explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2675: Pilot Priority List

2022-09-30T21:29:35Z

172.70.134.141:

Who else googled 'words ending with ate' and had an extra chuckle at what could have been? My favorites: circumnavigate, excommunicate, disarticulate. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.30|172.70.175.30]] 05:08, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:I was disappointed not to see 'conjugate' on the list. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 09:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:Not to mention 'copulate'. I guess he wanted to keep it G-rated. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

How about 'exterminate'? [[User:MarquisOfCarrabass|MarquisOfCarrabass]] ([[User talk:MarquisOfCarrabass|talk]]) 05:13, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:: Only if the pilot is a Dalek. {{unsigned ip|172.70.135.118|14:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)}}
: My thoughts exactly! (Note: I moved your signature up) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

What categories does this kind of list belong in. I guess Randall has made similar lists before? Should there be a category for this kind of comics, that do not easily belong in any other. I added Food category because of the cake, but that was just for the title text... Also if anyone has a better link to a good picture of a layered cake, as [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ the one currently] in the title text explanation please add that. But it is a good picture resembling the airspace diagram inverted very much --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:I can see that for instance this comic with a list, [[1957: 2018 CVE List]], has been added to the [[:Category:Charts]]. In that case this comic should also, but to me this is not really a chart. Maybe a Category:Lists would work? Should it be "lists" rather than "list"? Not native English speaker. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:56, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
::::(On List/Lists, yes, I would say Category:Lists would be a categorical list of all lists. Any such Category:List would be appropriate if ''a particular'' list (henceforth "it's that list again!") has multiple appearances (perhaps in rationed fractions, like the "things not to do" one) across comics that thus need to be categorised. If that ever happens though then the List might be better "Category:The List", leaving room for The Other List, A Further Different List, all those categories maybe needing to be added to a category of all "List"s (which of course qualifies them for being under "Lists"), but we'll cross those bridges if we come to them. :P ) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 14:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
::Other list comics (Feel free to add to mine without signature):
:::[[2525: Air Travel Packing List]]
:::[[1011: Baby Names]]
:::[[1957: 2018 CVE List]]
:::[[887: Future Timeline]]
:::[[]]

Afterate - enjoy a waffer-thin mint.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 09:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Does anybody else get "list of achievements" vibes from this? it shares many features like simple names, descriptions etc. [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 10:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Instead of ANC it's ANCDARESPC [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.12|172.71.167.12]] 12:40, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Bumpf

As for Categories, this is definitely Aviation related and a List. So, most of things that [[1937:_IATA_Airport_Abbreviations]] qualifies for, should also apply to this one. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 13:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:Created [[:Category:Aviation]]. [[User:Natg19|Natg19]] ([[User talk:Natg19|talk]]) 23:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Am I the only one who thought about the INXS video "Mediate"? https://youtu.be/Pr-Vfnd7Yno [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 17:21, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
::Definitely not. I came here to check for this. Kind of disappointed that this is the only comment to that effect (and also disappointed that Mr. Munro missed the opportunity.)[[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.177|172.71.142.177]] 04:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
::Like the above poster, I specifically came here to check for references to the INXS song.

Agitate - put protest signs on the cockpit door [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.227|108.162.216.227]] 11:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Way at the absolute bottom of the list should be Autodefenestrate - the act of throwing oneself out a window. -MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.177|172.69.33.177]] 00:03, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

This comment is to memorialize "our" (explainxkcd's) supposed "ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, CITATE AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST" for after the incomplete tag gets removed. Should we add a Trivia-level section after the Transcript for it? Or put it in the Editors' FAQ? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.243|172.70.210.243]] 02:06, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

