explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2214: Chemistry Nobel

2024-10-25T08:27:47Z

172.70.114.146:

No Discussion yet? REALLY?!!? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.82|162.158.214.82]] 15:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

This may be a reference to SCP-2046. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.34|162.158.146.34]] 15:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
:Or something else. From the beginning, what are the ten radical isotopes? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:36, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
::From the beginning, the ten radical isotopes are: Tukerium, negative 5. Dangor, negative 17. Lu, negative 31. Kartex, negative 79. Sharbar, negative 101. Muilamium, negative 127. Idaron, negative 173. Simmondsium, negative 211. Mattite, negative 239. Krasnov, negative 307. These are the radical isotopes from the beginning. --[REDACTED], 10/25/2024 04:26

Couldn't this potentially involve exotic isotopes of hydrogen that behave similarly to elements in the same group? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.136|162.158.214.136]] 16:02, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh gods, I needed this laugh. Have my Chemistry exam on Monday, this does put a smile on my face.

''"misconception that the empty space at the top of the periodic table represents undiscovered elements"''... [citation needed]. Is that really a thing? Never heard of it. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 16:53, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
:Somehow I did not think about that the entire time I was editing this thing, because I don’t believe it is. I guess I’ll fix it. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.56|172.69.34.56]] 18:32, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
::I guess my point, if I had any, is that I have a hard time believing there's such a "misconception" to begin with in real life. Of course, there is in Randall's strip universe, which is what makes the joke work in his usual out-of-this-world humor. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 07:40, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Some uninvited pedantry (unlike all my other didactic discourse here, which you guys bring on yourselves): Referenced in the comic is not THE periodic table, just ''a'' periodic table. And it isn't really objectively scientific. It's better to call it the ''most popular'' periodic table. Such tables are a rather ham-handed attempt to explain the patterns of the elements in an "intuitive" (or at least heuristic) way. But the popular one we learn in school is actually far from the best one even in that sense. [[wikipedia:Alternative periodic tables|Check out the alternatives]], many of which are more scientifically sound and logical...but aren't as simplistic for the easy-minded, so they haven't caught on. —[[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 23:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
:Do you mean the one that looks like a candyland board game (Benfey's) or the one that looks like the worst Tetris level ever (Tsimmerman's)? [j/k]... If I had seen that in school, I'd have been too distracted to ever pay attention ;-) [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 07:35, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
:A very interesting link. Thanks! [[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 12:41, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Did Mendeleev really design his table to represent the way electrons are arranged in atoms? In 1869, he must have been quite a visionary! Zetfr 09:23, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
:Oh no, he didn't. He did by patterns of their properties. Also by atomic weights, but those were imprecisely known then, also note the isotope paradox problem (e.g. K and Ar must be swapped). The first sorting already guarantess to represent the electronic arrangement to some degree. BTW, lanthanides and actinides need more love. For starters, I PhD'ed on them.
::Actually he was quite the visionary, considering what they didn't know back then. While everybody else was arranging their tables (and there were plenty of them) entirely by atomic weight, he arranged them by both atomic weight on the large scale and chemical valence on the small scale. This clued him in to the changing periods and also enabled him to correct elements out of order by weight. The noble gases hadn't been discovered yet, but when they were, they fit right in as they had a valence of zero. A few decades later [[wikipedia:Henry Mosely|Henry Mosely]] used proton bombardment and X-Ray radiation measurement to determine the electrostatic properties of various elements and found a simple progression that both absolutely vindicated Mendeleev and introduced the concept of [[wikipedia:Atomic Number|Atomic Number]]. He should have gotten a Nobel prize, but sadly, no prizes were awarded that year because of the war and Mosely himself was killed at the young age of 27 by a bullet with his name on it. Sigh.
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.22|172.69.55.22]] 15:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Clearly these new elements are fractional elements, with elements having - for instance - 1 3/16 protons, etc. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.248|108.162.241.248]] 21:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Of course, if someone ''did'' find a whole bunch of elements there, I'd say that they ''deserve'' a Nobel prize. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.133|172.69.63.133]] 12:37, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

for me, the explanation provided doesn't seem to emphasize why the joke works well enough. shouldn't the explanation more clearly state that the gap between hydrogen and helium is there because the table is grouped based on blocks of elements and electron orbits. the first row only has electrons in the s orbital and none in p, d or f orbitals, and that gaps between hydrogen and helium, for example, could not possibly be filled because there isn’t anything to fill them with. similarly for the 2nd and 3rd row "gaps". this impossibility really begets the humor of a figure pointing at the gap musing "i don't know why no one else thought to look here".

