] 19:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
::That is extremely possible. There's a guy in San Francisco harvesting and testing old prius cells; he apparently acquires them cheaply enough (stolen from junkyards perhaps) to offer them on Facebook Marketplace for $25 a cell. There are 28 cells in the standard prius 10kwh pack, each pack contains enough energy to push a prius 20 miles at 20 miles per hour (aka the infamous "out of gas" mode that you hit if you try to drive a prius >550 miles on a single tank of gas).
This comic depends on what RationalWiki calls the [https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as "Not as bad as" fallacy], which apparently has the fancier name "Fallacy of Relative Privation." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.36|108.162.237.36]] 18:35, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
:I went ahead and added it in with a link to TVTropes and RationalWiki. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 03:48, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
At least cueball ends up focused on the bigger problem. Too often I find people get caught up in an insignificant piece of a larger problem, a larger problem that they're ignoring. Then they fix the tiny symptom in a way that's unfair or makes it much harder to fix the real problem, often both. --[[User:Dprovan|Dprovan]] ([[User talk:Dprovan|talk]]) 16:29, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Two points: First, if your goal is to help the world by trying to fix some problem with it, the proper way to decide which problem to focus on is not the biggest problem, but you have to multiply together the severity of the problem, how likely you would be able to successfully help with fixing the problem, and, if successful in helping with the problem, how much help that would most likely be and the portion of the problem you would be able to personally fix. You should also factor in how much time or expenses you would incur in the attempt. Secondly, the proper response that should have been given by the guy at the end, instead of that lame deflection, should be "I was saying earlier that focusing on the wrong problem showed that you didn't really care. However, to begin with I never once actually claimed that I cared myself."--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.36|162.158.75.36]] 05:12, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

===Masks===
'''''WHY ARE NONE OF THE XKCD CHARACTERS WEARING MASKS?''''' [[User:Donthaveusername|Donthaveusername]] ([[User talk:Donthaveusername|talk]]) 19:46, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Dunno! I guess it's not really that important to the comics. Wear masks, people! {{unsigned ip|172.69.22.150|21:40, 11 October 2020}}