This explanation needs an actual picture of the "upside down wedding cake" airspace class diagrams referred to in the titletext. Like this: https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/FTB/Airspace/Airspace%20Chart.jpg —[[User:Scs|Scs]] ([[User talk:Scs|talk]]) 03:31, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:🗸 ILLUSTRATEd. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.99|172.69.33.99]] 05:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Why are complex airspace classes tiered instead of coned? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.243|172.70.210.243]] 08:43, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:So you don't have to do trigonometry to figure out if you're in the wrong place. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.146|172.70.211.146]] 09:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
::Well, trig isn't really needed for "if x-thousand feet away from (focal point/boundary) at height y, where x=ny" (n could even be 1). Trig isn't even really needed if you're sighting the angle between the horizon and the beacon at the apex of the cone and ''without needing to know your altitide'' need to know that once the declination is beyond a given amount that you're in the controlled-cone.
::But as much flight is horizontal within broad bands (save for deliberate ascending/descending) and altitude is actually supposed to be something you're very aware of at least within a hundred feet or so, you might as well just know that "lower than Level A, the radius to know about is A', or above that but lower than Level B it is B', ...etc". This can be represented on flat charts/on-screen displays much easier as nested/concentric/etc boundaries 'of interest', without any of the complexity of a [[2519: Sloped Border]] situation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.205|162.158.34.205]] 19:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps overly literal, but some of these "lower-priority" items might actually be of interest to real pilots. It's impossible to take off without accelerating, for one. For another, pilots do sometimes broadcast congratulatory messages, which is nice but would certainly be of a lower priority than aviating, navigating and communicating. Finally, occasions such as public holidays or the founding of the airline are sometimes celebrated aboard airliners, and would naturally be announced to the passengers by the captain - although having the pilot leave the cockpit and join in the celebrations might be a cause for alarm.{{cn}} [[Special:Contributions/172.70.142.95|172.70.142.95]] 06:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2679: Quantified Self

2022-09-30T20:05:34Z

172.70.134.141:

This could also be a call back to the Billy Path comics run in Family Circus. I don't have time today to add that research though. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.59|172.70.214.59]] 16:00, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Here is an explanation of what it is about
https://www.reddit.com/r/OCD/comments/1ve309/invisible_thread_attached_to_my_back_am_i_the/ {{unsigned|Florian F|18:11, 30 September 2022‎}}
:I was going to guess sorting Google Maps Directions by sustainability announced this past Wednesday. https://blog.google/products/search/new-ways-to-make-more-sustainable-choices/ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.17|172.69.134.17]] 18:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

GOOMHR! - Although for me it was the opposite aim. I've had periods of time when I wouldn't even like (if I noticed, I wasn't like OCD or anything[1]!!!) to make a return journey that meant I even crossed the road at a different point and thus passed under a different telegraph wire between a different set of adjacent poles, on the presumption that if I were to 'retract my path' then it would be irrevocably looped around at least one telegraph poles. (But normal lamp-posts were Ok... the path-'string' could just pass over and around the top and continue to retract. And it could pass above/below anything movable like cars, people, etc.) My ideal would be to be topologically contracted to zero length. Nut I wasn't actually obsessed by it, just... sometimes noticed when I was forced to do something that would cause such 'problems' and might deliberately ensure that any such loop was fully reversed (in strict reverse order to any such transit adding them in) ''if at all possible''. Of course, once it was spoilt by one end of the journey being held by a loop, the rest didn't matter so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.71|162.158.34.71]] 18:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
:''[1] Not even CDO, which is like OCD but ordered alphabetically!''
:: I definitely am also someone who always played it your way, the reverse XKCD. My cats play it straight though, running into the house, through, and out a different entrance repeatedly one day, then the other way the day after. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.45|172.68.210.45]] 19:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

; Red string of Fate
The drawing looks like the red thread connecting people in chinese mythology.
-[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.188|162.158.91.188]] 18:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

What happens to the string if you crawl under a car which then drives off?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.141|172.70.134.141]] 20:05, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

2678: Wing Lift

2022-09-30T18:57:31Z

172.70.134.141: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2678
| date = September 28, 2022
| title = Wing Lift
| image = wing_lift_2x.png
| imagesize = 679x358px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Once the air from the top passes below the plane of the wing and catches sight of the spooky skulls, it panics, which is the cause of turbulent vortices.
}}

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

This comic is a parody of the incomplete explanations given to physics students on how wings produce lift.

Specifically, it parodies the Equal Transit Time fallacy, which states that the air flowing above the wing and the air flowing below the wing have to travel from one side of the wing to the other in equal time, so the air above the wing has to travel faster to keep up with the air below. This assumes that the air above the wing is somehow conscious of what the air below the wing is doing. 

This assumption of consciousness is taken to extreme parody by the comic, suggesting that the bottom air can be frightened by skulls, that the top air is curious to see what's going on, and that air can panic. In real life, this is not the case.{{Citation needed}}

Wings can produce {{w|Lift (force)|lift}},<ref name="Prandtl & Tietjens (1952)">Tietjens, Oskar Karl Gustav; [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Prandtl Prandtl, Ludwig] (1957). [https://books.google.com/books?id=4KtFcuCZ3VsC&pg=PR1 ''Fundamentals of Hydro- and Aeromechanics'']. Courier Corporation. ISBN 978-0-486-60374-2</ref> i.e. an upwards force with which an aircraft is held in the air.