In Russian books on chemistry, elements are numbered, ordered in the same way, yet the table itself is arranged in a different manner: in R20, RO, R2O3, RO2, R2O5, RO3, R2O7, RO4 way. It, however, is done to make both the table + all the extra data on each element rectangular (so it would fit into one A4 sheet).[[Special:Contributions/172.68.11.67|172.68.11.67]] 05:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

A girl in my high school chemistry class seriously thought this. She was trying to argue with the teacher that "There's infinitely many elements, we just haven't discovered them yet. You can't ''prove'' 1p and 2d orbitals don't exist just because we haven't seen them." Ironically she was the "religion is the cause of all society's problems" type atheists.
[[User:StapleFreeBatteries|StapleFreeBatteries]] ([[User talk:StapleFreeBatteries|talk]]) 21:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
:To be half fair, to her statement (as reported), there's indeed no reason to believe that there aren't an infinite number of elements, just by extending the current table down infinitely (with or without filling in the 'gaps' in the top of it, which add only a finite extra number). Beyond (well beyond?) the lanthinide/actinide full-width it doesn't even need additional shells (unseen, thus not currently featured in the 'wider gap' model, just like La/Ac groups and transitional metals crowbar the upper bits apart, and indeed everything not Group1 or Group8/0 levers H and He apart), but that might happen too – without needing the new (upper) gap to be filled as well. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.139|172.70.91.139]] 14:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

2933: Elementary Physics Paths

2024-05-16T14:22:51Z

172.70.114.146: organized some lines that were out of order

{{comic
| number = 2933
| date = May 15, 2024
| title = Elementary Physics Paths
| image = elementary_physics_paths_2x.png
| imagesize = 464x672px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = ==COSMOLOGY==> 'Uhhh ... how sure are we that everything is made of these?'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a VERY NOT SIMPLE PARTICLE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic explores the complexities of understanding the fundamental building blocks of the universe.

The absurdity of understanding ''everything'' starting from just understanding basic particles is similar to the fallacy presented in [[1570: Engineer Syllogism]].

In the first panel, Cueball expresses the idea that if he understands the behavior of tiny particles, he'll understand everything. This reflects a common scientific pursuit, {{w|reductionism}}, to uncover the basic principles underlying all physical phenomena. For example, most chemical reactions can be explained as the recombinations of a few dozen common elements.

However, the comic then splits into two branches representing different fields of physics which refute Cueball's optimistic assumption: {{w|condensed matter physics}} and {{w|quantum field theory}}.

The concepts of {{w|antireductionism}} (or {{w|holism}}) is then demonstrated by following the left causal path using a 'traditional' physical approach.
In the Condensed Matter Physics branch, Cueball encounters a cloud of particles, which symbolizes the complexity that arises when simple particles combine to produce complex behaviors. The number of different interactions to understand makes the topic no longer simple. This highlights the challenge of predicting macroscopic properties from microscopic interactions, a central theme in condensed matter physics. This is shown in everyday life, from things like a baseball curving through the air, to how a mirror reflects light. [[1734: Reductionism]] also touches on the impractibility of gaining knowledge about a larger construct through understanding its constituent parts.

In the Quantum Field Theory branch, Cueball is faced with the realization that particles at the quantum level aren't as simple as initially thought. Quantum Field Theory deals with the fundamental particles and forces of nature, and it describes a complex world where particles can behave as both waves and particles simultaneously, among other strange phenomena.

The title text introduces a third branch: the field of {{w|cosmology}}, which deals with the large-scale structure and history of the universe. It humorously suggests that even our catalog of the most fundamental particles might not be as certain as we think - perhaps an allusion to theorized phenomena like dark matter and dark energy - raising questions about the nature of existence itself.

Overall, the comic illustrates the challenges and complexities inherent in trying to understand the fundamental nature of reality.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball gestures at a particle, represented as a dot with motion lines around it.]
:Cueball: Everything is made of tiny particles. If I understand those, I'll understand everything!
:[The comic splits into two branches.]
:[Condensed Matter Physics branch]
:[Cueball is fretting over a cloud of particles.]
:Cueball: Oh no.
:Cueball: Simple particles can combine to produce complex behaviors.
:[Quantum Field Theory branch]
:[Cueball is fretting over the same particle as in the first panel.]
:Cueball: Oh no.
:Cueball: '''''These particles aren't simple!'''''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Cosmology]]

Talk:2918: Tick Marks

2024-04-11T23:20:58Z

172.70.114.146:

The ticks on the y axis conceal the area of the graph between them. Why didn't Randall just build his graph so that the x axis did similar? Then he could keep up a continuous level of activity equal to the size of the ticks, rather than just doing short bursts to coincide with them.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.146|172.70.91.146]] 09:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:Don't really know. But look, I was waiting all day yesterday for the Wednesday comic, so I'll take any comic at this point T_T [[User:Z1mp0st0rz|Z1mp0st0rz]] ([[User talk:Z1mp0st0rz|talk]]) 14:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
::It was at least half an hour before end-of-day-Midnight, for Randall's expected TZ. I know you're a new username, so perhaps you weren't aware that he often publishes (as best as we can pick up) ''quite late'' in the respective day (currently UTC+6). And it's also really not so much unknown to be (fairly) early in the following day (yet still officially on the relevent M/W/F).
::That doesn't mean we aren't often frustratingly gripped by antici.................pation, but we are very rarely stymied for more than a whole day (developmental delays to rolling out 'special comics', aside), and I think we are lucky to have such a conscientious creator as we do. It must be a hard schedule to keep up with. (And also that even if "not every one is a winner", ''most'' still are, for ''most'' people. Could be worse!) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.110|172.71.178.110]] 15:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Should [[688: Self-Description]] also be linked as an example of "actual data is part of the graphical framing device"? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.39.12|172.70.39.12]] 21:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:It already is linked, in the prior paragraph, and ''isn't'' quite so relevent to the flag-based variation (which is a kind of cousin to this tricky graph thing). But do rewrite it if you think it can be expounded better. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 22:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, I must have missed it on my first read. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.146|172.70.114.146]] 23:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)