One or more of three main reasons may typically be given as to why airplane wings produce lift:
* {{w|Bernoulli's principle}} (Perhaps the most frequently cited/demonstrated as a basic introduction to wing-physics.)
* {{w|Angle of attack}} (The airplane wing angles up so that air is deflected downwards, by the {{w|Newton's sine-square law of air resistance|'ski effect'}}.)
* {{w|Coandă effect}} (The top is curved, so air going over the wing must curve downwards in order to avoid creating a vacuum above the back of the wing, and by Newton's third law, this results in an upwards force on the wing.)
The comic references all three of these reasons. Airflow splitting references Bernoulli's principle, while the air at the bottom being scared and fleeing downwards is similar to the effect of air hitting the angled bottom of the wing. The air going over the top curving down references the Coandă effect, although the comic claims that this effect is instead caused by the top-air noticing the bottom-air fleeing downward and goes down to investigate why the bottom-air is fleeing. The mention of Newton's third law is indeed correct, even if the movement of the air is for the wrong reasons. In the title text, it additionally suggests that the top-flow also end up glimpsing the printed skulls, causing it to also chaotically flee, generating a wing's classic turbulent wake.

Randall previously dealt with explanations of wing lift in [[803: Airfoil]].

==Transcript==
:[Caption at the top of the panel above the drawing:]
:How a wing produces lift

:[The drawing is a diagram of the cross-section of a plane wing. It is large and rounded on the left end and flat on the bottom while the top curves down to meet it at a sharp point to the right. There are many small arrows indicating the flow of wind, in front of, above and below and behind the wing. Four sections of the wind has captions.

:[The arrows come from the left of the panel, point towards the wing, and then half begin to go over and half begin to go under. There is a caption in the middle of this flow:]
:Airflow splits around the top and bottom of the wing

:[The arrow flowing above continue to the back without caption. But the arrows going under the wing goes by a circle underneath the wing. The circle is connected to an arrow which points to the underside of the wing indicating that the content of the circle represents the underside of the wing. The circle shows a repeating pattern of small black (simplified) skulls, that not only fills the circle but can be seen on the arrow pointing to the underside of the wing. There is a caption to the right of this:]
:Spooky skulls microprinted on the bottom of the wing frighten the air, which flees away downward

:[The arrows going above the wing begins to curve downward at the end of the wing. In the middle of these arrows is a caption:]
:Top air goes to see what's wrong

:[After the spooky skulls the the arrows under the wings also begins to curve downwards and both streams of arrows from above and below have joined at the end of the wing and are all pointing to the bottom right of the panel. In front of them is a caption:]
:By Newton's third law, downward deflection of air pushes wing upward

{{comic discussion}}

[[category:Engineering]]
[[category:Physics]]
[[category:Aviation]]

2641: Mouse Turbines

2022-07-07T00:17:08Z

172.70.134.141: Undo Error

{{comic
| number = 2641
| date = July 4, 2022
| title = Mouse Turbines
| image = mouse_turbines.png
| titletext = It's sad seeing those videos of turbine blade being torn apart in high winds, but it's the only way they can disperse their seeds.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a RENEWABLE ENERGY RODENT - Elaborate on the title text. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Beret Guy]] and [[Megan]] are walking during the summer, where Beret Guy expresses his appreciation for typical features of a summer day. Though, considering the rest of the comic, Beret Guy could mean there are {{w|Cloud computing|large (or popular) server farms}} [[908: The Cloud|somewhere]] and that the bugs are {{w|Zoom (software)|video chatting}}. He also mentions "wind turbines" put up by field mice, which Megan initially assumes to be referring to {{w|Taraxacum|dandelions}} (similar to the wordplay that Beret Guy utilized in [[1322: Winter]].) However, Beret Guy turns out to be speaking literally, as he picks up what is in fact a tiny {{w|wind turbine}}, says to [https://www.dandelionpress.com/dandelion-blog/2015/4/6/how-to-wish-on-a-dandelion make a wish,] and blows into it. This causes the blades of the turbine to spin rapidly, generating a lot of power for the structure it is connected to, thus causing a field mouse to cheer in excitement.

The comic was published on the 40th anniversary of the film release of {{w|The Secret of NIMH}},[https://twitter.com/DonBluth/status/1543282578173489153] a story featuring field mice and rats who escaped from a lab experiment which left them with a similar intelligence to human beings. The story takes place as the rats strive to achieve self-sufficiency, so that they no longer need to steal power from human-built electrical lines. (The novel this film was based on, {{w|Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH}}, describes the experiments and the rats' struggles in more detail.)

The title text builds on the similarities between small wind turbines and dandelions by claiming that turbines reproduce by dispersing their blades, in the manner of dandelion {{w|seed dispersal}}. Randall's suggestion of turbine seeds conflicts with Beret Guy's assertion that the turbines were built by field mice.

== Efficacy ==

Sadly, the power output per size of wind turbines increases with their size,[https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/wind-turbines-bigger-better] a limitation not shared by other forms of renewable energy such as {{w|solar panel}}s and {{w|pico hydro}}. According to [https://www.omnicalculator.com/ecology/wind-turbine this calculator], a 10 centimeter radius wind turbine powered by a 5.7 meter/second breath[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215098616300830] would produce one watt at just 26% efficiency.

Further frustrating mouse use of wind power, {{w|Wind gradient|windspeed increases logarithmically with height}} above ground. Windspeed is reported as its value 10 meters above ground, where it is 1.5 times faster than at ground level.[https://www.nooutage.com/wind.htm] In the U.S., where Randall lives, average year-round windspeed is about 15 km/h,[https://sciencing.com/average-daily-wind-speed-24011.html] or about 2.8 m/s at ground level, yielding only 0.11 watts from such turbines. However, a typical adult mouse weighs 25 grams,[https://web.jhu.edu/animalcare/procedures/mouse.html] compared to about 81 kilograms for humans in the U.S.,[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3408371/] so we could estimate that mouse electricity needs would be about 0.03% of people's.{{Dubious}} The average U.S. residential customer uses 1,242 watts of electricity,[https://www.electricchoice.com/blog/electricity-on-average-do-homes/] 0.03% of which is 0.37 watts. Therefore, the three turbines visible in this comic could serve about 89% of a mouse's needs. While this figure does not account for necessary {{w|home energy storage}} efficiency (92.5% for the {{w|Tesla Powerwall}}) overhead, mice usually live much less extravagantly than typical Americans,{{citation needed}} so three turbines per mouse should be sufficient.

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

:[Megan and Beret Guy are walking on grass.]
:Beret Guy: Ahh, summer!
:Beret Guy: The clouds are big, the bugs are zooming,

:[Beret Guy stops walking. There are three small trefoil structures and a tiny building on the grass in front of him.]
:Beret Guy: and the field mice have put up their little wind turbines.

:[Beret Guy picks up one of the turbines. Under the turbine there is a wire attached to the ground.]
:Megan (off-panel): You mean dandelions?
:Beret Guy: No.

:[Beret Guy holds the turbine in front of him.]
:Beret Guy: Make a wish!

:[Beret Guy blows into the turbine blades and makes them spin. The wire transfers electricity towards the ground.]
:''Puff''
:⚡ ⚡ ⚡ ⚡
:Voice at ground level: Yaaay!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Animals]]

2641: Mouse Turbines

2022-07-07T00:16:30Z

172.70.134.141: Space

Talk:2635: Superintelligent AIs

2022-06-21T14:53:11Z

172.70.134.141:

my balls hert [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.53|172.70.230.53]] 05:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I think "Nerdy fixations" is too wide a definition. The AIs in the comic are fixated on hypothetical ethics and AI problems (the Chinese Room experiment, the Turing Test, and the Trolley Problem), presumably because those are the problems that bother AI programmers. --Eitheladar [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.119|172.68.50.119]] 06:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

It's probably about https://www.analyticsinsight.net/googles-ai-chatbot-is-claimed-to-be-sentient-but-the-company-is-silencing-claims/ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.115|172.70.178.115]] 09:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the previous statement. The full dialogue between the mentioned Google worker and the AI can be found in https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/is-lamda-sentient-an-interview-ea64d916d917, published by one the Google employees.
:This is the first time I might begin to agree that an AI has at least the appearance of sentience. The conversation is all connected instead of completely disjoint like most chatbots. They (non-LaMDA chatbots) never remember what was being discussed 5 seconds ago let alone a few to 10s of minutes prior.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.141|172.70.134.141]] 14:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

What is “What you don't understand is that Turing intended his test as an illustration of the...” likely to end with? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.75|172.70.230.75]] 13:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

In response to the above: I believe the original "Turing Test" wasn't supposed to be a proof that an AI could think or was conscious (something people associate with it now), but rather just to show that a sufficiently advanced AI could imitate humans in certain intelligent behaviors (such as conversation), which was a novel thought for the time. Now that AI are routinely having conversations and creating art which seems to rival casual attempts by humans, this limited scope of the test doesn't seem all that impressive. "Turing Test" therefore is a modern shorthand for determining whether computers can think, even though Turing himself didn't think that such a question was well-formed. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 13:37, 21 June 2022 (UTC)